ABORTION VERSION TWO |
Here are the general forum rules that you must follow before you start any debate topics. Please make sure you've read and followed all directions.
ABORTION VERSION TWO |
Jul 20 2006, 12:54 AM
Post
#51
|
|
..♥.A Girl With Talents.♥.. Group: Member Posts: 172 Joined: Jun 2006 Member No: 422,238 |
^^^ Yer Der I no I was jus expressing my own opinion does't concern u
|
|
|
Jul 20 2006, 01:27 AM
Post
#52
|
|
out to life... Group: Member Posts: 216 Joined: Jul 2006 Member No: 434,862 |
|
|
|
Jul 20 2006, 01:59 AM
Post
#53
|
|
dripping destruction Group: Staff Alumni Posts: 7,282 Joined: Jun 2004 Member No: 21,929 |
what's with you people and opinions?
don't you get it? you are no one. no one cares what you think. if president bush were on this forum, then we might care. but you? me? we are nobodies. so we must stick to the facts. deal with it. |
|
|
Jul 20 2006, 09:27 AM
Post
#54
|
|
daughter of sin Group: Member Posts: 1,653 Joined: Mar 2006 Member No: 386,134 |
By the way, I really don't want to continue this - it's pointless. A waste of time. No one will convince anyone otherwise, because we're so damn stubborn. So that's it for me.. I quit.
|
|
|
Jul 20 2006, 12:21 PM
Post
#55
|
|
oooh yeah. Group: Member Posts: 1,333 Joined: Feb 2006 Member No: 376,533 |
Mells-Star:
Read the rules before posting in here. It clearly says to back up your opinions with facts, which you have not been doing. We don't just want you to say "ABORTION IS WRONG!!!111," we want you to show and/or tell us why. Because it's a debate. And as good debators, we have the right to reaffirm what you say or disprove it with even more facts. If you want to express your opinion without facts, go to a different forum please. But if you have facts, you are more than welcome to join us here. My post is an example of a good debate post. Why? Because I linked to a thread showing why I thought you weren't posting here properly. And I gave you a semi-intelligent response in addition to that. |
|
|
*disco infiltrator* |
Jul 21 2006, 11:19 AM
Post
#56
|
Guest |
|
|
|
*I Shot JFK* |
Jul 21 2006, 11:22 AM
Post
#57
|
Guest |
It REALLY frustrates me that the paper a couple of days ago has a number of interesting statistis about teen mothers which could hav ebeen used to refute some of Angelina's points
if only the recycling came on saturdays, not thrusdays... sigh. research mode it is, then |
|
|
*disco infiltrator* |
Jul 21 2006, 11:32 AM
Post
#58
|
Guest |
I don't really think the main question in this debate is whether it is right to killing a living human being; we all know it's not, but rather, is a fetus considered living? If not from conception, from what point?
I don't think that a fetus is really a full-fledged human until 21 days after conception, and most abortions are before that point unless the birth would be a danger to the mother or any other exceptional case. One could say, "The fetus still feels things!" but I really don't think that should come into play. It hurts an animal when you hit it with a car and we don't arrest every person who does that. Why? The animal cannot comprehend how he is being hurt or even what being hurt means. You didn't try to hurt the animal when you ran it over. Mothers don't try to hurt fetuses either. |
|
|
*I Shot JFK* |
Jul 21 2006, 11:39 AM
Post
#59
|
Guest |
well, you say they dont try to hurt them, but they DO deliberately set out to have them destroyed.
which is where it differs from hitting an animal with a car. and i totally agree that the main cause for debate is the humanity of the fetus, but that is something which it is difficult to debate factually, and lends itself to opinion, e.g. 'I don't think that a fetus is really a full-fledged human until 21 days after conception', which is valid, but isnt useful for debate, as it can be refuted with equal validity by saying, i DO think a fetus is a fully fledged human being before 21 days' oh, and i just noticed something, did you mean 21 weeks? |
|
|
*disco infiltrator* |
Jul 21 2006, 01:11 PM
Post
#60
|
Guest |
Yes I did.
And, I've before posted this humongous post contianing factual information (such as the biological requirements for life) a year ago in the other thread, but I can't find it.... I was just waiting for someone to refute me and tell me it begins at conception for sure until I busted that out again. |
|
|
*I Shot JFK* |
Jul 21 2006, 01:13 PM
Post
#61
|
Guest |
oh good, because i suddenly registered that it seemed odd.
|
|
|
*baby_in_blue* |
Jul 21 2006, 04:11 PM
Post
#62
|
Guest |
i think its the womans choice.. however i also think that it is as much pain to have the abortion than to have it.
|
|
|
Jul 21 2006, 04:17 PM
Post
#63
|
|
yawn :) Group: Official Member Posts: 2,926 Joined: Jul 2006 Member No: 434,041 |
I think it is the womans choice if she wants to or if she has a medical condition that makes it almost impossible for her to give birth
|
|
|
Jul 21 2006, 11:46 PM
Post
#64
|
|
Pokeball, GO! Group: Staff Alumni Posts: 2,832 Joined: Jul 2006 Member No: 433,009 |
By the way, I really don't want to continue this - it's pointless. A waste of time. No one will convince anyone otherwise, because we're so damn stubborn. So that's it for me.. I quit. Aw man, I just got back from my 2 day vacation at the beach lol. I guess it's pointless to reply to you. I agree with you though. Thanks for being a good sport and not getting all pissed like some people. I think it's pointless too. Both sides have really good arguments but nobody will change their mind. I've been enlightened on a few issues, but my opinion still stands, and I'll leave it at that. |
|
|
Jul 22 2006, 08:03 AM
Post
#65
|
|
daughter of sin Group: Member Posts: 1,653 Joined: Mar 2006 Member No: 386,134 |
Aw man, I just got back from my 2 day vacation at the beach lol. I guess it's pointless to reply to you. I agree with you though. Thanks for being a good sport and not getting all pissed like some people. I think it's pointless too. Both sides have really good arguments but nobody will change their mind. I've been enlightened on a few issues, but my opinion still stands, and I'll leave it at that. Yeah, after "debating" with that guy in the other thread, it was just the same thing all over. You're probably the only person who debated properly. See ya |
|
|
Jul 22 2006, 10:43 AM
Post
#66
|
|
Senior Member Group: Member Posts: 141 Joined: Sep 2005 Member No: 240,879 |
I support it because i think its the womens choice if she wants the baby or not. People who dont support it should just worry about themselves not others.If you think its killing someone than dont do it. Let them get the end results.
|
|
|
*ECD & C0* |
Jul 23 2006, 01:38 PM
Post
#67
|
Guest |
QUOTE What is it that gives an unborn child more value than the freedom a woman has over her body? the baby is alive and helpless the mother is required to take resposiblility for what is haping to her body. rape or not its her job to give birth to it then she can give it up for adoption. |
|
|
Jul 23 2006, 02:06 PM
Post
#68
|
|
in the reverb chamber. Group: Staff Alumni Posts: 4,022 Joined: Nov 2005 Member No: 300,308 |
the baby is alive and helpless the mother is required to take resposiblility for what is haping to her body. rape or not its her job to give birth to it then she can give it up for adoption. An animal is alive and helpless, however they have no right to life. So, the qualities of being alive and helpless do not exactly equate a right to life, or any rights for that matter. I would argue that a fetus is so impersonal, worthless, and so little sentient that it is not much unlike a common animal. In fact, in many cases, the common animal is far more human-like than a fetus. Just as I have no ill feelings in knowing that animals are killed for the convienence and comfort of specific types of food, I have no ill feelings in knowing that unborn children are being aborted at the will of their mother. Until that child is born, our society has no real way to recognize it as having personhood and rights with it. Once the child is born, the mother takes a legal obligation towards its well-being, this is meaningful and useful. However, forcing a mother to treat an unborn child as if it were a full-fledged person, just like you or I, is inherently rediculous as the unborn child is so little like you or I. |
|
|
*kryogenix* |
Jul 23 2006, 06:38 PM
Post
#69
|
Guest |
Like I said in the other thread: this is a dead horse that needs respite -- badly. But to answer the question posed: no, abortion should not be outlawed, for two reasons: 1) Realism: abortions are necessary at times. I don't like the idea of terminating a potential human being, but I don't like the idea of a baby having a baby even worse. How successful is a newborn with a 15 year old mother from the slums expected to be? If you can justify forcibly ruining several lives for the sake of your beliefs (of which almost 100% derive from your religion), I've lost faith in this society's capacity to use common sense. 2) Litigation's sake: we have to uphold the validity of Supreme Court decisions at all costs. Sure, we review/question them all the time, but rarely do we overturn them. To do this would be to undermine the very foundation upon which our justice system resides. We can't compromise the power of the Supreme Court without titanium proof of its necessity (which we don't have). 1) Two wrongs do not make a right. Not having access isn't what ruins someone's life, it's having underage sex that does. 2) Saying "Well, if we overturn a Supreme Court decision, we'll look stupid" doesn't really fly. If a mistake was made, it must be fixed, not swept under the rug and ignored. |
|
|
Jul 23 2006, 08:24 PM
Post
#70
|
|
dripping destruction Group: Staff Alumni Posts: 7,282 Joined: Jun 2004 Member No: 21,929 |
america is not the land of the moral high ground. it's the land of the free.
ergo, we should uphold the freedom to choose an abortion, rather than the morality of denying it. |
|
|
Jul 23 2006, 08:31 PM
Post
#71
|
|
Member Group: Member Posts: 27 Joined: Jul 2006 Member No: 442,882 |
One word.
Adopiton. Its better than killing a Human Being. I bet u if that baby could talk, It would just rather Get put in the adoption system, and then look on the bright side. when you get older you will see the Baby. so whats the point of kiiling it. |
|
|
Jul 23 2006, 08:37 PM
Post
#72
|
|
daughter of sin Group: Member Posts: 1,653 Joined: Mar 2006 Member No: 386,134 |
^ Um the fetus isn't a human being in the period when a woman can get an abortion. And it's not murder, because murder is killing a human being through the use/initiation of physical force. Seeing how it's just a potential human being, I don't see your argument.
|
|
|
Jul 23 2006, 08:43 PM
Post
#73
|
|
dripping destruction Group: Staff Alumni Posts: 7,282 Joined: Jun 2004 Member No: 21,929 |
banning abortions isn't really a life changing event for me, but it's more of the principle.
if you want to ban abortions, then sex ed should be taught in 6th grade, and condom machines avalible in all bathrooms middle school and onwards. okay, the second part maybe not so much. but you do know people that take virginity pledges are more likely to have unsafe sex thier first time? kids need to be educated beyond "don't do it till you're married". becuase that doesn't work. |
|
|
Jul 24 2006, 02:11 AM
Post
#74
|
|
out to life... Group: Member Posts: 216 Joined: Jul 2006 Member No: 434,862 |
2) Saying "Well, if we overturn a Supreme Court decision, we'll look stupid" doesn't really fly. If a mistake was made, it must be fixed, not swept under the rug and ignored. And I quote: QUOTE We can't compromise the power of the Supreme Court without titanium proof of its necessity (which we don't have). If this debate is continuing to drone on and drone on, it is because neither side can really prove the other one wrong. Yet, in 1973, a group of justices who were much more qualified than you and I to decide, through logistics, legality, and experience whether legalizing abortions was plausible or not, decided (7-2) for us that it is the right of the woman to terminate a pregnancy. Who are we to say that they were wrong? Imminent jurists like Harry Blackmun, William O. Douglas... My favorite kicker is that it was decided well into the term of one of the more established conservatives the presidency has ever seen. So, I'll reiterate one more time: unless the sun sits at high noon on our doubt, the Supreme Court's decision must always stand. |
|
|
*I Shot JFK* |
Jul 24 2006, 11:15 AM
Post
#75
|
Guest |
banning abortions isn't really a life changing event for me, but it's more of the principle. if you want to ban abortions, then sex ed should be taught in 6th grade, and condom machines avalible in all bathrooms middle school and onwards. okay, the second part maybe not so much. but you do know people that take virginity pledges are more likely to have unsafe sex thier first time? kids need to be educated beyond "don't do it till you're married". becuase that doesn't work. and furthermore, although admittedly i dont remember my source, 93% of virginity pledges are broken. |
|
|