Abortion
-
The real answer for abortion is being morally responsible about sex in the first place. People (men and women) need to understand that the choice is made at the time of intercourse that you will be responsible for the potential outcome: life. (Even if you're using contraception, a pregnancy is still possible. Contraception is not 100% foolproof.) Don't have sex until you're ready and able to be responsible for the possible outcome. Hence, no need for abortion to prevent an unwanted pregnancy. Don't rape women (indeed, don't rape anyone). Hence, no need for abortion because of rape. Don't have sex with your children (just another form of rape). Hence, no need for abortion because of incest. Don't have sex with someone you're not supposed to. Hence, no need for abortion because of adultery or licentious behavior. That leaves only abortion for the life & health of the mother. A relatively rare instance. In many cases, the mother would rather give her life (my wife included). Do I believe this is possible, yes. Do I believe it probable, no. Still that's the only real, viable solution. Wanton killing of babies because you are irresponsible and life is inconvenient is not a moral choice, is not a moral stance.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von Braun -
But I'm not going to change it.
ahmed zahmed wrote:
The real answer for abortion is being morally responsible about sex in the first place
. Who defines this morality? God is not a viable answer: many people don't believe in god. Amongst those that do there is a wide range of opinion about what is moral and what is not. I would suggest not allowing women to choose to abort (within certain limits - obviously a 39th week abortion is pretty much murder) is immoral, because an unwanted baby and its parents could suffer more.
ahmed zahmed wrote:
People (men and women) need to understand that the choice is made at the time of intercourse that you will be responsible for the potential outcome: life. (Even if you're using contraception, a pregnancy is still possible. Contraception is not 100% foolproof.)
About the only thing I agree with.
ahmed zahmed wrote:
Don't have sex until you're ready and able to be responsible for the possible outcome.
As DD has pointed out, teenagers are biologically programmed to start having sex, this is also the peak of fertility. These two things coincide for a reason, evolution. You are fighting human nature on this one.
ahmed zahmed wrote:
Don't rape women (indeed, don't rape anyone).
Suddenly the sorts of people who will commit rape will stop doing it on somebody's say so? No, because they don't care, this will continue to happen unfortunately. And you want to block the women's ability to prevent the life-long reminder of probably the most traumatic thing she'll go through being born.
ahmed zahmed wrote:
Don't have sex with your children (just another form of rape).
If they are children, then by definition they are unable to conceive, so I'm not sure what you are getting at. If you mean don't commit incest or have sex with adolescents, then fine, but it has the same problems as raping women, it is only likely to continue and by getting rid of abortion you could force the victim into a lifelong reminder of what they went through.
ahmed zahmed wrote:
Don't have sex with someone you're not supposed to.
What does that mean? Who defines this? I assume by "someone you're meant to" you mean wife, if so, what about the many unma
-
We should also do away with jails and all legal systems. Crime can be solved by people beinh morally respondible .
_Josh_ wrote:
We should could also do away with jails and all legal systems. Crime can be solved by people being morally responsible .
FTFY!
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von Braun -
The real answer for abortion is being morally responsible about sex in the first place. People (men and women) need to understand that the choice is made at the time of intercourse that you will be responsible for the potential outcome: life. (Even if you're using contraception, a pregnancy is still possible. Contraception is not 100% foolproof.) Don't have sex until you're ready and able to be responsible for the possible outcome. Hence, no need for abortion to prevent an unwanted pregnancy. Don't rape women (indeed, don't rape anyone). Hence, no need for abortion because of rape. Don't have sex with your children (just another form of rape). Hence, no need for abortion because of incest. Don't have sex with someone you're not supposed to. Hence, no need for abortion because of adultery or licentious behavior. That leaves only abortion for the life & health of the mother. A relatively rare instance. In many cases, the mother would rather give her life (my wife included). Do I believe this is possible, yes. Do I believe it probable, no. Still that's the only real, viable solution. Wanton killing of babies because you are irresponsible and life is inconvenient is not a moral choice, is not a moral stance.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von BraunI will go even further. I say let that unwanted children been taken from their irresponsible and immoral mothers (who will be obligated to give birth from the law) and raised from the society in a specialized facilities. Then they will have to work on behalf of that very society. The boys will become soldiers and the girls pole-dancers. The girls who don’t have looks for a pole-dancer and the boys who are too weak for soldiers will be forced to be software developers. Problem solved! Simples. On a more serious note, the human relationships are too complicated and dynamic to fit in the narrow frame you’re trying to put them. The society has to discourage the abortion in any possible reasonable way (financial stimulus, moral norms etc.), but never takes the choice from the parents, ever.
There is only one Vera Farmiga and Salma Hayek is her prophet! Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
-
We should also do away with jails and all legal systems. Crime can be solved by people beinh morally respondible .
You are right. We wouldn't have a need for them if people were responsible. That is his point about abortion. He didn't say it should be done away with he explained how it could be done away with. Seriously, you and nearly everyone else who have responded have missed that point. He isn't saying get rid of abortion he is saying get rid of what causes the need for it. I think you all saw abortion and then started getting your liberal panties in a wad instead of actually reading what he said.
-
You are right. We wouldn't have a need for them if people were responsible. That is his point about abortion. He didn't say it should be done away with he explained how it could be done away with. Seriously, you and nearly everyone else who have responded have missed that point. He isn't saying get rid of abortion he is saying get rid of what causes the need for it. I think you all saw abortion and then started getting your liberal panties in a wad instead of actually reading what he said.
ryanb31 wrote:
Seriously, you and nearly everyone else who have responded have missed that point. He isn't saying get rid of abortion he is saying get rid of what causes the need for it. I think you all saw abortion and then started getting your liberal panties in a wad instead of actually reading what he said.
And I'm saying get rid of gaols becuase they're also unnessasary. I think it is you that has missed my point. I didnt give an option on abortion, I only attemped to draw a parallel to point out the impracticle aspect of what was proposed. Why call me a liberal and be rude?
-
_Josh_ wrote:
We should could also do away with jails and all legal systems. Crime can be solved by people being morally responsible .
FTFY!
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von Braun -
ryanb31 wrote:
Seriously, you and nearly everyone else who have responded have missed that point. He isn't saying get rid of abortion he is saying get rid of what causes the need for it. I think you all saw abortion and then started getting your liberal panties in a wad instead of actually reading what he said.
And I'm saying get rid of gaols becuase they're also unnessasary. I think it is you that has missed my point. I didnt give an option on abortion, I only attemped to draw a parallel to point out the impracticle aspect of what was proposed. Why call me a liberal and be rude?
What I propose is that abortion would not be necessary (mostly) if people acted responsibly and unselfishly. The statement, even if impractical (as you opine), is true nonetheless. Your proposition is also true if people were indeed moral and responsible.
_Josh_ wrote:
Why call me a liberal and be rude
Liberal == rude? Wow, I didn't know. ;P :laugh:
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von Braun -
Are you intentionally trying to miss his point? He is explaining how to get rid of all needs for abortion.
And you appear to intentionally be trying to miss the counter-points that people are providing. How about providing something intelligent to the conversation beyond the silly "Why are you missing the point" comments.
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
-
ryanb31 wrote:
Seriously, you and nearly everyone else who have responded have missed that point. He isn't saying get rid of abortion he is saying get rid of what causes the need for it. I think you all saw abortion and then started getting your liberal panties in a wad instead of actually reading what he said.
And I'm saying get rid of gaols becuase they're also unnessasary. I think it is you that has missed my point. I didnt give an option on abortion, I only attemped to draw a parallel to point out the impracticle aspect of what was proposed. Why call me a liberal and be rude?
Impractical, maybe. But his post is getting a lot of negative criticism. < rant> Why not work on the problem instead of the symptom? Why not try and fix the real issues? This goes way beyond abortion but as a global society we all seem to try and fix the symptom instead of the problem. We do it in education, government, economy, unemployment, etc. We always want to blame something or somebody else. Let's put the responsibility back where it belongs, on the individual, and stop avoiding the actual issues. It's only impractical because not enough people support it. THAT is what makes it impractical. The principle alone is not impractical it is that not enough people care, and that is your (generally speaking) weakness, not a weakness in the principle. < /rant> Sorry, this isn't really just to you, in fact most of it is to the rest of the loons who are too lazy to do anything.
-
I will go even further. I say let that unwanted children been taken from their irresponsible and immoral mothers (who will be obligated to give birth from the law) and raised from the society in a specialized facilities. Then they will have to work on behalf of that very society. The boys will become soldiers and the girls pole-dancers. The girls who don’t have looks for a pole-dancer and the boys who are too weak for soldiers will be forced to be software developers. Problem solved! Simples. On a more serious note, the human relationships are too complicated and dynamic to fit in the narrow frame you’re trying to put them. The society has to discourage the abortion in any possible reasonable way (financial stimulus, moral norms etc.), but never takes the choice from the parents, ever.
There is only one Vera Farmiga and Salma Hayek is her prophet! Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
-
What I propose is that abortion would not be necessary (mostly) if people acted responsibly and unselfishly. The statement, even if impractical (as you opine), is true nonetheless. Your proposition is also true if people were indeed moral and responsible.
_Josh_ wrote:
Why call me a liberal and be rude
Liberal == rude? Wow, I didn't know. ;P :laugh:
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von Braunahmed zahmed wrote:
Why call me a liberal and be rude
the key word there is 'and' he called me a liberal AND he was being rude by suggesting my underpants where in a particular state causing discomfort. Truth is I'm not a liberal (either big of little L) and im not wearing underpants at the moment. Both our statements are true and both are worthless because neither will ever come to pass. Its nice to think that either might one day though.
-
Certainly, right now. But, ultimately, if we want to survive as a race: no.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von Braun -
All you godless people ever say is god doesn't exist so that you can justify your actions. If you don't have to answer to anyone then you can't be wrong. How convenient. :-\ Just because you do not believe in Him, does not mean He does not exist.
ryanb31 wrote:
All you godless people ever say is god doesn't exist so that you can justify your actions.
And the religious conveniently justify their hideous behavior by their 2000+ year old books.
ryanb31 wrote:
Just because you do not believe in Him, does not mean He does not exist.
Just because you say he exists, doesn't mean he does.
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
-
And you appear to intentionally be trying to miss the counter-points that people are providing. How about providing something intelligent to the conversation beyond the silly "Why are you missing the point" comments.
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
-
All you godless people ever say is god doesn't exist so that you can justify your actions. If you don't have to answer to anyone then you can't be wrong. How convenient. :-\ Just because you do not believe in Him, does not mean He does not exist.
ryanb31 wrote:
All you godless people ever say is god doesn't exist so that you can justify your actions
Actually, I didn't say god doesn't exist.You assumed that I said that. I said that God as a moral authority to justify restrictions on society was a non-starter, because many people do not believe. I don't need to justify anything, these are debating points.
ryanb31 wrote:
If you don't have to answer to anyone then you can't be wrong.
Again, you make the assumption I'm an atheist. Even people who are have to answer to themselves. If the fear Hell/Jahanam is the only thing keeping you on a straight and narrow path, I'd argue you are less moral than someone who does lead a good life and doesn't have this fear. Oh and I'm often wrong.
ryanb31 wrote:
Just because you do not believe in Him, does not mean He does not exist.
And just because you do, doesn't mean he does. See how that cuts both ways.
Sort of a cross between Lawrence of Arabia and Dilbert.[^]
-Or-
A Dead ringer for Kate Winslett[^] -
ryanb31 wrote:
All you godless people ever say is god doesn't exist so that you can justify your actions.
And the religious conveniently justify their hideous behavior by their 2000+ year old books.
ryanb31 wrote:
Just because you do not believe in Him, does not mean He does not exist.
Just because you say he exists, doesn't mean he does.
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
-
Impractical, maybe. But his post is getting a lot of negative criticism. < rant> Why not work on the problem instead of the symptom? Why not try and fix the real issues? This goes way beyond abortion but as a global society we all seem to try and fix the symptom instead of the problem. We do it in education, government, economy, unemployment, etc. We always want to blame something or somebody else. Let's put the responsibility back where it belongs, on the individual, and stop avoiding the actual issues. It's only impractical because not enough people support it. THAT is what makes it impractical. The principle alone is not impractical it is that not enough people care, and that is your (generally speaking) weakness, not a weakness in the principle. < /rant> Sorry, this isn't really just to you, in fact most of it is to the rest of the loons who are too lazy to do anything.
-
ryanb31 wrote:
All you godless people ever say is god doesn't exist so that you can justify your actions
Actually, I didn't say god doesn't exist.You assumed that I said that. I said that God as a moral authority to justify restrictions on society was a non-starter, because many people do not believe. I don't need to justify anything, these are debating points.
ryanb31 wrote:
If you don't have to answer to anyone then you can't be wrong.
Again, you make the assumption I'm an atheist. Even people who are have to answer to themselves. If the fear Hell/Jahanam is the only thing keeping you on a straight and narrow path, I'd argue you are less moral than someone who does lead a good life and doesn't have this fear. Oh and I'm often wrong.
ryanb31 wrote:
Just because you do not believe in Him, does not mean He does not exist.
And just because you do, doesn't mean he does. See how that cuts both ways.
Sort of a cross between Lawrence of Arabia and Dilbert.[^]
-Or-
A Dead ringer for Kate Winslett[^] -
ryanb31 wrote:
Sorry, this isn't really just to you, in fact most of it is to the rest of the loons who are too lazy to do anything.
Yes let's hold hands and pray!