Forum
»
I utterly Destroy the abortion argument in 30 seconds. Isn't even a response.
I utterly Destroy the abortion argument in 30 seconds. Isn't even a response.
07-08-2021, 11:33 AM
-
#61
Originally Posted By GreatOldOne⏩
False, read my reply after that. It does matter, because they/YOUsteal from my paychecks to support something that is only getting worse as a result of the wrong kind of help. In other words,YOUmake me an accomplice of your immoral behavior.You're missing that people don't and don't have to share your moral compass around abortions or sex or sexual preference.
Enjoyyourreligion.
Also, afaik we don't fund abortion either domestically or abroad...by law. The abortion rate has also been going down, I believe...for whatever it's worth. I consider that a good thing.
If you want abortions to stay low, then promote family planning and access to birth control and sex education.
Enjoyyourreligion.
Also, afaik we don't fund abortion either domestically or abroad...by law. The abortion rate has also been going down, I believe...for whatever it's worth. I consider that a good thing.
If you want abortions to stay low, then promote family planning and access to birth control and sex education.
Do you understand what liberty is?
Lastly, the immorality of this has been proven on a scientific level too, its just not a popular result to share in today's society and folks like you
One party system; Most Republicans are Democrats, but no Democrats are Republicans.
Hayek and Mises were right; they're all socialists.
"To Call something fair or unfair is a subjective value judgment and not liable to any verification" Ludwig Von Mises
07-08-2021, 11:36 AM
-
#62
- illriginalized
- Registered User
-
- illriginalized
- Registered User
- Join Date: Dec 2006
- Posts: 44,327
- Rep Power: 46892
-
-
OP,
Amongst the secularists, they don’t care.
For us believers we must follow the instructions given to us and that’s all that matters.
Amongst the secularists, they don’t care.
For us believers we must follow the instructions given to us and that’s all that matters.
أشهد أن لا إله إلاَّ الله و أشهد أن محمد رسول الله
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
🚷 Anti-Degeneracy League 🚷
https://www.twitter.com/eyeonpalestine
Mossad acronym: ISIS AKA Israeli Secret Intelligence Service
07-08-2021, 11:40 AM
-
#63
- GreatOldOne
- Cthulhu fhtagn
-
- GreatOldOne
- Cthulhu fhtagn
- Join Date: Jan 2013
- Posts: 39,712
- Rep Power: 210947
-
-
Originally Posted By Kraken⏩
The Hyde ammendment prevents this stealing from your paycheck business, unless I'm missing something.False, read my reply after that. It does matter, because they/YOUsteal from my paychecks to support something that is only getting worse as a result of the wrong kind of help. In other words,YOUmake me an accomplice of your immoral behavior.
Do you understand what liberty is?
Lastly, the immorality of this has been proven on a scientific level too, its just not a popular result to share in today's society and folks like you
Do you understand what liberty is?
Lastly, the immorality of this has been proven on a scientific level too, its just not a popular result to share in today's society and folks like you
Your notions of liberty and morality don't advance the conversation, that I've seen. You seem to be complaining about things that don't affect you.
...and there is no science which can detect the first consciousness, and certainly not the morality of the situation. You are using morality emotively, referring to your emotions.
Not that that is bad, it's just not going to convince detractors. You rely too much on empathy for your story and storytelling...very similar to the methods of CRT btw. It's great if you already believe that, but falls flat to other audiences.
07-08-2021, 11:40 AM
-
#64
Originally Posted By GreatOldOne⏩
Repped.You're missing that people don't and don't have to share your moral compass around abortions or sex or sexual preference.
Enjoyyourreligion.
Also, afaik we don't fund abortion either domestically or abroad...by law. The abortion rate has also been going down, I believe...for whatever it's worth. I consider that a good thing.
If you want abortions to stay low, then promote family planning and access to birth control and sex education.
Enjoyyourreligion.
Also, afaik we don't fund abortion either domestically or abroad...by law. The abortion rate has also been going down, I believe...for whatever it's worth. I consider that a good thing.
If you want abortions to stay low, then promote family planning and access to birth control and sex education.
Originally Posted By Kraken⏩
Strong reachFalse, read my reply after that. It does matter, because they/YOUsteal from my paychecks to support something that is only getting worse as a result of the wrong kind of help. In other words,YOUmake me an accomplice of your immoral behavior.
Do you understand what liberty is?
Lastly, the immorality of this has been proven on a scientific level too, its just not a popular result to share in today's society and folks like you
Do you understand what liberty is?
Lastly, the immorality of this has been proven on a scientific level too, its just not a popular result to share in today's society and folks like you
07-08-2021, 11:41 AM
-
#65
- PlanoLifter
- I lift therefore I am
-
- PlanoLifter
- I lift therefore I am
- Join Date: Oct 2014
- Location: Plano, Texas, United States
- Posts: 7,423
- Rep Power: 103033
-
-
Originally Posted By Fishin4gainz⏩
This is the issue with banning abortion - unwanted kids poorly raised by parents who can't or won't care for them properly, unwanted kids raised by the state using tax dollars, unwanted kids raised to become leaches on society or to become criminals.Whose going to raise these kids that you are saving from abortion? Already a lot of **** parents who don’t care for their kids. Then they grow up Democrats, do you really want more?
As abhorrent as I find abortion, I find equally abhorrent the idea of forcing the birth of unwanted children. Ideally, in a utopia that we have not yet found, each and every pregnancy will be a pregnancy of a wanted child. But in the real world unwanted pregnancies happen - always have and always will. We should strive to reduce unwanted pregnancies with good sex education and with free contraception in order to reduce the need for abortion.
74
07-08-2021, 11:41 AM
-
#66
- jimbone21
- Registered User
-
- jimbone21
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jun 2010
- Posts: 5,682
- Rep Power: 46655
-
-
Originally Posted By jofedm⏩
Arguably, the fact that there are miscarriages emphasizes what a miracle a baby really is. (nobiblethumper)Early term abortions and miscarriages are basically the same thing. Why does god allow one and not the other?
You anti abortion wackos always focus on late term abortions when like 90% are done during the first trimester when there already a 33% chance the women miscarries. Of course leaving this decision up to a bunch of women hating men is already part of the problem.
You anti abortion wackos always focus on late term abortions when like 90% are done during the first trimester when there already a 33% chance the women miscarries. Of course leaving this decision up to a bunch of women hating men is already part of the problem.
07-08-2021, 11:42 AM
-
#67
- PTzFree
- Sarcastic Sage
-
- PTzFree
- Sarcastic Sage
- Join Date: Mar 2010
- Location: United States
- Posts: 7,402
- Rep Power: 69078
-
-
Originally Posted By Rabbitjb⏩
Nonsensical is having the balls to post statements with such ardor when the fact that you're wrong on virtually every single one of them actually dictates you should be a little less confident in how much you think you know.You are truly nonsensical
You say the biblical rules are not arbitrary when they are absolutely
You think the bible isn’t a book of parables written by man
Great that’s your faith with zero substantiation, just more faith
And you’re quoting your bible as though it’s an argument, it not , it’s just your faith
You say the biblical rules are not arbitrary when they are absolutely
You think the bible isn’t a book of parables written by man
Great that’s your faith with zero substantiation, just more faith
And you’re quoting your bible as though it’s an argument, it not , it’s just your faith
You're not even trying. There are a thousand other things an atheist could chuck in the face of a Christian and you choose to cherry pick easily debunked claims out of context. If you had any actual knowledge of the history behind the rules you're claiming are arbitrary you'd know how badly you're in error. But you're clearly one of those atheists who are content just slinging mud without ever really investigating your beliefs. You believe what you believe because dismissing the alternative is a more comfortable outcome for you. Why investigate something that sounds like a sci-fi film when doing nothing means I can just go about my business, right? God forbid you might find out there's substance there. Then you'd have to actually contemplate how that impacts your life, your reality, and you might even have to conform to a system of doctrine that denounces self. **shudder**
Inb4 LOL you believe in a magical man in the sky
Yup. Pearls before swine.
AP7 Crew
Rogue Home Gym Crew
Officecel Crew
Motorcycle Crew
“When you want to succeed as bad as you want to breathe, then you'll be successful.”
― Eric Thomas, The Secret to Success
07-08-2021, 11:42 AM
-
#68
- plsmire
- Registered User
-
- plsmire
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jul 2012
- Location: London, State / Province, United Kingdom (Great Britain)
- Posts: 5,042
- Rep Power: 29655
-
-
The coma argument is weak if you’re arguing for abortion.
If someone is in the coma and you are 99.9% certain that they will wake up in 9-8-7-1 month time and you pull the plug, that is absolutely murder. Therefore, you could apply the same logic to abortion.
I used to be on the fence, but actually, it’s difficult to argue for abortion.
The argument is, “is the vaginal canal what grants life?”. The obvious answer is no, because a baby 5 minute before conception is really not much different from a baby 5 min out of the vagina, killing it then would be considered murder.
So now I ask, when does it become “not life”? The default is that it’s life whilst inside the womb because it was life 5 minute before it came out, still inside the womb.
Is it 1 day before? A month before? 3 months before? Whatever your answer is, tell me why? For example, if you say 3 months before, does that mean that if the baby is 89 days to birth, it’s life, but 91 days and it’s not? Why? What’s the marker?
Pro-abortion people has never been able to answer this question.
If someone is in the coma and you are 99.9% certain that they will wake up in 9-8-7-1 month time and you pull the plug, that is absolutely murder. Therefore, you could apply the same logic to abortion.
I used to be on the fence, but actually, it’s difficult to argue for abortion.
The argument is, “is the vaginal canal what grants life?”. The obvious answer is no, because a baby 5 minute before conception is really not much different from a baby 5 min out of the vagina, killing it then would be considered murder.
So now I ask, when does it become “not life”? The default is that it’s life whilst inside the womb because it was life 5 minute before it came out, still inside the womb.
Is it 1 day before? A month before? 3 months before? Whatever your answer is, tell me why? For example, if you say 3 months before, does that mean that if the baby is 89 days to birth, it’s life, but 91 days and it’s not? Why? What’s the marker?
Pro-abortion people has never been able to answer this question.
07-08-2021, 11:43 AM
-
#69
- Jayarbie
- Registered User
-
- Jayarbie
- Registered User
- Join Date: Apr 2010
- Age: 55
- Posts: 22,214
- Rep Power: 133991
-
-
Originally Posted By Kraken⏩
So abortion is evil because you have to pay taxes? Gotcha, chief.Shook? When you realize that bad people are doing evil, I guess that's what you could call it. You see, the people doing this, and who are a part of it, have bad things happen in their lives. They have to live with their conscious and they tell themselves lies until they believe it, or they look to their god, gubment for support. The problem I have is when money is taken from my pocket to allow immoral behavior, then I have to deal with the continuous policy making in an attempt to "fix" things...its not that the bad behavior affects me, it's the political aspect of it and the money they take from me to do it.
It's also terrible for the economy.
It's also terrible for the economy.
07-08-2021, 11:45 AM
-
#70
07-08-2021, 11:45 AM
-
#71
- PlanoLifter
- I lift therefore I am
-
- PlanoLifter
- I lift therefore I am
- Join Date: Oct 2014
- Location: Plano, Texas, United States
- Posts: 7,423
- Rep Power: 103033
-
-
Originally Posted By Jayarbie⏩
And if abortion is banned there will be more unwanted children whose upbringing will become the financial responsibility of the taxpayer due to the increased cost of social programs.So abortion is evil because you have to pay taxes? Gotcha, chief.
74
07-08-2021, 11:47 AM
-
#72
- Jayarbie
- Registered User
-
- Jayarbie
- Registered User
- Join Date: Apr 2010
- Age: 55
- Posts: 22,214
- Rep Power: 133991
-
-
Originally Posted By plsmire⏩
It's not whether it's a "life" that is important, it's whether it's a separate legal person with natural rights separate from the mother's. It's clearly a new "life" from the moment of conception, but that doesn't make it a separate person. IMO, it's not a separate person with its own legal rights and protections until it's actually born.The coma argument is weak if you’re arguing for abortion.
If someone is in the coma and you are 99.9% certain that they will wake up in 9-8-7-1 month time and you pull the plug, that is absolutely murder. Therefore, you could apply the same logic to abortion.
I used to be on the fence, but actually, it’s difficult to argue for abortion.
The argument is, “is the vaginal canal what grants life?”. The obvious answer is no, because a baby 5 minute before conception is really not much different from a baby 5 min out of the vagina, killing it then would be considered murder.
So now I ask, when does it become “not life”? The default is that it’s life whilst inside the womb because it was life 5 minute before it came out, still inside the womb.
Is it 1 day before? A month before? 3 months before? Whatever your answer is, tell me why? For example, if you say 3 months before, does that mean that if the baby is 89 days to birth, it’s life, but 91 days and it’s not? Why? What’s the marker?
Pro-abortion people has never been able to answer this question.
If someone is in the coma and you are 99.9% certain that they will wake up in 9-8-7-1 month time and you pull the plug, that is absolutely murder. Therefore, you could apply the same logic to abortion.
I used to be on the fence, but actually, it’s difficult to argue for abortion.
The argument is, “is the vaginal canal what grants life?”. The obvious answer is no, because a baby 5 minute before conception is really not much different from a baby 5 min out of the vagina, killing it then would be considered murder.
So now I ask, when does it become “not life”? The default is that it’s life whilst inside the womb because it was life 5 minute before it came out, still inside the womb.
Is it 1 day before? A month before? 3 months before? Whatever your answer is, tell me why? For example, if you say 3 months before, does that mean that if the baby is 89 days to birth, it’s life, but 91 days and it’s not? Why? What’s the marker?
Pro-abortion people has never been able to answer this question.
07-08-2021, 11:47 AM
-
#73
Lol.
To know, in religious terms, has a sexual connotation.
If God is claiming to know a child before it is even conceived then that means that God had sexual relations with that being before they entered our plane of existence.
I do agree that abortion is provably wrong(by our standards of right and wrong) but I won't speak on that now.
To know, in religious terms, has a sexual connotation.
If God is claiming to know a child before it is even conceived then that means that God had sexual relations with that being before they entered our plane of existence.
I do agree that abortion is provably wrong(by our standards of right and wrong) but I won't speak on that now.
I: Self, Lord and Master.
"I rub my hands when my palms itch."
"I call you Son not because you Shine but because you Mine."
07-08-2021, 11:50 AM
-
#74
- jimbone21
- Registered User
-
- jimbone21
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jun 2010
- Posts: 5,682
- Rep Power: 46655
-
-
Originally Posted By PlanoLifter⏩
Using that logic, any child conceived to a family that doesn't have the finances to support it should be forcibly aborted. I used to be in favor of abortion when I was younger because OF COURSE its a great idea. If someone wants a kid so little that they want to kill it before it is born, then why put that burden on the tax payer/adoption system? However, when I got older and realized I was basically in favor of eugenics by proxy using this logic, it disgusted me.And if abortion is banned there will be more unwanted children whose upbringing will become the financial responsibility of the taxpayer due to the increased cost of social programs.
07-08-2021, 11:52 AM
-
#75
Originally Posted By CalmWind⏩
Ive brought this up in the thread too. Supporting bad behavior promotes more bad behavior. When people don’t get money for having children and aren’t able to get abortions, they raise their standards to those expectations. This is what I mean when I say “compelled by God”. It’s not just religious, it’s metaphorical; Mother Nature is gonna make your life ****ty if you make bad decisions. Government replaces God, Mother Nature, or the punishment you have to deal with consequences. It’s all the same whether you’re religious or not. It’s two sides of the same coin.I tend to avoid using my religion to debate against abortion.
It is wrong on every logical standpoint. People are using it as a method of convenient birth control. To avoid parental responsibilities, so they murder their own developing children.
It is wrong on every logical standpoint. People are using it as a method of convenient birth control. To avoid parental responsibilities, so they murder their own developing children.
The welfare state snd social/racist policies (those based on skin color and preferential treatment) all creates unpredicted, unintended, and worse outcomes than they fixed.
Strong evidence shows us that giving out free or cheap abortions, money for having children, birth control etc made things worse; younger and younger children having children.
Originally Posted By GreatOldOne⏩
Planned parenthood is state and federally funded through Medicaid and subsidies as a healthcare facility. They then use that money for abortions, transsexual transitioning etc for ALL AGES.The Hyde ammendment prevents this stealing from your paycheck business, unless I'm missing something.
Your notions of liberty and morality don't advance the conversation, that I've seen. You seem to be complaining about things that don't affect you.
Your notions of liberty and morality don't advance the conversation, that I've seen. You seem to be complaining about things that don't affect you.
One party system; Most Republicans are Democrats, but no Democrats are Republicans.
Hayek and Mises were right; they're all socialists.
"To Call something fair or unfair is a subjective value judgment and not liable to any verification" Ludwig Von Mises
07-08-2021, 11:53 AM
-
#76
- PTzFree
- Sarcastic Sage
-
- PTzFree
- Sarcastic Sage
- Join Date: Mar 2010
- Location: United States
- Posts: 7,402
- Rep Power: 69078
-
-
Originally Posted By Abzu⏩
I really hope you're trolling.Lol.
To know, in religious terms, has a sexual connotation.
If God is claiming to know a child before it is even conceived then that means that God had sexual relations with that being before they entered our plane of existence.
I do agree that abortion is provably wrong(by our standards of right and wrong) but I won't speak on that now.
To know, in religious terms, has a sexual connotation.
If God is claiming to know a child before it is even conceived then that means that God had sexual relations with that being before they entered our plane of existence.
I do agree that abortion is provably wrong(by our standards of right and wrong) but I won't speak on that now.
It never ceases to amaze me how people who hate the Bible will be completely and utterly obtuse when interpreting it.
You do know that when a woman says she's taking her husbands name she's not literally taking it right?
"but... but... PtzFree, how can you be sure?"
glad you didn't ask: because words and phrases can have different meanings relative to the context in which they're used... and one quick way to double check is to ask yourself if the way you are translating it makes absolutely any friggin' sense.
AP7 Crew
Rogue Home Gym Crew
Officecel Crew
Motorcycle Crew
“When you want to succeed as bad as you want to breathe, then you'll be successful.”
― Eric Thomas, The Secret to Success
07-08-2021, 11:56 AM
-
#77
- jimbone21
- Registered User
-
- jimbone21
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jun 2010
- Posts: 5,682
- Rep Power: 46655
-
-
Originally Posted By Kraken⏩
Just think of how much better the family structure used to be before readily available abortion and birth control. Sex wasn't some casual thing and if a pregnancy happened the couple married a lot of the times. Granted, today's society will have you believe that every wife was some battered ragdoll, abused for a burned dinner or unclean shirt or unkind glance, but that is simply untrue.Ive brought this up in the thread too. Supporting bad behavior promotes more bad behavior. When people don’t get money for having children and aren’t able to get abortions, they raise their standards to those expectations. This is what I mean when I say “compelled by God”. It’s not just religious, it’s metaphorical; Mother Nature is gonna make your life ****ty if you make bad decisions. Government replaces God, Mother Nature, or the punishment you have to deal with consequences. It’s all the same whether you’re religious or not. It’s two sides of the same coin.
The welfare state snd social/racist policies (those based on skin color and preferential treatment) all creates unpredicted, unintended, and worse outcomes than they fixed.
The welfare state snd social/racist policies (those based on skin color and preferential treatment) all creates unpredicted, unintended, and worse outcomes than they fixed.
07-08-2021, 12:02 PM
-
#78
- PlanoLifter
- I lift therefore I am
-
- PlanoLifter
- I lift therefore I am
- Join Date: Oct 2014
- Location: Plano, Texas, United States
- Posts: 7,423
- Rep Power: 103033
-
-
Originally Posted By jimbone21⏩
Re: the bolded part: Not at all. I'm not talking about forcing abortion abortion on anyone. I'm simply stating that by banning abortion there will be a financial burden to the taxpayer. If taxpayers are okay with this and feel strongly that abortion should be banned then by all means they should push to have abortion banned. I'd rather the decision to abort (or not) be left to the parents with the resulting benefit to society being less taxpayer burden if they choose to abort due their financial position. I'd also prefer each and every child to be lovingly raised and cared for by parents who actually want the child. Forcing parents to raise an unwanted and perhaps unloved child (by banning abortion) can't be good for society as a whole.Using that logic, any child conceived to a family that doesn't have the finances to support it should be forcibly aborted.I used to be in favor of abortion when I was younger because OF COURSE its a great idea. If someone wants a kid so little that they want to kill it before it is born, then why put that burden on the tax payer/adoption system? However, when I got older and realized I was basically in favor of eugenics by proxy using this logic, it disgusted me.
My point is that there are (negative) consequences for society by banning abortion and that I'd rather my tax money go to minimizing the need for abortion rather than to raising unwanted children.
74
07-08-2021, 12:07 PM
-
#79
- PlanoLifter
- I lift therefore I am
-
- PlanoLifter
- I lift therefore I am
- Join Date: Oct 2014
- Location: Plano, Texas, United States
- Posts: 7,423
- Rep Power: 103033
-
-
Originally Posted By jimbone21⏩
You don't think abortions happened before the procedure was legalized? Are you saying birth control is a bad thing? Humans have had casual sex for as long as humans have roamed the planetJust think of how much better the family structure used to be before readily available abortion and birth control.Sex wasn't some casual thing and if a pregnancy happened the couple married a lot of the times. Granted, today's society will have you believe that every wife was some battered ragdoll, abused for a burned dinner or unclean shirt or unkind glance, but that is simply untrue.
74
07-08-2021, 12:10 PM
-
#80
Originally Posted By PlanoLifter⏩
Socialist policies create demand for socialist programs…paying for food…paying for children…paying for abortion…Re: the bolded part: Not at all. I'm not talking about forcing abortion abortion on anyone. I'm simply stating that by banning abortion there will be a financial burden to the taxpayer. If taxpayers are okay with this and feel strongly that abortion should be banned then by all means they should push to have abortion banned. I'd rather the decision to abort (or not) be left to the parents with the resulting benefit to society being less taxpayer burden if they choose to abort due their financial position. I'd also prefer each and every child to be lovingly raised and cared for by parents who actually want the child. Forcing parents to raise an unwanted and perhaps unloved child (by banning abortion) can't be good for society as a whole.
My point is that there are (negative) consequences for society by banning abortion
My point is that there are (negative) consequences for society by banning abortion
If you want to stop the cycle of nonsense, you have to stop it all. Keep in mind, charitable giving dramatically decrease with socialism too. So charitable giving would go back up as we lessen taxes and remove socialist programs.
The vast majority of the issue is understanding cause and effect and how it’s a process. The left/socialists have trouble with that concept because they depend on their feelings at the time and with one policy at a time. They can’t see the process and the outcomes they create. It’s a loss of objectivity.
“Capitalism is the most humane system ever created.” How? Because when government does nothing for us, we live up to very high standards and this creates a good and moral value system. The more the government interferes, the more humans will react in their own self interest.
Adam Smith called it the invisible hand. Christians call it the hand of God. Economist call it the chess fallacy
One party system; Most Republicans are Democrats, but no Democrats are Republicans.
Hayek and Mises were right; they're all socialists.
"To Call something fair or unfair is a subjective value judgment and not liable to any verification" Ludwig Von Mises
07-08-2021, 12:12 PM
-
#81
Originally Posted By PlanoLifter⏩
They happenedYou don't think abortions happened before the procedure was legalized? Are you saying birth control is a bad thing? Humans have had casual sex for as long as humans have roamed the planet
But more women died
But that’s ok to the religious it seems
07-08-2021, 12:19 PM
-
#82
- numberguy12
- Registered User
-
- numberguy12
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jan 2017
- Posts: 6,938
- Rep Power: 51915
-
-
Originally Posted By plsmire⏩
First, just want to point out that conception is not the moment of birth....(bolded above)The coma argument is weak if you’re arguing for abortion.
If someone is in the coma and you are 99.9% certain that they will wake up in 9-8-7-1 month time and you pull the plug, that is absolutely murder. Therefore, you could apply the same logic to abortion.
I used to be on the fence, but actually, it’s difficult to argue for abortion.
The argument is, “is the vaginal canal what grants life?”.The obvious answer is no, because a baby 5 minute before conception is really not much different from a baby 5 min out of the vagina, killing it then would be considered murder.
So now I ask, when does it become “not life”? The default is that it’s life whilst inside the womb because it was life 5 minute before it came out, still inside the womb.
Is it 1 day before? A month before? 3 months before? Whatever your answer is, tell me why? For example, if you say 3 months before, does that mean that if the baby is 89 days to birth, it’s life, but 91 days and it’s not? Why? What’s the marker?
Pro-abortion people has never been able to answer this question.
If someone is in the coma and you are 99.9% certain that they will wake up in 9-8-7-1 month time and you pull the plug, that is absolutely murder. Therefore, you could apply the same logic to abortion.
I used to be on the fence, but actually, it’s difficult to argue for abortion.
The argument is, “is the vaginal canal what grants life?”.The obvious answer is no, because a baby 5 minute before conception is really not much different from a baby 5 min out of the vagina, killing it then would be considered murder.
So now I ask, when does it become “not life”? The default is that it’s life whilst inside the womb because it was life 5 minute before it came out, still inside the womb.
Is it 1 day before? A month before? 3 months before? Whatever your answer is, tell me why? For example, if you say 3 months before, does that mean that if the baby is 89 days to birth, it’s life, but 91 days and it’s not? Why? What’s the marker?
Pro-abortion people has never been able to answer this question.
Also, the term life in biology, while nuanced, is not in question here at all. A developing fetus is life, as is someone’s stomach cell, as is a leaf, as is an insect, as is a single celled bacterium. So instead of life, “human being” is probably a better word to use in your above argument.
Finally, I find arguments like the above to be somewhat weak. On one hand, pro-abortion people have provided various answers of what they think are acceptable markers (depending on anatomical, physiological development markers, e.g. neurological milestones).
But let’s forget all that, back to your argument that since you can’t distinguish the developing fetus from one day to the next day all that much, then you can’t create a marker to divide, therefore everything has to be pushed back to the moment of conception, the only possible divide. One problem is you can apply this to any kind of gradual process and get strange results. There is no one moment in someone’s life where, biologically, they are capable of doing adult things (smoke cigarettes, engage in sex, etc). What exactly is the difference between someone 17 years old, 3 months, and 20 days....and the next day? Not much. However, no one in their right mind would then extrapolate this toit should be pushed back all the way to birthbecause of this. The law steps in in many situations and defines a legal definition of what it means to be an adult (e.g. 18)- even though there isn’t much difference on that day from the one previous. There is not one specific day an astrophysicist stepped back and said....ah, I am now able to understand higher subjects of science and math- in the sense he couldn’t do this the day before. He does not therefore conclude he was able to do calculus and Newtonian mechanics as an infant or when he was born.
∫∫ Mathematics crew ∑∑
♫1:2:3:4 Pythagoras crew ♫ ♫ 🧮
Nullius in verba
07-08-2021, 12:21 PM
-
#83
Originally Posted By PTzFree⏩
Do you know who Adam's first wife is?I really hope you're trolling.
It never ceases to amaze me how people who hate the Bible will be completely and utterly obtuse when interpreting it.
You do know that when a woman says she's taking her husbands name she's not literally taking it right?
"but... but... PtzFree, how can you be sure?"
glad you didn't ask: because words and phrases can have different meanings relative to the context in which they're used... and one quick way to double check is to ask yourself if the way you are translating it makes absolutely any friggin' sense.
It never ceases to amaze me how people who hate the Bible will be completely and utterly obtuse when interpreting it.
You do know that when a woman says she's taking her husbands name she's not literally taking it right?
"but... but... PtzFree, how can you be sure?"
glad you didn't ask: because words and phrases can have different meanings relative to the context in which they're used... and one quick way to double check is to ask yourself if the way you are translating it makes absolutely any friggin' sense.
Do you know what the Tree of Knowledge represents?
Adam's first wife was Lilith. The Tree of Knowledge is actually the Tree of Sex. Adam's first wife did not like Adam's second wife, Eve.
The story of the Tree of knowledge is really about Adam's first wife manipulating his second wife by means of seduction. Adam's sin was that he loved multiple women. Lilith then used Adam's corruption against him, came to him in the night and bore him children.
The children she bore him were known as Lilu.
Lilu is the Akkadian word for Demon.
Make your Mind your Kingdom.
I: Self, Lord and Master.
"I rub my hands when my palms itch."
"I call you Son not because you Shine but because you Mine."
07-08-2021, 12:23 PM
-
#84
- PTzFree
- Sarcastic Sage
-
- PTzFree
- Sarcastic Sage
- Join Date: Mar 2010
- Location: United States
- Posts: 7,402
- Rep Power: 69078
-
-
Originally Posted By Abzu⏩
"Stop it. Get some help." - Michael JordanDo you know who Adam's first wife is?
Do you know what the Tree of Knowledge represents?
Adam's first wife was Lilith. The Tree of Knowledge is actually the Tree of Sex. Adam's first wife did not like Adam's second wife, Eve.
The story of the Tree of knowledge is really about Adam's first wife manipulating his second wife by means of seduction. Adam's sin was that he loved multiple women. Lilith then used Adam's corruption against him, came to him in the night and bore him children.
The children she bore him were known as Lilu.
Lilu is the Akkadian word for Demon.
Make your Mind your Kingdom.
Do you know what the Tree of Knowledge represents?
Adam's first wife was Lilith. The Tree of Knowledge is actually the Tree of Sex. Adam's first wife did not like Adam's second wife, Eve.
The story of the Tree of knowledge is really about Adam's first wife manipulating his second wife by means of seduction. Adam's sin was that he loved multiple women. Lilith then used Adam's corruption against him, came to him in the night and bore him children.
The children she bore him were known as Lilu.
Lilu is the Akkadian word for Demon.
Make your Mind your Kingdom.
AP7 Crew
Rogue Home Gym Crew
Officecel Crew
Motorcycle Crew
“When you want to succeed as bad as you want to breathe, then you'll be successful.”
― Eric Thomas, The Secret to Success
07-08-2021, 12:26 PM
-
#85
07-08-2021, 12:42 PM
-
#86
Liberty; freedom from being a mechanism of someone else’s happiness.
Let’s face it, true liberty requires traditional values; two parent homes, family planning, willingness to work, faith in God and spirituality, “thick skin”, high standards, which leads to better moral systems and ethics…
A loss of liberty deteriorates all of this. Socialism does not require any of this, and thus, lower standards and morals. Those who believe in Socialism don’t understand the concept of morality and how it is affected by dependency. You will never convince them otherwise, because it would make them self reflect on their own responsibility, and their actions versus their words.
There is truly A loss of meaningful lives and happiness.
Let’s face it, true liberty requires traditional values; two parent homes, family planning, willingness to work, faith in God and spirituality, “thick skin”, high standards, which leads to better moral systems and ethics…
A loss of liberty deteriorates all of this. Socialism does not require any of this, and thus, lower standards and morals. Those who believe in Socialism don’t understand the concept of morality and how it is affected by dependency. You will never convince them otherwise, because it would make them self reflect on their own responsibility, and their actions versus their words.
There is truly A loss of meaningful lives and happiness.
One party system; Most Republicans are Democrats, but no Democrats are Republicans.
Hayek and Mises were right; they're all socialists.
"To Call something fair or unfair is a subjective value judgment and not liable to any verification" Ludwig Von Mises
07-08-2021, 12:51 PM
-
#87
- plsmire
- Registered User
-
- plsmire
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jul 2012
- Location: London, State / Province, United Kingdom (Great Britain)
- Posts: 5,042
- Rep Power: 29655
-
-
Originally Posted By Jayarbie⏩
Weird argument. You're allowed to murder someone because it's dependent on you? I mean...ok, if that's what you're going with.It's not whether it's a "life" that is important, it's whether it's a separate legal person with natural rights separate from the mother's. It's clearly a new "life" from the moment of conception, but that doesn't make it a separate person. IMO, it's not a separate person with its own legal rights and protections until it's actually born.
A 1 year old is also dependent on their mother, in societies where there is no welfare support, I guess they're allowed to murder them too if the mother doesn't want to have that responsibility. I'm pretty sure they did in the past, the good ones at least left their child by the churches footsteps.
07-08-2021, 12:56 PM
-
#88
Originally Posted By plsmire⏩
The Chinese used to eat them.Weird argument. You're allowed to murder someone because it's dependent on you? I mean...ok, if that's what you're going with.
A 1 year old is also dependent on their mother, in societies where there is no welfare support, I guess they're allowed to murder them too if the mother doesn't want to have that responsibility. I'm pretty sure they did in the past, the good ones at least left their child by the churches footsteps.
A 1 year old is also dependent on their mother, in societies where there is no welfare support, I guess they're allowed to murder them too if the mother doesn't want to have that responsibility. I'm pretty sure they did in the past, the good ones at least left their child by the churches footsteps.
Maybe some still do.
They still eat dog.
I: Self, Lord and Master.
"I rub my hands when my palms itch."
"I call you Son not because you Shine but because you Mine."
07-08-2021, 01:01 PM
-
#89
- plsmire
- Registered User
-
- plsmire
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jul 2012
- Location: London, State / Province, United Kingdom (Great Britain)
- Posts: 5,042
- Rep Power: 29655
-
-
Originally Posted By numberguy12⏩
OK, conception was the wrong choice of words, but my argument still stands.First, just want to point out that conception is not the moment of birth....(bolded above)
Also, the term life in biology, while nuanced, is not in question here at all. A developing fetus is life, as is someone’s stomach cell, as is a leaf, as is an insect, as is a single celled bacterium. So instead of life, “human being” is probably a better word to use in your above argument.
Finally, I find arguments like the above to be somewhat weak. On one hand, pro-abortion people have provided various answers of what they think are acceptable markers (depending on anatomical, physiological development markers, e.g. neurological milestones).
But let’s forget all that, back to your argument that since you can’t distinguish the developing fetus from one day to the next day all that much, then you can’t create a marker to divide, therefore everything has to be pushed back to the moment of conception, the only possible divide. One problem is you can apply this to any kind of gradual process and get strange results. There is no one moment in someone’s life where, biologically, they are capable of doing adult things (smoke cigarettes, engage in sex, etc). What exactly is the difference between someone 17 years old, 3 months, and 20 days....and the next day? Not much. However, no one in their right mind would then extrapolate this toit should be pushed back all the way to birthbecause of this. The law steps in in many situations and defines a legal definition of what it means to be an adult (e.g. 18)- even though there isn’t much difference on that day from the one previous. There is not one specific day an astrophysicist stepped back and said....ah, I am now able to understand higher subjects of science and math- in the sense he couldn’t do this the day before. He does not therefore conclude he was able to do calculus and Newtonian mechanics as an infant or when he was born.
Also, the term life in biology, while nuanced, is not in question here at all. A developing fetus is life, as is someone’s stomach cell, as is a leaf, as is an insect, as is a single celled bacterium. So instead of life, “human being” is probably a better word to use in your above argument.
Finally, I find arguments like the above to be somewhat weak. On one hand, pro-abortion people have provided various answers of what they think are acceptable markers (depending on anatomical, physiological development markers, e.g. neurological milestones).
But let’s forget all that, back to your argument that since you can’t distinguish the developing fetus from one day to the next day all that much, then you can’t create a marker to divide, therefore everything has to be pushed back to the moment of conception, the only possible divide. One problem is you can apply this to any kind of gradual process and get strange results. There is no one moment in someone’s life where, biologically, they are capable of doing adult things (smoke cigarettes, engage in sex, etc). What exactly is the difference between someone 17 years old, 3 months, and 20 days....and the next day? Not much. However, no one in their right mind would then extrapolate this toit should be pushed back all the way to birthbecause of this. The law steps in in many situations and defines a legal definition of what it means to be an adult (e.g. 18)- even though there isn’t much difference on that day from the one previous. There is not one specific day an astrophysicist stepped back and said....ah, I am now able to understand higher subjects of science and math- in the sense he couldn’t do this the day before. He does not therefore conclude he was able to do calculus and Newtonian mechanics as an infant or when he was born.
So my point stands, if you can't pinpoint the marker for deciding when it is "life" in a moral sense, I'm not arguing biology here, then we just have to assume it's life from the moment of conception when that pregnancy test says she's pregnant. Unless there is another, better marker somewhere for distinguishing between when is life and not life.
Secondly, your argument is weak. Just because there is no marker for drinking alcohol doesn't mean it applies to taking a life. EVERYBODY knows that it's pretty ridiculous that you can drink at 18 but cant at 17 years 364 days, but we need some sort of order so we follow it. Nobody is going to prison for drinking alcohol, driving, having sex 1 day before.
Now, when it comes to deciding when to take life, we can refer to how doctors treat this. If doctors KNOW that life can be saved, then they will absolutely save it, ending it, would be murder. A baby 6 months in has 99% chance at the minimum of being "saved", therefore the same set of standards should be set here. If you're making a decision that will be life or death for another human being, you better not enter that grey area, needs to be clear cut, and the only clear cut marker is conception.
Now if you're drinking alcohol, driving, plenty of grey areas there. The numbers are completely arbitrary, 16, 18, 21, doesn't matter, we're following an arbitrary law.
Human life is not arbitrary, it's either a human being alive or its not, the default is that it is until you can pinpoint that marker of when it's not. I can only pinpoint it's not right before conception.
Finally, I'm not actually against abortion weeks in, but the lines get blurry past that, and I can't actually justify to myself why it's ok to abort 1 month in but not 3 months in, perhaps its my lack of understanding of the biology. I just "feel" that it's ok, which is never a good argument.
07-08-2021, 01:06 PM
-
#90
Someone is only truly dead when they lose all brain activity so logic would dictate that someone becomes truly alive when brain activity begins.
If you cause someone to be brain dead then that is murder.
Abortion is basically an exemption.
The difference between cardiac death and brain death is that one is reversible and the other is true death.
If you cause someone to be brain dead then that is murder.
Abortion is basically an exemption.
The difference between cardiac death and brain death is that one is reversible and the other is true death.
I: Self, Lord and Master.
"I rub my hands when my palms itch."
"I call you Son not because you Shine but because you Mine."
Bookmarks
-
- Digg
-
- del.icio.us
-
- StumbleUpon
-
-
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts