Abortion and Capital Punishment

[The ivain isles]

No.

So you endorse slavery. Grand.

And you endorse murder.

[Zottistan]

Otherwise yes. Because consent can be revoked.

If a woman is having sex with a guy and tells him she wants to stop, and he keeps going, he's raping her. If a woman has a fetus and decides she doesn't want it in her womb, and it doesn't leave, it's trespassing.

The foetus is dependent on the mother for survival, the right to life trumps rights of property.

So again, you believe in slavery?

[Torcularis Septentrionalis]

Why shouldn't they be?

No. Stealing harms people. It's more like, if you don't like mustard, don't eat mustard. Otherwise, get your nose out of other people's sandwiches.

Because it ends up killing an innocent life.

Abortion results in the death of the fetus, so it does do harm.

Enslaving women is a far greater harm than stopping a pregnancy.

[Mavorpen]

Otherwise yes. Because consent can be revoked.

If a woman is having sex with a guy and tells him she wants to stop, and he keeps going, he's raping her. If a woman has a fetus and decides she doesn't want it in her womb, and it doesn't leave, it's trespassing.

The foetus is dependent on the mother for survival, the right to life trumps rights of property.

So if your right lung stops working, you should be able to take a piece of another person's liver against their will? Fuck that.

[Blasveck]

Otherwise yes. Because consent can be revoked.

If a woman is having sex with a guy and tells him she wants to stop, and he keeps going, he's raping her. If a woman has a fetus and decides she doesn't want it in her womb, and it doesn't leave, it's trespassing.

The foetus is dependent on the mother for survival, the right to life trumps rights of property.

The fetus is, biologically, a parasite.

Against her will.

[Brissia]

The foetus is dependent on the mother for survival, the right to life trumps rights of property.

The fetus is, biologically, a parasite.

Against her will.

That's a very realistic, but creepy way to put it.

[Franklin Delano Bluth]

Otherwise yes. Because consent can be revoked.

If a woman is having sex with a guy and tells him she wants to stop, and he keeps going, he's raping her. If a woman has a fetus and decides she doesn't want it in her womb, and it doesn't leave, it's trespassing.

The foetus is dependent on the mother for survival,

So is a tumor, E. Coli, and malaria.

the right to life trumps rights of property.

But non-persons (such as a fetus) don't have a right to life, so...

[Blasveck]

So you endorse slavery. Grand.

And you endorse murder.

You do know that banning/restricting abortions rarely ever stops them from happening, right?

[Zottistan]

So you endorse slavery. Grand.

And you endorse murder.

I've read this a lot.

You know, we probably could remove the fetus from the womb without killing it, as an eviction as opposed to murder, then simply remove the devices keeping it alive so it could die of its own accord. I mean, modern medicine can do remarkable things. And morally speaking, this would be sound.

Of course, assuming it has a developed nervous system, this could be a very painful process for it.

Pro-lifers, if you don't want this to happen but want to sustain a consistent morality, abortion is the way to go.

[Torcularis Septentrionalis]

The fetus is, biologically, a parasite.

Against her will.

That's a very realistic, but creepy way to put it.

Yeah, I try to stay away from that argument because it tends to not win over any anti-choicers. In the end it just makes them go, "NO UR RONG ITS A BABY!!! I HOPE YOU ARE NEVER AROUND CHILDrEN U WULD PROBALY KEEL DEM."

[Franklin Delano Bluth]

So you endorse slavery. Grand.

And you endorse murder.

It's not murder if what's being killed is not a person.

Why do you have such a low regard for human life, that you're willing to put a non-person above a person? Is it because you're not a Christian? Because if you were a Christian, you'd be pro-abortion, and recognize that it's the true pro-life position.

It's a parasite, not a person.

It's a choice, not a child.

The Christian position is pro-choice.

[Brissia]

That's a very realistic, but creepy way to put it.

Yeah, I try to stay away from that argument because it tends to not win over any anti-choicers. In the end it just makes them go, "NO UR RONG ITS A BABY!!! I HOPE YOU ARE NEVER AROUND CHILDrEN U WULD PROBALY KEEL DEM."

Sadly.

[Torcularis Septentrionalis]

Yeah, I try to stay away from that argument because it tends to not win over any anti-choicers. In the end it just makes them go, "NO UR RONG ITS A BABY!!! I HOPE YOU ARE NEVER AROUND CHILDrEN U WULD PROBALY KEEL DEM."

Sadly.

Hilariously enough I was an incredibly well-liked and well-respected preschool teacher, so....

[Brissia]

Sadly.

Hilariously enough I was an incredibly well-liked and well-respected preschool teacher, so....

Sadly, people don't realize the difference between a living, sentient being, and a meat sack that can't even think.

[The ivain isles]

No.

So you are saying that a woman can not get a trespassing thing that causes several horrible symptoms out of her body?
Why not?

Firstly, that trespassing thing is a potential candidate to the human race, secondly, dehumanising a life does not change the fact that its a life, and thirdly, to decide that that life has no rights because its in a woman's body seems to me to be akin to slavery, considering the fact that said life has no choice on any matter, and has its very existence placed into the hands of somebody else.

[Solarys]

:lol2:

In the case of rape, yes, but otherwise, no.

Otherwise yes. Because consent can be revoked.

If a woman is having sex with a guy and tells him she wants to stop, and he keeps going, he's raping her. If a woman has a fetus and decides she doesn't want it in her womb, and it doesn't leave, it's trespassing.

And what if it is too late to stop himself from ejaculating ? Rape.

Seriously, people should start taking these things seriously and not as some kind of a game. If you have any doubts, then you shouldn't be having sex in the first place. You should have changed your mind before you undressed and began, not when it is about to stop or after it has happened.

[The ivain isles]

And you endorse murder.

It's not murder if what's being killed is not a person.

Why do you have such a low regard for human life, that you're willing to put a non-person above a person? Is it because you're not a Christian? Because if you were a Christian, you'd be pro-abortion, and recognize that it's the true pro-life position.

It's a parasite, not a person.

It's a choice, not a child.

The Christian position is pro-choice.

Your right, it's an antelope instead, and lol, good work bringing religion into it, considering I'm an atheist.

[Blasveck]

So you are saying that a woman can not get a trespassing thing that causes several horrible symptoms out of her body?
Why not?

Firstly, that trespassing thing is a potential candidate to the human race, secondly, dehumanising a life does not change the fact that its a life, and thirdly, to decide that that life has no rights because its in a woman's body seems to me to be akin to slavery, considering the fact that said life has no choice on any matter, and has its very existence placed into the hands of somebody else.

I'll say this again:

You do know that banning/restricting abortions rarely ever stops them from happening right?

Either you want only the rich to be able to have safe, sterile abortions, or every woman being able to have safe, sterile abortions.

[Ceannairceach]

So you endorse slavery. Grand.

And you endorse murder.

Nope. Abortion is legal, and for something to be murder, it must be illegal.

[Blasveck]

Otherwise yes. Because consent can be revoked.

If a woman is having sex with a guy and tells him she wants to stop, and he keeps going, he's raping her. If a woman has a fetus and decides she doesn't want it in her womb, and it doesn't leave, it's trespassing.

And what if it is too late to stop himself from ejaculating ? Rape.

Seriously, people should start taking these things seriously and not as some kind of a game. If you have any doubts, then you shouldn't be having sex in the first place. You should have changed your mind before you undressed and began, not when it is about to stop or after it has happened.

So slut shaming?

Wonderful.

[Brissia]

Otherwise yes. Because consent can be revoked.

If a woman is having sex with a guy and tells him she wants to stop, and he keeps going, he's raping her. If a woman has a fetus and decides she doesn't want it in her womb, and it doesn't leave, it's trespassing.

And what if it is too late to stop himself from ejaculating ? Rape.

Seriously, people should start taking these things seriously and not as some kind of a game. If you have any doubts, then you shouldn't be having sex in the first place. You should have changed your mind before you undressed and began, not when it is about to stop or after it has happened.

Ever heard of condoms, or removing your dick before ejaculating?

[Solarys]

Enslaving women is a far greater harm than stopping a pregnancy.

I'd disagree. Taking a life is a far greater harm than temporary lose of complete control. Especially when you consider that freedom is an illusion and if given will result in complete chaos and breakdown of societies and civilizations.

[Blasveck]

Enslaving women is a far greater harm than stopping a pregnancy.

I'd disagree. Taking a life is a far greater harm than temporary lose of complete control. Especially when you consider that freedom is an illusion and if given will result in complete chaos and breakdown of societies and civilizations.

I....what?

[Brissia]

So you are saying that a woman can not get a trespassing thing that causes several horrible symptoms out of her body?
Why not?

Firstly, that trespassing thing is a potential candidate to the human race, secondly, dehumanising a life does not change the fact that its a life, and thirdly, to decide that that life has no rights because its in a woman's body seems to me to be akin to slavery, considering the fact that said life has no choice on any matter, and has its very existence placed into the hands of somebody else.

OK, so you're saying that something that is alive has the full right to live, right?

OK than, what about cancer cells? I mean, they're alive and all! They have no choice in the matter! But hey, they harm us! So you're saying we should let them continue to destroy our bodies, just because they have no choice in the matter?

[Solarys]

Ever heard of condoms, or removing your dick before ejaculating?

Ever heard that condoms are not 100% reliable ? Or that you can't always remove it before, depending upon how close you are to climax ?