- Dragon Ball Z Forum
- →
- The Lounge
- →
- Deep Discussion
- →
- Abortion Disussion and Arguments
| We hope you enjoy your visit to this forum. If you are reading this then it means you are currently browsing the forum as a guest, we don’t limit any of the content posted from guests however if you join, you will have the ability to join the discussions! We are always happy to see new faces at this forum and we would like to hear your opinion, so why not register now? It doesn’t take long and you can get posting right away. Click here to Register! If you are having difficulties validating your account please email us at admin@dbzf.co.uk If you're already a member please log in to your account: |
| Abortion Disussion and Arguments | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Mar 31 2014, 11:58 PM (11,985 Views) | |
| SaiyanHajime | Apr 4 2014, 07:59 AM Post #166 |
 
|
You're always going to find people who are exceptions to the rule, but I'd argue you'd never find a sane woman who continually put herself through the trauma of risking pregnancy and then aborting. You'd have to be exceptionally unlucky to, despite taking precautions, get pregnant twice. Someone I know, though wish I didn't, was actually told she'd not be able to have kids then found herself pregnant. So, ya know, fair enough. She kept the child because she disagrees with abortion, but then despite not wanting another child, got pregnant again. Okay, sorry, what? And then again, but miscarried. Okay wait. You found yourself pregnant TWO TIMES after the first unwanted pregnancy? Two. Times? And the dude claims she said she was on the pill. I dunno if anyone knew about this, but there's actually an injectable contraceptive for men. The more people who know about it, hopefully the demand will rise and it'll become cheaper. That would be f***ing amazing if it were on the NHS. Taking the bullet out of the gun seems far more logical than armour? Lol. Though, I still think both the man and woman in a sexual situation should take responsibility individually. I wouldn't trust anyone who said it didn't matter about condoms because they're on the pill. People are fallible, they can mess up their dosage, and the fear would outweigh the burden of condom use for me. Edited by SaiyanHajime, Apr 4 2014, 08:01 AM.
|
|
Twitter | deviantArt | Tumblr | |
 |
 
|
| Deleted User | Apr 4 2014, 05:14 PM Post #167 |
|
Deleted User
|
Wow, that's nuts. I think it's cool that she kept the fetus. Most women wouldn't do that if they didn't want a child. & The injection thing sounds cool. I would much radther inject something prior to sex than wear a condom lol. But how does it work exactly? |
|
|
|
| SaiyanHajime | Apr 4 2014, 05:44 PM Post #168 |
|
It's monthly, I think. The problem with male contraceptives is that controlling millions of cells every day is harder than the monthly release of one in females. I think it's tampering with hormones in the same way the pill does, though until recently they've not found a way to specifically target speed production without also hampering necessary male sex characteristics. The pill isn't without it's faults, screwing around with hormones is always going to have side effects. I don't think many people, especially us guys, realise what the pill is really doing. |
|
Twitter | deviantArt | Tumblr | |
|
|
|
| Deleted User | Apr 4 2014, 06:00 PM Post #169 |
|
Deleted User
|
Oh I see. I wouldn't mind injecting it monthly. &yeah, it'd probably mess with hormones a lot, but I think it'd be worth it. They really should tell you what it's actually doing, though. |
|
|
|
| lunar2 | Apr 6 2014, 03:10 AM Post #170 |
|
you yourself just said it is not a black and white issue. it does not come down to the only options being abortions are always allowed and abortions are never allowed. yes, if those were the only two choices, i would vote pro choice every time, because i know most abortions fall under the exceptions i listed. i would much rather protect the majority of women who do have a good reason for an abortion than restrict the minority that don't. and even if the ideal situation were to occur, in which abortion were only legally used for medical reasons, or in the case of rape/involuntary incest (sorry, if the adult brother and sister voluntarily get it on, they're in the same boat as any other couple, imo)/etc., i would not want getting an illegal abortion criminalized. i would want performing an illegal abortion criminalized. the woman is often desperate for whatever reason, and i understand that (hopefully the few monsters who just kill their children simply because they don't want them will sort themselves out from repeated use of inherently risky, unnecessary medical procedures). the abortion provider, on the other hand, has no such excuse. they bring any punishment they get onto their own heads, since they have nothing even resembling a valid reason to break the law. but it is not black and white, and contrary to what some people believe, there is such a thing as a middle ground stance that recognizes the value and importance of both the mother and the fetus. that type of thinking is what lead to cloning humans for research purposes (because the fetuses weren't implanted, and were terminated early on, they didn't run afoul of anti cloning laws based on the ruling that early term fetuses are not people) and attempting to harvest embryonic stem cells. although, wonder of wonders, when we told the scientists no, they won't get any new funding for that type of research, they figured out how to regress adult stem cells back to an embryonic state remarkably quickly. funny how, when you force scientists to respect human life, it actually accelerates the development of ethical alternatives. they can make surprising advances when their money is on the line. for the record, i am not against cloning if it ever becomes viable. i am not against fertility programs that at least give all the viable embryos a chance at life (i am against creating 2 dozen at a time when you only plan on using one or two). @brofist. yeah, when both sides start breaking forum rules, its time to drop the conversation. on that note, i apologize for the not understanding math quip. that was rude of me. it's clear we aren't going to reach an agreement on this issue, because we have fundamentally different priorities and beliefs. i do wish you'd at least acknowledge what my position actually is, instead of arguing past it. i never claimed that the rights of the fetus > the rights of the woman. i claimed that some of what you call rights aren't rights at all. you don't have a right to social status. you don't have a right to economic stability. you don't have a right to do whatever you want, regardless of the consequences to others. and the fetus is an "other". it is not part of the mother, it is merely attached to the mother. it is its own entity, with its own separate, inherent value, regardless of whether anyone wants it or not, or whether the mother plans/wants/needs to abort it. a fetus the mother wants, a fetus the mother doesn't want, and a fetus that is endangering the mother's health all have the same inherent value. it is the situation that is different, not the fetus. now, you do have the right to maintain your physical and psychological health. which was covered by my position. you also do have the right to life. which was also covered by my position. and these rights are not granted by any government or organization. they are inherent. you have the fundamental right to freedom of beliefs, expression, association, etc., regardless of whether the government you live under recognizes those rights or not. the role of the government is not to define what rights its citizens have (in fact, it's the other way around, it is the citizens' role to define what rights the government has). the role of the government is merely to enforce the rights of the citizens to the best of its ability. that a particular government may fail to do so doesn't negate the existence of those rights. also, in all those cases you mentioned, it was religion, or a specific system of morals, that caused the problem, not morality in general. morality in general is not only a good thing, but a necessary thing that is required for the functioning of any society, no matter how small or large, simple or complex. we may ascribe to different systems of morality (obviously, i place a higher value on sentient life, as well as personal responsibility), but everyone has a moral system. and until recently, i would have sworn that nearly everyone could at least agree in theory that the needless ending of a sentient life without its consent is a very bad thing. and yes, a fetus counts as sentient life because it has the capacity to develop sentience, unlike, say, a roach. but anyway, this is the last i'm going to say to you on this topic. we're both getting too emotional, and neither of us is going to change our minds. |
|
list of canon sources: the DB manga, and the Dr. Slump manga as it applies to the crossover during the rra saga. list of non canon sources: everything else, regardless of origin, format, or quality. for those that blindly follow word of god | |
|
|
|
| Master Gohan | Apr 8 2014, 12:18 PM Post #171 |
 
|
I think its unfair for the woman if the guy just leaves. He should at least pay for the baby. It's his responsibility too. |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 8 2014, 12:51 PM Post #172 |
|
Yeah, I think so too. Sticky situation, huh? |
|
|
|
| Prince Cooler4 | Apr 12 2014, 09:47 PM Post #173 |
|
Abortion is 100% pure evil...simple as that... Killing=wrong I believe in personal choice, and freedom as long as it dosint harm others. For example, you can do whatever you want as long as you don't bring physical harm onto others... Abortion is simply murder... Don't want the baby? put it up for adoption. Simple as that. Their are thousands of christian agencies (that I know) willing to PAY you for the child. |
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 12 2014, 10:34 PM Post #174 |
|
Why is it evil? And it isn't killing anything. You can't kill what isn't born. |
|
|
|
| lunar2 | Apr 13 2014, 01:43 AM Post #175 |
|
that is literally one of the dumbest arguments for abortion i have ever heard. life does not begin at birth. life began somewhere between 3.5 and 4.5 billion years ago, and has continued in an unbroken chain since then. the sperm and egg cells themselves are alive (although not human, since they're missing 23 chromosomes). when it comes to cellular life, there is no gray area between alive, and not alive. essentially, it boils down to this: does it have a working metabolism? if yes, it is alive. if no, it is not. only viruses have any debate over whether or not they are alive, because while they have no metabolism, they fit other criteria for life, such as having genetic code, being able to reproduce themselves, and reacting to stimuli. but a human embryo or fetus fits every criteria for life, save one. they are not able to reproduce. however, if merely not meeting that criteria is enough to say that it is not alive, then life does not begin until puberty, and people who are infertile are not alive, either. so obviously the ability to reproduce is not necessary to be counted as alive, so long as you meet all the other criteria. |
|
list of canon sources: the DB manga, and the Dr. Slump manga as it applies to the crossover during the rra saga. list of non canon sources: everything else, regardless of origin, format, or quality. for those that blindly follow word of god | |
|
|
|
| Krystal | Apr 13 2014, 02:20 AM Post #176 |
Cooking Mama
|
What dictates something as working though? In most cases, working would mean ' functional.' If they can't live outside the mother, is it a working metabolism? |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 13 2014, 02:32 AM Post #177 |
|
But Lunar, with the argument you're making, you may as well be against contraception and birth control as well. Kind of a silly argument if you ask me. You sound like Rick Santorum. 
|
|
|
|
| lunar2 | Apr 13 2014, 03:56 AM Post #178 |
|
no. because, as i said in the very post you quoted, sperm and eggs are not human. they do not have the same DNA as a whole human cell. the woman does not become responsible for the embryo until it attaches to the uterine wall. anything before that, including emergency contraceptive, is fair game. |
|
list of canon sources: the DB manga, and the Dr. Slump manga as it applies to the crossover during the rra saga. list of non canon sources: everything else, regardless of origin, format, or quality. for those that blindly follow word of god | |
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 13 2014, 04:09 AM Post #179 |
|
But they're alive. What's the difference between being alive and being human? There are some people out there who aren't even really living. (That was deep.) 
|
|
|
|
| lunar2 | Apr 13 2014, 04:21 AM Post #180 |
|
being human is being a member of the species homo sapiens. sperm and egg cells are not members of said species, because they only have half the chromosomes that make up a human. simply being alive is not unique to humanity. also, if those people "not really living" are satisfied with their lives, who are we to judge the quality of their lives? they may think their life is great. |
|
list of canon sources: the DB manga, and the Dr. Slump manga as it applies to the crossover during the rra saga. list of non canon sources: everything else, regardless of origin, format, or quality. for those that blindly follow word of god | |
|
|
|
| 0 users reading this topic | |
 |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Deep Discussion · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
 4:36 PM Jul 13
|
Theme Designed by McKee91
Powered by ZetaBoards Premium · Privacy Policy