Discussion-One on One: Abortion (red77 vs. Turbo)

[Glenda]

I've been raped, Glenda. And, I know all about the fear of being pregnant by my rapist. Fortunately, I didn't have to deal with something else that I found immoral because they hadn't come up with the day after pill, yet. I would get as much Christian counseling as I could find for my daughter. I would stand beside her throughout the pregnancy (she doesn't believe in abortion any more than I do). I would raise the child for her until she was an adult, and beyond if she couldn't handle having the child of the man who raped her. I would make sure that she knew that it was not her fault that these men chose to use and abuse her the way they did. I would do everything that my own mother didn't do when I was raped.

Are we discussing a young child of 11 years old (primary school age) when considering your daughter?
Also, what if your daughter was not against aborting? Would you take her choice into consideration?

 

[ebenz47037]

Are we discussing a young child of 11 years old (primary school age) when considering your daughter?

I was considering her when she was eleven. Yes. She's older now. But, that doesn't change the fact that since she's known what abortion was (ten years old because my sister had one) she's believed that they're wrong.

 

[Glenda]

I was considering her when she was eleven. Yes. She's older now. But, that doesn't change the fact that since she's known what abortion was (ten years old because my sister had one) she's believed that they're wrong.

Thanks for clarifying.
Not every family is so blessed to have knowledge or unity or support in such things and I certainly wouldn't condemn anyone for acting differently in this scenario in lack of such knowledge or unity or support.

 

[red77]

Debate found here.

I can't see how anybody can read this and not see that Turbo is seriously winning the debate.

When red77 admitted that "relieving suffering by causing others to suffer is wrong", he pretty much lost the debate right there. Every time he suggests that a woman has a right to to have an abortion for whatever reason he goes against what he said because he advocates relieving suffering by making another suffer.

People can make their own minds up, and it cuts both ways when it comes to the argument about suffering, if you think that it's justifiable for a woman to have complications and die as a result of a pregnancy gone wrong then you are placing the suffering of the mother underneath the suffering of the foetus, one way or another someone will suffer and you place more rights on the foetus

I honestly had to read this twice just to make sure I wasn't misunderstanding. This is a pathetic and incredibly twisted thing to say. :down:

Why? Why should the woman be expected to forfeit her own life? There's nothing she can do for the child in this scenario and she could theoretically survive, lets take the scenario further, suppose the mother had more children who are dependant on her and they will be in danger if she doesn't survive, would it be ok then? Or should she be expected to die herself and have her other children possibly die as well? :think:

 

[red77]

Turbo is definitely winning.

I think his advantage is that his position is internally consistent, at least as far as their discussion has gone so far. red77 seems to be taking a position that unborn babies possess the same rights as anyone else, but that there are also cases where their rights are essentially mute. This seems pretty indefensible to me.

If red77 wanted to win, he'd have to attack the premise that an unborn fetus possesses the same moral status as a young post-natal child, but I'm not sure he's prepared to do that, and it would involve a lot of backpedaling.

the point is that in the scenarios we're discussing equal rights become mute themselves, one either has to place the rights of the born over the unborn and vice versa depending on which side of the fence you stand....

 

[Mystery]

so how would you protect your child from further pain, shame, suffering and humiliation if your child was 11 years old and fell pregnant from a pack rape?

Let me ask you again...


Where and when did this happen?

 

[red77]

I'd be a grandfather a lot sooner :thumb:

Yes, that is something good from a horrible situation. Deal with it.

You do realise that you would be putting your child at physical risk to force her to go through with the pregnancy right?

 

[Poly]

Why is this thread in this forum section when 'politics' forum section is where abortion is discussed according to description of that forum?:
Politics
Current Events, Abortion, homosexuality, gun control, public schools, welfare, taxes, government etc.

The religion section of the forum doesn't seem to include such a discussion
Religion
Discuss General Theology, Religions and Denominations, God's Attributes, Predestination and Free Will, Dispensationalism, Eschatology, Philosophy, Origins, Archaeology, Science, World History and other such topics.

Outside that, the grandstands seems to be where people can discuss what they haven't been welcomed into adding their comments to:
The Grandstands
The grandstands are where we in the "peanut gallery" can discuss the battle.

I don't think I've ever seen such a fuss over where a thread is located.

Ok, the thread has now been moved.




Now quit your whinin', ya big baby!

 

[ebenz47037]

Thanks for clarifying.
Not every family is so blessed to have knowledge or unity or support in such things and I certainly wouldn't condemn anyone for acting differently in this scenario in lack of such knowledge or unity or support.

Okay. I talked to my daughter about this thread, today. When I told her that I had said she knew what abortion was when she was about ten, she said, "Mom, Nana told me what abortion was when I was about seven after I had seen a commercial about it on TV at her house." She had never told me that before.

Anyway, I asked her what she would want me to do if she was eleven years old and was raped and got pregnant. She said, "I would want to have the baby and have you raise it for me until I was at least eighteen." When I asked her why, she said, "Number one, abortion is killing a baby. You don't execute someone who hasn't committed a murder. So, why would you kill a baby when the father raped me? Number two, I know that you wanted me to stay a kid as long as I could. I'm glad you did that. If I were to get pregnant from a rape, I would want you to raise the baby for me because I know that I couldn't do it myself. I don't know if I would be able to handle taking the baby later or not. But, if I was eleven, and pregnant by a rapist, I know I couldn't handle it."

 

[PKevman]

I don't think I've ever seen such a fuss over where a thread is located.

Ok, the thread has now been moved.




Now quit your whinin', ya big baby!

:rotfl: :baby:

 

[Stripe]

Okay. I talked to my daughter about this thread, today. When I told her that I had said she knew what abortion was when she was about ten, she said, "Mom, Nana told me what abortion was when I was about seven after I had seen a commercial about it on TV at her house." She had never told me that before.

Anyway, I asked her what she would want me to do if she was eleven years old and was raped and got pregnant. She said, "I would want to have the baby and have you raise it for me until I was at least eighteen." When I asked her why, she said, "Number one, abortion is killing a baby. You don't execute someone who hasn't committed a murder. So, why would you kill a baby when the father raped me? Number two, I know that you wanted me to stay a kid as long as I could. I'm glad you did that. If I were to get pregnant from a rape, I would want you to raise the baby for me because I know that I couldn't do it myself. I don't know if I would be able to handle taking the baby later or not. But, if I was eleven, and pregnant by a rapist, I know I couldn't handle it."

You're twisted and evil, Glenda.

 

[red77]

You're twisted and evil, Glenda.

Hardly, anything but......the fact that you would think it ok for an 11 year old - even your own child to go through such a horrendous physically dangerous pregnancy as well as the obvious trauma is what is sickening IMO.....

 

[red77]

Poly - or anybody else.....

Poly - or anybody else.....

People can make their own minds up, and it cuts both ways when it comes to the argument about suffering, if you think that it's justifiable for a woman to have complications and die as a result of a pregnancy gone wrong then you are placing the suffering of the mother underneath the suffering of the foetus, one way or another someone will suffer and you place more rights on the foetus




Why? Why should the woman be expected to forfeit her own life? There's nothing she can do for the child in this scenario and she could theoretically survive, lets take the scenario further, suppose the mother had more children who are dependant on her and they will be in danger if she doesn't survive, would it be ok then? Or should she be expected to die herself and have her other children possibly die as well? :think:

Can someone please make an effort to at least address the last part of this post? The silence is deafening.......

 

[Stripe]

Can someone please make an effort to at least address the last part of this post? The silence is deafening.......

You have had this question answered. Mothers who love their child will give up their lives for the baby and would be repulsed by what you are suggesting. You are right, Red. A mother could eat her own child and save her own life given the right circumstances. But what you refuse to face are the consequences of those actions. Sane people aren't prepared to allow what you will allow.

 

[Stripe]

Hardly, anything but......the fact that you would think it ok for an 11 year old - even your own child to go through such a horrendous physically dangerous pregnancy as well as the obvious trauma is what is sickening IMO.....

You're a complete moron.

 

[Delmar]

Hardly, anything but......the fact that you would think it ok for an 11 year old - even your own child to go through such a horrendous physically dangerous pregnancy as well as the obvious trauma is what is sickening IMO.....

Did you really just say, that if an 11 year old gets pregnant the baby should be killed?

 

[Delmar]

Can someone please make an effort to at least address the last part of this post? The silence is deafening.......

Am I missing something? I thought Turbo addressed that subject thoroughly here.

 

[red77]

You're a complete moron.

Oh ok Stipe, please give definitive proof as to how an 11 year old going through pregnancy, labour and childbirth isn't physically dangerous....:doh:

 

[red77]

You have had this question answered. Mothers who love their child will give up their lives for the baby and would be repulsed by what you are suggesting. You are right, Red. A mother could eat her own child and save her own life given the right circumstances. But what you refuse to face are the consequences of those actions. Sane people aren't prepared to allow what you will allow.

Who said anything other? In this scenario the mother could do nothing to save the child with her, she would be repulsed etc etc obviously!!!!!!!! But lets take a look at what you're implying here, it would seem to be ok for the mother to eat her child (actually the child is gone, it's merely a shell correct?) if there were other babies or children dependant on her - but NOT ok for the mother to just survive by herself, is that correct?

 

[red77]

Did you really just say, that if an 11 year old gets pregnant the baby should be killed?

Would you rather an undeveolped yound girl go through with the physical dangers alongside the obvious mental trauma of such an undertaking?