Who decided that the mother's "rights" outweighed the baby's rights?

[BRUCE]

You can not win this one. You have the right to have your individual opinion, just like Gary Busey, but you can not force your opinion on others. Since your opinion is is of such nature, you can not win this discussion 

You're right, there isn't a way to win this debate because I'm not sure I have a definite answer to it - I don't think anyone of sound judgement does.  You believe you do, good luck with that.

[haider]

See Debusseys post above for arguments.

Morals = subjective, you can not avoid that, because no rational standard exists. The practical implications of making abortions illegal = enormous.

A fetus = not a person. Abortion = not murder, it is a surgery. You can not prove me wrong, because proving me wrong would mean that there exists a "master morality" based on rationality. There is no such thing, morals = a fluid concepts. Debussey can claim: Religion = evil. You can not disprove me, because it is all a matter of personal interpretation.

whoa there buddy, easy there Moral arguments need not a standard by which one evaluates what is right and what is wrong. The necessity here is rationality; so it is through reason alone that one can argue for the moral and immoral (given atleast some concensus of basic moral rights), especially in a case where huiman life is at stake. In fact u are doing this in the above post. For example, you are asserting that a fetus is not a person, which in turn falsifies the notion that a fetus has "moral" responsilities attached to it for the conciious human being. That's all I can say about the issue right now.

[Debussey]

whoa there buddy, easy there Moral arguments need not a standard by which one evaluates what is right and what is wrong. The necessity here is rationality; so it is through reason alone that one can argue for the moral and immoral (given atleast some concensus of basic moral rights), especially in a case where huiman life is at stake. In fact u are doing this in the above post. For example, you are asserting that a fetus is not a person, which in turn falsifies the notion that a fetus has "moral" responsilities attached to it for the conciious human being. That's all I can say about the issue right now.

Good post.

Moral arguments need not a standard by which one evaluates what is right and what is wrong.

No, and this is why there will always disagreement, and why one moralistic view could never rightfully be applied to the entire population at the cost of losing personal freedom in matters such as this. This is also why the negative implications on society and individuals from cutting abortions should matter more than morals.
If a moral view was to determine the legality of abortions, then a standard had to exist, which again proves Debusseys view.

so it is through reason alone that one can argue for the moral and immoral (given atleast some concensus of basic moral rights), especially in a case where huiman life is at stake. In fact u are doing this in the above post. For example, you are asserting that a fetus is not a person, which in turn falsifies the notion that a fetus has "moral" responsilities attached to it for the conciious human being.

Debussey has argumented through reason here all along. Debussey wrote that thing about the fetus not being a person to show that a personal opinion is just that.. When reason is applied (like the burden on a mother, overpopulation +++), it clearly shows that the only real moral view that applies here is that certain group interests should never steal personal freedom from the majority.

New codes will arrive shortly

[Debussey]

You're right, there isn't a way to win this debate because I'm not sure I have a definite answer to it - I don't think anyone of sound judgement does.  You believe you do, good luck with that.

You are correct, there is no definite answer except respect for other peoples opinions, personal freedom and their right to chose their own paths in life.


You also believe what you do, Gary Busey/Debussey respects that.

[BRUCE]

Good luck with the upcoming baby

Who told you I was having sex? 

[Debussey]

Who told you I was having sex? 

Ops. Debussey read one of your posts a bit fast. 

Ohh, remember: According to lunatics like MilitaryMuscle69, sex before marrage = wrong. You should listen to him, he is morally superior, because he believes in the Christian god. He has the right to tell you what to do, think and feel.

[BRUCE]

Ops. Debussey read one of your posts a bit fast. 

Ohh, remember: According to lunatics like MilitaryMuscle69, sex before marrage = wrong. You should listen to him, he is morally superior, because he believes in the Christian god. He has the right to tell you what to do, think and feel.

Important side issue: Is Gary Busey procreating?

[Debussey]

Important side issue: Is Gary Busey procreating?

yes, through the alien anal probes.

Last time Debussey was abducted (last week) by the aliens, they did some weird experiences with the anal probes. After years of alien abductions, Debussey is getting used to the equipment used, but these days: things are changing.

Many female alien abductees around the globe carry Gary Buseys child. Gary Busey = ultimate genetics. This means that Jesus will be reborn in multiple children. The children of Gary Busey.

It was all made possible through the alien abductions.

The aliens truly care about us humans, they help us save ourselves through giving us Gary Buseys kids.

[BRUCE]

yes, through the alien anal probes.

Last time Debussey was abducted (last week) by the aliens, they did some weird experiences with the anal probes. After years of alien abductions, Debussey is getting used to the equipment used, but these days: things are changing.

Many female alien abductees around the globe carry Gary Buseys child. Gary Busey = ultimate genetics. This means that Jesus will be reborn in multiple children. The children of Gary Busey.

It was all made possible through the alien abductions.

The aliens truly care about us humans, they help us save ourselves through giving us Gary Buseys kids.

I'm ashamed to admit that I laughed the whole way through this post.

[Debussey]

I'm ashamed to admit that I laughed the whole way through this post.

 

[haider]

Good post.

No, and this is why there will always disagreement, and why one moralistic view could never rightfully be applied to the entire population at the cost of losing personal freedom in matters such as this. This is also why the negative implications on society and individuals from cutting abortions should matter more than morals.

I don't think there are many people that ascribe to a moral law that doesn't value human life, or one that values all forms of life so much so that it leaves nothing to be debated. It seems to me now that we are weighing the moral implications of keeping the fetus alive versus aborting it. This shows that we do value life of the "baby" or the lives of the one bearing the child, in some moral sense. Morality in this sense is being rested on reason, since the rational being does base his/her moral opinions based on reason(contrary to basing it completely on some "written" law in a hitlerian way). Otherwise it would turn out to be nothing more than a shouting match (read: religious whackos)

Debussey has argumented through reason here all along. Debussey wrote that thing about the fetus not being a person to show that a personal opinion is just that.. When reason is applied (like the burden on a mother, overpopulation +++), it clearly shows that the only real moral view that applies here is that certain group interests should never steal personal freedom from the majority.

If we can prove abortion to be wrong then laws can be applied against it, just as laws are applied against other crimes. This doesnt leave it upto the individuals discretion completely to say what is right and wrong. Abortion is a very complex issue, and it seems to me that a lot of the arguments are based on religious doctrine, so I agree with u that it would be unfair for it to be applied to an entire population. I don't think we disagree about too much. I actually think we agree that morality doesnt rest merely on personal opinion. I think it is the definition we are disagreeing about- you were treating it as some obscure absolute law that is not to be broken (not much reasoning can be applied), whereas I'm saying that the human moral sense does exist which allows us to argue about these things in the first place. Reason is #1.

New codes will arrive shortly

[Debussey]

I don't think there are many people that ascribe to a moral law that doesn't value human life, or one that values all forms of life so much so that it leaves nothing to be debated. It seems to me now that we are weighing the moral implications of keeping the fetus alive versus aborting it. This shows that we do value life of the "baby" or the lives of the one bearing the child, in some moral sense. Morality in this sense is being rested on reason, since the rational being does base his/her moral opinions based on reason(contrary to basing it completely on some "written" law in a hitlerian way). Otherwise it would turn out to be nothing more than a shouting match (read: religious whackos)
If we can prove abortion to be wrong then laws can be applied against it, just as laws are applied against other crimes. This doesnt leave it upto the individuals discretion completely to say what is right and wrong. Abortion is a very complex issue, and it seems to me that a lot of the arguments are based on religious doctrine, so I agree with u that it would be unfair for it to be applied to an entire population. I don't think we disagree about too much. I actually think we agree that morality doesnt rest merely on personal opinion. I think it is the definition we are disagreeing about- you were treating it as some obscure absolute law that is not to be broken (not much reasoning can be applied), whereas I'm saying that the human moral sense does exist which allows us to argue about these things in the first place. Reason is #1.
 

We agree. Reason = 1. 

Side note: Chosing abortion over raising a child in very bad circumstances or the fact that a girl might get her life ruined by it is also morals. Sparing people from turmoil = good moral.

[BRUCE]

Those teeth are incredible.

I want one of those shirts.

[Debussey]

Debussey senses aliens approaching. Debussey will probably be abducted again in a few minutes. Debussey will be back tomorrow, hopefully able to sit without pain. (the new analprobe = HOOGE)

C you tomorrow. The aliens might also put a chip in Debusseys brain this time. Debussey is quite stupid to be honest, Gary Busey does all the talking. Perhaps this new chip will bring Debussey some braing power.

[haider]

LOL!

Good luck dude,



































with the aliens, plugs n all.

[BRUCE]

This thread took an unexpected turn.

[Debussey]

ok, Team dipshit or whatever the hell you call yourself
how much of man are you calling people retards from your keyboard??
i never attacked you, called you a name then you start with your immature BS knowing you'll never face me.  i bet your momma's proud.

you showed exactly what kind of person you are, a worthless waste of life.
grow up

You debated like a retard.

Go cry to your mommy poor little boy.

IT is ok.

If daddy raped your ass, go see a shrink.

G'night people.

 

[BRUCE]

You haven't truly lived until Debussey PM's you with that image.

[G o a t b o y]

ok, i gave you my answer. God has a plan. 

I'm afraid you're gonna have to ask this "God" character to flesh out his plan a little more and provide some details as to how he expects to meet the desired outcomes.  Simply saying "I have a plan" then not detailing it is similar to George W Bush saying "I have a plan" for Iraq. 

[sandycoosworth]

hi goatboy

[muscleforlife]

I stated that your posts across the GETBIG forums are prejudiced, not just this one thread.
You "see" poor people, do you engage them in conversation or do you just automatically assume you know all about their life?

I thought higher education was a forum to open your mind and see the bigger picture.
You are narrow minded when it comes to people outside of your "world".

If someone uses condoms/bc and has sex, is that still slutting around?

Sandra

[militarymuscle69]

Please stop posting.  Your dribble is ruining it for anyone who wants to argue against Roe v. Wade here for many weeks to come. 
You don't have the intillectual firepower to do battle here. 

I'll help you grasp what is going on here.  ieffinhatecardio is saying he can understand your stance.  He is saying he can see why people would think abortion is wrong.  He's rhetorically asking how the world would look, and how we would be able to take care of those children that aren't aborted. 

You just keep telling him that it is wrong....to which he's not disagreeing. 

Hey thanks for jumping into a ongoing conversation you know nothing about. My beef isn't with cardio though but thanks for your input.

[militarymuscle69]

Let's go over the facts again, FOR THE MILLIONTH TIME.

What will happen to the millions of unwanted babies? Who will take care of them?

Notice how you can't answer?

Notice how you don't care about answering?

This is the most valid point in this whole debate. You want to put an end to abortion, fantastic but something has to be done with the babies that are born.

YET YOU HAVE NO PLAN. DO YOU UNDERSTAND? YOU HAVE NO PLAN FOR MILLIONS OF UNWANTED BABIES. 

Ouch, sounds like someone's a little sensitive from getting called on his bullschit posts. 

Oh my dear friend Cardio....The fact that I don't have a plan for the million babies IS NOT THE MOST VALID POINT. The fact that it is the only thing you can come up with is sad. I don't have a plan for what to do with the homeless but I think something should be done, I don't have a a plan for sending my son to college but I will figure it out. But if you want a plan here it is. My first plan for what to do with the babies (in the US because different solutions need to be looked at otherwise) is to stop women from getting pregnant. I know that millions of babies are aborted, but how many of those million babies are made during drunken lust sessions, pure laziness with contraception, young boys saying "it just feels better without a condom" etc... In all of those millions of instances those people need to be held accountable for their actions, not be able to get away with murder to cover a mistake. Now for all the babies concieved by rape, incest, etc.... the number (in the US) is probably in the low 6 digits at the most. We need to take money that is used in 3rd world countries on programs like Operation New Horizons (google it) and use that money to combat the problem of shortages in places to put "unwanted" kids. It also can be used for my homeless problem and to help lower income families put their kids through college. Now back to those people that are having babies through negligence, again they need to be held accountable. If they abort, charge them and make them do time. If they have the baby but give it up, make them pay child support, there are hundreds of ways to hold someone accountable. If they have more than 2 kids that they have to give up, they are taken to the hospital and it is made sure it won't happen again. The last solution should be to Kill babies and that is what it is, killing. If the women want't to be able to "control" her body, then control it with contraceptives before spreading the legs.

Now, I know deep in your heart it wasn't a "solution" that you are searching for but at the time that was your best comeback. So I have offered. lets see your next "argument"

[militarymuscle69]

One thing I don't understand is why these hardcore Anti-Abortion people seem so content starting questionable wars that cause so many deaths. 

PLEASE DON'T CALL ME A LIB FOR POSTING THIS.  I 100% SUPPORT DESTROYING REAL THREATS TO MY COUNTRY.

Going to war and killing a baby is different. I am just as against helpless babies dying in war as in the womb. As far as combabtants dying we are all grown enough to fight and choose to do so. The baby doesn't have the choice.

[militarymuscle69]

Ops. Debussey read one of your posts a bit fast. 

Ohh, remember: According to lunatics like MilitaryMuscle69, sex before marrage = wrong. You should listen to him, he is morally superior, because he believes in the Christian god. He has the right to tell you what to do, think and feel.

Wait one minute! I have not one time brought religion into any of may arguments in this post. Not one time. I do believe in god but have not mentioned it once in here. This issue is a science one for me. It has been proven that a fetus is a human, capable of feelings etc. I think that human has the right to live and consider killing it the same as throwing a 1 week old baby in the dumpster, an action that would earn a murder charge.