Abortion, Genocide, what’s THE difference?!?!?!?!?.... do you condone murder???

If you do not wish to have an abortion, do not have one. In any other case - shut up please.

reply to post by Garfee


One could replace abortion with many other things in your logic. Your argument is very flawed.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by WhiteHat

 

Well aren't you saying the same with regards to forcing me to care about society?

No,I' m not forcing you on anything. I just said is your option what you care for. I don't propose to ban your right to NOT care, even if I don't agree with you.

Fact is this. What does being inside a body have to do with it being human or not? Rape or life threatening is all that matters.

Well, is our body belonging to ourselves, or not? What is inside it belong to us or not? Do we have or we don't have the right to use it or not use it the way we see fit?
Hypothetically, you cannot force a woman to carry another' woman fetus, or one conceived in vitro, only because she have the ability to nurture life. You can't use her body for procreation purposes, unless she wants to. So how come you want to force her carrying a fetus conceived by herself, if she choose not to?

Arguably, what you do with that body ends where the next one begins.

Arguably.

Laws at their core are not to stop people from doing something, but to point out what is wrong. You can't force people not to kill. but you can say it's wrong, and most will comply.

My point exactly.
And when most people don't comply, something is wrong, with the law or with the people. And we try a better solution. In the abortions case, I'd only say that something is wrong with the society.
But for now, the abortions are legal, and I, personally, don't think that changing that law will make the situation better. Educating people, maybe.

Thanks for an interesting discussion.

reply to post by Gorman91


Not when the decision lies with one person making a decision about their own body. That logic is not flawed unless perhaps you wish to allow me to decide which religion you should follow, when you make love, brush your teeth, get out of bed, eat...

reply to post by Garfee


A separate genetic unit with potential is not her body. It's more of a parasite. And humans are until like age 13.

reply to post by WhiteHat


But you told me "to be human". To live with it, more or less. how is that any different?

I'm not forcing her to do anything. people have free will to have sex, have protection, etc etc. Countless issues. I'm perhaps saying you get what you pay for. No refunds.

I think that making it banned will stop most of the problems. Like I said since the beginning. The only conceivable reason it would be needed is for where freedom and life are threatened. No other one. Everything else is the direct result of free choice. There is the right to choose. Not after the choice. You don't get second choice once a life is brought about. That's simple social responsibility. And yea I know I argued against that, call me a hypocrite. You do need responsibility for society to function. Telling them they can quite literally kill the problem is just plain wrong.

reply to post by Gorman91


Flat out banning abortions except for "sanctioned" instances where it would be allowed would be the worse decision. Alleyway/motel/self-inflicted abortions would rise again and so would the number of women dying.

reply to post by Dendro


that is their choice to do those things. We as a society cannot be held responsible because few desperate people want to murder.

Would you bring back the collesium for want of murder from the real psychopaths?

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by WhiteHat

 

I'm not forcing her to do anything. people have free will to have sex, have protection, etc etc. Countless issues. I'm perhaps saying you get what you pay for. No refunds.

I know what you mean,and in a perfect world it should work that way; my answer was that most of the time is not the irresponsible parents who pay the price, but the innocent children. Unfortunately, this is not a perfect world.

You don't get second choice once a life is brought about. That's simple social responsibility. And yea I know I argued against that, call me a hypocrite. You do need responsibility for society to function. Telling them they can quite literally kill the problem is just plain wrong.

Now I totally agree with you, but again, my only concern is all those kids suffering their whole life for something they didn't do, and put a burden on us, as society. That's the ugly reality, right outside our front doors. And as long as we don't have a better solution for that, banning abortion will only make it worse. I think.

reply to post by kevinunknown


Condone murder...sure, everybody does, it just depends in which ways we might look at it....for instance

Killing animals for sustenance, activists see that as murder.

Scenario: A man murders your loved one in cold blood, would you want the death penalty enacted?

Back on topic, of course, those 2 examples are NOT the same as abortion, but there are a few truths behind abortion;

1. It is very sad to hear about, but has no significance to me or you, our lives still go on.
2. There is nothing you can do to change the situation other-wise.

A couple of quick statistics;

52% of women obtaining abortions in the U.S. are younger than 25: Women aged 20-24 obtain 32% of all abortions; Teenagers obtain 20% and girls under 15 account for 1.2%.

World Wide Number of abortions per year: Approximately 42 Million
Number of abortions per day: Approximately 115,000

www.abortionno.org...

The first part of the quote, they're young, immature, and probably have some deep psych issues in turn, the kid would have psych issues and before you know it, we end up in a world almost like "Idiocracy" where everybody is dumb and our President is a gangster, pornstar, wrestling, weightlifter who speaks in Ebonics.

The second part, 42 MILLION, that is a lot of people. It's almost like...how hunters kill deer to keep the animal population down so they don't slowly kill themselves off by reducing resources. Again, sad..yes, does it effect you or me? No
ult.
*Note* The website in which I grabbed my statistics may, or may not be accurate, not my fault.

reply to post by WhiteHat


You make do with what you have. And to be honest, poor kids are the coolest kids when they're adults.

Greatness is forged in fire.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by WhiteHat

 

You make do with what you have. And to be honest, poor kids are the coolest kids when they're adults.

Greatness is forged in fire.

LOL...then let's just throw all our kids in the street, and we'll have the best, wonderful next generation ever! That's the spirit!

I'm sure that we can do better than shrugging at the unwanted children suffering.

reply to post by WhiteHat


No of course not. But You really are assuming a whole life based off a stereotype. A flawed system of thought that at it's worst lead to colonialism and at its best made stuck up elites.

Originally posted by kevinunknown
Do you know that in the UK in 2008 22% of all pregnancies ended in abortion. . .

Did you know spontaneous abortion is humanities biggest killer?
www.mainstreambaptists.org...

But you don't see any pro-lifers concerned about that.

The extent of the scientific evidence pro-lifers present that a fertilized egg = person is "Based on every embryology textbook I've ever seen, an individual human organism's life begins at conception and so that's when a human person's life begins, too."

This is very problematic from a legal standpoint. Also pro-lifers themselves don't follow this philosophy:

- Do we see pro-lifers protest outside IVF clinics? No.
- Do we see them put in any resources to stop Humanities biggest killer - spontaneous abortions? No.

But it's alright to deny a rape victim at a Catholic hospital emergency contraception. . . hmmm. Doesn't sound right to me.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by WhiteHat

 

No of course not. But You really are assuming a whole life based off a stereotype. A flawed system of thought that at it's worst lead to colonialism and at its best made stuck up elites.

I'm not talking stereotypes here, I'm talking real life, facts. Statistics. Homeless kids. Pregnant teenagers. Full orphanages. Gettos. Kids who grow up to fill the prisons, because no one ever wanted them, and they are not important to anybody. All this is real, is happening every day, all around us. Stop labeling, and start looking around. Where do you think are those kids coming for? From under the trees after rain, like mushrooms? Or from women who got pregnant without being ready to take responsibility for it?

What should be and what it is are two totally different things; step a little outside your rigid principles and look at the real life. The laws and principles are some perfect virtual destination; but the truth is we all are somewhere on our way to that, and most of us never reach it. Nothing is perfect, we are not perfect, and especially not the real world. The life itself is not mathematics, to shrink it in a formula and pass it on.
To solve the human dilemma of whether to give birth to an unfortunate kid or to kill it while it's still an unformed fetus is not a mathematical equation; it requires compassion, care and deep understanding of human nature. Is not for cold minds who put their holy higher principles and systems of thought above people's needs. I'm sorry, but I'm done with this discussion.

reply to post by WhiteHat


Considering America got along a lot better with much higher poverty rates in the past I would argue you are wrong. i would go so far as to say the abandonment of responsibility that was a byproduct of mid to late 1900s thinking is the cause of it all. And I'm happy to report my generation has rejected those values and begun to change. have you checked out the polls for the youth? We're this kind of weird mix between old fashioned 1900 conservative and 1780s Jeffersonian liberal. The outright rejection of post modernism is what will fix your problem. not the murder of those being born from those whom subscribe to it.

I see compassion is willing to put away your ways and teach a child to be a soldier of freedom and the restoration of old values that were thrown out with the 60s and 70s (not the civil rights movement. They're cool). I do not see murder as compassion. In fact, I outright reject the idea that murder can be out of compassion. Much more it seems to be dictatorial and active eugenics of a flawed individual whom thinks they know what another life is and will become.

I think i will keep my rigid Principles. Modernism certainly is far better than this post modern craptacular creation of society has gotten going for the past 40 years of total epic fail.

reply to post by igor_ats


What nature does and what man does are different. You cannot bring nature to a court when a tree hits someone. You can when someone drops a tree on you.

For those citing the lack of self-awareness as grounds for abortion being acceptable, please explain to us how you reliably determine the exact moment that self-awareness occurs. If you're off by even a second you've killed a sentient being... if you can't reliably determine that moment than it's a worthless criterian.

reply to post by SevenBeans


It doesn't happen in the womb.

Originally posted by Gorman91
It doesn't happen in the womb.

How do you know? When does it?

Seems that all we really know with certainty is the moment life begins and that is at conception.