All I'm objecting to is misuse of a term. An amoeba is living, it doesn't mean it has rights.
Advertisement
by Seskany » Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:14 pm
by Christian Democrats » Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:15 pm
Czechanada wrote:Christian Democrats wrote:I don't see why this should matter.
Maybe, it should be legal to kill someone in a temporary induced coma even though he or she eventually will go on living life independently.
That coma victim would already have been sapient, and not infringing on bodily sovereignty like a fetus.
Leo Tolstoy wrote:Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it.
by Avenio » Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:16 pm
Christian Democrats wrote:When did we start discriminating based on development?
Christian Democrats wrote:Are the developmentally disabled less human than you or I?
by Seskany » Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:16 pm
by Revolutopia » Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:17 pm
by Christian Democrats » Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:19 pm
Leo Tolstoy wrote:Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it.
by Seskany » Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:21 pm
Christian Democrats wrote:Explain this again. How can someone commit a wrong against something that doesn't exist?
by Yankee Empire » Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:22 pm
by Bleckonia » Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:22 pm
United States of Natan wrote:well, I for one think there is nothing wrong with it. in fact, an unborn child is sort of like a parasite, as it takes nutrients from the mother. and also, if it cannot survive on it's own (needs to take nutrients from someone else's body) then it is not technically alive. plus, as long as it is in the mother's body and takes nutrients from her, it is a part of her body. it can die if she dies. and what if a woman were to be raped, and from that rape, became pregnant and had no money to pay for the child? hmm? what then?
by Ifreann » Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:22 pm
by Yankee Empire » Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:23 pm
Bleckonia wrote:United States of Natan wrote:well, I for one think there is nothing wrong with it. in fact, an unborn child is sort of like a parasite, as it takes nutrients from the mother. and also, if it cannot survive on it's own (needs to take nutrients from someone else's body) then it is not technically alive. plus, as long as it is in the mother's body and takes nutrients from her, it is a part of her body. it can die if she dies. and what if a woman were to be raped, and from that rape, became pregnant and had no money to pay for the child? hmm? what then?
Well, if a woman is legitimately raped, she can't become pregnant.
- Rep. Todd Akin
by Ifreann » Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:24 pm
Raeyh wrote:Ifreann wrote:You keep it from existing by not having sex. Thus you keep it from having 80 years of life. Stop killing people and start impregnating as many women as you can.
You are comparing not having sex to an expensive medical procedure done with the sole intent of sabotaging a pregnancy.
by Christian Democrats » Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:24 pm
Avenio wrote:Christian Democrats wrote:When did we start discriminating based on development?
A long time ago. It's why 7-year-olds don't have the right to vote.Christian Democrats wrote:Are the developmentally disabled less human than you or I?
When the developmental stage the person is at precludes conscious thought or even the ability to survive independently of its host without what is in essence life support, yes. We give human rights based upon the fact that we're sentient creatures - fetuses are not sentient.
Leo Tolstoy wrote:Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it.
by Manahakatouki » Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:25 pm
by Bleckonia » Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:25 pm
Christian Democrats wrote:Czechanada wrote:
That coma victim would already have been sapient, and not infringing on bodily sovereignty like a fetus.
The "right to bodily sovereignty" does not extend to someone doing something to herself that will cause harm to other parties.
Who cares whether or not the coma victim used to be sapient? A corpse used to be sapient.
It is about the future. Someone in a coma will be sapient. An unborn child will be sapient. Thus, neither should be killed.
by Sprits » Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:25 pm
Avenio wrote:Christian Democrats wrote:When did we start discriminating based on development?
A long time ago. It's why 7-year-olds don't have the right to vote.Christian Democrats wrote:Are the developmentally disabled less human than you or I?
When the developmental stage the person is at precludes conscious thought or even the ability to survive independently of its host without what is in essence life support, yes. We give human rights based upon the fact that we're sentient creatures - fetuses are not sentient.
by Bleckonia » Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:26 pm
by Christian Democrats » Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:27 pm
Leo Tolstoy wrote:Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it.
by United States of Natan » Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:28 pm
Then it's a lie. Everything Fox News says is a lie.
Even true things once said on Fox News become lies.
(Family Guy: Excellence in Broadcasting)
by Seskany » Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:29 pm
Christian Democrats wrote:Which sperm cell is the victim of this crime?
by Christian Democrats » Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:29 pm
Bleckonia wrote:What if the woman is going to die?
Leo Tolstoy wrote:Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it.
by Revolutopia » Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:29 pm
by Bleckonia » Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:30 pm
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Atrito, Austria-Bohemia-Hungary, Duvniask, Ifreann, Vassenor
Advertisement