I am antiabortion because I am an atheist

[cyberateos]

I like the idea of some type of registry but I think it should actually be in reverse that you can only have a baby once you have been properly trained and licensed.  Much like getting married, practicing law, driving a card, cutting hair, and performing surgeries all require a license and proper qualifications so too should having a child.  So, it should be "no license = no baby".  And, if you don't want an abortion then you can pair up with couples or single people who have been properly licensed and you can give them your baby.

Really. Surely in the future a contraceptive annual injection could be applied to all persons, and only people who has obtained a Governmental permission to have children could have them.

[VanReal]

I like the idea of some type of registry but I think it should actually be in reverse that you can only have a baby once you have been properly trained and licensed.  Much like getting married, practicing law, driving a card, cutting hair, and performing surgeries all require a license and proper qualifications so too should having a child.  So, it should be "no license = no baby".  And, if you don't want an abortion then you can pair up with couples or single people who have been properly licensed and you can give them your baby.

Really. Surely in the future a contraceptive annual injection could be applied to all persons, and only people who has obtained a Governmental permission to have children could have them.

Don't know about government, maybe it could be privatized to a worthy "World's Children" non-profit organization or something.  Dare to dream, this is but one of mine!

[rlrose328]

Are you saying that a born 22 weeks baby could be legally ripped with an ax while resting into its artifitial incubator?

I don't believe she said anything of the sort.  You are doing nothing here but recasting our words in the worst possible light.  You KNOW she didn't mean that.  I believe you think you are making us think, but what you're really doing is rabblerousing with the intent to incite anger and frustration.  

Try reading what people ARE saying instead of rewording it with hurt in mind.

[cyberateos]

Are you saying that a born 22 weeks baby could be legally ripped with an ax while resting into its artifitial incubator?

I don't believe she said anything of the sort.  You are doing nothing here but recasting our words in the worst possible light.  You KNOW she didn't mean that.  I believe you think you are making us think, but what you're really doing is rabblerousing with the intent to incite anger and frustration.  

Try reading what people ARE saying instead of rewording it with hurt in mind.

She said clearly that an intrauterine baby younger than 23 week would be ethically killable.

But what if a 22 week baby is already extrauterine?

Abortion and infanticide cross their ways sooner or later.

[PipeBox]

Cyberateos, you cheeky, brazen bitch:  it is already illegal to abort at 8 months.  You want to outlaw all abortion that you don't consider euthanasia, which would include 3 month old fetuses.  The law, which is voted on in congress, or by the people, or by a jury, is necessarily ad populum.  It is an agreement by the people to abide by the rules of the majority.  And yes, a 3 month old fetus has less mental capacity than a cow, so I would not be terribly surprised by it.

You are not trying to make the case for your arguments, you are trying to twist other people's.  I'm finished with this thread.

Mods: kill my post if you need to, he isn't going to read this, anyway, just try to find some way to claim the moral high ground while giving no arguments to back his position.

[cyberateos]

Cyberateos, you cheeky, brazen bitch:  it is already illegal to abort at 8 months.  You want to outlaw all abortion that you don't consider euthanasia, which would include 3 month old fetuses.  The law, which is voted on in congress, or by the people, or by a jury, is necessarily ad populum.  It is an agreement by the people to abide by the rules of the majority.  And yes, a 3 month old fetus has less mental capacity than a cow, so I would not be terribly surprised by it.

You are not trying to make the case for your arguments, you are trying to twist other people's.  I'm finished with this thread.

Mods: kill my post if you need to, he isn't going to read this, anyway, just try to find some way to claim the moral high ground while giving no arguments to back his position.

Pipebox:

I don`t need to use offensive words against you.

Here is a big truth:

If you support abortion during all pregnancy stages, then, indirectly you are supporting infanticide and pedearasty too.

Then, I invite you and all atheists or not atheists to promote laws to protect intrauterine minors.

"IN A CIVILIZED SOCIETY, INTRAUTERINE CHILDREN ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT"

[curiosityandthecat]

Don't like abortions? Don't have one.

/thread

[cyberateos]

Don't like abortions? Don't have one.

/thread

[cyberateos]

Don't like abortions? Don't have one.

/thread

1) In slave traders time, it was said: "don`t like slavery? Don`t buy a slave?"


2) If you are a man, lots of Governments force you to accept an abortion of your fetal child.

[curiosityandthecat]

1) The sins of the fathers are not the sins of their sons. Also, please don't tell me that you're comparing the horrific life of adult slaves (typically families) with the well-being of a cluster of cells that can flush out of a woman's vagina completely unnoticed. If so, that's a harsh line to walk, man.

2) I have this nasty habit of being responsible, rational and thoughtful and only having safe sex with women who also happen to be responsible, rational and thoughtful. If there was more of that going on, this debate wouldn't be needed.

[jcm]

Hypothetical:

A woman has a rare disease, that if she gets pregnant, her body will release an enzyme that is fatal to her and would deeply impact the health of her child. If this woman is raped and impregnated, would you support her getting an abortion to save her life?

[rlrose328]

She said clearly that an intrauterine baby younger than 23 week would be ethically killable.

But what if a 22 week baby is already extrauterine?

Abortion and infanticide cross their ways sooner or later.

You have my deep and abiding pity if you cannot understand the difference between abortion of an embryo or fetus and blatant murder of a baby or child.  That's just sick, man.  

This is a prime example of your twisting what people say to fit your own argument.  It's not a proper method of debate.  If you can't state your argument without twisting the words of the opponent, then you shouldn't be debating.

[cyberateos]

1) The sins of the fathers are not the sins of their sons. Also, please don't tell me that you're comparing the horrific life of adult slaves (typically families) with the well-being of a cluster of cells that can flush out of a woman's vagina completely unnoticed. If so, that's a harsh line to walk, man.

2) I have this nasty habit of being responsible, rational and thoughtful and only having safe sex with women who also happen to be responsible, rational and thoughtful. If there was more of that going on, this debate wouldn't be needed.

1) A third trimester abortion is not a "cluster of cells that can flush out of a vagina unnoticed".

Use this link:

http://www.tldm.org/News7/ParallelsSlaveryAbortion.htm

2) I agree: men should not have sex with feminazis.

[cyberateos]

Hypothetical:

A woman has a rare disease, that if she gets pregnant, her body will release an enzyme that is fatal to her and would deeply impact the health of her child. If this woman is raped and impregnated, would you support her getting an abortion to save her life?

JCM:

I have said, very clearly, that it is dishonest to use cases with attenuating circumstances instead of cases with aggravating circumstances.

Let`s reach an agreement in this case:

A 31 year old healthy and reach woman who kills her 8 month healthy fetus because it had a cleft palate.

[cyberateos]

You have my deep and abiding pity if you cannot understand the difference between abortion of an embryo or fetus and blatant murder of a baby or child.  That's just sick, man.  

This is a prime example of your twisting what people say to fit your own argument.  It's not a proper method of debate.  If you can't state your argument without twisting the words of the opponent, then you shouldn't be debating.

Can you demonstrate that really it is different to kill a nine month fetus and to kill a seven month premature baby? Is not the first really older that the second?