Page 3 of 6

Re: New York passes new abortion bill involving poison and third trimester terminations

Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2015 11:26 pm
by Sstavix
As the old saying goes, when you point a finger, remember that three fingers are pointing right back at you.

It irritates me to no end when people keep complaining about their government, but when election time comes along, they vote in the same people who created the problems they're complaining about. Tired of being represented by "grumpy old white guys?" Then stop voting for "grumpy old white guys!"

It's well past time when people stopped voting for whoever just because they have a -D or an -R after their names. People need to take time to learn about the candidates - ALL the candidates, not just the ones from the "big two" - and vote for those that best represent their own views and interests. Or write in some other name, rather than vote for someone who is running.

Back to the topic at hand... my own views tend to be a bit skewed because I think the argument is broken in the first place. Everyone debates about the "right" of the woman to terminate her pregnancy... but no one ever discusses the right of the unborn child to simply live. We even give serial pedophile killers a trial before giving them the death penalty - these children don't even get charged with a crime before being brutally executed.

Am I calling for a ban on abortions? Not at this point, no. What I do want is for the unborn children to be seen for what they are - potential human beings. And the mothers need to understand that when they choose to have an abortion, they are choosing to terminate the life within them and the potential future that child could have.

To quote another phrase "won't someone please think of the children?!?"

Re: New York passes new abortion bill involving poison and third trimester terminations

Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2015 11:34 pm
by Lazarus
The unborn don't have rights, much like the undead. Nobody is campaigning to ban head-shots either.

Re: New York passes new abortion bill involving poison and third trimester terminations

Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2015 11:45 pm
by Sstavix
The unborn don't have rights, much like the undead.
The undead are intelligent enough to take care of themselves. But are you insinuating that the unborn don't have rights because you don't consider them to be human?

Re: New York passes new abortion bill involving poison and third trimester terminations

Posted: Tue Apr 14, 2015 12:29 am
by Lazarus
You know, you call them "children" when they're actually "fetuses".

"Children" makes people think of happy little babies, so it's easier to claim that they shouldn't be aborted, or brutally executed - before they've ever tasted food, like mashed carrots or baby peas. Even serial killers get a last meal! Oh the humanity! But they're not children.

This whole topic is about the gruesomeness of a medical procedure, and you and I will never agree because you think fetuses are people and I don't. I also don't believe that America's doctors are a bunch of heartless murderers.

Re: New York passes new abortion bill involving poison and third trimester terminations

Posted: Tue Apr 14, 2015 12:40 am
by ArcticFox
Am I calling for a ban on abortions? Not at this point, no. What I do want is for the unborn children to be seen for what they are - human beings.
There, fixed tat for ya, bro :)

Isn't it hilarious when people whine about calling unborn children "babies" on the grounds that it is somehow a way to evoke emotion, meanwhile insisting that we call them simply "fetuses" so they can minimize the impact.

It's all a word game.

"Hey guys, my wife and I are having a fetus!"
-no man, ever.

Re: New York passes new abortion bill involving poison and third trimester terminations

Posted: Tue Apr 14, 2015 12:54 am
by Lazarus
"My wife and I are having a baby!"
"Cool, I want to hold the baby!"
"Well, we don't have it yet..."

yeah, word games don't get us anywhere.

Re: New York passes new abortion bill involving poison and third trimester terminations

Posted: Tue Apr 14, 2015 2:08 am
by LAVA89
The unborn don't have rights,
So where do you feel rights for the born come from?

Not trying to derail things into nit picking your own belief system or anything, I just think before we can discuss what doesn't have rights, we have to decide what does have rights and where those come from.
Nobody is campaigning to ban head-shots either.
This is a bit of a tired argument. Because there can be lots of people (including myself) that hate both abortion AND war.

Re: New York passes new abortion bill involving poison and third trimester terminations

Posted: Tue Apr 14, 2015 2:24 am
by Sstavix
You know, you call them "children" when they're actually "fetuses".

"Children" makes people think of happy little babies, so it's easier to claim that they shouldn't be aborted, or brutally executed - before they've ever tasted food, like mashed carrots or baby peas. Even serial killers get a last meal! Oh the humanity! But they're not children.

This whole topic is about the gruesomeness of a medical procedure, and you and I will never agree because you think fetuses are people and I don't. I also don't believe that America's doctors are a bunch of heartless murderers.
So you don't view "fetuses" as human beings, even though they have the potential to grow into human beings.

As a result, since they do not classify as "human" to you, you take absolutely no issue with killing them. Even by the thousands or millions. Who cares? They're not even human. There's too many of them anyway, so why not? It's not like they'll be any good to society anyway. Just more "wasted meat" to throw on the scrap pile and feed to the dogs. Or to put into jars and display on our desks.

...

... remind me again about who are the "morally bankrupt" ones?

Re: New York passes new abortion bill involving poison and third trimester terminations

Posted: Tue Apr 14, 2015 3:03 am
by ArcticFox
That's the thing, moral bankruptcy is exactly what it takes to willfully pretend and unborn baby is not a human being. Think about it. To say it's perfectly okay to abort a fetus on the grounds that a fetus is somehow not a human being is completely irrational. It's saying the fetus is a fetus and then, as it's being born, the magical syntax fairy comes out of the clouds and bestows upon the newborn the title of "baby" with all the human rights you can think of.

This is irrational, of course, because in some states it's legal to abort right up to 24 hours before the due date, and babies can very easily survive premature birth for weeks prior to that day.

The term "fetus" simply describes one stage of human development, and happens to be the last one that takes place inside the womb. After that come other stage, like infant, toddler, etc. It's the favorite term used to de-humanize the unborn child so that pro-abortion people can sleep at night. After all, to acknowledge the unborn child as a full-fledged human being is to render the "woman's rights" argument moot, since no rational person would put any such right higher than the right for a human to live.

Re: New York passes new abortion bill involving poison and third trimester terminations

Posted: Tue Apr 14, 2015 3:52 am
by ChickenSoup
It irritates me to no end when people keep complaining about their government, but when election time comes along, they vote in the same people who created the problems they're complaining about. Tired of being represented by "grumpy old white guys?" Then stop voting for "grumpy old white guys!"
I think you're preaching to the choir, dude. I don't vote for grumpy old guys and they still get elected.

I won't even start into who's lining their pockets or how gerrymandering is alive and well in America, because that's another topic for another day :P

ANYWAY SO YEAH


I have a tangentially related question, because:
That's the thing, moral bankruptcy is exactly what it takes to willfully pretend and unborn baby is not a human being.
Well, I mean, yeah, once it doesn't look like a salamander :P But seriously, an acorn isn't a tree, you know? A sapling is, technically, but a shoot under the ground isn't. ...let's not get too wrapped up in the metaphor, it isn't perfect, but where do you draw the line? I'm not asking so I can contest your belief, I'm asking so I know what you believe. Is it at conception?

Here's the other reason I ask. I'm all for using birth control like "the pill." Part of arguments I've heard against it involves the "BC kills zygotes" deal. I don't want to go too deep into biology here (although we can if you wish), but what are your thoughts? For me, it gets almost silly, but it's also an important distinction to make for the sake of discussion

Re: New York passes new abortion bill involving poison and third trimester terminations

Posted: Tue Apr 14, 2015 6:16 am
by Bruce_Campbell
Yeah, my issue is there's a lot of gray area between late term abortions and the zygote stage, as well as a lot of misinformation and dishonesty from many pro-life organizations. (Note that I'm not pointing at the average pro-life individual... I'm looking at the leaders of the movement.)

Less than 1% of abortions happen during the third trimester, and because abortions at that stage tend to be more dangerous they are typically done for medical reasons (i.e. the mother's life is in danger, the baby has a terminal condition and is going to die in the womb, etc.). Most states ban abortions during this stage unless there is a medical need for them anyway. (It's also worth mentioning that I can't find anything on the bill outside of the OP, and from what I've seen Lifesitenews tends to exaggerate and sometimes just plain lie about things, but that's a topic for another day.)

Now, like C$ said, an acorn isn't an oak tree, so at what point are we saying life begins? When the sperm meets the egg might seem reasonable, but at that point roughly half the time the body might flush out the zygote on it's own. So if that's where life begins then why isn't the pro-life movement trying to find ways to save zygotes from being expelled from the body naturally? And if there's no reason to save those zygotes, then why are they against Plan B? And why are so many of them against birth control in general?

I've got more to say on this topic, but the point is this isn't really a black and white issue, although people tend to make it one by focusing on late term abortions, etc. There's some gray area in between, and personally, I don't feel like it's the government's job to step in and make those decisions for women.

Finally, I've posted this article before, but it does a good job of summing up all my problems with the pro-life movement (and it's a good read). To summarize the article, the pro-life movement seems less interested in preventing abortions and more interested in forcing women to conform their standards by controlling their sex lives, because they're constantly doing things that are counter-productive to their supposed cause.

Anyway, this particular discussion is kind of ugly for my tastes, so I don't know if I'll post again, but that's my two cents.

Re: New York passes new abortion bill involving poison and third trimester terminations

Posted: Tue Apr 14, 2015 9:39 am
by Lazarus
It's a good argument, but you're talking to people whose views on abortion are more regressive than Iranian law.

Re: New York passes new abortion bill involving poison and third trimester terminations

Posted: Tue Apr 14, 2015 1:16 pm
by ArcticFox
Now, like C$ said, an acorn isn't an oak tree, so at what point are we saying life begins?
This is really a good and reasonable question, because if nothing else, it represents an effort to get away from the rhetoric and seriously look at it constructively.

To be honest, I don't know where that line is. I'm inclined to say "conception" if, for no other reason than I don't see any other arbitrary line where you could call it, and that seems a safe bet. That's just me.

In any case, I'm rabidly against late term abortion because that means killing a baby that could have survived on its own outside the womb. To me, there's simply no justification for it whatsoever.

Re: New York passes new abortion bill involving poison and third trimester terminations

Posted: Tue Apr 14, 2015 1:35 pm
by Sstavix
As I mentioned before, I'm not opposed to abortion. I don't think it should be made illegal. As a reminder, I tend to lean hard right toward Libertarianism, almost to the point of anarchy. Why would I be in favor of the government getting involved in anything? :lol:

But it's the language around the abortion debate that bothers me. Whether you call it a zygote or a fetus or a "clump of cells," the simple biological fact is that it will eventually, if allowed, grow into a human being. Call it what you want, it's still a potential life, a potential child, a potential human. If a woman realizes that and still wants to go through with terminating her pregnancy, and can find a doctor willing to perform the procedure, then so be it. The moral implications are between her and her God, and not my place to judge.

But denying the idea of humanity to the unborn is something I find very disturbing. Stripping away the "human-ness" of a person is a very dangerous, potentially evil road to follow. Rapists do it to their victims. Serial killers, too. The Nazis did it to millions.

And when the "pro-choice" crowd assumes the same rhetoric, it makes me wonder who is really motivating their actions.
It's a good argument, but you're talking to people whose views on abortion are more regressive than Iranian law.
Classic Alinskyite tactic here; if you're losing the argument - even if the opposition is right - resort to insults and belittling the opponent to try to bully a win. Thing is, I think most of us here are too intelligent to fall for this. If you have nothing intelligent to contribute, feel free to sit down.

Re: New York passes new abortion bill involving poison and third trimester terminations

Posted: Tue Apr 14, 2015 2:05 pm
by ArcticFox
The Nazis did it to millions.
BOOM. Godwin.
-Broamir

(Not that I disagree, I just like to watch for Godwins almost as if it were a drinking game.)

I can understand the Libertarian approach to keeping the Government back. This is one of those issues though, that divides the Libertarian crowd. I too regard myself as Libertarian and I'm pro-life. I think the two separate Libertarian approaches are these: (Correct me if I misrepresent your stance, Brozilla.)

Pro-choice Libertarians regard restrictions as Government control and thus to be avoided as much as possible. Any spiritual implications are between the individual woman and her deity when applicable.

Pro-life Libertarians regard abortion as the unjust killing of a human being, which is murder and therefore should be illegal. (Exceptions are, of course, acknowledged, such as medical necessity.)

If I understand correctly, Brozilla is the former type while I am the latter.