- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Oklahoma lawmakers OK bill criminalizing performing abortion
Posted on 5/19/16 at 1:39 pm to Darth_Vader
Posted on 5/19/16 at 1:39 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
Even at a cluster of cells, it's still a human.
don't go jerking it in OK then. that's murdering your sperm cells.
0
Posted on 5/19/16 at 1:40 pm to Grandioso
quote:
Supremacy Clause, no?
I'm aware, my point is that this sort of thing should be handled no a state-by-state basis. Hell, most federal laws should be a state-by-state basis IMO.
Posted on 5/19/16 at 1:42 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
Even at a cluster of cells, it's still a human.
Darth, let's say a couple are having trouble conceiving a child. They decide that in vitro fertilization may be their only hope. They donate sperm and egg and create frozen embryos. Those frozen embryos are then genetically tested to determine which ones have the best viability. Now let's assume that if IVF works and the embryo takes. The couple decided that one child is enough and does not want to use the remaining frozen embryos. In your opinion, what should we do with those remaining embryos? If we somehow destroy them, is that murder?
Posted on 5/19/16 at 1:45 pm to UpToPar
quote:
If we somehow destroy them, is that murder?
duh bro. he said it himself. human cells = life. put the doctors and parents in jail!
Posted on 5/19/16 at 1:45 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
So, if a guy walks into a store and blows the back of the clerk's head out while robbing the place, would you have no problem with that since it does not involve you?
I'm perfectly fine with having an intelligent conversation about abortion, but hyperbolic comparisons aren't something I'm willing to entertain.
The problem is our beliefs are so fundamentally different, that they can not be debated.
Carry on.
Posted on 5/19/16 at 1:46 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
How does the ability to survive outside the womb constitute being the moment life begins?
How is "killing" a single-celled organism the instant it becomes "life" any different from killing a mosquito or an ant? The organism you're referring to at the moment of conception would be totally unrecognizable to you as a human being and has no brain, heart, lungs, liver, kidney or stomach.
This is distracting from the actual argument from people on the left, which is really about more than the scientific definition of life and the moment it begins.
More importantly, this bill is unquestionably unconstitutional and will be struck down. It's a waste of time and money, and just goes to show that Oklahoma is a joke of a state. Their governor is the worst governor in the nation, and their entire government is actually on an even par with Alabama's, which would seem almost impossible.
This post was edited on 5/19/16 at 1:56 pm
Posted on 5/19/16 at 1:49 pm to UpToPar
quote:
Darth, let's say a couple are having trouble conceiving a child. They decide that in vitro fertilization may be their only hope. They donate sperm and egg and create frozen embryos. Those frozen embryos are then genetically tested to determine which ones have the best viability. Now let's assume that if IVF works and the embryo takes. The couple decided that one child is enough and does not want to use the remaining frozen embryos. In your opinion, what should we do with those remaining embryos? If we somehow destroy them, is that murder?
This is one of the main reasons why I personally could not do IVF. If I am personally firmly against abortion, how is this that much different?
How can I justify to myself it's ok for one and not the other?
Granted I still think IVF is a wonderful option for other parents and am certainly not saying it needs to be outlawed by any means. But because it does involve some ethical dilemmas (for some)that are not so black and white...I'll chose to personally pass on such an option.
Posted on 5/19/16 at 1:50 pm to dbeck
quote:
The fetus develops in complexity from a mass of undifferentiated cells
quote:
That is where the 1st or 2nd trimester comes in.
8 weeks is not even the end of the 1st Trimester.
Posted on 5/19/16 at 1:50 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
Again, unless you can show me scientific proof otherwise, I contend that life begins at conception, and that life is human. One of the cornerstones of our Republic is that all people are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. The fact that human has not passed through their mother's vaginal canal does not mean those unalienable rights are voided and thus killing them without just cause before they have the chance to be born is in fact murder.
Ball is back in your court.
1. Show me the scientific proof that life begins at some point after conception
2. Show me a solid legal reason an unborn person should not have the same legal rights as all other persons.
I love how evangelical conservatards base their understanding of life for pro-choice/abortion arguments on science, and then go on to deny the existence of evolution and claim that the Earth is 3,000 years old because the Bible tells them so despite all scientific evidence to the contrary.
Hurr durr.
This post was edited on 5/19/16 at 1:52 pm
Posted on 5/19/16 at 1:51 pm to dbeck
quote:
Oklahoma lawmakers OK unconstitutional bill that will be a giant waste of time and money before it is overturned
You're probably right, but contesting federal laws in this manner are one of the few ways to get some of these things changed. If Oklahoma feels that strongly about it, let them go.
Posted on 5/19/16 at 1:53 pm to Green Chili Tiger
It's absurd people think a microscopic zygote should have human rights.
Once it develops slightly into something I see the argument, but come on.
That's one step away from saying birth control is murder.
Once it develops slightly into something I see the argument, but come on.
That's one step away from saying birth control is murder.
Posted on 5/19/16 at 1:58 pm to dbeck
quote:
1) The fetus cannot survive without the mother until very, very late in the pregnancy
21 weeks, or slightly over half way through has proven to be viable.
If the ability to live on your own is the stipulation, that doesn't occur until years into a child's development.
quote:
2) The fetus develops in complexity from a mass of undifferentiated cells.
The only think that will stop this, in the context of this discussion, is interference from an outside source. If the mother just goes about her life, she'll have a baby in 9 months. Practically speaking, that ball of cells will be a baby if you leave it alone.
Posted on 5/19/16 at 1:59 pm to TheCaterpillar
quote:
That's one step away from saying birth control is murder.
Birth control is also against the stance of the Catholic Church which is one of the biggest Pro Life figures.
"The explicit purpose of sex is procreation. Sex without at least being open to the chance of procreation is a sin."
Thank you Catholic school education.
Posted on 5/19/16 at 1:59 pm to TechDawg2007
States rights. If the free market doesn't want this, it will sort itself out.
Posted on 5/19/16 at 1:59 pm to TheCaterpillar
But didn't you see the pictures of that ugly little alien? There a fingers for God's sake. FINGERS
Posted on 5/19/16 at 2:00 pm to PrivatePublic
quote:
States rights. If the free market doesn't want this, it will sort itself out.
The states don't have the right to infringe on liberties protected by the federal constitution.
Posted on 5/19/16 at 2:01 pm to PrivatePublic
quote:
If the free market doesn't want this, it will sort itself out.
Do you know what a market is?
Posted on 5/19/16 at 2:01 pm to dbeck
quote:
Not arguing it's right, pointing out why the laws are like that.
Sure, but the law as it currently sits is asinine. Either it is or it isn't ok to kill/abort a fetus. Either the mother has or does not have the right over her body.
Picking a point between conception and birth as the threshold for when it is and is not illegal is ridiculous. The argument for it being legal up to a certain time frame can be used just as effectively for the 3rd trimester. The argument for it being illegal takes it all the way back to conception.
Posted on 5/19/16 at 2:01 pm to slackster
quote:
21 weeks, or slightly over half way through has proven to be viable
I think 25 weeks is what my sister was recently told. Even then, would require tremendous advanced medical efforts to keep the baby alive.
Posted on 5/19/16 at 2:01 pm to Belvedere
The next post after this will be the one that solves the abortion debate once and for all:
Page 4 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News