31st January 2003, 7:27 PM
The last paragraph wasn't aimed at me, it was aimed at whoever claimed abortion rates are dropping. While I'm all for that, I don't see how that helps my argument at all, either way. Yes, I too think murdering people is no way to stop abortion. Two wrongs don't make a right, but 3 lefts do, and all that bumper sticker stuff.
Regarding late term abortions, I wasn't really specifying late term or early term. I was targetting them all in general. They all are "before birth" which is about as specific as I got.
As for getting upset at removing choice, I have to say, AGAIN, that some things are meant to never be a free choice on. Theft is one of them. Unless you think that stealing (I'd use murder, but that's too close to what we are actually debating here) is something that should be left to the individual to decide if it's right or wrong, then you admit that some choices must be taken away from the masses. This debate isn't that removing choice in general is a bad thing, it's to decide if THIS is one of those things that should be a right to choose or not.
Now, onto the post you just made.
You are correct, by saying that you would have given me a victory, in fact THE victory, for if you can't defeat ONE point that specifically states your point is wrong, I win. Likewise for you.
You are also correct in saying that it's not specifically dependant on the mother for life after birth. However, this just brings to mind the only reason you would have said that, acknowledgement of adoption as a way out to prevent an ill-fit mother situation. If adoption is such an easy way out in the case of dependance on the mother (the one thing you cling to to differentiate the two stages of life so far), then it should also be equally easy a way out instead of abortion for me.
You also state that my argument is somehow hinged on late term abortions. I'd like to see where you misread my posts to gather that that's the case. Not once did I specify any specific term of pregnancy. I was always quite general. I stated "before birth", which is anything from conception to contraction. Maybe you mixed me up with other's comments about specific terms, but my argument didn't even mention any terms to be dependant on.
Finally, we have taken a step back. We are back to my main point. Why do you think it's not alive until birth? You have only stated "it just is". This isn't a box of apple jacks here, you can't just say something like that and expect it to be enough. Give me a reason why you think they are seperate. I'll even give you a head start. Your response starts with "well what about before conception?". Trust me, I'm open there. I haven't defended THAT argument yet. I have in fact dug an apparent grave for myself if you go that way so far.
Regarding late term abortions, I wasn't really specifying late term or early term. I was targetting them all in general. They all are "before birth" which is about as specific as I got.
As for getting upset at removing choice, I have to say, AGAIN, that some things are meant to never be a free choice on. Theft is one of them. Unless you think that stealing (I'd use murder, but that's too close to what we are actually debating here) is something that should be left to the individual to decide if it's right or wrong, then you admit that some choices must be taken away from the masses. This debate isn't that removing choice in general is a bad thing, it's to decide if THIS is one of those things that should be a right to choose or not.
Now, onto the post you just made.
You are correct, by saying that you would have given me a victory, in fact THE victory, for if you can't defeat ONE point that specifically states your point is wrong, I win. Likewise for you.
You are also correct in saying that it's not specifically dependant on the mother for life after birth. However, this just brings to mind the only reason you would have said that, acknowledgement of adoption as a way out to prevent an ill-fit mother situation. If adoption is such an easy way out in the case of dependance on the mother (the one thing you cling to to differentiate the two stages of life so far), then it should also be equally easy a way out instead of abortion for me.
You also state that my argument is somehow hinged on late term abortions. I'd like to see where you misread my posts to gather that that's the case. Not once did I specify any specific term of pregnancy. I was always quite general. I stated "before birth", which is anything from conception to contraction. Maybe you mixed me up with other's comments about specific terms, but my argument didn't even mention any terms to be dependant on.
Finally, we have taken a step back. We are back to my main point. Why do you think it's not alive until birth? You have only stated "it just is". This isn't a box of apple jacks here, you can't just say something like that and expect it to be enough. Give me a reason why you think they are seperate. I'll even give you a head start. Your response starts with "well what about before conception?". Trust me, I'm open there. I haven't defended THAT argument yet. I have in fact dug an apparent grave for myself if you go that way so far.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)