NATION

PASSWORD

Stance on Abortion?

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

Stance on Abortion

Pro-Choice (For Abortion)
503
65%
Pro-Life (Against Abortion)
203
26%
Neither/Other (Explain Below)
69
9%
 
Total votes : 775

User avatar
Nordengrund
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7531
Founded: Jun 20, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Nordengrund » Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:26 pm

Kemaliste wrote:Women's body belongs to women!


Yes, but the fetus is also the baby's body.
1 John 1:9

User avatar
Seperates
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14622
Founded: Sep 03, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Seperates » Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:26 pm

Samuraikoku wrote:
Seperates wrote:Meh... I know there is no such thing as personal liberty, but believe it's probably best to pretend there is for the sake of decency.


Regulated by the law, human construct, social contract. I know.

Gotta love Hobbes in that aspect...
Last edited by Seperates on Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
This Debate is simply an exercise in Rhetoric. Truth is a fickle being with no intentions of showing itself today.

Non fui, fui, non sum, non curo

"The most important fact about us: that we are greater than the institutions and cultures we build."--Roberto Mangabeira Unger

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:27 pm

Nordengrund wrote:
Kemaliste wrote:Women's body belongs to women!


Yes, but the fetus is also the baby's body.


And it is in the mother's body...using the mother's resources...making the mother have symptoms one would have as though they have been invaded by a bacterium or a virus.
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
Des-Bal
Post Czar
 
Posts: 32055
Founded: Jan 24, 2010
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby Des-Bal » Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:27 pm

Nordengrund wrote:Yes, but the fetus is also the baby's body.


No it's not because it's not a baby. The human cells in your body aren't individual humans.
Cekoviu wrote:DES-BAL: Introverted, blunt, focused, utilitarian. Hard to read; not verbose online or likely in real life. Places little emphasis on interpersonal relationships, particularly with online strangers for whom the investment would outweigh the returns.
Desired perception: Logical, intellectual
Public perception: Neutral-positive - blunt, cold, logical, skilled at debating
Mindset: Logos

User avatar
Saint Alexander
Diplomat
 
Posts: 901
Founded: Jan 11, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Saint Alexander » Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:27 pm

I'm pro-choice and here's why:

One has no right to say what a person does with their body. Aside from that, a wide variety of other circumstances surround abortions. One great example, as presented earlier in this thread, is that if a mother is in danger of dying because of the baby, then the abortion should happen in order to save her life. It's not murder, it's saving one person's life at the expense of another. Otherwise; we lose two people instead of gaining/saving anything. Besides; there are 7 billion people in this mad world, I'm sure we could afford to lose a rather small percentage to abortion.

That, and wouldn't the world be a better place if it were filled with wanted children? There are unwanted children that are abused and tortured simply because they were not wanted and the mothers were forced to have them thanks to those damn restrictions. You wonder why crime rates are so high; it's because some dumb-ass politician says you can't have a choice and then the police, the mixed blessings that they are, have to enforce those idiotic and non-progressive laws.

You foolish "pro-life" people get your life at the expense of the freedom that all people in the world seem to desire. Think carefully; would you rather live and let live, knowing it's another persons concern and not your own or would you rather be remembered as those few oppressive jerks who can't keep their big noses out of other people's lives?

Personally, I'll take the former any day.

User avatar
Individualist Constructivism
Envoy
 
Posts: 312
Founded: Aug 07, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Individualist Constructivism » Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:27 pm

Nordengrund wrote:
Kemaliste wrote:Women's body belongs to women!


Yes, but the fetus is also the baby's body.

The fetus is a grouping of cells formed by physical support of the mother's own body, and 'is' the mother's own body.

I might agree with your 'fetus bodily rights' approach in regards to a situation wherein the fetus was meant to live, but abortion is not one of those scenarios.
When debating your opponent, remember: without many of his views, many more of yours would not exist.


In philosophy, one must be right in order to be successful. In politics, one must be successful in order to be right.
Prussia-Steinbach wrote:Individdi Comstiputia, you make too many complicated threads with big words.

User avatar
Nordengrund
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7531
Founded: Jun 20, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Nordengrund » Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:30 pm

Des-Bal wrote:
Nordengrund wrote:Yes, but the fetus is also the baby's body.


No it's not because it's not a baby. The human cells in your body aren't individual humans.


It is a living thing. (If you want proof, read my posts a few pages back about the cells), even if it is not a baby, it still owns its own body.
1 John 1:9

User avatar
Katganistan
Senior Game Moderator
 
Posts: 35921
Founded: Antiquity
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Katganistan » Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:30 pm

Nordengrund wrote:
Samuraikoku wrote:
Except it's not unlawful to kill cancerous cells. Nor is it, via Roe vs. Wade, abortion.


Nope, but is illegal to kill anything with a soul, and humans have souls.

Where in the law does it refer to souls? I'll wait.

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:31 pm

Nordengrund wrote:
Des-Bal wrote:
No it's not because it's not a baby. The human cells in your body aren't individual humans.


It is a living thing. (If you want proof, read my posts a few pages back about the cells), even if it is not a baby, it still owns its own body.


...Who cares? You don't have the right to force a woman to allow you to enter her. Why does a fetus get a right that no fully developed person has?
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
Katganistan
Senior Game Moderator
 
Posts: 35921
Founded: Antiquity
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Katganistan » Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:32 pm

Fascist Iberia wrote:
Samuraikoku wrote:
Because I'm alive, and I have a computer, Internet access, two hands, and knowledge of the English language.


If you are a live it's because you have a soul if wasn't that you will be dead .

Do plants have souls? do animals?

User avatar
BushSucks-istan
Diplomat
 
Posts: 618
Founded: Aug 09, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby BushSucks-istan » Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:33 pm

The only reason abortion is banned is because of religion and nothing else. Just like euthanasia. We need to wake up and realize that every human has the right to decide his/her own fate.

And btw scratching your nose kills more living cells than an abortion, just saying...
Anti: God | Religion | Capitalism | Bigotry | Theocracy | Interventionalism | European Union | American Conservatism
Pro: Choice | Gay marriage | Secularism | Liberal Socialism | Nationalism | Anthropocentrism | Nihilism | Anti-theism
Religion IS the root of all evil
Supporter of Geert Wilders

Proud to be Dutch
My country is called The Netherlands, not Holland

User avatar
Katganistan
Senior Game Moderator
 
Posts: 35921
Founded: Antiquity
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Katganistan » Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:34 pm

Raeyh wrote:
Katganistan wrote:Because death and NOT DEATH are the same. :roll:


I would rather be dead than have syphilis, herpes or whatever.

Ok then.
That's your wish. Not everyone wishes they were dead.

User avatar
Kemaliste
Minister
 
Posts: 2722
Founded: Aug 02, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Kemaliste » Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:34 pm

Nordengrund wrote:
Kemaliste wrote:Women's body belongs to women!


Yes, but the fetus is also the baby's body.


Fetus is not a living body up until 20 weeks or something (not a scientist so idk).
Last edited by Kemaliste on Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Pro: Kemalism, Maoism, Leninism, National bolshevism, State socialism, State feminism, Laicism, Eurasianism, Left-wing nationalism, Left-republicanism
Anti: NATO, EU, IMF, Capitalism, Imperialism, Conservatism, Neo-liberalism, Privatization, Social fascism, Racism, Religious fundamentalism, Trotskyism

User avatar
Des-Bal
Post Czar
 
Posts: 32055
Founded: Jan 24, 2010
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby Des-Bal » Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:35 pm

Nordengrund wrote:
It is a living thing. (If you want proof, read my posts a few pages back about the cells), even if it is not a baby, it still owns its own body.


Your skin cells are alive too. That means they own their own body and if you ever itch at a mosquito bite you should be jailed for mass murder.
Cekoviu wrote:DES-BAL: Introverted, blunt, focused, utilitarian. Hard to read; not verbose online or likely in real life. Places little emphasis on interpersonal relationships, particularly with online strangers for whom the investment would outweigh the returns.
Desired perception: Logical, intellectual
Public perception: Neutral-positive - blunt, cold, logical, skilled at debating
Mindset: Logos

User avatar
Samuraikoku
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31947
Founded: May 13, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Samuraikoku » Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:35 pm

Seperates wrote:
Samuraikoku wrote:
Regulated by the law, human construct, social contract. I know.

Gotta love Hobbes in that aspect...


I'm more of a Locke follower.

User avatar
Saint Alexander
Diplomat
 
Posts: 901
Founded: Jan 11, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Saint Alexander » Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:35 pm

Des-Bal wrote:
Nordengrund wrote:
It is a living thing. (If you want proof, read my posts a few pages back about the cells), even if it is not a baby, it still owns its own body.


Your skin cells are alive too. That means they own their own body and if you ever itch at a mosquito bite you should be jailed for mass murder.


An excellent point, sir/madam ^^

User avatar
Samuraikoku
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31947
Founded: May 13, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Samuraikoku » Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:37 pm

Individualist Constructivism wrote:
Genivaria wrote:.....Are you for real?

Are you looking for someone to refute?

I'm pro-choice until the point of birth, if that helps whatever view you have of my previous post, which was, as a hint, satirical.


I figured it out, no worries.

The Emperor protects.

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:37 pm

Samuraikoku wrote:
Individualist Constructivism wrote:Are you looking for someone to refute?

I'm pro-choice until the point of birth, if that helps whatever view you have of my previous post, which was, as a hint, satirical.


I figured it out, no worries.

The Emperor protects.


Make sure the Emperor also uses protection.
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
Katganistan
Senior Game Moderator
 
Posts: 35921
Founded: Antiquity
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Katganistan » Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:37 pm

Nordengrund wrote:Yeah, and us religious folk and pro- life people do not get as much representation in the government, so should they not be taxed?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

User avatar
Individualist Constructivism
Envoy
 
Posts: 312
Founded: Aug 07, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Individualist Constructivism » Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:38 pm

Samuraikoku wrote:
Individualist Constructivism wrote:Are you looking for someone to refute?

I'm pro-choice until the point of birth, if that helps whatever view you have of my previous post, which was, as a hint, satirical.


I figured it out, no worries.

The Emperor protects.

And perhaps my post only speaks of a guilty conscience, just as great a sin as assumption.

Such a pity, sin is.
When debating your opponent, remember: without many of his views, many more of yours would not exist.


In philosophy, one must be right in order to be successful. In politics, one must be successful in order to be right.
Prussia-Steinbach wrote:Individdi Comstiputia, you make too many complicated threads with big words.

User avatar
Des-Bal
Post Czar
 
Posts: 32055
Founded: Jan 24, 2010
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby Des-Bal » Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:39 pm

Nornengruend wrote:Yeah, and us religious folk and pro- life people do not get as much representation in the government, so should they not be taxed?

There's one Atheist in congress.
Last edited by Des-Bal on Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Cekoviu wrote:DES-BAL: Introverted, blunt, focused, utilitarian. Hard to read; not verbose online or likely in real life. Places little emphasis on interpersonal relationships, particularly with online strangers for whom the investment would outweigh the returns.
Desired perception: Logical, intellectual
Public perception: Neutral-positive - blunt, cold, logical, skilled at debating
Mindset: Logos

User avatar
Nordengrund
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7531
Founded: Jun 20, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Nordengrund » Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:40 pm

I am willing to die gruesomely to save the lives of the unborn rather than living and have them lose their right to live.
1 John 1:9

User avatar
Saint Alexander
Diplomat
 
Posts: 901
Founded: Jan 11, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Saint Alexander » Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:40 pm

Nordengrund wrote:I am willing to die gruesomely to save the lives of the unborn rather than living and have them lose their right to live.


Then you are a fool -_-; A devoted fool, I'll give you that, but a fool, nevertheless.

User avatar
Des-Bal
Post Czar
 
Posts: 32055
Founded: Jan 24, 2010
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby Des-Bal » Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:40 pm

Nordengrund wrote:I am willing to die gruesomely to save the lives of the unborn rather than living and have them lose their right to live.


"I believe this very strongly" isn't an argument.
Cekoviu wrote:DES-BAL: Introverted, blunt, focused, utilitarian. Hard to read; not verbose online or likely in real life. Places little emphasis on interpersonal relationships, particularly with online strangers for whom the investment would outweigh the returns.
Desired perception: Logical, intellectual
Public perception: Neutral-positive - blunt, cold, logical, skilled at debating
Mindset: Logos

User avatar
Signob
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 6
Founded: Aug 09, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Signob » Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:41 pm

Fascist Iberia wrote:Of course Not .

When the women is having a Sex relationship should take protections to avoid get pregnant .

So if they don't take protection it was is fault and she should carry the baby since the kid doesn't deserve to be aborted .

Of course, that's why it is the woman's problem for getting pregnant after getting raped.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: EuroStralia, Hakinda Herseyi Duymak istiyorum

Advertisement

Remove ads