71 replies to this topic

[Hostile]

The focus of this article is to portray the hypocrisy of how we all veiw what we are allowed to do with our own selves and bodies.

http://dictionary.re...r=2&q=hypocrisy

My first point to say in the US woman are allowed to have abortions, the idea is that it is thier body and they can do with it what they will. This includes not telling the husband, (he has no say) and minors (people under 18) not having to tell parents they had an abortion.

This is the law of the land. So I accept it as such.

But if this is the case, than why are people thrown in jail for growing marijuana? It's a natural plant, a drug not refined in any way, and causes no violence from the individual and is not not addictive.

It's my body right?

Why is it doctors who created a scenerio so a terminally ill patient, in great pain, could end thier own life with a push of a button done by themselves was outlawed in the US?

It's my body right?

A women is put into jail for killing her baby and thrown it into a garbage can hours afters it's born, yet this women could kill the same baby with the aid of a doctor 3 months prior and it would be considered a "medical procedure"

It's my body right?

In conclusion, my point is if we are going to create a set of rules of what we can and cannot do with our bodies than I suggest they apply across the board for all people.

The irony is staggering...

[Comrade Kal]

Learn the definition of irony before you end every comment with mentioning how staggering it is.

In short, because governments are hypocritical. The UK government has the oddest policy on marijuana. They've practically legalised it, but they haven't completely legalised it - nothing will happen to you if you're caught with it, yet this way the government can't tax it. Very odd. To be honest, I really can't understand why marijuana isn't legalised - probably to do with the electorate and nothing else, assuming most people disapprove of it. Same with prostitution.

However, it seems stupid. The tax could benefit the NHS, and it could be regulated to make sure you get marijuana - if you buy it from a dealer it could be filled with all kinds of crazy chemicals.

As for abortion, you can't look at every single case - there simply isn't the time. You need to draw a clear line somewhere, and 24 weeks is where they've picked (here at least.) Also, like marijuana and prostitution that I mentioned above, it'll always og underground, so you may as well legalise it so you can keep an eye on it.

Edited by Kal, 18 December 2005 - 05:51 PM.

[Athena]

There is indeed hypocrisy in there I must say. People don't lay the line straight.
If someone wants to use marijuana, I have no problem with that (Dutch law actually allows it), as long as they don't harm other people. It is their body, if they want to destroy it, it's their choice. Same with alcohol. I don't mind as long as people do not force it onto me, or do things that can harm others.

Another hypocrisy thing is that marijuana is (in many countries) not allowed, but smoking and drinking are. I don't see the difference. All three are bad for your own body. Soft-drugs do not cause more damage than getting drunk every day or smoke a lot of ciggarettes.

I am pro abortian in an early enough stage, I do think the father should be informed though (unless there's not a stable relationship or something).

[Comrade Kal]

Well said, Blaat. Marijuana isn't any worse than smoking and drinking, in fact it's probably better. There's no doubt that if people went out to pubs and smoked marijuana at nights instead of drinking there'd be less violence.

I don't see any need to change the abortion laws as they are now (in the UK.) You can abort up to 24 weeks, and get it done without anybody else knowing.

[Athena]

Learn the definition of irony before you end every comment with mentioning how staggering it is.

Hostile posted the definition of hypocrisy Kal. Therefore I think it's fair to say he knows what he is talking about.

As for abortion, you can't look at every single case - there simply isn't the time. You need to draw a clear line somewhere, and 24 weeks is where they've picked (here at least.) Also, like marijuana and prostitution that I mentioned above, it'll always og underground, so you may as well legalise it so you can keep an eye on it.

In a stable relationship, the man has the right to know. After all, it took two to make the baby, not one. He deserves the right to know, unless say he left her or something.

[Hostile]

Learn the definition of irony before you end every comment with mentioning how staggering it is.

http://dictionary.re.../search?q=irony

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Comrade Kal]

At the end, he said "the irony is staggering." Whereas he already defined it as hypocrisy, which it is. But he also commented on irony oin 3 out of the 4 articles in this, and he was wrong every time. Just a helpful note.

[Hostile]

I don't mind being wrong, my point was to point out the obvious hypocrisy. Kal your point is well made.

[{IP}Gil-Galad]

Hmm. You know the city of Boston in Massachusetts has legalized marijuna up to carrying around an ounce. Thats a big shift in things over here, my friends say they're gonna head over there just for a week to smoke marijuana legally.

Edited by {IP}Gil-Galad, 18 December 2005 - 08:45 PM.

[MSpencer]

You have some proof behind that I hope... I live in Massachusetts and I've never heard of such a thing. I also checked the city of Boston website, the Globe and the Herald, and the Massachusetts Cannabis Reform Coalition. Yeah... it didn't happen.

[Hostile]

Yikes Gil this is a no spin zone so back up your words with something in regards to these subjects. We are only concerned with the facts....support them accordingly or don't reply.

[ihateharriers]

i agree with assisted suicide for the terminally ill, legalization of marijuana just so somebody keeps an eye on it, and i am fine with abortion. sometimes it's better if the father doesn't know, just for the sake of the relationship. if he wants to be he should be told, but otherwise just let it be. as for addictiveness of drugs, the nicotine found in cigarettes is more addictive that heroin. smoking gives you lung cancer, weed gives you anti-motivational syndrome. cancer kills, anti-motivation doesn't. how is that for hypocrisy?

[Silent_Killa]

We live in a world of comromises, such is the way of the west...

As far as abortion goes, I am no more against it than I am against murder. The current argument is if the baby can or cannot feel pain, well, I can think of a number of ways to kill people where they wouldn't feel pain, should that be legal then? Another argument is that it's not yet a person, well, I suppose the question then is, when exactly is it a person? Honestly, it's not like babies are capable of higher thought, should we be able to kill them? Of course not right, but why? Because society tells you no?

I believe in living with the consequences of your actions, there's a moring after pill for rape victims, and there are plenty of programs where you can give your baby up for adoption, free of charge, and completely anonomously, it couldn't be easier.

[Athena]

I wouldn't classify giving birth as easy Silent_Killa.

[Comrade Kal]

So you say morning after pills are all fine and well, yet you say "when does it become a person?". Clearly you must know then. What's the difference?

[Silent_Killa]

morning after pill... hell, you don't want a baby, get on the pill, and tell the guy to wrap it up... if you're too stupid to figure that out, you should have to live with the consequences

[Athena]

Then still there's always a slight chance it doesn't work. A chance of failure of for example 1% doesn't mean it never fails.

[MSpencer]

Would you not abort a baby if it had, say, cystic fibrosis, cri du chat, Tay-Sachs, one of the many sex chromosome aneuploidy diseases, trisomy 21, trisomy X, etc. etc.? How is it different? Should we have to live with our own genetic mistakes which we have no control over?
A fetus isn't alive until it takes a breath. And it's not alive when it's just a fertilized zygote or an embryonic clump of 12 cells...

[Hostile]

Than there is the infamous "partial birth abortion" Something that makes my skin crawl. Not sure you all know the procedure but it's horrific.

http://www.nrlc.org/...thers_Place.htm

http://www.nrlc.org/...th_Abortion.jpg

And yes they are sucking the brains out of the living unborn baby in the picture. Any thoughts on that one?

[Silent_Killa]

Then still there's always a slight chance it doesn't work. A chance of failure of for example 1% doesn't mean it never fails.

For rape victims, when the morning after pill fails, I could understand an abortion. Otherwise, you knew the risk going into when you had sex, or at least you should have. It doesn't stop me, yes, but IF my girl were to get pregnant, then I would take responsibility for my actions, it would be no one elses fault but our own, she knew what she was doing, as did I.

Would you not abort a baby if it had, say, cystic fibrosis, cri du chat, Tay-Sachs, one of the many sex chromosome aneuploidy diseases, trisomy 21, trisomy X, etc. etc.? How is it different? Should we have to live with our own genetic mistakes which we have no control over?
A fetus isn't alive until it takes a breath. And it's not alive when it's just a fertilized zygote or an embryonic clump of 12 cells...

Could I kill someone who had cystic fibrosis, cri du chat, etc if I could make it completely painless? If they requested it? It's hypocracy, and uterly rediculous to say that someone cannot make a choice for themselves, but they can make one for another human being.