I Sell Dead Babies

[fskimospy]

My responses are in bold.

-GP

1. Planned Parenthood provides tons of incredibly good services, regardless of how you feel about abortion. I'm unaware of a similar distribution of good/bad for the Nazis, the KKK, etc.

2. Acorns are fertilized. I don't see why there would be a difference between plants and animals either. Why is it inherently flawed?

3. The Constitution is filled with implied rights. That's the whole point of the 9th amendment, in fact, to remind us that those rights are there even if not explicitly called out.

4. I know that cheating on your spouse is illegal in a number of states, but that doesn't explain why it should be our business. If you think people shooting other people in the middle of the street isn't a threat to you, you're a much braver man than I am.

5. As for what gives government the ability do define what is right or wrong, that would be the Constitution, basically. I have made no attempt to bait you into bringing your faith into this discussion and I wouldn't attack you for it if you did. (why the persecution complex?) I'm telling you that you shouldn't be surprised when people don't let you enforce your morality on them.

6. You misunderstood my statement about the percentage of embryos that become babies. I'm telling you that your idea that embryos will become babies is inherently flawed, because most DON'T.

7. Whether or not you want to say that 'life' begins at conception, no sane person, you included I would bet, actually believes that life has all the same rights and protections as someone who was born. (This has been discussed kind of ad-nauseum here, so you can read more about it in other abortion threads if you would like.)

8. I'm glad you at least have a logically consistent position on abortion from the rape/no rape perspective. That's commendable.

Rape exceptions are totally illogical if you think abortion is murder. I find the fact that so many pro life people are ok with them to be very telling about their true motivations though.

 

[Gamingphreek]

Is it, though? How come sex so rarely results on reproduction, then? Do you wanna take a guess at the total number of instances of vaginal intercourse and compare it to the number of pregnancies that result from them? Anecdotally, I can say that exactly 0% of the times I've had vaginal intercourse has reproduction occurred.

Cue the 0 for 0 jokes...

The frequency of success in an act does not separate the act from it's purpose. If a person were to speed, it doesn't make it legal since they rarely get caught.

-GP

 

[fskimospy]

The frequency of success in an act does not separate the act from it's purpose. If a person were to speed, it doesn't make it legal since they rarely get caught.

-GP

Sex has tons of purposes other than reproduction.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

The whole premise of the movement is [correctly] that "life begins at conception".

Life, if it began at all, did so some several hundreds of millions of years ago, and has been an ongoing and uninterrupted process since then. There is no "beginning of life" at conception. The sperm and egg are both alive pre-conception, and the zygote continues to live post conception. Beginning of life not found.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

The frequency of success in an act does not separate the act from it's purpose. If a person were to speed, it doesn't make it legal since they rarely get caught.

-GP

You think having sex is like breaking the law, and getting pregnant is like getting caught? That has to be one of the stupidest things I've ever read, and patently absurd.

That's aside from the fact that you don't get to tell other people what the purpose of their sex acts are. You're simply deluded by your religion to believe something that stupid.

 

[Gamingphreek]

1. Planned Parenthood provides tons of incredibly good services, regardless of how you feel about abortion. I'm unaware of a similar distribution of good/bad for the Nazis, the KKK, etc.

2. Acorns are fertilized. I don't see why there would be a difference between plants and animals either. Why is it inherently flawed?

3. The Constitution is filled with implied rights. That's the whole point of the 9th amendment, in fact, to remind us that those rights are there even if not explicitly called out.

4. I know that cheating on your spouse is illegal in a number of states, but that doesn't explain why it should be our business. If you think people shooting other people in the middle of the street isn't a threat to you, you're a much braver man than I am.

5. As for what gives government the ability do define what is right or wrong, that would be the Constitution, basically. I have made no attempt to bait you into bringing your faith into this discussion and I wouldn't attack you for it if you did. (why the persecution complex?) I'm telling you that you shouldn't be surprised when people don't let you enforce your morality on them.

6. You misunderstood my statement about the percentage of embryos that become babies. I'm telling you that your idea that embryos will become babies is inherently flawed, because most DON'T.

7. Whether or not you want to say that 'life' begins at conception, no sane person, you included I would bet, actually believes that life has all the same rights and protections as someone who was born. (This has been discussed kind of ad-nauseum here, so you can read more about it in other abortion threads if you would like.)

8. I'm glad you at least have a logically consistent position on abortion from the rape/no rape perspective. That's commendable.

Rape exceptions are totally illogical if you think abortion is murder. I find the fact that so many pro life people are ok with them to be very telling about their true motivations though.

1. So if Planned Parenthood went away, the implication is that somehow all forms of contraception or counseling would vanish?

2. My apologies for misstating the difference between an acorn and a tree. That said, all you have really done is proven that plants and animals are inherently completely different. An animal and plant are in different kingdoms (with respect to Taxonomy) for starters.

3. Yes, there are enumerated rights not explicitly laid out in the constitution. The courts and people who are Pro-Life disagree with the application of the 9th amendment in this manner. Despite this, it would not require a constitutional amendment to outlaw abortion.

4.I was obviously being facetious with shooting example; however, if you care about others, you should strive to lovingly make things your business and have a positive impact in the world. If a woman has just had an abortion and is crying in the street over it, I can choose to make it my business by walking over and comforting her or I can mind my own business.

5. I apologize for the perceived persecution complex. Based on other content on P&N and the responses surrounding yours about "Christians", I was merely trying to address a point.

I guess the point about morality is that there *MUST* be a set of moral absolutes at some point, otherwise it falls to everyone doing what they see fit in their own eyes. If not that, then it could fall to majority rules. What if, at some point later in history, majority rejected all people named 'eskimospy' and decided to banish them to a deserted island - I know you wouldn't want that to happen and I certainly wouldn't wish that on you.

6. I understand your point, but I don't think I did a very eloquent job at addressing it. The fact that most don't make it is simply nature running its course (however callous that may sound). People who have a miscarriage are an example of the tragedies and struggles in this world. Neither of those statistics can justify the existence of ending the life since it many don't make it anyway.

7. The only right / protection I would care about in the instance of a life before birth but after conception is the right to life. I'll have to read some of the other threads to get a better idea of what you are saying to comment any further.

8. Thank you. I feel like I should mention that, I've also recently read some persuasive Christian articles that are against the death penalty that may have swayed me towards rejecting that as well. I don't want to create a tangent in this thread, I'm just merely trying to convey that I'm not stirring up trouble for troubles sake or conforming to anything other than the text of the Bible.

Thanks,
-GP

 

[Gamingphreek]

You think having sex is like breaking the law, and getting pregnant is like getting caught? That has to be one of the stupidest things I've ever read, and patently absurd.

That's aside from the fact that you don't get to tell other people what the purpose of their sex acts are. You're simply deluded by your religion to believe something that stupid.

I think you need research the definition of an analogy.

Additionally, I didn't define the primary purpose for sex. It is a reproductive act. Just because it happens to be pleasurable doesn't change that.

-GP

 

[Gamingphreek]

Life, if it began at all, did so some several hundreds of millions of years ago, and has been an ongoing and uninterrupted process since then. There is no "beginning of life" at conception. The sperm and egg are both alive pre-conception, and the zygote continues to live post conception. Beginning of life not found.

We are referring to the life of a human, not life as the collective of all things or of life as a concept regarding animate and inanimate objects.

-GP

 

[Paratus]

We are referring to the life of a human, not life as the collective of all things or of life as a concept regarding animate and inanimate objects.

-GP

since when can a human be multiple people? A zygote can.

 

[CitizenKain]

1. So if Planned Parenthood went away, the implication is that somehow all forms of contraception or counseling would vanish?

Not all, but a significant amount. Also a lot of affordable health screening, STD tests, prevention, education. Basically a lot of things that help the poor.

In its place would be those clinics run by anti-choice organizations that pretend they are health clinics while lying to patients. Those are good fun.

Anti-choice people won't be happy until women are dying from a back alley abortion that they feel is justified to feel morally superior.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

I think you need research the definition of an analogy.

What would you know about it? Please, defend your analogy then.

Additionally, I didn't define the primary purpose for sex.

Complete bullshit. You go on to do explicitly what you denied right here:

It is a reproductive act. Just because it happens to be pleasurable doesn't change that.

You have mistaken function for purpose because you are am imbecile. You suppose that because X does Y that the purpose of X is to do Y. This is only how idiots think.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

We are referring to the life of a human, not life as the collective of all things or of life as a concept regarding animate and inanimate objects.

-GP

That doesn't refute anything I've said. Biologically, life does not begin at conception. Legally, "life" is a meaningless term. The objects of rights and duties under the law are persons, and persons are born. Read the 14th amendment sometime you dummy.

 

[Subyman]

How is abstinence something that only fortunate people can engage in. Last time I checked, aside from cases of rape, you can choose whether or not to have sex. Fortune or luck doesn't have any ground to stand on.

Based on your statement, it seems that you are arguing that since "teens/young adults are really dumb", we need to give them the license to kill another being so they are inconvenienced or learn from their mistakes.

I'd also take this opportunity to say that I fully disagree with any Christians shaming anyone for sinning (in this case, sex outside of marriage). Christians shouldn't endorse the sin, but should recognize that we are all sinners in need of a Savior and should, therefore, strive to help one another "go and sin no more" (as Jesus said).

-GP

The reason is because abstinence is typically shilled by adults who made it through their teen years without any sexual issues that led to having a child. They were fortunate because they either had good parents/mentors who taught them how to protect themselves, made mistakes but were lucky, or were tied up in religion/self esteem issues/etc. Teens have sex and luckily for them, they don't get tied down for the rest of their lives because of youthful mistakes.

Learning from your mistakes typically applies to something that can be repeated in the future. Learning from a mistake that lasts your entire life and completely changes your life path isn't really a lesson at all for that individual. They can't choose to live their teen years again with the knowledge they gained.

Dumping nearly 1M babies per year into the adoption system isn't going to work either.

 

[michal1980]

The reason is because abstinence is typically shilled by adults who made it through their teen years without any sexual issues that led to having a child. They were fortunate because they either had good parents/mentors who taught them how to protect themselves, made mistakes but were lucky, or were tied up in religion/self esteem issues/etc. Teens have sex and luckily for them, they don't get tied down for the rest of their lives because of youthful mistakes.

Learning from your mistakes typically applies to something that can be repeated in the future. Learning from a mistake that lasts your entire life and completely changes your life path isn't really a lesson at all for that individual. They can't choose to live their teen years again with the knowledge they gained.

Dumping nearly 1M babies per year into the adoption system isn't going to work either.

So lets just sell some baby parts.

 

[ivwshane]

So lets just sell some baby parts.

So you are against using human tissue for science?

 

[michal1980]

So you are against using humane tissue for science?

are you for murder?

 

[ivwshane]

are you for murder?

Absolutely!

 

[dank69]

This is, inherently, a flawed argument. Consider the following:

Imagine if Auschwitz guards defended themselves by saying "We only gas people 5% of the time."

Ted Bundy also would like to point out that he only spent less than 1% of his time murdering people.

Should we bring back the Ku Klux Klan because they only were lynching people on a part time basis?



Comparing a plant to a mammal --in this case, a human-- is inherently flawed. I would say "Apples and Oranges", but even they share more similarities than an acorn and a human embryo.

That said, if I'm not mistaken, I believe an acorn has not yet been fertilized and has also not begun germination; thus, it is not a tree yet.



It actually wasn't, a court interpreted that a right that was explicitly defined implicitly defined other rights. This is where we get the terms 'liberal' and 'conservative' from.



How are they a danger to you? He/she hasn't attacked anyone not involved in the conflict after all.

I hate to break it to you, but in 21 states cheating on your spouse is actually against the law. Not only that, a person can make an issue his/her business - that doesn't necessarily mean that the other person will agree with it

In the case of abortion, the ones directly impacted are the father, mother, and child. Since the child doesn't have the ability to plead for life, I think it is the duty of other good and decent people to speak for the child since he/she cannot. Speaking for those who cannot is, arguably, one of the tenants of a moral society.



What gives Government and those appointed by the Government the ability to redefine what is right or wrong. What is morally acceptable to one person, may not be morally acceptable to another (including those on the court). Aside from legal repercussions, what compelling reason does someone have to think that a person with a degree in an appointed position is any more capable of defining morals than anyone else?

That said, it is painfully obvious that you are attempting to lead me on in bringing faith into a discussion where you and others like you just plan on attacking me based on it.

We aren't going to agree here, so what are you hoping to achieve? I am a Christian an believe there are moral absolutes and I reject moral relativism. You are the exact opposite. Are there any further points you would like to debate here?



What Pro-Life people have you talked to? The whole premise of the movement is [correctly] that "life begins at conception".



X% of children in this world will die before they are 18 (I say 'X' both because I don't know the statistic, and because it shouldn't matter). Does this mean we should just kill them now since they "most likely WON'T" develop into an adult human?



Well, sex is a reproductive act, so I think that question should answer itself.



Oh I'm not excluding it at all. I don't believe abortion should be an option even in cases of rape and incest. I was simply trying to avoid bringing in every facet of the topic into a post where we can barely adequately address it on an internet forum as it is.

Without getting any further into it, I certainly can sympathize (not empathize) with the small percentage of women who become impregnated when raped. Assuming that abortion isn't an option, those women (victims) should be given every ounce of support everyone else in society can muster - they would be truly virtuous, courageous heroes. At the end, if the (understandably) can't bring themselves to keep the child, this is the perfect case for adoption.

I'm sure you and the others supporting your opinion will curse at me and call me any number of names, but I didn't want you to think that I was hiding my views because they were controversial.

My responses are in bold.

-GP

Edit: I'm not sure why the bold tags don't appear to be working. I went back and reformatted the post to use multi-quote. Sorry for the confusion.

This post is so awful that I'm actually embarrassed for you. You literally don't even know that an acorn is fertilized. You should seriously stop posting on this subject until you can bother to do some rudimentary research first. This is shit kids learn in fifth grade. What did you think happened with acorns? Do you think the little acorns go to singles bars to hook up? Are the acorns meeting up in my mulch bed to have some sex? Are female oak trees laying acorns and then the male oak trees spraying them like chickens?

Take your first clumsy attempt to refute an argument. The percentage of what PP does that is abortions was grossly overstated. Someone pointed out the misrepresentation of reality and since you cannot argue that, you begin to argue that the actual small percentage is not a valid defense. Nobody claimed is was a valid defense, genius. They were just correcting the bullshit stats being vomited onto the forum, yet again. It would be just as wrong to say that Auschwitz guards spent most of their time gassing people, Ted Bundy spent most of his time killing people, and the KKK spent most of their time lynching people.

 

[Blackjack200]

Take your first clumsy attempt to refute an argument. The percentage of what PP does that is abortions was grossly overstated. Someone pointed out the misrepresentation of reality and since you cannot argue that, you begin to argue that the actual small percentage is not a valid defense. Nobody claimed is was a valid defense, genius. They were just correcting the bullshit stats being vomited onto the forum, yet again. It would be just as wrong to say that Auschwitz guards spent most of their time gassing people, Ted Bundy spent most of his time killing people, and the KKK spent most of their time lynching people.

I mean, Planned Parenthood probably prevents more abortions than it performs. A person that was against abortion but supported birth control would probably get the most milage by supporting Planned Parenthood and sexual education. That would have great impact on the number of abortions.

A better analogy that the Bundy or KKK would be if Planned Parenthood spent most of their time vaccinating people and providing antibiotics, but also performed euthanasia services when a person was terminally ill. Shutting down such an organization would certainly cause more death than it prevents.

My suspicion is that the most strident anti abortion activists also oppose birth control, and that's why they attack PP.

 

[IGBT]

..so the liberals are selling "baby foot" like a "rabbits foot"?? Will it bring good luck?

 

[Zorkorist]

As soon as you give Government power, you end up with babies being sold.

That's no baloney. It's the way it is.

You don't want aborted babies being sold, don't give Government power.

-John

 

[nickqt]

As soon as you give Government power, you end up with babies being sold.

That's no baloney. It's the way it is.

You don't want aborted babies being sold, don't give Government power.

-John

Solution: Somalia.

Yeah, keep f-ing that chicken.

 

[Zorkorist]

Solution, less Government, obviously.

-John

 

[werepossum]

I mean, Planned Parenthood probably prevents more abortions than it performs. A person that was against abortion but supported birth control would probably get the most milage by supporting Planned Parenthood and sexual education. That would have great impact on the number of abortions.

A better analogy that the Bundy or KKK would be if Planned Parenthood spent most of their time vaccinating people and providing antibiotics, but also performed euthanasia services when a person was terminally ill. Shutting down such an organization would certainly cause more death than it prevents.

My suspicion is that the most strident anti abortion activists also oppose birth control, and that's why they attack PP.

Well said and a good point. Even with something as horrific as abortion, we shouldn't cut off our nose to spite our face, and trapping two people in poverty is hardly an answer. Nor is cutting off one cheap avenue of education and birth control, probably resulting in more unwanted pregnancies and therefore more abortions. And while the baby has an inherent right to life, the mother also has an inherent right to control her own body. There is no solution to that conflict except death to the baby or slavery for the mother. (Slavery probably isn't the best description, but I don't have another term to describe someone else having control over a woman's body.) Same with father's rights. It's a damned shame that a father has no say in whether his child is aborted. Yet what solution can there be that does not infringe on the mother's rights?

So far no one has come up with a solution to end abortion that is less worse than abortion. Personally I support pregnant women renting out their wombs to the anti-abortion movement. "Don't want me to have an abortion? Let's talk dollars. How nice are you willing to make my life to save this baby?"

Note that while I am adamantly against selling people, I am perfectly willing to let people rent themselves out as long as it is of their own free will.

 

[Zorkorist]

What's new information, is how programs like "Planned Parenthood" get millions of dollars from the federal government to kill babies.

Who would have thought?

-John