?TriggerHappy998 wrote:
W00t Pro-choice!
I've always wondered... if a fetus is "alive" at conception, why is it that we choose to celebrate the date of birth instead of the date of conception? Wouldn't that seem more logical if a baby is alive at that time?
Last edited by =TFF=Omen_NataS (2006-06-09 10:57:27)
It just seems awkward to make the argument that everyone is alive at conception yet we don't start counting the days of our lives until we are actually born. So basically 9 months (give or take) of our lives is just... nothingness?Marconius wrote:
Maybe because some parents don't want their kids thinking about what they were up to 9 months before their kids were born?
Good thought.Jinto-sk wrote:
Never
But who's gonna charge next? WWIII sombody said.. hope not I say.LoMaX wrote:
Good thought.Jinto-sk wrote:
Never
Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2006-06-09 11:41:50)
Uhhhhhhhhhhh Marconius, it isn't polite to interrupt the grown-ups when they are talking. Children are to be seen and not heard.Marconius wrote:
Don't you dare bring up the age debate with me. Darth_Fleder has already tried and failed quite succinctly at that. If you can't bring up any argument other than what Churchill said over 50 years ago (based on the ideas of liberalism and conservativism at the time, both which have grossly changed since, especially in this country), then just don't bother. I choose to not remain ignorant of the world's affairs until I'm 40. If you have a problem with that, then so be it. Seriously, what type of world are you trying to create by trying to impress on people only one form of thought due to age differences?
Again, as with what is being discussed in the "Secular" thread at the moment, Morality is based on reason, common sense, and adapting social agreement. You may not particularly feel that aborting a fetus is morally right, but others, including the one responsible for making that ultimate decision (the mother) is in charge of delineating her own morality while understanding the practicality of the situation. Now will you actually respond to my post? Or are you going to go on another "What the fuck is this 21 year old thinking?! And who is He to tell me what's what here?!" rant?
If you live by that mentality then maybe you should stop talking.lowing wrote:
Uhhhhhhhhhhh Marconius, it isn't polite to interrupt the grown-ups when they are talking. Children are to be seen and not heard.Marconius wrote:
Don't you dare bring up the age debate with me. Darth_Fleder has already tried and failed quite succinctly at that. If you can't bring up any argument other than what Churchill said over 50 years ago (based on the ideas of liberalism and conservativism at the time, both which have grossly changed since, especially in this country), then just don't bother. I choose to not remain ignorant of the world's affairs until I'm 40. If you have a problem with that, then so be it. Seriously, what type of world are you trying to create by trying to impress on people only one form of thought due to age differences?
Again, as with what is being discussed in the "Secular" thread at the moment, Morality is based on reason, common sense, and adapting social agreement. You may not particularly feel that aborting a fetus is morally right, but others, including the one responsible for making that ultimate decision (the mother) is in charge of delineating her own morality while understanding the practicality of the situation. Now will you actually respond to my post? Or are you going to go on another "What the fuck is this 21 year old thinking?! And who is He to tell me what's what here?!" rant?
LOL oh my godTriggerHappy998 wrote:
If you live by that mentality then maybe you should stop talking.lowing wrote:
Uhhhhhhhhhhh Marconius, it isn't polite to interrupt the grown-ups when they are talking. Children are to be seen and not heard.Marconius wrote:
Don't you dare bring up the age debate with me. Darth_Fleder has already tried and failed quite succinctly at that. If you can't bring up any argument other than what Churchill said over 50 years ago (based on the ideas of liberalism and conservativism at the time, both which have grossly changed since, especially in this country), then just don't bother. I choose to not remain ignorant of the world's affairs until I'm 40. If you have a problem with that, then so be it. Seriously, what type of world are you trying to create by trying to impress on people only one form of thought due to age differences?
Again, as with what is being discussed in the "Secular" thread at the moment, Morality is based on reason, common sense, and adapting social agreement. You may not particularly feel that aborting a fetus is morally right, but others, including the one responsible for making that ultimate decision (the mother) is in charge of delineating her own morality while understanding the practicality of the situation. Now will you actually respond to my post? Or are you going to go on another "What the fuck is this 21 year old thinking?! And who is He to tell me what's what here?!" rant?
And America says Australia is next.the_heart_attack wrote:
answer : whenever america wants to.GATOR591957 wrote:
I think the question you want to ask is when is it legal to take another's human being's life?
In the hospital thats how it works. The baby is 9 months old when born.=TFF=Omen_NataS wrote:
?TriggerHappy998 wrote:
W00t Pro-choice!
I've always wondered... if a fetus is "alive" at conception, why is it that we choose to celebrate the date of birth instead of the date of conception? Wouldn't that seem more logical if a baby is alive at that time?
Enough America bashing, Berserk. If you have something against the US, fine. Use new and interesting facts to prove it. Otherwise, quite spewing your hate.Berserk_Vampire wrote:
I have no problem with killing terrorists or any one who shoots at you but killing unarmed people and kids thats just the cowardly american way.
Last edited by RAIMIUS (2006-06-09 20:53:16)
^RAIMIUS wrote:
Enough America bashing, Berserk. If you have something against the US, fine. Use new and interesting facts to prove it. Otherwise, quite spewing your hate.Berserk_Vampire wrote:
I have no problem with killing terrorists or any one who shoots at you but killing unarmed people and kids thats just the cowardly american way.
Hey lowing, my grandfather agrees with everything I say. Guess you'd better admit defeat, 'cos he's alot older than you.lowing wrote:
Uhhhhhhhhhhh Marconius, it isn't polite to interrupt the grown-ups when they are talking. Children are to be seen and not heard.
That is unnecessary and disgusting.Berserk_Vampire wrote:
I'm wondering if they raped the dead bodies of the children probably
yeah welllllll......................My DAD can beat up YOUR DAD!!..................................geeeeezzzzBubbalo wrote:
Hey lowing, my grandfather agrees with everything I say. Guess you'd better admit defeat, 'cos he's alot older than you.lowing wrote:
Uhhhhhhhhhhh Marconius, it isn't polite to interrupt the grown-ups when they are talking. Children are to be seen and not heard.
What are you on about?lowing wrote:
yeah welllllll......................My DAD can beat up YOUR DAD!!........................geeeeezzzz
The danger to that is when society would draw the line on the definition of "person". It will be interesting if we get to the point where infants under one can be legally killed because they aren't "people" yet.Marconius wrote:
Abortion is only murder if you can prove that the fetus is indeed a "person" while inside the mother. Difficulty: No religion allowed for this proof.
But Count Dracula disagrees with everything you say.Bubbalo wrote:
Hey lowing, my grandfather agrees with everything I say. Guess you'd better admit defeat, 'cos he's alot older than you.lowing wrote:
Uhhhhhhhhhhh Marconius, it isn't polite to interrupt the grown-ups when they are talking. Children are to be seen and not heard.
Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2006-06-10 04:04:17)
Uh........and we'd get there how exactly?unnamednewbie13 wrote:
The danger to that is when society would draw the line on the definition of "person". It will be interesting if we get to the point where infants under one can be legally killed because they aren't "people" yet.
Theoretical dystopian society. It's a bit of pop-science, deciding when someone's a person and when they are not, and one that could be easily expanded upon and abused.Bubbalo wrote:
Uh........and we'd get there how exactly?unnamednewbie13 wrote:
The danger to that is when society would draw the line on the definition of "person". It will be interesting if we get to the point where infants under one can be legally killed because they aren't "people" yet.
Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2006-06-10 04:07:37)
Only, no. The reason there's debate is we cannot declare something a sentient being until it's, y'know, sentient. Therefore, the issue is how do we determine when the fetus becomes sentient. It isn't so as soon as the sperm and the egg do their thing, but it is so when it comes out. The debate isn't really "Is abortion murder?" so much as "At what point does abortion become murder?".unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Theoretical dystopian society. It's a bit of pop-science, deciding when someone's a person and when they are not, and one that could be easily expanded upon and abused.
I'm waiting.Bubbalo wrote:
Uh-huh. How do you figure that?yerded wrote:
I am guilty, hence better qualified to judge than some.
Last edited by Bubbalo (2006-06-10 04:22:49)