Abortion? or No Abortion?

It is a butterfly in my eyes. It is what it will become.

if a seed can only become a tree, then why call it a seed?

people don't like their trees cut down, but they don't care about seeds

Fetus is not a human,

there is a reason that it is called a HUMAN fetus, because it is a fetus from a human.

if you are going to attack me, denial, feeling better, or self-delusion, fine

then i will too


what you propose it called government control

you don't like government, you your self said you might switch to libertarianism, this is hypocrisy to your beliefs,

it is simple logic, a seed is a tree, and nebulae are stars, no, that is not logic, that is poor english, their definitions differ, they are not the same, otherwise we would call them something more along the lines of an undeveloped baby, but we call it a fetus because it is not a baby, it is identical to a dolphin's fetus, if you had to kill one, you couldn't tell, but that doesn't matter, they are roughly the same, they can't think, they can't feel, for the religious subservience I can feel slipping into these arguments, it has no "sin".

How you are deluding yourself aard is that you believe you could put a fetus in a crib and treat like a baby in a crib, that is not correct, it is PART of the woman's body, until about 9 months where it can live by itself not inside a woman's body. Why would you think that something that could be, is, that is absurd.

assuming that something that could be, is that thing, is absurd, apply the logic to anything else you know, sundae making, farming, car making, you can't call a wheel of a car a wheel because it will be a car because it must be constructed for profit. that is just like a fetus, a wheel,

i'm not saying that it isn't without reprehensibility, i'm not saying that it should be done all the time, for that is wrong, i am saying that it is living off the woman's body whether by her choice or not, and, since we have the technology, why can't we change this.

aard if killing a fetus is like killing a baby, then what about rape, no abortion?

if you say that there should be, then you support, by your own design, "murder"

Nihil wrote:Universal healthcare

/OH SNAP

as Cog likes to say recently,

on a side note, anyone noticed that? XD

i beg to differ it's /snap and the examples aard is giving do make sense and I agree 100%, but I do believe that War is murder and that's highly accepted so your examples are kind of... questionable imo.

you posted this 3 minutes after i posted my mammoth paragraph up there, go read that.

Nihil wrote:you posted this 3 minutes after i posted my mammoth paragraph up there, go read that.

nty now im getting blamed for OT in 1 min

EDIT: I've debated this in school and won every debate I ever did, I am worn out of abortion topics, let's go with cheese doodles or cheese puffs........ /snap

LOL rep

Jus read ur MAMMOTH essay Lolz and dray's "cacoon" thing, very interesting points I will use those... /snap

Not COULD, WILL BE, there's a difference and the fact that you don't want to see it is self-denial.

It's not government control anymore then saying you cannot murder another person is government control. When a woman get's pregnant it's no longer just her body and she has no right to impose her will on a person that will be a part of society anymore then I have a right to impose my view on those I debate with.

Let me ask you this: When you see a pregnant woman what do you do? Do you act recklessly? Or are you careful around her? And if you're careful around her then why? She's not carrying a human, you can't harm anything so why fear for her well-being any more then a random stranger on the street? The reason is simple, because your conscious, your instincts tell you you should. Didn't you ever stop to think that maybe your instincts might be right?

ok, unless it dies, is miscarriage, something like that,

i'm careful because they are carrying something that they want, otherwise they wouldn't be carrying it. besides, the thought of that thing bleeding and spewing all its innards inside you is disgusting, that is what makes abortion much better, and better than infanticide, how about this instinct aard, in the paleolithic age, humans used infanticide, so much for those instincts you were praising so highly aard, huh? they are just as dumb as we are, to ignore those, and to transcend to humanity, is what makes us better than cats and dogs.

and the government has no right to impose its will upon what is part of teh woman's body, its her body, the government should keeps its hands off.

condoms are about 99% effective, say the 1 percent get pregnant, you say, No abortion for you young lady!

i say, if you want one go ahead, but think about it.

if its no longer her body, to whom does she share it, a loose mass of cells without specialization, which actually comes from evolution quite interestingly, but i digress, something i learned recently, does she really share it with a bunch of cells?

i dont mind at all if you view a fetus as important, i view too, and i agree with adoption, i really could careless about psychological effects.

but it isnt a baby. i dunno if ur using poetic license, but in logic, a fetus is not a baby. it will be a baby, if nothing stops it, but it is in fact, not a baby.

when you have a bunch of bricks and wood and cement lying around, thats not a house. after u structure them correctly, you cna call it a house. until then, its not a house.

same thing for babies. fetus is not a baby. it is important, and it should be treated as a baby, but it is not in fact, a baby. that would be going into sophisms.

I'm done here. I've given multiple examples as for why they should be viewed as people, but you won't listen, because no one is willing to accept that we've taken up murder for the sake of convenience.

you just don't like that i've applied your logic against you guys,


by your own logic

seed=tree

star=blackhole/white dwarf/ etc.

food=waste


so on and so on

a woman's life may change within the course of pregnancy, and trust me, I don't think any woman would want to undergo abortion.

A seed is actually the plant, which hasn't found a place to germinate

ur trying to say, as i've shown, that what will be, is being, which can be applied against you, as i have, what else do you want me to say?

i told you,

something that will be, isn't being, because it is, as of yet, not being.

however, you and aard are trying to say that was will be, is being, because a child fetus will grow into a child, possibly, if no defects occur,

and as you pointed out, then if you, using the least vulgar term i can, "waste" sperm, then you are committing the same crime as abortion, by such logic, because since it can be a child, the genetic material.

Difference is Sperm is a could because without an egg it will never become anything. A fetus is a will be meaning you have to interfere with it's growth to keep it from maturing.

To me i think its up to the two partners. And thats where it SHOULD start.
But ofc for us ppl in the Americas who dont give a damn about abstinence, it wont matter for them.

On another note i cant believe that this topic has 10 pages lol

O.K i'm still not getting how i'm not answer that but w/e

here something else,

how do you define personhood? a fetus can't have that, and it can't live without its mother, so it should be treated as part of her body.

Neither can an infant. So can I go step on the next baby I see and get away with it?

you just basically called a fetus a baby, also, you have also just a called an infant something without personality and preferences.

No I didn't, although I do see a fetus as a baby. You missed my point, an infant cannot survive without another to care for it, so it has no personhood. Therefore, by your logic it is not a person and I can kill it if I get annoyed at it's crying.

Oh and:

Dictionary wrote:It - Can be used to represent a person or animal understood, previously mentioned, or about to be mentioned whose gender is unknown.

Phail.