Points on abortion and the crutch of supporters

At some point it is a single cell. At a later point a mass of barely distinguishable cells. At some later point it does have differentiation and some organ function starting to occur. At a later point it has some brain function. At a still later point it will have the brain function of a mouse.No one has suggested that "a fetus is the same as a lump of garbage ". However, things aren't as simple or cut and dried as you want them to be.There is a point at which it is, at most, a minor tradgedy when a fetus(I'm using this term carelessly, starting with a single cell) is lost (which it may be that the majority of them are). At a later point it is a much bigger issue.

quote:

---

I suppose you will feel no resonsibility for the sharp increase in the number of women who die from illegal abortions, then, because that is exactly what will happen if abortion becomes illegal.

---

DOGMA! That's just a last-ditch scare tactic used by the pro-choice crowd when they discover no moral ground for abortion.You're a little late Schraf. My points are already made, and here in this post I will only repeat myself for your benefit. You apparently missed the peer-reviewed paper I cited and extensively quoted, written by a pro-choice medical doctor who went on to work for Planned Parenthood, from a time before Roe vs. Wade, a time when these illegal abortions you are talking about were taking place, that stated, over and over again, that illegal abortions were safe because 9/10s of them were being performed under-the-table by trained physicians, the same who did outpatient work legally.You should seek this paper out. It also mentioned that: (1) Women seeking abortion who are given access to trained counselors usually decide spontaneously to carry the child full-term, and that many abortions are simply the result of stressed mothers who do not know where to turn (2) that "therapeutic" abortions are generally recommended by psychiatrists, because they are afraid that the mothers will commit suicide, NOT because of some physical problem of the mother. It is stated explicity, in that paper, that there is rarely any physical danger to the mother from pregnancy that would justify abortion.Surely you understand the power of actual science as opposed to urban legends?

quote:

---

Why do you thhink you have the right to force a woman to incubate a fetus?

---

We have the same right to force women to feed their children *after* they are born. And the same reason: the life of the fetus or child is more important than the mother's convenience.I feel like Sisyphus, because I already covered that about a half dozen times.This message has been edited by gene90, 05-06-2004 07:11 PM

quote:

---

Are you saying we don't have enough people on the planet?

---

Actually, yes I am.But that's for another time. Let me entrench myself in the research library where I will have ready access to the papers, and have it as a closed debate (just you vs me) moderated (none of your shameless, under the belt stabs at religion) and judged so that a clear winner is declared and you might have yourself a debate. On this topic or another, when I have time, and when it pleases me. I would kind of like to debate global warming in this way.This thread is a waste of time but I feel like I have to reply to your comments even though I had answered nearly ALL of them before your first post.This thread is probably a good example of what Gish's debates were like.This message has been edited by gene90, 05-06-2004 07:31 PM

quote:

---

Gene, when does a egg and sperm become human, and how can you tell it's human?

---

How do I know you're a human?Maybe you don't reach the maturity level of a "real" human being until you reach...say...60? Thus making you (literally) a non-person with no rights.Deciding that a human being has no rights based upon his stage in the lifecycle is dangerous.The Constitution doesn't say anything about this. If the Supreme Court can decide that a black man is only 3/5s of a white man, then I guess we shouldn't be surprised when they call a fetus a non-person. Come to think of it, they could declare you or I a non-person just as easily.This message has been edited by gene90, 05-06-2004 07:17 PM

quote:

---

I suppose you have totally reversed your position on all military action, then, and become a pacifist, since you now believe that all killing of humans by other humans is morally wrong?

---

Are you conceding that abortion is the killing of a human being?This message has been edited by gene90, 05-06-2004 07:21 PM

quote:

---

If you think that it is merely inconvenient to be preganant and to endure labor and give birth, then it is clear that you have no clue and no respect for what women go through.

---

You think an abortion is a walk in the park?

quote:

---

How many unwanted children are you planning on adopting, gene?

---

The question is inappropriate for three reasons.First, because it would be something to come later in my life, after much discussion with my spouse. I wouldn't put it past me though. All I can say NOW is that a big family might be nice. But that too would be mostly up to the spouse.Second, because it is of a personal nature and absolutely none of your business. You had no right to ask it. In fact if you asked that at a job interview or in a professional setting you'd be in serious legal trouble. That's more of the way I see this, a professional, supposedly impersonal debate. None of you (esp Schraf) are my "buddies". You're going to have to really put on the heat to find out anything about my personal life after Schraf's brutal display of holy war when she found out I had religion. To think that at the time I offered that information freely! Will I be as open ever again here? Hell no! I was a fool to mention any personal information on the 'net, and so is anyone else here who tries. And, by the way, that's about as much an appropriate question as me asking the women here if they have ever had an abortion. But, of course, I have standards. (I wrote this before I read post #188).Third, you (Schraf) have shown a history of intolerance and "hate speech" (love those liberal buzzwords) towards me, personally. If this debate were in real life, you wouldn't be participating. And if you tried, I'd get a restraining order. No such luxury here, and I see you invited yourself in. You weren't actively participating when I joined this discussion, and if you had been I would have thought twice. Not because I expect any hard questions or insight from you, you've only towed the classic, predictable freeze dried and decades old pro-choice lines, many of which I had already rebutted before you even brought them up. In fact they are so predictable I don't *need* a pro-choice opponent to argue, I already know exactly what to expect, tediously over and over and over again. Something like a Creationist but without the interesting variability, as the Creationists have generated more "arguments" for their cause than the pro-choice crowd has over the years. No, I would have left because you're so pompous and pumped up on hate for me, my religion, and my politics that I have to wonder if a bunch of fallen missionaries didn't kill some childhood pet of yours. In fact, you, an agnostic who sits around on this site and talks about intolerant fundies, have shown more hatred towards my church than I have yet seen in any non-LDS Christian. (There's a story behind that somewhere.) Reading from you, the endless fountain of hatred for all things Conservative and anyone who would take a worldview opposite your own, is more tiresome than anything else. I started out wanting to debate but after your vitriol my interest in reasonable discourse is thoroughly sapped. At least Crashfrog keeps his worthless banter and cheap shots short enough that he can understand them (about a sentence fragment or two long) and occasionally funny. Your cheap shots are twice as insulting because they waste my time and on rare occasions require a thought or two which is more than they were ever worth. Once I angered you enough to say, "Apologize now or lose a playmate for good". I would have used "bully" instead but that is beside the point. Unfortunately you did not notice that I failed to apologize. You're still here. Did you really have to get my hopes up like that?Go and find your college roommate and sort out whatever personal problem you obviously have, I'm tired of being an effigy for it.When you've settled your...issues, maybe then you can accept that I, who once appeared to be intelligent, believe in a faith that you do not. Then, perhaps, reasonable discussion will again be possible. But from what I've seen so far, I'd be much surprised.This message has been edited by gene90, 05-06-2004 09:41 PM

Hi Gene,I'm just wondering what experience you have of either pregnancy or abortion. I ask this as someone who has had two children, a miscarriage and an abortion. I personally think that those that have no experience have no basis for an opinion.

---

Asgara
"Embrace the pain, spank your inner moppet, whatever....but get over it"

quote:

---

I'm just wondering what experience you have of either pregnancy or abortion.

---

Asgara, please read my message directly above regarding questions you have no right to ask. You wouldn't understand because you're always on the popular, liberal side. You've never actually taken a personal beating here from several users at once because you had the guts to disagree with them (or believe in something they don't). Yeah I see you gave us some information but nobody (including me) is going to give you any trouble for it.Why don't you go the archives and see how people have responded to personal revelations about me? Liberal tolerance my ...But I can answer your question with something about me generally known by all members of the board. It is quite personal though, and I should think I have a lot of experience with pregnancy as a result:I was born. That's right. Carried in the womb of my mother for nine months. I was not aborted.But the law did not protect me from being aborted. How many people who had just as much right to live as I weren't given the same consideration? And are dead because of it?

quote:

---

I personally think that those that have no experience have no basis for an opinion.

---

That's an ad hominem attempt to discredit me rather than directly facing my argument. But you delivered it well.Actually I think you are wrong. People with "no experience" of anything other than being in the womb are being killed by abortion every day. And because I was once in the womb, with no legal rights, I take the basis for opinion. Besides, if you just decided that you're the only one here with the "basis" for an opinion why do you bother?This message has been edited by gene90, 05-06-2004 09:22 PM

quote:

---

Yeah, the "special interest group" of those with ovaries.

---

So all women are pro-choice?Actually I was thinking mostly about the "special interest group" that wears robes.

quote:

---

If I'm supposed to do something about abortion, what are you doing about Creationism?

---

Well Crashfrog, I'm here an extra day. Don't get used to it though, when I get bored I'll leave with no warning.You didn't answer my question. If I should be doing something about abortion because it I disagree with it, what are you doing about Creationism? It's a fair question, if we are all supposed to be doing something about the things we talk about here.On the drive home today, I pondered what could be done about abortion:(1)Set up Web cams across the street from clinics. Morally wrong, but tempting.(2)High powered zoom lens from the road and mail photos to interested persons. Much like certain evangelicals are doing for adult movie joints. There's your "parental notification". Still wrong, but tempting.(3)Solicit lawsuits from those who have received abortions and changed their minds. Doctors get sued for everything else these days. States require doctors to have medical malpractice insurance to function. After a couple of $9 million dollar suits (we've seen several for GPs in this state) the premiums will go up or will cancel insuring abortion providers, effectively causing them to close. (As nearly happened in this state as a response to those aforementioned suits). In other words, we can effectively "ban" abortion on a state-by-state basis by pressuring the corporations that provide insurance, and because it is a matter of private business rather than public law, the Courts would be helpless to intervene. Inherently unfair, and inherently undemocratic, but it might get the job done.That's what I'll do before I pass out condoms.Which one would please you most?Or maybe I don't care enough to try to ruin lives over it? I don't suppose that it had occured to you that maybe I would rather debate gently than be an extremist? Or that maybe I'm debating this for the same reasons we debate Creationism -- for entertainment purposes? Especially since abortion rates have been in decline for years, and support for life is up. It's only a matter of time.This message has been edited by gene90, 05-06-2004 08:33 PM

I am writing a paper now, so I don't have time to search for this info. Later.

---

The Laminator

​

As for racial demographics, it's my understanding that abortion is most common amongst blacks. Some people call it genocide. They could be right.This message has been edited by gene90, 05-06-2004 09:43 PM

You had to change the focus of my points to escape them.When does a fetus possess a beating heart ?I've seen pictures of fetuses, they look like babies and not a mass of cells or even a cist that is tossed in the garbage.My only point is that the fetus, which you have dishonestly described as a mass of cells, is accurately described visually to look like a baby. It is not a matter of opinion - it looks like a baby - I don't need your pro-abortion spin to tell me what I don't see.This message has been edited by WILLOWTREE, 05-06-2004 10:44 PM

Remember you are dealing with a person that said in a previous post that people aren't people until they learn languages. That implies there's not a lot of difference between chunking a newborn into the incinerator and that severed arm he was talking about. (Post #144)His "it takes more than arms to be human, it takes more than genes to be human" reasoning makes me think of the days when the Supreme Court decided that you needed to be white to be human. This is discrimination just the same, only discrimination based upon a person's place in the lifecycle.This message has been edited by gene90, 05-06-2004 10:18 PM