|
Author
|
Topic: Abortion questions...?
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
(1)
| |
| |
| |
Re: Soul Math - 2nd Semester
slevesque writes: Yes, but a baby still can't survive outside the womb if what was given to it inside by the mother isn't still given to it once outside.
There is a point at which the baby can be removed from the womb and get everything it needs from somebody else. That's the point where I would call it a separate entity. After that point, I become steadily less comfortable with aborting it.
slevesque writes: I haven't yet studied the theological aspect of it.
Most opponents of abortion haven't. They have no clear idea of when a biological entity becomes a person. They don't know how to distinguish between a pregnancy caused by love and one caused by rape. But what they don't know doesn't prevent them from telling other people what to do.
"I'm Rory Bellows, I tell you! And I got a lot of corroborating evidence... over here... by the throttle!"
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 172 by slevesque, posted 01-26-2011 3:18 PM | | slevesque has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
Re: Soul Math - 2nd Semester
slevesque writes: So your position is that it is in some way fused to it's mother up until that point ? That the connection between the two is more then just an exchange of nutriments ?
No. My position is that the point at which a fetus becomes a separate entity from its host is an arbitrary one. You have decided arbitrarily that an egg cell doesn't have a soul but a clump of 100 cells does. Based on that arbitrary decision or one similar to it, anti-abortion advocates are willing to call a woman a murderer. Edited by ringo, : Message was too pointy - changed one "point" to "position".
"I'm Rory Bellows, I tell you! And I got a lot of corroborating evidence... over here... by the throttle!"
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 179 by slevesque, posted 01-26-2011 3:55 PM | | slevesque has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
Re: Soul Math - 2nd Semester
slevesque writes: But I haven't truly arbitrarily chosen where I put the line. I have exposed my reasoning on this. You have based your reasoning on our current technological development.
We're talking about souls here and you've admitted that you don't have the answers.
slevesque writes: She is the victim of a society who has lied to her, victim of the man amongst us who think with their dick and not their head.
How has society lied to her? I looks to me like society is at least willing to let her make her own choices. If a man has victimized her, the anti-abortion advocates want to victimize her again by forcing her to carry through the pregnancy. Edited by ringo, : pelling.
"I'm Rory Bellows, I tell you! And I got a lot of corroborating evidence... over here... by the throttle!"
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 190 by slevesque, posted 01-26-2011 4:43 PM | | slevesque has not replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
Message 211 of 403 (602294)
01-27-2011 11:06 AM
|
Reply to: Message 201 by slevesque
01-26-2011 10:51 PM
|
|
slevesque writes: My christian community (less than a thousand people) had already invested over 1 million dollars in haiti well before the earthquake, in a span of ten years.
I know you're not trying to brag and I commend what you are doing but lets put it in perspective: That's a little over a hundred dollars per person per year. It costs several times that much to support just one foster child in a Third World nation.
"I'm Rory Bellows, I tell you! And I got a lot of corroborating evidence... over here... by the throttle!"
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 201 by slevesque, posted 01-26-2011 10:51 PM | | slevesque has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 221 by slevesque, posted 01-27-2011 3:54 PM | | ringo has seen this message but not replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
Re: Evidence?
slevesque writes: I know how society and the government approaches this issue, and I know that someone wanting to bring to terms an unwanted pregnancy will have trouble getting the ressources needed.
You're a part of society. Your approach is part of the problem. You're one of those who is failing to provide the resources. Maybe your Christian community needs to focus some of its efforts closer to home. Instead of complaining about the choices that women make, maybe you need to make the alternatives more attractive.
"I'm Rory Bellows, I tell you! And I got a lot of corroborating evidence... over here... by the throttle!"
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 226 by slevesque, posted 01-28-2011 3:04 PM | | slevesque has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
Re: Evidence?
slevesque writes: Sorry to burst everyone's bubble here, but there is nothing pejorative about calling someone pro-abortion.
If you call somebody something they don't want to be called, that is perjorative (as well as rude). Despite your handy-dandy dictionary definition, I for one am decidedly NOT pro-abortion. I am decidedly ANTI-abortion. But I'm also anti-telling-people-how-to-run-their-lives. I'm pro-keeping-my-nose-out-of-other-people's-business. I'm pro-choice.
"I'm Rory Bellows, I tell you! And I got a lot of corroborating evidence... over here... by the throttle!"
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 235 by slevesque, posted 01-28-2011 4:14 PM | | slevesque has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
Re: Evidence?
slevesque writes: And if the government decided to give more ressources to woman who wanted to keep their babies, I would be the one paying for it.
You said yourself that not enough was being done. So do more. Lobby for higher taxes or do more privately so the government doesn't have to do it for you.
"I'm Rory Bellows, I tell you! And I got a lot of corroborating evidence... over here... by the throttle!"
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 242 by slevesque, posted 01-28-2011 4:35 PM | | slevesque has not replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
Re: Evidence?
slevesque writes: There is certainly a difference between pro-choice and pro-abortion, and when the nuance is needed in one way or another, I just use the appropriate word.
Then do that here.
"I'm Rory Bellows, I tell you! And I got a lot of corroborating evidence... over here... by the throttle!"
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 243 by slevesque, posted 01-28-2011 4:47 PM | | slevesque has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
Re: Evidence?
slevesque writes: So a pro-choice is automatically pro-abortion....
You admit that it's nuanced and then you ignore the nuance. No, pro-choice is not automatically pro-abortion. As I said, I'm anti-abortion. To add yet another analogy, I'm pro-drug-legalization but I'm anti-drug-use. You have to use the nuance whether your pet dictionary mentions it or not. That isn't an EvC exception. It's English. Do it right or expect to be called on it again and again.
"I'm Rory Bellows, I tell you! And I got a lot of corroborating evidence... over here... by the throttle!"
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 253 by slevesque, posted 01-28-2011 5:46 PM | | slevesque has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
Re: Evidence?
slevesque writes: When a creationist comes in with a wrong definition of the word ''evolution'', you correctly refer him to the dictionnary definition of the word. Why can't the same apply here ?
Because you're the one who's misusing the definition. I'm anti-abortion. What part of that do you not understand? How can I be anti-abortion and pro-abortion at the same time?
"I'm Rory Bellows, I tell you! And I got a lot of corroborating evidence... over here... by the throttle!"
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 260 by slevesque, posted 01-28-2011 6:18 PM | | slevesque has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
The definitions you're using are inadequate. There are more precise terms that you can use, so why don't you use them? Edited by ringo, : Fixed quote.
"I'm Rory Bellows, I tell you! And I got a lot of corroborating evidence... over here... by the throttle!"
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 271 by slevesque, posted 01-28-2011 6:45 PM | | slevesque has not replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
Re: step by step
slevesque writes: ... given the right care, could survive outside the womb.
When a five-year-old is deathly ill and "could survive" at great expense, who decides?
"I'm Rory Bellows, I tell you! And I got a lot of corroborating evidence... over here... by the throttle!"
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 321 by slevesque, posted 02-01-2011 4:54 PM | | slevesque has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
Re: step by step
slevesque writes: ringo writes: When a five-year-old is deathly ill and "could survive" at great expense, who decides?
Nobody decides, we do all we can to save him.
You know that isn't true. Every pateint is not kept on life-support forever. How about an honest answer? Who decides?
"I'm Rory Bellows, I tell you! And I got a lot of corroborating evidence... over here... by the throttle!"
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 324 by slevesque, posted 02-01-2011 5:09 PM | | slevesque has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
Re: step by step
slevesque writes: If everything has been done and tried, then the closest relatives decide to let him die. Note the important difference between ''letting him die'' and ''actively causing it's death''.
Yes, that was the criterion that I proposed earlier in the thread. If the fetus has a reasonable chance of survival outside the womb, I personally am less comfortable with aborting it. So if the closest relatives - e.g. the mother - get to decide how much effort goes into saving a five-year-old child, why should complete strangers get to decide the fate of a five-week-old fetus?
"I'm Rory Bellows, I tell you! And I got a lot of corroborating evidence... over here... by the throttle!"
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 328 by slevesque, posted 02-01-2011 5:28 PM | | slevesque has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
|
Message 341 of 403 (602976)
02-01-2011 11:33 PM
|
Reply to: Message 336 by slevesque
02-01-2011 9:53 PM
|
|
slevesque writes: But I did not say the mother decides how much effort is put into saving the life. I said that, as a collectivity, who should decide that the maximum effort should be put into saving every human life.
I didn't ask you who "should" decide. I asked you who does decide. And I asked you why the decision "should" be placed in different hands for a fetus than for a five-year-old.
slevesque writes: You are looking at it from the wrong angle, it is not about ''complete strangers deciding''. It is about the collectivity as a society needing to speak for those who cannot speak, defend those who are defenseless.
The "collectivity" are complete strangers. You want them to make decision "for" a defenseless fetus and against a defenseless woman. What most people in this thread are saying is that the woman should be allowed to make the decision.
slevesque writes: Same with a foetus. If we agree that it is a human being....
But we don't agree on that.
"I'm Rory Bellows, I tell you! And I got a lot of corroborating evidence... over here... by the throttle!"
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 336 by slevesque, posted 02-01-2011 9:53 PM | | slevesque has replied |
|
™ Version 4.2