^
Why the hell would you agree with that if you are not anti-abortion? I'm confused.

2/16/2012 10:42:40 AM

I think this is a compromise for people who cannot live their lives knowing abortions exist. The thought is that the women will see the baby and have a moment to decided if this is what they are really going to do. I personally have know clue what my decision would be in that moment if I was in an accidental pregnancy situation, but I will not take away anyone's right to choose that.

2/16/2012 10:46:15 AM

We should not guilt trip people into becoming mothers. A compromise would be offering the ultrasound, not enforcing it.

2/16/2012 10:49:52 AM

it is not a guilt trip, it is asking the female to understand that she is in fact looking at her unborn child. I I do not know that enforcing it is ever the best, but if they decide to not get an abortion, they don't have to be mothers.

If I were deciding to get an abortion and I saw the ultrasound, that would not impact my decision. So, IMO, I do think it makes a difference.... but you are right, enforcing it will make this service more out of reach (financially), and cause people with little resources to feel that they should parent a child they have no business raising.

2/16/2012 10:57:41 AM

Quote :

"it is not a guilt trip, it is asking the female to understand that she is in fact looking at her unborn child."

For a person who seems to support women's rights, that is pretty condescending.

Quote :

"if they decide to not get an abortion, they don't have to be mothers."

You say that like you can just drop your baby on some adoption agency's doorstep and be done with it. And it's not right to bring another unwanted child into the world.

2/16/2012 11:04:19 AM

I usually drop off my unwanted babies at one of those road-side salvation army drop-boxes.

2/16/2012 11:16:36 AM

Quote :

"it is not a guilt trip, it is asking the female to understand that she is in fact looking at her unborn child."

Give me a fucking break. The woman knows she has a fucking fetus in her, that's why she's at the doctor's office. Forcing her to look at it is a transparent attempt to evoke psychological and emotion reactions to, ultimately, just manipulate her. At least be forthright about it you snake. You have no right to force her to look at anything. You don't own her eyes any more than you own her womb.

[Edited on February 16, 2012 at 11:22 AM. Reason : .]

2/16/2012 11:20:42 AM

Quote :

"For a person who seems to support women's rights, that is pretty condescending."

maybe she also gives a fuck about the rights of the living being that is about to be murdered. call me crazy, but I'd say that's a reasonable thing to consider, too.

Quote :

"You have no right to force her to look at anything."

and she has no right to murder an innocent human life just because it is inconvenient to her.

2/16/2012 12:58:17 PM

You're crazy, and are still declaring a priori that abortion is murder without justifying this claim. Sure, your craziness sounds reasonable if you go ahead and make that assumption. Unfortunately for you, reasonable people and our government don't.

2/16/2012 1:07:49 PM

^
Pretty much.

2/16/2012 1:09:06 PM

^^^^ I think you are misunderstanding me. But I agree, it shouldn't be forced. But as a women, who believes deeply in the right to choose, this is still not a black and white situation. I never said it should be forced... so ease up. I think that it is to trigger an emotional response, so you are right.

WHAT I SAID (but it is not my opinion) is that the people who feel abortion is wrong, think that women are not thinking it through, and feel that it is a hasty band-aid fix, so they think this will solve that. It bothers me that in the end it is a religious moral that the lawmakers hide behind, it is the fucking lobbyist.

And as you can see I am still learning the intricacies of this highly volatile topic, as I have been with a few friends who have been in this predicament. I can vouch and say that the whole process is quite emotional and very hard, I don't think "pro-lifers" understand that women have already come to terms with what they are deciding is right for their bodies. I am a huge proponent for removing religion from all political dialogue, so know need to jump down my throat about her rights. I know about this on a personal level.

all I was trying to get across was that, my friend saw the ultrasound... knew what she had to do, and continued with her decision. Is it easy? never. But these are not going to have the effect they think it will. I don't agree with it, and I definitely oppose any measure to make the woman pay for the more precise ultrasound (as that is essentially taxing abortions because some religious groups do not agree) making them less accessible. If that is what in fact they are doing(sorry no time to read the legal jargon at work) then that is very sneaky, but I have expected nothing less with our current corrupt political system.

[Edited on February 16, 2012 at 1:13 PM. Reason : .]

2/16/2012 1:12:35 PM

^^^not yet. luckily for us, as things continue to deteriorate at home economically, social issues will suddenly become a huge issue so that unemployed mouth breathers will see abortion-loving-gays and sharia-pushing-liberal-muslims as the root of their problems and continue voting for a party that is actively looting their life savings.

[Edited on February 16, 2012 at 1:13 PM. Reason : ]

2/16/2012 1:13:16 PM

Quote :

"You're crazy, and are still declaring a priori that abortion is murder without justifying this claim."

because it is murder. Your only argument is that "it's legal." Well, Hitler killed millions of Jews, and he was the state. I guess that wasn't murder, was it, because the state did it, so it must have been legal. It's fucking murder, every time. You are killing a human life without any due process, ergo, murder. Do you not think it is human? Do you not think it is alive? You say it should have absolutely no rights, I disagree. You say life only matters if it's "good enough" for you, I find that deplorable.

2/16/2012 1:23:44 PM

Quote :

"Do you not think it is human? Do you not think it is alive?"

It is alive from a biological standpoint, but it is not a being that has entered into consciousness.

2/16/2012 1:27:35 PM

It's not a "human life" yet, silly, and this reasoning totally ignores the prevalence of the mother's bodily rights as well.

And did you honestly just compare the decision a single mother makes for her fetus to the entire Holocaust?

2/16/2012 1:28:28 PM

not what I asked. is it alive? is it human? your attempt to devalue life for convenience sake is disgusting

oh really? it's human, and it's alive, and it's a life, but it's not a human life. damn

Quote :

"And did you honestly just compare the decision a single mother makes for her fetus to the entire Holocaust?"

no, I just cut off your argument of "BUT IT'S LEGAL, IT CAN'T BE MURDER!!! THE STATE ALLOWS IT!!!"
then again, I imagine that there have been plenty of abortions worldwide to come at least up to the order of magnitude of the Holocaust.

and, I don't discount the mother's bodily rights. I just don't completely discount the right to life that the unborn also has, like you do.

[Edited on February 16, 2012 at 1:30 PM. Reason : ]

2/16/2012 1:28:29 PM

alive != "a life". Surely you agree with this point. Are the cells in your hand a human life?

2/16/2012 1:37:18 PM

^^when were you conceived?

2/16/2012 1:39:28 PM

I completely understand how you feel, but in reality it is how YOU feel. The person who pumps nutrients and life into the baby is in charge of the fetus, and if a crappy life is all that can be guaranteed, then it is the female who has to make the decision. Parents make decisions for their offspring all of the time, that is the real fact of life ... not a law, not a religious conviction, real life.

If you are going to say that an inseminated egg is life and before it has even developed into a conscious being that terminating it is murder, than so is eating meat. Grass is alive, meat comes from animals, we have to make ugly decisions sometimes because this is real life, not some fantasy where god fixes everything in the world.


And seriously, comparing abortion to the holocaust is not new and is such a troll move. These people were tortured and enslaved living breathing humans that were in charge of their own bodies, only to have their freedom ripped away and their lives destroyed in front of them.

If "god" wants a person to exist then it will be right? If my mother terminated me, I believe my "soul" would have entered the world via a different pathway, that is what I think. But it is not about what we believe in, this is real life where people must function as a society.

2/16/2012 1:39:52 PM

Quote :

"alive != "a life". Surely you agree with this point. Are the cells in your hand a human life?"

they all have their own lives, surely you would agree with that. The entirety of a human must certainly be a human life, no?

Quote :

"The person who pumps nutrients and life into the baby is in charge of the fetus, and if a crappy life is all that can be guaranteed, then it is the female who has to make the decision. Parents make decisions for their offspring all of the time, that is the real fact of life ... not a law, not a religious conviction, real life."

That doesn't make it any less murder. Sorry.

Quote :

"If you are going to say that an inseminated egg is life and before it has even developed into a conscious being that terminating it is murder, than so is eating meat. Grass is alive, meat comes from animals, we have to make ugly decisions sometimes because this is real life, not some fantasy where god fixes everything in the world."

Let's see... Eating, which every animal does, versus killing an human life because it is inconvenient to you. You really want to make that moral comparison? My dog is inconvenient to me right now... Does that mean I can beat his head into a bloody pulp?

Quote :

"And seriously, comparing abortion to the holocaust is not new and is such a troll move."

You don't understand the argument prior. Disco will say that abortion is not murder because murder is illegal, yet the state has made abortion legal, so it can't be murder. Meanwhile, I point out how Hitler made killing millions of Jews "legal". Yet we still call what he did "murder." Thus, it shows that the term "murder" is not solely seen in a context of what is necessarily legal or not. Moreover, you still ignore the millions of unborn who have been slaughtered, who have never even had a chance at life, simply because they were an inconvenience. Well, the Jews were an inconvenience to Hitler, too. The comparison is apt. The only saving grace for abortion is that it is as painless as killing a human can be.

2/16/2012 1:48:59 PM

Quote :

"they all have their own lives, surely you would agree with that. The entirety of a human must certainly be a human life, no?"

And there you have it. Is a fetus the "entirety of a human?" What parts do you need to be the "entirety of a human?" Does a fetus have all these parts. I'd argue that for early-term it clearly does not. Ergo, calling at least early-term abortion murder is clearly incorrect, even by your definition.

Secondly, not all termination of an entire human life is murder. Surely you agree on this. So the impetus is not just on you to prove it's an entire human, but that the definition of that termination is actually consistent with the definition of murder.

Quote :

" Disco will say that abortion is not murder because murder is illegal, yet the state has made abortion legal, so it can't be murder."

You don't speak for me. What I DID say was that both reasonable people and our government don't consider it murder. You skipped right over the "reasonable people" part and latched onto the "government" part and then claimed that I think that the only reason I don't think it's murder is because it's not against the law.

I think that it is not murder because it doesn't reasonably fit the definition of murder. Hell, executions fit the definition of murder more closely than abortion and I don't think executions are murder per se. I think the fact that our democratically elected legislatures have deemed abortion not murder is not a proof of it not being murder, but evidence that other reasonable people think the same way.

You're a cherry-picking fraud and your argument is internally inconsistent for at the very least early-term abortions in which the fetus has not fully developed the parts and functionality to be considered "an entire human being."

Quote :

"Let's see... Eating, which every animal does, versus killing an human life because it is inconvenient to you. You really want to make that moral comparison? My dog is inconvenient to me right now... Does that mean I can beat his head into a bloody pulp?"

Every placental animal miscarries as well, right?

[Edited on February 16, 2012 at 1:57 PM. Reason : .]

2/16/2012 1:57:05 PM

Quote :

"And there you have it. Is a fetus the "entirety of a human?" "

It's the entirety of that human at that point in time. Or is there more of that human somewhere else that we just don't know about?

Quote :

"What I DID say was that both reasonable people and our government don't consider it murder."

so, then, you at least are no longer clinging to your "it's legal" definition. that's fine. Now, tell me what's "reasonable" about killing a human life simply because it's inconvenient to you. Tell me how that is, in any way, a morally tenable position.

Quote :

"I think the fact that our democratically elected legislatures have deemed abortion not murder is not a proof of it not being murder"

So, if our Congress declared that it was legal to kill any Jew, would that no longer be murder, since Congress said so?

Quote :

"Every placental animal miscarries as well, right?"

And that miscarriage is 100% induced, right?

2/16/2012 2:01:33 PM

Quote :

"It is alive from a biological standpoint, but it is not a being that has entered into consciousness."

Can you address this? I'm curious about what makes you think killing a yet-to-be-conscious fetus constitutes murder.

2/16/2012 2:04:11 PM

Quote :

"It's the entirety of that human at that point in time. Or is there more of that human somewhere else that we just don't know about?"

Yeah, its fully functioning brain is missing.

Myself, and the entire neuroscience industry agree that the entirety of what makes a person a person is the brain. No brain, no person.

Quote :

"so, then, you at least are no longer clinging to your "it's legal" definition. that's fine. Now, tell me what's "reasonable" about killing a human life simply because it's inconvenient to you. Tell me how that is, in any way, a morally tenable position."

It's not a human life. It's not a person. Therefore terminating it is not murder. However, since we've established that even terminating people which are without a doubt people isn't necessarily murder, just proving that it is a person is not good enough anyway so I don't want you to think I'm conceding "well, if it's a person then it's definitely murder."

Quote :

"So, if our Congress declared that it was legal to kill any Jew, would that no longer be murder, since Congress said so? "

If killing Jews was also reasonable then yes. It isn't because this argument is retarded.

Quote :

"And that miscarriage is 100% induced, right?"

I'm not the one presenting the naturalistic fallacy "well, all animals eat, so clearly eating isn't murder." "That all animals do it" is not a good argument. We do things that other animals do not.

[Edited on February 16, 2012 at 2:16 PM. Reason : .]

2/16/2012 2:16:20 PM

I'd like to know aaronburro's views on Christian Scientists and Terri Schiavo.

2/16/2012 2:22:54 PM

this character that aaronburro has created is played the fuck out

why do people still fall for it?

2/16/2012 2:38:13 PM

Given that prominent figures in our government share the same values, I think it's dangerous to write it off as a "character."

2/16/2012 3:20:00 PM

My favorite part about the abortion issue is that it is rife with the opportunity to say absurd things, like aaronburro bringing up Godwin's law...classic and hilarious.

Also absurd:

There have been more miscarriages in the history of humanity than medically induced abortions. God, then, is the most prolific abortionist of all. Should we be held to a higher standard than god?

2/16/2012 3:24:57 PM

i'm curious what his opinion on stem cell research is and IVF

2/16/2012 3:39:10 PM

lucky i'm not in office. i'm a further-left-than-soros demonic style anarchy radical liberal. i'm pro AFTER-birth abortion... for instance retards, and drop-outs and gang members. i'd be putting forced sterilization back on the table for people who commit violent crimes in high school.

why give only the mother the choice to abort at 9 months limit. put that limit up to about age 18. never too late to abort a mistake.

in fact if you are found to have a single genetic defect (including the 'faith in religions' genetic defect) you are instantly aborted and raided for stem cells and other valuables.

wait, in this case probably every TWW user would never have existed




[Edited on February 16, 2012 at 3:55 PM. Reason : pwnt]

2/16/2012 3:51:32 PM

you would liken the slow beating of any creature (let's say a child), fully conscious and with neurons completely developed to feel every inch of pain to removing tissue and some blood


[Edited on February 16, 2012 at 4:19 PM. Reason : confusing/off topic]

2/16/2012 4:06:14 PM

i have no clue what you're advocating for or against.

2/16/2012 4:13:21 PM

Quote :

"If you know anything about biology then you know that unlimited reproduction eventually ends in any system. "

if your system is in a fucking jar. there's a lot of carbon and hydrogen out there in the universe (hmmmm i wonder what elements power our bodies and technology more than anything?)

but good job de-funding nasa and private space industry so you can pretend to put your own artificial limit on what life can and can't do

2/16/2012 4:20:43 PM

Quote :

"i'm curious what his opinion on stem cell research is and IVF"

I asked him the same thing months ago and he just kept screaming "IRREVERENT! IRREVERENT!". It was safe to conclude that he was too obtuse to know why that was being asked as he simply demanded to know what point I was trying to make.

2/16/2012 4:24:54 PM

Quote :

"but good job de-funding nasa and private space industry so you can pretend to put your own artificial limit on what life can and can't do"

nooooooooooo..... but maybe putting the brakes on production (since we don't live in 1850 and everyone dies of dysentery) and maybe allow research to work through some of the issues surrounding our limited resources.

2/16/2012 4:30:13 PM

^^I assume you mean "IRRELEVANT".

2/16/2012 4:31:44 PM

Haha. Oops. Damn spell checker thing.

2/16/2012 5:15:13 PM

Quote :

"Can you address this? I'm curious about what makes you think killing a yet-to-be-conscious fetus constitutes murder."

I'd be curious as to what makes you think it isn't... it's the killing of a human life without any sort of due process, based solely on the fact that the life is inconvenient to you. Go into any other circumstance where someone is killed because he is simply inconvenient and explain to me how it's not murder.

Quote :

"Yeah, its fully functioning brain is missing."

Which goes back to your "it's no important" idea. I don't work that way, and I find that idea to be completely disgusting.

Quote :

"It's not a human life."

Then what is it? it's clearly human, it's clearly alive. what is it.

Quote :

"If killing Jews was also reasonable then yes. It isn't because this argument is retarded."

No. you said that Congress said it was OK, therefor it must be reasonable. i reject that argument outright.

Quote :

"My favorite part about the abortion issue is that it is rife with the opportunity to say absurd things, like aaronburro bringing up Godwin's law"

There are times when invoking Hitler is entirely appropriate. In the context it was done here, it is appropriate, as someone asserted that if some act is legal in a jurisdiction, then it can never be murder. I've clearly shown otherwise.

Quote :

"I asked him the same thing months ago and he just kept screaming "IRREVERENT! IRREVERENT!"."

First off, the word is "irrelevant." Second off, you never established the link, and I'm not gonna do your work for you, so in order to avoid the inevitable "OMFG WHAT ABOUT THIS TANGENTIALLY RELATED SUBJECT!!!", I allowed you to show the relevance. You refused, so I refused to answer. Simple as that. Third, you only ever asked about IVF, IIRC.

2/16/2012 5:25:28 PM

It was never as simple as that. They absolutely are related if you actually knew what you were talking about and were consistent in your supposed convictions.

2/16/2012 5:27:48 PM

at which point it was your job to show the relevance. YOU FUCKING DIDN'T and I'M NOT GONNA DO YOUR GOD DAMNED RESEARCH. you wanna talk about it, explain the relevance. someone FINALLY explained it, and I responded.

2/16/2012 5:30:31 PM

If you recall correctly, I simply asked the question how you felt about IVF. Pretty straight forward. It's unfortunate that it took so much hand-holding from someone else before you gave an answer.

2/16/2012 5:41:23 PM

and, if you recall correctly, I asked you the relevance. and, if you recall correctly, you then refused to answer.

how about this:
How do you feel about wagons?
How do you feel about Stables?
How do you feel about 1990 Pontiac Grand Ams?
How do you feel about spinning tops?

now, explain to me why you won't answer those questions in this thread. right, because they are irrelevant. Now, if I continued wanting you to answer those questions, the onus would be on me to explain why they are relevant. You did the same thing. I didn't see the relevance, and I thus asked for it. I'm thinking about lots of things at one time, as are you, and I can certainly be excused for not seeing an immediate link between the two. You could have been a fucking grown up and said "blah blah blah relevance blah blah" and established that link for the sake of discussion, or you could have been a douchebag and hee-hawed over me not knowing every last part of every single thing that is tangentially related to abortion at a moment's notice. You chose the latter

[Edited on February 16, 2012 at 5:47 PM. Reason : ]

2/16/2012 5:44:38 PM

Given your intransigence on the issue, knowing how IVF fit in should have been easy enough for even you to see.

2/16/2012 5:47:37 PM

Quote :

"I'm thinking about lots of things at one time, as are you, and I can certainly be excused for not seeing an immediate link between the two. You could have been a fucking grown up and said "blah blah blah relevance blah blah" and established that link for the sake of discussion, or you could have been a douchebag and hee-hawed over me not knowing every last part of every single thing that is tangentially related to abortion at a moment's notice. You chose the latter"

2/16/2012 5:50:54 PM

Quote :

"I'd like to know aaronburro's views on Christian Scientists and Terri Schiavo."

2/16/2012 5:50:56 PM

start a thread, and I'll tell ya. or, establish some relevance to abortion directly. The relevance allows me to directly talk about whatever the fuck you think is interesting about that subject with regard to my views on abortion, so as not to have 3 pages of people going over their entire thoughts on a subject.

if it's obvious, such as morning after pill and abortion, then the relevance doesn't need to be stated, as it is, as I said, obvious, and i can tailor my thoughts directly to it. Terri Schaivo, though, what specifically? Right to life? Congressional laws about life? Tom Delay being a d-bag? Women's rights? Which one are you aiming at?

[Edited on February 16, 2012 at 5:58 PM. Reason : ]

2/16/2012 5:51:51 PM

Because she was inconvienent, Michael Schiavo had his wife removed from life support, leading directly to her death. Was that murder? Why or why not?

Children of Christian Scientists die (on a not infrequent basis) because their parents refuse to seek medical care. Is that murder? Why or why not?

2/16/2012 6:02:09 PM

Schiavo: I'm not sure it was as simple as "she was inconvenient" in that case. Some people made it out to be as such, but I think there were enough court cases to suggest otherwise. She probably had mentioned to Michael that she didn't want to be kept alive like that, as he said, and that's enough in a court case at that point. She expressed her wishes, the court agreed, they carried out her wishes. Tell me, what are the wishes of the unborn? Do they desire to be ripped out of the uterus and killed?

Christian Scientists: I'm assuming since you mentioned children, that you are drawing a link between the death of unborn children and the death of CS children after birth (obviously). I'd say that's not analogous, as one is directly caused for the sake of convenience, the other happens indirectly due to faith. And, given that faith has some vital protections under the 1st Amendment, I'm willing to allow the death of CS children to protect the right of Christian Scientists to practice their religion. Odd, though, that you would be against forbidding medical procedures on the basis of "rights to your own body" while you would force them on others, ignoring those rights to their own bodies.

2/16/2012 6:10:44 PM

It is OK with you that religious beliefs of one person result in the death of another? Would abortion be OK if my religion frowns on bastard children?

2/16/2012 6:17:30 PM

Quote :

"It is OK with you that religious beliefs of one person result in the death of another?"

depends on how the death occurs. is it direct harmful action on an unwilling victim? then, no. In CS, you have inaction which leads to death, which makes a difference.

Quote :

"Would abortion be OK if my religion frowns on bastard children?"

Does your religion specifically require the killing of bastard children? I mean, technically, Catholicism frowns on bastard children (except cute lil baby jeebus), but it also doesn't say to murder the bastard children. Thankfully, there are no religions that call for abortions, so I'm good for now But, if you can find me a bona fide religion which practices ritual abortions, then we'll deal with that when it occurs.

2/16/2012 6:26:48 PM