For all other arguments against the pro-choice position, and for alkl those I said to wait for the thread, please go here: http://www.politicalforum.com/debat...ortion-morally-acceptable.html#post1060878502 Remember to read the forum rules and answer relevantly and with logical argumentation, rather than emotional rethoric so I cna respond quickly and effectively tomorrow.
What do you mean "hypocrisy"? The fetus has no interest in being alive - I do. That's the difference. Yeah, I eat babies for breakfast. Actually, jokes aside, I dont WANT to kill babies - I frankly dont care. What I want is recognition of interests - something a baby doesn't have.
How can you say you value life respect all life when you want no PROTECTION for the human life in the womb and you are content to look away? Would you do that if your neighbor were abusing his children?
This is...incorrect. On many levels. I am not pro-abortion in any sense of the idea. It is a horrific act in my opinion. But so is an amputation. There are times it must be done. Medical reasons, such as an ectopic pregnancy- http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0001897/ You probably should think about this more clearly. I'm a big fan of people making more people, but blocking the legality of abortion shouldn't be on your list when it is clearly the only option in some medical cases. Yes it is an uncommon situation. But forcing abortion to be illegal condemns these women to death along with a certainly doomed child. I see no profit in dead women, particularly to their family. Abortion should be left to people's consciences and to whatever moral code they adhere to if any. Not pro-abortion, but I am for freedom to choose. And then let people live with their decision.
How do you know the fetus has no interest in being alive? Do the mentally retorted want to be alive? How about those in comas? How about a newly born baby .do they want to be alive? Do they know what is going on? Oh wait you probably based on your stance alread .think like Sanger did that it would be ok to kill a newly born infant. Right? You don't care ..which is the stance of the pro-choice community. You don't care simply do not care if human life is killed .even the innocent human life in the womb. Jokes aside .if we did that you couldn't debate could you because you think this is funny. Even the tone of your thread is cocky. You don't care ..THE PRO-ABORT/CHOICE BATTLECRY
It is an entirely different thing if the abortion is done to save the life or health of the mother. Thats basically killing in self-defense, and is always allowed. Where abortion is banned, it does not apply to these cases. I think most if not all of pro-life people here will agree with me.
Gemini_Fyre said, No it's not. If you deny protection to the unborn…look away…you stand in line with those who are pro-abortion…whether you would get an abortion or not. "I am not pro-abortion in any sense of the idea. It is a horrific act in my opinion. But so is an amputation. There are times it must be done. Medical reasons, such as an ectopic pregnancy-" To even compare an amputation to abortion is well……nonsensical. A leg is a leg and the person can still live with one leg. One can live without two legs. But killing by abortion…is different. It is one surgical procedure that is like no other on the face of the earth. It is a hired hit. The woman pays an abortion or hit man/woman to do ONE JOB. That one job kills the ALREADY STARTED HUMAN LIFE IN THE WOMB. You yourself said it is what did you say…"horrific"? Yet you condone those who want to do it. You want to deny protection to those getting,"hit". Not if your stance is not morally baffling I don't know what is. You just said abortion is horrific….and then you tell me who only wants protection for the unborn….that I SHOULD THINK MORE CLEARLY? Did cocktail hour start at your house already? LOL Your not a fan….(you think abortion is horrific) of abortion….but hey it must not be that bad in your book of morals…because you want it legal….so you just defined yourself……YOU ARE PRO-ABORTION BECAUSE YOU WANT IT LEGAL. Less than 1% of ALL ABORTIONS according to Guttmaucher are done to save the mothers life. These mothers would be saved anyway without abortion…because in our hospitals their lives take precedent. Your making excuses for this tiny tiny percent. How does forcing abortion condemn the healthy woman who would have a normal healthy child to death? You are a what if person. What if the child has a hair lip?……NO KILL IT. What if the child might be unhappy in life? NO KILL IT. What if the parents end up getting a divorce? Can't take the chance the kids would be better off dead. KILL IT. What if the child abused drugs? Kill it can't take the chance. You want to kill based on "what if"….it would be better off dead anyway. It is not your right to presume what the life of an unborn child would be like. He or she could have been the doctor to cure cancer, could have been a successful scientist,,,,artist,,,,,talk show host like Oprah. She was born into a life were she was abused and poor. She was better off dead right. Let me ask you this have you lived a perfect life free from all pain? Were your parents perfect people, did they treat you perfectly? Should you have been aborted based on the life you have lived thus far? Hey thats what I think about pornography…child pornography should be left up to the people with consciences. And someone who sells drugs…and abuses their spouse. WE SHOULD JUST BUTT OUT OF EVERYTHING AND LOOK AWAY. Hey the people in Germany did that as the Jews and Christians were led into the ovens. That is what happens when good men do NOTHING….who said that??? Can't remember…but its true. You are content to look away…..what does that say about your morals…and about your conscience? I can't believe how many people on this thread believe Hitlers position on this.
So here it goes ..you can't debate this your back is against the wall so you bring up religion. LOL Lets leave religion out of this .and debate it soley on what science says. OK? Secular humanism .Oh I know what that is. Lets start with relativism shall we? It is a claim that what we think is knowledge, what we think is a firm grasp of truth and reality is really only an opinion. And everyone has an opinion on things and they might differ from person to person. A fact-or a value, moral precept or outlook on life can be just true for you and at the SAME TIME not true for me. I would bet you would claim that universal truth does NOT EXIST. This worldview feeds on the collapse of normal everyday norms and the breakdown of society. Everything is relative today. You would argue that no fact is in all times and places true because we all look at things differently. So we can't know what really happened in any situation. Accident at the corner .five witnesses. Police interview all five and they all have a different story. So are all accounts fact? Does the facts even matter? How many different ways did this accident happen? So truth wars happen and that is what this debate is all about .the truth. You will see the same things happen in all abortion debates online or offline. Two sides fighting in a culture war becoming increasing polarized. No room for a middle ground. This has been going on since the beginning of man its not new. Relativism implies that the pursuit of any truth is an exercise in futility. Science therefore does not matter .God does not matter what matter is only what the individual thinks. Finishing this up .your position as a humanist no moral absolutes, no objective ethical right or wrong. Moral values are true for some but not for all. No one is more true and objective than another. So is adultery morally wrong? Is rape wrong in all cases? Slavery right or wrong? Stealing? Child pornography? Sleeping with the boss? So it is no wonder you condone abortion. How does one think something is wrong ..and look away while its killed? Funny that most pro-aborts here are that way ..its horrific wrong ..but the unborn still deserves no protection. This is pro-abortion, this in itself is moral baffling.
Because it doesn't have the mental ability to do so. Retarded? If they have no mental capacity for self awareness, then no. Nope. No. Correct. I care very much. Correct. i only care if a being with an interest in its existence is killed. Yep. I sent a PM for the debate thread a few moments ago. so by all means go ahead. Show how you know my intent ie show that I dont care about the abortion debate. Where is your evidence? That is just a highly offensive, completely ignorant, entirely stupid opinion and nothing more. Pathetic, actually.
You are full of hot air .and have said NOTHING TO PROVE YOUR POINTS. YOU DONT EVEN MAKE POINTS. I think you started the thread just to draw attention to yourself. LOL You have to offer evidence to debate you thus far have offered NOTHING .
MegadethFan said, Waiting? How about answering some of my questions? LOL Abortion is not ok to me, I never said that. I know the difference between right and wrong and killing something that has not given consent to be killed is wrong.
Typical. You are so incapable of debate all you have is petty insults. Yes I have. I also referred you to here: http://www.politicalforum.com/debat...ortion-morally-acceptable.html#post1060878502 See above. I specifically said around 5 times, killing a fetus is fine because it doesn't care about its existence, You never ATTEMPTED to refute this. All you did was have a cry like a child and say "oh you dont care" - so what? Grow up. Your argumentation is pathetic. You're the drama queen here mate. Keep saying that - you are making yourself look idiotic.
Megadeath said, So you think rape is wrong. You don't think rape is ok? Who told you it wasn't? ARe you tolerant of those who do think its ok? How about for some man whose wife won't have sex? Still wrong? What if in that culture it is looked at as a right? So you say child porn is wrong. You dance around the pedophelia question....but end up saying no. WEll actually you say pedophelia is wrong.....just not with children. LMAO You better go look up what it actually is.. You say logic is what tells you what stuff is wrong. You are a moral relativist right? So you must be tolerant of others opinions...and lifesyles. You look away when the unborn is killed...so dont you think you should just look away when a rape happens or something else I have mentioned. Who tells you this stuff is wrong? What do you say to someone who says that they are all right? Cant different people use logic differently? The men who took down the Twin Towers...used logic I would suppose. So that is a term that could mean anything. You said you would be tolerant of different views...but would try to oppose the tryranny they may actively enforce....such as rape. What right do you have to do this? I am actively trying to oppose abortion....doing the same thing you say you would do over rape. But you make fun of my position and the fact I am trying to stop abortion....THE SAME THING YOU JUST SAID YOU WOULD DO. What gives you the right to try to stop people from doing something they morally think is right? I thought you moral relativist said...there is no one definition of right and wrong. So while we would not allow sharia law in America.....you would have to maintain...that in the middle east they have every right to do it.
WEll late term abortions go on all the time the public just does not hear of them especially when there is a death. Most cases are settled out of court the families don't want it in the news the doctors don't want their name muddied and reputations tarnished. So they settle. Those here who are pro-choice/abortion .should champion all abortion even up until natural delivery. It is the woman's body .and no one should make the decision except the woman .its only a blob the life is not valued .so later term abortion shouldn't be that bad. Viability should not matter.
You need to insert quotation brackets or something because I dont know what you want from me here. I already explained my position on rape. Why are you asking me the same question? I do not think rape is ok - I said this before. Read the comments - dont ask the same questions over an over again. Pedophilia is an attraction to children. There is nothing wrong with that. What is wrong is when someone sexually assaults a child. This is not pedophilia - this is sexual assault. You clearly are clueless about these matters. That has to be the two most stupid lines in the world. How the fact can I be moral and also be a moral relativist? Do you not read the drivel you write? No I'm not a stupid moral relativist, as you should have figured out by the fact I said logic tells us what is right and wrong. Man you are slow. Yep. What do you mean? I dont "look away" - I support it. Nope. For the trillionth time - LOGIC. I show them that they are logically, and thus morally, wrong - like you. Nope. Something is either logical, or it isnt. You suppose incorrectly then. Maybe to you - not to those who think rationally. Correct. A view is different to an action. The right of defending the interest of the person being raped/assaulted. As stupid as that is... Nope. No, you try to stop abortion because you are an idiot. In the same way I would stop someone from raping another, because it is logical to do so, I would also stop you from hindering a woman trying to get an abortion - because that is also the logical, ie moral thing to do. If you wish to express the opinion that abortion is immoral, by all means go ahead. Logic. WHEN THE (*)(*)(*)(*) DID I SAY I WAS A MORAL RELATIVIST? HERE YOU GO AGAIN LYING ABOUT OTHERS. GET IT THROUGH YOUR EXTREMELY THICK HEAD - I AM NOT A MORAL RELATIVIST. i HAVE SAID A MILLION TIMES THAT THERE IS!! WHERE DID I ONCE SAY WHAT YOU JUST CLAIMED?????????? They dont have the right to do it.
Correct. Abortion should be allowed right up to birth. It should only stop then for the sake of order, although infanticide is morally acceptable.
OK, since you insist. Abortion is immoral. It is immoral for the same reason that taking the life of a 35 year old is immoral. In both cases ending the life cycles purposefully and unnaturally deprives the universe of whatever potential those lives may have possessed. Your turn bucko.
How Can Anyone Take You Seriously With The Mouth You Have. Is That How You Operate By Calling People Names? Wow. How Adult Of You. So You Disagree With Me and I Am An Idiot. Grow Up Buddy .
Why is "purposefully and unnaturally depriving the universe of whatever potential some lives may have possessed" bad?
Dont know. Obviously you're a push over in front of "evil" then. Call me evil - but it looks like you could prove evil wrong!
Fiction, I am not pro-abortion, for the same reason and not pro amputation, but sometimes you have to do it. Try not to mix yourself up here. I am pro choice, but not pro abortion, both decisions are possible. Be careful of absolute statements within an obviously gray area. Agreed, it is a hired hit, never disputed that. Never disputed that life starts during conception. No I don't condone it, I do condone the freedom to do it. I think it is gross in all respects of the word. I also don't condone warfare, but there are times it must be done. It isn't that I want to deny protection to them, but I won't go trampling on a person's freedom to do it either. It is a person in there, no surprise. They may have no way to voice their opinion on the matter this is true, but we cannot live our lives by the dictates of those who have no method of communicating with us. I think your zealous fury about this topic is shutting down the logic sections of your brain. Wrong again, read more careful, think more about what I wrote. Try to not interpret what you want, but rather take the text as it is written. I did point out that this is uncommon. Did you miss that? I never said it forces a healthy woman to death, you are blurring my thoughts with your own. The rest of this paragraph doesn't really make much sense, this operates on your own assumptions. Don't presume to understand my morality if you have not asked about it. I appreciate your zeal to protect human life, but to protect it at the cost of liberty is a path to tyranny. Yuck. Try to avoid speaking for me, the content is incorrect. I can speak for myself. You just happen to not like it. Take it gracefully and with a little class. My parents aren't the subject of the debate. And I think you already know the answer to the questions you asked. So why ask them? Off topic and without relevancy to abortion. Tough to answer this in a way you'll understand. But I'll try, drugs? If people want to get high, let them. If parents want to stop their kids from getting high, let them, case closed. Child pornography? It has an obvious victim with obvious harm done, you don't need to consult Black's Law Dictionary or consult a lawyer to know what to do. Find the offending party and...take care of it. In the mean time, wipe the foam from your frothing jaw and compose yourself. You are comparing me to ancestors I may or may not have? You need to stop operating on assumptions. Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them little Hitler Juniors. Calm down, eat a sandwich, come back when you have found your logic and reason.
