Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 58 (9173 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,573 Year: 4,830/9,624 Month: 178/427 Week: 91/85 Day: 8/20 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Problem with Legalized Abortion
tesla
Member (Idle past 1670 days)
Posts: 1199
Joined: 12-22-2007


Message 226 of 293 (444213)
12-28-2007 3:56 PM
Reply to: Message 224 by macaroniandcheese
12-28-2007 3:51 PM


Re: politics
then call it medical regulation.
there still will be a very large number of anti-abortionist pressing in politics to make abortian illegal.
because it currently is not doesnt mean it never will be.

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

This message is a reply to:
 Message 224 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-28-2007 3:51 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 228 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-28-2007 4:01 PM tesla has not replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4004 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 227 of 293 (444216)
12-28-2007 4:00 PM
Reply to: Message 225 by tesla
12-28-2007 3:54 PM


Re: Linear wants a conception certificate too!
if a human embreyo is classified as life
it isn't.
see. this is the issue.
religeos entities started the debate, yes, but they are makeing their point under political law.
you're unfortunately correct. they keep trying to legislate science. they want to legislate that life begins at "conception" a period that doesn't exist. they want to legislate that evolution is "just a theory" and that theory means something other than what it means and i'm sure they're not opposed to legislating that human beings are "special creation of god" except that it has the word god in it and they'd never get it passed. or at least not in the near future.
its the answere to your assertian that a free people are "unlimited" in their choices.
i think i almost get what you're saying. but no one is suggesting that people are unlimited in their choices. we just haven't figured out where the line should be drawn. why? because it's impossible to have a discussion about "when is a scientifically viable point and what restrictions should we have to demonstrate that compelling state interest?" without someone screaming about how life begins at conception and babies are precious and women are sluts and murderers.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 225 by tesla, posted 12-28-2007 3:54 PM tesla has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 229 by tesla, posted 12-28-2007 4:09 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4004 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 228 of 293 (444217)
12-28-2007 4:01 PM
Reply to: Message 226 by tesla
12-28-2007 3:56 PM


Re: politics
there still will be a very large number of anti-abortionist pressing in politics to make abortian illegal.
because it currently is not doesnt mean it never will be.
unfortunately, people don't understand how to read.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 226 by tesla, posted 12-28-2007 3:56 PM tesla has not replied

  
tesla
Member (Idle past 1670 days)
Posts: 1199
Joined: 12-22-2007


Message 229 of 293 (444218)
12-28-2007 4:09 PM
Reply to: Message 227 by macaroniandcheese
12-28-2007 4:00 PM


Re: Linear wants a conception certificate too!
if a human embreyo is classified as life
it isn't.
________________
hence the word if.
i beleive that further definition of rights need to be set by the government body for this reason:
my wife becomes pregnant, and i want the baby and she doesnt want to get fat; how do i persue the life of my unborn child?
however, under my own assertation of rights, i would have no viable action to save the existance of the child unless the child could first exist outside the womb.
the problem with defining embryonic rights, is that the rights of the woman cannot be ignored.
the unborn child and woman exist with a symbionic relationship. to put more rights over the embryo than the woman is criminal in my opinion. however, to assert that a woman has rights over a child that is in the womb that can survive without the relationship, then i beleive the unborn child has rights to exist as long as extraction and division from the parent entity would not cause death of the parent.
in which case, the parent must be allowed to assert which would live or die, since she would have greater rights of the two.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 227 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-28-2007 4:00 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 230 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-28-2007 4:14 PM tesla has replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4004 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 230 of 293 (444219)
12-28-2007 4:14 PM
Reply to: Message 229 by tesla
12-28-2007 4:09 PM


Re: Linear wants a conception certificate too!
my wife becomes pregnant, and i want the baby and she doesnt want to get fat; how do i persue the life of my unborn child?
i guess you mean preserve.
you don't. until you can carry your own child, you have no right to tell her what she has to do with her organs. being fat may sound like a cosmetic issue to you, but i think it should be very clear that it's a very serious health concern.
maybe you should better select which woman you choose to father children with.
the unborn child and woman exist with a symbionic relationship.
no, they don't. there is nothing that that fetus does for the woman alive that it wouldn't do for her dead. it is a parasite. it takes resources and gives nothing back.
to put more rights over the embryo than the woman is criminal in my opinion.
good job, this is what the legal precedence states.
however, to assert that a woman has rights over a child that is in the womb that can survive without the relationship, then i beleive the unborn child has rights to exist as long as extraction and division from the parent entity would not cause death of the parent.
in which case, the parent must be allowed to assert which would live or die, since she would have greater rights of the two.
good job. this is similar to what the legal precedence states.
you're not saying anything new. this is all in the caselaw.
Edited by brennakimi, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 229 by tesla, posted 12-28-2007 4:09 PM tesla has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 231 by tesla, posted 12-28-2007 4:21 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

  
tesla
Member (Idle past 1670 days)
Posts: 1199
Joined: 12-22-2007


Message 231 of 293 (444220)
12-28-2007 4:21 PM
Reply to: Message 230 by macaroniandcheese
12-28-2007 4:14 PM


Re: Linear wants a conception certificate too!
then there is nothing to debate with you, since we are on the same page, however i feel that the way you relayed it is cold.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 230 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-28-2007 4:14 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 232 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-28-2007 4:24 PM tesla has replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4004 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 232 of 293 (444221)
12-28-2007 4:24 PM
Reply to: Message 231 by tesla
12-28-2007 4:21 PM


Re: Linear wants a conception certificate too!
however i feel that the way you relayed it is cold.
are you gonna tell me i'm a slut and a murderer?
i don't care how "cold" you think i am. feti are parasites that should only exist at the express permission of a woman. they cause serious harm and the only "benefit" they offer is changing diapers in the future and having an excuse to buy doll clothes. oh, and if you're lucky, someday they'll be reasonable and intelligent people with whom you can carry on a conversation without wanting to smack them. maybe.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 231 by tesla, posted 12-28-2007 4:21 PM tesla has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 233 by tesla, posted 12-28-2007 4:31 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

  
tesla
Member (Idle past 1670 days)
Posts: 1199
Joined: 12-22-2007


Message 233 of 293 (444223)
12-28-2007 4:31 PM
Reply to: Message 232 by macaroniandcheese
12-28-2007 4:24 PM


Re: Linear wants a conception certificate too!
not at all.
i beleive for the sake of freedom the choice should exist.
my hope is that humanity still find life precios enough to want to protect it by their own wishes.
and that whatever the reasons of abortion, that if their is no guilt, they made the right choice. if a woman has had an abortion and feels guilt, then perhapts the choice of the abortion was not theirs.
the freedom of choice should still be allowed.
lol smack them huh? lol
if your lucky they will care enough about you to help you in your old age
Edited by tesla, : No reason given.

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

This message is a reply to:
 Message 232 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-28-2007 4:24 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 234 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-28-2007 4:52 PM tesla has not replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4004 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 234 of 293 (444225)
12-28-2007 4:52 PM
Reply to: Message 233 by tesla
12-28-2007 4:31 PM


Re: Linear wants a conception certificate too!
if your lucky they will care enough about you to help you in your old age
if i'm lucky, i'll be responsible enough to provide for my own old age.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 233 by tesla, posted 12-28-2007 4:31 PM tesla has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2246 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 235 of 293 (444228)
12-28-2007 5:19 PM
Reply to: Message 191 by tesla
12-28-2007 1:34 PM


Re: You are idealizing Lincoln
quote:
i dont see how slavery is a proper analogy for abortion, the abortion problem is the sybiotic relationship with the mpother and fetus.
It is not a symbiotic relationship, since in symbiotic relationships two organisms mutually benefit each other.
The carrier of a fetus doesn't derive any benefit from the fetus, and in fact the carrier is physically depleted by the fetus.
The more apt term you are looking for is "parasitic relationship".
Edited by nator, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 191 by tesla, posted 12-28-2007 1:34 PM tesla has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 236 by tesla, posted 12-28-2007 5:21 PM nator has not replied

  
tesla
Member (Idle past 1670 days)
Posts: 1199
Joined: 12-22-2007


Message 236 of 293 (444229)
12-28-2007 5:21 PM
Reply to: Message 235 by nator
12-28-2007 5:19 PM


Re: You are idealizing Lincoln
thanks, yeah that was pointed out.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 235 by nator, posted 12-28-2007 5:19 PM nator has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2246 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 237 of 293 (444231)
12-28-2007 5:28 PM
Reply to: Message 205 by LinearAq
12-28-2007 2:46 PM


Re: Linear wants a conception certificate too!
quote:
How will my paying for everything change the behavior that put her in the situation in the first place.
Look, I thought this was about babies, not controlling women's sexual behavior, or was I wrong about that?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 205 by LinearAq, posted 12-28-2007 2:46 PM LinearAq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 244 by LinearAq, posted 12-29-2007 1:17 PM nator has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 238 of 293 (444236)
12-28-2007 6:33 PM
Reply to: Message 193 by ringo
12-28-2007 1:48 PM


Re: MB sees what she wants to see
We already have laws against killing persons. Instead of bringing in a whole new set of laws just to protect fetuses, wouldn't it be simpler to just push back the personhood date by nine months?
............................................... What do you think we've been doing since Roe v Wade?.............................................
Why not actually fight for the rights of that "person" instead of fighting against the right of another person to control her body? We already have plenty of person v. person laws. Why do we need a whole new set of fetus v. person laws?
Are you kidding?....... Seriously....... Are you joking? We aren't trying to make special fetus laws, we're trying, and have been trying, to get a fetus recognized as a a person with rights. You should come down off the mountain every once and awhile to see how the lowlanders live.
Well, what efforts are they actually spending on it? Are they taking care of it until birth? Are they feeding and clothing its host and paying her medical bills to keep it healthy? It seems to me that once you've saved the fetus' life, you're quite content to throw it out into the cold.
What a ridiculous, bald-faced lie Ringo.... If we were allowed to care for a fetus, we would. But a woman bent on destroying her fetus is going to do what she wants. And from a lawful standpoint, there is nothing I can do about that except fight it through legislature.
quote:
What do they gain from it if they don't actually care?
A sense of self-righteousness?
There are plenty of things to be self-righteous about, none of which need include another person. Try again.
I've seen protests outside abortion clinics where woman are called sluts and murderers. I haven't seen protests outside legislatures demanding full human rights for the fetus. Did I miss the news that day?
Then go to Capital Hill some time. I guarantee you'll see it, since laws are passed and argued there, not at some obscure abortion clinic.
And I've seen you say that treating a fetus like a person is the silliest thing you've ever heard Message 120.
LOL! Putting the cart before the horse is the silliest thing I've ever heard.
quote:
Well, Joseph Goebbels seems a strange choice given the horrendous experiments he conducted.
(Read some history.)
What for? I already know all about Minister Goebbels. I just find it strange that you choose a Nazi for your quote.
Making abortions illegal is directed strictly at the woman. It has nothing to do with whether or not the fetus is a person.
What?!?! Are you joking??? Seriously.... Where do you come up with this nonsense?
From start to finish your post is riddled with error and character assassination.

“First dentistry was painless, then bicycles were chainless, and carriages were horseless, and many laws enforceless. Next cookery was fireless, telegraphy was wireless, cigars were nicotineless, and coffee caffeineless. Soon oranges were seedless, the putting green was weedless, the college boy was hatless, the proper diet -- fatless. New motor roads are dustless, the latest steel is rustless, our tennis courts are sodless, our new religion -- Godless” -Arthur Guiterman

This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by ringo, posted 12-28-2007 1:48 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 240 by molbiogirl, posted 12-28-2007 6:51 PM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 241 by ringo, posted 12-28-2007 7:57 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 2718 days)
Posts: 1909
From: MO
Joined: 06-06-2007


Message 239 of 293 (444238)
12-28-2007 6:48 PM
Reply to: Message 211 by LinearAq
12-28-2007 3:15 PM


Ringo writes:
That's a good idea too. Sex education and easy access to birth control are among the best proven methods of preventing abortion. The fact that anti-abortionists tend to oppose them is a further indication of insincerity.
Having been in that world I cannot agree with you here.
Linear, you pay for Viagra; "they" pay for Viagra.
That is, as taxpayers one pays for Viagra, since it is covered by Medicare and Medicaid. Birth control is not.
Gollygeewillikers, I wonder why not.
Let's see. Who is prescribed Viagra I wonder? Who is prescribed birth control?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 211 by LinearAq, posted 12-28-2007 3:15 PM LinearAq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 245 by LinearAq, posted 12-29-2007 1:26 PM molbiogirl has not replied

  
molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 2718 days)
Posts: 1909
From: MO
Joined: 06-06-2007


Message 240 of 293 (444239)
12-28-2007 6:51 PM
Reply to: Message 238 by Hyroglyphx
12-28-2007 6:33 PM


Stunning. Juggs avoids yet another question.
Whodathunkit?
Juggs, you going to get to that question of what specifically determines "new life" the moment the sperm penetrates the egg?
Or are you going to hide, since you haven't got a satisfactory answer?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 238 by Hyroglyphx, posted 12-28-2007 6:33 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 242 by Hyroglyphx, posted 12-29-2007 12:00 PM molbiogirl has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024