|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 1:14 pm
divineseraph Just want to say- you can't say that abstinence doesn't work when people don't use it. That's like saying "********! My condom failed! How was I supposed to know I had to put the damned thing ON?!" And again, an entire life beats out bodily integrity simply because a lifetime is worth more than 9 months. How is it that nine months can be worth more than someone's WHOLE LIFE? Yes, yes, bodily integrity. but again, KILLING someone for a temporary condition the mother CHOSE to CONSENT to? It's ludicrous. True, but you can say that people are pretty much incapable of abstaining. Which is just as bad. So if you were being raped for 9 months straight, and removal of the rapists would kill you, you should have to submit and endure? Also; please prove that sex = consent to pregnancy. No this is Ludacris. whee
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 3:03 pm
murder laws prove that sex consents to pregnancy.
pointing a gun and firing consents to the potential of hitting someone.
Therefore, one consents to the results of actions for which the result is involuntary- I.E.- bullet penetrating flesh, sperm meeting egg.
And since when would it kill a rapist to remove them? since when does one consent to a rapist existing in them? If I held up a poster and signed a waiver that said "Rape me for nine months" and someone did it, could I blame them?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 3:56 pm
Winged Isis First of all, prove that my reply was directed specifically at you and not just a general blowup at the bodily integrity argument, which really does disgust me. Secondly, you don't HAVE to kick me out, I quit. I didn't join a pro-life guild to be threatened by a pro-choicer, mod or not, for expressing my opinion. Wow - that was [unnamed member of another guild] special. If you cannot deal with debating, you should not have come into the SubForum, where we tend to debate things. I don't (and by the rules of the SubForum, can't) post in the main Forum or any of the other SubForums that you can see. I rarely even look anywhere in the PLG but in here (unless someone brings something up from "out there"). By avoiding this SubForum, you would completely avoid anything I have or might someday have said. I can't kick you out of the Guild anyway (nor would I, if I thought that needed to happen, which I don't, I would talk to Beware or a Real Mod who would look at things). I can just ban you from the SubForum, which I didn't do. What I did was warn you to try to keep it civil. If you can't take a warning from a Mod without losing your temper and quitting the entire guild, you might want to talk to a professional about your possible anger issues (they have these great anger management classes to help people who don't know how to express their anger in a healthy way - I'm not saying you need that, but it might really help if you did happen to need that). Is it just me, or do I seem to set off someone with possible anger issues like once every few months since I joined this SubForum? Anyone have any suggestions on how I could avoid this?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 4:02 pm
divineseraph Just want to say- you can't say that abstinence doesn't work when people don't use it. That's like saying "********! My condom failed! How was I supposed to know I had to put the damned thing ON?!" No - it's like telling Crack Addicts to "Just Say No" and then wondering why that didn't stop them from using crack. Abstinence doesn't work because most people do not have a personal moral belief that constantly supports their desire to refrain from sex. In fact, most people have no desire to refrain from sex at all. I fail to see how you telling people to not have sex when you are the one who doesn't want abortions to happen is helping the issue. The people having sex are the people who feel that abortion should be legal (at least, when they are in the situation where they desire one). I don't like pollution, are you going to refrain from driving/riding in a car because of my desire to stop cars from polluting?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 5:10 pm
I'm not saying don't have sex, but I wouldn't presume to say, "Abstinence doesn't work." Abstinence, excepting the case of rape ((EDIT: and artificial insemination, now stfu and make me a sandwich Peer! scream )), works perfectly.
Whether or not people choose to use it is a personal thing, but when people don't use it, it's not because it doesn't work.
It doesn't prevent people from having sex. It's not a magical cure for sex, because people won't use it. But it is the ultimate protection of bodily integrity. Nothing can "invade" women and "use their bodies without permission," if a woman and her partner refrain from causing something to NEED her body.
So yes, abstinence DOES work. People don't need to use it. And it won't stop abortion, because people will refuse to use the most effective form of pregnancy control in existence. But it is a viable option, and nowadays, people are allowed to kill to keep from using it Suggesting that people use this option instead of killing their children isn't outrageous. It's a matter of responsibility. Many people who are pro-choice are disgusted that some women choose not to use any form of birth control. In the same way, I'm disgusted that women choose to not use the ultimate birth control but then turn around and kill their offspring due to their own need to have sex. Basically, they're killing to have sex, and it disgusts me.
But none of this means abstinence doesn't work. It means people don't use it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 6:51 pm
ThePeerOrlando2 Beware the Jabberwock Sorry, I wasn't sure of the self awareness one. It's just a common arguement that has always bugged me. XD
The other element that you're missing as well, with the organ donation, is the fact that the fetus is already using the uterus which in truth makes a huge difference. The difference of course is that by denying someone the right to use your organs is not aiding them in continuing their life, by taking away something they're already using is killing them.
I see the bodily integrity arguement much the same as drunk driving. If you have your license you are allowed to drive, and if you're over the legal drinking age you're allowed to get drunk. However you're not allowed to mix the two together, even though you can get drunk and it is your body that is drunk and it is (hopefully) your car, you're barred from driving it. This is because there is a possibility that you will harm another person.
While this in no way mimics pregnancy, it sums up the pro-life stance very nicely... or at least my pro-life stance. You can do whatever you want with your body, until what you're doing directly puts another person in harms way.
Another way I see it, which doesn't really work unless the fetus is considered a person, (but because I see the fetus as a person you're going to have to bare with me) is the self defense laws. According to self defense laws you're allowed to exert the amount of force needed in order to protect your life. The fetus is doing just that, the mother (and father) put the fetus in a life or death situation, ie. it uses her body in order to maintain its own life or it dies. Denying the fetus the right to protect itself from death, a problem which only exists because of direct actions of other people, is how abortion works and imho is a violation of self denfense laws. But driving isn't a right, it's a privilege. Having legal power over your body is a right, not a privilege.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 8:21 pm
ThePeerOrlando2 divineseraph but... You have the now. Had you been uprooted then, there would be no now for you. Do you really hate yourself so much that you could honestly not mind that possibility? If nobody is guaranteed life, and thus life is disposable... Should murder laws be revoked? And if I had been uprooted then, I wouldn't have the now to have now. I wouldn't exist. The TPO you all know, love, worship and sexually lust after would not be here, and while that would be regrettable in the abstract, you wouldn't know I hadn't existed. You probably wouldn't care. Hell, KP'd probably be happy. If nobody is guaranteed bodily integrity, should laws against rape and slavery be revoked? Oooooo reversal! SHAWING! whee You aren't dying until we have sexual relations Peer. This is not a promise, this is a threat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 8:23 pm
WatersMoon110 kp is dcvi Waters, Is a child unwanted one that does not deserve to live? As an unwanted child myself, I would of course say that all born children have the same "right" to be here. However, I cannot say that anyone deserves to live, or not to live. Life isn't something that is supposed to happen, it just does (or does not). I would also state that unwanted children also should have the chance to get a good home. I feel it is unfair that older children, non-white children, and special needs children don't get adopted as often as white, healthy (male) newborns do. I think that maybe it shouldn't be allowed to request what sort of child (race, age, gender, health) one is looking to adopt, just so that all of the children growing up in the adoption system have more of a chance of getting a home (I know this wouldn't work, but I really wish that something could be done about this). Ok - I have to ask - what is "dcvi"? But does "unfairness" imply death is not only desireable but merited? DCVI is a number in Roman Numerals. That number being 606.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 8:53 pm
divineseraph murder laws prove that sex consents to pregnancy. pointing a gun and firing consents to the potential of hitting someone. Therefore, one consents to the results of actions for which the result is involuntary- I.E.- bullet penetrating flesh, sperm meeting egg. And since when would it kill a rapist to remove them? since when does one consent to a rapist existing in them? If I held up a poster and signed a waiver that said "Rape me for nine months" and someone did it, could I blame them? No, murder laws prove that illegally killing someone is punishable. Egragarious. You're trying to say that because the victim walked down the dark alley, they deserved to get raped. Who knows? Maybe it's a cyborg with a mechanical tentacle p***s that sucks energy from it's victims. whee KP: What, last night wasn't enough for you? Remember, you were the one complaining about how sore your a** was.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 8:54 pm
Beware the Jabberwock ThePeerOrlando2 Beware the Jabberwock Sorry, I wasn't sure of the self awareness one. It's just a common arguement that has always bugged me. XD
The other element that you're missing as well, with the organ donation, is the fact that the fetus is already using the uterus which in truth makes a huge difference. The difference of course is that by denying someone the right to use your organs is not aiding them in continuing their life, by taking away something they're already using is killing them.
I see the bodily integrity arguement much the same as drunk driving. If you have your license you are allowed to drive, and if you're over the legal drinking age you're allowed to get drunk. However you're not allowed to mix the two together, even though you can get drunk and it is your body that is drunk and it is (hopefully) your car, you're barred from driving it. This is because there is a possibility that you will harm another person.
While this in no way mimics pregnancy, it sums up the pro-life stance very nicely... or at least my pro-life stance. You can do whatever you want with your body, until what you're doing directly puts another person in harms way.
Another way I see it, which doesn't really work unless the fetus is considered a person, (but because I see the fetus as a person you're going to have to bare with me) is the self defense laws. According to self defense laws you're allowed to exert the amount of force needed in order to protect your life. The fetus is doing just that, the mother (and father) put the fetus in a life or death situation, ie. it uses her body in order to maintain its own life or it dies. Denying the fetus the right to protect itself from death, a problem which only exists because of direct actions of other people, is how abortion works and imho is a violation of self denfense laws. But driving isn't a right, it's a privilege. Having legal power over your body is a right, not a privilege. They aren't mandating that you can't use your body, they're mandating that you can't use a privilege. rymeu! Abstinence, excepting the case of rape, works perfectly. What about artificial insemination?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 9:00 pm
Quote: KP: What, last night wasn't enough for you? Remember, you were the one complaining about how sore your a** was. That's actually because I spent the first six hours listening to your lectures on how stupid it is Memorial Day doesn't have fashion laws instated like Labour Day does. But you know, I try. I really do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 9:08 pm
ThePeerOrlando2 rymeu! Abstinence, excepting the case of rape, works perfectly. What about artificial insemination? You've got me there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 24, 2007 2:09 am
kp is dcvi Quote: KP: What, last night wasn't enough for you? Remember, you were the one complaining about how sore your a** was. That's actually because I spent the first six hours listening to your lectures on how stupid it is Memorial Day doesn't have fashion laws instated like Labour Day does. But you know, I try. I really do. No no no no no. That was the GIMP that was lecturing. I was the guy with the clown mask on. Why the ******** would I care that Memorial Day doesn't have fashion laws? lyme; Rawr. :wiggles eyebrows at:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 24, 2007 10:12 am
lymelady I'm not saying don't have sex, but I wouldn't presume to say, "Abstinence doesn't work." Abstinence, excepting the case of rape ((EDIT: and artificial insemination, now stfu and make me a sandwich Peer! scream )), works perfectly. Whether or not people choose to use it is a personal thing, but when people don't use it, it's not because it doesn't work. It doesn't prevent people from having sex. It's not a magical cure for sex, because people won't use it. But it is the ultimate protection of bodily integrity. Nothing can "invade" women and "use their bodies without permission," if a woman and her partner refrain from causing something to NEED her body. So yes, abstinence DOES work. People don't need to use it. And it won't stop abortion, because people will refuse to use the most effective form of pregnancy control in existence. But it is a viable option, and nowadays, people are allowed to kill to keep from using it Suggesting that people use this option instead of killing their children isn't outrageous. It's a matter of responsibility. Many people who are pro-choice are disgusted that some women choose not to use any form of birth control. In the same way, I'm disgusted that women choose to not use the ultimate birth control but then turn around and kill their offspring due to their own need to have sex. Basically, they're killing to have sex, and it disgusts me. But none of this means abstinence doesn't work. It means people don't use it. Sorry, what I meant was that stressing abstinence doesn't work, because people won't use it. Just like the "just say no" campaign (why is there a silent "g" in campaign?) didn't work to stop drug use. In order to actually remain abstinent, someone must have a personal moral conviction about it. Most people don't, and so for them trying to remain abstinent would fail (because they would not have any personal beliefs to support them, so they would just end up having sex - with or without protection). If someone does have a personal moral conviction and the strength of will to remain abstinent, it does of course work for them (outside of rape - artificial insemination is done when the person involved wants it - otherwise it would still be rape, in my opinion). But in order to decrease the number and want for abortions, people must be taught about the proper use of birth control and have access to it (and use it - for the love of all that is holy - use it properly). Maybe we could find some way to allow people to be sterilized (if they want to) after age 18? Sterilized people almost never get pregnant (particularly women who have been sterilized). I can dream at least.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 24, 2007 10:13 am
kp is dcvi DCVI is a number in Roman Numerals. That number being 606. I feel kinda stupid now. *grin*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
