Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ah. You are OK with killing people just because you feel like. So just go the store and start taking people out is OK? You think that behavior is not wrong in any way?
Once again, I must point out that what you consider "people" is not what I consider "people." The "people" in the store are a bit more developed than an 8-week-old embryo. Clearly I don't think it is "wrong" to abort an embryo. I don't think it is "good" either. It is a way to deal with an unwanted pregnancy by ending the life of tissues that left alone would develop into a fetus and then a viable full-term baby, barring a miscarriage, injury, or illness.
Most babies are wanted. Two people have made a potential person that they welcome into the world.
Most of the time, all turns out well. Sometimes a pre-term baby will die in utero. It is sometimes necessary to induce labor to expel the dead body. Sometimes there is a miscarriage of an embryo or a fetus. In the early stages, the tissue expelled may or may not resemble a "baby," depending on the stage of development. Do you think women who see the growing life within them as a parasite or worse aren't different from women who lose their wanted pregnancies? The first may see carrying an unwanted infant to term as the final reason to end a miserable life--their own, while the second is likely ecstatic to welcome a new member of the family. I believe that women who are in difficult circumstances are better able to make decisions about their lives than anyone else, including politicians.
I believe that abortion should remain a legal procedure that is available for everyone who decides not to continue the pregnancy. I believe that the consequences of removing the option of legal abortion would be worse than having current laws that make abortion available on demand up to a point, then determined by a woman and her doctor with her conscience as her guide. I believe that it would not take very long before such undesirable consequences would become evident and remind people why abortion was legalized in the first place.
From our conversation, you and I will probably continue disagree on these fundamental issues. I hope that we can disagree with no further vitriol on your part.
In your opinion, a twelve-year-old who is sexually abused and becomes pregnant is mentally ill if she sees her only alternative as suicide. Your compassion appears to me to be for those "people" who cannot perceive it, much less return. You will probably take that to mean that I am in favor of going into extended care facilities to euthanize people en masse. If you do, then that would be an example of the vitriol of which I speak.
I'm not disagreeing, but my point is the vast-majority of people who do drugs don't commit crimes. And I would assume that if you, Annie, were shooting up heroine in your home, it would probably have zero effect on me.
It doesn't stop immigration, but it would likely reduce the need for foreign labor.
The problem in "The West", is that fertility-rates(IE the number of children the average woman has), is below the replacement-rate. Every woman needs to have two children in order to replace herself and her husband.
If the fertility-rate is 2, then for every four grandparents there will be four grandchildren. But if the fertility-rate is 1, then there will be four grandparents, two parents, and only one grandchild. A fertility-rate of 1 will cause a population to shrink dramatically.
The United States currently has a fertility-rate below the replacement-rate, and without immigration, we would be in far worse shape, since immigrants, legal and illegal, have much higher birthrates than the native-born.
Had there been no immigrants for the last four decades, the population of this country would actually be shrinking. "The West" has to import immigrants, otherwise it will have no workers, since no one is having children.
What about the theory that as technology advances the need for workers will diminish?
That said, you talk as if women should be managed like cattle, forced to reproduce whether they want to or not, part of the Borg, with no will of their own.
Once again, I must point out that what you consider "people" is not what I consider "people." The "people" in the store are a bit more developed than an 8-week-old embryo. Clearly I don't think it is "wrong" to abort an embryo. I don't think it is "good" either. It is a way to deal with an unwanted pregnancy by ending the life of tissues that left alone would develop into a fetus and then a viable full-term baby, barring a miscarriage, injury, or illness.
Most babies are wanted. Two people have made a potential person that they welcome into the world.
Most of the time, all turns out well. Sometimes a pre-term baby will die in utero. It is sometimes necessary to induce labor to expel the dead body. Sometimes there is a miscarriage of an embryo or a fetus. In the early stages, the tissue expelled may or may not resemble a "baby," depending on the stage of development. Do you think women who see the growing life within them as a parasite or worse aren't different from women who lose their wanted pregnancies? The first may see carrying an unwanted infant to term as the final reason to end a miserable life--their own, while the second is likely ecstatic to welcome a new member of the family. I believe that women who are in difficult circumstances are better able to make decisions about their lives than anyone else, including politicians.
I believe that abortion should remain a legal procedure that is available for everyone who decides not to continue the pregnancy. I believe that the consequences of removing the option of legal abortion would be worse than having current laws that make abortion available on demand up to a point, then determined by a woman and her doctor with her conscience as her guide. I believe that it would not take very long before such undesirable consequences would become evident and remind people why abortion was legalized in the first place.
From our conversation, you and I will probably continue disagree on these fundamental issues. I hope that we can disagree with no further vitriol on your part.
In your opinion, a twelve-year-old who is sexually abused and becomes pregnant is mentally ill if she sees her only alternative as suicide. Your compassion appears to me to be for those "people" who cannot perceive it, much less return. You will probably take that to mean that I am in favor of going into extended care facilities to euthanize people en masse. If you do, then that would be an example of the vitriol of which I speak.
My compassion is for mother and baby. That 12 y old? Needs a lot of care. Do you think if she gets an abortion and her baby is killed she will be suddenly perfectly healthy and happy? Not one problem? Wrong. Beyond wrong. Vitriol? Is telling me how I don't care about that 12 y old. I do. I also care about that baby. You don't. You didn't ask my opinion, you assumed it. Vitriol? Yep, there it is and it's coming from you.
And that is ALWAYS where the arguments fall apart for pro abortion, isn't it.
There are 12,000 reasons that people support killing the baby. The reasons get made up with 12,000 different scenarios with every proabortion post. But what if, but what about, but how about when ... and then you're a HORRIBLE person because you actually support NOT killing.
But there is only 1 reason why people don't support abortion. Because only 1 reason is needed. Not 12,000 different circumstances depending on which way the wind blows to deflect and move goal posts every which way.
You say killing someone because you feel like it is not good, and then in the next breath say you agree with abortion. Those are incompatible ideas.
ADD: Ever consider that the 12 y old girl does commit suicide? She was violated 2x. First by the rapist, then by the adults who decided it was in her best interest to kill the baby in her womb. She understands that killing babies is wrong .. and cannot live with herself knowing she was part of killing a baby. So she commits suicide in despair.
But that would never ever occur to you. Because you cannot understand that babies in the womb? Are as valuable as all babies.
Last edited by newtovenice; 04-20-2019 at 05:51 PM..
My compassion is for mother and baby. That 12 y old? Needs a lot of care. Do you think if she gets an abortion and her baby is killed she will be suddenly perfectly healthy and happy? Not one problem? Wrong. Beyond wrong. Vitriol? Is telling me how I don't care about that 12 y old. I do. I also care about that baby. You don't. You didn't ask my opinion, you assumed it. Vitriol? Yep, there it is and it's coming from you.
And that is ALWAYS where the arguments fall apart for pro abortion, isn't it.
There are 12,000 reasons that people support killing the baby. The reasons get made up with 12,000 different scenarios with every proabortion post. But what if, but what about, but how about when ... and then you're a HORRIBLE person because you actually support NOT killing.
But there is only 1 reason why people don't support abortion. Because only 1 reason is needed. Not 12,000 different circumstances depending on which way the wind blows to deflect and move goal posts every which way.
You say killing someone because you feel like it is not good, and then in the next breath say you agree with abortion. Those are incompatible ideas.
I was referencing another post you made when you were responding to me that a young girl who would choose suicide over childbirth was mentally ill. I was using your own words, not making assumptions.
Vitriol is defined as cruel, harsh, and bitter criticism. I have consistently tried to make reasoned arguments, and I don't attack people, but I may point out where I disagree with them on basic points. Equating a disagreement about abortion with shooting people at random in a store is neither kind, nor gentle, therefore, I used the word vitriol to characterize your suggestion that they are equivalent. Perhaps others might use different words, but it seemed to fit here. And again, I am not using these words to characterize a woman's reason to choose abortion. They again, are your words, and they sound vitriolic to me.
I would go so far as to say that every abortion has a unique scenario, far exceeding 12,000 reasons.
If you can't understand how I can believe that abortion is wrong but that it should also be legal, then I don't think we will get any further in our discussion.
Last edited by lhpartridge; 04-20-2019 at 06:53 PM..
I was referencing another post you made when you were responding to me that a young girl who would choose suicide over childbirth was mentally ill. I was using your own words, not making assumptions.
Vitriol is defined as cruel, harsh, and bitter criticism. I have consistently tried to make reasoned arguments, and I don't attack people, but I may point out where I disagree with them on basic points. Equating a disagreement about abortion with shooting people at random in a store is neither kind, nor gentle, therefore, I used the word vitriol to characterize your suggestion that they are equivalent. Perhaps others might use different words, but it seemed to fit here. And again, I am not using these words to characterize a woman's reason to choose abortion. They again, are your words, and they sound vitriolic to me.
I would go so far as to say that every abortion has a unique scenario, far exceeding 12,000 reasons.
If you can't understand how I can believe that abortion is wrong but that it should also be legal, then I don't think we will get any further in our discussion.
Anyone considered suicide? Is mentally ill. They need help. That is not vitriol to day that. It's fact and compassion and understanding. That someone who wants to kill themselves? Means the person is sick and needs HELP.
You don't like the facts I am presenting, so you accuse me of vitriol. You didn't like the ONE scenario I presented so say I am "unkind" even though they are parallel. Goal post moved.
Yet every argument FOR abortion is based on scenarios. Every single one. You provided a very specific scenario about a 12 y old girl who was raped and suicidal I say she needs HELP which is the compassionate response... and you say since I accuse her of being mentally ill that's just mean??? Really? That makes no sense.
But of course after the abortion she's perfectly healthy ... I noticed you did not respond to that comment I made that perhaps her suicidality? Was caused by the fact she was forced to have an abortion.
Killing someone because you feel like it is wrong. You disagree and think it's OK. But only if it's a baby in the womb? Is that the limit? Or is it OK to kill people in other scenarios? I don't think you ever responded to that. You continue to talk about the legality of it .. but again ... won't answer a question regarding legality: It's illegal tomorrow, still in favor of it?
People who allow their ability to see right and wrong through govt edicts have no value system or moral compass because they no ability to think for themselves.
But Abortion because ... 12,000,000 reasons .... because ...
drugs
foster care
career first
one night stand
deadbeat dads
oopsie
rape
age
incest
no use BC
improper use of BC
don't want to get fat
because it's a Tuesday
because I'm going to the Bahamas in 2 weeks
because women's rights
because
because
because
The list is endless. People who support abortion claim it is a solution.
Did it solve any of the above problems? Nope. Not a one.
But it killed somebody. Because they felt like it.
What about the theory that as technology advances the need for workers will diminish?
I'm confused by your question. Do you mean people shouldn't be having children because the vast-majority of the population won't be necessary as automation improves?
That is technically-true, but it is a lot more complicated than that. America can't safely-shed population until there is basically a one-world government. The United States is a superpower. But we are a superpower for only one reason, we have the largest-economy. And economies are what people call "consumption-based".
For the United States to remain the dominant world power, it will need to grow its population dramatically, otherwise it simply won't be able to compete with the rising behemoths, China and India. And unless you want to start speaking Mandarin or Hindu, and have the Chinese being the "policeman of the world" instead of us, we have no choice but to continue growing and growing.
As technology improves, the shift will be more-and-more away from manufacturing and production jobs, to service jobs. I think the number of service-jobs are theoretically-unlimited, although the jobs will likely be more and more in the field of entertainment(in all its forms).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annie53
That said, you talk as if women should be managed like cattle, forced to reproduce whether they want to or not, part of the Borg, with no will of their own.
I don't think they ought to be managed like cattle at all. I was merely pointing-out that if abortion causes the fertility-rate to drop below the replacement-rate, then abortion actually has a far more profound effect on society than people drinking coca-cola or smoking cigarettes.
In the most-extreme case, if women were literally aborting every single pregnancy, you would have complete societal collapse within a generation. All the coca-cola and cigarettes in the world really wouldn't make much of a difference.
It means exactly what it says - in favor of choice. If a woman wants to bear a child, she has that choice. If she does not, she has a choice to end the pregnancy.
Unlike pro-life ... Sounds nice in theory, but in practice fails miserably.
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtovenice
There are 12,000 reasons that people support killing the baby.
[snip]
But there is only 1 reason why people don't support abortion.
Perhaps because people who "don't support abortion" see the issue only in black and white, and are willfully incapable of recognizing the grey in between. It's not a yes or no question.
It means exactly what it says - in favor of choice. If a woman wants to bear a child, she has that choice. If she does not, she has a choice to end the pregnancy.
Pro-choice is a stupid slogan, because liberals aren't actually in favor of choice. And the desire to make abortion legal didn't come out of a principled desire for "individual-liberty". They just wanted to have an abortion.
Pro-choice is a stupid slogan, because liberals aren't actually in favor of choice. And the desire to make abortion legal didn't come out of a principled desire for "individual-liberty". They just wanted to have an abortion.
And with that, you illustrate the inability to look at each and every layer of an issue. The real world is not black and white. To the real world - the compassionate, critical thinking world - there's a lot in between.
Anyway, "pro-life" means nothing of the sort. It's just pro-birth.
I'm confused by your question. Do you mean people shouldn't be having children because the vast-majority of the population won't be necessary as automation improves?
That is technically-true, but it is a lot more complicated than that. America can't safely-shed population until there is basically a one-world government. The United States is a superpower. But we are a superpower for only one reason, we have the largest-economy. And economies are what people call "consumption-based".
For the United States to remain the dominant world power, it will need to grow its population dramatically, otherwise it simply won't be able to compete with the rising behemoths, China and India. And unless you want to start speaking Mandarin or Hindu, and have the Chinese being the "policeman of the world" instead of us, we have no choice but to continue growing and growing.
As technology improves, the shift will be more-and-more away from manufacturing and production jobs, to service jobs. I think the number of service-jobs are theoretically-unlimited, although the jobs will likely be more and more in the field of entertainment(in all its forms).
I don't think they ought to be managed like cattle at all. I was merely pointing-out that if abortion causes the fertility-rate to drop below the replacement-rate, then abortion actually has a far more profound effect on society than people drinking coca-cola or smoking cigarettes.
In the most-extreme case, if women were literally aborting every single pregnancy, you would have complete societal collapse within a generation. All the coca-cola and cigarettes in the world really wouldn't make much of a difference.
I don't think we are ever going to have to worry about the population being too low, just the opposite.
We are already starting to see the effects of climate change and our species has an expiration date just like others before us.....we aren't special.
Since I have no children and I, along with everyone I care about, will be dead within 30 years, not my problem.
And, the stress of living in today's world is already starting to take its toll....more and more people decide everyday it just isn't worth it and decide to bail out.
According to the study, the rate of suicide in the U.S. rose nearly 30 percent between 1999 and 2016.
Forcing women to give birth against their will, have children they never wanted in the first place, children growing up sensing they have been unwanted burdens since the day they were born is only going to make things worse.
Quality of life over quantity of life. Living in a world where we are crawling all over each other like bees in a hive isn't something we should strive for and is something that Mother Earth will not tolerate.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
