Abortion puzzles me

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: Trevelyan

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: Trevelyan

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Tell you what, you worry about yourself and stop carring about what the rest of us do to other people mmmkay?

It's really none of your business.

Fixed.

See, that's the problem with that line of thinking. It totally assumes that abortion affects only the mother. It doesn't consider the child being aborted. It sidesteps the real issue.

Does it effect you?

I don't want murderers running around, but not just because I don't want to be killed by them.

Sweet! Apples and oranges! I like apples and oranges.

Oh yes, compairing murder to murder and murderers to murderers, oh yeah, the whole apples and oranges sidestep sound _really_ intelligent there.

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: exdeath

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Tell you what, you worry about yourself and stop carring about what the rest of us do mmmkay?

It's really none of your business.

:thumbsup:

That is such a rediculous statement, and only made by simpletons and dullards. By your own statement, you too would in fact be encroaching on what is "none of your business."

How does that statement mean he'd be encroaching on anything?

And if we really did follow that kind of logic, then we would not have laws or law enforcement at all since if it didn't happen to them (them as in cops and lawmakers) then it would be "none of their business" to get involved in.

There sure are a lot of apples and oranges going around today.

Wow, it just keeps getting better. Well, lets see (it's really pretty obvious to begin with, but I can see from your posts I'm going to have to REALLY dumb this down). JulesMaximus is complaining that people are expressing their opinions on topics that are none of their business, but JulesMaximus is expressing his opinion in a discussion that he himself has no more business in than anyone else. Get it? Is that simple enough for you?

And again, you are claiming "apples and oranges" (obviously the statement of a dullard) at a comparison of killers (abortionists) and lawbreakers (which would include murderers).

I will admit though I do not agree with the pro-choicers, it is possible for them to have intelligent arguments. Yours however is not, so do not be surprised if you get ignored in the future.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: loic2003
Thare are far too many people on the planet already and loads of parents who can't support their young. Too many are consuming too much from the tax payer and producing too much waste. Less people would be a good thing.

Volunteer.

 

[kt]

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: exdeath

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Tell you what, you worry about yourself and stop carring about what the rest of us do mmmkay?

It's really none of your business.

:thumbsup:

That is such a rediculous statement, and only made by simpletons and dullards. By your own statement, you too would in fact be encroaching on what is "none of your business."

And if we really did follow that kind of logic, then we would not have laws or law enforcement at all since if it didn't happen to them (them as in cops and lawmakers) then it would be "none of their business" to get involved in.

Way to generalize a statement. And if you are going to use an example to generalize a statement, at least do it right. The business of cops and lawmakers IS to enforce the law. So it is THEIR business to get involved if a law is broken.

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: kt

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: exdeath

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Tell you what, you worry about yourself and stop carring about what the rest of us do mmmkay?

It's really none of your business.

:thumbsup:

That is such a rediculous statement, and only made by simpletons and dullards. By your own statement, you too would in fact be encroaching on what is "none of your business."

And if we really did follow that kind of logic, then we would not have laws or law enforcement at all since if it didn't happen to them (them as in cops and lawmakers) then it would be "none of their business" to get involved in.

Way to generalize a statement. And if you are going to use an example to generalize a statement, at least do it right. The business of cops and lawmakers IS to enforce the law. So it is THEIR business to get involved if a law is broken.

Yes, that is EXACTLY right, and in a democracy, it is up to the people to decide what those laws should be. Whether it be laws regarding stealing, or laws regarding killing, etc.

edit: ok, I realize there are some here who will probably not get what I was talking about here, so I will go ahead and point it out now, that I am talking about how it is "our business" because it is our responsibility to determine what abortion laws should be (that was a little bonus for you, nakedfrog ), just like it is the cops jobs to enforce those laws. Also thinks for really driving my point home, kt.

 

[dxkj]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Tell you what, you worry about yourself and stop carring about what the rest of us do mmmkay?

It's really none of your business.

Ignorant comment of the year!

I can't even take the time to go into how stupid of a post that was, good job!

 

[DougK62]

When people talk about abortion it's generally not someone that is 7 months into the thing. LOL. They're talking about a little clump of cells. Some people do not believe this to be a human at this stage, so they are pro-abortion. It's really quite simple.

 

[DougK62]

Originally posted by: artemis
...

I really wish that men could go through what it is like to miss a period and the fear you have going to the drug store and then taking a pregnancy test at home.

...

Uh - men go through a process very similar to women when they have sex and the woman misses her period. The only difference is that the woman has a real choice on whether she wants to continue the pregnancy or not. All a guy can do is twiddle his thumbs and hope that the woman wants the same thing that he does. I really wish a woman could go through THAT.

 

[kt]

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: kt

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: exdeath

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Tell you what, you worry about yourself and stop carring about what the rest of us do mmmkay?

It's really none of your business.

:thumbsup:

That is such a rediculous statement, and only made by simpletons and dullards. By your own statement, you too would in fact be encroaching on what is "none of your business."

And if we really did follow that kind of logic, then we would not have laws or law enforcement at all since if it didn't happen to them (them as in cops and lawmakers) then it would be "none of their business" to get involved in.

Way to generalize a statement. And if you are going to use an example to generalize a statement, at least do it right. The business of cops and lawmakers IS to enforce the law. So it is THEIR business to get involved if a law is broken.

Yes, that is EXACTLY right, and in a democracy, it is up to the people to decide what those laws should be. Whether it be laws regarding stealing, or laws regarding killing, etc.

So you are swinging the fence now?

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: exdeath

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Tell you what, you worry about yourself and stop carring about what the rest of us do mmmkay?

It's really none of your business.

:thumbsup:

That is such a rediculous statement, and only made by simpletons and dullards. By your own statement, you too would in fact be encroaching on what is "none of your business."

How does that statement mean he'd be encroaching on anything?

And if we really did follow that kind of logic, then we would not have laws or law enforcement at all since if it didn't happen to them (them as in cops and lawmakers) then it would be "none of their business" to get involved in.

There sure are a lot of apples and oranges going around today.

Wow, it just keeps getting better. Well, lets see (it's really pretty obvious to begin with, but I can see from your posts I'm going to have to REALLY dumb this down). JulesMaximus is complaining that people are expressing their opinions on topics that are none of their business, but JulesMaximus is expressing his opinion in a discussion that he himself has no more business in than anyone else. Get it? Is that simple enough for you?

And again, you are claiming "apples and oranges" (obviously the statement of a dullard) at a comparison of killers (abortionists) and lawbreakers (which would include murderers).

I will admit though I do not agree with the pro-choicers, it is possible for them to have intelligent arguments. Yours however is not, so do not be surprised if you get ignored in the future.

You are a funny little thing, you are. It's obvious you derive some sort of bizarre self-satisfaction from declaring people who disagree with you simpletons/dullards.
In fact, you have completely misinterpreted JulesMaximus' post. He is NOT complaining about people expressing their opinions at all--he's saying it's not your business if someone else gets an abortion. Whether or not doctors who perform abortions are killers is opinion. Thus, comparing them with murderers is a fallacy. Typical of your stripe, you feel that you should be able to force your opinions/beliefs upon others.
And I wish you were intelligent enough to realize the irony in you telling me my argument is not an intelligent one, but I suspect you are not.

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: kt

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: kt

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: exdeath

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Tell you what, you worry about yourself and stop carring about what the rest of us do mmmkay?

It's really none of your business.

:thumbsup:

That is such a rediculous statement, and only made by simpletons and dullards. By your own statement, you too would in fact be encroaching on what is "none of your business."

And if we really did follow that kind of logic, then we would not have laws or law enforcement at all since if it didn't happen to them (them as in cops and lawmakers) then it would be "none of their business" to get involved in.

Way to generalize a statement. And if you are going to use an example to generalize a statement, at least do it right. The business of cops and lawmakers IS to enforce the law. So it is THEIR business to get involved if a law is broken.

Yes, that is EXACTLY right, and in a democracy, it is up to the people to decide what those laws should be. Whether it be laws regarding stealing, or laws regarding killing, etc.

So you are swinging the fence now?

Nope, just pointing out how rediculous the "none of your business" statement is.

 

[nakedfrog]

FFS, it's "ridiculous"

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: DougK62
When people talk about abortion it's generally not someone that is 7 months into the thing. LOL. They're talking about a little clump of cells. Some people do not believe this to be a human at this stage, so they are pro-abortion. It's really quite simple.

But some people DO refer to 7 months into the thing, and why would it matter anyway? Why would all of a sudden at six months... BAM it's a person?

The only BAM that happens is at conception. THAT is when it becomes a person.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: DougK62
When people talk about abortion it's generally not someone that is 7 months into the thing. LOL. They're talking about a little clump of cells. Some people do not believe this to be a human at this stage, so they are pro-abortion. It's really quite simple.

But some people DO refer to 7 months into the thing, and why would it matter anyway? Why would all of a sudden at six months... BAM it's a person?

The only BAM that happens is at conception. THAT is when it becomes a person.

In your opinion.

 

[DougK62]

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: DougK62
When people talk about abortion it's generally not someone that is 7 months into the thing. LOL. They're talking about a little clump of cells. Some people do not believe this to be a human at this stage, so they are pro-abortion. It's really quite simple.

But some people DO refer to 7 months into the thing, and why would it matter anyway? Why would all of a sudden at six months... BAM it's a person?

The only BAM that happens is at conception. THAT is when it becomes a person.

No - that's not true. There is a lot of development that goes on in the womb. You'll NEVER be able to convince me that the couple cells at conception are a baby. IMO, you don't have a human until there is brain activity, which typically happens at at about 10 weeks.

My opinion and your opinion are different, but neither is really wrong. That's the whole problem with the abortion issue. Lots of gray area.

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: DougK62

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: DougK62
When people talk about abortion it's generally not someone that is 7 months into the thing. LOL. They're talking about a little clump of cells. Some people do not believe this to be a human at this stage, so they are pro-abortion. It's really quite simple.

But some people DO refer to 7 months into the thing, and why would it matter anyway? Why would all of a sudden at six months... BAM it's a person?

The only BAM that happens is at conception. THAT is when it becomes a person.

No - that's not true. There is a lot of development that goes on in the womb. You'll NEVER be able to convince me that the couple cells at conception are a baby. IMO, you don't have a human until there is brain activity, which typically happens at at about 10 weeks.

My opinion and your opinion are different, but neither is really wrong. That's the whole problem with the abortion issue. Lots of gray area.

But abortions are legally allowed and often happen well beyond 10 weeks (I'm just assuming you are correct on the brain activity timeframe, I had no idea when it began myself, and it's correctness doesn't affect the argument anyway). If abortions only happened before brain activity began, then I could see THAT as a gray area, but anything after there is brain activity I don't see how you could argue for (I'm not saying YOU are). And then, for the law, you would have to account for early developers, and make the limit at least a few weeks before 10 weeks.

I could see that as being another BAM moment, but I still believe life begins at conception, and that is when the baby becomes a real person who should be protected by the same laws and get the same moral obligations as anyone else.

edit: and I do know that a lot of development happens in the womb (I was, after all, a pre-med student and a man-nurse years ago, and have had a child myself...well, my wife did, of course), but what I was talking about was a single solitary defining moment that would indicate life. I consider that conception, you consider that brain activity.

 

[SlitheryDee]

Originally posted by: Brazen

LOL, definately spoken like an unmarried person! You are busy arguing semantics, when I can tell you as a husband, it is obvious he was meaning making the choice together, with his wife, they way a couple with a healthy relationship should. Ironically enough though, you made a very powerful pro-life statement there: "there is never a good reason to impose your "better judgement" on anyone else." Of course this would also include babies in the womb.

In fact, that entire last paragraph is very good reasons for why abortions is so wrong. After reading it, it makes me a little angry at how people could just take that away from those aborted babies.[/quote]

FTR you're right, I'm not married. But even in a close relationship thinking what "we would do" as being equal to "what I think should be done" is wrong. It's just as wrong as thinking that "abortion should be illegal" because "I think it should be illegal". You call it semantics, while I call it a very telling glimpse into Trevelyan's mind.

I mentioned that I do not support abortion in general, though I have somewhat different views about the "potential human" who's existance is at stake than you do. I would strongly urge anyone considering an abortion to think it through first, but I believe that if they choose to abort before the baby is viable outside the womb then that is their right. I realize that a woman's actual right to abort extends well into the 8th month, but I feel that killing the child needlessly is rediculous and I can't support this in good conscience.

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: SlitheryDee

Originally posted by: Brazen

LOL, definately spoken like an unmarried person! You are busy arguing semantics, when I can tell you as a husband, it is obvious he was meaning making the choice together, with his wife, they way a couple with a healthy relationship should. Ironically enough though, you made a very powerful pro-life statement there: "there is never a good reason to impose your "better judgement" on anyone else." Of course this would also include babies in the womb.

In fact, that entire last paragraph is very good reasons for why abortions is so wrong. After reading it, it makes me a little angry at how people could just take that away from those aborted babies.

FTR you're right, I'm not married. But even in a close relationship thinking what "we would do" as being equal to "what I think should be done" is wrong. It's just as wrong as thinking that "abortion should be illegal" because "I think it should be illegal". You call it semantics, while I call it a very telling glimpse into Trevelyan's mind.

I mentioned that I do not support abortion in general, though I have somewhat different views about the "potential human" who's existance is at stake than you do. I would strongly urge anyone considering an abortion to think it through first, but I believe that if they choose to abort before the baby is viable outside the womb then that is their right. I realize that a woman's actual right to abort extends well into the 8th month, but I feel that killing the child needlessly is rediculous and I can't support this in good conscience.[/quote]

Well, about the married thing... what I mean is: when I say "I will think about it" or "I will decide" what I really mean is that I will decide with my wife (if it regards a matter that concerns her or the family). I think married men just kinda get in the habit of not always specifying that they are meaing they will discuss it with their wife. It's sorta like I in the sense that "we are one." From the nature of his post, I'm pretty sure this is what Trevelyan meant. Not that he would decide FOR his wife, but that he would decide WITH his wife.

 

[bluemax]

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: bluemax

Originally posted by: gigapet
If all abortion ended tommorow who is supposed to support and raise all these unwanted babies? What would be the effects on society?

Like I said before (and, of course, ignored) the waiting list for babies to adopt is miles long. Couples wait 10 years and more.

That's where the babies would go - to parents who DO want them, rather than the careless parents that don't.

Bullshit angelina jolie adopted like 3 kids in a year.

Yeah.... THAT's a logical statement. I'm sure everyone gets the level of service AJ gets - or does everyone have that kind of money too? Dang... I must've misplaced my free money.

 

[shadow9d9]

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: SlitheryDee

Originally posted by: Trevelyan

Originally posted by: Boztech
If your wife was drugged, raped, and became pregnant, would you really want her to carry out the term of her pregnancy?

Or if she was a juvenile diabetic and had about a 90% chance of kidney failure or going into DKA during birth and dieing or having other very serious complications with birth?

Honestly, and I know this is easy for me to say, because it hasn't happened to me...

My reaction would first be extreme anger at the person who did this to my wife. The process of forgiving that person would be a long road. I would probably be extremely depressed and horrified for quite some time, and would have some long, tear-filled talks with God.

But, I would still believe the right thing to do would be to keep the baby. This child growing inside my wife would not be guilty because of his father... this child would still be innocent, and to kill him for my sake or my wife's sake would be selfish, and wrong.

I would probably think it my right to take that life, considering the extreme trauma that was endured. But that would not be so.

The rape would be the tragedy, but the child does not have to be.

*in the distance, the singing of angels could be heard...*


Such a saintly statement.

YOUR right to take that life? In that hypothetical situation you wouldn't be subject to any of the real consequences (other than the obvious empathy you would feel towards your wife). Not the rape, not the bearing of a child or the constant reminder that her swelling belly and rapidly changing body chemistry were the result of a most-likely violent and brutal encounter with a man she didn't know. Yet you presume to make this choice for her.

As you said you might feel it "my right to take that life". You make no mention of your wife's feelings other than some vague mention of "extreme trauma that was endured".

And you end with the grand finale "But that would not be so". I am correct in assuming that you were the only one posting right? Seems to me that you just made a decision for someone else, if only in a hypothetical situation.


Make no mistake I think abortion is horrible. The first time I heard a description of a partial birth abortion I expressed nothing but frank disbelief, and after learning about the other methods I am equally disgusted by them. There is one thing that I won't do however, and that's to impose my "better judgement" on others.


This is a central point in the pro-choice mindset IMO. Currently we have the freedom to make mistakes and learn from them; to succeed and prosper because of the lessons we learned in life. We are the results of our successes and failures, our good decisions and our mistakes. The only thing that can stop us is to eliminate our choices. Even though some think that the legal avenues that are available to us are immoral or even evil, there is never a good reason to impose your "better judgement" on anyone else.

LOL, definately spoken like an unmarried person! You are busy arguing semantics, when I can tell you as a husband, it is obvious he was meaning making the choice together, with his wife, they way a couple with a healthy relationship should. Ironically enough though, you made a very powerful pro-life statement there: "there is never a good reason to impose your "better judgement" on anyone else." Of course this would also include babies in the womb.

In fact, that entire last paragraph is very good reasons for why abortions is so wrong. After reading it, it makes me a little angry at how people could just take that away from those aborted babies.

That is not a powerful pro-life statement because it would not include "babies in the womb" since I am sure he(along with I, for that matter, and many pro-choice people) do not consider a fetus to be a baby. You didn't seriously believe that when you typed that, right?

 

[shadow9d9]

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: Trevelyan

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: Trevelyan

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Tell you what, you worry about yourself and stop carring about what the rest of us do to other people mmmkay?

It's really none of your business.

Fixed.

See, that's the problem with that line of thinking. It totally assumes that abortion affects only the mother. It doesn't consider the child being aborted. It sidesteps the real issue.

Does it effect you?

I don't want murderers running around, but not just because I don't want to be killed by them.

Sweet! Apples and oranges! I like apples and oranges.

Oh yes, compairing murder to murder and murderers to murderers, oh yeah, the whole apples and oranges sidestep sound _really_ intelligent there.

It isn't comparing murderers to murderers because many people, if not most, do not consider a fetus to be a living human... therefore, these people, do not consider it murder. I could go around saying that you are murdering weeds when you pull them out of your backyard... and then say that if we don't allow murder of humans, we can't allow murder of weeds... Then I could say it is comparing murderers to murderers, like you...

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: bluemax

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: bluemax

Originally posted by: gigapet
If all abortion ended tommorow who is supposed to support and raise all these unwanted babies? What would be the effects on society?

Like I said before (and, of course, ignored) the waiting list for babies to adopt is miles long. Couples wait 10 years and more.

That's where the babies would go - to parents who DO want them, rather than the careless parents that don't.

Bullshit angelina jolie adopted like 3 kids in a year.

Yeah.... THAT's a logical statement. I'm sure everyone gets the level of service AJ gets - or does everyone have that kind of money too? Dang... I must've misplaced my free money.

yea and its the waiting list for babies that PEOPLE WANT. that is long. if it were so long in general we'd have no foster children or children that fall through the cracks.

It isn't comparing murderers to murderers because many people, if not most, do not consider a fetus to be a living human... therefore, these people, do not consider it murder. I could go around saying that you are murdering weeds when you pull them out of your backyard... and then say that if we don't allow murder of humans, we can't allow murder of weeds... Then I could say it is comparing murderers to murderers, like you...

yup, for some like peta eating animals is murder. and in some ways they have a case, a cow or pig has far more intelligence than a fetus thats for sure. why are their lives not sacred? mostly because they are tasty and because we are arrogant.. we draw the line at us because we believe our lives are more valuable then ours for our own selfish reasons. some of them call it a holocaust of animals. i mean its fine and all to beleive that, its even somewhat valid, but to force others to follow those beliefs? its not at all black and white, and not at all an arguement that pro lifers have won on the merits. they pretend they have the undeniable answer as if its religion, but they don't. its best to leave such choices up to the individual. it doesn't impose beliefs on others where as pro lifers just want to impose their beliefs on all.

 

[shadow9d9]

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: kt

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: exdeath

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Tell you what, you worry about yourself and stop carring about what the rest of us do mmmkay?

It's really none of your business.

:thumbsup:

That is such a rediculous statement, and only made by simpletons and dullards. By your own statement, you too would in fact be encroaching on what is "none of your business."

And if we really did follow that kind of logic, then we would not have laws or law enforcement at all since if it didn't happen to them (them as in cops and lawmakers) then it would be "none of their business" to get involved in.

Way to generalize a statement. And if you are going to use an example to generalize a statement, at least do it right. The business of cops and lawmakers IS to enforce the law. So it is THEIR business to get involved if a law is broken.

Yes, that is EXACTLY right, and in a democracy, it is up to the people to decide what those laws should be. Whether it be laws regarding stealing, or laws regarding killing, etc.

edit: ok, I realize there are some here who will probably not get what I was talking about here, so I will go ahead and point it out now, that I am talking about how it is "our business" because it is our responsibility to determine what abortion laws should be (that was a little bonus for you, nakedfrog ), just like it is the cops jobs to enforce those laws. Also thinks for really driving my point home, kt.

Majority of the people in this country support abortion...

 

[shadow9d9]

CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll. Jan. 20-22, 2006. N=1,006 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.


.

"Turning to abortion: Would you like to see the Supreme Court overturn its 1973 Roe versus Wade decision concerning abortion, or not?"


.
Yes, Overturn No,Not Overturn Unsure
% % %


1/20-22/06 25 66 9
7/7-10/05 28 63 9



Believe it or not, a majority of people are for abortion:http://www.pollingreport.com/abortion.htm

 

[Hyperblaze]

Abortion = Murder

Pro-Life = Giving Life

Pro-Choice = Poor Choice

There are consequences to every action you do.

I have heard of folks who have been raped and still give birth and give up baby for adoption.

They say that 1 in 4 babies are aborted. How would YOU like it if your parents had chosen to abort you?

edit: I have no problems telling a smoker he's putting another nail in the coffin by smoking a cig.

and I'd have no problems telling a girl who had an abortion that she's a murderer.