Abortion Discussion

[ToddNotTodd]

Teaching science to kids doesn't cover the whole of it. I know you're an atheist and don't want God in the discussion, but that's why your atheism arguments don't work, because they leave out at least half of the subject. Sure, there are diseases, sure there's pregnancy, but why is that a bad thing? BECAUSE GOD TELLS US SO.

You mean you believe your god tells you so. Other people believe in a god that doesn't tell them that, or don't believe in a god at all.

That part of the conversation should happen at home, in addition to sex education in schools.

 

[AirPo]

And there is quite a waiting list for infants to be adopted. To offset the cost, an admin fee could be added to the adoption procedure.

Healthy white infants.

 

[Douglas Hendrickson]

Douglas Hendrickson said: ↑
There is one basic problem with this, and it is the failure to see the difference between "human" and "human being."
"... only became human when we had our umbilical cord severed" should read: "became a human being," and then it would be true. To understand better the difference between before birth and after see my post above, #1076. There is a difference of dependencies, but more important a difference of being, there exists an actual animal (human) beingonly after birth. A new member of the human species. Just like there are never any pigs in a pigs belly - we do not count pig fetuses as pigs, because they are not. So too is a chicken egg not a chicken even if it is fertilized.

Most people are able to tell the difference between a chicken and an egg!

I very well do know how to tell the difference. That's why I can easily detect that you are using a false analogy since there is absolutely no comparison between what is developing in the chicken egg and what is developing in the womb of a woman.


That is false - there is at least some comparison between the fertilized egg of chickens and the fertilized ovum in a woman's womb. For starters they are both fertilized eggs. They both develop into flesh that becomes another animal being, in one case a chicken and in the other a human being child.
That you fail to see the truth(s) of my analogy (although it may not be the best one possible) means your detection of my "false analogy" does NOT show you "do know how to tell the difference" between "human" and "human being." If you respected that distinction sufficiently, I think you would not use the form of words "only became human ..." but rather "became a human," or better yet, "became a human being."
Nobody can truthfully say that what is in a pregnant woman's womb is "not human," for it consists entirely of human cells. But so too is this true of a cancer in the same place, so saying something is "human" proves nothing.


Furthermore, the example of two men who struggle accidentally causing an abortion and the penalty of life for life required clearly contradicts your claim of inequality between prenatal life and post natal life.

True, you do have a right to your opinion. However, your opinion goes contrary to what the Bible clearly indicates.

You are wrong there, my opinion doe NOT go contrary to what the Bible clearly indicates. This instance of Exodus 21 is notoriously used by both sides of the debate to seem to confirm their completely opposite views.
[I will try to respond to your other Biblical misinterpretations later.]

 

[Root of Jesse]

You mean you believe your god tells you so. Other people believe in a god that doesn't tell them that, or don't believe in a god at all.

That part of the conversation should happen at home, in addition to sex education in schools.

I completely agree. But our society has made it so the parents aren't home or don't have the time to teach their children, and our government has made us believe that they are responsible for education. With no one at home to re-enforce the family's values, such as they may be, it becomes society's problem.
Of course, that what secular lies teach us...

 

[Root of Jesse]

Healthy white infants.

Another lie. While some people may only want healthy white children, and that's their own decision, others step up to the plate and take the children who need the most love, the most care, the most sacrifice. That's the Christian thing to do. Ironically, those who need the most love, care, and sacrifice often produce the most reward to the adoptive parents.

 

[KCfromNC]

Teaching science to kids doesn't cover the whole of it. I know you're an atheist and don't want God in the discussion, but that's why your atheism arguments don't work, because they leave out at least half of the subject.

Research shows that the half of the subject that is important has nothing to do with the existence of gods. It is the comprehensive part of comprehensive sex ed. That is, teaching safe sex and the correct use of various forms of contraception is the key leading to reduced teen pregnancy rates.

Ignore the data all you want, pretend it isn't there for all I care. The more anti-abortion groups fail to support simple ways to actually reduce the number of abortions, the less reasonable their position looks. But if you really want to reduce the number of pregnant kids wanting abortions, time to ditch antiquated ideas about birth control being evil or whatever it is some old single white dudes in funny hats are telling you this week.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Douglas Hendrickson said: ↑
There is one basic problem with this, and it is the failure to see the difference between "human" and "human being."
"... only became human when we had our umbilical cord severed" should read: "became a human being," and then it would be true. To understand better the difference between before birth and after see my post above, #1076. There is a difference of dependencies, but more important a difference of being, there exists an actual animal (human) beingonly after birth. A new member of the human species. Just like there are never any pigs in a pigs belly - we do not count pig fetuses as pigs, because they are not. So too is a chicken egg not a chicken even if it is fertilized.

Most people are able to tell the difference between a chicken and an egg!



You are wrong there, my opinion doe NOT go contrary to what the Bible clearly indicates. This instance of Exodus 21 is notoriously used by both sides of the debate to seem to confirm their completely opposite views.
[I will try to respond to your other Biblical misinterpretations later.]

Actually, it is a chicken after it's fertilized. You know that there are societies that favor fertilized eggs over non-fertilized? There's feathers, beaks, feet and claws. That's a chicken!

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Anything with completely human DNA. All 23 pairs.

So if you could keep a severed foot alive, it would be a person. Interesting.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Healthy white infants.

I used to lay out a newsletter for an adoption service. Is was beyond depressing seeing the same black kids issue after issue, knowing that they were never going to be adopted.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Research shows that the half of the subject that is important has nothing to do with the existence of gods. It is the comprehensive part of comprehensive sex ed. That is, teaching safe sex and the correct use of various forms of contraception is the key leading to reduced teen pregnancy rates.

That's why it works so well, I guess!

Ignore the data all you want, pretend it isn't there for all I care. The more anti-abortion groups fail to support simple ways to actually reduce the number of abortions, the less reasonable their position looks. But if you really want to reduce the number of pregnant kids wanting abortions, time to ditch antiquated ideas about birth control being evil or whatever it is some old single white dudes in funny hats are telling you this week.

The simplest, the ABSOLUTE simplest way to reduce the number of abortions is to reduce the number of pregnancies by encouraging kids not to have sex until they're married. It is also to walk with those who do have sex before marriage, because not all of us are strong enough to ignore our bodies, and support them as they have their children and place them for adoption.
Birth control is an evil. No way around it. It leads to false sense of security that engaging in pleasure has no consequences, and indulging in such pleasure is a no-risk endeavor. Again, the surest way to avoid something is to not do it. Note the period.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Healthy white infants.

Don't be afraid, say what you mean.....

 

[Archivist]

Healthy white infants.

Correct. As I recall from when I worked in the court system the adoption rate for healthy Asian infants, is only slightly lower than for healthy white infants. The adoption rate for healthy Hispanic or black infants or any infant with disabilities is much lower.

 

[rjs330]

There is one basic problem with this, and it is the failure to see the difference between "human" and "human being."
"... only became human when we had our umbilical cord severed" should read: "became a human being," and then it would be true. To understand better the difference between before birth and after see my post above, #1076. There is a difference of dependencies, but more important a difference of being, there exists an actual animal (human) being only after birth. A new member of the human species. Just like there are never any pigs in a pigs belly - we do not count pig fetuses as pigs, because they are not. So too is a chicken egg not a chicken even if it is fertilized.

Most people are able to tell the difference between a chicken and an egg!

Sorry I don't get your point. A pig fetus is still a pig. So? A fertilized chicken egg is still a chicken, although not fully developed yet, but it's still a chicken.

The basis of the argument is the fact that there is no difference between a human and human being. That is a philosphical argument. A person in a vegitative state could be considered a human, but not a human being because they are dependent on others for survival. As could many other humans on this planet. Most children could not survive on their own. They are still human beings. The fact that the baby in the mothers womb cannot survive without being in the mothers womb is meaningless. You obviously are debating the humanity of a human. Once you go down that road you are placing yourself into the position to decide what is human and what is not. That road inevitably leads to deciding if a person outside the womb is a human being. And what constitutes a human being. You do NOT get to decide that. No one should. But that is exactly what you have done. Placed yourself in the position on who lives and who dies based on YOUR definition of what is a human being. And that is as immoral as it comes.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Again, the surest way to avoid something is to not do it. Note the period.

Yes, but (whine) what fun is that?

 

[Archivist]

Another lie. While some people may only want healthy white children, and that's their own decision, others step up to the plate and take the children who need the most love, the most care, the most sacrifice. That's the Christian thing to do. Ironically, those who need the most love, care, and sacrifice often produce the most reward to the adoptive parents.

No, that isn't a lie. The statistics back that up.

 

[civilwarbuff]

No, that isn't a lie. The statistics back that up.

Post'em.....

 

[Archivist]

Post'em.....

Not in a place to do that right now. As I said earlier, I'm saying that based on memory.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

No, that isn't a lie. The statistics back that up.

Yep. And I've got years worth of newsletters where the black kids or the kids with disabilities just keep get older and the white toddlers get snatched up. This was happening even with an adoption waiting list. Add in that I live in the heart of the Bible belt, and you have a lot of Christians ignoring anything but healthy white kids.

 

[Archivist]

Yep. And I've got years worth of newsletters where the black kids or the kids with disabilities just keep get older and the white toddlers get snatched up. This was happening even with an adoption waiting list. Add in that I live in the heart of the Bible belt, and you have a lot of Christians ignoring anything but healthy white kids.

The people who amazed me the most when I was at the courthouse were the Amish because of the way that they looked out for each other. We had one Amish woman who was dying of cancer who had six children. Her husband had earlier been killed in a farming accident. She came into court and gave up her parental rights and the chuildren were all adopted by families from the neighboring farms so they would grow up together. Very sad but heartwarming...

 

[civilwarbuff]

We'll wait.....I am assuming you also have adoption rates broke down by race of the person adopting?