Purple Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uk6t_tdOkwo .. then what should the penalty be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 I thought we'd had this discussion... If one thinks that a foetus is a person and that abortion is murder, then one has to hold the opinion that it's premeditated murder, thus whatever the State sentence for murder applies.. so life without parole or death If they want to take that stance, then they really don't have a choice... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Purple Posted September 2, 2007 Author Share Posted September 2, 2007 I thought we'd had this discussion... If one thinks that a foetus is a person and that abortion is murder, then one has to hold the opinion that it's premeditated murder, thus whatever the State sentence for murder applies.. so life without parole or death If they want to take that stance, then they really don't have a choice... :S Sorry I've seen abortion disscussion, but I've missed this question, and the vid. There is something about the visual of a face, especialy on the first girl when asked a question that is, for them, coming completely from left field and yet you can tell they know it sholdn't be. I do think that believeing that abortion is murder, but then not thinking women should be held accountable says a lot about their beliefs about women in general. Seeing their faces, and the fact this question has never even crossed their minds, really REALLY makes right to lifers look like robots as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 I know... I'd just enjoy watching them squirm if I gave them the choice of the Death Penalty or Life without parole I'm nasty like that... Although having seen the Milgrom experiment most, if not all, would torture the 'prisoner' to death if their pastor told them it was the will of God Pascal, of wager fame, once pointed out that men never do evil so willingly as when driven by a religious impulse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Purple Posted September 2, 2007 Author Share Posted September 2, 2007 I know... I'd just enjoy watching them squirm if I gave them the choice of the Death Penalty or Life without parole I'm nasty like that... Although having seen the Milgrom experiment most, if not all, would torture the 'prisoner' to death if their pastor told them it was the will of God Pascal, of wager fame, once pointed out that men never do evil so willingly as when driven by a religious impulse. CS Lewis has some similar type quote that my swiss cheese mind can't remember at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dhampir Posted September 3, 2007 Share Posted September 3, 2007 I have two problems. One, as Asimov pointed out in a similar thread, the fetus, until a certain point at least is, for all intents and purposes, a parasite, solely dependent upon the host organism, and it doesn't matter whether you like that terminology or not, it's pretty much true. At the moment, I agree with that statement, which means that a woman is free to terminate a pregnancy at any point before birth, or at the very least, before the fetus can survive outside the womb, although one tends not to think of the psychological ramifications of bearing a child she does not want. The other problem I see is that this fact pretty effectively renders men nothing more than sperm donors, however at the moment, I see little way around that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. S. Martin Posted September 3, 2007 Share Posted September 3, 2007 What I don't get is that the unborn fetus has more rights than the host body (mother) bearing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted September 3, 2007 Share Posted September 3, 2007 It's a complete mine field. Unless a man is actually carrying the child then it's only logical that he has fewer rights, since it's not risking his life (there is no such thing a s a 'safe' pregnancy, any more than there is a 'safe' method of crossing the street, or that any of us know we'll get out of the room we're in alive... Certainly, pregnancy is an elevated state of risk), and he's not going to have the overall discomfort of pregnancy and birth, even if he's willing to take the child as sole guardian. Physiologically, a man is a sperm donor. Not a 'nice' view, but it's hard to prove otherwise without pulling special pleading, over morals that, to this man, are not self evident. In terms of medical advances, a foetus is now pretty well 'viable' from the late part of the second trimester... First trimester, it's blob to a homunculus, second trimester in the 4th and 5th month it is aesthetically more of a baby, but month 6 is the doozy, since we have the medical science to keep a 6 month foetus alive outside the womb... so for me, and a goodly number of pro-choicers like me, month 5 is the watershed. After that it's a moral judgement I wouldn't want to inflict, but terminations, for no good medical reason on or after month 6 (week 24) becomes something that I am uncomfortable with and I am quietly glad I don't have to make the call. I certainly claim no 'moral' high ground or certitude, just a creeping sense of 'not quite rightness' ... but that's just *my* opinion and I don't expect (or even necessarily want) anyone to take notice of me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted September 3, 2007 Share Posted September 3, 2007 One comment... I've never known anyone skip into or out of an abortion clinic singing... which is the other canard (fucking insult) that anti-choice people perpetuate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dhampir Posted September 3, 2007 Share Posted September 3, 2007 Setting aside the sperm donor thing for a moment, I'm thinking one day medicine will be able to keep a newly formed zygote alive outside the womb to term. At that point, will abortion after a certain stage still be a moral issue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted September 3, 2007 Share Posted September 3, 2007 It depends who is going to feed the mouth. TBH, I'm vaguely 'anti-life' since this planet needs another human on it like I need two arseholes... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evolution_beyond Posted September 3, 2007 Share Posted September 3, 2007 It depends who is going to feed the mouth. TBH, I'm vaguely 'anti-life' since this planet needs another human on it like I need two arseholes... I've noticed before just how un-environmental xian ethics are at times. It's not just the abortion issue. Over-population of the planet also makes things like homosexuality seem more right than wrong. More children is not something the human race needs at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unknowing1 Posted September 3, 2007 Share Posted September 3, 2007 This is just what kills me about the whole abortion issue. While this was a good question and you could tell most had just jumped on the band wagon without even thinking out the whole thing, a bigger question to me is if abortion becomes illegal what is the plan to provide the support for both the mother and the child? Sure adoption is an option but who is going to do all the adopting? Most of the people that I know who are anti-abortion have their children biologically. Are they going to stop procreating in order to adopt? Are the children going to be provided a loving, non abusive life? Is the mother going to be able to provide the appropriate care for the child both emotionally and monetarily? Show me the plan to provide support and care for both the mother and the child (and I'm not talking about until the child is born, I'm talking afterwards as well) without relying on the government social services programs. And when you show me that plan, please explain why we have too many kids in foster care now and the social services departments are clamoring for more foster parents. If your plan and explanation are good enough, maybe, just maybe I might change my mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted September 3, 2007 Share Posted September 3, 2007 It depends who is going to feed the mouth. TBH, I'm vaguely 'anti-life' since this planet needs another human on it like I need two arseholes... I've noticed before just how un-environmental xian ethics are at times. It's not just the abortion issue. Over-population of the planet also makes things like homosexuality seem more right than wrong. More children is not something the human race needs at the moment. God'll sort it out! Although looking at the rest of nature, Soylent Green is the most probable outcome. I hope they get the prion problem sorted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted September 3, 2007 Share Posted September 3, 2007 This is just what kills me about the whole abortion issue. While this was a good question and you could tell most had just jumped on the band wagon without even thinking out the whole thing, a bigger question to me is if abortion becomes illegal what is the plan to provide the support for both the mother and the child? Sure adoption is an option but who is going to do all the adopting? Most of the people that I know who are anti-abortion have their children biologically. Are they going to stop procreating in order to adopt? Are the children going to be provided a loving, non abusive life? Is the mother going to be able to provide the appropriate care for the child both emotionally and monetarily? Show me the plan to provide support and care for both the mother and the child (and I'm not talking about until the child is born, I'm talking afterwards as well) without relying on the government social services programs. And when you show me that plan, please explain why we have too many kids in foster care now and the social services departments are clamoring for more foster parents. If your plan and explanation are good enough, maybe, just maybe I might change my mind. and there are the psych issues to someone beating the child of incest, the issues of disabled children placement, and the Foster care vetting procedure barely works now, let alone if the number of prospective homes was doubled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taphophilia Posted September 3, 2007 Share Posted September 3, 2007 If abortion becomes illegal, they will have to resurrect the orphanages (as I call them child pounds) again. I'd like to point out that when abortion was illegal there were few true orphans in them, just as there is now in the foster care system. Parents who could not or would not care for their unwanted children dropped them off in droves pretty much no questions asked. The problem then becomes institutionalized children growing into adults and attempting to intigrate into society. I've talked to people who were in orphanages in the 70's and as bad as the foster care system is, it's a hell of a lot better than orphanages where horrific abuse and neglect of children is rampant and were not much better than concentration camps. The Pro-life side simply does not care about actual children. They refuse to look at the problems of the past or in other countries where abortion being illegal causes. They have blinders on and refuse to deal with reality. Sadly, their tactics are working. There are too few abortion clinics in the US and the ones that do exist have to serve too great a population. Illegal and unsafe abortions still occur in areas of the US where there are no safe alternitives for women and women sometimes have to travel a couple of hundred miles to obtain a safe abortion if they are lucky enough to be able to do so. It doesn't matter if abortion is legal if there are few areas where women have access to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted September 3, 2007 Share Posted September 3, 2007 From what I can see, the Zealots aren't above terror tactics... But I like like your idea about contra-Protests being the way forward... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piprus Posted September 4, 2007 Share Posted September 4, 2007 Stupids, idiots, imbeciles, morons...on the most fundamental level. I watched the video, and the anti-abortionists didn't seem to have an answer to the fundamental question..."if abortion is illegal, what should happen to the woman who has an abortion?" It's very simple, really...if you absolutely don't want to conceive...use the ancient, time-honored method...DON'T FUCK!!! That's Rule One. Rule Two...If you get uncontrollably hot, and lose control of your self, just remember and apply Rule One. If you fail to apply Rules One and Two, and end up pregnant, then apply Rule Three...You're an asshole, you blew it, so do the right thing. Your choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts