T-Nation Elections

[quote]Sloth wrote:
The fundamental issue is the deliberate (i.e. pursposeful, premeditated, and conscious) taking of a the most innocent of human life. That’s the part I’m not going to be argued past, because there is no justification for such an act.[/quote]

So the fact that it is “the most innocent of human life” factors in?

What about the fact that about 60% (and that’s the low end figure, it ranges up to 80%) of all embryos are naturally flushed out in women’s normal menstrual flows?

Why make it a fundamental issue if nature/God doesn’t? Even if you could prevent the 1.2 billions abortions per year, you could do nothing for the countless billions of flushed away embryos who are just as innocent as the ones who make it.

If embryos get a soul, Heaven must be filled with them to the brim.

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Well, true blue atheists are a minority, so it can’t be helped. However, there are secular and atheist groups growing up around a pro-life platform. Opposition to killing isn’t exactly restricted to the religious. And why in the world would you belittle housewives? No career? Maybe not, but they carry out perhaps the most essential role in society.[/quote]

I belittle everyone who wants to force women to deliver a child they don’t want. The decision is hard enough on the woman, so she doesn’t need some jackass calling her a murderer or something similar.

I’m pretty sure you folks would have a different discourse if it was you who had to put up with a life form growing inside of you, leeching off your proteins, reducing your mobility and tearing up your private parts while you kick and scream in agony.

If you really care about human life, do something to better the lives of one of the billions of kids around the world. Making a woman suffer because you don’t deem she should have control over her own body is not helping anyone.

[quote]Sloth wrote:
The fundamental issue is the deliberate (i.e. pursposeful, premeditated, and conscious) taking of a the most innocent of human life. That’s the part I’m not going to be argued past, because there is no justification for such an act.

Pookie wrote:
So the fact that it is “the most innocent of human life” factors in?
[/quote]
You’re forgeting a very important part of my view. “The fundamental issue is the deliberate (i.e. pursposeful, premeditated, and conscious)…”

I don’t follow. How many people die natural deaths per year? I’m not going to legalize drive-bys because nature claims human life. Honestly, I’m not trying to be clever, but I don’t understand how this would be a factor to consider.

See above. Also, I’m not interested in a religious debate, I’m keeping my argument secular.

Well, again, not really looking to argue this based on religious beliefs. If you want religious beliefs, I’d tell you homosexuality, prostitution, pre-marital sex, adultery, and drug use were sinful. However, you won’t catch me saying government has a role in punishing these behaviors in any way.

So, you have to ask yourself why I’m prepared to charge government with putting an end to abortion, if not for all those other religious beliefs? My answer has already been given.

And, I wouldn’t begin to know if Heaven is even close to being filled to the brim. But, I would say my own religious traditions would say heaven is most likely infinite. Hence, no need to worry about an available plot for home construction, if we get there.

I was under the impression that parasitism was heterospecific. While the embryo/mother relationship is an obligatory dependent relationship and homospecific.

[quote]lixy wrote:
I belittle everyone who wants to force women to deliver a child they don’t want. The decision is hard enough on the woman, so she doesn’t need some jackass calling her a murderer or something similar.
[/quote]

It’s a difficult and murderous decision. And, I very much fault society for advancing the notion that is anything but the taking of a human life. You can pout as much as need be, Lixy. However, we’re here to stay on this issue, so for the sake of your blood pressure, you might figure out a way not to get so darned mad. Hah! Just ribbing you.

Well, I guess if I saw a human life as nothing more than a tape worm. And the birth of a huma child as nothing more than torture, instead of the delivery of beforementioned human life, maybe I would!.

[quote]
If you really care about human life, do something to better the lives of one of the billions of kids around the world. Making a woman suffer because you don’t deem she should have control over her own body is not helping anyone.[/quote]

I do my works through the Catholic and Orthodox Churches I’ve had the pleasure of attending throughout my life. If you care to join me in those efforts, I’d be glad to provide you a link to the numerous Catholic and Orthodox Christian charities. They accept food, clothing, time, and of course money.

[quote]pat wrote:
Are you arguing on the basis of population control?[/quote]

I suppose I am.

Overpopulation is the ultimate cause of poverty, colonization, war, and tyranny. I don’t particularly care for these things, so I think that limits to overpopulation are desirable.

Obviously birth control is preferable to infanticide, but if birth control doesn’t work, infanticide, abortion or adoption are the only options for dealing with unwanted babies. Our current adoption system is not set up to handle the spawn of every unwanted pregnancy ever conceived, and infanticide is illegal in 21st century America. So we have abortion. I don’t like it, but it beats the alternative.

[quote]pat wrote:

Advantage? Let see. It makes people mad as hell. People insult and call me names (lieu of making an actual argument). I get no money. You know I don’t get shit, but a hard time for my pro-life stance.
I say I do it because I believe it is the taking of a human life and I think that is wrong.

[/quote]

Well, I’m sorry that you are the recipient of abuse for your views. They are yours and I respect you for holding to them. However, you miss the point of my question.

I don’t like the practice of killing babies any more than you do, probably. However, I don’t like the consequences of too many of them being born even more.

So my question was, can you or any person who passionately argues that every child conceived should be born, explain to me the real benefits to yourself or to society, of having an extra one and a half million mostly unwanted babies being born in this country every year?

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Nope. Not for controlling women. Not for demographics. And, not because of my Religion. Guys, guys, it would serve you better to accept my explanation. I simply object to murdering an innocent human life, and will not leave it as an option. So don’t waste any more of your time trying to ascribe to me motivations I don’t have. [/quote]

I’m not trying to ascribe any motives to you, Sloth. I’m just trying to understand your motives.

Just like I try to understand the motives of any person who is passionately against something that doesn’t directly or adversely affect them.

Perhaps it can be argued that someone who is a passionate advocate of gun control is afraid of weapons, or is afraid of being a victim of a shooting. That their fears may be pathological at worst (fear of weapons is an indication of of retarded sexual and emotional maturity, according to Freud) and irrational at best (legal owners of weapons are extremely unlikely to use them illegally) is beside the point.

But what about homosexuality? I can think of no other issue whose opponents froth at the mouth quite so heavily in their opposition of the practice, except maybe incest. And yet these opponents are at practically zero risk of being victimized by either practice (assuming we are not talking about homosexual or incestuous rape, which is another matter).

Similarly, an anti-abortionist is certainly at no risk of being the victim of an abortion, nor is any of their family, if they don’t elect to the procedure.

So, at the risk of sounding like a cold-hearted bastard, why should you or I care if a complete stranger on the other side of the country decides to end her pregnancy? To quote Thomas Jefferson, it neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.

I am voting for Obama!!!

[quote]pat wrote:
Molotov_Coktease wrote:
Not just smoking joints and giving birth to retarded opinions.

Don’t be so hard on yourself. You could attempt an actual argument.[/quote]

Lol…You just did the internet equivalent of ‘I know you are but what am I’. Get your own words.

As far as arguments go Pat, you just refuse to acknowledge any angle that involves ‘woman’. As for your ‘empirical’ approach, its hardly revolutionary, every single word you’ve spouted has been par for the course and textbook. So get over yourself.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Varqanir wrote:

I agree that children are important. However, unlike Japan, America has no shortage of children. We have, in fact, more than enough, evidently. And I would venture to guess that most mothers who abort their babies do so not out of confusion, but rather out of conviction that they really, really, don’t want those babies.

It is more than that otherwise the would simply give them up.[/quote]

Simply? Yeah Zap… its a cakewalk. Like handing over some loose change really. The absence of empathy is in blinking neon lights with ignorant statements such as yours.

Anyway, everyone is entitled to feel as they do. I think good points have been made all around. I don’t believe in late stage abortions, it makes me cringe as much as the next person. However, as I mentioned earlier on…I don’t see anybody attending or holding funerals for early miscarriages, for the same reasons I would not vehemently oppose early abortions. I am pro choice. Peace be with you all.

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Nope. Not for controlling women. Not for demographics. And, not because of my Religion. Guys, guys, it would serve you better to accept my explanation. I simply object to murdering an innocent human life, and will not leave it as an option. So don’t waste any more of your time trying to ascribe to me motivations I don’t have.

I’m not trying to ascribe any motives to you, Sloth. I’m just trying to understand your motives.

Just like I try to understand the motives of any person who is passionately against something that doesn’t directly or adversely affect them.

Perhaps it can be argued that someone who is a passionate advocate of gun control is afraid of weapons, or is afraid of being a victim of a shooting. That their fears may be pathological at worst (fear of weapons is an indication of of retarded sexual and emotional maturity, according to Freud) and irrational at best (legal owners of weapons are extremely unlikely to use them illegally) is beside the point.

But what about homosexuality? I can think of no other issue whose opponents froth at the mouth quite so heavily in their opposition of the practice, except maybe incest. And yet these opponents are at practically zero risk of being victimized by either practice (assuming we are not talking about homosexual or incestuous rape, which is another matter).

Similarly, an anti-abortionist is certainly at no risk of being the victim of an abortion, nor is any of their family, if they don’t elect to the procedure.

So, at the risk of sounding like a cold-hearted bastard, why should you or I care if a complete stranger on the other side of the country decides to end her pregnancy? To quote Thomas Jefferson, it neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.

[/quote]

Sorry, I hope I didn’t come off agitated, Varq. Just trying to save those questioning the motives of Pro-lifers some time. Of course, I can only answer for myself, so keep that in mind. But, once I do speak for myself, it would be helpful for people to recognize my motives, and not one’s they’d wish to attribute to me. Otherwise, we’ll all keep going in cirles in this conversation, as I’m forced to deal with each and every new motive placed at my feet.

Furthermore, I don’t know if I can explain why you should care about a human life you’ve never met. I’m not a big thinker, and this seems a little too philosophical for my level of miseducation. However, consider the folks you do know. Maybe friends, family, and even co-workers. Having met them, and knowing of them, do their lives have their own worth? Do they have their own value? If life had turned out different, and you had never met these folks, would their lives be of no worth? Simply because you had never experienced these folks with any of your senses?

Outside of the above, I’m not sure how else to approach such a question. Personally, I’ve experienced what it is to have one foot in the grave and to know, just know, when the darkness at the corners engulfs your vision, you’re not waking up ever again. But, a week and half later I did wake up. And slowly, but surely, as my head clears from comma inducing drugs, the ravages of blood loss and pneumonia, I realize I’ve escaped with the most important right in this world. Life.

You see, hypertension of the hepatic portal vein caused me to experience massive hemorraghing, via esophageal varicies. It took two shunts in a 12 hr. emergency surgey to save my life. Please, forgive any misspellings of medical terms, I was only 16 when this happened. Anyways, on top of all that, I had some issues develop from the event, such as nerve damage to my left left, and a nasty bout of pneumonia.

All in all, it took me 2 months and a handful of days before I left the hospital. Lots of pain, and walking with a walker, made for a long, painful, and often frustrating recovery. But, you know what? I was alive. I could sit outside, breathe the air, feel the warmth on my skin, and know that “Hey, at least I’m alive.” So, yeah maybe it has something to do with it. And maybe that’s why I refuse to feel guilty about my position.

Now, I notice this ended up far too personal, and far too long. Yet, I’ll hit the durned submit key, and maybe you’ll have a better understanding of how I view all this.

[quote]Molotov_Coktease wrote:
pat wrote:
Molotov_Coktease wrote:
Not just smoking joints and giving birth to retarded opinions.

Don’t be so hard on yourself. You could attempt an actual argument.

Lol…You just did the internet equivalent of ‘I know you are but what am I’. Get your own words.

As far as arguments go Pat, you just refuse to acknowledge any angle that involves ‘woman’. As for your ‘empirical’ approach, its hardly revolutionary, every single word you’ve spouted has been par for the course and textbook. So get over yourself.

[/quote]

You are mistaken in thinking that I give no value to the life of the woman involved. The problem with that angle is it simply puts the cart before the horse.
How a woman feels, what her lot in life is, what a child is going to do to her life, can she support it, etc. I get it, but if you would just for a moment, pretend you believe as I do that this “thing” growing in the woman is a human life and aborting it is killing a human.
If you think a particular action would kill somebody, would you still do that action, even if it’s perceived effect would be helpful to somebody else?
That is why my focus is simply on whether that little fetus is a human life first. If I am right and it is, then the plight of the mother has to shift to “I am having a baby what do I do next?” Not “I am pregnant, should I get rid of it?”
If I thought you were right, then I agree 100% with all your assertions.

You know it would be easier to share views and discuss it if you’d quit being so fucking hostile.

[quote]pat wrote:

The problem with that angle is it simply puts the cart before the horse. [/quote]

Or rather, the chicken before the eggs.

[quote]pookie wrote:
pat wrote:
Yes, but that won’t play in your favor. I’ve read biology articles that argued that infanticide up to 5-6 months of age was no different cognitively than flushing out an embryo.

I would agree with those articles.

Well, you shouldn’t because they weren’t arguing that an embryo is “a person” as much as they were “a young infant” is still not a person.
[/quote]

It is consistent, that what I like about it. It sees no difference between in-utero and extra(?)utero as I do. It just takes an opposing view, but it makes people think as most folks would be appalled at infanticide.

A new born cannot live on it’s own either as it can do nothing life sustaining for itself. The only survival mechanism it has it crying.

Well damn, I over simplified. I need to do some research and come up with a better hypothesis.

At it’s basic, yes. The worthlessness of a person doesn’t really factor in. Hell, I have known some useless motherfuckers in my life. Folks I’d consider a waste of flesh and air, but I can kill 'em.

Well nature can do things we can’t. Hell the tsumanmi wiped out 120,000 people in one fell swoop. That was a tragedy, if a person or people do that, it is a crime of the highest order. And act of ultimate despicable-ness or any other negative adjective you can throw at it.

Well, they can fuck, doesn’t mean it will work.

Because once “C” happens, it’s a human life and I don’t believe you can take that at will.

BTW, My wife was telling me the story of one of her co-workers who was pregnant, last night. She had a serious medical condition where her blood pressure soared (it has a name but I forgot what it was). They had to take the baby or she was going to be in danger of losing her life. Baby is in the NICU, at 27 weeks, but alive and well otherwise.

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
pat wrote:

Advantage? Let see. It makes people mad as hell. People insult and call me names (lieu of making an actual argument). I get no money. You know I don’t get shit, but a hard time for my pro-life stance.
I say I do it because I believe it is the taking of a human life and I think that is wrong.

Well, I’m sorry that you are the recipient of abuse for your views. They are yours and I respect you for holding to them. However, you miss the point of my question.

I don’t like the practice of killing babies any more than you do, probably. However, I don’t like the consequences of too many of them being born even more.

So my question was, can you or any person who passionately argues that every child conceived should be born, explain to me the real benefits to yourself or to society, of having an extra one and a half million mostly unwanted babies being born in this country?
[/quote]

Benefits? There aren’t any benefits that I can think of. I never really thought of it as a cost-benefit analysis. I just think of it like this. Is it a human life? If so, do we have the right to take it as a choice?
Don’t worry about the shit I take. If I never piss anybody off, I am probably not saying anything of value, I am just being a patsy.

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
pat wrote:
Are you arguing on the basis of population control?

I suppose I am.

Overpopulation is the ultimate cause of poverty, colonization, war, and tyranny. I don’t particularly care for these things, so I think that limits to overpopulation are desirable.

Obviously birth control is preferable to infanticide, but if birth control doesn’t work, infanticide, abortion or adoption are the only options for dealing with unwanted babies. Our current adoption system is not set up to handle the spawn of every unwanted pregnancy ever conceived, and infanticide is illegal in 21st century America. So we have abortion. I don’t like it, but it beats the alternative.

[/quote]

We don’t know if it beats the alternative or not, we have to see the alternative in action to know for sure. I do see you point that over population can be a problem though. The problem is that we humans really aren’t capable of engineering population control. China’s trying it and it is starting to back fire since they have the first generation that is mostly men. There aren’t enough woman to go around. You can just envision the multitude of sociological issues that causes.