The "Bubs" of politics

[HateTheFake]

Concrete read my quotes to there fullest please, tired of reposting the same quote because of your lack of ability to read suttle hints.

EDIT - There ARE parts that are thrown away during the meat packing process. You're kidding yourself if you think that absolutely everything is used.

True but we dont waste the animal, we use most of it for food, clothing, hotdogs. We dont just kill it and throw it away.

PS - YOU'RE STILL TAKING A LIFE. You still haven't responded as to why it's any different, just because you use it.

True but we dont waste the animal, we use most of it for food, clothing, hotdogs. We dont just kill it and throw it away.

We dont kill animals because of an inconveniance (like abortions) we do it to survive.

[Singularity]

True but we dont waste the animal, we use most of it for food, clothing, hotdogs. We dont just kill it and throw it away.

This is interesting btw: You say that killing an animal without purpose is wrong (which I agree with) yet there are circumstances where apparantly you say the benefits outweigh the fact you are killing an animal.

This is EXACTLY what the proponents of abortions say. Noone, with the exception of a few retards, will say abortions should be legalized so we can all have unprotected sex and clean up afterwards.
All abortions are carefully weighed against our own morales and ofcourse the physical/psychic problems that may be associated with the procedure before a decision is made. There are actually laws that decide people can't decide to have an abortion on the spot to make sure this is done.
The difference is, you seem to put a lot of stock in the value of (pre)-human life, which is basically the only reason this discussion is still going, as apparantly you agree with the statement above.

The right of life is indeed a strange one, one I do not always support.

[HateTheFake]

This is interesting btw: You say that killing an animal without purpose is wrong (which I agree with) yet there are circumstances where apparantly you say the benefits outweigh the fact you are killing an animal.

This is EXACTLY what the proponents of abortions say. Noone, with the exception of a few retards, will say abortions should be legalized so we can all have unprotected sex and clean up afterwards.
All abortions are carefully weighed against our own morales and ofcourse the physical/psychic problems that may be associated with the procedure before a decision is made. There are actually laws that decide people can't decide to have an abortion on the spot to make sure this is done.
The difference is, you seem to put a lot of stock in the value of (pre)-human life, which is basically the only reason this discussion is still going, as apparantly you agree with the statement above.

The right of life is indeed a strange one, one I do not always support.

Lol i dont mind hearing feedback but you have a way of putting words into a good arguement, if only everyone was as smart to do this, cough royce cough

[ConcreteSchlyrd]

Concrete read my quotes to there fullest please, tired of reposting the same quote because of your lack of ability to read suttle hints.

I think you're looking for the word "subtle," but that's splitting hairs.

Please answer the stem cell research question.

We dont kill animals because of an inconveniance (like abortions) we do it to survive.

But yet abortion, used in the case where the act of childbirth might cause the mother to die... still wrong? Hmm. Puzzling.

You know, it'd be a lot easier for you if you just said "I don't like this because it's against my religion." That's easier to defend. Anything else and you're just going to end up looking like a douche.

[HateTheFake]

But yet abortion, used in the case where the act of childbirth might cause the mother to die... still wrong? Hmm. Puzzling.

o a what if question. What if that was the reason for all abortions. Unfortunately this cause may only contribute to around 10 percent if that.

Ok in the case where the mother is involved, is it not true the mother has lived her life. Id view this like i would view a heart transplant, if i would have 1 heart, and had to decide between a woman in her 20s or a child id give the heart to the child.

You know, it'd be a lot easier for you if you just said "I don't like this because it's against my religion." That's easier to defend. Anything else and you're just going to end up looking like a douche.

This might go by easier if you just replied "I'm a monster and believe in the right for an innocent life to be taken." Because that would be easier to defend, because based on the medical info ive seen. You would be wrong there. Anything else and you will look like a douche

My religion has nothing to do with my view on the importance of human life.

[ConcreteSchlyrd]

Still waiting on that stem cell answer.

EDIT: In the meantime:

o a what if question. What if that was the reason for all abortions. Unfortunately this cause may only contribute to around 10 percent if that.

Apart from completely making up a rough statistic--the question remains. Is that okay, by your own standards?

Ok in the case where the mother is involved, is it not true the mother has lived her life.

Who's making that call? You? By using your own logic that you've presented earlier in this thread, who's to say that she wouldn't go on and cure AIDS?

Id view this like i would view a heart transplant, if i would have 1 heart, and had to decide between a woman in her 20s or a child id give the heart to the child.

But why? Just because the mother is older? That's pretty ridiculous.

This might go by easier if you just replied "I'm a monster and believe in the right for an innocent life to be taken." Because that would be easier to defend, because based on the medical info ive seen. You would be wrong there. Anything else and you will look like a douche

My name is ConcreteSchlyrd, and I'm a college-educated monster (on the basketball court). I believe in the rights of people to make educated decisions for themselves.

[HateTheFake]

Stem cells can be gathered from babies through there umbilical cords, what other kind of awnser would you need.

[Singularity]

o a what if question. What if that was the reason for all abortions. Unfortunately this cause may only contribute to around 10 percent if that.

Ok in the case where the mother is involved, is it not true the mother has lived her life. Id view this like i would view a heart transplant, if i would have 1 heart, and had to decide between a woman in her 20s or a child id give the heart to the child.

Would you consider making it illegal for others to donate the heart to the woman instead of the child? You probably would not, as everyone should have a choice in such a matter. The reason you made the choice is that you view the unborn child as very important, most other people would argue that a sentient being that has proven to function in society would be more valuable/has more of a right to live?. (More ethicals dilemmas wait around the corner here, as in, what age would be the threshold, how valuable should one be).
Same logic applies to abortion, with the distinction that the amount of importance we attach to an embryo increase with the coming closer to being born. It is all factored in the equation.

[ConcreteSchlyrd]

Stem cells can be gathered from babies through there umbilical cords, what other kind of awnser would you need.

You were legitimizing the killing of animals specifically because we utilize it to survive. If aborted embryos are used for stem cell research (which could ultimately lead to cures for disease, thereby promoting survival), why is that any different?

[genocidal]

Okay this time I seriously found the solution to the abortion debate:

If we just eat the dead babies then it won't be a waste of human life. In addition to getting sustenance, eating babies would allow us to procure their brain and heart and thus their power (energy). Therefore, their lifeforce won't be wasted either!

[HateTheFake]

Apart from completely making up a rough statistic--the question remains. Is that okay, by your own standards?

ive personally experienced this and through my experience i would say no, its not ok.

Who's making that call? You? By using your own logic that you've presented earlier in this thread, who's to say that she wouldn't go on and cure AIDS?

Whos to say the kid doesnt? Afterall the kid is alive during a time of technological advances. Doesnt he after all have a better shot at finding a cure?

My name is Nolimit and im a pre-med not all the way done with college major

[HateTheFake]

You were legitimizing the killing of animals specifically because we utilize it to survive. If aborted embryos are used for stem cell research (which could ultimately lead to cures for disease, thereby promoting survival), why is that any different?

Because theres other non lethal ways to receive those stem cells.

[genocidal]

I bet babies taste pretty good, if prepared correctly.

[ConcreteSchlyrd]

ive personally experienced this and through my experience i would say no, its not ok.

So murdering (your words, not mine) the mother is okay. Gotcha. I guess some life really IS more precious than others.

Whos to say the kid doesnt? Afterall the kid is alive during a time of technological advances. Doesnt he after all have a better shot at finding a cure?

How do you know that? How do you know that the kid won't contract the flu in a few weeks and die anyway? How do you know that he doesn't get placed in foster care, get abused, then go on a killing rampage when he's twenty? You're making wild conjecture, just like I am. The difference is that I'm not making a blanket statement about "who's life is more important." People don't take the abortion decision lightly (like Singularity has already mentioned), but it shouldn't be an "always no."

My name is Nolimit and im a pre-med not all the way done with college major

Pre-med? Riiiight. Remind me to never get sick in Arkansas.

Because theres other non lethal ways to receive those stem cells.

There's also other ways to survive than killing animals.

[genocidal]

Getting into the business of judging the value of lives is tantamount to genocide (which is, oddly enough, what people like NoLimit equate abortion to).

If we just eat them though they're all worth the same thing (maybe the fat ones are worth more but I would argue that skinnier ones have more energy, and therefore power, in their brains so it offsets itself).