Debate thread (revived)

CompWiz · Post by **CompWiz** » Thu 26 Jan, 2006 7:50 pm

Arcane WIzard wrote:[playingwithwords]

Imagine that you're just your soul, waiting, in that sack of meat we call an embrio, for birth. You have your whole life before you, anything you want to do can still be done, and you are pondering what you will do with the life you will recieve. What would you plan? What's really stopping you?

Ok, so now the anti-abortion team is going to say, death by abortion would stop it all.

I say the soul won't mind as the sack of meat it's visiting hasn't developed any senses yet so it can't notice and will just be suddenly released when the meatsack dies.

Bad to stop the plans, worse to stop those of the person who stopped them.

[/]

we did already say that bringing religion in is a bad idea. However, if a baby has a soul right away, then they are a definite human, seperate from the mother. Killing them would be just like killing a developed person. And how do you know that they don't mind dying? Maybe they lose their chance at life. They had a whole life ahead of them, and then you killed them.

Arcane WIzard · Post by **Arcane WIzard** » Thu 26 Jan, 2006 8:01 pm

we did already say that bringing religion in is a bad idea.

Spiritual concepts do not require a religious framework any more than morals do (I didn't state enough to pinpoint the notions to a religion AFAIK). And we're not leaving morals out of the debate.

However, if a baby has a soul right away, then they are a definite human, seperate from the mother.

Not if animals have souls too.

Killing them would be just like killing a developed person.

Except for the physical differences between the bodies the souls inhabit.

And how do you know that they don't mind dying?

I already said why:

I say the soul won't mind as the sack of meat it's visiting hasn't developed any senses yet so it can't notice and will just be suddenly released when the meatsack dies.

Maybe they lose their chance at life.

Maybe they get another one in another sack of meat.

They had a whole life ahead of them, and then you killed them.

Killed their body.

Timendus · Post by **Timendus** » Thu 26 Jan, 2006 10:05 pm

@Arcane: Flower power all the way, eh?

Love your avatar, by the way

CompWiz wrote:Every time you ride on a rollercoaster, you could die. When you do skydiving, you can die. if you decide that you'd rather have fun, even though you know the risks, then it's your problem if probability doesn't go in your favor.

So you wouldn't mourn over me if I died in a rollercoaster accident? It would just be "my problem if probability doesn't go in my favour"?

"Help me, I'm dying, get a docter!"
"Sorry, kid, if you wanted to live you shouldn't have gotten on that thing"

I hope I don't actually have to explain how this is just plain stupid reasoning?

Arcane WIzard · Post by **Arcane WIzard** » Thu 26 Jan, 2006 10:53 pm

:)

About the chances being tough luck. What if you're going to be born but are aborted? Tough luck, no?

I think someone needs to help CompWiz's side, he's being outnumbered :P

necro · Post by **necro** » Fri 27 Jan, 2006 1:54 am

Arcane, that was briliant. One could say if you got shot up because your wore a fine suit in the red light district, you knew the consequences of advertising wealth to the poor. You knew the risk of getting mugged right? Truth be told, how many children that end up in foster homes and stuff get severly abused and/or mollested. Statistics show their suicide rates are many times greater, as are the chances of them being convicted of most crimes.

If I asked: "How is rape diffrent form concenual sex" youd say "you have a choice." Then you talk about how the fetus doesn't have a choice. However, you are being a hypocrite...you are saying the fetus doesn't have a choice, and this is bad, but if the mother also didn't have a choice to abort it'd be good.

CompWiz · Post by **CompWiz** » Fri 27 Jan, 2006 6:35 pm

Arcane WIzard wrote:
And how do you know that they don't mind dying?
I already said why:
I say the soul won't mind as the sack of meat it's visiting hasn't developed any senses yet so it can't notice and will just be suddenly released when the meatsack dies.

Maybe they lose their chance at life.
Maybe they get another one in another sack of meat.

You just "know" this, how? Don't post your wild speculation here as fact.

They had a whole life ahead of them, and then you killed them.
Killed their body.

Killed their chance at life.

Timendus wrote: So you wouldn't mourn over me if I died in a rollercoaster accident? It would just be "my problem if probability doesn't go in my favour"?

"Help me, I'm dying, get a docter!"
"Sorry, kid, if you wanted to live you shouldn't have gotten on that thing"

I hope I don't actually have to explain how this is just plain stupid reasoning?

Of course we'd mourn over someone who died. But we wouldn't kill someone else so you could have convienience. If you eat too much, you have a chance of getting fat. That doesn't mean that we'd kill someone just so you wouldn't get overweight, if that would solve the problem. That would be putting your convienience over someone elses life.

If I asked: "How is rape diffrent form concenual sex" youd say "you have a choice." Then you talk about how the fetus doesn't have a choice. However, you are being a hypocrite...you are saying the fetus doesn't have a choice, and this is bad, but if the mother also didn't have a choice to abort it'd be good.

While I hate the idea of killing a human, I'd never want to force someone who was raped to bear the child. I would hope that that abortion could happen quickly though, like within a day of being raped. And on a genetic standpoint, I wouldn't want the genes of people who rape people to be spread around.

About the chances being tough luck. What if you're going to be born but are aborted? Tough luck, no?

but wouldn't it be a great idea to pass laws that will prevent people from being allowed to kill babies? We have already have laws that do this for humans, but they aren't inforced for unborn babies. Would you stand by and blame probability for deaths and not make a law against killing?

I think someone needs to help CompWiz's side, he's being outnumbered

Seriously. I really could better use my time to learn asm and make n-game than argue for hours alone against several people. How about this: abortionists: devise between yourselves one argument a day. I will then make one response to that. It will be a time saver for all of this. Or:
@Timendus: Your views are pretty close to mine. Join my side in arguing against abortions for convienience. Getting that would be in my opinion, a major and much needed victory for anti-abortionists.

Arcane WIzard · Post by **Arcane WIzard** » Fri 27 Jan, 2006 6:53 pm

CompWiz wrote:
Arcane WIzard wrote:
And how do you know that they don't mind dying?
I already said why:
I say the soul won't mind as the sack of meat it's visiting hasn't developed any senses yet so it can't notice and will just be suddenly released when the meatsack dies.

Maybe they lose their chance at life.
Maybe they get another one in another sack of meat.
You just "know" this, how? Don't post your wild speculation here as fact.

Why can't I post speculation but you can?

CompWiz wrote:That would be putting your convienience over someone elses life.

And putting someone in prison isn't convenient?

CompWiz wrote:Getting that would be in my opinion, a major and much needed victory for anti-abortionists.

It's a contest?

leofox · Post by **leofox** » Fri 27 Jan, 2006 8:41 pm

While I hate the idea of killing a human, I'd never want to force someone who was raped to bear the child. I would hope that that abortion could happen quickly though, like within a day of being raped.

Morning after pill, anyone?

That's about the first thing some girls do after they have unprotected sex

.

Arcane WIzard · Post by **Arcane WIzard** » Fri 27 Jan, 2006 9:25 pm

Some even after protected and while taking the other pill.

Leumas · Post by **Leumas** » Sat 28 Jan, 2006 9:23 am

Once again, i break in to say.

YOU ALL HAVE ISSUES!!!!!!!!! YOU ARE ACCOMPLISHING NOTHING!!!!!!

but to add something so this isn't deleted

im against abortion, and the majority is for it, or undecided. Polls don't matter so don't bother, because we have a representative democracy, and what they vote is the oppinion of the country, vote them out if you don't like it. Democracy is the MOST oppressive form of government, get over it. That being said, I will now hold all you "liberals" (i hate that word its SO wrong) to your own standards. YOU have to listen to us, because we are a MINORITY. Like it? If you do, you have issues, because that is sarcasim.
Unfortunately Democracy does rule, But the will of people changes, and it will still be unfortunate when the tide switches. Because than the charges will be that the for-life people are oppressing a minority. Intresting that its not oppressing when the minority is considered "conservative"/"closed minded".

Think it over. In 10-20 years the entire world may very well be different, will you arguments still be the same, will they have mattered, will you ever change your oppinion even if you are shown to be wrong? I can guarentee (except for the last one) that ALL of those will be "NOs".

but one parting thought again, since i expect the rest of this to be edited by a mod (although with this thread you can never tell).

The issue of Abortion is a MORALITY thing. Humans are the only creaturest that can be shown to have morality, so in any issue regarding humans morality comes into play. Remember that, you are all attacking other peoples Beliefs, how do you feel now? Are you really the just person you think you are? Are you still right, and does it matter? If you say the truth with the intention of harming others, are you still doing good?
Think about what you are trying to accomplish

As for myself i want to stop the arguing of nothing, i don't care who you think wins, because none of you have.

*Don't bother arguing any of these things, because most or neigther for nor against, but are simple questions, and statements of FACTS, which will never change... plus i based much off of what has already been said, so I will quote others in my deffence*

CoBB · Post by **CoBB** » Sat 28 Jan, 2006 9:47 am

Leumas wrote:Humans are the only creaturest that can be shown to have morality

Since when?

By the way, I think I have a brilliant idea. Everyone should argue passionately for the opposite side. It would surely make the debate much more interesting.

dysfunction · Post by **dysfunction** » Sat 28 Jan, 2006 2:26 pm

Easy enough for me, since I think both sides are right AND wrong

CoBB · Post by **CoBB** » Sat 28 Jan, 2006 2:27 pm

Here you are making the assumption that there are two sides.

dysfunction · Post by **dysfunction** » Sat 28 Jan, 2006 3:09 pm

There are two sides, as well as the ground in between.

CoBB · Post by **CoBB** » Sat 28 Jan, 2006 4:23 pm

And the sky above.