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
     War on Abortion
       Lets draw  lines in the sand.

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

    
dreadon

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Hello everyone,

The "War on Abortion" that’s great, more battles to be fought on the human frontier. I find more and more people are drawing lines in the sand and calling for sides. Personally, I find this whole deal with the War on Abortion to be inane and pointless. Abortion is a gray area that people are trying to make black and white. Anyone who has a solid grip on reality knows that nothing in life is this way. Nothing is just as simple as black and white. Yet we fight for it to be so. I mean look at how ANY society is run.  Within any society man has ever created we have fought for what we believe in but never think of the consequences or never care I should say.

Abortion is murder. That seems to be the consensus with pro-life opinions. Some choose to go as far as saying it should be against the law. So lets break this down.

1)Abortion is murder
2)It should be made illegal

Illegal, just like shooting another human being is illegal. Right? Has the law ever stopped someone from shooting someone else? Bottom line, no, it hasn’t…ever. If anything the law has made it easier with the out flux of illegal firearms being sold by crooked cops.

Now, breaking it down into a simple form like that isn’t acceptable because murder has certain guidelines. I know…guidelines…crazy isn’t it? Murder isn’t as simple as ending someone’s life. It means to end someone’s life with premeditated malice. Now unless abortion is against the law, which it isn’t, and every abortion clinic is run with the malice needed for abortion to be even considered as murder, why would you keep referring to abortion as murder? There is no logic there. At lest not within our legal boundaries…. yet.

Lets take this “War” into a true battlefield for a moment. Abortion is murder and war is? Well, war is justifiable. Therefore all the men, women, children and un-born children that die are casualties of war not victims of murder. They weren’t murdered because of the simply fact war isn’t outlawed, its justified.

The question is simple. Why as a society would we allow war to be justified but not abortions? Both have casualties and no murderers. Why can we call abortion doctor’s murderers but not the troops fighting a war? I can’t find the logic in it anywhere. Not to mention the hypocrisy of it all. If someone can answer me without involving their God and his “will” I'll accept the answer, and maybe even join a side to fight on. Until then I will remain in this gray area.








My own personal opinion on abortion is simple. I don’t care. And I won’t care until the day my girlfriend gets pregnant and tells me she’s going to abort my child. I’m sure some people can’t comprehend my apathy towards the issue but for me its like hearing about a man being shot on the news I simply think to myself “humans suck” and change the channel to watch Family Guy. This doesn’t mean I’m in denial about the whole subject it just means I can’t have a definite opinion on it until it happens to me. And lets face it, being a male rules out the possibility of ever getting pregnant so with that ruled out my opinion as a male isn’t even relevant because I wont ever carry a child inside of me. I will never know or feel anything like that. So what right do I have to force my opinion onto women? None.

 


Posts: 7 | Posted: 5:35 PM on March 29, 2005 | IP
Peter87

|      |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

What a perfect description of abortion... well done, there however a couple of flaws...

Many people have admitted that if they were 100% certain they wouldn't get caught they would commit murder, hence anti-murder laws have stopped murders...

Plus there is much debate into the justification of a war...

Although I agree with you entirly, the legality of abortion is somthing that should be decided my women, and if to be even more specific women of child bearing age, if we are to say men's opinions are less important becuase they will nether be pregnant and will nether have an abortion, then therefore we must say that women who are too old to be pregnant opinions should be viewed the same, however you could say if they have gone through child birth and or abortion then there opinion should also be seen as valid.


-------
Why should we bow to the will of anyone? Especialy a man who our country but another voted for?
 


Posts: 301 | Posted: 5:50 PM on March 29, 2005 | IP
dreadon

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Yeah, everyone can have an opinion but its when these opinions get set into action we have to decide whos opinions really count and matter. At that point things arent just gray....they are fuzzy.

But, in responce to your comment on people being 100% certain of commiting murder...

Its one thing to say/think something, and a totaly different thing to do actaully do it.
 


Posts: 7 | Posted: 6:19 PM on March 29, 2005 | IP
dreadon

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Sorry, posted by mistake....ill continue....

Laws are set into place not to stop criminals....but more as a form of damage control. Someone commits a crime, the law deals with them. Laws arent set in place to stop anything, they are there to deal with the aftermath of the crime commited.

So saying a law stops someone from doing something is slightly warped because at the end of the day i can choose to kill, or run a  red light...regardless of the law.
 


Posts: 7 | Posted: 6:36 PM on March 29, 2005 | IP
Peter87

|      |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Yes, but at the back of your mind would be the thought of being caught and punished. For example if you were desperate for money and there weren't anti-theft laws you would be more likly to commit theft becuase you would know that you wouldn't get punished. However with anti-theft laws you are much more likly to go job seeking. Laws/Punishment are also there to deter people from commiting crimes.

Another example, in facist regimes, many people want to speak out against the regime (and some do) however the majority of people will not speak out becuase of the laws and punishment in place for commiting such an act.


-------
Why should we bow to the will of anyone? Especialy a man who our country but another voted for?
 


Posts: 301 | Posted: 08:29 AM on March 30, 2005 | IP
dreadon

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Hmmmm....

Well, I can agree on one thing. The punishment of breaking the law is a factor in ones decision to actually commit a crime/break the law but once again, as an individual I could easily not abide the law, regardless of if I get caught or do not, therefore making the actual law itself obsolete because it is the punishment that weighs in on my decision not the law itself.


" Many people have admitted that if they were 100% certain they wouldn't get caught they would commit murder, hence anti-murder laws have stopped murders"

See what you said conflicts with itself. If they would do it because they WOULDN'T get CAUGHT, as in not be punished, they would do it. But see, a law is a rule and in this case the rule under law is...."don't kill because by law its conceded murder and if you are caught breaking this law you will be punished"...

Well, okay big deal. What backs-up/enforces the law and makes people think twice is the punishment of breaking said law.

Back to what I was saying before:

A law won’t stop a person from becoming a criminal. That’s in fact why we call them criminals because they have broken a law. What we can agree on is, the punishment will. Sometimes.

 


Posts: 7 | Posted: 8:45 PM on March 30, 2005 | IP
Peter87

|      |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Yes it is the punishment thats stops people from commiting crimes, but laws and punishment are linked very closely.

However anti-abortion laws wouldn't stop every woman from having an abortion. Many women would have ilegal abortions, which would be far more dangerous than to have abortions legal. Here you can't change laws on abortion you have to change opinions on abortion.


-------
Why should we bow to the will of anyone? Especialy a man who our country but another voted for?
 


Posts: 301 | Posted: 1:26 PM on March 31, 2005 | IP
got_dooie

|      |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

The "War on Abortion" that’s great, more battles to be fought on the human frontier. I find more and more people are drawing lines in the sand and calling for sides. Personally, I find this whole deal with the War on Abortion to be inane and pointless. Abortion is a gray area that people are trying to make black and white. Anyone who has a solid grip on reality knows that nothing in life is this way. Nothing is just as simple as black and white. Yet we fight for it to be so. I mean look at how ANY society is run.  Within any society man has ever created we have fought for what we believe in but never think of the consequences or never care I should say.

Abortion is murder. That seems to be the consensus with pro-life opinions. Some choose to go as far as saying it should be against the law. So lets break this down.

1)Abortion is murder
2)It should be made illegal

Illegal, just like shooting another human being is illegal. Right? Has the law ever stopped someone from shooting someone else? Bottom line, no, it hasn’t…ever. If anything the law has made it easier with the out flux of illegal firearms being sold by crooked cops.

Now, breaking it down into a simple form like that isn’t acceptable because murder has certain guidelines. I know…guidelines…crazy isn’t it? Murder isn’t as simple as ending someone’s life. It means to end someone’s life with premeditated malice. Now unless abortion is against the law, which it isn’t, and every abortion clinic is run with the malice needed for abortion to be even considered as murder, why would you keep referring to abortion as murder? There is no logic there. At lest not within our legal boundaries…. yet.

Lets take this “War” into a true battlefield for a moment. Abortion is murder and war is? Well, war is justifiable. Therefore all the men, women, children and un-born children that die are casualties of war not victims of murder. They weren’t murdered because of the simply fact war isn’t outlawed, its justified.

The question is simple. Why as a society would we allow war to be justified but not abortions? Both have casualties and no murderers. Why can we call abortion doctor’s murderers but not the troops fighting a war? I can’t find the logic in it anywhere. Not to mention the hypocrisy of it all. If someone can answer me without involving their God and his “will” I'll accept the answer, and maybe even join a side to fight on. Until then I will remain in this gray area.


Logically speaking, you come NOWHERE CLOSE to even making sense of your argument, much less demanding that God not be involved.

Murder, according to you, should be defined by law, so therefore if the law hasn't defined something as muder then we shouldn't call it such?  The answer is of course: NO!  Can you give me proof that the law is the "entity," that is self-sufficient, who holds the very truth to regard certain acts as murder?  Or is murder murder? and even if the law doesn't define it so, it still is murder?

Secondly.  We aren't all nine-year-old kids on here, so let's avoid the straw man fallacy and get on with our syllogisms the right way...shall we?  

But to content you, I will address your idea of "War on Abortion."  When you speak of "War on" a certain something, that means you are fighting that certain something.  It does not mean that certain something is now equated with war.  Example:  Declaring War on Germany.  You are fighting Germany...not war = Germany.  To fight against something and to have that something equated with the fight is two totally different things.  Furthermore, who says that the aborted unborn children are not "victims" of this war?  They precisely ARE the victims.  Again, going back to actual war, the victims of such are not victims or murder?  Not if they consented towards the death, i.e. soldiers.  But if they are innocent bystanders that get shot ON PURPOSE...they ARE victims of murder.

What you essentially are doing is playing a word game, yet you still lose as you do not realize how to define your words correctly.



-------
I always live in the past, the present is not not, the future is not yet, therfore only the past.
 


Posts: 84 | Posted: 7:41 PM on April 19, 2005 | IP
K8

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

it is still incorrect to use the term 'murder' as the law does not define abortion as such. You will find that most definitions of the term include the words 'unlawful' or 'illiegal' - words that, in the case of abortion, do not apply.
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 10:29 PM on April 19, 2005 | IP
got_dooie

|      |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

it is still incorrect to use the term 'murder' as the law does not define abortion as such. You will find that most definitions of the term include the words 'unlawful' or 'illiegal' - words that, in the case of abortion, do not apply.


Again we are back playing word games.  What other words are there, in the english language, if you look up in the dictionary, would give you the definition as "murder?"  How about NONE?  Well that is until you make up a word call "man-killing-innocent-man" then under such word will you find the definition as murder.  Murder is an action.  An action is murderous if it is the intent killing of an innocent human being.  So until you can prove to me that the unborn child is not an innocent human being, you cannot ask a person to stop call it murder...because it very well could be.

(Edited by got_dooie 4/20/2005 at 01:18 AM).

(Edited by got_dooie 4/20/2005 at 01:21 AM).


-------
I always live in the past, the present is not not, the future is not yet, therfore only the past.
 


Posts: 84 | Posted: 01:04 AM on April 20, 2005 | IP
K8

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Well, it would be more accurate to call it "man-killing-innocent-man" (or 'person' but i won't get too technical here...) than murder as, again, the law does not define abortion as murder due to its legality.

Quote from got_dooie at 7:41 PM on April 19, 2005 :
Murder, according to you, should be defined by law, so therefore if the law hasn't defined something as muder then we shouldn't call it such?  The answer is of course: NO!  Can you give me proof that the law is the "entity," that is self-sufficient, who holds the very truth to regard certain acts as murder?  Or is murder murder? and even if the law doesn't define it so, it still is murder?


The term 'murder' is defined by the law - most of its definitions have been influenced by the law, and this can be seen through the use of words such as 'unlawful' and 'illegal' being used in such definitions. The law is mankinds unequaled attempt to define what is right and wrong - what better definition is there to be followed?

When you call abortion 'murder', you name the doctor who performed the procedure as a 'murderer', and the woman who received/requested the procedure as an 'accessory to murder' (not to mention anyone else who knowingly did not hinder the procedure).

This is not justified, as you are making criminals out of people who have done nothing illegal, and advancing the stigma associated with women who seek abortions. This is, in itself, an evil thing to do.

By calling abortion 'murder', you are simply putting foward your opinion that it is not a justified killing.
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 03:29 AM on April 21, 2005 | IP
K8

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

sorry - didn't post that one too well!
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 03:30 AM on April 21, 2005 | IP
got_dooie

|      |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

The term 'murder' is defined by the law - most of its definitions have been influenced by the law, and this can be seen through the use of words such as 'unlawful' and 'illegal' being used in such definitions. The law is mankinds unequaled attempt to define what is right and wrong - what better definition is there to be followed?

When you call abortion 'murder', you name the doctor who performed the procedure as a 'murderer', and the woman who received/requested the procedure as an 'accessory to murder' (not to mention anyone else who knowingly did not hinder the procedure).

This is not justified, as you are making criminals out of people who have done nothing illegal, and advancing the stigma associated with women who seek abortions. This is, in itself, an evil thing to do.

By calling abortion 'murder', you are simply putting foward your opinion that it is not a justified killing.


Here's the deal.  Murder IS illegal according to law.  Murder in itself is murder.  The law IS NOT the CAUSE of Murder, nor is it THE EFFECT of the murder itself.  The law simply takes the cause of the murder and impose a certain punishment.  According to the law, certain criteria have to be met in order for an action to be murderous.  Yet, we all know that murder in itself has ITS OWN criteria.  So certain murders DO ESCAPE THE LAW, merely because the law does not consider such actions murder, hence abortion.

From the beginning of time, there was murder.  Maybe it wasn't called "murder" before, but what constitutes murder is anyone knowingly and intentionally killing an innocent human being.  In calling abortion murder, I AM calling the doctors who perform such operations murderers, and I am calling the mother assistant of murder, not to mention the cause of the murder itself.  Now people that know about it and did nothing about it is guilty by their conscience (if they feel so), or not.  But they are not guilty otherwise because they excercise their free will of not doing anything.  According to the good samaritan law they may be in trouble, but otherwise they have nothing to do with it.  Again, THE LAW DOES NOT DEFINE MURDER.  MURDER INTRINSICALLY DEFINES ITSELF.


-------
I always live in the past, the present is not not, the future is not yet, therfore only the past.
 


Posts: 84 | Posted: 08:55 AM on April 21, 2005 | IP
K8

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

call it killing, not murder.

Murder is a crime, abortion is not a crime.

It is not fair to link the mothers/doctors to a crime, hence labelling them as criminals, as this is incorrect and unfair.

Question: do you call someone turning off another person's life support murder?
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 04:31 AM on April 28, 2005 | IP
unworthy servant

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:




-------
WE MUST OBEY GOD RATHER THAN MEN - ACTS 5:29
 


Posts: 196 | Posted: 10:17 AM on May 7, 2005 | IP
Lord Iorek

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Do you mean pro-choice? Idiot.


-------
"At the age of six I wanted to be a cook. At seven I wanted to be Napoleon. And my ambition has been growing steadily ever since." - Salvador Dali

Guide the future by the past, long ago the mould was cast. - Rush
 


Posts: 121 | Posted: 9:40 PM on May 20, 2005 | IP
K8

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

yeah...i was kinda wondering about that too...
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 12:27 AM on May 21, 2005 | IP
Peter87

|      |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

No "he" means pro-life I think, becuase they are all anti-abortion, but still fund abortions becuase of the taxes they pay.
We say does he mean this, but really not only is he litrally interpreting the bible but he is getting the pictures for this from a web site presumably.


-------
Why should we bow to the will of anyone? Especialy a man who our country but another voted for?
 


Posts: 301 | Posted: 06:01 AM on May 21, 2005 | IP
Lord Iorek

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Oh, does that mean Unworthy doesn't pay his taxes.


-------
"At the age of six I wanted to be a cook. At seven I wanted to be Napoleon. And my ambition has been growing steadily ever since." - Salvador Dali

Guide the future by the past, long ago the mould was cast. - Rush
 


Posts: 121 | Posted: 12:49 PM on May 21, 2005 | IP
    
[ Single page for this topic ]

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
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.