-->
@ludofl3x
I see you have an issue with how others perceive you. It's interesting that you ignored the rest of what I wrote, as if you were somehow angry yet again.
Why I don't understand the left with abortion
Posts
Total:
53
-->
@zedvictor4
I don't really have an issue with a line being drawn, I just wish it was predictable and based on some sort of principle.
-->
@Double_R
It wasn't my body whose organs were about to be pushed to the side and rearranged to make room for another person. It wasn't my hormones that were about to go haywire. It wasn't my back and hips that were about to be abused to the point of possible permanent damage. And it wasn't my life that was about to be risked to go through all of this.
You are right. Your wife doesnt belong to you. She belongs to God. God commanded her to multiply.
Therefore, she has two options:
1) Obey the God and give birth,
2) Kill her own child and then go to hell to burn.
In case of 2, I would also argue for the punishment in this world too. I believe death penalty is appropriate.
-->
@FLRW
Clearly, life begins when you draw your first breath. That is when God places your soul in your body. Your soul enters your body with your first breath and it leaves with your last. The body is just a vessel — your being, your humanity, is your immortal soul. That's what the Bible says, and for the life of me I cannot understand why so many people, especially supposedly religious people, get this wrong. There is no question, no moral ambiguity. Abortion destroys an empty vessel, it does not kill a human being. That is not to say that a fetus isn't alive, because it clearly is. So is a cow, or an earthworm, or a tree. However, simply being alive does not make something a human being. Having a soul is what sets us apart from other living things. Otherwise, every farmer and every lumberjack would be a murderer. And so would all of the rest of us who eat living things. Even the hardcore vegans would be murderers since they eat plants and plants are alive too.
You are most definitely wrong.
Why is it then, that John the Babtist was said to be filled with the holy spirit whilst in the womb of his mother in the bible:
Can a body without a soul be filled with the holy spirit?
-->
@Double_R
Why is it that with any debate regarding abortion does nobody ever recognize the fact HOW the baby got there in the first place? It's as if woman just goes through life and then BAM, they're pregnant. All of a sudden, it's a big deal about how the sperm and egg grow, but not how they meet? Is there no real understanding on how life is crated between humans?
This is what baffles me about pro-choice people talking about "unwanted" pregnancies. If you don't want it, prevent it. Get snipped, use contraceptives, etc, but don't blame the organ redistribution on the baby that YOU created. Don't harm the child that will cause the hormone chaos on YOUR lack of ability to prevent it. Really, if your wife was upset about being pregnant, then she should have kicked YOU in the balls!
Then the left decides tries to play the "Oh the poor woman who has been raped or may die because of complications" card. Let's be real. Look at the stats! It's 7.5%!! Seven point five percent for people who may not know numbers too well. This is just one stat. Another one I looked at was 1.26%!!
This means that well over 90% of abortions are due to inconvenience. What?! Just because you are not "ready" to bring a life into the world means you get to end it? We put people in prison for things like this. Murders, assaults and muggings has the same reasoning behind it. People were inconvenienced by someone else.
It's amazing to think liberals can pull theirs heads out of their anal orifice to even spew their garbage on definitions on when life is relevant.
-->
@Double_R
Arguing that a zygote is not a person does not = arguing that a zygote is worthless
Your main argument for abortion being legal is the bodily autonomy argument. This is a seperate argument.
You believe a zygote is a human (I think), so you would want to reduce the abortion rate by alternative means.
But if you don't believe a zygote is a human being, you woudn't then care about the abortion rate.
-->
@TheUnderdog
But also, lots of liberals -- and especially people on the left -- don’t want to reduce the rate of abortion. They just want it to be safe, legal, and accessible.
-->
@DavidAZ
Why is it that with any debate regarding abortion does nobody ever recognize the fact HOW the baby got there in the first place?
If you bothered to follow the thread, you would recognize that the point you are raising is not the point I was responding to.
If you'd like to read my views on that part of the debate you are welcome to view and reply to the below thread, starting with this post (please read all of my posts that followed if you decide to reply):
-->
@TheUnderdog
Your main argument for abortion being legal is the bodily autonomy argument. This is a seperate argument.You believe a zygote is a human (I think), so you would want to reduce the abortion rate by alternative means.But if you don't believe a zygote is a human being, you woudn't then care about the abortion rate.
I wasn't advancing the bodily autonomy argument, I was using the reality of bodily autonomy to illustrate how someone who values a zygote could still support abortion.
You are the one who started off with the presumption that pro choice advocates don't think zygotes or embryos are human. I'm showing you why that presumption is false or at the very least unnecessary.
-->
@Tejretics
But also, lots of liberals -- and especially people on the left -- don’t want to reduce the rate of abortion. They just want it to be safe, legal, and accessible.
If you don’t believe a zygote is a human being and therefore don’t care about the abortion rate, why take a birth control pill? It produces worse side effects for the female than if she gets pregnant and gets an abortion.
If you REALLY don’t believe a zygote is a human being and your female, what’s stopping you from getting an abortion on a regular basis?
-->
@Double_R
I wasn't advancing the bodily autonomy argument, I was using the reality of bodily autonomy to illustrate how someone who values a zygote could still support abortion.
How is that not advancing the bodily autonomy argument?
-->
@TheUnderdog
Slowly but surely the science and societal/emotional experiences catch up.
If what you are saying is true, perhaps they are lieing, a part of this reason may deal with health reasons for woman instead of opinion on what a zygote is.
-->
@TheUnderdog
How is that not advancing the bodily autonomy argument?
The bodily autonomy argument is about justifying why a women should be entitled to an abortion. My story/example explains why your premise that liberals don't care about zygotes and embryos is nonsense.
-->
@Double_R
So you believe that a zygote is a human being but it's fine for a woman to kill them to prevent more maternal pain? I'm not knocking you if this is the case, but own it.
-->
@zedvictor4
Often works like that Mr A.
Athias requires only two more characters. Furthermore, my contention does not criticize how it "often works."
Though I will pontificate from a distance and suggest that with regard to the duration a nine month pregnancy, it is intellectually reasonable to vary ones own moral and ethical appreciation of the developing mass.
Considerations to be made by the mother and mother alone, and not those "pontificating from a distance."
Pro-choice with limits is perhaps more reasonable than pro-choice without limits.
It's either reasonable or unreasonable; it's either consistent or inconsistent. And pro-choice with limits is neither if premised on the notion that "her body is her body." So I ask once again: when does her body stop being her body?
Though I would further suggest that in terms of selective morality, there is very little difference between extreme left and extreme right.
Selective morality is equally inconsistent regardless of left-wing and right-wing ideology.
My final suggestion to you would be, that the left to right spectrum is broader than we might give it credit for here at Debateart, where more clearly defined contentions tend to arise.
My contention does not focus on a juxtaposition between left-wing and right wing nuances; just left-wing hypocrisy as it concerns the pro-choice position.
-->
@Greyparrot
Roe v Wade tried to draw the line at 20 weeks. Modern leftists tried to redraw the line at 9 months. What's to say the next line wont be 10 months. Or 10 years.
What do you picture an abortion at 10 months or 10 years would be?
-->
@Athias
Something like Canadian euthanasia. Unwanted children shouldn't be forced to suffer.
-->
@TheUnderdog
So you believe that a zygote is a human being but it's fine for a woman to kill them to prevent more maternal pain? I'm not knocking you if this is the case, but own it.
I have no problem owning my positions. I take issue with being strawmanned and/or mischaracterized.
The word human carries with it a powerful connotation because of how it's normally used. You are relying on that connotation to make your point while using the term in a way that is technically correct but void of any of the qualities that give it said connotation.
In other words, you are being dishonest.
I believe the woman has a right to her own body first and foremost. The fact that a zygote or embryo lacks the basic qualities I described only strengthens that point. None of this means "it's fine" to terminate the fetus. It means one right necessarily has to be deprioritized. Pro lifers believe it's the woman's bodily autonomy, Pro-choicers believe it's the fetus's right to development.
Stop trying to paint people who chose one side offer the other as being for the removal of rights.
-->
@Double_R
Do you have an issue with the traditional 20 week line of demarcation?
-->
@Athias
Sort of my point.
That it is your assumption, (which is probably based upon your own assumed political leanings) that all "left wing" are pro-choice.
What ever "left-wing" might be in your mind.
Is it simply the self opinionated folk down the road who didn't vote as you did? Or is it a pseudo-mythical alternative life-force, out there somewhere in your dark recesses.
Nonetheless, it's nice to see that your support is wholly in favour of the mother and her choices, irrespective of any assumptions regarding her political leanings. Which of course, could easily be regarded as a pro-choice and therefore a "left-wing" principle..
Though I would suggest that it is still reasonable for any individual regardless of classification, to formulate an opinion. Given the nature of the beast and it's on-board data processing unit. In fact, I would further suggest that it is nigh on impossible for a fully functioning data processing unit not to form an opinion.
And selective morality in regard to living matter, is something that 99.9% of the human race suffer from. It's a basic survival strategy. (In my opinion)
-->
@zedvictor4
Sort of my point.That it is your assumption, (which is probably based upon your own assumed political leanings) that all "left wing" are pro-choice.
Where did I assume that "all 'left-wing' are pro-choice"? When I started, I stated this:
I've come across many of those who are pro-choice, and happen to be left-wing, who are very inconsistent when it comes to their stance.
The reason the left-wing has garnered my focus is that the subject of this thread focuses on, for lack of a better term, "left wing" arguments, positions, ideologies and their presumably inexplicable caveats.
What ever "left-wing" might be in your mind.
Is it simply the self opinionated folk down the road who didn't vote as you did?
You know I don't vote.
Or is it a pseudo-mythical alternative life-force, out there somewhere in your dark recesses.
Not enough room in my "dark recesses" for more pseudo-mythical alternative life forces.
Nonetheless, it's nice to see that your support is wholly in favour of the mother and her choices, irrespective of any assumptions regarding her political leanings.
Why would her political leanings be relevant? I support her choices because she is first and foremost an individual with a fundamental right to herself. She could be a right-wing pro-life advocate and my stance on this still wouldn't change.
Which of course, could easily be regarded as a pro-choice and therefore a "left-wing" principle..
Didn't you just state the conclusion that "all 'left-wing' are pro-choice" is merely assumptive? Or are you simply attempting to extend your non sequitur as an inconsistency on my part? I'm a pro-choice--a truly pro-choice--advocate because I subscribe to individualism; not because of leftism.
Though I would suggest that it is still reasonable for any individual regardless of classification, to formulate an opinion. Given the nature of the beast and it's on-board data processing unit. In fact, I would further suggest that it is nigh on impossible for a fully functioning data processing unit not to form an opinion.
Opinions which do not qualify her right. My contention is not against others having opinions in the first place.
And selective morality in regard to living matter, is something that 99.9% of the human race suffer from. It's a basic survival strategy.
In other words, 99.9% of the human race (I'm not sure how you were able to observe and determine this statistic) maintain and apply their values inconsistently?
-->
@Athias
99.9 % is everyone, with a margin of error of 0.1.
Very few stationary hermits absorbing nutrients from the atmosphere.
And I don't actively attempt to conclude, I just formulate opinions and present them as ideas.
And you and I, peas in a pod. we should start the Non-Voting Party.
I wouldn't be voting for us though.
And do we agree then, that it is the right of the pregnant female to decide, (except where it is agreed that she is intellectually incapable of making such a decision). Within agreed limits.
OOOPS there's that agree word again.
Do you agree that it's nigh on impossible to get the human race to agree about anything.
Would you believe that some people still say that the Earth is flat.
Though I don't think that they actually think that the Earth is flat. I think.
-->
@zedvictor4
And do we agree then, that it is the right of the pregnant female to decide, (except where it is agreed that she is intellectually incapable of making such a decision). Within agreed limits.
No. You have yet to answer this: when does her body stop being her body? How is this qualified by her "intellectual" capacity?
Would you believe that some people still say that the Earth is flat.
But the Earth is... .... ... ... ... *cough* ... flat... ... ... *cough*