[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
So would my esteemed religious colleagues then please enlighten me as to what the status is of an IVF fertilized egg in their view?Are you against IVF on principle?[/quote]
Yes…And I like that fucking stick too.
[quote]JLu wrote:
Sloth wrote:
JLu wrote:
You still didn’t answer my question though, in that circumstance, assuming the teenage girl does not have a boyfriend, would you think abortion justified? If not please justify forcing a young woman into motherhood before she is ready.
No, it’s the killing of an innocent human.
You didn’t justify forcing a young woman into early motherhood/ruining her body/possibly ruining her future etc.[/quote]
Logically, the only way he (Sloth) could force her in to early motherhood, would be to rape her and hold her captive…Therefore he could not force her into “early” motherhood. She could choose not to fuck. The number one cause of pregnancy is fucking.
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
So would my esteemed religious colleagues then please enlighten me as to what the status is of an IVF fertilized egg in their view?Are you against IVF on principle?[/quote]
It is a human and should be treated as such. I don’t know enough about the procedure to comment on weather it should continue or not.
To the dolt saying “conciousness” is all that matters. WHAT? so if someone is sleeping you have the right to off them? What if they are in a coma? Go stab someone who is in a coma and see if you get charged with anything. Some of you are making arguments and claiming science is on your side, but then you swing and miss and it just makes you look stupid. I mean think your argument through, don’t just spout off because you are emotional about this and feel like anyone who is pro life wants to punish women or something. Some people actually hold firm that a fertalized agg with unique Human DNA which will develop in to a independant human being if left unmolested is actually a real live human and deserving of protection under our societal laws. (and thier natural rights, like the right to life)
V
[quote]Vegita wrote:
Neuromancer wrote:
So would my esteemed religious colleagues then please enlighten me as to what the status is of an IVF fertilized egg in their view?Are you against IVF on principle?
It is a human and should be treated as such. I don’t know enough about the procedure to comment on weather it should continue or not.
To the dolt saying “conciousness” is all that matters. WHAT? so if someone is sleeping you have the right to off them? What if they are in a coma? Go stab someone who is in a coma and see if you get charged with anything. Some of you are making arguments and claiming science is on your side, but then you swing and miss and it just makes you look stupid. I mean think your argument through, don’t just spout off because you are emotional about this and feel like anyone who is pro life wants to punish women or something. Some people actually hold firm that a fertalized agg with unique Human DNA which will develop in to a independant human being if left unmolested is actually a real live human and deserving of protection under our societal laws. (and thier natural rights, like the right to life)
V[/quote]
Go back and reread my posts. I wasn’t saying simply conciousness was the determining factor, but I have a hard time classifying something as a human being before it develops a brain and senses.
[quote]JLu wrote:
Vegita wrote:
Neuromancer wrote:
So would my esteemed religious colleagues then please enlighten me as to what the status is of an IVF fertilized egg in their view?Are you against IVF on principle?
It is a human and should be treated as such. I don’t know enough about the procedure to comment on weather it should continue or not.
To the dolt saying “conciousness” is all that matters. WHAT? so if someone is sleeping you have the right to off them? What if they are in a coma? Go stab someone who is in a coma and see if you get charged with anything. Some of you are making arguments and claiming science is on your side, but then you swing and miss and it just makes you look stupid. I mean think your argument through, don’t just spout off because you are emotional about this and feel like anyone who is pro life wants to punish women or something. Some people actually hold firm that a fertalized agg with unique Human DNA which will develop in to a independant human being if left unmolested is actually a real live human and deserving of protection under our societal laws. (and thier natural rights, like the right to life)
V
Go back and reread my posts. I wasn’t saying simply conciousness was the determining factor, but I have a hard time classifying something as a human being before it develops a brain and senses.[/quote]
No No, it wasn’t you I was refering to, I fully understood your point and to be honest it was one of the better ones I have heard. There was another guy who started of with “consiousness is everything”. You were saying that when the lump of stem cells are replicating, it’s just a lump of cells, there is no specialization, there is no tissue, there are no organs, while the DNA and potential for it to be human are there, to you they are not a human yet. But you think once the Stem cells start specializing, turing into clumps of cells that will develop into specific organs and systems, then it is a human.
Stage 8 of the 23 stages of embryonic development gave this description.
“Embryonic disc is piriform, Primitive pit appears, Neural folds may begin to form, Notochordal and neurenteric canals are generally detectable”
Source: http://virtualhumanembryo.lsuhsc.edu/HEIRLOOM/Stages/HEP_StagesFS.htm
Neural folds are the specific cells that will eventually become the developed brain. At this point in time, it is impossible to determine if there is some level of conciousness. This is at approx 23 days and almost no pregnancies are detected before this stage. I mean in most cases, a girl or woman will miss her period, wait a couple more days and then get the nerve up to take a pregnancy test. Also add in the fact that the sweet spot for pregancy is to have sex 1-2 days before ovulation. This is literally only a few days after the woman is over her last period, most pregnancies happen here because the embryo has time to develop and stick to the uterus lining. If fertilization happens when the egg is already far down the fallopian tube or past it, the fertilized egg will not attach to the uterine wall in time and the period will happen.
Basically what i’m getting at is that based on your previous argument it would be almost impossible, or at least very hard to have an abortion before the neural cells started developing. And if you say it needs to be a brain then we are back to arbitrary points on a continuum. I would much rather err on the side of not exterminating a human life. Put the cild up for adoption. Start a charitable orginazation that will take donations from every person who was previously pro choice, roll all that money into providing care for unwanted children.
Also pregnancy doesn’t “ruin” a womans body, it was specifically designed to handle it.
V
[quote]JLu wrote:
Vegita wrote:
Neuromancer wrote:
So would my esteemed religious colleagues then please enlighten me as to what the status is of an IVF fertilized egg in their view?Are you against IVF on principle?
It is a human and should be treated as such. I don’t know enough about the procedure to comment on weather it should continue or not.
To the dolt saying “conciousness” is all that matters. WHAT? so if someone is sleeping you have the right to off them? What if they are in a coma? Go stab someone who is in a coma and see if you get charged with anything. Some of you are making arguments and claiming science is on your side, but then you swing and miss and it just makes you look stupid. I mean think your argument through, don’t just spout off because you are emotional about this and feel like anyone who is pro life wants to punish women or something. Some people actually hold firm that a fertalized agg with unique Human DNA which will develop in to a independant human being if left unmolested is actually a real live human and deserving of protection under our societal laws. (and thier natural rights, like the right to life)
V
Go back and reread my posts. I wasn’t saying simply conciousness was the determining factor, but I have a hard time classifying something as a human being before it develops a brain and senses.[/quote]
Well let’s think about the clump of cells as you. Do you believe that you could ever exist, if you were the clump of cells that were destroyed? why or why not?
[quote]pat wrote:
Neuromancer wrote:
So would my esteemed religious colleagues then please enlighten me as to what the status is of an IVF fertilized egg in their view?Are you against IVF on principle?
Yes…And I like that fucking stick too.[/quote]
At least that’s consistent.And it’s a hell of a stick.
[quote]Vegita wrote:
JLu wrote:
Vegita wrote:
Neuromancer wrote:
So would my esteemed religious colleagues then please enlighten me as to what the status is of an IVF fertilized egg in their view?Are you against IVF on principle?
It is a human and should be treated as such. I don’t know enough about the procedure to comment on weather it should continue or not.
To the dolt saying “conciousness” is all that matters. WHAT? so if someone is sleeping you have the right to off them? What if they are in a coma? Go stab someone who is in a coma and see if you get charged with anything. Some of you are making arguments and claiming science is on your side, but then you swing and miss and it just makes you look stupid. I mean think your argument through, don’t just spout off because you are emotional about this and feel like anyone who is pro life wants to punish women or something. Some people actually hold firm that a fertalized agg with unique Human DNA which will develop in to a independant human being if left unmolested is actually a real live human and deserving of protection under our societal laws. (and thier natural rights, like the right to life)
V
Go back and reread my posts. I wasn’t saying simply conciousness was the determining factor, but I have a hard time classifying something as a human being before it develops a brain and senses.
No No, it wasn’t you I was refering to, I fully understood your point and to be honest it was one of the better ones I have heard. There was another guy who started of with “consiousness is everything”. You were saying that when the lump of stem cells are replicating, it’s just a lump of cells, there is no specialization, there is no tissue, there are no organs, while the DNA and potential for it to be human are there, to you they are not a human yet. But you think once the Stem cells start specializing, turing into clumps of cells that will develop into specific organs and systems, then it is a human.
Stage 8 of the 23 stages of embryonic development gave this description.
“Embryonic disc is piriform, Primitive pit appears, Neural folds may begin to form, Notochordal and neurenteric canals are generally detectable”
Source: http://virtualhumanembryo.lsuhsc.edu/HEIRLOOM/Stages/HEP_StagesFS.htm
Neural folds are the specific cells that will eventually become the developed brain. At this point in time, it is impossible to determine if there is some level of conciousness. This is at approx 23 days and almost no pregnancies are detected before this stage. I mean in most cases, a girl or woman will miss her period, wait a couple more days and then get the nerve up to take a pregnancy test. Also add in the fact that the sweet spot for pregancy is to have sex 1-2 days before ovulation. This is literally only a few days after the woman is over her last period, most pregnancies happen here because the embryo has time to develop and stick to the uterus lining. If fertilization happens when the egg is already far down the fallopian tube or past it, the fertilized egg will not attach to the uterine wall in time and the period will happen.
Basically what i’m getting at is that based on your previous argument it would be almost impossible, or at least very hard to have an abortion before the neural cells started developing. And if you say it needs to be a brain then we are back to arbitrary points on a continuum. I would much rather err on the side of not exterminating a human life. Put the cild up for adoption. Start a charitable orginazation that will take donations from every person who was previously pro choice, roll all that money into providing care for unwanted children.
Also pregnancy doesn’t “ruin” a womans body, it was specifically designed to handle it.
V[/quote]
Ok this is a good point I can’t really argue this. My previous point was more just trying to understand at what point Brother Chris, John S and Neuromancer decided that it was a human life.
I know it was specifically designed to handle it, but it certainly screws things up for a while if the woman had any type of athletic or physical aspirations (like a girl from my high school who was on her way to joining the national lacrosse team before she got preggers).
[quote]IgneLudo wrote:
Brother Chris wrote:
IgneLudo wrote:
Consciousness is the only thing that matters. DNA does not. Your skin cells have human DNA. You can grow skin cells in a petri dish forever.
Potential doesn’t matter either, otherwise your logic would dictate that you should be procreating as much as possible so that as many of your sperm/eggs develop into adults as possible. It does not matter than an embryo will develop into an adult human; it has not developed a consciousness yet (at least what we think of as a “human consciousness”). Unless you are vegetarian, don’t fucking talk about how the embryo might have some consciousness at X number of weeks into pregnancy. Like I said, it does not matter that it would develop the human consciousness in time. It hasn’t yet. It loses nothing. There is no more potential lost than is lost everytime a woman menstruates.
Anyone who thinks an embryo deserves equal status with an adult human is an open or secret believer in souls. Anyone who believes in souls doesn’t deserve an opinion on this subject. You certainly cannot feebly put forth bad scientific arguments with any sort of credibility.
Yes, Oh Mighty Lord of copying from Planned Parenthood.
Yes, Oh Mighty Lord of copying from ignorant Pro-Lifers.
Rofl dude, what? I’ve never read any Planned Parenthood materials and, quite frankly, I don’t think they are as clear as I am being.
Your literacy is pretty questionable.
[/quote]
Actually I am pretty sure their arguments are much more on par then yours, and much more clear than yours. Your statement doesn’t even follow logic, where the hell do you get this soul shit?
I am talking about science, the issue is not if she was raped, if she was poor, if she was this, of if any of the bullshit. The abortion debate is all about when the zygote, embryo, fetus, unborn baby, or whatever you wish to call it turns into a human, science. No one will say (unless they are my crazy philosophy teacher) that killing a human is just in any of those cases that pro-choice people put up for question (rape, accident, not read, poor, over population, cutting a families carbon foot print) if they were not in the womb. So in the abortion debate we have to decide when the organism turns into a human.
And if you talk to any scientist, they will tell you at conception that the organism attached to the womb of the mother is an organism commonly referred to as a human, or scientifically homo sapien.
[quote]IgneLudo wrote:
Brother Chris wrote:
The “mass of cells” called an organism is a human. Just like you are a mass of cells, and humans are always a mass of cells in any stage of development, location, size, or dependency. Comparing an embryo (or any stage of development) to a fingernail because they are both a mass of cells is illogical. They are two different things, if you kill a fingernail the human still lives, you kill a human, the human and the fingernail dies.
Do you even understand science? Was the last biology class you took in 9th grade? You aren’t arguing from science here. You are arguing that somehow you know that an embryo has a soul and things with souls are human. If you make arguments about souls, you can go talk with the guy who believes in unicorns and angels, not to people who actually make decisions in the real world.
The only thing that matters is consciousness and embryos don’t have consciousness. I would rather kill a hundred embryos than one chimpanzee. [/quote]
Here we go again with the fucking soul shit. Tell me, besides when replying to you, have I ever said the word “soul” in this thread. Go ahead, I’m still waiting.
I know you are a big shot caller in your dwelling, but I can attest I do make choices in the real world. However, from your arguments I can also attest that you likely really do not live in the real world. And if you keep this “soul” shit up, I’m sure everyone will realize you are the one that has a literacy problem, or you just put words in people’s mouths and use that against them. Which Sir, makes you a troll.
P.S. I shot Notorious B.I.G. and 2Pac.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
IgneLudo wrote:
Brother Chris wrote:
The “mass of cells” called an organism is a human. Just like you are a mass of cells, and humans are always a mass of cells in any stage of development, location, size, or dependency. Comparing an embryo (or any stage of development) to a fingernail because they are both a mass of cells is illogical. They are two different things, if you kill a fingernail the human still lives, you kill a human, the human and the fingernail dies.
Do you even understand science? Was the last biology class you took in 9th grade? You aren’t arguing from science here. You are arguing that somehow you know that an embryo has a soul and things with souls are human. If you make arguments about souls, you can go talk with the guy who believes in unicorns and angels, not to people who actually make decisions in the real world.
The only thing that matters is consciousness and embryos don’t have consciousness. I would rather kill a hundred embryos than one chimpanzee.
Here we go again with the fucking soul shit. Tell me, besides when replying to you, have I ever said the word “soul” in this thread. Go ahead, I’m still waiting.
I know you are a big shot caller in your dwelling, but I can attest I do make choices in the real world. However, from your arguments I can also attest that you likely really do not live in the real world. And if you keep this “soul” shit up, I’m sure everyone will realize you are the one that has a literacy problem, or you just put words in people’s mouths and use that against them. Which Sir, makes you a troll.
P.S. I shot Notorious B.I.G. and 2Pac.[/quote]
Oh yea? Well I shot sheriff John Brown, but I didn’t shoot no refugee.
V
[quote]JLu wrote:
Vegita wrote:
JLu wrote:
Vegita wrote:
Neuromancer wrote:
So would my esteemed religious colleagues then please enlighten me as to what the status is of an IVF fertilized egg in their view?Are you against IVF on principle?
It is a human and should be treated as such. I don’t know enough about the procedure to comment on weather it should continue or not.
To the dolt saying “conciousness” is all that matters. WHAT? so if someone is sleeping you have the right to off them? What if they are in a coma? Go stab someone who is in a coma and see if you get charged with anything. Some of you are making arguments and claiming science is on your side, but then you swing and miss and it just makes you look stupid. I mean think your argument through, don’t just spout off because you are emotional about this and feel like anyone who is pro life wants to punish women or something. Some people actually hold firm that a fertalized agg with unique Human DNA which will develop in to a independant human being if left unmolested is actually a real live human and deserving of protection under our societal laws. (and thier natural rights, like the right to life)
V
Go back and reread my posts. I wasn’t saying simply conciousness was the determining factor, but I have a hard time classifying something as a human being before it develops a brain and senses.
No No, it wasn’t you I was refering to, I fully understood your point and to be honest it was one of the better ones I have heard. There was another guy who started of with “consiousness is everything”. You were saying that when the lump of stem cells are replicating, it’s just a lump of cells, there is no specialization, there is no tissue, there are no organs, while the DNA and potential for it to be human are there, to you they are not a human yet. But you think once the Stem cells start specializing, turing into clumps of cells that will develop into specific organs and systems, then it is a human.
Stage 8 of the 23 stages of embryonic development gave this description.
“Embryonic disc is piriform, Primitive pit appears, Neural folds may begin to form, Notochordal and neurenteric canals are generally detectable”
Source: http://virtualhumanembryo.lsuhsc.edu/HEIRLOOM/Stages/HEP_StagesFS.htm
Neural folds are the specific cells that will eventually become the developed brain. At this point in time, it is impossible to determine if there is some level of conciousness. This is at approx 23 days and almost no pregnancies are detected before this stage. I mean in most cases, a girl or woman will miss her period, wait a couple more days and then get the nerve up to take a pregnancy test. Also add in the fact that the sweet spot for pregancy is to have sex 1-2 days before ovulation. This is literally only a few days after the woman is over her last period, most pregnancies happen here because the embryo has time to develop and stick to the uterus lining. If fertilization happens when the egg is already far down the fallopian tube or past it, the fertilized egg will not attach to the uterine wall in time and the period will happen.
Basically what i’m getting at is that based on your previous argument it would be almost impossible, or at least very hard to have an abortion before the neural cells started developing. And if you say it needs to be a brain then we are back to arbitrary points on a continuum. I would much rather err on the side of not exterminating a human life. Put the cild up for adoption. Start a charitable orginazation that will take donations from every person who was previously pro choice, roll all that money into providing care for unwanted children.
Also pregnancy doesn’t “ruin” a womans body, it was specifically designed to handle it.
V
Ok this is a good point I can’t really argue this. My previous point was more just trying to understand at what point Brother Chris, John S and Neuromancer decided that it was a human life.
I know it was specifically designed to handle it, but it certainly screws things up for a while if the woman had any type of athletic or physical aspirations (like a girl from my high school who was on her way to joining the national lacrosse team before she got preggers).[/quote]
On my thing, I guess I got a little confused. My determination of when something becomes human is at conception if it has human parents, and even though there is no specialization of stem cells, I see it as still a homo sapien organism even at an unrecognizable stage. And if it’s a human organism (the human organism not part of the human organism like I talked about human body vs. human fingernail) I see it as a life if it’s growing or developing, and reacts to stimuli (which can be many things converting energy to grow, feeling pain, thinking, etc.)
I always wonder where the gals are when this topic comes up.I guess they’re tired of being told by all the never to be pregnant vocal guys what they should or should not be allowed to do.Oh well…
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
I always wonder where the gals are when this topic comes up.I guess they’re tired of being told by all the never to be pregnant vocal guys what they should or should not be allowed to do.Oh well…[/quote]
If you haven’t noticed only a select few, and a very rarely do those select few even put messages up in threads on the PWI forum. I’m sure the posts are 99% by men.
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
I always wonder where the gals are when this topic comes up.I guess they’re tired of being told by all the never to be pregnant vocal guys what they should or should not be allowed to do.Oh well…[/quote]
Yea, when telling someone what to do involves telling them not to kill other human beings. It doesn’t make them any different than any man I would also tell to not kill another human being. You just like to spin the argument so that you attach your view of an embryo as not human to my beliefs scientific, or religious or whatever and then demonize me based on your belief systems. If you would take two seconds and look at it from my belief system that an embryo is in fact a human being a deserving of protection under societal laws and natural laws, I.E. the right to life, then I’m not telling a woman what to do, only that killing the human growing iside of her will be prosecuted as killing a human.
You can’t have your cake and eat it too, though that would be nice. Come up with some scientific argument that is valid that shows us that an embryo is not human, and we will be able to have a nice debate. If you just want me to change what I believe to fit your view of the world, well then shouldn’t I expect you to do the same thing? Heck I’m even providing scientific data to help you on your path to my viewpoint, you give me nothing but sarcasm.
V
[quote]Vegita wrote:
Neuromancer wrote:
I always wonder where the gals are when this topic comes up.I guess they’re tired of being told by all the never to be pregnant vocal guys what they should or should not be allowed to do.Oh well…
Yea, when telling someone what to do involves telling them not to kill other human beings. It doesn’t make them any different than any man I would also tell to not kill another human being. You just like to spin the argument so that you attach your view of an embryo as not human to my beliefs scientific, or religious or whatever and then demonize me based on your belief systems. If you would take two seconds and look at it from my belief system that an embryo is in fact a human being a deserving of protection under societal laws and natural laws, I.E. the right to life, then I’m not telling a woman what to do, only that killing the human growing iside of her will be prosecuted as killing a human.
You can’t have your cake and eat it too, though that would be nice. Come up with some scientific argument that is valid that shows us that an embryo is not human, and we will be able to have a nice debate. If you just want me to change what I believe to fit your view of the world, well then shouldn’t I expect you to do the same thing? Heck I’m even providing scientific data to help you on your path to my viewpoint, you give me nothing but sarcasm.
V[/quote]
You’ve mistaken me for someone who cares about your viewpoint.I don’t.I don’t expect you to change.I don’t want to change your viewpoint.You feel like I’ve demonized you?Where?Show me.You’ll look long and hard,but I’ll wait.Is it because I believe women have the right to choose what they can and cannot do as regards something that ,unfortunately for you,is their domain?That makes you feel persecuted?So disagreement equals persecution?
Tell me,do the innocents of wars that are euphemistically dubbed ‘collateral damage’ have any less right to live,in your point of view?As I mentioned earlier,IVF? How’s your viewpoint on fertility practices in general?What I would like is some philosophical consistency.Either killing innocent human beings is wrong,or it isn’t.That’s when all the “Well,no but,in some cases…(insert favorite scenario here) it’s sad but unavoidable” shuffling starts.
And that’s even before we get to the point of where does the line in the sand stand as far as what is or what isn’t a ‘human being’ starts to get debated.
I believe that the morality of these things is between each person and whatever moral authority or code they adhere to.Women have been having abortions since the beginning of time,and will continue to do so.Do you think you or any other swinging cock will change that?Why do you think that is?Would you rather have it go into the back alleys again?
I am pro choice.That is not the same a being a fervent advocate of abortion.I believe that prevention is better,and that contraception and education is preferable,but that shit happens and people sometimes have to make difficult choices.I would rather have those hard choices be made out in the open.
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
Vegita wrote:
Neuromancer wrote:
I always wonder where the gals are when this topic comes up.I guess they’re tired of being told by all the never to be pregnant vocal guys what they should or should not be allowed to do.Oh well…
Yea, when telling someone what to do involves telling them not to kill other human beings. It doesn’t make them any different than any man I would also tell to not kill another human being. You just like to spin the argument so that you attach your view of an embryo as not human to my beliefs scientific, or religious or whatever and then demonize me based on your belief systems. If you would take two seconds and look at it from my belief system that an embryo is in fact a human being a deserving of protection under societal laws and natural laws, I.E. the right to life, then I’m not telling a woman what to do, only that killing the human growing iside of her will be prosecuted as killing a human.
You can’t have your cake and eat it too, though that would be nice. Come up with some scientific argument that is valid that shows us that an embryo is not human, and we will be able to have a nice debate. If you just want me to change what I believe to fit your view of the world, well then shouldn’t I expect you to do the same thing? Heck I’m even providing scientific data to help you on your path to my viewpoint, you give me nothing but sarcasm.
V
You’ve mistaken me for someone who cares about your viewpoint.I don’t.I don’t expect you to change.I don’t want to change your viewpoint.You feel like I’ve demonized you?Where?Show me.You’ll look long and hard,but I’ll wait.Is it because I believe women have the right to choose what they can and cannot do as regards something that ,unfortunately for you,is their domain?That makes you feel persecuted?So disagreement equals persecution?
Tell me,do the innocents of wars that are euphemistically dubbed ‘collateral damage’ have any less right to live,in your point of view?As I mentioned earlier,IVF? How’s your viewpoint on fertility practices in general?What I would like is some philosophical consistency.Either killing innocent human beings is wrong,or it isn’t.That’s when all the “Well,no but,in some cases…(insert favorite scenario here) it’s sad but unavoidable” shuffling starts.
And that’s even before we get to the point of where does the line in the sand stand as far as what is or what isn’t a ‘human being’ starts to get debated.
I believe that the morality of these things is between each person and whatever moral authority or code they adhere to.Women have been having abortions since the beginning of time,and will continue to do so.Do you think you or any other swinging cock will change that?Why do you think that is?Would you rather have it go into the back alleys again?
I am pro choice.That is not the same a being a fervent advocate of abortion.I believe that prevention is better,and that contraception and education is preferable,but that shit happens and people sometimes have to make difficult choices.I would rather have those hard choices be made out in the open.
[/quote]
To give you a quick answer to a question you posed and then perhaps projected a little bit on, yes I do view every single “innocent” human life as having the right to live. Doesn’t matter if that life was made in a clinic, via the old fashioned dick to pussy transaction, or if your mom sat on a toilet seat with cum on it and get herself preggers. As a society, we should strive to protect the lives of our fellow humans and prosecute those who violate those rights. So basically what I am saying is I am all for prosecuting anyone who has taken by active decision, another human life under murder 1. Accidental deaths can be handled by manslaughter or other lesser charges but no one gets a pass.
Obviously in this barbaric time we live in, it’s going to be really hard to hold our own military to the same standards. However, I am at total disagreement with our current military ventures and believe we should pull our guys back to our borders until someone puts a bomb on our soil or tries to put boots on our soil. I think we should be fighting terrorists with the CIA, undercover special ops guys who go in and either eliminate known terrorists or bring them in to face thier crimes.
This whole thing is off the topic though. Was my argument too strong for you to just answer straight up? Why make me chase all these tangents down. Of course I have to or else you will accuse me of dodging your questions or accusations.
To get to the part of you demonizing me, you didn’t demonize me specifically, you just demonized anyone who was pro life with the post about running the women out of the discussion. We ran them out because we are insensitive and will never understand the pain they go through yet we sit and make these decisions for them or try to. That was your point, and it’s main spear is an attempt to make pro life people look like insensitive men with no respect for women. Unfortunatley it’s not true and I suspect that my argument got you uncomfortable else someone who doesn’t care what I think or believe wouldn’t have typed up a 5 paragraph response to my post.
Now back to my origional request, bring some science to the table telling me exactly when a human comes into existance. For you to say it’s not relevant is assenine and you my friend are just dodging. Do that or go away.
V
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
Would you rather have it go into the back alleys again?
[/quote]
Yes, I would. I’m not sure why some woman getting an abortion via a rusty coathanger at a crackhouse is supposed to change our mind. Was I supposed to condone the deliberate, premeditated murder of an innocent human life, in order for it to be easier and safer? The back alley abortion horror story has never been a compelling counter-argument, if you ask me.
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
I don’t understand how Christian’s think that just because abortion is legal it somehow infringes on their religious beliefs. No one is making your pregnant 16 year old daughter (who is going to hell anyway by definition) get an abortion. Why can’t Christians let heathens go to hell in peace?
When you take away a woman’s right to choose you are taking away the very thing that makes her a woman.
[quote]Vegita wrote:
Neuromancer wrote:
Vegita wrote:
Neuromancer wrote:
I always wonder where the gals are when this topic comes up.I guess they’re tired of being told by all the never to be pregnant vocal guys what they should or should not be allowed to do.Oh well…
Yea, when telling someone what to do involves telling them not to kill other human beings. It doesn’t make them any different than any man I would also tell to not kill another human being. You just like to spin the argument so that you attach your view of an embryo as not human to my beliefs scientific, or religious or whatever and then demonize me based on your belief systems. If you would take two seconds and look at it from my belief system that an embryo is in fact a human being a deserving of protection under societal laws and natural laws, I.E. the right to life, then I’m not telling a woman what to do, only that killing the human growing iside of her will be prosecuted as killing a human.
You can’t have your cake and eat it too, though that would be nice. Come up with some scientific argument that is valid that shows us that an embryo is not human, and we will be able to have a nice debate. If you just want me to change what I believe to fit your view of the world, well then shouldn’t I expect you to do the same thing? Heck I’m even providing scientific data to help you on your path to my viewpoint, you give me nothing but sarcasm.
V
You’ve mistaken me for someone who cares about your viewpoint.I don’t.I don’t expect you to change.I don’t want to change your viewpoint.You feel like I’ve demonized you?Where?Show me.You’ll look long and hard,but I’ll wait.Is it because I believe women have the right to choose what they can and cannot do as regards something that ,unfortunately for you,is their domain?That makes you feel persecuted?So disagreement equals persecution?
Tell me,do the innocents of wars that are euphemistically dubbed ‘collateral damage’ have any less right to live,in your point of view?As I mentioned earlier,IVF? How’s your viewpoint on fertility practices in general?What I would like is some philosophical consistency.Either killing innocent human beings is wrong,or it isn’t.That’s when all the “Well,no but,in some cases…(insert favorite scenario here) it’s sad but unavoidable” shuffling starts.
And that’s even before we get to the point of where does the line in the sand stand as far as what is or what isn’t a ‘human being’ starts to get debated.
I believe that the morality of these things is between each person and whatever moral authority or code they adhere to.Women have been having abortions since the beginning of time,and will continue to do so.Do you think you or any other swinging cock will change that?Why do you think that is?Would you rather have it go into the back alleys again?
I am pro choice.That is not the same a being a fervent advocate of abortion.I believe that prevention is better,and that contraception and education is preferable,but that shit happens and people sometimes have to make difficult choices.I would rather have those hard choices be made out in the open.
To give you a quick answer to a question you posed and then perhaps projected a little bit on, yes I do view every single “innocent” human life as having the right to live. Doesn’t matter if that life was made in a clinic, via the old fashioned dick to pussy transaction, or if your mom sat on a toilet seat with cum on it and get herself preggers. As a society, we should strive to protect the lives of our fellow humans and prosecute those who violate those rights. So basically what I am saying is I am all for prosecuting anyone who has taken by active decision, another human life under murder 1. Accidental deaths can be handled by manslaughter or other lesser charges but no one gets a pass.
Obviously in this barbaric time we live in, it’s going to be really hard to hold our own military to the same standards. However, I am at total disagreement with our current military ventures and believe we should pull our guys back to our borders until someone puts a bomb on our soil or tries to put boots on our soil. I think we should be fighting terrorists with the CIA, undercover special ops guys who go in and either eliminate known terrorists or bring them in to face thier crimes.
This whole thing is off the topic though. Was my argument too strong for you to just answer straight up? Why make me chase all these tangents down. Of course I have to or else you will accuse me of dodging your questions or accusations.
To get to the part of you demonizing me, you didn’t demonize me specifically, you just demonized anyone who was pro life with the post about running the women out of the discussion. We ran them out because we are insensitive and will never understand the pain they go through yet we sit and make these decisions for them or try to. That was your point, and it’s main spear is an attempt to make pro life people look like insensitive men with no respect for women. Unfortunatley it’s not true and I suspect that my argument got you uncomfortable else someone who doesn’t care what I think or believe wouldn’t have typed up a 5 paragraph response to my post.
Now back to my origional request, bring some science to the table telling me exactly when a human comes into existance. For you to say it’s not relevant is assenine and you my friend are just dodging. Do that or go away.
V[/quote]
To not care about what you think or believe is an entirely different animal from not enjoying the debate.And seriously…your arguments made me uncomfortable?Too strong?That must be why you brought my mother into it.But no matter.I’ll tell you why the women aren’t here discussing the issue.They couldn’t be bothered.But nice try trying to paint me as some bleeding heart.Women are more practical than men,make the tough decisions with very little romantic notions clouding their judgment.That’s what it takes to bear and raise children.If you want an example,look at the SAMA forum and all the pussyboy whining that goes on there as regards to break ups,etc.You know what I’m talking about.See many women starting those kinds of threads?
They just get on with it.
It’s late here,so I will bow out for the evening on that note,but will be back tomorrow to debate your other points,and just btw,your position on withdrawing troops etc definitely gives your position more consistency,and just as I told Pat,if you’re consistent,I respect that.