Abortion Debate - Page 11

Undertoad · 02-15-2005, 03:21 PM

Similarly, some people see a pile of plywood and nails and call it a pile of plywood and nails, but OC calls it a house.

being an ass and i know it

6sickchix · 02-15-2005, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Similarly, some people see a pile of plywood and nails and call it a pile of plywood and nails, but OC calls it a house.

I like that!

OnyxCougar · 02-15-2005, 09:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Similarly, some people see a pile of plywood and nails and call it a pile of plywood and nails, but OC calls it a house.

being an ass and i know it

?? WTF?

How can a pile of plywood and nails be compared to an unborn child?

A pile of plywood and nails can be shaped into any structure, while a human baby, barring severe abnormalities causing miscarriage, if left unkilled, will ALWAYS come out to be a human baby.

That was a dumb analogy, UT. And people need to stop "thinking" for me. "OC calls it this" and "OC thinks that". I don't do it to you. Please offer me the same respect.

jaguar · 02-15-2005, 04:01 PM

it's going to degenerate from here anyway, you might as well throw in the petrol can while you're at it.

mrnoodle · 02-15-2005, 04:21 PM

Tsk tsk UT. Leave the bad analogies to me.

The pro abortion crowd doesn't think it's a house until the final coat of paint has dried and a poofy haired realtor has hammered a sold sign in the yard. Up till then, it's a uninhabitable collection of building materials - just burn it down.

garnet · 02-15-2005, 04:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrnoodle

The pro abortion crowd doesn't think it's a house until the final coat of paint has dried and a poofy haired realtor has hammered a sold sign in the yard. Up till then, it's a uninhabitable collection of building materials - just burn it down.

No, that's just how radical pro-lifers like to portray anyone who is in favor of legalized abortion. Yup, we're all evil and our goal in life is to kill every baby we can get our hands on. Hide the kids, everyone! Hurry!

jaguar · 02-15-2005, 04:23 PM

Not only a bad analogy but a straw man to boot.

6sickchix · 02-15-2005, 04:23 PM

Or maybe, it's a house but not a home?

mrnoodle · 02-15-2005, 04:47 PM

petrol added, match lit.................

wolf · 02-15-2005, 09:55 PM

While there's a lot that OC and I don't agree on, we on the same page here. Tissue or fetus, it's a baby. I think I posted elsewhere in the thread about the pro-abortion/pro-choice semantic game.

BigV · 02-15-2005, 10:30 PM

I posted this in another thread where I thought it was on topic but the argument roared on without me. The jumping off point was whether or not abortion is murder. It speaks to when personhood begins. I think it is appropriate here.

The core question
For a murder to happen, a person has to be killed. If the an abortion is defined as murder, and the victim as a person, then much, much more should change to be consistent with the stance that the rights of the fetus/embryo/zygote include more that just protection from murder.

I find the prospect that the abortion of a zygote, while certainly “alive”, should, could be considered “murder” as sensible as the prospect that a woman carrying this zygote should be counted as two people in any other circumstance. If she drinks, smokes, or does any other legal physical activities minors are prohibited from, is she breaking the law? If “it’s” a person, and murder-able, why--no--how can the discussion stop there? Which brings come to…
There question in the abortion debate:
"When does human personhood begin?"
A description of all viewpoints

http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_when.htm

This is a calm, reasoned, informed discussion of the facts and opinions on all sides. I do not know of a “bright line” that separates one side from the other. I expect that search for such a line will be futile and acrimonious, because such a line does not exist. It is a range, not a point. At either end of the spectrum, the decision is clear, but in the immortal words of Kevin Kline in A Fish Called Wanda, “What was that part in the middle?”. The middle (range) is the part where lots of stuff happens, including personhood. That’s where the answer lies, along a continuum. After all, we’re human beings, taking nine months to develop. For me the emphasis here is on the being, as an active verb, as well as a noun. We don’t talk of dead people as “human was’es” or of a pregnant woman’s baby as a “human will-be’s”.

In the Roe v Wade decision, dividing the pregnancy into trimesters seems a wise, Solomonic decision, the best possible resolution in a minefield of difficult choices. To consider the independent viability of the fetus in the first trimester to be approximately zero, the court concluded that the decision was a medical judgment to be decided by the woman and her physician. In the third trimester where viability is much more likely permitted the court to consider a fetus more like a person and entitled to more recognition as such.

The search for a single marker to define personhood, and from that murder, and medical procedure and everything in between is doomed.

Saying “I’m pregnant” doesn’t work in carpool lanes either, (except in California, predictably).

http://ask.yahoo.com/ask/20041122.html
__________________
Yours,

mrnoodle · 02-16-2005, 08:56 AM

You're cells, but you're presumably also a fully grown human adult. I think the sticking point with me is that, while I'm radically pro-life (who ISN'T pro-life?), I would never do any of the things that the militant anti-abortionists do, but I'm lumped in with them. I'm not going to feign offense over being called "radical". I was answering UT's analogy with one that I thought was equally excessive and silly.

And for the record, I'm not hypocritical. I think pregnant women smoking or doing drugs when they know the effect on the baby constitutes child abuse, and maybe attempted murder. I think abortion is the killing of a living human (but I won't go so far as to call it murder - there are justifiable reasons for ending pregnancy).

People are so afraid that some religious nut is going to tell them how to live their lives that they fail to realize that there are real people on the other side of the argument. I don't give a rat's ass what you do with your body or your ovaries or what the hell ever. But if I really think that's a person living inside of you, wouldn't I be remiss if I didn't speak out in his/her defense when no one else would?

You'd do the same thing for a dog, but a human life somehow isn't that valuable. I don't get it.

dar512 · 02-16-2005, 09:51 AM

BigV - Your post is insightful and well reasoned. And will be ignored. What's going on here isn't really debate. It's more -- demolition derby.

mrnoodle · 02-16-2005, 11:42 AM

That was apparent by the title. Everyone always leaves miffed from this argument.

xoxoxoBruce · 02-16-2005, 06:30 PM

Quote:

i was talking about people who display the need to couch unfortunate, unpleasant actions in euphamistic terms.

They have to be more specific than "killing a person"

I feel that killing a person can't be compared with killing a person because....
You get my drift?

02-15-2005, 04:01 PM	#4
jaguar whig Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 5,075	it's going to degenerate from here anyway, you might as well throw in the petrol can while you're at it. __________________ Good friends, good books and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life. - Twain

02-15-2005, 04:21 PM	#5
mrnoodle bent Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: under the weather Posts: 2,656	Tsk tsk UT. Leave the bad analogies to me. The pro abortion crowd doesn't think it's a house until the final coat of paint has dried and a poofy haired realtor has hammered a sold sign in the yard. Up till then, it's a uninhabitable collection of building materials - just burn it down. __________________ Sìn a nall na cuaranan sin. -- Cha mhór is fheairrde thu iad, tha iad coltach ri cat air a dhathadh

02-15-2005, 04:23 PM	#7
jaguar whig Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 5,075	Not only a bad analogy but a straw man to boot. __________________ Good friends, good books and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life. - Twain

02-15-2005, 04:47 PM	#9
mrnoodle bent Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: under the weather Posts: 2,656	petrol added, match lit................. __________________ Sìn a nall na cuaranan sin. -- Cha mhór is fheairrde thu iad, tha iad coltach ri cat air a dhathadh

02-15-2005, 09:55 PM	#10
wolf lobber of scimitars Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Phila Burbs Posts: 20,774	While there's a lot that OC and I don't agree on, we on the same page here. Tissue or fetus, it's a baby. I think I posted elsewhere in the thread about the pro-abortion/pro-choice semantic game. __________________ wolf eht htiw og "Conspiracies are the norm, not the exception." --G. Edward Griffin The Creature from Jekyll Island High Priestess of the Church of the Whale Penis

02-15-2005, 03:21 PM	#1
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	Similarly, some people see a pile of plywood and nails and call it a pile of plywood and nails, but OC calls it a house. being an ass and i know it

02-15-2005, 04:23 PM	#8
6sickchix pirate amish radio Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 24	Or maybe, it's a house but not a home?

02-15-2005, 10:30 PM	#11
BigV Goon Squad Leader Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Seattle Posts: 27,063	the core question is I posted this in another thread where I thought it was on topic but the argument roared on without me. The jumping off point was whether or not abortion is murder. It speaks to when personhood begins. I think it is appropriate here. The core question For a murder to happen, a person has to be killed. If the an abortion is defined as murder, and the victim as a person, then much, much more should change to be consistent with the stance that the rights of the fetus/embryo/zygote include more that just protection from murder. I find the prospect that the abortion of a zygote, while certainly “alive”, should, could be considered “murder” as sensible as the prospect that a woman carrying this zygote should be counted as two people in any other circumstance. If she drinks, smokes, or does any other legal physical activities minors are prohibited from, is she breaking the law? If “it’s” a person, and murder-able, why--no--how can the discussion stop there? Which brings come to… There question in the abortion debate: "When does human personhood begin?" A description of all viewpoints http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_when.htm This is a calm, reasoned, informed discussion of the facts and opinions on all sides. I do not know of a “bright line” that separates one side from the other. I expect that search for such a line will be futile and acrimonious, because such a line does not exist. It is a range, not a point. At either end of the spectrum, the decision is clear, but in the immortal words of Kevin Kline in A Fish Called Wanda, “What was that part in the middle?”. The middle (range) is the part where lots of stuff happens, including personhood. That’s where the answer lies, along a continuum. After all, we’re human beings, taking nine months to develop. For me the emphasis here is on the being, as an active verb, as well as a noun. We don’t talk of dead people as “human was’es” or of a pregnant woman’s baby as a “human will-be’s”. In the Roe v Wade decision, dividing the pregnancy into trimesters seems a wise, Solomonic decision, the best possible resolution in a minefield of difficult choices. To consider the independent viability of the fetus in the first trimester to be approximately zero, the court concluded that the decision was a medical judgment to be decided by the woman and her physician. In the third trimester where viability is much more likely permitted the court to consider a fetus more like a person and entitled to more recognition as such. The search for a single marker to define personhood, and from that murder, and medical procedure and everything in between is doomed. Saying “I’m pregnant” doesn’t work in carpool lanes either, (except in California, predictably). http://ask.yahoo.com/ask/20041122.html __________________ Yours, __________________ Be Just and Fear Not.

02-16-2005, 08:56 AM	#12
mrnoodle bent Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: under the weather Posts: 2,656	You're cells, but you're presumably also a fully grown human adult. I think the sticking point with me is that, while I'm radically pro-life (who ISN'T pro-life?), I would never do any of the things that the militant anti-abortionists do, but I'm lumped in with them. I'm not going to feign offense over being called "radical". I was answering UT's analogy with one that I thought was equally excessive and silly. And for the record, I'm not hypocritical. I think pregnant women smoking or doing drugs when they know the effect on the baby constitutes child abuse, and maybe attempted murder. I think abortion is the killing of a living human (but I won't go so far as to call it murder - there are justifiable reasons for ending pregnancy). People are so afraid that some religious nut is going to tell them how to live their lives that they fail to realize that there are real people on the other side of the argument. I don't give a rat's ass what you do with your body or your ovaries or what the hell ever. But if I really think that's a person living inside of you, wouldn't I be remiss if I didn't speak out in his/her defense when no one else would? You'd do the same thing for a dog, but a human life somehow isn't that valuable. I don't get it. __________________ Sìn a nall na cuaranan sin. -- Cha mhór is fheairrde thu iad, tha iad coltach ri cat air a dhathadh

02-16-2005, 09:51 AM	#13
dar512 dar512 is now Pete Zicato Join Date: May 2003 Location: Chicago suburb Posts: 4,968	BigV - Your post is insightful and well reasoned. And will be ignored. What's going on here isn't really debate. It's more -- demolition derby. __________________ "Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain." -- Friedrich Schiller

02-16-2005, 11:42 AM	#14
mrnoodle bent Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: under the weather Posts: 2,656	That was apparent by the title. Everyone always leaves miffed from this argument. __________________ Sìn a nall na cuaranan sin. -- Cha mhór is fheairrde thu iad, tha iad coltach ri cat air a dhathadh

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)