The Necessity of Abortion

No, I don't believe that people should pay equally for the road. Tax payers pay money to the government and the government does what it likes with it.

 

But you said earlier no one should live off anyone else, so what should be done about the people who can't afford to pay taxes?

 

Well I don't classify this as people living off other people. I classify it as people living off the government, which individual tax payers also do, just not to the same degree because they are contributing something.

 

Ok fair enough. For second I thought you were going to end up being one of those "taxes are theft" type folk. I think we've derailed the abortion topic enough.

 

You're not seriously comparing a fetus to a living person are you?

 

Sorry I'm confused. Are you saying a fetus is or isn't alive?

Actually a better question would be what exactly is your objection to my statement? My questions were merely designed to get a sense of the logical framework that poster was using to base his opinions on. They weren't reflective of my own thoughts on the matter.

 

Actually I did as I gave done in most of these threads when I realize I am dealing with another egolaced Christian who want their God to rule everyones life and blew you off.

 

Well it is living, but when I say "living person" I mean someone who is born. Which I assume is the same way that you used "living people."

 

Wow, when did I say that I want my God to rule over your life? When did I ONCE quote God? I always make sure that I keep God out of debates with non-religious people.

 

.

Ok, you gave me a definition of nature but did NOT show where your "nature" should rule on what women do with their own bodies...,. or WHY


You did not show where YOU are the ruler of what "Nature" wants.

We've dragged this "Nature Rules Women " crap of yours far enough....I'm done...."Nature" does NOT rule on women's right to have an abortion.

no one being allowed to use another's body to sustain their own life is a FACT.
So do you NOW FINALLY understand what that sentence means ? I guess not ….forget it it...you don't seem to want to get it..

NO, that's not an answer to : ""WHERE does "Nature" say we can't take a life??

"Nature" and "morals" have nothing to do with each other...

No, if a woman has sex with a man she does not own him , and I'm glad you finally understand that men have no say in what women do with their bodies so quit trying to say it.

However, if a man has a kid he's responsible for it....yes, he can walk away but the law wants parents to support their kids so taxpayers don't have to.

 

There ya go again with your "Nature is the Supreme Ruler god" ….no, it's not.

First, This applies ONLY if the fetus is deemed a legal person. If it has the same rights as a legal person it should also have the same RESTRICTIONS we all have.

Second, a fetus uses a woman's body to sustain it's life. It uses her circulatory system, etc. , her heart, her body...if it didn't then it could be taken out and set on a shelf to grow on it's own.

NO other legal person can use another's body, any part of it, without their CONSENT.

So if a woman does not consent to have another use her body to sustain it's life then, like ALL the rest of us she can refuse to do it.


Your "nature" has nothing to say about rights and laws...

So then you are Pro-Choice.

No, because you don't need "self defense" if the fetus is not a legal person, the woman just does what she wants with her own body, just like you do.

Because they want women to lose the right to their own bodies if they become pregnant.

WTF does that have to do with anything ?

 

Here's the REST of his post :


"""Actually a better question would be what exactly is your objection to my statement? My questions were merely designed to get a sense of the logical framework that poster was using to base his opinions on. They weren't reflective of my own thoughts on the matter.""""

 

You were asked : ""BobbyRam said: ↑
For example if a fetus's life is unsustainable on its own, does the mother have an obligation to allow the fetus to live off her? If so why?""""""""""

You didn't answer......you just, as usual, asked more questions....why not answer the question?


"""does the mother have an obligation to allow the fetus to live off her? If so why?""""


To paraphrase a certain poster, "there were two questions in that post "

 

BobbyRam said: ↑
For example if a fetus's life is unsustainable on its own, does the mother have an obligation to allow the fetus to live off her? If so why? Does that extend to living people? If they are incapable of surviving on their own do they have the right to live off of us?

There were four questions in that post


None were answered.

I'll help. This has to do ONLY with living off another person's PHYSICAL body, nothing about taxes or roads.


Do you think a woman has an obligation to allow someone to live off her physical body when no one else has that "obligation" ?

 

""""if they are incapable of surviving on their own do they have the right to live off of us" (the answer) is NO """""


So it looks like you believe women have a right to have an abortion. A fetus is incapable of surviving on it's own.

 

Well considering that I didn't mention God, this is a pretty hilarious excuse! You clearly are just not competent enough to answer my challenging questions! You stuck it out pretty well I have to say, but like so many others on here, you have reached the end of your ability to debate me!

 

Well it is living, but when I say "living person" I mean someone who is born. Which I assume is the same way that you used "living people."

 

If you are capable, name just ONE single thing in this world that you would consider 'UNnatural.' Because it does appear that you think that everything is natural!

 

The poster was talking about living people. His question was, "if [living people] are incapable of surviving on their own do they have the right to live off of us?"

ORIGINAL POST: http://www.politicalforum.com/index...lin-kaepernick.540973/page-64#post-1069584401

@BobbyRam has now joined Bowerbird and pulled out! Its just you left! Well done!

 

Again, IF by "no one", you mean a living person, then yes, that is a fact.

AGAIN, earlier you went further, saying that because no one is allowed to use another's body to sustain their own life, this means that there is "no right to life." For the THIRD time asking, do you stand by that?

Okay, but as you say, we've dragged this nature thing far enough.

On a separate matter, why would you say that murder is wrong and therefore should be illegal? What would your reasoning be?

In your opinion.

I never DID try to say it. You tell me where I did. You won't find anywhere.

Is it acceptable that the man is responsible for the kid IF BEFORE the birth he made it clear to the woman that he is not prepared for fatherhood and wanted her to have an abortion?

I don't think it DOES have the "same" rights, but I think it at the very least, it has the right not to be killed.

Correct. I still don't see how it applies to a fetus, which is slightly different to a living person. Wouldn't you agree that it is slightly different to a living person? You should be able to see a bit of a difference.

Actually I am, but I'm also pro-life, meaning that I see the value in life and therefore the value in unborn lives. And being pro-choice doesn't mean that I am pro-abortion. I think that women should be able make whatever CHOICE that they want but I don't believe that they should have the RIGHT to an abortion.

How does this mean that they think that getting pregnant is a crime? Are you sure you don't mean that they think that ABORTION is a crime?

If an anti choicer gets pregnant, do you think that they would believe that they have committed a crime? Surely not!

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
""""if they are incapable of surviving on their own do they have the right to live off of us" (the answer) is NO """""

So it looks like you believe women have a right to have an abortion. A fetus is incapable of surviving on it's own.

WTF are you talkin about?

 

Short version - Eugenics.

 

Yes.

You take a birth control pill and put it on your left knee. Then you hold it down with your right knee.

Works every time.

 

That would only apply to women that are like rutting animals and unable to control themselves.

 

You make false assumptions:
1. You assume no women support human rights
2. You assume no women could possibly love their own children.