Human foetus feels no pain before 24 weeks

[lone wolf]

So ... uh ... what time do the Academy Awards come on? This ain't about abortion any more is it?

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Well, if you don't want to get pregnant, don't be promiscuous.

And how is that any of your business, YJ (or mine, for that matter)? It is a free country, if somebody wants to be promiscuous, he or she will. how does it concern anybody else?

And if a woman is promiscuous and get pregnant, again, how is that any of your business? And if she decides to get an abortion, how does that concern you (apart from your religious belief that abortion is murder)?

 

[JLM]

And how is that any of your business, YJ (or mine, for that matter)? It is a free country, if somebody wants to be promiscuous, he or she will. how does it concern anybody else?

And if a woman is promiscuous and get pregnant, again, how is that any of your business? And if she decides to get an abortion, how does that concern you (apart from your religious belief that abortion is murder)?

You were doing well, until you started the second paragraph. :lol::lol::lol:

 

[TenPenny]

Yes, I forgot the morality police feel that any 'promiscuous' woman is their business.
Whatever 'promiscuous' means. Typically, it is a way to insult women, while letting promiscuous men get off scott free (pun intended).

 

[Cliffy]

Yes, I forgot the morality police feel that any 'promiscuous' woman is their business.
Whatever 'promiscuous' means. Typically, it is a way to insult women, while letting promiscuous men get off scott free (pun intended).

Yup! The ol' double standard. It's been around long before I was a kid. People who spend time judging the actions of others are just avoiding dealing with their own crap. They only believe in freedom when it comes to their own. Everybody else should be subject to whatever beliefs they have (but usually too lazy to practice).

 

[JLM]

Yup! The ol' double standard. It's been around long before I was a kid. People who spend time judging the actions of others are just avoiding dealing with their own crap. They only believe in freedom when it comes to their own. Everybody else should be subject to whatever beliefs they have (but usually too lazy to practice).

I think the "double standard" has been wired into us genetically and hormonally and doubt very much if it is something society has much control over. :smile:

 

[SirJosephPorter]

You were doing well, until you started the second paragraph. :lol::lol::lol:

Doesn't concern me whether you think I am doing well. In fact, I would start wondering about my views if you did think that I am doing well, that would give me a problem.

Yup! The ol' double standard. It's been around long before I was a kid. People who spend time judging the actions of others are just avoiding dealing with their own crap. They only believe in freedom when it comes to their own. Everybody else should be subject to whatever beliefs they have (but usually too lazy to practice).

That is called hypocrisy, conservatives have mastered the art to a perfection.

 

[JLM]

Doesn't concern me whether you think I am doing well. In fact, I would start wondering about my views if you did think that I am doing well, that would give me a problem.

That's true to form, typical of your attitude and arrogance. :smile:

 

[YukonJack]

SirJosephPorter, if being promiscous, getting pregnat and bailing the offender out is on my dime, as a taxpayer, it is definitely my business.

If there was government provided funding as readily avilable for prostate testing (male affliction, not preventable) as it is for abortion, (female condition, TOTALLY preventable) perhaps I would modify my stand.

 

[JLM]

SirJosephPorter, if being promiscous, getting pregnat and bailing the offender out is on my dime, as a taxpayer, it is definitely my business.

If there was government provided funding as readily avilable for prostate testing (male affliction, not preventable) as it is for abortion, (female condition, TOTALLY preventable) perhaps I would modify my stand.

Good point that I totally agree with. :smile:

 

[Tonington]

So, should it be my business if other policy holders of the same insurance that I have use their insurance? That's all our government funded health care system is. It's the same principle as insurance. Many people pool their resources to be used when they need it. They are putting money into it (through taxes) so it's really not your business at all what they do with their portion. Unless you want to dictate to everyone what they can do, and what services they can use. I'm not personally interested in telling you what to do...

How many people smoke, drink, eat ridiculous amounts of sugar and fat, and take other known health risks? Should we be telling them what to do as well?

Poppycock.

 

[TenPenny]

SirJosephPorter, if being promiscous, getting pregnat and bailing the offender out is on my dime, as a taxpayer, it is definitely my business.

If there was government provided funding as readily avilable for prostate testing (male affliction, not preventable) as it is for abortion, (female condition, TOTALLY preventable) perhaps I would modify my stand.

That makes no sense whatsoever.

First off, your reasoning boils down to the idea that 'you can't have something unless I have something', which is selfish and idiotic.

Second, what prostate testing is not government funded?

 

[YukonJack]

"First off, your reasoning boils down to the idea that 'you can't have something unless I have something', which is selfish and idiotic."

So, are all the arguments unions have based on that very same principle selfish and idiotic?

Are all the Canadian laws of equalization between provinces, again, based on the very same principle, selfish and idiotic?

I had to pay $25.00 for my PSA test, out of my own pocket, while all some bitch who laid down once, has to do is lay down once again, and get her irresponsibility fixed up at my expense.

 

[JLM]

So, should it be my business if other policy holders of the same insurance that I have use their insurance? That's all our government funded health care system is. It's the same principle as insurance. Many people pool their resources to be used when they need it. They are putting money into it (through taxes) so it's really not your business at all what they do with their portion. Unless you want to dictate to everyone what they can do, and what services they can use. I'm not personally interested in telling you what to do...

How many people smoke, drink, eat ridiculous amounts of sugar and fat, and take other known health risks? Should we be telling them what to do as well?

Poppycock.

I can't quite agree with that, there is a slight difference- with most insurance policies premiums are set according to risk. As a taxpayer I do object to frivolent use of tax payers money same as do to those "Einsteins" that torched four police cars in Toronto. Analogies are good but they have to be appropriate. :smile:

 

[lone wolf]

that makes no sense whatsoever.

First off, your reasoning boils down to the idea that 'you can't have something unless i have something', which is selfish and idiotic.

Second, what prostate testing is not government funded?

PSA.... The most accurate one.

 

[Tonington]

I can't quite agree with that, there is a slight difference- with most insurance policies premiums are set according to risk. As a taxpayer I do object to frivolent use of tax payers money same as do to those "Einsteins" that torched four police cars in Toronto. Analogies are good but they have to be appropriate. :smile:

How is this inappropriate? The function is the same: users put money in, and take it out when they need to. Having more users contributing spreads the risk, and removes the financial burden of big payouts for procedures.

The only difference is as you said, some users pay more because of their risk. So what? Everyone is still paying in, and they should still expect to have coverage when they need it, and what and when they need is none of your business.

 

[L Gilbert]

Most of them are religious and most of them are in it to promote their religion. Their religion (or rather, their interpretation of their religion, their are plenty of Christians who don't have any problem with abortion) tells them that their God forbids abortion, so they are against abortion.

I would think most atheists are against senseless abortion. But I guess you aren't like most atheists. lol

As to Atheists, no doubt there are some who are prolife, but they are an exception. In general, very few Atheists are anti-abortion. In USA, the states where Fundamentalists have the most influenced are also strongest opponents fo abortion.

Why not stick to your own opinions and quit presuming you can speak for other people. You don't speak for me or most other atheists. I have discussed the issue of abortion with quite a few other atheists and extremely few are anti-life atheists like you and prefer abortions to be left out of the courts and people have good reason for doing abortions.

And I am full of it?

Usually.

And exactly what issue am I fudging, Avro? You have decided unilaterally what is a murder and what isn't. Do you expect the society to adopt your definition, lock, stock and barrel?

Or yours?

Quite so, I think that is how most prochoice people feel. If I become convinced that abortion is murder, I will be against abortion as well. But ‘abortion is murder’ is a religious view, not a scientific, biological or medical one. There is no evidence in support of the supposition that human life begins at conception.

There's loads of scientific evidence supporting the fact that human life begins within hours of conception, though.

Those of us who oppose abortion were told: If you don't like abortion, don't have one.

Well, if you don't want to get pregnant, don't be promiscuous.

So any woman that likes sex but doesn't want to have a child is promiscuous? You either haven't a clue what "promiscuous" means or else you have the same puritanical, anally retentive view of sex that coldstream does.

 

[gerryh]

Those of us who oppose abortion were told: If you don't like abortion, don't have one.

Well, if you don't want to get pregnant, don't be promiscuous.

Let me adjust YJ's response a tad.

If you don't want to get pregnant, then abstain. If you don't want to take responsibility for your actions, then abstain.

By having sex, you are acknowledging the possibility of getting pregnant and as such should be prepared for that possibility and be prepared to take reponsibility for the consequences of your actions. If you are not, then keep the dimes between your legs or your pecker in your pants.

 

[TenPenny]

PSA.... The most accurate one.

Oh, you guys must be behind the times.

10 out of 13 jurisdictions in Canada cover PSA tests, as far as I know, it's been covered here in NB for years.

 

[L Gilbert]

Quite so, I agree.

That is a religious view, not a scientific view. Scientific view is that there is no beginning or end to life, it is a continuum. Thus sperm and egg are very much alive before conception, life very much exists before conception.

So every time someone pins you down about individual life you squirm and start spewing your opinion about life in general. Ridiculous.
Anyway, sure sperm are alive before conception. Are they human life? No. Can they reproduce? No. They are only a single cell organism that have a very short life span and are manufactured and given life in testes. Do you get your medical facts from Reader's Digest? National Enquirer? Mad Magazine?

It is quite possible. And as we know more and more about it, it may very well be that the limits to abortion will be pushed further and further back. In the limit, suppose technology advances so much that the fetus can be removed at conception and incubated in a Petri dish to a baby. Then it would be perfectly OK to ban abortion in my view, provided government is willing to pay all the costs of incubating the baby and for its upbringing.

There's no sensible reason for banning abortions. Introducing a variety of "if"s does nothing is simply fantasizing.

That is the standard question posed by prolifers

Is it? Have you evidence supporting your claim?

and that is pure nonsense. If my mother had had an abortion, I would not be sitting in some corner, crying because my mother aborted me. I will never have existed; I will never have been born. And I would be OK with that, because I wouldn’t’ be aware of it anyway.

Ya think?