It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Support Abortion? Watch this video and please defend your decisions...

page: 31
8
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Clearskies
 



A baby is not just a 'potential human' it IS HUMAN.


We're not talking about babies and I already posted why it is not murder.

The definition of a baby, an infant, and something within the first weeks of life are very different. At that stage it is not a human, humans can survive outside of their mother's womb.

[edit on 30-3-2009 by rapinbatsisaltherage]




posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Clearskies
How is it NOT murder in most cases?


THIS is how it is NOT murder, right here, very clearly....


mur·der (mûrdr)
n.
1. The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.
2. Slang Something that is very uncomfortable, difficult, or hazardous: The rush hour traffic is murder.
3. A flock of crows. See Synonyms at flock1.
www.thefreedictionary.com...


Emphasis mine.



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 02:56 PM
link   
edit: double post...again, sorry


[edit on 30-3-2009 by 27jd]



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 02:59 PM
link   
reply to post by 27jd
 

Okay, so what if you see people as animals before you kill them on the street, WITHOUT malice.
What if they are just cockroaches to you, is that still murder?



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 03:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Clearskies
 


The point that is trying to be made is that murder is illegal.

Abortion is legal.

In your mind, the two may be the same, but not in the eyes of a lot of others, the legal system, and a large portion of society.



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Clearskies
 


I've never considered killing animals or bugs murder. The term is always thrown around where it doesn't belong (I've probably done it many times) but when it comes down to it, it is simply incorrect. There is no unlawful killing, there is no human being involved.



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Clearskies
What if they are just cockroaches to you, is that still murder?


Well yes, it would still be murder, because killing people on the streets is illegal, the police would want to have words with you regardless if you saw people as animals. Abortion doctors are not breaking the law, so it is not murder. Murder has a very strict definition, many use it for shock value when it does not fit the definition.



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd

Originally posted by Clearskies
What if they are just cockroaches to you, is that still murder?


Well yes, it would still be murder, because killing people on the streets is illegal, the police would want to have words with you regardless if you saw people as animals.


Oh that was her point? Wow, I totally missed what that post was questioning.

I agree with 27jd here, killing a human being who you consider to be an animal or bug is completely different than abortion.

[edit on 30-3-2009 by rapinbatsisaltherage]



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 06:27 PM
link   
reply to post by 27jd
 


Since when does the laws strictly follow the dictates of morality? And it doesn't matter if the law calls it murder or not. Do you know what, "Argumentum ad populum" is?



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 06:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
 


Legislating morality never works.

No one's morals are the same.



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 06:29 PM
link   
reply to post by 27jd
 


How about you post all the possible definitions eh? Instead of just the one that suits your case. I guess I shall do it, AGAIN.

mur·der (mûrdr)
n.
1. The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.
2. Slang Something that is very uncomfortable, difficult, or hazardous: The rush hour traffic is murder.
3. A flock of crows. See Synonyms at flock1.
v. mur·dered, mur·der·ing, mur·ders
v.tr.
1. To kill (another human) unlawfully.
2. To kill brutally or inhumanly.
3. To put an end to; destroy: murdered their chances.
4. To spoil by ineptness; mutilate: a speech that murdered the English language.
5. Slang To defeat decisively; trounce.
v.intr.
To commit murder.
Idioms:
get away with murder Informal
To escape punishment for or detection of an egregiously blameworthy act.
murder will out
Secrets or misdeeds will eventually be disclosed.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Middle English murther, from Old English morthor; see mer- in Indo-European roots.]

SOURCE:www.thefreedictionary.com...
Deny selective ignorance.



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by skeptic1
 


Exactamundo. Murder is not purely a legal issue as you are trying to state. It is also a moral issue.



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
Since when does the laws strictly follow the dictates of morality?


Morality is subjective.



And it doesn't matter if the law calls it murder or not.


It doesn't matter to you, personally. But, when you compare the other side of the debate's arguments to court arguments, it does matter, actually. There would not be an abortion doctor having to defend himself in court, so I fail to see the comparison. Either way, no matter how many variations of the verb form of murder you find, both noun and verb, the # 1 definition is specific in calling it illegal. Murder, is against the law. If you want to butcher the english language in order to spice up your arguments, be my guest. There are other words that are just as shocking that aren't blatantly incorrect, if you care to get creative.



Do you know what, "Argumentum ad populum" is?


I don't listen to hip-hop....



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 06:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
 


Oh yeah, and just curious, which of those definitions does abortion fall into, in your opinion?

[edit on 30-3-2009 by 27jd]



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 07:05 PM
link   
reply to post by 27jd
 


Argumentum ad populum is a logical fallacy of which certain people here are blaringly abusing. Basically it is the idea that if a certain group says it is ok or true that it must be ok or true. In this case we are talking about what the federal government says is ok by what it passes laws for or against. Just in case you do not believe me go here:Argumentum ad populum@wikipedia.org

Which is funny in a way since the OP was not about the legality of the issue yet it is repeatedly being kicked up by those that support it. Which of course begs the question why people believe that just because the government says something is ok why is it being assumed that it is? Especially on a CT site where questioning the government's actions are common place.

I call any needless killing murder and will continue to. Abortion more so because the methods are brutal and under certain circumstances simply because someone has deemed that life inconvient. You may have a problem with that and throw up any number of semantic argument you wish but it simply won't change anything as I have yet to have seen a viable argument against it.



[edit on 30-3-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
Especially on a CT site where questioning the government's actions are common place.


I'm just saying, the word itself is over used, by vegans, pro-lifers, anti-war folks, etc.



I call any needless killing murder and will continue to. Abortion more so because the methods are brutal and under certain circumstances simply because someone has deemed that life inconvient. You may have a problem with that and throw up any number of semantic argument you wish but it simply won't change anything as I have yet to have seen a viable argument against it.


Well, semantic or not, it's not necessary to kill flys cuz they are inconvenient, and smashing them is particularly brutal, technically they are alive. That's murder, regardless how much less important a flys life is to you personally. Nobody will ever present a viable argument in your eyes, it's not possible so why do you pretend to ask somebody to? I know, to argue it....



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 07:21 PM
link   
reply to post by 27jd
 


Actually, flys can and often do spread disease due to the surfaces they come into contact with. So killing them is not needless.

And to use your own argument against you, killing a fly is legal.


[edit on 30-3-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 07:24 PM
link   
I haven't seen argumentum ad populum used but maybe I'm just not paying attention. I have not followed every post but never in my post did I state that abortion is okay because it is legal and many people believe in it. (I've had to fend off the same argument with Amerachii in a gay marriage thread so believe me I try to avoid it and I in no way agree with it either.)

I stated this:

And I think right and wrong are getting thrown around too much, and I apologize for using the terms too often. Just like you stated everything is grey. Everything is subjective. And honestly I don’t know why I spend so much time discussing this issue when every abortion measure I’ve supported has been successful in my state. Or with so many people favoring abortion. I guess I just want the other side to see my point of view, but at the end of the day I’m thankful their morality (on this issue) is not a legal reality.


I was trying to explain why I think everything is subjective, but still bother to debate this issue. I never stated that abortion being legal or widely accepted was an argument for abortion. In fact jasonjnelson misquoted abortion statistics to make it seem like a decent majority was against it and tried to use that in his arguement. I'm glad to have a phrase for what he was doing.



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage
 


I explained it if you didn't pay attention that is your problem, remember the first part of my post? I am noticing though you are good at this one as well,argumentum ad hominem which has become glaringly evident, especially with your rants about "pro-lifers". Doesn't mean your wrong of course, just shows other things I have neither the inclination nor would I be within the confines of the T&C to discuss.



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 07:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
 



...rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim


Funny you should think I'm doing this when you keep addressing debates with me and ignoring any evidence I post. Not only that, but instead of trying to address what I actually post you mainly deflect and call me names.




top topics



 
8
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join