|
Post by Cody™ on Jul 26, 2018 17:30:20 GMT
Me: “A fetus is a human being. Abortion is the killing of a human being. “ Me : "I don't care. There are things at stake more important than that." You : "Well then you're a poopy head! My feelings are hurt and I'm going to insult you! Booooo you! Booooo!" *runs away crying, unable to think of any counter argument* You: “A woman’s choice is more important than a babies life” Me: “You’re a deranged idiot!” You: “You’re just whining because I have different opinion to you..go ahead and prove me wrong then?!!!”
|
|
|
Post by 🌵 on Jul 26, 2018 17:30:39 GMT
Human life begins at conception. 'Potential life' can begin at conception. It has about an even chance. As many as 50% of all pregnancies end in miscarriage -- most often before a woman misses a menstrual period or even knows she is pregnant. About 15-25% of recognized pregnancies will end in a miscarriage. That's not really an argument against the view that human life begins at conception. It would just be that 50% of all humans die during pregnancy, often before the woman is even aware that she's pregnant. I'm quite happy to say that life begins at conception, that conception is the point at which a new biological organism is created. I'm still pro-choice though. For me it's just a matter of "her body, her choice", as the slogan goes. The status of the foetus is irrelevant. Even if the foetus had all the same mental capacities as an average adult human, it should still be legal to abort it in my view.
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Jul 26, 2018 17:32:14 GMT
Human beings are just clumps of cells more or less. Pro choice arguments don't involve arguing that the clumps of cells aren't human beings. The arguments have to do with properties the clumps of cells/human beings have at different points of development. A human being is a human being. We all go through the same developmental stages. Nobody should have the right to end the clump of cells/human beings life based on their lack of properties. Why not? According to what objective moral standard? Don’t murder the fetus and in time it will obtain those properties just like everyone else. Termination of a fetus is not “murder”. It’s use of pejorative, inflammatory, and judgemental language like this that turns pro-choicers off of even having a conversation with you conservatives. You can’t take your emotions out of the discussion long enough to argue logically. Your entire position is nothing more than an emotional appeal to religion. If the mother doesn’t feel she can support the child then the ethical thing to do is give it up for adoption. The ethical thing according to YOU, that is. But I believe that it is unethical to force a teenage girl who was raped by her uncle and became pregnant to be forced to deliver a child she’s never intended to have. How is forcing a pregnancy that was the result of an incestruous rape to term “ethical”?
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Jul 26, 2018 17:33:14 GMT
If it's 'common sense' it should be easily explainable. If you had any common sense I wouldn’t need to explain it to you. Seeing as you don’t I feel it would be futile even trying to.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2018 17:34:49 GMT
If it's 'common sense' it should be easily explainable. If you had any common sense I wouldn’t need to explain it to you. Seeing as you don’t I feel it would be futile even trying to. Wow, resorting to fallacy and ad hominem... you really can't explain it, can you? Perhaps you could share a link that would explain it? Do you want to be taken seriously on the subject?
|
|
|
Post by Cinemachinery on Jul 26, 2018 17:35:21 GMT
I've yet to hear anyone explain how the rights of an unthinking, non-sentient, growing fetus that relies on a host body for nourishment to reach a state of autonomy overrides those of the thinking, sentient body doing the carrying. Much as I find abortion a tragedy, my feelings just don't override the woman's rights. Until then: be still, Cody.
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Jul 26, 2018 17:35:22 GMT
If it's 'common sense' it should be easily explainable. Saying that something isCommon sense is the go-to answer when you believe in something that you CAN’T explain. It’s a way to avoid having to explain it. “common sense” implies that it doesn’t require explanation, and that you are stupid for even challenging the person to explain it.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jul 26, 2018 17:38:51 GMT
A human being is a human being. We all go through the same developmental stages. Nobody should have the right to end the clump of cells/human beings life based on their lack of properties. Why not? According to what objective moral standard? Don’t murder the fetus and in time it will obtain those properties just like everyone else. Termination of a fetus is not “murder”. It’s use of pejorative, inflammatory, and judgemental language like this that turns pro-choicers off of even having a conversation with you conservatives. You can’t take your emotions out of the discussion long enough to argue logically. Your entire position is nothing more than an emotional appeal to religion. If the mother doesn’t feel she can support the child then the ethical thing to do is give it up for adoption. The ethical thing according to YOU, that is. But I believe that it is unethical to force a teenage girl who was raped by her uncle and became pregnant to be forced to deliver a child she’s never intended to have. How is forcing a pregnancy that was the result of an incestruous rape to term “ethical”? Just clarifying (for anyone else reading the thread) that I didn't say those last two things you responded to. That was Cody.
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Jul 26, 2018 17:50:17 GMT
captainbryce For the same reason no one should have the right to end human beings life after it’s birthed. We’ve been over this. Killing an innocent human being is murder plain and simple. Making it legal doesn’t make it any less immoral. Slavery was legal a couple of hundred years ago. So was killing Jews during Nazi Germany. You support the murder of preborn babies. You’re in no position to call anyone else’s logic into question. If you honestly believe killing a innocent baby is less unethical than forcing a woman to give birth to a child she didn’t plan to have then you really need to reassess your own code of ethics.
|
|
|
Post by general313 on Jul 26, 2018 17:53:41 GMT
In my opinion I agree that that is pretty nonsensical, but I also think that picking the moment of conception as a magical moment is also nonsensical. As for "before", how about you explain why the Catholic church is or was opposed to condoms? I am not a Catholic. You’ll have to take it up with the RCC. Neither am I. I'm just using them as an example of different groups applying different and arbitrary standards of where to draw the line. In your case you've stated that "intuition" backs up your claim, but are unable to provide any argument beyond that. Intuition is largely a matter of opinion and clearly different groups have different ideas on the topic.
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Jul 26, 2018 17:59:58 GMT
And how do you know this? Common sense. If you think that's 'common sense' then common sense isn't as common as you think it is. 'Common sense'--the fool's term for ignorance.
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Jul 26, 2018 19:43:16 GMT
You’re in no position to call anyone else’s logic into question. I feel the same way about people who want to take women's choice away about going through with a pregnancy or not. If you honestly believe killing a innocent baby is less unethical than forcing a woman to give birth to a child she didn’t plan to have then you really need to reassess your own code of ethics. No. You do, if you honestly believe that forcing a woman to give birth to a child she didn’t plan to have is less unethical then killing a fetus. See how it works? Just stating how unethical something supposedly is, without backing it up with rational arguments, is not going to convince rational people. And links to YouTube videos without transcripts aren't rational arguments.
|
|
Lugh
Sophomore
@dcu
Posts: 848
Likes: 77
|
Post by Lugh on Jul 26, 2018 20:31:37 GMT
I hate egoism and individualism. It's one of the reasons I am pro-life. I am a Communist about pretty much everything.
Autonomy is very overrated, control is neccessary a lot of the time
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jul 26, 2018 21:03:46 GMT
And how do you know this? Common sense. LOL
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jul 26, 2018 21:10:38 GMT
'Potential life' can begin at conception. It has about an even chance. As many as 50% of all pregnancies end in miscarriage -- most often before a woman misses a menstrual period or even knows she is pregnant. About 15-25% of recognized pregnancies will end in a miscarriage. That's not really an argument against the view that human life begins at conception. It would just be that 50% of all humans die during pregnancy, often before the woman is even aware that she's pregnant. I'm quite happy to say that life begins at conception, that conception is the point at which a new biological organism is created. I'm still pro-choice though. For me it's just a matter of "her body, her choice", as the slogan goes. The status of the foetus is irrelevant. Even if the foetus had all the same mental capacities as an average adult human, it should still be legal to abort it in my view. I agree. I wasn't actually proposing it as such, and my post is an afterthought following on from the prior post of mine to Cody which asked him why his God ( because he believes that God is involved in everything ) causes miscarriages. My point was more that since the percentages were so high, one could call it life beginning at conception, butt in reality it is a 'potential' life without a preordained future. A potential life has to come through obstacles to achieve life, so at this very early stage ( and I am only talking about first trimester)abortion can be one more obstacle similar to that which Cody's God imposes routinely. BTW I am not pro-abortion, I have never had one and never would butt that doesn't stop me being pro-Choice for OTHERS which is what Cody and co seem to forget. Telling others what to do seems to be the 'Christian' thing!
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Jul 26, 2018 21:24:54 GMT
You’re in no position to call anyone else’s logic into question. I feel the same way about people who want to take women's choice away about going through with a pregnancy or not. If you honestly believe killing a innocent baby is less unethical than forcing a woman to give birth to a child she didn’t plan to have then you really need to reassess your own code of ethics. No. You do, if you honestly believe that forcing a woman to give birth to a child she didn’t plan to have is less unethical then killing a fetus. See how it works? Just stating how unethical something supposedly is, without backing it up with rational arguments, is not going to convince rational people. And links to YouTube videos without transcripts aren't rational arguments. Murdering somebody is far more immoral than being forced to give birth to them. It’s not even close. Why should the baby have to face the death penalty for her father’s crime?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2018 21:28:45 GMT
Me : "I don't care. There are things at stake more important than that." You : "Well then you're a poopy head! My feelings are hurt and I'm going to insult you! Booooo you! Booooo!" *runs away crying, unable to think of any counter argument* You: “A woman’s choice is more important than a babies life” Me: “You’re a deranged idiot!” You: “You’re just whining because I have different opinion to you..go ahead and prove me wrong then?!!!” Exactly so. Except you missed the part where you then fail to prove me wrong, and so run away.
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Jul 26, 2018 21:35:08 GMT
You: “A woman’s choice is more important than a babies life” Me: “You’re a deranged idiot!” You: “You’re just whining because I have different opinion to you..go ahead and prove me wrong then?!!!” Exactly so. Except you missed the part where you then fail to prove me wrong, and so run away. You somehow believe a woman’s choice is more important than a babies right to life. You’ve proven right there that you’re a deranged idiot. What more proof is needed?
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Jul 26, 2018 21:46:45 GMT
Exactly so. Except you missed the part where you then fail to prove me wrong, and so run away. You somehow believe a woman’s choice is more important than a babies right to life. You’ve proven right there that you’re a deranged idiot. What more proof is needed? Some proof that you aren't a deranged idiot might be nice .
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jul 26, 2018 21:47:30 GMT
I feel the same way about people who want to take women's choice away about going through with a pregnancy or not. No. You do, if you honestly believe that forcing a woman to give birth to a child she didn’t plan to have is less unethical then killing a fetus. See how it works? Just stating how unethical something supposedly is, without backing it up with rational arguments, is not going to convince rational people. And links to YouTube videos without transcripts aren't rational arguments. Murdering somebody is far more immoral than being forced to give birth to them. It’s not even close. Why should the baby have to face the death penalty for her father’s crime? Did you mention that to God? You know....about that whole miscarriage thing with your God murdering up to half the 'new lives at conception'? What was his answer and excuse?
|
|