A thread about page 2

I don't really care if shitbags want to eat their young I just don't like to call it anything other than what it is, homicide.

As the top species of this planet we have a moral obligation to protect the weakest among us, especially an unborn baby.

 
In this day and age of science there is no good reason for a women to get pregnant if she does not wish to.


She made her "choice" the second she consented to unprotected sex.


Rape or incest are other debates, life of the mother in danger it's her choice pure & simple.




Anyone looking back on history a 1000 years from now will look at us the way we look at the Roman Coliseum slaughters, Barbaric.




Life coming form another solar system surely will look at us as savages , they would have to be evolved far beyond us just to make such a journey.




Killing to protect your self or family is fine, killing in war time , again you're not killing an innocent intentionally.




Mothers who use abortion as birth control pay for their actions one way or another.


I have met these women (some) they all have severe regrets.


 

 
remember though, jesus can and will forgive this just as any other sin if you repent


a great example of this in my own extended family


she lived with horrible guilt for what she had done until she accepted the grace and forgiveness that was there for the taking

Why am I not allowed to terminate my own property?

If it's not people, and I have a two decade financial obligation of aforementioned property - I should be allowed to destroy said property or at least opt out of my financial obligation to it.

Except that you made none of those points.

First, you did not refute that humans kill their offspring as a result of resource scarcity, real or perceived, and you did not offer any other reason for humans to kill their children.

Second, I did not claim that humans only kill their offspring because of resource scarcity.

My only point was that animals do kill their offspring, because of resource scarcity, just like humans do.

I cannot argue with your logic

I'm pro life in that I see abortion as the work of evil people. It takes a special kind of badness to kill your own child.
I'm pro choice in that I realize I can't stop it and likely would not want to even if I could - Democrats get abortions, mostly, not my people. Interrupting them while they kill their own would be a grave mistake.

In the end, I have more important things to worry about than whether or not people who oppose my culture kill themselves. Less democrats is a very good thing.

You're either killing a human being or you're not. It's really that simple. The only reason religion is brought into this is because most people are too stupid to think for themselves, so they use religion as their cheat sheet to life.

If you're killing a human being, it's no different than regular homicide. It's either murder or in self-defense. The "life of the mother" argument is self-defense. All others are murder, and therefore wrong. This isn't even a question of morality. Our government exists to protect the liberties of persons.

God has nothing to do with it.

Even most hardcore abortion supporters have no problem admitting a fetus is a human being. They just believe you can kill it if you want at any point.

But if you don't want to make your truck payment thats on you.

Wow next you wacky fuckers will want yo eat your own children.

Read the history of 'Planned Parenthood' (a misnomer if there ever was one) and to think that the National Socialist Party in Germany (that would be uncle Adolph and his merry cohorts) liked the whole concept and took it to a whole new height - I think (if they were alive today) they would be proud of what we here in the United States have done - what could be more evil that to 'surgically' (suck out/sell body parts/etc.) remove an unborn child?  What did I read recently that we were up to about 55 million of 'unviable' tissue removed?  I think (and I am not 'religious') that someone, somehow and in someway is going to pay for this travesty.

Weird, in my experience, everyone of them seems to fall back to the "it's just a clump of cells" line of bullshit.

Abortion is murder.  Legalized murder is still murder.

Anyone claiming otherwise is just tap-dancing around these core truths, with varying degrees of delusion and denial.

Usually get that from people who haven't thought about it much. The real sickening part is the most pro abort people who know its a life but believe you have the right to choose to kill it. This is from the likes of the late Dr Tiller and his supporters/colleauges.

I said:      "The availability of resources, real or imagined, is not the only reason humans kill their young and with very, very few exceptions (i.e. war, prolonged siege, etc), humans generally do not eat their young once they have killed them. "

Then I said:

"I thought making the point that humans kill their children for reasons other animals do not (to the best of our knowledge) was important given the fact the assertion was made that animals "do it for the same reason humans do it."

I also thought the fact that humans in the Western world do not, in fact, kill their children for the same resource issues you cited, was somewhat important."

Those statements seem to assert the same points to me.  



Human beings, generally, do not kill and eat their new born offspring due to lack of resources with lack of resources either meaning a lack of nutrients (i.e. the mother eats the baby to prevent herself from starving to death) or a lack of resources in general to rear the child until the child is of age to fend for himself/herself.

The only examples I know of that come even remotely close that do not involve freshly born young (as in the examples in the sources you posted) and those that I am aware of involved protracted sieges where the mothers/parents reluctantly killed and ate their young for survival (and I only have a few examples of that).   There are other examples where parents chose death rather than kill and eat their children or if they did eat their children only did so following natural death.

The point is not that it has happened or that it happens but that it is an absolutely not a "natural" occurrence to the human race.

Generally speaking a human mother who gives birth and is, herself starving to death, will not kill and then eat her baby to prevent herself from dying from malnutrition.  This aspect of humanity appears to transcend cultures.

Edit:  On the other hand, killing babies because you don't want to care for them, don't want them (i.e. born a girl when you wanted a boy, disfigured, etc) or expend the resources you do have?   This appears to be a human trait that transcends cultures throughout history in one form or fashion.





I understand that however my contention is that humans don't kill their offspring because of resource scarcity as a natural practice and the few examples I can think of where such a practice did occur are not typical of the human condition.   Edit:  as I said before:  killing the baby for another reason unrelated to "can I care for it" or "will I die if I don't eat it?"  Yeah; we have documented examples of that and I would wager a rather unhealthy chunk of abortions carried out today fall under the "I just don't want it" category.  

My point was that human beings, generally speaking, will do anything before they resort to killing and eating their young due to lack of nutrients which is completely different than what we see in some other animals within the animal kingdom.

Going beyond that to the issue of resources in general for the rearing of the child, again, the comparison between the examples in your sources did not match up with human kind (on average).     Even your NatGeo source demonstrated this difference with the humans working diligently to prevent the sloth from eating the last of her young to ensure the offspring survived.

In other words:  mankind appears to be simultaneously better and worse than what we observe in the rest of the animal kingdom.  

This has been my experience as well.    They may know it is a human being however the people  I have met would not admit that.    Perhaps some do.  

That would be worse in my opinion.  

My view is not religion based. It is murder, plain and simple. What was a breathing, heart beating human is now dead intentionally by another human. It's murder. The fact that this person had not yet passed thru the"magical barrier" of the vagina is irrelevant.

Its a barbaric practice for the sake of convenience. There are so many other methods for birth control.

Are we really so short of degenerate low-lifes in this country that we need to force child murderers to reproduce?

Mine too

I really don't care.

The generation that embraces abortion for financial reasons will live long enough to be euthanized for the same reason.

Most abortions occur one generation late.

Don't call it a choice, it's a murder.

well said!

 

Because human life is not property

 

Yes it is. women own it and can put it down, like a lame house cat.

And if it survives the test of vanity and convenience I have a legal obligation to pay a woman to care for it.

Sounds like property to me.

Are miscarriages (without any intent of the mother to abort) just part of God's plan? Does God's plan just include him killing babies (a sin)?

just when you thought the free loaders couldn't get any dumber....

So because children die of cancer, we should be able to kill children?

brilliant logic professor.

In the past half decade, ~700,000 babies are aborted per year.  39% of them African American.   That's genocide and pure evil.

I believe murder is wrong. Murder is the unjustified, premeditated killing of a human. I believe the fetus is a person as soon as its DNA is different enough to tell it as a separate human from the mother. As soon as this happens, abortion becomes murder. Religion has little to no basis in me feeling this way.

That is exactly what moral relativism means.

That was Margret Sangers vision and the left loves her for it.

A woman's uterus decides a pregnancy is a no-go, that's fine.



A woman's brain decides a pregnancy is a no-go, that's a moral outrage.



 

No shit.

A miscarriage, while emotionally tragic, is a biological function to avoid the creation of an unfit human. It's the last vestige of natural selection we have.

How that has anything to do with God, is beyond me.

If it's just a tissue, the mother should have no problem taking the "tissue" home with her and trowing it into the trash herself.

And IBTL

Because uteri aren't conscious, and miscarriages are unintentional?

I'm pro-choice too, but seriously?

No freakin' kidding.  

The mental, moral, and intellectual gymnastics they have to go through to defend the "legitimacy" of abortion hearken back to that of the drug-addled fools of the '60s.  

Even worse, a decade or so later those very fools got their way.        

Why do people over complicate this issue? What's the difference in an abortion and a murder? If the conclusion is at x amount of time it's a baby or it has a heart beat or whatever why would society be okay with taking it's life?

I'm as pro choice as the next guy until you take another humans life. This option is truly disgusting to me considering the majority of people put in this situation had a choice. Just because you made a shitty one doesn't mean you get to kill it.

If heaven is wonderful, and babies are innocent and will go to heaven, where's the harm in sparing them a life on earth? Boom, straight from the womb to Jesus' arms. Isn't that a nice thing?

Following that logic why don't we just kill all the babies that know no better for they will be in Heaven?

What is up with these arguments.

Selfishness. We want the company of the babies so we doom them to a life on earth and the risk that they'll reject Jesus and damn themselves to hell.

Maybe it's the same kind of selfishness that God has, that makes him give us free will, thus risking our eternal souls.

If you love someone, you'd want to give them certain salvation. A guaranteed eternal life in blissful comune with their creator. And they'd thank you for it.

Pro abortion advocates have been brainwashed by the media into believing that the only opposition to abortion can come from a religious standpoint.  Hence the silly religious comments.

Because human agency is the heart of ethical action. Ethical action is the heart of civilization. Civilization rests on human autonomy. Once you remove ethics, you revert to the laws of biology, starting with the negation of autonomy.

I believe it's morally wrong.

That being said, I'd rather they get it done early than me having to do it with a 12 ga when they're 17 and kicking in my sliding glass door in a home invasion.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

Yup. Just another reason the GOP fails to gain young people.

Google my username and "abortion". You'll see my arguments are 99% non-religious.

You misunderstand at least the human requirement for the freedom of love.

I cannot control someone completely and demand they unconditionally love me. I am forced to choose.

The biggest supporters of abortion are males 18 to 30...mostly because they duck an 18 year  [or more] obligation quite easily.