I respect the honesty

Author: TheUnderdog

Posts

Total: 21
Topic's author
#1
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10

When you are anti-abortion and you believe the following:

  1. Murder should be punished with death.
  2. Abortion is murder.

Then it makes sense to punish abortion with death.  Now if this turns you off, it's understandable; you are AUP; fine.  Not everyone is.

Go after the doctor
If you do that, then doctors won't perform any more abortions, which means the women who want them will get them done personally and will do them on themselves.  So whatever punishment you give to the doctor, you would give to the woman (whether it's a murder charge or no charge).

But bodily autonomy with the (unwanted pain vs preventing fetal homicide dichotomy) is for men only; not women in all states that banned abortion.  I'm not endorsing that; but it's the truth.

Either preventing fetal homicide should be the consistent goal or preventing unwanted pain should be the consistent goal; but it's only consistent in the states where abortion is legal until the moment of birth.
#2
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,652
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
Most anti-abortion retards think woman shouldnt be punished for doing what they think is equal to murder.

So let me get this straight.

Abortion = murder

Woman having abortion  = woman doing murder

Woman doing murder = no punishment what so ever for the woman

So either they think woman shouldnt be punished if she murders someone, either they think abortion isnt equal to murder.

Whats next, swallowing is murder too?
#3
Savant
Savant's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 1,999
3
7
6
Savant's avatar
Savant
3
7
6
-->
@TheUnderdog
Then it makes sense to punish abortion with death.
So anti-abortion people can (a) advocate abortions be punished with death and not succeed at passing legislation, or (b) advocate more politically feasible legislation and have a chance at banning abortion. Why would they choose (a) in the current political climate? There's a reason Abraham Lincoln was more successful than John Brown.
#4
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,467
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@TheUnderdog
Murder should be punished with death.
Abortion is murder.

Not all.murders are equal. No matter how much you lie and claim the republicans are hypocritical here, they just don't have this child like false binary of murder good or murder bad. It is a scale. 

If I murder an 
#5
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Savant
Most anti-abortion retards think women shouldn't be punished for doing what they think is equal to murder.
bingo
#6
Savant
Savant's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 1,999
3
7
6
Savant's avatar
Savant
3
7
6
-->
@3RU7AL
I think you meant to tag Best.Korea
#7
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@WyIted
Not all.murders are equal.
ok, then women should at least get a manslaughter charge

and a "child endangerment" charge on top of that
#8
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Savant
So anti-abortion people can (a) advocate abortions be punished with death and not succeed at passing legislation, or (b) advocate more politically feasible legislation and have a chance at banning abortion. Why would they choose (a) in the current political climate? There's a reason Abraham Lincoln was more successful than John Brown.
why not free healthcare for pregnant mothers and bastard children ?

that will greatly reduce the demand
#9
Savant
Savant's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 1,999
3
7
6
Savant's avatar
Savant
3
7
6
-->
@3RU7AL
why not free healthcare for pregnant mothers and bastard children ?
I would support that.
Topic's author
#10
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@Savant
Why would they choose (a) in the current political climate? There's a reason Abraham Lincoln was more successful than John Brown.
If John Brown didn’t commit terrorism (justified terrorism by our time because slavery is an abomination), then Lincoln wouldn’t have freed the slaves.  John Brown made Lincoln possible.

But to lie about what you really believe doesn’t please anyone, not even your supporters.  I don’t think the debate back then was, “slavery is murder”.  Even Lincoln was a white supremest; whereas John Brown may have seen blacks as equal to whites.  The pro lifer believes the zygote is equal to a woman, so if they are consistent, then they act like John Brown.  If you had Lincoln’s mentality (black less than white), then you had a chance of getting elected back then.  The right doesn’t have Lincoln’s mentality; they have John Brown’s.


Topic's author
#11
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
@wylted

You didn’t finish your post.
#12
Savant
Savant's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 1,999
3
7
6
Savant's avatar
Savant
3
7
6
-->
@TheUnderdog
John Brown made Lincoln possible.
It's just as likely that he made Lincoln's job harder. Lincoln denounced John Brown as a radical, and Brown made abolitionists look bad.

to lie about what you really believe doesn’t please anyone 
You don't have to lie to say "let's pass [x] law" or to vote for a moderate. Most people with John Brown's mentality probably voted for Lincoln, because it was the easiest way forward.
#13
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,467
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@TheUnderdog
You didn’t finish your post.
That's because I knew what I was saying was retarded and thought to myself. Why not one time in my life let my brain stop my mouth from making me sound retarded. (Metaphorically)
#14
Moozer325
Moozer325's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 1,187
3
2
8
Moozer325's avatar
Moozer325
3
2
8
-->
@TheUnderdog
By that logic mastrubation is murder. (Prob spelled that wrong. My spell check won’t work on it for some reason.) Birth control also becomes murder because your actions directly deprived a fetus, or a sperm cell of life. 
Topic's author
#15
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@Savant
Good point, but Trump won’t denounce the John Brown’s of the party.

It’s also different because nationwide, 1/4 Abortion Recieving Females (ARFs) in their life and it’s very spread out.  Slavery in 1860 was gone in half of the country (and this half didn’t get exposed to slave owners, so they were hated in the North).  ARFs are common in every state.

9 days later

Topic's author
#16
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@Moozer325
Sperm cells don't have all the needed chromosomes.

A complete puzzle with 1000 piecies is worth $10; one with 1 missing piece is 10 cents; a sperm cell is missing 500 piecies.
#17
Moozer325
Moozer325's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 1,187
3
2
8
Moozer325's avatar
Moozer325
3
2
8
-->
@TheUnderdog
But that’s besides the point. You are still depriving a possible human being of life. The logic follows that if women can’t have abortion, then men have to make sure that every time they cum it’s into a women for the purpose of making a baby.

Topic's author
#18
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@Moozer325
You are still depriving a possible human being of life. 
The anti-abortion argument is a zygote already is a human life, whereas sperm cells are just potential for life.  Just like an 8 year old kid has the potential to become a driver sometime in the future; but you don't live them a license until they pass the test.
#19
Moozer325
Moozer325's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 1,187
3
2
8
Moozer325's avatar
Moozer325
3
2
8
-->
@TheUnderdog
I guess that I just kinda assumed that most people didn’t use that argument because of its complete lack of evidence.

A zygote does not have consciousness, or any of the traits that make a human a human, so it is not living. 
Topic's author
#20
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@Moozer325
I guess that I just kinda assumed that most people didn’t use that argument because of its complete lack of evidence.
I can find articles that claim a zygote is a human being.

A zygote does not have consciousness
Neither does a sleeping person.

If a woman doesn't want pregnancy, then she should make sure her bf has a vasectomy before they have sex.  I'm fine with getting a vasectomy before I have sex if that's what I got to do.  It would also make transwomen more attractive to date (because transwomen won't require vasectomies to have sex with them).  So if you claim to be very pro trans, then this arrangement is something you would want to support because it makes trans people more attractive to date.

or any of the traits that make a human a human
The doctors claim a zygote is a human being.

#21
Moozer325
Moozer325's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 1,187
3
2
8
Moozer325's avatar
Moozer325
3
2
8
-->
@TheUnderdog
Doctors have differing opinions. The problem with your correlation is that a sleeping person is alive. They are living and breathing, and they have had consciousness previously. A Zygote is not alive. It will become alive, and become a human, but it’s not there yet. It’s just a jumble of cells that you claim has more rights than a living breathing human woman.