41% of Births end in Abortion...100%

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
181

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]buckeye girl wrote:

A fetus just a mass of cells until it can function outside of the womb. (Note that I said function not walk around, feed itself, and survive on its own). It has no soul. No destiny. And its not a “miracle from god”.

[/quote]

Nice dogma.

I say you have no soul. You aren’t something special from some magic being. I or anyone else can kill you if they want and no one should care.[/quote]

I would care very much, I might be next.[/quote]

You have no magic soul either, so why would that matter?[/quote]

I just does, I am kind of irrational that way.

You may notice that an embryo is not. [/quote]

Is not what?[/quote]

Irrational in any way,shape or form.

In fact, its complete inability to be irrational means that it lacks quite a lot that human beings have.[/quote]

So do the mentally handicapped and infants.

But fetuses are human beings, so fetuses should be included in that average.

So lets say you fall and knock yourself in the head, rendering yourself unconscious. You have lost the ability to be irrational or rational or anything higher brain function. Do you then lose your humanity?

You guys drawing these arbitrary lines are reaching. Either humans have rights or they don’t.

182

[quote]TooHuman wrote:

[quote]buckeye girl wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]buckeye girl wrote:
DD and Cortes: Like stronghold, my definition of “life” is different from others posting on here. A person, whether they’re 2 months old, 2 years old or 72 years old, is not the same as a partially developed fetus in the womb.

I have no interest in discussing the infinite numbers of hypothetical situations and “what ifs” that we can certainly come up with. With varying beliefs and definitions, abortion is a complicated topic. And I know the climate of this board.

My point was simply that with our current laws, abortion is not a crime and individuals have a choice. Not everyone thinks abortion is wrong. Some women have them. It’s their decision, their body, and their clump of cells. End of story.[/quote]

I’m not interested in hypothetical situations. I don’t care what people “think” is right and wrong. I want actual reasons. You have them, don’t you?

For all your complaining about religion, so far the only mystical, magical beliefs I’ve heard so far in this thread have come from you and your fellow pro-abortionists.

So, if it isn’t “magic,” then you should be able to kindly point me to the difference that you so keenly discern between the “clump of cells” and the 2 month old child I referred to above.

I’ll be waiting on that.

[/quote]

A fetus just a mass of cells until it can function outside of the womb. (Note that I said function not walk around, feed itself, and survive on its own). It has no soul. No destiny. And its not a “miracle from god”.

[/quote]

NO human can “survive on it’s own” and no human can “function” without other living organisms, there’s no basic function an adult can do that a single cell doesn’t perform. Only the complexity and difficulty changes. In fact there are plenty of people born without the “function” of other people still in the womb. You are claiming there is an arbitrary line at the cervix that changes the identity of a human. That is complete bullshit.[/quote]

The reading comprehension around here is astounding. Y’all have fun twisting around someone else’s words and making statements about things that are totally irrelevant.

I’m going back to The Land of Science and Barbells. Enjoy your pseudo-intellectual circle jerk.

183

I can’t wait to read the cat’s argu(e)ment !

184

[quote]buckeye girl wrote:
DD and Cortes: Like stronghold, my definition of “life” is different from others posting on here. A person, whether they’re 2 months old, 2 years old or 72 years old, is not the same as a partially developed fetus in the womb.

I have no interest in discussing the infinite numbers of hypothetical situations and “what ifs” that we can certainly come up with. With varying beliefs and definitions, abortion is a complicated topic. And I know the climate of this board.

My point was simply that with our current laws, abortion is not a crime and individuals have a choice. Not everyone thinks abortion is wrong. Some women have them. It’s their decision, their body, and their clump of cells. End of story.[/quote]

The problem is your definition of life is wrong and allows you to perpetrate the horrors of abortion.

A fetus isn’t alive or isn’t human so kill it. It is so horrible you reuse to let yourself consider the truth of your position.

185

[quote]kaaleppi wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]buckeye girl wrote:
DD and Cortes: Like stronghold, my definition of “life” is different from others posting on here. A person, whether they’re 2 months old, 2 years old or 72 years old, is not the same as a partially developed fetus in the womb.

I have no interest in discussing the infinite numbers of hypothetical situations and “what ifs” that we can certainly come up with. With varying beliefs and definitions, abortion is a complicated topic. And I know the climate of this board.

My point was simply that with our current laws, abortion is not a crime and individuals have a choice. Not everyone thinks abortion is wrong. Some women have them. It’s their decision, their body, and their clump of cells. End of story.[/quote]

I’m not interested in hypothetical situations. I don’t care what people “think” is right and wrong. I want actual reasons. You have them, don’t you?

For all your complaining about religion, so far the only mystical, magical beliefs I’ve heard so far in this thread have come from you and your fellow pro-abortionists.

So, if it isn’t “magic,” then you should be able to kindly point me to the difference that you so keenly discern between the “clump of cells” and the 2 month old child I referred to above.

I’ll be waiting on that.

[/quote]

This, this, this. I’m sick and tired of seeing the same “well, we don’t know when ‘life’ begins.” The human embryo IS an organism. Period. And an organism is what class? A) non-living or B) Living. Let’s agree to B), since science has already told us the answer. So then, does human mommy carry a dog life in here tum-tum? Nooooo, that would be silly, silly. It’s a human life.

Seriously, what don’t people get about this? There is no magical swap here. It IS the same individual organism throughout it’s entire life and developmental cycle. This isn’t a point for debate. The debate is, is intentionally taking innocent human life a legitimate “choice” in a nation that supposedly values “inalienable rights.” First, necessarily, being the right to life.[/quote]

I’ll hop in here. I’ll tell you why we need abortion. This is an imperfect word, perfect moral laws don’t work here, this is the reality-zone, after a couple of turns they turn imperfect and to a mockery of themselves, like in the example of a rape, should the woman get an abortion or not. Of course abortion is a termination of a beginning life. Murder is a strongly emotional word and plays in your favour and I understand why you use it, but it isn’t entirely honest.

The life that was aborted, you didn’t know the person that was murdered and there is no-one in this world who could tell you about it. This is a sad part, the potential, and it would be great if no-one would have an abortion. All of this is sad, really, but unavoidable.

Now, 41% is way too much, and something should be done about it, if it is true, it tells of severe underlying problems. Now, I don’t know enough about things in america, where you have seperate clinics for abortion? Really? No wonder emotions run so high there.
[/quote]

This is an intellectually honest argument I can respect.

186

[quote]buckeye girl wrote:

[quote]TooHuman wrote:

[quote]buckeye girl wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]buckeye girl wrote:
DD and Cortes: Like stronghold, my definition of “life” is different from others posting on here. A person, whether they’re 2 months old, 2 years old or 72 years old, is not the same as a partially developed fetus in the womb.

I have no interest in discussing the infinite numbers of hypothetical situations and “what ifs” that we can certainly come up with. With varying beliefs and definitions, abortion is a complicated topic. And I know the climate of this board.

My point was simply that with our current laws, abortion is not a crime and individuals have a choice. Not everyone thinks abortion is wrong. Some women have them. It’s their decision, their body, and their clump of cells. End of story.[/quote]

I’m not interested in hypothetical situations. I don’t care what people “think” is right and wrong. I want actual reasons. You have them, don’t you?

For all your complaining about religion, so far the only mystical, magical beliefs I’ve heard so far in this thread have come from you and your fellow pro-abortionists.

So, if it isn’t “magic,” then you should be able to kindly point me to the difference that you so keenly discern between the “clump of cells” and the 2 month old child I referred to above.

I’ll be waiting on that.

[/quote]

A fetus just a mass of cells until it can function outside of the womb. (Note that I said function not walk around, feed itself, and survive on its own). It has no soul. No destiny. And its not a “miracle from god”.

[/quote]

NO human can “survive on it’s own” and no human can “function” without other living organisms, there’s no basic function an adult can do that a single cell doesn’t perform. Only the complexity and difficulty changes. In fact there are plenty of people born without the “function” of other people still in the womb. You are claiming there is an arbitrary line at the cervix that changes the identity of a human. That is complete bullshit.[/quote]

The reading comprehension around here is astounding. Y’all have fun twisting around someone else’s words and making statements about things that are totally irrelevant.

I’m going back to The Land of Science and Barbells. Enjoy your pseudo-intellectual circle jerk.[/quote]

You make an emotionally based argument that doesn’t hold up to any scrutiny and then duck out to return to “science.” Why do I suspect you are a climatologist?

187

[quote]kamui wrote:
I can’t wait to read the cat’s argu(e)ment ![/quote]

You’d be disappointed. In one thread where I supported the idea of the US renting out property on the moon to nations looking to make their own landings (so we could pay down our debt with the revenue, mind you) it responded…I’m paraphrasing, but I believe this is pretty accurate…“Meow, Meow-Meow, MeoW, hiss.” Tell me, why should that make my idea unworkable?

188

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]kamui wrote:
I can’t wait to read the cat’s argu(e)ment ![/quote]

You’d be disappointed. In one thread where I supported the idea of the US renting out property on the moon to nations looking to make their own landings (so we could pay down our debt with the revenue, mind you) it responded…I’m paraphrasing, but I believe this is pretty accurate…“Meow, Meow-Meow, MeoW, hiss.” Tell me, why should that make my idea unworkable? [/quote]

At least it didn’t shit on your pillow.

189

[quote]TooHuman wrote:

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]buckeye girl wrote:
DD and Cortes: Like stronghold, my definition of “life” is different from others posting on here. A person, whether they’re 2 months old, 2 years old or 72 years old, is not the same as a partially developed fetus in the womb.

I have no interest in discussing the infinite numbers of hypothetical situations and “what ifs” that we can certainly come up with. With varying beliefs and definitions, abortion is a complicated topic. And I know the climate of this board.

My point was simply that with our current laws, abortion is not a crime and individuals have a choice. Not everyone thinks abortion is wrong. Some women have them. It’s their decision, their body, and their clump of cells. End of story.[/quote]

I’m not interested in hypothetical situations. I don’t care what people “think” is right and wrong. I want actual reasons. You have them, don’t you?

For all your complaining about religion, so far the only mystical, magical beliefs I’ve heard so far in this thread have come from you and your fellow pro-abortionists.

So, if it isn’t “magic,” then you should be able to kindly point me to the difference that you so keenly discern between the “clump of cells” and the 2 month old child I referred to above.

I’ll be waiting on that.

[/quote]

This, this, this. I’m sick and tired of seeing the same “well, we don’t know when ‘life’ begins.” The human embryo IS an organism. Period. And an organism is what class? A) non-living or B) Living. Let’s agree to B), since science has already told us the answer. So then, does human mommy carry a dog life in here tum-tum? Nooooo, that would be silly, silly. It’s a human life.

Seriously, what don’t people get about this? There is no magical swap here. It IS the same individual organism throughout it’s entire life and developmental cycle. This isn’t a point for debate. The debate is, is intentionally taking innocent human life a legitimate “choice” in a nation that supposedly values “inalienable rights.” First, necessarily, being the right to life.[/quote]
Good post, though I am amazed at the claims some people I have argued with made on behalf of defending the “right to abortion” such as it isn’t alive, its not human etc…

I have always thought the ruling on Roe v. Wade based on the right of privacy is equivalent to murdering people who aren’t able to defend themselves in the privacy of ones home.[/quote]

At the time of Roe V. Wade the actual process of conception wasn’t clear before the 6th day or so. In fact, the entire premise of genetic identity and the now well determined fact that two human’s cannot conceive anything except another unique human organism was absent from the evidence in the case.
In that case the court used a lot of conjecture from the stance of common law on abortion to determine a historically relevant consensus as to the “feasibility” of an unborn child. In fact, the justice who wrote the opinion of the court admitted that if it could be determined that an unborn child was a person in the meaning of the 14th amendment, that any claim to privacy by the parent was surpassed by the explicit right to life of the child.
[/quote]
I know its been some forty years since the ruling, it seems to me it should of been entirely obvious during that time period(or even before that) that whats conceive is human.

Although I have to say you post was quite informative and even got me to look up excerpts from the dissenting opinion.

190

[quote]Big Banana wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]kamui wrote:
I can’t wait to read the cat’s argu(e)ment ![/quote]

You’d be disappointed. In one thread where I supported the idea of the US renting out property on the moon to nations looking to make their own landings (so we could pay down our debt with the revenue, mind you) it responded…I’m paraphrasing, but I believe this is pretty accurate…“Meow, Meow-Meow, MeoW, hiss.” Tell me, why should that make my idea unworkable? [/quote]

At least it didn’t shit on your pillow.[/quote]
lol

191

[quote]kamui wrote:
I can’t wait to read the cat’s argu(e)ment ![/quote]

lol

192

[quote]buckeye girl wrote:

The reading comprehension around here is astounding. Y’all have fun twisting around someone else’s words and making statements about things that are totally irrelevant.

I’m going back to The Land of Science and Barbells. Enjoy your pseudo-intellectual circle jerk.[/quote]

That’s funny, as I’m absolutely positive that all I did was ask you to clarify your position.

For all your bluster and tough talk, it sure doesn’t take much pressure for you to turn tail and scurry off to more comfortable environs, does it?

193

[quote]Big Banana wrote:

[quote]buckeye girl wrote:
DD and Cortes: Like stronghold, my definition of “life” is different from others posting on here. A person, whether they’re 2 months old, 2 years old or 72 years old, is not the same as a partially developed fetus in the womb.

I have no interest in discussing the infinite numbers of hypothetical situations and “what ifs” that we can certainly come up with. With varying beliefs and definitions, abortion is a complicated topic. And I know the climate of this board.

My point was simply that with our current laws, abortion is not a crime and individuals have a choice. Not everyone thinks abortion is wrong. Some women have them. It’s their decision, their body, and their clump of cells. End of story.[/quote]

The problem is your definition of life is wrong and allows you to perpetrate the horrors of abortion.

A fetus isn’t alive or isn’t human so kill it. It is so horrible you reuse to let yourself consider the truth of your position.[/quote]

Bingo. As clearly demonstrated by the absolute refusal to do anything other than assert her religious dogmas, call us names, and spout Orwellian Newspeak as if it were some substitute for actually defending her position.

194

[quote]Stronghold wrote:
sentient human being[/quote]

I agree that an unborn child can’t feel things early in its development. They also can’t think and aren’t self aware until much later. Nevertheless, how does level of development determine our value? Are there not many humans outside the womb who cannot feel or perceive things? Or, even have worse thinking skills or are lack self-awareness than others? If being able to feel is what gives us value, wouldn’t that mean those people who have higher mental processing skills have more value than those of use with less?

Still not following what you’re saying. I am sure you have some merit to your argument, but I just cannot connect a natural phenomena such as miscarriage to manslaughter.

As I pointed out my intellect is weak, please explain further.

195

[quote]buckeye girl wrote:
That 41% statistic is misleading. It refers specifically to either NYC or the state, which has a higher than average rate. I found that stat, but now I don’t remember where, so I can’t comment on the source.

The CDC reports that in 2000 there were 246 abortions per 1000 live births in the US (minus a few states that did not report data for the year). That puts us at a rate much lower than the 41% that keeps getting mentioned. The CDC also reports that for every 1000 women of child bearing age (15-44,), 16 of them had an abortion. Remember, the second stat includes all women, not just the ones that were pregnant that year, but it does give us a better picture of just how many women in the population are having abortions.

Aside from the statistics that may or may not be correct, I take issue with one thing in here. And it’s this: whether or not some woman somewhere chooses to have an abortion is none of your damn business. I’m not saying that what they are doing is right or wrong, just that what they are doing is legal and a personal decision that they will have to live with, not you. If your religion/morals/philosophy dictate that it is wrong, that’s fine. Don’t have one yourself and find a partner who shares your views. Not everyone shares those views. [/quote]

Why is it none of my business?

196

[quote]buckeye girl wrote:
It’s their decision, their body, and their clump of cells. End of story.[/quote]

What makes the baby their body? It has a unique DNA, which means it is a separate human being. If someone found two sets of DNA at say a crime scene, the forensic team wouldn’t pronounce that there was only one human being there. Two DNA samples, two different humans.

197

[quote]buckeye girl wrote:
It has no soul.[/quote]

For a minute, I thought Sloth had his wish answered.

198

[quote]kaaleppi wrote:

Yes, but that is the main difference between first and second trimester, developed brainfunction. According to my knowledge, I might be wrong, that is the reason why the limit for most abortions is where it is. [/quote]

Why does that matter? It’s not like the kids is going to rip out quantum equations in-utero.

199

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

Seriously, what don’t people get about this? There is no magical swap here. It IS the same individual organism throughout it’s entire life and developmental cycle. This isn’t a point for debate. The debate is, is intentionally taking innocent human life a legitimate “choice” in a nation that supposedly values “inalienable rights.” First, necessarily, being the right to life.

Orion wrote:
If you say so.

[/quote]

Here’s the telling thing about every response of this nature. Not once have they challenged me. I made plain claims, why not falsify them? I’m claiming to argue from science, after all.

  1. Human embryo is an organism. Y or N
  2. The above organism is an individual, having it’s own diploid set of DNA. Y or N
  3. An organism is living. Y or N

I’ll make this last one multiple guess. Human mother carries in the womb a) a dog b) a parrot c) a jackalope or d) none of the previous, as we can see by DNA testing that it is human. And, as we already know anyways, there is no organism swap-out just before birth.

If no one falsifies what I’ve said, then I’ve framed the debate correctly. This is a discussion about the “right” to take innocent human lives. Now, I can’t seem to find this right anywhere in our historic and founding documents. But, I did find this gem “The right to life.” It is–well, sadly that might be ‘was’–also a peculiar historical belief that our rights were inalienable.

[/quote]

Yes, yes and yes.

Does not change that an embryo does not have the same rights as a born human being and for good reasons.

[/quote]

WE’re not talking about applying for social security here, just a simple right to exist.

200

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]buckeye girl wrote:

A fetus just a mass of cells until it can function outside of the womb. (Note that I said function not walk around, feed itself, and survive on its own). It has no soul. No destiny. And its not a “miracle from god”.

[/quote]

Nice dogma.

I say you have no soul. You aren’t something special from some magic being. I or anyone else can kill you if they want and no one should care.[/quote]

I would care very much, I might be next.[/quote]

You have no magic soul either, so why would that matter?[/quote]

I just does, I am kind of irrational that way.

You may notice that an embryo is not. [/quote]

Is not what?[/quote]

Irrational.