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
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 8
  • 18
being pro life outside the political arena
Topic Started: Nov 12 2008, 06:24 AM (4,742 Views)
Jolly
Member Avatar
Geaux Tigers!
Moonbat
Nov 14 2008, 04:39 PM
Quote:
 

No hunter wishes to see what he kills, suffer.

Same things goes for when we butcher...I can slaughter beeves, hogs and chickens, but the Shakespeare rule always applies... If t'were done...


Fair enough, i certainly wouldn't want any foetus to suffer.
People aren't animals.
The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Moonbat
Member Avatar
Pisa-Carp
Actually they are - specifically they are a species of hairless ape.
Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JBryan
Member Avatar
I am the grey one
Jesus H. Christ. This is why I didn't want to hop on the merry-go-round. You are a very smart guy but that is not going to do you any good if you can't tell the difference between what is obvious and what is rediculous. And you not only dance when your arguments fail but you kick up a cloud of smoke in the process.
"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
 
AlbertaCrude
Bull-Carp
John D'Oh
Nov 14 2008, 05:54 PM
OK - can I take a moment to ask a question. It's pretty obvious that none of the pro-lifers are willing to make any compromises, which was the point of the initial point of the discussion.

My question: How well has that strategy worked so far in reducing the number of abortions?

There is clearly a need for state legislation to create mandatory stare regulated birthing hospices for all unwed mothers as well as married mothers at risk having an abortion. Likewise women should be held criminally responsible for endangering the unborn child they carry. No woman has the unalienable right to seek, obtain or engage in activities that would increase the risk of misscarriage or willfully seek and obtain an abortion of an embryo or fetus in the womb.

Very simple.

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

Jesus H. Christ. This is why I didn't want to hop on the merry-go-round. You are a very smart guy but that is not going to do you any good if you can't tell the difference between what is obvious and what is rediculous. And you not only dance when your arguments fail but you kick up a cloud of smoke in the process.


It's pretty outlandish for you to claim my arguments "fail" when no matter how many times i ask you to explain what it is you think is wrong you refuse to answer.

Really JBryan if you don't know anything about how variable the various reproductive process are just say so, there's no need to accuse other people of "speculation" when basically what you really mean is "i don't know enough to evaluate your statements".

(Edit: I'm actually quite tempted to take the time to do the calculation now, sadly i suspect it wouldn't make any difference)
Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
Jolly
Nov 14 2008, 06:30 PM
John D'Oh
Nov 14 2008, 05:54 PM
OK - can I take a moment to ask a question. It's pretty obvious that none of the pro-lifers are willing to make any compromises, which was the point of the initial point of the discussion.

My question: How well has that strategy worked so far in reducing the number of abortions?

If a strategy isn't working, why keep pursuing it? This debate is strangely reminiscent of WW1. 'We've been dropping artillery on 'em for 2 solid days, sergeant , so we're absolutely sure they're all dead. We're just about to give the order to march slowly towards the trenches. Yes, I know, I know, the last 15 times we did this everybody got killed, but this time is going to be different!'

Wouldn't it be better to half the number of abortions than have no change at all?
Or maybe having a father have sex with only half of his female children?

Yeah, bad analogy, but....if something is inherently wrong, it is just as wrong in little pieces as it is in its entirety...
Judging by the number of abortions, a very large number of people don't agree with the hard-line pro-lifers. This isn't the case with the child-abuse analogy. In this type of situation, the only hope you have is some sort of compromise. The problem with so much of the debate is that it becomes so harsh, as evidenced by this thread. Thus far, the pro-lifers haven't had much success in gaining anything other than their own perception of the moral high-ground.

My main objection to abortion, incidentally, isn't really in what happens to the fetus, at least in it's early stages, but what happens to the people who have abortions. The case of IVF was raised - most people don't have any issues with that procedure, even though fetuses are also used. As I've said somewhere else, I have a very beautiful nephew, and a good friend with wonderful twin boys because of this - obtained, incidentally, on the socialistic British National Health Service.
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AlbertaCrude
Bull-Carp
John D'Oh
Nov 14 2008, 06:46 PM
Judging by the number of abortions, a very large number of people don't agree with the hard-line pro-lifers.
Or, judging by the quoted numbers- 50 million for the USA alone- individuals are incapable of making rational decsions on this matter and the state must give clear direction. My mandatory birthing hopsice option is universally acceptable and serves the greater good by providing clear guidelines and consequences for women (and to an extent men) on the social responsibilities that come with pregnancy and motherhood.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
AlbertaCrude
Nov 14 2008, 06:53 PM
John D'Oh
Nov 14 2008, 06:46 PM
Judging by the number of abortions, a very large number of people don't agree with the hard-line pro-lifers.
Or, judging by the quoted numbers- 50 million for the USA alone- individuals are incapable of making rational decsions on this matter and the state must give clear direction. My mandatory birthing hopsice option is universally acceptable and serves the greater good by providing clear guidelines for women (and to an extent men) on the consequences of their behavior and actions.
At the very least, this idea would have the merit of providing the enormously entertaining spectacle of American conservatives tearing themselves apart over which was the greater evil - abortion or government-funded medical services.
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AlbertaCrude
Bull-Carp
Of course it would be government funded. That goes without saying, as the trade off for legislation outlawing all elective abortions is accepting that both you and your unborn child belong and are beholden to the greater good of the collective via the secular state.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JBryan
Member Avatar
I am the grey one
Quote:
 
Really JBryan if you don't know anything about how variable the various reproductive process are just say so, there's no need to accuse other people of "speculation" when basically what you really mean is "i don't know enough to evaluate your statements".


No, what I am saying is that you have not proven your statement. Mine requires no proof. That there are people who have not been born as a result of abortion is self-evident. Your statement that there are those who would not be born as a result of abortion not being available is not. Prove it. Otherwise we can speculate about pink unicorns or flying monkeys or whatever else but it does not get you where you want to be: the two arguments are not equivalent. I thought you were smarter than this.
"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
 
Dewey
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Quote:
 
If a strategy isn't working, why keep pursuing it?


Because it isn't a strategy, it's a moral value. A moral value remains constant regardless of whether a majority of people follow it.

"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685.

"Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous

"Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011

I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Moonbat
Nov 14 2008, 05:45 PM
If you could somehow go back and undo that termination, if you could split reality at that point then in the alternate no-termination world they would not end up with the child they have in the was-a-termination world.
Wow.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JBryan
Member Avatar
I am the grey one
That was a real head scratcher for me as well. However, it was really just a high falutin tap-dancer.
"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
 
AlbertaCrude
Bull-Carp
Not really tap dancing nor dancing on the head of pin either:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds_interpretation
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JBryan
Member Avatar
I am the grey one
Well, yeah, that clears things up.
"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
 
Larry
Member Avatar
Mmmmmmm, pie!
Moonbat's argument is beyond silly.


As for the rest of this thread, I feel like my very soul has been sullied by some of this mess. Just an empty, hollow sadness.

Kathy, you disgust me.
Of the Pokatwat Tribe

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AlbertaCrude
Bull-Carp
Moonbat
Nov 14 2008, 06:35 PM
Actually they are - specifically they are a species of hairless ape.
[harumpfing indignation] I'll have you know that I have a pretty healthy head of hair for a silverback over fifty! [/harumpfing indignation]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
John D'Oh
Nov 14 2008, 06:46 PM
Jolly
Nov 14 2008, 06:30 PM
John D'Oh
Nov 14 2008, 05:54 PM
OK - can I take a moment to ask a question. It's pretty obvious that none of the pro-lifers are willing to make any compromises, which was the point of the initial point of the discussion.

My question: How well has that strategy worked so far in reducing the number of abortions?

If a strategy isn't working, why keep pursuing it? This debate is strangely reminiscent of WW1. 'We've been dropping artillery on 'em for 2 solid days, sergeant , so we're absolutely sure they're all dead. We're just about to give the order to march slowly towards the trenches. Yes, I know, I know, the last 15 times we did this everybody got killed, but this time is going to be different!'

Wouldn't it be better to half the number of abortions than have no change at all?
Or maybe having a father have sex with only half of his female children?

Yeah, bad analogy, but....if something is inherently wrong, it is just as wrong in little pieces as it is in its entirety...
Judging by the number of abortions, a very large number of people don't agree with the hard-line pro-lifers. This isn't the case with the child-abuse analogy. In this type of situation, the only hope you have is some sort of compromise. The problem with so much of the debate is that it becomes so harsh, as evidenced by this thread. Thus far, the pro-lifers haven't had much success in gaining anything other than their own perception of the moral high-ground.

My main objection to abortion, incidentally, isn't really in what happens to the fetus, at least in it's early stages, but what happens to the people who have abortions. The case of IVF was raised - most people don't have any issues with that procedure, even though fetuses are also used. As I've said somewhere else, I have a very beautiful nephew, and a good friend with wonderful twin boys because of this - obtained, incidentally, on the socialistic British National Health Service.
When you got the proborts demanding partial birth abortion and Obama voting against (or present) on measure to protect live born survivors of abortion because he thinks its a gateway to stopping all abortion -- I think you are talking to the wrong side.

The proborts want and have unrestricted abortion until birth.

They understand that if they draw any other arbitrary line other than their arbitrary line of birth -- such as some "trimester" convention, or "brain wave" or "heartbeat" or "sentiency" or whatever -- they have to acknowledge that it is an innocent human being that they have been advocating be killed on demand.

That won't happen.

Conversely the pro life side understands that if you draw any arbitrary line that nothing holds together. Why sentiency or heart beat or brain wave or birth or maturation or any legal status? Either human beings have an intrinsic right to life that neither another can justly take nor does the state have the right to waive, or it is all up for grabs. The pro life side won't accept artificial lines such as sentiency or thinking/feeling or capacity for hopes and dreams and self determination as categories of "person" and therefore of protected legal status. Either human beings have a right to life per se, or they don't.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AlbertaCrude
Bull-Carp
So what makes a zygote so special that it should be accorded full human rights?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
ivorythumper
Nov 14 2008, 07:38 PM
When you got the proborts demanding partial birth abortion and Obama voting against (or present) on measure to protect live born survivors of abortion because he thinks its a gateway to stopping all abortion -- I think you are talking to the wrong side.
It's both sides that need to compromise, and neither side is willing to. What's more, neither side can see it.
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
AlbertaCrude
Nov 14 2008, 07:44 PM
So what makes a zygote so special that it should be accorded full human rights?
Nothing, unless it happens to be a human zygote. Dog zygotes I really don't care about, but I suppose they should have all the rights given to other dogs.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
John D'Oh
Nov 14 2008, 07:47 PM
ivorythumper
Nov 14 2008, 07:38 PM
When you got the proborts demanding partial birth abortion and Obama voting against (or present) on measure to protect live born survivors of abortion because he thinks its a gateway to stopping all abortion -- I think you are talking to the wrong side.
It's both sides that need to compromise, and neither side is willing to. What's more, neither side can see it.
What exactly is there to see? How can a person who thinks that human life begins at conception allow for a law that permits the murder of a human being?

Your numbers argument is just not convincing. We'll only kill 1 in 10 old people. It's better than killing them all.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
Dewey
Nov 14 2008, 07:17 PM
Quote:
 
If a strategy isn't working, why keep pursuing it?


Because it isn't a strategy, it's a moral value. A moral value remains constant regardless of whether a majority of people follow it.

So claiming moral superiority over those with differing views is more important than reducing the number of abortions?

Isn't one of the most important part of becoming an adult human being learning to work constructively with people who have different beliefs to one's own?
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AlbertaCrude
Bull-Carp
ivorythumper
Nov 14 2008, 07:47 PM
AlbertaCrude
Nov 14 2008, 07:44 PM
So what makes a zygote so special that it should be accorded full human rights?
Nothing, unless it happens to be a human zygote. Dog zygotes I really don't care about, but I suppose they should have all the rights given to other dogs.
So I take it you are not averse to A.I or IVF in species other than homo sapiens. How do propose to regulate the practice among humans where zygotes and blastocysts are at risk of being....selected?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
Trying to ban IVF on the grounds of being 'pro-life' is more than a tad ironic. The whole purpose of the procedure is to allow human beings to reproduce who would otherwise not be able to.
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Join the millions that use us for their forum communities. Create your own forum today.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 8
  • 18