By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Is abortion a crime against humanity?

Maskedpainter on 15 April 2009
vlad321 said:
Maskedpainter said:

 

The only 'right' that actually exists is when it does not require or interfere with the right of another human being, hence the pro-choice crowd argues for the elimination of the rights of the child in favor for the parent. Anyone ever noticed how quick people are willing to defend the ability to murder children, yet get defensive if you try to defend those who cannot defend themselves? Maybe some folks here should actually begin to socialize and venture out into the real world because the disconnect they have with reality and their own moral compass is very disturbing.

 

What does make me smile though are the majority of people who argue pro choice policies are unlikely to reproduce themselves. Which if you're going to advocate the destruction of your own species then by all means don't continue your damaged gene pool.

 

Ok let's all be hoenst. Did anyone else laugh at how pathetic this post was when they read through it?

 

Pro Tip: It's not a child until it reaches a few years of age. It's not a baby until it's born. It's a fetus.

So, if it's not human, please explain to me what a fetus is?

 

Dog, cat, a bird even? You honestly cannot be serious. You think you laughed hard? Really now, the sheer stupidity of it's a fetus not a human argument shows the level of which people are willing to go to justify murder. A fetus is a human being in a stage in it's life, just like a child is, an adult and even death.

 

Maybe a fetus is a chicken even.




Around the Network
sethnintendo on 15 April 2009

What if we just let them all give birth and conscripted them into a mass army to take over the world or turned them into slaves or used them as organ donors? On a more serious note I believe a woman should have the right. It is her body but soon that doesn't matter. Pretty soon the government will probably want to control what we put into our body, our bodily functions, and etc (in most cases they already do this). If a woman is going to die from giving labor and there is a law against any kind of abortion then this would pretty much be a death sentence to her. If she was raped and didn't feel like filling the world with more shitty genes then it should be her choice.



vlad321 on 15 April 2009
Maskedpainter said:
vlad321 said:
Maskedpainter said:

 

The only 'right' that actually exists is when it does not require or interfere with the right of another human being, hence the pro-choice crowd argues for the elimination of the rights of the child in favor for the parent. Anyone ever noticed how quick people are willing to defend the ability to murder children, yet get defensive if you try to defend those who cannot defend themselves? Maybe some folks here should actually begin to socialize and venture out into the real world because the disconnect they have with reality and their own moral compass is very disturbing.

 

What does make me smile though are the majority of people who argue pro choice policies are unlikely to reproduce themselves. Which if you're going to advocate the destruction of your own species then by all means don't continue your damaged gene pool.

 

Ok let's all be hoenst. Did anyone else laugh at how pathetic this post was when they read through it?

 

Pro Tip: It's not a child until it reaches a few years of age. It's not a baby until it's born. It's a fetus.

So, if it's not human, please explain to me what a fetus is?

 

Dog, cat, a bird even? You honestly cannot be serious. You think you laughed hard? Really now, the sheer stupidity of it's a fetus not a human argument shows the level of which people are willing to go to justify murder. A fetus is a human being in a stage in it's life, just like a child is, an adult and even death.

 

Maybe a fetus is a chicken even.

The difference between a human fetus in the earliest stages and any other mammal's fetus in the early stages only exists in the DNA, which is indeed human. That's quite literally it, otherwise they are all just a clmp of cells.  Also death is a stage of life? WOW. I'd say that you shouldn't have any chicldren so that you don't spread your naive opinoins on, but then I'd be depriving my own of geting as epic lulz out of yours as I am out of you. I simply can't have that.

 

Quick Edit: I bet you that if I gave you an early stage fetus of a human, cat, and a dog, you wouldn't be bale to tell the difference.



Tag(thx fkusumot) - "Yet again I completely fail to see your point..."

HD vs Wii, PC vs HD: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93374

Why Regenerating Health is a crap game mechanic: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3986420

gamrReview's broken review scores: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4170835

 

WessleWoggle on 15 April 2009
Maskedpainter said:
vlad321 said:
Maskedpainter said:

 

The only 'right' that actually exists is when it does not require or interfere with the right of another human being, hence the pro-choice crowd argues for the elimination of the rights of the child in favor for the parent. Anyone ever noticed how quick people are willing to defend the ability to murder children, yet get defensive if you try to defend those who cannot defend themselves? Maybe some folks here should actually begin to socialize and venture out into the real world because the disconnect they have with reality and their own moral compass is very disturbing.

 

What does make me smile though are the majority of people who argue pro choice policies are unlikely to reproduce themselves. Which if you're going to advocate the destruction of your own species then by all means don't continue your damaged gene pool.

 

Ok let's all be hoenst. Did anyone else laugh at how pathetic this post was when they read through it?

 

Pro Tip: It's not a child until it reaches a few years of age. It's not a baby until it's born. It's a fetus.

So, if it's not human, please explain to me what a fetus is?

 

Dog, cat, a bird even? You honestly cannot be serious. You think you laughed hard? Really now, the sheer stupidity of it's a fetus not a human argument shows the level of which people are willing to go to justify murder. A fetus is a human being in a stage in it's life, just like a child is, an adult and even death.

 

Maybe a fetus is a chicken even.

He said it wasn't a child.... You know child and human are two different  word right?

Fetuses are humans, he didn't deny that.

 



Killzowned on 15 April 2009
luinil said:
Killzowned said:
luinil said:
Killzowned said:
ssj12 said:
I look at it this way. A fetus is nothing more than a parasite until it stops feeding off its mother.

Exactly.

So until the kid is 18 years old? (earlier in some cases, later in others)

That's either a funny joke or you completely mis-interpreted what was meant.

Either way you ruined it by asking the question.

Ah, but I didn't ask a question!

 



Around the Network
Tyrannical on 15 April 2009

Woman should be able to sell their babies for cash. It would cut down on abortion, and the adoption demand for babies far out strips the supply.



Yet, today, America's leaders are reenacting every folly that brought these great powers [Russia, Germany, and Japan] to ruin -- from arrogance and hubris, to assertions of global hegemony, to imperial overstretch, to trumpeting new 'crusades,' to handing out war guarantees to regions and countries where Americans have never fought before. We are piling up the kind of commitments that produced the greatest disasters of the twentieth century.
 — Pat Buchanan – A Republic, Not an Empire

Maskedpainter on 15 April 2009

When it comes to rape, I still believe the child has done nothing wrong so why should it be killed? Obviously the mother could give it up for adoption. In terms of the mother possibly dying from the pregnancy then I believe abortion is an option, because what rights do we honestly have if not the right of self perseverance? Aside from those extremes I cannot justify snuffing out a life for convenience, which is what 99.9% of abortions are done for.

I am not arguing a faith based argument here, all I am doing is advocating the rights held by a human being in every stage of its life, as long as it does not infringe on the rights of another. The fact that abortions are done for convenience so that not to put the mother into a position where she has to raise a child are not greater than the right to life by the child. The right to life of the mother (for you nitpickers obviously in the physical sense) if threaten by an impending birth outweighs the life of the child due to the ability of the mother to communicate her wishes and invoke her right of self perseverance.  That is where a lot of my more ‘religious’ friends disagree with me.

We have two extremes to this issue and both sides look completely selfish and utterly misguided. One extreme demands abortion on demand and claims a human being in the early stages isn’t a human being and thus there is a right to violate its right to life. They use arguments justifying murder yet claim they are compassionate to the plight of the women, who the VAST majority of the time walks away with severe emotional damage.  The other side refuses to accept the option of abortion in any sense, risking the life of women and even abused children because they alone have the authority to risk human life for they own twisted view of saving grace with their god.  Yet the woman dies or has medical problems which in turn make her a dependent of society and a hollow husk of the possible life she could have had.

To borrow a line from the beginning of the thread, those who advocate abortion are all alive themselves. Like the people who wants to lower the number of human beings, just like those who advocate abortion under any circumstance, who gives anyone the right to make that choice? Might want to read the forward to State of Fear before you advocate lowering our numbers, or by all means just like that dumb ass in England who sterilized herself to do her part to save the planet, please do so and leave the rest of us alone.

Edit* replaced no with two




sethnintendo on 15 April 2009

Why are humans granted the right to life? Why do humans believe they have any rights? Nature could swipe us off the face of the universe at any point. We are only lucky to be able to live not granted it.



vlad321 on 15 April 2009
Maskedpainter said:

When it comes to rape, I still believe the child has done nothing wrong so why should it be killed? Obviously the mother could give it up for adoption. In terms of the mother possibly dying from the pregnancy then I believe abortion is an option, because what rights do we honestly have if not the right of self perseverance? Aside from those extremes I cannot justify snuffing out a life for convenience, which is what 99.9% of abortions are done for.

I am not arguing a faith based argument here, all I am doing is advocating the rights held by a human being in every stage of its life, as long as it does not infringe on the rights of another. The fact that abortions are done for convenience so that not to put the mother into a position where she has to raise a child are not greater than the right to life by the child. The right to life of the mother (for you nitpickers obviously in the physical sense) if threaten by an impending birth outweighs the life of the child due to the ability of the mother to communicate her wishes and invoke her right of self perseverance.  That is where a lot of my more ‘religious’ friends disagree with me.

We have two extremes to this issue and both sides look completely selfish and utterly misguided. One extreme demands abortion on demand and claims a human being in the early stages isn’t a human being and thus there is a right to violate its right to life. They use arguments justifying murder yet claim they are compassionate to the plight of the women, who the VAST majority of the time walks away with severe emotional damage.  The other side refuses to accept the option of abortion in any sense, risking the life of women and even abused children because they alone have the authority to risk human life for they own twisted view of saving grace with their god.  Yet the woman dies or has medical problems which in turn make her a dependent of society and a hollow husk of the possible life she could have had.

To borrow a line from the beginning of the thread, those who advocate abortion are all alive themselves. Like the people who wants to lower the number of human beings, just like those who advocate abortion under any circumstance, who gives anyone the right to make that choice? Might want to read the forward to State of Fear before you advocate lowering our numbers, or by all means just like that dumb ass in England who sterilized herself to do her part to save the planet, please do so and leave the rest of us alone.

Edit* replaced no with two

That's my point exactly. Who the f*ck are you to say what a woman can and can't do? Have you or your wife been in such a position? You don't know shit when it comes to the situations under abortion, plain and simple. I might as well argue with my physics prof about physics (im not a PHS major at all). Even if you were in such a situation, your conditions may have been far far better off than someone else's. Therefore, pro-choice.

 



Tag(thx fkusumot) - "Yet again I completely fail to see your point..."

HD vs Wii, PC vs HD: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93374

Why Regenerating Health is a crap game mechanic: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3986420

gamrReview's broken review scores: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4170835

 

WessleWoggle on 15 April 2009
Maskedpainter said:

When it comes to rape, I still believe the child has done nothing wrong so why should it be killed?

The fetus doesn't know anything bad is happening to it. Why should it not be killed? 

Obviously the mother could give it up for adoption.

Add another being to the already overpopulated state of the human world? Think of the staving africans.

In terms of the mother possibly dying from the pregnancy then I believe abortion is an option, because what rights do we honestly have if not the right of self perseverance? Aside from those extremes I cannot justify snuffing out a life for convenience, which is what 99.9% of abortions are done for.

Well, what if it's not only for convienience, but for the greater good. Fetuses don't know they're dying, and don't know how wonderful life can be. Also, just in case you may argue, what if someone shot me in the head while I was sleeping? That's different, I'm already born, have freinds, family, hopes, and dreams. A fetus has none of this.  

I am not arguing a faith based argument here, all I am doing is advocating the rights held by a human being in every stage of its life, as long as it does not infringe on the rights of another.

Well, your argument isn't faith based, but it isn't logic based either. In earlier stages, before significant brain activity and pain perception starts, what's wrong with abortion?

We have two extremes to this issue and both sides look completely selfish and utterly misguided.

I disagree. My side is better as it helps humanity and uses logic. More people adding to this world's consumtion is not needed, and in early stages the fetus isn't developed enough for it to matter. Your side: Fetuses have rights because I think it's the right thing. If that's not your side please correct me.

One extreme demands abortion on demand and claims a human being in the early stages isn’t a human being and thus there is a right to violate its right to life. They use arguments justifying murder yet claim they are compassionate to the plight of the women, who the VAST majority of the time walks away with severe emotional damage.  

Once again, the dictioanry definition of murder is unlawful killing of another human being. Abortion is within the law. Anyways, It's womens own fault if they have emotional damage after an abortion. Better than a damaged vagina and 9 months of pregnancy and pain.

To borrow a line from the beginning of the thread, those who advocate abortion are all alive themselves.

Who's to say that? You don't know dead or unborn's people's opinions. They don't have any.

Might want to read the forward to State of Fear before you advocate lowering our numbers, or by all means just like that dumb ass in England who sterilized herself to do her part to save the planet, please do so and leave the rest of us alone.

State of fear? Please elaborate. Lowering our numbers is a good thing if we do it by peaceful means, and remain peaceful. I don't want to leave you alone. I'm not advocating sterilizing yourself.