hot Topic: Obama to reverse "gag rule" on abortion

[SeraRelm]

I once again pose my question to those that either did not see it or chose to ignore it when continuing debate, since we've come to the conclusion that murder is wrong and that murder should never be committed.

No you don't. You allude to your question in an attempt to inspire a search for said question, but you don't pose it.

I find your claim both false and instigative.

I concur with this statement.

I'm too lazy to search for the relevant question.

Indeed.

 

[ElJuski]

Foiled!

Okay, now I will pose it again!

Is war murder too? Capital punishment? Hunting? Second-hand smoke?

I want to know what the definition of murder is, to those who consider abortion murder. I also want to know how in certain cases, especially like the ones I listed above, murder would *not* apply.

I'm going to assume that murder WOULD apply, and that the justification of war, or capital punishment, being legal and morally sound is a necessary evil. In which case I would have to counter that abortion in cases of rape or endangerment to the life of the woman is also a necessary evil.

Otherwise the only other argument I can think of is, "Oh, the convict / terrorist already had a chance to be good!" In which case the appeal to moral superiority is already moot, since the moral rule is being based on relative terms to the person. If one is to make the claim that murder is wrong, then murder must be wrong, regardless of who is committing the crime and who it is being committed upon.

 

[SeraRelm]

Ah, well it's not directed at me, but I'll field the question anyway!

Is war murder too?

Yes, it's killing people.

Capital punishment?

Yes, it's killing people.

Hunting?

No, it's not killing people.

Second-hand smoke?

No, though it can lead to health problems, people may choose to remove themselves from the situation.

 

[Calleja]

What if they're hunting sentient wabbits?

 

[ElJuski]

Yes but is hunting -murder-? Is purposely causing the death of an animal "murder"? I want to talk semantics because it's important to lay out what people consider murder, and then to find out how their definition of murder matches up with abortion and other cases such as capital punishment, war, etc etc.

And, thanks for answering, Sera I have a feeling nobody on the anti-abortion side of the debate is going to respond, which is unfortunate.

 

[Futureking]

Yes but is hunting -murder-? Is purposely causing the death of an animal "murder"? I want to talk semantics because it's important to lay out what people consider murder, and then to find out how their definition of murder matches up with abortion and other cases such as capital punishment, war, etc etc.

And, thanks for answering, Sera I have a feeling nobody on the anti-abortion side of the debate is going to respond, which is unfortunate.

Well. There's a chance flames will arise. I'll assume this isn't a trap. I trust you on this, juski.

Let's see. Murder.

Mw defines is as

1: the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought

To kill is to take a life. That's obvious. By the definition, its murder if its illegal.

I quote Arthur Conan Doyle, in the story "Black Peter". In this case, the killing was done in self defense.

You say I murdered Peter Carey. I say I KILLED Peter Carey.

That said. I suppose abortion is no longer murder if its legal. But its still the taking of a life. So, I'm not all that comfortable about it.

And yeah, at least imo, life begins at the fetal level. So, I don't have problems with morning after pills.

 

[Kitty Sinatra]

That said. I suppose abortion is no longer murder if its legal.

It was likely never murder. I don't believe a fetus has ever held the legal status of "person"

But it's still the taking of a life. So, I'm not all that comfortable about it.

 

[ElJuski]

I think nobody really should be comfortable about it. But I'm trying to figure out where anti-abortion people stand on the murder issue, and how it relates to their beliefs of war and capital punishment.

Basically, what I'm trying to call out is certain hypocrasies, and point out the idea of moral relativism: not everything is wholly right or wrong. There are varying degrees. Like, say, between killing a cat and killing a bear and killing a human being. I think it's impossible to justify an absolute "Killing is Wrong" because there are plenty of times where killing may be right, or if not right, it may be necessary.

As for abortion, I would hope that people would choose to not take a life and find more viable routes. But I think the citizenry should have that choice in case of certain situations--specifically rape or when the woman's life is in danger. If we can justify killing in the name of war to protect the citizenry, and capital punishment to protect the citizenry, it is by far NOT a stretch of the imagination to protect the female citizen's right to life, too.

And, as is, I'm still quite interested in hearing what the opposing side has to say. I mean this in the most friendly and curious way, too. I just want to know how the other side justifies certain things.

 

[HowDroll]

That is all.

 

[Espy]

That is all.

So... you are pro-masturbation?

Thanks... for sharing?

 

[Allen who is Quiet]

That is all.

So... you are pro-masturbation?

Thanks... for sharing?

It is a way to avoid the issue.

 

That is all.

So... you are pro-masturbation?

Thanks... for sharing?

If masturbation becomes illegal, only criminals will jack off.

 

[HowDroll]

That is all.

So... you are pro-masturbation?

Thanks... for sharing?

 

[JONJONAUG]

Abortion is morally wrong, and should never be an acceptable course of action barring health issues with the expectant mother. Killing something that will become a human life (barring extraordinary circumstances that lead to a miscarriage) is the same as killing an infant and should be punished in the same way (although not necessarily as murder in the first degree, it should be treated as voluntary manslaughter, since emotional state leading to an abortion would be impossible to gauge in a court of law on a regular basis).

Alternatives to abortion should be fully explored and offered (adoption, foster care, etc), but abortion should not be legally sanctioned.

[/2cents]

 

[Bubble181]

 

[Troll]

Abortion is morally wrong, and should never be an acceptable course of action barring health issues with the expectant mother. Killing something that will become a human life (barring extraordinary circumstances that lead to a miscarriage) is the same as killing an infant and should be punished in the same way (although not necessarily as murder in the first degree, it should be treated as voluntary manslaughter, since emotional state leading to an abortion would be impossible to gauge in a court of law on a regular basis).

Alternatives to abortion should be fully explored and offered (adoption, foster care, etc), but abortion should not be legally sanctioned.

[/2cents]

I see you didn't include an exclusion for cases of rape or incest. Do you think those mothers should be forced to give birth in those situations?

 

[JONJONAUG]

Abortion is morally wrong, and should never be an acceptable course of action barring health issues with the expectant mother. Killing something that will become a human life (barring extraordinary circumstances that lead to a miscarriage) is the same as killing an infant and should be punished in the same way (although not necessarily as murder in the first degree, it should be treated as voluntary manslaughter, since emotional state leading to an abortion would be impossible to gauge in a court of law on a regular basis).

Alternatives to abortion should be fully explored and offered (adoption, foster care, etc), but abortion should not be legally sanctioned.

[/2cents]

I see you didn't include an exclusion for cases of rape or incest. Do you think those mothers should be forced to give birth in those situations?

Yes, because the inalienable right to life should not be ignored in favor of personal emotions.

 

[Troll]

Abortion is morally wrong, and should never be an acceptable course of action barring health issues with the expectant mother. Killing something that will become a human life (barring extraordinary circumstances that lead to a miscarriage) is the same as killing an infant and should be punished in the same way (although not necessarily as murder in the first degree, it should be treated as voluntary manslaughter, since emotional state leading to an abortion would be impossible to gauge in a court of law on a regular basis).

Alternatives to abortion should be fully explored and offered (adoption, foster care, etc), but abortion should not be legally sanctioned.

[/2cents]

I see you didn't include an exclusion for cases of rape or incest. Do you think those mothers should be forced to give birth in those situations?

Yes, because the inalienable right to life should not be ignored in favor of personal emotions.

I find that to be pretty cold blooded.

 

[Bubble181]

[quote="A Troll":uh4e7nd4]

Abortion is morally wrong, and should never be an acceptable course of action barring health issues with the expectant mother. Killing something that will become a human life (barring extraordinary circumstances that lead to a miscarriage) is the same as killing an infant and should be punished in the same way (although not necessarily as murder in the first degree, it should be treated as voluntary manslaughter, since emotional state leading to an abortion would be impossible to gauge in a court of law on a regular basis).

Alternatives to abortion should be fully explored and offered (adoption, foster care, etc), but abortion should not be legally sanctioned.

[/2cents]

I see you didn't include an exclusion for cases of rape or incest. Do you think those mothers should be forced to give birth in those situations?

Yes, because the inalienable right to life should not be ignored in favor of personal emotions.

I find that to be pretty cold blooded.[/quote:uh4e7nd4]

Your idea that people should simply be allowed to kill off their babies because they don't like the father anymore is cold-blooded.
this is fun.

 

[JONJONAUG]

[quote="A Troll":2tqbzw02]

Abortion is morally wrong, and should never be an acceptable course of action barring health issues with the expectant mother. Killing something that will become a human life (barring extraordinary circumstances that lead to a miscarriage) is the same as killing an infant and should be punished in the same way (although not necessarily as murder in the first degree, it should be treated as voluntary manslaughter, since emotional state leading to an abortion would be impossible to gauge in a court of law on a regular basis).

Alternatives to abortion should be fully explored and offered (adoption, foster care, etc), but abortion should not be legally sanctioned.

[/2cents]

I see you didn't include an exclusion for cases of rape or incest. Do you think those mothers should be forced to give birth in those situations?

Yes, because the inalienable right to life should not be ignored in favor of personal emotions.

I find that to be pretty cold blooded.[/quote:2tqbzw02]

I don't. The life of someone born through a stable marriage is not worth more than the life of someone born through rape or incest.

 

[Espy]

...cases of rape or incest. Do you think those mothers should be forced to give birth in those situations?

Well, here's a question for you in reply, if those babies are actually 100% fully human and deserve the same rights as all humans from the moment of conception wouldn't you say of course? And again, if you thought they were not deserving of human rights on the ground that they are not able to be defined as a "human being" yet then of course the answer is the opposite.

See why this is such a difficult thing and not matter how we peg someone down they have a solid base of reasoning. I can't blame you if you don't think it's human for not caring if abortion happens or not to it, after all, why should you? Likewise I don't see how someone who believes life begins at conception can be hated for wanting to protect that life (depending on their methods of protection of course).
We are dealing with two views that are so opposite there is almost ZERO middle ground.

 

[Troll]

...cases of rape or incest. Do you think those mothers should be forced to give birth in those situations?

Well, here's a question for you in reply, if those babies are actually 100% fully human and deserve the same rights as all humans from the moment of conception wouldn't you say of course? And again, if you thought they were not deserving of human rights on the ground that they are not able to be defined as a "human being" yet then of course the answer is the opposite.

See why this is such a difficult thing and not matter how we peg someone down they have a solid base of reasoning. I can't blame you if you don't think it's human for not caring if abortion happens or not to it, after all, why should you? Likewise I don't see how someone who believes life begins at conception can be hated for wanting to protect that life (depending on their methods of protection of course).
We are dealing with two views that are so opposite there is almost ZERO middle ground.

Worst.trolling.wingman.EVER.

 

[Espy]

:finger:

 

[AshburnerX]

Abortion is morally wrong, and should never be an acceptable course of action barring health issues with the expectant mother. Killing something that will become a human life (barring extraordinary circumstances that lead to a miscarriage) is the same as killing an infant and should be punished in the same way (although not necessarily as murder in the first degree, it should be treated as voluntary manslaughter, since emotional state leading to an abortion would be impossible to gauge in a court of law on a regular basis).

Alternatives to abortion should be fully explored and offered (adoption, foster care, etc), but abortion should not be legally sanctioned.

[/2cents]

I see you didn't include an exclusion for cases of rape or incest. Do you think those mothers should be forced to give birth in those situations?

Yes, because the inalienable right to life should not be ignored in favor of personal emotions.

Inalienable right to life? What about Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness? Someone's liberty is being stolen when you tell that rape victim she must carry the child of the man raped her, not to mention completely overlooking the economic and health consequences. Your robbing her of the right to happiness as she watches her stomach swell with the reminder of a tragic event that will scar her forever. Your effectively denying the rights of someone else (who may not have even had any say in the matter of conceiving the child) in order to grant them to someone who may not even survive and who the law says has none to begin with.

 

[JCM]

I once again pose my question to those that either did not see it or chose to ignore it when continuing debate, since we've come to the conclusion that murder is wrong and that murder should never be committed.

Ah yes, murder used in an abortion debate. I'll let Carlin handle that.

Why, why, why, why is it that most of the people who are against abortion are people you wouldn't want to fuck in the first place, huh? Boy, these conservatives are really something, aren't they? They're all in favor of the unborn. They will do anything for the unborn. But once you're born, you're on your own. Pro-life conservatives are obsessed with the fetus from conception to nine months. After that, they don't want to know about you. They don't want to hear from you. No nothing. No neonatal care, no day care, no head start, no school lunch, no food stamps, no welfare, no nothing. If you're preborn, you're fine; if you're preschool, you're fucked.

Conservatives don't give a shit about you until you reach 'military age'. Then they think you are just fine. Just what they've been looking for. Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. Pro-life... pro-life... These people aren't pro-life, they're killing doctors! What kind of pro-life is that? What, they'll do anything they can to save a fetus but if it grows up to be a doctor they just might have to kill it?They're not pro-life. You know what they are? They're anti-woman. Simple as it gets, anti-woman. They don't like them. They don't like women.They believe a woman's primary role is to function as a brood mare for the state.

Pro-life... You don't see many of these white anti-abortion women volunteering to have any black fetuses transplanted into their uteruses, do you? No, you don't see them adopting a whole lot of crack babies, do you? No, that might be something Christ would do. And, you won't see alot of these pro-life people dousing themselves in kerosene and lighting themselves on fire. You know, moraly committed religious people in South Vietnam knew how to stage a goddamn demonstration, didn't they?! They knew how to put on a fucking protest. Light yourself on FIRE!! C'mon, you moral crusaders, let's see a little smoke. To match that fire in your belly.

Here's another question I have: how come when it's us, it's an abortion, and when it's a chicken, it's an omelette? Are we so much better than chickens all of a sudden? When did this happen, that we passed chickens in goodness? Name six ways we're better than chickens... See, nobody can do it! You know why? 'Cuz chickens are decent people. You don't see chickens hanging around in drug gangs, do you? No, you don't see a chicken strapping some guy to a chair and hooking up his nuts to a car battery, do you? When's the last chicken you heard about came home from work and beat the shit out of his hen, huh? Doesn't happen. 'Cuz chickens are decent people.

But let's get back to this abortion shit. Now, is a fetus a human being? This seems to be the central question. Well, if a fetus is a human being, how come the census doesn't count them? If a fetus is a human being, how come when there's a miscarriage they don't have a funeral? If a fetus is a human being, how come people say 'we have two children and one on the way' instead of saying 'we have three children?' People say life begins at conception, I say life began about a billion years ago and it's a continuous process. Continuous, just keeps rolling along. Rolling, rolling, rolling along.

And say you know something? Listen, you can go back further than that. What about the carbon atoms? Hah? Human life could not exist without carbon. So is it just possible that maybe we shouldn't be burning all this coal? Just looking for a little consistency here in these anti-abortion arguments. See the really hardcore people will tell you life begins at fertilization. Fertilization, when the sperm fertilizes the egg. Which is usually a few moments after the man says 'Gee, honey, I was going to pull out but the phone rang and it startled me.' Fertilization.

But even after the egg is fertilized, it's still six or seven days before it reaches the uterus and pregnancy begins, and not every egg makes it that far. Eighty percent of a woman's fertilized eggs are rinsed and flushed out of her body once a month during those delightful few days she has. They wind up on sanitary napkins, and yet they are fertilized eggs. So basically what these anti-abortion people are telling us is that any woman who's had more than more than one period is a serial killer! Consistency. Consistency. Hey, hey, if they really want to get serious, what about all the sperm that are wasted when the state executes a condemned man, one of these pro-life guys who's watching cums in his pants, huh? Here's a guy standing over there with his jockey shorts full of little Vinnies and Debbies, and nobody's saying a word to the guy. Not every ejaculation deserves a name.

Now, speaking of consistency, Catholics, which I was until I reached the age of reason, Catholics and other Christians are against abortions, and they're against homosexuals. Well who has less abortions than homosexuals?! Leave these fucking people alone, for Christ sakes! Here is an entire class of people guaranteed never to have an abortion! And the Catholics and Christians are just tossing them aside! You'd think they'd make natural allies. Go look for consistency in religion. And speaking of my friends the Catholics, when John Cardinal O'Connor of New York and some of these other Cardinals and Bishops have experienced their first pregnancies and their first labor pains and they've raised a couple of children on minimum wage, then I'll be glad to hear what they have to say about abortion. I'm sure it'll be interesting. Enlightening, too. But, in the meantime what they ought to be doing is telling these priests who took a vow of chastity to keep their hands off the altar boys! Keep your hands to yourself, Father! You know? When Jesus said 'Suffer the little children come unto me', that's not what he was talking about!

So you know what I tell these anti-abortion people? I say 'Hey. Hey. If you think a fetus is more important that a woman, try getting a fetus to wash the shit stains out of your underwear. For no pay and no pension.' I tell them 'Think of an abortion as term limits. That's all it is. Bioligical term limits.

Basically what seems to be the debate here isn't any more whether women have the right to abort, but whether killing a fetus is murder. I say killing sperm is murder, and all of you who masturbate/get blowjobs should die.

 

[zero]

Come on JCM, that text was awful... I could not keep reading after the "chicken" part.

But you are right on spot, this thread should be about criminalization of induced abortion, not whether abortion is murder or not.

Heck, risking to sound like a broken record, to steal a car isn't murder either... should it be allowed?

 

[Troll]

Come on JCM, that text was awful... I could not keep reading after the "chicken" part.

But you are right on spot, this thread should be about criminalization of induced abortion, not whether abortion is murder or not.

Heck, risking to sound like a broken record, to steal a car isn't murder either... should it be allowed?

If remove the argument as to whether or not abortion means killing another human, or whether or not abortion is murder, then why should it be illegal? If you're not basing it on the termination of another life, what are you basing it on?

 

[JCM]

Come on JCM, that text was awful... I could not keep reading after the "chicken" part.

Did you just call George Carlin awful? :shock:

 

[JONJONAUG]

Basically what seems to be the debate here isn't any more whether women have the right to abort, but whether killing a fetus is murder. I say killing sperm is murder, and all of you who masturbate/get blowjobs should die.

Masturbation is not murder, there is no egg to fertilize.

Birth control is not murder nor is it immoral since there isn't anything definite that exists that you are killing (and I am not playing the Schroedinger's cat game with fetuses).

Abortion IS murder, since you are killing something that will definitely become a human being, barring extraordinary circumstances.

Inalienable right to life? What about Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness? Someone's liberty is being stolen when you tell that rape victim she must carry the child of the man raped her, not to mention completely overlooking the economic and health consequences. Your robbing her of the right to happiness as she watches her stomach swell with the reminder of a tragic event that will scar her forever. Your effectively denying the rights of someone else (who may not have even had any say in the matter of conceiving the child) in order to grant them to someone who may not even survive and who the law says has none to begin with.

I consider the right to life more important than anything based in emotions (unless the person is willing to die as a result of serious health problems that are untreatable and don't have any hope for being treatable in the expected remaining lifespan of the person). I also consider the chances of a miscarriage (which I believe is what you mean by "may not even survive") to be negligible (you don't shoot yourself in the head because you think you might get run over by a car while walking to work).

Economic costs are avoided through adoption or foster care and a rapist should be made to pay for medical costs if the expectant mother chooses. Again, I believe abortion should be allowed if the health of the mother is at risk, but if you mean short-term health consequences (labor pains, mood swings, etc) then they are negligible.

As for the George Carlin text: It was funny, but anyone that lives their life by the moral code of a curmudgeon like Carlin is an idiot.

 

[Espy]

As for the George Carlin text: It was funny, but anyone that lives their life by the moral code of a curmudgeon like Carlin is an idiot.

Thats why I live by the "Chris Rock" moral code. Cuz I'm not an idiot.

 

[Kitty Sinatra]

Come on JCM, that text was awful... I could not keep reading after the "chicken" part.

Did you just call George Carlin awful? :shock:

Zero automagically wins that Troll poll.

. . . and I was leading :waah:

 

[zero]

Come on JCM, that text was awful... I could not keep reading after the "chicken" part.

Did you just call George Carlin awful? :shock:

Seriously... "Chicken"? Unless he's mocking the "pro-choice" field... but knowing George Carlin, I'd say this is unlikely. Carlin has its moments, but I don't think this text is one of them.

Zero automagically wins that Troll poll.

. . . and I was leading :waah:

Come on guys... CHICKEN!

 

[Kitty Sinatra]

That was the best part!

 

[JCM]

Agreed, some people seems to have no sense of humor when trying to shove outrgae backed by weak logic on us.

Zero automagically wins that Troll poll.

. . . and I was leading

Amen on that.

The outrage these people have on a fetus dying makes an awesome contrast to the indifference in the Israeli attack thread over Palestinian kids dying.

Basically what seems to be the debate here isn't any more whether women have the right to abort, but whether killing a fetus is murder. I say killing sperm is murder, and all of you who masturbate/get blowjobs should die.

Masturbation is not murder, there is no egg to fertilize.......As for the George Carlin text: It was funny, but anyone that lives their life by the moral code of a curmudgeon like Carlin is an idiot.

Yet Carlin seems to be smarter and throws your "no egg/fertilization" argument out the window.

But even after the egg is fertilized, it's still six or seven days before it reaches the uterus and pregnancy begins, and not every egg makes it that far. Eighty percent of a woman's fertilized eggs are rinsed and flushed out of her body once a month during those delightful few days she has.

Did you know many things, from sex to exercise, can kill a fertilized egg/young fetus? Heck, Ive had a girlfriend lose a 4-month pregnancy due to sex (she didnt know she was pregnant,neither did I)

More people to add to the "MURDERERS!!" list, people who have lots of sex with the same woman and people who work out.

 

[JONJONAUG]

Agreed, some people seems to have no sense of humor when trying to shove outrgae backed by weak logic on us.

Zero automagically wins that Troll poll.

. . . and I was leading

Amen on that.

The outrage these people have on a fetus dying makes an awesome contrast to the indifference in the Israeli attack thread over Palestinian kids dying.

Basically what seems to be the debate here isn't any more whether women have the right to abort, but whether killing a fetus is murder. I say killing sperm is murder, and all of you who masturbate/get blowjobs should die.

Masturbation is not murder, there is no egg to fertilize.......As for the George Carlin text: It was funny, but anyone that lives their life by the moral code of a curmudgeon like Carlin is an idiot.

Yet Carlin seems to be smarter and throws your "no egg/fertilization" argument out the window.

But even after the egg is fertilized, it's still six or seven days before it reaches the uterus and pregnancy begins, and not every egg makes it that far. Eighty percent of a woman's fertilized eggs are rinsed and flushed out of her body once a month during those delightful few days she has.

Did you know many things, from sex to exercise, can kill a fertilized egg/young fetus? Heck, Ive had a girlfriend lose a 4-month pregnancy due to sex.

More people to add to the "MURDERERS!!" list, people who have lots of sex with the same woman and people who work out.

All cases of accidental miscarriage, which isn't the issue here. The issue is whether willful abortion is immoral, not whether the human body's internal workings are.