So last I heard the bill passed and Texas banned abortion after 20 weeks.
[quote]bdocksaints75 wrote:
So last I heard the bill passed and Texas banned abortion after 20 weeks.[/quote]
Good
[quote]bdocksaints75 wrote:
So last I heard the bill passed and Texas banned abortion after 20 weeks.[/quote]
It passed a preliminary vote in the House. It now goes to a full vote in both the House and the Senate. Should be passed though either today or tomorrow.
[quote]hungry4more wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]hungry4more wrote:
You have a right to pursue your desires insofar as it doesn’t deprive others of their fundamental rights, life, liberty, pursuit of happiness. Killing a baby deprives them of all of their rights, therefore it is an immoral path to take in pursuit of one’s own comfort. [/quote]
Explain war. [/quote]
War is generally what happens when the leaders of one nation decide another nation has what they want. Conversely, it can be waged in defense against another country/people that wants what you have.
Explain war’s immediate relevance to this. [/quote]
War does just what you describe abortion does. Why is war OK and abortion isn’t? And I’m not talking about two soldiers trying to kill each other but the deliberate and calculated killing of civilians. How do we justify bombing a city when we know that the majority of dead will be civilians? How many fetuses get aborted when among the dead are pregnant women?
The point being that we manage to find a way to morally justify killing anyone at anytime. You can’t say killing is wrong except when it is morally acceptable, as in war, and then say abortion is wrong when someone came to a morally acceptable decision to have one.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]hungry4more wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]hungry4more wrote:
You have a right to pursue your desires insofar as it doesn’t deprive others of their fundamental rights, life, liberty, pursuit of happiness. Killing a baby deprives them of all of their rights, therefore it is an immoral path to take in pursuit of one’s own comfort. [/quote]
Explain war. [/quote]
War is generally what happens when the leaders of one nation decide another nation has what they want. Conversely, it can be waged in defense against another country/people that wants what you have.
Explain war’s immediate relevance to this. [/quote]
War does just what you describe abortion does. Why is war OK and abortion isn’t? And I’m not talking about two soldiers trying to kill each other but the deliberate and calculated killing of civilians. How do we justify bombing a city when we know that the majority of dead will be civilians? How many fetuses get aborted when among the dead are pregnant women?
The point being that we manage to find a way to morally justify killing anyone at anytime. You can’t say killing is wrong except when it is morally acceptable, as in war, and then say abortion is wrong when someone came to a morally acceptable decision to have one. [/quote]
I don’t think comparing war and abortion is fair at all. I don’t think it’s even the same sport let alone in the same ball park so to speak.
First of all, we are methodical in our bombings. Civilians do get killed, which is tragic, but the number of civilian deaths is pretty few. It is part of the cost of war, which is ugly.
Abortion is a systematic slaughter of the helpless. It’s the point. It is not collateral damage.
Secondly, carpet bombing is something that hasn’t been done for a while now. The only time we have deliberately bombed a city(s) with the intent to kill civilians was during WWII and ultimately that saved both American and Japanese lives.
Does abortion ultimately save lives? No it doesn’t. Does abortion stop oppression? No it doesn’t.
Third, war is fought for only a few reasons. The defense of others, self, or in aggression. It’s been a while since America has gone to war out of anything but defense.
Abortion is an act of pure aggression against a defenseless opponent. Even worse, the aggressor put their opponent there in the first place.
Lastly, war is fought by men and women, it is a choice “we” as rational adults make. Abortion is slaughter. Even in cases of mass genocide at the very least, even if futile, the people affected can fight back. A child cannot. It is the equivalent of stepping on an ant in that one party has no defense against the other.
The two are not the same.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]hungry4more wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]hungry4more wrote:
You have a right to pursue your desires insofar as it doesn’t deprive others of their fundamental rights, life, liberty, pursuit of happiness. Killing a baby deprives them of all of their rights, therefore it is an immoral path to take in pursuit of one’s own comfort. [/quote]
Explain war. [/quote]
War is generally what happens when the leaders of one nation decide another nation has what they want. Conversely, it can be waged in defense against another country/people that wants what you have.
Explain war’s immediate relevance to this. [/quote]
War does just what you describe abortion does. Why is war OK and abortion isn’t? And I’m not talking about two soldiers trying to kill each other but the deliberate and calculated killing of civilians. How do we justify bombing a city when we know that the majority of dead will be civilians? How many fetuses get aborted when among the dead are pregnant women?
The point being that we manage to find a way to morally justify killing anyone at anytime. You can’t say killing is wrong except when it is morally acceptable, as in war, and then say abortion is wrong when someone came to a morally acceptable decision to have one. [/quote]
I don’t think comparing war and abortion is fair at all. I don’t think it’s even the same sport let alone in the same ball park so to speak.
First of all, we are methodical in our bombings. Civilians do get killed, which is tragic, but the number of civilian deaths is pretty few. It is part of the cost of war, which is ugly.
Abortion is a systematic slaughter of the helpless. It’s the point. It is not collateral damage.
Secondly, carpet bombing is something that hasn’t been done for a while now. The only time we have deliberately bombed a city(s) with the intent to kill civilians was during WWII and ultimately that saved both American and Japanese lives.
Does abortion ultimately save lives? No it doesn’t. Does abortion stop oppression? No it doesn’t.
Third, war is fought for only a few reasons. The defense of others, self, or in aggression. It’s been a while since America has gone to war out of anything but defense.
Abortion is an act of pure aggression against a defenseless opponent. Even worse, the aggressor put their opponent there in the first place.
Lastly, war is fought by men and women, it is a choice “we” as rational adults make. Abortion is slaughter. Even in cases of mass genocide at the very least, even if futile, the people affected can fight back. A child cannot. It is the equivalent of stepping on an ant in that one party has no defense against the other.
The two are not the same. [/quote]
Does the fetus that is killed during war see a difference? Does your moralizing in order to justify its death make it feel better? Again, humans have always decided who and who isn’t expendable at one time or another. To argue that rationale does not apply to abortion yet applies in other areas makes no sense. You can claim there is a difference between a fetus being killed during war or during an abortion but does this supposed, according to many here, innocent human who has rights (especially the right to live) recognize anything other than death is death and killing is killing?
BTW, how does a woman put the “opponent” there in the first place? Women/girls don’t always have a choice.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
War does just what you describe abortion does. Why is war OK and abortion isn’t? And I’m not talking about two soldiers trying to kill each other but the deliberate and calculated killing of civilians. How do we justify bombing a city when we know that the majority of dead will be civilians? How many fetuses get aborted when among the dead are pregnant women?
The point being that we manage to find a way to morally justify killing anyone at anytime. You can’t say killing is wrong except when it is morally acceptable, as in war, and then say abortion is wrong when someone came to a morally acceptable decision to have one [/quote]
Who said killing civilians was a generally acceptable matter in war? When did I say or insinuate that I support that killing civilians for no reason? If you are still stuck on us nuking Japan, you truly are dense, and either unable, or more likely unwilling to come to grasp the reality and gravity surrounding that situation.
Don’t get me wrong, I am NOT by any means saying we were faultless in WWII (Then again, what country is ever faultless when it comes to that messy and horrid thing called war?), but the bombing of those cities, and the firebombing of all the other major Japanese cities (why does that always get overlooked by most people?), saved a LOT of civilian and military lives, Japanese and American alike.
You point and premise are ridiculously flawed. Yes I can say killing is wrong unless it is morally acceptable, because that is the simple truth. If an armed man breaks into my house, killing him is morally acceptable. I would not lose any sleep over killing him, while protecting myself and my family. If I come across somebody clearly raping a girl, killing him is unquestionably morally acceptable, and again, not a moment of sleep would be lost over it. You call it callous, I call it being intellectually honest and forthright.
For the same reason, I submit that abortion is wrong. The only real exception I would make is when carrying through with the pregnancy/birth would put the mother at severe risk of dying; in that case, you have to choose one life or another, and sadly, there’s not always a “right” choice in those situations. People just have to use their best judgement. Aside from that type of circumstance, there’s no justifiable reason to kill the baby.
And this gem, this just made me laugh, in a pitying way: [quote]You can’t say killing is wrong except when it is morally acceptable, as in war, and then say abortion is wrong when someone came to a morally acceptable decision to have one [/quote]
Just how exactly did you arrive at the conclusion that the person who decided to kill their baby did so in a morally acceptable manner? See here’s the thing, when you are debating the merits for one side vs the other, just because you SAY your side is morally acceptable, despite a complete lack of reasoning for why you think it so, doesn’t make it so.
For that and other reasons, I believe you to either be extremely narrow-minded/deluded, or a troll, just looking for a reaction, like in the case of pittbull/headhunter/zep.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
BTW, how does a woman put the “opponent” there in the first place? Women/girls don’t always have a choice. [/quote]
Stop playing (or being) the idiot, and come to terms with the fact that the VAST amount of the time women have abortions, it is NOT a pregnancy as a result of rape.
Aside from that almost negligibly tiny amount of instances, every time a woman has an abortion, it is HER (And the man involved of course, I’m not absolving him of blame) that put the “opponent” in that position. But you knew that, which is why I conclude you’re just playing stupid for the sake of reactions.
If you believe that a fetus killed during war can be justified morally and that abortion cannot, in spite of the moralizing of the mother, then you are saying that you are morally superior. Gott mit uns.
[quote]hungry4more wrote:
Just how exactly did you arrive at the conclusion that the person who decided to kill their baby did so in a morally acceptable manner? [/quote]
How are you arriving at the conclusion they didn’t? I gave a hypothetical for when it happens, that is different than saying it always happens.
[quote]hungry4more wrote:
People just have to use their best judgement. Aside from that type of circumstance, there’s no justifiable reason to kill the baby.
[/quote]
Incongruity?
See, it all comes down to human judgement which is influenced by many variables. It isn’t black and white. It isn’t based on facts or truths. It is playing God without being privy to what he knows.
zecarlo, I’m done here. Your complete inability to grasp another point of view renders this farce of a discussion pointless, and a complete waste of time. I could swear that I’m arguing with pittbull right now.
I just love the Pro-Abortion crowd in Austin yelling and screaming about the 20 week limit. You know the place most Progressives love to be like, Europe, only has a 12 week provision?
[quote]bdocksaints75 wrote:
So last I heard the bill passed and Texas banned abortion after 20 weeks.[/quote]
Woohoo!
[quote]stokes1989 wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]stokes1989 wrote:
[quote]bdocksaints75 wrote:
[quote]stokes1989 wrote:
[quote]bdocksaints75 wrote:
Babies feel pain during abortion and in some cases even try to fight back.
and a lobster feels pain and tries to fight back when you drop it in a pot of boiling water, are you saying that that is murder and it shouldn’t be allowed? or are you saying that because humans have deemed themselves a higher class of being than something as simple as a lobster that things like that doesn’t matter, but an unwanting mother opting to abort her unborn child is wrong…the flaw in that logic in so apparent it laughable[/quote]
very interesting, I suppose I just value human life a little bit more. I am grateful for the sacrifice the lobster makes so I can enjoy its deliciousness as well with all animals.[/quote]
hahaha, i can respect just. I was just pointing it out…and who knows, if you season it right, humans may be able to taste awesome[/quote]
Humans are more important than other animals. I don’t think it’s arrogant to say that, it’s just a fact.[/quote]
and the only reason that is, is because we as humans have deemed ourselves that way…just saying[/quote]
Doesn’t much matter. Though I do believe in a metaphysical and divine order of things. That not withstanding, it doesn’t matter why we are top dog, we are you’ll have a hard time arguing against that fact.
Tampons, urine and feces removed from those tolerant young women protesters as Texas senate gathers to vote on measure to pass abortion law.
We’re supposed to be impressed with that. Meanwhile the media paints tea party conservatives that protest with signs as racist a__holes who need guns to compensate for their small genitals.
[quote]conservativedog wrote:
Tampons, urine and feces removed from those tolerant young women protesters as Texas senate gathers to vote on measure to pass abortion law.
We’re supposed to be impressed with that. Meanwhile the media paints tea party conservatives that protest with signs as racist a__holes who need guns to compensate for their small genitals.
[/quote]
I heard about that Friday. And that still let those women in the building. I would be afraid they would shite their pants and start throwing it into the gallery like a monkey.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]bdocksaints75 wrote:
So last I heard the bill passed and Texas banned abortion after 20 weeks.[/quote]
Good[/quote]
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]bdocksaints75 wrote:
So last I heard the bill passed and Texas banned abortion after 20 weeks.[/quote]
Good[/quote]
[/quote]
Sorry, but these two bozos do not know how the Texas Legislature works. It is not like DC where the reps and Senators are there every week unless there is a recess or vacation. They all have a real job and do this on the side. The regular session is 3 months and that is it. If everything is not taken care of the Governor may call a special session that last 2-3 days. One bozo in the house makes a stupid statement and these two bozos come up with more stuff. It is what it is.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]hungry4more wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I guess I am a feminist because I feel until the fetus has ability to survive on it’s own, it life is at the discretion of the mother. It could further be argued that the said fetus could be evicted at moms whim as well , at any time . The state that has draconian laws could pay for life support if they wish[/quote]
You honestly believe that without the ability to take care of oneself, one is not a person?
That rules out infants, old individuals, the mentally challenged, most in the ICU, and many other categories out as people. We can just let them die, and have no moral obligation to assist them, is that right? [/quote]
I did not say that but until the child is viable it isw up to the mothers discretion whether it is the right time to bring a child into (HER) life
[/quote]
She already made the decision when she had sex.