My Kidney Challenge II

[Kylie]

It would solve tons of problems in the current society.

But its not necessary when the one who is doing it just for a bit of fleshy pleasure understands that it naturally leads to pregnancy and that this is a risk he/she must reckon with.

Well, it's only an issue when women have sex with men. If we stopped doing that, it would solve the problem, yes?

 

[o_mlly]

What in the world are you talking about?

Really, you don't know the difference between a hysterectomy (removal of the uterus) and a direct abortion (removal of a child from the uterus)?

No it's not.

"Hey, person X, we are going to force you to use <YOUR BODY PART HERE> to keep another person alive, and we don't care if you don't like it!"

It's the same thing.

Sorry, no brass ring. Here's the parallel:

"Hey, person X, we are going to murder you to keep another person from enduring a pregnancy or to insure she get her medical degree or gets that "beemer" she's always wanted, and we don't care if you don't like it!"​

Ah yes, completely ignore the fact that people enjoy having sex.

Responsible sex, no problem. Irresponsible sex, problems. "Tubby" really enjoys his chocolate ice cream. Is it someone else's fault that "Tubby" weighs 20 stone and can't get out of bed?

And what about cases of rape?

There you go again.

The "don't have sex unless you're willing to be forced to go through a pregnancy" argument is disgusting.

No need to get emotional. No one forces another to do anything in this thread. Do society's laws against murder force the would be murderer to abstain?

 

[Hammster]

You can't honestly think that's a valid argument?

Not allowing your uterus to be used to have a pregnancy that you don't want is nothing like giving up a kidney to save the life of a child you DO want.

It’s a valid argument because I’m using your argument against you. The only way that it isn’t valid is if what is in the uterus isn’t a person.

 

[trophy33]

Well, it's only an issue when women have sex with men. If we stopped doing that, it would solve the problem, yes?

It would stopped pregnancies, unwanted ones included.

 

[Kylie]

Really, you don't know the difference between a hysterectomy (removal of the uterus) and a direct abortion (removal of a child from the uterus)?

Yes, I'm just trying to figure out why you've started talking about hysterectomies.

Sorry, no brass ring. Here's the parallel:

"Hey, person X, we are going to murder you to keep another person from enduring a pregnancy or to insure she get her medical degree or gets that "beemer" she's always wanted, and we don't care if you don't like it!"​

"Hey, we're going to let you die because the one person with the body part that can keep you alive doesn't want to let you use it."

If it's a person not wanting to donate a kidney, people accept it. If it's a pregnant woman, people cry foul. Why the difference?

Both have one person who is alive who is facing death if the other person doesn't agree to allow their body to be used.

Responsible sex, no problem. Irresponsible sex, problems.

Do you REALLY think that responsible sex means birth control never fails?

And let's not forget that some people believe birth control is just as bad as abortion.

And what about cases of rape? Should a ten year old girl raped by her uncle be forced to carry the child?

"Tubby" really enjoys his chocolate ice cream. Is it someone else's fault that "Tubby" weighs 20 stone and can't get out of bed?

Do actually think about what you post, or did you actually think this is a good argument?

There you go again.

You seem eager to pretend it doesn't happen.

No need to get emotional. No one forces another to do anything in this thread. Do society's laws against murder force the would be murderer to abstain?

I think you'll notice that murder victims aren't forcing the murderer to use their body to keep the victim alive.

 

[Kylie]

It’s a valid argument because I’m using your argument against you. The only way that it isn’t valid is if what is in the uterus isn’t a person.

Well, you either think it's a valid argument or it's not a valid argument.

If you think it is a valid argument, then I expect you're going to immediately donate as many organs as you can to help people who would die without them.

If you don't think it's a valid argument, then you shouldn't see it as an argument against abortion.

Take your pic.

 

[Kylie]

It would stopped pregnancies, unwanted ones included.

Maybe we can keep a supply of men somewhere, and when a woman wants to have a child, she can go and pick one and use his seed to produce a child.

 

[o_mlly]

Yes, I'm just trying to figure out why you've started talking about hysterectomies.

Uterus = kidney? I'm still trying to figure out why you try to compare a kidney to a kid.

"Hey, we're going to let you die because the one person with the body part that can keep you alive doesn't want to let you use it."

You do not recognize the difference between letting someone die and murdering someone.

If it's a person not wanting to donate a kidney, people accept it. If it's a pregnant woman, people cry foul. Why the difference?

? I have no problem with a pregnant woman not wanting to donate her kidney.

Both have one person who is alive who is facing death if the other person doesn't agree to allow their body to be used.

"Both have one person who is alive ..." Is that the second time in this thread that you've acknowledged the person hood of the preborn?

Again, the difference, as noted above, is that it is not always immoral to let a person die a natural death by withholding extraordinary care but it is always immoral to murder.

Do you REALLY think that responsible sex means birth control never fails?

Do you really think that using imperfect birth control appliances equates to responsible sex? Celibacy is the only perfect method of birth control.

And let's not forget that some people believe birth control is just as bad as abortion.

Please don't deflect. Let's stay on topic.

And what about cases of rape? Should a ten year old girl raped by her uncle be forced to carry the child?

There you go again.

Just 1% of women obtain an abortion because they became pregnant through rape, and less than 0.5% do so because of incest, according to the (pro abortion) Guttmacher Institute.​

I think you'll notice that murder victims aren't forcing the murderer to use their body to keep the victim alive.

Wanna try that one again? Whatever does that word salad mean?

Do actually think about what you post, or did you actually think this is a good argument?

I think about all my posts and, yes, that one is especially good.

 

[Hammster]

Well, you either think it's a valid argument or it's not a valid argument.

If you think it is a valid argument, then I expect you're going to immediately donate as many organs as you can to help people who would die without them.

If you don't think it's a valid argument, then you shouldn't see it as an argument against abortion.

Take your pic.

Now you are deflecting. If what is in your uterus is a person, and you are willing to kill it because you should be able to use your uterus when and how you see fit, then you would also be willing to not donate a kidney to your child for the same reason. If it’s not a person, then the OP is a moot point.

 

[Kylie]

Uterus = kidney? I'm still trying to figure out why you try to compare a kidney to a kid.

I'm not.

You didn't actually understand the analogy, did you?

You do not recognize the difference between letting someone die and murdering someone.

Both cases you are making a choice that results in the death of a person.

? I have no problem with a pregnant woman not wanting to donate her kidney.

Person does not want their kidney to maintain the life of another person - you have no problem.

Person does not want their uterus to maintain the life of another person - you cry foul.

"Both have one person who is alive ..." Is that the second time in this thread that you've acknowledged the person hood of the preborn?

Because my argument here - that forcing a woman to remain pregnant when she does not want to be - is denying her of her bodily autonomy.

Do you really think that using imperfect birth control appliances equates to responsible sex? Celibacy is the only perfect method of birth control.

HA!

I know many lesbians who would happy to tell you how they can have sex with zero chance of pregnancy.

There you go again.

Just 1% of women obtain an abortion because they became pregnant through rape, and less than 0.5% do so because of incest, according to the (pro abortion) Guttmacher Institute.​

Yeah, I've mostly tried to avoid talking about the reasons that a woman might want an abortion, because it doesn't matter. If a woman wants an abortion - for whatever reason - refusing it is denying her bodily autonomy.

Wanna try that one again? Whatever does that word salad mean?

It's quite clear.

I think about all my posts and, yes, that one is especially good.

No, it isn't.

Are you really comparing a person who has an eating disorder with a pregnant person?

 

[Kylie]

Now you are deflecting. If what is in your uterus is a person, and you are willing to kill it because you should be able to use your uterus when and how you see fit, then you would also be willing to not donate a kidney to your child for the same reason. If it’s not a person, then the OP is a moot point.

If I have a child who needs a kidney, then I decided I wanted that child. Why would I then decide I did not want that child?

 

[Hammster]

If I have a child who needs a kidney, then I decided I wanted that child. Why would I then decide I did not want that child?

I’m not saying that you would. I’m saying that if you are correct, you could easily not give a child a kidney as you could easily not provide your uterus. You’ve made no distinction between the two.

 

[Kylie]

I’m not saying that you would. I’m saying that if you are correct, you could easily not give a child a kidney as you could easily not provide your uterus. You’ve made no distinction between the two.

Yes I have made a distinction.

If I fall pregnant, carry the pregnancy to term, give birth, raise the child and then when they are 10 years old they need a kidney, I have already demonstrated several times over that I want this child in my life. This is not the case if I find that I am pregnant and choose to have an abortion.

 

[trophy33]

Maybe we can keep a supply of men somewhere, and when a woman wants to have a child, she can go and pick one and use his seed to produce a child.

We can speculate about various nonsense, but in the end we will end up with traditional family as the most functional system for a long-term working society.

 

[Kylie]

We can speculate about various nonsense, but in the end we will end up with traditional family as the most functional system for a long-term working society.

I won't speak on this any further in this thread (if you'd like to continue discussing it, please feel free to start a new thread on it and I'll join in), but the nuclear family - father as breadwinner, mother as a housewife, two kids - has not been viable for quite a while, and when we look at different cultures around the world, it's just one of many different family structures.

Why the Nuclear Family Ruined Us

The nuclear family has failed

The male breadwinner nuclear family is not the ‘traditional’ human family, and promotion of this myth may have adverse health consequences | Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

 

[trophy33]

I won't speak on this any further in this thread (if you'd like to continue discussing it, please feel free to start a new thread on it and I'll join in), but the nuclear family - father as breadwinner, mother as a housewife, two kids - has not been viable for quite a while, and when we look at different cultures around the world, it's just one of many different family structures.

Why the Nuclear Family Ruined Us

The nuclear family has failed

The male breadwinner nuclear family is not the ‘traditional’ human family, and promotion of this myth may have adverse health consequences | Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Well, you basically want to have the last word, be it as you wish. Its your thread.

 

[Kylie]

Well, you basically want to have the last word, be it as you wish. Its your thread.

No, I just don't want to derail this thread with an off-topic discussion.

 

[trophy33]

No, I just don't want to derail this thread with an off-topic discussion.

After you posted an attack on the nuclear family, you said you do not want to discuss that further... OK.

 

[o_mlly]

You didn't actually understand the analogy, did you?

No, I understood what you were trying to infer but your analogy is fatally flawed. No one is dying in an elective abortion.

Both cases you are making a choice that results in the death of a person.

Again, you recognize the preborn child as a person. Consult Sigmund on your repeated slip as it likely discloses your preconscious and/or subconscious true feelings on the matter.

However, you still will not acknowledge the categorical difference between killing another and letting someone die. Does the doctor who will not perform a heart transplant on a terminally ill senile 90 year old patient with heart disease commit murder? No.

Person does not want their kidney to maintain the life of another person - you have no problem.

Person does not want their uterus to maintain the life of another person [again you betray your true position] - you cry foul.

Cry foul? The emotive language does not help your case. Only an irresponsible woman would engage in sex without being willing to accept the possible consequence of pregnancy.

Because my argument here - that forcing a woman to remain pregnant when she does not want to be - is denying her of her bodily autonomy.

We have laws "forcing" women and men to not run around naked in the public square. Do those laws deny them their "bodily autonomy"? No.

I know many lesbians who would happy to tell you how they can have sex with zero chance of pregnancy.

I'm sure you do.

Are you really comparing a person who has an eating disorder with a pregnant person?

Are you really comparing a kidney to a preborn child?

 

[Kylie]

After you posted an attack on the nuclear family, you said you do not want to discuss that further... OK.

I'd hardly call it an attack.

And, as I said, I'm happy to discuss it with you further if you wish, but (as I also very clearly stated) such a discussion would be off topic for this thread, I said I wouldn't say anything further in this thread. I also very clearly said that I'd be happy to discuss it in a new thread, if you wanted to create one.

So don't try this strawman stuff on me, okay? I was very clear that I'm happy to discuss this topic in a more appropriate place.