Dunce Americans Created 18 years ago2006-04-08 11:58:23 UTC by satchmo

Jax is so cool

Murder = Chuck Norris

On Abortions: I think that as soon as it has its own DNA, it is a new organism.

Thats a good point, as it takes a little while for the eggs to be fertilised the woman who gets raped has a little while to take the pill/seek advice before its murder.

Condoms and pulling out and all that are fine IMO, but my church is against even that for some reason. unsure - :

I thought the vatican was in a massive uproar at the moment because the nazi (lolz) pope is trying to get that ban reversed

I can understand your point that the feotus/cells/whatever will most likely eventually become a life, something I think is the most precious and important thing in the world not to be taken lightly. But again I also believe in personal freedoms as being a standpoint of a persons life and removing a womans ability to control her own body upto a certain extent seriously erodes those personal freedoms. There are so many mitigating circumstances from rape to endangerment of the woman that its somethign that should never be banned, if its used as more than just a last resort then it starts to get a little iffy, but i'm not a woman so I can't appreciate it obviously.

So if you have an abortion, you DIDN't plan to have the abortion? You just accidentally go up to the clinic and get the plunger job done or what?

Jobabob: Even if a girl is raped, how is it going to be made right by killing someone else who is innocent. They have not even had the chance to breathe yet, much less piss anyone off.

Where does the woman's right to "be happy" or whatever stop and the baby's right to live start? If there is a chance the mother might die: STILL why would any mother want to kill her baby?

If you heard of a woman who got an abortion because the doctor told her the child would be retarded when it was born, surely you'd see something wrong with that, yeah? Then why is it not wrong in other cases? Rape victims can opt for adoption, get some welfare money or something while they are pregnant to help them with it.

When you say, "a woman's right to control her own body" I agree, that a woman should be able to control her body, but the other person inside her is NOT her body, it's just another person.

Only more 142 posts to beat the record.

sigh. since when does a topic stating the obvious (americans are dumb) turn into a debate about abortions?

Please end this thread now. So we all have opinions on America, arguing them is not going to change the way America deals with the world, or the way we go about our daily lives. Not all Americans are dumb, it's just lucky enough to be run by the dumbest group of people you're ever likely to find. Remember, happy threads = happy Strider, and you don't wanna' make me mad.

If you heard of a woman who got an abortion because the doctor told her the child would be retarded when it was born, surely you'd see something wrong with that, yeah?

We clearly aren't going to come to much common ground on such a fundamental topic about life and freedoms, but I would obviously agree that if it is done for reasons of the childs livelihood it requires very VERY careful thought, there is little to no excuse for an abortion if the parents dont think they can cope with a child with mental defficiences. However, if the child were to encounter medical difficulties and would not live to see its first month it is an argument against this.

Then why is it not wrong in other cases? Rape victims can opt for adoption, get some welfare money or something while they are pregnant to help them with it.

Imagine getting raped by a man, you dont win your case in court, you are heartbroken. You then find out you are forced to have that mans child for gods sake!

lol, google 'failure' and click 'im feeling lucky'

Sounds more fun than this thread, Penguinboy.

You then find out you are forced to have that mans child for gods sake!

If after the child is born you'll give it to the raper then it's his. If you don't then you will be the one who will educate him, it will be your own child, it doesn't mean he'll be like his father or something. You musn't hate him because his father raped you, you must treat him acording the way he is.

I myself am against abortions. It's just as bad as murder. You are murdering the person the baby will grow to.
I understand it's sometimes hard to raise a child, especially if it's your raper's child, but life isn't always easy. To kill a creature just because you didn't want to bother to raise him is unforgivible though. Leaving him in a place you know he wont survive or survive in very poor conditions(like in the hands of the raper) is just as bad.

I had a point to make, but I've forgotten it.

On Abortions: I think that as soon as it has its own DNA, it is a new organism.

So, er, when the egg is fertilised, then. You seriously consider a single cell to have the same rights, responsibilities, et c., as a newborn baby (steering clear of the in-between bits for a mo')?

YES, because there is a chance it will grow to be a grown up human being.

would you have aborted hitler [/pointlesshypothetical]

He was probably a result of different factors like education and personal experiences. I would just educate the little hitler to become a doctor or something like that. And forbid him to use moustache, of course.
You can never be completely sure of the outcome. Everyone must have heard that famous question:
If you knew a woman who was pregnant, who had 8 kids already, three who were deaf, two who were blind, one mentally retarded, and she had syphilis, would you recommend that she have an abortion?
If you did, you just killed Beethoven.
Of course, today it is possible to know if a child will have serious problems like malformations etc, and we could've said there was nothing wrong with Beethoven.

You seriously consider a single cell to have the same rights, responsibilities, et c., as a newborn baby

Definately not the same, but at least the most basic one, the right to live.
I didn't know babies had responsibilities though...

then if the baby kills the mother the mother has lost her right to live by becoming pregnant, its all so simple isnt it?

I like completely opinionated debates, they dont accomplish anything.

So anyway, in my opinion, abortions for some, miniature american flags for others!

no, he had the EVIL gene

well I was

I am nearly 100% sure that Hitler the babe, didn't plan on invading Europe

The EVIL gene is fiction!

Where does the woman's right to "be happy" or whatever stop and the baby's right to live start

Do you realize that most of the times these girls arent ready for it, neither are there bodies.Heck how could you live with a child that has been born because you have been raped? Do you actualy met anyone? Do you know there stories? Its different for anyone. luckily its legal here.

I dont think the baby would have a happy life after all.

It really is different from case to case. We have absolutely no clue how the child would turn out had it been born, so speculating in such is quite pointless.

I'm totally pro-abortion, though. It's pretty shitty to force a woman to have a child when we have the ability to prevent it.
If it's murder when you kill a cell, with the potential to become a baby, isn't it then murder to use a condom, since if you hadn't, there was the potential of life?

If it's murder when you kill a cell, with the potential to become a baby, isn't it then murder to use a condom, since if you hadn't, there was the potential of life?

Technically, no , its not a murder.Then you are a murderer when you masturbate.Uhh...yea.What a stupid question was that?

What stupid statement is "Killing a single cell makes you a murderer"?

Half-Life : Hostage Situation (part 1)
pages: [26] | Posts: 1258

Half-Life : Hostage Situation (part 2)
pages: [21] | Posts: 1040

Dunce Americans
pages: [20] | Posts: 983

Total number of Hostage Situation posts

2298

Abortion is rarely about killing a single cell. But that single cell is nothing but a previous stage before growing into a human. That's the whole point. You're not killing a cell. You're stopping a complex process.
There's a difference with the term "potential of life". In your example, sperm and egg cells can create life together. They can't do so by themselves. The moment there's a single cell with 46 chromosomes, that's technically a human.

You can say

that most of the times these girls arent ready for it, neither are their bodies

. But then we come to the obvious conclusion regarding these situations (young mothers). They aren't ready for sex either. That's the whole problem. People thinking they're so grown up and can have relationships without knowing there is almost always a risk of pregnancy. So abortion is not the solution. Education is.

Yeah, but until we've established that, abortion is handier. Anyway, if the mother doesn't want the baby itself, what kind of life will it have?

A happy live with adoptive parents, for example. Some mothers don't know if they really want the baby until they have it in their arms, you never know...

So abortion is not the solution. Education is.

Agreed, then again, its all a case by case thingy i think none of us can really judge about.

It's sad, but i have to agree with ZombieLoffe on this one. There are already too many people in the world. Cutting back some on possible life may not help much. But still, It's better to killing off something that have yet to develop than killing off something that already has. Of course another world war or a plague would help, but i think abortion works better, wouldn't you say? :

Let them have the abandoned babies. We shall take them all and throw them in a fight to the death battle. Whoever is standing at the end gets a parent!

Adoption is naturally preferable before abortion - the problem is, if there isn't anyone to adopt them, they get stuffed in a childcare centre, giving them (most often) a quite crappy childhood.

im going to start adoptafoetus.com, who wants to invest

I'm totally pro-abortion. You people need to get in touch with your masculine side and stop with all the touchy feelings. Just because you think it's wrong to stop the growth of a few dozen cells doesn't make it right for the mother to have to put up with an unwanted child. The world is over populated anyway.
"Guess what jimmy! Your father raped me but I was forced to have you! We also both have HIV! Yay! No wonder we're poor and in a shack in the woods."

You can still have an opinion on something even if it has not affected you directly, you could have found it an interesting topic and researched it. Thats like saying a soldier is more knowledgeable about the conflict in iraq because he is there, thats just one perspective and one based on their experiences.

Yeah, are we not allowed to voice what we think of a subject unless it has personally affected us? I, clearly, am not a woman, have never had children, much less an abortion - yet, I think it's wrong. I'm not actively working against the banning of it or anything, it's just the stance that I've chosen to take because of stuff that I've read or heard about.
Sure, what we say might be bullshit speculation or unimportant ranting, but we can still discuss the matter.

Isaac Newton's life can be divided into three quite distinct periods. The first is his boyhood days from 1643 up to his appointment to a chair in 1669. The second period from 1669 to 1687 was the highly productive period in which he was Lucasian professor at Cambridge. The third period (nearly as long as the other two combined) saw Newton as a highly paid government official in London with little further interest in mathematical research.

Isaac Newton was born in the manor house of Woolsthorpe, near Grantham in Lincolnshire. Although by the calendar in use at the time of his birth he was born on Christmas Day 1642, we give the date of 4 January 1643 in this biography which is the "corrected" Gregorian calendar date bringing it into line with our present calendar. (The Gregorian calendar was not adopted in England until 1752.) Isaac Newton came from a family of farmers but never knew his father, also named Isaac Newton, who died in October 1642, three months before his son was born. Although Isaac's father owned property and animals which made him quite a wealthy man, he was completely uneducated and could not sign his own name.

Isaac's mother Hannah Ayscough remarried Barnabas Smith the minister of the church at North Witham, a nearby village, when Isaac was two years old. The young child was then left in the care of his grandmother Margery Ayscough at Woolsthorpe. Basically treated as an orphan, Isaac did not have a happy childhood. His grandfather James Ayscough was never mentioned by Isaac in later life and the fact that James left nothing to Isaac in his will, made when the boy was ten years old, suggests that there was no love lost between the two. There is no doubt that Isaac felt very bitter towards his mother and his step-father Barnabas Smith. When examining his sins at age nineteen, Isaac listed:-

Threatening my father and mother Smith to burn them and the house over them.

Upon the death of his stepfather in 1653, Newton lived in an extended family consisting of his mother, his grandmother, one half-brother, and two half-sisters. From shortly after this time Isaac began attending the Free Grammar School in Grantham. Although this was only five miles from his home, Isaac lodged with the Clark family at Grantham. However he seems to have shown little promise in academic work. His school reports described him as 'idle' and 'inattentive'. His mother, by now a lady of reasonable wealth and property, thought that her eldest son was the right person to manage her affairs and her estate. Isaac was taken away from school but soon showed that he had no talent, or interest, in managing an estate.

An uncle, William Ayscough, decided that Isaac should prepare for entering university and, having persuaded his mother that this was the right thing to do, Isaac was allowed to return to the Free Grammar School in Grantham in 1660 to complete his school education. This time he lodged with Stokes, who was the headmaster of the school, and it would appear that, despite suggestions that he had previously shown no academic promise, Isaac must have convinced some of those around him that he had academic promise. Some evidence points to Stokes also persuading Isaac's mother to let him enter university, so it is likely that Isaac had shown more promise in his first spell at the school than the school reports suggest. Another piece of evidence comes from Isaac's list of sins referred to above. He lists one of his sins as:-

... setting my heart on money, learning, and pleasure more than Thee ...

which tells us that Isaac must have had a passion for learning.

A beating heart means something is alive. A baby born dead has died in the womb. If the child is born dead and so didn't induce it, it's sad. But if you do induce it, you killed it...
The reasoning behind all of this is something like: It is right to kill a foetus if the mother agrees. But what if she doesn't? Would you say someone killed her child against her will? No, because if wasn't alive yet? Of course it was.

Slightly off-topic: For the sake of argument, let's say that abortion's not murder until it's past the 20 weeks or whatever it is the law says. How come somebody who shoots a mother who's been pregnant for a week gets charged with double homicide?

Is this thread going anywhere?

no, orpheus is going on about debating debates and Ive come to the conclusion that debating on the internet is a complete waste of time, it takes too long to say nothing