Total Posts:12|Showing Posts:1-12
Jump to topic:

Re-establishing abortion debate terminology

Arasa
Posts: 380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2014 12:28:31 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
We've all heard and read about it: One is Pro-life, and the other is Pro-choice. Without revealing my own personal opinion on the matter, I would like to bring up an issue, if you all would have me do so.
The terms "Pro-life" and "Pro-choice" are often thrown around to say that one is opposed to, or in favor of, abortion. However, more specifically than that, as I read disturbing remarks on both sides, I notice that the words have become used as more than they are, even on this platform. Let me then propose a widely accepted agreement on these two words, open to suggestion, correction, and refutation, starting with a version of my own, but ending with a decision made by a noticeable majority:
Pro life: Life begins at inception [implying that abortion is murder]
Pro-choice: Life begins at the age of 28 weeks since inception (as laid out by Roe v Wade) [implying that abortion is not murder, as life does not begin until this point]

If you accept these two definitions, say something and continue to use them under these guidelines. If not, explain why, present your own if possible, and we will attempt to arrive at a joint decision.

August Rasa, a 4:53 mind
lifemeansevolutionisgood
Posts: 551
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2014 3:20:34 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/28/2014 12:28:31 PM, Arasa wrote:
We've all heard and read about it: One is Pro-life, and the other is Pro-choice. Without revealing my own personal opinion on the matter, I would like to bring up an issue, if you all would have me do so.
The terms "Pro-life" and "Pro-choice" are often thrown around to say that one is opposed to, or in favor of, abortion. However, more specifically than that, as I read disturbing remarks on both sides, I notice that the words have become used as more than they are, even on this platform. Let me then propose a widely accepted agreement on these two words, open to suggestion, correction, and refutation, starting with a version of my own, but ending with a decision made by a noticeable majority:
Pro life: Life begins at inception [implying that abortion is murder]
Pro-choice: Life begins at the age of 28 weeks since inception (as laid out by Roe v Wade) [implying that abortion is not murder, as life does not begin until this point]

If you accept these two definitions, say something and continue to use them under these guidelines. If not, explain why, present your own if possible, and we will attempt to arrive at a joint decision.


August Rasa, a 4:53 mind

I am pro-choice, not because a fetus is not life (it is, by definition, life) but because a fetus is not a person until it is sentient. If killing non-sentient beings is wrong then I dare you to try and go without eating anything that was once sentient or non-sentient life. You won't be able to do it.

Pro-choice is simply accepting of a woman's choice to abort a fetus, it says nothing about the view of the person on what the fetus is.
Arasa
Posts: 380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2014 3:53:49 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/28/2014 3:20:34 PM, lifemeansevolutionisgood wrote:
At 7/28/2014 12:28:31 PM, Arasa wrote:
We've all heard and read about it: One is Pro-life, and the other is Pro-choice. Without revealing my own personal opinion on the matter, I would like to bring up an issue, if you all would have me do so.
The terms "Pro-life" and "Pro-choice" are often thrown around to say that one is opposed to, or in favor of, abortion. However, more specifically than that, as I read disturbing remarks on both sides, I notice that the words have become used as more than they are, even on this platform. Let me then propose a widely accepted agreement on these two words, open to suggestion, correction, and refutation, starting with a version of my own, but ending with a decision made by a noticeable majority:
Pro life: Life begins at inception [implying that abortion is murder]
Pro-choice: Life begins at the age of 28 weeks since inception (as laid out by Roe v Wade) [implying that abortion is not murder, as life does not begin until this point]

If you accept these two definitions, say something and continue to use them under these guidelines. If not, explain why, present your own if possible, and we will attempt to arrive at a joint decision.


August Rasa, a 4:53 mind

I am pro-choice, not because a fetus is not life (it is, by definition, life) but because a fetus is not a person until it is sentient. If killing non-sentient beings is wrong then I dare you to try and go without eating anything that was once sentient or non-sentient life. You won't be able to do it.

Pro-choice is simply accepting of a woman's choice to abort a fetus, it says nothing about the view of the person on what the fetus is.

Here's something to avoid:
-- I am Pro-Choice because a fetus is not alive
-- Pro-choice says nothing about the view on what the fetus is
The danger is using the word "Because" in that first point. It makes one dependent on the other, and then you point out that there aren't dependencies of that nature involved in the decision to become pro-choice.

As for the rest of it, good points to make. I would argue from a Christian background that animals and people are not on the same level of significance. To killing animals and killing people are not parallel cases. But that's going into the actual argument of Pro-life v Pro-choice, which I'm trying to avoid, so if you'd like to respond to this one comment, that'll be the end of it. I won't respond further, but I want to give you the opportunity to respond to this in particular.

August Rasa, a 4:53 mind
lifemeansevolutionisgood
Posts: 551
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2014 4:28:03 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/28/2014 3:53:49 PM, Arasa wrote:
At 7/28/2014 3:20:34 PM, lifemeansevolutionisgood wrote:
At 7/28/2014 12:28:31 PM, Arasa wrote:
We've all heard and read about it: One is Pro-life, and the other is Pro-choice. Without revealing my own personal opinion on the matter, I would like to bring up an issue, if you all would have me do so.
The terms "Pro-life" and "Pro-choice" are often thrown around to say that one is opposed to, or in favor of, abortion. However, more specifically than that, as I read disturbing remarks on both sides, I notice that the words have become used as more than they are, even on this platform. Let me then propose a widely accepted agreement on these two words, open to suggestion, correction, and refutation, starting with a version of my own, but ending with a decision made by a noticeable majority:
Pro life: Life begins at inception [implying that abortion is murder]
Pro-choice: Life begins at the age of 28 weeks since inception (as laid out by Roe v Wade) [implying that abortion is not murder, as life does not begin until this point]

If you accept these two definitions, say something and continue to use them under these guidelines. If not, explain why, present your own if possible, and we will attempt to arrive at a joint decision.


August Rasa, a 4:53 mind

I am pro-choice, not because a fetus is not life (it is, by definition, life) but because a fetus is not a person until it is sentient. If killing non-sentient beings is wrong then I dare you to try and go without eating anything that was once sentient or non-sentient life. You won't be able to do it.

Pro-choice is simply accepting of a woman's choice to abort a fetus, it says nothing about the view of the person on what the fetus is.

Here's something to avoid:
-- I am Pro-Choice because a fetus is not alive
-- Pro-choice says nothing about the view on what the fetus is
The danger is using the word "Because" in that first point. It makes one dependent on the other, and then you point out that there aren't dependencies of that nature involved in the decision to become pro-choice.

As for the rest of it, good points to make. I would argue from a Christian background that animals and people are not on the same level of significance. To killing animals and killing people are not parallel cases. But that's going into the actual argument of Pro-life v Pro-choice, which I'm trying to avoid, so if you'd like to respond to this one comment, that'll be the end of it. I won't respond further, but I want to give you the opportunity to respond to this in particular.


August Rasa, a 4:53 mind

You are correct, killing animals and killing people is different, but a fetus is not a person.
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2014 7:59:57 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/28/2014 12:28:31 PM, Arasa wrote:

Pro-choice: Life begins at the age of 28 weeks since inception (as laid out by Roe v Wade) [implying that abortion is not murder, as life does not begin until this point]

"The Court later rejected Roe's trimester framework, while affirming Roe's central holding that a person has a right to abortion until viability.[1] The Roe decision defined "viable" as being "potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid", adding that viability "is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks"

http://en.wikipedia.org...
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
Arasa
Posts: 380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2014 10:08:28 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/29/2014 7:59:57 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 7/28/2014 12:28:31 PM, Arasa wrote:

Pro-choice: Life begins at the age of 28 weeks since inception (as laid out by Roe v Wade) [implying that abortion is not murder, as life does not begin until this point]

"The Court later rejected Roe's trimester framework, while affirming Roe's central holding that a person has a right to abortion until viability.[1] The Roe decision defined "viable" as being "potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid", adding that viability "is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks"

http://en.wikipedia.org...

As a general rule, bullet points are prelude to conclusions. Not because we don't know where you're going with it, but because it's good policy and ensures that anyone who joins the conversation knows as well.
bulproof
Posts: 25,272
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2014 10:22:40 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/29/2014 10:08:28 AM, Arasa wrote:
At 7/29/2014 7:59:57 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 7/28/2014 12:28:31 PM, Arasa wrote:

Pro-choice: Life begins at the age of 28 weeks since inception (as laid out by Roe v Wade) [implying that abortion is not murder, as life does not begin until this point]

"The Court later rejected Roe's trimester framework, while affirming Roe's central holding that a person has a right to abortion until viability.[1] The Roe decision defined "viable" as being "potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid", adding that viability "is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks"

http://en.wikipedia.org...

As a general rule, bullet points are prelude to conclusions. Not because we don't know where you're going with it, but because it's good policy and ensures that anyone who joins the conversation knows as well.
I didn't read all the crap.

What's your point?

Abortion?
Y or N?
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Arasa
Posts: 380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2014 10:27:20 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/29/2014 10:22:40 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 7/29/2014 10:08:28 AM, Arasa wrote:
At 7/29/2014 7:59:57 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 7/28/2014 12:28:31 PM, Arasa wrote:

Pro-choice: Life begins at the age of 28 weeks since inception (as laid out by Roe v Wade) [implying that abortion is not murder, as life does not begin until this point]

"The Court later rejected Roe's trimester framework, while affirming Roe's central holding that a person has a right to abortion until viability.[1] The Roe decision defined "viable" as being "potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid", adding that viability "is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks"

http://en.wikipedia.org...

As a general rule, bullet points are prelude to conclusions. Not because we don't know where you're going with it, but because it's good policy and ensures that anyone who joins the conversation knows as well.
I didn't read all the crap.

What's your point?

Abortion?
Y or N?

The purpose of this feed is not to debate the morality and legality of abortion. The purpose is to ensure that people do not throw the terms around loosely.
bulproof
Posts: 25,272
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2014 10:35:36 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/29/2014 10:27:20 AM, Arasa wrote:
At 7/29/2014 10:22:40 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 7/29/2014 10:08:28 AM, Arasa wrote:
At 7/29/2014 7:59:57 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 7/28/2014 12:28:31 PM, Arasa wrote:

Pro-choice: Life begins at the age of 28 weeks since inception (as laid out by Roe v Wade) [implying that abortion is not murder, as life does not begin until this point]

"The Court later rejected Roe's trimester framework, while affirming Roe's central holding that a person has a right to abortion until viability.[1] The Roe decision defined "viable" as being "potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid", adding that viability "is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks"

http://en.wikipedia.org...

As a general rule, bullet points are prelude to conclusions. Not because we don't know where you're going with it, but because it's good policy and ensures that anyone who joins the conversation knows as well.
I didn't read all the crap.

What's your point?

Abortion?
Y or N?

The purpose of this feed is not to debate the morality and legality of abortion. The purpose is to ensure that people do not throw the terms around loosely.

So is what is quaintly called (by misogynists) a miscarriage an abortion?
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Arasa
Posts: 380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2014 12:04:56 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/29/2014 10:35:36 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 7/29/2014 10:27:20 AM, Arasa wrote:
At 7/29/2014 10:22:40 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 7/29/2014 10:08:28 AM, Arasa wrote:
At 7/29/2014 7:59:57 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 7/28/2014 12:28:31 PM, Arasa wrote:

Pro-choice: Life begins at the age of 28 weeks since inception (as laid out by Roe v Wade) [implying that abortion is not murder, as life does not begin until this point]

"The Court later rejected Roe's trimester framework, while affirming Roe's central holding that a person has a right to abortion until viability.[1] The Roe decision defined "viable" as being "potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid", adding that viability "is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks"

http://en.wikipedia.org...

As a general rule, bullet points are prelude to conclusions. Not because we don't know where you're going with it, but because it's good policy and ensures that anyone who joins the conversation knows as well.
I didn't read all the crap.

What's your point?

Abortion?
Y or N?

The purpose of this feed is not to debate the morality and legality of abortion. The purpose is to ensure that people do not throw the terms around loosely.

So is what is quaintly called (by misogynists) a miscarriage an abortion?

In terms of definitions, abortion is intentional, whereas a miscarriage is, by and large, not. To intentionally cause a miscarriage in yourself would fall under the wing of abortion

August Rasa, a 4:53 mind
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/30/2014 7:29:03 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/29/2014 10:08:28 AM, Arasa wrote:
At 7/29/2014 7:59:57 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 7/28/2014 12:28:31 PM, Arasa wrote:

Pro-choice: Life begins at the age of 28 weeks since inception (as laid out by Roe v Wade) [implying that abortion is not murder, as life does not begin until this point]

"The Court later rejected Roe's trimester framework, while affirming Roe's central holding that a person has a right to abortion until viability.[1] The Roe decision defined "viable" as being "potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid", adding that viability "is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks"

http://en.wikipedia.org...

As a general rule, bullet points are prelude to conclusions. Not because we don't know where you're going with it, but because it's good policy and ensures that anyone who joins the conversation knows as well.

Sounded to me that you wrongly presented the pro choice line in regards to Roe vs Wade.

The court didn't determine that life begins at 28 weeks but rather "viable life".
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
bulproof
Posts: 25,272
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/30/2014 7:39:27 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/29/2014 12:04:56 PM, Arasa wrote:
At 7/29/2014 10:35:36 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 7/29/2014 10:27:20 AM, Arasa wrote:
At 7/29/2014 10:22:40 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 7/29/2014 10:08:28 AM, Arasa wrote:
At 7/29/2014 7:59:57 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 7/28/2014 12:28:31 PM, Arasa wrote:

Pro-choice: Life begins at the age of 28 weeks since inception (as laid out by Roe v Wade) [implying that abortion is not murder, as life does not begin until this point]

"The Court later rejected Roe's trimester framework, while affirming Roe's central holding that a person has a right to abortion until viability.[1] The Roe decision defined "viable" as being "potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid", adding that viability "is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks"

http://en.wikipedia.org...

As a general rule, bullet points are prelude to conclusions. Not because we don't know where you're going with it, but because it's good policy and ensures that anyone who joins the conversation knows as well.
I didn't read all the crap.

What's your point?

Abortion?
Y or N?

The purpose of this feed is not to debate the morality and legality of abortion. The purpose is to ensure that people do not throw the terms around loosely.

So is what is quaintly called (by misogynists) a miscarriage an abortion?

In terms of definitions, abortion is intentional, whereas a miscarriage is, by and large, not. To intentionally cause a miscarriage in yourself would fall under the wing of abortion


August Rasa, a 4:53 mind

So what causes a "miscarriage" ? Is it nothing natural? Or is it natural? What do you consider natural? Is god involved? Or is it just nature?
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin