• 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!

So, if abortion is murder...

Our Constitution and rule of law.

A piece of paper is what makes humans special? ****ing seriously?

That's sad. And here I thought it might actually be something profound like sentience, sapience, empathy, love, compassion. But no, just a piece of paper.
 
A piece of paper is what makes humans special? ****ing seriously?

Not the paper itself.

It's the process and the nature of humans that the Constitution (and our laws) represents and resulted from,... that "makes us special" above all other animals.

That and opposing thumbs, and the fact that we will eat almost anything.

That's sad. And here I thought it might actually be something profound like sentience, sapience, empathy, love, compassion. But no, just a piece of paper.

What else did you think the Constitution and our laws stem from?
 
Not the paper itself.

It's the process and the nature of humans that the Constitution (and our laws) represents and resulted from,... that "makes us special" above all other animals.

That and opposing thumbs, and the fact that we will eat almost anything.



What else did you think the Constitution and our laws stem from?

Then it's not the paper that makes us special, it's something else entirely. Since we had said "specialness" LONG before we started written communication. Ergo, written communication is simply an eventual byproduct of our "specialness" and not necessary for our "specialness" to exist.

So I ask, what makes us special? And do unthinking, unfeeling organisms have that same quality? And if not, then why should we consider them as "special" as organisms that DO have those qualities?
 
So I ask, what makes us special? And do unthinking, unfeeling organisms have that same quality? And if not, then why should we consider them as "special" as organisms that DO have those qualities?

:shock:

I think one of the things that makes human beings special is our compassion not only for animals 9and other organisms) that are not human in nature,... but especially our compassion for humans which are in whatever way flawed, vulnerable, weak, or otherwise incapable of making it without our help or intervention.

Do you disagree?
 
:shock:

I think one of the things that makes human beings special is our compassion not only for animals 9and other organisms) that are not human in nature,... but especially our compassion for humans which are in whatever way flawed, vulnerable, weak, or otherwise incapable of making it without our help or intervention.

Do you disagree?
I do disagree. I think there are many things that make us special. None of which are present in a zygote or an early term fetus.
 
:shock:

I think one of the things that makes human beings special is our compassion not only for animals 9and other organisms) that are not human in nature,... but especially our compassion for humans which are in whatever way flawed, vulnerable, weak, or otherwise incapable of making it without our help or intervention.

Do you disagree?

I do disagree. I think there are many things that make us special. None of which are present in a zygote or an early term fetus.

:doh

Rivrrat,.. is our compassion for others (smaller, weaker, more challenged, less developed than ourselves) not one of the things that makes we "humans" special?
 
:doh

Rivrrat,.. is our compassion for others (smaller, weaker, more challenged, less developed than ourselves) not one of the things that makes we "humans" special?

Compassion may be ONE of those "special" quailites, but my compassion for other organisms doesn't stop me from swatting flies.
 
Compassion may be ONE of those "special" quailites, but my compassion for other organisms doesn't stop me from swatting flies.

Does it stop you from recognizing the rights of or the humanity of more vulnerable human beings?
 
Does it stop you from recognizing the rights of or the humanity of more vulnerable human beings?

Organisms without a cerebral cortex, lacking the physical components necessary for thought? Yes.
 
:doh

Rivrrat,.. is our compassion for others (smaller, weaker, more challenged, less developed than ourselves) not one of the things that makes we "humans" special?

Compassion may be ONE of those "special" quailites, but my compassion for other organisms doesn't stop me from swatting flies.

Does it stop you from recognizing the rights of or the humanity of more vulnerable human beings?

Organisms without a cerebral cortex, lacking the physical components necessary for thought? Yes.

:roll:

Can you accept the fact that some of us have more compassion than others?

Especially for fellow human beings who may only temporarily lack the attributes you demand of them?

In fact, I would say that another significant thing that makes us human beings special above other animals is our ability and willingness to defend the weaker and more vulnerable members of our kind,... even against those among ourselves who would do them harm,... and the lengths that we will go to defend them.
 
:roll:

Can you accept the fact that some of us have more compassion than others?
Yes, which is why I would never force anyone to have an abortion or use hormonal birth control.

In fact, I would say that another significant thing that makes us human beings special above other animals is our ability and willingness to defend the weaker and more vulnerable members of our kind,... even against those among ourselves who would do them harm,... and the lengths that we will go to defend them.
Yes yes, I know... all of us that use the pill or IUDs should be sought out and soundly disciplined for harming the "weaker" members of our kind. :roll:
 
Why shouldn't we? We're killing "people". Possibly every single month.

Prevention is not killing.

I've used the analogy before,... that if you have an un-attended pool in your yard,.... toys strewn all about and anything else that would invite a child in (think consensual sex),... and a child finds their way in and drowns? You will likely be held responsible.

However, if you put a fence and other barriers up, lock the gate, remove temtations and essentially do everything you can do to prevent a child from finding their way in (IUD/ prevention),.... and one gets in and drowns despite all your efforts?

No-one would hold you liable for that.

An elective abortion is tantamount to (in either case) looking out the window and seeing a child (who you don't want) thrashing in your pool,.... and throwing a plugged in toaster to kill him or her,.... before you decide to remove them.
 
Prevention is not killing.
They don't always prevent conception. On the chance that an egg does get fertilized and makes it to the uterus, the uterus is made inhospitable and the "person" is expelled. Dead. Murdered. Flushed down the toilet.
 
:roll:

Can you accept the fact that some of us have more compassion than others?

Especially for fellow human beings who may only temporarily lack the attributes you demand of them?

In fact, I would say that another significant thing that makes us human beings special above other animals is our ability and willingness to defend the weaker and more vulnerable members of our kind,... even against those among ourselves who would do them harm,... and the lengths that we will go to defend them.

I will accept that some have more compassion than others when I see that compassion demonstrated toward pregnant women who either have a difficult time with pregnancy, such as Aunt Spiker, or who will not be able to properly care for a child. It is quite calloused to refer to a difficult pregnancy as "an inconvenience." Those who do so simply imagine they are "compassionate" by verbalizing sympathy toward an unfeeling, unthinking zef.
 
They don't always prevent conception. On the chance that an egg does get fertilized and makes it to the uterus, the uterus is made inhospitable and the "person" is expelled. Dead. Murdered. Flushed down the toilet.

See my previous post.

You wouldn't be liable.
 
Last edited:
I will accept that some have more compassion than others when I see that compassion demonstrated toward pregnant women who either have a difficult time with pregnancy, such as Aunt Spiker, or who will not be able to properly care for a child. It is quite calloused to refer to a difficult pregnancy as "an inconvenience." Those who do so simply imagine they are "compassionate" by verbalizing sympathy toward an unfeeling, unthinking zef.

So, in the absence of your acceptance,... no.... the compassion does not exist.

Got it.
 
See my previous post.

You wouldn't be liable.

Even though I put something in place specifically designed to kill a "person"? With full knowledge that I am going to kill a "person" at some point, and possibly many of them?

How the **** is that different than an abortion after implantation? Is the "person" you're so anxious to protect only a "person" once it's secure in the womb?
 
Even though I put something in place specifically designed to kill a "person"? With full knowledge that I am going to kill a "person" at some point, and possibly many of them?

How the **** is that different than an abortion after implantation? Is the "person" you're so anxious to protect only a "person" once it's secure in the womb?

Well,... now.

If someone can show you have intent that's a different matter.

You would essentially have to turn yourself in.
 
Well,... now.

If someone can should you have intent that's a different matter.

You would essentially have to turn yourself in.

LMFAO Of course I have intent. I'm willingly using the damn contraceptive. How is that NOT intent?
 
LMFAO Of course I have intent. I'm willingly using the damn contraceptive. How is that NOT intent?

Contra-ceptive = NOT conception = No person created = prevention.

If a person is created despite the product,.... think back to the pool analogy.

You tried to prevent it.

No liability.
 
Contra-ceptive = NOT conception = No person created = prevention.
Yes, that's its intent. But it isn't always successful at preventing fertilization. Which is why its second line of defense is to expell the "person" from the body by making the uterus inhospitable.


If a person is created despite the product,.... think back to the pool analogy.

You tried to prevent it.

No liability.

So it's okay to have an abortion as long as you used contraception and got pregnant anyway?

Your "person's" rights are contingent upon the intent of the mother?
 
Yes, that's its (birth controls) intent. But it isn't always successful at preventing fertilization. Which is why its second line of defense is to expell the "person" from the body by making the uterus inhospitable.

Now you are introducing malice and a forethought.

You (in doing so) have changed the dynamic.

So it's okay to have an abortion as long as you used contraception and got pregnant anyway?

Why are you intentionally twisting and mischaracterizing what I said?

How does doing that benefit anyone in a debate?

When you take contraception,... you know and accept the fact that it is not %100 effective. Don't you?

So,... when you have intercourse even with contraceptives,... you are taking that risk. Aren't you?

So, no,... when your protection fails and a new life has began as a result of you taking that risk,... you do not have the right to abort them.

Your "person's" rights are contingent upon the intent of the mother?

You know me and my position better than that.
 
Now you are introducing malice and a forethought.
Holy crap. Do you understand that every single woman who takes a hormonal birth control pill takes it so that she won't get pregnant? Do you understand that hormonal birth control pills TRY to prevent fertilization and if it fails, it makes the uterus inhospitable so as to expel this "person" from the uterus before it implants? Do you understand that every woman who takes hormonal birth control is given this information prior to taking it?

Therefore, every woman who takes hormonal birth control knows that it will either prevent fertilization or prevent implantation.

So, I ask you, how can you accept usage of hormonal birth control (and IUDs) and yet not accept abortion? Both kill a "person".

You (in doing so) have changed the dynamic.
The dynamic has always been the same.


Why are you intentionally twisting and mischaracterizing what I said?

How does doing that benefit anyone in a debate?

When you take contraception,... you know and accept the fact that it is not %100 effective. Don't you?

So,... when you have intercourse even with contraceptives,... you are taking that risk. Aren't you?

So, no,... when your protection fails and a new life has began as a result of you taking that risk,... you do not have the right to abort them.
So, I have the right to force the "persons" expulsion from my body using birth control pills or IUDs, but not the right to do it using abortion.

Tell me where the difference is.


You know me and my position better than that.
Obviously not. Or you would be rallying for the banning of birth control pills and IUDs since they kill "people".
 
Back
Top Bottom