19th May 2019
449 views
449 views
abortion
#CutestPersonAlive
Member
1,887 posts
1,949
Seen 30th August 2023
25th May 2019, 10:10 AM
Sampopxxx101 wrote on 24th May 2019, 10:53 PM:
Also if you tell women to put these children up for adoption, then you should have adopted a child. Don't want to? Then you're not pro-life if you're gonna leave that child alone in a foster home.
it's almost as if not everybody has to adopt a child
* play gitaroo man. my final message. gootbye.
Master
1,167 posts
1,891
Seen 10th February 2021
CrimeSolvers
25th May 2019, 11:48 AM
Sampopxxx101 wrote on 24th May 2019, 10:53 PM:
Also if you tell women to put these children up for adoption, then you should have adopted a child. Don't want to? Then you're not pro-life if you're gonna leave that child alone in a foster home.
Also, according to sources, 85% of women get abortions for lifestyle reasons so they can live out their selfish "dream" lives. Keep in mind, rape is extremely uncommon, and under 1% of abortions are from rape victims, making one of the biggest arguments of pro-choice near invalid. There are also plenty of women who are pro-life, some even in the government.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/47227/walsh-three-reasons-why-rape-and-incest-argument-matt-walsh
Queen Regent of Snaildom
Master
1,826 posts
3,332
Seen 15th August 2023
Topaz
25th May 2019, 12:01 PM
MuscleBob1 wrote on 25th May 2019, 11:48 AM:
Sampopxxx101 wrote on 24th May 2019, 10:53 PM:
Also if you tell women to put these children up for adoption, then you should have adopted a child. Don't want to? Then you're not pro-life if you're gonna leave that child alone in a foster home.
So you're saying if people are pro-life they are legally required to adopt a child? The whole point of putting them in an adoption center is to give them a family that has the ability and is willing to support and raise a child.
Also, according to sources, 85% of women get abortions for lifestyle reasons so they can live out their selfish "dream" lives. Keep in mind, rape is extremely uncommon, and under 1% of abortions are from rape victims, making one of the biggest arguments of pro-choice near invalid. There are also plenty of women who are pro-life, some even in the government.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/47227/walsh-three-reasons-why-rape-and-incest-argument-matt-walsh
Also if you tell women to put these children up for adoption, then you should have adopted a child. Don't want to? Then you're not pro-life if you're gonna leave that child alone in a foster home.
So you're saying if people are pro-life they are legally required to adopt a child? The whole point of putting them in an adoption center is to give them a family that has the ability and is willing to support and raise a child.
Also, according to sources, 85% of women get abortions for lifestyle reasons so they can live out their selfish "dream" lives. Keep in mind, rape is extremely uncommon, and under 1% of abortions are from rape victims, making one of the biggest arguments of pro-choice near invalid. There are also plenty of women who are pro-life, some even in the government.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/47227/walsh-three-reasons-why-rape-and-incest-argument-matt-walsh
P.S. a child should only be raised in the best possible conditions a parent could supply. Most women have abortions for reasons: poverty, getting through mental illness, etc,. Children should not have to go through poverty or neglect because that would just be gruesome honestly.
#CutestPersonAlive
Member
1,887 posts
1,949
Seen 30th August 2023
25th May 2019, 01:14 PM
Sampopxxx101 wrote on 25th May 2019, 12:01 PM:
MuscleBob1 wrote on 25th May 2019, 11:48 AM:
Sampopxxx101 wrote on 24th May 2019, 10:53 PM:
Also if you tell women to put these children up for adoption, then you should have adopted a child. Don't want to? Then you're not pro-life if you're gonna leave that child alone in a foster home.
So you're saying if people are pro-life they are legally required to adopt a child? The whole point of putting them in an adoption center is to give them a family that has the ability and is willing to support and raise a child.
Also, according to sources, 85% of women get abortions for lifestyle reasons so they can live out their selfish "dream" lives. Keep in mind, rape is extremely uncommon, and under 1% of abortions are from rape victims, making one of the biggest arguments of pro-choice near invalid. There are also plenty of women who are pro-life, some even in the government.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/47227/walsh-three-reasons-why-rape-and-incest-argument-matt-walsh
Wow it’s almost as if you have the choice to not adopt a child! Quit turning your backs on those who are actually living and not some insentient embryos who wouldn’t know or feel if they have been aborted.
P.S. a child should only be raised in the best possible conditions a parent could supply. Most women have abortions for reasons: poverty, getting through mental illness, etc,. Children should not have to go through poverty or neglect because that would just be gruesome honestly.
Sampopxxx101 wrote on 24th May 2019, 10:53 PM:
Also if you tell women to put these children up for adoption, then you should have adopted a child. Don't want to? Then you're not pro-life if you're gonna leave that child alone in a foster home.
So you're saying if people are pro-life they are legally required to adopt a child? The whole point of putting them in an adoption center is to give them a family that has the ability and is willing to support and raise a child.
Also, according to sources, 85% of women get abortions for lifestyle reasons so they can live out their selfish "dream" lives. Keep in mind, rape is extremely uncommon, and under 1% of abortions are from rape victims, making one of the biggest arguments of pro-choice near invalid. There are also plenty of women who are pro-life, some even in the government.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/47227/walsh-three-reasons-why-rape-and-incest-argument-matt-walsh
Wow it’s almost as if you have the choice to not adopt a child! Quit turning your backs on those who are actually living and not some insentient embryos who wouldn’t know or feel if they have been aborted.
P.S. a child should only be raised in the best possible conditions a parent could supply. Most women have abortions for reasons: poverty, getting through mental illness, etc,. Children should not have to go through poverty or neglect because that would just be gruesome honestly.
* play gitaroo man. my final message. gootbye.
Queen Regent of Snaildom
Master
1,826 posts
3,332
Seen 15th August 2023
25th May 2019, 01:36 PM
MintWolf wrote on 25th May 2019, 01:14 PM:
Sampopxxx101 wrote on 25th May 2019, 12:01 PM:
MuscleBob1 wrote on 25th May 2019, 11:48 AM:
Sampopxxx101 wrote on 24th May 2019, 10:53 PM:
Also if you tell women to put these children up for adoption, then you should have adopted a child. Don't want to? Then you're not pro-life if you're gonna leave that child alone in a foster home.
So you're saying if people are pro-life they are legally required to adopt a child? The whole point of putting them in an adoption center is to give them a family that has the ability and is willing to support and raise a child.
Also, according to sources, 85% of women get abortions for lifestyle reasons so they can live out their selfish "dream" lives. Keep in mind, rape is extremely uncommon, and under 1% of abortions are from rape victims, making one of the biggest arguments of pro-choice near invalid. There are also plenty of women who are pro-life, some even in the government.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/47227/walsh-three-reasons-why-rape-and-incest-argument-matt-walsh
Wow it’s almost as if you have the choice to not adopt a child! Quit turning your backs on those who are actually living and not some insentient embryos who wouldn’t know or feel if they have been aborted.
P.S. a child should only be raised in the best possible conditions a parent could supply. Most women have abortions for reasons: poverty, getting through mental illness, etc,. Children should not have to go through poverty or neglect because that would just be gruesome honestly.
yeah aight but you could have just used contraception... ur irresponsibility is not that child's fault!
MuscleBob1 wrote on 25th May 2019, 11:48 AM:
Sampopxxx101 wrote on 24th May 2019, 10:53 PM:
Also if you tell women to put these children up for adoption, then you should have adopted a child. Don't want to? Then you're not pro-life if you're gonna leave that child alone in a foster home.
So you're saying if people are pro-life they are legally required to adopt a child? The whole point of putting them in an adoption center is to give them a family that has the ability and is willing to support and raise a child.
Also, according to sources, 85% of women get abortions for lifestyle reasons so they can live out their selfish "dream" lives. Keep in mind, rape is extremely uncommon, and under 1% of abortions are from rape victims, making one of the biggest arguments of pro-choice near invalid. There are also plenty of women who are pro-life, some even in the government.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/47227/walsh-three-reasons-why-rape-and-incest-argument-matt-walsh
Wow it’s almost as if you have the choice to not adopt a child! Quit turning your backs on those who are actually living and not some insentient embryos who wouldn’t know or feel if they have been aborted.
P.S. a child should only be raised in the best possible conditions a parent could supply. Most women have abortions for reasons: poverty, getting through mental illness, etc,. Children should not have to go through poverty or neglect because that would just be gruesome honestly.
yeah aight but you could have just used contraception... ur irresponsibility is not that child's fault!
it was only hypothetical
Master
6,414 posts
8,754
Seen 25th August 2023
Solaris
25th May 2019, 02:57 PM
Damen wrote on 25th May 2019, 01:39 AM:
CoolLloyd wrote on 24th May 2019, 12:46 PM:
Damen wrote on 24th May 2019, 03:47 AM:
CoolLloyd wrote on 23rd May 2019, 06:23 PM:
Damen wrote on 23rd May 2019, 12:37 PM:
1 Corinthians 13:4 says
Quote:
Love is patient and kind ... Love does not look for its own interests.
Letting the child live and giving it the best upbringing you can is surely the best way of making good out of a crappy situation right?
Making good? What is good? Good for society, for the child or for the pregnant woman?
Good for child, good for carer (whoever it ends up being)
Killing babies is hardly 'good' for anyone, no matter how entitled we think we are
It disturbs me deeply that this is even a debate in our society... but what can I expect from a me-first culture like ours
We are not really speaking in axiological terms (good or bad) but through ethical terms (right or wrong). I hardly imagine somebody saying that having an abortion is a "good thing", it's a very traumatic process and women know that.
I don't think that this debate is disturbing. Everything should be discussed.
This is the problem... We invent words and complicated ideas to justify our selfish desires. And anyway, right and wrong are the same thing as good and bad...
Damen wrote on 24th May 2019, 03:47 AM:
CoolLloyd wrote on 23rd May 2019, 06:23 PM:
Damen wrote on 23rd May 2019, 12:37 PM:
1 Corinthians 13:4 says
Quote:
Love is patient and kind ... Love does not look for its own interests.
Letting the child live and giving it the best upbringing you can is surely the best way of making good out of a crappy situation right?
Making good? What is good? Good for society, for the child or for the pregnant woman?
Good for child, good for carer (whoever it ends up being)
Killing babies is hardly 'good' for anyone, no matter how entitled we think we are
It disturbs me deeply that this is even a debate in our society... but what can I expect from a me-first culture like ours
We are not really speaking in axiological terms (good or bad) but through ethical terms (right or wrong). I hardly imagine somebody saying that having an abortion is a "good thing", it's a very traumatic process and women know that.
I don't think that this debate is disturbing. Everything should be discussed.
This is the problem... We invent words and complicated ideas to justify our selfish desires. And anyway, right and wrong are the same thing as good and bad...
Not really. Some things that are good for society are not right, because they require violence towards individuals. Good and bad are axiological terms and they depend on values. Right and wrong do not depend on values. For a christian, it would be good that christian values were spread to everybody. But the right thing is that people should have religious freedom and be able to choose their religion/creed freely.
MintWolf wrote on 25th May 2019, 10:10 AM:
Sampopxxx101 wrote on 24th May 2019, 10:53 PM:
Also if you tell women to put these children up for adoption, then you should have adopted a child. Don't want to? Then you're not pro-life if you're gonna leave that child alone in a foster home.
if you want to put puppies up for adoption, then you should adopt a puppy. don't want to? then you hate all dogs if you're gonna leave that puppy alone in an adoption centre.
it's almost as if not everybody has to adopt a child
Also if you tell women to put these children up for adoption, then you should have adopted a child. Don't want to? Then you're not pro-life if you're gonna leave that child alone in a foster home.
if you want to put puppies up for adoption, then you should adopt a puppy. don't want to? then you hate all dogs if you're gonna leave that puppy alone in an adoption centre.
it's almost as if not everybody has to adopt a child
That's a false analogy. Dogs and children are substantially different.
MuscleBob1 wrote on 25th May 2019, 11:48 AM:
Sampopxxx101 wrote on 24th May 2019, 10:53 PM:
Also if you tell women to put these children up for adoption, then you should have adopted a child. Don't want to? Then you're not pro-life if you're gonna leave that child alone in a foster home.
So you're saying if people are pro-life they are legally required to adopt a child? The whole point of putting them in an adoption center is to give them a family that has the ability and is willing to support and raise a child.
Also, according to sources, 85% of women get abortions for lifestyle reasons so they can live out their selfish "dream" lives. Keep in mind, rape is extremely uncommon, and under 1% of abortions are from rape victims, making one of the biggest arguments of pro-choice near invalid. There are also plenty of women who are pro-life, some even in the government.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/47227/walsh-three-reasons-why-rape-and-incest-argument-matt-walsh
Also if you tell women to put these children up for adoption, then you should have adopted a child. Don't want to? Then you're not pro-life if you're gonna leave that child alone in a foster home.
So you're saying if people are pro-life they are legally required to adopt a child? The whole point of putting them in an adoption center is to give them a family that has the ability and is willing to support and raise a child.
Also, according to sources, 85% of women get abortions for lifestyle reasons so they can live out their selfish "dream" lives. Keep in mind, rape is extremely uncommon, and under 1% of abortions are from rape victims, making one of the biggest arguments of pro-choice near invalid. There are also plenty of women who are pro-life, some even in the government.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/47227/walsh-three-reasons-why-rape-and-incest-argument-matt-walsh
Which sources? The article you sent doesn't have any sources. There's no source for such information.
And even if a woman does it for "lifestyle" reasons, what's the problem? I don't know why society should control our bodies.
And considering that you cannot derive a norm from a fact (Hume's guillotine or fact-value gap), it is illogical to create norms based on facts, since there is a huge difference between normative affirmations and descriptive affirmations.
Study philosophy, guys, please.
Gone
Sweet memories
Sweet memories
IKEA Swedish Meatballs
Master
492 posts
1,027
Seen 5th October 2020
Stags
26th May 2019, 01:14 PM
MuscleBob1 wrote on 25th May 2019, 11:48 AM:
Also, according to sources, 85% of women get abortions for lifestyle reasons so they can live out their selfish "dream" lives. Keep in mind, rape is extremely uncommon, and under 1% of abortions are from rape victims, making one of the biggest arguments of pro-choice near invalid. There are also plenty of women who are pro-life, some even in the government.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/47227/walsh-three-reasons-why-rape-and-incest-argument-matt-walsh
https://www.dailywire.com/news/47227/walsh-three-reasons-why-rape-and-incest-argument-matt-walsh
I would just like to point out that your 'source' is a very right-leaning news media outlet with no actual listed sources for its own information. Random news articles don't suffice without actual sources listed in it to back it up.
#CutestPersonAlive
Member
1,887 posts
1,949
Seen 30th August 2023
26th May 2019, 01:49 PM
EbonJaeger wrote on 26th May 2019, 01:14 PM:
MuscleBob1 wrote on 25th May 2019, 11:48 AM:
Also, according to sources, 85% of women get abortions for lifestyle reasons so they can live out their selfish "dream" lives. Keep in mind, rape is extremely uncommon, and under 1% of abortions are from rape victims, making one of the biggest arguments of pro-choice near invalid. There are also plenty of women who are pro-life, some even in the government.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/47227/walsh-three-reasons-why-rape-and-incest-argument-matt-walsh
I would just like to point out that your 'source' is a very right-leaning news media outlet with no actual listed sources for its own information. Random news articles don't suffice without actual sources listed in it to back it up.
Also, according to sources, 85% of women get abortions for lifestyle reasons so they can live out their selfish "dream" lives. Keep in mind, rape is extremely uncommon, and under 1% of abortions are from rape victims, making one of the biggest arguments of pro-choice near invalid. There are also plenty of women who are pro-life, some even in the government.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/47227/walsh-three-reasons-why-rape-and-incest-argument-matt-walsh
I would just like to point out that your 'source' is a very right-leaning news media outlet with no actual listed sources for its own information. Random news articles don't suffice without actual sources listed in it to back it up.
* play gitaroo man. my final message. gootbye.
IKEA Swedish Meatballs
Master
492 posts
1,027
Seen 5th October 2020
26th May 2019, 04:01 PM
MintWolf wrote on 26th May 2019, 01:49 PM:
so im assuming, using your logic, you only trust left wing media?
I don't trust much of any media, certainly not on controversial topics. Both sides have the same problem. I'm far more interested in actual studies that can document how they reached their conclusions.
it was only hypothetical
Master
6,414 posts
8,754
Seen 25th August 2023
26th May 2019, 05:08 PM
MintWolf wrote on 26th May 2019, 06:45 AM:
despite making up less than 0.5% of th
There are many different methodologies to create a statistic, and the validity of the number depends on that methodology. Who said that those numbers are valid? For example, who are the women considered? American women only? Because then, the data is only valid for the american case, and as we know, abortion is not an american problem, it happens worldwide. Secondly, what's the source? That's just a table with percentages, anybody could have made that up. There's no source, no study, no authors, articles and scientific data.
And what's the problem with having no reason? It's your body, why can't you just let people control it? Society should not control individuals because individuals compose society. This means that a group of individuals should not violate the body of an individual.
Again, it is not logically consistent to derive a norm from a fact because there is a huge difference between normative statements and descriptive statements. You cannot say that a woman must (this is a norm) not have an abortion because she had intercourse (this is a fact). Read David Hume's Treatise on Human Nature.
MintWolf wrote on 26th May 2019, 01:49 PM:
EbonJaeger wrote on 26th May 2019, 01:14 PM:
MuscleBob1 wrote on 25th May 2019, 11:48 AM:
Also, according to sources, 85% of women get abortions for lifestyle reasons so they can live out their selfish "dream" lives. Keep in mind, rape is extremely uncommon, and under 1% of abortions are from rape victims, making one of the biggest arguments of pro-choice near invalid. There are also plenty of women who are pro-life, some even in the government.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/47227/walsh-three-reasons-why-rape-and-incest-argument-matt-walsh
I would just like to point out that your 'source' is a very right-leaning news media outlet with no actual listed sources for its own information. Random news articles don't suffice without actual sources listed in it to back it up.
so im assuming, using your logic, you only trust left wing media?
MuscleBob1 wrote on 25th May 2019, 11:48 AM:
Also, according to sources, 85% of women get abortions for lifestyle reasons so they can live out their selfish "dream" lives. Keep in mind, rape is extremely uncommon, and under 1% of abortions are from rape victims, making one of the biggest arguments of pro-choice near invalid. There are also plenty of women who are pro-life, some even in the government.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/47227/walsh-three-reasons-why-rape-and-incest-argument-matt-walsh
I would just like to point out that your 'source' is a very right-leaning news media outlet with no actual listed sources for its own information. Random news articles don't suffice without actual sources listed in it to back it up.
so im assuming, using your logic, you only trust left wing media?
No, he's just saying that biased media should not be used as a source, no matter if the bias is right-leaning or left-leaning.
Gone
Sweet memories
Sweet memories
#CutestPersonAlive
Member
1,887 posts
1,949
Seen 30th August 2023
26th May 2019, 05:28 PM
CoolLloyd wrote on 26th May 2019, 05:08 PM:
MintWolf wrote on 26th May 2019, 06:45 AM:
despite making up less than 0.5% of th
There are many different methodologies to create a statistic, and the validity of the number depends on that methodology. Who said that those numbers are valid? For example, who are the women considered? American women only? Because then, the data is only valid for the american case, and as we know, abortion is not an american problem, it happens worldwide. Secondly, what's the source? That's just a table with percentages, anybody could have made that up. There's no source, no study, no authors, articles and scientific data.
And what's the problem with having no reason? It's your body, why can't you just let people control it? Society should not control individuals because individuals compose society. This means that a group of individuals should not violate the body of an individual.
Again, it is not logically consistent to derive a norm from a fact because there is a huge different between normative statements and descriptive statements. You cannot say that a woman must (this is a norm) not have an abortion because she had intercourse (this is a fact). Read David Hume's Treatise on Human Nature.
MintWolf wrote on 26th May 2019, 01:49 PM:
EbonJaeger wrote on 26th May 2019, 01:14 PM:
MuscleBob1 wrote on 25th May 2019, 11:48 AM:
Also, according to sources, 85% of women get abortions for lifestyle reasons so they can live out their selfish "dream" lives. Keep in mind, rape is extremely uncommon, and under 1% of abortions are from rape victims, making one of the biggest arguments of pro-choice near invalid. There are also plenty of women who are pro-life, some even in the government.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/47227/walsh-three-reasons-why-rape-and-incest-argument-matt-walsh
I would just like to point out that your 'source' is a very right-leaning news media outlet with no actual listed sources for its own information. Random news articles don't suffice without actual sources listed in it to back it up.
so im assuming, using your logic, you only trust left wing media?
No, he's just saying that biased media should not be used as a source, no matter if the bias is right-leaning or left-leaning.
despite making up less than 0.5% of th
There are many different methodologies to create a statistic, and the validity of the number depends on that methodology. Who said that those numbers are valid? For example, who are the women considered? American women only? Because then, the data is only valid for the american case, and as we know, abortion is not an american problem, it happens worldwide. Secondly, what's the source? That's just a table with percentages, anybody could have made that up. There's no source, no study, no authors, articles and scientific data.
And what's the problem with having no reason? It's your body, why can't you just let people control it? Society should not control individuals because individuals compose society. This means that a group of individuals should not violate the body of an individual.
Again, it is not logically consistent to derive a norm from a fact because there is a huge different between normative statements and descriptive statements. You cannot say that a woman must (this is a norm) not have an abortion because she had intercourse (this is a fact). Read David Hume's Treatise on Human Nature.
MintWolf wrote on 26th May 2019, 01:49 PM:
EbonJaeger wrote on 26th May 2019, 01:14 PM:
MuscleBob1 wrote on 25th May 2019, 11:48 AM:
Also, according to sources, 85% of women get abortions for lifestyle reasons so they can live out their selfish "dream" lives. Keep in mind, rape is extremely uncommon, and under 1% of abortions are from rape victims, making one of the biggest arguments of pro-choice near invalid. There are also plenty of women who are pro-life, some even in the government.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/47227/walsh-three-reasons-why-rape-and-incest-argument-matt-walsh
I would just like to point out that your 'source' is a very right-leaning news media outlet with no actual listed sources for its own information. Random news articles don't suffice without actual sources listed in it to back it up.
so im assuming, using your logic, you only trust left wing media?
No, he's just saying that biased media should not be used as a source, no matter if the bias is right-leaning or left-leaning.
Did you just say that there's no problem with murdering a child for no reason
i need to. sit down
* play gitaroo man. my final message. gootbye.
it was only hypothetical
Master
6,414 posts
8,754
Seen 25th August 2023
26th May 2019, 05:49 PM
MintWolf wrote on 26th May 2019, 05:28 PM:
CoolLloyd wrote on 26th May 2019, 05:08 PM:
MintWolf wrote on 26th May 2019, 06:45 AM:
despite making up less than 0.5% of th
There are many different methodologies to create a statistic, and the validity of the number depends on that methodology. Who said that those numbers are valid? For example, who are the women considered? American women only? Because then, the data is only valid for the american case, and as we know, abortion is not an american problem, it happens worldwide. Secondly, what's the source? That's just a table with percentages, anybody could have made that up. There's no source, no study, no authors, articles and scientific data.
And what's the problem with having no reason? It's your body, why can't you just let people control it? Society should not control individuals because individuals compose society. This means that a group of individuals should not violate the body of an individual.
Again, it is not logically consistent to derive a norm from a fact because there is a huge different between normative statements and descriptive statements. You cannot say that a woman must (this is a norm) not have an abortion because she had intercourse (this is a fact). Read David Hume's Treatise on Human Nature.
MintWolf wrote on 26th May 2019, 01:49 PM:
EbonJaeger wrote on 26th May 2019, 01:14 PM:
MuscleBob1 wrote on 25th May 2019, 11:48 AM:
Also, according to sources, 85% of women get abortions for lifestyle reasons so they can live out their selfish "dream" lives. Keep in mind, rape is extremely uncommon, and under 1% of abortions are from rape victims, making one of the biggest arguments of pro-choice near invalid. There are also plenty of women who are pro-life, some even in the government.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/47227/walsh-three-reasons-why-rape-and-incest-argument-matt-walsh
I would just like to point out that your 'source' is a very right-leaning news media outlet with no actual listed sources for its own information. Random news articles don't suffice without actual sources listed in it to back it up.
so im assuming, using your logic, you only trust left wing media?
No, he's just saying that biased media should not be used as a source, no matter if the bias is right-leaning or left-leaning.
Did
Did you just say that there's no problem with murdering a child for no reason
i need to. sit down
MintWolf wrote on 26th May 2019, 06:45 AM:
despite making up less than 0.5% of th
There are many different methodologies to create a statistic, and the validity of the number depends on that methodology. Who said that those numbers are valid? For example, who are the women considered? American women only? Because then, the data is only valid for the american case, and as we know, abortion is not an american problem, it happens worldwide. Secondly, what's the source? That's just a table with percentages, anybody could have made that up. There's no source, no study, no authors, articles and scientific data.
And what's the problem with having no reason? It's your body, why can't you just let people control it? Society should not control individuals because individuals compose society. This means that a group of individuals should not violate the body of an individual.
Again, it is not logically consistent to derive a norm from a fact because there is a huge different between normative statements and descriptive statements. You cannot say that a woman must (this is a norm) not have an abortion because she had intercourse (this is a fact). Read David Hume's Treatise on Human Nature.
MintWolf wrote on 26th May 2019, 01:49 PM:
EbonJaeger wrote on 26th May 2019, 01:14 PM:
MuscleBob1 wrote on 25th May 2019, 11:48 AM:
Also, according to sources, 85% of women get abortions for lifestyle reasons so they can live out their selfish "dream" lives. Keep in mind, rape is extremely uncommon, and under 1% of abortions are from rape victims, making one of the biggest arguments of pro-choice near invalid. There are also plenty of women who are pro-life, some even in the government.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/47227/walsh-three-reasons-why-rape-and-incest-argument-matt-walsh
I would just like to point out that your 'source' is a very right-leaning news media outlet with no actual listed sources for its own information. Random news articles don't suffice without actual sources listed in it to back it up.
so im assuming, using your logic, you only trust left wing media?
No, he's just saying that biased media should not be used as a source, no matter if the bias is right-leaning or left-leaning.
Did
Did you just say that there's no problem with murdering a child for no reason
i need to. sit down
Let's define child firstly. A child is a young human being, between birth and puberty. A fetus is not born yet, thus, it's not a child.
Plus, murdering means killing an extrauterine life, which means, outside of the uterus.
Stop bringing common sense notions to this debate. Common sense is only applicable to day-to-day topics, and abortion is not one of them. There are profound ethical discussions, it's not something that you can discuss with vague common sense, you need a critical sense.
Gone
Sweet memories
Sweet memories
#CutestPersonAlive
Member
1,887 posts
1,949
Seen 30th August 2023
it was only hypothetical
Master
6,414 posts
8,754
Seen 25th August 2023
27th May 2019, 06:36 PM
MintWolf wrote on 27th May 2019, 06:37 AM:
CoolLloyd wrote on 26th May 2019, 05:49 PM:
A fetus is not born yet, thus, it's not a child.
"YET"
thanks for proving my point, by advocating the termination of a potential life.
A fetus is not born yet, thus, it's not a child.
"YET"
thanks for proving my point, by advocating the termination of a potential life.
I don't know how this proves your point. The fact that it is not born is just a mere observation, and anybody is capable of seeing that. Everything is potential, if you know Aristotle's pair (actuality and potentiality). Every tree is a potential table, every ink is a potential painting, but those are hypothetical situations. As we know, it's unwise and reckless to stick to possibilities, we must stick to reality firstly, after that we may consider possibilities and probabilities. Let's not invert the chronology.
I believe that now you prove my point, you said "potential life" and not "life", thus, abortion is not murder, since murdering means ending a life.
Your reasoning seems very inconsistent to me, firstly you said "child" and now you say "potential life". You keep changing your terminology, but they are all supposed to have the same meaning. Until now, I haven't seen a single definition, a single clear concept, again, the same vague common sense notions appear.
Gone
Sweet memories
Sweet memories