Abortion

Quote from: General Douchebag on January 01, 2009, 02:35:21 PM

There are many, but only correct one, and that is not it, you soporific dullard.

Alright I am done with that. If it is a parasite, why does the womans body deliberately support the life? If it was an enemy to the body, wouldn't the body try to kill or get rid of it?

Most parasites trick hosts into not killing them. Some even force the animal to do things that they would not normally do.

Quote from: General Douchebag on January 01, 2009, 02:40:00 PM

I know through basic biology. Why does a parasite have to be a different species?

But the body actually helps the fetus. Why would it do this if the fetus is a parasite.

It doesn't, the parasite takes the nutrients from the bloodstream, and there is no way to kill it. And why would the body kill it, if it ultimately leads to the continuation of the species? Any creature that killed its offspring indiscriminately wouldn't continue its genes. This is Darwinism in its most obvious form.

Libertarians are for banishment of the age of consent. (currently their stance is lowering it, their overall goal is abolishment.)

I'm sorry did you use an organization you knew nothing about for information? Very credible source then.

Tolerance is not approval. Libertarians are generally against outlawing unseemly behaviour such as abortion, prostitution or drug use.

Quote from: Raist on January 01, 2009, 01:28:00 PM

Libertarians are for banishment of the age of consent. (currently their stance is lowering it, their overall goal is abolishment.)

I'm sorry did you use an organization you knew nothing about for information? Very credible source then.

Tolerance is not approval. Libertarians are generally against outlawing unseemly behaviour such as abortion, prostitution or drug use.

Actually they think it should be a state issue and are fairly split on the abortion debate.

Quote from: Althalus on January 06, 2010, 04:41:28 PM

Quote from: Raist on January 01, 2009, 01:28:00 PM

Libertarians are for banishment of the age of consent. (currently their stance is lowering it, their overall goal is abolishment.)

I'm sorry did you use an organization you knew nothing about for information? Very credible source then.

Tolerance is not approval. Libertarians are generally against outlawing unseemly behaviour such as abortion, prostitution or drug use.

Actually they think it should be a state issue and are fairly split on the abortion debate.

ur nuts if u think abortion should b banned. im a relativist cuz absolute ethics lead to war and thats not good. but i think freedomfor all is great. but all u pro-choice peeps had better watch out cause the abortion industry is actually rly corrupt. mayb if bein pro-life pays more they mightdo that and screw u all!

Quote from: Raist on January 06, 2010, 06:53:42 PM

Quote from: Althalus on January 06, 2010, 04:41:28 PM

Quote from: Raist on January 01, 2009, 01:28:00 PM

Libertarians are for banishment of the age of consent. (currently their stance is lowering it, their overall goal is abolishment.)

I'm sorry did you use an organization you knew nothing about for information? Very credible source then.

Tolerance is not approval. Libertarians are generally against outlawing unseemly behaviour such as abortion, prostitution or drug use.

Actually they think it should be a state issue and are fairly split on the abortion debate.

ur nuts if u think abortion should b banned. im a relativist cuz absolute ethics lead to war and thats not good. but i think freedomfor all is great. but all u pro-choice peeps had better watch out cause the abortion industry is actually rly corrupt. mayb if bein pro-life pays more they mightdo that and screw u all!

That is an extremely well thought out post. I will surely look up to your knowledge for information regarding this subject in the future.

Quote from: Raist on January 06, 2010, 06:53:42 PM

Quote from: Althalus on January 06, 2010, 04:41:28 PM

Quote from: Raist on January 01, 2009, 01:28:00 PM

Libertarians are for banishment of the age of consent. (currently their stance is lowering it, their overall goal is abolishment.)

I'm sorry did you use an organization you knew nothing about for information? Very credible source then.

Tolerance is not approval. Libertarians are generally against outlawing unseemly behaviour such as abortion, prostitution or drug use.

Actually they think it should be a state issue and are fairly split on the abortion debate.

ur nuts if u think abortion should b banned. im a relativist cuz absolute ethics lead to war and thats not good. but i think freedomfor all is great. but all u pro-choice peeps had better watch out cause the abortion industry is actually rly corrupt. mayb if bein pro-life pays more they mightdo that and screw u all!

My thoughts exactly. One question, what if the pro life people are just a bunch of lamers and are just gonna lol when there aren't any more abortions?

The ironic thing about the abortion debate is the pro-lifers feel the need to argue for the unborn fetus.  Surely if he/she was alive they would be able to put together a coherent argument for themselves?

I want to represent the suicidal fetus' right to die.

Foetus = part of woman's body
Parts of woman's body = woman's property
Foetus = property
Property can be destroyed.

Until a child is born (and probably for a while after), I don't think it has developed intelligence. It does not think beyond instincts, and we kill animals who do the same thing every day.

Quote from: General Douchebag on January 01, 2009, 02:40:00 PM

I know through basic biology. Why does a parasite have to be a different species?

But the body actually helps the fetus. Why would it do this if the fetus is a parasite.

Because the "fetus" tells it to.  Do you think the mother consciously decides to not go through her menstral cycle while she is pregnant?  The fertilized egg implants in the uterine linining and releases hormones which instruct the ovaries to keep producing progesterone, which keeps the uterine lining (its lifeline to food)intact.  Hormones also instruct the mother's body to increase blood supply to provide for the developing fetus, to change the volume of blood, to change nutritional requirements and processing and to prepare the mother's body to provide for it after it is born.

Regarding the OP I don't see how, in a general legal sense, that I (or anyone else) has the right to tell a woman what she can or can't do to her own body.  If the couple decides that it is the best option then they should be afforded that option.  The one or two people involved are the only ones that will have to live with that decision, not you, not me, not a judge and not the people standing outside the abortion clinic with signs of an aborted fetus making a woman's difficult decision worse.

While a partial birth abortion (or similar act) is extremely disturbing, it "technically" is still the mother's choice, though I do think some line should be drawn legally, minimally at the point where the fetus is viable outside the mother.

There is also the matter of the father's rights.  Does he have to carry it?  No, but it is still his child, though how do you force a woman to carry a pregnancy she doesn't want?  But at least in that case it is someone who is directly involved in the situation.

Foetus = part of woman's body
Parts of woman's body = woman's property
Foetus = property
Property can be destroyed.

Until a child is born (and probably for a while after), I don't think it has developed intelligence. It does not think beyond instincts, and we kill animals who do the same thing every day.

ya i agree. liek i wouldnt want any1 cming up 2 me and saying u gotta worry about something inside of you. think of the movie alien:would u want to carry those aliens to term if it would kill u? by prolifers logic all life is sacred so that must mean something killing u like an alien would have to be bought to termto make u die. wat?!

so u see i too think that singer and others have pointed out that in todays world being practical with life, people younger than 2 living, is unneccessary if parents dont want it. ya know?

Foetus = part of woman's body
Parts of woman's body = woman's property
Foetus = property
Property can be destroyed.

Until a child is born (and probably for a while after), I don't think it has developed intelligence. It does not think beyond instincts, and we kill animals who do the same thing every day.

Humans are not animals.

Quote from: toothyp1cks on January 07, 2010, 02:59:01 AM

Foetus = part of woman's body
Parts of woman's body = woman's property
Foetus = property
Property can be destroyed.

Until a child is born (and probably for a while after), I don't think it has developed intelligence. It does not think beyond instincts, and we kill animals who do the same thing every day.

Humans are not animals.

I'll ask you this one more time. Name the requirement for animal that we do not meet. Name a single one.

Quote from: WardoggKC130FE on January 07, 2010, 09:28:52 AM

Quote from: toothyp1cks on January 07, 2010, 02:59:01 AM

Foetus = part of woman's body
Parts of woman's body = woman's property
Foetus = property
Property can be destroyed.

Until a child is born (and probably for a while after), I don't think it has developed intelligence. It does not think beyond instincts, and we kill animals who do the same thing every day.

Humans are not animals.

I'll ask you this one more time. Name the requirement for animal that we do not meet. Name a single one.

inb4 irrelevant dictionary entry #2 defining animal as excluding humans.

Quote from: WardoggKC130FE on January 07, 2010, 09:28:52 AM

Quote from: toothyp1cks on January 07, 2010, 02:59:01 AM

Foetus = part of woman's body
Parts of woman's body = woman's property
Foetus = property
Property can be destroyed.

Until a child is born (and probably for a while after), I don't think it has developed intelligence. It does not think beyond instincts, and we kill animals who do the same thing every day.

Humans are not animals.

I'll ask you this one more time. Name the requirement for animal that we do not meet. Name a single one.

How about 5, or 6 if you split envy and covetousness, or 5 again if you split that one but dont count the last one.

Only humans kill for pleasure.

Laughter

Humans are filled with wonder at the awe of something.  IE a sunset or pictures of the universe

Envy and covetousness

Altruism  (i will admit this one is debatable)

Have you ever had a chicken coop?  Dogs will break into it and kill the chickens and then leave them there.  I do believe they just like doing it.

My dog is filled with wonder and awe ever time we sit down at the table for dinner.

My dog is jealous if I pay attention to another dog, or person.  

Have you ever had a chicken coop?  Dogs will break into it and kill the chickens and then leave them there.  I do believe they just like doing it.

Do you have any evidence to support this outlandish claim?

The shredded chickens have decomposed. 

The shredded chickens have decomposed. 

Evidence?

Have you ever had a chicken coop?  Dogs will break into it and kill the chickens and then leave them there.  I do believe they just like doing it.

My dog is filled with wonder and awe ever time we sit down at the table for dinner.

My dog is jealous if I pay attention to another dog, or person.  

Not the same.  A dog "plays" with a chicken like a chew toy.  Problem is chickens don't stand up like a good ol' squeaky toy. 

No, your dog wants some food, and is always hungry.  Not in awe that you sit at the table and eat.

I may give you this one, but jealousy and envy are different.   Envy is hateful.  Jealous is not always.

How about 5, or 6 if you split envy and covetousness, or 5 again if you split that one but dont count the last one.

Only humans kill for pleasure.

Laughter

Humans are filled with wonder at the awe of something.  IE a sunset or pictures of the universe

Envy and covetousness

Altruism  (i will admit this one is debatable)

Why are these requirements. We are also the only animals that have cities; does that make us not animals?

Certain species can use tools; does that make them not animals? You're basically pulling these out of your ass with no reasoning as to why these would make us not animals.

Why are these requirements. We are also the only animals that have cities; does that make us not animals?

Not really, see ant colonies.  http://lmgtfy.com/?q=ant+colony

Certain species can use tools; does that make them not animals? You're basically pulling these out of your ass with no reasoning as to why these would make us not animals.

No that makes them a smarter animal. 

None of my points have yet to be refuted.

Quote from: Trekky0623 on January 07, 2010, 05:45:06 PM

Why are these requirements. We are also the only animals that have cities; does that make us not animals?

Not really, see ant colonies.  http://lmgtfy.com/?q=ant+colony

Quote from: Trekky0623 on January 07, 2010, 05:45:06 PM

Certain species can use tools; does that make them not animals? You're basically pulling these out of your ass with no reasoning as to why these would make us not animals.

No that makes them a smarter animal. 

None of my points have yet to be refuted.

Human DNA is related all the way back to LUCA (some bacteria living in a warm primeval ooze at the dawn of the ages).  
We are apes (most of which went extinct 15 million years ago in a competition with better designed monkeys).  
We are primates (mammals that almost became extinct 45million years ago in a competition to become a better rodent).  
And you can take the argument all the way back to LUCA.  We are the end of the chain yet we share amazing similarities with something so small it can't be seen with the naked eye.  There are over 6 billion of us and most animals that outnmber us are the ones we have smartly domesticated. We are also populating all continents and ecosystems (hot, dry, wet, cold etc) whereas most animals (except a few dumb birds) are confined to a niche.  At the same time, mind bogginly so, we have become capable of such a high levels of thinking whereby we now know all about our links back to such evolutionary creatures and have proven them.
Chimpanzees and humans share 98% of thier DNA in common. Over 40% of predicted human proteins share similarity with fruit-fly or worm proteins.  There is not one chemical or body organ found in a chimpanzee that is not found in humans. Amazingly chimps are more like humans than they are like gorillas.

Of course is DNA studies and the human genome sequencing is all false science and a conspiracy to make trolls look smart than I could be wrong.

Quote from: Raist on January 07, 2010, 09:39:26 AM

Quote from: WardoggKC130FE on January 07, 2010, 09:28:52 AM

Quote from: toothyp1cks on January 07, 2010, 02:59:01 AM

Foetus = part of woman's body
Parts of woman's body = woman's property
Foetus = property
Property can be destroyed.

Until a child is born (and probably for a while after), I don't think it has developed intelligence. It does not think beyond instincts, and we kill animals who do the same thing every day.

Humans are not animals.

I'll ask you this one more time. Name the requirement for animal that we do not meet. Name a single one.

How about 5, or 6 if you split envy and covetousness, or 5 again if you split that one but dont count the last one.

Only humans kill for pleasure.

Laughter

Humans are filled with wonder at the awe of something.  IE a sunset or pictures of the universe

Envy and covetousness

Altruism  (i will admit this one is debatable)

Animals don't covet? There was an experiment where a chimp was originally given a reward for pressing a button. Another chimp in a cage beside him was given the same reward for pressing the same button. When the trainers started giving the second chimp a better reward the first chimp refused to press the button, as it was not getting the same reward.

Also, I did not ask you about emotions, which are products of mixing and complicating several emotions and instincts into one. I asked you what qualifications for an animal we do not meat, not what qualifications for a highly developed emotional animal other animals do not meet.

I will give you one final chance, what qualifications for animal do we not meet. I do not mean the dictionary definition of animal meaning "inhuman behavior" I mean the biological definition for animal. (lacks cell walls, etc.)

The point is none of your reasons prove in any way that humans aren't animals. Just as you dismissed my reasoning behind animals using tools, I can dismiss your reasons as such:

Killing: we're mean animals. Also, certain primates will wage "war" against each other.

Laughter: Got any sources for that? I think primates can laugh. And even if they couldn't, this still doesn't prove anything. Only whales can make their whale song and that doesn't make them special.

Wonder, Awe: Again, this doesn't make us not animals, only sentient beings.

Envy: Animals aren't jealous? I believe you are mistaken. Animals will steal belongings from other animals.

Altruism: As you yourself stated, this is debatable. All animals are interested in the welfare of the species.

Quote from: Raist on January 07, 2010, 09:39:26 AM

Quote from: WardoggKC130FE on January 07, 2010, 09:28:52 AM

Quote from: toothyp1cks on January 07, 2010, 02:59:01 AM

Foetus = part of woman's body
Parts of woman's body = woman's property
Foetus = property
Property can be destroyed.

Until a child is born (and probably for a while after), I don't think it has developed intelligence. It does not think beyond instincts, and we kill animals who do the same thing every day.

Humans are not animals.

I'll ask you this one more time. Name the requirement for animal that we do not meet. Name a single one.

How about 5, or 6 if you split envy and covetousness, or 5 again if you split that one but dont count the last one.

Only humans kill for pleasure.

Laughter

Humans are filled with wonder at the awe of something.  IE a sunset or pictures of the universe

Envy and covetousness

Altruism  (i will admit this one is debatable)

All of these are caused by a high intelligence, which we have evolved because at some point in time it was necessary (inb4 God), not because we are special. Take away the intelligence and you have your average monkey (kind of).

Only humans kill for pleasure because it is easy to kill things if you are a human, because of rifles. Killing is easy for us, and we have the spare time to do it in. If you were a wild dog you would have to fight the thing you wanted to kill and you would need time not spent maintaining pack relations or hunting.

We laugh because we find things humorous because of our intelligence. No intelligence = no laughter.

Envy and covetousness: animals experience these too, just ask my dog.

Altruism is caused by higher intelligence and the society we live in. If you exchanged any other animal body with our body (that was capable of using tools and such) but not the minds (i.e. we all wake up in monkey bodies but keep the same minds [and don’t go bat-shit insane]) and they would be altruistic as well.

It’s not the species that determines the actions, it’s the mind. And the mind develops due to circumstance. If monkeys suddenly developed the exact same society and level of intelligence, technology, everything we had, they would be the same.

Any uniqueness of an animal doesn't necessarily contribute to it not being an animal. Even if humans were totally unique in the features you listed, we would still be considered animals.

Simply enough, in the biological definition humans apply, but in the colloquial usage humans often will not. If you disagree upon the subject of evolution, any further argument you have will be semantics....

Quote from: WardoggKC130FE on January 07, 2010, 06:34:29 PM

None of my points have yet to be refuted.

You might want to rephrase that.

Agreed.

I will give you one final chance, what qualifications for animal do we not meet. I do not mean the dictionary definition of animal meaning "inhuman behavior" I mean the biological definition for animal. (lacks cell walls, etc.)

Humans extend past the biological definition of animal.  Thats what makes us human.