Support NeoGAF

[BobLoblaw]

Oh look, an abortion thread on gaf. The only thing more original would be making a thread about not tipping an uncircumcised middle-eastern bi-curious man who's having relationship troubles with the girlfriend.

 

[DevelopmentArrested]

Oh look, an abortion thread on gaf. The only thing more original would be making a thread about not tipping an uncircumcised middle-eastern bi-curious man who's having relationship troubles with the girlfriend.

Oh look, someone on gaf who reads one word in the thread title then posts a cry post without even reading the article in question.

 

[Meus Renaissance]

Oh look, someone on gaf who reads one word in the thread title then posts a cry post without even reading the article in question.

I actually came across the Ricky Gervais show today on YouTube. Looks hilarious.

 

[BobLoblaw]

Oh look, someone on gaf who reads one word in the thread title then posts a cry post without even reading the article in question.

Except I did. Fact. People will never completely agree on abortion. Ever. Gaf is comprised of people. Therefore, Gaf will go back and forth on this topic and no one will change their opinion.

 

[LabouredSubterfuge]

Such as?

Sublime. A good question to ask now that the search function is disabled. The thread proposing that abortion was wrong because parents may abort upon finding out the sex of their child was one that they did not want. There are others where commensurate comments were made. I'm sure I'm not the only one that noticed.

Notwithstanding the above, the line was more of a jab than an out and out insult. Take it as you will though.

 

[Aske]

Abortion is wrong unless raped or medically unfit to have children. It's selfish, irresponsible and wrong.

If fetuses are morally equivalent to children and shouldn't be 'murdered' by abortion; why is it okay to womb-lynch them if their fathers were rapists? Surely they are every bit as much the victims as their mothers?

You can't have your cake and eat it. You might as well argue that it's not okay to kill children...but if a five-year-old's mother finds out that his father has raped someone, and can no longer stand the sight of her child, it's okay to for her to shoot the kid in the face.

I'm pro-choice, and while I completely disagree with the 'fetuses-are-people-too' crowd, I can at least respect their ethical stance if its logically consistent. But anyone who condemns abortion of accidental pregnancies between consenting adults while giving it a thumbs-up if the mother was a victim of rape or incest doesn't really care about the rights of fetuses. They're just trying to punish the 'sinful' behaviour of women who have sex but don't want children.

 

[dinazimmerman]

Judith Jarvis Thomson's A Defense of Abortion should be required reading for anybody engaging in a serious discussion about abortion. You dudes should look it up.

 

[CharlieDigital]

You're really ignoring the real issue. all you're really saying is that pregnancy is unfair to women, therefore getting rid of the option to terminate it is akin to slavery. The real issue is the personhood of the fetus, and the right to life that would logically follow from personhood.

No, I'm not. I'm in the Gaborn camp in terms of when abortion should no longer be a non-medical choice: when the fetus can survive outside of the mother's body. Once a baby has been carried to that point, I agree, the choice should only be driven by medical decision (i.e. woman's life is on the line, maybe it's a multiple birth and a woman might lose all of them if one is not removed, etc.).

The fact of the matter is that the statistics on abortion show that late term abortions due to non-medical reasons are incredibly rare and the occurrences are completely overblown.

In 2003, from data collected in those areas that sufficiently reported gestational age, it was found that 6.2% of abortions were conducted from 13 to 15 weeks, 4.2% from 16 to 20 weeks, and 1.4% at or after 21 weeks.[13] Because the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's annual study on abortion statistics does not calculate the exact gestational age for abortions performed past the 20th week, there are no precise data for the number of abortions performed after viability.[13] In 1997, the Guttmacher Institute estimated the number of abortions in the U.S. past 24 weeks to be 0.08%, or approximately 1,032 per year.[14]

That's .08% of all abortions.

Additionally, George Tiller was one of the few doctors with the balls to help women who had to abort due to medical conditions like anencephaly.

See this video @ 14:30 (watch at least to 16:10): http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/524/index.html about a woman who was 5 months pregnant, a devout Catholic who had protested outside of abortion clinics, and suddenly, found out that her baby was diagnosed with anencephaly. The general public has the wrong perception about late terms abortions, their frequency, and the reasons women might seek a late term abortion. It's rarely, if ever, a frivolous decision.

 

[Meus Renaissance]

Sublime. A good question to ask now that the search function is disabled. The thread proposing that abortion was wrong because parents may abort upon finding out the sex of their child was one that they did not want. There are others where commensurate comments were made. I'm sure I'm not the only one that noticed.

Notwithstanding the above, the line was more of a jab than an out and out insult. Take it as you will though.

That's what Google is for. A quick search and you find the last thread I made a comment in response to you and the now banned Ignis' failure to understand my original posts about the abortion/sacrifice thing.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=388362

The only comment to the actual story I gave was that the thread title was misleading. I don't think I have myself commented on any Pro-Life cause let alone "rationalise them for hilariously marginal reasons". I don't mind jabs but I'd rather you not associate me with things I haven't said or done. Just because this is GAF doesn't mean it needs to be a school playground.

 

[JoeBoy101]

I really probably shouldn't step in here and think the analogy in the OP (or used by the Pastor in the OP that is) is twisted.

But, for edification of those who may not know:

Half of the roughly 1.2 million U.S. women who have abortions each year are 25 or older. Only about 17 percent are teens. About 60 percent have given birth to least one child prior to getting an abortion.

A disproportionately high number are black or Hispanic. And regardless of race, high abortion rates are linked to hard times.

Linkie

 

[DanteFox]

forget it. a whole nother can of worms has been opened.

 

[CharlieDigital]

forget it. a whole nother can of worms has been opened.

I went through a lot of trouble to dig up the video, so at least give it a watch:

@ 14:30 (watch at least to 16:10): http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/524/index.html

Edit: And if you want to get really pissed off, watch the O'Reilly bullshit after 16:10

I really probably shouldn't step in here and think the analogy in the OP (or used by the Pastor in the OP that is) is twisted.

You have to realize the context of the message and the audience they are targeting with this video. Slavery is a cover for the broader pro-life message.

 

[LabouredSubterfuge]

That's what Google is for. A quick search and you find the last thread I made a comment in response to you and the now banned Ignis' failure to understand my original posts about the abortion/sacrifice thing.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=388362

The only comment to the actual story I gave was that the thread title was misleading. I don't think I have myself commented on any Pro-Life cause let alone "rationalise them for hilariously marginal reasons". I don't mind jabs but I'd rather you not associate me with things I haven't said or done. Just because this is GAF doesn't mean it needs to be a school playground.

Last comment I'll make on this, but that is certainly not the thread or threads I was referring to. Once again you've dodged the point.

 

[Dude Abides]

Judith Jarvis Thomson's A Defense of Abortion should be required reading for anybody engaging in a serious discussion about abortion. You dudes should look it up.

This man is correct. It completely avoids the "is a fetus a person?" issue as it is not necessary for her argument that abortion is morally justified.

Here 'tis:

http://spot.colorado.edu/~heathwoo/Phil160,Fall02/thomson.htm

 

[way more]

I just read something about a conservative saying ACORN was the new Klu Klux Klan.

Democrats used the Klan to suppress their political opposition, with vote fraud and intimidation and violence. Klansmen aimed at African-Americans, nearly all Republicans in those days, and at white Republicans who tried to help them. Once threatened by the KKK, Republicans could in many cases save their lives only by publicly swearing allegiance to the Democratic Party. According to a southern governor, "Few Republicans dare sleep in their houses at night."

Like ACORN, the Ku Klux Klan operated with impunity until Republican politicians and journalists sounded an alarm. In 1869, Nathan Bedford Forrest, the KKK's Grand Dragon, ordered the Klan disbanded. Why? The national organization was getting too much attention, so Klansmen would have to soldier on in state-level organizations, such as the Red Shirts in South Carolina and the Men of Justice in Alabama. Nonetheless, most members of these spin-off groups considered themselves to be Klansmen.

http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/breitbarts-big-government-compares-a

 

[DanteFox]

more stuff

alright. fair enough. I personally think that if the child would have died anyway, then the mother made a humane decision in this case. though I still disagree with the other stuff about slavery and pro-life.

Judith Jarvis Thomson's A Defense of Abortion should be required reading for anybody engaging in a serious discussion about abortion. You dudes should look it up.

I just read the first few paragraphs. Does it get better eventually? So far it's just poor analogies and strawmen.

 

[Odoul]

I saw the whole thing on Youtube a few months ago.

Interesting stuff.

The part where this guy recorded an abortion clinic promising him his donations would exclusively go to funding black terminations was surreal.

 

[QuickSilverD]

This man is correct. It completely avoids the "is a fetus a person?" issue as it is not necessary for her argument that abortion is morally justified.

Here 'tis:

http://spot.colorado.edu/~heathwoo/Phil160,Fall02/thomson.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Defense_of_Abortion#Criticism

 

[dinazimmerman]

I would also recommend that pro-lifers interested in the "is the fetus a person" debate read a paper by Robert P. George titled "Embryo Ethics." I couldn't find it for free online, so I've uploaded it myself: http://ifile.it/c51pnxk/embryoethics.pdf. He outlines his argument logically, and like the Jarvis paper, it has its flaws but at least its well reasoned.

 

[Blackace]

I don't like abortion, but I don't like this guy either. I definitely don't like the Ku Klux Klan.

Hmm.

I don't know why but this made me laugh out loud

 

[roosters93]

I think deliberately killing a human being is as bad as deliberately killing a human being.

Yet you said it was worse...

 

[Meus Renaissance]

Last comment I'll make on this, but that is certainly not the thread or threads I was referring to. Once again you've dodged the point.

I don't know what you're talking about then. Everytime I respond and dismiss you or Ignis' farce claims, you just say "you dodged the point". It doesn't really help when none of you are making any sense in the first place with your snide comments. Either state your points or say nothing. If I wanted to ignore people, I wouldn't respond to them.