Go  |
New |
Find |
Notify |
|
Reply |
|
Admin |
New PM! |
Registered: December 27, 2006
Posts: 3981
|
quote: So people should have the ability to decide if they want to murder their babies. Would you advocate making all murder legal?
You're trying to dehumanize me. Go ahead, try. There are sometimes good reasons for murder. I am all for those reasons. I believe I have stated before though, that murder should be decided by justice, not law. I do not debate on whether things should be made legal. quote: So I'm curious, who here is against the death penalty or for it?
For it.
...a Wandering Star for whom the black darkness has been reserved forever...
|
Registered: January 16, 2004
Posts: 3993
|
I'm against it. Kant was an interesting person...
L'enfer, c'est les autres. -Jean-Paul Sartre
|
Registered: January 16, 2003
Posts: 12687
|
So I'm curious, who here is against the death penalty or for it?
"In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act." - George Orwell
|
Registered: November 05, 2004
Posts: 6054
|
Again, I never said the fetus was part of the mother's body. I said (or rather implied) it was contained within her body. This may not be the best comparison, but think of tapeworms. They are not part of a person's body, but that person has every right to deal with that tapeworm how they wish, whether they opt to have it removed or decide to keep it as a pet. It's not part of their body, but it certainly is within their body and therefore subject to their decisions.
The more you know, the less you don't know.
|
Registered: February 10, 2007
Posts: 691
|
Here are some reasons why a Fetus is not part of a woman body. quote: 1. If a "fetus" is a "part" of a pregnant woman's body, then they would have a common genetic code, since a "part" of a body is defined by its having the same genetic code as other "parts" in the body. (For example, the lungs and legs and livers of Person X all have the same genetic code.) An unborn baby is a genetically distinct being; therefore it is not a part of its mother's body.
2. If a "fetus" is a "part" of a pregnant woman's body, then if the woman died, the part would die as well. (For example, lungs and legs and livers don't live on when a woman dies). But an unborn baby can survive the death of a mother--see Bobbi Jo Stinnett--therefore is it not a part of its mother's body.
3. If a "fetus" is a "part" of a pregnant woman's body, then the woman would have four eyes, two hearts, four lungs, etc. And yes, if the "fetus" is a boy, then the mother would also have male sexual organs.
4. Why does Caulson think that a "fetus" is "part" of a pregnant woman's body? There's only two possible reasons I can think of: (a) because the "fetus" is inside the woman; (b) because the "fetus" is dependent on the woman for survival. But both are absurd criteria: (a') being in the hospital doesn't make me part of the hospital (in that sense that I'm am no longer an individual, distinct entity); and (b') being dependant upon a life-support machine does not make me a part of the life-support machine.
quote: I'll state right now that pro-life people should stop calling themselves pro-life and call themselves anti-abortion or something
Alright, fine, I’m anti-abortion.
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." Albert Einstein
|
Registered: November 27, 2004
Posts: 1322
|
quote: If you look at a book on anatomy, you will not see a Fetus, listed as one of a woman’s body parts.
are you stupid? quote:
A choice for what? Abortion. So pro-choice is Just another way of saying pro- allowing people to have an abortion, or pro-abortion.
No. A choice. Just like she said. There are multiple choices, among them abortion. That doesn't mean you like abortion(pro-abortion implies you like abortion), it means you think it should be one of the options, but there are others. Stop twisting things to fit your argument. If we're going to get into this absurd argument I'll state right now that pro-life people should stop calling themselves pro-life and call themselves anti-abortion or something, because lots of pro-life people are pro-death penalty(and I don't have the statistical numbers for that so don't ask). But you don't do that, call yourself that, because pro-life sounds much more pretty. quote:
Would you advocate making all murder legal?
yeah why don't we? 
Democracy is the recurrent suspicion that more than half of the people are right more than half of the time. - E.B.White
|
Registered: January 22, 2005
Posts: 716
|
Kant says that we cannot make an ethical decision unless we are free from all constraints. In this instance, it is impossible for the mother to be free from constraints, as all sorts of pressure will be being applied to her. She cannot make a truly ethical or objective decision one way or the other under the circumstance, and therefore I think that it is unfair of us to place her in a postion where that unnecessary confusion is possible. I agree with choice up to a point; it seems to me that by placing the emphasis on the choice of the mother, we trivialise our beginnings as human. Having just reread my first paragraph, I seem to be a lot more confident on paper than I am in real life about this issue...
Only simple and quiet words will ripen of themselves. For a whirlwind does not last a whole morning, nor does a sudden shower last the entire day.
|
Registered: February 10, 2007
Posts: 691
|
quote: I never denied that fetuses are living. I merely said that point is moot because it's not about killing living beings (or it shouldn't be about that). It's about the mother's choice to do what she wishes with her own body.
A fetus is a baby, not part of a woman’s body. If you look at a book on anatomy, you will not see a Fetus, listed as one of a woman’s body parts. quote: They are not pro-abortion. No one likes abortion. They are pro-choice. They would rather the mother have a choice.
A choice for what? Abortion. So pro-choice is Just another way of saying pro- allowing people to have an abortion, or pro-abortion. quote: I'd appreciate it if you didn't generalize, friend. I believe it's murder, but I am pro choice.
So people should have the ability to decide if they want to murder their babies. Would you advocate making all murder legal?
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." Albert Einstein
|
Registered: December 27, 2006
Posts: 3981
|
quote: Okay so you are more knowledgeable in defining words then the dictionary?
Sometimes the dictionary doesn't get it right. Maybe words mean more, or less, than that book describes. And, as it is, the dictionary is just a book, like the bible. Just a book. Not a God. You shouldn't base your whole life on it. quote: The pro-abortion position will always be to minimize the fact that we are killing a living person.
I'd appreciate it if you didn't generalize, friend. I believe it's murder, but I am pro choice.
...a Wandering Star for whom the black darkness has been reserved forever...
|
Registered: November 05, 2004
Posts: 6054
|
I never denied that fetuses are living. I merely said that point is moot because it's not about killing living beings (or it shouldn't be about that). It's about the mother's choice to do what she wishes with her own body.
The more you know, the less you don't know.
|
Registered: October 28, 2005
Posts: 5354
|
quote: pro-abortion
They are not pro-abortion. No one likes abortion. They are pro-choice. They would rather the mother have a choice. Stop being such an illogical a-hole. Please.
draft beer not soldiers...
|
Registered: February 10, 2007
Posts: 691
|
quote: They mean nothing and are always being changed and skewed!
Well then, what are we killing during an abortion? The pro-abortion position will always be to minimize the fact that we are killing a living person. I was defining Fetus because some people seemed to have a miss-understanding about what a fetus was.
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." Albert Einstein
|
Registered: October 28, 2005
Posts: 5354
|
FUCK DEFINITIONS! They mean nothing and are always being changed and skewed!
draft beer not soldiers...
|
Registered: February 10, 2007
Posts: 691
|
quote: Take your pick. Use whatever defintion you want to 'prove' your point. It's not going to change anyones mind.
My point is to show that in abortion we are killing children, albeit unborn children. Killing children regardless of how old they are is wrong. quote: The young of viviparous animals in the womb
viviparous,Is defined as living young instead of eggs from within the body. your definition also describes the Fetus as living.
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." Albert Einstein
|
Registered: November 05, 2004
Posts: 6054
|
If we're going to quote definitions at each other, I've got the best of them all, straight from the Oxford English Dictionary: fetus:The young of viviparous animals in the womb, and of oviparous animals in the egg, when fully developed.So there. But seriously, quoting definitions is pointless because different dictionaries can have different meanings. You can't hide behind the dictionary, especially when language is fluid and open to interpretation. Semantics, anyone?
The more you know, the less you don't know.
|
Registered: October 28, 2005
Posts: 5354
|
There is more than one definiton of child. child –noun, plural chil·dren. 1. a person between birth and full growth; a boy or girl: books for children. 2. a son or daughter: All my children are married. 3. a baby or infant. 4. a human fetus. 5. a childish person: He's such a child about money. 6. a descendant: a child of an ancient breed. 7. any person or thing regarded as the product or result of particular agencies, influences, etc.: Abstract art is a child of the 20th century. 8. a person regarded as conditioned or marked by a given circumstance, situation, etc.: a child of poverty; a child of famine. 9. British Dialect Archaic. a female infant. Take your pick. Use whatever defintion you want to 'prove' your point. It's not going to change anyones mind.
draft beer not soldiers...
|
Registered: February 10, 2007
Posts: 691
|
quote: A fetus is a stage in the development of a child. Calling a fetus a child is the same as calling a seed a plant. It will become one if given the chance, but the two are not exactly equal.
I will restate the Definition quote: The unborn child from the start of the ninth week after conception to the time of birth.
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." Albert Einstein
|
Registered: November 27, 2004
Posts: 1322
|
quote: Originally posted by Nephilem: quote: And Nephilem, I don't care what the dictionary says, I don't equate a fetus to a born child, and that's not even the point anyway.
Okay so you are more knowledgeable in defining words then the dictionary? Despite what you want the word Fetus to mean the meaning remains the same. A fetus is an unborn baby.
did you not read what I said? are you telling me a fetus is the same thing as a child? I can't explain it better than clpo already did, so try reading.
Democracy is the recurrent suspicion that more than half of the people are right more than half of the time. - E.B.White
|
Registered: November 05, 2004
Posts: 6054
|
A fetus is a stage in the development of a child. Calling a fetus a child is the same as calling a seed a plant. It will become one if given the chance, but the two are not exactly equal.
The more you know, the less you don't know.
|
Registered: February 10, 2007
Posts: 691
|
quote: And Nephilem, I don't care what the dictionary says, I don't equate a fetus to a born child, and that's not even the point anyway.
Okay so you are more knowledgeable in defining words then the dictionary? Despite what you want the word Fetus to mean the meaning remains the same. A fetus is an unborn baby.
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." Albert Einstein
|
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
