Support NeoGAF

[way more]

Great post, especially how you cap it all off by nullifying your credibility!

You know who the GOP is appealing to? The people who actually respect life. Who's going to benefit from this? How about the child that didn't get murdered? And lets think about that little child who must hear from his mom (or adopted parents) that he/she is the result of the rape, I'm pretty sure he/she would be more thankful that he/she isn't dead.

If my birth meant my mother lived in a cycle of poverty till she died working several shit jobs with no chance supporting her own health let alone mine then yes, I would be glad not to be born. If I'm 1/1,000,000 related to the dead sperm and egg combo that potentially meant my mother becoming a mother at 15, getting a job at Dairy Queen instead of going to school, and living a life paycheck to paycheck, then I'll speak for my non-tangible cousin and say I'd rather my mom lived without torment than my existence.

Anyway, a pro-life position I can respect, it doesn't really seem like a value that will change. Let's just not bring our mothers into it.

 

[jaxword]

Dude. Dude. You're comparing a violent crime that's never been legal to a medical procedure that some people think is unethical due to their particular religious beliefs. You need to think before you post this kind of thing.

I actually got the irony DanteFox was going for. He just replaced the word "abortion" with "rape" from the typical "this is why we can't make abortion illegal" post. Done right, using that kind of ironic commentary gets people thinking. Done wrong...well...

He probably could have chosen a far better analogy since, well, nobody got it and it just across as needlessly offensive. Especially after a few weeks ago when Evilore and co made it clear where the line is. Oh well, know your audience, DanteFox.

 

[Orayn]

Going to bed, will check up on this thread tomorrow. For the record, the stuff in parentheses was indeed my opinion (man), and the sperm comments were mostly snark, though I did want to highlight the implications of drawing such black and white distinctions between human life+full legal personhood and nonlife.

 

[LordCanti]

I had to stop arguing because the semantic battle is one that gets boring really quick. Life itself isn't sacred or special though, it's how life lives. I wouldn't consider a fetus living, it may have life, but it isn't living.

More importantly, it's not sentient*. It won't know it's been aborted any more than the millions of other sperm that didn't make it to the finish line, or the eggs that weren't fertilized.

*speaking of "at conception" specifically. I'm more of a first trimester pro-choice advocate than an outright pro-choicer, but that's mostly because I've never had cause to look into exactly when sentience is achieved.

 

[commedieu]

I actually got the irony DanteFox was going for. He just replaced the word "abortion" with "rape" from the typical "this is why we can't make abortion illegal" post.

However, he probably could have chosen a far better analogy since, well, nobody got it and it just across as needlessly offensive. Especially after a few weeks ago when Evilore and co made it clear where the line is. Oh well, know your audience, DanteFox.

its safe to say everyone got it. It was, ghastly.

 

[Renji_11]

Cells are living according to science. And these clump of cells that make up a fetus have a unique genetic code that says it is human. So yeah, I'm pretty sure that conception is when we can start calling it a human. Fetus is just the term we use to describe that phase of life, just like "baby," "child," and "adult."


The difference being that the people are military is trying to kill are not innocent. The people on death row are not innocent. An unborn human is innocent. And if we aren't living in a country with a moral code then I must have jumped to an alternate universe.

I am not removing a woman's choice to kill her unborn child for my own reason, I am in support of removing a woman's choice to kill her unborn child for the unborn child's reasons.

Just want to say that not everyone on death row are guilty.

 

[Deified Data]

In my very humble opinion, an embryo/zygote/fetus/infant is the physical property of the woman it's bound to until it's delivered. Is it a life? Does it have rights? All impossible questions to definitely answer, and all immaterial. In an outright contest between the rights of an adult woman and the rights of her unborn child, the woman wins out every time. I can't in good conscience support abortion...only up to a certain point. For me, either abortion is always right, or it never is. Not a commonly-expressed belief but it's how I feel.

 

[Fantastical]

I actually got the irony DanteFox was going for. He just replaced the word "abortion" with "rape" from the typical "this is why we can't make abortion illegal" post. Done right, using that kind of ironic commentary gets people thinking. Done wrong...well...

He probably could have chosen a far better analogy since, well, nobody got it and it just across as needlessly offensive. Especially after a few weeks ago when Evilore and co made it clear where the line is. Oh well, know your audience, DanteFox.

Um, I think everyone got it. The analogy doesn't work at all, and it's offensive to compare the right to rape someone to the right of a woman to her own body.

 

[Kazerei]

A tumor does not have a unique genetic code, it has the same genetic code as the organism of which it was derived except with some mistranscriptions.

My argument that a fetus is a human life is still backed up by science, nice try though. Actually pretty clever, I had to think for a second.

The genetic mutations make it unique.

At some point (let's say ~24 weeks) it's pretty arguable that a fetus is a human life, but a zygote? Nope. No science behind it.

 

[Seventy_X_Seven]

Just want to say that not everyone on death row are guilty.

Thank you for correcting me. This is absolutely true. And that's why death row is such a long process. Still it sucks because if they are later proven not guilty no amount of money can repay the lost time. And sadly sometimes the innocent make it to the execution day. Really a crappy thing, but this is an argument for a different thread.

 

[stupei]

I actually got the irony DanteFox was going for. He just replaced the word "abortion" with "rape" from the typical "this is why we can't make abortion illegal" post. Done right, using that kind of ironic commentary gets people thinking. Done wrong...well...

He probably could have chosen a far better analogy since, well, nobody got it and it just across as needlessly offensive. Especially after a few weeks ago when Evilore and co made it clear where the line is. Oh well, know your audience, DanteFox.

Ohhhhh.

How clever.

 

[jaxword]

Um, I think everyone got it. The analogy doesn't work at all, and it's offensive to compare the right to rape someone to the right of a woman to her own body.

Hey, no argument here, I'm not on DanteFox's side. I agree with you and the rest.

 

[monchi-kun]

More importantly, it's not sentient. It won't know it's been aborted any more than the millions of other sperm that didn't make it to the finish line, or the eggs that weren't fertilized.

Yes, but judgmental people will! They will know it's been aborted. It's all irrational projection of one's beliefs over another persons. Life isn't precious or special in the grand scheme of things, it is created and extinguished in a scale we can barely imagine in this vast universe.

 

[DarkFlow]

What I don't understand is why GOP males are so concerned about what a woman does. They really need to just shut up about it and stop trying to force views on too others.

 

[Fantastical]

Hey, no argument here, I'm not on DanteFox's side.

I understand, but the analogy didn't work not because it was too complicated or something. It was just horrible.

 

[AnathemicOne]

I actually got the irony DanteFox was going for. He just replaced the word "abortion" with "rape" from the typical "this is why we can't make abortion illegal" post. Done right, using that kind of ironic commentary gets people thinking. Done wrong...well...

He probably could have chosen a far better analogy since, well, nobody got it and it just across as needlessly offensive. Especially after a few weeks ago when Evilore and co made it clear where the line is. Oh well, know your audience, DanteFox.

I think everyone understood his point, the analogy however was terrible and outright offensive.

The point of my original post was to highlight the historical event concerning Prohibition, which anyone living in the US whose passed US History would know, and how it ultimately failed in the end.

 

[jaxword]

The difference being that the people are military is trying to kill are not innocent.

This statement seems to have slipped by unnoticed.

Really, the people killed by our military are NOT innocent simply because...we're trying to kill them?

 

[ClassyPenguin]

Nope, there is no such thing as 0.5 of a life, at least not in the universe I've been living in. If you leave an ejaculated sperm alone, it will die. If you leave a fetus alone, it will continue to grow (unless the mother chooses to kill it, the mother dies, or some other tragedy). And don't say that it's dependence on a host doesn't make it a life because last I checked science considers mutualistic, commensalistic, and parasitic organisms as life.

wut
If that were the case premature babies would not need life support.

 

[Hero_of_the_Day]

Seriously. Why can't these stupid mother fuckers just not talk!? They keep seeing others in their party get burned for it, and yet they can't help themselves. You'd think there would be a memo sent to everyone in the club to just not use the word rape until after the elections.

 

[Kazerei]

Nope, there is no such thing as 0.5 of a life, at least not in the universe I've been living in. If you leave an ejaculated sperm alone, it will die. If you leave a fetus alone, it will continue to grow (unless the mother chooses to kill it, the mother dies, or some other tragedy). And don't say that it's dependence on a host doesn't make it a life because last I checked science considers mutualistic, commensalistic, and parasitic organisms as life.

Well, leaving a fetus in the womb isn't really leaving it alone...

 

[Seventy_X_Seven]

The genetic mutations make it unique.

At some point (let's say ~24 weeks) it's pretty arguable that a fetus is a human life, but a zygote? Nope. No science behind it.

The genetic mutations make it a mutated form of the host. Though technically a unique set of DNA, any good scientists can tell the difference between a normal human genetic code and a mutated human genetic code.

And a zygote is still a cell (living according to science) that has it's own genetic code that states it is human.

Well, leaving a fetus in the womb isn't really leaving it alone...

And the latter part of my post explains that science states life can be dependent on another life.

wut
If that were the case premature babies would not need life support.

See above quote and response.

 

[Veezy]

Seventy, three questions:

1. Do you believe that a person who tries to commit suicide and fails should be tried for aggravated assault?
2. Do you believe that if a woman's actions intentionally cause or unintentionally cause a miscarriage that she should be charged with first degree murder or manslaughter charges?
3. Do believe that a woman who performs an abortion on herself should be charged for first degree murder?

 

[LordCanti]

This statement seems to have slipped by unnoticed.

Really, the people killed by our military are NOT innocent simply because...we're trying to kill them?

One argument at a time. Two at a time is exhausting.

 

[kinoki]

Can't men, and white rich men at that, stop discussing legislation concerning rape? Can't we let women be the only spokespersons in this debate?

 

[Kazerei]

The genetic mutations make it a mutated form of the host. Though technically a unique set of DNA, any good scientists can tell the difference between a normal human genetic code and a mutated human genetic code.

And a zygote is still a cell (living according to science) that has it's own genetic code that states it is human.

You're still making a leap between having human genetic code and being a "life". Lots of things have "human genetic code".

And the latter part of my post explains that science states life can be dependent on another life.

It seemed that your point was "it continues to grow when you leave it alone so it's a life". Unlike a sperm cell, which does nothing when left alone.

 

[Aaron]

New rule, Republicans: DON'T EVER MENTION RAPE AGAIN.

Seriously, wipe that word from your lexicon. If someone asks you a question related to it, just don't answer. There's plenty of other topics you're mum about, so I think it's finally time you bury this like you did with Paul Ryan. Or how about this. Every time you're going to say rape, say something else instead, like Paul Ryan.

"But on the Paul Ryan thing, it's like, how does putting more Rand onto a woman's body and taking the life of an innocent economy that's a consequence of this crime, how does that make it better?"

See? It makes it much better.

 

[stupei]

wut
If that were the case premature babies would not need life support.

Well, leave it alone inside the inconsequential meatsack that serves as host to the innocent baby.

So then it's time to own up and state what your stance is on the morning after pill.

Morning after pill = murder ... yes or no

Don't you have to also be opposed to condoms, though?

Left alone, with no condom to interfere, that sperm may have resulted in a pregnancy. Because of outside interference, it's a potential life wasted.

Abortion after all is never a discussion of conscious life but rather the potential for conscious life.

 

[monchi-kun]

And a zygote is still a cell (living according to science) that has it's own genetic code that states it is human.

So then it's time to own up and state what your stance is on the morning after pill.

Morning after pill = murder ... yes or no

 

[sleepykyo]

What I don't understand is why GOP males are so concerned about what a woman does. They really need to just shut up about it and stop trying to force views on too others.

Presumably it is a rallying flag for republicans. Also a great way to pick up the Hispanic/Latino vote given the tendency to be Catholic.

 

[Deified Data]

Can't men, and white rich men at that, stop discussing legislation concerning rape? Can't we let women be the only spokespersons in this debate?

I hate this. Why make this distinction? So long as the conversation is sane and empathetic, we should have as many people talking about it as possible.

 

[Mumei]

The difference being that the people are military is trying to kill are not innocent. The people on death row are not innocent. An unborn human is innocent. And if we aren't living in a country with a moral code then I must have jumped to an alternate universe.

I am not removing a woman's choice to kill her unborn child for my own reason, I am in support of removing a woman's choice to kill her unborn child for the unborn child's reasons.

You said "Now if the women's health was a concern then yeah I can see how people would be ok with it then because you are weighing a life against a life" earlier. What if her reasons - you didn't mention those - included a concern for her health and the effects that pregnancy will have on her body, as well as the simple fact that carrying a child to term still has a significantly higher maternal mortality rate than does abortion and thus makes having an abortion inherently a health decision?

 

[jaxword]

It seemed that your point was "it continues to grow when you leave it alone so it's a life". Unlike a sperm cell, which does nothing when left alone.

A fetus won't grow if left 100% alone, either.

The mother needs to provide it with adequate sustenance otherwise it (and herself) could die. You could argue that SOME mothers could literally do nothing and still provide it sustenance by default, but that's really stretching the point.

 

[Seventy_X_Seven]

This statement seems to have slipped by unnoticed.

Really, the people killed by our military are NOT innocent simply because...we're trying to kill them?

I tried to word this very carefully because I am aware that our military does end up killing innocent people. What I am saying is I'm pretty sure our military's goal isn't to go out and kill innocent people.

Seventy, three questions:

1. Do you believe that a person who tries to commit suicide and fails should be tried for aggravated assault?
2. Do you believe that if a woman's actions intentionally cause or unintentionally cause a miscarriage that she should be charged with first degree murder or manslaughter charges?
3. Do believe that a woman who performs an abortion on herself should be charged for first degree murder?

1. In this case it is the person is making the choice on his own life so that's fine.
2. Intentionally yes, unintentionally no.
3. Yes.

And by the way, none of this is based on religious views (if it were than I would be against question 1.) This is all based on my view that fetus - and even a zygote - is a human life.

So then it's time to own up and state what your stance is on the morning after pill.

Morning after pill = murder ... yes or no

I know it's an unpopular opinion, but no. Morning after pill is the same thing. If I were to say the morning after pill is ok then I would go against everything I previously stated, wouldn't I? But if you just wanted to get me on the record saying it there you go.

 

[monchi-kun]

Abortion after all is never a discussion of conscious life but rather the potential for conscious life.

And here is the problem I have with people trying to impose morality and beliefs because it places more emphasis on the life "yet to be" versus that of the mother who already has grown, has likely built some for of deep emotional connections, has probably contributed to society in one form or another.

 

[Christine]

1.) This is all based on my view that fetus - and even a zygote - is a human life.

Can you demonstrate a moral imperative to protect all forms of human life?

 

[monchi-kun]

I know it's an unpopular opinion, but no. Morning after pill is the same thing. If I were to say the morning after pill is ok then I would go against everything I previously stated, wouldn't I? But if you just wanted to get me on the record saying it there you go.

Morning after pill is murder. Thanks for clarifying. I can see this a belief, while poorly argued, is totally unshakable. May you never be in a position to deprive a woman of her choice if she is rapped weather she keeps it, gives it up for adoption, or abort it. I don't have an issue with your morality, I just have an issue with your hardcore desire to impose it on others. She has the freedom to choose and you have the freedom to call her a murderer....but taking her right to choose is where I draw the.

 

[Seventy_X_Seven]

Can you demonstrate a moral imperative to protect all forms of human life?

What are you trying to say? That without religion there is no reason why anyone would find it the morally right thing to protect all forms of human life? I'm afraid I don't quite understand the question, but if that's it then that's just ridiculous.

 

[Team Filler]

...I don't have an issue with your morality, I just have an issue with your hardcore desire to impose it on others.

Nice way to put it.

What are you trying to say? That without religion there is no reason why anyone would find it the morally right thing to protect all forms of human life? I'm afraid I don't quite understand the question, but if that's it then that's just ridiculous.

Without religion, there'd probably be less moralizing for the taking of human life, actually.

 

[kinoki]

I hate this. Why make this distinction? So long as the conversation is sane and empathetic, we should have as many people talking about it as possible.

Okay, when in the 10+ years this has been discussed in the US (or anywhere else in the world) has rich white men had a sane and empathetic conversation about rape? How many more years should we give them "a chance" to sound sane?

 

[squidyj]

Okay, when in the 10+ years this has been discussed in the US (or anywhere else in the world) has rich white men had a sane and empathetic conversation about rape? How many more years should we give them "a chance" to sound sane?

I'm sure there's a number of rich white men that have sane and empathetic opinions on rape.

 

[Christine]

What are you trying to say? That without religion there is no reason why anyone would find it the morally right thing to protect all forms of human life? I'm afraid I don't quite understand the question, but if that's it then that's just ridiculous.

I didn't reference religion at all. I'm just asking if you can show that there exists a moral duty to refrain from destroying every form of human life.

For instance, there might be some attribute or characteristic common to all forms of human life that creates such a duty. Can you describe and demonstrate any such universal quality?

 

[kinoki]

I'm sure there's a number of rich white men that have sane and empathetic opinions on rape.

I'm sure there are too. Most of them, I guess, don't feel the need to discuss it because it goes something like this: "Rape is wrong. If a woman gets pregnant due to rape it's her choice to have an abortion. Why are we discussing this?"

 

[metalslimer]

The fact that men even try to chime in this issue is kind of amusing.

 

[monchi-kun]

What are you trying to say? That without religion there is no reason why anyone would find it the morally right thing to protect all forms of human life? I'm afraid I don't quite understand the question, but if that's it then that's just ridiculous.

I would go back in time and ask Hitler's mother to have an abortion.

 

[kiryogi]

The fact that men even try to chime in this issue is kind of amusing.

Yknow that brings up a very good question. Has their been any woman from the GOP that's supported these statements?

 

[Veezy]

I tried to word this very carefully because I am aware that our military does end up killing innocent people. What I am saying is I'm pretty sure our military's goal isn't to go out and kill innocent people.

Our military kills plenty of civilians. It's unintentional, but it happens. If we're being consistent, we should be a pacifist.

1. In this case it is the person is making the choice on his own life so that's fine.
2. Intentionally yes, unintentionally no.
3. Yes.

The reason I through this though experiment at you was to try and gauge where you were coming from. You're wanting to tell a woman not only that she would have to carry presidencies to term, but how she would have to live her life and treat her own body. Isn't that trumping her right to her personal sovereignty in order to keep the pregnancy? What if she's just to poor to afford the food? What if she works at a bar and the secondhand smoke fucks with her? What if she gets over worked since she has two jobs? At what point is the miscarriage unintentional and at what point is it her lifestyle causing the problem?

There so much gray area that acting like it's a cut or dry issue is foolish. I mean, you're advocating investigations into miscarriages and self performed abortions. Sending a sixteen year old to jail because she puts a coat hanger into her womb. That's inside her vagina. You seriously think that's the same crime as an adult committing premeditated murder of another adult?

And by the way, none of this is based on religious views (if it were than I would be against question 1.) This is all based on my view that fetus - and even a zygote - is a human life.

So, at what point does one person's right to life trumps another person's right to the sovereignty of their own body? What makes a developing zygote different than, say, somebody needing my kidney?

I know it's an unpopular opinion, but no. Morning after pill is the same thing. If I were to say the morning after pill is ok then I would go against everything I previously stated, wouldn't I? But if you just wanted to get me on the record saying it there you go.

This is terrible. A woman gets raped and she just has no option. She has to deal with the fact she doesn't even have control or choice in deciding to take a pill that can avoid the issue altogether. That the man now will control her in some way for the rest of her life, at least until the baby is born. Then, the paperwork to set up the adoption, the costs for doctor's care while preggers, extra food costs, new clothing costs, the lifetime damage to her body. You can't see how cold and callous that is?

 

[AnathemicOne]

Yknow that brings up a very good question. Has their been any woman from the GOP that's supported these statements?

I'm curious on this too

 

[Seventy_X_Seven]

Morning after pill is murder. Thanks for clarifying. I can see this a belief, while poorly argued, is totally unshakable. May you never be in a position to deprive a woman of her choice if she is rapped weather she keeps it, gives it up for adoption, or abort it. because I don't have an issue with your morality, I just have an issue with your hardcore desire to impose it on others.

*thinks of how to word this so the argument doesn't shift to "but the military kills people!!!" . . . ah you know what, why should I. Y'all know what I mean*

I also have a moral view that a man shouldn't kill his another man, and I'm sure you also don't have an issue with this nor do you have an issue with having the government having a hardcore desire to impose it on others. It all comes done to this fundamental viewpoint on where life starts, and to me it's perfectly clear that it begins at conception. Hypothetically, if you had this view wouldn't you feel responsible to protect that life? Why do you have to phrase it in a way that makes me sound like some stubborn prick dictator?

And in case you say that you wouldn't feel responsible to protect that life, then let's say - hypothetically again - that murder of a fully grown human being was not against the law. Would you feel responsible to protect life and make it against the law?


That's all for tonight guys, it's been fun debating! If anyone wants to get another response from this crazy man then shoot me a PM and I'll get back to you by tomorrow! Cheers and good night.


EDIT: Ok, Veezy is the last person I will get to tonight but I'm going to have to make it quick. Basically the cold hard truth is human beings are an organism dependent on others. Everyone starts out dependent on the mother, and eventually a woman may have to to be the one that another is dependent on. It would be wonderful if every person was completely independent of eachother, but we're not. All these ideals that a person should always have the right to choose how to live their life sounds great, but that would require living in an ideal fantasy world. The moment a women is impregnated she no longer has complete control of her life, she now has a responsibility for that other human (and it doesn't have to be as bad as y'all make it up to be). Now obviously it's not fair that women have to bear the burden while men don't, but life's not always fair. This is the world we live in and it's facts. It's not the ideal world but it's our world and we have no choice but to deal with it.

 

[metalslimer]

I can't believe there are people actually against the morning after pill.

It all comes done to this fundamental viewpoint on where life starts, and to me it's perfectly clear that it begins at conception

Why is human life so special?

 

[stupei]

Yknow that brings up a very good question. Has their been any woman from the GOP that's supported these statements?

I'm curious on this too

I think there was a female Republican candidate recently who discussed abortion, but now I can't find it.

I don't remember if she specifically spoke about rape victims or not.

I can't believe there are people actually against the morning after pill.

It's extremism, but they usually refuse to take it to the next logical step -- nearly its neighbor -- which would be opposing the use of condoms.

Because that would actually inconvenience men as well.