people are using exceptions to poke holes in their flimsy ideology, not against them personally

11/11/2013 8:12:43 AM

Quote :

"ook, I'm sure a lot of anti-abortion folks really don't like to make exceptions, but they make several - rape/incest and harm to the mother. And now you are using those exceptions in your arguments against them. Rape is a trauma that I couldn't ever imagine going through, and I certainly wouldn't want to carry around a daily reminder. But shit, if pro lifers said no abortions for any situations, you would certainly attack the shit out of them, and now your attacking them for the exceptions they make."

That's the problem with having a morally inconsistent ideology. It's not my fault someone picked a position that's indefensible.

Quote :

"To change topics a little, there's something that isn't much debated when it comes to the abortion issue, and that is the rights of the father. Biology has worked itself out that the female carries the full burden of childbirth, but I think its kinda shitty that the father has no say whatsoever."

I'd like to hear what you have in mind as far as "the rights of the father" or what "say" you think father's should have.

11/11/2013 9:05:19 AM

I think that child is as much the father's as it is the mother's, and that if he wants the child then a serious discussion should be had. I mean, if the mother wants an abortion, by law I don't think the father should just be completely shut out of the decision.

11/11/2013 9:19:07 AM

How much does the fact that the mother is the only one who has to carry the fetus and give birth to the child, entirely by herself, weigh in that discussion?

11/11/2013 9:26:07 AM

70/30?? I don't know. I mean fuck it takes two to tango. If dad wants to keep kid, then he should have a say. I doubt this happens much anyway, I mean its usually more like the man might push for the abortion, but you never know.

I'm just saying its a serious discussion that should be had.

11/11/2013 9:28:54 AM

Quote :

""If you want to protect the meek you should start with saving the whales. Or livestock. These are dramatically more sophisticated than a fetus. No pro-life person has even attempted to respond to this criticism." That's because it's completely, 100% unrelated. Why waste time arguing points that are solely invented to divert the topic at hand? Hey, let's talk about the Packers while we're at it!"

Then stop pussyfooting around and state why a human fetus should be protected. Is it because of their ability to feel, or is it because it's human?

What is the virtue of "being alive" that you are seeking to protect, and why have you rejected basically all arguments that a fetus is at an extremely low level of development? Saying that life is sacred isn't good enough, because I don't know what life means to you.

[Edited on November 11, 2013 at 9:43 AM. Reason : ]

11/11/2013 9:42:45 AM

Quote :

"70/30?? I don't know."

so by your own estimation of how much input the man should have, it doesn't matter what he thinks

11/11/2013 9:47:09 AM

Quote :

"70/30?? I don't know. I mean fuck it takes two to tango. If dad wants to keep kid, then he should have a say. I doubt this happens much anyway, I mean its usually more like the man might push for the abortion, but you never know. I'm just saying its a serious discussion that should be had."

I still don't know what you mean by "have a say." Do you mean legally? Like he should be able to sue her to have the child or something?

Otherwise, "serious discussions" are probably already happening in the vast majority of abortions anyway.

11/11/2013 9:48:43 AM

a man should be able to prevent the mother from killing his child.

[Edited on November 11, 2013 at 9:57 AM. Reason : ]

11/11/2013 9:56:05 AM

^^he means that you need legally protected time for the man to slut-shame the woman a bit before she uses her majority-share opinion to do whatever she chooses on her own

[Edited on November 11, 2013 at 9:57 AM. Reason : ^ that would only be true if it were possible for the man to be pregnant ]

11/11/2013 9:56:25 AM

Quote :

"a man should be able to prevent the mother from killing his child."

Do you honestly think a man should be able to tell a woman whether to they should have a medical procedure? And a fetus is not a child, nice edit btw.

11/11/2013 9:58:41 AM

if the medical procedure involved a woman KILLING my offspring, then yes I should 100% have a say in it.

I'm sorry your morals are so low/convoluted that you advocate the killing of the most innocent and helpless human beings in existence.

11/11/2013 10:06:19 AM

soyou just give the child to the man and its okay, just remove it from the woman and give it to the man. Since its a child and not a fetus, the man should do just fine taking care of it on his own.

11/11/2013 10:38:53 AM

Quote :

"if the medical procedure involved a woman KILLING my offspring, then yes I should 100% have a say in it. "

all hyperbole aside (love the all caps "KILLING")

do you think you have the right to force a woman to go through childbirth because you impregnated her?

nvm missed this:

Quote :

"a man should be able to prevent the mother from killing his child. "

again, what if he raped her? it's still his child, and it's still an INNOCENT HUMAN BEING

[Edited on November 11, 2013 at 10:55 AM. Reason : .]

11/11/2013 10:54:39 AM

They're not human beings, no matter how many times you say it or what you capitalize.

11/11/2013 11:19:53 AM

i'm using his argument against him. it is a debate technique. thanks though

[Edited on November 11, 2013 at 11:33 AM. Reason : .]

11/11/2013 11:32:45 AM

wait... killing is in no way hyperbole. that is exactly what you are doing. killing an immature human being.

and if someone wanted to kill my offspring, no matter how young they were, i would do everything i could to protect them, and i feel i should have a legal course of action to do so.

[Edited on November 11, 2013 at 11:39 AM. Reason : ]

11/11/2013 11:36:23 AM

the emphasis you put on the word KILLING implies that it's wrong. hyperbole

and you didn't answer either of my questions.

more useless roundabout "arguments"

11/11/2013 11:41:28 AM

^^ you forgot to answer this:

Quote :

"again, what if he raped her? it's still his child, and it's still an INNOCENT HUMAN BEING"

[Edited on November 11, 2013 at 11:43 AM. Reason : /q]

11/11/2013 11:43:15 AM

^ a lot of conservatives, you realize, are against abortion in cases of even rape for this same reason.

11/11/2013 11:45:03 AM

you people are trying to sidetrack the argument. of course cases of rape are different circumstances, but that's not the point. typical liberal argument: find the most indirect/irrelevant line of questioning possible and discuss nothing but that.

11/11/2013 11:45:45 AM

Quote :

"the emphasis you put on the word KILLING implies that it's wrong. hyperbole"

uhh... because it IS wrong.

[Edited on November 11, 2013 at 11:47 AM. Reason : unless it inconveniences someone. ]

11/11/2013 11:47:04 AM

no, its directly relevant, how are you not understanding this?

the reason it matters because it cuts through the reasons people say to the reasons people actually think and mean.

if you actually thought that any abortion was killing an innocent human being with full rights, then it should not be allowed even in cases of rape. if you allow it in cases of rape, then really the reason you are opposed to it is something else that you haven't said yet.

11/11/2013 11:47:17 AM

i mean if you admit that you're okay with your morality being ridiculously inconsistent, fine. no point in arguing then.

i'm pretty sure you're trolling at this point but whatever

[Edited on November 11, 2013 at 11:51 AM. Reason : .]

11/11/2013 11:50:49 AM

i don't think abortion is good ever.

i do however understand why someone who is raped would get one.

11/11/2013 11:51:23 AM

inconsistent morality? "i'm perfectly happy with someone killing a person who was conceived x weeks ago"... what's the number for x? how arbitrary is that number?

11/11/2013 11:54:14 AM

well 1) arbitrary and inconsistent don't mean the same thing and 2) it doesn't begin to respond to the position that it should be allowed because its a woman's medical decision for her own body


so if you think abortion is understandable and allowed in cases of rape, then you are not against abortion because you think the fetus is a human being with full rights. so since we have removed that argument, can you try another reason to justify being against abortion?

11/11/2013 12:00:43 PM

Quote :

"i'm using his argument against him. it is a debate technique. thanks though"

Sorry I was actually responding to Smath.

Quote :

"inconsistent morality? "i'm perfectly happy with someone killing a person who was conceived x weeks ago"... what's the number for x? how arbitrary is that number"

Take a moment and define "a person" for us.

And answer the following thought experiment: If we chopped your head off and kept it alive and let your body start decomposing, which part would be you? Why?

11/11/2013 1:14:03 PM

Quote :

"killing an immature human being. "

Why should the species matter?

11/11/2013 1:14:19 PM

Quote :

"so if you think abortion is understandable and allowed in cases of rape, then you are not against abortion because you think the fetus is a human being with full rights. so since we have removed that argument, can you try another reason to justify being against abortion?"

i can simultaneously understand something yet not agree with it.

11/11/2013 1:16:16 PM

oh, so you think it should be illegal in the case of rape you just understand why they would want an abortion?

11/11/2013 1:17:56 PM

A clumb of cells has not rights.....

11/11/2013 1:30:08 PM

Quote :

"you people are trying to sidetrack the argument. of course cases of rape are different circumstances, but that's not the point. typical liberal argument: find the most indirect/irrelevant line of questioning possible and discuss nothing but that."

It IS the point. You are the one that believes in black/white arguments like "a life is a life", "life begins at conception", "abortion is ALWAYS murder" and yet somehow when we point out the absurdity of these blanket statements, you and other pro-lifers ignore the question or come up with dumb exceptions that make your entire argument fall apart.

In the future, if you want to cling to dumb, irrational beliefs go for it. In the future, just say "I believe in the bible and the bible is against abortion"- it will save everybody loads of time.


[Edited on November 11, 2013 at 2:53 PM. Reason : .]

11/11/2013 2:47:57 PM

Is the Bible against abortion though? Ahh, nevermind that's a pointless conversation to have.

11/11/2013 4:46:52 PM

Not sure if it actually is or not (I doubt it), but that never stops people from trying to use the Bible as a trump card for any given argument. Never mind the fact that the book is FULL of contradictions and outdated models for behavior.

11/11/2013 5:00:53 PM

I have not once mentioned the bible or given my opinion on the legality of abortion (other than I think a man should have a legal say if they want to keep their child alive)

11/11/2013 7:45:06 PM

As soon as Bioscience can routinely allow a man to carry a child to term, then men will get a valid, legal say as to what occurs to and in their bodies.

11/11/2013 7:54:28 PM

Quote :

"I have not once mentioned the bible or given my opinion on the legality of abortion (other than I think a man should have a legal say if they want to keep their child alive)"

well thank you for your valuable contribution!

from now on i will only say that i think abortion is good. that is my argument and i am not willing to elaborate

11/11/2013 8:25:07 PM

i think abortion is just OK. i like it only for some people, but not others.

11/11/2013 8:28:39 PM

Quote :

"the man should do just fine taking care of it on his own."

Someone bitched at me a few pages ago for speaking hypotheticals, so don't do it here. We have no idea how a father would do taking care of a child. I would think however that if he were that serious that he would go to such lengths to try to talk the mother out of killing it, then he would be serious about raising it.

Stop it with the slut-shaming argument. I don't see how "taking responsibility for your actions" = "slut shaming." I don't consider women with a healthy sex life sluts. Maybe you do, because you keep saying it. Over and over again. But to beat the dead horse I've been beating, if you've had 4 abortions...birth control - YOU"RE DOING IT WRONG

[Edited on November 11, 2013 at 8:58 PM. Reason : rewt]

11/11/2013 8:44:08 PM

I think a man pretty much forfeits his 'say' about keeping the child the second he willingly dumps a warm, creamy deposit of semen inside a woman without a condom on. If men really wanted to have the upper hand in the negotiations, they'd be smart and not dole it out so easily. Finders/keepers and whatnot.

11/11/2013 8:50:33 PM

You can't use the argument of no birth control, because its been mentioned time and time again in this thread that birth control doesn't always work. Best laid plans and what not. Something could always go wrong. So no, the man doesn't give up his say the minute the birth control fails to work properly. Does he give up his say the minute she forgets to take her pills? Does he give up his say if the condom breaks?

11/11/2013 9:01:08 PM

The man gives up his say when he decides to bang the sloot that supports abortion.

Amirite?

11/11/2013 9:15:01 PM

Quote :

" Best laid plans "

11/11/2013 9:38:34 PM

republicans and Islamists will save the world from this scourge

11/11/2013 9:41:01 PM

I mean, if women, under Republican edict, will have to ask their employer if they can have access to birth control, then should they also have to ask their employer if they may have an abortion? Double points if their employer is male?

11/11/2013 9:52:26 PM

Quote :

"if you've had 4 abortions...birth control - YOU"RE DOING IT WRONG"

quite the equation

11/11/2013 10:35:31 PM

The bible sorted this out long ago.

Quote :

"And if it be from a month old even unto five years old, then thy estimation shall be of the male five shekels of silver, and for the female thy estimation shall be three shekels of silver. -- Leviticus 27:6"

The value of a fetus is less than five shekels of silver.

11/11/2013 10:45:03 PM

Quote :

"if you've had 4 abortions...birth control - YOU"RE DOING IT WRONG"

doing what wrong? she's had ZERO unwanted children. sounds like 100% effective to me

again, i'm sorry if her choice to have unprotected sex and then abort children she can't/won't support later bothers you, but that's between her and whatever value/beliefs she subscribes to. you aren't really in any place to judge her, but if it somehow makes you feel better about yourself to call her an irresponsible slut, go for it. perhaps the next time she gets drunk and knocked up, you can step in to take care of her unborn baby for her, or pay child support for the next 18 years of the bastard's life since you think you're a much more responsible person than she is.

11/11/2013 11:00:24 PM

Quote :

"that's between her and whatever value/beliefs she subscribes to. you aren't really in any place to judge her"

the only people allowed to judge are the ones who have my worldview. but i won't call it judging. tolerance (narrowly defined my way) sounds better. and if you have a different worldview, well... you're judging!

you see, what i do with my body only affects me, because every man is an island you know. and because abortion is about my body only, when you ignore the whole murdering-a-developing-person thing.

but seriously, all this talk about pro-lifers allowing for abortion in the case of rape and that not making sense. my position, and the position of many, is defensible. the fetus is a person. and so it shouldn't be murdered. not even in rape. because it's a person. inconvenience, heart ache, life-altering circumstances aren't an excuse to kill someone. If it were, I know a lot of people that should be killed. They just make life so unnecessarily hard for others!

http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/tgc/2013/10/21/why-we-should-legalize-murder-for-hire/?comments#comments

the only exception might be when the pregnancy or birth would be clearly life-threatening. If one person has to die, who should you choose? Murder is never ok, but when nature or life presents a situation where one will absolutely not survive, and you have to choose, there are no easy answers. For the other circumstances of abortion, the baby is a human so the answers are much easier, no matter how we want to convolute our morals and vocabulary and desensitize an entire culture to mask the truth. I think it's safe to say, though, that those instances make up less than 0.05% of total abortions in this country, and if all of the other cases were outlawed, that'd be great progress.

[Edited on November 12, 2013 at 12:55 AM. Reason : ]

11/12/2013 12:39:30 AM