Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[G-Flex]

... Maybe I'm just tired, but I have -no- idea what you just said, Chairman.

I think he's making fun of the fact that Tellemurius' post was... pretty hard to interpret, I'll put it that way.

[Tellemurius]

I don't get it, you don't want the child yet you have sex knowing well that you are creating potential life. I understand theres always mistakes but no matter what you are throwing away something. Fuck it theres no end to this argument and i really don't even have a solution for this unless you guys want to go back to chastity belts.

[ChairmanPoo]

I don't get it, you don't want the child yet you have sex knowing well that you are creating potential life.

Not everyone agrees on the meaningfulness of "this potential life". Particularily early on. Besides, easier said than done. Chastity based programs have repeatedly failed in the west. And before someone brings up the supposed success of these in Uganda: bear in mind the most obvious potential confusion factor in those studies: Uganda's condom price is among the lowest in the world.

[Leafsnail]

Ḿaybe the article gives an altogether too-negative interpretation to the posting of that woman's comment at the end of the news report. Maybe it was thrown in meaning to imply that even anti-abortionists are against such shows of violence, as to discourage teenage vandals willing to engage in a crusade (just musing)

The weird thing about the anti-abortionist quote is that it falls short of a condemnation.  It's merely saying the person didn't think it was the right method for them, without the all crucial "What this person did was bad".  Maybe this is just an ambiguous statement but you'd think they could've got a more damning quote if they were going for "some anti-abortionists are against this violence".

Fuck it theres no end to this argument and i really don't even have a solution for this unless you guys want to go back to chastity belts.

This strikes me as weird because a chastity belt is not and has never been a contraception device (it's been an anti-rape measure and is now generally sold as fetish gear).  Unless you're suggesting just locking all women up in them or something since... what, women clearly can't be trusted with their own bodies, and need to be locked up by someone else?

[G-Flex]

Look, I've seen a lot of your posts in this thread, and I have to say this:

You make a lot of short, somewhat confused, and somewhat confusing posts without a lot of elaboration or explanation behind them. If you can't try to think through what you're about to say, explain yourself well, and respond to other people, then you're not going to get far talking about anything.

I don't get it, you don't want the child yet you have sex knowing well that you are creating potential life. I understand theres always mistakes but no matter what you are throwing away something. Fuck it theres no end to this argument and i really don't even have a solution for this unless you guys want to go back to chastity belts.

Or you could just recognize a woman's right to terminate a pregnancy, at least during the period during which it wouldn't make much scientific sense to call the embryo/fetus a thinking human life. You're saying "no matter what you are throwing away something", but the question is: What is that "something"? For instance, I feel very little compassion for an 80-celled blastocyst made of largely undifferentiated cells.

The fact that something is the result of a mistake does not negate that person's right to deal with the results of that mistake.

[Frumple]

I don't get it, you don't want the child yet you have sex knowing well that you are creating potential life. I understand theres always mistakes but no matter what you are throwing away something. Fuck it theres no end to this argument and i really don't even have a solution for this unless you guys want to go back to chastity belts.

Not that simple, not that simple, not, that, freaking, simple.

Accidents happen, but the state of sex ed and availability of contraception in (numerous) places in the USA is absolutely shit poor (lolabstinence, to put it in simpler terms), and, as usual, the lack thereof hits the poor (who are consistently more likely both to become more pregnant and not be able to support the child) harder than everyone else.

You're not going to get people to stop screwing, but you can prevent that from ruining peoples lives. Adoption isn't always an option (There's orphanages, yes, but not always adopters), and isn't necessarily the best one. Carrying a child to term can, and I'll be directly honest and vulgar here, fucking ruin a woman's life; a lot of places of employment are not very understanding and there's very much a heightened financial strain involved, especially if the woman wants to frakking survive the birth, even more so if the child's going to make it, too. When someone's already barely scraping by, that stuff can be a breaking point. And again, you're not going to get people to stop having sex, especially in high stress situations where abortion is being considered, even more especially for poorer demographics. It's just not going to happen.

[Darvi]

Not to mention, say, rape or broken condoms.

[SalmonGod]

Reason why would be this isn't shouldn't be a choice if you can't care for the child. just wondering why nobody would consider having abortions for worst-case scenarios.

You’ve got to be kidding me. I’ve been further even more decided to use even go need to do look more as anyone can. Can you really be far even as decided half as much to use go wish for that? My guess is that when one really been far even as decided once to use even go want, it is then that he has really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like. It’s just common sense.

This is skill.  You just won yourself some internets.

Nobody wants to have an abortion.

I still don't believe this.  Women vary in their senses of personal responsibility and ethics just as much as men.  I've personally spoken with multiple women who have had abortions, and their stories range from locking herself away to cry for a week before gathering the resolve to go through with it to being completely nonchalant about it, and I mean literally "Oh shit.  Pregnant again.  Abortion time."  It might be accurate to say that no woman aims for abortion as a goal in and of itself, but to characterize the entire female gender as being so sensitive and responsible is unrealistic and sexist in its own way.

Remember, I'm pro-choice.  I just hate to see so many arguments on both sides of the issue that reek of bullshit.

[Tellemurius]

Yea sorry i can't elaborate most of my posts, thats my thought process and barely anyone understands it, no i can't fix it for everyone.

Fuck it theres no end to this argument and i really don't even have a solution for this unless you guys want to go back to chastity belts.

This strikes me as weird because a chastity belt is not and has never been a contraception device (it's been an anti-rape measure and is now generally sold as fetish gear).  Unless you're suggesting just locking all women up in them or something since... what, women clearly can't be trusted with their own bodies, and need to be locked up by someone else?

Theres some male versions..... you can find those yourself.

[Leafsnail]

Fuck it theres no end to this argument and i really don't even have a solution for this unless you guys want to go back to chastity belts.

This strikes me as weird because a chastity belt is not and has never been a contraception device (it's been an anti-rape measure and is now generally sold as fetish gear).  Unless you're suggesting just locking all women up in them or something since... what, women clearly can't be trusted with their own bodies, and need to be locked up by someone else?

Theres some male versions..... you can find those yourself.

Oh god.  Guys, it's time to throw in the towel.  This perfectly and completely refutes all the points you just made.  Sorry, looks like pro-choice is dead.

[scriver]

(not to mention the serious financial costs involved!)

And also pure financial loss, seeming as you might not be able to work for amounts of time both before and after the birth, which means you might not still have a job when you're strong enough to work again (depending on how strong job security is in your country, of course). And a woman with a young child isn't exactly prime employee material either.

I don't get it, you don't want the child yet you have sex knowing well that you are creating potential life. I understand theres always mistakes but no matter what you are throwing away something. Fuck it theres no end to this argument and i really don't even have a solution for this unless you guys want to go back to chastity belts.

Shit happens. Contraceptions fail more often than people think. Also, about the potential life. Yeah, I get that you think it's sad. I get very sad as well when I think of the lives these fetuses "could have had" - it's not a sunny, unquestionable thing. I understand that you think something important is just being discarded. But if a woman keeps a child she does not want, something is also thrown away. Her own life, for starters. Her dreams. Same for the father. Their lives are changed for all time. But most importantly - the lives of the children they would have had at a later date. These later children might have lived better lives, when their parents could better provide for them and had planned for them, when they were definitely 100% wanted. These potential lives are also thrown away. If the mother is forced to go through with her first pregnancy, they might never be possible. The lives of both her, her spouse and her/their children changed for the worse. All because an idiotic mistake. Is that fair?

And lastly, because this cannot be said enough, nobody is forced to abort their pregnancies. People who want to go through with it despite it being unplanned, or just a general bad time in their lives, can. There's nothing stopping them from having their children.

to being completely nonchalant about it, and I mean literally "Oh shit.  Pregnant again.  Abortion time."

While I can't speak for your experiences, I have never met anyone like this myself. I have talked to more than a few who were putting on brave faces about it, though. Maybe some people like you describe exist, but until I either see some research on it or run into a horde of them myself, I can't reasonably believe they're more than a tiny minority.

[Glowcat]

I don't get it, you don't want the child yet you have sex knowing well that you are creating potential life. I understand theres always mistakes but no matter what you are throwing away something. Fuck it theres no end to this argument and i really don't even have a solution for this unless you guys want to go back to chastity belts.

The solution is to stop confusing a fetus (and human DNA) with personhood. It's bad reasoning which ends up unjustly restricting a woman's rights and entrenches poverty among families that cannot afford to raise more children.

Abortion is one of those issues in which there isn't any debate needed, but rather better methods of educating those who fail to understand the arguments presented. There is also the reticence of religious conservatives in accepting what they see as "science" or "secular" arguments, and perhaps a failure on the part of pro-choicers to show that even in the Christian religous-cultural tradition there exist arguments that support the difference between flesh and person. Namely, the "divine spark" which is supposed to set humans apart from beasts, shown by the ability to reason.

[SalmonGod]

to being completely nonchalant about it, and I mean literally "Oh shit.  Pregnant again.  Abortion time."

While I can't speak for your experiences, I have never met anyone like this myself. I have talked to more than a few who were putting on brave faces about it, though. Maybe some people like you describe exist, but until I either see some research on it or run into a horde of them myself, I can't reasonably believe they're more than a tiny minority.

And I'm not saying that they're a majority.  I'm just saying that women are human beings who vary in personality and perspective just as much as men.  They can be serial killers or saints.  They can be rapists or victims.  They can have mental issues.  They can be sociopaths.  They can simply buy fully enough into the idea that a fetus isn't a human being that there's not a shred of guilt in the matter.  They can be responsible or irresponsible.  Some throw their entire lives away to care for children they don't even love, because they're ingrained with such a strong sense of obligation.  Others leave their babies in dumpsters.  *And for every one of these extremes, the majority will fall on some point in between.  They're human beings.  This idea that they'll always feel a certain way or make the "right" decision on one particular issue as if they're all programmed a specific way suggests otherwise, and is really absurd.

*This sentence edited in, because I felt it was an important point.

[kaijyuu]

*slow clap for SalmonGod*



Anywho, I've already given my stance on this and it doesn't have much content to it, so I'll just respond to one line that stuck out in the previous few replies:

The solution is to stop confusing a fetus (and human DNA) with personhood. It's bad reasoning which ends up unjustly restricting a woman's rights and entrenches poverty among families that cannot afford to raise more children.

This is not a viewpoint you can reasonably expect others to have. It may be yours, and you may believe its right, and you can certainly argue for it, but don't assume everyone who doesn't agree is somehow irrational.

The problem is "personhood" is friggin' ill defined no matter how you slice it. You can point out specific traits that a fetus may lack to justify their non-humanity, but 1) good luck getting people to agree with you, 2) make sure you're not taking away the "personhood" of non-fetuses who may lack said traits (we got in a debate about intelligence last time).

It's far from cut and dry. Your definition of "personhood" is NOT universal; that I know despite not knowing what your definition is. I find your claim that people who disagree with you need "education" silly in the same way I find the opposite side arguing the exact same thing silly. Do remember it's 100% an ethical question.

[Glowcat]

The solution is to stop confusing a fetus (and human DNA) with personhood. It's bad reasoning which ends up unjustly restricting a woman's rights and entrenches poverty among families that cannot afford to raise more children.

This is not a viewpoint you can reasonably expect others to have. It may be yours, and you may believe its right, and you can certainly argue for it, but don't assume everyone who doesn't agree is somehow irrational.

The problem is "personhood" is friggin' ill defined no matter how you slice it. You can point out specific traits that a fetus may lack to justify their non-humanity, but 1) good luck getting people to agree with you, 2) make sure you're not taking away the "personhood" of non-fetuses who may lack said traits (we got in a debate about intelligence last time).

It's far from cut and dry. Your definition of "personhood" is NOT universal; that I know despite not knowing what your definition is. I find your claim that people who disagree with you need "education" silly in the same way I find the opposite side arguing the exact same thing silly. Do remember it's 100% an ethical question.

Considering that the majority of pre-lifers do not understand the difference and fall for simple trickery such as false equivalence fallacies, I'm pretty confident in my assertion that this is one area where one side is correct and the other are simply having issues accepting that. Perhaps some of that confidence only comes due to once holding the pre-life position and after seeing both sides I feel my understanding of the issue is superior to those who've not invested themselves as much as I.

My definition of sapience is the ability for the mind to understand basic social concepts such as reciprocity and have at least a bit of personal responsibility when it comes to breaking that contract (whether the punishment is imposed by society at large or parents). Without that basic ability to operate within society it is impossible to call anything a person, considering that all rights and privileges surrounding that term depend on working within a social framework. Throwing rights at organisms who've never been a part of a society and cannot appreciate them is foolish. Giving those rights at the expense of those who can understand them is abominable.

I know that non-committal stances are popular because they reduce conflict, but ending those arguments requires a "right" answer. Certainly it's possible for somebody to value their own emotions over rational consideration of the issue but any actual debate requires respect for the latter. I am of the opinion that all rational consideration points towards pre-life arguments being empty of merit, thus we're in a period where getting that information across is more essential than leaving the question open.