Abortion to be outlawed by Bush in this term...

[Patroklos]

Good old Dissident

I was directing that mainly at Mobius Elephant whoever though.

[Zulu Elephant]

Originally posted by Patroklos


Enjoy being a bigot?

I dont think Im a bigot. I believe that serious issues deserve serious discussion. AND I am willing to respect (although in some cases passionately disagree with) everyone's views, providing they are based on REASON, LOGIC and EVIDENCE and not a personal leap of faith.

If I had said that anyone citing the divine right of kings in a serious discussion of the pros and cons of democracy deserved to be laughed at - would that make me a bigot? If so, so be it.

[:) Smiley]

They used to keep revolving shelves in convents for this purpose, Japher.

The baby would be left in the shelf, and turned, so that the nuns never knew the mother.

So whatever happened to this ingenious architectural device?

- - - - - - -

Anyway, we're going to get to a point where conservatives will start realizing the costs of having poorly raised children, while liberals will realize the costs of not having children at all.

[Patroklos]

would that make me a bigot? If so, so be it.

As long as your okay with that. Bigot.

providing they are based on REASON, LOGIC and EVIDENCE

But since this is an abortion debate you have neither either. Sure your side uses alot of Techno/Med babble (and the other to a lesser degree) but none of it has proven when the abstract of "human" life begins.

All points chosen are arbitrary based on your belief, and your belief in psuedo science is nothing more than..... wait for it.....

FAITH.

[Elok]

Eh, if he does stuff the SCOTUS to overturn Roe it'll be a temporary solution at best. Abortion isn't defeated until we eliminate its social causes (rape, stigmatization of pregnancy, neglect of personal accountability on the part of both sexes), and cleanse the mental poison that makes people think such a perverted institution could possibly be just or honorable to begin with. Otherwise there will just be another ruling in a few years reversing it, and another one reversing that one, and so on. If the nastiest war in American history couldn't decisively end slavery, it's gonna take a lot more than a court ruling or an amendment to end abortion.

[Zulu Elephant]

Originally posted by Patroklos

As long as your okay with that. Bigot.

I love people who talk like that!
Like on South Park when a gnome calls Cartman a ***** and Cartman replies "Your the *****. *****"

Techno/Med babble

translation: "Medical evidence"

All points chosen are arbitrary based on your belief, and your belief in psuedo science is nothing more than..... wait for it.....

FAITH.

FANTASTIC! - I love religious people who use postmodernism too! - All points of view are equally true regardless of overwhelming evidence or no evidence whatsoever.

Go on...do the thing where you use the same logic to say that creationism is equally true as evolution. I love that!

[Whaleboy]

We're talking economics here. You have a dwindling population, that is going to hurt you in the long run.

So the decision for or against abortion should be taken on the ground of economics? Well in economic terms, maintaining an immigrant until they can work and pay taxes is cheaper than a child. A weak argument, after the usual crap has fallen.

Everyone here who thinks it is up to woman to decide can not auto-ban themselves from all Iraq debates if they are not a service memeber who has been there.

Bull, we can debate because we have a position of wildcarded-subjectivity to this. On the abortion issue, we men are merely outsiders.

abortion is murder.

no other way to look at it. How anyone can claim it is not murder is beyond me.

The pro-choice argument rests on the assumption that the embryo is not a being, and is in terms of existence and essense nothing more than any other group of cells. If you hold that assumption, then it is not murder to abort that embryo.

I dont think Im a bigot. I believe that serious issues deserve serious discussion. AND I am willing to respect (although in some cases passionately disagree with) everyone's views, providing they are based on REASON, LOGIC and EVIDENCE and not a personal leap of faith.

If I had said that anyone citing the divine right of kings in a serious discussion of the pros and cons of democracy deserved to be laughed at - would that make me a bigot? If so, so be it.

Well said! I'm impressed! And no, I do not think you are a bigot on the issue. A bigot would merely reject religion out of hand, whereas it is perfectly legitimate to say with reason that it is irelevant to this debate.

But since this is an abortion debate you have neither either. Sure your side uses alot of Techno/Med babble (and the other to a lesser degree) but none of it has proven when the abstract of "human" life begins.

And you think religion can provide an answer to that? You don't need to resort to subjective, individual faith, 3000 year old pseudo-science and profitable dogma in order to answer that question, it simply requires a logical argument. I would direct you to Husserl, Heidegger and David Chalmers for examples of such existential discussions, who's impact upon medical ethics is self-explanatory. But the enquires are equally scientific, however philosophy has now replaced quantity.

All points chosen are arbitrary based on your belief, and your belief in psuedo science is nothing more than..... wait for it.....

FAITH.

Not at all, we experience the world through empirical means, science is merely the extension of that. Remember, you have little or no faith in something where there is reason to concur with it. Science, accordingly, requires no belief in science, indeed to do so would be inconsistent and dogmatic, which is against the principle of scientific proof. That principle is that we cannot ever be certain of anything. That the Earth goes roung the sun, that oppose poles of a magnet attract, that electrons exist to power your computer, the speed of light, that humanity evolves.... are all still "theories". There can be no such thing as a scientific "absolute" fact, so we assign science the same value we do our sight, and since there is reason to concur with our sight (and again Cartesian doubt kicks in too) there is no faith required in it.

[Patroklos]

I like people who quote southpark and then try to talk about medical evidence.

As far as abortion all you can get with "medical evidence" is when actual life starts or when the organism is independant of the host. We are talking human life, which ther is no medical evidence to back up because it is an abstract none physical thing.

So since you are all about medical evidence, go run around hospitals and unplug life support, even for those who could recover, because that is what your medical faith tells you is okay.

And while I am religious, not one of my arguements against abortion had ever included religion. Cute though.

and just so you know, saying "evidence" is not a vet for your opinion, you have to provide it

[Whaleboy]

Go on...do the thing where you use the same logic to say that creationism is equally true as evolution. I love that!

[Patroklos]

And you think religion can provide an answer to that?

No, did I say this somewhere?

[Whaleboy]

As far as abortion all you can get with "medical evidence" is when actual life starts or when the organism is independant of the host. We are talking human life, which ther is no medical evidence to back up because it is an abstract none physical thing.

Oh please! That it cannot be measured need not mean that it cannot be understand and therefore, faith is not required to (by definition subjectively) infer it's existence.

So since you are all about medical evidence, go run around hospitals and unplug life support, even for those who could recover, because that is what your medical faith tells you is okay.

How do you reconcile a patient on life support with an embryo?

[Patroklos]

Not at all, we experience the world through empirical means

There is no empirical evidence to define when human life begins. Some of you label it as such, but we who disagree with you find that just as absurd as you find religious people declaring their belief factual.

It is a matter of opinion, both sides.

I would have alot more respect for you guys if you would just drop the facade and say its murder, and you are okay with that. Just like ZE and his bigotry.

[Whaleboy]

No, did I say this somewhere?

It was an implication of your position... indeed in the subjective case I might agree with you, but only on a descriptive basis, so a woman coming to a decision consistent with her faith is not universalisable to all based upon it. It's part of my reason for why people who are, for example, against gay marriage, should be pro-gay marriage for others, since they are just making a descriptive sentence. Of course, absolutist stupidity gets in the way

[Patroklos]

It was an implication of your position

Why, are all anit-abortionists religious?

Simply because I come to a groups defense when a bigot begins calling names makes me a believer of that faith?

[Dis]

It's really hard to say when an embryo is capable of feeling pain. But even simple creatures like fish can feel pain. I think it's safe to say embryos can feel pain. This is why I consider it murder. I'd say if you did it within the first week it would be okay.

I can never understand why people can't see emryos as humans. Even at the late stages. Kerry doesn't even regard them as humans as he voted against partial birth abortion.