• 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!

At what exact moment is it Not okay to kill a child?

Ikari said:
Indeed. Of course the difference here being one at the end of their life vs one at the beginning of their life. Nature being as it is, the fetus would develop into a healthy human (in most cases), where as the brain dead would just die. But why bring nature and biology into this?
Click to expand...

The difference is you suggested you go in and unplug people.

Unless you're the close family member, you can't do that.

Just like you can't go terminate somebody elses pregnancy.
 
Dragonfly said:
The difference is you suggested you go in and unplug people.

Unless you're the close family member, you can't do that.

Just like you can't go terminate somebody elses pregnancy.
Click to expand...

Why can't I though? I mean, they're not really human, they're dependents. And dependents can be offed at whim.
 
Ikari said:
Why can't I though? I mean, they're not really human, they're dependents. And dependents can be offed at whim.
Click to expand...

See, and this is why I have no respect for "Libertarian" pro-lifers. You talk good game about "rights", but your entire argument against abortion-- from top to bottom-- ignores the fact that women have rights and ignores the criteria you establish for what rights are and how they work. "Rights" are just a convenient excuse to you people.
 
Viktyr Gehrig said:
See, and this is why I have no respect for "Libertarian" pro-lifers. You talk good game about "rights", but your entire argument against abortion-- from top to bottom-- ignores the fact that women have rights and ignores the criteria you establish for what rights are and how they work. "Rights" are just a convenient excuse to you people.
Click to expand...

All humans have rights. And sentient humans make choices, and those choices can have consequences. I don't see what getting mad at biology has to do with any of it. This is known.
 
Rockclimber1 said:
What is magical about 20 weeks that makes it okay to end the life of the baby? Just wondering what the pro choice answer is.
Click to expand...

I'm more for 12 or 16 weeks. It gives the parent time to find out they're pregnant, decide if they want the kid and have the abortion. It's never ok to kill a child, it's not something I'd do, but it should be permissible at the stage when the child is least socially valuable.
 
Ikari said:
Indeed. Of course the difference here being one at the end of their life vs one at the beginning of their life. Nature being as it is, the fetus would develop into a healthy human (in most cases), where as the brain dead would just die. But why bring nature and biology into this?
Click to expand...

My understanding is that instructions for what to do in that scenario can be left in one's will, or one can choose someone to make that decision for them. That's pretty different than giving someone no right to their life.

That would be more of an example to support legalization of suicide honestly.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
Abortion doesn't kill children. Children are young autonomous human organisms. ZEF's are not autonomous.

So the answer is, I suppose, when it becomes a child, at which point it is no longer siphoning from the woman's body.
Click to expand...

After breastfeeding?
 
Rockclimber1 said:
A what month, week, hour, second should you not murder the child?
Click to expand...

According to republican war hawks... 32.

We have no problem drafting and sending innocents to go kill other innocents in made up wars to advance American commercial interests.

Some republicans say we shouldn't have social safety nets, regardless of the reasons for your poverty, poor children should not receive the benefit of our state of the art medical system, proper nutrition, safe neighborhoods, etc.
 
Occam's Razor said:
According to republican war hawks... 32.

We have no problem drafting and sending innocents to go kill other innocents in made up wars to advance American commercial interests.

Some republicans say we shouldn't have social safety nets, regardless of the reasons for your poverty, poor children should not receive the benefit of our state of the art medical system, proper nutrition, safe neighborhoods, etc.
Click to expand...

What wars for American commercial interests are we drafting for?
 
Ikari said:
All humans have rights.
Click to expand...

You say that. And then you endorse policies that force women to gestate against their will.

It's like you don't really believe what you're saying, or something.
 
Viktyr Gehrig said:
You say that. And then you endorse policies that force women to gestate against their will.

It's like you don't really believe what you're saying, or something.
Click to expand...

Their choices force them to do that. You can't have freedom if people do not have to accept responsibility for their actions. I'm not violating the rights of someone by saying they can't rob a bank for crack money because they did crack, knowing full well it's addictive properties, and now are in a place where they pretty much need crack and have no other way to get the money. Sorry, but other people have rights too and they don't lose them because you made a mistake.
 
Viktyr Gehrig said:
You say that. And then you endorse policies that force women to gestate against their will.

It's like you don't really believe what you're saying, or something.
Click to expand...

There were choices, and there are known consequences. I can't do anything about that. I'm not god of quantum mechanics nor biology, I have no control over probabilities.
 
Ikari said:
All humans have rights. And sentient humans make choices, and those choices can have consequences. I don't see what getting mad at biology has to do with any of it. This is known.
Click to expand...

ZEF's have no rights
 
Republic Now! said:
Their choices force them to do that. You can't have freedom if people do not have to accept responsibility for their actions. I'm not violating the rights of someone by saying they can't rob a bank for crack money because they did crack, knowing full well it's addictive properties, and now are in a place where they pretty much need crack and have no other way to get the money. Sorry, but other people have rights too and they don't lose them because you made a mistake.
Click to expand...

forcing people to be responsible is to freedom as forcing people to say smart things is to.......take a guess
 
Ikari said:
There were choices, and there are known consequences. I can't do anything about that. I'm not god of quantum mechanics nor biology, I have no control over probabilities.
Click to expand...

And sometimes an abortion is the consequence of an unplanned pregnancy. You can't do anything about that too.
 
sangha said:
And sometimes an abortion is the consequence of an unplanned pregnancy. You can't do anything about that too.
Click to expand...

Certainly can't; but we all know how biology works, so it's not a surprise either.
 
Ikari said:
Science shall set us free.
Click to expand...

Science does not determine what should or should not have rights especially something as the ''right to life''

That is philosophically determined not scientifically
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom