The Proudest Hour of the Prolife Movement.

[SirJosephPorter]

I oppose abortion because it it almost 100% preventable.

Really? Then do you also oppose treating smokers for lung cancer? That is also 100% preventable. So just as you would like to ban abortion, would you also like to pass a law prohibiting smoker’s from being treated for lung cancer, emphysema etc.(or at least ascertain that they were not caused by smoking, only then they can be treated)? If not, why not? These conditions also are 100% preventable.

I oppose abortion because the "blob" the butcher removes from the womb is a future human being,

So is the sperm in man’s seminal fluid (it is a future human being). Do you also want to ban masturbation and contraception?

 

[Tonington]

I agree Tonington. But this is where the ‘sanctity of life’ argument leads. Just as preventing a pregnancy is not killing a human being, same way destroying an embryo (by abortion, miscarriage or whatever) is not killing a human being.

Preventing a pregnancy is not killing a human, because there is no human to kill. Sperm and egg never joined.

An embryo, is a human. It has the full chromosome number. It is metabolically active. It is a human. Just because it doesn't look like an adult doesn't mean it isn't a human.

 

[Machjo]

No proof, Machjo, just my opinion. Hypocrisy comes naturally to many conservatives. There are so many examples in the public life. If leaders are like that, why would the followers be any different?

Only to conservatives?

 

[YukonJack]

"Really? Then do you also oppose treating smokers for lung cancer? That is also 100% preventable. So just as you would like to ban abortion, would you also like to pass a law prohibiting smoker’s from being treated for lung cancer, emphysema etc.(or at least ascertain that they were not caused by smoking, only then they can be treated)? If not, why not? These conditions also are 100% preventable."

Back to your favourite pastime, SirJosephPorter, comparing apples to oranges.

Lung cancer is a disease, and it is definitely NOT 100% preventable. Think of the waiters in smoking bars. Pregnancy definitely NOT a disease and it is caused by an act that IS almost 100% preventable.

Also, remember that nobody forces anyone to smoke. Nobody prevents anyone from quitting the habit. I did it after 40 years. Cold Turkey.

Nobody forces sex on anyone, resulting in pregnancy, either.

Now, tell me when did I ever promote banning abortion?

 

[Niflmir]

I oppose abortion because it it almost 100% preventable. I oppose abortion because the "blob" the butcher removes from the womb is a future human being, that was never given a chance. Unlike the abortionists.

This same argument implies any form of birth control is immoral because those sperm and ova were future humans, which were not given the chance. This absurd conclusion leads one to throw away the idea that there is any moral value to the future possibility of human life.

Trichinosis is 100% preventable, not even almost, it is 100% preventable. Maybe it should be illegal to take antibiotics to kill it off. Thus I must conclude that the preventability of something does not make it necessary to bear the side effects.

Your arguments are absurdly weak.

 

[YukonJack]

"An embryo, is a human. It has the full chromosome number. It is metabolically active. It is a human. Just because it doesn't look like an adult doesn't mean it isn't a human."

Tonnington, I know we disagreed in the past on other issues, but on this, I am with you 100%, and could not have said it better.

Only a left-wing baby-killing protagonist would say otherwise.

 

[Niflmir]

"An embryo, is a human. It has the full chromosome number. It is metabolically active. It is a human. Just because it doesn't look like an adult doesn't mean it isn't a human."

Tonnington, I know we disagreed in the past on other issues, but on this, I am with you 100%, and could not have said it better.

Only a left-wing baby-killing protagonist would say otherwise.

The cells I spit into the sink with my toothpaste fulfill these requirements. As do the cells flushed down the toilet attached to my excrement. Plucking my eyebrows kills many such cells. All of these cells are human too.

That in no way gives them the right to attach themselves to someone and start sucking nutrients out of them.

 

[JLM]

""An embryo, is a human. It has the full chromosome number. It is metabolically active. It is a human. Just because it doesn't look like an adult doesn't mean it isn't a human."" To give the devil his due, he's right on this one. I'm proud of you Y.J.

 

[talloola]

I am OK with early abortions, as I am OK with birth control measures.

One can't really favour birth control, then be against early abortion.
The sperm and egg are both very much alive, and preventing a pregnancy
is killing both, and preventing the life of a newborn.

 

[Colpy]

Humans aren't broadcast spawners. If you think about this absurd notion, a successful pregnancy involves killing the remaining potential humans...

Indeed Tonington, I agree with you. But the argument can be made from prolife point of view. A large number of fetuses are destroyed by miscarriage. But prolifers tolerate that as being God’s will. They don’t want humans to kill the babies; it is OK for God to kill the babies.

By this logic, sure successful pregnancy kills remaining potential humans, but that is God’s will and so is permissible (just as miscarriages are permissible as God’s will). However, just as it is not permissible to kill a baby by abortion, same way it should not be permissible to kill human beings by masturbation or by contraception.

This really illustrates the absurdity of prolife argument.

By your logic we should be able to murder as many people as we want because some will die of the flu.

Now that is nonsense.

 

[Tonington]

The cells I spit into the sink with my toothpaste fulfill these requirements. As do the cells flushed down the toilet attached to my excrement. Plucking my eyebrows kills many such cells. All of these cells are human too.

Except those cells don't have all three germ layers

They aren't forming a digestive tract, directing cell growth towards a human body plan. They are developing towards their germ layer specific, cell type specific, or tissue type specific plan.

An embryo is an entire human entity, while a single epithelial cell is just that.

 

[lone wolf]

""An embryo, is a human. It has the full chromosome number. It is metabolically active. It is a human. Just because it doesn't look like an adult doesn't mean it isn't a human."" To give the devil his due, he's right on this one. I'm proud of you Y.J.

If YJ would learn how to quote you'd realize those are Tonnington's words

 

[johnnyhangover]

An embryo, is a human. It has the full chromosome number. It is metabolically active. It is a human. Just because it doesn't look like an adult doesn't mean it isn't a human.

While I agree with this statement, all it proves is that sometimes it's ok to kill a human.

 

[Tonington]

While I agree with this statement, all it proves is that sometimes it's ok to kill a human.

Yup. Humans do this all over the world. Criminals, soldiers, homosexuals, raped women and babies. And that's just the lawful killing...

 

[YukonJack]

"If YJ would learn how to quote you'd realize those are Tonnington's words"

lone wolf, if you read my post #266, you willl see that I gave credit to Tonnington.

 

[Niflmir]

Except those cells don't have all three germ layers

They aren't forming a digestive tract, directing cell growth towards a human body plan. They are developing towards their germ layer specific, cell type specific, or tissue type specific plan.

An embryo is an entire human entity, while a single epithelial cell is just that.

While I agree with this statement, all it proves is that sometimes it's ok to kill a human.

Just because cells are human cells does not mean that the collection of cells is a human. As I have pointed out with the cells spit into the sink.

Just because, if allowed to attach to the endometrium and if successful in said attaching, the cells would soon develop human characteristics (if not miscarried) does not make it a human either. But these points are irrelevant.

The point is that a woman has the right to not be a host to a parasitic entity. If it were possible to transplant the embryo, this wouldn't even be an issue since nothing would die which is the only argument in the anti-abortion camp.

So up until the embryo dies nobody complains. We don't have said technology but the morality of the choice can not depend on the technology, the problem is our inability to keep the embryo alive without the original host not the original host's decision not to be a host.

The same is true with certain siamese twins. If they do operate one will likely die but there is no crime in separating them. If one dies it is a tragedy of science's failure, not a crime of the choice to separate them.

 

[lone wolf]

"If YJ would learn how to quote you'd realize those are Tonnington's words"

lone wolf, if you read my post #266, you willl see that I gave credit to Tonnington.

Obviously it wasn't clear. Bottom right corner of the post is a "Quote this" feature. It eliminates confusion (unless one is prone to editing) and properly credits the author.

 

[TenPenny]

I oppose abortion because it it almost 100% preventable. I oppose abortion because the "blob" the butcher removes from the womb is a future human being, that was never given a chance. Unlike the abortionists.

So how do you plan to deal with miscarriages?

 

[YukonJack]

lone wolf, when you use that feature, you are liable to attribute quotes to the wrong person. Therefore, I never use it. I preface my quotes and ALWAYS enclose words of others in double quotes.

 

[YukonJack]

TenPenny challenged me thus:

"So how do you plan to deal with miscarriages?"

A miscarriage in unplanned. It is totally natural, unlike an abortion.

But that is just my opinion, I may be wrong.