Old 04-1-2004, 10:23 PM   #41
Moogy
嗚呼
FFR Simfile Author
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: 車輪の国
Age: 31
Posts: 10,306
Send a message via AIM to Moogy
Default

the internet
__________________
Plz visit my blog
Moogy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-1-2004, 10:45 PM   #42
BluE_MeaniE
FFR Player
 
BluE_MeaniE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Worcester, MA
Posts: 796
Send a message via AIM to BluE_MeaniE Send a message via MSN to BluE_MeaniE
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chardish
I didn't convince you, Jewpin, but I successfully argued my case before many. I'm sure some people were swayed somewhat by my arguments...it seems like Blue Meanie was leaning that way to an extent.

I mean, you just had good points and information.
Of course, that could be all wrong, but the way it is, I just don't know.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henri Poincaré
The scientist does not study nature because it is useful to do so. He studies it because he takes pleasure in it, and he takes pleasure in it because it is beautiful.
BluE_MeaniE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-1-2004, 11:31 PM   #43
perfect_fat
FFR Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 161
Default

Abortion is a neccessary evil. I think everyone can agree to that one.
perfect_fat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-2-2004, 04:22 PM   #44
AlbinoLime
FFR Player
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 101
Send a message via AIM to AlbinoLime
Default

It doesn't matter if abortion is killing somebody, as long as it's legal it's gonna be done. Of course it will be done if it's illegal too, just not as well. But that's one of the good things about living in America, if it's legal then it doesn't matter what others think.
AlbinoLime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-2-2004, 04:46 PM   #45
Laharl
FFR Player
 
Laharl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Age: 35
Posts: 1,821
Send a message via AIM to Laharl Send a message via MSN to Laharl
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by perfect_fat
Abortion is a neccessary evil. I think everyone can agree to that one.
No.

Two wrongs don't make a right. If you think that abortion is an "evil", that means you'd rather people didn't have to do it. Well, my arguement is that people shouldn't have done stuff in the first place so that abortion would be the "best course of action."
__________________
SIG PICTURES:

POINTLESSLY TAKING UP BANDWIDTH SINCE THE INCEPTION OF THE INTERNET
Laharl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-2-2004, 10:19 PM   #46
chardish
Environmentally Friendly
Retired StaffFFR Veteran
 
chardish's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: In transit
Age: 34
Posts: 6,929
Default

There is no such thing as a "necessary evil."

I was driving this morning and a good argument hit me:

Should mothers be allowed to chop off the limbs of their unborn children?

If you answer "yes", then the response is "So parents are allowed to do whatever they want to their children as long as they're still in the womb, even if it scars them for life? Even if they have to live their whole lives a cripple?"

If you answer "no", then the response is "So how come they're allowed to kill their children, but not deform them? Isn't a bit silly that you're only allowed to intentionally harm a human being as long as you completely kill them?

And if you think my argument is ridiculous, read Brave New World...as part of their social engineering projects they inject some babies with drugs that make them retarded.
chardish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-3-2004, 01:49 AM   #47
perfect_fat
FFR Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 161
Default

Quote:
social engineering
ummm Mitnick?

Anyways, (sorry bout that). What does it say on your birth certificate? Does it say your date of conception? No, it says that day that you were born. When society decided that you were imbued with life. You can argue with the definition, but your example is just ridiculous and I'm not even going to respond to it.
perfect_fat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-3-2004, 01:53 AM   #48
fusi0n
FFR Player
 
fusi0n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Age: 32
Posts: 2,158
Send a message via AIM to fusi0n
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chardish
There is no such thing as a "necessary evil."

I was driving this morning and a good argument hit me:

Should mothers be allowed to chop off the limbs of their unborn children?

If you answer "yes", then the response is "So parents are allowed to do whatever they want to their children as long as they're still in the womb, even if it scars them for life? Even if they have to live their whole lives a cripple?"

If you answer "no", then the response is "So how come they're allowed to kill their children, but not deform them? Isn't a bit silly that you're only allowed to intentionally harm a human being as long as you completely kill them?

And if you think my argument is ridiculous, read Brave New World...as part of their social engineering projects they inject some babies with drugs that make them retarded.
that's a pretty rediculous situation. cutting off a child's limb is just unecessary cruelty. abortion isn't always unecessary. you are stretching it
__________________
fusi0n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-3-2004, 01:54 AM   #49
perfect_fat
FFR Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 161
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Laharl
Quote:
Originally Posted by perfect_fat
Abortion is a neccessary evil. I think everyone can agree to that one.
No.

Two wrongs don't make a right. If you think that abortion is an "evil", that means you'd rather people didn't have to do it. Well, my arguement is that people shouldn't have done stuff in the first place so that abortion would be the "best course of action."
What about rape? Was she asking for it by dressing a certain way?
perfect_fat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-3-2004, 01:59 AM   #50
BluE_MeaniE
FFR Player
 
BluE_MeaniE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Worcester, MA
Posts: 796
Send a message via AIM to BluE_MeaniE Send a message via MSN to BluE_MeaniE
Default

I just don't see what's wrong with taking pleasure from something that gives you pleasure. Sure there are consequences, but there are things to get rid of those consequences. But then ever once in a while those things don't work. So they have more things to help get rid of the consequences.

Of course, things are more complicated than that, when you get to the consequence, but that's my view on the point that if they have sex, they have to expect the consequences, or that they shouldn't have sex at all unless they are fine with the consequences.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henri Poincaré
The scientist does not study nature because it is useful to do so. He studies it because he takes pleasure in it, and he takes pleasure in it because it is beautiful.
BluE_MeaniE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-3-2004, 02:50 AM   #51
chardish
Environmentally Friendly
Retired StaffFFR Veteran
 
chardish's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: In transit
Age: 34
Posts: 6,929
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue_MeaniE
I just don't see what's wrong with taking pleasure from something that gives you pleasure. Sure there are consequences, but there are things to get rid of those consequences. But then ever once in a while those things don't work. So they have more things to help get rid of the consequences.

Of course, things are more complicated than that, when you get to the consequence, but that's my view on the point that if they have sex, they have to expect the consequences, or that they shouldn't have sex at all unless they are fine with the consequences.
There's nothing wrong with taking pleasure from sex, and I wasn't saying that there was. I find it ironic that you say "once in a while those (countermeasures) don't work", because from a biological standpoint, sex exists for reproduction and reproduction alone, and if a child was not conceived, then something didn't work right.

My rule is this: No two people should be having sex unless they're willing to accept the fact that they might become parents. Which is why I won't get married until I'm at least in my mid-twenties.

Quote:
Originally Posted by perfect_fat
Anyways, (sorry bout that). What does it say on your birth certificate? Does it say your date of conception? No, it says that day that you were born. When society decided that you were imbued with life. You can argue with the definition, but your example is just ridiculous and I'm not even going to respond to it.
The birth certificate says that you've been born, not that you're alive. Being born (coming out of your mother) is a lot different than being alive.

The date of conception is fairly irrelevant, as is the date of birth, if you think about it. And it's impossible to prove on what date you were conceived - but this doesn't mean there wasn't an instantaneous moment when you became a complete single-celled human being.

The fact that you refuse to respond to my argument shows nothing but your inability to counter it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by fusi0n
that's a pretty rediculous situation. cutting off a child's limb is just unecessary cruelty. abortion isn't always unecessary. you are stretching it
So injuring someone else is cruel, but killing them isn't? And it's okay to kill, but not okay to injure?
chardish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-3-2004, 03:24 AM   #52
jewpinthethird
(The Fat's Sabobah)
FFR Music ProducerFFR Veteran
 
jewpinthethird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Palm Springs, California
Posts: 11,711
Send a message via AIM to jewpinthethird
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BluE_MeaniE
Quote:
Originally Posted by chardish
I didn't convince you, Jewpin, but I successfully argued my case before many. I'm sure some people were swayed somewhat by my arguments...it seems like Blue Meanie was leaning that way to an extent.
:x
I mean, you just had good points and information.
Of course, that could be all wrong, but the way it is, I just don't know.
This is true, you did have very many good points. But, in my opinion, it always seemed to end in a stalemate.

I cant say I was totally unaffected by anything you said, there were some points that made me think for awhile.
jewpinthethird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-3-2004, 03:45 AM   #53
C104K3D
FFR Player
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 22
Default

You can't kill what isn't living, so the real debate here is whether a child is alive when they are still in their mothers womb. In my opinion, something may be removed from existence by it's creator before it is finished, but not after (only in the case of human life). Lets say someone painted a picture, and before it was finished he scrapped it. He painted another picture, and when it was finished he still didn't like it and wanted to destroy it as well. Someone else said they liked it and didn't want him to destroy it, so he didn't. Now change the painting and artist to a baby and it's parents. Before the child is born, if both parents agree to it, they should be able to have an abortion, because they either may not be able to support the child, or just don't want to have children at all. This should be their decision, whether to bring life into this world, and not someone else's. Abortion is not murder, because matter that isn't born yet wouldn't be considered life, as our age is based on our birth date. And I strongly oppose people that meddle with parents that choose to have an abortion. It's their child, whether they'd like to have it or not, and I'm sorry, but it's not your decision. Now killing a child after it's born is murder.

The painting example was bad, but in the end I made my point.
C104K3D is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-3-2004, 11:46 AM   #54
chardish
Environmentally Friendly
Retired StaffFFR Veteran
 
chardish's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: In transit
Age: 34
Posts: 6,929
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by C104K3D
You can't kill what isn't living, so the real debate here is whether a child is alive when they are still in their mothers womb. In my opinion, something may be removed from existence by it's creator before it is finished, but not after (only in the case of human life). Lets say someone painted a picture, and before it was finished he scrapped it. He painted another picture, and when it was finished he still didn't like it and wanted to destroy it as well. Someone else said they liked it and didn't want him to destroy it, so he didn't. Now change the painting and artist to a baby and it's parents. Before the child is born, if both parents agree to it, they should be able to have an abortion, because they either may not be able to support the child, or just don't want to have children at all. This should be their decision, whether to bring life into this world, and not someone else's. Abortion is not murder, because matter that isn't born yet wouldn't be considered life, as our age is based on our birth date. And I strongly oppose people that meddle with parents that choose to have an abortion. It's their child, whether they'd like to have it or not, and I'm sorry, but it's not your decision. Now killing a child after it's born is murder.

The painting example was bad, but in the end I made my point.
A human being is "complete" from the moment of conception. Once conception takes place, the human has a complete set of human DNA and begins to grow. Nothing new will be added to his being until his natural death. All he needs to turn into an adult is time and nutrition.

Now what about a 6 year old? He has a complete set of human DNA and begins to grow. Nothing new will be added to his being until his natural death. All he needs to turn into an adult is time and nutrition.

Neither of those examples are fully mature humans, though. Young children haven't gone through puberty, so if you make the claim that unborn babies are "incomplete" you must argue that humans up until the age of puberty are also "incomplete." But you'd be wrong. They're still complete human beings -- they're just growing, that's all.
chardish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-6-2004, 11:24 AM   #55
Anonymous
FFR Player
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 1,088
Default

Well anyways, the main point I was trying to get across was the fact that others shouldn't have the right to decide whether someone should have an abortion. It's THEIR decision. If one of the parents didn't agree then the abortion shouldn't take place, and whoever wanted the abortion shouldn't have to pay for raising the child. My opinion: Whoever wants to bring life into this world has to pay for it! And sex doesn't always result in a child so having intercourse doesn't always mean that you want to have a child!
Anonymous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2004, 11:26 PM   #56
DracIV
FFR Player
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 298
Default

I have two intertwined arguments that seem to support abortion.

The right to pursue happiness. If having a baby screws over your entire life forever after (I've seen it happen), then it is part of your right to pursue preventing that baby when a mistake was made. Everyone makes mistakes, but should someone's life be totally ruined because they made the wrong mistake? This adds a situation to the list of times when abortion might be acceptable. If the child is born, it means that they will most likely grow up in poverty or fairly poor conditions with incompetent parents, or they will spend their youth being juggled in the adoption system.

A similar situation is if you are taking the SATs and you mess up a single question. Because you messed up that question, you are screwed over for life and no longer have a hope for a good college or well-paid job. Due to that one mistake, everything went down the drain. That's why people can take the SATs multiple times, to let them correct their mistakes and do better next time. Why can't this apply to this situation? Abortion gives the parents a second chance to not ruin their lives with a stupid mistake.

(note: my argument was discussing parents [far] under age 28)
DracIV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2004, 11:35 PM   #57
chardish
Environmentally Friendly
Retired StaffFFR Veteran
 
chardish's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: In transit
Age: 34
Posts: 6,929
Default

How not to get pregnant:

Don't have sex.

People make it seem like pregnancy is something uncontrollable.
chardish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2004, 11:53 PM   #58
fusi0n
FFR Player
 
fusi0n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Age: 32
Posts: 2,158
Send a message via AIM to fusi0n
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chardish
Quote:
Originally Posted by fusi0n
that's a pretty rediculous situation. cutting off a child's limb is just unecessary cruelty. abortion isn't always unecessary. you are stretching it
So injuring someone else is cruel, but killing them isn't? And it's okay to kill, but not okay to injure?
the reason just injuring it would be worse would be that the baby would have to live with that injury, and with the insane mother that decided to inflict the damage her child. the child would have to live with that pain. with that injury, it is being tortured for the rest of its life, and there is nothing that person can do about it.
__________________
fusi0n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2004, 11:59 PM   #59
Jam930
FFR Player
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,069
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chardish

Don't have sex.

that's not as easy as you think.
__________________
-Jamie
Jam930 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2004, 12:05 AM   #60
Lupin_the_3rd
FFR Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 2,665
Send a message via AIM to Lupin_the_3rd
Default

Jam930, don't be foolish. They make those blow up dolls for a reason...
Lupin_the_3rd is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright FlashFlashRevolution