Question about pro-lifers

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: Jellomancer

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: Jellomancer

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: Jellomancer

Originally posted by: datalink7

Originally posted by: Jellomancer
Why do they always bring religion into their arguments? Seriously.. don't they realize that preaching about stuff that has nothing to do with abortion is not going to help their cause? Besides that, it belittles the issue to be about some religious morals rather than a philosophical issue.

I'm an atheist and I am prolife.

Ouch... there goes your theory.

I'm agnostic and I am prolife. What theory?

I'm atheist and pro choice... must be nice being a man and sitting on your high horse while the woman makes her choice... huh?

Maybe the woman should choose to use birth control rather than commit murder.

Maybe a woman should choose and not you?

Maybe the woman made the choice for a reason? and maybe you should have used rubber and understand that it is NOT ONLY the womans resposibility... If you ever grow up and become a man... you might understand that...

No, i don't think this is about opinions, unless you ARE the woman in question...

I didn't say it should be the woman's responsibility. But the comment was about the woman choosing, and so was my response. If a couple does not want babies, it should do everything in its power not to, short of killing a person that is not considered a person just because it is biologically dependent on another person.

You're a bit idealistic... a couple could produce a child, but NOTHING says that the couple will care for it...

I really don't care about the arguments why or why not.. it's the womans choice... period... That is my opinion... that the woman, who IS the one who has to carry the child, SHOULD be the one to decide... nobody else...

I realize this is going nowhere, it's a question whether you should be allowed to decide what another person does with her life... and that is always wrong...

i have said what i wanted... so i'm out of here...

have a great day...

 

[BatmanNate]

I'm out for the evening, I have work in the morning.

Thank you Amused, Gopunk, and Jellomancer for your insight on the topic.

Snapit, I pity you.

Goodnight, all!

 

[0roo0roo]

you seem to have a strange definition of a person. one that is based on nothing but dna. a 2 cell egg is a person? no conscious thought possible yet it is a person?

i think not.

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: BatmanNate

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: BatmanNate

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: Jellomancer

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: Jellomancer

Originally posted by: datalink7

Originally posted by: Jellomancer
Why do they always bring religion into their arguments? Seriously.. don't they realize that preaching about stuff that has nothing to do with abortion is not going to help their cause? Besides that, it belittles the issue to be about some religious morals rather than a philosophical issue.

I'm an atheist and I am prolife.

Ouch... there goes your theory.

I'm agnostic and I am prolife. What theory?

I'm atheist and pro choice... must be nice being a man and sitting on your high horse while the woman makes her choice... huh?

Maybe the woman should choose to use birth control rather than commit murder.

Maybe a woman should choose and not you?

Maybe the woman made the choice for a reason? and maybe you should have used rubber and understand that it is NOT ONLY the womans resposibility... If you ever grow up and become a man... you might understand that...

No, i don't think this is about opinions, unless you ARE the woman in question...

Nobody implied that is was the woman's responsibility. It is clearly the responsibility of all parties involved, and instead of instulting us based on your assumptions you should read the topic at hand before entering the discussion.

I did... and again you are responding to a post that i did not write to you and then act surprised when the words don't fit...

If you find it insulting... then figure out why... were there any insults directed towards you?

So if a man has been irresponsible, a woman has to live with it?

Ovbiously the comment wasn't directed at me, however mine was directed at you. Insulting the person who wrote the coment is not going to gain you any ground. And it's not just a man being irresponsible if no birth control is used, because that is the responsibility of BOTH parties involved. Get that into your head.

I got that into my head... what you haven't got into yours is that the WOMAN has to carry the child, if she didn't, you would have a point...

I say that NOBODY should ever have sex at all, that would be the most responsible thing to do... no abortions, no birth control... silly argument, isn't it, just like yours...

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: BatmanNate
I'm out for the evening, I have work in the morning.

Thank you Amused, Gopunk, and Jellomancer for your insight on the topic.

Snapit, I pity you.

Goodnight, all!

Awww, maybe you will grow up someday too, then you will realize that life really isn't as simple as you trying to make it, and that deciding what other people should do is silly...

Maybe...

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: BatmanNate

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: BatmanNate
I agree with you guys. Adoption is definately the best course of action if you're not able to provide adequately for the child, and I wholeheartedly support that. But Gopunk, when you say that abortion is best for all parties involved, you're neglected the child. Even a difficult life is better than no life at all. Don't you know anyone that was grown up the hard way with a messed up family or in poverty but has more character to show for it? It is not our choice to make, the child has a right to live be it for better or worse, through adoption or through natural parenting. Any way you look at it, it's better than death.

which would be a fine arguement if children could grow to viability in petri dishes

as such, they aren't. you cannot force a woman to be an incubator to a seed.

as for your assertion that many people grow stronger from poverty or hardship, well just as many slip through the cracks. makes it a pointless arguement.

You entirely missed my point. I realize that it is not always the case that hardship creates character, in fact it is not even usually the case, it is rare. However, whether the person grows up to be a criminal or an altruist the fact remains that it is human life. As that point, the person is innocent and cannot be judged for a life they have not lived. Whether or not you think they'll lead what you deem to be an acceptable life, the fact remains that they are a person, flesh and blood, just like you or me. They've no less right to live because you are too cowardly to at least wait out 9 months for adoption.

actually you missed the point, i was just pointing out that your arguement was weak.

and then now you go on to try and make your point based on the assumption that whatever there is after the point of conception is a full person which is nothing more then opinion. then you go on to call a womans choice cowardly based on this assumption.

based on logic, everything else is shaky if one of your premises is not fully supported.

 

[datalink7]

SnapIT says:

I realize this is going nowhere, it's a question whether you should be allowed to decide what another person does with her life... and that is always wrong...

Awww, maybe you will grow up someday too, then you will realize that life really isn't as simple as you trying to make it, and that deciding what other people should do is silly...

Contradictions are cool, aren't they

 

[Dragnov]

I HATE the argument that a guy has no right in the say of his childs own well being. If thats the way you want it, then a guy shouldn't pay child support for a pregnant mother right? I mean, it's her own body then she should take care of it.

I'd say the woman has more say, but to exclude the male from any decision regarding the chlid is absurd.

I am pro-life. Agnostic.

I can understand abortion in the case of rape, death of mother, etc. But to prevent a life just because you were irresponsible tards? No thank you. Of course, being born into adoption and state control ain't that grand either, but thats a different story.

 

[0roo0roo]

why is this a religious issue? because religious people see things in black and white. they are right, you are wrong, why? you don't have to really explain faith they'll just force their ideas on you.

i don't think it was always the position of the church either


religious view = everything after conception is a full person, therefore it is murder to kill.

problems? definition of person unsupported. usage of concepts such as soul not good basis for legislation. religious people don't really know when souls are imbued. if souls are imbued at the point of conception, a large number of souls have been wasted in miscarriages. most women don't notice their miscarriages, just a heavy flow sometimes. What of twins? or triplets? they split off after the time of conception. if a soul is really imbued at conception, does it get shared? how do you know?


choice view = after conception the few cells present are just that, its a developing egg. no real consciousness, and at an early stage strangely fish like in similarity. although it is charitible to bring to term, forcing a woman into slavery to anther organism because of your beliefs is unacceptable. perhaps a woman only wants to produce wanted children..who are you to tell her what she can do with her body.

since its an eternally unanwerable question, choice gives you just that. you can choose to follow your reliigon or whatever you want.

religious people(pro lifers) in their zeal want to force their view on everyone. they want to legislate their view of morality.

thats why they spew rhetoric calling people who have valid disagreements with them murderers.

 

[BatmanNate]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
why is this a religious issue? because religious people see things in black and white. they are right, you are wrong, why? you don't have to really explain faith they'll just force their ideas on you.

i don't think it was always the position of the church either


religious view = everything after conception is a full person, therefore it is murder to kill.

problems? definition of person unsupported. usage of concepts such as soul not good basis for legislation. religious people don't really know when souls are imbued. if souls are imbued at the point of conception, a large number of souls have been wasted in miscarriages. most women don't notice their miscarriages, just a heavy flow sometimes. What of twins? or triplets? they split off after the time of conception. if a soul is really imbued at conception, does it get shared? how do you know?


choice view = after conception the few cells present are just that, its a developing egg. no real consciousness, and at an early stage strangely fish like in similarity. although it is charitible to bring to term, forcing a woman into slavery to anther organism because of your beliefs is unacceptable. perhaps a woman only wants to produce wanted children..who are you to tell her what she can do with her body.

since its an eternally unanwerable question, choice gives you just that. you can choose to follow your reliigon or whatever you want.

religious people(pro lifers) in their zeal want to force their view on everyone. they want to legislate their view of morality.

thats why they spew rhetoric calling people who have valid disagreements with them murderers.

Whenever I take Ephedrine, sleep hangs over my head taunting me.



0roo0roo,

How come you have so much angst towards religion? Stating that "religious people(pro lifers) in their zeal want to force their view on everyone" is a pointeless generalization based upon personal bias. I am an agnostic as well as pro-life, so you can stash your assumptions as to the origins of my views on this subject. I intend to force my views upon you no more than you do yours upon me, assuming that you are of age and a registered voter in this country.

 

[BatmanNate]

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: BatmanNate
I'm out for the evening, I have work in the morning.

Thank you Amused, Gopunk, and Jellomancer for your insight on the topic.

Snapit, I pity you.

Goodnight, all!

Awww, maybe you will grow up someday too, then you will realize that life really isn't as simple as you trying to make it, and that deciding what other people should do is silly...

Maybe...

When the argument lacks substance, feel free to substitute character attacks. You should be a politician.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: BatmanNate

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
why is this a religious issue? because religious people see things in black and white. they are right, you are wrong, why? you don't have to really explain faith they'll just force their ideas on you.

i don't think it was always the position of the church either


religious view = everything after conception is a full person, therefore it is murder to kill.

problems? definition of person unsupported. usage of concepts such as soul not good basis for legislation. religious people don't really know when souls are imbued. if souls are imbued at the point of conception, a large number of souls have been wasted in miscarriages. most women don't notice their miscarriages, just a heavy flow sometimes. What of twins? or triplets? they split off after the time of conception. if a soul is really imbued at conception, does it get shared? how do you know?


choice view = after conception the few cells present are just that, its a developing egg. no real consciousness, and at an early stage strangely fish like in similarity. although it is charitible to bring to term, forcing a woman into slavery to anther organism because of your beliefs is unacceptable. perhaps a woman only wants to produce wanted children..who are you to tell her what she can do with her body.

since its an eternally unanwerable question, choice gives you just that. you can choose to follow your reliigon or whatever you want.

religious people(pro lifers) in their zeal want to force their view on everyone. they want to legislate their view of morality.

thats why they spew rhetoric calling people who have valid disagreements with them murderers.

Whenever I take Ephedrine, sleep hangs over my head taunting me.



0roo0roo,

How come you have so much angst towards religion? Stating that "religious people(pro lifers) in their zeal want to force their view on everyone" is a pointeless generalization based upon personal bias. I am an agnostic as well as pro-life, so you can stash your assumptions as to the origins of my views on this subject. I intend to force my views upon you no more than you do yours upon me, assuming that you are of age and a registered voter in this country.

i specified the prolife section of the religious people for a reason, not all religious people are rabid pro lifers. but it just so happens the most rabid pro lifers are religious, not agnostic or athiest. the problem is, they really do want to force their views on everyone.

 

[Chaotic42]

Philisophocally- Against
Morally- Against
Legally- For

It's not my place to dictate morals to people. It boils down to whether or not you consider a fetus as a human being. I do, the law doesn't.

 

[BatmanNate]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: BatmanNate

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
why is this a religious issue? because religious people see things in black and white. they are right, you are wrong, why? you don't have to really explain faith they'll just force their ideas on you.

i don't think it was always the position of the church either


religious view = everything after conception is a full person, therefore it is murder to kill.

problems? definition of person unsupported. usage of concepts such as soul not good basis for legislation. religious people don't really know when souls are imbued. if souls are imbued at the point of conception, a large number of souls have been wasted in miscarriages. most women don't notice their miscarriages, just a heavy flow sometimes. What of twins? or triplets? they split off after the time of conception. if a soul is really imbued at conception, does it get shared? how do you know?


choice view = after conception the few cells present are just that, its a developing egg. no real consciousness, and at an early stage strangely fish like in similarity. although it is charitible to bring to term, forcing a woman into slavery to anther organism because of your beliefs is unacceptable. perhaps a woman only wants to produce wanted children..who are you to tell her what she can do with her body.

since its an eternally unanwerable question, choice gives you just that. you can choose to follow your reliigon or whatever you want.

religious people(pro lifers) in their zeal want to force their view on everyone. they want to legislate their view of morality.

thats why they spew rhetoric calling people who have valid disagreements with them murderers.

Whenever I take Ephedrine, sleep hangs over my head taunting me.



0roo0roo,

How come you have so much angst towards religion? Stating that "religious people(pro lifers) in their zeal want to force their view on everyone" is a pointeless generalization based upon personal bias. I am an agnostic as well as pro-life, so you can stash your assumptions as to the origins of my views on this subject. I intend to force my views upon you no more than you do yours upon me, assuming that you are of age and a registered voter in this country.

i specified the prolife section of the religious people for a reason, not all religious people are rabid pro lifers. but it just so happens the most rabid pro lifers are religious, not agnostic or athiest. the problem is, they really do want to force their views on everyone.

That's a very dangerous assertion. Some religious activists do, as do some athiest. Just because a person is religious and prolife does not mean they will force their veiws upon you. The idea of forcing a viewpoint upon someone is a tool for the uneducated, regardless of religion or stance.

 

[datalink7]

Originally posted by: Chaotic42
Philisophocally- Against
Morally- Against
Legally- For

It's not my place to dictate morals to people. It boils down to whether or not you consider a fetus as a human being. I do, the law doesn't.

So you wouldn't be for changing the law?

 

[Chaotic42]

Originally posted by: datalink7

So you wouldn't be for changing the law?

Not really. People will just go to other countries to get it done, or buy pills on the street, or do something even worse like try to do it themselves. I'd rather it get done in a hospital than on the street.

I would be for changing people's minds about abortion by talking to them though. Let them know about alternatives like adoption.

 

[datalink7]

Originally posted by: Chaotic42

Originally posted by: datalink7

So you wouldn't be for changing the law?

Not really. People will just go to other countries to get it done, or buy pills on the street, or do something even worse like try to do it themselves. I'd rather it get done in a hospital than on the street.

I would be for changing people's minds about abortion by talking to them though. Let them know about alternatives like adoption.

So you are probably against drug laws then.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: BatmanNate

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: BatmanNate

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
why is this a religious issue? because religious people see things in black and white. they are right, you are wrong, why? you don't have to really explain faith they'll just force their ideas on you.

i don't think it was always the position of the church either


religious view = everything after conception is a full person, therefore it is murder to kill.

problems? definition of person unsupported. usage of concepts such as soul not good basis for legislation. religious people don't really know when souls are imbued. if souls are imbued at the point of conception, a large number of souls have been wasted in miscarriages. most women don't notice their miscarriages, just a heavy flow sometimes. What of twins? or triplets? they split off after the time of conception. if a soul is really imbued at conception, does it get shared? how do you know?


choice view = after conception the few cells present are just that, its a developing egg. no real consciousness, and at an early stage strangely fish like in similarity. although it is charitible to bring to term, forcing a woman into slavery to anther organism because of your beliefs is unacceptable. perhaps a woman only wants to produce wanted children..who are you to tell her what she can do with her body.

since its an eternally unanwerable question, choice gives you just that. you can choose to follow your reliigon or whatever you want.

religious people(pro lifers) in their zeal want to force their view on everyone. they want to legislate their view of morality.

thats why they spew rhetoric calling people who have valid disagreements with them murderers.

Whenever I take Ephedrine, sleep hangs over my head taunting me.



0roo0roo,

How come you have so much angst towards religion? Stating that "religious people(pro lifers) in their zeal want to force their view on everyone" is a pointeless generalization based upon personal bias. I am an agnostic as well as pro-life, so you can stash your assumptions as to the origins of my views on this subject. I intend to force my views upon you no more than you do yours upon me, assuming that you are of age and a registered voter in this country.

i specified the prolife section of the religious people for a reason, not all religious people are rabid pro lifers. but it just so happens the most rabid pro lifers are religious, not agnostic or athiest. the problem is, they really do want to force their views on everyone.

That's a very dangerous assertion. Some religious activists do, as do some athiest. Just because a person is religious and prolife does not mean they will force their veiws upon you. The idea of forcing a viewpoint upon someone is a tool for the uneducated, regardless of religion or stance.

its not dangerous, its simply the position the most powerful pro life groups in the US hold. they want to ban all abortion. its simple as that.

in other words, religious people that don't force their views on you don't really belong to that group, by your definition they are pro choice.

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: datalink7
SnapIT says:

I realize this is going nowhere, it's a question whether you should be allowed to decide what another person does with her life... and that is always wrong...

Awww, maybe you will grow up someday too, then you will realize that life really isn't as simple as you trying to make it, and that deciding what other people should do is silly...

Contradictions are cool, aren't they

ehhh... maybe you know something i don't... or you're just tired... but that was no contradiction...

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: BatmanNate

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: BatmanNate
I'm out for the evening, I have work in the morning.

Thank you Amused, Gopunk, and Jellomancer for your insight on the topic.

Snapit, I pity you.

Goodnight, all!

Awww, maybe you will grow up someday too, then you will realize that life really isn't as simple as you trying to make it, and that deciding what other people should do is silly...

Maybe...

When the argument lacks substance, feel free to substitute character attacks. You should be a politician.

LOL, look who's talking...

It's the womans choice, what gives YOU the right to choose for her?

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: datalink7

Originally posted by: Chaotic42

Originally posted by: datalink7

So you wouldn't be for changing the law?

Not really. People will just go to other countries to get it done, or buy pills on the street, or do something even worse like try to do it themselves. I'd rather it get done in a hospital than on the street.

I would be for changing people's minds about abortion by talking to them though. Let them know about alternatives like adoption.

So you are probably against drug laws then.

Skipping from one point to the other makes your whole argument worthless, stick to one point... i didn't think that drugs included fetuses or babies... but... maybe, again, you know something i don't...

 

[datalink7]

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: datalink7
SnapIT says:

I realize this is going nowhere, it's a question whether you should be allowed to decide what another person does with her life... and that is always wrong...

Awww, maybe you will grow up someday too, then you will realize that life really isn't as simple as you trying to make it, and that deciding what other people should do is silly...

Contradictions are cool, aren't they

ehhh... maybe you know something i don't... or you're just tired... but that was no contradiction...

First you say something is always wrong.

Then, when somebody else tries to do the same thing, you say life isn't as simple as that.

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: Gr1mL0cK
I HATE the argument that a guy has no right in the say of his childs own well being. If thats the way you want it, then a guy shouldn't pay child support for a pregnant mother right? I mean, it's her own body then she should take care of it.

I'd say the woman has more say, but to exclude the male from any decision regarding the chlid is absurd.

I am pro-life. Agnostic.

I can understand abortion in the case of rape, death of mother, etc. But to prevent a life just because you were irresponsible tards? No thank you. Of course, being born into adoption and state control ain't that grand either, but thats a different story.

I am pro choice... period...

When you are a pregnant woman... you decide for yourself, until then, what gives YOU the right to decide over her destiny?

 

[datalink7]

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: Gr1mL0cK
I HATE the argument that a guy has no right in the say of his childs own well being. If thats the way you want it, then a guy shouldn't pay child support for a pregnant mother right? I mean, it's her own body then she should take care of it.

I'd say the woman has more say, but to exclude the male from any decision regarding the chlid is absurd.

I am pro-life. Agnostic.

I can understand abortion in the case of rape, death of mother, etc. But to prevent a life just because you were irresponsible tards? No thank you. Of course, being born into adoption and state control ain't that grand either, but thats a different story.

I am pro choice... period...

When you are a pregnant woman... you decide for yourself, until then, what gives YOU the right to decide over her destiny?

It is the babies desitny that pro-lifers are argueing about. What gives YOU the right to decide its destiny?

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: datalink7

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: datalink7
SnapIT says:

I realize this is going nowhere, it's a question whether you should be allowed to decide what another person does with her life... and that is always wrong...

Awww, maybe you will grow up someday too, then you will realize that life really isn't as simple as you trying to make it, and that deciding what other people should do is silly...

Contradictions are cool, aren't they

ehhh... maybe you know something i don't... or you're just tired... but that was no contradiction...

First you say something is always wrong.

Then, when somebody else tries to do the same thing, you say life isn't as simple as that.

First i say that deciding over another persons life is wrong... then when somebody else is trying to tell me that it's right and i say he's wrong...

I really don't get your point... why don't you read it again...