South Dakota bans abortion

[Injury]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: Injury

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: tjaisv
It's wrong to kill an unborn human life.

if i gave you the choice of having your dog killed to save a day old embryo left over from invetro from disposal which would you choose.

:roll:

That argument is like saying "I'm going to kill one of your family members. Pick one."

That holds no water whatsoever. It proves NOTHING.

it goes to the actual value this person places on this so called human being. you would have to be a moron to not sacrifice your dog to save ...say your brother...or mother. you see how that works? its not like oh noes..i couldn't choose. its impossible!! bullpucky. i wouldn't sacrifice a fish to save a frozen embryo. and pro lifers aren't sacrificing their wombs to save them either.

:roll:

Your argument still doesn't make a point other than "choose who is going to die." It holds NO connection to abortion.

Last I checked, if you want to save an unborn child, you don't have to sacrifice someone close to you.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: Injury

Originally posted by: ILoveLamp
It's because you're all men, you think you don't have to worry about it.

It's because I don't go around screwing women without using a condom that I don't worry about it.

Maybe women should think about keeping their legs shut or taking BC if they don't want to worry about it.

I'm not criminalizing sex, but if you know what sex is you know what happens when it works the way it's supposed to. Even though it's a pleasuring experience, our bodies were conditioned for sex as a means of reproduction, not sex as a means of entertainment.

I despise abortion. Saying "take responsibility for your actions" is a stupid way to put it. "Be responsible about your actions" is how it should be.

If you don't want a kid, stop f'ing people. The statement is true whether you are male or female.

no actually we are also built for entertainment. other animals that don't have sex for entertainment have set periods where there is sexual activity. when the female is not in heat there is no sexual activity. that is designed for reproduction only. human females are the only primates with bulbous funbags of which 2/3rds is actually just fat not function. thats always entertaining. not to mention the old or infertile.

we exist in the real world. not some utopia where you expect people to be perfect and only have perfect choices. absolutes are ineffective in the real world. look at prohibition. its better to have free choice and mind your own business. and besides, keep your moralizing to yourself. you pretend its a fact that its wrong to destroy an embryo when its not. that is a personal choice, a personal judgement. if it were so cut and dry there would have been no debate. the second a sperm and egg meet isn't magic. 40-80% of the time the result of conception is lost in the days after as a natural abortion. this is the moral worth god himself places on fertilized eggs. in the early days of judaism and islam a fetus wasnt considered a human being until well after conception. thus there was only a fine for causing a miscarriage. not a murder charge. and certainly we don't search all menstral fluids from a woman in the days after intercourse to find out if there was a early miscarriage so there can be a funeral for this "human being". its not clear at all, no matter what u pretend it to be.

 

[concreteDonkey]

I can't start a new topic for some reason?!

Could somebody start a new topic in tech support for me with the title:

Excel is making explorer crash on win2000 machine!

Thanks very much!

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: Injury

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: Injury

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: tjaisv
It's wrong to kill an unborn human life.

if i gave you the choice of having your dog killed to save a day old embryo left over from invetro from disposal which would you choose.

:roll:

That argument is like saying "I'm going to kill one of your family members. Pick one."

That holds no water whatsoever. It proves NOTHING.

it goes to the actual value this person places on this so called human being. you would have to be a moron to not sacrifice your dog to save ...say your brother...or mother. you see how that works? its not like oh noes..i couldn't choose. its impossible!! bullpucky. i wouldn't sacrifice a fish to save a frozen embryo. and pro lifers aren't sacrificing their wombs to save them either.

:roll:

Your argument still doesn't make a point other than "choose who is going to die." It holds NO connection to abortion.

Last I checked, if you want to save an unborn child, you don't have to sacrifice someone close to you.

its called a forced value judgement. one you want to ignore because it makes it clear how even you don't really believe it is a full human being. how many real children would you sacrifice to save 10,000 frozen embryos?

i made the numbers huge so its an easy choice. 10,000 embryo's aka human beings to you?

i'd choose the real child no matter the number of embryos. i wonder why. i guess because i'm just a murdering baby killer. but really, thats how i am you know, immoral to the core unlike you. you like the taliban always know whats best for everyone else.

 

[Sphexi]

Go South Dakota!


*stirs pot some more*

 

[jlee]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: Injury

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: Injury

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: tjaisv
It's wrong to kill an unborn human life.

if i gave you the choice of having your dog killed to save a day old embryo left over from invetro from disposal which would you choose.

:roll:

That argument is like saying "I'm going to kill one of your family members. Pick one."

That holds no water whatsoever. It proves NOTHING.

it goes to the actual value this person places on this so called human being. you would have to be a moron to not sacrifice your dog to save ...say your brother...or mother. you see how that works? its not like oh noes..i couldn't choose. its impossible!! bullpucky. i wouldn't sacrifice a fish to save a frozen embryo. and pro lifers aren't sacrificing their wombs to save them either.

:roll:

Your argument still doesn't make a point other than "choose who is going to die." It holds NO connection to abortion.

Last I checked, if you want to save an unborn child, you don't have to sacrifice someone close to you.

its called a forced value judgement. one you want to ignore because it makes it clear how even you don't really believe it is a full human being. how many real children would you sacrifice to save 10,000 frozen embryos?

i made the numbers huge so its an easy choice. 10,000 embryo's aka human beings to you?

i'd choose the real child no matter the number of embryos. i wonder why. i guess because i'm just a murdering baby killer. but really, thats how i am you know, immoral to the core unlike you. you like the taliban always know whats best for everyone else.

You're missing the point -- we don't need to choose a "real" person over an unborn child, or vice-versa. Why not let both live, eh?

 

[rufruf44]

So, how much longer before this will go in front of the Supreme Court?

 

[NikPreviousAcct]

Originally posted by: ILoveLamp
I got an email today with an article about how a bill was passed banning abortion in South Dakota, going against Roe v. Wade and opening it all up to Supreme Court decision.

I'm so pissed and disappointed right now I can't even see straight.

Good. One down, 49 to go.

 

[concreteDonkey]

Please!

Somebody start a new topic in tech support for me?!

(See my post above)

 

[Injury]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
its called a forced value judgement. one you want to ignore because it makes it clear how even you don't really believe it is a full human being. how many real children would you sacrifice to save 10,000 frozen embryos?

i made the numbers huge so its an easy choice. 10,000 embryo's aka human beings to you?

i'd choose the real child no matter the number of embryos. i wonder why. i guess because i'm just a murdering baby killer. but really, thats how i am you know, immoral to the core unlike you. you like the taliban always know whats best for everyone else.

I don't think you could make a post filled with more logical falicies short of adding "Because I said so!" to the end of it.

You STILL are not getting it. It's a decision that doesn't have to be made. You're asking me to decide which is more important but you fail to see that it doesn't matter.

What if the children you chose to save were all future cancer fatalities and had but a few hours to live with no chance of a turn around? What if you had to be the one to tell a woman that was perfectly fit to be one of the best mothers in the world that you killed off her embryo in favor of saving a child that will be dead within the hour? What if a doctor told that to your wife... or said that he chose his dog's life over you having a child? We can add in the "what if's" all day long, but it still doesn't change the fact that your argument has nothing to do with abortion.

 

[jlee]

Originally posted by: concreteDonkey
Please!

Somebody start a new topic in tech support for me?!

(See my post above)

Nobody's making you read this..go start a topic yourself.

 

[Injury]

Originally posted by: concreteDonkey
Please!

Somebody start a new topic in tech support for me?!

(See my post above)

Maybe you can't make a post in tech support because you are in off-topic... where funny enough, this post doesn't even belong.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: CadetLee

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: Injury

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: Injury

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: tjaisv
It's wrong to kill an unborn human life.

if i gave you the choice of having your dog killed to save a day old embryo left over from invetro from disposal which would you choose.

:roll:

That argument is like saying "I'm going to kill one of your family members. Pick one."

That holds no water whatsoever. It proves NOTHING.

it goes to the actual value this person places on this so called human being. you would have to be a moron to not sacrifice your dog to save ...say your brother...or mother. you see how that works? its not like oh noes..i couldn't choose. its impossible!! bullpucky. i wouldn't sacrifice a fish to save a frozen embryo. and pro lifers aren't sacrificing their wombs to save them either.

:roll:

Your argument still doesn't make a point other than "choose who is going to die." It holds NO connection to abortion.

Last I checked, if you want to save an unborn child, you don't have to sacrifice someone close to you.

its called a forced value judgement. one you want to ignore because it makes it clear how even you don't really believe it is a full human being. how many real children would you sacrifice to save 10,000 frozen embryos?

i made the numbers huge so its an easy choice. 10,000 embryo's aka human beings to you?

i'd choose the real child no matter the number of embryos. i wonder why. i guess because i'm just a murdering baby killer. but really, thats how i am you know, immoral to the core unlike you. you like the taliban always know whats best for everyone else.

You're missing the point -- we don't need to choose a "real" person over an unborn child, or vice-versa. Why not let both live, eh?

why not choose. in the thought experiment i say you must. and well that holds in the real world, sometimes one must choose between two distasteful choices and make a judgement. how you make that judgement reveals the true value of the things involved. to cheat is to dodge the issue and really not the point.

 

[farmercal]

It's because I don't go around screwing women without using a condom that I don't worry about it. Maybe women should think about keeping their legs shut or taking BC if they don't want to worry about it. I'm not criminalizing sex, but if you know what sex is you know what happens when it works the way it's supposed to. Even though it's a pleasuring experience, our bodies were conditioned for sex as a means of reproduction, not sex as a means of entertainment. I despise abortion. Saying "take responsibility for your actions" is a stupid way to put it. "Be responsible about your actions" is how it should be. If you don't want a kid, stop f'ing people. The statement is true whether you are male or female.

I have to agree with Injury, my wife and I had as many kids as we wanted to and then stopped having kids. If you don't want to get pregnant use protection against getting pregnant. Anyway isn't it far better for the woman to NOT get pregnant in first place?

 

[Conky]

Originally posted by: ILoveLamp
It's because you're all men, you think you don't have to worry about it.

Why should women get to decide if babies live or die?

 

[Conky]

Originally posted by: farmercal

It's because I don't go around screwing women without using a condom that I don't worry about it. Maybe women should think about keeping their legs shut or taking BC if they don't want to worry about it. I'm not criminalizing sex, but if you know what sex is you know what happens when it works the way it's supposed to. Even though it's a pleasuring experience, our bodies were conditioned for sex as a means of reproduction, not sex as a means of entertainment. I despise abortion. Saying "take responsibility for your actions" is a stupid way to put it. "Be responsible about your actions" is how it should be. If you don't want a kid, stop f'ing people. The statement is true whether you are male or female.

I have to agree with Injury, my wife and I had as many kids as we wanted to and then stopped having kids. If you don't want to get pregnant use protection against getting pregnant. Anyway isn't it far better for the woman to NOT get pregnant in first place?

Yes, but this assumes personal responsibility.

 

[jlee]

Originally posted by: Crazyfool

Originally posted by: farmercal

It's because I don't go around screwing women without using a condom that I don't worry about it. Maybe women should think about keeping their legs shut or taking BC if they don't want to worry about it. I'm not criminalizing sex, but if you know what sex is you know what happens when it works the way it's supposed to. Even though it's a pleasuring experience, our bodies were conditioned for sex as a means of reproduction, not sex as a means of entertainment. I despise abortion. Saying "take responsibility for your actions" is a stupid way to put it. "Be responsible about your actions" is how it should be. If you don't want a kid, stop f'ing people. The statement is true whether you are male or female.

I have to agree with Injury, my wife and I had as many kids as we wanted to and then stopped having kids. If you don't want to get pregnant use protection against getting pregnant. Anyway isn't it far better for the woman to NOT get pregnant in first place?

Yes, but this assumes personal responsibility.

Personal responsibility? :Q

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: CadetLee

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: Injury

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: Injury

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: tjaisv
It's wrong to kill an unborn human life.

if i gave you the choice of having your dog killed to save a day old embryo left over from invetro from disposal which would you choose.

:roll:

That argument is like saying "I'm going to kill one of your family members. Pick one."

That holds no water whatsoever. It proves NOTHING.

it goes to the actual value this person places on this so called human being. you would have to be a moron to not sacrifice your dog to save ...say your brother...or mother. you see how that works? its not like oh noes..i couldn't choose. its impossible!! bullpucky. i wouldn't sacrifice a fish to save a frozen embryo. and pro lifers aren't sacrificing their wombs to save them either.

:roll:

Your argument still doesn't make a point other than "choose who is going to die." It holds NO connection to abortion.

Last I checked, if you want to save an unborn child, you don't have to sacrifice someone close to you.

its called a forced value judgement. one you want to ignore because it makes it clear how even you don't really believe it is a full human being. how many real children would you sacrifice to save 10,000 frozen embryos?

i made the numbers huge so its an easy choice. 10,000 embryo's aka human beings to you?

i'd choose the real child no matter the number of embryos. i wonder why. i guess because i'm just a murdering baby killer. but really, thats how i am you know, immoral to the core unlike you. you like the taliban always know whats best for everyone else.

You're missing the point -- we don't need to choose a "real" person over an unborn child, or vice-versa. Why not let both live, eh?

why not choose. in the thought experiment i say you must. and well that holds in the real world, sometimes one must choose between two distasteful choices and make a judgement. how you make that judgement reveals the true value of the things involved. to cheat is to dodge the issue and really not the point.

Your "thought experiment" can say whatever it wants to say - it holds no bearing on me or any other person on this planet. When a real situation happens, then it's worth thinking about.

I may not know what's "best for everyone else" - but I do know that I'd rather live than die. Considering most people think the same about themselves, I would think that a baby - if given the choice - would rather have lived as well.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: Injury

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
its called a forced value judgement. one you want to ignore because it makes it clear how even you don't really believe it is a full human being. how many real children would you sacrifice to save 10,000 frozen embryos?

i made the numbers huge so its an easy choice. 10,000 embryo's aka human beings to you?

i'd choose the real child no matter the number of embryos. i wonder why. i guess because i'm just a murdering baby killer. but really, thats how i am you know, immoral to the core unlike you. you like the taliban always know whats best for everyone else.

I don't think you could make a post filled with more logical falicies short of adding "Because I said so!" to the end of it.

You STILL are not getting it. It's a decision that doesn't have to be made. You're asking me to decide which is more important but you fail to see that it doesn't matter.

What if the children you chose to save were all future cancer fatalities and had but a few hours to live with no chance of a turn around? What if you had to be the one to tell a woman that was perfectly fit to be one of the best mothers in the world that you killed off her embryo in favor of saving a child that will be dead within the hour? What if a doctor told that to your wife... or said that he chose his dog's life over you having a child? We can add in the "what if's" all day long, but it still doesn't change the fact that your argument has nothing to do with abortion.

good god man, the fear in you is amazing. you just don't want to admit anything. of course the decision in a thought experiment doesn't have to be made if you don't want to think about it. but that is silliness and avoidance.

it is just a thought experiment. you are making up different thought experiments to try to cloud the main issue, the true value of an embryeo. by your reasoning you wouldn't be able to make a choice in any of the situations you brought up. its not about what ifs, but the actual value of the thing in question. and frankly you only brought them up because the answer to mine was too clear. it has everything to do with abortion. those against abortion have to make the case that everyone else cannot have abortions because they define an embryeo as having the exact same value as a real human being. this is obviously not cut and dry. for instance sperm and egg are not considered half the value of a real human being even when they are components that can create one.

lets make it easier. we know its hard to play with the lives of others. would you sacrifice your life to save 10,000 frozen embryo from the dumpster. its just your life against 10,000.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: Crazyfool

Originally posted by: ILoveLamp
It's because you're all men, you think you don't have to worry about it.

Why should women get to decide if babies live or die?

like it or not they take the burden of 99% of the creation.
you squirt

 

[jlee]

lets make it easier. we know its hard to play with the lives of others. would you sacrifice your life to save 10,000 frozen embryo from the dumpster. its just your life against 10,000.

Again, an unrealistic situation.

Would I take a bullet for a good friend? Yes. Is it likely that it would ever happen? No, but it could. Would your situation ever happen? No. End of story.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: CadetLee

Originally posted by: Crazyfool

Originally posted by: farmercal

It's because I don't go around screwing women without using a condom that I don't worry about it. Maybe women should think about keeping their legs shut or taking BC if they don't want to worry about it. I'm not criminalizing sex, but if you know what sex is you know what happens when it works the way it's supposed to. Even though it's a pleasuring experience, our bodies were conditioned for sex as a means of reproduction, not sex as a means of entertainment. I despise abortion. Saying "take responsibility for your actions" is a stupid way to put it. "Be responsible about your actions" is how it should be. If you don't want a kid, stop f'ing people. The statement is true whether you are male or female.

I have to agree with Injury, my wife and I had as many kids as we wanted to and then stopped having kids. If you don't want to get pregnant use protection against getting pregnant. Anyway isn't it far better for the woman to NOT get pregnant in first place?

Yes, but this assumes personal responsibility.

Personal responsibility? :Q

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: CadetLee

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: Injury

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: Injury

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: tjaisv
It's wrong to kill an unborn human life.

if i gave you the choice of having your dog killed to save a day old embryo left over from invetro from disposal which would you choose.

:roll:

That argument is like saying "I'm going to kill one of your family members. Pick one."

That holds no water whatsoever. It proves NOTHING.

it goes to the actual value this person places on this so called human being. you would have to be a moron to not sacrifice your dog to save ...say your brother...or mother. you see how that works? its not like oh noes..i couldn't choose. its impossible!! bullpucky. i wouldn't sacrifice a fish to save a frozen embryo. and pro lifers aren't sacrificing their wombs to save them either.

:roll:

Your argument still doesn't make a point other than "choose who is going to die." It holds NO connection to abortion.

Last I checked, if you want to save an unborn child, you don't have to sacrifice someone close to you.

its called a forced value judgement. one you want to ignore because it makes it clear how even you don't really believe it is a full human being. how many real children would you sacrifice to save 10,000 frozen embryos?

i made the numbers huge so its an easy choice. 10,000 embryo's aka human beings to you?

i'd choose the real child no matter the number of embryos. i wonder why. i guess because i'm just a murdering baby killer. but really, thats how i am you know, immoral to the core unlike you. you like the taliban always know whats best for everyone else.

You're missing the point -- we don't need to choose a "real" person over an unborn child, or vice-versa. Why not let both live, eh?

why not choose. in the thought experiment i say you must. and well that holds in the real world, sometimes one must choose between two distasteful choices and make a judgement. how you make that judgement reveals the true value of the things involved. to cheat is to dodge the issue and really not the point.

Your "thought experiment" can say whatever it wants to say - it holds no bearing on me or any other person on this planet. When a real situation happens, then it's worth thinking about.

I may not know what's "best for everyone else" - but I do know that I'd rather live than die. Considering most people think the same about themselves, I would think that a baby - if given the choice - would rather have lived as well.

it really says something that you can't even think about it. or admit to think about it. thought experiments are used to test out idea and reasoning like it or not.

i know i'm not selfish enough to want to be born to say a teenage unwed mother to have her suffer the rest of her life for a mistake. there will be other sperm and other egg, and another person in time when the time comes. and i wouldn't have been around to have cared.

 

[jlee]

it really says something that you can't even think about it. or admit to think about it. thought experiments are used to test out idea and reasoning like it or not.

"Like it or not" - idea and reasoning have no bearing on an impossible/unrealistic situation.

i know i'm not selfish enough to want to be born to say a teenage unwed mother to have her suffer the rest of her life for a mistake. there will be other sperm and other egg, and another person in time when the time comes. and i wouldn't have been around to have cared.

But she's selfish enough to want to end a life in order to make hers easier?

By this logic, should I not be able to kill you if you make my life difficult?

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: CadetLee

lets make it easier. we know its hard to play with the lives of others. would you sacrifice your life to save 10,000 frozen embryo from the dumpster. its just your life against 10,000.

Again, an unrealistic situation.

Would I take a bullet for a good friend? Yes. Is it likely that it would ever happen? No, but it could. Would your situation ever happen? No. End of story.

thats funny ..thats also an unrealistic situation. are you a cowboy in the wild wild west? you made a value judgement about whether you would sacrifice your life to save someone you valued. yet you won't for another situation. i'd say its mostly because you'd have to admit something you would rather you not have to.

because clearly if you thought each of those 10,000 embryos was sacred human life you'd say yes. and on the other hand you know very well its still absurd to sacrifice a real human life for an embryo.

 

[dabuddha]

Originally posted by: ILoveLamp
I got an email today with an article about how a bill was passed banning abortion in South Dakota, going against Roe v. Wade and opening it all up to Supreme Court decision.

I'm so pissed and disappointed right now I can't even see straight.

Idiot. This belongs in P&N, not here.
If you can't even figure out where to place this post, then you probably shouldn't have the option of having an abortion

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: CadetLee

it really says something that you can't even think about it. or admit to think about it. thought experiments are used to test out idea and reasoning like it or not.

"Like it or not" - idea and reasoning have no bearing on an impossible/unrealistic situation.

i know i'm not selfish enough to want to be born to say a teenage unwed mother to have her suffer the rest of her life for a mistake. there will be other sperm and other egg, and another person in time when the time comes. and i wouldn't have been around to have cared.

But she's selfish enough to want to end a life in order to make hers easier?

By this logic, should I not be able to kill you if you make my life difficult?

i wouldn't want to be a burden for no good reason. the world has enough human beings and if i were aborted i would never known or cared in the end. just as all those lost to natural abortions are irrelevant.

logic logic logic. i'm not an embryo. i'm a full human being a fact which cannot be denied or even argued about and so no, you cannot kill me.


now just imagine. if there was a dying stranger in a coma and the surgeon decides to save him by sewing his torso to yours for life support. does he have a right to your body for life support? or can you refuse. its a simple question. does another being have an absolute right to your body for life support.