But how can we live in a society where the killing and euthanization of animals are looked down upon, but abortions of human foetus are found to be humane because the fetus is not a person. Animals are not people, but we still view them as deserving of rights. And the euthanization of for example, dogs in a shelter after a certain period of days, is seen to be a way of saving money or because the dog cannot be cared for. Same as a human fetus. Can't you see that we are treating humans like dogs?
@UTubeLightBulb "But how can we live in a society where the killing and euthanization of animals are looked down upon,"
It isn't looked down upon. Animals are euthanized for a variety of reasons, such as to alleviate their suffering as they are dying, or because they are dangerous. It's only a problem of ethics when healthy animals are euthanized in crowded shelters.
"but abortions of human foetus are found to be humane because the fetus is not a person."
Numbers 31:17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones. I Samuel 15:3 slay both man and woman, infant and suckling. 2 Kings 8:12 dash their children, and rip up their women with child. 2 Kings 15:16 all the women therein that were with child he ripped up. Isaiah 13:16 Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled and their wives ravished. Isaiah 13:18 They shall have no pity on the fruit of the womb; their eyes shall not spare children.
@xamot27 Again that is not abortion it is judgment. Learn the difference. For example, President Obama order the strike against Bin Laden. If I would kill my enemy it would be murder but if the government does it (properly) it is to protect our nation.
Religion wants to save the unborn yet would easily murder the born as soon as it disobeys its dogma!
Some states still having the death penalty are predominantly christian, yet on the death certificate it states "homicide" e.g. MURDER! But that's "an eye for an eye" right, thus justice has been served?
Lets just agree that killing a cognitive being with a fully developed central nervous system is murder, but I ask you Christians.. Was it wrong for us to murder Jesus?
@Smirnoff71 "Religion wants to save the unborn yet would easily murder the born as soon as it disobeys its dogma!" This statement I cannot take seriously. For Stalin would "murder the born as soon as it disobeys its dogma!" also. "Was it wrong for us to murder Jesus?" I do not understand your question. Please clarify.
love this video,but i find that trying to convince pro-lifers from their positions i feel is futile, they must be opposed everywhere, the pro-life movement is vile sick and often very violent, they are mostly religious fanatics, and the few secular pro-lifers out there have been hoodwinked buy the religious right.these are very ignorant and mostly uneducated people,for the most party the really want to subjugate women,they are fundamentalist Christians after all so that should not be a surprise
I so fucking tired of religitards and other fuckwads who think its their duty to stick their noses up every woman's vagina and tell them what they can and cannot do with it.
if they made masterbation illegal especially for men we would never have any discussion about abortion. sperm are techniqually alive... i know i would be worst than hitler for spilling all of those seeds.... goooeeewwww
Ultimately, we need to take care of the people that are here now. If a woman is forced to make such a difficult decision, why not make sure it's as safe as possible to protect her health? Why are people trying to superimpose their own ethical system on the Joneses?
Anti-Abortionism sort of takes two forms of justification: The first is lost potential of human life and accomplishment. That is fucking retarded, I argued this in my class when we had to debate abortion. Our school had I think 500 females physically able to bear children, by that logic because none of them did have children, we lose 500 human lives, and if everyone had sex and had those 500 babies then 5 of them would statistically become huge successes and do some awesome shit for man kind...
@TheRepublicOfUngeria ...(assuming income automatically equals achievement and doing good). How dare you take that away from humanity by not having sex!?!?!? Well it's an opportunity cost, because that means that those same women can't go forward and have children later in life, and if they did that then maybe 10 or 12 of them would grow up to be awesome successes instead of just 5. Or all of them would be well fed or have energy or a car instead of just a few, because we lived sustainably......
@TheRepublicOfUngeria ...The next argument is a person-hood argument, which is far more subjective. Personally I see absolutely no reason to extend person-hood to fetuses. They feel less than a cow and yet we still torture them for cheapnesses sake. I see a pre-personhood argument however. If I'm in labor and I smoke I won't be doing harm to a person until that child can be born and age into person-hood, but then you should be able to be charged with abuse.
i dont get why most creationists are against abortion. god was all for it!!! in the "great flood" god destroyed every living thing on the planet except those on the ark. there must have been hundreds of thousands of pregnant women at the time!!! there must of been lots of other pregnant women in other slaughters he condones. he even murdered the first born of all in egypt for what pharoah did!!! talk about mega-hipocrites. ahhh creationists....will you ever learn??
@xamot27 if you read numbers 5 in the old testament, god spells out how to get an abortion :) when it warms up I'm making a picket sign with that verse and will hang out at their protests :D
Well put peaches. I tried to explain this to a street preacher years ago, in front of a facility as I was walking down the street, and couldn't ignore their hypocrisy. I told them about how it is okay for religion to dictate the world, and cause death and chaos over the world in the name of god. But, removing a zygote is wrong? He didn't say anything.
@Bllackguard666 Wow dud,e that is an attack on the man but not a real argument. Even for the sake of discussion of this video if your premise was right "My point is: most religious people are hypocrites."
that premise does not prove or disprove the premise that induced abortions are the killing of an Innocent human being without proper justification. The funny thing is miss peach in other videos blast others for only attacking the person and not the argument.
I'm out. Gotta get some kind of homework done today. ^_^ Cozstuart, myquestionis123, Peach, it's been a pleasure conversing with you all today. Peace. :D
@HPGWellscraft So long. I will also leave and maybe miss peach could decide once and for all what she believes and actually state why. I did like the other conversation. Thanks.
"If you're on the side of the anti abortion lobby, then that means you're on the same side as people who would threaten to use biological agents against innocent people. Or to stand outside of a clinic and blow them away with a sawn off shotgun"
Prove it. Give me two examples that proves that I have done that. You made the claim now back it up.
@lxAgnosticxl Then that should be applied to me. Why is one saying I would
"If you're on the side of the anti abortion lobby, then that means you're on the same side as people who would threaten to use biological agents against innocent people. Or to stand outside of a clinic and blow them away with a sawn off shotgun"
BTW in your video I don't recall you saying anything about a person being a human being, So now that I see that you video did not define a person but you did not show the difference in your view between a human and human being even though you yourself used the word human as a person. Please make up your mind what you believe.So when exactly does a "human" become a "human being" and why did you use human in a comment to me if they are a person (referring to a slave).
@myquestionis123 " So now that I see that you video did not define a person but you did not show the difference in your view between a human and human being even though you yourself used the word human as a person."
That video was recorded over two years ago. Back then, I was naive enough to assume that the average person understood the difference between what is human and what a person is. Shame on me, huh?
@xxxThePeachxxx "Back then, I was naive enough to assume that the average person understood the difference between what is human and what a person is. Shame on me, huh?"
If the supreme court argued about what is a person then why in the world would you think people would agree on your premise?
*sigh* For fuck's sake, don't argue something if you have no knowledge of it.
They defined a person has one who has "individual human rights." To say that a developmental organism the size of a pinhead has rights would require them to be counted as part of the population, which is IMPOSSIBLE, as many women miscarry without ever having known they were pregnant. In addition, they are not viable, no matter what what may possibly occur in the future.
@myquestionis123 Defined* and besides you bad grammar, what does slavery have to do with a zygote? If you knew biology, you would answer your own question. Slaves can fight back, as most are adults, slaves can also speak and perform work. So, you argument fails.
@myquestionis123 "The unborn of today are in some ways being treated as the slaves of yesterday."
Oh give me a goddamn break. Slaves were undoubtedly people; there's no question about their rights as human beings were being violated. A zygote has no sentience, no viability, not even a real form. When you start advocating issuing death certificates for every single miscarriage, then come back and drone on about how pinhead-sized eukaryotes are people.
@xxxThePeachxxx It apparently wasn't unquestionable, since it was questioned frequently. Why are viability and sentience relevant? Also, no form? What, are they some sort of energy beings?
The first half of your last sentence is an ad hominem attack; what one guy on the Internet is advocating has no bearing on the personhood or nonpersonhood of an embryo or fetus. I also love how you try to use "eukaryotes" in a dehumanizing way, when all it means is that an organism's cells contain organelles.
@Nulono "It apparently wasn't unquestionable, since it was questioned frequently."
It was a matter of economics for the proponents of slavery.
"Why are viability and sentience relevant?"
Because viability and sentience are both major factors in what we are as human beings.
"I also love how you try to use "eukaryotes" in a dehumanizing way,"
That was simply your interpretation. And since we all begin in this way, why would I consider it something dehumanizing at all? Try to make some sense.
@xxxThePeachxxx It was partially economics, but there were also many people who viewed Africans as subhuman. If it were simply economics, the laws wouldn't've specified race.
Could you clarify what you mean by "sentience"? Viability and sentience are properties held by some humans, but they're in no way what make us human.
The way you used the word certainly implied a level of condescension. Why even use the word if not?
@Nulono I am sure before the slaves got freedom people were saying. "I can't afford to run my business without slaves. Who are you to tell me what to do?" The one change is simple. It is a new group that can't defend and thus people treat them subhuman.
@xxxThePeachxxx Certainly many people did not believe that "their rights as human beings were being violated". Abolitionists did, but it was hardly a consensus position for a long time. The VA Supreme Court, for instance, ruled in 1858 that slaves were not persons in the eye of the law.
Of course. Nobody denied this. They were counted as 3/5 of a full person in population counts, which is beyond insulting, but nobody denied the fact that they were people. They were considered lesser peoples.
As for zygotes and blastocysts and embryos, however, there's no debate in biology. They're not people.
@xxxThePeachxxx "They defined a person has one who has "individual human rights."
Really yet you talk about the difference between a human and human being. Now you quote them using human and not human being. I love this. Wow. this is toooooooo good to be true.
I've just read some of the crimes that have been committed by the anit abortiong lobby against people and property that provide abortion. These crimes include property damage, arson, bombing, kidnapping, assault, attempted murder, murder, and the one that shocked me most.....the threatend use of anthrax of which 655 offence have been committed. So abortion's off, but biological warfare is fine.
@cozstuart So how does those crimes make abortion moral? If some guy killed a muslin that would be a crime. If that muslin that was killed beheaded that guys wife and children would that mean that what the muslin did was right? The real question is what is the unborn.
So if a woman has the right (BTW where does that come from) to kill the unborn without proper justification, does God have the right to be God? So who has the right to do what and why?
@myquestionis123 Well, if there were a god i'm sure he would. Of course we have the right to be who we are. But since god doesn't actually exist, he can't be god. It's the existence part that Peach and others are taking issue with.
@myquestionis123 "So if there was no God then you support the right to kill a human being without proper justification right?" It is justified by the mother. Do you support euthanasia of animals?
"So if there was no God then you support the right to kill a human being without proper justification right?" Well as i've already said, i myself am opposed to abortion and would never ask someone to have one. But i'm opposed to lots of things that i don't think should be illegal. A persons, or group of persons, opinions should not be made into laws. But i do support their rights to have abortions, yes. There are just so many ambiguous words in there; "right", "human being", "justification"
@myquestionis123 Why am i opposed to Abortion? Because i do see it as a person, but thats me. I can't force everyone to see things the way i do and wouldn't even if i could.
@HPGWellscraft So you seem to be saying that you believe that abortion is wrong because an abortion kills a person and that a mother should have the right to kill a person. Is that correct?
@myquestionis123 "So you seem to be saying that you believe that abortion is wrong because an abortion kills a person and that a mother should have the right to kill a person. Is that correct?" Yeah, pretty much.
@HPGWellscraft So I am personal opposed to miss peach getting raped but would that be wrong to force my beliefs on others that would like to? I guess I am intolerant to that but should I allow others to make up their own minds and keep my beliefs to myself?
@myquestionis123 "So I am personal opposed to miss peach getting raped but would that be wrong to force my beliefs on others that would like to? I guess I am intolerant to that but should I allow others to make up their own minds and keep my beliefs to myself?" No, of course not, but rape is pretty straight forward, unlike abortion. What about statutory rape? If a 30yr old has consensual sex with a 16 yr old should he/she be charged with rape? Even if they're in love?
@HPGWellscraft As long as the child/fetus/embryo/whatever is a part of the mothers physical being, it's ultimately her decision. If siamese twins wanted to get separated would you stop them? That is how god made them, after all.
@HPGWellscraft Okay you support the killing of a person. I don't agree but that is your belief. Hey muslin's kills gays but that is their belief not mine. I can't change your heart.
@myquestionis123 "Okay you support the killing of a person. I don't agree but that is your belief. Hey muslin's kills gays but that is their belief not mine." I also support the death penalty. Obviously i don't support killing gays or anybody because to race, nationality or religious beliefs, but i'm also in no position to define "life" or tell someone what they're rights are. As much as i would like to think differently, HPGWellscraft is not the moral arbiter of the universe.
A fetus is not a person. Your problem is that you are so ignorant of induced abortions that you automatically assume that they are conducted as elective procedures. Women who have ectopic pregnancies MUST have them terminated. If she doesn't, she'll die. When faced with such a situation, then what? Are you in favor of allowing a woman, who is undoubtedly a person, die?
@HPGWellscraft I know, and that's why I'm asking him about situations in which a fetus MUST be terminated. What then? Is it still a person? If so, how could one rationalize killing a "baby" to save the mother?
@xxxThePeachxxx Understood and very true. Although i don't believe the status of personhood should be conditional on convenience (not that you were saying that. Just sayin') but if the woman is going to die, unless she wants to give her live to carry out the pregnancy, it seems that there would be very little choice.
@xxxThePeachxxx I will try to make this as clear as possible. I believe that induce abortion is wrong. In fact an induce abortion is the killing of an innocent human being without proper justification. That is my belief. I have not presented a case for that but you have presented yours. I do believe self defense is the proper justification of an induced abortion. My evidence is simple. If someone or something endangers a person's life then one can defend and even kill another person.
@myquestionis123 "I do believe self defense is the proper justification of an induced abortion"
Self-defense? That's not the case of ectopic pregnancies. Self-defense implies preservation of life and limb against an attack; there's no attack here. It's not like the blastocyst made a conscious decision to implant itself outside of the uterus... you know why? Because a blastocyst/zygote/embryo cannot make a conscious decision... BECAUSE IT'S NOT A PERSON.
@myquestionis123 "So I am personal opposed to miss peach getting raped but would that be wrong to force my beliefs on others that would like to?"
So now you're comparing rape to abortion? Rape, which is undoubtedly an act of violence, as opposed to induced abortions, which are LITERALLY the medical equivalent of a spontaneous miscarriage... there's something seriously wrong with your brain if you honestly can't see the difference.
@HPGWellscraft And also if i can get just a tad nihilistic here for a second, right and wrong, good and evil, are mostly abstract concepts that change so often people can hardly keep up with them anymore. And Even if abortion is without a doubt wrong, what about overpopulation?What about finite resources? Should we let these children be born so they can be poor and miserable just like the rest of us? Drugaddicts? sexslaves? starving? Cold? I'd support sterilization before making abortion illegal
@myquestionis123 "So if a woman has the right (BTW where does that come from)"
From us. Where else would it come from?
"to kill the unborn without proper justification"
The "unborn" is a zygote, or an embryo, or an early-stage fetus. Women don't need to justify their actions to anyone, thus protecting their rights to privacy.
"does God have the right to be God?"
God isn't real. You may as well ask me if the baby fairy has a right to be a baby fairy. Join reality, please.
@xxxThePeachxxx "From us. Where else would it come from?" What about the Declaration of Independence?
"The "unborn" is a zygote, or an embryo, or an early-stage fetus. Women don't need to justify their actions to anyone, thus protecting their rights to privacy."
So can a woman kill a two year old as long as it is done in private?
"God isn't real. You may as well ask me if the baby fairy has a right to be a baby fairy. Join reality, please."
@xxxThePeachxxx "The Declaration of Independence is not a framework of law. It was just a letter written to the King of England." then why do you quote from it and why do gay advocates do?
"No, that would be called murder. Unlike an embryo, a two-year-old child is a person, protected under the law."
@myquestionis123 "then why do you quote from it and why do gay advocates do?"
And when did I do that?
"So were slaves protected under the law?"
Aside from the fact that they were slaves, in some cases, they were. But they were not protected as human beings in their own right. They were property, and if someone killed a slave, then it was a crime against his/her owner.
@xxxThePeachxxx "So the real question is what is the unborn"
A zygote, or an embryo, or an early-stage fetus."
So you are the one making the claim in the video so all I am asking is for logical reasons to state your premise. I do not believe " if it has to be explained to you why" is evidence but only ridicule. All I ask to to back up your claims. Fair enough?
@myquestionis123 "So you are the one making the claim in the video so all I am asking is for logical reasons to state your premise."
Logical reasoning is derived from reality: they are zygotes, or embryos, or early-stage fetuses. That's not my opinion; these are the facts. And as such, my opinion about the legality of induced abortions is based upon these facts.
@myquestionis123 "Yes they are infants, toddlers, children, adults which are facts. Still you need to prove your point."
Then they are not, using your own term, the "unborn." Those individuals have been born, and their personhood is undeniable. But comparing a fully-developed human being to an embryo barely bigger than being microscopic is simply moronic.
@xxxThePeachxxx at what point in the 9 months of pregnancy would you deem an abortion to be no longer just a scrambling of an egg? I am trying to figure out what your line in the sand is. Is it once the fetus has self awareness or feelings and emotions? or only once they come out are they truly a person?
@zeusvalentine "at what point in the 9 months of pregnancy would you deem an abortion to be no longer just a scrambling of an egg?"
Ehh... sounds like someone has a limited knowledge of induced abortions. Most of them are not so invasive, and require nothing more than taking a pill. So try rephrasing your question without the venom and ignorance.
"Is it once the fetus has self awareness or feelings and emotions?"
Infants don't have self-awareness, so that one certainly doesn't apply.
@zeusvalentine "I think the question was perfectly valid. You just chose not to answer it."
Actually, the question is not valid, because it contains an incorrect assumption of what an induced abortion is. It would be like asking me why I think we evolved from monkeys.
@xxxThePeachxxx My question has nothing to do with induced abortions. I want to know at what point does Peach think an abortion, induced or otherwise, should not be performed. c'mon Peach - tell us where you stand.
@zeusvalentine I am going but keep her feet to the fire There was a time when she was alive and people would have no problem killing her back then as an unborn baby. The real question is when does someone become a human being. I think she will continue to play dodge ball.
@myquestionis123 "I am going but keep her feet to the fire There was a time when she was alive and people would have no problem killing her back then as an unborn baby."
Idiot, what would it matter to me if the pregnancy that eventually led to me had been terminated? I'll say it again: making an argument on the prospect of the billions of "people" who have never existed is RETARDED. You may as well as be against birth control. Fucking moron.
@xxxThePeachxxx "Idiot, what would it matter to me if the pregnancy that eventually led to me had been terminated?" Wow you just contradicted yourself and didn't even know that you did. So what was it before it was you during your mother's pregnancy? At what point did it become you? If it was not you but human then who was it?
@xxxThePeachxxx "I'll say it again: making an argument on the prospect of the billions of "people" who have never existed is RETARDED" That is a contradiction. If you never existed then you can never be terminated.
@xxxThePeachxxx ". You may as well as be against birth control. Fucking moron."
You mentioned that all of us want to reduce abortions. Why? if there is no taking of a Innocent life then why would you care? In fact why not have people get pregnant just to have abortions for the fun of it if there is no human being killed in the process?
@zeusvalentine "My question has nothing to do with induced abortions. I want to know at what point does Peach think an abortion, induced or otherwise, should not be performed."
First off, there's only two kinds of abortions: spontaneous and induced. It would naturally follow that a spontaneous abortion cannot be "performed." And secondly, I would leave the "when" up to the woman and her doctor's ability to perform one safely. It's nobody else's business from a medical standpoint.
@xxxThePeachxxx she finally answered - yeah! you are an absolutist. See folks, Peach thinks an induced abortion at 8 months is ok. Her line in the sand is whether or not the baby is inside or outside the body. that's it. Personally, I couldn't answer the question with such definite point.
@lxAgnosticxl I am not responding to what she says in this video. this goes back further to when I asked at what point in the 9 months of pregnancy would an abortion not be acceptable. She didn't answer the question, then she did, stating that it was up to the woman and doctor. By that logic, an abortion at 8 months with the Doctor and woman checking off, would be ok. Then she says that isn't what she said and that I was a lying sack of shit. I expected more honesty from Peach
So she did answer the question, Then why are you complaining?
"By that logic, etc."
By that logic would mean you're interpreting what shes saying, so infact she didn't say that you're putting words in her mouth.
The way I view it and maybe Peach is somewhere along these lines is that an embryo is not a person it doesn't have a persona ( a state of self awareness).
@zeusvalentine "See folks, Peach thinks an induced abortion at 8 months is ok."
That's not what I said, you lying sack of shit. I said that it should be left up to the woman and her doctor's opinion and ability to perform the procedure safely. And since I'm not a medical profession (and YOU sure as fuck aren't one either), neither of us can make a determination of when the limit should be.
@zeusvalentine "you had finally answered the question. now we are back to square one again. "
Don't blame me because you can't understand words. I never said that any specific gestational age was the cut-off point. That's what you were trying to weasel out of me, but I'm honest enough to admit that I'm not qualified to provide a definitive answer. I'll leave medical decisions up to patients and their doctors. I respect privacy. You clearly don't.
@xxxThePeachxxx actually, you did answer the question. (sorry, I am doing 3 things at once). So, you don't know when the cutoff should be. You know what Peach - me neither.
@xxxThePeachxxx What a joke. You do a video blasting those against abortions and can't take a stand on when the cut off point it. You jelly logic cannot hold a good argument.
Second respect privacy is a joke. So do you respect the privacy of a guy that beats his wife up black and blue each night? Wow you sure are something.
@xxxThePeachxxx Self-awareness as we generally understand it would require substantial neocortical development, which seems to occur at or near week 23. In the premodern era, self-awareness was most often presumed to occur at quickening, which generally takes place around the 20th week of pregnancy.
@zeusvalentine "Self-awareness as we generally understand it would require substantial neocortical development, which seems to occur at or near week 23."
The consensus among psychologists is that an infant does not become self-aware until around the age of 1 year.
@xxxThePeachxxx that's from the mirror test where the infant is expected to recognize themselves in a mirror. the guy who came up with that was an idiot.
@zeusvalentine I'm not talking about the mirror test. I'm talking about self-awareness: that is, sense of self, understanding that you exist. And as I said, the consensus among psychologists is that an infant cannot grasp this concept until he/she is about a year old.
@zeusvalentine The neocortex does not begin to develop until week 26. The nerves which connect it to the central nervous system do not begin to establish connections until week 29. These nerves grow rapidly until week 35. At the same time, the uterus and the fetal brain produce chemicals which keep the fetus unconscious until birth. The passage through the birth canal would otherwise be excruciatingly painfull, as the skull is squeezed out of shape during the process.
I saw this video awhile back, and liked it. Peach, you are so eloquent and intelligent you can almost convince me of things that i don't even agree with. (pro-life, but don't think abortion should be illegal) , But i have to say, i think myquestionis123's analogy, drawing a parallel between abortion and slavery, is a valid comparison as both could be construed as moral/ethical issues. :)
Still waiting for miss peach to tell us the difference between a human being and a person. Until she can she supports the killing of a human being without proper justification I will continue to remind her.
@myquestionis123 "Still waiting for miss peach to tell us the difference between a human being and a person."
There is no difference between a human BEING and a person; the two terms are synonymous. You were asking me what the difference between the term HUMAN and the term person. I've answered twice already. If your reading comprehension is that bad, that's not my problem.
Human moral concepts rely on crisply defined boundaries and definitions, e.g. what is a person. Nature has no obligation to behave in accordance with these.
. You said that the unborn is alive and a human. However, you believe it is alright to kill a human. Thus you have divided humans into two groups. Those that can be killed and those that should not. If you believe that a human has to be a person then what is the difference between the two and why? Finally, if you can justify the killing of millions of humans because they are not a person, how come you never defined what a person is? Please think through your position next time.
@xxxThePeachxxx Still you cannot even define what a person is and what the difference between a human and a person. You may change the subject but I will hold your feet to the fire.
@myquestionis123 "Still you cannot even define what a person is"
A person is a human being. Human is the name of our species used descriptively, such as a human heart, human hair, or a human fetus. Get it now? I doubt it.
"a person, especially as distinguished from other animals or as representing the human species: living conditions not fit for human beings; a very generous human being." Have fun.
BTW so what is the difference between a human and a person?
Biology Online, Person - self-conscious being, as distinct from an animal or a thing; a moral agent; a human being; a man, woman, or child. Consider what person stands for; which, i think, is a thinking, intelligent being, that has reason and reflection. (locke)
@pirbird14 I've got no problem with that definition, except it excludes people who don't have reason and reflection, such as people who are comatose or in vegetative states.
@xxxThePeachxxx I would suggest that people who are comatose, vegetative, or even asleep have their personhood in a state of temporary suspension. We preserve their lives if there is any possibility they may re-attain their personhood. Individuals who are incapacitated such that they can no longer care for themselves are not persons under law. They are placed under legal guardianship. We have legal protection for animals because they are sentient, not persons.
@xxxThePeachxxx Please note that I offered the definition without comment. It's the only definition I can find from any science source - and it's a wiki, not an authoritative science text. The term "human being" does not have an objective, scientific definition. It is a matter of philosophy, hence of personal conscience. Freedom of conscience is foundational to democratic society. This is why I support a woman's right to decide for herself what the conceptus is.
@pirbird14 So still waiting for miss peach to tell the difference of a human being and an person. I am not letting her off the hook and noticed that in the definition you gave it says "a human being" and thus miss peach by definition that you gave believes in killing a person. Thanks.
@myquestionis123 God committed abortion, when he slaughtered all those people in Sodom and Gomorah. Sinners yes, but are you telling me that there wasn't atleast one pregnant woman with a (I use the term loosely) "human" in her uterus. What is it they say about people in glass houses?
@HPGWellscraft Don't make excuses for god. We should make our mind up across the board. If you make it illegal to have an abortion, or to be said aborter, then god broke the law before there even was one.
@cozstuart Wow you remind me of a two year old telling a parent how things should be done. BTW to you humans are divided into two groups. Those you can kill and those you should not. That sounds like a hate crime to me. But wait, those humans have no rights even though you were one years ago. I am sure you are glad that you have the right to kill a group that you use to be a part of.
@myquestionis123 Hardly killing son. I've killed, up close and personal. Believe me, a woman having a bunch of cells dragged out of her is not killing anything. Can't really grasp how you think i'm a two year old telling my parents what to do though, sounds to me liike you're trying to dodge my legitimate point that I made.
@cozstuart "Believe me, a woman having a bunch of cells dragged out of her is not killing anything." That sounds like a contradiction. If there was no "thing" growing in the womb then why do people have abortions in the first place?
@myquestionis123 That's not a contradiction at all, you're not following, pay attention. I've killed, i've shot people, i've stabbed people with a bayonet, i've called in airstrikes, that's killing. It's killing someone with a face, with a personality, with a family of their own, with memories, the list goes on. A cluster of cells is not a human, or a person. Even a fetus, they have no personality, no memories. Read my other comment, you fit the bill for that.
@cozstuart ". A cluster of cells is not a human" Then what is the unborn. So miss peach is wrong when she says it is human. I will leave a comment concerning that.
@myquestionis123 I think I should still scream at you. Plus you have some major double standards. You need to make YOUR mind up across the board. If you're on the side of the anti abortion lobby, then that means you're on the same side as people who would threaten to use biological agents against innocent people. Or to stand outside of a clinic and blow them away with a sawn off shotgun. Sound like your kind of people?
@cozstuart Oh i wasn't making excuses up for god. Don't get me wrong. But saying god performed an abortion just because a pregnant woman just happened to be in the blast radias of his orbital space laser doesn't really make sense to me. That would've been an accident. The term abortion seems like it should pertain to something more purposeful, with intent.
But how can we live in a society where the killing and euthanization of animals are looked down upon, but abortions of human foetus are found to be humane because the fetus is not a person. Animals are not people, but we still view them as deserving of rights. And the euthanization of for example, dogs in a shelter after a certain period of days, is seen to be a way of saving money or because the dog cannot be cared for. Same as a human fetus. Can't you see that we are treating humans like dogs?
UTubeLightBulb 1 week ago
@UTubeLightBulb "But how can we live in a society where the killing and euthanization of animals are looked down upon,"
It isn't looked down upon. Animals are euthanized for a variety of reasons, such as to alleviate their suffering as they are dying, or because they are dangerous. It's only a problem of ethics when healthy animals are euthanized in crowded shelters.
"but abortions of human foetus are found to be humane because the fetus is not a person."
You just answered your own question.
xxxThePeachxxx 1 week ago
Numbers 31:17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones. I Samuel 15:3 slay both man and woman, infant and suckling. 2 Kings 8:12 dash their children, and rip up their women with child. 2 Kings 15:16 all the women therein that were with child he ripped up. Isaiah 13:16 Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled and their wives ravished. Isaiah 13:18 They shall have no pity on the fruit of the womb; their eyes shall not spare children.
xamot27 2 weeks ago
@xamot27 Yes, the Bible is pretty terrible. Your point?
Nulono 2 weeks ago
@xamot27 Again that is not abortion it is judgment. Learn the difference. For example, President Obama order the strike against Bin Laden. If I would kill my enemy it would be murder but if the government does it (properly) it is to protect our nation.
myquestionis123 2 weeks ago
Religion wants to save the unborn yet would easily murder the born as soon as it disobeys its dogma!
Some states still having the death penalty are predominantly christian, yet on the death certificate it states "homicide" e.g. MURDER! But that's "an eye for an eye" right, thus justice has been served?
Lets just agree that killing a cognitive being with a fully developed central nervous system is murder, but I ask you Christians.. Was it wrong for us to murder Jesus?
Smirnoff71 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Smirnoff71 "Religion wants to save the unborn yet would easily murder the born as soon as it disobeys its dogma!" This statement I cannot take seriously. For Stalin would "murder the born as soon as it disobeys its dogma!" also. "Was it wrong for us to murder Jesus?" I do not understand your question. Please clarify.
myquestionis123 2 weeks ago
It's never okay to kill a potential human being....
TheCameraEye11 2 weeks ago
love this video,but i find that trying to convince pro-lifers from their positions i feel is futile, they must be opposed everywhere, the pro-life movement is vile sick and often very violent, they are mostly religious fanatics, and the few secular pro-lifers out there have been hoodwinked buy the religious right.these are very ignorant and mostly uneducated people,for the most party the really want to subjugate women,they are fundamentalist Christians after all so that should not be a surprise
phoboskitty 3 weeks ago
I so fucking tired of religitards and other fuckwads who think its their duty to stick their noses up every woman's vagina and tell them what they can and cannot do with it.
xephyr1000 3 weeks ago
if they made masterbation illegal especially for men we would never have any discussion about abortion. sperm are techniqually alive... i know i would be worst than hitler for spilling all of those seeds.... goooeeewwww
20jandrews 3 weeks ago
how anyone could support abortions is insane.
enuvune 3 weeks ago
quick question peach what ethinicity are you.. my guess is some cherokee
20jandrews 3 weeks ago
Ultimately, we need to take care of the people that are here now. If a woman is forced to make such a difficult decision, why not make sure it's as safe as possible to protect her health? Why are people trying to superimpose their own ethical system on the Joneses?
upabittoolate 3 weeks ago
what about still borns? why did god abort them?
xamot27 3 weeks ago
Anti-Abortionism sort of takes two forms of justification: The first is lost potential of human life and accomplishment. That is fucking retarded, I argued this in my class when we had to debate abortion. Our school had I think 500 females physically able to bear children, by that logic because none of them did have children, we lose 500 human lives, and if everyone had sex and had those 500 babies then 5 of them would statistically become huge successes and do some awesome shit for man kind...
TheRepublicOfUngeria 3 weeks ago
@TheRepublicOfUngeria ...(assuming income automatically equals achievement and doing good). How dare you take that away from humanity by not having sex!?!?!? Well it's an opportunity cost, because that means that those same women can't go forward and have children later in life, and if they did that then maybe 10 or 12 of them would grow up to be awesome successes instead of just 5. Or all of them would be well fed or have energy or a car instead of just a few, because we lived sustainably......
TheRepublicOfUngeria 3 weeks ago
@TheRepublicOfUngeria ...The next argument is a person-hood argument, which is far more subjective. Personally I see absolutely no reason to extend person-hood to fetuses. They feel less than a cow and yet we still torture them for cheapnesses sake. I see a pre-personhood argument however. If I'm in labor and I smoke I won't be doing harm to a person until that child can be born and age into person-hood, but then you should be able to be charged with abuse.
TheRepublicOfUngeria 3 weeks ago
i dont get why most creationists are against abortion. god was all for it!!! in the "great flood" god destroyed every living thing on the planet except those on the ark. there must have been hundreds of thousands of pregnant women at the time!!! there must of been lots of other pregnant women in other slaughters he condones. he even murdered the first born of all in egypt for what pharoah did!!! talk about mega-hipocrites. ahhh creationists....will you ever learn??
xamot27 3 weeks ago
@xamot27 if you read numbers 5 in the old testament, god spells out how to get an abortion :) when it warms up I'm making a picket sign with that verse and will hang out at their protests :D
recyard12x 3 weeks ago
@recyard12x lol. no shit?!?!?! do it!! ;D
xamot27 3 weeks ago
@xamot27 True that.
Bllackguard666 3 weeks ago
Well put peaches. I tried to explain this to a street preacher years ago, in front of a facility as I was walking down the street, and couldn't ignore their hypocrisy. I told them about how it is okay for religion to dictate the world, and cause death and chaos over the world in the name of god. But, removing a zygote is wrong? He didn't say anything.
Bllackguard666 3 weeks ago
@Bllackguard666 So how does that prove anything?
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 You tell me. You are the one with the burden of proof.
Bllackguard666 3 weeks ago
@Bllackguard666 You made a claim then you have the burden of proof is I recalled correctly.
myquestionis123 2 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 Like Peaches said, you're a moron. My point is: most religious people are hypocrites.
Bllackguard666 2 weeks ago
@Bllackguard666 Wow dud,e that is an attack on the man but not a real argument. Even for the sake of discussion of this video if your premise was right "My point is: most religious people are hypocrites."
that premise does not prove or disprove the premise that induced abortions are the killing of an Innocent human being without proper justification. The funny thing is miss peach in other videos blast others for only attacking the person and not the argument.
myquestionis123 2 weeks ago
I'm out. Gotta get some kind of homework done today. ^_^ Cozstuart, myquestionis123, Peach, it's been a pleasure conversing with you all today. Peace. :D
HPGWellscraft 3 weeks ago
@HPGWellscraft So long. I will also leave and maybe miss peach could decide once and for all what she believes and actually state why. I did like the other conversation. Thanks.
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
"If you're on the side of the anti abortion lobby, then that means you're on the same side as people who would threaten to use biological agents against innocent people. Or to stand outside of a clinic and blow them away with a sawn off shotgun"
Prove it. Give me two examples that proves that I have done that. You made the claim now back it up.
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123
"You're never called upon to prove a negative, thats a law of logic" -Ayn Rand
lxAgnosticxl 3 weeks ago
@lxAgnosticxl Sorry if someone makes a claim they need to back it up. BTW would that happen in a court of law?
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123
Yes it would and it does , innocent BEFORE PROVEN guilty. The claim beginng made (that they are guilty) is taken as false until proven true.
lxAgnosticxl 3 weeks ago
@lxAgnosticxl Then that should be applied to me. Why is one saying I would
"If you're on the side of the anti abortion lobby, then that means you're on the same side as people who would threaten to use biological agents against innocent people. Or to stand outside of a clinic and blow them away with a sawn off shotgun"
and expect me to go along with that?
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
BTW in your video I don't recall you saying anything about a person being a human being, So now that I see that you video did not define a person but you did not show the difference in your view between a human and human being even though you yourself used the word human as a person. Please make up your mind what you believe.So when exactly does a "human" become a "human being" and why did you use human in a comment to me if they are a person (referring to a slave).
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 " So now that I see that you video did not define a person but you did not show the difference in your view between a human and human being even though you yourself used the word human as a person."
That video was recorded over two years ago. Back then, I was naive enough to assume that the average person understood the difference between what is human and what a person is. Shame on me, huh?
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx "Back then, I was naive enough to assume that the average person understood the difference between what is human and what a person is. Shame on me, huh?"
If the supreme court argued about what is a person then why in the world would you think people would agree on your premise?
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 "If the supreme court argued about what is a person then why in the world would you think people would agree on your premise?"
Fair enough. If the Supreme Court had to dumb it down for people, then I should have known in advance that I would have to do the same.
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx "If the Supreme Court had to dumb it down for people"
How did they dumb it down?
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 "How did they dumb it down?"
*sigh* For fuck's sake, don't argue something if you have no knowledge of it.
They defined a person has one who has "individual human rights." To say that a developmental organism the size of a pinhead has rights would require them to be counted as part of the population, which is IMPOSSIBLE, as many women miscarry without ever having known they were pregnant. In addition, they are not viable, no matter what what may possibly occur in the future.
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx "*sigh* For fuck's sake, don't argue something if you have no knowledge of it."
I guess your knowledge of the average guy is lacking but you still did the video.
"They defined a person has one who has "individual human rights.""
So what. How were slave defined? Did that make it right?
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 Defined* and besides you bad grammar, what does slavery have to do with a zygote? If you knew biology, you would answer your own question. Slaves can fight back, as most are adults, slaves can also speak and perform work. So, you argument fails.
Bllackguard666 3 weeks ago
@Bllackguard666 " what does slavery have to do with a zygote?" You might want to look at the other comments before jumping in.
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 No, not really. I don't make the claims of a cosmic friend.
Bllackguard666 3 weeks ago
@Bllackguard666 You did make a claim sure.
myquestionis123 2 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 "So what. How were slave defined? Did that make it right?"
Slaves didn't have human rights... THEY WERE SLAVES. What are you going on about?
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx That is the point. The unborn of today are in some ways being treated as the slaves of yesterday.
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 "The unborn of today are in some ways being treated as the slaves of yesterday."
Oh give me a goddamn break. Slaves were undoubtedly people; there's no question about their rights as human beings were being violated. A zygote has no sentience, no viability, not even a real form. When you start advocating issuing death certificates for every single miscarriage, then come back and drone on about how pinhead-sized eukaryotes are people.
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx It apparently wasn't unquestionable, since it was questioned frequently. Why are viability and sentience relevant? Also, no form? What, are they some sort of energy beings?
The first half of your last sentence is an ad hominem attack; what one guy on the Internet is advocating has no bearing on the personhood or nonpersonhood of an embryo or fetus. I also love how you try to use "eukaryotes" in a dehumanizing way, when all it means is that an organism's cells contain organelles.
Nulono 3 weeks ago
@Nulono Good stufff. I need to get going. Miss peach will probable call more people a retard since she can't present a real case.
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@Nulono "It apparently wasn't unquestionable, since it was questioned frequently."
It was a matter of economics for the proponents of slavery.
"Why are viability and sentience relevant?"
Because viability and sentience are both major factors in what we are as human beings.
"I also love how you try to use "eukaryotes" in a dehumanizing way,"
That was simply your interpretation. And since we all begin in this way, why would I consider it something dehumanizing at all? Try to make some sense.
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx It was partially economics, but there were also many people who viewed Africans as subhuman. If it were simply economics, the laws wouldn't've specified race.
Could you clarify what you mean by "sentience"? Viability and sentience are properties held by some humans, but they're in no way what make us human.
The way you used the word certainly implied a level of condescension. Why even use the word if not?
Nulono 2 weeks ago
@Nulono I am sure before the slaves got freedom people were saying. "I can't afford to run my business without slaves. Who are you to tell me what to do?" The one change is simple. It is a new group that can't defend and thus people treat them subhuman.
myquestionis123 2 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx Certainly many people did not believe that "their rights as human beings were being violated". Abolitionists did, but it was hardly a consensus position for a long time. The VA Supreme Court, for instance, ruled in 1858 that slaves were not persons in the eye of the law.
Nulono 2 weeks ago
@Nulono I have been trying to tell her that also. Thanks for sharing that.
myquestionis123 2 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx "Oh give me a goddamn break. Slaves were undoubtedly people;"
Now but were they back then?
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 "Now but were they back then?"
Of course. Nobody denied this. They were counted as 3/5 of a full person in population counts, which is beyond insulting, but nobody denied the fact that they were people. They were considered lesser peoples.
As for zygotes and blastocysts and embryos, however, there's no debate in biology. They're not people.
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx "They defined a person has one who has "individual human rights."
Really yet you talk about the difference between a human and human being. Now you quote them using human and not human being. I love this. Wow. this is toooooooo good to be true.
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 "Really yet you talk about the difference between a human and human being. "
Because you don't understand what the terms mean. I'll repeat for the last time:
The term "HUMAN" is descriptive of our species, i.e. a human heart, human skin, human hair, etc.
The term "HUMAN BEING" is synonymous with the term PERSON.
Oh my god... it's like talking to a retarded 5 yr old...
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
I've just read some of the crimes that have been committed by the anit abortiong lobby against people and property that provide abortion. These crimes include property damage, arson, bombing, kidnapping, assault, attempted murder, murder, and the one that shocked me most.....the threatend use of anthrax of which 655 offence have been committed. So abortion's off, but biological warfare is fine.
cozstuart 3 weeks ago
@cozstuart So how does those crimes make abortion moral? If some guy killed a muslin that would be a crime. If that muslin that was killed beheaded that guys wife and children would that mean that what the muslin did was right? The real question is what is the unborn.
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
So if a woman has the right (BTW where does that come from) to kill the unborn without proper justification, does God have the right to be God? So who has the right to do what and why?
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 Well, if there were a god i'm sure he would. Of course we have the right to be who we are. But since god doesn't actually exist, he can't be god. It's the existence part that Peach and others are taking issue with.
HPGWellscraft 3 weeks ago
@HPGWellscraft " But since god doesn't actually exist, he can't be god. It's the existence part that Peach and others are taking issue with."
So if there was no God then you support the right to kill a human being without proper justification right?
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 "So if there was no God then you support the right to kill a human being without proper justification right?" It is justified by the mother. Do you support euthanasia of animals?
splicedenergy 3 weeks ago
"So if there was no God then you support the right to kill a human being without proper justification right?" Well as i've already said, i myself am opposed to abortion and would never ask someone to have one. But i'm opposed to lots of things that i don't think should be illegal. A persons, or group of persons, opinions should not be made into laws. But i do support their rights to have abortions, yes. There are just so many ambiguous words in there; "right", "human being", "justification"
HPGWellscraft 3 weeks ago
@HPGWellscraft Now let me ask a question. Why are you opposed to abortion?
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 Why am i opposed to Abortion? Because i do see it as a person, but thats me. I can't force everyone to see things the way i do and wouldn't even if i could.
HPGWellscraft 3 weeks ago
@HPGWellscraft So you seem to be saying that you believe that abortion is wrong because an abortion kills a person and that a mother should have the right to kill a person. Is that correct?
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 "So you seem to be saying that you believe that abortion is wrong because an abortion kills a person and that a mother should have the right to kill a person. Is that correct?" Yeah, pretty much.
HPGWellscraft 3 weeks ago
@HPGWellscraft So I am personal opposed to miss peach getting raped but would that be wrong to force my beliefs on others that would like to? I guess I am intolerant to that but should I allow others to make up their own minds and keep my beliefs to myself?
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 "So I am personal opposed to miss peach getting raped but would that be wrong to force my beliefs on others that would like to? I guess I am intolerant to that but should I allow others to make up their own minds and keep my beliefs to myself?" No, of course not, but rape is pretty straight forward, unlike abortion. What about statutory rape? If a 30yr old has consensual sex with a 16 yr old should he/she be charged with rape? Even if they're in love?
HPGWellscraft 3 weeks ago
@HPGWellscraft As long as the child/fetus/embryo/whatever is a part of the mothers physical being, it's ultimately her decision. If siamese twins wanted to get separated would you stop them? That is how god made them, after all.
HPGWellscraft 3 weeks ago
@HPGWellscraft Okay you support the killing of a person. I don't agree but that is your belief. Hey muslin's kills gays but that is their belief not mine. I can't change your heart.
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 "Okay you support the killing of a person. I don't agree but that is your belief. Hey muslin's kills gays but that is their belief not mine." I also support the death penalty. Obviously i don't support killing gays or anybody because to race, nationality or religious beliefs, but i'm also in no position to define "life" or tell someone what they're rights are. As much as i would like to think differently, HPGWellscraft is not the moral arbiter of the universe.
HPGWellscraft 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 "Okay you support the killing of a person."
A fetus is not a person. Your problem is that you are so ignorant of induced abortions that you automatically assume that they are conducted as elective procedures. Women who have ectopic pregnancies MUST have them terminated. If she doesn't, she'll die. When faced with such a situation, then what? Are you in favor of allowing a woman, who is undoubtedly a person, die?
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx In his defense i believe this comment was made in response to my statement regarding my belief that a fetus counts as a person.
HPGWellscraft 3 weeks ago
@HPGWellscraft I know, and that's why I'm asking him about situations in which a fetus MUST be terminated. What then? Is it still a person? If so, how could one rationalize killing a "baby" to save the mother?
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx Understood and very true. Although i don't believe the status of personhood should be conditional on convenience (not that you were saying that. Just sayin') but if the woman is going to die, unless she wants to give her live to carry out the pregnancy, it seems that there would be very little choice.
HPGWellscraft 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx I will try to make this as clear as possible. I believe that induce abortion is wrong. In fact an induce abortion is the killing of an innocent human being without proper justification. That is my belief. I have not presented a case for that but you have presented yours. I do believe self defense is the proper justification of an induced abortion. My evidence is simple. If someone or something endangers a person's life then one can defend and even kill another person.
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 "I do believe self defense is the proper justification of an induced abortion"
Self-defense? That's not the case of ectopic pregnancies. Self-defense implies preservation of life and limb against an attack; there's no attack here. It's not like the blastocyst made a conscious decision to implant itself outside of the uterus... you know why? Because a blastocyst/zygote/embryo cannot make a conscious decision... BECAUSE IT'S NOT A PERSON.
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 "So I am personal opposed to miss peach getting raped but would that be wrong to force my beliefs on others that would like to?"
So now you're comparing rape to abortion? Rape, which is undoubtedly an act of violence, as opposed to induced abortions, which are LITERALLY the medical equivalent of a spontaneous miscarriage... there's something seriously wrong with your brain if you honestly can't see the difference.
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx Then show me unless you are not smart enough to do so.
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 I just did! You simply aren't smart enough to comprehend words.
Rape = act of violence.
Abortion = medical procedure, induced equivalent of miscarriage.
I can't dumb it down any more for you. If you still can't see the difference, then you're just a retard.
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx "Rape = act of violence" So if a guys slaps you then you can kill him right?
"Abortion = medical procedure, induced equivalent of miscarriage."
How so? So is self defense and killing an abortion doctor is the same?
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 "So if a guys slaps you then you can kill him right?"
Okay, you're a moron.
"How so? So is self defense and killing an abortion doctor is the same?"
Yep... huge moron.
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@HPGWellscraft And also if i can get just a tad nihilistic here for a second, right and wrong, good and evil, are mostly abstract concepts that change so often people can hardly keep up with them anymore. And Even if abortion is without a doubt wrong, what about overpopulation?What about finite resources? Should we let these children be born so they can be poor and miserable just like the rest of us? Drugaddicts? sexslaves? starving? Cold? I'd support sterilization before making abortion illegal
HPGWellscraft 3 weeks ago
@HPGWellscraft So can you please respond to my question of why you are opposed to abortion?
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 "So if a woman has the right (BTW where does that come from)"
From us. Where else would it come from?
"to kill the unborn without proper justification"
The "unborn" is a zygote, or an embryo, or an early-stage fetus. Women don't need to justify their actions to anyone, thus protecting their rights to privacy.
"does God have the right to be God?"
God isn't real. You may as well ask me if the baby fairy has a right to be a baby fairy. Join reality, please.
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx Privacy does not mean not having to justify your actions.
Nulono 3 weeks ago
@Nulono "Privacy does not mean not having to justify your actions."
Yes, actually it does.
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx "From us. Where else would it come from?" What about the Declaration of Independence?
"The "unborn" is a zygote, or an embryo, or an early-stage fetus. Women don't need to justify their actions to anyone, thus protecting their rights to privacy."
So can a woman kill a two year old as long as it is done in private?
"God isn't real. You may as well ask me if the baby fairy has a right to be a baby fairy. Join reality, please."
I have it called defending the unborn.
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 ""From us. Where else would it come from?" What about the Declaration of Independence?"
Um... no. The Declaration of Independence is not a framework of law. It was just a letter written to the King of England.
"So can a woman kill a two year old as long as it is done in private?"
No, that would be called murder. Unlike an embryo, a two-year-old child is a person, protected under the law.
*facepalm*
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx "The Declaration of Independence is not a framework of law. It was just a letter written to the King of England." then why do you quote from it and why do gay advocates do?
"No, that would be called murder. Unlike an embryo, a two-year-old child is a person, protected under the law."
So were slaves protected under the law?
So the real question is what is the unborn
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 "then why do you quote from it and why do gay advocates do?"
And when did I do that?
"So were slaves protected under the law?"
Aside from the fact that they were slaves, in some cases, they were. But they were not protected as human beings in their own right. They were property, and if someone killed a slave, then it was a crime against his/her owner.
"So the real question is what is the unborn"
A zygote, or an embryo, or an early-stage fetus.
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx "So the real question is what is the unborn"
A zygote, or an embryo, or an early-stage fetus."
So you are the one making the claim in the video so all I am asking is for logical reasons to state your premise. I do not believe " if it has to be explained to you why" is evidence but only ridicule. All I ask to to back up your claims. Fair enough?
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 "So you are the one making the claim in the video so all I am asking is for logical reasons to state your premise."
Logical reasoning is derived from reality: they are zygotes, or embryos, or early-stage fetuses. That's not my opinion; these are the facts. And as such, my opinion about the legality of induced abortions is based upon these facts.
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx Yes they are infants, toddlers, children, adults which are facts. Still you need to prove your point.
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 "Yes they are infants, toddlers, children, adults which are facts. Still you need to prove your point."
Then they are not, using your own term, the "unborn." Those individuals have been born, and their personhood is undeniable. But comparing a fully-developed human being to an embryo barely bigger than being microscopic is simply moronic.
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx at what point in the 9 months of pregnancy would you deem an abortion to be no longer just a scrambling of an egg? I am trying to figure out what your line in the sand is. Is it once the fetus has self awareness or feelings and emotions? or only once they come out are they truly a person?
zeusvalentine 3 weeks ago
@zeusvalentine "at what point in the 9 months of pregnancy would you deem an abortion to be no longer just a scrambling of an egg?"
Ehh... sounds like someone has a limited knowledge of induced abortions. Most of them are not so invasive, and require nothing more than taking a pill. So try rephrasing your question without the venom and ignorance.
"Is it once the fetus has self awareness or feelings and emotions?"
Infants don't have self-awareness, so that one certainly doesn't apply.
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx I think the question was perfectly valid. You just chose not to answer it.
zeusvalentine 3 weeks ago
@zeusvalentine "I think the question was perfectly valid. You just chose not to answer it."
Actually, the question is not valid, because it contains an incorrect assumption of what an induced abortion is. It would be like asking me why I think we evolved from monkeys.
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx No you just want to answer a hard question.
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx My question has nothing to do with induced abortions. I want to know at what point does Peach think an abortion, induced or otherwise, should not be performed. c'mon Peach - tell us where you stand.
zeusvalentine 3 weeks ago
@zeusvalentine I am going but keep her feet to the fire There was a time when she was alive and people would have no problem killing her back then as an unborn baby. The real question is when does someone become a human being. I think she will continue to play dodge ball.
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 "I am going but keep her feet to the fire There was a time when she was alive and people would have no problem killing her back then as an unborn baby."
Idiot, what would it matter to me if the pregnancy that eventually led to me had been terminated? I'll say it again: making an argument on the prospect of the billions of "people" who have never existed is RETARDED. You may as well as be against birth control. Fucking moron.
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xxxThePeachxxx "Idiot, what would it matter to me if the pregnancy that eventually led to me had been terminated?" Wow you just contradicted yourself and didn't even know that you did. So what was it before it was you during your mother's pregnancy? At what point did it become you? If it was not you but human then who was it?
myquestionis123 2 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx "I'll say it again: making an argument on the prospect of the billions of "people" who have never existed is RETARDED" That is a contradiction. If you never existed then you can never be terminated.
myquestionis123 2 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx ". You may as well as be against birth control. Fucking moron."
You mentioned that all of us want to reduce abortions. Why? if there is no taking of a Innocent life then why would you care? In fact why not have people get pregnant just to have abortions for the fun of it if there is no human being killed in the process?
myquestionis123 2 weeks ago
@zeusvalentine "My question has nothing to do with induced abortions. I want to know at what point does Peach think an abortion, induced or otherwise, should not be performed."
First off, there's only two kinds of abortions: spontaneous and induced. It would naturally follow that a spontaneous abortion cannot be "performed." And secondly, I would leave the "when" up to the woman and her doctor's ability to perform one safely. It's nobody else's business from a medical standpoint.
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx she finally answered - yeah! you are an absolutist. See folks, Peach thinks an induced abortion at 8 months is ok. Her line in the sand is whether or not the baby is inside or outside the body. that's it. Personally, I couldn't answer the question with such definite point.
zeusvalentine 3 weeks ago
@zeusvalentine
zygotes and blastocysts and embryos are all in the first trimester.
An 8 month old feetus is in the third trimester. can't figure out the difference?
It must be a confusing world to you were you, huh?
lxAgnosticxl 3 weeks ago
@lxAgnosticxl well, according to Peach, there is no difference.
The only thing confusing about this world is why the fuck people like you think you are smarter than everyone else.
zeusvalentine 3 weeks ago
@zeusvalentine
I never said I was , I just don't have my head up my arse.
"according to Peach, there is no difference."
*SIGH*
@3:50 She did make a difference Watch the video , before replying to it.
lxAgnosticxl 3 weeks ago
@lxAgnosticxl I am not responding to what she says in this video. this goes back further to when I asked at what point in the 9 months of pregnancy would an abortion not be acceptable. She didn't answer the question, then she did, stating that it was up to the woman and doctor. By that logic, an abortion at 8 months with the Doctor and woman checking off, would be ok. Then she says that isn't what she said and that I was a lying sack of shit. I expected more honesty from Peach
zeusvalentine 3 weeks ago
@zeusvalentine
I can't speak for her and nether can you.
"She didn't answer the question, then she did."
So she did answer the question, Then why are you complaining?
"By that logic, etc."
By that logic would mean you're interpreting what shes saying, so infact she didn't say that you're putting words in her mouth.
The way I view it and maybe Peach is somewhere along these lines is that an embryo is not a person it doesn't have a persona ( a state of self awareness).
lxAgnosticxl 3 weeks ago
@zeusvalentine I agree keep it up.
myquestionis123 2 weeks ago
@zeusvalentine "See folks, Peach thinks an induced abortion at 8 months is ok."
That's not what I said, you lying sack of shit. I said that it should be left up to the woman and her doctor's opinion and ability to perform the procedure safely. And since I'm not a medical profession (and YOU sure as fuck aren't one either), neither of us can make a determination of when the limit should be.
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx you had finally answered the question. now we are back to square one again. you are a debater. I get that.
Abortions are always safer than giving birth silly bear.
Even if you don't answer my question here, make sure you answer it to yourself.
zeusvalentine 3 weeks ago
@zeusvalentine "you had finally answered the question. now we are back to square one again. "
Don't blame me because you can't understand words. I never said that any specific gestational age was the cut-off point. That's what you were trying to weasel out of me, but I'm honest enough to admit that I'm not qualified to provide a definitive answer. I'll leave medical decisions up to patients and their doctors. I respect privacy. You clearly don't.
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx so we are back to you not answering the question.
zeusvalentine 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx actually, you did answer the question. (sorry, I am doing 3 things at once). So, you don't know when the cutoff should be. You know what Peach - me neither.
zeusvalentine 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx What a joke. You do a video blasting those against abortions and can't take a stand on when the cut off point it. You jelly logic cannot hold a good argument.
Second respect privacy is a joke. So do you respect the privacy of a guy that beats his wife up black and blue each night? Wow you sure are something.
myquestionis123 2 weeks ago
@zeusvalentine I agree. She can only respond to calling someone a retard then answering a question.
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 I think she is starting to think about what she is saying. I was once exactly like her. No easy answers.
zeusvalentine 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx Self-awareness as we generally understand it would require substantial neocortical development, which seems to occur at or near week 23. In the premodern era, self-awareness was most often presumed to occur at quickening, which generally takes place around the 20th week of pregnancy.
zeusvalentine 3 weeks ago
@zeusvalentine "Self-awareness as we generally understand it would require substantial neocortical development, which seems to occur at or near week 23."
The consensus among psychologists is that an infant does not become self-aware until around the age of 1 year.
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx that's from the mirror test where the infant is expected to recognize themselves in a mirror. the guy who came up with that was an idiot.
zeusvalentine 3 weeks ago
@zeusvalentine I'm not talking about the mirror test. I'm talking about self-awareness: that is, sense of self, understanding that you exist. And as I said, the consensus among psychologists is that an infant cannot grasp this concept until he/she is about a year old.
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@zeusvalentine The neocortex does not begin to develop until week 26. The nerves which connect it to the central nervous system do not begin to establish connections until week 29. These nerves grow rapidly until week 35. At the same time, the uterus and the fetal brain produce chemicals which keep the fetus unconscious until birth. The passage through the birth canal would otherwise be excruciatingly painfull, as the skull is squeezed out of shape during the process.
pirbird14 2 weeks ago
I saw this video awhile back, and liked it. Peach, you are so eloquent and intelligent you can almost convince me of things that i don't even agree with. (pro-life, but don't think abortion should be illegal) , But i have to say, i think myquestionis123's analogy, drawing a parallel between abortion and slavery, is a valid comparison as both could be construed as moral/ethical issues. :)
HPGWellscraft 3 weeks ago
Still waiting for miss peach to tell us the difference between a human being and a person. Until she can she supports the killing of a human being without proper justification I will continue to remind her.
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 "Still waiting for miss peach to tell us the difference between a human being and a person."
There is no difference between a human BEING and a person; the two terms are synonymous. You were asking me what the difference between the term HUMAN and the term person. I've answered twice already. If your reading comprehension is that bad, that's not my problem.
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx You answered as to "human" the adjective, not "a human", the noun.
Nulono 3 weeks ago
Human moral concepts rely on crisply defined boundaries and definitions, e.g. what is a person. Nature has no obligation to behave in accordance with these.
j2eeguru 3 weeks ago
abortions are biodegradable! Pro choice FTW
undeadmx 3 weeks ago
. You said that the unborn is alive and a human. However, you believe it is alright to kill a human. Thus you have divided humans into two groups. Those that can be killed and those that should not. If you believe that a human has to be a person then what is the difference between the two and why? Finally, if you can justify the killing of millions of humans because they are not a person, how come you never defined what a person is? Please think through your position next time.
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 "You said that the unborn is alive and a human"
Skin is also alive and human. Does that make it a person? Nope. You are confusing the term "human" with "human being." Try again.
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx Still you cannot even define what a person is and what the difference between a human and a person. You may change the subject but I will hold your feet to the fire.
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 "Still you cannot even define what a person is"
A person is a human being. Human is the name of our species used descriptively, such as a human heart, human hair, or a human fetus. Get it now? I doubt it.
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx How about this definition
"a person, especially as distinguished from other animals or as representing the human species: living conditions not fit for human beings; a very generous human being." Have fun.
BTW so what is the difference between a human and a person?
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 "BTW so what is the difference between a human and a person?"
I must be talking to myself...
I'll just copy and paste my previous post:
A person is a human being. The term "human" is the name of our species used descriptively, such as a human heart, human hair, or a human fetus.
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123
How about this definition:
Biology Online, Person - self-conscious being, as distinct from an animal or a thing; a moral agent; a human being; a man, woman, or child. Consider what person stands for; which, i think, is a thinking, intelligent being, that has reason and reflection. (locke)
pirbird14 3 weeks ago
@pirbird14 I've got no problem with that definition, except it excludes people who don't have reason and reflection, such as people who are comatose or in vegetative states.
xxxThePeachxxx 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx if you really want to have fun with the christians, you can point out that even GOD gave permissions to get abortions. Numbers 5.
recyard12x 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx I would suggest that people who are comatose, vegetative, or even asleep have their personhood in a state of temporary suspension. We preserve their lives if there is any possibility they may re-attain their personhood. Individuals who are incapacitated such that they can no longer care for themselves are not persons under law. They are placed under legal guardianship. We have legal protection for animals because they are sentient, not persons.
pirbird14 3 weeks ago
@xxxThePeachxxx Please note that I offered the definition without comment. It's the only definition I can find from any science source - and it's a wiki, not an authoritative science text. The term "human being" does not have an objective, scientific definition. It is a matter of philosophy, hence of personal conscience. Freedom of conscience is foundational to democratic society. This is why I support a woman's right to decide for herself what the conceptus is.
pirbird14 3 weeks ago
@pirbird14 So still waiting for miss peach to tell the difference of a human being and an person. I am not letting her off the hook and noticed that in the definition you gave it says "a human being" and thus miss peach by definition that you gave believes in killing a person. Thanks.
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 God committed abortion, when he slaughtered all those people in Sodom and Gomorah. Sinners yes, but are you telling me that there wasn't atleast one pregnant woman with a (I use the term loosely) "human" in her uterus. What is it they say about people in glass houses?
cozstuart 3 weeks ago
@cozstuart I think you may be stretching it a bit. I wouldn't call an indirect victim of Sodom and Gomorah an Abortion. :/
HPGWellscraft 3 weeks ago
@HPGWellscraft Don't make excuses for god. We should make our mind up across the board. If you make it illegal to have an abortion, or to be said aborter, then god broke the law before there even was one.
cozstuart 3 weeks ago
@cozstuart Wow you remind me of a two year old telling a parent how things should be done. BTW to you humans are divided into two groups. Those you can kill and those you should not. That sounds like a hate crime to me. But wait, those humans have no rights even though you were one years ago. I am sure you are glad that you have the right to kill a group that you use to be a part of.
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 Hardly killing son. I've killed, up close and personal. Believe me, a woman having a bunch of cells dragged out of her is not killing anything. Can't really grasp how you think i'm a two year old telling my parents what to do though, sounds to me liike you're trying to dodge my legitimate point that I made.
cozstuart 3 weeks ago
@cozstuart "Believe me, a woman having a bunch of cells dragged out of her is not killing anything." That sounds like a contradiction. If there was no "thing" growing in the womb then why do people have abortions in the first place?
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 That's not a contradiction at all, you're not following, pay attention. I've killed, i've shot people, i've stabbed people with a bayonet, i've called in airstrikes, that's killing. It's killing someone with a face, with a personality, with a family of their own, with memories, the list goes on. A cluster of cells is not a human, or a person. Even a fetus, they have no personality, no memories. Read my other comment, you fit the bill for that.
cozstuart 3 weeks ago
@cozstuart ". A cluster of cells is not a human" Then what is the unborn. So miss peach is wrong when she says it is human. I will leave a comment concerning that.
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 She didn't say it was human though, again, pay attention. I feel like I should be screaming that at you. She said clearly, EMBRYO.
cozstuart 3 weeks ago
@cozstuart Twice she mentioned human one at about 5:15 of the video. So you should not scream and watch it again.
myquestionis123 3 weeks ago
@myquestionis123 I think I should still scream at you. Plus you have some major double standards. You need to make YOUR mind up across the board. If you're on the side of the anti abortion lobby, then that means you're on the same side as people who would threaten to use biological agents against innocent people. Or to stand outside of a clinic and blow them away with a sawn off shotgun. Sound like your kind of people?
cozstuart 3 weeks ago
@cozstuart Oh i wasn't making excuses up for god. Don't get me wrong. But saying god performed an abortion just because a pregnant woman just happened to be in the blast radias of his orbital space laser doesn't really make sense to me. That would've been an accident. The term abortion seems like it should pertain to something more purposeful, with intent.
HPGWellscraft 3 weeks ago