Anti-abortionists don't believe that life begins at conception.

[Beskar]

I was born by C-section.

"i will not be killed, for none of woman born, shall harm me!" the tyrant comments.
Rhyfelwyr aligns his blade, striking the fearsome man in his heart.
"How.. can this be?" he mutters in disbelief.
"c-section", Rhyfelwyr replies.

- William Orgspeare

[HoreTore]

To be fair HoreTore has adopted a more nuanced position and we were able to have a decent dialogue with each other I think.

But I would say that there are many irrelevant arguments being banded about because they don't get to the core of the matter, which as you said, is about when life begins.

My original intent with this thread was to argue against absolute positions, not against anti-abortion in general. I went with the anti-abortion absolute because that's what I was raging about at the time. Further, I haven't really seen anyone claiming that abortion one week before birth is okay.

[Fragony]

Absolute positions are always stupid.

Wait, that's an absolute position. Still true though.

[ajaxfetish]

-> Cesarian section babies are zombies and cannot be counted as being alive.

<-- Proud father of 2 lifeless abominations here.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

<-- Proud father of 2 lifeless abominations here.

The big chap seems to be looking over things calmly...the little tyke is clearly sizing up my brain-pan for a feast.

Or in my case a snack.

[Crandar]

<-- Proud father of 2 lifeless abominations here.

They used Caesarian section for both your kids?!
That's a case of either extreme bad luck or avaricious gynaecologist.
Just a couple of days ago, the media exposed a doctor of a public hospital, who applied the Caesarian section for the 97% of the childbirths he hanlded.

[HoreTore]

They used Caesarian section for both your kids?!
That's a case of either extreme bad luck or avaricious gynaecologist.
Just a couple of days ago, the media exposed a doctor of a public hospital, who applied the Caesarian section for the 97% of the childbirths he hanlded.

C-section often makes it so that every following child also needs a c-section. My sister was born by c-section, and because of that both myself and my brother were born by c-section...

[Seamus Fermanagh]

They used Caesarian section for both your kids?!
That's a case of either extreme bad luck or avaricious gynaecologist.
Just a couple of days ago, the media exposed a doctor of a public hospital, who applied the Caesarian section for the 97% of the childbirths he hanlded.

Actually, VBAC is often considered the riskier choice. A caesarian first delivery is often followed with subsequent caesarians for the same woman.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

C-section often makes it so that every following child also needs a c-section. My sister was born by c-section, and because of that both myself and my brother were born by c-section...

Oh, so you are also part of the zombie threat...this explains much.

[HoreTore]

Oh, so you are also part of the zombie threat...this explains much.

Now I know why I enjoyed eating sheeps brain so much...

[ajaxfetish]

They used Caesarian section for both your kids?!
That's a case of either extreme bad luck or avaricious gynaecologist.
Just a couple of days ago, the media exposed a doctor of a public hospital, who applied the Caesarian section for the 97% of the childbirths he hanlded.

Both emergency C-sections when the baby's heart-rate dropped precipitously during labor. From what our doctor told us, there's been a lot of progress such that VBAC is more likely to work than in the past, and we tried going natural for the second, but it didn't work out. If we decide to ever have a third, we'll plan on it being a C-section from the get-go.

[burphat]

I think the belief has something to do with religion. Catholics believes that life begins with conception. Logically, different from murder but with the same intent. That is to get rid of someone/"something".

[Kralizec]

Could be, I don't how it's in England, here is a waiting list.

You might be thinking of adoptive parents. There's no shortage of those. Foster parents = "pleegouders"; this often is a temporary arrangement for kids who need a temporary stay somewhere else, before a permanent solution is reached (either the real parents get their act together or a permanent replacement family is found)

My impression from Frags post, while acknowledging the fact that Fragolese is a very ambiguous language, was that he is against all abortions where the reason given is 'unwanted pregnancy', with the only exceptions being rape and such. I may be wrong.

I thanked this post for coining the term 'Fragolese'.

[Kralizec]

C-section often makes it so that every following child also needs a c-section. My sister was born by c-section, and because of that both myself and my brother were born by c-section...

Same here.

We should invent some sort of Zombie/Abomination handshake...

[HopAlongBunny]

Birth, conception what nonsense.
Really people, there's a pill for that:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...bstinence.html

[Vincent Butler]

HoreTore, you have a point in what you say about us not acting like the murder of unborn children is any big deal. The problem is, most people don't see what they can do, especially as the Supreme Court upheld it. It is still preached and taught against in the churches, but as a court has made it legal, what can we do? We would like to see Roe v. Wade reversed, but it is out of our hands. Abortion is not specifically mentioned in our constitution. And the question of when life really starts is still a subject of debate, even in the churches. Really, your logic about not believing applies to Christians as well. We believe that those who reject Christ are going to hell, yet very few Christians really do anything about it. We believe it, but we don't really comprehend the ramifications of it. My church does support around sixty missionaries, both here in America and abroad, including the Philippines, Papua New Guinea, Mongolia, and Thailand. Or, Christians are too comfortable here to bother about other people across the world. They don't want to leave their comfort zone. Notice that the underground churches in places like Iran and North Korea grow very well. The church grows under persecution. It grows lackadaisical in the lack of persecution. Sad, but a fact. But I digress. A life is a life. There is brain activity and response to outside influences such as the mother's voice, in an unborn child. And as Reagan said, "I notice that everybody who is for abortion has been born." Your point deals with either apathy on the pro-life crowd, they believe it but don't care enough to do anything, or simply not knowing what they can do. I guess for now, all we can do is educate people on that goes on before birth. Also, several states do pass laws restricting abortions, without actually making the act itself illegal. That is also an option.

[Kadagar_AV]

HoreTore, you have a point in what you say about us not acting like the murder of unborn children is any big deal.

The problem is, most people don't see what they can do, especially as the Supreme Court upheld it.

It is still preached and taught against in the churches, but as a court has made it legal, what can we do? We would like to see Roe v. Wade reversed, but it is out of our hands.

Abortion is not specifically mentioned in our constitution. And the question of when life really starts is still a subject of debate, even in the churches. Really, your logic about not believing applies to Christians as well.

We believe that those who reject Christ are going to hell, yet very few Christians really do anything about it.

We believe it, but we don't really comprehend the ramifications of it. My church does support around sixty missionaries, both here in America and abroad, including the Philippines, Papua New Guinea, Mongolia, and Thailand. Or, Christians are too comfortable here to bother about other people across the world. They don't want to leave their comfort zone.

Notice that the underground churches in places like Iran and North Korea grow very well. The church grows under persecution. It grows lackadaisical in the lack of persecution. Sad, but a fact.

But I digress. A life is a life.

There is brain activity and response to outside influences such as the mother's voice, in an unborn child. And as Reagan said, "I notice that everybody who is for abortion has been born."

Your point deals with either apathy on the pro-life crowd, they believe it but don't care enough to do anything, or simply not knowing what they can do. I guess for now, all we can do is educate people on that goes on before birth.

Also, several states do pass laws restricting abortions, without actually making the act itself illegal. That is also an option.

Fixed your block of text.

[Papewaio]

Separation of Church and State.

People should be allowed to chose what happens to their bodies regardless of what beliefs others have.

Until I see Zeus, Thor, or any other diety running around I'm going to park a religious system in the same regard as a sci-Fi convention. Dress up in your costumes and have as much fun as you want; just don't expect me to pay or play your way.

[Brenus]

I will start to listen to believers when they will all agree on the number of god(s), names and how to worship him/her/them/it.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Separation of Church and State.

People should be allowed to chose what happens to their bodies regardless of what beliefs others have.

Until I see Zeus, Thor, or any other diety running around I'm going to park a religious system in the same regard as a sci-Fi convention. Dress up in your costumes and have as much fun as you want; just don't expect me to pay or play your way.

This sort of mentality always strikes me as an abuse of what separation of church and state was originally intended for.

Especially in an American context, it meant that there was not be any established national, or federal, church. It was never intended to mean that Christians must abandon their religious beliefs as soon as they go to the ballot box, or engage at all in politics. Why should atheists vote according to their conscience, but not Christians?

The above should be obvious when you consider that many states had their own established churches which citizens were required to pay taxes to and attend if they wanted to hold public office. Connecticut and Massachusetts had established Congregationalist churches. More strangely, some, like Virginia, continued for a short time after the establishment of the constitution to have the Church of England as their established church; which is of course a national church, just not that of their own nation.

[Vincent Butler]

Separation of Church and State.

People should be allowed to chose what happens to their bodies regardless of what beliefs others have.

Until I see Zeus, Thor, or any other diety running around I'm going to park a religious system in the same regard as a sci-Fi convention. Dress up in your costumes and have as much fun as you want; just don't expect me to pay or play your way.

You are welcome to feel the way you feel about religion. The Bible says we walk by faith, not by sight. But the concept of people doing what they want with their own bodies...that baby is a separate person, not just an extension of the woman's body.
Separation of church and state comes from a letter by Thomas Jefferson to the Dansbury Baptists, with the context being that the government could not come in and tell the church what to preach. Our founding fathers in no way intended for religious beliefs to be kept out of government, virtually all our founding fathers were deeply religious.

[Brenus]

“But the concept of people doing what they want with their own bodies...that baby is a separate person, not just an extension of the woman's body.” Ahh, you have to know what you want: either baby is separate person (so foetus not be separated is not a person, until birth) or it is a person inside when not separate, so is an extension of the woman’s body.

“Our founding fathers in no way intended for religious beliefs to be kept out of government, virtually all our founding fathers were deeply religious.” Quite difficult to know what they were really as they are all dead. Because all the facts and their acts tend to show they were not.

“It was never intended to mean that Christians must abandon their religious beliefs as soon as they go to the ballot box, or engage at all in politics.” It never meant this. It means you can’t act and impose to others following you belief. You do it following the law that is for the all population. You are a deep whatever that forbids you to wear clothes, well, you can’t do it in public places or offices. You are deep Catholic believing that the Jews killed Christ and make the bread with the blood of Children, well, you can’t kill the Jews. Nor you can nail cats or owls on the door of a barn…

[Rhyfelwyr]

“It was never intended to mean that Christians must abandon their religious beliefs as soon as they go to the ballot box, or engage at all in politics.” It never meant this. It means you can’t act and impose to others following you belief. You do it following the law that is for the all population.

Agreed.

But that "law that is for all the population" brings in a couple of grey areas. You and me can agree that murder is wrong and should be punished by law. The grey area is of course about when life (or more accurately, personhood) begins. In this instance, in being anti-abortion, I do not see myself as forcing religious beliefs upon others... I see myself as supporting one of the most basic secular laws of the land - the law against murder.

What about atheists who oppose abortion? And/or those who oppose it for non-religious philosophical reasons?

[Vincent Butler]

“[B]
“Our founding fathers in no way intended for religious beliefs to be kept out of government, virtually all our founding fathers were deeply religious.” Quite difficult to know what they were really as they are all dead. Because all the facts and their acts tend to show they were not.

Umm...yes, they were religious. Read especially some of the comments by John Adams. If you are referring especially to Jefferson and Franklin, Franklin's comment about an empire not rising without God's aid, and Jefferson's comment about God's justice, make null and void the arguments that those two were not religious, albeit perhaps not like some of the others. I guess it depends on your definition of the word "religious". I mean actively following a religious faith. Washington was Anglican, but his personal chaplain was a Baptist. There was even a Muslim, but by the end of it all, he had become a Christian.

[HoreTore]

How are people who lived 200 years ago even remotely relevant to the current day and age...?


Get with the times, people.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

How are people who lived 200 years ago even remotely relevant to the current day and age...?

Er.... isn't that the definition of history?

[Ironside]

Er.... isn't that the definition of history?

History is complex. On one hand it teaches much about human nature, on the other, it's severly underequiped to deal with the consequences of technological and sociological progression. Even the wisest person in history was only wisest at his time. For the rest of time, he might qualify as wise.

[HoreTore]

Er.... isn't that the definition of history?

And why should "history" dictate the present?

[a completely inoffensive name]

History is complex. On one hand it teaches much about human nature, on the other, it's severly underequiped to deal with the consequences of technological and sociological progression. Even the wisest person in history was only wisest at his time. For the rest of time, he might qualify as wise.

Odd how you recognize history is complex, but still subscribe to the idea that history is one long thread of positive progression.

[a completely inoffensive name]

And why should "history" dictate the present?

Would you rather it be the people flying by the seat of their pants?