Abortion

@ Flareon - you would know... why? I wasn't asking it in the rhetorical sense either, don't be so jumpy @_@

@ DJ - post deleted: be more specific.

And I probably should apologize since spider made it seem as if I'm patronizing krusty: I just got curious and thought it'd be interesting to hear from someone who has experienced it first hand, but it goes without saying you obviously don't need to share anything you don't want to...

Bored so go to debates an' debate...

From a female point of view, I'm completely against it unless the mother's life is in danger if she had the child. Even if the woman was raped, is that a reason to end a life? To a point it's understandable, but meh... If ya can't afford to take care of it then give it up for adoption. We're not all bad kids.

An' the whores... I just wanna beat the $hit out of them sometime. They NEED to go through the pain of labor if they get preggers an' stop whorin' around like a bunch of friggin' idiots.

Thank you for yur time.

On 21-Jul-2007 Fwank said:

@ Flareon - you would know... why? I wasn't asking it in the rhetorical sense either, don't be so jumpy @_@

@ DJ - post deleted: be more specific.

And I probably should apologize since spider made it seem as if I'm patronizing krusty: I just got curious and thought it'd be interesting to hear from someone who has experienced it first hand, but it goes without saying you obviously don't need to share anything you don't want to...

I don't see why you're apologising. Like you say, it's not like you were actually patronising Krusty; FD just made it seem that way. But anyway, back on topic... back on Earth, as some might say...

SGX: That's fine, but, as mentioned before on this topic, it raises the question of when exactly a foetus counts as 'alive'. That view also depends on whether you count murder as an absolute sin, no questions asked.

On 22-Jul-2007 ShadowGX said:

Bored so go to debates an' debate...

From a female point of view, I'm completely against it unless the mother's life is in danger if she had the child. Even if the woman was raped, is that a reason to end a life? To a point it's understandable, but meh... If ya can't afford to take care of it then give it up for adoption. We're not all bad kids.

An' the whores... I just wanna beat the $hit out of them sometime. They NEED to go through the pain of labor if they get preggers an' stop whorin' around like a bunch of friggin' idiots.

Thank you for yur time.

As for prostitutes you make it sound as if many of them do it for a laugh, whereas in truth many are forced to do it.

I heard quite a good point about abortion in the case of rape, that if you are able to bring the baby up so that has a happy life then you have turned a really negative thing into something which is really positive. Though personally I can imagine that having the baby would still be very hard for the mother.

« Last edited by super craig on Jul 22nd 2007 »

1st- who is Krusty?

2nd- to SGX- if a woman is raped, then just loking at the child would bring back the horrific memories of the act.

and Fwank- I would know, because it's common sense for me to know which questions are considered inappropriate to ask a lady. and by inappropriate, i meant questions that would be too emotional for a woman and would backfire on you. and yes, i know that swould have the right to now answer it, but i was just trying to 'save' you from a woman's furry.

hmm, i got a feeling you're gonna be, uhh, disgruntled with the word 'save'..

"Who is krusty?" It's questions like these which make me remember how my faith in humanity got destroyed... I'm not even going to grace it with an answer. Go back and look, will you?

Furthermore, I don't know about you, but I wouldn't consider that question offensive if I were a woman. Of course, I wouldn't know, but then, neither would you. And don't regurgitate that "common sense" argument again, because that's bullshit, your common sense may not be right.

On 22-Jul-2007 ShadowGX said:

Bored so go to debates an' debate...

From a female point of view, I'm completely against it unless the mother's life is in danger if she had the child. Even if the woman was raped, is that a reason to end a life? To a point it's understandable, but meh... If ya can't afford to take care of it then give it up for adoption. We're not all bad kids.

An' the whores... I just wanna beat the $hit out of them sometime. They NEED to go through the pain of labor if they get preggers an' stop whorin' around like a bunch of friggin' idiots.

Thank you for yur time.

First of all, keep your abbreviations out of those forum. No "an', yur, ya, meh, preggers, whorin, friggin."

I would like to take this time to rip your post apart (aside from the abbreviations though, good post, just try to keep them out please).

If a woman is raped, you are ending a life that was never supposed to be. If you fix a mistake, is that bad? Didn't think so. You're a girl aren't you? What would you do if you were raped and giving birth to the child was not dangerous. Would you still do it? Think of having your vagina stretched to the width of a baby's shoulders all because of an unfortunate accident. Think about 8 months of torture with a rounder, and larger belly all because you were raped.

Whores need money, and they get it through sex. It is their work, and it's how they get paid. It comes with the risk of getting STDs and becoming pregnant, but they need to survive somehow. I would much rather see an attractive young woman working for a decent wage to get her money instead of begging for it on the streets.

Simple Theory, since yur above me you get to go first. I'll post however I like thank you. Get an admin to tell me to stop an' I will. You don't get that authority. Now to the actual debate...

"If a woman is raped, you are ending a life that was never supposed to be. If you fix a mistake, is that bad?" A mistake? MISTAKE?! *censored*

"Whores need money, and they get it through sex. It is their work, and it's how they get paid. It comes with the risk of getting STDs and becoming pregnant, but they need to survive somehow." Don't you DARE start on that BS how prostitution is the only route.

Next... Flareon Dude_. "If a woman is raped, then just looking at the child would bring back the horrific memories of the act." Then don't look. Push, shove, give it up. Now I s'ppose yur thinkin' "well why carry it, still the memories come..." If it's that much of a psychological torture for you, kill the damn thing, by all means.

Craigy is next. "As for prostitutes you make it sound as if many of them do it for a laugh, whereas in truth many are forced to do it." No one is for God's sake forced to do anythin'. They may be threatened an' pushed into it, but there are always ways out if one tries.

"I heard quite a good point about abortion in the case of rape, that if you are able to bring the baby up so that has a happy life then you have turned a really negative thing into something which is really positive. Though personally I can imagine that having the baby would still be very hard for the mother." Agreed. Some women have the courage to suck it up, others do not.

Last but not least, SL. "That's fine, but, as mentioned before on this topic, it raises the question of when exactly a fetus counts as 'alive'. That view also depends on whether you count murder as an absolute sin, no questions asked." The second the sperm meets the egg it has a soul, therefor is alive. A whole nother discussion though... As for the "murder = absolute sin"... does it not? O.o Or did someone forget to send me the memo that murder is now okay? I've got a whole list of people here... I mean... *cough* Murder is bad. Keep it alive. Woo.

Note to self: Stay out of debates when yur high on nothin'. ><

You encounter a notorious serial killer. You have no way of detaining him, but you can kill him. If you let him go, he'll certainly kill again. Probably several times. Is it wrong to kill him?

On 26-Jul-2007 Shadow_Lord said:

You encounter a notorious serial killer. You have no way of detaining him, but you can kill him. If you let him go, he'll certainly kill again. Probably several times. Is it wrong to kill him?

Thats a difficult question, personally I think that if you did you would be saving more lives, but you would still have to end one for that, plus unless you killed in self defence you would be a murderer yourself.

Almost the enire arguement about abortion hinges on when it is 'alive', can something be alive when it can't survive on its own?


« Last edited by super craig on Jul 26th 2007 »

But surely, if you let him get away, knowing he'll kill again, you're as responsible for the deaths of whoever else he kills as he is? It's the lesser of two evils, killing him.

killing him in self defemse would be the just thing to do, but if you just kill hoim for the sake of killing him, then it is wrong.

and you really would not be responsible for all his future murders, only he would be. it would be his choice to kill, not yours. He (or she) is the one commiting the act of violence, not you. If you were to let him get away, you would not be responsible for his futre murders. you would just feel really really guilty about it.

oh and super craig, yes. yes something can be alive when it can't survive on it's own. if i am not mistaken, i do believe that wolf or coyote cubs are left alone at an early age if they are seen as a threat by the alpha dog. in most cases, they die, but they were in fact alive when they could not survive.

but that has almost nothing to do with abortion. and i also agree that this whole topic dwelves on when the life process begins, but it is just way too controvercial. whether a good doctor knows when the life is gien, it just won't matter, because there will always be some super religious person who will basically be one level below a martyr who will just shove their beliefs in the mouth of good science to the point of almost choking. there will just always be many accepted beliefs on which one is right, but there will just never be an accepted anwer by all. So, no one will ever really know, for sure, and that just makes this debate pointless.

to sum it all up, abortion is just ending a life that possibly never existed at the time of the abortion, or did exist at the time of te abortion. we will never really know for sure, so anyone can be right, really.


Just a little P.S.- if there any typos above, sorry. im using a computer that does not have very good keys and sometimes doesn't work when i hit the buttons. again, if it's hard to read, i apologize.

@ SGX - no, you're not going to "post however you like" in here: set a proper example for the rest of us like you should be doing, or risk getting your posts deleted. Warned.

House keeping aside, mind sharing what you think the swell folks at the red light district could do as an alternative to make money? In my opinion, without the help from others, it's pretty much the only feasible route in order to lead a semi-decent western cultured lifestyle that's still within the boundaries of the law (so long as prostitution isn't being slammed)

Side note: leave the existence of the soul outside of abortion debates D= it's too intangible yet sticky of a subject D=

@ Shadow - That's only relatively speaking; it's still entirely possible for both to be wrong but "one of them more/less wrong than the other", like 1+1= 3 or 12 billion: the former is more correct than the later, however, still wrong. Utilitarianism is a widely accepted judgment tool in modern society... to the extent that it's unquestioned, so it's pretty hard to say actually.

@ Craig - technically nothing survives solely on its own; we have ecosystems, and it's a delicate balance. Aside from that, there are other symbiotic organisms, such as many aquatic/marine animals, a butt load of plants, and double that amount of insects and micro-organisms that are depend on others a lot more than themselves which are all considered to be "alive".

@ Spider - hi, I ran out of things to say...

abortion is totally wrong, i dont care if its an accsident or not.
you dont even have to carry the baby, there are surgeroys, get another women to carry the baby for you and then either give it to that woemn or put it up for adoption.

What?

Take the baby out and put it in another person?

Aside from the fact that it isn't doable... why did you even think that was possible? Who'd want somebody else's kid when they can have their own? (and now you can, with eggs being able to be preserved and all...)

SL: That's stoppin' a murderer. Completely different than killin' a helpless thing.

Fwank: Again, until I see an admin or someone who actually has authority to tell me to change the way I have been typin' for the past 2 years, I will not. So far only you, ST, an' Cez have complained. Get over it or don't read my posts. At least they're legible.

"In my opinion, without the help from others, it's pretty much the only feasible route in order to lead a semi-decent western cultured lifestyle that's still within the boundaries of the law (so long as prostitution isn't being slammed)." Help from others is bad how now? Agreed that it'd be damn hard to get out on yur own, but that's what certain organizations are for, say, the cops? An' to the slammed thing, here in the US it IS illegal. Dunno 'bout elsewhere.

Now lookit... You made me disobey my note to self. Mean boy... =[

On 27-Jul-2007 Fwank said:

What?

Take the baby out and put it in another person?

Aside from the fact that it isn't doable... why did you even think that was possible? Who'd want somebody else's kid when they can have their own? (and now you can, with eggs being able to be preserved and all...)

not eery women can have babys, no matter how hard they try, i know two.

On 27-Jul-2007 GlobalFatality said:

abortion is totally wrong, i dont care if its an accsident or not.
you dont even have to carry the baby, there are surgeroys, get another women to carry the baby for you and then either give it to that woemn or put it up for adoption.

As Fwank said that is impossible, you can take eggs out, fertilise them and them put them into another woman but not once it was been fertlised in the woman.

Also I take it that in your last post you meant that the ones that aren't aborted can be given to couples that can't have kids which is a nice idea, but is it worth possibly destroying one life so that someone else can have a better one?

@Fwank: Good point about the ecosystem thing, guess thats my theroy out the window, lol.

« Last edited by super craig on Jul 27th 2007 »

On 27-Jul-2007 GlobalFatality said:

abortion is totally wrong, i dont care if its an accsident or not.
you dont even have to carry the baby, there are surgeroys, get another women to carry the baby for you and then either give it to that woemn or put it up for adoption.

you got that idea from Friends, didn't you?

« Last edited by Flareon Dude_ on Jul 28th 2007 »

FD_: Oh come on. If you know he's going to kill again, then responsibility lies with you as much as him. You had the oppurtunity to stop him. You didn't. Why do you think you feel guilty if there's nothing to feel guilty about?

Fwank: So it's a lesser of two evils thing. Comparatively, killing the man's still the 'right' course of action.

GF: Please try to avoid absolute statements like that without providing supporting arguments. Also, seeing as you claim to know so much about the medical science related to pregnancy, I'd have thought you'd know about IVF treatment.