?
nah i guess you're right:
http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/b/babysamuel.htm
i posted that as a source to prove that it was real, until i read what it said
http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/b/babysamuel.htm
i posted that as a source to prove that it was real, until i read what it said
Some truthorfiction.com image he posted.
No they haven't, but there is no argument to pinpoint an essential difference that seperates us from the animal kingdom, we simply have dramatically enhanced versions of capabilities which many animals possess.Blue Herring wrote:
Animals have never through their own thought and usage gone to space.
Outside the womb, so effectively a born baby.I'm sure you mean 100% developed since even a fetus has 100% human genes. But even then, technically speaking, we're not fully developed when we're babies. We actually continue development until adulthood. We continue to change our whole lives but less because of development and more because of deterioration.
In defining human life? I'm a bit lost now. Don't think so else we could regard everyone from age 0-4 as being sub-humans, which is obviously a bit strange.Fair enough, though that doesn't quite answer the question. Your whole point was that is isn't present conscious(sapience), even though it will be. My question was, does only present sapience matter?
Alright now throwing all the minute details out, lets compare it to a self-building car with the 24 week old fetus being the engine block.A chassis will never be a car unless we actively make it one, and the difference between a chassis and a car is about on par with a child and an adult. By that I mean they're both very different. It's the difference between action and inaction. You don't kill every person who dies every day because you failed to help them, and you don't stop cars from being made because you choose not to make them. Rather, by ending the fetus, we actively stop it from developing fully.
The child, as being a fetus, I can't consider anywhere remotely human... but I think we've gone over this several times already. Your view being that it's one continouos process with every step being at least as important as the previous; I don't think so. I don't see it as a innocent human as it doesn't fit the very definition. It's in a premature state, it cannot comprehend anything, an empty shell if you will. The 24 week barrier was conventionally defined because 1; brain activity starts in the 25th week, so people see this as the real start of what it means to be human, and 2; the woman's health gets endangered by removing a fetus after having carried it for 20+ weeks, with it getting more dangerous over time.I'm sorry but she put herself in that situation. The child has a right to a chance at life, it didn't do anything wrong, and no number of paragraphs trying to make me feel guilty will change that this occurrence was a direct consequence of her action which she was fully aware of when she had sex. Its no more self-righteous than any other law meant to protect the vulnerable. What IS going to change that is an actual explanation of why the innocent should have to pay for the sake of the guilty.
I think this comes down to something fundemental; you believing that human beings have no right to interfere with life, me believing that humans control their own world, I have never seen, and really see no divine purpose or creation in life as we know it.
I find it strange that you would advocate putting the kid on this world yet do not care for the mother or whatever happens afterwards to the kid; being born is just the beginning, there is so much more that is needed to help a life be succesful. A mother, happy living and healthy social interaction being vital parts to that. If a mother is uncertain wether or not she can provide any of that for the kid, I can't raise any moral objection to her decision. Nor do I feel that I should, I'm not really into the whole life ruining thing. Caring for those who are alive, real human beings is more important than looking out for empty shells.
inane little opines
I'm confused, so be responsible when having sex and you won't have an abortion? Wait what's responsible, is that abstinence?
Ever Child is not sacred and we need to stop protecting children at ever stage of the game. When a child hits grade school and if he/she doesn't know how to cross the road the child needs to die.
We really as Adults need to think more of the future for the children that are burn and not let ever one have children. Do you think the mother having a 7th child for the extra money in her welfare check is going to take care of her child as well as a responsible family? Do you really think a 15 year old is going to have the same chances with 9 months of pregnancy. But guess what the responsible families child still cost me, but not as much as the welfare mothers/ 15 year olds baby.
I say you're responsible enough to get pregnant then you're responsible to do what you want with your child.. Not my body not my choice. It's not going to bring the end of the world, gods not going to smite us. Also I'd like to say that I'd like to see all citizens being taken care of before we think someone else is going to take care of someones elses problems.
Ever Child is not sacred and we need to stop protecting children at ever stage of the game. When a child hits grade school and if he/she doesn't know how to cross the road the child needs to die.
We really as Adults need to think more of the future for the children that are burn and not let ever one have children. Do you think the mother having a 7th child for the extra money in her welfare check is going to take care of her child as well as a responsible family? Do you really think a 15 year old is going to have the same chances with 9 months of pregnancy. But guess what the responsible families child still cost me, but not as much as the welfare mothers/ 15 year olds baby.
I say you're responsible enough to get pregnant then you're responsible to do what you want with your child.. Not my body not my choice. It's not going to bring the end of the world, gods not going to smite us. Also I'd like to say that I'd like to see all citizens being taken care of before we think someone else is going to take care of someones elses problems.
Still even though you are pro life I don't see how you could come to the conclusion that abortion equates to murder. That's really making a stretch, if you were pro-life in your own personal environment that would be fine with me, but crusading against people who decide to abort a pregnancy? No, that's too far. The implications of murder as we know it and aborting are very, very different. I don't know what pushed you in that direction but it's a very hurtful statement towards anyone who's had an abortion or who's having an unwanted pregnancy.
You're trying to rob women of a very essential part of their freedom, and as a man that's even easier said because you won't ever have to be confronted with the massive burden. What if you are simply incapable of taking care of the kid? Telling them "well then put it up for adoption" is so damn cruel I don't even know where to start. There's no morality in that, it's tyranny. Being on the pil and using a condom does not guarantee that you won't get pregnant, if that happens you're effectively saying "tough luck". If the girl is somewhere in her 20s, she can say goodbye to any ambitions she may have had at that point.
"guilty" right..?
You're trying to rob women of a very essential part of their freedom, and as a man that's even easier said because you won't ever have to be confronted with the massive burden. What if you are simply incapable of taking care of the kid? Telling them "well then put it up for adoption" is so damn cruel I don't even know where to start. There's no morality in that, it's tyranny. Being on the pil and using a condom does not guarantee that you won't get pregnant, if that happens you're effectively saying "tough luck". If the girl is somewhere in her 20s, she can say goodbye to any ambitions she may have had at that point.
"guilty" right..?
inane little opines
What makes you think raising taxes has anything to do with job creation?AussieReaper wrote:
Raised taxes? Anything that is job creation?FEOS wrote:
There has, AR. Their attempts at cutting spending have been stymied in the Senate, which run by the Democrats...hence the "draconian cuts" comment.AussieReaper wrote:
Granted, but the economy should be the focus.
Defunding Planned Parenthood. Defunding NPR. Investigating American Muslims. Declaring English As America's Official Language. Reaffirming The "In God We Trust" Motto.
I'd like to see some strength from the Repubs on the economy. Raise taxes and slash spending. Why go after womens rights and public radio?
And if they are multi-tasking, why hasn't there been as much focus on the job creation?
Going after abortion in light of the ecnomic situation doesn't make sense imo. They can score plenty of points with the public if they introduced bills to that effect only to have the senate stone wall.
They've been focusing on cutting spending, trying to get control of what is perceived to be an out-of-control federal government. And getting blocked by a Senate with complaints of "draconian cuts" because they'll be doing away with "cowboy poetry festivals."
And again: they're big kids. They can handle more than one legislative item at a time. It's not a serial process.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
I don't even know what you said.Blue Herring wrote:
Animals have never through their own thought and usage gone to space.
Murder, choosing to end a human life other than my own. Implications different? I think not. Both victims cannot go on to live their lives. Want to avoid unwanted pregnancy? Incapable of taking care of the kid? Want to avoid the "tyranny" of parenthood? Condoms work quite well if one is responsible enough to wrap up one's equipment. Need more insurance? The pill. And if you're really concerned about not creating another human being before you are capable of raising it you could ... *gasp* ... wait until your married. Don't give me this bs about abortion being the only option to prevent "unwanted" pregnancy. Abortion as last chance birth control is pathetic. Period. Parenthood is not a curse, it is a choice that one makes by default when one is too irresponsible to take the necessary preventative steps. Oh but I wanted to get my sex on raaaaaawr! Pfffff.Shocking wrote:
...The implications of murder as we know it and aborting are very, very different. I don't know what pushed you in that direction but it's a very hurtful statement towards anyone who's had an abortion or who's having an unwanted pregnancy.
You're trying to rob women of a very essential part of their freedom, and as a man that's even easier said because you won't ever have to be confronted with the massive burden. What if you are simply incapable of taking care of the kid? Telling them "well then put it up for adoption" is so damn cruel I don't even know where to start. There's no morality in that, it's tyranny. Being on the pil and using a condom does not guarantee that you won't get pregnant, if that happens you're effectively saying "tough luck". If the girl is somewhere in her 20s, she can say goodbye to any ambitions she may have had at that point.
"guilty" right..?
...and then we go back to the issue of rape...Stingray24 wrote:
Murder, choosing to end a human life other than my own. Implications different? I think not. Both victims cannot go on to live their lives. Want to avoid unwanted pregnancy? Incapable of taking care of the kid? Want to avoid the "tyranny" of parenthood? Condoms work quite well if one is responsible enough to wrap up one's equipment. Need more insurance? The pill. And if you're really concerned about not creating another human being before you are capable of raising it you could ... *gasp* ... wait until your married. Don't give me this bs about abortion being the only option to prevent "unwanted" pregnancy. Abortion as last chance birth control is pathetic. Period. Parenthood is not a curse, it is a choice that one makes by default when one is too irresponsible to take the necessary preventative steps. Oh but I wanted to get my sex on raaaaaawr! Pfffff.Shocking wrote:
...The implications of murder as we know it and aborting are very, very different. I don't know what pushed you in that direction but it's a very hurtful statement towards anyone who's had an abortion or who's having an unwanted pregnancy.
You're trying to rob women of a very essential part of their freedom, and as a man that's even easier said because you won't ever have to be confronted with the massive burden. What if you are simply incapable of taking care of the kid? Telling them "well then put it up for adoption" is so damn cruel I don't even know where to start. There's no morality in that, it's tyranny. Being on the pil and using a condom does not guarantee that you won't get pregnant, if that happens you're effectively saying "tough luck". If the girl is somewhere in her 20s, she can say goodbye to any ambitions she may have had at that point.
"guilty" right..?
Back and forth and nothing ever changes....
It's not a human life, it's a very romantic notion you people consider it human as soon as a egg gets fertilized but that's really just wrong. There is no scientific or logical backing to any of it - even within theology there's no consensus (I believe the church allowed abortions through most of history, as fetuses were not considered human beings). It doesn't fit any definition of what we constitute as human beings. Typically though your personal religious notions demand you invade and attempt to control other people during a most painful and private moment in their lives, ridiculously enough not caring about anything that happens to that person in question or the child during and after pregnancy; meaning that you would happily force your moral high ground principles unto people yet do not want to be confronted with any consequences as that is "their problem".Stingray24 wrote:
Murder, choosing to end a human life other than my own.
It's human nature to have sex, people have a right to - and they have a right to abort as well. Maybe you didn't know but using a condom and being on the pill does not guarantee you won't get pregnant, there is still a minuscule chance that you will despite using all available methods of birth control. Say this happens to a girl who's about 18-20 years old, a pregnancy would ruin much of her future plans and disrupt her life, all because of mere chance. You're saddling other, actual human beings, with burdens they are not willing to and/or cannot carry.Stingray24 wrote:
Implications different? I think not. Both victims cannot go on to live their lives. Want to avoid unwanted pregnancy? Incapable of taking care of the kid? Want to avoid the "tyranny" of parenthood? Condoms work quite well if one is responsible enough to wrap up one's equipment. Need more insurance? The pill. And if you're really concerned about not creating another human being before you are capable of raising it you could ... *gasp* ... wait until your married. Don't give me this bs about abortion being the only option to prevent "unwanted" pregnancy. Abortion as last chance birth control is pathetic. Period. Parenthood is not a curse, it is a choice that one makes by default when one is too irresponsible to take the necessary preventative steps. Oh but I wanted to get my sex on raaaaaawr! Pfffff.
Apply the same logic you have on fetuses to other life; you would have to consider an acorn an oak tree. Do you?
Another thing I don't understand is that you're willing to compromise your stance on abortion if the pregnancy has certain complications; be it pregnancy through rape. Do you still consider it murder when a 14 year old aborts because she got raped? If you don't, or you somehow feel that is acceptable your definition of human being and their rights are flexible and stop making sense all togheter.
Last edited by Shocking (2011-03-29 07:48:59)
inane little opines
What would your attitude be if your 14 year old daughter became pregnant. I am sorry, I hate "what if's". but something like that happens daily, so it isn't such a far fetched notion that you would have to face. So, what would be your solution to it?Stingray24 wrote:
Murder, choosing to end a human life other than my own. Implications different? I think not. Both victims cannot go on to live their lives. Want to avoid unwanted pregnancy? Incapable of taking care of the kid? Want to avoid the "tyranny" of parenthood? Condoms work quite well if one is responsible enough to wrap up one's equipment. Need more insurance? The pill. And if you're really concerned about not creating another human being before you are capable of raising it you could ... *gasp* ... wait until your married. Don't give me this bs about abortion being the only option to prevent "unwanted" pregnancy. Abortion as last chance birth control is pathetic. Period. Parenthood is not a curse, it is a choice that one makes by default when one is too irresponsible to take the necessary preventative steps. Oh but I wanted to get my sex on raaaaaawr! Pfffff.Shocking wrote:
...The implications of murder as we know it and aborting are very, very different. I don't know what pushed you in that direction but it's a very hurtful statement towards anyone who's had an abortion or who's having an unwanted pregnancy.
You're trying to rob women of a very essential part of their freedom, and as a man that's even easier said because you won't ever have to be confronted with the massive burden. What if you are simply incapable of taking care of the kid? Telling them "well then put it up for adoption" is so damn cruel I don't even know where to start. There's no morality in that, it's tyranny. Being on the pil and using a condom does not guarantee that you won't get pregnant, if that happens you're effectively saying "tough luck". If the girl is somewhere in her 20s, she can say goodbye to any ambitions she may have had at that point.
"guilty" right..?
His 14 year old daughter wouldn't become pregnant. She practices abstinence, just like Bristol Palin d--lowing wrote:
What would your attitude be if your 14 year old daughter became pregnant. I am sorry, I hate "what if's". but something like that happens daily, so it isn't such a far fetched notion that you would have to face. So, what would be your solution to it?Stingray24 wrote:
Murder, choosing to end a human life other than my own. Implications different? I think not. Both victims cannot go on to live their lives. Want to avoid unwanted pregnancy? Incapable of taking care of the kid? Want to avoid the "tyranny" of parenthood? Condoms work quite well if one is responsible enough to wrap up one's equipment. Need more insurance? The pill. And if you're really concerned about not creating another human being before you are capable of raising it you could ... *gasp* ... wait until your married. Don't give me this bs about abortion being the only option to prevent "unwanted" pregnancy. Abortion as last chance birth control is pathetic. Period. Parenthood is not a curse, it is a choice that one makes by default when one is too irresponsible to take the necessary preventative steps. Oh but I wanted to get my sex on raaaaaawr! Pfffff.Shocking wrote:
...The implications of murder as we know it and aborting are very, very different. I don't know what pushed you in that direction but it's a very hurtful statement towards anyone who's had an abortion or who's having an unwanted pregnancy.
You're trying to rob women of a very essential part of their freedom, and as a man that's even easier said because you won't ever have to be confronted with the massive burden. What if you are simply incapable of taking care of the kid? Telling them "well then put it up for adoption" is so damn cruel I don't even know where to start. There's no morality in that, it's tyranny. Being on the pil and using a condom does not guarantee that you won't get pregnant, if that happens you're effectively saying "tough luck". If the girl is somewhere in her 20s, she can say goodbye to any ambitions she may have had at that point.
"guilty" right..?
Oh.
So what if it was a victim of sexual assault, is it still immoral then?
If the women don't find ya handsome. They should at least find ya handy.
its one of god's miracles
Tu Stultus Es
Take a clever pill
Not for abortion, was a 'teebow baby' myself. However, at this point in my life I could care less about what the rest of the retards out there do. Also wouldn't care either if the doctor fucks up the procedure and it results in the death of the doctor, patient & every else in the operating room. Fuck em' all.
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something. - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
quit recyclingjord wrote:
Take a clever pill
Tu Stultus Es
The only recycling I do is sending my bitches fetus to china to make fetus soup with.
You send them all the way to China? Waste of resources tbh, find some place close to home.jord wrote:
The only recycling I do is sending my bitches fetus to china to make fetus soup with.
If the women don't find ya handsome. They should at least find ya handy.
I don't pay the postage, jan chee lou does.UnkleRukus wrote:
You send them all the way to China? Waste of resources tbh, find some place close to home.jord wrote:
The only recycling I do is sending my bitches fetus to china to make fetus soup with.
I just googled fetus soup
Tu Stultus Es
Yeah I imagine the first time eating that is pretty hard.
Everythings easier the second time though, everything.
Everythings easier the second time though, everything.
makes you have the intelligence of 5 men.eleven bravo wrote:
I just googled fetus soup
I have a quibble with this. The definition of life is entirely arbitrary. Some say it's at conception, some say it's later on when human features develop. Either way, it's arbitrary. What makes someone human? The ability to reason? To think? Does that mean people in a coma are no longer human? We certainly don't view children or teenagers as fully human as they are essentially property until their 18th birthday in much of the western world.Shocking wrote:
It's not a human life, it's a very romantic notion you people consider it human as soon as a egg gets fertilized but that's really just wrong. There is no scientific or logical backing to any of it - even within theology there's no consensus (I believe the church allowed abortions through most of history, as fetuses were not considered human beings). It doesn't fit any definition of what we constitute as human beings.
I don't really have a point, and I'm not joining in this debate, I just think the whole 'where does life begin?' debate is rather stupid. My view on it is very similar to burnzz... and I'll expand it in a way that he may not have thought of (probably has though, he's a smart guy). If a person/place/thing/whatever is negatively impacting human beings, we as a society generally deal with it in a like manner. Murderer? Rapist? Death penalty or life in prison. They've fucked up peoples lives. I view abortion in much the same light. If a kid is going to fuck up someones world and make their life impossible and make them both miserable, have at it. That kid didn't have a chance anyway.
Ten years ago I found out the girl I was with was pregnant. Scared the ever living shit out of me. If that kid had been mine (she cheated, and it ended up being someone elses) it would've completely fucked up my world. I would probably still be in the army, no college, no happy ever after with my fiancee. I could've totally justified to myself going the abortion route. Today, I'm not in the same position and would not make that choice. But because I do have real world experience, and I have been in the situation, I can empathize with those who are forced to make that shitty decision.
So, I guess I do have a point now after all. People who are anti-abortion: good on ya. You're willing to raise a kid no matter what the circumstances. Potentially sucks for your kid, but whatever, you get to chill with god when you die (or something). But that's your choice and you have no right to make other peoples decisions for them. You'd be fucking pissed if someone else came in and banned bibles and start pissing and moaning about your rights and freedom of religion and stuff. So why do the same shit to others?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat