Why "Planned Parenthood" is wrong.

[AiliailiA]

Because your highschool teacher has a better definition of "guilty" than the Oxford dictionary.

Because he went to law school and learned the legal definition of guilty, yes.

If you're going to resort to authority, you should name the authority.

[Bottle]

You can't have a balanced solution, then, so grant the rights to the mother, given that she's an actual living human being and not just a potential human being.

Its not a potential human being its an actual human being! Thats what I have been arguing for dozens of pages! If it is a human being then our governments are permitting a grave injustice.

Not really.

No born human person has the right to force me to donate my body to them, even if they need it to live.

I don't care whether a fetus is a human person or not; I still support a woman's right to end her participation in a pregnancy at any time and for any reason. Because I am pretty sure that women are human persons.

[Zottistan]

Because your highschool teacher has a better definition of "guilty" than the Oxford dictionary.

Because he went to law school and learned the legal definition of guilty, yes.

Legal definition=/=universal definition

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

It's not violating her wishes. It's violating her rights to bodily sovereignty. Also, why are we even debating this? I already proved that making abortion illegal does not work.

Welcome to the abortion debate. It's basically arguing with a voice recording on a loop.

*inserts abortion debate CD into CD player*

*listens*

Pro-lifer (PL): "Abortion is wrong because the baby isn't guilty of anything and it's murder and it's against the Bible".
Pro-choice (PC): "Why not give the woman a right to choose about the baby? It's her body and her womb. Besides, it's not legally considered murder."
PL: "But it still is a baby and it's a human being, and objective morality has it that murder is bad."
PC: "It's not a baby, it's a foetus, and it's not really a conscious human being up until a few weeks before term at most any more than a sperm is."
Random Christian fundamentalist (RCF): "BLAH BLAH BLAH IMMORAL BLAH BLAH GOD'S WILL BLAH BLAH BLAH SIN BLAH BLAH SIN BLAH BLAH MURDER BLAH BLAH EVIL BLAH BLAH"
PL: "How's it not murder?"
PC: "Legally speaking, it's not murder. Therefore, it's not murder. You're neglecting the fact that it's a woman's body and she should be allowed to choose what it's used for."
PL: "It's better for women to die in agony than for foetuses that are unwanted and will be uncared for to be 'killed'."
PC: "That's misogyny, and it doesn't respect the rights of the woman."

Rinse and repeat.

[The Little Harmonic Labyrinth]

Because your highschool teacher has a better definition of "guilty" than the Oxford dictionary.

That's an argument from authority and that;s a fallacy.

[Mavorpen]

Why should they have rights? Is this going to come down to whether they are people again?

Why should they not have rights? We are talking about human beings at a stage of development every human being goes through in its natural growth to adulthood, to assume they are not persons is in itself a leep.

Not really since I proved that they are not human beings.

[Bottle]

Because he went to law school and learned the legal definition of guilty, yes.

Which doesn't apply to a fetus since it is not a human being.

Who cares though?

Seriously, why are you guys arguing over whether a fetus is a person or not, when it doesn't matter. No born person has any of the rights that the anti-choicers are attempting to appropriate on behalf of fetuses.

[Parchelon]

Nor should the mother have the right to destroy it.

Really? So if you try to force me to give you my kidney, then I can't defend myself?

As I have been arguing an unborn foetus is completely different from a kidney, hell the foetuses develop kidneys of their own, this is not about organs but human beings.

[Parchelon]

They should have rights, though currently have been either stripped of them or have never had any (depending on which nation you are in, in some nations abortion is illegal in most if not all situations).

For reasons quite explained and developed before, you're wrong.

I am afraid I disagree with you and I hope I have addressed all the points you speak of.

[Mavorpen]

Which doesn't apply to a fetus since it is not a human being.

Who cares though?

Seriously, why are you guys arguing over whether a fetus is a person or not, when it doesn't matter. No born person has any of the rights that the anti-choicers are attempting to appropriate on behalf of fetuses.

I understand your pain. I proved that making abortion illegal doesn't even work. The thread should have ended there. We proved that even people don't have the rights that he wants fetuses to have, it should have ended. The only thing he says is that either fetuses are human beings (which is wrong) and that they are innocent (again, also wrong). He repeats it like a mantra.

[The Little Harmonic Labyrinth]

Really? So if you try to force me to give you my kidney, then I can't defend myself?

As I have been arguing an unborn foetus is completely different from a kidney, hell the foetuses develop kidneys of their own, this is not about organs but human beings.

Drawing parallels from an equivalant case and using those to make a point is an established debating technique. You've tried to do it several times in this thread, e.g. comparing abortion to slavery.

[Samuraikoku]

I am afraid I disagree with you and I hope I have addressed all the points you speak of.

No. You've just limited yourself to repeat the same retorts over and over again.

[Mavorpen]

As I have been arguing an unborn foetus is completely different from a kidney, hell the foetuses develop kidneys of their own, this is not about organs but human beings.

Yeah, not really. You admit a fetus cannot choose to do things. Neither does my kidney. You unknowingly admitted that a fetus is no more important than a rock or a kidney, or anything that cannot "choose."

[Blakk Metal]

SELF-DEFENSE IS NOT JUSTICE

And abortion is self defense.

Arguments from authority mean nothing.

SELF DEFENSE IS JUST SELF DEFENSE, WE'VE ESTABLISHED THIS ALREADY!
I will avoid breaking the "garish post' rule and leave that uncolored.

He doesn't seem to get it.

Fully in support of the OP. And no I am not a Republican. I am a Democrat when it comes to economic issues, Libertarian in Foreign Policy and lean Conservative (I am pro-life, pro traditional marriage although I do believe that any form of discrimination or poor treatment of an LGBT individual should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, contrary to conservative ideology I oppose capital punishment and I am in favor of gun control) in Social Issues. So in the truest sense of the word I believe I am an Independent. PS: I will be voting for Obama over Romney although I would like Ron Paul to be President more than anybody.

Oh shit. It's a communitarian.

Thanks for the logical response.

Thanks for breaking the page.

He deserves a medal for destructive fail.

Then they don't have the capacity to take priority over the would-be mother's wishes.

Nobody should have the right to commit murder simply because someone else violates their wishes.

Yes they do. It's called 'self-defense'.

You can't have a balanced solution, then, so grant the rights to the mother, given that she's an actual living human being and not just a potential human being.

Its not a potential human being its an actual human being! Thats what I have been arguing for dozens of pages! If it is a human being then our governments are permitting a grave injustice.

The only grave injustice is banning abortion.

[Tekania]

There obviously only one way to solve this abortion is murder debate.... each side should appoint a volunteer, be given a hand gun..... and whoever shoots the other dead first is the winner, unless it's the pro-lifer in which case they lose anyway.

[Cameroi]

i have to second the very first two replies to this thread, and i'm sure many others, to reply quite simply: this thread is wrong.

[Christ and His Kingdom]

You guys are taking this way off track. Now we are talking about Roe V Wade and how it would unconstitutional to ban planned parenthood. Please re-read the original OP. Just to make it easy for you I put it at the bottom. The point of the OP was to change the morality of the people not the policy of a nation. He is not calling for the end of Planned Parenthood through government action but rather by the action of the populace which is achieved by changing the morality of the people of the U.S. If people shift their view of Planned Parenthood from the last line of defense to the epitome of sexual immorality then Planned Parenthood will be out of business. "I also experienced a time later on in my [doctoral] training in the 1960s when the culture was changing. The Vietnam war was going on. The drugs were there. Pornography came in and abortion became prevalent even though it was illegal. The morality of the country changed. The law followed up. When morality changed, it reflects on the laws. The law’s very important. We should have these laws. Law will not correct the basic problem. That’s the morality of the people.” -Ron Paul

This article says that a 24 y.o woman died at a "planned parent" hood clinic after recieving an abortion. http://www.google.com/webhp?rlz=1C1AVSX ... =514&ion=1
http://www.lifesitenews.com/blog/americ ... -abortion/

Planned Parenthood is for lazy and irresponsible people. You're probably wondering "How is it lazy and irresponsible to plan when to have children?" I'll explain why...

1. If someone does not want to have children, then don't have sex. In order to truly plan your parenthood, you need self control. Contraceptives are for those without self control.

2. Children are a blessing. Some women are infertile and can't have any. Some men are impotent, and can' impregnate a woman so those who are fully capable of having biological kids should be proud of it.

3. People should always wait until marriage instead of gambling thier chances with contraceptives. (condoms tear, pills are forgotten) there will also be less single mothers that way

4. People should have as many children as they can, and populate the Earth. Even though you might die, you wan't to have enough children to live on so that your family will continue, and not come to a end. People should be proud of haing lots of children, not ashamed of it. Besides, people can also use their eldest children to watch after the younger ones. The eldest children should receive the harshest discipline so that they can be like young parents.

5. People need to stop using children as an excuse for laziness! If someone has kids, he/she can still further their education or career if they WORK HARDER. Having kids is not the end of someones life, it is just a part of it, and they might need to work multiple jobs or attend classes at night, and just keep working hard. Children are no excuse for laziness.

6. People with children live longer. http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/women- ... ger-study/
http://extremelongevity.net/2011/09/28/ ... ve-longer/

[Mavorpen]

You guys are taking this way off track. Now we are talking about Roe V Wade and how it would unconstitutional to ban planned parenthood. Please re-read the original OP. Just to make it easy for you I put it at the bottom. The point of the OP was to change the morality of the people not the policy of a nation. He is not calling for the end of Planned Parenthood through government action but rather by the action of the populace which is achieved by changing the morality of the people of the U.S. If people shift their view of Planned Parenthood from the last line of defense to the epitome of sexual immorality then Planned Parenthood will be out of business. "I also experienced a time later on in my [doctoral] training in the 1960s when the culture was changing. The Vietnam war was going on. The drugs were there. Pornography came in and abortion became prevalent even though it was illegal. The morality of the country changed. The law followed up. When morality changed, it reflects on the laws. The law’s very important. We should have these laws. Law will not correct the basic problem. That’s the morality of the people.” -Ron Paul

You lost all credibility at the Ron Paul quote.

[The Little Harmonic Labyrinth]

If people shift their view of Planned Parenthood from the last line of defense to the epitome of sexual immorality then Planned Parenthood will be out of business.

And why exactly would this be a good thing, assuming briefly that you're for it?

[DaWoad]

Out of curiosity, can anybody out there provide a definition for personhood that includes fetuses but doesn't include dead people, cancer nor sperm/eggs

[Norstal]

Welcome to the abortion debate. It's basically arguing with a voice recording on a loop.

*inserts abortion debate CD into CD player*

*listens*

Pro-lifer (PL): "Abortion is wrong because the baby isn't guilty of anything and it's murder and it's against the Bible".
Pro-choice (PC): "Why not give the woman a right to choose about the baby? It's her body and her womb. Besides, it's not legally considered murder."
PL: "But it still is a baby and it's a human being, and objective morality has it that murder is bad."
PC: "It's not a baby, it's a foetus, and it's not really a conscious human being up until a few weeks before term at most any more than a sperm is."
Random Christian fundamentalist (RCF): "BLAH BLAH BLAH IMMORAL BLAH BLAH GOD'S WILL BLAH BLAH BLAH SIN BLAH BLAH SIN BLAH BLAH MURDER BLAH BLAH EVIL BLAH BLAH"
PL: "How's it not murder?"
PC: "Legally speaking, it's not murder. Therefore, it's not murder. You're neglecting the fact that it's a woman's body and she should be allowed to choose what it's used for."
PL: "It's better for women to die in agony than for foetuses that are unwanted and will be uncared for to be 'killed'."
PC: "That's misogyny, and it doesn't respect the rights of the woman."

Rinse and repeat.

Abortion Debate Platinum CD has over 150 extra hours of content. Buy it today!

[AiliailiA]

Nobody should have the right to commit murder simply because someone else violates their wishes.

It's not violating her wishes. It's violating her rights

Yes, rights. Parchelon has previously assented to killing (of adult humans) in self-defense, also as legal punishment, and also in war. All based in the defense of rights.

That Parchelon now uses the word "wishes" to describe a right is an admission of weakness. "Nobody should have the right to commit murder simply because someone else violates their rights" would be blatantly inconsistent with a right to kill in self-defense, a right to execute, and a right to kill in war.

So downgrade a "right" to "wish" and everything is peachy. When did the woman's right become a "wish"? Well she had sex ... that's when.

[The Little Harmonic Labyrinth]

Out of curiosity, can anybody out there provide a definition for personhood that includes fetuses but doesn't include dead people, cancer nor sperm/eggs

Sure. "A person is a sapient human being or human foetus."

[Samuraikoku]

"I also experienced a time later on in my [doctoral] training in the 1960s when the culture was changing. The Vietnam war was going on. The drugs were there. Pornography came in and abortion became prevalent even though it was illegal. The morality of the country changed. The law followed up. When morality changed, it reflects on the laws. The law’s very important. We should have these laws. Law will not correct the basic problem. That’s the morality of the people.” -Ron Paul

Get with the times, then.

[Blakk Metal]

You guys are taking this way off track. Now we are talking about Roe V Wade and how it would unconstitutional to ban planned parenthood. Please re-read the original OP. Just to make it easy for you I put it at the bottom. The point of the OP was to change the morality of the people not the policy of a nation. He is not calling for the end of Planned Parenthood through government action but rather by the action of the populace which is achieved by changing the morality of the people of the U.S. If people shift their view of Planned Parenthood from the last line of defense to the epitome of sexual immorality then Planned Parenthood will be out of business. "I also experienced a time later on in my [doctoral] training in the 1960s when the culture was changing. The Vietnam war was going on. The drugs were there. Pornography came in and abortion became prevalent even though it was illegal. The morality of the country changed. The law followed up. When morality changed, it reflects on the laws. The law’s very important. We should have these laws. Law will not correct the basic problem. That’s the morality of the people.” -Ron Paul

You lost all credibility at the Ron Paul quote.

ad hominem