...but aren't they supposed to be evil?


God's a pretty good aborter as it is: miscarriages.


Me being a smartass aside, I'm against abortion...or at least that "abortion on demand" attitude...disgusting.

~Zoo

Ah miscarriages. The world's number 1 killer. We should really do something about them.

cscoles, you broke teh intarwebs.

On the OP: Saturday there was a big protest in the streets of my beautiful city, about abortion. They were walking with large signs that read:

Avortament: Llibre i Gratuit

For those who don't speak Catalan, it read "Abortion: Free (as in choice) and Free (as in price)." (Stupid English with only one word for 'free'. I hate this language.)

There were thousands marching, carrying signs, young and old, male and female, every race you can imagine. They had a drum line giving a martial beat as they paraded around the plaça and hoisted their signs.

It was something to see.

I like ANTI-abortion protesters because they are just about the only protesters who wouldn't beat me up for my beliefs or what I am. I feel safe around them.

 

Erathoniel, I wish you would write more and add arguments to your opinions. Abortion is one of those subjects were not much technical knowledge is needed for a valid argument (it can be seen purely on ethical grounds). I just wish you would make a point.

 

I mean, what is that? Why are casual sex and prostitution immoral?

And if they are, why should there be repercussions? Why should "immoral" people become parents? How would such a world be better?

As usual, you are defending a position you haven't thought through. Abortion is wrong because it leads to casual sex? So casual sex is the sin? I cannot see how casual sex and abortion are even in the same league of "immorality". For one thing, casual sex has no victims other than the parties who agreed to the sin. It's ridiculous to argue that abortion is wrong because casual sex is wrong. It's quite the contrary, really. Casual sex is wrong because abortion is wrong. At least that makes more sense.

I know this is likely not your only argument, but the fact that you brought it up shows that you adopted a position before you thought it through.

 

P.S.: Please don't use Bible quotes as arguments. I don't currently have the time to waltz through 3000-year old Hebrew text to find out if whatever translation your faith is based on is correct and I don't have the time to find rabbinic decisions about the interpretation of the text either. I did that for the "angels" discussion and I can tell you that serious theology is very very difficult.

 

Actually, you could use "Unimpeeded and Gratutious" instead of free and free. The second one is from the same root as the Spanish Gratuit, Gratis - from the latin.

Indeed, the Libre is more accurately related to "liberal" (as in freely given or available). Again same root as the latin.

English is one of the worst languages simply because it not only freely borrows from every other language on earth, but because it also has so many synonyms for just about every word it does have.

 

Safe? Guess again

 

Pro-lifers killing people.  Lovely.

No, abortion is always wrong, but it is not only wrong but also leads directly to uninhibited sin. Prostitution is always wrong, as is casual sex, for its end result of potential transfer of STD's, not to mention the broken lives it creates.

Also, it is never right to attack someone for their sin, unless you are actively protecting innocents through this process. It is better to use words than swords. Words are still better than a gun, but it doesn't rhyme.

Actually, this is not a trend among pro-lifers, Ockham, and I'm sure you know that. While incidents HAVE happened, they are not widespread, and do not in any way represent the mainstream of the prolife movement. But it's so much fun to portray stereotypes as typical of a group or organization!

But neither of those words correctly convey the meaning of the words in Spanish. Free and Free do a far better job than either of those two.

Thanks for trying to give me a vocab lesson, though. I'm sure I'll come to your immense knowledge next time I need something translated!

Free as in speech and free as in cost.

Try making up words and using them. See how far they spread.

abortion, birth control, death penalty, gay marraige, gun control, intelligent design v. evolution...

~yawn~

wake me when ya'll get it all worked out.

I've got a pretty good outline of it all...if only people would shut up and listen.

~Zoo

So, if we found the cures for and/or reliable ways to prevent the spread of STDs, and the parties involved could conduct themselves in such a manner as to not "break their lives", would these things still be wrong?

The problem with the way anti-abortionists paint the issue is that they ignore the deeper questions and label those who disagree with them as murderers or accomplices to it. They ignore that abortion really does occupy a grey area. Is killing in general wrong? Unless you are a vegetarian, then I think your answer would be no more often than not if the question were asked at each meal. Is killing a person wrong? Unless you don't believe in your right to defend yourself with whatever means necessary, I think this question wouldn't have a straightforward answer. The issue gets even more cloudy when you realize we still haven't agreed on the definition what a "person" is, and I mean no allusions to any 3/5th's or Nazi references. Most anti-abortionists I have encountered seem to be unmoving in their definition of person as, roughly though probably more precise and a little less appealing to emotion, "a conceived mass of cells containing the genetic code to grow into an independent human being". Many outside of their movement disagree with this definition. Anti-abortionists also point to examples of late term abortions as counter arguments, and most of them don't realize the examples they use are already illegal.


Actually, its a fetus. I am pretty sure, to be technical, "unborn infant" is probably an oxymoron.

But then that is the core of the debate.

~Zoo