Abortion

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
Hmmm, actually I think I have a fairly good grasp actually - during my final year of legal studies in High School I was required to do a major research assignment on the subject of the evolution of the law, and it's relationship with the people - we had to pick up a number of current events causing debate to highlight our arguments - one at the time being a man charged with manslaughter for harming a pregnant women within the three two month abortion period. Ultimately it is not clear cut.

Whob/Gay Guy has tried, for whatever sad reason, to make it appear that members of the pro-choice lobby believe that abortion is legal infanticide, and are happy with it. Final Warrior, I can say without a doubt that this is legally and scientifically absurd and completely incorrect.

And the relevance of this? An unborn child is not an infant. An abortion does not, due to a number of things, fall under the unborn child violence act - except in still legally shaky cases where a a foetus has been lost due to the actions of another - and cases have occurred where a medical/scientific professional has been called to testify that in the first portion of the pregnancy the foetus is not medically an "unborn child"- thus causing conflict of definition.

By that logic the bill would classify abortion as an act against an unborn child. It doesn't. Further more it is a different set of laws as to those that govern treatment of children from new born onwards. It is not infanticide.

Actually I am showing a more in depth knowledge then Gay Guy/whob or you seem to be - taking a cut down definition of a law and taking it at face value in line with your own opinions.

Now I get to question your common sense. Abortion is not legally infanticide, and quoting an act which simply outlines the situations and legal process in regards to harm to unborn children does not instantly translate into proving that abortion is infanticide - rather it shows ignorance of where the law applies and how it is perceived. Just as with the euthanasia debate it is not applicable to include legislation regarding 1st degree murder. A, does not necessarily in law lead to b.

And as I have said, the law is constantly evolving, and people have used, successfully as a defense, the fact abortion can be carried out, and that it can be carried out because the initial phase of the pregnancy the foetus is not considered an "unborn child" or a child in utero - in certain legal terms. A man, who punched his wife in the stomach 3 weeks into the pregnancy, causing a miscarriage, can legally defend himself thus: it is legal to have an abortion in the three weeks, and abortion is legal as the foetus does not qualify as a child, and thus I have not committed a crime, other then assault, against a human being, and certainly not murder or manslaughter. And there is a good chance he can win - because the law has yet to come to terms with this in a sound fashion.

Go trawl some case law, and you will see and understand that law, any law is not a simple thing like you or gay guy are making out.

And gay guy can cherry pick web definitions all he likes - infancy/infant does not apply to an unborn child during gestation/pregnancy - it only applies from the moment of birth. But if you like I can post a couple of defs. based upon the defs in biological and medical text books? Would you like that?

Well look at that. From the encyclopedia Britannica. Join the web site (or buy the encyclopedias like I did) to get the whole article.

Now the law expands upon these and changes them somewhat - infant refers almost exclusively to any person in the age category "minor" - that is the entire time from birth onwards before they become an adult, and has little to do with infanticide. Not really relevant then. However infanticide laws deal more with the biological definition= the UK infanticide act is applicable to parents who kill the infant in the primary period of infancy (I believe the first nine months of it's life, that is from the moment it is born up till it's ninth month in case you are confused.)

Yes, I know that is likely, still I got some basic enjoyment out of pulling apart his absurd arguments.

The heart of a fool is in his mouth, but the mouth of the wise man is in his heart.

Posting more, does not make your arguments sound any more truthful. Nor does it make the position that you defend any more noble. When your right hand addresses your left, does it understand the difference between the two?

You claim to defend an individual's life, while taking away the right to life of an individual. You claim that you are about giving more choices, while taking away the ability to choose.

It is a thousand times better to have common sense without education than to have education without common sense. Yet neither education nor common sense can justify the inherent stupidity which lies in your arguments.

May God bless you my ignorant-intelligent friend.

Bill Hicks (bless his soul) said it best: "If you're so pro-life, do me a favour: don't lock arms and block medical clinics. If you're so pro-life, lock arms and block cemeteries."

😂

Originally posted by Final Warrior

May God bless you my ignorant-intelligent friend.

wtf whob...what are you frikin ghandi now??? whob-di?

Originally posted by Arachnoidfreak
c'mon 400 pages!

It could be more less for others. It's only 393 pages for me, and people are saying there are about 500 pages...

Originally posted by autumn dreams
It could be more less for others. It's only 393 pages for me, and people are saying there are about 500 pages...

When post count is set to the default 20 posts per page, it's 393 pages. For me, I have post count at 40 posts per page, so it's actually at 197 for me.

And you completely misread my post. I want it to reach 400 pages, not that it's already at 400 pages.

Originally posted by Final Warrior
The heart of a fool is in his mouth, but the mouth of the wise man is in his heart.

Posting more, does not make your arguments sound any more truthful. Nor does it make the position that you defend any more noble. When your right hand addresses your left, does it understand the difference between the two?

You claim to defend an individual's life, while taking away the right to life of an individual. You claim that you are about giving more choices, while taking away the ability to choose.

It is a thousand times better to have common sense without education than to have education without common sense. Yet neither education nor common sense can justify the inherent stupidity which lies in your arguments.

May God bless you my ignorant-intelligent friend.

So basically you are unable to counter the argument I have set forth, based on fact and understanding of the legal system, so you grabbed a book of proverbs and decided to go all metaphorical on me, in the process revealing you have no counter argument to logic, common sense and down right fact.

Yes. Way to show your... *wisdom* there grasshopper. Much yet to learn have you. snort, snicker.

Originally posted by PVS
wtf whob...what are you frikin ghandi now??? whob-di?

Yes, it appears he is the man thing of a million faces. Sadly for all concerned they are all equally unpleasant. I'm just wondering how long it will be for his gay christian persona to get some air time.

Abortion is murder...

N'uff Said

Although I am pro-life, sometimes abortion is necessary to save the mother's life. For example, my wife had to have an abortion due to an ectopic pregnancy. She and the baby would have died if she had gone full term. We even had 3 opinions from 3 different doctors all came to the same conclusion. So we finally made a decision to have the surgery. I stopped going to my Catholic parish because of this incident. They did not understand that my wife and the baby would have died if she had gone full term. All they knew was that my wife was pregnant, and that she was getting surgery to remove the fetus to save her life. These people didn't even care about what would have happened. All they said was you should have left it alone and the lord would watch over you. Heck, I stopped going to church totally because of the ignorance of the people in my local parish. They made us feel like outcasts for it. That does not change my outlook on abortion though. It did change my outlook on my religion though.

Originally posted by Grimm22
Abortion is murder...

N'uff Said

Simple, accurate, and to the point. There are definitely many here who could learn from you.

I'm almost certain that if given the choice to debate about whether a spade is a spade, there are more than a few on this forum who would argue ad infinitum about it not being one, veiled under the guise of their seemingly conspicous intellectual arguments.

Hello, new whob sock.

Originally posted by Final Warrior
I'm almost certain that if given the choice to debate about whether a spade is a spade, there are more than a few on this forum who would argue ad infinitum about it not being one, veiled under the guise of their seemingly conspicous intellectual arguments.

Oh my, I wonder who that could be directed at. Heheheh.

Me, I am almost certain there is one person on this forum who was unable to literally, legally or scientifically prove that abortion is infanticide, and now feels bitter.

I am happy to debate the subject - what I ask is that people argue the facts, not by flinging about inciteful, incorrect claims.

Hello, new whob sock.

Maybe we should have a betting pool or something here about what kind of character the next one will be.

Originally posted by autumn dreams
Lets say the guy and girl find out she's pregnant and she wants the baby, then five months later she turns around and gets rid of it, even though her boyfriend wanted it. Same thing.

If they guy leaves her, so be it. Give the baby up for adoption. I wouldn't support an abortion at 5 months, it would depend on the circumstances.

You’re missing my point. My point is that if the guy walks out on her, he can easily sign off any fatherly duties and responsibilities. This is not the case today. Since it is the woman who’s pregnant it is HER body we’re talking about. Not some thing. And after FIVE months you can’t get an abortion here in DK without danger to the woman’s life.
So it is NOT the same thing. If the guy walks out on her up until the end of the legal abortion period she CAN have the abortion in question.
If he waits until after that point she’s STUCK with the pregnancy. And women are NOT breeding machines for childless couples…
Maybe her choice to keep the child was partly dependent on her and the guy being together and sharing the responsibilities not to name the PRICE of a baby.
So – you’re saying that to let men “get off the hook” after the legal abortion-period has passed, thereby in some cases making it impossible for the girl to support financially the child she should “just” give it up for adoption. What if she could keep it and had enough money if the guy paid his part?

Originally posted by Grimm22
Abortion is murder...

N'uff Said

Words like murder and morals need to be DEFINED – again.

So – morals are motivation based on ideas of right and wrong. Ideas being a key here, as well as “right” and “wrong”, which again are HUMAN terms. There is no absolute moral and no one to tell us what REALLY TRULY IS right or wrong.
Morals have changed over time – once slavery was ok, today it isn’t for example.

MURDER – is a legal term, it is the “UNLAWFUL killing of another human being”, as opposed to legal killings like executions, manslaughter (accidents) and war, and the slaughter of livestock. Sine an unborn foetus is not even a full human being capable of independent life; it falls in a category of its own.
But an abortion is NOT murder. It is not killing a human being, since a foetus is not a human being yet. This is a crucial point here. Whether YOU personally agree with abortions or not is irrelevant; it is NOT murder, since murder it is NOT the unlawful killing of another human being or a PERSON (An individual of specified character).

It’s important to remember, that most states that allow abortions do not do so completely free. There is a limit of 12 weeks here in DK, after that it requires a life threatening complication for the woman before the abortion will be performed. After about 3 months the girl/woman also has had ample time to decide whether or not SHE wants the child.
N’uff Said.

Why oh why is the murder discussion still happening? Seriously.

-AC

Perhaps on every page, someone should be designated to repeat the facts of the argument, thus limiting the amount of stupidity that enters the debate when they don't realize that their point has probably been repeated and refuted at some point in the previous...393 pages. Something generic like this:

"Abortion is not murder, and cannot be defined as such. Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being. Abortion, as of yet, is not unlawful.

A foetus, which if you are unaware is what is aborted, may or may not be considered to be a human being. Because the exact definition of human is ambiguous, one must consider other factors, instead of thinking of this argument by itself. While conclusive proof either way on this point would indeed provide a strong argument towards either pro-life or pro-choice stances, none has been provided yet.

Banning abortion could be a slippery slope. If it is inconclusive as to whether or not abortion is the equivalent of killing a human being, what shall be outlawed next? Would fast food companies be charged with mass murder for giving young children fatty foods that could one day kill them?

Potentiality is not a strong enough argument to go on. Yes, you could say that one day, that child could grow up to be a great painter, or scientist or whatnot, but there is an equal, if not greater, chance that the child will simply be average or even considered to be a bad person. Looking further upon potentiality, sperm that are not used during a male's lifetime could have created thousands more children. Does that make him a killer by negligence? No one would think that way. Or if a man dies in a car accident, do the thousands of children he could have spawned also die with him? I think not.

Good and bad are defined by morals. Each person's set of morals varies, but there are some actions that are commonly believed to be wrong. Stealing, rape, murder, etc. are commonly believed to do so, because they harm another human being. Do you see how strongly the debate hangs upon the point of whether the foetus is human or not? Morals change over time though. It used to be that disagreeing with the Church made you a sinner, deserving of death. Looking different, or being of a different race made it alright for you to be treated badly, or even killed.

On that note, pro-choice does not mean pro-abortion. It is perfectly possible for someone to believe that it is alright for a woman to have an abortion, but not support their choice. Something along the lines that Voltaire once said "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it". Of course, it is widely supported on both sides the use of abortion if it threatens the mother's life. Hmm, does that mean the mother is more important, because she is already alive? Wait, that would imply that the unborn was not yet a full person! That's just my pro-choice bias, but think about that.

And of course, one must consider the consequences of outlawing abortion. Some women who have abortions feel, and rightly so, that they cannot support themselves and their child. That is not always the case, but surely those who value life so much can see that forcing young women and children to undergo hardships day after day is cruel. But oh wait, because they did not die, it's fine, right? Here's another fact: thousands of children die everyday. While some relief is provided, it still happens. If there really were so many homes for adoption, as some pro-lifers claimed (they believe that adoption is a viable alternative to abortion) why are they not used presently to save the lifes of children in poorer countries?"

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
Me, I am almost certain there is one person on this forum who was unable to literally, legally or scientifically prove that abortion is infanticide, and now feels bitter.

I am happy to debate the subject - what I ask is that people argue the facts, not by flinging about inciteful, incorrect claims.

"What is Truth?"

The Roman Governor, Pontius Pilot, asked Christ this question before sentencing him to crucifixion. I've always found it unusual that Christ remained silent, and never directly answered. However, as I've grown more spiritually mature, so has my understanding.

Some truths are self-evident, and need no explanation. If I was to continue to argue with you indefinitely about the self-evident truth of a spade being a spade, then it would only serve the purpose of proving our combined overall stupidity.

So since you are already confident in proving your stupidity, I no longer feel the need to continue proving mine.

God bless.

Originally posted by Adam Warlock
Although I am pro-life, sometimes abortion is necessary to save the mother's life. For example, my wife had to have an abortion due to an ectopic pregnancy. She and the baby would have died if she had gone full term. We even had 3 opinions from 3 different doctors all came to the same conclusion. So we finally made a decision to have the surgery. I stopped going to my Catholic parish because of this incident. They did not understand that my wife and the baby would have died if she had gone full term. All they knew was that my wife was pregnant, and that she was getting surgery to remove the fetus to save her life. These people didn't even care about what would have happened. All they said was you should have left it alone and the lord would watch over you. Heck, I stopped going to church totally because of the ignorance of the people in my local parish. They made us feel like outcasts for it. That does not change my outlook on abortion though. It did change my outlook on my religion though.

welcomer to the world of everyone whos tried to make a valid point to the devout

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Why oh why is the murder discussion still happening? Seriously.

-AC

Because certain people feel incapable of discussing the matter on it's merits and feel the need to muddy the water of inaccurate names and definitions, such as murder and infanticide.

Originally posted by Final Warrior
"What is Truth?"

The Roman Governor, Pontius Pilot, asked Christ this question before sentencing him to crucifixion. I've always found it unusual that Christ remained silent, and never directly answered. However, as I've grown more spiritually mature, so has my understanding.

Uh Huh. Yes. Yes. I can see how that is relevant to the facts here.

Some truths are self-evident, and need no explanation. If I was to continue to argue with you indefinitely about the self-evident truth of a spade being a spade, then it would only serve the purpose of proving our combined overall stupidity.

No, apparently some truths are NOT self evident. There is, many a philosopher has said, a fundamental difference between fact and truth - truth being the more subjective aspect of fact - you are choosing to subvert the facts into your version of the truth. But that, as it were, does not make them somehow ultimate and binding. You keep saying a spade is a spade - though a shovel and a spade have enough differences to set them apart, they both dig the earth, but are slightly different.

What you aren't doing is debating the matter, no, you are holding on to a view that is incorrect by definition, by science and by the law. Debate the facts, not the biased interpretations.

So since you are already confident in proving your stupidity, I no longer feel the need to continue proving mine.

God bless.

I find it funny you can say that when you have so singularly failed to prove anything or win the argument. A very Whob-ish thing indeed - to totally fail to achieve anything but claim victory any way. I'm just thankful there are no "owned" pics being posted.

Originally posted by Adam Warlock
Although I am pro-life, sometimes abortion is necessary to save the mother's life. For example, my wife had to have an abortion due to an ectopic pregnancy. She and the baby would have died if she had gone full term. We even had 3 opinions from 3 different doctors all came to the same conclusion. So we finally made a decision to have the surgery. I stopped going to my Catholic parish because of this incident. They did not understand that my wife and the baby would have died if she had gone full term. All they knew was that my wife was pregnant, and that she was getting surgery to remove the fetus to save her life. These people didn't even care about what would have happened. All they said was you should have left it alone and the lord would watch over you. Heck, I stopped going to church totally because of the ignorance of the people in my local parish. They made us feel like outcasts for it. That does not change my outlook on abortion though. It did change my outlook on my religion though.

See thats not abortion in my eyes 😬

Abortion is when a woman dosent take responsibility for her own actions and decides to kill her own child for her own selfish reasons and shows little to no remorse whatsoever.

When its a situation like what you are describing thats not even in the same leauge as abortion

Originally posted by The Omega

MURDER – is a legal term, it is the “UNLAWFUL killing of another human being”, as opposed to legal killings like executions, manslaughter (accidents) and war, and the slaughter of livestock. Sine an unborn foetus is not even a full human being capable of independent life; it falls in a category of its own.
But an abortion is NOT murder. It is not killing a human being, since a foetus is not a human being yet. This is a crucial point here. Whether YOU personally agree with abortions or not is irrelevant; it is NOT murder, since murder it is NOT the unlawful killing of another human being or a PERSON (An individual of specified character).

Sure its "lawful" but then again the nazi death camps were "lawful", the torture chambers in the Soveit Union were "lawful"

Murder is above the laws of man and is answered to a higher power