NationStates

Akrisen wrote:

San Lumen wrote:If a fetus is a person then it is using a rape or incest victims body without their consent.

There is no evidence of fetuses being sentient until late stage pregnancy.

Why should a women be forced to carry to term a child she does not want?

They are potential humans thats all that matters, if you refuse to commit suicide that means you value living over not living so shouldnt do the same to other humans like foetuses for example.

Do you want to build a strawman?
Come to NSG and play!
There's no need for logic anymore
Just grab the straw
And build a man to-day!

... That argument is not impressive.

San Lumen wrote:

Akrisen wrote:
They are potential humans thats all that matters, if you refuse to commit suicide that means you value living over not living so shouldnt do the same to other humans like foetuses for example.

You didnt answer any of my points.

who are you to force a rape victim to carry to term a child they dont want?

If there is no right to bodily autonomy why not have mandatory blood donations?

Who are you to deny one of existence and not do the same to yourself showing you agree that nonexistence is preferable to existence? If rights are so important why arent people with STDs segregated from healthy people to preserve the sexual freedom rights of healthy people hmm? Because its morally wrong and yet abortion isnt oh the hypocracy.

Akrisen wrote:

San Lumen wrote:You didnt answer any of my points.

who are you to force a rape victim to carry to term a child they dont want?

If there is no right to bodily autonomy why not have mandatory blood donations?

Who are you to deny one of existence and not do the same to yourself showing you agree that nonexistence is preferable to existence? If rights are so important why arent people with STDs segregated from healthy people to preserve the sexual freedom rights of healthy people hmm? Because its morally wrong and yet abortion isnt oh the hypocracy.

So we can take your blood to save another human ?

Akrisen wrote:

San Lumen wrote:You didnt answer any of my points.

who are you to force a rape victim to carry to term a child they dont want?

If there is no right to bodily autonomy why not have mandatory blood donations?

Who are you to deny one of existence and not do the same to yourself showing you agree that nonexistence is preferable to existence? If rights are so important why arent people with STDs segregated from healthy people to preserve the sexual freedom rights of healthy people hmm? Because its morally wrong and yet abortion isnt oh the hypocracy.

Not a good comparison.

If a fetus is a person they a using ones body without their consent. I ask again why should a rape victim have to carry to term a pregnancy they dont want and didnt ask for?

What gives you the right to make medical decisions for others?

Should we have mandatory blood and organ donation then?

San Lumen wrote:

Akrisen wrote:
Who are you to deny one of existence and not do the same to yourself showing you agree that nonexistence is preferable to existence? If rights are so important why arent people with STDs segregated from healthy people to preserve the sexual freedom rights of healthy people hmm? Because its morally wrong and yet abortion isnt oh the hypocracy.

Not a good comparison.

If a fetus is a person they a using ones body without their consent. I ask again why should a rape victim have to carry to term a pregnancy they dont want and didnt ask for?

What gives you the right to make medical decisions for others?

Should we have mandatory blood and organ donation then?

I mean, you have to provide a portion of your personal wealth to care for your kids as well. You already are forced to work for them.... So that argument kind of falls apart.

The Grims wrote:

Akrisen wrote:
Who are you to deny one of existence and not do the same to yourself showing you agree that nonexistence is preferable to existence? If rights are so important why arent people with STDs segregated from healthy people to preserve the sexual freedom rights of healthy people hmm? Because its morally wrong and yet abortion isnt oh the hypocracy.

So we can take your blood to save another human ?

Thats not the same as ending the life of a potential human.

Not a good comparison.

If a fetus is a person they a using ones body without their consent. I ask again why should a rape victim have to carry to term a pregnancy they dont want and didnt ask for?

What gives you the right to make medical decisions for others?

Should we have mandatory blood and organ donation then?

Unless the rape victim commits suicide they are hypocrite if they seek abortion.

The Emerald Legion wrote:

San Lumen wrote:
Not a good comparison.

If a fetus is a person they a using ones body without their consent. I ask again why should a rape victim have to carry to term a pregnancy they dont want and didnt ask for?

What gives you the right to make medical decisions for others?

Should we have mandatory blood and organ donation then?

I mean, you have to provide a portion of your personal wealth to care for your kids as well. You already are forced to work for them.... So that argument kind of falls apart.

Not really.

With a born child, you can immediately -- without delay -- surrender them to foster care or leave them at a hospital or other designated space if you no longer wish to care for them. You can claim financial support to help you care for them. A born child is not living inside you, using your organs and blood; you are not likely to haemorrhage without warning, or suffer a ruptured uterus while caring for a born child.

Having a job, to support a child, does not cause health complications or aggravate existing ones (and, if it does, you can just go and get a new one). Having a job does not cause trauma. You do not have to push a desk through a very tiny hole in your anatomy, at great personal pain.

It's completely different.

Akrisen wrote:

The Grims wrote:
So we can take your blood to save another human ?

Thats not the same as ending the life of a potential human.

Not a good comparison.

If a fetus is a person they a using ones body without their consent. I ask again why should a rape victim have to carry to term a pregnancy they dont want and didnt ask for?

What gives you the right to make medical decisions for others?

Should we have mandatory blood and organ donation then?

Unless the rape victim commits suicide they are hypocrite if they seek abortion.

How are they a hypocrite? They didnt want the child why should they be forced to have it?

Akrisen wrote:

The Grims wrote:
So we can take your blood to save another human ?

Thats not the same as ending the life of a potential human.

Not a good comparison.

If a fetus is a person they a using ones body without their consent. I ask again why should a rape victim have to carry to term a pregnancy they dont want and didnt ask for?

What gives you the right to make medical decisions for others?

Should we have mandatory blood and organ donation then?

Unless the rape victim commits suicide they are hypocrite if they seek abortion.

So you're saying pregnant rape victims should raise the offspring in submission to the rapist, or kill themselves.

Akrisen wrote:

The Grims wrote:
So we can take your blood to save another human ?

Thats not the same as ending the life of a potential human.

No, it's the same as saving a life that depends on you.

You are the only match for the person who needs the blood. The mother is the only match for the foetus.

That's the comparison.

Not a good comparison.

If a fetus is a person they a using ones body without their consent. I ask again why should a rape victim have to carry to term a pregnancy they dont want and didnt ask for?

What gives you the right to make medical decisions for others?

Should we have mandatory blood and organ donation then?

Unless the rape victim commits suicide they are hypocrite if they seek abortion.

This strawman is trite, repetitive and wholly unimpressive.

Gormwood wrote:

Akrisen wrote:
Thats not the same as ending the life of a potential human.



Unless the rape victim commits suicide they are hypocrite if they seek abortion.

So you're saying pregnant rape victims should raise the offspring in submission to the rapist, or kill themselves.

Yes if they wish to be logically consistent in their message that nonexistence is better than existence. The people who keep saying they dont care if mommy aborted them should commit suicide to prove their point.

How are they a hypocrite? They didnt want the child why should they be forced to have it?

Its hypocritical to use morals to back up one issue then ignore it for another.

Akrisen wrote:

Gormwood wrote:So you're saying pregnant rape victims should raise the offspring in submission to the rapist, or kill themselves.

Yes if they wish to be logically consistent in their message that nonexistence is better than existence. The people who keep saying they dont care if mommy aborted them should commit suicide to prove their point.

How are they a hypocrite? They didnt want the child why should they be forced to have it?

Its hypocritical to use morals to back up one issue then ignore it for another.

Are you aware that a zygote in week 0.142857142857... does not equal a born person or a person of childbearing age? Drawing equivalency between those three states is nonsensical.

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:

Akrisen wrote:
Yes if they wish to be logically consistent in their message that nonexistence is better than existence. The people who keep saying they dont care if mommy aborted them should commit suicide to prove their point.



Its hypocritical to use morals to back up one issue then ignore it for another.

Are you aware that a zygote in week 0.142857142857... does not equal a born person or a person of childbearing age? Drawing equivalency between those three states is nonsensical.

They are a potential person.

Akrisen wrote:

Gormwood wrote:So you're saying pregnant rape victims should raise the offspring in submission to the rapist, or kill themselves.

Yes if they wish to be logically consistent in their message that nonexistence is better than existence. The people who keep saying they dont care if mommy aborted them should commit suicide to prove their point.

1) That is not our message, nice strawman.
2) That isn't our point, nice strawman.

Akrisen wrote:

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:Are you aware that a zygote in week 0.142857142857... does not equal a born person or a person of childbearing age? Drawing equivalency between those three states is nonsensical.

They are a potential person.

Its not a person. If a rape victim doesnt want the child why should they be forced to have it?

If a fetus is a person why dont we give pregnant women two votes in an election? Or count fetus in the census?

Akrisen wrote:

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:Are you aware that a zygote in week 0.142857142857... does not equal a born person or a person of childbearing age? Drawing equivalency between those three states is nonsensical.

They are a potential person.

My intention to cook dinner is potentiality for dinner, is it an actual dinner though? Is a bag of flour, a few tomatoes and some raw milk a pizza simply because it's potentiality for pizza?

Akrisen wrote:

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:Are you aware that a zygote in week 0.142857142857... does not equal a born person or a person of childbearing age? Drawing equivalency between those three states is nonsensical.

They are a potential person.

So... the woman discovers that she's got cancer (of the endometrium/cervix/uterus, etc) early in the pregnancy. If the pregnancy goes to term, the foetus may live, but the cancer would probably metastasise. Would you ban a sentient woman -- a human being (with thoughts, a family, perhaps other children who need her) -- from having an abortion (a chance of life) for the sake of an insentient embryo only a few weeks old?

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:

Akrisen wrote:
They are a potential person.

My intention to cook dinner is potentiality for dinner, is it an actual dinner though? Is a bag of flour, a few tomatoes and some raw milk a pizza simply because it's potentiality for pizza?

My supermarket sells pizza kits with ready made tomato sauce, cheese and dough in one package, can we call this a pizza since it's also a potential pizza?

San Lumen wrote:

Akrisen wrote:
They are a potential person.

Its not a person. If a rape victim doesnt want the child why should they be forced to have it?

If a fetus is a person why dont we give pregnant women two votes in an election? Or count fetus in the census?

If all girls killed their rape babies none of us would exist right now.

Akrisen wrote:

The Grims wrote:
So we can take your blood to save another human ?

Thats not the same as ending the life of a potential human.

It is actually, in the case of pregnancy. You are witholding lifesustaining blood and organs from the fetus. Same as refusing to give a lifesaving bloodtransfusion to another human or refusing to donate a lifesaving kidney.

Well not exactly the same actually. In the latter cases the recipient would be an actual fully grown person with thoughts and feelings. Which you value as being worth less than a potential person.

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:

Akrisen wrote:
They are a potential person.

My intention to cook dinner is potentiality for dinner, is it an actual dinner though? Is a bag of flour, a few tomatoes and some raw milk a pizza simply because it's potentiality for pizza?

Unless some process naturally makes it become pizza its not the same as a foetus.

So... the woman discovers that she's got cancer (of the endometrium/cervix/uterus, etc) early in the pregnancy. If the pregnancy goes to term, the foetus may live, but the cancer would probably metastasise. Would you ban a sentient woman -- a human being (with thoughts, a family, perhaps other children who need her) -- from having an abortion (a chance of life) for the sake of an insentient embryo only a few weeks old?

No

Akrisen wrote:

San Lumen wrote:Its not a person. If a rape victim doesnt want the child why should they be forced to have it?

If a fetus is a person why dont we give pregnant women two votes in an election? Or count fetus in the census?

If all girls killed their rape babies none of us would exist right now.

Where do you get that leap of logic?

Plus your not the one whose pregnant. If you have no uterus you get no opinion.

Plus you dodged my other question

Akrisen wrote:

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:My intention to cook dinner is potentiality for dinner, is it an actual dinner though? Is a bag of flour, a few tomatoes and some raw milk a pizza simply because it's potentiality for pizza?

Unless some process naturally makes it become pizza its not the same as a foetus.

You do realise that going through a pregnancy involves a whole lot of effort too right?

Akrisen wrote:

San Lumen wrote:Its not a person. If a rape victim doesnt want the child why should they be forced to have it?

If a fetus is a person why dont we give pregnant women two votes in an election? Or count fetus in the census?

If all girls killed their rape babies none of us would exist right now.

Why is that?

San Lumen wrote:

Akrisen wrote:
If all girls killed their rape babies none of us would exist right now.

Where do you get that leap of logic?

Plus your not the one whose pregnant. If you have no uterus you get no opinion.

Plus you dodged my other question

The leap in logic is that rape is why any of us exist right now. I know you have your idealistic views on mankind but rape was the natural form of reproduction since the Paleolithic era meaning none of us would exist without rape and if babies spawned by rape were killed again none of us would exist. So why should a baby produced by rape be killed if you wont agree to not killing yourself?