You are not logged in.

Announcement

Welcome to the the original, the one and only, Spiceislander Talkshop. The site remains Grenadian owned and hosted in the United States.

#1 Jan 05, 2017 10:10 pm

Expat
Active

OK, so answer me this

I understand that there has been a strong racial control element to the Abortion program in America, where the leading family planing organisation (can't think of the name) has been located in principally Black areas, and none in mainly White, but equally poor areas in the same City. I completely accept this as unjust.

I also understand the likes of RD fuming at the mouth at casual abortions.

But who is getting the short end of the stick, the Blacks who are having unplanned and  socially damaging pregnancies terminated, or the Whites who had to carry on in their self made squalor raising loads of unwanted and often uncared for children.
My own belief is that girls and boys of ALL racial groups should be made aware of the results of unprotected jiggy jig, and in my view then made to live up to the responsibility of 20 seconds of lust. Let life be tough and soul destroying if you are too stupid to use protection.

But really who is getting the better deal, if the Whites have to get on with the results of their stupidity, and the Blacks don't.

Yet historically the Black movements call it a form of Genocide.

Offline

#2 Jan 05, 2017 11:15 pm

Real Distwalker
Active

Re: OK, so answer me this

The murdered babies are getting the worst of it.

Offline

#3 Jan 06, 2017 11:30 am

New Historian
Active

Re: OK, so answer me this

Real Distwalker wrote:

The murdered babies are getting the worst of it.

How can you murder a thing that isn't a person? If you take a 9-week foetus out of its mother's womb, would it survive? Is it sustainable? Therefore is it a "human life"? No to all; it is pre-life.

Offline

#4 Jan 06, 2017 11:41 am

Real Distwalker
Active

Re: OK, so answer me this

I guess I would respond several ways....

1) The fetus has all of the genetic components of an individual human being.  The fetus has unique DNA that is different from that of the mother.

2) There are many times when humans cannot survive without assistance.  A person on life support cannot survive without assistance.  A six month old baby cannot survive long without assistance.  The fact that someone needs assistance to survive does not mean he or she isn't human.

3) I noticed that you used the word "mother".  Only individual entities have mothers.  Inanimate "things" do not have mothers.

4) I start worrying when anyone starts implying someone is "sub-human" and thus not worthy of rights... at any stage.

Offline

#5 Jan 06, 2017 12:12 pm

New Historian
Active

Re: OK, so answer me this

"The fetus has all of the genetic components of an individual human being"

So does a single strand of hair - is that human? So when does the protection of "human" life start? Is the morning after pill murder? Or the ordinary pill for that matter? Thou dost take an extreme view of "life".

Offline

#6 Jan 06, 2017 12:36 pm

Real Distwalker
Active

Re: OK, so answer me this

New Historian wrote:

So does a single strand of hair - is that human?

The hair has the same DNA as the woman.  It is part of her.  The fetus has DNA unique to that child and different from the mother.  The fetus is a unique individual.


New Historian wrote:

So when does the protection of "human" life start?

If it were up to you and me to decide, I would argue early and you would argue late.  I doubt you would argue that a woman who is nine months along with close contractions, who is 10 cm dilated and has her feet in the stirrups is still eligible to opt for abortion on demand.

I would not argue that a six hour fertilized zygote must necessarily be protected. 

I would like to think that we could come up with a protection point between those two extremes.

Offline

#7 Jan 06, 2017 1:27 pm

New Historian
Active

Re: OK, so answer me this

I don't know where it is, but I too would argue for it to be sooner than later. Once you can start making out the features of the little buggers, it's too late.

Offline

#8 Jan 06, 2017 3:36 pm

Real Distwalker
Active

Re: OK, so answer me this

New Historian wrote:

Once you can start making out the features of the little buggers, it's too late.

I could easily agree to that standard.

Offline

#9 Jan 06, 2017 5:56 pm

Expat
Active

Re: OK, so answer me this

Real Distwalker wrote:
New Historian wrote:

Once you can start making out the features of the little buggers, it's too late.

I could easily agree to that standard.

By that definition 2 months old.

Without doing research I am not sure at what point cognisance and pain are present. I suspect it is later than that.

At 3 months the child/foetus is 3 inches long.

Addendum, is is pretty much accepted that the foetus does not feel pain until the 3rd trimester, around 27 weeks, as the neurotransmitters are not developed until that point.

Last edited by Expat (Jan 06, 2017 6:05 pm)

Offline

#10 Jan 06, 2017 6:13 pm

Real Distwalker
Active

Re: OK, so answer me this

The unconscious don't feel pain either.  That is no justification for killing them,

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB