Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Points on abortion and the crutch of supporters
joshua221 
Inactive Member


Message 91 of 440 (93976)
03-22-2004 8:15 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by Asgara
03-18-2004 12:40 PM


sry posted something on bros name, bros name is prophex- Messenjah
[This message has been edited by prophex, 03-22-2004]

The earth is flat.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Asgara, posted 03-18-2004 12:40 PM Asgara has not replied

Trump won 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1240 days)
Posts: 1928
Joined: 01-12-2004


Message 92 of 440 (93978)
03-22-2004 8:23 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by Asgara
03-18-2004 12:40 PM


quote:
Why does your conviction trump mine?
uhhh? It doesn't. Right?
quote:
What is a person?
Why would a doctor perform an abortion on something that isn't going to become a baby? What would be the need of that procedure?
[This message has been edited by messenjaH of oNe, 03-22-2004]

-chris

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Asgara, posted 03-18-2004 12:40 PM Asgara has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by nator, posted 03-24-2004 4:14 AM Trump won has replied

Trump won 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1240 days)
Posts: 1928
Joined: 01-12-2004


Message 93 of 440 (93983)
03-22-2004 8:44 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by Silent H
03-18-2004 1:05 PM


quote:
No they are not. See how easy that is?
Unfortunately this isn't easy. Can you please explain why "they are not"?
quote:
If you have evidence that your SPECIFIC METAPHYSICAL POSITION is better than mine, then I would like to see it.
When did blatant truth become a metaphysical position?
I know I've said this to death but here it goes again:
Why would a doctor perform an abortion on something that isn't going to become a baby? What would be the need of that procedure?
quote:
Since you cannot know what the future holds, then you are the one defining optimism/pessimism for someone else. It is not giving the "child" the benefit of the doubt, it is depriving a 100% sentient being the benefit of the doubt of being intelligent enough to make her own choices regarding her own life and that of her offspring.
You are telling someone you know what reality is (despite being unable to answer critical questions to your "theory" of life), and so what she believes is completely wrong and cannot make judgements based on those beliefs.
Please forgive me holmes. I know I am judging her on the belief that murder is wrong. I'm also sorry if this sounds harsh. I'm sorry you disagree. I'm sorry there is no other definition to use to describe such a procedure. There is no other belief in this besides respect for human life. If letting someone decide upon murder is what is needed for the mother that needs choice, then that is fine I guess, all depending on your point of view.
Regarding most of your other post:
Why would a doctor perform an abortion on something that isn't going to become a baby? What would be the need of that procedure?
quote:
Given your answer you can no longer make arguments along the lines that humans might kill Jesus when they perform abortions.
I was wrong here
quote:
While I sympathize that you have a strong gut reaction to this topic, and so want it to be easy to make arguments, it is not easy at all. This is doubly true when your position requires a SPECIFIC METAPHYSICAL POSITION, a religious one at that, which not everyone shares, and the government is bound from imposing on others.
I don't know why you corner me into this idea that my insentive for this was religious. Anyone with a respect for life could agree. I know it is easier for me to be arguing for "my heavenly Father" or for me to feel I'm feeling this way because this is what God wants. Accuse me, assume, however you want to tear down someone who is "anti abortion" assuming they are religious.
peace
[This message has been edited by messenjaH of oNe, 03-22-2004]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by Silent H, posted 03-18-2004 1:05 PM Silent H has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by Asgara, posted 03-22-2004 9:05 PM Trump won has replied

Asgara
Member (Idle past 2303 days)
Posts: 1783
From: Wisconsin, USA
Joined: 05-10-2003


Message 94 of 440 (93985)
03-22-2004 9:05 PM
Reply to: Message 93 by Trump won
03-22-2004 8:44 PM


Chris, I have a GREAT respect for life but that doesn't change the fact that I also have a GREAT respect for a woman's right to choose.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why does your conviction trump mine?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
uhhh? It doesn't. Right?
Then you are agreeing that it's the woman's choice? It's her convictions that matter and no one else's?
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What is a person?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why would a doctor perform an abortion on something that isn't going to become a baby? What would be the need of that procedure?
The removal of tissue from a woman's uterus isn't always called an abortion and it isn't always performed on something that MIGHT become a baby.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by Trump won, posted 03-22-2004 8:44 PM Trump won has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by Trump won, posted 03-23-2004 6:58 PM Asgara has not replied

Trump won 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1240 days)
Posts: 1928
Joined: 01-12-2004


Message 95 of 440 (94230)
03-23-2004 6:58 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by Asgara
03-22-2004 9:05 PM


quote:
Then you are agreeing that it's the woman's choice? It's her convictions that matter and no one else's?
So the woman is allowed to be Death?
quote:
The removal of tissue from a woman's uterus isn't always called an abortion and it isn't always performed on something that MIGHT become a baby.
I'm saying an abortion is performed when their is a future baby inside a woman right?

-chris

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by Asgara, posted 03-22-2004 9:05 PM Asgara has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by nator, posted 03-24-2004 4:48 AM Trump won has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 96 of 440 (94352)
03-24-2004 4:03 AM
Reply to: Message 87 by Silent H
03-22-2004 1:05 AM


This is a misunderstanding of my own intentions. I am much more interested in facts supporting a position, than debates surrounding whether I got your position on a specific statement right or not.
quote:
All it takes is a quick correction on your part, if you believe I got it wrong. I might defend my interpretation as a valid one, but as I said I do not believe intentions can be debated. Thus I HAVE to assume whatever you tell me your true intent or position was, was in fact your position.
Well, that's just it, isn't it?
I think your perspctive of yourself might be a little inaccurate.
I have, in fact, had to correct you many times because your tendency can sometimes be to misinterpret in the worst light possible.
It's not so easy to dissuade you from your interpretation, in my experience. So this is why I and some others have had frustrations with you. We end up doing exactly what you say you don't want to do; arguing what we said/meant instead of arguing facts.
quote:
That's why in each of my posts I try to move beyond that issue. I generally accept what anyone says their true intent/position was.
See, that's not the experience I have had. Not with every point and not in every post, but it happens enough.
quote:
Facts, arguments, and positions are three totally separate things. People can get any combination of those three right and wrong.
I'm not sure why being wrong on one should cause debate on the others to come to a screeching halt. You may feel like you will not get a fair hearing, but you should be able to judge whether you are or not based on what I have said about the facts, or the arguments, separate from what I said about your position.
Its kind of a guilt by association to link all three.
Well, I do judge whether or not I am right or wrong based upon facts, but whether or not I am willing to continue to spend time in discussion with a particular debater is determined by how interesting they are to debate with and if they debate in good faith.
Like I said, you don't do this all the time. It seems to happen when emotional hot buttion issues are discussed. (Mind you, I am not trying to portray myself as some kind of flawless debater here.)
[quote]"Are you seriously suggesting that rapes make up all abortions, or that women should be given a free ride on sexual responsibility when it is not rape?"
quote:
As you can see I never said that's what you actually thought, just pointed out that is how it reads. That is the explicit (intended or not) message of the statement.
...if you interpret what I said in the worst possible (and silly) light.
Nobody else in this thread seems to have come to the same interpretation you did, not even close.
I told you that I did not believe this at all, and did not understand why you woult think that I did, yet you repeated it in a later post.
quote:
You should also note that was only a small point made within a larger body of criticism regarding your injecting feminist jargon/arguments into the abortion debate, including the bizarre suggestion they do not go after men as being reponsible for pregnancies.
That's true, but when you make these worst-possible interpretations to argue against, it makes me less inclined to listen to what you have to say.
quote:
You could also note I started the post by agreeing with the rest of what you had said, and at the end of my own hyperbolic attack on your use of feminist arguments said...
"But I guess that's my two cents, which may be just as alienating to others as yours.
Which should indicate my message was about use of language that alienates readers, rather than what your actual agenda/position was.
Given the above I feel that particular post of mine has turned out rather prophetic. Not only was I right that you appeared like a feminist fundie to an antiAbortionist, but I managed to alienate you from the actual message of my own post.
Well, that is certainly what happened.
quote:
You can choose to draw the line wherever you want. But personally I separate misreads of statements from errors of fact or logic and treat them separately.
So do I, except when the misreads of statements are not so easily corrected and I am forced to correct misstatements repeatedly.
quote:
Its only when a person consistently dodges facts and arguments that I no longer trust them. If its just simple errors in figuring out my intent/positionwas, then its no biggie, I just say what I meant.
I understand, but I feel like it isn't so easy to get you to change your misinterpretation.
quote:
However, if a person keeps editing my text so as to try and make my position appear different in their quotes, and refuses to accept my statements of true intent, I don't lose trust, I just get pissed off. BTW, I'm not saying you do this, just saying this is when I get pissed off regarding misreads of my position.
Well, you were pissing me off, too.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by Silent H, posted 03-22-2004 1:05 AM Silent H has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 97 of 440 (94353)
03-24-2004 4:07 AM
Reply to: Message 90 by joshua221
03-22-2004 6:15 PM


quote:
Maybe, but what you are condemning another about, sounds awfully familar of what, when you wrongfully accused me of stating, I let slide. Now this isn't about me, I am of course in no way perfect, but you should know this of holmes, yourself.
(Abortion Article of long ago.)
I have no idea what you are talking about.
Perhaps a link or thred and message number?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by joshua221, posted 03-22-2004 6:15 PM joshua221 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by joshua221, posted 03-24-2004 5:45 PM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 98 of 440 (94354)
03-24-2004 4:14 AM
Reply to: Message 92 by Trump won
03-22-2004 8:23 PM


Messinjah, please explain where along in gesteation fertilized egg becomes a person.
Or, do you equate fertilized eggs with persons?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Trump won, posted 03-22-2004 8:23 PM Trump won has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by Trump won, posted 03-26-2004 4:21 PM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 99 of 440 (94359)
03-24-2004 4:48 AM
Reply to: Message 95 by Trump won
03-23-2004 6:58 PM


quote:
So the woman is allowed to be Death?
So the government is allowed to force a woman to incubate a fetus?
Remember, childbirth is not some kind of walk in the park. Women and girls die from pregnancy and birth complications every year, and many more are left infirile or otherwise injured. Medically, it's much safer for even a healthy woman or girl to have an abortion or take the morning after pill.
Attention Required! | Cloudflare
'A government study conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and released in 1999, found that the maternal mortality rate is still problematic. The national rate is 7.7 per every 100,000 women: the death of one woman for every 12,987 who give birth. That's more than twice the goal set by the federal government under its Healthy People 2000 initiative (3.3 deaths per 100,000 women). And big disparities also exist; among African-American women in New York, for example, the study found that 28.7 of these women die for every 100,000 pregnancies.
And those numbers simply reflect maternal mortality the number of women who died in pregnancy or 42 days after giving birth. That's not counting the number of women who survived the various serious complications that can occur during and after pregnancy. Dr. Jeffrey C. King, head of the Maternal Mortality Task Force of the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology, reported that for every maternal death there were an estimated 3,100 hospitalizations for pregnancy-related complications.
Patricia Schroeder, the former Democratic Congress member from Colorado, once voiced these concerns about the dangers of pregnancy and childbirth. She did so both as a lawmaker and as a woman who had nearly died in childbirth. As Ms. Schroeder remarked, "There is a myth that pregnancy is no problem and that the only reason someone would want to end it is for something trivial or selfish."
quote:
I'm saying an abortion is performed when their is a future baby inside a woman right?
So, since most "future babies" do not lead to a pregnancy and are flushed out of the body during menstruation, do you suggest colletion and examination of all menstrual fluid just in case there is a "future baby" in there?
Also, do you object to IUD's?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by Trump won, posted 03-23-2004 6:58 PM Trump won has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by Trump won, posted 03-26-2004 4:31 PM nator has replied

joshua221 
Inactive Member


Message 100 of 440 (94533)
03-24-2004 5:45 PM
Reply to: Message 97 by nator
03-24-2004 4:07 AM


Of course, let me dig it up.

The earth is flat.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by nator, posted 03-24-2004 4:07 AM nator has not replied

Trump won 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1240 days)
Posts: 1928
Joined: 01-12-2004


Message 101 of 440 (95002)
03-26-2004 4:21 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by nator
03-24-2004 4:14 AM


quote:
Messinjah
lol Was that typo made on purpose?
quote:
please explain where along in gesteation fertilized egg becomes a person.
Or, do you equate fertilized eggs with persons?
"Why would a doctor perform an abortion on something that isn't going to become a baby? What would be the need of that procedure?"
When the pregnant mother-to-be is able to have an abortion performed.
-peace

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by nator, posted 03-24-2004 4:14 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by nator, posted 03-27-2004 1:28 PM Trump won has replied

Trump won 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1240 days)
Posts: 1928
Joined: 01-12-2004


Message 102 of 440 (95004)
03-26-2004 4:31 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by nator
03-24-2004 4:48 AM


quote:
So the government is allowed to force a woman to incubate a fetus?
Let's play a little game I like to call repetition.
So the woman is allowed to be Death?
Her governing choices decide life or death for the baby. For life or choice? Give me liberty or give me death! How ironic.
quote:
So, since most "future babies" do not lead to a pregnancy and are flushed out of the body during menstruation, do you suggest colletion and examination of all menstrual fluid just in case there is a "future baby" in there?
Let me rephrase that. It's hard to compile words together when one likes to distort them. When there is a pregnancy. When the abortion can be performed. Like a broken record. I'm getting tired of these questions that I've already answered.
quote:
IUD
nope.
-peace
[This message has been edited by messenjaH of oNe, 03-26-2004]

-chris

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by nator, posted 03-24-2004 4:48 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 104 by nator, posted 03-27-2004 1:32 PM Trump won has not replied
 Message 105 by nator, posted 03-27-2004 1:38 PM Trump won has replied
 Message 106 by NosyNed, posted 03-27-2004 1:41 PM Trump won has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 103 of 440 (95130)
03-27-2004 1:28 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by Trump won
03-26-2004 4:21 PM


You haven't answered my question:
"Please explain where along in gesteation fertilized egg becomes a person.
Or, do you equate fertilized eggs with persons?"
quote:
When the pregnant mother-to-be is able to have an abortion performed.
A woman is able to take a morning-after pill which will flush an egg out of her body mere hours after it was fertilized.
This is essentially an extremely early abortion.
Do you equate the taking of a morning after pill with murdering a person?
Also, do you advocate examining the menstrual fluid of all women to look for "potential babies", as most fertilized eggs do not implant and are discharged during menstruation?
Can you please indicate and explain where along in the gestation of a fertilized egg that it becomes a person?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by Trump won, posted 03-26-2004 4:21 PM Trump won has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by Trump won, posted 04-08-2004 11:25 PM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 104 of 440 (95131)
03-27-2004 1:32 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by Trump won
03-26-2004 4:31 PM


quote:
Let's play a little game I like to call repetition.
So the woman is allowed to be Death?
Her governing choices decide life or death for the baby.
Where along in the gestation of a fertilized egg does it become a person?
The moment of conception? 24 hours? One week? 6 weeks? 3 months?
At what moment is it a person?
Or, do you equate fertilized eggs with persons?
Yes or no, chris?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by Trump won, posted 03-26-2004 4:31 PM Trump won has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 105 of 440 (95132)
03-27-2004 1:38 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by Trump won
03-26-2004 4:31 PM


quote:
Her governing choices decide life or death for the baby.
Her choiced also decide, in some cases, life or death for herself, as well.
I find it very telling that you have no comment whatsoever on my data regarding the danger of childbirth.
Women DIE from complications of childbirth.
More are rendered infertile.
Death from abortion is almost unheard of.
Death from the morning after pill is even less heard of.
You believe that the you or the government has the right to force girls and women to increse their chance of death and infertility?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by Trump won, posted 03-26-2004 4:31 PM Trump won has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by Trump won, posted 04-08-2004 11:10 PM nator has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024