Abortion and the Death Penalty

Discussion in 'Human Science' started by Cazzo, Jul 18, 2008.


I am :

  1. For abortion and for the death penalty.

    16 vote(s)
  2. Against abortion and against the death penalty.

    3 vote(s)
  3. Against abortion and for the death penalty.

    11 vote(s)
  4. For abortion and against the death penalty.

    8 vote(s)
  5. Not sure.

    1 vote(s)
  1. Mrs.Lucysnow Valued Senior Member

    Sam: Yes, its a common tactic called dehumanization, makes it easier to kill someone.

    Oh now now Sam don't get your moral barometer in a twist. It's not dehumanization or rather don't you think its dehumanizing to force a woman to carry a child for 9 months no matter how she feels about it? If you are pregnant (for whatever reason be it negligence, rape, bad timing, social or economic factors) and its unwanted it would indeed seem like a parasite. Everything a woman does once she is pregnant is for the growing fetus, I can imagine that if its not wanted then it would be a pretty traumatic affair. What's worse is a resentful pregnant woman not caring for the growing fetus or simply discarding of it once its born. Been to an orphanage lately? Fun! Childbirth is also life threatening don't forget that. Why is the life of the unborn potential more important than the woman's life?

    Sam: You have to pretty well fed and comfortable to think that far.

    Yes yes very well fed.

    John99: Either way the world will become overpopulated. Or at least what we view as being overpopulated because too many countries do not allow abortion at all and the people do not agree with it anyway. By now this is fairly obvious.

    Yes but that's not a reason not to have the legal right to abortion. I am not referring to countries where the right does not exist.

    John99: Saw a news clip where like over 40% of sexually active teens in New York (you can get condoms on every street, just walk into a store and buy one) dont use condoms. And they are getting all the diseases associated with that and obviously getting pregnant.

    Well yea many sexually active people are irresponsible, does this mean we want those irresponsible disease ridden people running around BREEDING? Can you imagine all those legs spread wide open popping out kiddies willy nilly based on some ridiculous sexual escapade? Bleeding the welfare state of resources? Its terrible I tell ya terrible

    No seriously I simply think a woman has the right to decide what she wants to do or not do with her body without some snippity waggy fingers placing a moral tag on her decision. Let's face it no one gives a hoot what happens to the little ones once their out of the uterus...just ask the Austrians.

    As for the death penalty, it beats paying to clothe and feed the undeserving miscreants. Ever see OZ I say let em fry!
    Actually I can go back and forth on the death penalty. Some crimes are worthy of death others just need to cool their heels and be re-directed. Difficult call.
    Last edited: Jul 20, 2008
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. curiosimmortal Registered Member

    I think abort the mother and death penalty for the baby.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Orleander OH JOY!!!! Valued Senior Member

    I think abortion is horrible, but should be legal. Women have always had abortions no matter the legality of it. Legalizing it makes it safer.
    I am also for the death penalty. Timothy McVeigh comes to mind. But only for cases of people killing other people. I would like pedophiles put to death, but I can't morally justify it. It would just be a revenge thing on my part and revenge shouldn't play a part in the law.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. Sciencelovah Registered Senior Member


    Uhm, I disagree. Legalizing it (abortion) means you (the system) are give up.
    It should never be legalized. People should be discourage to do it, and doctor
    who commit it (without acceptable excuse) should at least lose their license.
    This way the practice could be minimized. If it is legalized, people are going to
    be so easy to do abortion. :crazy:
  8. Cazzo Registered Senior Member

    While I'm against abortion for fetuses that have already developed a brain or heart, if it's considered legal anyhow and the woman's doing it simply because she wants to, then both her and the father should be sterilized if she wants to get an abortion.
    If you're going to be irresponsible in sex, there should be consequences.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  9. visceral_instinct Monkey see, monkey denigrate Valued Senior Member

    Exactly, a little viscous thing that is scarcely or even not a human, depending on what time in the pregnancy, is sacred, but the woman? Nah, she's just a baby machine, how dare she be the one to decide when (or if) she will become a mother?

    So she should be prevented from having a child later in life, because she accidentally got pregnant at a bad time?

    I tried looking for some reason in that...but it was like looking for Kadark at a Reclaim the Night parade.
  10. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    i love all these christian fuck wits against abortion. the fact that abortions have been around longer than than there religion never occurs to them. abortions have been happening for about as long as there has been medicine.
  11. John99 Banned Banned

    Do you really think that you are in a position to call anyone a fuck wit?

    You do not even understand that those opposed to it are also atheist, agnostics, other religions.
  12. Pandaemoni Valued Senior Member

    I was listing different bases upon which some people feel abortion is okay. Many feel that abortion on demand of teh mother for any reason is perfectly fine. Some feel that abortion should be limited tpo cases of rape and incest, or threats to the life of the mother. I was not listing a sigle position that all abortion rights supports hold, but four four separate standards that different ones may hold.

    Sure, but see the definition below,

    That's true, but fetuses are only innocent in the same way any non-sentient object that has not taken any substantial actions is innocent. Chickens have a greater degree of sentience, but we kill them all the time. Fetuses have the same level of "innocence" as chickens or toasters.

    By definition, "inalienable" means that it cannot under any circumstances be surrendered, given away or sold. As such, if a person can surrender the right to live by murdering another (as they can in many states) then the right to live is not an "inalienable" right, at most it would be "a right that is not lightly deemed alienable, but may be so deemed under certain circumstances.

    (That would have made the Declaration of Independence slightly less powerful: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are endowed by their creator with certain rights that they cannot easily alienated, but that can be, sure, we acknowledge that, and that amongst those rights are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.)

    I am completely comfortable with the notion that there is no such thing as an inalienable right, and that lives may be forfeit, however important the right to life may be, but I do understand that others do view the right to live as an inalienable one,in the true sense, and not merely as the rhetorical hyperbole that the drafters of the Declaration did.

    Says you...and your medical degree come from? It may be a disturbing procedure to you or me, but if it's what a woman's doctor recommends because it's safer and less painful for the woman, why should the state intervene?

    Once upon a time in Europe, the law forbade the dissection of human bodies in part on the grouds of its gruesomeness, and the result was that science was held back until those laws were repealed. That the procedure was disturbing was not a compelling argument for banning it.

    In the case of D&X procedures you have a bunch of bureaucrats, telling an actual doctor—against his better judgment as it only comes up in cases where the doctor suggests it in the first place—to risk the health and well being of patient to make the bureaucrats feel better? Bear in mind that these bureaucrats are subject to the following limitations:
    • few of them have any medical training,
    • theirhealth and welfare is not on the line, and
    • they have no knowledge of the details of a particular case or patient that has led the doctor to recommend the procedure in the first place.
    Even bureaucrats at HMOs work with fewer limitations than these (and people love it when their HMO's start interfering with their health care...and the HMOs are actually paying for it. Shouldn't Congress at least pick up the price difference if the second best procedure--which they are forcing the doctor to use--is more expensive than the relatively cheap D&X?

    You may well choose to get your health care delivered by a committee of lawyers 1000 miles away, but I would not.

    I hope they don't look too closely at surgery in general, as they may find that "icky" too.
    Last edited: Jul 20, 2008
  13. Simon Anders Valued Senior Member

    I think, to be fair to women, we should say that men and women have always been having abortions. Certainly the women undergo the procedure and can make the decision themselves. But men have been approving of this decision, demanding it, and by their actions and inactions making it more likely. Defacto and direct participation. If I remember right you are a woman, so this next part is not directed at you. I am skeptical of the depth of understanding of men who want to ban abortion. It is an easy rule. I think men, in general, would be vastly more likely to have abortions if they were the ones with the 'problem'.
  14. lepustimidus Banned Banned

    I just love the poor logic employed on this thread. Note that the claim "You believe X, but not Y, hence you're a hypocrite!" does not refute X in any shape or form.

    Then you have shit like this:

    "It's been around for a long time, hence society should accept it" (correct me if I'm mistaken?). Um, yeah, I don't even think I need to point out why that argument is fallicious.

    Then you have appeals to authority:
    Since when was a medical degree required to pass moral judgements on a medical procedure? How incredibly elitist! Thankfully even doctors today make it a habit to incorporate the patient's value judgements into the treatment of said patient.
  15. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    So is it ok for women who have children but decide they no longer want them to kill the children? ie don't you think its dehumanizing to force a woman to care for a child for years no matter how she feels about it? Why is the life of the child more important than the woman's life?
  16. Orleander OH JOY!!!! Valued Senior Member

    I don't think a child should be viewed as punishment for irresponsible sex. Why should a stupid person have a child they don't want when a rape victim doesn't. Its still a fetus no one wants.
  17. lepustimidus Banned Banned

    Do you view child support payments in the same manner?

    I don't consider being held accountable for your behaviour as 'punishment', merely responsibility.
  18. Orleander OH JOY!!!! Valued Senior Member

    money and a kid are no where near the same. One is alive, the other isn't. :bugeye:

    I keep saying, abortion is about the mother and not about the child. If it was really about the child, rape/incest victims wouldn't be allowed to have abortions. Why is their innocent child less deserving of life than a whore's?
  19. lepustimidus Banned Banned

    Relevance? I'm not even sure what you're trying to say here.

    No, it's about both, as pregnancy and abortion directly affect BOTH entities. Who is given precedence depends on the individual you ask, the context of the situation, and what the outcomes are for each party. The fact that many 'pro-choicers' can't grasp this complexity is telling.

    So child support payments aren't about the child? After all, if child support payments were really about the child, males who impregnated women unwillingly (ie. due to rape) would still be obligated to pay child support.

    I don't know where that came from? Is that what you think pro-lifers believe?

    What's also very telling is that pro-choicers equate 'taking responsibility for your actions' with 'punishment'. Yet another distinction that they can't appreciate.

    And that doesn't only apply to Orleander, but almost every pro-choicer I have met. If you suggest even the slightest disagreement with the pro-choice stance, you're lumped in with this 'pro-life' stereotype who all hate women, regard a blastocyst as human, and have a hard on for the death penalty (OMG HYPOCRITEZ!)
  20. Steve100 O͓͍̯̬̯̙͈̟̥̳̩͒̆̿ͬ̑̀̓̿͋ͬ ̙̳ͅ ̫̪̳͔O Valued Senior Member

    For both.
    I have no problem with abortion, but the death penalty is a tough one because sometimes people get it based on evidence that is not 100% conclusive. However if they are 100% sure then I have no gripe against the death penalty.
  21. Pandaemoni Valued Senior Member

    The mother and doctor get to make the moral judgment...not people sitting thousands of miles away who know nothing about the case and (obviously) don't give a shit about the health of the mother. that's where the medical degree comes into play. Anyone who does even a cursory reading about D&X procedures discovers that this procedure (the banning of which was "certainly justified") is safer and healthier by far than the alternatives an many situations, hence the reason it was developed. Contrary to the "partial birth abortion" adversaries' suggestions, doctors and mothers were not ghouls trying to purposefully and needlessly inflict pain on the fetus. I trust mothers more than ill-informed lawyers in any event.

    Why is your moral judgment about the procedure more valid than the doctor involved and the mother? Both of them have far better information about the particular situation that you do confronting a hypothetical one, and you deign to substitute the judgment of the unknowing ill-informed mob for theirs? If having people who know the relevant facts make the call is elitist, then I proudly wear that title. It's better than the shroud of ignorance.
  22. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    When "taking responsibility for your actions" is code for "suffering whatever consequences we assign to your actions", they are right to make that equation.
  23. Mrs.Lucysnow Valued Senior Member

    Inzominia:Uhm, I disagree. Legalizing it (abortion) means you (the system) are give up.
    It should never be legalized. People should be discourage to do it, and doctor
    who commit it (without acceptable excuse) should at least lose their license.
    This way the practice could be minimized. If it is legalized, people are going to
    be so easy to do abortion.

    Whereas the death penalty is a state issue an abortion is an intimate individual one. If you disagree with it you have the right not to engage in it, but why would you want to hinder the rights of another over their own body? What difference could it possibly make to you as an individual if your neighbor has an abortion or not? Do you also take responsibility for the raising of unwanted children? I think people who believe abortion wrong should take in orphans, adopt the unwanted and raise them if they believe it such an evil but they rarely do. Why is that?

Share This Page