|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
posted April 03, 2013 12:19 PM |
|
|
Quote:
While I don't use contraception (I don't have a spouse yet, but even then, I won't use the pill), I am concerned about the widespread use of the pill and condom and believe that it's not a good thing to make them widely available.
What's bad about their widespread use?
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted April 03, 2013 12:53 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I disagree with you. While the question, "when does a human start being considered a human", may be interesting philosophically or morally even, practical consideration obviously take precedence. Consider the following case:
You consider a fetus a human being from day X of the fertilization. Now say, a pregnant woman falls down a staircase, breaking an arm, but the fetus is killed/aborted with the incident, happening on day X + Y after fertilization.
That means, a human being came to death, and his or her death has to be investigated. Now, there are only two possibilities here:
a) the fall was voluntarily with the intention to kill the fetus; in that case it's murder. Or
b) the fall was an accident - in that case it was homicide by negligence.
Which would be absurd, practically spoken, since a law has to be enforceable, and this one wasn't.
Well, yes, but in the case of a 7.5 month fetus, you can't have a legal abortion anywhere. So besides the ethical discussion, there is a difference in the eyes of the law between a fetus and a developed baby inside the womb. I agree it's a very gray area and we are not exactly talking about an individual. But I'm fine with abortion being legal up to a period of pregnancy, unless the mother's life is in danger.
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted April 03, 2013 01:21 PM |
|
Edited by Zenofex at 13:24, 03 Apr 2013.
|
Quote:
Abortion is morally wrong.
That's very deep...
Quote:
Besides it causes a lot of pain to get an abortion for the woman.
What if the woman actually wants the abortion?
Quote:
Speaking as a Christian, when a woman gets pregnant, God places a soul in the embryo. In other words, life begins at contraception. Therefore, if you abort the unborn child, you are practically murdering an innocent victim: the unborn child.
What if you're not a Christian, nor you believe in what the Christians believe (souls, etc. - that's not a Christian patent)? The majority of the population on this planet are not Christians, for example.
Quote:
While I don't use contraception (I don't have a spouse yet, but even then, I won't use the pill), I am concerned about the widespread use of the pill and condom and believe that it's not a good thing to make them widely available.
Because? Don't expect someone to take your honest, passionate opinions seriously if you are not willing to even make an effort to explain yourself.
|
|
Vindicator
Supreme Hero
Right Back Extraordinaire
|
|
posted April 03, 2013 01:38 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Besides it causes a lot of pain to get an abortion for the woman.
As opposed to...giving birth?
____________
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted April 03, 2013 02:01 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Practically spoken, human life starts only, when a baby can survive outside/without the mother (and of course technology and society help to make this possible ever earlier). Everything else is simply beside any relevant point.
Your answer totally contradicts science. And murder is not "simply beside any relevant point."
A fetus is human because:
1) It is the product of human conception. It would be moronic to think a human would give birth to a cow. No deep scientific knowledge is even needed on that point.
2) The fetus has complete human DNA, and has it from the moment of conception.
So it is scientific FACT that the fetus is human.
Now, science also establishes the answer as to whether that human in the womb is alive. The cells are multiplying. The cells of dead humans don't multiply, thus the fetus is alive.
The fetus is human life according to science. Any other claim is made out of ignorance of science (and of common sense, in my opinion.)
It would also be rather silly to think that advancements in modern medical technology that allows doctors to save premature babies at an ever-increasingly young age means that a fetus is somehow "becoming" human at an earlier age. Quite silly indeed.
Also, human life can certainly be dependent on others.
1) A fetus is dependent on the mother for nourishment and shelter.
2) An infant who has been born is dependent on the parents for nourishment and shelter.
3) A very sick human can be dependent on others for nourishment
My mother is totally dependent on others. She is in the advanced stages of Alzeheimers. She has not said a word I could recognize in several months. She now spends most of the time asleep and now often she can't be awakened when it is time to feed her. She can't feed herself. My father spoon feeds her processed food twice a day and a nurse feeds her the other meal, when she can be awakened.
Anyone who says my mother is not human because she is totally dependent on others is either clueless or an inhuman monster.
Anyone who claims a fetus or anyone else at any stage of the human life cycle is not human because of dependence on others is certainly rejecting science to cling to a wrong-headed, wrong-hearted inhuman ideology.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 03, 2013 02:15 PM |
|
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted April 03, 2013 02:32 PM |
|
Edited by artu at 14:33, 03 Apr 2013.
|
Quote:
fetus is human because:
1) It is the product of human conception. It would be moronic to think a human would give birth to a cow. No deep scientific knowledge is even needed on that point.
2) The fetus has complete human DNA, and has it from the moment of conception.
So it is scientific FACT that the fetus is human.
You are once again applying to logical fallacy. A sperm is the product of human conception too. A cow wont come out of a human sperm. A sperm cell is a living organism in the biological sense and it has complete human DNA. Is masturbation murder to you too? Are we murdering sperms.
And you call your "pepper is green, pepper is real, reality is green" stuff science and common sense!
We are not a self, before brain develops. According to science, that is that. Stop being desperate. Are you suggesting that according to YOUR scientific facts we are all living in countries with legalized murder! Are you even aware of the gravity of the word murder... Sigh
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted April 03, 2013 02:36 PM |
|
|
|
Tsar-Ivor
Promising
Legendary Hero
Scourge of God
|
|
posted April 03, 2013 02:47 PM |
|
|
I believe that Elodin is right, abortion is murder. I don't care about its brain development or any of that ****; in the US, don't you punish extra hard for the murder of kids because of all the lost potential that has been extinguished? I would apply the same concept for fetuses, sure they're not developed, but I think even morons know that the fetus would eventually had become a baby had it not been ripped from the womb.
I don't disagree with contraception or abortion, people must do what they must and I have no right to tell others what they must do, however I don't condone or support it. Besides, in the end we all serve a greater purpose, even if it was death before we've even opened our baby eyes.
____________
"No laughs were had. There is only shame and sadness." Jenny
|
|
Seraphim
Supreme Hero
Knowledge Reaper
|
|
posted April 03, 2013 02:50 PM |
|
Edited by Seraphim at 15:10, 03 Apr 2013.
|
All pro-life supporters can be classified by this picture:
http://weknowmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/tea-party-ted-meme-pro-life.jpg
Every pro life supporter should adopt at least one orphaned child and we shall see than how "Pro-Life" they would stay.
I doubt very much that any of them would undertake such action. I doubt that pro life supporters know what a disaster it is for the child to grow up in streets and be exposed to drugs from the child hood.
Being pro life in the face of promoting social disorder, ruining the lives of children and promoting criinality is inane for me.
It is the same with euthanasia. Sometimes, death is better than living in **** or with **** or with the knowledge of facing death everyday.
____________
"Science is not fun without cyanide"
|
|
Tsar-Ivor
Promising
Legendary Hero
Scourge of God
|
|
posted April 03, 2013 02:52 PM |
|
|
I don't see how that applies.
____________
"No laughs were had. There is only shame and sadness." Jenny
|
|
Seraphim
Supreme Hero
Knowledge Reaper
|
|
posted April 03, 2013 02:58 PM |
|
Edited by Seraphim at 15:08, 03 Apr 2013.
|
Quote:
I don't see how that applies.
A child is like a business investment. If you have doubts or will be unable to support it. You will fail so miserably that your actions will echo to the child until death.
So unless people are ready to raise a child, it is better to abort them than forcing them to fend for themselves.
Once they grow they will ask "Mommy, I want to eat something" and Mommy has no food and has 24 other children to attend to.
Than those kids will want to play and then they are put to streets. Then they become thugs.
Yeah, that kid will have a rosy future...
One person should not have to bear the weight of a difficult life just because their mom or daddy had the brains the size of a nut and forgot to use contraceptives.
The same goes for rape victims.
____________
"Science is not fun without cyanide"
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted April 03, 2013 05:08 PM |
|
|
@JJ
Quote:
Irrelevant.
Wow, what enlightened commentary! 
So, you now claim religion is irrelevant and science is irrelevant in the abortion debate.
@artu
Quote:
You are once again applying to logical fallacy. A sperm is the product of human conception too. A cow wont come out of a human sperm. A sperm cell is a living organism in the biological sense and it has complete human DNA. Is masturbation murder to you too? Are we murdering sperms.
Uh, your knowledge of human reproduction is somewhat lacking. A sperm is a specialized cell that combines with an egg (conception.) A sperm is one agent in conception, NOT the product of conception.
The zygote (fertilized egg) is a brand spanking new human life, having complete human DNA that differs from that of the mother. Killing that life is indeed murder.
@Seraphim
Quote:
So unless people are ready to raise a child, it is better to abort them than forcing them to fend for themselves.
Nah, if if a person is incapable of loving the child they should just give the child up for adoption so a more mature person can raise her in a loving home. Killing the child is not better than giving the child to someone who will love her.
|
|
gnomes2169
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Duke of the Glade
|
|
posted April 03, 2013 05:27 PM |
|
|
@Elodin: I don't quite recall where I heard this, but generally, only 30-50% of orphans or children put up for adoption in the US (I believe it varies from state-to-state, with more population-dense and poorer areas having a lower adoption rate, despite there being a higher "Orphaning" rate) are actually adopted by a family. And if I remember right, 10-20% of those children end up in an abusive family, and up to 30% are given up again. This is why I don't really think that adoption can be considered a viable choice in these situations, since a child without an actual family or close support group tends to not have a good life style, tends to be more violent and tends to do more criminal activities. And by tends, I mean that they are ~70% more likely to do any of the actions described above.
They are also more likely to run away from whatever orphanage they live in, and gangs are just dying to recruit these kids.  After all, 7 year olds can't be charged with murder or drug trafficking.
____________
Yeah in the 18th century, two inventions suggested a method of measurement. One won and the other stayed in America.
-Ghost destroying Fred
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 03, 2013 05:51 PM |
|
|
Quote:
@JJ
Quote:
Irrelevant.
Wow, what enlightened commentary!
So, you now claim religion is irrelevant and science is irrelevant in the abortion debate.
Yes. In a society where every religion is equal and atheism is considered a religion as well (meaning that an atheist has the same "religious rights" than a peryon clinging to a religion), the law must be secular, because the law cannot "favor" one of those. Which means:
All moral consisiderations based on religion are irrelevant for making laws. God is irrelevant as well, and while this has not been so 200 years ago, NOW it certainly is.
Which makes religion irrelevant for laws of abortion.
Secondly, science is trumped by practicality. It's irrelevant, whether science claims "human life" at any point or not, because as long as everyone EXCEPT the mother is UNABLE to support that life, scientific truth has only theoretical value. If you had read what I've written, you would see that your points are invalid - a baby or an old person can be supported by ANYONE, no matter by whom. A fetus can be supported ONLY by the mother, and no one can change that, which means PRACTICALLY spoken, a fetus' fate is COMPLETELY, UTTERLY and SOLELY dependant on the fate of its mother, which makes science in that case relevant only in the consideration whether it is able to HELP support a fetus. Once a fetus can be supported by someone else than the mother, there are PRACTICAL alternatives, which is all that is relevant.
Another PRACTICAL point is - and I'm repeating myself -, that if you grant a fetus from the point of union of sperm and egg "human life", then EVERY loss of it makes an investigation necessary. EVERY SINGLE ONE. Every person can go to the police, say "my girlfriend was pregnant week 6 and told me, she just lost the fetus; I believe she took something and did it deliberately. She murdered my baby."
And since the fetus was treated like a living person, the case had to be investigated.
I don't believe you want that.
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted April 03, 2013 05:55 PM |
|
|
|
The quality of life is not the same thing as life though. While killing is strictly forbidden both by law and religion (in the greater part of the world anyway), living a miserable life is considered normal, even The normal. And then, when one day some unwanted child enters Elodin's house to rape his wife (and dog), he'll shoot him on sight and end the sad story. There's a multi-layered irony in this, you gotta admit.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted April 03, 2013 07:18 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Secondly, science is trumped by practicality. It's irrelevant, whether science claims "human life" at any point or not, because as long as everyone EXCEPT the mother is UNABLE to support that life, scientific truth has only theoretical value.
OK, now that you have admitted the undeniable fact that the unborn baby is scientifically human life explain why it is ok for Mommy to kill baby.
What is your reason for saying since the baby is totally dependent on Mommy then Mommy has a right to kill the baby?
And what is the magic that makes it ok for Mommy to kill the baby if it totally dependent on her and not ok for other people to kill the baby if the baby is only needs them or somebody else (not one particular person?)
____________
Revelation
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 03, 2013 08:52 PM |
|
|
Quote:
OK, now that you have admitted the undeniable fact that the unborn baby is scientifically human life ...
I didn't. I just said, it's IRRELEVANT, whatever science says - and to my knowledge "human life" isn't even scientifically unanimously defined. The only relevant question is whether you give a fetus PERSON status, not whether it's "human life".
Quote:
What is your reason for saying since the baby is totally dependent on Mommy then Mommy has a right to kill the baby?
And what is the magic that makes it ok for Mommy to kill the baby if it totally dependent on her and not ok for other people to kill the baby if the baby is only needs them or somebody else (not one particular person?)
Let's do this one after the other:
1) There is no more reason to kill a born baby (or a helpless sick or old person) than to kill any other living PERSON. Dependancy is something that can be institutionalized in a society, and in fact that is necessary for survival, because if it wasn't, how should a person survive if they were sick, and how should a child survive if their parents or parent were sick?
So the first thing to start at, is that it is NOT ok to kill a person.
2) Why, then, is it ok for a woman to abort?
Because it's other than above not the question whether it's "ok" or not. The fetus is NOT a person, and dependancy canNOT be institutionalized. It's a relationship EXCLUSIVELY between the pregnant woman and the fetus, and everything that influences the woman influences the fetus. NO ONE can force a woman to love the fetus in her womb or to accept what is growing in her, if she doesn't willingly embrace it or, at the very least, accept it, and NO ONE can help the fetus OR the pregnant woman. Which makes it PERSONAL. Society's obligation and responsibility stops here, because - a fetus isn't a person.
3) Now fill in practicality of murder/negligence/manslaughter claims and their pursuit, if you grant a fetus PERSON STATUS, and there you go.
The consequence is, this isn't a question of what is RIGHT, because that's a general moral question. It's simply a PERSONAL question. Think: consider a woman who grudgingly gives birth to a child and then mis-educates him or her, negligates, isn't there for the child - a bad mother. That's not right either, but it's IMPRACTICAL to punish her, because that will rob the child of him or her mother and might make things worse. Also, if you make that a crime, you need a squad to investigate things.
Abortion is a grey area where society has no business to judge. It shouldn't be encouraged, but it also shouldn't be criminalized - it should be something that is possible.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted April 03, 2013 10:03 PM |
|
Edited by artu at 22:22, 03 Apr 2013.
|
Quote:
Uh, your knowledge of human reproduction is somewhat lacking. A sperm is a specialized cell that combines with an egg (conception.) A sperm is one agent in conception, NOT the product of conception.
Every cell in our body is the result of our parents' conception. That was what I meant. Since you pro-lifers love to go with "if this had not been done this was going to be a person", same could be said for a sperm. The blunt logic (-al fallacy) you applied to, can easily be used for a sperm too. Fetus being human DNA, production of conception and living tissue does not automatically make fetus a human individual. I was simply caricaturizing your cum hoc ergo propter hoc.
Edit: Let me reverse your old person in hospital analogy, a fetus has no brain, is it murder when the person is brain dead and we turn off the machine?
|
|
Damacon_Ace
Famous Hero
Also known as Nobris Agni
|
|
posted April 03, 2013 11:59 PM |
|
|
Count me out of this debate from now on, I ain't talking to a bunch of left-wing radical lunatics.
And no amount of debate will change my opinions, especially on abortion.
____________
No one knows my true nature here...
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
