Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
HHS: When life begins
Author Message
umbluegray Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 28,645
Joined: Nov 2003
Reputation: 516
I Root For: The Tigers!
Location: Memphis
Post: #51
RE: HHS: When life begins
(10-12-2017 08:27 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  
(10-12-2017 05:22 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  
(10-12-2017 04:01 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  It is no more acceptable for a third party to end a human life in the womb than it is to murder a 3 year old child.


Your definition is potentially incomplete. Please expand it if so, or explicitly state that the following is also never ok to terminate a "life" as you have defined it:
- War
- Brain dead
- Capital punishment
- Self-defense
- Abortion from rape
- Abortion from incest
- Abortion from mortality risk to the mother
- "Mercy" abortion for genetic incompatibility with life (some genetic disorders are terminal but will take years before they kill off the person, some genetic disorders are fatal shortly after birth or even during gestation, etc etc).


In the spirit of fairness, to answer my own question, as to whether it is OK to terminate a third party life in certain cirumstances:
- War: Yes, for reasons already discussed in this thread
- Brain dead: Yes, every time for a living well, with some minimal standards in all other cases
- Capital punishment: Yes, but only if there is irrefutable evidence
- Self-defense: Yes, for reasons already discussed in this thread
- Abortion for rape/incest/mortality risk: Yes, with some time constraints related to my post immediately above this one
- Abortion for genetic incompatibility with life: Yes, at any time. But I would have aggressive fines / jail time for gross negligence and unnecessary suffering beyond a certain point.

I see war as kind of a good thing. Good in the sense that it stops a bad thing.

Yes, war is hell and we don't want war. But in some cases the alternative isn't good.

Take Nazi Germany. Before war was declared they took over Austria and later attacked Poland. That wasn't war. It was unchecked, violent aggression.

War is when another country says "no more."
10-13-2017 01:15 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
EverRespect Offline
Free Kaplony
*

Posts: 21,793
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 481
I Root For: ODU
Location:
Post: #52
RE: HHS: When life begins
(10-12-2017 09:13 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(10-12-2017 07:13 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  
(10-12-2017 07:05 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(10-12-2017 04:58 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  
(10-12-2017 04:52 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Why are people pretending like if they can prove that conception is when life begins, that they've won the game?

Life can absolutely be taken away from someone, morally and legally, in certain circumstances. For example, if a person is sentenced to death for a crime they've committed, their life can be taken from them. That is morally and legally correct.

Likewise, just because an unborn baby has life, does not automatically make it immoral and illegal to take away that life. And that is correct.

The person who was sentenced to death for a crime has committed an act against humanity.

An unborn baby is not guilty of any crime.

Legal does not necessarily = moral.

Agreed that the fertilized egg is not guilty of a crime. The reason I brought that up is that it disproves the broadest claim that human life should never be taken away. I’ve proven it can, and even should in some circumstances.

That said, it can still be morally and legally correct to take away life, in certain circumstances.

Actually, I did not say that a human life should never be taken away. In fact, I am a firm believer in capital punishment.

So, yes, of course it can be both moral and legal to end a human life in certain circumstances.

My contention was that though ending an unborn human life is legal it is not necessarily moral.

Taking away human life, in general, can be moral and legal.

You want to add an extra term and call it “unborn human life”, like that changes the equation somehow. An unborn human life can be taken, morally and legally. It depends on the circumstances, of course.
The only reason I can think of is an etopic pregnancy.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
10-13-2017 05:34 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
200yrs2late Offline
Resident Parrothead
*

Posts: 10,412
Joined: Jan 2010
Reputation: 327
I Root For: East Carolina
Location: SE of disorder
Post: #53
RE: HHS: When life begins
(10-13-2017 05:34 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  
(10-12-2017 09:13 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(10-12-2017 07:13 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  
(10-12-2017 07:05 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(10-12-2017 04:58 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  The person who was sentenced to death for a crime has committed an act against humanity.

An unborn baby is not guilty of any crime.

Legal does not necessarily = moral.

Agreed that the fertilized egg is not guilty of a crime. The reason I brought that up is that it disproves the broadest claim that human life should never be taken away. I’ve proven it can, and even should in some circumstances.

That said, it can still be morally and legally correct to take away life, in certain circumstances.

Actually, I did not say that a human life should never be taken away. In fact, I am a firm believer in capital punishment.

So, yes, of course it can be both moral and legal to end a human life in certain circumstances.

My contention was that though ending an unborn human life is legal it is not necessarily moral.

Taking away human life, in general, can be moral and legal.

You want to add an extra term and call it “unborn human life”, like that changes the equation somehow. An unborn human life can be taken, morally and legally. It depends on the circumstances, of course.
The only reason I can think of is an etopic pregnancy.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

You have to remember Bison's proclivity to redefine words to fit her narrative and to create absolutes that must be held above all else in order to make her assertions true. There is little fact or logic in anything she posts.
10-13-2017 07:38 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TigerBlue4Ever Offline
Ban bans
*

Posts: 34,251
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation: 921
I Root For: truffles
Location: is everything
Post: #54
RE: HHS: When life begins
(10-12-2017 03:50 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  
(10-12-2017 03:23 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  
(10-12-2017 02:13 PM)Paul M Wrote:  It starts at conception. Only dishonest liars don't acknowledge this.

Paul, you do realize that you cannot predict the exact date of conception don't you? It's only an estimate...and it can be off by as much as a month in some cases.

Conception dates are estimates, but you are estimating a past event. Therefore it doesn't matter if the exact day is off a little bit, there is a life present that began when it was conceived. Not knowing whether that was 24 or 34 days ago doesn't change the fact that it exists.

This ^ Pro-abortionists need a specific benchmark so they can feel comfortable with committing murder by not acknowledging a life is involved.
10-13-2017 07:54 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TigerBlue4Ever Offline
Ban bans
*

Posts: 34,251
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation: 921
I Root For: truffles
Location: is everything
Post: #55
RE: HHS: When life begins
(10-12-2017 04:52 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Why are people pretending like if they can prove that conception is when life begins, that they've won the game?

Life can absolutely be taken away from someone, morally and legally, in certain circumstances. For example, if a person is sentenced to death for a crime they've committed, their life can be taken from them. That is morally and legally correct.

Likewise, just because an unborn baby has life, does not automatically make it immoral and illegal to take away that life. And that is correct.

Wow. What a monstrous statement that is.
10-13-2017 07:57 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 21,852
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 439
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #56
RE: HHS: When life begins
(10-12-2017 07:53 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  
(10-12-2017 06:18 PM)bullet Wrote:  Life clearly begins at conception. I believe all unborn children should have the right to life.

At the same time, I also know that 1/3 of first pregnancies spontaneously abort (so you never tell anyone during the first trimester). That is a lot of unborn children that never make it. That is a complication to the religious based arguments.

Not really a contradiction or complication.

A religious person would look at a spontaneous abortion as an act of God. A religious person submits to God's Will.

Abortion is a calculated act of man defying God's will.

Well from a religious viewpoint if you view each as a "soul" with the possibility of eternal life, it is complicated, when up to 1/3 of them aren't viable human beings. Its peripheral to this discussion, but related.
Abortion is, ultimately, a moral question weighing the rights of the unborn to life vs. the decision making rights of the parents.
(This post was last modified: 10-13-2017 08:13 AM by bullet.)
10-13-2017 08:13 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
200yrs2late Offline
Resident Parrothead
*

Posts: 10,412
Joined: Jan 2010
Reputation: 327
I Root For: East Carolina
Location: SE of disorder
Post: #57
RE: HHS: When life begins
(10-13-2017 08:13 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(10-12-2017 07:53 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  
(10-12-2017 06:18 PM)bullet Wrote:  Life clearly begins at conception. I believe all unborn children should have the right to life.

At the same time, I also know that 1/3 of first pregnancies spontaneously abort (so you never tell anyone during the first trimester). That is a lot of unborn children that never make it. That is a complication to the religious based arguments.

Not really a contradiction or complication.

A religious person would look at a spontaneous abortion as an act of God. A religious person submits to God's Will.

Abortion is a calculated act of man defying God's will.

Well from a religious viewpoint if you view each as a "soul" with the possibility of eternal life, it is complicated, when up to 1/3 of them aren't viable human beings. Its peripheral to this discussion, but related.
Abortion is, ultimately, a moral question weighing the rights of the unborn to life vs. the decision making rights of the parents.

By engaging in action that can lead to conception, the parents have already decided. After that point they (specifically the woman in the first 9-10 months) are responsible for that new life.
10-13-2017 08:22 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2017 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2017 MyBB Group.