• 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: What is YOUR view, what would YOU do.

davidtaylorjr said:
My view is that abortion, no matter what the circumstance, is immoral and wrong. It is not our role to play God. Every life is sacred and made in the image of God, and it is not our job to determine who is born and who is not. It is not a woman's "right" to kill a baby. Just like it is not my "right" to kill my neighbor.

Life begins at conception, so abortion is murder no matter which way you slice it.

Now before all of the haters begin... I am not saying that it is good if a woman becomes pregnant after a rape, or if the woman's life is in peril, those are terrible things. But those things do not give us the right to kill the baby. It was of no fault of the baby that those things happen. That would be like killing someone for a crime their brother committed. It just isn't right.
Click to expand...

thanks for your reply

so what would you like done legally?
do you want abortion totally banned and made murder?
 
davidtaylorjr said:
Medical treatment is ok, I never said we shouldn't do everything possible to keep someone alive. However, it is not our role to choose to kill a baby vs a mother.
Click to expand...

So basically, you are actually perfectly ok with playing god, as long as it comes down on the side of the ZEF. Ok then...
 
davidtaylorjr said:
Medical treatment does not equate playing God.
Click to expand...

It certainly does. Medical treatment determines who lives and who dies, when nature might have decided differently.

It's also clear that you'd prefer to save a ZEF over a woman carrying it, if sustainability were not an issue.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
It certainly does. Medical treatment determines who lives and who dies, when nature might have decided differently.

It's also clear that you'd prefer to save a ZEF over a woman carrying it, if sustainability were not an issue.
Click to expand...

You clearly don't understand what I am talking about. First, it is a baby, not a ZEF. Second, I didn't say I would prefer to save it, you should do everything you can to save both.
 
AGENT J said:
This is what I would do

First off whether you are for or against I don’t know anybody that thinks abortion is a great thing or pleasant. Most feel its reality and something that has to be. If I could eliminate the need for abortions I would, if I could just make it so they were never needed I would but that’s not reality.
Click to expand...

with our current understanding, the only issue I would have with the above is the lack of expanded public funding for abortion and would probably loosen some restrictions that come with viability, if I heard a good argument in favor of such. Also, I would like to see a heavy BC program being rolled into the public education system. With public funding amounting to pretty much free access, including condoms
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
with our current understanding, the only issue I would have with the above is the lack of expanded public funding for abortion and would probably loosen some restrictions that come with viability, if I heard a good argument in favor of such. Also, I would like to see a heavy BC program being rolled into the public education system. With public funding amounting to pretty much free access, including condoms
Click to expand...

Not the role of the government or tax payers.
 
davidtaylorjr said:
You clearly don't understand what I am talking about. First, it is a baby, not a ZEF. Second, I didn't say I would prefer to save it, you should do everything you can to save both.
Click to expand...

I understand what you're talking about perfectly. And no, I will not indulge your emotionally dishonest make-believe by calling it a baby.

Sorry, I don't believe you. You think of pregnancy in terms of innocent and guilty, the ZEF being the former and women being the latter.
 
davidtaylorjr said:
You clearly don't understand what I am talking about. First, it is a baby, not a ZEF. Second, I didn't say I would prefer to save it, you should do everything you can to save both.
Click to expand...

There is no need for a organism with a animal class brain that has not even contributed to society to be saved.

Abortion serves as a good population control measurement and good for other reasons as well.

Say byebye to inherent value and say hello to the law of supply and demand applyed to human life in the womb utilitarianized style.
 
GEIxBattleRifle said:
There is no need for a organism with a animal class brain that has not even contributed to society to be saved.

Abortion serves as a good population control measurement and good for other reasons as well.

Say byebye to inherent value and say hello to the law of supply and demand applyed to human life in the womb utilitarianized style.
Click to expand...

What a sad and pathetic view of life.
 
davidtaylorjr said:
I assume you also believe we should kill off the elderly who "serve no futher purpose" so we can better control the population explosion then?
Click to expand...

The elderly have contributed to society and we should respect their wishes if anything bad were to happen to them.

They earned their right to life and if they want us to end their life when they're suffering then we can peacefully use Euthanasia (if they want us to) but before we use euthansia on them, we will take away their personhood at the last second so it's not counted for as murder.
 
GEIxBattleRifle said:
The elderly have contributed to society and we should respect their wishes if anything bad were to happen to them.

They earned their right to life and if they want us to end their life when they're suffering then we can peacefully use Euthanasia (if they want us to) but before we use euthansia on them, we will take away their personhood at the last second so it's not counted for as murder.
Click to expand...

Do you actually believe that garbage? We actually "take away their personhood?"
 
davidtaylorjr said:
And why do babies not get the same courtesy? There are abortion clinics who kill them after they are born.
Click to expand...

Because they haven't done anything to contribute to society in anyway and they have animal class brains and minds. It isn't until a couple years after birth do they then get a person class brain and mind in my opinion.

Yes I note that abortion clinics do kill them sometimes after birth which I really don't have much problem with personally.

If they need to kill them though then euthansia should be used. Though I don't mind infants having the ''right to life'' at all since newborns on up to death don't interfere with a womens right to abort.
 
Last edited:
GEIxBattleRifle said:
Because they haven't done anything useful for society and they have animal class brains and minds. It isn't until a couple years after birth do they then get a person class brain and mind in my opinion.

Yes I note that abortion clinics do kill them sometimes after birth which I really don't have much problem with personally.

If they need to kill them though then euthansia should be used. Though I don't mind infants having the ''right to life'' at all since newborns on up to death don't interfere with a womens right to abort.
Click to expand...

And who and what determines value to society?
 
davidtaylorjr said:
And who and what determines value to society?
Click to expand...

Values are assigned by rational beings to other organisms all the time it's been done throughout history.

Hell it's even up to the point where pets are valued more then the unborn since the unborn are very easy to make/replace they have low value because of that.
 
GEIxBattleRifle said:
Values are assigned by rational beings to other organisms all the time it's been done throughout history.

Hell it's even up to the point where pets are valued more then the unborn since the unborn are very easy to make/replace they have low value because of that.
Click to expand...

But once they are born the immediately get value, even though they have only changed location?
 
GEIxBattleRifle said:
Values are assigned by rational beings to other organisms all the time it's been done throughout history.

Hell it's even up to the point where pets are valued more then the unborn since the unborn are very easy to make/replace they have low value because of that.
Click to expand...

So why are people charged with murder if they do something to a woman that causes her unborn baby to die? By your standard it shouldn't be murder because the baby has no value.
 
davidtaylorjr said:
1. So why are people charged with murder if they do something to a woman that causes her unborn baby to die?

2. By your standard it shouldn't be murder because the baby has no value.
Click to expand...

1. It's because of the stupid unborn victims of violent crime act or whatever it is call that bush signed in when he was elected second time. It's not like that in Canada though.

2. Yeah it shouldn't be murder at all. The USA is not consistent with it's views on abortion. Heck ''wantedness'' defines the unborn status in the USA
 
GEIxBattleRifle said:
1. It's because of the stupid unborn victims of violent crime act or whatever it is call that bush signed in when he was elected second time. It's not like that in Canada though.

2. Yeah it shouldn't be murder at all. The USA is not consistent with it's views on abortion. Heck ''wantedness'' defines the unborn status in the USA
Click to expand...

You are too far gone and clearly don't have moral standards.
 
davidtaylorjr said:
But once they are born the immediately get value, even though they have only changed location?
Click to expand...

Some humans immediately give them value right when they change location because human usually show a generic bias towards the species not me and some others though.

Yes it is only a location change but it's like I said most pro choicers agree with a women's right to abort once born the infant doesn't interfere with the women's right to abort. To continue arguing it doesn't have a right to life is a completely different ball game which is why I have no problem with personhood at birth since the killing of infants usually has a dramatic impact on it's caretakers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom