- Joined
- Jan 31, 2010
- Messages
- 31,645
- Reaction score
- 7,598
- Location
- Canada, Costa Rica
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Actually, my criteria is consciousness. I mentioned pain and you focused on that.
I 'focused' on consciousness as well though I may not have added what a silly excuse that was. We don't not end the life of someone because they are 'unconscious'. There has to be be more to it than that, and I mentioned examples and the reasons.
Your opinion on the word "lawful" has no affect on its meaning. Abortion is lawful and is therefore not murder. People who get and perform abortions are 99.9% not doing it out of malice. You want to frame them that way, but it's just not the case.
Because you seem to have missed the point doesn't make it any less real. It is lawful now, in some areas of the world, and illegal in others. It was illegal in the United States at one time and now it is legal, and there are many abortion advocates who want to fight against the issue returning to the Supreme Court because it might be proved illegal once again. And of course the Supreme Court should never have ruled in the case anyway.
It doesn't seem to effect you emotionally so what does it matter? If you kill someone who is 'unconscious', who has every chance of gaining consciousness, it is still murder. You just prefer not to think of it like that in order to continue your rationalization.I said the "taking life" part was arguable at best. You're arguing it and I disagree with you. It still doesn't meet the requirements of murder. Your use of the term doesn't make any sense. You're just using it for emotional pull.
1. People who are unconscious were conscious before and will be after their temporary lack of conscious (barring irreversibly comatose people). A fetus, like an embryo, never had consciousness - they only have the potential for conscious.
As mentioned earlier they do have senses. And of course they are alive. We have the decision to let there be life and let that life continue or put to death. You choose death and I chose life. The issue seems clear.
2. What is a human being? is a difficult question to answer. I believe that a fetus is human just as I believe a person in an irreversible coma is human - so it's not really a relevant question.
Certainly it's a relevant question, it's what separates us from animals, and it is not a difficult question to answer. You just don't want to enter areas in which your strongly held belief makes you feel uncomfortable. But most moral questions are like that..
Most women think about it before it happens and most women aren't happy to get it.
So then there is premeditation.
Counseling usually means emotional manipulation.
Counseling means just what it says. Your concern seems to be that they might not choose abortion.
Women can think for themselves.
Obviously many of them cannot or they wouldn't be in that situation.
Most human beings don't kill their young, which is why liberals don't have children and then kill them. Nice try though.
As a matter of fact many Liberals are killing their children and most Conservatives are not. That is why the future tends to be Conservative.
Really? Because most anti-war arguments are based on nothing being worth the life of a human beingi
If only! Instead they are based on political ends, nothing more. Why do you suppose the Left always supported Communism? Because they valued human life?
And most anti-death penalty arguments are based on having problems with 1) The killing of innocent people. 2) Taking other people's life in general. Try harder.
I understand the Left will stand up for criminals, just as they have for the Communists, Islamic fanatics, and a variety of dictators everywhere, while safely turning on their own government. Meanwhile the fetus is not even a living thing, much less a human being.