Author Topic: Question to religious "pro-lifers" (only, plz).  (Read 2561 times)

Offline Kieran

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4119
Question to religious "pro-lifers" (only, plz).
« Reply #30 on: December 02, 2002, 06:42:10 PM »
What's wrong with that? It's just a few clumps of unviable tissue... certainly nothing to get upset about.

Offline Thrawn

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6972
Question to religious "pro-lifers" (only, plz).
« Reply #31 on: December 02, 2002, 06:46:48 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by LoneStarBuckeye
Thrawn:

What does "viability" mean?  Is a fetus viable only when it can exist on its own, outside of the womb.


That's what I think.

Recently a judge in the US state that doctors of a coma patient could stop feeding her at her husbands request.  She's been in a vegatative state for 7 years, she's going to starve to death.  What about her moral authority?

What IS a human being is a very complex issue.  As to why most pro-choicer chose viablility, that was covered extensively in a thread you will find about two weeks back.

Offline Thrawn

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6972
Question to religious "pro-lifers" (only, plz).
« Reply #32 on: December 02, 2002, 06:48:44 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Kieran
What's wrong with that? It's just a few clumps of unviable tissue... certainly nothing to get upset about.


I'm no more upset by it then seeing any other human tissue.  Some other people on this board are probably more sensitive to it and as such it was in extrodinarily poor test.  Much like that eviserated deer Rip posted.

Offline -ammo-

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5124
Question to religious "pro-lifers" (only, plz).
« Reply #33 on: December 02, 2002, 06:54:20 PM »
Excuse me, that is NOTHING like the harvested deer that Rip posted.  

That IS a murdered baby.
Commanding Officer, 56 Fighter Group
Retired USAF - 1988 - 2011

Offline NUKE

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8599
      • Arizona Greens
Question to religious "pro-lifers" (only, plz).
« Reply #34 on: December 02, 2002, 06:57:35 PM »
Quote
I'm no more upset by it then seeing any other human tissue. Some other people on this board are probably more sensitive to it and as such it was in extrodinarily poor test


What if someone came up and kicked your pregnant wife and killed the fetus at a late stage? Would you be no more upset than if she had a wart burned off her face? After all, it's just human un-viable tissue, nothing more.

If I did that, at least the law would prosecute me, even if you wouldn't.

You see Thrawn, that would be considered manslaughter here........ isn't that interesting how the law works?

I mean, on the one hand, it's not a life..... on the other , it is!

So what is it? Let me know please.

Offline Thrawn

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6972
Question to religious "pro-lifers" (only, plz).
« Reply #35 on: December 02, 2002, 07:01:14 PM »
Maybe to you ammo, but not to me.

If it was late stage Nuke, then I would consider it murder.

Which state is this manslaughter law in, Nuke?  Arizona?

Offline LoneStarBuckeye

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 336
      • http://None
Question to religious "pro-lifers" (only, plz).
« Reply #36 on: December 02, 2002, 07:02:41 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Thrawn
I'm no more upset by it then seeing any other human tissue.
If that's true, then I'm truly sorry for you.  My baby boy looked just about like that when I saw him being born.

- JNOV

Offline Thrawn

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6972
Question to religious "pro-lifers" (only, plz).
« Reply #37 on: December 02, 2002, 07:03:24 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by LoneStarBuckeye
If that's true, then I'm truly sorry for you.  My baby boy looked just about like that when I saw him being born.

- JNOV


My baby girl was a fair bit larger.

Offline LoneStarBuckeye

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 336
      • http://None
Question to religious "pro-lifers" (only, plz).
« Reply #38 on: December 02, 2002, 07:09:51 PM »
Thrawn:

You are hard core.  My soul-based argument definitely would have been lost on you.  I think you'd need to have one yourself before you could appreciate it.

- JNOV

Offline Thrawn

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6972
Question to religious "pro-lifers" (only, plz).
« Reply #39 on: December 02, 2002, 07:12:56 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by LoneStarBuckeye
Thrawn:

You are hard core.  My soul-based argument definitely would have been lost on you.  I think you'd need to have one yourself before you could appreciate it.

- JNOV


I fear it would have been.  I do not believe in a soul in the christian sense.  I believe we and every thing are part of an unversal soul if you will, God/Universe/Tao, or what have you.


Offline Kieran

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4119
Question to religious "pro-lifers" (only, plz).
« Reply #41 on: December 02, 2002, 07:21:08 PM »
Yikes Thrawn, that blows me away. You can't spank your child, but you could kill that baby without a thought?

I'm truly out on this thread.

Offline Thrawn

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6972
Question to religious "pro-lifers" (only, plz).
« Reply #42 on: December 02, 2002, 07:25:06 PM »
Thank you for links Nuke.  I would like to point out that the in the first two case the unborn children where both viable outside the uterus so I would definately agree that charges should be laid.

There does appear to be some controversy over the second two cases.  Do you know if they were able to make the charges stick?
« Last Edit: December 02, 2002, 07:27:31 PM by Thrawn »

Offline mietla

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2276
Question to religious "pro-lifers" (only, plz).
« Reply #43 on: December 02, 2002, 07:25:40 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by midnight Target
Sick Bastard!


What's wrong MT, don't you like the way a "choice" looks?

Offline midnight Target

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15114
Question to religious "pro-lifers" (only, plz).
« Reply #44 on: December 02, 2002, 07:36:10 PM »
Showing pictures of extreme late term abortions to make a point is ludicrous. What exactly does it prove? Could have been a stillborn infant for all you know. How far along was that child? Any Idea?

BS!