Abortion Is a Natural Right

in abortion •  8 years ago  (edited)

When people start engaging in discussion about abortion they neglect that they are discussing about how other people should treat their own bodies.

Our bodies are our temples,
Our only true property

Nobody has the right to tell us what to do with it under no circumstances even if the population of the planet was down to a few thousand.


“The Baby is defenseless”

So is the mother who supports it. Whether it is a clump of cells or a developed embryo is irrelevant. The host will have to take care of the potential offspring until it exits the cervix. The baby while being incubated in the guts of the mother functions much like a parasite. In other words it lives inside another organism and benefits by deriving nutrients at the host's expense. The parasite in this case can also kill the host so it can survive. Evolutionary mechanisms do not care about ethics or what some group of humans at a random era on this planet have to say about it. This is how life has evolved on this planet for millions of years. If the mother decides to end the pregnancy to salvage any risk of her dying then she has every right to do so.

Even if hypothetically there was no risk of death, the mother should be able to decide about her own body since she is the providing life—and she will continue to do so after the baby is born. She is solely responsible for it. The potential offspring can have a major negative impact both in her mental and social life. She owes to treat the birth like an investement for her own livelihood. We get to live only once.


“I object ethically because my religion prohibits it”

You said it. Your religion. Your ethics. You are allowed to believe whatever you want but you have no right to say to others what they can or can’t do with their body because you were brought up to believe in some sets of ethics and not others. Nobody gives you the right to decide for the life of others.


Abortion is an issue of entitlement. Some people believe that they can have a say about how other people treat their own bodies. The drama behind it is mostly for religious reasons. Most believers feel the right to “guide” other people’s lives because they feel that we are part of a greater plan. Truth or ethics are not and cannot be democratic if we value individuality. No matter what one believes about the value of life, no one has the right to impose their will on others. Our bodies are our only sacred property—not the will of others.







Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

You nailed this one. And you'e one of the reasons I find Steemit valuable.

My body, my choice. = The baby's body, no choice + The father's wallet, no choice + the father's emotions, no choice.

Now, between the baby and the mother, they have to work that out on their own. If a mother's body feels it can't support the fetus, it will abort. If the mother's brain feels it can't support the fetus, then it may abort. It is between the mother and the child, there is no other power on the land that has any say.

Demanding others to pay for this is wrong. Your body, your choice; their pocket book, their choice. If you believe the first argument, you believe the 2nd. Or, your a hypocrite.

Everyone has their opinion. They are entitled to their opinion.
What is really being argued here is to stop the shaming of abortions. And it has gone further into trying to shame people who shame abortions. This ends up in a big fight over emotions. Were no facts are really involved.
That fact is abortion is legal, because having it illegal doesn't stop it, and just endangers women. (Rowe vs Wade)

My opinion: The bond between mother and child is very strong. To break that bond wilfully has a great impact. Learning that a potential partner has had an abortion pretty much eliminates them from selection as partner. They are not mother & wife material.

Loading...

People who think it's ok to take another human's life should be encouraged to abort their offspring - lest they pass their values on to the next generation.

And by the same logic, that person I'm competing with for the Next Big Promotion represents a serious risk to my health since without that promotion I won't be able to afford better health care. I need to be able to eliminate that person, because their life constitutes a risk, however small, to my own. It's my body they are threatening after all...

the difference stan is that the people whom you work with do not recide inside your body. Your body is your property.

now if you perceive that group of cells as a "baby with a soul" because of your religious belief that is another story. that's the problems with most religious arguments in here.

lack of basic knowledge of biology. It's like trying to explain to tribes in Africa that magic is bullshit

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

Without the religious component, every human being is just a group of cells without a soul. That being the case, if one of them should inconvenience my body in any way...

Yes Stan. That's all we are. We don't have a soul. Deal with it. You can believe whatever fairy tale your parents have taught you but don't try to justify it in regards to how other people should live.

I mean be a little objective at least. if there is indeed a soul, your merciful all loving God allows 16.000 children to die everyday from hunger...from which you do nothing...

and you care about abortions? please man. give it up. I am not buying this medieval hypocrisy

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

I haven't argued any such thing. Read more carefully. Your position is that there is no difference between a fetus and an adult. They both consist of a mass of cells with the same DNA. That is also my position.

The existence of a soul in either of them is an orthogonal issue which has nothing to do with whether the state should protect a mass of cells of any size.

If you can kill one for your convenience you should logically be able to kill the other.

So, if I can rationalize that you represent a threat to my body to any degree at all, I can snuff you out like the mere sack of cells you claim to be. My domain does not end at my skin - you are in the environment I need to sustain life. So I'm morally and ethically fully within my rights to eliminate you - even as a precaution against how you might inadvertently inconvenience me in the future.

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

Your position is that there is no difference between a fetus and an adult.

My position is that you can't have a say over someone else's body unless that body lives inside of you.

If you can kill one for your convenience you should logically be able to kill the other.

In our case the life living inside another one can kill its host at any time. It threatens its existence.

Pretty straight forward mate.
So to summarise

1-Your body, your business, your property.
2- You can kill anything, anytime, if that thing lives inside of you and threatens your own life.

Sorry but you can't twist the religious component any way you like. In your cult you can practise anything you want. let others be.

Talking to your imaginary friend won't change anything. Also this "I will pray for you' is nothing more than passive aggresiveness while at the same time you try to demonstrate moral superiority.

OK, that's for me to live with isn't it ?

You seem to be trying to convince everyone else what you did was right. How long has it been since you had your abortion ?

Do you feel the need for us to feel the same pain you do ?

I love you and I do feel the pain you feel and I honestly will pray for you and all that you can be, there is no discretion that can't be forgiven by Jesus Christ.

I wasn't commenting to judge you, but if you re-read your comments you obviously judged me. I can live with that....

Blessings.

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

OK, that's for me to live with isn't it ?

Sure

You seem to be trying to convince everyone else what you did was right. How long has it been since you had your abortion ?Do you feel the need for us to feel the same pain you do ?

Assumption is the mother of all fuck-ups. I am a man. I understand that religion can make someone naive assuming all kinds of things but please, keep the IQ of the conversation above room temperacture.

I love you and I do feel the pain you feel and I honestly will pray for you and all that you can be, there is no discretion that can't be forgiven by Jesus Christ.

Love is conditional. You don't love me. Your magical book sais that you should love everybody, but really, you are lying.

I wasn't commenting to judge you, but if you re-read your comments you obviously judged me. I can live with that....

If you could, you wouldn't be commenting

Blessings.

Again. Magical spells don't work in the land of the crypto

LOL

If you're a man and you think you understand women well enough to discuss this firsthand , then you're mentally ill and there is no reason for further discussion.

It appears you're just flaming. Perhaps what you need is another beer...

If you're a man and you think you understand women well enough to discuss this firsthand , then you're mentally ill and there is no reason for further discussion.

well, that escalated quickly. Whether one is a man or a woman is irrelevant. All I am saying is that no one has a say about what another person can do or cannot do with their bodies. is that simple.

It appears you're just flaming. Perhaps what you need is another beer...

Again with your assumptions. No wonder you are still believing in Santa Claus for grown ups...

Actually this is the first article written by a man about abortion that I totally agree with.

Murder followed by lusts, if one ever one repents from abortion murder to Jesus and enters Heaven to be with Jesus and sees the own ones they aborted it would be a reunion, only through Jesus though

I would have to summon Satan to make sense of your comment

Despite the amount of hate you are getting on this post. I completely agree.
If I were to get pregnant anytime soon by accident. I would immediately want an abortion.

To be honest, Nothing terrifies me more, Than having some thing growing inside me like that. Hell no! I can't stand the vulnerability. To be forced into it, Sounds terrifying. I would kill myself if I couldn't have the abortion. Therefore ending 2 lives instead of one.

Religion needs to stay out of our laws, Otherwise they should be paying taxes!

It reminds me of gay marriage. Don't want one? Don't get one!

Good job. You really know how to chose a topic for your posts. People just go nuts. Most of them are brainwashed by media and hypocritical politicians. They should look at mother nature and animal kingdom and learn.

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

Steemit needs more people from the realm of scientific reality. Right now all we get is people who know how to mine, religious conservatists and plenty of gamblers with get quick fast scheme mentality. People of science and freethinkers are rare and I think they are scared away from all the medieval level views of the world.

Just from basic conversations I can tell most people never took biology, history or worse, barely made it through highschool.

Sad really. I never thought the crypto culture was so pathetic. The worthy ones are rare to find

I don't want to insult anybody here. I'm new in crypto and have the feeling that most so called crypto experts still live in parent's basements and they recently switched from gaming to crypto. If they finished high school or not is irrelevant these days if you consider quality of education. For sure there are a lot of bright and talented guys in this community to, but they are in minority.

most so called crypto experts still live in parent's basements and they recently switched from gaming to crypto.

that. you nailed it.

There is no legal solution to a morale problem...

Legally no one has a right to force a woman to use her special manufacturing facility to produce anything...

Morally it's wrong, it's murder and she'll likely burn in hell for all eternity.

Good luck with everything...

Morality is subjective. What is moral for you might not be for someone else.
What you call murder a mother might call it self defence.

Very true, it is a choice one can only make for themselves. Everything else is in deed subjective observation. But we certainly cannot make laws preventing it was my point, even though I personally think it's wrong :)

which belongs to another temple that it can destroy thus it doesn't have any right from there on

Where to start with this, so much I see wrong. You seem to generalize a lot. I have no idea if "The drama behind it is mostly for religious reasons" is true or not, but I do know people can be religious and take an ethical stand simply because they see unnecessary suffering and death as immoral. Those with empathy will, and that's not because Odin told them it's wrong.

I think few would argue that abortion is necessary to save the life of the mother, that is a tough ethical question if you're in that situation. But the answer seems easy. Abortion just because you feel the life inside you is a parasite and you have to take care of the child? Is that unnecessary death? Yeah, that is an easy question, yes, it's unnecessary and unethical/immoral - and no Odin or Zeus involved.

"Nobody gives you the right to decide for the life of others." How does this not apply to the life of an unborn child?

Where to start with this, so much I see wrong. You seem to generalize a lot. I have no idea if "The drama behind it is mostly for religious reasons" is true or not, but I do know people can be religious and take an ethical stand simply because they see unnecessary suffering and death as immoral.

If rellgious people saw death as immortal then they wouldn't join war. Morality is subjective. What you consider moral might be immoral for someone else.

Those with empathy will, and that's not because Odin told them it's wrong.

Odin can dictate murder. We see it all the time from religions that oppose abortion but they are ok if the murder occurs in war. An unborn parasite can kill the mother. anytime.

I think few would argue that abortion is necessary to save the life of the mother, that is a tough ethical question if you're in that situation.

Numbers are irrelevant. You cannot dictate what someone else can do with their life no matter how big your collective is.

But the answer seems easy. Abortion just because you feel the life inside you is a parasite and you have to take care of the child? Is that unnecessary death? Yeah, that is an easy question, yes, it's unnecessary and unethical/immoral - and no Odin or Zeus involved.

According to you. If you ever have a baby do as such. You have no right to dictate to others how they should treat their body.

"Nobody gives you the right to decide for the life of others." How does this not apply to the life of an unborn child?

You call the unborn offspring a child. As you can see there are major issues when it comes to understanding what an embryo is and the dangers a birth can bring. You cannot impose your own perception or ethics to others.

Religion is irrelevant to our discussion, this is about morality/ethics. While subjective, what about you? Does your moral code hold that unnecessary suffering and death is wrong?

An unborn fetus/child can kill the mother at any time? You have the data to support that? I can die at any time depending on the circumstances, but that doesn't mean my life is can end at any given moment. There can be complications, my wife could have died with each pregnancy, but I think you need more than this generalization.

I didn't try to dictate what someone else can do, I was making a moral/ethical point. While I typically will not dictate what someone else does with their body, that would have to involve my body/property, I can make a moral judgment about their actions.

I'm not dictating what others should do, it's just a moral judgment. My moral/ethical code is basically "Do no harm", that unnecessary suffering and death is wrong. If the killing of the fetus is unnecessary, then it's wrong. Your moral code may hold that unnecessary suffering and death is good, I don't know, you have not added your personal morals or ethics to the discussion explicitly. Though I do get that you are ok with a fetus being killed despite any present danger to the mother. Do you believe unnecessary suffering and death is wrong? And please spare me any religious rhetoric if you choose to answer.

Fine, I'll take the offending word out for you, maybe you'll answer. "Nobody gives you the right to decide for the life of others." How/why does this not apply to the life of a fetus?

Religion is irrelevant to our discussion, this is about morality/ethics. While subjective, what about you? Does your moral code hold that unnecessary suffering and death is wrong?

It tells me that a mother can suffer at any time for any reason during pregnancy

An unborn fetus/child can kill the mother at any time? You have the data to support that? I can die at any time depending on the circumstances, but that doesn't mean my life is can end at any given moment.

Yeah I have 250.000 years of human births. Biologically a fetus acts like a parasite. it can kill the mother at any trimester. biology 101.

There can be complications, my wife could have died with each pregnancy, but I think you need more than this generalization.

If you admit that there is a chance, even 1% there is nothing more to the argument. In this case over generalisation applies. Even 1% is still danger to the host.

If the killing of the fetus is unnecessary, then it's wrong.

You cannot know the needs of the mother. What is necessary for you might not be for someone else.

Do you believe unnecessary suffering and death is wrong?

Suffering has hand in hand with pregnancy. A pregnant woman will suffer from day one if she doesn't want the baby both psychologically and physically.

"Nobody gives you the right to decide for the life of others." How/why does this not apply to the life of a fetus?

The fetus has no rights since it bases its life to the host which it can kill at any time. Even if by some biological magical reason the chance was 0% (which is never) then again the mother could be able to abort at any time if she believed that it endangers her livelihood in any way.

You can't answer a straight question about your moral code? Your so-called "data" about 250k years of births is not data regarding the fetus being able to kill the mother at any time, and you insult me? I'm done, but I did want to comment on your post about the cells under your nail being no different than a fetus, but could not post there because the comment was "too deep" and the site would not allow it.

You really come off as a jerk, my comment had nothing to do with morality. Uneducated? Can you post a comment without an insult? Whatever you think of my education, you still made a false analogy as the clone has exactly the same DNA. You think the cells under your nails are no different than the cells of a fetus and I'm uneducated. Whatever, enjoy your false analogies and generalizations while putting others down.

Whatever you think of my education, you still made a false analogy as the clone has exactly the same DNA

irrelevant. you can still make a human. that was the point.

You think the cells under your nails are no different than the cells of a fetus and I'm uneducated.

yes you are.

Whatever, enjoy your false analogies and generalizations while putting others down.

people with imaginary friends that tell them how to live their lives and then they try themselves to impose those beliefs to others are the pain in the ass. Don't talk about false analogies when your holy books and god is based on them.

I give specific anwers to your enquiries. You just don't have the educational calliber to get them

I know a couple that were told to murder their unborn child because doctors told them that he/she would be severely handicapped. They told the doctors that they would not kill/murder their unborn child.

They went home, got down on their knees and prayed to God for a miracle whilst telling him that they would accept whatever outcome they were given and unconditionally love the child no matter what.

They prayed for weeks on end and over the next few months more doctors and specialists attempted to convince them that murdering their child was in their best interests. They refused to kill their baby and they kept praying to God throughout the duration of the pregnancy.

16 years later their daughter is studying medicine because she is a genius that graduated high school at 14. She was admitted to college the following year as a 14 year old. She is also a classical pianist and she sings like an angel. She is not handicapped, far from it.

Murder is not a natural right!

You deem her a parasite - some of us view her as a gift from God.

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

Nice story. Nonetheless, a story. Hearsay and most likely like all miracles...bullshit

You can view it as a you like. Thing is you cannot tell other people what to do based on your beliefs about your imaginary friend.

Loading...

It is truth - I rarely lie though all humans lie at times and I am not immune but not in this case and I have never lied on steemit.

You have chosen to file it away as a story because it fits your worldview.

You are going to meet my imaginary friend one day and he has a very special reward waiting for you.

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

It is truth - I rarely lie though all humans lie at times and I am not immune but not in this case and I have never lied on steemit.

Saying "it is truth" does not make it so. You just repeat what your magical book and pastor sais. You are a parrot.

You have chosen to file it away as a story because it fits your worldview.

Unlike you, I actually have evidence to believe what I believe.

You are going to meet my imaginary friend one day and he has a very special reward waiting for you.

There 16.000 religions on this planet and approximately 5.000 Gods. How do you know you picked the right religion. What if we both die and see a god that is half elephant half goat and he tell us "You were both wrong fuckers". I could say that there were many religious books and if he was God he surely could show up from tiem to time and take care all the suffering. He wouldn't hide to promote belief.

You see my friend. You cannot know. Nobody does. You are just afraid of death and you need something to cling upon. You have to accept the possibility that you are merely believing in a fairy tale.

I mean come on. Your religious story is about a God who send his son on earth, who is also himself in order to commit suicide on a piece of wood and then become a zombie and vanish in order to save his creations from the shit he put them into from the beginning.

If there is a God he is surely a twisted fucker

You have very little evidence to support what you believe - you have scientific propaganda!

Knowing the parents and seeing them live through the experience makes it truth - it doesn't suit your worldview so you dismiss it like the ignorant fool that you are.

1 Cor 2;14 - But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

It is impossible for you to know what I am saying - you are a lost cause IMHO because you sound like a reprobate (rejected by God). I hope that I am wrong.

Romans 1:21-26 - Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

Oh you want to play bible verses?

Exodus 21:7
"When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are."

Deuteronomy 28:30-31,35
You will be pledged to be married to a woman, but another will take her and rape her. You will build a house, but you will not live in it. You will plant a vineyard, but you will not even begin to enjoy its fruit. Your ox will be slaughtered before your eyes, but you will eat none of it. Your donkey will be forcibly taken from you and will not be returned. Your sheep will be given to your enemies, and no one will rescue them. . . . The Lord will afflict your knees and legs with painful boils that cannot be cured, spreading from the soles of your feet to the top of your head.

Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material. Leviticus 19:19

Leviticus 15: 19-20
When a woman has a discharge, if her discharge in her body is blood, she shall continue in her menstrual impurity for seven days; and whoever touches her shall be unclean until evening. Everything also on which she lies during her menstrual impurity shall be unclean, and everything on which she sits shall be unclean.

and my favourite

Deuteronomy 25:11-12
When men fight with one another, and the wife of the one draws near to rescue her husband from the hand of him who is beating him, and puts out her hand and seizes him by the private parts, then you shall cut off her hand.

Please entertain me more with your buffet christianity.

@kyriacos
You are my hero! Wonderful arguments my friend!

In modern times, like we are having now, people have educated themselves so well in Biology 101 that there are plenty of options not to get pregnant! If you don't want to become pregnant you can pick many of those option, the pill, a spiral, condoms etc.

Don't get me wrong, I am not against abortion itself but I am against abortion when it's done as anti conception while there are many things to chose from not become pregnant! If by accident you do get pregnant while you take all the steps not to get pregnant I believe abortion should be an option! Same goes for god forbid Rape.

you can pick many of those option, the pill, a spiral, condoms etc.

you can't dictate to people how to treat their bodies or how to get sexual pleasure. is that simple

It's just as simple as the fact that you can't tell us what is good or wrong in this whole discussion.

what is good is allowing people to do whatever the fuck they want with their bodies.

And their opinions!

What is good is to be able to control your own body. A human has control over their body and nobody else, nor religions, nor goverments nor any other has the right to judge or force anyon what they should do with their body.

stop being so thick

I do believe that you are the person who is screaming that people should be able to control their own body. As far as I know that also means that every soul on this earth had a right to have their opinion about things. I shared mine and I never once insulted you. So I wonder why did you feel the need to end your reply with an insult? Only shows how mature you really are.

If you really want to scream that people have their own rights allow others to have their opinion without turning things personal.

The life that depends on anothr body which it can kill at any time has no say in the process.

if you honored the "right to have your own opinion" you shouldn't be allowed to say what other people should do with their bodies.

maturity is for the time being measured on the fact that you base your ethos on an imaginary friend that was inventd by goat fuckers. so yeah. no respect for grown ups with imaginary friends that also want to impose them upon others

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

The mistake most people make on both sides of this debate is to assert that one party or another has all the rights, while the converse party has no rights.

Never in the course of human interaction is that correct. The mother has some rights, the child has some rights. The question is how do we mediate those rights in a civilized way?

With all other conflicts of rights, we appoint a judge to oversee the process, in clear cases, we simply have a clerk of the court sign off on it, in unclear cases both parties bring their arguments to court. In this case, since the child cannot speak for itself, the Judge must advocate for them.

But we can never do that, because some people say the mother has all the rights, others say the child has all the rights. Stalemate.

The mistake most people make on both sides of this debate is to assert that one party or another has all the rights, while the converse party has no rights.

Your decide for your own body. There is no middle ground to this reality. one has all the rights about oneself. Is that simple. Nobody can decide even one thing for you.

Never in the course of human interaction is that correct.

Up to last century slavery was de-facto legal. Never say never. Not an argument.

The mother has some rights, the child has some rights.

The unborn child has no rights other than the ones the mother dictates. Those "rights" you speak of come from the opinion of other people. Other people shouldn't have a say about your body.

The question is how do we mediate those rights in a civilized way?

Let others be with their own body. As simple as that.

With all other conflicts of rights, we appoint a judge to oversee the process, in clear cases, we simply have a clerk of the court sign off on it, in unclear cases both parties bring their arguments to court. In this case, since the child cannot speak for itself, the Judge must advocate for them.

Absolutely unecceptable. The judge does not have a parasite threatening his livelihood. Also you cannot call it an unborn fetus a child. That's your perception. It does not apply to everyone.

But we can never do that, because some people say the mother has all the rights, others say the child has all the rights. Stalemate.

Not really. I just demostrated to you how simple the issue is. The problem is only one. People believe that just because they have larger numbers and decide to establish ethics, religions, courts etc that allows them to dictate what others should do with their own bodies.

The case is crystal clear.

You just demonstrated the one side of my observation. Thanks.

BTW, you can't argue for "natural rights" while devaluing the rights of others to societal privileges. And I can too call a child a child, that's my right, or are you telling me what to do with my own fingers on my own keyboard?

No I demonstrated both. Your "other side" is irrelevant.

BTW, you can't argue for "natural rights" while devaluing the rights of others to societal privileges.

When one life depends on the other and the second acts like a parasite, the one providing life can decide for the other—especially when the second can kill at any moment kill the first.

And I can too call a child a child, that's my right, or are you telling me what to do with my own fingers on my own keyboard?

I am telling you that your perception of the unborn fetus as a child rewards my argument. You can say whatever you want. You cannot by any means dictate to others what they should do a how they can perceive a clump of cells within a host.

Yep, this is the problem alright. People who don't understand mediate rights and want to polarize the issue as much as possible. Both sides are just as bad. Thanks for playing.

Its your body. There are no "both sides are bad". Don't try to play it intellectually superior by calling everyone wrong. It's idiotic and you don't even make an argument.

If I call somebody to decide upon your health you will see how cut and clear the issue is.

So many words for a "simple thing":
Do what you think is "right", but don´t force me to tolerate that.

Personally I believe that live starts with conception, so I would never suggest to abort to anyone. I find it not good, even evil. But that´s just me. As long as you don´t force me to see it as a human "right", I don´t much care what you do to your soul / conscience.

Some cultures in history would agree. They thought killing their babies was just fine. In fact they thought that killing their children was OK. The age varied but some considered children property of their parents until they left home...to be killed at the will of the parent....or not.

Same argument.

I am not even speaking for a child. I am talking about an unborn fetus.

Even then though the mother who supports life is allowed to decide as she wishes. nobody else

a fetus is a child.
life begins at conception.

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

or so you think. at conception the cells of the fetus are no different than the ones found under your nails when you scratch your skin.

I would assume biology wasn't your forte at school

Do you believe the cells under your nails can grow into a separate, individual homo sapien? Looks like a false analogy fallacy.

Yes, under proper scientific advances you can clone an entire human being even from a hair follicle.

you see what's the problem with these debates? Uneducated people try to reason their morality. it's like debating about magic with people from the middle ages

if something can be killed then it is alive.
simple logic.
I'm surprised...it took you almost two paragraphs before you resorted to personal attack.
very good.

Are you a master to treat me as an inferior?

nah. just advice so can you stop looking like an idiot to more people

Oddly enough I agree with you.
The sort of people that want abortions should be allowed to have them.
encouraged actually.

7+ billion people are enough for this planet. I am not going to fathr any children. ever.

A cell on your skin can be killed. A plant in your garden can be killed. Your hair follicles can be killed.

indeed. very simple logic. Thing is in our case a parasite that depends on another life to have life can kill the host.

You need to google what a personal attack is. You are too touchy feely. Next time think before you type.

VERY GOOD. See how clearly one can thing when not blinded by hatred?
That's exactly what I said.

Oh..and who are you to tell me what I NEED to do?
do you have some special gift?
Are you a master to treat me as an inferior?

(6 deep nest)

Oddly enough I agree with you.
The sort of people that want abortions should be allowed to have them.
encouraged actually.

A fetus is like a plant.
We chop trees and kill plants everyday! It's the same thing.

Your DNA produces plants?

Strawman.

The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern:

Person A has position X.
Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
Person B attacks position Y.
Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html

No...it is what's called a JOKE.
Lighten up.
was your sense of humor surgically removed?

Aztecs did it regularly, read an old book for more info on the matter:

https://www.amazon.com/Conquest-New-Spain-Penguin-Classics/dp/0140441239

I wonder how big they were on woman's rights?
I wonder what the correlation is between the cultural attitude toward abortion and woman's rights.
I wonder if women should be careful what they wish for?

I wonder if you've read the book.

One was written by Cortez's personal chronicler and one about 500 years later...

Think about it :)

and the bible was writtedn fifteen hundred years earlier.
The Koran was written five hundred years earlier.
The Rig Veda was written 2500 years earlier.
The work I indicated REFERENCED the cortez expedition. (and many others, the bibliography is about twenty pages)
Think about it.

@everittdmickey
With men in charge, women are often put into places of protection. (or up on a pedestal). The woman's body, her choice is an argument that only works on men.

With women in charge, they will control each others access to breeding. They will decide who can and who cannot have children. If the grand dame does not approve of you having a child, then getting pregnant is akin to being thrown out of the tribe. My body, my choice, quickly becomes our food/shelter our choice under a patriarchy.

I have a RADICAL idea
How bout NO ONE be "in charge".
Oddly enough I don't feel the need to have someone else tell me how to live.
Do you?

I am tired of having men/women flip/flop who's in charge.
I am ready to see something else. I don't know if we will get to no one being in charge. At least not soon. But, we can hope.

I was just stating what things were like in the past.

Yeah kill all the babies because until they are out of the mother it is not considered murder.
Maybe stupid people shouldn't be getting prego if they are only going to abort the baby.
But yeah the fact that we have birth control to stop the murder of children must not matter.
Fucking swear.

Yeah kill all the babies because until they are out of the mother it is not considered murder.

Nobody said anything about killing all the babies.

Maybe stupid people shouldn't be getting prego if they are only going to abort the baby.

Who made you king to decide what other people can do with their bodies?

But yeah the fact that we have birth control to stop the murder of children must not matter.

Parasitic fetuses are not children until they are born.

LMFAO!
I did not say what people should do with their bodys, I said there is birth control so that baby murder does not need to happen. your response is asking if I should have the right to tell people what they should do with their bodys.
LOL
I have not said what they can and cant do to their kids, I was only saying their is an option out there so that we don't need to kill babies.
So I guess your question has nothing to do with my statement but it does raise other questions.
Are you supporting a persons right to get prego when their plan
is to kill the baby? If some girl said "I want to get prego so I can get an abortion" are you supporting that? If not then why does my comment about how people should be using birth control instead of killing the baby come down to me trying to tell someone what they can and cant do to their body?
There are some reasons I support abortion but I will not support someone to get an abortion when all they had to do was take a fucking pill to never get prego in the first place.
We arent talking about rape victims or people that will die giving birth or anything like that. we are talking about the average person making decisions that cost a life out of laziness.
I find it funny that they are parasitic until they are born but after you don't see them as parasitic for the first 18 years the are alive that you are required by law to take care of them properly.
What about premi babies? they are proof that they are alive before coming out of the mother naturally. So if it is ok to kill them day before they come out naturally, is it ok to also kill the babies that came out earlier or by operation?
You say the right to do what you want to your own body but when do you take into account the babies body and life? is it only after the mother has decieded to give the baby its rights by letting it come out of her?
IDK yo.
Oh, what about the fathers right? Does the father have any say in this process? what if a woman wants to or doesn't want to have a kid and the father wants the oppsite?
Is it ok to force the father to raise a kid they don't want or to let a mother kill the baby when the father wants it?
It has a lot more to it then just "well its in you so do what you want" in my opinion.
But whatever its just some kids life.

I did not say what people should do with their bodys, I said there is birth control so that baby murder does not need to happen.

birth control is dictating what one should ingest or not thus it has to do with their bodies.

Are you supporting a persons right to get prego when their plan
is to kill the baby?

Are you really beggining the question through a strawman to make an ethical point to the extreme? Do you really believe that there are women outhere who think "Hmmm, let me get pregnant so i can get an expensive abortion and kill it. that will make me happy".

I find it funny that they are parasitic until they are born but after you don't see them as parasitic for the first 18 years the are alive that you are required by law to take care of them properly.

Google the word parasite. They can also be a parasite after they are born but then they don't endanger the mother's life.

You say the right to do what you want to your own body but when do you take into account the babies body and life?

I don't . it is irrelevant. Life A gives life to B. B can kill A by being a hostile parasite.A can decide at any moment to get rid of it. Really simple.

Oh, what about the fathers right? Does the father have any say in this process?

Nobody has a say when it comes to another person's body. Your body, your property.

Is it ok to force the father to raise a kid they don't want or to let a mother kill the baby when the father wants it?

It is not ok to force anyone to do anything.

It is not a strawman, it is something that is included with your position.
So question still stands.Do you support people that want to get prego only to get an abortion?
Yes there are women out there that want to get prego just so they can get an abortion. I have met one irl even. Calling it a strawman does not inform us on where you sit on the subject.
Ok I get it that you think all kids are parasites now. thank you for clearing that up.
Thank you for saying that you think babies have no rights.
You say the father has no rights what so ever when it comes to their kid because its in the mothers body. if you feel that way, what is your stance on forced fatherhood? how does the baby suddenly become property of the fathers only after it has been born? the day before the kid is born its not the fathers but the second it comes out of the mother no matter the age of the baby it suddenly becomes the fathers kid? is a baby that came out of the mother a month early the fathers when a baby that came out 2 weeks late not the fathers for a full month after the other baby that came out early?
You say it is not ok to force anyone to do anything but you are not taking into account the babys rights. also yor not taking into account forcing a man to have a kid agienst his will. we are not talking about raising the kid. we are talking about forcing someone to have offspring in the world. So how can you support the mother killing the kid and say the father has no say but at the same time you are forcing the father to let the woman kill his kid? or the other way around even if the father doesn't want the kid and the woman wants it you are forcing the father to have a kid. by law he is forced to pay for it too.

I think I get where your coming from though. Your saying till the kid breaths air they do not have human rights.
I may disagree with that but we al have the right to believe what we want.

P.S.
Look up abortion addiction if you don't think women get prego just to get abortions.

Yeah keep dodging.
If a woman wants to get prego so she can get an abortion is covered by your stance.

I am nto dodging. Yes she can do that. It is her body. You have no right to tell to another person what they can do with their body. same logic applies.

I never said anything about the effects of birth control only said it is an option to prevent getting prego.

It has nothing to do with effects of birth control. you cannot dictate what one can do with their body even if it involves ingesting harmless sugar pills. You don't get it do you?

just ecause you say "natural" and not "human" does not change the rights

Natural vs Human Rights is an actual philosophical debate. They are defined differently. Google before you try to play smartass

http://www.counter-currents.com/2015/08/natural-rights-vs-human-rights/

the evidence is there, all you have to do is type in abortion addiction and it is not an exception to the rule, it is part of your rule.

i googled. found no statistics that they are the rule. you are talking out of your ass again because you saw it in the news..if its in the news...it means its rare and flashy. that's how they make it to the new..normal things don't make head lines. honor your name. be a "sceptic" .

Loading...

Yeah keep dodging.
If a woman wants to get prego so she can get an abortion is covered by your stance.

I never said anything about the effects of birth control only said it is an option to prevent getting prego. abortions has effects too. was never a part of the statements I made.

When does personal responsibility come into play and where do you draw the line?

It is a choice not to take birth control so getting prego is a choice (because we aren't talking about rape victims) so they are choosing to get prego or are to stupid and lazy not to. the only force getting used is agienst the baby by the mother that had the choice not to get prego in the first place.

You say hearsay but
the evidence is there, all you have to do is type in abortion addiction and it is not an exception to the rule, it is part of your rule.
Exception to the rule would be rape victims or chance of death from giving birth.

Whatever though. Its pointless to bring any outside views to anything you say because you play games and dodge points.

just ecause you say "natural" and not "human" does not change the rights. I could understand more if you said we have no rights and they are all made up but to play the word/name game is sad and pathetic imo.

LMFAO!
So now atleast you have answered it even though you keep with your games.
You think women should have the right to get prego if they are only doing it because they want an abortion.
LOL
Have fun playing your games. I find it funny that because im skeptical of your stance you try to play the your not skeptical because your bringing points I disagree with.
LMFAO!!!!!!
STEEM ON WITH YOUR BULLSHIT!
xD

How do you know what pills someone can take? Are you spying on peoples medical histories? :p

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

Im not agienst abortion or saying it should be illegal. I think the option should be there I just think that getting prego (by choice) thn aborting the baby later seems stupid as hell. If you don't want the baby don't choose to get prego or don't get someone prego. I see a huge difference in day after pill and waiting 2 days before giving birth to get an abortion. but as the author of the post says, its the same thing in their opinion and the baby doesn't matter if its 9 months old as lon as its still in the mother.
Whatever though, not my kids getting murdered so I shouldn't care. I do feel if you make the choice to get prego you have the responsibility to raise the kid. but we dot hold people accountable or responsible for their actions anymore so lets just abort all the bad dcisions and learn nothing so we can keep repeting the process.
LOL
Maybe I see it wrong because I was brought up understanding that if I made the choices to do something and got a girl prego that I would be faced with the responsibility to raise the kid. but I guess that's only because the man has no say in what happens to his kids tll they are born. I am surprised women don't get held to the same standard or they don't want to get held to the same standard to their male counterparts.

but I guess that's only because the man has no say in what happens to his kids tll they are born.

That's the difference. A man isn't responsible for a fetus/unborn child; unless he chooses to through helping the mother in some way; though there's still no equivalence to the male and female experience.

last time I checke you can get birth control over the counter.
or the day after pill
or condoms
or a sponge
or don't have sex

I think unless your getting raped that getting prego is a choice even if it was the choice to be lazy and have sex knowing you might get prego because you choose to not take something or whatever it is.

If it is a choice then their should be no need for abortions for anyone unless they were raped (forced) into prego or unless it has a chance of killing the mother.

So idk
Im not coming from a religious perspective, just a personal responsibility point of view.
People should be held accountable for their actions imo.
Abortion comes off to me as a easy solution for people to stupid or lazy to take percautions to not have a baby in the first place. Why not take birth control, or whatever the options are to not get prego if that's not what you want?

But what medication someone can take would only cancle out a couple of the many options we have.

You're right, the reasons women have an unplanned pregnancy are entirely irrational, and irresponsible. The individual circumstances are infinite. Sometimes when women feel the most horny enough to have risky sex, is the time when pregnancy is going to occur.

The option should be a choice. It does no benefit to anyone to make it illegal. It doesn't save lives. Being pregnant, having a baby, doesnt make anyone accountable.

Also a lot of birth control methods work by triggering an 'abortion' in event the first defense fails. It makes the uterus inhospitable to a fertilized egg. Can't know for sure if that method has gone down inside the womans body. Dead baby? lol

How does the man not have responsibilities till after the child is born?
I have never been told that if I get a girl prego that im not responsibil till the kid comes out. we are told that if you get the girl prego then you are responsible for the child or you are deemed a piece of shit by society.
I am not trying to compare the male to female experience. I was talking about responsibilitys for ones actions. gender/sex has no room in that equasion.
I personally believe that both parents should have a say in the outcome for equality.
But equality be dammed. lol
I fall back to my original point that getting prego in this day and age when you could not get prego if you choose to do so comes with concequences. they can be accountable and responsible for their choices and actions or not. Either way it is a choice they are making to kill the baby, plain and simple imo.
Atleast I don't think we are talking about forced abortion. D:

"the mother should be able to decide about her own body since she is the providing life—and she will continue to do so after the baby is born. She is solely responsible for it. The potential offspring can have a major negative impact both in her mental and social life. She owes to treat the birth like an investement for her own livelihood. We get to live only once."

Everyone conceived gets the chance to live this life once and the pregnancy is the biggest single part of the beginning of that lifetime. The time to choose that, for those reasons is before becoming pregnant.

I can understand other peoples choices, even if I don't agree with them or choose to do them myself. Like the woman who got attacked and couldn't live with those consequences; who am I to say how she feels?

The right to preserve ones lifestyle and livelihood and conception of a new life should be thought about beforehand.

Either way whatever others choose to do, only they have to live with what comes after but they do not have to bash me over the head trying to convince me they had that right. Obviously they had that opportunity and chose to do it but is that the same thing? and does it help to try and convince others?

The right to preserve ones lifestyle and livelihood and conception of a new life should be thought about beforehand.

Who sais so? People can decide whenever they want about their own body and livelihood. What kind of rule is that? Someone can choose living irresesponsibly.

I would say they have a natural right over their bodies if they want to hire a doctor to perform an abortion, but they don't have a right to force a doctor to perform one for free or others to pay for it.

The doctor has also the natural right to decide whether or not can go with the abortion.

Yeah of course. Ok we're on the same page :)

Rights are an imaginary thing, though. Fantasy.

Natural rights are not. You fuck with somebody's body you pay for it. Human rights are imaginary. Natural rights are default by nature.

What about the right of the baby?

Murder is not a natural right.

You are one sick and lost puppy.

The baby depends on the mother. The mother supplies life. The baby can kill the mother at any time because that's how nature works. The baby has no rights because it cannot sustain itself. The rights of the baby depend on those of the mother.

A baby can murder the mother since it functions much like a parasite. It can kill the mother. Actually throughout millenia babies have been killing their mothers at will in order for them to survive. Only modern medicine changed that.

I didn't see your God's "intelligent design" taking place for more than 250.000 years. So I don't see how you object now about the ethos of the process.

Modern science is jam packed with theories and lies with a sprinkling of truth on top. The world as we know it has not existed for 10,000 years, let alone 250,000 years.

I know that I can't change your mind on that. You have been well and truly indoctrinated and I doubt that anything can save you now.

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

Modern science is jam packed with theories and lies with a sprinkling of truth on top. The world as we know it has not existed for 10,000 years, let alone 250,000 years.

sais your magical book that was written by uneducated goat fuckers. Science makes mistakes all the time. That's its point. Religion assumes absolute truth. That's its demise.

I know that I can't change your mind on that. You have been well and truly indoctrinated and I doubt that anything can save you now.

Everybody is born atheist. You get indoctrinated with a religion based on the geographical area you were born. Not the other way around

Try to use arguments that surpass potato level I.Q

Wrong (again), science itself says that is packed with theories and lies and that the world is less than 10,000 years old.

Gravity is just one example of scientific theory that is widely accepted as fact but cannot be proven. Science is theory, layered upon theory, layered upon theory. Any honest scientist will admit to that.

I haven't taken the time to begin tearing science apart as I've been distracted with the election (which I have proven to be rigged) but it's possibly a good time for me to switch gears seeing that the election is done and dusted.

With all due respect, your intelligence is so low that I am not going to invest much time on you. The bible says that you are a dog and a swine and I'm not going to fall into your trap. Your lost, and while that is sad to see (for you) that is your problem, choice and right to do so. Goodbye

Matthew 7:6 - Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.

It's entirely possible to get away with fucking with someone else's body. Rights are preferences. They're nothing real, just a man made concept. You take humans out of the world and rights stop existing.

Not that I'm against rights, they are a handy concept. But libertarian-minded people have this weird, absurd need to make rights into something they're not.

They're like God for atheist people. Rights are the imaginary friend of the atheist.

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

I'm on the fence on this issue, and would just like to expand on the discussion: Would it be moral to abort a fetus simply because of the sex of the fetus? For example, if a mother doesn't want to give birth to a girl.

If it's early, I think it should be allowed. Enough people do not care about the gender that I feel this would happen only rarely.

It happens...which is a great idea, everyone should do it, and see how much violence and murder ends up in a world where men vastly outnumber women :|

your body. you do whatever you want.

The answer is in two parts.

  • It has to be legal for a woman to have an abortion. Making it illegal just makes a black market, and you cannot enforce morality through law.
  • Morality is based on human interactions. Its punishment is through community. Its guidelines is set through community. So, you have to ask the community if it is ok. (right now, feminists are pushing for a community destructive, anything goes and is all right frame.)

What you are probably really asking is it ok spiritually speaking to abort a child any given reason (from rape, to they won't have green eyes). Many mothers to be, talk of a sense of connection with the child growing within them. This connection, how far does it go? Was there an exchange, an agreement, that the child made with the mother to come into this world and be her child? If there is this connection, then to sever that connection is a huge choice. But, if it is only a pile of cells, a blood sucking leach, then the decision is only a matter of aesthetics. Which is morally right is hacked out by the community at that time. Which side is correct? Only really getting in touch with your intuition will tell you.

This reminds me of something a friend (who is no longer with us) once said...

Abortion is a natural right because in the end it is a matter of respect for a private property, the body of the woman.

holy fuck, I've never seen a post get so many flags. Thats fucking sad. What's so threatening about abortion?

26 abortion doctor snipers lurking on Steemit! and counting!

It is not about the abortion topic, it is about the shaming and the one sided argument. And comments like:

26 abortion doctor snipers lurking on Steemit! and counting!

There is more than one person involved in any pregnancy. And the post states that only one person matters, that all other people, and arguments do not matter. And then, these people's points of view are ridiculed, derided, and put down.

I will, herein, make a warning to all women who believe in the words of this post.

You will lose, and you will lose badly


One does not go and ignore (mock and ridicule) the other parties in a deal without seeing retribution. It is only because men love and care for women, that this has even been tolerated. If men could turn off that part of themselves, then women who feel this way (in the above post) would be left, alone, in a cold, lightless shack.

Keep stabbing at the ones who will do the providing for the women and the children, then they will walk off the plantation. This one sided negotiation will leave you all in ruins.

If you don't believe me, look at marriage rates. There is literally nothing in a marriage for men, accept to make the woman happy. Keep beating this one sided argument and the other side will just leave.

marriage is dead. if anything it is the tradition of selling women as property.

with abortion everyone wins. less children, less burden on the planet, les trouble for the women. the only problem recites to people who want to have a say about other people's lives or those who have an imaginary friend that dictates them ethics.

Thanks for answering my question abou why abortion is so threatening.

I think most women consult their partners when they get knocked up. Unless you expect that they should do so for a casual sex partners...but why? Any man would be totally confused why he's even getting that phone call.

Women can still have kids after getting an abortion. The chance of it injuring her so she can't is the same as the problems that end a pregnancy before there's an infant out of it.

For guys like you, anything regarding women's freedoms is centered around dating, marriage, sex partners. And anything that benefits women is labelled as 'feminism.' It is threatening to me because the undertones are to go backwards with womens rights so men can feel they have more control in sex, dating. There's more to women's lives as individuals, and not thinking about it that way shows a lack of empathy for women, not the other way around. And if it was about men's rights, men angry at anything they call 'feminism' would be discussing things homelessness and incarceration instead, but all they do is define themselves in terms of women. Maybe some men don't feel like men anymore because it's unmasculine to do that?

When you ad negotiating with individuals about other people's choices, it is no longer individual rights. A woman's body and sexual choices aren't a democracy nor is it a courtroom needing a judge, jury, prosecuter, defendant and a sentence.

Maybe it's not 'fair', but it's not my fault if men choose partners out of cowardice, fearing that they won't get a better woman or secure another womb. The reason that more women initiate divorces is because men don't leave. If a marriage is at the point where one person wants a divorceand it's unreconcilable, he's not staying out of valour and duty, he's staying out of fear of being alone and not wanting to face the challenges of getting another woman, being single, potentially being judged as 'less of a man' for not having a woman. These are problems that men have to take care of within their sphere and not just throw the blame at 'feminism.' Women didn't make the male martyrdom trope anymore than anyone with a penis today had a hand in cultivating 'patriarchal' oppression of women.

I support the freedom of people to make their choices. Anyone who makes them out of cowardice or trying to appease other people or an abstraction like society will be discontented. I don't mock men for not buying into their martydom trope. Projecting issues on to things like abortion and divorce solves nothing.

I enjoyed writing this. Thanks for the ideas and discussion.

Kids are wonderful! stop screwing around

NO one should be forced to have kids, We are overpopulated. We should encourage people to not have kids. It's destroying the environment.

You said it yourself:

Nobody gives you the right to decide for the life of others.

In no case is it okay for one person to arbitrarily decide to kill another. You may try to argue that a baby is not a person, but it is how you and everyone else began.

That said, there are cases where groups of people decide whether to kill someone. It is not an easy decision, but it can be made. As a general rule, a woman should have to confer with the father of the child and a doctor at the very least, with the exception that in the case of rape, the man loses any right to be involved.

In no case is it okay for one person to arbitrarily decide to kill another. You may try to argue that a baby is not a person, but it is how you and everyone else began.

no i am not. the woman has control over her own life and anything else that is insid of her. the baby has no right to anything since it cannot support itself.

As a general rule, a woman should have to confer with the father of the child and a doctor at the very least, with the exception that in the case of rape, the man loses any right to be involved.

not really. her body. her business

There will probably be a parody post of this.

@kyriacos - am sorry - abortion is an escape to having irresponsible sex
it's the key to just f...ing whoever you like whenever you feel like it cause if you get knocked up - there'll be someone who'd take care of the life in the womb -
May I ask you something - if you have knocked someone up and that woman would want to abort your baby - how would you feel?
I'm not writing out of prejudice - who am I to judge - I live in the principle - Live and Let Live - this article is provocative - has achieved effective writing - but like a bitter pill - it's hard to swallow

am sorry - abortion is an escape to having irresponsible sex

having children in a planet with 7+ billion people and a massive carbon footprint problem is much more irresponsible (if you want to play the blame game)

May I ask you something - if you have knocked someone up and that woman would want to abort your baby - how would you feel?

its her body. she can do as she pleases.

@kyriacos

if you want to play the blame game

You're assuming - I am not the type who'd blame nor whine.
It's a fact - on some sides of the earth. A certain country in Asia is exercising abortion - in secrecy and they have the highest cases of teen pregnancy and abortion.

If you want to know which one surf the net yourself.

Thank you for answering the question. Like I wrote up there, I'm writing not out of prejudice - but curiosity .

Yeah. Japan. Good for them.

their bodies, their property.

This post has been linked to from another place on Steem.

Learn more about and upvote to support linkback bot v0.5. Flag this comment if you don't want the bot to continue posting linkbacks for your posts.

Built by @ontofractal

Most abortions don't happen because there's a threat to the woman.
And if a woman is in danger an abortion takes to long a cesarean is faster.

Question So if a man kicks a woman in the stomach and kill's the parasite, than he can't be charged with murder cause he didn't kill a human being. He can only be charged with aggresing against the woman. And in fact he can claim he did it to protect the woman and her body from the parasite that might have killed her any moment? Or is it the woman that decides if the man is a murderer or a savior.

the baby is property of the woman. if it kicks it it also kicks her and threatens both their lives. She can decide for any action but it is an attack on her liberty and property.

your logic is faulty Mr. Strawman

Maybe you read it to fast, but that's not an answer to my question.
I meant if someone kick's the woman in the stomach (from the outside), or does something else that kill's her parasite.

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

@kyriacos, you seem so angry at people that have faith, its like you're on a mission to discredit or disprove with such hostility. You come across as hateful and superior with your insults and comments. We all will believe what ever we want and you can't change that! With that said, why does it anger you so much? Peace.

It doesn't anger me. You are doing it again. You try to play psychologists by analysing words from a computer screen. I notice that a lot with religious people. They feel that they hold the truth. that..they know something more.and based on that they feel that they have the power to say to others what they can do with their life.

notice how all the flags i got where from religious people who got "offended". so the angry ones are the people with imaginary friends.

I don't think this really addresses what most people who are against abortion actually argue, who are you arguing against? Your post would pack more punch if you address what the most reasonable critiques say. Quotes from actual arguments that have been well articulated would be most effective.

quoting other people? really that's the best you could do?

here is the best argument. my body, my business. you can't beat that

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

I just don't see the point of writing this since everybody, on both sides, understands your argument. However do you understand what the other side is actually saying? If you don't address their counterargument you come off uninformed.

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

sure the other side is saying that there is either a magical thing called "soul" within a group of cells (based on a version of their religious fairy tale) or they neglect the mother's life and put forward the one of the child. In other words they don't care about individual rights and they forget the fact that the fetus is something that can kill the mother at any time.

I addressed it many times. Other people have done as well. Suprinsingly they persist because the whole thing is not about arguments but belief.

Read the comments before you comment on the same thing

Take my advice, and you will be better at arguing your position.

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

Take mine and state where did you saw a straman. This post or others. Should be easy for you to point it out. No need to play the "high ground" advisor.

I already explained myself.. Plus if I go take a couple quotes I will be quote mining right? You wrote the article, and you are the one who is supposed to do the research. You can disagree, I am telling you how to improve your argument. Take it or leave it.

There is no strawman in my argument or in my other articles. You might need to polish up on your philosophy 101.

I can't read your mind to understand what you think, you think you understand.

You could also include a definition of natural rights in the article - since you don't even mention it..

Clicked on a couple other posts from you and it seems this fallacy is a re-occurring theme.

which fallacy do you speak of?

Here you go

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

Just because you think it is, it doesn't make it so.

So. instead of copy-pasta-ing aimelessly things that you know that i already know, copy-paste the parts that I said and that you think that I commit a strawman.

be careful. Don't fall into the "quote-mining" fallacy. (if you really want to start playing the douchebag armchair philosopher arguments with me do it properly)

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

kyriacos, you are being needlessly confrontational. I merely offered some constructive criticism. Also, I am confused by this "So. instead of copy-pasta-ing aimelessly things that you know that i already know" what is it exactly, that I know you already know?

I could go find some reasonable arguments that address everything you wrote in the original post, but I really think YOU should be the one that does that. I can do it for you if you want, maybe tomorrow if I have time.

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

you wrote 5 comments trying to deviate from the point. you could have pointed out the fallacy by now. here is what i think. you are trying to play smartass, ..but sure...you can hit me up anytime you are free.

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

I pointed out the fallacy. I have watched countless videos that address this without bringing soul and religion into it. You are making a claim that abortion is a natural right, but don't even define what a natural right is, and then you create a straw man argument that most people aren't making, so you have an easy target. NOW you want me to do all the research that YOU should have done before writing this. I am telling you how to do a better job making your argument, because what you have written is tired and redundant. It is also intellectually dishonest to do such a poor job at representing the other sides argument.

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

natural right = right to control one's life as dictated by nature.

pretty simple mate.

and then you create a straw man argument that most people aren't making,

so again. which strawman are you refering to? (it is amazing how you made a comment about stramwan and you managed to elaborately say everything else besides pointing out the strawman itself).

good job man. you would be an excellent politician.

Finally, a subject that creates controversy and a social exchange, not only blockchain and SP.
You say a natural right? I would say a social right. Nature: plants, animals, human engenders life. Only a human can decide to stop life. It is a power, but this power is it right?

your body, your absolute power. is that simple

  ·  8 years ago Reveal Comment

Ahh, a voice of reason.