[Debate] If Abortion Isnt Murder Why Are Killers Charged With Double Homicide?

[FreakensteinAG]

and my comparison to a deliveryman is perfect because both pregnant women and a deliveryman are delivers, there is no fallacy in that comparison, with the woman's case, it's a child, with the deliveryman it's whatever you ordered?

Lucy, like I said at the beginning. False Equivalence Fallacy. Deliveryman delivering the goods does not own the goods, but the pregnant woman DOES own the goods.

Here's MY analogy. The MAN is the one who delivers the goods. The goods are what the woman owns. Because it's hers, it's HER right to do with the goods what she wants. Capiché?

Then she has no right to petition for child support if the father wants nothing to do with the kid.

Sure she can have the embryo, the man should get 100% of the say on his finances if thats the way we're breaking it down

Sorry, but no, this does not work. Like I just said, after the baby is born, the rights now belong to 50% the father and 50% the mother, because they now can both share in the fate of the baby. When the baby was an embryo, only the mother could do anything with it.

 

[Solidus Solidus Solidus]

No, it's not pathetic, your argument that a woman going through pain for 9 months gives her right to the fruition of a sperm that does not belong to her is pathetic AND SEXIST, and my comparison to a deliveryman is perfect because both pregnant women and a deliveryman are delivers, there is no fallacy in that comparison, with the woman's case, it's a child, with the deliveryman it's whatever you ordered,


So.. What? That doesn't negate my arguments.


This is a possibility scenario, if the possibility of non-risk plays out, what do you say then?

You know, the deliveryman is a deliveryman because he chose so. It's his Job. It's something he wanted to do.

That's why your argument is complete bullshit, sorry.

 

[Phact]

I believe that abortion is murder but I think it is ok if u get an abortion before it reaches 6 weeks because someone might get pregnant from rape and they don't want the baby of the man that raped them

 

[demon of the leaf]

False equivalence fallacy, the things you ordered online are not the deliveryman's things.


School taught you that a man knocking up a woman has 50% rights over the embryo, while the woman who got knocked up and has to spend 9 months expelling energy and resources housing the embryo only has 50% rights over the embryo?

Yeah, maybe you have a shitty school teacher. How about you listen to me, a Biologist, and dismiss the discount teacher your school has to teach you? That way you can learn much more from me.

Honestly that is very wrong in so many ways and lacks a lot of humanity biologist or no it is a 50/50 in my book law or no law if a woman wanted to not have a kid then we work together for those 9 months then she can leave and i would keep the kid in the end of the day that fetus is a life that we both created there is no such thing as self impregnation

 

[FreakensteinAG]

Honestly that is very wrong in so many ways and lacks a lot of humanity biologist or no it is a 50/50 in my book law or no law if a woman wanted to not have a kid then we work together for those 9 months then she can leave and i would keep the kid in the end of the day that fetus is a life that we both created there is no such thing as self impregnation

There is a such thing as self-impregnation, but that is a very rare phenomenon and that's left up for another story. Anyway. That's what you get as a consequence for impregnating the woman. You chose to impregnate her, and now you reap the consequences, positive and negative.

 

[demon of the leaf]

You know, the deliveryman is a deliveryman because he chose so. It's his Job. It's something he wanted to do.

That's why your argument is complete bullshit, sorry.

And the woman who consented choose to have *** knowing she could get pregnant so its her fault as much as the guys

 

[Punk Hazard]

Sorry, but no, this does not work. Like I just said, after the baby is born, the rights now belong to 50% the father and 50% the mother, because they now can both share in the fate of the baby. When the baby was an embryo, only the mother could do anything with it.

I hate to say it, but SlimReaper is right in this scenario. If a woman is capable of saying "Yo, I don't want jack shit to do with this baby" and that justifies her TERMINATING ITS EXISTENCE, something far more extreme than simply not paying to support it, then a man should be able to pull out and have nothing to do with supporting it financially.

You're essentially saying that the father is ****ed. He has no say in whether or not his child lives, and if it does, he cannot renounce his responsibility, but the mother can renounce her responsibility for the child by straight up ending its existence. That just makes you a hypocrite.

 

[Solidus Solidus Solidus]

Honestly that is very wrong in so many ways and lacks a lot of humanity biologist or no it is a 50/50 in my book law or no law if a woman wanted to not have a kid then we work together for those 9 months then she can leave and i would keep the kid in the end of the day that fetus is a life that we both created there is no such thing as self impregnation

But if she doesn't want the child because of the burden of pregnancy? That's like saying: yeah waste 9 months of your life filled with pain so you just can give it to me. That's nonsense as well.

 

[Prince Lucifer]

You know, the deliveryman is a deliveryman because he chose so. It's his Job. It's something he wanted to do.

That's why your argument is complete bullshit, sorry.

So is claiming that pain through 9 months automatically gives you right to a baby whose birth required the actions of TWO SEPARATE INDIVIDUALS.

 

[Pride]

Then she has no right to petition for child support if the father wants nothing to do with the kid.

Sure she can have the embryo, the man should get 100% of the say on his finances if thats the way we're breaking it down

For once i agree with slim, but lets cut the crap the courts will never agree to that they almost all of the times rule with the woman. Women trap men into paying child support for 18 years and have custody too.

 

[demon of the leaf]

There is a such thing as self-impregnation, but that is a very rare phenomenon and that's left up for another story. Anyway. That's what you get as a consequence for impregnating the woman. You chose to impregnate her, and now you reap the consequences, positive and negative.

Well that is indeed another story but indeed and yes that is very true

 

[FreakensteinAG]

So is claiming that pain through 9 months automatically gives you right to a baby that required the actions of TWO SEPARATE INDIVIDUALS.

Yes. Obviously. The deliveryman delivered the sperm to the woman's fertilization of her egg, giving her the full rights to the embryo. Duh.

 

[Michelle]

So what? That doesn't negate the facts I presented, what argument do you use on women who did not suffer the conditions you just described, the woman has rights to her body but not the sperm.

The father should take it and go with it then to another woman, isn't it? Oops... is quite impossible.

Why doesn't the dad have a right?

So do I forget everything School taught me and listen to a stranger on Narutobase.net?

All you say is so theoretically that indeed are not your thoughts and life experience, but brain manipulation from school. Both the NB members who explained you so well have the point in this thread.
I can say it once more, the mother is not the delivery person, she gives her body and life to the unborn child, the pregnancy is heavier than your imagination and you know nothing about the mother's pain.

And yes, abortion is murder. But ....

 

[Punk Hazard]

Yes. Obviously. The deliveryman delivered the sperm to the woman's fertilization of her egg, giving her the full rights to the embryo. Duh.

Actually, the analogy is more accurate if the creator of the product is also the delivery man. You order an album online, the album is distributed to you. You own the album, but the content still belongs to the producer of the content as well.

 

[Solidus Solidus Solidus]

So is claiming that pain through 9 months automatically gives you right to a baby whose birth required the actions of TWO SEPARATE INDIVIDUALS.

But it's still inside her body.
And if her body gets damaged by it, it is her decision to get rid off it.

 

[FreakensteinAG]

Actually, the analogy is more accurate if the creator of the product is also the delivery man. You order an album online, the album is distributed to you. You own the album, but the content still belongs to the producer of the content as well.

Then we move on to the compromise of the man having 0.1% of the rights of the embryo, as I've said earlier.

 

[Prince Lucifer]

But it's still inside her body.
And if her body gets damaged by it, it is her decision to get rid off it.

But it's not hers alone, it also belongs to the man, you cannot negate his rights.. and that's a 50/50 chance of that scenario playing out, what if it doesn'tt?

 

[Punk Hazard]

Then we move on to the compromise of the man having 0.1% of the rights of the embryo, as I've said earlier.

That compromise is illogical and panders to a party that does not deserve it.

 

[slimreaper]

Then we move on to the compromise of the man having 0.1% of the rights of the embryo, as I've said earlier.

then we move on to the compromise of the woman getting 0.1% of my money to support the kid

 

[FreakensteinAG]

But it's not hers alone, it also belongs to the man, you cannot negate his rights.. and that's a 50/50 chance of that scenario playing out, what if it doesn'tt?

It does not matter if there are harmful, physical effects towards pregnancy, the woman has the sole right alone to terminating the pregnancy.

then we move on to the compromise of the woman getting 0.1% of my money to support the kid

I'm up for that, actually.