Abortion

[desirexnoel]

Nope, you said the Law doesn't matter...

If I didn't add the words "to me" I add them now. If it does to you.. then whatever. I am letting out a big sigh every time I open this thread now.

This thread was started by accident. I don't really care enough about this subject to do anything more then state my opinion over... and over... and over... and over. I have said I plan to not get an abortion so it being legal doesn't bother me. I have said that the reason for most abortions in my mind is a mistake, but it is their reason and their reason alone. You have said all of the same things I learnt in catholic school, and amazingly enough hearing it again doesn't change anything for me. It just means that those are the same things I will probably have to hear for the rest of my life.

It is my opinion and you have proven you can't change it. You can chop up my opinion all you want but in the end what you come up with is your opinion. Not any more persuasive to me than mine to you.

[Dravin]

If I didn't add the words "to me" I add them now.

Except it does, which is my point. If it didn't matter to you one way or the other then you wouldn't have ventured an opinion about it. You did, so it does, even if not much.

[desirexnoel]

Except it does, which is my point. If it didn't matter to you one way or the other then you wouldn't have ventured an opinion about it. You did, so it does, even if not much.

Again. It matters WHY you are changing the law because a change to where you want it is FORCING people to not have abortions which was SATAN'S plan. Was it not? Forcing people to choose the right choice?

[Dravin]

Again. It matters WHY.

I'm not saying it doesn't, but that's because the law matters, if it didn't matter then the why wouldn't matter.

you are changing the law because a change to where you want it is FORCING people to not have abortions which was SATAN'S plan. Was it not? Forcing people to choose the right choice?

Fun argument, I assume you are against laws of all kinds? I never pegged you for an anarchist, which is the logical conclusion to your argument.

Laws against Murder: Forcing people to make the right choice of not killing other people.

Laws against Rape: Forcing people to make the right choice of not raping other people.

Laws against Abuse: Forcing people to make the right choice of not beating up other people.

Laws against Theft: Forcing people to make the right choice of not stealing.

If not, why not? Why is it acceptable to prevent (or more accurately dissuade) somebody from doing one thing by force of law and not another? I'm asking why you might point out? Yep, but to repeat, it is because the law matters that the why of the law matters.

Additionally semantics and rhetoric can be great fun if you seriously want to go down that road, because making it legal to kill innocents for the convenience of the mother who chose to put themselves in the predicament of being with child (We're talking about demand here, you'll find no issue, or less issue with rape) doesn't sound like a good idea, what's next? Tired of your two year old? Bust out the Black and Decker!

Or on the flip side making it illegal to prevent a cluster of unwanted cells in your body from continued existence doesn't sound like a good idea, what's next? Cancer has a right to life!

Both sides are coming from fundementally different views on just what exactly is residing in the mother's womb, what you consider it to be and an extension of that what rights it may or may not have and how they weigh against what rights the women may or may not have are the heart of the issue and the disagreement, and you are free to disagree. *shrug*

Edited August 23, 2009 by Dravin

[desirexnoel]

All I can assume is that you truly think I am an anarchist and that you really have no clue what I am saying to you.

You can believe that abortion is the same as rape, and that you should have a say in the batter... but none the less I still disagree.

It is funny... I give you a tiny bit of string and you get excited and run with it.

I can't wait to find out what else I am "really" saying, and how I truly am an anarchist.

[Dravin]

All I can assume is that you truly think I am an anarchist and that you really have no clue what I am saying to you.

Nope, I don't think you are an anarchist, I do think you are using flawed and not very well thought out arguments in an emotional appeal to assign moral equivalence to something you disagree with (yes I realize you are probably thinking the same thing to a degree).

If you were actually anarchist you probably would have tried to support your argument, the fact that you don't speaks volumes.

You can believe that abortion is the same as rape, and that you should have a say in the batter... but none the less I still disagree.

Which ultimately had jack all to do with what I've been talking about, actually I don't think anyone has said abortion is the same as rape, though they have compared them on differing levels.

I just asked why is it okay to force people to do the 'right' thing in the case of rape, murder, theft and abuse but not in others? Unless of course you are an anarchist and believe force of law dissuading people from doing things society has deemed wrong/they shouldn't do is wrong in all cases, in which case one doesn't need to explain why the difference as you don't see one, making the answer, "Its not okay."

Since I don't actually think you are an anarchist thus I'm assuming you believe there is a difference and my question of what is that difference, why is it okay in one case and not another still stands.

BTW, I've never seen anybody make the argument that people in a democracy (well, democratic republic) shouldn't have an influence on the laws and policies in said country. I'm curious, if I was for legal abortion would you still think I shouldn't have a say in what the laws in the country I live in are (at least in this particular case)? If yes I at least have to give you credit for being consistent.

It is funny... I give you a tiny bit of string and you get excited and run with it.

Not really, its just something to do. Talking about what a law should be to the point of providing arguments in favor of that position (and still doing so) and then saying you don't think it matters what the law is is a bit of nonsensicalness I felt like pointing out, then you moved on to saying it matters why the law is the way it is but it doesn't matter what the law is ignoring that if the law truly doesn't matter then why doesn't, why would the fact it was written up by a random phrase generator or by polling all guys named Bob in Alabama matter unless the law itself mattered in some way, even if only in wasting paper and money being printed up and archived?

I can't wait to find out what else I am "really" saying, and how I truly am an anarchist.

Except nobody has called you an anarchist, its just been pointed out that such a philosophy is congruent with an argument you've made. And still haven't supported btw, you might want to get around to doing that at some point.

Edited August 23, 2009 by Dravin

[desirexnoel]

You're right. I'm wrong. You have totally changed my opinions about abortion. It totally effects my life now. If my next door neighbour got an abortion I would put signs outside her house saying "Abortion is murder" and "Why don't you just become a serial killer!" and other things. I need to completely control the way they live. Why? Because abortion is murder and it is wrong! I don't care if she was raped or if she is a complete crack head or if she sniffs glue daily, because here... on the 23rd day of August, I have seen the error of my passive ways.

[desirexnoel]

If that isn't enough... I don't know what you are expecting from me. Whatever it is though, I can't give it to you.

[Dravin]

You're right. I'm wrong. You have totally changed my opinions about abortion.

Except I wasn't talking about abortion. I was talking about you saying it doesn't matter what the law is when it obviously does (by your actions), you're the one that keeps on bringing up abortion, I was just addressing it (in these later posts). Though I do notice you failed to support your argument.

The same thing would apply to speed limits. If somebody complained about a speed limit and thought it should be a certain number even going so far as to provide arguments why such should be the case and then said, "but speed limits don't matter to me." they'd be doing the same thing.

If my next door neighbour got an abortion I would put signs outside her house saying "Abortion is murder" and "Why don't you just become a serial killer!" and other things.

I'd probably call you a nut case if you did that.

I need to completely control the way they live.

Why? Nobody has been arguing that.

I know its just an emotionally distraught vent of frustration, but sheesh, put some effort into it.

[desirexnoel]

So you agree we are no longer talking about abortion.

Oh my gosh... then leave me alone!

[Dravin]

So you agree we are no longer talking about abortion.

In this last little bit we never really were, right from the get go it was about you saying something didn't matter when it very obviously did.

Oh my gosh... then leave me alone!

This I find hilarious. Nothing compels you to respond to my posts or to even poke your head in this thread. You've responded to each post I've made, freaking out because I won't leave you alone is like when my brother pokes my other brother and then complains that he just won't be left alone because he's poked back. Or if you prefer the guy on the bus who freaks out that the guy he's engaging in small talk with next to him just won't leave him alone, why does he keep responding to my questions and answers!?!

[desirexnoel]

Nothing compels you to respond to my posts or to even poke your head in this thread. You've responded to each post I've made...

I inherited some stubborness from my insanely stubborn parents. I am only a fraction of what they are... So I am actually VERY compelled to look at your responses which in turn makes me feel like if I don't express the fact that you make me want to bash my head against my desk numberous times until I feel good again or I will die!

[Dravin]

you make me want to bash my head against my desk numberous times until I feel good again or I will die!

I have that effect on people.

P.S. I'm fairly sure the stubbornness here isn't unilateral. :)

[desirexnoel]

I know...

*SIGH*

[Maxel]

My first (and until now only) post was comparing abortion to murder. I've never been comfortable with the comparison because (not to offend) I feel many people are incapable of seeing the similarity because they are unable to emotionally connect with the idea of an unborn child. Therefore, I will reword the argument using another similar topic: illegal drugs.

Illegal drugs are illegal. Many people die in the illegal traficking and use thereof. Therefore, we should legalize the use of currently illegal drugs to make the use of illegal drugs safer and legal.

This argument falls on its face because it assumes the inherent moral neutrality of using drugs and the wrongness of a law restricting actions of moral neutrality (that such laws cause more harm than good).

It's been said here that one can be pro-choice and pro-life. I consider myself pro-choice: it is the woman's choice to follow the age-old law of chastity and abstain from sex outside of marriage (when, normally, a woman will be prepared to have a child). I am also pro-consequence: we ought to let the natural consequences of actions come to fruition.

IF a woman gets pregnant due to irresponsible sexual activity (here defined as 'any sexual activity outside of marriage'), THEN it is her responsibility to care for the life she foolishly created with as much wisdom and maturity as possible (this discludes abortion as a possibility). IF the emotional/physical safety of mother and/or child is at greater risk than usual and in cases of rape, incest, etc. I believe there's "wiggle-room" when it comes to abortion, but only in those cases.

I think that's all the points I wanted to bring up for this thread...

[desirexnoel]

IF a woman gets pregnant due to irresponsible sexual activity (here defined as 'any sexual activity outside of marriage'), THEN it is her responsibility to care for the life she foolishly created with as much wisdom and maturity as possible (this discludes abortion as a possibility).

Or adoption. It doesn't benefit the child any if the mother clearly did not want it. There are plenty of people willing to adopt and would love the child as their own.

I was raised by a woman who constantly told me that she couldn't wait until I was 16 so she could kick me out, and then kicked me at 15 anyway. I bet adoptive parents would have been different...

[Traveler]

Desirexnoel: Just because something is better than being fed to crocodiles does not mean that it is the one and only best possibility or something we should rejoice about or support. In our “through-away” society one thing we should have learned by now is that disposing of the evidence does little to change the damage and is counterproductive in overcoming any real problems or social injustices.

Abortion is at best a distraction that treats a symptom and diverts needed focus and social attention to the real causes of a much greater problem. If indeed a woman has been abused and needs an abortion why is it that in not one or your posts have you suggested that the abuse be found, punished and forever ended? None of this is any excuse for a late term abortion. Though you and I may disagree on some things – but can we at least agree that late term abortions are wrong and should not be performed? If a child fully developed, is living and will live if allowed – We should not go out of our way to kill the child. If fact can we agree that if something that is alive is human – we should not consider killing such a life without overwhelming necessity. Would you think your life is worth such a consideration?

The Traveler

[desirexnoel]

Desirexnoel: Just because something is better than being fed to crocodiles does not mean that it is the one and only best possibility or something we should rejoice about or support. In our “through-away” society one thing we should have learned by now is that disposing of the evidence does little to change the damage and is counterproductive in overcoming any real problems or social injustices.

Abortion is at best a distraction that treats a symptom and diverts needed focus and social attention to the real causes of a much greater problem. If indeed a woman has been abused and needs an abortion why is it that in not one or your posts have you suggested that the abuse be found, punished and forever ended? None of this is any excuse for a late term abortion. Though you and I may disagree on some things – but can we at least agree that late term abortions are wrong and should not be performed? If a child fully developed, is living and will live if allowed – We should not go out of our way to kill the child. If fact can we agree that if something that is alive is human – we should not consider killing such a life without overwhelming necessity. Would you think your life is worth such a consideration?

The Traveler

I said adoption...

[desirexnoel]

Everyone is so ready to jump down my throat that people are skimming then attacking...

[Maxel]

Or adoption. It doesn't benefit the child any if the mother clearly did not want it. There are plenty of people willing to adopt and would love the child as their own.

EXACTLY! I believe adoption to be a wonderful option if the parents are unwilling or unable to give the child the kind of home it deserves.

I was raised by a woman who constantly told me that she couldn't wait until I was 16 so she could kick me out, and then kicked me at 15 anyway. I bet adoptive parents would have been different...

I'm so sorry... No one should have to go through that.

Big hug!

[Dravin]

In some cases adoption is the preferred and more responsible approach compared to raising the child yourself for instance a 16 year old gal, or a 27 year old drug addict. I don't know about other processes but when using LDS Family Services they would place them in a home with both a mother and a father who are temple worthy and thus said child could be sealed to their adoptive parents and realize the advantages and blessing from being in a sealed family.

The Church even has a website about it: https://www.itsaboutlove.org/ial/ct/eng/site/pregnant

[desirexnoel]

EXACTLY! I believe adoption to be a wonderful option if the parents are unwilling or unable to give the child the kind of home it deserves.

I especially agree because I am infertile. The waiting list is so long too...

I'm so sorry... No one should have to go through that.

Big hug!

Awe! Thank you! n_n It happens a lot though I find.

[Maxel]

Awe! Thank you! n_n It happens a lot though I find.

You're right; far too much. I think the best thing we as human beings can do is to stop negative cycles of behavior we were taught by our parents, and instill good values into our children.

[desirexnoel]

You're right; far too much. I think the best thing we as human beings can do is to stop negative cycles of behavior we were taught by our parents, and instill good values into our children.

That's the goal.

[Justice]

I'm very sorry to hear that about your relationship with your parents, desire. I have no idea how hard that must be or what it must be like trying to live with those feelings every day of your life. I have seen how it has affected those that I know who have been in similar situations. I just wanted to express my love, concern, symapthy and hope to you. I sincerely do hope the remainder of your life makes up the difference to you, if that's possible. God bless you.