Originally posted by James the Lesser
First one. I am religous, do as my religon says or I kill you. We have done it in the past, hell, my god has killed millions with plagues, fire, brimestone. In a country where it is illegal for the government to promote one religon over the other I want it to ban people from doing things my religon doesn't say anything about but still, want it banned because I don't like it.

This could possibly be the single lamest post you have ever posted. Not to mention ridiculous and completely wrong. Hell, I'm not even close to one of the people you are talking about and I'm annoyed by it.

So let me translate your views through the Jamserphone to see how they sound:

I am Pro-Choice. I completely ignore the fact that pregnant women more often then not do it to themselves and think they should be barred from any blame while in the throws of passion. Regardless of how easy and reasonable birth control is, I can say that makes no difference to me because when I want to get my dick wet, I do it. Although no baby ever born has been able to live without someone doing everything for it (much like a parasite), I'll use the example despite scientific study and call it a jumble of cells for at least 5 to 6 months.

Now I'm sure that's how you feel about it, being that you created the Jamerphone, it must stand correct for you as well. Shouldn't it?

So let's try to get real and stop jackassing yourself around like a woman who isn't getting her way.

Originally posted by KrazyJethro
As for the questions, I'll answer since most lack backbone.

Worms, slugs, jellyfish, etc. lack backbone, I do not see how that could apply to a question, a question is a question. But, whatever.

As horrible as rape is, I'd have to say yes. Being that I think abortion a crime against humanity (which is my personal belief, so no need to argue that), I don't know of another crime that allows the victim to commit one scott free.

First off, I think your compassion for life is a good quality, unfortunately it is often only applied when it suits ones personal agenda, and it is unfortunate you would make a member of your own family feel worse than she already would in that situation. Here's a few more invertabrae questions for you, if abortion is a crime against humanity because you consider it to be murder, how do you feel about the current wars we are engaged in? When we kill our enemys, is that not also murder? Or, is murder OK if it suits your own agenda? Are our soldiers murderers? And here's the kicker question you probably won't answer, or you will dance around it. What if that female in your family was your wife? Would you insist she give birth to the child?

Problem is, is that your side likes to point out the negative as if it is the standard. There are two sides to every coin.

Very true, why would it be your wish to eliminate the other side to fit your personal morals? There are two sides, and everybody should have the option to choose whichever side they wish.

Originally posted by James the Lesser
Fine, I am going to argue from both points of veiw, the religous and the not blinded by stupidity.

First one. I am religous, do as my religon says or I kill you. We have done it in the past, hell, my god has killed millions with plagues, fire, brimestone. In a country where it is illegal for the government to promote one religon over the other I want it to ban people from doing things my religon doesn't say anything about but still, want it banned because I don't like it.

Second one. Uh, it isn't my body. And if you don't want to get an abortion then don't get one. Like if you don't like CSI:MIAMI, don't watch it. Also, in this country you have freedom of religon and from religon. I don't want to hear about all mighty powerful invisable people that live in the clouds and live to be 900 or a flood and a boat with 2 of every animal which is genetically impossible and about how if yu don't do what the all mighty powerful invisable people say you get sent to a place wqith fire and other things even though the only proof you have is a book that has been edited by a corrupted society.

I may switch to the invisible guy who lets me have 71 virgins at death!
Hey, if your gona make up an after life I prefer virgins over streets of gold WOOOP

X

Okay I haven't read the whole thread -- which I probably should have... but I just wanted to get this point out:

Do I think it's reprehensible to kill an unborn child? Sure.

Do I think the government has a right to regulate this choice? No.

So, instead of preaching "Ban abortion", say "let it be possible", but give alternatives. Hold morality lectures, what ever... but do not remove the choice. It's there for those who really need it mentally and physically.

This isn't a moral issue in this society. It's a legal one. It stopped being a moral issue when our society began thinking about making it legal or illegal. It stopped being a moral issue when some think it's fine and others think it's not.

Murder is a moral issue. Murder was never up for grabs. Abortion is up for grabs; therefore I fail to see the people calling it a moral issue.

Perhaps it's a personal moral belief, but not an all-encompassing universal "truth" so to speak, as our belief on murder (although "war" usually gives a different connotation).

My $0.02.

"So let's try to get real and stop jackassing yourself around like a woman who isn't getting her way. "

Sounds the same like an angry conservative who swings his military might around on foreign soil when his religion and corporate controlled government system of hard capitalism is not in use in every nation on earth.

Sounds alot like.. GW BUSH!

Curse those who try to base public/foreign policy on religion and amount of profits.

Either everyone has freedom...or no one has it.

Originally posted by 27jd
First off, I think your compassion for life is a good quality, unfortunately it is often only applied when it suits ones personal agenda, and it is unfortunate you would make a member of your own family feel worse than she already would in that situation.

I'm not sure if you are aware, but abortion is no quick fix. It comes with it's fair share of emotional trauma, not to mention risking damage to future conception. I'm not sure why you are pointing the "when it fits your agenda" argument. That was the same thing I said for your side.

Here's a few more invertebrate questions for you, if abortion is a crime against humanity because you consider it to be murder, how do you feel about the current wars we are engaged in?

There are nuances in life that deify any general speaking, but never-the-less I am not a big fan of the current wars. I'm not so much concerned with those who chose to run the risk, but it does stand true for those on the side lines. Should it not be our goal to preserve life in everything we do? I think yes. Those cruise missiles aren't quite the same as a sniper rifle. It's the drive by of warfare. War is a complicated argument, and can't be spoken of in straight positives and negatives.

When we kill our enemies, is that not also murder?

Yes, it is murder. And as one who has served, I certainly recognize that. But there is a difference between killing for protection and killing for an agenda (which the latter is the current situation rather than the former).

And here's the kicker question you probably won't answer, or you will dance around it.

Not sure why you'd say this, seems to me that I am the only one answering the questions, regardless of your distaste for my views. But let's continue to the "Kicker".

What if that female in your family was your wife? Would you insist she give birth to the child?

How I answer this question (which you know is loaded) doesn't really matter to you. BUT, the long and the short of it, is yes I would. I do not prescribe views that are for others with me and mine as the exception. As a matter of fact, me and my wife have discussed this at length and she agrees with me and would do the same.

If you want to get down to brass tacks, my wife was raped when she was 17. Did she carry the child? Yes. Did she make sure that the family she chose was a worthy one (aside from the executive process it already is)? Yes, and I can say that I am proud of her steadfast strength and dedication to her values. It's easy to hold a value, but it takes courage to uphold them when it would be easy to justify breaking it when it happens to you.

So, sorry to disappoint you guys, but my view is not religious in the slightest (although I am well versed in that side since they share my opinion-which is more often than not a bad thing for me). My view comes from seeing the sickness living in the world and in the human heart. I've found love for life and the life of children.

I wish it could go back to being a celebrated event rather than a curse or "situation" that needs to be handled. But that is a pipe dream now-a-days.

Originally posted by RedOctober90
"So let's try to get real and stop jackassing yourself around like a woman who isn't getting her way. "

Sounds the same like an angry conservative who swings his military might around on foreign soil when his religion and corporate controlled government system of hard capitalism is not in use in every nation on earth.

Sounds alot like.. GW BUSH!

Curse those who try to base public/foreign policy on religion and amount of profits.

No, it sounds like someone trying to have a reasonable conversation rather than you trying to pin GW's faults on me. I am not a republican or a member of the religious right.

So again, let's try to be a bit more real. I know you can get your kicks in this faceless wonderland, but some don't treat this place like Romper Room.

Abortion is homicide. Anything else said about it is rationalization.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Abortion is homicide. Anything else said about it is rationalization.

Yes it is murder plain and simple, Scott peterson is getting charged with killing inside the body. This will hopeuflly set a precedent for the law to change.

First off, I think your compassion for life is a good quality, unfortunately it is often only applied when it suits ones personal agenda, and it is unfortunate you would make a member of your own family feel worse than she already would in that situation. Here's a few more invertabrae questions for you, if abortion is a crime against humanity because you consider it to be murder, how do you feel about the current wars we are engaged in? When we kill our enemys, is that not also murder? Or, is murder OK if it suits your own agenda? Are our soldiers murderers? And here's the kicker question you probably won't answer, or you will dance around it. What if that female in your family was your wife? Would you insist she give birth to the child?

Murder is the killing of the innocent. How can anyone be more innocent than an unborn human being?

Originally posted by KrazyJethro
I'm not sure if you are aware, but abortion is no quick fix. It comes with it's fair share of emotional trauma, not to mention risking damage to future conception. I'm not sure why you are pointing the "when it fits your agenda" argument. That was the same thing I said for your side.

I'm quite aware, as long as we're all spilling our guts, I had a girlfriend who said her Dr. told her she could not get pregnant, so being young and stupid, I thought "cool" and took her word for it, and well, her Dr. was wrong. She was horrified about being pregnant, and she decided to terminate the pregnancy. Being as it was HER body, I was in no position to force her to keep the child. I told her I would support her decision, and I drove her to the clinic, and I had to face the religious fanatics that camp out in the parking lots with signs shouting hateful things at me. Yes, I felt like $hit. We broke up and went our seperate ways. I now have a 3 yr. old son, who I love more than anything. Do you think the past doesn't bother me when I think about it, and the child that could've been? But that still does NOT give me the right to decide for others. And like you yourself stated, life is hard and sometimes things happen we disagree with, but that does not give us the right to force our morals on others.

There are nuances in life that deify any general speaking, but never-the-less I am not a big fan of the current wars. I'm not so much concerned with those who chose to run the risk, but it does stand true for those on the side lines. Should it not be our goal to preserve life in everything we do? I think yes. Those cruise missiles aren't quite the same as a sniper rifle. It's the drive by of warfare. War is a complicated argument, and can't be spoken of in straight positives and negatives.

Abortion is just as, if not more complicated than war, should we outlaw cruise missiles as well? Murder is murder, no matter what face or purpose you put on it.

Yes, it is murder. And as one who has served, I certainly recognize that. But there is a difference between killing for protection and killing for an agenda (which the latter is the current situation rather than the former).

How have we killed for "protection" in the past few wars? What are we protecting against in Iraq? Our government kills to support their agenda, but that is a different subject.

How I answer this question (which you know is loaded) doesn't really matter to you. BUT, the long and the short of it, is yes I would. I do not prescribe views that are for others with me and mine as the exception. As a matter of fact, me and my wife have discussed this at length and she agrees with me and would do the same.

If you want to get down to brass tacks, my wife was raped when she was 17. Did she carry the child? Yes. Did she make sure that the family she chose was a worthy one (aside from the executive process it already is)? Yes, and I can say that I am proud of her steadfast strength and dedication to her values. It's easy to hold a value, but it takes courage to uphold them when it would be easy to justify breaking it when it happens to you.

I have much respect for your wife's decision, you married a very strong woman.

My view comes from seeing the sickness living in the world and in the human heart. I've found love for life and the life of children.

The sickness you have seen does not only exist in the human heart, but in nature itself, look at the male lion, who will roam into a pride of females and murder their cubs, so that he can mate with them and make sure only his genes are passed. And I too love life and the children, but I am fully aware that we live in a relatively horrible world, all I can do is do my best to protect my loved ones, allow others to do the same, and NOT force my beliefs or sense of decency on others.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Murder is the killing of the innocent. How can anyone be more innocent than an unborn human being?

Well, a born Iraqi infant, sleeping in his/her crib that happens to be in the path of an off-mark tomahawk is equally innocent. Right?

I only have two things to say.

1) I said there was a difference between killing for protection and killing for an agenda. I think you misunderstood me. I find us to be killing for an agenda, NOT for protection.

2) From my knowledge and best judgement, I think outlawing abortion would be making the world a better place. Now before all the nastiness I'm almost sure will follow that little gem, I'll say this: Hold your breath. You can argue my reasons, but not a belief. If you think keeping it legal makes the world a better place, then so be it. But don't fault me for trying to do that.

Originally posted by 27jd

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Murder is the killing of the innocent. How can anyone be more innocent than an unborn human being?

Well, a born Iraqi infant, sleeping in his/her crib that happens to be in the path of an off-mark tomahawk is equally innocent. Right?

Okay. For the really concrete thinkers among us, I will rephrase my original statement. Murder is the intentional killing of the innocent. The equivalence of innocence is not in question. No one should justify either death. They are both tragic.

Originally posted by KrazyJethro
1) I said there was a difference between killing for protection and killing for an agenda. I think you misunderstood me. I find us to be killing for an agenda, NOT for protection.

OK. We agree on that.

2) From my knowledge and best judgement, I think outlawing abortion would be making the world a better place. Now before all the nastiness I'm almost sure will follow that little gem, I'll say this: Hold your breath. You can argue my reasons, but not a belief. If you think keeping it legal makes the world a better place, then so be it. But don't fault me for trying to do that.

There will be no nastiness. I respect your belief. I don't think keeping it legal will make the world a better place, having dealt with it personally, if asked, I would tell somebody considering it that it will make them feel horrible. But I don't support the government regulating our personal lives anymore than they already do. I think it should be a personal choice (excluding late term, which I think should be illegal unless the mother is in danger). I can assure you I am not "pro-abortion", just pro-choice.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Okay. For the really concrete thinkers among us, I will rephrase my original statement. Murder is the intentional killing of the innocent. The equivalence of innocence is not in question. No one should justify either death. They are both tragic.

Thank you. I agree, the death of any innocent being is tragic.

I find it telling that none have addressed my question. Allow me to repeat it. Given that by the 8th week the fetus has diferentiated between right and left handed, has been observed moving rythmically to music being played outside the womb, has a beating heart, working lungs, brain activity, a functinng nervous sytem up to and including the abillity to feel pain, How can you characterise that fetus as not alive? You see I am not aganst abortion because I am trying to take any rights away from the mother, However I also don't believe that the mother has the right to take away the fetus's most basic right. I agree that abortion should be allowed in cases of iminent danger to the mother but if the mother is not having an abortion in self defense then she is infringng on the rights of another human being. So the question becomes, what is a fair and unbiased way to determine human life?

Originally posted by mwm1331
I find it telling that none have addressed my question. Allow me to repeat it. Given that by the 8th week the fetus has diferentiated between right and left handed, has been observed moving rythmically to music being played outside the womb, has a beating heart, working lungs, brain activity, a functinng nervous sytem up to and including the abillity to feel pain, How can you characterise that fetus as not alive? You see I am not aganst abortion because I am trying to take any rights away from the mother, However I also don't believe that the mother has the right to take away the fetus's most basic right. I agree that abortion should be allowed in cases of iminent danger to the mother but if the mother is not having an abortion in self defense then she is infringng on the rights of another human being. So the question becomes, what is a fair and unbiased way to determine human life?

The fetus may have brain activity (telling the heart to beat, etc.) but it is not self-aware. And I doubt they feel pain, I SERIOUSLY doubt it, and would question the validity of any "scientific" source that would claim that. A heartbeat and a nervous system do not guarantee any creature rights on this planet, otherwise we would all eat only plants. As for your "dancing" 8 wk old fetus theory, I'm sorry but that is extremely far-fetched because at 8 wks the fetus is less developed than a tadpole. I'm afraid you are getting your info from biased (pro-life) sources. But you are free to believe as you wish. This is a very sensitive argument and once somebody has their position, they are not likely to change it.