I believe in free speach. Anyone can say anything stupid that they want to. And just waht is wrong with working for McDonald’s? In your political/economic model they should get paid as little as proffesors, teachers and doctors and are just as valuable.
Well, considering that a great many McDonald’s employees - especially in urban areas - are black, perhaps Lifticus, unencumbered by convention of course, could just have a widespread abortion of blacks and save them all the trouble?
[/quote]
You can believe it how ever you want. Since, I didn’t define my terms I am leaving the implications to you.
My quote was actually, "Other than reducing the McDonalds employee pool I don’t see anything wrong with this. The “other than” portion of the statement would indicate I think it to be “bad”–as long as we’re getting technical. But then you don’t really know if I meant it sarcastically…your decision.
[quote]pat36 wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
As long as they are not poor. Health care isn’t a right in this country. Sure, we spend tons of money on informational pamphlets but if the mother can’t read them they don’t do any good.
Again, you are mixing the potential for life with actual life. A fetus is not a life.
So, now your a capitolist?
A new born can’t live on it’s own either. It’s just no tied in with an umbilical cord. If you just leave it in the middle of a room for a day or two, it will die. You obviously have no children. Hell, even a two year old wouldn’t live long left to it’s own devices.
Is a kid born at 8 months less human than a kid born at 9?[/quote]
I am as much a capitalist as I am a communist. I give preference to communism because it is an immutable fact of natural law. My statement about health care is a statment about how it is–not how I think we should behave.
I would say once the fetus is born it doesn’t matter when it was born. If you can cut the umbilical cord and it lives then it is alive. Give it a birth certificate and make it legal.
[quote]derek wrote:
I’m saying abortion is performed almost exclusively because it was “bad timing” to get pregnant. I just wanted to dispell the oft-cited “rape/incest” excuse. [/quote]
But my question was: In those cases, are you ok with abortion?
I don’t have exact recent numbers, but I did check some years ago and the number of abortions exceeded the number of adoptions by about 10:1.
Many couples who are having trouble conceiving are not willing to adopt. Just look at the millions (billions?) spent at fertility clinics each year. Many people want their own children; and will go childless rather than adopt.
So, in the event abortion was made illegal and became impossible to have, you’d have a lot of unwanted children to deal with.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
I am as much a capitalist as I am a communist. I give preference to communism because it is an immutable fact of natural law. My statement about health care is a statment about how it is–not how I think we should behave.
I would say once the fetus is born it doesn’t matter when it was born. If you can cut the umbilical cord and it lives then it is alive. Give it a birth certificate and make it legal.[/quote]
Oh, I see it now. You’re an Idiot Savant minus the “Savant”.
Does a woman’s right to NOT have a child end anywhere, and if so, where?
[/quote]
I don’t believe that right ever ends.
Yes, the farther along in a pregnancy she is, the more strongly I would recommend her giving birth, and I see nothing wrong with people suggesting that women not get abortions or speaking out against abortion, however, I draw the line at those same people trying to take away that right.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Again, you are mixing the potential for life with actual life. A fetus is not a life.[/quote]
WARNING; Graphic pictures link.
L-Max, if you can look at the aborted baby pictures and still honestly say that they all weren’t alive before they were killed then you are a better man than me (not so much!). JUst page down a bit and you’ll see them if you dare.
[quote]pookie wrote:
derek wrote:
I’m saying abortion is performed almost exclusively because it was “bad timing” to get pregnant. I just wanted to dispell the oft-cited “rape/incest” excuse.
But my question was: In those cases, are you ok with abortion?
[/quote]
No. I’m not “ok” with those abortions. Was that a serious question? That assumes that you ARE ok with those abortion?
I’m not saying I want to overturn Roe vs Wade but am I “ok” with those abortions? Not at all.
So I suppose taking someone off of life support is also murder, since it results in the loss of a human life?
And certainly assisted suidice (regardless of the consent or wishes of the patient) is murder, since it results in the loss of a human life.
Funny, I hear little complaints about the war in Iraq from your side of the table, despite the fact that it, too, results in the loss of many human lives.
Would you also say that not supporting or contributing to organizations that provide food and medicine to poor and needy people is also murder, since it (albeit indirectly) results in the loss of human life?
Or are there some instances where a choice or action that results in the loss of a human life is not the same as murder?
You are a fool drawing such idiotic comparisons.
[/quote]
So let me get this straight…
You claim that abortion is murder because it results in the loss of a human life. So you’re asserting that doing something that results in a human being dying is murder.
I give several examples of situations where decisions are made or actions are taken that directly or indirectly result in a human being dying, but are not considered murder.
Therefore defeating your point that “Since a person dies, its murder!”, since I’ve illustrated that this is not always true.
Your well crafted response is to call me stupid. Why am I not suprised?
[quote]pat36 wrote:
CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
I do not believe that abortion is murder. Yes, it results in the death of a human, but equating abortion with homicide is the same as equating ordering a hamburger at McDonalds with stabbing your neighbors dog (since both result in the death of an animal).
Abortion is a woman exercising her right to govern her own body. Unfortunatly, as it stands now, there is no way for the unborn child to continue living without the support of her body. I’m an advocate of finding a way to make this happen, thus protecting the rights of both the woman and the child.
Yes, fucking means risking pregnancy, the same way driving means risking a car accident, the same way playing sports means risking injury, the same way eating means risking choking. Just because an action has some inherent risks does not mean you have no alternative than to “Deal with the consequences of your actions!” should risk become reality.
And please… be fucking serious… you’re suggesting that being pro-choice is genetic? Do you think all opinions on every matter are genetic, or just this opinion on this matter?
LOL!!! Are you serious! Did you just say this as a counter argument? I can’t stop laughing.
I got what I wanted out of you. You admit abortions terminate a human life. I ain’t gonna argue whether or not taking a human life is a worth while endevour for what ever reason.[/quote]
Wow you people sure do know how to debate an issue.
I must admit something here; I’ve been posting with my 9 month old baby girl sitting on my lap. Until you go through a pregnancy (with my wife), birth and holding that precious, helpless life in your arms, I don’t think you are qualified to be pro-abortion.
Go see your “fetus” on an ultrasound screen when he/she wriggles away from the ultrasound wand. Feel and even see your “fetus” kick and get the hicups and tell me that’s not a life in there.
And let’s get technical here;
What is the fetus as it “crowns” at the vagina?
What is the fetus when he/she emerges from the mother and the cord is still attached?
Does a woman’s right to NOT have a child end anywhere, and if so, where?
I don’t believe that right ever ends.
Yes, the farther along in a pregnancy she is, the more strongly I would recommend her giving birth, and I see nothing wrong with people suggesting that women not get abortions or speaking out against abortion, however, I draw the line at those same people trying to take away that right. [/quote]
I can completely understand this position. Next time you see a representative of NARAL ask yourself do they truly represent your position.
Are they trying to minimize abortions while keeping them legal or are they just trying to make them easy to get and thus maximize them?
You claim that abortion is murder because it results in the loss of a human life. So you’re asserting that doing something that results in a human being dying is murder.
I give several examples of situations where decisions are made or actions are taken that directly or indirectly result in a human being dying, but are not considered murder.
Therefore defeating your point that “Since a person dies, its murder!”, since I’ve illustrated that this is not always true.
Your well crafted response is to call me stupid. Why am I not suprised?[/quote]
This was my earlier response to you. You must’ve missed it.
"I also tend to think of adults capable of defending themselves, thinking for themselves and deaths as a result of war somewhat differenly than the most precious form of human life (unborn baby) but that’s just crazy ol’ me talkin’. "
And come on, give me some credit. I called you an Idiot Savant minus the Savant part, not “stupid”.
[quote]derek wrote:
I’m not saying I want to overturn Roe vs Wade but am I “ok” with those abortions? Not at all.
[/quote]
I do. I’ve met Jane Roe, actually I sat and had a couple of smokes with her (back when I smoked). Norma McCorvey, I believe was her name. Anyway, she’s, made a total 180 and she is trying to undo the Roe v. Wade decision. Ironically, she has never had an abortion, but she has worked at abortion clinics. She explained her deep regret for her past. She’s hung with all the heavy hitters: Patricia Ireland, Gloria Steinam, etc.
I am against them all, except where the life of the mother or child is in danger. I am not going to force one to die so that the other may live.
A fetus is not a life. It cannot live on its own. It cannot breathe on its own. Your definition proves me correct. I said it does not have life. Therefore not alive. Unborn–not alive.
You want to distinguish a human fetus because you consider it “human” and therefore worthy of some higher moral laws. That is fine. I am merely pointing out that life begins at birth.
Is a seed alive? Is a germinated seed alive? We normally don’t consider it a living plant until it shoots thru the soil and we can see the tiny cotyledons. Why are humans any different in relation to nature?
To answer your question I am not a biologist. I am a physicist but I also investigate the world of natural philosophy which covers all the sciences.
Yikes! You need to go back to school.
life ?noun
the condition that distinguishes organisms from inorganic objects and dead organisms, being manifested by growth through metabolism, reproduction, and the power of adaptation to environment through changes originating internally.
[/quote]
How can you be alive if you are not born? Do not all living organisms go thru some process of “birth”? Or are they spontaneously created?
You believe life to begin at conception. That is fine. I disagree. I believe life to begin at birth. Can a fetus metabolise on its own? Can it respire on its own? Can it grow on its own? Can it reproduce? A fetus does not meet any of the criteria your definition lays out for it to be considered a life. It has potential–nothing more.
[quote]derek wrote:
No. I’m not “ok” with those abortions. Was that a serious question? That assumes that you ARE ok with those abortion?
I’m not saying I want to overturn Roe vs Wade but am I “ok” with those abortions? Not at all.[/quote]
Well which is it? You don’t want to overturn Roe v. Wade, so you support the choice option; but you’re against abortions even when they are the results of rape/incest?
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
I am saying there are 2 camps. Pro-abortion and anti-abortion.
You appear to be in the pro-abortion camp.
Calling it a choice (a positive sounding word) instead of an abortion means that you understand it is a horrible thing and you are trying to use language to disguise the horror.
Be honest about the issue and don’t play word games. [/quote]
I am being honest on the issue.
Being pro-abortion would mean suggesting and advocating that women get abortions. A pro-abortionist would tell a woman “You should get an abortion.”
Someone who is pro-choice would tell a woman “You have the right to choose to get an abortion.”
Being pro-choice has no absolute bearing on if a person thinks abortion is moral, just, or fair.
The same way I think its immoral for people to claim that homosexuals are evil or that minorities are inferior human beings, but I support their right to say it. This does not make me pro-racism or pro-homophobia, does it?
The same way its possible to be opposed to people burning the US flag, but support their right to do so because they have the freedom of expression.
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
So let me get this straight…
You claim that abortion is murder because it results in the loss of a human life. So you’re asserting that doing something that results in a human being dying is murder.
[/quote]
I don’t know. Tearing the head and limbs off a living human fetus seems pretty murderous to me, the extremist I am.
What is the fetus when he/she emerges from the mother and the cord is still attached?
See the folly in your “not a life” arguement?
[/quote]
Yes, excellent points–all of them; however, technically it is still attached to the mother and thus not an independent life form and in all reality hasn’t taken its first real live breath. Way to use emotive arguments, though. On some people that works.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Are they trying to minimize abortions while keeping them legal or are they just trying to make them easy to get and thus maximize them?[/quote]
Who the hell would want to maximize them?
I think abortions should be a last resort, used only when all other available options have been considered and rejected. Personally, I can’t imagine any situation where I’d want to abort a pregnancy, but still, I’d prefer to have the choice to do so if for some reason the case arose. And that’s pretty much the gist of the issue: I think the parents should be the ones to make the choice for themselves and not have it imposed on them by society or, worse, religion.
There is a lot of weird reasoning from the anti-choice side, where not only would they make abortion illegal, but they would also remove methods of birth control. They even oppose HPV vaccines that could prevent future cancer one the idiotic premise that it might make someone “more promiscuous.” If the goal is to reduce abortions, shouldn’t birth control be encouraged?
You claim that abortion is murder because it results in the loss of a human life. So you’re asserting that doing something that results in a human being dying is murder.
I give several examples of situations where decisions are made or actions are taken that directly or indirectly result in a human being dying, but are not considered murder.
Therefore defeating your point that “Since a person dies, its murder!”, since I’ve illustrated that this is not always true.
Your well crafted response is to call me stupid. Why am I not suprised?
This was my earlier response to you. You must’ve missed it.
"I also tend to think of adults capable of defending themselves, thinking for themselves and deaths as a result of war somewhat differenly than the most precious form of human life (unborn baby) but that’s just crazy ol’ me talkin’. "
[/quote]
So you admit that not all cases involving the death of a human are murder. However, you still assert that abortion is, based on the fact that unborn babies are the “most precious form of human life”.
i dont think you can substantiate that claim based on anything other than your own emotional response; since its possible to both argue that the most precious human life is the one that has done the most good (in which case an unborn child certainly wouldnt qualify) or that the most precious human life is the one that has done the least bad (in which case an unborn baby would be the most precious).
Or you could take the stance that all human life is equally precious, but that would be going back on your stance that unborn babies are more precious than those of us who have been born.