Why Can't the Pro-Abortionists be Honest?

[revelarts]

So you think it makes sense that this god would bother to imbue a fertilized egg with a soul (for those who believe in such nonsense) and then a few days or weeks later just kill it? To what purpose?

the purpose is beyond me. And it's beyond my pay grade to find fault with it. In a present state it's the natural order of things. whereas Adult men and women killing a growing human with intention is rightly considered a crime.

Where do you stand on aborting pregnancies with catastrophic defects?

Are you proposing to make all abortions illegal except for those who Choose to abort children with "catastrophic" defects? (parental choice not the state or dr's..)
That's not ideal but I'll vote for that law.
Are you with me?

[J.T]

You need to quote where I said anything even remotely like that. I really would appreciate it if you'd stop attributing your made up, ridiculous arguments to me.

So now you're denying that you claimed you weren't a human being when you were younger?

It's all on record, babe.

I don't recall stipulating to using your definition sparky

Of course you didn't agree to use the real definition; you people are incapable of honesty.

So let's start with a complete human being and we'll remove parts one at a time. How many and which pieces need to remain in order to still have a human being? For example, if we remove everything except one eyeball, is it still a human being?

http://www.google.com/search?q=organism

Do your own homework, toots.

[PostmodernProphet]

Where's the memorial to the BILLIONS of fetuses killed by your god?

are you god?.....

So let's start with a complete human being and we'll remove parts one at a time. How many and which pieces need to remain in order to still have a human being? For example, if we remove everything except one eyeball, is it still a human being?

a very dead one....who, like the fetus, was a living one before you began carving.....

[Missileman]

So now you're denying that you claimed you weren't a human being when you were younger?

It's all on record, babe.



Of course you didn't agree to use the real definition; you people are incapable of honesty.


http://www.google.com/search?q=organism

Do your own homework, toots.

This board comes equipped with a quote function. It's easy to use, even easy enough for a dolt such as yourself. I suggest you familiarize yourself with how to use it. Your attempts at paraphrasing what I've written are dreadful. In fact, should there ever be a "Horrible Paraphrasers Hall of Fame" you're a cinch for first ballot inductee.

So break out the quotes dumbshit...your constant lying about what I've written is getting tiresome.

Do your own homework, toots.

Too chickenshit to answer a simple question huh? I figured as much.

the purpose is beyond me. And it's beyond my pay grade to find fault with it. In a present state it's the natural order of things. whereas Adult men and women killing a growing human with intention is rightly considered a crime.

That's a really nice cop out, but I'd say it's a question that needs to be answered before passing any judgement on men and women. After all, if your god can find it just to kill billions of the unborn, I find it hard to believe the same god would find a man or woman immoral for killing one.

Are you proposing to make all abortions illegal except for those who Choose to abort children with "catastrophic" defects? (parental choice not the state or dr's..)
That's not ideal but I'll vote for that law.
Are you with me?

You'd have to include situations where the mother's life is in peril AND because I find it unacceptable to force a woman to bear an unwanted child only to have that child neglected by the birth mother or in some state-run institution, you'd also have to include adoption reform and make it easy and FREE for a couple to adopt.

What plans do you have to imprison these women who don't want to carry to term? Will you go so far as to strap them down and regulate their diet and prevent them from smoking, drinking, or doing drugs til they pop? I mean the world sure as hell doesn't need any more crack babies, right?

[gabosaurus]

What is missing from the OP's argument is common sense.
My friend Katie is a soccer referee, and often talks about rules being different once they are "put into motion." Which means you have to adapt rules to real life situations.

Let's take, for example, a 14 year old girl raped by an adult. Under the OP's definition, this girl has to carry a child for nine months, go through child birth and then have the child taken away and thrown into some anonymous nursery. Forget about the damage done to the child, but we can't "kill" anyone.

I would be interested in how the OP would approach miscarriages. The woman's body fails to sustain the life of the fetus. Can women who have miscarriages be charged with murder?

When I look at what constitutes "life," I look at what is "sustainable life." I draw that line at three months. I view late term abortions as murder. Those should be illegal.

You want fewer abortions? Allow women of all child bearing ages free access to health care and birth control. Allow teachers to teach "how" instead of just "don't."

Not that men are interested in any of this, since men can't get pregnant. It's not their problem.

[PostmodernProphet]

Allow teachers to teach "how" instead of just "don't."

are you pretending they aren't?......

[J.T]

Let's take, for example, a 14 year old girl raped by an adult.

Why can't you people be honest? According to the Guttmachter Institute (a spin-off of Planned Parenthood) ~ 1% of abortions involve rape or incest.

So how about, instead of exploiting real victims to push your own agenda, your start addressing reality and be honest about the 93% that are performed out of convenience?

Under the OP's definition

You mean the scientific definition? Facts are facts, hon.

, this girl has to carry a child for nine months, go through child birth and then have the child taken away and thrown into some anonymous nursery.

That doesn't follow from the scientific definition of what a human is at all. Why can't you people ever be honest? That's one position someone could take, but it is not the logical implication of the definition of a human being.

Why can't you people ever be honest?

Forget about the damage done to the child, but we can't "kill" anyone.

Why the quotation marks? Can't admit what you advocate? Why's that, if it's not wrong?

I would be interested in how the OP would approach miscarriages. The woman's body fails to sustain the life of the fetus. Can women who have miscarriages be charged with murder?

Another strawman. Why can't you be honest? Answer your own question: what is the legal definition of 'murder' and do we usually press such charges in cases of accidental/natural death?

When I look at what constitutes "life,"

The only correct and honest way to finish this sentence is 'I ask what it means for a system to be alive and I consult working scientific definitions of the term'.

I look at what is "sustainable life."

Then no life is alive, since all living things, if they continue their course, are guaranteed to die.

I draw that line at three months.

About 22 years old and on a respirator following a car crash? Does a woman cease to be alive, as she looks up at you and writes you a note with her one working hand, because the fire resulting from the exploding gas tank burnt her lungs and she'll die if taken off the support systems at this time?

Since she's no longer 'alive' by your (bullshit) definition, what is she?

I view late term abortions as murder. Those should be illegal.

Why? What changes?

You want fewer abortions? Allow women of all child bearing ages free access to health care and birth control. Allow teachers to teach "how" instead of just "don't."

Kinda late. That's been S.O.P. for a generation and abortions have skyrocketed. More and more of the profits are from repeat business.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/lif...cle6335880.ece

Not that men are interested in any of this, since men can't get pregnant. It's not their problem.

And here comes the misandry.... of course, no Whites were ever abolitionists, either

[fj1200]

What is missing from the OP's argument is common sense.
My friend Katie is a soccer referee, and often talks about rules being different once they are "put into motion." Which means you have to adapt rules to real life situations.

So common sense allows intervention in the development of a new life?

Let's take, for example, a 14 year old girl raped by an adult. Under the OP's definition, this girl has to carry a child for nine months, go through child birth and then have the child taken away and thrown into some anonymous nursery. Forget about the damage done to the child, but we can't "kill" anyone.

Adoption is an anonymous nursery?

I would be interested in how the OP would approach miscarriages. The woman's body fails to sustain the life of the fetus. Can women who have miscarriages be charged with murder?

What action did they take that caused the miscarriage and is thus punishable?

When I look at what constitutes "life," I look at what is "sustainable life." I draw that line at three months. I view late term abortions as murder. Those should be illegal.

Many would agree with that except for those far right and far left. The problem is SCOTUS took away the right for individuals, via their state, to make such a decision.

You want fewer abortions? Allow women of all child bearing ages free access to health care and birth control. Allow teachers to teach "how" instead of just "don't."

Not that men are interested in any of this, since men can't get pregnant. It's not their problem.

Ah, free health care solves all. How many abortions are performed in the enlightened government health care countries? How many low income mothers who already get free health care and birth control are making the abortion decision?

[LuvRPgrl]

Because the choice of communal society is for the betterment of communal society. If an individual values their own life and choices more than the future life of their own progeny then that decision will result in the betterment of society because communal resources will not be wasted on an unwanted child.

when the communal group has UNWANTED children, that, and that alone spells the inevitable end of that community to function well, and ultimately it's demise.

As JT outline, just because it is unwanted, doesn't make it right, anymore than killing/murdering your unwanted one year old baby

As for the poster who asked why we cant compromise,,,abortion is or isnt the killing of an individual human being. THere is no compromise. If it is the killing of an indivudual human being, then it is wrong at all times, to compromise would be to allow murdering some, while saving others. If it isnt the killing of an individual human being, then there is no need to end any, at all.

There are only TWO clear cut clean demarkation points, insemenation and birth. The organism is an individual human being at one of those two points. All other points during pregnancy and are subjective in nature and are changing all the time depending upon the level of our science. Whether it is biologically human is NOT and never will be determined by our level of science.

The abortionists are all over the place on the issue.
They are extremely inconsistent. If a woman is driving to have an abortion, the abortion is legal, but if a person crashes into her and kills the baby, they are guilty of killing a human being. Hmmmmm
If a woman is pregnant, the llibs insist that she, and she alone has the decision to abort or not, yet if the man wants her to have one, and she refuses, he is obligated by law to pay child support, so she has the power to make decisions regarding his future finances and fatherhood, as she can also make it all but impossible for him to see the kid if she wants to.

They use DNA to prove humanhood and individuality of that humanhood, yet they refuse to use it in the case of a pregnancy.
They claim they want to reduce abortions, yet support its legality. Either abortion is wrong and bad and should be illegal, or there is nothing wrong with it. If it isnt the killing of a human being, why be desiring to reduce the numbers.

They often refer to the fetus as a child, yet they refuse to acknowledge its "childhood" status regarding abortions.

I guess you need to learn how to accept the fact that many people, including the supreme court, don't agree with your definition of when a clump of cells crosses the line and becomes a human being.

sorry.

for me, it's kinda like calling a fertilized egg a chicken.

Same was said about slavery

quickening....""to reach the stage of pregnancy at which the child shows signs of life."......works for me....of course, that would mean abortion would be illegal before any woman was aware she was pregnant, but I can live with that compromise.....

At the time quickening was used to decide if abortion were moral or not, and hence illegal or not, science had no way to determine if the fetus was showing signs of life until they could actually feel it move.

Today, we have the ability to determine that all the way down to the state of fertilization.

Upon fetillization, the organism is now controlling its destiny all the way til death of old age, or otherwise. The nucleus of the single cell organism is now controlling its growth and what to do with the nutrition it is receiving. Like all other living organisms, all it needs is nutrition and protection from enviormental elements that will kill it, like abortion

If EVERY fertilized egg became a human being, you'd have a valid argument. Some 15% of pregnancies miscarry, mostly because the cells dividing in the mother's womb are becoming something definitely NOT a viable human being.

Proof? and, what are they becoming?

[Missileman]

Proof? and, what are they becoming?

http://www.medicinenet.com/miscarriage/article.htm

As for the second question, which part of "not a viable human being" wasn't clear?

Upon fetillization, the organism is now controlling its destiny all the way til death of old age, or otherwise. The nucleus of the single cell organism is now controlling its growth and what to do with the nutrition it is receiving. Like all other living organisms, all it needs is nutrition and protection from enviormental elements that will kill it, like abortion

Except for the fact that 15% of these fertilized eggs never implant and another 15% are lost through spontaneous abortion without any outside interefence whatsoever. Your premise is flawed.

[jimnyc]

Not that men are interested in any of this, since men can't get pregnant. It's not their problem.

Men ARE interested in every last detail, from having sex with women, to the type of birth control, till the baby is born. The ONLY thing the overwhelming majority of us have a problem with is the women terminating pregnancies, and men not having a damn thing to say about it.

When the women have a baby without consulting the fathers - will you also say then that it's not their problem to the fathers?

[LuvRPgrl]

http://www.medicinenet.com/miscarriage/article.htm

As for the second question, which part of "not a viable human being" wasn't clear?

so, its BECOMING a "not viable human being"? then what is it until it becomes that?

That's a really nice cop out, but I'd say it's a question that needs to be answered before passing any judgement on men and women. After all, if your god can find it just to kill billions of the unborn, I find it hard to believe the same god would find a man or woman immoral for killing one.




You'd have to include situations where the mother's life is in peril AND because I find it unacceptable to force a woman to bear an unwanted child only to have that child neglected by the birth mother or in some state-run institution, you'd also have to include adoption reform and make it easy and FREE for a couple to adopt.

What plans do you have to imprison these women who don't want to carry to term? Will you go so far as to strap them down and regulate their diet and prevent them from smoking, drinking, or doing drugs til they pop? I mean the world sure as hell doesn't need any more crack babies, right?

This coming from a person who thinks its ok to strap a person down and draw their blood just because they were driving a vehicle. Gotta love the hypocracy

[Missileman]

so, its BECOMING a "not viable human being"? then what is it until it becomes that?

Nothing more than a lump of cells with no potential to ever become a human being.

This coming from a person who thinks its ok to strap a person down and draw their blood just because they were driving a vehicle. Gotta love the hypocracy

That's a huge distortion of what I wrote and you know it. I suppose the lie you just told was easier to write than a coherent, logical response to the rest of the post. As I recall, it's not an unusual tactic for you.

[red states rule]

[avatar4321]

No. We need to cut spending and pay it off ourselves.

Abortion needs to be stopped because life is precious and all of us have a fundamental right to life.