The Abortion Debate

[Private Eleven Bravo]

Who is Morgan

Master Secret Asian Man

Quote:

2) A foetus is infringing on a female's bodily domain.

A fetus that will become a person has bodily domain, which the procedure of abortion infringes. mrgreen

If I infringe upon your bodily domain, you have the right to use force, even lethal force, to end my infringement. I have bodily domain too.

Why should a foetus have a right that a born human doesn't have?

Because the fetus isn't violating bodily domain, since the body was responsible for its existence in the first place.

[Master Secret Asian Man]

Quote:

Where did I say we should abort every foetus?

If you're not using that to support the majority of abortion, then why are you using it at all? confused

Quote:

If I infringe upon your bodily domain, you have the right to use force, even lethal force, to end my infringement. I have bodily domain too.

Bodily domain doesn't trump life. I guess if you abort my baby I have the right to shoot you on your way out of the clinic! After all, you horribly violated someone else's bodily domain. mrgreen

Quote:

Why should a foetus have a right that a born human doesn't have?

Which would that be? confused

Quote:

I'm confused by this statement. Please rephrase so that it makes sense.

You say it's a right all women deserve. I say it's a power over another human that a woman shouldn't have. See? mrgreen

Quote:

Because I was born to parents who didn't want me and I wish I'd never been born. Because I've seen the worst of situations and they've led me to value quality over quantity, even when it comes to life.

So basically, you're a perfect example of what I meant? biggrin

Quote:

How? Where do we find the resources? Where do we find the care providers?

Well if it's really as bad as you say, you'll all be home washing the dishes and telling the kids bedtime stories anyway! biggrin

[Master Secret Asian Man]

Who is Morgan

Master Secret Asian Man

Who is Morgan

Master Secret Asian Man

Who is Morgan

GoatShow

How so?

Kill the baby boomers and use their social security.
According to wikipedia, 76 million American children were born between 1945 and 1964.
You don't have any sort of moral objections to this, do you?

So you're not pro-life, then?

I think that was an example to show that five million people wouldn't be as big a problem as you make it.

5 million children. Many infants every year. When we do NOT have enough good care for the children currently in care. That doesn't seem a problem to you?

That's mainly because of a faulty system, and not due to a lack of ability to care for them. More kids would force changes that are needed. mrgreen

Yes, the system is faulty. It also doesn't have enough people willing to provide care for children. How do you propose that we increase the number of people willing to take in children by, assuming each person willing takes in two children, 2.5 million people when we have trouble finding 248 000 people to take in the 596 000 children currently in care?

We are walking the road of grossly violating human right, aren't we? biggrin

[Mundus Transit]

Elf Lord Chiewn

It wasn't even used as an argument, though it could easily be couched as such.....The only reason, of course, that Morgan even called it a "valid argument" is because you treated it as one.

Hmm...I wonder why I would even consider approaching her position in such a way?!

Quote:

It's fine if you want to do so, but if that is the case, you need to give Morgan a chance to fill in the blanks, as it were, since it is still an unfounded argument and does not have sufficient premises to be considered in this debate.

If I have couched it correctly, it, even elaborated upon, hardly rises above "Abortion is wrong because I say so! scream "

[Mundus Transit]

Who is Morgan

What do pro-lifers propose to do about the nearly 5 million children who will need to be cared for by the state?

Kill them.

[braidedsilver]

Alright peoples, I have a scenario for you, doesn't matter if you're pro-life or pro-choice, lets see who decides what.

So let's say you're a woman and you're pregnant. This is wonderful, you love your husband you've been trying hard for this baby and you couldn't be happier. However, the pregnancy seems to be taking and extra toll on you so you go see a doctor. Some time later you find out you have cancer. Lymphoma- which is virtually untreatable. You're given a choice. Abort and undergo treatment with a very small success rate, or have the baby and resign yourself to death. Which do you choose?

Please note this is a scenario based on my grandmother in 1951, from what I understand the treatments haven't gotten much better but at the time it wasn't very good. TL;DR she died, my dad lived.

[braidedsilver]

Mundus Transit

Who is Morgan

What do pro-lifers propose to do about the nearly 5 million children who will need to be cared for by the state?

Kill them.

AND EAT THEM!

amirite?

[Who is Morgan]

Mundus Transit

Who is Morgan

What do pro-lifers propose to do about the nearly 5 million children who will need to be cared for by the state?

Kill them.

Pro-lifers want to kill 5 million children? Either you've misread something, typoed or you've just confirmed yourself to be a troll.

[Who is Morgan]

braidedsilver

Alright peoples, I have a scenario for you, doesn't matter if you're pro-life or pro-choice, lets see who decides what.

So let's say you're a woman and you're pregnant. This is wonderful, you love your husband you've been trying hard for this baby and you couldn't be happier. However, the pregnancy seems to be taking and extra toll on you so you go see a doctor. Some time later you find out you have cancer. Lymphoma- which is virtually untreatable. You're given a choice. Abort and undergo treatment with a very small success rate, or have the baby and resign yourself to death. Which do you choose?

Please note this is a scenario based on my grandmother in 1951, from what I understand the treatments haven't gotten much better but at the time it wasn't very good. TL;DR she died, my dad lived.

What kinds of odds are we talking about? If my odds of survival were 30% or less? I'd probably have the baby--even though I'm psychologically incapable of pregnancy.

[Who is Morgan]

Macai

Who is Morgan

Unfortunately, it would.

Fortunately, that has not happened and Roe vs. Wade will hopefully keep that from happening.

That said, you STILL haven't answered my question.

What do you propose we do with those 5 million children?

So you'd become pro-life if Roe v Wade was overturned with a new ruling which said that women are not entitled to bodily domain in the context of abortion, and that fetuses are people?

No. Because I wouldn't agree with it. It would eliminate several legal arguments for abortion.

[Who is Morgan]

Master Secret Asian Man

Quote:

Where did I say we should abort every foetus?

If you're not using that to support the majority of abortion, then why are you using it at all? confused

I just want an answer from pro-lifers. Pro-lifers want the babies to live.

I want to know what we then do with the babies. Not that difficult.

Quote:

Quote:

If I infringe upon your bodily domain, you have the right to use force, even lethal force, to end my infringement. I have bodily domain too.

Bodily domain doesn't trump life. I guess if you abort my baby I have the right to shoot you on your way out of the clinic! After all, you horribly violated someone else's bodily domain. mrgreen

No. If I'm raping you, though, you have the right to kill me as I am in the process of actually violating your bodily domain. You can kill to defend your own bodily domain.

Quote:

Quote:

Why should a foetus have a right that a born human doesn't have?

Which would that be? confused

Protection against retaliatory attacks to protect bodily domain.

Quote:

Quote:

I'm confused by this statement. Please rephrase so that it makes sense.

You say it's a right all women deserve. I say it's a power over another human that a woman shouldn't have. See? mrgreen

So instead, the government should have the right to do what they want with women's bodies?

Quote:

Quote:

Because I was born to parents who didn't want me and I wish I'd never been born. Because I've seen the worst of situations and they've led me to value quality over quantity, even when it comes to life.

So basically, you're a perfect example of what I meant? biggrin

I'm sitting here in physical and mental pain as I type this. I would rather have never been born than have lived as I have.

Quote:

Quote:

How? Where do we find the resources? Where do we find the care providers?

Well if it's really as bad as you say, you'll all be home washing the dishes and telling the kids bedtime stories anyway! biggrin

I'd kill myself first. Thanks.

And you still haven't answered the question. What do you propose happens to the 5 million children who would need state care (aka Foster Care)?

[Mundus Transit]

braidedsilver

AND EAT THEM!

amirite?

Not much meat on a child, but yes; use the blood to provide myself with bloodbaths, and eat the more tasty parts of them (ribs and that fleshy area on your shoulders, believe it or not).

Who is Morgan

Pro-lifers want to kill 5 million children? Either you've misread something, typoed or you've just confirmed yourself to be a troll.

Well, I've always called myself pro-life in the sense of anti-abortion, not all-pro-life. After it's born, we have many good uses for it other than actually raising it.

[Who is Morgan]

Macai

Who is Morgan

Macai

Who is Morgan

Unfortunately, it would.

Fortunately, that has not happened and Roe vs. Wade will hopefully keep that from happening.

That said, you STILL haven't answered my question.

What do you propose we do with those 5 million children?

So you'd become pro-life if Roe v Wade was overturned with a new ruling which said that women are not entitled to bodily domain in the context of abortion, and that fetuses are people?

No. Because I wouldn't agree with it. It would eliminate several legal arguments for abortion.

So the law justifies the law unless you dislike it? Why bother even bringing up Roe v Wade if you don't take the Supreme Court seriously in itself?

Okay. Let me get this straight. If I do not instantly become pro-life based upon the law, I have no respect for the supreme court and the fact that several arguments--but not all--against abortion would be eliminated means somehow that the law is justified unless I dislike it?

wut?