this came up in another post, and i wanted to get a sense of what people thought about this.
I am pro-choice, i think a woman has a right to choose, and i believe that taking away that rigt is about the worse thing you can do to a person. I always believe there should be a medically determined point in which we say "life begins here",and after that point abortion should should not be had unless complications would endanger the mother.
What i dont understand is why do people who are pro-life violently resist compromise? Instead of setting a date and going from there, its as if the second sperm meets egg its life. And by that philosophy, am i killing millions of people for every sperm of mine that doesnt get used? Or is my wife commiting genocide when she has her period? Should every egg be extracted from every woman and fertilized to save that person that "might have been". If not, then how can the same argument be used for someone saying that the newly fertilized egg "will become someone".
i often hear "they could have cured cancer!", but couldnt they have just as easily been another Jeffery Dhalmer?
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Abortion
AbortionFollow
the religious right feels life begins at conception.
anything past that point is murder.
compromising on this would amount to ignoring their faith.
kind of like how the muslim extremist feel about us sitting on their land.
scarey isnt it?
anything past that point is murder.
compromising on this would amount to ignoring their faith.
kind of like how the muslim extremist feel about us sitting on their land.
scarey isnt it?
As I said in the other thread we have discussed this already. There is a thread with close to 300 replies from no more than 2 weeks ago on the subject.
Please dont rehash sh[b][/b]it just so you can up your post count.
Please dont rehash sh[b][/b]it just so you can up your post count.
Bode - 100 Holy Paladin - Lightbringer
bhodisattva Defender of Justice wrote:
Please dont rehash sh[b][/b]it just so you can up your post count.
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
I'm pro-choice, however your argument doesn't make sense. Menstruation and sperm count are natural occurrences hardwired into the system. A miscarriage is also a part of the natural system. A forced miscarriage, however, is not. Using outside forces to abort a pregnancy cannot compared to these.
EP wrote:
I always believe there should be a medically determined point in which we say "life begins here",and after that point abortion should should not be had
Well, Catholics have determined that point for their own purposes. It's conception.
Quote:
What i dont understand is why do people who are pro-life violently resist compromise?
The ones who do it for religious reasons, frankly shouldn't compromise. The church is pretty strict with its rules, you don't get to mix-and-match which ones to follow, and which ones to break.
Edited, Fri Jul 15 16:46:58 2005 by trickybeck
bhodisattva Defender of Justice wrote:
As I said in the other thread we have discussed this already. There is a thread with close to 300 replies from no more than 2 weeks ago on the subject.
Please dont rehash sh[b][/b]it just so you can up your post count.
Please dont rehash sh[b][/b]it just so you can up your post count.
i wasnt here for the other one, sorry, didnt know about it. As for this thread, after looking at the other thread, i beleive im asking another question, dealing more with the idea of non-compremize, which one poster asnwered rather well. Do we win a prize for posting more O.o.?
BoondockSaint wrote:
I'm pro-choice, however your argument doesn't make sense. Menstruation and sperm count are natural occurrences hardwired into the system. A miscarriage is also a part of the natural system. A forced miscarriage, however, is not. Using outside forces to abort a pregnancy cannot compared to these.
Agreed. First you say that Pro-Life people won't compromise.
Then, you admit there is an even MORE extreme pro-life position, that of saving all unfertilized sperm and eggs. If there exists a more extreme position, the religious determination of life at conception is indeed a compromise.
You shot down your own argument there.
quote
--------------------------------------------------------------
The ones who do it for religious reasons, frankly shouldn't compromise. The church is pretty strict with its rules, you don't get to mix-and-match which ones to follow, and which ones to break.
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
hmm, ok, i can accept that, but why should they have the right to tell my wife what she can or cant do with her body, when she doesnt share the same faith.
Edited, Fri Jul 15 16:52:00 2005 by EvilPhysicist
Edited, Fri Jul 15 16:58:15 2005 by EvilPhysicist
--------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
What i dont understand is why do people who are pro-life violently resist compromise?
The ones who do it for religious reasons, frankly shouldn't compromise. The church is pretty strict with its rules, you don't get to mix-and-match which ones to follow, and which ones to break.
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
hmm, ok, i can accept that, but why should they have the right to tell my wife what she can or cant do with her body, when she doesnt share the same faith.
Edited, Fri Jul 15 16:52:00 2005 by EvilPhysicist
Edited, Fri Jul 15 16:58:15 2005 by EvilPhysicist
Quote:
hmm, ok, i can accept that, but why should they have the right to tell my wife what she can or cant do with her body, when she doesnt share the same faith.
Pro Tip: Not all pro-life people are out to change the law.
Anything that thins the population of our species is good for the long term health of this planet.
what frys my balls is when people take the verse: "be fruitfulland multiply" as an excuse to have 498 little brats and say the planet will support it becuase its god's will. its that kind of logic that puts humanity in a pretty tight jam for the future of our species.
hmm, ok, i can accept that, but why should they have the right to tell my wife what she can or cant do with her body, when she doesnt share the same faith
-----------------------------------------------
because people create God in their own immage. they feel the entire world should feel as they feel, think as they think, and do as they would do.
we all do it to an extent. every war that has been fought is because we all create God in our own immage. we chant a line, and find enough people to chant the same thing, and off we go on a crusade to "save" the rest of humanity for thinking, feeling, doing the "wrong" thing.
racism. nationalism. left. right. christian. muslim. athiest.
we all do it.
and instead of accdepting our differances and opting for an enviroment of "freedom to choose" whichever path any one of us wants to take, we try to whittle away at those protections to "save" the masses from making the "wrong" choice.
the mission of the republican party. whitteling away your freedoms.
-----------------------------------------------
because people create God in their own immage. they feel the entire world should feel as they feel, think as they think, and do as they would do.
we all do it to an extent. every war that has been fought is because we all create God in our own immage. we chant a line, and find enough people to chant the same thing, and off we go on a crusade to "save" the rest of humanity for thinking, feeling, doing the "wrong" thing.
racism. nationalism. left. right. christian. muslim. athiest.
we all do it.
and instead of accdepting our differances and opting for an enviroment of "freedom to choose" whichever path any one of us wants to take, we try to whittle away at those protections to "save" the masses from making the "wrong" choice.
the mission of the republican party. whitteling away your freedoms.
EvilPhysicist wrote:
what frys my balls is when people take the verse: "be fruitfulland multiply" as an excuse to have 498 little brats and say the planet will support it becuase its god's will. its that kind of logic that puts humanity in a pretty tight jam for the future of our species.
Well the reason religious families have many children is because the Church (capital C here, referring the Roman Catholic Church) has determined it a sin to use any birth control other than the Rhythm Method.
So it's not really that they want to have many children, it's that they are obliged to use a birth control that is 79% effective at best.
Tee hee...rhythm method.
I think Texas is a good example of faith based teachings. They do not teach birth control in schools, well, not the artificial type: condoms, pills, diaphragms. In Texas, they teach abstainance, yet I believe they have the highest teen pregnancy rate in the country.
I think Texas is a good example of faith based teachings. They do not teach birth control in schools, well, not the artificial type: condoms, pills, diaphragms. In Texas, they teach abstainance, yet I believe they have the highest teen pregnancy rate in the country.
Edited, Fri Jul 15 17:17:22 2005 by BoondockSaint
Edited, Fri Jul 15 17:21:40 2005 by BoondockSaint
I'm more or less against it considering I'm catholic. Though I think a compromise should be made for cases such as rape and the such.
40 posts
Ok, a few points to make here:
For those of you who want to reduce the population, jump off a cliff as a service to humanity, that's -1 each. India alone produces enough food to feed it's population and the population of every nearby country, but it's mostly consumed by rats and other vermin because they won't kill them. Starvation is rampent in India because of their worldview.
For those who think it is so bad to actually think something is right and others can be wrong, closely observe how those that jump off the cliff fall, regardless of their personal convictions about gravity or their ability to fly. There is right and wrong, so instead of flaming anybody who says they are right, you should find out what the truth is before you judge them all as crazy and write them all off.
As far as abortion goes, I don't think an argument about the pro-life view will do any good, but I am so sick of hearing "she can do what she wants with her body" I could scream. Does that mean I can punch you in the nose? After all, my fist is my body, I can do with it what I want. Of course I can't, because I am interacting with your body. Well, pregnant women are interacting with the body of their child, and that child has as much right to life as she does. If she wanted to prevent pregnancy she should have kept her pants on, that is all about her body. Choices have consequences.
For those of you who want to reduce the population, jump off a cliff as a service to humanity, that's -1 each. India alone produces enough food to feed it's population and the population of every nearby country, but it's mostly consumed by rats and other vermin because they won't kill them. Starvation is rampent in India because of their worldview.
For those who think it is so bad to actually think something is right and others can be wrong, closely observe how those that jump off the cliff fall, regardless of their personal convictions about gravity or their ability to fly. There is right and wrong, so instead of flaming anybody who says they are right, you should find out what the truth is before you judge them all as crazy and write them all off.
As far as abortion goes, I don't think an argument about the pro-life view will do any good, but I am so sick of hearing "she can do what she wants with her body" I could scream. Does that mean I can punch you in the nose? After all, my fist is my body, I can do with it what I want. Of course I can't, because I am interacting with your body. Well, pregnant women are interacting with the body of their child, and that child has as much right to life as she does. If she wanted to prevent pregnancy she should have kept her pants on, that is all about her body. Choices have consequences.
Quote:
Does that mean I can punch you in the nose? After all, my fist is my body, I can do with it what I want. Of course I can't, because I am interacting with your body. Well, pregnant women are interacting with the body of their child, and that child has as much right to life as she does. If she wanted to prevent pregnancy she should have kept her pants on, that is all about her body. Choices have consequences.
Almost a decent argument, although the child cannot survive without the mother's body. Anyway, don't be a sock whimp.
40 posts
Here in AZ kids die in pools all the time because people are idiots and are not responsible for their children. The baby dosn't stop being dependant after birth.
It's kindof a fact of life that if you have a child you are responsible for that child and if you don't fulfill that (even by finding them a good home through adoption) charges are pressed. That's why they convict people for leaving babies in trash cans and all that.
I have never understood how the baby is alive outside the belly, but a non-living thing inside the belly. Will the baby become a non-living thing again if I put it in a wet backpack?
And I have no idea what a sock wimp is, so that flame means nothing.
It's kindof a fact of life that if you have a child you are responsible for that child and if you don't fulfill that (even by finding them a good home through adoption) charges are pressed. That's why they convict people for leaving babies in trash cans and all that.
I have never understood how the baby is alive outside the belly, but a non-living thing inside the belly. Will the baby become a non-living thing again if I put it in a wet backpack?
And I have no idea what a sock wimp is, so that flame means nothing.
Quote:
Almost a decent argument, although the child cannot survive without the mother's body. Anyway, don't be a sock whimp.
So if somebody is a caretaker for a mentally/physically disabled person who would die without them, the caretaker has ever right to kill them?
40 posts
They do now, or did you miss what happend to Terri Shavio? (sp?)
At least according to our legal system. It's the same thing as abortion. You only have the right to live if you can speak up for yourself. I wonder what line will be crossed next?
At least according to our legal system. It's the same thing as abortion. You only have the right to live if you can speak up for yourself. I wonder what line will be crossed next?
Telaron wrote:
They do now, or did you miss what happend to Terri Shavio? (sp?)
At least according to our legal system. It's the same thing as abortion. You only have the right to live if you can speak up for yourself. I wonder what line will be crossed next?
At least according to our legal system. It's the same thing as abortion. You only have the right to live if you can speak up for yourself. I wonder what line will be crossed next?
It's a slippery slope! Oh noez!
I'm not sure who it was but can somebody link the schiavo/pope avater for telaron.
I susually don't touch these threads.... but..
Waht is the legal basis that they can tell somone waht they can do with their body?
Is it because of the "rights" of the thing in the womb?
Where does Science say that "Life" begins? because the whole thing is about saving a Life right?
Because if they make a Law based on a Religious idea that LIFE is even an issue before that this has hands and feet.... then
Are we living in the Holy Roman Empire now where the church decides waht is medically and morally correct for the country?
I'm not going to argue about waht life is, but why should we even care? They say "Hey! that baby could have been Elvis!" this is all frivalous conjecture.... Somthing has no Life until it has a future. face it, in the natural order of things abortion and suicides are the bottom of the food chain. ONce again we're pplaying God! and trying to control and manipulate nature for our own superfical and imaginary whims.
It's all a bunch of ******** posturing. If you're 'butthurt' about a zygote being destroyed, then get butthurt about people dying of starvation. get some fu[b][/b]cking perspective and off the bandwagon.
Unless you beleive in Life eternal jada jada jada..... Then this is an abomination Indeed...
But only a bud on the Tree of True Abombination..... Humanity's apathy toward itself...
Waht is the legal basis that they can tell somone waht they can do with their body?
Is it because of the "rights" of the thing in the womb?
Where does Science say that "Life" begins? because the whole thing is about saving a Life right?
Because if they make a Law based on a Religious idea that LIFE is even an issue before that this has hands and feet.... then
Are we living in the Holy Roman Empire now where the church decides waht is medically and morally correct for the country?
I'm not going to argue about waht life is, but why should we even care? They say "Hey! that baby could have been Elvis!" this is all frivalous conjecture.... Somthing has no Life until it has a future. face it, in the natural order of things abortion and suicides are the bottom of the food chain. ONce again we're pplaying God! and trying to control and manipulate nature for our own superfical and imaginary whims.
It's all a bunch of ******** posturing. If you're 'butthurt' about a zygote being destroyed, then get butthurt about people dying of starvation. get some fu[b][/b]cking perspective and off the bandwagon.
Unless you beleive in Life eternal jada jada jada..... Then this is an abomination Indeed...
But only a bud on the Tree of True Abombination..... Humanity's apathy toward itself...
I know someone's gonna get all butthurt over this, but IMO it seems like most pro-lifers are men. Men without children, too. That's just been my perspective on it.
Also, pro-choice does not mean pro-abortion. So get your panties out of a wad.
And like Kelv stated, if you're going to be all worried over a clump of cells that may or may not be aborted, you need to get worried about those clumps of cells over in the middle east that are now dying of starvation. Or do you not care about these babies once they are actually born?
Also, pro-choice does not mean pro-abortion. So get your panties out of a wad.
And like Kelv stated, if you're going to be all worried over a clump of cells that may or may not be aborted, you need to get worried about those clumps of cells over in the middle east that are now dying of starvation. Or do you not care about these babies once they are actually born?
Recent Visitors: 200
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (200)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Abortion
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC