Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next

Reply to topic
Texan Christian
First Post
PostPosted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 12:30 am  Abortion Reply with quote

Do y'all believe it is acceptable for a woman to have an abortion?

IMO:

when a woman says "I should decide what to do with my body" I'm like "well... first of all that baby isn't part of your body, it's someone else's body, so yeah..."

what're yalls views on this topic? post below!

Good day and God Bless Smile
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 51: Thu Jun 28, 2018 1:29 pm
Reply
Re: Abortion

Like this post
Bluethread wrote:
Doesn't the March of Dimes do research into stopping miscarriage?

I don't know.
Now what do you think about the 50% abortion rate? This figure kinda puts abortions in perspective a little bit don't you think?

Are you disturbed at all that your god (assuming he is our creator) is the biggest abortionist on the planet, by far? Or does he get a free pass? If so, I can see how judging others decision to not keep an unwanted fetus might make a person feel better while believing in such a god.

Quote:
Then are you arguing that the unborn don't matter at all, or is it just that the unborn only matter if they are wanted by the mother?

I am not arguing that the unborn don't matter.
In fact, I know some parents that want nothing more than to have their own baby at some point, but they cannot so far get past the 50% abortion rate of fetuses that we currently have.

Quote:
So, is it losing the forest for the trees, if I protest child abuse, because of all the "wanted" children who die of childhood illnesses?

I don't believe so, but feel free to convince me that it is if you have an argument.

What I said, and what I find to be missing the forest for the trees is to focus on unwanted fetuses while seemingly ignoring all the wanted fetuses that get aborted.

Where are all the people picketing their god for creating biological reproduction so poorly? Why are the gods not being judged for aborting so many fetuses by the religious, who can be so loud at times while judging those that abort a fetus that is not wanted?

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 52: Thu Jun 28, 2018 5:27 pm
Reply

Like this post
Clownboat wrote:

Bluethread wrote:
Doesn't the March of Dimes do research into stopping miscarriage?

I don't know.
Now what do you think about the 50% abortion rate? This figure kinda puts abortions in perspective a little bit don't you think?


Why did they come out with that statistic, if they weren't going to do anything about it. The perspective depends on what makes up that rate. Much of that is probably do to disease and disability on the part of the mother and/or child. One can make the same argument regarding any stage in life. In fact, the longer one lives the more likely it is that one will live longer. Resistance to disease and disability is lower at the beginning and end of life.

Quote:
Are you disturbed at all that your god (assuming he is our creator) is the biggest abortionist on the planet, by far? Or does he get a free pass? If so, I can see how judging others decision to not keep an unwanted fetus might make a person feel better while believing in such a god.


That is basically the question of why people die. It is disturbing that people die, but that doesn't make those deaths murder. Murder is the killing of another person without justification or valid excuse. A deity is a different life form and so is not subject to the same laws that apply to men. Also, the justification is that those that die in the womb would not survive outside the womb. That last is a justification that nearly everyone accepts. However, the taking of a life simply because the parent does not want to provide for it is very different thing.

Quote:
Quote:
Then are you arguing that the unborn don't matter at all, or is it just that the unborn only matter if they are wanted by the mother?

I am not arguing that the unborn don't matter.
In fact, I know some parents that want nothing more than to have their own baby at some point, but they cannot so far get past the 50% abortion rate of fetuses that we currently have.


So, you are saying that the unborn that are desired by the parent matter. How are they different from those that are not desired by the parent, apart from the parent's desire?

Quote:
Quote:
So, is it losing the forest for the trees, if I protest child abuse, because of all the "wanted" children who die of childhood illnesses?

I don't believe so, but feel free to convince me that it is if you have an argument.

What I said, and what I find to be missing the forest for the trees is to focus on unwanted fetuses while seemingly ignoring all the wanted fetuses that get aborted.


Well, the difference is the premeditated killing of humans by humans as compared to the unintentional death of humans due to disease and disability, in spite of human attempts to avoid those unintentional deaths. That is my point, is infanticide acceptable because of the high rate of infant death from disease and disability?

Quote:
Where are all the people picketing their god for creating biological reproduction so poorly? Why are the gods not being judged for aborting so many fetuses by the religious, who can be so loud at times while judging those that abort a fetus that is not wanted?


Many who lose children do to disease and disability do engage in such protests. However, the fact that a deity is a different life form, makes such protests of no more effect than the protests of sheep when a shepherd culls the herd.

So, here is a question for you. If a protester hits a pregant women who is going to get an abortion and as a result she has a miscarriage, should the protester be required to compensate her for the lose of a child?

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 53: Fri Jun 29, 2018 9:17 am
Reply

Like this post
Bluethread wrote:
Why did they come out with that statistic, if they weren't going to do anything about it.

I don't work for them. Unrealistic for you to expect me to know such things. Research is needed, and if you want to know, you should be the one to do it.

Quote:
The perspective depends on what makes up that rate. Much of that is probably do to disease and disability on the part of the mother and/or child.

Most are due to genetic problems. Now did the parents set up the system for such poor reproduction, or did a god? Your just blaming the victim Bluethread.

Quote:
One can make the same argument regarding any stage in life. In fact, the longer one lives the more likely it is that one will live longer. Resistance to disease and disability is lower at the beginning and end of life.

No comment at this time as I cannot figure out what this has to do with the fact that 50% of fetuses abort naturally.

Quote:
Are you disturbed at all that your god (assuming he is our creator) is the biggest abortionist on the planet, by far? Or does he get a free pass? If so, I can see how judging others decision to not keep an unwanted fetus might make a person feel better while believing in such a god.


Quote:
That is basically the question of why people die.

Not even close. We don't judge people for dying. What is see are people judging others for not keeping an unwanted fetus. They justify such judging because of their religious beliefs. However, according to their own religious beliefs, their god is the biggest cause of abortions by far. The process your god came up with aborts half of fertilized fetuses. Most of these fetuses are wanted, unlike the removal of an unwanted fetus.

Quote:
It is disturbing that people die, but that doesn't make those deaths murder. Murder is the killing of another person without justification or valid excuse.

Agreed. Nothing to say.

Quote:
A deity is a different life form and so is not subject to the same laws that apply to men.

Is this your attempt to just sweep all these abortions your god is responsible for under the rug? The lump under the rug is still plane to see I'm afraid.

Quote:
Also, the justification is that those that die in the womb would not survive outside the womb.

Why do the gods get a free pass here for creating a process that is so abysmal? Apparently you are in fact OK with 50% of abortions when women choose to abort because half of them would not survive outside the womb anyway. Your half way to being pro choice!

Quote:
However, the taking of a life simply because the parent does not want to provide for it is very different thing.

And yet you give a free pass to your god and its process that robs countless wanted fetuses from countless parents trying desperately to conceive. You're literally judging a women for removing a fetus she does not want conceived, yet ignoring all the wanted fetuses that your god aborts because of its failed form of reproduction.
You must see this right?

Quote:
I am not arguing that the unborn don't matter.
In fact, I know some parents that want nothing more than to have their own baby at some point, but they cannot so far get past the 50% abortion rate of fetuses that we currently have.


Quote:
So, you are saying that the unborn that are desired by the parent matter.
Yes, desired fetuses matter greatly to the parents. Surely you agree?
For some reason though, your focus is on the unwanted fetuses. This is where I feel you are missing the forest for the trees.
Do YOU want these unwanted fetuses? If you would be OK with passing a law to not allow abortions, would you desire these unwanted fetuses yourself?

Quote:
How are they different from those that are not desired by the parent, apart from the parent's desire?

They are different because they are desired. A desired fetus that makes it to birth will be better cared for than an unwanted fetus that just so happens to survive the 50% abortion rate set up by the gods.
You answered the question yourself and keep in mind that 50% of unwanted fetuses will abort naturally thanks to the gods.

So the gods abort 50% of unwanted fetuses (as well as wanted), but when a women does it, it is wrong? Do I have this right?

Quote:
Well, the difference is the premeditated killing of humans by humans as compared to the unintentional death of humans due to disease and disability, in spite of human attempts to avoid those unintentional deaths.

It is not fair to call a fetus a human when it only has a 50% chance of making it to the human 'person' state.
You're also giving your god concept a free pass by blaming the 50% abortion rate it created on disease and disabilities. So generous you are when it comes to the gods.

Quote:
That is my point, is infanticide acceptable because of the high rate of infant death from disease and disability?

I don't think anyone should kill infants, nor grade schoolers, nor kids in elementary school, etc, but lets focus on what actually gets aborted shall we? No one, including your god aborts infants, so we can leave that out I would think.

Quote:
Many who lose children do to disease and disability do engage in such protests. However, the fact that a deity is a different life form, makes such protests of no more effect than the protests of sheep when a shepherd culls the herd.

I disagree. As you surely agree with me on, all the gods are false (best we can tell), except for one exception in your case. Therefore to point out the poor behavior of the gods may help some to realize that their preferred god is no different then the other gods that are already known to be false.

Quote:
So, here is a question for you. If a protester hits a pregant women who is going to get an abortion and as a result she has a miscarriage, should the protester be required to compensate her for the lose of a child?

Of course. I am against people assaulting other people. Not to mention the stress of aborting due to being beaten compared to the medical process of aborting a fetus.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 54: Sat Jun 30, 2018 7:21 pm
Reply

Like this post
[Replying to post 53 by Clownboat]

Quote:
Quote:
Are you disturbed at all that your god (assuming he is our creator) is the biggest abortionist on the planet, by far? Or does he get a free pass? If so, I can see how judging others decision to not keep an unwanted fetus might make a person feel better while believing in such a god.


Quote:
That is basically the question of why people die.

Not even close. We don't judge people for dying. What is see are people judging others for not keeping an unwanted fetus. They justify such judging because of their religious beliefs. However, according to their own religious beliefs, their god is the biggest cause of abortions by far. The process your god came up with aborts half of fertilized fetuses. Most of these fetuses are wanted, unlike the removal of an unwanted fetus.


We don't judge people for being aborted either. However, we do judge people for killing. Is it hypocritical for theists to judge people for killing other people, just because a deity sets up an ecosystem in which all people die? What requires a deity to allow anyone to live?

Quote:
Quote:
It is disturbing that people die, but that doesn't make those deaths murder. Murder is the killing of another person without justification or valid excuse.

Agreed. Nothing to say.

Quote:
A deity is a different life form and so is not subject to the same laws that apply to men.

Is this your attempt to just sweep all these abortions your god is responsible for under the rug? The lump under the rug is still plane to see I'm afraid.


No, the two statements go together. I am just pointing out that the activities of one life form do not excuse the activities of another life form. Humans kill livestock with impunity, but they do not permit the livestock to kill each other.

Quote:
Quote:
Also, the justification is that those that die in the womb would not survive outside the womb.

Why do the gods get a free pass here for creating a process that is so abysmal? Apparently you are in fact OK with 50% of abortions when women choose to abort because half of them would not survive outside the womb anyway. Your half way to being pro choice!


Because deities are not human. Why is this so hard to understand? No, I am not in favor of 50% of abortions. I am opposed to those abortions performed by humans for which there is no medical justification. This is not an uncommon view. It is just not discussed much, because the argument tends to be for abortion on demand, not abortion for medical reasons.

Quote:
Quote:
However, the taking of a life simply because the parent does not want to provide for it is very different thing.

And yet you give a free pass to your god and its process that robs countless wanted fetuses from countless parents trying desperately to conceive. You're literally judging a women for removing a fetus she does not want conceived, yet ignoring all the wanted fetuses that your god aborts because of its failed form of reproduction.
You must see this right?


How does one remove a fetus one does not want to conceive. It isn't conceived yet. If one does not want a fetus, one should make sure one does not conceive. All I am asking that the same standards be applied to all human life after conception. If a deity makes it so that a human dies, what is one to do? If a human makes it so another human does dies, what is one to do then? Are these really the same thing?

Quote:
Quote:
So, you are saying that the unborn that are desired by the parent matter.
Yes, desired fetuses matter greatly to the parents. Surely you agree?
For some reason though, your focus is on the unwanted fetuses. This is where I feel you are missing the forest for the trees.
Do YOU want these unwanted fetuses? If you would be OK with passing a law to not allow abortions, would you desire these unwanted fetuses yourself?

Quote:
How are they different from those that are not desired by the parent, apart from the parent's desire?

They are different because they are desired. A desired fetus that makes it to birth will be better cared for than an unwanted fetus that just so happens to survive the 50% abortion rate set up by the gods.
You answered the question yourself and keep in mind that 50% of unwanted fetuses will abort naturally thanks to the gods.

So the gods abort 50% of unwanted fetuses (as well as wanted), but when a women does it, it is wrong? Do I have this right?


You are breaking up my statements so that you can throw in different arguments to confuse the issue. Please, keep my statements in context. The point is that women, or men for that matter, are not deities. Also, it is not necessary for there to be deities for the argument to apply. At it's root your argument is that since 50% of fertilized eggs do not come to term naturally, it is acceptable for humans to destroy the unborn simply because they do not want to be responsible for having conceived them. Whether theist or atheist, wanted or unwanted, fratricide for convenience is generally unacceptable.

Quote:
Quote:
Well, the difference is the premeditated killing of humans by humans as compared to the unintentional death of humans due to disease and disability, in spite of human attempts to avoid those unintentional deaths.

It is not fair to call a fetus a human when it only has a 50% chance of making it to the human 'person' state.
You're also giving your god concept a free pass by blaming the 50% abortion rate it created on disease and disabilities. So generous you are when it comes to the gods.


What do you mean by "the human 'person' state"? How does one determine what a 'person' is? If we deem some thing to not be a 'person', then are we permitted to kill it for our convenience?

Quote:
Quote:
That is my point, is infanticide acceptable because of the high rate of infant death from disease and disability?

I don't think anyone should kill infants, nor grade schoolers, nor kids in elementary school, etc, but lets focus on what actually gets aborted shall we? No one, including your god aborts infants, so we can leave that out I would think.


Wait, you wish to consider every death prior to birth as the same, yet similar deaths after birth are somehow different. How so?

Quote:
Quote:
Many who lose children do to disease and disability do engage in such protests. However, the fact that a deity is a different life form, makes such protests of no more effect than the protests of sheep when a shepherd culls the herd.

I disagree. As you surely agree with me on, all the gods are false (best we can tell), except for one exception in your case. Therefore to point out the poor behavior of the gods may help some to realize that their preferred god is no different then the other gods that are already known to be false.


I made no such qualification. Many may protest and wail as part of the grieving process, but that does not obligate a deity, any deity, any more that the bleating of a ewe obligates the shepherd.

Quote:
Quote:
So, here is a question for you. If a protester hits a pregant women who is going to get an abortion and as a result she has a miscarriage, should the protester be required to compensate her for the lose of a child?

Of course. I am against people assaulting other people. Not to mention the stress of aborting due to being beaten compared to the medical process of aborting a fetus.


I did not ask if she should be compensated for personal injury, pain and suffering. I asked if she should be compensated for the lose of a child.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 55: Tue Jul 03, 2018 10:29 am
Reply

Like this post
Quote:
We don't judge people for being aborted either.

What does it even mean to abort a person?

Quote:
However, we do judge people for killing.

What is going on? Are we no longer talking about abortion?

Quote:
Is it hypocritical for theists to judge people for killing other people, just because a deity sets up an ecosystem in which all people die?

This is phrased odd, but I believe 'no' is my answer.
What I find hypocritical is religious people railing against a women that decided to not keep an unwanted fetus that had a 50% chance to abort naturally, and then go on to seemingly ignore how their god concept created a procedure that aborts 1/2 of fetuses. Most of which are wanted.

Quote:
What requires a deity to allow anyone to live?

No idea. Are there any real gods in the first place? Perhaps there are god laws enforced by the god police?
It doesn't seem fair to ask me unknowable questions about unknown entities that may not even exist.

Quote:
Why do the gods get a free pass here for creating a process that is so abysmal? Apparently you are in fact OK with 50% of abortions when women choose to abort because half of them would not survive outside the womb anyway. Your half way to being pro choice!


Quote:
Because deities are not human.

Apparently, if they exist, they are terrible leaders too. As you know, a good leader leads by example.

Quote:
Why is this so hard to understand?
It's not, however, if they exist, they lead by a terrible example when it comes to aborting fetuses.

Quote:
No, I am not in favor of 50% of abortions. I am opposed to those abortions performed by humans for which there is no medical justification. This is not an uncommon view. It is just not discussed much, because the argument tends to be for abortion on demand, not abortion for medical reasons.

Common ground! This is good.
I'm also not in favor of abortions. What my being in favor of or not in favor of has to do with whether a women is allowed to choose to carry a fetus to term or not is something I don't understand.

What if a person is not in favor of religions? Should they seek to legislate your ability to choose to be religious or not?

Quote:
How does one remove a fetus one does not want to conceive.
In the scenario you present, there is no fetus available for removal, so I don't understand your question.

Quote:
If one does not want a fetus, one should make sure one does not conceive.

Agreed, but you and I both know that this is not always what happens on our planet. So our dictating what one should do is irrelevant don't you think? Who are you and I anyways to dictate to others what they can or can't do with their bodies?

Quote:
All I am asking that the same standards be applied to all human life after conception. If a deity makes it so that a human dies, what is one to do? If a human makes it so another human does dies, what is one to do then? Are these really the same thing?

If there are deities guiding this world, then we should probably heed their examples wouldn't you think?
The fact that 50% of fetuses abort naturally evidences the lack of there being gods though don't you think? At least gods that could be argued about caring about us or wanting to have a relationship with us.

Quote:
You are breaking up my statements so that you can throw in different arguments to confuse the issue. Please, keep my statements in context. The point is that women, or men for that matter, are not deities. Also, it is not necessary for there to be deities for the argument to apply. At it's root your argument is that since 50% of fertilized eggs do not come to term naturally, it is acceptable for humans to destroy the unborn simply because they do not want to be responsible for having conceived them.

You are mistaken about my argument. First thing you must understand is that I am not a fan of abortions. I have a hard time finding them as acceptable. However, what I find less acceptable is seeing humans dictate to other humans what they can or can't do with their own bodies. When it comes to abortion, I see the religious doing this the loudest while noting that their god concept is responsible for way, way more abortions and we don't hear a peep from them about that.

Quote:
What do you mean by "the human 'person' state"?

Thank you for asking for clarification. What I mean in this case is for 'person state' to mean having been born.

Quote:
How does one determine what a 'person' is?

I don't know, but I clarified what I meant by it.

Quote:
If we deem some thing to not be a 'person', then are we permitted to kill it for our convenience?

No, and no one here has made such an argument.

Quote:
Wait, you wish to consider every death prior to birth as the same, yet similar deaths after birth are somehow different. How so?

Your doing it again! You're ignoring, to use your words, all the deaths your god concept is responsible for.
To answer your question. Yes, I consider a fetus to have less value than a 1 year old for example. You do as well in fact.

Quote:
I made no such qualification. Many may protest and wail as part of the grieving process, but that does not obligate a deity, any deity, any more that the bleating of a ewe obligates the shepherd.

Sheep are not intelligent like humans are. Therefore a shepherd would have no reason to lead by example. Gods, if they exist and rule over intelligent humans would lead by example if they were also intelligent. My opinion of course as there could exist nefarious gods that see us more as play things than things to have a relationship with.

Quote:
I did not ask if she should be compensated for personal injury, pain and suffering. I asked if she should be compensated for the lose of a child.

Depends, is the women in question asking for compensation for the loss of the fetus? If so, you would probably need to prove that she was not going to have a change of heart about getting an abortion before giving the person who assaulted her a free pass. Either way though, the assault of course would need to be addressed.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 56: Tue Jul 03, 2018 2:26 pm
Reply

Like this post
Quote:
[quote="Clownboat"]
Quote:
We don't judge people for being aborted either.

What does it even mean to abort a person?


The termination of a pregnancy resulting in the death of a human being.

Quote:
Quote:
However, we do judge people for killing.

What is going on? Are we no longer talking about abortion?


It is my understanding that abortion involves the killing of a human being.

Quote:
Quote:
Is it hypocritical for theists to judge people for killing other people, just because a deity sets up an ecosystem in which all people die?

This is phrased odd, but I believe 'no' is my answer.
What I find hypocritical is religious people railing against a women that decided to not keep an unwanted fetus that had a 50% chance to abort naturally, and then go on to seemingly ignore how their god concept created a procedure that aborts 1/2 of fetuses. Most of which are wanted.


Ok, argue that with those people. I am not ignoring that, I am dealing with it directly. Does the fact that a deity has established a system that results in 50% of human beings dying justify the killing of human beings by human beings?

Quote:
Quote:
What requires a deity to allow anyone to live?

No idea. Are there any real gods in the first place? Perhaps there are god laws enforced by the god police?
It doesn't seem fair to ask me unknowable questions about unknown entities that may not even exist.


Your the one who is asking me to ignore that actions of humans based on the presumed actions of deities. Are you dropping that argument now?

Quote:
Quote:
Why do the gods get a free pass here for creating a process that is so abysmal? Apparently you are in fact OK with 50% of abortions when women choose to abort because half of them would not survive outside the womb anyway. Your half way to being pro choice!


Quote:
Because deities are not human.

Apparently, if they exist, they are terrible leaders too. As you know, a good leader leads by example.


Hold it. You just refused to answer the previous question, because you say that deities do not exist. Which is it, are we to presume that deities exist or that they do not exist? Is this your argument that requires deities to allow people to live, that they must be "good leaders"?

Quote:
Quote:
Why is this so hard to understand?
It's not, however, if they exist, they lead by a terrible example when it comes to aborting fetuses.


Does that justify humans killing humans?

Quote:
Quote:
No, I am not in favor of 50% of abortions. I am opposed to those abortions performed by humans for which there is no medical justification. This is not an uncommon view. It is just not discussed much, because the argument tends to be for abortion on demand, not abortion for medical reasons.

Common ground! This is good.
I'm also not in favor of abortions. What my being in favor of or not in favor of has to do with whether a women is allowed to choose to carry a fetus to term or not is something I don't understand.

What if a person is not in favor of religions? Should they seek to legislate your ability to choose to be religious or not?


They legislate my ability to take another human life, regardless of my philosophical views. That is what we are talking about here, the right to terminate a human life.

Quote:
Quote:
How does one remove a fetus one does not want to conceive.
In the scenario you present, there is no fetus available for removal, so I don't understand your question.


It is your scenario,. You said, "You're literally judging a women for removing a fetus she does not want conceived". I am not doing that, because I do not believe that she can remove a fetus until she has conceived it.

Quote:
Quote:
If one does not want a fetus, one should make sure one does not conceive.

Agreed, but you and I both know that this is not always what happens on our planet. So our dictating what one should do is irrelevant don't you think? Who are you and I anyways to dictate to others what they can or can't do with their bodies?


We do it all of the time. However, even if I were to grant that people should be able to do whatever they want with their own bodies, that does not mean that they are not responsible for the consequences.

Quote:
Quote:
All I am asking that the same standards be applied to all human life after conception. If a deity makes it so that a human dies, what is one to do? If a human makes it so another human does dies, what is one to do then? Are these really the same thing?

If there are deities guiding this world, then we should probably heed their examples wouldn't you think?
The fact that 50% of fetuses abort naturally evidences the lack of there being gods though don't you think? At least gods that could be argued about caring about us or wanting to have a relationship with us.


No, they are different life forms. We expect dogs to emulate some of our behaviors, but we do not think that they should do everything we do. Regarding your conclusions about deities, neither of them are conclusive, there are a lot of factors involved in those judgements. However, one does not have to believe in deities to oppose humans killing other humans for convenience.

Quote:
Quote:
You are breaking up my statements so that you can throw in different arguments to confuse the issue. Please, keep my statements in context. The point is that women, or men for that matter, are not deities. Also, it is not necessary for there to be deities for the argument to apply. At it's root your argument is that since 50% of fertilized eggs do not come to term naturally, it is acceptable for humans to destroy the unborn simply because they do not want to be responsible for having conceived them.

You are mistaken about my argument. First thing you must understand is that I am not a fan of abortions. I have a hard time finding them as acceptable. However, what I find less acceptable is seeing humans dictate to other humans what they can or can't do with their own bodies. When it comes to abortion, I see the religious doing this the loudest while noting that their god concept is responsible for way, way more abortions and we don't hear a peep from them about that.


Well, as I stated, it is not necessary for there to be deities for the argument to apply. We regulate what people can do with their bodies all of the time, especially when it involves the life of another human being.

Quote:
Quote:
What do you mean by "the human 'person' state"?

Thank you for asking for clarification. What I mean in this case is for 'person state' to mean having been born.

Quote:
How does one determine what a 'person' is?

I don't know, but I clarified what I meant by it.

Quote:
If we deem some thing to not be a 'person', then are we permitted to kill it for our convenience?

No, and no one here has made such an argument.

Quote:
Wait, you wish to consider every death prior to birth as the same, yet similar deaths after birth are somehow different. How so?

Your doing it again! You're ignoring, to use your words, all the deaths your god concept is responsible for.
To answer your question. Yes, I consider a fetus to have less value than a 1 year old for example. You do as well in fact.


No, I am addressing the issue that you wish to ignore, that is the killing of humans by humans. I have repeatedly addressed the issue of deities in multiple ways. They are not human, humans kill other life forms with impunity, and deities are not necessary for one to argue that humans should not kill humans simply because they wish to be irresponsible in what they do with their bodies.

Quote:
Quote:
I made no such qualification. Many may protest and wail as part of the grieving process, but that does not obligate a deity, any deity, any more that the bleating of a ewe obligates the shepherd.

Sheep are not intelligent like humans are. Therefore a shepherd would have no reason to lead by example. Gods, if they exist and rule over intelligent humans would lead by example if they were also intelligent. My opinion of course as there could exist nefarious gods that see us more as play things than things to have a relationship with.


Humans are not deities either and how does any of this excuse humans who killing other humans, because they do not wish to be responsible in what they do with their bodies.

Quote:
Quote:
I did not ask if she should be compensated for personal injury, pain and suffering. I asked if she should be compensated for the lose of a child.

Depends, is the women in question asking for compensation for the loss of the fetus? If so, you would probably need to prove that she was not going to have a change of heart about getting an abortion before giving the person who assaulted her a free pass. Either way though, the assault of course would need to be addressed.


How would one prove that she was not going to have a change of heart?

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 57: Thu Jul 05, 2018 10:46 am
Reply

Like this post
Quote:
What does it even mean to abort a person?


Quote:
The termination of a pregnancy resulting in the death of a human being.

I was afraid you might be making an emotional argument.
A terminated fetus does not qualify as a human being for not yet having superior mental development, power of articulate speech, or an upright stance. If it survives the 50% abortion rate set up by the gods (as many presume), and it is not removed by the mother, then it would likely reach the human being qualifier.
Fetuses are aborted. To say human beings are, serves only to muddy the waters and appeal to emotion.

Quote:
It is my understanding that abortion involves the killing of a human being.
Then in this context, where you are insisting on calling it the killing of a human being, then no, we do not judge people for such a thing as you should know, abortions (the removal of a fetus, not a human being) are legal.

To clarify, if any of us are to actually kill a human being, we have laws in place for that and people are then judged.

Quote:
Does the fact that a deity has established a system that results in 50% of human beings dying justify the killing of human beings by human beings?

First of all, the fact that 50% of pregnancies abort, shows to me at least that no caring deities were involved.
To answer your question, only in rare circumstances is it justified to kill another human being and a 50% natural abortion rate has nothing to do with this.

Quote:
Hold it. You just refused to answer the previous question, because you say that deities do not exist.

Let's cut and paste my words:
"Why do the gods get a free pass here for creating a process that is so abysmal?"
"Apparently, if they exist, they are terrible leaders too."

Quote:
Which is it, are we to presume that deities exist or that they do not exist?
Presume what you wish. Either natural evolution or the gods (or others if you wish to posit) came up with a biological process that aborts 50% of conceptions.

Quote:
Is this your argument that requires deities to allow people to live, that they must be "good leaders"?

Please stay on topic. We are talking about abortions here. All people die, so please stop asking about deities allowing people to live.

Quote:
Does that justify humans killing humans?

No, killing humans is rarely justified. Once again though, we are talking about abortions here. You for some reason are unable to stay focused and instead are talking about a different topic, humans killing humans. Are you deliberately trying to obfuscate?

Quote:
They legislate my ability to take another human life, regardless of my philosophical views. That is what we are talking about here, the right to terminate a human life.

Only in rare circumstances will you be justified in terminating a human life. You are correct, we have laws against murder. Please try to stay focused as you are making this discussion difficult.

Quote:
It is your scenario,. You said, "You're literally judging a women for removing a fetus she does not want conceived".

Obviously, I was talking about removing an unwanted fetus. My mistake for having typed 'conceived' here as that is illogical and not what I meant.

Quote:
However, even if I were to grant that people should be able to do whatever they want with their own bodies, that does not mean that they are not responsible for the consequences.

Correct. Any women that chooses to not attempt to try to carry a fetus will be responsible for any consequences, if there are any.

Quote:
No, they are different life forms.

How you can pretend to know this information? What if the gods are nothing other than advanced humans traveling back in time? What if there are no gods? If either of these scenarios are true, your claim above is false.
Your scapegoat also does not address how we could even begin to argue for gods that care about having a relationship with us.

Quote:
We expect dogs to emulate some of our behaviors, but we do not think that they should do everything we do. Regarding your conclusions about deities, neither of them are conclusive, there are a lot of factors involved in those judgements. However, one does not have to believe in deities to oppose humans killing other humans for convenience.

Thanks for helping to put this into perspective!
Imagine this dog you bring up. Pretend it wants nothing more than to have some puppies. Would you, if it was in your power, create a system where 50% of puppies abort naturally? Would that seem logical to you?

Quote:
Well, as I stated, it is not necessary for there to be deities for the argument to apply. We regulate what people can do with their bodies all of the time, especially when it involves the life of another human being.

Yes, we regulate what one human can do to another being that possess superior mental development, power of articulate speech, and upright stance. In other words, a human being.

We are talking about abortion here. We do not abort human beings. I can only assume you having nothing but an appeal to emotion by your continued obfuscation. This is telling.

Quote:
No, I am addressing the issue that you wish to ignore, that is the killing of humans by humans.

I'm with you on this and it does not need to be addressed again.
I am against humans killing other humans, same as you (with exceptions of course).

Quote:
I have repeatedly addressed the issue of deities in multiple ways.

What you failed to address was how your justification seems to rule out caring gods that want to have a relationship with us humans, or how they are terrible examples if they do exist.

<Snipped for once again being about killing other humans>
Here we are talking about abortion:
Abortion is the ending of pregnancy by removing an embryo or fetus before it can survive outside the uterus.

<Snipped again for once again being about killing other humans>
Here we are talking about abortion:
Abortion is the ending of pregnancy by removing an embryo or fetus before it can survive outside the uterus.

Neither a fetus nor an embryo has the value that a human being has. Therefore, you can stop talking about humans murdering other humans.

Quote:
How would one prove that she was not going to have a change of heart?

A jury would have to decide. Either way, I urge you to not go around committing violent assault on women who may be about to abort a fetus.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 58: Thu Jul 05, 2018 1:28 pm
Reply

Like this post
Clownboat wrote:

I was afraid you might be making an emotional argument.
A terminated fetus does not qualify as a human being for not yet having superior mental development, power of articulate speech, or an upright stance. If it survives the 50% abortion rate set up by the gods (as many presume), and it is not removed by the mother, then it would likely reach the human being qualifier.
Fetuses are aborted. To say human beings are, serves only to muddy the waters and appeal to emotion.


I'm sorry but this is one of the worst set of criteria I've heard for defining a human being. Everything you said would mean that babies aren't human beings either. Try again, and maybe look up some or your sides definitions for human beings. They're all sorely lacking, but they're better than yours.

Goto top, bottom
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 59: Thu Jul 05, 2018 3:08 pm
Reply
Re: Abortion

Like this post
Texan Christian wrote:

Do y'all believe it is acceptable for a woman to have an abortion?


Acceptable, yes. Desirable, no.

In my opinion the time when zero abortions happen worldwide is long distant into the future. This time is to be devoutly to be desired, but it is not now, and legal constraints on women and girls to force conformity to someone else's conception of morality will not make it happen sooner. The only way this controversy can be rightly won is when all pregnant women and girls are persuaded that abortion is the worst possible option available to them. And that means that their other choices, to have and keep their child, or to have and give up their child for adoption, must be made more attractive.

In other words, we need to win the moral argument, not the political, legislative one. If we can do that, (and we should be able to, given the arguments pro and con work out decisively against killing the unborn) the politics become irrelevant, anyway, because abortions will not even be wanted. If we try to specify what someone else's morality should be, on the other hand, using the law, we are in for a long, bitter, divisive, unproductive struggle that will serve only to prolong women's suffering and the deaths of babes.

Best wishes, 2RM.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 60: Thu Jul 05, 2018 4:55 pm
Reply

Like this post
Clownboat wrote:

Quote:
What does it even mean to abort a person?


Quote:
The termination of a pregnancy resulting in the death of a human being.

I was afraid you might be making an emotional argument.
A terminated fetus does not qualify as a human being for not yet having superior mental development, power of articulate speech, or an upright stance. If it survives the 50% abortion rate set up by the gods (as many presume), and it is not removed by the mother, then it would likely reach the human being qualifier.
Fetuses are aborted. To say human beings are, serves only to muddy the waters and appeal to emotion.


So, are you arguing that all people with inferior mental development, do not have the power of articulate speech and can not stand upright are not human? Well, that would mean that bed ridden mutes with down's syndrome are not human. Is that really your argument?

Quote:
Quote:
It is my understanding that abortion involves the killing of a human being.
Then in this context, where you are insisting on calling it the killing of a human being, then no, we do not judge people for such a thing as you should know, abortions (the removal of a fetus, not a human being) are legal.

To clarify, if any of us are to actually kill a human being, we have laws in place for that and people are then judged.


So, you are making the legal argument. Do you believe that all laws are right? What we do all of the time is hold people responsible for what they do with their bodies. It is common to justify the killing of humans by first dehumanizing them, as with the debilitated, mentally inferior and disabled, as you have done with your definition of what is not human.

Quote:

Quote:
Does the fact that a deity has established a system that results in 50% of human beings dying justify the killing of human beings by human beings?

First of all, the fact that 50% of pregnancies abort, shows to me at least that no caring deities were involved.
To answer your question, only in rare circumstances is it justified to kill another human being and a 50% natural abortion rate has nothing to do with this.


OK, so let's leave deities out of this. Is it acceptable to kill mute down syndrome cancer patients for convenience, because 50% will die anyway?

Quote:
Quote:
Hold it. You just refused to answer the previous question, because you say that deities do not exist.

Let's cut and paste my words:
"Why do the gods get a free pass here for creating a process that is so abysmal?"
"Apparently, if they exist, they are terrible leaders too."

Let's cut and past what you said just before that.
"It doesn't seem fair to ask me unknowable questions about unknown entities that may not even exist."

If it isn't fair to ask you unknowable questions about unknown entities that may not even exist, why is it fair for you to ask me about them? All of the things I have said so far about deities are in response to your statements regarding deities. If you don't wish to discuss deities, stop discussing them.

Quote:
Quote:
Which is it, are we to presume that deities exist or that they do not exist?
Presume what you wish. Either natural evolution or the gods (or others if you wish to posit) came up with a biological process that aborts 50% of conceptions.


You're the one that introduce deities into this. So, let's just look at the assertion that it is acceptable to kill a human life form that is mute, non-ambulatory, and of inferior intellect, if 50% die of similar life forms die natural causes. Do you think that it was appropriate for a mother to engage in infanticide in Germany and India in the late 19th century, because only 50% of children survived to the age of 5?

Quote:
Quote:
Is this your argument that requires deities to allow people to live, that they must be "good leaders"?

Please stay on topic. We are talking about abortions here. All people die, so please stop asking about deities allowing people to live.


You are the one who is making arguments about deities. I am just attempting to address your justification for killing the unborn. If you are willing to focus on that and not muck this up with discussions about the moral obligations of deities, that is fine with me.

Quote:
Quote:
Does that justify humans killing humans?

No, killing humans is rarely justified. Once again though, we are talking about abortions here. You for some reason are unable to stay focused and instead are talking about a different topic, humans killing humans. Are you deliberately trying to obfuscate?


No, I am deliberately trying to focus on the issue. If the unborn are not human, what are they?

Quote:
Quote:
They legislate my ability to take another human life, regardless of my philosophical views. That is what we are talking about here, the right to terminate a human life.

Only in rare circumstances will you be justified in terminating a human life. You are correct, we have laws against murder. Please try to stay focused as you are making this discussion difficult.


I am sorry you find this discussion difficult, but if we focus on the nature of human life and not dogma regarding what constitutes human life. it might be easier.

Quote:
Quote:
However, even if I were to grant that people should be able to do whatever they want with their own bodies, that does not mean that they are not responsible for the consequences.

Correct. Any women that chooses to not attempt to try to carry a fetus will be responsible for any consequences, if there are any.


OK, so let's look at what those consequences should be, without just saying there are none, based on the someone should be permitted to do what they want with their own body principle.

Quote:
Quote:
No, they are different life forms.

How you can pretend to know this information? What if the gods are nothing other than advanced humans traveling back in time? What if there are no gods? If either of these scenarios are true, your claim above is false.
Your scapegoat also does not address how we could even begin to argue for gods that care about having a relationship with us.


Well, if one believes that deities are human that might be something you could discuss with them. However, I am not one of them.

Quote:
Quote:
We expect dogs to emulate some of our behaviors, but we do not think that they should do everything we do. Regarding your conclusions about deities, neither of them are conclusive, there are a lot of factors involved in those judgements. However, one does not have to believe in deities to oppose humans killing other humans for convenience.

Thanks for helping to put this into perspective!
Imagine this dog you bring up. Pretend it wants nothing more than to have some puppies. Would you, if it was in your power, create a system where 50% of puppies abort naturally? Would that seem logical to you?


I don't know, there are a lot of factors involved there. There are humans systems where 50% of puppies die. What can dogs do about that? Is it therefore acceptable for dogs to kill their own puppies, just because humans set up systems that kill their puppies?

Quote:
Quote:
Well, as I stated, it is not necessary for there to be deities for the argument to apply. We regulate what people can do with their bodies all of the time, especially when it involves the life of another human being.

Yes, we regulate what one human can do to another being that possess superior mental development, power of articulate speech, and upright stance. In other words, a human being.

We are talking about abortion here. We do not abort human beings. I can only assume you having nothing but an appeal to emotion by your continued obfuscation. This is telling.

No, it is an appeal to biological consistency. Is the bed ridden, mute, down syndrome child not human?

Quote:
No, I am addressing the issue that you wish to ignore, that is the killing of humans by humans.

I'm with you on this and it does not need to be addressed again.
I am against humans killing other humans, same as you (with exceptions of course).


No, it is an appeal to biological consistency. Is the bed ridden, mute, down syndrome child not human?

Quote:
Quote:
I have repeatedly addressed the issue of deities in multiple ways.

What you failed to address was how your justification seems to rule out caring gods that want to have a relationship with us humans, or how they are terrible examples if they do exist.

<Snipped for once again being about killing other humans>
Here we are talking about abortion:
Abortion is the ending of pregnancy by removing an embryo or fetus before it can survive outside the uterus.

<Snipped again for once again being about killing other humans>
Here we are talking about abortion:
Abortion is the ending of pregnancy by removing an embryo or fetus before it can survive outside the uterus.

Neither a fetus nor an embryo has the value that a human being has. Therefore, you can stop talking about humans murdering other humans.


I say I have addressed the issue of deities and you say we can stop talking about humans killing other humans. What does one have to do with the other? Regarding the previous things you quoted, you have not established that HUMAN embryos and fetuses are not human, but have merely stated it as so. We are talking about human embryos and fetuses, and not dog, cat or lizard embryos, right?

Quote:
Quote:
How would one prove that she was not going to have a change of heart?

A jury would have to decide. Either way, I urge you to not go around committing violent assault on women who may be about to abort a fetus.


How would a jury make such a decision? On what would they base such a decision? After all, you say it is just an embryo or a fetus and it is not human.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Display posts from previous:   

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next

Jump to:  
Facebook
Tweet

 




On The Web | Ecodia | Hymn Lyrics Apps
Facebook | Twitter

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.   Produced by Ecodia.

Igloo   |  Lo-Fi Version