abortion
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-10-2011, 03:54 AM
RE: abortion
#2 was already tried in the WW2, it was successful for a short period of time and did nothing on a global scale. Actually, I think it made things even worse, because after the war there was a big baby-boom, so even more people were born after some time.

[Image: a6505fe8.jpg]
I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours.
-Hunter S. Thompson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-10-2011, 05:07 AM
RE: abortion
(12-10-2011 03:54 AM)Filox Wrote:  #2 was already tried in the WW2, it was successful for a short period of time and did nothing on a global scale. Actually, I think it made things even worse, because after the war there was a big baby-boom, so even more people were born after some time.

it was?, well maybe i shouldn't use that example then. that can be misinterpreted
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-10-2011, 08:19 AM
RE: abortion
[/quote]

i accually don't agree with you. people don't take up much space we got enough space for every person even if our population reaches 10 billions we just have to spread across the globe better not just be like clusters in citys, and as for the enviroment i accually believe that we can solve it by putting enough money on for example nuclear energy (make it safe make it more efficient, and more effektive) since nuclear power is only using so little of its capability there's already a prototype for this. if you are courious about that go check out bill gates speach (Innovation to zero) on TED, it a absolutley amazing. you got one valid point tho most of the peeps in my class aren't that bright they don't know of todays science as i do and they won't pick up on the fact that there's a alternative way.

[/quote]

Though it's true that humans tend to cluster in cities, I don't think I'm too keen on spreading out into the lesser occupied areas. I'd prefer to have rain forests and natural areas left alone (Oxygen production, anyone?). We don't really need to sacrifice whole eco systems for the sake of accommodating a bunch of people who don't or won't control their breeding habits.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-10-2011, 08:30 AM
RE: abortion
Couple problems spring to mind.
People do, in fact, take up a huge amount of space, when you take into account all the food that has to be grown for them and all the resources they use for shelter, transport and other stuff. And more billions of people keep wanting more stuff.

The planet is losing 1000 species a day, because of human pollution, habitat degradation and deliberate extermination. Ecosystems are already depleted; the cycles that keep everyone alive are already failing. Ozone is full of holes; there aren't enough trees to clean the air and we keep cutting them down and spewing more pollutants. The poles are melting, the glaciers are disappearing, the water is rising in one place and gone in another; tornadoes and hurricanes, droughts and floods, snowstorms and sandstorms....
The more humans come onto the scene the quicker we all die.

Abortion is a little part of the massive birth control program that's needed. Not gonna happen, though.

If you pray to anything, you're prey to anything.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-10-2011, 12:35 PM
RE: abortion
I'm pro-choice, if you want to phrase it like that. I think we should keep abortion legal, and that it is not unethical. It's also useful to point out that the same number of abortions will occur anyway, even if you impose death threats. The difference is maternal mortality and child mortality. The abortions are still seeked out by many mothers and by whoever can do it. We see this all over the world, and we are even beginning to see it happen in America, where some states and made it extremely hard to get an abortion, so people will go between states and even out of America to get one - although I don't think the conditions are far worse..

"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason and intellect has intended us to forego their use." - Galileo

"Every man is guilty of all the good he did not do." - Voltaire
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-10-2011, 12:47 PM
RE: abortion
I find it really unfunny that the most anti-abortion - i mean, of course, pro-life - states are also keenest on the death penalty.

If you pray to anything, you're prey to anything.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-10-2011, 01:48 PM
RE: abortion
It just makes it really obvious they are covering up their religious motivation with pathetic arguments.

"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason and intellect has intended us to forego their use." - Galileo

"Every man is guilty of all the good he did not do." - Voltaire
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-10-2011, 02:06 PM
RE: abortion
(12-10-2011 12:35 PM)daemonowner Wrote:  I'm pro-choice, if you want to phrase it like that. I think we should keep abortion legal, and that it is not unethical. It's also useful to point out that the same number of abortions will occur anyway, even if you impose death threats. The difference is maternal mortality and child mortality. The abortions are still seeked out by many mothers and by whoever can do it. We see this all over the world, and we are even beginning to see it happen in America, where some states and made it extremely hard to get an abortion, so people will go between states and even out of America to get one - although I don't think the conditions are far worse..

I wanna make it look like abortion could save everyone and really prize it although my arguments have to be very solid since my teacher will argue against me with some of the minority of Christians in my class,

we learn that it's a good thing in this class.
although he needs us to present a good case for or against depending on what you believe. so he will argue for it when the Christians are entering the stage

i don't know if i could have done it anymore confusing i think.... sorry for that
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-10-2011, 07:50 PM (This post was last modified: 12-10-2011 08:10 PM by mysticjbyrd.)
RE: abortion
(12-10-2011 03:53 AM)Gucar Wrote:  
(12-10-2011 02:06 AM)mysticjbyrd Wrote:  Reduce the surplus population is the only argument you need.

The Earth is currently in a near ideal state to support human life, yet we are already WAY WAY over the carrying capacity of the planet earth.

This fact leaves us with 3 choices that will have to be made in the near future.
#1) Child limits, thus required abortions.
#2) Euthanasia - Kill the elderly, Handicapped, etc...or start a good old fashioned war.
#3) Everyone, everywhere, has to drastically cut back on expending resources. And not just slightly, but drastically, and every year they have to use exponentially even less per person to compensate for the exponential population growth. (In other words, not possible)

And those are the only two viable choices....
China, with a population over a billion, was already forced to make that decision.
Of course they chose #1, the only logical choice.

If anyone tries to argue #3, just ask them how many cars their family has, then talk about their new cell phone etc...
Therefore, they have to either admit they are a hypocrite, thus the plan wont work, or they have to agree with you

i accually don't agree with you. people don't take up much space we got enough space for every person even if our population reaches 10 billions we just have to spread across the globe better not just be like clusters in citys, and as for the enviroment i accually believe that we can solve it by putting enough money on for example nuclear energy (make it safe make it more efficient, and more effektive) since nuclear power is only using so little of its capability there's already a prototype for this. if you are courious about that go check out bill gates speach (Innovation to zero) on TED, it a absolutley amazing. you got one valid point tho most of the peeps in my class aren't that bright they don't know of todays science as i do and they won't pick up on the fact that there's a alternative way.
Facts do not care whether you agree or not.
#3 is not possible. Even if you could diminish the average expenditures of people to compensate for the exponential growth rate, you would never get people to agree to it. And if by some miracle it did work, you would eventually get to a point where you were forced to choose #1 or #2 yet again.

Forget luxuries, eventually you run out of water and food., like india, mexico, and other countries. We are currently using up top soil faster than it can be replenished by the earth. We pollute water supplies with toxic chemicals, and drain local water supplies dry. The Ogallala Aquifer is a great example in the US. Currently it supplies the water for an enormous amount of the food in the US, and every year it gets depleted more than run off can fill it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-10-2011, 10:10 PM
RE: abortion
(12-10-2011 02:06 PM)Gucar Wrote:  I wanna make it look like abortion could save everyone and really prize it although my arguments have to be very solid since my teacher will argue against me with some of the minority of Christians in my class,

Back on topic:
You need counter-arguments to the religious taboos. You can't do that while also accepting that the majority of people obey their religious laws.
Actually, they don't. Most of them break most of the biblical rules most of the time. You might illustrate that point for the christians by using a different example, like maybe how the dietary laws of the Jews were discarded after Jesus. This is an easy one, if the anti-abortion text is from the old testament. But other rules have been changed, too, like stoning blasphemers.

Another way might be to take a text that prohibits abortion - even better if it's part of a rule that prohibits any kind of birth control - and show that text in two situations: at the time it was written and today, in the same place.
How many people lived in that city, and how many live there now? What were the conditions and what are the conditions now? How was abortion performed then, and now? What was the purpose of the rule when it was made? Does it serve the same purpose now?

If you pray to anything, you're prey to anything.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: