If you think that that is the difference then you haven’t understood a single word I have said.
Because the comparison is so apt. They are helpless creatures that are fully dependent on the parents who have a legal obligation to care for and protect them.
Yes it does. It forces the uterus to shed its lining, so that if an egg is fertilized in the fallopian tube (as often happens), there will be no “fertile ground” in which to implant when it descends. Apparently it can also terminate a pregnancy when it is in its earliest stages (shortly after implantation).
Geez, at least beagledave knows his stuff.
Would you have used that same argument during slavery or the Holocaust? At what point can I depend and act on my own ideas? You could say that about any argument any opinion. There has to be a point where you say to yourself “I have considerd the arguments and have come down on this position”. If I went by your logic I could never be sure of anything.
Do I even need to bother pointing out to you that lots of women use birth control pills to regulate difficult periods? It’s very common for women, evne those who aren’t sexually active, to be prescribed some form of the pill to control highly irregular or excessive menstrual flow.
Not currently. In Canada, a fetus is not a citizen and therefore is not entitled to any “rights”. If that is not the case in the US as well, I would be surprised.
Re: your response to my other post, the Holocaust and slavery affected the rights of actual human beings. What I am asking you to question is your assertion that a fetus who cannot survive independent of its placenta is a full “person”. Some people, even some religions, do not believe this to be true. We have no real way of knowing when “personhood” is endowed on a human being, there is no test for that. Until we have one or set one standard everyone agrees on, you are just as “correct” as I am on the subject, even though we have opposing opinions, because there is no way of knowing for sure. I just choose to err on the side of human freedom and choice, that’s all.
You’re making it pretty tough. You come into a thread that was not intended to be a debate about abortion and start proclaiming that you want to “force” your anti-abortion views on people. This thread was intended to be a rant about a group of protestors and their nasty pictures. I wasn’t arguing their opinion, I was arguing that they should move their damn pictures away from the eating area.
Take yourself over to Great Debates already.
Yes, and you don’t understand that your position is that of an ignorant sanctimonious fucktard so I’m not calling you one.
Seriously, I was about to jump into this and make some other reply but when I read that Muad’Dib considers a fertilized egg not finding the uterine wall and a baby dying of cancer to be equally tragic… well that pretty much did it.
What next? A sperm and an egg in the same room is also a human life?
“But they could have met up and then the egg could have been fertilized and then it could have made it to the wall and it could have become an embryo and then… and then… and then…”
Now, there are definitely strong moral arguments to be made against the practice abortion. Likewise, I don’t think anyone is arguing that abortion is a lovely and glorious thing. But for god’s sake…
Can anyone on the anti-abortion side at at least agree that a freshly fertilized egg is not a fucking person?
Fuck the slippery slope angle. Fuck the, “Oh if we agree that a sperm pushing its way into an egg isn’t a person then where will it stop?”
You want to argue against abortion? Fine, there are good arguments to be made. Just please, tell people like Muad’Dib to get a clue. They’re not doing y our side any good.
Jeep, let me apologize for taking part in this hijack. Not that it’s any excuse, but it’s an issue I feel very strongly about because of my mother’s work.
I’ll be back when I have something relevant to the OP to add.
That is the difference, that at the point of conception I say that it is an actual human-being. Just because it is a single cell makes no difference, it has begun its trip on the road of life and will become a living breathing human. Before the egg was fertilized it was a potential, after fertilization it has become an actual. ANd so I, and others, must fight to make the laws recognize and enforce this.
How is protecting this innocent life not erring on the side of human freedom? Is their no greater denial of freedom than killing someone?
And I was arguing, before others hijacked the thread, that the protestors have very strong and legitament reasons for action as they do.
Aw, that’s OK. I’ve been participating too. I guess the direction this thread took was inevitable.
Oh yeah, suppose I should actually respond to the OP while I’m here. The abortion protestors fall under the previously mentioned catagory of sanctimonious fucktards. However, they have every right to protest.
Likewise, they should have every expectation of being roundly scorned and mocked for their tactics.
Once again, no it would not be. It would be a potential life, but not an actual one. There has to be conception for a life to begin.
No, because that is when life begins. It is no less a person than a baby is. It is just at a very early stage of life.
In their own minds they do, maybe. But they have to accept that not everybody shares their view or is sympathetic to it. Most of us learned that in grade school. They’re grossing complete strangers out, which is just plain rude, and they can’t even provide a reasonable justification for it, which would at least make up for the rudenesss.
So the NAACP should not have marched with the pictures of lynched men during the 50’s and 60’s because others may have found it rude or distasteful?
Once again, you are trying to ascribe moral absolutism where there is none. Nada. Zip. Zilch. Just because you want there to be oh so very badly, doesn’t mean there is. I would love a pet unicorn, but no matter how hard I believe in unicorns, we’ll never see any in our stables.
As has already been pointed out, you’re being a sanctimonious prick, just like the people holding the signs.
Muad’Dib, in this thread you have:
[ul]
[li]proposed making abortion illegal[/li][li]proposed forcing reluctant pregnant women to carry to term, implying some sort of detainment[/li][li]decreed that anyone who has medical reasons not to have children must abstain from sex, get permanently sterilized or make sure that they’re using birth control with complete and total perfection; however, you have also[/li][li]proposed that two of the most effective forms of birth control should be made illegal because they could prevent the implantation of a fertilized egg[/li][li]decried the Pill, one of the two methods above, despite the fact that it is often the only effective treatment for menstrual problems; in such a situation, birth control is merely a side effect[/li][li]suggested that miscarriages should be examined to make sure they weren’t actually abortions[/li][/ul]
Do you not see, that to those who as fiercely believe that a fertilized egg does not have rights that trump the woman’s as you fiercely believe it does, this is terribly restrictive and intrusive?
You want to talk about slavery? What would you call having all aspects of everyone’s reproductive life overseen by the government, as you’re apparently suggesting? Hell, you’d need a whole new branch of government for the registry and oversight of every fertile woman in this country. Just in case they get pregnant, of course. Can’t let a single fetus go unmonitored for a single week, or else - BOOM! the mother might kill it while you’re not looking. Women are stupid that way, you know. Poor things, they don’t realize it’s murder.
If I were absolutely sure that I never ever wanted to have kids, I would get a vasectomy. Why leave things to chance?
Don’t be silly. Do we have any of that now? We have laws that protect the already born. Laws that hold parents responsible for those children and punish them if they let the children come to harm and we have all of that without some kiddie Gestapo. I would just like to see those same laws extended to the point of contraception.