True conservatives are pro-choice

[RadiomanATL]

Whether a black man is human is not cut and dry? That's why I can still find rednecks who think they're not?

No. When life begins.

Is settled science. Your own quotes prove that as they don't attempt to argue it, choosing instead to argue an entirely different matter.

We've been operating under two different definitions of life.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Really? Because I'm pretty sure they still argue over whether Jews and Blacks are human over at Stormfront. I'm also pretty sure the science is settled on that.

It's settled on that issue.

Obviously not on the abortion issue.

O really?

Show me the scientific papers/evidence to suggest that a human zygote is not genetically human or is not alive.

Human as in what? Containing the genetic material to construct a fully developed human being over time?

 

[JBeukema]

For the purposes of the abortion discussion, it's always been life=awareness, soul, consciousness, whatever.

Like 'Men' was understood to mean white landed gentry when the FF wrote it?

Why can't you people ever be honest when discussing abortion?

You said 'life', not 'sentience' or 'personhood' or anything else.

You lost the argument because you argued against the facts and now you want a different argument but you're not honest enough to say from the beginning 'I don't care if it's alive, I care whether it's sentient'.

Just as I said earlier you people would do- because you always do.

 

[DiveCon]

It's settled on that issue.

Obviously not on the abortion issue.

O really?

Show me the scientific papers/evidence to suggest that a human zygote is not genetically human or is not alive.

Human as in what? Containing the genetic material to construct a fully developed human being over time?

so, life begins at 18 for you?

 

[JBeukema]

No. When life begins.

Is settled science. Your own quotes prove that as they don't attempt to argue it, choosing instead to argue an entirely different matter.

We've been operating under two different definitions of life.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4XT-l-_3y0[/ame]


1
a : the quality that distinguishes a vital and functional being from a dead body b : a principle or force that is considered to underlie the distinctive quality of animate beings c : an organismic state characterized by capacity for metabolism, growth, reaction to stimuli, and reproduction

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


Says nothing about sentience, legal status, or having to be smarter tan you seem to be

Flowers are living things, yet they're not sentient

 

[JBeukema]

O really?

Show me the scientific papers/evidence to suggest that a human zygote is not genetically human or is not alive.

Human as in what? Containing the genetic material to construct a fully developed human being over time?

so, life begins at 18 for you?

Non sequitur (logic) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[manifold]

If the difference isn't obvious, then there is no reason to believe you can be taught it.

Yeah, one is human and the other is a ******! It's different!

One is a German and the other is Jewish swine! It's different!

You're not the first to decide whose humanity is convenient for you and who's more convenient as a non-person and declare them to be such based on... well, mostly your own convenience and stupidity, to be fair.

Just when I thought you couldn't possibly ratchet up the hyperbolic nonsense anymore, you outdo yourself with this gem.

 

[manifold]

mani is wrong, a true conservative can be both pro-life and pro-choice
what it depends on is how they can justify their stands on the issue

The only thing I will concede is wrong with my opening supposition is the absolutist language I chose. But without it, I doubt this thread would've gotten off the ground.

But now that it's off the ground, I still maintain that pro-choice is MORE consistent with conservative ideals than pro-life.

i can be both pro-choice and pro-life at the same time
i am pro-life as i believe life begins at conception and as such should be protected
i am pro-choice as i dont believe it is the federal governments position to be imposing laws that restrict the choices individuals can make
that should rest in the state and local governments to decide

That's a copout.

If you got your way, would you or would not want abortion legal in YOUR state?

 

[DiveCon]

The only thing I will concede is wrong with my opening supposition is the absolutist language I chose. But without it, I doubt this thread would've gotten off the ground.

But now that it's off the ground, I still maintain that pro-choice is MORE consistent with conservative ideals than pro-life.

i can be both pro-choice and pro-life at the same time
i am pro-life as i believe life begins at conception and as such should be protected
i am pro-choice as i dont believe it is the federal governments position to be imposing laws that restrict the choices individuals can make
that should rest in the state and local governments to decide

That's a copout.

If you got your way, would you or would not want abortion legal in YOUR state?

legal, but with very strict controls

 

[misteroboto]

The problem with abortion is that none of you asses on either side can ever be honest when discussing it.

Irony, thy name is JB.

You are 100% correct, most people cannot discuss the issue honestly, including you when you equate abortion with someone invading your home and putting a bullet in your head.

Both are, by definition, homicide

S: (n) homicide (the killing of a human being by another human being)

Care to explain the difference?

homicide is not always illegal -

and the law doesnt recognize a fetus as a human being or even a separate entity from the mother

 

[Quantum Windbag]

True conservatives believe that a government that governs least governs best.

And that would naturally mean an opposition to a government forcing newly pregnant women to carry to term.

Alleged conservatives perform a lot of mental gymnastics to try to rationalize away this simple fact. But they're still wrong and they're not true conservatives.

And that's just the way it is.

True conservatives, or liberals for that matter, do not judge themselves by the answer to a single issue question. You should really get past your pro abortion stance and realize their are issues that are a lot more important than being able to kill children because they inconvenience you.

Fail.

Most people here know by now that I'm adamantly ANTI-ABORTION. I believe it's wrong on every level and if there is a God these people will be dealt with. But as an adamant believer in individual liberty in this life, I don't believe it's my place, or the governments, to force my moral standard on others when what they are doing doesn't affect me either way.

I don't give a **** what your beliefs are, you are attempting to boil a complicated definition down to a simple choice because it suits some obscure point you are trying to make. If you really did not believe the government, or anyone else, has a right to impose their beliefs on others you would not be trying to impose your definition on me. That makes you a hypocrite, a partisan hack, and an idiot. That is your fail, not mine.

 

[manifold]

True conservatives, or liberals for that matter, do not judge themselves by the answer to a single issue question. You should really get past your pro abortion stance and realize their are issues that are a lot more important than being able to kill children because they inconvenience you.

Fail.

Most people here know by now that I'm adamantly ANTI-ABORTION. I believe it's wrong on every level and if there is a God these people will be dealt with. But as an adamant believer in individual liberty in this life, I don't believe it's my place, or the governments, to force my moral standard on others when what they are doing doesn't affect me either way.

I don't give a **** what your beliefs are, you are attempting to boil a complicated definition down to a simple choice because it suits some obscure point you are trying to make. If you really did not believe the government, or anyone else, has a right to impose their beliefs on others you would not be trying to impose your definition on me. That makes you a hypocrite, a partisan hack, and an idiot. That is your fail, not mine.

Yeah, clearly.

 

[BenNatuf]

True conservatives also recognize that the securing of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is the role of government. True conservatives recognize that there are times where some interests overlap and come into conflict.

Thus, a true conservative might very well believe that the government has an obligation to preserve the life of the pre-born.

^See what I mean about mental gymnastics?

I am willing to acknowledge that my opinion regarding the origin of life is just that, an opinion. Are you?

I don't think the swamp ooze is much a factor here. What is is the bilogical definition of life because that is the only one that science and therefor law should accept. Any other argument is based on philosophy, in which case society could determine willy nilly whether or not a 2 year old or a ten year old is a "person" within the definition of the 14th amendment.

 

[BenNatuf]

abortion is a social issue and should not be subject to government intervention one way or the other....

murder and robbery are social issues too

if a women wants to kill her unborn child ...and you can find a doctor to do it....go for it....

and if she wants to kill her husband and can find a hit man is that OK too?

on the flip side if she wants to have it and the father doesn't...go for it...but don't ask for financial help form the dad....

your body ...your choice...your problem....

the baby is not "her body".

 

[RadiomanATL]

For the purposes of the abortion discussion, it's always been life=awareness, soul, consciousness, whatever.

Like 'Men' was understood to mean white landed gentry when the FF wrote it?

Why can't you people ever be honest when discussing abortion?

You said 'life', not 'sentience' or 'personhood' or anything else.

You lost the argument because you argued against the facts and now you want a different argument but you're not honest enough to say from the beginning 'I don't care if it's alive, I care whether it's sentient'.

Just as I said earlier you people would do- because you always do.

What are you talking about JB?

I am against abortion. Whats with this "you people" stuff?

All I have said, from the beginning, is that there is debate over all of it, and no one is using the same yardstick for IT. I used the word "life" in place of IT, because that is how the argument is best understood by all involved. If the word "consciousness" was used for IT, then the reverse argument is that brain dead people are not "human" either. Or babies who are born brain dead are never "human". Same reason I can't use the word "awareness". Or even the word "soul", because not everyone believes in a soul.

"Life" seems to be the best term available to use. And there is argument over when that exactly begins for humans.

This is why I don't get into abortion debates normally. I am against it, why? Because I believe it is killing another living human being. But what makes us human? When does that happen? When does IT come into our bodies? Conception? Implantation? Birth? There is no agreement on it. I believe it happens at conception. Others, even scientists, disagree.

 

[RadiomanATL]

Is settled science. Your own quotes prove that as they don't attempt to argue it, choosing instead to argue an entirely different matter.

We've been operating under two different definitions of life.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4XT-l-_3y0[/ame]


1
a : the quality that distinguishes a vital and functional being from a dead body b : a principle or force that is considered to underlie the distinctive quality of animate beings c : an organismic state characterized by capacity for metabolism, growth, reaction to stimuli, and reproduction

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


Says nothing about sentience, legal status, or having to be smarter tan you seem to be

Flowers are living things, yet they're not sentient

No, not what is the definition of "is".

But if you use sentience as a yardstick, we can off all brain dead humans with no legal ramifications, because then they should have no more protections than the flower in your example.

See? Whatever term you use to describe "IT", it isn't going to be sufficient. I use the term life. Pick another one.

 

[shintao]

I have YET to see a compelling argument that defends on a logical, scientific and factual level the contention that a pre-born baby (zygote, embryo, whatever), after conception, is "not" a human life.

This needs a thread. I would give you the opportunity to define what "human Life" is determined by physically and mentally.

 

[JBeukema]

Irony, thy name is JB.

You are 100% correct, most people cannot discuss the issue honestly, including you when you equate abortion with someone invading your home and putting a bullet in your head.

Both are, by definition, homicide

S: (n) homicide (the killing of a human being by another human being)

Care to explain the difference?

homicide is not always illegal -

I never said it was, genius

and the law doesnt recognize a fetus as a human being or even a separate entity from the mother

Tell it to Scott Peterson...

 

[JBeukema]

All I have said, from the beginning, is that there is debate over all of it, and no one is using the same yardstick for IT. I used the word "life" in place of IT, because that is how the argument is best understood by all involved. If the word "consciousness" was used for IT, then the reverse argument is that brain dead people are not "human" either. Or babies who are born brain dead are never "human". Same reason I can't use the word "awareness". Or even the word "soul", because not everyone believes in a soul.

Fail. There's no argument over what to call 'it'. There's argument over whether life or sentience matters. You said life. You meant life. If you wanted to argue that life isn't the important bit, then you should have made that argument.

"Life" seems to be the best term available to use.

Only if that's what you mean.

And there is argument over when that exactly begins for humans.

No, there's not. Because it's a simple matter of scientifically verifiable empirical fact

This is why I don't get into abortion debates normally. I am against it, why? Because I believe it is killing another living human being.

Is that necessarily and always a bad thing?

But what makes us human?

Our DNA. By definition.

When does that happen?

When an ovum and a sperm come together to create a lifeform with human DNA.

Again, by definition.

When does IT come into our bodies?

What are you babbling about? Will you pick one argument and stick with it?

 

[RadiomanATL]

All I have said, from the beginning, is that there is debate over all of it, and no one is using the same yardstick for IT. I used the word "life" in place of IT, because that is how the argument is best understood by all involved. If the word "consciousness" was used for IT, then the reverse argument is that brain dead people are not "human" either. Or babies who are born brain dead are never "human". Same reason I can't use the word "awareness". Or even the word "soul", because not everyone believes in a soul.

Fail. There's no argument over what to call 'it'. There's argument over whether life or sentience matters. You said life. You meant life. If you wanted to argue that life isn't the important bit, then you should have made that argument.

"Life" seems to be the best term available to use.

Only if that's what you mean.


No, there's not. Because it's a simple matter of scientifically verifiable empirical fact

Is that necessarily and always a bad thing?

Our DNA. By definition.

When does that happen?

When an ovum and a sperm come together to create a lifeform with human DNA.

Again, by definition.

When does IT come into our bodies?

What are you babbling about? Will you pick one argument and stick with it?

You're missing the forest for the trees JB. The very title of the article I cited was "When Does Human Life Begin?", in the journal of Developmental Biology online. If it's (the term "life") good enough for those scientists, it's good enough to user on a Message Board.