By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
MontanaHatchet on 17 May 2009
Edit Thread
iclim4 said:
MontanaHatchet said:
Thanks for misinterpreting what I said. It's so easy to do when you disagree with someone, but it also makes you a jerk. So don't do it. I was just pointing out the obvious, which is that millions if not billions of kids will never see their potential for reasons other than being aborted. Hitler's mother considered having an abortion, but she decided against it. Don't you think the world would have been a good bit deal better off if Hitler never saw his potential? A potential child could be a life-saving doctor or a tyrannical dictator. I don't think "he or she could have been" is a very good argument for abortion at all.

By the way, no one's going to slow down their kid production. A young work force is necessary for a strong and healthy economy, and no nation is going to sacrifice their might for the good of humanity.

Calm down there Montana. No need to be hostile or to start name calling.
What happened to the days where VGC prided itself for being civil?
"You misinterpreted what I said, what I was trying to convey was..."

And I'm not using the "He she could have been" argument, I'm saying once the kid has reached conception(situational) give that kid a shot. (My beliefs lies closer to Vagabound's) instead of snuffing him out because I don't want to bear the responsibility or because we have enough kids in the world.
Color me naive but I would rather shoot straight to the root which is conception itself rather than go for an often selfish remedy which is abortion.

MontanaHatchet said:
Trust me, this planet has plenty of kids already. What about the kid that's starving in a third world country, do you think he could have been the great artist of the century?

MontanaHatchet said:
 no one's going to slow down their kid production. A young work force is necessary for a strong and healthy economy, and no nation is going to sacrifice their might for the good of humanity.

Sounds like they don't know where to go. They think they're getting over populated and can't feed everyone, but then they don't want to diminish their work force.
Aborting kids is already "Sacrificing" their might:
"I would rather shoot straight to the root which is conception itself rather than go for an often selfish remedy which is abortion."

blegs1992 said:
I'm not saying ignorance was a proper excuse for getting pregnant and aborting a child.  I was saying that ignorance is not a good enough reason to punish her with a child to raise.

Sure it's not a good enough reason to punish her with raising a kid, a lot of things happen to people who don't deserve it. 
Let's say for example my parents told me not to play with the electric socket, as a curious kid I disobeyed them and electricuted myself and became paralized. Was it my fault? Yes. Did I deserve to be paralyzed for the rest of my life? No. Take that person in my other analogy, he didn't deserve to get HIV either. It happened, and there is no "reset" button. In the case of abortion, there is, but at a cost. You could either take responsibility to what you have done, or past it on to someone else.

Also, don't look too far into my analogies because pregnancy is not some life taking, life altering disease, and no one else suffers for you when you take medication or do therapies.

Calling someone a "jerk" does fit under the definition of name calling, but it's the least offensive form of it and I don't see how you can take such great offense from it. And don't bring up what Vgchartz used to be. The site is no less civil than it was a year or two ago, because we've always had the same types of people we have now (probably not as many spambots though).

If you're not saying what I thought you were saying, what's the point? Why doesn't every anti-abortion person sponsor a child in a third world country so that kid has a chance at life too? You claim that abortions are often for selfish reasons, but what about the people against abortion? How many of them care about the people holding the fetus inside of them? What about all the men against abortion who could never become pregnant even if they wanted to be?

Overpopulation is different than having too many kids. Take China, for example. Their birth rate was 153rd of all the countries in the world in 2008 (source), but there is no question that they are overpopulated right now. Aborting kids isn't the same as having less kids. If a law stated you could have no more than 2 kids, than that would be the limit and you couldn't have any more. However, if there was no law but abortion existed, someone could conceive 15 kids, abort 10, and still be left with 5 kids (well above the replacement rate). By the way, your quote shouldn't be repeated because it's not like it's somehow clever or intuitive. I don't want to argue about conception because frankly, it doesn't interest me that there's a slight possibility than someone's condom broke against all odds. Very boring stuff.