Pro Abortion = Anti Death Penalty

[wednesday]

Peter are you pro assisted suicide?...for someone whos is deathly ill, you think it should be made legal for them to end there life without having to go through the suffering?...
What about for a unborn baby...whos mother has been told he will life a live of pain, and not live long....Do you think she is murdering that child by choosing to end its life before it begins??Saving it suffering?

 

[Makedde]

^Those should be different, and I imagine Peter and others may have a different idea. As for assisted suicide...that's always a good debate. Is there a thread for that subject yet?

 

[motorbyclist]

Don't even suggest putting up an Euthanasia thread!

 

[Makedde]

Don't even suggest putting up an Euthanasia thread!

I am not! Yet.

But do we have one in existance already?

 

[Goat Whisperer]

Natasha is all for killing everyone.

Me too! I'm pro-death.

 

[motorbyclist]

I am not! Yet.

But do we have one in existance already?

Not sure. Would be interesting nonetheless.

[edit] there is four, just search them.

 

[The Joker]

It's a greater punishment than getting a quick needle in the arm to be a lifer. Most lifers are there because they killed someone and know they deserve their punishment or they should do. Innocent babies do not deserve to be killed.

Apart from the fact that a lot of people that receive the death penalty become Martyrs, the "quick needle" isn't what it seems.

The poison in the needle actually gives EXCRUCIATING pain, however it also paralyses.

Pretty much, the person who receives it wants to scream so loud their vocal chords would tear, but they are unable to.

Also, the point you unknowingly brought up ("an innocent baby"). Is the main point abortion is legal.

What a baby actually IS is widely debated.

Killing a baby is ONLY illegal if that baby has inhaled enough air to fill it's lungs.

 

[motorbyclist]

The poison in the needle actually gives EXCRUCIATING pain, however it also paralyses.

Though this is questionable it is not excrutiating at all.

Firstly a barbiturate (can't remember chemical names right now) is injected which is a very strong anaesthetic, renders the patient unconcious in about 10-20 secs.
Second, a muscle relaxant is injected, aka paralysis.
Thirdly, KCl is injected which induces cardiac arrest, if asphyxiation has not occured from the relaxant.

The patient is said to be unconcious or in a minor induced coma during all this and supposedly cannot feel a thing.

 

[The Joker]

Though this is questionable it is not excrutiating at all.

Firstly a barbiturate (can't remember chemical names right now) is injected which is a very strong anaesthetic, renders the patient unconcious in about 10-20 secs.
Second, a muscle relaxant is injected, aka paralysis.
Thirdly, KCl is injected which induces cardiac arrest, if asphyxiation has not occured from the relaxant.

The patient is said to be unconcious or in a minor induced coma during all this and supposedly cannot feel a thing.

"supposedly"

Also, people have been known to hear, see and feel everything going on around them while in comas.

 

[motorbyclist]

"supposedly"

Also, people have been known to hear, see and feel everything going on around them while in comas.

Yes, thats why I say that.

But it is generally assumed that the anaesthetic and paralysis and unconciousness would render the patient unable to have alert senses.

But who the fuck cares if they are hurting or not. The hurt and pain they caused the victims family and friends are enough to justify it IMO.

 

[The Joker]

Yes, thats why I say that.

But it is generally assumed that the anaesthetic and paralysis and unconciousness would render the patient unable to have alert senses.

But who the fuck cares if they are hurting or not. The hurt and pain they caused the victims family and friends are enough to justify it IMO.

That's an opinion.

Regardless of what I feel, I was just stating it wasn't a "quick painless needle"

 

[motorbyclist]

That's an opinion.

Regardless of what I feel, I was just stating it wasn't a "quick painless needle"

An opinion of the majority of the worlds medical scientists. But an opinion nonetheless.

 

[The Joker]

An opinion of the majority of the worlds medical scientists. But an opinion nonetheless.

I meant the hurt and pain opinion.

 

[thatguyjeff]

The primary reason one would oppose one and support the other is simply politics. This is in the US I mean.

Prior to Roe V. Wade (in the 1970's), abortion was illegal. So at the time, the only issue was capital punishment. The conservatives took one side (pro) while the liberals took the other side (against).

Once the supreme court changed things on abortion, again the politicos had to take sides. This time is was the conservatives against and the liberals pro.

It's really silly when, IMHO, the two sides simply take opposite sides on morally charged issues like this for no other reason (it seems) than they don't want to agree with the other.

 

[AnitaBeer]

I am pro choice and pro death penalty.

 

[Goat Whisperer]

I am pro choice and pro death penalty.

Another pro-deafer....

 

[Wookiegirl]

I agree with you Peter. I'm totally anti-death penalty but I am totally pro-choice. NOT because I think abortion is right, but because I don't feel that I have the authority to tell someone else what to do with their body. I just feel it's a very personal choice and while for me, life begins at conception, I know that there are those that disagree and it's their choice to do that. Free will at it's finest

 

[SgtSpike]

I have a friend that lives in Denmark, and it's a much different place there. Legal sex age is 16 and many have sex before then. Sex is an open and common thing, and it is much less safe. Yesterday she told me about how one of her friends just had her second abortion.

Now I am pro-choice. And I think how it is in Denmark is fine. We talked about it for a while and I realized, getting an abortion is the same thing as using protection, the egg is killed by not being fertilized by the sperm, and then the sperm dies as well. So any sex at all is 'killing innocent babies' just before the baby is allowed to develop at all.

I am against the death penalty, simply because I think it allows them out of a life of hell, prison seems like a boring, redundant, and awful place to live. And it allows innocent men to die before their innocence is discovered.

Interesting argument, but I still say conception is where a human is formed. That is when the potential for human life is realized. If you left it alone, it would grow into a baby. If you leave an unfertilized egg alone, it does nothing.

I wish prison was a horrible place to live, but I know of people who have committed crimes just so they could be in prison. It's actually a better place to live than many poor neighborhoods. All your needs are taken care of, food, water, shelter, etc. Plus, there's tons of entertainment, like basketball, TV, etc. It is ridiculous how well-treated prisoners are.

The primary reason one would oppose one and support the other is simply politics. This is in the US I mean.

Prior to Roe V. Wade (in the 1970's), abortion was illegal. So at the time, the only issue was capital punishment. The conservatives took one side (pro) while the liberals took the other side (against).

Once the supreme court changed things on abortion, again the politicos had to take sides. This time is was the conservatives against and the liberals pro.

It's really silly when, IMHO, the two sides simply take opposite sides on morally charged issues like this for no other reason (it seems) than they don't want to agree with the other.

I couldn't disagree with you more. The ONLY reason I am against abortion is because I have a personal conviction that it is killing innocent human beings. It is more religious than anything, and it has nothing to do with my political beliefs. The reason most conservatives are against abortion is that most of them are Christians or hold Christian values, and thus have the same moral standing on the matter. I have no idea why liberals do not take the stance they do though, you'd have to ask one of them.

I never cling to an idea simply because it is the political stance of my party, and I hope no one else does that. I don't know where you got the idea that that is what people do, but you're wrong.

 

[Natasha]

Natasha is all for killing everyone.

I'm also for fewer appeals in death penalty cases...this whole multi-decade appeals crap is insane. Show me one homicide victim allowed the chance to appeal for their life multiple times, eat their requested last meal, say goodbye to their family one last time, and do it all while living on the taxpayer's dollar for 20 years...show me one and I'll reconsider my viewpoint.

 

[Goat Whisperer]

Interesting argument, but I still say conception is where a human is formed. That is when the potential for human life is realized. If you left it alone, it would grow into a baby. If you leave an unfertilized egg alone, it does nothing.

Still if you didn't put a condom on the egg would have been fertilized, either way the baby would have ended up not becoming a full grown adult, whether kids 'wise up and use protection' or get an abortion later on: The baby still wouldn't have been born.

When does a baby constitute being a baby protected from murder laws? The instant it is capable of becoming a baby when it is an egg? When it is sperm that are very small babies?

It's just that: If a couple did use protection, they just killed the baby before it could get implanted in the uterus, and if they didn't, they had an abortion, killing the baby after it was implanted into the uterus. I'm just not seeing the difference here, both ways the baby is killed, but why is one way excepted and one way not?