Such a poor argument for pro-choice. It doesn't affect me negatively if some parents chose to lock their infant in a room to be raised by a dog, yet I would chose to defend that kid with my life, even though it really is none of my business, nor would it hurt me if I never knew of it.
What it boils down to, is abortion is a complex issue, there are many valid points saying that it should be legal (and perhaps moral), and many valid points saying that it should be illegal, and is immoral.
Then who speaks for the unable? Tell me how did 9/11 negatively effect you personally if some thousands of people you don't know are killed. Why do most people care for the life of others even if they don't know them? Because we are human and value life. If we see life being destroyed somewhere around the world we become concerned.
I don't understand how any pro-choicer can say that "it is none of your business". It is everyone's business to stand up for the rights of those who will be violated. Most pro-life individuals see abortion as just plain and simple murder. How can you expect them not to become concerned?
Which side is your argument for again? Yes people should be responsible for their choices - but their kids shouldn't.
I'd like to see how many males would change their tune if males were the ones who got pregnant... I'd guess ~80% would pull a complete 180, with about 15% becoming a LOT more understanding.
You have it good as compared to many others. You have a doctor, you have a home and you have a wife, and most likely a caring family to back you. That is not the case with everyone else in the world.
Forcing people to live a lifestyle that you can afford and they cannot is wrong. It is as wrong as aborting that child.
Why is it better to put a child into the system, with the potential of never having parents and being a ward of the state until they are 18. That isn't much of a life, and many of thoes children don't go on to live wonderful lives.
I have aborted two of my own "children", neither I nor my gf feel a single ounce of guilt at this point.
So, I guess I'm an evil baby killing bastard, while you are a stand-up moral soldier willing to push his moral agenda on others.
That is only what the law says (and in certain countries). Law and reality don't always coincide. Most people would agree that a fetus is a life. Look at it from a moral standpoint not a legal one.
People don't become interested because of the legality of it but due to the moral situation. If I see a cuban on an inner tube coming towards the mainland should I not care if a shark gobbles him up because he is not a US citizen?
By that logic, you're as guilty as anyone; instead of posting this reply, you could have been busy impregnating women - consensual or otherwise - because not doing so leads to the same lack of lives that could have been.
The Christians (yes, I know not all or even a majority of them, not flaming religion here, calm down) who shove their religion down everyone's throat operate on much the same principle.
It was a bad analogy perhaps but I'm just trying to point out that everyone has a right to be concerned with those who are unable to have a voice that is all.
Great logic :roll: Those lives would never have existed (in fetus or otherwise) so it is a moot point. How can you honestly try to compare those situations? When people become concerned for fetus it is for a life that EXISTS (albeit dependant or otherwise) but nonetheless it IS... your logic is flawed.
Yeah they probably do. I'm not a Christian and I'm not pro-life (so I don't know) but rather just trying to make a point that everyone should be concerned about one another and human life.
I think everyone here is missing the real point here. The real question is, is the mother HOT? Because obviously if she is ugly she needs to get rid of it. If she's hot, she needs to keep it. We don't need anymore ugly people in this world.
Gunslinger08
Lifer
- Nov 18, 2001
- 13,234
- 2
- 81
I honestly fail to see the difference. I'm admittedly left-brained almost (many would say no 'almost' is needed) to a fault; I operate completely on logic and practicality. To me, there's no difference between a few cells forming and dying and a few cells never having formed, if they don't form to the point of becoming a sentient being and/or a being with whom others have an emotional attachment. In the latter case, of course, the 'others' with the attachment are the parent(s) and would not abort, and so the problem is solved. The new problem arises, of course, when the human desire for power and control takes over, as it has with Christianity, government, etc. Without abortion as an issue, I really think 98-100% of pro-lifers woud be militantly against some other societal norm - nuclear power, meat-eating, republicans/democrats, militant atheists or pro-religion, etc. Are all pro-choicers' beliefs based on religion? That question is honest; not a dig at all. Without religion I just fail to see how one can equate a few cells to a human being.
Gunslinger08
Lifer
- Nov 18, 2001
- 13,234
- 2
- 81
Talking about saving and caring for people's lives. You know how hard it is for people to go through these things. You're not making anyone's life better. You just got nothing to do with your sorry ass life thatyou got to mess with other peoples.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 407
-
Facebook
Twitter