Well, based on this... you're saying they can survive on their own AFTER they're out of your body? Because that is not true as well. I've yet to see a baby survive out of the womb on it's own without the care of another person or species (myths of lore and such). Even outside of your body, it doesn't cease to be yours. It's still your kid. Children will be parasites until they move out of your house. From birth, they will drain you of your mind, body, food, home, and every resource you can possibly supply them. We're all growth of cells. Our cells keep growing even after birth. Hell, even after we die, hair and nail cells grow. So the whole "it's just cells" argument is a moot point. It's like saying we're something completely different outside of a womb. Wrong. We're still a bunch of cells. One other thing... There are many people that can't live on their own without an apparatus. Iron lung, pacemaker, heart stints, prosthetics, etc. Does that make them less human?

This is one of the most ridiculous arguments I see pro lifers/pro fetus people make time and again. There is one GIANT difference. Before it's born it needs MY body. No one else can feed it, nurture it, grow it, etc. Once it's born it does not need me at all anymore. Anyone can feed it, nurture it, raise it, etc. If I die when I'm 4 months pregnant the fetus dies too. If I die in childbirth the fetus will likely live. If I die when my child is 2 months old it won't affect its physical growth in any way at all.

Being unable to live on your own is also a silly argument. Very, very, very few people are 100% self sufficient. Some need pacemakers, some need someone else to grow their food or build their shelter. Unless you live in the wilderness in a cabin you built and hunt, gather, and grow your own food you are not living on your own. Does that make you less human? Of course not! The difference is that you, like that hermit in Wyoming and the man with a pacemaker are born. If you aren't yet born then yes, you are less. Even the government thinks so. There is no death certificate issues if you miscarry. If you give birth at 12:00:01am on Jan 1 you cannot claim your child as a dependent on your taxes for the previous year but if you gave birth 2 seconds earlier you could. I always laugh at the people who want the first baby of the New Year. I'd much rather have had the last baby of the old year. Those 2 seconds can be worth a pretty substantial amount of money because the government doesn't recognize it as a dependent unless it's been born.

Not a pro-lifer, nor pro choice. I said it already, I could care less what a woman does. It's her choice. Laws are in place to protect that. We are cells to begin with. If we're going to define some organism as a bunch of cells that can't survive on it's own, I'll stick to my view. If we start making test tube babies (which will happen eventually), how will we define that? Will it be human only if it comes from a person? Will it be considered abortion or disposal of cellular waste when someone doesn't want said test tube baby. It's the same *kitten* based on the "can of worms" opened. So because the gov't says it isn't based on not giving a death certificate, then it is absolute! Yes! The gov't is always right! I love how some can say "how dare the gov't deem what a woman can and cannot do with their body", but then defend that same body when it suits your view/agenda. I do like your way of thinking when it comes to taxes. It's why I timed it with my first to get that extra there at the last minute.

I am not sure how to break this to you but you are pro-choice.

The 'body' inside mine can NOT survive on it's own

this.

a fetus exists in me AT MY DISCRETION. or it doesn't. AT MY DISCRETION. end of story. that is what's unacceptible: a human being, let alone a WOMAN, having power over Life. only GOD is supposed to have power over Life, right? :noway: they used to call us (women) 'kingmakers'. for a reason.

no abortions should be off the table because sometimes they are medically necessary. the important piece here is that we make sure we stick to the 'sometimes' and 'necessary' parts. i don't think it's a huge deal because i don't think many women are running off to get abortions on a whim without really thinking about it first. i think by and large a decision to have an abortion is arrived at with much reflection and deep consideration. no one wants to have an abortion, just like no one wants to have chemotherapy. (save the flaming over what a bad analogy this is. idngaf.)

late term? well, as long as the reason is appropriate, the procedure should be available.

I am not sure how to break this to you but you are pro-choice.

Right...cuz you've known me for years and know who I am and know what I have been through and what I have voted for. Good to know people can assume what you are based on an argument on late term abortions.

I did not make any assumptions other than one where I assume you mean what you are saying. You might not like the idea of being pro-choice but you did make a pro-choice argument. I don't need to know you for years all I have to do is read what you write and make an objective assessment of what you said and then draw a logical conclusion.

Perhaps you misrepresented yourself but that would be your fault.

And yes I can figure out based on what you say whether or not you are pro-choice based on an argument about late term abortions and if you don't understand why that is then I am not sure how seriously I should take your position in the future. I cannot sum up your entire character based on that information and I have not tried to. I hope you aren't so quick to get defensive all the time.

I am not sure how to break this to you but you are pro-choice.

Right...cuz you've known me for years and know who I am and know what I have been through and what I have voted for. Good to know people can assume what you are based on an argument on late term abortions.

I did not make any assumptions other than one where I assume you mean what you are saying. You might not like the idea of being pro-choice but you did make a pro-choice argument. I don't need to know you for years all I have to do is read what you write and make an objective assessment of what you said and then draw a logical conclusion.

Perhaps you misrepresented yourself but that would be your fault.

And yes I can figure out based on what you say whether or not you are pro-choice based on an argument about late term abortions and if you don't understand why that is then I am not sure how seriously I should take your position in the future. I cannot sum up your entire character based on that information and I have not tried to. I hope you aren't so quick to get defensive all the time.

Yes. I get quite defensive all the time. It's a hobby. I also like starting fights and arguments for sh!ts and giggles. I troll sometimes, but other times, I just watch. And yes, my argument is pro-choice, doesn't necessarily mean I'm all the way on that side. Just like you aren't all the way one side of the spectrum on your beliefs and arguments. All in all, I still don't make assumptions on anyone. Regardless of what their arguments are.

You were also right about the nails and hairafter death. I stand corrected. :drinker:

I am not sure how to break this to you but you are pro-choice.

Right...cuz you've known me for years and know who I am and know what I have been through and what I have voted for. Good to know people can assume what you are based on an argument on late term abortions.

I did not make any assumptions other than one where I assume you mean what you are saying. You might not like the idea of being pro-choice but you did make a pro-choice argument. I don't need to know you for years all I have to do is read what you write and make an objective assessment of what you said and then draw a logical conclusion.

Perhaps you misrepresented yourself but that would be your fault.

And yes I can figure out based on what you say whether or not you are pro-choice based on an argument about late term abortions and if you don't understand why that is then I am not sure how seriously I should take your position in the future. I cannot sum up your entire character based on that information and I have not tried to. I hope you aren't so quick to get defensive all the time.

Yes. I get quite defensive all the time. It's a hobby. I also like starting fights and arguments for sh!ts and giggles. I troll sometimes, but other times, I just watch. And yes, my argument is pro-choice, doesn't necessarily mean I'm all the way on that side. Just like you aren't all the way one side of the spectrum on your beliefs and arguments. All in all, I still don't make assumptions on anyone. Regardless of what their arguments are.

You were also right about the nails and hair after death. I stand corrected. :drinker:

You are defensive as a hobby. You start fights and arguments flippantly, and you troll. When you aren't doing that you are just watching. I will try to remember these things should I see you posting again in the future.

We actually have to make assumptions every day just to survive. We should try to be aware of what assumptions we are making and not treat them as facts. We should also try to avoid using assumptions when they are not needed. A good assumption will be based on some sort of evidence and it will be able to survive repeated tests.

The statement, "I am not pro-life or pro-choice." doesn't really make a lot of sense. You can't be both simultaneously so the only other option remaining is to be completely apathetic toward the issue which I think is impossible if you are human. Supposing it is not and that you are completely apathetic the it doesn't make sense for you to make a post at all because in that scenario you would not care.

I feel I was rationally justified in assuming that you were pro-choice based on the content of your argument. That does not mean that you agree wholeheartedly with everything said by everyone that is pro-choice. It only means that believe a women has the right to choose.

I suppose I should have said "If you agree with what you just posted then you are pro-choice."


The hair and nails thing is a common misconception. No biggie.

And that's why the internetz rock!!! You can cause tom foolery and no one can do anything but read. I am passionate about certain things. Don't ever get me involved in a console discussion. It gets ugly. And for the record, a woman should choose what she wants to do. Now if my wife wants to abort the baby I want just to spite me, a whole other argument.

The only time I have a real problem with late term abortions... and it's because I know it's done typically for health reasons at that point... is when people do it when they find out their baby is the wrong gender... while I understand you have the right to do what you wish (and even that it doesn't happen all that often), I'm still going to be a judgy mcjudgerson about it... because I think and feel it's a callous thing to do just because it doesn't conform to your vision of your perfect family.

And to be honest, even when it's done because a test came up that the child would have an extra chromosome... because it happens quite often that those tests are wrong and all based on statistical probability. But I'm less judgy about that than I am about gender selection.

wow ive never heard of anyone doing it because of that!? they really do that?

Honestly, it doesn't happen all that often, but it does happen. I'll see if I can find some examples.

It happens a lot in countries where female children are seen as "bad".

I was talking about in Western Culture... yes, in Eastern culture it happens pretty regularly, but in Western Culture it happens pretty rarely and when it does it's usually from immigrants from Asian countries.... however, I have read a few stories (that I can't find now) about white women aborting a specific gender for whatever reason. I remember one story about a mother who aborted a twin because it was the wrong gender.... but it was a couple of years ago and I can't find the story anymore.