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

[Kitty Sinatra]

Not much to argue about. We've pretty much established some points
1) Abortion is ok only if the life of the mother is in danger

That'd be a point I would argue with if I was interested in arguing this. I firmly believe that abortion is ok under any circumstance deemed acceptable by the woman bearing the kid.

But Juski wants an argument with the other side of the issue, so I won't bother explaining why that's my position.

 

[ElJuski]

Right, so you aren't exactly on the other side of the fence thhp: I was hoping that Neon or Stienman or even Espy would take a crack at it (I especially have a lot of respect for Espy's religious stance, because the mothafucka is a scholar).

Gruebeard--I mean, go ahead and switch it around to what you want. I guess we're not really getting anywhere anymore as it stands. I was just taking smaller steps from the other side, try and find a rational consensus.

 

[Futureking]

Not much to argue about. We've pretty much established some points
1) Abortion is ok only if the life of the mother is in danger

That'd be a point I would argue with if I was interested in arguing this. I firmly believe that abortion is ok under any circumstance deemed acceptable by the woman bearing the kid.

But Juski wants an argument with the other side of the issue, so I won't bother explaining why that's my position.

Shit, man. There's this chick lives down the hall from me. We passed by each other in the hall once in a while, and I thought "meh, she's alright." But then, check this out, my neighbour - a right nosy bitch this neighbour - told me, whispered at me how this chick has had like seven abortions in the past 3 years. Well, I don't think I hafta tell you, but I had to get me a new second look at this chick. So I grabbed me a bottle of wine, picked up some flowers and knocked on her door. When she answered, I saw her in a whole new light. Smoking hot. I was right turned on. There was nothing gonna stop my fires that night. I used all my moves and I had her on the floor before the flowers were in the vase or the wine was uncorked. And oh boy is she fertile. Got her pregnant that night. The next week she got herself an abortion and and I was back in her apartment quick as you could say "Casanova." Didn't even bother bringing no wine or flowers. She was just rarin' ta get pregnant again.

She must've aborted 13 of my babies before I grew bored of her.

Now, replace the world's greatest violinist with Hitler, and let's restart the discsussion. Do you keep him alive?

oooh, Juski! You've just been Godwin'd. You ain't gonna take that now are ya?

Fight!

Fight!

Fight!



(I'll earn that Troll vote yet!)

Actually, its getting pretty civil since steinman got bored with this thread and went looking for a new one.

:sadness: I'm just not trolling well enough. :waah:

He's trolling. Eat him, jrue-ski.

 

[ElJuski]

:sobad:

 

[Chibibar]

Every abortion topic always raises the following question with me: why would you ever want to be so cruel to a baby to force it to be born in a world where it was unwanted by its parents. Life is more than about life - there's already too many children out there made to fend for themselves because their mother doesn't give a damn and their father gives them a beating every night and those are the ones that grow up to be criminals, sociopaths, etc.

Adoption.

It has its limitations, but it's an available third option much of the time.

adoption are only available to a limited amount of people (generally none same sex couples, etc etc etc)

There are kids who never get to be adopted and put into society. some DO turn out well and some don't. The moral part gets very tricky really fast when you think about all the "exceptional" situation.

What if the baby is going to be born without parents, the baby is going to have major health issues (since the parents have health issue) what if the baby is going to be deformed? what if the baby is missing limbs when he/she is born? What if the baby requires life support at least 1 year before it can survive on its own. Who is going to pay for all that? my sister just had a baby (back in September) and it cost a bundle for a normal baby to be born (medical insurance and such) but if this future baby do no have parents (i.e. given up for adoption) would you mind your tax dollar to pay for that?

What if we made abortion illegal and require everyone to give up 2% of their paycheck (before deduction so it would be a require tax for everyone like sales tax without exception)to ensure these kids will have a future if they don't get adopted or have medical help for them.

 

[Iaculus]

Every abortion topic always raises the following question with me: why would you ever want to be so cruel to a baby to force it to be born in a world where it was unwanted by its parents. Life is more than about life - there's already too many children out there made to fend for themselves because their mother doesn't give a damn and their father gives them a beating every night and those are the ones that grow up to be criminals, sociopaths, etc.

Adoption.

It has its limitations, but it's an available third option much of the time.

adoption are only available to a limited amount of people (generally none same sex couples, etc etc etc)

There are kids who never get to be adopted and put into society. some DO turn out well and some don't. The moral part gets very tricky really fast when you think about all the "exceptional" situation.

What if the baby is going to be born without parents, the baby is going to have major health issues (since the parents have health issue) what if the baby is going to be deformed? what if the baby is missing limbs when he/she is born? What if the baby requires life support at least 1 year before it can survive on its own. Who is going to pay for all that? my sister just had a baby (back in September) and it cost a bundle for a normal baby to be born (medical insurance and such) but if this future baby do no have parents (i.e. given up for adoption) would you mind your tax dollar to pay for that?

What if we made abortion illegal and require everyone to give up 2% of their paycheck (before deduction so it would be a require tax for everyone like sales tax without exception)to ensure these kids will have a future if they don't get adopted or have medical help for them.

Oh, I know the downsides - check out what happened in Romania when Ceaucescu outlawed abortion and tried to replace it with adoption. Or don't, if you're disinclined to look up horribly depressing stuff and ruin your day.

It's just that in these debates there's often the false dichotomy of abort/keep in all situations, which was what I wanted to point out. Adoption isn't a blanket solution by any means, but it's certainly an alleviator.

 

[Futureking]

What if the baby is going to be born without parents, the baby is going to have major health issues (since the parents have health issue) what if the baby is going to be deformed? what if the baby is missing limbs when he/she is born? What if the baby requires life support at least 1 year before it can survive on its own. Who is going to pay for all that? my sister just had a baby (back in September) and it cost a bundle for a normal baby to be born (medical insurance and such) but if this future baby do no have parents (i.e. given up for adoption) would you mind your tax dollar to pay for that?

No. A child should not be denied the right to life just because of unfavourable genes.

Maybe its the way you put it. But did you just compare the value of a child's life to savings in tax dollars?

 

[Iaculus]

What if the baby is going to be born without parents, the baby is going to have major health issues (since the parents have health issue) what if the baby is going to be deformed? what if the baby is missing limbs when he/she is born? What if the baby requires life support at least 1 year before it can survive on its own. Who is going to pay for all that? my sister just had a baby (back in September) and it cost a bundle for a normal baby to be born (medical insurance and such) but if this future baby do no have parents (i.e. given up for adoption) would you mind your tax dollar to pay for that?

No. A child should not be denied the right to life just because of unfavourable genes.

Maybe its the way you put it. But did you just compare the value of a child's life to savings in tax dollars?

In actuarial terms, a human life is worth roughly two and a half million dollars. Currency is a form of opportunity - you can use the same amount of money to help one person a lot, another person a lot, or several people a little. Thus, considerations of money in ethical disputes are valid, though not nearly as flippantly as some use them.

Just saying.

 

[Futureking]

What if the baby is going to be born without parents, the baby is going to have major health issues (since the parents have health issue) what if the baby is going to be deformed? what if the baby is missing limbs when he/she is born? What if the baby requires life support at least 1 year before it can survive on its own. Who is going to pay for all that? my sister just had a baby (back in September) and it cost a bundle for a normal baby to be born (medical insurance and such) but if this future baby do no have parents (i.e. given up for adoption) would you mind your tax dollar to pay for that?

No. A child should not be denied the right to life just because of unfavourable genes.

Maybe its the way you put it. But did you just compare the value of a child's life to savings in tax dollars?

In actuarial terms, a human life is worth roughly two and a half million dollars. Currency is a form of opportunity - you can use the same amount of money to help one person a lot, another person a lot, or several people a little. Thus, considerations of money in ethical disputes are valid, though not nearly as flippantly as some use them.

Just saying.

Now that reminds me of a good joke.

[Insert the names of 3 politicians you dislike]

The three of them were in a helicopter.

Politician 1: I will throw this $100 note out of this helicopter. The guy who picks it up will be happy
Politician 2: Well, I'll throw two $50 notes. And there will be TWO happy people
Politician 3: I shall throw ten $10 notes out of the helicopter. And TEN people will be happy

In the midst of their squabble, the helicopter crashed. And the people of the nation were happy.

 

[Iaculus]

Well, yes, governmental inaction is also a valid option. If you want to take money (or any other resource) out of society for a certain use, you have to be sure that said society's existing systems are not doing a better job of it.

 

[JCM]

In actuarial terms, a human life is worth roughly two and a half million dollars. Currency is a form of opportunity - you can use the same amount of money to help one person a lot, another person a lot, or several people a little. Thus, considerations of money in ethical disputes are valid, though not nearly as flippantly as some use them.

Just saying.

Yep.

Its easy for some people to pretend they have the moral high ground because they didnt "murder" a fetus, but take a look at the life of Palestinian orphans, children in Somalia and the child prostitutes of Brazil and tell me thats humane.

If they are going to bring "murder" and the like to a debate on abortion, theres no problem in bringing the more logical problem, money to raise unwanted children, and their life, into it.

Every abortion topic always raises the following question with me: why would you ever want to be so cruel to a baby to force it to be born in a world where it was unwanted by its parents. Life is more than about life - there's already too many children out there made to fend for themselves because their mother doesn't give a damn and their father gives them a beating every night and those are the ones that grow up to be criminals, sociopaths, etc.

Adoption.

It has its limitations, but it's an available third option much of the time.

adoption are only available to a limited amount of people (generally none same sex couples, etc etc etc)

There are kids who never get to be adopted and put into society. some DO turn out well and some don't. The moral part gets very tricky really fast when you think about all the "exceptional" situation.

What if the baby is going to be born without parents, the baby is going to have major health issues (since the parents have health issue) what if the baby is going to be deformed? what if the baby is missing limbs when he/she is born? What if the baby requires life support at least 1 year before it can survive on its own. Who is going to pay for all that? my sister just had a baby (back in September) and it cost a bundle for a normal baby to be born (medical insurance and such) but if this future baby do no have parents (i.e. given up for adoption) would you mind your tax dollar to pay for that?

What if we made abortion illegal and require everyone to give up 2% of their paycheck (before deduction so it would be a require tax for everyone like sales tax without exception)to ensure these kids will have a future if they don't get adopted or have medical help for them.

This.

Probably less than half of unwanted children/orphans are adopted.

 

[Chibibar]

What if the baby is going to be born without parents, the baby is going to have major health issues (since the parents have health issue) what if the baby is going to be deformed? what if the baby is missing limbs when he/she is born? What if the baby requires life support at least 1 year before it can survive on its own. Who is going to pay for all that? my sister just had a baby (back in September) and it cost a bundle for a normal baby to be born (medical insurance and such) but if this future baby do no have parents (i.e. given up for adoption) would you mind your tax dollar to pay for that?

No. A child should not be denied the right to life just because of unfavourable genes.

Maybe its the way you put it. But did you just compare the value of a child's life to savings in tax dollars?

in a way, yes... how many of us are willing to give up their personal income for a plan that "may work" to appease the masses?

In this modern time, having a child cost a lot of money. We are talking about medical expenses, school, clothing, taxes, etc etc you name it. Anyone on this forum can give us a rough estimate on the cost BUT the return is more than worth for many people (when it is their own child) because you are raising something of you own.

But when we talk about murder, killing, or anything like that, it takes money to NOT do these things. It cost a lot of money to keep prisoner in jail rather than kill them off. As humans, we have many rights to live, fair trials and such, but do we have the right to bring a child into the world where his/her life may not be as equal as if they had a parent? even a single parent would be better than none. It is better than to have a system (which IMO broken in many ways) to raise a child and hoping to be a productive member of society. It is hard enough to get normal kids to be adopted, but what about a child that could cost the new family hundred if not thousands of dollars to keep the child healthy. More than likely if no abortion is available, then there must be another system in place to ensure the child is going to grow up normal and have a fair share as if the child had a parent (or two)

I donate every year as part of our school district program and we had people come to our campus every year asking for money from donation to keep these facilities like adoption, halfway homes and such in place to ensure the child's future, but if the government is NOT spending on these system (or enough) for people to ask for donation, what about mandatory tax... would people vote for it?

It is nice for us to debate all day long, but when it starts hitting your personal bank account, where do you stand? (note: this is a general "you" I am not targeting anyone in particular)

 

[Icarus]

Every abortion topic always raises the following question with me: why would you ever want to be so cruel to a baby to force it to be born in a world where it was unwanted by its parents. Life is more than about life - there's already too many children out there made to fend for themselves because their mother doesn't give a damn and their father gives them a beating every night and those are the ones that grow up to be criminals, sociopaths, etc.

Adoption.

It has its limitations, but it's an available third option much of the time.

You're forgetting one thing. Adoption is not forced on these parents. I don't think I'll be far off when I say that less than 20% of parents that have an unwanted child would actually put it up for adoption when they aren't able to use abortion.

I personally know a couple that was only together for a few weeks. Girl gets pregnant but is convinced by her parents that she shouldn't have it aborted. By the time the baby is nearly born, she managed to get used to the idea of having a child. The father and her try to act like a standard couple expecting a baby. Baby gets born, a month of bliss and then the paint starts to fleck. The father loses interest in the mother (post-pregnancy she wasn't quite as attractive anymore). They break up and the baby becomes a serious burden. She had to take another job so she could support it: working night shifts at a factory. Now, the kid was never put up for adoption yet its life is far from great. A father who doesn't give a damn, a mother that is out for work all day while her mother "cares" for him (= he's in a small play pen around the clock). Whenever I see the mother with her son, I never ever see any spark of happiness or even that she cares for the kid. She dumps it at whatever relative she can find whenever she can. I feel really bad for the kid because it's obvious that he's not receiving a lot of affection except maybe from his great-grandparents.

Anyway, long story but it's just one example of how parents will often TRY to make things work because they HAVE to. The kid is getting born so they might as well give it a try. The problem is that once its part of their life, as much as its hated, they refuse to give it up for adoption for many reasons, the main one being a serious social stigma. Having a baby and then suddenly giving it away is not something that many mothers want to admit to. Abortion is much easier - no-one has to even know about the pregnancy!

 

[zero]

Well, sure, life is pain, but...


... in a few years, go ask the baby if he'd rather being DEAD.

 

[Bubble181]

A good solution to teenage pregnancy: start young enough. I knew a girl in high school who got pregnant at 12 (the father was 10, WTF?!). The baby was raised by the grandparents as a younger brother to her and as far as I know, the child still doesn't know that his "parents" are in fact his grandparents. Just has an sister 6 years older and one 12 years older. Heh.
Mind you, that family's all kinds of fucked up on a lot of other counts as well, but they do seem to take good care of the child....or at least, as much as they did their other children (.e. not enough,but hey).

 

[Bubble181]

Well, sure, life is pain, but...


... in a few years, go ask the baby if he'd rather being DEAD.

So if he's emo, we get to kill him? Awesome!

 

[zero]

Well, sure, life is pain, but...


... in a few years, go ask the baby if he'd rather being DEAD.

So if he's emo, we get to kill him? Awesome!

Win-Win scenario, right?

 

[Le Quack]

Let's talk about keeping babies that are born already alive, before we start talking about saving the ones that are getting brutally murdered as two-three cell clumps.

Universal Healthcare anybody?

 

[Amy old]

A solution to the abortion problem: If the mother doesn't want the child, force her to deliver the baby anyway, and then locate and kill the father. If it's twins, find the father's closest male relative and kill him as well. If she doesn't know who the father is, kill her instead, after THE ALL IMPORTANT BABY is born, of course. Balance will be achieved.

Or you know, let the woman choose what's best for her instead of relegating her existence as a uterus life support machine for a child who will be born unwanted.

Oh wait, we live in a Utopian society that risks no global overpopulation issues, where every child given up for adoption is accepted into a loving two parent heterosexual home! Phew!

 

[Espy]

Universal Healthcare anybody?

Hey, hey, hey, lets keep things civil. No need to break out a nasty topic like that.

Right, so you aren't exactly on the other side of the fence thhp: I was hoping that Neon or Stienman or even Espy would take a crack at it (I especially have a lot of respect for Espy's religious stance, because the mothafucka is a scholar).

And sorry Juski, I just don't feel like going into a deep argument about something that can't really be moved forward since we have such different bases we are building on. You know as well as I do the difference between someone slitting your throat in order to steal your wallet and killing on the battlefield or in self defense. I'm not saying one is more valid or better, but it's obvious there is a difference. If abortion is truly the intentional killing of a human being then I'm sure you can see why people would want it stopped yes? And if it's not then, of course, why not abort if it's inconvenient? Although I would say we must then discuss where we start valuing potential life...
Does that make sense? I'm in class so I'm only half here right now...

 

[JCM]

Bingo LeQuack.

Well, sure, life is pain, but...


... in a few years, go ask the baby if he'd rather being DEAD.

Yeah, ask that to the brazilian child prostitutes, ethopian starving kids and street children.

Jesus fuck, its amazing how some would pretend so much outrage over a fetus that can die if you prenetrate deep while having sex, exercise, heck, a fetus that has a good 50% of dying in the first few months, but not give a shit on making a human being suffer.

:eyeroll:

Or you know, let the mother choose what's best for her instead of relegating her existence as a uterus life support machine for a child who will be born unwanted.

Amen.

Although on the other issue at hand, unwanted children/orphans, we'd get rid of much siffeing if we'd treat homosexual couples like equals and let them adopt.

 

[Amy old]

Thankfully, US adoption laws are slowly allowing gay couples the right to adopt. Which is what my partner and I will be doing, hopefully next year.

 

[zero]

Bingo LeQuack.

Well, sure, life is pain, but...


... in a few years, go ask the baby if he'd rather being DEAD.

Yeah, ask that to the brazilian child prostitutes, ethopian starving kids and street children.

Their life is miserable beyond imagination... and still they want to live. That's all life imperative...

 

[Amy old]

Bingo LeQuack.

Well, sure, life is pain, but...


... in a few years, go ask the baby if he'd rather being DEAD.

Yeah, ask that to the brazilian child prostitutes, ethopian starving kids and street children.

Their life is miserable beyond imagination... and still they want to live. That's all life imperative...

Proof?

Because without any, you're making general statements based on hypotheticals to support your position. JCM on the other hand, has posted pictoral evidence that people in fact do not all want to live.

 

[Bubble181]

There are an infinite amount of disconnects on this topic, anyway.
The biggest disconnect is right at the start: when is it "alive". Heck, when is it "human"? These are two different questions - at 2 weeks, there's no visible difference between a dog embryo, a human embryo, or even a dolphin embryo.
Since people will disagree on this forever, the rest of the debate becomes, quite often, completely useless. If person A believes life begins at conception, his view will obviously differ from that of one who believes life begins at birth.
Both of these seem inherently flawed to me (on the one hand, conception takes place a heck of a lot more than we think - it would mean practically every woman with an active sex life has had half a dozen miscarriages, easily; on the other hand, saying birth is the marker would mean an 8-month-old baby that can survive on its own wouldn't, technically, be alive yet...which makes no sense).
A second problem is that, even accepting the same base, it's still possible to have wildly divergent views. Based on religion or other moral/ethical grounds, it can be considered either OK or not to terminate this life. Or, taking the other view, it can be OK or not to terminate this not-life.
Or, it can be OK to terminate this life (or not-life) up to a certain point in time (either determined as the point it becomes life, or not, as the case may be).
Then there's the added problem of when it is OK or not. While the two extremes are possible, there's all kinds of middle steps of rape, incest, physical harm to the mother, physical harm to the baby, deformities, social acceptance, wanted or not, and so on and so on. I could yammer on another hour, but I've grown tired of myself, so I stop now...for now.

 

[JCM]

Proof?

Because without any, you're making general statements based on hypotheticals to support your position. JCM on the other hand, has posted pictoral evidence that people in fact do not all want to live.

Guess somebody has never seen the US suicide rate, or better, the Japanese one?
EDIT:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate

Yeah, life's swell, everyone wants to live.

Thankfully, US adoption laws are slowly allowing gay couples the right to adopt. Which is what my partner and I will be doing, hopefully next year.

Im crossing my fingers and hoping you get it.

All the legal gay couples I know are awesome people who'd make better parents than some kid who got knocked up and because some dumbass pope/outrage activist/legislator wants to control her body, is forced to raise a kid she never wanted.The biggest disconnect is right at the start: when is it "alive". Heck, when is it "human"?

These are two different questions - at 2 weeks, there's no visible difference between a dog embryo, a human embryo, or even a dolphin embryo.
Since people will disagree on this forever, the rest of the debate becomes, quite often, completely useless. If person A believes life begins at conception, his view will obviously differ from that of one who believes life begins at birth.

Which brings us to the question, why the fuck dont we ban sex, exercise, drinking and etc for the first months of pregnancy? Heck, if life begins at conception, have every woman post-unprotected sex be forced into a regime of a balanced diet and daily routine to improve the chances of those many fetoes after conception actually making it.

But hey, its okay to order a woman to have an unwanted child, but bad to tell her husband to stop fucking her, even though the last could pretty much kill a fetus (happened to me, twice)

 

[zero]

Proof?
Because without any, you're making general statements based on hypotheticals to support your position. JCM on the other hand, has posted pictoral evidence that people in fact do not all want to live.

Are you for real???

If you are going to tell me that suicide rates are higher on miserable people, I'll answer "well duh"...

Of course some people end up killing themselves... I won't deny it, nor I need to... the fact is (and if you want proof, I can pull suicide rates and GPD per capita, or HDI, or whatever...) the VAST majority of human beings, and yes, even the very miserable, just want to live.

 

[makare]

I've always wondered about this, if life begins at conception why do we celebrate birthdays instead of Conception Day! or the day mom found out she was pregnant day... you know what I mean.

 

[JCM]

:eyeroll: @ hypocritical outrage.

 

[zero]

Guess somebody has never seen the US suicide rate, or better, the Japanese one?
EDIT:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate

Wanna bet on a POSITIVE correlation on legalization of induced abortion and suicide rates?

But I won't be dishonest enough to claim that abortion leads to more suicides... statistics are a dangerous thing, you can pull almost whatever you want out of them...

 

[SeraRelm]

Thankfully, US adoption laws are slowly allowing gay couples the right to adopt. Which is what my partner and I will be doing, hopefully next year.

Hoping for the same, eventually. :|

 

[JCM]

Guess somebody has never seen the US suicide rate, or better, the Japanese one?
EDIT:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate

My hypothetical opinion good, statistics bad?

My apologies, but is that what you are trying to say when Amy called you out to prove your point? Again, apologies if I misunderstood it, as increased pregancy rates among teenagers and low-income families brings a higher suicide rate as well, some examples-
http://www.teenshelter.org/data.htm
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/lo ... 39339.aspx

Although I do remember once reading that abortions among middle-class families lead to a higher suicide rate, anyway, again- Why the fuck dont we ban sex, exercise, drinking and etc for the first months of pregnancy? Heck, if life begins at conception, have every woman post-unprotected sex be forced into a regime of a balanced diet and daily routine to improve the chances of those many fetoes after conception actually making it.

But hey, its okay to order a woman to have an unwanted child, but bad to tell her husband to stop fucking her, even though the last could pretty much kill a fetus (happened to me, twice)

If you wanna treat a fetus like a person, go all the way mate, or like Amy has suggested-

let the mother choose what's best for her instead of relegating her existence as a uterus life support machine for a child who will be born unwanted.

 

[Charlie Don't Surf]

Thankfully, US adoption laws are slowly allowing gay couples the right to adopt. Which is what my partner and I will be doing, hopefully next year.

Best of luck, I really hope you get it.

 

[Iaculus]

Thankfully, US adoption laws are slowly allowing gay couples the right to adopt. Which is what my partner and I will be doing, hopefully next year.

Mmm? Thought you already had one.

Best of luck anyway.

 

[Bubble181]

Amy and parnter: go for it!
Sera and partner: go for it!
Shego and partner: Run for the hills! They'll raise one like her!

:-P