South Dakota bans abortion

[jlee]

Originally posted by: 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.

Again - your situation is not possible. Bring up something realistic and maybe we'll talk again.

 

[dabuddha]

Originally posted by: 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.

Depends on if you're the one who put the dying strange in his coma

 

[jlee]

You are very good at twisting logic - I'll give you that.

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.

An embryo in someone's womb is a human as well - a fact which you are denying.

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.

Twisted logic FTW.
Must you sacrifice your family's food for a starving family in China?

No? I didn't think so.

Can a mother starve her baby? Ah...see? It's a different situation when you're talking someone's kids vs a stranger.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: CadetLee

Originally posted by: 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.

Again - your situation is not possible. Bring up something realistic and maybe we'll talk again.

lol, dodging and ducking, its unrealistic nature is irrelevant and you only avoid the issue because you fear to answer.

lets make it easier. imagine if you have a genetic test on an fetus that tells you that it will die before it is fully developed will be still born. do you let the woman suffer for another months to give birth to a dead baby? or do you abort. but how can you abort, this is a "human being", that would be murder.

i would of course allow abortion. no question.

now imagine a fetus that is developing a brain on the outside of its head. this does happen. do you abort? but how can you? its a human being once again its "murder".


you realize the whole idea that we would abort a fetus to save the life of the mother is making one of these so called impossible and unrealistic choices you keep trying to avoid.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: CadetLee
You are very good at twisting logic - I'll give you that.

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.

An embryo in someone's womb is a human as well - a fact which you are denying.

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.

Twisted logic FTW.
Must you sacrifice your family's food for a starving family in China?

No? I didn't think so.

Can a mother starve her baby? Ah...see? It's a different situation when you're talking someone's kids vs a stranger.

you are making value judgements that are supposedly unrealistic and impossible to make decisions on aren't you. funny how that works.

so out of practicality and the realities of the real world you choose your family over your obligation to human life.

so maybe you should stfu about abortion. you've pwned yourself.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: dabuddha

Originally posted by: 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.

Depends on if you're the one who put the dying strange in his coma

perhaps this society just values human life over personal freedom?

 

[dabuddha]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: dabuddha

Originally posted by: 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.

Depends on if you're the one who put the dying strange in his coma

perhaps this society just values human life over personal freedom?

That statement is a little too broad to have any truth to it.

 

[jlee]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: CadetLee
You are very good at twisting logic - I'll give you that.

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.

An embryo in someone's womb is a human as well - a fact which you are denying.

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.

Twisted logic FTW.
Must you sacrifice your family's food for a starving family in China?

No? I didn't think so.

Can a mother starve her baby? Ah...see? It's a different situation when you're talking someone's kids vs a stranger.

you are making value judgements that are supposedly unrealistic and impossible to make decisions on aren't you. funny how that works.

so out of practicality and the realities of the real world you choose your family over your obligation to human life.

so maybe you should stfu about abortion. you've pwned yourself.

you are making value judgements that are supposedly unrealistic and impossible to make decisions on aren't you.

English, please.

Ah - the universal "I ran out of arguments" argument -- when all else fails, tell the other guy to STFU. Touche.

 

[MBrown]

Good.

 

[misle]

IMO, Roe v. Wade is a bad law/decision. Abortion is not a 'right' that can be constitutional or not. Roe v. Wade should be over turned and Abortion will become a state's rights decision. Then the people of that state can determine if it is legal or not.

 

[Aharami]

Originally posted by: Mill
All abortion threads should be banned from all internet forums. No good ever comes out of them.

yea lets make the forums a dull place. lets not talk about anything of any consequence...

 

[AMDZen]

Originally posted by: ILoveLamp

Originally posted by: IAteYourMother

Originally posted by: ILoveLamp

Originally posted by: Schadenfreude
Eh, well you can at least drive out of state to get one then, I suppose.

btw, this thread really belongs more on the P&N forums, though.

And when they ban it in all of the US, what then? Drive to Mexico? Let some sketchy guy in a sombrero liquor you up with tequila and scrape it on out of ya? I don't think so.

And I'll put it where I want it.

somehow I don't think this will set a precedent for the rest of the USA

The point is, since it's obviously unconstitutional, it could very possibly be appealed to the Supreme Court, and then all the conservatives there will have to "re-evaluate" Roe v. Wade, in other words totally take it apart, and in a few years it could be banned altogether.

Wait. Unconstitutional? Where have you been living lately? What about all the smoking bans taking place, the illegal search and seizure now possible through the Patriot Act and its revisions? I didn't see you complaining in the smoking thread when it was banned. Oh, but I see - rights in the US are only important if they affect you.

Really though, you may have been in there fighting the power, I don't know. And I know where your coming from. Still, you should probably get used to it or actually do something about it - this is the new America we all live in. I guess we should all be happy, even if America isn't anywhere close to as "Free" as it once was, or should be - its still the freest nation on the planet bar none.

 

[Aharami]

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.

what happens when a woman gets pregnant from a rape? does she still have to bear the child?

 

[acemcmac]

http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=42385

This whole story is BS

From Catholic World News: Abortion ban advances in South Dakota legislature

Feb. 13 (CWNews.com) - The lower house of the South Dakota state legislature has approved a bill that would outlaw abortion virtually all abortions. If the state senate approves, the law could pose a direct challenge to the US Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision.

The South Dakota bill is based on the report from a legislative task force which found that human life begins at conception. In the Roe v. Wade decision, the Supreme Court majority said that it could not firmly establish when human life begins. The South Dakota task force argues that new scientific advances have answered that question clearly.

The bill would outlaw abortion unless continuing the pregnancy constituted a threat to the mother's life.

The new legislation, which won approval on February 10 by a clear 47-22 vote, now faces a tough battle in the upper house of the legislative, were a similar bill was defeated by a single vote in 2004. South Dakota Governor Mike Rounds, a strong pro-life advocate, has pledged to sign the legislation if it is passed.

Read the bold. It still has a long way to go.

 

[acemcmac]

Originally posted by: SofaKing
link?

I can't believe you're the only one who asked

 

[waggy]

Abortion as a form of birth control is wrong. If a girl gets knocked up because she wants to have unprotected sex then to bad. deal with it.

But for rape and if can be harmfull to the mother, or the fetus has a potantial for Phsycal disablities then yes.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: ILoveLamp

Originally posted by: IAteYourMother

Originally posted by: ILoveLamp

Originally posted by: Schadenfreude
Eh, well you can at least drive out of state to get one then, I suppose.

btw, this thread really belongs more on the P&N forums, though.

And when they ban it in all of the US, what then? Drive to Mexico? Let some sketchy guy in a sombrero liquor you up with tequila and scrape it on out of ya? I don't think so.

And I'll put it where I want it.

somehow I don't think this will set a precedent for the rest of the USA

The point is, since it's obviously unconstitutional, it could very possibly be appealed to the Supreme Court, and then all the conservatives there will have to "re-evaluate" Roe v. Wade, in other words totally take it apart, and in a few years it could be banned altogether.

That's funny...somehow I think murdering a child should be unconstitutional.

Hey, I have an idea. Let's no longer arrest people for driving under the influence of alcohol. Afterall, people can't be expected to control their drinking impulses. COME ON....IT'S OPPRESSION OF THE ALCOHOLIC!!!! RISE UP!!!! DEMAND EQUAL RIGHTS FOR ALCOHOLICS!!!!!

 

[AMDZen]

Originally posted by: Aharami

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.

what happens when a woman gets pregnant from a rape? does she still have to bear the child?

Abortion should be OK in instances of rape, incest or if the mothers life is in danger. If you actually look up the term abortion, you would learn something. If a mothers life is in danger, it isn't called an abortion. Any such law making abortion illegal in any state will have these exceptions tied to it.

 

[Aharami]

Originally posted by: waggy
Abortion as a form of birth control is wrong. If a girl gets knocked up because she wants to have unprotected sex then to bad. deal with it.

But for rape and if can be harmfull to the mother, or the fetus has a potantial for Phsycal disablities then yes.

finally...some logical reasoning.
should the woman be able to have an abortion just because she feels like it? I dunno. Im inclined to say no but then again it is her body. The embro is in her and depends on her for life.

But if the pregnancy poses a threat to the mother or was the result of forceful conception, the mother should have all the right to abort. The feeling I get from most members here is that they wouldnt have the mother abort even if it meant she were to die from giving birth.

If I were married and my pregnant wife were unconsious or were otherwise unable to make a decision at the moment and the decision came to my shoulders where either my baby lives or my wife lives, I'd choose my wife 100% of the time

 

[Phoenix86]

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

Ignorance ++

Yeah, guys don't have to worry about their children. :roll:

Just because some men are deadbeats doesn't mean they all are.

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: ILoveLamp
I'm so pissed and disappointed right now I can't even see straight.

Why? Against baby's rights?

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: ILoveLamp

Originally posted by: ntdz
Do you live in SD? Then wtf do you care?

Because this is the first step in fvcking up what lawyers fought so hard for.

Fixed. Women didn't want this until they were told they wanted it. Roe was pressured by lawyers who wanted to win a controversial case.

Many ladies are now brainwashed into thinking they have a right to kill pre-birth babies.

That being said, I have begun to question my initial opinion on abortions, as well as euthanasia and death penalties. If you truly care about the quality of life, sometimes death is better for everyone including the person dying. It never should be about life versus death. It should be about pain.

 

[QED]

Originally posted by: Phoenix86

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

Ignorance ++

Yeah, guys don't have to worry about their children. :roll:

Just because some men are deadbeats doesn't mean they all are.

I think abortion itself is about as anti-feminist as anything out there.

How many women do you think have had abortions because their boyfriend or insignificant other forced them to? I lived in a battered women's shelter for a short while, and I kid you not every pregnant woman that lived there was there because their jagoff of a BF was trying to force them to have an abortion.

 

[DougK62]

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

I was right with you until you started spewing this bull$hit.

 

[skimple]

Originally posted by: ILoveLamp

The point is, since it's obviously unconstitutional, it could very possibly be appealed to the Supreme Court, and then all the conservatives there will have to "re-evaluate" Roe v. Wade, in other words totally take it apart, and in a few years it could be banned altogether.

You need to go back and research the legal history of abortion instead of making blanket statements that are not founded in fact or precedent.

Prior to RvW, abortion was a issue that was decided upon by each state - states are supposed to have rights, you know. What RvW did was to proclaim that a power previously reserved by the states was in violation of a clause in the Constitution that was not actually in the constitution, but was "implied" if you take certain sections out and stick them together. Therefore, the states could make no law in violation of the constitution, and abortion could no longer be prohibited by the states.

There are several fundamental legal arguments that could challenge the RvW decision:

- If a right is not explictly called out in the constitution, does it exist?
- Does the federal government have the authority to override the power of states?
- At what stage of life is a person entitled to individual rights?
- Etc.

IF the US Supreme Court ever decided to re-open the decision of the RvW case, and IF they decided that the legal arguments did not withstand scrutiny, the impact of the changes wrt a woman's "right" to an abortion would depend entirely on the where the court found a "flaw" in the previous decision.

It is entirely possible that the court could decide that it was a power which should be reserved for the states, in whihc case, each state could establish it's own laws. This could mean that all of the blue states would allow abortion, and all of the red states would prohibit abortion. But there is no way to predict the outcome without knowing the which legal arugument would be overturned.

If you really have the passion that you express, you need to spend the time to research and learn about the topic before posting emotionally charged statements that provide value to the debate.

Think - then speak.