Pages: 1 2 3  Next -- Posted by whoisabs at 5:38 pm on April 2, 2007 I am a strong supporter of the concept of choice, and thus consider myself to be pro-choice. I support the choice to have sex. That sex is a concious act that individuals take part in, and in doing so make a voluntary choice to do so, with the exception of rape. I also have enough knowledge of science to understand that upon making the choice to have sex, that I am also making the choice to run the risk of having my sperm mix with a woman's eggs to produce a separate and unique individual. Rape is when your right to choice has been violated, thus any obligation to future consequence is null and void. I also support the choice to live or not. That if an individual wants to kill themselves for whatever reason, then they should be allowed to do as such. Thus if someone is so poor, or so unloved that their quality of life is to a point where their life is not worth living, then they should have the right to make the choice to continue living or not. In support of the choice to live or not also follows that other individuals should not be allowed to force either of those conditions upon another individual, unless said individual has done something to forefit their rights. That a person who has made grievous crimes has forefitted their right to make their own choice about life or death, thus the state is allowed to make the choice for them. That an individual who has attempted to attack another and as such is attempting to take away that person's right to choice is in effect forefitting their own right to choice and as such the person being attacked has every right to choose to kill the attacker or not in the defense of their own personal right to choose. When abortions take place there is no regard for choice, with exception to medical emergancies and sometimes rape. The child's right to decide if it lives or not is being violated, and the violators of said rights should be punished. Anyone who would do such a thing simply is proving that they oppose the very concept of choice, and are in effect anti-choice. -- Posted by The Dalai Lama at 5:40 pm on April 2, 2007 fetuses don't have rights.  they aren't citizens yet. -- Posted by whoisabs at 5:42 pm on April 2, 2007 Quote: from The Dalai Lama at 5:40 pm on April 2, 2007 fetuses don't have rights.  they aren't citizens yet. Just nice to know that you believe that non-citizens should have no rights, and should just be slaughtered for whatever reason. -- Posted by nickkyd at 5:42 pm on April 2, 2007 i am pro-abortions if you dont like to bad -- Posted by vanquisher91 at 5:42 pm on April 2, 2007 Quote: from The Dalai Lama at 7:40 pm on April 2, 2007 fetuses don't have rights.  they aren't citizens yet. That may be the most horrible correct statement I've ever read... -- Posted by nickkyd at 5:43 pm on April 2, 2007 Quote: from whoisabs at 5:42 pm on April 2, 2007 Quote: from The Dalai Lama at 5:40 pm on April 2, 2007 fetuses don't have rights.  they aren't citizens yet.   Just nice to know that you believe that non-citizens should have no rights, and should just be slaughtered for whatever reason. that not what he is saying -- Posted by Rastafarian at 5:43 pm on April 2, 2007 Quote: from whoisabs at 6:38 pm on April 2, 2007 When abortions take place there is no regard for choice, with exception to medical emergancies and sometimes rape. The child's right to decide if it lives or not is being violated, and the violators of said rights should be punished. Anyone who would do such a thing simply is proving that they oppose the very concept of choice, and are in effect anti-choice. So very true. Who are we to violate the rights of another person? If so should forfeit our own rights it would seem, as that is what takes place in ANY other situation other then abortion. -- Posted by whoisabs at 5:44 pm on April 2, 2007 life liberty and property -- Posted by marine chic at 5:44 pm on April 2, 2007 Even though you have contradicted yourself, I think that this is one issue where that might be necessary.  But I have a question:  Since the doctor performing the abortion has killed the fetus (if it is indeed to be considered alive at this point), shouldn't he then be considered a murderer?  And if not, then what about the people who throw the switch for the electric chair?  Should they not be killed as well? -- Posted by Glow Worm at 5:45 pm on April 2, 2007 That's nice and all, but I believe that only people get rights, and I don't know about how things roll in Texas, but the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that fetuses are not people. That's enough for me. -- Posted by Rastafarian at 5:46 pm on April 2, 2007 Quote: from The Dalai Lama at 6:40 pm on April 2, 2007 fetuses don't have rights.  they aren't citizens yet. So. If I hypothetically made a time machine and killed you as a fetus. I'm off scot free? I hate time machine analogies but... This irrationality could extend to killing someone and then saying "THEY WERE A FETUS, THEY'VE GOT NO RIGHT TO LIVE!!!?!" Which is idiocy. -- Posted by The Dalai Lama at 5:48 pm on April 2, 2007 Quote: from Rastafarian at 5:46 pm on April 2, 2007 Quote: from The Dalai Lama at 6:40 pm on April 2, 2007 fetuses don't have rights.  they aren't citizens yet. So. If I hypothetically made a time machine and killed you as a fetus. I'm off scot free? I hate time machine analogies but... This irrationality could extend to killing someone and then saying "THEY WERE A FETUS, THEY'VE GOT NO RIGHT TO LIVE!!!?!" Which is idiocy. uh.  hyopthetically.  sure. -- Posted by whoisabs at 5:50 pm on April 2, 2007 Quote: from Rastafarian at 5:46 pm on April 2, 2007 Quote: from The Dalai Lama at 6:40 pm on April 2, 2007 fetuses don't have rights.  they aren't citizens yet. So. If I hypothetically made a time machine and killed you as a fetus. I'm off scot free? I hate time machine analogies but... This irrationality could extend to killing someone and then saying "THEY WERE A FETUS, THEY'VE GOT NO RIGHT TO LIVE!!!?!" Which is idiocy. Or you could just simply look at the fact that the reason why they have no rights, especially the right not to be murdered, is the fact that they are not citizens. -- Posted by Cingular Wireless at 5:50 pm on April 2, 2007 I hate murder -- Posted by drifting at 5:51 pm on April 2, 2007 I pretty much agree, although I think in the case of rape, they should be discouraged, and should have to do a ton of counseling before they are able to make that choice. They should also have to fully understand what they are doing. -- Posted by eiwets at 5:51 pm on April 2, 2007 The fetus is not really a person yet though. they do not have a life, they have the potential of life. if it's a crime to take away potential of life, Am i not killing a person everytime i walk by a woman on the street without having sex with her the same way i am when i kill a fetus? -- Posted by Rastafarian at 5:52 pm on April 2, 2007 Quote: from whoisabs at 6:50 pm on April 2, 2007 Quote: from Rastafarian at 5:46 pm on April 2, 2007 Quote: from The Dalai Lama at 6:40 pm on April 2, 2007 fetuses don't have rights.  they aren't citizens yet.    So. If I hypothetically made a time machine and killed you as a fetus. I'm off scot free?    I hate time machine analogies but...    This irrationality could extend to killing someone and then saying "THEY WERE A FETUS, THEY'VE GOT NO RIGHT TO LIVE!!!?!"    Which is idiocy. Or you could just simply look at the fact that the reason why they have no rights, especially the right not to be murdered, is the fact that they are not citizens. So illegal immigrants should be murdered it seems. -- Posted by whoisabs at 5:52 pm on April 2, 2007 Quote: from marine chic at 5:44 pm on April 2, 2007 Even though you have contradicted yourself Proof? And if not, then what about the people who throw the switch for the electric chair?  Should they not be killed as well? That a person who has made grievous crimes has forefitted their right to make their own choice about life or death, thus the state is allowed to make the choice for them. Learn to read. -- Posted by Khadgar at 5:53 pm on April 2, 2007 It's not about if you believe in choice or not, it's about in whose hands you feel the choice should be placed, and the circumstances surrounding this placement. -- Posted by seg at 5:53 pm on April 2, 2007 abortion is abortion: murder... it's not an issue about 'who' is responsible for killing the baby/fetus.  it's still terminating a life, a soul.  the concern is not primarily the mother, but the baby.  i think it's ridiculous people have stupid debates about such a plain fact that abortion is terrible.  adoption's always an option.  a life's a life, no matter what stage a person's in.  it's like saying it's okay to kill seniors/old people who can't function on their own in the world.  it's like saying if people aren't living the 'normal' life in the world, they dont' relaly need the opportunity to live, in whatever stage they are in.  we were all fetuses at the beginning of our lives.  we are no better or worthy than those babies to live.  that's what i have to say. -- Posted by shadowFox at 5:53 pm on April 2, 2007 Quote: from whoisabs at 5:38 pm on April 2, 2007 I am a strong supporter of the concept of choice, and thus consider myself to be pro-choice. I support the choice to have sex. That sex is a concious act that individuals take part in, and in doing so make a voluntary choice to do so, with the exception of rape. I also have enough knowledge of science to understand that upon making the choice to have sex, that I am also making the choice to run the risk of having my sperm mix with a woman's eggs to produce a separate and unique individual. Rape is when your right to choice has been violated, thus any obligation to future consequence is null and void. I also support the choice to live or not. That if an individual wants to kill themselves for whatever reason, then they should be allowed to do as such. Thus if someone is so poor, or so unloved that their quality of life is to a point where their life is not worth living, then they should have the right to make the choice to continue living or not. In support of the choice to live or not also follows that other individuals should not be allowed to force either of those conditions upon another individual, unless said individual has done something to forefit their rights. That a person who has made grievous crimes has forefitted their right to make their own choice about life or death, thus the state is allowed to make the choice for them. That an individual who has attempted to attack another and as such is attempting to take away that person's right to choice is in effect forefitting their own right to choice and as such the person being attacked has every right to choose to kill the attacker or not in the defense of their own personal right to choose. When abortions take place there is no regard for choice, with exception to medical emergancies and sometimes rape. The child's right to decide if it lives or not is being violated, and the violators of said rights should be punished. Anyone who would do such a thing simply is proving that they oppose the very concept of choice, and are in effect anti-choice. I overall agree with what you're saying. -- Posted by marine chic at 5:54 pm on April 2, 2007 Quote: from eiwets at 5:51 pm on April 2, 2007 The fetus is not really a person yet though. they do not have a life, they have the potential of life. if it's a crime to take away potential of life, Am i not killing a person everytime i walk by a woman on the street without having sex with her the same way i am when i kill a fetus? But there is a difference between "Potential Life" and the beginning of a life, is there not? -- Posted by whoisabs at 5:55 pm on April 2, 2007 Quote: from Rastafarian at 5:52 pm on April 2, 2007 So illegal immigrants should be murdered it seems. That a person who has made grievous crimes has forefitted their right to make their own choice about life or death, thus the state is allowed to make the choice for them. Considering that the operative term is illegal when it comes to illegal immigrant... -- Posted by Honey Lee at 5:55 pm on April 2, 2007 Quote: from Glow Worm at 5:45 pm on April 2, 2007 That's nice and all, but I believe that only people get rights, and I don't know about how things roll in Texas, but the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that fetuses are not people. That's enough for me. So if I was the Supreme Court of Canada and I said you should die, would that be enough for you? Sorry to be rude but develop your own thoughts. -- Posted by Rastafarian at 5:56 pm on April 2, 2007 Quote: from eiwets at 6:51 pm on April 2, 2007 The fetus is not really a person yet though. they do not have a life, they have the potential of life. if it's a crime to take away potential of life, Am i not killing a person everytime i walk by a woman on the street without having sex with her the same way i am when i kill a fetus? You made the choice to run the risk of creating potential life. That is a choice you make by having sex. However, if you make the choice not to run that risk then so be it. You head off the risk of having a child before it happens. There is a difference between the actual existence of an entity (which you created through your choices), and not. -- Posted by whoisabs at 5:57 pm on April 2, 2007 Quote: from seg at 5:53 pm on April 2, 2007 abortion is abortion: murder... it's not an issue about 'who' is responsible for killing the baby/fetus.  it's still terminating a life, a soul. Souls cannot be proven to exist, and if you do introduce souls into the equation, then you have a few problems in your argument dealing with the first ~14 days. -- Posted by whoisabs at 5:59 pm on April 2, 2007 Gametes =/= separate and unique individual human. gametes == potiental life humans == new life -- Posted by eiwets at 6:03 pm on April 2, 2007 Quote: from Rastafarian at 5:56 pm on April 2, 2007 Quote: from eiwets at 6:51 pm on April 2, 2007 The fetus is not really a person yet though. they do not have a life, they have the potential of life. if it's a crime to take away potential of life, Am i not killing a person everytime i walk by a woman on the street without having sex with her the same way i am when i kill a fetus? You made the choice to run the risk of creating potential life. That is a choice you make by having sex. However, if you make the choice not to run that risk then so be it. You head off the risk of having a child before it happens. There is a difference between the actual existence of an entity (which you created through your choices), and not. The difference between a fetus that has been unconcious in a mothers womb doing shit all and a sperm/egg i dont combine walking down the street seems to me to be negligable. religious beliefs that such things have a soul should be left out of government. if you think this fetus is truly alive with a soul fine dont get an abortion. But unless you can prove a case that a fetus is more than a potential life other people should still be aloud to get them. -- Posted by eiwets at 6:04 pm on April 2, 2007 Quote: from marine chic at 5:54 pm on April 2, 2007 Quote: from eiwets at 5:51 pm on April 2, 2007 The fetus is not really a person yet though. they do not have a life, they have the potential of life. if it's a crime to take away potential of life, Am i not killing a person everytime i walk by a woman on the street without having sex with her the same way i am when i kill a fetus? But there is a difference between "Potential Life" and the beginning of a life, is there not? In this case? only if your a christian. -- Posted by Glow Worm at 6:07 pm on April 2, 2007 Quote: from Honey Lee at 8:55 pm on April 2, 2007 Quote: from Glow Worm at 5:45 pm on April 2, 2007 That's nice and all, but I believe that only people get rights, and I don't know about how things roll in Texas, but the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that fetuses are not people. That's enough for me. So if I was the Supreme Court of Canada and I said you should die, would that be enough for you?   Sorry to be rude but develop your own thoughts. Oh, I've been supportive of abortions since I found out what abortions were. The fact that my government backs me up is just a bonus. Pages: 1 2 3  Next