Fair Abortion Discussions

2006-08-05 [tuff ghost]: Oh, hush.

The egg thing brings up an interesting point. Many
vegetarians eat eggs. That was my point. Extrapolate.

2006-08-05 [Fizban]: eggs, that were never fertalized, thus never had any potential to become anything without some male roosters around. No baby, no baby death. 

Either way, in male seahorses they are the ones that have the sperm...yet carry the babies as well. They in a large sense, were definetly designed to be incubators. Especially since they are fish, with literal eggs.

2006-08-05 [M_Sinner]: "Oh, hush..." I'll have to remember that debating technique in college...

When you get to the point of eggs I think that it would be just the same as eating any other animal, with all the implications. Most eggs that are eaten by the general populace, though (including vegetarians, I would think) are unfertalized. As such, I don't think that they're living.

2006-08-05 [Fizban]: they aren't or else, you wouldnt have an egg and a yolk come out...you would have a fetus, or a deformed egg yolk, thats bloody lol.

Vegatarians, dont just eat vegatables, they just dont eat meat. Eating eggs is fine, unless you are...*cant remember the name*--then they eat nothing of anything that comes from animals, no milk, no eggs, no nothing.

2006-08-05 [Fizban]: oh lord, sine, you are right. This can get ugly...the messages, have no limit to word amount. This make RP'ing in the messages much better...but oppourtunities for others, much worse.

2006-08-05 [M_Sinner]: I think that those are Vegans, but I've heard another word that means kind of the same thing, and that might be the word you're looking for... we would probably be able to remember if it wasn't one in the morning (at least where I am)

2006-08-05 [ceridwen]: ... So what does eating eggs have to with abortions? xP Sorry... I'm trying to catch up, but I got lost.

2006-08-05 [M_Sinner]: Yeah... it wasn't exactly a smoothe transition. Ask Annakin why we're talking about eggs. He's the only one in the world that would know why he brought us to this subject.

2006-08-05 [tuff ghost]: She* Seems we're gender confused. I thought you were a girl for the longest time.

And I was tired too.
Think.... 3-4ish in the morning.

2006-08-06 [Dil*]: I can't believe you described a woman as a lump of tissue, damn, I find that insulting. NO! okay! A woman is not comparable to a damned zygote, a damned zygote can't even appreciate it's rights being taken away.

What trimester are you argueing for? Some idiots want to ban the day after pill. 

2006-08-06 [M_Sinner]: Oh... that's right. It can't understand what's being taken away. Well, for that matter, neither can a newborn kid. True memories don't really start until around the age of three. So, for that matter, they can't technically understand anything until that point. So, I guess that a woman should be able to take a baby for a test run, and as long as she decides whether she wants it or not before 3 years old, it can be killed.

Or what about retarded people?! It could be argued taht they don't fully understand their rights, either? Time for some euthenasia! Take that burden off the state!

We're all lumps of tissue, Dil. You, me, fiz, all of us. Sorry to put it so bluntly, but when you're speaking biologically, that's just the truth.

As far as what trimester I'm arguing for, I'm not exactly positive. Like I said, I perfer that it doesn't happen at all. I think that most times when an abortion occurse (with a few obvious exceptions) it stems from someone's selfishness. For me, if I must draw a cuttoff point, it would be when measurable brain waves begin from the unborn child. But that's a point of debate, with both sides vieing for more time in their direction (pro-lifers claiming that it starts within 6 weeks and pro-choicers saying that it doesn't being until the third trimester, depending on where you read).

2006-08-07 [ceridwen]: ... Wow. I think I'm the only female here that isn't getting offended.

Geh... So... You want want women to have abortions because itself? Then we should make shopping too much illegal as well, because that's selfish. We should make mothers working too late just to get a bigger office illegal as well... That's damn sure selfish. We can't ban something just because it's selfish... It doesn't make sense.

2006-08-07 [tuff ghost]: Children under the age of 3 certainly have self awareness. As do the cognatively disabled. I mean, what a low shot to take. 

2006-08-07 [Fizban]: I dont think working for something is selfish lol. I think working for a bigger office shows initiative and work ethic.

Also, being selfish with how much money you spend and being selfish with someones life is to me, a completely different and un-comprable situation.

Also, he is saying its the selfish ones that are intolerable...its not because its selfish, its because they ahve no other needs or motives...

if they were raped, or forced, or tricked, or going to die if they didnt have the abortion, some estranged situation, then it wouldnt be so bad.

however its the killing for your own selfish purposes...to me and sine thats selfishly inexcuseable, and the times with abortion is intolerable to us.

I beleive I covered you correctly on that sine...

2006-08-07 [tuff ghost]: Hm. Not just selfish.  An unwanted child drains many things.
A.) Mother's health and ability to earn money at her job (for a while)
B.) Possibly mother's life
C.) Insurance companies to pay for hospital stay (mother and child) or an uninsured family would have to pay those ridiculous rates itself...
D.) Staffing at hospital
E.) space in foster care
F.) adoptive home that could have gone to another child
G.) drain on economy and natural resources
H.) overpopulation, in general
and I.) I don't know if this is true, or not, but it makes sense that children put up for adoption and/or foster care would have a higher crime rate, with all the moving around and such. don't bash me for this one, because it's just a thought.

2006-08-07 [Fizban]: overpopulation is the reason I am fine with it...abortion in general, our society needs it.

mother shouldnt have screwed around unsafely if they didnt want to face the consequences...

consequences shouldnt be a dead baby either....oys.

Thats what I mean by selfish.

2006-08-07 [ceridwen]: Ah... But it's not always because the mother screwed around. That's just the assumption one makes. The mother could have only been with her husband, but she's divorced now, or her husbands dead and she doesn't think she can handle having a child. It's not always for some terrible reason. We shouldn't let some suffer because of the stupidity of others.

Geh... See, the problem with only allowing special cases, such as rape victims, is the proof. A woman would have to prove that she was in fact raped. I don't think we should make that woman go through that. It's like going to trial for it, only she just doesn't want the baby. She doesn't want to be a witness against some creep, she just doesn't want his child in her. She shouldn't have to prove anything to us.

And that's my problem with North Dakota. They banned all abortions, even those special cases. Which is insnae. They'd rather put a mentally retarded woman through pregnancy and birth, who probably can't handle it physically along with mentally, then get rid of that little lump of tissue. Geh... It really gets my goat.

2006-08-07 [M_Sinner]: Okay, I haven't read everything on here yet, but this is what I read first: "Geh... So... You want want women to have abortions because itself? Then we should make shopping too much illegal as well, because that's selfish. We should make mothers working too late just to get a bigger office illegal as well... That's damn sure selfish. We can't ban something just because it's selfish... It doesn't make sense."-- ceridwen.

Except in the other cases, there isn't the harm of another involved. But that's what this ALL comes down to, I suppose, "Is the Fetus a living thing." I believe it is, and that's why I think that the DEATH OF ANOTHER because of selfishness is atrocious. If it's just a lump of tissue, then selfishness in destroying it is certainly normal. Not to be mean, but try to see things from beyond your own point of view.

"Children under the age of 3 certainly have self awareness. As do the cognatively disabled. I mean, what a low shot to take. "-- Annakin. Depends on who you're talking to. From what I read, we weren't arguing that they don't have cognitive awareness. We were arguing that they don't even understand teh rights that are being denied them. How much did YOU understand as a one-year old?

Fizban-- Indeed, you did cover my beliefs quite well. Thank you. ^_^

Annakin, points C, D, G, and H can also be applied to the retired. Make your own conclusion from that information. =P Points E, F, and I assume that the child is going to be put up for adoption. 

"The mother could have only been with her husband, but she's divorced now, or her husbands dead and she doesn't think she can handle having a child."-- Ceridwen. If it's a divorce, then child support is still being paid. If it's the death of a husband, then why cause more death? Certianly, it will be ard to raise the child, but that's just another risk that is taken when you decide to have sex. Pleanty of horrible shit happens every day. The "Choice" was made, and I don't see why someone should be protected from the consequences. That would be remotely akin to investing in a buisiness, and then thinking that you should be re-imbursed when the buisinesss goes under.

Yes. They made that law thinking "Haha! Kill two birds with one stone! Get rid of those damned retards while bringing more babies into the world!!! HAHAHAHA!" When policy is made, the gov't doesn't often take into account the exceptions. Moronic, yes. But time would be better spent trying to get that repealed instead of typing away angrilly about it in a chatroom that 5 out of 300 Million people see.

2006-08-07 [Dil*]: Sine, I don't deny that abortions can be 'immoral' or 'selfish', -but- we just believe in the right to have one, if you're not argueing against banning abortions or forcing women to give birth, then you're not really argueing pro-life that much.

there can be a dispute about when abortions should be illegal, I personally think it's 3rd trimester because that's when brain waves begin, and it is pointless to have an abortion at that time because it's just as harmful physically anyways. Unless of course it is rape or a possible threat to the well-being of the mother (possiblility of dying giving birth).

2006-08-08 [ceridwen]: So... women shouldn't be able to have sex if they don't want to raise a child? That is an outdated point of view... Women may haven been designed to give birth, but we don't have to. That's the beauty of our society. Saying that we should only have sex if we want kids is a huge step backwards.

Geh... Child support; it isn't always paid, and it's sometimes hard to get from an unwilling father. And... that's not what I meant when I said the mother doesn't think she can raise the child. I meant she may not be emotionally stable enough to go through with the pregnancy. And more death? That all depends on when you think life begins.

Abortion is not about protecting anyone form the consequences. A mother could have used birth control, have been completely faithful to one man, and still gotten pregnant. But for some reason, she isn't emotionally or physically stable enough to go trough with everything. Also, having an abortion is no easy thing. It takes it's toll on the mother. But if she feels that she can go though with it, and that it's the better of the two options, then that's her choice. It's not for the government to decide.

(I hope I'm making sense. I can get a bit... scattered in my thinking some time. So... if you're confused, just ask me and I'll try to explain it again.)

2006-08-08 [Fizban]: And sine and I agree with you on that point. That it is the mothers choice, and because there are definetly times where abortions shouldnt be denied (like we were saying, when there may be damage to the baby or the mother that could be horribly detrimental or causing of death,...or if the woman was raped, I personally would say keep the baby, but I would fully understnad if you didn't want to have a child you couldnt love becuase thinking about them, only made you think of the horrible person who inflicted the child upon you)

Neither Sine or I are arguing that abortions should be made illegal, for we both understand that there needs to be a choice and others morals shouldn't be dictating the actions of those people without those morals.

However...we are both trying to arguing the immorality of abortion, and expression our mutual sentiment...

that when its not some mother who can't bear to have a child, or a mother that cant handle it...

when its a mother that simply had sex without being prepared that she could become pregnant...
ran the risk of pregnancy, and doesnt want to face the fact that now she created..CREATED life...that should would then be responsible for.

She terminates the life becuase she doesn't want to deal with it. Because it's too much of a bother. Because she would let it ruin her life...because she is selfish and careless, and doesn't want to take responsibility.

It's the same as a guy walking away from his pregnant girlfriend...It's selfish and self centered.

Yet no one would ever argue that the guy is right...no one would ever argue that he shouldn't be forced to stay and watch after his child and his girlfriend at least a little.

he is walking away from the baby...

she is walking away from the baby...

everyone would call the guy a horrible person because he was dicking around and wasnt ready to face the consequences of if he got some girl pregnant...

Killing the baby, or abandoning the baby, they are both irresponsible and horrible in my eyes...I am not longer speaking for sine here, if you noticed he hadn't said any of this stuff.

However, I digress back to the original point I was making.

Both of us understand the need,...but are still going to argue the morality...

like the point on when they get there rights...everyone is a lump of tissue, we are being choosey about which lumps get what rights when...I dont feel thats fair.