Republicans succeed in ploy to increase unsafe abortions

Post Reply New Topic

{snip quote nest, in which AngelRho decides not to contradict any of my points}

Human tissue, yes. So? I work in a clinical lab. I deal with 'human collections of cells' on an almost-daily basis, from blood samples to nevi to POC, and ain't none of it 'persons' except for the people that it came out of. I see this for myself. It would take mental gymnastics for me to think otherwise, and it would be then that I had trouble sleeping, not now. Now, I pour formalin over it, spin it in centrifuges, culture it, freeze it, and incubate it. Other lab workers slice it and dice it with microtomes and stain it with various chemicals that would be toxic to living people. I don't feel guilty, and neither do they.

As has already been explained in other threads, 'human' is non-specific. It refers to everything from spermatozoa to hair to pancreatic tumor cells, as well as adult human organism and human zefs.

by what law?

I can see hypocritical, but rude?

Seriously, why should I really care about people I have never met dying before they are even born?

Because on a psychological level it's important for human beings to have empathy for one another. It has been fundamental because it forms trust, civil decency, cooperation, and friendship. If you don't care about strangers, you can never befriend them. Relationships have to build from 'stranger' to 'friend' or more than friends in some cases. We live in a society where we overlook everything these days. Nobody helps against a robbery, or getting somebody to hospital. I don't think you can comprehend it, but in a society where everybody is out for themselves, everybody is also in great danger.

Plus, why should you really care about women you have never met? Why are you even on this thread???

http://29.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lybeu ... o1_500.jpg

Again, I'm not Christian, but I still find this a funny, and ever-so-true image.

I don't really care about them individually. What I care about is the rights they have to their own body, something that I believe should never be taken away from anyone, ever.

Then why do you believe you can take away a person's right to life?

You seem to want women to have rights over their own bodies, but while they were in the womb, they didn't have rights over their own bodies because of abortion! You're contradicting yourself here!

Can the fetus survive without being inside the womans body? No.

To quote someone in another thread, that's tough luck for the fetus.

Can an abortion facility legally exist in a pro-life society? No. To quote you just now, that's tough luck for the abortion facility. Thanks for the irrelevant point.

Now please answer my point, stop redirecting the argument.

That is because you are equivocating between human as a property of an object and human as an entity. A human cell has the property of being human. A human, as in a fetus, is a human by virtue of its intrinsic nature. This is just a trick of language on your own part, a fallacy of equivocation.

And as to law. Try natural law and natural rights. Enshrined I just about every major legal document on the subject, mankind has the right to life. That right is applied to the entity that has the intrinsic property of being human, it requires no further justification.

@Abacacus

You miss the point. It is not that I would have noticed, it is that there was a specific point where my life was not covered with any real legal protection, where I had no rights. It is right to be worried about this. Arguing that a slave knew no freedom and therefor knew no better, is no argument against their need or right to have it. I do not need to know my rights have been violated for them to have been so, that is just a silly proposition.

Last edited by 91 on 28 Jan 2012, 11:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Yes, the fetus has the rights over it's own body. Now, pray tell how this over rides the womans rights? How is the fetus is going to exercise them?

Also, I do not live in a pro life society. Abortion clinics exist in every province of Canada aside from PEI.

But that's the thing, the so-called "fetus" (you say it like it's some sort of alien) has no rights. They're all dictated by the mother, even the father has no say in most cases (which relates to gender inequality, but that's for a different argument). The fact is that one set of rights contradicts another, and society has to determine the more important one. If I'm a blood-thirsty psychopath and need to satisfy a killing sensation, I do not get the right to do that because it impedes another human being's right to live! Personally, I find a potential for 80 years of human life (more or less) overrides a woman's right to choose whether she wants a 9-month pregnancy. To me it seems like common sense!

Plus, what about people with severe autism or down syndrome? Do they get no rights because they have no way to knowingly exercise them??? I have yet to hear a single compelling argument from you!

...You're either very stunned or like to annoy people.

You're making no sense. You want to remove someones rights because you think you should be able to.

She wouldn't have aborted 'me,' she would have aborted the zef that eventually became me when it was allowed to live. By that same argument, OMG if my mother hadn't had sex at that exact time (or had been on birth control) then I wouldn't exist! Oh, noes! No one should ever use birth control! Women should pump out as many babies as their bodies can handle, so that all of these people will come into being who might never have existed!! !!111!! !! !!1


My mother was pro-choice, thank you very much. I am glad to know that I was a wanted child; if I were to find out that I was an unwanted one, my self-esteem would take a serious nose-dive.


here's a beginning look, compare these:
[img][800:644]http://flowingdata.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/abortions-albers-revised1.gif[/img]

with these:



(also, for fun: http://flowingdata.com/2009/05/12/maps- ... adly-sins/)

Well, for one thing I'd be far more likely to have been stillborn if I was a week late (post-date delivery is a huge risk). For another, it's human tissue the entire way through; the ovum and spermatozoa were human before the fertilization even took place (and alive, too!). The tumor cells on someone with cancer are human. The question is not humanity, but personhood. Finally, you need to learn this: most pro-choice people, myself included, are perfectly ok with having some pretty firm restrictions on late-term (3rd-trimester) abortions. It's not the difference between a fetus at 38 weeks vs. 39 weeks, but the difference between a fetus at 12 weeks and 38 weeks. The vast, vast majority of abortions that take place happen in the first trimester; almost all of them happen before the end of the second. Those that happen in the third almost all have a very good reason; women do not go through nine months of pregnancy and then decide, 'oh, changed my mind; all of that nausea, back pain, swollen body, etc wasn't worth it.'