abortion

D!ve^Bomb!

Originally posted by Lemming
Just as well as you know him or anyone else yet feel the absolute right to pontificate on how to live their lives.

i am merely expressing an opinion that states that abortion is wrong when used as a 'way out' from facing the consequences of ones own actions

Originally posted by Lemming
"Money talks, Bullsh*t walks". It's easy to stand there and say 'x' when you aren't (nor plan to be) facing it.

I would wager a very real likelihood that if _she_ were have an unplanned pregnancy she wouldn't be feeling so resolute.

i would agree, BUT, being the kind, generous, loving, selfless person she is, she would think about the child inside of her rather than herself, and see it as wrong to make that unborn child pay for OUR irresponsabilty, believe it or not there are some nice people in this world.

Originally posted by Lemming
It's her body that will undergo changes that neither you nor I can possibly fathom. All this "we" business is b*llocks. You'll be there for her, but make no mistake about it. "YOU" are not pregnant. "WE" are not pregnant. "Your girlfriend" is, and "YOU" are supporting her.

why do you continue to take everything i am saying into a literal context

Originally posted by Lemming
Yes. yes you are. You make such a flippant remark about what is an extremely tragic and terrible thing and then dare to pontificate.

it is also a remark that is 100% fact, i'm sorry but the truth hurts,

D!ve^Bomb!

Originally posted by dr_manhattan
"exactly wot am i guessing about,"

What it is like to have an abortion.

i never guessed wot it is like to have an abortion

Originally posted by dr_manhattan
"i never said its a perfect world, people do have problems, but a lot of the time people bring these problems on themselves.. and continue to punnish others(unborn children) for wot they have done."

No, what you said was "I don't care how bad the remorse is, abortion is the easy way out" or something very close. This is an example of the guessing you are asking about above. You have no experience of this thing that you say is so wrong: and to say that 'a lot of the time' and 'some people' is a big change here from 'abortion is wrong'.

i never said abortion is wrong in all cases, as i said before, if u would take the time to read all my posts u would know that.

Originally posted by dr_manhattan
"Now, as to the rest of what you've said, the only things you've actually replied to are the dumb points. You are the one that insists on posting "WE" (your caps) in regard to pregnancy, hence my pointing out that no "WE" ever gets pregnant: I believe that many men make it sound more like it's their issue by saying "we", and it's incorrect..

i know its not just the mans issue, thats exactly why i said ''we'', meaning both people involved.

Originally posted by dr_manhattan
As regards knowing you, sorry but I was being sarcastic: I obviously know nothing about you except what you've told me, and I never made any criticisms based on this. Your profile tells me you're 20, and I think it's rich that someone so young speaks with such authority on abortion, and feels that they have a right to say what's right and wrong.

(and before you point out that 30 isn't too old either, I'd remind you that my position is to not tell anyone what to do with their pregnancies. Pro choice is a non-opinion, see previous post.)..

first of all, i am stating wot I think is wrong, and secondly, dont patronize me by saying that i am too 'young' to have, and express my own opinion, that is just lame and weak and totally pointless, i am not the only one with this opinion and we are not all 20 for gods sake.

Originally posted by dr_manhattan
next, the confusing couplet:

"yes she agrees and the law isn't always right, in this case it is wrong"

"...that is something that should be addressed properly by the law, and i have spoken to my gf bout this, and she WOULDN'T have an abortion, even if she was raped"

So the law is wrong when it doesn't suit you, but fine when it does?

err yes, all the laws in the world should coincide with all my beliefs, that's wot i said

Originally posted by dr_manhattan
And by the way, your willingness to volunteer opinions on pregnancy without having any experience of it is staggering: but do me a favour and leave rape out of this. Your GF may think she knows about rape, but she does not. Believe me, rape and its consequences change a lot of things, is all you can do in terms of through process to just sit there and go "IF x happens, then I would do this: IF y happens, then I would NEVER do this"

i'm sick of the argument ''if u haven't experienced it then u haven't got a clue'', thats just plain stupid. I belive that u are right, after rape then morals may change for some people, but there ARE people who would still choose to keep a baby none the less because they believe it is wrong to punnish it for the wrong doings of another man, you cannot deny this

Originally posted by dr_manhattan
"abortion is the termination of a pregnancy of an unwanted CHILD,"

no, it is the termination of unwanted pregnancy. In the first trimester there is nothing resembling a child in the womb, there is just a potential child. That's like saying that jumping up and down on a beach is destroying a bunch of unmade glass - if you stop the pregnancy, no child.

yes but u will aborting a process that has already begun, just because it doesn't resemble a child, doesn't mean it wont resemble one, wot about if a women was 6months into her pregnancy and decided that she didn't care and took some pills washed down with a bottle of JD to cause a miscarrage, wot then? will people just say, ah well, if she didn't want it then its ok then?? when is it wrong to abort a child, when they have an arm? a leg? a heart?

Originally posted by dr_manhattan
By the way, if your GF wanted to terminate, that's 50% in favour and 50% against - so what would happen?

First off, you mentioned the law (the one you say is wrong), but this isn't a question of law, this is maths:

if you have 50% control and want to have the kid
but your GF has 50% and wants to terminate, then:
who has the casting vote? Cos 50% v 50% is stalemate. How does that work?.

well obviously its a tricky situation, and all options would have to be considered, i would be assuming that if a guy wants to fight for his own babies right to live then he would also be more than willing enough to support this child if on his own if needs be, and if that is the case, then why should the women be allowed to abort if the child will be in a good home with a loving father..

Originally posted by dr_manhattan
And finally, the questions you really didn't answer at all:

Why do you want to take people who are in hell and make them feel worse for what they've done? Why do you assume that you know what it feels like to lose a child for ANY reason?

thats not me thats making them feel bad, thats their guilty conscience eating away at them.

Originally posted by dr_manhattan
Have you ever bought a homeless person some food or given them a room for the night? Or do you do volunteer work or charity work at all? because it strikes me that maybe, just MAYBE, you could be as kind to unwanted kids after birth as you seem to want to be before birth. It seems to me that clumps of cells mean more to you than human beings.

yes, i do give to charity, i do give homeless people money, i do let little old ladies and pregnant women sit down on the bus when there are no seats. but even if i didn't do these things, it doesn't make abortion any less wrong

Lemming

Originally posted by newband
i am merely expressing an opinion that states that abortion is wrong when used as a 'way out' from facing the consequences of ones own actions

you're fully entitled to that opinion. That is all it is. An opinion by somebody who, quite frankly, doesn't have have a jaffa about what they're on about.

I don't pretend to know what people should or should not do in such a situation, yet you continue to pontificate on something you know squat about.

i would agree, BUT, being the kind, generous, loving, selfless person she is, she would think about the child inside of her rather than herself, and see it as wrong to make that unborn child pay for OUR irresponsabilty, believe it or not there are some nice people in this world.

Again, my above comment about money and bullsh*t stands. Easy to say x, y, z until you are facing the situation and I honestly think that this is something that you are simply not grasping.

Nice or not has nothing to do with this. Having an abortion doesn't make you any less of a person and to make light of something that (I would imagine) the vast majority of people go through the emotional wringer over is simply sickening and very callous.

why do you continue to take everything i am saying into a literal context

Because that's the way that you would appear to be arguing it. Black or white. Sadly, life is not quite so ordered and is very much a thousand shades of grey in between.

it is also a remark that is 100% fact, i'm sorry but the truth hurts,

No, that's not 'truth'. That's a flippant, cynical, demeaning remark about a tragic reality. There's truth, and then there's uncaring ruthlessness. Are you one of these people who condones putting aborted foetus pictures up outside a girl's PRIMARY school?

Amz

I'm going to have to go with what Lemming and dr manhattan have said, as they seem to have put accross far better a few of the points I tried in vain to make.

Lemming makes a good point about the pictures of aborted foetuses being placed in prominent positions outside girls schools and other such places. I think that's disgusting! The fact that these people are on the main street of our capital city at any hour of the day forcing people to look at such images is downright wrong! If someone tried to put that sort of thing on TV during the day when kids are likely to see it, you can be damn sure it'd be disallowed! The fact that it is allowed on public streets needs to be stopped. These pro lifers have no right to educate/shock kids or anyone for that matter in such a way!

Why is nothing done about it?

Why are the same sort of censorship laws which govern what children are able to see on TV etc. applied to our public places?

I was walking in town with my 12 year old brother when a Pro Life campaigner thrust an image of an aborted foetus into my brothers hand and started to rant at him! I would have swung for this man had my brother not been so young. Noone has the right to behave in such a manner. What gives him the right to think that he should be allowed to "educate" my brother?

Something needs to be done about this, but I don't see it happening any time soon.
*shrug*

ixoy

Pictures of aborted foetuses are disgusting and far too zealot like. They do nothing for their arguments at all with their inflammatory actions. I may not agree with abortion, in principle, but I don't agree with their methodology.

Now one of the general arguments here is that, given that the majoriy of posters are men, we can't really argue the merits of the emotional/physical trauma of having a baby. There's probably something to be said about that, much the same way we can all la-de-da about drug abuse/extreme poverty-linking-crime and so forth from our warm chairs. Given this, would all the pro-life males here be willing to - if they had the option somehow (it's meant to be theoretically plausible) carry a child? The argument would be more balanced if we were given the option: should we take it?

Myg

This thread is totaly sickening, the amount of people here that would murder another human being just cause it makes them/someone feel bad is totaly appaling. How is that different from ethnic cleansing, mass murder and genocide? Feelings arnt important here, its doing the right thing that matters, and killing is wrong, period. Simple truth.

embee

This thread is totaly sickening, the amount of people here that would murder another human being just cause it makes them/someone feel bad is totaly appaling. How is that different from ethnic cleansing, mass murder and genocide? Feelings arnt important here, its doing the right thing that matters, and killing is wrong, period. Simple truth.

Are you male, perchance?

Feeling that you are. It seems to mainly be men who screech and shout the 'abortion is murder' line.

End of the day - it does take two to tango. It takes one WOMAN to be pregnant. It takes one WOMAN to carry said child until delivery. It is NOT the choice of the man whether a foetus is terminated or not.


People shouldnt confuse the 'potential for life' with 'actual life'. A cluster of cells can potentially form a child. A cluster of cells can potentially form a fatal cancerous tumour. A foetus of two weeks is a mere cluster of cells. It doesnt respond to stimuli. It doesnt possess a brain, heart or lungs. It is not capable of conscious thought. It is not a human child.

Definition of murder (As per dictionary.com) :
The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.

Therein lies the tickler. 'One human by another' and 'premeditated malice'.

Abortion runs into problems here. A cluster of cells is NOT a Homo Sapiens.
An abortion is NOT done with malice.
To suggest premeditation would be to suggest a woman gets pregnant with the express intent of having an abortion, and that isnt true.

On what Amz said about the pro life lobbyists parading on the street their offensive and graphic pictures to children, there surely has to be legislation about acceptable usage of signs and posters etc somewhere. If it is deemed 'offensive' by members of the general public to have an image of the model Sophie Dahl sprawled naked for a perfume advert all over advertising hoardings, surely wherever their complaints were lodged should consider complaints regarding the Pro Life lobby and their own particular brand of 'advertising'.

Myg

Yes i am, but me being male has nothing to do with it, right is right and wrong is wrong, they are instincts built into all of us. Having a child is not a "problem" as alot of people seem to think, its a gift, no matter the circomstance. If you really dont want to keep the child, put him/her up for adoption, but dont deny the child's right to live. There is another whole person growing, with a unique personality and his/her existance has more meaning then any fluctuating feelings of regret, hatred, or desires you/the mother might have. How could someone prioritise those meaningless, shallow things over human Life? Heres a quick point: The brain, conciousness, and the rest of the body is garunteed to be there given time. How does the lack of function justify the act? Its still killing, and its still murder. Does that mean we should start killing off incapacited people and people in comas and other illnesses because they lack functions? The truth is staring right at us, though we choose to follow the easiest path, our feelings, and what other people tell us. Just because you are angry at some sort of hypocracy, doesnt mean you should dismiss the obvious lack of morality, and the blatant attack on human rights (the right to life being paramount). If we start thinking that abortion(killing/murder) is an "ok" thing to do, where does that leave us?

ixoy

Originally posted by embee
End of the day - it does take two to tango. It takes one WOMAN to be pregnant. It takes one WOMAN to carry said child until delivery. It is NOT the choice of the man whether a foetus is terminated or not.

Whoa! So you admit there are two responsible for the child - just there. Then you suddenly disavow the man's responsibility? You involve the man and then go: "Wait, sorry you no longer count." If you accept the man's culpability, surely then you have to accept the man's right to involve himself in the future of a situation that he created, right? Now based on that merit of responsiblity, can you really be pious enough to argue that he should have NO say in his child? That the woman alone should decide something he helped bring about?
Recall that the man cannot become pregant but he can help bring it about. It's not the man's fault that he can't become pregnant though is it? Thus surely the woman has a moral responsiblity to involve him in this situation, to take into account his decision as well?

People shouldnt confuse the 'potential for life' with 'actual life'. A cluster of cells can potentially form a child. A cluster of cells can potentially form a fatal cancerous tumour. A foetus of two weeks is a mere cluster of cells. It doesnt respond to stimuli. It doesnt possess a brain, heart or lungs. It is not capable of conscious thought. It is not a human child.

Now, hold up again. Your argument implies, falsely, that the potential-baby has an equal chance of turning into a fatal cancerous tumour. That's a mis-step. The fact is that if those cells are left uninterrupted they will become a foetus that will, in turn, become a child. It is highly unlikely that these cells will become this tumour of yours, or mutate into a tertiary kidney.

Please then posit the logic of how you can justifiably remove cells that will, with a good degree of certainty, become a child? It may currently be the echo of a child, but that echo is just a future voice you could be silencing.

Typedef

Originally posted by Amz
The argument that men should have an input is one which is flawed in my opinion.

Amz, I like you, but, that's a sexist and ignorant thing to say.

It's the same old crap from women. "You're a man" "you can't understand".

That's crap, we have a 'different' understanding of the issues, perhaps, dare I even venture, a more 'objective' understanding, but, I honestly get quite tired of women beating men over the head and deriding us 'all' as sexist, female-oppressors, who have an invalid opinion on abortion, if that opinion happens to deviate from the bog-standard agreement with the view that abortion is a women's rights issue.

I don't accept the women's rights issue, I think it's a human rights issue, ie, that every human has a right to be alive and I can live with being called a sexists woman-oppressor for holding that view.

dr_manhattan

Myg, I appreciate the way you feel, and indeed onmce felt this way about the idea of terminating a pregnancy (or, yes, "murdering a potential human being" as many would have it)

Then my life took a turn for the worse and the strange and it seems to me like I've been seeing / dealing with / helping people through situations of such horror for half my life. I understand people's moral repulsion at the idea but unfortunately this is an awful world, and awful things happen, and until you can stop them, you cannot summarily say that abortion is wrong.

Bear with me: because as I said above, the law recognises that sometimes cold blooded murder is right: the "coalition" killed a couple of thousand innocent iraqis last year, these were people that had done nothing wrong and yet perished at the hands of weapons that cost more than they earn in a lifetime and took years to develop.

The law also recognises self defence: I simply wish people would understand that abortion is not a process that anyone does lightly. It is not a form of contraception. It is a nightmare, an awful thing.

now, back to newband:

first off, you ask:

"i never guessed wot it is like to have an abortion"

and as far as I'm concerned, you saying "I don't care how bad it is afterwards, abortion is wrong" is guessing that you know how bad it can be.

Now to be honest your answers are evasive and you change your mind a lot about things, plus you insist on saying that what you think would happen IF your GF got pregnant is relevant, when you have no real idea.

So I will just mention this: you pointed oput rightly before that 100 years agoi women had no vote, and this is what this is ALL about:

for about as long as history goes for, a male dominated society has treated women as variously, property, vessels for producing children, and useless objects of scorn. Women were married off for cash sums at the ages of 9 and 10 and younger, so that men would go about their business of making more families and doing business with other men.

Any women who stuck their heads up were ruthlessly put down, often using public rapes and violations to pass the message on. Even joan of Arc, hero of france, was burned for refusing to renounce her mens clothing and mans attitude.

And all the time, this rule of men was enfforced by the fact that even if a woman resisted her man, she could be taken by force and forced to bear his children. One of the few weapons of resistance women had was suicide of homespun miscarriage...

Now, you may say I exaggerate but i do not: most people don't like to think of it this way, but I damn well do.

Now, although these days we have managed to change things a lot, the fact is that 85% of the world's women are born at a serious social disadvantage: honor killing and dowry abuses in the east, but the west has its own dodgy legacy for women.

We're only getting to a point now in ireland where women recieve the same level of education as men: when Iw as young my sisters were denied science and technical subjects in favour of homes economics. And the social pressure on a woman to submit to this system which presents her with much narrower options than her male peers is quite simply unfair. It is a civil rights issue.

And this is the reason the catholic church kept this country in a state where condoms were prescription materials: because they did not want to give women control over when they reproduce. They did not want the type of society to exist where women are equal.

And I, to be honest, do. I want a woman to have every form of CHOICE as to whether to carry a pregnancy to term or not, I want to take one of the barbs out of the vicious weapon that is rape, and I want a society that is equal for all. And if that means legal abortion, so be it: until men begin to honestly build an equal society where every piece of privilege is not traded for and squabbled about, where equal wages and treatment are no longer a privilege, and where children are not indoctrinated with roles based on some archaic idea of a patriarchal society.

And that's all I really have to say: I obviously can't convince all these people with their grandiose convictions about "murder", so why bother.

Lemming

Originally posted by Myg
Yes i am, but me being male has nothing to do with it, right is right and wrong is wrong

See my above comment on life, black & white, and shades of grey

they are instincts built into all of us.

In keeping with your unrealistic 'black & white' attitude, what about sociopaths? They don't have "right or wrong" built into them. So what then?

Having a child is not a "problem" as alot of people seem to think, its a gift, no matter the circomstance.

I'm sure we could find mannnnny parents who might disagree with that opinion. Children are (in my inexperienced opinion) a grave responsibility that will alter your life radically and are thus not something to be contemplated lightly or on a "black or white" whim. You will be responsible for a whole other life for the next couple of decades.

There is another whole person growing

"Whole" eh? Can we get a doctor in here to confirm that babies are just developed "whole" overnight please? :rolleyes:

A point that a lot of people have been trying to make is that up to a certain point there is no "baby". There is no "other human life". There's a clump of cells.

with a unique personality

your personality is shaped by society and experience, not just bestowed. Come on, use your common sense before you write this stuff .....

Heres a quick point: The brain, conciousness, and the rest of the body is garunteed to be there given time.

I do believe that someone else made a point against this further back in the thread. 1 in 7 or something like that?

/sarcasm
After all, mother nature is the biggest aborter of all ....
/end sarcasm

How does the lack of function justify the act? Its still killing, and its still murder. Does that mean we should start killing off incapacited people and people in comas and other illnesses because they lack functions?

I highlighted the words that are relevant in itallics from that last quote which completely shoot your argument out of the water. I don't even feel I *need* to comment since it should be obvious as to why the words in question have been highlighted.

The truth is staring right at us, though we choose to follow the easiest path, our feelings, and what other people tell us.

And what truth would that be? You think that people come to the decision to abort easily? You think that once the abortion's over that's it? The end of the anguish? My god you ARE naieve if you believe that.

Followed by the irony of mentioning doing "what other people tell us".

doesnt mean you should dismiss the obvious lack of morality, and the blatant attack on human rights (the right to life being paramount). If we start thinking that abortion(killing/murder) is an "ok" thing to do, where does that leave us?

Nobody's saying "Abortion is good". Abortion is a terrible and tragic thing, but so are many other things in this world. Given that point, I would consider it a necessary evil, and until such point that *I* can personally speak about abortion with 100% experience (and I hope to god I never do) I will not preach from on high to others on such a painful issue

oscarBravo

Originally posted by dr_manhattan
I obviously can't convince all these people with their grandiose convictions about "murder", so why bother.

I hope I'm not counted among that number, because I'm not as far from your perspective as you might think. The only issue I'll take with your arguments is that just because people kill other people all the time, just because it seems to be inevitable - doesn't ever make it right.

I accept the point that you're not talking about what's "right" and "wrong" in this debate, and I respect you for that - there's too much heavy-handed polarity already in this matter.

Originally posted by Lemming
For the record, I am pro-choice simply because I firmly believe (as dr_manhattan has pointed out) that until *I* have faced the prospect of abortion, I have no real right to tell someone else what to do.

I haven't expressed an opinion - for precisely the same reason. I don't feel I have the right to have a strongly-held view on a subject I'm not qualified to fully understand.

Originally posted by Embee
People shouldnt confuse the 'potential for life' with 'actual life'. A cluster of cells can potentially form a child. A cluster of cells can potentially form a fatal cancerous tumour. A foetus of two weeks is a mere cluster of cells. It doesnt respond to stimuli. It doesnt possess a brain, heart or lungs. It is not capable of conscious thought. It is not a human child.

At what point does it become one? That's not a philosophical question, it's a practical one. If you express the opinion that it's OK to kill something because it's not a human (and by implication that it's not OK to kill something if it is), you also have to accept that there comes a time when it stops being one and starts being the other. Can you draw that dividing line with confidence?

D!ve^Bomb!

[/B][/QUOTE] Myg, I appreciate the way you feel, and indeed onmce felt this way about the idea of terminating a pregnancy (or, yes, "murdering a potential human being" as many would have it)

Then my life took a turn for the worse and the strange and it seems to me like I've been seeing / dealing with / helping people through situations of such horror for half my life. I understand people's moral repulsion at the idea but unfortunately this is an awful world, and awful things happen, and until you can stop them, you cannot summarily say that abortion is wrong.[/B][/QUOTE]

so if i were to kill a man today, can i go ahead and blame it on the war in iraq, sayin ''but you cant blame me, deal with the war first then get to me, i'll wait''... err, no! just cos there is other **** happenin in the world doesn't mean that we should focus on the other **** that has less meanin, in your opinion..

[/B][/QUOTE] Bear with me: because as I said above, the law recognises that sometimes cold blooded murder is right: the "coalition" killed a couple of thousand innocent iraqis last year, these were people that had done nothing wrong and yet perished at the hands of weapons that cost more than they earn in a lifetime and took years to develop.

The law also recognises self defence: I simply wish people would understand that abortion is not a process that anyone does lightly. It is not a form of contraception. It is a nightmare, an awful thing..[/B][/QUOTE]

irrelevant, see above

[/B][/QUOTE] now, back to newband:

first off, you ask:

"i never guessed wot it is like to have an abortion"

and as far as I'm concerned, you saying "I don't care how bad it is afterwards, abortion is wrong" is guessing that you know how bad it can be..[/B][/QUOTE]

err, noo, thats called an opinion, how can i guess wot my own opinion is, if i already know..

[/B][/QUOTE] Now to be honest your answers are evasive and you change your mind a lot about things, plus you insist on saying that what you think would happen IF your GF got pregnant is relevant, when you have no real idea.[/B][/QUOTE]

i'm using my gf and i as an example, i could just as easily say that u have no idea also,

[/B][/QUOTE] So I will just mention this: you pointed oput rightly before that 100 years agoi women had no vote, and this is what this is ALL about:[/B][/QUOTE]

err, no, this is about human rights

[/B][/QUOTE]for about as long as history goes for, a male dominated society has treated women as variously, property, vessels for producing children, and useless objects of scorn. Women were married off for cash sums at the ages of 9 and 10 and younger, so that men would go about their business of making more families and doing business with other men.

Any women who stuck their heads up were ruthlessly put down, often using public rapes and violations to pass the message on. Even joan of Arc, hero of france, was burned for refusing to renounce her mens clothing and mans attitude.

And all the time, this rule of men was enfforced by the fact that even if a woman resisted her man, she could be taken by force and forced to bear his children. One of the few weapons of resistance women had was suicide of homespun miscarriage...

Now, you may say I exaggerate but i do not: most people don't like to think of it this way, but I damn well do.

Now, although these days we have managed to change things a lot, the fact is that 85% of the world's women are born at a serious social disadvantage: honor killing and dowry abuses in the east, but the west has its own dodgy legacy for women.

We're only getting to a point now in ireland where women recieve the same level of education as men: when Iw as young my sisters were denied science and technical subjects in favour of homes economics. And the social pressure on a woman to submit to this system which presents her with much narrower options than her male peers is quite simply unfair. It is a civil rights issue.

And this is the reason the catholic church kept this country in a state where condoms were prescription materials: because they did not want to give women control over when they reproduce. They did not want the type of society to exist where women are equal.

And I, to be honest, do. I want a woman to have every form of CHOICE as to whether to carry a pregnancy to term or not, I want to take one of the barbs out of the vicious weapon that is rape, and I want a society that is equal for all. And if that means legal abortion, so be it: until men begin to honestly build an equal society where every piece of privilege is not traded for and squabbled about, where equal wages and treatment are no longer a privilege, and where children are not indoctrinated with roles based on some archaic idea of a patriarchal society. [/B][/QUOTE]

all that crap u just came out with bassically means, ''well we treated women like crap back then and still a little bit now, so NOW WE should start payin for it by giving up our god given right to have a say''

the world also does not work like this, i feel sorry for the way women were treated back then, and now and wot ever, but i, or any other man, should NOT have to pay for something that has NOTHING WOT SO EVER TO DO WITH US..

Beruthiel

there isn’t a person on this planet who has the right to tell me what I should or shouldn’t do with my body, nor do I have the right to tell anyone what they should do with theirs

Hobart

Originally posted by newband
so if i were to kill a man today, can i go ahead and blame it on the war in iraq, sayin ''but you cant blame me, deal with the war first then get to me, i'll wait''... err, no! just cos there is other **** happenin in the world doesn't mean that we should focus on the other **** that has less meanin, in your opinion..

No one is an illegal act i.e.the killing of a person other than under a very extreme circumstance, such as war, government sanctioned excecutions etc... Remember self defence is not recognised as a valid defence against killing and you can still be charged with murder or even manslaughter in this country in relation to self defence. Abortion is legal in a lot of countries in this world. Now as was said earlier this does not make it right or wrong. But what it does make it is legal.

err, noo, thats called an opinion, how can i guess wot my own opinion is, if i already know..

It's actually called an uninformed opinion. Until you have been true an experience such as this you cannot fully understand the bigger picture.

err, no, this is about human rights

When it comes to unborn children they have no human rights with regard to abortion. So your argument holds no water.

all that crap u just came out with bassically means, ''well we treated women like crap back then and still a little bit now, so NOW WE should start payin for it by giving up our god given right to have a say''

You have no right to have a say. Why don't you answer these questions, which you have previously ignored:

1) What if you, or somebody you knew raped a girl. She became pregnant. Would you still say that the rapist should have a sya in the bringing up of that child?

2) what if you donated your sprem and it was used to produce a child? Would you still want a 50% say in that childs upbringing?

3)

the world also does not work like this, i feel sorry for the way women were treated back then, and now and wot ever, but i, or any other man, should NOT have to pay for something that has NOTHING WOT SO EVER TO DO WITH US.. [/B][/QUOTE]

Originally posted by Beruthiel
there isn’t a person on this planet who has the right to tell me what I should or shouldn’t do with my body, nor do I have the right to tell anyone what they should do with theirs

This is too ambiguous a comment. So you consider the unborn child a part of your body? Would you therfore contend that abortion should be made legal upto and including 40 weeks?

Typedef

Originally posted by Beruthiel
there isn’t a person on this planet who has the right to tell me what I should or shouldn’t do with my body, nor do I have the right to tell anyone what they should do with theirs

Does that include telling a person, that they can't be alive?

That's kind of dictatorial of what one does with one's body no? Being alive or not, is .... quite a physical imposition I'd say.

Beruthiel

Originally posted by Hobart
Would you therfore contend that abortion should be made legal upto and including 40 weeks?

lol
that makes no sense
who in their right mind would wait 40 weeks to abort? If you waited that long you might as well just have it

Does that include telling a person, that they can't be alive?

in your opinion typie, and you can have your opinion, as each of us can

That's kind of dictatorial of what one does with one's body no?

indeed, as it is dictatorial of others to tell me what I can and cannot do with my body

Hobart

Originally posted by Beruthiel
lol
that makes no sense
who in their right mind would wait 40 weeks to abort? If you waited that long you might as well just have it

Some people would say who in thier right mind would have an abortion at all? And your response does not address my point. What if somebody found out after 39 weeks that thier unborn child was severely mentally handicaped. Would your stance of " there isn’t a person on this planet who has the right to tell me what I should or shouldn’t do with my body, nor do I have the right to tell anyone what they should do with theirs " still apply? Would you allow that unborn child to be aborted?

dr_manhattan

newband says:

"should start payin for it by giving up our god given right to have a say"

right, you've brought god into it, so do ya know what, you're just another religious nut and I don't know why I bothered even talking to you. I don't have any interest in debating real life issues with delusionary religious nuts who believe we were all created by a bloke with a beard because ther's no ****in' point. Besides which, you have nothing to say, and are not answering any of my questions.

"i feel sorry for the way women were treated back then, and now and wot ever, but i, or any other man, should NOT have to pay for something that has NOTHING WOT SO EVER TO DO WITH US.."

Yeah, cos men have no privileges in this world, don't get better wages, aren't way more likely to get a decent job, and don't basically live at the top of society? Why not just admit it and say you don't give a **** about your privileged position in the world? You remind me of the squealing white americans who keep saying "slavery ended 400 years ago, I never opressed anyone" - a point blank refusal to acknowledge that you are born into a position of power by being white and male: like it or not. ANd yes, IMO you should have to pay for that, because everyone else does, so why not you?

Anyways, next:

oscarbravo, no I don't count you among those mentioned: your input is coherent and consistent (heh, unlike mine as you point out) - no worries there. I should never have picked up that barge pole though, huh?

And as for typedef:

"does that include telling a person, that they can't be alive?

That's kind of dictatorial of what one does with one's body no? Being alive or not, is .... quite a physical imposition I'd say"

Okay, first off, nothing that can support itself, has its own circulatory system and internal organs, is ever aborted. Full stop. It simply does not happen unless the mother is going to die or serious complications occur.

What we are talking about is (at most) a dependant organism, it has no body of its own. And besides that, it could never speak or understand language.

So why not keep your hyped up ideas of "telling a foetus to die" in the hyped up "book of how to make women in a difficult situation feel bad without doing anything of any value yourself". (I'm convinced there actually i such a book)

A woman's body must undergo all the changes (bones, teeth, hair, weight, sanity, appetite, the works) that it does in order to carry a child, and you say she's telling that choild what to do? That's a joke, I could as easily say that foetus is dictating to her how she lives, and it's be the same lame rubbish. talk sense why don'tchya.

ixoy

Originally posted by Beruthiel
indeed, as it is dictatorial of others to tell me what I can and cannot do with my body

As it is arrogant to tell yourself what you can and cannot do with your body AND another body temporarily connected to yours...

ixoy

Originally posted by dr_manhattan
Yeah, cos men have no privileges in this world, don't get better wages, aren't way more likely to get a decent job, and don't basically live at the top of society? Why not just admit it and say you don't give a **** about your privileged position in the world? You remind me of the squealing white americans who keep saying "slavery ended 400 years ago, I never opressed anyone" - a point blank refusal to acknowledge that you are born into a position of power by being white and male: like it or not. ANd yes, IMO you should have to pay for that, because everyone else does, so why not you?

Actually, that's a very interesting point which would make a good seperate thread. Should the white man pay for the sins of his fathers? You testify that they should acknowledge their forebearers sins and seek to address it. That sort of thinking isn't always safe - check out today's Independent where it points out that such thoughts have helped to keep a large swathe of anti-Semitic feelings in Europe.

I have done nothing wrong or suppressive with my life. Should I feel guilt or responsibility then? Maybe sympathy but should that be guilt? It's not my fault, I've worked to a certain degree but - given that we're mostly white males here - are we actually too blasé about our inheritance? By the same token, however, I see no reason why I should abandon my position in life - just ensure that I never commit suppressive crimes of times yore.

Beruthiel

Originally posted by Hobart
Some people would say who in thier right mind would have an abortion at all? And your response does not address my point. What if somebody found out after 39 weeks that thier unborn child was severely mentally handicaped. Would your stance of " there isn’t a person on this planet who has the right to tell me what I should or shouldn’t do with my body, nor do I have the right to tell anyone what they should do with theirs " still apply? Would you allow that unborn child to be aborted?

sorry, I didn’t know this was a thread on a specific case, 39 weeks? there is still no point on aborting at this stage, the child will be born any minute - didn't you know that if you aborted at 39 weeks there is a good chance the child would live? - so it would make no sense

As it is arrogant to tell yourself what you can and cannot do with your body AND another body temporarily connected to yours...

in your opinion

uberwolf

Originally posted by ixoy
. Should the white man pay for the sins of his fathers?

should a kid pay for the sins* of their parents (or as some have argued - parent)

this isn't really my view point but it struck me when I read it

*sins not to be taken as a religious or any other kind of judgement and can be read as actions

Hobart

Originally posted by Beruthiel
sorry, I didn’t know this was a thread on a specific case, 39 weeks? there is still no point on aborting at this stage, the child will be born any minute - didn't you know that if you aborted at 39 weeks there is a good chance the child would live? - so it would make no sense

You know what the thread is about. Stop avoiding the issue here. I am asking you a specific question in relation to abortion. You contend that

" there isn’t a person on this planet who has the right to tell me what I should or shouldn’t do with my body, nor do I have the right to tell anyone what they should do with theirs

Therfore, if a person decided, for whatever reason, to have an abortion at 39 weeks and it was legal to do so, and it was thier decision. Would you support that action, based on your previous contention? It's a simple yes or no question. Why wont you answer it?

Lemming

Originally posted by Hobart
Therfore, if a person decided, for whatever reason, to have an abortion at 39 weeks and it was legal to do so, and it was thier decision. Would you support that action, based on your previous contention? It's a simple yes or no question. Why wont you answer it?

lets put this in context:

"Black or white"

"You're either with us, or against us" (now WHO said that I wonder .... )

This _ISN'T_ a black or white issue Hobart, and to suggest that it is implies a deep lack of realisation as to how complex the issue is.

Beruthiel

Originally posted by Hobart
You know what the thread is about. Stop avoiding the issue here. I am asking you a specific question in relation to abortion. You contend that Therfore, if a person decided, for whatever reason, to have an abortion at 39 weeks and it was legal to do so, and it was thier decision. Would you support that action, based on your previous contention? It's a simple yes or no question. Why wont you answer it?

is that what this thread is about, abortion up to 40 weeks?
I was not aware of that, I thought we were discussing it within the parameters of the usual legal limit that some countries have of 3/4 months - my opinions are to be taken within that time limit

I believe I did answer your question
I would consider there to be no point to abort at 39 weeks for the reasons stated above

Hobart

Originally posted by Lemming
lets put this in context:

"Black or white"

"You're either with us, or against us" (now WHO said that I wonder .... )

This _ISN'T_ a black or white issue Hobart, and to suggest that it is implies a deep lack of realisation as to how complex the issue is.

I never contended that it was a black and white issue. I agree that it is not. I was looking for a specific answer to a specific question, based on a previous contention.

Originally posted by Beruthiel
is that what this thread is about, abortion up to 40 weeks?
I was not aware of that, I thought we were discussing it within the parameters of the usual legal limit that some countries have of 3/4 months - my opinions are to be taken within that time limit

I believe I did answer your question
I would consider there to be no point to abort at 39 weeks for the reasons stated above

One of the options on the poll is :-yes, definitely, circumstances dont matter-:. So its' about abortion, full stop. As with many threads the subject matter deviates from what the original thread starter posted.

However there are legal situations, in the UK for example, where abortion can legally be performed upto and including 28 weeks. So 3/4 months is way off.

However that was not the main thrust of my argument with you. I would refer you back to my first quotation from you. To say that "I can do with my body whatever I want" when it comes to abortion is misinformed, over simplistic and wrong IMO. I would also say that most women that have abortions, for whatever reasons, go through the awful dilemmas and feelings that most normal people in that situation do. I have seen situations where abortion is used as a form of contraceptive. I don't really know if I agree with that. And just to nail my colours to the ol' flag pole, I am pro choice.

D!ve^Bomb!

Originally posted by Hobart
It's actually called an uninformed opinion. Until you have been true an experience such as this you cannot fully understand the bigger picture.

how is saying that abortion is wrong is an unimformed opinion, i dont have to experience anything to know if it is wrong or not in my opinion, killing someone is wrong, most people have never experienced it but yet still know that its wrong..

Originally posted by Hobart
You have no right to have a say. Why don't you answer these questions, which you have previously ignored:

1) What if you, or somebody you knew raped a girl. She became pregnant. Would you still say that the rapist should have a sya in the bringing up of that child?

first of all i was never even asked this question.. and the answer is no, and i think the reasons are obvious

Originally posted by Hobart
2) what if you donated your sprem and it was used to produce a child? Would you still want a 50% say in that childs upbringing?

i wouldn't 'donate' my sperm in the first place, and if someone was to go to a sperm bank for it then i guess they're not really planning on having an abortion now are they?

D!ve^Bomb!

Originally posted by dr_manhattan
"should start payin for it by giving up our god given right to have a say"

right, you've brought god into it, so do ya know what, you're just another religious nut and I don't know why I bothered even talking to you. I don't have any interest in debating real life issues with delusionary religious nuts who believe we were all created by a bloke with a beard because ther's no ****in' point. Besides which, you have nothing to say, and are not answering any of my questions

oh ffs, i merely used it as a figure of speech, but if u really are the kind of person who wouldn't talk to someone because of their religious beliefs then i'm sorry, but u are a muppet

Originally posted by dr_manhattan
"i feel sorry for the way women were treated back then, and now and wot ever, but i, or any other man, should NOT have to pay for something that has NOTHING WOT SO EVER TO DO WITH US.."

Yeah, cos men have no privileges in this world, don't get better wages, aren't way more likely to get a decent job, and don't basically live at the top of society? Why not just admit it and say you don't give a **** about your privileged position in the world? You remind me of the squealing white americans who keep saying "slavery ended 400 years ago, I never opressed anyone" - a point blank refusal to acknowledge that you are born into a position of power by being white and male: like it or not. ANd yes, IMO you should have to pay for that, because everyone else does, so why not you?

you really are talkin ****e now, all this has nothing to do with abortion, i bet u still hate english people as well because of the way U were treated..even tho u weren't even ****in alive when this happened,, believe it or not, history is in the PAST!