By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
elprincipe on 24 January 2009
akuma587 said:

I just don't prefer to impose my will on other people. And before those words get contorted, being pro-choice is not imposing your will on others. You can argue that it is, but giving people a choice is not imposing something on them. They are still entitled to make whatever decision they want.

Here is where you either ignore or misunderstand the opposing viewpoint.  You say you don't want to impose your will on anyone.  I don't want that either.  In fact, most people don't.  This is what's known as a strawman argument.  Everyone agrees, yet you use it to bash the opposing viewpoint.

You say "giving people a choice is not imposing something on them."  Yet that choice is the murdering of a baby.  So you are asking me (and others) to logically and morally hold a position that while murder of a person outside the womb is not okay, murder of a person inside the womb is okay.  Obviously, I cannot accept such a position unless I accept that a pesron inside the womb is not a person at all.  Since that is illogical on its face, at least to me and many others, your argument just makes no sense at all unless you have already accepted your viewpoint.

 



In Memoriam RVW Jr.

SSBB Friend Code = 5455-9050-8670 (PM me if you add so I can add you!) 

Tetris Party Friend Code = 116129046416 (ditto)

Around the Network
Nirvana_Nut85 on 24 January 2009
Final-Fan said:
Nirvana_Nut85 said:
Final-Fan said:
Nirvana_Nut85 said:
Final-Fan said:
Nirvana_Nut85 said:
akuma587 said:
Final-Fan said:
Nirvana_Nut85 said:
Pro Life and I'd like to quote something that I found very interesting while reading The Revolution: A Manifesto by Ron Paul

"People ask an expectant mother how her baby is doing. They do not ask her how her fetus is doing, or her blob of tissue, or her parasite. But that is what her baby becomes as soon as the child is declared unwanted. In both cases, we try to make human life into something less than human, simply according to our will."
(A) Baby is a more natural word for most people to use in ordinary conversation

(B) This is not any kind of valid argument for the pro-life position, only a blatant stab at emotion
Well said.
Well said....not really. Try reading over his statement again and you'll find it does make sense, and is not a stab at emotion. It's a very logical way of putting it. How can one justify what form of life isn't important? In an abortion what alot of people don't seem to fully understand is that it's an actualy living human being inside the mother. So therefore to terminate the pregnancy they do have to kill the unborn child.

I just personally find it appualling how people can act as if its nothing and that because the child is unborn its life is meaningless, but thats just my opinion.
His argument is just about semantics.  Whether people ask a pregnant woman abot her "baby" or her "fetus" is utterly irrelevant to the factual question of whether the thing in question is a person or not.  That is the debate worth having, not ranting about people making incorrect statements about a human body's stage of development.

The quote is just pro-life propaganda about what he sees as pro-choice propaganda, and not any actual argument about abortion at all.
It does have relevence because the question is as Dr. Ron Paul stated we try to classify human life as irrelevant when it suits are own selfish need. Human life is still human life wether its a baby in it's mother's womb or someone like me and you. It's just as he stated when someone doesn't want the baby we use terms like fetus or tissue to attempt justify killing the baby inside when it's not wanted (or the candy coated term of terminating the pregnancy).
You're missing the point and (to be fair) so, perhaps, was he.

If people really think of it explicitly as a baby until they decide to get rid of it, and then think of it as a mere lump of flesh, then sure, they're hypocrites.  But that's in their own minds.

The object of their thoughts does not change based on their thoughts about it.  Indeed, that's Ron Paul's entire point.  So the question is, which is the correct view?  Is it a tiny little person, or is it not a person yet?  You're assuming one answer to this question, but the quoted material does nothing to prove this.
Not trying to be rude here but the problem is that I don't think you fully understand what he's trying to say, but thats ok I'll try and be a little more clear if your having trouble understanding.

He was simply stating how in this society when a woman is pregnant people will ask her how's the baby coming along and refer to it as a baby, yet when a woman who gets pregnant and does not want the child, we act as if that baby is just a pile of tissue, a fetus(depending on the stage ect) to help us justify killing the baby inside when its not wanted.

You need to re-read what he said because I think your confusing yourself . It's not assuming an answer to any question because there was no question, but merely stating how people act as if human life is less human when it suits them. That is a fact with most people.

I understand perfectly what he was trying to say.  In fact I restated the same thing that you restated.  If my restatement was substantially different from yours (except in the fact that it was couched inside an if/then construction as part of another point), then perhaps we actually do have a problem. 

My point is that what he said is only an indictment of the hypocrites who do that.  It says nothing to prove that they were right the first time -- that it actually is a baby (a person) instead of a bunch of developing human tissue that will someday become a person.  What if they were right with their second belief?  They're still hypocrites, but not murderers. 

Yes, exactly.  There is no question -- you're not even allowing the question to be asked, just making the assumption that the pro-life position is correct.  To use this as a pro-life argument is massively begging the question.  If you weren't intending to use this as a pro-life argument, but were merely preaching about people being hypocrites, then I'm sorry for assuming otherwise and please STFU. 

I'm not using the statement as an argument to justify pro life. I think thats were you misunderstood. I was giving a quote that I thought was interesting in regards to abortion. It's more of stating how hypocritical our socitey is towards the issue and it absolutely isnot preaching so try ands use more approiate terms next time.

As for STFU, well all I can say is take your own advice.

 



" Rebellion Against Tyrants Is Obedience To God"

RCTjunkie on 24 January 2009

Well, I don't want to get involved in this discussion (which is already going places), so I'll just vote pro-life and leave.
*leaves*



WHO IS JESUS REALLY?

Final-Fan on 24 January 2009
Nirvana_Nut85 said:
I'm not using the statement as an argument to justify pro life. I think thats were you misunderstood. I was giving a quote that I thought was interesting in regards to abortion. It's more of stating how hypocritical our socitey is towards the issue and it absolutely isnot preaching so try ands use more approiate terms next time.

As for STFU, well all I can say is take your own advice.

Not literally preaching, as in a sermon in church, but I think preaching is a totally appropriate way to describe you coming in and saying that.  It's also "preaching to the choir", since your post assumes a pro-life position. 

The STFU remark is because I don't appreciate the distraction of your preaching. 

You know, you could have saved us both a LOT of trouble at the beginning of all this.  I said,
"This is not any kind of valid argument for the pro-life position, only a blatant stab at emotion"
And you said,
"Try reading over his statement again and you'll find it does make sense, and is not a stab at emotion."

Now I know that that's not ALL of what you said but the point is that you said "it does make sense" instead of pointing out that I was mistaken in my presumption that your posting the quote was related to making an argument for the pro-life position.  Your response instead did nothing to discourage my mistaken impression. 

It bugs me that you didn't. 



Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom! 

akuma587 on 24 January 2009
elprincipe said:
akuma587 said:

I just don't prefer to impose my will on other people. And before those words get contorted, being pro-choice is not imposing your will on others. You can argue that it is, but giving people a choice is not imposing something on them. They are still entitled to make whatever decision they want.

Here is where you either ignore or misunderstand the opposing viewpoint.  You say you don't want to impose your will on anyone.  I don't want that either.  In fact, most people don't.  This is what's known as a strawman argument.  Everyone agrees, yet you use it to bash the opposing viewpoint.

You say "giving people a choice is not imposing something on them."  Yet that choice is the murdering of a baby.  So you are asking me (and others) to logically and morally hold a position that while murder of a person outside the womb is not okay, murder of a person inside the womb is okay.  Obviously, I cannot accept such a position unless I accept that a pesron inside the womb is not a person at all.  Since that is illogical on its face, at least to me and many others, your argument just makes no sense at all unless you have already accepted your viewpoint.

 

I'm not asking people to hold any position whatsoever.  I don't care if people think that killing people is OK as long as they don't do it.  A person can think whatever they want, I'm not telling you that you can't think abortion is the worst thing man has ever done.  I'm not telling someone they can't hate black people.  I'm not telling someone they can't hate gay people.  You are completely missing the issue.

Because I think a society should allow something doesn't mean I think everyone in a society needs to agree with that.  I'm not asking you to accept my argument or any argument.  A society allowing something to happen does not force you to believe that is the morally correct choice.

See, what you are doing is using a straw man.  You are misrepresenting my viewpoint as requiring people to believe something.  That is untrue.  I don't care what people believe.  They can believe that abortion is immoral.  That is fine with me.  I'm not forcing them to go out and get an abortion.  I don't even care if they protest abortion.

I understand your viewpoint.  You think abortion is murder and that no one should be allowed to have one.  I'm perfectly fine with that.  I am not fine with you forcing people to not be able to make that choice for themselves though.  A society doesn't make its laws based on what you believe.  If you believed that using birth control in any form was immoral, should a society outlaw birth control?  No.  But society will never force you to use birth control.  You are free to do whatever you want and to express your opinion about what you believe.

 

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Around the Network
Snake612 on 24 January 2009

Pro-Life all the way. A life is something that shouldn't be thrown away.



TO GOD BE THE GLORY

elprincipe on 24 January 2009
akuma587 said:

I understand your viewpoint.  You think abortion is murder and that no one should be allowed to have one.  I'm perfectly fine with that.  I am not fine with you forcing people to not be able to make that choice for themselves though.

 

Well obviously you are not fine with it, because you disagree.  However, you should consider that "forcing someone not to have an abortion" is the same as "forcing somoene not to murder someone else" to someone who is pro-life.  As you accurately point out, laws are not set by my opinion, but by the majority's.  If the majority determines that abortion is murdering a baby, surely you can see why logically it follows that this act should be outlawed, just like you murdering me is outlawed.  And I'm not fine with you saying it's fine for a mother to take away a baby's right to life.



In Memoriam RVW Jr.

SSBB Friend Code = 5455-9050-8670 (PM me if you add so I can add you!) 

Tetris Party Friend Code = 116129046416 (ditto)

akuma587 on 24 January 2009
elprincipe said:
akuma587 said:

I understand your viewpoint.  You think abortion is murder and that no one should be allowed to have one.  I'm perfectly fine with that.  I am not fine with you forcing people to not be able to make that choice for themselves though.

 

Well obviously you are not fine with it, because you disagree.  However, you should consider that "forcing someone not to have an abortion" is the same as "forcing somoene not to murder someone else" to someone who is pro-life.  As you accurately point out, laws are not set by my opinion, but by the majority's.  If the majority determines that abortion is murdering a baby, surely you can see why logically it follows that this act should be outlawed, just like you murdering me is outlawed.  And I'm not fine with you saying it's fine for a mother to take away a baby's right to life.

 

I can be fine with a decision you make and disagree with it at the same time.  Have you ever heard of a little thing called tolerance?  Go scream out at the top of your lungs on the street that you hate abortion, you can talk crap about every woman you know who has gotten an abortion and tell them they are going to hell.  I really don't care.  Its your right to do so.  But I don't agree that what you believe should be what everyone is forced to do. 

I actually do think abortion is more or less murder (murder is a word that is thrown around to loosely based on how it is defined legally), so to some degree I agree with you.  But I don't think that what I believe is what a society should be forced to believe.  I understand that people have a right to choose, and I value that right.  I am willing to let them make their own decision.

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Final-Fan on 24 January 2009

Wait, wait. You, akuma587, believe that women getting abortions and/or the doctors performing them are murdering people, but you are OK with those murders because they have the right to make that decision (of murder)?

Do you believe that a fetus young enough to be legally aborted is a "person"? What are you saying the proper definition of murder is?



Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom! 

akuma587 on 24 January 2009

Well, I'll say I think it is definitely immoral. Murder may be a stretch.

Even the Old Testament treated someone causing a miscarriage and someone who committed murder differently.



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson