Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5
Results 81 to 99 of 99
  1. #81
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    272
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Any prevalent American social issue

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    So the 4yo's mother doesn't have the right to decide whether he lives or dies?
    Absolutely not! Are you arguing she should be able to?

    In your 4ry old case, a situation arose completely out of the mothers control. That she chooses against a procedure that is no where near 100% effective, and could kill one or both of them (during the Op. or post-Op complications) does not in ANY way equate to a mother not wanting her child (that she is responsible for!)to be born and paying someone to terminate it prior to it being born. In one case, something out of her control threatens to kill her child. In the case of abortion, the mother DIRECTLY chooses death of her child, when the death is to occur, and PAYS to have it done!
    How much more different can those two cases be!???
    I wish you would try a different analogy, this one does not relate even slightly.





    Look none of any of that really matters. As has been stated on this thread by at least two people (and is yet unchallenged)

    At what stage of life does some one become "human being" (from a legal perspective)? At conception? At birth? Somewhere in between?

    If at some point, while still in the womb, the fetus is "human being", there are current laws that would protect it from being terminated.
    If it is not a "human being" until after birth, then there is little to discuss.

    Consent issues (especially since the woman is still "responsible" for the pregnancy) would not pass legal muster as a means to justify terminating said human being's life.


    If a fetus did have the same legal rights as a 4yr old (as you suggest) you would not see abortion on demand (for any reason) still legal. We just don't allow the terminating of 4yr old children legally and if a fetus had the same rights, it wouldn't be legal to terminate it either, for the exact same reasons...

    We have seen legal precedent for the fetus being a "human life". A boyfriend that hits his girlfriend (even if she asked him to do it) in the stomach till the fetus aborts can be charged with homicide. Someone who murders a pregnant woman can be charged with double homicide. Pregnant women have been prosecuted for drinking/taking drugs there by exposing the fetus to unhealthy substances. I'm fairly certain that exposing your baby to an abortion is unhealthy (for the baby AND for the mother!....).

    The logical flip/flop to go from it's fine for a doctor to kill a fetus for any reason the MOTHER chooses, but everyone else "that there fetus is a (legal) human life, and hurting it is against the law" is a bit too far for me...

    What of the unborn baby's "bodily autonomy" anyway?
    Why are late term abortions limited?

  2. #82
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    403
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Any prevalent American social issue

    Iím repeating this, since you ignored it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Ok, lets say I agree with this point (as of yet, I do not though). I don't see what has really changed?
    Let's re-cap:
    FB: The same rights are granted - you can't use someone's body without their consent.
    BZ: This woman made the decisions that lead to her body being "used" by this individual. Pretty much consent!
    FB: not all pregnancies are the result of the woman's informed decision
    BZ: I am discussing abortion on demand, just because the mothers regrets HER choice to have gotten pregnant.

    So, do you retract your argument that, since consent to intercourse is necessarily consent to pregnancy, we should not allow abortions on the grounds of non-consent to pregnancy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Absolutely not! Are you arguing she should be able to?
    By deciding to withdraw consent to the donation, she is also deciding that the child dies. Do you think she should be forced to donate her organ so that the child could live?

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    In your 4ry old case, a situation arose completely out of the mothers control.
    By focusing only on this difference and ignoring the question of the motherís right to bodily autonomy, are you then in favour of allowing abortions in cases where the pregnancy arose out of the womanís control?

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Look none of any of that really matters. As has been stated on this thread by at least two people (and is yet unchallenged)
    If you think about it youíll see thereís a good reason for thatÖ

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Consent issues (especially since the woman is still "responsible" for the pregnancy) would not pass legal muster as a means to justify terminating said human being's life.
    And yet they routinely do. I donít know why this is so hard for you, but luckily we still protect womenís bodily autonomy and ability to choose whether to go through with pregnancies, regardless of how they came about.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    If a fetus did have the same legal rights as a 4yr old (as you suggest) you would not see abortion on demand (for any reason) still legal.
    Again missing the point, which is that granting the fetus the same rights as the 4yo means that the fetusí rights donít preclude anotherís personís right to bodily autonomy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    We just don't allow the terminating of 4yr old children legally and if a fetus had the same rights, it wouldn't be legal to terminate it either, for the exact same reasons.
    And the fetusí rights would not preclude another personís right to bodily autonomy, just like the 4yoís rights donít.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    We have seen legal precedent for the fetus being a "human life". A boyfriend that hits his girlfriend (even if she asked him to do it) in the stomach till the fetus aborts can be charged with homicide. Someone who murders a pregnant woman can be charged with double homicide. Pregnant women have been prosecuted for drinking/taking drugs there by exposing the fetus to unhealthy substances.
    Unfortunately, the legal precedent goes both ways, and there are also numerous cases where the death of the fetus goes uncharged specifically because itís not considered to be a human being.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    I'm fairly certain that exposing your baby to an abortion is unhealthy (for the baby AND for the mother!)
    Support or retract this assertion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    The logical flip/flop to go from it's fine for a doctor to kill a fetus for any reason the MOTHER chooses, but everyone else "that there fetus is a (legal) human life, and hurting it is against the law" is a bit too far for me.
    Thatís why your assertion is not accepted as fact.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    What of the unborn baby's "bodily autonomy" anyway?
    Are you saying that an unborn personís bodily autonomy is more important that an actual personís bodily autonomy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Why are late term abortions limited?
    I already provided an answer to this.

  3. #83
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    272
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Any prevalent American social issue

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    Iím repeating this, since you ignored it.


    Let's re-cap:
    FB: The same rights are granted - you can't use someone's body without their consent.
    BZ: This woman made the decisions that lead to her body being "used" by this individual. Pretty much consent!
    FB: not all pregnancies are the result of the woman's informed decision
    BZ: I am discussing abortion on demand, just because the mothers regrets HER choice to have gotten pregnant.

    So, do you retract your argument that, since consent to intercourse is necessarily consent to pregnancy, we should not allow abortions on the grounds of non-consent to pregnancy?
    I don't remember making that argument per se, regarding consent, perhaps you could direct me?

    I do remember saying something like (in parenthesis and hardly a major point of mine) "I would listen to the argument for abortion in cases of rape"....

    ---------- Post added at 04:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:35 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy;556244
    By deciding to withdraw consent to the donation, she is also deciding that the child dies. Do you think she should be forced to donate her organ so that the child could live?
    Would you pick an analogy that actually applies to abortion please

    4yr: a mother has a child she wants (since she would have aborted it if she didn't want it). it somehow lost kidney function. mother might be able to donate one. decides the risks outweigh the "possible" outcome of her child living (a transplant is hardly 100% effective). the child probably die, but NOT BECAUSE the mother wants him/her to die!!!!!!!
    Ab: a mother has a fetus (unborn child) she doesn't want, and wants terminated (see killed). she chooses the date/time, place of termination, and the person who is going to do the terminating (see killing). the fetus dies BECAUSE the mother wanted it to die!!!!!!!


    These two scenarios are POLAR OPPOSITES!
    4yr-died because of an "act of nature" (because the mother didn't cause the kidney to fail)!
    Ab- died because the mother wanted it dead and purposely had it killed!

    Can we move on from this now?

    ---------- Post added at 04:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:50 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    If you think about it youíll see thereís a good reason for thatÖ

    And yet they routinely do. I donít know why this is so hard for you, but luckily we still protect womenís bodily autonomy and ability to choose whether to go through with pregnancies, regardless of how they came about.

    That it is currently legal, hardly speaks to whether it should be legal. Kinda why we are talking about it don't ya think?

    ---------- Post added at 04:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:52 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    Again missing the point, which is that granting the fetus the same rights as the 4yo means that the fetusí rights donít preclude anotherís personís right to bodily autonomy.

    I don't remember the fetus being allowed a choice where to exist or to exist at all. If the mother doesn't allow the fetus a choice or the option to ask to you her "bodily autonomy" what choice if the fetus left with?

    Again, what of the fetus' "bodily autonomy" since it enjoys the same legal rights?

    ---------- Post added at 04:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:55 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    Unfortunately, the legal precedent goes both ways, and there are also numerous cases where the death of the fetus goes uncharged specifically because itís not considered to be a human being.
    Please support this

    ---------- Post added at 05:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:56 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    Support or retract this assertion.
    The CDC "estimates" 424 deaths since 1973, but admits the number is likely inaccurate...
    (also, that is just deaths, not other complications. Doctors review the possible damage an abortion can cause the mother prior to the "procedure" (see killing). I have been present during such a conversation...)

    But this can not speak to the possible emotional trauma of the mother. I personally know a number of women that deeply regret having had an abortion. The emotional pain is hard to put on a graph, but it is still real....

    ---------- Post added at 06:10 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:00 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    I’m repeating this, since you ignored it.


    Let's re-cap:
    FB: The same rights are granted - you can't use someone's body without their consent.
    BZ: This woman made the decisions that lead to her body being "used" by this individual. Pretty much consent!
    FB: not all pregnancies are the result of the woman's informed decision
    BZ: I am discussing abortion on demand, just because the mothers regrets HER choice to have gotten pregnant.

    Perhaps you could try some examples that aren't soooo extreme: eg
    Women over 18 that don't know intercourse might lead to pregnancy
    A 4 yr old that can ONLY get a transplant from his mother

    maybe something that is kinda common in the world we live in

    ---------- Post added at 06:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:10 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    Are you saying that an unborn person’s bodily autonomy is more important that an actual person’s bodily autonomy?
    Please support that the "unborn person" is not an "actual person" since that is where YOU came from!!

    ---------- Post added at 06:15 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:13 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    I already provided an answer to this.
    Cute, but why respond at all if you are unwilling to "repeat yourself". My question stands

    ---------- Post added at 06:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:15 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    I already provided an answer to this.
    The answer is too obvious. The support for abortion drops dramatically the more the "fetus" " LOOKS like a "person".

  4. #84
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    403
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Any prevalent American social issue

    Dude, you're all over the place, and I don't know which of your responses to my points you want me to respond to.

    Anyway, since you also appear to not want to treat the consent issue honestly, let's approach this from a different angle.

    You've said before that you object to abortion as a method of birth control. Why is that?

  5. #85
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    272
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Any prevalent American social issue

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    Dude, you're all over the place, and I don't know which of your responses to my points you want me to respond to.
    I just responded to your post, not sure why that should confuse you

    ---------- Post added at 05:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:52 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    Anyway, since you also appear to not want to treat the consent issue honestly, let's approach this from a different angle.
    Please show ANY instance where I have not been honest!
    I will immediately retract any comment where you can show this to be true...

    ---------- Post added at 06:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:55 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    You've said before that you object to abortion as a method of birth control. Why is that?
    As stated numerous times in this thread, the thought that a fetus suddenly becomes a human being just because it is no longer inside the mother seems kinda dumb and I can't figure out how to support it. So I thought I would see if someone else could support it. After all, if it is a human being at any time prior to leaving the mother's body, abortions could not be legal as it would indeed be the definition murder...
    Don't forget, I have been pro-choice nearly my whole life (black and white tv and no internet when I was young BTW, just to show I have been pro-choice a long time) but never tried to defend it intellectually until this thread.


    So a question for you:
    Do you agree late term abortions should be regulated more so than earlier term abortions?

  6. #86
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    403
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Any prevalent American social issue

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Please show ANY instance where I have not been honest!
    Every time you've refused to answer the question about consent by deflecting.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    As stated numerous times in this thread, the thought that a fetus suddenly becomes a human being just because it is no longer inside the mother seems kinda dumb and I can't figure out how to support it.
    What's dumb about it? Entities are considered living humans when they can do the basic things which the rest of us living humans can do, mainly survive outside a womb. This goes back to the answer I provided to what you seem to think is the nail-in-the-coffin question of why late-term abortions are usually not allowed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    After all, if it is a human being at any time prior to leaving the mother's body, abortions could not be legal as it would indeed be the definition murder.
    It still sounds like you're opposed to any form of abortion, could you please clarify? Are you in favour of refusing the right to abortion under any circumstances? Would you like to see abortion criminalized?

  7. #87
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    272
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Any prevalent American social issue

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    Every time you've refused to answer the question about consent by deflecting.
    OMG!!
    I have explained why (at length) your 4 yr old story does NOT equate to abortion. Your rebuttal is simply keep repeating it!

    Your 4 yr old story isn't even internally consistent with your position because
    Whether the mother "consented" or if she did not "consent" would not change her legal obligations in the least, and you are arguing consent is all important with regards to abortion. Again, polar opposites for comparison

    ---------- Post added at 05:47 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:42 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    This goes back to the answer I provided to what you seem to think is the nail-in-the-coffin question of why late-term abortions are usually not allowed.
    Is that what I think

    What is your "answer" to late term abortions being limited (as apposed to earlier term)?

  8. #88
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    403
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Any prevalent American social issue

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    I have explained why (at length) your 4 yr old story does NOT equate to abortion.
    It equates to another situation in which the child's life is dependent on another person's body.
    Let's take it a step further since you still appear to be having an issue with it: Imagine that the parent has a gene that causes a rare kidney disease which they knew they could possibly pass onto their offspring, but they chose to procreate anyways.
    When their child ends up hospitalized and in need of a life-saving transplant, do you think the parent should be forced to donate their kidney, since they made the choices which lead to the child's kidney failure? It's a simple "yes" or "no".

    Please note that this is a fairly common and simple modification of the popular "violinist" analogy, which is quite often referred to when discussing abortion.

  9. #89
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    272
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Any prevalent American social issue

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    It equates to another situation in which the child's life is dependent on another person's body.
    Let's take it a step further since you still appear to be having an issue with it: Imagine that the parent has a gene that causes a rare kidney disease which they knew they could possibly pass onto their offspring, but they chose to procreate anyways.
    When their child ends up hospitalized and in need of a life-saving transplant, do you think the parent should be forced to donate their kidney, since they made the choices which lead to the child's kidney failure? It's a simple "yes" or "no".

    Please note that this is a fairly common and simple modification of the popular "violinist" analogy, which is quite often referred to when discussing abortion.

    I mentioned this before, but dude, really?

    "a 4 yr old that can "only" be saved by his mothers kidney"
    "rare diseases"
    "women of legal age that have no clue intercourse can lead to pregnancy"

    If you want to use an analogy, can you come up with anything that is bit more common in the real world AND actually equates to abortion?

    I have given a list of reason why the 4yr old story doesn't equate at all and adding a "rare disease" changes nothing.

    I mean surely, if your positon is strong, you should be able to make an example that is not at the extreme edges of reality.

  10. #90
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    403
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Any prevalent American social issue

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    If you want to use an analogy, can you come up with anything that is bit more common in the real world AND actually equates to abortion?
    Your objection is irrelevant. An analogy does not need to be common. The way in which is equates to abortion is that the child will die without the parent's organ, and the parent has responsibility for the child's situation. Look, as I already explained, this is quite a common analogy used in many discussions about abortions. Your refusal to consider it and answer honestly because of irrelevant objections speaks volumes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    I mean surely, if your positon is strong, you should be able to make an example that is not at the extreme edges of reality.
    Should I really? Can you support that assertion?

  11. #91
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    272
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Any prevalent American social issue

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    Your objection is irrelevant. An analogy does not need to be common.
    I guess, but your position would be stronger if you weren't always at the fringes of reality.

    ---------- Post added at 05:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:21 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    The way in which is equates to abortion is that the child will die without the parent's organ, and the parent has responsibility for the child's situation.

    The parent is NOT "responsible for the child's situation", as the parent cannot affect the child needing the kidney in the first place (something I have repeatedly shown and as yet ignored).
    The parent is responsible for the "child"

    And your 4 yr old story is not internally consistent any more that it is externally.
    The mothers LEGAL RESPOSIBILITIES DON"T CHNGE BECAUSE SHE CONSENTED TO A KIDNEY DONATION THEN CHANGED HER MIND! She can't be legally forced to donate whether she consented or not.
    What answer are you looking for that is more "honest"?.

    Now, how about you answer why late term abortions should be limited or should they not be?

    ---------- Post added at 05:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:30 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    Should I really? Can you support that assertion?
    You want me to support common sense?

    ---------- Post added at 05:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:31 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    Your objection is irrelevant.

    And again, you suggested the fetus had the same legal rights as the 4yr old. No one would be able to abort/kill the 4 yr for any reason that I am aware of????
    So how could a fetus be aborted legally in this scenario?

  12. #92
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    272
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Any prevalent American social issue

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    Your objection is irrelevant.
    I know you are pretty busy with Squatch in the Bible/slavery thread, so just checking to see if you are just too busy to respond or if still supporting the position you have taken in this thread?

  13. #93
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    403
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Any prevalent American social issue

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    I guess, but your position would be stronger if you weren't always at the fringes of reality.
    Unfortunately, that's not how analogies work. You don't get to dismiss a perfectly valid analogy simply because you think it's a less common occurrence than what it's being compared to. The principles in play in both scenarios are what matters.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    The parent is NOT "responsible for the child's situation", as the parent cannot affect the child needing the kidney in the first place (something I have repeatedly shown and as yet ignored).
    By knowing the risk involved in procreating, and that there was a very good chance of passing on the disease gene, the parent is in a very real way responsible for the child's situation. It's a comparison with the principle that a woman who engages in sexual intercourse is responsible for the possibility of the fetus existing inside her uterus.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    And your 4 yr old story is not internally consistent any more that it is externally.
    I don't even know whether you're actually trying to make a rational point with this.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    The mothers LEGAL RESPOSIBILITIES DON"T CHNGE BECAUSE SHE CONSENTED TO A KIDNEY DONATION THEN CHANGED HER MIND! She can't be legally forced to donate whether she consented or not.
    Exactly, a person can't be forced to donate their body or use of their body for the benefit of another. This is the principle in play with the 4yo kidney situation, and it's the same principle being applied to a woman's right to decide whether to continue a pregnancy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Now, how about you answer why late term abortions should be limited or should they not be?
    This has already been answered for you in post # 67: I imagine it's because most folks consider late term, or "postviability" abortions to be killing a fetus that is developed enough to be able to survive outside the mother's body.
    If you think about it, it actually lends credence to the principle mentioned above. Since the fetus is considered able to survive without requiring the mother to donate use of her body, then it's outside the realm of situations under which said principle would apply.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    You want me to support common sense?
    I want you to support your assertion that a strong position necessarily requires one to use analogies which describe common occurrences, and conversely, you need to support your implied assertion that the use of an uncommon analogy necessarily means that one's position is not strong.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    And again, you suggested the fetus had the same legal rights as the 4yr old. No one would be able to abort/kill the 4 yr for any reason that I am aware of????
    You are misrepresenting abortion when you say "abort/kill". Do you know how most abortions are done?

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    I guess, but your position would be stronger if you weren't always at the fringes of reality.
    Again, support your assertion or retract it. Otherwise, the irrelevance of your objection stands, especially since you just conceded it.

  14. #94
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    272
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Any prevalent American social issue

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    You are misrepresenting abortion when you say "abort/kill". Do you know how most abortions are done?
    My ex wife had three abortions (that I am aware of).

    Do tell why the term "kill" isn't accurate?

  15. #95
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    403
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Any prevalent American social issue

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    My ex wife had three abortions (that I am aware of).
    Do tell why the term "kill" isn't accurate?
    Not all abortions are performed in the way you describe, but you keep misrepresenting them all as a violent act of murder/killing, and you seem to be arguing from the position that any/all abortions should be made illegal on the basis of said misrepresentation.

    Further, the fact and nature of your recent admission that your former wife had abortions indicates a fairly strong emotional bias towards the issue. It also explains your responses to date as well as your inability to at least consider it objectively, let alone from the perspective of a woman's rights over her body.

    Given the above, I don't see any value in continuing this discussion with you.

  16. #96
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    272
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Any prevalent American social issue

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    Not all abortions are performed in the way you describe,
    Do you mean some fetus' survive an abortion???
    I am pretty convinced they ALL die during an abortion (kinda the definition!).

    ---------- Post added at 05:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:25 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    Not all abortions are performed in the way you describe, but you keep misrepresenting them all as a violent act of murder/killing, and you seem to be arguing from the position that any/all abortions should be made illegal on the basis of said misrepresentation.
    I mentioned NOTHING about "violence" at ALL. I have mentioned murder once, but retracted when Mican mentioned it can't be murder if it's legal act. So, at the moment it is not murder according to US law.

    I have said multiple times I am arguing against abortion used as a primary means of birth control. I have been quite clear about this, but for some reason you and Mican seem to be of the opinion that is has to be an all or nothing situation. But that did not come form my argument.
    And do correct me if I am wrong (please), but again, to the best of my knowledge, ALL fetus' are killed during an abortion.

    ---------- Post added at 05:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:31 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    Further, the fact and nature of your recent admission that your former wife had abortions indicates a fairly strong emotional bias towards the issue. It also explains your responses to date as well as your inability to at least consider it objectively, let alone from the perspective of a woman's rights over her body.
    Several things here:
    1. My "admission"?!?!?...
    Wow, weird comment. We weren't married when she had them by the way. It's just an example of abortion being used as birth control, little more.
    Now, prove to me you have NO BIAS whatsoever and you may have some kind of point, but not much, as my argument is valid or not, whether I am biased or not!!! The source of a truth matters little if it's actually truth

    2. You have given me almost nothing to consider. Your argument revolves around "consent". In your 4 yr old example consent doesn't come into play at ALL. Whether the mother consented to donate or not changes NOTHING. Let alone having given me anything objective.

    3. We are talking about aborting a human being (see killing). That is NOT the mothers body.

    ---------- Post added at 05:44 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:41 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    Given the above, I don't see any value in continuing this discussion with you.
    No worries. Given the weakness of your current argument and the fact you have offered no other possibilities, I can understand why....

  17. #97
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    403
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Any prevalent American social issue

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    I have said multiple times I am arguing against abortion used as a primary means of birth control.
    Yes, yes, you've repeatedly stated that you're arguing against abortion "as a primary means of birth control", but haven't offered any actual arguments for that position. Further, do you honestly think abortion is used as the "primary means" to prevent unwanted births?

    ---------- Post added at 08:54 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:44 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    No worries. Given the weakness of your current argument and the fact you have offered no other possibilities, I can understand why....
    That's real cute, but please note that the pro-choice side makes pretty much the same arguments, and it is by no means weak, but instead the core principle behind the reasoning.

    Further, it's not clear what you mean by offering other possibilities, or whether this is an actual flaw in the pro-choice side. No other possibilities to what?
    Incoherent statements such as these, the fact that all you do is repeat that you're arguing against abortion as birth control while not offering any real arguments, and your heavy use of all-caps makes it hard to have a rational discussion with you.

  18. #98
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    272
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Any prevalent American social issue

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    That's real cute,
    My sense of humor can be a little dry at times I suppose

    ---------- Post added at 05:19 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:15 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    you're arguing against abortion "as a primary means of birth control", but haven't offered any actual arguments for that position. Further, do you honestly think abortion is used as the "primary means" to prevent unwanted births?[COLOR="Silver"]
    Women that have many abortions are using it as primary birth control it seems.

    If you don't "like what I have argued" staying with yours "4 yr olds and fetus' have the same legal rights is fine with me?

    ---------- Post added at 05:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:19 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    No other possibilities to what?
    To your 4 yr old analogy, because it doesn't relate to abortion for the reasons already stated. I thought perhaps you could try a different one?

    ---------- Post added at 05:25 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:22 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    and your heavy use of all-caps makes it hard to have a rational discussion with you.
    Really? I thought I was only "capping" points that seemed to be going unacknowledged.
    I will try to be judicious in my emphasis
    Last edited by Squatch347; December 4th, 2017 at 06:06 AM. Reason: Tag Fix

  19. #99
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    403
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Any prevalent American social issue

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Women that have many abortions are using it as primary birth control it seems.
    Again, this is not an argument, but instead simply a kind of statement about how the situation "seems", to you. It's not even coherent, since any abortion, for any reason, is technically a method of birth control. Also, I question the rationale behind your desire to limit women's bodily autonomy simply because it seems to you that women who have many abortions are using it as a primary means of birth control. How do you know that those women aren't also using other methods of birth control, albeit unsuccessfully? Even relying solely on the "pull-out" method and then abortion when that fails would mean that abortion is not actually the primary method in use, but an ultimate or last-resort method. Having to resort to abortion multiple times due to the failure of other methods doesn't change this.

    Further, it's clear that you haven't actually thought about the real-world implications of what you're suggesting. Should women only be allowed to get one or some arbitrary number of abortions by choice, and after that they can only get one if they've been raped or if the pregnancy becomes life-threatening? And otherwise, they must absolutely continue with the pregnancy against violating their non-consent to do so?

    Can you imagine the circumstances many of the resulting children would be subject to by implementing this "no aborting as birth control" ridiculousness? Or do you not care about that, as long as you can live in a world where women don't use abortion as birth control.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    If you don't "like what I have argued" staying with yours "4 yr olds and fetus' have the same legal rights is fine with me?
    Not really coherent here - maybe you'd like to rephrase or elaborate?

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    To your 4 yr old analogy, because it doesn't relate to abortion for the reasons already stated. I thought perhaps you could try a different one?
    I've already explained how it does relate. Your only objection so far has been that it's not common, which is irrelevant.

 

 
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5

Similar Threads

  1. New Social Group
    By Loller65 in forum Shootin' the Breeze / Off-Topic
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: July 22nd, 2009, 02:57 PM
  2. Social Anxiety
    By vec90 in forum Community Advice Forum
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: August 22nd, 2008, 08:31 AM
  3. Social Retards
    By mysticalwonder in forum Shootin' the Breeze / Off-Topic
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: April 22nd, 2007, 12:02 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •