Abortion?

[Agathon]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Pat, Ben, you're pissing into the wind. You're arguing morals with people who have none. It's a losing proposition.

You can talk. You know nothing about ethics, you hayseed.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by The Emperor Fabulous

I mean, you make a good point...but you also look like a fascist in making it.

Walks like a duck...

[fed1943]

"The continuum (of life) begins with the conception" (?).
Just not true; it begins much before, with life itself (or with the Creator
if you are a believer like I'm).
So, it could be argued that a virgin (male or female) is against life.
IMHO, all the posts here just proved that the deeper things,i.e. the
first and last "steps" cannot be get by logic.
Best regards,

[Patroklos]

Kid, it looks like you have competition in this thread.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Patroklos
Kid, it looks like you have competition in this thread.

You're never much competition Patty.

[Patroklos]

[Elok]

Originally posted by Kidicious
Ah, they have to stuff their emotions though. They have to convince themselves that the other tribe that they are killing are not persons. No one has to do that when they have an abortion. They already instintually know that a fetus is not a person.

I'm sorry, but you are so full of **** that it's overflowing and coming out your ears. Plenty of women feel emotionally conflicted when they have abortions. Some of them ultimately decide they made the right choice anyway, but it's not like it's a no-brainer.

[Arrian]

Summary of thread: WTF, Imran?

-Arrian

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Elok


I'm sorry, but you are so full of **** that it's overflowing and coming out your ears. Plenty of women feel emotionally conflicted when they have abortions. Some of them ultimately decide they made the right choice anyway, but it's not like it's a no-brainer.

Yea, it's just like killing someone.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Mr. Fun, this is a conversation you need to excuse yourself from participating in at all.

I'll participate in any thread I feel like participating in.

[Elok]

Originally posted by Kidicious
Yea, it's just like killing someone.

:slapforeheadsmiley:

Look at what I quoted. Then look at what I said in response. Repeat as necessary until you stop oversimplifying and distorting every argument that comes your way.

[Ben Kenobi]

So, it could be argued that a virgin (male or female) is against life.

If, as you've argued all life comes from God, why would it be against life to devote yourself to him? I would agree but most who choose that life choose it so that they can be devoted to God alone.

[Q Classic]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Pat, Ben, you're pissing into the wind. You're arguing morals with people who have none. It's a losing proposition.

It is a question of morality.

And, I've said again and again: this whole thing is a thorny moral issue.

If you could completely guarantee that any unwanted baby would find a loving, adopting home, that no woman suffering from any form of brutality were forced to carry something she didn't want, and that no accidental pregnancies would occur to those using contraception, and that the social costs of having a child out of wedlock were mitigated, I'd agree that abortion should be prohibited.

But we don't live in an ideal society. Allowances must be made.

Add to that that I simply can't reconcile destroying (by means of illegal procedures) or ruining (by means of the inevitable social opprobrium) one extant, possibly productive (within a span of a year) life in exchange for one of unknown potential that wouldn't be realized for at least 15 years...

One in hand is better than two in bush, so to speak.

I think it's more moral to strongly counsel against abortion, properly educate people on contraception, provide for critical health care, revitalize the entire adoptive process, among other things and maintain its legality, than to simply ban abortion and ignore the other issues--which, while it may not be the exact argument being put forth, seems so often to be glossed over in these discussions.

That's the problem with a lot of the anti-abortion arguments, I've found; by trying to suggest that those in favor of choice are somehow anti-life, anti-baby, while ignoring that virtually nobody likes the act, and that those who are pro-choice often realize that abortion is not a single, isolated issue, but connected to a wide variety of social problems which also need to be remedied...

Well, it's cheap.

Sloww, you're better than that.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Elok


:slapforeheadsmiley:

Look at what I quoted. Then look at what I said in response. Repeat as necessary until you stop oversimplifying and distorting every argument that comes your way.

But you were responding to me, so I was trying to make my point clearer. That being that having abortion is in no way comparable to killing someone, killing people being extremely difficult.

That's why I rolled my eyes btw.

[Q Classic]

Originally posted by Patroklos
You keep saying this but there is no data to prove it. SOME women will go for an illegal abortion, but most will probably just deliver and give the children up.

The Guttmacher study should be enlightening.
The rates of abortion stay largely constant; access to legal abortions often means that these often occur earlier, before the second trimester and the quickening, and are done with minimal risk.

My reason leads to the conclusion that illegality raises prices and danger (see: black market, drugs); therefore, only those wealthy enough to have an abortion will be able to attempt one; the underclass will simply have to deal with yet another mouth they may not be able to care for.

The "value" of the human life at the time of the abortion is irrelevant because we consider all human equal under the law. We don't consider doctors better people than janitors.

We don't count them better people; we do place more worth on their abilities and capabilities, though--otherwise, a janitor would be making just as much as a doctor.

Whether you like or not, value is placed.

If you think the fetus isn't human fine, at least you are logically consistant, but it is becoming increasingly ridiculous to deny that the fetus becomes a human being by all standards we apply in other situations sometime in the second trimester.

I've never said a foetus isn't human. And I'm not in favor of late-term abortions. That said, I can't justify banning abortions because it won't solve the underlying issues.

If it is "wage of sin" then I prefer the women pay it with a temporary inconvienience instead of an uninvolved bystander paying with their life.

That's the problem. I don't believe in 'wages of sin', and find it somewhat reprehensible. We're not arguing just elective abortions done by men and women who are just getting rocks off, we're also considering elective abortions for those who actually may have very legitimate, socioeconomic, political, or biological reasons to have one.

And Pat, please don't mingle my comments with someone else's in the same thread without clearly delineating where each response ends.

I do so despise being linked with that fellow.