Conquer Club

Rick Santorum argues that abortion a kind of/equal to/ as bad as slavery. Thoughts?

I'll add other options if you can argue for their presence.

Santorum....

Hahaha!

Murder.

Timminz wrote:Santorum....

Hahaha!

I've got to be honest- It's very difficult for me to take anything he says seriously after the Dan Savage stuff.

grifftron wrote:Murder.

Cool- care to explain? I'm wary of controlling the argument here, but clearly abortion isn't murder in any legal terms, and I suspect you wouldn't push for murder charges against the women who have had abortions.

I could be wrong...

Abortion is abortion, thanks to the reflexive postulate

Hilarious.

Is this a reunion or something?


-----
Abortion should be mandantory

Right now, all of the options (except for the kittens one ♥) are all bias towards the negative pits of abortion. You're assuming that coming into the poll, that the voter must always think that abortion is bad. You should include something along the lines of "a last resort for some women" or something to balance out the different views on the issue.

Also, do you have a link to Rink Santorum doing this? I don't doubt it, but I want to read it

-rd

rdsrds2120 wrote:Right now, all of the options (except for the kittens one ♥) are all bias towards the negative pits of abortion. You're assuming that coming into the poll, that the voter must always think that abortion is bad. You should include something along the lines of "a last resort for some women" or something to balance out the different views on the issue.

Also, do you have a link to Rink Santorum doing this? I don't doubt it, but I want to read it

-rd

Army of GOD wrote:Abortion is abortion, thanks to the reflexive postulate

that's the exact pro-choice perspective. not good, nor evil, just is.

Mr_Adams wrote:

rdsrds2120 wrote:Right now, all of the options (except for the kittens one ♥) are all bias towards the negative pits of abortion. You're assuming that coming into the poll, that the voter must always think that abortion is bad. You should include something along the lines of "a last resort for some women" or something to balance out the different views on the issue.

Also, do you have a link to Rink Santorum doing this? I don't doubt it, but I want to read it

-rd

Army of GOD wrote:Abortion is abortion, thanks to the reflexive postulate

that's the exact pro-choice perspective. not good, nor evil, just is.

As a pro-choice advocate myself, I disagree.

-rd

true. perhaps "a right of choice"

...A tool for men to guilt-trip women into submissive roles for the maintenance of the status quo?

Symmetry wrote:

grifftron wrote:Murder.

Cool- care to explain? I'm wary of controlling the argument here, but clearly abortion isn't murder in any legal terms, and I suspect you wouldn't push for murder charges against the women who have had abortions.

I could be wrong...

No i wouldn't, but i believe it is murder... taking a life away from a life form before they are born.

Murder. Plain & Simple.

If you don't want to get knocked up, put a sock on it, or keep in it your pants!

Lol @ people who don't know shit about biology talking about biology.

Living organisms will die. Dead organisms will not live. Unborn fetuses will live. Unborn fetuses are therefore alive. Killing them is therefore killing a living human. That is murder. Murder is wrong. Therefore, abortion is wrong.

pretty simple imo

Neoteny wrote:Lol @ people who don't know shit about biology talking about biology.

LOL @ people who think they are so smart yet know nothing

john9blue wrote:Living organisms will die. Dead organisms will not live. Unborn fetuses will live. Unborn fetuses are therefore alive. Killing them is therefore killing a living human. That is murder. Murder is wrong. Therefore, abortion is wrong.

pretty simple imo

No. What's "simple" is that 1 in 3 pregnancies wind up in a natural miscarriage within the first 3 months. A number of others have extremely serious problems so that they won't survive, or will only survive with the assistance of extremely advanced medical care. Medical care, I add that the right wing is curtailing heavily because its "too expensive" or requiring people to buy insurance is somehow "oppressive". This does not even include those situations where the woman's life or health, particularly the future ability to bear children, is at risk.

Beyond that, most of you who talk about abortion have no idea that a good many of those number represent miscarriages that are surgically removed. Because there is no legal definition of life prior to 3 months, no records are kept as to whether the child is alive or dead when removed. The totals represent the procedure ONLY. Many of us have to have surgary because we have conditions such as a negative Rh blood type or other situations that make it risky to have a "natural' miscarriage. Beyond that... I won't get graphic, but just think a minute about what a "natural" miscarriage really means....and where those precious remains wind up. Many women would much rather just have surgary and get it over.


BUT, and this is the real key. The real debate is not over whether abortion is "good" or bad". Despite what the right wing tries to imply, NO ONE but a few idiotic extremists "like" abortion or think it is truly a good thing. Nor are we naive about what it truly means.
It is sometimes a necessary thing (to save the woman's life or general health -- particularly the ability to have future children) and sometimes a better choice of terrible options (a pregnant woman who is raped, a child with extremely serious medical issues, etc.).


The REAL argument, debate is over the best way to limit abortions. History gives us the best argument for that. The FACTS are that women died over and over in the past because they did not have acces to safe abortions. We see that trend resurging, as exemplified by the Philidelphia clinic.. a truly absolutely stomache-turning operation, beyond even the tragedy of a medically clean operation. As my grandmother, a nurse at that time told me, the nurses back then were in favor of legal abortion because at least then 1 of he 2 lives could be saved. And, yes, women can go on to have other children.

I do NOT agree with "abortion on demand", but my morals are not those of everyone. It was not so long ago that midwives were trained to have a bucket of water. It was not just for washing up. If a "monster" (words of the time, NOT my opinion!) was born, the goal was the child would never cry. In days of limited medical ability, it was considered far more kind than allowing a child who could not support him or herself, who would likely be doomed and perhaps doom the family to poverty, distrust, etc. Thankfully we are past those days. Yet, the truth is we still have to ask those same questions. Claiming that we have the finacial, physical ability to care for each and every child that comes out of the womb breathing or barely breathing is a false notion.

Go to a neonatal unit. Watch what happens to babies born to crack, other problems. If you watch the pain they go through, even the most sympathetic of person at some point asks if this child truly is better off not being born. Or, worse, set aside even those cases, what of the child doomed to go home not to love, but to neglect or worse. The REAL truth is that a quick death is not the worst thing that can happen to a child.

NO ONE wants abortion to be common. I wish it were only used in the most extreme cases .. to save a mother's life, perhaps (? not sure about this) rape and in some of the most severe medical cases AFTER consultation with clergy and doctors. And for myself.. only a miscarried child or a child with no chance at all of survival (yes, this happens, there are medical cases where a child can survive within the womb, but not after even with all the most modern medicine).

The QUESTION is how best to limit. Here the right wing is hypocritic beyond belief. The way to limit abortion is to educate young girls and boys about the facts of life. To inform them honestly about the risks not just of pregnancy, but disease. AND, yes, because not everyone lives in a household where premarital sex is considered wrong or entirely wrong, they do need to learn some protection methods, along with the honest truth about effectiveness. This includes telling even kids in houses without "traditional" values that getting pregnant as a teen is not a good idea, medically, socialy, etc. A GOOD program reduces teen pregnancies and unwanted pregnancies in general. The FACTS do bear that out. If you don't wish to believe history, just look at Texas.

grifftron wrote:

Neoteny wrote:Lol @ people who don't know shit about biology talking about biology.

LOL @ people who think they are so smart yet know nothing

You are welcome to challenge Neoteny (or myself) on any biological point you wish.

You are welcome to challenge me on any biblical/moral point you wish.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

grifftron wrote:

Neoteny wrote:Lol @ people who don't know shit about biology talking about biology.

LOL @ people who think they are so smart yet know nothing

You are welcome to challenge Neoteny (or myself) on any biological point you wish.

You are welcome to challenge me on any biblical/moral point you wish.

Why? it doesn't do me any good... you just think you know what your talking about, but you don't know sheesh...

“Remember what Isaiah said, God will turn conventional wisdom upside down. The time will come when the so-called religion experts will be the ones who look foolish. So where does that leave the one who thinks he’s wise, or the well educated, or the one who understands the ways of the world? Isn’t God going to expose all this pretentious nonsense? The world never had a clue when it came to knowing and understanding God. That’s why He uses the things that the world thinks are foolish or just plain wrong, even unpleasant, to guide those who trust in Him on their way to salvation.” (I Corinthians 1:19-21)

So you just sit high and mighty, knowing all that you know, because people like you will never change your minds... In Thai we call you HuaKheang.

Player, I know it's the fashionable thing here to disagree with you, but I agree with everything you've said in this thread.

Abortion is not some black & white thing, no matter what some naive people want to convince themselves of. It's most definitely not "murder". It's not pretty, but it's necessary in some circumstances. It certainly shouldn't be used frivolously, though.

How many of you remember being in the womb? How many of you can say with 100% honesty that you had any awareness of life when you were in the womb? A fetus may be considered "alive", but it certainly has no awareness as such - so the fetus does not "care" if it dies, as it is not developed enough to know how.

OOPS, I should have read more clearly before responding
(so deleted quote) This is now a "stand alone" comment, not a response" The only thing that is "black and white" is whether this should be decided by law or through other means, such as education. History, evidence proves that. Laws cause more harm than good in the long run.

A baby in the womb does have awareness, but not prior to 3 months. Biologically, a fetus that young does not show responses (yes, I know some have tried to say they did, but that does not appear to be true.. I am not going to go into debating those studies, here, though, because I actually do believe that a fetus is life)

The dispute is over things like when the soul actually enters the Bible. The Bible is far from clear on that. Some refer to the point at which blood appears. Some refer to being borth (breathing life). I personally consider a fetus to be a living being. So do many people who support legalized abortion.

I definitely don't believe that abortion should be used as birth control. I do not believe that people should be able to, say, just choose not to have a child who is "less than perfect". However, when I see and hear about (note, I am talking about kids I know, not just esoteric or hypothetical situations) who seem to spend their entire lives in misery, who's parents wind up doing little but caring for those children, getting divorced, facing financial ruin , and neglecting their other children because of the pure physical demands of caring for a highly disabled child (Medicaid does cover medical expenses, but not non-medical stuff and it can be very hard to maintain a job while caring for a highly disabled child). I DO say that unless you have been in that situation, you don't have the right to judge someone who decides that it is simply better a child not be born... a WANTED child, a loved child, but a child that will be left with God. I don't feel I have the right to push that choice onto someone else. I particularly do not have that right when I cannot afford to pay more taxes, know most people cannot, to pay for those highly, highly disabled children.

When we cannot even fund basic medical care for so many what right do we have to spend millions on one child?

I have no idea why you seem to think I believe this is an easy or clear choice. Everything I have said declares exactly the opposite. BUT, and this is key. Because it is not absolutely clear, neither the government, or anyone else.. anyone else's church has the right to dictate the choices people make.

AND, no matter how it gets framed as "let's not let tax dollars pay for abortion" or anything else, it really and truly amounts to letting some people decide this extremely difficult question for someone else. If we allow some people to decide not to pay for abortion because it does not fit with their beliefs, then why not also allow jehovah's witnesses to declare that no tax dollars should be used for blood transfusions or, for that matter Christian Scientists decide that no tax dollars at all should be used for medical care.

grifftron wrote:

Neoteny wrote:Lol @ people who don't know shit about biology talking about biology.

LOL @ people who think they are so smart yet know nothing

This indeed describes you quite accurately.

john9blue wrote:Living organisms will die. Dead organisms will not live. Unborn fetuses will live. Unborn fetuses are therefore alive. Killing them is therefore killing a living human. That is murder. Murder is wrong. Therefore, abortion is wrong.

pretty simple imo

I build a device that takes some eggs and some sperm. When I press a button the device will activate and in 10 minutes time the eggs will be fertilized with 99% probability, the egg is then cared for "Brave new world" style . Therefore the device will likely produce a living human.

By your definition, what is alive in those 10 minutes? The individual eggs and sperm? The whole contraption? If I press a second button and stop the fertilization am I liable for murder?

grifftron wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:

grifftron wrote:

Neoteny wrote:Lol @ people who don't know shit about biology talking about biology.

LOL @ people who think they are so smart yet know nothing

You are welcome to challenge Neoteny (or myself) on any biological point you wish.

You are welcome to challenge me on any biblical/moral point you wish.

Why? it doesn't do me any good... you just think you know what your talking about, but you don't know sheesh...

“Remember what Isaiah said, God will turn conventional wisdom upside down. The time will come when the so-called religion experts will be the ones who look foolish.

Except, I don't consider myself wise or to be an expert on religioin. I do, however, know that the Bible does not teach us to lie. Nothing that is true can be contrary to the Bible. If you put forward a belief in a lie, then you do not represent Christ.

grifftron wrote:So where does that leave the one who thinks he’s wise, or the well educated, or the one who understands the ways of the world? Isn’t God going to expose all this pretentious nonsense? The world never had a clue when it came to knowing and understanding God. That’s why He uses the things that the world thinks are foolish or just plain wrong, even unpleasant, to guide those who trust in Him on their way to salvation.” (I Corinthians 1:19-21)

Faith doe NOT come from knowledge. It comes from belief.

However, science does rely upon proof and facts. Those facts are never contrary to the Bible, because the Bible represents truth. People who try to twist science because they cannot see how it fits into their perception of the Bible are liars and hypocrites. They destroy faith. They do not create it and are among the worst of the worst. Christ taught us to tell the truth and he taught us that one who teaches the young untruth commits the greatest of evil.

So, I say again.. if you wish to dispute biology. Go for it. As for faith.. I will take that on, as well. Neoteny, has other beliefs.

grifftron wrote:So you just sit high and mighty, knowing all that you know, because people like you will never change your minds... In Thai we call you HuaKheang.

LOL.. seems like you are the one claiming to know all. I simply said if you dispute what I say, let's hear why. Instead, you choose to attack me personnaly. Interesting. Common tactic, but interesting...

PS, I suggest you read what I actually say, instead of assuming you know what I think because you believe or other people tell you that anyone who disagrees with you must think xyz.