What is your stance on abortion?

Coronary artery bypass surgery is a medical procedure that some people need to save their lives. I'm against eating bacon fat and drinking Pepsi with the attitude that I'll just get CABP surgery when my arteries clog up. Not the same by any means, but it kind of sums up my point of view. And I believe that life begins at conception because chasing any other time is arbitrary.

HelpImLost said:

I already have babies with you! What's one more?

Click to expand...

Cool. Let's make more babies.

Led_Astray said:

if you can't tell the difference between a baby and a blastocyte, you definitely should not be involved in any medical decisions involving other people, ever.

Click to expand...

That's like saying I'm opposed to eating chicken. I'll have a fried egg instead. I understand the importance of who sits on the Supreme court beings they have the power to redefine you out of existence.

Led_Astray said:

I'm not against abortion, but I don't think I qualify as "for" it.
I believe that a woman should have autonomy over her own body, and it should be her choice. Tiny bundles of cells that have no sentience or soul get no say in the matter.

Click to expand...

That's the typical statement baby killers and their supporters spew to make themselves feel better.

rae121452 said:

unless it's your womb, it's none of your fucking business.

Click to expand...

Tigersman said:

No one has the right to tell another they can or can not have an abortion.

Click to expand...

The blithering ignorance of people who obstinately refuse to acknowledge that the gestation of a human being at a point wherein that entity posses a heartbeat and brain activity is a legitimate concern of society as a whole (which, of course, would include BOTH men and women) is staggering to me and is on a par with the blithering ignorance of people who obstinately refuse to acknowledge that the termination of that gestation process for any number of medical and/or personal reasons of the mother IS ALSO a legitimate concern of society as a whole.

Welcome to the club of which you wouldn't be caught dead being a member.

Oblimo said:

This article from 1971, arguing for making abortion legal, provides an argument that has never been successfully refuted by Pro-Life advocates (no, really, it never has), although most fail because they do not understand it.

How does it do it? It accepts the premise that abortion is the murder of a human being.

And then irrefutably shows why it must be made legal anyway.

A Defense of Abortion, Judith Jarvis Thompson

Knock yourself out, lady.

Click to expand...

Here's an argument that's never been refuted, notwithstanding Roe v Wade, it isn't in the Constitution.

Rightguide said:

Here's an argument that's never been refuted, notwithstanding Roe v Wade, it isn't in the Constitution.

Click to expand...

You didn’t even read the article, did you? Give it a try.

HelpImLost said:

That's the typical statement baby killers and their supporters spew to make themselves feel better.

Click to expand...

Shhh, listen... Did you hear it? That faint "whiiffing" noise?

That was the very last shred of your credibility evaporating.

But feel free to prove me wrong.

Here is a photo of a Blastocyst.

https://encrypted-tbn0.***********/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTq5Adu6tg5IirHf4xmq3hAB5tUcFBhLLEoG696GPTdBvvu5FQv

Please add arrows and labels showing in which part the consciousness and the soul reside.

Led_Astray said:

Shhh, listen... Did you hear it? That faint "whiiffing" noise?

That was the very last shred of your credibility evaporating.

But feel free to prove me wrong.

Here is a photo of a Blastocyst.

https://encrypted-tbn0.***********/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTq5Adu6tg5IirHf4xmq3hAB5tUcFBhLLEoG696GPTdBvvu5FQv

Please add arrows and labels showing in which part the consciousness and the soul reside.

Click to expand...

You can show which part the consciousness and soul resides in a human being, after birth?

Fascinating.

I look forward to your annotated drawing of such.

Led_Astray said:

Shhh, listen... Did you hear it? That faint "whiiffing" noise?

That was the very last shred of your credibility evaporating.

But feel free to prove me wrong.

Here is a photo of a Blastocyst.

https://encrypted-tbn0.***********/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTq5Adu6tg5IirHf4xmq3hAB5tUcFBhLLEoG696GPTdBvvu5FQv

Please add arrows and labels showing in which part the consciousness and the soul reside.

Click to expand...

How exactly does that answer or respond to my statement... another typical response from a wicked baby killer supporter. The diversion tactic of spewing a reply, that makes no sense.

"There are six things that the Lord hates, seven that are an abomination to him: haughty eyes, a LYING tongue, and hands that shed INNOCENT BLOOD, a heart that devises WICKED PLANS, feet that make haste to run to evil, a false witness who breathes out LIES, and one who sows discord among brothers." -Proverbs 6: 16-19

Que said:

You can show which part the consciousness and soul resides in a human being, after birth?

Fascinating.

I look forward to your annotated drawing of such.

Click to expand...

Well, you are out of luck with the soul, because I don't believe in them, but the consciousness is easy. Frankly, I'm astonished you need a diagram, but maybe you slept through some biology classes, so here you go:

https://orig00.deviantart.net/0a74/f/2018/261/f/f/banbyconc_by_mayhem_on_da-dcn6ggp.jpg

HelpImLost said:

How exactly does that answer or respond to my statement... another typical response from a wicked baby killer supporter. The diversion tactic of spewing a reply, that makes no sense.

Click to expand...

Well, I'm sorry if it made no sense to you. Did you skip some biology classes too?

Let me break it down to a simpler level.

A blastocyst (pictured in my earlier post) is a small bundle of replicating cells, created when sperm fertilises an egg. It's what doctors are usually dealing with in cases of abortion.

You, however, are claiming that a blastocyst and a baby are the same thing. Otherwise your "babykiller" accusation makes zero sense.

Hence my question to you. Whereabouts, in the blastocyst is the consciousness? The thing that differentiates, according to you, this bundle of cells from any other random cell sample? What about this particular selection of cells makes it identical to a baby, in your eyes? Show me.

HelpImLost said:

"There are six things that the Lord hates, seven that are an abomination to him: haughty eyes, a LYING tongue, and hands that shed INNOCENT BLOOD, a heart that devises WICKED PLANS, feet that make haste to run to evil, a false witness who breathes out LIES, and one who sows discord among brothers." -Proverbs 6: 16-19

Click to expand...

Oooh, the bible quote game! Can I play?

"Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones." - Psalm 137:9 (God cheering on the murder of babies)

" Give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts.” - Hosea 9:14 (So who is asking the lord to carry out abortions? Only Hosea, one of the 12 minor prophets of Christianity, and one of the writers of the bible.)

"Now go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them. But kill both man and woman, infant and nursing child, ox and sheep, camel and donkey. - 1 Samuel 15:3 (Oh look, this time it's God himself that is planning the shedding of innocent blood, and making wicked plans)

"But if you have gone astray while married to your husband and you have made yourself impure by having sexual relations with a man other than your husband”— here the priest is to put the woman under this curse—“may the Lord cause you to become a curse among your people when he makes your womb miscarry and your abdomen swell." - Numbers 20-21 (God is actually keen to cause an abortion if the child is a result of infidelity!)

What day of gestation are brain cells imbued with "consciousness."

Disclaimers up front: I'm a male. Talking from ex-soviet north Europe. I'm not a Christian (kind of pagan, for lack of better short definition). I believe there's no principal difference between killing a fly and a man. I kill a lot of flies, for no good reason. If you're still interested in my opinion, it's rather typical around here.

First, there is cases when you have to decide, kill the girl and the child or just the child.

Second, why anyone should carry to term a rape child against their will? Hint, it very much fall back in the first category if you try to force. Talk about suicide and self harm.

Those two groups of cases should be out of discussion, period. However neither can be defined undoubtedly and razor shap, nor should be.

Therefore, it ends up as her decision, and her alone. Nobody else have any say (well, beyond expert advice, but more on than later). It is horrible decision, never to be seen lightly, but she's all on her own on this, and so it must be. You have all rights to have your strong opinion and make it even more difficult as it should be, but the option should be there, and only she have any and all rights to decide.

Now, here it is almost the other way around.

I know a woman who had a surprise child at 44. Well, not completely surprise, she kind of let it happen, but here I must say, they had yuge problems to get their three previous children (now late teens), so it was kinda improbable... not, as turned out. Surprise as it was, she was happy about.

Her age, and previous problems, and all the things that might go wrong, she was tasked with innumerable tests and analyses, and had to answer, even sign a dozen times that she indeed want and intend to carry to term and born her child. At one point she was literally reduced to tears:

"Why everyone wants to kill my child? And so what, if that or that or that? That won't change a thing, I made that decision long ago. Do I even want to know, well maybe, to be ready, but with that attitude, I'm not sure anymore."

Bad luck with a doctor or two? Maybe, I don't know. Btw, the child is a healthy bundle of joy, and if anything is abnormal about her, it is how fast she develops.

Just saying, there may be times it can be overdone, but I also know for fact, even after all that, if there was any necessity, any treat her right to decide be taken away, she would go and do whatever it takes and lead others in defence of it.

Que said:

What day of gestation are brain cells imbued with "consciousness."

Click to expand...

For you? Never. It's obvious by your posts.


For the OP... I recommend you don't get an abortion and butt out of other womens legal choice to have one. It's none of your business..

It's hilarious when message board trolls think they're smart enough to make choices for someone else, when they're on here constantly acting like total morons.

cowslinger64 said:

For you? Never. It's obvious by your posts.


For the OP... I recommend you don't get an abortion and butt out of other womens legal choice to have one. It's none of your business..

It's hilarious when message board trolls think they're smart enough to make choices for someone else, when they're on here constantly acting like total morons.

Click to expand...

No. I will never stop fighting for the rights of the unborn , who lack a voice.

Que said:

You can show which part the consciousness and soul resides in a human being, after birth?

Fascinating.

I look forward to your annotated drawing of such.

Click to expand...

I can't speak to the soul, but one certainly can in principle point to neuroanatomical structures and function as the locus of consciousness. And in practice this can already be done for at least one sense of consciousness.

HelpImLost said:

No. I will never stop fighting for the rights of the unborn , who lack a voice.

Click to expand...

2 questions then..

Is this a religious issue?

How many babies born with handicaps or things missing or those that were destined to die right after birth or forced to live in a vegetative state for their entire "life span" or some other horrible existence... Have you adopted?

cowslinger64 said:

2 questions then..

Is this a religious issue?

How many babies born with handicaps or things missing or those that were destined to die right after birth or forced to live in a vegetative state for their entire "life span" or some other horrible existence... Have you adopted?

Click to expand...

How many have I adopted? None. Because I'm a broke, 20 year old finishing off her degree. Can you adopt one in the mean time?

I wont even answer your religious question, because it's obvious.

And you think they were destined to die? Are you more superior than them? My my.. I didn't realize God himself would be in this forum. Because that's who , AND ONLY WHO decides who should die. Mankind just thinks they're entitled to that role. You're a disgusting excuse for a human being , and I hope someone steals your new smoker!

ButterflyMcQueef said:

You can show which part the consciousness and soul resides in a human being, after birth?

Fascinating.

I look forward to your annotated drawing of such.

Click to expand...

Is this more of this "virtual signaling" (sic) that you are always yammering about?

Led_Astray said:

Well, you are out of luck with the soul, because I don't believe in them, but the consciousness is easy. Frankly, I'm astonished you need a diagram, but maybe you slept through some biology classes, so here you go:

https://orig00.deviantart.net/0a74/f/2018/261/f/f/banbyconc_by_mayhem_on_da-dcn6ggp.jpg



Well, I'm sorry if it made no sense to you. Did you skip some biology classes too?

Let me break it down to a simpler level.

A blastocyst (pictured in my earlier post) is a small bundle of replicating cells, created when sperm fertilises an egg. It's what doctors are usually dealing with in cases of abortion.

You, however, are claiming that a blastocyst and a baby are the same thing. Otherwise your "babykiller" accusation makes zero sense.

Hence my question to you. Whereabouts, in the blastocyst is the consciousness? The thing that differentiates, according to you, this bundle of cells from any other random cell sample? What about this particular selection of cells makes it identical to a baby, in your eyes? Show me.




Oooh, the bible quote game! Can I play?

"Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones." - Psalm 137:9 (God cheering on the murder of babies)

" Give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts.” - Hosea 9:14 (So who is asking the lord to carry out abortions? Only Hosea, one of the 12 minor prophets of Christianity, and one of the writers of the bible.)

"Now go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them. But kill both man and woman, infant and nursing child, ox and sheep, camel and donkey. - 1 Samuel 15:3 (Oh look, this time it's God himself that is planning the shedding of innocent blood, and making wicked plans)

"But if you have gone astray while married to your husband and you have made yourself impure by having sexual relations with a man other than your husband”— here the priest is to put the woman under this curse—“may the Lord cause you to become a curse among your people when he makes your womb miscarry and your abdomen swell." - Numbers 20-21 (God is actually keen to cause an abortion if the child is a result of infidelity!)

Click to expand...

What you don't know about anatomy, physiology, embryology and cellular biology is alot.

Oblimo said:

You didn’t even read the article, did you? Give it a try.

Click to expand...

I don't give a shit what's in the article. My comment was directed at the original question. There's no rational legal argument for abortion that can be found in the Constitution. If that's true, so can almost anything else.

Oblimo said:

You didn’t even read the article, did you? Give it a try.

Click to expand...

I read it. This from your link:

First, while I do argue that abortion is not impermissible, I do not argue that it is always permissible. There may well be cases in which carrying the child to term requires only Minimally Decent Samaritanism of the mother, and this is a standard we must not fall below. I am inclined to think it a merit of my account precisely that it does not give a general yes or a general no. It allows for and supports our sense that, for example, a sick and desperately frightened fourteen-year-old schoolgirl, pregnant due to rape, may of course choose abortion, and that any law which rules this out is an insane law. And it also allows for and supports our sense that in other cases resort to abortion is even positively indecent. It would be indecent in the woman to request an abortion, and indecent in a doctor to perform it, if she is in her seventh month, and wants the abortion just to avoid the nuisance of postponing a trip abroad.

Click to expand...

The only thing I would question is if the writer believes that the "standard we must not fall below" should represent a LEGAL standard. She specifically said that a law that would prohibit a 14-year-old girl from choosing an abortion is an insane law. I would agree. What she did NOT say, unfortunately, is that a law that would PERMIT abortion for any number of reasons repugnant to the Minimally Decent Samaritanism standard "we must not fall below" is also an insane law. If she HAD said that, I would also fully agree. But in a sense we are left to wonder if her condemnation of "indecency" of a woman's request for such an abortion and a doctor's performance of it also represents a legal insanity.

What we are NOT left to wonder about it is the insanity of a large segment of our population who believe, apparently, that a woman's right to an abortion in all circumstances is absolute. They have declared themselves as loudly and as intransigently as the pro-life opposition.

I am assuming by the citation of the article you are NOT among their number. Would I be correct?

Colonel Hogan said:

I read it. This from your link:



The only thing I would question is if the writer believes that the "standard we must not fall below" should represent a LEGAL standard. She specifically said that a law that would prohibit a 14-year-old girl from choosing an abortion is an insane law. I would agree. What she did NOT say, unfortunately, is that a law that would PERMIT abortion for any number of reasons repugnant to the Minimally Decent Samaritanism standard "we must not fall below" is also an insane law. If she HAD said that, I would also fully agree. But in a sense we are left to wonder if her condemnation of "indecency" of a woman's request for such an abortion and a doctor's performance of it also represents a legal insanity.

What we are NOT left to wonder about it is the insanity of a large segment of our population who believe, apparently, that a woman's right to an abortion in all circumstances is absolute. They have declared themselves as loudly and as intransigently as the pro-life opposition.

I am assuming by the citation of the article you are NOT among their number. Would I be correct?

Click to expand...

I'm not saying Abortion cannot be legalized. I'm just saying it isn't in the Constitution. It's a matter for the states, Roe v Wade notwithstanding.

von_Bismarck said:

I can't speak to the soul, but one certainly can in principle point to neuroanatomical structures and function as the locus of consciousness. And in practice this can already be done for at least one sense of consciousness.

Click to expand...

Same qusstion:

Que said:

What day of gestation are brain cells imbued with "consciousness."

Click to expand...

Que said:

Same qusstion:

Click to expand...

Meaningless question. Brain cells themselves aren't imbued with consciousness.