Political Crossfire Forums

Plodder · Joined: 01 Nov 2005 Posts: 803 Location: USA

what do you consider more improtant?

Ch33kY · Joined: 21 Sep 2005 Posts: 1281

I'm not sure that it takes 10,000 horses to perform an abortion.

Seeing as I'm anti-life, I choose to kill 10,001.

Plodder · Joined: 01 Nov 2005 Posts: 803 Location: USA

this thread is about importance of a baby's life.

LostSoul3412 · Joined: 10 Feb 2005 Posts: 8838

Seeing as how 10,000 horses could feed over 10,000 people... I would save the horses, and then kill them to feed to people.

Swandazi · Joined: 31 Mar 2006 Posts: 268

since the baby is a human and humans are more important then an easilly bred domesticated farm animal i would save the baby

Plodder · Joined: 01 Nov 2005 Posts: 803 Location: USA

Quote: Seeing as how 10,000 horses could feed over 10,000 people... I would save the horses, and then kill them to feed to people the essential question is which is more important?

LostSoul3412 · Joined: 10 Feb 2005 Posts: 8838

Plodder wrote: Quote: Seeing as how 10,000 horses could feed over 10,000 people... I would save the horses, and then kill them to feed to people the essential question is which is more important?

If 10,000 horses can save 10,000 people from starvation, then wouldn't it be better to save the horses and save 10,000 people from death instead of sacraficing 10,000 people for the sake of one baby?

Plodder · Joined: 01 Nov 2005 Posts: 803 Location: USA

You are making an inferece that was not part of the question. The question does NOT say: 10000 horses that vcan be used as food for people. It says 10000 horses period.

LostSoul3412 · Joined: 10 Feb 2005 Posts: 8838

Plodder wrote: You are making an inferece that was not part of the question. The question does NOT say: 10000 horses that vcan be used as food for people. It says 10000 horses period.

Nothing is in a vaccum. If I can use the 10,000 horses in anyway possible, then I would choose the horses to feed people.

And if it was considered in a vaccum, then I would still choose the 10,000 horses because 10,000 lives is more important than 1 life. If the horses are in a vaccum, then so is the baby.

Plodder · Joined: 01 Nov 2005 Posts: 803 Location: USA

you are playing around with my question. The question is simple. Which life is more valuable 1 baby or 10k horses. I never mention anyone else. Please stop going round in circles.

LostSoul3412 · Joined: 10 Feb 2005 Posts: 8838

Plodder wrote: you are playing around with my question. The question is simple. Which life is more valuable 1 baby or 10k horses. I never mention anyone else. Please stop going round in circles.

As far as material value, 10,000 horses are worth more than the child, since horses can be sold whereas a child cannot.

But as far as basic life is concerned, the 10,000 horses are still more valuable because it is saving 10,000 lives in exchange for 1.

...And I'm not going around in circles, you just don't like my answers.

steen · Joined: 14 Jan 2006 Posts: 1430 Location: Upper Midwest

Plodder wrote: you are playing around with my question. The question is simple. Which life is more valuable 1 baby or 10k horses. I never mention anyone else. Please stop going round in circles. But then, that would have nothing to do with abortion anyway, so why are you posting it here?

Plodder · Joined: 01 Nov 2005 Posts: 803 Location: USA

it has all to do with abortion since you place somthin of lesser value infront of something of greater value : the comfort of the mother for the lfe of the baby

LostSoul3412 · Joined: 10 Feb 2005 Posts: 8838

Plodder wrote: it has all to do with abortion since you place somthin of lesser value infront of something of greater value : the comfort of the mother for the lfe of the baby

:roll: :sigh1:

The issue isn't the comfort of the mother, it's the right to one's own body. It's the value of choice above the value of the unknown. Individual decision before governmental regulation. Also, there is no baby in question, only an embryo awaiting to become life. It is the choice of the mother that is important.

LostSoul3412 · Joined: 10 Feb 2005 Posts: 8838

Also, this is about horses and babies, not mothers and their comfort. Considering this is your own thread, I would hope that you of all people would understand that.

steen · Joined: 14 Jan 2006 Posts: 1430 Location: Upper Midwest

Plodder wrote: it has all to do with abortion since you place somthin of lesser value infront of something of greater value : the comfort of the mother for the lfe of the baby As you are talking about horses and babies. it has absolutely nothing to do with abortiosn, embryos, fetuses or women.

Plodder · Joined: 01 Nov 2005 Posts: 803 Location: USA

thtaks steen for reapeating the previous post.

Quote: The issue isn't the comfort of the mother, it's the right to one's own body. It's the value of choice above the value of the unknown. Individual decision before governmental regulation. Also, there is no baby in question, only an embryo awaiting to become life. It is the choice of the mother that is important. An embryo IS life. Quote: Also, this is about horses and babies, not mothers and their comfort. Considering this is your own thread, I would hope that you of all people would understand that. this thread is to see of simply you value the life of one human or that of a multitude of non human life. and yes Abortion is about comfort. It is almost never about life and death for the mother. It is always life and death for the baby though.

LostSoul3412 · Joined: 10 Feb 2005 Posts: 8838

Plodder wrote: An embryo IS life.

Proof?

Plodder wrote: this thread is to see of simply you value the life of one human or that of a multitude of non human life. and yes Abortion is about comfort. It is almost never about life and death for the mother. It is always life and death for the baby though.

That still does not explain why it is about comfort, which it is not. Abortion is an issue where an individual has a choice as to whether or not they want to have a child. Regardless, you have yet to explain the relationship between the value of human and non-human life and the comfort of the mother...

Also, there still is not baby in question.

Plodder · Joined: 01 Nov 2005 Posts: 803 Location: USA

Quote: Proof? proof that it is not? Lets see, embryo has human chromosomes individual to that being only... yes. an embryo grows .... yes. and embryo can react to stimuli...... yes. an embryo can consume food provided by the mother.... yes. that sure looks like life to me.

Quote:
That still does not explain why it is about comfort, which it is not. Abortion is an issue where an individual has a choice as to whether or not they want to have a child. Regardless, you have yet to explain the relationship between the value of human and non-human life and the comfort of the mother...
hey look , ive tried explaining it, but if you still dont get it thats your problem, everyone elso seems to get it becuse they are not childishly reapeating the same thing over and over.....

AllAmericanMan · Joined: 07 Mar 2005 Posts: 3606

Quote: The issue isn't the comfort of the mother, it's the right to one's own body. It's the value of choice above the value of the unknown. Individual decision before governmental regulation. Also, there is no baby in question, only an embryo awaiting to become life. It is the choice of the mother that is important Its a newly concevied human life. Not an embryo waiting to become life. And the issue isnt the right to the womans body, its the developing body inside her she CHOSE to create. Funny "pro choice" people never acknowledge that fundamental decision and never acknowledge the lack of choice the life inside her gets.