Pages: 1 … 5 6 7

 

2007-05-02 09:29:48
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|7003

Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

weamo8 wrote:

Good for you.

I work with a guy who thinks that black people are monkeys.  If there were no repercusions, I truly believe he would be running around killing them.  Why cant he?  Because they are human beings.  What makes them individual human beings?

Two arms?  No, (monkeys).  Two legs?  What about war vets?  Can I kill someone with an artificial heart?
If someone is knocked out, unconscious, or in a coma do I have the right to kill them?  Are they still human beings?  What is a good way to classify human beings?  Why not genetics? (Can run into trouble with some twins, but is still better than most other classifications.)

We give human beings rights.  What classifies something as a human being?  If a fetus is a genetically distinct individual from its mother, shouldnt it have its own rights?

I hope this doesnt come off as a racially charged post.  The guy I work with is a dumbass.

(Damn this post has a lot of questions)
I'd be of the opinion that if a foetus cannot survive unaided in the outside world then it doesn't qualify for human rights. All of the things you mention, aided or unaided, can survive in the outside world. Take a 1 month old baby out of a womb and stick it in an incubator and get back to me on how long it lasts, if it is even visible to the naked eye that is.

FTR When it can survive in an incubator should be the cut-off point for whether an abortion should be permitted.
And if we did have the technology to keep them alive what then? 100 years ago we couldn't save the lives of premature babys as early as we can today.
Extract them and keep them in a cryogenic adoption centre? Mother gets rid of the baby (it's as good as an abortion), baby lives: everybody happy (except perhaps for the baby who realises it wasn't wanted in later life...).

Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-05-02 09:31:05)

2007-05-02 10:03:27
=OBS= EstebanRey
Member
+256|6998|Oxford, England, UK, EU, Earth

Stingray24 wrote:

I stated long ago in other threads that if abortion is banned, I'll become an animal right activist.  The pro-abortion side is in a much worse position of defending animal life, but refusing to stand up for helpless infants in the womb.

PS I'm pretty sure I answered all your questions.
I fall into that category but then I have more faith in animals than I do in mankind.  Humans are just stupid IMO.....

P.S Just remember how many lowings we've avoided thanks to abortion, LOL

Last edited by =OBS= EstebanRey (2007-05-02 10:04:29)

2007-05-02 10:56:30
Stingray24
Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
+1,060|6893|The Land of Scott Walker

=OBS= EstebanRey wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

I stated long ago in other threads that if abortion is banned, I'll become an animal right activist.  The pro-abortion side is in a much worse position of defending animal life, but refusing to stand up for helpless infants in the womb.

PS I'm pretty sure I answered all your questions.
I fall into that category but then I have more faith in animals than I do in mankind.  Humans are just stupid IMO.....

P.S Just remember how many lowings we've avoided thanks to abortion, LOL
We could have very well aborted the child who would have found the cure for cancer or AIDS.  On the practical side, we've aborted literally millions of future taxpayers in the US alone.  And we wonder why Social Security is running out of money.
2007-05-02 12:39:01
konfusion
mostly afk
+480|6998|CH/BR - in UK

Stingray24 wrote:

=OBS= EstebanRey wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

I stated long ago in other threads that if abortion is banned, I'll become an animal right activist.  The pro-abortion side is in a much worse position of defending animal life, but refusing to stand up for helpless infants in the womb.

PS I'm pretty sure I answered all your questions.
I fall into that category but then I have more faith in animals than I do in mankind.  Humans are just stupid IMO.....

P.S Just remember how many lowings we've avoided thanks to abortion, LOL
We could have very well aborted the child who would have found the cure for cancer or AIDS.  On the practical side, we've aborted literally millions of future taxpayers in the US alone.  And we wonder why Social Security is running out of money.
Actually, the world is over populated as it is. Furthermore, people who have abortions usually have them because they are in neither financial nor psychological situation to take care of a child, and therefore, the child would grow up in a bad environment, which makes the probability of this child becoming a good tax payer a lot lower than it would with another child.

-konfusion
2007-05-02 14:47:34
Stingray24
Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
+1,060|6893|The Land of Scott Walker
We are not all products of our environment.  Some of us rise above it and make something of ourselves rather than whining about being poor or a victim our whole lives.  One could even argue that being in a less than ideal would be further motivation to escape that environment.  I grew up in a home that only made 20K per year my whole childhood.  We had very little, but our basic needs were met.  I have a job making 30K already and my kids haven't even reached age 4.  I decided I wanted better for my family, went to school, found a career, and earn a decent wage.  I'm not rolling in green by any means, but my kids live better than I did at their age.  That's the American Dream in action - work hard and receive the reward for your efforts.
2007-05-09 11:24:17
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|7003
http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0509/abortion.html

High Court rules that the subject of the OP case CAN leave the country for an abortion!

Mr Justice Liam McKechnie also criticised the HSE for its actions after the girl told her social worker she wanted an abortion. He said he firmly and unequivocally held the view that there was no statutory or constitutional impediment to Miss D travelling for the purposes of terminating her pregnancy, if that was what she wanted.
He said this case was not about abortion; it was about the right to travel.
2007-05-09 11:28:29
Agent_Dung_Bomb
Member
+302|7184|Salt Lake City

CameronPoe wrote:

http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0509/abortion.html

High Court rules that the subject of the OP case CAN leave the country for an abortion!

Mr Justice Liam McKechnie also criticised the HSE for its actions after the girl told her social worker she wanted an abortion. He said he firmly and unequivocally held the view that there was no statutory or constitutional impediment to Miss D travelling for the purposes of terminating her pregnancy, if that was what she wanted.
He said this case was not about abortion; it was about the right to travel.
I would say it was the right decision by the court.

 

Pages: 1 … 5 6 7

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard