A question aimed at pro-lifers

What if I do that?

Since you didn't specify "between consenting adults", he's got you.

Quote from: T.T. Monsieur on November 27, 2008, 12:22:15 PM

Since you didn't specify "between consenting adults", he's got you.

Murder-suicide.

Assisted suicide.

Now that Switzerland has legalized it, they have suicide tourism. You aren't required to see if you have any treatable mental problems before-hand, so many government sanctions deaths now occur.

Since you didn't specify "between consenting adults", he's got you.

I still think it's better than amateurs failing to blow their brains out and becoming human vegetables for life.

I say, make sure they don't fail and severely injure themselves.

Some people don't want to live, Emir. If they want to commit suicide, they will still try. I say, make sure they don't fail and severely injure themselves.

Most suicide survivours say they are glad they lived.

Now that Switzerland has legalized it, they have suicide tourism. You aren't required to see if you have any treatable mental problems before-hand, so many government sanctions deaths now occur.

Also, pro-life is an overly positive term for what you are. I would rather call you pro-control society, or pro-fascism. A society does not get to give its women orders to have a baby whether they want it or not. You are not pro-life, you are anti-abortion.

Quote from: Dark Knight on November 26, 2008, 11:20:29 PM

The word fetus is the stage between the embryonic stage and birth, so therefor as far as your concerned, as long as a baby isn't born, it is not a baby since it is still a fetus.

It's not as far as I'm concerned, it is as far as the factual definition is concerned. You don't like it, take it up with doctors.

Well that is the factual definition. 

Quote from: Dark Knight on November 26, 2008, 11:20:29 PM

You must hang out with the same people who think that delivering a baby feet first up to the "fetus'" nose and sticking a needle into its skull to "destroy the fetus".  That way they can say that although it was late term it isn't a baby because it was never fully delivered.  You might wanna study up on the subject before you start talking so stupid.

Apparently you don't get what attached means.

Guess not

Quote from: Dark Knight on November 26, 2008, 11:20:29 PM

Um, yah, the options are all available to the mother except for but the only one the pro-choice people are fighting for is the choice to have an abortion, I don't hear any Pro-Choice people running around yelling I'm pro-Choice and I thing women need be able to choose to give their baby up for adoption.  No they are all fighting for the right to abort.  That is a fact. so again, they should at least change the name to pro-abortion because the choice part is bs.

What the hell are you talking about? You can't just omit things to make your argument sound better. Pro-choice is a choice for all options. If a mother wants to have the baby and keep it, abort, or deliver and give it up once it's born, those are all part of pro-choice. Hell, she can decide to kill herself if she wants to, SHE HAS THAT CHOICE. What you are advocating is oppression.

Saying this other crap about being pro-abortion is just stupid; please show me some proof that people have berated mothers for having children and claimed to be pro-choice. I'd love to see that illogical mess.

Exactly my point, Pro-Choice people have not berated mothers for having children, they only fight for the right to have an abortion.  They are not fighting for the choice to keep it, or to deliver and give it up once it's born.  Please show me some proof that pro-choice people have fought for any of the other to options.

Quote from: Dark Knight on November 26, 2008, 11:20:29 PM

What about the rights of the baby?

Fetus. And it can have rights once it is it's own entity separate of the mother.

Again changing the terminology.  Fine what about the rights of the Fetus

Quote from: Dark Knight on November 26, 2008, 11:20:29 PM

wow that was easy, and forcing unwanted pregnancies upon people is quite far from trying to force people to buy something or how to spend their time.

Well, it's worse in my book, seeing as buying things and most hobbies or activities don't cause pain and other problems for the person. So, you like the idea of putting someone through pain and discomfort, all for the sake of another being on the planet, versus abolishing that being that can't think, see, feel or choose something?
   

I agree and we can just use your words ----                                     Well, it's worse in my book also, seeing as buying things and most hobbies or activities don't cause pain and other problems for the person. So, you like the idea of putting someone (baby/Fetus) through pain, discomfort, & death, all for the sake of another being on the planet (mom), versus abolishing that being(baby, Fetus) that can think, see, feel and choose something?

Now first off, I am not at all for any abortion, but if a mother chooses to do so, All I ask is that they make the decision quickly.   My main issue is the late term abortions and since nobody knows exactly when a life begins, I would choose  to not agree with any.  But in the case of the conversation I would at least go as far back as I know that the baby/Fetus thinks, sees, feels, and chooses something.  A baby/Fetus cannot see at 23 weeks as its eyes are still sealed shut but they do still respond to light, they feel pain, they feel emotions , happy, sad, fear, and can be comforted by touch or sound when they are scared or in pain. And can make simple choices like what side they would prefer to lay on or if they want their foot rubbed.   I know this because my daughter was born at 23 weeks and seeing this does affect my opinion.  ok,  so then there are the stages before this well you would have to go back to at least the 15 and 16th week of Gestation but even then they are knowen to react to sound, light, and they suck their thumb by choice so you can think it is either involentary or volentary reactions.  (sorry about the spelling).  The problem is that there is no scientific proof of when a fetus is a living human or a "parasite"  (yes I saw that episode of House too and if you recall even he changed his mind at the end).    I also understand what a lot of pro-lifers are trying to protect the early abortions but they need to at least shorten the term limit on when they can be performed. 




As is common, your logic applies to all eggs and sperm. Why not attack people that practice safe sex? You're pro-life, you should want to preserve all potential life, just like a fetus.

Eggs and sperm do not contain enough chromesomes to be human and only contain 1 cell.

Quote from: Dark Knight on November 26, 2008, 11:20:29 PM

Then I guess we should just make it legal for people to randomly shoot people on the street because it isn't far from forcing what people should  buy something or spend their time.

You're confusing rights with law and order (or at least the attempt). Almost anyone (barring physical or mental ailments) has the ability to kill someone; that is their right. They choose not to do so due to a variety of factors. They either believe it's wrong, or they simply don't want to burden themselves by either dying or going to jail for life. Abortion is no different.

Again, pro-choice is for all options. If you don't believe in pro-choice, I'd like you to follow my strict guidelines of what to eat, drink and say. Better yet, move to China.

Again, big difference, I don't see pro-life people telling pro-choice people what to eat, drink and say.  And if due to the humanitarian rights that are in effect in China, I don't think a pro-lifer would prefer that area.

Quote from: Dark Knight on November 26, 2008, 11:20:29 PM

Still waiting for something accurate other then simple ramblings of liberal opinions.  Not Facts

Scientific definition is a fact, why ignore it? Also, I'm not a liberal; I simply use definitions and facts to make conclusions and choices.

Well that is the factual definition.

Exactly my point, Pro-Choice people have not berated mothers for having children, they only fight for the right to have an abortion.  They are not fighting for the choice to keep it, or to deliver and give it up once it's born.  Please show me some proof that pro-choice people have fought for any of the other to options.

Again changing the terminology.  Fine what about the rights of the Fetus

So, you like the idea of putting someone (baby/Fetus) through pain, discomfort, & death, all for the sake of another being on the planet (mom), versus abolishing that being(baby, Fetus) that can think, see, feel and choose something?

Eggs and sperm do not contain enough chromesomes to be human and only contain 1 cell.

Again, big difference, I don't see pro-life people telling pro-choice people what to eat, drink and say.  And if due to the humanitarian rights that are in effect in China, I don't think a pro-lifer would prefer that area.

Some people don't want to live, Emir. If they want to commit suicide, they will still try. I say, make sure they don't fail and severely injure themselves.

Your teacher was a moron. In some catholic countries, though, suicide attempts are punishable by law.

Quote from: Wendy on November 27, 2008, 12:44:10 PM

Some people don't want to live, Emir. If they want to commit suicide, they will still try. I say, make sure they don't fail and severely injure themselves.

If you attempt suicide but fail, you can actually be tried for attempted murder. Or at least that's what my 7th grade teacher told me.

Quote from: Dark Knight on November 28, 2008, 01:51:56 AM

Well that is the factual definition.

Perfect, use it from now on.

Fine, just as long as it is in agreement that a full term child at 40 weeks is also a fetus before it has been born because that is also the definition.  And in that case as long as it is still a "fetus" you are ok with it being aborted.

Quote from: Dark Knight on November 26, 2008, 11:20:29 PM

Exactly my point, Pro-Choice people have not berated mothers for having children, they only fight for the right to have an abortion.  They are not fighting for the choice to keep it, or to deliver and give it up once it's born.  Please show me some proof that pro-choice people have fought for any of the other to options.

They do not fight actively for those options, such as to deliver a child because it is legal and doesn't infringe upon the rights of a person if they make that choice. Anti-abortion, on the other hand, does.

Saying someone must have a baby against their will, especially while maintaining a pro-life stance, is not only authoritarian but hypocritical as well.

Well saying someone must stop at stop signs and drive the speed limit is authoritarian and hypocritical as well.

Quote from: Dark Knight on November 28, 2008, 01:51:56 AM

Again changing the terminology.  Fine what about the rights of the Fetus

I didn't change the terminology, you agreed with the definition. What rights do you think a parasitic entity should have? And why? Again, a pro-life stance is hypocritical.

Again changing the terminology,  and again using a quote for "House".  Now that you changed the term from baby, to parasitic entity.  I am getting dizzy from the circles your speaking in.

Quote from: Dark Knight on November 26, 2008, 11:20:29 PM

So, you like the idea of putting someone (baby/Fetus) through pain, discomfort, & death, all for the sake of another being on the planet (mom), versus abolishing that being(baby, Fetus) that can think, see, feel and choose something?

So, it's fine to abort before such things occur?
Nope, I was just going off what you feel and  as YOU stated in YOUR Quote in the last thread, it seems that you think THIS  since you provided me with those stipulations.  YOU stated that YOU feel that they cannot think, see , feel or choese something and I provided you proof that they do at 23 weeks.  I like how you cut the quote off to serve your need,  Next time you quote someone, you should provide the entire quote because that was as direct quote from you.  This is getting funny.   Please re-read the last 2 threads so you can rememer what your beliefs are.

Quote from: Dark Knight on November 28, 2008, 01:51:56 AM

Eggs and sperm do not contain enough chromesomes to be human and only contain 1 cell.

Arbitrary. Fetuses do not contain all features of a human at <insert week here>. I could make up a whole list of conditions.
Arbitrary?  Last I heard, each only have 23 chromosomes.  That to is a fact so you may want to consider that as you, and I quote "simply use definitions and facts to make conclusions and choices."
And I could give you factual proof that a Fetus does contain all features of a human at, 23 weeks, and at 18 weeks.  

Quote from: Dark Knight on November 28, 2008, 01:51:56 AM

Again, big difference, I don't see pro-life people telling pro-choice people what to eat, drink and say.  And if due to the humanitarian rights that are in effect in China, I don't think a pro-lifer would prefer that area.

You're missing the point. Forcing someone to do something, no matter what it is, is forcing someone to do something.