giddyup: you're full of ****. Not really, if it's true. You're a hypocrite though. And a liar. You scream bloody murder about abortion, but you're okay with innocent people dying in wars. Incidentally, these are innocent people who might have families who rely on them, spouses who might love them and rely on them, employees who might look to them for their next paycheck to feed their families -- not unborn, unformed, not-even-yet-intelligent enough to grasp death fetuses. But you're okay with killing them. (This is not to denigrate unborn children -- only to point out that while our full or ****, resident moralist is "indignant" about their deaths, he cares not for innocent people with families if they happen to live in a country we disagree with). Refman's right. You try to be cute with your inflammatory language and pass it off as thoughtful debate. I can do the same thing, bozo. I choose not to because I respect the level of debate on this board and I respect the debaters. You don't. You play cute with issues you either don't personally understand well enough to be sensitive about or you do understand and just don't care. That's jerky, bro. Jeff wasn't asking you to "mince around with nice-nice words" and I'm not either. Do you think I mince around? Have you read my posts? I clearly, emphatically state fairly radical views (and do my best to back them up), but I do it respectfully. And I also do it passionately. Frankly, I get more replies from righties than lefties, and we're able to discuss the issues passionately but respectfully. And I don't hear -- from either side of the aisle -- that I should tone it down. You're hearing it from BOTH sides of the aisle. Take note. You want a response to your argument rather than your rhetoric? Why don't you present an argument then, friend? All you've given us so far is puffed up posturing, from the bumper sticker branch of your party. We have a bumper sticker branch of my party too. I choose not to insult my peers here by quoting them and passing it off as discourse. You say a dead baby should be the face of the abortion debate, because pro-choice often results in abortion. Every pregnant woman right now has the option of abortion. Do more than half of pregnant women have abortions? Do you know the answer? Here it is: NO. Why don't you make a smiling, living baby the face of pro-choice America? Here's why. You prefer to shriek. I can do it, too. Innocent people have been killed by the death penalty, so here goes... The face of law enforcement is an innocent man being electrocuted while Republicans laugh about it and eat big steaks.... What??? Why does that bother you??? I'm just presenting an argument... Why don't you respond to the argument??? I'm not p***y footing around here!!! Real live innocent people died! End law enforcement! Why are you so hung up on my style??? If you gotta be a bozo, get the makeup. It's not that expensive and you could actually make some money doing what you love -- being a clown. Yes. I am insulting you. Personally. Now we're even.
Even though I am pro-life I have to ask you to elaborate on your thought. All you have given are conclusory statements. Nothing is added to the debate that way.
1:14 am on August 14, 2002...somebody please write it down. I may not agree with what you have to say but I will defend to my death your right to say it. Caveat: so long as you are respectful about it (like Batman Jones). I have often wondered exactly what the percentage is. We may never know though. It is an interesting contrast you made between this and the death penalty. Since innocents do not represent half of the people executed, would you agree that the death penalty is ok. I'm not trying to be flippant...I want to see where you come out on that. I think the distinction here is one of intent. In a time of war there will be collateral casualties. I'm not saying that I'm happy about it but it is a fact and their deaths are not intended. When there is an abortion, there is definitely intent to dispose of a fetus which may have a heartbeat, fingers, toes...etc etc etc. BTW...when there are collateral casulaties in war...I am saddened. I am saddened when soldiers die. I was saddened when a guy my sister went to high school with was brought home from Afghanistan in a box. Unfortunately sometimes in this world you have to accept casualties in order to get your job done. I don't like it, but I intellectually understand it.
<b>Batman</b>: I've made sufficient argument. A human conception is an innocent child of God and deserves a right to life. I think that there can be exceptions in cases of rape, incest, and medical necessity i.e. the health of the mother... now there's a choice! You are the one shrieking. Your rant is uncalled for and is unbecoming. I've yet to insult you yet you still have a need to pour it on. My argument is not complex because I am wanting to leave alone the growing child in it's mother's womb. That is simple. It is those who would seek to terminate it who need the complex arguments for justification. I never said that a dead child is THE face of abortiion. In response to Mrs.JB's inquiry about personal images I wrote, "For me, a dead child is the face of abortion." So now I'm not allowed to have an opinion? The loss of life in war is tragic but it may be just if the war is just and just plain unavoidable unless you profess pacifism, Herr Batman. The loss of life through the execution of innocent prisoners is unjust but unintentional. We strive to do better. How many unjustly executed prisoners have there been? And how many aborted chldren? Wow, huh? The loss of life through most abortions is grossly unjust because a totally innocent life is being snuffed for reasons that have nothing to do with the well-being or interest of that child. You can indict me with all the hysterical accusations you want, but I thought we were talking about abortion and not war or the death penalty. You don't even reallyl know my positions on those issue but you call me a hypocrite. How uncouth!!! BTW, I have to insert this: you example of making a smiling baby the face of abortion is just totally ludicrous and hugely disrespectful to all the babies who died from abortions. Think about that. And your image of Republicans eating steak and "celebrating" the wrongful death of a convict is equally ridiculous. Where do you get this stuff. I don't care if you're a cool guy who works in theatre.... <b>Refman</b>: Show me the arguments that others have made. You say I only make conclusory statements. Which are the arguments of others that so tower over mine? Hint: I don't think they are much there. This whole thread is mostly conclusory statements. I made at least one HUGELY, OVERPOWERING argument. Show me others. Show me even one that compares..... Are you kidding about The Batman being respectful? Ha.... I use strong language about the argument and he uses strong language to insult me. What's wrong with that picture? It's the liberal way (overstatement to make a point: apologies to Jeff et al....)
... but you can't know that ahead of time to disallow parental interest and a sperm donor still does make a human child.
I can recognize an insult, and they've been thrown around in this thread, but not by giddyup...come on.
giddyup, You came into a thread where people were having an unusually successful time respectfully discussing the most sensitive of issues, to coyly "correct" Mrs. JB with incendiary sloganeering. Jeff told you he understood where you were coming from, but that you'd do well to tone it down and discuss it calmly. We all get upset about this issue, but we were treating each other respectfully and you basically brought the old, black and white, baby murdering stuff in. When Jeff suggested you tone it down, you said you wouldn't "mince around with nice-nice words," because you cared so much about this issue, suggesting the rest of us don't, or that we were too lily-livered to have strong feelings about it. I'm curious. Have you had personal experience with abortion? I have. Your insensitivity to the issue, to the debate and to the debaters insulted me. So I gave it back to you. You'll notice I waited through several of your heated posts before responding directly to you. You'll also notice, by reading my posts in this thread, that I understand your argument and party share it. It is a difficult issue for me. But even people who share your philosophy recognized your comments as being beyond the pale. That's all. I don't know what me being a "cool guy who works in theater" has to do with any of this.
http://bbs.clutchcity.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=33548 Read this thread Batman, it's long but worth it.
I just read it HTown. Thanks for the tip. It's so true that all the best stories have already been told. This thread's nothing but a re-tread. And that other one ended up, appropriately enough, with giddyup calling someone a twit. I suspect this one will end similarly. The level of debate on this board is always amazing. It is likewise amazing how it can all be brought down by one self-superior moralist. I'd been doing such a good job not bringing up innocent animals who are slaughtered unnecessarily for people's pleasure and convenience, but I enjoyed reading Jeff's take in that other thread. And so many other people's takes. And, of course, giddyup who, "more Christian than ever," is content once again to judge other people's most intimate decisions. Christ wasn't like that, giddyup. Anyway, I think this is pretty played out -- especially after reading the other five pages on it. Giddyup: If you want to take another swing, go ahead. If you just want to hate me in silence, that's fine too. Folks like you can't possibly hurt my feelings.
If you don't understand by now then I can never make you understand. Read the thread you will see many arguments. Here's a hint for you...an argument leaves something to respond to other than "no it's not." Speaking of hints...I really don't need your but thank you oh so much for worrying about me. I love it that you claim you have done nothing wrong...but as soon as Batman, Jeff and I called you on it that your posts changed from conclusions to an actual argument. Just keep on posting like that last one...it was your best argument to date. As I said, I tend to agree with you on this issue, but respect our position enough to argue it the right way.
Oh, and to refman and giddyup: I thought I was clear that my examples of innocent people sometimes dying by execution or in wartime was a direct response to giddyup saying he would be equally indignant any time an innocent person was killed. It's an easy statement to make. There are reasons we still have the death penalty (even though innocent people die), there are reasons we still have war (even though innocent people die). It's the same with abortion, though I'm not willing to concede a fetus is a person. There are differing views on this. Everyone knows that innocents dying in wars are definitely sentient persons who feel pain and leave loved ones behind. giddyup: You wanted to know how many innocents died on death row vs. how many fetuses were aborted? Answer: More fetuses have been aborted. Now consider how many civilians have died in wars in the history of the world versus how many abortions have been performed. No contest. Still doesn't mean there will never have to be a war. Nor does it mean a woman will never have a good reason to have an abortion.
How trite. So now men are merely sperm donors. We are faceless, emotionless, robotic sperm donors. That is simply put...the most ignorant thing I have ever had the misfortune of reading.
No...he wasn't. Although I doubt that Jesus Christ would like legalized abortion. The teaching is hate the sin but love the sinner. These reasons totally eclipse any reason you can have for abortion. In the two examples you listed the death of innocents is not the sole reason for them. I understand you were responding to giddyup's ridiculous post...but these are apples to oranges. Of course not...that would destroy your position. If you want my totally unwashed thought on this then here goes...liberals think this way because it is the only way they can rationalize the act. If you assumed that it was a baby then it'd make you sick. Here's a question...at what point of development can a fetus feel pain? I have been told that it's pretty early on. I do know that within the first few months that there are fingers and toes and facial features. It's so bothersome that in a lot of abortion clinics they finish off the procedure by pulling out identifiable body parts. A severed hand does make me think about a mutilated person. All of that being said I can understand the other side and I don't hold any grudge...I just don't agree with them. But I'm not ready to throw around the inflammatory bumper sticker fodder.
I didn't seek to draw a parallel. Only to respond to giddyup's assertion that he would be indignant about ANY innocent death. It was a false assertion, as evidenced by his posts in other threads favoring war, even at the cost of innocent life. I sought to illustrate the fact that in certain situations, he would not be indignant about the deaths of innocents, because these are not black and white issues. He made a false claim and I called him on it. I never said abortion was the same as war was the same as the death penalty. My position, clearly stated, is that there are no easy answers here, that I see and feel both sides and that, barring an easy solution, I think it best to leave this deeply difficult choice to the person who will be most affected by it. Same here.
Understood...my bad. I hear you on this one...wow...we agree again. Two in a row Batman...let's keep it going. This is why I jumped into this thread in the first place. There are at least two people who will be deeply, deeply affected by this in a very permanent way (mother and father). Only one of those people is allowed to be in the calculus. No matter how you slice it that is wrong.
Explain to me how this makes the father's voice at all meaningful. At that point he may as well keep quiet because nobody's listening anyway.
What I mean by that is that the woman should be willing to sit down with the man and listen to him. Hear all he has to say and keep an open mind. If in the end, she still wants the abortion, I feel it's her call to make.
H-Town -- I understand that point...I really do...it just seems unworkable, particularly if it were me who were personally involved. If my wife said, "hey...let's have a baby." and i agreed and got excited about bringing a child into the world...and she got pregnant...and two months in, after we've picked out names and clothes and the countless other things that fathers do, she said, "nah...i think i'm gonna abort this baby." There's not a damn thing I can do about that. That, my friend, is what I would call an injustice. I don't have a workable solution to it...but it is an injustice nonetheless. I heard in law school that a Japense company had built a pseudo-womb that could be used...that they could extract the fetus out through surgical means and hook it up in the artificial womb...does this development change anybody's opinion on this??? just asking, because i don't know what effect that has...
