• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

A letter

T

traillius

New member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
11
Reaction score
2
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
To the approximately 1 billion little humans that have been slaughtered by abortion:
On the behalf of all people of earth who live now, or have ever lived, We would like to extend an apology to all of you.We wish you could have been born and survived to enjoy all the blessings of life that we share on earth. We are sorry that, for whatever reason, you were wiped from this life before you had any chance to live. We hope and trust that you are now with God enjoying the love and life that you were denied on earth. We look forward to seeing you one day, and telling you these things in person. Maybe We can see then what you would have been had you been allowed to live. Until then, We wish you God's blessings and peace. We will pray for you, please pray for us. Once again, we are sorry your lives were taken.

Love,
the people of earth.
 

Some arrogance you have, attempting to speak for all the people of earth. Give it a rest.
 

If they are with God, then why do you care? Isn't that your ultimate goal, to make it to heaven?

What would you be willing to sacrafice to make sure you made it to heaven? What about for your children? Would you sacrafice your child's earth life and risk going to hell yourself to gaurantee your child's life ever lasting in heaven? Isn't that what abortion accomplishes? Killing of a pure spirit MUST make it to heaven yes?

I don't mean to speak for you as you have spoken for me, but anyway... please I look forward to your comment.
 

Bait thread, nothing to see here, move along folks :2wave:
 
Jerry said:
Bait thread, nothing to see here, move along folks :2wave:
Click to expand...

I don't agree--

I do think at some time in the future we will be rightfully appalled at the legal killing called abortion. We will be ashamed of the past in much the same way we are ashamed of our country's history of slavery--only the number of slaughtered human beings has already surpassed by far any previous horror that man has committed against his fellow man.
 

I don't consider this:



...my fellow man. It's a woman's property and I don't have any interest in telling her what she can and cannot do with it.
 

Uhmm what about all the miscarriages?
 
jallman said:
I don't consider this:



...my fellow man. It's a woman's property and I don't have any interest in telling her what she can and cannot do with it.
Click to expand...
/\
|| I think that's a mouse...but anyway...
I do believe that at that stage of human development, it is indeed your "fellow man" in that it is a human being at a very early stage of development. (Also--most abortions happen later than that stage and the little human is even more developed and "looks" even more "human"--as if "looks" matter:roll

Your not considering that human being a "person" illustrates the point I made about the way we now view our country's history of slavery. It seems absolutely obvious that blacks were and are indeed full human persons with inalienable rights of life and liberty. Likewise, human beings at whatever stage of development also deserve that recognition. It is "self-evident" as our fore-fathers noted.

LA BIOLOGIA DEL DESARROLLO PRENATAL Click on the videos--they are narrated in English.
 

It is self evident that all men are created equal. That is still being created and it's creation may be terminated with no moral consequence as a result. It is not your fellow man because it can return no empathy you mistakenly lavish upon it.

Don't believe me...get your tweezers and microscope out and give it a little cuddle. Maybe a little eskimo kiss if you don't mistakenly snort it up your nose first. See what you get out of it in the way of interaction or returned empathy.

To compare the plight of that thing to the plight of a slave is patently absurd.
 
traillius said:
On the behalf of all people of earth who live now, or have ever lived, We would like to extend an apology to all of you.
Click to expand...

Speak for yourself. I don't even apologize for the millions killed by my country dropping bombs indiscriminately on their countries. I don't apologize for rounding up the native inhabitants of this continent, slaughtering their women and children, and giving them disease-laden blankets as a gesture of "generosity."

What makes you think, for one second, that I would apologize for the deaths of innocent little babies who were killed under policies that I support, and whose killings I would have helped pay for if I could?

If they've got a grievance with me, I'll met them in the afterlife. And I'll kill them again there.
 
A Letter

To the countless sperm that have had their lives destroyed by the wicked whims of Trojans:

On the behalf of all people of earth who live now, or have ever lived, we would like to extend an apology to all of you. We wish you could have been born and survived to enjoy all the blessings of life that we share on earth.

We are sorry for the accursed promiscuous who sought to destroy the glories of the majestic cumshot. We weep and mourn for those who suffered and died in the horrific rubber chamber created by the abominations of latex. We gnash our teeth and curse the "pro-contraception" murderers and their despicable "Spunk is Junk" campaign. We condemn those who chose to "jack and jizz," and follow this blasphemy with the use of tissues to wipe you from the face of our world.

Until then, we wish you God's blessings and peace. We will pray for you, please pray for us. Once again, we are sorry your lives were taken.
 
jallman said:
It is self evident that all men are created equal. That is still being created and it's creation may be terminated with no moral consequence as a result. It is not your fellow man because it can return no empathy you mistakenly lavish upon it.
Click to expand...
You just make stuff up, don't you? What does "empathy" have to do with whether or not a human being is a person? It is a made up "criteria" that you and people who want to be able to kill humans with no legal consequence cite as if your "say so" means anything at all in reality. YOU are still being created. Human beings grow throughout their lifetimes.

To compare the plight of that thing to the plight of a slave is patently absurd.
Click to expand...
Your "feelings based" argument is what is absurd.
 

You used the word "fellow", not me. So let's see what empathy has to do with something being your "fellow" anything, shall we?

fellow

Comrade, partner, friend...nah, none of those things require a measure of empathy. What the hell was I thinking just making that stuff up? :roll:

And your assessment of "being created" is shallow and self serving to your agenda. It is in no way, shape, or form relevant to the discussion at hand.

Your "feelings based" argument is what is absurd.
Click to expand...

Feelings based argument, my ass. That's code for "felicity won't put thought into debunking it so she's going to dismiss it out of hand whether that's an honest dismissal or not".

We've played this game before. You've yet to win it thus far and your chances of winning it now are about nil.
 
Last edited:
jallman said:
Yeah...how does that begin to answer anything I said so far? :doh
Click to expand...

Well your feelings based argument hasn't been defended, so I don't know what you want And your simple dismissal of fact --repeatedly-- shows you're without grounds for your assertions. I can't help you when you have no substance and only personal attacks on the facts I present you with. :shrug:
 

I've presented grounds for my assertions. You dismissed them with some irrelevant definition which, coincidentally, proved my point entirely.

If you want to discuss it, discuss it. But I have moved way beyond tolerance of your dismissals and cries of emotional arguments where there are none.
 
jallman said:
I've presented grounds for my assertions. You dismissed them with some irrelevant definition which, coincidentally, proved my point entirely.
Click to expand...
You are deflecting away from the issue by miring in an irrelevant rabbit trail. You claimed somehow your emotional appeal was justified since I used the term "fellow man." But fellow man simply means "kindred human being" and kindred simply means related. Being that all human beings are kindred in that we are of the same "kind"--your claim, and the rabbit trail it inspires, are wrong.

If you want to discuss it, discuss it. But I have moved way beyond tolerance of your dismissals and cries of emotional arguments where there are none.
Click to expand...

Why don't you look up empathy, and tell me how your argument that an embryo can't feel empathy isn't a "feelings" based argument.

Further, your claim that the human being in the womb is a woman's "property" most certainly is comparable to the slavery issue. All you do is say the comparison is absurd. But in both cases it's human beings being considered property, not persons.
 
You nor anybody else speaks for THIS person on Earth! Talk about an ego problem:roll:
 
Felicity said:
-- It seems absolutely obvious that blacks were and are indeed full human persons with inalienable rights of life and liberty.
Click to expand...

I doubt the US forefathers were really that prescient as early history showed they treated their fellow man differently from their lofty ideals.

Felicity said:
-- Likewise, human beings at whatever stage of development also deserve that recognition. It is "self-evident" as our fore-fathers noted --
Click to expand...

Now that is where the problem lies.

The logic of giving equal rights at conception / attachement / whatever early stage to the adult carrier / pregnant female would cause all sorts of ethical problems that are simply unenforceable. That is why as the child develops within the womb is acquires greater and greater rights until they are almost full rights.

There are consequences to saying that the mother's personal liberty is compromised because of her unborn child that should not be tolerated - compromises that would either fill the prisons with mothers who drank while pregnant or smoked a cigarette. Equally there would be unseen consequences for mothers unwilling to carry through to birth whose lifestyle would have to be curtailed so that others (who will never have to care for the child) can mollify their lofty ideals of liberty.

The consequences for the unwanted children however are the greatest - if a mother does not give up personal liberty and spends her time during gestation injecting / flying in an airplane / drinking alcohol / popping recreational drugs / whatever - do we arrest the mother before or after she has given birth?

Who then takes these children on? Some may be adopted but would anyone argue that all of them would be? Care homes are not the way forward and many adults who came through care homes will tell you of the hell they can be.

What about the children whose development was damaged because their mother was forced to carry through and either affected her children through lifestyle choices that a mother who wants her children would never consider?

And finally, where are these "inalienable rights" that some go on about? Where are they codified into any legal law? In the US (as most posters are from the US) only certain elements have been codified into law i.e. "Unborn Victims of Violence" - giving only limited grounds for application and it excluded abortion. Where is else is it codified? Roe vs Wade (if memory serves).

Thus the letter of the OP is a moral sentiment - not even an argument. It has no grounds in legal law and as stated it has unforeseen consequences for those unwanted children and unwilling mothers that society could not tolerate.
 
I would like to point out that the person who wrote this original post has not taken any time to follow up on any thing here...

I suggest we let this one die if he is not willing to engage in the debate.
 
Infinite Chaos said:
I doubt the US forefathers were really that prescient as early history showed they treated their fellow man differently from their lofty ideals.
Click to expand...
I don't doubt they never imagined the legal killing of human beings in the womb! It doesn't matter whether they "thought of it" or not--the fundamental principle applies. Even at the time they expressed it, they did not appreciate the all encompassing Truth of the statement. Personally, I believe it was Divine Inspiration!



The logic of giving equal rights at conception / attachement / whatever early stage to the adult carrier / pregnant female would cause all sorts of ethical problems that are simply unenforceable.
Click to expand...
Whether or not one can "enforce" a position has no bearing on what is the RIGHT position.

That is why as the child develops within the womb is acquires greater and greater rights until they are almost full rights.
Click to expand...
It has nothing to do with acquiring "rights" and everything top do with imposed legal opinion. Human rights transcend law. What is "legal" is not always in accord with human rights as (again) the slavery issue demonstrates.

There are consequences to saying that the mother's personal liberty is compromised because of her unborn child that should not be tolerated - compromises that would either fill the prisons with mothers who drank while pregnant or smoked a cigarette.
Click to expand...


Birthing Under The Influence - July 15, 2005

Fetal homicide charge for drinking while pregnant -- Macready 313 (7058): 645 -- BMJ

FindLaw's Writ - Aronson: A South Carolina Conviction Based On A Pregnant Woman's Cocaine Use



Equally there would be unseen consequences for mothers unwilling to carry through to birth whose lifestyle would have to be curtailed so that others (who will never have to care for the child) can mollify their lofty ideals of liberty.
Click to expand...
Oh well. You can't kill a born human because he's "inconvenient to a lifestyle.":roll:


States can figure that out.

Who then takes these children on? Some may be adopted but would anyone argue that all of them would be? Care homes are not the way forward and many adults who came through care homes will tell you of the hell they can be.
Click to expand...
People's behaviors would change. Drunk driving laws and adverts attest to behavior modifications.


What about the children whose development was damaged because their mother was forced to carry through and either affected her children through lifestyle choices that a mother who wants her children would never consider?
Click to expand...
Hmmmm...killing 50 million....some affected children...50 million dead, some much smaller number harmed, but not likely dead....strictly on numbers, gotta go with NOT killing babies.
All our laws rest upon our fundamental and inalienable rights.:doh

Where is else is it codified? Roe vs Wade (if memory serves).
Click to expand...
RvW is not a law--it's a legal ruling that usurps states' right to make laws concerning the prohibition of abortion.
 

I disagree here.

If overpopulation becomes a global strain on resources, you will see more govts. following the lead of China. Outside of war or pandemic, how else would we control overpopulation?
 
independent_thinker2002 said:
I disagree here.

If overpopulation becomes a global strain on resources, you will see more govts. following the lead of China. Outside of war or pandemic, how else would we control overpopulation?
Click to expand...

That overpopulation argument is lame. Support your assertion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…