Can people who disagree on abortion stop attacking each other?

[YahuahSaves]

In what post did you articulate it? Yet again I ask you to explain what was illogical about it?

I said:

you cannot claim abortion is OK because the pregnant woman didn't give verbal consent to the baby growing in her womb - that would be illogical. She gave consent by not using contraception (or consent that her partner didn't use protection) when engaging in an act that has a known consequence of pregnancy.

You said:

It is not illogical and that is the very basis of bodily integrity

"Bodily autonomy" refers to human rights.
It's been discussed (and I've given plenty of factual evidence for), the unborn being a living, individual human being. So what gives one person the right of life over another? You will answer: "the baby is growing inside the woman's body". Who's fault is that?

 

[YahuahSaves]

So your claim is that anytime we perform an action we "consent" to any possible outcome from that action? This is your understanding of consent?

Have you ever spent time on self-reflection?

 

[David Collins]

I have a question for those who support rape exceptions. Do you support these in the case of statutory rape? For example if a 15 year old girl has sex that is agreed upon with a 21 year old man and gets pregnant, would she now be eligible for a rape exception? Or would this only apply to forcible rapes?

Also if you support complete legalization of abortion don't answer because then the rape exception becomes moot.

 

[ralliann]

You're right. And in that little scripture the author is confusing breathing and "souls". Seems like its part of the argument that biblically life begins with breath.

It is what makes mankind different than the rest of life. God did not make them a living soul. The soul of man is not the physical aspect of man.

 

[ralliann]

Lose all you blood and you die. Yes, people knew that. But, they didn't know why or that it was tied to breathing. (Galen may have figured that out, but that is just after the time of Jesus.)

Here is also what they knew
Ge 9:6 Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.

Men, so jealous of their brother, wanted to kill him

Ge 37:22 And Reuben said unto them, Shed no blood, but cast him into this pit that is in the wilderness, and lay no hand upon him; that he might rid him out of their hands, to deliver him to his father again.

They sold him into slavery instead.

Years later they thought God had brought them to account for his blood

Ge 42:22 And Reuben answered them, saying, Spake I not unto you, saying, Do not sin against the child; and ye would not hear? therefore, behold, also his blood is required.

Ge 9:5 And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man’s brother will I require the life of man.

It was known from the beginning.

God heard a great cry, from Soddom and Gomorrah

Ge 18:20 And the LORD said, Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous;
Ge 18:21 I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me; and if not, I will know.
Ge 19:13 For we will destroy this place, because the cry of them is waxen great before the face of the LORD; and the LORD hath sent us to destroy it.
23 And Abraham drew near, and said, Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked?

Save it for 50 righteous in it?

24 Peradventure there be fifty righteous within the city: wilt thou also destroy and not spare the place for the fifty righteous that are therein?
25 That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked: and that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from thee: Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?

Finally, Abraham gets it down to just ten

32 And he said, Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak yet but this once: Peradventure ten shall be found there. And he said, I will not destroy it for ten’s sake.

There were not even ten left in the city. Lot, his wife and two daughters escaped before God destoyed it.

So, who were so many for such a great crying to God? No righteous were left to cause such a great cry. The blood of all the righteous which had been slain were crying out from the ground unto God. Just like Able's blood did.

You may not care what scripture says, but you keep commenting on what people knew. Well, they knew God to avenge the blood of man from the very beginning. Therefore men began to call upon him right from the beginning.

Ge 4:26 And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the LORD.

We do not live in a vaccume before God. What we do to others can and will be heard by God. He is their God too. That is what men knew. They wrote about it.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Why should I look at your biological "facts" if you won’t look at mine.

You mean the "fact" where you think fetuses "breathe", or the one where "all organisms need oxygen"?

The latter is demonstrably false (the fact you laughed at and the link you refuse to look at).

The former is a technical definition (breathing versus respiration) that is only relevant because *your* holy book has passages describing newborns taking the breath of life. (And it clearly isn't talking about our modern understanding of oxygen transport in mammals.) It is this notion about the "breath of life" that Jewish scholars and theologians use to accept abortion (you remember abortion right, it is the actual topic of this thread). The need for oxygen is not a consideration by them.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Here is also what they knew

Do you know what I do with large quotes from "scripture"?

I skip them. End of message.

(Stuff I didn't read below for reference.)

Ge 9:6 Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.

Men, so jealous of their brother, wanted to kill him

Ge 37:22 And Reuben said unto them, Shed no blood, but cast him into this pit that is in the wilderness, and lay no hand upon him; that he might rid him out of their hands, to deliver him to his father again.

They sold him into slavery instead.

Years later they thought God had brought them to account for his blood

Ge 42:22 And Reuben answered them, saying, Spake I not unto you, saying, Do not sin against the child; and ye would not hear? therefore, behold, also his blood is required.

Ge 9:5 And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man’s brother will I require the life of man.

It was known from the beginning.

God heard a great cry, from Soddom and Gomorrah

Ge 18:20 And the LORD said, Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous;
Ge 18:21 I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me; and if not, I will know.
Ge 19:13 For we will destroy this place, because the cry of them is waxen great before the face of the LORD; and the LORD hath sent us to destroy it.
23 And Abraham drew near, and said, Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked?

Save it for 50 righteous in it?

24 Peradventure there be fifty righteous within the city: wilt thou also destroy and not spare the place for the fifty righteous that are therein?
25 That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked: and that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from thee: Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?

Finally, Abraham gets it down to just ten

32 And he said, Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak yet but this once: Peradventure ten shall be found there. And he said, I will not destroy it for ten’s sake.

There were not even ten left in the city. Lot, his wife and two daughters escaped before God destoyed it.

So, who were so many for such a great crying to God? No righteous were left to cause such a great cry. The blood of all the righteous which had been slain were crying out from the ground unto God. Just like Able's blood did.

You may not care what scripture says, but you keep commenting on what people knew. Well, they knew God to avenge the blood of man from the very beginning. Therefore men began to call upon him right from the beginning.

Ge 4:26 And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the LORD.

We do not live in a vaccume before God. What we do to others can and will be heard by God. He is their God too. That is what men knew. They wrote about it.

 

[Hans Blaster]

It is what makes mankind different than the rest of life. God did not make them a living soul. The soul of man is not the physical aspect of man.

Souls remain undetected.

 

[Belk]

In the general meaning of consent, which is permission, yes. "consent" by your definition is a legal term. Do people sign contracts before they have sex? I would think not.

No, it is not a legal definition it is the standard definition. To wit:

consent
verb
con·sent kən-ˈsent
consented; consenting; consents

intransitive verb
1
: to give assent or approval


If, by your claim above, a women went to a party and was given a drug and raped she would of consented to it because it was a possible outcome. This is nonsensical. Consent is not a passive byproduct of knowing possible consequences but a positive assent or approval. A person has to be approving of the outcome for it to be consent.

 

[Belk]

I said:

You said:

Thank you. It is not illogical to claim consent is required. If it was you would not keep trying to equate consequence with consent. A lack of contraception is no more consent then would be a lack of a seat belt if your driving. Consent is something that must be given, it is not something that is simply implied.

I am not making ANY argument regarding abortion. My entire point in this thread is that you are misstating what consent is.

"Bodily autonomy" refers to human rights.

Bodily autonomy refers to the ability to control what happens with our own body and that is reliant on a grounded view of what consent is and is not.

It's been discussed (and I've given plenty of factual evidence for), the unborn being a living, individual human being. So what gives one person the right of life over another? You will answer: "the baby is growing inside the woman's body". Who's fault is that?

I don't care. No matter how many times you try to drag me into this I am not going to argue abortion.

 

[Belk]

Have you ever spent time on self-reflection?

I don't understand your question. Can you elaborate?

 

[Hans Blaster]

No, it is not a legal definition it is the standard definition. To wit:

consent
verb
con·sent kən-ˈsent
consented; consenting; consents

intransitive verb
1
: to give assent or approval


If, by your claim above, a women went to a party and was given a drug and raped she would of consented to it because it was a possible outcome. This is nonsensical. Consent is not a passive byproduct of knowing possible consequences but a positive assent or approval. A person has to be approving of the outcome for it to be consent.

I will note here that in the interpretation of the law for application to specific cases (such as should a person be charged with rape) the normal, common definitions are used unless there is a specific legal definition use widely in legal work (there are many words that have legal usage different than common usage, the same also goes with other things like science which causes confusion over usage by non-specialists) or the definition or restrictions on the common definition will be given in the statute. In the "consent" case the law might note that "consent" is not valid if the consenting party is intoxicated, or that consent can be withdrawn requiring a cessation of the no longer consented activity.

 

[ralliann]

Here is also what they knew
Ge 9:6 Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.

Men, so jealous of their brother, wanted to kill him

Ge 37:22 And Reuben said unto them, Shed no blood, but cast him into this pit that is in the wilderness, and lay no hand upon him; that he might rid him out of their hands, to deliver him to his father again.

They sold him into slavery instead.

Years later they thought God had brought them to account for his blood

Ge 42:22 And Reuben answered them, saying, Spake I not unto you, saying, Do not sin against the child; and ye would not hear? therefore, behold, also his blood is required.

Ge 9:5 And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man’s brother will I require the life of man.

It was known from the beginning.

God heard a great cry, from Soddom and Gomorrah

Ge 18:20 And the LORD said, Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous;
Ge 18:21 I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me; and if not, I will know.
Ge 19:13 For we will destroy this place, because the cry of them is waxen great before the face of the LORD; and the LORD hath sent us to destroy it.
23 And Abraham drew near, and said, Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked?

Save it for 50 righteous in it?

24 Peradventure there be fifty righteous within the city: wilt thou also destroy and not spare the place for the fifty righteous that are therein?
25 That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked: and that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from thee: Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?

Finally, Abraham gets it down to just ten

32 And he said, Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak yet but this once: Peradventure ten shall be found there. And he said, I will not destroy it for ten’s sake.

There were not even ten left in the city. Lot, his wife and two daughters escaped before God destoyed it.

So, who were so many for such a great crying to God? No righteous were left to cause such a great cry. The blood of all the righteous which had been slain were crying out from the ground unto God. Just like Able's blood did.

You may not care what scripture says, but you keep commenting on what people knew. Well, they knew God to avenge the blood of man from the very beginning. Therefore men began to call upon him right from the beginning.

Ge 4:26 And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the LORD.

We do not live in a vaccume before God. What we do to others can and will be heard by God. He is their God too. That is what men knew. They wrote about it.

A way to avoid what you have brought up. Oh well. OKIE DOKIE.

 

[Kylie]

A sperm or an ovum are not a human because a human is an organism and neither sperm nor ovum are an organism.

So how do I determine if something is a human organism or not?

 

[YahuahSaves]

You mean the "fact" where you think fetuses "breathe", or the one where "all organisms need oxygen"?

The latter is demonstrably false (the fact you laughed at and the link you refuse to look at).

The former is a technical definition (breathing versus respiration) that is only relevant because *your* holy book has passages describing newborns taking the breath of life. (And it clearly isn't talking about our modern understanding of oxygen transport in mammals.) It is this notion about the "breath of life" that Jewish scholars and theologians use to accept abortion (you remember abortion right, it is the actual topic of this thread). The need for oxygen is not a consideration by them.

I disputed the other posters use of the "breath" of life. It refers to our soul, not respiration. Something that you may deem irrelevant because you can't measure it. The embryology has proven the unborn are living, individual human beings. If you dispute that, that's your prerogative, but you'd be going against facts.

 

[YahuahSaves]

No, it is not a legal definition it is the standard definition. To wit:

consent (v.)

"c. 1300, "agree, give assent; yield when one has the right, power, or will to oppose," from Old French consentir "agree; comply" (12c.) and directly from Latin consentire "agree, accord," literally "feel together," from assimilated form of com "with, together" (see con-) + sentire "to feel" (see sense (n.)).

"Feeling together," hence, "agreeing, giving permission," a sense evolution that apparently took place in French before the word reached English." Source

By that definition, the consent given to have unprotected sex is a free will choice to engage in risky behaviour, regardless of the outcome. I'm not talking about your analogy, I'm talking about 2 consenting adults. this is the group of people that have the highest amount of abortions according to the statistics.

 

[YahuahSaves]

A lack of contraception is no more consent then would be a lack of a seat belt if your driving.

Are you kidding? What happens to people if they or their passengers aren't wearing a seatbelt in the event of an accident? 》illogical

Bodily autonomy refers to the ability to control what happens with our own body and that is reliant on a grounded view of what consent is and is not.

Bodily autonomy is a term coined by the "human rights" movement. There are separate dictionary definitions for both those words.

I am not making ANY argument regarding abortion.

Really?

I don't care. No matter how many times you try to drag me into this I am not going to argue abortion.

How have I "dragged you into this"? You're on a thread about abortion, arguing for abortion. Are you retracting all of your previous posts now?

 

[YahuahSaves]

I don't understand your question. Can you elaborate?

self-reflection
noun

Self-examination; introspection.

 

[Kylie]

Are you kidding? What happens to people if they or their passengers aren't wearing a seatbelt in the event of an accident? 》illogical


Bodily autonomy is a term coined by the "human rights" movement. There are separate dictionary definitions for both those words.


Really?

How have I "dragged you into this"? You're on a thread about abortion, arguing for abortion. Are you retracting all of your previous posts now?

I've gone back through the conversation you and Belk have been having, and he's been talking about consent pretty consistently. And I haven't seen him say anything about abortion.

 

[YahuahSaves]

And I haven't seen him say anything about abortion.

He's on a thread arguing for abortion.

If you go back to where the conversation on consent started, here is the link:

Consequence and consent are two completely separate things. For one consent can be revoked at any time.

He is in agreement with the poster who @coffee4u was responding to. Who said quote: "Cause and effect are not the issue. Permission is the issue, which can't be granted to "someone" who does not exist."

"This does not address your claim that permission was granted to the unborn before the unborn was conceived."
Cause and effect deals exactly with the issue at hand. If you know what causes something and do it anyway you are either:
1. A fool 2. Insane 3. An addict or 4. And most commonly, completely selfish.