• 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!

Abortion sends people to heaven sooner.

Atreus21 said:
In day to day use, murder means that. If it happened to be legal for whites to kill black people, we wouldn't stop calling it murder on the technicality that it's legal. What the Nazis did to the Jews was murder even though it was legal at the time, and even if they hadn't been defeated. Stalinists legally killing the kulaks are rightly called murderous.
Click to expand...

Nobody who has sinned is truly innocent though. Of course 6 million Jews did not deserve to be slaughtered in concentration camps. That is pure evil. But they were not "innocent" in the eyes of God because of their past sins.
 
Omniscient said:
**** the scientists

cut off point is for pragmatism in society

a compromise between both sides

womens rights and baby rights
Click to expand...

YOU said "so let the scientists make it then".

No compromise - abortion at any stage and without apology.
 
Scrabaholic said:
How can an INFANT deliberately disobey it's parents?
Click to expand...

I actually do not believe infants sin and go to hell. But to answer the question: If a parent tells her baby not to throw something and the baby throws the toy anyway, you bet that is disobedience.
 
Blue Donkey said:
I actually do not believe infants sin and go to hell. But to answer the question: If a parent tells her baby not to throw something and the baby throws the toy anyway, you bet that is disobedience.
Click to expand...

I don't think infants are capable of knowing right from wrong.
 
Blue Donkey said:
Nobody who has sinned is truly innocent though. Of course 6 million Jews did not deserve to be slaughtered in concentration camps. That is pure evil. But they were not "innocent" in the eyes of God because of their past sins.
Click to expand...

What does that have to do with what I said? I argued that murder may be narrowly defined as unlawful killing, but in practical use means wrongful killing.
 
Scrabaholic said:
No. No human being has the right to use the body as another for life support.
Click to expand...
Right. So then why bother posting this:

Scrabaholic said:
A fetus is not a human being. FACT.
Click to expand...

My whole objection to abortion lies in opposition to deliberately killing innocent human beings. If you believe it's okay to deliberately kill innocent human beings, then there isn't much to discuss. We can't agree on even the most fundamental moral claim.
 
Last edited:
Atreus21 said:
A corpse is dead by definition.The term child is here is defined in relation to his or her parents. You were a child from the moment you were conceived. A mother and father become parents when the mother gets pregnant.
Click to expand...

A child is born by definition. A fetus is a potential child. Every live body is a potential corpse. Ignoring the proper terms in favor of the emotional ones to make yourself sound more sincere is a little childish, but we all know the real anti-abortion agenda, so be our childish guest at the adult discussion.
 
weaver2 said:
A child is born by definition. A fetus is a potential child. Every live body is a potential corpse. Ignoring the proper terms in favor of the emotional ones to make yourself sound more sincere is a little childish, but we all know the real anti-abortion agenda, so be our childish guest at the adult discussion.
Click to expand...

You're wrong. The definition of child encompasses both interpretations, among others.

1616801184357.png
1616801261988.png
1616801314623.png
 
Atreus21 said:
My whole objection to abortion lies in opposition to deliberately killing innocent human beings. If you believe it's okay to deliberately kill innocent human beings, then there isn't much to discuss. We can't agree on even the most fundamental moral claim.
Click to expand...

Just out of curiosity; have you ever thought beyond your religious morality and the maudlin emotionalism of killing an innocent babies to what happens when the unwanted fetus of an unplanned pregnancy is not aborted, and is born into a poor and dysfunctional family?

Are you aware that 75% of abortions are done for women that live at or below the poverty line and actually can't afford another child? Do you know what happens to the other children when another child is added and the family sinks further into poverty?

Are you aware of how lack of financial stability disrupts normal, rational, behavior and why so many poor families are dysfunctional?

Are you aware of the dismal statistics concerning the adult future of unwanted children?

Do you have any thoughts on the morality of bringing a baby into a situation where it is not wanted, creates more family instability, can't be cared for lovingly, and where it will not grow up to be a contributing member of society?
 
weaver2 said:
Just out of curiosity; have you ever thought beyond your religious morality and the maudlin emotionalism of killing an innocent babies to what happens when the unwanted fetus of an unplanned pregnancy is not aborted, and is born into a poor and dysfunctional family?

Are you aware that 75% of abortions are done for women that live at or below the poverty line and actually can't afford another child? Do you know what happens to the other children when another child is added and the family sinks further into poverty?

Are you aware of how lack of financial stability disrupts normal, rational, behavior and why so many poor families are dysfunctional?
Click to expand...

If a child were conceived by a wealthy and happy couple, would you oppose their decision to abort? No. So this is all a smokescreen.

Are you aware of the dismal statistics concerning the adult future of unwanted children?
Click to expand...

Yes. Clearly killing the kid to save his life is a good solution. I wonder what the adult future is of dead kids as compared to poor ones.

Do you have any thoughts on the morality of bringing a baby into a situation where it is not wanted, creates more family instability, can't be cared for lovingly, and where it will not grow up to be a contributing member of society?
Click to expand...

Yes I do: Problematic living is better than being prescribed death without your consent.
 
weaver2 said:
Very gold star thorough. The technical term, used in formal discussions, debates, medical and legal situations is fetus if it is past the embryo stage. Words matter.
Click to expand...

Yes, and this is an internet politics forum.

Child can mean one of several things. I used the term correctly. A fetus isn't a child in the sense that it's been born, but is a child in relation to its ancestors.
 
Yeah why are these Christians walking around all paranoid with their guns if they know there’s heaven after this?
 
All your problems go away supposedly once you go to heaven. Death should be welcomed.
 
Is it because they know God isn’t going to forget that they locked up migrant children? Or that they support police killing black people?
 
I'm sorry you thought the questions were so stupid they warranted only flip answers.
Atreus21 said:
If a child were conceived by a wealthy and happy couple, would you oppose their decision to abort? No. So this is all a smokescreen.
Click to expand...
No smokescreen. When any family says, right now is a bad time for the family and for the potential child it would be wise to listen. It has been proven over and over that an unwanted child usually grows up to be an unhappy and unproductive adult. Women and their families do not abort for frivolous reasons. The questions were posed mainly about financially insecure families because that is the cohort that gets 75% of abortions and the results of an unwanted child are more devastating for the child and the family if they are living in poverty.

Clearly killing the kid to save his life is a good solution. I wonder what the adult future is of dead kids as compared to poor ones.
Click to expand...
An abortion does not "kill the kid". What is aborted is not a "kid". At the stage most abortions take place, 10 weeks or less, the fetus is 1.5" or less and weighs less than .5 ounces. It cannot think; it cannot feel; it is unaware; it is non-sentient. It has no biological independence. It cannot live outside the uterus. It is not a "kid". It is an unplanned and unwanted pregnancy that will produce an unplanned and unwanted "kid" who looks forward to a bleak future. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK232137/

Problematic living is better than being prescribed death without your consent.
Click to expand...
It is impossible for you to know that the life of an unwanted child is better for them than never having been born. You cannot make that assumption since you do not know the family. However, the family does know. They are in a position to to make the decision that an abortion is better than an unwanted child. What makes you so certain that you have the right to make decisions for them?
 
Dragonfly said:
Except killing 6 month old child is murder, while aborting 8 weeks old fetus is not.

Pro-choice folks don’t disagree with the above comment.
Click to expand...
Killing a six month old sends them to heaven
Killing a six year old sends them to heaven.....

Not the best of logic there...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom