User Tag List

First 35434445464755 Last

Results 441 to 450 of 643

  1. #441
    Priestess Of Syrinx Katsuni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    3w4?
    Posts
    1,238

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ragingkatsuki View Post
    I agree with this.

    There is a beautiful thing about a fetus. It is the bud of a life that will grow into one of the most beautiful things, which is a baby. That bud depends on you to let it grow into that miracle. And thus, abandoning it and letting it die is not allowing that baby to live. Many babies that could have been alive now could have been your best friend, lover, teacher, doctor, savior, etc. To think that a baby would die before it has a chance to be one is very upsetting.

    Oh yay. This was my 1000th post
    I totally disagree with this.

    There is a beautiful thing about an egg cell. It is the bud of a life that will grow into one of the most beautiful things, which is a baby. That bud depends on you to let it grow into that miracle. And thus, abandoning it and letting it die is not allowing that baby to live. Many babies that could have been alive now could have been your best friend, lover, teacher, doctor, savior, etc. To think that a baby would die before it has a chance to be one is very upsetting.

    Therefore, every time yeu've had yeur period and *NOT* given birth, every time yeu've used a condom, every time yeu've done oral instead of traditional vaginal sex, YEU'RE A MURDERING BASTARD WHO JUST KILLED A BABY.


    "potential to be" and "are" are two distinctively seperate things. A fetus is still not a child, any more than a seperated egg and a sperm are. When it's born and can live independantly, it is a child. When it is a part of the mother, it is 'a part of the mother', not a 'part of itself'.

    Until such time as it is NOT a part of the mother, and can live on its' own, it is not a child, it is just the 'possibility of a child'. Many fetuses that could have been your best friend, lover, teacher, doctor, savior, etc. are DEAD from stillbirth, diseases, and other ailments within the first week after birth.

    Keep in mind as well, that this whole idea of "zomg babies are people too!" is still a relatively recent concept, and not supported in much of the world. It's a heavily cultural concept. It's not supported hardly at all in china, and until the last few hundred years, children were considered 'expendable' until they were about 5 years old due to a greater than 50% child death rate. Why do yeu think yeur great grandparents had like 11 siblings? Because they needed that many because at the time only about half of them lived to age 10, and their parents really didn't care if they died before then.

    It's not a "pure" morality issue, despite whot people want to believe, on either side of the fence, it's very much so a cultural issue.

    If kids live longer and live better lives, then this 'zomg no abortion!' thing arises. If they die early on at a young age regularly for several contributing factors, then this isn't even considered to be an issue most of the time.

    In any case... it's not even so much that I disagree with the stance here, I just completely disagree with the poor line of reasoning is all.

  2. #442
    Listening Oaky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    SLI None
    Posts
    6,168

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Katsuni View Post
    I totally disagree with this.

    There is a beautiful thing about an egg cell. It is the bud of a life that will grow into one of the most beautiful things, which is a baby. That bud depends on you to let it grow into that miracle. And thus, abandoning it and letting it die is not allowing that baby to live. Many babies that could have been alive now could have been your best friend, lover, teacher, doctor, savior, etc. To think that a baby would die before it has a chance to be one is very upsetting.

    Therefore, every time yeu've had yeur period and *NOT* given birth, every time yeu've used a condom, every time yeu've done oral instead of traditional vaginal sex, YEU'RE A MURDERING BASTARD WHO JUST KILLED A BABY.


    "potential to be" and "are" are two distinctively seperate things. A fetus is still not a child, any more than a seperated egg and a sperm are. When it's born and can live independantly, it is a child. When it is a part of the mother, it is 'a part of the mother', not a 'part of itself'.

    Until such time as it is NOT a part of the mother, and can live on its' own, it is not a child, it is just the 'possibility of a child'. Many fetuses that could have been your best friend, lover, teacher, doctor, savior, etc. are DEAD from stillbirth, diseases, and other ailments within the first week after birth.

    Keep in mind as well, that this whole idea of "zomg babies are people too!" is still a relatively recent concept, and not supported in much of the world. It's a heavily cultural concept. It's not supported hardly at all in china, and until the last few hundred years, children were considered 'expendable' until they were about 5 years old due to a greater than 50% child death rate. Why do yeu think yeur great grandparents had like 11 siblings? Because they needed that many because at the time only about half of them lived to age 10, and their parents really didn't care if they died before then.

    It's not a "pure" morality issue, despite whot people want to believe, on either side of the fence, it's very much so a cultural issue.

    If kids live longer and live better lives, then this 'zomg no abortion!' thing arises. If they die early on at a young age regularly for several contributing factors, then this isn't even considered to be an issue most of the time.

    In any case... it's not even so much that I disagree with the stance here, I just completely disagree with the poor line of reasoning is all.
    I'm not going to reason with you on the matter. I would like to ask you, when does life present itself in a baby?
    Also, supposing babies aren't people. Would it be fine with you if you killed a baby?

  3. #443
    Don't Judge Me! Haphazard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Posts
    6,707

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ragingkatsuki View Post
    Your comment is very saddening. One must realise that what they are dealing with is a life. The fetus is there awaiting to be born yet it is prevented. Life is being constructed in the fetus. You would be removing the life of a baby that would have been born within less than half a year. It would be the dead older brother or sister of a child you may have in the future. It could have been your son or daughter that would have come to you for help whenever someone picked on them in school. It is sad to see that someone would abort what would have loved them a year later.
    I wasn't being sarcastic.

    If you really want fetuses to be considered people too, then you need to treat them as such in all laws, not just laws pertaining to abortion. It's not fair to the fetus.
    -Carefully taking sips from the Fire Hose of Knowledge

  4. #444
    Listening Oaky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    SLI None
    Posts
    6,168

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Haphazard View Post
    I wasn't being sarcastic.

    If you really want fetuses to be considered people too, then you need to treat them as such in all laws, not just laws pertaining to abortion. It's not fair to the fetus.
    It seemed you were.

    How about if I said fetuses weren't people but a root that creates a person. You would then be removing something that creates something beautiful which is of course a baby. And thus the future is that that something is not alive when it could've been. You have then killed a future life. I could see a child walking down the street. What if that child's parents aborted him. Then I wouldn't ever see him.

  5. #445
    Don't Judge Me! Haphazard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Posts
    6,707

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ragingkatsuki View Post
    It seemed you were.

    How about if I said fetuses weren't people but a root that creates a person. You would then be removing something that creates something beautiful which is of course a baby. And thus the future is that that something is not alive when it could've been. You have then killed a future life. I could see a child walking down the street. What if that child's parents aborted him. Then I wouldn't ever see him.
    But would you have ever known that that child 'should' have been there?

    And in this argument we seem only to be discussing babies that are merely 'inconvenient'. We seem to be skipping over babies that are products of rape, incest, incestual rape, babies that would harm the mother by continuing to grow, and babies with such severe congenital defects that they would likely die a few days after being born.
    -Carefully taking sips from the Fire Hose of Knowledge

  6. #446
    Listening Oaky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    SLI None
    Posts
    6,168

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Haphazard View Post
    But would you have ever known that that child 'should' have been there?

    And in this argument we seem only to be discussing babies that are merely 'inconvenient'. We seem to be skipping over babies that are products of rape, incest, incestual rape, babies that would harm the mother by continuing to grow, and babies with such severe congenital defects that they would likely die a few days after being born.
    When it would come to these awfully horrible situations there may be set ideals depending on the person. It would be the person themselves that would decide what they should do. Any action could be right.
    As for what I've bolded out, no one knows the future so no one knows whether the baby will become harmful to the mother. It is in the hands of the mother to make sure it does not happen.

    What I have said before were not pointed towards these unfortunate situations.

  7. #447
    Supreme Allied Commander Take Five's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Posts
    925

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Haphazard View Post
    Then we need to expand all rights of people to fetuses, too.

    Like taxes. Fetuses need taxes paid on them. Rights need to begin at fetushood, meaning that any person conceived in the US could become President, not just those born there. And if they want to leave the country, they'll need passports, too. Also, if the mother is abusing the fetus it needs to be able to be taken away by child services to a more loving womb.
    In both theory and practice, you would be wrong. The fetus can easily be given tax exempt status, as a nine month fetus status would not be practical. Think temporary resident status instead of the same full fledged citizenship with which we are familiar. As I'm sure you know, it is illegal to murder a foreign alien just as much as to murder a US citizen. The role of government is not just dishing out rights--the essential function of government is to protect those living in its borders, from invasion, from the government itself, and from other people. Fulfilling that basic obligation in no way implies granting citizenship.

  8. #448
    Priestess Of Syrinx Katsuni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    3w4?
    Posts
    1,238

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ragingkatsuki View Post
    I'm not going to reason with you on the matter. I would like to ask you, when does life present itself in a baby?
    Also, supposing babies aren't people. Would it be fine with you if you killed a baby?
    People aren't even people. Humans in general, despite claiming to be a "thinking" species, rarely ever do so.

    A baby is meat. An animal, and little more than a chicken or a cow until it has managed to prove itself otherwise. There are many adults who still have yet to manage to prove themselves to be anything better than their base instincts, or even capable of the level of training that a DOG can handle.

    Obviously, I would prefer to provide the chance for that individual to attempt to prove themselves. It would be better if we had all the chances in the world to try to let the best and brightest of us succeed!

    ...But it's not very practical. Nor likely to ever occur. Realistically speaking, thousands of children die every single day anyway. Another dead child that I have no contact with and never knew existed is little more than a statistic, it has no relevance to me, no baring on my life if it lives or dies. I would *PREFER* to hear that it lived, but if I hear "another 1000 babies died today" it means pretty much nothing to me.

    To put things in perspective, on 9/11, about 43,000 people died. About 3,000 of those were at the WTC. Less than 10% of the people that died that day had anything even remotely to do with the WTC incident. And yet people still make a big deal out of it.

    We are emotionally insecure and attach ourselves far too frequently to matters which really have absolutely no consequence to us. If I had the personal option to kill a baby or not, I may or may not take that chance, depending on the circumstances surrounding it. Would it be more beneficial to kill the baby? If I were on a train with no brakes, and had the option to switch rails, and there were two choices, either I was going to be forced to kill 10 babies, or 10 lawyers... and I couldn't prevent it from happening, I absolutely had to choose a group to kill... I'd kill the babies. The lawyers may very well have had children already, and they've already proven themselves to have at least some resemblance of a mind in their head, the babies are still little more than clay to be sculpted. Were I to let them live, I could have given us the next Einstein. Or the next Hitler. I have no way of knowing whot I'd get from the mix. Maybe the babies are all going to die from illness, considering less than half the babies in the world born every day live beyond childhood, could I really assume it'd be a good idea to trade "probably 4 will live" for "guaranteed 10 ARE alive"?

    There's alot more to be considered than just "think of the children!".

    There's also the fact that, since I've started writing this response, someone just died horribly in a car accident. Someone starved to death. And a fetus was aborted. Yeu didn't know any of these things had occurred either. Yeu have no personal connection to them. Yeu have no interest in the outcome. Once yeu've had yeur say, yeu will forget and leave, and never think of it again, leaving someone else with yeur decision yeu made for them for the rest of their lives. Really, whot right do yeu have to dictate their decision that yeu have no interest in other than yeur own personal morals?




    To answer the question bluntly, though, and to put things in perspective:

    I wouldn't actively kill a baby. I also wouldn't actively kill an ant, or even a misquito. I don't kill ANYTHING that does not bother me or harm me in some way. If the ant is in my house, it is dead. If the misquito tries to drink my blood, it's toast. If the baby does NOTHING to bother me in any way shape or form, I will not interfere with it, I shall not harm it, and would attempt to protect it's life. Until such time as it harmed another, and then it is that other's decision to determine the outcome, as my opinion on the matter no longer matters.

    When does life present itself as being 'life'? Essentially when it has the ability to survive on its' own. Until such time, it has no rights, but whot it's parents give it. If it's still legally considered under the care and protection of its' parents, then it's still their choice whot to do with it. They obviously have an obligation to do whot they believe is best for it; occasionally, that may not include life. There have actually been quite a few cases where parents have killed their child and been found not guilty of murder or even manslaughter for it.

    As a braindead vegitible on life support's family has the right to pull the plug, the fetus, too, is literally on life support. Remove the placenta and it dies.

    I would FAR prefer that life be allowed to flourish, and I would not actively kill a child, or a fetus, or whotever myself. But at the same time... I also acknowledge that there are times when whot we want, and whot must be, are two distinctly different things as well.

    I don't really feel like being a cannibal either, but if everyone else on the plane is dead, and I'm starving, guess who's having a human buffet tonight?

    In the end though, I would *PREFER* that babies not be aborted under the vast majority of situations. I also, however, concede that there are situations where such is a perfectly valid, and sometimes even preferred, option, to the contrary.

    If a woman is likely going to die in childbirth for some complication, would it not make more sense to KILL THE CHILD? The mother already is alive, and can just have another baby. Or two. If she dies, she can't have any, and the child, if it even lives, would be short a parent, and yeu'd still have killed someone.

    If people refuse to wear condoms, and refuse to abstain or use common sense, and a child is going to be born which they can't support, is it so easy as to just say 'put it up for adoption'? Not always, how many children have grown up moving from one adoption agency to another, never having been the one picked? The more that people consider it to be valid to just put them up for adoption, the more supply, to the same demand. This won't solve anything either, leaving children orphaned without homes or families of their own when it overpopulates because of people not thinking straight. Can we really afford to put all these extra 'throw away children' somewhere by not throwing them away after all?

    As much as I value life, I'm also a realist and pragmatic... the ideal position is rarely plausible. We don't live in a perfect world sadly; if we did, we wouldn't even have to ask this question in the first place.

    I do agree with abortion in cases where it has valid reasoning behind it.

    I don't agree with it occurring when someone just goes "lol oops forgot 2 use teh kondumb lolz". But at the same time, it literally is their body, the fetus literally IS on life support, and it literally could die before birth anyway. I don't agree with it, but neither is it my place to force my moral views upon them either. I can explain my views and try to convince them of my position, but I have no right to force them to conform to my way of thought.



    The singular rule I follow is: "Do not force your views upon others". This applies to both sides of the situation in different ways; to the mother, it is HER body, and HER child. It is her obligation to do whot she decides to be best for her child because the child can't decide for itself. This's in every law ever made; a parent has to make decisions for their children that their children can't make themselves. Therefore, they are excluded in this one situation, as their view is not being forced. On the other hand, my views would be forced to make them conform to my beliefs. As such, even though I disagree with them, I can only educate and try to explain, I can not at any point take a gun to their head and tell them to not abort or I'll kill them.

    It's a bit convoluted there, but I hope that clears things up some.

  9. #449
    Don't Judge Me! Haphazard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Posts
    6,707

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ragingkatsuki View Post
    When it would come to these awfully horrible situations there may be set ideals depending on the person. It would be the person themselves that would decide what they should do. Any action could be right.
    As for what I've bolded out, no one knows the future so no one knows whether the baby will become harmful to the mother. It is in the hands of the mother to make sure it does not happen.

    What I have said before were not pointed towards these unfortunate situations.
    As for all the other situations that are causes for women to want abortions, either allow them to have them or make it not so horrible to have a child.
    -Carefully taking sips from the Fire Hose of Knowledge

  10. #450
    Listening Oaky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    SLI None
    Posts
    6,168

    Default

    @Katsuni: I see... You like to talk much. It's a cheerful thing to see.
    I very well understand your point of view of things. There are certain things you believe and see which would change your views. What I see about you though is that you seem to lack affection. If one shows affection for someone or something it would equal that of the whole world. It is within you. Not outside.

Similar Threads

  1. For those who believe in spirit/soul...
    By Little Linguist in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 08-16-2008, 09:17 AM
  2. For those who like Japanese animes...
    By Seether in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-12-2008, 05:09 PM
  3. For those with high cuteness thresholds...
    By anii in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 12-23-2007, 09:47 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-10-2007, 10:56 PM
  5. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-28-2007, 01:32 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO