|
|
| Post Number: 31
|
|
|
| Post Number: 32
|
|
|
| Post Number: 33
|
Michael 
FNG
Group: Members
Posts: 290
Joined: Sep. 2000
|
 |
Posted on: Jan. 05 2001,02:05 |
|
    |
quote:
Originally posted by RenegadeSnark:
Far as I'm concerned, the moment the baby leaves the womb, no more aborts. But before then, sure!I'm sorry, but it just isn't considered a human in my view until it pops.
In my experience, I would say that children aren't really "human" until they're at least teenagers. Before the age of 11 or so, children are incapable of abstract, hypothetical thinking. Before the age of 5 or 6, children assume that everyone shares their experiences and that the world "revolves around them." When they are born, children cannot distinguish between what is a part of their body and what is not, and they do not understand the existence of objects or the fact that objects continue to exist even when they cannot see them. So, obviously, a child is not really "human." If we should have no qualms about killing a fetus with a brain that is only partially developed compared to a live baby, why should we hesitate to kill a living child whose brain, after all, is just as undeveloped compared to an adult as the brain of the fetus is compared to a baby? For that matter, in my view there are plenty of adults who do not classify as "human" either. quote:
originally posted by DjSokol
in the torah (or the old testament for you strange christians), it clearly states that a child is not human or alive until it leaves the womb and gets out into the world.
OK, name the verse which says that. I don't believe that there is one. And even if it says that an unborn child is not human, that's not the same as saying that it is permissible to kill that child. In my opinion, the question of abortion isn't a question of whether or not it's murder. The problem that I have with abortion is that it tells people that they no longer have to be responsible for their actions. If you have sex with someone, there is always the risk that pregnancy will result. You already decided to take that risk, and you shouldn't be allowed an easy out just because you wanted to take the risk without facing the consequences. Those of you who are supporting a woman's right to choose are forgetting the fact that she already _did_ make a choice when she had sex in the first place. What you're really supporting is not the right to choose, but the right to change that choice the moment you don't want to deal with the consequences.
|
 |
|
|
| Post Number: 34
|
|
|
| Post Number: 35
|
askheaves
Ack!!!
Group: Members
Posts: 1955
Joined: Sep. 2000
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 05 2001,03:20 |
|
|
I was thinking about making that point before, Michael. My earliest solid memories are from my 5th birthday, so I'm thinking that it was probably legitimate for me to be aborted up to that point and it wouldn't have made a huge difference.It's going to be hard to convince me that there is anything right about abortion. I have a particular interest since it was certainly an option when I was born. My parents were in their 2nd year of engineering school. I haven't had the guts to ask my mom about this, but I have the feeling that it was considered for a while. The question I bring to mind is this... if I were to find out that one of them wanted me aborted, and the other didn't, do I have a right to be angry? I think back and I can identify with the situation they were in, but it wasn't like they were aborting me... they would be aborting a cell mass that ended up being me. I don't know.. This will always cloud my judgement on abortion since it's hitting awfully close to home. If I were with a girl who became pregnant (had a few scares), I don't think I could live with myself if she had an abortion. I would probably curl up and die. While this doesn't give me the right to force my belief on how other people treat their body and the forming cell mass within them, it certainly it a good explanation for my thoughts. That's why I don't kill abortion doctors, I don't try to pass legislation, and I try to mimilize my role in abortion debates. I will always think that a society that allows abortion is twisted. That's my opinion and you will never ever change it. Don't you dare trivialize my opinion (Snark).
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 36
|
PersonGuy
Right-wing pigeon from outer space
Group: Members
Posts: 2081
Joined: --
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 05 2001,08:46 |
|
|
Sith-man! That's the most thoughtful responce I've ever heard! Most people go down the "rape" path, but you added a VERY clever twist! Good job!Anyway, there's been a ton of other good posts (props to kuru, ask-man, and mikey-man), but I just thought of something to add... In war we kill people. Usually this is done by dehumanizing the enemy or in some cases, dehumanizing ourselves. Is calling a fetus a "cell mass" dehumanising? Or is it more like when someone says to their pet, "Oh... you think this movie is funny tooo! Don't you! Oh... Are you tired? bla bla bla" People are OVERhumanizing a fetus when they call it a baby? Oh, and good point ask-man! I got my nose broken at 3 when I fell from a latter. I didn't find out it was broken until I was 14, nor do I have any memory of it! I could have be slow tourtured and killed at 4, and it wouldn't have made the slightest difference to me. ------------------
<P:\>erson\Guy.exe -PersonGuy *pERSONgUY.cfg
http://www.personguy.com
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 37
|
Michael
FNG
Group: Members
Posts: 290
Joined: Sep. 2000
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 05 2001,16:41 |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by kuru:
then i guess that means i'm capable of murder. really michael, be glad that you're male and you will never be faced with it.
And why wouldn't men be faced with that decision? If a man gets a woman pregnant, he has equal responsibility for the baby. The only difference is that the man has the option to just walk away and pretend he had nothing to do with it. Now, if rather than trying to get laws on a woman's right to choose, we passed a law on a man's obligation to share responsibility, that would have a much better effect than anything else. quote:
Originally posted by kuru:
i don't really have much else to say here, and my beliefs have already caused me enough grief today, so if anyone else would like to suggest anything about my character, you'll have to wait until tomorrow for a response.
Comments on your character? I believe what I posted said the following: quote:
Originally posted by Michael:
Based on your posts here, I have a good deal of respect for the responsible attitude that you have towards sex... The fact is, there are a lot of people who are out there taking a lot more risks and doing a lot less to protect themselves than you are, kuru....
I'm sorry if it offend you for me to suggest that you make much more intelligent decisions than the majority of people in the world. ... quote:
Originally posted by Sithee
so, wait, when you remove a tumor, is that murder too? i mean, it is a "cell mass" that grows in size.
I believe I said that human beings are more than "cell masses" that grow in size because we have a future as well. the future of that tumor is that it will, almost definitely, kill the person. The future of the embryo, on the other hand, is that it will _become_ a person. There is a big difference there. ... quote:
Originally posted by DuSTman
not that I believe in moral absolutes... There really isn't any such thing as a "right".
Well, why not? Some moral values are just about universal. For instance: "Thou shalt not kill DuSTman." Wouldn't you hope that that's an absolute statement, rather than something like "Thou shalt not kill DuSTman unless there are mitigating circumstances, such as if he manages to annoy you sufficiently." quote:
Originally posted by DuSTman
b: Have the baby, keep it and have to change any dreams she may have had to be something more than just a mother.
c: Have the baby, have it adopted, and feel bad about it forever, knowing that the baby thinks it was unwanted.
First of all, there's nothing that says that a woman can't be anything "more than just a mother" just because she has a baby. Second of all, option c should read more like: "Have the baby, have it adopted, and know that your child is living in a much more loving and supportive environment than you could have provided, and has parents that love him or her very much and to whom he or she was definately _not_ unwanted."
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 38
|
Michael
FNG
Group: Members
Posts: 290
Joined: Sep. 2000
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 05 2001,17:09 |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by kuru:
isn't it just a bit unfair to expect a woman who doesn't want to have children to go through her entire reproductive years (in my case this could very well be the next thirty-five years) without sex because she might accidentally get pregnant?
Based on your posts here, I have a good deal of respect for the responsible attitude that you have towards sex, despite the fact that I disagree completely with your views on sex from a moral standpoint. The fact is, there are a lot of people who are out there taking a lot more risks and doing a lot less to protect themselves than you are, kuru, and they are the ones which are a lot more likely to get pregnant as a result. However, the fact is that abortion is ending a human life. Calling an embryo a "cell mass" rather than a human being doesn't let you escape from that point; after all, all of us are really nothing more than "cell masses" too, albeit somewhat larger and more complex ones. But we are also much more than that; we also contain the past that has shaped us and the future that we might some day live. Cutting off that future is murder, no matter how you look at it. And that past is something that we have to live with, even if we make bad decisions. Abortion cuts of the future of one human being while smoothing over the past of another, and in the end it does no one any good.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 39
|
|
|
| Post Number: 40
|
Sithiee
FNG
Group: Members
Posts: 1941
Joined: May 2000
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 05 2001,17:33 |
|
|
so, wait, when you remove a tumor, is that murder too? i mean, it is a "cell mass" that grows in size. i think the best way to define a person as being a person is when they could feasably survive on their own. a fetus has 0 chance of surviving without the mother. a baby, since it technically would find food and shelter, even if by accident, but would not die without its mother, is a human. that is the difference, dependence vs. independence. and why make exceptions for rape and incest? again, the fetus has no control over the circumstances of its coming in to being. why do you promote one babies life over another simply because of their parents?? it has to be uniform. no abortions or abortions for everyone, you cant say that one fetus has less right to resist abortion than another because of who the parents were. and when you do that, it seems a bit more unreasonable to outlaw abortion. or maybe its just me and the fact that its 3:30 at night.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
