Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hypocrism)
    Yes, in fact, she's skipped an entire step by not mentioning neonaticide!
    Worrying. Particularly as many midwives are involved with terminations and miscarriages, I would hope that she learns how to evoke a little sympathy for real patients.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Calllu-m)
    It isn't infanticide because it isn't yet an infant. It's a foetus. Make the distinction.
    I didn't say it was infanticide, I made the comparison. Make the distinction.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HopefulMidwife)
    I didn't say it was infanticide, I made the comparison. Make the distinction.
    Rubbish, you put words in the poster's mouth with your snarky, sarcastic comparison of infanticide with bringing up a child in a broken home.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by edithwashere)
    I find it worrying that a prospective midwife doesn't know the difference between a foetus and an infant. I'll have to make a note of her face and avoid her if I ever have the misfortune of getting
    her as my midwife in future.
    Quite. I feel they should screen prospective midwives for this idiocy.

    (Original post by HopefulMidwife)
    I didn't say it was infanticide, I made the comparison. Make the distinction.
    Semantics. You manipulated what the poster had said by making an idiotic comparison that holds no weight because the situation is utterly different. You clearly need a lesson in biology.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Care-Free)
    Abortion is terrible, its horrendous and traumatizing but I'd rather go through that than raise a child wrong and give it a bad life.

    It's (not) my body, i will have a child when I.m ready for motherhood, when i can love and support a child and give him/her what she/he needs.
    then don't get pregnant. abortion only stops the pregnancy before it may be completed.

    all any child needs is a mother to act like a mother. a father to act life a father. that's all.

    the child is not your body.

    your concept still does not make sense. go through with absoluteness vs limited possibility.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sereni)
    There are vast differences between the bunch of cells that consist an embryo and those that I am made up of. Read around embryology if you want to better see how vast that difference is.
    Never said there were no differences between your bunch of cells vs a pre-born child at any stage in their life. just like how my cells are different than yours, as is an African's or a Jew's bunch of cells. we are all still human...you have still failed at arguing that.

    rightfully so, all humans should be respected and given the chance to live. your denial to this?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gray Wolf)
    You quoted the thing that explicitly stated "Just because we wish to prevent 93% of unnecessary killings it doesn't mean we can't make amends for where the lives of mothers are threatened."
    Then... you went on to write that anyway...
    well, how would you make amends for the lives of mothers who are threatned?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by da_nolo)
    then don't get pregnant. abortion only stops the pregnancy before it may be completed.

    all any child needs is a mother to act like a mother. a father to act life a father. that's all.

    the child is not your body.

    your concept still does not make sense. go through with absoluteness vs limited possibility.
    a pipe down, im not pregnant nor have i ever been jeeeeze. it's not a child in my eyes, the embryo, the bunch of cells are part of my body. The fact that a child would wreck my life isnt a limited possibility, it's an absolute certainty.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    Wow. The same two people have managed to argue for 26 pages and counting.

    I don't agree at all with what you're saying, but damn... I respect your stamina.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Muppetmad)
    To quote Judith Jarvis Thomson, who covers this point wonderfully: If the room is stuffy, and I therefore open a window to air it, and a burglar climbs in, it would be absurd to say, "Ah, now he can stay, she's given him a right to the use of her house--for she is partially responsible for his presence there, having voluntarily done what enabled him to get in, in full knowledge that there are such things as burglars, and that burglars burgle.''
    Sex was made for the creation of new beings. Windows that open were not made to let burglars in. This metaphor is invalid.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lady_L)
    Sex was made for the creation of new beings. Windows that open were not made to let burglars in. This metaphor is invalid.
    Assumes a creator.

    The metaphor is that sex allowing pregnancy is comparable to leaving a window open allowing a burglar in.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Calllu-m)
    It isn't infanticide because it isn't yet an infant. It's a foetus. Make the distinction.
    The 'creature' inside the womb is a foetus until it is borne...and yet they could live outside the womb a few months before birth - but they're still given the name foetus as it makes a distinction between humans and unborn humans as killing a baby would be murder - but removing life from a foetus is nothing because foetus' have no rights.

    Disabled foetus' can be aborted up to the day of birth. If one foetus was born early it could not be destroyed as it is now considered a human...and other humans generally have morals about murdering humans. However, if the foetus was not born early it could still be killed and society would completely except it.

    People get upset about unnecessary wars in other countries with many people dying and yet they condone the killing of millions innocent children. Hypocrisy in its greatest form!

    I find abortion completely unacceptable and very upsetting.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hypocrism)
    Assumes a creator.

    The metaphor is that sex allowing pregnancy is comparable to leaving a window open allowing a burglar in.


    Posted from TSR Mobile

    Ok, well the function of sex is to create new beings.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lady_L)
    Ok, well the function of sex is to create new beings.
    And that assumes sex cannot be used for pleasure!

    And it still doesn't negate the metaphor.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hypocrism)
    And that assumes sex cannot be used for pleasure!

    And it still doesn't negate the metaphor.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Scientifically, we are animals. In nature animals have sex to reproduce to keep their species running, pleasure is a by-product.
    However, humans see themselves in a different light.

    Anyhow, people should be aware of the possible outcome of sex - even with contraception. Why should an innocent child (foetus is just a word used to deceive people into believing that an unborn child shouldn't have rights) be painfully killed for their parents' actions. It wouldn't be acceptable if you were killed because your parent did something wrong, so why is it acceptable in these cases?

    How does my argument not negate the metaphor?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lady_L)
    Scientifically, we are animals. In nature animals have sex to reproduce to keep their species running, pleasure is a by-product.
    However, humans see themselves in a different light.

    Anyhow, people should be aware of the possible outcome of sex - even with contraception. Why should an innocent child (foetus is just a word used to deceive people into believing that an unborn child shouldn't have rights) be painfully killed for their parents' actions. It wouldn't be acceptable if you were killed because your parent did something wrong, so why is it acceptable in these cases?

    How does my argument not negate the metaphor?
    This is very true of animals. However, we are one of the few animals that gain physical pleasure from sex. From that, we can see it is logical to view sex as having more than one function, including pair bonding.

    You should know that dolphins also have casual sex for physical pleasure and bonding!

    It doesn't negate the metaphor because you've failed to demonstrate that sex can only be used for reproduction. The metaphor is that both actions have unintended consequences, and that from a certain moral perspective that makes the people involved not responsible for those unintended consequences. The same arguments you are using are applied by people who blame women for their own rapes!

    Let me be honest; it sounds like you are less concerned about stopping abortion, and more concerned about stopping people from having sex. You said that a child shouldn't be punished for its parents' bad actions, and that presupposes that sex is bad.

    You also claim that abortion is painful without evidence. In short: arguments from emotion without substance are weak arguments.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lady_L)
    The 'creature' inside the womb is a foetus until it is borne...and yet they could live outside the womb a few months before birth - but they're still given the name foetus as it makes a distinction between humans and unborn humans as killing a baby would be murder - but removing life from a foetus is nothing because foetus' have no rights.

    Disabled foetus' can be aborted up to the day of birth. If one foetus was born early it could not be destroyed as it is now considered a human...and other humans generally have morals about murdering humans. However, if the foetus was not born early it could still be killed and society would completely except it.

    People get upset about unnecessary wars in other countries with many people dying and yet they condone the killing of millions innocent children. Hypocrisy in its greatest form!

    I find abortion completely unacceptable and very upsetting.
    Well you might find abortion unacceptable. But frankly, I think it's a woman's right to choose, and I think you need to keep your conservative and reactionary opinions to yourself.

    They aren't children. They're unborn zygotes with no nerve endings and can't feel pain. It isn't hypocrisy, as it isn't murder.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Care-Free)
    a pipe down, im not pregnant nor have i ever been jeeeeze. it's not a child in my eyes, the embryo, the bunch of cells are part of my body. The fact that a child would wreck my life isnt a limited possibility, it's an absolute certainty.
    ....:confused: okay a pipe is down. ware you fixing your plumbing?

    no, the child is not a part of your body, it is simply connected to your inners.
    your arm is a part of your body. your appendix is a part of your body. another human is not.

    conjoined twins? is one a part of the other? no, just connected. same thing here. you are connected.

    cheerio
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by da_nolo)
    ....:confused: okay a pipe is down. ware you fixing your plumbing?

    no, the child is not a part of your body, it is simply connected to your inners.
    your arm is a part of your body. your appendix is a part of your body. another human is not.

    conjoined twins? is one a part of the other? no, just connected. same thing here. you are connected.

    cheerio
    So, where along the umbilical cord does it go from being the baby to being the mother?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Calllu-m)
    Well you might find abortion unacceptable. But frankly, I think it's a woman's right to choose, and I think you need to keep your conservative and reactionary opinions to yourself.

    They aren't children. They're unborn zygotes with no nerve endings and can't feel pain. It isn't hypocrisy, as it isn't murder.
    funny how you'd yell at her to keep her opinions to herself, but if another pro-abortionist was 'defending the right'...well then speak up brother! speak up sister! THAT's hipocrisy.

    children
    1.A young human being below the age of full physical development or below the legal age of majority.
    2.A son or daughter of any age.
    are not children? ha! clearly they are young and a son or daughter. they are children.

    it may not be hipocrisy to stamp out a single group of humans and seperate their 'worth' from the rest (some times), but it is prejudice.

    the definition of murder may not fit to your liking, but homicide does regardless to anyone's liking.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Have you ever participated in a Secret Santa?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.