Abortion is as unjust as slavery. An American historical perspective.

Discussion in 'Abortion' started by DixNickson, Mar 25, 2017.

  1. Old Trapper

    Old Trapper Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2016
    Messages:
    1,961
    Likes Received:
    707
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Not at all. What I said, <Mod Edit- Rule 3/5>, is that once they made the decision to have sex knowing that such an action could result in a pregnancy, then they have an obligation to protect that child, not destroy it based on convenience.

    Physical age has nothing to do with mental maturity.

    An unproven adage usually used by fools who have nothing else to say.

    Like calling one a "sexist", or "misogynist".

    So, now supporting the right of the child created by the actions of the woman is a "punishment". Pregnancy is a "punishment"? The woman's body was designed, whether by God, or by chance, to carry a child to birth. It is a biological fact. It is called "preservation of the species" upon which all of life depends. I understand that actually raising a child rather then killing it requires a sense of decency, common sense, and responsibility, that obviously some are unwilling to accept since it would be an inconvenience to their pleasures, or their careers, but really....

    Sorry, but it is not me that keeps distorting what one says.

    Ahhh, so one can decide when murder is murder, theft is theft, lying is lying, etc. on their own, and there are no Natural Rights to life, liberty, and happiness. Got it.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 17, 2017
    DixNickson likes this.
  2. NCspotter

    NCspotter Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2015
    Messages:
    425
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    I never said giving birth is a punishment. You know damn well how babies are made, and if you don't want one, you should keep your pants on. There's an old saying that children do what feels good while adults do what is right. Children have sex because it feels good, adults do the right thing and don't have sex unless they're prepared for its result.

    It seems to me that progressives want to strip all personal responsibility from personal decisions. Got pregnant because you couldn't keep your pants on? Burned yourself by spilling your coffee on your lap? Accidentally run yourself over with your own car because you were too lazy to make sure your car was in park? All are personal responsibilities that they love to pass on to someone else.

    I stopped arguing with you, then you responded to a post directed at another user. At what point does the life become a human? Is it okay to end one life (a fetus) because it will be a burden to its parents while not ending another life (a convicted felon) even though it will be a burden to those who have to support it?
     
  3. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    56,891
    Likes Received:
    21,024
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So show me the LAW that says women have an obligation to give birth.
    There is no law so it's only your opinion. Your opinion doesn't, and shouldn't, rule what other do.
    Then quit referring to age at all..




    OH? I have plenty to say and did say it, you just don't like it ....and what is "wrong" about this fact:""people like you seem to think they should rule over what is responsible for others""

    That is exactly what you are trying to do.


    If one says sexist misogynistic things then one is sexist and misogynistic....(like the following...)

    YES, when you tell women they must pay for having sex, YOU view it as her punishment.


    .


    WHERE is the law that says all women must do what they were "designed" to do(BTW, DO YOU TELL THAT TO PRIESTS AND NUNS?)

    Humans were "designed" with fingers and thumbs so strangling each other is OK?



    So women who have abortions, according to you are indecent, have no common sense and are irresponsible....gee, no misogyny there!

    And why you want indecent, irresponsible people with no common sense to raise kids shows you sure must not care about kids !!


    No, people can't, the LAW does that.


    NOPE, there are no "natural" rights, all rights are given by mankind.


    YOU want to take away women's right to life , liberty, and the pursuit of happiness....and give MORE rights to a fetus!
     
    Zeffy likes this.
  4. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    56,891
    Likes Received:
    21,024
    Trophy Points:
    113
    .


    POST 95 : You: ""Should people suffer consequences for their actions?



    :roflol: Ya, we'll just ignore the history of the world which proves what horsepuckey that is...ya, sure people, women and MEN, will just stop having sex....do you actually believe that?


    It seems to me that conservative want to rule over everyone else's lives and, like DICTATORS, decide what is and isn't "responsible". They allow no room for women to think for themselves what would be responsible and some people think NOT having a kid you don't want or can't afford IS responsible.



    So if you burn yourself YOU do NOT seek to rectify it by getting medical attention, YOU just let it burn? Weird.

    You don't seek medical attention after being run over by a car because you didn't put it in park so you just lay there? Weird.

    Getting an abortion is PASSING the responsibility off on to someone else??? HOW?????


    :) :) SO YOU"RE PASSING YOUR RESPONSIBILITY FOR POSTING ON TO SOMEONE ELSE :) :)






    The second it's conceived in a human it's human




    YUP! A fetus is not a person, a convicted felon is...


    A felon is NOT using another's body physically to sustain their life, a fetus is.....
     
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2017
    Derideo_Te and Zeffy like this.
  5. Doofenshmirtz

    Doofenshmirtz Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2016
    Messages:
    28,018
    Likes Received:
    19,305
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So you care about the lives of these precious human beings as long as you don't have to do anything. There are currently thousands of unwanted children that will never see the inside of a loving home. You would support adding millions more as long as the burden doesn't fall on your shoulders. You refuse to accept them, but insist that others do. How is that different from not caring at all? Can it be that your appearance is what you really care about?
     
    Derideo_Te, Zeffy and FoxHastings like this.
  6. Zeffy

    Zeffy Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    Messages:
    1,654
    Likes Received:
    405
    Trophy Points:
    83

    I *will* have sex where, when and with whom I choose. If I conceive, I *will* abort. Cope.
     
    Derideo_Te and FoxHastings like this.
  7. NCspotter

    NCspotter Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2015
    Messages:
    425
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    If they wanted a child, good for them. There's a reason sex exists.

    Just because people do something doesn't make it right. Having sex just because you can doesn't mean you should.

    You're confusing conservatives and progressives. Last time I noticed, conservatives weren't trying to regulate which lightbulbs you can buy. And if the women were thinking for themselves, they wouldn't have gotten pregnant in the first place unless they wanted a child.

    The worse the burn, the better the lawsuit.

    If you were using sex like it was intended to be used, you wouldn't be having an abortion. Sex isn't a requirement to live except to procreate. Once you've decided you won't let the baby grow up, you've passed up all personal responsibility.

    If I didn't want to respond to your response, I wouldn't have. Same way that if I didn't want to get any of the girls I know pregnant, I wouldn't.

    The definition of conceived is to become pregnant, so now I'm not even sure what you're talking about. And in any case, we - regardless of how young, old, or developed - are all just bundles of cells.

    People on life support don't sustain themselves either.
     
  8. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    56,891
    Likes Received:
    21,024
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That answer has NOTHING to do with your assertion that you didn't say pregnancy was a punishment.

    POST 95 : You: ""Should people suffer consequences for their actions?

    So you admit that forcing a woman to have a baby is punishment.

    .

    So you think "should" will change humankind from what it has been for about 10,000 years! Really?
    Have a problem with facts and logic?


    No, this is what I posted: ""It seems to me that conservative want to rule over everyone else's lives and, like DICTATORS, decide what is and isn't "responsible". They allow no room for women to think for themselves what would be responsible and some people think NOT having a kid you don't want or can't afford IS responsible.""

    I used examples from this thread...and you couldn't deny it so went off on one of your irrelevant, inaccurate rants.


    .

    Which, OF COURSE, is irrelevant to the abortion debate where CONSERVATIVES want to take away women's rights to their own bodies...


    So you think that if a woman gets pregnant they can't think for themselves...VERY sexist and misogynistic especially coming from someone who will never get pregnant
    .

    :) Couldn't answer the question :)




    WHO are YOU to tell the world how sex should be "used"....sad that some women's husbands only want sex to PRO-CRE-ATE...;)


    .


    AGAIN, I feel sorry for women who have husbands who only have sex to PRO-CRE-ATE....maybe they can look for fun sex somewhere else :)

    ONLY in your opinion :roflol:

    YOU: ""I stopped arguing with you, then you responded to a post directed at another user."""

    SO YOU"RE PASSING YOUR RESPONSIBILITY FOR POSTING ON TO SOMEONE ELSE but claimed having an abortion is passing responsibility on to someone else.....and NEVER explained HOW abortion is passing responsibility on to someone else....seems there's lots of things you can't address.




    LOL! So you would get them pregnant if you wanted to? No, getting someone pregnant is NOT a matter of wanting to.
    Ask somone who has been trying to get pregnant...or read a biology book





    YOU ASKED: """At what point does the life become a human?"" (That would be "you" as in YOU.)


    And I responded: ""The second it's conceived in a human it's human. Good lord, do you read what's written? It's a simple sentence.



    .

    NO, but no other person is forced to use their body physically to help keep them alive.

    Would you like to be forced to have a blood transfusion or have your heart taken because someone else needs it?

    You want women forced to do that......why do you think you and fetuses have more rights than pregnant women?
     
  9. Old Trapper

    Old Trapper Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2016
    Messages:
    1,961
    Likes Received:
    707
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Have you ever heard of Natural Law?

    http://www.uffl.org/vol 9/kalpakgian9.pdf

    Where did I mention age?

    Not at all in spite of your whining. What you are saying is that sex is a free for all strictly for pleasure, and if one, the woman, feels that a pregnancy might inconvenience her in any manner she is free to kill the life she has helped to create through her promiscuity, and reckless, behavior. The life that she has created is not to be a burden on her, and is to be looked upon as a "punishment" is she decides to keep the baby to full term.

    That was a response to your comment saying that if a woman were to become pregnant having casual sex then "it's a matter of anything but punishing women for having consensual sex.."

    More fanciful BS. It is her responsibility (do you know the meaning of the word?) to accept the consequences of her actions.

    And yet another childish response. Just what do you think the vagina, fallopian tubes, womb, eggs, were "designed" for?

    Not sure how you get hatred, contempt, or prejudice, out of telling the truth, and upholding responsible behavior, but I am sure in your wee little mind you will find a way.

    Really scratching low there I see. Must have run out of, as if you had any, rational arguments. Having the child, or giving birth, or even adopting the child out, has a way of making decent, responsible, people out of some. However, your lack of concern in not tiewht the morality of an issue, it is simply the desire to kill the unwanted.

    But YOU said "Adults, whether mature or not, get to decide for themselves what is responsible and what isn't responsible without YOUR "guidance".

    If there are no "Natural Rights", and ALL rights are given by man, then those same rights can be taken away, and the Founding Fathers of this country, and those tru=oughout history (Zabarella, Plato, Socrates, Aristotle, Locke, Newton, etc.), were all wrong, and you have the ultimate answer, and true knowledge.

    The woman does not have the right to kill another living human being (whether or not it has fully developed) no matter how much that person might inconvenience her.
     
    DixNickson and NCspotter like this.
  10. NCspotter

    NCspotter Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2015
    Messages:
    425
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    It's a "punishment" for using sex in its proper form. I'm sorry you disagree with that, but sex - which, take note, is short for sexual reproduction - exists to allow us to reproduce. It wasn't invented for us to have fun, otherwise women wouldn't be able to get pregnant. Du-huh. Feeling sorry for people who don't get laid 17 times a day doesn't change that. I'm not getting anyone I know pregnant even if I want to because I have enough self control to keep my pants on. You said "The second it's conceived in a human it's human"; conceive means to BECOME PREGNANT. So, to paraphrase, the second a woman gets pregnant, a human is living inside of her. A woman isn't pregnant when there isn't a baby inside of her anymore. A woman doesn't get to kill something just because she couldn't keep her pants on and now has something living inside of her. A fetus has its own DNA (not the woman's DNA) and is not the woman's property.

    I'm not going to address anything else because clearly you're so much smarter than everyone here and know so much more than all of us that it's impossible for anyone to reason at a level you can accept. Plus I just don't have time because I have to finish some biology homework to graduate college in a couple weeks.
     
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2017
  11. DixNickson

    DixNickson Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2012
    Messages:
    1,856
    Likes Received:
    103
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Been away for a short bit, but I believe my views have been consistently themed.

    So you are saying you would have had your Mother choose your death than the life you've led?!

    I find that hard to accept as a rational choice, you choosing to be aborted.

    I believe that you, as human are deserving of the human right to life. I understand wanting to know your mother and father, to have that relationship, but rather death in the absence of that knowledge/experience is squandering the great gift of life your parents have given you.
     
  12. DixNickson

    DixNickson Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2012
    Messages:
    1,856
    Likes Received:
    103
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    I thought once the child survived the abortion there were failed abortion related laws that required the child be helped? I recall President Obama voting against and/or filibustering legislation (as a state and federal politician) that would require the aborted surviving child be treated. Considering his legislating acts, I believe that Kermit's acts and goals would meet with the President's (Obama) approval. He only did in practice what Obama supported in legislation.
     
  13. DixNickson

    DixNickson Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2012
    Messages:
    1,856
    Likes Received:
    103
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Killing can be a necessary act but not in the case of unborn/preborn humans. Human life begins at conception, it is not plant life, the life is human. You may argue that having been given authority over the life of the unborn empowers you to take that life, however that is not a responsible action, as it is done to avoid maternal or paternal responsibility.
    The D of I is the precursor, the foundation, the beginning of what was destined to be the law of the land.
     
  14. DixNickson

    DixNickson Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2012
    Messages:
    1,856
    Likes Received:
    103
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Sexual intercourse is the mechanism designed by Nature's Creator to perpetuate Mankind. Of course there are other benefits inherent in the act and shared between the actors.
     
  15. Vegas giants

    Vegas giants Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2016
    Messages:
    49,909
    Likes Received:
    5,343
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Abortion can be the most responsible thing a woman can do
     
    Zeffy likes this.
  16. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,706
    Likes Received:
    13,464
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Are you reading impaired ? What part of "There are 5 different scientific perspectives on when human life begins" .... did you not understand ? .....

    .... complete with a link to a chapter in a developmental biology textbook ( biology being the subject matter domain) explaining what each of the 5 perspectives are and giving strengths and weaknesses of each.

    When you have read each of the 5 different perspectives .... such that you have some semblance of a clue of what you are talking about, come back and talk to me.
     
  17. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,706
    Likes Received:
    13,464
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You are confused. Of course it is the responsibility of a woman to deal with an unwanted pregnancy. If a woman does not want a child to be created the responsible thing to do is end the pregnancy prior to the creation of a living human.

    You do not understand what the founding fathers had to say. Rights applied to citizens - parties to the "social contract". "Life liberty, pursuit of happiness" merely puts the individual rights and freedoms of all parties to that contract "Above" the legitimate authority of Gov't.

    In other words .. Gov't is not to make any law messing with individual liberty as it is not within the legitimate purview of Gov't.

    Second - your assumption that a zygote (single cell at conception) is a living human .. is just that. (assumed premise fallacy).

    If you want to claim that a living human exists (such that it should have rights including the right to life) at the zygote (or any other stage of pregnancy), then you must provide support showing that this claim is true. That you have not done so and just assumed this premise commits a logical fallacy.

    One of the main debates within the abortion debate is whether or not a zygote (or any other stage of pregnancy) is a living human/person.

    You standing on the debate stage and repeating your claim over and over like some broken record - is not an argument for much. The point of a debate is to justify your claim. ... and good luck with that.
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  18. DixNickson

    DixNickson Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2012
    Messages:
    1,856
    Likes Received:
    103
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    I am thankful that you care for your five children, that there are organizations and people being of service to those less fortunate or in need. I would hope for all of us to have people to love and who freely love us in return.

    People using your logic about killing the unwanted or unloved makes those thousands of unwanted (born) children targets for termination as well as any other human deemed an unwanted or unloved individual of any age. A cruel and brave new world mindset indeed. What I refuse to accept is the notion that killing the unborn is a righteous, good and productive event. Perhaps this makes me that person who only sees a naked head of state in the emperor's new clothes story but the truth is denied at one's own peril.

    I suppose I could have a healthy dose of vanity however the only appearance I (or any of us should) care about with grave concern is the one we'll make before our/Nature's Creator. Henry Hyde spoke of just that terrifying and awesome moment.

    You don't really care whether I am a parent/adoptive parent/foster parent. It is my beliefs and opinions that trouble you, that you would rather silence. You've stated previously that you are personally against abortion and yet you de facto defend/encourage the taking of the life of the unborn human in subsequent posts. Your true position regarding the lives of the unborn is not confusing at all, I can see it clearly.
     
  19. DixNickson

    DixNickson Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2012
    Messages:
    1,856
    Likes Received:
    103
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Oh great and powerful Giftedone looking down from the on high superego 8), when does human life begin? Could it be from the beginning? or is it in the middle or towards the end? Not punk questions.
     
  20. DixNickson

    DixNickson Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2012
    Messages:
    1,856
    Likes Received:
    103
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Ah, nope. Disagree.
     
  21. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,706
    Likes Received:
    13,464
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Clearly you did not read the link provided - explaining the 5 main scientific perspectives on when human life begins.

    The beginning of what ? Mr. Fallacy ... the twinkle in your fathers eye when he looked at your mommy ?

    Obviously the sperm is "human life". Obviously a single human heart cell is human life.

    Lesson number 1: Understand the difference between the word "human" when used as a descriptive adjective (human life, human sperm, human cell, human feces) and when used as a noun ( a human, a living human)

    Newsflash: Stating "Human life begins here" does not mean a living human exists at that point.

    Now go read the link given you previously so you might begin to have a clue what you are talking about.
     
  22. Old Trapper

    Old Trapper Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2016
    Messages:
    1,961
    Likes Received:
    707
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Sorry, but life begins the moment the cells begins to divide, and the baby is growing. Hard to accept for those who do not understand what life is. And the responsible thing for the woman to do is if she does not want to get pregnant then use a dildo, or remain celibate. Same goes for the man. Use a "doll", or remain celibate.

    Within this modern society of declining morality, and a "anything goes" attitude it would be hard to prove that life begins at conception. However, you ignore the very real reality that once the egg, and the sperm, unite it begins to form its own independent DNA, and within 24-30 hours begins its cellular division. As time passes it forms its own blood supply, heart, lung, etc. The ONLY thing it requires from the mother, other then the protection the womb offers, is supplements. I would actually argue that the process of forming its own DNA is the beginnings of life.

    Simply renaming the baby a "zygote", and then acting as if it is some kind of parasite on the woman's body, is the ignorance of the pro-choice people since the babe in the womb has no choice, and in most cases neither does the father. The sole authority is that of the mother, and thus the babe is considered either as property, or as slave.

    Now, using your distortion of the rights of the babe in the womb, one could assume that government has the right to determine the rights of the child. However, how can that be? It cannot thus we have fetal homicide laws, fetecide laws, etc. In fact, if one was to beat a woman so that she goes into a miscarriage that person can be charged with murder, homicide, involuntary murder, etc. depending on what State you are in. Same is true if one is in a motor accident, and the babe is killed.

    So, in conclusion, while you may argue for the right of the woman to kill her unborn child your argument defies logic, medical reasoning, or anything resembling a moral basis.

    http://www.abort73.com/abortion/competing_rights/
     
  23. Old Trapper

    Old Trapper Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2016
    Messages:
    1,961
    Likes Received:
    707
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    human
    [​IMG]
    1. of, belonging to, or typical of mankind
    2. of or having to do with hominids in general:
    If not human is the babe then animal, plant, or some foreign entity? And if it is dividing cells is it not alive, or is it dead?

    "Living Human"
     
  24. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,706
    Likes Received:
    13,464
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Your assertion that a cell - which happens to have human DNA- makes that cell a human is demonstrably false.

    Every human cell has human DNA. A heart cell is neither a human nor a heart. Your claim that "a child" has been renamed is abject nonsense. A zygote is a single human cell. The reason it is called a zygote is to differentiate this cell from other human cells.

    The zygote cell is "special". It is not special because it has complete human DNA. Almost every human cell has that.

    It is special because the codes for creation of a human are turned on thus initiating the process of creating a human. It is not that the other cells do not have these same codes - they do. It is just that they are not turned on.

    A human is not a single celled Eukaryote ... the Zygote is. A human is a multi cellular organism. If you want to get technical - Human taxonomy states that a Homo sapiens needs to have membership in/characteristics of "all" of the clubs - Kingdom, Domain, Phylum, Order, Class, Family, Genus, Species. A zygote only has membership in one. How can something that is not a Homo Sapiens be a human ?

    Getting less technical - The human structure is made of Trillions of cells. You would not call a single brick a building. Why would you call a single cell - a human ?

    The fact of the matter is at the zygote stage ... not even a single brick/cell in the structure of a human exists. The single cell at conception (nor any of the other cells created until the embryoblast starts to forms) will never be part of the structure of the human that is being created.

    After the blastocyst has formed (a hollow sack of cells that will go on to become the placenta) then, the cells that will actually be part of the human structure start being formed. Until this point not a single cell of the human under construction exists.

    How can a human exist when not one single cell of that human exists ?

    It is true that the zygote contains the blueprint for a human but, a blueprint for a human is not a human ... just as a blueprint for a building is not a building. It is true that there is a process underway that will create every cell in that blueprint, but not one cell in that blueprint has been created at the zygote stage. The initial cells are similar the workers creating a building. The workers are not a building.

    Perhaps we should put some value on the blueprint on the basis that construction is underway. That this process has the potential to create a human should all go well. The idea that the process of creating a human "is" a human defies logic, science and rational thought.
     
    FoxHastings likes this.
  25. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,706
    Likes Received:
    13,464
    Trophy Points:
    113
    False Dichotomy. It is neither. If we are talking zygote it is a single human cell.

    A heart cell is alive (dividing) but a human heart cell is not a human - neither is it a plant or an animal.

    A dictionary will tell you that the term "with child" means that a woman is pregnant. This does not mean a child actually exists silly.

    What the dictionary is telling you is what a person using the term "with child" means. It is a colloquialism.

    Once again - if a dictionary was a textbook .. we would not need textbooks. A dictionary does not give "the why".

    If you can not explain "the why" behind a claim ... then you have no business thinking your claim is true.
     
    FoxHastings likes this.

Share This Page