abortion / animal rights / death penalty / etc.

rldriver2
rldriver2 Posts: 27
edited August 2007 in A Moving Train
First of all: I'm all about having a civilized discussion and I'm certainly not into Bible thumping to back up my views (glancing at Juberoo).

Things are a little slow on the Moving Train this morning so I'm just trying to stir things up a bit (evil grin). In other words, take my name calling with a grain of salt.

Why do hippy liberals ;-) tend to be about animal rights and anti death penalty scenes out of respect for life and it's quality but at the same time support abortion rights with respect for choice over life? Exclude extenuating circumstances that involve rape, incest, and the mother's life. Why does the concern for the freedom to be alive and well not extend to something as innocent and pure as a newly conceived life?

Fire away...
Raleigh 1992 - Raleigh 2003 - Charlotte 2003 - Asheville 2004 - Lollapolooza 2007
Post edited by Unknown User on
«13

Comments

  • keeponrockin
    keeponrockin Posts: 7,446
    Death Penalty: IMO, Death shouldn't be a punishment for killing someone. Yes, some deserve to die, but I don't think that it's fair because it doesn't make us any better than the killers.

    Abortion: It is simply a matter of when a life is considered a life and when it isn't. IN MY OPINION, a fetus is not a living, especially in the first 3 months. It wouldn't survive on it's own.

    Again, that's all my opinion.
    Believe me, when I was growin up, I thought the worst thing you could turn out to be was normal, So I say freaks in the most complementary way. Here's a song by a fellow freak - E.V
  • Carlos D
    Carlos D Posts: 638
    Becuase they've convinced themselves that calling an unborn human a 'foetus' makes it less gruesome.
    It may be the devil or it may be the Lord
    But you're gonna have to serve somebody.

    www.bebo.com/pearljam06
  • Derrick
    Derrick Posts: 475
    I am a liberal that supports animal rights, dislikes the death penalty, and dislikes abortion. My view on abortion has changed 3 times in my life, but I've been this way for about seven years now. Call me Kerry, I'm a flipflopper and proud of it.
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    rldriver2 wrote:
    First of all: I'm all about having a civilized discussion and I'm certainly not into Bible thumping to back up my views (glancing at Juberoo).

    Things are a little slow on the Moving Train this morning so I'm just trying to stir things up a bit (evil grin). In other words, take my name calling with a grain of salt.

    Why do hippy liberals ;-) tend to be about animal rights and anti death penalty scenes out of respect for life and it's quality but at the same time support abortion rights with respect for choice over life? Exclude extenuating circumstances that involve rape, incest, and the mother's life. Why does the concern for the freedom to be alive and well not extend to something as innocent and pure as a newly conceived life?

    Fire away...

    i dont think a fetus is alive.

    im not huge on animal rights. i dont believe in intentional cruelty to them, but shit happens.

    i see the death penalty as expensive, unnecessary, and prone to abuse or mistakes that are unacceptable.
  • rldriver2
    rldriver2 Posts: 27
    keeponrockin wrote:
    Abortion: It is simply a matter of when a life is considered a life and when it isn't. IN MY OPINION, a fetus is not a living, especially in the first 3 months. It wouldn't survive on it's own.

    A new child born naturally after 9 months in the womb wouldn't survive by itself either. How it is nurtured changes through out it's devlopment inside and outside of the womb, what is significant about 3 months?
    Raleigh 1992 - Raleigh 2003 - Charlotte 2003 - Asheville 2004 - Lollapolooza 2007
  • blackredyellow
    blackredyellow Posts: 5,889
    There is always a level hypocrisy with all of our stances (like pro-life people who are for the war or dealth penalty), but I think it mostly has to do with when you feel life begins...

    The vast majority of pro-choice people have a point where they consider the fetus as being a "life" and at that point are against abortion. In the first few weeks after conception, to me, it's just a mass of cells in a yolk sac that has the potential for life.

    My wife is 20 weeks pregnant, and at our first ultrasound 5 weeks in, there was no heartbeat, no visible formation, just a yolk sac... While we were beyond thrilled that she was pregnant, I wouldn't consider it "life" at that point.

    Most pro-choice people are anti-abortion, but don't feel that the gov't should make laws against that choice.

    There are some people who don't have a problem with second or third trimesters, but I think they are in the very small minority. And a lot of the fight against things like the partial birth abortion bans are done more so out of fear of the slippery slope argument, not that they think partial birth abortions are ok.
    My whole life
    was like a picture
    of a sunny day
    “We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
    ― Abraham Lincoln
  • blackredyellow
    blackredyellow Posts: 5,889
    I sorta forgot about the other points of your thread.

    I am all for animal rights... not the crazy peta point of view, but I think people who harm, neglect or kill animals for pleasure or whatever need to be dealt with severely. That being said, I am for hunting if you actually eat what you shoot and don't do it for sport/pleasure and waste the meat.

    I am anti-death penalty, not because I am against that form of punishment, but more so because we can't seem to guarantee that innocent people aren't getting convicted. The innocence project has exonorated over 100 people wrongfully convicted, and I don't want to take the risk of people wrongfully convicted and sentenced to death. Now if you are caught in the act and there is indisputable proof, then I am ok with it.
    My whole life
    was like a picture
    of a sunny day
    “We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
    ― Abraham Lincoln
  • rldriver2
    rldriver2 Posts: 27
    Derrick wrote:
    I am a liberal that supports animal rights, dislikes the death penalty, and dislikes abortion. My view on abortion has changed 3 times in my life, but I've been this way for about seven years now. Call me Kerry, I'm a flipflopper and proud of it.

    I hear you. I'm a "conservative" that loves cats, dogs, Bambi, cute mice, eats meat like a mad man, would own a gun if I wasn't scared I'd shoot myself in the knee cap (but could never shoot Bambi's mom) and works in the human service field (if the people I vote for have their way I'll be looking for another job).
    Raleigh 1992 - Raleigh 2003 - Charlotte 2003 - Asheville 2004 - Lollapolooza 2007
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    rldriver2 wrote:
    A new child born naturally after 9 months in the womb wouldn't survive by itself either. How it is nurtured changes through out it's devlopment inside and outside of the womb, what is significant about 3 months?

    it needs to be fed, yes. but in early pregnancy, it cannot breath or maintain a heartbeat on its own. that is the difference.
  • Derrick
    Derrick Posts: 475
    I wish the government would supply free birth control pills to all women old enough to use them. This would reduce unwanted pregnancies and bring hormonal balance to the fairer sex en masse. It's a win-win situation.
  • rldriver2
    rldriver2 Posts: 27
    blackredyellow wrote:
    There is always a level hypocrisy with all of our stances (like pro-life people who are for the war or dealth penalty), but I think it mostly has to do with when you feel life begins...

    I think that it could make sense that some people are pro-life and support the death penalty though. The difference there is an innocent life and someone that may not be so innocent. I could see justification in the execution of a convicted murderer (although I'm reluctant to feel comfortable leaving that up to my government) but still oppose abortion. That's not always hypocrisy imo.
    Raleigh 1992 - Raleigh 2003 - Charlotte 2003 - Asheville 2004 - Lollapolooza 2007
  • Derrick
    Derrick Posts: 475
    soulsinging wrote:
    it needs to be fed, yes. but in early pregnancy, it cannot breath or maintain a heartbeat on its own. that is the difference.

    Devil's Advocate speaking here: how is this different than a patient in emergency in the hospital? Suppose in the beginning, they would die without doctor assistance or machine assistance...but they get repaired through surgery and time and can possibly go back to their life normally.

    During the time in which they are unable to breathe/maintain a heartbeat by themself, is it ok to just kill them without legal repercussion? I guess I just don't see why one dependent lifeform is more valued than the other dependent lifeform.
  • rldriver2
    rldriver2 Posts: 27
    soulsinging wrote:
    it needs to be fed, yes. but in early pregnancy, it cannot breath or maintain a heartbeat on its own. that is the difference.

    All this occurs after an egg is fertilized though. The sole reason an egg is fertilized is to create life. Levels of dependency on the mother doesn't determine the value of the life.
    Raleigh 1992 - Raleigh 2003 - Charlotte 2003 - Asheville 2004 - Lollapolooza 2007
  • cornnifer
    cornnifer Posts: 2,130
    In my mid thirties, with a wife and three boys of my own, i still depend on my mother. :D
    "When all your friends and sedatives mean well but make it worse... better find yourself a place to level out."
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    Derrick wrote:
    Devil's Advocate speaking here: how is this different than a patient in emergency in the hospital? Suppose in the beginning, they would die without doctor assistance or machine assistance...but they get repaired through surgery and time and can possibly go back to their life normally.

    During the time in which they are unable to breathe/maintain a heartbeat by themself, is it ok to just kill them without legal repercussion? I guess I just don't see why one dependent lifeform is more valued than the other dependent lifeform.

    i see no problem with letting them pass. in that case, such medical decisions are made by loved ones... parents, spouses, etc. they decide whether the person lives or dies, whether the life support is continued. i see abortion the same... a loved one making the decision as to whether or not the life support is maintained.
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    rldriver2 wrote:
    All this occurs after an egg is fertilized though. The sole reason an egg is fertilized is to create life. Levels of dependency on the mother doesn't determine the value of the life.

    levels of biological processes determine whether something is able to maintain living. i don't consider vegetable on life support to be alive either.

    if the mother works out too hard during her pregnancy and causes a miscarriage, should she be imprisoned for manslaughter?
  • Uncle Leo
    Uncle Leo Posts: 1,059
    As a liberal...

    Animal rights: I think PETA needs to be WAY more pragmatic, as there are some legitimate cruelty issues. By no means do I consider myself a crusader, but still feel that mistreatment of pets, etc. is wrong. If the implication is that liberals favor animals over people (or hold them on the same level), I don't think that is usually the case

    Capital Punishment: Most libs are not comfortable with state-sponsored killing. Personally, I was pro-capital punishment for years. But just the thought that even one innocent person could be put to death is enough to make me anti-capital punishment. To suggest that any mistakes like this are worth it because the death penalty is just so noble is odd to me. The value of death vs. life in prison (which is, ironically, usually less expensive than the death penalty), is not so great that it is worth those mistakes.

    Abortion: My view will probably piss off pro-lifers more than most lib views. The following two reasons:
    1. Overpopulation. The last thing the planet needs is more people, particularly unwanted people. It's actually part of the reason I don't want kids (though its mainly the times I see them throwing fits in public).
    2. I do not know when it is "alive" or "human" but I do believe this...you are destroying nobody's hopes and dreams. The fetus has no friends, no dreams and its termination will really not be a loss for anyone. The world will not miss that fetus. In other words, "big fuckin' deal." Seriously. The unborn that so many advocate for, nobely stating that they are "fighting for those who cannot defend themselves" will only be "missed" in theoretical terms. All that said, a legal line has to be drawn, because you could make the same argument about a newborn. For me, it actually does go in line with what some of the above said. I am more of a first trimester proponant, because, while my "no hopes and dreams" argument continues to hold true, you'll be stunned to know that the further along it gets, the less comfortable I am. Perhaps I contradict myself, but that is how I feel.
    I cannot come up with a new sig till I get this egg off my face.
  • Uncle Leo
    Uncle Leo Posts: 1,059
    soulsinging wrote:
    lev

    if the mother works out too hard during her pregnancy and causes a miscarriage, should she be imprisoned for manslaughter?


    Actually, to remain consistant, she should get the chair.
    I cannot come up with a new sig till I get this egg off my face.
  • deadnothingbetter
    deadnothingbetter Posts: 2,202
    rldriver2 wrote:
    First of all: I'm all about having a civilized discussion and I'm certainly not into Bible thumping to back up my views (glancing at Juberoo).

    Things are a little slow on the Moving Train this morning so I'm just trying to stir things up a bit (evil grin). In other words, take my name calling with a grain of salt.

    Why do hippy liberals ;-) tend to be about animal rights and anti death penalty scenes out of respect for life and it's quality but at the same time support abortion rights with respect for choice over life? Exclude extenuating circumstances that involve rape, incest, and the mother's life. Why does the concern for the freedom to be alive and well not extend to something as innocent and pure as a newly conceived life?

    Fire away...
    my cousin is probably the biggest liberal that i've come to know on a more personal level. he believes in and supports gay marriages, is opposed to the death penalty, hates bush, believes in animal rights..... but he doesn't believe in abortions, or at least, he wouldn't participate in one.
    This isn't the land of opportunity, it's the land of competition.
  • deadnothingbetter
    deadnothingbetter Posts: 2,202
    Uncle Leo wrote:
    Actually, to remain consistant, she should get the chair.
    depends where you live.... since the chair isn't in all states.... isn't florida a state who still uses the chair? texas uses lethal injection.. (*i think?)
    This isn't the land of opportunity, it's the land of competition.

Categories