"ABORTION NOT A HUMAN RIGHT EVEN IN CASES OF RAPE" - UN Security Council [W:231]

[joko104]

Re: "ABORTION NOT A HUMAN RIGHT EVEN IN CASES OF RAPE" - UN Security Council

[Insert "Nazi's didn't think Jews were people either" comment here.]

That's a lie anyway. Nazi's didn't think Jews weren't people. But some Nazi's did believe in using women as breeding stock.

 

[zgoldsmith23]

Re: "ABORTION NOT A HUMAN RIGHT EVEN IN CASES OF RAPE" - UN Security Council

If you don't consider the unborn to be people. I however, do.

Great, then don't have an abortion. Shouldn't be too hard for you.

 

[davidtaylorjr]

Re: "ABORTION NOT A HUMAN RIGHT EVEN IN CASES OF RAPE" - UN Security Council

Great, then don't have an abortion. Shouldn't be too hard for you.

That has nothing to do with anything.

 

[zgoldsmith23]

Re: "ABORTION NOT A HUMAN RIGHT EVEN IN CASES OF RAPE" - UN Security Council

That has nothing to do with anything.

Yeah, don't talk about abortion when talking about abortion. :roll:

 

[davidtaylorjr]

Re: "ABORTION NOT A HUMAN RIGHT EVEN IN CASES OF RAPE" - UN Security Council

Yeah, don't talk about abortion when talking about abortion. :roll:

You weren't talking about abortion. You told me to not get one. Essentially you were saying: "shutup" to me.

 

[zgoldsmith23]

Re: "ABORTION NOT A HUMAN RIGHT EVEN IN CASES OF RAPE" - UN Security Council

You weren't talking about abortion. You told me to not get one. Essentially you were saying: "shutup" to me.

Playing the victim card? It's a bit early for that. And yes, I specifically said "abortion" in the sentence - I see reading isn't on your resume under "skills."

Anyway, you want to think they're people and it's wrong to kill them? Great. Don't get an abortion. That doesn't mean you can force someone to accept your claim and live under your standard especially when the situation does not even involve you.

 

[davidtaylorjr]

Re: "ABORTION NOT A HUMAN RIGHT EVEN IN CASES OF RAPE" - UN Security Council

Playing the victim card? It's a bit early for that. And yes, I specifically said "abortion" in the sentence - I see reading isn't on your resume under "skills."

Anyway, you want to think they're people and it's wrong to kill them? Great. Don't get an abortion. That doesn't mean you can force someone to accept your claim and live under your standard especially when the situation does not even involve you.

I will fight for the unborn. They deserve life and freedom from the opression of monsters like yourself.

 

[zgoldsmith23]

Re: "ABORTION NOT A HUMAN RIGHT EVEN IN CASES OF RAPE" - UN Security Council

I will fight for the unborn. They deserve life and freedom from the opression of monsters like yourself.

Why do they deserve life? Oppression, really?

 

[davidtaylorjr]

Re: "ABORTION NOT A HUMAN RIGHT EVEN IN CASES OF RAPE" - UN Security Council

Why do they deserve life? Oppression, really?

Because they are a living human being. Everyone has a right to life. You do agree with the Declaration right?

 

[zgoldsmith23]

Re: "ABORTION NOT A HUMAN RIGHT EVEN IN CASES OF RAPE" - UN Security Council

Because they are a living human being. Everyone has a right to life. You do agree with the Declaration right?

Perhaps. Perhaps I don't. Specifically, how are they a living human being?

 

[davidtaylorjr]

Re: "ABORTION NOT A HUMAN RIGHT EVEN IN CASES OF RAPE" - UN Security Council

Perhaps. Perhaps I don't. Specifically, how are they a living human being?

The better question is how are they not?

 

[zgoldsmith23]

Re: "ABORTION NOT A HUMAN RIGHT EVEN IN CASES OF RAPE" - UN Security Council

The better question is how are they not?

Positive claim is yours and the scientific burder of proof rests on your shoulders. Good luck, Atlas.

 

[davidtaylorjr]

Re: "ABORTION NOT A HUMAN RIGHT EVEN IN CASES OF RAPE" - UN Security Council

Positive claim is yours and the scientific burder of proof rests on your shoulders. Good luck, Atlas.

when does life begin?

 

[joko104]

Re: "ABORTION NOT A HUMAN RIGHT EVEN IN CASES OF RAPE" - UN Security Council

I will fight for the unborn. They deserve life and freedom from the opression of monsters like yourself.

zgoldsmith is not a monster. He is a "human homosapien person" and a member in good standing of this DebatePolitics.com forum.

 

[zgoldsmith23]

Re: "ABORTION NOT A HUMAN RIGHT EVEN IN CASES OF RAPE" - UN Security Council

when does life begin?

Wow quality source. Doesn't get more "middle of the road" than that.

Anyway, good job. You've proved that, at some time, the fetus is alive. Of course, I could question when are all five of those facts met. But, nah, I'll save that for another one. Next, is it a human being? Well, it (presumably) carries human DNA so, it's safe to say it's a potential human. Is it a being? Well, it's certainly not sentient early on. I'll try to find a copy that you can read, but I remember Tawia showing sentience, at the earliest forms was around 18 - 25 weeks and proposed it is closer to 30 weeks. I could also ask you, why are you so certain they deserve life? Why are you so certain that, even when I grant all the premises required to make it a human being, that murdering it is wrong? These are all positive claims for which you must provide evidence.

 

[davidtaylorjr]

Re: "ABORTION NOT A HUMAN RIGHT EVEN IN CASES OF RAPE" - UN Security Council

Wow quality source. Doesn't get more "middle of the road" than that.

Anyway, good job. You've proved that, at some time, the fetus is alive. Of course, I could question when are all five of those facts met. But, nah, I'll save that for another one. Next, is it a human being? Well, it (presumably) carries human DNA so, it's safe to say it's a potential human. Is it a being? Well, it's certainly not sentient early on. I'll try to find a copy that you can read, but I remember Tawia showing sentience, at the earliest forms was around 18 - 25 weeks and proposed it is closer to 30 weeks. I could also ask you, why are you so certain they deserve life? Why are you so certain that, even when I grant all the premises required to make it a human being, that murdering it is wrong? These are all positive claims for which you must provide evidence.

So murder isn't wrong?

 

[zgoldsmith23]

Re: "ABORTION NOT A HUMAN RIGHT EVEN IN CASES OF RAPE" - UN Security Council

So murder isn't wrong?

Again, your positive claim, the scientific BoP is on you. Good luck (again).

 

[davidtaylorjr]

Re: "ABORTION NOT A HUMAN RIGHT EVEN IN CASES OF RAPE" - UN Security Council

Again, your positive claim, the scientific BoP is on you. Good luck (again).

Already proved my point. You want more and more and more, when I already proved my point.

 

[Dittohead not!]

Re: "ABORTION NOT A HUMAN RIGHT EVEN IN CASES OF RAPE" - UN Security Council

when does life begin?

Of course the association of pro life physicians, or an association of pro life anyone else, is going to agree that life begins at conception. And, given that presumption, abortion is no different from killing a child. Since no one would support killing a child because he/she was the result of a rape, then it follows that abortion for that reason is no different.

So, the argument boils down to life beginning at conception and a collection of cells that requires the use of a microscope to see being no different from a living, breathing, thinking human being at any age.

But, you see, the presumption of life beginning at conception is the issue with the entire argument.

 

[zgoldsmith23]

Re: "ABORTION NOT A HUMAN RIGHT EVEN IN CASES OF RAPE" - UN Security Council

Already proved my point. You want more and more and more, when I already proved my point.

Well, it's a debate site, generally discussion and discourse is par the course. You proved your point of, what, exactly? Conception being a potential beginning of life if one accepts the premise?

Oh, and this is the article I was referencing earlier: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

Of course the association of pro life physicians, or an association of pro life anyone else, is going to agree that life begins at conception. And, given that presumption, abortion is no different from killing a child. Since no one would support killing a child because he/she was the result of a rape, then it follows that abortion for that reason is no different.

So, the argument boils down to life beginning at conception and a collection of cells that requires the use of a microscope to see being no different from a living, breathing, thinking human being at any age.

But, you see, the presumption of life beginning at conception is the issue with the entire argument.

Well, not so fast. How old is the child? If the child is the product on incestuous rape and will have genetic plagues, etc. then it could, potentially, be justifiable.

 

[Removable Mind]

Re: "ABORTION NOT A HUMAN RIGHT EVEN IN CASES OF RAPE" - UN Security Council

If you don't consider the unborn to be people. I however, do.

We all understand that's your belief, David....but you have to realize that beliefs can only be a reality by those who have the ability to manifest beliefs into actions or behaviors. As a man, that leaves you little to take action on because you don't ever have to worry about aborting a fetus inside yourself.

Beliefs are just beliefs...unless they are manifested into a behavior. You are powerless over the behaviors of other people. Well, unless you confine them in a small room and restrain their arms and legs. And even then...a person can hold their breathe until they die.

What you are really saying is that, based on your beliefs, that you want women's right to control their reproductive roles substantially reduced and/or oppressed to the point that they have no choice...by some authority. In order to do that...an authority would have to know when a woman co-conceives. Unless a woman shares that she has co-conceived...????? So essentially, a woman is the master of her own uterus. And it is up to each and every woman who does co-conceive to determine, by choice, as to whether or not she wants allow that co-conception to develop to full-term.

The only thing authorities can do is cause risk to life and health of a born women, who must endure the daily tasks and struggles that all other born persons must...by imposing legal penalties on persons who would assist women who seek an abortion. That is not in any shape or form allowing women equality under the law.

If you had the power...you would deny women equal have rights under the law...once they co-conceive.

You place the value of a fetus over born women...period. And by your past posts - the reason for that belief is because you believe that all conceptions are of a divine origin, nature, or influence for the purpose to providing a biological entity for a supernatural being to take possess of...which is not a globally accepted belief. And further more...you believe that all persons who don't believe as you do...are committing sins and in the case of abortion...cold blooded murder of another person. That too is not a globally accepted belief...by human laws and some religions.

The ability to have "choice" is what keeps humanity for becoming extinct.

 

[davidtaylorjr]

Re: "ABORTION NOT A HUMAN RIGHT EVEN IN CASES OF RAPE" - UN Security Council

We all understand that's your belief, David....but you have to realize that beliefs can only be a reality by those who have the ability to manifest beliefs into actions or behaviors. As a man, that leaves you little to take action on because you don't ever have to worry about aborting a fetus inside yourself.

Beliefs are just beliefs...unless they are manifested into a behavior. You are powerless over the behaviors of other people. Well, unless you confine them in a small room and restrain their arms and legs. And even then...a person can hold their breathe until they die.

What you are really saying is that, based on your beliefs, that you want women's right to control their reproductive roles substantially reduced and/or oppressed to the point that they have no choice...by some authority. In order to do that...an authority would have to know when a woman co-conceives. Unless a woman shares that she has co-conceived...????? So essentially, a woman is the master of her own uterus. And it is up to each and every woman who does co-conceive to determine, by choice, as to whether or not she wants allow that co-conception to develop to full-term.

The only thing authorities can do is cause risk to life and health of a born women, who must endure the daily tasks and struggles that all other born persons must...by imposing legal penalties on persons who would assist women who seek an abortion. That is not in any shape or form allowing women equality under the law.

If you had the power...you would deny women equal have rights under the law...once they co-conceive.

You place the value of a fetus over born women...period. And by your past posts - the reason for that belief is because you believe that all conceptions are of a divine origin, nature, or influence for the purpose to providing a biological entity for a supernatural being to take possess of...which is not a globally accepted belief. And further more...you believe that all persons who don't believe as you do...are committing sins and in the case of abortion...cold blooded murder of another person. That too is not a globally accepted belief...by human laws and some religions.

The ability to have "choice" is what keeps humanity for becoming extinct.

The opinion against mine is not globally accepted either. It's a split issue.

 

[Dittohead not!]

Re: "ABORTION NOT A HUMAN RIGHT EVEN IN CASES OF RAPE" - UN Security Council

The opinion against mine is not globally accepted either. It's a split issue.

Exactly so.

Which is why the debate will continue indefinitely.

 

[davidtaylorjr]

Re: "ABORTION NOT A HUMAN RIGHT EVEN IN CASES OF RAPE" - UN Security Council

Exactly so.

Which is why the debate will continue indefinitely.

In which case, should you not take the more conservative route in case that is actually the correct one? I mean think if we truly have been murdering thousands of children.

 

[joko104]

Re: "ABORTION NOT A HUMAN RIGHT EVEN IN CASES OF RAPE" - UN Security Council

In which case, should you not take the more conservative route in case that is actually the correct one? I mean think if we truly have been murdering thousands of children.

The words "conservative" and "liberal" have no meaning in the abortion issue. Claiming they do is partisan hackery and blind loyalty to assigned terminology. A person can define both prolife and prochoice as both liberal or conservative. That is so obvious I see no reason to explain in detail.

However, for example, many "conservatives" take an anti-big-government view for which the government should just butt out of such personal issues. The "conservative" may then personally oppose abortion on a moral ground, but militantly oppose the government enforcing that morality - OR may support abortion rights as a fundamental individual right each person decides - ie a "conservative" personal liberty opinion.

The same type of variations of priorities and fact-applications can have a "liberal" be prochoice or prolife.