The abortion issue is way too complex to summarize into banners or bumper stickers, regardless of what stance you take. If you want to use the fact that one side's placards don't make complete and compelling logical arguments, keep in mind that sword cuts equally both ways.
I would disagree. It can be summed up pretty neatly.
Actually my daughter is a bit more articulate than pro-abort rehtoric.
It's pro-choice. One can be against abortion personally and still be for the choice of others to make that ethical decision on their own.
But the real issue is can she really remain articulate when she's about to pee her pants because you won't let her into the bathroom with the naughty scribble?
I don't understand the complexity argument---I understand the female control aspect...which makes sense in a homicidal kinda way---but I don't understand what is "complex" with saving unwanted children.
Scientifically speaking, once you achive independent DNA/independent development, you have a human individual---whether you want to nurture him/her or not.
I would disagree. It can be summed up pretty neatly.
Pro-choice: George stay out of my Bush.
Anti-choice: Abortion is murder.
Those cover about 99% of the people involved.
Neither of those are compelling, logical arguments. The second is designed for more emotional impact, but that hardly means it makes a better case.
The first is a mildly clever phrasing of what's wanted in terms of policy. Obviously the full case as to why the desired policy (government staying out of reproductive rights) should be followed is not made.
The second is simply a statement of a professed belief. Obviously the case is not made why abortion should be considered murder, unless of course you believe in proof by vigorous assertion.
Neither of those are compelling, logical arguments. The second is designed for more emotional impact, but that hardly means it makes a better case.
The first is a mildly clever phrasing of what's wanted in terms of policy. Obviously the full case as to why the desired policy (government staying out of reproductive rights) should be followed is not made.
The second is simply a statement of a professed belief. Obviously the case is not made why abortion should be considered murder, unless of course you believe in proof by vigorous assertion.
Those arguments sum up what each side generally believes. The pro-choice side for the most part believes the decision should be left up to the woman as there are too many different ethical interpretations for one to dominate the rest. The anti-choice side firmly believes that abortion is murder and therefore should be entirely outlawed.
It's pro-choice. One can be against abortion personally and still be for the choice of others to make that ethical decision on their own.
But the real issue is can she really remain articulate when she's about to pee her pants because you won't let her into the bathroom with the naughty scribble?
[for the 2nd time:]
actually she said she was okay with it....and.....it was a 3-foot by 4-foot mural that detailed oral sex with a "massive cock".
For those who have to think about such things.........had I deliberatly shown my daughter a printed version off what was on that wall, CPS could have removed her from my home.
I don't understand the complexity argument---I understand the female control aspect...which makes sense in a homicidal kinda way---but I don't understand what is "complex" with saving unwanted children.
Scientifically speaking, once you achive independent DNA/independent development, you have a human individual---whether you want to nurture him/her or not.
Others would argue that a mass of cells without brainwaves is just a mass of cells.
actually she said she was okay with it....and.....it was a 3-foot by 4-foot mural that deatailed oral sex with a "massive cock".
For those who have to think about such things.........had I deliberatly shown my daughter a printed version off what was on that wall, CPS could have removed her from my home.
Not nice.
OH NO A COCK! If she's such a good little girl tell her to ignore the picture on the wall. And frankly I don't see what harm can come to a child from seeing a picture of a cock.
-Daddy, what's that?
-Sweety, it's just a picture of a man's private part. Some people think it's funny to draw them. You are better than that.
OH NO A COCK! If she's such a good little girl tell her to ignore the picture on the wall. And frankly I don't see what harm can come to a child from seeing a picture of a cock.
-Daddy, what's that?
-Sweety, it's just a picture of a man's private part. Some people think it's funny to draw them. You are better than that.
-OK Daddy. Thanks for letting me pee.
BR, you couldn't see the "massive cock"---it was in the other persons mouth.
-Sweety, it's just a picture of a man's private part. Some people think it's funny to draw them. You are better than that.
-OK Daddy. Thanks for letting me pee.
Sounds more like
-Daddy what's that?
-A woman chocking on a massive cock
-Why does she have a massive cock in her mouth
-I think it's more a reflection of mens sexual fantasies
-Men like to pretend that woman are choked to death by massive cocks
-Well no see it's sexual fantasy and you see men like to pretend about thing they want woman to do but it's all just imagination and they don't really want to choke women with massive cocks.
-Do you have a massive cock daddy?
-I have a regular size cock honey
-Do you choke mommy with it
-well there was that one time in the car when I hit the brakes but I learned my lesson and no I don't choke mommy with it.
-Do you pretend to choke mommy with it?
-No I don't.
But you know BR you are correct on your hypothetical discussion of massive cocks with a young kid. Maybe they should teach massive cocks in preschool?
Please don't pretend that science has any definitive answers here.
Quote:
once you achive independent DNA/independent development, you have a human individual---whether you want to nurture him/her or not.
And if a fertilized egg suddenly splits and a woman ends up giving birth to twins instead of a single baby, was that fertilized egg two individuals to start with or only one that became two?
It seems to me, scientifically speaking, there's no simple connection between merely have a full complement of human genes and the potential to grow into a "human individual", given that many fertilized eggs never even become one recognizable individual, and some eventually become two or more individuals.
Science can add something to the debate, but it hardly solves the social question of what exactly a "human individual" is, why we consider human individuals to have rights, what those rights are, which traits are or aren't important to having a protected status as a "human individual", etc.
....because BR, [for the 3rd, and final time] had I shown printed versions of this mural to my 7 year-old-daughter, CPS could have removed my daughter form my care.
You have carried your libertarian argument well passed relevancy.
Please don't pretend that science has any definitive answers here.
I don't see this---or BR's cancer cell argument (which is much weaker). The Zygote is programmed to develop into a human individual---with a unique DNA. That individual controls its own development---and does it as a parasite. The woman's body goes through significant change to support feeding and getting rid of the resultant waste over the months---but in the end, it is a choice to destroy a separate individual.
Comments
Originally posted by shetline
The pro-life sloganeering is any better?
The abortion issue is way too complex to summarize into banners or bumper stickers, regardless of what stance you take. If you want to use the fact that one side's placards don't make complete and compelling logical arguments, keep in mind that sword cuts equally both ways.
I would disagree. It can be summed up pretty neatly.
Pro-choice: George stay out of my Bush.
Anti-choice: Abortion is murder.
Those cover about 99% of the people involved.
Originally posted by dmz
Actually my daughter is a bit more articulate than pro-abort rehtoric.
It's pro-choice. One can be against abortion personally and still be for the choice of others to make that ethical decision on their own.
But the real issue is can she really remain articulate when she's about to pee her pants because you won't let her into the bathroom with the naughty scribble?
Originally posted by shetline
The pro-life sloganeering is any better?
The abortion issue is way too complex....
I don't understand the complexity argument---I understand the female control aspect...which makes sense in a homicidal kinda way---but I don't understand what is "complex" with saving unwanted children.
Scientifically speaking, once you achive independent DNA/independent development, you have a human individual---whether you want to nurture him/her or not.
Originally posted by BR
I would disagree. It can be summed up pretty neatly.
Pro-choice: George stay out of my Bush.
Anti-choice: Abortion is murder.
Those cover about 99% of the people involved.
Neither of those are compelling, logical arguments. The second is designed for more emotional impact, but that hardly means it makes a better case.
The first is a mildly clever phrasing of what's wanted in terms of policy. Obviously the full case as to why the desired policy (government staying out of reproductive rights) should be followed is not made.
The second is simply a statement of a professed belief. Obviously the case is not made why abortion should be considered murder, unless of course you believe in proof by vigorous assertion.
Originally posted by shetline
Neither of those are compelling, logical arguments. The second is designed for more emotional impact, but that hardly means it makes a better case.
The first is a mildly clever phrasing of what's wanted in terms of policy. Obviously the full case as to why the desired policy (government staying out of reproductive rights) should be followed is not made.
The second is simply a statement of a professed belief. Obviously the case is not made why abortion should be considered murder, unless of course you believe in proof by vigorous assertion.
Those arguments sum up what each side generally believes. The pro-choice side for the most part believes the decision should be left up to the woman as there are too many different ethical interpretations for one to dominate the rest. The anti-choice side firmly believes that abortion is murder and therefore should be entirely outlawed.
Originally posted by BR
It's pro-choice. One can be against abortion personally and still be for the choice of others to make that ethical decision on their own.
But the real issue is can she really remain articulate when she's about to pee her pants because you won't let her into the bathroom with the naughty scribble?
[for the 2nd time:]
actually she said she was okay with it....and.....it was a 3-foot by 4-foot mural that detailed oral sex with a "massive cock".
For those who have to think about such things.........had I deliberatly shown my daughter a printed version off what was on that wall, CPS could have removed her from my home.
Not nice.
Originally posted by dmz
I don't understand the complexity argument---I understand the female control aspect...which makes sense in a homicidal kinda way---but I don't understand what is "complex" with saving unwanted children.
Scientifically speaking, once you achive independent DNA/independent development, you have a human individual---whether you want to nurture him/her or not.
Others would argue that a mass of cells without brainwaves is just a mass of cells.
Originally posted by dmz
[for the 2nd time:]
actually she said she was okay with it....and.....it was a 3-foot by 4-foot mural that deatailed oral sex with a "massive cock".
For those who have to think about such things.........had I deliberatly shown my daughter a printed version off what was on that wall, CPS could have removed her from my home.
Not nice.
OH NO A COCK! If she's such a good little girl tell her to ignore the picture on the wall. And frankly I don't see what harm can come to a child from seeing a picture of a cock.
-Daddy, what's that?
-Sweety, it's just a picture of a man's private part. Some people think it's funny to draw them. You are better than that.
-OK Daddy. Thanks for letting me pee.
Originally posted by BR
Others would argue that a mass of cells without brainwaves is just a mass of cells.
Geeez Louise........... the "mass of cells" controls it's own development and has a complete human DNA fingerprint.
Originally posted by BR
OH NO A COCK! If she's such a good little girl tell her to ignore the picture on the wall. And frankly I don't see what harm can come to a child from seeing a picture of a cock.
-Daddy, what's that?
-Sweety, it's just a picture of a man's private part. Some people think it's funny to draw them. You are better than that.
-OK Daddy. Thanks for letting me pee.
BR, you couldn't see the "massive cock"---it was in the other persons mouth.
Originally posted by dmz
BR, you couldn't see the "massive cock"---it was in the other persons mouth.
So?
Originally posted by dmz
Geeez Louise........... the "mass of cells" controls it's own development and has a complete human DNA fingerprint.
So do cancer cells.
Originally posted by BR
...
-Daddy, what's that?
-Sweety, it's just a picture of a man's private part. Some people think it's funny to draw them. You are better than that.
-OK Daddy. Thanks for letting me pee.
Sounds more like
-Daddy what's that?
-A woman chocking on a massive cock
-Why does she have a massive cock in her mouth
-I think it's more a reflection of mens sexual fantasies
-Men like to pretend that woman are choked to death by massive cocks
-Well no see it's sexual fantasy and you see men like to pretend about thing they want woman to do but it's all just imagination and they don't really want to choke women with massive cocks.
-Do you have a massive cock daddy?
-I have a regular size cock honey
-Do you choke mommy with it
-well there was that one time in the car when I hit the brakes but I learned my lesson and no I don't choke mommy with it.
-Do you pretend to choke mommy with it?
-No I don't.
But you know BR you are correct on your hypothetical discussion of massive cocks with a young kid. Maybe they should teach massive cocks in preschool?
Originally posted by dmz
Scientifically speaking
Please don't pretend that science has any definitive answers here.
once you achive independent DNA/independent development, you have a human individual---whether you want to nurture him/her or not.
And if a fertilized egg suddenly splits and a woman ends up giving birth to twins instead of a single baby, was that fertilized egg two individuals to start with or only one that became two?
It seems to me, scientifically speaking, there's no simple connection between merely have a full complement of human genes and the potential to grow into a "human individual", given that many fertilized eggs never even become one recognizable individual, and some eventually become two or more individuals.
Science can add something to the debate, but it hardly solves the social question of what exactly a "human individual" is, why we consider human individuals to have rights, what those rights are, which traits are or aren't important to having a protected status as a "human individual", etc.
Rather than repeat myself, I'll just include a link to my last long diatribe on the subject.
Originally posted by BR
So?
....because BR, [for the 3rd, and final time] had I shown printed versions of this mural to my 7 year-old-daughter, CPS could have removed my daughter form my care.
You have carried your libertarian argument well passed relevancy.
Originally posted by shetline
Please don't pretend that science has any definitive answers here.
I don't see this---or BR's cancer cell argument (which is much weaker). The Zygote is programmed to develop into a human individual---with a unique DNA. That individual controls its own development---and does it as a parasite. The woman's body goes through significant change to support feeding and getting rid of the resultant waste over the months---but in the end, it is a choice to destroy a separate individual.
Originally posted by dmz
I don't see this
Then read the old thread I linked to so I don't have to repeat it all.
Originally posted by shetline
Then read the old thread I linked to so I don't have to repeat it all.
okay
--
Responsibility, that will also ask more of men, a lot more than they have had to pay in some cases.
--
You did not answer my question.
You said the "pro-abortion" argument was not about choice. I asked you what it was about, then.
Originally posted by BR
No but it sure seems like it's your time of the month with your voracity and (lack of) quality of posts of late.
Try a sense of humor. It's funny.
As for my posts, just because you disagree doesn't mean they lack quality. Short and to the point. Clarify later.