08-11-2003 21:26									#91
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger Why not? Have you tried to put a mirror in front of an infant? It recognises itself.

not before the rapid head-growth, he doesn't.

Let's throw him in the dumpster.

	08-11-2003 21:38									#92
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Elok GePap: it is Nietzsche-babble because it ignores an actual issue by making broad psychoanalytical generalizations about the human race, and in the process implies that the question asked is beneath you. I didn't ask you about the development of society and why we stupid Americans are narrow-minded. If we are wrong and it is better to think of things in terms of demographic consequences like the wise people in India, please explain why. If, on the other hand, you're doing one of those "there is no absolute truth" things, why are you even arguing?

I must wonder where the hell you draw your implications from..cause they seem to come out of left field-must be that anti-Kane side of you.

Abortion is part of reproductive policy, just like defining what is murder or not is part of crimnal policy..and if people start trying to decide that policy should be base don moral absolutes that do NOT exists, then one is basing policy on a foundation of smoke..and what happens to such edifices? Personally, I prefer policy to come from more sensible realms.

THe fact is that Roe v Wade was a problematic decision, becuase it turned the aboriton battle into a constitutional ojne instead of a legislative one, which it should not be. I support the ability of women to get abortions..is it a right? NO, no more than there is some nebulous "right to life".

	08-11-2003 21:44									#93
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Azazel not before the rapid head-growth, he doesn't. Let's throw him in the dumpster.

I have never seen any cites to that effect. But if that's the case, I completely agree.

	08-11-2003 21:47									#94
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Elok There's no pat analogy here, but nobody's ever explained to me why it doesn't matter that one becomes the other.

If you don't think there's a difference between the two, you have to agree that there is nothing wrong with murder. After all, we are all going to die, right?

	09-11-2003 03:08									#95
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by GePap I must wonder where the hell you draw your implications from..cause they seem to come out of left field-must be that anti-Kane side of you. Abortion is part of reproductive policy, just like defining what is murder or not is part of crimnal policy..and if people start trying to decide that policy should be base don moral absolutes that do NOT exists, then one is basing policy on a foundation of smoke..and what happens to such edifices? Personally, I prefer policy to come from more sensible realms. THe fact is that Roe v Wade was a problematic decision, becuase it turned the aboriton battle into a constitutional ojne instead of a legislative one, which it should not be. I support the ability of women to get abortions..is it a right? NO, no more than there is some nebulous "right to life".

GePap, for once, you and I are in complete agreement. Abortion is a legislative matter or a matter that should be decided by the people in a direct referendum such as we have here in "Kali"-fornia.

The Supremes started down this "privacy" path earlier when they declared statutes regulating private sexual activity unconstitutional. Do you also believe the Supremes should or should have stayed out of this area? You cannot have one without the other.

	09-11-2003 03:40									#96
	Remove this text

quote: You are begging the question, because you are already assuming the "unborn child" is a person.

And you are assuming that the unbron child is not. Please rebut my earlier argument where I explain why the unborn child is a person.

	09-11-2003 03:44									#97
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

UR:

And how do you know that an unborn child will not recognise himself in the womb?

Theben:

quote: Maybe men could force women to have babies if women could force men to have vasectomies.

Ah, but that would only work during the case of rape. Do you agree we should ban all other abortions?

	09-11-2003 03:54									#98
	Support Apolyton

Ned:

You fail to understand my critique. All pregnancies have a marginal risk of death, though hardly substantial. Does this mean that everyone has the right to kill someone just because their life may be at risk?

If someone approaches you with a black object in his hand, does that give you the right to shoot him in the head, killing him? No.

A better wording of your policy would be to name the specific conditions, of which the only one common is ectopic pregnancy. I agree that where we have an ectopic pregnancy that because we cannot save both lives, we ought to save the one that we can, the mother. At this point in time, we cannot save the life of the unborn child in this situation.

It's not about a balance of lives, but that we can save one life rather than letting two die.

	09-11-2003 03:59									#99
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Ned:

quote: I think will eventually permit deformed and genetically diseased infants to die rather than to allow them to suffer horribly until they do die. Not pulling the plug under these circumstances in my view is inhumane.

Okay. Why don't you start by killing all those downs syndrome children, the spastics, those with cystic fibrosis, the deaf, the blind who all have genetic causes for their afflictions? It would save society plenty of money, and spare them from suffering.

Is this humane?

	09-11-2003 04:12									#100
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi Theben: Ah, but that would only work during the case of rape. Do you agree we should ban all other abortions?

Read my earlier post regarding my views on abortion (the one you haven't answered).

And if you think I'm kidding about the vasectomies, think again. If vasectomies were 100% reversible, I'd call for legislation to have all male children snipped at the age of 12. You can get 'em put back to normal when you want kids, starting at age 21.

No more unwanted pregnancies, except the odd f-up.

	09-11-2003 04:13									#101
	Tired of ads?

quote: Sure why not. I'm positive that the majority will ask for what I believe in: no interference with 1st trimester abortions, 2nd trimester abortions requriing some oversight, and no 3rd, unless the life of the mother is in danger, or in case of rape. Would you and all other Christians be satisfied with that result?

I would accept the result if and only if you get a different ruling that you would be willing to abide by that result.

NO changing the rules after the referendum has started if the results are not in your favour, as common here in Canada.

"I won by the rules, but the rules always change when I win. "

	09-11-2003 04:27									#102
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Azazel I haven't formulated my own opinion, so expect me to criticize the opinions of both sides, to put the to test, sort of speaking.

Same here.

	09-11-2003 04:32									#103
	Increase the size of your Attachments

St. Swithin:

quote: potentially thinking, living, air-breathing human being

Not potentially living. If the unborn were already dead, why would one need an abortion? You are either dead or living.

quote: should have the right to say what can live in her body and what can't.

Good point. What is the unborn? If the unborn is a person, then she too has the right to do what she would with her body.

quote: If it were solely the man's decision, he would be forcing a woman to endure 9 months of physical suffering and encumberment for his benefit only,

I'm cheap. Why should I have to pay for a child for the rest of my life? There is no reason to assume that an abortion has no benefits for men. It's a way to have sex without ever having to worry about a baby, and best of all, you don't have to have the surgery or wear a condom. What could be better for men?

quote: Why should the man get a say in how that woman's life will progress for the next 9 months? Women don't necessarily have a say in the man's life, and he bears none of the responsibility or burden.

It takes two to make a baby. This is why the man has a responsibility to take care of his lover, and her child. So if you say the man ought not to have any say, why should he stick around?

quote: work for Heidi Fleiss and then hire herself out as a human incubator, because that's all she'd have left.

Hey, no one forced you to have sex. One of the consequences of sex is pregnancy. Therefore your analogy is moot. No one is forcing a woman to get pregnant.

quote: the world's already as f'd up as it's going to get.

Why work for a better world if you've already given up? Why bother with taking care of these kids, when the irresponsible woman should have had an abortion? Abortion is corrosive to care for children, it is only when it is no longer an option that people will start to seriously consider funding alternatives such as adoption.

	09-11-2003 04:34									#104
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by MOBIUS For a start there are too many people on this planet in the first place, so getting rid of a few unwanted ones is a step in the right direction if you ask me.

You know, if you said that anywhere except an abortion thread...

Think about that statement for a bit, will you?

	09-11-2003 04:36									#105
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi That's precisely the former status of women. Do you believe that society has the right to abitrarily classify people as non-persons?

The glaring problem with this argument is the following, if you never have the right to not define anything as a person, does this mean you need to define sperm and Chimpanzees for that matter as humans? You can't define something as a person without making some sort of decision in the first place. After all, the first one has to potential to become a human being, and the second one in its adult stage not only has DNA extremely similar to humans, but arguable is capable of more sophisticated thoughts than a newborn human. If you can't define ANYTHING as non-human you end up with all plants and animals having all the rights of people.

	09-11-2003 04:37									#106
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by GePap What factual arguements exist about abortion? So you can say: at 7 months a fetus can fell pain..so what? So can a 50 year old man, and that 50 year old man has no right to live either. While in the pre-amble it may speak of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, the state has the right to take life, has the right to deputize people to take life..in essence, there is NO right to life for any human being. THe very fact that people speak about it using the US constitution is meaningless...that constitution governs 5% of humanity. The vast, vast majority of abortions happen in the third world. If anyone claims this is a universal issue, then a non-universal matter like the consitution of one single state means nothing. That is what it simply boil down to: all rights are conditional, creation of human society, not in any way distinct from social existence. So as I said, I agree wityh Freako: abortion should be a simple legislative matter, and any debates about the either-or nature of the debate are totally faith based, be it a religious or secualr faith one uses as their justification. Oh, and get the stick out of your butt, and learn what is condecension and what is not, BOY. (note, that was it)

The STATE can take someone's life only in a few well-defined circumstances.

	09-11-2003 04:41									#107
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Rogan Josh Now we define the guy on life support as 'alive' if he has significant brain activity. I don't see anything wrong with this definition - if the fetus has no significant brain activity then it is not aware and not conscious.

Yes, but assuming nothing goes wrong, the fetus will in the future have significant brain activity, but the guy on life support will not.

	09-11-2003 04:44									#108
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Jack the Bodiless "With that said, I'd like to branch out my earlier argument, that the constitutional right to pizza simply does not exist. Pizza is never mentioned in the constitution or any of the amendments, nor are there any references to any subject even vaguely related to it or which can be construed by a reasonable person to include pizza. The Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision is ostensibly valid because of the principle of judicial review, which allows them to declare laws unconstitutional, i.e. that said laws VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION ITSELF. With no actual constitutional backing, RvW is no more worthy of recognition than a statement by the CIA approving a new food for human use. RvW excersized powers that the SCOTUS never had, and is therefore in my opinion invalid." If pizza is legal, then constitutionally why shouldn't abortion be?

RvW said that any law prohibiting abortions was unconstitutional. Elok's point is that this is absurd - it isn't mentioned in the Consitution. Now, this doesn't mean that Congress is REQUIRED to prohibit abortion - but overturning RvW would mean that Congress COULD prohibit abortion.

	09-11-2003 04:54									#109
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Theben:

quote: In this country and in this day, abortion is legal, and tolerated by the majority of citizens.

How do we know? Have we asked the people what they believe? Have they had an opportunity to espress their views in a national referendum? NO.

quote: I can't think of an article or amendment allowing for abortion.

Then why do we permit abortion?

quote: Not having a baby is less strenuous on the resources of parents and society.

Strenuous in the short term. Much less so in the long term, for both the mother an society. Without children, a society has no future, no resources to operate.

quote: Also abortion removes a large section of the criminal underclass.

It also kills Beethoven. How can you tell looking at a child today whehter he or she will become a criminal?

	09-11-2003 04:58									#110
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Murdoch:

Reread my statement. I use the word 'arbitrarily'. I'm trying to smoke out Gepap. Society has the right to define personhood. They do not have the right to do so arbitrarily.

	09-11-2003 05:52									#111
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi Ned: You fail to understand my critique. All pregnancies have a marginal risk of death, though hardly substantial. Does this mean that everyone has the right to kill someone just because their life may be at risk? If someone approaches you with a black object in his hand, does that give you the right to shoot him in the head, killing him? No. A better wording of your policy would be to name the specific conditions, of which the only one common is ectopic pregnancy. I agree that where we have an ectopic pregnancy that because we cannot save both lives, we ought to save the one that we can, the mother. At this point in time, we cannot save the life of the unborn child in this situation. It's not about a balance of lives, but that we can save one life rather than letting two die.

We are getting closer to an agreement on general principles, it appears. You do seem to be recognizing that there are a balance of rights involved. This is progress.

And, do not get me wrong. I think the probability of real harm to the mother must be more than a slight risk. We agree on that.

Also, I strongly object to the Supremes formulation that "health" includes the risk that the mother will use a coat hanger. That formulation removes health as a basis for leaving the decision to the doctor and patient, almost forcing the statute-drafter to list all possible health risks. That should not be necessary.

	09-11-2003 05:54									#112
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: No more unwanted pregnancies, except the odd f-up.

Think about that statement again

	09-11-2003 05:55									#113
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by skywalker RvW said that any law prohibiting abortions was unconstitutional. Elok's point is that this is absurd - it isn't mentioned in the Consitution. Now, this doesn't mean that Congress is REQUIRED to prohibit abortion - but overturning RvW would mean that Congress COULD prohibit abortion.

Prior to RvW, Congress said nothing on the issue because it was considered to be a matter for the states. This remains, IMHO, a state matter outside the perview of Congress.

	09-11-2003 05:58									#114
	Support Apolyton

Whatever. Replace "Congress" with "state legislatures" in my post, if you want. What I meant was that it was a legislative decision, not a constitutional one.

	09-11-2003 06:02									#115
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Sky, agreed.

	09-11-2003 07:37									#116
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi UR: And how do you know that an unborn child will not recognise himself in the womb?

I did not make such a judgement. If you can indeed show that fetuses are sentient, they will be considered as persons.

	09-11-2003 18:09									#117
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by GePap I must wonder where the hell you draw your implications from..cause they seem to come out of left field-must be that anti-Kane side of you. Abortion is part of reproductive policy, just like defining what is murder or not is part of crimnal policy..and if people start trying to decide that policy should be base don moral absolutes that do NOT exists, then one is basing policy on a foundation of smoke..and what happens to such edifices? Personally, I prefer policy to come from more sensible realms. THe fact is that Roe v Wade was a problematic decision, becuase it turned the aboriton battle into a constitutional ojne instead of a legislative one, which it should not be. I support the ability of women to get abortions..is it a right? NO, no more than there is some nebulous "right to life".

Eh, that's a little more lucid. Thank you. Were you not saying anything but that abortion isn't denied by the Constitution either? If so, JtB beat you to it, and I never said so in the first place anyway. Well, I don't think I did...I believe that abortion is a form of temporal discrimination more than anything else. I would, however, say that it IS primarily a question of whether it is murder or not. The only reason for not allowing abortion would be the belief, which I deem correct, that human rights begin at conception.

	09-11-2003 19:56									#118
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi How do we know? Have we asked the people what they believe? Have they had an opportunity to espress their views in a national referendum? NO.

We know 'cuz the law's on the books. And yes, despite what you think the majority does tolerate abortion, even if they don't like it.

quote: Then why do we permit abortion?

The constitution is not the limit of our freedoms. I hope you don't wish this was the case.

quote: Strenuous in the short term. Much less so in the long term, for both the mother an society. Without children, a society has no future, no resources to operate.

Immigrant workers will serve.

quote: It also kills Beethoven. How can you tell looking at a child today whehter he or she will become a criminal?

The Chicago Tribune ran an article a few years ago linking a significant decrease in the rate of crime to abortion. Face it, poor unwanted kids run a greater risk of becoming criminals.

EDIT:

quote: ABORTION, REDUCED CRIME LINKED STUDY SUGGESTS 1970S LEGALIZATION HELPED LEAD TO '90S CRIME DROP:[CHICAGOLAND FINAL Edition] Karen Brandon, Tribune Staff Writer. Chicago Tribune. Chicago, Ill.: Aug 8, 1999. pg. 1 Abstract (Article Summary) Steven Levitt, a University of Chicago economist, and John Donohue III, a Stanford University Law School professor, conclude that legalized abortion may explain as much as half of the overall crime reduction the nation experienced from 1991 to 1997.

sky: Doesn't it make that statement all the more accurate?

	09-11-2003 20:19									#119
	Got spare money?

Yes, I just thought it was amusing

	10-11-2003 00:31									#120
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Theben The Chicago Tribune ran an article a few years ago linking a significant decrease in the rate of crime to abortion. Face it, poor unwanted kids run a greater risk of becoming criminals.

You could argue the same for minorities; in both cases, it's not genetics but a hostile environment that causes the problem. Abortion is a very slapdash solution to societal ills. It sweeps the long-term consequences of widespread ignorance, perversion and misogyny under the carpet instead of fighting the problems themselves. It works in much the same way that taking an aspirin might help you ignore the pain caused by a brain tumor. I suspect the only reason we go with the crappy quick-fix in this case is to avoid the arduous alternative of broad, meaningful societal change.