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.
Where did I say that I felt everyone should agree with me?
We are having a conversation about abortion. You replied to me, and
you, in turn, received a reply.
I feel you are very narrow-minded when it comes to this topic, and I'm sure you can see that my previous replies have conveyed that. It's my right to have that opinion and feel that way.
If you do not like what I have to say, you probably should have refrained from addressing me directly. You're allowed to have your opinion. But when I deem your reply offensive, I have the freedom to point it out. You opened that door hun.
From the numerous amount of reputation points I am receiving everyday, I'm sure I'm being pretty fair in this debate.
It is your right to have that opinion and feel that way. However, the reason i didnt like what you had to say was because that vast majority of your post was either a slew of insults towards my character, or just some attempt to tug on someones emotions. It was completely devoid of any rational arguments (mostly) other than "its my opinion to feel this way and i did the right thing." that is what leads me to believe that you are the narrow minded one, and not me. Although i will say i have pretty much made up my mind on this subject(though that was only after many months of researching and thinking) i still do try to see it from other peoples perspectives, but i just don't see any real reasoning behind it. And i do try, whether anyone here believes it or not...
Also, just because you get +reps, it doesn't mean you are being fair. (I'm not saying you are or aren't being fair, but in general, reps =/= fair, people could be +reping you for any number of reasons, probably simply cause the fact that they are pro choice as well. They may not have even read the other arguments)
Quote:
Originally Posted by trmihall01
These people will never get it honey, although it is a wonderful point. Well, when they get to the heaven they are so fond of, hope god doesn't say" you were judgemental and condemning and used my words against people, you never truely knew me so i can't know you". Boy wouldn't that suck for them. Hey, but you know it's easier to point a finger at others than it is to examine our shortcomings! And reps to you even though this thing won't let me.
Let me be clear. I am not judging anyone here for any decisions they have made regarding this issue. It is not my place to judge ANYONE as we are all equal. I never said "your bad for getting an abortion" because i dont believe that in the slightest. I am simply here to express my views, not judge, condemn, or be "nasty" to any particular person. And i would like to "get it" as you put it, but maybe i already have. Maybe its you who doesnt get it. But again maybe not, maybe its me. I still think killing is wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Platinum333
So, let me get this straight: You're calling those who allow their grandparents to pass away in hospice, murderers?
Perhaps we should go to war with them. Those killers/murderers who are allowing their grandparents to pass peacefully. Shame on them!
Thats absolutely NOT what i am saying. Those people are dying. We can postpone death sure, but we can't stop it. If an old person dies, no one is at fault. No one is to blame, they are old and it is time to go. And to compare that to the killing of a human child?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Platinum333
I know, it's awfully sad. I'm a Christian and find this sort of thinking so...well, un-Christian.
We had a good example of a true Christian lady a few threads back...but generally speaking..it doesn't seem like we have had too many more.
Thank you for being so intelligent. It's refreshing in the midst of such fickle ignorance.
Last time i checked (which was admittedly a long time ago) but last time i checked the Christian bible was against murder. And you use that word "ignorance" again, but have you really shown how i have been ignorant? What your doing is basically throwing out an insult at me for lack of a constructive argument. (Well i take that back, you have had a few somewhat constructive arguments, but it seems like theres been a lot more insults thrown out.)
Anyways, i hope you guys don't think badly of me for my views, i certainly don't think badly of you for yours. I know things can get heated on the internet, but its all in the name of debate, and nothing personal against anyone.
And are you saying that means anything? Just because the majority of people say something doesn't make it true. The VAST majority of the world once believed that the world was flat. No matter how many people believed that, it still didn't make it true. The same applies here. No matter how many people agree with you, it doesn't make killing a child right.
This is what i mean in earlier posts when i say i fail to find any logical arguments in your posts. You say things that at first glance to some seem like an argument, but when you really look at it, it means nothing.
And just out of curiosity Platinum333, i know in your case having an abortion doesnt really seem to be a clear cut case of right and wrong. What are your views on abortions that women get simply because they do not want to take care of the child? Do you agree that thats wrong? Or are your views still pro choice in that case as well? Just curious.
I think that a woman should have the right to get the abortion as long as it does not affect anyone else directly. Also, once a heartbeat is there unless it is an emergency then the baby is in fact alive.
Now since it takes two to tango, it should take two to make that dicision. alot of you here say that it is the womans choice to have the abortion or not. But when I ask you about a reasonable outcome of allowing the man to opt out of providing for the child you claim that it is his responsability to do so, since he had sex with the woman.
Well the woman had sex as well, how many children do you know of that where born without a male donor? it doesnt happen, unless the woman has both sexual organs and two forms of bodily fluid (sperm and Eggs) then she cannot choose for the male.
I am not saying that I condone men abandoning a child, but if you want women to have the choice to choose the outcome for two people then the man should as well.
I think that a woman should have the right to get the abortion as long as it does not affect anyone else directly. Also, once a heartbeat is there unless it is an emergency then the baby is in fact alive.
It is effecting someone else, the fetus/child.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fracturedman
Now since it takes two to tango, it should take two to make that dicision. alot of you here say that it is the womans choice to have the abortion or not. But when I ask you about a reasonable outcome of allowing the man to opt out of providing for the child you claim that it is his responsability to do so, since he had sex with the woman.
Well the woman had sex as well, how many children do you know of that where born without a male donor? it doesnt happen, unless the woman has both sexual organs and two forms of bodily fluid (sperm and Eggs) then she cannot choose for the male.
I am not saying that I condone men abandoning a child, but if you want women to have the choice to choose the outcome for two people then the man should as well.
This is more of an equal rights debate, not abortion. But yeah i think the man should have a voice equal to the womans in this as well.
(just a note, i am not condoning abortion if both mother and father agree on it or anything, i just feel that the father should have a voice equal to the mothers. I think that the mother shouldn't get to choose abortion and the father shouldn't either. I have to put this little note/disclaimer because some people would try to twist my comment against me and claim that it says something it doesn't [not necessarily you, just saying that someone probably would])
I think that a woman should have the right to get the abortion as long as it does not affect anyone else directly. Also, once a heartbeat is there unless it is an emergency then the baby is in fact alive.
Now since it takes two to tango, it should take two to make that dicision. alot of you here say that it is the womans choice to have the abortion or not. But when I ask you about a reasonable outcome of allowing the man to opt out of providing for the child you claim that it is his responsability to do so, since he had sex with the woman.
Well the woman had sex as well, how many children do you know of that where born without a male donor? it doesnt happen, unless the woman has both sexual organs and two forms of bodily fluid (sperm and Eggs) then she cannot choose for the male.
I am not saying that I condone men abandoning a child, but if you want women to have the choice to choose the outcome for two people then the man should as well.
If a woman chooses abortion, she is choosing the outcome for herself and, sometimes, the man involved. If a man chooses to not involve himself with a child he fathered, he is choosing the outcome for three people, himself, the woman, and his child.
You are unhappy that the woman alone makes the decision to abort and so have come up with a retaliatory action on the part of the man, which is to choose to not contribute in any way to his living, existing child. The two actions, abortion and abandonment are not equal.
Fortunately, or unfortunately from your perspective, the law does not agree with you.
If a woman chooses abortion, she is choosing the outcome for herself and, sometimes, the man involved. If a man chooses to not involve himself with a child he fathered, he is choosing the outcome for three people, himself, the woman, and his child.
Both decisions choose the outcome for 3 people. If the mother chooses abortion, theres a dead child, and the woman and man don't have a kid (3 peoples outcomes) and also as you said, if the father abandons the other two, theres a single mother, a child without a father, and a man who has to pay child support. Either decision will affect the outcome of 3 people.
Both decisions choose the outcome for 3 people. If the mother chooses abortion, theres a dead child, and the woman and man don't have a kid (3 peoples outcomes) and also as you said, if the father abandons the other two, theres a single mother, a child without a father, and a man who has to pay child support. Either decision will affect the outcome of 3 people.
I suppose thats true, but your stating the obvious. Pointing out that the law doesn't agree with me doesn't disprove anything i've said.
The whole point of this debate is that the law should recognize the fetus as a human being (or continue to deny it, depending on what side your looking at it from), but there is nothing that suggests its not a human. I have already shown that the human fetus is in fact a human being in previous posts. It is a human, and it is wrong to kill it, regardless of if the law classifies it as human or not. My argument still stands.
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.
I know things can get heated on the internet, but its all in the name of debate, and nothing personal against anyone.