Abortions in US decline again, likely due to Obamacare contraceptive access

ToddNotTodd said:

Depending on where you live, that’s demonstrably false. So much so that I have a hard time believing I need to say it...

Click to expand...

No, it is not. It's human biology. A new human being exist at conception. Not a matter of opinion.

David Cabrera said:

If supporting supporting women and children pre/post-natal is helping reducing abortion, I believe it is good. I am not against that per se.

Click to expand...

Their whole thing that if you're not for socialism you can't oppose murder is a big fat canard. Call them out on it. Every time.

CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN said:

Apparently the women and her boyfriend isn't responsible and probably never will be. So another generation un-responsible being born. Stopping abortions does nothing and still is non of your business.

Click to expand...

No idea what you said in the first sentence.

Children being abused is non of my business so according to you I should just pretend it doesn't happen

CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN said:

Apparently the women and her boyfriend isn't responsible and probably never will be. So another generation un-responsible being born. Stopping abortions does nothing and still is non of your business.

Click to expand...

Human rights and pre-born equality are none of our business. You tell 'em!

ThatRobGuy said:

...but the thing people need to remember is to be pragmatic with regards to tolerance of behavior and accept the the reality that a person wanting to tolerate (or not tolerate) a behavior has very little impact on whether or not other people engage in that behavior.

For instance, I don't like the behavior of people abusing opiates, and would prefer they didn't...but I understand the reality that me not liking it and me saying, till I'm blue in the face, "you shouldn't do that, there will be consequences" isn't going to change the fact that people are going to do it, so it's best to have contingencies in place to minimize the harm when it does happen.

For instance, providing funds toward rehabilitation programs and giving narcan to EMS and Police.

Such measures don't really exist for cases of unplanned pregnancies. Our welfare benefits are pretty much a joke compared to what other industrialized nations have in place to help low income households with healthcare and education costs, and we have a substantial portion of the country fighting against making contraception more widely available to prevent the pregnancies in the first place.

Obviously you've stated your position that you don't like people having premarital sex, or for purposes outside of procreation (if I understood your post earlier). But I think you'd agree that a person having sex using contraception to prevent the pregnancy in the first place is much better than getting pregnant and having an abortion, or getting pregnant then trying to raise a child under abysmal financial circumstances (that also leads to child suffering)

Click to expand...

Right now, just expressing myself is the only thing I can do even though I might believe society is far gone.

KarateCowboy said:

No, it is not. It's human biology. A new human being exist at conception. Not a matter of opinion.

Click to expand...

Homicide is a legal term. In the US, abortions are not against the law, therefore they obviously can’t be homicide

In addition, the idea that a zygote should have rights when it doesn’t possess the basic attributes that persons with rights have, makes no sense.

ToddNotTodd said:

Homicide is a legal term. In the US, abortions are not against the law, therefore they obviously can’t be homicide

In addition, the idea that a zygote should have rights when it doesn’t possess the basic attributes that persons with rights have, makes no sense.

Click to expand...

Homicide is also a regular term that means one human killing another. A zygote is a human being and a member of the species. That is not a matter of opinion. Human rights belonge to humans. Hence, as humans, they have basic human rights. That's why they're called human rights, not arbitrary level of development of specific organs rights.

You're making the same bigoted arguments that white supremacists made about black slaves. Though, the white supremacists were generally promoting a less evil thing.

KarateCowboy said:

Homicide is also a regular term that means one human killing another. A zygote is a human being and a member of the species. That is not a matter of opinion. Human rights belonge to humans. Hence, as humans, they have basic human rights. That's why they're called human rights, not arbitrary level of development of specific organs rights.

You're making the same bigoted arguments that white supremacists made about black slaves. Though, the white supremacists were generally promoting a less evil thing.

Click to expand...

So how are you going to deal with it?
1. Not everyone believes that a zygote is a human being entitled to human rights. In fact they are sincerely convinced that it is not. That's a fact, and you can't just impose your view of it by force.
2. Abortion is defined as termination of pregnancy, but pregnancy is not deemed to begin until implantation. You are going to have to change the definition of pregnancy, or of abortion.
3. If a zygote is a human being entitled to human rights, then it must be afforded those rights. How are you going to tell when a zygote is formed? No medical test will tell you, there is no no known way of detecting it. What is to become of those zygotes which fail naturally to implant? According to your definition, that means millions of human beings are dying every day without being afforded their rights, nor even an inquest into their deaths. If millions of human beings were dying every day in a disease epidemic or natural catastrophe something would be done about it. What are you going to do?

KarateCowboy said:

No, it is not. It's human biology. A new human being exist at conception. Not a matter of opinion.

Click to expand...

And that human being doesn't get the right to enslave the mother for 9 months just by virtue of being a human.

A persons right to live doesn't mean we get to force people to provide life-support against their will.

KarateCowboy said:

Homicide is also a regular term that means one human killing another. A zygote is a human being and a member of the species. That is not a matter of opinion. Human rights belonge to humans. Hence, as humans, they have basic human rights. That's why they're called human rights, not arbitrary level of development of specific organs rights.

You're making the same bigoted arguments that white supremacists made about black slaves. Though, the white supremacists were generally promoting a less evil thing.

Click to expand...

From the dictionary:

hom·i·cide
/ˈhäməˌsīd/

noun
NORTH AMERICAN

1. the deliberate and unlawful killing of one person by another; murder.
"he was charged with homicide.”

Notice the word “unlawful”. Abortion, at least in most cases in the US, isn’t illegal and therefore not homicide. Your use of the term is just emotional rhetoric.

And yes, zygotes have human DNA. So do dead bodies. Dead bodies don’t have the same rights as living persons. If you could keep a headless body alive, it would also be comprised of human DNA. It would, of course, be ridiculous to think that a living headless body would have the same rights as a living person. And before you go down the “unique DNA” route, not all our cells have the exact same DNA. Are cells in your body that have different DNA different people?

Zygotes don’t have higher brain functions, because they don’t have the mechanisms in place to allow for higher brain functions. To me, these functions are necessary for personhood, and unless you use personhood as a qualifier for rights, you end up with nonsensical situations.

And to suggest that I’m being bigoted for my views is more emotional rhetoric. You can only be bigoted towards persons.

Speedwell said:

So how are you going to deal with it?
1. Not everyone believes that a zygote is a human being entitled to human rights. In fact they are sincerely convinced that it is not. That's a fact, and you can't just impose your view of it by force.
2. Abortion is defined as termination of pregnancy, but pregnancy is not deemed to begin until implantation. You are going to have to change the definition of pregnancy, or of abortion.
3. If a zygote is a human being entitled to human rights, then it must be afforded those rights. How are you going to tell when a zygote is formed? No medical test will tell you, there is no no known way of detecting it. What is to become of those zygotes which fail naturally to implant? According to your definition, that means millions of human beings are dying every day without being afforded their rights, nor even an inquest into their deaths. If millions of human beings were dying every day in a disease epidemic or natural catastrophe something would be done about it. What are you going to do?

Click to expand...

It's not a matter of opinion that a zygote, fetus, etc are human individuals. It's a matter of biological fact. The only question is: do we believe all humans are equally have basic human rights.... or just the ones we can tolerate

Skreeper said:

And that human being doesn't get the right to enslave the mother for 9 months just by virtue of being a human.

A persons right to live doesn't mean we get to force people to provide life-support against their will.

Click to expand...

That's a non-issue because the child is not enslaving anyone. In fact, he didn't even choose his position. What you're advocating is lethal intolerance, which is the worst form of bigotry out there.

ToddNotTodd said:

From the dictionary:

hom·i·cide
/ˈhäməˌsīd/

noun
NORTH AMERICAN

1. the deliberate and unlawful killing of one person by another; murder.
"he was charged with homicide.”

Notice the word “unlawful”. Abortion, at least in most cases in the US, isn’t illegal and therefore not homicide. Your use of the term is just emotional rhetoric.

Click to expand...

The killing of one person by another, regardless of intention or legality. Like I said: ignorant bigotry.

And yes, zygotes have human DNA. So do dead bodies. Dead bodies don’t have the same rights as living persons. If you could keep a headless body alive, it would also be comprised of human DNA. It would, of course, be ridiculous to think that a living headless body would have the same rights as a living person. And before you go down the “unique DNA” route, not all our cells have the exact same DNA. Are cells in your body that have different DNA different people?

Click to expand...

Wow. This is hate speech. Super ignorant hate speech.

“It should always be remembered that many organs are still not completely developed by full-term and birth should be regarded only as an incident in the whole developmental process.” F Beck Human Embryology, Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1985 page vi

“Every human being alive today and, as far as is known scientifically, every human being that ever existed, began his or her unique existence in this manner, i.e., as one cell. If this first cell or any subsequent configuration of cells perishes, the individual dies, ceasing to exist in matter as a living being. There are no known exceptions to this rule in the field of human biology.” Human Life and Health Care Ethics, Vol. 2

“The zygote and early embryo are living human organisms.” Keith L. Moore & T.V.N. Persaud Before We Are Born – Essentials of Embryology and Birth Defects (W.B. Saunders Company, 1998. Fifth edition.) Page 500

“The life cycle of mammals begins when a sperm enters an egg.” Okada et al., A role for the elongator complex in zygotic paternal genome demethylation, NATURE 463:554 (Jan. 28, 2010)

And to suggest that I’m being bigoted for my views is more emotional rhetoric. You can only be bigoted towards persons.

Click to expand...

Yup. And like white supremacists, you define the object of your bigotry as a non-person. That's the parodox of bigotry.

KarateCowboy said:

It's not a matter of opinion that a zygote, fetus, etc are human individuals. It's a matter of biological fact. The only question is: do we believe all humans are equally have basic human rights.... or just the ones we can tolerate

Click to expand...

So what should be done about it? So far all I have seen from you is condemnation, even of people who oppose abortion but don't have a clear about how to include zygotes in the definition of legal homicide and prosecute people for it. All you are doing is offensive virtue signalling.

Speedwell said:

So what should be done about it? So far all I have seen from you is condemnation, even of people who oppose abortion but don't have a clear about how to include zygotes in the definition of legal homicide and prosecute people for it. All you are doing is offensive virtue signalling.

Click to expand...

Zygote is just a stage of human development, much like infant, adolescent, etc. You don't need to do any special defining. You just protect the most marginalized of humans from bigotry, like in any other situation. What's offensive is the dehumanizing, hateful rhetoric from the anti-equality side.

KarateCowboy said:

The killing of one person by another, regardless of intention or legality. Like I said: ignorant bigotry.

Click to expand...

All the dictionaries I have define “homicide” in terms of legality. So, to pretend like the word doesn’t haven’t a strong connection to the law is misleading, and part of the standard rhetoric.

And, as I’ve already said, if a zygote isn’t a person, then your definition doesn’t apply.

Wow. This is hate speech. Super ignorant hate speech.

Click to expand...

Ridiculous.

“It should always be remembered that many organs are still not completely developed by full-term and birth should be regarded only as an incident in the whole developmental process.” F Beck Human Embryology, Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1985 page vi

Click to expand...

Obviously immaterial to my argument.

“Every human being alive today and, as far as is known scientifically, every human being that ever existed, began his or her unique existence in this manner, i.e., as one cell. If this first cell or any subsequent configuration of cells perishes, the individual dies, ceasing to exist in matter as a living being. There are no known exceptions to this rule in the field of human biology.” Human Life and Health Care Ethics, Vol. 2

Click to expand...

Obviously immaterial to my argument.

“The zygote and early embryo are living human organisms.” Keith L. Moore & T.V.N. Persaud Before We Are Born – Essentials of Embryology and Birth Defects (W.B. Saunders Company, 1998. Fifth edition.) Page 500

Click to expand...

Obviously immaterial to my argument.

“The life cycle of mammals begins when a sperm enters an egg.” Okada et al., A role for the elongator complex in zygotic paternal genome demethylation, NATURE 463:554 (Jan. 28, 2010)

Click to expand...

Obviously immaterial to my argument.

So, instead of actually responding to what I wrote, you took the common tactic of hand waving away my argument, and responding with a wall of text that had nothing to do with it. And then added in some insults that don’t actually apply.

I’m sure that’s not going to convince anyone to switch views.

Now, would you like to actually respond to what I wrote, or can we write you off at this point?

KarateCowboy said:

Zygote is just a stage of human development, much like infant, adolescent, etc. You don't need to do any special defining. You just protect the most marginalized of humans from bigotry, like in any other situation. What's offensive is the dehumanizing, hateful rhetoric from the anti-equality side.

Click to expand...

So what are you going to do about it? How are you going to craft laws and carry out prosecutions of those who murder zygotes?

David Cabrera said:

No idea what you said in the first sentence.

​

Click to expand...

Children being abused is non of my business so according to you I should just pretend it doesn't happen

​

Click to expand...

CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN said:

Someone put the sole blame on the women. It's both their fault. Both are irresponsible, may always be irresponsible.
Don't pretend to me, that anyone cares about abused children. ​

Click to expand...

I always keep hearing about reproductive rights for women but then men are blamed when there was consent. As someone said before, you cannot have both sides of your cake or something like that.

Yes, change the topic because you know I am right.

KarateCowboy said:

That's a non-issue because the child is not enslaving anyone. In fact, he didn't even choose his position. What you're advocating is lethal intolerance, which is the worst form of bigotry out there.

Click to expand...

If you tell a woman that she can't abort then that means that she has to provide life-support for nine months against her will which could potentially result in her death.

If I need a new kidney, do you think my right to live trumps your right to bodily autonomy?

Please take the time to watch this:

ToddNotTodd said:

All the dictionaries I have define “homicide” in terms of legality. So, to pretend like the word doesn’t haven’t a strong connection to the law is misleading, and part of the standard rhetoric.

And, as I’ve already said, if a zygote isn’t a person, then your definition doesn’t apply.

Click to expand...

Then the problem is you need to buy better dictionaries and get educated. Now you're just playing word games. Killing another human is homicide. The point stands.

Also, "person" and "human" are synonyms. The overwhelming majority of thesauruses will show you that. "They're humans but they're not persons" is a false distinction made by anti-equality bigotry movements throughout history. They used to say that about negroes.

Ridiculous.

Click to expand...

What's ridiculous is how you dehumanize others and act like it's somehow OK.

Obviously immaterial to my argument.



Obviously immaterial to my argument.



Obviously immaterial to my argument.



Obviously immaterial to my argument.

Click to expand...

I actually agree with you to a point on this. Your argument is ignoring biological reality and appealing to the same old "human but not a person" canard that white supremacists and other bigots have relied on.

I’m sure that’s not going to convince anyone to switch views.

Click to expand...

Well, that's the whole thing about bigotry: "An obstinate or intolerant devotion to one's own views". In this case, the stubborn insistence to ignore history, biology, and walk in step with the KKK, Nazis, and other bigots. You use the same rationale as the extermination camp officers: "Well, the law defines it as legal to kill them, so it wasn't murder". Frankly, it's disgusting.

Speedwell said:

So what are you going to do about it? How are you going to craft laws and carry out prosecutions of those who murder zygotes?

Click to expand...

The same way as other forms of murder. Are you going to join the fight against bigotry and support equality for the pre-born?

David Cabrera said:

I always keep hearing about reproductive rights for women but then men are blamed when there was consent. As someone said before, you cannot have both sides of your cake or something like that.

Yes, change the topic because you know I am right.

Click to expand...

Yup! "My body, my choice, your child support cheque!". Funny how men are responsible for things that are 100% the right and choice and decision of women. Then, it's nothing new: women didn't want the vote when it came tied to the draft and bucket duty.

At the end of the day, they just want to be able to kill people who incovenience them. It's nothing new or unprecedented. The ancient Romans, Greeks, and other civilizations did the same to newborns. If we let it slide, we would see it happening here today. And, they would still think themselves to be good people.

Skreeper said:

If you tell a woman that she can't abort then that means that she has to provide life-support for nine months against her will which could potentially result in her death.

If I need a new kidney, do you think my right to live trumps your right to bodily autonomy?

Click to expand...

Your argument is based on the bigoted, dehumanizing premise that the preborn are somehow inferior humans. What you're advocating is lethal intolerance.

They are not inferior. Human equality means all humans are equally valuable, not just the ones you find convenient.

Abortion is homicide, because you are killing another human "homi-cide" from "homo" meaning human/man and "cide" meaning "kill". If you kill the child then you are killing the child, resulting in his death. Not POTENTIALLY resulting in his death but DEFINITELY resulting in his death. Shoving that needle in his chest or scissors in his skull is EQUALLY a violation of his bodily autonomy.

Abortion is lethal intolerance. A society cannot tolerate the spread of intolerance. See "Popper's Paradox".