Abortion?

If you admit your arguments are irrational, you have no place here. This is supposed to be the logical debate/discussion forum.

I've read your posts, but the majority of your arguments seem to be "because god says so"

How exactly can you see where they are coming from when we are dealing with the death of a human being?

 

Your decision is irrational because faith itself is irrational.

Imagine that a woman is raped and becomes pregnant. You said yourself that the fetus is a human life worthy of human rights. Then, you go on to say that this human life can be sacrificed in consideration of the woman's emotional state? Again: Your position is incoherent.

 

abortion is fine in my oppinion.
the reason is becouse the embryo(the baby at early stages) haven't evolved in to anything else then a "bag" of cells, also called meat.

so, it doesnt feel anything. No Brain, no pain.

 

Shedder you are forgetting one main detail here. I am not all knowing. I am human and have errors. I try to see both sides of the story and make my decision based on the evidence. If I am wrong some times it's my own fault. It is human nature to sin. I don't find my faith to make me irrational though.

 

You don't have to be all-knowing to have a logically consistent viewpoint.

Now, at the risk of repeating myself, you have said that a human embryo is a human life worthy of the full rights of any human being. In that case, can you explain why abortion is an option in cases of rape? Would you allow a woman to murder a 20 year old man if she was upset? There is no difference between that and abortion if you grant fetuses human rights.

 

I see your point and have come to the conclusion that you are correct in the fact that it is still a life no matter what happens, and I should stick with one argument. I have come to the conclusion abortion is wrong no matter the circumstances. Be it rape or there own ignorance.

 

Ok, now your view is more consistent.

Why does a fetus gain rights?

 

A fetus does not gain rights, because it is not born yet. Once your umbilical cord is cut, you are fully born.

 

Why does the cutting of a cord grant rights?

 

I say no no no. You don't have the rights to cut someones life, in this case, the babies.

 

What determines whether an entity has rights?

 

I think as soon as the cell begins to divide it has become another living being. It might be inside of the parent host, but that does not mean it is not alive. I think what determines the entities right it when it begins to divide. It might look nothing like a human being. It might act nothing like a human being, but given the right conditions it will in no time become one. I think the "day after pill" is just as bad since it does the same thing.

 

Why is it that if a person attempted to commit suicide, but failed they can be tried, found guilty, and thrown in jail. Is it not their body, don't they have the right to do whatever they want with it?
If a man were to go to a one-month pregnant woman, take a wooden stick or a bat, hit her stomach, and cause her to lose her baby, what should he be tried for? He only hit her once, and most definitely not lethally. Based on your views he should be tried only for assault. With that he would be in jail for maybe two years. Two years he would be in jail for taking away her baby. Two years he would be in jail for taking away, an average of, 75 years of life. If you were that father what would you think? If you were that mother what would you think? Just answer that question.

 

What determines that you have rights than? Are we allowed to kill you, have sex with you, or even eat you?


Rights are made up by humans, because we are the higher species, we can control who has rights and who not.

 

Yes, it is another living being at that point, but why does it get rights?

So because it might become a human one day, it gains the rights of one?

I'm addressing your position at the moment, not comparing mine to yours.

We only have rights because people think we should have them? Say that the majority of the world's population voted that you should not have any rights - would you then agree that you do not have any?

 

Wow, you keep going on to your super-basic argument. And there's really no effective counter, as religion doesn't apply as it's irrational, and there's no rational reason to state that rights don't spring from reason, and fetuses don't have reason.

You win. I really wanna see someone argue this without going in circles :S

 

Logically I would think it is wrong because we could be killing someone who could improve this miserable shithole of a world, or someone else important. On the level of does Morbid care? I don't give a fuck. People can do what they want.

Also something sort of funny Marilyn Manson keeps an aborted fetus in a jar lol

 

Marilyn Manson is fucking weird. And what about every time you jack off, how you kill millions of potential babies? :O

 

I'd say the "potential babies" are the eggs inside a woman's womb.

 

Fair enough. So we should do everything in our power to modify human genetics so it's not necessary to ovulate every month for optimal survival? And no, I think every single sperm leads to a different baby, no? Isn't that how chromosomes kind of work?