Of course he does. But that doesn’t mean he’s not a complete ass for posting it. Just because you have the right to do something doesn’t mean it’s a good idea to do it.
According to you and… who, exactly? We already have Official Moderator Response in the MSPSIMS thread, which backs up the opinions of most of the posters in this one. You, on the other hand, have… well, yourself, and the fuckwit. It’s nice of you to give him company, though- I’d hate to think of him getting all lonely.
Yeah, I could see that…for the purposes of an animal rights debate, I would vehemently disagree with a cat being equated with a human. But for the purposes of an MPSIMS thread, I would realize I don’t share that person’s perspective and just bow out.
“Nobody”? A “real” child? What was it, imaginary? I mean, it gets back to the same debate…if the baby died during child birth would that be close enough? It’s born but hasn’t bonded with mom and dad outside the womb…still not real?
Yeah. . .but who is posting here (or on any message board anywhere on the internet) that doesn’t realize that at least one person is going to write what DtC wrote?
That doesn’t make it right. But as far as I’m concerned it’s hardly “insulting” because it is 100% expected.
I, too, am deeply offended that someone could equate the loss of child with the loss of one of my fur-babies.
Well, I fucked that one right up. Fetus. Loss of a fetus. Sheesh.
You’re like the third person to post this, so let me state again: I didn’t read the thread, because never read that forum. My position is not that the person had no right to post it. I understand mouse-click democracy. My position is that IF he posts it in a public forum, to random people, THEN he runs a risk of unsympathetic views. Please make sure all future name-calling, insults, judgments, and arguments directed at me address this point and no other.
Mm, I think you meant “blob of cells”.
Bascically, yes. It existed as a “child” only in the imaginations of the parents. It would have eventually become a child but it wasn’t there yet.
Sure.
I’m sorry, Skald, I can’t imagine anything any worse.
But, see, that’s your opinion. And even as a matter of opinion, it’s a quagmire, surely you see that. It’s also clearly not held by the OP’er and the vast majority of people posting.
Oh, I know. We’ve met a time or two before, on the Boards. 
But who doesn’t post too impulsively on occasion?
TRUNK –
I vehemently disagree with this. Just because you have the resignedly expectation that someone will play the asshole in the piece, doesn’t mean that the expected assholery, when it arrives, is somehow less insulting. And it also doesn’t mean that someone has to be an asshole, or that you, personally, should feel obliged to assume that role if another asshole doesn’t show up.
Thank you.
I’m as pro-choice as the next gal, but you horrify me, Dio. How dare you belittle someone else’s loss? Just because your belief system has you thinking it’s a lump of tissue until it breathes on its own doesn’t mean it’s not loved, and anticipated, and dreamed for.
You make me sick, apology notwithstanding. All you had to do was say “I’m sorry for your loss” but you had to climb up on your soapbox and make your smug point under the guise of “enlightenment.” You’re as bad as any Christian fundamentalist. Anyone who doesn’t agree with your mindset is plain wrong, period, end of discussion.
Go to hell.
See, that’s the problem right there, Diogenes. Your political position ≠ truth. Yes, the current US law defines a person as someone post-birth. But that’s not “truth”. It’s one of many possible definitions that could be used, and, more importantly, has nothing whatsoever to do with how any given person might grieve during a time of loss. Are you so wedded to your pro-choice position that you need to smack down the mere suggestion that someone can mourn the loss of a fetus in the same way that someone else can mourn the loss of a baby? This isn’t the first time you’ve been pitted for this type of behavior and I suspect it won’t be the last, until you relaize that truth and politics aren’t the same thing.
To be completely fair, it’s true that it wasn’t a baby. It wasn’t a fetus. It was a pregnancy with no potential child involved, which is why it was ended. This has absolutely no bearing on the real issue, which is exactly what WhyNot described - that the child they dreamed of and expected was taken away from them.
I read sympathy threads here every day that nobody has bothered to crap in.
However, of those ones where somebody has stepped in to take a dump in it, the response to that person is pretty much what we’re seeing here, and is therefore pretty much 100% expected. To paraphrase the old saying, I may think he’s a troll and a jerk, but I’ll defend until his banning the right for DtC to post anything he wants on these boards. It’s up to him to decide whether or not he’s going to make a jerkish post, and whether or not he’s going to go trolling for this type of response. It’s up to the mods to decide whether or not he’s crossed that line of no return.
I have a fucking problem with it, and I’ll step up. Regardless of your political stance on abortion, I think you need to open up some biology books. A horse, or a rose plant will never, ever eventualy grow into something that even remotely resembles a human being.
The differences between losing an unborn child and one that has been born, are leagues apart from losing a child an a plant. Sure, if you’re TRYING to be a callous dickhead, you could make those comparisons, but you’ll have to acknowledge yourself as a callous dickhead first. And callous dickheads are not too far removed from jerks, and what’s the first rule of SDMB membership?
Jesus, DIO, when you know you’re in the hole you should put the shovel down and stop digging.
In this case there wasn’t even a fetus.
The only “perspective” DtC seems to bring to any situation is one of a person who has very limited human contact.
I have no idea if that reflects reality.