what's the difference between abortion and slavery? - Page 17 - Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest

Go Back   Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat
GL4x4 Live! GL4x4 Casino

Politics, Government, or Religion Chat Bring your flamesuit!

greatlakes4x4.com is the premier Great Lakes 4x4 Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Search
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old January 11th, 2008, 09:04 PM   #321
Sandals
Fucking Zen as Shit
 
Sandals's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Lindenhurst, IL
Posts: 15,399
iTrader: (7)
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Default

Worth a Mention

Gay Sex doesn't lead to pregnancy, so no abortion.

So if your anti abortion, your pro homosexual relations and marriage?
Sandals is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old January 11th, 2008, 09:09 PM   #322
cornfed
I have an avatar. Yippee.
 
cornfed's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-04-05
Location: Happy Funtown U.S.A.
Posts: 4,119
iTrader: (22)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Kerwin View Post
It is cute and all with you, and others, picking the most extreme case you can, to try and unermine me personally, which may undermine my credibility, which would be a failed attempt to undermine the principles in the argument I am setting forth.... however, I will answer it, but on one condition: That you comment on what your views are with the 99% of actual normal pregnancies that get aborted. I will assume that you will be fair enough to do so, so now on to your question.

A 8 second google search reveals the following: "A partial molar pregnancy is a variation of a molar pregnancy, an abnormal pregnancy in which an embryo (the fertilized egg) either develops incompletely, or doesn’t develop at all. Instead, a cluster of grape-like cysts (known as a hydatidiform mole) grows in the uterus."

What started as a fertilized egg never formed into a child, it formed into a hydatidform mole because it had been fertilized by two sperm. This is not a child, it has to be removed. End of story.

Ok, your turn.
I posted this question while I was in Boston this AM. I'm home now. Relax, I'm not dodging you.

End of story? Not even close. You need to recheck your facts. You confused the definitions of a complete and partial molar pregnancy. This slight oversight is definitely worth another look.

When you discuss the abolishment of a process, abortion, you must consider all scenarios of the condition, even the most extreme cases. After all, we're discussing life and death matters, right? Your abortion stance is not, "I am against abortion*" You are 100% against it for ALL situations.

To say a partial molar pregnancy cannot lead to a developed child is an incorrect statement. Please go back to google and post the link of your source. Read this article LINK
Extreme example? You betcha. Your closing statement confused the definitions of a complete and partial molar pregnancy. Your statement said it's not a child and it has to be removed- end of story.

Let's regroup. Complete molar pregnancies are all placenta, no fetus. Partial molars are when two sperm fertilize an egg and instead of creating twins, they lead to an abnormal pregnancy with an abnormal fetus and abnormal placenta. Treatment consists of a D&C (dilation and curettage) of the uterus, where a small vacuum device is inserted into the uterus, under anesthesia, to remove the molar pregnancy. Damn, the "D&C" term is really good camoflauge for the word "abortion". After all, they can be the same process depending on when the abortion is performed, right?LINK

A few pages ago, you explained how you could react to knowing your wife would give birth to a severely deformed child. You provided an example of friends carrying a stillborn to full term so they could bury the child and have closure, and you agreed with their decision. You have been presented with an example that is rare for white American women, less rare for minorities and foreigners. Once treated, the woman is 10x more likely to have another m pregnancy. We know that a child can be delivered. We know a fetus can be produced. We know that leaving the growing cells in the womans uterus can have lead to many different forms of aggressive cancer. We know the cancer can kill the women, or the treatment render her sterile.

Removing a complete molar pregnancy through a D&C is not at issue.
Removing a partial molar pregnancy is. Now that you're armed with this information, are you considering changing your position to "I'm against abortion*", whoops- D&C?


I'm not undermining you, I'm just putting your hard-line position to the test. I've never read that you're in favor of abortion under certain circumstances.
I have a morbid curiosity to know if you'd stake your wife's life and/or fertility on your abortion/D&C beliefs.

My position on abortion is this: In US politics, too much attention is given to this topic which distracts Joe(ann) Q. Public from more important issues. Allowing abortion doesn't affect me personally, spiritually, or emotionally. 100% abortion ban could jeopardize my wife's health should we create a molar pregnancy. Short story: pro choice.
cornfed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2008, 09:11 PM   #323
Dave Kerwin
web wheeling, hard.
 
Dave Kerwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-18-05
Location: SE MI
Posts: 6,693
iTrader: (9)
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandals View Post
Worth a Mention

Gay Sex doesn't lead to pregnancy, so no abortion.
wait, you have experience to say that you can't get pregnant?
Dave Kerwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2008, 09:13 PM   #324
Sandals
Fucking Zen as Shit
 
Sandals's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Lindenhurst, IL
Posts: 15,399
iTrader: (7)
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Kerwin View Post
wait, you have experience to say that you can't get pregnant?
you dont remember
Sandals is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2008, 09:14 PM   #325
K&J's Dad
Senior Member
 
K&J's Dad's Avatar
 
Join Date: 08-11-07
Location: Roseville, Michigan
Posts: 227
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Kerwin View Post
Look, for you to call a 10 week or 20 week fetus a lump of cells only makes you to be a total moron. If you cannot simply go off of a picture to tell you this, then there is no hope for you. When a fetus resembles a lump of cells, it is only within the time period before a woman is certain she is even pregnant. After that time, it is a tiny little dude with arms and legs. A tiny baby with arms and legs is no longer lumps of microscopic cells. I feel embarassed for you that you need this explained in such detail.
You didn't answer the question. Where are your facts??? Can't find any can you? So you have to revert to name calling. Nice!
K&J's Dad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2008, 09:16 PM   #326
K&J's Dad
Senior Member
 
K&J's Dad's Avatar
 
Join Date: 08-11-07
Location: Roseville, Michigan
Posts: 227
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Kerwin View Post
Answer me this: Is Murder a religious or a scientific law?
It is based on religious morals. Murder exists in nature throughout different animal species. It is not scientific based.

Last edited by K&J's Dad; January 11th, 2008 at 09:20 PM.
K&J's Dad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2008, 09:30 PM   #327
Dave Kerwin
web wheeling, hard.
 
Dave Kerwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-18-05
Location: SE MI
Posts: 6,693
iTrader: (9)
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cornfed View Post
I posted this question while I was in Boston this AM. I'm home now. Relax, I'm not dodging you.

End of story? Not even close. You need to recheck your facts. You confused the definitions of a complete and partial molar pregnancy. This slight oversight is definitely worth another look.

When you discuss the abolishment of a process, abortion, you must consider all scenarios of the condition, even the most extreme cases. After all, we're discussing life and death matters, right? Your abortion stance is not, "I am against abortion*" You are 100% against it for ALL situations.

To say a partial molar pregnancy cannot lead to a developed child is an incorrect statement. Please go back to google and post the link of your source. Read this article LINK
Extreme example? You betcha. Your closing statement confused the definitions of a complete and partial molar pregnancy. Your statement said it's not a child and it has to be removed- end of story.

Let's regroup. Complete molar pregnancies are all placenta, no fetus. Partial molars are when two sperm fertilize an egg and instead of creating twins, they lead to an abnormal pregnancy with an abnormal fetus and abnormal placenta. Treatment consists of a D&C (dilation and curettage) of the uterus, where a small vacuum device is inserted into the uterus, under anesthesia, to remove the molar pregnancy. Damn, the "D&C" term is really good camoflauge for the word "abortion". After all, they can be the same process depending on when the abortion is performed, right?LINK

A few pages ago, you explained how you could react to knowing your wife would give birth to a severely deformed child. You provided an example of friends carrying a stillborn to full term so they could bury the child and have closure, and you agreed with their decision. You have been presented with an example that is rare for white American women, less rare for minorities and foreigners. Once treated, the woman is 10x more likely to have another m pregnancy. We know that a child can be delivered. We know a fetus can be produced. We know that leaving the growing cells in the womans uterus can have lead to many different forms of aggressive cancer. We know the cancer can kill the women, or the treatment render her sterile.

Removing a complete molar pregnancy through a D&C is not at issue.
Removing a partial molar pregnancy is. Now that you're armed with this information, are you considering changing your position to "I'm against abortion*", whoops- D&C?


I'm not undermining you, I'm just putting your hard-line position to the test. I've never read that you're in favor of abortion under certain circumstances.
I have a morbid curiosity to know if you'd stake your wife's life and/or fertility on your abortion/D&C beliefs.

My position on abortion is this: In US politics, too much attention is given to this topic which distracts Joe(ann) Q. Public from more important issues. Allowing abortion doesn't affect me personally, spiritually, or emotionally. 100% abortion ban could jeopardize my wife's health should we create a molar pregnancy. Short story: pro choice.
Fair post, let me respond.

I will take your word on the difference, because I am not going to read half hour worth of data right now. But as I have said twice in this thread already, I would prefer to legislate against ANY part of abortion. There is a difference between how I would prefer laws to be put in place, and how I feel personally on this topic. I have never said that I want all abortions to stop, but I surely want the vast majority to.

I understand that all issues need to be discussed, but I also view it in as a categories of weighted factors. If 95% of pregnancies are normal, then 95% of time and 95% of decisions should be placed on them. Otherwise we are not focused on the actual issue here.

I am not opposed to a D&C (abortion) when the child is dead or dying or cannot live. But I would not personally abort unless the child was confirmed dead early on. If the child was dead, and it was late term, no way, I would want to bury my child.

Why is too much attention given to this? This is an issue of life and death. I don't think enough attention can come its way.

Does this answer your question?
Dave Kerwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2008, 09:32 PM   #328
Dave Kerwin
web wheeling, hard.
 
Dave Kerwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-18-05
Location: SE MI
Posts: 6,693
iTrader: (9)
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by K&J's Dad View Post
You didn't answer the question. Where are your facts??? Can't find any can you? So you have to revert to name calling. Nice!
I will not wast the time on you. Seriously, I won't
Dave Kerwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2008, 09:33 PM   #329
Dave Kerwin
web wheeling, hard.
 
Dave Kerwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-18-05
Location: SE MI
Posts: 6,693
iTrader: (9)
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by K&J's Dad View Post
It is based on religious morals. Murder exists in nature throughout different animal species. It is not scientific based.
laws on murder are based on religion.

should we get rid of these laws?
Dave Kerwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2008, 09:36 PM   #330
K&J's Dad
Senior Member
 
K&J's Dad's Avatar
 
Join Date: 08-11-07
Location: Roseville, Michigan
Posts: 227
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Kerwin View Post
I will not wast the time on you. Seriously, I won't
If you are going to say ANY medical or scientific person would agree with you, quote your source on where you found this information. This is how you build respect. Just saying you believe everyone is on your side doesn't cut it. You say stuff like this quite often. If someone doesn't agree they are a moron even if you can't prove anything other than you said it.
K&J's Dad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2008, 09:39 PM   #331
brewmenn
Grumpy old man.
 
brewmenn's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Inkster, MI
Posts: 10,512
iTrader: (9)
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by K&J's Dad View Post
[COLOR="Red"]

"[COLOR="DarkOrange"]Whether or not abortion should be legal turns on the answer to the question of whether and at what point a fetus is a person. This is a question that cannot be answered logically or empirically. The concept of personhood is neither logical nor empirical: It is essentially a religious, or quasi-religious idea, based on one's fundamental (and therefore unverifiable) assumptions about the nature of the world." Paul Campos, professor of law at the University of Colorado. (2002)

To me it's more a matter of rights and not religion. At what point does the baby's right to live out weigh the mothers right to control what goes on in her body.
brewmenn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2008, 09:42 PM   #332
K&J's Dad
Senior Member
 
K&J's Dad's Avatar
 
Join Date: 08-11-07
Location: Roseville, Michigan
Posts: 227
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Kerwin View Post
laws on murder are based on religion.

should we get rid of these laws?
One in particular yes. Assisted suicide should not be murder in my opinion. The death penalty is murder and it isn't illegal in all states. (which I am for by the way). Other than this I like the law the way it is. I also don't think abortion is murder so your arguement is going nowhere.
K&J's Dad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2008, 09:46 PM   #333
Dave Kerwin
web wheeling, hard.
 
Dave Kerwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-18-05
Location: SE MI
Posts: 6,693
iTrader: (9)
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by K&J's Dad View Post
One in particular yes. Assisted suicide should not be murder in my opinion. The death penalty is murder and it isn't illegal in all states. (which I am for by the way). Other than this I like the law the way it is. I also don't think abortion is murder so your arguement is going nowhere.
So is it ok for me to come to your house and murder you because it is a religious law that we should ignore?
Dave Kerwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2008, 09:47 PM   #334
K&J's Dad
Senior Member
 
K&J's Dad's Avatar
 
Join Date: 08-11-07
Location: Roseville, Michigan
Posts: 227
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brewmenn View Post
To me it's more a matter of rights and not religion. At what point does the baby's right to live out weigh the mothers right to control what goes on in her body.
The fetus doesn't have any rights. Rights are what we want to hand out. This is why citizens of countries throughout the world have differing rights. The government decides when and how you get them. What about the right of an 18 year old to die for this country but he can't legally buy a beer. Who gave him these rights? The government. The government decides if the fetus has any rights. And I guess they agreed that the fetus has no right.
K&J's Dad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2008, 09:47 PM   #335
Dave Kerwin
web wheeling, hard.
 
Dave Kerwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-18-05
Location: SE MI
Posts: 6,693
iTrader: (9)
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Default

you religious law follower!!
Dave Kerwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2008, 09:48 PM   #336
Dave Kerwin
web wheeling, hard.
 
Dave Kerwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-18-05
Location: SE MI
Posts: 6,693
iTrader: (9)
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by K&J's Dad View Post
The government decides if the fetus has any rights. And I guess they agreed that the fetus has no right.
the goverment also use to think that slaves were property, that one man could own another. but when government wises up, things change. It is time to get wise, and time for change.
Dave Kerwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2008, 09:51 PM   #337
K&J's Dad
Senior Member
 
K&J's Dad's Avatar
 
Join Date: 08-11-07
Location: Roseville, Michigan
Posts: 227
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Kerwin View Post
So is it ok for me to come to your house and murder you because it is a religious law that we should ignore?
It was based on religious laws and is now a governmental law. Don't confuse the two. Christians aren't supposed to sleep with their neighbors spouse - religious law (and before you say it, she committed adultery, not me). If I am single and sleep with my neighbors wife, I didn't break a governmental law. A lot of governmental law started out from religious law. Not all religious law became governmental law, especially in the US.
K&J's Dad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2008, 09:54 PM   #338
K&J's Dad
Senior Member
 
K&J's Dad's Avatar
 
Join Date: 08-11-07
Location: Roseville, Michigan
Posts: 227
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Kerwin View Post
the goverment also use to think that slaves were property, that one man could own another. but when government wises up, things change. It is time to get wise, and time for change.
There is a HUGE flaw in your arguement. The slaves could speak up and make their voices heard about them not wanting to be slaves. Many died voicing these concerns. Fetuses can't do this. Less voices arguing in their favor especial when we abort them - guess they are dying for the cause.
K&J's Dad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2008, 09:58 PM   #339
cornfed
I have an avatar. Yippee.
 
cornfed's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-04-05
Location: Happy Funtown U.S.A.
Posts: 4,119
iTrader: (22)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Kerwin View Post
Fair post, let me respond.

I will take your word on the difference, because I am not going to read half hour worth of data right now. But as I have said twice in this thread already, I would prefer to legislate against ANY part of abortion. There is a difference between how I would prefer laws to be put in place, and how I feel personally on this topic. I have never said that I want all abortions to stop, but I surely want the vast majority to.

I understand that all issues need to be discussed, but I also view it in as a categories of weighted factors. If 95% of pregnancies are normal, then 95% of time and 95% of decisions should be placed on them. Otherwise we are not focused on the actual issue here.

I am not opposed to a D&C (abortion) when the child is dead or dying or cannot live. But I would not personally abort unless the child was confirmed dead early on. If the child was dead, and it was late term, no way, I would want to bury my child.

Why is too much attention given to this? This is an issue of life and death. I don't think enough attention can come its way.

Does this answer your question?
Not completely because there are too many variables to discuss in this format.

"Early on" and "late term" are vague statements. If your wife has an irregular menstrual cycle, she might not find out she's pregnant until weeks/months after conception. The meat of the discussion is how do you respond when you first receive notice of the situation. There are simply too many plausable "what-ifs" to peck in this format.

The point that I'm trying to make is if you're going to favor legislation that 100% abolishes the procedure, then you must weigh 100% of the conditions the procedure treats. If you're comfortable with 95% ban, 5% legal then I can respect that opinion.

If you want to stoke another multi-page abortion thread, then fire up a thread hashing out the (psuedo, ha-ha) importance of abortion in American law versus other topics with less emotion and more direct impact of daily life. (taxes, immigration, civil rights)
cornfed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2008, 10:00 PM   #340
Dave Kerwin
web wheeling, hard.
 
Dave Kerwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-18-05
Location: SE MI
Posts: 6,693
iTrader: (9)
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by K&J's Dad View Post
There is a HUGE flaw in your arguement. The slaves could speak up and make their voices heard about them not wanting to be slaves. Many died voicing these concerns. Fetuses can't do this. Less voices arguing in their favor especial when we abort them - guess they are dying for the cause.

Friend, that is no flaw, if anyting you grant further support to what I am saying. If slaves can speak, and voice their concerns and fight for themselves, then how much more do the unborn need OUR voices for them, how much more do they need our FIGHT for them? They have no voice, which makes their case even more worth fightint for.
Dave Kerwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:26 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd. Runs best on HiVelocity Hosting.
Page generated in 0.50907 seconds with 80 queries