The great bastions of detached observation and neutrality: newcrasher, JThunder, Aldebaran, and beagledave join to weigh in on this profound scientific question of when human life begins!
I’m sure their participation in this thread has nothing to do with their anti-abortion views, as they are merely discussing the beginings of life as an academic matter. :rolleyes:
If it looks like it, smells like it, and sounds like it, I’m not afraid to call it what it is. I know a circle jerk when I see one.
Huh?
Damn, where to begin Sparky.
newcrasher doesn’t seem pro life to me. He/she posits that life begins either at the beginning of a heartbeat…or the beginning of measurable brain waves. But hey genius…if you want to haul him over the coals for a pro choice viewpoint…have at it.
Did you read the second paragraph of the OP, Braniac?
Sounds like the OP is asking about “When Life Begins” as it might apply yo an abortion debate…or that it is AT LEAST relevant to the abortion debtae.
Umm the cites I provided (religioustolerance.org and Medline)…are they “academic” enough for you?
I was looking for your “academic” contribution to the thread…must have missed it.
Brilliant thread. :rolleyes:
Blalron, stop being such a pussy and get your sorry ass back to GD so that it may be appropriately shredded.
Pathetic.
And of course, as some of them are men, their views are just so relevant to the abortion issue. Excuse me as I add my own :rolleyes: .
Why should half of the population be disenfranchised regarding a certain political issue, lola?
As for Blalron’s thoughts on the linked thread, let me make the following points:
Firstly, discussing when life begins =/= a pro-life circle-jerk, although it would be naive to say the two issues are not at all related. But one could very well believe that human life begins at conception, but that the quality of the mother’s life is more important during pregnancy than the life of the embryo/fetus.
But of course the issue relates to abortion. So how does this make the thread a circle-jerk? You haven’t provided any support for that view.
A pro-life circle-jerk, to me, would be a thread called, “How many abortion clinics did you picket this week?” or maybe, “Look at these pictures of dead fetuses! Don’t they make you want to vomit and thus prove my political point?”
The linked thread is by no means a circle-jerk, but rather shows the potential to develop into an intriguing discussion on an issue of utmost importance both philosophically and politically.
(FYI, I’m moderately pro-life, but I’m not taking issue with your beliefs, just the inanity of your OP.)
Was there any particular reason this is in the Pit? If you disagree, disagree in the GD thread.
There’s a trade-off. Men are allowed to care about abortion because women are allowed to whine if we leave the toilet seat up.
Poor debating skills on the part of the OP, I suppose?
I agree. I really wish men would stay the fuck out of legislating their morality on abortion.
Because months from now they will use this as fodder in an abortion debate. “Look! We established that LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION in this thread!”
And when was the last time a GD thread ever established anything? 
Still killing babies? How’s that working out for ya? Good times?
I guess the great bastions of social progress are still excusing mass murder on the premise that it makes life better for a few people. Boy, I bet I could find a few people whose existence is an inconvenience to me, maybe I should shove a rotating blender in their fucking brain and make short work of them. After all, who gives a fuck who I have to murder, so long as I don’t have to resort to abstinence, I mean if I couldn’t get my fucking rocks off every night I’d just fucking have to kill myself. What a goddamn fucking tragedy that would be, taking responsibility for my own actions, Jesus fucking Christ! Not able to solve the problem I created by shredding a baby into beef jerky, holy fuck, what am I to do??? Oh, I’m sure the NARAL crowd is just discussing this as a matter of intellectual curiousity, they don’t really mean to butcher babies, do they?
Oh, and Mockingbird and kung fu lola, here’s a hearty STFU. Logic knows no gender. You don’t have to be a woman to address abortion, because personal experience is absolutely fucking irrelevant to the issue of whether it amounts to mass baby-killing. The question is whether this 3 month old fetus amounts to a morally considerable human life. Statements are true or false independantly of the person advocating them. Welcome to modernism.
Christ, you abortionists make me sick, I don’t know how I even manage to talk to you. It’s like having a conversation with serial killers. I used to be like you, willing to forgive heinous acts for the sake of bettering the lives of adults. No longer. All you other pro-lifers out there, I ask you, how can we even maintain a dialogue with these abortionists? How can we bring ourselves to confront people who tuck logic and reason into a closet to be ignored for the sake of some nebulous notion of “social justice”?
I don’t understand how I can do it anymore. I don’t understand how I’m supposed to treat with civility and respect those who, by my beliefs and my process of reason, I consider murderers. I’ve stood there in front of the governer’s mansion protesting the death penalty, begging for a leader with the compassion to realize that what his government does is murder, and gotten no more than indifference even from the self-proclaimed “liberal” presently residing there. WTF is to be done with people who don’t understand that life is a right not to be destroyed through force? What’s to be done with people who won’t even meet you on the field of logic, who would rather give you their pleas of what’s “pracitical”, who would rather evade the nature of their actions?
I’m pro-life and I completely agree. I really wish men would stay the fuck out of legislating their morality on abortion. Truly. In fact, I think the first step to eradicating the pernicious influence of men from this debate would be to overturn Roe vs Wade which was, after all, passed by a wholly male supreme court.
I nbever had you figured as a pro-lifer, Mockingbird
While the OP is obviously an idiot, please tell me, lola et al, that your statements about men having no place in an abortion debate were made in jest?
OK BLALRON…
First of all I was hoping that the thread in GD would NOT be derailed into an abortion debate, since I am ambivalent at best on the issue. I am passionate about many things, but being pro-life/choice is not one of them.
I have never participated in an abortion thread, and certainly would not use a thread to establish something as intangible as the beginning of life.
If you will read the OP, I never mention abortion. My wife happens to be pregnant and the concept that we created life within her amazes me. I am fully aware that the 4 month along fetus is alive now, but I was wondering when did it actually become alive. That was the catalyst for my thread.
I know whenever you mention conception, life, the womb and pregnancy, some hotheads are going to jump right to an abortion debate, and you didn’t dissappoint.
Apparently you have a horse in the abortion rights race, or you would not be so ready to jump with such rudeness and venom on someone who has made no stand on the issue whatsoever. You though you smelled blood in the water, but it was just curiosity.
Regarding your OP:
Life does begin at some point. Like it or not. and that is what I was discussing. Sorry if you were offende by it. By what measure would you call me pro-life? I hardly think our paths have crossed before, let alone have I EVER participated in an abotion debate with you or anyone else. Regarding the circle-jerk statement I have to admit I have only a vague idea of what that is, but I am was not engaging in one.
All threads do not lead to abortion. Nor do they need to lead to hostility or lashing out at others. Even if I WAS pro-choice, why do you feel the need to lamnaste me because I possibly hold a view different from yours. Some people ARE pro-choice, and you are not the arbiter of if that stance is right or wrong. The world struggles with this issue every day and if everyone behaved as you do, the issue would be resolved by those who can shout the loudest.
Again it appears the abortion issue has struck a raw nerve with you. I apologize for opening a thread on a web board discussing something peripherally related to it. I will include the following disclaimer in future GD threads:
“This thread has been started in the Great Debates forum with the intent that open minded and learned people form around the world may have open and frank discussion on the subject herein. If you have difficulty dealing with opinions that differ from yours, please feel free to visit nother forum.”
Don’t hold your breath, Coldfire. Basically, if I understand it right, men’s place in the abortion issue is to build the clinics, provide the transportation to them, perform the procedure, or pay for all of this, and not only refrain from expressing an opinion on the matter but, preferably, not have one at all unless it is “Whatever a woman wants is a woman’s right”.
This is not an original observation but a synthesis of some I’ve seen expressed elsewhere. I may have summed up inaccurately and I know that there are many who don’t hold the above views.
'Scuse me, I’m meant to be kicking the Dope habit at the moment. I can give it up any time I want, honest.
Well, the component germ cells were alive before they united. The somatic cells they came from were alive, too. And the cells they came from. Repeat ad infinitum, or at least ad (while not-abiogenesis)-itum. This, however, is irrelavent to the issue of when bits of stuff become (and stop becoming) recognized people.
I am, of course, pro-life.
In my view, most - not all, but a vast majority - of the pro-choice folks hold the views they do in good faith. That is, they have applied logic and reason to arrive at their views. If they were a tiny fraction of the population, perhaps their views could be dismissed as nonsense; they are not. We must thus confront the fact that, as wrong as their conclusions are to us, they are likely not the product of irrationality, madness, or evil.
What, then, is the appropriate tactic? To cut off all communication? It’s hard for me to see how this will change anything.
I would argue that continuing the dialog, and, above all else, living what we preach, is the key to changing the understanding of people.
One of my friends tells the story that about fifteen years ago, he was protesting outside an abortion clinic. A woman going past him, into the clinic, said something to him along the lines of, “Hey, you idiot! What the hell good does it do to tell me I’m about to murder my child? If I had this baby, who’s going to be responsible for making sure he’s fed? Who’s going to pay to take care of it? You?”
He stopped for about two seconds, and said, “Let me call my wife.”
The woman didn’t have an abortion that day. My friend and his wife adoped the baby girl, and have kept her biological mother involved in her life.
Now, one story does not a policy make. Anecdotes prove nothing… but I have to say the story has always inspired me.
People who choose abortion are not evil. They truly believe they are making the best possible choice for themselves, in their situation. Yes, - they are wrong. But how can we help them?
Take from this what you will.
Allow me to offer you a hearty fuck you.
By the way, Bricker, that’s a great story.
I wish there were more projects like the Public Conversations Project.
The Talking With The Enemy editorial that they published in the Boston Globe is a model for dealing with opposing viewpoints in a public dialog.
Damn, Bricker, that story’s amazing! Your friend sounds like one hell of a human being!
As for those who are preaching “Men should keep their nose out of the abortion debate”, I don’t want to scream “FUCK YOU,” but would like to ask that you get your heads out of your asses. Abortion rights aren’t a simple matter of women’t rights, there’s a huge amount of philosophical and moral delemas involved in the topic that are of human importance. The meaning of life; the quality of life; the existance or life; these are all things that concern ALL humanity, not just one little subset of it, so get over yourselves.
Also, abortion DOES effect the lives of men. Sure, not every man, but there are plenty of men out there who want to have a family, yet can’t support one and are having to face a rather difficult decision right now. There are fathers about to become grandfathers when their daughters are still just children. And, yes, I’m even sure there are plenty of single men out there who have discovered they’re about to become fathers as well, and want to take responsibility for their actions and be a good parent, and have to fight for that right. It’s an old adage, I know, but it DOES take two to make a baby, and abortion is a decision that impacts BOTH members (yes, there are exceptions like rape, one night stands, and artificial insimination, but that’s not what most people are talking about).
Personally, I’m pro-life in belief, but pro-choice in stance. I do believe that it should NEVER be used as a form of birthcontrol, but I also understand that NOONE walks around with the belief that “Well, I don’t have a condom, but I can just get an abortion later.” I hope that I’m never faced with the decision to make, but if I am, I’d like to think I’d make a pro-life stance. But, every situation is different, and I do believe everyone has the right to make their own choice on the matter and take whatever action they deem necessary. Hey, free will…it means the right to make decisions, no? Like Bricker said, I’m very sure noone who goes threw an abortion does so without serious consideration to the repercussions of their decision. It’s not an easy decision to make, and I feel anyone who’s gone threw the process of consideration has made a very clear decision in their mind as to what’s best for them. That’s their right, and that’s how I can tolerate to talk to “these people.”