Abortion

[Gawain of Orkeny]

The photoshop painting is still fresh on your propaganda picture.

Are you trying to say this photo is fake?

Do you really think you can make your position acceptable to people by systematically lying to them and to appeal only to their emotions, never to their reasoning?

So you do think its fake and that the story is a lie?

If this is it the only way you found to make your point, then it must be specially wrong, whatever it can be.

The only way? Have you been following this thread or read any of my posts on the topic over the last few years. My only way. Thats a laugh.

As was said a picture is worth a thousand words. You just cant handle the truth.

[drone]

Real or fake, this photo doesn't really mean anything. Infants (even premature ones) all have the grasping reflex. This is built in along with the sucking reflex. These these are not conscious actions, but reflexes built in for the survival of the very young. Run anything along the palm of a newborn's hand, and he/she will clamp down. It is an cool picture, but if it gets misinterpreted for the purposes of political protest, it becomes propaganda.

Now if you want to debate whether baby reflexes are a sign of being "alive", I'll let someone else take that one over...

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Now if you want to debate whether baby reflexes are a sign of being "alive", I'll let someone else take that one over...

That was my point. That and looking at that picture how can you deny the humanity there?

[Ser Clegane]

Judging from the reactions to the picture I can only assume that a number of people think that abortion in week 21 is OK.

Usually I dislike the frequent use of such pictures in abortion discussions, as they usually represent phases of a pregnancy in which the majority of the pro-choice faction would clearly oppose an abortion

Of course there seem to be some exceptions...

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Usually I dislike the frequent use of such pictures in abortion discussions, as they usually represent phases of a pregnancy in which the majority of the pro-choice faction would clearly oppose an abortion

Me too. Their usually done for shock value. Much like showing a beheading. This though is a picture of joy and hope not disgust and death.

[Ser Clegane]

This though is a picture of joy and hope not disgust and death.

Actually I also like the picture as such.

It's not necessarily the shock value I am referring to - it's the fact that often late stage abortions are shown to make the argument that abortion=murder, while most pro-choicers would vehemently oppose late stage abortions anyway - so such pictures actually have nothing to do with the actual discussion (unless you talk to one of those radical pro-choicers who seem to have the opinion that a baby miraculously receives the spark of life when it leaves its mothers body)

[Don Corleone]

Petrus,
I'm having a hard time following your reasoning. People that support abortion generally support it because they claim the fetus isn't a human being yet. Gawain is offering evidence that at week 21, it is indeed a human being. You turn around and accuse him of manipulating people's emotions. Which is it? Are you looking for evidence of humanity, or are you looking for people to make the argument for viablility in a vacuum of pure reason, with nothing so confusing as empirical observations?

Kurki,
I think you're 100% correct. The abortion debate really is a 'when does life begin' debate, because I've never met anyone who claims it's okay to kill an infant later the same day it's been born. I've never seen a good argument made for 'life begins at birth', but I would be interested to hear it. This is a really difficult question, because the definition of what it means to be alive is widely argued. Some bio-ethicists claim that viruses aren't alive. Others have argued that fire is. Personally, I hold that life begins with viability. And I know this can be viewed as a cop-out, because the age of viability is dependent on the available technology, but let's face it folks, there aren't going to be any simple answers to these questions. We need something that at the very least is definable. The solution we have in the USA right now is abominable and does not work.

[Don Corleone]

Actually I also like the picture as such.

It's not necessarily the shock value I am referring to - it's the fact that often late stage abortions are shown to make the argument that abortion=murder, while most pro-choicers would vehemently oppose late stage abortions anyway - so such pictures actually have nothing to do with the actual discussion (unless you talk to one of those radical pro-choicers who seem to have the opinion that a baby miraculously receives the spark of life when it leaves its mothers body)

I hate to sound like a broken record on this one, Ser C, but you're applying a Euro-centric view of abortion. In most states in the USA, a woman 'has the right to choose' whether to go to an abortion clinic or the delivery room after her water breaks. Every time somebody has attempted to limit discretionary abortion in the 3rd trimester, President Clinton or the court systems have found a way to block it.

[Petrus]

Are you trying to say this photo is fake?

So you do think its fake and that the story is a lie?

The only way? Have you been following this thread or read any of my posts on the topic over the last few years. My only way. Thats a laugh.

As was said a picture is worth a thousand words. You just cant handle the truth.

A picture can stand a billion words and still have no meaning.

In the case of fetus pictures, this is but a show, not an information.

You can find real pictures of 20 weeks old fetus and know nothing about their developpement.

At this age, they can, under some circumstances, remain alive without their mother.

Which means that you chose for your example the show of a supposed abortion which is illegal except under the direst circumstances concerning the mother's life.

By this way you illustrate abortion with an image that does not concern abortion and that is specially designed to make feel horror to it's viewers.

Is it what you call the truth?

If you want to fight/defend abortion, i do not understand how you can pretend to do it with this kind of supposed argument.

Are you writing for sheeps or for responsible individuals?

And yes i have read your posts in this thread and i think they stand at the same level, you mix links of pure propaganda with other that contain informations, you quote statements after shorting them and without explaining them, you never develop your arguments to their full extand, in fact you seem to play in a show, not in a debate, you do not try to convince, only to make already convinced readers confortable.

I ignore wether this is limited to this thread or not but your attitude concerning others pain and the way you treat it is disgusting in this very threat.