Politics

ScottyRo · 07-25-2004, 02:14 PM

Just in case you haven\'t heard...

On Thursday, the U.S. House of Representatives voted 233-194 in favor of the Marriage Protection Act (MPA) which would take away from activist federal judges the power to declare the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) unconstitutional. DOMA says that no state has to accept another stateÃƒÂ¢Ã¢Â‚Â¬Ã¢Â„Â¢s marriage laws which legalize homosexual marriage. DOMA was passed overwhelmingly in 1996 by both the House and Senate and signed into law by then President Bill Clinton.

WhoDat · 07-25-2004, 05:01 PM

Scotty, I do not think that the government should be banned from making any law that may have religious signifigance - or maybe better put, if you think killing is wrong b/c it\'s one of the ten commandments, that\'s OK. Why? B/c the same argument can be made without God.

Here\'s what I see on the abortion issue:

I see one side saying, we don\'t know when life begins, but our church tells us it is wrong. It should be banned. Some, and from what I\'ve seen this number is very small, but some people, like you, say, \"I don\'t know either way on abortion and since it may be wrong we should deem it wrong.\"

The opposite side says, \"I don\'t know one way or the other on abortion, and since it cannot be decided outright, I am happy to allow it to remain a personal decision.\"

Now, I don\'t mean to be inflamatory, but one of these seems in the spirit of individual freedom, and the other seems religiously backed, if not entirely based.

I mean, I\'m not sure whether or not my microwave is giving me and my family members cancer. Should we outlaw that b/c it MAY give us cancer?

In any case, there is one major point that the pro-lifers seem to miss. Many claim that the child should be given a chance. What chance would these children have being born into situations where they are unwanted? Further, should abortion be outlawed in the US, do you think that it would actually stop? It won\'t, it will simply put more women at risk, as they have to perform procedures \"under ground\" or fly to Mexico or wherever to get the procedures done. A law banning abortion won\'t stop abortion, it will put more people at risk though, and cause even more suffering for the women and families who have them.

ScottyRo · 07-25-2004, 10:16 PM

Scotty, I do not think that the government should be banned from making any law that may have religious signifigance - or maybe better put, if you think killing is wrong b/c it\'s one of the ten commandments, that\'s OK. Why? B/c the same argument can be made without God.

Here\'s what I see on the abortion issue:

I see one side saying, we don\'t know when life begins, but our church tells us it is wrong. It should be banned. Some, and from what I\'ve seen this number is very small, but some people, like you, say, \"I don\'t know either way on abortion and since it may be wrong we should deem it wrong.\"

The opposite side says, \"I don\'t know one way or the other on abortion, and since it cannot be decided outright, I am happy to allow it to remain a personal decision.\"

Now, I don\'t mean to be inflamatory, but one of these seems in the spirit of individual freedom, and the other seems religiously backed, if not entirely based.

I don\'t think your observations about religious people are inflamatory, it\'s just wrong.

I see some religious people thinking they way you say above. But there are others who know that just because they can\'t tell you the moment the combination of sperm and egg becomes a life doesn\'t mean that it\'s not so early on as to be irrelevant. (I was just about to go into my reasons for why it\'s true, but we won\'t agree or settle it so why bother at this point). It seems clear enough to me that by the time the woman knows she is pregnant, it is a life.

The opposite also has people that think as you say above - that it is about freedom. But there are also people that want it to be legal just in case they ever need it to be. They\'ll be as sexually irresponsible as they want to be and kill any child they might create in the process.

Just because the congregation is told they should not be in favor of something doesn\'t mean that they blindly follow. There are plenty of intellegent people who can figure these things out for themselves that also believe in God and go to church.

I mean, I\'m not sure whether or not my microwave is giving me and my family members cancer. Should we outlaw that b/c it MAY give us cancer?

Maybe. But is the microwave a life or just a mass of cells?

In any case, there is one major point that the pro-lifers seem to miss. Many claim that the child should be given a chance. What chance would these children have being born into situations where they are unwanted?

Talk about weak links in the argument. So you\'re saying that they\'re better off not having been born. I suppose since they\'re born into tough situations, there\'s no chance that any good can come from them or their lives. Certainly none of them will grow up to win the superbowl for the Saints.

Further, should abortion be outlawed in the US, do you think that it would actually stop? It won\'t, it will simply put more women at risk, as they have to perform procedures \"under ground\" or fly to Mexico or wherever to get the procedures done. A law banning abortion won\'t stop abortion, it will put more people at risk though, and cause even more suffering for the women and families who have them.

Ahh, the old \"we can\'t stop it so we might as well make it legal\" argument. Not your proudest moment here either. How about these: Drugs? Prostitution? Illegal immigration? Don\'t all of these laws drive people underground and put them at risk simply because they\'d rather take the risk than abide by the law?

WhoDat · 07-26-2004, 08:54 AM

Yes, they do, and I am in favor of legalizing drugs and prostitution, for the record. Want to find the safest prostitute in America? Go to Vegas, where it is legal. The UK has programs where addicts can go to hospitals and slowly be weened off a drug. The hospital will administer a clean, safe dose of the drug and monitor the user. They get stepped off the program. Those are both MUCH BETTER situations than what we have here now, yes.

In any case, I\'m quite sure you understand now. Here\'s the problem:

It seems clear enough to me that by the time the woman knows she is pregnant, it is a life.

Well it\'s not CLEAR to ME that is true. So who is right? Both of us, or neither of us, however you want to put it. In that case what do you do? There is no right or wrong. I say take power from the state and leave it where I think it belongs, in the hands of the people to make their own decisions. You think it should be a federal issue to protect the potential life. Neither of us is right, or wrong. I rest happy knowing that right now, the law supports my view.

ScottyRo · 07-26-2004, 09:14 AM

Well it\'s not CLEAR to ME that is true. So who is right? Both of us, or neither of us, however you want to put it. In that case what do you do? There is no right or wrong. I say take power from the state and leave it where I think it belongs, in the hands of the people to make their own decisions. You think it should be a federal issue to protect the potential life. Neither of us is right, or wrong. I rest happy knowing that right now, the law supports my view.

So, hypothetically, if it was proven to be life at implantation would that change your thinking to not allowing the procedure?

You said in an earlier post that breathing and a heartbeat are the requirements for life. Is there anything else?

WhoDat · 07-26-2004, 03:52 PM

Not waking into that trap!

Let me put it to you this way: I have seven doctors in my family. If they cannot agree and tell me when life actually begins, if the entire medical profession can\'t answer that question, then I am smart enough to know that I am not smart enough to answer it myself.

I can tell you that I FEEL that a month old embryo/fetus bears more resemblance to a cyst than a human being. Right now, without further proof, I think it is the mother\'s choice.

Here\'s another key difference. Let\'s assume for a moment that the medical industry came together and supported a view that life begins at \"implantation\". Would I change my view? Given good evidence and the respected opinions of experts, yes. I would.

Now consider the opposite. If the medical industry united to say that a child is not alive until it is born, would you change your view? Would other pro-lifers? I doubt it.

ScottyRo · 07-27-2004, 01:27 PM

I can tell you that I FEEL that a month old embryo/fetus bears more resemblance to a cyst than a human being. Right now, without further proof, I think it is the mother\'s choice.

You may be right that it looks like a cyst at that stage, but it has a heartbeat and a spinal column at that time too. I know the cyst doesn\'t have its very own heartbeat.

You could gather all the scientists and doctors together and debate this for eternity and never come to a conclusion. But I guarantee that if only as much of a person as a recently implanted baby were discovered on some other planet, they\'d generally agree that they found evidence of human life on that other planet. It is taken for granted as being such on Earth because it is so plentiful.

saintfan · 08-20-2004, 06:20 PM

Why is the woman\'s right to choose greater and more important than the child\'s right to life, if any?

I\'m not saying her right to choose is greater than the childs right to life. I\'m saying I don\'t have the right to make that decision for her. Neither do you man. You don\'t have that right because people WAY smarter than either of us have thought and thought about it and they figured the woman should have the right to figure out what\'s best for her.

Scotty -- Man I\'m not callin\' you a liar. I\'ve said before I respect your opinion. I\'ve even indicated that I, too, think that abortion is wrong...that\'s what my gut tells me. Somewhere deep down I think it\'s not the right thing to do in \"most\" cases; however, I just can\'t imagine myself ever using what \"I\" think is right or wrong as justification to force my opinion on someone else. I especially don\'t think I should be given that power over someone I don\'t know...someone who\'s circumstances are beyond my knowledge.

I type angry sometimes. Don\'t take me personally...ever. I just come across that way. The fact is that abortion is legal. That\'s the only fact we\'ll come up with here. I get miffed when I hear the anti-abortion activitists hollerin\' on the radio about how all these women are going to hell, or using the most disgusting language possible to describe the procedure. I detest their \"in your face\" tactics. I have no doubt an abortion isn\'t a fun time. These people, to me, are WAY over the top and likely in need of attention. They should go and live their own lives ya know? Now I\'m not speaking of you. You seem to have the ability to debate the issue intelligently...more so than me even...but then again that\'s not very difficult. :P

The issue of right or wrong goes deep man. You said so yourself. If you acknowledge that then you must also acknowledge that it\'s just not as simple as pro-choice people being misguided. You may think they\'re misguided, but everything is with respect to where you\'re viewing it from. You may not be able to comprehend someone else\'s reasoning behind a particular decision they make about a particular thing because you\'re not living their reality. I shake my head at the ignorance I see daily, but I also remind myself that other people view me through their reality too. At least that\'s my opinion. Because I feel that way I believe a woman should be allowed to make her own decision. That\'s her baby and none of my business. If it\'s wrong then she\'ll pay for that decision. It\'s not up to me. I might suggest to her that there are options, but that\'s as far as I\'ll go. That\'s as far as I have to go morally since I do beleive what I beleive.

Anyway, we can agree to disagree. I don\'t sweat that, and I hope you don\'t. In my heart I think the right to choose is the right thing even tho I think abortion isn\'t morally sound. I\'m all for the death penalty. I think war is sometimes necessary and I\'d like to see Iraq made into the worlds biggest parking lot mostly because I don\'t think those folks in the middle east really want peace. They like to fight. They are a plague spreading across the planet and they should be eliminated. Saddam was brutal because he HAD to be. There is no peace with those animals. How\'s that for over the top! LOL I think the abuse of animals is wrong, but cook me a steak any day. LOL

[Edited on 20/8/2004 by saintfan]

ScottyRo · 08-20-2004, 06:09 PM

What I\'m trying to do ScottyRo is figure out how it is that people think they have the right to make this sort of decision on behalf of someone else. Someone they don\'t know. Someone who\'s circumstances they are totally unaware of, simply because they think they\'re right. The law doesn\'t give you that right. Society has told you that you don\'t have that right, and yet you\'re still at it, and I wonder why?

Maybe because I think that saving children is important enough that I\'d risk ruffling your feathers over it to discuss the topic and say that I don\'t think it\'s right. How is that wrong? Don\'t I have 1st Amendment right to say that?

Dude, it\'s not about a worst case scenario. You don\'t care about the scenario. That\'s my whole point. You just think you\'re right...period. You can\'t see past it.

Man, you don\'t know how I feel on the subject entirely. The problem is that it\'s just too hard to discuss every single scenario possible. This medium is too limiting. I prefer to talk about the less difficult questions here because it\'s easier to do so.

Further, you accuse me of not seeing past something. This seems awfully contradictory when you\'re holding onto your views just as adamantly as I. Aren\'t you also one that can\'t see past it. Whatever IT is.

Now, if you\'re not propping yourself up with religion and the \"Good book\" then what is it?

I will say again that I\'ve done what I can to avoid religios and biblical foundations in my arguments. I have tried to state my opinions in legal and philosophical terms only unless asked otherwise. Those who have been debating me on this and who agree with you will at least agree with me on that.

It is my opinion that when you recognize that everyone doesn\'t think the way you think or think way you think they should think then you\'ll understand. But not until then.

C\'mon! It is abundantly clear that people disagree with me. This debate has raged (and ebbed) on here for weeks and only recently has anyone that comes to this site said anything on my side about it. But you say things like the above in a way that tells me you don\'t think I have a right to disagree. In what way are you not trying to get me to think like you think? I guess it\'s ok for you to do it but not me since I might have been tainted by some religion.

You\'ll still think abortion is wrong, but you\'ll have faith in the fact that you\'re not in control (nor should you be) of what a woman does in that situation.

Again, you harp so hard on the \"control\" issue it\'s obvious you\'re not reading a thing I have to say about it. Control is not the issue for me. Saving lives is. You keep asking me about the \"why\'s\" of this debate so I have one for you.

Why is the woman\'s right to choose greater and more important than the child\'s right to life, if any?

Go ahead. Dazzle me. Show me that you\'ve actually thought this through and you\'re not just spouting \"women\'s choice\" arguments you\'ve been hearing elsewhere.

Do you show up at abortion clinics and councel women about to have the procedure?

Do you show up at prisons prior to an execution and councel the executioner?

Do you protest War?

No to all three. Does that mean I can\'t have an opinion? Let me say again you\'ve either forgotten or you haven\'t READ the previous posts on this thread. So, before you ask me about justifications for killing go look up my opinion for yourself.

Do you go to inner city neighborhoods and council folks there in crack houses before they go bust a cap in somebody for their next blow?

In what way could this possibly be relevant to a discussion about abortion? You\'re all over the place, man.

Why have you chosen the abortion issue when I\'d bet good money you don\'t do any of these other things. What gives man?

So now I have to be out counseling people in order to hold an opinion on an issue. You know what? We\'re here discussing things. If you want to discuss those, start a thread on them. I guess if you have to be involved to have an opinion, then you\'re the guy getting all these girls pregnant and taking them to get abortions or counseling them to have them. I know you\'re an intelligent guy. Slow down before you write and you\'ll stop making these rediculous errors in logic.

ScottyRo · 08-20-2004, 05:22 PM

Ok Saintfan, you asked and I don\'t mind telling. This is where I come from on this debate.

When I was 17, I became sexually active. This is when I began to form my thoughts on abortion. The reality of my opinion about it around that time was that I wasn\'t really in favor of it, but I wanted it to be legal in case I needed it. As I have gotten older and more mature, I have realized that if I were to get a woman pregnant unexpectantly, I should accept that responsibility rather than have the child pay with its life for my mistake.

I was raised in church, but didn\'t attend from the time I was 16 until about 31. I can\'t really say that religion affected my decision. There was a time when I might have called myself an atheist. Certainly, it wasn\'t the church since I wasn\'t going at that time. I think of myself as a fairly philosophical sort of person in that even in things I am told about at church I search out for myself the answer I believe to be correct.

You put the woman\'s right to choose first and I can understand that. All I can tell you is that I see that right to choose as an UNFORTUNATE victim in that situation because the life of the child comes first to me. It seems like you think I set out to take away that right when that is not the case. It is collateral damage so to speak because it is subsequent to a greater good.

You say things that make it seem like you are getting angry at me when you read my opinions and I think it is because you misinterpret the reasonings for my opinions. I\'m trying to elaborate as much as possible so you can see that my intent here is to be as honest as possible with you.

The summary here if I haven\'t gotten it across is that my view on this has changed, but it wasn\'t affected by my religious views as you want to suggest. Whether I was truly an atheist or just a person that wanted to say he believed more in science is irrelevant, because during that time I did not believe abortion was the right thing to do. I decided to start attending church again for many reasons, but I had long before had my mind set on which was the more important issue.

Go ahead. Call me a liar. Suggest that I\'ve conjured up this post only to further my views. There\'s nothing I can do to prove to you otherwise that I am telling you the truth except post this. If you wont believe this, then there\'s nothing I can tell you that you\'ll believe or honestly consider.

Note that I hadn\'t read your last post when I wrote this. I just want that clear.

[Edited on 20/8/2004 by ScottyRo]

07-25-2004, 02:14 PM	#1
ScottyRo 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Williamsburg, VA (ugh, the food here) Posts: 1,704	Politics Just in case you haven\'t heard... On Thursday, the U.S. House of Representatives voted 233-194 in favor of the Marriage Protection Act (MPA) which would take away from activist federal judges the power to declare the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) unconstitutional. DOMA says that no state has to accept another stateÃƒÂ¢Ã¢Â‚Â¬Ã¢Â„Â¢s marriage laws which legalize homosexual marriage. DOMA was passed overwhelmingly in 1996 by both the House and Senate and signed into law by then President Bill Clinton.

07-25-2004, 05:01 PM	#2
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	Politics Scotty, I do not think that the government should be banned from making any law that may have religious signifigance - or maybe better put, if you think killing is wrong b/c it\'s one of the ten commandments, that\'s OK. Why? B/c the same argument can be made without God. Here\'s what I see on the abortion issue: I see one side saying, we don\'t know when life begins, but our church tells us it is wrong. It should be banned. Some, and from what I\'ve seen this number is very small, but some people, like you, say, \"I don\'t know either way on abortion and since it may be wrong we should deem it wrong.\" The opposite side says, \"I don\'t know one way or the other on abortion, and since it cannot be decided outright, I am happy to allow it to remain a personal decision.\" Now, I don\'t mean to be inflamatory, but one of these seems in the spirit of individual freedom, and the other seems religiously backed, if not entirely based. I mean, I\'m not sure whether or not my microwave is giving me and my family members cancer. Should we outlaw that b/c it MAY give us cancer? In any case, there is one major point that the pro-lifers seem to miss. Many claim that the child should be given a chance. What chance would these children have being born into situations where they are unwanted? Further, should abortion be outlawed in the US, do you think that it would actually stop? It won\'t, it will simply put more women at risk, as they have to perform procedures \"under ground\" or fly to Mexico or wherever to get the procedures done. A law banning abortion won\'t stop abortion, it will put more people at risk though, and cause even more suffering for the women and families who have them.
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. ThatÃ¢Â€Â™s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans SaintsÃ¢Â€Â™ organization.\" - Eric Narcisse \"Being a Saints fan is almost like being addicted to crack,\" he said.[i]\"You know you should stop, but you just can\'t.\"

07-25-2004, 10:16 PM	#3
ScottyRo 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Williamsburg, VA (ugh, the food here) Posts: 1,704	Politics Scotty, I do not think that the government should be banned from making any law that may have religious signifigance - or maybe better put, if you think killing is wrong b/c it\'s one of the ten commandments, that\'s OK. Why? B/c the same argument can be made without God. Here\'s what I see on the abortion issue: I see one side saying, we don\'t know when life begins, but our church tells us it is wrong. It should be banned. Some, and from what I\'ve seen this number is very small, but some people, like you, say, \"I don\'t know either way on abortion and since it may be wrong we should deem it wrong.\" The opposite side says, \"I don\'t know one way or the other on abortion, and since it cannot be decided outright, I am happy to allow it to remain a personal decision.\" Now, I don\'t mean to be inflamatory, but one of these seems in the spirit of individual freedom, and the other seems religiously backed, if not entirely based. I don\'t think your observations about religious people are inflamatory, it\'s just wrong. I see some religious people thinking they way you say above. But there are others who know that just because they can\'t tell you the moment the combination of sperm and egg becomes a life doesn\'t mean that it\'s not so early on as to be irrelevant. (I was just about to go into my reasons for why it\'s true, but we won\'t agree or settle it so why bother at this point). It seems clear enough to me that by the time the woman knows she is pregnant, it is a life. The opposite also has people that think as you say above - that it is about freedom. But there are also people that want it to be legal just in case they ever need it to be. They\'ll be as sexually irresponsible as they want to be and kill any child they might create in the process. Just because the congregation is told they should not be in favor of something doesn\'t mean that they blindly follow. There are plenty of intellegent people who can figure these things out for themselves that also believe in God and go to church. I mean, I\'m not sure whether or not my microwave is giving me and my family members cancer. Should we outlaw that b/c it MAY give us cancer? Maybe. But is the microwave a life or just a mass of cells? In any case, there is one major point that the pro-lifers seem to miss. Many claim that the child should be given a chance. What chance would these children have being born into situations where they are unwanted? Talk about weak links in the argument. So you\'re saying that they\'re better off not having been born. I suppose since they\'re born into tough situations, there\'s no chance that any good can come from them or their lives. Certainly none of them will grow up to win the superbowl for the Saints. Further, should abortion be outlawed in the US, do you think that it would actually stop? It won\'t, it will simply put more women at risk, as they have to perform procedures \"under ground\" or fly to Mexico or wherever to get the procedures done. A law banning abortion won\'t stop abortion, it will put more people at risk though, and cause even more suffering for the women and families who have them. Ahh, the old \"we can\'t stop it so we might as well make it legal\" argument. Not your proudest moment here either. How about these: Drugs? Prostitution? Illegal immigration? Don\'t all of these laws drive people underground and put them at risk simply because they\'d rather take the risk than abide by the law?

07-26-2004, 08:54 AM	#4
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	Politics Yes, they do, and I am in favor of legalizing drugs and prostitution, for the record. Want to find the safest prostitute in America? Go to Vegas, where it is legal. The UK has programs where addicts can go to hospitals and slowly be weened off a drug. The hospital will administer a clean, safe dose of the drug and monitor the user. They get stepped off the program. Those are both MUCH BETTER situations than what we have here now, yes. In any case, I\'m quite sure you understand now. Here\'s the problem: It seems clear enough to me that by the time the woman knows she is pregnant, it is a life. Well it\'s not CLEAR to ME that is true. So who is right? Both of us, or neither of us, however you want to put it. In that case what do you do? There is no right or wrong. I say take power from the state and leave it where I think it belongs, in the hands of the people to make their own decisions. You think it should be a federal issue to protect the potential life. Neither of us is right, or wrong. I rest happy knowing that right now, the law supports my view.
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. ThatÃ¢Â€Â™s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans SaintsÃ¢Â€Â™ organization.\" - Eric Narcisse \"Being a Saints fan is almost like being addicted to crack,\" he said.[i]\"You know you should stop, but you just can\'t.\"

07-26-2004, 09:14 AM	#5
ScottyRo 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Williamsburg, VA (ugh, the food here) Posts: 1,704	Politics Well it\'s not CLEAR to ME that is true. So who is right? Both of us, or neither of us, however you want to put it. In that case what do you do? There is no right or wrong. I say take power from the state and leave it where I think it belongs, in the hands of the people to make their own decisions. You think it should be a federal issue to protect the potential life. Neither of us is right, or wrong. I rest happy knowing that right now, the law supports my view. So, hypothetically, if it was proven to be life at implantation would that change your thinking to not allowing the procedure? You said in an earlier post that breathing and a heartbeat are the requirements for life. Is there anything else?

07-26-2004, 03:52 PM	#6
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	Politics Not waking into that trap! Let me put it to you this way: I have seven doctors in my family. If they cannot agree and tell me when life actually begins, if the entire medical profession can\'t answer that question, then I am smart enough to know that I am not smart enough to answer it myself. I can tell you that I FEEL that a month old embryo/fetus bears more resemblance to a cyst than a human being. Right now, without further proof, I think it is the mother\'s choice. Here\'s another key difference. Let\'s assume for a moment that the medical industry came together and supported a view that life begins at \"implantation\". Would I change my view? Given good evidence and the respected opinions of experts, yes. I would. Now consider the opposite. If the medical industry united to say that a child is not alive until it is born, would you change your view? Would other pro-lifers? I doubt it.
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. ThatÃ¢Â€Â™s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans SaintsÃ¢Â€Â™ organization.\" - Eric Narcisse \"Being a Saints fan is almost like being addicted to crack,\" he said.[i]\"You know you should stop, but you just can\'t.\"

07-27-2004, 01:27 PM	#7
ScottyRo 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Williamsburg, VA (ugh, the food here) Posts: 1,704	Politics I can tell you that I FEEL that a month old embryo/fetus bears more resemblance to a cyst than a human being. Right now, without further proof, I think it is the mother\'s choice. You may be right that it looks like a cyst at that stage, but it has a heartbeat and a spinal column at that time too. I know the cyst doesn\'t have its very own heartbeat. You could gather all the scientists and doctors together and debate this for eternity and never come to a conclusion. But I guarantee that if only as much of a person as a recently implanted baby were discovered on some other planet, they\'d generally agree that they found evidence of human life on that other planet. It is taken for granted as being such on Earth because it is so plentiful.

08-20-2004, 06:20 PM	#8
saintfan Donated Plasma Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 18,556 Blog Entries: 5	Politics Why is the woman\'s right to choose greater and more important than the child\'s right to life, if any? I\'m not saying her right to choose is greater than the childs right to life. I\'m saying I don\'t have the right to make that decision for her. Neither do you man. You don\'t have that right because people WAY smarter than either of us have thought and thought about it and they figured the woman should have the right to figure out what\'s best for her. Scotty -- Man I\'m not callin\' you a liar. I\'ve said before I respect your opinion. I\'ve even indicated that I, too, think that abortion is wrong...that\'s what my gut tells me. Somewhere deep down I think it\'s not the right thing to do in \"most\" cases; however, I just can\'t imagine myself ever using what \"I\" think is right or wrong as justification to force my opinion on someone else. I especially don\'t think I should be given that power over someone I don\'t know...someone who\'s circumstances are beyond my knowledge. I type angry sometimes. Don\'t take me personally...ever. I just come across that way. The fact is that abortion is legal. That\'s the only fact we\'ll come up with here. I get miffed when I hear the anti-abortion activitists hollerin\' on the radio about how all these women are going to hell, or using the most disgusting language possible to describe the procedure. I detest their \"in your face\" tactics. I have no doubt an abortion isn\'t a fun time. These people, to me, are WAY over the top and likely in need of attention. They should go and live their own lives ya know? Now I\'m not speaking of you. You seem to have the ability to debate the issue intelligently...more so than me even...but then again that\'s not very difficult. :P The issue of right or wrong goes deep man. You said so yourself. If you acknowledge that then you must also acknowledge that it\'s just not as simple as pro-choice people being misguided. You may think they\'re misguided, but everything is with respect to where you\'re viewing it from. You may not be able to comprehend someone else\'s reasoning behind a particular decision they make about a particular thing because you\'re not living their reality. I shake my head at the ignorance I see daily, but I also remind myself that other people view me through their reality too. At least that\'s my opinion. Because I feel that way I believe a woman should be allowed to make her own decision. That\'s her baby and none of my business. If it\'s wrong then she\'ll pay for that decision. It\'s not up to me. I might suggest to her that there are options, but that\'s as far as I\'ll go. That\'s as far as I have to go morally since I do beleive what I beleive. Anyway, we can agree to disagree. I don\'t sweat that, and I hope you don\'t. In my heart I think the right to choose is the right thing even tho I think abortion isn\'t morally sound. I\'m all for the death penalty. I think war is sometimes necessary and I\'d like to see Iraq made into the worlds biggest parking lot mostly because I don\'t think those folks in the middle east really want peace. They like to fight. They are a plague spreading across the planet and they should be eliminated. Saddam was brutal because he HAD to be. There is no peace with those animals. How\'s that for over the top! LOL I think the abuse of animals is wrong, but cook me a steak any day. LOL [Edited on 20/8/2004 by saintfan]
	C'mon Man...

08-20-2004, 06:09 PM	#9
ScottyRo 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Williamsburg, VA (ugh, the food here) Posts: 1,704	Politics What I\'m trying to do ScottyRo is figure out how it is that people think they have the right to make this sort of decision on behalf of someone else. Someone they don\'t know. Someone who\'s circumstances they are totally unaware of, simply because they think they\'re right. The law doesn\'t give you that right. Society has told you that you don\'t have that right, and yet you\'re still at it, and I wonder why? Maybe because I think that saving children is important enough that I\'d risk ruffling your feathers over it to discuss the topic and say that I don\'t think it\'s right. How is that wrong? Don\'t I have 1st Amendment right to say that? Dude, it\'s not about a worst case scenario. You don\'t care about the scenario. That\'s my whole point. You just think you\'re right...period. You can\'t see past it. Man, you don\'t know how I feel on the subject entirely. The problem is that it\'s just too hard to discuss every single scenario possible. This medium is too limiting. I prefer to talk about the less difficult questions here because it\'s easier to do so. Further, you accuse me of not seeing past something. This seems awfully contradictory when you\'re holding onto your views just as adamantly as I. Aren\'t you also one that can\'t see past it. Whatever IT is. Now, if you\'re not propping yourself up with religion and the \"Good book\" then what is it? I will say again that I\'ve done what I can to avoid religios and biblical foundations in my arguments. I have tried to state my opinions in legal and philosophical terms only unless asked otherwise. Those who have been debating me on this and who agree with you will at least agree with me on that. It is my opinion that when you recognize that everyone doesn\'t think the way you think or think way you think they should think then you\'ll understand. But not until then. C\'mon! It is abundantly clear that people disagree with me. This debate has raged (and ebbed) on here for weeks and only recently has anyone that comes to this site said anything on my side about it. But you say things like the above in a way that tells me you don\'t think I have a right to disagree. In what way are you not trying to get me to think like you think? I guess it\'s ok for you to do it but not me since I might have been tainted by some religion. You\'ll still think abortion is wrong, but you\'ll have faith in the fact that you\'re not in control (nor should you be) of what a woman does in that situation. Again, you harp so hard on the \"control\" issue it\'s obvious you\'re not reading a thing I have to say about it. Control is not the issue for me. Saving lives is. You keep asking me about the \"why\'s\" of this debate so I have one for you. Why is the woman\'s right to choose greater and more important than the child\'s right to life, if any? Go ahead. Dazzle me. Show me that you\'ve actually thought this through and you\'re not just spouting \"women\'s choice\" arguments you\'ve been hearing elsewhere. Do you show up at abortion clinics and councel women about to have the procedure? Do you show up at prisons prior to an execution and councel the executioner? Do you protest War? No to all three. Does that mean I can\'t have an opinion? Let me say again you\'ve either forgotten or you haven\'t READ the previous posts on this thread. So, before you ask me about justifications for killing go look up my opinion for yourself. Do you go to inner city neighborhoods and council folks there in crack houses before they go bust a cap in somebody for their next blow? In what way could this possibly be relevant to a discussion about abortion? You\'re all over the place, man. Why have you chosen the abortion issue when I\'d bet good money you don\'t do any of these other things. What gives man? So now I have to be out counseling people in order to hold an opinion on an issue. You know what? We\'re here discussing things. If you want to discuss those, start a thread on them. I guess if you have to be involved to have an opinion, then you\'re the guy getting all these girls pregnant and taking them to get abortions or counseling them to have them. I know you\'re an intelligent guy. Slow down before you write and you\'ll stop making these rediculous errors in logic.

08-20-2004, 05:22 PM	#10
ScottyRo 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Williamsburg, VA (ugh, the food here) Posts: 1,704	Politics Ok Saintfan, you asked and I don\'t mind telling. This is where I come from on this debate. When I was 17, I became sexually active. This is when I began to form my thoughts on abortion. The reality of my opinion about it around that time was that I wasn\'t really in favor of it, but I wanted it to be legal in case I needed it. As I have gotten older and more mature, I have realized that if I were to get a woman pregnant unexpectantly, I should accept that responsibility rather than have the child pay with its life for my mistake. I was raised in church, but didn\'t attend from the time I was 16 until about 31. I can\'t really say that religion affected my decision. There was a time when I might have called myself an atheist. Certainly, it wasn\'t the church since I wasn\'t going at that time. I think of myself as a fairly philosophical sort of person in that even in things I am told about at church I search out for myself the answer I believe to be correct. You put the woman\'s right to choose first and I can understand that. All I can tell you is that I see that right to choose as an UNFORTUNATE victim in that situation because the life of the child comes first to me. It seems like you think I set out to take away that right when that is not the case. It is collateral damage so to speak because it is subsequent to a greater good. You say things that make it seem like you are getting angry at me when you read my opinions and I think it is because you misinterpret the reasonings for my opinions. I\'m trying to elaborate as much as possible so you can see that my intent here is to be as honest as possible with you. The summary here if I haven\'t gotten it across is that my view on this has changed, but it wasn\'t affected by my religious views as you want to suggest. Whether I was truly an atheist or just a person that wanted to say he believed more in science is irrelevant, because during that time I did not believe abortion was the right thing to do. I decided to start attending church again for many reasons, but I had long before had my mind set on which was the more important issue. Go ahead. Call me a liar. Suggest that I\'ve conjured up this post only to further my views. There\'s nothing I can do to prove to you otherwise that I am telling you the truth except post this. If you wont believe this, then there\'s nothing I can tell you that you\'ll believe or honestly consider. Note that I hadn\'t read your last post when I wrote this. I just want that clear. [Edited on 20/8/2004 by ScottyRo]

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode