Alot of pro-life people like to adopt.Why would someone pro-abortion adopt a kid if they earlier in life just took there own child?Or can have child and decided not too.See my point?jm
You're right, genocide is perfectly fine in some places in the world. Clearly they are right in their own way though.
Well that would be pretty bad wouldnt it? I agree.
The reason I include rape is because it is not natural sex in normal society, which means it is not ultimately a woman's own decision to have a child. I say maybe, because even in these cases you do not have to have an abortion and you dont have to keep the child.
I draw the line at rape and therapeutic abortion because that is the ultimate line for a real "justified" abortion that is not of the parent's own bad choices. Anything further and abortion is just an escape route.
Remember you would be doing the same. Everything, every idea, every law was once an opinion that just became socially acceptable by the majority. In democracy, you can't actively build a facist sub-government, but that is inflicting on people's decisions as well. I agree that people deserve their own choices to a fair extent, but not all choices, especially ones dealing with future human life.
Because it effects more than the mother, it affects a child. Children arent property, as I would argue for all life.
Tacos are tasty.
And no, its definately happening right now. I see ideas and principles changing everyday. Law has become lenient enough that it is taken for granted, and now everyone wants more and more power that they dont deserve at all. And other things like tacos.
Except this and this actually did occur and has been occuring. A testament to the sixties. Aye?
Never said they were. I was explaining how the wierd baby-selling scenario isnt that wierd for something in the future.
Who said it doesnt? Plenty of heavy drinkers and smokers do drugs.
I'll give YOU a hint: [SPOILER - highlight to read]: You cant with shit in your mouth! Get it?
Apparently they just wouldn't care if you died. I see how our definitions of good and flawed do vary considerably.
But it is not caused by the crossing the road it is caused by the cars/drivers. Just like post-partum is a dirent cause from child abortion or stillborn children. Im not saying its the root of my argument, I meant it is one of the risks involved.
Sure it has. Take a good look around and tell me how people act.
I dont care if it impacts me or not. Ignorance is not an excuse for anything.
Yes.
And its funny because abortion is usually in response to just that -stupidness.
Yes but what has been altered by metal music? There was no tampering with life or people or anything, where abortion does. That's like saying there is a relationship between rabbits and tigers.
Yes, and sadly concepts and ideas are now banned, because their veiws would be "subjective". The future is now. Morality and ethics are real, they are important, they are overly objective. They are everything, allse is secondary.
Thats subjective shut up. You have no right to tell me when something is important or not.
Yes, I tuck them in goodnight and read them stories...
I never said it wasnt abortion. In this case, yes, I would be pro-abortion...for strictly the reason it was first made medically -to help women who would have otherwise died, and for rapes. I make allowances for the reasons, because it is the why, not the what that is important. Its not them getting an abortion that is STRICTLY the problem, it is many women's reasons for them. Many of which are absurdly self-centered.
As some are capable and incapable for relationships.
And yet it is a mother's responsibility to look out for a child, and it is no ones responsibity to look out for the mother?
I see nothing selfish about it, because it is selfishness that is why the mother wants the abortion in the first place usually.
__________________ Blog discussing politics, society, and current events! TOMORROW TODAY: A CHANGING WORLD
***> http://ttacw.blogspot.com/ <***
Precisely. They believe they are doing the right thing, Bin Laden believes he is doing the right thing, Hitler believed he was doing the right thing.
We do not have some higher power that means our morals are more correct than theirs, it's just more accepted. They are still entirely subjective, because if morals were not subjective, everyone would be forced to either agree on everything or admit they were doing something wrong. I think you have poor morals, but you do not. Vice versa.
What would? Nice little slip up there. Your whole crusade is, so you say, to make sure the world is a good place, right? So why then, if you could view the future, would you say a BETTER world as the result of abortion, would be bad? If you could objectively see that the world was great and abortion was the reason, why would you still deny it?
Be VERY careful how you answer.
If your reaction to rape pregnancy is anything other than "She has the complete right to abort it.", then you are a sadistic idiot.
As for "ultimate line" and "justified". You only get to decide where you THINK it is, or should be. Not enforce that, Ghost. To a woman, your opinion is probably worth f*ck all, dude. If you said to anyone's girlfriend "Hey! You can't do that! That's unjustified!", you'd get a smack around the face. Abortion WILL be abused, but there are people, decent people, who will use if for genuine reasons, and the whole point is that it IS an escape route from an ALL ROUND worse consequence. You not liking it is something you have to deal with, because it's not infringing upon you, you just act like it is.
It's not actually a future anything, though. The future is a concept, nobody knows what will be, only what is. What IS? Cells/foetus. Now, you can defend the two with the same vigour you would defend a born baby (As that's the only age you're prepared to fight for freedom for.), but do not act as though they are the same. It would theoretically become a human if allowed, it isn't currently.
It doesn't affect a child. The foetus has no clue, it's not getting offended.
People do not want power, they want the right to choose. You want the power you don't deserve, you want what you aspire to take away from others. Do YOU believe you deserve the power you feel you should have? The power to force women to live and choose as you selfishly desire?
It hasn't, not as of 2007. What you "see" isn't necessarily what is. The world isn't as you like it, big deal, we don't all want to live in a society run by tyrants who decide what is and isn't right according to what does and doesn't offend them, which we are moving toward not because of abortion, but the kind of mindset opposed to robbing women of their right to it.
We're not in the future. Your argument is based on something that doesn't exist, and everytime you try to point it out in modern days, you fail miserably.
Answer my question, because that doesn't. Marijuana isn't actually addictive, for the record. Second;
If that is a gateway drug, why isn't everyone who drinks caffeine, alcohol or smokes tobacco, out there trying more drugs? Because it's not true. People assume that because of the illegality stamp, it's worse than the legal drugs, the reason why SOME might try more drugs after trying pot? Probably because upon discovering how it's illegal for no reason, they probably feel like other illegal drugs might be similar.
The fact is, it's not definitely a gateway drug. It doesn't make you want to do more, some do, some do not. Some try weed, then crack, then heroin. Some try weed and nothing more, some try weed then spend life sober. It's a pointless notion to bring up.
Why wouldn't they care if I died?
Post-partum is caused by childbirth, not abortions.
It hasn't. I see the way people act, I see nothing connecting any of this to abortion. The Iraq war? That's because of abortion?
YOU are seeing this, it doesn't mean it's there. I mean for crying out loud, Ghost, your argument is based on a dystopian future as a result of abortion, through massively farfetched scenarios concocted by you alone. How can you expect to be taken seriously? You cannot say "THIS IS WHAT WILL HAPPEN!" and expect everyone to go "Oh yeah!". It's bs, you have no reason to believe as you do, but you do because it's the only way you can have reason to believe it. Fake.
Do I need to point out how that defeats you? You do not care if any of this impacts you...but your argument is that it infringes upon you...so...no, it doesn't does it? You just want a world fit for The Black Ghost, and want to force everyone into doing and not doing things that will achieve that result. Hitler had the same outlook.
What about quality of human life? That's not important to you is it? You only care when it's in the womb and soon after. That's the only time you will fight to protect its freedom.
Do you have a list of reasons people usually have abortions? Subjective. People may see your argument as great, subjective morality. I'd never try to remove your right to think it, but your right to act on it is a non-existent one.
Nobody is forcing anybody to get abortions, so there's no "tampering". It's choice. Your main blockage here is the inability to say "Cells are nothing close to human, this is scientific fact and therefore I cannot place human worth on it.", which is factually true. You do so in ignorance of fact.
So? You think that by showing one side of the argument you have won?
Do you deny that there is equal possibility of post-abortion...with no problems? Because they exist to. Post-adoption problems? Ever heard of those? They exist. You see what you desire to see, Ghost. I see the good and bad of abortion, you see the bad, then you make up more bad, then add some more.
The future is a conceptual idea of what will be, now is what we call the present.
So? Sickening stories or not, if we keep banning things that are also used responsibly because morons are being dumb with it, we'll end up with nothing left. That's not the way to go.
Ban cars cos people drive drunk? Ban TV because people take it as gospel? Ban free thought because people use it?
Precisely, so at least admit you are only using foetuses and cells as tools to push a view. You don't actually care about protecting life or the quality of it, as proven below.
As proven here.
Why protect a foetus to ensure it is born when you will oppress it anyway?
Did I not just do that for the benefit of keeping you focused on topic? To which I have reduced you to a doomsaying, one-line nonsense-retorting babbler? Most of the post I just replied to was dodging and chicken-isms. It's easy to take care of you when not catering to your whims.
I did that last time and you vanished.
You may feel free to reply to these, I will read them, but I will rest assured there are others willing to handle you. Twice in the same thread is simply enough for me.
So you are saying they were justified because everyone has their own opinion and no one can interfere with them?
Yes, vice-versa. Part of what you consider to be a moral right -or just a god given right in general, is to abortion. Some parents kill their kids after they have them, and that is no different than abortion. Just because they are physically "more cells" and they can think "more intelligently" doesnt make them much different than the damn fetus they came from. Its is "becoming" a human, it was that same person/thing -Whatver, all along. So if abortion is alright, technically so should be killing any newborn as well. To say that the developing child and the newborn (still developing in its own way) is really a differnt person, is a false beleif someone invented. People just assume that it is differnt because we can physically see how the child is a human because its right there in front of us, but for those unfortunate premature babies, some dont look much different than the child they would have otherwise aborted. Apparently a child is only a child in your eyes once the umbilical cord is cut, yes?
I'll pose my own question as an answer then. Tell me how the hell that would work out? Freedom upheld? Mothers rejoice?
Consequences... Consequences... Decent reasons= "whatever I decide to justify in my own head" to some people. Most decent people dont get abortions. Most see the alternatives as more humane.
[It's not actually a future anything, though. The future is a concept, nobody knows what will be, only what is. What IS? Cells/foetus. Now, you can defend the two with the same vigour you would defend a born baby (As that's the only age you're prepared to fight for freedom for.), but do not act as though they are the same. It would theoretically become a human if allowed, it isn't currently.]
Ive said it above, and I want your straight answer for my own interest only: Is a human only a human once it is ejected from the birth canal? Seems like i'll be getting a yes, but I thought I'd ask. Will be interesting.
Neither does a newborn child. In fact, once someone is killed at any age, they will have no idea they are being offended either. And that leads to the interesting question of killing itself: What is so wrong with it if once the victim is dead they dont know about it anymore? If no one catches you, so, you wasted some life? Who cares? Maybe they didnt even see the bullet? Maybe they were killed instantly? In that case their live was never really effected, only ended. Without morals, there is no value in ANY life. Subjective or not.
Choice IS power. Choice has been the fundamental element of radical liberal government thinking for hundreds of previous years leading to democratic governements. The right to vote for one- gives power to the people.
The choice of a life -future/present? Doesnt sound like something people should be messing with. The choice of a life... hmm
It has nothing to do with offensiveness. You could consider present legislature in your country as tyrannical, you would just be making an opinion on what is tyranny.
Nature never provided women with a choice in giving birth, it is not a right. You can poison yourself or poke sticks up to stab a baby to death, but that is using outside means. There is no "right" implied other than what we dictate for ourselves, which as subjective as anything, and not in the constitution of either of our countries.
Thats an opinion too. You dont like opinions, remember?
But it has been proven in very scientific (you like science) analysis on the % of who takes drugs and started on marajauna then later went to something worse.
I never said the rest were any better. Caffeine isnt really a drug though, its a minor stimulant that does nothing harmful really unless in massive amounts. Tobbacco and (alchohol, unless in small/reasonable amounts) is just as bad in my mind. Marajauna is not illegal for no reason -if you beleive it is not dangerous you are a fool.
Statistics, my friend, prove otherwise. Marajauna has been known as the gateway drug for some time now, and it is called that by almost all medical professionals or even drug users.
According to you:
You know what I meant. Post-abortion syndrome (PAS) thats the correct terminology.
Means nothing to me since I supported the war. Dont start on that though.
Then all of history is fake as well. The holocaust never happened, Stalin never rose to power in Russia and he killed no one. 9/11 never happened. Maybe someone predicted those things, but who would have beleived them?
I never said my exact scenarios were going to happen. I dont even think they will happen. ---but something like them could and very possibly will. One thing leads to another. No one would have expected the depression, no one would have expected Hitler to cause such a catastrophe to the world (and i hate to keep using WWII examples, there are many others). THis is reality. You cant just close your ears and pretend nothign ever happened or ever will.
__________________ Blog discussing politics, society, and current events! TOMORROW TODAY: A CHANGING WORLD
***> http://ttacw.blogspot.com/ <***
Last edited by The Black Ghost on Jun 2nd, 2007 at 05:52 AM
Doesnt defeat me at all, and I dont see how you think it does. Things dont have to directly impact me to be important or worth fighting for. I will go back to 9/11 incident, which is mostly an American tradgedy. I was not affected whatsoever, but I still am part of this country, and a part of the world, and I have feelings for the people affected.
The quality of life.... no, its the manipulation of life the way it suits us best. We want only one kid, but we accidently get pregnant again-too bad, abortion.
As is the right to abortions itself. As are all rights. Subjective, and invented by humankind.
How close to human is human? It has all the DNA and genertic code, its just missing its companion cells.
There may be good and bad (which do not forget is subjective) but in the world, if the bad outwieghs the good- it aint worth it.
This second you are reading this is the present, but in a second, in the future, you will still be reading it.
The future may not be "Right now" but it stills comes. Does the fact it means nothign now mean we should ignore what we do now that could affect it?
Abortion does not fit into the category of things that CAN be used responsibly. At least not abortion for anything more than what I have said specifically before.
Yes? I'm trying to put two and two together but the puzzle dont fit. If I was just using fetuses to push a view, then I wouldnt be arguing about abortion at all.
I would hope they would be more grateful they got the chance to live at all by my work than to be angry they could themselves not have abortions.
I fled in absolute horror of the almighty power of the god Alpha Centuari.
And I consider 1-lined responses more suitable for the slower minded.
One last huge question I have not asked: Is there any difference in your mind between abortion at the begining of pregnancy and at the end when the baby is nearly developed?
__________________ Blog discussing politics, society, and current events! TOMORROW TODAY: A CHANGING WORLD
***> http://ttacw.blogspot.com/ <***
No, I don't think the woman in question should be entitled to have an abortion because she's not in danger from the pregnancy.
No, it would be saying, "What you're wanting to do is wrong. You can't do it. I don't give a damn if you think it's right, good, and just--you can't do it."
No more so than allowing abortion--you're trying to say that abortion is morally acceptable! TO THE PANIC ROOM!!1!11!!
Driving a car can lead to getting to work on time. I have a feeling that the two are less connected than you'd like to pretend they are.
The issue isn't her having tons of abortions, it's that she's having an abortion for the wrong reasons. She had sex--she knew the risks, but she decided that the pleasure was worth those risks.
__________________ Ask me about my "obvious and unpleasant agenda of hatred."
KMC Community Forums
Jun 2nd, 2007 01:47 AM
Get it?
Decent reasons= "whatever I decide to justify in my own head" to some people. Most decent people dont get abortions. Most see the alternatives as more humane. 
