Quoting Post Archived Topic: It will not be bumped to the top of the forum. Topic I don't get how people born in non-ideal situations can be pro-choice? Membername   Not a member? Sign Up Free (takes 20 seconds) Password   Forgotten your password? Post Font: Verdana Arial Black Georgia Comic Sans Impact   Size: Tiny Normal Big Huge   Color: Default Dark Red Red Orange Brown Green Olive Cyan Blue Dark Blue Indigo Black [ Check Spelling ] [ Post Preview ] [ LiveTags ] Quote: from [m]Jim Raynor[/m] at 12:00 pm on Dec. 6, 2011[quote]Quote: from [m]sequelmc[/m] at 4:23 pm on Dec. 6, 2011[quote]Quote: from [m]Jim Raynor[/m] at 11:05 am on Dec. 6, 2011[quote]Quote: from [m]sequelmc[/m] at 3:18 am on Dec. 6, 2011[quote]Quote: from [m]Stormblazer[/m] at 10:34 pm on Dec. 5, 2011[quote]Quote: from [m]sequelmc[/m] at 11:28 pm on Dec. 5, 2011[quote]Quote: from [m]Stormblazer[/m] at 10:27 pm on Dec. 5, 2011[quote]Quote: from [m]justherefornow1[/m] at 11:20 pm on Dec. 5, 2011[quote]well it's the fucking truth and it's insane to just assume they can make that choice. I wouldn't put my life in the hands of a random women's why would I do that to someone else?[/quote]Equivocating fetuses with people doesn't make sense.[/quote]That's because you don't believe in souls. Which doesn't make sense because you are a soul.[/quote]I don't care that people believe in souls (and notably not everyone who believes in souls believes they are created at conception), but making legal policy on the basis of one particularly set of beliefs is generally a bad idea, and unconstitutional.       To be honest, I find the concept of souls incomprehensible. The brain is who you are. If there's an afterlife, a container for the mind would be formed from the emergent matrix formed from the physical substrate of the brain. Having a separate arbitrary container makes no sense unless you also believe in reincarnation.[/quote]That's because you only believe in things existing within science. Science does not, and cannot explain everything. You want to revolve legal policy around atheism. i hope you see the hypocrisy in that and also that you see the fact that our country wouldn't have its current moral code if it weren't for Christianity. That's because Christianity preaches peace and love for others, and using strength to uphold that peace.[/quote]    Excuse me? Bullshit. The Founding Fathers were at best deists and tried to distance their policy as far as possible from christianity. It's a little thing called SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE, asshole. If you think peace and love is the only thing it preaches, you really need to look again at your bible.    The real moral dilemma here is forcing a burden on someone who made a mistake and can't support it and give it the life it really deserves so it can become a supporter of society and so that society can support it good. All for one and one for all and heaven bless the land, as the Japanese used to say. Who are YOU to say what's right and what's wrong?[/quote]Why do you think the founding fathers didn't mention Christianity in the Constitution? It is because Christianity promotes tolerance towards other positive religions, and it would be ass backwards trying to promote religious freedom in your land while declaring it a Christian nation. That doesn't take away from the fact that our moral code is heavily influenced by Judeo-Christian values, and that once you start seeing certain lives as not being valuable, that moral code disintegrates.[/quote] Have you ever heard their words on christianity? And where is it that Christianity promotes tolerance to other religions?[/quote] FAQ Keyword Search: Post Options Favorites Manager Notify me of new replies to this topic by email Notify me of new replies to this topic by private message Original Post justherefornow1 Posted at 9:10 pm on Dec. 5, 2011 well I'm curious. To me I was born in a pretty much with all the reasons to abort besides rape or incest well at least with my mother not being the victim. But I had a teen single mom who was poor and high school drop out on government assistance and I was born as they called it 'crippled' my legs bent forward and my hips were dislocated hips. I ended up loving life. To me even when I wasn't able to walk I was even happier idk why but that's how my personality was as a young child. My mom was born to a woman in a horrible relationship having her 8th child and the 7th she was taking care of and on government assistance. Her mom's husband had in some form sexually abused her mom as a married couple it wasn't seen as much back then. But my grandparents loved her and favored her over all their kids. She's become an accountant and is thriving well. Throughout my family tree I have several different situations. But to me it's like to me I know so many people who with that reasoning would be dead because of abortion. I don't see why someone should die because you personally don't like the way their life will be. It's not yours to live. Bud out of it. To me I just don't get how like people who were in the exact same situations as the ones who weren't as lucky and were aborted to just turn around and be for abortion sounds hypocritical. Anyway just want to hear you guy's opinion. I think maybe I'd be pro-choice too if I was born in a different situation. I was just wondering how do people born from unplanned pregnancies become pro-choice? What's your view on it?

Replies Shogun villimax Posted at 3:27 pm on Jan. 3, 2012 Quote: from justherefornow1 at 12:41 pm on Dec. 7, 2011 they're alive otherwise it would rot. Where they are actually dead it's perilous to keep a pregnancy that has a dead fetus. So yea they're alive like it or not... Your right! They ARE alive! Kaijuu Posted at 6:12 am on Jan. 3, 2012 Well the way I see it, some people like my mom feel like they can handle a child in shit situations but others just don't want to deal with it. And to me either. Hoice is fine because it is their life. justherefornow1 Posted at 11:37 am on Dec. 10, 2011 spm that's not unusual for you. justherefornow1 Posted at 11:31 am on Dec. 10, 2011 Quote: from Wilder at 9:52 am on Dec. 10, 2011 my mom thinks gays and lesbians aren't viable human beings and I could support her thought with the high suicide rates and the lifestyle causing an issue with childbearing. It's just a fact that gays have less children than straight people. My mom thinks people who are in that lifestyle are worthless and wouldn't exactly see it as 'murder' if someone killed them because she doesn't truly believe they function in the way a person should.   that's why I don't believe in personal perception of personhood. I understand why you believe in an objective understanding of what is a person and what isn't, and that it shouldn't be a matter left up to opinion. But can you (finally) admit that, by virtue of that fact, personhood can be used in different contexts by different people? I'm not asking you to accept my understanding of personhood. I'm asking you to understand that when I first said the word, I was referring to an ethical concept, not human beings. finally got back to you thank you for your patience. I know you think that I don't care. My argument still stands and only explains mine more. oh yea your definition of murder first main definition is what we believe it to be... That's what I meant. My only point was that murder, like personhood, has multiple definitions. In a legal context murder is a violent act, in another context it is a group of crows. In an ethical context personhood is a category with debated boundaries that entitels something to certain ethical considerations, whereas in another context it just means "human beings." Referring to one definition when someone else is talking about a different one (ie: telling me that I can't have a different concept of personhood because you found a dictionary entry that defines "person" as "human") doesn't get anyone anywhere. I could philosophical fight many definition. I could debate anything. Doesn't mean the definition should be ignored. It is used as the standard use in our language. And it may not be from wikipedia but it's biased. The individual had a biased premise. Therefore his reasoning is off. You keep acting like I gave you one source, not tens of thousands of sources. Also, you might not be quoting Wikipedia but you're biased. You have a biased premise. Therefor your reasoning is off. See why that's flawed? Also, as I stated before, bias doesn't factor into this. All I was demonstrating was the personhood in ethics doesn't necessarily mean what your dictionary definition says "person" is, just like "murder" in law doesn't mean "a group of crows." You saying "mine were not biased. I was just stating definitions" is like a lawyer saying "I was just stating a definition. 'Murder' is a group of crows, and my client isn't a group of crows, so he's innocent." I'm not talking about the definitions that you're stating. They're irrelevant. This whole debate came from my, not your, use of the word 'personhood.' I was not using personhood to refer to human beings, and you citing the fact that 'person' can mean 'human beings' is thus irrelevant. I never said I was not biased of course I am but my sites weren't. I am basing my belief on a non bias source. You are basing it off a certain agenda that's the difference... JennyColada Posted at 11:01 am on Dec. 10, 2011 justherefornow1 Posted at 10:58 am on Dec. 10, 2011 ok then were your ancestors in mexico when the spanish arrived? if you don't know the history you don't realize they dehumanized non-whites. That's all I meant which is akin to what you were trying to do. also what is the difference between you and the orchestrators of the holocaust nothing in thought process. You pretend it's not killing and they may have felt the same. SpM Posted at 10:55 am on Dec. 10, 2011 yeah, those filthy spaniards are pretty racist we should probably take away their civil rights to teach them a lesson about not judging people justherefornow1 Posted at 10:53 am on Dec. 10, 2011 nope I never did believe that abortion was ok because it needs its mother's body. You can't deny a fetus at 20 wks is a person by that logic. Therefore you think abortion is killing but legal because you think it should be.... JennyColada Posted at 10:52 am on Dec. 10, 2011 My family is from Mexico and Israel. To my knowledge I have no family from Spain. But I don't see what that has to do with anything about this discussion. And it does nothing to make your opinion seem rational or well-thought-out. And considering that I have family that was Jewish during the Holocaust, I really appreciate you trying to claim that my family was akin to slave owners. [/sarcasm] SpM Posted at 10:52 am on Dec. 10, 2011 men are just as free as women to jump up and down on petri dishes filled with human embryos. it's merely an accident of biology that women tend to have fetuses inside them. justherefornow1 Posted at 10:50 am on Dec. 10, 2011 I saw your photos you have spanish ancestry I thought anyway the spanish had dehumanized the slaves of african and native americans the same you tried to take personhood from fetuses. You'd be typical probably back then a slave owner... JennyColada Posted at 10:49 am on Dec. 10, 2011 I never did believe it: you did. justherefornow1 Posted at 10:44 am on Dec. 10, 2011 Quote: from JennyColada at 10:15 am on Dec. 10, 2011 Quote: from justherefornow1 at 10:13 am on Dec. 10, 2011 btw do you think your mom should have bashed your head in? Because you know you can abort at 24 and 25 weeks. Boulder colorado and surgicenter in atlanta are two in many abortion clinics that do this.... If my mon wanted an abortion that would have been her choice, not mine. I have no plan on suicide and my mother is quite happy to have me in her life. But that's the point, she chose to have a child with her husband (my father). exactly thanks this is what I mean why are you even pretending it's a matter of if the child needs to live in the mother's womb. If you are saying at 24 or 25 weeks or even 26 wks that it's what the mother says even though you admit at this far along it doesn't need its mother's body. That's what I mean for you you believe that a human should not have the right to have human rights because women should have more rights than anyone else for no apparent reason. That isn't very logical. But yea under your logic abortion is not a matter of whether it's killing rather an illogical belief that the mother should abort because she wants to. either way you've disproven your own belief on it needing to live in the mother's body as a valid reason as you apparently don't believe this yourself. JennyColada Posted at 10:15 am on Dec. 10, 2011 Quote: from justherefornow1 at 10:13 am on Dec. 10, 2011 btw do you think your mom should have bashed your head in? Because you know you can abort at 24 and 25 weeks. Boulder colorado and surgicenter in atlanta are two in many abortion clinics that do this.... If my mon wanted an abortion that would have been her choice, not mine. I have no plan on suicide and my mother is quite happy to have me in her life. But that's the point, she chose to have a child with her husband (my father). justherefornow1 Posted at 10:13 am on Dec. 10, 2011 btw do you think your mom should have bashed your head in? Because you know you can abort at 24 and 25 weeks. Boulder colorado and surgicenter in atlanta are two in many abortion clinics that do this.... Most recent 15 of 126 previous replies displayed.