Play
Multi-Player
Coins
Community
Settings
Help
Community   Maps   Forum   Mail   Ladders   Clans   Recent Games
Sign In | Sign Up
<< Back to Off-topic Forum   

Posts 1 - 30 of 103   1  2  3  4  Next >>   
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 19:57:42


[WOLF] The Conservative
Level 56
Report
A main factor in libertarianism is " Do whatever you want as long as you don't hurt other people ". As a libertarian, I would firmly believe in the right of women being able to control what happens to there body. Where does the problem kick in? Well, the problem is there is a little human being inside the women, developing into a full human. So, the reason I do not support abortion is because it negatively affects someone else, the child. However, I think if the mothers life is in danger then it should be allowed ( My reasoning behind this is if it comes down to the life of the mother Vs the child, It negatively affects both of them thus I think its fair the mother should live at all costs, considering if the babys mother died in labor or after there is a good chance that child will have tons of issues )



Life begins at conception, period. Thus, no matter how liberals like to word it, it is always the murder of an innocent child, always. I find it utterly horrifying that people actually think that the mothers preference is more Important then the life of another person. I have great sympathy for women who were raped and become pregnant but the answer is not ruining another persons life. Its funny that the US government funds PlanParentHood yet, the agencies first purpose was to kill black babies because they were " Half breeds ". Its also odd that the US government officially recognizes abortion as a right for women yet, the justice system ranks a pregnant womens murder as a double homicide ( implying the death of two people ).


How do we fix this? adoption is a major way to fix this. Adoption is an option that is not given enough attention. A federally funded adoption agency that replaces PlanParent would be a good choice. Anyway, Discuss


EDIT: I was adopted and my original mother at one point wanted to abort me, so this is a bit personal

Edited 2/12/2016 20:01:34
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 20:21:57


Hitchslap
Level 56
Report
Life begins at conception, period. Thus, no matter how liberals like to word it, it is always the murder of an innocent child, always. I find it utterly horrifying that people actually think that the mothers preference is more Important then the life of another person.


well this is the whole point here. This is an arbitrary position, and pro-choice people don't agree to this statement.
According to you, a fertilized egg cell IS:
- an innocent child
- a person
- a baby

If you really think that, then yeah the debate is over. But do you really think that an egg cell should have the same rights as a human being? Does anything that has the potential to become a human being should have its own rights?
Where do you scientifically draw the line? is it when the spermatozoïde meets the egg cell? Do you really think that it makes sense calling a fertilized egg cell a person

edit: just trying to understand what is your position here.
should a woman taking the day after pill be prosecuted whith murder charges in your mind?
Are you against stemcell research?
since you are a christian, do you think that fertilized egg cells that don't make it goes to heaven, or hell?


Edited 2/12/2016 20:46:33
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 20:26:55


{Canidae} Kretoma
Level 57
Report
The concept of a person itself is debatable, we all consist of lots of different cells, many not even sharing the same genes. Simply praise like as what it is: The most beautiful and horrifying thing in the universe.
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 20:34:17


chuck norris
Level 58
Report
when it becomes a human is the debate issue here, if you really wanted to you could say a sperm is a human and your a mass murderer every time you ejaculate
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 20:45:13


Death 
Level 59
Report
^ Chuck obviously exaggerates, but he's got a point. Why would I (puns ftw) begin at conception? Who said I do? It's an arbitrary value people have agreed on. It does not convince me and probably would not convince a lot of other people. I don't think life begins at conception, but we can't really know when life begins, as it is defined in many different ways...

It's closely linked with euthanasia though, in my opinion. If a child will have a really bad life because his parents won't love him/he'll be retarded/some other reason, why bother giving him the opportunity to live? While I would completely agree with anti-abortion if it affected only the child, as everyone deserves their chance to live... don't you think so does the child's potential mother? If a child will prevent her from living the life she wants to, I'd be inclined to let her abort at the early stage of her pregnancy. Why create a new life if it's at the expense of an old one and possibly, the new one as well?

Feel free to point out eventual flaws in my argumentation.
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 20:45:52


Imperator
Level 53
Report
Whether or not a "Fetus" is a human being is really irrelevant. Something doesn't have to be human to have intrinsic rights, or even be alive at all for someone to be punished for destroying it.

You see all these animal rights people going nuts about how animals have intrinsic rights(Case in point, Cecil the f*cking Lion), and then at the same time saying that because a "fetus" is not human it has no value and no rights. This is probably the most abhorrent double standard that is commonly propogated in modern society.

You see this all the time. In fact, This double standard is even applied to trees and other "Nature" by most people. How is it in any way reasonable that Trees, lions, Dirt, etc should have more rights than a baby human?
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 20:47:15

Luna {TJC}
Level 56
Report
I don't feel like the underlining issue in this debate is when does life begin. Both side get stuck up on this issue when there is nothing to discuss life begins at contraception.

The real argument being; is it alright to kill baby's (fetuses but whatever). And if it is alright why is it?
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 20:52:18

Luna {TJC}
Level 56
Report
Who said I do?
Science

A nice quote I remember but can't find ffs so my memory of it might be uneloquently

When does life begin? 24 Weeks? 12 Weeks? When the brain develops? When the heart starts to beat?

Or does it start at the earliest possible moment that it can; contraception
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 20:53:05


Hitchslap
Level 56
Report
@Imperator

grown animals and trees are actually a life form that can go on living on its own. A fetus is not.
forbidding people to kill animals and plants have nothing to do with them having "intrinsic rights". The concept of "rights" is a human made up concept.
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 20:54:19


{Canidae} Kretoma
Level 57
Report
Life does not know morality, only mortality.
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 20:55:12


Hitchslap
Level 56
Report
there is nothing to discuss life begins at contraception

Or does it start at the earliest possible moment that it can; contraception


yeah...when i hear things like that, i'm all in favor of contraception
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 20:57:04


Death 
Level 59
Report
^ Very true, Kretoma.

Imperator, despite my best intentions, I just can't understand your line of defence.

Luna, how would you define a living being, huh? A being which is capable of thinking?
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 20:59:04


Hitchslap
Level 56
Report
how would you define a living being, huh? A being which is capable of thinking?


In the context of abortion, it is usually defined as a being that can survive outside the womb
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 20:59:26


Imperator
Level 53
Report
grown animals and trees are actually a life form that can go on living on its own. A fetus is not.


This argument doesn't hold water IMO. Newborn babies can't go on living on their own either. They are just as dependent on their mothers as they were in the womb. A newborn baby cannot "go on living on its own.". It will die very quickly if it is detached from other people.

Under this logic, it's no biggie to kill Newborn babies either then. In fact, it's also okay to kill people who are dependent on the government for their incomes, and Every animal who is living in zoos.

So let me ask you the same question about this logic: How does something being Dependent on something else diminish it's value, or warrant depriving it of it's basic rights?

Edited 2/12/2016 21:01:56
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 21:00:03


OxTheAutist 
Level 58
Report
Just allow abortion... you Americans who are anti-abortion are so stupid.
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 21:02:37

Luna {TJC}
Level 56
Report
It's hard to define if it about thinking than is a down or a brain dead person alive (Not really imo at least not worth keeping them 'alive')

I think it could easly be defined as 'a being that can think or will in the future be able to think'
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 21:05:38

Luna {TJC}
Level 56
Report
In the context of abortion, it is usually defined as a being that can survive outside the womb

The issue I have with this is someone on life support not really alive?

Also I find it annoying that w baby can't survive on its own anyway
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 21:08:43


OxTheAutist 
Level 58
Report
I mean, look at this.

According to the bible, a fetus is not a living person with a soul until after drawing its first breath.


Yet, fucking bible-bashers selectively take out parts of the bible that they want to use against their opposition, but neglect these parts. Seriously, some people are so hypocritical, inconsistent and stupid.

The people who are anti-abortion are the same people (on the most part) as people who are Christian!
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 21:11:00


Hitchslap
Level 56
Report
So let me ask you the same question about this logic: How does something being Dependent on something else diminish it's value?


It's not about dependency. Its about the fact that a fetus is a biological system that can't survive in the outside world, biologically. However the help and medical assistance you give it, it will never grow into a human.
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 21:14:51


Hitchslap
Level 56
Report
@Ox
According to the bible, a fetus is not a living person with a soul until after drawing its first breath.

Can you actually quote the bible on that please?
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 21:16:34


Death 
Level 59
Report
Woah... here you go a bit far, Imperator. Comparing babies to people or animals in zoos is a bit extreme.

Firstly, we do kill animals, albeit for other purposes (mostly meat), so it's not really a good example. Secondly, why would anyone kill animals in the zoos or people dependant on their government? I gave you reasons for which abortion would influence positively (or rather not influence negatively the child and/or his mother). Would you randomly go and start killing people in their houses for no reason? If someone does that, it's probably caused by mental issues. Thirdly, how can you compare a child to a grown person? People are able to survive without the help of the government. Might not be an easy life, but it's possible to survive. A newborn child (and a fetus as well, of course) wouldn't stand any chance without his mother (or any other female of his species, but that would imply the child was successfully born). Which leads us to my fourth point, which is the following : if a child (or especially, a fetus) is completely dependant on his mother, it would imply that his mother would have to dedicate a significant part of her life to him, therefore I find it natural that she has to agree to bear a child and then make him survive.

Though honestly, in such a debate there is no "good" or "bad" arguments. All arguments are good from a point of view and bad from another one. It has always been that way and it probably will stay so... ^^
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 21:20:00


GeneralPE
Level 56
Report
I understand rape, but I still think you should put it up for adoption. but if you aren't ready to have a baby, don't go around making them.
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 21:20:25


Hitchslap
Level 56
Report
The key point in determining if a living form should be given "rights", is on determining if this living form is a sentient form of life.
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 21:43:38


OnlyThePie
Level 53
Report
This is an argument that's impossible to win. It revolves around the discerning of the moment of when the baby counts as "alive" or "sentient." Since this itself is a matter of opinion, as we have no solid definition for this, it's really unwinnable unless you can convince everyone to see things your way.

Personally, I think that once the Brain is fully formed, then you shouldn't do anything. But before that, it doesn't really count as killing a person.
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 21:50:57


Darth Darth Binks
Level 56
Report
Why would you start this again?
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 21:53:09


Lolicon love 
Level 56
Report
This is how it should be done:
If you want your unborn kid dead, That's cool.
If you want to die,That's cool.
If you own it kill it.
Your pet included.
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 21:53:52


Hitchslap
Level 56
Report
This is an argument that's impossible to win. It revolves around the discerning of the moment of when the baby counts as "alive" or "sentient."

Actually no. You don't need to know where to draw the line in order to know that there is a line.
If you acknowledge that a fertilized egg cell is not sentient, and you acknowledge that a newborn baby is sentient, then you also acknowledge than the line between "to be or not to be" exists. And the debate is now much more rational and answers can be studied scientifically.
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 22:39:00


[AOE] JaiBharat909
Level 56
Report
I have a quick question. What's the argument against adoption?

I understand that a mother for various reason may not want the child, but what is wrong with having that child become a ward of the state until such time it A) becomes independent or B) is adopted. I think instead of wasting half a trillion on defense spending we could invest in more adoption facilities, greater advertisement for adoption, and better standards of living/education for those in the adoption system.

The question is not whether women should control their bodies, its why don't we want these fetuses to have a chance at life when it is easily possible for the state or government to facilitate it?

Also we should mention another double standard having to do with abortion: Republicans say no to abortion, then say no to greater federal funding for adoption facilities because of their political philosophy on smaller government. It can't happen both ways. I think (and this is coming from a pro-life conservative) that we should increase government spending to help increase adoptions while imposing stricter regulations on abortions and stricter requirements for being eligible to have an abortion.

Edited 2/12/2016 22:41:46
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 22:52:23

wct
Level 56
Report
when it becomes a human is the debate issue here
Because of the controversial nature of the debate, using precise terminology is very important. Because fertilized human eggs are genetically human (species Homo sapiens), they are all 'human'. The correct term to use for this debate is 'person', not 'human'. So, I would rephrase your statement as:
when it becomes a person is the debate issue here

For the anti-abortionists, the reason 'human' is not the correct term is because every cell of a human's body is 'human'. You kill far more human cells when you scratch your nose than when a woman gets an early abortion. But your nose skin cells are not persons. They have no minds, no feelings of their own, etc. You're not committing mass murder when you scratch your nose. (Now at least you can get to sleep tonight.)
The Argument Against Abortion: 2/12/2016 22:56:58

wct
Level 56
Report
You see all these animal rights people going nuts about how animals have intrinsic rights(Case in point, Cecil the f*cking Lion), and then at the same time saying that because a "fetus" is not human it has no value and no rights.

Even animal rights wouldn't come into play here because it's legal to kill animals if done in a humane fashion, i.e. with no unnecessary suffering. The argument is that there is a certain point before which a fetus is not fully developed enough to suffer. Where this point is, is somewhat debatable, but a fertilized egg is certainly not.
Posts 1 - 30 of 103   1  2  3  4  Next >>   

Contact | About WarLight | Play Risk Online | Multiplayer Strategy Game | Challenge Friends, Win Money | Skill Game | Terms of Service