Abortion

1…1113151617

Comments

  • callen
    callen Posts: 6,388
    Dog Loyal wrote:
    Yes, and they think a bucket full of acorns is a forest of mighty oaks.

    To call a fertilized egg a "a child" is the equivalent stupidity of calling a newborn "a grown man." They are not the same thing, they do not have the same abilities or rights, and to treat them as the exact same thing is myopic.
    my freind is the rub...that's what all this boils down to...those that think its a human at conception and those that don't. Course once we get past this sillyness (yes my opinion I understand)...we then are tasked with deciding when its a human.......thats the b*tch.
    10-18-2000 Houston, 04-06-2003 Houston, 6-25-2003 Toronto, 10-8-2004 Kissimmee, 9-4-2005 Calgary, 12-3-05 Sao Paulo, 7-2-2006 Denver, 7-22-06 Gorge, 7-23-2006 Gorge, 9-13-2006 Bern, 6-22-2008 DC, 6-24-2008 MSG, 6-25-2008 MSG
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    callen wrote:
    but how....how can a few cells be called a person...can't...thats my issue...so the way that I see it...and as you mentioned in last couple of posts....there is grey area in this..and not an easy answer....BUT...If a person truely feels that its a person at conception they're using their religion...which is logically flawed..hence their argument is flawed.

    no they are not. you don't need religion to feel that there is life at conception and i know MANY people who feel exactly that way.
  • Dog Loyal
    Dog Loyal Posts: 336
    callen wrote:
    but how....how can a few cells be called a person...can't...thats my issue...so the way that I see it...and as you mentioned in last couple of posts....there is grey area in this..and not an easy answer....BUT...If a person truely feels that its a person at conception they're using their religion...which is logically flawed..hence their argument is flawed.
    I actually have no problem with people using their own religious views to make their own decisions regarding abortion for themselves. It's when they start foisting on everyone else, trying to change the laws, and calling those of us who've had abortions "skanks" and "murderers" and whatnot, that I start objecting ... and not wanting to pussyfoot around their precious "sensibilities" as SoulSinging seems to think I should.

    SoulSinging, go ahead and pussyfoot. I'm going to call stuff like I see it.
    The kids of today should defend themselves against the Seventies Nineties.
  • callen
    callen Posts: 6,388
    bee_boy wrote:
    How do you define a religion as flawed by using human logic?
    Sorry not following you.......not being sarcastic mind you. Please expound....
    10-18-2000 Houston, 04-06-2003 Houston, 6-25-2003 Toronto, 10-8-2004 Kissimmee, 9-4-2005 Calgary, 12-3-05 Sao Paulo, 7-2-2006 Denver, 7-22-06 Gorge, 7-23-2006 Gorge, 9-13-2006 Bern, 6-22-2008 DC, 6-24-2008 MSG, 6-25-2008 MSG
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    Dog Loyal wrote:
    Geez, did I really need a lecture on "how I treat people?" That they are "sensitive and emotional on the subject" does not mean that I shouldn't be allowed to point out that a clump of cells is not a child.

    you can argue that a clump of cells is not a child, but to "point out" that anyone who feels different is an idiot is what ensures that nobody who feels differently will ever listen to you. which means we have no open and respectful debate on the subject. which means you cannot ever convince someone to think otherwise. which leaves us where we are now... a bunch of pro-lifers calling pro-choicers baby-murderers and a bunch of pro-choicers calling pro-lifers illogical idiots and too stupid to understand the issue.

    your point is valid. your tone is not. it's arrogant and condescending and if i were a pro-lifer, id ignore you too and probly tell you to go feck yourself. but im not, so im just telling you maybe you should try talking to them rather than lecturing them on when you feel life begins.
  • callen
    callen Posts: 6,388
    Dog Loyal wrote:
    I actually have no problem with people using their own religious views to make their own decisions regarding abortion for themselves. It's when they start foisting on everyone else, trying to change the laws, and calling those of us who've had abortions "skanks" and "murderers" and whatnot, that I start objecting ... and not wanting to pussyfoot around their precious "sensibilities" as SoulSinging seems to think I should.

    SoulSinging, go ahead and pussyfoot. I'm going to call stuff like I see it.
    completely...if you want to raise that child...have at it. Again as I mentioned in post....womans choice. Period...end of story...damnit... (-:

    Don't get too bent on soulsinging....I, like you, get rather brash but we do have the unique opportunity to give our thoughts to people that don't agree with us..and if you sell it...it may stick. Soooo...just keep pointing out the obvious...without calling them idiots and they may listen....this is a kick ass medium..for sure.
    10-18-2000 Houston, 04-06-2003 Houston, 6-25-2003 Toronto, 10-8-2004 Kissimmee, 9-4-2005 Calgary, 12-3-05 Sao Paulo, 7-2-2006 Denver, 7-22-06 Gorge, 7-23-2006 Gorge, 9-13-2006 Bern, 6-22-2008 DC, 6-24-2008 MSG, 6-25-2008 MSG
  • Dog Loyal
    Dog Loyal Posts: 336
    callen wrote:
    completely...if you want to raise that child...have at it. Again as I mentioned in post....womans choice. Period...end of story...damnit... (-:

    Don't get too bent on soulsinging....I, like you, get rather brash but we do have the unique opportunity to give our thoughts to people that don't agree with us..and if you sell it...it may stick. Soooo...just keep pointing out the obvious...without calling them idiots and they may listen....this is a kick ass medium..for sure.
    Point taken. I did indeed use the word "stupidity" in a previous post arguing that a clump of cells is no more a child than a newborn is a grown man. Unfortunately, I cannot think of any other words to describe that sort of a stance that aren't simply synonyms for stupidity, so I won't try.

    BeeBoy is actually quite reasonable in this discussion. We cross-posted and I think SoulSinging thought what I wrote was meant as a slam at BeeBoy. It was not.
    The kids of today should defend themselves against the Seventies Nineties.
  • bee_boy
    bee_boy Posts: 384
    callen wrote:
    Sorry not following you.......not being sarcastic mind you. Please expound....

    It's all cool. What you said: "If a person truely feels that its a person at conception they're using their religion...which is logically flawed", doesn't make much sense to ME. That is, say that a religion is flawed by using logic. Most non-religious people I know basically go by the "if I don't understand it, then it's wrong" rule. I'm a very religious person and one of the things that I've found with religion is that you can't explain everything. Ok, so a lot of you would say "that's what the dickhead says because he can't explain all the nonsense that his church preaches", well it's not that. I just think that religion is supposed to be like that. Based upon a being that is so divine that it will always remain a mystery for us.

    Being in a board full of Atheists and Agnostics I shouldn't be so open about this since I'd more than likely get some sort of verbal attack, but I'm not trying to impose whatever it is that I believe in. I mean, I'm VERY happy being a religious person and I try my best to live as a good man. That's enough for me.
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    Not that it matters, but can anyone point to a passage in the Bible that says anything about aborting fetuses? Or when "soul" begins. For political and scientific puposes though, the "soul" doesn't exist. I'm just curious if anyone has a basis for that belief.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • bee_boy
    bee_boy Posts: 384
    As a brief parenthesis, I JUST BECAME A SOLDIER OF LOVE! :D
  • bee_boy
    bee_boy Posts: 384
    Ahnimus wrote:
    Not that it matters, but can anyone point to a passage in the Bible that says anything about aborting fetuses? Or when "soul" begins. For political and scientific puposes though, the "soul" doesn't exist. I'm just curious if anyone has a basis for that belief.

    I don't think that the essence of the soul is mentioned in the Bible. Haven't read it in quite a while. I think that this topic was something brought forward as a bunch of assumptions made by a lot of bearded men many years before we were born...

    Some people just follow the "tradition".
  • Dog Loyal
    Dog Loyal Posts: 336
    Ahnimus wrote:
    Not that it matters, but can anyone point to a passage in the Bible that says anything about aborting fetuses? Or when "soul" begins. For political and scientific puposes though, the "soul" doesn't exist. I'm just curious if anyone has a basis for that belief.
    Ahnimus, I don't believe in the bible of course, but you might enjoy this article that details the bible's stance on things unborn:

    http://www.elroy.net/ehr/abortion.html
    The kids of today should defend themselves against the Seventies Nineties.
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    bee_boy wrote:
    I don't think that the essence of the soul is mentioned in the Bible. Haven't read it in quite a while. I think that this topic was something brought forward as a bunch of assumptions made but a lot of bearded men many years before we were born...

    Some people just follow the "tradition".

    That's kind of what I thought. So the whole argument is just speculation upon speculation.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • bee_boy
    bee_boy Posts: 384
    Ahnimus wrote:
    That's kind of what I thought. So the whole argument is just speculation upon speculation.

    I think so, yeah. It's all down to personal beliefs (many of them based upon religion), I guess.
  • Dog Loyal
    Dog Loyal Posts: 336
    bee_boy wrote:
    I think so, yeah. It's all down to personal beliefs (many of them based upon religion), I guess.
    Right then. Seems we're all in agreement that those who believe a fertilized egg is a person deserving full human rights can choose not to have abortions; and those of who believe they are merely potential humans can avail ourselves of choice.
    The kids of today should defend themselves against the Seventies Nineties.
  • bee_boy
    bee_boy Posts: 384
    Dog Loyal wrote:
    Right then. Seems we're all in agreement that those who believe a fertilized egg is a person deserving full human rights can choose not to have abortions; and those of who believe they are merely potential humans can avail ourselves of choice.

    Well, in the end absolutely everything is up to each one of us. No one is ever going to tell us what we should or shouldn't do (unless it's illegal and the coppers are in the right to bust your ass).

    The tricky bit is that everyone has different opinions, therefore, different choices. Hence, this board.

    Isn't it fun?
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    Dog Loyal wrote:
    Right then. Seems we're all in agreement that those who believe a fertilized egg is a person deserving full human rights can choose not to have abortions; and those of who believe they are merely potential humans can avail ourselves of choice.

    Right, so it's all individual choice which is the "Pro-Choice" stance. Then we get further into depth and can agree on limitations for the pro-choice option. Such as third trimester abortions. Personally, I'm satisfied with the current law.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_federal_abortion_legislation
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • Jeanie
    Jeanie Posts: 9,446
    Dog Loyal wrote:
    Thank you Jeanie. I enjoy your posts too. Tell me you like Yield! :)

    :) Of course I like Yield!!! What's not to like? ;)

    Yep, I read right through this thread last night and I have to say that it was very exciting to see somebody articulate pretty much word for word my thoughts on this issue. I do get a bit muddled sometimes! :eek: Your posts were excellent Dog Loyal. And I did go and add both your links to my favorites so I can take a better look at them later. The maggots sound very interesting! :)
    NOPE!!!

    *~You're IT Bert!~*

    Hold on to the thread
    The currents will shift
  • bee_boy
    bee_boy Posts: 384
    Jeanie wrote:
    :) Of course I like Yield!!! What's not to like? ;)

    Yep, I read right through this thread last night and I have to say that it was very exciting to see somebody articulate pretty much word for word my thoughts on this issue. I do get a bit muddled sometimes! :eek: Your posts were excellent Dog Loyal. And I did go and add both your links to my favorites so I can take a better look at them later. The maggots sound very interesting! :)

    You're the nice, Aussie, icon-using girl that hijacked the "Overrated bands" thread, right?
  • Jeanie
    Jeanie Posts: 9,446
    soulsinging wrote:
    i agree with that. id like to see abortion become unnecessary rather than illegal.

    Me too. :)
    NOPE!!!

    *~You're IT Bert!~*

    Hold on to the thread
    The currents will shift

Categories