Marco Rubio...no abortions for Zika infected pregnant women.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
24-08-2016, 04:43 AM (This post was last modified: 24-08-2016 04:51 AM by Heywood Jahblome.)
RE: Marco Rubio...no abortions for Zika infected pregnant women.
(24-08-2016 04:31 AM)adey67 Wrote:  
(24-08-2016 03:48 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  I really screw up that post. I meant to say He should be applauded for not basing his morality on whims and what feels right as so many of you do.

Anyways, If you have so much experience with babies born with defects or babies born to poverty and that has convinced you abortion is okay, are you also okay with mothers killing their new borns because they are poor or have defects?

If you are not, I would say you believe abortion is okay because a child in utero doesn't deserve moral protection.

A lot depends how far the pregnancy is along and how developed the foetus is wether its capable of independent existence type of deformity I could go on ad infinitum its not a black and white issue there are many shades of grey and this is the problem with the religious mindset it lacks flexibility of thought Imo.

If it is not a black and white issue how do you know you are not making a mistake by supporting a woman's right to kill her child in utero?

Sometimes it is best to take a safe route and employ a ridged stance. For instance, if you hunt, you should know exactly what it is you are shooting before you pull the trigger. If you pull the trigger because the target might be a deer and you kill a human child, in my opinion you behaved immorally because you did not take the safe route.

The same is true of abortion. If you are uncertain exactly what it is you are doing when you kill the child in utero....you shouldn't kill the child or support someone else's "right" to kill the child. You admit it is not a black and white issue and you believe that gives you an excuse to behave any way you want. It doesn't.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-08-2016, 05:00 AM (This post was last modified: 24-08-2016 05:04 AM by adey67.)
RE: Marco Rubio...no abortions for Zika infected pregnant women.
Err there are plenty of rules and regulations in place surrounding terminations of pregnancy there for the protection of mother and in some cases foetus as well. This safe route unless it relates to safe lawful medical practice I'm not fully getting. You seem to be saying lets take MY safe route incase skydaddy gets angry and fries our asses with lightning.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes adey67's post
24-08-2016, 05:12 AM
RE: Marco Rubio...no abortions for Zika infected pregnant women.
(24-08-2016 05:00 AM)adey67 Wrote:  Err there are plenty of rules and regulations in place surrounding terminations of pregnancy there for the protection of mother and in many cases foetus as well. This safe route unless it relates to safe lawful medical practice I'm not fully getting. You seem to be saying lets take MY safe route incase skydaddy gets angry and fries our asses with lightning.

I'm saying if you are not 100% positive the child in utero doesn't deserve moral protection, then you should not support it being killed by anyone.

You said it was not a black and white issue, which leads me to believe you are unsure. To me it is black and white. Either the unborn deserve moral protection or they do not. I side on the unborn do deserve moral protection. In my opinion all human beings(or human organisms if you think human being is loaded term) deserve moral protection. I don't take a wishy washy stance like they do deserve moral protection except when the killer is the mother.

Our legal system takes such a wishy washy stance. The unborn are morally protected by threats from anyone except the mother and her agents. This is silly, but to some on this forum it feels right.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-08-2016, 05:17 AM
RE: Marco Rubio...no abortions for Zika infected pregnant women.
What you regard as wishy washy I regard as being flexible.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes adey67's post
24-08-2016, 05:17 AM
RE: Marco Rubio...no abortions for Zika infected pregnant women.
(24-08-2016 02:22 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  A human organism and a human being are the same thing. A human organism and a person are not necessarily the same thing.

You are the only person who I have ever heard make that distinction. It is nonsensical to the point of absurdity.

Quote:Person (noun)
A human being, whether an adult or child.

Dictionary - Person

No one gets to redefine words to suit their own preferences.

(24-08-2016 02:22 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  When you are under general anesthesia I do not consider you to be a person at that moment.

And that's as intelligent as believing the earth is flat and 6000 years old.

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Fatbaldhobbit's post
24-08-2016, 05:25 AM
RE: Marco Rubio...no abortions for Zika infected pregnant women.
(24-08-2016 05:17 AM)adey67 Wrote:  What you regard as wishy washy I regard as being flexible.

If a hunter killed a child instead of a deer I don't think the "I was just being flexible" excuse would be persuasive.

Be honest, you have taken a position that the unborn are not worthy of moral protection. But if that is true....then a father should not be prosecuted for murder if he causes the mother of his child to miscarry by punching her in the stomach. He should only be charged with assault because a child in utero isn't a legal victim.

Strive for a position that is consistent. Consistency demands the child in utero deserves moral protection or is doesn't. Not this wishy washy it depends crap.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-08-2016, 05:26 AM
RE: Marco Rubio...no abortions for Zika infected pregnant women.
(24-08-2016 05:12 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  [Our legal system takes such a wishy washy stance. The unborn are morally protected by threats from anyone except the mother and her agents. This is silly, but to some on this forum it feels right.

Silly like believing in an imaginary friend who created the entire universe and still talks to you and gives a shit about the location of your car keys?

Silly like not allowing a pregnant woman to abort a dead fetus? A dead fetus that poisoned the woman's body and caused her to die in agony?

Silly like forcing an 11 year old girl to give birth to her rapist's child?

Silly like forcing someone else to conform to your nonsensical, irrational beliefs?

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Fatbaldhobbit's post
24-08-2016, 05:28 AM
RE: Marco Rubio...no abortions for Zika infected pregnant women.
(24-08-2016 02:34 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  What you are too stupid to realize Bucky, is that it is simply not illegal for a mother to kill her child in utero. You know in some countries it is not illegal to kill gays. Does that make gay people not human beings in those countries.....obviously it does not. It just that killing gays in those countries is not murder(its still morally wrong though in my opinion).

Perfect example of a non-sequitur.
No one cares whet your opinions are, fool.

(You STILL have not answered the questions posed to you, idiot).
The law is the law. The DISHONEST part here was the YOU imported your legal definition from a law that protected a fetus in a special situation, and did not use the general law. YOU are the dishonest one here.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
24-08-2016, 05:32 AM
RE: Marco Rubio...no abortions for Zika infected pregnant women.
(24-08-2016 05:25 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Strive for a position that is consistent. Consistency demands the child in utero deserves moral protection or is doesn't. Not this wishy washy it depends crap.

Strive for a position that is intelligent.

There are laws for different situations. Each situation is defined by a set of criteria. Circumstances, intent, exculpatory factors, etc. all play a part in defining the laws, situations and consequences.

This is not being wishy-washy.

Wishy-washy is having your imaginary friend tell his followers to commit genocide in one chapter and to love their neighbors in another.

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Fatbaldhobbit's post
24-08-2016, 05:36 AM
RE: Marco Rubio...no abortions for Zika infected pregnant women.
(24-08-2016 05:28 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Perfect example of a non-sequitur.
No one cares whet your opinions are, fool.

(You STILL have not answered the questions posed to you, idiot).
The law is the law. The DISHONEST part here was the YOU imported your legal definition from a law that protected a fetus in a special situation, and did not use the general law. YOU are the dishonest one here.

The law is the law huh? Are you saying that in countries where is it legal to kill people for being gay it is actually okay to kill people for being gay?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: