Political Crossfire Forums

[Selfish_Meme]

Lost_In_Ambivelence wrote: Selfish_meme:
Quote: We eat meat and plants, what happens if we say killing is immoral, we all starve. The only difference between abortion and killing a cow is that the embryo/fetus is human. In many ways the cow is the greater being, it is sentient, while an early embryo is not. It can feel and fear while an embryo cannot. The only justification for the difference is if you believe in a soul, the rest is just sophistry.


It would seem to me that you view us a similar to animals (if there is nothing that differentiates us then we must be the same). We constantly impregnate livestock and force them to breed in order for us to eat. Perhaps all you pro-choice individuals would like to go to each farmer and verify that their cows wished to procreate. If not, then there must be some inate difference between us and livestock. Therefore, comparing embryos to them is just illogical and rediculus.
There are things to differentiate an adult human from an animal, they just are't present in an embryo or early fetus. I'm not claiming the right not to be killed for animals, but if you think killing is immoral don't kill see how long you live.

[Sailor Moon]

the_lizard_on_the_wall wrote: Sailor, i understand the neccesity of killing. i have come to respect life more as result of my experiences, but i still will not hesitate to kill. and i love steak. my point was, why? i would be disturbed if someone killed cows... and then left the body to rot.
But the whole issue comes down to the question of whether or not we have soul, doesnt it? because if we have souls, then it is present from conception. and abortion is murder. and if we dont have souls, "murder" is only a violation of the social contract. and if we dont have souls, there probably isnt a god. if there is no god, there are no self-evident rights, and "murder" is a fiction anyways!

I really dont know what youre talking about. A soul is just your body. If youre looking for some metaphysical thing, well, thats not what the bible says, if thats what youre referring to. A soul, as in the creation of Adam, IS the body. Just go to Genesis 2:7..

"And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul." He wasnt GIVEN any soul, he BECAME a living one when he became alive. see?


Quote: and again, we come back to the women

(yogi, i think we are walking in circles. -noonsense booboo! we're walking to aaa picinick basket!)

issue. women are not enslaved. if anything YOU disrespect women by claiming that what a women naturally does and is made for is at all "enslavement". its like saying men are enslaved, because we have testicles, and it hurts to be kicked in them.
and supposing they WERE enslaved. Do you think the draftees in WWII rescuing jews from camps would have thrown down their guns and said "screw this! screw them! im no slave!" and walked off? no, because it was saving lives. it is pretty arrogant to deny a child 70 years or so, because you were [questioning] enslaved [/questioning] for nine months.and "the more i post, the more disgusting i get" ??? i thought i was childish for slighting YOU! but, of course, you can do that. because, of course, i enslave women and you liberate them, fighting bravely, letting no child stand in the way!

I'm sorry but that post doesnt make any sense to me. Are you now saying that abortion FREES an enslaved baby?

How are lives saved, also? Arent millions of humans dead now? Am I just lost in space here? Are these truths NOT self evident?

[Lost_In_Ambivelence]

Selfish_Meme wrote: Lost_In_Ambivelence wrote: Selfish_meme:
Quote: We eat meat and plants, what happens if we say killing is immoral, we all starve. The only difference between abortion and killing a cow is that the embryo/fetus is human. In many ways the cow is the greater being, it is sentient, while an early embryo is not. It can feel and fear while an embryo cannot. The only justification for the difference is if you believe in a soul, the rest is just sophistry.


It would seem to me that you view us a similar to animals (if there is nothing that differentiates us then we must be the same). We constantly impregnate livestock and force them to breed in order for us to eat. Perhaps all you pro-choice individuals would like to go to each farmer and verify that their cows wished to procreate. If not, then there must be some inate difference between us and livestock. Therefore, comparing embryos to them is just illogical and rediculus.
There are things to differentiate an adult human from an animal, they just are't present in an embryo or early fetus. I'm not claiming the right not to be killed for animals, but if you think killing is immoral don't kill see how long you live.

I am saying that all humans, from conception to death, are different from animals. This has nothing to do with not killing. Killing is necessary for eating and eating is necessary for survival.

What I am asking you is when a human becomes different than an animal. If an embryo is no different, is a premie? Newborn? Toddler? Adolecent? When do we become "something special" such that we get rights that other animals don't have and what is it about that point in time that gives it to us?

[Selfish_Meme]

Lost_In_Ambivelence wrote: I am saying that all humans, from conception to death, are different from animals. This has nothing to do with not killing. Killing is necessary for eating and eating is necessary for survival.

What I am asking you is when a human becomes different than an animal. If an embryo is no different, is a premie? Newborn? Toddler? Adolecent? When do we become "something special" such that we get rights that other animals don't have and what is it about that point in time that gives it to us?
For me personally? I think if you abort as soon as you know, then you can have a good conscience about the decision. Because you didn't want to be pregnant in the first place. Once you know, if you continue with the pregnancy, I feel you are entering into a social contract to give birth. The longer you go the less right you have to abort. Unless of course your life is at risk.

That is my own personal opinion. I don't feel that the rights of the embryo supersede those of the mother. However like all of us she can enter into a contract.

[Sailor Moon]

Selfish_Meme wrote: Lost_In_Ambivelence wrote: I am saying that all humans, from conception to death, are different from animals. This has nothing to do with not killing. Killing is necessary for eating and eating is necessary for survival.

What I am asking you is when a human becomes different than an animal. If an embryo is no different, is a premie? Newborn? Toddler? Adolecent? When do we become "something special" such that we get rights that other animals don't have and what is it about that point in time that gives it to us?
For me personally? I think if you abort as soon as you know, then you can have a good conscience about the decision. Because you didn't want to be pregnant in the first place. Once you know, if you continue with the pregnancy, I feel you are entering into a social contract to give birth. The longer you go the less right you have to abort. Unless of course your life is at risk.

That is my own personal opinion. I don't feel that the rights of the embryo supersede those of the mother. However like all of us she can enter into a contract.

I have alot of respect for the way you said that. Bravo, Selfish Meme.. SM!! :-D

From, Sailor Moon, SM...

[Kt]

Sailor Moon wrote: What is preferable? Being killed with a knife while inside, or shot after you get outside?
Does it matter?
Quote:
So answer me this: Which is preferable? Why? Whats the difference, if the desired outcome is achieved?
Neither is preferrable, both are fine.
Quote: What changed for the fetus in that instant?
Nothing.

[Sailor Moon]

Helena` wrote: Sailor Moon wrote: What is preferable? Being killed with a knife while inside, or shot after you get outside?
Does it matter?

Not to me, I think both are dispicable. I am asking YOU.

Quote: Quote:
So answer me this: Which is preferable? Why? Whats the difference, if the desired outcome is achieved?
Neither is preferrable, both are fine.

So you say that killing a newborn baby is the equivalent to killing a fetus, then? By the way- I have no idea still, on your stance on abortion, so please give details with your responses.

Quote: Quote: What changed for the fetus in that instant?
Nothing.

I really need more than one word answers, please.

[Kt]

Sailor Moon wrote: Helena` wrote: Sailor Moon wrote: What is preferable? Being killed with a knife while inside, or shot after you get outside?
Does it matter?

Not to me, I think both are dispicable. I am asking YOU.
Fair enough. Quote:

Quote: Quote:
So answer me this: Which is preferable? Why? Whats the difference, if the desired outcome is achieved?
Neither is preferrable, both are fine.

So you say that killing a newborn baby is the equivalent to killing a fetus, then? By the way- I have no idea still, on your stance on abortion, so please give details with your responses.
I don't beleive fetus is a person untill it develops a sense of self.
Quote:
Quote: Quote: What changed for the fetus in that instant?
Nothing.

I really need more than one word answers, please.
ok i'll try harder.

EDIT: Baby is a parasite untill it is born, and mother has 100% rights to abort. This is my position.

[Sailor Moon]

Helena` wrote: Sailor Moon wrote: Helena` wrote: Sailor Moon wrote: What is preferable? Being killed with a knife while inside, or shot after you get outside?
Does it matter?

Not to me, I think both are dispicable. I am asking YOU.
Fair enough. Quote:

Quote: Quote:
So answer me this: Which is preferable? Why? Whats the difference, if the desired outcome is achieved?
Neither is preferrable, both are fine.

So you say that killing a newborn baby is the equivalent to killing a fetus, then? By the way- I have no idea still, on your stance on abortion, so please give details with your responses.
I don't beleive fetus is a person untill it develops a sense of self.

How do you know it doesnt have a sense of self? Are you psychic or something?


Quote: Quote:
Quote: Quote: What changed for the fetus in that instant?
Nothing.

I really need more than one word answers, please.
ok i'll try harder.

EDIT: Baby is a parasite untill it is born, and mother has 100% rights to abort. This is my position.

I find these sort of terms reprehensible. How can you call a baby a parasite? How? Thats the most shameful term, aside from "unwanted child" I have ever heard. It really means alot to many people, including children.. and it does nothing but continue to destroy, rather than build.

MY child was never a parasite, and I know of not one woman who has aborted or gotten pregnant and though "Heavens! HOW will I get this PARASITE out of me!!"

This parasite you speak of, is her offspring, so please try to use better words than this.

Also, in the weeks before its born, dont you think a fetus has a sense of self, for sure? After all, its proven to be so.
I find your short winded arguments to be short sighted, and destructive, at the most. Can you try to elaborate, please, in the future?

[Prole]

Regardless of whether or not it is a welcomed parasite, Sailor, a preborn human is from its inception to its birth a parasite, regardless of whether you like the terminology or not. That does not make it innately bad or good. It simply means that it lives inside the host while taking nutrients, and not contributing to the host's survival.

[alclarkey]

Prole wrote: Regardless of whether or not it is a welcomed parasite, Sailor, a preborn human is from its inception to its birth a parasite, regardless of whether you like the terminology or not. That does not make it innately bad or good. It simply means that it lives inside the host while taking nutrients, and not contributing to the host's survival.

Technically when compared with the rest of the universe you are nothing, and you are in my way. So maybe I should I just kill you, that way you won't be in my way any more hmm...?

[brendan101]

Hey, I'm new to this thread/website so I'll try to be brief. Abortion is not a matter of morality, as the variance of positions is infinite, and it is not a matter of "enslaving women", as that clearly is an exaggeration. The reason were arguuing this is whether or not it should be banned, and it comes down to being constitutional or not. Since the baby is not actually sensate until the 26th week (3rd trimester), it is not scientifically speaking alive. Abortions DO NOT occur after the 3rd trimester (except in medical emergencies) in the first place. Since it is not alive, it is not murder, and therefore not unconstitutional. And also, when people bring in the BIBLE to support their claims is the moment that i lose all respect for their arguments. I am a leftish republican, and a christian, and i find it reprehensible that people bring in a holy text as support for an argument. Though i believe its teachings, not all do, and a little thing called the seperation of church and state doesnt believe in it either. So basically I'm pro choice until someone can actually proove, contrary to scientific evidence, that the fetus is in fact a sentient, living being, capable of all mental thought processes. Arguments consisting of "of course its alive" or "i cant think of anything so ill bring up the fact your killing the CHILD" are unacceptable and do not constitute an argument from this point on.

thanks for reading my first post :-D

[Prole]

Welcome, brendan101, to PCF.

alclarkey wrote: Prole wrote: Regardless of whether or not it is a welcomed parasite, Sailor, a preborn human is from its inception to its birth a parasite, regardless of whether you like the terminology or not. That does not make it innately bad or good. It simply means that it lives inside the host while taking nutrients, and not contributing to the host's survival.

Technically when compared with the rest of the universe you are nothing, and you are in my way. So maybe I should I just kill you, that way you won't be in my way any more hmm...?
I do not believe that because someone is small, or incapable of having a "significant" impact that they are unworthy of moral status. Likewise, even if one was unworthy of moral status because of their size, I would certainly not think it right or justified to kill someone simply because they are small. But a preborn human does not have "small" consciousness, compared to anything. It has none, until a point. There is no arbitrary judgement based on its signifigance; it has no innate signifigance whatsoever.

Furthermore, if you are going to argue that no human has any worth because of the vastness of the universe, then moral code can hold true. So yeah, I suppose that you can believe that any action is meaningless because each individual and each action affects such a minority. But that would be an arguement to completely abandon morality, and certainly not one that I agree with.

[Sage Orator]

After the child is born it is definitely murder. There is absolutely no dispute that they are alive in any way. The majority of abortions take place before the baby has a responsive nervous system, before it can control its movements, and before it can be classified as a living thing. Before I present my links, let me ask you a question. If there is a case of craniopagus parasiticus or similar cases such as when the kid had a fetus in his stomach, are the fetus' that are inside or attached to the child alive?
Fetal Development
Abortions by week of gestation
Living things 1
Living things 2
Living things 3

[Sailor Moon]

Prole wrote: Regardless of whether or not it is a welcomed parasite, Sailor, a preborn human is from its inception to its birth a parasite, regardless of whether you like the terminology or not. That does not make it innately bad or good. It simply means that it lives inside the host while taking nutrients, and not contributing to the host's survival.

Homeless people could be declared "parasites" also...

So could all those people on welfare checks...

Should we dismember them, too?

PS fetuses are not parasites. Fetuses save womens lives more frequently than you can imagine.

Here are some examples of this:

http://www.afterabortion.info/PAR/V9/n2/childbirthprotection.html

http://www.breastcancer.org/ubbthreads/showthreaded.php?Number=138677

http://www.covenantnews.com/abortion/archives/016620.html

http://www.newfilipina.com/members/pngayon/02.10/Bulimiapregnancy.html

Plus, women with diabetes get help, also, due to the added insulin the baby holds in his own kidneys. Some women have extremely positive diabetes results, much different from pre pregnancy, after they deliver.

There is also a much desired feeling of "being needed", which many women like to have.. why else do you think women nowadays are such top dogs in all aspects of life?

Fetuses ARE NOT parasites.

[steen]

alclarkey wrote: Prole wrote: Regardless of whether or not it is a welcomed parasite, Sailor, a preborn human is from its inception to its birth a parasite, regardless of whether you like the terminology or not. That does not make it innately bad or good. It simply means that it lives inside the host while taking nutrients, and not contributing to the host's survival. Technically when compared with the rest of the universe you are nothing, and you are in my way. So maybe I should I just kill you, that way you won't be in my way any more hmm...? What nonsense, it had nothing to do with Prole's remark. Seems like you are dishonestly trying to detract from a subject you are unable to answer in support for your oppressive cause.

[Sailor Moon]

Steen, FYI- in case you responded to me- which I dont care, but you havent seemed to have clued into the fact that I am ignoring you.. So just a heads up, babe.

[alclarkey]

steen wrote: alclarkey wrote: Prole wrote: Regardless of whether or not it is a welcomed parasite, Sailor, a preborn human is from its inception to its birth a parasite, regardless of whether you like the terminology or not. That does not make it innately bad or good. It simply means that it lives inside the host while taking nutrients, and not contributing to the host's survival. Technically when compared with the rest of the universe you are nothing, and you are in my way. So maybe I should I just kill you, that way you won't be in my way any more hmm...? What nonsense, it had nothing to do with Prole's remark. Seems like you are dishonestly trying to detract from a subject you are unable to answer in support for your oppressive cause.

And you missed the point of the post. You abortionists love to use technicalities to support your cause. "Well under the dictionary definition a baby is really a parasite..." blah blah blah. So I simply used your aruguing tactics to illustrate a point. Basically illustrating absurdity by being absurd.

Let me reiterate my point. You mean nothing in the grand scheme of things. If I were to dispose of you not many people would miss you. Being that you are inconvenient to me I think I will do just that.

[brendan101]

Quote: You mean nothing in the grand scheme of things. If I were to dispose of you not many people would miss you.

Thank you for that piece of knowledge. It helps our argument. No one in the world knows the fetus/child/whatever you want to call it, except for the mother and possibly the father. These are the only two with an emotional or physical attachment to the child. They have made the decision. If the only two people who it is important to, are the ones who have done the "murder" it must be infinitely insignificant since it doesnt matter whatsoever whatever happens to the baby. So yes you are quite correct in this matter. The fetus is not only not sensate/alive, but no one cares about it.

[Sailor Moon]

brendan101 wrote: Quote: You mean nothing in the grand scheme of things. If I were to dispose of you not many people would miss you.

Thank you for that piece of knowledge. It helps our argument. No one in the world knows the fetus/child/whatever you want to call it, except for the mother and possibly the father. These are the only two with an emotional or physical attachment to the child. They have made the decision. If the only two people who it is important to, are the ones who have done the "murder" it must be infinitely insignificant since it doesnt matter whatsoever whatever happens to the baby. So yes you are quite correct in this matter. The fetus is not only not sensate/alive, but no one cares about it.

I care about it.... And the only way you would know if IT cares, if if you were psychic.