Roe vs Wade

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » February 2, 2005, 4:51 pm

Akaran_D wrote:She tries to commit murder and she dies in the process.
I'm sorry, I'm not going to have a lot of sympathy here.

But is it then better than there will be "two" deaths now as opposed to "one"?

Akaran_D · Post by **Akaran_D** » February 2, 2005, 4:52 pm

No, it isn't, but if she attempts to comit murder, is that someoen we want walking around the streets anyways?

Edit: One more thing.
I'm not in a position to make any changes in the legal or educational systems in the US. Neither is anyone else that posts here. My views are not tempered enough by age nor experience to likely provide an accurate or even largely acceptable methods for dealing with the issue that exists in our country and therfor, are quite likely to offend the persons who argue against it or even come off as stupid, as well they may be.

Dregor Thule · Post by **Dregor Thule** » February 2, 2005, 4:56 pm

I'd rather have someone like her allowed to roam free without supervision than someone who likens having an abortion to kill a full fledged person. And I don't mean only you, but all those who share your belief.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » February 2, 2005, 4:57 pm

But in both cases, the fetus dies. However, in the case where abortion is illegal, one more person has been taken out of society.

Cold Argument: This leads to one less person paying taxes, which is bad. How can you equate killing a fetus with killing a grown person? Fetus is not a productive member of society which is why murder is always illegal in the first place.

Akaran_D · Post by **Akaran_D** » February 2, 2005, 5:00 pm

A person that gets caught smoking weed and whom is taken to the local jail for a few months isn't a productive member of society for 9months+ either, but it's likely they will be after removed from their incarceration - but we can't kill them without extensive legal procedures.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » February 2, 2005, 5:02 pm

There are tons of people who smoke weed and are productive members of society. For example, Carlos Santana.

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » February 2, 2005, 5:05 pm

Akaran_D wrote: If you abort, you're stopping a life from forming. If your life isn't at risk and the baby does not have a problem such that it would be unable to survive out of the womb, it shouldn't be an option, period.

What do you call birth control and condoms, should those be outlawed too? Both of these prevent a life from forming.

Akaran_D · Post by **Akaran_D** » February 2, 2005, 5:10 pm

But when incarcerated, or even disabled, they aren't productive. A quadreplegic(sp) usually isn't a productive member of society, but we can't kill them. A person in a coma isn't productive, but we can't abritrarily decide to pull the plug on them (in some states) except in rare circumstances. A person in jail because of tax fraud isn't being productive, and we even have to pay for that person's room and boarding.

Heck, even a 5yr old isn't productive, but we can't randomly decide to execute it when it's whining.

And unlike some of the types of people listed above, a fetus will eventually become someone that can produce in society (or will end up as one of the above, but my crystal ball is too foggy to tell which).

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » February 2, 2005, 5:13 pm

So wait let me get this straight. It's okay to kill people or let them die for stopping a fetus from developing? But it's not okay to kill a fetus because that would be morally wrong to kill?

Akaran_D · Post by **Akaran_D** » February 2, 2005, 5:14 pm

No Lynks. It's designed to prevent a pregnancy from occuring - not ending it after it's already well on its way.

Akaran_D · Post by **Akaran_D** » February 2, 2005, 5:17 pm

A murder is a murder Lohrno.
If I snap the neck of my neighbor, I should be punished. If you vaccum out your uterus and kill your baby, you should be punished. It's not that hard of a concept.

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » February 2, 2005, 5:26 pm

It is a hard concept seeing that the fetus cannot live on its own after a few months after conception.

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » February 2, 2005, 5:30 pm

Akaran_D wrote:A murder is a murder Lohrno.
If I snap the neck of my neighbor, I should be punished. If you vaccum out your uterus and kill your baby, you should be punished. It's not that hard of a concept.

A fetus IS NOT a baby

a baby has a brain, and can live outside the womb without being dependant on the parent, a fetus can not

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » February 2, 2005, 5:33 pm

Akaran_D wrote:No Lynks. It's designed to prevent a pregnancy from occuring - not ending it after it's already well on its way.

should birth control be banned? in the same manner as an abortion, it prevents the developement and potential life creation of what could one day become a baby

most religions against abortion are also against birth controll...so by the same means you should try to push for a ban on birth control

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » February 2, 2005, 5:35 pm

Akaran_D wrote:A murder is a murder Lohrno.
If I snap the neck of my neighbor, I should be punished. If you vaccum out your uterus and kill your baby, you should be punished. It's not that hard of a concept.

on another unrelated note, your grandchildren will most likely live in a time period where the government requires mandatory abortions/birth control after you have 1 child due to overpopulation...by the time your grandchild reaches middle age, earth will be projected to have a population of around 40 BILLION

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » February 2, 2005, 5:36 pm

Thats only if those damn dirty apes don't get to us first.

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » February 2, 2005, 5:37 pm

Lohrno wrote:There are tons of people who smoke weed and are productive members of society. For example, Carlos Santana.

and several of our founding fathers... and many wealthy and successful business people i know or know of

not to mention college professors, a huge % of them smoke herb...they are just descrete

Dregor Thule · Post by **Dregor Thule** » February 2, 2005, 5:39 pm

Do the left a favor and get off our side, Xzion.

nobody · Post by **nobody** » February 2, 2005, 5:47 pm

Xzion wrote:
Akaran_D wrote:A murder is a murder Lohrno.
If I snap the neck of my neighbor, I should be punished. If you vaccum out your uterus and kill your baby, you should be punished. It's not that hard of a concept.
A fetus IS NOT a baby

a baby has a brain, and can live outside the womb without being dependant on the parent, a fetus can not

a baby is not independant with out it's mother. if that is your definition of life is not being dependant on a parent, people should be able to abort infants.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » February 2, 2005, 6:31 pm

nobody wrote: a baby is not independant with out it's mother.

Bull. A baby does not rely on it's MOTHER. In fact any lactating female can feed it and care for it. If not lactating, then bottle fed. An infant does not depend physically on it's mother, and is too emotionally immature on birth to know the difference. You could have a baby born then hand it to another woman and it'll be totally fine with it.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » February 2, 2005, 6:33 pm

Xzion wrote: most religions against abortion are also against birth controll...so by the same means you should try to push for a ban on birth control

In all fairness he has stated on numerous occaisions that his reasons for being against abortion are not religious in nature.

The question is still a good one though. Waiting for your answer Akaran.

miir · Post by **miir** » February 2, 2005, 6:38 pm

a baby is not independant with out it's mother. if that is your definition of life is not being dependant on a parent, people should be able to abort infants.

The overwhelming majority (i would estimate over 99%) of abortions are performed in the first trimester. A fetus at that stage is a non sentient lump of flesh and cartiledge... unable to survive outside of the womb under any circumstance. At that point it is clearly still a part of womans body and not an entity unto itself.

There are (literally) no doctors who will perform a late 2nd or 3rd trimester abortion unless the woman has a high risk of death because of the prenancy.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » February 2, 2005, 6:38 pm

Akaran_D wrote:A murder is a murder Lohrno.
If I snap the neck of my neighbor, I should be punished. If you vaccum out your uterus and kill your baby, you should be punished. It's not that hard of a concept.

Those are two different acts. The one is murder, the other is more like mutilation. Legally speaking, a baby doesn't even exist in the system until it is carried to term and given a certificate. It's just another developing part of the woman's body until it is born. In fact that is just what it is. How at any given moment is a fertilized egg a few generations divided more valuable than a cancerous tumor? Sure the cancerous tumor could kill you, but right now it can't. Sure the fertilized egg could be a baby, but right now it isn't.

Akaran_D · Post by **Akaran_D** » February 2, 2005, 7:16 pm

Busy, but answer, already stated it above to Lynks.

It's designed to prevent a pregnancy from occuring - not ending it after it's already well on its way.

Wiping your jizz up with a sock is not murder, no more than pulling out before the sperm can be deposited in the woman is. By stopping the act of conception from taking place, there is no life to kill. Every time you choose not to have sex (or someone chooses for you), you are preventing something from occuring, not stoppig it once it has begun.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » February 2, 2005, 7:26 pm

Akaran_D wrote: Wiping your jizz up with a sock is not murder, no more than pulling out before the sperm can be deposited in the woman is. By stopping the act of conception from taking place, there is no life to kill. Every time you choose not to have sex (or someone chooses for you), you are preventing something from occuring, not stoppig it once it has begun.

But it is life...is it not? Are you not killing life by not letting the sperm get to the egg?

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » February 2, 2005, 7:40 pm

Dregor Thule wrote:Do the left a favor and get off our side, Xzion.

im not on your side

Akaran_D · Post by **Akaran_D** » February 2, 2005, 7:59 pm

No, I'm just not letting it do its job.
Not letting it start its job != to stopping it once it has begun.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » February 2, 2005, 8:03 pm

Akaran_D wrote:No, I'm just not letting it do its job.
Not letting it start its job != to stopping it once it has begun.

But it began when you started wanking/fucking. By not letting the sperm get there you are stopping it once it has begun.

And secondly, what makes you think your belief that it is a baby is more important than mine that is not? Suppose I believe that all electricity is food for extradimensional life to feed on. By using electricity you are depriving them of their food, and thus murdering them. I say we outlaw use of electricity you murderers!

Akaran_D · Post by **Akaran_D** » February 2, 2005, 8:20 pm

My hip movments != the process of life UNLESS I am doing it stricky for reproduction, which IS what it is intended for but largely NOT what it is used for. I could have a dry orgasm, and produce no sperm at all. She could pass gas and the mood die. Is farting a way to kill something? Generally speaking, no....

And secondly, what makes you think your belief that it is a baby is more important than mine that is not?

I don't, which is why we have a political and legal system to decide those things for us. I may believe that it is murder, but until the courts and the talking heads in DC are convinced of that argument, it won't be legally classified as such. I, as a person, do not have the power and authority to decide that for every person in the country; however, I can lobby the people that DO make the decisions to get them to do what I think is right - it is their job to answer those questions. I certaintly may not like it, but I am bound by it.

That is not going to stop me from arguing the case for reform of the abortion laws themselves, but, largely speaking - as with all political discussions conducted by people such as ourselves, it is largely meaningless to engage in the argument with you unless there is some chance to change your way of thinking. Unfortunately, given both the medium of our conversation and my personal inability to step back away from the issue to deliver a powerful, griping speech or whatever else it would take to convince you, I realize that I lack the ability to convey myself in such a way to do so, a limitation I hope to one day out grow.

All I can say is a question that was asked earlier - wouldn't you rather err on the side of caution that a fetus IS a child - incase you're wrong that it isn't?

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » February 2, 2005, 8:28 pm

Well, lets take the fetus out after the 1st month and ask it.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » February 2, 2005, 8:28 pm

Akaran_D wrote: All I can say is a question that was asked earlier - wouldn't you rather err on the side of caution that a fetus IS a child - incase you're wrong that it isn't?

No - I don't believe in creating an unsafe situation for people, and causing more death. I don't believe it's the side of caution because I don't believe the fetus at any given moment until a certain point is more valuable than a patch of skin.

Moreover it's a question of women's rights. That is why I think the argument of legal and majority decision is a bad one in this case. The majority of people in the south in the 1800s were okay with slavery. Does that mean that it was right?

Fash · Post by **Fash** » February 2, 2005, 8:29 pm

humanity, folks... a sperm is not human. it's not human until the dna is merged and cell division begins.

i don't think it's "cool" to kill life, but i see our society that we've built and live under create incredible expectations of us, and we find ourselves forced down certain paths..

i look at the numbers, and i look at it a-religiously. to look at it a-religiously, you might go over the following....

/soapbox on

we, having achieved global dominance and assured survival as long as earth is habitable, having extended our lifespans through medicine, having over-population and under-employment, do hereby declare that since we so carelessly take the lives of, breed explicitly to harvest, and kill for entertainment thousands of different species, that we should accept the optional abortion of those who do not wish to raise a child or a second child, a child of rape or in a situation of abuse. This is to stop children from being brought up in unloving situations, and to save unwilling parents from a difficult life. The net effect could be a much more loving society.

Chmee · Post by **Chmee** » February 2, 2005, 8:45 pm

In my opinion, the poll answers to the original question don't really match. Whether or not Roe vs Wade should be overturned shouldn't rest on whatever feelings you have about abortion, but whether or not it was a correct interpretation of the constitution. That is what the Supreme Court judges.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » February 2, 2005, 8:59 pm

Yes. Ideally that should be the case, however with the growing fundamentalist movement in this country, an overturn of RvW would result in a snowball movement to ban it altogether.

VeeshanVault

Roe vs Wade

Should Roe v Wade be overturned?