|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
posted April 07, 2013 05:45 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Your justification for murdering the child was that the child would remind the mother of being raped.
That is untrue. My general reasoning why the abortion of a sufficiently young fetus should not be illegal (as opposed to the murdering of a child), is the fact that the fetus is utterly, completely and absolutely depending on the mother and her fate. Everything the mother does has consequences for the fetus, good and bad, and the goodwill of the mother is absolutely necessary for the well-being of the fetus and later the child. On the other hand, no one else has any means to do something for it, except extreme force against the pregnant woman.
That means, it makes no sense to make abortions illegal (which is not the same as making them legal, mind you).
In a rape case, quite obviously the girl or woman in question didn't want to get pregnant at all and has no part in becoming so, except that she wasn't prepared to be raped and used no contraception, so it is like someone rammed her the fetus in. If you've seen the X-Files or Dark Skies, it's like transferring an alien into her womb - against her will.
Now, the best thing here is obviously an IMMEDIATE abortion - the sooner the better. If you make abortions illegal you force a raped, pregnant woman to the decision I outlined - not to mention to endure 9 months of pregnancy. None of the 2 options - giving it away for adoption or keeping it - is obviously great, and the main thing is: FOR NO ONE.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted April 07, 2013 07:30 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Your justification for murdering the child was that the child would remind the mother of being raped.
That is untrue.
In the post I was responded to you stated:"What is so great in forcing a rape victim to give birth to a child and then have to decide whether to forsake a being that has been growing in her womb for 9 months or whether to keep it and be reminded for the rest of her life of that rape, his face and his stinking breath on her? Can you answer that?
That certainly seems to say that in order for the woman not to be reminded of her rape by her child she should be allowed to kill her unborn child which is why I said by that same logic the woman should be allowed to kill the child at age 5 (or whenever.)
Quote:
My general reasoning why the abortion of a sufficiently young fetus should not be illegal (as opposed to the murdering of a child), is the fact that the fetus is utterly, completely and absolutely depending on the mother and her fate.
I don't understand you logic. Dependence of one person does not correlate to the person you are dependent on having the right to murder you. Lots of born people are dependent on others.
Quote:
In a rape case, quite obviously the girl or woman in question didn't want to get pregnant at all and has no part in becoming so, except that she wasn't prepared to be raped and used no contraception, so it is like someone rammed her the fetus in. If you've seen the X-Files or Dark Skies, it's like transferring an alien into her womb - against her will.
Oh please. Pregnancy is natural for females. comparing it to some alien infestation is insulting to women everywhere. Certainly rape would be a horrible experience but many women have faced that unfortunate experience and have gone on to love the child and be grateful for his existence.
Quote:
Now, the best thing here is obviously an IMMEDIATE abortion - the sooner the better.
I can't agree that murdering the child is the best solution.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 07, 2013 07:54 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Your justification for murdering the child was that the child would remind the mother of being raped.
That is untrue.
In the post I was responded to you stated:"What is so great in forcing a rape victim to give birth to a child and then have to decide whether to forsake a being that has been growing in her womb for 9 months or whether to keep it and be reminded for the rest of her life of that rape, his face and his stinking breath on her? Can you answer that?
That certainly seems to say that in order for the woman not to be reminded of her rape by her child she should be allowed to kill her unborn child which is why I said by that same logic the woman should be allowed to kill the child at age 5 (or whenever.)
Sorry, I can't follow your logic - if it was allowed to kill a CHILD AT AGE 5, there was no decision. If in doubt, she could keep it and later on kill the child, so that's complete crap, and I suspect you are making this up as a red herring only.
Quote:
Quote:
My general reasoning why the abortion of a sufficiently young fetus should not be illegal (as opposed to the murdering of a child), is the fact that the fetus is utterly, completely and absolutely depending on the mother and her fate.
I don't understand you logic. Dependence of one person does not correlate to the person you are dependent on having the right to murder you. Lots of born people are dependent on others.
You are deliberately vague. We are not talking about ANY person - which is what you do - but a SPECIFIC person. There is no parallel for that, no matter how hard to try to invent them.
Quote:
Quote:
In a rape case, quite obviously the girl or woman in question didn't want to get pregnant at all and has no part in becoming so, except that she wasn't prepared to be raped and used no contraception, so it is like someone rammed her the fetus in. If you've seen the X-Files or Dark Skies, it's like transferring an alien into her womb - against her will.
Oh please. Pregnancy is natural for females....
Death is natural for humans as well. Great point you make there.
Quote:
Quote:
Now, the best thing here is obviously an IMMEDIATE abortion - the sooner the better.
I can't agree that murdering the child is the best solution.
Not murdering the child, but aborting a fetus.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted April 13, 2013 03:34 AM |
|
|
Quote:
I can't agree that murdering the child is the best solution.
Not murdering the child, but aborting a fetus.
"Aborting a fetus" simply means murdering an innocent unborn baby. According to science (and common sense) the fetus is a human life.
By the way, "fetus" is simply Latin for "offspring." Baby.
Here is a link to a story that relates to Planned Parenthood's claims that a woman should be allowed to kill her baby if the baby survives an attempt to abort him. That is just what the doctor in question did numerous time in this article, and what nurses in other instances (such as a you tube video I linked to earlier) say is done in the clinics.
Abortion is murder, pure and simple. And when abortion fails to murder the baby many "doctors" finish what they started by killing the born baby. A doctor willing to murder the baby in the womb certainly would have no moral scruples about killing the baby a short time after the abortion attempt if the baby survives an abortion. There's no moral difference at all.
Clicky
Quote:
They say they were just doing what the boss trained them to do.
But eight former employees of a run-down West Philadelphia abortion clinic now face prison time for the work they did for Dr. Kermit Gosnell. Three have pleaded guilty to third-degree murder.
And Gosnell, 72, is on trial in the deaths of a patient and seven babies allegedly born alive.
.....
Unlicensed doctor Stephen Massof, 50, of Pittsburgh, said he could not get a U.S. medical residency after finishing medical school in Grenada and went to work for Gosnell as a "backup plan" after six years running a bar. He admitted killing two babies by snipping their necks, as he said Gosnell taught him to do.
.....
Her daughter, Ashley, went to work for Gosnell when she was 15 because she was interested in medicine. Before long, she was working past midnight — and missing school — to help the nocturnal doctor perform abortions. More than once, she said, she saw a baby move after the procedure. Gosnell would explain to his teenage trainee that the movements were a last reflex during the death process.
...
The others convicted include clinic workers Lynda Williams and Sherry West. Williams was hired to clean instruments but soon helped anesthetize patients, perform ultrasounds and carry out abortions, cutting babies in the back of the neck. She has pleaded guilty to third-degree murder, which carries a 20- to 40-year prison sentence.
West, 53, had been a longtime surgical technician at the Veterans Administration but quit in 2007 after contracting Hepatitis C. A year later, still waiting on disability benefits, she went to work for Gosnell.
West has pleaded guilty to third-degree murder for administering drugs to the refugee from Bhutan who died of a drug overdose during a 2009 abortion, but she testified this week she has her doubts about her plea.
____________
Revelation
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted April 13, 2013 05:30 AM |
|
Edited by artu at 05:59, 13 Apr 2013.
|
1- Taking etymological roots of words for direct meaning is a very deceiving method. In most cases, there is a semantic shift from the original meaning of the word and sometimes it turns into something else completely.
2- It is called even a fetus -let alone a child- after week 10. But you are against any action that takes place even a second after the fertilization, you said it yourself. Which clearly proves that it's about the religious concept of "having a soul" to you. Only that position is not defendable since we live under secular law, so you manipulate scientific knowledge to fit your agenda.
3- Having human DNA means being human in the sense that a piece of hair is human. Being a human being individual that has rights means you have to have a brain and central nervous system. Anything except our brain is not "the self" in us. They are instruments that (if the technology is convenient)you can replace, just like in a heart transplant. What makes us an individual is our brain, that IS the scientific fact, and without it a human body is a collection of organs, tissue and is treated as one before or AFTER birth. That's what organ donors do.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted May 13, 2013 09:45 PM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 21:50, 13 May 2013.
|
Abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell is a murderer, so says the jury.
Clicky
Quote:
A Philadelphia doctor was found guilty Monday of murdering three babies born alive in an abortion clinic, Fox News confirms. He was acquitted in the fourth baby's death, and found guilty of involuntary manslaughter in the overdose death of an adult patient.
Dr. Kermit Gosnell, 72, was convicted of first-degree murder and could face execution in the deaths of three babies who authorities say were delivered alive and then killed with scissors at his grimy clinic, in a case that became a flashpoint in the nation's debate over abortion.
Gosnell was cleared in the death of a fourth baby, who prosecutors say let out a soft whimper before he snipped its neck.
Gosnell was also found guilty of involuntary manslaughter in the drug-overdose death of a patient who had undergone an abortion.
....
Former clinic employees testified that Gosnell routinely performed illegal late-term abortions past Pennsylvania's 24-week limit, that he delivered babies who were still moving, whimpering or breathing, and that he and his assistants "snipped" the newborns' spines, as he referred to it.
"Are you human?" prosecutor Ed Cameron snarled during closing arguments as Gosnell sat calmly at the defense table. "To med these women up and stick knives in the backs of babies?"
....
Stephen Massof, an unlicensed medical school graduate who could not find a residency, told jurors that Gosnell taught him how to snip babies' spines, something he then did at least 100 times at the clinic.
____________
Revelation
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted May 13, 2013 09:54 PM |
|
|
|
Your way of representing things summarizes everything unethical about today's media, this is like a miniature of shameless journalism. What does killing babies after they're born got to do anything with abortion or contraception.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted May 13, 2013 09:56 PM |
|
|
So he killed live babies? He should go jail.
Wait, what does this have to do with abortion again?
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted May 13, 2013 09:59 PM |
|
|
Quote:
So he killed live babies? He should go jail.
Wait, what does this have to do with abortion again?
He attempted to abort the babies but they were born alive instead. So he killed them. Something that Planned Parenthood says should be ok.
|
|
bixie
Promising
Legendary Hero
my common sense is tingling!
|
|
posted May 13, 2013 10:04 PM |
|
|
72
____________
Love, Laugh, Learn, Live.
|
|
Hobbit
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted May 13, 2013 10:04 PM |
|
|
|
Vindicator
Supreme Hero
Right Back Extraordinaire
|
|
posted May 13, 2013 10:16 PM |
|
|
Elodin is saying killing babies that have been born is the same as killing babies still in the womb.
____________
|
|
Hobbit
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted May 13, 2013 10:18 PM |
|
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted May 13, 2013 10:22 PM |
|
|
The law said is not, he was found guilty. Abortion legal, what he did not. Case closed.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted May 14, 2013 01:28 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Elodin is saying killing babies that have been born is the same as killing babies still in the womb.
And it is rational to say that killing a baby in the womb is the same as killing one outside the womb.
If the abortionist had been successful in killing the babies in the womb a mere few minutes before they had been born alive he would not have been able to have been brought up on murder charges under the current laws (thanks to loony judges that made up an imaginary right to kill one's baby in the womb.) But since the abortionist did a poor job of killing the babies in the womb and killed them a few minutes later when they were born alive he is able to be brought to justice under the current law as the murderer that he is.
____________
Revelation
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted May 14, 2013 01:36 AM |
|
|
Is a bit simplistic of analyze, isn't? The article says he performed illegal late-term abortions past Pennsylvania's 24-week limit, that's why he was found guilty. Moreover, instead of abortions, he delivered them alive then killed by snipping the neck.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted May 14, 2013 01:38 AM |
|
|
|
Yes, maybe the charges were not going to be murder but aborting a 9 month-old baby is still illegal and people who defend the right of abortion in general don't defend it for that period of pregnancy. So don't try to manipulate people into thinking it's about that.I guess when denying or bending the reality to make it fit your faith becomes OK, it turns into a habit.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted May 14, 2013 02:14 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Yes, maybe the charges were not going to be murder but aborting a 9 month-old baby is still illegal and people who defend the right of abortion in general don't defend it for that period of pregnancy. So don't try to manipulate people into thinking it's about that.I guess when denying or bending the reality to make it fit your faith becomes OK, it turns into a habit.
You continually lie about me. That says a lot about you. Unfortunately you appear to lack the ability to hold a discussion or participate in a debate without getting personal.
I linked to the story and quoted a portion of the story and have not tried to manipulate anything.
The abortion doctor attempted to abort some babies and failed at the abortions. Instead of the babies being born dead, the way he planned, they were born alive.
The "abortion" resulted in live babies instead of dead babies. So he murdered the babies who had survived his abortion attempts. Those babies who had fought to survive his attempts to murder them in the womb and did survive to draw breath. Until he flipped them over on the table and cut their spines.
Planned Parenthood favors allowing this if it is what the mother wants, as a Planned Parenthood representative testified before law makers recently (I posted a link previously.)
Really, abortion supporters should have no issue with what the doctor did. The mother came in to the abortion clinic to have her baby killed. What difference does it make that the doctor failed to kill the baby in the womb? He corrected his mistake a few minutes later by killing the baby when it was born.
|
|
gnomes2169
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Duke of the Glade
|
|
posted May 14, 2013 02:30 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
So he killed live babies? He should go jail.
Wait, what does this have to do with abortion again?
He attempted to abort the babies but they were born alive instead. So he killed them. Something that Planned Parenthood says should be ok.
Not... really? I believe that Planned Parenthood (the organization that spearheads the movement) actually has a statement relating to cases exactly like the ones you describe (the fetus is alive when aborted). I believe it is basically, "If it can survive on its own or minimal life support, then let it live."  Murder is not part of the policy, and a born, independent, living baby is recognized as a living human.
____________
Yeah in the 18th century, two inventions suggested a method of measurement. One won and the other stayed in America.
-Ghost destroying Fred
|
|
Hobbit
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted May 14, 2013 02:37 AM |
|
|
Quote:
You continually lie about me. That says a lot about you. Unfortunately you appear to lack the ability to hold a discussion or participate in a debate without getting personal.
You're definitely talking too much about others lying and hating you while you're also "lying" about pro-abortionists and Planned Parenthood...
Quote:
What difference does it make that the doctor failed to kill the baby in the womb?
Let me quote your own news:
Quote:
Former clinic employees testified that Gosnell routinely performed illegal late-term abortions past Pennsylvania's 24-week limit, that he delivered babies who were still moving, whimpering or breathing, and that he and his assistants "snipped" the newborns' spines, as he referred to it.
That's something you fail to understand. This was a murder from the very beginning. It couldn't be called an abortion since it was made on independent organisms that could be born in any minute. None of thinking doctors would do an abortion on children which are just about to be born.
Read texts you quote, please. It would certainly be useful for you.
____________
Horn of the
Abyss on AcidCave
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
