tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post2188358398542331481..comments2023-05-14T03:03:09.451-05:00Comments on Female Impersonator: Oklahoma Ameliahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10884754298018500343noreply@blogger.comBlogger129125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-1582552710865602122008-04-30T07:51:00.000-05:002008-04-30T07:51:00.000-05:00Actually, every argument I have made is one that I...Actually, every argument I have made is one that I believe in (although in one instance, my wording was off to seem as though I had misspoken about facts, which I'm sorry for) equally as much. The Impersonators simply respond to particular arguments made by commenters with the parts that seem to make the most sense. I do not understand what makes you think that all of our arguments are based on opinion. I also have not seen many facts backing up the arguments made on the other side, either, just to be fair.<BR/><BR/>I have also said that I am for education - education from both sides, presented in a non-threatening, non-persuasive manner, because I believe that for a woman to truly make a free "choice" she must have information...but not only one side of the information.<BR/><BR/>So I'm glad that we...agree?Ameliahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10884754298018500343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-30542349190369546492008-04-29T23:57:00.000-05:002008-04-29T23:57:00.000-05:00"Abortions will continue to happen whether or not ..."Abortions will continue to happen whether or not they are legal. Women have always, and always will, work to control their reproductive lives. So why not make them legal, so they can be safe, clean, and regulated?"<BR/><BR/><BR/>THANK YOU<BR/><BR/>My arguments obviously make me seem strictly pro-life, but this is the one thing that keeps me from claiming to be completely pro-life. I feel strongly that abortions should not be done, but I agree with you that there's no way to stop it from happening completely. It's best to keep it as safe as possible since it's going to happen, and that's why I'm not exactly for making it illegal. I am strongly in favor of educating women as much as possible to make sure they make the decision that they feel most comfortable with and won't think they'll regret.<BR/><BR/>It frustrates me beyond belief, though, that it took so long for any of the impersonators to make this argument. It's the first time any of them have made an argument that didn't appear to be based on opinion or facts that don't support them enough.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-6082316574078766582008-04-29T11:36:00.001-05:002008-04-29T11:36:00.001-05:00And great question, Anon!And great question, Anon!Ameliahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10884754298018500343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-78860301254210667112008-04-29T11:36:00.000-05:002008-04-29T11:36:00.000-05:00Wouldn't you be really upset if you were a genius ...Wouldn't you be really upset if you were a genius child with the potential to do great things if you were able to go to college and get a degree...but your parents REFUSED to let you go to school (even if there would be no financial or emotional burden for them)because you didn't already know quantum physics? They're taking away your opportunity to learn quantum physics just because you don't already know it and they think you'll be bad at it. Isn't it the same when a parent refuses to let a child live just because it isn't living already, and there's a chance (very small chance, btw) that it won't live<BR/><BR/>I think that your analogy is off, Julie, but you are trying to make a point, so I will continue this discussion, and I will try to be more careful about it.<BR/><BR/>First of all, I am not trying to argue that abortion should be legal based on the idea that not all fetuses will make it. I think that that is a weak argument.<BR/><BR/>And I kind of held back saying this last night when I was tired, but here goes. <BR/><BR/>Abortions will continue to happen whether or not they are legal. Women have always, and always will, work to control their reproductive lives. So why not make them legal, so they can be safe, clean, and regulated? <BR/><BR/>Also, I have a hard time swallowing anti-choice arguments because of the vast difference between life and life-potential. It's something I have been chewing on a lot lately.Ameliahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10884754298018500343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-31886641227237318132008-04-29T11:33:00.000-05:002008-04-29T11:33:00.000-05:00Julie, that happens quite a bit with super religio...Julie, that happens quite a bit with super religious parents who restrict access to education to their children (especially girls). Check out what's happening now with the FLDS sect in Texas. <BR/>It's unfortunate, but it happens. Some women will always opt to terminate a pregnancy. Do you have any concrete ideas of ways to prevent abortion?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-8087581936103327142008-04-29T11:23:00.000-05:002008-04-29T11:23:00.000-05:00Wouldn't you be really upset if you were a genius ...Wouldn't you be really upset if you were a genius child with the potential to do great things if you were able to go to college and get a degree...but your parents REFUSED to let you go to school (even if there would be no financial or emotional burden for them)because you didn't already know quantum physics? They're taking away your opportunity to learn quantum physics just because you don't already know it and they think you'll be bad at it. Isn't it the same when a parent refuses to let a child live just because it isn't living already, and there's a chance (very small chance, btw) that it won't liveAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-77770084461191359492008-04-29T10:18:00.000-05:002008-04-29T10:18:00.000-05:00I would like to thank those of you who have pointe...I would like to thank those of you who have pointed out the "fetus as living" fact that I misspoke of. I appreciate it.Ameliahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10884754298018500343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-67364035314732195852008-04-29T02:02:00.000-05:002008-04-29T02:02:00.000-05:00TO EVERYONE:Fetuses are alive, you can't argue thi...TO EVERYONE:<BR/><BR/>Fetuses are alive, you can't argue this fact.<BR/><BR/>Termination of something that is alive is not immoral.<BR/><BR/>All that is necessary for life is oxygen, water, and caloric intake; not sex.<BR/><BR/>Sexual intercourse is a socially built up ritual that can imply deep psychological and emotional attachment, that can only be expressed in this manner. <BR/><BR/>Viruses are not alive; a living creature is defined as displaying homeostasis, organization, metabolism, growth, adaptation, response to stimuli, and reproduction. Viruses only exhibit 1 of these, reproduction. They are, however, certainly biological in nature.<BR/><BR/>Finally, an act's moral status is not determined by its status as natural.<BR/><BR/>List of things that occur in nature:<BR/><BR/>infanticide<BR/>nurturing of young<BR/>abandonment of young<BR/>death at 30<BR/>destruction of the weak<BR/>society<BR/>social bonding<BR/>learning<BR/>anthrax<BR/>SEX<BR/>nonverbal communication<BR/>incest<BR/>violence<BR/>consumption of meat<BR/>cannibalism<BR/>feces<BR/><BR/>what is not natural:<BR/><BR/>pants<BR/>computers: ergo BLOGS<BR/>cars<BR/>governments<BR/>RELIGION<BR/>birth control<BR/>moon landings<BR/>literature<BR/>nerve gas<BR/>mechanized warfare<BR/>economies<BR/><BR/>I'm not going to argue what is good or bad there, I think we all have our own opinions of what is and isn't. Point being morality is not determined by natural status. Generally what is right is that which gives the largest number of people most closely involved the choice that is nearest to their preference (yay relative preference utilitarianism)<BR/><BR/>Overall>>> <BR/>1. I think the impersonators(speaking in terms of professional logic), while making some errors in some of their premises, do reach correct conclusions. <BR/>2. Anonymous, you are a coward, and quite rude<BR/>3. though I exhibited behavior as obnoxious as yours, in my initial reply. My jab at fundamental Christians was uncalled for, and I apologize to any and all who may have been offended. <BR/><BR/>I will have a post for you on my blog, you can find it here: http://theobsessiveinsomniac.blogspot.com/(The Korean) Andrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07645765513232869925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-77107646378884536092008-04-29T00:45:00.000-05:002008-04-29T00:45:00.000-05:00"It's violating the woman's body and forcing her t..."It's violating the woman's body and forcing her to do something she doesn't want to do - regardless of if the man wants to care for and support the child after it's been born. If he wants a child that badly, he can adopt one of the many children who are in need of homes."<BR/><BR/>One could easily, easily say this in return:<BR/><BR/>It's violating the man's life and freedom, and forcing him to do something he doesn't want to do - regardless if the woman wants to care for and support the child after it's been born. If she wants a child that badly, she can adopt one of the many children who are in need of homes.<BR/><BR/>The argument goes both ways. If she keeps it, and he doesn't want it, no one cries that his personal freedoms and life are violated and intruded upon, nor the emotional and financial trauma he has to go through - he's just told he should have "kept it in his pants", despite the fact that feminists attack anyone who says "she should have kept her legs closed".<BR/><BR/>"I think once if something can survive outside of the womb, you can call it alive. If it won't survive outside the womb, why try to categorize it as life?"<BR/><BR/>I'm not even pro-life, and even I can call this argument intellectually dishonest.<BR/><BR/>Is it dead? The fetus is quite clearly alive. It's a living thing, and an abortion does in fact end it's life. To argue otherwise is to do what you seem so against: Give a woman getting an abortion false information.<BR/><BR/>Would you advocate telling them "It's okay to get an abortion, after all, the fetus isn't even alive yet!"?<BR/><BR/>That's a bit silly. Like I said, not pro-life one bit, but, come on. Be a bit more honest in your statements. Just because it can't live outside the womb doesn't make it not alive.<BR/><BR/>A tapeworm can't live outside your stomach, but it's pretty damn alive. Same with a cold virus. It can only survive outside the body for a very limited time, but it's clearly alive.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-83950376192854575942008-04-29T00:07:00.000-05:002008-04-29T00:07:00.000-05:00Amelia - I also feel that the welfare of the mothe...Amelia - <BR/><I>I also feel that the welfare of the mother greatly effects the welfare of the child born. If a mother has to go through an unwanted pregnancy, she would probably be emotionally unwell. Who is to say that she will be well enough to make a sound decision for the child she brought into the world?</I><BR/><BR/>I agree, the mother's health does have a direct impact on the health of the child. However, making a decision between the two is a lot like picking favorites... and I believe that's just wrong.<BR/><BR/>Lindsay - <BR/><I>The situations I'm referring to aren't ones where the baby survives. The diseases or deformities are so severe that without modern medicine, the baby would die immediately, and with modern medicine, the baby would die very shortly. There is no, I repeat, no saving the child. There is no good quality of life for these children. Isn't it best to stop their suffering before it even starts? </I><BR/><BR/>Like I said, the advancements in modern medicine are becoming greater and greater thus limiting what they cannot fix to a small amount of rare cases. I understand the point you are trying to make, however, in several cases the doctors have overestimated the chance of survival for children, and they have overestimated the severity of what the child has/would suffer from. By killing one of those children, it is indeed murdering someone who could have lived given the chance. Doctors make mistakes in judgement.Rachelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06073483751626337353noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-1250602120345446902008-04-29T00:04:00.000-05:002008-04-29T00:04:00.000-05:00I just have a couple of thoughts before I go to sl...I just have a couple of thoughts before I go to sleep.<BR/><BR/>I would disagree with the "whoever comes first" analogy. Both of those people were fully formed, living, breathing human beings with connections to the other life on Earth. A woman is also one of those beings, however a fetus is not a six-year old child. It is a cluster of cells with life potential. Life potential is not life and does not have the same value as existing life.<BR/><BR/>Also, most women who have abortions are already mothers, so they also have to take into consideration the well being and futures of their other children in addition to their personal concerns about carrying a pregnancy to term. What does this add to a debate that seems to be the life of a mother versus the potential of a fetus?Katehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00139058825727884888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-33828411207656498372008-04-29T00:01:00.000-05:002008-04-29T00:01:00.000-05:00Honestly, Lindsay, I believe that with the way med...<I>Honestly, Lindsay, I believe that with the way medical advancements are gong, every baby should have the right to be born. Because things can be done to keep them alive and better their quality of life. You cannot give up on a child just because the odds are bad - because there's always that chance that baby could survive, even if the odds are the equivelant of lighting striking a submarine.</I><BR/><BR/>The situations I'm referring to aren't ones where the baby survives. The diseases or deformities are so severe that without modern medicine, the baby would die immediately, and with modern medicine, the baby would die very shortly. There is no, I repeat, <B>no</B> saving the child. There is no good quality of life for these children. Isn't it best to stop their suffering before it even starts?lindsayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13285797515594923013noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-33103308959366707222008-04-28T23:55:00.000-05:002008-04-28T23:55:00.000-05:00You make some good points, and I would like to tha...You make some good points, and I would like to thank you for engaging in this discussion with me, Jezabel.<BR/><BR/>I also feel that the welfare of the mother greatly effects the welfare of the child born. If a mother has to go through an unwanted pregnancy, she would probably be emotionally unwell. Who is to say that she will be well enough to make a sound decision for the child she brought into the world?Ameliahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10884754298018500343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-56996817229444705812008-04-28T23:50:00.000-05:002008-04-28T23:50:00.000-05:00Honestly, Lindsay, I believe that with the way med...Honestly, Lindsay, I believe that with the way medical advancements are gong, every baby should have the right to be born. Because things can be done to keep them alive and better their quality of life. You cannot give up on a child just because the odds are bad - because there's always that chance that baby could survive, even if the odds are the equivelant of lighting striking a submarine.Rachelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06073483751626337353noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-88676235463483560392008-04-28T23:49:00.000-05:002008-04-28T23:49:00.000-05:00you have to be both- the welfare of the fetus and ...you have to be both- the welfare of the fetus and subsequent child depends on the health, safety and security of the mother.<BR/>which is why the pro-life camp seems so inherently wrong to me because they often disparage the mother (calling her selfish) or belittle the work that goes into carrying a child to term ("pregnancy is only a minor discomfort", etc).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-29874912044013267482008-04-28T23:48:00.000-05:002008-04-28T23:48:00.000-05:00a lot of things can happen during the course of a ...<I>a lot of things can happen during the course of a pregnancy and some babies won't survive upon delivery due to congenital birth defects or a whole host of other complications.<BR/>should those women be made to carry the fetus until birth?</I><BR/><BR/>I don't think the author's point here was to talk about "tragic miscarriages" but instead irreversible birth defects that will cause the child to die shortly after birth, or to live a very painful, very short existence. Isn't it more moral to not even bring the child into the world in the first place?<BR/><BR/>I'm not talking about Down's Syndrome or other things that can be detected before birth, but very severe, very painful complications such as being born without a skull or things like that. Things the child wouldn't survive anyway.lindsayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13285797515594923013noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-88115666795773570762008-04-28T23:45:00.000-05:002008-04-28T23:45:00.000-05:00Actually, yes, that makes a lot more sense now, th...Actually, yes, that makes a lot more sense now, thank you.<BR/><BR/>The dangers to the mother that you had mentioned so far is purely emotional. I know there are physical dangers to some women if they carry their pregnancy to full term.<BR/><BR/>I do understand where you are coming from with that.<BR/><BR/>However, I do not see how it is responsible to deem one persons life as having a higher value than someone else's. The way I see it, that's like having the option of killing the 60 year old grandmother or the 6 year old grandchild. The way pro-choicers view it, the grandmother would get priority over the child because she was here first. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's just how I see it - the mother is given preference because she was born first. However, if you think about it, the baby would not exist without the mother.Rachelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06073483751626337353noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-24430508231071484212008-04-28T23:36:00.000-05:002008-04-28T23:36:00.000-05:00It's okay.I am just trying to see if you from the ...It's okay.<BR/><BR/>I am just trying to see if you from the pro-life camp can help me think of a way to approach the abortion question that does not make us decide that the life of a fetus is more important than the life of the mother.<BR/><BR/>For example, you say that a fetus is a could-be life and should be allowed to live by staying in the womb. <BR/><BR/>But I could argue that a woman, who is already alive, could suffer greatly by having a pregnancy that she did not want.<BR/><BR/>It seems like we have to take sides - we're either pro-baby or pro-mother. I don't think it should have to be that way exactly, but I don't know how else to think about it. Do you have any ideas? Hope that's less confusing.Ameliahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10884754298018500343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-12093332094738943432008-04-28T23:33:00.000-05:002008-04-28T23:33:00.000-05:00Amelia - sorry for this, but what exaclty are you ...Amelia - sorry for this, but what exaclty are you asking us to discuss? Your post confused me a little bit.Rachelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06073483751626337353noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-78369430813780255322008-04-28T23:28:00.000-05:002008-04-28T23:28:00.000-05:00I have a very serious question of all you pro-life...I have a very serious question of all you pro-lifers reading this. Please listen, and please consider what I have to say, because I would love to make this a truly productive discussion.<BR/><BR/>The nature of this debate is over the value of lives (and could-be lives). Who should be valued at the time that the abortion could take place? The woman who is already assuredly living, or the fetus who COULD be living if left alone, perhaps against the already-living woman's will?<BR/><BR/>How can we move away from this debate and toward one that doesn't force us to make judgment calls over who is more important, mother or fetus? <BR/><BR/>Is that even possible?<BR/>Are you willing to try to make it possible?Ameliahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10884754298018500343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-80383816120133846182008-04-28T23:26:00.000-05:002008-04-28T23:26:00.000-05:00but what if certain women opt not to protect the l...but what if certain women opt not to protect the life-to-be for whatever reason? <BR/>what should happen to them? should they be forced to carry the fetus to term against their wishes?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-16882999320334833122008-04-28T23:24:00.000-05:002008-04-28T23:24:00.000-05:00Okay... all the same - a fetus will, in most cases...Okay... all the same - a fetus will, in most cases, bar a tragic miscarriage, become a human life... unless others step in to inhibit that. So why not give the baby a chance? Why not let another famliy who cannot have their own child be happy with a baby if you yourself do not want it?Rachelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06073483751626337353noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-60663559057656834072008-04-28T23:22:00.001-05:002008-04-28T23:22:00.001-05:00I am sticking to the topic at hand - uncloned fetu...I am sticking to the topic at hand - uncloned fetuses that are conceived in a woman's womb.Ameliahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10884754298018500343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-69262928613491448722008-04-28T23:22:00.000-05:002008-04-28T23:22:00.000-05:00See the funny thing about fetuses, even ifyou don'...See the funny thing about fetuses, even ifyou don't consider them living now, the vast majority of them will at some point have that status if you let them, so why don't we. Even if we are not protecting life now, we are protecting life to be.Goosehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05425919642933133023noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-52395879883271584242008-04-28T23:20:00.001-05:002008-04-28T23:20:00.001-05:00But because the process of leaving the womb is nec...<I>But because the process of leaving the womb is necessary in order to live life as we humans know it, without that step being an option, I don't view a fetus as living.</I><BR/><BR/>So according to your arguement, one must make it thru "pre-life" in the womb in order to become living... does this mean that once cloning is achieved, clones will not be considered living because they did not experience the "pre-life" in the womb?Rachelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06073483751626337353noreply@blogger.com