The Glade 4.0

I thought you didn't pay any taxes?

You claimed that years ago, what changed your position?

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

The reality that it makes it easier to make my argument from the inside than from the outside.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

Ry,
I was just making a stupid reference to our last abortion thread.

But I didn't think abortions, by a doctor or otherwise, were legal that late in the process?

You would not be correct. States have tried to put an end to late term abortions for quite awhile, only to have the courts strike down the various laws unless the wording was so vague that the effect was meaningless. Very few doctors performed such procedures, but it's done legally.

According to Wiki, as of 2007, 36 states had bans on late-term abortions (with exceptions for the woman's health, which is what the courts require). Anyway, generally speaking, I'd be extremely surprised if more than a minuscule handful of people suddenly decide to have an abortion 5-6 months in unless there's a serious medical reason for it.

External baggage, 5 yard penalty, replay first down.

_________________

but it was, like, the same exact discussion!

We ran the actual statistics back when Monty was here and that late term abortion doctor was killed. I believe we quite easily showed that the ban on late term abortions was nothing more than just filing a bit of paperwork and getting them to cross to a friendly state to perform it.

_________________
A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. ~ John Stuart Mill

Curiously been thinking about this video. What about the father who knowingly had unprotected sex to put the woman in that situation? Seems highly unfair that he doesnt need to take any responsibility if he doesnt want to for the first 9-10 months.

If abortion was made illegal though, then I would probably support full murder charges for the mother, and a lot more orphanages...

Technically, if abortion were made illegal, the person acting as the "doctor" would be committing the murder. The mother would be chargeable as accessory, or in conspiracy with "the doctor" to commit murder. Paying someone to commit a murder would also be considered. Of course under current law, both of those can carry the same penalty as the murderer. If it were illegal I doubt many real doctors would risk their careers and freedom to perform them.

_________________
The U. S. Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. B. Franklin

"A mind needs books like a sword needs a whetstone." -- Tyrion Lannister, A Game of Thrones

I support the legality of abortions, and I definitely support the trimming down of the gene pool. think it should be legal for an old person to decide to die and not live with a terminal condition. Those are because it is not my body, it is not my choice. It should be left to the people it involves, not the morality of some bunch of strangers and their ideals, even if those ideals take the form of some sort of right to life.

I do not think that abortion should be used as a contraceptive, but again... it is not anyone else's choice, but the people involved.

If that means I support killing babies; so be it. I will stand as the baby killer with no shame in that.

I also support the death penalty.

_________________
Darksiege
Traveller, Calé, Whisperer
Lead me not into temptation; for I know a shortcut

Interesting to note that abortions actually come with a lot of things that could go wrong during the procedure, some of which could leave you infertile in the future. Not to mention if you perform an abortion after certain weeks, it damages your uterous and lowers your chances for future pregnancy/keeping a baby.

So in essence the problem is fairly self limiting.

Then so far as the baby was concerned, he should have been charged with practicing medicine without a license. If a doctor can kill babies in the womb legally, no way what he did rises to the level of murder of the baby.

Echoing my sentiments pretty closely.

_________________
"Aaaah! Emotions are weird!" - Amdee
"... Mirrorshades prevent the forces of normalcy from realizing that one is crazed and possibly dangerous. They are the symbol of the sun-staring visionary, the biker, the rocker, the policeman, and similar outlaws." - Bruce Sterling, preface to Mirrorshades

Human Being = Homo Sapien

What species is it then Aizle? Or are you arguing for subjectively determining who has rights by dehumanizing? Well I don't consider Chinese to be "human beings", off with their head. Strict, objective standard or you really don't have any standard.

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville

So you oppose allowing homicide committed in self-defense? After all, if you think killing for one reason is acceptable, what's to stop me from saying killing for some other reason is acceptable too? Strict, objective standard - no homicide, period - or you really don't have any standard.

You're changing the goal posts. It's a fetus and a part of the mother, and therefore under her control, until it is born.

If you will note I previously defined one of the qualifications of murder as targeting an innocent. An innocent is defined as an individual that is not currently engaged in the infringement of rights of another or others.

There is a difference between a thing with built in qualifications and one in which a term that is entirely subjective is included.

You know this yet you argue as if you do not. There is no jury to convince here by pretending you don't understand the difference so that you can communicate this conjured confusion to the them.

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville

I've seen you've already adapted the argument from "it is the mother" to "it is part of the mother". Good. Continuing to show how this as well goes against reason will force you to further progress from wrong belief to truth (even if it may be uncomfortable for you).

And no I not changing goal posts.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictiona ... 1291921488

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/human


Human being = human = member of homo sapiens

Please stop using language incorrectly or come to understand the meaning of words.

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville

The subjectivity is in deciding which "qualifications" are morally legitimate. In your view, it's morally legitimate to differentiate between humans based on their actions, but it's not morally legitimate to differentiate between humans based on their stage of biological development. That's a subjective moral judgment on your part. So in short, the "strict, objective standards" you advocate - "self-defense homicide ok, abortions not ok" - were themselves chosen based on entirely subjective moral judgments. That's exactly what pro-choice people are doing too: "abortion ok prior to developmental stage X" is a strict, objective standard based on the subjective moral judgment that X is a morally legitimate basis for differentiation.

Learn to read and **** off. You're attributing claims to me that aren't mine. I use language just fine thank you and the only one with comprehension problems here is you.

He likes to fall back on semantics when his insanity is shown to him and he is unable to reconcile it with reality.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

Just to throw another spanner in the works for Elmo. If that zygot was placed in the womb, it has the potential to become a baby. If that same zygot was placed anywhere else, it has the potential to become just a cell. (neural, muscular, etc) As the case, your assertion that the zygot at the stage of conception is a human being is logically circumstantially dependent.

But we are dealing with a zygote in the circumstances needed for it to continue to develop and be born. The other circumstances aren't relevent to the situation.

_________________
A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. ~ John Stuart Mill