Dixie's idiotic signature...!

But why does that make a difference, just because they dont share the same DNA?

So, a twin should be allowed to kill her twin because they share DNA...


I've never said that having the same DNA should give you the right to kill. You gave the analogy about the thumb, and I pointed out, the thumb is part of your body, it belongs to you, it has your own DNA, you are free to do whatever you want to do with your own thumb, being it's part of your body. An embryo is not part of your body, it has its own unique DNA, and is its own entity, seperate from yours. If you want to divert the argument off into a debate about DNA and twins, that's fine, you are avoiding the original argument. I don't blame you a bit, it's hard to defend murdering innocent human life.
 
I've never said that having the same DNA should give you the right to kill. You gave the analogy about the thumb, and I pointed out, the thumb is part of your body, it belongs to you, it has your own DNA, you are free to do whatever you want to do with your own thumb, being it's part of your body. An embryo is not part of your body, it has its own unique DNA, and is its own entity, seperate from yours. If you want to divert the argument off into a debate about DNA and twins, that's fine, you are avoiding the original argument. I don't blame you a bit, it's hard to defend murdering innocent human life.


1) I am not defending anything. Your words not mine.

2) You are diverting the origional argument about how your idiotic signature has NO relivence to my position on abortion.

3) My point is that there is plenty of moral ambiguity on this issue and thus the governmetn should stay out of it!
 
Alex, Bushies don't believe in moral ambiguity, just moral certainty. No shades of grey or colors, just black and white/yes no/ 1 or 0/ good evil, etc...
 
Yes, but not human. Once it morphs into a Cancer cell it distinguishes itself from human DNA through the genetic shift....
So do some Fetusus, pretty much, not totally unhuman, but far from normal.......Should they be kept if not naturally aborted thru miscarriage ?
 
That is my point, I can't decide for everyone, nor do I feel that I should decide for someone else.
I believe that one should always err on the side of another's rights in a hierarchy. If we do not have a reason to deny the right to life there should be nothing that can trump it other than self-defense.

The "life of the mother" is about the only excuse good enough to take the right to life from another.
 
Your position and I respect you for it Damo. I however feel that the woman should have more leeway than that, at least in the early stages of pregnancy.
In any case pregnancies resulting from rape and incest should be allowed to be aborted.
 
Your position and I respect you for it Damo. I however feel that the woman should have more leeway than that, at least in the early stages of pregnancy.
In any case pregnancies resulting from rape and incest should be allowed to be aborted.
I do too. Hence the reason I believe that we should remove the fetus with the intent to save it at her direction.

I do know that:

1. Many will die in the first stages of this.
2. In the end it will create an actual choice for all women whether to carry the child in utero or ex utero...
 
1) I am not defending anything. Your words not mine.

Oh, excuse me then! The whole thing about the thumb and twins DNA fooled me into thinking you were making an argument in defense of abortion.

2) You are diverting the origional argument about how your idiotic signature has NO relivence to my position on abortion.

DPQM is designed to illustrate the idiocy of pinheads, it's not my idiotic statement. And of course it has relevance to your position on abortion, just as I pointed out above, and you admitted, it should be legal to abort something when it's sub human, like a thumb.

3) My point is that there is plenty of moral ambiguity on this issue and thus the governmetn should stay out of it!

Oh no, there is no moral ambiguity at all. I think we can all agree, intentionally taking a human life is immoral. The question is, does our government have a right to condone, fund, and support immorality or should they attempt to promote and enforce moral values, when it comes to human life? You feel it is okay for the government to allow abortion, because you view the fetus as "sub-human" like a thumb...or ...like the slaves once were.
 
That is my point, I can't decide for everyone, nor do I feel that I should decide for someone else.


You decide whether people are allowed to murder others, don't you?

If you were in a park, and you saw a man with a big knife, about to chop the head off of a little kid, would you just sit there and say... I can't decide for everyone, nor do I feel I should decide for someone else? When the police come and ask you what you saw, would you say that you didn't want to get involved in someone else's ordeal, it was none of your business? When they apprehend the guy, and you are asked to be a witness for the prosecution, are you going to recuse yourself and claim that you do not have the right to judge the decisions of others?

What you have decided, is to play it safe... publicly denounce abortions... claim that you don't support them... admit that they are awful and terrible... BUT, you don't feel obligated to stop them from happening, you don't think that is your right, you can understand that everyone has to decide for themselves. This way, you can play both sides of the fence, you can portray yourself as a moderate on the issue, and feel good about your views. Meanwhile, another million innocent human lives were sucked down a tube last year, because of the kind of indifference people like yourself maintain.
 
I however feel that the woman should have more leeway than that, at least in the early stages of pregnancy.
In any case pregnancies resulting from rape and incest should be allowed to be aborted.

Here is the problem... you want to have your cake, and eat it too. The debate over abortion is not going away, ever. With this factual consideration, we must decide as a society, what the boundaries are, and what we will accept and not accept, as civilized people.

Most people are sympathetic toward others, it's human nature, it's called 'humanity'. No one wishes to see a young woman agonize over what to do about this life she produced inside her, with the willing assistance of Mr. WooHoo! The thing is, there is something called 'personal responsibility' and most of today's generation has completely forgotten about it. We should be teaching young women, and young men, that life is not about having sex, relationships and love have little to do with sex, and there are more important aspects to consider, than personal sexual gratification in the heat of the moment.

My daughters were taught and raised to understand, their decisions and actions have consequences, and they were going to have to face them in life, so make good decisions. For the most part, they have. Abortion is being used as a cop-out for personal choices and responsibilities, and unfortunately, society is caught in the middle of it.

The sad thing is, so many Americans are like uscitizen, willing to allow the deplorable practice to continue unabated, to the horrifying extent of partial birth, no less... as they sit comfortably with their moderate viewpoint. Anyone who dares to challenge "a woman's right" is castigated and ridiculed as a religious zealot, trying to force their morality on others, and mind other people's business for them.

I have always said, I favor abortions, only if all three parties agree. I can understand an argument for abortion in rare cases of incest, rape, or life of the mother, although I wish there were a 'Damo-like' alternative for those cases. I can also understand a young couple being confronted with whether to give birth to a severely deformed or abnormal child, but these things can be detected very early in a pregnancy. There is no excuse for allowing second and third trimester abortions, under any circumstance.

I would hope that America could come to terms with the issue by fully understanding what we are talking about, the extermination of a human life. We can have a reasonable and civilized debate over the parameters for exterminating human life, when it should be allowed, under what conditions, etc... but we first need to come to terms with what we are discussing. As long as people don't have to see the human life, or hear its voice, know its pain... they can continue to hide in the false reality of 'cell clumps' and zygotes, pretty language to make it benign... sub human... then wrap themselves in fake pride for standing in defense of a "woman's right".
 
your daughters were taught and raised with YOU as an absentee father... what the fuck do you have to say about how they were, or were not raised? you, for whatever reason, were not there to play any sort of role in their upbringing. shame on you.
 
your daughters were taught and raised with YOU as an absentee father... what the fuck do you have to say about how they were, or were not raised? you, for whatever reason, were not there to play any sort of role in their upbringing. shame on you.

Go to hell you fucking child predator pervert, you know nothing of my family or my life. Why don't you go get drunk and find someone to harass by threatening to rape their children again? Maggot!
 
I know that you have admitted that your daughter had to find YOU over the internet after being separated for several years.

I know, being a good father, that a good father would NEVER let their children drift away and would NEVER lose touch with them and would CERTAINLY be the one doing all I could to find them and not vice versa should we ever become separated.

And as I have said several times....you want a more cordial discourse on the issues, you know what you need to do - and you know what I have already done.
 
....and I know you admitted that you wanted to rape my daughter at gunpoint with your disease-ridden biker buddies. As far as I am concerned, every allegation made against you, is true. I'm not the least bit sorry for anything I might have insinuated regarding you.

You are fortunate that I have not taken the advice of my friends at Perverted Justice and filed charges against you, the only thing that saved your ass was SR deleting the threads. If you continue to harass me, I will be happy to share what the people from the Maine chapter had to say about you... (yes they know your name.)

I think you need to cease and desist with the slander against me, and the continued haranguing for an apology from me, and consider yourself fortunate to live in Maine, far away from my retribution, and you'd better hope we never-ever cross paths.
 
For God's sake, knock it off you two fat-headed egomaniacs.

Anyhow: Dixie says "I can also understand a young couple being confronted with whether to give birth to a severely deformed or abnormal child, but these things can be detected very early in a pregnancy."

Is that child "sub-human"? Would it be "cruel" to force a couple to accept into their family, a monster? Like Joseph Merrick or Rocky Dennis? Is life life Dixie, or is life subjective? Would it be okay to kill the Elephant man because his "young couple" parents could have in the womb, so thus he is and always will be sub human?
 
Dixie says "I can also understand a young couple being confronted with whether to give birth to a severely deformed or abnormal child, but these things can be detected very early in a pregnancy."

Is that child "sub-human"? Would it be "cruel" to force a couple to accept into their family, a monster? Like Joseph Merrick or Rocky Dennis? Is life life Dixie, or is life subjective? Would it be okay to kill the Elephant man because his "young couple" parents could have in the womb, so thus he is and always will be sub human?


Let me be clear, I am not in favor of abortion in these cases, although I do understand the difficult struggle people might have, in this situation. Raising a special needs child is a tremendous burden... And I've been told it also has special rewards... I don't know about it first-hand. I can't honestly say that I would not want to terminate such a pregnancy, I don't think anyone can say what they would do, until they are in those shoes. I don't think I would abort, that's my personal view on it, but I can understand the feelings of someone who might.

The point is, we can have reasoned and rational debate on when it is acceptable to terminate pregnancy and end human life, but first we have to agree on what we are doing, and stop hiding behind the sophistry of words to camouflage it. By not admitting this, we enable the 16 year old girl to get drunk, get pregnant, and have an abortion in time to fit into her prom dress... never-mind, that she will end up an alcoholic suffering from chronic depression the rest of her life over what she did.
 
Let me be clear, I am not in favor of abortion in these cases, although I do understand the difficult struggle people might have, in this situation. Raising a special needs child is a tremendous burden... And I've been told it also has special rewards... I don't know about it first-hand. I can't honestly say that I would not want to terminate such a pregnancy, I don't think anyone can say what they would do, until they are in those shoes. I don't think I would abort, that's my personal view on it, but I can understand the feelings of someone who might.

The point is, we can have reasoned and rational debate on when it is acceptable to terminate pregnancy and end human life, but first we have to agree on what we are doing, and stop hiding behind the sophistry of words to camouflage it. By not admitting this, we enable the 16 year old girl to get drunk, get pregnant, and have an abortion in time to fit into her prom dress... never-mind, that she will end up an alcoholic suffering from chronic depression the rest of her life over what she did.

I'm wondering where the threshold of understanding the feelings comes in? Is it the level of burden that it might cause the young couple? Is it the horrible social stigma the child will suffer through life because of his disfigurement the source of burden? Is it about the source of burden or the magnitude of burden?

At what point can you understand an abortion? Where is the line in the sand?
 
Back
Top