A question for anti-choicers

Yurt said:
what about the male that created the life? he has no say despite being half responsible for the creation of the baby?
Click to expand...

Many males faced with unwanted pregnancies encourage the woman to have an abortion. Their moral standards vs. their wallets, and the wallet usually wins out.
 
Yurt said:
hate to break it to you, but a woman can't simply make a baby either

its not slavery, if she willingly chose to have sex.....if you willingly eat a fat burrito from taco bell and get the shits, is it slavery you have to sit on the throne for hours? did taco bell enslave your ass on the porcelain throne?
Click to expand...

Did the man willingly choose to have sex? If so, why didn't he take precautions for his own sake, if not the woman's.
 
Yurt said:
good points...it is a very complex issue and since it deals with life or potential life, a very emotional issue. to those who believe life begins at conception, that the state allows abortion is tantamount to the state allowing murder...i can see what you're saying about teh very early stages due to the fact i do not know exactly when life begins, but i'm with you in leaning heavily against the middle, later stages....my best friend's wife is due in a month, they've seen the sonograms and i can't help but believe that if (they would never) she aborted now simply because she didn't want the child, that this would not be murder

something i've never understood is: how can abortion be legal, but someone who is not the mother or doctor, kills the unborn child and gets charged with murder
Click to expand...

She couldn't just abort at will during the third trimester.
 
christiefan915 said:
Did the man willingly choose to have sex? If so, why didn't he take precautions for his own sake, if not the woman's.
Click to expand...

irrelevant to the discussion of that post, i believe watermark or someone claimed forcing a woman to carry a baby to term is slavery....surely you saw that as you read my post...

therefore, it matters not about the man....do you think it is slavery to force a woman to carry a baby to term?
 
christiefan915 said:
Many males faced with unwanted pregnancies encourage the woman to have an abortion. Their moral standards vs. their wallets, and the wallet usually wins out.
Click to expand...

is english your first language? you seem to not understand what people are talking about.....

i never said men don't want women to have abortions, i was talking about the man's right to choose what happens to the baby
 
Yurt said:
irrelevant to the discussion of that post, i believe watermark or someone claimed forcing a woman to carry a baby to term is slavery....surely you saw that as you read my post...

therefore, it matters not about the man....do you think it is slavery to force a woman to carry a baby to term?
Click to expand...

I'll chime in; I don't know about the characterization of "slavery", but it's certainly Draconian. When I read someone like PMP, I wonder if they have ever even known anyone who was pregnant, and what it entails to not just get through the pregnancy, but the birth process, as well.

I honestly can't imagine a state that would force a woman to carry a fetus to term under any & all circumstances. It would be difficult to argue that as an advancement of freedom.
 
Onceler said:
What would the opposite be?

Life DOES begin at conception. But is the life just after conception a fully realized human being, or can it be classified as a human being? Is the acorn a tree? Does a clump of cells have the same rights as an independent person?

The debate is more than definitions from Webster's dictionary.
Click to expand...

see... there you go... that is what I have been saying.... the last question is the one we should be debating. That is the issue.

To answer your first two questions...

Yes... for the 1000000000th time... it IS a human being. Not sure what you mean by fully realized.

No... an acorn is not a tree, no more than a baby is an adult. But genetically speaking the acorn and the tree are both OAK and the baby and adult are both HUMAN.
 
Superfreak said:
see... there you go... that is what I have been saying.... the last question is the one we should be debating. That is the issue.

To answer your first two questions...

Yes... for the 1000000000th time... it IS a human being. Not sure what you mean by fully realized.

No... an acorn is not a tree, no more than a baby is an adult. But genetically speaking the acorn and the tree are both OAK and the baby and adult are both HUMAN.
Click to expand...

Why do you keep referring to the zygote as a baby? A zygote is not a baby, just as a baby is not an adult.

And, as I said before, if they passed a law protecting trees in a certain area, you wouldn't be breaking that law by destroying an acorn.

That's what "fully realized" means. A zygote is not a person, just as an acorn is not a tree.
 
Onceler said:
There is no sentience, no viability, no nervous system or brain development, no consciousness - and no, this isn't the same as someone in a coma.

There are other factors at work, particularly in the debate about "personhood"; no - a clump of cells does NOT meet many of the standards that are involved in that discussion.
Click to expand...

See... now THIS is where the debate truly lies... in the arbitrary...
 
PostmodernProphet said:
I don't need consensus....I only need a court order.....we currently don't have consensus but abortion is legal....eventually we won't have consensus but abortion will be illegal....
Click to expand...

Conservatives have had 36 years to get up a movement to overturn Roe v. Wade but it hasn't happened. Why? Because conservatives support and have abortions, too.
 
Yurt said:
irrelevant to the discussion of that post, i believe watermark or someone claimed forcing a woman to carry a baby to term is slavery....surely you saw that as you read my post...

therefore, it matters not about the man....do you think it is slavery to force a woman to carry a baby to term?
Click to expand...

The term "slavery" may be his rhetorical device to make a point, but NOBODY should be able to force a woman to carry a baby to term.
 
Onceler said:
I'll chime in; I don't know about the characterization of "slavery", but it's certainly Draconian. When I read someone like PMP, I wonder if they have ever even known anyone who was pregnant, and what it entails to not just get through the pregnancy, but the birth process, as well.

I honestly can't imagine a state that would force a woman to carry a fetus to term under any & all circumstances. It would be difficult to argue that as an advancement of freedom.
Click to expand...

i guess laws forcing people not to beat their children are against the advancement of freedom as well....shouldn't parents be able to beat their children to make them obedient.....

if the life aborted is human as you've said, then aborting that human life, according to the laws we have regarding murder, should be illegal
 
Onceler said:
Why do you keep referring to the zygote as a baby? A zygote is not a baby, just as a baby is not an adult.

And, as I said before, if they passed a law protecting trees in a certain area, you wouldn't be breaking that law by destroying an acorn.

That's what "fully realized" means. A zygote is not a person, just as an acorn is not a tree.
Click to expand...

Sorry... my fault... Both the ZYGOTE and the ADULT are human (as you yourself stated) and BOTH the ACORN and the TREE are OAK.

Your analogy again fails because you keep trying to equate "tree" to "human". The proper comparison is either "tree" to "adult" or "OAK" to "HUMAN"

Again... stating a "zygote is not a person" is the arbitrary portion. The term "person" is completely subjective and as I have said before. THIS is the area where a debate can actually occur.

I don't think our views are all that far off on where the debate should be. Other than your hang up with actually realizing the zygote is human, alive and in existence and thus by definition a human being.

As for whether it is a 'person' and thus entitled to basic rights provided by the Constitution... THAT is where the debate lies.
 
Onceler said:
When I read someone like PMP, I wonder if they have ever even known anyone who was pregnant, and what it entails to not just get through the pregnancy, but the birth process, as well.
Click to expand...

I have known two women who were pregnant and chose to carry the child to birth and place it for adoption.....I raised those children to adulthood and thank both women for the opportunity.....
 
christiefan915 said:
The term "slavery" may be his rhetorical device to make a point, but NOBODY should be able to force a woman to carry a baby to term.
Click to expand...

what about the man's rights? its his child too....the state makes the man pay child support if he leaves....yet we don't allow the man a say in whether the child lives....

as i said, if she willingly chose to have sex, she can't complain about getting pregnant....we certaintly force parents to raise their kids without abuse, feed them, clothe them.....why don't you demand NOBODY force parents to feed or clothe their children or take them to school?
 
Yurt said:
is english your first language? you seem to not understand what people are talking about.....

i never said men don't want women to have abortions, i was talking about the man's right to choose what happens to the baby
Click to expand...

Is reading comprehension your problem? "The man's right to choose what happens..." often translates to the man asking, demanding, urging, etc. the woman to have an abortion because he doesn't want the financial responsibility of an unwanted pregnancy.

But if that's too nuanced for you, then the B&W answer is no, the man cannot demand that the woman carry a pregnancy to term.
 
Onceler said:
Why do you keep referring to the zygote as a baby? A zygote is not a baby, just as a baby is not an adult.

And, as I said before, if they passed a law protecting trees in a certain area, you wouldn't be breaking that law by destroying an acorn.

That's what "fully realized" means. A zygote is not a person, just as an acorn is not a tree.
Click to expand...

a human being is not a tree.....we don't chop down human beings and build houses out of them....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top