Should the Supreme Court overturn Roe V. Wade?

Quote from trdrmac:

So I come back to my original premise that if life was so precious then this number would be zero. And the fact remains that people just don't give a shit once the kids are born, on the whole.

But if the question is which bothers me more, a baby who has to have it's anus reconstructed because it's mother sold it to a child pornographer for crack, or the same mother having an abortion, well I will let you decide.
More...

No argument that a baby given over to a child pornographer is a horrible, horrible thing.

The sad truth is, horrible things happen to children all over the world whose parents never even considered abortion to begin with. Child slavery, indentured servitude, pornography, etc. That some children who were allowed to live instead of being aborted have had terrible experiences does not, in my opinion, validate terminating the lives of ALL unborns to prevent the awful fates of a few.

As far as noone giving a crap about babies put up for adoption, if that were indeed true the adoption rate would be zero.
 
Quote from hapaboy:



The sad truth is, horrible things happen to children all over the world whose parents never even considered abortion to begin with. Child slavery, indentured servitude, pornography, etc. That some children who were allowed to live instead of being aborted have had terrible experiences does not, in my opinion, validate terminating the lives of ALL unborn to prevent the awful fates of a few.

I don't think anywhere in my writing I have ever tried to Validate Abortion. It is what it is in an imperfect world.

What I do see is that there is a lot more suffering of Born Children than there is among unborn children. If you have 20,000 children die of malnutrition each day and another 20,000 die of a lack of immunization from disease, this far outnumbers the number of abortions worldwide.

So when you say the awful fate of A FEW you are kidding yourself about just how horrible a fate many born children endure.
More...
 
Quote from LongShot:

i would rather be ALIVE with a reconstructed anus than torn apart at conception without choice or chance!

but that's just ol' silly me :-|
More...

I would suggest you spend a little time working with the homeless or mentally disturbed individuals. You will find in many if not all cases a Trigger Event like sexual abuse has taken away any CHOICE or CHANCE as you would call it.

Sure there are exceptions, but most people are not that strong.
And most of the people who claim to be probably are white, above average intelligence, from middle to upper income families. Who just THINK they made it all alone.

If there were loving families to support these people I would see it differently, but there just aren't enough people who will step up to the plate to give many kids a choice or a chance.
 
Quote from trdrmac:

Quote from hapaboy:



The sad truth is, horrible things happen to children all over the world whose parents never even considered abortion to begin with. Child slavery, indentured servitude, pornography, etc. That some children who were allowed to live instead of being aborted have had terrible experiences does not, in my opinion, validate terminating the lives of ALL unborn to prevent the awful fates of a few.

I don't think anywhere in my writing I have ever tried to Validate Abortion. It is what it is in an imperfect world.

What I do see is that there is a lot more suffering of Born Children than there is among unborn children. If you have 20,000 children die of malnutrition each day and another 20,000 die of a lack of immunization from disease, this far outnumbers the number of abortions worldwide.

So when you say the awful fate of A FEW you are kidding yourself about just how horrible a fate many born children endure.
More...
tdrmac, I respect and agree with your opinion that there is immense suffering by children worldwide. There is also the absence of suffering by children in the hundreds of millions.

I don't know what else to say except to simply wish you the best.

Hapaboy
More...
 
Quote from daniel_m:




way to go lundy. that was a brilliant 'argument from outrage' you gave me.

now, have a REAL HARD THINK about it, and tell me:

what exactly is INTRINSICALLY wrong about kiling?


is there ANY other reason we consider it 'wrong', 'evil', 'immoral' apart from the fact that we simply DON'T LIKE IT?

THINK dude.
More...



Daniel M,

You are crazy, i don't argue with crazy people. Because my debate has no effect.

However, I will agree with you on the fact that killing in itself is not wrong. Killing a non-innocent person is not wrong if the situation is grave enough. For example: self defense, criminal execution, etc.

For the sake of any other sane person on this forum, who is listening to your "what's wrong with killing" idea, heres my reply.

The basis for right and wrong is not whether everyone agrees it's right or wrong. Right and wrong are experienced thru a person's conscience or higher self. When we do wrong. We experience guilt. When we do right, we experience happiness, even when it comes at the expense of our immediate so-called enjoyment of life.

This is based on the fact that there is a higher cause, and a higher purpose than just trying to squeeze every drop of pleasure out of the things and people around us. That higher cause is God.

The majority of people on earth have some concept of God, or a higher purpose, and so that's why most everyone belongs to one faith or another.

Trust me the atheists are outnumbered.

So killing innocent persons is wrong because it is displeasing to God as he states in many scriptures.

For clarification, God means the person who is higher than everyone else. An atheist is not a person who doesn't beleive in God, he is a person who thinks himself God. Because he thinks he is not under anyone else.

I'm not going to bat back and forth with an atheist. It's a waste of time and a useless show of words. If you want me to respond to anything, please pm me.

edit: a few other things,

you mention a about killing animals:

killing animals unnecessarily is also wrong.
killing plants unnecessarily is also wrong.

however, there are degrees of wrong doing.

it's very easy to live in this world without killing humans.
some people find it a little harder to give up the taste for animal blood.
the optimum diet in this regard is vegetarian.

all of this brings up the topic of who we are.... am I a 140 pounds of blood, mucus, air, water, muscle, fat, bile and shit?

am I matter, or spirit? is an animal a living being... equal to me? what's reincarnation? and many more possible questions.

also in regards to people's question about God and whether He really exists, or about anything for that matter. You can't really put it into perspective unless you know exactly who you are. So the most important question for a person is "Who Am I". Then all other answers fit in their place. Otherwise your like a fly in a hurricane.

it's a very big subject matter and I don't intend to lay it all out here. again if anyone interested, you can pm me.
 
Quote from lundy:


Daniel M,

You are crazy, i don't argue with crazy people. Because my debate has no effect.
More...

oh yeah.... i'm talking to mr brainiac himself... double down on the market 16 times since june 02 and _I'M_ the crazy one.. .LOL



This is based on the fact that there is a higher cause, and a higher purpose than just trying to squeeze every drop of pleasure out of the things and people around us. That higher cause is God.

So killing innocent persons is wrong because it is displeasing to God as he states in many scriptures.
More...

oh man, i should've known you'd turn to 'god'... always the easy way out...

obviously you had no answer whatsoever for my question, "what is INSTRINSICALLY (dictionary) wrong about killing"? (except some nonsensical, irrelevant babbling...)


now, earlier i asked you what is it about killing that we consider 'wrong' apart from the fact that we generally dislike it?

you're answer seems to be "it's wrong cos 'god' says it's wrong".

a couple of points.

firstly, if it's only wrong cos 'god' says it's wrong, then it is STILL not INTRINSICALLY wrong -- it's only 'wrong' cos GOD (in this case) doesn't like it.

secondly, how do YOU know 'god' doesn't like it? what in the world could you have based this idea on? 'scripture'? in that case, god most certainly doesn't think killing is intrinsically wrong -- he only thinks it's wrong for humans to kill other humans... and again, his only basis for calling it 'wrong' is because HE doesn't like it.

thirdly, it is most certainly NOT a FACT that "there is a higher cause". you might THINK there is, and there MIGHT be, but it is NOT FACT.

the only thing you're doing by introducing this 'higher cause' is taking your own moral position, ascribing it to 'god' and calling it a universal law of nature. wish i had a 'get out of debate free' card like that!

the only reason's no one's bothered to answer my question yet is because they have no answer...

so the challenge is still out: why, apart from humans generally not liking it, is killing 'wrong'?

and if you think you have some reason, then do you ever make exceptions to it? (criminals, war, animals etc) WHY? why does your law not hold true in THOSE cases?

if you say killing is generally wrong, but kiling in a war is permitted, why do you disallow killing of a fetus? WHY, beyond the fact that you don't like it?
 
Quote from LongShot:

life in (almost) ANY situation is better than no life at all.

we're talkin consciousness here folks.

sentience.

being.
More...

long shot, get a GRIP dude. "it's life, it's consciousness, it's this, it's that"... ok. i agree.
but isn't that doing nothing more than simply stating that YOU value life, that YOU value consciousness? WHY should someone else do so too? is their ANY objective, moral reason someone should?

i have looked high and low and i can't find one. help me out dude!

i sure would LIKE to think that there's some moral objective value to life, but thus far, it seems that the only reason life is important is because most of us think it is...

but WHY should OUR opinion hold any more water than someone who HATES life? WHY!

that is to say, on what basis can we call somone who values killing 'wrong'?
he is wrong because: [insert answer]

(and PLEASE, give me something more than "because we don't like it...")
 
Quote from daniel_m:



long shot, get a GRIP dude. "it's life, it's consciousness, it's this, it's that"... ok. i agree.
but isn't that doing nothing more than simply stating that YOU value life, that YOU value consciousness? WHY should someone else do so too? is their ANY objective, moral reason someone should?

i have looked high and low and i can't find one. help me out dude!

i sure would LIKE to think that there's some moral objective value to life, but thus far, it seems that the only reason life is important is because most of us think it is...

but WHY should OUR opinion hold any more water than someone who HATES life? WHY!

that is to say, on what basis can we call someone who values killing 'wrong'?
he is wrong because: [insert answer]

(and PLEASE, give me something more than "because we don't like it...")
More...

There is no criteria to value human life?

How about the golden rule?

Who wants to die? What percentage wants their own life to end?

99% of the healthy population of this world chooses to live, not die.

Life is valued, cherished, sought after to extend it.

So to suggest that termination of human life is not wrong, is nonsensical.

The issue of this thread is whether or not a fetus is human life, not whether murder is morally wrong.

Even in the most negative societies, like Iraq, life is cherished. Take monsters like Hussein. He values life, his own. By his own standards, life has value. That he is twisted sufficiently to kill others doesn't make it moral, it just makes him a hypocrite and immoral.

Yes, life is valuable, because most of us think it is. If you don't really understand that, you have no concept of morality that will fit any rational model of the concept of morality.

Won't prevent you from coming up with your own model, but you are so whacked out from what I have read, that would not surprise me in the least.

Even if you take a pure atheistic perspective, if the majority, vast and overwhelming majority--not just a simple majority--deem the mores of that society to be valuation and preservation of life, then it is immoral to murder.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top