|
Posted Jul 30, '12 at 3:52pm
Kasic
5,184 posts
|
most people are good people, not what you mentioned.
So? Neither of us can prove either way what would have happened if not aborted. There could have been a miscarriage. It might have got sick and died before age 3. It may have been hit by a car. We can't say.
Hitler
Godwin's law.
|
| |
|
Posted Jul 31, '12 at 6:09am
HahiHa
4,239 posts
|
Chances aren't valid arguments, because of what they are - chances. What is your reason to say that an abortion could have killed a miracle child? If you hope that it will become a miracle child, then you're most definitely gonna be frustrated. If you don't then why use that argument?
|
| |
|
Posted Jul 31, '12 at 12:28pm
Jacen96
1,200 posts
|
Chances aren't valid arguments, because of what they are - chances. What is your reason to say that an abortion could have killed a miracle child?
no, i hope it will be a person.
|
| |
|
Posted Jul 31, '12 at 1:40pm
HahiHa
4,239 posts
|
no, i hope it will be a person.
Which it will, if it isn't aborted naturally. Since it will become a person like any other, it has no special claim to existence. So if it is threatening the mothers health, there is no special reason not to abort. Right?
|
| |
|
Posted Jul 31, '12 at 1:54pm
BRAAINZz
593 posts
|
Which it will, if it isn't aborted naturally. Since it will become a person like any other, it has no special claim to existence. So if it is threatening the mothers health, there is no special reason not to abort. Right?
That does make a lot of sense. Also, there are too many humans, and each one added only makes the planet worse, so if they're nothing special, can't we abort a lot more for the good of the planet?
(Not trying to belittle your argument HahiHa, legitimate post)
|
| |
|
Posted Jul 31, '12 at 3:32pm
jimbol
2 posts
|
in my view no. abortion is not ok.
|
| |
|
Posted Jul 31, '12 at 6:25pm
Bladerunner679
1,256 posts
|
no, i hope it will be a person.
look man, your argument is basically as pointless as trying to hold water with a strainer, and just as hard to accomplish. you are using "what if", which is a terrible argument style (almost as bad as afterburner's little stunt where he tried to put words in our mouths). while you deal in possibilities, the rest of us will deal in facts, and one fact is that the "worshiped tumor's" wellfare is up to the mother. if the mother doesn't want a tumor to grow into something much worse, then it is her right to get rid of it. abortion is like chemo, it's the patient's descision as to whether or not the procedure should be done.
-Blade
|
| |
|
Posted Aug 1, '12 at 12:33pm
Jacen96
1,200 posts
|
So you are saying, that as long as your mother has custody over you, see has the right to kill you, just go where ever you are and make your body shut down?
|
| |
|
Posted Aug 1, '12 at 12:41pm
BRAAINZz
593 posts
|
ee has the right to kill you, just go where ever you are and make your body shut down?
No, but while your not-quite sentient, sure.
|
| |
|
Posted Aug 1, '12 at 1:31pm
Kasic
5,184 posts
|
So you are saying, that as long as your mother has custody over you, see has the right to kill you, just go where ever you are and make your body shut down?
No.
Here's the differences:
1) The mother is sentient. She is aware of what is going on. She has connections to other people. She has to take care of the child.
2) The fetus/baby is unable to survive outside of the mother.
3) The fetus/baby isn't aware. It is a mass of cells that are developing into a person, but are not yet one.
If the mother's life is going to be ruined by having that child, or made substantially harder by it, or just plain not wanted, why should she not be able to make that choice for herself and not have that child? It is not yet its own person, it is attached and growing inside the mother's body. You make the argument that it can be a person. So can just a single ovum/sperm, except they are one step shorter. Is it murder to menstruate? No. So why are you calling it murder when that mass of cells is a few weeks further along?
|
| |
