Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.atheism > #1960469 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Paul <papa_fox@cybertown.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-08-14 14:40 -0700 |
| Last post | 2015-08-20 16:49 +0000 |
| Articles | 5 on this page of 25 — 10 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.atheism
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: Secular case against abortion Paul <papa_fox@cybertown.com> - 2015-08-14 14:40 -0700
Re: Secular case against abortion Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 01:19 -0400
Re: Secular case against abortion Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 01:27 -0400
Re: Secular case against abortion Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 01:51 -0400
Re: Secular case against abortion Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 02:01 -0400
Re: Secular case against abortion Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2015-08-15 05:17 -0700
Re: Secular case against abortion "W*T*S*." <m14m@earthlink.net> - 2015-08-15 01:08 -0500
Re: Secular case against abortion "W.TS." <m14m@earthlink.net> - 2015-08-15 02:51 -0500
Re: Secular case against abortion Planet Visitor II <nappy@nosuchserver.com> - 2015-08-15 23:41 -0400
Re: Secular case against abortion "W.TS." <m14m@earthlink.net> - 2015-08-15 01:04 -0500
Re: Secular case against abortion "W.TS." <m14m@earthlink.net> - 2015-08-15 02:49 -0500
Re: Secular case against abortion Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2015-08-15 06:40 -0500
Re: Secular case against abortion Paul <papa_fox@cybertown.com> - 2015-08-15 14:45 -0700
Re: Secular case against abortion MarkA <someone@somewhere.invalid> - 2015-08-18 21:45 +0000
Re: Secular case against abortion Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2015-08-18 21:53 -0700
Re: Secular case against abortion "W.TS." <m14m@earthlink.net> - 2015-08-15 01:01 -0500
Re: Secular case against abortion "W.TS." <m14m@earthlink.net> - 2015-08-15 02:48 -0500
Re: Secular case against abortion Carl Kaufmann <cwkaufmann@cox.net> - 2015-08-15 03:16 -0400
Re: Secular case against abortion "W.TS." <m14m@earthlink.net> - 2015-08-15 02:44 -0500
Re: Secular case against abortion MarkA <someone@somewhere.invalid> - 2015-08-19 19:59 +0000
Re: Secular case against abortion "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-08-15 15:14 +0100
Re: Secular case against abortion "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-08-16 15:00 +0100
Re: Secular case against abortion Paul <papa_fox@cybertown.com> - 2015-08-15 14:42 -0700
Re: Secular case against abortion MarkA <someone@somewhere.invalid> - 2015-08-19 19:57 +0000
Re: Secular case against abortion MarkA <someone@somewhere.invalid> - 2015-08-20 16:49 +0000
Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]
| From | "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-15 15:14 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <d38vppFkv0rU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #1960469 |
On 15/08/2015 06:03, Rudy Canoza wrote: > On 8/14/2015 2:40 PM, Paul wrote: >> So getting back to the original point -- there is no rational secular >> case against abortion. > > Of course there is. The developing baby is a person. Killing it is > murder. Murder is wrong. > > Case closed. > "Murder" is a legal definition. Once upon a time not so long ago, it was legally permissible to kill a black person, or a Native American -- it wasn't murder. As long as the law says it is permissible, aborting a foetus is not murder.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-16 15:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <d3bjb8Fag85U3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #1960920 |
On 15/08/2015 18:37, Rudy Canoza wrote: > On 8/15/2015 7:14 AM, Alex W. wrote: >> On 15/08/2015 06:03, Rudy Canoza wrote: >>> On 8/14/2015 2:40 PM, Paul wrote: >>>> So getting back to the original point -- there is no rational secular >>>> case against abortion. >>> >>> Of course there is. The developing baby is a person. Killing it is >>> murder. Murder is wrong. >>> >>> Case closed. >>> >> >> "Murder" is a legal definition. > > Based on morality. > Based on legislation which may or may not be rooted in morality ... and even where it is based in morality, the laws may well not reflect current morality, or indeed the morality of a majority.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul <papa_fox@cybertown.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-15 14:42 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <2a11fcb2-a51c-41a6-970d-4e36511cfda6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #1960469 |
On Saturday, August 15, 2015 at 1:03:24 AM UTC-4, Rudy Canoza wrote: > On 8/14/2015 2:40 PM, Paul wrote: > > So getting back to the original point -- there is no rational secular case against abortion. > > Of course there is. You have yet to produce one. > The developing baby is a person. Wrong. Please read up on the legal definition of "person." > Killing it is murder. Wrong again. Please read up on the legal definition of "murder." > Murder is wrong. At least you got one statement right. > Case closed. Your "case" doesn't exist. :-D
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | MarkA <someone@somewhere.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-19 19:57 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pan.2015.08.19.19.56.40@somewhere.invalid> |
| In reply to | #1960469 |
On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 22:03:21 -0700, Rudy Canoza wrote: > On 8/14/2015 2:40 PM, Paul wrote: >> So getting back to the original point -- there is no rational secular >> case against abortion. > > Of course there is. The developing baby is a person. Killing it is > murder. Murder is wrong. > > Case closed. The developing baby is threatening the life and health of the woman. She has every right to defend herself, if she so chooses. Case closed. -- MarkA The best revenge is to be unlike him who performed the injury. -- Marcus Aurelius
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | MarkA <someone@somewhere.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-20 16:49 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mr50e531id2@news7.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #1964277 |
On Wed, 19 Aug 2015 14:16:18 -0700, Rudy Canoza wrote: > On 8/19/2015 12:57 PM, MarkA wrote: >> On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 22:03:21 -0700, Rudy Canoza wrote: >> >>> On 8/14/2015 2:40 PM, Paul wrote: >>>> So getting back to the original point -- there is no rational secular >>>> case against abortion. >>> >>> Of course there is. The developing baby is a person. Killing it is >>> murder. Murder is wrong. >>> >>> Case closed. >> >> The developing baby is threatening the life and health of the woman. > > No, it isn't, and that's not the reason the vast majority of women get > abortions, even if they're happy enough to have that as a > rationalization. It's for convenience. It must be wonderful to have so many interesting things about the world yet to learn. Too bad that you will almost certainly fail to learn any of them. -- MarkA I don't mind if people want to live in an alternate reality, as long as they don't try to govern in this one.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]
Back to top | Article view | alt.atheism
csiph-web