Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 mattyrm wrote:
It absolutely isn't. Did you actually read the wikipedia entry?

You're joking right?

A false dilemma .. is a type of logical fallacy that involves a situation in which only two alternatives are considered, when in fact there is at least one additional option.

 mattyrm wrote:
You are either a bare faced liar, you are staggeringly ignorant, willfully ignorant, or you are trolling us.

See? All you need to do is add one or more examples and prove the false dilemma.

I think if we start a new thread every time a Republican says something incredibly stupid about how they basically think women are just incubators, eventually this forum is going to be filled with nothing but.

Seriously. A conservative has opinion on rape that borders on insanity? Wow. "ZZzzzzzzzzzzz, sky is blue, water is wet, why is this news?"

Why is anything news. Not much reinventing of the wheel going on these days. Probably 99% (exaggeration imminent) of the threads on this forum are already covered ground

 d-usa wrote:
It was an emotional day holding that fetus. I wish nobody would ever need or have an abortion. But I will always fight to have the legal option to do so and I will always try to educate people who don't know what they are talking about when they make stupid arguments against it.

The most succinct summery of my stance on abortion possible. I don't like it, but it's not my choice to make, and it certainly isn't my choice to say you can't do it.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
It was an emotional day holding that fetus. I wish nobody would ever need or have an abortion. But I will always fight to have the legal option to do so and I will always try to educate people who don't know what they are talking about when they make stupid arguments against it.

The most succinct summery of my stance on abortion possible. I don't like it, but it's not my choice to make, and it certainly isn't my choice to say you can't do it.

I'll choose D please, all of the above are correct.

Contraceptives on the most basic level are not a bad thing.

Some contraceptives, however, do result in the death of the embryo by not allowing it to attach to the uterine wall. Thus on a technical level it could be seen as an abortion pill/whatever method its taken as. With the assumption that life begins at conception.

IMO, anything that prevents fertilization is perfectly fine. Anything that prevents the already fertilized embryo from attaching to the uterine wall is immoral as it causes a human death.

There needs to be a definitive line as to exactly how a contraceptive works, and they should be clearly labeled as such.

Anway, all these chemical contraceptives are rather unnecessary. Condoms are sooo cheap and easy to get there is no reason people shouldn't use them in preference to other methods. They're so cheap in fact that just about everyone is giving them away.

Here on my college for example, there are no less then 10 locations you can get free condoms. Thats 10 locations that arn't more then 3 minutes walk from each other.

And then a pack of 20 at a drug store is, what, $2.50?

 AustonT wrote:
You'd think Republicans would look at who wants to have abortions and start backing it whole heartedly, just throw buckets of money at opening abortion clinics, and then encourage all thier little evangelist daughters and sons to breed like rabbits...

Could it be that they are holding a specific moral point that abortion is wrong, no matter who gets one, and not trying to have a double standard

 Grey Templar wrote:
Anway, all these chemical contraceptives are rather unnecessary. Condoms are sooo cheap and easy to get there is no reason people shouldn't use them in preference to other methods.

Many women use the various contraceptive pills to prevent menstrual cramps and the fact that they have to bleed for several days a month without them. Being safer from becoming infected with unwanted babies is an added bonus.

So yeah, plenty of reasons people would take the pill. If there was an equivalent pain/bleeding/etc for males and there was a pill which would prevent it, I'd sure as hell use it rather than just using physical barrier protection.

Besides, if that barrier breaks, you have another line of protection, further reducing the risks of becoming pregnant.

How do so many people think a cluster of cells is a human life?

You know, the female body can dump fertilized eggs out too, simply because they don't attach to the uterine wall.

Are all of those females murderers?

Every sperm a man has could potentially fertilize an egg, are they committing mass infanticide every time they polish one off? Or are they simply also clusters of cells?

 Grey Templar wrote:
Anway, all these chemical contraceptives are rather unnecessary. Condoms are sooo cheap and easy to get there is no reason people shouldn't use them in preference to other methods. They're so cheap in fact that just about everyone is giving them away.

But some women want to feel the skin of the penis rather than latex and some men want to feel the soft, moist texture of a warm vagina rather than latex.

 daedalus-templarius wrote:
How do so many people think a cluster of cells is a human life?

You know, the female body can dump fertilized eggs out too, simply because they don't attach to the uterine wall.

Are all of those females murderers?

Every sperm a man has could potentially fertilize an egg, are they committing mass infanticide every time they polish one off? Or are they simply also clusters of cells?

*sigh,

1) There is a huge difference between something happening beyond our control and a deliberate action. Its the difference between accidentially knocking someone off some scaffolding and deliberatly pushing them off. One is a horrible accident, the other is murder.

2) Sperm and Eggs are not human life unless they are combined. Before that they are simply part of the person's body they come from. They are cells, but not a seperate life form until they combine. Its really not that hard of a concept.

Or god forbid, Sheepskin Condoms.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grey Templar wrote:

 daedalus-templarius wrote:
How do so many people think a cluster of cells is a human life?

You know, the female body can dump fertilized eggs out too, simply because they don't attach to the uterine wall.

Are all of those females murderers?

Every sperm a man has could potentially fertilize an egg, are they committing mass infanticide every time they polish one off? Or are they simply also clusters of cells?

*sigh,

1) There is a huge difference between something happening beyond our control and a deliberate action. Its the difference between accidentially knocking someone off some scaffolding and deliberatly pushing them off. One is a horrible accident, the other is murder.

2) Sperm and Eggs are not human life unless they are combined. Before that they are simply part of the person's body they come from. They are cells, but not a seperate life form until they combine. Its really not that hard of a concept.

And up until a certain point, so is the fertilized egg, it just a clump of cells.

Cheesecat wrote:

But some women want to feel the skin of the penis rather than latex and some men want to feel the soft, moist texture of a warm vagina rather than latex.

Ok, that is a bit much

Grey Templar wrote:

 daedalus-templarius wrote:
How do so many people think a cluster of cells is a human life?

You know, the female body can dump fertilized eggs out too, simply because they don't attach to the uterine wall.

Are all of those females murderers?

Every sperm a man has could potentially fertilize an egg, are they committing mass infanticide every time they polish one off? Or are they simply also clusters of cells?

*sigh,

1) There is a huge difference between something happening beyond our control and a deliberate action. Its the difference between accidentially knocking someone off some scaffolding and deliberatly pushing them off. One is a horrible accident, the other is murder.

2) Sperm and Eggs are not human life unless they are combined. Before that they are simply part of the person's body they come from. They are cells, but not a seperate life form until they combine. Its really not that hard of a concept.

I can see I won't get anywhere with you. I find your position to be backwards and crazy, and at odds with certified scientific doctors, rather than religious gut feelings.

 Cheesecat wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Anway, all these chemical contraceptives are rather unnecessary. Condoms are sooo cheap and easy to get there is no reason people shouldn't use them in preference to other methods. They're so cheap in fact that just about everyone is giving them away.

But some women want to feel the skin of the penis rather than latex and some men want to feel the soft, moist texture of a warm vagina rather than latex.

Maybe thats the drawback for wanting to ensure you don't get pregnant.

And I'm sure there are chemical contraceptives that prevent conception without causing the death of the embryo.

Grey Templat, do you eat eggs? Did you know some eggs can be fertilized but put in the cold so they dont develop?
Are you murddering baby chickens?

And I'm sure there are chemical contraceptives that prevent conception without causing the death of the embryo.

Am I the only one who finds something off with this sentence?

So women who take the morning after pill are guilty of first degree murder?

 LordofHats wrote:

And I'm sure there are chemical contraceptives that prevent conception without causing the death of the embryo.

Am I the only one who finds something off with this sentence?

Yes we need contraceptives that tell sperm to leave the vagina.

Contraceptives: "No eggs here sir"

Sperm: "Oh, OK I'll just look somewhere else"

 streamdragon wrote:
So women who take the morning after pill are guilty of first degree murder?

If it causes the death of an embryo, yes.

I confess I am not familier with all the various types of pills and how they chemically work.



And they really can't use the excuse that they have no other option.

There are plenty of options.

1) You can use Condoms

2) You can use a spermicide

3) You can use a ovulation inhibiting chemical


Those 3 options should cover just about any situation. I think its a very reasonable set of options


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Cheesecat wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

And I'm sure there are chemical contraceptives that prevent conception without causing the death of the embryo.

Am I the only one who finds something off with this sentence?

Yes we need contraceptives that tell sperm to leave the vagina.

Contraceptives: "No eggs here sir"

Sperm: "Oh, OK I'll just look somewhere else"

Spermicidal chemicals and chemicals that prevent ovulation are what I was referring to. I fail to see any problem here.

Did you mean eggs instead of embryo? I was thrown off because why would someone need a contraceptive (specifically designed) that prevents conception if they're already carrying an embryo

Ok, imagine this, you and your GF/BF/Booty call are getting busy, passionate and everything, the guy stops and says, "Let me put on the spermicide/condom"
Boom, Mood Killed.

Responsibility is a buzzkill like that.

 streamdragon wrote:
So women who take the morning after pill are guilty of first degree murder?

They should obviously be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law for these vicious murders.

 LordofHats wrote:
Did you mean eggs instead of embryo? I was thrown off because why would someone need a contraceptive (specifically designed) that prevents conception if they're already carrying an embryo

I meant something that prevents fertilization as opposed to preventing a viable living embryo from attaching to the uterine wall and killing it.

Looking back I messed up the sentence.


It should have been something like "I am sure you can easily use a chemical that prevents fertilization as opposed to something that prevents the already fertilized embryo from attaching to the uterine wall(which kills it)"

 Grey Templar wrote:

Here on my college for example, there are no less then 10 locations you can get free condoms. Thats 10 locations that arn't more then 3 minutes walk from each other.

And then a pack of 20 at a drug store is, what, $2.50?

Magnums are $18 for 24, but that's still cheaper than a rug rat.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Grey Templat, do you eat eggs? Did you know some eggs can be fertilized but put in the cold so they dont develop?
Are you murddering baby chickens?

Hah, you strayed into my turf. I know all about chickens.

An animal's life is not comperable to a human's.

If you think human life and animal life are no different then you wouldn't eat fertilized eggs. And you certaintly wouldn't even consider Abortion or any form of Birth Control that kills the Embryo because with that set of morals both would be considered wrong.

So if you don't eat fertilized eggs because you don't want to kill a baby chicken, then you can't also say Abortion is ok. unless you have a set of morals where human life is below animal life.

So what about those women that have embryos that fail implant and get flushed out with menstruation like so much used uterine lining?

Is that like manslaughter?

What about a lady that miscarries when she gets into car accident? Should we be writing her up for motor vehicular homicide?

I mean you can just find a positively staggering number of crimes to pin women with once you start considering embryos & fetuses full persons.

 Chongara wrote:
So what about those women that have embryos that fail implant and get flushed out with menstruation like so much used uterine lining?

Is that like manslaughter?

What about a lady that miscarries when she gets into car accident? Should we be writing her up for motor vehicular homicide?

I mean you can just find a positively staggering number of crimes to pin women with once you start considering embryos & fetuses full persons.

As I already said, it is no different then an accident.

The difference is deliberatly causing an action rather then it happening naturally or by chance.


The women who has an egg fail to implant through no concious action of her own is not commiting murder. That requires you to deliberatly do something.

If the egg fails to implant because of some natural fluke its nobodys fault.


Its like the example I gave earlier. If someone accidentally falls off a piece of scaffolding because they tripped over a power cord someone had left lying around, its an accident. Where as if the person had instead pushed them off the scaffolding it would be murder.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 streamdragon wrote:
So women who take the morning after pill are guilty of first degree murder?

If it causes the death of an embryo, yes.

So to follow up, if I cause an auto accident, and this woman suffers a miscarriage, I am guilty of manslaughter?

 Grey Templar wrote:
An animal's life is not comperable to a human's.

Except for a heartbeat.
And eating/breathing. Many of them share the same vertebrate structure as you.
Many of them also have higher level feelings and emotions. If you had a pet dog you would know this.

Your a smart guy GT. It suprises me to see a comment like that come from you.

 labmouse42 wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
An animal's life is not comperable to a human's.

Except for a heartbeat.
And eating/breathing. Many of them share the same vertebrate structure as you.
Many of them also have higher level feelings and emotions. If you had a pet dog you would know this.

Your a smart guy GT. It suprises me to see a comment like that come from you.

I believe the standard line is that non-human life does not have a soul, and is thus intrinsically inferior to human life.

Which I think is a load of crap, but there you are.