SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 5 of 17 FirstFirst 12345678915 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 404
  1. #101
    e=2.718281828459045235360 HyperBaseball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    boston, MA
    Posts
    277
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by TWTCommish
    Nope, killing an animal is not murder. It is perfectly acceptable, though not always preferable, or particularly moral (it depends).


    So, since we've already determined that what separates animals from humans is that animals don't have the ability to reason, and you stated that fetuses don't have the ability to reason:

    A fetus (or child, as I still call it) cannot reason
    therefore, fetuses must be animals, and "It is perfectly acceptable, though not always preferable, or particularly moral" to kill an animal. There's my argument. Logic.

    No, I want you to define birth. Let me ask you: if the baby is "alive" when it has emerged from the mother, what of the split second before that? Is it just some creature when it's in her stomach while she's in the hospital bed about to give birth any second, but a human a second later when it's basically the same, only outside of her stomach rather than in?
    My name isn't Webster, or Samuel Johnson for that matter. If you want to change what the dictionary says for the definition of birth, talk to them, not me.

    Alright, I'm not going to necessarily doubt you, but can you provide a quote here?
    Maybe if you actually read my post, you would notice I did include the quote where you stated this. It was a pretty good quote, too. I'll post it again, so it's there again.

    Originally posted by TWTCommish
    As for the mother being in danger: I really don't know what to think of that, and I'm not concerned with it right now.


    And yeah, I did write all that stuff. And I agree with that, why wouldn't I? But if you'll notice, this is what I said, not some twisted version like was proposed.

    Originally posted by HyperBaseball
    Of course the man should have input into the decision, it's his child too.


    Did I say that the decision was to be made entirely by the woman? No... I said that the final decision should made by her. It is her body, and she is the one carrying the baby. But that doesn't mean that the father shouldn't put forth his feelings on the idea!

    Anyway, that all hardly matters in comparison to my question about when life begins. Quite frankly, I'm amazed you offered that definition up...it's so remarkably impractical. I guess that maybe, despite the fact that it's kicking for months up until the birth, it's not alive, but when the baby is seen outside of the womb instead of inside it, it magically becomes alive? The second we can "see" it, eh?
    I can't stand when people complain to me about what other people have said. Go complain to them about that definition, it makes damn well sense to me.
    Jason Unger is me.
    "Homer no function beer well without"
    http://www.jasonunger.com

  2. #102
    SitePoint Wizard TWTCommish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA, USA
    Posts
    3,910
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    So, since we've already determined that what separates animals from humans is that animals don't have the ability to reason, and you stated that fetuses don't have the ability to reason:
    Um, I do not recall ever agreeing that the ability to reason is what set us apart from animals. Now, if I were to imitate you, I would go off on a mini-tirade and say "don't put words in my d*mn mouth", or something of the sort, but I won't.


    My name isn't Webster, or Samuel Johnson for that matter. If you want to change what the dictionary says for the definition of birth, talk to them, not me.
    Wow, what a dodge! You managed to completely and totally miss the point of the question...either intentionally, or otherwise.

    This is a simple question, Jason: you say it is alive on birth. I'm asking you why it's alive the second it is outside of the woman, but not a split second before when it's half-way out, or just about to come out. This has nothing to do with the raw definition.


    Maybe if you actually read my post, you would notice I did include the quote where you stated this. It was a pretty good quote, too. I'll post it again, so it's there again.
    That's it? Geez, you obviously totally misunderstood what I said. I figured the meaning was obvious, but apparently this is not the case. It's a simple quote, and it means a simple thing: the issue at hand is where life begins, basically. I've said several times I do not have a stance on other circumstances, such as the mother being in danger. That's the kind of thing I'd have an opinion on in a case-by-case manner.

    Did I say that the decision was to be made entirely by the woman? No... I said that the final decision should made by her. It is her body, and she is the one carrying the baby. But that doesn't mean that the father shouldn't put forth his feelings on the idea!
    Putting forth his ideas is not the same thing at all. I'm saying that the woman should not have some "final say" she can wield. If the man "puts forth his feelings", the woman, I don't think, should necessarily be allowed to just run off and kill the child anyway.

    I can't stand when people complain to me about what other people have said. Go complain to them about that definition, it makes damn well sense to me.
    See above. I'm quite frustrated with your last post...and I'm sure you realize the "I'm not Webster" comment was a waste of everyone's time. I asked you some simple questions -- now either you simply decided not to answer them, or you didn't understand what I had read, in which case you really ought to turn this "why don't you read my posts" stuff onto yourself.

    I'm not looking for a flame, and I'll argue with you all day and all night, but that was rather blatant, IMO. Read the post again...read my words, and the questions among them, and then read yours, which address only the definition.
    Last edited by TWTCommish; Jul 20, 2001 at 15:55.

  3. #103
    Non-Member superharris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    do you really need to know
    Posts
    17
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Mariana if this did make your mother miserable guess what IT WOULD BE HER FAULT she was the one that got the old stick in her. Besides who are we to say oh my this child will go to adoption it's life would be horrible so instead let's JUST KILL it that is a bit of a superior commit I think it is ******** even if a 15 year old girl is pregnant she knew what sex could bring and if she does not want the child atleast give it a chance put it up for adoption atleast it has a chance is abortion exactly murder I am not sure but if murder also means preventing the possibility of life after fully knowing of it's possibility YES it is. Another dumb argument I hear from some stupid feminist is that it is our body blah blah blah excuse excuse excuse sorry babe but that thing growing in you will have a life of it's own like all life it comes from preexisting cells how would you feel if your selfish mom was like this is my body and aborted you well that line was stupid wasn't it

  4. #104
    Making a better wheel silver trophy DR_LaRRY_PEpPeR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    3,428
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    HyperBaseball, the "points" you're trying to make really sound stupid, you know that? they're laughable, the examples you give.

    just like everyone that tries to say abortion is OK...

  5. #105
    e=2.718281828459045235360 HyperBaseball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    boston, MA
    Posts
    277
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by TWTCommish
    Um, I do not recall ever agreeing that the ability to reason is what set us apart from animals.
    Excuse me then, I thought that was pretty much assumed.

    Now, if I were to imitate you, I would go off on a mini-tirade and say "don't put words in my d*mn mouth", or something of the sort, but I won't.
    What, you're like a comedian now?

    Wow, what a dodge! You managed to completely and totally miss the point of the question...either intentionally, or otherwise.

    This is a simple question, Jason: you say it is alive on birth. I'm asking you why it's alive the second it is outside of the woman, but not a split second before when it's half-way out, or just about to come out. This has nothing to do with the raw definition.


    I did answer your question. You asked for a definition of birth, I gave one to you. What's so difficult about that? I gave you a link, too. If you want to know what separates life from the split second before the baby comes out and when it actually does, go here and ask the people who made Dictionary.com. I'm not going to change the meaning of the word, it wouldn't make much sense.

    That's it? Geez, you obviously totally misunderstood what I said. I figured the meaning was obvious, but apparently this is not the case. It's a simple quote, and it means a simple thing: the issue at hand is where life begins, basically.


    Uh, right. The quote related to your stance on being concerned about the welfare of mothers, and you stated that you weren't concerned about the mother being in danger. What does that have to do with when life begins?

    Putting forth his ideas is not the same thing at all. I'm saying that the woman should not have some "final say" she can wield. If the man "puts forth his feelings", the woman, I don't think, should necessarily be allowed to just run off and kill the child anyway.


    So then who does make the final decision? You? Jesus?

    I'm not looking for a flame, and I'll argue with you all day and all night, but that was rather blatant, IMO. Read the post again...read my words, and the questions among them, and then read yours, which address only the definition.
    You asked one question. When does life begin? I answered: Life begins at birth. Then you asked what differentiates the second before the baby pops out and when it actually is out. I said that I couldn't tell you because I didn't write the dictionary and don't have the ability to make that decision. What's so hard about that?
    Jason Unger is me.
    "Homer no function beer well without"
    http://www.jasonunger.com

  6. #106
    Next stop: PHP! Marina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    692
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by DR_LaRRY_PEpPeR
    HyperBaseball, the "points" you're trying to make really sound stupid, you know that? they're laughable, the examples you give.

    just like everyone that tries to say abortion is OK...
    What an eloquent post! I wish I could write like this. "Stupid" is sooo constructive!

  7. #107
    Next stop: PHP! Marina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    692
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by superharris
    Mariana if this did make your mother miserable guess what IT WOULD BE HER FAULT she was the one that got the old stick in her. Besides who are we to say oh my this child will go to adoption it's life would be horrible so instead let's JUST KILL it that is a bit of a superior commit I think it is ******** even if a 15 year old girl is pregnant she knew what sex could bring and if she does not want the child atleast give it a chance put it up for adoption atleast it has a chance is abortion exactly murder I am not sure but if murder also means preventing the possibility of life after fully knowing of it's possibility YES it is. Another dumb argument I hear from some stupid feminist is that it is our body blah blah blah excuse excuse excuse sorry babe but that thing growing in you will have a life of it's own like all life it comes from preexisting cells how would you feel if your selfish mom was like this is my body and aborted you well that line was stupid wasn't it
    Actually, superharris, I'm surprised that you of all people would care so much for unborn children. Your posts have been so agressive so far that I was really shocked to read this. You have a heart!
    On the topic of abortion, I think that we disagree because of the following: I don't think that a fetus prior to 28 weeks is any higher form of life than an insect. It has the potential to become a human being but it isn't at that stage. Therefore I put the welfare of the mother first. In your opinion the fetus is a child and therefore you think that killing it should be called murder. I guess that we can't always agree, but c'est la vie.
    Also, I think that some pro-life people unconciously regard women who have sex as whores and think that they should take the consequenses as a punishment for that.

  8. #108
    will code HTML for food Michel V's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Corsica
    Posts
    552
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Blah blah I don't have real innovative idea so let's say I write a long line without any punctuation because let's face it you understand what I write you get what I'm saying my argument is so strong I write a 2000 words' sentence for it because my church condemns the use of commas and more than one ending dot per paragraph you are all stupid.
    [blogger: zengun] [blogware contributor: wordpress]

  9. #109
    will code HTML for food Michel V's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Corsica
    Posts
    552
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    but if murder also means preventing the possibility of life after fully knowing of it's possibility YES it is
    You know, spermatozoids are living beings too, according to the pro-life idea of life. What ? So I've killed innocents by billions in these condoms ! Ha.

    Also, "IF" statements can lead you so far that it's not even funny to debate against someone using such powerful argumental weapons.
    There's a french saying that goes like "With IFs, you could put Paris in a bottle."
    [blogger: zengun] [blogware contributor: wordpress]

  10. #110
    Bimbo With A Brain! silver trophy Saz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Kent, United Kingdom
    Posts
    5,275
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by Marina
    On the topic of abortion, I think that we disagree because of the following: I don't think that a fetus prior to 28 weeks is any higher form of life than an insect. It has the potential to become a human being but it isn't at that stage.
    I'm sure the many couples who have had their children born to them at 26 weeks, and even 24 and 22 weeks in some cases, would be only to glad to here you say this! You're basically saying that these women have given birth to some sort of low-life. At 28 weeks, the baby is developed enough to survive out of the womb on it's own, but that doesn't mean it's not human prior to this time. A fetus, even though tiny, fully resembles a human baby at 16 weeks. By 20 weeks, it's fully formed and merely needs to develop stronger organs - heart, lungs etc, to enable it to survive when it leaves the comfort of it's mother's womb.

    If you want to be pro-abortion, that's fine - we'll just have to agree to disagree on that one, but please don't liken an unborn child to an insect. As a mother, I find that incredibly insulting.
    Saz: Naturally Blonde, Naturally Dizzy!
    No longer Editor of the Community Crier.

    Don't mind me, I'm having a BLONDE moment!

  11. #111
    Next stop: PHP! Marina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    692
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Sorry, got the weeks all wrong. Ment to write "prior to 20 weeks". It makes a great difference because the child develops quickly and I don't think that it's all right to abort at a later stage than that. (It's also dangerous.)

  12. #112
    Bimbo With A Brain! silver trophy Saz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Kent, United Kingdom
    Posts
    5,275
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by Marina
    Sorry, got the weeks all wrong. Ment to write "prior to 20 weeks". It makes a great difference because the child develops quickly and I don't think that it's all right to abort at a later stage than that. (It's also dangerous.)
    Thanks Marina. Sorry for seeming to get on my high horse over this, but a close friend of mine miscarried last year at 23 weeks and, needless to say, she was absolutely devastated.

    With regard to abortions after the 20 week point, I mentioned in an earlier post that a friend of my mum's nearly quit her nursing job because of this. She was placed on the ward that dealt with abortions and found the procedure for late stage terminations very upsetting. I won't go into details - suffice to say it was gross. Of course, this is going back 20 years and things have probably changed now, but the mere thought of it still turns my stomach.
    Saz: Naturally Blonde, Naturally Dizzy!
    No longer Editor of the Community Crier.

    Don't mind me, I'm having a BLONDE moment!

  13. #113
    Next stop: PHP! Marina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    692
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It's all right Saz. I just want to add that 20 weeks = 5 months! That's a really long time to wait. If a woman considers abortion I would recommend that she would do it much sooner.

  14. #114
    will code HTML for food Michel V's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Corsica
    Posts
    552
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Any responsible doctor will refuse an abortion after the 13th or 14th week. So the whole "you kill a baby" doesn't make sense, since prior to 16-20 weeks, it's not even a baby yet.
    Abortions after that limit are handled on a case-by-case basis.
    This is how it goes in my country, where abortion has been legal since the '70s.
    [blogger: zengun] [blogware contributor: wordpress]

  15. #115
    Bimbo With A Brain! silver trophy Saz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Kent, United Kingdom
    Posts
    5,275
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think the abortions carried out at the 4 to 5 month point are probably more medically related than anything else. Amniocentesis isn't usually carried out until around 16 weeks, and it's this test that can determine if the baby is going to be handicapped in some way. Some couples just can't handle the thought of having a handicapped child and get the pregnancy terminated. Whether this is right or wrong is a moral issue. Personally, the only reason I agree with this test is so that parents have time to prepare themselves mentally for looking after a handicapped child.
    Saz: Naturally Blonde, Naturally Dizzy!
    No longer Editor of the Community Crier.

    Don't mind me, I'm having a BLONDE moment!

  16. #116
    SitePoint Wizard TWTCommish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA, USA
    Posts
    3,910
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Excuse me then, I thought that was pretty much assumed.
    Why? Maybe you shouldn't assume things. Reason is not what sets us apart. An animal can reason to a degree. Besides, once again, you were comparing a complete creature, to one still growing. Not a valid comparison, IMO.

    What, you're like a comedian now?
    Not at all, but hopefully you'll see the problem with you going off on something, and then doing the same thing yourself.


    I did answer your question. You asked for a definition of birth, I gave one to you. What's so difficult about that? I gave you a link, too. If you want to know what separates life from the split second before the baby comes out and when it actually does, go here and ask the people who made Dictionary.com. I'm not going to change the meaning of the word, it wouldn't make much sense.
    Crap man, are you ever going to understand the question?

    I'm asking for a reasonable answer: how can you believe that it's alive the second it's outside of the mother, but NOT alive a split second before, with it's legs dangling, or kicking from inside? That's what I want to know. I want to know why you consider that to be anything less than insane.

    I think you're playing dumb here Jason. You know very well I'm not asking for what Dictionary.com says, I'm asking you how you can justify using "birth" as the delimiter between a human rights and as low as an animal. You chose that as the moment of human life, so now I'm asking you to defend it.


    Uh, right. The quote related to your stance on being concerned about the welfare of mothers, and you stated that you weren't concerned about the mother being in danger. What does that have to do with when life begins?
    It doesn't. However, someone (I believe it was you) accused me of "not caring about the mother", or something of the sort. That's ridiculous...I simply care MORE about the child.


    So then who does make the final decision? You? Jesus?
    Jesus isn't exactly likely to step in. As for the "You?" -- that was a bit ridiculous. The decision is a joint one. If they can't come to an agreement, well, then the baby is born. If one says "abortion" and the other says "birth", then it certainly doesn't seem at all fair to have one of their opinions ignored, now does it?

    You asked one question. When does life begin? I answered: Life begins at birth. Then you asked what differentiates the second before the baby pops out and when it actually is out. I said that I couldn't tell you because I didn't write the dictionary and don't have the ability to make that decision. What's so hard about that?
    You don't understand. You CHOSE "birth" as the delimiter between life/just some animal. As such, you should be able to defend any flaws it has. I asked you more than one question...after I asked you when life began, I asked you what was different about the child one moment before birth. This doesn't have anything to do with the definition of birth anymore...this is about you defending your own answer to "when life begins."

    Dictionary.com is not valid anymore: Dictionary.com did not say "life begins at birth", it just tells you what the definition of birth is. Therefore, you cannot use Dictionary.com to defend YOUR assumption that life begins at birth.
    Last edited by TWTCommish; Jul 21, 2001 at 10:01.

  17. #117
    SitePoint Wizard TWTCommish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA, USA
    Posts
    3,910
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You know, spermatozoids are living beings too, according to the pro-life idea of life. What ? So I've killed innocents by billions in these condoms ! Ha.
    Totally, utterly incorrect. I have never in my entire life met anyone who believes sperm is alive. Life begins at conception.

    Oh, and I'd like to add that I'm disturbed at the thought of aborting babies with birth defects of some sort. Where would the line be drawn? Would S. Hawking have been aborted? He sure isn't all that physically strong. Selective birth based on genetics is a terrifying thought.
    Last edited by TWTCommish; Jul 21, 2001 at 09:59.

  18. #118
    Bimbo With A Brain! silver trophy Saz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Kent, United Kingdom
    Posts
    5,275
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by TWTCommish
    Oh, and I'd like to add that I'm disturbed at the thought of aborting babies with birth defects of some sort. Where would the line be drawn? Would S. Hawking have been aborted? He sure isn't all that physically strong. Selective birth based on genetics is a terrifying thought.
    Yep, I agree with you, Chris. Unfortunately, it's something that happens
    Saz: Naturally Blonde, Naturally Dizzy!
    No longer Editor of the Community Crier.

    Don't mind me, I'm having a BLONDE moment!

  19. #119
    Destiny Manager Plebius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Posts
    682
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by TWTCommish

    Totally, utterly incorrect. I have never in my entire life met anyone who believes sperm is alive. Life begins at conception.
    I believe sperm is alive. I also believe a fetus is alive. I just believe that it doesn't become a human being until its parasitic relationship with the mother ends through birth.

  20. #120
    SitePoint Wizard TWTCommish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA, USA
    Posts
    3,910
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    So I suppose the little creature kicking from the inside is not a live human? What about babies old enough that they begin to recognize their own mother's voice, so that they are more comfortable with them once they are born? What about 10 seconds before the cord is cut? Not a human?

  21. #121
    :) delemtri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    579
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Let me pose a question which I am sure is going to get me flamed but gets you to the root of the discussion:

    Why is it wrong to kill a human in the first place?

    I don't think it's right, I'm simply interested.

  22. #122
    Bimbo With A Brain! silver trophy Saz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Kent, United Kingdom
    Posts
    5,275
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by delemtri
    Let me pose a question which I am sure is going to get me flamed but gets you to the root of the discussion:

    Why is it wrong to kill a human in the first place?

    I don't think it's right, I'm simply interested.
    Well for a start - because the law says so!

    Seriously, though, that's a hard question to answer away from using the law. It all comes down to moral standards I guess, in the same way that some of us see abortion as morally wrong and others don't.
    Saz: Naturally Blonde, Naturally Dizzy!
    No longer Editor of the Community Crier.

    Don't mind me, I'm having a BLONDE moment!

  23. #123
    :) delemtri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    579
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Yes, but how do you decide on those moral standards? How can you logically say it's wrong to kill a human? It's a hard question.

  24. #124
    Destiny Manager Plebius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Posts
    682
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by TWTCommish
    So I suppose the little creature kicking from the inside is not a live human? What about babies old enough that they begin to recognize their own mother's voice, so that they are more comfortable with them once they are born? What about 10 seconds before the cord is cut? Not a human?
    The little creature kicking inside is much like a kidney. It is alive, it is human, but it's not a human being.

    Something becomes a human being when it takes its first breath.

  25. #125
    Bimbo With A Brain! silver trophy Saz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Kent, United Kingdom
    Posts
    5,275
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by Plebius


    The little creature kicking inside is much like a kidney. It is alive, it is human, but it's not a human being.

    Something becomes a human being when it takes its first breath.
    So what if a child is still born and never takes it's first breath? Would you then say that baby wasn't a human being?
    Saz: Naturally Blonde, Naturally Dizzy!
    No longer Editor of the Community Crier.

    Don't mind me, I'm having a BLONDE moment!


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •