The thread where we make enemies out of friends, aka the abortion debate thread — Page 16

CP3S said:

And yes, Bingo has said many times that this is his belief system and has been saying it for years, so I see no reason to doubt he is being earnest.

well, it is sometimes hard for me to know when he is being serious and when he is joking.     He often butts into a serious conversation and posts jokes and nonsense or meanless pics.   He will also often respond with jokes and nonsense and/or meaningless pics when I am posting something serious to him.   So, it is hard for me to take him serious sometimes.

Or in other words I'm nuts and it difficult to tell when I'm being serious?

I don't think the comparison to the Holocaust is an invalid one.  While it is often unwise to make comparisons to Nazis, Hitler, the Holocaust, and such, Warbler's point was not about the morality of it per se.  His argument appears to have to do with the definition of murder.  In other words, since murder is illegally killing, and since killing Jews in the Third Reich was legal, does that mean it wasn't murder?  It's a fair question, again dealing with semantic differences.  I know C3PS doesn't want to talk about the definition anymore, but clearly Warbler's intention is that just because killing someone is legal doesn't make it right.

And also to be clear, regardless of any improper word choices, the intent of his argument is not invalidated just because his interpretation of the word 'murder' is not necessarily the legal definition.  We use many words improperly.  Warbler's argument is not deflated simply because his usage involves what he and I believe is the violation of a higher law than that here on earth.

walkingdork said:

Warbler said:

CP3S said:

And yes, Bingo has said many times that this is his belief system and has been saying it for years, so I see no reason to doubt he is being earnest.

well, it is sometimes hard for me to know when he is being serious and when he is joking.     He often butts into a serious conversation and posts jokes and nonsense or meanless pics.   He will also often respond with jokes and nonsense and/or meaningless pics when I am posting something serious to him.   So, it is hard for me to take him serious sometimes.

That's why I like Bingo. This isn't a private conversation, it's a public thread on a public forum. Frink's and Bingo's side comments keep the rest of us from taking this conversation so we aren't screaming MURDER!! in an abortion thread.

 

Yes, I too appreciate the distractions and humor.  Sometimes I find it quite beneficial to jump into their jokes rather than taking the topic too seriously, even if it is something I feel quite passionate about.

Higher laws should go to a higher judge than earthly laws.

That's the problem.

Too many Adams gavelling Mjölnir.

walkingdork said:

darth_ender said:

I don't think the comparison to the Holocaust is an invalid one. 

Oh no, it's invald...as well as crazy.

Oh!  You got me there!  My point crumbles at your logic! ;)

Please quote me fully, and make sure you understand my meaning.  His statement was not that killing a fetus is equivalent to killing a Jew.  His statement is that both are murder, though both are/were legal.  It's a matter of definition.  He may feel the two are equal, but that's not what he was saying in this instance.  He is saying that both were legal killings, but that one can still argue that they are murder in spite of not fitting the official definition.

 Warbler's argument is not deflated simply because his usage involves what he and I believe is the violation of a higher law than that here on earth.

This is why I'm completely fine with people wanting to discourage people from having abortions. However, higher laws should have no bearing on "earth laws."

Again, I'm discussing definitions.  Bingowings made a couple of teasing statements about how unfortunate it is when words don't mean what we want them to mean.   I am pointing out that just because he got the word wrong, that does not invalidate his point.  I seem to recall you using the word zygote incorrectly recently.  While I drew attention to that incorrect usage, I wasn't trying to throw out your whole argument based on that little error.  I'm defending Warbler's word usage yet again.  My mention of the higher law is simply to defend the usage of the term 'murder,' though it is technically incorrect.  In his and my mind, it opposes God's law, and is thus 'illegal' in that sense.  But I am not trying to argue that solely based on my interpretation of moral and heavenly law should it be outlawed on earth.  I've enumerated quite a number of philosophical reasons and parallel examples of why it should be illegal.  While to me Heaven's law trumps all other reasons, I understand that when debating with others regarding earthly law, my argument must appeal to other trains of thought.

Well, much as I enjoy this debate, I don't think I'm going to argue with you if you think that a perfectly fair analogy is crazy without providing any rational reason.  You don't have to like it, but both were/are legal, and yet some people saw/see such as acceptable while others saw/see such as unacceptable.  Nothing crazy about that.  But I think I'm done defending definitions since I feel like I am continually taken out of context (not just by you, mind you).

Sorry if I'm coming off as snotty.  Not my intention.

EDIT: As for the Bible, I'm not sure if you mean in reference to abortions or just using the term at all.  Frankly, I'm not sure...but searching on the BibleGateway, it appears that the term murderer is used a few times in the KJV, but not just plain murder.  As for the NIV, it gets a bit more usage as both murderer and murder.

Now doing a little research and wasting valuable study time yields some interesting biblical arguments regarding abortion.  One site gave some extremely bizarre and stretched interpretations justifying abortion from the Bible.  Only a few citations could be considered truly worthy of further examination and rebuttal.  However, several other citations support the notion of preserving life.  I'd be interested in discussing that topic further, but I can't get on this site anymore today--too much to do.

Bingowings said:

Or in other words I'm nuts and it difficult to tell when I'm being serious?

I truly do not know if you are nuts or not, but I do know I have a hard time telling whether or not you are being serious sometimes. 

Bingowings said:

Too many Adams gavelling Mjölnir.

huh?

walkingdork said:

darth_ender said:

I don't think the comparison to the Holocaust is an invalid one. 

Oh no, it's invald...as well as crazy.

whatever.

walkingdork said:

 Warbler's argument is not deflated simply because his usage involves what he and I believe is the violation of a higher law than that here on earth.

This is why I'm completely fine with people wanting to discourage people from having abortions. However, higher laws should have no bearing on "earth laws."

higher laws?  do you mean the laws of my religion.   I don't believe in any of my arguments in regards to abortion,  that I have mentioned my beliefs in God or Christ.   I see absolutely no reason why atheist could not be pro-life.   I see no reason why one would need to believe in God to believe that the fetus is a human being that should have the same right to life as you or I and that therefore people shouldn't be allowed to kill it.   What do my religious beliefs have to do with any of this.   If you've read my posts in the political thread, you should know that I am an avid defender of  the concept of separation of church and state.   There are many of the laws of my religion that I would totally object to being part our government's laws.   Did you not see that I was pro gay marriage?    Gays getting married clearly contradict my religious beliefs, but I do not want want my religion's believes forced on everyone.   I think people should be allowed to live how they like as long as they are not hurting anyone else.   I believe abortion does hurt someone else, the unborn baby.   

walkingdork said:

darth_ender said:

Well, much as I enjoy this debate, I don't think I'm going to argue with you if you think that a perfectly fair analogy is crazy without providing any rational reason.  You don't have to like it, but both were/are legal, and yet some people saw/see such as acceptable while others saw/see such as unacceptable.  Nothing crazy about that.  But I think I'm done defending definitions since I feel like I am continually taken out of context (not just by you, mind you).

Comparing the legality of abortion to the legality of genocide during Nazi Germany is the dumbest fucking idea I have ever heard of. So no, I will not be offering much "rational reason" for saying an analogy is crazy.

why was it crazy?  C3PS argued that since abortion is legal and socially acceptable,  I was silly for "getting my panties tangled up" over it.   In Germany, at the time, the Holocaust was also deemed legal and socially acceptable(at least for some Germans, I realize some Germans opposed all the stuff Hitler was doing).    The comparison seems very logical to me.  

walkingdork said:

Sorry if I'm coming off as snotty.  Not my intention.

I know, I just think you need to step back and realize how ridiculous this conversation has become. This is beyond semantics.

no, I think you need to step back and realize how snotty you are coming off.   

walkingdork said:

EDIT: As for the Bible, I'm not sure if you mean in reference to abortions or just using the term at all.  Frankly, I'm not sure...but searching on the BibleGateway, it appears that the term murderer is used a few times in the KJV, but not just plain murder.  As for the NIV, it gets a bit more usage as both murderer and murder.

Now doing a little research and wasting valuable study time yields some interesting biblical arguments regarding abortion.  One site gave some extremely bizarre and stretched interpretations justifying abortion from the Bible.  Only a few citations could be considered truly worthy of further examination and rebuttal.  However, several other citations support the notion of preserving life.  I'd be interested in discussing that topic further, but I can't get on this site anymore today--too much to do.

some dude in the bible shot one off (ejaculated) into the ground and was immediately put to death by God for wasting his seed. Pretty sure the big man would be against abortion.

Yes, I am betting he would be.   The question at hand isn't whether or not God wants us committing abortions,  the question is whether or not it should be legal.    With Gay Marriage, I also believe that God doesn't want Gays to get married,  but I think it should be legal for them to do so.   They of course, have answer to God for that, but that is between them and God.   The reason I think Gay Marriage should be legal and abortion not, is because I believe that gay marriage hurts no one but possibly the gay couple deciding to get married, however I do believe that abortion hurts someone other than the person deciding to have an abortion.   I believe it hurts the unborn child, hence the difference.   Despite how you want to paint me, I am not some sort of right wing nutcase, trying to force his religion down the throats of others.  

walkingdork said:

I'm just thankful that the God (who is the same today as he was yesterday (or however that phrase goes)) doesn't continue to kill people for jerking off or using BC.

I am glad that God does not kill people for sinning,  if he did, no one would be here. 

walkingdork said:

Warbler said:

walkingdork said:

darth_ender said:

I don't think the comparison to the Holocaust is an invalid one. 

Oh no, it's invald...as well as crazy.

whatever.

Seriously bring this argument up to a stranger and see what they say.

I don't need to.  I don't think it was crazy, and that is enough for me. 

walkingdork said:

walkingdork said:

 Warbler's argument is not deflated simply because his usage involves what he and I believe is the violation of a higher law than that here on earth.

This is why I'm completely fine with people wanting to discourage people from having abortions. However, higher laws should have no bearing on "earth laws."

higher laws?  do you mean the laws of my religion.   I don't believe in any of my arguments in regards to abortion,  that I have mentioned my beliefs in God or Christ.  

Ender brought up higher laws, not me.

my mistake then.   I honestly thought you had brought them up. 

walkingdork said:

I see no reason why one would need to believe in God to believe that the fetus is a human being that should have the same right to life as you or I and that therefore people shouldn't be allowed to kill it.   What do my religious beliefs have to do with any of this.  

I don't disagree but it turns out most religious people are pro-life not pro-choice. So maybe it has something to do with it, but I'm not about to guess.

I am sure for many, the reason they are pro-life is because of their religious beliefs.  But for me, it is more than that.

walkingdork said:

 

Edit: well I could guess, but I won't claim that my guess is correct and others incorrect. My guess is that religious folks have read a bible that puts women in a position that is unequal to me and therefore men have no issue telling women how to make decisions about her body.

1. I have always been very uncomfortable with passages in the Bible saying that women are subservient to men. 

2.  May I remind you that many women are pro-life?

walkingdork said:

If you've read my posts in the political thread, you should know that I am an avid defender of  the concept of separation of church and state.   There are many of the laws of my religion that I would totally object to being part our government's laws.   Did you not see that I was pro gay marriage?    Gays getting married clearly contradict my religious beliefs, but I do not want want my religion's believes forced on everyone.   I think people should be allowed to live how they like as long as they are not hurting anyone else.   I believe abortion does hurt someone else, the unborn baby.   

I know that's how you feel warbler, and I think it's great you can think outside of your religion/upbringing. Again, I did not bring up higher laws.

thankyou.

walkingdork said:

darth_ender said:

Well, much as I enjoy this debate, I don't think I'm going to argue with you if you think that a perfectly fair analogy is crazy without providing any rational reason.  You don't have to like it, but both were/are legal, and yet some people saw/see such as acceptable while others saw/see such as unacceptable.  Nothing crazy about that.  But I think I'm done defending definitions since I feel like I am continually taken out of context (not just by you, mind you).

Comparing the legality of abortion to the legality of genocide during Nazi Germany is the dumbest fucking idea I have ever heard of. So no, I will not be offering much "rational reason" for saying an analogy is crazy.

It is because of this statement that I am sure you don't understand what I'm talking about.

I am not equating the two at all, except in the misuse of the word 'murder'.  I am not calling abortion doctors Hitlers and Himmlers.  I am not calling women who get abortions genocidal or even infanticidal.  I am not declaring that the 40 million annual pre-birth killings are the same as the 6 million WWII Jewish killings.  I am simply saying that C3PS said abortion cannot be murder because murder is, by definition, killing illegally.  In Nazi Germany, killing Jews was not illegal killing, and therefore was not murder, according to the official definition (at least not illegal in Nazi Germany).  To Warbler's (and my) sentiments, killing someone can still be morally wrong, even if it is not illegal.  Therefore, according to Warbler's definition, just because abortions are legal, that doesn't make them morally right.  Much of this country and the world agrees with him.  Even more of the country and world would agree that just because killing Jews in Germany was legal, it wasn't right.

We are not saying they are the same!  We are not comparing the nature of the acts.  We are merely pointing out that just because it is legal doesn't mean that it is right.  Don't get so caught up in the popular "Oh, someone compared something to Nazis so I won't even consider the nature of the argument" fad.  We are not comparing anyone to Nazis.  We are drawing a rather tangential parallel.

walkingdork said:

Warbler said:

walkingdork said:

darth_ender said:

Well, much as I enjoy this debate, I don't think I'm going to argue with you if you think that a perfectly fair analogy is crazy without providing any rational reason.  You don't have to like it, but both were/are legal, and yet some people saw/see such as acceptable while others saw/see such as unacceptable.  Nothing crazy about that.  But I think I'm done defending definitions since I feel like I am continually taken out of context (not just by you, mind you).

Comparing the legality of abortion to the legality of genocide during Nazi Germany is the dumbest fucking idea I have ever heard of. So no, I will not be offering much "rational reason" for saying an analogy is crazy.

why was it crazy?  C3PS argued that since abortion is legal and socially acceptable,  I was silly for "getting my panties tangled up" over it.   In Germany, at the time, the Holocaust was also deemed legal and socially acceptable(at least for some Germans, I realize some Germans opposed all the stuff Hitler was doing).    The comparison seems very logical to me.  

America is nothing like Nazi Germany. Abortion is nothing like genocide.

I know that, but that is irrelevant to the comparison I was making.  I think you need to go back and read the conversation between me and C3PS.  Maybe then it will make more sense to you what I brought up the Holocaust.

walkingdork said:

walkingdork said:

EDIT: As for the Bible, I'm not sure if you mean in reference to abortions or just using the term at all.  Frankly, I'm not sure...but searching on the BibleGateway, it appears that the term murderer is used a few times in the KJV, but not just plain murder.  As for the NIV, it gets a bit more usage as both murderer and murder.

Now doing a little research and wasting valuable study time yields some interesting biblical arguments regarding abortion.  One site gave some extremely bizarre and stretched interpretations justifying abortion from the Bible.  Only a few citations could be considered truly worthy of further examination and rebuttal.  However, several other citations support the notion of preserving life.  I'd be interested in discussing that topic further, but I can't get on this site anymore today--too much to do.

some dude in the bible shot one off (ejaculated) into the ground and was immediately put to death by God for wasting his seed. Pretty sure the big man would be against abortion.

Yes, I am betting he would be.   The question at hand isn't whether or not God wants us committing abortions,  the question is whether or not it should be legal.    With Gay Marriage, I also believe that God doesn't want Gays to get married,  but I think it should be legal for them to do so.   They of course, have answer to God for that, but that is between them and God.   The reason I think Gay Marriage should be legal and abortion not, is because I believe that gay marriage hurts no one but possibly the gay couple deciding to get married, however I do believe that abortion hurts someone other than the person deciding to have an abortion.   I believe it hurts the unborn child, hence the difference.   Despite how you want to paint me, I am not some sort of right wing nutcase, trying to force his religion down the throats of others.  

I've never painted you as a right wing anything. I'm not accusing you of anything. Everything I've said is only in response to what Ender is saying. Nothing to do with you I promise.

again, my mistake.   Please understand I posted the things you've responded  to here, before I understood that Ender was the one that brought religion into the conversation.

walkingdork said:

walkingdork said:

I'm just thankful that the God (who is the same today as he was yesterday (or however that phrase goes)) doesn't continue to kill people for jerking off or using BC.

I am glad that God does not kill people for sinning,  if he did, no one would be here. 

Unless of course the whole idea of God was completely fabricated, but that's a whole 'nother conversation for a different thread.

yes, and a completely pointless conversation, since I can not prove to you that God exists, and you can not prove to me that he doesn't exist.

walkingdork said:

darth_ender said:

walkingdork said:

darth_ender said:

Well, much as I enjoy this debate, I don't think I'm going to argue with you if you think that a perfectly fair analogy is crazy without providing any rational reason.  You don't have to like it, but both were/are legal, and yet some people saw/see such as acceptable while others saw/see such as unacceptable.  Nothing crazy about that.  But I think I'm done defending definitions since I feel like I am continually taken out of context (not just by you, mind you).

Comparing the legality of abortion to the legality of genocide during Nazi Germany is the dumbest fucking idea I have ever heard of. So no, I will not be offering much "rational reason" for saying an analogy is crazy.

It is because of this statement that I am sure you don't understand what I'm talking about.

I am not equating the two at all, except in the misuse of the word 'murder'.  I am not calling abortion doctors Hitlers and Himmlers.  I am not calling women who get abortions genocidal or even infanticidal.  I am not declaring that the 40 million annual pre-birth killings are the same as the 6 million WWII Jewish killings.  I am simply saying that C3PS said abortion cannot be murder because murder is, by definition, killing illegally.  In Nazi Germany, killing Jews was not illegal killing, and therefore was not murder, according to the official definition (at least not illegal in Nazi Germany).  To Warbler's (and my) sentiments, killing someone can still be morally wrong, even if it is not illegal.  Therefore, according to Warbler's definition, just because abortions are legal, that doesn't make them morally right.  Much of this country and the world agrees with him.  Even more of the country and world would agree that just because killing Jews in Germany was legal, it wasn't right.

We are not saying they are the same!  We are not comparing the nature of the acts.  We are merely pointing out that just because it is legal doesn't mean that it is right.  Don't get so caught up in the popular "Oh, someone compared something to Nazis so I won't even consider the nature of the argument" fad.  We are not comparing anyone to Nazis.  We are drawing a rather tangential parallel.

I realize that you are not comparing the acts of abortion to genocide. That would beyond stupid.

C3PS's saying that murder is illegal killing may not be an acceptable answer but saying that Jews killed in the Holocaust were not technically murdered in Nazi eyes by the same definition is just ridiculous. They were crimes against humanity and war crimes. Most of what happened during the Holocaust was behind closed doors and most Germans didn't even know what was happening.

Ridiculous analogy.

 

CP3S's argument:

1.  CP3S's definition of murder: to unlawfully kill

2.  abortion is legal

3   Therefore abortion is not murder 

My rebuttal:

1.  CP3S's definition of murder: to unlawfully kill

2. the Holocaust, while sick and evil, was legal in Germany at the time it was committed.

3   Therefore the Holocaust was not murder.  

Now do you see why I brought up the holocaust? 

To the Nazis, killing Jews wasn't murder. Behind closed doors, yes, but still legal in those instances. Many German citizens turned in their Jewish neighbors and those who aided them, often with the knowledge of the likely consequences. Perhaps a German civilian wouldn't get away with flat out killing a Jewish man (though I'm not certain, I kinda doubt any officials would have stopped him), it was legal in the various prison camps and ghettos. If a Nazi soldier didn't like a particular Jew for no reason and shot him, no action would be taken against him.

Of course such were crimes against humanity. But they were legal, at least in certain circumstances. And if in its purest form murder means unlawful killing, then according to German law, the Jews were not murdered. Of course, to the most of the rest of the world, they were.

But this is why the abortion argument is such a difficult one: if we really wanted to get into the nitty gritty subjectivity of morals debate again, many consider abortion to be a crime against humanity too. There are valid arguments supporting that belief, even if many ultimately disagree. To them it could be argued that it is murder, even if it is legal.

This is from Wikipedia, detailing the essential ingredients to murder:<br />

1. Unlawful
2. killing
3. of a human
4. by another human
5. with malice aforethought

According to CP3S, abortion is not murder because of #1. While that is technically true, I find it unlawful according to a different set of laws. Just as it was legal to kill Jews in the Third Reich, the rest of the world didn't see it that way and viewed it as murder. In the U.S. abortion is legal. However, much of the world sees it as unlawful, whether it be according to God's law, or even the actual written laws of several countries (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_law ). Are we judging murder by the host country's laws, or by the laws of those who judge that country? Could the Irish or Chileans justifiably say that Americans are committing murder, just as we said of Germany? Just because we don't see it as a crime against humanity doesn't mean they are obliged to agree.

But I personally do not see abortion as murder, though my reasoning is based on #5. I do not believe most who abort their children are doing so with any intent to harm a living person. Nevertheless, I believe it to be utterly wrong in the vast majority of cases.

Out of interest, this article discussing the responsibility of the German people with regards to the Holocaust is an worthwhile read on the topic, presenting opinions for and against the responsibility of the German public.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsibility_for_the_Holocaust#The_German_people

(Sorry for posting the long links like this--trouble hyperlinking right now)