Login

**Joods** · December 1, 2015 at 12:59 am

Well.... that's a bit disturbing.

LOL

**Jackalope** · December 1, 2015 at 1:06 am

That's just another free service I offer.

**Joods** · December 1, 2015 at 1:14 am

You are too much. But I like it. Continue.

**Whateverist** · December 1, 2015 at 1:15 am

(November 30, 2015 at 8:04 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I don't agree with the argument that a fetus has no right to be in his/her mom's womb. If he/she was conceived there, that is exactly where they are supposed to be. That is how nature was designed to work, that is how it was all intended to be.

World's worst argument to bring to an atheist forum.

(November 30, 2015 at 8:04 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I know I'm just reiterating what Tib already said, but talking like a baby has no business being in his/her mom's womb just sounds silly to me, so I figured I'd comment.

But no one is saying a mother's baby has no business being in its mom's womb. We're just saying no rapist's baby has any right to her womb. Which baby's are the mother's? Ask her. If she chooses not to incubate her attackers DNA that is her right to decline.

**Whateverist** · (This post was last modified: December 1, 2015 at 1:54 am by Whateverist.)

(November 30, 2015 at 8:27 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:
(November 30, 2015 at 8:22 pm)Clueless Morgan Wrote: I don't agree with the argument that a cancerous tumor has no right to be in a smoker's lung. If it grew there, that is exactly where it's supposed to be. That is how nature was designed to work, that is how it was all intended to be.

I know I'm just restating what Cathy already said, but talking like a cancerous tumor has no business being in a smoker's lungs just sounds silly to me, so I figured I'd comment.

(This is also known as the naturalistic fallacy, in case you didn't know.)

... This was good, actually. This shows the fundamental difference between our thinking, and really, the root of the argument.

That argument being this: is an unborn entity with human DNA a human being?

Oh an unborn baby is certainly on a trajectory to be a human being. It is at least a "human becoming". But a fetus implanted by a rapist against the mother's wishes has more in common with a cancerous growth than a baby. It certainly has no more business being there, if the mother doesn't want it, than the perp's penis had in her vagina. But I suppose that too is where it was always intended to be.

*[Mega-props to Morgan, nothing clueless about this post.]

Cato · December 1, 2015 at 1:25 am

This is for all the pro-life warriors out there; you were duped almost 40 years ago. Just another example why the general population shouldn't be allowed to vote for President.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2...4cuc15MkmY

Short version: Jesus doesn't give a fuck about abortion, Republicans made it a wedge issue in the late 70s to keep the Strom Thurmond Dixiecrat racist base alive.

**Minimalist** · December 1, 2015 at 1:49 am

(December 1, 2015 at 1:15 am)Whateverist the White Wrote:
(November 30, 2015 at 8:04 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I don't agree with the argument that a fetus has no right to be in his/her mom's womb. If he/she was conceived there, that is exactly where they are supposed to be. That is how nature was designed to work, that is how it was all intended to be.

World's worst argument to bring to an atheist forum.

(November 30, 2015 at 8:04 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I know I'm just reiterating what Tib already said, but talking like a baby has no business being in his/her mom's womb just sounds silly to me, so I figured I'd comment.

But no one is saying a mother's baby has no business being in its mom's womb. We're just saying no rapist's baby has any right to her womb. Which baby's are the mother's? Ask her. If she chooses not to incubate her attackers DNA that is her right to decline.

The mother gets to decide what is in her womb..... not some pandering political asshole and certainly not a corrupt church full of perverts.

**Whateverist** · December 1, 2015 at 1:56 am

Oh there you go talking sense. Why do you insist on confusing the poor bastards like that?

**Minimalist** · December 1, 2015 at 2:01 am

I can't help it. It's not my job to make them feel good about professing horseshit. Particularly when that horseshit harms an actual person.

Mudhammam · December 1, 2015 at 2:08 am

Being against abortion doesn't mean that you value the life of a fetus for religious reasons. It doesn't mean that you think it should be illegal. It doesn't even mean that you think it is in every situation immoral. I certainly don't care what a woman does with her body, though at some point when her pregnancy is far enough along that the fetus is viable I do think there is an ethical dilemma. Again though, morality doesn't always equal legislation.

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread		Author	Replies	Views	Last Post
	[Serious] Attack on Russian Concert Hall	Ravenshire	11	1421	March 27, 2024 at 11:14 am Last Post: The Grand Nudger
	Terror attack at UK hospital	downbeatplumb	6	665	November 15, 2021 at 10:17 pm Last Post: HappySkeptic
	Escalating violence as armed protests planned in all 50 state capitals	TaraJo	64	5781	January 15, 2021 at 12:10 pm Last Post: Spongebob
	IS attack on Kabul Uni	Silver	4	634	November 3, 2020 at 8:58 am Last Post: brewer
	Charlie Hebdo republished "Mohammed Cartoons" to mark terrorist attack trial	Fake Messiah	3	564	September 3, 2020 at 3:26 pm Last Post: Angrboda
	Greta Thunberg: adults who attack her ‘must feel threatened’	EgoDeath	148	12584	October 3, 2019 at 1:05 pm Last Post: downbeatplumb
	Yellow Vest protests masked by a terrorist attack	WinterHold	7	1586	December 14, 2018 at 9:01 am Last Post: FatAndFaithless
	Terror attack in Melbourne this arvo.	ignoramus	19	2157	November 10, 2018 at 4:12 pm Last Post: no one
	Potential Vehicle Attack In Toronto	Amarok	24	2674	July 13, 2018 at 12:24 am Last Post: Amarok
	Today The Temporary Monument To The Toronto Van Attack Was Taken Down	Amarok	1	526	June 4, 2018 at 11:43 pm Last Post: Cecelia