 02/06/2009 11:56 AM
|
JRH Executive Member
Posts: 823
Joined: 10/28/2008
|
Here two of my recent posts about the rape issue. I have yet to see a coherent response to either.
The right to life any person has does not include the right to use non consenting individuals. If you will die no one must help you simply because you require it-they have the right to refuse to help you and let you die. If you attempt to use them to continue your life then they have the right to stop you from using them by any means necessary. This applies to the rape situation because the woman did not agree to have sex, and thus she did not in any way agree to be pregnant. If she did not agree to be pregnant then the fetus has not been given consent to use her body . Therefore, abortions should be allowed for rape victims even if a fetus is a person. Denying this leads to many philosophical problems.
If you can justify violating autonomy to save lives in this case how can you argue against it in others? Why can't we force people to save lives by making them work certain jobs? Why can't we take their property from them in order to save lives? Under your proposed system, no one has the right to control their own lives if they can save someone else. Their life is owned collectively.....
There is only one reasonable position: No one has to help someone else live even if that person is an innocent. A fetus has no right to use a raped woman. To claim otherwise is to claim that a woman's autonomy is less important than the life of another. One you justify removing the autonomy of any individual without justification we can apply this principle to anything. Bill Gates has money that can save lives-let's take it! Tom can save lives by performing a certain job job-let's make him do it no matter what he wants! It is the route of slavery and tyranny.
People are self owners and can protect themselves from being used.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muHg86Mys7I
-------------------------
I have not had sex with a woman. -Augustine man-on-top vanilla sex. BORING.-LiberalChiRo The notion that human life is sacred just because it is human life is medieval. -Peter Singer
|
|
|
|
02/06/2009 01:24 PM
|
JRH Executive Member
Posts: 823
Joined: 10/28/2008
|
The silence is deafening.
-------------------------
I have not had sex with a woman. -Augustine
man-on-top vanilla sex. BORING.-LiberalChiRo
The notion that human life is sacred just because it is human life is medieval.
-Peter Singer
|
|
|
|
02/06/2009 01:26 PM
|
faithman CEO
Posts: 14867
Joined: 03/17/2005
|
Womb children are not property to be disposed of as you wish. The same was said of slaves, and was wrong, it is just as wrong to call these little persons the same.
-------------------------
http://i81.photobucket.com/alb...avater/IamaPerson2.jpg
|
|
|
|
02/06/2009 01:28 PM
|
JRH Executive Member
Posts: 823
Joined: 10/28/2008
|
Originally posted by: faithman
Womb children are not property to be disposed of as you wish. This is not my claim. Please do not strawman my position.
The same was said of slaves, and was wrong, it is just as wrong to call these little persons the same.
My claim is that if they are people then they do not have the right to use the raped woman without her consent. Please respond to my actual argument.
-------------------------
I have not had sex with a woman. -Augustine man-on-top vanilla sex. BORING.-LiberalChiRo The notion that human life is sacred just because it is human life is medieval. -Peter Singer
|
|
|
|
02/06/2009 01:30 PM
|
faithman CEO
Posts: 14867
Joined: 03/17/2005
|
Killers have to blur that line to justify their evil deeds. Darkness avoids light, because it is exposed for what it is in light. The borties want to cover their issue, and as the profetii killer has said herself," fight tooth and toenail" against the light of personhood for the womb child. Personhood is the light. The line drawn in the sand. The distinction between false and true. If things seem shadowy, it is no time to compromise. It is time to turn up the light of personhood until there is no more "what if" shadows. Just the simple fact of womb child personhood, and the final judgment of citizen jurist as to what punishment for those who destroy the preborn. That is the way it is for the born person, that is the way it should be with the womb child person.
-------------------------
http://i81.photobucket.com/alb...avater/IamaPerson2.jpg
|
|
|
|
02/06/2009 01:31 PM
|
JRH Executive Member
Posts: 823
Joined: 10/28/2008
|
Originally posted by: faithman
Killers have to blur that line to justify their evil deeds. Darkness avoids light, because it is exposed for what it is in light. The borties want to cover their issue, and as the profetii killer has said herself," fight tooth and toenail" against the light of personhood for the womb child. Personhood is the light Even if they are people my argument holds. No person has the right to use another person without consent.
-------------------------
I have not had sex with a woman. -Augustine man-on-top vanilla sex. BORING.-LiberalChiRo The notion that human life is sacred just because it is human life is medieval. -Peter Singer
|
|
|
|
02/06/2009 01:33 PM
|
faithman CEO
Posts: 14867
Joined: 03/17/2005
|
What the bortheads, and the false pro-lifers do not understand, is that there is more to life than this physical world, and our physical bodies. Our bodies are merely the containers of the precious substance Called life. Life has to have that container to express itself in the natural world. Even if the container is flawed, it still makes it possible for the miracle of life to be expressed. Our common value is not found in the container, but what is contained. The life of a womb child is equal to the life contained in all of us. The only legitimate breaking of this container, is if it has the compunction to smash other containers without cause. When you take way the ability to express life, you loose the great privilege to express your own. Evil aggression must be subdued, or no container can have any security from unjust breakage. To take away the possibility of this wonderful spark of life to be expressed, makes this world a darker place, and the rest of us containers a little more impoverished, and alone. Though the womb child is a small container, it does not lessen the value of the life it contains. If fellow containers do not value the life of the womb child container, then they have placed their personhood container in great jeopardy. Anyone who does not see that womb children are fellow human containers, containing life of equal value to their own, is a self destructive fool, drunk on the power to kill, and must be stopped for the sake of the rest of us life containers. It is the life in us that makes us equal, not our degree of ability to express it.
-------------------------
http://i81.photobucket.com/alb...avater/IamaPerson2.jpg
|
|
|
|
02/06/2009 01:34 PM
|
JRH Executive Member
Posts: 823
Joined: 10/28/2008
|
Wow, you really cannot think of a response. This is sort of sad.
-------------------------
I have not had sex with a woman. -Augustine
man-on-top vanilla sex. BORING.-LiberalChiRo
The notion that human life is sacred just because it is human life is medieval.
-Peter Singer
|
|
|
|
02/06/2009 03:01 PM
|
JRH Executive Member
Posts: 823
Joined: 10/28/2008
|
*crickets chirp*
-------------------------
I have not had sex with a woman. -Augustine
man-on-top vanilla sex. BORING.-LiberalChiRo
The notion that human life is sacred just because it is human life is medieval.
-Peter Singer
|
|
|
|
02/06/2009 03:09 PM
|
JRH Executive Member
Posts: 823
Joined: 10/28/2008
|
Originally posted by: joueravecfou
Here's a crazy idea! Let's keep bumping this thread every day for ever and ever and then maybe cut and paste it into every other thread until someone answers. That'll really be a hoot and original too!
I am not concerned with originality. Knowing that they have no response to my argument and that their positions are intellectually bankrupt is worth far more than originality.
Also, I like your posts.
-------------------------
I have not had sex with a woman. -Augustine man-on-top vanilla sex. BORING.-LiberalChiRo The notion that human life is sacred just because it is human life is medieval. -Peter Singer
|
|
|
|
02/06/2009 03:19 PM
|
Rhiannontex Executive Member
Posts: 247
Joined: 06/29/2008
|
Pregnancy is simply not like any other situation! If you refuse to donate an organ or blood or anything else to another person, you are not ACTIVELY killing them and there is always a chance that someone else can make the needed donation. To stop a pregnancy, however, you MUST actively kill the fetus. Are you truly unable to see the difference? Yes, it sucks to be pregnant from a rape, but will killing the fetus somehow magically undo the rape? Or is it simply killing the child for the sins of the father?
|
|
|
|
02/06/2009 03:29 PM
|
JRH Executive Member
Posts: 823
Joined: 10/28/2008
|
Originally posted by: Rhiannontex
Pregnancy is simply not like any other situation! If you refuse to donate an organ or blood or anything else to another person, you are not ACTIVELY killing them and there is always a chance that someone else can make the needed donation. To stop a pregnancy, however, you MUST actively kill the fetus. So? You do the same thing to stop a rape or a parasite. Those are the situations which are truly analogous. Action action is justifiable if you are already being used without consent.
Are you truly unable to see the difference? Between action and inaction? Of course I see it. The thing is-that makes no difference. The fetus is using the woman. It does not have consent. Ergo, she may take what ever actions needed to remove it-which is what I said in my OP. I never said she was going to be denying it blood or something.
Yes, it sucks to be pregnant from a rape, but will killing the fetus somehow magically undo the rape? What does this have to do with my argument?
Or is it simply killing the child for the sins of the father?
Perhaps this is the reason many women do not give the fetus consent and go through with their pregnancy. I don't care since the reasoning used by the women to give or deny consent is not important for discussions of my argument.
-------------------------
I have not had sex with a woman. -Augustine man-on-top vanilla sex. BORING.-LiberalChiRo The notion that human life is sacred just because it is human life is medieval. -Peter Singer
|
|
|
|
02/06/2009 03:30 PM
|
JRH Executive Member
Posts: 823
Joined: 10/28/2008
|
Thank you for at least attempting at counter argument. That's more than most of the others can say .
-------------------------
I have not had sex with a woman. -Augustine
man-on-top vanilla sex. BORING.-LiberalChiRo
The notion that human life is sacred just because it is human life is medieval.
-Peter Singer
|
|
|
|
02/06/2009 03:31 PM
|
faithman CEO
Posts: 14867
Joined: 03/17/2005
|
Take a glass of milk, and add a few drops of arsnic. Now how much of the glass is milk, and how much is poison? Just a few drops of pro-death poison makes one pro-death, no matter how much good pro-life milk is in your glass. To vow to fight personhood for the womb child, for what ever reason, is deadly borthead poison. It is no act of "compassion" to ignore that fact.
-------------------------
http://i81.photobucket.com/alb...avater/IamaPerson2.jpg
|
|
|
|
02/06/2009 03:35 PM
|
JRH Executive Member
Posts: 823
Joined: 10/28/2008
|
Originally posted by: faithman
Take a glass of milk, and add a few drops of arsnic. Now how much of the glass is milk, and how much is poison? Just a few drops of pro-death poison makes one pro-death, no matter how much good pro-life milk is in your glass. To vow to fight personhood for the womb child, for what ever reason, is deadly borthead poison. It is no act of "compassion" to ignore that fact.
How does this relate to my thread?
-------------------------
I have not had sex with a woman. -Augustine man-on-top vanilla sex. BORING.-LiberalChiRo The notion that human life is sacred just because it is human life is medieval. -Peter Singer
|
|
|
|
02/06/2009 03:45 PM
|
JRH Executive Member
Posts: 823
Joined: 10/28/2008
|
Originally posted by: Augustine
I get the rape issue.
A child in the womb is not an unnatural threat to the mother, a woman. The conceived child is not an invader. The physical relationship which allow life to flourish in the womb is a natural one. Parasitic relationships are natural, and so was rape for much of the history of humanity.
That the woman might not consciously consent to the functions which keep that unborn child alive and growing does not change the fact that she is a mother carrying a conceived child. When has anyone ever claimed otherwise?
This conceived child is a person due all the rights of other human persons. This does not include the right to use others.
Once the child is conceived, the woman may be reasonably expected to accomodate this life in her womb by caring for the health of both, until the child can be safely delivered. No, please see my post for where this type of thinking leads. You are denying her right to refuse to consent to help the fetus. This is an egregious violation of her autonomy.
This newly conceived life in the womb is a person and has the same right to live as the mother has. Does the mother have the right to use people without consent to live? No.
After the child is born, the woman is perfectly within her rights to give that child away to the proper institutions that would provide care for that child and seek a proper home for the child where they may be permently care for and loved.
The woman may not have given consent to the means and time of the conception in her womb, but that does not give her the right to cease care and terminate the life of another human person. Of course it does. She has no obligation to care for another human unless she has consented to help it. If it already using her then she can remove it.
Abortion in the case of rape should never be allowed, especially because it is a human person in the womb. The carrying of a conceived life in the womb against consent is but one of many instances where a person, through no fault of their own, finds themself in the care of another human person's safety and well being. So? Who cares about fault? Lack of consent is lack of consent.
Carrying the child to term is truly an instance and opportunity for charity and caring and healing. The unlawful act of the child's father does not reflect upon or revoke the rights of the child as a human person in any way. Caring for life is a way to control the events of a persons life by excercising human compassion rather than compounding the violence of rape with the violence of abortion. Caring for life is true personal autonomy. Please explain. This makes no sense based on the definition of autonomy.
By seeking an abortion you only turn the control of two human persons over the the rapi By choosing life, a woman dictates the terms of her personal freedom She does the same when she aborts.
and entrusts herself to the care of and compassion for the second victim of rape, the conceived child.
You seem to think that consent means nothing based on this post. If that is so then why can we not force people to do whatever we tell them to save lives or take away their property to save lives? What makes on morally permissible and the other not morally permissible?
-------------------------
I have not had sex with a woman. -Augustine man-on-top vanilla sex. BORING.-LiberalChiRo The notion that human life is sacred just because it is human life is medieval. -Peter Singer
|
|
|
|
02/06/2009 03:54 PM
|
faithman CEO
Posts: 14867
Joined: 03/17/2005
|
What the bortheads, and the false pro-lifers do not understand, is that there is more to life than this physical world, and our physical bodies. Our bodies are merely the containers of the precious substance Called life. Life has to have that container to express itself in the natural world. Even if the container is flawed, it still makes it possible for the miracle of life to be expressed. Our common value is not found in the container, but what is contained. The life of a womb child is equal to the life contained in all of us. The only legitimate breaking of this container, is if it has the compunction to smash other containers without cause. When you take way the ability to express life, you loose the great privilege to express your own. Evil aggression must be subdued, or no container can have any security from unjust breakage. To take away the possibility of this wonderful spark of life to be expressed, makes this world a darker place, and the rest of us containers a little more impoverished, and alone. Though the womb child is a small container, it does not lessen the value of the life it contains. If fellow containers do not value the life of the womb child container, then they have placed their personhood container in great jeopardy. Anyone who does not see that womb children are fellow human containers, containing life of equal value to their own, is a self destructive fool, drunk on the power to kill, and must be stopped for the sake of the rest of us life containers. It is the life in us that makes us equal, not our degree of ability to express it.
-------------------------
http://i81.photobucket.com/alb...avater/IamaPerson2.jpg
|
|
|
|
02/06/2009 04:41 PM
|
JRH Executive Member
Posts: 823
Joined: 10/28/2008
|
Originally posted by: Augustine
THE UNBORN HUMAN PERSON IN THE WOMB IS NOT A PARASITE.
I did not say it was; I merely implied that the two are analogous, which is true.
-------------------------
I have not had sex with a woman. -Augustine man-on-top vanilla sex. BORING.-LiberalChiRo The notion that human life is sacred just because it is human life is medieval. -Peter Singer
|
|
|
|
02/06/2009 04:43 PM
|
JRH Executive Member
Posts: 823
Joined: 10/28/2008
|
Augustine, your pwnage here will NEVER BE FORGOTTEN. If you can't think of a response fine, but don't try to make me believe these lame cop outs.
-------------------------
I have not had sex with a woman. -Augustine
man-on-top vanilla sex. BORING.-LiberalChiRo
The notion that human life is sacred just because it is human life is medieval.
-Peter Singer
|
|
|
|
02/06/2009 05:03 PM
|
Shenanigans VP
Posts: 3735
Joined: 02/05/2009
|
Here's the deal... I'll try and make it nice and short so you bort heads can get it.
Rape is a circumstance, albeit a very nasty, horrific circumstance.
You cannot use a circumstance to justify killing a human being, unborn or otherwise.
What's the difference between a foetus concieved in a Friday night orgy, in a loving, committed child ready relationship or in a rape?
Nothing.
Its still human, its still worthy of personhood rights and protection.
The only differences are the circumstance. If we deny the use of abortion for the friday night orgy foetus and the loving relationship foetus, then we must extend that refusal for abortion to the rape foetus.
Yeah, it sucks for the woman, I'm sure, but more and mroe evidence and women are coming out who have been raped and fallen pregnant and NOT killed their children. Victims and Victors. Go google it cos I"m sick of posting the link.
Concurrently, pregnancy from rape is very rare. Less then 1% of rapes end in pregnancy. And 97% of abortions on average for social reasons. And the other 3% include the majority of foetal abnormality, life of mother, and very rarely, the rape excuse.
Shame on you and your pro-choice to kill unborn children kin for putting women in a *****ty situation where if they don't abort their rape children people will question their stories! SHAME! May the fleas of a thousand camels infest you armpits!
-------------------------
God is Love.
The question then becomes in all of life's circumstance, "what is the loving thing to do?"
|
|
|
|
Search Topic
