A Question for The Pro-Choicers on this Board

[nirgrahamUK]

@Maxliberty

Do you want us to pretend babies just magically appear and that sex has no relationship with creating babies too?

is that seriously what you think he said? he suggested you should stop anthropomorphising mere objects. good advice i think.

[Maxliberty]

@liberty student

Indeed. That is the entire discussion really. What are the conditions for rights?

Exactly. I believe rights start when you become human which is at conception. You believe rights start when?

@liberty student

Again, this is not a contract. A contract requires consent from two parties. You can’t contract yourself to something, and then claim you can’t break that contract. That’s illogical.

Sure you can, it is called responsibility. If we take responsibility out of the human existence you have nothing left.

@liberty student

You’re approaching a familiar level of hostility, and yet seem to fail to recognize that you and I are closer on this in some ways, than anyone else is to your position. I don’t know when life begins.

Bingo, no discussion of liberty can begin until we know when we are human. My question was a serious one, Are you human now? Move back in time until the point you were not human, when was that? That is the answer to your question and if your answer is vague that same vagueness can be used to kill you by the state or anybody else. I much prefer a biological answer to my humanity than any contrived “rational” one. If your not human then you can’t have liberty and I would much prefer my humanity not be something that can be redefined at the whim of others.

@liberty student

You actually have it easy. You’re a theist. You can make appeals to a spiritual origin from the supreme power and arbiter. Atheists like myself have no such starting point. While that doesn’t prove the existence of God, his existence sure would make morality a lot easier to sort out.

I hardly ever bring up religion in these debates but it is true that without a reference point it is hard to know where your going.

[Maxliberty]

@wilderness

If that’s what this has to boil down to - opinion - then I refrain from acting as if I have the ultimate answer on this topic and will not play God and kill somebody over it. And. That’s my opinion.

But you are playing God, the baby is murdered at the whims of the mother. I say let us have responsibility for our actions. You put people in your care, then you care for them. Common sense really, a rare commodity around here.

[liberty_student]

@Maxliberty

if your answer is vague that same vagueness can be used to kill you by the state or anybody else.

Actually, people can kill for any reason. They don’t need a when life begins argument. The imperial soldiers mass murder innocent people who qualify as human by all conventional standards.

@Maxliberty

I much prefer a biological answer to my humanity than any contrived “rational” one.

You mean an empirical answer than an axiomatic one.

@Maxliberty

If your not human then you can’t have liberty

Why?

@Maxliberty

I would much prefer my humanity not be something that can be redefined at the whim of others.

Again, people can redefine you in a heartbeat, regardless of your status as a human.

@Maxliberty

I hardly ever bring up religion in these debates but it is true that without a reference point it is hard to know where your going.

I didn’t want to introduce it, but it is there. You are informed by a particular conception of reality that differs from mine. Trying to reach the same point from different directions is easier said than done.

That said, I’ve tried to be intellectually honest here. I don’t know what I don’t know. And I do not know when life begins, and what separates a human fetus from a monkey fetus. I’d like to know, because I want to protect life, show love and compassion, and want my morals to reflect that.

[Maxliberty]

@nirgrahamUK

@Maxliberty

Do you want us to pretend babies just magically appear and that sex has no relationship with creating babies too?

is that seriously what you think he said? he suggested you should stop anthropomorphising mere objects. good advice i think.

Are we talking about humans or objects? When do we become humans? Please provide the exact moment for everyone. I have stated the reasoning for human life and rights at conception please tell us when it starts from your perspective. Please no vague answers, a specific universal starting point that we can all recognize.

[Maxliberty]

@liberty student

@Maxliberty

if your answer is vague that same vagueness can be used to kill you by the state or anybody else.

Actually, people can kill for any reason. They don’t need a when life begins argument. The imperial soldiers mass murder innocent people who qualify as human by all conventional standards.

@Maxliberty

I much prefer a biological answer to my humanity than any contrived “rational” one.

You mean an empirical answer than an axiomatic one.

@Maxliberty

If your not human then you can’t have liberty

Why?

@Maxliberty

I would much prefer my humanity not be something that can be redefined at the whim of others.

Again, people can redefine you in a heartbeat, regardless of your status as a human.

@Maxliberty

I hardly ever bring up religion in these debates but it is true that without a reference point it is hard to know where your going.

I didn’t want to introduce it, but it is there. You are informed by a particular conception of reality that differs from mine. Trying to reach the same point from different directions is easier said than done.

That said, I’ve tried to be intellectually honest here. I don’t know what I don’t know. And I do not know when life begins, and what separates a human fetus from a monkey fetus. I’d like to know, because I want to protect life, show love and compassion, and want my morals to reflect that.

Are you human now?

[DD5]

@Maxliberty

@liberty student

Again, this is not a contract. A contract requires consent from two parties. You can’t contract yourself to something, and then claim you can’t break that contract. That’s illogical.

Sure you can, it is called responsibility. If we take responsibility out of the human existence you have nothing left.

" Responsibility" for sacrifice. Euphemism!

[wilderness]

@Maxliberty

@wilderness

If that’s what this has to boil down to - opinion - then I refrain from acting as if I have the ultimate answer on this topic and will not play God and kill somebody over it. And. That’s my opinion.

But you are playing God, the baby is murdered at the whims of the mother. I say let us have responsibility for our actions. You put people in your care, then you care for them. Common sense really, a rare commodity around here.

I am not playing God. Letting something happen when I don’t know what to do isn’t me playing God. I know I’m not God do you know you are not God either? You are being piss poor in your dialogue.

[nirgrahamUK]

@Maxliberty

Are we talking about humans or objects? When do we become humans? Please provide the exact moment for everyone. I have stated the reasoning for human life and rights at conception please tell us when it starts from your perspective. Please no vague answers, a specific universal starting point that we can all recognize.

ok, first admit that there are human objects. such as dead people. and that they have no rights. and they are human. and they have no rights.then i can proceed to dialogue with you.

[DD5]

@Maxliberty

We are human beings that have biological functions that limit what we can do in some cases. Do you want us to pretend babies just magically appear and that sex has no relationship with creating babies too?

You’ll have to excuse my tone here on this one, but

I don’t know what they thought you in bible school but when a stranger forces his penis inside your daughter or sister, it ain’t consent!!

[DD5]

Why is this even a debate? I don’t see how abortions could possibly be outlawed in a free society. Would you support an invasion of say France in order to force your anti-abortion stance on them?

If not, then admit that any ban against abortion is incompatible with the free society. There is no way to enforce it on everybody without bringing back the State again. And if you’re a miniarchist, you still have to rationalize why you support compelling your fellow neighbors but not the French.

[AlextheAmused]

If you can kill it morally, it seems like it would rather wasteful to just throw the body away. Why not eat it? /troll

[liberty_student]

@Maxliberty

Are you human now?

White Zombie - More Human Than Human

[Conza]

@I. Ryan

@Conza88

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNTAmwUHcLM

@Walter Block in http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNTAmwUHcLM

An other objection to my […] theory is that, if I push some one into the water and, then, he starts to drown, then, I owe a positive obligation which otherwise I wouldn’t owe a positive obligation to. So what they’re trying to say is that, by having a child, you’re putting him at risk and therefore you owe him to keep him alive for nine months. My claim is that, by giving birth to a child, you’re not harming him, you’re not putting him in a worse position, you’re putting him in a better position, because, before the sperm and the egg meet, there’s no person at all. Surely it’s better to have, be a person for a little time than not at all. So I reject the analogy that you’re throwing some one into the water and therefore you have an obligation to save him.

If you save a man who, if you were to not have saved him, would have drowned, do you now have the “right” to, at any time thereafter, push him into a similarly dangerous or even slightly less dangerous venue? If not, his above defense vis-à-vis that objection is inadequate.

You should probably present an argument as to why the objection is inadequate… instead of just asserting it.

[scineram]

He did. You are just evading.

[banned]

@Maxliberty

Some things just have no middle ground. If I think you are murdering someone and I want to protect them and you refuse to stop then the only alternative is violence.

Cool story. You should put your convictions to use.

1. Get a truck and load it up with homemade explosives

2. Get some vanity plates that say something along the lines of Land Shepherd.

3. Go out and film yourself bombing some abortion clinics.

4. Sell the footage to Discovery Channel under the title “Fetus Wars”

5. ???

6. Profit

[scineram]

I can see him shooting pregnant women who enter abortion clinics.

[Conza]

@scineram

He did. You are just evading.

No he didn’t.

A question is now an argument? lmao.

“If not, his above defense vis-à-vis that objection is inadequate.”

Why?

[bbnet]

I once believed abortion was horrible but necessary in some cases, now I believe it is just horrible.

Logic might lead one to believe that a being must have self identity to have a right to life but my heart says something is wrong wit this presumption. With a brighter vision of life’s intricacies, perhaps the answer would be revealed?

This is not an issue that a guy like me can really have a voice in since the burden and blessing of possessing a womb rests solely with women who bear the responsibility of nurturing or killing their unborn. No laws can prevent it since there are 1,000+ ways to kill a fetus discreetly.

In response to the OP, women do have a right to abort, eat, and sell their unborn but I also have the right to pick, eat, and sell my boogers.

Some cultures kill female babies and some may eat them too.

There already is a booming market for aborted fetal tissue commonly used in rejuvenating skin creams and for research and therapies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOxNOchm2kY

[Spideynw]

@bbnet

I once believed abortion was horrible but necessary in some cases, now I believe it is just horrible.

I once believed stepping on grass was horrible, but necessary in some cases. Now, I believe it is just horrible.

@bbnet

Logic might lead one to believe that a being must have self identity to have a right to life but my heart says something is wrong wit this presumption.

Logic might lead one to believe that animals are property, but my heart says something is wrong with this presumption.