Abortion is acceptable, but.. (1 Viewer)

[MarAzul]

Navy Seals killed Bin Laden.

And a good deed it was. After due process they terminated his ass and that sir will never be called "Murder".

 

[Further]

Both of these are wedge issues used by politicians to rally their troops and keep people looking away from the important matters.

 

[Denny Crane]

And a good deed it was. After due process they terminated his ass and that sir will never be called "Murder".

What due process for Bin Laden? There was no trial. But you said there was no right to kill. But there is!

Right to Abortion was given due process in a case called "Roe v. Wade."

 

[tlongII]

You'll meet him one day

Or not.

 

[magnifier661]

What due process for Bin Laden? There was no trial. But you said there was no right to kill. But there is!

Right to Abortion was given due process in a case called "Roe v. Wade."

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/may/03/osama-bin-laden-killing-legality

The immediate justification for the killing was that the head of al-Qaida had long ago declared war on the US and other nations. "In war you are allowed to attack your enemy," a US embassy spokesman in London said.

A more thorough explanation of the legal basis was given last year by Harold Hongju Koh, legal adviser at the US state department. He told a meeting of the American Society of International Law: "Some have argued that the use of lethal force against specific individuals fails to provide adequate process and thus constitutes unlawful extrajudicial killing. But a state that is engaged in an armed conflict or in legitimate self-defence is not required to provide targets with legal process before the state may use lethal force.

 

[magnifier661]

Or not.

We will see won't we?

 

[tlongII]

What is the difference between killing life and interfering with the creation of life? Both are unnatural ways to avoid the creator's intent of birth.

There is no "creator's intent." It is a biological process. An unborn fetus that is less than 24 weeks is not a person. It is completely different than killing a living person. Do you remember what you were doing when you were 5 month old fetus?

 

[magnifier661]

There is no "creator's intent." It is a biological process. An unborn fetus that is less than 24 weeks is not a person. It is completely different than killing a living person. Do you remember what you were doing when you were 5 month old fetus?

Do you remember what you did when you were 1? Does that mean parents can kill their 1 year olds?

 

[tlongII]

Do you remember what you did when you were 1? Does that mean parents can kill their 1 year olds?

I have some faint recollection of being 1 year old. I also have pictures.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

You are right and I regretted doing it. But that was then when I decided. Now I'm paying for it after I found the woman I want to spend the rest of my life with.

But if life officially is created, then killing that life is no different than killing some 3 year old.

Not trying to ride you about your personal decision, more theoretical question. If killing a 'life" in the womb is just as bad as killing a 3 year old, is that just as bad as stopping a life from ever happening?

 

[magnifier661]

I have some faint recollection of being 1 year old. I also have pictures.

Oh there can be pictures of the baby in the womb too? Wanna see my children's ultra sounds?

http://mentalfloss.com/article/12330/why-cant-you-remember-being-baby

There are probably blackout periods you can’t remember at all from your childhood, and the memories you do have are likely hazy and garbled. Although pretty much everyone experiences this phenomenon known as childhood amnesia, its causes are still somewhat of an enigma. Here are 4 hypotheses that might explain why you can’t remember much from your pre-kindergarten days.

1. Your Brain Was Underdeveloped
Many neuroscientists argue that infants can’t lay down long-term memories because their brains aren’t fully developed.

As infants, we can certainly make some types of memories. In fact, two of our brain systems necessary for memory-making – the hippocampus and the medial temporal lobe – are pretty well developed by the time we’re a year old. However, the prefrontal cortex doesn’t completely mature until our early twenties. Neuroscientists believe this region of the brain helps us form episodic memories – memories about things that happened to us. Before our prefrontal cortex is at least partially developed, we might be able to recall skills or recognize items, but we won’t be able commit full scenes to memory.

2. Your Language Was Limited
Some psychologists argue that we can’t remember our infancy because we couldn’t frame the memories in linguistic terms – and thus never really organized or stored them away properly. When you think about it, learning language changed the way you represented the world. During your first visit to the doctor, you weren’t surrounded by “stethoscopes,” “scales” and “syringes.” You probably thought about things differently before you had words to describe your surroundings. Thus, your memories from your pre-verbal days might be less vivid because your whole schema for representing the world was different.

And while we don’t need language to form memories, it does help us rehearse them – both aloud and in our own heads. You might not have remembered the time the Tommy wet his pants in third grade if you didn’t remind him (and yourself) about it all the time. But if you’d been too young to verbalize what happened, you’d have missed the chance to talk about it over and over again until you’d committed the episode to memory.

3. You Had No Sense of Self
Some psychologists believe that infants need to develop a sense of self before they can develop memories about things that happened to them – known as autobiographical memories. Babies who don’t really understand who they are will have a difficult time picking out the things that are personally relevant.

One experiment on self-recognition and memory provided support for this hypothesis. Psychologist Hark Howe tested whether infants were able to recognize themselves in a mirror. He then let them play with a stuffed animal and told them to put it in a drawer in the laboratory for safekeeping. He brought them back two weeks later and discovered that only the infants who could recognize themselves in a mirror were able to recall where they had stashed the toy. Those who couldn’t had no memory of what they’d done with poor Teddy.

4. You Had No Retrieval Cues
Other psychologists argue that we never have any problem making memories – we just have trouble recalling them when we get older. It’s possible that we forget our episodes from our childhood because there are no context cues around to help trigger the memories. Even if you’ve lived in the same house all your life, the world looks a lot different now than when you were a baby. Think of how your first birthday party must’ve looked through your eyes. The furniture towered over you, the food was hard to eat, and all these people you didn’t invite were speaking a strange language you didn’t understand. But as an adult, it’s pretty rare that you walk by an enormous picnic table surrounded by Esperanto-speaking giants, so there's nothing to trigger the memory of Grandma introducing you to buttercream frosting. We may forget our infancy because our perspective has changed so radically since childhood that retrieval cues are hard to come by.



Read the full text here: http://mentalfloss.com/article/12330/why-cant-you-remember-being-baby#ixzz2j3HduupQ
--brought to you by mental_floss!

 

[Denny Crane]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/may/03/osama-bin-laden-killing-legality

So killing is allowed under certain circumstances.

Thou shalt not kill, sometimes!

Thanks for proving my point.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

There is no "creator's intent." It is a biological process. An unborn fetus that is less than 24 weeks is not a person. It is completely different than killing a living person. Do you remember what you were doing when you were 5 month old fetus?

I was in a fetal position loving my mom's womb, it's like yesterday for me. Only my mother's womb is under my desk and my fetal position isn't quite as comfortable.

I understand the biological reasoning. Mags believes in a creator which makes me wonder how someone who believes in a creator can say it is OK to interfer with the creation of life. Doesn't that go against the creator's intent.

 

[magnifier661]

Not trying to ride you about your personal decision, more theoretical question. If killing a 'life" in the womb is just as bad as killing a 3 year old, is that just as bad as stopping a life from ever happening?

Not trying to defend my decision, but using a contraceptive is a little different in my eyes. The life-force hasn't been established yet, and even though protection truly is "playing God"; it's not the same as actually "killing". And this debate is "what is worth killing?"

 

[Denny Crane]

[video=youtube;fUspLVStPbk]

 

[magnifier661]

So killing is allowed under certain circumstances.

Thou shalt not kill, sometimes!

Thanks for proving my point.

You are aware that Theists aren't the only ones that are against abortion right?

This is a debate on why is killing someone on death row wrong and killing a baby is okay?

 

[Denny Crane]

You are aware that Theists aren't the only ones that are against abortion right?

This is a debate on why is killing someone on death row wrong and killing a baby is okay?

The constitution says "no person shall be deprived of LIFE, Liberty, or Property" without due process. Due process is given. May be deprived of LIFE.

I think the "liberals" are inconsistent in their entire philosophy, but it makes them happy somehow. I'm with ToB - pro death penalty, and pro choice. In both cases, due process is done.

 

[magnifier661]

The constitution says "no person shall be deprived of LIFE, Liberty, or Property" without due process. Due process is given. May be deprived of LIFE.

I think the "liberals" are inconsistent in their entire philosophy, but it makes them happy somehow. I'm with ToB - pro death penalty, and pro choice. In both cases, due process is done.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Targeted_killing

And while you are trying to use another "straw man", lets take it to another level shall we? So when we were defending ourselves from attack from Germany, was it against the laws of the United States to bomb the city of Berlin?

Oh and P.S. Osama wasn't an American Citizen, so he has no "civil rights"

 

[MarAzul]

What due process for Bin Laden? There was no trial. But you said there was no right to kill. But there is!

Right to Abortion was given due process in a case called "Roe v. Wade."

Ben laden had a long tenuous process not in court, but congress and the executive branch.
He was terminated by the Seals on orders from the Commander in Chief..

The Roe vs Wade rule is total trash, read it. About as stupid as the ruling that the individual mandate is a tax but not a direct tax. We get people appointed to the court that are there simply to bollix the system.

 

[barfo]

The constitution says "no person shall be deprived of LIFE, Liberty, or Property" without due process. Due process is given. May be deprived of LIFE.

I think the "liberals" are inconsistent in their entire philosophy, but it makes them happy somehow. I'm with ToB - pro death penalty, and pro choice. In both cases, due process is done.

I can't speak for other liberals, but my issue with the death penalty is the process, not the punishment. I'm fine killing those that deserve it, that includes foreign enemies, domestic terrorists, criminals, libertarians, and the unborn.

barfo

 

[Further]

[video=youtube;fUspLVStPbk]

I just love that! As funny today as the first time I saw it.

 

[Further]

The constitution says "no person shall be deprived of LIFE, Liberty, or Property" without due process. Due process is given. May be deprived of LIFE.

I think the "liberals" are inconsistent in their entire philosophy, but it makes them happy somehow. I'm with ToB - pro death penalty, and pro choice. In both cases, due process is done.

I was pro death penalty until I had to write a paper on the subject a while ago. In researching I just found that there are too many people convicted who later turn out to be innocent. If we could correct for that issue, I would be perfectly fine with the death penalty. I personally have no issues with people who commit heinous crimes being put to death, but I do have a problem with a severely flawed system being asked to determine who is and isn't guilty.

Still there are two other big problems with the death penalty, the racially biased sentencing and the excessive cost, but in both of those if the original problem I had were corrected I feel we could work on these other two problems. But until we can have proof positive that the guilty are in fact guilty, I would rather not execute a sentence that can't be retracted if more information is gained.

 

[magnifier661]

I was pro death penalty until I had to write a paper on the subject a while ago. In researching I just found that there are too many people convicted who later turn out to be innocent. If we could correct for that issue, I would be perfectly fine with the death penalty. I personally have no issues with people who commit heinous crimes being put to death, but I do have a problem with a severely flawed system being asked to determine who is and isn't guilty.

Still there are two other big problems with the death penalty, the racially biased sentencing and the excessive cost, but in both of those if the original problem I had were corrected I feel we could work on these other two problems. But until we can have proof positive that the guilty are in fact guilty, I would rather not execute a sentence that can't be retracted if more information is gained.

Yeah it is racist!!!! Look at the discrepancy!

http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/...us-death-penalty-facts/death-penalty-and-race

 

[RR7]

Yeah it is racist!!!! Look at the discrepancy!

http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/...us-death-penalty-facts/death-penalty-and-race

That graph shows the race of the victims.

 

[magnifier661]

That graph shows the race of the victims.

Exactly!!! I actually couldn't believe how lopsided it was. He's got a point.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

I'm pro choice and pro death penalty.

I'm also pro guns but I don't think they should be used for abortions.

 

[magnifier661]

I'm pro choice and pro death penalty.

I'm also pro guns but I don't think they should be used for abortions.

Lmao

 

[magnifier661]

What they should do is have the aborted babies photo album

 

[SlyPokerDog]

What they should do is have the aborted babies photo album

Why? You think women should be scared into not having abortions? "Here you stupid life killing whore, look at these pictures. LOOK AT THEM!"

Or should it be like those anti drug commercials?

"This is your fetus. This is your fetus skewered on wire coat hangers. Any questions?"

 

[blazerboy30]

There is no "creator's intent." It is a biological process. An unborn fetus that is less than 24 weeks is not a person. It is completely different than killing a living person. Do you remember what you were doing when you were 5 month old fetus?

When does a fetus become a human?

When it has a heart? When it has a brain? When it has eyes? When it can speak? When it can walk?

24 weeks is about as arbitrary as you can get. Being able to "remember what you were doing" is a ridiculous measuring stick as there are many fully grown adults with memory loss. Should they be aborted?