|
On April 28 2011 18:44 Linkirvana wrote:Show nested quote +Dude its middle school biology. Haploid vs Diploid. Sperm has absolutely no chance to become a human being without outside help(needs an egg), an inseminated egg is already well on its way to becoming human. Lol, that's basically what I said. The difference between masturbation and abortion is sex, just plain sex. There's no actual change in how "alive" the cells are. By me deciding to not use my penis for sex but for masturbation instead I effectively aborted a lot of potential lives.
Thats like saying that not having sex or masturbating is murder because the unused sperm dies, its pointless and not a defendable argument. Those sperm cells from masturbating are going to die either way, and even if you do have sex 99.9999% will still die, its not a valid argument.
|
By me deciding to not use my penis for sex but for masturbation instead I effectively aborted a lot of potential lives
The difference between masturbation and abortion is sex, just plain sex. There's no actual change in how "alive" the cells are.
Yes there is.. but i guess the discussion between us is pointless, lets agree to disagree.
|
On April 28 2011 18:48 feanor1 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2011 18:44 Linkirvana wrote:Dude its middle school biology. Haploid vs Diploid. Sperm has absolutely no chance to become a human being without outside help(needs an egg), an inseminated egg is already well on its way to becoming human. Lol, that's basically what I said. The difference between masturbation and abortion is sex, just plain sex. There's no actual change in how "alive" the cells are. By me deciding to not use my penis for sex but for masturbation instead I effectively aborted a lot of potential lives. Thats like saying that not having sex or masturbating is murder because the unused sperm dies, its pointless and not a defendable argument. Those sperm cells from masturbating are going to die either way, and even if you do have sex 99.9999% will still die, its not a valid argument.
One might say, as valid as... the anti-abortion arguments? :trollface:
Clearly what I said there is retarded, in an attempt to point out the similarities with the anti-abortion arguments. Where the heavy accusation "murder" is put on doctors removing a bunch of cells as alive as your semen.
|
On April 28 2011 18:41 Linkirvana wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2011 18:37 scouting overlord wrote:Thanks for just being outright misogynist for people to see  . Helps illustrate what kind of man cares more for an unconscious cellular mass than a fully developed human being. The big problem with your "women should be the only ones making the decision" is that the guyhas to deal with the consequence of the decision as well, for the rest of his life. Compared to that your argument of carrying the child for 9 months seems trivial then, and should not be an argument as to why the woman should be the only one with a say in this.
You must be fucking joking. 'Carrying the child for 9 months seems trivial' I'm guessing you're not a father, or a woman whos been through childbirth, which is a greater physical and mental pain than you'll ever experience fyi. But I'm sure having a small % of your money deposited to the mother is just as important, as well as your precious little feelings about the child you neglected to raise. Even if you're still with your pregnant partner, if she doesn't want to bear the child it's her body and her right . Maybe next life you can experience how great it is to be female in this world, with Brave Men FIGHTING FOR THE UNBORN RIGHTS, but for now you'll just have to wait.
|
On April 28 2011 18:49 chickenhawk wrote:Show nested quote +By me deciding to not use my penis for sex but for masturbation instead I effectively aborted a lot of potential lives Show nested quote +The difference between masturbation and abortion is sex, just plain sex. There's no actual change in how "alive" the cells are. Yes there is.. but i guess the discussion between us is pointless, lets agree to disagree.
Agree to disagree? To be honest I've always hated people who use those kind of sentences, except when we're talking about something actually subjective, like taste in food or music.
Scientific evidence suggests the cells that get aborted are as alive as for example semen (Also known as: Not alive at all)
Surely I realize the whole problem with people against abortion is the potential. However once again I'd like to point out that my semen has the same potential right before having sex.
Deciding to put on a condom, or masturbating, both have the exact same effect as abortion. (The semen and egg don't get to grow to a point where a clump of cells actually starts to resemble a human being/something alive)
|
On April 28 2011 18:51 Linkirvana wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2011 18:48 feanor1 wrote:On April 28 2011 18:44 Linkirvana wrote:Dude its middle school biology. Haploid vs Diploid. Sperm has absolutely no chance to become a human being without outside help(needs an egg), an inseminated egg is already well on its way to becoming human. Lol, that's basically what I said. The difference between masturbation and abortion is sex, just plain sex. There's no actual change in how "alive" the cells are. By me deciding to not use my penis for sex but for masturbation instead I effectively aborted a lot of potential lives. Thats like saying that not having sex or masturbating is murder because the unused sperm dies, its pointless and not a defendable argument. Those sperm cells from masturbating are going to die either way, and even if you do have sex 99.9999% will still die, its not a valid argument. One might say, as valid as... the anti-abortion arguments? :trollface: Clearly what I said there is retarded, in an attempt to point out the similarities with the anti-abortion arguments. Where the heavy accusation "murder" is put on doctors removing a bunch of cells as alive as your semen.
Your not getting the point, that clump of cells is working its way towards becoming a human being, while that sperm is on its way to dying. Well maybe I'm not getting your argument, but either way its not the most effective way to argue for abortion. Anyhow that clump of cells requires outside intervention not to become a child in 9 months, while that sperm requires outside intervention to become a clump of cells.
|
It's the body of the woman, she gets to decide, it's that simple. The discussion is deluded by discussions about at what point it is considered life or religious morons coining the phrase "sanctity of life".
Some people suggest adoptions, it should be an offered alternative but the women can still decide. Many of those are the same people that will be whispering behind the back of a pregnant team and talk about what a whore she is. Socially stigmatise the pregnant teen whilst demanding they carry the child for 9 months.
Women should have control over their body, that is what this is about. The government shouldn't get this involved in people's personal lives and truth be told nobody should. Abortions don't affect you in any way. It's like gay marriage, if you stopped making such a big deal out of it you would realize it really doesn't affect your life at all.
Allow women to maintain control over their own life, permit abortions, stop forcing other people to live up to your magic book.
|
if she doesn't want to bear the child it's her body and her right
And his child, you arguments did not me change my mind. I still think that the male should always be part of the decidion. If a male has resposabilities for the child after the child is born, i do think that he should have the some responsabilities for the child before the chikd is born.
|
On April 28 2011 18:55 Linkirvana wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2011 18:49 chickenhawk wrote:By me deciding to not use my penis for sex but for masturbation instead I effectively aborted a lot of potential lives The difference between masturbation and abortion is sex, just plain sex. There's no actual change in how "alive" the cells are. Yes there is.. but i guess the discussion between us is pointless, lets agree to disagree. Agree to disagree? To be honest I've always hated people who use those kind of sentences, except when we're talking about something actually subjective, like taste in food or music. Scientific evidence suggests the cells that get aborted are as alive as for example semen (Also known as: Not alive at all) Surely I realize the whole problem with people against abortion is the potential. However once again I'd like to point out that my semen has the same potential right before having sex. Deciding to put on a condom, or masturbating, both have the exact same effect as abortion. (The semen and egg don't get to grow to a point where a clump of cells actually starts to resemble a human being/something alive)
Instead of saying clump of cells can you actually specify what you are talking about so other people can understand? Is a 8 1\2 month old fetus a clump of cells? We honestly don't know what you are talking about.
|
On April 28 2011 11:02 gun.slinger wrote:
Old man regulating what happen inside a women womb :S With all due respect, would you liked to be considered justifiable to be murdered, if some big monster ate you and you lived in its belly. Would that give justification for other monsters to suck you out of the belly and break your vertebrae in a brutal manner.
|
On April 28 2011 18:58 zalz wrote:
It's the body of the woman, she gets to decide, it's that simple. The discussion is deluded by discussions about at what point it is considered life or religious morons coining the phrase "sanctity of life".
Some people suggest adoptions, it should be an offered alternative but the women can still decide. Many of those are the same people that will be whispering behind the back of a pregnant team and talk about what a whore she is. Socially stigmatise the pregnant teen whilst demanding they carry the child for 9 months.
Women should have control over their body, that is what this is about. The government shouldn't get this involved in people's personal lives and truth be told nobody should. Abortions don't affect you in any way. It's like gay marriage, if you stopped making such a big deal out of it you would realize it really doesn't affect your life at all.
Allow women to maintain control over their own life, permit abortions, stop forcing other people to live up to your magic book.
Amen. The government if anything should protect her rights to her body . It's nice to live in a progressive state.
|
On April 28 2011 18:59 xarthaz wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2011 11:02 gun.slinger wrote:
Old man regulating what happen inside a women womb :S With all due respect, would you liked to be considered justifiable to be murdered, if some big monster ate you and you lived in its belly. Would that give justification for other monsters to suck you out of the belly and break your vertebrae in a brutal manner.
Lmfao, I can't even parody how stupid this is. WELL, does it justify it??? HUH?? Bet you never thought of it this way guys!
|
On April 28 2011 19:00 scouting overlord wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2011 18:58 zalz wrote:
It's the body of the woman, she gets to decide, it's that simple. The discussion is deluded by discussions about at what point it is considered life or religious morons coining the phrase "sanctity of life".
Some people suggest adoptions, it should be an offered alternative but the women can still decide. Many of those are the same people that will be whispering behind the back of a pregnant team and talk about what a whore she is. Socially stigmatise the pregnant teen whilst demanding they carry the child for 9 months.
Women should have control over their body, that is what this is about. The government shouldn't get this involved in people's personal lives and truth be told nobody should. Abortions don't affect you in any way. It's like gay marriage, if you stopped making such a big deal out of it you would realize it really doesn't affect your life at all.
Allow women to maintain control over their own life, permit abortions, stop forcing other people to live up to your magic book. Amen. The government if anything should protect her rights to her body . It's nice to live in a progressive state.
What does rights to her body mean?
|
On April 28 2011 18:58 zalz wrote:
It's the body of the woman, she gets to decide, it's that simple. The discussion is deluded by discussions about at what point it is considered life or religious morons coining the phrase "sanctity of life".
Some people suggest adoptions, it should be an offered alternative but the women can still decide. Many of those are the same people that will be whispering behind the back of a pregnant team and talk about what a whore she is. Socially stigmatise the pregnant teen whilst demanding they carry the child for 9 months.
Women should have control over their body, that is what this is about. The government shouldn't get this involved in people's personal lives and truth be told nobody should. Abortions don't affect you in any way. It's like gay marriage, if you stopped making such a big deal out of it you would realize it really doesn't affect your life at all.
Allow women to maintain control over their own life, permit abortions, stop forcing other people to live up to your magic book.
A lot of people who are against abortions are not necessarily religious, just as there are many Catholics who disagree with the churches views on abortion and contraception.
Stop trying to demonize religion as the root cause of peoples views that you don't agree with.
|
You must be fucking joking. 'Carrying the child for 9 months seems trivial' I'm guessing you're not a father, or a woman who's been through childbirth, which is a greater physical and mental pain than you'll ever experience fyi. But I'm sure having a small % of your money deposited to the mother is just as important, as well as your precious little feelings about the child you neglected to raise. Even if you're still with your pregnant partner, if she doesn't want to bear the child it's her body and her right . Maybe next life you can experience how great it is to be female in this world, with Brave Men FIGHTING FOR THE UNBORN RIGHTS, but for now you'll just have to wait.
I'm not a father, nor a woman.
Also wow your arguments are all over the place, making very little sense at all.
You think the difference between a woman's responsibility to her child, and a man's responsibility to his child is only seperated by the 9 months of carrying the child?
Carrying a child for 9 months does indeed seem trivial compared to the lifetime of responsibility that comes with it for both man and woman.
In my eyes both the man and the woman have equal responsibility for the child, which means they will both be "equally burdened (Spelling?) by it"
A lifetime of responsibility compared to 9 months of being pregnant.
Ofcourse I'm assuming the father feels as responsible as he should. I'm not talking about deadbeat dads, fuck those.
|
On April 28 2011 19:02 Linkirvana wrote:Show nested quote +You must be fucking joking. 'Carrying the child for 9 months seems trivial' I'm guessing you're not a father, or a woman who's been through childbirth, which is a greater physical and mental pain than you'll ever experience fyi. But I'm sure having a small % of your money deposited to the mother is just as important, as well as your precious little feelings about the child you neglected to raise. Even if you're still with your pregnant partner, if she doesn't want to bear the child it's her body and her right . Maybe next life you can experience how great it is to be female in this world, with Brave Men FIGHTING FOR THE UNBORN RIGHTS, but for now you'll just have to wait. I'm not a father, nor a woman. Also wow your arguments are all over the place, making very little sense at all. You think the difference between a woman's responsibility to her child, and a man's responsibility to his child is only seperated by the 9 months of carrying the child? Carrying a child for 9 months does indeed seem trivial compared to the lifetime of responsibility that comes with it for both man and woman. In my eyes both the man and the woman have equal responsibility for the child, which means they will both be "equally burdened (Spelling?) by it" A lifetime of responsibility compared to 9 months of being pregnant. Ofcourse I'm assuming the father feels as responsible as he should. I'm not talking about deadbeat dads, fuck those.
I don't care if the poor man feels sad, it's nothing compared to an unwanted childbirth. There is no way, no how that a man's part is equal in birthing and raising a child.
|
On April 28 2011 19:01 scouting overlord wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2011 18:59 xarthaz wrote:On April 28 2011 11:02 gun.slinger wrote:
Old man regulating what happen inside a women womb :S With all due respect, would you liked to be considered justifiable to be murdered, if some big monster ate you and you lived in its belly. Would that give justification for other monsters to suck you out of the belly and break your vertebrae in a brutal manner. Lmfao, I can't even parody how stupid this is. WELL, does it justify it??? HUH?? Bet you never thought of it this way guys!
THe difference between a trespasser and a baby in a womb is that the baby did not CHOOSE to violate the property rights of the mom, the mom herself chose that. Hence the claim that abortion is enforcement of womens property rights is incorrect, as a women herself demonstrated the preference of the baby having a right to living in her body, by the action of unprotected sex. This is crucial, because it is the CORE of the anti-life argument, and yet it is completely fallacious.
|
Instead of saying clump of cells can you actually specify what you are talking about so other people can understand? Is a 8 1\2 month old fetus a clump of cells? We honestly don't know what you are talking about.
I clarified what I ment after using that term even, read please.
|
On April 28 2011 19:04 scouting overlord wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2011 19:02 Linkirvana wrote:You must be fucking joking. 'Carrying the child for 9 months seems trivial' I'm guessing you're not a father, or a woman who's been through childbirth, which is a greater physical and mental pain than you'll ever experience fyi. But I'm sure having a small % of your money deposited to the mother is just as important, as well as your precious little feelings about the child you neglected to raise. Even if you're still with your pregnant partner, if she doesn't want to bear the child it's her body and her right . Maybe next life you can experience how great it is to be female in this world, with Brave Men FIGHTING FOR THE UNBORN RIGHTS, but for now you'll just have to wait. I'm not a father, nor a woman. Also wow your arguments are all over the place, making very little sense at all. You think the difference between a woman's responsibility to her child, and a man's responsibility to his child is only seperated by the 9 months of carrying the child? Carrying a child for 9 months does indeed seem trivial compared to the lifetime of responsibility that comes with it for both man and woman. In my eyes both the man and the woman have equal responsibility for the child, which means they will both be "equally burdened (Spelling?) by it" A lifetime of responsibility compared to 9 months of being pregnant. Ofcourse I'm assuming the father feels as responsible as he should. I'm not talking about deadbeat dads, fuck those. I don't care if the poor man feels sad, it's nothing compared to an unwanted childbirth. There is no way, no how that a man's part is equal in birthing and raising a child.
Women raising children is just a societal thing. Beyond being able to feed them fairly well by having the goods, (uneducated on issue) I think men statistically do just as well. The amount of labor required to provide child support demanded by courts is pretty hefty.
On April 28 2011 19:05 Linkirvana wrote:Show nested quote +Instead of saying clump of cells can you actually specify what you are talking about so other people can understand? Is a 8 1\2 month old fetus a clump of cells? We honestly don't know what you are talking about. I clarified what I ment after using that term even, read please.
Oh, ok. I gotcha.
|
On April 28 2011 19:05 xarthaz wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2011 19:01 scouting overlord wrote:On April 28 2011 18:59 xarthaz wrote:On April 28 2011 11:02 gun.slinger wrote:
Old man regulating what happen inside a women womb :S With all due respect, would you liked to be considered justifiable to be murdered, if some big monster ate you and you lived in its belly. Would that give justification for other monsters to suck you out of the belly and break your vertebrae in a brutal manner. Lmfao, I can't even parody how stupid this is. WELL, does it justify it??? HUH?? Bet you never thought of it this way guys! THe difference between a trespasser and a baby in a womb is that the baby did not CHOOSE to violate the property rights of the mom, the mom herself chose that. Hence the claim that abortion is enforcement of womens property rights is incorrect, as a women herself demonstrated the preference of the baby having a right to living in her body, by the action of unprotected sex. This is crucial, because it is the CORE of the anti-life argument, and yet it is completely fallacious.
You are crazy, just so you know. None of your points are intelligent or relevant to real life. "Anti-life" isn't a position people take. Please return to whatever conservative white male-dominated echo chamber you came from.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
