|
On April 29 2011 00:45 -Archangel- wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2011 00:26 PolSC2 wrote:On April 29 2011 00:23 -Archangel- wrote:On April 29 2011 00:01 nihlon wrote:On April 28 2011 23:51 -Archangel- wrote:On April 28 2011 21:56 Ghostcom wrote:On April 28 2011 21:03 -Archangel- wrote:On April 28 2011 20:42 Ghostcom wrote:On April 28 2011 20:04 -Archangel- wrote:
12 week fetus is already a really small baby, 20 weeks is pure murder. Statements like these are so detrimental to any worthwhile debate >_> In the end it all comes down to how you define life - is it when sperm meets egg? is it self-sustainability? is it awareness - and what degree of awareness? And 20 weeks seems like an odd time, but if I'm to guess it's because the earliest a baby can survive being born is 15 weeks premature, thus at 20 weeks it still can't survive AND by giving time until week 20 you can actually test for Downs syndrome which is done @ week 16. As a father I felt the need to say this because it is the truth. Even in europe the 3 month limit of being able to preform an abortion is probably too high, but 20 weeks that, I will say it again, is murder. I know how my little girl looked at 20 weeks and nobody can tell me she is not a person or alive. No law can tell me that. Laws are artificial constructions of men, this is nature that is above any human law. It's not the truth - it's your perception which isn't based on anything objective, but "merely" your feelings as a dad. The only reason WHY you even knew how your daughter looked at week 20 in the first place was because you were getting an ultrasound to test wheter or not there were any developmental defects which would make life impossible meaning your wife would've had to abort or give birth to a dead baby. You are being a total hypocrit so take your "I'm telling the truth" BS and shut up or bring some valid arguments. I know I'm VERY blunt, but you do not hold any moral highground in this, stop trying to make it seem like that. And congratulations with your daughter, kids can really be a blessing, but don't try and make your subjective feelings a universal standard. Exactly where the limit should be placed is very hard to decide and tbh I don't think there is any 100% correct answer. I DO however support the option of being able to abort a child with trisomy 21 and thus I also support abortion @ week 16-20 as that is the earliest you can with certainty say wheter or not the mutation is present without an unacceptable risk to the mother or fetus. I am sorry, but you are also just stating your opinion and it is no more true then mine. Science does not 100% know when the baby is aware or if there is something called a soul (a religious version or otherwise). But what is without doubt is that it is alive and a seperate being that depends on the mother to grow and survive at that point. It does not give the mother right to kill it as long as it is going to end up healthy and able to lead a normal life. If the mother/father do not want it, the government can take care of it. Instead of wasting money on abortions and developing technology and drugs for that, that money can be spent into government programs that will let abandoned children find new homes as painless as possible or be able to grow up and have similar chance to be a useful part of society. You last part is a bit weird. You honestly think the cost of an abortion is greater to our society than the cost of raising an orphant/adoptie? Of course it is not, but anything helps. And there is a lot of people that want to adopt children because they cannot have their own. A good program for that will make abortions not needed unless there is a medical reason behind it. It also doesn't help that adopting a child is an extremely long and difficult process(I understand why). Now imagine all those smart people fighting to keep abortion legal (and all those on the other side fighting against them) using this energy and brain power to make this system better and faster :D
There isn't a foster family for every unwanted child, how can you be so naive? That's a rhetorical question by the way friend  . Do you think each foster child is received into a loving home, and develops just like one raised with their biological parents?
Also you're shifting responsibility for unwanted children onto people who might not want children at all -- which is definitely a step up than holding the responsibility solely on the mother, so I have to commend you on that.
|
On April 29 2011 00:49 PolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2011 00:45 -Archangel- wrote:On April 29 2011 00:26 PolSC2 wrote:On April 29 2011 00:23 -Archangel- wrote:On April 29 2011 00:01 nihlon wrote:On April 28 2011 23:51 -Archangel- wrote:On April 28 2011 21:56 Ghostcom wrote:On April 28 2011 21:03 -Archangel- wrote:On April 28 2011 20:42 Ghostcom wrote:On April 28 2011 20:04 -Archangel- wrote:
12 week fetus is already a really small baby, 20 weeks is pure murder. Statements like these are so detrimental to any worthwhile debate >_> In the end it all comes down to how you define life - is it when sperm meets egg? is it self-sustainability? is it awareness - and what degree of awareness? And 20 weeks seems like an odd time, but if I'm to guess it's because the earliest a baby can survive being born is 15 weeks premature, thus at 20 weeks it still can't survive AND by giving time until week 20 you can actually test for Downs syndrome which is done @ week 16. As a father I felt the need to say this because it is the truth. Even in europe the 3 month limit of being able to preform an abortion is probably too high, but 20 weeks that, I will say it again, is murder. I know how my little girl looked at 20 weeks and nobody can tell me she is not a person or alive. No law can tell me that. Laws are artificial constructions of men, this is nature that is above any human law. It's not the truth - it's your perception which isn't based on anything objective, but "merely" your feelings as a dad. The only reason WHY you even knew how your daughter looked at week 20 in the first place was because you were getting an ultrasound to test wheter or not there were any developmental defects which would make life impossible meaning your wife would've had to abort or give birth to a dead baby. You are being a total hypocrit so take your "I'm telling the truth" BS and shut up or bring some valid arguments. I know I'm VERY blunt, but you do not hold any moral highground in this, stop trying to make it seem like that. And congratulations with your daughter, kids can really be a blessing, but don't try and make your subjective feelings a universal standard. Exactly where the limit should be placed is very hard to decide and tbh I don't think there is any 100% correct answer. I DO however support the option of being able to abort a child with trisomy 21 and thus I also support abortion @ week 16-20 as that is the earliest you can with certainty say wheter or not the mutation is present without an unacceptable risk to the mother or fetus. I am sorry, but you are also just stating your opinion and it is no more true then mine. Science does not 100% know when the baby is aware or if there is something called a soul (a religious version or otherwise). But what is without doubt is that it is alive and a seperate being that depends on the mother to grow and survive at that point. It does not give the mother right to kill it as long as it is going to end up healthy and able to lead a normal life. If the mother/father do not want it, the government can take care of it. Instead of wasting money on abortions and developing technology and drugs for that, that money can be spent into government programs that will let abandoned children find new homes as painless as possible or be able to grow up and have similar chance to be a useful part of society. You last part is a bit weird. You honestly think the cost of an abortion is greater to our society than the cost of raising an orphant/adoptie? Of course it is not, but anything helps. And there is a lot of people that want to adopt children because they cannot have their own. A good program for that will make abortions not needed unless there is a medical reason behind it. It also doesn't help that adopting a child is an extremely long and difficult process(I understand why). Now imagine all those smart people fighting to keep abortion legal (and all those on the other side fighting against them) using this energy and brain power to make this system better and faster :D That would be a dream come true. My Wife and I really want to adopt our second child, because there are so many children in need of a loving family.
My wife and me were talking if we could not have a child normally to adopt one instead of hunting for expensive medical procedures that let her become pregnant (and fail most of the time).
|
On April 29 2011 00:50 scouting overlord wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2011 00:45 -Archangel- wrote:On April 29 2011 00:26 PolSC2 wrote:On April 29 2011 00:23 -Archangel- wrote:On April 29 2011 00:01 nihlon wrote:On April 28 2011 23:51 -Archangel- wrote:On April 28 2011 21:56 Ghostcom wrote:On April 28 2011 21:03 -Archangel- wrote:On April 28 2011 20:42 Ghostcom wrote:On April 28 2011 20:04 -Archangel- wrote:
12 week fetus is already a really small baby, 20 weeks is pure murder. Statements like these are so detrimental to any worthwhile debate >_> In the end it all comes down to how you define life - is it when sperm meets egg? is it self-sustainability? is it awareness - and what degree of awareness? And 20 weeks seems like an odd time, but if I'm to guess it's because the earliest a baby can survive being born is 15 weeks premature, thus at 20 weeks it still can't survive AND by giving time until week 20 you can actually test for Downs syndrome which is done @ week 16. As a father I felt the need to say this because it is the truth. Even in europe the 3 month limit of being able to preform an abortion is probably too high, but 20 weeks that, I will say it again, is murder. I know how my little girl looked at 20 weeks and nobody can tell me she is not a person or alive. No law can tell me that. Laws are artificial constructions of men, this is nature that is above any human law. It's not the truth - it's your perception which isn't based on anything objective, but "merely" your feelings as a dad. The only reason WHY you even knew how your daughter looked at week 20 in the first place was because you were getting an ultrasound to test wheter or not there were any developmental defects which would make life impossible meaning your wife would've had to abort or give birth to a dead baby. You are being a total hypocrit so take your "I'm telling the truth" BS and shut up or bring some valid arguments. I know I'm VERY blunt, but you do not hold any moral highground in this, stop trying to make it seem like that. And congratulations with your daughter, kids can really be a blessing, but don't try and make your subjective feelings a universal standard. Exactly where the limit should be placed is very hard to decide and tbh I don't think there is any 100% correct answer. I DO however support the option of being able to abort a child with trisomy 21 and thus I also support abortion @ week 16-20 as that is the earliest you can with certainty say wheter or not the mutation is present without an unacceptable risk to the mother or fetus. I am sorry, but you are also just stating your opinion and it is no more true then mine. Science does not 100% know when the baby is aware or if there is something called a soul (a religious version or otherwise). But what is without doubt is that it is alive and a seperate being that depends on the mother to grow and survive at that point. It does not give the mother right to kill it as long as it is going to end up healthy and able to lead a normal life. If the mother/father do not want it, the government can take care of it. Instead of wasting money on abortions and developing technology and drugs for that, that money can be spent into government programs that will let abandoned children find new homes as painless as possible or be able to grow up and have similar chance to be a useful part of society. You last part is a bit weird. You honestly think the cost of an abortion is greater to our society than the cost of raising an orphant/adoptie? Of course it is not, but anything helps. And there is a lot of people that want to adopt children because they cannot have their own. A good program for that will make abortions not needed unless there is a medical reason behind it. It also doesn't help that adopting a child is an extremely long and difficult process(I understand why). Now imagine all those smart people fighting to keep abortion legal (and all those on the other side fighting against them) using this energy and brain power to make this system better and faster :D There isn't a foster family for every unwanted child, how can you be so naive? That's a rhetorical question by the way friend . Do you think each foster child is received into a loving home, and develops just like one raised with their biological parents? Also you're shifting responsibility for unwanted children onto people who might not want children at all -- which is definitely a step up than holding the responsibility solely on the mother, so I have to commend you on that.
From my experience (not 1st hand) that is more a problem of the system then the children or a lack of parents.
|
On April 29 2011 00:48 scouting overlord wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2011 00:39 HULKAMANIA wrote:On April 29 2011 00:03 scouting overlord wrote:On April 28 2011 23:56 HULKAMANIA wrote:On April 28 2011 18:21 scouting overlord wrote:
I'm pointing out that you're all more than likely male with no idea what it's like to bear or raise a child, especially one which has been accidentally or unwillingly conceived or has been diagnosed with a serious illness inutero. A female should be the one allowed to make a decision On April 28 2011 18:32 scouting overlord wrote:
Cry me a river macho man, it's her child in her body and you have no leg to stand on if you've broken up with her in pregnancy, you know the most important time to care for your wife? 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. On April 28 2011 18:53 scouting overlord wrote: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 19:07 scouting overlord wrote: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. On April 28 2011 19:10 scouting overlord wrote:
You have never experienced pregnancy. You never will experience pregnancy. No male will, and it's a greater burden on the women, both mentally and physically, than whatever "statistics" and "labor" the court puts on you. It will scar her body and mind for life, not just for when the court dictates your "labor time" On April 28 2011 19:12 scouting overlord wrote:
I'll let this slide as you defend the women's right to abortion at least. But trust me on this, nothing you ever experience is even close to childbirth. It isn't 'only' or 'just' 9 months from the women's point of view, and you should respect that. No one should be forced to go through childbirth unwillingly. On April 28 2011 19:13 scouting overlord wrote:
It's based around pregnancy being a burden wholly put on the woman and her body you fucking mong. On April 28 2011 19:27 scouting overlord wrote:A man does not get pregnant . It's not even close to 50/50. You have no idea what pregnancy does to a person's body and mind. Women don't leave men to spite them out of child support. Taking your child from the biological father isn't something women just do to 'run off with another man'. I suppose I could go on with the quotes, but I think these are sufficient to my point. Throwing your gender around for the purpose of squelching debate is a disingenuous (not to mention tedious) way to argue. It’s also somewhat questionable that your position revolves around men being unable to understand a female perspective, yet you seem to have an exhaustive knowledge of what’s going on in the misogynistic and naïve minds of the males with whom you’re speaking. Personally, I would love to hear your opinion on abortion if it involves something other than gender stereotypes, angry dismissals of opposing viewpoints, and the old you-can’t-possibly-understand-what-it’s-like- for me! assertion that you’re the only individual in the discussion with a leg to stand on. You think pregnancy and abortion is a gender-neutral issue? Do you think pregnancy and abortion is as hard on the male as the female, and that the male's judgement is greater or equal to a female's on this issue? You are a very special person, like many proud Americans. Thanks for picking out all of the gender related arguments from the female perspective by the way, while ignoring the many from the male side Nope, I don't think that abortion is a "gender-neutral" issue. I think that you're conducting a campaign of condescension and personal attacks in lieu of actual debate, which is what I said. I'm conducting a campaign of reality checking . I'm sorry the language I use doesn't coddle the "pro-life" (lol) crowd, but none of their arguments demand it. I know "debate" that is seen on television tries to present opposing viewpoints as equal and deserving respect, but I'm afraid it's just not the case in reality.
Right. You conceive of yourself as a purveyor of Truth and Reality to a group of hopelessly backward and uninformed individuals. That's exactly why your contributions to this discussion are so full of vitriol and self-overestimation as to be... well... not really contributions at all in any constructive sense.
|
Right. You conceive of yourself as a purveyor of Truth and Reality to a group of hopelessly backward and uninformed individuals.
Such is the burden of debating science and humanity to a lot of the population .
|
On April 29 2011 00:43 Arkless wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2011 00:09 scouting overlord wrote:On April 29 2011 00:08 eLiE wrote:On April 29 2011 00:03 scouting overlord wrote:On April 28 2011 23:56 HULKAMANIA wrote:On April 28 2011 18:21 scouting overlord wrote:
I'm pointing out that you're all more than likely male with no idea what it's like to bear or raise a child, especially one which has been accidentally or unwillingly conceived or has been diagnosed with a serious illness inutero. A female should be the one allowed to make a decision On April 28 2011 18:32 scouting overlord wrote:
Cry me a river macho man, it's her child in her body and you have no leg to stand on if you've broken up with her in pregnancy, you know the most important time to care for your wife? 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. On April 28 2011 18:53 scouting overlord wrote: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 19:07 scouting overlord wrote: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. On April 28 2011 19:10 scouting overlord wrote:
You have never experienced pregnancy. You never will experience pregnancy. No male will, and it's a greater burden on the women, both mentally and physically, than whatever "statistics" and "labor" the court puts on you. It will scar her body and mind for life, not just for when the court dictates your "labor time" On April 28 2011 19:12 scouting overlord wrote:
I'll let this slide as you defend the women's right to abortion at least. But trust me on this, nothing you ever experience is even close to childbirth. It isn't 'only' or 'just' 9 months from the women's point of view, and you should respect that. No one should be forced to go through childbirth unwillingly. On April 28 2011 19:13 scouting overlord wrote:
It's based around pregnancy being a burden wholly put on the woman and her body you fucking mong. On April 28 2011 19:27 scouting overlord wrote:A man does not get pregnant . It's not even close to 50/50. You have no idea what pregnancy does to a person's body and mind. Women don't leave men to spite them out of child support. Taking your child from the biological father isn't something women just do to 'run off with another man'. I suppose I could go on with the quotes, but I think these are sufficient to my point. Throwing your gender around for the purpose of squelching debate is a disingenuous (not to mention tedious) way to argue. It’s also somewhat questionable that your position revolves around men being unable to understand a female perspective, yet you seem to have an exhaustive knowledge of what’s going on in the misogynistic and naïve minds of the males with whom you’re speaking. Personally, I would love to hear your opinion on abortion if it involves something other than gender stereotypes, angry dismissals of opposing viewpoints, and the old you-can’t-possibly-understand-what-it’s-like- for me! assertion that you’re the only individual in the discussion with a leg to stand on. You think pregnancy and abortion is a gender-neutral issue? Do you think pregnancy and abortion is as hard on the male as the female, and that the male's judgement is greater or equal to a female's on this issue? You are a very special person, like many proud Americans. Thanks for picking out all of the gender related arguments from the female perspective by the way, while ignoring the many from the male side lol, there's no point, man. It's just something we have to ignore at this time. No point for a privileged first world male to have an opinion on, I agree -- they'll likely never encounter the grief of an unwanted child in their lifetime . Edit: Especially one that they can't afford to care for First I must ask, are you female? Because you seem to forget that creating a child takes two people, man AND woman. What if the woman just decided to get the baby aborted but the man totally wanted it. Was prepared for it, and everything else. WTF is that? I understand the it's a womans body argument, but to think someones lover got his baby aborted doesnt mentally affect the male. Then you are just plain stupid. You throw out misogynist like 50x but I think a more apt description for you is radical feminist. Because you clearly have no idea, have never had a child. Nor had a child aborted. Why does it matter if it mentally affects the man? A lot of illogical stupid thing can mentally affect the men. At the end of the today you can just go cum on someone else. But she will still go through all of the trouble of carrying a baby inside her for 9 months regardless of what you do.
|
On April 29 2011 00:55 scouting overlord wrote:Show nested quote +
Right. You conceive of yourself as a purveyor of Truth and Reality to a group of hopelessly backward and uninformed individuals.
Such is the burden of debating science and humanity to a lot of the population .
Edit: I'm not even sure what you mean by "contributions", this isn't a stage where everyone chips their precious little opinions in and they get rewarded for "contributing", it's about the rights of a woman to her own body, to prevent anyone from bearing an unwanted child.
Oh I pressed quote instead of edit, oops.
|
it makes me sick how decrepit society is today... i cant believe how callous people are to even think about supporting abortion. yeah, it's your body, why should i stop you from killing a child?
its amazing how people would view a mother killing her 3 year old "unwanted"
(what a sick world where being unwanted is an excuse to die...)child as an utter travesty, but dont give a crap if she kills her child while she's still inside her? its just sad... maybe im just weird for loving kids :/
|
On April 28 2011 23:51 -Archangel- wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2011 21:56 Ghostcom wrote:On April 28 2011 21:03 -Archangel- wrote:On April 28 2011 20:42 Ghostcom wrote:On April 28 2011 20:04 -Archangel- wrote:
12 week fetus is already a really small baby, 20 weeks is pure murder. Statements like these are so detrimental to any worthwhile debate >_> In the end it all comes down to how you define life - is it when sperm meets egg? is it self-sustainability? is it awareness - and what degree of awareness? And 20 weeks seems like an odd time, but if I'm to guess it's because the earliest a baby can survive being born is 15 weeks premature, thus at 20 weeks it still can't survive AND by giving time until week 20 you can actually test for Downs syndrome which is done @ week 16. As a father I felt the need to say this because it is the truth. Even in europe the 3 month limit of being able to preform an abortion is probably too high, but 20 weeks that, I will say it again, is murder. I know how my little girl looked at 20 weeks and nobody can tell me she is not a person or alive. No law can tell me that. Laws are artificial constructions of men, this is nature that is above any human law. It's not the truth - it's your perception which isn't based on anything objective, but "merely" your feelings as a dad. The only reason WHY you even knew how your daughter looked at week 20 in the first place was because you were getting an ultrasound to test wheter or not there were any developmental defects which would make life impossible meaning your wife would've had to abort or give birth to a dead baby. You are being a total hypocrit so take your "I'm telling the truth" BS and shut up or bring some valid arguments. I know I'm VERY blunt, but you do not hold any moral highground in this, stop trying to make it seem like that. And congratulations with your daughter, kids can really be a blessing, but don't try and make your subjective feelings a universal standard. Exactly where the limit should be placed is very hard to decide and tbh I don't think there is any 100% correct answer. I DO however support the option of being able to abort a child with trisomy 21 and thus I also support abortion @ week 16-20 as that is the earliest you can with certainty say wheter or not the mutation is present without an unacceptable risk to the mother or fetus. I am sorry, but you are also just stating your opinion and it is no more true then mine. Science does not 100% know when the baby is aware or if there is something called a soul (a religious version or otherwise). But what is without doubt is that it is alive and a seperate being that depends on the mother to grow and survive at that point. It does not give the mother right to kill it as long as it is going to end up healthy and able to lead a normal life. If the mother/father do not want it, the government can take care of it. Instead of wasting money on abortions and developing technology and drugs for that, that money can be spent into government programs that will let abandoned children find new homes as painless as possible or be able to grow up and have similar chance to be a useful part of society.
Difference is that my opinion is morally consistent, yours isn't due to several points:
1) As soon as you begin to talk about exceptions (if the fetus is a result of a rape), you aren't being morally consistent any more - it is still a "life" (according to you) that is being murdered no matter how it was produced.
2) You neglect the mothers right to govern her own body in favor of a lump of cells which as you say yourself can't survive without her.
These were only 2 of the reasons, others would be to ask if you used contraceptives? If you mastubated? I could go on... If a rule is to serve universally, consistency is the absolute most important feature...
|
On April 29 2011 00:56 VIB wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2011 00:43 Arkless wrote:On April 29 2011 00:09 scouting overlord wrote:On April 29 2011 00:08 eLiE wrote:On April 29 2011 00:03 scouting overlord wrote:On April 28 2011 23:56 HULKAMANIA wrote:On April 28 2011 18:21 scouting overlord wrote:
I'm pointing out that you're all more than likely male with no idea what it's like to bear or raise a child, especially one which has been accidentally or unwillingly conceived or has been diagnosed with a serious illness inutero. A female should be the one allowed to make a decision On April 28 2011 18:32 scouting overlord wrote:
Cry me a river macho man, it's her child in her body and you have no leg to stand on if you've broken up with her in pregnancy, you know the most important time to care for your wife? 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. On April 28 2011 18:53 scouting overlord wrote: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 19:07 scouting overlord wrote: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. On April 28 2011 19:10 scouting overlord wrote:
You have never experienced pregnancy. You never will experience pregnancy. No male will, and it's a greater burden on the women, both mentally and physically, than whatever "statistics" and "labor" the court puts on you. It will scar her body and mind for life, not just for when the court dictates your "labor time" On April 28 2011 19:12 scouting overlord wrote:
I'll let this slide as you defend the women's right to abortion at least. But trust me on this, nothing you ever experience is even close to childbirth. It isn't 'only' or 'just' 9 months from the women's point of view, and you should respect that. No one should be forced to go through childbirth unwillingly. On April 28 2011 19:13 scouting overlord wrote:
It's based around pregnancy being a burden wholly put on the woman and her body you fucking mong. On April 28 2011 19:27 scouting overlord wrote:A man does not get pregnant . It's not even close to 50/50. You have no idea what pregnancy does to a person's body and mind. Women don't leave men to spite them out of child support. Taking your child from the biological father isn't something women just do to 'run off with another man'. I suppose I could go on with the quotes, but I think these are sufficient to my point. Throwing your gender around for the purpose of squelching debate is a disingenuous (not to mention tedious) way to argue. It’s also somewhat questionable that your position revolves around men being unable to understand a female perspective, yet you seem to have an exhaustive knowledge of what’s going on in the misogynistic and naïve minds of the males with whom you’re speaking. Personally, I would love to hear your opinion on abortion if it involves something other than gender stereotypes, angry dismissals of opposing viewpoints, and the old you-can’t-possibly-understand-what-it’s-like- for me! assertion that you’re the only individual in the discussion with a leg to stand on. You think pregnancy and abortion is a gender-neutral issue? Do you think pregnancy and abortion is as hard on the male as the female, and that the male's judgement is greater or equal to a female's on this issue? You are a very special person, like many proud Americans. Thanks for picking out all of the gender related arguments from the female perspective by the way, while ignoring the many from the male side lol, there's no point, man. It's just something we have to ignore at this time. No point for a privileged first world male to have an opinion on, I agree -- they'll likely never encounter the grief of an unwanted child in their lifetime . Edit: Especially one that they can't afford to care for First I must ask, are you female? Because you seem to forget that creating a child takes two people, man AND woman. What if the woman just decided to get the baby aborted but the man totally wanted it. Was prepared for it, and everything else. WTF is that? I understand the it's a womans body argument, but to think someones lover got his baby aborted doesnt mentally affect the male. Then you are just plain stupid. You throw out misogynist like 50x but I think a more apt description for you is radical feminist. Because you clearly have no idea, have never had a child. Nor had a child aborted. Why does it matter if it mentally affects the man? A lot of illogical stupid thing can mentally affect the men. At the end of the today you can just go cum on someone else. But she will still go through all of the trouble of carrying a baby inside her for 9 months regardless of what you do.
You just answered his question.
It also sounds like you are very bitter from a past experience with a boyfriend (or husband?). I'm sorry for that, but you don't have to be spitting venom every time you try to discuss the topic at hand.
Why does it matter if it mentally affects the man? A lot of illogical stupid thing can mentally affect the men.
I'm not even going to get into this with you.
You are not helping with the discussion, and I'd like to ask for you to refrain from posting anything else, please.
|
On April 29 2011 00:56 VIB wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2011 00:43 Arkless wrote:On April 29 2011 00:09 scouting overlord wrote:On April 29 2011 00:08 eLiE wrote:On April 29 2011 00:03 scouting overlord wrote:On April 28 2011 23:56 HULKAMANIA wrote:On April 28 2011 18:21 scouting overlord wrote:
I'm pointing out that you're all more than likely male with no idea what it's like to bear or raise a child, especially one which has been accidentally or unwillingly conceived or has been diagnosed with a serious illness inutero. A female should be the one allowed to make a decision On April 28 2011 18:32 scouting overlord wrote:
Cry me a river macho man, it's her child in her body and you have no leg to stand on if you've broken up with her in pregnancy, you know the most important time to care for your wife? 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. On April 28 2011 18:53 scouting overlord wrote: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 19:07 scouting overlord wrote: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. On April 28 2011 19:10 scouting overlord wrote:
You have never experienced pregnancy. You never will experience pregnancy. No male will, and it's a greater burden on the women, both mentally and physically, than whatever "statistics" and "labor" the court puts on you. It will scar her body and mind for life, not just for when the court dictates your "labor time" On April 28 2011 19:12 scouting overlord wrote:
I'll let this slide as you defend the women's right to abortion at least. But trust me on this, nothing you ever experience is even close to childbirth. It isn't 'only' or 'just' 9 months from the women's point of view, and you should respect that. No one should be forced to go through childbirth unwillingly. On April 28 2011 19:13 scouting overlord wrote:
It's based around pregnancy being a burden wholly put on the woman and her body you fucking mong. On April 28 2011 19:27 scouting overlord wrote:A man does not get pregnant . It's not even close to 50/50. You have no idea what pregnancy does to a person's body and mind. Women don't leave men to spite them out of child support. Taking your child from the biological father isn't something women just do to 'run off with another man'. I suppose I could go on with the quotes, but I think these are sufficient to my point. Throwing your gender around for the purpose of squelching debate is a disingenuous (not to mention tedious) way to argue. It’s also somewhat questionable that your position revolves around men being unable to understand a female perspective, yet you seem to have an exhaustive knowledge of what’s going on in the misogynistic and naïve minds of the males with whom you’re speaking. Personally, I would love to hear your opinion on abortion if it involves something other than gender stereotypes, angry dismissals of opposing viewpoints, and the old you-can’t-possibly-understand-what-it’s-like- for me! assertion that you’re the only individual in the discussion with a leg to stand on. You think pregnancy and abortion is a gender-neutral issue? Do you think pregnancy and abortion is as hard on the male as the female, and that the male's judgement is greater or equal to a female's on this issue? You are a very special person, like many proud Americans. Thanks for picking out all of the gender related arguments from the female perspective by the way, while ignoring the many from the male side lol, there's no point, man. It's just something we have to ignore at this time. No point for a privileged first world male to have an opinion on, I agree -- they'll likely never encounter the grief of an unwanted child in their lifetime . Edit: Especially one that they can't afford to care for First I must ask, are you female? Because you seem to forget that creating a child takes two people, man AND woman. What if the woman just decided to get the baby aborted but the man totally wanted it. Was prepared for it, and everything else. WTF is that? I understand the it's a womans body argument, but to think someones lover got his baby aborted doesnt mentally affect the male. Then you are just plain stupid. You throw out misogynist like 50x but I think a more apt description for you is radical feminist. Because you clearly have no idea, have never had a child. Nor had a child aborted. Why does it matter if it mentally affects the man? A lot of illogical stupid thing can mentally affect the men. At the end of the today you can just go cum on someone else. But she will still go through all of the trouble of carrying a baby inside her for 9 months regardless of what you do.
The man's feelings are just as important as a woman's on everything of course, even biogical events that a man cannot even begin to imagine the experience of. I'm some crazy radical feminist for suggesting that the woman's say over her own body is more important than her lover's.
|
On April 29 2011 00:55 scouting overlord wrote:Show nested quote +
Right. You conceive of yourself as a purveyor of Truth and Reality to a group of hopelessly backward and uninformed individuals.
Such is the burden of debating science and humanity to a lot of the population .
I suppose. There is a tendency, however—one that comes with intellectual maturity—to view oneself less as a missionary sent by science to convert the unwashed masses into right thinking and more as a fellow inquirer into and observer of the complex phenomena of lived experience against which convenient certainties and glib assertions of one's own intellectual superiority sound increasingly hollow.
|
On April 29 2011 01:01 HULKAMANIA wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2011 00:55 scouting overlord wrote:
Right. You conceive of yourself as a purveyor of Truth and Reality to a group of hopelessly backward and uninformed individuals.
Such is the burden of debating science and humanity to a lot of the population . I suppose. There is a tendency, however—one that comes with intellectual maturity—to view oneself less as a missionary sent by science to convert the unwashed masses into right thinking and more as a fellow inquirer into and observer of the complex phenomena of lived experience against which convenient certainties and glib assertions of one's own intellectual superiority sound increasingly hollow.
You should definitely apply that advice to yourself friend . Any perspectives on abortion by the way? Might sound crazy but that's what we're discussing, not whatever wank you thought was clever to say.
|
On April 29 2011 00:57 scouting overlord wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2011 00:55 scouting overlord wrote:
Right. You conceive of yourself as a purveyor of Truth and Reality to a group of hopelessly backward and uninformed individuals.
Such is the burden of debating science and humanity to a lot of the population . Edit: I'm not even sure what you mean by "contributions", this isn't a stage where everyone chips their precious little opinions in and they get rewarded for "contributing", it's about the rights of a woman to her own body, to prevent anyone from bearing an unwanted child. Oh I pressed quote instead of edit, oops.
I certainly wish some individuals in this thread would refrain entirely from chipping in their precious opinions, starting with those who denigrate the practice in the first place.
|
On April 29 2011 01:02 scouting overlord wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2011 01:01 HULKAMANIA wrote:On April 29 2011 00:55 scouting overlord wrote:
Right. You conceive of yourself as a purveyor of Truth and Reality to a group of hopelessly backward and uninformed individuals.
Such is the burden of debating science and humanity to a lot of the population . I suppose. There is a tendency, however—one that comes with intellectual maturity—to view oneself less as a missionary sent by science to convert the unwashed masses into right thinking and more as a fellow inquirer into and observer of the complex phenomena of lived experience against which convenient certainties and glib assertions of one's own intellectual superiority sound increasingly hollow. You should definitely apply that advice to yourself friend . Any perspectives on abortion by the way? Might sound crazy but that's what we're discussing, not whatever wank you thought was clever to say.
That's not what I am discussing. What I am discussing is the disheartening pattern of vacuous ad hominems in your posting, of which the above quoted addition is a prime example.
|
On April 29 2011 00:51 -Archangel- wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2011 00:49 PolSC2 wrote:On April 29 2011 00:45 -Archangel- wrote:On April 29 2011 00:26 PolSC2 wrote:On April 29 2011 00:23 -Archangel- wrote:On April 29 2011 00:01 nihlon wrote:On April 28 2011 23:51 -Archangel- wrote:On April 28 2011 21:56 Ghostcom wrote:On April 28 2011 21:03 -Archangel- wrote:On April 28 2011 20:42 Ghostcom wrote:
[quote]
Statements like these are so detrimental to any worthwhile debate >_>
In the end it all comes down to how you define life - is it when sperm meets egg? is it self-sustainability? is it awareness - and what degree of awareness?
And 20 weeks seems like an odd time, but if I'm to guess it's because the earliest a baby can survive being born is 15 weeks premature, thus at 20 weeks it still can't survive AND by giving time until week 20 you can actually test for Downs syndrome which is done @ week 16. As a father I felt the need to say this because it is the truth. Even in europe the 3 month limit of being able to preform an abortion is probably too high, but 20 weeks that, I will say it again, is murder. I know how my little girl looked at 20 weeks and nobody can tell me she is not a person or alive. No law can tell me that. Laws are artificial constructions of men, this is nature that is above any human law. It's not the truth - it's your perception which isn't based on anything objective, but "merely" your feelings as a dad. The only reason WHY you even knew how your daughter looked at week 20 in the first place was because you were getting an ultrasound to test wheter or not there were any developmental defects which would make life impossible meaning your wife would've had to abort or give birth to a dead baby. You are being a total hypocrit so take your "I'm telling the truth" BS and shut up or bring some valid arguments. I know I'm VERY blunt, but you do not hold any moral highground in this, stop trying to make it seem like that. And congratulations with your daughter, kids can really be a blessing, but don't try and make your subjective feelings a universal standard. Exactly where the limit should be placed is very hard to decide and tbh I don't think there is any 100% correct answer. I DO however support the option of being able to abort a child with trisomy 21 and thus I also support abortion @ week 16-20 as that is the earliest you can with certainty say wheter or not the mutation is present without an unacceptable risk to the mother or fetus. I am sorry, but you are also just stating your opinion and it is no more true then mine. Science does not 100% know when the baby is aware or if there is something called a soul (a religious version or otherwise). But what is without doubt is that it is alive and a seperate being that depends on the mother to grow and survive at that point. It does not give the mother right to kill it as long as it is going to end up healthy and able to lead a normal life. If the mother/father do not want it, the government can take care of it. Instead of wasting money on abortions and developing technology and drugs for that, that money can be spent into government programs that will let abandoned children find new homes as painless as possible or be able to grow up and have similar chance to be a useful part of society. You last part is a bit weird. You honestly think the cost of an abortion is greater to our society than the cost of raising an orphant/adoptie? Of course it is not, but anything helps. And there is a lot of people that want to adopt children because they cannot have their own. A good program for that will make abortions not needed unless there is a medical reason behind it. It also doesn't help that adopting a child is an extremely long and difficult process(I understand why). Now imagine all those smart people fighting to keep abortion legal (and all those on the other side fighting against them) using this energy and brain power to make this system better and faster :D That would be a dream come true. My Wife and I really want to adopt our second child, because there are so many children in need of a loving family. My wife and me were talking if we could not have a child normally to adopt one instead of hunting for expensive medical procedures that let her become pregnant (and fail most of the time).
Wait what?! Have you utilized fertilitytreatment or IVF and you are against abortion?! I'm going to stop all discussion right here, because obviously consistency isn't your strong suite (note, I'm not against IVF or the likes, I'm against inconsitency.) Congratulations on your daughter.
|
On April 28 2011 11:16 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2011 11:09 gogogadgetflow wrote:
You can't be banned for arguing for/against abortion as long as you keep it civil and substantive. No need to paint tl negatively.
For now the solution for Hoosiers is simple. Leave the state if you need an abortion. On one hand 20 weeks is plenty of time for an abortion, so the law is at least moderate in that respect. Ethically, however, I support the right of a woman to expel the fetus at any stage of pregnancy; because the baby lives inside the woman its right to life is forfeit. Whether or not it can feel pain is a non-factor (legally - I myself would consider such a factor but I cannot force someone else to). No one has the right to kill another individual unless your life is in danger. Yes, you have the right to evict, but not kill, which means the woman can have (induce) early pregnancies and put the child up for adoption. You do not have a right to kill a trespasser on your property who is not a danger to you, your family, or your property. I really do not like to get into this debate, because both sides are pretty well set in their views. My personal view is pretty moderate -- a woman has a right to evict, but not kill.
your not an individual when you are part of someone elses body and live off what she eats.
|
That's not what I am discussing.
Get out of a discussion thread about abortion then? You have nothing to add except laughable logic 101 burns and gripes about me, why even post? You can PM me if you want instead.
|
On April 29 2011 01:07 Piste wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2011 11:16 Wegandi wrote:On April 28 2011 11:09 gogogadgetflow wrote:
You can't be banned for arguing for/against abortion as long as you keep it civil and substantive. No need to paint tl negatively.
For now the solution for Hoosiers is simple. Leave the state if you need an abortion. On one hand 20 weeks is plenty of time for an abortion, so the law is at least moderate in that respect. Ethically, however, I support the right of a woman to expel the fetus at any stage of pregnancy; because the baby lives inside the woman its right to life is forfeit. Whether or not it can feel pain is a non-factor (legally - I myself would consider such a factor but I cannot force someone else to). No one has the right to kill another individual unless your life is in danger. Yes, you have the right to evict, but not kill, which means the woman can have (induce) early pregnancies and put the child up for adoption. You do not have a right to kill a trespasser on your property who is not a danger to you, your family, or your property. I really do not like to get into this debate, because both sides are pretty well set in their views. My personal view is pretty moderate -- a woman has a right to evict, but not kill. your not an individual when you are part of someone elses body and live off what she eats.
IMO give fetus' the right to vote, also the God given right to bear arms. They are individuals just like a 3 year old child, or you, or me.
|
On April 29 2011 01:09 scouting overlord wrote:Get out of a discussion thread about abortion then? You have nothing to add except laughable logic 101 burns and gripes about me, why even post? You can PM me if you want instead.
You're making nothing but angry and substanceless posts in this thread. Pointing that out is relevant to this thread, as refraining from such posting behavior allows the rest of teamliquid to discuss the topic in a mutually helpful way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
