• 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!

There is a knock at his door....

S

Simpletruther

DP Veteran
Joined
May 18, 2019
Messages
16,336
Reaction score
3,206
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Ted lives alone in the remote subarctic. A few scattered natives live in the area. One family is in such a difficult survival mode they drop their 6 year old off in his yard and leaving, hoping ted will take her in.

It’s in the middle of a blizzard in early winter. Ted answers the door and finds the cold little girl. It’s 30 below and she has minutes before dangerous hypothermia takes hold.

Ted ponders what taking this child in means. It means a major inconvenience. She will require feeding though he has a large stockpile more than enough. She will make a mess and he will be cleaning more. She could (though it seems a remote chance) even have a mental problem and kill him in his sleep. He would have till keep her until the late spring thaw at least 6 months before it would be feasible to take her to authorities.

Ted decides it’s his house, his food his labor and he has a right to use them how he sees fit and slams the door as she comes forward hoping for salvation. She cries for help but within 20 minutes she dies.

The questions on the table are is ted morally ok in this decision? Do you approve of ted? Should ted be held accountable in any way?
 
Simpletruther said:
Ted lives alone in the remote subarctic. A few scattered natives live in the area. One family is in such a difficult survival mode they drop their 6 year old off in his yard and leaving, hoping ted will take her in.

It’s in the middle of a blizzard in early winter. Ted answers the door and finds the cold little girl. It’s 30 below and she has minutes before dangerous hypothermia takes hold.

Ted ponders what taking this child in means. It means a major inconvenience. She will require feeding though he has a large stockpile more than enough. She will make a mess and he will be cleaning more. She could (though it seems a remote chance) even have a mental problem and kill him in his sleep. He would have till keep her until the late spring thaw at least 6 months before it would be feasible to take her to authorities.

Ted decides it’s his house, his food his labor and he has a right to use them how he sees fit and slams the door as she comes forward hoping for salvation. She cries for help but within 20 minutes she dies.

The questions on the table are is ted morally ok in this decision? Do you approve of ted? Should ted be held accountable in any way?
Click to expand...
No children are involved in abortions and the unborn suffer and are aware of nothing regarding abortion.

There is no parallel here at all.

Your presumption that women who choose abortion are immoral and cruel...is false and if you truly believe it...immoral.
 
Lursa said:
No children are involved in abortions and the unborn suffer and are aware of nothing regarding abortion.

There is no parallel here at all.

Your presumption that women who choose abortion are immoral and cruel...is false and if you truly believe it...immoral.
Click to expand...
You are incorrect you can find even left sources referring to unborn as babies.

And also Incorrect is s proven fact I born can experience pain pretty early on.

0 for 2
 
Simpletruther said:
Ted lives alone in the remote subarctic. A few scattered natives live in the area. One family is in such a difficult survival mode they drop their 6 year old off in his yard and leaving, hoping ted will take her in.

It’s in the middle of a blizzard in early winter. Ted answers the door and finds the cold little girl. It’s 30 below and she has minutes before dangerous hypothermia takes hold.

Ted ponders what taking this child in means. It means a major inconvenience. She will require feeding though he has a large stockpile more than enough. She will make a mess and he will be cleaning more. She could (though it seems a remote chance) even have a mental problem and kill him in his sleep. He would have till keep her until the late spring thaw at least 6 months before it would be feasible to take her to authorities.

Ted decides it’s his house, his food his labor and he has a right to use them how he sees fit and slams the door as she comes forward hoping for salvation. She cries for help but within 20 minutes she dies.

The questions on the table are is ted morally ok in this decision? Do you approve of ted? Should ted be held accountable in any way?
Click to expand...
Sorry, but conflating fetuses with toddlers is a disingenuous argument.
 
Simpletruther said:
You are incorrect you can find even left sources referring to unborn as babies.

And also Incorrect is s proven fact I born can experience pain pretty early on.

0 for 2
Click to expand...
You said a 6 yr old, and the usage you describe has to be qualified, as in 'unborn baby' to be accurate no matter who writes it.

And when 97.5% of all abortions take place, they cannot. The rest are mostly medically necessary and by law, anesthetic/lethal injection must be given first.

So...you are 0 for 2 (more really)
 
Simpletruther said:
Don't act obtuse.
Click to expand...
Here's one for you:

The govt comes to your house, forces you to give blood and give you a medical examination. They see you are a compatible donor and then they demand that you give one of your kidneys to save another person's life. Without your consent.

Should the govt be able to do all that?
 
Lursa said:
Here's one for you:

The govt comes to your house, forces you to give blood and give you a medical examination. They see you are a compatible donor and then they demand that you give one of your kidneys to save another person's life. Without your consent.

Should the govt be able to do all that?
Click to expand...
No
 
Simpletruther said:
Claiming I did is disingenuous.
Click to expand...
No it's not...the unborn are certainly not the same as toddler.

In your example, to care for the 6 yr old did not violate anyone else's Const rights.
 
Lursa said:
You said a 6 yr old, and the usage you describe has to be qualified, as in 'unborn baby' to be accurate no matter who writes it.

And when 97.5% of all abortions take place, they cannot. The rest are mostly medically necessary and by law, anesthetic/lethal injection must be given first.

So...you are 0 for 2 (more really)
Click to expand...
I
Lursa said:
You said a 6 yr old, and the usage you describe has to be qualified, as in 'unborn baby' to be accurate no matter who writes it.

And when 97.5% of all abortions take place, they cannot. The rest are mostly medically necessary and by law, anesthetic/lethal injection must be given first.

So...you are 0 for 2 (more really)
Click to expand...
Sorry but you were wrong. Your goalpost change doesn't escape that. 0 for 2.


And regardless if it's rare they felt pain. The point is relevant to the far left position of no regulation women can abort whenever they choose.
 
Lursa said:
No it's not...the unborn are certainly not the same as toddler.

In your example, to care for the 6 yr old did not violate anyone else's Const rights.
Click to expand...
Yes it is I never made that claim.
 
Simpletruther said:
I
Sorry but you were wrong. Your goalpost change doesn't escape that. 0 for 2.


And regardless if it's rare they felt pain. The point is relevant to the far left position of no regulation women can abort whenever they choose.
Click to expand...
No, you use terms for emotional effect because your argument is based on your feelings. The use of the word 'child' or 'baby' is inaccurate unless qualified by 'unborn.' Fact. No goalpost change.

And where did you make any such argument in your OP about regulating abortion? LOLOLOLOLOLOL YOu just moved the goalposts to another time zone :rolleyes: You dismissed my argument...you did not refute it.

ST: 0 for 2, minimum
 
In this hypothetical scenario the family abandoned the girl, leaving her in dire circumstances. Ted didn't rescue her. The parents bear the most responsibility. Ted is not vetted; he could be a colonialist.
 
Simpletruther said:
Incorrect
Click to expand...
Ha, then please demonstrate how the CHOICE of care of a 6 yr old compares with the care of the unborn inside a woman that you have ZERO right to act on, no matter how you 'feel?'

Please clarify the purpose of your OP and comparison to abortion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom