[manimal]

Originally posted by gecko
I think the ROOT of the problem is that people can somehow call having and raising a child as a consequence!

It should be a blessing.

How is someone going to raise a child properly if they see them as a consequence, or burden, or repercussion, for some "terrible" act they committed?

that IS my whole point. don't make the child pay for your accident. both of my kids are "accidents", will they ever know that? NO! i accepted the fact that i screwed up but i'm not going to make the kids pay for my mistake. i'll have to make some SACRIFICES in my life plan but now that i have the kids (well, one's still in the oven)....it's definitely worth it.

so the whole thing comes down to, "you've got to pay to play".

this nation is like a bunch of whiny 2 yr olds who's sole purpose in life is the acquisition of personal gain. "mine! mine! mine!"

 

[Jesus]

That's the point, the child does pay if you didn't want it in the first place. But I agree with you on one point. If my wife was to get pregnant again, god forbid, I would want to keep the baby. She wouldn't. Like you said , the accident we had 12 years ago, was the best thing that could have happened to us. But it's not the same for all people.

I would like to save every puppy at the pound too, but it isn't realistic.

 

[manimal]

Originally posted by Jesus
That's the point, the child does pay if you didn't want it in the first place. But I agree with you on one point. If my wife was to get pregnant again, god forbid, I would want to keep the baby. She wouldn't. Like you said , the accident we had 12 years ago, was the best thing that could have happened to us. But it's not the same for all people.

I would like to save every puppy at the pound too, but it isn't realistic.

so now we're equating a human child to a puppy?

kids aren't like herpes. they're real, you can't just get "rid" of the problem without murder. so i say make the best of it and give that child the best life you can give.

the ideal that the child will pay if you didn't want it in the first place is sick. if you could ask the child whether he/she would rather grow up without perfect parents or be violently exterminatd, what do you think he/she would choose?

 

[ohio]

Originally posted by manimal
so now we're equating a human child to a puppy?

human fetus to a puppy, and I'm not a big fan of the comparison either.

As far as I'm concerned, a fetus represents potential. A potential which is (too) easily recreated. From a given couple, any fetus has the same potential. People should wait until they can make the most of that potential.

When it's born, it's no longer potential. It's unique and cannot be recreated. The question in my mind is where do you draw the line. One could easily argue that at conception is when it becomes unique. But at that point it has no thought, feelings etc, and could be replaced with another egg/sperm from the same couple without ever knowing the difference. One could argue it's when the first nerve cell appears, but at that point it's less human than jellyfish. Or at the 11 weeks DT felt the need to show, but at that point it's still "feeling" less pain than any barnyard animal we "brutally kill" for food by the millions. Some people draw their line at birth.

For me, it's a hazy area somewhere around the second trimester. But since I don't believe in "sanctity of life" I would be okay with a late term abortion to save the mother or in the case of rape. In any other case, if you can't make the decision faster, too bad... have the baby. I don't believe I will ever convince someone that thinks it's another point to see it my way... and I doubt I could be convinced to see it theirs. This argument always has, and probably always will, go nowhere.

 

[LoboDelFuego]

Nice sum-up Ohio. I think that this is just basically a personal matter that must be judged case by case. It is wrong for both sides of the argument to make blanket statements. All you guys who are against it, don't use it. But do not force your beliefs on other people. You do not know how it is going to affect their lives, and neither do they. So let them make the choice, and then they are stuck with all the blame or praise.

 

[BMXman]

I can't seem to understand how people come down on True for his posting of the aborted babies but the average American watches more than 10,000 acts of violence and gore on TV a year and thinks nothing of it

 

[Ridemonkey]

Originally posted by BMXman
I can't seem to understand how people come down on True for his posting of the aborted babies but the average American watches more than 10,000 acts of violence and gore on TV a year and thinks nothing of it

Not on this site.

 

[BMXman]

Originally posted by Ridemonkey
Not on this site.

hmmm.....Die Bill???????

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by ohio

For me, it's a hazy area somewhere around the second trimester.

This is just sad.

Why cant you just say that you think its ok if moms kill babies?

I dont think abortion should be illegal, because i know im not arrogant enough to think i can make everyone's decision for them, but i also dont hide behind lame arguments about when its ok to kill a living being. Moms kill babies, thats how it works. What difference does it make when you kill it? You;re just killing it younger or older?

Whats so hard about it?

 

[Jesus]

Originally posted by manimal
so now we're equating a human child to a puppy?

kids aren't like herpes. they're real, you can't just get "rid" of the problem without murder. so i say make the best of it and give that child the best life you can give.

the ideal that the child will pay if you didn't want it in the first place is sick. if you could ask the child whether he/she would rather grow up without perfect parents or be violently exterminatd, what do you think he/she would choose?

I am not going to say a lot of pro-lifers agree with me on this issue, but here is how I see it. For me, until the baby is BORN, I could care less. That fetus, baby, whatever you want to call it don't mean sh!t to me. I could care less what it looks like, brain waves, etc. Just get rid of the damn thing.

As I recall Manimal, you are in the Marines right? I was in the Army for a few years, and I had to make choices on wether I was going to kill someone or not on a regular basis. These are decisions that I am comfortable with. I don't believe I ever made the wrong decision.

So, what i'm thinking is mabye you feel so strongly about this because you have a few "issues" about some people you killed, and now you don't believe in killing anyone?

BTW Manimal, I am not being mean, sarcastic, or an asshole. Just curious if this is the case.

 

[Triphop]

Originally posted by ohio

As far as I'm concerned, a fetus represents potential. A potential which is (too) easily recreated. From a given couple, any fetus has the same potential. People should wait until they can make the most of that potential.

When it's born, it's no longer potential. It's unique and cannot be recreated. The question in my mind is where do you draw the line. One could easily argue that at conception is when it becomes unique. But at that point it has no thought, feelings etc, and could be replaced with another egg/sperm from the same couple without ever knowing the difference. One could argue it's when the first nerve cell appears, but at that point it's less human than jellyfish. Or at the 11 weeks DT felt the need to show, but at that point it's still "feeling" less pain than any barnyard animal we "brutally kill" for food by the millions. Some people draw their line at birth.

I am gonna have to disagree with this statement...of the idea that a fetus is only potential and can be *easily* recreated.

Here is an example...If you knew a woman who was pregnant, who had 8 kids already, three who were deaf, two who were blind,one mentally retarded, and she had syphilis, would you recommend that she have an abortion?

That 9th child was Beethoven. You can't say that if that fetus was aborted that another conception would have the same potential to become Beethoven. We are individuals immediately from conception as the genetic code is one of a kind.

And as for this just being a personal matter, it really isn't. As Burly said, abortion is simply Moms killing babies. It just is. It is a life, yes it can't yet support itself but neither can a full grown human with a serious mental illness, but in time it will. Killing another living human being is called murder, abortion is legalized murder, the victim just can't be seen.

As for laws on it, I think there is enough punishment emotionally for someone who goes through an abortion already, no need to add to it. That person has to live their entire life knowing the took a life and will never know who that person may have been.

 

[ohio]

Originally posted by Triphop

That 9th child was Beethoven.

As for laws on it, I think there is enough punishment emotionally for someone who goes through an abortion already, no need to add to it.

Yeah, we've all heard that before. It's called "anecdotal", and if you take a statistics class you'll realize that what you're saying is that everyone should have as many children as physically possible because it will increase our chances of giving birth to a genius. Do you advocate every woman on earth being pregnant from the moment she reaches sexual maturity until the day her womb finally gives out?

In regards to your second statement, I could not agree more. Anyone who calls abortion a "method of birth control" obviously has zero experience with it. I know several women who have turned to abortion, and it was a horrific experience for all of them. No one would use it as a "method." It was an education that they (and their partners) should have been taught in early highschool. Unfortunately many of the same people that oppose abortion also oppose funding for true sex education. God forbid the kids actually learn about sex before having it.

 

[ohio]

Originally posted by BurlySurly

Whats so hard about it?

Nothing.

I believe I said explicitly "I don't believe in the sanctity of life."

Was that not clear enough for you? I'll try smaller words next time.

 

[ohio]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
because i know im not arrogant enough to think i can make everyone's decision for them

You keep saying that, but then every post of yours contradicts that sentiment.

It's okay to believe that you know what's best for someone else. It's a sign that you have confidence in your knowledge. It's also okay to say sometimes, "okay, in this case I DON'T know what's best for someone else." It's a sign of maturity.

Your world doesn't have to be black and white. It's dynamic and so are the people in it.

 

[Triphop]

Originally posted by ohio
Yeah, we've all heard that before. It's called "anecdotal", and if you take a statistics class you'll realize that what you're saying is that everyone should have as many children as physically possible because it will increase our chances of giving birth to a genius. Do you advocate every woman on earth being pregnant from the moment she reaches sexual maturity until the day her womb finally gives out?

Ohio...you are stretching what I said into something that I did not mean, nor intended to mean. All I am saying is that your statement earlier about any fetus from a given couple having the same potential is not true. The potential for a life yes, but you can not say that the individual characteristics would be the same nor their potential would be the same(maybe I inferred that point from your statement). I would never advocate the having as many children as possible to increase the chances of a genius. Personally, my bag is population control...I do not condone birthing large numbers of children.

I understand your point of view, but I think you trivialize the conception of life.

 

[ohio]

Originally posted by Triphop
Ohio...you are stretching what I said into something that I did not mean, nor intended to mean. All I am saying is that your statement earlier about any fetus from a given couple having the same potential is not true. The potential for a life yes, but you can not say that the individual characteristics would be the same nor their potential would be the same

I understand your point of view, but I think you trivialize the conception of life.

I didn't intend to put words in your mouth. I was also not saying that every fetus is the same. I'm saying every fetus from the same couple is STATISTICALLY identical. Beethoven had no greater chance of being a genius then the baby that came before or after him. If you argue that HE is an example of why abortion should not be allowed, then whether you intend it or not, you are arguing we should have as many children as possible, even if you didn't mean it. One could argue, the world would be better if Hitler's mom had aborted him... same argument, reversed.

And you're correct, I DO trivialize the conception of life. That is why we will almost always disagree. If I felt the conception of life was all that special and significant, I would likely agree with you.

 

[Triphop]

Originally posted by ohio
I didn't intend to put words in your mouth. I was also not saying that every fetus is the same. I'm saying every fetus from the same couple is STATISTICALLY identical. Beethoven had no greater chance of being a genius then the baby that came before or after him. If you argue that HE is an example of why abortion should not be allowed, then whether you intend it or not, you are arguing we should have as many children as possible, even if you didn't mean it. One could argue, the world would be better if Hitler's mom had aborted him... same argument, reversed.

And you're correct, I DO trivialize the conception of life. That is why we will almost always disagree. If I felt the conception of life was all that special and significant, I would likely agree with you.

Every fetus is not statistically identical, the statistical *chance* of the right DNA combining in such a way as to create a genius may be identical, but not the fetus itself. I don't think I worded that correctly, but I hope you see my point.

I would not use the Beethoven example as an example of why abortion should not be allowed, it is an emotional argument, not a logical one. The only true argument I can use against abortion is that a fetus is a human life, and aborting that fetus is killing a human life. Which by definition is against the law.

As you admit to trivializing conception of life, I am curious what value you place on an adult life? This is not to pass judgement, merely to better understand your views.

 

[manimal]

Originally posted by Jesus
I am not going to say a lot of pro-lifers agree with me on this issue, but here is how I see it. For me, until the baby is BORN, I could care less. That fetus, baby, whatever you want to call it don't mean sh!t to me. I could care less what it looks like, brain waves, etc. Just get rid of the damn thing.

As I recall Manimal, you are in the Marines right? I was in the Army for a few years, and I had to make choices on wether I was going to kill someone or not on a regular basis. These are decisions that I am comfortable with. I don't believe I ever made the wrong decision.

So, what i'm thinking is mabye you feel so strongly about this because you have a few "issues" about some people you killed, and now you don't believe in killing anyone?

BTW Manimal, I am not being mean, sarcastic, or an asshole. Just curious if this is the case.

sorry dude....pretty far off. for one, i WAS in the marines, now i'm just joe schmoe civilian. fortunately i was never required to kill anyone, if i had to i would have because that was my job and i trusted my commanding officer enough to believe that if i was required to kill then it was for a pretty good reason.

you cannot equate killing someone in the line of duty with abortion, if that's what you're getting at. once a child comes of age and is able to make decisions for itself, then it is responsible for it's actions and possible consequences. there is nothing in my judeo christian beliefs that contradicts killing in battle.
with your philosophy, there is no difference between a 2 second old newborn and a baby that will be delivered within the hour. is there really a difference? do you think that the child just suddenly becomes human when it breathes real air? give me a break, any woman can tell you that their baby is alive from the 10th week when they feel it moving around.

the big problem here is that everyone is saying that we don't know what's right for everyone else.....well, i'm sorry to inform you that IT'S NOT ABOUT YOU! it's about what you've helped create. (this last statement is not directed at jesus)

sorry if this post is sort of scatter brained. it's waaaaay past my bedtime.

 

[fluff]

Originally posted by Triphop
Every fetus is not statistically identical, the statistical *chance* of the right DNA combining in such a way as to create a genius may be identical, but not the fetus itself. I don't think I worded that correctly, but I hope you see my point.

I would not use the Beethoven example as an example of why abortion should not be allowed, it is an emotional argument, not a logical one. The only true argument I can use against abortion is that a fetus is a human life, and aborting that fetus is killing a human life. Which by definition is against the law.

As you admit to trivializing conception of life, I am curious what value you place on an adult life? This is not to pass judgement, merely to better understand your views.

By implication it does appear that you value a genius over a non-genius. That doesn't seem right to me. Whilst we all have differing value systems we need consistency in each one. I am not against abortion, although clearly it is a complex and emotive issue, but I would disagree with any argument that states that one foetus is worth more than another.

 

[Triphop]

Originally posted by fluff
By implication it does appear that you value a genius over a non-genius. That doesn't seem right to me. Whilst we all have differing value systems we need consistency in each one. I am not against abortion, although clearly it is a complex and emotive issue, but I would disagree with any argument that states that one foetus is worth more than another.

I think you missed my point, I was not trying to imply that I value a genius over a non genius, or one fetus more than another. I was merely trying to counter Ohio's argument that all fetus' are identical. As in the Beethoven example, it clearly shows that all fetus' are not identical, that each conception of life is unique, and the potential for each is unique. And, it is not possible to recreate the identical potential (fetus) from a given couple. Sorry if I was unclear.

 

[Jesus]

Originally posted by manimal
sorry dude....pretty far off. for one, i WAS in the marines, now i'm just joe schmoe civilian. fortunately i was never required to kill anyone, if i had to i would have because that was my job and i trusted my commanding officer enough to believe that if i was required to kill then it was for a pretty good reason.

you cannot equate killing someone in the line of duty with abortion, if that's what you're getting at. once a child comes of age and is able to make decisions for itself, then it is responsible for it's actions and possible consequences. there is nothing in my judeo christian beliefs that contradicts killing in battle.
with your philosophy, there is no difference between a 2 second old newborn and a baby that will be delivered within the hour. is there really a difference? do you think that the child just suddenly becomes human when it breathes real air? give me a break, any woman can tell you that their baby is alive from the 10th week when they feel it moving around.

the big problem here is that everyone is saying that we don't know what's right for everyone else.....well, i'm sorry to inform you that IT'S NOT ABOUT YOU! it's about what you've helped create. (this last statement is not directed at jesus)

sorry if this post is sort of scatter brained. it's waaaaay past my bedtime.

First, I agree that abortion is murder. Plain and simple, at any stage of the pregnancy. But murder is needed sometimes for the greater good. And I do believe that abortion does more good than bad.

Also, I want to say that I have been very impressed with the thought you have put into this subject. You have stated your views with intelligence, and regardless of what others might think, integrity. You are definatly not the "on the fence" type, which I appreciate. I might not agree with you, but I respect your point of view. Thank you.

Showing thoses pictures shows the reality of the process. Reality hurts sometimes, but as adults, I think we can handle it.

 

[ohio]

Originally posted by Triphop
Every fetus is not statistically identical, the statistical *chance* of the right DNA combining in such a way as to create a genius may be identical, but not the fetus itself.

As you admit to trivializing conception of life, I am curious what value you place on an adult life? This is not to pass judgement, merely to better understand your views.

statistically identical does not mean that they are identical. It means that any of them have the same chance of being geniuses, defective, or evil mass murderers. Until recently, there was no way of knowing until maybe age 2 at the earliest. Current advances are about to really mess with our ethics...

I'll expand on trivializing the conception of life. I've already stated I don't believe in the sanctity of life. That is, I don't believe that a human life, in and of itself, is a valuable thing... any more valuable than the life of any other species. It's value lies not in simple "being," but in what it contributes to the world around it. Actions not thoughts. I do believe that almost every living human DOES have something to contribute, something others can learn from, and I also believe that it is not my (nor any other single person's) right to decide who specifically is contributing or not. This is how I can justify the death penalty, and this is how I can justify abortion. The next child has statistically just as much chance of contributing something valuable to the world. I oppose late term abortions, because by that point I feel that the fetus likely has contributed something to the life of the mother, and severing that connection is emotionally too taxing. It takes more from the world than it contributes....

That's about as simply as I can put it, without taking a couple of hours... I'm not really sure if it aligns itself prefectly with some pre-existing belief system, though likely it does. It sounds cold and calculating, like the economists view of human value, but it's not when you get down to it. It actually places a lot of faith in human nature...

 

[Triphop]

Originally posted by ohio
statistically identical does not mean that they are identical. It means that any of them have the same chance of being geniuses, defective, or evil mass murderers. Until recently, there was no way of knowing until maybe age 2 at the earliest. Current advances are about to really mess with our ethics...

Thanks for the explanation of your views. I see where you are coming from.

The only thing that I will comment on, seems it is the same sticking point again, is your above statement. I beleive that at the point of conception the forces are set in motion to create an individual, whether the person will be a genius or defective, or whatever. We may not be able to detect the nature of the individual until the age of 2, but the genetics were designed at the time of conception, IMO. So, after the time of conception the fetus no longer has a statistically identical chance to be a genius, defective or what have you. A fetus' potential has already been predetermined.

Not trying to argue, this is just what I think.

*I don't think mass murderer is a predeterimined trait such as intelligence, as usually this is influenced by environment and external forces.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by ohio


Was that not clear enough for you? I'll try smaller words next time.

Oh yeah?

Well......uh....you suck.


No, what i mean is, you dont have to go citing stats and theories about trimesters when it could all be summed up by saying you dont care when moms kill babies. Dont dance around points, spit them out, and try using smaller words.

 

[Damn True]

Originally posted by gecko
Not all abortions are merely inconvienent.

Sure, some are the result carelessness, but what about the couple struggling to get by raising 3 kids already when their birth control fails, or the 15 year old girl who makes a horrible mistake, or any other situation along these lines.

Is it more responsible to bring a child in to the world under such circumstances? Where right off the bat their standard of life is severely disadvantaged, and couldn't possibly grow and mature at the same rate as a child in a healthy, loving, devoted family. Are they better off growing up with parents who could quite possibly resent their very existance? Is it fair to that 15 year old girl to say sorry, you have to drop out of school, get a minimum wage job waiting tables, and pray that your tips will by diapers?

I don't think so.

There are a lot of factors involved in raising a healthy, well-adjusted, loving person, and sometimes, for whatever reason, a couple, or single mother, can't provide these things, often at no fault of their own.

This issue is frequently over-simplified. It is not black and white. I really don't think that anyone can justify saying every case is wrong, or every case is right. I think depending on the scenario there can be many answers.

Sidenote: DT, going for shock value to try to make a point is a little juvenile, if I wanted to see that I'd watch FOX. We're all familiar with the fact that it's a gruesome and unpleasant process, there was no need for that.

More hypothetical BS.

As for the photos....God forbid we bring reality to the discussion.

You guys go ahead and keep dealing in "what if's".
Keep being wrong.
Keep killing innocent human beings.

I was born under "inconvienent" circumstances. My folks managed just fine. Mom worked, Dad went to college and worked as a DJ for a radio station. It was hard. But things worth doing often are. There is a concequence for every action. Sometimes they can be positive.

 

[Damn True]

Originally posted by ohio
Yeah, we've all heard that before. It's called "anecdotal", and if you take a statistics class you'll realize that what you're saying is that everyone should have as many children as physically possible because it will increase our chances of giving birth to a genius. Do you advocate every woman on earth being pregnant from the moment she reaches sexual maturity until the day her womb finally gives out?

In regards to your second statement, I could not agree more. Anyone who calls abortion a "method of birth control" obviously has zero experience with it. I know several women who have turned to abortion, and it was a horrific experience for all of them. No one would use it as a "method." It was an education that they (and their partners) should have been taught in early highschool. Unfortunately many of the same people that oppose abortion also oppose funding for true sex education. God forbid the kids actually learn about sex before having it.

Anecdotal huh?

Kinda like the statistically irrelevant yet oft used, "What if a woman gets raped?" or "What if the pregnancy could kill her?" or "What if the parents don't want the child?" or "What if the person is just a f'd up lazy irresponsible a-hole?" or "What if some other BS?"

Let's try to deal with reality here.

WE ARE SUPPOSED TO MAKE BABIES, NOT KILL THEM!

 

[Damn True]

Some of you should be ashamed of yourselves.

The photos have been taken down.

You want the right to murder innocent children. But you don't want to be faced with the reality represented by the visualization of that act.

Wonderful.
You want free reign to kill. You just don't want the concequence. Isn't that the line of thinking that gets people into the situation in the first place?

 

[LoboDelFuego]

Originally posted by Damn True

Let's try to deal with reality here.

WE ARE SUPPOSED TO MAKE BABIES, NOT KILL THEM!

I tend to side with the laws of nature (which is kind of a contradictory statement, because nature is all chaotic and everything, soo lets call them the "principles of nature") The one and only reason that we are existing right here today is to do one simple thing: ensure the continuation of our species.

Please do not be confused. Many people interpret this as "I must have as many offspring as is humanly possible, in order to continue the human race" WRONG.

We have to insure the continuation of our speices. Be grateful that our ancestors were fast enough to escape a sabertooth tiger and pass down the genetics for our large brains. Now we can actually think how to go about this. The truth of the matter is that in order to survive as a species, we must STOP. We have overpopulated the world.

Now, this would'nt be a problem if none of us could think, because then we would just keep on fu/cking until one day all the food ran out and half the population starved. But we have compassion for fellow human beings, and we do not want to see the suffer and die. At this point in history, it is alot better to stop a fetus from beng born than to let a man starve to death. Therefore, the argument "we are supposed to make babies, not kill them" falls. Not only is it justified, but soon it may be necessary.

You may say "ahh well its still murder." OK, maybe, in a sense, you are killing what has the possibilty of becoming a human being. 2 responses:

1. Aren't we all, as mountain bikers, potentially "murdering" the sperm that have potential of becoming human by putting ourslves in danger of crotch-saddle/toptube collision? Should this be illegal?

2. Isn't it better to stop something that hasn't been born, that will not suffer (well not more than cells do), than to kill a functional member of society by depriving him of the things he needs to live?

We have enough people as is, so if you're not 110% completely absolutely sure that you wil be able to raise this child in the optimal environment and give it the best life it can have, don't have the baby. It's that simple. Those are the ethical reasons. The political reasons are all in favor of abortion anyway.

 

[manimal]

Originally posted by Jesus
First, I agree that abortion is murder. Plain and simple, at any stage of the pregnancy. But murder is needed sometimes for the greater good. And I do believe that abortion does more good than bad.

Also, I want to say that I have been very impressed with the thought you have put into this subject. You have stated your views with intelligence, and regardless of what others might think, integrity. You are definatly not the "on the fence" type, which I appreciate. I might not agree with you, but I respect your point of view. Thank you.

Showing thoses pictures shows the reality of the process. Reality hurts sometimes, but as adults, I think we can handle it.

thanks, i'll take that as a compliment. i'm glad that, although we disagree, you're not getting caught up in the whole "when is it actually a human" garbage.
This is a subject that will be debated for a long time, i'm just doing my part as a "warrior" for the voiceless. at least this forum allows us all to see the point of view from others, and allows me to sharpen my debating skills

peace out hippie

 

[Eddie420]

Manimal I don't want to start another **** fight, but since when is it not against christian beliefs to kill someone.
Thy shall not kill???

 

[manimal]

Originally posted by Eddie420
Manimal I don't want to start another **** fight, but since when is it not against christian beliefs to kill someone.
Thy shall not kill???

we've already had this discussion in another thread. here it is:turn the other cheek?

 

[ohio]

Originally posted by Damn True
Anecdotal huh?

Kinda like the statistically irrelevant yet oft used, "What if a woman gets raped?" or "What if the pregnancy could kill her?" or "What if the parents don't want the child?" or "What if the person is just a f'd up lazy irresponsible a-hole?" or "What if some other BS?"

Seriously, I shouldn't have to explain this stuff to adults. Anecdotal is not the same as "what if?"

an·ec·dot·al __ (_P_)__Pronunciation Key__(nk-dtl)
adj.

1. also an·ec·dot·ic (-dtk) or an·ec·dot·i·cal (--kl) Of, characterized by, or full of anecdotes.
2. Based on casual observations or indications rather than rigorous or scientific analysis: “There are anecdotal reports of children poisoned by hot dogs roasted over a fire of the [oleander] stems” (C. Claiborne Ray).

Anecdotal evidence is a single event, or event occuring at a statistically insignicant frequency, such as the birth of a genius to the mother of 8, my birth or the birth of Damn True alone, that carries added significance emotionally usually because of a personal connection (my or DT's birth), but also often due to media exposure (Beethoven). As opposed to the rape of a women, or early-teen pregnancy, something that occurs millions of times per year around the world. If you want it to stop being anecdotal, start talkin about something that occurs more than once in the history of mankind, such as the GENERAL CASE of mothers or couples that choose to have the child.

 

[gecko]

Originally posted by Damn True
More hypothetical BS.

As for the photos....God forbid we bring reality to the discussion.

You guys go ahead and keep dealing in "what if's".
Keep being wrong.
Keep killing innocent human beings.

I was born under "inconvienent" circumstances. My folks managed just fine. Mom worked, Dad went to college and worked as a DJ for a radio station. It was hard. But things worth doing often are. There is a concequence for every action. Sometimes they can be positive.

Oh I see...these examples are hypothetical. Here I thought I was making practical observations, but apparently stuff like this NEVER happens. How on earth did we dream up such zany scenarios? I'm sorry, these examples are obviously BS, whereas yours are clearly pure wisdom.

I'm sorry, but saying I'm wrong, and you're right is not going to win anyone over.

Abortion is a nasty thing. The right to have one is often abused. Yes, some people are careless, and go for an easy fix. But there are also so many cases where it can be justified. That's all I, and most pro-choice advocates are trying to say. SOME cases can be justified.

Call it BS if you like.

 

[manimal]

Originally posted by Damn True
Some of you should be ashamed of yourselves.

The photos have been taken down.

You want the right to murder innocent children. But you don't want to be faced with the reality represented by the visualization of that act.

Wonderful.
You want free reign to kill. You just don't want the concequence. Isn't that the line of thinking that gets people into the situation in the first place?

good point DT. i suppose that a fair debate isn't possible if you bring reality to the table.


taking down those pics just shows that you're ashamed of what abortion really is.

 

[D_D]

Originally posted by manimal
good point DT. i suppose that a fair debate isn't possible if you bring reality to the table.

taking down those pics just shows that you're ashamed of what abortion really is.

I wouldn't have taken down the pictures myself but fail to see what relivance they have to a decussion about the rights and wrongs of abortion.

It's a moral issue, and what it looks like when it is done is irrelevent to if it is right or wrong.

 

[manimal]

Originally posted by D_D
I wouldn't have taken down the pictures myself but fail to see what relivance they have to a decussion about the rights and wrongs of abortion.

It's a moral issue, and what it looks like when it is done is irrelevent to if it is right or wrong.

they are relevant. too many people think of the baby as just a fetus, thuse eliminating the morality of the argument. those pictures show that it's not just a fetus, but a human child.

if the pictures disgust you, then we're on the same page now aren't we.

 

[eric strt6]

Originally posted by manimal
they are relevant. too many people think of the baby as just a fetus, thuse eliminating the morality of the argument. those pictures show that it's not just a fetus, but a human child.

if the pictures disgust you, then we're on the same page now aren't we.

naw the pics were crude and irrelevant but not disgusting.

Disgusting is the fact that 38 million are facing death by starvation in africa due to overpopulation [they have exceeded the ability of the land to sustain them] and the Church continues to have the gall to Ban Birth control as immoral.

disgusting is the organization fom whom you take your Moral High ground, continues to hide , defend , and employ child molesting priests

 

[D_D]

Originally posted by manimal
they are relevant. too many people think of the baby as just a fetus, thuse eliminating the morality of the argument. those pictures show that it's not just a fetus, but a human child.

if the pictures disgust you, then we're on the same page now aren't we.

It is just a foetus nothing more nothing less.
It may be born it may not.
The moral issue of if it's ok to kill this foetus for whatever reason has nothing todo with it's apperance afterwards or even before.

I wasn't disgusted by the photos, I just can't see what the point in posting them was, it should be easy enought to express the morality of abortion in words with out having to post pictures that are obviously going to offend some people.

 

[ohio]

Originally posted by manimal

if the pictures disgust you,

So do pictures of a hip replacement surgery... therefore it must be eeeeeeevil.

 

[LoboDelFuego]

Originally posted by eric strt6
Disgusting is the fact that 38 million are facing death by starvation in africa due to overpopulation [they have exceeded the ability of the land to sustain them] and the Church continues to have the gall to Ban Birth control as immoral.

disgusting is the organization fom whom you take your Moral High ground, continues to hide , defend , and employ child molesting priests

well the child molesting thing is kinda outside the realm of this argument, but in everything else I agree. The church is a cruel, evil organization. Add in the fact that some methods of birth control also prevent horrible diseases as well, and you see that it is not helping anybody. I have countless stories from my dad about that.

Yes the pictures were digusting. We are discussing the moral implications, not the exact procedure, but we should not be blind to reality either. Lets just not make this forum "who can do an altavista image search quickest?"