Original question: Why should an unconscious fetus be afforded human rights?

Your response: Because people have rights.


????

3/22/2011 8:40:39 PM

well, there you go.

then again, that original question was improper anyway, as, like I said, rights are not given by any government

3/22/2011 8:44:49 PM

right. they're instilled in us by our Creator. gotcha.

3/22/2011 8:48:16 PM

some would say that. I do not.

3/22/2011 8:49:03 PM

weren't you supporting the death penalty in another thread? if the government doesn't give us rights why can they take them away?

3/22/2011 9:17:54 PM

I'd say the gov't doesn't "take them away," either. Rather, the people require the gov't to respect some rights while not doing so with others. The people, however, can get lax, and let the gov't ignore its obligations. I'm sure you've seen that before...

btw, how is the death penalty related to "taking away rights?" Our gov't is only required not to deprive someone of life, liberty, or property without due process.

3/22/2011 9:44:55 PM

i was actually referring to the unaleinable rights our founding fathers described, first of which is life.

but no, due process does not remove your rights.

Quote :

"Rather, the people require the gov't to respect some rights while not doing so with others."

so then even by your confusing logic, there would be no problem with the government not respecting the rights of fetuses and allowing abortions if the people require it.

3/22/2011 10:28:46 PM

Quote :

"they're instilled in us by our Creator."

I would be more amicable to the anti-abortion position if the action of adults had no impact on the creation of new humans.

3/23/2011 12:10:41 AM

Quote :

"Is a fertilized human egg a human life burro?"

Answer the question or admit defeat.

3/23/2011 8:15:06 AM

Respect for life only makes sense in the first place where there's some other autonomy that you may be treading on in order to do something. It's like in Speaker for the Dead, when Pequeninos do all kinds of crazy and cruel things things in their reproductive cycle. It's not that it's wrong, it's just that they're alien.

3/23/2011 8:33:18 AM

Quote :

"well, now we've got a circular argument A human is capable of human consciousness."

You're a damned moron. I'm explaining the difference between an underdeveloped neural tube and a developed brain with synapses capable of consciousness.

Quote :

"Actually, no. Your finger is not alive. it is a part of you, which is alive."

Since your definition of life appears to be "contains living cells" my finger is very much alive. Or are you suggesting that an embryo can survive and maintain independent homeostasis when it is not a part of the mother? Because if "not being a part of something else" is your definition of "alive" then you just lost.

Quote :

"The question of "what makes a human a human" has been asked for thousands of years. I seriously doubt we will arrive at the answer in this thread..."

Decartes said it nearly 400 years ago, "cogito ergo sum". It has been proven that the working brain is sole organ responsible for consciousness, identity, memory, personality, and everything that differentiates you from a cadaver.

You're welcome to throw your hands and give up thinking, but if you'd like to have a conversation with the adults I'd suggest otherwise.

Quote :

"If that's what you took from it, then you might want to brush up on your reading comprehension skills."

aaronburro

Quote :

"But, I think at the point you know you are pregnant, no matter when, you then are responsible for the choice you make with regards to a human life, as it is no longer a question of "if." It's no longer a question of prevention. It's now a matter of life."

Taking pills to prevent implantation or force a miscarriage is knowingly making the choice.

3/23/2011 9:09:31 AM

I'd be in favor of a national referendum to settle the issue once and for all, where only women are allowed to vote.

Men can vote on whether or not we'll allow male genital manipulation.

3/23/2011 10:42:22 AM

Surely you meant mutilation. It'll be a cold day in hell before they stop men from manipulating their genitals.

3/23/2011 10:45:06 AM

we proclaimith that if you shall shaketith more than twice it shall be deemed play

3/23/2011 12:52:12 PM

Quote :

"Since your definition of life appears to be "contains living cells" my finger is very much alive."

hmmm, strawman. nice

Quote :

"but no, due process does not remove your rights. "

correct, it does not. but, our nation says that the gov't can infringe on those rights via due process. as in, a trial.

Quote :

"so then even by your confusing logic, there would be no problem with the government not respecting the rights of fetuses and allowing abortions if the people require it."

maybe, maybe not. If there were a Constitutional amendment, then sure.

Quote :

"You're a damned moron"

for pointing out a circular argument? hardly.

Quote :

"Taking pills to prevent implantation or force a miscarriage is knowingly making the choice."

True, but you are doing it before the conception event, which, to me, makes a difference. You could not use BC and never get pregnant. Thus, the taking of BC would have had no effect in that instance. Again, it's a matter of knowing versus not knowing. And I look at it as a matter of prevention, which, to me, is responsible, as opposed to after the fact saying "eh, fuck it, I'm not gonna accept the consequences."

Quote :

"Answer the question or admit defeat."

Nice false dilemma there, buddy. Either I submit to all your random, ever changing questions, or I am wrong? hahaha. You still won't admit that you have changed the fucking question. Yet want me to answer the new one. You are hilarious.

Quote :

"I'd be in favor of a national referendum to settle the issue once and for all, where only women are allowed to vote."

To do such a thing is to already say what the desired outcome is. Abortion affects more than just a woman. To suggest otherwise is to say that it is, in fact, only the woman's body in question. Considering that that is the item in question, it would seem a bit disingenuous to set up a method of getting people's opinion when the method already assumes an answer.

3/23/2011 4:54:29 PM

not a strawman, not a circular argument, and it appears you understand very little about emergency contraception, fertilization, implantation, or hominid embryology. Given your obvious disdain for science I'm not surprised.

How is preventing implantation or forcing a miscarraige "doing it before the conception event"? Do you understand the process that occurs when fertilization occurs and what these pills actually do? They either prevent a fertilized egg (a life according to the definition you've been not fully addressing in this thread) from implanting or they break the implantation and cause a miscarriage.

Fertilization (what you're referring to as conception) occurs very shortly after intercourse. Knowingly taking pills to prevent pregnancy at this point will end up destroying at the very least a zygote, and possibly an embryo.

In short, you are making absolutely no sense and are refusing to clarify.

Quote :

"To do such a thing is to already say what the desired outcome is. Abortion affects more than just a woman. To suggest otherwise is to say that it is, in fact, only the woman's body in question. Considering that that is the item in question, it would seem a bit disingenuous to set up a method of getting people's opinion when the method already assumes an answer."

wat? You declare by fiat that abortion affects more than just a woman without explaining your reasoning. Are you claiming that men have rights to the zygote/embryo/fetus that trump the woman's right to her own body? Or are you suggesting that the zygote/embryo/fetus has rights that trump the woman's right to her own body?

Because from where I'm standing abortion does only affect the woman going through the medical procedure. This is like saying we need to consider outlawing all surgery, because someone else may be affected by your choice to have surgery. The only person going under the knife (this is a metaphor before you try to be cute) is the woman.

[Edited on March 23, 2011 at 5:26 PM. Reason : .]

3/23/2011 5:24:06 PM

Quote :

"and it appears you understand very little about emergency contraception, fertilization, implantation, or hominid embryology. "

This is obviously true given his insistence that my "question has changed". The entire premise of my line of questioning was to ask burro if the termination of a fertilized egg (morning after pill has the potential to do this) is the same as killing a new born infant. He has refused to even begin answering this question. Either he is extremely ignorant or even he has a problem with the logic of a fertilized egg being a human being just like a newborn infant.

3/23/2011 7:20:44 PM

Quote :

"To do such a thing is to already say what the desired outcome is. Abortion affects more than just a woman. To suggest otherwise is to say that it is, in fact, only the woman's body in question. Considering that that is the item in question, it would seem a bit disingenuous to set up a method of getting people's opinion when the method already assumes an answer."

Equalize child custody rights. I'll admit trolling to the extend that, of course, men don't have 0% relevance to abortion decisions. But the matter of bringing a new human into this world sure isn't a 50%/50% between men and women, and we don't treat almost anything regarding incubation or upbringing as such.

In fact, I don't think I even suggested that there was nothing more than the woman's body in question. All I said was that women should decide the law on abortion. If you can make the case against abortion, is there anything preventing a woman from making the same arguments and thinking the same thing?

Ok, so next you're going to say "no, it's about the democratic rights that should be shared equally"

To which I saw "get your laws off her body!"

3/23/2011 8:21:50 PM

Quote :

"not a strawman"

actually, yeah it is... show me where I said "anything with cells is a separate, living entity." Yeah, I didn't.

Quote :

"and it appears you understand very little about emergency contraception, fertilization, implantation, or hominid embryology."

Actually, I understand it very well.

Quote :

"Given your obvious disdain for science I'm not surprised."

I have a disdain for science? Really? I never knew that. Must be because I don't buy the bullshit line that the earth is going to boil over unless we get rid of a trace gas.

Quote :

"How is preventing implantation or forcing a miscarraige "doing it before the conception event"? "

Assuming that you are talking about BC, it is because you are taking the action, itself, before the conception event.

Quote :

"You declare by fiat that abortion affects more than just a woman without explaining your reasoning."

Because, maybe, just maybe, there is another life involved. DURRR.

Quote :

"Are you claiming that men have rights to the zygote/embryo/fetus that trump the woman's right to her own body? Or are you suggesting that the zygote/embryo/fetus has rights that trump the woman's right to her own body?"

Who said anything about any one having rights that trump any one else's rights? Another strawman. good work!

Quote :

"The only person going under the knife (this is a metaphor before you try to be cute) is the woman."

Sure, if we ignore the thing that is about to be cut up and have its brains sucked out by a vacuum cleaner. Remember this little guy?

Quote :

"This is obviously true given his insistence that my "question has changed"."

Let's see... let's show you your original question.

Quote :

"Answer this question. Is removing a fertalized egg from a womans womb immediately after conception the same thing as killing a freshly born infant. I am truly trying to understand how your logic works."

http://www.thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=566663&page=3#14653404
which magically morphed to this:

Quote :

"Is a fertilized human egg a human life burro?"

http://www.thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=566663&page=3#14653876

Not even close to being the same question. so shut the fuck up.

Quote :

"In fact, I don't think I even suggested that there was nothing more than the woman's body in question."

To let the question only be answered by women most certainly does suggest a thing. Which was my whole point. It would be tantamount to saying "since it is only a woman's body in question here, should abortion be allowed?" Well, an underlying part of the discussion is whether or not there is more to it than just a woman's body. Otherwise, why limit it solely to women? What's that you were about to say?

Quote :

"He has refused to even begin answering this question."

No, I answered the original question. you then decided to morph the question because you did not like my answer. Moreover, I am talking about abortion, which tends be a discussion about the physical removal of a fetus from the uterus. I've also made it abundantly clear that I've been discussing fetu, not a fertilized egg. Thus, you are merely diverting the topic.

3/25/2011 8:54:00 PM

^
Why do you keep posting that disgusting picture? No one in this thread has argued for late-term abortion.

3/25/2011 9:22:10 PM

to dispell the myth that only a woman's body is involved, maybe? Or are you just ashamed to admit that this is the face of what you support

3/25/2011 9:48:21 PM

Quote :

"No one in this thread has argued for late-term abortion"

3/25/2011 9:49:12 PM

Actually the original question was:

Quote :

" I think most everyone would be ok with banning late stage abortions (unless significant risk to mothers life or extreme extenuating circumstances). However a clump of fucking cells is not a baby and scraping out a clump of cells shouldn't be equated to killing a human. Do you think the morning after pill is just as wrong as waiting till a baby is born and choking it out? "

Your attempt to dodge the central premise of the question:

Quote :

"^^ you are nothing more than a "clump of cells.""

Because you were being deliberately obtuse I continued along the same central premise:

Quote :

""Answer this question. Is removing a fertalized egg from a womans womb immediately after conception the same thing as killing a freshly born infant. I am truly trying to understand how your logic works.""

Your 2nd attempt to dodge:

Quote :

"What part of "one you know you are pregnant, the other you don't" doesn't make sense to you?"

Therefore I tried to make it as blatant as possible:

Quote :

""Is a fertilized human egg a human life burro?""

So no the question hasn't changed you just can't find a way to dance around the central premise anymore so of course you are trying to distract.

In other words quit playing games and answer the fucking question burro.

[Edited on March 25, 2011 at 9:54 PM. Reason : I wish I could go back in time and give burro's mom a coat hanger. ]

3/25/2011 9:52:58 PM

Quote :

"Your attempt to dodge the central premise of the question:"

not a dodge at all. I never even tried to answer that question. nice.

Quote :

"Your 2nd attempt to dodge:"

How did I dodge the question by directly answering what you asked? WTF, dude. You asked if something, I pointed out I had already answered it in another post. Weak Sauce.

Quote :

"So no the question hasn't changed"

Actually, yes. You, yourself have proven that it changed. Thank you

3/25/2011 10:16:57 PM

Still no answer. I wish I could say I was surprised. Looks like you lost this one

3/26/2011 12:12:07 AM

Sorry for the double post but this seemed like a good reason to revive this discussion:
http://www.wral.com/news/state/nccapitol/story/9578448/
basically it is bill that would require a 24 hour waiting period and an ultrasound before an abortion is allowed. My question is who the fuck is paying for this? It is an unnecessary medical procedure that is being forced upon people simply to help guilt trip them into keeping a baby they don't want and furthering the worlds horrible population problem. great fucking job

5/11/2011 8:51:44 AM

I don't think it's a double-post when it's two months apart.

5/11/2011 9:00:59 AM

Quote :

"My question is who the fuck is paying for this?"

The one having the abortion, undoubtedly.

Several other states are passing/pushing for the same legislation. Bev Perdue will veto it.

5/11/2011 9:07:11 AM

I know. how dare someone have to actually think about the life they are about to murder. what a terrible thing!

5/11/2011 7:15:03 PM

QUIET you fetus hotlinking cunt!

5/11/2011 7:30:18 PM

Quote :

"I know. how dare someone have to actually think about the life they are about to murder. what a terrible thing!"

I know. how dare someone mind their own fucking business and not attempt to force their subjective moral beliefs on others. what a terrible thing!

5/11/2011 8:07:22 PM

I think 3 or 4 more dead baby pics will change my stance on abortion. Maybe more, I dunno.

5/11/2011 8:08:34 PM

Quote :

"I know. how dare someone mind their own fucking business and not attempt to force their subjective moral beliefs on others."

yep. there should be no laws against murder. How dare you say I can't kill someone. mind your own fucking business!
yep. there should be no laws against theft. How dare you say I can't steal someone else's shit. mind your own fucking business!

what a terrible thing!

^ nothing will change the mind of someone who can devalue human life when it is inconvenient

5/11/2011 8:10:26 PM

how does abortion inconvenience me exactly?

dont bother explaining- i know i dont get it. i wont get it until one of the four horsemen carves "babykiller" into my ass.

5/11/2011 8:22:38 PM

Don't steal my unborn fetus' possessions!!111

5/11/2011 8:27:18 PM

^^ Except murder is defined as killing another human and not the killing of a fetus.

5/11/2011 9:04:19 PM

old fetuses never die; they just fade away.

[Edited on May 11, 2011 at 9:23 PM. Reason : i]

5/11/2011 9:23:12 PM

That was directed at burro.

5/11/2011 9:50:26 PM

This angers me to no end. What many don't realize (sadly) is that not all abortions are wanted. To force someone to wait for a termination and have an ultrasound to look at their deformed child, or even a child that might kill them by continuing the pregnancy, is wrong and sad. I also can't help but wonder what will happen to the women who will be pushed into the "no longer legal" category due to having to wait 24 hours. There is a time frame for legal abortions in NC and sometimes terminations are decided the last day possible. (Hopefully that all makes sense.)

Even if there is not a medical issue at hand, to have someone do this is ridiculous. What do they really think they're going to accomplish? Even if you look at this from a monetary standpoint, guilting a woman terminating for a specific reason (i.e., severely malformed child) will actually cost more in the end and will cause the child more harm if it has to suffer. I can't help but wonder if these people have ever seen how much one day costs to stay in the NICU..


(Just a side note: I haven't read the whole bill so I'm not sure if they have exclusion criteria or whatever, but I wanted to rant.)

5/11/2011 10:54:22 PM

I don't have a problem with very early term (like first few weeks) abortions...like, the RU-486 variety where you pretty much just cause the miscarriage of a lump of cells.

I also think that about 98% of abortions should be done at this stage. If you're going to wait around until you have a little human being on your hands, I think you kinda missed the boat and shouldn't be allowed to mangle and kill him/her.

5/11/2011 11:19:40 PM

But for many medical cases, you can't even tell something's wrong until you're past the first trimester. What then? (Unless of course you just mean other abortions not dealing w/ medical issues... if so, ignore me )

5/11/2011 11:24:54 PM

Quote :

"how does abortion inconvenience me exactly? dont bother explaining- i know i dont get it. i wont get it until one of the four horsemen carves "babykiller" into my ass."

how does murder inconvenience me? I'll probably never be murdered, and I'll never murder anyone, either. no need for laws against it

Quote :

"Except murder is defined as killing another human and not the killing of a fetus."

too bad a human fetus is, by definition, a human. DOH!

Quote :

"To force someone to wait for a termination and have an ultrasound to look at their deformed child, or even a child that might kill them by continuing the pregnancy, is wrong and sad. "

Yep, because that is 100% of abortions these days. yep.

Quote :

"What do they really think they're going to accomplish?"

Maybe make someone thing about the fact that they are about to murder a human being because they couldn't shut their fucking legs or use birth control? Maybe cause them to alter their future decisions?

5/11/2011 11:49:18 PM

I realize you're trolling, but it's important to note that I think even you would be surprised by the amount of terminations performed for a medical reason. You're less likely to hear about them because, well, who really wants to talk about the loss of a pregnancy they actually wanted?

And what about rape cases?

[Edited on May 11, 2011 at 11:53 PM. Reason : .]

5/11/2011 11:52:23 PM

what about the even less statistically significant rape cases? you mean the ones where, if you go to the fucking police, they give you the morning after pill and you have nothing to worry about? seriously, everyone knows that almost all abortions are performed because people didn't think about what they were doing before they did it. let's not make policy on the extreme cases that are the exception, rather than the rule

[Edited on May 11, 2011 at 11:58 PM. Reason : ]

5/11/2011 11:56:23 PM

Hah, k. I hope you're trolling.

PS the morning after pill is not always offered.

5/11/2011 11:58:49 PM

Quote :

"(Unless of course you just mean other abortions not dealing w/ medical issues... if so, ignore me"

yes, that's what i mean.

5/12/2011 12:04:04 AM

well, then, it should be.

look, rape and incest are quoted at, at most, 1% of abortions. And even that is questionable, as most statistics seem to suggest it is around .4-.5%, with a few outliers pushing the average up. The same goes for health of the mother and fetal abnormalities, with the average being slightly higher, again due to outliers.
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/abreasons.html

so please, forgive me if I am not crying a river for the absurd reasons you give for allowing abortions to be performed. You wanna make exceptions for these cases, I can get down with that. But let's not pretend that the overwhelming majority of abortions, well over 95%, are because people just couldn't stop fucking.

5/12/2011 12:06:42 AM

1% of all abortions is still a LOT of abortions

5/12/2011 9:34:33 AM

^^
Is the morning after pill only acceptable if you're raped?

5/12/2011 9:57:50 AM

I seriously think you're underestimating how many terminations are due to medical reasons.

When you think of not only things going wrong with the baby, but also things like the mother having an autoimmune disease (more common than you think), preeclampsia, Rh-, infection, placental causes... it adds up.

I also don't think people realize how common some things are. Neural tube defects are about 3-4/1000 births in Alabama (typically 1/1000 in the southeast) and Down syndrome is 1/700 births. Most pregnancies with an NTD are terminated because few can survive, and many Down syndrome cases include very bad things like extreme holes in their heart and many other problems.


I also don't understand how you could ever have an accurate number for medical and rape cases. Not every termination is going to be reported to a research study.

5/12/2011 10:30:11 AM