User Tag List

First 81617181920 Last

Results 171 to 180 of 194

  1. #171
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    783
    Posts
    240

    Default

    lmfao pony boy got banned

  2. #172
    Senior Member NK258's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx/sp
    Posts
    288

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ozones View Post
    lmfao pony boy got banned
    *likes*
    6w7 Sx/Sp (621 or 612. Same diff :p).

  3. #173
    Senior Member prplchknz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    yupp
    Posts
    29,776

    Default

    you do know there's a member named @Ponyboy on here? and I thought he had gotten banned and was wondering why people were happy about it, and why in this thread
    In no likes experiment.

    that is all

    i dunno what else to say so

  4. #174

    Default

    To quote someone else who posted a few pages ago - what a gong show. That said, I can't resist throwing in my two cents.

    I think that abortion is wrong, I think it's a shameful tragedy, and I think it's a stain on humanity that we don't have the self-control to make the point moot. I find it obscene that people talk about pregnancy as if it's something that "happened to them" instead of something they did because they attempted to game a process nature designed for reproduction and failed. I hate that adoption is not a choice more people make.

    But, having said all that, I think it should be legal. As @cafe illustrated, many of the people that seek it are powerless people who aren't the sole architects of their position in life. I also think it should be legal because I find the arguments on both sides to be muddled and inconclusive, and until that is not the case, rights should not be abridged.

    However, I find some of the arguments in favor of legal abortion to be unconvincing, primarily the "my body my choice" argument. That argument works for many topics, but not this one. Obviously this is reliant on one's position as to when life begins, but when you are pregnant, there are two bodies. It's not fair that only women bear children, but biology doesn't make political decisions and doesn't hew to legislation. It bothers me that one can ping-pong back and forth as to whether a fetus is a person depending on the topic at hand. Abortion is okay because a fetus is just a lump of cells, but smoking while pregnant isn't okay because you're harming the baby. Abortion is okay because a fetus is just a lump of cells, but if you kill a pregnant woman, you are charged with two murders. I understand that the counter to this is "those babies were wanted". However, you can't determine whether a fetus is a person based on how much that fetus is loved. It either is or is not a biological person. If it is, then you must protect it. And if it is not, then you cannot force people to recognize it. This, to me, is the crux of the debate, and why this is such a fucked topic whenever it's brought up.

    So I guess I'm a self-loathing pro-choicer. Ugh.
    Everybody have fun tonight. Everybody Wang Chung tonight.

    Johari
    /Nohari

  5. #175
    Senior Member prplchknz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    yupp
    Posts
    29,776

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EffEmDoubleyou View Post
    To quote someone else who posted a few pages ago - what a gong show. That said, I can't resist throwing in my two cents.

    I think that abortion is wrong, I think it's a shameful tragedy, and I think it's a stain on humanity that we don't have the self-control to make the point moot. I find it obscene that people talk about pregnancy as if it's something that "happened to them" instead of something they did because they attempted to game a process nature designed for reproduction and failed. I hate that adoption is not a choice more people make.

    But, having said all that, I think it should be legal. As @cafe illustrated, many of the people that seek it are powerless people who aren't the sole architects of their position in life. I also think it should be legal because I find the arguments on both sides to be muddled and inconclusive, and until that is not the case, rights should not be abridged.

    However, I find some of the arguments in favor of legal abortion to be unconvincing, primarily the "my body my choice" argument. That argument works for many topics, but not this one. Obviously this is reliant on one's position as to when life begins, but when you are pregnant, there are two bodies. It's not fair that only women bear children, but biology doesn't make political decisions and doesn't hew to legislation. It bothers me that one can ping-pong back and forth as to whether a fetus is a person depending on the topic at hand. Abortion is okay because a fetus is just a lump of cells, but smoking while pregnant isn't okay because you're harming the baby. Abortion is okay because a fetus is just a lump of cells, but if you kill a pregnant woman, you are charged with two murders. I understand that the counter to this is "those babies were wanted". However, you can't determine whether a fetus is a person based on how much that fetus is loved. It either is or is not a biological person. If it is, then you must protect it. And if it is not, then you cannot force people to recognize it. This, to me, is the crux of the debate, and why this is such a fucked topic whenever it's brought up.

    So I guess I'm a self-loathing pro-choicer. Ugh.
    the not smoking thing seems to make most sense when it is used in reference to a pregnant lady planning to carry to term, because down the line those lumps of cells will become a biological person.

    Though I am pro-choice, for me it's really the last option except adoption, and if the foster care system and the adoption system here was better I'd make that my second to last choice. The point is for me my first choice would be to keep the child, even though I don't want children and raise it best I can. But I do have a family that is supportive and if anything were to happen, or was unable to take care of the child they would do so. So I'm not one of those people who can justify abortion for myself because I have options. But I am still pro-choice. It's just the issue isn't black and white and it should be done case by case. I wonder if that wouldn't be a bad idea. To have the woman's background reviewed and if it's determined that bringing the baby into the enviroment it's going to be raised in is going to be more harmful than helpful then they can get an abortion. But would we need that? I feel-and it might be my naivete, but I feel that people don't get abortions just because. Plus burecacy would fuck it all up. Ok so there's no real good solution.
    In no likes experiment.

    that is all

    i dunno what else to say so

  6. #176

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by prplchknz View Post
    the not smoking thing seems to make most sense when it is used in reference to a pregnant lady planning to carry to term, because down the line those lumps of cells will become a biological person.
    That's true, but I addressed that point in my post. What I'm saying is that it's problematic to treat a fetus like a person in some circumstances and not in others, because making "when life begins" a question of intent instead of biology is trying to have your philosophical cake and eat it too. Until that is addressed, we're all going to be talking past each other.
    Everybody have fun tonight. Everybody Wang Chung tonight.

    Johari
    /Nohari

  7. #177
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,541

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EffEmDoubleyou View Post
    But, having said all that, I think it should be legal. As @cafe illustrated, many of the people that seek it are powerless people who aren't the sole architects of their position in life. I also think it should be legal because I find the arguments on both sides to be muddled and inconclusive, and until that is not the case, rights should not be abridged.

    However, I find some of the arguments in favor of legal abortion to be unconvincing, primarily the "my body my choice" argument. That argument works for many topics, but not this one. Obviously this is reliant on one's position as to when life begins, but when you are pregnant, there are two bodies. It's not fair that only women bear children, but biology doesn't make political decisions and doesn't hew to legislation. It bothers me that one can ping-pong back and forth as to whether a fetus is a person depending on the topic at hand. Abortion is okay because a fetus is just a lump of cells, but smoking while pregnant isn't okay because you're harming the baby. Abortion is okay because a fetus is just a lump of cells, but if you kill a pregnant woman, you are charged with two murders. I understand that the counter to this is "those babies were wanted". However, you can't determine whether a fetus is a person based on how much that fetus is loved. It either is or is not a biological person. If it is, then you must protect it. And if it is not, then you cannot force people to recognize it. This, to me, is the crux of the debate, and why this is such a fucked topic whenever it's brought up.

    So I guess I'm a self-loathing pro-choicer. Ugh.
    Well, I'm a pro-choicer who wants to stack the deck in favor of choices other than abortion. I agree with you about the inconsistency. I'm sure many will disagree with me, but I consider a fetus to be just that bunch of cells, at least until viability. Once viable it is still not equivalent to a born child. This means I think it is wrong to consider the fetus a second person when judging homicides. Killing a fetus/unborn child can be a crime on its own, without equating the fetus to a person. Similarly, all those prohibitions we level against pregnant women and judge them for not following go too far. Things like smoking aren't bad because they impact another human with rights equal to the mother's. It's bad because it may cause the pregnancy to fail, or result in a baby with serious problems. In other words, if you want a healthy baby, these practices may impact your reaching your goal.

    Bottom line: nature/God/the universe/whatever gave women the task of human gestation. This also gives them the right to make decisions throughout the process. They may of course consult whatever family, friends, medical, or religious people they choose, but taking the decision away from them almost goes against nature. The government especially has no role in this, other than enforcing the usual truth-in-advertising laws, legitimate oversight of medical services for quality, and keeping everyone else out of the decision. Abortion rights are like the canary in the mine: their erosion points to a slippery slope in both women's rights and personal autonomy overall.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  8. #178
    Rainy Day Woman MDP2525's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    5,532

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EffEmDoubleyou View Post
    That's true, but I addressed that point in my post. What I'm saying is that it's problematic to treat a fetus like a person in some circumstances and not in others, because making "when life begins" a question of intent instead of biology is trying to have your philosophical cake and eat it too. Until that is addressed, we're all going to be talking past each other.
    I can understand where you are coming from. Your logic stems from your belief that a woman does not have a right to choose. Or, at least, you really don't like it. LOL. So everything about your points make sense when coming from that initial chain of thought.

    Intent isn't just a philosophical cake and eat it too situation. It is relied on heavily on almost every level of the legal system.


    In my opinion, a pregnant woman is the only one who gets to decide whether a pregnancy is wanted or not, not a third party.
    Would you forgive someone who came along with a pair of scissors and snipped your testicles off because "Oh, well...I wanted a vasectomy anyway." (?)


    I see my above question the same way I see a woman who has intentions to carry a child to term and loses that unborn fetus because of a violent attack. It isn't the same thing as an abortion. You go to a doctor for an abortion. You don't become the victim of a crime to lose a fetus. (I get that you think legally the perpetrator should not be charged with a crime if the fetus was miscarried. Possibly only the act of the assault). Again, my opinion on this is different because it does take "choice" out of the equation for the woman and similarly, you wouldn't want someone to snip your tubes while you were sleeping and making that decision for you. After all, vasectomies are legal. No, you probably would want that perpetrator to face consequences for your lost potential of creating a human being.


    So my point is viewed through logic as well. However, we are coming from two different chains of thought. This is why abortion is not black and white. Because either side has logical consistency when you start at either standing tenet.
    ----------------

    Regardless. No one wants abortions. Even those that agree it is necessary.

    I do have a question for people on the pro-life side that I have NEVER had answered. If abortion is made illegal. What punishment should there be for those who undertake it? If it's murder would a life sentence be fair? If that seems harsh then maybe that is thought provoking in itself. What punishment would fit the crime? And how do you think this would affect socio-economics?
    ~luck favors the ready~


    Shameless Self-Promotion:MDP2525's Den and the Start of Motorcycle Maintenance

  9. #179
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,541

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MDP2525 View Post
    I see my above question the same way I see a woman who has intentions to carry a child to term and loses that unborn fetus because of a violent attack. It isn't the same thing as an abortion. You go to a doctor for an abortion. You don't become the victim of a crime to lose a fetus. (I get that you think legally the perpetrator should not be charged with a crime if the fetus was miscarried. Possibly only the act of the assault). Again, my opinion on this is different because it does take "choice" out of the equation for the woman and similarly, you wouldn't want someone to snip your tubes while you were sleeping and making that decision for you. After all, vasectomies are legal. No, you probably would want that perpetrator to face consequences for your lost potential of creating a human being.
    Exactly. Causing a woman to lose a pregnancy against her will takes the decision away from her, just as forcing her to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term does. It is an assault primarily against the woman. This has been a problem in China with its "one-child" policy. We criticise the Chinese government for interfering in these decisions on the one side, but are still too willing to let our government interfere on the other.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  10. #180
    A window to the soul
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ozones View Post
    lmfao pony boy got banned
    Quote Originally Posted by NK258 View Post
    *likes*
    Quote Originally Posted by prplchknz View Post
    you do know there's a member named @Ponyboy on here? and I thought he had gotten banned and was wondering why people were happy about it, and why in this thread
    @Ponyboy is still around, sillies. He's just not around here. No worries. (:

Similar Threads

  1. Is dialogue possible and what if its not?
    By Survive & Stay Free in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-22-2010, 11:29 PM
  2. McCain a maverick? Not if the Mavericks have anything to say about it!
    By IlyaK1986 in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 10-07-2008, 05:34 PM
  3. Has anyone heard of Global Dimming and if so what are your thoughts on it??
    By ladypinkington in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 09-16-2007, 06:13 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