Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Councillor under fire over disabled remarks


  • Please log in to reply
35 replies to this topic

#16    Hasina

Hasina

    Maximillion Hotpocket Puckershuttle

  • Member
  • 3,032 posts
  • Joined:28 Aug 2012
  • Gender:Female

  • JINKIES

Posted 27 February 2013 - 05:09 PM

View PostTheLastLazyGun, on 27 February 2013 - 04:37 PM, said:



Why is killing disabled children in the womb considered okay but killing disabled children out of the womb isn't?
Cause they have to look their victims in the eyes.

Posted Image

~MEH~


#17    Jeffertonturner

Jeffertonturner

    Hero Squad

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,091 posts
  • Joined:21 Jan 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Brunswick, Canada

  • I may not be the smartest, or the best looking, or the most successful but...what was I saying? I'm depressed.

Posted 27 February 2013 - 05:10 PM

View PostTheLastLazyGun, on 27 February 2013 - 04:37 PM, said:



Why is killing disabled children in the womb considered okay but killing disabled children out of the womb isn't?

Right wing nonsense thread-derail attempt. Fetal abortion is not the issue here.

~Life goes by pretty fast. If you don't stop and look around once in a while -and do whatever you want all the time -you can miss it.~

#18    Hasina

Hasina

    Maximillion Hotpocket Puckershuttle

  • Member
  • 3,032 posts
  • Joined:28 Aug 2012
  • Gender:Female

  • JINKIES

Posted 27 February 2013 - 05:12 PM

View PostJeffertonturner, on 27 February 2013 - 05:10 PM, said:



Right wing nonsense thread-derail attempt. Fetal abortion is not the issue here.
It may be nonsense and a derail attempt but he brings up a good point. If a politician is for abortion, he's just pro-choice. When someone says something about euthanasia outside of the womb? That's when people start crying foul.

Edited by Hasina, 27 February 2013 - 05:12 PM.

Posted Image

~MEH~


#19    ExpandMyMind

ExpandMyMind

    Telekinetic

  • Closed
  • 6,628 posts
  • Joined:23 Jan 2009

Posted 27 February 2013 - 05:16 PM

View PostHasina, on 27 February 2013 - 05:12 PM, said:

It may be nonsense and a derail attempt but he brings up a good point. If a politician is for abortion, he's just pro-choice. When someone says something about euthanasia outside of the womb? That's when people start crying foul.

That's because a fetus, before a certain point in its development, isn't a human being, as is defined by the medical profession almost exclusively worldwide. Which is why it is legal.


#20    TheLastLazyGun

TheLastLazyGun

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,144 posts
  • Joined:08 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The edge of the West Pennine Moors, Northern England

Posted 27 February 2013 - 05:27 PM

View PostExpandMyMind, on 27 February 2013 - 04:51 PM, said:


It's called diplomacy (a useful tool), and I'm pretty sure it existed before Blair.

It was Blair who started off the tradition of British politicians apologising for things which happened before they were born when he apologised to the Irish for the Potato Famine.


#21    Hasina

Hasina

    Maximillion Hotpocket Puckershuttle

  • Member
  • 3,032 posts
  • Joined:28 Aug 2012
  • Gender:Female

  • JINKIES

Posted 27 February 2013 - 05:32 PM

View PostExpandMyMind, on 27 February 2013 - 05:16 PM, said:



That's because a fetus, before a certain point in its development, isn't a human being, as is defined by the medical profession almost exclusively worldwide. Which is why it is legal.
I know this and it's understood. My reasoning is this, that fetus will always become human. Always. I'm pro-choice of course, what others do is their business. Myself? I'm personally pro-life with some stipulations.

So because the dictionary says so, fetus = not human, it's totes okay. (Gonna sound mean now) But these disabled children who won't be contributing anything to society are humans. The potential human life is less important then already established but disabled human life.

Edited by Hasina, 27 February 2013 - 05:33 PM.

Posted Image

~MEH~


#22    ExpandMyMind

ExpandMyMind

    Telekinetic

  • Closed
  • 6,628 posts
  • Joined:23 Jan 2009

Posted 27 February 2013 - 05:35 PM

View PostTheLastLazyGun, on 27 February 2013 - 05:27 PM, said:

It was Blair who started off the tradition of British politicians apologising for things which happened before they were born when he apologised to the Irish for the Potato Famine.

I'm sure you'll find precedent long before that. I think you've been blinded by your political beliefs again.


#23    ExpandMyMind

ExpandMyMind

    Telekinetic

  • Closed
  • 6,628 posts
  • Joined:23 Jan 2009

Posted 27 February 2013 - 05:38 PM

View PostHasina, on 27 February 2013 - 05:32 PM, said:

I know this and it's understood. My reasoning is this, that fetus will always become human. Always. I'm pro-choice of course, what others do is their business. Myself? I'm personally pro-life with some stipulations.

So because the dictionary says so, fetus = not human, it's totes okay. (Gonna sound mean now) But these disabled children who won't be contributing anything to society are humans. The potential human life is less important then already established but disabled human life.

Not because the dictionary says so, because medical professionals, almost unanimously, say so.

It is less 'important' because it is only a 'potential', not a reality. Every menstrual cycle and every pull-out-at-the-last-minute is also a 'potential' life, depending on how you look at it.


#24    TheLastLazyGun

TheLastLazyGun

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,144 posts
  • Joined:08 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The edge of the West Pennine Moors, Northern England

Posted 27 February 2013 - 05:41 PM

View PostExpandMyMind, on 27 February 2013 - 05:16 PM, said:

That's because a fetus, before a certain point in its development, isn't a human being, as is defined by the medical profession almost exclusively worldwide. Which is why it is legal.

The Nazis said that about the Jews to justify their murder of them.

There are many abortions going on today in which the baby is developed enough for it to be an actual human being.  That's why the British Government is looking at reducing the abortion limit from 24 weeks to 20 weeks.

Edited by TheLastLazyGun, 27 February 2013 - 05:46 PM.


#25    Hasina

Hasina

    Maximillion Hotpocket Puckershuttle

  • Member
  • 3,032 posts
  • Joined:28 Aug 2012
  • Gender:Female

  • JINKIES

Posted 27 February 2013 - 05:46 PM

View PostExpandMyMind, on 27 February 2013 - 05:38 PM, said:



Not because the dictionary says so, because medical professionals, almost unanimously, say so.

It is less 'important' because it is only a 'potential', not a reality. Every menstrual cycle and every pull-out-at-the-last-minute is also a 'potential' life, depending on how you look at it.
Of course, the professionals know it all, and hey, they know exactly where to draw the line, right? There's absolutely no argument at all amongst medical professionals about this? It just slight tiffs really? No important debates about it? Okay. Glad you checked.

The problem with a menstrual cycle is you're expelling just the egg, half a human, same goes if the guy pulls out, only 'half a human' is technically wasted. When the sperm and egg form the zygote and then into the fetus, then it's fully human, it'll develop unless euthenised into a homo sapian.

Edited by Hasina, 27 February 2013 - 05:48 PM.

Posted Image

~MEH~


#26    ealdwita

ealdwita

    Hwt oredmcg

  • Member
  • 4,682 posts
  • Joined:08 Jun 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:astcentingas , England

  • Hige sceal e heardra, heorte e cenre, mod sceal e mare, e ure mgen lytla.

Posted 27 February 2013 - 05:47 PM

View PostTheLastLazyGun, on 27 February 2013 - 04:29 PM, said:

Someone should point it out to Cameron, too.  I can't understand this modern obsession amongst British politicians to apologise for eveything, even for things that happened before they were born.  I think it was Tony Blair who started the whole thing.

The other day Cameron apologised to the Indians for the 1919 Amritsar Massacre (which was only retaliation for the murders of Europeans by Indians), yet so far we've not had a word of apology from the Indians for their brutal massacre of Britons during the 1857 Rebellion, which was started by brutal Indian religious leaders when Hindu and Muslim Indian soldiers in the British Army were asked - like other soldiers - to bite off the paper cartridges for their rifles which were greased with animal fat, namely beef and pork.  

Which serves as a classic example of the truth being twisted to suit the aims of terrorists, a tactic that continues to this day. The cartridges used for the 1853-pattern Enfield rifle were lubricated with a mixture of beeswax and nut oils, but because the P53's predecessor, the short-lived (and totally useless) P47, which was never used in India, used tallow in the cartridge lubricant, this gave the mutineers the excuse they needed to commit all sorts of atrocities, against their own people as well as the British 'oppressors'!

Edited by ealdwita, 27 February 2013 - 06:17 PM.

"G a wyrd swa hio scel, ac gecnwan n gef!": "Fate goes ever as she shall, but know thine enemy!".

"I was born with a priceless gift - the ability to laugh at other peoples' troubles" - Dame Edna Everage

#27    Yes_Man

Yes_Man

    hi

  • Member
  • 7,839 posts
  • Joined:22 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portsmouth

Posted 27 February 2013 - 05:57 PM

View PostTheLastLazyGun, on 27 February 2013 - 05:41 PM, said:

The Nazis said that about the Jews to justify their murder of them.

There are many abortions going on today in which the baby is developed enough for it to be an actual human being.  That's why the British Government is looking at reducing the abortion limit from 24 weeks to 20 weeks.
Don't tell me...you want a baby to live..even though it will die anyway?


#28    Yamato

Yamato

    Omnipotent Entity

  • Member
  • 9,767 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 27 February 2013 - 06:01 PM

View PostHasina, on 27 February 2013 - 05:32 PM, said:

I know this and it's understood. My reasoning is this, that fetus will always become human. Always. I'm pro-choice of course, what others do is their business. Myself? I'm personally pro-life with some stipulations.

So because the dictionary says so, fetus = not human, it's totes okay. (Gonna sound mean now) But these disabled children who won't be contributing anything to society are humans. The potential human life is less important then already established but disabled human life.
He could be aborting the next Mahatma Gandhi or Leonardo da Vinci but how does he know?  Not knowing makes it okay!

Just don't ask those four or five-month pregnant women how their "fetus" is doing when they're "having a baby".  Crikey!   Political correctness is what's truly important here!

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#29    Yamato

Yamato

    Omnipotent Entity

  • Member
  • 9,767 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 27 February 2013 - 06:06 PM

View PostHasina, on 27 February 2013 - 05:46 PM, said:

Of course, the professionals know it all, and hey, they know exactly where to draw the line, right? There's absolutely no argument at all amongst medical professionals about this? It just slight tiffs really? No important debates about it? Okay. Glad you checked.

The problem with a menstrual cycle is you're expelling just the egg, half a human, same goes if the guy pulls out, only 'half a human' is technically wasted. When the sperm and egg form the zygote and then into the fetus, then it's fully human, it'll develop unless euthenised into a homo sapian.
Looking forward into the future isn't politically admissible for medical professionals in abortion-etiquette, Hasina.  Medical professionals can only testify that a fetus isn't a human when it's not, not after it is.  ;)

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#30    ExpandMyMind

ExpandMyMind

    Telekinetic

  • Closed
  • 6,628 posts
  • Joined:23 Jan 2009

Posted 27 February 2013 - 06:58 PM

View PostTheLastLazyGun, on 27 February 2013 - 05:41 PM, said:

The Nazis said that about the Jews to justify their murder of them.

There are many abortions going on today in which the baby is developed enough for it to be an actual human being.  That's why the British Government is looking at reducing the abortion limit from 24 weeks to 20 weeks.

You're actually trying to compare euthanasia to abortion?

View PostHasina, on 27 February 2013 - 05:46 PM, said:

Of course, the professionals know it all, and hey, they know exactly where to draw the line, right? There's absolutely no argument at all amongst medical professionals about this? It just slight tiffs really? No important debates about it? Okay. Glad you checked.

The problem with a menstrual cycle is you're expelling just the egg, half a human, same goes if the guy pulls out, only 'half a human' is technically wasted. When the sperm and egg form the zygote and then into the fetus, then it's fully human, it'll develop unless euthenised into a homo sapian.

I stated that it was a majority of the profession who adhere to and believe in the standards, not all of them.

Personally, I don't classify a fetus as a human being if it is too early in the pregnancy to live outside the womb (and actually, the cut-off dates for abortions are actually much earlier in the pregnancy than that). I'm sorry, but I can't. How can it fit the definition? Until then it is just a collection of cells and an extension of the woman, unable to live without being a part of the woman. It seems that laws and medical definitions would for the most part agree with me, which, again, is why it is legal.

And OK then, you do have a point about those examples only being half a life (but then, this is actually a matter of perspective), but what is your opinion of the morning after pill which acts in a different way to the pill? It kills potential life in the same manner as an abortion.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users