PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: bflynn on December 02, 2016, 10:06:26 AM
-
Breaking this off to a new thread because it's a hot one.
I'm there as well, what a woman does with her body and unborn child is all on her, the father, and her spirituality. I don't think the government should have any say in the matter.
I generally agree - but at some point it become's the child's body and the mother loses that right. At some point a baby becomes capable of being an independent self-sustaining life, so does it matter whether they receive nourishment inside the mother's body or outside? If their lungs are developed and they can, with great care, live outside the mother, then shouldn't they be considered a member of society at that point?
This gets into a deep spiritual situation and the issue is not my belief, your belief or even the mother's belief. Once the child becomes capable of independent life, the mother's belief that it's ok to kill an unborn baby cannot override the baby's inherent rights as a human being. As a society, we agree to defend each other against lethal aggression and there isn't someone in much more need than a defenseless child whose mother wants to kill it so isn't inconvenienced.
From a logic and philosophy standpoint, I think that if you disagree that an independent, self-sustaining life form has the right to live because it hasn't exited the mother's womb yet, then you also cannot justify your right to make that decision or even justify your right to exist. If you do not value life then nobody should value yours.
-
for me, the whole abortion issue comes down to when the blob of cells has rights. When does the fetus become a human being with rights? And then it becomes a conlict between the rights of the woman and the rights of child/fetus. Notice that I don't talk all about viability of the fetus.
I also have a real problem with the concept of liability for birth defects caused during pregnancy while also allowing the mother to have an abortion during that same period... that is phrased awkwardly, I hope people understand what I'm getting at. For example, how can someone be liable for harm to a fetus at, say, 3 months, when a fetus of 3 months could be destroyed because it has no rights?
-
I agree in principle that abortion should not be allowed. But it doesn't make sense to outlaw it entirely. History shows us clearly that there will always be women who choose to end pregnancies for a variety of reasons. That is unlikely to change, unfortunately.
Also, people will never agree on when a life begins. To me, that means we should not allow abortions because if we can't agree on when a life begins, we should err on the side of life.
My greatest wish is that all people use self control, birth control, and self respect, and respect other lives as well. But this will never happen. That is why we have to allow for the abortion option. I don't like it; I respect and see great wisdom in the Catholic teaching on birth control and on abortion and euthanasia. Such a disciplined approach is a wonderful and rewarding thing to strive for. But many people can never achieve it.
Abortion is an issue where the ideal and the real collide. The best we can do is compromise.
-
Abortion is the ultimately selfish solution to a problem that was easy to solve but the practitioner far too lazy to allow THEMSELVES be forced to behave responsibly. It is also the ultimate power trip for a truly powerless idiot to present murder as a human right.
-
I would not argue in favor of abortion, because I am against it on principle.
But what about the real world? No method of birth control except abstinence or sterilization is 100% effective. In the real world, people make mistakes, lose control, are physically or mentally unable to carry another child to term, are economically unable to support it, and will seek any means possible to end the pregnancy. What then? Provide a safe-ish option, or drive abortion doctors underground?
See America's bloody abortion industry 1800s - Roe v Wade.
That history is why libs go crazy and foam at the mouth whenever abortion rights even hint at going back on the table.
-
I would not argue in favor of abortion, because I am against it on principle.
But what about the real world? No method of birth control except abstinence or sterilization is 100% effective. In the real world, people make mistakes, lose control, are physically or mentally unable to carry another child to term, are economically unable to support it, and will seek any means possible to end the pregnancy. What then? Provide a safe-ish option, or drive abortion doctors underground?
See America's bloody abortion industry 1800s - Roe v Wade.
That history is why libs go crazy and foam at the mouth whenever abortion rights even hint at going back on the table.
Abortion has a place as a medical procedure, such as when the mother's life is in actual danger.
Just because people will seek to terminate a pregnancy is not justification for making it legal, free, and ubiquitous. We know that murder and theft have occurred since the beginning of human history. Doesn't make it right. Doesn't make it something we should facilitate.
Kind of like, hey, let's give drug addicts free drugs and needles.
-
I love when women say "My body, my choice." Yeah, you had a choice not to have unprotected SEX!
-
Abortion has a place as a medical procedure, such as when the mother's life is in actual danger.
Just because people will seek to terminate a pregnancy is not justification for making it legal, free, and ubiquitous. We know that murder and theft have occurred since the beginning of human history. Doesn't make it right. Doesn't make it something we should facilitate.
Kind of like, hey, let's give drug addicts free drugs and needles.
We do give addicts free needles, actually. Anyway, there is no adequate comparison to conception, birth, and abortion, because there is nothing like it. And it is also a topic for which there is no perfect answer that most will agree on.
-
We do give addicts free needles, actually.
duh, I know that. A monumentally stupid thing to do.
-
it is also a topic for which there is no perfect answer that most will agree on.
I disagree. Most agree it is abhorrent to kill a baby. They don't all agree on when it becomes a baby.
That is the real issue. If it might be a fully protected citizen, shouldn't it be afforded full protection of the law? Wouldn't it be far better to error on the side of caution here? Because if you don't then the error is killing a baby.
-
duh, I know that. A monumentally stupid thing to do.
Arguable, obviously.
-
What is the statistical probability a fetus will become a baby if not aborted in the U.S.? Another way to ask this, I assume, is what is the mortality rate of a fetus?
-
I disagree. Most agree it is abhorrent to kill a baby. They don't all agree on when it becomes a baby.
That is the real issue. If it might be a fully protected citizen, shouldn't it be afforded full protection of the law? Wouldn't it be far better to error on the side of caution here? Because if you don't then the error is killing a baby.
Well the question isn't "is it bad to kill a baby", for which there is an answer that most would agree on. The question is abortion, and whether we should (and how much, and at what point) or shouldn't allow it. That is a question for which there is no perfect answer that most will agree on, in my opinion.
-
What is the statistical probability a fetus will become a baby if not aborted in the U.S.? Another way to ask this, I assume, is what is the mortality rate of a fetus?
What I've looked at in the past is the miscarriage rate, which is typically defined as natural termination of a pregnancy from 0 - 20 weeks. But I've never been able to nail this down. Rates are all over the place depending on where you look. You'll see ranges of 8 - 40%, and risk factors (including age) have a big hand in miscarriage rates.
PS - Many women miscarry very early on and don't even know they were pregnant.
-
Well the question isn't "is it bad to kill a baby", for which there is an answer that most would agree on. The question is abortion, and whether we should (and how much, and at what point) or shouldn't allow it. That is a question for which there is no perfect answer that most will agree on, in my opinion.
And the question of abortion is when does the glob of cells become human life (a baby)? There are dozens of nuanced answers ranging from conception to "when it votes republican". Somewhere in between is the truth.
We're dealing with human life. Assuming that we all believe life is important and valuable, shouldn't we error on the side of caution and make sure we're not murdering a human being?
Or if you don't believe life is important...then you are a sociopath and ought to be examined.
-
And the question of abortion is when does the glob of cells become human life (a baby)? There are dozens of nuanced answers ranging from conception to "when it votes republican". Somewhere in between is the truth.
We're dealing with human life. Assuming that we all believe life is important and valuable, shouldn't we error on the side of caution and make sure we're not murdering a human being?
Or if you don't believe life is important...then you are a sociopath and ought to be examined.
You're throwing terms all over the place here, which serves to illustrate my point. Glob of cells, human life, baby...we can't even agree on what these terms mean and the defining endpoints in the cycle that the terms describe.
But even if we could agree on what those terms mean, what I'm telling you is that I don't believe there is "the truth" that we'll eventually find and all settle on. There are very many people who believe that conception is a gift from God that should never be terminated. You'll never convince those people that abortion is acceptable at any point, no matter how early in the pregnancy. Likewise for the opposite end of the spectrum. There is no magic truth here that just needs discovering to make everyone happy.
It's a difficult subject that has no analogue.
-
It's a difficult subject that has no analogue.
I think that is only when one wants it to be.
To the abortion industry it is all about money. It is particularly about free money from the taxpayers.
To politicians it is all about votes.
To assholes like the snowflakes and liberals it is all about political correctness.
To me it is all about turning medical practitioners into evil mad scientists.
And it is a sickening practice that makes those who support it no better than those that chose to sacrifice virgins and lynch negros.
-
I think that is only when one wants it to be.
You don't have to believe me. You can simply recall all the contentious threads involving abortion of this site and POA.
-
You don't have to believe me. You can simply recall all the contentious threads involving abortion of this site and POA.
I DON'T have to do anything. Reason and logic convict the practice of abortion. Political agendas keep it alive. Profit keeps it expanding and lies from liars keep it relevant.
-
I DON'T have to do anything. Reason and logic convict the practice of abortion. Political agendas keep it alive. Profit keeps it expanding and lies from liars keep it relevant.
I'd wager we've all spent dozens of hours arguing this subject here and on POA, with differences of opinion even within each partisan side. And you think the subject is not difficult? Reality suggests you're wrong.
-
I'd wager we've all spent dozens of hours arguing this subject here and on POA, with differences of opinion even within each partisan side. And you think the subject is not difficult? Reality suggests you're wrong.
A contentious subject, absolutely.
But has no analogue? I don't think so Tim.
-
A contentious subject, absolutely.
But has no analogue? I don't think so Tim.
What's a good analogue, Al?
-
What's a good analogue, Al?
Pretty much any subject of conflicting rights. Example, 2nd amendment rights.
-
Pretty much any subject of conflicting rights. Example, 2nd amendment rights.
I think he was making fun of the way you misspelled analogy.
-
I'd wager we've all spent dozens of hours arguing this subject here and on POA, with differences of opinion even within each partisan side. And you think the subject is not difficult? Reality suggests you're wrong.
Reality is not the frantic blabbering of progressives for whom abortion is the holy grail.
It is not enough that frothing liberalism requires all to submit to the cantankerous idiocy of political correctness when regarding abortion. The topic is repugnant as is the never ending bullshit of the left as to its validity and necessity.
-
Pretty much any subject of conflicting rights. Example, 2nd amendment rights.
I disagree. None of them involve the intimate intertwining of another being literally growing inside of a human host.
-
Reality is not the frantic blabbering of progressives for whom abortion is the holy grail.
It is not enough that frothing liberalism requires all to submit to the cantankerous idiocy of political correctness when regarding abortion. The topic is repugnant as is the never wending bullshit of the left as to its validity and necessity.
Partisan regurgitation number 43566.
-
Pretty much any subject of conflicting rights. Example, 2nd amendment rights.
I don't think that is a good analogy, and I don't see "conflicting rights" in the 2A. It is very specific. The right to defend oneself through the use of "arms", is a Natural Right we have by being human beings. It also is enumerated in the Constitution as a Right not to be Infringed. I don't see abortion as guaranteed not to be infringed.
-
Partisan regurgitation number 43566.
Politically correct bullshit # 999,999.
We already understand that you have no real argument other than partisanship, and projection, so project away but know you've lost the argument.
-
I don't think that is a good analogy, and I don't see "conflicting rights" in the 2A. It is very specific. The right to defend oneself through the use of "arms", is a Natural Right we have by being human beings. It also is enumerated in the Constitution as a Right not to be Infringed. I don't see abortion as guaranteed not to be infringed.
Yes... But, Those mean, ugly, uneducated, republican brutes are so mean and definitely really mean and they have no right to question a liberal when they are in their safe space where nobody is allowed to disagree with them...
-
Politically correct bullshit # 999,999.
We already understand that you have no real argument other than partisanship, and projection, so project away but know you've lost the argument.
Hehe, you just can't help yourself. Here's a summary of our recent back-and-forth:
- Me: Abortion is a tough subject
- You: It's not tough, liberals just make it seem like that
- Me: We've spent a lot of time arguing this around here, and there is not total agreement even within the partisan divides. Wouldn't that suggest it is tough?
- You: LIBERALZ!
Mmmmk.
-
I think he was making fun of the way you misspelled analogy.
I doubt it, given that I was quoting someone else (and "analogue" is a valid American-English spelling, albeit an alternative one).
-
I disagree. None of them involve the intimate intertwining of another being literally growing inside of a human host.
not much point of discussing if you only focus on one aspect to the exclusion of anything else. Do you understand that analogue doesn't mean exactly the same?
-
I doubt it, given that I was quoting someone else (and "analogue" is a valid American-English spelling, albeit an alternative one).
Correct. Analogue and analogy are different words, though I didn't realize i was using the older spelling of analog.
-
not much point of discussing if you only focus on one aspect to the exclusion of anything else. Do you understand that analogue doesn't mean exactly the same?
Yes, but it requires enough similarity to make a useful comparison. The fact that the baby grows inside of, and for a long time can not live independently of, the mother, is a significant part of why this issue is so difficult.
I mean, if you want to try to compare this to 2A rights we can, but it doesn't seem adequate to me.
-
Yes, but it requires enough similarity to make a useful comparison. The fact that the baby grows inside of, and for a long time can not live independently of, the mother, is a significant part of why this issue is so difficult.
That's not what makes it difficult. It's the conflicting rights - the rights of the baby/fetus/blob of cells vs the rights of the mother.
If the baby/fetus/blob of cells has no rights, then this is a trivial exercise.
-
Hehe, you just can't help yourself. Here's a summary of our recent back-and-forth:
- Me: Abortion is a tough subject
- You: It's not tough, liberals just make it seem like that
- Me: We've spent a lot of time arguing this around here, and there is not total agreement even within the partisan divides. Wouldn't that suggest it is tough?
- You: LIBERALZ!
Mmmmk.
Bullshit.
Your lack of honest input relative to the topic always ends with that type of evasion. You can make book on how fast you retreat to partisan bullshit and projection.
-
If the baby/fetus/blob of cells has no rights, then this is a trivial exercise.
And by inference, if it has rights then it is also a trivial exercise.
When the baby gains rights is the real discussion.
-
"Get your abortions now..."
0:42
Sick, sick, sick.
-
I had a very long and civil discussion with someone and I think sadly I might of had her believing my side :(
I was telling her I agree it is a women's body and she could do anything she wants. I also told her a baby really was not a person for the first 3 months. They have not developed enough still to be called a person. All they were capable of is eating and pooping.
So I figured we should be able to change our mind in the first 3 months and put the baby to sleep.
Personal I believe that abortion is wrong and you may rot in hell. Not something I would do. Also I am not going to force my beliefs on other people, way to many wars have started that way.
-
That's not what makes it difficult. It's the conflicting rights - the rights of the baby/fetus/blob of cells vs the rights of the mother.
If the baby/fetus/blob of cells has no rights, then this is a trivial exercise.
Disagree. That's what gives it some similarity to other conversations where rights are in conflict. But it is the details of human conception and reproduction that make it unique among those conversations. There is no other situation that I can think of where the two parties are inextricably linked.
-
Disagree. That's what gives it some similarity to other conversations where rights are in conflict. But it is the details of human conception and reproduction that make it unique among those conversations. There is no other situation that I can think of where the two parties are inextricably linked.
Again, I hope you understand that analogous does not mean identical.
-
Again, I hope you understand that analogous does not mean identical.
I'm tired of fighting. Fist bump? :)
-
I'm tired of fighting. Fist bump? :)
wait, this is the interweb. What's with the make nice stuff?
;)
-
I had a very long and civil discussion with someone and I think sadly I might of had her believing my side :(
I was telling her I agree it is a women's body and she could do anything she wants. I also told her a baby really was not a person for the first 3 months. They have not developed enough still to be called a person. All they were capable of is eating and pooping.
So I figured we should be able to change our mind in the first 3 months and put the baby to sleep.
Personal I believe that abortion is wrong and you may rot in hell. Not something I would do. Also I am not going to force my beliefs on other people, way to many wars have started that way.
If a baby could choose, do you think they would want to force their views about living on their mother? Or just passively sit back and accept her views about killing them?
-
wait, this is the interweb. What's with the make nice stuff?
;)
Dunno what came over me. Christmas spirit? Wait, I'm sorry, in lieu of "Christms" I really meant Nondescript-and-wholly-non-denominational-festivus-time. ;D
-
Festivus for the rest of us!!!
And not to let the Fallen Angel feel out of place. A nod to the Dark Side as well! Cessnas!
:)
-
Dunno what came over me. Christmas spirit? Wait, I'm sorry, in lieu of "Christms" I really meant Nondescript-and-wholly-non-denominational-festivus-time. ;D
And a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you
(don't forget my last name...)