TitanTiger 20,471 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 I can't comprehend because it didn't make any sense. Maybe you or Mims can explain. My original point was that you feel you have the right to exercise your own freedom of choice while denying the freedom of choice of a pregnant woman. ...who denies the freedom of choice to the child. There is no "child" by definition. By concocted definition designed to dehumanize the child and justify its killing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarTim 3,456 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 I can't comprehend because it didn't make any sense. Maybe you or Mims can explain. My original point was that you feel you have the right to exercise your own freedom of choice while denying the freedom of choice of a pregnant woman. ...who denies the freedom of choice to the child. Does the unborn have the same rights that we do? That's what I figured WarTimmys point was, and I was trying to convey that to homer. If he believes a fetus holds the same rights as he does then he is not being hypocritical in saying he doesn't believe a human life should be murdered because it has became an inconvenience to its carrier. Correct. (and that's Mr. WarTim to you. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,462 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 Forget about the law, which human beings can we morally and justifiably kill? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarTim 3,456 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 To those who have no problem with this practice I have two questions: 1. If you had a baby that died shortly after birth would you be OK with selling it's body parts for medical use/research? 2. Are you donating your own body or possible organ reuse or medical research? 1) Yes. Lost a family member to organ failure. Have no issue with the tissue of my child being used for medical research. It could prevent another couple from losing their child in the future. 2) Yes. I am a organ donor. 3) Should include this one also. If through a procedure I had tissue removed, or was asked for blood for research I would consent yes also. Tissue is also used from living humans. I would have no problem with #3. I give blood on a regular basis. Curious as to why you would not allow organs/tissue to be used after death but would contribute tissue from surgeries etc while alive. Or were you just referring to the part about blood so three would be a No also? One reason. Because I can do as I please. Personal preference... That's pretty ironic considering your position on abortion. Hypocritical even. Not if he sees fetuses as holding the same value as himself... :dunno:/> Not shocked at all that you can't comprehend ... I can't comprehend because it didn't make any sense. Maybe you or Mims can explain how that qualifies as a response to the question asked. Regardless, my point was that you assume the right to exercise your own freedom of choice while denying freedom of choice to a pregnant woman. Apples/Oranges. Try to keep up... No it's not. Quit trying to obfuscate. It's OK for you to exercise your freedom of choice, but you would make it illegal for a pregnant woman to do so. "Freedom of choice"=Hamburger or steak for supper?......That is a bit different than Murdering an innocent Human. Try and keep up... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texan4Auburn 1,626 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 To those who have no problem with this practice I have two questions: 1. If you had a baby that died shortly after birth would you be OK with selling it's body parts for medical use/research? 2. Are you donating your own body or possible organ reuse or medical research? 1) Yes. Lost a family member to organ failure. Have no issue with the tissue of my child being used for medical research. It could prevent another couple from losing their child in the future. 2) Yes. I am a organ donor. 3) Should include this one also. If through a procedure I had tissue removed, or was asked for blood for research I would consent yes also. Tissue is also used from living humans. I would have no problem with #3. I give blood on a regular basis. Curious as to why you would not allow organs/tissue to be used after death but would contribute tissue from surgeries etc while alive. Or were you just referring to the part about blood so three would be a No also? One reason. Because I can do as I please. Personal preference... Well it is your personal preference in both instances. Your right to do it, so cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarTim 3,456 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 Forget about the law, which human beings can we morally and justifiably kill? IMHO....Only in self defense or in defense of others. (Quick, somebody explain to homey Claus )... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texan4Auburn 1,626 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 Anybody else sick of these whiners losing their collective brain over this freaking lion, but have zero problem with the genocidal issue of abortion? So hypocritical. Seriously? Is that what passes for logic with you? :no:/> When animals are more important than human lives, then you have a fundamental problem in your thinking. You are digging even deeper into your logical fallacy. Really? I've often wondered how someone from PETA could invest so much in protecting animal rights but support the killing of an unborn baby. I'm not 100% against abortion, but it's an interesting stance. Well to be truthful. I have a Springer Spaniel that if it were to come down to her or some around here..... just say the Springer will be celebrating more birthdays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texan4Auburn 1,626 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 To those who have no problem with this practice I have two questions: 1. If you had a baby that died shortly after birth would you be OK with selling it's body parts for medical use/research? 2. Are you donating your own body or possible organ reuse or medical research? 1) Yes. Lost a family member to organ failure. Have no issue with the tissue of my child being used for medical research. It could prevent another couple from losing their child in the future. 2) Yes. I am a organ donor. 3) Should include this one also. If through a procedure I had tissue removed, or was asked for blood for research I would consent yes also. Tissue is also used from living humans. I would have no problem with #3. I give blood on a regular basis. Curious as to why you would not allow organs/tissue to be used after death but would contribute tissue from surgeries etc while alive. Or were you just referring to the part about blood so three would be a No also? One reason. Because I can do as I please. Personal preference... That's pretty ironic considering your position on abortion. Hypocritical even. Not if he sees fetuses as holding the same value as himself... Fetus as pointed out had nothing to do with my question. We were talking about grown adults for the two parts giving consent on their own bodies. Part two was are you a organ donor? Part three was would you donate your own tissue while still alive (like if you had arm amputated for example due to disease). I was curious to why one would say yes during life you can have my tissue, but then after death say no you can't have my tissue. If you were to compare freedoms and abortion. I would ask doesn't a woman have a right to choose not to carry a child conceived out of rape ( I would also argue mental health issues for the mother also)? Or do you go with the argument that one senator used and say well it is God's decision she was raped. Which in that case if you listen to certain churches also, then it was God's decision that the individuals in the movie theater in Lafayette were shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mims44 1,864 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 I can't comprehend because it didn't make any sense. Maybe you or Mims can explain. My original point was that you feel you have the right to exercise your own freedom of choice while denying the freedom of choice of a pregnant woman. ...who denies the freedom of choice to the child. Does the unborn have the same rights that we do? That's what I figured WarTimmys point was, and I was trying to convey that to homer. If he believes a fetus holds the same rights as he does then he is not being hypocritical in saying he doesn't believe a human life should be murdered because it has became an inconvenience to its carrier. That wasn't the question that was posed. Go back and look. As Timmy likes to say, keep up. :-\ The question posed by YOU was why do you give tissue/organs while alive but would not upon death. His answer (that wasn't a real answer) was basically "Because I can" You then called him a hypocrite because you see the issue of abortion as giving or taking the rights away from a woman, in that sense it is hypocritical. I pointed out that his viewpoint which is abortion takes away that freedom of choice from the fetus who he considers to have equal rights as himself is not hypocritical. It's getting tiresome explaining simple nuances of speech/writing to you btw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,462 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 Forget about the law, which human beings can we morally and justifiably kill? IMHO....Only in self defense or in defense of others. (Quick, somebody explain to homey Claus )... May I indiscriminately kill Muslims? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aujeff11 6,243 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 To those who have no problem with this practice I have two questions: 1. If you had a baby that died shortly after birth would you be OK with selling it's body parts for medical use/research? 2. Are you donating your own body or possible organ reuse or medical research? 1) Yes. Lost a family member to organ failure. Have no issue with the tissue of my child being used for medical research. It could prevent another couple from losing their child in the future. 2) Yes. I am a organ donor. 3) Should include this one also. If through a procedure I had tissue removed, or was asked for blood for research I would consent yes also. Tissue is also used from living humans. I would have no problem with #3. I give blood on a regular basis. Curious as to why you would not allow organs/tissue to be used after death but would contribute tissue from surgeries etc while alive. Or were you just referring to the part about blood so three would be a No also? One reason. Because I can do as I please. Personal preference... That's pretty ironic considering your position on abortion. Hypocritical even. Not if he sees fetuses as holding the same value as himself... Fetus as pointed out had nothing to do with my question. We were talking about grown adults for the two parts giving consent on their own bodies. Part two was are you a organ donor? Part three was would you donate your own tissue while still alive (like if you had arm amputated for example due to disease). I was curious to why one would say yes during life you can have my tissue, but then after death say no you can't have my tissue. If you were to compare freedoms and abortion. I would ask doesn't a woman have a right to choose not to carry a child conceived out of rape ( I would also argue mental health issues for the mother also)? Or do you go with the argument that one senator used and say well it is God's decision she was raped. Which in that case if you listen to certain churches also, then it was God's decision that the individuals in the movie theater in Lafayette were shot. The unborn has the same rights as the woman, the raped one is just SOL. Don't you get it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,354 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 I can't comprehend because it didn't make any sense. Maybe you or Mims can explain. My original point was that you feel you have the right to exercise your own freedom of choice while denying the freedom of choice of a pregnant woman. ...who denies the freedom of choice to the child. There is no "child" by definition. By concocted definition designed to dehumanize the child and justify its killing. Actually, calling a fertilized egg, zygote or fetus a "child" or a "baby" is a concocted definition to promote the 'life begins at conception belief '. Of course, that is strictly true but is still doesn't make a fetus a child. Furthermore, no one has claimed that a fetus is not human or doesn't have the potential to become a baby or child if it is carried to term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texan4Auburn 1,626 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 To those who have no problem with this practice I have two questions: 1. If you had a baby that died shortly after birth would you be OK with selling it's body parts for medical use/research? 2. Are you donating your own body or possible organ reuse or medical research? 1) Yes. Lost a family member to organ failure. Have no issue with the tissue of my child being used for medical research. It could prevent another couple from losing their child in the future. 2) Yes. I am a organ donor. 3) Should include this one also. If through a procedure I had tissue removed, or was asked for blood for research I would consent yes also. Tissue is also used from living humans. I would have no problem with #3. I give blood on a regular basis. Curious as to why you would not allow organs/tissue to be used after death but would contribute tissue from surgeries etc while alive. Or were you just referring to the part about blood so three would be a No also? One reason. Because I can do as I please. Personal preference... That's pretty ironic considering your position on abortion. Hypocritical even. Not if he sees fetuses as holding the same value as himself... Fetus as pointed out had nothing to do with my question. We were talking about grown adults for the two parts giving consent on their own bodies. Part two was are you a organ donor? Part three was would you donate your own tissue while still alive (like if you had arm amputated for example due to disease). I was curious to why one would say yes during life you can have my tissue, but then after death say no you can't have my tissue. If you were to compare freedoms and abortion. I would ask doesn't a woman have a right to choose not to carry a child conceived out of rape ( I would also argue mental health issues for the mother also)? Or do you go with the argument that one senator used and say well it is God's decision she was raped. Which in that case if you listen to certain churches also, then it was God's decision that the individuals in the movie theater in Lafayette were shot. The unborn has the same rights as the woman, the raped one is just SOL. Don't you get it! True, plus it was all her fault also to begin with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanTiger 20,471 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 I can't comprehend because it didn't make any sense. Maybe you or Mims can explain. My original point was that you feel you have the right to exercise your own freedom of choice while denying the freedom of choice of a pregnant woman. ...who denies the freedom of choice to the child. There is no "child" by definition. By concocted definition designed to dehumanize the child and justify its killing. Actually, calling a fertilized egg, zygote or fetus a "child" or a "baby" is a concocted definition to promote the life begins at conception belief. Furthermore, no one has claimed that a fetus is not human or doesn't have the potential to become a baby or child if it is carried to term. There is no rational distinction to be made. A fetus is a baby is a child. It's only modern vernacular that has attempted to create legal distinctions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aujeff11 6,243 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 I want an answer btw...should a pregnant woman be charged with negligence for smoking, drinking, etc? Does the unborn not have the right to decide who should be allowed to act reckless with the its life? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,354 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 To those who have no problem with this practice I have two questions: 1. If you had a baby that died shortly after birth would you be OK with selling it's body parts for medical use/research? 2. Are you donating your own body or possible organ reuse or medical research? 1) Yes. Lost a family member to organ failure. Have no issue with the tissue of my child being used for medical research. It could prevent another couple from losing their child in the future. 2) Yes. I am a organ donor. 3) Should include this one also. If through a procedure I had tissue removed, or was asked for blood for research I would consent yes also. Tissue is also used from living humans. I would have no problem with #3. I give blood on a regular basis. Curious as to why you would not allow organs/tissue to be used after death but would contribute tissue from surgeries etc while alive. Or were you just referring to the part about blood so three would be a No also? One reason. Because I can do as I please. Personal preference... That's pretty ironic considering your position on abortion. Hypocritical even. Not if he sees fetuses as holding the same value as himself... :dunno:/> Not shocked at all that you can't comprehend ... I can't comprehend because it didn't make any sense. Maybe you or Mims can explain how that qualifies as a response to the question asked. Regardless, my point was that you assume the right to exercise your own freedom of choice while denying freedom of choice to a pregnant woman. Apples/Oranges. Try to keep up... No it's not. Quit trying to obfuscate. It's OK for you to exercise your freedom of choice, but you would make it illegal for a pregnant woman to do so. "Freedom of choice"=Hamburger or steak for supper?......That is a bit different than Murdering an innocent Human. Try and keep up... Actually we were talking about donating ones organs when they die. You justified refusal to do so on the basis of having the freedom to decide. Do you understand that your decision not to donate your organs may - or even probably - condemns another person to die from the lack of said organ? So exercising your freedom of choice in this case results in the death of another person in need of one of those organs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quietfan 233 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 As in almost every other abortion discussion, the entire debate hinges on the question of whether an unborn fetus is a human being or not, with the full legal and/or ethical protections of a human being (which is why I generally stay away from such debates). But even among those who supposedly have the most expertise in that question--scientists, medical doctors, theologians, or lawyers--there is no overwhelming consensus one way or another. For those who see a fetus as a human person with the full legal and moral rights of a human being, I understand your appall. Since I do not consider an unborn fetus a human being, "person", or "baby", and since in these cases the biological material has been voluntarily donated and would be discarded otherwise, I feel no concern or revulsion. However, I also respect that others do not share my beliefs, and do not scoff at their feelings or beliefs. As it happens, I am a registered organ donor and a regular blood donor. If I were the legal guardian or the post-death decision maker for anyone else, I would donate any of those biological materials that could be used for further good. I also understand that use of those parts necessarily involves some "cutting, sorting, and processing". But I would not feel like I'm "selling body parts" if the recipients of those materials covered my own expenses. (A slight thought detour: When it comes to the ethics of selling biological parts for money: Should we discontinue the practice by some private labs/commercial enterprises of paying blood donors, sperm donors, etc? Are they no better than "Nazis" for doing so? Or from a legal standpoint, I suppose those donors are being paid for their "time", not their biological materials...) In any case, until there is general agreement regarding the "person-hood" status of an unborn fetus, it seems to me that all debates over abortion reflect positions of conscience in which there is no middle ground, and are therefore exercises in futility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,354 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 I can't comprehend because it didn't make any sense. Maybe you or Mims can explain. My original point was that you feel you have the right to exercise your own freedom of choice while denying the freedom of choice of a pregnant woman. ...who denies the freedom of choice to the child. Does the unborn have the same rights that we do? That's what I figured WarTimmys point was, and I was trying to convey that to homer. If he believes a fetus holds the same rights as he does then he is not being hypocritical in saying he doesn't believe a human life should be murdered because it has became an inconvenience to its carrier. Correct. (and that's Mr. WarTim to you. :-) That's not the question that was posed. Keep up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texan4Auburn 1,626 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 I want an answer btw...should a pregnant woman be charged with negligence for smoking, drinking, etc? Does the unborn not have the right to decide who should be allowed to act reckless with the child's life? I would be on board for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarTim 3,456 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 Forget about the law, which human beings can we morally and justifiably kill? IMHO....Only in self defense or in defense of others. (Quick, somebody explain to homey Claus )... May I indiscriminately kill Muslims? life and death is God's realm. Ask Him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,354 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 I can't comprehend because it didn't make any sense. Maybe you or Mims can explain. My original point was that you feel you have the right to exercise your own freedom of choice while denying the freedom of choice of a pregnant woman. ...who denies the freedom of choice to the child. Does the unborn have the same rights that we do? That's what I figured WarTimmys point was, and I was trying to convey that to homer. If he believes a fetus holds the same rights as he does then he is not being hypocritical in saying he doesn't believe a human life should be murdered because it has became an inconvenience to its carrier. That wasn't the question that was posed. Go back and look. As Timmy likes to say, keep up. :-\ The question posed by YOU was why do you give tissue/organs while alive but would not upon death. His answer (that wasn't a real answer) was basically "Because I can" You then called him a hypocrite because you see the issue of abortion as giving or taking the rights away from a woman, in that sense it is hypocritical. I pointed out that his viewpoint which is abortion takes away that freedom of choice from the fetus who he considers to have equal rights as himself is not hypocritical. It's getting tiresome explaining simple nuances of speech/writing to you btw. First, it wasn't my question, it was T4AU. And it had nothing to do with fetuses or abortion. Secondly, fetuses don't have a choice to begin with. Duuuuuh. Thirdly, please don't tell me what my point was. Don't assume you know what I am getting at, because you rarely do. If you have a question, then ask. Otherwise, leave my posts alone if they aren't addressed to you. This isn't the first time you felt the compulsion to chime in on something I posted to someone else, thereby derailing the thread. It's very annoying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aujeff11 6,243 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 I want an answer btw...should a pregnant woman be charged with negligence for smoking, drinking, etc? Does the unborn not have the right to decide who should be allowed to act reckless with the child's life? I would be on board for that. Theoretically, I would too until I realized the rights of the mothers are walking down a slippery slope because the next step would be to charge pregnant women for carrying heavy boxes or something like that or for not taking their prenatal vitamins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,354 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 I can't comprehend because it didn't make any sense. Maybe you or Mims can explain. My original point was that you feel you have the right to exercise your own freedom of choice while denying the freedom of choice of a pregnant woman. ...who denies the freedom of choice to the child. There is no "child" by definition. By concocted definition designed to dehumanize the child and justify its killing. Actually, calling a fertilized egg, zygote or fetus a "child" or a "baby" is a concocted definition to promote the life begins at conception belief. Furthermore, no one has claimed that a fetus is not human or doesn't have the potential to become a baby or child if it is carried to term. There is no rational distinction to be made. A fetus is a baby is a child. It's only modern vernacular that has attempted to create legal distinctions. If there was no rational distinction to be made, the term "fetus" wouldn't be necessary or even exist. And the term is late middle English derived directly from Latin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aubearcat 2,132 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 I want an answer btw...should a pregnant woman be charged with negligence for smoking, drinking, etc? Does the unborn not have the right to decide who should be allowed to act reckless with the its life? I believe with smoking it would probably be no, it'd depend on the DA I suppose and if the baby had some immediate health problems that could be proven to be a result of said smoking. . Alcohol, I would say probably. In the same type situation, I've seen numerous women charged with chemical endangerment if their children test positive for illegal drugs at birth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mims44 1,864 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 I can't comprehend because it didn't make any sense. Maybe you or Mims can explain. My original point was that you feel you have the right to exercise your own freedom of choice while denying the freedom of choice of a pregnant woman. ...who denies the freedom of choice to the child. Does the unborn have the same rights that we do? That's what I figured WarTimmys point was, and I was trying to convey that to homer. If he believes a fetus holds the same rights as he does then he is not being hypocritical in saying he doesn't believe a human life should be murdered because it has became an inconvenience to its carrier. Correct. (and that's Mr. WarTim to you. :-) That's not the question that was posed. Keep up. Again, I was pretty sure the name calling you threw out so quickly "hypocrite" was directed at his stance on abortion, while simultaneously claiming his rights over his own body. Thus bringing the abortion topic into the discussion of his answer and defense of his answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.