I agree with Ahmet.
Hey Fox News, can I intern for your editing position yet?
Asherian: Pro-death implies the person deserves to be killed, while pro-life objects that the child isn't given the chance to live. Being against pro choice has many non religious implications. You might have your baby with a disease that could make it's quality of life very poor, so you can decide to abort. Except we agree you couldn't kill your three year old already born and diagnosed with the disease. If the child's disease doesn't threaten your life while pregnant, it is hypocritical to think that the child has a right to live but the fetus does not. The difference is that the child is still inside you and you can rationalize it.
If you were raped, you can abort. If your life is threatened by it, you can abort. Otherwise, it's much more complicated. I support the right but disagree when it is my child on the line. Now, here's the tricky part, because I'm not a simple minded ass hole. I said being against pro choice is warranted in many cases most people just don't think about, but being for it is also warranted. A woman can die from complications of birth. Calcium deposits, nutrition, a great amount of time, effort, and money are all sucked from her body before a baby can suck at her teat. There is that level, where a mother wants to abort a baby because she doesn't want to have that child from the man who doesn't want to raise it, or the one where the teen girl doesn't want the baby but the teen daddy does. So I think it should be allowed legally, but just as closely watched as Sahan's euthanasia.
Which brings me to Sahan! Many people, when healthy, decided upon a DNR, but there have been many that on the brink of losing consciousness have begged to be saved. Many people become highly depressed when facing death, and decide to just end it. A large number simply lose the will to live, and because they are sick we think that's okay, while a healthy person "DESERVES" to live or some shit. Many people that have survived were glad they were not allowed to die. And sure, many more probably died, and perhaps it's only the ones that could survive that would actually not be depressed. Then again, many people would electrocute a person near to death if ordered by an official rather than voice an opinion, so I'm not a big fan of the collective idea. Also, a person willing to die would have much less of a chance of recovery if allowed to resign. Perhaps even if immoral, not allowing them to die has saved slightly more lives that it ruined by not letting people die. I dunno. I think the doctor that killed all those patients in that hospital when the people couldn't escape due to storms (either in asia or katrina) rather than let them die from lack of support or drowning did an admirable thing.
I'm against feminism, not equal sexes. The fact I have a penis and you maybe have a vagina is not enough of a difference to base our entire philosophy around.
LOL QUOTE FAIL.
LordRetard wrote:I want you to expain what you mean by being pro-abortion. Are you saying that most pregnancies should end in abortion?
I combined the feminist view of marriage as a means to control women and property with the radical athiest (or perhaps at least radical agnostic) belief that marriage is a shall meant to oppress.
Just like an std, will never fully go away.