1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

New abortion ban law in S.Carolina, thoughts?

Discussion in 'Health' started by Zanna, May 21, 2016.

  1. dogtowner

    dogtowner Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    16,778
    Likes Received:
    1,350
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Sec 9 Row J Seat 1 @ VCU home games
    I don't dispute that in the popularity contest people are ok with it, I will continue to not dispute it so perhaps we can agree this point is an assumption.

    If I wanted to watch you try and move goalposts I would say so but the point us you will say anything but what might be pertinent. I understand, it's a pretty normal response.

    So you are ok with abortion and I am not.
     
  2. Senter

    Senter Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2016
    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Oregon
    That's pretty obscure and non-specific. Care to be clear?

    ... because . . . . "you will say anything but (except that which) what might be pertinent"? So you want to "take the edge" in the debate on the basis of your claim that I dodge, deflect, raise irrelevant points, and debate dishonestly? LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    I'm the one here who insists on recognized, accepted definitions in debating and calls for clarity and you think you can paint me as a debater who dodges, deflects, raises irrelevant points, "says anything but what might be pertinent" and therefore debates dishonestly??? LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That alone would disqualify you.
     
  3. Old_Trapper70

    Old_Trapper70 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2014
    Messages:
    1,757
    Likes Received:
    198
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Then post a reason you would oppose an abortion. Too hard for you to do?

    [quote}Well, I'll ignore the BS "parasite" remark since it doesn't apply. But for the first 3 months or so it is referred to properly, clinically, and by definition as an "embryo". After that it is referred to properly, clinically, and by definition as a "fetus". And only after birth is it properly, clinically, and by definition as a "baby", the right-to-lifer nutjobs notwithstanding. It is commonly known that desperate people who are struggling to win an argument that they know they lost before beginning, typically resort to redefining words to help them, like "baby" and "murder" and "human being". But I don't fall for the trick, so good luck.[/QUOTE]

    Your opinion, and that of others like you. Due to the inadequacy of your argument, and the lack of moral justification, people like you will always use terms "arguments" like "that they know they lost before beginning, typically resort to redefining word" not having the intellectual honesty to know that when you define the life in the womb as a "fetus", "embryo", or other then a "baby" (a term that was used for thousands of years) that is axactly what you are doing.

    https://carm.org/parasite

    https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/u...utting-edge-science-shows-fetal-cells-heal-mo
     
  4. Old_Trapper70

    Old_Trapper70 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2014
    Messages:
    1,757
    Likes Received:
    198
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Perhaps your usual confusion comes from not understanding moral concepts, or even the English language. Care to give an example of where murder is NOT the taking of innocent life?

    Does not make it moral. Slavery at one time was also legal. Was that moral in your world?

    Not at all. It is driven by a sense of morality which is sadly lacking in the world today.

    BTW, morality in itself never changes, just mans lack of acceptance.
     
  5. dogtowner

    dogtowner Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    16,778
    Likes Received:
    1,350
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Sec 9 Row J Seat 1 @ VCU home games

    You keep mentioning some 80% figure of people for aborting. Don't feel the need to mention it more. I don't dispute it. But polls are popularity contests so all it says is 80% prefer convenience to ethical behavior. This is not news.


    And he's off again !
     
  6. Senter

    Senter Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2016
    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Oregon
    You are really big on insults, accusations, defamation, name-calling, and general antagonisms. It's like it's your crutch to support you in your weakness.

    No, it's not too hard for me to do. Is it too hard for you to omit such accusatory and inflammatory words?

    I oppose abortion for "convenience" or anything other than cases of rape, incest, or health of the mother after the 20th week.


    No, it was not used "for thousands of years". But more importantly, if we are to debate anything, debating guidelines require that we use terms reliably and agree on the validity of terms as indicated by reliable sources like good dictionaries. Without such agreement we talk past each other. And the term "baby" is at best a modern emotional expression commonly used by expectant mothers and right-to-lifers, and is not actually supported by any good dictionary. Now, you can call me "immoral" for this if that floats your leaky boat, but you would be opposing fact. You are campaigning for us to ignore reliable, rigorous language in favor of emotional preference.


    LOL!!!!!!!!! "PARASITE"???? Are you kidding? The first is a Christian site presumably quoting one person. If I were to claim that no one can be found who has referred to a fetus as a "parasite" it would be as idiotic as claiming that the sun never shines when it's raining. But while you are so dishonest as to object to the word "parasite" in describing a fetus, you are the only one in this thread who used that word in describing a fetus. Granted, you used it in an accusation of what you claim pro-abortionists say, but you are struggling to show one pro-abortion person on this forum who used the word.

    And your second link is even less credible in supporting your trumped-up claim since it was only the anti-abortionist writer of the article who used the term, --not anyone else.

    You lose BIG on this, then.
     
  7. Senter

    Senter Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2016
    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Oregon
    If you don't stop this insulting attack BS I'll start ignoring you. My feeling about it so far is "screw you!!!" So it isn't contributing anything to the conversation or to your image.


    Regarding morality, morality is first and foremost "beliefs about what is right behavior and what is wrong behavior". Notice the word "belief". If that doesn't convince you, consider that to fish, an ape, an ant, or the cosmos the notion of "morality" is non-existent. So it isn't an absolute and it isn't anything more than personal judgement. So far you have been unable to recognize and put aside your own personal emotional preferences long enough to see this. Or maybe it's simply to your debating advantage to ignore this reality and pretend that moral judgements are real, tangible, fact-based reality even though different civilizations and different people have different and even contradicting morals.

    My refusal to share your morals doesn't mean I am immoral, and such a claim will get you ignored hereafter.

    My morals in this are guided by science and fact: an embryo doesn't feel pain nor does it think nor does it have any personality or personal identity. It doesn't think. It lacks developments that allow it to function in those ways or most other ways for that matter. So the question for me is where I draw the line between the value of an egg or sperm and the value of a person. I consider on the basis of science and fact that a one-week-old embryo is no more in need of society's protection than an unfertilized egg or the hair on your head. I extend this to the second, third, forth week etc until we get to week 20. That is my morality on the subject. My morality doesn't hold an adulterous woman worthy of stoning and it doesn't hold an embryo worthy or protection by law.

    But after week 20 science says the embryo is now called a "fetus" and begins to develop sufficiently to allow it to feel pain even if it doesn't think or know a "selfness". And I think 20 weeks is long enough for any woman to make a decision regarding "convenience". At that point I oppose abortion unless it's a case of rape or incest because it may involve lengthy litigation, or in cases of the health (life) of the mother being in danger.

    I don't think I've omitted anything important about my position here. Your turn.
     
  8. Senter

    Senter Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2016
    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Oregon
    Ah, but it is your ethics. I am not required to comply with your personal morals and ethics.
     
  9. Old_Trapper70

    Old_Trapper70 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2014
    Messages:
    1,757
    Likes Received:
    198
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Listen child, I am only doing the same as you, and you don't like it. You said one time before you were going to ignore me, however, your overblown ego will not allow that.

    Oh great, we are now to be compared to the animal world. Animals live by instinct, humans live by reasoning. According to your "judgement", or lack thereof, murder, theft, adultery, etc., are not immoral as long as ones " personal judgement" approves of it.

    There are certain morals that are absolute, and your claim of "get you ignored" is nonsense since you are no more then a speck in the eye of a newt if you get what I mean.

    LOL, no one mentioned stoning an adultrous woman, yet you had to bring it up. The science you refer to also says that the baby begins growing from the time that the egg, and the sperm, connect. Whether you like it, or not, that is life. As to feeling pain, how do you know there is no pain?

    Over 90% of abortions are for "convenience", and you say you oppose abortions for that reason. Now you say that you oppose abortions after the 20 week mark. This is the baby at 12 weeks, and you, with your "morals", would kill it:

    http://baby2see.com/development/week12.html

    • The fetus is now about 2.5 inches (6cm) length and weighs about 0.7 ounce (20 g).
    • The feet are almost half an inch (1cm) long.
    • The fetus starts moving spontaneously.
    • The face is beginning to look like a baby's face.
    • The pancreas is functioning and producing insulin.
    • Fingernails and toenails appear.
    • The baby can suck his thumb, and get hiccups.
    This is the first two weeks of growth, and you would kill it:

    "The baby begins to form from a single fertilized egg to a cell that has divided itself and is now multiplying rapidly. Every sperm carries a half-set of genetic information with it, including an X or Y chromosome which will determine your baby's gender. The egg carries the other half set and the X chromosome. These chromosomes combine, which pre-determines all of a person's physical characteristics. Thirty hours later the developing embryo is still rapidly dividing, as it floats down from the fallopian tube and towards the uterus."
     
  10. dogtowner

    dogtowner Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    16,778
    Likes Received:
    1,350
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Sec 9 Row J Seat 1 @ VCU home games
    You are required to comply with law, not me. But murder is against the law. Not just here but in every society I am aware of. There are things so basic to our nature that they work themselves into all societies with without interaction. It's not juse me or you.
     
  11. Senter

    Senter Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2016
    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Oregon
    Of course. All true.
     
  12. dogtowner

    dogtowner Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    16,778
    Likes Received:
    1,350
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Sec 9 Row J Seat 1 @ VCU home games
    So why is murdering babies ok ?
     
  13. Old_Trapper70

    Old_Trapper70 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2014
    Messages:
    1,757
    Likes Received:
    198
    Trophy Points:
    63

    Because they don't call it a "baby". They have renamed it a fetus, embryo, or basically just a blob of cells, nothing living, or growing. Not a life. Something to be destroyed for the convenience of the woman.
     
  14. Senter

    Senter Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2016
    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Oregon
    It's not ok. And it's illegal.
     
  15. Senter

    Senter Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2016
    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Oregon
    Precision, accuracy, principle, truth, and fact are important. Confusion is created by distortion, misstatements, lies, and emotionally guided agenda.
     
Loading...

Share This Page