It is a word.
I stand corrected.
I think I need to put this in plainer English for you.
"freely acknowledged by most in this discussion"
Why I took issue with that statement was not because it's meaning was unclear to me in the least.
The reason I took issue with such form of "proof" is that it isn't proof of anything except of how you interpreted the collective opinions of a group of people discussing an issue on a message board. This wouldn't be the first time many people were wrong about something. So, while you may find solace in a crowd, I am here to let you know that it counts for nothing in terms of actually supporting an opinion.
I think I need to put this in plainer English for you. ... If there is any reasonable doubt about whether someone is guilty, we don't kill them.
And I must return the favour: please define what exactly "reasonable doubt" means to you.
So, if there is any reasonable doubt about when life begins ... then we shouldn't kill what might be a very small human being.
First of all WE aren't killing anyone. If someone kills another person we don't all accept responsibility for that so please keep me out of other people's decisions. Secondly, it is NOT up to you or me to decide for another woman how she views her pregnancy (this is where you will run into the most trouble with your argument).
As I mentioned previously, the closer your time line moves towards conception, the more divided opinions become on what is living and what is human.
Do I think the little zygote is human? Well it's not a bear, is it?
Is it a person?
Define what a person is.
Is a brain dead corpse on life support a person?
I think the little zygote is alive, I am convinced it's human but I don't know if it's a person but then again, it's not up to me to make that distinction for others.
And if you are wrong, someone gets killed. So I would prefer the former, because that leaves open the possibilities
What if you're wrong about that too?
The fact of the matter is there are millions of parents throughout the world who simply don't give a damn about their children. You presume too much with your scenario and it betrays your attempts at presenting a reasoned argument. Your lack of experience with people outside your social milieu is evident through such presumptions. You simply haven't met some of the worst society has to offer and don't know what you're talking about when you assume every parent-to-be will love and cherish their children- the world around you shows that to be categorically false. Case closed.
Now, could every parent love their children?
I hope so, but again, making that happen isn't going to be through litigation. That's the lazy way of trying to get that done. This is also a fact.
If you want to force all pregnant women into parenthood then I'm assuming you want to force all the fathers-to-be into assuming their role as well. Do you also want to force society to pay for their children when they can't afford to raise them properly? Do you want to force standards as to what proper raising of a child is? How much do you want to force society to contribute towards poorer parents achieving those standards? Who is to decide these standards? Do you want to force society to take care of these children if the parents prove to be inept?
No, but I think the institution that allows this, and the doctor who carries out this procedure, have done something wrong
So if I understand you correctly, the institution allowing an abortion and the doctor performing an abortion are guilty of murder but the woman who decides to have the procedure done to her body and to the human life in her body (YES I AGREE IT'S HUMAN AND HAVE BEEN ADAMANT ABOUT THAT) is not guilty of murder nor is an accomplice to murder in your opinion? What is your reasoning behind that one?
Personally I didn't feel like a murderer, but I felt that I had failed to defend my child against someone else killing them.
So you made a decision to allow what you think of as murder but don't see that as being an accomplice to murder?
I'm not trying to make you feel bad here, I just really don't see any logical consistency in you.
I am not saying this with an empty hand either. You I have also lost a child and wasn't too far away from losing my wife as well. Ours was killed by incompetent medical staff here in Poland.
We named him, we visited him every day, we played the music for him that he could hear while my wife was still carrying him. We tried to relieve his suffering every day. We saw his eyes light up when we came to visit him (although I must admit despite my constant doting he always gave his mother a bigger reaction). We tried to stimulate him through little touching games and saw the little guy figure out my primitive little tasks and we were completely in love with him. And when he died it absolutely devastated us. There cannot be anything worse to endure than watching your child fighting to live, suffering throughout their life, enduring nothing but pain and irritation in between controlled visits and then watching the life drain from their body.
This says nothing about the nightmare that an ACTUAL MOTHER had to go through in not being able to take care of her child as her body demanded, this says nothing about what that innocent little person had to endure in their tortured life. I got off easy compared to them!
And despite all that, deep down, I know I am responsible for his death as my decisions led us to that hospital at that time. I could have decided on a different hospital, I could have become more involved in my wife's pregnancy, I could have educated myself MUCH MORE- I didn't. He's dead because of my failings.
I've accepted responsibility for this. I am still here, I have to continue....
...now then are you done with your little pity-party, because I for one am sick of it and like other people on this site have had my own trials to endure.
The following is not a personal attack,; it is a call for logical and moral consistency:
I am not prepared to decide how others are to see their pregnancy or in their decision to terminate their pregnancy. However if you are prepared to do that then you better be prepared to accept responsibility for engaging in what you call it.
- they all went ahead with something very, very wrong.
But you didn't...nice.
You know that when I was referring to proof ,it had to do with the way you were misrepresenting what I have been saying
Tell me what I've misrepresented.
Show me what you wrote.
Show me my response.
Explain how you feel I misrepresented your reference to "proof" and I will explain why I wrote what I did.
You keep making vague references while using neither the quote function nor anything resembling paragraphs and accepted spacing-what gives man?
This is one of the reasons I suspect you of being intellectually dishonest.
By using the quote function I've been able to illustrate the logical failings in your arguments- it's documented.
You can make all the snide comments you want but aside from that you've offered me precious little to respond to and have yet to effectively deal with any of the 3 points I laid out to you. You have attempted explanations but each time I've shown you where and how your thinking on the matter doesn't hold up and then I get these vague replies with no substance like the one I quoted. I'm not going to start guessing at what you mean. This is a lengthy discussion so as a moderator you of all people should be adhering to the practices that add clarity to it.
I like the approach you used in regards to the "Double Homicide" angle but I feel there is a logical explanation for this that doesn't rely on religion or subjective views of what person-hood is. When one kills a mother-to-be (we don't call either the father-to-be or pregnant woman a parent until after the child is born), we can clearly delineate between the murderer and victim(s) (the "s" is to acknowledge both perspectives). We cannot know the intentions of the victim but we are forced to accept she wanted to see her pregnancy through to motherhood. It's an interesting angle but proves nothing as to what is or isn't a person regarding the development of the unborn.
Yes I'm stupid, stupid me. Call me stupid again. Go on. You can call me a c*nt too if you like.
You're easily one of the most well reasoned posters on this entire message board.
I was a bit annoyed with you and p3undone hypothesizing about deciding whether to let a baby or mother die during delivery but that's because it touched a nerve with me. It's a horrible position to find oneself in and although I think the subject deserves greater discretion, I shouldn't have been so quick to lash out at you for it.
My apologies, I over-reacted.