Should abortion be legal or illegal?

Bogan

Abortion is a bit like homosexuality or the death penalty.   .    A lot of religious people may seriously object to it, but too many non religious people see nothing wrong with it.   In a democracy, the majority rules.     If religious people do not believe in abortion, then don't have one.    The problem is when a minority of people try to push their own minority morality upon the majority.    We see this every day with climate protestors gleiing themselves to busy roadways, or vegans invading steak restaurants, or so called "transgender" people getting angry if ordinary people do not use whatever idiotic pronoun the sexually confused person prefers.         There appears to be a proportion of people within every kind of culture who not only take the morality of their culture to it's absurd limits, but who try and impose their belief system on others.    

just_sayin

Bogan said:

Abortion is a bit like homosexuality or the death penalty.   .    A lot of religious people may seriously object to it, but too many non religious people see nothing wrong with it.   In a democracy, the majority rules.     If religious people do not believe in abortion, then don't have one.    The problem is when a minority of people try to push their own minority morality upon the majority.    We see this every day with climate protestors gleiing themselves to busy roadways, or vegans invading steak restaurants, or so called "transgender" people getting angry if ordinary people do not use whatever idiotic pronoun the sexually confused person prefers.         There appears to be a proportion of people within every kind of culture who not only take the morality of their culture to it's absurd limits, but who try and impose their belief system on others.    

@Bogie,  Let me use your own logic to show you how irrational it is.  A lot of people object to sexually assaulting kids, but some people don't find it offensive.  According to you 'if you don't believe in pedophilia, don't have sex with kids'.  Such a position, fails to acknowledge that the one committing the act is not the one actually harmed by it.  The child is the victim - and that is why they need to be protected.  In the same way, the unborn child, can not speak for themselves, nor defend themselves.  When someone has an abortion, it is not their life that is taken from them - but it is the innocent child who loses her life.  It is her right to life that is violated.  We should protect rather than kill innocent human life.

Your line of reasoning would make things like pedophilia OK if we could just get 1 person more than 50% to say its OK.  If we took a poll you might be able to get more than 50% to say its OK to kill rich people and take all their money, because they are rich.  Laws and morals are there to protect those who can not protect themselves.   

Thank you for being useful.  I keep pointing out to May, factfinder, and Zeus that atheists have no objective moral basis for their views and this results in a system of might makes right - the strongest impose their morality upon the weak.  Your argument made my point for me.  

RickeyHoltsclaw

@elijah44 ;  Abortion is murder. Abortion is infanticide. Abortion is immoral. Abortion is indicative of a morally and ethically and spiritually sick society.

 

Bogan

@just_sayin

Just-sayin  quote  Let me use your own logic to show you how irrational it is. 

Hahaha!    This will be good.    En guarde.

 

Just-sayin quote      A lot of people object to sexually assaulting kids, but some people don't find it offensive.  According to you 'if you don't believe in pedophilia, don't have sex with kids'.  Such a position, fails to acknowledge that the one committing the act is not the one actually harmed by it.  The child is the victim - and that is why they need to be protected. 

I could counter that one a dozen different ways.    All societies throughout history have realised that having sex with a very young female can damage her reproductive organs beyond repair, so I presume that every society throughout history has an age restriction on having sex with a young female?     But throughout history and even today, what makes a “child”, or what is the proper age for a young female to engage in sex,  is very much in dispute.      In Spain the Age of Consent is 13.     In much of eastern Europe it is 14.    In France it is 15.    In most of western Europe it is 16.  In one Australian state it was 17, but this has now been reduced to 16 to keep it’s laws in step with all other Australian states.    In the USA, it is a mind boggling 18.   Which, I think most people in the world would consider absolutely ridiculous.

 

Just-sayin quote     In the same way, the unborn child, can not speak for themselves, nor defend themselves. 

As a person who lived in a very poor community, I think that you do not understand how poor people think?      My own experience living in a block of housing commission flats, was that as a young man who went off to work every day, I was considered a good catch by the parents of under age girls who quite openly encouraged me to have a relationship with their under age daughters, in the hope that I would marry them.    Compared to the dole bludging “no hopers” (a very good Australian expression) who were sniffing around their girls, I was the pick of the crop.     And most of these parents could hardly complain about under age sex as most of the single female parents had gotten preggers (and were dumped by their boyfriends) at a very early age themselves.

 

Just-sayin quote   When someone has an abortion, it is not their life that is taken from them - but it is the innocent child who loses her life.  It is her right to life that is violated.  We should protect rather than kill innocent human life.

The majority of people do not agree with that premise.    And in a democracy, majority rules.    You can try and convince the majority that they are wrong, but claiming that your morality is just self evidently right, while their morality is self evidently wrong, is not going to work.      Morality usually works to sublimate individual rights or beliefs for the good of the community as a whole.

 

Just-sayin quote   Your line of reasoning would make things like pedophilia OK if we could just get 1 person more than 50% to say its OK.

51% and It sure does.     What constitutes “paedophilia” is subjective.    It has differed with time and place.     It was only 150 years ago that it was quite common in the western world for rich middle aged (or even old men) to marry very young females.      In Britain in 1720, parliament enacted a law making it illegal to for a man to marry a female under the age of 10.     In the1970’s, there were still elderly war widows in the US collecting war pensions from their deceased civil war husbands.    Your mistake, is to use an example of “self evident” good and evil, which you have always considered to be a moral absolute, but which just happens to be subjective.    

 

Just-sayin quote      If we took a poll you might be able to get more than 50% to say its OK to kill rich people and take all their money, because they are rich.  Laws and morals are there to protect those who can not protect themselves. 

 Then under the dictates of democracy, that is the correct thing to do.   Although such a 50-50 attitude could cause a civil war.     The majority may usually be considered to be right, but where very extreme policies are in disagreement, then society should be very careful in alienating such a large proportion of their population who may oppose their opinions.      Communities which are full of low IQ people can enact absolutely st-upid laws, take for example “Defund the Police.    Or, voting for Biden.      But such communities end up shooting themselves in the foot and end up ruefully admitting to their own st-upidity.      

 

 Just-sayin  Thank you for being useful. 

 A useful idi-ot?    Hahaha.    Stop it, just-sayin, your killing me!  

 

Just-sayin quote   I keep pointing out to May, factfinder, and Zeus that atheists have no objective moral basis for their views and this results in a system of might makes right - the strongest impose their morality upon the weak.  Your argument made my point for me.  

 While religious people thank that morality is carved in stone.    Which is why Islam is failing.    Its moral system based upon a male dominated warriors’ creed from the 6th century has no validity today.     What is worse, is that its inventor claimed that its morality was perfect and must never change.   Morality can never be carved on stone, or Christians would still be hanging witches.      What defines morality (provided that its implementation is not foisted upon the people from the top down) is a general consensus as to what constitutes correct behaviour by the individual, in order to propagate the continued peaceful co existence of the group. 

jack

elijah44 said:

Should abortion be legal or illegal?

Hello e,

Personally, I believe in freedom.  Consequently, a person should be free to do what they wish with their own body.  Abortion is terrible thing.  However, requiring a woman to carry their baby to term is a tad bit worse..

excon

elijah44

But what if the baby would be brought into a bad life, what if the mother was in poverty?

just_sayin

elijah44 said:

But what if the baby would be brought into a bad life, what if the mother was in poverty?

I think there is a simple test to see if this is a valid argument or not.  Let's say the kid is 2 years old and is being brought up in a bad life or poverty, would you kill her then for those reasons?  If not, then I suggest that those reasons are not sufficient reasons to kill an innocent  human life in the womb. 

Factfinder

jack said:

elijah44 said:

Should abortion be legal or illegal?

Hello e,

Personally, I believe in freedom.  Consequently, a person should be free to do what they wish with their own body.  Abortion is terrible thing.  However, requiring a woman to carry their baby to term is a tad bit worse..

excon

But does she have the rights over someone else's body? That's not quite so obvious. Yes, the fetial human is completely depended on the host mother, but it doesn't decide such things. The mother and father did, get it? There was the choice. Freedom was exercised. Understandably nothing is clear cut across the board and the mother's health deserves provisionary concern. But, I want to go to college in two weeks, or I want to party for a couple years, anything in between that's not a health concern; are they reasons to kill off spring?

Barnardot

@Bogan ;Abortion is a bit like homosexuality or the death penalty.

And it takes some one with half a brain to conflate 3 completely different issues.

There is nothing wrong with minority groups pushing their views since it is them who constantly get vilified and harrassed by others who think that minority views dont count. And in the case of abortion the tables have reversed. If you openly oppose abortion then your the out sider wiredo not them.

just_sayin

@Bogan
 A useful idi-ot?    Hahaha.    Stop it, just-sayin, your killing me!  

Bogie, you are honestly one of my favorites on the site.  Now, I never call you an idi-ot, to me you are just useful.  For example these statements of yours I find helpful to my argument:

But throughout history and even today, what makes a “child”, or what is the proper age for a young female to engage in sex,  is very much in dispute.      In Spain the Age of Consent is 13.     In much of eastern Europe it is 14.    In France it is 15.    In most of western Europe it is 16.  In one Australian state it was 17, but this has now been reduced to 16 to keep it’s laws in step with all other Australian states.    In the USA, it is a mind boggling 18.   Which, I think most people in the world would consider absolutely ridiculous.

51% and It sure does.     What constitutes “paedophilia” is subjective.

Then under the dictates of democracy, that is the correct thing to do. 

I think the sentiment of your opinion is classic atheist thought.  Might makes right.  If you have the numbers, you have the moral high ground under the atheist world view.  I believe that morals have an objective source, so even if everyone says pedophilia is good, its not.  I believe that some actions are evil, an atheist can't really say that.  At most they can say something is unpleasant to them, but since there is no objective good or evil, it would be wrong to call anything truly 'evil'.  Thanks again.  

My own experience living in a block of housing commission flats, was that as a young man who went off to work every day, I was considered a good catch by the parents of under age girls who quite openly encouraged me to have a relationship with their under age daughters, in the hope that I would marry them.    Compared to the dole bludging “no hopers” (a very good Australian expression) who were sniffing around their girls, I was the pick of the crop.     And most of these parents could hardly complain about under age sex as most of the single female parents had gotten preggers (and were dumped by their boyfriends) at a very early age themselves.

Bogie, I love how you took my comment about how we should protect those who are defenseless to telling about how you are killing it with the ladies who are getting knocked up at young ages.  

To conclude it is OK to kill an innocent unborn human life, someone has to dehumanize her.  They have to rationalize that she is somehow less than human and that her value is such that it is OK to kill her.  I believe that when weighing the harm to the progenitor and the harm to the child, that the harm to the child is significantly greater, because she loses her very life.  

Barnardot

@just_sayin ;When someone has an abortion, it is not their life that is taken from them

And there is no life at all taken from them. As much as any body wants to believe that a fetus before 12 weeks is a life there totally wrong in the eyes of society and in the eyes of the law. Both the law and society have made much more educated and considered decisions as to what constitutes a life and any one who says other wise is saying that for purely self-centered personal reasons.

Barnardot

@RickeyHoltsclaw ;Abortion is murder. Abortion is infanticide. Abortion is immoral. Abortion is indicative of a morally and ethically and spiritually sick society.

Thats your opinion and its totally wrong because the law and society have spoken and if you dont except that then thats your burden to carry.

Barnardot

@just_sayin ;Let's say the kid is 2 years old and is being brought up in a bad life or poverty, would you kill her then for those reasons?  If not, then I suggest that those reasons are not sufficient reasons to kill an innocent  human life in the womb. 

Well if your into hypatheticals then take a look at what Im about to bash you over the ears with.

John_C_87

@just_sayin
innocent  human life in the womb.

The life is presumed to be innocent there just so happens to be no united state made by the criminal accusation of murder between the mother and the life.

One of the findings in Roe Vs Wade describes the legal issue as a perpetual loss of innocence and invasion of privacy. The courts cannot charge the life with attempted murder, so the lives are to be forever presumed innocent.

Factfinder

Barnardot said:

@just_sayin ;When someone has an abortion, it is not their life that is taken from them

And there is no life at all taken from them. As much as any body wants to believe that a fetus before 12 weeks is a life there totally wrong in the eyes of society and in the eyes of the law. Both the law and society have made much more educated and considered decisions as to what constitutes a life and any one who says other wise is saying that for purely self-centered personal reasons.

The 'eyes of society' or the law have never been wrong? Logically explain this if you will When a human female and male conceive is the the resulting conception human dna or not? And if conception isn't the logical start of human life, what is? Time just doesn't seem to do it for me. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conception

Barnardot

@Factfinder ;The 'eyes of society' or the law have never been wrong?

Well your dangerously going down the nothing is 100% is right road here.Thats right. Nothing is 100% right but were talking about wacking a stick in the sand here. The debate has been done a zillion times over, the research has been done a zillion times over and the experts have weighed the evidence a zillion times over. I'm not going to poor over a zillion pages of evidence and expect to make a valued balanced decision and trying tore invent the wheel. Having some itching in the back your brain that it is all wrong isnt going to be very fruit full at all.in making a proper determination. Some times we need to all go with a definition in order to have a definitive reference point. It may not be perfect but nothing is perfect.

just_sayin

John_C_87 said:

@just_sayin
innocent  human life in the womb.

The life is presumed to be innocent there just so happens to be no united state made by the criminal accusation of murder between the mother and the life.

One of the findings in Roe Vs Wade describes the legal issue as a perpetual loss of innocence and invasion of privacy. The courts cannot charge the life with attempted murder, so the lives are to be forever presumed innocent.

John C, glad you are feeling better.  From reading your comment, I see you are smoking the 'herb' again.  You really should cut back.  just sayin

Factfinder

Barnardot said:

@Factfinder ;The 'eyes of society' or the law have never been wrong?

Well your dangerously going down the nothing is 100% is right road here.Thats right. Nothing is 100% right but were talking about wacking a stick in the sand here. The debate has been done a zillion times over, the research has been done a zillion times over and the experts have weighed the evidence a zillion times over. I'm not going to poor over a zillion pages of evidence and expect to make a valued balanced decision and trying tore invent the wheel. Having some itching in the back your brain that it is all wrong isnt going to be very fruit full at all.in making a proper determination. Some times we need to all go with a definition in order to have a definitive reference point. It may not be perfect but nothing is perfect.

Wrong is wrong regardless. Having some itching in the back of your brain saying it's right isn't fruitful either. That's said I'm perfectly willing to accept the law. Here in California I'm pretty sure it will remain legal. At the same time I do not believe people in California should dictate law to Idaho or Texas. If they don't want it, then who are we to say? In that respect the supreme courts decision was correct, I believe. 

elijah44

Should the baby even be considered a human at that point, because wouldn’t it just be an embryo?
Should abortion become a right everywhere, or does it violate the constitution?

just_sayin

elijah44 said:

Should the baby even be considered a human at that point, because wouldn’t it just be an embryo?
Should abortion become a right everywhere, or does it violate the constitution?

An embryo is a stage of human development, not a different life form.  Biologists' Consensus on 'When Life Begins' says

Overall, 95% of all biologists affirmed the biological view that a human's life begins at fertilization (5212 out of 5502). 

RickeyHoltsclaw

@elijah44 ; Life begins at conception...

Factfinder

elijah44 said:

Should the baby even be considered a human at that point, because wouldn’t it just be an embryo?
Should abortion become a right everywhere, or does it violate the constitution?

Just think logically. If a human male and a human female mate, what else could the life at conception be but human? Conception actually means the point life is conceived. you understand that, right?

John_C_87

@just_sayin

Any human life in a womb is by truth, whole truth, and nothing but truth presumed to be innocent.  No, I am not smoking Marijuana or anything else it is called.

just_sayin

John_C_87 said:

@just_sayin

Any human life in a womb is by truth, whole truth, and nothing but truth presumed to be innocent.  No, I am not smoking Marijuana or anything else it is called.

You doing the hard stuff, John?  Be careful, before you know it you will be so hooked you are working for foreign national companies, collecting paychecks off your daddy's name, just to pay for your cocaine habit which is so bad that your friends send you messages with images of sawdust in lines that makes you high and want to deny your daughter is your daughter cause you don't want to pay child support because it means less money for snorting.  Its a slippery slope.  Constitutionalist one day, hiding coke in the white house the next, .  

Factfinder

John_C_87 said:

@just_sayin

Any human life in a womb is by truth, whole truth, and nothing but truth presumed to be innocent.  No, I am not smoking Marijuana or anything else it is called.

And what may I ask if you had been smoking marijuana is the big deal? 

John_C_87

@elijah44

Should abortion become a right everywhere, or does it violate the constitution?

Abortion / pregnancy abortion is illegal as a name for a medical procedure or criminal law. 1) The "life" is a part of a group named under United States Constitution as "posterity" this has been well documented in established justice described this type of life as America's posterity. 2) Abortion is a right everywhere it is just a Miranda right not a United States Constitutional right, it is a criminal law imported and sold in American courts. The conflict is the one who is held by the Miranda read the right is not the life for that life is not subject to American law.

just_sayin

Factfinder said:

John_C_87 said:

@just_sayin

Any human life in a womb is by truth, whole truth, and nothing but truth presumed to be innocent.  No, I am not smoking Marijuana or anything else it is called.

And what may I ask if you had been smoking marijuana is the big deal? 

I'm just sayin that if you find yourself writing sentences like John C, you might want to open a window instead of disabling the fire alarm. 

Putin

Both.

John_C_87

@Factfinder

Just think. A woman creates an egg what else is that living egg going to become but human. This is well established practice in medical justice for the creation of a larger United State human posterity. The definition of conception has never had to stand up in a court of law with a signed affidavit as to be truth. Conception means the point life is conceived. You understand that, right? The logic is clearly understood, it does not make it truth life begins at the creation of egg by law of Nature. A male and female couple can copulate forever and unless there is an egg created or egg created is then placed by the women. The issue with the logic is the life is only documented by established justice recognized after the life is recognized post posterity by the State and Federal Government.

Agian, we are debating female specific amputation it is a part of a unratfide United Stats Consitutional Right yet written.

John_C_87

@Factfinder

And what may I ask if you had been smoking marijuana is the big deal? 
The illness I have has spread to my lungs among other places.

Factfinder

John_C_87 said:

@Factfinder

And what may I ask if you had been smoking marijuana is the big deal? 
The illness I have has spread to my lungs among other places.

Sorry to hear that, My wife passed away in 2020 because of copd. Wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy. Just don't see a good reason for the personal attacks against you.

Barnardot

@Factfinder ;Conception actually means the point life is conceived. you understand that, right?

I could conceive that if I chuck a heap of chopped vegetables and meat in a pot that it is going to be a stew. And I can’t really call it a stew until it’s cooked. Say my partner came in 9 minutes after I conceived the stew she’s going to say what s that. But then once I have plated up she will say oh wow stew. And if she comes in say 20 minutes after I concieve the stew then she’ll say oh wow we’re going to have stew. And then it would be fare for me to say that’s right so don’t you dear chuck it out.

But if she comes in before 12 minutes and says what s that crap in the pot I don’t want it then chucks it out then I can’t accuse her of chucking away a stew because all sh did was chuck a heap of diced vegetables and steak down the insinkerater.

Bogan

@just_sayin

Just-sayin quote   I think the sentiment of your opinion is classic atheist thought.  Might makes right.  If you have the numbers, you have the moral high ground under the atheist world view. 

 Actually, it is the democratic view.    In a democracy, even one which was originally based upon strong religious teachings, what is right and what is wrong is decided by the majority of the people.    Within western democracies, the majority of people just do not buy your “abortion is murder” argument.     That is why abortion is legal in every western country, and I am pretty sure that this even includes Italy and Spain.    You are flogging a horse that left the barn a few decades ago.   You may as well campaign for no divorce and no contraception again.   

 

Just-sayin quote      I believe that morals have an objective source,

So do the Muslims, which is why their civilisation has stagnated.      This was also a problem for the Catholics, until they too had to realise that their long held religious beliefs were holding back their development when compared to the Protestant world.      Today, countries like Spain and Italy may still be Catholic, but they may as well be Protestant because they have ignored the supposedly divinely ordained dictates of their Pope’s, and adopted more Protestant like values, attitudes, and behaviours.   

 

Just-sayin quote       so even if everyone says paedophilia is good, its not.    

Your problem is defining “paedophilia,” which means different things in different locations and in different time periods.      My first girlfriend told me she had willingly lost her virginity when she was “15 years, 11 months, 3 weeks, 6 days, and 23 and a half hours old.”  Did that make her former boyfriend a paedophile?       True story.     In much of Africa and in Muslim countries, what the west would consider  “underaged” brides is still the norm.     In Islam, it is even justified through their religion.      The Koran declares “It is better for a girl to attain puberty in her husbands house, than in her fathers.”     So, there you go.    It must be okay, because Allah said it is okay.     

 

Just sayin quote  I believe that some actions are evil, an atheist can't really say that. 

Yes, we can.    What constitutes “good” or “evil” is a matter of conjecture among free people, and majority rules.      Sometimes we get it wrong, (Defund the Police) and when that happens, our whole society suffers.   So, we think again.  

        

Just-sayin quote      At most they can say something is unpleasant to them, but since there is no objective good or evil, it would be wrong to call anything truly 'evil'.  Thanks again.  

 “Evil” can be defined as extreme selfishness, with no regard for the consequences for the entire community.    People who are extremely selfish with no regard for the rest of society are usually universally despised.   People who either risk their lives, or who sacrifice their lives for the common good, are hailed as societies heroes.    We use those heroes as inspiration for our young.   Unfortunately, our present media inspired culture is depicting criminals as heroes who have lots of money, sexy girlfriends, nice cars, nice clothes, and an adventurous lifestyle.   Then we wonder why our kids want to be criminals?

 

Just-sayin   Bogie, I love how you took my comment about how we should protect those who are defenseless to telling about how you are killing it with the ladies who are getting knocked up at young ages.

 I used my own experiences as a teenager/young adult, to explain to you, that other people do not think like you.     I myself was shocked at the time when my neighbours were offering their under aged daughters to me as girlfriends.     It floored me.    I just could not understand it?     It seemed to me to be a violation of every principle of parents protecting their young daughters?       It took my first girlfriend to explain to me the facts of life.     Some parents desperately want their daughters to get out of the disadvantaged class by “marrying up” to a working class man.    Especially one who they deemed to be a decent bloke, who would treat their daughter well.    The fact that their daughters were underage did not alter that desperate need.     Anything was better than having their daughter knocked up by a low IQ, dole bludging, alcohol and drug abusing no hoper.   And there were plenty of them around.  

 

Just-sayin quote        To conclude it is OK to kill an innocent unborn human life, someone has to dehumanize her.  They have to rationalize that she is somehow less than human and that her value is such that it is OK to kill her.  I believe that when weighing the harm to the progenitor and the harm to the child, that the harm to the child is significantly greater, because she loses her very life.  

 Nice little rationalisation, but the majority of people in the western world just do not buy it.     Especially, if their daughter gets knocked up by a dole bludging no hoper.     The general consensus is, that every child should be wanted.     Western society already has too many dysfunctional kids from single parent households to want any more.     

John_C_87

@Factfinder

My Condolences Factfinder.

just_sayin

Factfinder said:

John_C_87 said:

@Factfinder

And what may I ask if you had been smoking marijuana is the big deal? 
The illness I have has spread to my lungs among other places.

Sorry to hear that, My wife passed away in 2020 because of copd. Wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy. Just don't see a good reason for the personal attacks against you.

John C,  you got @Factfinder thinking I'm being mean to you.  He probably thinks you are mentally challenged (eccentric, yes,m but not mental) or that you are a foreigner and can't write well, when you and I know that you can speak and write better English than I can.  Anyway, hope you get to feeling better soon.  

jack

Argument Topic: Hmm.. According to Alabama, embrio's are now children. Who didn't see that coming?

Hello:

Du*de.  This is nuts..  There goes in vitro fertilisation.  Families wanting children are now outta luck.  Will condom's be next?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_vitro_fertilisation

excon

PS:  That would be "embryo"

MayCaesar

I think that if it got to the stage of you having to undergo abortion, then you have screwed up royally somewhere - but, by the same token, if you want to stop someone you have never met from undergoing abortion, then you have screwed up royally somewhere. It should be legal, but also a red flag. Kind of like someone who puts milk in the bowl before cereal: it is not like it should be illegal... but you really don't want to associate with someone like that, do you?

Barnardot

@MayCaesar ;but you really don't want to associate with someone like that, do you? 

I think that’s a good point you pointed out there only to the point though that does it really matter if some one poors the milk in first? And I would still associate with an anti abortion ist even if it just to help him see the would for the trees. Also I have a friend who is a real cheep skate and he always buys things by price and I just love it when the inevitable happens and I tell him I told you it was a heap of crap.

Factfinder

Barnardot said:

@Factfinder ;Conception actually means the point life is conceived. you understand that, right?

I could conceive that if I chuck a heap of chopped vegetables and meat in a pot that it is going to be a stew. And I can’t really call it a stew until it’s cooked. Say my partner came in 9 minutes after I conceived the stew she’s going to say what s that. But then once I have plated up she will say oh wow stew. And if she comes in say 20 minutes after I concieve the stew then she’ll say oh wow we’re going to have stew. And then it would be fare for me to say that’s right so don’t you dear chuck it out.

But if she comes in before 12 minutes and says what s that crap in the pot I don’t want it then chucks it out then I can’t accuse her of chucking away a stew because all sh did was chuck a heap of diced vegetables and steak down the insinkerater.

You first conceived the stew in your mind. Once you acted and brought the ingredients together it became the stew though not the appetizing image we usually form as if it were fully cooked. That's not the only flaw in your analogy. To conceive an idea mentally is not the same thing as fertilization conception. Human fertilizing agents ( male sperm) penetrating the human female egg equals human life, though not at its most appealing age. If someone wants an abortion they're going to get one, and who am I to stop them. Right? But who are they to tell me I must accept their spin on the facts?

MichaelElpers

@Factfinder

Barnardot will never provide a source or answer any questions regarding how the fetus as one of the developmental stages of a human being, a living organism is somehow not alive.
No matter how many questions or arguments you provide he will always point to law and societies view, even if law doesnt declare a fetus isnt alive.

He is not willing to engage any argumentation on this and his replies shows he has a complete mob mentality.  

John_C_87

@MichaelElpers

The issue is that science as a peer is to be used to determine when human life begins.

elijah44

@Factfinder, honestly the best way to prevent an unwanted child is a condom.

Factfinder

@elijah44

Abstinence is the best way to prevent pregnancies.

RickeyHoltsclaw

Barnardot said:

@RickeyHoltsclaw ;Abortion is murder. Abortion is infanticide. Abortion is immoral. Abortion is indicative of a morally and ethically and spiritually sick society.

Thats your opinion and its totally wrong because the law and society have spoken and if you dont except that then thats your burden to carry.

@Barnardot ; Society does not determine morality, our Creator does. Taking the life of a baby is murder and it is especially offensive to our Creator and will receive extreme prejudice in Hell.

MichaelElpers

@John_C_87 @Barnardot

Sure, most definetly agree science is used as a tool to determine what is alive.  So what does science say:

Pulled directly from google:

A cell is the smallest unit that is typically considered alive and is a fundamental unit of life. All living organisms are composed of cells, from just one (unicellular)to many trillions (multicellular).
So...
A fetus is a living organism composed of cells, specifically those designed to cultivate development of a human organism.

In Barnadots case he seems to struggle to understand that alive doesnt always equal value as having rights under law.   Certainly we can kill many things that alive that do not make us culpable of murder under law. Humans lose 5 billion skin cells per day.
Its just weird he cant accept reality that if cells are alive fetus is most definetly alive.

Barnardot

@MichaelElpers ;Its just weird he cant accept reality that if cells are alive fetus is most definetly alive.

I don't struggle with that. It simply doesnt make any sents thats all and has nothing to do with the argument. We are talking about human life and if you cant accept that most people accept when a fetus is a human life and unfortunately for you the jury of human life made its verdict ages ago and if you dont accept it then thats your problem. All Im saying is that you should have no right to turn your problem into a guilt trip that you lay on perfectly descent law abiding people.

Barnardot

@Factfinder ;@elijah44 Abstinence is the best way to prevent pregnancies.  honestly the best way to prevent an unwanted child is a condom.

I think that if you analize the hole situation then in the end you will find that the most common form of contraception in the world is giving her one in the rare.

John_C_87

@Barnardot

 The ruling in Roe Vs Wade made it clear and it was a court ruling, Abortion was found to be illegal as a personal invasion of privacy. Where is the United State of loss of privacy and how large is this state of the Union. In American and Texas Constitution the loss occurs when the women can be charged with a criminal act but it is not possible for the people of Texas to file charges against the posterity of our nation such a young age. Texas has never at any risk assumed the burden of emancipation of the egg, embryo, or fetus that originates as posterity by United States Constitutional Right.

In some forms of civil litigation there is a legal loophole allowing some dismissal of a trial before the courts when the person making the civil claim dies. Much like how criminal cases often can be dismissed when key witnesses die in criminal cases. Constitutionally in America this is not the argument with this imported criminal law file as grievance with the name abortion, from the State of Texas has been completed trial and the case ruled on, the findings should no long be overturned. In a simpler statement the supreme court does not possess the powers, by opinion to lower law found to be illegal into state Courts, civil, or criminal findings down to lower courts for appeal.

The Supreme court has found the law to be unconstitutional by loss of privacy. The loss of privacy cannot be in the establishment of criminal law against the mother, the creator of the egg for she already can be charged with a crime of some type of lethal force. However the egg, the embryo, and fetus have no law restricting them very young from use of otherwise criminal lethal force in this imported criminal law into America.

John_C_87

@MichaelElpers

A cell is the smallest unit that is typically considered alive and is a fundamental unit of life. All living organisms are composed of cells, from just one (unicellular)to many trillions (multicellular). So...A fetus is a living organism composed of cells, specifically those designed to cultivate development of a human organism.

This can be rephrased as: A cell is the smallest unit of measurment that is typically considered alive and is the largest United State held by science for life. All living organisms are comprosed of cells, from just one ( unicellular) to many trillions (mulltiplicellular) So a fetus is aliving organism composed of cell, posterity, specifically thse designed to cultivate development and death of human organisms.

In Barnadots case he seems to struggle to understand that alive doesnt always equal value as having rights under law.

Alive does not mean a living person or posterity can hold a United States Constitutional Right. A criminal law does not depend on the ability for it to be held by the living person or posterity. Something never made clear about the criminal law abortion to the public abstinence also is a type of abortion. Why doesn't the legal definition, medical definition, definition, Google, search or A.I.?

John_C_87

@RickeyHoltsclaw

 Life begins at conception...

Life does not begin at conception of the female egg however in the contexed of some religion they tell us it is the possibly location where some demonic possession of a humn souls occure, the birth of children conceived by angels who had been cast down from the heavens by GOD, or the anti-Christ may begin.