Nothing to actually talk about, abortion is between the doctor and the patient. All society has a right to regulate is to make them safe.
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: August 24, 2026, 9:44 am
Thread Rating:
|
Secular reasons for and against legalising abortion
|
 RE: Secular reasons for and against legalising abortion
October 16, 2014 at 10:02 pm
(This post was last modified: October 16, 2014 at 10:06 pm by Neo-Scholastic.)
(October 16, 2014 at 3:07 pm)Brian37 Wrote: Nothing to actually talk about, abortion is between the doctor and the patient. All society has a right to regulate is to make them safe.Not very safe for the unborn. (October 16, 2014 at 12:44 pm)paulpablo Wrote: ...it's possible that abortion reduces the crime rate, .... and it's basically saying abortion stops unwanted babies which turn into unwanted children who basically know they are unwanted and hold a lot of resentment and so on.So what they are suggesting is to limit the population growth of unwanted minorities. You do know that Planned Parenthood grew out of the American eugenics movement, right?  (October 16, 2014 at 10:02 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: You do know that Planned Parenthood grew out of the American eugenics movement, right? Because Margaret Sanger was into eugenics? So were Winston Churchill and Teddy Roosevelt. It was a bad idea, but it was a popular bad idea of the time. Didn't the Carnegie Institute fund eugtenics research into the forties? And wasn't Andrew Carnegie a Swedenborgian? Is there some legitimate inference that can be drawn from that to reflect on Swedenborgianism or the Carnegie Institute of today? WTF does is matter what it 'grew out of''? What non-fallacious argument can you make out of that against the organization?
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.
 RE: Secular reasons for and against legalising abortion
October 17, 2014 at 10:01 am
(This post was last modified: October 17, 2014 at 10:02 am by Jackie.)
(October 16, 2014 at 10:02 pm)ChadWooters Wrote:(October 16, 2014 at 3:07 pm)Brian37 Wrote: Nothing to actually talk about, abortion is between the doctor and the patient. All society has a right to regulate is to make them safe.Not very safe for the unborn. Masturbation and blowjobs are not safe for the sperm, your point? There is no debate to be had here. There are just morons who fucking think they have the right to control bodies they do not own. PERIOD! (October 17, 2014 at 10:01 am)Brian37 Wrote: Masturbation and blowjobs are not safe for the sperm, your point?A sperm cell is not a complete human, dipshit. (October 17, 2014 at 10:01 am)Brian37 Wrote: There is no debate to be had here. There are just morons who fucking think they have the right to control bodies they do not own. PERIOD! What the fuck makes you think you have the right to end another human life for any reason at all? There is no debate to be had about whether unborn humans are biologically distinct life forms, in their own right, both genetically and developmentally, regardless of whether they are in the womb or in a dish. All you have is the claim that they aren't 'persons', an ambiguous legal concept without any scientific basis whatsoever.  (October 17, 2014 at 12:00 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: All you have is the claim that they aren't 'persons', an ambiguous legal concept without any scientific basis whatsoever. *coughs and points out that claiming they ARE person is an ambigious legal concept as well*
In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty.
- Thomas Jefferson  (October 15, 2014 at 2:01 pm)Dolorian Wrote:(October 15, 2014 at 1:44 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: Yes, people are responsible for their actions and must live with the consequences of their choices. The couple responsible for the creation of the new life is financially responsible for it. Your average fine xtian shithead will tell you the bitch had it coming. (October 17, 2014 at 12:02 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote:Search my posts and you will find no reference to personhood. Only those in favor of abortion promote that idea as justification for ending a human life.(October 17, 2014 at 12:00 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: All you have is the claim that they aren't 'persons', an ambiguous legal concept without any scientific basis whatsoever. (October 17, 2014 at 12:25 pm)ChadWooters Wrote:(October 17, 2014 at 12:02 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: *coughs and points out that claiming they ARE person is an ambigious legal concept as well*Search my posts and you will find no reference to personhood. Only those in favor of abortion promote that idea as justification for ending a human life. So you don't claim a fetus is a person?
In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty.
- Thomas Jefferson  (October 17, 2014 at 12:25 pm)ChadWooters Wrote:(October 17, 2014 at 12:02 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: *coughs and points out that claiming they ARE person is an ambigious legal concept as well*Search my posts and you will find no reference to personhood. Only those in favor of abortion promote that idea as justification for ending a human life. No, it is a definition of a human being. I don't care about a bunch of cells without a brain and nervous system.
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method. |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
