User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 5:40:28 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In my opinion, a person should be able to evict anything and anyone from her body at any time. If the baby is viable outside the womb, then I'm comfortable with requiring her to remove it intact if she insists on removing it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not a person. Then what are you killing? What am I killing? Not a damn thing. What do I support women doing? Using some damn birth control. Would I stop them from killing their own fetus? No, I don't have the right. At what point in a fetus' development is it your right to stop someone from maliciously killing them? Do they need to be exposed to air first and smacked on the ass? Should I be able to snip the spinal cord of one right before it crowns and be able to get away scot free? In my opinion, a person should be able to evict anything and anyone from her body at any time. If the baby is viable outside the womb, then I'm comfortable with requiring her to remove it intact if she insists on removing it. What if eviction process means death for the renter? "Doctor, please remove this clump of cells growing in my body, but do it in a way that allows it to survive without me." |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 5:40:56 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I fully understand your concern over this criteria. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Personhood is determined by level of cognition. What level of cognition? Yeah, what level? Does the kid have be entertaining, tell jokes and sing show tunes? Post online voraciously? Laugh? Cry? React to stimuli? What? I fully understand your concern over this criteria. You sure? What's my concern? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 5:41:07 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: okay. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Use it against me?  OK. Have at it. okay. Quoted: Most of humanity needs to be exterminated.  I reconsidered and thought it might not be a good thing to post on an Internet forum, but I don't back down from it. Most people on this planet a worse than worthless, their existence is detrimental to the future of the species. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 5:41:08 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes, it's human. But there are contexts when it's ok to kill humans. This is one of them. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not a person. Then what are you killing? Look, you're never gonna convince anyone . It sucks but it is what it is. That murdered baby has human DNA . They can say fetus all day long . What kind of DNA does it have? Human. It's a human fucking being and people are chopping them up and selling them . I can't say anymore or I'd get banned Yes, it's human. But there are contexts when it's ok to kill humans. This is one of them. The most innocent of the innocent is not one of them . Killing a human being for being......unplanned, unwanted , is a far cry from executing a filthy murderer. And I'm pretty sure we don't chop them up and sell them. We don't see a political group formed for their deaths. We don't see the POSIC extolling the virtues of chopping up death row inmates. Now, ask yourself why that is. Why do libs place so much emphasis on it being fine to chop up babies and sell them being a right for christs sake, and then watch them go absolutely batshit about killing a murderer. Can you envision those same monsters saying, well grandma is old and in pain, she is costing husseincare a lot of money, we're just gonna chop her up and sell her good parts ? I'm telling you this is where we're headed. You may think your "fighting for women's rights" , but you , like so many others are the unwitting dupe of monsters. Chopping up babies and selling them is evil and monstrous . |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 5:41:21 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In my opinion, a person should be able to evict anything and anyone from her body at any time. Quote HistoryQuoted:
In my opinion, a person should be able to evict anything and anyone from her body at any time. You have the right to evict a person who was residing in your real property. You do not have the right to kill that person for failure to vacate your property on the day and time you have specified. Quoted:If the baby is viable outside the womb, then I'm comfortable with requiring her to remove it intact if she insists on removing it.
A 2 year old child is not "viable" to live on its own with out care and support. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 5:41:32 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Lions are endangered  Wrong. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 5:41:33 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Aborting an unwanted baby could save someone and/or the taxpayer 150k or more. How many people bitching about and protesting abortion have adopted an unwanted child. Not a Chinese or Russian kid, but an American kid out of the projects. Didn't think so. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
What did he pay to kill that lion? $50k? I bet that did a lot of preservation work in shit-hole Africa. I don't have the energy to talk about abortion today Aborting an unwanted baby could save someone and/or the taxpayer 150k or more. How many people bitching about and protesting abortion have adopted an unwanted child. Not a Chinese or Russian kid, but an American kid out of the projects. Didn't think so. Why did you quote me  lol
While I tend to like animals more than 99.87% of people, it's not the same thing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 5:41:51 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No one is comparing the procedures. I'm comparing her reaction. She cares more about the removal of a small part of a women's genital area, roughly 1/8th of the entire clitoris, that actually doesn't even stop orgasms from happening. So lessening the ability to achieve orgasm=fucking atrocity. But killing babies=women's right. Its the symbology man...can you dig it? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
A clitoris is not a fetus. They are fundamentally different. If a woman wants to have her clitoris removed of her own free will and makes a conscious decision to go through with it, then that is her choice and she should be free t do so. To pin down an adolescent female and forcibly remove her clitoris against her free and conscious will is an act of barbarism, and can be called an atrocity. By comparing FGM to abotion all you are doing is trying to construct a false dichotomy. To make the comparison you do, actually undermines your argument. You are comparing a far more complex multi-organed, multicellular structure to a bundle of nerve endings. If you are opposed to aborton then I have no problem with your view at all. Cant say I approve of it myself. But making unrelated comparisons is not the way to express your point. No one is comparing the procedures. I'm comparing her reaction. She cares more about the removal of a small part of a women's genital area, roughly 1/8th of the entire clitoris, that actually doesn't even stop orgasms from happening. So lessening the ability to achieve orgasm=fucking atrocity. But killing babies=women's right. Its the symbology man...can you dig it? There is no symbology. It is a false dichotomy. It assumes that BES is not outraged by someone being pinned down and forced to abort a fetus against their will but is outraged if someone was pinned down and forcibly circumcised against their will. I'm sure that BES would agree that both are acts of barbarism. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 5:41:58 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sure, why not? A 2 year old child is also a "developing human being."  
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 5:42:15 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You sicken me. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I don't care if you kill your fetus or your lion. If it's not your fetus or your lion, then that might be a problem. I really don't see how lion killing and fetus killing are related though. You sicken me. So does state control over my body. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 5:44:09 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So does state control over my body. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I don't care if you kill your fetus or your lion. If it's not your fetus or your lion, then that might be a problem. I really don't see how lion killing and fetus killing are related though. You sicken me. So does state control over my body.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 5:44:42 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's a load of horse manure. The government can interfere in people wanting to rob, rape, kill, etc. They can certainly make laws against killing unborn children too. What is it inside a woman's womb? Hmm? What is it? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Apples and oranges. I have a right to put down my dog, I don't have a right to so much as cut the ears off yours. Women can kill her child in utero and its cool, but if she waits 10 years and only chop her clit off then its a "fucking atrocity." Yeah, that makes a ton of sense. BTW, your analogy is stupid. You might be able to put your dog down, because no one gives a shit. But try that with your kid, people might have some issues. It makes sense because a fetus is not a child. Who's talking about my trying it with my kid? I'm sorry if this shit makes you all irrational and upset. And if you just want to have your opinion and promote it, that's fine. I don't have an issue with you being anti-abortion. I certainly wouldn't have one. The only issue I have is if you try to take the right away from women. It's simply not the government's place to interfere in that. Apples and oranges. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 5:46:22 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Can mommy cut off her female fetus' clitoris in utero? Is that cool? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
lol, you compared killing your kid with being able to put your dog to sleep versus clipping the ears off someone else's dog. Talk about irrational and upset, I'm laughing. I just find it funny and extremely hypocritical that you care more about a 10 year old's clitoris but don't give a fuck about that kid when she's in some lady's belly. What constitutes a child? Exposure to air? An analogy isn't a comparison, in that sense. But whatever. The situations are totally different. It's not hypocritical at all. Personhood is determined by level of cognition. Control over one's own body, and the non-person in it, belongs to that person and no one else. I can't tell the lady what to do with the fetus in her belly any more than I can tell you that you need to hand over a kidney because it will save another person's life. I can beg and I can cuss, but I can't compel you to do anything with your body you don't want to do. Can mommy cut off her female fetus' clitoris in utero? Is that cool? My argument for women's freedom is about women controlling their bodies. Your question has nothing to do with that. It's ridiculous. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 5:48:11 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
lol. Now who is emotional? No, I'm not down with removing small clumps of cells, whether they be babies or clits. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not a person. Then what are you killing? Small clumps of cells. Oh wait, that's a clitoris, which she considers the removal being a "fucking atrocity." 
So you're cool with FGM, is what you're saying. lol. Now who is emotional? No, I'm not down with removing small clumps of cells, whether they be babies or clits. If sarcasm sounds like me being emotional to you, you have problems reading people . |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 5:48:44 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My argument for women's freedom is about women controlling their bodies. Your question has nothing to do with that. It's ridiculous. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Can mommy cut off her female fetus' clitoris in utero? Is that cool? My argument for women's freedom is about women controlling their bodies. Your question has nothing to do with that. It's ridiculous. According to your own words, you consider what ever is inside mom's body to be her possession, to do with what she wills. So mommy is fine disposing of the baby, even if it means killing it. But if mommy wants to chop off the clitoris of the fetus and not wait to do it after birth, do you see a moral conundrum with this? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 5:48:46 PM EDT
[#16]
...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 5:49:45 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So does state control over my body. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I don't care if you kill your fetus or your lion. If it's not your fetus or your lion, then that might be a problem. I really don't see how lion killing and fetus killing are related though. You sicken me. So does state control over my body. do you get all crazy over seatbelt laws? State control over your body. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 5:50:41 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So does state control over my body. I do not want control over your body or anyone else's body. I want you and women like you to stop asserting control over the body that resides within your body. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 5:50:55 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If sarcasm sounds like me being emotional to you, you have problems reading people . Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So you're cool with FGM, is what you're saying. lol. Now who is emotional? No, I'm not down with removing small clumps of cells, whether they be babies or clits. If sarcasm sounds like me being emotional to you, you have problems reading people . lol. Sarcasm: the use of irony to mock or convey contempt. You tried to say I was cool with FGM. No mocking or trying to convey contempt, you are insinuating something. Get a dictionary and calm down. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 5:52:31 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What level of cognition? By that definition it may be possible to "abort" children well after they have left the birth canal. If you take my property from me and swallow it, it is still my property despite the fact the property is currently residing within your property (body). My property may pass from your body naturally or it may not; requiring surgical extraction. The point is ownership does not necessarily transfer with venue. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Personhood is determined by level of cognition. What level of cognition? By that definition it may be possible to "abort" children well after they have left the birth canal. Quoted:Control over one's own body, and the non-person in it, belongs to that person and no one else. I can't tell the lady what to do with the fetus in her belly any more than I can tell you that you need to hand over a kidney because it will save another person's life. I can beg and I can cuss, but I can't compel you to do anything with your body you don't want to do. If you take my property from me and swallow it, it is still my property despite the fact the property is currently residing within your property (body). My property may pass from your body naturally or it may not; requiring surgical extraction. The point is ownership does not necessarily transfer with venue. Opening can of worms: I'm ok with euthanasia of mental vegetables. If I swallow your ring of my own free will and against yours, I can see why I might have to get cut open against my will. If a chef feeds me your ring in a pie, I don't think you can force me into surgery to retrieve it. If the fetus is not the woman's, whose is it? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 5:53:55 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Apples and oranges. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
That's a load of horse manure. The government can interfere in people wanting to rob, rape, kill, etc. They can certainly make laws against killing unborn children too. What is it inside a woman's womb? Hmm? What is it? Apples and oranges. No, apples and clumps of cells. Keep the clitoris part, or its considered an atrocity. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 5:54:08 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
not a person I will submit that all of your points are correct if you are not both scientifically ending A. "Human" B. "life" |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 5:55:45 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We are not talking about their own bodies. We are talking about a completely separate human being residing with in their bodies. You have no right to kill a person without just cause who happens to be renting your house (thus residing within your property) any more than you have a natural right to kill a person temporarily residing within your body (even more so when YOU PUT THAT PERSON THERE to begin with). Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
But the bottom line is that you don't have the right to stop women from controlling their own bodies. You don't have to like it, you just can't stop them. We are not talking about their own bodies. We are talking about a completely separate human being residing with in their bodies. You have no right to kill a person without just cause who happens to be renting your house (thus residing within your property) any more than you have a natural right to kill a person temporarily residing within your body (even more so when YOU PUT THAT PERSON THERE to begin with). You're talking about a non-person. It doesn't have the rights of a baby. My body is more than a rental home. And evicting squatters doesn't kill them. Furthermore, it would be ok to evict squatters at gun point if they refused to go. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 5:57:48 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yeah, what level? Does the kid have be entertaining, tell jokes and sing show tunes? Post online voraciously? Laugh? Cry? React to stimuli? What? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Personhood is determined by level of cognition. What level of cognition? Yeah, what level? Does the kid have be entertaining, tell jokes and sing show tunes? Post online voraciously? Laugh? Cry? React to stimuli? What? I don't need to define the tipping point into personhood to hold that anything in a woman's body is hers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 5:59:36 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What if eviction process means death for the renter? "Doctor, please remove this clump of cells growing in my body, but do it in a way that allows it to survive without me." Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Then what are you killing? What am I killing? Not a damn thing. What do I support women doing? Using some damn birth control. Would I stop them from killing their own fetus? No, I don't have the right. At what point in a fetus' development is it your right to stop someone from maliciously killing them? Do they need to be exposed to air first and smacked on the ass? Should I be able to snip the spinal cord of one right before it crowns and be able to get away scot free? In my opinion, a person should be able to evict anything and anyone from her body at any time. If the baby is viable outside the womb, then I'm comfortable with requiring her to remove it intact if she insists on removing it. What if eviction process means death for the renter? "Doctor, please remove this clump of cells growing in my body, but do it in a way that allows it to survive without me." I don't understand your question. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 6:00:19 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Apples and oranges. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Apples and oranges. I have a right to put down my dog, I don't have a right to so much as cut the ears off yours. Women can kill her child in utero and its cool, but if she waits 10 years and only chop her clit off then its a "fucking atrocity." Yeah, that makes a ton of sense. BTW, your analogy is stupid. You might be able to put your dog down, because no one gives a shit. But try that with your kid, people might have some issues. It makes sense because a fetus is not a child. Who's talking about my trying it with my kid? I'm sorry if this shit makes you all irrational and upset. And if you just want to have your opinion and promote it, that's fine. I don't have an issue with you being anti-abortion. I certainly wouldn't have one. The only issue I have is if you try to take the right away from women. It's simply not the government's place to interfere in that. Apples and oranges. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 6:02:13 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:If I swallow your ring of my own free will and against yours, I can see why I might have to get cut open against my will. Quote HistoryQuoted:If I swallow your ring of my own free will and against yours, I can see why I might have to get cut open against my will. I may want you to swallow my property for whatever reason (rational, irrational, silly, functional, doesn't really matter) with out transferring ownership and that will depend upon your consent. You agreed to swallow my property (in this theoretical example) therefore you cannot just decide that my property is yours to do with as you please simply because it currently resides within your body. Quoted:If a chef feeds me your ring in a pie, I don't think you can force me into surgery to retrieve it. I would agree but by that same token you would not have the right to cut yourself open and destroy the ring without my consent. Quoted:If the fetus is not the woman's, whose is it? Who owns you? You own yourself, do you not? Likewise the developing baby owns itself although a its's caretaker (parent) you have rights and responsibilities that go along with the care of that person until they are of an age to care for themselves. Ergo either you have the logical right to terminate the life of that child at ANY point in that chain of custody (pre birth - emancipation) or you do not not. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 6:03:04 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The most innocent of the innocent is not one of them . Killing a human being for being......unplanned, unwanted , is a far cry from executing a filthy murderer. And I'm pretty sure we don't chop them up and sell them. We don't see a political group formed for their deaths. We don't see the POSIC extolling the virtues of chopping up death row inmates. Now, ask yourself why that is. Why do libs place so much emphasis on it being fine to chop up babies and sell them being a right for christs sake, and then watch them go absolutely batshit about killing a murderer. Can you envision those same monsters saying, well grandma is old and in pain, she is costing husseincare a lot of money, we're just gonna chop her up and sell her good parts ? I'm telling you this is where we're headed. You may think your "fighting for women's rights" , but you , like so many others are the unwitting dupe of monsters. Chopping up babies and selling them is evil and monstrous . Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not a person. Then what are you killing? Look, you're never gonna convince anyone . It sucks but it is what it is. That murdered baby has human DNA . They can say fetus all day long . What kind of DNA does it have? Human. It's a human fucking being and people are chopping them up and selling them . I can't say anymore or I'd get banned Yes, it's human. But there are contexts when it's ok to kill humans. This is one of them. The most innocent of the innocent is not one of them . Killing a human being for being......unplanned, unwanted , is a far cry from executing a filthy murderer. And I'm pretty sure we don't chop them up and sell them. We don't see a political group formed for their deaths. We don't see the POSIC extolling the virtues of chopping up death row inmates. Now, ask yourself why that is. Why do libs place so much emphasis on it being fine to chop up babies and sell them being a right for christs sake, and then watch them go absolutely batshit about killing a murderer. Can you envision those same monsters saying, well grandma is old and in pain, she is costing husseincare a lot of money, we're just gonna chop her up and sell her good parts ? I'm telling you this is where we're headed. You may think your "fighting for women's rights" , but you , like so many others are the unwitting dupe of monsters. Chopping up babies and selling them is evil and monstrous . I'm not the lefts keeper. I'm not even their neighbor. I can tell you where I stand, but that's it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 6:04:13 PM EDT
[#29]
1. We have established that prohibition of destructive abortion of a viable fetus is acceptable to all parties.
2. Fetuses are generally viable from conception, provided nature is allowed to take its course and the fetus is left in its natural environment. A healthy 30 year-old is not viable if air-dropped onto the South Pole. 3. Therefore . . . . 4. A man makes his decision to become a father when he commences copulation. 5. Until 1973, a woman made her decision at the same time. Apparently there was a change in the Constitution between 1789 and 1973 which was visible only to the elect. 6. It is no more reasonable to say that the right to abort is inherent in womanhood than it is to say that a man has the inherent right to tender the fee for an abortion and then abandon the mother and child. 7. It is no less reasonable to say that a woman has an obligation to gestate those she conceives than it is to say that a man must contribute to the costs of pregnancy, birth, and support of those he conceives. 8. It is no less reasonable to say that a woman has an obligation to gestate those she conceives than it is to say that a parent has an obligation to support those actually born. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 6:05:06 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I reconsidered and thought it might not be a good thing to post on an Internet forum, but I don't back down from it. Most people on this planet a worse than worthless, their existence is detrimental to the future of the species. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Use it against me?
OK. Have at it. okay. Quoted:
Most of humanity needs to be exterminated. I reconsidered and thought it might not be a good thing to post on an Internet forum, but I don't back down from it. Most people on this planet a worse than worthless, their existence is detrimental to the future of the species. And of course that doesn't include you or anyone you care about, right? It rarely does. Its easy to wish death on people you don't know. Different story when it hits close to home though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 6:06:08 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You have the right to evict a person who was residing in your real property. You do not have the right to kill that person for failure to vacate your property on the day and time you have specified. A 2 year old child is not "viable" to live on its own with out care and support. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
In my opinion, a person should be able to evict anything and anyone from her body at any time. You have the right to evict a person who was residing in your real property. You do not have the right to kill that person for failure to vacate your property on the day and time you have specified. Quoted:If the baby is viable outside the womb, then I'm comfortable with requiring her to remove it intact if she insists on removing it.
A 2 year old child is not "viable" to live on its own with out care and support. I wouldn't need to kill them to remove them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 6:06:27 PM EDT
[#32]
I 100% support abortion for the simple reason of preventing millions of unwanted babies that grow up in shit hole families eventually becoming welfare recipients. If you support abortion, you might as well start voting democrat and ramping up the government tit so these 'saved' childrenz can blossom into beautiful, production citizens that you seem to think are.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 6:08:20 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A 2 year old child is also a "developing human being." Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Sure, why not? A 2 year old child is also a "developing human being." It's also a person. Do you need a Venn Diagram? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 6:08:28 PM EDT
[#34]
This thread is aids.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 6:10:14 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 1. We have established that prohibition of destructive abortion of a viable fetus is acceptable to all parties. 2. Fetuses are generally viable from conception, provided nature is allowed to take its course and the fetus is left in its natural environment. A healthy 30 year-old is not viable if air-dropped onto the South Pole. 3. Therefore . . . . 4. A man makes his decision to become a father when he commences copulation. 5. Until 1973, a woman made her decision at the same time. Apparently there was a change in the Constitution between 1789 and 1973 which was visible only to the elect. 6. It is no more reasonable to say that the right to abort is inherent in womanhood than it is to say that a man has the inherent right to tender the fee for an abortion and then abandon the mother and child. 7. It is no less reasonable to say that a woman has an obligation to gestate those she conceives than it is to say that a man must contribute to the costs of pregnancy, birth, and support of those he conceives. 8. It is no less reasonable to say that a woman has an obligation to gestate those she conceives than it is to say that a parent has an obligation to support those actually born. If you look at it from a simply natural perspective, then it is clear that abortion is a completely unnatural act which is completely contrary to the purpose of human females. Their bodies, as with the females of all mammals, have evolved to be ideally suited for the conception, development, delivery and care of human children. Abortion deprives the woman of her natural purpose and makes her body nothing more than entertainment for men. But this is an acceptable idea to millions and millions of people. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 6:10:27 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's also a person. Do you need a Venn Diagram? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Sure, why not? A 2 year old child is also a "developing human being." It's also a person. Do you need a Venn Diagram? Sure. Can I see it? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 6:10:36 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You're talking about a non-person. It doesn't have the rights of a baby. Quote HistoryQuoted:
You're talking about a non-person. It doesn't have the rights of a baby. What is it if is not a person? When is the transition made between "thing" or "clump of cells" and baby? Quoted:And evicting squatters doesn't kill them. If I understand your position correctly you are saying a woman should have the right to evict the baby from their body at any time. O.k. Well when you evict the squatters from your real property, they walk away (hopefully) on their own. That baby in your body cannot walk away and cannot leave your body unless the baby is TAKEN by FORCE via some procedure that invariably leads to their death. That baby has no choice in the matter. Quoted:Furthermore, it would be ok to evict squatters at gun point if they refused to go. Agreed and sometimes it would be within your rights to kill them if the circumstances permitted. However that baby cannot leave on its own. Quoted:My body is more than a rental home. Indeed. Your body, in my opinion, is a sacred Temple and no man or woman has a right to invade your body without your permission and consent. With that said when you PLACE or ARRANGE for another human being to start developing WITHIN YOUR BODY, you are no longer talking about JUST YOUR sacred temple. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 6:10:45 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I 100% support abortion for the simple reason of preventing millions of unwanted babies that grow up in shit hole families eventually becoming welfare recipients. If you support abortion, you might as well start voting democrat and ramping up the government tit so these 'saved' childrenz can blossom into beautiful, production citizens that you seem to think are. So basically you support killing people with different political believes than you... Or in this case those who may potentially Your avatar is fitting |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 6:10:52 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
According to your own words, you consider what ever is inside mom's body to be her possession, to do with what she wills. So mommy is fine disposing of the baby, even if it means killing it. But if mommy wants to chop off the clitoris of the fetus and not wait to do it after birth, do you see a moral conundrum with this? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Can mommy cut off her female fetus' clitoris in utero? Is that cool? My argument for women's freedom is about women controlling their bodies. Your question has nothing to do with that. It's ridiculous. According to your own words, you consider what ever is inside mom's body to be her possession, to do with what she wills. So mommy is fine disposing of the baby, even if it means killing it. But if mommy wants to chop off the clitoris of the fetus and not wait to do it after birth, do you see a moral conundrum with this? I already answered that. Mutilating her fetus has nothing to do with controlling her body. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 6:11:11 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: And of course that doesn't include you or anyone you care about, right? It rarely does. Its easy to wish death on people you don't know. Different story when it hits close to home though. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Use it against me? OK. Have at it. okay. Quoted: Most of humanity needs to be exterminated. I reconsidered and thought it might not be a good thing to post on an Internet forum, but I don't back down from it. Most people on this planet a worse than worthless, their existence is detrimental to the future of the species. And of course that doesn't include you or anyone you care about, right? It rarely does. Its easy to wish death on people you don't know. Different story when it hits close to home though. No, it does not include me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 6:12:54 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I wouldn't need to kill them to remove them. Compromise? A woman is not required to carry a child to term but must carry the child to a point where the baby can be removed to be cared for by someone else? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 6:13:31 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
do you get all crazy over seatbelt laws? State control over your body. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I don't care if you kill your fetus or your lion. If it's not your fetus or your lion, then that might be a problem. I really don't see how lion killing and fetus killing are related though. You sicken me. So does state control over my body. do you get all crazy over seatbelt laws? State control over your body. I'm against seatbelt laws, yes. However being forced to wear a strap across me just doesn't seem as outrageous an infringement on my freedom as not allowing someone to terminate a pregnancy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 6:14:06 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's also a person. Do you need a Venn Diagram? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Sure, why not? A 2 year old child is also a "developing human being." It's also a person. Do you need a Venn Diagram? I very well may as I warned you in advance that I was spectacularly dense. When does that "fetus" become a person? I apologize for asking repeatedly however in my mind this is an incredibly important determining factor on which all else may hinge. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 6:14:23 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I do not want control over your body or anyone else's body. I want you and women like you to stop asserting control over the body that resides within your body. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So does state control over my body. I do not want control over your body or anyone else's body. I want you and women like you to stop asserting control over the body that resides within your body. If it's just a "want" with you, then we have no beef. I don't want women to have abortions either. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 6:15:21 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
lol. Sarcasm: the use of irony to mock or convey contempt. You tried to say I was cool with FGM. No mocking or trying to convey contempt, you are insinuating something. Get a dictionary and calm down. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So you're cool with FGM, is what you're saying. lol. Now who is emotional? No, I'm not down with removing small clumps of cells, whether they be babies or clits. If sarcasm sounds like me being emotional to you, you have problems reading people . lol. Sarcasm: the use of irony to mock or convey contempt. You tried to say I was cool with FGM. No mocking or trying to convey contempt, you are insinuating something. Get a dictionary and calm down. Lol. Same to you, buddy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 6:15:52 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If it's just a "want" with you, then we have no beef. I don't want women to have abortions either. I don't want any human being to kill another human being with out just cause. Is that so unreasonable? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 6:16:25 PM EDT
[#47]
I'm not paying out the ass to support the lion. Someone pays big money out of pocket to kill it. Fine by me.
That said.... I am paying out the ass to support some brood sow that won't use BC so she can get a boost on Section 8 housing, EBT, and a tax credits for out of wedlock kids. I'm paying for some bastard or bitch brought to term on a generational basis. It never ends.. I will continue to pay the bitch's way even when some bastard knocks her up at 14-15. Then I'll be paying for whatever she carries to term to boot. I also stand a better than even chance to have to pay to incarcerate the bastard. I suspect you can tell which side of the abortion equation I'm on. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 6:16:50 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So basically you support killing people with different political believes than you... Or in this case those who may potentially Your avatar is fitting Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I 100% support abortion for the simple reason of preventing millions of unwanted babies that grow up in shit hole families eventually becoming welfare recipients. If you support abortion, you might as well start voting democrat and ramping up the government tit so these 'saved' childrenz can blossom into beautiful, production citizens that you seem to think are. So basically you support killing people with different political believes than you... Or in this case those who may potentially Your avatar is fitting I support women being able to make decisions regarding their OWN bodies... which just so happens to support my point above. I like how the anti crowd 'white knights' the human right of a fetus and then when it comes to help support that child or support the mother through healthcare or welfare you're completely against it. makes zero sense. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 6:17:01 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I will submit that all of your points are correct if you are not both scientifically ending A. "Human" B. "life" Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
not a person I will submit that all of your points are correct if you are not both scientifically ending A. "Human" B. "life" Human life is not necessarily a person. If I lost all brain function except what kept my heart pumping and lungs working and you decided to stop my heart and lungs, you wouldn't be killing a person. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2015 6:17:10 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There is no symbology. It is a false dichotomy. It assumes that BES is not outraged by someone being pinned down and forced to abort a fetus against their will but is outraged if someone was pinned down and forcibly circumcised against their will. I'm sure that BES would agree that both are acts of barbarism. I'm not actually comparing the two acts, I'm comparing HER response. What I am saying has nothing to do with the mother, its the baby. You mention someone being pinned down and forcibly circumcised against their will as being barbarism. How about being killed against their will? Is that barbarism too? What about it being not only legal, but funded by the state, with the organizations doing it receiving extra money on the side selling off the body parts of dead babies clumps of cells used for research? Is that barbarism too? Let's see... Barbarism: extreme cruelty or brutality Yep, sure looks like it. So for BES, a baby gets killed=no problem, as long as its inside mom. Older girl gets circumcised=fucking atrocity. The mother has nothing to do with either of these accept making chooses. And BES has nothing to do with either accept condoning one and being outraged at the other. Which I find amusing because its hypocritical. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
