Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Jewelz on December 1, 2011 at 10:30pm

Well thank you, but you may not want to roll those dice. Your genetic material appears to be desirable, so I would be obligated to bring your intellectually superior little heathens into the world. I'd do it for science.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Reggie on December 1, 2011 at 10:51pm

Normally the ladies do it for pity's sake, so science is a step up.  

Practice pick-up line: Our progeny could become the scientist that develops cancer cures. Should we go back to your place or mine to...you know...cure cancers?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Zach Winkler on December 2, 2011 at 5:58pm

You bring-up a great point. I am actually really confused on the topic of rape. It is not the child's fault that the mother was raped, but that is alot for a mom to deal with. Maybe they should be protected. That specific aspect is just a big "I don't know" for me. I seem to change my mind every other month on it. By my logic, you are exactly correct.

I find this funny because I would consider myself "mostly pro-life", as I consentrate more on the fetus's rights, rather than the mother's.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jewelz on December 3, 2011 at 10:28pm

I am actually really confused on the topic of rape... I would consider myself "mostly pro-life", as I consentrate more on the fetus's rights, rather than the mother's.

Of the following reasons for abortion (likely death of fetus/mother, ectopic pregnancy, severe deformity, rape, incest, and 'oopsie') I'm willing to bet the only situation in which you're staunchly anti-choice would be that of 'oopsie.' If you're confused or at least think it should be legal for the other situations then you are indeed mostly pro-choice, regardless of what you call yourself. I assure you the only reason you are "anti-choice in the case of oops" is residual religion and cultural indoctrination. You've been told over and over again by the religious right "don't have sex until you're ready to have children," "life begins at conception," and "abortion = murder." I'd love to help you rethink this position.

If you truly believe a sperm and an egg should have humans rights and protection from murder bestowed upon them at the moment they join, then women using most forms of birth control are no different than murderers. Also, you claim you condone abortion in cases such as severe deformity. Why do severely deformed fetuses have fewer rights than healthy ones? Would you allow the murder of a severely deformed newborn? Of course not. You're confused in some cases because a newborn person is not a fertilized egg, and a fertilized egg is not a person. On some level, you realize this.

I'd to suggest a read for you when you have time. It's long, but the best essay I've ever seen on the subject.

Abortion: Is it Possible to be Both "Pro-Life" and "Pro-Choice"? by Carl Sagan

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Zach Winkler on December 4, 2011 at 10:53pm

Wow now, no. I think it is rude to lower my opinion on abortion to my victimization of my culture and religious influences. I come to my opinions on my own accord and "oopsies" are problems that are not solved by murder in my opinion. They are solved by life-style changes and suffering to give that child the best life you can. I doubt that you would like it if I called your pro-choice opinions just a side-effect of this overly-liberal biases going on in the current young-adult generation (which I do not believe, but is just an example). And know that I am happy to hear that you would "love" to help me "rethink" my position, but with your initial statement, it kind-of hurts my feelings and makes me reluctant to take you seriously, but I will I guess.

Oh, you bring-up a great loop-hole in my logic. I do not support the killing of humans with birth control. You can kill half-humans (sperm and eggs), but once they are joined I view it as murder. So that is that, and with the severe deformity thing is one that I can not get around. Either I need to make an immoral exception for them or I need to allow it. I guess I should allow severely dis-formed humans to be born, I should not discriminate upon them just because of their predisposition. So that is that in my book.

I do not see how you can not see conception as the beginning of a human life (as a whole human life). The being conceived is genetically a human and should not be allowed to be killed just because of it's age. It is discrimination! (I will try to read your suggestion, thank-you.)

 

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jewelz on December 5, 2011 at 12:23am

I apologize if I came off as rude. That was not my intention. I was simply pointing out the contradiction in your opinion when it comes to your 'exceptions' for what you consider murder. Your response did clarify things, though I find it hard to believe you think a female should be forced to carry to term fetuses with deformities such as anecephaly. I'm also surprised you think birth control should be illegal.

These are not positions for which you will find much, if any, support among the skeptic community.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Zach Winkler on December 5, 2011 at 7:28pm

Something kind-of funny, but not so funny in you last response is that you brought-up Anecephaly. My older brother and his wife had to abort their first child because it suffered from that disorder. It was very hard for them to deal with, especially sens they too were pro-life. I agree that a human so deformed should not "have" to be punished with the process of natural death (or a horid forced life), but how am I to discriminate upon such a being when it did not choose it's deformity. And there is no way to verufy if it wants to live or not. It is very confusing.

And you are extremely correct on that last point.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by 3equ3cp1fsw0n on December 1, 2011 at 11:12pm

@ Zach - Why is it okay to murder in a war and not okay to do a merciful abortion?

p.s. Yeah Mo, I stole that from you lol. Hope you don't mind.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Zach Winkler on December 2, 2011 at 6:01pm

War (in the sense of what I think of as a "proper" war) is self-defense. I find that calling an abortion in the name of "oh, I do not want a kid" or "I don't have the money to raise it good" as not merciful, but selfish. That's all.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by 3equ3cp1fsw0n on December 2, 2011 at 6:42pm

War (in the sense of what I think of as a "proper" war) is self-defense. I find that calling an abortion in the name of "oh, I do not want a kid" or "I don't have the money to raise it good" as not merciful, but selfish. That's all.

@ Zach - I said a merciful abortion (not "Oh, I do not want a kid" or "I don't have the money to raise it good").

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Zach Winkler on December 3, 2011 at 9:19pm

Oh! I see, okay, sorry. Some people consider "merciful" as what I described, sorry for generalizing your statement in such a way. Well, what you consider merciful is probably the same exceptions that I would make for abortion as-well. The only difference is that you may identify as pro-choice while I identify as pro-life. Does that make sense?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sharon M on December 2, 2011 at 10:48am

I don't want to come off as vulgar but if you've ever ejaculated, then by your definition you just committed murder. Did you ever use condoms? Again, you're a murderer.

George Carlin puts it nicely if you're in the mood for a laugh: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvF1Q3UidWM

 

Why do pro-lifers draw the line at conception? I encourage all pro-lifers to please explain their reasoning being against abortion but being okay with masterbation and birth control use. I'm really curious to know how that can be justified.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 35
• 36
• 37
• 38
• 39
• …
• 59
• Next ›
• Page