Dad tosses 4 kids to their death

[This_person]

I still don't understand how you two don't see the difference between the two.

I think it's because it seems like you're saying you don't like it, but accept it as a relatively morally okay thing for someone else to do, and Vrai is saying there is no such thing as relatively moral, there's right and wrong, so you're either against abortion or for it, not wishy washy in between.


I could be reading it way wrong, though.

 

[theArtistFormerlyKnownAs]

I still don't understand how you two don't see the difference between the two.

because they are stubborn

thats why I dropped the discussion yesterday. some people simply don't open their minds to realize that other people might think differently than them. :shrug:

 

[This_person]

because they are stubborn

thats why I dropped the discussion yesterday. some people simply don't open their minds to realize that other people might think differently than them. :shrug:

Pot, kettle. Kettle, pot.

 

[Cowgirl]

Then we're even because I don't see how you do see a difference.

 

[theArtistFormerlyKnownAs]

Pot, kettle. Kettle, pot.

ha, nice try. the brilliant part to all of this is that I am well aware the people think differently...

and I honestly don't understand how there has been at least one person to say that I am stating otherwise...

I can understand that you think differently and still say that you're wrong in your thinking :shrug:

 

[LexiGirl75]

I am for the right to an obtain abortion but if you choose not to do that, it's your choice. That's why I say pro-choice. I see the 2 sides as anti-choice and pro-choice. What is black and white in one's mind is not that way in anothers mind.

Of course we veered off topic

I feel the same way as both you and Cowgirl except I don't think it's something that should be abused as a "oops" but maybe as a careless situation one got themselves in and maybe they are mentally unable, financially unable, or physically (unhealthy) to have a child. After that they really need to take precautions for the future. Some people have had multiple abortions and I don't see this as an oops but abuse. But every activity has the opportunity to be abused (eating, sex, discipline, drug use, etc.).

 

[vraiblonde]

some people simply don't open their minds to realize that other people might think differently than them.

Okay.....

 

[LexiGirl75]

Glitterizing. Shining it up to make it more attractive and palatable. Polishing the turd.

Thanks.

 

[Cowgirl]

I think it's because it seems like you're saying you don't like it, but accept it as a relatively morally okay thing for someone else to do, and Vrai is saying there is no such thing as relatively moral, there's right and wrong, so you're either against abortion or for it, not wishy washy in between.


I could be reading it way wrong, though.

I feel the same way as both you and Cowgirl except I don't think it's something that should be abused as a "oops" but maybe as a careless situation one got themselves in and maybe they are mentally unable, financially unable, or physically (unhealthy) to have a child. After that they really need to take precautions for the future. Some people have had multiple abortions and I don't see this as an oops but abuse. But every activity has the opportunity to be abused (eating, sex, discipline, drug use, etc.).

It's not about whether I agree with it or not. This is just about the choice.

because they are stubborn

thats why I dropped the discussion yesterday. some people simply don't open their minds to realize that other people might think differently than them. :shrug:

No, people just disagree on things. It's fine.

 

[theArtistFormerlyKnownAs]

Okay.....

simple example for you vrai because you still don't get it apparently.

I do not smoke cigarettes nor would I encourage anyone else to do it. I do think people should have the option to smoke if they would like to though. You could consider yourself pro-smoking. I would not consider myself anti-smoking because I am not against it...(i'm not fighting to get cigarettes made illegal, encouraging taxes on them, trying to force people to not smoke, ect.), i'm simply not FOR smoking. I'm pro-choice whether you want to smoke or not.

my comparisons hitting home yet?

 

[This_person]

ha, nice try. the brilliant part to all of this is that I am well aware the people think differently...

and I honestly don't understand how there has been at least one person to say that I am stating otherwise...

I can understand that you think differently and still say that you're wrong in your thinking :shrug:

The bolded part is how we're the same. Assuming I disagree because I don't understand your point is where you're wrong.

 

[This_person]

It's not about whether I agree with it or not. This is just about the choice.

And, the discussion appears to me to be whether a choice of abortion or not should even be considered a viable choice. The argument for is that the life in the mother isn't a life yet. The argument against is that the life in the mother is a life, and mom's (and dad's) choice was before the baby was put there, not after.

It's understood that some people consider the fetus not a separate life until the umbillical (sp?) cord is cut, and others consider it a life immediately upon fertilization. Many noted scientists have argued first trimester abortions okay, because of the look of the child (developmentally) being insufficient, but everything after being wrong. Some people are good with killing the child as it's emerging from the womb, because the cord hasn't been cut yet.

If you accept the choice of killing the child as a fetus, people consider that pro-abortion (because you're either for it or not - no grey area allowed). It's not being for the choice, because you have to accept both alternatives of the choice as acceptable to be for allowing the choice.

Is that more clear?

 

[vraiblonde]

It's not being for the choice, because you have to accept both alternatives of the choice as acceptable to be for allowing the choice.

Exactly, and thank you

 

[Cowgirl]

And, the discussion appears to me to be whether a choice of abortion or not should even be considered a viable choice. The argument for is that the life in the mother isn't a life yet. The argument against is that the life in the mother is a life, and mom's (and dad's) choice was before the baby was put there, not after.

It's understood that some people consider the fetus not a separate life until the umbillical (sp?) cord is cut, and others consider it a life immediately upon fertilization. Many noted scientists have argued first trimester abortions okay, because of the look of the child (developmentally) being insufficient, but everything after being wrong. Some people are good with killing the child as it's emerging from the womb, because the cord hasn't been cut yet.

If you accept the choice of killing the child as a fetus, people consider that pro-abortion (because you're either for it or not - no grey area allowed). It's not being for the choice, because you have to accept both alternatives of the choice as acceptable to be for allowing the choice.

Is that more clear?

You can argue the same points over and over, but I still disagree with you. I understand what you are saying, but I still disagree.

 

[Cowgirl]

Exactly, and thank you

:shrug: I have a different opinion. No big deal.

 

[This_person]

You can argue the same points over and over, but I still disagree with you. I understand what you are saying, but I still disagree.

fair enough!

 

[theArtistFormerlyKnownAs]

:shrug: I have a different opinion. No big deal.

:discussionover:

:SLAM:

 

[Plan B]

Heard he did it because he was mad at his wife.