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.
No need to be rude. This is a logical question, I am merely asking since people who have abortions cannot afford to raise a child in most cases even if that is not the reason for the abortion, and there are people out there that would force someone to have a child and then give it up for adoption. What most dont realize is that if we did this, becasue abortion was illegal, we would have a crisis of abandond children...if you dont think so...do the math,..and some actual research...and dont just read an artical and think that you are an expert or take someone elses opinion as your own becasue it sounds good.
Since pro-lifers seem to have all this extra money lying around...and are willing to support an child that is unwanted by its natural parents...well then they should have to support it out of pocket and leave my wallet alone.
Fallacious logic is being used to achieve a specific result. When a question is asked, it is seeking knowledge and understanding. When a question such as yours is asked, it is seeking to place people into a position that you can defeat.
The question excludes alternative valid approaches because it conflicts with the position of the giver. You are what they call "leading the witness" in order to obtain testimony that makes your position appear valid.
I met a fallacious argument with another fallacious one. The point was to show the absurdity of the OP's position. *chuckle*
The, OPs post, while I may not agree with it does have a valid logic that is not fallacious. That logic being if person/group X is going to use the power of law to force person/group Y not to excersize one of person/group Y's rights. Then person/group X should be made to bear a certain share of the costs that result from depriving person/group Y of that right.
It may not be a good idea, but I contend it is not fallacious or abusurd because it does have a valid logic.
A baby is not a mistake! The unmarried parents chose to do wrong, thereby creating a living human being. Labeling this child as a mistake is barbaric. I did not vote in your poll because of that.
Yes, I would take a loving child into my home. I would not have to be forced to do so. After all, I earn my living by watching the little ones. It's not a JOB, it is a pleasure.
It's not a mistake, it's just a wrong choice? How is that any better terminology? At least you avoid even creating a baby that will be labeled in this way through an early abortion. Of course, the label is nothing compared to growing up living as an unwanted kid.
At least you are one of the few who actually would take responsibility for your vote if you vote against abortion. Unfortunately I doubt you could handle even a fraction of the extra 'wrong choices' that abortion criminalization would bring, with no help from the majority of anti-abortion voters.
What I find interesting is that the lot of you pro-lifers have a magical point that a human exist in the womb, as do I...mine is at third term...yours is at conception... by your logic a human exists when the egg is fertalized...well why not protect the sperm and the egg seperatly...why not outlaw masturbation or sex all together and require a license to have children...if you never want children but want sex...then get "fixed"...
For me asking someone to give up a life of happiness to meet your moral standing is wrong. You say that it is wrong to kill a fetus...what about killing an already born person or adult? In times of war we have a kill or be killed attitude...shoot first ask questions later. We also have the death penalty...how are either of these morally right? You know that wars kill more humans that abortion.
So why dont you fight against something like war, death penalties, torture.
Also my question was to show my point...pro lifers are willing to take away a womans rights but they dont want theirs infringed upon. This goes for most anti-_____ (fill in the blank) groups. They want their way and thats it...if a compromise is made that would meet their outcome but also favor the other side...they are against it.
In another thread I asked if we outlawed homosexual marriage or even homosexuality itself, would anyone be willing to give up their rights to freedom of religion? After all it is a compromise...most said no.
People want to control others actions...we want that pleasant ville style life...sugar coated movie world. In reality, this will never happen. For any situation nothing will be resolved without a compromise..but most dont want to compromise their rights to stop another.
The OP's question IS the fallacy. Nothing can be achieved by answer it because it specifically is designed to support the givers position. It really is a stupid question.
It is to prove my point that no one wants to take responsibility of another actions. I could argue that the sperm and egg are in the wrong for fertalizing when the woman didnt want them to...why didnt they ask permission first?
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,012,380 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by fracturedman
No need to be rude. This is a logical question, I am merely asking since people who have abortions cannot afford to raise a child in most cases even if that is not the reason for the abortion, and there are people out there that would force someone to have a child and then give it up for adoption. What most dont realize is that if we did this, becasue abortion was illegal, we would have a crisis of abandond children...if you dont think so...do the math,..and some actual research...and dont just read an artical and think that you are an expert or take someone elses opinion as your own becasue it sounds good.
Since pro-lifers seem to have all this extra money lying around...and are willing to support an child that is unwanted by its natural parents...well then they should have to support it out of pocket and leave my wallet alone.
Who says that pro-lifers have lots of money lying around?
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,012,380 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtoli
Well getting an abortion would be the responsible thing to do, but if someone wanted to vote to take that option away from a woman, you'd be taking away the
her option to own responsibility for that pregnancy.
Unless the goal is punishment, not responsibility.
Abortion is punishment: for the unborn baby who little life gets snuffed out because they are an inconvenience.
Abortion is punishment: for the unborn baby who little life gets snuffed out because they are an inconvenience.
Some might argue that having birth is punishment as well, as is raising a child they dont want. But then you say give it up for adoption..this is also punishment...for the child, mother, and tax payers.
That stated: my being a man; I really have no say-so one way or the other since I cannot get pregnant.
If a woman does become PG; it is between her and her God whether she carries to term or aborts.
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 did not vote in your poll because of that.
