Posted on 02/03/2014 10:35:02 AM PST by carlo3b
Not just men, but everyone else has no choice, including other women. So like you wrote, on the one hand the pro-aborts say no one has a right to tell women what to do, but on the other hand, she has the right to demand that other people either pay for her abortion (via Obamacare) or take care of the child after it’s born. It’s a very illogical position, but pro-aborts aren’t known for their logic.
I think this is what carlo3b was trying to convey, in an ironic manner that went over too many people's heads.
Let's apply the logic imposed on men...they have the right to decide, also...but only before they engage in the act. After that, they are along for the ride.
Seems fair to be equitable...
Holy crap.... carlo3b has been here for more than a decade.... and he chose the zot....wow....
Where I seem to differ is that you can’t have a spectrum on a binary issue. One can not be semi preggers, nor can one partially kill their child.
I catch hell for seeing many things in black and white. But many things ARE black and white. There is alive/dead. There is Lib/Conservative. There is dark/light. And it is a waste of time to engage in the philosophy of why black is black/white is white. It serves only to draw out a given issue to avoid a line/call.
Here’s the logic as I see it. You have a live breathing child or a dead child called medical waste in the bottom of a garbage can. Abortion OR not at any stage results in one OR...OR...OR the other. There is no graded curve of anything.
One cannot define a ‘living cell’ as not being alive and have it make sense. A human cemm destened to be a fetus will not then grow into a Porsche or a gopher. There is one potential outcome (assuming a normal term pregnancy). A live human child.
Or there is so called medical waste.
Nothing between to discuss, entertain, contemplate or philosophize. Nothing. Opinions people may hold are opinions. Facts are what they are. People need to start thinking about facts instead of pondering the opinions of whoever.
There can be a spectrum in how much you care.
If somebody was trying to kill one of my kids, I would care enough to take drastic action. Somebody killing kids in Syria? It is not something I'm happy about, but it's not something I'm going to go to Syria to do anything about. It's not even something I would support sending our troops over to do something about. I care more about the welfare of our troops than I do about the residents of Syria. That's how it is.
At one point, I found out one of my old college buddies was down on his luck and living in a homeless shelter. I took him in and let him live with us until he got a job and moved out. Am I going to do that for a complete stranger? No. Does the fact that people are starving to death in the Third World mean that I will impoverish my own family in order to help some Third World kids to survive? No. Don't care that much. You can consider me a bad person for feeling that way, it won't bother me. I doubt you would impoverish your own kids for the benefit of kids in the Third World either.
Am I in favor of abortion? No.
Am I going to quit my job and spend my days demonstrating in front of abortion clinics to convince women to not have abortions? No. Are you?
Sounds fair to me, and it sounds like the point carlo3b was trying to make.
the cery concept of ‘How much one cares’ is the direct result of grey area rationalization and little actual thought into this subject.
Subjects like this aren’t light reading. Their existential. That’s exactly why they should be given serious thought. That said... Now in 100% honesty, how much serious thought actually is required to conclude that abortion intentionally ends the life of a child? How much? What is the quantifiable spectrum one must consider between the states of alive and dead?
This is a complete no brainer for literally anyone with the most basic sense of morality. Of all potential deep subjects we could discuss as humans, there is nothing so basic as alive vs. dead. I simply do not see any logical or moral basis for entertaining degrees of either when there are no degrees of either. So that leaves people with ‘spectrums’ because they simply don’t care enough to apply 5 seconds of rational thought.
If people want to participate in mental exercises, they should study reductionism and category error. Because the issue at hand has nothing to do with women’s rights, choice or any of the other ‘spectrums’ of thought. And it is wholly category error to deal with anything but the core/sole issue.
Good points.
“The child has its own rights to life and liberty.”
Actually, under current law, a child has few if any rights until the age of majority which is 16,18 or 21 depending on the state. That is why it is a child and not an adult.
Furthermore, until about month 6 after conception, the unborn will fail to be able to biologically function on its own without extraordinary medical intervention. It is totally dependent on the mother’s biological processes to continue to live.
Something that is that dependent and interwoven with the mother could be considered an extension of the mom’s body and she has ownership until the time when that appendage can be removed and function on its own biologically.
Adding to my previous response: Would you actually respond to prevent a first trimester abortion the same way you would respond to prevent the murder of a three year old? I would respond with deadly force to prevent the murder of a three year old in front of me. Would you? I would not use force to prevent a woman from entering an abortion clinic. Would you? Would you advocate that a woman who gets an abortion be subjected to the same penalty as a woman who commits first degree murder?
If your answer to any of the above questions is "no", then you are not as "black/white" as you say.
Answer quickly, as I think this thread will be pulled soon, rather than have a frank discussion on these points.
“One cannot define a ‘living cell’ as not being alive and have it make sense.”
But you could define a single living cell as not sufficiently well developed to be able to be endowed with a soul.
I guess if you had a bare car engine on the assembly line waiting to grow into being a car that can move about, I don’t think you would call a car engine an “unborn car”.
Umm, no. I was on this thread from the get-go. I was actually the first with the IBTZ. But more than than; I nailed it in post 61.
It obviously is carlo’s point to mislead and be misinterpreted. This thread has been up over 30 minutes and he has not responded or clarified his remarks that have lead to so much confusion as to what he means.
He obviously is playing a clever word game here. Either that or he is very stupid as he is about to be zotted at any moment.
Clever word game or very stupid. Those were the options. Turns out - both options were correct. Later in this thread, when JR gave him 3-4 chances to walk back his comments, he only made matters worse.
Finally look at post 180. Carlo apologizes, but its too late. He was done in by his clever word games.
I already did. Repeatedly. A human fetus will only become a fully grown human. Killing humans via abortion is murder.
In what other case is intentionally killing an innocent human not murder? That is where lines and civilization vs liberalism come in.
This sounds like the lib I once debated about 1+1 =ing something other than 2.
Cars are not human. Not even close to relevant to the point.
OK. So you would advocate prosecuting women who have abortions for first degree murder, and putting them in prison?
If that penalty for abortion ever becomes American law, absolutely. I have no more moral problem jailing a female child killer than I do a male pedophile.
Sound harsh? Tell me what’s worse. My position or a dead baby.
OK. I respect your position, and that you are consistent in your beliefs.
Are you going to openly advocate that the law should be changed such that women who get abortions be subject to the penalties for first degree murder? Have you voiced that opinion to many people? If so, what was their response?
the response from the majority of people I have indeed discussed this issue with is at first shock, then after making my above argument, agreement in most cases. Not all, but most. What I hear most is “I never really thought about it like that.
I also hear “That’s cruel” alot. Then silence after I point out the actual details of a vaccu suck abortion.
See Post 180.
Thanks. By describing abortion graphically, you may convince people to not be so “pro-choice”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.