No, nothing about that post was logical...nothing, it made no sense.... Here's the whole UNCHERRY PICKED post:HOW could you ever arrive at that conclusion by reading : JakeStarkey said: ↑ A fetus is not an independent "somebody else."""" kazenatsu: """"Guess slipping an abortion pill into a woman's drink isn't all that bad then, and women who are grieving over miscarriages are just being silly.""" That's the most illogical conclusion I've seen yet in here... You don't seem to get that it's the pregnant woman's CHOICE...it isn't the choice of a pig who slips an abortion pill into her drink! ...and ""women who are grieving over miscarriages are just being silly"" NO, it wasn't their CHOICE to have a miscarriage, DUHHHHHHHHHHH they wanted the pregnancy so why wouldn't they grieve.... Your post didn't make any sense and maybe you should go back to your "Panda Fetuses Have Something to do With Abortion But I don't know What" thread
Let's try to clarify. You (presumably) agree that a fetus is not an independent somebody else, but you don't see how it could be logical to make a sarcastic comment about that "somebody else" who doesn't exist not being a tragedy if they died. Which can only mean that you must believe it's obvious that this "somebody else" exists and it would be a tragedy if they died.
Gee, so easy , all I have to do is C&P ""No, nothing about that post was logical...nothing, it made no sense....""""
kazenatsu allows his personal feelings to override facts. A fetus is not a viable person outside of the womb.
Neither is a severely afflicted polio patient outside of an iron lung. What exactly is your point? It's okay to kill them because they can't survive on their own yet? Oh, so this isn't really about the developmental state of the fetus. It's all about what the woman CONSENTS to happen to that fetus. Do you pro-choicers even listen to yourselves? It's like you're running around in logical circles, failing to step back and see that everything you're arguing about doesn't make any sense when looking how it all connects together as a whole.
kazenatsu can argue all day and will lose, having neither the language or logic or symbols to support that a fetus and a polio victim are the same.
As you've ben told a dozen or more times, an iron lung is NOT another human....the patient is NOT using another person's body to sustain it's life. It is using a MACHINE. It is OK to kill a fetus because it is part of a woman's body. YES, it is her body. Only she can consent to stay pregnant or not. Do you ever listen to yourself say the same things over and over again and get proven wrong over and over again? If you listened to us it would make sense to you. None of "us" ever introduced Panda gestation into the abortion debate....
fallacy of false equivalency: an iron lung in a hospital helping a patient is not the equal of a mother with a fetus in the womb.
If you accidentally shoot someone, and they are laying there bleeding out, and you could save their life by tightly tying on a tourniquet over the affected body part to slow the bleeding and holding it there until the paramedics can arrive, are you telling me you would be under no obligation to keep that person alive? Let's examine the situation: 1. You created the situation to put that other person where they are 2. That other person cannot survive without you 3. The situation that demands your assistance is ultimately temporary in nature I'll make this scenario even more analogous and say there may be wolves in the area, and a possibility exists (however small) that if you stay in the area wolves might attack. You're in a remote area in the backwoods of Alaska and it may likely be a while before help arrives.
No, Pro-Choicers would say "women, like everyone else, have a right to their own body and get to choose whether to remain pregnant or not." Anti-Choicers would say, " You are only a woman so have no right to your own body(like slaves) , do as I see fit because I like playing god"
So it really has nothing to do with viability at all, but goes back to choice of the woman. Why should a "viable" fetus have rights then? Don't you believe a woman should be able to expel her fetus from her body at 24 weeks, if she so chooses? I assume you are all for induced labor abortions at seven months? (just make the fetus come out and leave it to survive if it can, if the mother wants to cut the pregnancy short for some reason)
Foxhastings said nothing of what you suggest, kazenatsu, and the law prevents such behavior. I suspect, my friend, you put the need of the fetus before that of the mother, automatically.
But with his reasoning, why wouldn't he support that? He basically said viability only matters because the mother is having to use her body to sustain the fetus. Well, that's true at 28 weeks like it's true at 20 weeks. If that's the main reasoning he has, I don't see why he'd be against kicking out the fetus earlier into the pregnancy, viability or not.
kazenatsu, you are trying to create a scenario that does not exist. You could have a sex change but probably won't falls in the same category.
FoxHastings said: ↑ DUH, the person in the iron lung is NOT being sustained by a human body but by a machine.... That has nothing to do with the post of mine you quoted but YES, it ALL goes back to the woman's right to CHOOSE. It doesn't ...and you have been told that many, many times....why can't you get it? The viable fetus has PROTECTIONS. Remember how I schooled you in the fact that "rights" and "protections" are two different words with two different meanings? Why do you insist they are the same?? Sure, why not it's VIABLE.....but a woman would only want to do that if her health or life or the health or life of the fetus was in danger. No, I'm not, why would I be? IF it's to save the life/health of the woman then that's fine. If not then I would hope she gets the mental health care she needs since no mentally healthy woman "enjoys" 7 months of pregnancy just to have the "fun" of an abortion at 28 weeks... That doesn't make sense...""""just make the fetus come out and leave it to survive if it can""".....looks like just one more of your weird scenarios...
NO I DID NOT! You have my statements so TOTALLY screwed up...do NOT speak for me again. . WHY do Anti-Choicers HAVE to twist and "misrepresent" what others say? Because they have NOTHING on their side in the line of facts..[/QUOTE]
Couldn't you say the same thing before viability? Say at 15 weeks, for example. I'm still not seeing a difference between how your argument would apply differently pre-viability versus post-viability.
