Abortion

Republican_Man · **Fri Mar 04, 2005 8:33 pm Abortion**

I don't mean to be mean or anything, but I'm telling the truth--you can't handle the truth!

No, seriously. I don't mean the subject, but I want to discuss this here, since another topic spun this off. First I want to apologize to Beta for saying that her arguments were stupid, but next I want to open up the debate to Abortions. In the "Gay Marriage is Evil" topic, I asked a question that Beta just couldn't answer: When does life begin? What was life at first on Earth?

TOPIC TITLE EDIT

Defiant · **Fri Mar 04, 2005 8:42 pm**

RM, you cant argue abortion. Its one of those topics where you believe one way or the other, and you cant change that for anything. Its a very sensitive topic.

webtaz99 · **Fri Mar 04, 2005 8:42 pm**

The answer lies in reversing the question.

How does one start life? By fertilizing an egg.

Republican_Man · **Fri Mar 04, 2005 8:43 pm**

Arellia · **Fri Mar 04, 2005 8:50 pm**

*sighs* I know that it's supposedly a 'choice,' but really--what have we demeaned ourselves to if we treat other forms of life like that? Would any Starfleet doctor perform an abortion? No, I don't think so. I don't like infringing on 'freedoms,' but I have a hard time seeing killing your own child as a 'freedom.'

Zeke Zabertini · Captain Joined: 13 Sep 2002 Posts: 4832

The trouble with that question is that no one knows. Even the lawyers and medical experts testifying in court can't answer that question. Sure, there are various biological landmarks, but every active cell is "alive." Since cells are "killed" by medicines, medical oerations, and simple exposure to everyday life without moral dilemma, the line becomes blurred. The question really being asked is, when does a fetus' life become viable? This question is asking for an opinion though, and, accordingly, answers differ. Often, a person's answer to this question goes a long way to determining their stance on abortion.

My personal view is that abortion, the ending of a human life (or at least a potential human life), is inherantly immoral. When the right of a woman to control her body is weighed against a child's right to life, I cannot see how the child's right takes precedence. Opposite logic would dictate that anyone's right to self-control would take precedence over their taking another life; essentially, that I could kill people with immunity from legal action because I have the right to control my own body and if I want to use it to kill someone I can. Of course, it can be validly argued that a life growing inside someone is very different from an independent life, but once again I refute. Children are entirely dependent on their adult guardians for several years after birth. This does not give the guardians the right to kill them.

Overall, I support abortion on a logical basis, contrary to my moral inclination. As the United States adoption system has serious problems, some children can be born with birth defects and/or as a result of rape or other extraordinary circumstance, and world overpopulation is the issue of tomorrow, it makes sense to me to limit growth and problems by allowing mothers to end a pregnancy with an abortion. This branches off into several other key issues which I won't address now, but the basic idea is this as I see it: abortion is morally wrong, but until there's an alternative that's healthy for the mother/family, the child, and society at large, it is the simplest way to limit unnecessary welfare costs and population growth.

Republican_Man · **Fri Mar 04, 2005 8:53 pm**

One word: Barbaric.

Defiant · **Fri Mar 04, 2005 8:53 pm**

I love how killing one unborn child is the most unspeakable of all evils, but going to Iraq and killing MILLIONS of people is OK.

((Do not start debating Iraq, it was just a random example. If it really bothers you, then replace it with the Crusades or something))

Republican_Man · **Fri Mar 04, 2005 8:56 pm**

Puck · The Texan Joined: 05 Jan 2004 Posts: 5596

Millions...gosh, even in all caps like RM. (False statement by the way)

And if you don't want Iraq debated, don't bring it up. The crusades I don't condone, but Iraq I do. But in Iraq, the only killing that the US does is killing evil people to protect the good. I think there is a big difference.

There is a difference between killing an innocent child, and killing a terrorist in combat.

Republican_Man · **Fri Mar 04, 2005 8:59 pm**

Zeke Zabertini · Captain Joined: 13 Sep 2002 Posts: 4832

Barbaric: Marked by crudeness or lack of restraint in taste, style, or manner.

Response: I suppose that's based on opinion too. I don't support legalized abortion for the rights of the woman; I support it for the benefit of our entire society. I have thought very long on the issue, and I believe that the practical benefits, both now and in the future, of government regulation of population growth outweigh the moral implications. That is based on my valuing morality subordinately to reason. In my opinion, logic usually leads to morality. When it does not, one must weigh the two against each other and decide which is more beneficial.

Defiant · **Fri Mar 04, 2005 9:01 pm**

Dont debate the Iraq war, because youre going off topic. The point being, you are outraged over these "people" dying over here, but you dont give a damn about these people dying over here. Its so double standard, its not even funny.

Puck · The Texan Joined: 05 Jan 2004 Posts: 5596

How is it a double standard? Do you think I WANT, anyone to die? No, that is gross. However, it is not a comparison to compare combating terrorists to killing a child.

Republican_Man · **Fri Mar 04, 2005 9:02 pm**

Defiant · **Fri Mar 04, 2005 9:03 pm**

And I never said millions of people were killed in Iraq, simply that million of people die in conflicts all the time that you support, not specifically tailored to Iraq. Iraq has had like...15000 or so I believe.

Defiant · **Fri Mar 04, 2005 9:04 pm**

STOP DEBATING IRAQ! Im not arguing that at all, stop trying to turn it into a war issue. You know what I said, and youre twisting it around to make it into something its not. Debate abortion if you will, otherwise stop posting.

webtaz99 · **Fri Mar 04, 2005 9:05 pm**

That reminds me of "Men in Black" where K says,
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panic-y, dangerous animals."

Republican_Man · **Fri Mar 04, 2005 9:06 pm**

Puck · The Texan Joined: 05 Jan 2004 Posts: 5596

Defiant · **Fri Mar 04, 2005 9:09 pm**

You argue with no honor or intelligence. You stray the topic to something other than what you should care about, to what end I dont know. You know damn well my comparison was general, and yet you try to attack the comparison, when you should be debating the issue at hand. You need to learn how to debate.

Zeke Zabertini · Captain Joined: 13 Sep 2002 Posts: 4832

Collateral damage has always been a part of war, now perhaps more than ever with weapons such as bombs, missiles, and chemical/biological/nuclear weapons. Even the warriors in a war are human beings, and the innocent who suffer becouse of it, those who are victimized simply for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, are to be even more mourned. Though there is definately a difference between a child and someone like Osama bin Laden, the fact remains that both are human beings and deserve equal recognition as such. If it is not absolutely immoral to kill, then when does it become immoral? To say "when they kill others" is an easy answer, but Defiant is correct when he calls it a double standard. To reference the Bible, the commandment reads "thou shalt not kill," not "thou shalt not kill unless the person you're killing killed someone else first." God later sanctions his people violating this and his other commandments, both directly and indirectly, throughout the stories. Obviously this cannot be a valid moral guide. Words like "but", "unless", "until", and "if" are simply used to justify such amoral actions.

Puck · The Texan Joined: 05 Jan 2004 Posts: 5596

And clearly you need to learn how to make reasonable comparisons. I could say that that comparison in my opinion was just provocation. YOU were the one that brought Iraq up and twisted it into a gross comparison to fit your agenda.

Republican_Man · **Fri Mar 04, 2005 9:11 pm**

Zeke Zabertini · Captain Joined: 13 Sep 2002 Posts: 4832

JanewayIsHott: The individual's rights are important, but I believe that they should be subordinate to the rights of society at large. You are correct in saying that that carries a Nazi undertone. I don't deny that some of my views carry fascist elements. However, it is the fact that this brutal practicality is tempered with values of life, liberty, and fundamental equality, as well as my sense of the individual's rights being inextricably tied to the benefit of society that sets me apart from those who would eliminate individualism for conformity and efficiency. My philosophy is deep, cold, and sometime even twisted, but its intentions are only the purest. It has been said that the road to hell is paved with good intentions, but if that's where my road leads, then I accept it.