(September 30, 2015 at 10:50 pm)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote:

(September 30, 2015 at 10:49 pm)Losty Wrote: Sorry, my touché was mean to be me agreeing that yes men do have to deal with the consequences of sex because stds. Sorry should have written that out to make it more clear.

Except for the fact that women get HIV (and all other STDs) at the same rate men do, so it's irrelevant that men get them for the purposes of a discussion for who primarily  bears the burden of sexual consequences. They have to deal with the same shit men do and  the pregnancy issues.

I can't believe I'm having to explain this!

"so it's irrelevant that men get them for the purposes of a discussion for who primarily  bears the burden of sexual consequences"

What happened to the goal posts? I could of sworn they were there a second ago... oh there they are!
Now how did they get all the way over the horizon?

(September 30, 2015 at 4:16 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(September 30, 2015 at 3:56 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: CL, that's your definition of life.  Not the definition of life, and yours certainly isn't based on any scientific reasoning (brain activity, ability to feel pain, consciousness, etc).  So no, I don't have to think that aborting an early term fetus is 'killing a human', thank you very much.

In any case, bodily autonomy is paramount for me in this issue.  The rights of the woman to use her own body as she likes supersedes the rights of anyone else, even if we were to agree that a blastocyst had the rights of a human being.  You're not asking for equal human rights for an embryo, you're asking for special rights above those that we would give ANY human, from a toddler to the Pope.  No human in any situation can claim another's body to use as their own, and there's no reason we should give that 'special' right to a fetus either.

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=life+definition

life
līf/
noun

1. 1.
   the condition that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic matter, including the capacity for growth, reproduction, functional activity, and continual change preceding death.
   "the origins of life"
   synonyms:
   existence, being, living, animation; More
   [url=https://www.google.com/search?biw=1242&bih=585&q=define+creation&sa=X&ved=0CCMQ_SowAGoVChMI_cnqxcifyAIVyZeACh2XBAGv][/url]
   2.
   the existence of an individual human being or animal.
   

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/life

life
noun \ˈlīf\
: the ability to grow, change, etc., that separates plants and animals from things like water or rocks
: the period of time when a person is alive
: the experience of being alive

http://www.merriam-webster.com/medical/life

life
 noun\ˈlīf\

plural lives \ˈlīvz\ 
Medical Definition of LIFE
a :  the quality that distinguishes a vital and functional plant or animal from a dead body
b :  a state of living characterized by capacity for metabolism, growth, reaction to stimuli, and reproduction

By many of the definitions above, you can make the argument that cancer is "life" and chemotherapy is killing that life and should be banned.

(September 30, 2015 at 11:04 pm)lkingpinl Wrote:

(September 30, 2015 at 10:49 pm)Losty Wrote: Can you explain further because I don't see your point...

You said no person has a right to your body even if they need it to survive.  I agree, I can't force you to give me a kidney because I need one to live and you're a match.  My point was the fetus/baby did not make any conscious effort/request/demand to use your body.  Your actions created it.  That "person" is only using your body because you made it so.  That's a big difference.

Meh. That just takes us right back to the whole. She spread her legs so it serves her right argument. I'm sorry but I don't care if I had a fetus surgically implanted into my body, the second I decide I don't want it there then I should be allowed to have it removed.

I'm not just pro-choice personally. I think more people should abort. If you don't want to be a parent. Abort. If you're selfish. Abort. If you or your partner has a history of physical violence. Abort. We don't need any more unwanted children than we already have. Even 1 more is too many.

(September 30, 2015 at 11:07 pm)RaphielDrake Wrote:

(September 30, 2015 at 10:50 pm)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote: Except for the fact that women get HIV (and all other STDs) at the same rate men do, so it's irrelevant that men get them for the purposes of a discussion for who primarily  bears the burden of sexual consequences. They have to deal with the same shit men do and  the pregnancy issues.

I can't believe I'm having to explain this!

"so it's irrelevant that men get them for the purposes of a discussion for who primarily  bears the burden of sexual consequences"

What happened to the goal posts? I could of sworn they were there a second ago... oh there they are!
Now how did they get all the way over the horizon?

Yeah, sorry dude. I didn't see where she had inadvertently claimed women bear the only consequences. I thought she had said they bear the majority and/or the weight of the consequences.

I wonder if Randy is insulted that we are using his thread to discuss abortion. I never bothered to look back and see how the thread took this turn lol

(September 30, 2015 at 11:07 pm)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote:

(September 30, 2015 at 11:00 pm)lkingpinl Wrote: I don't think its irrelevant.  The kidney example, while I understand the point, is not the same in my opinion.  We don't know the circumstances and intent in that scenario.  We are talking the basics of human reproduction that everyone knows.  When you have consensual sex you go in to it knowing that a possible result is a pregnancy.  It is my personal opinion that you are willing to give up those rights to bodily autonomy knowing that the sexual encounter may result in the conception of a human being.  It may not be the intention but you certainly know it's a possibility.  

Again, though I would like to understand why people feel its ok to abort in the first trimester but not in the third.  Baby is still in utero and still living off the mothers resources.  Is it the heartbeat (as early as 18 days)? Is it because the baby moves (as early as 4 weeks)?  Because there is brain activity (10 weeks)?

Then let's assign circumstances and intent in that scenario. Let's make it as bad as possible-- far, far worse than the degree of culpability of simply following our sexual insticts, or experiencing a failure in our birth control.. 

Let's eliminate gender from the equation, so I'll use you and me as examples. 

Let's eliminate benefit of the doubt, and say that you did a truly amoral, immoral thing to me, and caused my kidneys to shut down. I, a fully grown adult, am lying there with my kidneys destroyed because you thought it was funny to swap antifreeze for my cough medicine. (Or whatever.) And now, here you are in jail for attempted murder, soon to be fully murder, and I'm lying in the hospital bed, slowly fading. You, it turns out, happen to have two healthy kidneys, and you are my only matching donor. 

Without one of your kidneys I will certainly die. Do we have the legal right to invade your body, take a kidney, and put it into me? Why or why not?

Ok, but again this is not the same thing.  Pregnancy in most cases is not life threatening to the mother or child.  Most cases, it's pretty straightforward process.  Plus, I've already said I don't think abortion should be illegal, because I do believe that scenarios exist where it is justified and/or necessary.  I'm also of the belief that no one should tell a woman what she should do with her body.  I'm trying to show that this choice doesn't just affect her body, but the body of the one living inside of her that is there of a choice she made herself.  And I've already stated my concern for the father's rights as well to that child and some of you have echoed your own disappointment in such a situation, but still respect the woman's choice.  That's fine.  

I'm trying to understand in what scenarios people feel it is ok to terminate a pregnancy and why is it different at different stages?  If you can terminate in week 4, but not in week 30, why?  And if you argue you can terminate in week 30, why not a minute after birth?  If you decide you don't want the child, what's wrong with terminating at any stage?  Look I understand this isn't a light discussion and each case may be unique, so if we are going in circles, we can just leave it alone and move on

(September 30, 2015 at 1:06 pm)ChadWooters Wrote:

(September 30, 2015 at 11:42 am)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: When you eat a boiled egg are you eating a boiled chicken?

Everyone who kudos this must be ignorant of the fact that hens lay unfertilized eggs. Anti-science dopes.

How does the yolk get inside the egg shell?  Does the shell prevent the egg from getting fertilized?

(September 30, 2015 at 11:11 pm)Losty Wrote:

(September 30, 2015 at 11:04 pm)lkingpinl Wrote: You said no person has a right to your body even if they need it to survive.  I agree, I can't force you to give me a kidney because I need one to live and you're a match.  My point was the fetus/baby did not make any conscious effort/request/demand to use your body.  Your actions created it.  That "person" is only using your body because you made it so.  That's a big difference.

Meh. That just takes us right back to the whole. She spread her legs so it serves her right argument. I'm sorry but I don't care if I had a fetus surgically implanted into my body, the second I decide I don't want it there then I should be allowed to have it removed.

I'm not just pro-choice personally. I think more people should abort. If you don't want to be a parent. Abort. If you're selfish. Abort. If you or your partner has a history of physical violence. Abort. We don't need any more unwanted children than we already have. Even 1 more is too many.

Yeah I can see it comes across that way and that's not my intent.  I respect your right and opinion on the issue Losty.  I was an unwanted child so I know the horrors that some of those can endure.  My step-father told me once he tried to have my mother get an abortion and they seriously considered it.  I'm personally glad they didn't.

(September 30, 2015 at 11:19 pm)Losty Wrote: I wonder if Randy is insulted that we are using his thread to discuss abortion. I never bothered to look back and see how the thread took this turn lol

Lol I was wondering this too but I'm too lazy to go back and look.  

(September 30, 2015 at 11:21 pm)lkingpinl Wrote: I'm trying to understand in what scenarios people feel it is ok to terminate a pregnancy and why is it different at different stages?  If you can terminate in week 4, but not in week 30, why?  And if you argue you can terminate in week 30, why not a minute after birth?  If you decide you don't want the child, what's wrong with terminating at any stage?  Look I understand this isn't a light discussion and each case may be unique, so if we are going in circles, we can just leave it alone and move on

IMO all abortion should be legal.

I'm confused about the after the baby has been born thing.... You can't claim bodily autonomy as a reason to kill something that isn't affecting your body. So the reason we can't kill the baby after it's born is the same reason you can't kill a random stranger on the bus.