Abortion///cont.

[glassjester]

Ok.... so you're a conscientious objector.
I can respect COs, who won't, cannot serve in combative roles, carry weapons, support war etc.

A just war is possible, isn't it?

Defending one's country is the moral equivalent of defending one's family or oneself from attack.

Certainly self-defense is not immoral.

 

[quip]

doser notes:

quip, having misplaced his glasses, reads "similar" as "identical""

:think: ...sounds like backpedaling to me.

perhaps quip should take his own advice:

If only your problem was reading comprehension..if only.

 

[eider]

What if the mother doesn't find out the baby's disabled until he's born? Can she kill him then?

That is totally unreasonable and no excuse for not carrying out extensive pre-natal scans and tests.
Stop hedging........ do you expect severely disabled pregnancies to be made to go full term to birth?

 

[quip]

Earlier you said that your moral compass is your reason for believing certain abortions are immoral. You also said a woman's moral compass is what allows her to choose to have her unborn child deliberately killed.

Well who's right? And on which side should the law be?

Isn't it just your "moral compass," after all, that tells you that murdering an 11-day-old baby is immoral? Yet I seriously doubt you'd favor a law that allows people to follow their "moral compass" in deciding whether to murder an 11-day-old.

Clearly the moral compass is not a sufficient reason for you to believe something ought to be legal.


Quip, why should murder be illegal?

...or do you not believe it should be?

Only when you equate the two situations, though the only connection they have is by way of your flair for dramatics.

 

[glassjester]

That is totally unreasonable and no excuse for not carrying out extensive pre-natal scans and tests.
Stop hedging........ do you expect severely disabled pregnancies to be made to go full term to birth?

Yes, of course. Was that not already clear?

So why would it be wrong for a woman to kill a disabled infant?

 

[glassjester]

Only when you equate the two situations, though the only connection they have with your flair for dramatics.

Why should murder be illegal?

 

[eider]

A just war is possible, isn't it?

Defending one's country is the moral equivalent of defending one's family or oneself from attack.

Certainly self-defense is not immoral.

So you do support killing...... under some circumstances.
I support termination of severely disabled pregnancies, and 'crime' pregnancies where the mother cannot cope with the idea of birth.

You have reasons...... so do I.

 

[glassjester]

So you do support killing...... under some circumstances.
I support termination of severely disabled pregnancies, and 'crime' pregnancies where the mother cannot cope with the idea of birth.

You have reasons...... so do I.

Yes - we believe things for reasons. Let's examine the reasons.

Why should it be illegal to kill disabled infants?

 

[eider]

Yes, of course. Was that not already clear?

So why would it be wrong for a woman to kill a disabled infant?

There would not be a severely disabled or comatose infant, would there?


It's OK......... you'll never be able to agree to the termination of SD pregnancies, I can see that, but common sense and reason will keep your demands at bay. The women of your country will keep control of such decisions, not you. :idunno:

 

[glassjester]

There would not be a severely disabled or comatose infant, would there?

Are you serious? Of course there are.

Should it be legal to kill them?

 

[quip]

Why should murder be illegal?

Why? Do you believe it should be legal? Otherwise, you've rhetorically arrived at your own answer. Your childish line of questioning serves no purpose.

 

[eider]

Are you serious? Of course there are.

Should it be legal to kill them?

In the case of severely disabled or comatose patients, doctors often decide that there is no hope, and turn off the switches. Does your crusade address that?

Of course, you have not undertaken to help provide for all seriously disabled .....and of course children die all the time in your country because of your lack of support for medicare on welfare.

Your crusade seems to exhonerate yourself. My crusade, as you can see, starts with he self-righteous being made to cough up towards their tenets. Money talks, but in your case it seems 'not'....?

Can you see the horrible gaps in your crusade?

 

[eider]

Are you serious? Of course there are.

Should it be legal to kill them?

Here's an investigation for you.
Go search out 'feed on demand' and see if you can get any info. You probably will fail, but if you succeed then you've answered your own question.
Most sadly I have some knowledge of this subject but I cannot help you, I'm afraid.

 

[WizardofOz]

In cases of rape, severe disability, risk to mother, then abortion should be supported.

Should all other abortion not 'be supported' or is this a red herring?

 

[glassjester]

In the case of severely disabled or comatose patients, doctors often decide that there is no hope, and turn off the switches.

Correct. And keeping someone alive by extraordinary and artificial means is not a moral necessity. There is, however, a huge moral difference between someone dying naturally, and someone being deliberately killed.

Of course, you have not undertaken to help provide for all seriously disabled .....and of course children die all the time in your country because of your lack of support for medicare on welfare.

Please provide evidence that my tax money does not help the sick and poor.

Your crusade seems to exhonerate yourself. My crusade, as you can see, starts with he self-righteous being made to cough up towards their tenets. Money talks, but in your case it seems 'not'....?

You're just holding the unborn hostage. Either everybody pays the ransom, or you deny the unborn their right to life. You're sick.

And what's worse - you've already stated that unborn children deserve the same rights as born children. That means you'd just as readily legalize the murder of born children, unless all your demands are met.

The right to life is not contingent upon anything. It is God-given.


Yet you have openly admitted that you would outlaw abortion if your demands are met. So you are against abortion. You do recognize that it is not good to do. Yet you would continue to allow it until your ransom is paid.

I have not argued against healthcare for children. I have not argued against help for the disabled. I have only argued that a person's right to exist should not depend on such programs. Still, you continue to attack a straw man that I never constructed.

You need clarity.


Let's start with a simple question you refused to address earlier:

Why should abortion be illegal, if all your preferred social programs were in effect?

 

[eider]

Should all other abortion not 'be supported' or is this a red herring?

Come on....... tell us all what you support, or don't support, eh?

 

[glassjester]

Why? Do you believe it should be legal? Otherwise, you've rhetorically arrived at your own answer. Your childish line of questioning serves no purpose.

No, I do not believe the deliberate killing of a human being should be legal. No matter the age of the victim.
But you do. You believe it should remain legal to deliberately kill a human being, based on age.

So that is why I am asking you why you believe murder should be illegal at all.

 

[glassjester]

Come on....... tell us all what you support, or don't support, eh?

Wizard's question was a fair one. Should all other abortions be illegal?

 

[eider]

Correct. And keeping someone alive by extraordinary and artificial means is not a moral necessity. There is, however, a huge moral difference between someone dying naturally, and someone being deliberately killed.

Oh please......... somebody actually has to deliberately 'turn off' equipment!

Please provide evidence that my tax money does not help the sick and poor.

Just tell me straight out...... come out of the closet. Do you support the concept of your State or Federal Government providing full medicare et al, and welfare for all children in your country, financed by taxation?
Yes or No. ?

The right to life is not contingent upon anything. It is God-given.

Says you, who is prepared to kill when your morals give you a go ahead..?
God given, eh? The right to life? Where did you get that, then?
And where does God demand that severely disabled pregnancies must continue to full term?
I can't wait to see this......

 

[eider]

Wizard's question was a fair one. Should all other abortions be illegal?

I want to see Wizard explain exactly what Wizard believes about all this.
I want to see your reply as to whether you support State/Government welfare/medicare for all infants/juniors. So far you've not answered the question.

I don't believe that you have any intention lof supporting all children's welfare and medicare in your State or country financed by taxation, by the way. I think you're a fraud who just wants to apply control upon women's and couples' decisions.

And I can't wait to read about 'God given rights to life'....... wow!