Just because I COULD learn to be a doctor
doesn't mean I have all of the rights of a
doctor right now. That would be silly,
wouldn't it?
Yes, it would be.
However, having the right to life, and
therefore the right to make decisions
regarding one's own life, is hardly the
same as giving medical treatment to
others, is it?
|
yodavater
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 10 Dec 2007 Posts: 818
Posted: 02-08-08 15:57pm
Snug
wrote:
You were asking why it's
okay to kill something that will have
rights somewhere down the road. The
answer is, because women have no
obligation to incubate a fetus to protect
its "future
rights."
Why not? What "right" does she have to
take away all "future rights" of the
baby?
Do the conditions of human reproduction
constitute a moral permission to kill?
|
manuftw82
Supporter
Joined: 02 Dec 2007 Posts: 360 Location: Vestal/LI, NY USA
Thanks: 7
Thanked:3
Posted: 02-08-08 16:41pm
Birch
wrote:
Sorry manulft82, alot of
prolife advocates use the rhetoric that
women facing unwanted pregnancies are
irresponsible and deserve to be forced to
give birth because they had a night of
fun.
I got from your last comment to killbill
that you have been in this situation. Is
that right? If so, what did you do?
Just a side note, yodavater, I saw that
you incorrectly stated that "unborn babies
don't need "attention"." I am quite sure
that you don't literally mean that, or you
are not educated on prenatal/prematernal
care and I don't believe that's the case.
Are you attempting to belittle pregnancy
as a method of justifying your prolife
views?
Well I thought I was pregnant (or possibly
was?) I was over a week late took a test,
got a faint line, and went over the
options (including abortion which is why I
am pro-life because I weighed out the
option and just couldn't understand how I
or anyone could take the life of a baby to
live my life as I pleased), I decided to
keep it (I was 15 or 16 at the time) but
then I ended up getting my period a few
days later or miscarrying if I actually
was pregnant I don't know.
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12985
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 02-08-08 16:59pm
You're pro-life for YOURSELF. But just
because you can't understand the other side
doesn't mean they feel the same way you
do. During my pregnancy scare, my only
thoughts were on how to get the abortion
without anyone knowing, including my
parents and pro-life boyfriend.
|
manuftw82
Supporter
Joined: 02 Dec 2007 Posts: 360 Location: Vestal/LI, NY USA
Thanks: 7
Thanked:3
Posted: 02-08-08 17:08pm
Eiri
wrote:
You're pro-life for
YOURSELF. But just because you can't understand the other side
doesn't mean they feel the same way you
do. During my pregnancy scare, my only
thoughts were on how to get the abortion
without anyone knowing, including my
parents and pro-life
boyfriend.
But I wasn't going to keep the pregnancy
because I wanted a baby or had planned to
have one. But I think that everyone
deserves a chance at life whether my child
be taken care of by me or by a loving
couple who needs a baby. I just don't see
why everyone does not deserve a chance at
life. That's the only thing I can't
understand. It's not about screwing up
and having a one night stand or using a
condom with a loving partner that breaks,
it's about deciding why one person is
better than another and deserves a shot at
life when another does not.
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12985
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 02-08-08 17:23pm
I can't explain to you in any other way
than has already been explained that the
right to life does not matter when the
fetus is being kept alive only by the good
graces of the mother's body.
It is HER body first, not the fetus'. It
is by HER permission that it gets to stay,
or, it is by her CHOICE that it must go.
HER BODY COMES FIRST.
|
manuftw82
Supporter
Joined: 02 Dec 2007 Posts: 360 Location: Vestal/LI, NY USA
Thanks: 7
Thanked:3
Posted: 02-08-08 17:39pm
Eiri
wrote:
I can't explain to you in
any other way than has already been
explained that the right to life does not
matter when the fetus is being kept alive
only by the good graces of the mother's
body.
It is HER body first, not the fetus'. It
is by HER permission that it gets to stay,
or, it is by her CHOICE that it must go.
HER BODY COMES
FIRST.
I just don't think so. I think that she
shouldn't have control over someone else's
body either. I wish there was a way the
baby could grow outside the body or be put
into someone else's body because that
would solve a lot of problems. But it
can't so I'm going to agree to disagree
and leave it at that.
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12985
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 02-08-08 18:50pm
Even someone who is raping her? Should she
have the right to control her body and
defend herself? Saying a woman doesn't
have the right to remove something from
her body that she doesn't want inside of
her - even if it is a baby - means that
she is less worthy of rights than the
thing inside of her. You really are saying
that the right to life is higher than the
right to self-control, but only in the
case of a WOMAN. It's very, very sexist.
I too wish there was a way for the baby to
grow outside of the mother's body. I hope
that someday, artificial wombs are
invented. But until then, I maintain the
view that a woman's rights supercede the
rights of anything inside of her.
Actually I got a 100 on it soooooo..
and I refuse to read what you write until
you put it in Laymen's terms. I am not an
English major..I hate English and I refuse
to read something that I will likely
misunderstand.
So you're admitting that you can't be
bothered to read important information
about a subject that you are debating
people on because simple English is too
difficult for you to comprehend? Am I
reading this right?
If this is the case, what makes you think
you're qualified to argue the removal of
female rights with any credibility if you
can't even be bothered to read or research
information pertaining to the right that
you want to rob the female gender of?
If you consider it an insult for people to
try and debate with you on an intelligent
level (aka using proper English and
providing definitions that you're too lazy
to read) then you have no place in a
debate of any sort, let alone such a
crucial one that involves half of the
human population's right to make their own
medical
decisions.
Um no I READ what she wrote and didn't
understand it. It was clear she was
trying to use larger sized words to sound
more intelligent and I can't be bothered
with hifalutin
people.
Wrong. We're not in primary school any
longer. "Big" words shouldn't even be
conceived in a mature, informative debate.
You can't understand what I wrote. Fair
enough. In that case I don't consider your
contribution to the abortion debate to be
that worthy, because the language was
fairly basic to a discussion of this
nature. You're basically accusing me of
being a sophist to get out of your own
lack of comprehensio . Grow up, chick.
|
manuftw82
Supporter
Joined: 02 Dec 2007 Posts: 360 Location: Vestal/LI, NY USA
Thanks: 7
Thanked:3
Posted: 02-08-08 19:13pm
Eiri
wrote:
Even someone who is raping
her? Should she have the right to control
her body and defend herself? Saying a
woman doesn't have the right to remove
something from her body that she doesn't
want inside of her - even if it is a baby
- means that she is less worthy of rights
than the thing inside of her. You really
are saying that the right to life is
higher than the right to self-control, but
only in the case of a WOMAN. It's very,
very sexist.
I too wish there was a way for the baby to
grow outside of the mother's body. I hope
that someday, artificial wombs are
invented. But until then, I maintain the
view that a woman's rights supercede the
rights of anything inside of
her.
I think when someone else's life is
endanger she does not have the right
unless her life is endanger too and it's
one or the other I think she (or next of
kin depending on how bad the situation is
at the time) should be able to choose
which one lives. I don't think a woman
should be raped. I was raped and would
never ever wish that on anyone else and I
could honestly not say whether or not I
would have gone through with the pregnancy
had I gotten pregnant. Honestly, probably
not because I can't even go past the place
it happened without freaking out and
panicking. If men could get pregnant I
would have the same views for them...but
they can't so I don't. It's not sexist.
It's like comparing apples and oranges.
|
manuftw82
Supporter
Joined: 02 Dec 2007 Posts: 360 Location: Vestal/LI, NY USA
Thanks: 7
Thanked:3
Posted: 02-08-08 19:14pm
Kypros
wrote:
manuftw82
wrote:
Darkmoon
wrote:
manuftw82
wrote:
Actually I got a 100 on it soooooo..
and I refuse to read what you write until
you put it in Laymen's terms. I am not an
English major..I hate English and I refuse
to read something that I will likely
misunderstand.
So you're admitting that you can't be
bothered to read important information
about a subject that you are debating
people on because simple English is too
difficult for you to comprehend? Am I
reading this right?
If this is the case, what makes you think
you're qualified to argue the removal of
female rights with any credibility if you
can't even be bothered to read or research
information pertaining to the right that
you want to rob the female gender of?
If you consider it an insult for people to
try and debate with you on an intelligent
level (aka using proper English and
providing definitions that you're too lazy
to read) then you have no place in a
debate of any sort, let alone such a
crucial one that involves half of the
human population's right to make their own
medical
decisions.
Um no I READ what she wrote and didn't
understand it. It was clear she was
trying to use larger sized words to sound
more intelligent and I can't be bothered
with hifalutin
people.
Wrong. We're not in primary school any
longer. "Big" words shouldn't even be
conceived in a mature, informative debate.
You can't understand what I wrote. Fair
enough. In that case I don't consider your
contribution to the abortion debate to be
that worthy, because the language was
fairly basic to a discussion of this
nature. You're basically accusing me of
being a sophist to get out of your own
lack of comprehensio . Grow up,
chick.
No actually you're wrong and maybe you
should grow up.
|
Snug
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 12 Dec 2007 Posts: 151 Location: In the jacuzzi, silly.
Thanks: 21
Thanked:0
Posted: 02-08-08 19:23pm
yodavater
wrote:
Snug
wrote:
You were asking why it's
okay to kill something that will have
rights somewhere down the road. The
answer is, because women have no
obligation to incubate a fetus to protect
its "future
rights."
Why not? What "right" does she have to
take away all "future rights" of the
baby?
Do the conditions of human reproduction
constitute a moral permission to
kill?
Yes.
There can be no parity of reproductive
rights between men and women, because
women carry the pregnancy and men do not.
There can be no parity of rights between
women and fetuses, because rights given to
the fetus are rights subtracted from the
woman.
You might say you would subjugate your
rights to those of a fetus if you could.
But that is an opinion, not a moral
imperative.
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12985
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 02-08-08 19:59pm
manuftw82
wrote:
Eiri
wrote:
Even someone who is raping
her? Should she have the right to control
her body and defend herself? Saying a
woman doesn't have the right to remove
something from her body that she doesn't
want inside of her - even if it is a baby
- means that she is less worthy of rights
than the thing inside of her. You really
are saying that the right to life is
higher than the right to self-control, but
only in the case of a WOMAN. It's very,
very sexist.
I too wish there was a way for the baby to
grow outside of the mother's body. I hope
that someday, artificial wombs are
invented. But until then, I maintain the
view that a woman's rights supercede the
rights of anything inside of
her.
I think when someone else's life is
endanger she does not have the right
unless her life is endanger too and it's
one or the other I think she (or next of
kin depending on how bad the situation is
at the time) should be able to choose
which one
lives.
I don't think I totally understand you
here. For me, "someone" else's life isn't
in danger. Ever. Just hers. That's because
I don't believe - with biology to back it
up - that the fetus is a person or a
"someone".
I don't know of many women who are
accidentally pregnant who would choose the
baby's life over their own. I certainly
wouldn't. (it's "in danger" by the way.
"endanger" is a totally different word)
I would hope that
any next of kin for me would chose my life
over that of the unborn. I cannot
be replaced. And unborn fetus can. I can
go get pregnant again, I can go have five
more children. But if I'm left to die and
that fetus is saved... then all of those
other potential children never get born.
I myself am a prime example of this. I
literally wouldn't exist if my mother had
not aborted when she was in
college. That pregnancy was unwanted. Her
pregnancy with me was wanted. So I was given
the right to live by my mother. So was my
brother. Neither of us would exist if it
weren't for that abortion.
You hear stories of "I survived my
abortion". Well, I exist because of a
successful abortion. One
life for two. Sounds fair to me.
Quote:
I don't think a
woman should be raped. I was raped and
would never ever wish that on anyone else
and I could honestly not say whether or
not I would have gone through with the
pregnancy had I gotten pregnant.
And that's your choice. But you cannot
force your choice upon other women. Their
bodies are not your body.
Quote:
Honestly,
probably not because I can't even go past
the place it happened without freaking out
and panicking. If men could get pregnant
I would have the same views for them...but
they can't so I don't. It's not sexist.
It's like comparing apples and
oranges.
It is still, however, saying that during
your lifetime, there are certain times
when you have less rights than someone who
doesn't even exist yet.
It can become a slippery slope. No
abortion, then maybe no birth control,
then back and back until we as women don't
have rights anymore.
All we want is to maintain the right to
make our own medical decisions. Is it a
depressing choice from the outside? Yes. I
find abortion very depressing. I wish
babies didn't have to die.
But I care more for the woman who is going
through the experience than I do for the
baby. I care about the woman and her
rights, as she is the independent, born,
conscious person. The fetus is not.
|
manuftw82
Supporter
Joined: 02 Dec 2007 Posts: 360 Location: Vestal/LI, NY USA
Thanks: 7
Thanked:3
Posted: 02-08-08 20:14pm
The definition of fetus or baby is really
where we disagree most.
and as for my grammar error I don't proof
read my work and I tend to spell things
wrong and make grammar errors that I know
are wrong had I proof read it. I'm just
in cruise control sometimes.
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12985
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 02-08-08 21:01pm
No, the definition of a person vs an
unborn human is where we differ. You'll
notice I interchangeably used the terms
fetus and baby, and that was to prove the
point. I know you're working on your
spelling and grammar, that's why I simply
told you the right way to spell it instead
of ragging on you
I think the unborn baby/fetus/widget (lol
Birch) is not worthy of life over the
mother's right to control her body.
|
Jincks013
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 18 Apr 2007 Posts: 1171 Location: ,
Thanks: 21
Thanked:8
Posted: 02-08-08 21:46pm
I have a marvelous Idea for you manuftw82.
You decide what is best for you, I decided
what is best for me. We both go away
happy..
|
manuftw82
Supporter
Joined: 02 Dec 2007 Posts: 360 Location: Vestal/LI, NY USA
Thanks: 7
Thanked:3
Posted: 02-08-08 21:57pm
Eiri
wrote:
No, the definition of a
person vs an unborn human is where we
differ. You'll notice I interchangeably
used the terms fetus and baby, and that
was to prove the point. I know you're
working on your spelling and grammar,
that's why I simply told you the right way
to spell it instead of ragging on you
I think the unborn baby/fetus/widget (lol
Birch) is not worthy of life over the
mother's right to control her
body.
Yea that's what I meant but couldn't find
the right words.
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12985
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 02-08-08 22:06pm
manuftw82
wrote:
Eiri
wrote:
No, the definition of a
person vs an unborn human is where we
differ. You'll notice I interchangeably
used the terms fetus and baby, and that
was to prove the point. I know you're
working on your spelling and grammar,
that's why I simply told you the right way
to spell it instead of ragging on you
I think the unborn baby/fetus/widget (lol
Birch) is not worthy of life over the
mother's right to control her
body.
Yea that's what I meant but couldn't find
the right
words.
Lol. I'll help you debate with me
|
killbill
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 Posts: 380
Thanks: 26
Thanked:19
Posted: 02-08-08 23:41pm
manuftw82
wrote:
Well I thought I was
pregnant (or possibly was?) I was over a
week late took a test, got a faint line,
and went over the options (including
abortion which is why I am pro-life
because I weighed out the option and just
couldn't understand how I or anyone could
take the life of a baby to live my life as
I pleased), I decided to keep it (I was 15
or 16 at the time) but then I ended up
getting my period a few days later or
miscarrying if I actually was pregnant I
don't know.
hmmm
"went over the options"
"I decided"
isn't that the whole point here? you had
options. you decided.
imagine if that weren't the case. that is
the point.
you can urge people to CHOOSE life but do
you really want to advocate for the
options to be taken away from other women
by force of law?
do you think that taking that option away
will stop all women from trying to abort
anyway?
you are entitled to your opinions of
course. we all are aren't we? it's just
some things to think about.
|
manuftw82
Supporter
Joined: 02 Dec 2007 Posts: 360 Location: Vestal/LI, NY USA
Thanks: 7
Thanked:3
Posted: 02-08-08 23:52pm
killbill
wrote:
manuftw82
wrote:
Well I thought I was
pregnant (or possibly was?) I was over a
week late took a test, got a faint line,
and went over the options (including
abortion which is why I am pro-life
because I weighed out the option and just
couldn't understand how I or anyone could
take the life of a baby to live my life as
I pleased), I decided to keep it (I was 15
or 16 at the time) but then I ended up
getting my period a few days later or
miscarrying if I actually was pregnant I
don't know.
hmmm
"went over the options"
"I decided"
isn't that the whole point here? you had
options. you decided.
imagine if that weren't the case. that is
the point.
you can urge people to CHOOSE life but do
you really want to advocate for the
options to be taken away from other women
by force of law?
do you think that taking that option away
will stop all women from trying to abort
anyway?
you are entitled to your opinions of
course. we all are aren't we? it's just
some things to think
about.
Yea it was an option and I don't think it
should be one. I wish I didn't even have
that option. And no I wrote a paper on
this and I KNOW that women will still
abort whether or not its legal or not but
at least then it is punishable (although
when it was illegal it was rarely or ever
punished). And if women will abort
anyways then why do they care if it is
legal or illegal and if they won't get in
trouble or not?
I would hope that
any next of kin for me would chose my life
over that of the unborn. 
