There you go again with the slavery arguement! Geez!
Again - it’s not your body. Deal with it.
All right. But I have no doubt that abortion is murder and I must therefore do all that I can to stop, what I believe to be, this horrific procedure
Neither is the baby the mothers body. Deal with it.
So are big aborted fetus photos near a food court going to stop abortion?
Actions have consequences. One of the consequences of vaginal intercourse is the possibility of pregnancy, even moreso for young, healthy people.
Do you really think that one should be able to consent to sex, but disavow the possible results?
“Damn, I really wanted to have sex, but NO WAY did I sign up for this pregnancy thing. Oh well, I fucked up (literally), but I can just get rid of “it”.” That’s OK with you?
Sorry, but lots of people disagree.
When come back, bring grammar book.
Again assuming that the fetus is a human with a right to life and then justifying violating someones right from that is not a valid argument. You are begging the question by assuming your conclusion in your premise.
Again these are not comparible situations. There is no significant difference between a slave and a non-slave that allows you to usurp the rights of the slave. However there is a significant difference between a fetus and conscious human being.
Sorry but that is not the case. If I assume that you eating meat is murder that does not make it morally acceptable for me to use force and violate your rights. If you wish to be taken seriously you need to develop your argument beyond saying I think its wrong and some hand waving about slavery.
Why don’t you understand that I see the fetus as a separate and distinct creature with its own right to life. Once you understand that the parallels become obvious.
I mean sheesh, I understand you guys and that is why I am not calling you all murderers, because you don not understand what you are doing even though someone is being murdered.
The problem is not whether I think abortion is morally justified or not but rather whether it is morally justifiable to impose my moral beliefs on someone else. It is impossible to do so without assuming that the fetus is a human life that needs protection. However assuming that is a logical fallacy becuase you are assuming the conclusion of your argument namely that the fetus is a human life that needs protection.
The point is however that the lots of people that disagree can sod off. For example most of us have no problem eating meat despite the large number of people that equate it with murder.
Why don’t you understand that what you think is not necessarily what is?
:rolleyes:
Do you have any understanding at all of moral or ethical arguments?
If you understood that not everyone is going to become miraculously enlightened to your way of thinking, we wouldn’t still be experiencing this thread hijack. There’s a thread about abortion in Great Debates right now; I think your slavery analogy would get a better analysis over there.
Those who prefer the ability to choose usually don’t see it as not understanding that murder is going on, but rather not considering such to be murder.
No I did not. The right to life for the unborn and whether a person is taking a risk having unprotected sex are two seperate isues.
And that is where I disagre. Once the egg and sperm fuse you have a new and distinct life form that will gain consciousness and therefor has a right to life.
If they were right, yes it would and the moment someone proves to me that cows are self-aware creatures with a full consciousness I will be on the front-lines defending their right to life.
I know, that is the point and that is the problem.
I’m sorry, but the sentence you quoted is entirely grammatically correct…
I assume nothing. A fetus is a human life that needs protection.
I wonder the same about you.
Sometimes dead is better than alive. There’s nothing inherently sacred about human life apart from the sentience we posess.
Well, it was making about as much sense as the rest of his posts…
Most of those “unborn children” in the photos are rubber dolls. The remenants of abortions are more like a thick jelly. Anything below 12 weeks is suctioned out, and considering the fragility of a 12 week or less fetus, nothing would be left to see, even with a D&C. This is why women report only large clots during 1st trimester miscarriage.
The remenants of 2nd trimester abortions are almost always pulverized by the methods used and the softness of the fetus.
Finally, check out the SIZE of those “unborn babies” in the pics. My son was smaller than many at birth. Moreover, the sizes portrayed in no way correlate to the size of actual fetuses, unless of course they are the spawn of giants.
You want me to listen? Stop coating toys in fake blood. I’ve seen abortion remanents, they are small tupperwares of blood - like all of a period in one glop. Not very interesting. Terrible pie filling.
Fine. By what logic did you come to the conclusion that a fetus is a human life that needs protection.
Why becuase I haven’t fallen back on the “I’m right becuase I think I am right” argument?