• 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!

The root of all pregnancy

lurchadams said:
Mine wasn't reversible, but I still agree with you. You can get them so they are. Parents of boys might consider giving them reversible vasectomies. It's going to have zero effect on their lives except prevent them from causing unwanted pregnancies. I wish I could claim this as my idea but my therapist actually suggested it and I agree with her.
Click to expand...
Vasectomies don't cease the production of sperm, so sperm can be obtained from a testicle of a man who has had a vasectomy, if desired.
 
j brown's body said:
A person in the womb is not a political entity.

This raises the question, if women are not legally considered a political entity, as shown by depriving them of the right to control their own bodies, why should they have the right to vote?
Click to expand...
Or pay taxes, or obey laws?
 
Individual said:
Feticide is the killing of a fetus, can't really comment on what the sentence might be for conviction though. The point is that abortion is legal when chosen by the Woman containing the fetus. Her decision alone, like it or not.
Click to expand...
California Penal Code Section 187(a), murder is defined as the unlawful killing of a human being or fetus by another human being with malice aforethought.

You can use whatever term you decide to, but it's murder. You cannot murder a goat. You cannot murder a monkey. You can only murder a person.
 
justoneman said:
Our laws spring from the constitution. While the constitution does not draw and distinctions between a person and one in the womb, our laws do infer rights to them. If you maliciously cause the death of an unborn child, you are charged with murder. How do you square that one?
Click to expand...

You can "square it" by understanding it, which you clearly don't. You can ask Mr. Google to tell you about The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212). Then you wouldn't ask such a dumb question.
 
justoneman said:
California Penal Code Section 187(a), murder is defined as the unlawful killing of a human being or fetus by another human being with malice aforethought.

You can use whatever term you decide to, but it's murder. You cannot murder a goat. You cannot murder a monkey. You can only murder a person.
Click to expand...

And that's fine. But you should be aware that that a fetus is a human being is a subjective opinion that no one else should be required to care about.
 
justoneman said:
California Penal Code Section 187(a), murder is defined as the unlawful killing of a human being or fetus by another human being with malice aforethought.

You can use whatever term you decide to, but it's murder. You cannot murder a goat. You cannot murder a monkey. You can only murder a person.
Click to expand...
I agree, ONLY the Woman carrying the fetus has a Right to abort it.
I can't see a person until after the Woman has given birth, prior to birth abortion is of a fetus.
 
j brown's body said:
And that's fine. But you should be aware that that a fetus is a human being is a subjective opinion that no one else should be required to care about.
Click to expand...
It's not subjective. To intentionally kill an unborn child by California law is murder. Unless the mother decides to have its life ended, then it's just a medical procedure.
 
Individual said:
I agree, ONLY the Woman carrying the fetus has a Right to abort it.
I can't see a person until after the Woman has given birth, prior to birth abortion is of a fetus.
Click to expand...
I am not arguing that abortion should be made illegal. My only point is that we should not be sugar coating it. It is legal muder. The alternative is forced pregnancy. Both things are equally terrible.
 
justoneman said:
I am not arguing that abortion should be made illegal. My only point is that we should not be sugar coating it. It is legal muder. The alternative is forced pregnancy. Both things are equally terrible.
Click to expand...
Abortion is a term used to define the termination of a pregnancy. I don't see that as sugar coating it, simply identifying what it actually is.
I presume you would call a Woman who has 3 or more abortions a serial killer?
 
Individual said:
Vasectomies don't cease the production of sperm, so sperm can be obtained from a testicle of a man who has had a vasectomy, if desired.
Click to expand...
Well.. yaaahhh but my point was, boys could be prevented from making babies until they really want to.
 
Spunkylama said:
6o79kazkkbx81.jpg

Click to expand...


justoneman said:
Our laws spring from the constitution. While the constitution does not draw and distinctions between a person and one in the womb, our laws do infer rights to them. If you maliciously cause the death of an unborn child, you are charged with murder. How do you square that one?
Click to expand...
The "right" you are referencing belongs to the 'state'. not the unborn. That is how "that one is squared." Also, the unborn is 'not' a "child." A "child" has rights and a SS#. The 'unborn' do not have any rights, nor a SS#.
 
Logician Man said:
The "right" you are referencing belongs to the 'state'. not the unborn. That is how "that one is squared." Also, the unborn is 'not' a "child." A "child" has rights and a SS#. The 'unborn' do not have any rights, nor a SS#.
Click to expand...
So before there were SS#s you could murder people? I got my SS# age 15. That is a silly arguement. Unborn children have the right to not be murdered according to existing law.
 
justoneman said:
So before there were SS#s you could murder people? I got my SS# age 15. That is a silly arguement. Unborn children have the right to not be murdered according to existing law.
Click to expand...
A "silly argument" is claiming the unborn are "children" with "rights". "Existing law" clearly states otherwise. The unborn, per "existing law" have zero "rights." But the 'state' does reserve the "right" to charge a perp with 'double homicide/murder', should said perp kill/murder a pregnant female, and the 'fetus' ( not "child" ) also dies as a result of the deed.
 
Last edited:
lurchadams said:
Nope. Vasectomies are voluntary. Forced pregnancies are not. Nice try - you must be a Tucker watcher - he comes up with some cool catch-phrases, but he doesn't prepare you for defending the bullshit, does he? I can't help you.
Click to expand...

If you were allowed to perform involuntary vasectomies on men, would you then admit restrictions on abortion?
 
justoneman said:
You can only murder a person right? If the law considers the unborn child a person then how is abortion not murder? Bear in mind I do not advocate for abortion to be made illegal. I am just wrestling with the issue in my own mind.
Click to expand...
I'll try and help you wrestle.

Let's assume you're right and it's a BIG "if". And abortion is killing a child.
What do you do if the woman dies at childbirth ? An accident ? Or has the child killed the mother ? Bit silly, but hey , they try 13 year old kids as adults, which is completely insane.
Bit more serious :
A woman is raped, or the circumstances she has to live in are very bad or she has mayor mental problems and doesn't even understand what's happening or can sufficiently comprehend the results ?
In that case I see abortion as frakking self-defense ! You want to hang a person like that for murder ? They always fail to mention that "pro-life" only seems to care about the foetus. They even try to shoot the damn doctors.
Btw, if the family (or man) forces her into an abortion, who kills who ????

You think you're going to stop the killing ? Afcourse not and everybody knows about the horror-stories that are going to come from this. Are you going to make sure you catch all the rapists ? Straighten all the families ?
Afcourse not, because your idea is not protecting life, but put these women in their place.

Some on your side argue that taking away abortions only hurts women that want a CONVIENIANCE way out.
I can tell you, never met a women who was happy after an abortion, they can go into depression, can be traumatized or become suicidal.

But yes, men always know better, right ?
 
Atreus21 said:
If you were allowed to perform involuntary vasectomies on men, would you then admit restrictions on abortion?
Click to expand...
I don't support involuntary surgeries of any kind. You wanna try another hit post? That one sure missed the mark.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom