They Call It Murder?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
81

[quote]lixy wrote:
pat36 wrote:
Is that an argument? Sounds like a straw man of the most obvious sort. When did I ever mention religion?

You didn’t. I just extended the debate. The whole “pro-life” debate was sparked by religion. Had it not been for the millions spent on propaganda by religious groups in your country. There is a good reason well over 80% of people who participate in European referendums support abortion. I recommend you look into that.[/quote]

Prove it, raper.

Prove that the anti-murder movement is nothing but a religious ploy.

You are so full of shit it is unbelievable. And your fear of engaging me is even better.

Ignore that which scares you - it will always go away.

I guess it’s a little more difficult to impose your will when the victim is old enough to fucking vote, huh baby fucker?

82

Consensus gentium and assigning guilt by association. Look them up.

That 80% of Europeans support abortion is not an argument. Nor does Christian opposition to abortion on religious grounds serve as an argument against the “pro-choice” position - let alone against those who hold the same position for purely secular reasons.

83

[quote]IvanDmitritch wrote:
Consensus gentium and assigning guilt by association. Look them up.

That 80% of Europeans support abortion is not an argument. Nor does Christian opposition to abortion on religious grounds serve as an argument against the “pro-choice” position - let alone against those who hold the same position for purely secular reasons.

[/quote]

What everyone else thinks, or what a religion thinks are weak arguments if that is all you bring to the table. That’s where the fringes of this argument lose credibility. You have the militant feminist pro-abortionists that think every woman should have an abortion, and you have those that would blow up abortion clinics in the name of God.

Lixy, in her usual manner, can’t keep from using the bigot brush in defense of her weakness.

At first she goes Kanye on everyone telling us that the US hates women.

When that was laughed off, she accuses the entire ant-death side of being religious fanatics.

Will she actually engage in debate? She never has in the past.

84

[quote]rainjack wrote:
lixy wrote:
pat36 wrote:
Is that an argument? Sounds like a straw man of the most obvious sort. When did I ever mention religion?

You didn’t. I just extended the debate. The whole “pro-life” debate was sparked by religion. Had it not been for the millions spent on propaganda by religious groups in your country. There is a good reason well over 80% of people who participate in European referendums support abortion. I recommend you look into that.

Prove it, raper.

Prove that the anti-murder movement is nothing but a religious ploy.

You are so full of shit it is unbelievable. And your fear of engaging me is even better.

Ignore that which scares you - it will always go away.

I guess it’s a little more difficult to impose your will when the victim is old enough to fucking vote, huh baby fucker? [/quote]

LOL! I take it Lixy won’t experience any of the famous Texas hospitality any time soon.

But you better watch out, RJ — he may strap on a vest and visit you someday!!

85

[quote]IvanDmitritch wrote:
Consensus gentium and assigning guilt by association. Look them up.

That 80% of Europeans support abortion is not an argument. Nor does Christian opposition to abortion on religious grounds serve as an argument against the “pro-choice” position - let alone against those who hold the same position for purely secular reasons. [/quote]

I made it clear that I am not looking for an argument here. It’s been settled decades ago, and I refuse to engage in that discussion because we all know it’s futile. I do believe that fundamentalists are the driving force behind the anti-abortionist movement. So, no arguments there. Just observations and suggestions.

And yes, there exists a bunch of atheists who oppose abortion, but there are even more believers who prefer empowering the woman rather than have the legislature dictate what her options are.

I’ll ask again. Do you guys see the pattern in this map?

86

[quote]Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
lixy wrote:
pat36 wrote:
It’s not the woman’s body I am worried about. It’s the little baby inside them. Killing a fetus is like killing a baby outside the womb. Until such point that somebody can convince me that the “fetus” is not a person, then I will continue to be against abortion.

Not quite. You are against abortion because the Vatican (or whatever guru you prefer) told you to.

Lixy, that is the worst form of debate. You not only ignored his reasons, but turned around and created an arguement for him out of thin air. Try to be more honest. This is becoming a pattern for you.

How is this unfair?

The idea that life begins at conception is a Christian idea.

Were he born somewhere else he would not only not be Christian but this idea would also not be part of his culture.

What are you talking about? Pro-life atheists oppose abortion in the belief, that from embryo on, a new individual human being is developing. They see a human being as a chain of developmental stages, from embryo to elderly. Break one part of that chain and a human life is ended. You may not like it, but people do opposse abortion for purely secular reasons, also.

[/quote]

And yet noone in Israel gives a fuck about embryonic stem cell research.

Religiously they are just not wired that way.

The idea that it is wrong for a mother to kill her “baby”, a fertilized cell in the case of the morning after pill , is also Christian.

There are lots of historical and present examples where people kill their real, i.e born babies because they have genetic defects, like being born female.

The whole idea of the Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away is also deeply Christian.

In this day and age if you are born in Europe or the US you cannot not be catholic to some degree religious wingnut or not.

87

Orion, you could same the same thing about the natural rights theory you and I base our political theory on. Should that too be dismissed simply because of its roots in Christian philosophy? Whether the pro-life position is ultimately a derivative of Christian philosophy is irrelevant to the validity of the arguments of those who make no religious claims in defense of their beliefs.

88

[quote]IvanDmitritch wrote:
Orion, you could same the same thing about the natural rights theory you and I base our political theory on. Should that too be dismissed simply because of its roots in Christian philosophy? Whether the pro-life position is ultimately a derivative of Christian philosophy is irrelevant to the validity of the arguments of those who make no religious claims in defense of their beliefs. [/quote]

But they insist with religious zeal that human “life” begins at conception though it is all a matter of definitions.

Some people see it differently and yet they have no problems with forcing other people to bow to their beliefs.

That is a lot of conviction for an idea they would not even have were they born somewhere else, i.e a geographic accident.

89

[quote]lixy wrote:

And yes, there exists a bunch of atheists who oppose abortion, but there are even more believers who prefer empowering the woman rather than have the legislature dictate what her options are.[/quote]

I know “empowering” and “dictate” are cute words that carry a lot of emotional sting, but you are intentionally framing the debate so as to avoid the real issue. It all comes down to when human life starts. A person’s rights extend only so far as they do not infringe on another’s, correct?

When does a fetus become a human being? when does it “acquire” the same rights as its mother? If you say after birth, I ask what criterion are you using for life? If not at birth, when? At what stage of development does a fetus cease being a non-human being in your eyes?

90

[quote]orion wrote:
IvanDmitritch wrote:
Orion, you could same the same thing about the natural rights theory you and I base our political theory on. Should that too be dismissed simply because of its roots in Christian philosophy? Whether the pro-life position is ultimately a derivative of Christian philosophy is irrelevant to the validity of the arguments of those who make no religious claims in defense of their beliefs.

But they insist with religious zeal that human “life” begins at conception though it is all a matter of definitions.

Some people see it differently and yet they have no problems with forcing other people to bow to their beliefs.[/quote]

Seems to be a condition of human kind, religious or otherwise. I don’t understand your point here. We all force others to bow to our beliefs at some level. There are those, I’m sure, who say the murder of an adult is perfectly fine. We don’t respond with “knock yourself out.” You seem to be arguing that because a majority don’t think it’s murder it ought not be treated as such (is-ought).

Because we all agree on the individual’s right to life, that is where we must begin; it all comes down to when an individual comes into existence? when does one acquire the natural rights you and I hold dear? (An accident of geography, by the way.)

91

[quote]IvanDmitritch wrote:

You seem to be arguing that because a majority don’t think it’s murder it ought not be treated as such (is-ought).

[/quote]

That is how most laws are made, yes.

And the government has no business legislating morality.

92

Pro-lifers -

Go to an abortion clinic and offer to adopt all of the would be children.

You’d save some lives! It’s God’s work people.

And obviously you can take care of the little buggers.

See, there’s a non-violent solution to every problem!

93

[quote]lixy wrote:
…
I just can’t understand adepts of regressionism who want to take away rights of women that took centuries to get. The international community’s position is unambiguous on the subject.
…
[/quote]

If one looks at the world map that you provided, one would see that about half the world restricts abortion in some form or fashion, including those primitive, backwater hellholes Germany, Spain, Great Britain, Brazil, Japan, and Australia.

Hardly unambiguous.

94

[quote]orion wrote:
IvanDmitritch wrote:

You seem to be arguing that because a majority don’t think it’s murder it ought not be treated as such (is-ought).

That is how most laws are made, yes.

And the government has no business legislating morality.

[/quote]

Or funding immorality.

Your arguments about religion are not even the issue. It is as simple as a DNA test. There is a unique being growing and developing in the womb. To attach religious zeal to it as an attempt to discredit the fact that a new life exists in the womb should be beneath you.

Just because Euros are so used to mass murders doesn’t make it right. I guess the holocaust never existed because it was based on religion, and we can’t have religious zealotry ruining a good killing for everyone else, huh?

95

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Pro-lifers -

Go to an abortion clinic and offer to adopt all of the would be children.

You’d save some lives! It’s God’s work people.

And obviously you can take care of the little buggers.

See, there’s a non-violent solution to every problem![/quote]

How about you keep your fucking pants zipped, or perhaps man up and take responsibility for your actions?

You are a fucking idiot.

96

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
LOL! I take it Lixy won’t experience any of the famous Texas hospitality any time soon.

But you better watch out, RJ — he may strap on a vest and visit you someday!!

[/quote]

Lixy is a chicken shit little coward.

Hide - you ass raping. child molesting bitch.

You’re awful fucking tough when you can hit and run. Most cowards are.

97

[quote]rainjack wrote:
orion wrote:
IvanDmitritch wrote:

You seem to be arguing that because a majority don’t think it’s murder it ought not be treated as such (is-ought).

That is how most laws are made, yes.

And the government has no business legislating morality.

Or funding immorality.

Your arguments about religion are not even the issue. It is as simple as a DNA test. There is a unique being growing and developing in the womb. To attach religious zeal to it as an attempt to discredit the fact that a new life exists in the womb should be beneath you.

Just because Euros are so used to mass murders doesn’t make it right. I guess the holocaust never existed because it was based on religion, and we can’t have religious zealotry ruining a good killing for everyone else, huh? [/quote]

Whos said that the government should pay for anything?

Fund your own abortions!

It is not as simple as an DNA test because everything biological has it.

Even cancer cells.

Yet we kill creatures by the thousands that are infinitely more evolved than the few cells a morning after pill kills. Most of the times they do not even kill anything because most fertilized are aborted by mother nature herself.

If you believe human life begins at conception, fine.

I don´t.

And, even if I did, I think especially the US has enough people behind bars to realize that state sanctioned violence is not the end all and be all of societies problems.

98

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Pro-lifers -

Go to an abortion clinic and offer to adopt all of the would be children.

You’d save some lives! It’s God’s work people.

And obviously you can take care of the little buggers.

See, there’s a non-violent solution to every problem![/quote]

Not relevant.

This is like looking at the child of a poor parent, or one housed in an orphanage, and thinking, “You’d have been better off had your life been snuffed out in the womb.”

Even if the odds aren’t great, poverty and orphanhood are both surmountable. Death isn’t. This is similar to the death penatly stance I’ve taken. An innoncent man wrongfully imprisoned has some hope of being set free. An innocent man put to death has no hope, at all. Even a poor orphan has hope.

And that, is my Christmas message. Back to the Christmas party!

99

[quote]orion wrote:

Whos said that the government should pay for anything?[/quote]

Legislating/funding - two sides of the same coin.

Read up on R. v. Wade

[quote]It is not as simple as an DNA test because everything biological has it.

Even cancer cells.[/quote]

That shares the dna from both the mother and the father, growing in an organized manner forming organs and systems? Give me more credit than that.

I am not talking about ru-486 - if I have misled you, I apologize. It is a huge leap from the morning after to the 2nd, or 3rd trimester.

[quote]If you believe human life begins at conception, fine.

I don´t.[/quote]

Good for you. I don’t know when life begins. I do know that somewhere between the 16-cell stage and parturition, the cancer becomes a unique individual - right down to the ability to smile, kick, punch, and has its own finger prints.

[quote]And, even if I did, I think especially the US has enough people behind bars to realize that state sanctioned violence is not the end all and be all of societies problems.
[/quote]

I would rather save the state sanctioned violence for those able to have a defense attorney present when sentencing is handed down. Aborted infants are not afforded the luxury we provide serial rapists and child molestors. Ask Lixy - she knows all about rape and child molesting.

100

[quote]rainjack wrote:

I am not talking about ru-486 - if I have misled you, I apologize. It is a huge leap from the morning after to the 2nd, or 3rd trimester.

[/quote]

Abortion is legal in Austria in the first trimester. That seems to be a reasonable rule for me.