Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Mother confronts woman with "I had an abortion" sh

Page 8 of 11 [ 175 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

mercifullyfree
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 21 Dec 2012
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 362
Location: internet

23 Jan 2013, 12:37 pm

MCalavera wrote:
By the way, speaking of positives and negatives, my little sister was one whom my parents were considering aborting at first, but then they changed their minds about it after a long talk, and look at her now. She's a blessing in the family. And I wouldn't have learned the things I learned from her if she hadn't been born. That, to me, is a positive.


That's nice, but I do consider it a private matter for women and families to sort out, as yours did. The benefits were private and personal to your family and it happened to have worked out for you. This cannot be said for everyone.



Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,398

23 Jan 2013, 12:40 pm

Quote:
So you're saying that it's better for someone to loose their chance to life completely rather than have one that is marginally worse off? And, preempting you're "I don't consider it a person" argument, you shouldn't find either immoral
It is immoral only after birth. Because that would be a person. Before birth it is a thing, so we are better off killing it.

I don't give a damn about "potential life". It is just that potential. Each of my sperm have the potential to fertilize an egg. Should that mean that I should bother to crazily look for a sexual mate right today so that I would not be potentially ending lives by being passive? Nah. If potential life does not come to be, then somebody else's potential life will. We are at no shortage of people in this world.

Quote:
So let me get this straight - you believe humans just magically become alive the moment their head pops out of the vagina?
Alive? No, the thing is alive before popping out of the vagina. But we do not care of the lives of things. We care of the lives of people. And it legally and morally becomes a person only at birth. A line must be drawn somewhere, and there is no better, less ambiguous line than birth.

Quote:
I'm going to end the sexism debate here
I am not, because stripping 1 half of the population of their rights to decide what to do with their bodies is intrinsically sexist.


_________________
.


Last edited by Vexcalibur on 23 Jan 2013, 12:43 pm, edited 2 times in total.

MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,442

23 Jan 2013, 12:41 pm

mercifullyfree wrote:
MCalavera wrote:
By the way, speaking of positives and negatives, my little sister was one whom my parents were considering aborting at first, but then they changed their minds about it after a long talk, and look at her now. She's a blessing in the family. And I wouldn't have learned the things I learned from her if she hadn't been born. That, to me, is a positive.


That's nice, but I do consider it a private matter for women and families to sort out, as yours did. The benefits were private and personal to your family and it happened to have worked out for you. This cannot be said for everyone.


Yeah, but remember, you were arguing for the lack of positives. And I gave you one in response.



MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,442

23 Jan 2013, 12:44 pm

Vexcalibur wrote:
Quote:
So you're saying that it's better for someone to loose their chance to life completely rather than have one that is marginally worse off? And, preempting you're "I don't consider it a person" argument, you shouldn't find either immoral
It is immoral only after birth. Because that would be a person. Before birth it is a thing, so we are better off killing it.


Morals are not absolute. And the fetus can be considered a person just as much as its mother.

Quote:
I don't give a damn about "potential life". It is just that potential. Each of my sperm have the potential to fertilize an egg. Should that mean that I should bother to crazily look for a sexual mate right today so that I would not be potentially ending lives by being passive? Nah. If potential life does not come to be, then somebody else's potential life will. We are at no shortage of people in this world.


Yes, but other people do. And those people don't see the fetus having the same value as sperm. They see it as having the same value as a new born baby.

Lack of shortage of people in this world is irrelevant to whether the fetus absolutely has no right.

To avoid confusion on what I'm actually arguing for, I'm saying that when it comes to rights, there is nothing absolute. It's all subjective.



mercifullyfree
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 21 Dec 2012
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 362
Location: internet

23 Jan 2013, 12:46 pm

hanyo wrote:
I'm emotionally invested in it because until recently I was capable of getting pregnant. I don't want children, to give birth, or be pregnant at all. If I were to get pregnant all I'd want is for it to be out of me asap.


Same. If I had the misfortune of living in a society that outlawed abortion, I think I would just stop having sex with men and only go for women. I know there is birth control, but even a fraction of the risk is too much for me to handle if there were no way out of it. I will not breed! :x



mercifullyfree
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 21 Dec 2012
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 362
Location: internet

23 Jan 2013, 12:51 pm

MCalavera wrote:
Yeah, but remember, you were arguing for the lack of positives. And I gave you one in response.


I specified for society as a whole, because public policy has an impact on everyone. Your family made a private choice which had private benefits to you.



Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,398

23 Jan 2013, 5:37 pm

Quote:
Yes, but other people do. And those people don't see the fetus having the same value as sperm. They see it as having the same value as a new born baby.
Yes, and those people are either a) Stupid. b) Misogynistic. c) Evil. d) Misinformed. e) all of them. So I don't care.

Quote:
Lack of shortage of people in this world is irrelevant to whether the fetus absolutely has no right.
Certainly, because it has no rights and never should.

Lack of shortage of people is relevant shall people try to bring the topic that making sure all life meets its potential is ultra duper important. It is not.



To avoid confusion on what I'm actually arguing for, I'm saying that when it comes to rights, there is nothing absolute. It's all subjective.[/quote]


_________________
.


Last edited by Vexcalibur on 23 Jan 2013, 5:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,442

23 Jan 2013, 5:38 pm

mercifullyfree, have you ever asked those children whether or not they wished they weren't alive? You are looking at it from only one relatively narrow perspective (quite possibly with a feministic agenda). You assume they didn't ask to live, but how do you know that's how each one of them feels? What if some of them actually look forward to a brighter future?



hyperlexian
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2010
Age: 52
Gender: Female
Posts: 22,023
Location: with bucephalus

23 Jan 2013, 5:39 pm

MCalavera wrote:
Have you ever asked those children whether or not they wished they weren't alive? You are looking at it from only one relatively narrow perspective (quite possibly with a feministic agenda). You assume they didn't ask to live, but how do you know that's how each one of them feels? What if some of them actually look forward to a brighter future?

the abortion survivor who i knew personally was never happy to be alive. so there's that.


_________________
on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
viewtopic.php?t=391105


ripped
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Jan 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 651

23 Jan 2013, 5:39 pm

MCalavera wrote:
I don't know about conditions, but my whole aim just now in this thread was to keep things in perspective.


The perspective of a man dictating to women what they 'should' do with their lives and their bodies.



Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,398

23 Jan 2013, 5:40 pm

MCalavera wrote:
mercifullyfree, have you ever asked those children whether or not they wished they weren't alive? You are looking at it from only one relatively narrow perspective (quite possibly with a feministic agenda). You assume they didn't ask to live, but how do you know that's how each one of them feels? What if some of them actually look forward to a brighter future?
I don't care how they feel because they are things and not people.

Even if you assume they are people. In order for us to force women to be pregnant we would have to assume that fetuses are some sort of Super people. People with rights that triumph even the rights of others.

My agenda is "feministic"! Oh NO!


_________________
.


MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,442

23 Jan 2013, 5:41 pm

Vexcalibur wrote:
Quote:
Yes, but other people do. And those people don't see the fetus having the same value as sperm. They see it as having the same value as a new born baby.
Yes, and those people are either a) Stupid. b) Misogynistic. c) Evil. d) Misinformed. e) all of them. So I don't care.

Quote:
Lack of shortage of people in this world is irrelevant to whether the fetus absolutely has no right.
Certainly, because it has no rights and never should.

Lack of shortage of people is relevant shall people try to bring the topic that making sure all life meets its potential is ultra duper important. It is not.



To avoid confusion on what I'm actually arguing for, I'm saying that when it comes to rights, there is nothing absolute. It's all subjective.
[/quote]

Nice bunch of fallacies. Nothing you said really counters the logic being argued.



MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,442

23 Jan 2013, 5:42 pm

hyperlexian wrote:
MCalavera wrote:
Have you ever asked those children whether or not they wished they weren't alive? You are looking at it from only one relatively narrow perspective (quite possibly with a feministic agenda). You assume they didn't ask to live, but how do you know that's how each one of them feels? What if some of them actually look forward to a brighter future?

the abortion survivor who i knew personally was never happy to be alive. so there's that.


That's just one person. I know at least two who are glad to be alive.



MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,442

23 Jan 2013, 5:44 pm

ripped wrote:
MCalavera wrote:
I don't know about conditions, but my whole aim just now in this thread was to keep things in perspective.


The perspective of a man dictating to women what they 'should' do with their lives and their bodies.


Dictating is not the right word.

Plus, what about fetuses?



MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,442

23 Jan 2013, 5:45 pm

Vexcalibur wrote:
MCalavera wrote:
mercifullyfree, have you ever asked those children whether or not they wished they weren't alive? You are looking at it from only one relatively narrow perspective (quite possibly with a feministic agenda). You assume they didn't ask to live, but how do you know that's how each one of them feels? What if some of them actually look forward to a brighter future?
I don't care how they feel because they are things and not people.

Even if you assume they are people. In order for us to force women to be pregnant we would have to assume that fetuses are some sort of Super people. People with rights that triumph even the rights of others.

My agenda is "feministic"! Oh NO!


Yes, the agenda is feministic. Why shy away from what it really is. Just as the agenda of most pro-lifers is religious.



ripped
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Jan 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 651

23 Jan 2013, 5:58 pm

MCalavera wrote:
Morals are not absolute. And the fetus can be considered a person just as much as its mother.

For someone arguing under the premise of perspective, you are certainly demonstrating very little of it.

Considering a fetus to be a 'person' is an opinion so ridiculous it calls for more than just a statement.
You argue for the violation of a woman's body and life.
I wonder how you would react if a comparable violence were inflicted upon your body, and a punishment then meted out to you because of it.

MCalavera wrote:
To avoid confusion on what I'm actually arguing for, I'm saying that when it comes to rights, there is nothing absolute. It's all subjective.


You hide behind a philosophical foil while advancing a moral and ethical corruption.
You demonstrate contempt for the well-being of a great many women and their unwanted or orphaned progeny.
You are playing a game who's issue threatens to harm a great many lives.

The whole hypocritical 'pro-life' euphemism also ultimately means less sex for men, more sexually frustrated men and the inevitable problems that come along with that as well.



Last edited by ripped on 23 Jan 2013, 6:09 pm, edited 2 times in total.