If a girl is raped and pregnant, should she keep the baby?

Post Reply New Topic

Looks like Vexcalibur got Pwned........

He certainly did.

Either your stupidity is making you unable to comprehend written text at all or you are being dishonestly misrepresenting what I wrote. Or probably a combination of both. Either way, you keep demonstrating that you are the only subhuman in here. Not like I am not surprised. At all.

I am saying that we can deal with the problem of eugenics separately from the problem of abortion, and that your attempt to merge the topics is dishonest and a slippery slope.


It boils down whether a fetus (which is not a person nor a child) can be considered to have more rights than the mother (Which is officially a person). Right to have someone else donate her own body for you is an enormous privilege that no born person enjoys. It is hard to believe a non-person should enjoy this right.





Hey anti-vaxer enabler, we don't need your kind here.

Last edited by Vexcalibur on 20 Sep 2011, 10:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Looks more like your comprehension sucks, because they are already using eugenics to get rid of people with down syndrome while they are in the womb, only reason they haven't hit Autism yet is cause they can't figure out what causes Autism or what genes.

Also are you going to acknowledge that a fetus is a child and that you were wrong?

Learn to read (and learning to actually quote dictionary stuff is also very useful).





Definitely not. Your opinion is worth 0 cents. Or even negative cents. It is her own body. It is not your body. You are entitled to 0% of power decision about it.

The best of it. There is nothing you can do about it. You can complain on forums all day about how you think women are worth less than brainless fetuses. But you still won't have any control at all over the decision of women. You can get to elect religious nuts, so that they can make abortion illegal. It still won't stop women from aborting if they need to.

And that's why this discussion is so unfair. Since I argue that is the woman's choice, I have already won. Because the woman is the one deciding, regardless of anything.

When you get pregnant, feel free to keep the fetus.

You used to be a fetus, just like you used to be sperm and just like you used to be excrement. It doesn't give you any entitlement to decide what others do with their bodies.


When you claim they are equivalent, you are implying that black people are 'subhuman' to paraphrase.

http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art ... lekey=3424








Haha.

Nobody cares about your little conspiracy theory. The fact is that the current more accurate definition of fetus does not include "unborn infant" as the sixth definition because it allowed nutjobs to actually believe that they are the same thing. (Disregard the use of the word unborn). Innacuracies got fixed (thankfully) and now we have better definitions. Although I guess that your kind misses the good ole times in which women were property and what not. I don't.

Last edited by Vexcalibur on 20 Sep 2011, 10:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Maybe you should learn to read cause that was the second definition given in the dictionary. I also sourced the dictionary too, which you didn't bother to acknowledge.


You lose Vexcalibur.



Actually the brain is one of the first organs to start to form and there is brain activity 48 days into the pregnency, we've already established that, and your group was arguing it didn't have a certain part of the brain, but they acknowledged there is a brain there.

You lose again.



Nope it just shows why I have absolutely no respect radical feminists. The child has rights too, and the woman's rights end where there child's rights begin, you do not have the right to have someone stab the child through the head to inject chemicals to destroy their brain.



Actually I'm comparing your dehumanization of children to what people used to do with blacks. I'm not implying blacks are subhuman, I'm saying you are doing the equivalent of saying blacks are subhuman.

You really need to learn to read.

Your little attempts are cute. Unfortunately: You obviously didn't quote the dictionary correctly (Note how certainly what you posted is probably not the dictionary's definition for child). That you cut the definition to put it without context seems fishy., and finally (as I already addressed) your source is awfully old. I should have rephrased that you should use an actual current definition, because obviously as you yourself mentioned, people in 1970 were more ignorant and dictionaries had to pander to them and also included inaccurate terms. Do notice that "unborn infant" and child are certainly not the same either way, so your own dictionary quote agrees with me anyway.



My legs have the sort of brain activity you talk about. You know, random electric impulses in nerves. Wait, did we go through this 666 times already or not? 26-th week, no thalamic connections, ergo the brain is not even plugged. Oh, did that fact not magically go away? You can pretend like your brain activity pseudoscience was not dealt with pages ago. Unfortunately for you, we will not stop to remind you.

It is irrelevant anyway. Women that want abortions will get abortions anyway, regardless of whether you succeed in making it illegal or not. At the end of the day, you are just an impotent internet freak that cannot do anything about these evil women taking decisions for themselves.

Keep repeating yourself that.



Except that I am not dehumanizing children. I am stating the obvious. Fetuses are not people. You may like to repeat that they are children. But I have gone over this a thousand of times already.

Your "comparison" implicitly dehumanizes black people. Because you consider the discussion to be equivalent to one about black people. The arguments used here are completely different than those of your racist buddies. Your cheap shot is not only a cheap shot but demonstrates what sort of person you are. Willing to dehumanize women and black people just so that your worst nightmare (the notion of women deciding what to do with their own bodies) doesn't get fulfilled.


Oh sure the child has rights too, but since we are not talking about any child that is not relevant.

And we could argue that the fetus has rights too. Like the right not to be killed because of its genes. Because that would be genocide. And that's great.

Do note that Down Syndrome fetus and non-Down syndrome fetus to me both have the equal amount of rights or lack thereof. Same with Asperger fetus or not. When I talk about not letting eugenics happen, I do not do it for the unborn offspring with for the sake of avoiding the risk of eugenics. Do note that just like people with Down syndrome are not subhuman, the converse is also false: fetus with Down syndrome are not super-fetus with more rights than other fetus.

Anyway, if we were to admit that the fetus has rights. We would have to make sure that the fetus' rigths do not surpass the woman's rights. Since the woman is an actual human being, then the rights should be totally biased towards her. Just like all other rights are usually biased towards human beings. It is probably perfectly legal for us to steal a banana from a chimp. Or to kill rats. Etc.

The rights of the fetus cannot surpass the rights of the woman. And I am very sorry but the moment we are talking about forceful donation of your body to another being, that doesn't sound right. Specially since the other being is not human.

All in all, I am just glad that regardless of what you post here. Women are still going to decide for themselves. Many, and I mean many women with unwanted pregnancies will decide to keep the pregnancy because they don't dislike the idea of having children and they can feel like risking it doing it at the current time. But many other will decide to abort. I guess that it is a big problem for you that the effect of making abortion illegal is the creation of clandestine clinics rather than actually making abortions stop. Thank god that is not my problem because I am not interested in forcing my opinion on women.

"anti-vaxer enabler" I have got to remember that one.

Subversive, you'll be seeing more of me around here.

Well please, stay. It is always good to have guys like Inuyasha and you in the other side of the discussion. It saves me the problem of coming up with strawmen of my own.

Sorry if you consider not willing to dehumanize an innocent child like pro-abortionists seem to, to be ignorance you've got a screw loose.




I've already pointed out there is voluntary motor function that occurs well before the 26th week, sorry your argument is a complete and total farce and you know it.



Then they should face the consequences for having said abortion. Seriously if someone can be charged with a double homicide for killing a pregnent woman, then the woman should be able to be charged for manslaughter at the very least.



Didn't you say that I couldn't find a dictionary outside of some 'pro-life crackpot group' that would say a fetus = child. It didn't take me ten minutes after seeing that statement in your post to prove you didn't know what the heck you were talking about as usual.



Sorry but a dictionary that hasn't been altered by the political correct looney fringe says otherwise.





Again you don't know what you are talking about. I consider black people to be human beings and I consider the child in the womb to be a human being, so stop making up garbage to try to claim that children are somehow not human. Btw, I can make that statement cause I have established by a dictionary that a fetus is a child, don't like that fact tough.



The fetus is a human child as you well know, so stop comparing human children to a chimpanzee, or rodents.



By definition the being you are claiming is not human, is human due to their genetic code. According to the dictionary as I have pointed out, the fetus is a human child that is still inside the womb. First you claim they don't have rights, now you're saying they aren't even human... You are quite frankly full of it.



That's like saying murders are going to happen anyways so we should make it legal to murder people...



Considering I've pretty much dismantled your argument and made you into a laughing stock, looks more like your entire case is a strawman.

please show objective evidence to support your assumption that any movement is voluntary, especially since that requires one to be consciouss.

Considering swimming is not something that is just random movements, I would say that is voluntary motor activity.

I would like you to show objective evidence to prove that the movement is nothing more than spasms, which I know you can't because if something like that was going on, something would be seriously wrong in the pregnency.

go back and find them i wasted enough time digging links for this purpose already, all of which you have disregarded, several places in this very thread.

a voluntary movement is a choice and a choice requires conscoiusness, something that cannot physically exist untill at least week 20, that is the point where the brain starts to interconnect.
at week 24-28 the thalamo-cortical complex has begun to develop, something that takes roughly two months, after that the different parts of the brain are all syncronized and global conections have been established.
again had you actually read all the different articles posted in this thread you would have known all this by now(not just mine many important details were present in others)

well then onwards with this march of the damned
"Let them bestride the galaxy like the gods of old, sheltering Mankind from destruction at the hands of an uncaring universe."

We agree that nervous tissue is there at 48 days, not that a brain is there.

All you did was find an outdated definition, misinterpret it and quote it removing context.


IT IS POLITICALLY CORRECT IT MUST BE WRONG.

Sorry, but disregarding any reality that disagrees with you as part of a mass conspiracy against republicans is a very unhealthy behavior.

Are you sure you are not skipping some pills?


We know what your unjustified beliefs are. I knew your intention when making that comparison. However, when you claim the debate of abortion is equivalent to the race debate you are implicitly stating that you believe black people and fetuses are equivalent in your scale of "things with rights". That is a very terrible thing you are saying and is equivalent to dehumanizing black people. That you are not aware that what you are saying is terrible does not make it better, it actually makes it worse.

Of course, in reality we do know that is not really what you believe. You were just trying to pull a very cheap argument to justify your idea that women should be forced to do with their bodies what YOU want. So, the terrible implications of your argument are unintentional. You are not really racist, you are just your standard conservative pushing for a misogynistic law. But you should be more careful.

Depending on the stage of development. The human fetus may not even be as complex as a rat. Rat has voluntarily movement, and that is not something that can happen up till the 25-th week. And we are only arguing for making abortion legal until around the 10-ish week.

You may want me to go politically correct and call it a human child just so you don't feel bad. Well, unfortunately , PC is crap. A 10-ish week fetus is really mindless and killing it , although surely messy and not optimal as a solution (an optimal solution is not getting pregnant in the first place) should be legal, because after-all it is the mother's body.



Human DNA is not holy. Sperm have unique human DNA. So yes, the fetus has human DNA. It is not a human being and not a person. It is human (adjective) it is not a human. Just like human skin cells are human (adjective) skin cells and we don't panic over dandruff.


Your dictionary defines a fetus as unborn offspring. It says nothing about it being a child. Definitely nothing about it being a human child. Or a human being or a person. Even your 1970 dictionary agrees with everyone else but you. Although you can delude yourself into thinking otherwise, it is not healthy.



The slope is so slippery! I am in fear!

So, is the only thing between you and going on a murdering rampage that murder is illegal? That's good to know.

But do admit it. You are right that making murder illegal has definitely not stopped murder. It is more of a punitive thing and a way of asking for retribution for emotional and economical harm the murder causes, and jailing murderers in theory makes them less likely to commit murder again. That is the reason murder is a crime. Abortion on the other hand, doesn't seem to work that way. The victim, in the case of 10 weeks things, is clearly not a person or a human being. The embryo does not have any people depending on it for survival. The only person which would have an emotional problem with its death is the one making the decision. And on top of that, the fetus existence will mean a life risk to the pregnant woman, and serious health problems related to donating her body to the process of hosting the fetus.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Ld07TtV03E[/youtube]

Oh noes!!