IMO, a choice that ends with the death of an innocent can never be construed as "the right choice".
Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: June 3, 2024, 12:04 am
Thread Rating:
|
Come to England
|
 (February 14, 2012 at 5:48 am)Tiberius Wrote: IMO, a choice that ends with the death of an innocent can never be construed as "the right choice". To me there are many factors to be taken into account, I guess I am 'pro-choice' although that is an american phrase that doesnt really exist here - The subject certainly isn't quite as high profile in the UK media although it rears its head from time to time - perhaps that is due to the 62% mentioned earlier?  (February 14, 2012 at 5:48 am)Tiberius Wrote: IMO, a choice that ends with the death of an innocent can never be construed as "the right choice". I agree with you Tiberius to a point. The death of an innocent can never be "the right choice" as you say. However at what point does an embryo become a person? It sounds like you consider the moment of conception to be that point but many other (myself included) it comes at a later stage of development. A bundle of cells only a few weeks into pregnancy doesn't constitute an innocent life in my opinion. I'm probably touching on a very emotive issue so I don't want to start a riot but I have always believed a woman has the right to choose (up to a certain time in the development of the embryo). And as for the clergy sitting in the upper house (house of lords in our case). The British house of lords has very little power. Yes they have the option to reject legislation from the elected members of parliament but if the government so chooses they can quite easily bypass the lords and make it law anyway. Just like what happened the other week with the welfare benefits cap.
The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It may be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It may not be consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our preferences do not determine what's true - Carl Sagan
 RE: Come to England
February 14, 2012 at 8:14 am
(This post was last modified: February 14, 2012 at 8:15 am by KichigaiNeko.)
Quite frankly guys ... the decision is not yours to make.
It is up to the female and she alone will decide what is best for her offspring. And please tell me WHY we are talking about abortion and not the wonders of the British Isles?? "The Universe is run by the complex interweaving of three elements: energy, matter, and enlightened self-interest." G'Kar-B5
 (February 14, 2012 at 8:14 am)KichigaiNeko Wrote: Quite frankly guys ... the decision is not yours to make. That is just it, Tiberius points out that killing her offspring is not the best for her offspring, only for the female.
Best regards,
Leo van Miert Horsepower is how hard you hit the wall --Torque is how far you take the wall with you 
@MrSkeptic: What do you mean by "person"? The embryo is a human (genetically speaking) from conception. If you support any kind of abortion, you support the killing of innocent humans, and there is no getting around that fact. I'm not holding it against you if that is really what you support, but I personally cannot.
@Kich: Legality and ethics aside, why shouldn't the father have a say in the decision? It's his child as much as it is the mother's. 
'why shouldn't the father have a say in the decision?It's his child as much as it is the mother's.'
Agreed, but! They both produce, but thats where that ends, the mother does all the carrying in her body, the final say must be hers, not the donor's.
Yet if the child is born, the father suddenly has responsibility again? What kind of absurd system do you have when a father's rights wax and wane depending on the growth (and location) of the baby? The fact that the carrying is done by the mother is simply the outcome of evolution; it shouldn't give her any more rights to the baby's life than the father.
(February 14, 2012 at 9:06 am)Tiberius Wrote: Yet if the child is born, the father suddenly has responsibility again? What kind of absurd system do you have when a father's rights wax and wane depending on the growth (and location) of the baby? The fact that the carrying is done by the mother is simply the outcome of evolution; it shouldn't give her any more rights to the baby's life than the father. And thats a whole other can of worms - This archaic sexism is rife when it comes to parenting laws which are heavily biased towards the mother even in an increasingly androgenous society  RE: Come to England
February 14, 2012 at 12:08 pm
(This post was last modified: February 14, 2012 at 12:14 pm by Doubting Thomas.)
(February 12, 2012 at 5:49 pm)5thHorseman Wrote: Summer, when you get here, you have Darjeeling tea in the morning, brewed for no more than 4 minutes, with a splash of milk, no sugar. Afternoon tea is Earl Grey, served with lemon, not milk, and a scone with clotted cream and jam. When I was in England, the one phrase I really just couldn't get over was "clotted cream." Just doesn't sound appetizing at all. (February 14, 2012 at 9:06 am)Tiberius Wrote: Yet if the child is born, the father suddenly has responsibility again? What kind of absurd system do you have when a father's rights wax and wane depending on the growth (and location) of the baby? The fact that the carrying is done by the mother is simply the outcome of evolution; it shouldn't give her any more rights to the baby's life than the father. What if the father wanted the mother to have an abortion? If the father has as many rights, then he'd be able to force the woman to abort the child. I don't think he should have say one way or the other when it comes to a woman's body. Even if you're against abortion, please tell me that you still support terminating a pregnancy which endangers the life of the mother or in cases of rape where the woman clearly doesn't want the child.
Christian apologetics is the art of rolling a dog turd in sugar and selling it as a donut.
|
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
