• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

You can choose not to be pregnant without abortion.

star2589 said:
killing something - human or not - which is incapible of sentience or feeling pain, is perfectly humane.

How is it incapable? It is only incapable because you kill it, on those grounds I could kill you by stating that you are in capable of breathing because I have just killed you. Besides, you have effectively said it is justifiable to kill those who feel no pain, so what does that say about people who have a disability to feel pain, can we kill them humanely?

star2589 said:
perhaps.

but abortion does not stop the spread of STDs.


I totally agree.
 
jimmyjack said:
How is it incapable?

as for sentience, read this: FETAL BRAIN & COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT

It is evident that the fetus is capable of considerable behavioral complexity. These complex actions appear to be mediated and governed by the brainstem with minimal forebrain participation, for similar behaviors are demonstrated by anencephalics and following forebrain destruction. However, although forebrain influences are minimal, the late-term fetal brainstem may also be capable of experienced-induced synaptic plasticity, and can become organized to respond selectively to certain auditory stimuli presented up to 6 weeks before birth. These latter findings could be interpreted as evidence for exceedingly rudimentary, learning-related cognitive-like activity.

Nevertheless, the fetus and neonate appears incapable of thinking, reasoning, understanding, comprehending, or experiencing or generating "true" emotion or any semblance of higher order, forebrain mediated cognitive activity. Rather, although capable of learning, the increasingly complex behaviors demonstrated by the fetus and neonate, including head turning, eye movements, startle reactions, crying, screaming, and rudimentary smiling, are probably best described as brainstem reflexes.

as for pain read this: Fetal Pain: A Systematic Multidisciplinary Review of the Evidence

Pain perception requires conscious recognition or awareness of a noxious stimulus. Neither withdrawal reflexes nor hormonal stress responses to invasive procedures prove the existence of fetal pain, because they can be elicited by nonpainful stimuli and occur without conscious cortical processing. Fetal awareness of noxious stimuli requires functional thalamocortical connections. Thalamocortical fibers begin appearing between 23 to 30 weeks’ gestational age, while electroencephalography suggests the capacity for functional pain perception in preterm neonates probably does not exist before 29 or 30 weeks...

...Evidence regarding the capacity for fetal pain is limited but indicates that fetal perception of pain is unlikely before the third trimester.



you have effectively said it is justifiable to kill those who feel no pain

no, I said it's justifiable to kill those that are neither capible of sentience nor feeling pain.



jimmyjack said:
[abstinence] will also help reduce sexually transmitted diseases and is an all round healthier option than alternate methods such as destroying humans in the womb.
star2589 said:
abortion does not stop the spread of STDs.
jimmyjack said:
I totally agree.

I'm glad that you have conceded the point, and that we agree on something
 
star2589 said:
I'm glad that you have conceded the point

I have not conceded anything.

star2589 said:
no, I said it's justifiable to kill those that are neither capible of sentience nor feeling pain.

How is it incapable? It is only incapable because you kill it, on those grounds I could kill you and justify it by stating that you are in capable of breathing because I have just killed you.
 
Last edited:
jimmyjack said:
I agree condoms do absolutely nothing to stop the spread of AIDS. In fact they have only helped spread AIDS, since they lead people to believe that they won’t get AIDS, however they often break so it is a false sense of security.

Do you have any idea what you are talking about most of the time or do you make it up as you go?

http://aids.about.com/cs/safesex/a/condoms.htm

"Laboratory studies show that latex condoms are effective barriers to HIV and other STDs. In addition, several studies provide compelling evidence that latex condoms are highly effective in protecting against HIV infection when used for every act of intercourse...n a 2-year study of discordant couples in Europe, among 124 couples who reported consistent use of latex condoms, none of the uninfected partners became infected. In contrast, among the 121 couples who used condoms inconsistently, 12 (10%) of the uninfected partners became infected."

So we see here from an unbiased source (about.com) that you are totally full of bs. Not supprising but there it is anyway.
 
jimmyjack said:
How is it incapable? It is only incapable because you kill it, on those grounds I could kill you and justify it by stating that you are in capable of breathing because I have just killed you.

NO, it is incapable becaue it hasn't developed enough yet to produce either cognative thought patterns or pain. Your comparison doesn't work.
 
Well I'll be a monkey's uncle! :monkey I just looked up that breastfeeding thing that jimmyjack was talking about and apparently it actually works (assuming you are willing to stick to a rigorous 2-4 hour feeding schedule). The studies only show that it works for up to six months though.

Jimmyjack let me be the first to say: You were right (on this one issue).

*Opens mouth, inserts foot.:3oops:

BTW Its called LAM contraception (Lactational Amenorrhea Method)
 
My wife actually breastfed each of our kids.....and we did indeed, depend on lactation as a means of limiting her fertility. It worked quite well, as our kids are all 2 years apart, after we decided three were enough....I got Fixed...because to be honest, I would just assume slam My D!ck in a door,as abstain from what is without a doubt one of lifes main pleasures.
 
Indy said:
Do you have any idea what you are talking about most of the time or do you make it up as you go?

http://aids.about.com/cs/safesex/a/condoms.htm

"Laboratory studies show that latex condoms are effective barriers to HIV and other STDs. In addition, several studies provide compelling evidence that latex condoms are highly effective in protecting against HIV infection when used for every act of intercourse...n a 2-year study of discordant couples in Europe, among 124 couples who reported consistent use of latex condoms, none of the uninfected partners became infected. In contrast, among the 121 couples who used condoms inconsistently, 12 (10%) of the uninfected partners became infected."

So we see here from an unbiased source (about.com) that you are totally full of bs. Not supprising but there it is anyway.

Do you have any idea what you are talking about? We have had condoms for years yet AIDS and STD’s are at epidemic levels, when sex was respected years ago there was no such epidemics, in fact AIDS was not even a concern. Condoms have not even made a blip on the problem of STD’s and AIDS. However it is true that in Africa where Abstinence and Condoms have been used to curb AIDS, abstinence out preformed condoms.
 
jimmyjack said:
Do you have any idea what you are talking about? We have had condoms for years yet AIDS and STD’s are at epidemic levels, when sex was respected years ago there was no such epidemics, in fact AIDS was not even a concern. Condoms have not even made a blip on the problem of STD’s and AIDS. However it is true that in Africa where Abstinence and Condoms have been used to curb AIDS, abstinence out preformed condoms.

Um... once again I have to ask: Do you know what you are talking about? True, the EXISTANCE of condoms does not prevent the spread of HIV but the USE of them does. For you to lie and say that "Condoms do not prevent the spread of HIV" and know that to be false... shame. What happened to "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor". So much for the moral high ground.
 
Indy said:
NO, it is incapable becaue it hasn't developed enough yet to produce either cognative thought patterns or pain. Your comparison doesn't work.


So you agree with killing people in comas, and children up to 2 years old?
 
jimmyjack said:
So you agree with killing people in comas, and children up to 2 years old?

Um... children who are 2 years old don't have cognative though patterns or feel pain huh? Aparently you are no doctor.

Neither do people in comas? No cognative brain activity? No ability to experience pain? Again.... aparently you are not doctor.

Yes, I agree with allowing the family to end the life of somebody who is braindead by taking them off of life support. No problem there. Was that what you were refering to?

And don't change the subject: Will you admit that you lied about the ability for condoms to prevent the spread of HIV? You did lie after all, might as well fess up to it.
 
Indy said:
Um... once again I have to ask: Do you know what you are talking about? True, the EXISTANCE of condoms does not prevent the spread of HIV but the USE of them does. For you to lie and say that "Condoms do not prevent the spread of HIV" and know that to be false... shame. What happened to "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor". So much for the moral high ground.


AIDS is rife, it is false witness to claim condoms are a solution to the problem, they are not. Abstinence is the solution to the problem, there is simply no argument you can generate to combat that fact. Condoms break, fact!
 
jimmyjack said:
AIDS is rife, it is false witness to claim condoms are a solution to the problem, they are not. Abstinence is the solution to the problem, there is simply no argument you can generate to combat that fact. Condoms break, fact!

Where did I saw that comdoms are the solution to the problem (feel free to quote me) Now let me quote you:

I agree condoms do absolutely nothing to stop the spread of AIDS. In fact they have only helped spread AIDS

The proper use of condoms do indeed preven the spread of AIDS with a 99% success rate. The existance of condoms does nothing, one must use them to be affective. How many of those people out there who contracted HIV did so while using a condom? Hmm? I bet it is a very low percentage, probably singe digits. Now: Will you admit that you lied knowing full well that condoms do prevent the spread of HIV?
 
Indy said:
Where did I saw that comdoms are the solution to the problem (feel free to quote me) Now let me quote you:

More to the point, where did I say you said that?


Indy said:
The proper use of condoms do indeed preven the spread of AIDS with a 99% success rate. The existance of condoms does nothing, one must use them to be affective. How many of those people out there who contracted HIV did so while using a condom? Hmm? I bet it is a very low percentage, probably singe digits. Now: Will you admit that you lied knowing full well that condoms do prevent the spread of HIV?


That one percent demonstrates that they do not prevent the spread of AIDS.

I think you have shot yourself in the foot there.
 
Indy said:
Um... children who are 2 years old don't have cognative though patterns or feel pain huh? Aparently you are no doctor.

Neither do people in comas? No cognative brain activity? No ability to experience pain? Again.... aparently you are not doctor.

Yes, I agree with allowing the family to end the life of somebody who is braindead by taking them off of life support. No problem there. Was that what you were refering to?

The word is “cognitive”.

It means: having a basis in or reducible to empirical factual knowledge

How does a man in a coma do this, or a child between the years of one and two?

Indy said:
And don't change the subject: Will you admit that you lied about the ability for condoms to prevent the spread of HIV? You did lie after all, might as well fess up to it.

Well you have just admitted that they fail, so no, I have not lied.
 
jimmyjack said:
That one percent demonstrates that they do not prevent the spread of AIDS.

I think you have shot yourself in the foot there.

:rofl :2funny: You can't be serious! I guess there is no debating you then if you are not willing to use rational judgments. 99% means that they don't work huh? Keep in mind that THEY PREVENTED THE SPREAD OF HIV/AIDS IN 99% OF THE CASES.

You said: Condoms do not prevent the spread of HIV. Well those 99 people out of 100 would disagree with you, an so would any other rational person who cares to look at the facts and not the religeous dogma.

BTW am I the only one who is still waisting my time debating with this guy? Has everybody else left?
 
jimmyjack said:
I have not conceded anything.

then I shall refraise my point in post 300:

star2589 said:
jimmyjack said:
[abstinence] will also help reduce sexually transmitted diseases and is an all round healthier option than alternate methods such as destroying humans in the womb.
jimmyjack said:
No, a lot of people have abortions because condoms fail, so condoms are a primary culprit insofar as reasons people have abortions.

perhaps, but abortion is not an aternate method of reducing sexually transmitted diseases

jimmyjack said:
How is it incapable? It is only incapable because you kill it, on those grounds I could kill you and justify it by stating that you are in capable of breathing because I have just killed you.

that was answered in post 302, you have not responded to those answers.
 
Indy said:
BTW am I the only one who is still waisting my time debating with this guy? Has everybody else left?

Quite some time ago
 
star2589 said:
yes, 7 kids is what every family needs.

And what may i ask is wrong with having 7 kids?

As long as you can support them the amount of kids you have is irrelevant.
 
star2589 post 64 said:
jimmyjack said:
I suggest abstinence as a measure to be taken by those who claim abortion is their only choice not to be pregnant. Since abstinence is a more humane method of avoiding pregnancy, surely you agree?

Have sex often if you wish, by all means, but do it within marriage, and remember all forms of contraception are wrong and detrimental to human beings.

yes, 7 kids is what every family needs.

FISHX said:
And what may i ask is wrong with having 7 kids?

As long as you can support them the amount of kids you have is irrelevant.

nothing is wrong with having 7 kids if thats they want, and if they can support them. I'm just saying its not for everyone.
 
star2589 said:
nothing is wrong with having 7 kids if thats they want, and if they can support them. I'm just saying its not for everyone.

Fine, just make sure you don’t compromise human lives for the sake of sex.
 
Back
Top Bottom