Abortion

Originally posted by Gannon
So then you don't think the government should punish murderers for murdering? After all, its their choice to kill.

Originally posted by Gannon
What happened to the baby's choices and rights? Does the baby get a choice to live?

Originally posted by Gannon
Making the choice to kill another human being is wrong and should not be tolerated.

Originally posted by Gannon
Sure i am a guy and i don't know what it is like to be pregnant but i was once an unborn baby and if my mom decided to abort me then that would have violated my rights.

Originally posted by Gannon
I am not anti choice. However I believe that if someones choice takes away the rights of others, than it shouldn't be allowed.

Not that the baby chose to live or anything.

Originally posted by Gannon
Your argument for there being too many people in the world is just plain illogical. We, obviously being more fortunate then most of the world, having access to computers etc. should make an effort to help others around the world but killing our unborn baby's is not the way to do it. But that is another issue.

Originally posted by Gannon
I'm not saying women are wimps if that is what you thought. I was simply replying to Bardock's statement on one reason why a women might want an abortion.

Obviously every time someone has sex they do not have a baby. However we all know having sex can result in having a baby. If a couple gets pregnant with an unwanted baby, as much as you might not like it, it is their own fault.

Please read the posts before you get offended. My apologies if you were offended.

I don't get offended, I get angry. Stupid people just piss me off.

So, let me get this straight. Getting pregnant is someone's fault, so it's wrong and it needs to be punished. And what could be a better punishment for a failed contraception than forcing a human life (which you so want to protect) to an environment where it's not wanted, not treated well, abused and so on. Because happy ends don't just happen all the time.

And if you were a woman, and you got pregnant and didn't want the baby (I don't care why), would you abort it? If you say yes, you're a hypocrite, if you say no, you're a liar.

That's retarded logic.

If I point a gun to someone's head, and say that i'm either going to kill them or brutalize them if i'm not allowed to kill them you know what would happen to me?

I'd get thrown on the ****ing ground, handcuffed, and probably get thwapped a few times with a baton, that's what would happen.

Yet we're suppose to validate that as a serious answer when it comes to abortion. No. That's crazy talk. What kindof sociopath uses that sortof logic?

Howzabout this, you can't kill them, you can't abuse them, there's a strict no douchebag law. If you're a douchebag, you're going to jail.

I think that's a pretty fair law. I mean if I can't be a douchebag why should a pregnant woman get to be? Cause she has a vagina? Does having a vagina grant you some special murder/abuse privlages?

No, cause she has a parasitical tumour in her body and has the right to get rid of it like you'd have the right if you had one.

So now a baby's a parasite. We all know what an embryo or a fetus becomes. There's no doubt or dispute about that. We all know that it's potential life. You may as well have a baby in your body, which you do. To crush and suck away a fetus is to crush and suck away a baby. Saying it's your right is just an excuse to not take responsibility for your actions and to not feel guilty about it. Do vegans eat eggs? No. Why? They care for animals too much. Do we kill fetuses? Yes. Why? Because we don't care about other people. We only care about ourselves.

Originally posted by apoc001
So now a baby's a parasite. We all know what an embryo or a fetus becomes. There's no doubt or dispute about that. We all know that it's potential life. You may as well have a baby in your body, which you do. To crush and suck away a fetus is to crush and suck away a baby. Saying it's your right is just an excuse to not take responsibility for your actions and to not feel guilty about it. Do vegans eat eggs? No. Why? They care for animals too much. Do we kill fetuses? Yes. Why? Because we don't care about other people. We only care about ourselves.

Oh and just in case no one noticed, you are an idiot.

Originally posted by Bardock42
We all know what semen can become. You might as well have a baby in your penis. To shoot and flush away the semen is to shoot and flush away a million babies.

Oh and just in case no one noticed, you are an idiot.

Originally posted by apoc001
A single sperm may or may not become a baby. Probably not. An embryo or a fetus WILL become a baby. See my point now? By the way, name-calling doesn't prove anything.

And you are still an idiot.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Nah, it may or may not become one. It won't become one for natural causes in many cases, it certainly won't become one if the host refuses to continue sustenance, or if the host sticks a hangar in it's vagina, which, I am pretty sure everyone should have the right to do. The fetus is not conscious, it's not independent, it has no citizen rights, it is parasitical. There's no good reason why a woman should be forced to host a lump of cells causing severe risks and discomfort for a lengthy period of time if there is a different way without any victims whatsoever.

And you are still an idiot.

Originally posted by apoc001
Fetuses are, by definition, unborn animals still in development. Does this not make it human? It has bones, blood, and internal organs.

It has no higher brain functions. It doesn't know it exists. It has no thoughts, no memories, no ideas, no believes, no hopes, no dreams, no emotions, it doesn't even care about being aborted. It does not exist as human being. It is a bunch of human cells. As you said a potential human, not a human yet though.

Originally posted by apoc001
Women aren't forced to host lumps of cells causing severe risks and discomfort for lengthy periods of time.

Yes they are if they are not allowed to take them out of their body.

Originally posted by apoc001
If they would live responsibly, they wouldn't get pregnant at an inconvenient time.

It's not their duty though. It's their body they can do with it what they want. But you come in and tell them they can't. By making abortion illegal you and everyone else is, in fact, forcing her to host a parasite. there can be accidents and there can be rape, it's not the person's fault in every case, which is beside the point though, as every woman should have the right to subtract cells from her body as she pleases.

Originally posted by apoc001
The victim is the unborn baby.

Which has no rights. And doesn't mind. There is no victim, not in any usable sense of the word. If an aborted fetus is a victim, then a stone thrown against a wall is a victim.

Originally posted by apoc001
If you yourself were killed in your early stages of development, you would be dead.

I wouldn't be alive. I would never have been alive, "I" would not have existed. You know, I have to be alive in order to be dead.

Originally posted by apoc001
You would be the victim.

Bullshit.

Originally posted by apoc001
Again, I bring up my Vegan analogy.

Which sucked. Vegans don't prove points, Vegans randomly decide their diet.

Originally posted by apoc001
Idiots have IQs from 0-25. If I were an idiot, I wouldn't be able to type, let alone read.

That's the medical definition, there's a more common one, too. Should look it up, will be like looking in a mirror.

C-cause you are an idiot.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I wouldn't be alive. I would never have been alive, "I" would not have existed. You know, I have to be alive in order to be dead.

Originally posted by Bardock42
No, cause she has a parasitical tumour in her body and has the right to get rid of it like you'd have the right if you had one.

Stop being so preadjudice and discriminating against humans based on thier age and current location.

Originally posted by Captain King
Fetus is latin for "small child".

Stop being so preadjudice and discriminating against humans based on thier age and current location.

Not age or location. Conscious and actions.

Originally posted by apoc001
You said embryos and fetuses are parasites. Well, guess what. Parasites are organisms. C-cause I'm an idiot.

They are of a parasitical nature, I realize they can't be parasites as they are not of a different species in the first place for one. A better analogy might be cancer cells. Either way, a fetus is not human being.

Cancer cells?

Cancer is a mutation, so now apparently you think fetuses are the X-Men.

Why oh why do such tards have to call themself anarchists? Am I like the only competant one around?

Originally posted by Captain King
Cancer cells?

Cancer is a mutation, so now apparently you think fetuses are the X-Men.

Why oh why do such tards have to call themself anarchists? Am I like the only competant one around?

Cancer is a mutation. The X-Men are mutants. Mutant X is a TV show. John Shea played in Mutant X. Apparently I think fetuses are John Sheah. Odd.

I don't call myself anarchist. And you aren't.

What it boils down to, there are no reasons to extend human rights to fetuses, before we even consider that we must have given human rights to all animals and quite a few plants.

I propose then, that we grant that the fetus is a person from the moment of conception. How does the argument go from here? Something like this, I take it:

Every person has a right to life, so the fetus has a right to life. No doubt the mother has a right to decide what shall happen in and to her body, everyone would grant that. But surely, a person's right to life is stronger and more stringent than the mother's right to decide what happens in and to her body, and so outweighs it. So the fetus may not be killed, an abortion may not be performed.

It sounds plausible, but now let me ask you to imagine this:

You wake up in the morning and find yourself back-to-back in bed with an unconscious violinist—a famous unconscious violinist. He has been found to have a fatal kidney ailment, and the Society of Music Lovers has canvassed all the available medical records, and found that you alone have the right blood type to help. Therefore, they have kidnapped you, and last night, the violinist's circulatory system was plugged into yours so that your kidneys can be used to extract poisons from his blood as well as your own.

The director of the hospital now tells you, "Look, we're sorry the Society of Music Lovers did this to you—we would never have permitted it if we had known. But still, they did it, and the violinist now is plugged into you. To unplug you would be to kill him. But never mind, it's only for nine months—by then he will have recovered from his ailment, and can safely be unplugged from you."

Is it morally incumbent on you to accede to this situation? No doubt it would be very nice of you if you did, a great kindness. But do you have to accede to it? What if it were not nine months, but nine years, or longer still?

What if the director of the hospital says, "Tough luck, I agree, but now you've got to stay in bed with the violinist plugged into you for the rest of your life, because remember this: All persons have a right to life, and violinists are persons; granted, you have a right to decide what happens in and to your body, but a person's right to life outweighs your right to decide what happens in and to your body, so you cannot ever be unplugged from him."

I imagine you would regard this as outrageous, which suggests that something really is wrong with that plausible-sounding argument I mentioned a moment ago.

Giving birth to a baby doesn't leave you incapacitated for life, so the analogy isn't that good.

Originally posted by Nellinator
Giving birth to a baby doesn't leave you incapacitated for life, so the analogy isn't that good.

Being plugged into the famous unconscious violinist will not necessarily leave one incapacitated for life either, so the analogy stands.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Being plugged into the famous unconscious violinist will not necessarily leave one incapacitated for life either, so the analogy stands.

I agree that your point is made even better about the violinist because the violinist has lived long enough to learn something...make themselves a person...grow enough to be attached to someone enough to reciprocate the love...an unborn fetus does not have those complex feelings/attributes...so your example is actually even harder to make a decision, imo.

It works very wel...again, imo.

Good way of putting it, Adam. Human is human.