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.
Most surgical procedures can be described as gruesome if that's all your intent is to begin with...
No I should have said chemical instead since the procedure I said isn't the most common one just the one that popped in my head. I didn't really think I needed to go into detail but did so for the response that followed.
AKA: "You've got me. My argument is absurd, and I cannot form a legitimate response to logical, rational analysis."
lol...whatever floats your boat. I've gone round and round with him, and he rarely comes up with anything worth responding to, or he just makes stuff up, or he accuses me of saying something posted by someone else entirely, or whatever. So I try to avoid engaging him. If it makes you feel better to think that, though, by all means, go for it
Used properly, contraceptive are 99% effective, or better. Do you need a link to that statistic, as well?
Assuming that one were interested in dealing with reality, wouldn't it make more sense to link to effectiveness rates in actual practice?
Quote:
Originally Posted by dunkel25
Besides, I doubt that if I had only listed rape and incest originally, it would matter...you're looking for any little nitpick to try and invalidate my argument because, as a whole, you know I'm right.
I don't think it's really nitpicking to point out that you made one claim, then backed up a different one. That's called bait-and-switch in some circles...it's kind of frowned upon in nearly all circles...
Doesn't that definition of "human being" exclude infants up to about 3 months old?
In most cases well beyond that, at least if one were talking about completion or full attainment of such processes. And as with all forms of development, we are talking here about a process, not a moment. If a neonate itself were a fully developed and qualified human being, we would extend to it full rights as a human being. Instead, we attach a tiny fraction of rights at birth, vesting all others in the parents or others deemed responsible. From this barely qualified level then, we would have extend backward down the development curve by many months to reach the points where most abortions are performed. In those ranges, the level of developed human being-ness is still at zero.
Last edited by saganista; 01-25-2009 at 06:35 PM..
In most cases well beyond that, at least if one were talking about completion or full attainment of such processes. Ans as with all forms of development, we are talking here about a process, not a moment. If a neonate itself were a fully developed and qualified human being, we would extend to it full rights as a human being. Instead, we attach a tiny fraction of rights at birth, vesting all others in the parents or others deemed responsible. From this barely qualified level then, we would have extend backward down the development curve by many months to reach the points where most abortions are performed. In those ranges, the level of developed human being-ness is still at zero.
And this is why I try my hardest not to respond to you. The stuff you post is just not rational, so it's hard for me to really relate and try and form a legitimate response.
Translation: You've never been outside the box before, and are flustered at having to confront some perhaps atypical questions...
Translation: You've never been outside the box before, and are flustered at having to confront some perhaps atypical questions...
Translation: I post ridiculous and irrational stuff and when I get called on it, it make me feel good to think it's the other person that's goofy in the head.
I would like to see the government stay out of the abortion issue. Abortions should remain a private contract between a woman and her doctor, with no restrictions except any self imposed moral limitations.
Having said that, I think at a time when the economy is in the toilet, the government shouldn't be funding any programs for or against this topic, especially in foreign countries who don't need any more American morality shoved down their throats. It has been bad enough to have suffered 8 years of neo-conservatism without having to endure a backlash of neo-liberalism.
I think this post is just a scare tactic from a pro-lifer. All of the points are exaggerated.
For one, the only person who should be able to decide whether a health risk is worth getting an abortion is the mother and her doctor.
Another thing, a teen who can decide to have sex can decide whether or not they want to become a mother. I have known people who could not tell their parents that they had an abortion because they would have been beaten to death. In my experience those who did not include their parents had good reason. Forcing a teen to tell their parent is a way of scaring them out of the decision. It has less to do with their safety than it does punishing the teen.
The "Pro-life" movement has nothing to do with life and has everything to do with punishing women for behavior that the religious right does not approve of. If they cared about life they would be outraged about all death. Why do they stop caring once it is no longer a fetus?
Abortion is not something that most women take lightly, it is always a hard decision and it is always the woman's choice. No one is going to strap you down and end your pregnancy, that is why it is called pro CHOICE!
I would like to see the government stay out of the abortion issue. Abortions should remain a private contract between a woman and her doctor, with no restrictions except any self imposed moral limitations.
Having said that, I think at a time when the economy is in the toilet, the government shouldn't be funding any programs for or against this topic, especially in foreign countries who don't need any more American morality shoved down their throats. It has been bad enough to have suffered 8 years of neo-conservatism without having to endure a backlash of neo-liberalism.
The problem with that is that it's not just another medical procedure...whether people like to think so or not, it is a human life that is being ended. That IS a matter for the state.
Generally, I agree with you...the state needs to stay out of most things...but when someone is being murdered, which is what it is, all euphemisms aside, that is one of the main purposes of government.
You make a good point, though...we're enough problem on our own without sending even more money overseas, for ANY reason, let alone to fund abortion.
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.
