Indisputable Abortion FACTS:

[Spiffor]

Erm, not precisely Asuka

But I'd like to see us discussing about the real issue behind abortion, rather than being dragged into the anti-choicer's trap.

You don't have to chant girl power to be pro-choice. You merely have to be interested in the actual living conditions of people past birth: mother, father, siblings, and the unwanted child itself. And this is what abortion is really about. This is why abortion exists at all.

[The Templar]

Originally posted by Zylka


So what if you read the entire thread, where I time and again established the fact that we are DEALING WITH MAJORITY ISSUE here - rather than the exceptions? That would have been helpful!

Translation: I know my position is inconsistent, so please debate me on terms where my argument might hold water.

Sorry, but your position was that a woman's choice to have sex tipped the balance in favor of putative fetal rights. I have pointed out to you that choice as the foundation for the superior moral claims of fetuses is insufficient to support the sort of strong pro-life position you claim. Thus your position is undermined.

1 - Simply because "you said so"? Gee, not even I am arrogant or delusional enough to arrive at the concrete conculsion of whether or not a fetus is always living. Given the significant opinion chance that it is (which you can and have NOT disproved) - YOU DON'T RISK MURDER

Next time, jackass, read the previous posts in the thread. I had explained my position earlier. Moreover, don't elide 'living' with 'human' as you do here. Yes, a fetus is living. So what? At some point, I had strep throat as a kid. The bacteria were alive before I killed them with drugs. A fetus is a developmental stage of a human as I wrote earlier - it is in the process of becoming human - and its humanity increases during gestation (for you logic types, I am treating 'human' as a fuzzy predicate here.)

2 - In this case - A woman's right to control her body for 9 months after impregnating herself outweighs the rights of life of another. That's wonderful, thanks for coming out.

This sounds good, if a fetus is human. But even if a fetus is human, yes, the right to control one's own body is greater.

Assume that without a kidney transplant I will die. Turns out we have a tissue match and you are the only available donor. You can live perfectly well with only one kidney. Should it be permissable for your kidney to be taken against your will in order to save my life? I'm going to have to say no to this - you have a right to keep your kidney even if it means my death. Or do you think kidneys should be stolen to save others?

Now your little point about "its only control of you body versus a life" doesn't seem so hot, does it?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Most anti-choice people I have met (there are exceptions) are also pro-death penalty. One cannot be pro-life and pro-death penalty simultaneously. Should I call them pro-fetus?

This line of reasoning then assumes that 'pro-choice' means that you are for a choice in every single situation. Do you believe a criminal should have a choice to go to jail? That reasoning leads to absurdity.

pro-life and pro-choice are simply confined to the abortion debate and don't go beyond that.

[Jack the Bodiless]

I would also question the appropriateness of "pro-life" for many within the abortion debate.

I'm thinking of the "Jodie and Mary" siamese twins case. While many individual "pro-lifers" saw the logic of separating them, causing the death of one to save the other, various "pro-life" organizations wanted no intervention: in effect, they became pro-death, seeking the death of both.

Interestingly, it turned out that the parents' motive for opposing the operation WAS that they wanted both to die: they didn't want a handicapped daughter, they wanted a "Catholic abortion" of both.

You could almost hear the "pro-life" spokespeople struggling NOT to use the phrase "God's will".

[Jon Miller]

how does that post have anything to do with the topic?

Jon Miller

[Rasbelin]

Originally posted by Spiffor

You don't have to chant girl power to be pro-choice.

Sorry, I was just joking. And yes, I do understand the real issue. Didn't have time to write my serious post yet, but will do so ASAP.

[The Templar]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Most anti-choice people I have met (there are exceptions) are also pro-death penalty. One cannot be pro-life and pro-death penalty simultaneously. Should I call them pro-fetus?

This line of reasoning then assumes that 'pro-choice' means that you are for a choice in every single situation. Do you believe a criminal should have a choice to go to jail? That reasoning leads to absurdity.

pro-life and pro-choice are simply confined to the abortion debate and don't go beyond that.

Yeah right. Trying to shut out the cognitive dissonace. The fact is, being against abortion on the grounds that life is sacred or whatever is incompatible with being pro-death penalty. While I am willing to engage in serious discussion with people who view life as sacred and do so consistently, I am not interested in arguing with anti-woman religious zealots who only care about fetuses insofar as said fetuses can be used to steal the rights of women to control their reproductive capacity.

Frankly, if one isn't consistent in their positions, this is evidence that they are the boring Taliban-type (Christian, Muslim, whatever superstition one prefers) of woman-hater/man-insecure-with-penis-size. As George Carlin once put it - republicans want live fetuses so they can grow up to be dead soldiers.

[Dom Pedro II]

Well, I think that something's a human being when it knows it is sentient. An 11 week-old fetus isn't aware of its own existence.

And besides, killing it in the early stages is the humane thing to do.... its a shame when we let them slip by and be actually born... put it out of its misery before it has a chance to see what misery is.

I'm not pro-choice, I'm pro-abortion.

[Jon Miller]

I know of no person who wishes they were aborted

Jon Miller

[Dom Pedro II]

There are those days when I wish I had been... and today (as you can tell) is one of those days.

And if there is no one who wishes they had been aborted, it is only because they have had the chance to live... but honestly, in a world as craptacular as this one, wouldn't it just be easier if we'd never set foot on it at all?

I'm also a proponent of the Nuke the World campaign in case you didn't know...

Still waiting for that asteroid....

[Zylka]

Originally posted by Dom Pedro II
There are those days when I wish I had been... and today (as you can tell) is one of those days.

Poor muffin. Know what the logical advice is for this situation? (It has to do with your own life, not the estimated lives of unborn others)

I'm also a proponent of the Nuke the World campaign in case you didn't know...

Still waiting for that asteroid....

Oh yes, humanity deserves death. Again, after you - as*hole.

[yavoon]

Originally posted by Asuka

so to avoid the inconvenience of unwanted children u would rather just terminate them.

You mean that I would become a craddle snatcher and suffocate all "unwanted" children?

And please use more well written English in order to make your message abit more clear.

yes but u still would decide to kill the children based on the fact that u didn't want them. I realize that u r able to kill children in the womb and not ones already born. its very common in humanity. killing a man w/ a knife is harder than dropping a bomb on him from an f 16.

[yavoon]

Originally posted by The Templar


Yeah right. Trying to shut out the cognitive dissonace. The fact is, being against abortion on the grounds that life is sacred or whatever is incompatible with being pro-death penalty. While I am willing to engage in serious discussion with people who view life as sacred and do so consistently, I am not interested in arguing with anti-woman religious zealots who only care about fetuses insofar as said fetuses can be used to steal the rights of women to control their reproductive capacity.

Frankly, if one isn't consistent in their positions, this is evidence that they are the boring Taliban-type (Christian, Muslim, whatever superstition one prefers) of woman-hater/man-insecure-with-penis-size. As George Carlin once put it - republicans want live fetuses so they can grow up to be dead soldiers.

I don't think its all that hard to hold life as precious yet still have room for the death penalty. perhaps if u thot about it more u could also see this.

[Zylka]

Originally posted by The Templar

Frankly, if one isn't consistent in their positions, this is evidence that they are the boring Taliban-type (Christian, Muslim, whatever superstition one prefers) of woman-hater/man-insecure-with-penis-size. As George Carlin once put it - republicans want live fetuses so they can grow up to be dead soldiers.

All because you say so! Indeed, I HATE WOMEN, AND IT'S ALL THEIR FAULT. Put yourself in a situation where you have to ethically decide over an abortion yet at the same time don't at all want the child who you admit fault for, then we'll see who's "anti woman" and rather who's "anti themselves" in accepting like suffering in avoiding what essentially could be death.

...and George Carlin? OH MAN HAHAHA HE IZ REAL FUNNY - Only if you're a f*cking unaccomplished loser who needs reasons to hate and blame the successful and realistic conservative world around you. Unreal, you've gained Urban Ranger like respect in a few short posts. That's ok - because all I'm harbouring is resentment towards women. "Taliban" is such a nice cliche to throw around for the pathetically inadequate

[Imran Siddiqui]

The fact is, being against abortion on the grounds that life is sacred or whatever is incompatible with being pro-death penalty.

Actually it isn't. There is this whole thing about guilt/innocence you are totally ignoring.

this is evidence that they are the boring Taliban-type (Christian, Muslim, whatever superstition one prefers) of woman-hater/man-insecure-with-penis-size. As George Carlin once put it - republicans want live fetuses so they can grow up to be dead soldiers.

Resorting to ad hominums because you can't prove your point? Very bad form .

The fact is if you cannot understand the other side without resorting to name calling, then you are simply an ideologue who really hasn't thought things through. Knowing and respecting the other side's arguments is fundamental for a good understanding of the issue (any issue).