Jump to content


Photo
* - - - - 2 votes

Blood on the hands of pro-abortionists... "deal with it"


  • Please log in to reply
199 replies to this topic

#76 carpantherfan84

carpantherfan84

    Abductive Reasoner

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,577 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 07:32 PM

in principle i agree with you. i remain very uncommitted either way on the issue of abortion because it's such a precarious question philosophically. i tend to err on the side of caution on this one; i don't believe that a tiny cluster of cells = a human being, but at the same time the question of where you draw the line, where you define that singular moment when a mass of tissue becomes a human, is an incredibly sticky one and fraught with philosophical and ethical peril.

i am content to admit that for the moment i do not know the answer.


I could live with that. That is the most honest and logical way to look at it. I stated before that to look at a loved one who had become a victim of some heinous act... there is no way of knowing what I would agree to in order to stop their pain. But I also work very closely with people who have dedicated their life to self sacrifice and live by the principle of "So Others May Live".

This is a hard one. But if there is any issue that would cause action, this should be it. I mean whatever the right way is, I have to believe that the law got this one wrong.

#77 carpantherfan84

carpantherfan84

    Abductive Reasoner

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,577 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 07:35 PM

Besides having laws against it, making people aware of said laws, & prosecuting those who break said laws, there is no way to stop it.


I'm sorry, but for me it is just not enough.

#78 Nicks To The Colts

Nicks To The Colts

    shitpost around the clock

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,300 posts
  • LocationChapel Hill

Posted 11 April 2013 - 07:38 PM

Let me tell you this. My mom had three miscarriages. Each one sent her into near emotional breakdown. My wife had a miscarriage and it devastated her. Truly devastated. For her it was a life. Just as alive as the 5 year old we have or the baby she carries inside her now. If we could have buried the child we would have. For us it was alive. We have done something special that only she and I know, that we will never tell anyone, something that helps us remember and keep close the child we never got to see. She was 8 weeks.

My wife does not share my belief. She does not believe that she would do it herself but she says that she could understand a woman that would do it because of rape or incest. How can both be true? How can she know in her heart that her child was lost yet empathize with a woman that would abort a baby???

And the reason is because this is not about whether or not life happens at a certain point. It should be but it isn't. This argument is about women not wanting to be pregnant. And what it would take for them to choose that over their child. Not every woman has that point but for some it is very easy. And the law has made it even easier. But no, I don't respect my wife any less because of her beliefs. In my house we talk to each other.


i'm trying to illustrate a dilemma, not hurt your feelings.

#79 Nicks To The Colts

Nicks To The Colts

    shitpost around the clock

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,300 posts
  • LocationChapel Hill

Posted 11 April 2013 - 07:42 PM

banning abortion is demonstrably the most wrong way to approach this matter.

what things were like before roe v. wade is well documented and it wasn't pretty. if you think that we have a problem with the law failing us now, you haven't seen anything.

#80 carpantherfan84

carpantherfan84

    Abductive Reasoner

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,577 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 07:46 PM

i'm trying to illustrate a dilemma, not hurt your feelings.


Lol. It is interesting that you would say that. I had a conversation with a coworker today where he basically said that I seem to be offended when people disagree. I assure you that is not the case. I am however idealistic and passionate. I believe in right and wrong and I would gladly give my life to save another. (well I have a family nowso obviously I live for them, but I do still have a pretty dangerous occupation that might require me to fulfill that statement) So for me this is not about proving a point. It is not about winning an argument. It is not about liberals and conservatives, dems, or reps or anything else. It is not about women's rights or w/e.

It is just about killing babies, which bothers me.

#81 Nicks To The Colts

Nicks To The Colts

    shitpost around the clock

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,300 posts
  • LocationChapel Hill

Posted 11 April 2013 - 07:52 PM

Lol. It is interesting that you would say that. I had a conversation with a coworker today where he basically said that I seem to be offended when people disagree. I assure you that is not the case. I am however idealistic and passionate. I believe in right and wrong and I would gladly give my life to save another. (well I have a family nowso obviously I live for them, but I do still have a pretty dangerous occupation that might require me to fulfill that statement) So for me this is not about proving a point. It is not about winning an argument. It is not about liberals and conservatives, dems, or reps or anything else. It is not about women's rights or w/e.

It is just about killing babies, which bothers me.


i don't like to bring personal stories into the matter. i believe it colors one's perspective and that's one of the worst things to do when you're talking about policy decisions that affect millions of people.

i've known plenty of girls who've had abortions. girls who were raped, 15 and 16 year olds who were fuged and hung out to dry by men they thought loved them only to be subsequently called sluts and spit on by self righteous protestors when they went to do the deed, good christian girls who thought they'd met the man they were going to marry and would have never in a million years "killed their baby", and so on. but i don't think their stories have any bearing on the debate in the macro sense. it's certainly influenced my personal feelings regarding abortion but they are ultimately small compared to a greater pragmatism that's supposed to influence US law.

#82 Bronn

Bronn

    Sellsword

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,631 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 08:14 PM

The problem with this topic and lots of others in the Tinderbox is:

There are some people that just don't grasp that people, by their nature, are very primitive, selfish, arrogant, and sometimes downright bloodthirsty.

Sure, it'd be great to shield us all from the things some of us see as bad in life like guns, abortion, the death penalty, poverty, etc. etc. etc. but the point people continually fail to realize is that there is no Utopia. This world and the people in it are poo. You can try all you want to do what is best for yourself and your loved ones, but there are always going to be people out there that disagree with your views or either downright don't care about anyone or anything.

This means what you perceive as bad will never cease to exist. No matter how hard you try, you can never save mankind from itself. Why else do you think "savior" mythos spring up. Why do you think people need "fellowship" with each other. It is because we have an innate fear of the outside world, and have a desire or need for someone or something to save us from it.

Don't like abortions? Don't get one. That should be the end of it. Stop trying to meddle in the lives of others based on your own world view.

#83 carpantherfan84

carpantherfan84

    Abductive Reasoner

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,577 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 08:16 PM

banning abortion is demonstrably the most wrong way to approach this matter.

what things were like before roe v. wade is well documented and it wasn't pretty. if you think that we have a problem with the law failing us now, you haven't seen anything.


I am aware of the risks, or rather the extremes that women will go through IOT have the abortion.
But is a self inflicted wound, no matter how severe, not still self-inflicted. We do not as a society treat suicides, attempted suicides, or assisted suicides as if we are talking about a victim. We get mental help to those we can. We sit with them. We comfort them. We counsel them. We attempt to get them to address, fix, or live with the pain they feel, or show them that it is not worth taking their life. Because their life, no matter how bad is still valuable.

i don't like to bring personal stories into the matter. i believe it colors one's perspective and that's one of the worst things to do when you're talking about policy decisions that affect millions of people.

i've known plenty of girls who've had abortions. girls who were raped, 15 and 16 year olds who were fuged and hung out to dry by men they thought loved them only to be subsequently called sluts and spit on by self righteous protestors when they went to do the deed, good christian girls who thought they'd met the man they were going to marry and would have never in a million years "killed their baby", and so on. but i don't think their stories have any bearing on the debate in the macro sense. it's certainly influenced my personal feelings regarding abortion but they are ultimately small compared to a greater pragmatism that's supposed to influence US law.


In that case what should be the law? Do you really think that 20 weeks is still within acceptable limits. What do you feel should influence the law. I believe it is a question of when life happens. Which is immeasurable so no one has the right to kill it. You stated here that the feelings of the woman should not influence the law. What should?

#84 carpantherfan84

carpantherfan84

    Abductive Reasoner

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,577 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 08:28 PM

The problem with this topic and lots of others in the Tinderbox is:

There are some people that just don't grasp that people, by their nature, are very primitive, selfish, arrogant, and sometimes downright bloodthirsty.

Sure, it'd be great to shield us all from the things some of us see as bad in life like guns, abortion, the death penalty, poverty, etc. etc. etc. but the point people continually fail to realize is that there is no Utopia. This world and the people in it are poo. You can try all you want to do what is best for yourself and your loved ones, but there are always going to be people out there that disagree with your views or either downright don't care about anyone or anything.

This means what you perceive as bad will never cease to exist. No matter how hard you try, you can never save mankind from itself. Why else do you think "savior" mythos spring up. Why do you think people need "fellowship" with each other. It is because we have an innate fear of the outside world, and have a desire or need for someone or something to save us from it.

Don't like abortions? Don't get one. That should be the end of it. Stop trying to meddle in the lives of others based on your own world view.


Is there really nothing you would fight for? No cause that you would lay your life on the line for? Does nothing strike you at the heart? I find that hard to believe, no matter how cynical you are claiming to be.

I don't know if people are good or bad, but I do believe in right and wrong. And I believe that some things are worth fighting for. Don't you understand, it is not about winning, no greater accomplishment is achieved than the dedication of ones life to the well being of others. It is not just a religious sentiment to say that one should not stand idly by while bad things happen or atrocities are inflicted on the helpless, no matter who you consider helpless.

#85 Bronn

Bronn

    Sellsword

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,631 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 08:34 PM

There's a huge difference in what you might see as bad or atrocious or right/wrong and what someone else might see as bad or atrocious or right/wrong..

Abortion is a personal decision that needs no input from anyone other than the person(s) involved. Period.

There's plenty I would fight for. I don't "fight for causes" though. That's terribly cliche in this day and age. It is usually a veiled political front to bleed money from people for lobbying needs.

#86 carpantherfan84

carpantherfan84

    Abductive Reasoner

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,577 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 08:58 PM

There's a huge difference in what you might see as bad or atrocious or right/wrong and what someone else might see as bad or atrocious or right/wrong..

Abortion is a personal decision that needs no input from anyone other than the person(s) involved. Period.

There's plenty I would fight for. I don't "fight for causes" though. That's terribly cliche in this day and age. It is usually a veiled political front to bleed money from people for lobbying needs.


Even though you said that I know you don't believe it. If what you say was true, then what the Dr. did would be okay. If abortion was truly so private a matter there would be no limit to the amount of time a woman has to abort a child. But once again, anyone can see that that would not be right. We all feel that what the Dr. did was wrong. Why is that? He wasn't kidnapping women and aborting their babies. They all sought him out. Why did these women not have the "right" to abort their pregnancy and the other women did.

#87 Nicks To The Colts

Nicks To The Colts

    shitpost around the clock

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,300 posts
  • LocationChapel Hill

Posted 11 April 2013 - 09:06 PM

I am aware of the risks, or rather the extremes that women will go through IOT have the abortion.
But is a self inflicted wound, no matter how severe, not still self-inflicted. We do not as a society treat suicides, attempted suicides, or assisted suicides as if we are talking about a victim. We get mental help to those we can. We sit with them. We comfort them. We counsel them. We attempt to get them to address, fix, or live with the pain they feel, or show them that it is not worth taking their life. Because their life, no matter how bad is still valuable.


i don't like to play games of philosophical grab ass when it comes to abortion. history has proven that, at least in the context of the US, banning the procedure is useless if your end goal is to make the kermit gosnells of the world vanish.

i want abortion to be treated as a legitimate medical procedure that is subject to tight regulatory oversight. that's the best way to address this problem because it directly hits the main failure that allowed this to happen. had regulators done their jobs, kermit gosnell would have been shut down possibly decades ago. and no, half baked open-ended crap legislation forcing abortion providers to get admitting privileges in an environment where hospitals don't want to be dragged into a "political debate" and trans vaginal wands aren't going to accomplish anything.

In that case what should be the law? Do you really think that 20 weeks is still within acceptable limits. What do you feel should influence the law. I believe it is a question of when life happens. Which is immeasurable so no one has the right to kill it. You stated here that the feelings of the woman should not influence the law. What should?


remember how i talked about not liking philosophical grab ass? well, since you're pushing things in that direction, i'm about to get grab-assey. this is going to be a lot of text. you've been warned.

i was talking about how small my feelings and life experiences are in the general sense compared to the millions of people who are affected by any given law at the federal level. doubly so since i'm a man and will never actually have the procedure performed on me. where on earth did you get the notion that i was implying that the feelings of a woman shouldn't matter? what kind of subtext are you reading in to this?

if anything a woman's opinion on the issue is more qualified than mine. the reason that i mentioned that their experiences don't have any bearing on the issue is because their lives and political power are a drop in the bucket in the wider context of the united states which is in no way arguing that they don't matter in the sense that i/nobody should care. i still have feelings and i still have opinions on the matter. for example, i don't agree with intact dilation and extraction (what pro lifers call "partial birth abortion") but, pragmatically speaking, banning it is little more than a feel-good measure because it represents something like 0.17% of all abortions with a statistically significant number of those likely being medically necessary and not elective. again, see my appeal to pragmatism. of course, someone could easily come back at me with the accusation that i'm "condoning murder" and that .00000000001% of all abortions being "murder" should be too many for any civilized person or the like but you may note that i didn't actually call it that myself. it is, however, too close for me, personally.

my problem with the "WHEN DOES LIFE BEGIN HUH ABORTIONISTS???" circle jerk and various offshoot arguments along with fetal personhood bills pushed by social conservatives lies with the enormous legal problems and deep contradictions inherent within the rhetoric. first of all, advocates of such measures still have to point to a time when "life begins" because a law without such parameters is utterly useless and impossible to enforce. second, saying that a fetus is a "baby" or "child" implies that it has rights. duh, right? i mean, this is a right to life debate, isn't it? this is the crux of the miscarriage point i brought up earlier: do we create another category for fetuses where we effectively say that, yeah, they're people but they're subject to spontaneous death for no reason so law enforcement shouldn't investigate every miscarriage as a possible murder/manslaughter? in this situation, you're still making a judgment call on what a "life" is worth and acting accordingly. should a woman who doesn't know she's pregnant and engages in some kind of stressful activity and subsequently miscarries be subject to negligent homicide? could pregnant women claim personal exemptions when filing taxes for unborn children? could they demand social security numbers for them? do we add 9 months to everybody's life? people have a lot more rights outside of the right to not be killed. half of this sounds stupid as poo but they're now plausible at least philosophically if we're bent on fetal personhood.

ultimately, how late in a pregnancy that i feel abortion should be acceptable doesn't matter. truth is, i'd love it if there was never another abortion performed. my main problem is that all of the measures that have been introduced to supposedly make the procedure cease to exist have been complete pieces of poo and would be useless for achieving their stated objective.

#88 carpantherfan84

carpantherfan84

    Abductive Reasoner

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,577 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 09:57 PM

i don't like to play games of philosophical grab ass when it comes to abortion. history has proven that, at least in the context of the US, banning the procedure is useless if your end goal is to make the kermit gosnells of the world vanish.

I am truly willing to do anything to make something like this never happen again, anything short of trading a child's life for someone else's comfort.

where on earth did you get the notion that i was implying that the feelings of a woman shouldn't matter? what kind of subtext are you reading in to this


it's certainly influenced my personal feelings regarding abortion but they are ultimately small compared to a greater pragmatism that's supposed to influence US law.


If I misinterpreted I apologize. If I understand you correctly, the logical or "pragmatic solution would be to make it a legitimate medical procedure. Sounds good, only if there is only one patient. Do you disagree? Would it still be a simple procedure if the fetus was considered a patient as well. (fwi the term fetus is applied from week 10 until birth)



forgive me for saving page space.


ultimately, how late in a pregnancy that i feel abortion should be acceptable doesn't matter.

are you similarly neutral on everything. Gun laws, health care, taxes etc...


truth is, i'd love it if there was never another abortion performed. my main problem is that all of the measures that have been introduced to supposedly make the procedure cease to exist have been complete pieces of poo.


Wouldn't we all.

#89 logic1977

logic1977

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 385 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 10:15 PM

here's another twist to the debate i'd be interested in.
Most people already agree that there is a certain point at which abortions shouldn't be allowed. Even though i have seen accusations to the contrary, i haven't actually seen any pro-choice people say they disagree with that.

If that's the case, then what is the process we should use for drawing the line at which an abortion becomes not allowed.
Science hasn't been able to produce an answer.

I think we can't look to religion just due to the fact that we shouldn't force any one religion's views on all.

So how do you go about setting the criteria? Not really looking for "I believe the line should be XXX because......."

Looking for how do you develop the rules coming up with the line

#90 BBQ&Beer

BBQ&Beer

    The good actor

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,965 posts
  • LocationMissouri

Posted 11 April 2013 - 11:51 PM

I'm sorry, but for me it is just not enough.

K.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.