Originally posted by Schecter
and what are the "right" reasons?
you cant slip in your own moral standard as cannon for reality.
The fact is, the point of being pro-life is to protect life. If the baby is going to die from some kind of genetic defect, the life cannot be protected. If the mother is in danger from having birth, one cannot justify protecting one life while endangering another.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Me not adopting has nothing to do with it. There are a shitlod of couples out there willing to adopt a healthy infant. Me not being one of them means crap.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
so just because I will never give birth, my argument here is not valid?
I didn't say that. I said because you'll never give birth you can't toss off pregnancy as just some "thing" women have to go through.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Here's the thing, can one take a life to protect another life?
I swear you said it wasn't about protecting life, but protecting your beliefs.
Don't actually try to come off as pro-life.
-AC
While we're asking questions;
Who here, as a pro-lifer, actually does believe in the sanctity of life? Not just the sanctity of foetuses? Because I haven't really seen one yet.
I've seen a pro-lifer admit he'd commit murder and then say it's not about protecting life, I've seen one who doesn't know whether he's coming or going.
-AC
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
You toss off the potential life inside her because "she has the right to do so." Same thing.
It's not, is it? Because it's either cells or it's a foetus, currently, in the now. I don't toss it off, if she chose to have it, put it up for adoption or whatever else, I'd say "Go for it.".
The difference between organisms and what they are/are not is there for all to see and prove. YOU will never know what childbirth is like, so you have no right to act like it's as easy as pissing.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauriso what you are saying that said cells and/or fetus is not a potential human life?
It's not, is it? Because it's either cells or it's a foetus, currently, in the now. I don't toss it off, if she chose to have it, put it up for abortion or whatever else, I'd say "Go for it.".The difference between organisms and what they are/are not is there for all to see and prove. YOU will never know what childbirth is like, so you have no right to act like it's as easy as pissing.
-AC
I never implied that giving birth was easy. But aborting the fetus simply"because she doesnt want to have a baby" is chicken shit. give the baby up for adoption after birth if you like. Having sex is a risk. pregnancy is one of the things she is risking. she knew the possible consequences of her actions, so she should have to deal with it.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
While we're asking questions;Who here, as a pro-lifer, actually does believe in the sanctity of life? Not just the sanctity of foetuses? Because I haven't really seen one yet.
-AC
AC, man, I'm going to answer you one last time.
No one can be truly pro-life, because everyone at one point in their life has taken a life regardless. I've killed Bugs, Germs, and purchased animal meat. There's no way around it, you have to kill to live. I wouldn't want someone to kill me without Good Reason (By good reason, I mean life and death situation) And I wouldn't want to kill without good reason as well.
If killing means saving lives, I'll do it.
WW2 was fought in part to save people from the holocaust
American Revolution was fought for the colonies to live freely
ETC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You don't see much difference between giving actual birth, waiting for the birth to finish, then going "OH I DON'T WANT IT! *Stab to death*.", and actually having a legal medical procedure? Then your arguments get even worse.
There is no difference. The difference you see is an illusion. We assume that since it is legal and since we dont actually see it taking place, that abortion is fine and not wrong, but when actually having a kid in your hands and killing it is wrong. To a blind person there might be no difference. A developed fetus can kick and move, but you assume that since it is not visible, once it goes through the suction, it is just organic garbage and guts.
There is no difference. Its only in your head.
One doesn't have any human rights, it's not a human being, it's a human foetus in the sense that it was created by a human. Just like a hair off your head is a HUMAN hair, but not a human. That was originally VVD's point, I restated it cos it got overlooked.
A human baby was created by a human too. Therefore accordingly, it should have no more rights than it had as a fetus, at least if we were to follow your arguement.
Read a book called "The Giver". A certain part may shed some light on the point I am trying to make.
Yes, they do deserve it.
According to who? And why, may I ask? Because it exists? There are plenty of tools we have as a human power that we should never use, but do anyways, to our own detriment -and to the world's.
Location or not, it's still a factor that YOU cannot counter. All you have is "I DON'T SEE A DIFFERENCE!". Apparantly you're the minority, because science and many laws provide justifiable reason as to why abortions are legal.
-AC
Location or not? You never answered my question. Is location of a human baby/fetus giving it more precedence in your mind?
And we both know how reliable science and laws can be.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
so what you are saying that said cells and/or fetus is not a potential human life?
Tell me how you got that out of my post, considering I agreed. "Potential" doesn't count, the eggs in my fridge are a potential omelette.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I never implied that giving birth was easy. But aborting the fetus simply"because she doesnt want to have a baby" is chicken shit. give the baby up for adoption after birth if you like. Having sex is a risk. pregnancy is one of the things she is risking. she knew the possible consequences of her actions, so she should have to deal with it.
And if her "punishment" causes a really shitty life for the baby, what then? Because you do realise that she might not even give it up for adoption if forced to keep it, she might try herself and fail. Two lives ruined, your solution to that is what?
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
No one can be truly pro-life, because everyone at one point in their life has taken a life regardless. I've killed Bugs, Germs, and purchased animal meat. There's no way around it, you have to kill to live. I wouldn't want someone to kill me without Good Reason (By good reason, I mean life and death situation) And I wouldn't want to kill without good reason as well.
So where does your; "Who said it was about protecting life?" and "I'm about protecting my own beliefs." come into that? Because that is what you said. You said it wasn't about protecting life, but protecting your own beliefs, and when I called it a selfish crusade you admitted you never denied such.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
If killing means saving lives, I'll do it.
You did just say that it wasn't about protecting life, though.
Make your mind up.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriSo where does your; "Who said it was about protecting life?" and "I'm about protecting my own beliefs." come into that? Because that is what you said. You said it wasn't about protecting life, but protecting your own beliefs, and when I called it a selfish crusade you admitted you never denied such.
You did just say that it wasn't about protecting life, though.
Make your mind up.
-AC
I clearly remember saying it's more so about protecting beliefs then it's about protecting life. I never said I was pro-life, but killing babies is just wrong to me. How else could I justify my stance? I cannot say killing babies is wrong period because wrong and right are generally relative.
Originally posted by The Black Ghost
There is no difference. The difference you see is an illusion. We assume that since it is legal and since we dont actually see it taking place, that abortion is fine and not wrong, but when actually having a kid in your hands and killing it is wrong. To a blind person there might be no difference. A developed fetus can kick and move, but you assume that since it is not visible, once it goes through the suction, it is just organic garbage and guts.
No, there is a difference, fact. One is murder, one is abortion. One is the unlawful killing of what most courts would be considering a human being, one is a legal procedure preventing the creation or COMPLETED creation (Hence ABORTion.) of a human foetus.
Originally posted by The Black Ghost
There is no difference. Its only in your head.
Where as the dystopian future you create is actually happening...where? Oh, "The future is NOW!". Hahah, yes Ghost.
Originally posted by The Black Ghost
A human baby was created by a human too. Therefore accordingly, it should have no more rights than it had as a fetus, at least if we were to follow your arguement.
We're not talking about human babies, we're talking about cells and foetuses.
Originally posted by The Black Ghost
Read a book called "The Giver". A certain part may shed some light on the point I am trying to make.
I don't think the Sun itself could shed light on it, but sure thing.
Originally posted by The Black Ghost
According to who? And why, may I ask? Because it exists? There are plenty of tools we have as a human power that we should never use, but do anyways, to our own detriment -and to the world's.
According to me and many others. They don't deserve it? According to who? You and many others. We can sit on this roundabout all day.
Originally posted by The Black Ghost
Location or not? You never answered my question. Is location of a human baby/fetus giving it more precedence in your mind?
If it's not in the womb, it's up to the woman, I did just say this to you.
Originally posted by The Black Ghost
And we both know how reliable science and laws can be.
The dangerous thing is that you'd have belief negate science.
"The Earth is flat!", "Science says you're wrong.", "Well, how reliable is science?".
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
I clearly remember saying it's more so about protecting beliefs then it's about protecting life. I never said I was pro-life, but killing babies is just wrong to me. How else could I justify my stance? I cannot say killing babies is wrong period because wrong and right are generally relative.
I think killing actual baby human beings is as wrong as killing adult ones.
We're not discussing baby human beings, we're discussing human foetuses or cells created by humans.
There's a factual, scientific difference.
-AC