Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
being pro life outside the political arena
Topic Started: Nov 12 2008, 06:24 AM (4,747 Views)
AlbertaCrude
Bull-Carp
Copper
Nov 12 2008, 06:21 PM

If by "tantamount" you mean it has the same effect - no, it doesn't.

And you would really have to twist the definition of "abortion" to make it fit.
If you accept the premise that human life begins at the moment of conception I cannot see how it does not have the same effect. While I personally do not agree with the premise it can be argued that a zygote or blastocyst is every bit as human as an embryo or fetus and ought to be treated as such.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Moonbat
Member Avatar
Pisa-Carp
Quote:
 

This is an issue where there is no compromise. Either you believe a fetus is a living human being or not.


You use one word "fetus" but what the word represents is in a state of flux. It's possible to compromise on the abortion question because it's possible to recognise the huge difference between a single cell and a newly born baby whilst also recognising that a minute before birth the baby/fetus is much the same organism as it is a minute later.
Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Luke's Dad
Member Avatar
Emperor Pengin
ivorythumper
Nov 12 2008, 02:47 PM
Luke's Dad
Nov 12 2008, 11:58 AM
To equate abortion to excess drinking or adultery... I don't even know what to say...

The only thing I'm going to say is that Pro-Life groups need to come up with more and better choices than abortion. I'm all about prochoice, as long as abortion isn't one of the options. That means better support systems for unwed mothers. That means better promotion and execution of adoptive programs. That means counseling sessions for young ladies, and that means explicit sex education with a high emphasis on abstinance.
They already do that. They facilitate adoption, they have social services for unwed mothers, they provide counseling (both before and after abortion). They have explicitly pro abstinence sex ed programs.
There are alot of wonderful things being done by a number of individual organizations to help. I don't deny that. On a one on one basis, they are saving lives and making a difference. That is to be commended and cheered. On a national basis, however, they can never be able to adequately get the job done. They are understaffed, underfunded, and generally short of resources. Just think of what they could accomplish with the type of funding Family Planning gets? Just think of the manpower they could have if those spending their time protesting spent one hour a week working with them?

It still wouldn't be enough. It will never be enough as long as abortion is a legitimate out for these women.

Nobody wants to hear this, everybody wants to find excuses for it, everybody wants to devalue life to protect themseelves from facing the shame. We all know somebody that's had an abortion, we want to protect them and help them and give them support so we try to cover up something that I think most everybody feels somewhere deep inside. Abortion is evil. Perhaps the most evil act in existence, IMO. I think just about everybody feels this to some extent too. Otherwise, why all this talk about making it rare. If it's not evil, if it doesn't devalue life and drag us all lower, then why all this talk about reducing the number of abortions? If it's just a medical procedure, who cares?

Some of you might see me as being to the far right on alot of issues. So be it. I would be able to compromise on most or all of them, however. The one I won't compromise on is abortion.

I would gladly compromise on each and every one of my conservative view points if abortion was done away with.
The problem with having an open mind is that people keep trying to put things in it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
Luke's Dad
Nov 12 2008, 11:58 AM
To equate abortion to excess drinking or adultery... I don't even know what to say...
You should be glad I didn't mention coveting your neighbour's ass.

In your book:

13 You shall not murder.

14 You shall not commit adultery.

They are right next to each other, so I guess I'm in good company.
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Luke's Dad
Member Avatar
Emperor Pengin
You're assuming I'm basing my feelings on abortion on my being a Christian. Christianity has nothing to do with my feelings on abortion aside from the fact that it agrees.

My beliefs aren't formed by being a Christian. My choice of being a Christian comes from my beliefs.
The problem with having an open mind is that people keep trying to put things in it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Luke's Dad
Member Avatar
Emperor Pengin
As an aside, Adultery is illegal in many states, carrying penalties ranging from Life Imprisonment in Michigan to a $10.00 fine in Maryland. Pennsylvania carries a two year sentence, I know somebody busted for it.

At the very least, it can be used in divorce proceedings in finding fault and used to determine allocation of assets.

The problem with having an open mind is that people keep trying to put things in it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Luke's Dad
Nov 13 2008, 06:10 AM
Otherwise, why all this talk about making it rare. If it's not evil, if it doesn't devalue life and drag us all lower, then why all this talk about reducing the number of abortions? If it's just a medical procedure, who cares?
Exactly. The backpedaling the probort side does in the name of compromise manifests this schizophrenia. Safe, legal and rare? Why rare?
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Moonbat
Nov 13 2008, 01:01 AM
Quote:
 

This is an issue where there is no compromise. Either you believe a fetus is a living human being or not.


You use one word "fetus" but what the word represents is in a state of flux. It's possible to compromise on the abortion question because it's possible to recognise the huge difference between a single cell and a newly born baby whilst also recognising that a minute before birth the baby/fetus is much the same organism as it is a minute later.
Let's see how well that works:

You use one word "infant" but what the word represents is in a state of flux. It's possible to compromise on the infanticide question because it's possible to recognise the huge difference between a newly born baby and an adolescent....



The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Moonbat
Member Avatar
Pisa-Carp
Quote:
 

Let's see how well that works:

You use one word "infant" but what the word represents is in a state of flux. It's possible to compromise on the infanticide question because it's possible to recognise the huge difference between a newly born baby and an adolescent....


Newly born babies and adolescents are also very different but they have various features in common, if you care about thinking feeling people-like things (and ultimately i think if people are honest with themselves and explore various logically possibile scenarios they will realise that's what they care about), then it follows that one cares about newly born babies and adolescents but not about bricks or fertilised eggs or other blind collections of matter.

Of course where one draws the line when presented with a continuum of development that takes you from unambiguously blind and unthinking to unambiguously conscious and aware is the central question and i think it's a very gray area rather than the clear cut no-compromise stuff that the religious right makes it out to be.
Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Copper
Member Avatar
Shortstop
AlbertaCrude
Nov 12 2008, 08:51 PM

If you accept the premise that human life begins at the moment of conception I cannot see how it does not have the same effect.

In an IVF cycle many eggs may be fertilized. The doctor and parents decide how many eggs to put back.

The number is selected to maximize the likelihood of a successful pregnancy.

Choose too low and none may make it, too high and too many may survive and ultimately none survive or the mother may be injured.

So there is a bit of playing God involved, some are chosen to have a chance and some aren’t. In that sense the effect is the same – death.

A case could be made that the death was caused in defense of the mother or even the potential siblings. This may be similar to what is sometimes called justifiable homicide or self defense.
The Confederate soldier was peculiar in that he was ever ready to fight, but never ready to submit to the routine duty and discipline of the camp or the march. The soldiers were determined to be soldiers after their own notions, and do their duty, for the love of it, as they thought best. Carlton McCarthy
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Larry
Member Avatar
Mmmmmmm, pie!
I wonder.......

if we accepted abortion as just another medical procedure with all the ethical and moral issues of having a wart removed the way the pro-abortion crowd would like for us to see it....

how many of us would not be here right now?

And of those who might not be here now, how many of those (if they could) would wish there had been someone out there trying to defend their Constitutional right to life?
Of the Pokatwat Tribe

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Moonbat
Member Avatar
Pisa-Carp
Quote:
 

how many of us would not be here right now?

And of those who might not be here now, how many of those (if they could) would wish there had been someone out there trying to defend their Constitutional right to life?


Of those who might not be here now, how many would wish X if only their non-existence didn't stop them wishing anything?

.... hrmm.

Anyway one can easily setup the exact same argument in reverse:

How many people who are not here now would be here were abortion more prevalent? How many of those (if they could) would wish there had been someone out there trying to defend their "right" to life?

The above isn't presented as an argument that abortion is good - it just shows that the argument you presented doesn't work.
Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Copper
Member Avatar
Shortstop

Well once the government gets control of all the "current economic meltdown" that the MSM likes to scream about we won't have to worry.

The Feds will make sure that no baby is born until the government has a budget to take that baby all the way to the grave.

That will fix everything.
The Confederate soldier was peculiar in that he was ever ready to fight, but never ready to submit to the routine duty and discipline of the camp or the march. The soldiers were determined to be soldiers after their own notions, and do their duty, for the love of it, as they thought best. Carlton McCarthy
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Larry
Member Avatar
Mmmmmmm, pie!
Quote:
 
The above isn't presented as an argument that abortion is good - it just shows that the argument you presented doesn't work.


Oh, it works. What doesn't work is the question you came up with to try to counter it. The most ridiculous thing I've read in awhile...
Of the Pokatwat Tribe

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kathyk
Member Avatar
Pisa-Carp
George K
Nov 12 2008, 06:50 AM
brenda
Nov 12 2008, 06:47 AM
George, have some milk with that popcorn.
:smooch:
Beer goes much better.
Blogging in Palestine: http://kksjournal.com/
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kathyk
Member Avatar
Pisa-Carp
Copper
Nov 12 2008, 06:59 AM
Axtremus
Nov 12 2008, 06:31 AM

The pro-life people simply have to accept that there are cases where abortion is the correct, proper, and moral course of action.


The Jewish people simply have to accept that there are cases where Nazism is the correct, proper, and moral course of action.
Posted Image
Blogging in Palestine: http://kksjournal.com/
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
MIke Godwin
Member Avatar
Junior Carp
Thanks Kathy. I missed that one. :wave: :wave:
Now behave, it's the law, you know.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kathyk
Member Avatar
Pisa-Carp
ivorythumper
Nov 12 2008, 04:05 PM
What is asinine? I think abortion is much worse than kiddie porn or child abuse.
Wow. This explains a lot.
Blogging in Palestine: http://kksjournal.com/
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kathyk
Member Avatar
Pisa-Carp
ivorythumper
Nov 13 2008, 07:57 PM
Luke's Dad
Nov 13 2008, 06:10 AM
Otherwise, why all this talk about making it rare. If it's not evil, if it doesn't devalue life and drag us all lower, then why all this talk about reducing the number of abortions? If it's just a medical procedure, who cares?
Exactly. The backpedaling the probort side does in the name of compromise manifests this schizophrenia. Safe, legal and rare? Why rare?
Because most people can agree that it's an awful option. There are a lot of awful procedures available that shouldn't necessarily be criminalized. Root canals, for example - although some might disagree. :$
Blogging in Palestine: http://kksjournal.com/
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Moonbat
Member Avatar
Pisa-Carp
Quote:
 


Oh, it works. What doesn't work is the question you came up with to try to counter it. The most ridiculous thing I've read in awhile...


Sorry - should have known better than to try logical consistency with you. Back to ignored you go.
Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JBryan
Member Avatar
I am the grey one
Call me thick but how do you get to people who would be here if abortion were more prevalent?
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne


There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it".


Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody.

Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore.

From The Lion in Winter.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Moonbat
Member Avatar
Pisa-Carp
Well if a couple want a child and discover that the embryo or fetus has say Downs and as a result terminate the pregnancy then it seems reasonable to suppose they will have another pregnancy. The person that comes about from that other pregnancy would not exist were it not for the termination.

The logic of 'what about the people who would have otherwise existed but for X decision' is easily seen as hugely problematic - think about all the people who would be here otherwise but who are not because rape is prohibited, i mean think of all the people who would be here otherwise but are not because 100 years ago John Smith took the scenic route home. Every action taken in the present massively alters which hypothetically possible future human beings end up actual human beings in the future and which hypothetically possible future human beings are consigned to never were's. If we want to try and maximise the number of possible future people who end real people then i suppose we should force all women to reproduce at their maximum rates.

Edit: actually that will fail too because it will clearly shorten humanities life span - a loss of countless trillions of possible future humans. I suppose then if you want to maximise the number of people (and lets face we're still talking about 'saving' an almost infinitely small percentage of these possible people) then you want humanity to be around a long time so you should emphasise stability, I think one might argue that legalised abortion would actually further that end, amusingly then one might well imagine the truely fervent pro-lifers should be pro-choice :D.
Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kathyk
Member Avatar
Pisa-Carp
One thing that just hit me, especially in context of IT's statement that childhood abuse is preferable to abortion, is that the absolute pro-lifers are incredibly rigid in their thinking. This black and white thinking is also illustrated by IT's seeming inability to comprehend the fact that pro-choice folks can abhor abortion and at the same time oppose criminalizing it. There's no room whatsoever for nuance in the thinking of the hard line pro-lifers.

I think the Japanese Buddhists have the right approach. They view abortion as a terrible choice, but they don't condemn it; rather they provide an open ritual to mourn the passage of life. What we could learn from the Japanese

Snips:

There has always been some form of opposition to abortion in Japan. Abortion is not regarded as a "good," but rather as a regrettable or necessary evil.

------

Buddhism's strong opposition to any form of killing would seem to support opposition to abortion. However, like Shinto, Buddhism cannot be expressed in doctrines nor can conclusions be argued from rational premises, as in Western religious arguments against abortion. Buddhism, especially in Japan, deals with life as ambiguous; birthing and dying are processes through stages rather than fixed events.

Precisely out of compassion for a woman's or a family's difficult situation, then, Buddhism also tolerates abortion.
Blogging in Palestine: http://kksjournal.com/
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JBryan
Member Avatar
I am the grey one
Quote:
 
The person that comes about from that other pregnancy would not exist were it not for the termination.


I'm sorry but I don't see how that follows necessarily unless you have a one child policy or whatever number is one over the number the couple already has. There certainly are people who are not here because of abortion. Your attempt at inversion falls short of that certainty.
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne


There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it".


Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody.

Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore.

From The Lion in Winter.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Moonbat
Member Avatar
Pisa-Carp
Quote:
 

I'm sorry but I don't see how that follows necessarily unless you have a one child policy or whatever number is one over the number the couple already has. There certainly are people who are not here because of abortion. Your attempt at inversion falls short of that certainty.


Surely you see that people who would otherwise be here, are not, because terminations don't occur (for whatever reason) just as people who would otherwise be here, are not, because event X occured in the past rather than event Y.

Returning to terminations suppose you consider a couple who have terminated a pregnancy and then go on to have another child - and clearly there are examples. Now consider going back in time and preventing that termination, are you seriously trying to tell me that in that altered reality the couple would still concieve that same second child? That even though events would be different the exact same combination of genes and environmental stimuli that weave together to create an individual would occur again?

The reasoning of we have to maximise the number of future people therefore no abortions doesn't work at all as i mentioned in the previous post.
Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums. Reliable service with over 8 years of experience.
Learn More · Sign-up Now
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic »
Add Reply