Abortion

Originally posted by Ayelewis
Well, if we're wrong then you should blame God for not giving us a proper view of reality. Cauliflowers may have souls and I recall a short story on that subject. However, things without functioning brains have no minds, no awareness and there's nobody home from what I can tell. Fertilized eggs immediately after ejaculation have no brains and it's perfectly acceptable to abort such things before a nervous system develops.

I get my views from logic and observable facts. It's preposterous to think that something without a brain has a mind. On the other hand you get your views from some lying preacher who talks shit about a stupid book of fables that anybody can interpret to mean whatever he or she wants.

Pardon me? Where exactly did I use religious points in any of my of what I just said? If you're gonna try and refute someone's argument, the least you can do is read it and argue point per point. Your entire line of logic is nothing but tossing ad hominems around and not really arguing any kind of logic.

Never made the no brain = mind "preposterous" argument you're talking about. Since it looks like you can't refute any of what I said, it looks like you're just making up arguments I never made just to make yourself feel better. Oh well.

Of course I believe in abortion. It exists, I know of it. Therefore, I believe in it. Socratic, really.

I've got mixed feelings on this.

On one hand, yes, you are killing a pre-born child.

On the other hand, no one should be FORCED to raise their child.

Originally posted by Jmanghan
On the other hand, no one should be FORCED to raise their child.

They could give up the kid to adoption. But for a woman carrying the child giving birth also affects their income and the likehood of retaking their job while affecting their body.

Also even if adoption was a go-to solution and somehow woman were devolved into a mindslaved population that is willing to carry unwanted babies to term on a regular basis, once the baby is born the law considers that the dad starts existing and has some saying in what happens to the kid. You could end up in a situation where the woman loses her job so a former lover gets a baby (which is kind of messed up).

Originally posted by Bentley
They could give up the kid to adoption. But for a woman carrying the child giving birth also affects their income and the likehood of retaking their job while affecting their body.

Plus, health effects.

There's really no equivalent situation- no-one is forced to sacrifice their health for months for another.

And it doesn't help one bit that many are also against contraception or education on said topics...

Jmanghan
I've got mixed feelings on this.

On one hand, yes, you are killing a pre-born child.

On the other hand, no one should be FORCED to raise their child.

The thing is, most of the time, what's being killed is really darn far from a child.

Like, if something is pretty much a baby, it just hasn't been born yet? I object to that, unless there's major health risks, then it's a straightforward-if-unpleasant 'one person or another' choice.

The vast majority of abortions are in the, 'no functional brain, not within a thousand miles of being a functional independent entity' category.

But it will be once its born, it still moves around in the womb, the woman feels a life growing inside of her.

Even after being born they still aren't independant entities, not immediately.

So, if it isn't an independant entity, its okay to get rid of it?

BUT I stick to what I said, the person shouldn't be forced to raise a child if she doesn't want to, and even if she gives it up for adoption it may come back to haunt her later.

Just gonna leave this here, while not actually joining the convo:
http://imgur.com/gallery/3kscWU5

I don't care enough about the issue to make it one of the things I take a stand on. It just doesn't affect my life or the lives of anyone I know. I prefer to become invested where I see a chance of making a difference one way or another. But I thought the letter linked there was kinda funny and crazy, given the legal situation down in Texas.

Originally posted by Digi
Just gonna leave this here, while not actually joining the convo:
http://imgur.com/gallery/3kscWU5

I don't care enough about the issue to make it one of the things I take a stand on. It just doesn't affect my life or the lives of anyone I know. I prefer to become invested where I see a chance of making a difference one way or another. But I thought the letter linked there was kinda funny and crazy, given the legal situation down in Texas.

You don't know any women? Just kidding, but perhaps it has affected people in your life but they haven't shared it, because of the stigma, shame and well danger, associated with it.

Good image though 👆

Originally posted by Bardock42
You don't know any women? Just kidding, but perhaps it has affected people in your life but they haven't shared it, because of the stigma, shame and well danger, associated with it.

Good image though 👆

Entirely possible. But either way, it's not something I've had any input or influence on. So for practical purposes, it's been an entirely academic topic for me my whole life. Getting worked up over it seems pointless.

You could appeal to the general good as an argument to be invested. But there are few issues that DON'T affect the public good in tangible ways, and they often affect far more people than abortion does (environmental issues, health care, economic prosperity, etc.). So that argument has never enticed me either. Also, as a not-woman, it seems a bit cheap to really take a stand when I don't have the right parts to be affected by this the most.

But thanks. 😊

Hmm, there's a lot of issues I get worked up over that don't actually impact me personally, is that not the case for you at all?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Hmm, there's a lot of issues I get worked up over that don't actually impact me personally, is that not the case for you at all?

It's not that it doesn't happen, it just makes it less likely that I'll be invested. With something like abortion, every time I peek into the debate - on KMC or otherwise - it just resembles a shouting match. There doesn't seem to be as much room for compromise. So, comparatively speaking, I see less room for progress or mutual understanding. So if I'm going to invest myself - emotionally or with a time investment - it always seems like there are better areas to focus my attention.

My edit to my last post elaborates a bit too:

Originally posted by Digi
You could appeal to the general good as an argument to be invested. But there are few issues that DON'T affect the public good in tangible ways, and they often affect far more people than abortion does (environmental issues, health care, economic prosperity, etc.). So that argument has never enticed me either. Also, as a not-woman, it seems a bit cheap to really take a stand when I don't have the right parts to be affected by this the most.

So with something like environmental issues, for example, you can make the case that, even if we don't live to see some of the consequences of our actions, our children and grandchildren likely will. There is debate over the severity of the problem, and the solutions, but not the general hope that we leave a livable world for future generations. No such common ground exists with abortion, and it's also impossible to predict if it will ever affect me or anyone I'm close to. So I instinctively gravitate toward one issue and away from the other.

Also, in political terms, I loathe how abortion can hijack entire elections, while others issues get ignored. Issues that undoubtedly affect more lives. I don't enjoy being a part of that problem.

Still hard to get over PP being the child of a tyrannical racist mongoloid hell bent on wiping out the black population.

bump 🙂

*reported for Dead Thread Ressurection*

🙂

Shouldn't break the Forum Rules Buddy.

Oh wait.. I forgot. Protected SnowFlakeList.

🙂

droolio

no more drug-fueled rants?