Sorry about that. I'm not sure what "cruel womanizing" means. That term just sounds like there are issues with a person that would use it. I'm really not trying to offend anyone by it.

I do disagree with you in that lesbians tend to look at males in a negative way and would tend to view male traits toward women in a negative way. Personally I have not met to many helpless women, and I have had a few in my younger life that rode me for everything they could get out of me. They have the fine art of dangling sex in front of a man so that he will grant their wishes. Sex is a very powerful tool and women hold that tool.

Getting pregnant is a by-product of both the woman and the man not ensuring protection, or in other words neither of them not being responsible for their actions. The government from the state to the federal has made it an quick and easy option to abort that responsibility. This is not about the welfare of the mother it is all about money pure and simple.

Abortions is the cheap way out for everyone involved. Other than cost give me one good reason not to take a healthy child in a health mother to term to either raise it or give it up at birth.

I'm not some religious fanatic. There are cases where hard decisions need to be made such as health issues with either the mother or baby or social issues such as rape pregnancies. Abortion should be a hard decision in every case not just a form of birth control or money issue.

Out of the 1.6 million abortions last year how many do you think fit into health or social issues as the decision reason. I would bet it is 1% of 1% of 1%. Doesn't that number worry you that all your arguments could be wrong?

I know you want to blame it all on the guys, but birth control pills are the responsibility of the woman and they should have some responsibility to ensure protection for not only getting pregnant but also diseases.

If you had sex with a girl and she gave you a disease and you got her pregnant who is at fault?

No. I should've said 'human life'.

Do you consider a skin cell to be alive? And if so, do you value that life as much as that of another human?

__________________
It's the difference between suicide and slow capitulation... - Jim Morrison

Again a juvenile attempt to equate a human to a single cell that is not a singular species. If you leave a skin cell alone to do it's work will it continue to grow and develope, as a viable life form. Will it take on expression and individual atributes? What simplistic reasoning. There is not one form of life on this planet that can afford to have it's process interupted in it's infantile stages. Does that mean they arent alive? Then to say "I should have said "Human Life"". As if human life was capable of being defined outside the commonality of ALL other life. It's absolutely ridiculous, boarderline Moronic to hold the position that, concerning human life you could define it as something other, than is common to all life. I got news for you Humans are the only creature on the planet that are not self sustainable from birth. Humans arent self-sustainable until about age 8yrs. So why not allow abortion until at least 6yrs. Afterall abortion simply means putting an end to the on going process. The process is on going from conception until death. If you want abortion atleast be intellectually honest enough to say it's for the conveinence of it and pass on the attempted science of viability.

__________________
Get on the Soap box at http://politicsforum.forumup.org/

I did not attempt to do any such thing. I simply wished to know if you were logically consistent.

A skin cell and a human being are both alive, yet only the human is conscious and has a brain. Therefore, they are not the same.

I do not want abortion as a birth control measure. Read my previous posts in this thread.

__________________
It's the difference between suicide and slow capitulation... - Jim Morrison

If removing that skin cell ended the life of a human being I would value it.
Is there a part of your body that by removing it would end your life holds no value to you?

Honestly what is a human but physical and chemical processes much like any other animal or plant. Any value that is placed on us is purely a intellectual thought nothing more. If you are an American there are many in the world that hold no value for your life here and now. What makes them right or wrong?

We all contently assigning and reassigning value to life every day. "save the women and children first!", death penalty, self defense, "don't let the general get captured!" etc etc. To want to argue on when a human is a human is stupid. You have already assigned value.

If I asked you to tell me when a unborn child was human and I went backwards from just the moment before birth one day at a time to conception what day would you tell me that child is no longer a child, and then you picked a day and I broke that day down in to minutes to find the exact time to the second that that child was just a piece of tissue, can it be done?

In America we struggle to hold a moral sense to the value of life. We do not always succeed but we continue to strive to maintain that value. Other parts of the world hold little value to any life. A part of what make America great is that continue struggle to maintain life's value. Abortion anyway you look at it is in direct conflict of what we struggle so hard to maintain and to allow it the way we do cheapens our value on life. If we continue to chip away at that value what would become of us?

It is really nothing more or less than that.

No.

So then you advocate the abolition of the death penalty?

__________________
It's the difference between suicide and slow capitulation... - Jim Morrison

I do not personally believe in the death penalty. Not because I'm religious about it, but because it is a waste of time, man power and money and really does no good for the old eye for an eye thing. A part of my value on life does lean toward people should be accountable for their actions, and prison today does not meet what I would think a person on death row should get. Death penalty is also like abortion in that there is no correcting it. If the person was found not guilty by DNA a day after they were killed then it is a nonrecoverable error.

I'm also not some good be all person. If someone hurt my family I could go down that path. I'm also in the military and would not hesitate if I needed to defend myself.

That all said I still have a problem with goverment santioned abortions that kills 1.6 million per year. Nothing is black and white, but somethings just tend to really standout as wrong.

Based on your posts so far, yeah, I think it would.

You see men as inherently evil. You have already admitted you are self-hating, and it is probably for this reason. It is reasonable to assume you would feel good by seeing Evil punished.

So would I...but then, I dont deny this. Revenge is an indulgence.

Imprisonment would accomplish the same thing, would it not?

Castration assumes their motives are sexual. As pedantic as you are about psychology, surely you know that rape is not necessarily about sex in many cases. Castration would not do anything if their motive was power. You can rape someone even without nuts or a penis.

So castration is pointless as a means of preventing rape. The only remaining reason to do it is to mutilate someone you consider evil. Revenge.

None of which is certain. Lots of mothers that give birth do NOT succumb to those things. The depression is temporary and they recover just fine. Or they get depressed, but not enough to kill themselves. In fact, the vast majority of them do not succumb to the things you mention. But you make it sound as if it is a foregone conclusion.

By contrast, 100% of aborted children die.

Yes, it is. Suicide cannot happen without her own cooperation. Give the baby the same choice with regards to abortion.

The mother has options. The child has none.

No. The child you fathered gets money.

At least thats how it works in the US. Who knows how retarded European laws would work.

In America, you can surrender parental rights at birth. The child becomes a ward of the state and is adopted out.

But even if it wasnt that easy, it still would not be justified to kill the child.

Why?

Your brain is what makes you who you are. Any other organ could be removed from your body and replaced, and you would still be you.

A beating heart is irrelevant. Hearts can be replaced. Brains cannot.

The egg does not think or feel. It is a potential person.

Because without brain activity, it is impossible for it to think or feel. It is no more sentient than a rock.

It doesnt scream for the same reason rocks dont scream.

In their defense, that is not always true. Rape is an obvious exception.

Not any more arbitrary than definiting that it begins at conception. That statement is hypocritical.

At least my definition can be verified.

Says who?

No, it is because they believe they are defending people's lives. Pro-choice people are simply defending people's freedoms.

His question is valid. Your definition is completely arbitrary, with no supporting evidence at all. Why does the sperm only gain value after it has fertilized the egg? Arnt all those sperm also potential lives?

Exiting the male is not the function of sperm. Fertilization of the egg is the function of sperm. Exiting the male is a means to an end, not the end itself.

Not always. There are many other variables that interfere with that process besides aboriton.

Understanding of what?

Only because they dont comprehend the real question. They will take the question at face value.

Heh heh, no, he is a guy. Believe me, I thought he was a lesbian at first too. It took me a long time to refer to him as a "he" in my responses.

As a gay man, that has not been my experience. This is purely anecdotal evidence of course. Do you have any objective statistics to back your claim?

The question isnt whether he is human. Every cell in my hand is human. But every cell is not a person. Being human isnt enough.

Incorrect. Evolution only requires reproduction. Once he has reproduced, he has contributed to evolution already. No matter when he dies after that.

When is that? The Sperm and Egg are both alive before they merge.

You mean when the Sperm and egg are first formed?

Translation: "If you agree with me"

Again, his question is valid. It is not unreasonable to ask you to be specific about your definitions. He's asking for clarification of your opinion. Thats all.

So the fact that it will eventually develop into a human is what makes it a person?

"Alive" isnt the argument. Yes they are alive. But they are not people deserving of human rights.

To most people, squashing a zygote is not the same thing as killing a newborn baby. The baby obviously has more value to most people. Even people that oppose abortion.

__________________
My Political Blog (Most recent update Oct 3rd) - Which Flame Warrior are you?

Sadistic-Savior wrote:

This is the very essence of the entire argument. Who gets to decide the day they are suddenly "worthy" to be people?

Sadistic-Savior wrote:

On this point you are wildly mistaken.

Los Angeles Times Poll:
This was taken on 2005-JAN-14 to 18. They asked 1,118 randomly selected American adults the question: "Which comes closest to your view on abortion: abortion should always be legal, or should be legal most of the time, or should be made illegal except in cases of rape, incest and to save the mother's life, or abortion should be made illegal without any exceptions?"

Results:

41% favored making abortion illegal with a few exceptions.
24% favored making abortion always legal
19% favored making abortion legal most of the time.
12% favored making abortion totally illegal.

Margin of error ±3% percentage points. It is notable that 12% of American adults would totally prohibit all abortions, including those needed to save the life of the mother.

To reiterate Only 24% of the US population hold your point of view. 53% favor making it illegal either completely of with few exceptions.

__________________
Get on the Soap box at http://politicsforum.forumup.org/

It is subjective. Brain activity is a reasonable starting point IMO. Because it is impossible to be a person without it.

(emphasis mine)

uh...how am I mistaken? The poll supports my position. Only 12% supported outlawing ALL abortion (including zygotes).

88% said that zygotes can be terminated, but MOST of that 88% still said that abortion should be illegal in most cases.

__________________
My Political Blog (Most recent update Oct 3rd) - Which Flame Warrior are you?