Debate Android Raptor about abortion again

I was going to make a violent and rapey threat & compare the victim to a home dishwashing appliance but I couldn't find a way to make it funny so here I am just phoning it in this time. Just be mad and assume I was going to abuse Mod status to edit your posts into liking my misogynist rhetoric
Alright, what's the difference between Android Raptor and a Maytag® dishwasher? When you squirt your gel into the designated compartment, the Maytag® doesn't back buck backwards, call you daddy, moan, and then kill a fetus 8 weeks later with a vacuum attachment.
 
children have the right to be born
If they aren't born yet, they can't be considered children. They are either embryos, fetuses or unborn babies. Besides that, you clearly show no understanding of what is needed to grant rights to someone. There are two basic requirements:
  1. They are aware of their rights and able to understand them
  2. They are able to make a conscious decision of invoking or waiving their rights
Animals and the unborn don't fulfill these requirements, therefore they can't have rights. Children have a limited understanding and capacity concerning their rights, therefore they have a limited set of rights. Granting rights to unborn people is nonsense, both legally and biologically speaking.

wait until marriage before sex
It's always funny when the average Kiwi Farmer makes a statement. In the "good ol' times", people could wait until marriage before sex because they married when they were 18 - 21 (even then, marrying in your 20s would be considered strangely late). How do you plan to enforce that rule in today's society, in which virtually everyone is interested in a cosmopolitan lifestyle (going to college or university, travelling the world, knowing different cultures, etc) and is constantly watching people having sex on tv and in the internet? What makes you think that they would change their ways, which have been more or less like this for 60 years by now, to abide by the rules of a 20-something shut-in loser virgin in the internet who idealizes and romanticizes a society he never even experienced?
 
If they aren't born yet, they can't be considered children. They are either embryos, fetuses or unborn babies. Besides that, you clearly show no understanding of what is needed to grant rights to someone. There are two basic requirements:
  1. They are aware of their rights and able to understand them
  2. They are able to make a conscious decision of invoking or waiving their rights
Animals and the unborn don't fulfill these requirements, therefore they can't have rights. Children have a limited understanding and capacity concerning their rights, therefore they have a limited set of rights. Granting rights to unborn people is nonsense, both legally and biologically speaking.
So are you saying that killing someone's pet is okay then since as an animal, they don't have rights? Or hunting out of season? Because I'm pretty sure you would get in huge trouble for both.
It's always funny when the average Kiwi Farmer makes a statement. In the "good ol' times", people could wait until marriage before sex because they married when they were 18 - 21 (even then, marrying in your 20s would be considered strangely late). How do you plan to enforce that rule in today's society, in which virtually everyone is interested in a cosmopolitan lifestyle (going to college or university, travelling the world, knowing different cultures, etc) and is constantly watching people having sex on tv and in the internet? What makes you think that they would change their ways, which have been more or less like this for 60 years by now, to abide by the rules of a 20-something shut-in loser virgin in the internet who idealizes and romanticizes a society he never even experienced?
I don't. I can't control people, they are free to live as they choose. All I know is, the Lord's way is the right way, and so many of us have forsaken it. For the rules you speak of aren't my rules. They are God's.

The problem is, you view things in a worldly sense. The rules the world makes are not always based on the rules God makes. We don't like to take responsibility for our sinful nature so we make up rules to try and avoid that responsibility because the things the world offers are so appealing to us. Don't want to commit to marriage and raise a child but you wanna have sex anyway? Make up rules and laws that favor those who make irresponsible decisions that lead to them potentially having a child outside of wedlock and wanting a quick fix solution. To the point where you can kill babies that survive abortion in some places.

I don't expect people to change their ways on a dime. The world has always been like this and there was never an "ideal" time. That doesn't change the fact that the way most people are living their lives today is wrong and ultimately leads to them being unhappy and unfulfilled. And there's nothing I can do about it other than live my life the way the Lord wills it. And that includes telling people the truth.
 
I don't want to derail the thread any further, but I feel those are pertinent questions so I will answer them:

killing someone's pet is okay
Obviously not. Don't you pay attention to what you write? If they are someone's pet, they are someone's property. Therefore, killing them violates property rights. Needless to say, property rights are not rights of the thing which is a property per se, they are the owner's rights concerning their property. If the owner however decides to liquidate their own property, then nothing can be done.

hunting out of season
I come from a place where there isn't a sports hunting culture, so I don't understand the cultural context behind this question. You shouldn't hunt endangered species or in areas designated as environmentally protected.

the Lord's way is the right way
Maybe. Religion gets a lot of things right, but also a lot of things wrong.

For the rules you speak of aren't my rules. They are God's.
They are the rules of men who claimed to speak in behalf of God. Important difference.

you view things in a worldly sense
I view things in a pragmatical sense.

our sinful nature
There's no sin.

child outside of wedlock
Contraception, although not 100% efficient, is the best way to prevent this from happening. Of course, if you're skeptical of contraception, you may try abstinence.

you can kill babies that survive abortion in some places.
Which places? never heard of those. If they exist, they are in the wrong.

the way most people are living their lives today is wrong
Agree, but for different reasons: war, violence, poverty, inequality, economic stagnation, corruption, addictions, conspicuous consumption, fanaticism and alienation are much bigger problems nowadays than abortion or children being raised out of wedlock.

ultimately leads to them being unhappy and unfulfilled. And there's nothing I can do about it other than live my life the way the Lord wills it
Are you happy and fulfilled living your life the way "the Lord" (actually priests and politicians from the Iron Age and late Antiquity) wills it? You seem pretty alienated from your society. I doubt that's a condition that would lead to happiness, since humans are inherently social animals.

And that includes telling people the truth.
That's called proselytizing and it's a bad thing. It only leads to you becoming more of a social pariah. Although you are entitled to having and expressing your beliefs, you shouldn't make a big deal out of them. You come off as someone who feels superior because of your beliefs (like many people who are debating Android Raptor in this thread, even though she hasn't said anything absurd). Maybe you have some kind of narcissism, but I'm no psychologist to diagnose you.
 
If they aren't born yet, they can't be considered children. They are either embryos, fetuses or unborn babies. Besides that, you clearly show no understanding of what is needed to grant rights to someone. There are two basic requirements:
  1. They are aware of their rights and able to understand them
  2. They are able to make a conscious decision of invoking or waiving their rights
Animals and the unborn don't fulfill these requirements, therefore they can't have rights. Children have a limited understanding and capacity concerning their rights, therefore they have a limited set of rights. Granting rights to unborn people is nonsense, both legally and biologically speaking.


It's always funny when the average Kiwi Farmer makes a statement. In the "good ol' times", people could wait until marriage before sex because they married when they were 18 - 21 (even then, marrying in your 20s would be considered strangely late). How do you plan to enforce that rule in today's society, in which virtually everyone is interested in a cosmopolitan lifestyle (going to college or university, travelling the world, knowing different cultures, etc) and is constantly watching people having sex on tv and in the internet? What makes you think that they would change their ways, which have been more or less like this for 60 years by now, to abide by the rules of a 20-something shut-in loser virgin in the internet who idealizes and romanticizes a society he never even experienced?
Ok you responded to me first so I shall get off my phat ass and fire back. I'm a welder, lady. And religious. In one fell swoop i've killed the bottom part of your "every one is partying in the city" argument. I'm not.

As for the top half of the argument, half the U.S. has made that a crime at this point. And yes, rape is an exception, as rare as it is. Here's the thing, if you don't want to get pregnant, close your legs. Stay a virgin until you find the right guy of your dreams, and then responsibly have sex. Simple as. I am simply done with the petty "what if" arguments. Most, as in 99 something percent, of unwanted pregnancies, are men and women being whores. Stop it. Get some help for your sex addiction. And if women don't heed that advice, have him wear a condom every time and have her use a iud that's up to date in effectiveness. That's about as close as it gets to 100%. And if she get pregnant, she knew the risks.
 
Last edited:
Are you happy and fulfilled living your life the way "the Lord" (actually priests and politicians from the Iron Age and late Antiquity) wills it? You seem pretty alienated from your society. I doubt that's a condition that would lead to happiness, since humans are inherently social animals.


That's called proselytizing and it's a bad thing. It only leads to you becoming more of a social pariah. Although you are entitled to having and expressing your beliefs, you shouldn't make a big deal out of them. You come off as someone who feels superior because of your beliefs (like many people who are debating Android Raptor in this thread, even though she hasn't said anything absurd). Maybe you have some kind of narcissism, but I'm no psychologist to diagnose you.
Quite the opposite. By following God, I've made new friends, am attending Church and have become more sociable with people at my workplace. Especially those who are Christian as well. Then again, I live in a more conservative and religious area, so I'm blessed for that. I still struggle with a lot of things, but I'm happier than I was before I came to believe.

And I do and should make a big deal about my beliefs because we are born from God. Jesus is the one way to heaven. The sooner we all accept that truth the better.

And no, as much as I would like to think I'm better than other people just because I'm Christian, I'm not. I was a nonbeliever as well at one point and I'm still capable of sinning just as badly, if not worse.
 
Are you happy and fulfilled living your life the way "the Lord" (actually priests and politicians from the Iron Age and late Antiquity) wills it? You seem pretty alienated from your society. I doubt that's a condition that would lead to happiness, since humans are inherently social animals.
I'm not interested in the rest of your post but I'll answer this:

King Solomon said:
It is better to dwell in the wilderness, than with a contentious and an angry woman.
 
@Android raptor

Out of curiosity - what are your opinions on capital punishment and euthanasia/'assisted dying' ?

Yay/nay?
Depends. I would be all for capital punishment if it wasn't so expensive on taxpayers and was only used on the most evil criminals (like mass shooters or serial killers). Euthanasia I think is ok for terminally ill people who can consent to it.

Lord knows some of the conditions discussed in Tard Baby I'd rather have assisted dying than suffer with unnecessarily (like brain tumors).
 
Depends. I would be all for capital punishment if it wasn't so expensive on taxpayers and was only used on the most evil criminals (like mass shooters or serial killers). Euthanasia I think is ok for terminally ill people who can consent to it.

Lord knows some of the conditions discussed in Tard Baby I'd rather have assisted dying than suffer with unnecessarily (like brain tumors).

Red tape makes everything so damn expensive.
Browsing Home Depot I can get 50FT of rope and a stool for under $50.

In the case of babies, when (in your opinion) does abortion become euthanasia?
I.e. infant is born with extreme abnormality - once outside the uterus is this now euthanasia to terminate it?
 
Red tape makes everything so damn expensive.
Browsing Home Depot I can get 50FT of rope and a stool for under $50.

In the case of babies, when (in your opinion) does abortion become euthanasia?
I.e. infant is born with extreme abnormality - once outside the uterus is this now euthanasia to terminate it?
I mean if it's outside the uterus and FUBAR, it's probably gonna get palliative care only. Load that fucker up w/morphine until is passes and is no longer suffering, no extraordinary life-saving care for life-incompatible spuds (like severe holoproscencephaly cyclops babies).
 
Back