Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The Abortion Paradox

page: 13
2
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 02:58 PM
link   
reply to post by saint4God
 


Oh, so then the aborted fetus must end up existing also?




posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
reply to post by juveous
 


- like this - If your parents aborted you instead, are there some people alive right now that would not have existed besides you?



I might not be following your question correctly. If my parents had aborted me, I do not believe anyone else would cease to exist who is currently alive (if that's what you mean).

There were no other children born after me.
reply to post by Irish M1ck
 


I'm glad you found some personal reference for that question of mine - now can you humor me as to see that other people who's lives were affected by abortions?. - In other words, think of people who have been affected by your "paradox" and ask them that question.



And stop trying to win over this debate with "people wouldn't be the same" or "genetics would have altered others into a different person altogether"

That's where you insinuate that abortions are the effect to what you can be "thankful for" today. AKA - abortions are good. The very reason there are a LOT of people in here that don't appreciate that kind of rhetoric.



Sorry for the facts. I know it blows your brain apart to think about genetics and the endless possibilities, but the fact still remains the same.


what facts? that we are affected by our genes? It is your stance. You said there is people around right now that "could not" exist if it wasn't for previous abortions. And then we say - "what's your point"? and then you say - "its just a fact"?




If you could go back in time and stop abortion, you would literally be killing thousands of people who are alive today. You would be creating other life, but you would still be killing people.


If I went back in time and stopped abortions, guess what I would be in the past. Sooo I wouldn't be killing anyone, because they don't exist. All I know now is that I just let a lot of children live. This is why I think you are confused. you equate this "killing" people who are alive today, by changing the "past" - it doesn't work that way


There is endless scenarios for us to speculate in from our past to present by throwing a what if here and a what if there. But stop connecting the scenarios. Face it, if we change the past the future to present will change.
they will no longer be the same, so all the talk about people not existing and not being the same is just irrelevant, you are dealing with an entirely different lineage of time.

connecting an altered past with today's present = pointless. because in the end you can't possibly know the effects of an altered past. The only thing you can know is the effects of the present.

Everyone who is alive today has no say in regards to if the past was changed.
I actually almost regret coming in here as this was your premise the entire time



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 03:29 PM
link   
reply to post by juveous
 



I'm glad you found some personal reference for that question of mine - now can you humor me as to see that other people who's lives were affected by abortions?. - In other words, think of people who have been affected by your "paradox" and ask them that question.


Well that's why I made the thread... so that people can share their opinions, stories, or ideas about it.


what facts? that we are affected by our genes? It is your stance. You said there is people around right now that "could not" exist if it wasn't for previous abortions. And then we say - "what's your point"? and then you say - "its just a fact"?


Well it is. People say, "every life counts", yet it is clearly not true. That life counts to them because they have been indoctrinated to hate anyone who has had abortions.

The truth of the matter is that no one is "pro-life". It's a cop out. That's why most of them advocate for capital punishment and couldn't care less about welfare programs. It also explains how they are so easy to misinterpret this thread and dismiss it.

How is someone who is alive today theoretical? If they are living, they are much less theoretical than the fetus that was aborted.

How can you care more for the aborted fetus than the person that is living and breathing?

Pro-life? No.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
Oh, so then the aborted fetus must end up existing also?


Yep. Let's call the aborted fetus as "Michelle" (many parents have a name picked out when they learn they're pregnant). Let's say Michelle was killed and sequentially, "Janis" and "Robin" were born after. Essentially, I believe that if Michelle were allowed to live, circumstances would be such that Janis and Robin would exist as well whether that be from the same mother or being blessed to a different mother. All Michelle, Janis, and Robin would be alive albeit with the possibility of slightly different circumstances. Who is the next nobel prize winner, Michelle, Janis or Robin? If Michelle is killed, then the chances that one of the three could've been it is reduced by 33.33%.

In another analogy, let's say that you run a small car rental company in a very small town. You've just started, you're the only rental place in town, so you only have 3 cars. The cars represent bodies, your customers represent souls. Now, as you're getting your cars ready for the day, you find out one has been vandalized, completely smashed and no good. The next day you have three customers at different times who want to rent a car to visit family out of town. Unfortunately, only two of them can do so, the third one is wrecked. So, one poor customer will not be able to leave the town to visit their family. They did not get to choose whether they stayed or left...the person who vandalized that car revoked their ability to rent a car.

[edit on 21-1-2009 by saint4God]



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
The truth of the matter is that no one is "pro-life". It's a cop out. That's why most of them advocate for capital punishment and couldn't care less about welfare programs. It also explains how they are so easy to misinterpret this thread and dismiss it.


This statement is incorrect. I'd mentioned before that I was pro-life, against both abortions and the death penalty and you'd given it an acknowledgement as well.


Originally posted by Irish M1ck
And I am glad to know that you are not pro-capital punishment.


[edit on 21-1-2009 by saint4God]



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 03:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
reply to post by Xtrozero
 


Yeah, except that's not true. They are actual lives. If you are talking about in the future, then yes, it is theoretical, but you can also examine the present. There are people who would not exist if their mother had not had an abortion. Right now. Real people. They breathe and eat just like you.


And the question is, so? First it is not a fact (for it needs to be proven, and it can't be). Second, there is no point to your logic in saying there are different people here in present day based on past actions....and so I need to say no #...

Once again every little action or non-action creates infinite possibilities and so you can not pick one action above all the other infinite actions that ALL do the same thing in changing the future.

To say there are different people on the earth because of abortions is just as correct as saying if I delayed leaving my house by a second 10 years ago my future would have headed in a different direction of infinite possibilities that would also mean my future kids would not be the same ones I have to day.

The illogic to all this is justifying past actions with how the present ended up from those actions. This fallacy is created by looking from the present to the past along one single time line, where the truth is that in the past there was an infinite number of future timelines that ended into one timeline of the present.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by saint4God
 


Why doesn't the car dealership owner just get a different car transfered in? If Janis and Robin get to be born regardless, why doesn't Michelle?



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
Why doesn't the car dealership owner just get a different car transfered in? If Janis and Robin get to be born regardless, why doesn't Michelle?


The car she wanted to rent that day was wrecked, she missed her family reunion. Can't transfer when you only own one rental place. Cars represent fetuses/babies. Rental place represents a woman's body. Customers represent children's souls.


[edit on 21-1-2009 by saint4God]



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by saint4God
 


Yes I know you are. I didn't say all, I said most. You have a particularly different theory on life than most (which is good). It's not all black and white, and I respect that.

reply to post by Xtrozero
 



And the question is, so?


What do you mean, "so?" I thought you were intensely passionate about life.


First it is not a fact (for it needs to be proven, and it can't be).


I thought I solved then when I showed the probability of creating the same person (even using the same parents). Less than 1 in a billion or some crazy number.


Second, there is no point to your logic in saying there are different people here in present day based on past actions....and so I need to say no #...


No #... what? That they are here or that you don't care?


Once again every little action or non-action creates infinite possibilities and so you can not pick one action above all the other infinite actions that ALL do the same thing in changing the future.


Why do you get to tell me what actions I can pick and what I can't? I have no problem with your statement that many decisions affect our lives, and therefore affect who is born and who isn't.

In fact, that's absolutely correct. It still doesn't change anything.


To say there are different people on the earth because of abortions is just as correct as saying if I delayed leaving my house by a second 10 years ago my future would have headed in a different direction of infinite possibilities that would also mean my future kids would not be the same ones I have to day.


It is fairly synonymous, but not really. Would leaving your house one second later have changed something? Maybe some days. Maybe you wouldn't have bumped into someone that you did.

It's not the same because you can't pinpoint anything that would be different. If something major would have changed, then I think I would be inclined to agree with you.


The illogic to all this is justifying past actions with how the present ended up from those actions. This fallacy is created by looking from the present to the past along one single time line, where the truth is that in the past there was an infinite number of future timelines that ended into one timeline of the present.


Are you talking about Multi-verse theory? I am not following you. I do not see how any of that applies when we are talking about abortion.

Do you or do you not concede that there are people who are alive today only because their mother had an abortion?



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 03:53 PM
link   
reply to post by saint4God
 


Right, but if Michelle gets a car, then she gets all three (in my paradox). So, in your example, if Michelle gets all three cars, where are the other two going to get them from?

You said it was fate, so no matter what, the other two will get cars. Why can the other two always get cars but Michelle is limited by reason?



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
How can you care more for the aborted fetus than the person that is living and breathing?

Pro-life? No.


It is an alternate reality man. You are allowed to compare because you exist.

how can one care about anyone besides themselves? Understanding the potential of everyone, realizing that it is possible that you are alive because of the exact same decision your mother might have made towards yourself.

If I look back, where one came to the decision of an abortion, and they don't choose life, but still give birth to someone significant to me. No one should be saying -
"hey if she didn't have an abortion, that significant person wouldn't have existed"
but rather - If she didn't have an abortion, that might have been one more person that could have been significant to me.

maybe some people are hypocritical, maybe we are all are at times. But the hypocrisy you mention is theoretical. All the pro-lifer's suggest is that it doesn't not matter who is born, as long as we let them experience life.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 03:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
Right, but if Michelle gets a car, then she gets all three (in my paradox). So, in your example, if Michelle gets all three cars, where are the other two going to get them from?


I've never met a person who could drive three cars at once. I've never heard of a soul that could inhabit three bodies at once.


Originally posted by Irish M1ck
You said it was fate, so no matter what, the other two will get cars. Why can the other two always get cars but Michelle is limited by reason?


Eventually (as far as how fate works) Michelle is recognized as an innocent party having being denied by someone else. That party who vandalized the car will eventually be caught and thrown in jail. This is how justice of a Master Plan/fate would work. The end may come out similar, but it's a painful journey, one with collateral damages.

[edit on 21-1-2009 by saint4God]



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by saint4God
 


Well, I never met a car company that would turn down first come, first serve. In reality, she would get the car and the third person would be the one not making it to the reunion.


Eventually (as far as how fate works) Michelle is recognized as an innocent party having being denied by someone else. That party who vandalized the car will eventually be caught and thrown in jail. This is how justice of a Master Plan/fate would work. The end may come out similar, but it's a painful journey, one with collateral damages.


So basically, by some miracle, if Michelle is born, the other two get to live. However, if Michelle is aborted, she does not get any miracles, and the mother goes to "jail" (aka hell)?



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by juveous
 


How is it an alternate reality? It's #*$&#$(*# science man. That's all it is. They wouldn't exist because the odds of the same sperm and egg coming together are next to none. If you factor in total genetic make up and timing... the odds are next to none.

It's not a separate reality, it's just looking at something with objectivity.


"hey if she didn't have an abortion, that significant person wouldn't have existed"
but rather - If she didn't have an abortion, that might have been one more person that could have been significant to me.


But in my theory that's not possible. Scientifically, that's not possible. The person you know, would not exist anymore.

 

Would someone explain to me scientifically how it is even possible that the same person would be born?



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 06:52 PM
link   
What if worms carried machine guns?...Birds wouldnt mess with them. The justification posed in the question has a Hitleresque undertone to me. Eliminate the less fortunate...so that something more palletable can be created later. Im not going to voice my opinion on the issue of abortion because the question can be applied to many issues. Where is the honor in avoiding a challenge (unexpected child) to ensure a white pickett fence down the road. Butterfly effect? I suppose thats referring to string theory, vibrations and the like....accordingly, every action (and yes, thought is an action) no matter how minute causes unnumerable other actions which in turn cause others etc...etc. Why not do the best with what were given right now? Give every moment 110 percent. Isnt trying to control society the very thing that has brought us to the point we are today?



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 07:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by psyko45
What if worms carried machine guns?...Birds wouldnt mess with them.


Those aren't even real options.


The justification posed in the question has a Hitleresque undertone to me. Eliminate the less fortunate...so that something more palletable can be created later.


Jesus you people are indoctrinated. You can't even read words. That is not even close to what anyone on this thread has said.


Im not going to voice my opinion on the issue of abortion because the question can be applied to many issues. Where is the honor in avoiding a challenge (unexpected child) to ensure a white pickett fence down the road.


Again, that's an argument for an entirely different thread.


Butterfly effect? I suppose thats referring to string theory, vibrations and the like....accordingly, every action (and yes, thought is an action) no matter how minute causes unnumerable other actions which in turn cause others etc...etc.


Butterfly effect was a joke. It was an attempt to explain my position by using a Hollywood movie - something everyone could understand.


Why not do the best with what were given right now? Give every moment 110 percent. Isnt trying to control society the very thing that has brought us to the point we are today?


I don't know. Go on the road with Tony Robbins and try to inspire people then. That's again, not the point.

The point is that there are people who are alive today who would not exist if their mother had not had an abortion.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 07:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Irish M1ck
 


And again the point is that if wormies had machine guns birdies wouldnt mess with them.

Im sorry I dont know who Tony Robbins is, but I suppose it was used as some kind of sarcastic insult.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 07:13 PM
link   
reply to post by psyko45
 


Tony Robbins is a guy who goes around trying to pump everyone up and make them happy about life.

Also, again, your worm thing is kind of dumb. Comparing the dead fetus to the worm is more suitable, since the fetus doesn't exist anymore, and neither do worms with guns.

*Edit:

Scratch that. The worms with guns scenario doesn't really apply to this any way you look at it. It may fit with God and religion, since its all speculation, but not this.

[edit on 1/21/2009 by Irish M1ck]



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 07:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Irish M1ck
 


The what if question is to demonstrate how ridiculous most what ifs actually are, and to use one such as the one posed in the op isnt convincing enough to sway opinion on any issue, except for something like "what if I wouldnt have eaten that kitten anus?"



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
Well it is. People say, "every life counts", yet it is clearly not true. That life counts to them because they have been indoctrinated to hate anyone who has had abortions.


Life has VALUE to those who cherish it, so far mick, in spite of all the disclaimers that you are not using this thread as a platform to espouse the virtues of one of the most ghastly genocides we have ever witnessed and on which technically makes all those liberals who support it, right up therer with Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, and the Khamir Rouge.


The truth of the matter is that no one is "pro-life".


You are right, they ought to call us, "Anti Baby Killers" as the Antithesis to the Pro Choice who use the word pro choice as if there was a mulligan or "do over" clause when presented with the consequences of their actions.

The choice isn't really about what to do after the REAL choice was made to have sex. After that you are accountable for your actions and it aint like they didn't know what the risks or or ramifications are. Then after the miss their period they say DO OVER ! I want a do over and they call that pro choice. Never mind that the ramifcations are very serious and could mean someone gets hurt, or has to quit school now because of the HUGE responsibilities but hey at the time, it was just about sex and THAT is the Choice they made. What happens after should have never been allowed without mitigating circumstances.

Yeah, I see it as Genocide and that is a FIXED OPINION no if's ands or but's so if you care to make a rebuttal appreciate my offer to have you save the time as i ain't budging on this one and don't give a damn what anyone thinks of me calling it that.
It's a cop out. That's why most of them advocate for capital punishment and couldn't care less about welfare programs. It also explains how they are so easy to misinterpret this thread and dismiss it.

ALL life is precious and anyone that has a life should know this. Abortion Killinics not withstanding, we have a system of Government that has recognized this and is why taking a life is a capital crime when not in the defense of our own life and freedoms given under our constitution






top topics



 
2
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join