|
So my friend is driving his ex girlfiend up to DC for an abortion. (pg. 12)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Inertia |
when in doubt (or when out of dead baby jokes...) always contact Cyanide & Happiness:
proof of the uberness of explosm.net! |
|
|
| Ivand |
| replace Guatemala with Haiti plskthxbye :o |
|
|
| Lebezniatnikov |
| quote: | Originally posted by Omega_Blue
perhaps thompson is pro-abortion, but i'm saying that her argument (whether purposely or not) only suggests justification in cases of rape. what steps did you take to avoid getting attached to the violinist? none? well then that's your up. remember, you were KIDNAPPED. forced. most cases of pregnancies are not "forced."
the main idea is, abortion is ok in cases of SD, R, I. it is NOT okay because of irresponsibility on the mother's part.
another thompson analogy...
the problem with this, as with most feminist-ethics views on abortion:
- this theory treats offspring as an object, not a person.
- this theory assumes the offspring is an "intruder."
- the offspring has no choice as to whether it should be in the "house" or not.
...ANNNDDD.. the religion thing will not work in an abortion argument. God would NOT want you to kill your baby. under any circumstances. unless he/she deemed so. It's part of the ten commandments. And furthermore, since God creates life, he created your baby, and has a plan for said baby. to kill the baby would be to defy God's plan. (but then again one could say that you would kill it no matter what, God planned on you killing it, and the death of the baby is part of God's plan also. you could never truly figure that out). You can't possibly say that God would definitely want you to kill the baby, for the sake of a "better life." In the end, you can never know what life that child will lead, so i think the "better life" argument is flawed. |
this is the only response I can think of:
What is red and pink and can't turn round in a corridor?
A baby with a javelin through its throat. |
|
|
| Theresa |
| quote: | Originally posted by Omega_Blue
perhaps thompson is pro-abortion, but i'm saying that her argument (whether purposely or not) only suggests justification in cases of rape. what steps did you take to avoid getting attached to the violinist? none? well then that's your up. remember, you were KIDNAPPED. forced. most cases of pregnancies are not "forced."
the main idea is, abortion is ok in cases of SD, R, I. it is NOT okay because of irresponsibility on the mother's part.
another thompson analogy...
the problem with this, as with most feminist-ethics views on abortion:
- this theory treats offspring as an object, not a person.
- this theory assumes the offspring is an "intruder."
- the offspring has no choice as to whether it should be in the "house" or not.
...ANNNDDD.. the religion thing will not work in an abortion argument. God would NOT want you to kill your baby. under any circumstances. unless he/she deemed so. It's part of the ten commandments. And furthermore, since God creates life, he created your baby, and has a plan for said baby. to kill the baby would be to defy God's plan. (but then again one could say that you would kill it no matter what, God planned on you killing it, and the death of the baby is part of God's plan also. you could never truly figure that out). You can't possibly say that God would definitely want you to kill the baby, for the sake of a "better life." In the end, you can never know what life that child will lead, so i think the "better life" argument is flawed. |
The only way this ties into the 10 commandments is if you are referring to the 7th commandment - thou shalt not commit adultery. However, this is assuming that all unwanted pregnancies are created outside of marriage (not true).
"- this theory treats offspring as an object, not a person.
- this theory assumes the offspring is an "intruder."
- the offspring has no choice as to whether it should be in the "house" or not."
It *is* an object, and not yet a person. At the early stages of creation, it is only a lump of cells that have the POTENTIAL to become a human life.
If the woman does not want the cells in her body, it is an intruder.
–verb (used with object)
1. to thrust or bring in without invitation, permission, or welcome.
Why should a lump of cells have a choice? The owner of the "house" does not want any tenants, so GTFO.
LOL!
I don't understand how you can give a lump of cells a choice when it is not even capable of forming thoughts or decisions. We don't even give FULL GROWN babies and children the same "rights" and "choices" as we do adults. Typically, those rights and choices are made for them by their care-taker.
Is it wrong to vaccum the floor? There are tonnes of cells floating around that have the POTENTIAL to become something. Is it our right to decide that we wish to eliminate their potential? |
|
|
| RJT |
| quote: | Originally posted by Theresa
Is it wrong to vaccum the floor? |
Laugh of the day right there! 
Thanks for that Theresa, you just won my vote  |
|
|
| Theresa |
| quote: | Originally posted by Omega_Blue
God would NOT want you to kill your baby. under any circumstances. unless he/she deemed so. It's part of the ten commandments. And furthermore, since God creates life, he created your baby, and has a plan for said baby. to kill the baby would be to defy God's plan. |
Ahhh, but you say that it is ok for women who have been raped etc. So are you trying to say that God's plan is ok so long as it suits you, and that when it doesn't seem appealing, then you can over-ride his plan, and choose to abort?
Wasn't it God's plan to have her raped in the first place? If God allowed a woman to get pregnant from rape, didn't he want her to have it?
Why all of a sudden are you allowed to decide that you know better than God?
Gah, religious people are always so inconsistent. They only believe what suits them best, and only practice what they think is their worthwhile practicing.
If you are going to abide by what God says, and think that it's only one way or the wrong way, then be consistent and say that abortion is wrong NO MATTER WHAT.
Otherwise, your theory is useless. |
|
|
| Arbiter |
| quote: | Originally posted by Theresa
Ahhh, but you say that it is ok for women who have been raped etc. So are you trying to say that God's plan is ok so long as it suits you, and that when it doesn't seem appealing, then you can over-ride his plan, and choose to abort?
Wasn't it God's plan to have her raped in the first place? If God allowed a woman to get pregnant from rape, didn't he want her to have it?
Why all of a sudden are you allowed to decide that you know better than God?
Gah, religious people are always so inconsistent. They only believe what suits them best, and only practice what they think is their worthwhile practicing.
If you are going to abide by what God says, and think that it's only one way or the wrong way, then be consistent and say that abortion is wrong NO MATTER WHAT.
Otherwise, your theory is useless. |
Yes, the whole "god's plan" thing is never consistent.
If you want to believe in a God that has a "plan," then you pretty much have to believe either that everything people do is part of God's plan, or that nothing people do is part of God's plan. Because it would be pretty presumptuous to think you could arbitrarily pick and choose which human decisions are part of God's plan and which aren't and end up with any sort of accurate picture. Well, the alternative is to admit that you can't know what is part of God's plan and what isn't. But then you can't really use it to argue for or against anything.
So, with regards to abortion, either:
1. It was never part of God's plan for you to have sex in the first place, so his plan has already been derailed and you're just trying to right the course. Also, you shouldn't open any doors, because if it was God's plan for you to go through, he would have opened it for you, or
2. It was God's plan for you to have sex, get pregnant, and subsequently have an abortion, and, in the case of rape, it was God's plan for you to get raped as well... because he's into that stuff, I guess. Oh yeah and I guess free will doesn't really exist under this option. |
|
|
| Omega_Blue |
| quote: | Originally posted by Theresa
Ahhh, but you say that it is ok for women who have been raped etc. So are you trying to say that God's plan is ok so long as it suits you, and that when it doesn't seem appealing, then you can over-ride his plan, and choose to abort?
Wasn't it God's plan to have her raped in the first place? If God allowed a woman to get pregnant from rape, didn't he want her to have it?
Why all of a sudden are you allowed to decide that you know better than God?
Gah, religious people are always so inconsistent. They only believe what suits them best, and only practice what they think is their worthwhile practicing.
If you are going to abide by what God says, and think that it's only one way or the wrong way, then be consistent and say that abortion is wrong NO MATTER WHAT.
Otherwise, your theory is useless. |
yup, i wasn't trying to play the religion card (and i thought "thou shalt not kill" was one of the ten commandments, which obviously it is not. my mistake). see below. like arbiter said, the whole God's plan thing will never work, and if you wanna get into a determinism argument based on God's teachings then we could argue some more.
| quote: | Originally posted by Omega_Blue
(...ANNNDDD.. the religion thing will not work in an abortion argument....
...but then again one could say that you would kill it no matter what, God planned on you killing it, and the death of the baby is part of God's plan also. you could never truly figure that out). |
it all comes down to when you believe a baby is considered "human." the first thing that thompson's argument agrees with is the fact that fetuses have moral rights at the moment of conception. you, do not. no biggie. i guess you could say killing those human cells is no more murder than say, scratching the skin cells off your arm. same difference.
| quote: | Originally posted by Theresa
If the woman does not want the cells in her body, it is an intruder.
–verb (used with object)
1. to thrust or bring in without invitation, permission, or welcome.
Why should a lump of cells have a choice? The owner of the "house" does not want any tenants, so GTFO.
|
When you have intercourse you are "welcoming" (in a sense) the possibility of pregnancy and childbirth. if the owner of the "house" doesn't want any tenants, don't leave the ing door open. lol! you leave it open, you have the chance of intruders coming in. that's your choice as to whether you wanna take the risk or not. my battery is gonna die i'll finish this later |
|
|
| Omega_Blue |
| at what age (of the fetus) is abortion wrong? |
|
|
| dallastar |
any age really, but some girl have to do what they have to do!
to each their own is all I can think of with this subject,
E.O.D. |
|
|
| Sunsnail |
| quote: | Originally posted by dallastar
E.O.D. |
not really
Anyway, a lot of you have been saying that its only justifiable with rape and such, but I feel that if you use a condom or other preventative measures and you still get pregnant, then its ok to get an abortion. |
|
|
|
|
