Famous Abortionist Killed in Church

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
222

[quote]pushharder wrote:
orion wrote:

The pro life crowd did not do itself a favor in the US because their adamant insisting on that every fertilized egg is holy has led to partial birth abortions which are hopefully not the norm around the world.

C’mon, Joe, I don’t think the pro-lifers’ fertilized egg insistence leads to partial birth abortions. That’s just too much of a stretch.[/quote]

Of course it does, because it makes it an all or nothing issue though it does not have to be.

I think most people would be ok with some sort of compromise, like abortions in the first trimester.

223

[quote]orion wrote:
pushharder wrote:
orion wrote:

The pro life crowd did not do itself a favor in the US because their adamant insisting on that every fertilized egg is holy has led to partial birth abortions which are hopefully not the norm around the world.

C’mon, Joe, I don’t think the pro-lifers’ fertilized egg insistence leads to partial birth abortions. That’s just too much of a stretch.

Of course it does, because it makes it an all or nothing issue though it does not have to be.

I think most people would be ok with some sort of compromise, like abortions in the first trimester.

[/quote]

Ok, what? Partial birth abortions would never have happened had first trimester abortions never been opposed? That makes no sense. Why isn’t it the easiest explanation? That dehumanizing humans in the womb, makes it much easier to kill them in the womb, at any point. And, what’s to compromise? If you believe it’s truely a property issue (her body) you must support the “right” to abortion throughout the entire pregnancy. Not to mention infanticide by neglect.

224

[quote]orion wrote:
John S. wrote:
orion wrote:
pushharder wrote:
orion wrote:
pushharder wrote:
orion wrote:
pushharder wrote:
orion wrote:

IF it is A human it has rights.

As in endowed with by our creator.

Now we just have to call him to tell is when the exact moment of endowment happens and we�??�??�??�??�??�??�??�??�??�?�´re golden.

If we don’t know for sure, which side should we err on?

You are assuming that there is a “right” and a “wrong” side and that we just do not, or cannot, know (yet).

I am assuming that it is a matter of degrees and that there is no clear point where a fetus poofs in to a full fledged human being.

You cannot err on either side, there are no sides, just a continuum.

Oy vey, no black and white.

The mind boggles.

It is ridiculous to say there is no “right” or “wrong”. Let’s start at three months after birth. Right or wrong to eliminate unwanted human life form? Three days after birth? Three minutes after birth? At the instant of birth (body exits womb)? Three minutes before birth? Three days before birth? Three weeks before birth? Three months before birth?

There aint no fuckin “continuum” and yes, there is some black and white. Answer the above questions and see if there isn’t.

When it is a fertilized egg it has no rights whatsoever- when it has been born it has all the rights of a human being.

There is no stage in between where that magically flips and presto!: human being.

All that remains are compromises, third trimester seems to be ok for me.

edited, first trimester- FIRST!

What happens in second trimester that makes it magically turn into a human?

Nothing.

But since we do not know and most agree that last trimester is too late, what can we do but compromise?

[/quote]

I get it compromise, kind of like how people compromised that black people where only 3/5th human right? How did that turn out again?

225

[quote]John S. wrote:
I get it compromise, kind of like how people compromised that black people where only 3/5th human right? How did that turn out again?
[/quote]

I sincerely hope that you’re not arguing that the 3/5’s Compromise caused the Civil War and, thus, a compromise on abortion could possibly lead to another? If you are, then I wish you good luck in your attempt to defend that position.

A compromise like the one Orion suggested is the only way to remove the prickly ambiguities of the issue without the government flippantly dismissing the views and opinions of half the nation. That is, if we’re still rejecting the option of allowing individual states to determine the legality of abortion within their own jurisdictions.

226

[quote]John S. wrote:
orion wrote:
John S. wrote:
orion wrote:
pushharder wrote:
orion wrote:
pushharder wrote:
orion wrote:
pushharder wrote:
orion wrote:

IF it is A human it has rights.

As in endowed with by our creator.

Now we just have to call him to tell is when the exact moment of endowment happens and we�??�??�??�??�??�??�??�??�??�??�?�´re golden.

If we don’t know for sure, which side should we err on?

You are assuming that there is a “right” and a “wrong” side and that we just do not, or cannot, know (yet).

I am assuming that it is a matter of degrees and that there is no clear point where a fetus poofs in to a full fledged human being.

You cannot err on either side, there are no sides, just a continuum.

Oy vey, no black and white.

The mind boggles.

It is ridiculous to say there is no “right” or “wrong”. Let’s start at three months after birth. Right or wrong to eliminate unwanted human life form? Three days after birth? Three minutes after birth? At the instant of birth (body exits womb)? Three minutes before birth? Three days before birth? Three weeks before birth? Three months before birth?

There aint no fuckin “continuum” and yes, there is some black and white. Answer the above questions and see if there isn’t.

When it is a fertilized egg it has no rights whatsoever- when it has been born it has all the rights of a human being.

There is no stage in between where that magically flips and presto!: human being.

All that remains are compromises, third trimester seems to be ok for me.

edited, first trimester- FIRST!

What happens in second trimester that makes it magically turn into a human?

Nothing.

But since we do not know and most agree that last trimester is too late, what can we do but compromise?

I get it compromise, kind of like how people compromised that black people where only 3/5th human right? How did that turn out again?
[/quote]

Well this not compromising leads to partial birth abortions.

227

[quote]Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
pushharder wrote:
orion wrote:

The pro life crowd did not do itself a favor in the US because their adamant insisting on that every fertilized egg is holy has led to partial birth abortions which are hopefully not the norm around the world.

C’mon, Joe, I don’t think the pro-lifers’ fertilized egg insistence leads to partial birth abortions. That’s just too much of a stretch.

Of course it does, because it makes it an all or nothing issue though it does not have to be.

I think most people would be ok with some sort of compromise, like abortions in the first trimester.

Ok, what? Partial birth abortions would never have happened had first trimester abortions never been opposed? That makes no sense. Why isn’t it the easiest explanation? That dehumanizing humans in the womb, makes it much easier to kill them in the womb, at any point. And, what’s to compromise? If you believe it’s truely a property issue (her body) you must support the “right” to abortion throughout the entire pregnancy. Not to mention infanticide by neglect.[/quote]

You can only dehumanize what is human.

There is no way to dehumanize a fertilized egg.

228

[quote]John S. wrote:
orion wrote:
John S. wrote:
orion wrote:
pushharder wrote:
orion wrote:
pushharder wrote:
orion wrote:
pushharder wrote:
orion wrote:

IF it is A human it has rights.

As in endowed with by our creator.

Now we just have to call him to tell is when the exact moment of endowment happens and we�??�??�??�??�??�??�??�??�??�??�?�´re golden.

If we don’t know for sure, which side should we err on?

You are assuming that there is a “right” and a “wrong” side and that we just do not, or cannot, know (yet).

I am assuming that it is a matter of degrees and that there is no clear point where a fetus poofs in to a full fledged human being.

You cannot err on either side, there are no sides, just a continuum.

Oy vey, no black and white.

The mind boggles.

It is ridiculous to say there is no “right” or “wrong”. Let’s start at three months after birth. Right or wrong to eliminate unwanted human life form? Three days after birth? Three minutes after birth? At the instant of birth (body exits womb)? Three minutes before birth? Three days before birth? Three weeks before birth? Three months before birth?

There aint no fuckin “continuum” and yes, there is some black and white. Answer the above questions and see if there isn’t.

When it is a fertilized egg it has no rights whatsoever- when it has been born it has all the rights of a human being.

There is no stage in between where that magically flips and presto!: human being.

All that remains are compromises, third trimester seems to be ok for me.

edited, first trimester- FIRST!

What happens in second trimester that makes it magically turn into a human?

Nothing.

But since we do not know and most agree that last trimester is too late, what can we do but compromise?

I get it compromise, kind of like how people compromised that black people where only 3/5th human right? How did that turn out again?
[/quote]

Do you know why the 3/5ths clause was in there? Somehow I doubt it.

229

[quote]orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
pushharder wrote:
orion wrote:

The pro life crowd did not do itself a favor in the US because their adamant insisting on that every fertilized egg is holy has led to partial birth abortions which are hopefully not the norm around the world.

C’mon, Joe, I don’t think the pro-lifers’ fertilized egg insistence leads to partial birth abortions. That’s just too much of a stretch.

Of course it does, because it makes it an all or nothing issue though it does not have to be.

I think most people would be ok with some sort of compromise, like abortions in the first trimester.

Ok, what? Partial birth abortions would never have happened had first trimester abortions never been opposed? That makes no sense. Why isn’t it the easiest explanation? That dehumanizing humans in the womb, makes it much easier to kill them in the womb, at any point. And, what’s to compromise? If you believe it’s truely a property issue (her body) you must support the “right” to abortion throughout the entire pregnancy. Not to mention infanticide by neglect.

You can only dehumanize what is human.

There is no way to dehumanize a fertilized egg.
[/quote]

Is the human embryo some other organism that magically becomes another? Like a shark that, shazam!, becomes a human at some point during it’s term?

Edit: Isn’t Orion embryo the exact same individual organism as PWI Orion? Or, was there some kind of swap out in the womb at some point?

230

[quote]Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
pushharder wrote:
orion wrote:

The pro life crowd did not do itself a favor in the US because their adamant insisting on that every fertilized egg is holy has led to partial birth abortions which are hopefully not the norm around the world.

C’mon, Joe, I don’t think the pro-lifers’ fertilized egg insistence leads to partial birth abortions. That’s just too much of a stretch.

Of course it does, because it makes it an all or nothing issue though it does not have to be.

I think most people would be ok with some sort of compromise, like abortions in the first trimester.

Ok, what? Partial birth abortions would never have happened had first trimester abortions never been opposed? That makes no sense. Why isn’t it the easiest explanation? That dehumanizing humans in the womb, makes it much easier to kill them in the womb, at any point. And, what’s to compromise? If you believe it’s truely a property issue (her body) you must support the “right” to abortion throughout the entire pregnancy. Not to mention infanticide by neglect.

You can only dehumanize what is human.

There is no way to dehumanize a fertilized egg.

Is the human embryo some other organism that magically becomes another? Like a shark that, shazam!, becomes a human at some point during it’s term?

Edit: Isn’t Orion embryo the exact same individual organism as PWI Orion? Or, was there some kind of swap out in the womb at some point? [/quote]

You are playing with words.

Not everything that is “human” is a “human being”.

You only can dehumanize human beings, fertilized eggs are not human beings, therefore they cannot be dehumanized.

231

[quote]orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
pushharder wrote:
orion wrote:

The pro life crowd did not do itself a favor in the US because their adamant insisting on that every fertilized egg is holy has led to partial birth abortions which are hopefully not the norm around the world.

C’mon, Joe, I don’t think the pro-lifers’ fertilized egg insistence leads to partial birth abortions. That’s just too much of a stretch.

Of course it does, because it makes it an all or nothing issue though it does not have to be.

I think most people would be ok with some sort of compromise, like abortions in the first trimester.

Ok, what? Partial birth abortions would never have happened had first trimester abortions never been opposed? That makes no sense. Why isn’t it the easiest explanation? That dehumanizing humans in the womb, makes it much easier to kill them in the womb, at any point. And, what’s to compromise? If you believe it’s truely a property issue (her body) you must support the “right” to abortion throughout the entire pregnancy. Not to mention infanticide by neglect.

You can only dehumanize what is human.

There is no way to dehumanize a fertilized egg.

Is the human embryo some other organism that magically becomes another? Like a shark that, shazam!, becomes a human at some point during it’s term?

Edit: Isn’t Orion embryo the exact same individual organism as PWI Orion? Or, was there some kind of swap out in the womb at some point?

You are playing with words.

Not everything that is “human” is a “human being”.

You only can dehumanize human beings, fertilized eggs are not human beings, therefore they cannot be dehumanized.

[/quote]

Well, I am curious. Are you the same individual organism as the one in the womb? And “being?” Like a German Shepard being? Or a Soft shelled turtle being?

232

[quote]Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
pushharder wrote:
orion wrote:

The pro life crowd did not do itself a favor in the US because their adamant insisting on that every fertilized egg is holy has led to partial birth abortions which are hopefully not the norm around the world.

C’mon, Joe, I don’t think the pro-lifers’ fertilized egg insistence leads to partial birth abortions. That’s just too much of a stretch.

Of course it does, because it makes it an all or nothing issue though it does not have to be.

I think most people would be ok with some sort of compromise, like abortions in the first trimester.

Ok, what? Partial birth abortions would never have happened had first trimester abortions never been opposed? That makes no sense. Why isn’t it the easiest explanation? That dehumanizing humans in the womb, makes it much easier to kill them in the womb, at any point. And, what’s to compromise? If you believe it’s truely a property issue (her body) you must support the “right” to abortion throughout the entire pregnancy. Not to mention infanticide by neglect.

You can only dehumanize what is human.

There is no way to dehumanize a fertilized egg.

Is the human embryo some other organism that magically becomes another? Like a shark that, shazam!, becomes a human at some point during it’s term?

Edit: Isn’t Orion embryo the exact same individual organism as PWI Orion? Or, was there some kind of swap out in the womb at some point?

You are playing with words.

Not everything that is “human” is a “human being”.

You only can dehumanize human beings, fertilized eggs are not human beings, therefore they cannot be dehumanized.

Well, I am curious. Are you the same individual organism as the one in the womb? And “being?” Like a German Shepard being? Or a Soft shelled turtle being?[/quote]

Depends on how you look at it.

I do not share one cell with this fetus.

Not one-

233

[quote]orion wrote:
Depends on how you look at it.

I do not share one cell with this fetus.

Not one-
[/quote]

I’m not sure how that changes anything. Are you saying that because you no longer have one original cell, you’re not the same individual organism?

Edit: I hate to make this so personal, by the way. However, your answers seem dodgy. As if you refuse to acknowledge the 800 pound gorilla in the room. You kill the orion embryo, you kill the organism. The same organism that is the same Orion posting here today.

234

[quote]Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Depends on how you look at it.

I do not share one cell with this fetus.

Not one-

I’m not sure how that changes anything. Are you saying that because you no longer have one original cell, you’re not the same individual organism?

Edit: I hate to make this so personal, by the way. However, your answers seem dodgy. As if you refuse to acknowledge the 800 pound gorilla in the room. You kill the orion embryo, you kill the organism. The same organism that is the same Orion posting here today.[/quote]

So?

235

[quote]orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Depends on how you look at it.

I do not share one cell with this fetus.

Not one-

I’m not sure how that changes anything. Are you saying that because you no longer have one original cell, you’re not the same individual organism?

Edit: I hate to make this so personal, by the way. However, your answers seem dodgy. As if you refuse to acknowledge the 800 pound gorilla in the room. You kill the orion embryo, you kill the organism. The same organism that is the same Orion posting here today.

So?

[/quote]

Well, “so?” is answer of sorts. An honest one, even. I only wish more pro-choicers were as honest about the taking of an innocent huaman life. Oh, and their attitude towards it. It’s better when both sides agree to what abortion accomplishes. The debate can then move on to if one cares, or not.

237

[quote]Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Depends on how you look at it.

I do not share one cell with this fetus.

Not one-

I’m not sure how that changes anything. Are you saying that because you no longer have one original cell, you’re not the same individual organism?

Edit: I hate to make this so personal, by the way. However, your answers seem dodgy. As if you refuse to acknowledge the 800 pound gorilla in the room. You kill the orion embryo, you kill the organism. The same organism that is the same Orion posting here today.

So?

Well, “so?” is answer of sorts. An honest one, even. I only wish more pro-choicers were as honest about the taking of an innocent huaman life. Oh, and their attitude towards it. It’s better when both sides agree to what abortion accomplishes. The debate can then move on to if one cares, or not.[/quote]

As I have posted above, constantly reframing the other sides argument does not make you right.

I have, as any other humnan being progressed from a fertilized egg into a human being. There is also no clear cut off point in my case.

Therefore:

So?

238

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Sloth wrote:

…It’s better when both sides agree to what abortion accomplishes. The debate can then move on to if one cares, or not.

Therein lies the pro-abortion side’s Battle of the Bulge. A final counteroffensive. Delay the war and impending defeat.

Let’s face it, as more and more preemie babies are successfully delivered we as a society all realize third trimester babies are human beings.[/quote]

Then maybe you should focus on late term abortions instead of fighting for every frozen embryo?

239

[quote]dhickey wrote:

Do you know why the 3/5ths clause was in there? Somehow I doubt it.
[/quote]

Your right that was a bad example to use. I am well aware of what it means. 3/5 of all slaves would be considered in the enumeration(sp?) and would be counted towards taxes and the house of representatives. It is not hard to come to the conclusion that they where saying slaves are only 3/5 human in this. that is my interpretation of it.

*edited