Bans 'do not cut abortion rate'

[_Simpson_ 250]

Yeah but on this topic - you seem to believe that responsiblity ought to be imposed (hence I call it punishment).

Not holding people responsible for there actions is detrimental to our society. The victim in this topic is the fetus.

I believe responsibility comes from giving the individual the freedom to do what is in their own best interests.

Yeah if your the only person in existence. Theres a tribe of cannibals out there that would just love to have you as there president.

Edited October 16, 2009 by _Simpson_

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

A fetus isn't an individual Joe. Not now, not ever.

I'm wondering how many more pages can be squeezed out of Joe's circular logic and blunt thinking.

No circular. A baby is a baby. Thats all.

But a fetus isn't a baby in the sense of murder.

As I'm sure you know people are conferred certain rights and legal protections when you're born or when you reach the ages of 16, 18 and 21. Barring some very narrow distinctions, that doesn't apply to developing fetuses - which are deemed the biological property of the mother.

Doesn't matter if chocolate is deemed broccoli - its still chocolate.

Whatever you want to call it - its still the biological property of the mother.

No - the right answer is - No matter what you want to call it - its still a baby and killing babies is murder.

No Joe, it isn't.

The law doesn't confer the same protections to the unborn that it does to autonomous individuals, nor is legal abortion classified as murder.

If I follow your line of reasoning - then we might as well argue that any killing (under any circumstances) is murder. It just isn't the case, no matter how badly you want to believe it.

[Joseph & Ana 0]

Atheism isn't a religion, it's the absence of religious belief Joe.

I did answer the question already. That doesn't take away from the fact that you are incredibly naive if you needed to ask it.

Actually it has just as much belief. One cannot know there is no God, or he'd be God. He'd have to be able to scour the universe and declare there is no God. However, since he can't, he must BELIEVE there is no God, and that belief helps govern his behavior. So it is a religion. But thats not what we're here to talk about.

I must have missed where you answered my question.

[Peikko 1,575]

Capital punishment murder? Say it isn't so?

[Joseph & Ana 0]

A fetus isn't an individual Joe. Not now, not ever.

I'm wondering how many more pages can be squeezed out of Joe's circular logic and blunt thinking.

No circular. A baby is a baby. Thats all.

But a fetus isn't a baby in the sense of murder.

As I'm sure you know people are conferred certain rights and legal protections when you're born or when you reach the ages of 16, 18 and 21. Barring some very narrow distinctions, that doesn't apply to developing fetuses - which are deemed the biological property of the mother.

Doesn't matter if chocolate is deemed broccoli - its still chocolate.

Whatever you want to call it - its still the biological property of the mother.

No - the right answer is - No matter what you want to call it - its still a baby and killing babies is murder.

No Joe, it isn't.

The law doesn't confer the same protections to the unborn that it does to autonomous individuals, nor is legal abortion classified as murder.

If I follow your line of reasoning - then we might as well argue that any killing (under any circumstances) is murder. It just isn't the case, no matter how badly you want to believe it.

So you admit that its killing. Thats one step. Now is the baby innocent or guilty? BTW - If you say it really big, it doesn't make it any more true.

[HAL 9000 96]

Joe, are you really that naive? Truthfully?

You didn't answer my questions

And you never answered mine.

[Peikko 1,575]

Atheism isn't a religion, it's the absence of religious belief Joe.

I did answer the question already. That doesn't take away from the fact that you are incredibly naive if you needed to ask it.

Actually it has just as much belief. One cannot know there is no God, or he'd be God. He'd have to be able to scour the universe and declare there is no God. However, since he can't, he must BELIEVE there is no God, and that belief helps govern his behavior. So it is a religion. But thats not what we're here to talk about.

I must have missed where you answered my question.

Completely untrue Joe, that is not what religion is, nor what the absence of religious belief means.

Yes, you must. How atypical eh Joe?

[HAL 9000 96]

Again. People have sex for recreation and have done so for thousands of years (hence the world's oldest profession).

In a modern society that respects the rights on individuals to make reasonable choices - there is no mandate that forces a woman to go through with a pregnancy as punishment for having sex. Nor should there be.

Again. My major concern is saving the fetus if it doesnt put the mothers life at risk. I dont see that as a punisment for having sex I see it as saving a life.

But it *is* a punishment, because you'd essentially be forcing the woman to undergo a pregnancy against her will - and your only response to that is "well that's what you get for opening your legs".

Well thats what you get for opening your legs??? Thats not what I said!, not even close, I get your being a little sarcastic here but thats really dishonest what your doing here, after all this discussion we have had here you have to know by now that my concern is with the fetus and that I dont want people having sex if there not willing to take responsibility of there actions.

Again, 'choice' is part of the responsibility. You make it sound like a consequence- something a bit different. But I would like to know how one can control something you don't want people doing... which is technically- none of anyone's business other than they themselves doing the deed unless you're somehow in on it.

Its not anyone's business if they want to have sex. It is when they want to kill an individual.

A fetus is not an individual. Individuality is developed.

[Joseph & Ana 0]

Joe, are you really that naive? Truthfully?

You didn't answer my questions

And you never answered mine.

I won't regurgitate the liberal definition of what is an isn't a baby. My question is at least valid.

[HAL 9000 96]

Whether or not you are religious is immaterial

I know that, it kind of goes without saying, religion came up in this discussion because you tried to write me of as religious.

if you judge someone to be a criminal when that judgement is based on a subjective set of morals rather than a codefied law, then it is not reasonable.

So basically, a person who breaks the law is a criminal. I agree. I dont see a abortion doctor as a murderer or a criminal. I think what he/she is doing is morally wrong, and sure thats subjective. I seek to change the laws within the laws, you wont see me out there bombing a abortion clinic.

The problem is that if you're against murder - you're religious (in their eyes).

Yes true, if only we could get them to open there eyes.

The conclussion is drawn because that is a moral judgement based upon a religious ideal. Not a bad thing per se, but can you really say that you independently came to the conclussion that murder was bad without the aide of some sort of religious or religious based literature?

Joe.... that is insane and illogical. You are comparing an insane woman who killed her children to keep her boyfriend to a legal procedure. I propose this again, why can't you hold your personal beliefs to your own decisions and let others decide for themselves?

So how does an atheist know that murder is bad?

What if she didn't do it for any other reason than just not wanting her kids?

Now which situation are we talking about not wanting her kids? In the absence of clarrification, I will address both. Clearly Susan Smith, the woman who drowned her kids to satisfy her boyfriends desire not to have them, that was murder. That was her intention. In the case of a woman getting an abortion, if she gets one simply because she doesn't want kids, that is legal, but whether or not it is moral is really up to her. You are certainly within your rights to share your opinion, but at the end of the day, it is just that your opinion. I don't see why you can't just condemn the act, but support individual freedom to make the choice. Do you lose sleep at night because of abortions? Are you unable to feed your family because of abortions?

it wouldn't matter to you if I lost sleep over it.

It was murder because her intention was to kill her kids? What if someone has an abortion because her boyfriend didn't want it? You're saying that morality is up to the person it is moral to. So, why can't we kill people and not be looked down apon (even if the law puts us in prison)?

Because those are incongruous examples. They simply do not make parallel sense. Most of us here can deduce this. Why can't you?

[Joseph & Ana 0]

Atheism isn't a religion, it's the absence of religious belief Joe.

I did answer the question already. That doesn't take away from the fact that you are incredibly naive if you needed to ask it.

Actually it has just as much belief. One cannot know there is no God, or he'd be God. He'd have to be able to scour the universe and declare there is no God. However, since he can't, he must BELIEVE there is no God, and that belief helps govern his behavior. So it is a religion. But thats not what we're here to talk about.

I must have missed where you answered my question.

Completely untrue Joe, that is not what religion is, nor what the absence of religious belief means.

Yes, you must. How atypical eh Joe?

If you posted a video - again I can't see it here at work. I see where you quoted my question but below it appears blank.

Its not untrue. Atheism is just as religious as any belief.

[HAL 9000 96]

A fetus isn't an individual Joe. Not now, not ever.

What if the law says it is one day?

Based upon what factor(s)?

A fetus isn't an individual Joe. Not now, not ever.

I'm wondering how many more pages can be squeezed out of Joe's circular logic and blunt thinking.

No circular. A baby is a baby. Thats all.

What's a baby?

[Joseph & Ana 0]

A fetus isn't an individual Joe. Not now, not ever.

What if the law says it is one day?

Based upon what factor(s)?

What does it matter? Its the law?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Yeah but on this topic - you seem to believe that responsiblity ought to be imposed (hence I call it punishment).

Not holding people responsible for there actions is detrimental to our society. The victim in this topic is the fetus.

Forcing people in an overpopulated world to have children they don't want, can't afford or won't keep is detrimental to our society.

As I said, you don't seem to want to consider the ramifications that may result from this. Having kids or indeed - an abortion - isn't an easy decision for anyone. The point surely is that while you want to make blanket pronouncements (and you do) the reality is that these are decisions that are best made on a case by case basis.

I believe responsibility comes from giving the individual the freedom to do what is in their own best interests.

Yeah if your the only person in existence. There a tribe of cannibals out there that would just love to have you as there president.

OMG. Can you seriously be any more stupid, Simpson? Really!?

[Joseph & Ana 0]

A fetus isn't an individual Joe. Not now, not ever.

What if the law says it is one day?

Based upon what factor(s)?

A fetus isn't an individual Joe. Not now, not ever.

I'm wondering how many more pages can be squeezed out of Joe's circular logic and blunt thinking.

No circular. A baby is a baby. Thats all.

What's a baby?

A baby is a baby.