PRO

Where Your Ideas can change Minds

Please visit our new forum at

http://www.4forums.com

CON


YouDebate.com Forum
» back to YouDebate.com
Register | Profile | Log In | Lost Password | Active Users | Help | Board Rules | Search | FAQ |
Custom Search
» You are not logged in.   log in | register

  YouDebate.com Forum
   Abortion Debates
     Abortion

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
Multiple pages for this topic [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

    
squirt1983

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I never said that my baby will be the president, or that I want her to be.  What I meant was that she could be something great, and I didn't kill her.  
As for her being a serial killer, I don't know that she won't.  But does that mean that we should kill all the babies, just in case they decide to become serial killers.  Come on!!


-------
Happiness is wetting your pants--the whole world can see it, but only you can feel its warmth.
-Author Unknown
 


Posts: 41 | Posted: 12:58 PM on November 12, 2002 | IP
locagirl

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

yes
 


Posts: 60 | Posted: 1:49 PM on November 12, 2002 | IP
thistownwilleatu

|       |       Report Post



Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Sarcasm...please let it be sarcasm....


-------
"The greatest evil is not done in those sordid dens of evil that Dickens loved to paint ... but is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted) in clear, carpeted, warmed, well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices." - Thomas Merton

"I thank my God for every remembrance of you." - Paul
 


Posts: 341 | Posted: 2:04 PM on November 12, 2002 | IP
locagirl

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

yes, that was sarcasm.  and we shouldnt kill all babies. in fact, we shouldnt kill any babies. just the fetuses .  you could call me a fetus murderer...! oh no!!!! maybe i should be killed for killing a fetus!
 


Posts: 60 | Posted: 2:53 PM on November 12, 2002 | IP
Cool-Hand-Dave

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

a fetus is still a baby.  it's alive.  it's a baby from the moment of conception.


-------
Cool Hand Dave
 


Posts: 134 | Posted: 12:19 AM on November 13, 2002 | IP
thistownwilleatu

|       |       Report Post



Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Wow, you cut me to the quick, you forced me to take an objective look at myself and my beliefs for the first time.  I see the world in a whole new light, clean, pure, and undistorted by my pesky beliefs.  Thank you, thank you and your words of wisdom.

I think it was the oh no!!!! that did the trick, transformed me from the boy I was to the man I am now.

And what makes "fetus" any different from "toddler" or "adolescent"?  Nothing more than location.  They are all stages of HUMAN development, it's just that one takes place inside the body.  We as a society have disaccociated the word "fetus" with that of "baby" or "human" because those words remind us to much of the things we can see.  

My point is, if women had glass stomachs abortions would not exist.  Far too cute.


-------
"The greatest evil is not done in those sordid dens of evil that Dickens loved to paint ... but is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted) in clear, carpeted, warmed, well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices." - Thomas Merton

"I thank my God for every remembrance of you." - Paul
 


Posts: 341 | Posted: 12:22 AM on November 13, 2002 | IP
locagirl

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

no problem
 


Posts: 60 | Posted: 2:42 PM on November 14, 2002 | IP
Gs_Deus

|        |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Abortion, as evil as it is, is used on a daily basis. Over 3300 abortions are made everyday- at least the legal ones. There are many more. What is the process of an abortion? Well, because this forum is most likely rated PG or even PG-13, I will not state what happens in an abortion- but it's brutal. Not only does it kill the fetus, a little child, but it can kill the mother as well. But this is not the issue. What is the question? When should we or should we not kill a human?

The question comes up. When Jeff White, a leader of the group "Survivors", which is a pro-life organization, was washing dishes in the kitchen, his five year old daughter asked him "Can I kill this". Since he was occupied washing dishes he didn't see what she was holding. But without turning around asked "What is it?". This "What is it?" defines life. There is a line to when we can kill and when we can kill. The line is morality, and the morality is you cannot kill a human life. Just as you cannot kill an infant, you cannot kill a fetus.

Then what is the fetus? Is it a human? Yes. And I will tell you why. Louis Pasteur, a famous scientist of the 19th century who came up with "pasteurization" and found a cure for rabies and many other illnesses, was researching about many theories of spontaneous life- maggots don't spontaneously appear on meat, and rats don't spontaneously appear from rags. So he came up with the principle of biogenesis, which said that all life came from pre-existing life, and all life reproduces after it's own kind. This is a scientific fact. Now, if the fetus is not human, then what is it? The only option is that it's another animal. But it's not- humans don't make animals. Humans make humans.  Dogs make dogs. Dogs don't make cats. Therefore, the only option is that the fetus is human.

Now that we know that it's human- a new question arises. Is it alive? The biological criteria of life includes four things. A) Metabolism B) Reproduction C) Reaction to stimuli D) Growth.  The fetus possesses every single one of these traits. First, the fetus does reproduce. The cells reproduce. The fetus reprodoces. Second, the fetus reacts. This is a fact. If you touch it, it will, in some way, react. Third, the fetus certainly does grow and Metabolise. There is no other option- the fetus is definatly alive and human. Another point comes up- "It's just a blob of cells". Well guess what- you're a blob of cells. Everyone is a blob of cells, to be frank. Size doesn't define life.




-------
TorchX.com- conservative youth site.
 


Posts: 49 | Posted: 6:21 PM on November 14, 2002 | IP
Cool-Hand-Dave

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

i very much agree with your statements deus.  it was a good post.


-------
Cool Hand Dave
 


Posts: 134 | Posted: 11:38 AM on November 15, 2002 | IP
locagirl

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

deus, you sound like you would be a vegetarian. but then again, vegetables are alive. what do you eat? what are you high off of?
 


Posts: 60 | Posted: 1:12 PM on November 15, 2002 | IP
Gs_Deus

|        |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote:"deus, you sound like you would be a vegetarian. but then again, vegetables are alive. what do you eat? what are you high off of?"

You are alive as well. Can I kill you? Oh come on, think of something better and at least not as absurd as this statement. It isn't a vegetable. It isn't an animal. I have just proven that it's human. It's alive- i've proven it. It's human- I've proven this. We cannot kill humans. We cannot kill a life that will not get a chance to see the light of day. What difference, may I ask, is a 8 month old fetus and a newborn baby?


-------
TorchX.com- conservative youth site.
 


Posts: 49 | Posted: 1:46 PM on November 15, 2002 | IP
locagirl

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

you did not answer my question.

anyways, why are humans superior to other animals?
 


Posts: 60 | Posted: 7:57 PM on November 15, 2002 | IP
Gs_Deus

|        |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

you did not answer my question.

anyways, why are humans superior to other animals?


That's a very dumb question- we just are! We have more rights than animals because animals do not think like we do. I know exactly what you're going to say next, but I'm not going to stop you. Let me ask you- if Gorillas were not endangered- could I kill one?


-------
TorchX.com- conservative youth site.
 


Posts: 49 | Posted: 10:13 PM on November 15, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

i don't if it's human is the end all-be all of the question. there is a difference between a newborn baby and a fetus (at what stage don't ask me, I don't know). the fetus feels no pain. there will be no change of awareness from existence to non-existence. to me, that makes it ok. i am not contributing any more suffering to the world by aborting the fetus. so, what about people who won't come out of their comas? well, i am pro-euthanasia too. now they may feel no pain, but we know they have been conscious before, so killing them would prevent the possibility of returning to that state, so I am changing the condition. (unless they really won't come back, in which case euthanasia). but a fetus never had a state of mind, never had an awareness. why sacrifice so much on an individual and societal level to protect that? I am refering to the dangers of illegal abortions, of violating a woman's control over her own body, of too many children in abusive foster homes. oh, and I am anti-death penalty! go figure, guess I have a softer spot for murderers than babies. tell me I'm inconsistent, c'mon I know you want to!!!!


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 10:49 PM on November 15, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

and asking why humans are "superior" to animals is not stupid. you say we have more rights because they don't think the way we do. well, actually we have more rights because we know what rights are, and prefer our own species over others, so we want to extend more protection to humans than animals. but to say we are superior because we are smarter is an arbitrary criterion for allocation of value. why can't physical speed be the marker of superiority? then it would be cheetahs and peregrin falcons. or size? blue whale. or least amount of damage to the environment (pretty sure humans wouldn't rank high with this criterion)? or chances of long-term survival? probably the cockroach or something. your assumption that we are superior based on our intellect or self-awareness is a result of the mind's natural tendency to value its own perception. this is the same problem with the teleological argument for the existence of god, which i raised earlier in another forum and no religious person responded intelligently to it.


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 10:56 PM on November 15, 2002 | IP
thistownwilleatu

|       |       Report Post



Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Here's what I think....you said yourself that no one exactly knows the time period in which poof, the "fetus" magically transforms into a human being....so being in the situation of utter cluelessness, who are we to decide?  

One could compare it to, "They're probably guilty....Wait I don't even know what guilty is!!! oh well, start the injection."

And you're right, a coma can be closely related to an abortion.  Let's say you have man in a coma, and by some odd reason you know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that this man (child) will wake up in 7 months (gestation) and go on to live a completely normal and productive life.  Unfortunatly, the relatives (mother) have grown tired of paying the medical bills and demand that you cut his life support, despite perfect and clear knowledge of his full, guaranteed recovery.  He will feel no pain, no awareness of the life to death transition, and you are not contributing to the suffering of the world by taking what he will, in 8 months, hold closer than anything else, his existence.  

You speak of sacrificing individual and societal....what??  All we would be sacrificing is individual and societal lifestyles.  We must draw the fine line between which is more important, a lifestyle which is nonessential to life, or the very life that we are you yourself are trying to protect.  


-------
"The greatest evil is not done in those sordid dens of evil that Dickens loved to paint ... but is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted) in clear, carpeted, warmed, well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices." - Thomas Merton

"I thank my God for every remembrance of you." - Paul
 


Posts: 341 | Posted: 11:20 PM on November 15, 2002 | IP
thistownwilleatu

|       |       Report Post



Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

"This is the same problem with the teleological argument for the existence of god, which i raised earlier in another forum and no religious person responded intelligently to it."

I'm 18 years old and I thank the God that I so stupidly and blindly believe in that I am happy.  That I don't have to base my existence in cynacism and bitterness, that I don't define who I am through attacks and the desperate life-consuming drive for superiority.  

I don't know you Alexander...and it is quite possible that you save all your sarcasm and belittlement for this message board and keep it out of your daily life, and if this is so I apologize.  I may be ignorant, narrowminded, and God forbid, naive, but I'm content.


-------
"The greatest evil is not done in those sordid dens of evil that Dickens loved to paint ... but is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted) in clear, carpeted, warmed, well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices." - Thomas Merton

"I thank my God for every remembrance of you." - Paul
 


Posts: 341 | Posted: 11:27 PM on November 15, 2002 | IP
Gs_Deus

|        |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

i don't if it's human is the end all-be all of the question. there is a difference between a newborn baby and a fetus (at what stage don't ask me, I don't know). the fetus feels no pain. there will be no change of awareness from existence to non-existence.


You only prove how ignorant you are. The Fetus starts feeling pain at 6 weeks, this is less than two months in development. The fetus can also see through itís eyes, hear the mother speak, and can feel the scissors cut off his or her arms and legs. Yes, the fetus is killed by having itís arms and legs chopped off, a brutal yet legal crime.

to me, that makes it ok.


Do you then believe than killing a person in a vegetative state is perfectly acceptable?

i am not contributing any more suffering to the world by aborting the fetus.


Besides being the one who supports the killing of 3300 innocent children daily, and causing suffering and brutal killing to a child- who has done nothing wrong!

so, what about people who won't come out of their comas? well, i am pro-euthanasia too. now they may feel no pain, but we know they have been conscious before, so killing them would prevent the possibility of returning to that state, so I am changing the condition.


Even without their consent? This is horrible! Why do you all of a sudden have a say if somebody should live or die? Now, if it was the case where the person was on life support- sure, let the life support go. But to kill a person? That is murder- like abortion!

but a fetus never had a state of mind, never had an awareness


YOU ARE VERY IGNORANT. I hope you know that. YES THE FETUS IS AWARE OF EVERYTHING! The fetus is aware of as much as a newborn baby in a dark room. He can feel everything.

why sacrifice so much on an individual and societal level to protect that?

Can I kill you? Why not?

I am refering to the dangers of illegal abortions, of violating a woman's control over her own body, of too many children in abusive foster homes.


A) Illegal Abortions- then letís go legalize bank robbery- the person robbing the bank can be killed! At least if we legalize it, they wont be doing it the WRONG way! Man, youíre ignorance is unbelievable!

B) Once again, your ignorance has defeated your argument. It is not part of the mother- a medical fact. It is itís own being. Is it an organ? No. An organ is what the mother uses. Is it a parasite? No, because the parasite was created outside of the body, and has no use whatsoever, besides killing the person. Humans make humans! They donít make parasites or organs like that!

C) 9 out of ten babies are adopted before they are born- the rest are adopted shortly after. This has nothing to do with anything. CHildren in foster homes are in these homes because their parents died or left them at a late age. People donít want to adopt kids at late ages.

oh, and I am anti-death penalty! go figure, guess I have a softer spot for murderers than babies. tell me I'm inconsistent, c'mon I know you want to!!!!


I am too! I believe any human life should be respected.

and asking why humans are "superior" to animals is not stupid. you say we have more rights because they don't think the way we do. well, actually we have more rights because we know what rights are, and prefer our own species over others, so we want to extend more protection to humans than animals. but to say we are superior because we are smarter is an arbitrary criterion for allocation of value. why can't physical speed be the marker of superiority? then it would be cheetahs and peregrin falcons. or size? blue whale. or least amount of damage to the environment (pretty sure humans wouldn't rank high with this criterion)? or chances of long-term survival? probably the cockroach or something. your assumption that we are superior based on our intellect or self-awareness is a result of the mind's natural tendency to value its own perception. this is the same problem with the teleological argument for the existence of god, which i raised earlier in another forum and no religious person responded intelligently to it.

What does talking abut whales and God have to do with abortion?

IF you want to talk about God, I will discuss it, but on another forum.


-------
TorchX.com- conservative youth site.
 


Posts: 49 | Posted: 11:37 PM on November 15, 2002 | IP
Gs_Deus

|        |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

WARNING; these pictures are GRAPHIC but the TRUTH about abortion. Unless you want to be close-minded and not view these, you will understand that abortion is wrong and does kill a child!

THESE PICTURES ARE ALL MEDICALLY PROVED TO BE REAL ABORTED FETUSES.

http://www.survivors.la/abortionpics.html


-------
TorchX.com- conservative youth site.
 


Posts: 49 | Posted: 11:41 PM on November 15, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

whoah did I get a round-table slam or what? awesome. so...I don't have time now to respond to everything but I promise I will eventualluy. okay....
1. thistown...there is a big difference between me saying I don't know the cut-off point and me saying it is impossible for EXPERTS to know the cut-off point. I never said I didn't think it was possible to make a medical distinction (in my mind, before and after awareness/brain function whatever). so I'm not saying, oh let's just inject away without knowing, I am saying inject away when u do know. and about comas, I don't think you read my post very well. I didn't say people should be unplugged indiscriminately (a la your example of the wife who doesn't wanna pay medical bills). in fact i said it would be murder to do that because you are altering his condition from awareness (before coma) to lack of (death). I said only do it when there essentially no chance of recovery, which happens. maybe everyone should make that choice a head of time. if i was on life support for years, i would may loved ones to pull the plug.  now for my favorite part of your posts...
"I'm 18 years old and I thank the God that I so stupidly and blindly believe in that I am happy.  That I don't have to base my existence in cynacism and bitterness, that I don't define who I am through attacks and the desperate life-consuming drive for superiority.  "
whoah, hard-core. I am 22 and I am not proud of anything. I am bitter and cynical, because I the world is a pretty awful place with no meaning, lots of suffering, and no light at the end of the tunnel, unless you include that bright light of the inevitable nuclear holocaust. now, I also am not defiend through attacks and the desperate life consuming drive for superiority. I have no idea where u got that from. this is a debate post, so I get fiesty. I love everyone, I have lots of religious friends (in fact, almost all my BEST friends are christians). In a post where there are whole forums devoted to arguing the very morality of MY lifestyle and who I love and who I sleep with, and who I want to marry and have kids with, I think I am allowed to be fiesty. In a forum like this one where people argue for a Christian nation which by definition (at least in their eyes) means making me a second-class citizen, I think I get some leeway to be fiesty. I don't know you either thistown, but I have no idea what prompts you to make character attacks from my statements here. instead, maybe you should comment on my refutation of the teleological argument for God. then u could really stick it to me! I never meant all religious people are stupid, but I do think it is your responsibility in a debate forum to address the issue with intelligent arguments, and not u personally, but in general, I think the religious crowd is falling short of arguments against my points about the existence of God. whew, I gotta go eat dinner. basically, don't be mad at me, I am really a nice guy, and I am just being a jerk here because this is a debate forum and debates get nasty. let's be friends!!!


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 05:18 AM on November 16, 2002 | IP
thistownwilleatu

|       |       Report Post



Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Ok.  God, I feel like we're married, we make up more than anyone I know....I hunted around for this theological argument against God and I couldn't find it....all I found was the "why not kill" um...."stuff".  So could you refresh my memory as to what that argument was, or direct me to the specific post?  Thanks...pal.


-------
"The greatest evil is not done in those sordid dens of evil that Dickens loved to paint ... but is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted) in clear, carpeted, warmed, well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices." - Thomas Merton

"I thank my God for every remembrance of you." - Paul
 


Posts: 341 | Posted: 1:28 PM on November 16, 2002 | IP
Gs_Deus

|        |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Ok.  God, I feel like we're married, we make up more than anyone I know....I hunted around for this theological argument against God and I couldn't find it....all I found was the "why not kill" um...."stuff".  So could you refresh my memory as to what that argument was, or direct me to the specific post?  Thanks...pal.


You talking to me? BTW- i'm a guy, i hope you're not. :-)


-------
TorchX.com- conservative youth site.
 


Posts: 49 | Posted: 4:03 PM on November 16, 2002 | IP
thistownwilleatu

|       |       Report Post



Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

No I'm talking to Alexander...and I'm not gay.


-------
"The greatest evil is not done in those sordid dens of evil that Dickens loved to paint ... but is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted) in clear, carpeted, warmed, well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices." - Thomas Merton

"I thank my God for every remembrance of you." - Paul
 


Posts: 341 | Posted: 11:38 PM on November 16, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

this town...
my internet is really slow, so I don't have time to find it. i think it is probably in gay rights or one of the religion threads (sorry, not very helpful). basically, sakata said she sees evidence for God all around her, and i said, that sounds like the teleological (or design theory) argument for the existence of God, which I think was deconstructed pretty clearly by David Hume. basically my overall point is this, in a way that is as minimally cop-out as possible (not just by agnostic/atheist standards, but by the standards of logic as used by the Western world), I want religious people to asnwer two questions. 1. why do you believe in God? 2. How can you possibly believe in a transcendental power (and not even that, but a specific one with tenets you read outta a book), and not feel, well, ridiculous? in the first question, i want to basically know if you really believe because there is a reason to, or if you (honestly) just do it because it makes you feel better (a la the "I can't imagine living in a world without God" statement). and for 2, I want to know why so many people who use logic in every other facet of life so readily are willing to throw it out the window when it comes to this.


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 04:56 AM on November 17, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

ok, gs-deus...
if u are right and the fetus feels pain at 6 weeks, than i would be willing to reconsider my position. i have been pro-life in the past, and i keep an open mind. i don't really think that's right though. please, somebody who knows more, say something. i will try to do some research. i never said it was fine to kill people who were in comas, just to let them go if they are never coming back. i don't consider that murder, i consider it allowing someone a dignified death instead of lying unconsious on a bed for years and years. if someone could come back, then i am all for keeping them on life support. but that is a decision that needs to be made by the loved ones in conjunction with a medical expert. if i am correct about the fetus feeling no pain (maybe before 6 weeks, how would you respond to that...), then i am not contributing suffering, so in that case I would be right. again, for your next point, i never said just go around unplugging people. i meant people who are not coming back. sheesh, i'm not a psycho. the fetus is as aware as a baby in a dark room???? the whole time, from conception on? what period are u talking about? what medical evidence supports that? could u please refer me to a site that doesn't have the words "conservative", "I love God", or "Christians forever" in the name? then i will feel comfortable it is an impartial medical website. now..."9 out of ten babies are adopted before they are born- the rest are adopted shortly after. " where did you get that info? why are there then thousands and thousands of children in adoption services for years and years? and by the way I am all for adoption. since i'm gay, I don't have much choice. now, i am not saying illegal abortions, nblahblahblah are more important than stopping murder, what i am saying is if i am right and it causes no pain and no change in mental state, then yes those social problems are more important. in one case, you do something, and no one is hurt, and in the other you do not do something, and as a result many suffer. but again, if i am wrong scientifically none of those points hold up (unless you are a utilitarian, which i am not - or at least not usually). an you are the one who criticized someone for asking why people are more important than other animals, so I was just responding to that statement. basically, i apologize for my ignorance if i am wrong. so....go ahead and refer me to something that shows impartial medical evidence that they feel pain and are aware, and when all that happens. and please, other people, give me some stuff too.


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 05:15 AM on November 17, 2002 | IP
thistownwilleatu

|       |       Report Post



Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

The day anyone finds an impartial abortion website is the day I will undergo a sex change.  They don't exist Alexander.


-------
"The greatest evil is not done in those sordid dens of evil that Dickens loved to paint ... but is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted) in clear, carpeted, warmed, well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices." - Thomas Merton

"I thank my God for every remembrance of you." - Paul
 


Posts: 341 | Posted: 7:14 PM on November 17, 2002 | IP
Gs_Deus

|        |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

ok, gs-deus...
if u are right and the fetus feels pain at 6 weeks, than i would be willing to reconsider my position. i have been pro-life in the past, and i keep an open mind. i don't really think that's right though. please, somebody who knows more, say something. i will try to do some research.


http://www.parentsplace.com/first9months/main.html <--- hereís a good secular site you can use to educate yourself!

i never said it was fine to kill people who were in comas, just to let them go if they are never coming back. i don't consider that murder, i consider it allowing someone a dignified death instead of lying unconsious on a bed for years and years. if someone could come back, then i am all for keeping them on life support. but that is a decision that needs to be made by the loved ones in conjunction with a medical expert


You can never know if somebody is going to come back. If the person is on life support, and wont come back- thatís fine, take them off. But Euthanasia is killing somebody that has a chance to continue living. They are two very different things. Like the fetus- he is most likely going to live!

if i am correct about the fetus feeling no pain (maybe before 6 weeks, how would you respond to that...), then i am not contributing suffering, so in that case I would be right.


If you were completely numb, deaf, not able to scream, not able to smell, and blind, and somebody chopped off your head- would you be suffering? Yes! You would be- youíre dying- thatís suffering! Nobody has a right to choose if somebody wants to live or not- thatís not your choice to decide- let the baby live, let the baby choose to live, instead of you imposing your own favorable choice on the little child.

the fetus is as aware as a baby in a dark room???? the whole time, from conception on? what period are u talking about?


I defined what period- an 8-month-old. But just because the baby canít feel anything from conception on means that we can kill it? Are you crazy? :-p

why are there then thousands and thousands of children in adoption services for years and years?


I said that 9 out of ten babies are adopted before birth, the rest are adopted later or not adopted. Every year 2 Million couples are ready and willing to adopt a new baby. In fact, my friends have been waiting years to adopt a child, and just adopted one! The problem doesnít come from newborns, but from children whoís parents died, abandoned them, etc. This is the problem- people donít want to adopt kids that are already older.

now, i am not saying illegal abortions, nblahblahblah are more important than stopping murder, what i am saying is if i am right and it causes no pain and no change in mental state, then yes those social problems are more important. in one case, you do something, and no one is hurt, and in the other you do not do something, and as a result many suffer. but again, if i am wrong scientifically none of those points hold up (unless you are a utilitarian, which i am not - or at least not usually). an you are the one who criticized someone for asking why people are more important than other animals, so I was just responding to that statement.


The pain begins at 6 weeks as I have shown- the fetus starts moving at two months, so itís already developed itís nervous system some time before, at 6 weeks. Yes, it can feel everything that happens to him or her. But just because the baby canít feel anything doesnít mean social problems are more important- would you kill a little baby by chopping off itís head and legs (the baby is paralized and canít feel anything), so that you can deal with your SOCIAL problems? Whatís more important, killing a life or killing your ďsocial problemsĒ. Life is much more important than making friends.
I donít think youíre dumb- you are very intelligent, but you must understand that it is wrong to kill a fetus, because it is a human, and has the same rights as the next person. :-)


-------
TorchX.com- conservative youth site.
 


Posts: 49 | Posted: 8:57 PM on November 17, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

this town...you never answered any of my questions...

gs-deus...i will check out that site and get back to you. but how do u define suffering? death is not necessarily suffering. suffering is pain (either emotional or physical). if death was always suffering, than what about dying peacefully in your sleep at an old age? that's why people say, "He didn't feel a thing. He didn't suffer." Is that just BS?


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 12:00 AM on November 18, 2002 | IP
Gs_Deus

|        |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

"Death" itself is suffering- because you have to face heaven, hell, or whatever you believe- nothingness if you want. The fact that you leave this world- or dont even get a chance to see it- is suffering. If I stole a nice ice cream cone from you- you WOULD be suffering.


-------
TorchX.com- conservative youth site.
 


Posts: 49 | Posted: 12:29 AM on November 18, 2002 | IP
Cool-Hand-Dave

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

that's all just a personal definition, gs.  some people use death to escape suffering.  i do agree, however, that abortion causes suffering both to the baby and the mother.  the baby because of the ways they are put to death.  i mean being ripped apart or burned up has to hurt.  the mother because of the emotional ties and i don't doubt she experiences some pain and such from the abortion itself.  but, gs, your definition of suffering is completely opinion based.  i'd be sad if you took my ice cream cone, but i doubt i'd suffer.


-------
Cool Hand Dave
 


Posts: 134 | Posted: 12:48 AM on November 18, 2002 | IP
thistownwilleatu

|       |       Report Post



Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

You're right I haven't answered any of your questions...I can't by your criteria.  If you completely disregard abortion facts that are from a biased web site then you don't really have any.  Abortion is so controversial that EVERY website seems to be either hardcore pro-life or pro-choice, no objective, neutral source.  If anyone finds or knows of any completely, or mostly unbiased website on the subject tell me, because I'm yet to find one.


-------
"The greatest evil is not done in those sordid dens of evil that Dickens loved to paint ... but is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted) in clear, carpeted, warmed, well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices." - Thomas Merton

"I thank my God for every remembrance of you." - Paul
 


Posts: 341 | Posted: 02:43 AM on November 18, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

this town...
not by my criteria???? you mean logic? i am impressed, usually i am frustrated by a cop-out answer, but you copped-out of an answer altogether! and i never said i would totally disregard a biased website. but there must be info out there about abortions in medical manuals, etc., that are published by the american medical association or something.
gs-deus...
you can't use heaven and hell to define suffering in an argument about whether to define abortion as suffering and therefore murder in a secular society. those are not proper criteria for a secular debate. laws are not passed based on heaven and hell. and if its nothingness, how is that suffering, especially if it is before the six week cut-off point you mentioned, in which the fetus experiences nothingness already? you compared stealing my ice cream cone to never getting to see this world. bad analogy. the proper analogy would be if u stole my ice cream cone, but i never knew i had one to begin with. would i person feel bad about that? you already seem to have conceded to the fetus not feeling anything before 6 weeks, so if that is true, is abortion before then ok?


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 09:23 AM on November 18, 2002 | IP
thistownwilleatu

|       |       Report Post



Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I fail to see the "logic" questions.


-------
"The greatest evil is not done in those sordid dens of evil that Dickens loved to paint ... but is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted) in clear, carpeted, warmed, well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices." - Thomas Merton

"I thank my God for every remembrance of you." - Paul
 


Posts: 341 | Posted: 09:29 AM on November 18, 2002 | IP
Gs_Deus

|        |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

you can't use heaven and hell to define suffering in an argument about whether to define abortion as suffering and therefore murder in a secular society. those are not proper criteria for a secular debate.


I told you- nothingness if you'd like. It doesn't matter. The analogy I used was perfectly acceptable. Anyway, if you had that Ice Cream- it's still yours! Little Babies don't know that they can have sex- can we take away sex from them at a young age, and when they grow up expect them the be fine? Of course not! They don't care or know about it, but they will!


-------
TorchX.com- conservative youth site.
 


Posts: 49 | Posted: 5:14 PM on November 18, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

and i told you, "and if its nothingness, how is that suffering, especially if it is before the six week cut-off point you mentioned, in which the fetus experiences nothingness already?"
I shouldn't have to repeat myself. When i respond to u, I respond to your WHOLE argument, not just the parts I want to. Please do me the same favor. my point above is as follows: if death is nothingness, there is no change for the fetus that feels nothing (which is before 6 weeks, if I concede to your scientific analysis...).  
your ice cream cone analogy sucked, and your new "sex" one sucks for the same reason,. You said...
"Little Babies don't know that they can have sex- can we take away sex from them at a young age, and when they grow up expect them the be fine? Of course not! They don't care or know about it, but they will!"
The babies in your analogy will eventually know what they have lost, and that realization, as you put it, is the cause of their suffering. The fetus goes from nothingness to nothingness, and never knows the difference, so what realization in that case causes suffering??? None. If a person with no senses was handed an ice cream cone, and then you took it away, how would they suffer?


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 09:51 AM on November 20, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

thistown...
i am getting frustrated
you don't see "logic" questions???
here they are, plain as day...
1. how can u use empiricism and logic in every other facet of life and yet not feel ridiculous about abandoning it when it comes to religion?
2. why do YOU think you believe in God?
3. doesn't it bother you that mathematically the chances of you being right in your religion are astronomically small (there is an equal chance barney the purple dinosaur created the cosmos)?


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 09:59 AM on November 20, 2002 | IP
fallingupwards84

|       |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

doesnt it bother you that the chances of the universe forming without a God is like one in a zillion?


-------
i am a liberal chrisitian and proud of it!!!

"Those who produce should have, but we know that those who produce the most - that is, those who work hardest, and at the most difficult and most menial tasks, have the least." - Eugene Debs
 


Posts: 971 | Posted: 2:50 PM on November 20, 2002 | IP
thistownwilleatu

|       |       Report Post



Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

When did logic and God seperate?  When did people begin to see the two as opposing forces? both attempting to cancel the other out?  So I will answer your question.  

I warn you, this will sound cheesy.

As trite and generic as it sounds I cannot look at the world around me, the dazzling array of people I interact with everyday, the perfection of the earth's animals, the unity of nature, the unflawed sychronization of the tiny mechanics of our bodies, the trees, the sun and the universe.  The fact that the earth is absolutely ideal for my existence and the existence of everything around me.  God or no God, one cannot deny the fact that we live in a beautiful, mysterious, and miraculous world.  But in all this there exists such fragility.  One chromosome out of alignment and humanity is lost, a few light years closer to the sun and all we have is a scorched wasteland.  My personal logic tells me that this kind of thing doesn't just conveniently happen to fall in place.  

It seems the reason people don't believe in God is because this wondrous set of laws that I believe he created aren't broken byu him to prove his existence.  The idea that God would perform a miracle for someone to prove his existence-- secretly lifting a pencil from its cup, for instance-- is childish. I did the same thing when I was ten. But our paths diverged from there. To lift a pencil off the desk would be contrary to the laws of this universe. These are not laws that God cannot break. They are the equivalent of speech. To me, it is not the possibility of a temporary suspension of God's laws which would prove His existence, but the continuous, dependable expression of those laws which does. The most incredible sunset I ever saw is proof of that existence. Action, reaction. Cause, result. Mathmatics. Quantum physics. Indeed, I find the way the world works more cause for belief in the existence of God than some random miracle. Without meaning to sound trite, I believe we're living in a constant miracle. The expression of those laws, and I dare say, the artistic expression is what keeps me coming back for more.  The fact that I don't know anything, we as men know almost nothing of the nature of the world around us, and we never will, we weren't meant to understand.  Have you ever tried to explain yourself to a cockroach?

There is far to much creativity and progression beyond the necessary, beyond what would be ample and conventional for me to believe that my existence and everything else's is originally the product of blind luck and then from there on simply striving to survive.  Why color?  Shape?  Music and love?  We don't need any of these to exist.  

And then there is the bible.  Long before I believed in a God of any kind, I saw the greatness of the book, specifically the new testament.  It embodied, long before I became a Christian, what I wanted the world to be like, what I wanted to be like.  It fits the world perfectly.  Everyday we prove more and more of the Bible to be true historically.  It coincides perfectly with other written historys.  I honestly believe that no man could have simply conjured the bible out of his own imagination.  It's far to revolutionary, things men had never thought of.  And it's flawless.  Utopian.  But we as humans are anything but flawless, as you stated before, I am a weak person.  People die, are killed, children starve, Jesus is crucified, etc.  The abuses of humans against other humans dose not negate God's existence whatsoever. When we discuss the history of earth, we do not discuss God's history. God does not have a history of abuse and hatred. Man does.  We were not created to be God-clones.  Where is the freedom in that?  Therefore we choose. And bombs are built. Kittens, puppies, parents and children, all die. All in the name of freedom. Complete freedom.


The point is, I cannot explain why I believe in God on a level where anyone but me will understand.  This sounds, I know, like a Gs-Deus cop-out, but really I have no reason to attempt to explain it.  It is about me, and I personally can't wake up anymore and not in some sense see him.  Yes I doubt his existence sometimes, but then I meet someone new, do a few days on the Appalachain Trail, and I can't force myself to even consider the possibility that he doesn't run this whole deal.  I'm happy, far happier than I was before I became a Christian, and that is quite enough.

This all sounds so pathetically melodramatic and overdone, I hate the fact that this all sounds like a broken record to you (I know it does) but this is honestly what I believe.  I've always respected you Alexander and your lifestlye and beliefs, I know you will do the same.




-------
"The greatest evil is not done in those sordid dens of evil that Dickens loved to paint ... but is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted) in clear, carpeted, warmed, well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices." - Thomas Merton

"I thank my God for every remembrance of you." - Paul
 


Posts: 341 | Posted: 3:50 PM on November 20, 2002 | IP
fallingupwards84

|       |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

will said what i meant to say best


-------
i am a liberal chrisitian and proud of it!!!

"Those who produce should have, but we know that those who produce the most - that is, those who work hardest, and at the most difficult and most menial tasks, have the least." - Eugene Debs
 


Posts: 971 | Posted: 4:07 PM on November 20, 2002 | IP
kc2gwx

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from fallingupwards84 at 2:50 PM on November 20, 2002 :
doesnt it bother you that the chances of the universe forming without a God is like one in a zillion?



Actually, it's impossible. It defies the first and second laws of phyics. Evolutionists seem to forget this fact.


-------
Sam, KC2GWX
 


Posts: 101 | Posted: 10:02 PM on November 20, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

ok, thistown...
nice post. i liked it, and i respect it fine. ok, that out of the way, you never once used logic in it. there is no such thing as "personal logic". if there was, why would they teach "logic courses"? you used senitment. you FEEL the presence of God in allt he wondrous things you see and how everything works so in tune, but you do not DEDUCE it empirically. there are many equally good explanations, so you choose religious faith (maybe not "choose") out of those logical possibilities because you FEEL it.
kc2gwx...
why is it more believable that an eternal being with no beginning created the universe than it is to believe that the universe itself is eternal and has no beginning? and how is God creating Adam and Eve more compatible with the second law of thermodynamics than evolution???



-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 12:55 AM on November 21, 2002 | IP
thistownwilleatu

|       |       Report Post



Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

You're probably right, I didn't use much logic, but let's just say I was right and there is a God.  Logic is the attempt to grasp a concept,etc. using the human mind.  Assuming that there is a God, do you really think that we could use "deductive reasoning" to figure him out.  Could the cockroach use logic to understand quantum physics, poilitics, and my thought process on gay rights?  No.  His mind, as hard as it is to admit, is not the center of the universe....if there is a God we are not even in the same league when it comes to the mind.  You have to admit that.  So it would make sense that logic, reasoning, etc. cannot be the only tools you use when addressing God.  We only have what we've learned here on Earth, and this God is not a part of it.  The last thing I want you to interpret is that I think that logic and reasoning are bad things.  I believe that we, as humans, need them to survive.  But I also believe that it's ok to say, I don't understand, because we shouldn't.  No one will ever understand this God that we are talking about.  Not that we should give up trying, but to think that we can use "deductive reasoning" to prove his existence and figure him out is ludicrous.  We are cockroaches.  

If anything God and proof don't mix.  It's been going on for a thousand years, no one can prove that God exists just as no one can prove otherwise.  I think it was meant to be that way, because proof that God existed would completely destroy Christianity.  Then there is no faith, and faith in my opinion is far better than proof.  


-------
"The greatest evil is not done in those sordid dens of evil that Dickens loved to paint ... but is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted) in clear, carpeted, warmed, well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices." - Thomas Merton

"I thank my God for every remembrance of you." - Paul
 


Posts: 341 | Posted: 01:30 AM on November 21, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

thistown...
okay, so we agree, logic can not be used to conclude there is a God. but then we part, when u say, "oh, I can't use logic, so I will conclude it otherwise, using faith". why do that, other than to make yourself feel better? i also agree I do not understand, and never will fully understand, because the human mind has limits, of perception and knowedge. but knowing that limit, I don't try to take it any farther with fantasy. i accept the limitations of my knowledge. i am humble. i am not arguing against the existence of God, I am arguing against the belief in the existence of God. there is a MAJOR difference!!! bu k-what's-his-name is doing just what u said cannot be done. he just posted that the 2nd law of thermodynamics proves there is a God (also check out his propaganda in the 2nd law thread). so basically what he is doing is trying to show the limits of science (no duh, it is science, we don't know everything), and then fill in the gaps of ignornace with fantasy. he actually said the 2nd law proves God created Heaven, with some quote from the Institute for Creation Research!!!! that's cheating. you can't say science fails to prove such and such, so therefore religion is right. it just doesn't follow logically. saying A does not = B does not mean A=C.
kc2gwx...
i included some stuff for u to check out above, and below i have pasted the same answer i gave to you in the 2nd law thread just now.
---
that sounded like the most outrageously obvious propaganda I have ever seen!!!
I love how the author jumps logically from his point that energy cannot be ex nihilo to heaven: "Since energy could not create itself, the most scientific and logical conclusion to which we could possibly come is that: "In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth."
how is heaven derived from 2nd law of thermodynamics???
I did some research today (which for us "evolutionists" means looking at several different kinds of sources, not just the ones blatantly trying to defend a pre-determined point of view...), and here's what made sense to me (the higher math eludes me): the creationist point makes sense only if you are talking about life on earth as a closed system. but it is an open system, fueled by energy elsewhere in the universe (e.g. the sun), which is itself the ultimately closed system. (i don't know where you heard evolutionists' argument is based on the assumption that there is a closed system; in fact, it is seeing the earth as an OPEN system that helps our argument) now, you said, "Evolution requires organisms to become more complex over time, entropy states organisms become less complicated over time." that's just plain not true. check out sources besides just religious ones. entropy refers to the GENERAL flow of the UNIVERSE to disorder, but in this system not every component has to constantly demonstrate a flow towards disorder. now if we trace that energy back to a time, that might be the big bang, which could be one transition in a cycle of infinite universes through infinite time. energy building and disassembling forever. I ask, how is that less plausible than an eternal entity?


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 02:22 AM on November 21, 2002 | IP
kc2gwx

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

"now if we trace that energy back to a time, that might be the big bang, which could be one transition in a cycle of infinite universes through infinite time. energy building and disassembling forever. I ask, how is that less plausible than an eternal entity?"

Your thought defies the first and second laws of physics. There would be no reason for any of this to happen spontaniously, and it could not 'accidentally' create the laws of gravity, ect.

You are asking two completely different questions. You are asking me to believe that matter has streched back in time infinitly. That is impossible, it must have had a beggining. God is not matter, nor can you put him on our timescale.

"(i don't know where you heard evolutionists' argument is based on the assumption that there is a closed system; in fact, it is seeing the earth as an OPEN system that helps our argument)"

You must not have read my post closely. Yes, the earth is an open system, I never said it wasn't. But open systems undergo as much, or more, entropy than closed systems (which don't really exist anyway).

"but in this system not every component has to constantly demonstrate a flow towards disorder. "

This is true, I was making a generalization. But what have you seen, in the long run, that is more complex than when it started?


---
Sam, KC2GWX
 



-------
Sam, KC2GWX
 


Posts: 101 | Posted: 3:03 PM on November 21, 2002 | IP
kc2gwx

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

"he just posted that the 2nd law of thermodynamics proves there is a God (also check out his propaganda in the 2nd law thread)."

Well, actually I quoted that. I think it is a good conclusion, but I did not state that myself.

Their point is, if evolution is impossible, what else is it but creation? I don't know...but I think that is what they were saying.


-------
Sam, KC2GWX
 


Posts: 101 | Posted: 3:17 PM on November 21, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

first, i am not saying matter stretches back infinitely, rather i am saying energy may stretch back infinitely, and somehow recreates matter in successive cycles (why does it make more sense to believe in an intelligent creator outside the timeline than it is to believe in some self-sustaining energy source without intelligent design that exists outside the timeline in the same and creates new universes over and over for infinity, and on an infinite timeline, must eventually create life from random combinations of matter?) second, the assumption of a heaven and a God from the 2nd law totally reveals the absurd path religious "research" of the kind ICR stands for. you criticize science for not explaining everything, and attempt to use science to do so, but then fill in the missing pieces with faith. You can use the scientific method to deduce a God. third, you say there is no such thing as a perfectly closed system. why not? finally, you aks for an example of something that is more complicated since it started. answer: my life. hahaha


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 11:15 PM on November 21, 2002 | IP
fallingupwards84

|       |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

i will take a quote from one of the greatest bands out there, System of a Down:
"science has failed our world. it fails to recognize the single most potent element of human existence, which is faith."


-------
i am a liberal chrisitian and proud of it!!!

"Those who produce should have, but we know that those who produce the most - that is, those who work hardest, and at the most difficult and most menial tasks, have the least." - Eugene Debs
 


Posts: 971 | Posted: 11:45 PM on November 21, 2002 | IP
Exxoss

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Gs_Deus at 11:41 PM on November 15, 2002 :
WARNING; these pictures are GRAPHIC but the TRUTH about abortion. Unless you want to be close-minded and not view these, you will understand that abortion is wrong and does kill a child!

THESE PICTURES ARE ALL MEDICALLY PROVED TO BE REAL ABORTED FETUSES.

http://www.survivors.la/abortionpics.html



...Those pictures nearly made me cry.  I sat in my chair thinking about how these babies died-what it was like to be a fetus being aborted.  Then I thought about the people that go through not getting an abortion, and also found this site by a girl who did not get an abortion and what happened to her...

Here is her website/story.

That also made me sad.  That someone didn't get an abortion, was beaqten almost to death by her parents, and gang raped to have the baby conceived...Please, tell me where your God was when she waws gang raped, when her dad almost beat her to death...Where was your God when she believed in him?  Now, the baby is dead, killed by the father from abuse at only 3 years old...  So whats better.  The baby to (not) feel any/little pain when he dies, or the baby to feel every single slap, kick, punch and whip?  You tell me...that abortion is wrong...


-------
I am Exxoss, come to save you all from your impending doom!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

-Exxoss
 


Posts: 438 | Posted: 8:37 PM on November 23, 2002 | IP
thistownwilleatu

|       |       Report Post



Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
+1

Rate this post:

Ok.  Abortion is wrong, if the only reason that you think it is right is to prevent future suffering.  This girl is a tiny statistic.  The baby is a tiny statistic.  Period.  And even so, it's not your choice om whether or not the child's bad childhood overrules the life as a whole, or vice-versa.  All it takes is 1 single, solitary child to have endured child-abuse, neglect, etc. and still grow up to be happy and love life for your justifications to be wrong.  

And God never claimed to have created a perfect world.  He gave man choice.  Free will, we are not God clones.  Jesus's own disciples were stoned and crucified.  The fact that evil exists in the world does not negate the existence of God.  


-------
"The greatest evil is not done in those sordid dens of evil that Dickens loved to paint ... but is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted) in clear, carpeted, warmed, well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices." - Thomas Merton

"I thank my God for every remembrance of you." - Paul
 


Posts: 341 | Posted: 9:23 PM on November 23, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

examples are a bad way to argue, no matter what side you're on. bringing god into the equation doesn't help much either. you can't convince non-believers that way, and it's a pointless justification once you get into talking about legality, because this is a secular society. Evil in the world (I am using the term loosely to include bad crap that happens, cause the term "evil" doesn't mean that much to me), in my opinion, makes it pretty hard to believe in God, since he is perfect, how could anything imperfect, or even with the potential to be imperfect (which actually really just means imperfect) come out of him??? and that's just talking about people. what about hurricanes, rockslides, etc??? none of that can be blamed on free will.
ok, back to abortion...
please respond to my point that got buried under gs_deus' babble. if the fetus is not conscious in any way of itself or its surroundings, death will be no change in status for it. there will be no suffering.


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 08:48 AM on November 24, 2002 | IP
    
Multiple pages for this topic [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 ]

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
Multiple pages for this topic [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

Topic options: Lock topic | Unlock topic | Make Topic Sticky | Remove Sticky | Delete thread | Move thread | Merge thread

 

©†YouDebate.com
Powered by: ScareCrow version 2.12
© 2001 Jonathan Bravata. All rights reserved.