Supercandy afraid of reality puts those who speak truth on Ignore...zygote not child!

Mott the Hoople said:
or right wingers. What makes abortion really complex is that both extremes of the argument, abortion for any reason what so ever and abortion for no reason what so ever are both morally objectionable. What is morally permissable is somewhere in the grey area between these two extremes. Then throw in the fact that it's also a very emotional issue and things really get complicated.
Click to expand...

What is legally permissible is all that matters. The mother's morals are none of anyone's business.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
or right wingers. What makes abortion really complex is that both extremes of the argument, abortion for any reason what so ever and abortion for no reason what so ever are both morally objectionable. What is morally permissable is somewhere in the grey area between these two extremes. Then throw in the fact that it's also a very emotional issue and things really get complicated.
Click to expand...

that was my point to bijou which she has repeatedly rejected. she claims i am idiot to believe that way. pity for her, i could care less what she thinks.
i believe you are and i are pretty much in agreement on that statement.
 
enough said:
there you go again with your immature rabid far left wing talk. even mott understands that the issue is not as simple as you would like to have us believe. you ran away from my post yesterday discussing your claims that women do in fact go through intense emotional anguish over what to do. if it was as simple as you claim, there would be no anguish.

the fact remains, if it is a human, then why should just the mother get to decide? using your logic, i should get to decide to kill anyone i want.
Click to expand...
Well the reason the mother should get the benefit of the doubt in the decision making process is because when a woman is pregnant it is her life and health and well being which are at risk. It's easy for some neanderthal like Todd Akins to oppose all forms of abortion. I mean what the hell, it aint his life that's at risk. If it was, I'm sure he'd be singing a differant tune.
 
enough said:
that was my point to bijou which she has repeatedly rejected. she claims i am idiot to believe that way. pity for her, i could care less what she thinks.
i believe you are and i are pretty much in agreement on that statement.
Click to expand...

It's none of your business why a woman chooses to abort her unborn child. What part of that are you too stupid to comprehend?
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Well the reason the mother should get the benefit of the doubt in the decision making process is because when a woman is pregnant it is her life and health and well being which are at risk. It's easy for some neanderthal like Todd Akins to oppose all forms of abortion. I mean what the hell, it aint his life that's at risk. If it was, I'm sure he'd be singing a differant tune.
Click to expand...

when it comes to risk like that, i do believe it is the woman's decision as the reality in virtually all those situations is that both could die if the woman gives birth.
 
Bijou said:
It's none of your business why a woman chooses to abort her unborn child. What part of that are you too stupid to comprehend?
Click to expand...

after running away from the tough questions you decide to simply repeat ad nausuam? what is the matter, why can't you answer post 33 and the other post i've reposted for you after you whined about SF and others doing that? are you a two faced whiner?

if i helped create the child, it damn is my business. using your logic, if i want to kill someone, it is none of your business what i want to do. after all, we are talking about human life. what part of that are you too stupid to comprehend runner?
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
I am completely against late term abortions except for life threatening conditions. The cutoff point for me is 22 weeks.
Click to expand...
From what I"ve seen it is very rare that late term abortions are performed for anything other than to save the life of the mother or to protect her health from serious and disabling injury. In the US the late term abortion issue is used as a wedge issue to try and undermine early term abortion, which is why abortion opponents so adamantly oppose language which protects the womans health even when the term "Health" has been specifically defined.

That's when you start crossing from the arena of politics and into the arena of medicine. There is no medical procedure that I can think of that is 100% contraindicated. EVER! That being the case I'm completely opposed to some ideological politician playing Doctor and tying physicians hands and professional judgement in a manner which may cost a young woman her life.
 
King of Owls said:
no it isn't. the issue is not choice. the issue is when personhood begins. If a woman actually had a full fledged autonomous sentient child inside them they would be committing murder. As it stands, that's not the case. It's not a fully developed human and it's not sentient.
Click to expand...
That's debatable.
 
enough said:
after running away from the tough questions you decide to simply repeat ad nausuam? what is the matter, why can't you answer post 33 and the other post i've reposted for you after you whined about SF and others doing that? are you a two faced whiner?

if i helped create the child, it damn is my business. using your logic, if i want to kill someone, it is none of your business what i want to do. after all, we are talking about human life. what part of that are you too stupid to comprehend runner?
Click to expand...

Are you of the retarded mindset that thinks all questions, no matter how idiotic, deserve answers? I guess it sucks to be you, then.

And no, whether you helped create the child or not, guess what? If the mother decides to abort, you're powerless to stop it.
 
Bijou said:
Are you of the retarded mindset that thinks all questions, no matter how idiotic, deserve answers? I guess it sucks to be you, then.

And no, whether you helped create the child or not, guess what? If the mother decides to abort, you're powerless to stop it.
Click to expand...

lmao. then why did you run around the forum earlier complaining multiple times how SF ignored your questions? is it because you are a two faced whiner?

i'm not powerless at all to stop it. you're have no fucking clue what you're talking about. you're not even discussing facts or the issues, you're just being emotive and spewing nonsense and ignoring the tough questions because you know they blow your logic clear out of the water. like i said before, you are not qualified to discuss this issue.
 
Damocles said:
Only if the egg is fertilized would this be a fair comparison; when fertilized the egg contains an embryonic chicken, or a "chick". Basically a baby chicken. A human zygote, being a fertilized egg, is a unique human life.

This isn't hard to understand and is part of almost any 6th Grader's Life Science textbook.

Where the pro-abortionist seems to diverge from facts is when they start getting into measuring the value of that life. The argument of whether it is a unique human life is already answered. One may argue that it is valueless until it is somehow magically imparted with whatever measure they call "personhood"... or one can believe that it has value regardless, or because we cannot be sure of, the magical moment of "person" or "soul infusion"... some measure this by "viability" which is a silly measure, that human life will have many years of dependence even after they are born, hence the idea of "viability" is simply a different level of medical necessity. Some babies born will need medical assistance, should they not be considered human? It's actually quite a foolish measure.

Some religions measure it by sentience, others believe that the "soul" is infused at the moment of conception...

Either way it is just another divergent way of defining the value of that life, not arguing that the life doesn't exist at all or isn't human.
Click to expand...
Yes but we devalue human life all the time. The staggering hypocrisy of most anti-abortion people is that they are as a group very pro war. A person who is opposed to abortion in all circumstances should also, using the same logic and morallity, be opposed to war in all circumstances.

So yes, you do have a point about devaluing human life but point of fact is, there are times and circumstances in which it is morally permissable to devalue a human life.
 
enough said:
lmao. then why did you run around the forum earlier complaining multiple times how SF ignored your questions? is it because you are a two faced whiner?
Click to expand...

No, it's because I asked a legitimate question based on what SF has professed to believe scientifically about when life begins. Your idiocy doesn't warrant an answer; that's why you're not getting one.

i'm not powerless at all to stop it. you're have no fucking clue what you're talking about.
Click to expand...

Sure you are. Unless you plan on somehow restraining her. Is that your plan, tough guy? Gee I can't imagine why some woman wouldn't want to have your baby..... :rofl2:
 
Bijou said:
What is legally permissible is all that matters. The mother's morals are none of anyone's business.
Click to expand...
That's a circular argument because what is legally permissable is damned well based on what is percieved to be morally and ethially permissable. Meaning that what is legally permissable can change. In my life time I've seen abortion go from one extreme, illegal in almost all circumstances to the exact opposite extreme, to being legal virtually at will.
 
enough said:
when it comes to risk like that, i do believe it is the woman's decision as the reality in virtually all those situations is that both could die if the woman gives birth.
Click to expand...
I agree and I can remember a time when that right did not exist for women. I definately oppose turning back the clock to that time.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
That's a circular argument because what is legally permissable is damned well based on what is percieved to be morally and ethially permissable. Meaning that what is legally permissable can change. In my life time I've seen abortion go from one extreme, illegal in almost all circumstances to the exact opposite extreme, to being legal virtually at will.
Click to expand...

And yet abortions continue to be performed regardless. In other words, the moral issue has no bearing on whether or not abortion will continue. It will. So we might as well be civilized, mature and pragmatic about this unpleasant but necessary option. As well, it would behoove society if the mouthbreathing religious zealots would start walking upright and begin to perceive contraception like evolved 21st-century human beings do. That way, there will be less abortion.
 
Bijou;1062115]No, it's because I asked a legitimate question based on what SF has professed to believe scientifically about when life begins. Your idiocy doesn't warrant an answer; that's why you're not getting one.
Click to expand...

what a two faced hack. my questions went directly to the heart of your stated beliefs. you won't answer them because they shatter your beliefs to the core and you can't face that.


Sure you are. Unless you plan on somehow restraining her. Is that your plan, tough guy? Gee I can't imagine why some woman wouldn't want to have your baby..... :rofl2:
Click to expand...

your idiocy doesn't deserve a meaningful response. you need to grow up and stop acting like an emotional troll.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top