kallend 2,027 #76 June 20, 2007 Quote Okay. Now look at it from the POV of the fetus. What proof do you have that fetuses have a POV?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Royd 0 #77 June 20, 2007 Quote Do you really have any idea of the problems of prematurity, or the expense to deal with it? I have an idea. Quote Premature babies are at high risk for chronic problems, because the organs did not have time to properly develop before birth. Problems include underdeveloped lungs, underdeveloped brain, brain hemorhhage, problems regulating glucose levels, immature immune system, kidney problems, digestive tract and liver problems, such as necrotizing enterocolitis. Babies born before 28 weeks are at a high risk for cerebral palsy, mental retardation, epilepsy and blindness. I will now argue the other side for a minute. Liberals are big on science for science sake, so we need every opportunity to expand our knowledge and technology. And, hey, the child was going to die anyway, so why not use it to our advantage. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Royd 0 #78 June 20, 2007 QuoteDefine viability, please. To be able to live in a particular climate or environment. If the child can live, even in the artificial evironment of a neonatal unit , until it can survive on its own, it should be given a chance to reach its full potential. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Royd 0 #79 June 20, 2007 Tunnel vision for sure. QuoteAbortion is outlawed = crime, homelessness rates go up = society at large suffers/pays.You missed one. The Socialist party has a lot more voters to put on the govt. dole. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #80 June 20, 2007 QuoteTunnel vision for sure. QuoteAbortion is outlawed = crime, homelessness rates go up = society at large suffers/pays.You missed one. The Socialist party has a lot more voters to put on the govt. dole. Are you claiming socialists are pro-life then, so they get more voters?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Royd 0 #81 June 20, 2007 Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Abortion is outlawed = crime, homelessness rates go up = society at large suffers/pays. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You missed one. The Socialist party has a lot more voters to put on the govt. dole. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- QuoteAre you claiming socialists are pro-life then, so they get more voters? Not hardly, but they have missed a grand opportunity. They could have had 40 million more subjects, claiming that they saved their lives. The ultimate victim! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mijnjiku 0 #82 June 20, 2007 QuoteQuoteThere's nothing to get in to. You made a contradictory statement. You can't protect the "right" of an unborn child to live without infringing upon the "right" of the mother to choose whether or not to carry the pregnancy. If the child must live, then the woman must carry. If the woman must carry then she logically has no choice. Canuck was just pointing this out. You need to refine your statement because pro-lifers can't take shelter in the camp of protecting the woman's rights. The mother had the choice whether or not to have sex and use protection. Be prepared for the risks (consequences) that come along with the reward (actions).If only decisions were all 1 layer deep. Why would you punish someone for making a bad decision by taking away their ability to make a subsequent decision that is better than the alternative? Two wrongs don't make a right. Let them turn their lemons into lemonade, so to speak. And anyone who responds to that analogy with some sickening reference to the late-term (or otherwise) abortion process can die in a fire. Fair warning. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
steveorino 7 #83 June 20, 2007 Quote Quote Okay. Now look at it from the POV of the fetus. What proof do you have that fetuses have a POV? I didn't make the statement above, but I did work as a respiratory therapist in a neonatal unit. I've seen infants as little as 1 pound. They feel, believe me they are not subhuman. steveOrino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #84 June 20, 2007 I was a 'premie' - an original 'kilogram kid'. Luckily for me, the docs didn't decide I was a "lost cause" just because I was born at ~28 weeks.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #85 June 21, 2007 QuoteI was a 'premie' - an original 'kilogram kid'. Luckily for me, the docs didn't decide I was a "lost cause" just because I was born at ~28 weeks. 28 weeks is past 6 months, and a big difference from 23 weeks. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #86 June 21, 2007 Quote I will now argue the other side for a minute. Liberals are big on science for science sake, so we need every opportunity to expand our knowledge and technology. And, hey, the child was going to die anyway, so why not use it to our advantage. Would that be the same defence Mengel used when he experimented on Jewish twins? "We're going to kill them anyway, so it's ok if I torture them for a while first?" The ethics of that sort of research is one huge grey zone. Inducing labor or doing a c section on these women also puts them at increased risk. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #87 June 21, 2007 QuoteQuoteDefine viability, please. To be able to live in a particular climate or environment. If the child can live, even in the artificial evironment of a neonatal unit , until it can survive on its own, it should be given a chance to reach its full potential. Just trying to get some details from your plan here... Who is going to pay for the NICU care? Certainly not the mother who didn't want the child to begin with. Certainly not the health insurance companies. Are you saying we should bill society the hundreds of thousands of dollars it can take to keep a 28 week preemie alive? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Keith 0 #88 June 21, 2007 Yes, and I think the only people who should be allowed to vote on women's issues are women. Men should shut the fuck up.Keith Don't Fuck with me Keith - J. Mandeville Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #89 June 21, 2007 QuoteQuoteI was a 'premie' - an original 'kilogram kid'. Luckily for me, the docs didn't decide I was a "lost cause" just because I was born at ~28 weeks. 28 weeks is past 6 months, and a big difference from 23 weeks. How about 19 weeks? This type of argument is like the global warming issue - a lot of theory, but very few tangibles. We don't KNOW at what point in development the consciousness forms, and only the parent(s) can make that decision for themselves if it's "worth it".Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #90 June 21, 2007 Quote This type of argument is like the global warming issue - a lot of theory, but very few tangibles. We don't KNOW at what point in development the consciousness forms, and only the parent(s) can make that decision for themselves if it's "worth it". That's the status quo - where the woman has the ability to choose. The Prolifers seek to change that arrangement and make the decision for her. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DFWAJG 4 #91 June 21, 2007 Quote Quote There's nothing to get in to. You made a contradictory statement. You can't protect the "right" of an unborn child to live without infringing upon the "right" of the mother to choose whether or not to carry the pregnancy. If the child must live, then the woman must carry. If the woman must carry then she logically has no choice. Canuck was just pointing this out. You need to refine your statement because pro-lifers can't take shelter in the camp of protecting the woman's rights. The mother had the choice whether or not to have sex and use protection. Be prepared for the risks (consequences) that come along with the reward (actions). The father also had the choice. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Royd 0 #92 June 21, 2007 QuoteJust trying to get some details from your plan here... Who is going to pay for the NICU care? Certainly not the mother who didn't want the child to begin with. Certainly not the health insurance companies. Are you saying we should bill society the hundreds of thousands of dollars it can take to keep a 28 week preemie alive? Why not? We've spent tons of money over the years keeping perfectly healthy, lazy adults alive. Why not add one more burden to the huge social experiment? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PLFXpert 0 #93 June 21, 2007 OK, so hypothetically, we implement your plan... Then what? You mentioned earlier "There are 40 million dead babies..." What happens to the millions we've now "saved" in your plan? Are there millions of families waiting to adopt them?Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #94 June 21, 2007 Quote Quote The mother had the choice whether or not to have sex and use protection. Be prepared for the risks (consequences) that come along with the reward (actions). The father also had the choice. Yes, I know (and have stated that many times). You have to look at the context I was replying to."That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Royd 0 #95 June 21, 2007 OK, so hypothetically, we implement your plan... Then what? You mentioned earlier "There are 40 million dead babies..." Quote What happens to the millions we've now "saved" in your plan? Are there millions of families waiting to adopt them? Well, some of them would be close to 50 by now. How many potential geniuses, entrepreneurs or philanthropists have we destroyed? And for those who weren't the brightest, we wouldn't have had to replace them with illegal immigrants. They probably would still be voting Democrat.When you spread that 40 million over the last 40 years, I'm sure that society could have easily absorbed them successfully. We now have couples running off to foreign lands to get children. Maybe they just want a cute Asian baby. Who knows. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #96 June 21, 2007 Quote Just trying to get some details from your plan here... Who is going to pay for the NICU care? Certainly not the mother who didn't want the child to begin with. Certainly not the health insurance companies. Are you saying we should bill society the hundreds of thousands of dollars it can take to keep a 28 week preemie alive? I never hear the "pro-life" folks worrying about what happens to them after they're born. Typically after they come out of the womb the song changes to "why should my tax dollars go to pay for the welfare and education of that lazy, good for nothing, deadbeat drain on the system?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #97 June 21, 2007 Quote Quote When it's mine or my wife, I will. you haven't been paying attention. It's none of your business - only your wife/servant/sexslave's's not only can she make the decision without you knowing, she is encouraged to for the sake of self determination How can you sit and effectively enslave her like 'man' has been doing to 'woman' over the last few millenium?Take off the chains, dude, evolve, kum bi ya, kum bi ya, hmmmmmmmm No way dude. I'm the man around the house. And when she says that I can make a decision, I do. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #98 June 21, 2007 QuoteYes, and I think the only people who should be allowed to vote on women's issues are women. Men should shut the fuck up. That is total nonsense. It essentially means you want to pick and choose who gets to vote on issues. And you only want to do that to ensure the voting supports your point of view. Saddam would be proud. Especially when one side terms it a "women's issue" for emotional impact, and the other side terms it a "Life of a child" issue for emotional impact. So I assume then that on abortion, only women get to vote from the pro-choice camp and everybody gets to vote from the pro-life camp (they were all children in their life)? Voting has to do with the allocation of money (every issue, once you drill down far enough). It would make more sense to say that only people that pay taxes should vote and the rest should stay quiet. (It makes more sense, but it also nonsense, IMO. Except I think everyone should pay taxes of some amount - even if just a token - so every would get to vote as long as they had ownership in the process) Women's abortion issue example - "all abortions should be publicly funded, but only from the salaries of men. Each abortion the woman should receive $18000 from the same fund so the woman can get back on her feet." ok, VOTE (sorry, men are restricted and not allowed to vote) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #99 June 21, 2007 Quote Yes, and I think the only people who should be allowed to vote on women's issues are women. Men should shut the fuck up. Are you saying that abortion is only a women's issue? "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #100 June 21, 2007 Quote We now have couples running off to foreign lands to get children. Maybe they just want a cute Asian baby. Who knows. That comes just about as close as you can possibly get .. to lamenting the lack of WHITE babies to adopt as you can get..... I have heard that WAY too many times from what I thought were normally good peopleOne of them was a FORMER good friend that I will no longer have anything to do with since she made that statement. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
