Keep it up. I stumbled across that article
by chance - and I'm so glad I did!
Talking of pro-lifers avoiding comments,
yodavater is yet to
answer my points. Oh yodiiiiiiii, wherever
you are, come back
|
diamondsz
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 Posts: 3216 Location: , Candyland-Canada
Thanks: 80
Thanked:114
online
Posted: 01-06-08 09:44am
Its true though its puts you in a position
where you make the choice to agree or
disagree (one hell of a smart woman) but
shes stating it for what it is....
Its true though its puts you
in a position where you make the choice to
agree or disagree (one hell of a smart
woman) but shes stating it for what it
is....
Yep, I am in awe at how she manages to
rubbish the pro-life argument whilst
making it seem so simple to do so. Well,
in fact it is easy, it just
requires a pensive character like Wendy
McElroy to inforce the message.
|
yodavater
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 10 Dec 2007 Posts: 818
Posted: 01-06-08 16:26pm
sillyakchick
wrote:
Since you cut me off earlier, saying it
was pointless to argue about morals,
shouldn't this fit into your category too?
You must have me confused with someone
else. I've never "cut off" anyone. But I
also didn't say what you claimed, either.
Morals can be debated by comparing them to
each other, but values cannot be logically
debated. They are simply opinions, and no
logic is involved.
sillyakchick
wrote:
You see things differently than I do and I
am OK with that, until you start ENFORCING
your views upon me.
.
I don't know of any one individual who can
"enforce" their moral views on another,
legally, so that's hyperbole.
However, you yourself probably do
"enforce" your moral views on others, by
your support of local criminal laws. Did
you realize that?
|
yodavater
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 10 Dec 2007 Posts: 818
Posted: 01-06-08 16:33pm
Kypros
wrote:
In general, societal morals agree with the
pro-choice position,
Even if we stipulated that, what would it
prove?
Kypros
wrote:
It is not in the slightest arbitrary to
place lower value on the unborn -
scientifically they are not entirely the
same.
And a one year old is not entirely the
same as a two year old. So do you equate
"value" with age and size, or what?
Kypros
wrote:
You are the first pro-lifer I have ever come across
who feels that, since it is illegal to
force born babies to drink alcohol,
swallow tablets, ride in a car without
protection, then it must also be against
the law for pregnant women to do the same
thing. .
Actually, there are some states that
already have laws which punish women who
knowingly expose their unborn babies to
cocaine or other addictive drugs and/or
alcohol. Fetal alcohol syndrome, and
fetal addiction are serious health
problems.
But I'm honored to know that I'm the first
prolifer you've encountered who actually
is consistent in saying that no law should
discriminate against the unborn. And I'm
also saddened, because I think that's the
only logical position for our side.
|
yodavater
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 10 Dec 2007 Posts: 818
Posted: 01-06-08 16:34pm
Kypros
wrote:
Oh yodiiiiiiii, wherever you are, come
back
Do I need permission to be absent from
here?
|
Sandbox Party
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 25 Jul 2006 Posts: 7276
Posted: 01-06-08 16:36pm
yodavater
wrote:
Kypros
wrote:
Oh yodiiiiiiii, wherever you are, come
back
Do I need permission to be absent from
here?
why do you take everything so personally?
just a question.
|
sillyakchick
Supporter
Joined: 12 Apr 2007 Posts: 2688
Thanks: 5
Thanked:0
Posted: 01-06-08 16:37pm
yodavater
wrote:
However, you yourself probably do
"enforce" your moral views on others, by
your support of local criminal laws. Did
you realize
that?
how do I do this?
|
yodavater
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 10 Dec 2007 Posts: 818
Posted: 01-06-08 16:56pm
Sandy_Pants
wrote:
why do you take everything so
personally?.
Um... that particular post contained my
name twice, once in very large bold
letters..... any more questions for me....
??? Do you ever ask prochoicers similar
questions?
|
yodavater
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 10 Dec 2007 Posts: 818
Posted: 01-06-08 16:57pm
sillyakchick
wrote:
yodavater
wrote:
However, you yourself probably do
"enforce" your moral views on others, by
your support of local criminal laws. Did
you realize
that?
how do I do this?
By supporting criminal laws, you support
the imposition of penalties for certain
acts.... thereby "forcing" your opinion on
people who might otherwise commit those
acts.
|
diamondsz
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 Posts: 3216 Location: , Candyland-Canada
Thanks: 80
Thanked:114
online
Posted: 01-06-08 18:37pm
yodavater
wrote:
By supporting criminal
laws, you support the imposition of
penalties for certain acts.... thereby
"forcing" your opinion on people who might
otherwise commit those
acts.
Without law there would be complete Chaos
and god forbid if someone one shot you now
because they took the laws into their own
hands......
you steal you go to Jail
You talk caca and hurt someone you dont
(Can be morally right or wrong)
you homicide a person you got jail
You have an abortion you don't (can be
morally right or wrong)
you sell Drugs you got to jail (Cocaine)
or get a severe penalty
you watch someone do drugs (can be
morally right or wrong)
catch my drift
If done in moderation, things can balance
out, if you are too much on one side you
remove other peoples rights. She doesnt
support it but when it comes down to it
she understands that is she gets caught
for stealing that chocolate bar, shes
going to go to jail.
You make your own decisions and reap the
consequences (or rewards from them)_
Humans evolve because we learn, if we do
not allow ourselves to makes choices and
learn from our mistakes then we we'll
alway be jane or john doe.
|
diamondsz
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 Posts: 3216 Location: , Candyland-Canada
Thanks: 80
Thanked:114
online
Posted: 01-06-08 18:41pm
And yodi you still havent answered Kypros
quetsion....
yodavater
wrote:
Ownership of other human beings has been
illegal in this country for a long time.
Even though you have the legal right to
kill your baby, you don't "own" it.
If you did, you could sell it,
legally.
You saids its illegal to own someone elses
body? So then why should a fetus have the
right to own the body in which it is
within?
In general, societal morals agree with the
pro-choice position,
Even if we stipulated that, what would it
prove?
You brought it up. You mentioned societal
morals and I said society is pro-choice.
Kypros
wrote:
It is not in the slightest arbitrary to
place lower value on the unborn -
scientifically they are not entirely the
same.
And a one year old is not entirely the
same as a two year old. So do you equate
"value" with age and size, or
what?[/quote]
I cannot state simply what I equate value
with, but I will explain. Foetuses are
parasitic. Not one single foetus can
survive independently. It exists solely by
living in and off another person's bodily
resources. I believe that person's bodily
resources belong to the woman, not the
foetus. Also, regulating pro-life laws
such as "pregnant woman cannot drive" are
next to impossible. Most pregnant women
would be imprisoned, which is laughable
but scary.
If, like you, you value anything and
everything with human DNA, you end up
claiming that teeth, tumours, and cancers
are separate human entities with a right
to life. Value, for me, comes at birth.
When the foetus ceases to be a parasite,
is biologically independent, and
recognised as such by the law.
yodavater
wrote:
Kypros
wrote:
You are the first pro-lifer I have ever come across
who feels that, since it is illegal to
force born babies to drink alcohol,
swallow tablets, ride in a car without
protection, then it must also be against
the law for pregnant women to do the same
thing. .
Actually, there are some states that
already have laws which punish women who
knowingly expose their unborn babies to
cocaine or other addictive drugs and/or
alcohol. Fetal alcohol syndrome, and
fetal addiction are serious health
problems.
But I'm honored to know that I'm the first
prolifer you've encountered who actually
is consistent in saying that no law should
discriminate against the unborn. And I'm
also saddened, because I think that's the
only logical position for our
side.
So it is logical to arrest a pregnant
woman for driving a car as it endangers a
human life, just as it is by driving with
a newborn in your arms. That's sad and
far, far, far rom logical.
|
msrosie
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 02 Jan 2005 Posts: 360 Location: Ontario, Canada
Thanks: 4
Thanked:1
Posted: 01-07-08 14:53pm
yodavater
wrote:
By supporting criminal laws, you support
the imposition of penalties for certain
acts.... thereby "forcing" your opinion on
people who might otherwise commit those
acts.
There are many laws I do not support. I do
not support laws making prostitution
illegal, laws mandating seat belts,
helmets for bikes, laws prohibiting soft
core drug use ie. marijuana etc. etc.
For the most part, I do not support the
govt. telling me what to do with my body
if it doesn't harm other people. And,
before you say it, even IF I felt the
embryo/fetus were a person, I do not think
that abortion is harmful to it.
|
Birch
Supporter
Joined: 07 Nov 2005 Posts: 4034 Location: Bliss,
Thanks: 141
Thanked:13
Posted: 01-07-08 23:18pm
yodavater
wrote:
However, you yourself probably do
"enforce" your moral views on others, by
your support of local criminal laws. Did
you realize
that?
This is a pretty good concept to sit and
stew about.
Unless you are a total anarchist you are
going to be doing this, I suppose.
Does that mean it's 'right'?
Does participating in society mean that
you support criminal laws?
Is this a form of secondary consent?
How does this fit in with abortion?
Good food for thought.
|
oopoopoop
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 18 Mar 2004 Posts: 1356 Location: ,
Thanks: 57
Thanked:3
Posted: 01-08-08 12:27pm
My perspective is that you can do what you
like with yourself and your life, up to
the point where it infringes on my right
to do what I like with myself and my life.
That means you can't steal my stuff or
injure me, or keep me from legitimately
enjoying my stuff on my own property. It
doesn't mean I can play my obscene and
obnoxious music so loudly that you can't
listen to your own obscene and obnoxious
music in peace. If I want to have oral or
anal sex, as long as it is with a
consensting adult, why should that be
illegal? Drugs? Legalise it all, but have
big penalties for doing any harm or damage
to anyone in the process.
