• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is Abortion wrong?

Is abortion wrong?

  • Total voters
    49
lewstherin said:
i stayed on topic as well. YOU brought up legality. i responded. that's not a deflection. sorry.
and all your little emoticons aren't going to change the FACT that the deflections are yours alone.
Click to expand...


I deflected?? :shock:
uhm I brought up legality because of YOUR example LMAO
your example has no barring on the subject and is irrelevant.
Its an appeal to emotion and holds no weight in the debate because YOUR example is of a different legality.

LMAO sorry some people live in reality and some dont, you fall in the later category.

You sir did NOT stay on topic because cutting a daughters head off for having sex is NOT the same as abortion.

You deflected with an appeal to emotion and the proof is all right here.:lamo

Do you read what you write?
Ill still be waiting for your example of me deflecting instead of bold face lies:laughat:

also, just a side note, commenting on my emoticons instead of staying on topic is also technically a deflection, just saying ;)

but please continue :D
 
Removable Mind said:
I don't know your sister. Your the one playing the race game. All babies are of color!

The fact remains. People who want to abolish abortions and give the unborn (at any stage of development) full legal right - but once a child is outside the womb don't want to accept responsibility for any "unwanted" babies. Babies that would have been aborted and won't be because of the laws are UNWANTED. Pro-lifers don't want to be involved in the lives of children after they are born. What part of "unwanted" is so hard to understand?

Millions of kids are reported as having been abused each years. Nearly a million are in the system...including babies. Why are conservative elected politicians in state and federal working diligently to remove social programs that DIRECTLY affect the health and welfare of innocent children. And guess what? These same politicians are trying to have abortion made illegal. How do you explain that?
Click to expand...

/angry outburst "How DARE you ignore the existence of albinos!?"
 
BDBoop said:
I did that myself. But he didn't just want the child, he wanted me. And he didn't propose until I said I was pregnant. In my defense, I was 19. I don't know how many men would actually walk away with the baby, no visitation, no child support, no contact. Simply by virtue of being male, he'd have a better shot at a decent paying job, so maybe being a single dad wouldn't be quite as painful as being a single mom - or maybe it would.
Click to expand...

Why is it that when we all look back at things weve done over our lives and the things we may regret or think we shold have done different.... always right around age 18 or 19. LOL
 
BamaBrat said:
Why is it that when we all look back at things weve done over our lives and the things we may regret or think we shold have done different.... always right around age 18 or 19. LOL
Click to expand...

True. But I do forgive myself. :)
 
Moderator's Warning:
Let's play nice and spend less time talking about posting styles and who is deflecting, and moe time talking about the topic.
 
RamFel said:
It is a person.
Click to expand...

What makes a ZEF a person?

RamFel said:
Liberals are always saying that the joined egg & sperm isn't life, but this is merely an excuse so that they can support abortion.
Click to expand...

It is life, but does that make it a person.

RamFel said:
Aren't liberals supposed to be the compassionate ones?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't know. I'm not a liberal.

Henrin said:
Not my argument, but cute. My argument is simple, and very basic. I imagine you are understanding exactly what I said, but please yourself by missing it for debating purposes. Lets say it again, the baby is functioning while it is working to a higher function. Are you part of this? Yes and no. While it is true that without you the baby would die, and its true that without you it wouldn't exist, its not true that you are actively involved in baby developing from one functional order to another. The difference in the example is pretty glaring to me.
Click to expand...

When an organism is connected to the bloodstream of another organism, it is usually called a parasite. In order for the ZEF to be considered a person, it needs to have existed as a separate being - an individual.
 
BamaBrat said:
i agree. Takes two to tango, two should be in decision making process. I also agree with you about cases or rape and the morning after pill.

BDBoop... I think you are correct, it doesnt involve a lot of cases. But it is there. I pesonally know of two women who have had abortions behind their SO's backs after the man telling them they wanted the child.
Click to expand...

I know a woman who did that. Because her boyfriend beat the hell out of her when she said she wanted to abort. She aborted anyway, and dumped the loser.

Women don't do this to be spiteful. A lot of the time, they do it because their partner is manipulative or abusive.
 
I can't help but notice that many on the Pro-Life side have a bad habit of asserting their religious beliefs as if they were facts.
 
NGNM85 said:
I can't help but notice that many on the Pro-Life side have a bad habit of asserting their religious beliefs as if they were facts.
Click to expand...

I cant help but notice:

1. not many folks here are talking about religion, we are talking about abortion.

2.That anytime anyone doesnt have anything useful to add to a conversation, they belittle someone else or belittle religion.
 
BamaBrat said:
I cant help but notice:

1. not many folks here are talking about religion, we are talking about abortion.
Click to expand...

Abortion is a religious issue. The only way to consider the embryos that are aborted, or, at least, something like 90% of them, as human beings, or being equivalent to human beings, is to imbue them with a magical essence. This religious belief has been stated numerous times as if it were a fact.

BamaBrat said:
2.That anytime anyone doesnt have anything useful to add to a conversation, they belittle someone else or belittle religion.
Click to expand...

I've got plenty to say about it, and have not been shy about sharing my ideas on the subject. However, this is not a particularly complex issue. It's essentially a debate between rational utilitarians, who define human beings in terms of biology, and religious deontologists, who believe that human beings are defined by a magic essence. Theres' really nothing else to discuss. The entire debate reduces to these two, competing, and, incompatible viewpoints. People can either change their minds, or not. Until everyone, or, at least, the overwhelming majority takes one side or the other, the debate will continue, indefinately.

Pointing out that there is absolutely no evidence to support religious contentions is not only not mean or insensitive, it isn't unfair, either. That is the definition of a fairness. This is just a special rule of conversation that applies to no other subject. No-one is ever obligated to simply respect and accept anyone's opinion, on anything. People engage in raucous, impassioned debates about everything from sports to politics, yet you expect me to stand idly mute while dogmatists make extreme, and completely unsubstantiated claims about magic essences, or the origins of the universe, etc. That is unfair, and I absolutely refuse to live by this absurd prohibition.
 
I know a lot of very NON religious folks who are very pro life. I also know a lot of religious people who are pro choice. Religion doesnt always dictate your thoughts on abortion. Your own personal morals and beliefs do, with or without religion.

and no...i dont expect you to stand by and do anything. You made a comment, so did I. It is what it is.
 
BamaBrat said:
I know a lot of very NON religious folks who are very pro life.
Click to expand...

First of all, the belief that human life is defined by a magic essence, while religious, is nondenominational. One need not even necessarily believe in god, although, it is rare. The point is there is no other way to justify equivocating a zygote and a person.

BamaBrat said:
I also know a lot of religious people who are pro choice. Religion doesnt always dictate your thoughts on abortion. Your own personal morals and beliefs do, with or without religion...
Click to expand...

You don't have to be religious to be Pro-Choice. You do have to be religious, (See above.) to some degree, to be Pro-Life.

Moreover, to clarify, I am not completely intolerant of said religious beliefs, crazy as they may be. However, I most certainly do object to people treating them as if they were facts, or presuming that myself, or anyone else, is under any obligation to live by their religious beliefs.
 
BamaBrat said:
I know a lot of very NON religious folks who are very pro life. I also know a lot of religious people who are pro choice. Religion doesnt always dictate your thoughts on abortion. Your own personal morals and beliefs do, with or without religion.

and no...i dont expect you to stand by and do anything. You made a comment, so did I. It is what it is.
Click to expand...

Same. I'm a non-religious yet spiritual person who is firmly pro-choice.
 
BamaBrat said:
I know a lot of very NON religious folks who are very pro life. I also know a lot of religious people who are pro choice. Religion doesnt always dictate your thoughts on abortion. Your own personal morals and beliefs do, with or without religion.

and no...i dont expect you to stand by and do anything. You made a comment, so did I. It is what it is.
Click to expand...

I won't claim to know that this is what he's saying, but as I understand it, and as I personally think of it, it comes down to this:

Whether the person is religious in a larger sense doesn't change that the only argument against abortion is "magical essence," as he puts it. Such beliefs are not limited to any particular dogma. Hell, I know one or two atheists who believe in "human by magical essence." Atheism only has to do with deities - any other supernatural stuff is still fair game. Hell, a straight-up Buddhist is an atheist, but they still believe in reincarnation.

I think it may be incorrect to call this a religious belief, since it isn't limited to religion. But it is most certainly an irrational and unsubstantiated belief that comes from a place of superstitious and magical thinking, like religion does.

As far as I can tell, this is the main argument against abortion. It is based on a supernatural claim that is without foundation, and is in fact verifiability wrong.
 
BamaBrat said:
I know a lot of very NON religious folks who are very pro life. I also know a lot of religious people who are pro choice. Religion doesnt always dictate your thoughts on abortion. Your own personal morals and beliefs do, with or without religion.

and no...i dont expect you to stand by and do anything. You made a comment, so did I. It is what it is.
Click to expand...

Statistically, there are very few non religious people who are anti abortion. The simple fact is that the majority of arguments against abortion are religious in nature. This idea that somehow human life is "sacred" and begins at conception is definitely religious.
 
MistressNomad said:
As far as I can tell, this is the main argument against abortion. It is based on a supernatural claim that is without foundation, and is in fact verifiability wrong.
Click to expand...

You can keep making generalizations and passing them off as not generalizations if you wish but I do not believe in any magical force, supernatural gibberish, or any other religious insult you can muster.
 
evanescence said:
When an organism is connected to the bloodstream of another organism, it is usually called a parasite. In order for the ZEF to be considered a person, it needs to have existed as a separate being - an individual.
Click to expand...

..by society. You need to finish your sentences.

Oh and btw, twins that are connected at the hip are still individuals.
 
Last edited:
Henrin said:
..by society. You need to finish your sentences.

Oh and btw, twins that are connected at the hip are still individuals.
Click to expand...

Why do we call those who support abortion "pro-choice"? The opposite of pro-life would be pro-death, wouldn't it?

Yeah, pro-death. That's what we need to call them!
 
Henrin said:
You can keep making generalizations and passing them off as not generalizations if you wish but I do not believe in any magical force, supernatural gibberish, or any other religious insult you can muster.
Click to expand...

Do you believe life begins at conception? Or at any point early in pregnancy?

If the answer is yes, then you most assuredly do believe in "magic essence" as personhood. whether you choose to call it that or not. If no, then you don't. But there is also then no argument for being against abortion.
 
MistressNomad said:
Do you believe life begins at conception? Or at any point early in pregnancy?

If the answer is yes, then you most assuredly do believe in "magic essence" as personhood. whether you choose to call it that or not. If no, then you don't. But there is also then no argument for being against abortion.
Click to expand...

OR maybe he, like I, disagrees that person-hood defines life.
 
mac said:
OR maybe he, like I, disagrees that person-hood defines life.
Click to expand...

The claim isn't that personhood defines life. An infant doesn't even meet all of the qualifications for personhood. You're dodging.
 
Henrin said:
..by society. You need to finish your sentences.

Oh and btw, twins that are connected at the hip are still individuals.
Click to expand...

Yes, society. And thankfully, this society still values at least a modicum of privacy and personal liberty. Also, twins do not compare to ZEFs.
 
MistressNomad said:
The claim isn't that personhood defines life. An infant doesn't even meet all of the qualifications for personhood. You're dodging.
Click to expand...

You said "magic essence as personhood".....does that mean personhood is not a factor? Why mention it at all then?

It's not me dodging...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom