Report, edit, etc...Posted by Tavrobel on 2005-08-12 at 16:25:52
QUOTE
A small clump of cells isn't human.
What about a fetus, which is defined as a human in maturation in a mother's womb. It merely is a clump of cells, carbon, and lipids. Would you deny their humanity? Would you call the gift of life pointless and profane?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by I-X-King-X-I on 2005-08-12 at 16:26:05
QUOTE(Tavrobel @ Aug 12 2005, 02:23 PM)
Yes, but undr what condition does she acept the child? Out of love, or irresponsibility? Who knows what children can do when they mature. This is like EUDs. Who knows what EUDs could have done in their full blossom? We knew they were powerful, but what power would we abuse? Our children are NOT betting chips in the dance of life. They are the accomplishment. Children is considered the greatest joy in the world. Those who would deny themselves of it know that it is completely their choice.
[right][snapback]286352[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]286352[/snapback][/right]
true...but what if she used protection and got it and didnt want it in the first place?
then its right for her to get an aboriton?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MapUnprotector on 2005-08-12 at 16:27:39
QUOTE(Tavrobel @ Aug 12 2005, 04:25 PM)
What about a fetus, which is defined as a human in maturation in a mother's womb. It merely is a clump of cells, carbon, and lipids. Would you deny their humanity? Would you call the gift of life pointless and profane?
[right][snapback]286358[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]286358[/snapback][/right]
Yes, let's mourn the loss of every cell that dies in your body constantly. You are denying those cells too aren't you?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Tavrobel on 2005-08-12 at 16:28:40
QUOTE
Tavrobel, how about you get raped and have a baby you don't want? How about you also don't have money to support yourself and then having to support a child? I'm sure you want a child that you never wanted to ruin your life and also have a crappy life just because "abortion" is wrong.
Not our choice now is it? And i didn't mention rape yet. Abortion because of rape I do say is ok. Because of the trauma of the mother. But consider this: women in the olden days didn't have the option of having abortion. Instead they were raped, and had the children of their immoral father. But some grew to accomplish things we could only dream of doing.
ADDITION:
QUOTE
Yes, let's mourn the loss of every cell that dies in your body constantly. You are denying those cells too aren't you?
Prevention is not death. Death is the natural end of life as we know it. We mourn becuase we cannot look out for those we come to love and care for.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by I-X-King-X-I on 2005-08-12 at 16:29:12
QUOTE(MrrLL @ Aug 12 2005, 02:26 PM)
I LIEK THE BIBLE CAZ IT MAKES MY PANTS GO HAPPY
[right][snapback]286361[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]286361[/snapback][/right]
please pass over the happy pants
QUOTE(Tavrobel @ Aug 12 2005, 02:27 PM)
Not our choice now is it? And i didn't mention rape yet. Abortion because of rape I do say is ok. Because of the trauma of the mother. But consider this: women in the olden days didn't have the option of having abortion. Instead they were raped, and had the children of their immoral father. But some grew to accomplish things we could only dream of doing.
[right][snapback]286365[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]286365[/snapback][/right]
so even if they are raped, or for any other reason for not wanting the child, child aboriton should be illegal becuse its 'killing' a child?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MapUnprotector on 2005-08-12 at 16:29:35
Just because we now have the option to end the life of a fetus and in the olden days they didn't, doesn't mean it's wrong, just because they weren't able to do it in the past.
I just want to point this fallacy out:
I just want to point this fallacy out:
QUOTE
Argumentum ad antiquitatem
This is the fallacy of asserting that something is right or good simply because it's old, or because "that's the way it's always been." The opposite of Argumentum ad Novitatem.
"For thousands of years Christians have believed in Jesus Christ. Christianity must be true, to have persisted so long even in the face of persecution."
This is the fallacy of asserting that something is right or good simply because it's old, or because "that's the way it's always been." The opposite of Argumentum ad Novitatem.
"For thousands of years Christians have believed in Jesus Christ. Christianity must be true, to have persisted so long even in the face of persecution."
Report, edit, etc...Posted by ShadowBrood on 2005-08-12 at 16:30:17
MrrLL, that's about the most sense you've made today 
Look, the girl was irresponsible and didn't tell the guy to use protection. Her fault, maybe she should've thought about that earlier. Now she's gotta deal with the psychological problems of abortion and the physical ones. She's got to suffer, the fetus however, doesn't.
Now, if it's a late abortion, that's just sick.
Look, the girl was irresponsible and didn't tell the guy to use protection. Her fault, maybe she should've thought about that earlier. Now she's gotta deal with the psychological problems of abortion and the physical ones. She's got to suffer, the fetus however, doesn't.
Now, if it's a late abortion, that's just sick.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Merrell on 2005-08-12 at 16:30:51
Abortion.. is great, it can make a great dinner..
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Tavrobel on 2005-08-12 at 16:31:05
QUOTE
true...but what if she used protection and got it and didnt want it in the first place?
then its right for her to get an aboriton?
then its right for her to get an aboriton?
No protection is fool proof except for complete abstinence. The only exception is Mary because of Divine intervention. God doesn't do that anymore. We have become the state of which we can defend for ourselves. We make our own miracles come true. Not that we don't need God, but He sees usas being less dependent now.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by ShadowBrood on 2005-08-12 at 16:31:38
... 
...
No.
...No.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MapUnprotector on 2005-08-12 at 16:32:11
Wow now let's turn this into a religious argument 
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Tavrobel on 2005-08-12 at 16:33:34
QUOTE
Just because we now have the option to end the life of a fetus and in the olden days they didn't, doesn't mean it's wrong, just because they weren't able to do it in the past.
I just want to point this fallacy out:
QUOTE
Argumentum ad antiquitatem
This is the fallacy of asserting that something is right or good simply because it's old, or because "that's the way it's always been." The opposite of Argumentum ad Novitatem.
"For thousands of years Christians have believed in Jesus Christ. Christianity must be true, to have persisted so long even in the face of persecution."
I just want to point this fallacy out:
QUOTE
Argumentum ad antiquitatem
This is the fallacy of asserting that something is right or good simply because it's old, or because "that's the way it's always been." The opposite of Argumentum ad Novitatem.
"For thousands of years Christians have believed in Jesus Christ. Christianity must be true, to have persisted so long even in the face of persecution."
I didn't say it was right becuase that's the way it has always been. And Christianity doesn't have to be true. We just don't know if it is not true.
ADDITION:
QUOTE
Wow now let's turn this into a religious argument
I think we did that AWHILE ago.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by SuperToast on 2005-08-12 at 16:33:49
You mean turn back into one.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by I-X-King-X-I on 2005-08-12 at 16:35:03
QUOTE(Tavrobel @ Aug 12 2005, 02:31 PM)
No protection is fool proof except for complete abstinence. The only exception is Mary because of Divine intervention. God doesn't do that anymore. We have become the state of which we can defend for ourselves. We make our own miracles come true. Not that we don't need God, but He sees usas being less dependent now.
[right][snapback]286374[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]286374[/snapback][/right]
condoms arent full proof at all...
sperms can slip by through tiny micro holes...even tho it rarley happends...
it still isnt full proof...
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MapUnprotector on 2005-08-12 at 16:35:41
QUOTE(Tavrobel @ Aug 12 2005, 04:33 PM)
I didn't say it was right becuase that's the way it has always been. And Christianity doesn't have to be true. We just don't know if it is not true.
ADDITION:
I think we did that AWHILE ago.
[right][snapback]286377[/snapback][/right]
ADDITION:
I think we did that AWHILE ago.
[right][snapback]286377[/snapback][/right]
Okay then no one should listen to you, because your arguments are based in religion.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by SuperToast on 2005-08-12 at 16:36:22
And no one should listen to anyone because their arguments are all based in stupid.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Merrell on 2005-08-12 at 16:37:03
Wow, syrup can be used on french fries for the same effect as of pancakes and french toast.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by I-X-King-X-I on 2005-08-12 at 16:37:16
QUOTE(SuperToast @ Aug 12 2005, 02:36 PM)
And no one should listen to anyone because their arguments are all based in stupid.
[right][snapback]286386[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]286386[/snapback][/right]
based in stupid??
but if we wont listen to anyone, who will the followers follow?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by evolipel on 2005-08-12 at 16:37:33
This is the 3rd time I'm browsing through this topic, I have to say...
What... the... hell...
First it was semi-on-topic, people discussing Yoshi's comments. Then it turned into an argument between 2 or 3 members about EUD triggers, and now it turned into... Bush? War in Iraq? Abortion? God?
I'm not saying "get back on topic you wonderful friends" (although somebody should) but instead pointing out how funny it is to read threads like these once in a while ;p .
Edit: It's even more funny that the language filter changed "b*stards" to "wonderful friends". Note that I didn't use it in a derogatory manner.
What... the... hell...
First it was semi-on-topic, people discussing Yoshi's comments. Then it turned into an argument between 2 or 3 members about EUD triggers, and now it turned into... Bush? War in Iraq? Abortion? God?
I'm not saying "get back on topic you wonderful friends" (although somebody should) but instead pointing out how funny it is to read threads like these once in a while ;p .
Edit: It's even more funny that the language filter changed "b*stards" to "wonderful friends". Note that I didn't use it in a derogatory manner.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by ihatett_da_hated on 2005-08-12 at 16:38:31
QUOTE(CheeZe @ Aug 12 2005, 12:07 PM)
Don't worry guys, ihatett is just trying to revive a "dead" game. I'm with him.
[right][snapback]286120[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]286120[/snapback][/right]
Are you saying that SC is dead?
This Sky Proleague was the biggest turnout ever. Back in 2002 (when the game was already old) people were saying that it was the height of BW, and that it had nowhere to go but down. 3 years later, it's still growing.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Tavrobel on 2005-08-12 at 16:39:34
So none of us should be listening to each other. Good conclusion. I for one think he's right. there is no point to this discussion anymore! We've strayed so far off topic, that we've become a walking contradiction. My views based on religion are my views, and I don't mean to impose them. I mean to defend them. And don't be an idiot and say "you're completely wrong, so stfu", because everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I've got mine, and you got yours, and I couldn't care less whether you think the way I do or not.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Merrell on 2005-08-12 at 16:40:07
I heard a tsunami is going to kill all the south koreans. I think Japan has something to do with this.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by ShadowBrood on 2005-08-12 at 16:40:20
*ShadowBrood agrees with devilesk.
Religion is all based on faith. Therefore, you can't accept everything as concrete fact.
Also dude, you said it's existed for 1000s of years, even in persecution. You're wrong. It's existed for much less time than that. Orthodox churches however have lasted a little over 1000 years.
Another thing. You say because of it lasting so long, it HAS to be true. What about when humanity was Pagan? That's lasted longer than Christianity by so much longer it's not even funny. We still have Pagans today, so don't say it's dead. Since it lasted so long, even through the Christian Pagan slaughters, it HAS to be true.
GG no RM
Religion is all based on faith. Therefore, you can't accept everything as concrete fact.
Also dude, you said it's existed for 1000s of years, even in persecution. You're wrong. It's existed for much less time than that. Orthodox churches however have lasted a little over 1000 years.
Another thing. You say because of it lasting so long, it HAS to be true. What about when humanity was Pagan? That's lasted longer than Christianity by so much longer it's not even funny. We still have Pagans today, so don't say it's dead. Since it lasted so long, even through the Christian Pagan slaughters, it HAS to be true.
GG no RM
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Tavrobel on 2005-08-12 at 16:40:37
Wow, I hatett is back! Welcome tp another long day of discussion, argument, andslit wrists.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MapUnprotector on 2005-08-12 at 16:41:38
Btw, about your other point that "the person might be a great person if he survived, blah blah blah"
Here's another fallacy I think fits:
So basically to say that abortion is wrong because the person could have been great or whatever, you must prove that the person could have grown up to be a great person.
Here's another fallacy I think fits:
QUOTE
Ad hoc
As mentioned earlier, there is a difference between argument and explanation. If we're interested in establishing A, and B is offered as evidence, the statement "A because B" is an argument. If we're trying to establish the truth of B, then "A because B" is not an argument, it's an explanation.
The Ad Hoc fallacy is to give an after-the-fact explanation which doesn't apply to other situations. Often this ad hoc explanation will be dressed up to look like an argument. For example, if we assume that God treats all people equally, then the following is an ad hoc explanation:
"I was healed from cancer."
"Praise the Lord, then. He is your healer."
"So, will He heal others who have cancer?"
"Er... The ways of God are mysterious."
As mentioned earlier, there is a difference between argument and explanation. If we're interested in establishing A, and B is offered as evidence, the statement "A because B" is an argument. If we're trying to establish the truth of B, then "A because B" is not an argument, it's an explanation.
The Ad Hoc fallacy is to give an after-the-fact explanation which doesn't apply to other situations. Often this ad hoc explanation will be dressed up to look like an argument. For example, if we assume that God treats all people equally, then the following is an ad hoc explanation:
"I was healed from cancer."
"Praise the Lord, then. He is your healer."
"So, will He heal others who have cancer?"
"Er... The ways of God are mysterious."
So basically to say that abortion is wrong because the person could have been great or whatever, you must prove that the person could have grown up to be a great person.