[smacintush]

Originally Posted by Moderator

Fuzzy Math is what GW used to describe Al Gore's surplus (remember that?) calculations in the 2000 debates....before he promptly turned it into...well we all know what happened.

TURNED INTO WHAT? DON'T LEAVE ME HANGING! WHAT DID HE TURN INTO? A CHIMPANZEE? A FASCIST THEOCRAT? WHAT?

[Moderator]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Again, if it didn't involve murder it wouldn't be a big deal.

Kevin..I'd like to hear your take on the one point that cause me to think very early term abortions are ok. I wrote it above..but here it is again.

1/4 of an inch long....doesn't have a brain, a heart, or or a central nervous system...how can you call it a human?

[hyteckit]

You have to understand the legal ramifications of giving human rights to embryos and fetuses. If abortions are considered murder because you are intentionally ending a human life, then miscarriages are considered manslaughter, since it involves the accidental death of human life.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Moderator

Kevin..I'd like to hear your take on the one point that cause me to think very early term abortions are ok. I wrote it above..but here it is again.

1/4 of an inch long....doesn't have a brain, a heart, or or a central nervous system...how can you call it a human?

We have different definitions of human.

We really don't know much when "life" actually begins.

We have guesses however.

My stance is, unless we are for DAMNED sure, we shouldn't be doing it.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by hyteckit

You have to understand the legal ramifications of giving human rights to embryos and fetuses. If abortions are considered murder because you are intentionally ending a human life, then miscarriages are considered manslaughter, since it involves the accidental death of human life.

Depends on how the miscarriage happened I would say.

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Depends on how the miscarriage happened I would say.

How about a woman drinking too much coffee during her pregnancy then has a miscarriage?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/1078716.stm

[hyteckit]

Or girl accidental slips on stairs and ended her pregnancy? She wrecklessly ran down the stairs when she didn't have to.

[myisha]

Why are so many men so adamantly against abortions?Honestly I was hoping for more post from pro-abortion or pro-choice men.I don't think abortion will never be a think of the past as long as a women can get pregnant women will be still be having abortions.I would rather live in a world where women can have access to safe legal abortions.

[Spliffdaddy]

What if a kid rides his bicycle into the path of a car?

Accidents happen. Miscarriages happen It's left up to the district attorney to determine if there is compelling evidence to prosecute the case.

[Spliffdaddy]

Originally Posted by myisha

Why are so many men so adamantly against abortions?Honestly I was hoping for more post from pro-abortion or pro-choice men.I don't think abortion will never be a think of the past as long as a women can get pregnant women will be still be having abortions.I would rather live in a world where women can have access to safe legal abortions.

I'd rather live in a world where all children can experience the world. To hell with what adults want.

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

What if a kid rides his bicycle into the path of a car?

Accidents happen. Miscarriages happen It's left up to the district attorney to determine if there is compelling evidence to prosecute the case.

Depends on what the driver was doing and if he was wreckless. If the driver was going 50mph in a 25mph area, then the driver is charged with manslaughter.

For cases where embryos and fetuses are given human rights:

If the girl wrecklessly runs down the stair and slips, then she is charge with manslaughter. Court finds that she was wreckless.

If a woman drink too much coffee during her pregnancy and then has a miscarriage, then she is charged with manslaughter. Can't claim ignorance cause ignorance is never a good defense.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Kevin

My stance is, unless we are for DAMNED sure, we shouldn't be doing it.

Do you believe this is something that can be objectively determined?

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by hyteckit

How about a woman drinking too much coffee during her pregnancy then has a miscarriage?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/1078716.stm

I would say it depended on if the women knew it would hurt it.

Originally Posted by subego

Do you believe this is something that can be objectively determined?

I am against the Death Penalty for the same reasons. Unless we know for sure, we shouldn't be doing it.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by hyteckit

You have to understand the legal ramifications of giving human rights to embryos and fetuses. If abortions are considered murder because you are intentionally ending a human life, then miscarriages are considered manslaughter, since it involves the accidental death of human life.

You ought to check out the Unborn Victims of Violence Act. It's a federal criminal statute, i.e., it's not going to be applied very often, but injuring or killing an unborn baby is an offense just the same as if the unborn was an adult. If it injures the baby, it is assault; if it kills the baby, it is murder.

Obviously it should be against the law to make a woman lose a baby against her will, and in fact there already were laws about that. But one twist of this law is that it applies even if the offender didn't know the woman was pregnant, and even if the woman herself didn't know she was pregnant.

Given that you normally have to prove intent when someone kills a fully... uh born person, this actually makes it a worse crime to kill an unborn baby vs. a fully born person.

[Montezuma58]

Originally Posted by hyteckit

You have to understand the legal ramifications of giving human rights to embryos and fetuses. If abortions are considered murder because you are intentionally ending a human life, then miscarriages are considered manslaughter, since it involves the accidental death of human life.

Miscarriages are a very common occurrence. About 25% of pregnancies end in one. There are host of possible causes such as chromosomal abnormalities, defects in the uterus, various medical conditions, etc that are beyond the control of anyone. There are correlations between some things such as smoking and drug use with increased risk of a miscarriage. But there is no way to prove to any act or series of acts led to a particular instance of a miscarriage. It could just as easily be any number of natural causes.

Doctors don't normally investigate the possible cause of a patient's single miscarriage. They will look at it closer if a patient has multiple miscarriages and still wishes to have children. The thought of law enforcement getting involved in the case of a miscarriage is just ridiculous. Especially when it something doctors consider a common occurrence.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Kevin

I am against the Death Penalty for the same reasons. Unless we know for sure, we shouldn't be doing it.

I still don't understand if you think there are objectively determinable answers to these issues.

I'd say with the death penalty there usually are objectively determinable answers, at least WRT whether a crime was committed or not. The problems arise when people fail to come to the objectively determinable conclusion.

With the point at where an embryo becomes human life? I don't think this has an objectively determinable answer. It never will. The objectively determinable conclusion just doesn't exist. There is no metric we could all agree upon with which to measure the process.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by Montezuma58

Miscarriages are a very common occurrence. About 25% of pregnancies end in one.

I've heard that it's over 50%, if you include pre-implantation.

[Montezuma58]

Originally Posted by BRussell

I've heard that it's over 50%, if you include pre-implantation.

That's sounds right. I guess it's really a matter definitions. The 25% number came from my wife's doctor. She was talking about pregnancies that have been confirmed with a sonogram.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by BRussell

You ought to check out the Unborn Victims of Violence Act. It's a federal criminal statute, i.e., it's not going to be applied very often, but injuring or killing an unborn baby is an offense just the same as if the unborn was an adult. If it injures the baby, it is assault; if it kills the baby, it is murder.

Obviously it should be against the law to make a woman lose a baby against her will, and in fact there already were laws about that. But one twist of this law is that it applies even if the offender didn't know the woman was pregnant, and even if the woman herself didn't know she was pregnant.

Given that you normally have to prove intent when someone kills a fully... uh born person, this actually makes it a worse crime to kill an unborn baby vs. a fully born person.

Funny how one law goes against the other. It's not a life when the mother kills it, but when anyone else does, it's a life!



More fuzzy brain ideas.

Originally Posted by subego

With the point at where an embryo becomes human life? I don't think this has an objectively determinable answer. It never will. The objectively determinable conclusion just doesn't exist. There is no metric we could all agree upon with which to measure the process.

I agree. So it shouldn't be happening.

[Moderator]

I'd have to say a brain, CNS, and/or heart is a pretty objective place to start.

Your only argument is "well we don't know when life starts." No, we don't. But we're talking about human life, not just life...athlete's foot is life. You're being disingenious to suggest that this 1/4" long tumor without a brain or CNS to think or feel with is anything but a potential human being.

[Kevin]

Ah so it's reverting to calling a growing, human life a "tumor"

Fuzzy brain thinking again

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Moderator

1/4 of an inch long....doesn't have a brain, a heart, or or a central nervous system...how can you call it a human?

Easily. In knowing this is also how you began your humanity. Prenatal care? BAH! Don't worry about that little thing inside you 'til at least 4 months in.

[Busemann]

Originally Posted by ebuddy

Easily. In knowing this is also how you began your humanity.

Actually he began as a sperm cell

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Busemann

Actually he began as a sperm cell

No. Actually, prior to fertilization, it was just a sperm cell. Using your logic, you could say he began as his father's penis.

[Busemann]

Originally Posted by ebuddy

No. Actually, prior to fertilization, it was just a sperm cell. Using your logic, you could say he began as his father's penis.

Had a different sperm-cell been fertilized, it would have become a completely different person.

A fertilized egg is also just a cell, you know, which turns into a fetus, which turns into a baby.

[Spliffdaddy]

omg. it turns into a baby???

[Busemann]

yea some people in here seem to think it's a baby from day one

[Moderator]

Originally Posted by Busemann

yea some people in here seem to think it's a baby from day one

Exactly. More black & white absolutism from the usual suspects.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Busemann

A fertilized egg is also just a cell, you know, which turns into a fetus, which turns into a baby.

Yes. A unique egg, fertilized by a unique sperm cell, becoming a unique individual. Not really a commodity to be bought, sold and terminated ad nauseam, but the inception of the most beautiful facet of existence. Life itself.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Moderator

Exactly. More black & white absolutism from the usual suspects.

There's nothing more absolute than abortion my friend. Unlike you, I believe this degree of absolutism requires more serious consideration.

[Moderator]

Originally Posted by ebuddy

Yes. A unique egg, fertilized by a unique sperm cell, becoming a unique individual. Not really a commodity to be bought, sold and terminated ad nauseam, but the inception of the most beautiful facet of existence. Life itself.

That's so poetic, now lets go put a retard on the electric chair and watch that sucker fry.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Moderator

That's so poetic, now lets go put a retard on the electric chair and watch that sucker fry.

I'm opposed to the death penalty. Were you projecting or did you truly have nothing to say?

[Moderator]

Originally Posted by ebuddy

There's nothing more absolute than abortion my friend. Unlike you, I believe this degree of absolutism requires more serious consideration.

Pay attention. The absolutism is where you claim a sperm infiltrates an egg and presto! you've got a human being!

Sorry. A little too simplistic.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Moderator

Pay attention. The absolutism is where you claim a sperm infiltrates an egg and presto! you've got a human being!

Sorry. A little too simplistic.

It is indeed a living, growing human being. Saying otherwise is again fuzzy thinking.

The only reason to call it something else, is to sugar-coat what is actually going on during abortion.

"It's not a baby it's a fetus!" or a tumor!


I give it to the pro abortion folks. Their marketing sure has payed off.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Moderator

Pay attention. The absolutism is where you claim a sperm infiltrates an egg and presto! you've got a human being!

Do you have a more fool-proof way of getting a human being Mr. Ambiguity?

Sorry. A little too simplistic.

apology for inability to express a view succinctly, accepted.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Moderator

That's so poetic, now lets go put a retard on the electric chair and watch that sucker fry.

I'm opposed to the death penalty. Were you projecting or did you truly have nothing to say?

*this was not a database error, I've repeated my question to give you another opportunity to justify the sweeping generalization you threw out here. In your distaste for seeing things in black and white it seems you failed to notice the brush you're using only has those two colors.

[Busemann]

Originally Posted by Kevin

I give it to the pro abortion folks. Their marketing sure has payed off.

I've never met a person who's pro abortion in my entire life. Pro choice, yes, but not pro abortion. Those are two VERY different things.

Anyways, as you're such a staunch pro-lifer, knowing that there are a lot of wanted children who are abused, what do you think would happen to all of the unwanted children that would end up being born?

[Moderator]

Originally Posted by ebuddy

I'm opposed to the death penalty. Were you projecting or did you truly have nothing to say?

I was projecting, after all that is the position of your brethren...I assume you're against elective wars that kill 30,000 people too, right. I mean human life is human life.

[Moderator]

Originally Posted by ebuddy

Do you have a more fool-proof way of getting a human being Mr. Ambiguity?

Pregnancy has a little something to do with it.

Mitosis & Meiosis are also kind of important.

In any case if the Presto! method makes your case a little easier to make..then you have no choice but to ignore the fact that human life takes a while to develop..doesn't just POP! happen.

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by Moderator

...I assume you're against elective wars…

All wars are elective.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Moderator

I was projecting, after all that is the position of your brethren...I assume you're against elective wars that kill 30,000 people too, right. I mean human life is human life.

Likewise, you're apparently in favor of more economic sanctions serving only to starve hundreds of thousands of Iraqis to death while their leader makes back-door deals with those governments you deem more "humanitarian" than the US.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Moderator

Pregnancy has a little something to do with it.

Mitosis & Meiosis are also kind of important.

In any case if the Presto! method makes your case a little easier to make..then you have no choice but to ignore the fact that human life takes a while to develop..doesn't just POP! happen.

I never said it did.

Honestly, I'm not sure what point you were trying to make, but it seems the take-away from all this is;

Moderator acknowledges that while quick to indict others of simplicity, he failed to notice his own hypocracy and in fact views things in black and white himself, guilty of knee-jerk projection of ideals onto others not holding to those ideals, and understands there are multiple steps to human existence.

Thanx for your contribution to the thread.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Moderator

I was projecting, after all that is the position of your brethren...

My brethren? Does the Jr. Highschool librarian know you're using that computer to participate in online forums? Honestly Moderator, this is all way beneath you brother.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by ebuddy

Likewise, you're apparently in favor of more economic sanctions serving only to starve hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's to death while their leader makes back-door deals with those governments you deem more "humanitarian" than the US.

Let's see now, how have things gotten better?

Saddam Hussein in power = state-backed oppression of the Iraqi people with lots of innocent citizens dying for political reasons or due to lack of food

Coalition Provisional Authority in power = no state-backed oppression of the Iraqi people with lots of innocent citizens still dying for political reasons or due to lack of food AND lots of innocent citizens dying caught in the conflict betwen the CPA and home-grown insurgents

newly elected Iraqi government in power = isolated cases of state-backed oppression of the Iraqi people with lots of innocent citizens still dying for political reasons or due to lack of food AND lots of innocent citizens dying caught in the conflict between Sunni and Shia muslims for religio-political contorl of Iraq


You know, you are right. Things ARE better now for the Iraqi people now that they are dying at the hands of political or religious enemies instead of at the hands of Saddam Hussein's henchmen. How could I or anyone else ever question the sentiment that the Iraqi people are better off now than when they were under Saddam Hussein? Sure lots of Iraqi citizens are still dying due to political AND religious conflict but it's the conflict of Freedom they are dying under and that makes it all OK.

Seriously dude, there are some improvements in the overall condition of the Iraqi people but don't make the dis-ingenuous claim that living now in a civil war is better than living then under a dictatorial regime. Now, a majority of the Iraqi people still suffer some form of political oppression and most all of them endure some kind of economic hardship. It seems to me that the Iraqi people are in the same situation as before only those at the top of the society calling the shots have changed.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

Seriously dude, there are some improvements in the overall condition of the Iraqi people but don't make the dis-ingenuous claim that living now in a civil war is better than living then under a dictatorial regime. It seems to me the Iraqi people are in the same situation as before only those at the top of the society calling the shots have changed.

I can appreciate your comparisons to conditions as they stand today, but you may not have noticed that pre-invasion the dying citizenry and oppression had no goal other than an arms race with Iran and another gold-adorned palace. At that time there was no cause nor call for change and freedom and there was every indication that the Middle East was only going to become more volatile. You may say it is now and I'd agree with that assessment. Where I disagree is that somehow things would be different and/or better yesterday with inaction and no goal, than they are today with action and a goal.

What causes those who lack perseverence to naysay, is pessimism and I dare say a hint of xenophobia in assuming the average Middle Easterner is incapable of attaining and maintaining civility and freedom. There is no civil war. I choose not to qualify with the word "yet" because as an optimist, I believe Iraq will pull through. Then again, nothing worth accomplishing occurs with naysaying, pessimism, and constant focus on failure.

So, when you say I'm being disingenuous because I compare hundreds of thousands of dead due to failed UN policy to 30,000 dead in coalition action I disagree. I disagree with many people's idea of what constitutes "humanitarian" motivation. Why? Because I've seen no other ideas offered.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Busemann

I've never met a person who's pro abortion in my entire life. Pro choice, yes, but not pro abortion. Those are two VERY different things.

Another spin. If you are PRO abortion being legal, you are pro-abortion like it or not. This is just another way of people supporting their "side" while attempting to distance themselves from the act at the same time.

That would be like me saying "I am pro-death penalty but I am not pro-killing humans"
Meaning I am not for killing other people for justice, but I am for letting other people do it.

If I were to say that, I would get flamed.

Anyways, as you're such a staunch pro-lifer, knowing that there are a lot of wanted children who are abused, what do you think would happen to all of the unwanted children that would end up being born?

Lots of things could happen. There are lots of great people that exist that could have been aborted. Even you.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

Let's see now, how have things gotten better?

Saddam Hussein in power = state-backed oppression of the Iraqi people with lots of innocent citizens dying for political reasons or due ....

And here DC shows again he has no self control when it comes to Iraq.

This is a thread about abortion.

Please quit this obnoxiousness.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by Kevin

And here DC shows again he has no self control when it comes to Iraq.

This is a thread about abortion.

Please quit this obnoxiousness.

Hmmm, Zimphy, you did notice I was replying to a post from ebuddy about the situation in Iraq. Any chance you might go back and reply to his post with a similar sentiment, castigating him for discussing the Iraq war in a thread about abortion? If not, why not? Why would you choose to selectively criticize certain posters for straying off-topic in a thread?

PM me when you have posted a thread telling ebuddy to "quit this obnoxiousness" in regards to his post about the situation in Iraq. Thanks!

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

Hmmm, Zimphy, you did notice I was replying to a post from ebuddy about the situation in Iraq. Any chance you might go back and reply to his post with a similar sentiment, castigating him for discussing the Iraq war in a thread about abortion? If not, why not? Why would you choose to slectively criticize certain posters for straying off-topic in a thread?

PM me when you have posted a thread telling ebuddy to "quit this obnoxiousness" in regards to his post about the situation in Iraq. Thanks!

Originally Posted by Moderator

I was projecting, after all that is the position of your brethren...I assume you're against elective wars that kill 30,000 people too, right. I mean human life is human life.

at no time did I mention Iraq until the above was thrown out. I respond to arguments. So many posts out of pride. At some point I'm hoping common sense will prevail. Don't fall into traps like these out of nothing more than a need to speak dcmacdaddy. Kevin responded to the poster who derailed the thread. You're simply reacting in an adversarial manner.

[Stradlater]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Another spin. If you are PRO abortion being legal, you are pro-abortion like it or not. This is just another way of people supporting their "side" while attempting to distance themselves from the act at the same time.

Rather: another example that you have trouble defining spin (see: China/Pakistan thread from earlier this week).

All of these labels can be used in a spinning manner.

Pro-life is spin for the same reason you think pro-choice is.

Pro-abortion is spin because the people who support the legality of abortion (given restraints) do not necessarily believe that it is the right decision and are not pro- the decision of abortion, but pro- the legal availability at the discretion of individual mothers.

Anti-abortion is probably the closest to non-spin you're going to get, because anti-abortion people not only believe abortion is almost never the right decision, but they're also against its legality.