So how do you justify the fact that if anyone aside from the mother windes up killing the baby, at any stage of the pregnancy, can be charged with murder?
"Therefore, Abortion Must Remain Legal"
- Thread starter WizardofOz
- Start date
Choice. It wasn't hers.
It's either that, or they stop charging people who winde up killing babies in womb with murder. I doubt our society would have the moral courage to make abortion illegal & call it what it is-murder-...I'd support it if the option were available to.
SMH, that is the most illogical line of reasoning possible. So it is killing a human being if she didn't choose, but it's not a human being if she chooses to hire someone to kill the baby for her.
With that type of rubbish thinking, If a husband decides to hire a hitman to kill his wife, he should be free & in the clear.
It's in her body, sport. How many trespasses do you allow upon yours? Second, why pass specific legislation protecting the unborn, if indeed your defacto assumption of abortion as murder is correct? (it would be redundant) :idea:
What? :chuckle:
The baby is a seperate human life, that is why they charge someone who, let's say kills both the mother & child in the womb with double murder. That is how it is justifies by law, not because the woman did not choose to kill her child herself. How does it then make sense that when she chooses to have her child killed, that makes the child no longer human being, and therefore no longer murder?
Are you really unable to see how illogical that is? Well you're a leftist, so I shouldn't be surprised you can't.
The same logical reason I -- a "separate human life" -- can't rape another "separate human life" or freely take their kidney without adequate consent. Why the special pleading for the "separate human life" otherwise subsisting as an incipient human life form?
Were are you having difficulties here?
You're the one having difficulties here. And you still didn't address what I said with anything of substance.
If it is considered the murder of a human being in one scenario, why not in the other? Your reply is illogical and inadequate, quip.
Context, extenuating circumstances, the lay of the law. :idunno: Why is it acceptable to kill in the name of self defense? Abortion is no different.
People who say they believe abortion is murder don't really believe it.
And I can show it right here:
If you were able to go into the past and prevent either World War II ~or~ the past three years of abortions worldwide, but could only choose one, which one would it be?
No need to entertain a lie:
~you don't believe abortion is murder, so stop preaching it~
And I can show it right here:
If you were able to go into the past and prevent either World War II ~or~ the past three years of abortions worldwide, but could only choose one, which one would it be?
No need to entertain a lie:
~you don't believe abortion is murder, so stop preaching it~
That'd be a good argument if it weren't that abortion is done mostly on-demand because of financial reasons & not because the woman is having or potentially will have complications that would amount to being the same as self defense.
I'm curious, is it a tenet of Buddhism to support murder when the government says it's okay?
I'm curious, is it a tenet of Buddhism to support murder when the government says it's okay?
No, Buddhism takes an objective view of the world and the acts held within it and tries not to form irrational, ego influenced, visceral arguments over such things as abortion.
Now, answer me one: How many trespasses upon your body do you weekly/annually accept?
Well I really believe it is murder, Sky. If you're not interested in entertaining the fact that I believe it is murder... You don't have to participate in thread, my friend.
Nothing personal, just don't see how you claiming I am being disingenuos is a productive in this discussion.
Nothing personal, just don't see how you claiming I am being disingenuos is a productive in this discussion.
Frame the question a bit better. Are you claiming the baby is a tresspasser?
That's fine...just don't expect others to accept your sensitive interpretation.
Only to a woman who doesn't desire pregnancy....otherwise it's generally viewed as a blessing.
You're an idiot. And you've made an assumption with no foundation.
the amount of deaths in the past three years by abortion alone is greater then the amount of deaths in the Holocaust. And in the prevention of WWII a lot would have gone unlearned.
So selfishness is a virtue in Buddhism?
Selfishness brings about bad karma; self-righteousness brings about bad karma. Both need to be worked through.
You seem to show a little of both in your support of the selfish act of abortion on demand. Abortion, aside from if a woman's life is in jeapordy, is a selfish act. Supporting selfishness = bad karma in Buddhism as well?