CDZ Abortion

[C_Clayton_Jones]

BONZI SAID: ↑

“A human being (even in the earliest of stages) has just as many rights as a human being walking around. If not more so, because it has the inability to defend itself.”

This is also wrong, proven to be factually incorrect in post #68.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I can understand that a woman has a right to control her own body; however, there is also an issue of responsibility. If a woman were to choose not to use her body to feed her new born baby and allow the baby to simply to starve to death she would most likely be charged with murder based on neglect. The woman is expected to use that body of her's (not necessarily breastfeeding ) and take care of that baby or find someone else that will.

This fails as a false comparison fallacy.

 

[JoeMoma]

I can understand that a woman has a right to control her own body; however, there is also an issue of responsibility. If a woman were to choose not to use her body to feed her new born baby and allow the baby to simply to starve to death she would most likely be charged with murder based on neglect. The woman is expected to use that body of her's (not necessarily breastfeeding ) and take care of that baby or find someone else that will.

So... bottle feeding is illegal?

The woman would still have to use her body to prepare the bottle and feed the baby. It doesn't happen by magic.

Could someone else use their body to do this?

Yes. You might want to reread my original post because this is the second thing you missed.

"The woman is expected to use that body of her's (not necessarily breastfeeding ) and take care of that baby or find someone else that will."

Not necessarily breastfeeding -- Use of her body can mean other things than breastfeeding. Holding a bottle, changing diapers, keeping the baby warm are examples.

Or find someone that will -- This responsibility can be transfer to someone else such as another relative. In some states, the parents may drop a newborn baby off at a police department, fire department, or hospital and give up a baby without being arrested for neglect. That being said, if an infant is in the custody of a woman (the mother), she is expected to use her body to care for that baby. She can't simply leave the infant to fend for itself and use the right to control her own body and her right to privacy to justify allowing the baby to die.

 

[JoeMoma]

I can understand that a woman has a right to control her own body; however, there is also an issue of responsibility. If a woman were to choose not to use her body to feed her new born baby and allow the baby to simply to starve to death she would most likely be charged with murder based on neglect. The woman is expected to use that body of her's (not necessarily breastfeeding ) and take care of that baby or find someone else that will.

This fails as a false comparison fallacy.

It's not exactly the same situation, but there are some valid comparisons.
One of the things abortion is about is the avoidance of responsibility for one's actions. Yes abortion is legal, but that doesn't make the statement any less true.

When you use the word "fallacy", you rarely back up why it is a fallacy (or in this case a false comparison).

 

[Derideo_Te]

One of the things abortion is about is the avoidance of responsibility for one's actions.

How about when abortion is the responsible action to take and continuing the pregnancy is the irresponsible action?

 

[JoeMoma]

One of the things abortion is about is the avoidance of responsibility for one's actions.

How about when abortion is the responsible action to take and continuing the pregnancy is the irresponsible action?

Somehow I think your definition of what is a responsible action is different than mine.

 

[Blackrook]

Catholic Democratic politicians are Democrats before they are Catholics. Joe Biden is one of them. I am glad the Catholic Church gave a Catholic funeral to Joe Biden's son, but I think Joe Biden shouldn't even be allowed to take the Eucharist.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Democrats pretend to care about the poor, minorities and gays but their compassion is not real. All they want is votes and power.

The Democrats are cold-blooded murderers and sociopaths when they support legalized abortion. Unborn babies can't vote, so Democrats have no use for them.

I remember when Democrats were divided on this issue. Believe it or not, Al Gore was once pro-life.

But Al Gore became a bloody pro-abort when he was picked to be Vice-President.

Damn! I didn't realize that I was a cold blooded murder and sociopath! I'm going to have to talk to my Life Couch about this!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I can understand that a woman has a right to control her own body; however, there is also an issue of responsibility. If a woman were to choose not to use her body to feed her new born baby and allow the baby to simply to starve to death she would most likely be charged with murder based on neglect. The woman is expected to use that body of her's (not necessarily breastfeeding ) and take care of that baby or find someone else that will.

This fails as a false comparison fallacy.

It's not exactly the same situation, but there are some valid comparisons.
One of the things abortion is about is the avoidance of responsibility for one's actions. Yes abortion is legal, but that doesn't make the statement any less true.

When you use the word "fallacy", you rarely back up why it is a fallacy (or in this case a false comparison).

No, they aren't.

This is one of the many mistakes common to you and others on the right concerning the issue, that abortion represents an “avoidance of responsibility” on the part of the woman, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

Many women make an effort to avoid pregnancy in good faith, where those efforts fail through no fault of their own. And because you perceive women who have abortions as being 'irresponsible,' that somehow 'mitigates' their right to privacy. Indeed, for many women, having an abortion is the responsible thing to do.

Last, your argument fails as a fallacy because you compare two different and unrelated things: the embryo/fetus with that of a newborn.

 

[Derideo_Te]

One of the things abortion is about is the avoidance of responsibility for one's actions.

How about when abortion is the responsible action to take and continuing the pregnancy is the irresponsible action?

Somehow I think your definition of what is a responsible action is different than mine.

How about when a woman who is already a mother to a couple of small children who is having health and/or financial problems discovers that she is pregnant again?

Is her responsibility towards those children who are already dependent upon her limited health and/or financial resources or should she jeopardize their future by bringing yet another child into the mix that drain her already limited resources even further?

Do you recall what happened with Andrea Yates?

Sometimes the responsible action is to have an abortion.

 

[daws101]

Democrats pretend to care about the poor, minorities and gays but their compassion is not real. All they want is votes and power.

The Democrats are cold-blooded murderers and sociopaths when they support legalized abortion. Unborn babies can't vote, so Democrats have no use for them.

I remember when Democrats were divided on this issue. Believe it or not, Al Gore was once pro-life.

But Al Gore became a bloody pro-abort when he was picked to be Vice-President.

Major bullshit just as many conservatives have abortions as liberals .
your hypocrisy is fucking amazing , conservatives fain concern for the unborn but could give a shit about what happens afterwards

 

[daws101]

One of the things abortion is about is the avoidance of responsibility for one's actions.

How about when abortion is the responsible action to take and continuing the pregnancy is the irresponsible action?

Somehow I think your definition of what is a responsible action is different than mine.

True Dt's makes sense.

 

[JoeMoma]

I can understand that a woman has a right to control her own body; however, there is also an issue of responsibility. If a woman were to choose not to use her body to feed her new born baby and allow the baby to simply to starve to death she would most likely be charged with murder based on neglect. The woman is expected to use that body of her's (not necessarily breastfeeding ) and take care of that baby or find someone else that will.

This fails as a false comparison fallacy.

It's not exactly the same situation, but there are some valid comparisons.
One of the things abortion is about is the avoidance of responsibility for one's actions. Yes abortion is legal, but that doesn't make the statement any less true.

When you use the word "fallacy", you rarely back up why it is a fallacy (or in this case a false comparison).

No, they aren't.

This is one of the many mistakes common to you and others on the right concerning the issue, that abortion represents an “avoidance of responsibility” on the part of the woman, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

Many women make an effort to avoid pregnancy in good faith, where those efforts fail through no fault of their own. And because you perceive women who have abortions as being 'irresponsible,' that somehow 'mitigates' their right to privacy. Indeed, for many women, having an abortion is the responsible thing to do.

Last, your argument fails as a fallacy because you compare two different and unrelated things: the embryo/fetus with that of a newborn.

An embro, fetus and a newborn are all three human life at various stages of development. This is indisputable scientifically. Legally you can dispute this because embryos and fetuses are not granted the rights of personhood that a newborn is granted. Legallities can be changed but the science cannot.

Now that I've established that relationship, parents of a newborn are responsible for that newborn even if they tried to use birth control to prevent the conception of the newborn. Furthermore, if they allow the newborn to die in the privacy of their own home due to neglect, privacy rights do not negate their responsibility to the newborn. Abortion is a means to avoid responsibility for a human life.

 

[daws101]

I can understand that a woman has a right to control her own body; however, there is also an issue of responsibility. If a woman were to choose not to use her body to feed her new born baby and allow the baby to simply to starve to death she would most likely be charged with murder based on neglect. The woman is expected to use that body of her's (not necessarily breastfeeding ) and take care of that baby or find someone else that will.

This fails as a false comparison fallacy.

It's not exactly the same situation, but there are some valid comparisons.
One of the things abortion is about is the avoidance of responsibility for one's actions. Yes abortion is legal, but that doesn't make the statement any less true.

When you use the word "fallacy", you rarely back up why it is a fallacy (or in this case a false comparison).

No, they aren't.

This is one of the many mistakes common to you and others on the right concerning the issue, that abortion represents an “avoidance of responsibility” on the part of the woman, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

Many women make an effort to avoid pregnancy in good faith, where those efforts fail through no fault of their own. And because you perceive women who have abortions as being 'irresponsible,' that somehow 'mitigates' their right to privacy. Indeed, for many women, having an abortion is the responsible thing to do.

Last, your argument fails as a fallacy because you compare two different and unrelated things: the embryo/fetus with that of a newborn.

An embro, fetus and a newborn are all three human life at various stages of development. This is indisputable scientifically. Legally you can dispute this because embryos and fetuses are not granted the rights of personhood that a newborn is granted. Legallities can be changed but the science cannot.

Now that I've established that relationship, parents of a newborn are responsible for that newborn even if they tried to use birth control to prevent the conception of the newborn. Furthermore, if they allow the newborn to die in the privacy of their own home due to neglect, privacy rights do not negate their responsibility to the newborn. Abortion is a means to avoid responsibility for a human life.

That's pretentious.

 

[JoeMoma]

One of the things abortion is about is the avoidance of responsibility for one's actions.

How about when abortion is the responsible action to take and continuing the pregnancy is the irresponsible action?

Somehow I think your definition of what is a responsible action is different than mine.

How about when a woman who is already a mother to a couple of small children who is having health and/or financial problems discovers that she is pregnant again?

Is her responsibility towards those children who are already dependent upon her limited health and/or financial resources or should she jeopardize their future by bringing yet another child into the mix that drain her already limited resources even further?

Do you recall what happened with Andrea Yates?

Sometimes the responsible action is to have an abortion.

Your rational for this depends on the rational that the fetus is not yet valued as a person. Would it be responsible for the mother to sacrifice one of her children so that she can use her resources to better take care of the remaining child?

 

[daws101]

One of the things abortion is about is the avoidance of responsibility for one's actions.

How about when abortion is the responsible action to take and continuing the pregnancy is the irresponsible action?

Somehow I think your definition of what is a responsible action is different than mine.

How about when a woman who is already a mother to a couple of small children who is having health and/or financial problems discovers that she is pregnant again?

Is her responsibility towards those children who are already dependent upon her limited health and/or financial resources or should she jeopardize their future by bringing yet another child into the mix that drain her already limited resources even further?

Do you recall what happened with Andrea Yates?

Sometimes the responsible action is to have an abortion.

Your rational for this depends on the rational that the fetus is not yet valued as a person. Would it be responsible for the mother to sacrifice one of her children so that she can use her resources to better take care of the remaining child?

The answer is yes. Although you won't admit it.

 

[JoeMoma]

One of the things abortion is about is the avoidance of responsibility for one's actions.

How about when abortion is the responsible action to take and continuing the pregnancy is the irresponsible action?

Somehow I think your definition of what is a responsible action is different than mine.

How about when a woman who is already a mother to a couple of small children who is having health and/or financial problems discovers that she is pregnant again?

Is her responsibility towards those children who are already dependent upon her limited health and/or financial resources or should she jeopardize their future by bringing yet another child into the mix that drain her already limited resources even further?

Do you recall what happened with Andrea Yates?

Sometimes the responsible action is to have an abortion.

Your rational for this depends on the rational that the fetus is not yet valued as a person. Would it be responsible for the mother to sacrifice one of her children so that she can use her resources to better take care of the remaining child?

The answer is yes. Although you won't admit it.

Mmmmm.......Okay. For clarification, which question did you answer? I hope it wasn't the last one I posed.

 

[daws101]

How about when abortion is the responsible action to take and continuing the pregnancy is the irresponsible action?

Somehow I think your definition of what is a responsible action is different than mine.

How about when a woman who is already a mother to a couple of small children who is having health and/or financial problems discovers that she is pregnant again?

Is her responsibility towards those children who are already dependent upon her limited health and/or financial resources or should she jeopardize their future by bringing yet another child into the mix that drain her already limited resources even further?

Do you recall what happened with Andrea Yates?

Sometimes the responsible action is to have an abortion.

Your rational for this depends on the rational that the fetus is not yet valued as a person. Would it be responsible for the mother to sacrifice one of her children so that she can use her resources to better take care of the remaining child?

The answer is yes. Although you won't admit it.

Mmmmm.......Okay. For clarification, which question did you answer? I hope it wasn't the last one I posed.

It's obvious is.

 

[JoeMoma]

Somehow I think your definition of what is a responsible action is different than mine.

How about when a woman who is already a mother to a couple of small children who is having health and/or financial problems discovers that she is pregnant again?

Is her responsibility towards those children who are already dependent upon her limited health and/or financial resources or should she jeopardize their future by bringing yet another child into the mix that drain her already limited resources even further?

Do you recall what happened with Andrea Yates?

Sometimes the responsible action is to have an abortion.

Your rational for this depends on the rational that the fetus is not yet valued as a person. Would it be responsible for the mother to sacrifice one of her children so that she can use her resources to better take care of the remaining child?

The answer is yes. Although you won't admit it.

Mmmmm.......Okay. For clarification, which question did you answer? I hope it wasn't the last one I posed.

It's obvious is.

So you think it is okay for a mother of two to sacrifice (kill) one of her children to better use her resources to provide for the other.

 

[daws101]

How about when a woman who is already a mother to a couple of small children who is having health and/or financial problems discovers that she is pregnant again?

Is her responsibility towards those children who are already dependent upon her limited health and/or financial resources or should she jeopardize their future by bringing yet another child into the mix that drain her already limited resources even further?

Do you recall what happened with Andrea Yates?

Sometimes the responsible action is to have an abortion.

Your rational for this depends on the rational that the fetus is not yet valued as a person. Would it be responsible for the mother to sacrifice one of her children so that she can use her resources to better take care of the remaining child?

The answer is yes. Although you won't admit it.

Mmmmm.......Okay. For clarification, which question did you answer? I hope it wasn't the last one I posed.

It's obvious is.

So you think it is okay for a mother of two to sacrifice (kill) one of her children to better use her resources to provide for the other.

If it was necessary for the others to survive.