Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 51 to 60 of 60
  1. #51
    Guess Who's Back?
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Post Count
    1,558
    It's not my opinion of the procedure that would change... it's my opinion of its legality. If the life of the embryo can be protected without the mother, then she should not have the choice to terminate it. Her body will not be violated by keeping the embryo alive in a lab.
    Apparently there are no moral absolutes in Spurminatorland.
    Seeing as it IS relative to different situations, it's pointless to define a certain point in the pregnancy, isn't it? The child's ability to survive on its own would have to be determined on a case-by-case basis... and I'll leave that to the doctors, not the partisans. It's not perfect, but it's the better option.
    It's not perfect? Several million abortions a year, and it's not perfect? How many unnecessary deaths have resulted from that "imperfection?"

    Please, tell me you don't oppose the death penalty on the basis it might result in innocents being put to death...that would be just too ironic.
    You are confusing "conception" with "pregnancy."
    No, pregnancy ensues from a conception caused by sexual intercourse. People have the choice to abstain -- except for the instance of rape, as I pointed out. Only rape resulting in conception is a "forced pregnancy."
    Forced pregnancy occurs when a woman is told that she must carry a child against her will for 9 months of her life and face all of the responsibilities and physical changes that come with pregnancy.
    When that person makes an informed decision to engage in consensual sexual intercourse -- a practice widely (if not universally) known to result in pregnancy -- it's not forced.

  2. #52
    Still Hates Small Ball Spurminator's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Post Count
    37,751
    Apparently there are no moral absolutes in Spurminatorland.
    Spurminatorland, like the United States of America, is not ruled by "Moral Law".

    It's not perfect? Several million abortions a year, and it's not perfect? How many unnecessary deaths have resulted from that "imperfection?"
    How is setting a hard timeline for termination any more perfect than, or even preferable to, allowing for the doctor's professional opinion?

    Please, tell me you don't oppose the death penalty on the basis it might result in innocents being put to death...that would be just too ironic.
    Not really. Besides, the Death Penalty argument involves one person's rights. The Abortion argument involves two.

    What's ironic is that you seem to be making that argument yourself... Outlaw all abortions because we risk the possibility of terminating a fetus that could have survived outside the womb. Is that not your argument?

    People have the choice to abstain -- except for the instance of rape, as I pointed out. Only rape resulting in conception is a "forced pregnancy." When that person makes an informed decision to engage in consensual sexual intercourse -- a practice widely (if not universally) known to result in pregnancy -- it's not forced.
    And if they choose not to abstain, and they conceive, they would be forced to keep the child in their womb until birth. Forced pregnancy.

    What you propose, in essence, is to punish women for having sex.

  3. #53
    e^(i*pi) + 1 = 0 MannyIsGod's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    57,943
    Spurminatorland, like the United States of America, is not ruled by "Moral Law".
    Genius.

  4. #54
    Guess Who's Back?
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Post Count
    1,558
    Spurminatorland, like the United States of America, is not ruled by "Moral Law".
    Moral absolutes are not equivalent to moral law. I was speaking of absolute right and wrong, not the ten commandments. I was commenting on your all to contemporary ability of moral relativism...where, if it's okay with everyone else, it's okay.

    Like I said, there are no moral absolutes in Spurminatorland.
    How is setting a hard timeline for termination any more perfect than, or even preferable to, allowing for the doctor's professional opinion?
    No one said it was. I prefer we not do it at all since we have no absolute way of knowing when a particular fetus is viable. I'd prefer we err on the side of life and not depend on the judgement of a doctor or a legislator or a judge.
    Not really. Besides, the Death Penalty argument involves one person's rights. The Abortion argument involves two.
    So, you admit there are two people involved in an abortion argument. At least that's a start.

    And, on that vein, you believe a woman's right to choose comfort supercedes the unborn child's right to life?
    What's ironic is that you seem to be making that argument yourself... Outlaw all abortions because we risk the possibility of terminating a fetus that could have survived outside the womb. Is that not your argument?
    No, outlaw abortion because, as Al Gore once said, it is arguably the taking of an innocent human life.
    And if they choose not to abstain, and they conceive, they would be forced to keep the child in their womb until birth. Forced pregnancy.
    If you choose to drink and drive and it results in a crash that kills 5 people, are you being forced to live with the results of your drinking and driving or are you suffering the consequences? It's semantics.

    Again, the only forced pregnancy is one that results from the act of rape...forced sex. All others are a choice made by the person engagin in the act.
    What you propose, in essence, is to punish women for having sex.
    No, I propose women be aware of the consequences of sex and be prepared to live with those consequences. Otherwise, don't have sex. Many people abstain...we do have free will.

  5. #55
    Still Hates Small Ball Spurminator's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Post Count
    37,751
    Moral absolutes are not equivalent to moral law. I was speaking of absolute right and wrong, not the ten commandments. I was commenting on your all to contemporary ability of moral relativism...where, if it's okay with everyone else, it's okay.

    Like I said, there are no moral absolutes in Spurminatorland.
    Since when is my position okay with everyone else?

    Not every issue has a cut-and-dry Moral Absolute. Particularly not Abortion, which is a losing situation either way you slice it. You have to choose the lesser of two Evils, and there's certainly no dominant view of which Evil that is.

    So, you admit there are two people involved in an abortion argument. At least that's a start.
    Absolutely. I've always maintained an anti-abortion stance based on Free Speech and Education to discourage abortions. I wouldn't want my wife or my daughter to have an abortion.

    But the ultimate decision, and the guilt that goes along with it, including whatever judgement will be made upon her by God, must be left to her. Not her father, her husband, or her government.

    And, on that vein, you believe a woman's right to choose comfort supercedes the unborn child's right to life?
    Even when you put it that way, yes.

    If you choose to drink and drive and it results in a crash that kills 5 people, are you being forced to live with the results of your drinking and driving or are you suffering the consequences? It's semantics.
    Drinking and driving is illegal. Sex is not. That's not semantics, it's a very clear cut difference.

    Again, the only forced pregnancy is one that results from the act of rape...forced sex. All others are a choice made by the person engagin in the act.
    Again, PREGNANCY is the act of carrying a child. Not the act of conceiving one.

    No, I propose women be aware of the consequences of sex and be prepared to live with those consequences. Otherwise, don't have sex. Many people abstain...we do have free will.
    They don't have to live with the consequence because they have the option of having an abortion. You propose taking that option away from them, thereby forcing them to continue to carry a child against their will because there are no other options. Therefore, you are punishing them for having sex.

  6. #56
    W4A1 143 43CK? Nbadan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Post Count
    32,408

  7. #57
    Keith Jackson mookie2001's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Post Count
    13,278
    Thanks for not staring at my adam’s apple.’

    ROFL

  8. #58
    Bad Kitty Gatita's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Post Count
    2,790
    Wow, what a waste of time reading that crap. I figured a 20-something wrote that after seeing one too many porns and playing with himself.
    "Yogurt cannon"....gimme a f*cking break!

  9. #59
    Veteran exstatic's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    45,483

  10. #60
    It's 11:46...and OU STILL sucks!!!!! jalbre6's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Post Count
    1,439
    And here I was thinking about an Ann Coulter watch when I opened this thread, and then to my amazement I get to read the " ed in the Ass" blog. That calls for another beer.

    You ers are the best. Damn that was funny.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •