Rape does not justify abortion

[Quantum Windbag]

Um, no it's not....And in any definition, it is something that is claimed to make up PART of the self, not the entirety...

Really?

1: the immaterial essence, animating principle, or actuating cause of an individual life
2a : the spiritual principle embodied in human beings, all rational and spiritual beings, or the universe b capitalized Christian Science : god 1b

3: a person's total self

Soul - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

And yet one and two don't support your argument..

1.
the principle of life, feeling, thought, and action in humans, regarded as a distinct entity separate from the body, and commonly held to be separable in existence from the body; the spiritual part of humans as distinct from the physical part.
2.
the spiritual part of humans regarded in its moral aspect, or as believed to survive death and be subject to happiness or misery in a life to come: arguing the immortality of the soul.
3.
the disembodied spirit of a deceased person: He feared the soul of the deceased would haunt him.
4.
the emotional part of human nature; the seat of the feelings or sentiments.
5.
a human being; person.

Five does here, but 1-4 don't. Shrug..

I've never seen a soul referred to as a person in any way shape of form. The embodiment of what some think make up in the intangible part of the human - thinking, thought processes etc - sure. But a human being itself? Nope...

What part of "one of the definitions" do you not understand?

 

[Dr Grump]

It doesn't really matter. It all comes down to one's conscience and appreciation for human life. It all comes down to whether one can rationalize it in a way that a human life can be casually discarded at the whim of the woman who is told over and over that it is a bunch of cells and therefore is inconsequential. Or whether we return to a time in which there is no part of a human life that is any less important than any other from the time the woman becomes pregnant until the baby exits her body and begins to breathe on its own and then, with even more help of responsibile people, procceeds on to become an adult and all the stages of life involved in that.

But if one doesn't see a 6-8 week old foetus as a human life, that doesn't mean they don't appreciate human life.

You call it rationalisation, but one has to wonder how a group of cells that have no cognitive responses can be seen as human.

A anti-abortionist isn't in any way morally superior or more 'switched on' than a pro-choice person. In my experience, the vast majority (but not all I'll concede) of anti-abortionists have a religious bent attached to their ideals. And once they do that, they lose me...

How can a man in a come be called human? He has no cognitive response either, but no one ever questions his humanity because of that.

1) If they have no cognitive response or brain waves, then they are a vegetable and the machine usually gets switched off
2) If there are brainwaves then they are cognitive, but we just can't see it because their mind is trapped. Here's an example of a man who was overtly cognitive, but in a very, very limited way. However, his brain function was was far from limited.. UK man who failed to overturn euthanasia law dies - Yahoo! News

IOW, your example is comparing apples and oranges...

 

[Dr Grump]

Really?

1: the immaterial essence, animating principle, or actuating cause of an individual life
2a : the spiritual principle embodied in human beings, all rational and spiritual beings, or the universe b capitalized Christian Science : god 1b

3: a person's total self

Soul - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

And yet one and two don't support your argument..

1.
the principle of life, feeling, thought, and action in humans, regarded as a distinct entity separate from the body, and commonly held to be separable in existence from the body; the spiritual part of humans as distinct from the physical part.
2.
the spiritual part of humans regarded in its moral aspect, or as believed to survive death and be subject to happiness or misery in a life to come: arguing the immortality of the soul.
3.
the disembodied spirit of a deceased person: He feared the soul of the deceased would haunt him.
4.
the emotional part of human nature; the seat of the feelings or sentiments.
5.
a human being; person.

Five does here, but 1-4 don't. Shrug..

I've never seen a soul referred to as a person in any way shape of form. The embodiment of what some think make up in the intangible part of the human - thinking, thought processes etc - sure. But a human being itself? Nope...

What part of "one of the definitions" do you not understand?

That wasn't my point. Which part of that don't you understand?

 

[Vidi]

heres the thing folks:

The argument Im seeing throughout this thread is Life Begins at Conception vs Life begins sometime AFTER conception.

No one has yet defined "conception". Lets start there.

Is it fertilization? Implantation? What biological process is conception exactly?

Points will be deducted from those who do not understand the biological process by which we are created.

It doesn't really matter. It all comes down to one's conscience and appreciation for human life. It all comes down to whether one can rationalize it in a way that a human life can be casually discarded at the whim of the woman who is told over and over that it is a bunch of cells and therefore is inconsequential. Or whether we return to a time in which there is no part of a human life that is any less important than any other from the time the woman becomes pregnant until the baby exits her body and begins to breathe on its own and then, with even more help of responsibile people, procceeds on to become an adult and all the stages of life involved in that.

actually it absolutely DOES matter, but it takes an understanding of how the process of human procreation actually works in order to see how it matters.

I find it irresponsible to NOT use birth control if one is financially or emotionally incapable of raising a child. But depending on WHEN conception is defined as occuring, some would regard birth control as abortion as well.

So how about in the future, we define the terms we are using so we all have a frame of reference before we start calling each other monster baby killers or misogynistic pigs, hmmm?

 

[Dr Grump]

Completely pro abortion, and people keep telling me you don't exist.

It's called being pro choice, not pro abortion.

Me? I'm both pro choice and anti-abortion....

They call Romney a conservative, doesn't make him one anymore than calling a pro abortion person pro choice makes them not pro abortion.

I would argue that somebody who actively wants everybody to abort due to world over population is pro-abortion. I know women who have had abortions. Not one of them was 'pro' it in any way, shape or form....

 

[Vidi]

Completely pro abortion, and people keep telling me you don't exist.

It's called being pro choice, not pro abortion.

Me? I'm both pro choice and anti-abortion....

They call Romney a conservative, doesn't make him one anymore than calling a pro abortion person pro choice makes them not pro abortion.

Black and White no greys huh?

 

[jwoodie]

So QW wants a world where even though a rapist may go to prison, he gets to continue to victimize his victim with the aid of a government that forces his victim - at point of a gun if necessary - to bear his offspring. And while the rapist sits in prison having his needs taken care of by the people's taxes, QW favors a world where the government programs that may have helped his victim raise his child have been defunded to nothing, so she has to beg on the streets to put food into her rapsit's child's mouth.

So to QW - "small government" means government teaming up with rapists to force women to bear children against their will - and then casting them off into the world without any help at all to raise the child the rapist and government forced them to have.



I'm guessing QW has no daughters.

Is using strawmen the only way you can counter my argument? I guess my position is a lot stronger than I thought.

Actually, it is more of a red herring argument, but let's take it a step further: If you discovered that one of your grandchildren had been conceived during a rape, would you want that child put to death? Exactly where do you draw the line for infanticide?

 

[Dr Grump]

Actually, it is more of a red herring argument, but let's take it a step further: If you discovered that one of your grandchildren had been conceived during a rape, would you want that child put to death? Exactly where do you draw the line for infanticide?

in·fan·ti·cide
   [in-fan-tuh-sahyd] Show IPA
noun
1.
the act of killing an infant.
2.
the practice of killing newborn infants.
3.
a person who kills an infant.


in·fant
   [in-fuhnt] Show IPA
noun
1.
a child during the earliest period of its life, especially before he or she can walk; baby.
2.
Law . a person who is not of full age, especially one who has not reached the age of 18 years; a minor.
3.
a beginner, as in experience or learning; novice: The new candidate is a political infant.

Another strawman...

 

[Quantum Windbag]

But if one doesn't see a 6-8 week old foetus as a human life, that doesn't mean they don't appreciate human life.

You call it rationalisation, but one has to wonder how a group of cells that have no cognitive responses can be seen as human.

A anti-abortionist isn't in any way morally superior or more 'switched on' than a pro-choice person. In my experience, the vast majority (but not all I'll concede) of anti-abortionists have a religious bent attached to their ideals. And once they do that, they lose me...

How can a man in a come be called human? He has no cognitive response either, but no one ever questions his humanity because of that.

1) If they have no cognitive response or brain waves, then they are a vegetable and the machine usually gets switched off
2) If there are brainwaves then they are cognitive, but we just can't see it because their mind is trapped. Here's an example of a man who was overtly cognitive, but in a very, very limited way. However, his brain function was was far from limited.. UK man who failed to overturn euthanasia law dies - Yahoo! News

IOW, your example is comparing apples and oranges...

Cognitive brain function implies that the brain is processing information. That is something that is entirely separate from brain function. Comatose patients have brain function, not cognition.

In other words, you are redefining, and ignoring science, cognition to support your position.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

And yet one and two don't support your argument..

1.
the principle of life, feeling, thought, and action in humans, regarded as a distinct entity separate from the body, and commonly held to be separable in existence from the body; the spiritual part of humans as distinct from the physical part.
2.
the spiritual part of humans regarded in its moral aspect, or as believed to survive death and be subject to happiness or misery in a life to come: arguing the immortality of the soul.
3.
the disembodied spirit of a deceased person: He feared the soul of the deceased would haunt him.
4.
the emotional part of human nature; the seat of the feelings or sentiments.
5.
a human being; person.

Five does here, but 1-4 don't. Shrug..

I've never seen a soul referred to as a person in any way shape of form. The embodiment of what some think make up in the intangible part of the human - thinking, thought processes etc - sure. But a human being itself? Nope...

What part of "one of the definitions" do you not understand?

That wasn't my point. Which part of that don't you understand?

I specifically pointed out which definition of soul I am using, You denied it was valid, and I proved it is. Now you are trying to pretend you were making another point, but I am not going to let you.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

It's called being pro choice, not pro abortion.

Me? I'm both pro choice and anti-abortion....

They call Romney a conservative, doesn't make him one anymore than calling a pro abortion person pro choice makes them not pro abortion.

I would argue that somebody who actively wants everybody to abort due to world over population is pro-abortion. I know women who have had abortions. Not one of them was 'pro' it in any way, shape or form....

If I am to take your argument literally, you are saying that your personal experience encompasses the entire world, and that anything that you have not personally experienced has not happened. Strangely enough, I don't believe you.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

It's called being pro choice, not pro abortion.

Me? I'm both pro choice and anti-abortion....

They call Romney a conservative, doesn't make him one anymore than calling a pro abortion person pro choice makes them not pro abortion.

Black and White no greys huh?

Nope, I fully admit that there are quite a few pro choice people who are not pro abortion. What I refuese to allow anyone to argue is that no one in the entire world is pro abortion, that is facially absurd.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

So QW wants a world where even though a rapist may go to prison, he gets to continue to victimize his victim with the aid of a government that forces his victim - at point of a gun if necessary - to bear his offspring. And while the rapist sits in prison having his needs taken care of by the people's taxes, QW favors a world where the government programs that may have helped his victim raise his child have been defunded to nothing, so she has to beg on the streets to put food into her rapsit's child's mouth.

So to QW - "small government" means government teaming up with rapists to force women to bear children against their will - and then casting them off into the world without any help at all to raise the child the rapist and government forced them to have.



I'm guessing QW has no daughters.

Is using strawmen the only way you can counter my argument? I guess my position is a lot stronger than I thought.

Actually, it is more of a red herring argument, but let's take it a step further: If you discovered that one of your grandchildren had been conceived during a rape, would you want that child put to death? Exactly where do you draw the line for infanticide?

I was referring to him arguing that I want a word where rapists get to continue to victimize people. Since I am the one arguing that rape does not justify abortion I am pretty sure I can make a case that it doesn't justify infanticide either.

 

[Valerie]

That is not what Cheryl said. She was free to be this child's mother and help her become the beautiful girl that she is. My Sister always said she is glad she had the baby. It helped her to focus on what mattered

Oh and I am glad too.

That's when it goes well. When it doesn't go well, it's a worse disaster. I know a woman that was raped and had the baby thinking it would help her heal. Instead she took out her anger on the baby, the girl and the young woman that baby became. The daughter could not live being the subject of a lifetime of total resentment and no love. She committed suicide at 17. Mother died two years later of acute alcoholism. A woman on another board was the product of a rape but given up for adoption. She made the mistake of tracking down her biological mother and got told if mother knew she would be tracked down and her privacy invaded, she would have had an abortion.

I knew the woman and her daughter. It was a total tragedy. Years and years of tragedy.

The fact that some people are not qualified to be parents doesn't justify abortion either. Unless, that is, you think the government can mandate abortions whenever people don't meet whatever qualifications it imposes.

By the way, do you have any evidence she would not have taken her anger out on her child if she hadn't been raped?

 

[Ravi]

Never happened? Why would they revoke the medical license of a doctor over something that never happens?

Doctor loses license in live birth abortion case - CNN

That has nothing to do with Obama, dummy

My thread has nothing to do with Obama either. what's your point?

You replied to something we were discussing without even knowing what you replied to....but you did highlight the fact that you don't need to make laws for what is already illegal, so it wasn't a total waste.

 

[Vidi]

So QW wants a world where even though a rapist may go to prison, he gets to continue to victimize his victim with the aid of a government that forces his victim - at point of a gun if necessary - to bear his offspring. And while the rapist sits in prison having his needs taken care of by the people's taxes, QW favors a world where the government programs that may have helped his victim raise his child have been defunded to nothing, so she has to beg on the streets to put food into her rapsit's child's mouth.

So to QW - "small government" means government teaming up with rapists to force women to bear children against their will - and then casting them off into the world without any help at all to raise the child the rapist and government forced them to have.



I'm guessing QW has no daughters.

Is using strawmen the only way you can counter my argument? I guess my position is a lot stronger than I thought.

As the Constitution in no way guarantees a right to life, your position has always been one based on a false premise.

Dont feel bad though. Most of the threads original posts lately seem to be based on a false premise.

 

[Vidi]

That is not what Cheryl said. She was free to be this child's mother and help her become the beautiful girl that she is. My Sister always said she is glad she had the baby. It helped her to focus on what mattered

Oh and I am glad too.

That's when it goes well. When it doesn't go well, it's a worse disaster. I know a woman that was raped and had the baby thinking it would help her heal. Instead she took out her anger on the baby, the girl and the young woman that baby became. The daughter could not live being the subject of a lifetime of total resentment and no love. She committed suicide at 17. Mother died two years later of acute alcoholism. A woman on another board was the product of a rape but given up for adoption. She made the mistake of tracking down her biological mother and got told if mother knew she would be tracked down and her privacy invaded, she would have had an abortion.

I knew the woman and her daughter. It was a total tragedy. Years and years of tragedy.

The fact that some people are not qualified to be parents doesn't justify abortion either. Unless, that is, you think the government can mandate abortions whenever people don't meet whatever qualifications it imposes.

By the way, do you have any evidence she would not have taken her anger out on her child if she hadn't been raped?

We need a licence to marry, to drive, hell, to FISH...but any idiot can procreate.

Maybe thats not always best.

 

[Dr Grump]

How can a man in a come be called human? He has no cognitive response either, but no one ever questions his humanity because of that.

1) If they have no cognitive response or brain waves, then they are a vegetable and the machine usually gets switched off
2) If there are brainwaves then they are cognitive, but we just can't see it because their mind is trapped. Here's an example of a man who was overtly cognitive, but in a very, very limited way. However, his brain function was was far from limited.. UK man who failed to overturn euthanasia law dies - Yahoo! News

IOW, your example is comparing apples and oranges...

Cognitive brain function implies that the brain is processing information. That is something that is entirely separate from brain function. Comatose patients have brain function, not cognition.

In other words, you are redefining, and ignoring science, cognition to support your position.

Um no. There have been many instances where people have been in comas or seemingly unresponsive, that once they have regained their faculties have told people that they could see and hear everything going on around them, but couldn't say or do anything due to their condition.

THAT aside, we are getting sidetracked. You example is, and will remain, a strawman to this argument...

 

[Dr Grump]

I specifically pointed out which definition of soul I am using, You denied it was valid, and I proved it is. Now you are trying to pretend you were making another point, but I am not going to let you.

No, I disagree with that definition and would love to know who decided that that was the definition. Meanwhile, you miss the other four or five that came before it on the scale to suit your own purpose...funny how that works...

 

[Dr Grump]

They call Romney a conservative, doesn't make him one anymore than calling a pro abortion person pro choice makes them not pro abortion.

I would argue that somebody who actively wants everybody to abort due to world over population is pro-abortion. I know women who have had abortions. Not one of them was 'pro' it in any way, shape or form....

If I am to take your argument literally, you are saying that your personal experience encompasses the entire world, and that anything that you have not personally experienced has not happened. Strangely enough, I don't believe you.

You don't have to believe me and you do not have to take my argument literally. What you do have to do, because it is a fact, is believe that if somebody has an abortion it doesn't mean that they are pro abortion.

I eat Brussell sprouts. I don't eat them because I am pro them, I eat them because I know vegetables are good for me. In fact, I hate the taste of them.

You use the term pro-abortion so as to be emotive and somehow you think it supports your argument. It doesn't.