Abortion bill pass in Kentucky

[ChrisBFRPKY]

I don't 'know' that because I don't even agree with it.

You introduced the standard of 'if it has a heartbeat.'

Other examples of someone with a heartbeat was put forward. You described such examples (humans with beating hearts) as 'disease.'

I'm just going to conclude that you are now abandoning your previous assertion. You can comfort yourself with whatever rationalizations you prefer.



I prefer discussion in good faith, myself.

Guess we can't always get what we want 'as you well know.'

KY, introduced the standard "if it has a heartbeat" thing, I merely referred to it.

I made the "if the foetus has DNA it's a human being" statement.

Should parasitic twins be aborted? Nope.

Is a tumor a person? Nope. Can it ever develop into a person? Nope.

I view all life as precious.
Chris B.

 

[uke2se]

KY, introduced the standard "if it has a heartbeat" thing, I merely referred to it.

I made the "if the foetus has DNA it's a human being" statement.

Should parasitic twins be aborted? Nope.

Is a tumor a person? Nope. Can it ever develop into a person? Nope.

I view all life as precious.
Chris B.

Do you sweep the street in front of you to avoid crushing bugs?

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

First of all, it's not just a hypothesis. It's the best possible explanation for what we observe: we are all descendants from the same organism. Any other organism formed prior to it or during that time was wiped out. My, aren't we lucky they were squished.

Your post is an appeal to potential by looking at the result of past events, but it has no bearing on the issue whatsoever. Perhaps if you'd care to make an actual argument, we could discuss it, but as it stands you're just "against" it because of, I guess, religion.

I think it does. We all start out as a small organism that develops into a human being. No matter how under developed we were at one point, we became a human being. To destroy an under developed human is no different than destroying a 60 year old man walking down the street. We cannot moralize destruction of life.
Chris B.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

Do you sweep the street in front of you to avoid crushing bugs?

No I don't. Do you purposely speed up to nail that cat or dog that runs into the path of your vehicle?

Chris B.

 

[fagin]

No I don't. Do you purposely speed up to nail that cat or dog that runs into the path of your vehicle?

Chris B.

Only possums and bigfoots.

 

[marplots]

In the end, biology is immoral through and through.

 

[uke2se]

No I don't. Do you purposely speed up to nail that cat or dog that runs into the path of your vehicle?

Chris B.

So you don't actually "view all life as precious" then. Why did you feel the need to lie about that?

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

Only possums and bigfoots.

Now that's funny.
Chris B.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

So you don't actually "view all life as precious" then. Why did you feel the need to lie about that?

I'm not sure how sweeping the ground in front of me makes me truthful but not doing so makes me lie..........Is the broom the difference?
Chris B.

 

[uke2se]

I'm not sure how sweeping the ground in front of me makes me truthful but not doing so makes me lie..........Is the broom the difference?
Chris B.

You apparently don't care enough about the life you crush underfoot to make the statement that you view all life as precious truthful.

 

[Belz...]

I think it does. We all start out as a small organism that develops into a human being. No matter how under developed we were at one point, we became a human being.

Again: you are looking at a potential future outcome and trying to apply it to a current situation. The foetus is not, currently, a person. Ergo saying that it will become a person in the future is just as silly as treating a car like a pile of rust because at some time in the future it'll be a pile of rust.

To destroy an under developed human is no different than destroying a 60 year old man walking down the street.

Yeah, except for the fact that the 60 year old man has 60 years of experience and full personhood. Yeah, other than those two fundamental differences, they're exactly the same!

We cannot moralize destruction of life.

What a silly, extremist ideology. War is sometimes the moral choice despite the death it causes, and I presume that you eat previously-living beings?

 

[Darat]

And why not? If you believe that aborting a fetus is, without qualification, murder of a human being, then isn't the death penalty for the murderers the logical outcome of your own argument?

(That's assuming you favor the death penalty- if not, change "death penalty" to "life in prison" for any woman having an abortion)

And if we accept Chris's starting point women will need to be prosecuted if they do anything to endanger the fetus, and if they have an accident and lose the fetus they will need to be prosecuted for manslaughter (think you call that 2nd degree homicide in the USA?). The idea we hold the fetus sacred from the moment of conception actually run counters to "Judo_Christian" religious traditions.

 

[Darat]

I don't believe in killing anyone. Abortion certainly is murder. If a woman can live with the knowledge of having one, I expect that's punishment itself.
Chris B.

If I murder you I should avoid prosecution because I'd have to live with the knowledge of killing you?

 

[Cleon]

If I murder you I should avoid prosecution because I'd have to live with the knowledge of killing you?

It's funny how the crowd that claims "abortion is murder" never seems to actually believe it.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

The important thing is that we all agree that my personal beliefs in magical sky monsters is so important that everyone else should be compelled by law to not get treatment for ectopic pregnancy even though it is 100% fatal to fetus and mother.

Classic Straw Man.

I am an atheist personally opposed to unlimited abortion rights. I think reasonable restrictions are defensible. However, inserting a fringe position into the discussion - I assume you meant a TOTAL abortion ban that had NO exceptions for the health and life of the mother - does nothing to move this discussion forward.

"Magical sky monsters" doesn't help much, either.

 

[Belz...]

No but you can't deny that the sky monster is the root cause of much of the abortion opposition.

 

[The Greater Fool]

I think it does. We all start out as a small organism that develops into a human being. No matter how under developed we were at one point, we became a human being. To destroy an under developed human is no different than destroying a 60 year old man walking down the street. We cannot moralize destruction of life.
Chris B.

Highlights: To 'develop into' or 'become' a human clearly includes the idea that they are not yet a human. One can't 'develop into' or 'become' something they already are.

 

[Belz...]

Oops.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

No but you can't deny that the sky monster is the root cause of much of the abortion opposition.

Stipulated. I think you could safely substitute "most of" for "much of" and still have an accurate statement.

But I'm a data point of one that an atheist "secular humanist" can find rights for a human fetus beyond a certain level of development that may begin to conflict with a mother's abortion rights. With no "sky monster" in play.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Classic Straw Man.

I am an atheist personally opposed to unlimited abortion rights. I think reasonable restrictions are defensible. However, inserting a fringe position into the discussion - I assume you meant a TOTAL abortion ban that had NO exceptions for the health and life of the mother - does nothing to move this discussion forward.

"Magical sky monsters" doesn't help much, either.

I feel no requirement to be reasonable in the face of the opposition who are not only utterly unreasonable but glory in being so. Being polite is catering to stupid beliefs and stupid people. They do not return the favor. You can be reasonable, and calm, and mature, and make rational arguments...and they straight up bomb abortion clinics and assassinate doctors and lobby the government to harrass people and deny them their constitutional rights. The stupid have been waging war upon the reasonable for a long time now, and are doing more damage than ever before. It's time to stop being polite to them before they wreck everything.