Dawkins and "The Great Tim Tebow Fallacy" (re: pro-life advertisement)

My issue has always been, who cares what other people do?Why is there even an argument? It's fake. It is not sincere. People don't care about the mother, the guy who got here pregnant, what happens to her/their life after, if she has insurance, a place to live, any dependances. All they give their opinion on is the abortion it self. Why?If you have no reason to even think about the life of another human being, why concern yourself with that human being when it is pregnant?Ignore them as you will ignore them the rest of their life and their life leading up to them being pregnant. It's so fake to justify these abortion discussions with self-righteous bullshit.Has anyone who is pro-life ever tracked the rest of the babies life to see how it did it's first day of school, or when it got sick, or when it needed food, or shelter, or any other part of a babies life? No. You went on about your day ignoring every other human being you come in contact with. Well, in my humble opinion, we should just keep ignoring them.Quit! It's fake!- Oni

And I'll play, Oni, a mild tempered individual with with a huge penis. Yea, but only because it could affect you as well. That's why we care about things, self-presevation. It's selfishness that wants us to protect freedoms, not concern for other individuals. Nope. Not at all. I am however concerned for my well being and those of my DNA's (kids). I want to protect them and myself from being murder too, so I want laws to cover that.Guess what, someone just die in America, who cares? Really, do you? Oops, someone just died again, still care?Death is of no concern to me unless it involves me, my family or friends - they are the only ones I have a bond with. No, I just don't care. I get on with my life not concerning myself with the lives of anyone else, or the death of anyone else for that matter - except in the cases I mention above. And that's how everyone for the most part is. Lets be honest. It's not, I don't care about abortions either. Have one everyday what do I care? How does that affect my life? What do I care what some chic in Maine did with her collection of cells in her body?Again, I'm just being openly honest. You, and everyone else, could care less about the individual that's pregnant, why care about the fetus? It's fake sincerity. I don't care either way, I don't get pregnant. The only thing I like about pro-choice is that it gives individuals the right to choose. I'm pro-choice on anything. Drugs = pro-choice. Gay marriage = pro-choice. Euthanasia = pro-choice.Why? Cause I believe people are responsible enough to make their own choices without my irrelevant opinion. In cases where they can't, then some family member who can make a responsible choice for the person. I personally couldn't care less.- Oni

First, I'd like to point out that you caimed to be having fun with my member. Well (1) no one said anything about the dad not getting a choice, you're assuming that. I was part of a decision to abort, I got a choice in the matter. So lets not focus on the dad and assume, at least for this conversation, that everyone gets a choice.So it leaves the (what you chose to call) baby, but lets call it a fetus, make me and my huge penis happy.Fact is, the fetus gets no choice. It gets no choice in anything. And you don't care about it either, you go all day not even thinking about it the poor thing.I argue for real human beings, living life here on earth with the rest of us, who suffer under tyranny and oppression - it's the oppressive measure and tyranical control that concerns me, because, that kind of shit can spread and hurt me as well. I've seen you argue against them in some threads, where is your humanity then? Or is it just the fetus' that warm your heart?What I'm saying is, just like you don't care about the Iraqi who lost his life an hour ago, or the Palestinian woman who lost her life and was pregnant a month ago, lets not care about a fetus in some random persons womb that's getting aborted.Why show sincerity for one thing but not the other? There are ways to get through this logically and I'll address them further in the post. You missed my point. It's the whole package (no pun intended ).I like living in a society where murder is not ok, because I can be murdered in a society that allows it. Also, my kids can be murdered as well. I like measures to be taken to prevent this. The plus side is that the laws also protect everyone else because curiously enough, most, if not everyone I've ever met, likes living in this type of society too. It's like we're all trying to protect our own. I wouldn't destroy my DNA at this point in my life. I would not have an abortion. That would be my choice. However, I wouldn't expect you to care about my fetus whether I did or didn't choose to abort it. But can't you see how this type of a society would affect me? I would be concerned with my family and myself before anyone else. This concern for my family and self is also shared by everyone else. So, since we all live together in this society, it covers everyone within it even though the reasons for it are selfish. Yes. But I don't share this same concern for a fetus in someones womb. I don't see them as anything until they're born. I can't experience them till then. However, for my own fetus in my ladies womb, I am connected to it and would consider it something because I am experiencing it. That's what she said! - Michael Scott Yeah of course I'm entitled to something - an opinion on the matter. But I recognize that the woman's opinion is the deciding factor. I'm not carrying the fetus, it's not my body that it will use to incubate, I don't have to give birth - if it affects me to a lesser degree wouldn't her opinion be the one that matters a bit more?When it's out and I'm physically with the child then all opinions are equal. No. White people watched and waited for justice. Black people watched and waited for OJ to go free. Everyone took it personally. I think it's different. We're talking about a fetus in a womb and people living on earth (and here's the key factor) independent of a life support.The fetus is subject to the wishes of the host, we the people are not subject to the wishes of anyone else, we are true individuals. Exactly. This has nothing to do with abortion, this has to do with establishing what an "individual" is.For this I'll send you to Stile's post where he gives the definition for "alive". Message 4

quote:

---

UNIFORM DETERMINATION OF (human) LIFE (rev 1):
1. [Determination of Life.] An individual who experiences both...
(1) the continued operation of circulatory and respiratory functions, and
(2) the continued operation of any functions of the (entire) brain, including the brain stem,
...is alive.
A determination of life should be made in accordance with accepted medical standards.

---

And I agree with the conditions Stile gives:

quote:

---

This allows possible abortions for the following reasons:
-it is early in the pregnancy and you do not want to go through child-birth for whatever reason
-you were raped, regardless of how far along the pregnancy is
-the baby's birth will place a significant risk on the life of the mother, regardless of how far along the pregnancy is

​

This allows for possible refusal of abortions for the following reasons:
-it is late in the pregnancy and birthing the baby will not cause any significant risk to the mother's health

​

No doctor would be allowed to refuse to do an abortion because "they don't want to" (or "for religious reasons"... if you prefer). The would have to document the reasons why they refuse an abortion in exactly the same way they are required to document the reasons they saved Person A over Person B in a triage situation.

---

That covers your concern of "someone's freedom." If we don't legally have a "someone" then no freedoms are violated.But again, lets not make this a concern for a fetus because we don't care about that. We care about the freedoms that we value. Yes. Because of the reasons I state above, and under the conditions that Stile set up. I thought he had the best post in this thread.- Oni

Wtf?! - Oni

Do you honestly think it would be best for the human race to give birth to every single conceived fetus?Don't you think that natural abortions help control our numbers that are ever increasing?Are you simply stating that if it happens naturally it's cool, but if someone makes the decision to end it on their own terms it's not cool? What is the point of that?- Oni

According to who? What purpose would your opinion on morality serve in someone elses life?- Oni

Right, but the point to consider is, how is it relevant what you think concerning someone elses body?I can understand if you personally would not have an abortion (or you and your partner). But why should that also be how everyone else should decide? Choice words...Anyway, to a lesser dramatic affect. Abortions occur naturally, or, in small cases woman make a decision to abort - is it seriously an issue that people should concern themselves with when they have nothing to do with the pregnancy? Why don't you just post a picture of a dead fetus for the full affect? The vacuum isn't "jammed". It doesn't just go into the "crotch". The intent is to "remove" what's inside, not kill. Or are you now judging the intent of people you don't even know? I recall you taking a different position in the "hate crime" thread.You could have said it a lot easier, but you went the route of a fundamentalist christian teenage girl screaming outside of an abortion clinic using hyperbole. Until she gets pregnant and...well...has an abortion.People choose to remove a growth in their womb. I could care less. Why do you care so much? It seems like fake sincerity to my, Hyro.- OniEdited by onifre, : No reason given.

I still don't see how your particular opinion relevant. Why not the person who has the fetus growing in them? Why is there opinion not the ONLY valid one? Why is yours as important if you will never have anything to do with the fetus, or anything to do with it when it is born? Again, it still doesn't mean anyone else's opinon is of value, only the person with the growth in them, that has to see to it that not only it's incubated properly, but has to deliver it and perhaps raise it. I have 2 daughters, and they are 13 and 11 years old. They would have the same reaction as they would if they saw what happened to puppies at the Humaine Society.They would act that way because they are children.But...lets say she's 22 years old, gets drunk and unfortunately has unprotected sex (not that they haven't been talked to about it, but lets just say she fucked up and didn't take proper action before sex). She gets prego. But she also has a few years of school left and in no way wants a child. Do you think her reaction is going to be the same as when she was 13 and saw a picture of a dead fetus? No. Not at all. So what's the point?Like Tim Tebow. Sure he's pro-life...cuz he's a virgin. Let him become a pro football player and get some black stripper from Atlanta pregnant. Shit. He'll beat her in the stomach with his Heisman trophy.Everyone is pro-life untill they get tested...then they're glad there is an option. No it doesn't. And you couldn't possibly know the intent...unless you want to be of the opinion that what ever you think the intent is, that's what it is. If that's the case then cool, enjoy sticking to your one-sided opinion Mr. Bunker. Your description is inaccurate. And you act as though people are scared of abortion and don't want to think about it. Dude I do jokes about it on stage, so don't think I care that abortions exist.It's a process that is needed, like the murder of thousands of dogs every day by the Humaine Society. But you don't give a shit about puppies, right? Just human pups... It has nothing to do with conceptualizing it, it has to do with the fact that no one cares about living things but pretend to care about a fetus because it has the word "baby" implied. If it was a dog you wouldn't care. If it was an adult you wouldn't care.But a fetus?! Oh NO! All of a sudden every single fetus is the messiah. But as soon as the kid is born we go back to not giving a shit again. I don't, I've just assumed the roll of Bullshit caller. I'm EvC's Penn and Teller. - Oni

Ok. I get what you meant. So only to a specific group of people. I get what you meant now. I guess I just don't see how it's morally wrong to have an abortion, when someone has made their own choice on it based on what they felt was best for themselves.- Oni

I don't assume that at all.To me, women, who unfortunately make eggs even if they don't want to get pregnant, can choose to do to their body whatever they want. I know if I had to carry that burden I wouldn't want anyone's opinion affecting my decision.It's growing in their body, how annoying to think someone else can decide what you should do.- Oni Edited by onifre, : No reason given.Edited by onifre, : No reason given.

But we don't care, see that's the thing. If I told you a dog was killed you may sympathize, sure, I would too. But the truth is dogs are killed every hour, every day, and we do nothing to stop this.Now, I'm not saying it isn't a necessary service. I get that it has to be done. People choose to take the dog to be put to sleep. Choices are made, we can't save all of them. And the same goes for a pregnancy. We have enough people who are poor, starving, living bellow standards, who will grow up to be criminals, develop drug addictions, and, go on to have more fuckn' kids who will repeat this never ending process.We don't need every pregnancy to go to term. People die of starvation every day. The world, and the US, is over populated. Source

quote:

---

In 1994 the Urban Institute in Washington DC estimated that one out of 6 elderly people in the U.S. has an inadequate diet.

​

In the U.S. hunger and race are related. In 1991 46% of African-American children were chronically hungry, and 40% of Latino children were chronically hungry compared to 16% of white children.

​

The infant mortality rate is closely linked to inadequate nutrition among pregnant women. The U.S. ranks 23rd among industrial nations in infant mortality. African-American infants die at nearly twice the rate of white infants.

​

One out of every eight children under the age of twelve in the U.S. goes to bed hungry every night.

---

Abortion is a necessary service. And the numbers above are just for the US. Globally, it is sickening. I think what we actually do is grow up and rationalize things. If resources were abundant, jobs abundant, food abundant, living conditions equal for everyone, money equal for everyone, then you could set up a mandatory "do the time" situation. But the reality of the matter is we have too many unwanted children who will grow up in poverty, some starve to death, some grow up to be criminals, drug addicts, have many kids of their own.....And all for what? So we can feel good about ourselves that we didn't allow someone to terminate a pregnancy?Reality is a lot more real than you are viewing it as. I know. But he's pro-life because he's a virgin.Like I said, and you agreed, everyone is pro-life until they get tested. Then reality punches them in the face and they wake up from the fake world of no consequences. No. You said they had the intent to "murder a baby." That is just wrong. That is not the intent. They don't "jam a vacuum up a crotch," dude. You say it as though everyone is enjoying the fuckn' thing - like it's a fetus vacuuming party.It sucks. It can be depressing. But it is necessary. Every murderer was a fetus.But more to the point, no one is having an abortion to kill babies, as though they wanted to. They judged the situation and felt it would be best to not bring another unwanted life into the world.But don't worry, most unwanted kids grow up to be criminals, perhaps even murderers, then we can execute them and feel a "sense of justice." The very government who would impose a law against abortions! Ask any inner city kid if anyone in the government cares for them and is taking measures to see to it that they grow up with a good education, with food, a place to live, etc....In fact, lets look at the numbers again:

quote:

---

In the U.S. hunger and race are related. In 1991 46% of African-American children were chronically hungry, and 40% of Latino children were chronically hungry compared to 16% of white children.

​

The infant mortality rate is closely linked to inadequate nutrition among pregnant women. The U.S. ranks 23rd among industrial nations in infant mortality. African-American infants die at nearly twice the rate of white infants.

​

One out of every eight children under the age of twelve in the U.S. goes to bed hungry every night.

---

No one gives a shit in the sense that no one will be responsible for the child as it grows up. That sole responsibility is for the person who had them. If that is the case, then they have full rights to decide to have it.There are enough unwanted kids, man.- OniEdited by onifre, : No reason given.Edited by onifre, : No reason given.

I understand that. And I did like Stile's take on the issue with the "when is someone alive" point that he made.Maybe something like that can, and does in some cases, come into play. LMAO! Nice one, dude. Agreed. If it's a person. But equally it would have to be decided that at some point it is not a person, and just a collection of cells, and thus an option to remove them should be given to anyone who has to take on the burden of a child.We can't just arbitrarily decide that its a person, it needs to be established scientifically. Before the line it's OK to abort, after the line it is not OK to abort. I could agree with that. Sure, I guess that would be cool. But not just any random dude with a fundamentalist ideology. I pick who is a rational contributor of opinions in my life. Again, I, I, I...am the decider. As a personal choice, for someone theistic, of course. Each individual has their own values that they...well...value.But this should not influence, and for sure should not be forced on, someone else of a different opinion. And vice-verca. I think this is the best way. With educated people in a variety of fields deciding based on evidence what constitutes a "person".Or we can take Bill Hick's opinion: "You're not a human being until you're in the YellowPages." If you take a look at the source for world hunger that I linked to Hyro, you'll see that this is a grave issue to concern oursleves with. We don't need more humans, especially not anymore unwanted ones.Also, have you seen the traffic lately? - Oni

Then how does that make them pro-life? Seem like they're just pro-controlling what people do.- Oni

Actually I don't believe this is correct anymore. Vatican

quote:

---

The International Theological Commission has studied the question of the fate of un-baptised infants, bearing in mind the principle of the hierarchy of truths and the other theological principles of the universal salvific will of God, the unicity and insuperability of the mediation of Christ, the sacramentality of the Church in the order of salvation, and the reality of Original Sin. In the contemporary context of cultural relativism and religious pluralism the number of non-baptized infants has grown considerably, and therefore the reflection on the possibility of salvation for these infants has become urgent. The Church is conscious that this salvation is attainable only in Christ through the Spirit. But the Church, as mother and teacher, cannot fail to reflect upon the fate of all men, created in the image of God, and in a more particular way on the fate of the weakest members of the human family and those who are not yet able to use their reason and freedom.

​

It is clear that the traditional teaching on this topic has concentrated on the theory of limbo, understood as a state which includes the souls of infants who die subject to original sin and without baptism, and who, therefore, neither merit the beatific vision, nor yet are subjected to any punishment, because they are not guilty of any personal sin. This theory, elaborated by theologians beginning in the Middle Ages, never entered into the dogmatic definitions of the Magisterium, even if that same Magisterium did at times mention the theory in its ordinary teaching up until the Second Vatican Council. It remains therefore a possible theological hypothesis. However, in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1992), the theory of limbo is not mentioned. Rather, the Catechism teaches that infants who die without baptism are entrusted by the Church to the mercy of God, as is shown in the specific funeral rite for such children. The principle that God desires the salvation of all people gives rise to the hope that there is a path to salvation for infants who die without baptism (cf. CCC, 1261), and therefore also to the theological desire to find a coherent and logical connection between the diverse affirmations of the Catholic faith: the universal salvific will of God; the unicity of the mediation of Christ; the necessity of baptism for salvation; the universal action of grace in relation to the sacraments; the link between original sin and the deprivation of the beatific vision; the creation of man in Christ.

---

Yeah, me too. I did the whole thing: Catecism, Confirmation, I was even an alter (guy) in the military. Truth be told, it just got me out of cleaning the barracks. But now look at us, we're a couple a heathens. - Oni

You don't miind if I borrow that, do you?- Oni