Home » General Discussions » Heated Discussions and Debates » Abortion [split]
| Re: I need some good Conservative/Republican types [message #178260 is a reply to message #178245] |
Mon, 07 November 2005 10:38   |
 |
Crimson
Messages: 7427
Registered: February 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars)
ADMINISTRATOR |
|
|
| gbull wrote on Mon, 07 November 2005 08:17 |
Think of what could have been. Have we aborted the scientist who was destined to find the cure for AIDS?
|
Yeah, you're right. In fact, what about the billions of sperm that die every minute to masturbation or sodomy or condoms... and all the unfertilized eggs bled out in menstrual periods. This is an OUTRAGE! There are enough sperm cells in one ejaculate the re-populate the earth. Entire civilizations of people have been wiped away on a kleenex! This is an OUTRAGE!
I'm the bawss.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: I need some good Conservative/Republican types [message #178292 is a reply to message #178164] |
Mon, 07 November 2005 15:13 |
Seeker
Messages: 5
Registered: November 2005
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
While I'm not a fan of abortion I would much rather see a woman remove the "unborn" fetus before it gets to experience life, I'm sick of hearing about mothers drowning their kids in bath tubs, throwing them into rivers beating them to death etc etc.
Giving a child life then ripping it from them is the cruelest of all.
|
|
|
|
| Re: I need some good Conservative/Republican types [message #178293 is a reply to message #178292] |
Mon, 07 November 2005 15:22 |
 |
Arcane1
Messages: 28
Registered: November 2005
Location: NW Burbs, Chicago
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
The concept of abortion, and the practice more so, is an assault against life. That is indeed a reality.
The concept of the State having the right to control a person is more of an assault in my opinion.
The problem becomes where is the line of control that the State has over the Individual to be drawn? And how far into the Individual's life does the State have the right to interfere?
The Founding Fathers did not intend for the State to have the type of powers that are had now. The Patriot Act would cause them to spin in their graves.
For Men, who have never and will never experience the trials that a Woman goes through to be the ones making the Laws is not right. It is a method of enslavement taking the rights of an Individual away. Typically, Governments do not handle that responsibility well and historically have abused it terribly.
It is time to realize that we have tread where it was unwise. Bring them home before another 2000 die. Every day sooner is another service member not wounded, maimed, killed or away from home.
|
|
|
|
| Re: I need some good Conservative/Republican types [message #178298 is a reply to message #178164] |
Mon, 07 November 2005 16:04 |
|
|
Killing an unborn child is murder. Mothers who kill their own children by drowning them and such are arrested and prosecuted, so what makes this any difference? Simply because there are people who consider a fetus to be less than human? It's against the law to kill a black person, yet people still refuse to believe that they are human. Same goes for homosexuals. You can't kill a homosexual even though there are plenty of people who claim that they're not human (such as my uncle).
Libertarian Party | The King's Throne | The Soda Shop
|
|
|
|
| Re: I need some good Conservative/Republican types [message #178299 is a reply to message #178292] |
Mon, 07 November 2005 16:30 |
 |
NeoSaber
Messages: 336
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
| Seeker wrote on Mon, 07 November 2005 17:13 |
While I'm not a fan of abortion I would much rather see a woman remove the "unborn" fetus before it gets to experience life, I'm sick of hearing about mothers drowning their kids in bath tubs, throwing them into rivers beating them to death etc etc.
Giving a child life then ripping it from them is the cruelest of all.
|
But it is a biological fact that life begins at conception. It's at that moment when your DNA is created and you physically become a distinct living organism. Regardless of when a child is killed after that moment, their life has been taken from them. Philosophical arguments on when sentience begins are immaterial to that physical fact.
I get sick of hearing about people who murder their children too, but I don't think the answer is to kill people at a younger age so we can't hear them scream when it happens. Then we are just making ourselves feel better instead of solving the problem.
| Arcane1 wrote on Mon, 07 November 2005 17:22 |
The problem becomes where is the line of control that the State has over the Individual to be drawn? And how far into the Individual's life does the State have the right to interfere?
|
The state is obligated to defend people from harm they could otherwise not be protected from. Armies defend from invaders from elsewhere, laws defend people from being attacked by other people. A person becomes a distinct living organism at conception, there is no event later on that makes it come to life again. That gives the state an obligation to defend their life, just like it has to defend anyone else's life.
Even when Roe v Wade legalized unrestricted abortion in the US, it stated the right to live is paramount in this issue:
| Roe v Wade |
The appellee and certain amici argue that the fetus is a "person" within the language and meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment. In support of this, they outline at length and in detail the well-known facts of fetal development. If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant's case, of course, collapses, for the fetus' right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the Amendment.
|
Legally, a person's right to live is considered above another person's right to privacy, or whatever. Even the court that legalized abortion acknowledged this, however they went on to ignore basic biology and declared 'the unborn' to not be human. If you want to talk discrimination and taking away rights, that's blatant age discrimination right there: An unborn child isn't old enough to be 'human' under the law. It's the same reasoning used to justify slavery: "They aren't human, they have no rights".
I would have hoped we could have learned from history about that kind of mindset, but it seems America is doomed to repeat that mistake over and over again.
NeoSaber
Renegade Map Maker at CnC Source
Animator/Compiler/Level Editor/Object Rigger/Programmer for Red Alert: A Path Beyond
|
|
|
|
| Re: I need some good Conservative/Republican types [message #178301 is a reply to message #178292] |
Mon, 07 November 2005 16:42 |
 |
Hydra
Messages: 827
Registered: September 2003
Location: Atlanta, GA
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| Seeker wrote on Mon, 07 November 2005 17:13 |
While I'm not a fan of abortion I would much rather see a woman remove the "unborn" fetus before it gets to experience life, I'm sick of hearing about mothers drowning their kids in bath tubs, throwing them into rivers beating them to death etc etc.
Giving a child life then ripping it from them is the cruelest of all.
|
How are the two practices different? You've basically proven my point for me.
Abortion is akin to infanticide. Mothers who abuse and kill their children should be arrested and prosecuted as J_Ball said. Why do you want to legalize one form of murder over another?
| Arcane1 |
The concept of abortion, and the practice more so, is an assault against life. That is indeed a reality.
The concept of the State having the right to control a person is more of an assault in my opinion.
The problem becomes where is the line of control that the State has over the Individual to be drawn? And how far into the Individual's life does the State have the right to interfere?
|
So you concede that abortion is akin to murder, then you say you're more concerned with how intrusive government has become into the lives of its citizens.
To me, that sounds like you're trying to imply that the government shouldn't have the right to outlaw certain kinds of murder.
Please tell me I read wrong....
| Quote: |
The Founding Fathers did not intend for the State to have the type of powers that are had now. The Patriot Act would cause them to spin in their graves.
|
As would Social Security, Medicare, the income tax, affirmative action policies, the controversy over "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, many current forms of gun control, and the legaized practice of abortion.
Right now, we're focusing on abortion; let's take this one issue at a time.
| Quote: |
For Men, who have never and will never experience the trials that a Woman goes through to be the ones making the Laws is not right. It is a method of enslavement taking the rights of an Individual away. Typically, Governments do not handle that responsibility well and historically have abused it terribly.
|
That would be true if women weren't allowed to vote; could not run for federal offices such as the House of Representatives or the Senate; could not be appointed to major executive offices; could not be appointed to federal judgeships; and could not participate in their state and local governments.
Each is the case, however, so whatever "enslavement" of women you think men have does not exist in reality.
Walter Keith Koester: September 22, 1962 - March 15, 2005
God be with you, Uncle Wally.
 (<---New(ish) Prayer Group Forums)
 (<---Archived Prayer Group Forums)
|
|
|
|
| Re: I need some good Conservative/Republican types [message #178304 is a reply to message #178164] |
Mon, 07 November 2005 16:49 |
 |
NukeIt15
Messages: 987
Registered: February 2003
Location: Out to lunch
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| Quote: |
But it is a biological fact that life begins at conception. It's at that moment when your DNA is created and you physically become a distinct living organism.
|
That fails to explain identical twins, triplets, etc. Identical twins are created when the fertilized egg splits in two and develops into two seperate people. How can a fertilized egg be an individal when the possibility exists that it will become two or more? It makes far more sense to say that life begins when the central nervous system begins developing- before that exists, there is no consciousness, there is no thought. That is scientific fact; anything further than that is religious belief and does not belong in legislation.
When a person becomes brain dead, they are no longer alive. Therefore, before the brain becomes functional, a person is not yet alive.
"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. Horrid mischief would ensue were (the law-abiding) deprived of the use of them." - Thomas Paine
Remember, kids: illiteracy is cool. If you took the time to read this, you are clearly a loser who will never get laid. You've been warned.
[Updated on: Mon, 07 November 2005 16:52] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: I need some good Conservative/Republican types [message #178307 is a reply to message #178164] |
Mon, 07 November 2005 17:09 |
|
NeoSaber
Messages: 336
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
Anything further than that is religious belief? A newly conceived zygote is a living organism with a distinct genetic code. That's biology, not religion. It's philosophy and religion that clouds the issue by saying "when does sentience begin?". Science says physical life begins at conception, religions are all over the map on where life begins.
I hold to that in part because of identical twins, triplets, etc. Despite that the zygote divided from one into two, or more, it's physical existence, its genetic identity, still began when that egg got fertilized by that sperm. Not before and not after.
When a person becomes brain dead, their body dies too as there is nothing left to tell it to keep functioning (yes, I know, unless artificial means are used to force the body to continue). Before we can detect brain activity in a fetus, its body is very much alive and growing.
NeoSaber
Renegade Map Maker at CnC Source
Animator/Compiler/Level Editor/Object Rigger/Programmer for Red Alert: A Path Beyond
|
|
|
|
| Re: I need some good Conservative/Republican types [message #178310 is a reply to message #178164] |
Mon, 07 November 2005 17:25 |
 |
Ryan3k
Messages: 363
Registered: September 2004
Location: USA
Karma: 0
|
Commander |
|
|
Here's how I see this ::
This situation is a lot like how I hear certain people on this forum argue that if guns are outlawed, than criminals will still find a way to get guns, so doing so is pointless.
If abortion is outlawed, women who still want abortions will still find a way to get them, by the same logic. And, probably to greater risk to their personal health. So, isn't it pointless?
So, if by opposing abortion you are for the conservation of life, then by this same gun control logic, if it were outlawed, abortion would still be rampant. However, the womens' lives would be in greater danger due to the unprofessional and illegal nature of the abortions (back-alley). You'll probably say they deserve it. And they probably do, but still. Life is life, right?
Solution: Legalize murder. Boom, problem solved. YAY! Murders attributed to guns? LEGAL! Abortion of fetuses? LEGAL!
And it all works out.
A Path Beyond
[Updated on: Mon, 07 November 2005 17:29] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: I need some good Conservative/Republican types [message #178311 is a reply to message #178310] |
Mon, 07 November 2005 17:42 |
|
Hydra
Messages: 827
Registered: September 2003
Location: Atlanta, GA
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| Ryan3k wrote on Mon, 07 November 2005 19:25 |
This situation is a lot like how I hear certain people on this forum argue that if guns are outlawed, than criminals will still find a way to get guns, so doing so is pointless.
If abortion is outlawed, women who still want abortions will still find a way to get them, by the same logic. And, probably to greater risk to their personal health. So, isn't it pointless?
|
Let's just go ahead and get rid of all laws since they'll just be broken anyway. Who needs this orderly society, anyway?
| Quote: |
Solution: Legalize murder.
|
It already is if you're a black former NFL player and you live in southern California. 
Walter Keith Koester: September 22, 1962 - March 15, 2005
God be with you, Uncle Wally.
(<---New(ish) Prayer Group Forums)
(<---Archived Prayer Group Forums)
[Updated on: Mon, 07 November 2005 17:46] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: I need some good Conservative/Republican types [message #178313 is a reply to message #178304] |
Mon, 07 November 2005 17:56 |
|
Arcane1
Messages: 28
Registered: November 2005
Location: NW Burbs, Chicago
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
| NukeIt15 wrote on Mon, 07 November 2005 17:49 |
| Quote: |
But it is a biological fact that life begins at conception. It's at that moment when your DNA is created and you physically become a distinct living organism.
|
That fails to explain identical twins, triplets, etc. Identical twins are created when the fertilized egg splits in two and develops into two seperate people. How can a fertilized egg be an individal when the possibility exists that it will become two or more? It makes far more sense to say that life begins when the central nervous system begins developing- before that exists, there is no consciousness, there is no thought. That is scientific fact; anything further than that is religious belief and does not belong in legislation.
When a person becomes brain dead, they are no longer alive. Therefore, before the brain becomes functional, a person is not yet alive.
|
Being a living being, and being an entity that is capable of existing out of the womb are two different issues. Until a certain degree of maturity is accomplished, the zygote cum fetus is little more biologically than a parasite, feeding off of the Mother. By that definition, the Mother should have the right to terminate the relationship on her terms.
Yet some call that Murder. Murder of a living being is the charge.
How can a parasite be considered a living being? How can the life of that parasite become more important than the wishes of the host?
Can we draw a parallel to the person who is "brain dead" or "clinically dead" and yet maintains life functions with the assistance of machines? Technically that person becomes a parasite themselves, the organ that is supporting them being the hispital and framework of machines. Is unhooking the machines that support life comitting murder?
It is time to realize that we have tread where it was unwise. Bring them home before another 2000 die. Every day sooner is another service member not wounded, maimed, killed or away from home.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: I need some good Conservative/Republican types [message #178317 is a reply to message #178313] |
Mon, 07 November 2005 18:43 |
|
NeoSaber
Messages: 336
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
| Arcane1 wrote on Mon, 07 November 2005 19:56 |
Being a living being, and being an entity that is capable of existing out of the womb are two different issues. Until a certain degree of maturity is accomplished, the zygote cum fetus is little more biologically than a parasite, feeding off of the Mother. By that definition, the Mother should have the right to terminate the relationship on her terms.
|
Yes, being a living being and being able to exist out of a womb are two different issues. Being completely self sufficient means nothing in the debate on whether something is alive. No one is self sufficient, as we all need to eat. Having to eat doesn't make an adult not a person. It's really a non-issue in what constitutes life.
A parasite latches onto a host and forcefully sucks out nutrients it needs to live. A fetus doesn't do this. The mother's body is designed to support and nourish it. The fetus can't sink its 'fangs' into the mother's body and suck out food. The mother's body has to send food to the fetus, or it dies. Like a new born baby is dependant on a caregiver, so is a preborn baby. If the baby was a parasite, the mother's immune system would attack it as a foreign invader, yet her body actually creates defense mechanisms to ensure its survival while it is still vulnerable to things like parasites and infections. The relationship is closer to being symbiotic than it is parasitic.
Even if we were to accept the idea that a fetus is a parasite, a parasite is still a living organism, and in this case its genetic code is that of a living human. Regardless if it was a parasite, its still a human. It is just at a stage in life where it's parasitic. It still has the right to live, as it is human genetically and humans have the right to life.
When it comes to the mother having a right to terminate the relationship, that's just ridiculous. Did the baby force itself into the mother? Of course not, the baby's parents forced it to exist in the first place, or in the case of rape, one of its parents forced it to be there. The baby never asked to be there to begin with and can't be held responsible for being there now. By allowing an abortion for this reason, you are punishing a child for the actions of a parent or parents. If anyone has a right to terminate the relationship its the fetus, as it was forced into the arrangement to begin with.
You might as well argue a slave master has the right to kill a slave if they no longer want to feed the slave. That argument would miss the whole point that slaves shouldn't be denied their freedom to begin with.
NeoSaber
Renegade Map Maker at CnC Source
Animator/Compiler/Level Editor/Object Rigger/Programmer for Red Alert: A Path Beyond
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: I need some good Conservative/Republican types [message #178408 is a reply to message #178164] |
Tue, 08 November 2005 15:45 |
 |
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
And it would even fit the argument if the non-hippie was giving birth to the condor.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: I need some good Conservative/Republican types [message #178414 is a reply to message #178164] |
Tue, 08 November 2005 16:00 |
|
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
Yeah, DUH, but the cartoon is directly implying hypocrisy between a pro-choice and pro-environment stand.
Such an implication is, however, logically flawed in that the non-hippie is not giving birth to the condor eggs.
As far as "when life begins," I believe it begins in higher organisms when the brain develops and begins to function. Environmentalists don't protect the eggs of endangered species because it would be wrong for them to die, necessarily, but because the eggs will eventually become endangered species to refurnish the population that has been minimized by inbred Republican hunters. I do not deny that either a human embryo nor a condor egg will become a fully developed organism. The underlying principles behind abortion and protecting species, are however, entirely different.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
| Re: I need some good Conservative/Republican types [message #178419 is a reply to message #178164] |
Tue, 08 November 2005 16:38 |
|
NukeIt15
Messages: 987
Registered: February 2003
Location: Out to lunch
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| Quote: |
the population that has been minimized by human expansion into their habitats, deforestation, and overpopulation of other species.
|
Fixed.
"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. Horrid mischief would ensue were (the law-abiding) deprived of the use of them." - Thomas Paine
Remember, kids: illiteracy is cool. If you took the time to read this, you are clearly a loser who will never get laid. You've been warned.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: I need some good Conservative/Republican types [message #178425 is a reply to message #178351] |
Tue, 08 November 2005 17:33 |
|
Ryan3k
Messages: 363
Registered: September 2004
Location: USA
Karma: 0
|
Commander |
|
|
| warranto |
The comic has nothing to do with endangered species.
The point of the comic (at least in the context of this thread) is when "life begins".
|
You missed my point, which was that the comic is just a stereotype, so it has no value in this discussion. It depicts the "liberal" as an ugly, haggardly-dressed and kempt hypocrite, while the "conservative" is clean-shaven, well-dressed, and handsome (comparatively).
If someone wants to point out a "paradox" in beliefs and add something to this discussion of actual worth, you can do without a childish and prejudiced cartoon.
...Like how I described earlier in this thread how many conservatives don't believe in gun control, yet would support the illegalization of abortion.
Meaning,
If you illegalize guns, criminals will still get guns.
THEREFORE,
If you illegalize abortion, women will still get abortions.
A Path Beyond
[Updated on: Tue, 08 November 2005 17:43] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Tue May 07 16:27:25 MST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01680 seconds
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
