[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;33915845]No, it is entirely a women's rights issue. It is entirely about the mother and her right to self determination which is something that no fetus, regardless of its age, is capable of.[/QUOTE]
So killing a small child is the same as an abortion by your logic.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;33915934]So killing a small child is the same as an abortion by your logic.[/QUOTE][url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawman[/url]
[QUOTE=yawmwen;33915934]So killing a small child is the same as an abortion by your logic.[/QUOTE]
if that child is a fetus then yes
[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;33915396]...
Anyways, that's an awful argument and life does begin at conception whether you're pro-life or not. It's a scientific fact that fetuses are alive.
...[/QUOTE]
"life begins at conception because I say so"
And at what point does the fetus become alive? It it a sudden transition after being an embryo or does it start after the organs actually become functional?
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;33915986][url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawman[/url][/QUOTE]
A small child has the exact same capability of self determination as a fetus. You are drawing an arbitrary line between the two and saying "it's different because I say so".
[editline]27th December 2011[/editline]
In fact not allowing a mother to kill her one year old would be inconsistent with your view of what a woman's right is.
[QUOTE=The Baconator;33915765]Well then what was some bad stuff Reagan did?[/QUOTE]
The Iran Contra affair, pushing the drug war up to eleven, ignored the aids epidemic, star wars, big cuts to LBJ's great society, inflated the military budget even larger than it already was
[editline]27th December 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=yawmwen;33916152]A small child has the exact same capability of self determination as a fetus. You are drawing an arbitrary line between the two and saying "it's different because I say so".
[editline]27th December 2011[/editline]
In fact not allowing a mother to kill her one year old would be inconsistent with your view of what a woman's right is.[/QUOTE]
A fetus by and large can not survive outside the womb. It cannot survive without the mother. So it is not a full human in my eyes.
[QUOTE=Contag;33909616]It's okay if he screws over the gays and the womens and minorities, as long as it's not us[/QUOTE]
Gays are already screwed over, but how exactly is he going to screw over Women and Minorities considering they are already protected by the equal protections clause of the US constitution
[QUOTE=Broseph_;33916724]Gays are already screwed over, but how exactly is he going to screw over Women and Minorities considering they are already protected by the equal protections clause of the US constitution[/QUOTE]
probably just by being libertarian
Why did Obama agreed to NDAA?
Now this guy is going to be in the office...
[QUOTE=TheDecryptor;33916135]"life begins at conception because I say so"
And at what point does the fetus become alive? It it a sudden transition after being an embryo or does it start after the organs actually become functional?[/QUOTE]
Do you not understand what life means? There is an objective definition of life, go look it up. A fetus is made of cells. Cells are alive. Therefore, the fetus is alive.
[QUOTE=Lambeth;33916553]
A fetus by and large can not survive outside the womb. It cannot survive without the mother. So it is not a full human in my eyes.[/QUOTE]
At a certain point a fetus can survive outside the womb.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;33916955]At a certain point a fetus can survive outside the womb.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, but for the most part they can't. And not all fetuses are perfectly healthy from the beginning
[QUOTE=Kopimi;33913414]it generally comes down to "life is sacred and that baby is a human now lets fry these deathrow inmates" and "no it isn't and no it isn't"
i wouldn't call it very complex[/QUOTE]
Maybe in popular opinion but im talking more about the philosophical side of the argument.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;33913667]Um so murder shouldn't be against the law either? That's what the argument against abortion is.
Anyone who uses a "this is a woman's rights issue" argument completely misunderstands the issue and is using a sensationalist emotional argument to get support. It's an argument about where human life begins and when that life deserves legal protection.[/QUOTE]
No, it isn't. Until that child is born it's but a parasite. No different than any other organism that slurps down it's host's resources and provides no health benefit in return.
It's as simple as this: The government has no business telling women what they can and can't do with unborn kids.
As for the 'debate' on when life starts, I base it on when the kid's old enough to survive in the real world. If it's too young to survive if delivered at that moment it's not alive. This date coincides pretty nicely with the current cutoff date abortion clinics go by.
[QUOTE=DarkendSky;33914526]Just vote for someone else, holy shit.
You guys pretend like the Democrat and Republican candidates are the only ones, because of this stupid idea that voting for say, the Green party is 'throwing your vote away'. It's not throwing your vote away unless you vote for someone you don't actually like, dumbass.
[/QUOTE]
The chances of one of the independents getting enough votes to even be mentioned on the newscast come November are lower than the chances of scoring the lotto jackpot.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;33915665]Except in the violinist case you had no choice. Pregnancy is a choice you make through action with the exception of rape. [/QUOTE]
So I guess people just choose for the condom to break? I guess they just choose for that defective birth control pill to not work? I guess they just choose for that tube-tying procedure they got three years ago to fail?
this is quite the development
I think a chatbot should run the united states.
[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;33916906]Do you not understand what life means? There is an objective definition of life, go look it up. A fetus is made of cells. Cells are alive. Therefore, the fetus is alive.[/QUOTE]
I expected a different definition than "cellular activity", but ok, even then what baring does that have over anything? Should we base laws on that?
[QUOTE=yawmwen;33915813]Alright, so why did you post it if it was invalid? It isn't even worth using if it isn't relevant to the argument.[/QUOTE]
It [I]is[/I] directly relevant to this argument, in that it exposes the fact that you haven't a leg to stand on and think about everything [I]but[/I] the actual decision it presents.
You're critiquing schrodinger's box for animal cruelty. That's not really the sign of a man who understands what the fuck he's discussing.
[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;33916906]Do you not understand what life means? There is an objective definition of life, go look it up. A fetus is made of cells. Cells are alive. Therefore, the fetus is alive.[/QUOTE]
Going by this, killing a plant should be classified as murder, because it too is made up of cells.
[QUOTE=TheDecryptor;33917503]I expected a different definition than "cellular activity", but ok, even then what baring does that have over anything? Should we base laws on that?[/QUOTE]
I say we start charging guys who masturbate with mass murder. Think of all the sperm they are killing.
[editline]27th December 2011[/editline]
Suddenly, all men in the U.S. would be imprisoned.
[QUOTE=thisispain;33909656]oh boy here comes reagan 2.0.[/QUOTE]
His age also matches pretty well
[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;33916906]Do you not understand what life means? There is an objective definition of life, go look it up. A fetus is made of cells. Cells are alive. Therefore, the fetus is alive.[/QUOTE]
A fetus is alive in the same sense that a parasite is alive.
[editline]1[/editline]
You could make the argument that a fetus [i]is[/i] a parasite.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;33915665]Except in the violinist case you had no choice. Pregnancy is a choice you make through action with the exception of rape. If you agreed to have the violinist attached to you, is it right to go back on that agreement later and kill the violinist?
No, anyone who argues it is a women's rights issue completely misunderstands the issue. You did a good job of using an analogy that doesn't really work, as your point of view is barely defensible in its own context and outright indefensible outside of it.[/QUOTE]
Let's look at the definition of parasite
[quote]
An organism that lives in or on another organism (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the host's expense.
[/quote]
Sound familiar? Don't you think that letting something or someone live in your body, eating your resources, limiting what you can do, and putting you at a risk for death should be your choice? (and don't you dare say I'm an "evil babykiller," I'm just using reason) The difference between pro-lifers and pro-choicers is that pro-lifers are [b]almost always[/b] religious. The reason they're pro-lifers in the first place is because they believe that life has an inherent right to exist. But I think you're forgetting about this wonderful thing called the first amendment
[quote]
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.
[/quote]
If you're religious and want to respect your religion, just don't have an abortion. But don't force your religion down other peoples throats and bar them off from a human right. Banning abortion is typical of a theocracy, and we all know theocracies always end in napalm.
[editline]27th December 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;33916906]Do you not understand what life means? There is an objective definition of life, go look it up. A fetus is made of cells. Cells are alive. Therefore, the fetus is alive.[/QUOTE]
If you were to argue for that I can argue that sperm is life. BAN FAPPING.
The "sanctity of life" is completely hypocritical bullshit. If the life of a parasite, bug, or germ is not sacred, no life is sacred. People end practically millions of "lives" every day without even realising or caring.
*sneeze* oh no I killed millions of germs goddamnit how am I gonna be pro life now
[QUOTE=Sanius;33913262]if life begins at conception, why do we celebrate birth days instead of conception days?
I think I just won this argument[/QUOTE]
and why is it that when there's a miscarriage there isn't a funeral?
Why when a woman is pregnant the parents say we have 2 children and 1 on the way, instead of saying we have 3 children.
[img]http://monkeypuzzlepress.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/George-Carlin1.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=Helix Alioth;33919882]Let's look at the definition of parasite
Sound familiar? Don't you think that letting something or someone live in your body, eating your resources, limiting what you can do, and putting you at a risk for death should be your choice? (and don't you dare say I'm an "evil babykiller," I'm just using reason) The difference between pro-lifers and pro-choicers is that pro-lifers are [b]almost always[/b] religious. The reason they're pro-lifers in the first place is because they believe that life has an inherent right to exist. But I think you're forgetting about this wonderful thing called the first amendment[/quote]
Why are you arguing with me about this? I'm an atheist, I have no religious motivation for my viewpoint of abortion. Hell, I'm not even really against abortion. I'm trying to show you guys that it isn't some simple black and white issue.
[quote]If you're religious and want to respect your religion, just don't have an abortion. But don't force your religion down other peoples throats and bar them off from a human right. Banning abortion is typical of a theocracy, and we all know theocracies always end in napalm.[/quote]
But then why is murder banned? We all have rights, don't we? We ban stuff like murder because we need to limit some rights to create and maintain a civilized society. Abortion may be beneficial to a civilized society, it may be detrimental. Not every argument against abortion is inherently religious.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;33921796]But then why is murder banned?[/QUOTE]
You cannot keep bringing up murder as relevant in an argument over abortion when presented with and choosing to ignore the classic "that doesn't apply here you fucking nimrod" argument. This is like trying to discuss calculus with someone who denies basic algebra- you can do it as much as you'd like, it just means we can't actually talk to you about it until you get your head out of your ass and get up to speed.
Murder has no relevance here because it involves only "right to life", whereas abortion involves
[QUOTE]"right to life" and "right to what is needed to sustain life."[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Xenocidebot;33923218]You cannot keep bringing up murder as relevant in an argument over abortion when presented with and choosing to ignore the classic "that doesn't apply here you fucking nimrod" argument. This is like trying to discuss calculus with someone who denies basic algebra- you can do it as much as you'd like, it just means we can't actually talk to you about it until you get your head out of your ass and get up to speed.[/quote]
Good job not reading my post. Also trying to equate an issue that is completely subjective(abortion) with an issue completely objective(algebra), you show that you have no interest in a rational argument.
regardless of how you feel about the morality of abortion can't you realize that making it illegal generally leads to a lot more unwanted children, which has to proven to be [i]very, very bad[/i] for society in almost every way?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
