Science doesn't say shit about the morality of abortion. Your blather about skin cells is just that, blather. "even at the expense of the child"? Allowing someone to live is an "expense" to them? Face it, your argument boils down to "your convenience is more valuable than another's life and anyone who disagrees with that is a meany"
I was beginning to think, maybe I was the only one who thought that way, too. Is it just me, or is the abortion argument becoming more and more retarded? What will they bitch about next once all babies are born like in A Brave New World or Logan's Run? Where you can have all the sex freedom, with no risks like STDs or a cancerous skin cell growing inside you that sucks your paycheck dry for 18+ years?
so you claim to be libertarian, but won't allow women the liberty to own their own bodies?
Why should the taxpayer suffer because the child's parents are "selfish". How do you justify that?
How does the taxpayer suffer for that baby?
The science does not agree with your stance that an abortion is "murder", that is in fact a moral stance. You think it's immoral to get an abortion based on, most likely, religious convictions, science says it's a medical procedure, no different than the morning after pill, no different than birth control
I don't care about the mother, she lived her life. She now has the responsibility as an incubator. What about the baby who has more potential than the mother? If you want to murder, then you lose your right over your body. If the mother is under 18, then we can have a debate. Over 18, no debate. Any mother who gets an abortion is murderer, any father who condones or asks a mother to get an abortion is an accessory to murder, along with the doctor. I'm not a Libertarian. The Libertarian party thinks abortion is liberty over their own body, I don't. As a Buddhist it's my duty to be the protector of all life as best as possible. Within reason and my ability to do my other duties in this life as well.so you claim to be libertarian, but won't allow women the liberty to own their own bodies?
too facile.
I don't agree with our current system. You really don't understand Buddhist philosophy, yet you WERE a religious mod here. I know more about almost all religions than you do.
Where did I support that?
Unless you believe in just letting a newborn baby live on the streets by itself when it's born, taxpayers will face the financial burden of raising it using the state
America is not a buddhist society, go masturbate to your pipe dream somewhere else
But, LIFE!!!!!
Wh
for you its a money thing surely this would save big.
What did the baby do again? You have a choice not to ever have a baby, it's called sterilization. Just like you can sell treadmills without government authorization, if you refuse to sign the employer's mandated tax form. It's the risk you take with life. Which is why I carry a gun. I don't trust my fellow human. If I were a woman, I'd carry a gun EVERYWHERE, even if it meant it was illegal. It must really suck being a woman, but I'm not a woman. Every man looks at girls, I bet they are creeped by it. I know I am when some hag looks at me. Such is life though.
People once defended slavery and called freedom a pipe dream. I'll NEVER give up my dreams. I made most of them come true already. Unlike you I'm willing to fight for them and not consider it unfair to do so. Remember how you said it's not fair that you have to spend over 10,000 hours to master something, and you still risk failure? You want the easy way out in life. Life isn't easy, and I'm glad it isn't.
It's a scientific/medical thing, the money aspect is secondary
No, I never said mastering something wasn't "fair". You're making shit up again
a. intolerant of organized religions that attempt to dismiss accepted reality in favor of their bullshit dogma, yes, absolutely
I said we should attempt to make life as fair as possible, and that's what I work for
Cry more, your tears are delicious!