Originally posted by Bardock42
do they say "A fetus (despite medical disagreement) is a human and should have the same rights as in the other moral absolutes I consist of, meaning, it shouldn't be aborted"
Wow, if you can't even answer those questions how can you even debate about it.
Even assuming that your God made us....your God made everything...and he gave us free will....why are his moral standards absolute? Just because he created it? Come on...that's bullshit and you know it. My girlfriend and I could make a baby...does that mean everything we say about it is absolute and right and unchangeable?
Why was it wrong to kill the infant? Why? On what absolute standard that applies to everyone is it wrong?
Why are there so many sets of morals?
How do you know, that killing an infant, isn't in fact, the highest form of morality? How do you know, that we shouldn't all kill infants? I mean, some seem to think that that is the right way to go...why are your wishes and your conscience to be seen as the absolute and not theirs?
We are discussing whether this:should have the same rights as these
Think you anti-freedom (choice) morons. THINK!
You have not yet answered my question: what makes a fetus not a person?
Originally posted by Schecter
then call me "pro reproductive choice", i guess. but i am certainly not pro-abortion. not antiabortion either. i just believe that its not my or anyone's right to impose their own sense of morals on the other half of their population who doesnt agree.
Which makes you for the option of abortion. Or in short pro-abortion. Reasonable people should realize that pro-abortion doesn't mean you think that everyone should have an abortion regardless of their choice...and unreasonable people are anti-choice anyways.
[QUOTE=]Originally posted by FeceMan
They say that we should not kill humans. [/QUOTE]
Why? Do they define what a human is or do we get to decide that? What about euthanasia? Self defense? Are they all mentioned? And what is the ruling on it?
[QUOTE=]Originally posted by FeceMan
If you can't infer them, I don't know how you managed to sign up for KMC. [/QUOTE]
Bullshit. Just tell me already.
[QUOTE=]Originally posted by FeceMan
Why? Because He gets to set the rules. [/QUOTE]
He doesn't get to set the rules. Why should he?
[QUOTE=]Originally posted by FeceMan
Because it just is. Kant would say that it is wrong because we have not respected the will of the baby. I agree, but I believe it is on a more fundamental level: it's just wrong to put babies in a meatgrinder. [/QUOTE]
That is ridiculous. For two reasons:
1st you totally disregard the will of the mother
and
2nd the fetus doesn't have a will lacking a conscious and all.
[QUOTE=]Originally posted by FeceMan
Sets of morals? Elaborate. [/QUOTE]
Well, for one everyone has their own. Then there are Kant's morals, Plato's morals, Schopenhauer's morals...is it alright to have an abortion? Some say yes others no. Is it right to lie if you save the life of a friend? Some say yes some say no. There are some sets of morals that even state you should be able to kill a baby after it is born...now I don't agree with that, but are they maybe right? Is that maybe one of the absolute moral values?
[QUOTE=]Originally posted by FeceMan
It's not my wishes and conscience. I know because...well, you know. That one book and all that. Not to derail the thread. [/QUOTE]
Oh, right, the bullshit book again. Well, written by humans...totally subjective and in many ways morally outdated.
[QUOTE=]Originally posted by FeceMan
Actually, I was discussing whether or not it was wrong to kill this, not whether this has the same rights as these, though that's part of it. [/QUOTE]
Wait, if it is a human why shouldn't it have the same rights as those other humans? And why can't you not "kill" those cells? Do you have a problem with Steak too?
You have not yet answered my question: what makes a fetus not a person? [/B][/QUOTE]
Higher brain function.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Which makes you for the option of abortion. Or in short pro-abortion. Reasonable people should realize that pro-abortion doesn't mean you think that everyone should have an abortion regardless of their choice...and unreasonable people are anti-choice anyways.
shut your whoring mouth
Originally posted by Bardock42
Actually pro-abortion is appropriate.Because if you just say pro-choice it is hardly defined.
The issue is abortion.
You could be pro-choice on drugs.
And pro-life is indeed retarded. I am just saying that either pro-choice or pro-abortion should be considered alright. Also, because in both cases the opposite is applicable too, they are against abortion and they are against the choice.
The most accurate is of course for the legalization and against the legalization of abortion.
Thats the most reasonable thing Ive heard for a long time, and it isnt really that important. Why cant people who support the legallity of abortion call themselves pro-abortion? They are. Its a point of view, not a swear or something. Pro-life -I'll even go with anti-choice, it doesnt change my stance on the subject.
Originally posted by The Black Ghost
Thats the most reasonable thing Ive heard for a long time, and it isnt really that important. Why cant people who support the legallity of abortion call themselves pro-abortion? They are. Its a point of view, not a swear or something. Pro-life -I'll even go with anti-choice, it doesnt change my stance on the subject.
If I could some that view up in a word, it'd be fascism.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Why? Do they define what a human is or do we get to decide that? What about euthanasia? Self defense? Are they all mentioned? And what is the ruling on it?
Bullshit. Just tell me already.
He doesn't get to set the rules. Why should he?
That is ridiculous. For two reasons:1st you totally disregard the will of the mother
and
2nd the fetus doesn't have a will lacking a conscious and all.
Well, for one everyone has their own. Then there are Kant's morals, Plato's morals, Schopenhauer's morals...is it alright to have an abortion? Some say yes others no. Is it right to lie if you save the life of a friend? Some say yes some say no. There are some sets of morals that even state you should be able to kill a baby after it is born...now I don't agree with that, but are they maybe right? Is that maybe one of the absolute moral values?
Oh, right, the bullshit book again. Well, written by humans...totally subjective and in many ways morally outdated.
Wait, if it is a human why shouldn't it have the same rights as those other humans? And why can't you not "kill" those cells? Do you have a problem with Steak too?
Higher brain function.
Have it your way. Now retarded people aren't actually people. Neither are babies. People who are comatose? Not people. And neither are people who are braindead.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Admitting to being anti-choice just pretty much says it all.-AC
Originally posted by chillmeistergen
I still cannot understand people who fight for oppression, it makes no sense to me.
(See, I can straw man the argument.)
Originally posted by FeceMan
*Shrugs.*Have it your way. Now retarded people aren't actually people. Neither are babies. People who are comatose? Not people. And neither are people who are braindead.
retarded people exhibit higher brain function, comatose people are sentient beings with in tact yet temporarily disabled brain function, and people who are braindead? yeah, lets fight to protect the rights of a vegitable which needs a machine to live. let them die, as god intended.
Originally posted by FeceMan
I still cannot understand people who fight for murder. It makes no sense to me.(See, I can straw man the argument.)
It's not murder though, it's proved not to be.
No one is saying that people can't object to it, but to openly confess to wanting to limit choices, or entirely take away a possible action; is oppressing. There's no escaping that fact.