Pro-choice or Pro-life? Debate which position seems to be most morally correct. - Page 7

11-27-2006, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by foundit66

It's an inconvenient comparison for you.
It demonstrates PRECISELY what I said earlier. Being "human" is not all that is involved.
But of course, you rushed to judgment without having a clue as to what I was really talking about.

I knew damn well what you were talking about. The comparison is still lame.

I see.
So we could actually "evict" the "baby", and since it "needs nothing", it could survive by just giving it the food and water?

WTF are you talking about ? This makes ZERO sense. Im talking about UNBORN children here. Not some sick experiment.

So a baby born at 32 weeks does not need anything extra in your opinion?

Why are we including children that have already been born? One last time, we are talking about UNBORN children, try to keep up.

Terry lived her life. For reason beyond her control, it was ended shortly. In no way would keeping her alive bring back her life. These children (like Terry) should have a shot to live. Until reasons beyond (or with in) there control bring them to demise (like Terry). Like I said, terrible comparison.

intangible child · 11-29-2006, 03:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jefferson

A newborn baby cannot sustain life outside the womb without being taken care of.

Therefore, your "it's not a baby" is pure stupidity.

Then you will support her baby? And at what cost to her, and the non acceptance of the child, because it is not yours? You will accept her if you get laid and the child does not get in the way?

I've seen it before, it's not funny, Think about it!

CHILD ABUSE!

But if it's repulsian child abuse, it's good? We can alway's put it on the welfare system?

11-30-2006, 06:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by intangible child

Then you will support her baby? And at what cost to her, and the non acceptance of the child, because it is not yours? You will accept her if you get laid and the child does not get in the way?

I've seen it before, it's not funny, Think about it!

CHILD ABUSE!

But if it's repulsian child abuse, it's good? We can alway's put it on the welfare system?

Translation- We cannot expect people to take responability for there actions.

foundit66 · 11-30-2006, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayD

Why are we including children that have already been born? One last time, we are talking about UNBORN children, try to keep up.

Oh dear. I've completely lost JayD.
I WAS talking about unborn fetuses. Fetuses that are 32 weeks away from their delivery date. Evidently in my terminology you really got lost.

Either that or you recognized your error, and decided to obfuscate the issue.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayD

Terry lived her life. For reason beyond her control, it was ended shortly. In no way would keeping her alive bring back her life. These children (like Terry) should have a shot to live. Until reasons beyond (or with in) there control bring them to demise (like Terry). Like I said, terrible comparison.

It was a comparison because of your "terrible" choice of standards.
I said that being human was not enough. You derided me for that statement.
Yet more and more, you demonstrate that you have OTHER STANDARDS beyond just something "being human" for why it should be protected.

You are unwittingly proving my point as you go along. You just can't remember what has been said to even realize that you're doing it.

11-30-2006, 03:58 PM

Around and around we go

RidinHighSpeeds · 12-02-2006, 12:16 AM

Now I know I am viewed as conservative on many views...but when it comes to abortion, I think that the woman should have the choice to consider an abortion only within the first 2 weeks of pregnancy.

I am completely against mid-late term abortions. If you really don't want the baby, fine; but let it be within the first couple of weeks.

How do you guys feel about that?? Just my stance..

Peggy_Sue · 12-02-2006, 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hevusa

So you can buy life insurance for the two cells? I'll be happy to sell you some at a great rate.

If it is a religious/Christian ideal you are relying on wouldn't the mother be sending "the child" straight to heaven? What sin could you commit in the womb? And what better gift could a mother give a child?

The above statements should show you how faulty it is to rely on a theory about God to come to a conclusion about what is moral and what isn't. It doesn't work.

I said the biological definition of life should be used in law. How did you go off on a theory tangent from that? In a state of denial, are you?

Observer · 12-03-2006, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hevusa
So you can buy life insurance for the two cells? I'll be happy to sell you some at a great rate.

If it is a religious/Christian ideal you are relying on wouldn't the mother be sending "the child" straight to heaven? What sin could you commit in the womb? And what better gift could a mother give a child?

The above statements should show you how faulty it is to rely on a theory about God to come to a conclusion about what is moral and what isn't. It doesn't work.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peggy_Sue

I said the biological definition of life should be used in law. How did you go off on a theory tangent from that? In a state of denial, are you?

I had to re-read the title of this forum "Defending the Truth" as when I read Hevusa's comments, I feel it should re-named to "Perverting the Truth". The (childish) statements he makes about God just proves how much he doesn't know about Him, yet he pontificates as if he's some great authority... not just on God and what He thinks, but on everything.

Observer · 12-03-2006, 11:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peggy_Sue

I said the biological definition of life should be used in law. How did you go off on a theory tangent from that? In a state of denial, are you?

Quote:

Originally Posted by RidinHighSpeeds

Now I know I am viewed as conservative on many views...but when it comes to abortion, I think that the woman should have the choice to consider an abortion only within the first 2 weeks of pregnancy.

I am completely against mid-late term abortions. If you really don't want the baby, fine; but let it be within the first couple of weeks.

How do you guys feel about that?? Just my stance..

I wonder what an abortionist would tell her if she came in at 2 weeks? "Wait until you've missed your first period then come back"?

What gets me about this whole conversation is that we ALL know if a pregnancy is allowed to continue, the end result is a B-A-B-Y, yet pro abortion/choice use all kinds of rhetoric that "it's NOT a baby until it takes a breath." Which is exactly why abortionists turn the baby to come feet first, put a hole in the base of the skull to syphon the brains out. In other words, kill the child before it takes the first breath. If another 2-3 seconds is allowed, the head will exit the birth canal and the baby takes a breath. "THEN" (pro-choice/abortion say) "it's a baby." But the body that's expelled somehow is NOT a baby. How hypocritical is that? It just go to show us how far liars will go to justify their deeds. OH! but they will sell body parts of that "thing" to other humans who have need for them.

12-10-2006, 08:36 AM

[quote=foundit66;61805]Oh dear. I've completely lost JayD.
I WAS talking about unborn fetuses. Fetuses that are 32 weeks away from their delivery date. Evidently in my terminology you really got lost.

Either that or you recognized your error, and decided to obfuscate the issue.

WTF? You said "So a baby born at 32 weeks does not need anything extra in your opinion?"

So I ask what Born children have to do with it,

Then you said" I was talking about unborn fetuses"

But im the one confussed? Be for fuckin real man.

It was a comparison because of your "terrible" choice of standards.
I said that being human was not enough. You derided me for that statement.
Yet more and more, you demonstrate that you have OTHER STANDARDS beyond just something "being human" for why it should be protected.

You are unwittingly proving my point as you go along. You just can't remember what has been said to even realize that you're doing it.

My bad, your absolulty right. Its not enough to just be human, you cant have your life force come from a machine either. So I ask you again what the hell does this have to do with abortion?

12-02-2006, 12:16 AM		#66 (permalink)
	RidinHighSpeeds Website Owner Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Taxachusetts Gender: Posts: 5,514 Country: Thanks: 12 Thanked 74 Times in 64 Posts	Now I know I am viewed as conservative on many views...but when it comes to abortion, I think that the woman should have the choice to consider an abortion only within the first 2 weeks of pregnancy. I am completely against mid-late term abortions. If you really don't want the baby, fine; but let it be within the first couple of weeks. How do you guys feel about that?? Just my stance.. Networked Web Sites Jon-Kingsbury.com DefendingTheTruth UML Forums

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

11-30-2006, 03:58 PM		#65 (permalink)
	JayD Guest Posts: n/a	Around and around we go

12-10-2006, 08:36 AM		#70 (permalink)
	JayD Guest Posts: n/a	[quote=foundit66;61805]Oh dear. I've completely lost JayD. I WAS talking about unborn fetuses. Fetuses that are 32 weeks away from their delivery date. Evidently in my terminology you really got lost. Either that or you recognized your error, and decided to obfuscate the issue. WTF? You said "So a baby born at 32 weeks does not need anything extra in your opinion?" So I ask what Born children have to do with it, Then you said" I was talking about unborn fetuses" But im the one confussed? Be for fuckin real man. It was a comparison because of your "terrible" choice of standards. I said that being human was not enough. You derided me for that statement. Yet more and more, you demonstrate that you have OTHER STANDARDS beyond just something "being human" for why it should be protected. You are unwittingly proving my point as you go along. You just can't remember what has been said to even realize that you're doing it. My bad, your absolulty right. Its not enough to just be human, you cant have your life force come from a machine either. So I ask you again what the hell does this have to do with abortion?