Oh my gosh....your kidding right?

Are you kidding? What is the difference between death and dreamless sleep?

Well, you don't know what happens when you die. He could know his brother killed him for nothing, and that could bring untold anger and sadness to him. Or maybe as you die, you feel your body steadily degrading until you're nothing.

Anyways, your brother doesn't need to die, X. So please don't kill him.

Well, you don't know what happens when you die. He could know his brother killed him for nothing, and that could bring untold anger and sadness to him. Or maybe as you die, you feel your body steadily degrading until you're nothing.

This is more theologic than anything, but even if it is like you said - there's nothing for him to do on Earth, nothing he literally can do on Earth, so who cares? It's just saving some resources.

What is the difference between being in favor of Abortion and being in favor of Death penalty/openly carrying a firearm in public that is the direct cause of thousands of innocent deaths? Both results in the deaths of actual people.

What is the difference between being in favor of Abortion and being in favor of Death penalty/openly carrying a firearm in public that is the direct cause of thousands of innocent deaths? Both results in the deaths of actual people.

The statistics aren't even comparable. In 2012 Gun homicides caused around 11 thousand deaths, capital punishment caused around 40 deaths, and abortions caused around 700 thousand deaths.

In fact, Abortion is a bigger killer than a lot of things. For example:

Heart disease: 614,348
Cancer: 591,699
Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 147,101
Accidents (unintentional injuries): 136,053
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 133,103
Alzheimer's disease: 93,541
Diabetes: 76,488
Influenza and Pneumonia: 55,227
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome and nephrosis: 48,146
Intentional self-harm (suicide): 42,773

Edited 5/26/2016 18:23:27

And both results in the deaths of actual people. Stats or not, my statement is valid.

and some correction about your stats: these stats are only showing US figures not Worldwide figures.

I perfectly understand people against abortion, mainly because they are defended by people of religious background, and I respect all religions (not sure it is everyone's case here again), and what I find hypocritical here is that some people here are against abortion but still in favor of death penalty/generalization of firearms that also causes many deaths. If you want to be consistent in your views, you should be in favor/against any of them.

we shood jus forc every1 to hav aborshin. problm solvd !! dee end

And both results in the deaths of actual people. Stats or not, my statement is valid.

Your statement is incorrect. You said:

that is the direct cause of thousands of innocent deaths

Abortion is the cause of hundreds of thousands of deaths, not thousands like gun homicide.

and some correction about your stats: these stats are only showing US figures not Worldwide figures.

Practically every single country has stricter gun laws than the US, so it's pretty moot to discuss having tighter restrictions in these countries; They already exist.

Yes, I did forget to mention that the figures were specifically for the US, but let's face it, when we're discussing gun control and abortion as hot button topics we're talking about the US. Practically every other country has already implemented stricter gun laws and either banned or allowed abortion.

I perfectly understand people against abortion, mainly because they are defended by people of religious background, and I respect all religions (not sure it is everyone's case here again), and what I find hypocritical here is that some people here are against abortion but still in favor of death penalty/generalization of firearms that also causes many deaths. If you want to be consistent in your views, you should be in favor/against any of them.

It is a theological position in part stemming from the belief that since God created people they are inherently superior to beasts, but for the most part people realize this long before they have any sort of theological convictions. For instance, when I was younger, I loved digging up anthills with the aim of killing every single ant inside, and I was totally okay with this.

Guns actually have practical uses, for example self defense or hunting; They just happen to be good at killing people too. Abortion has no practical uses, and its only aim is to kill humans. This is why it's so easy to accept guns and reject abortion, and it's not inconsistent at all.

Edited 5/26/2016 19:06:27

Open carry is not directly causing the deaths of thousands of folk.

Abortion is the cause of hundreds of thousands of deaths, not thousands like gun homicide.

If we consider all abortion as the direct cause of thousands of deaths yes, but there is no universal consensus about it, contrary of death penalty and/deaths by guns. See the nuance.

Practically every single country has stricter gun laws than the US, so it's pretty moot to discuss having tighter restrictions in these countries; They already exist.

Yes, I did forget to mention that the figures were specifically for the US, but let's face it, when we're discussing gun control and abortion as hot button topics we're talking about the US. Practically every other country has already implemented stricter gun laws and either banned or allowed abortion.

Well for a pernickety person correcting me about those "thousands", you are very imprecise and inexact here: The least when you are giving some stats and details is to explain what exactly are they dealing about and which population is concerned.

Also let's face it, abortion is not universally recognized as "killing a person". So let's compare things that are comparable and stay accurate.

It is a theological position in part stemming from the belief that since God created people they are inherently superior to beasts, but for the most part people realize this long before they have any sort of theological convictions. For instance, I personally loved digging up anthills with the aim of killing every single ant inside of them when I was younger, and I was totally okay with this.

Killing anthills is not something condemnable by (at least) the Abrahamic religions, you are mixing religions here, Buddhism and sometimes Hinduism (some sects) are condemning the killing of any living being indeed. Same can't be said about Abrahamic religions (religious animal sacrifices as an example).

Some funny anecdote: I worked in a hotel during one summer, the funny story is that the governess was Buddhist and could not kill any ants nor spiders in rooms while cleaning them because of her religion forbidding it...

Guns actually have practical uses, for example self defense or hunting; They just happen to be good at killing people too. Abortion has no practical uses, and its only aim is to kill humans. This is why it's so easy to accept guns and reject abortion, and it's not inconsistent at all.

Indeed guns have practical uses, as you may have noticed I also said my Grandpa and uncles had rifles in their houses, it is tolerated in France as long as it is for hunting or if you are part of a shooting club.

Abortion has no practical uses? For you on religious grounds certainly there is no practical uses at all, but without abortion and uncontrolled births what would happen? Hundred of thousands of unwanted babies = potential orphans (knowing how the US system is wrecked about orphanages, see Disposable Children or rehoming unwanted children at will), potential children raised without love because unwanted. What about the ones discovering they would have babies that would have a horrible life (congenital deseases which make life unbearable).

And "this is why it's so easy to accept guns and reject abortion": frankly let me doubt about that, guns are not universally accepted in most of the developed nations (excepted the US and few others), whereas abortion is widely accepted in those developed nations (with the exception of very few country, the only country I heard where it is indeed illegal is Ireland for religious reasons, but I heard that many debates started lately about it even there).

What is the difference between being in favor of Abortion and being in favor of Death penalty/openly carrying a firearm in public that is the direct cause of thousands of innocent deaths? Both results in the deaths of actual people.

Comparing executing Rapist and Killers to killing babies? Seriously? Oh, and the open carry part is completely false, the majority of shootings take place in "Gun Free" zones, and in the States with the strictest gun control laws. While places that embrace open carry enjoy a nice 23 percent decrease in violent crime this year alone.

^ If we consider abortion as killing babies yes, but it is not universal and even a minority view mainly supported by religious people/people living in zones with few access to information/people with few education or knowledge about the topic, so explain me something : why in almost all of the developed nations do we tolerate "killing babies"?

Because the term "developed nation" doesn't actually apply to anything, it's just used when it's politically useful, like now.

This is a pretty simple argument. If someone kills a live human without moral justification(self-defense), it is murder. A baby is alive. Therefore abortion is murder.

Rapists should be tracked down and put in prison with harsh sentences. But even if a woman is raped, the baby is still a live human. Killing it would be murder.

The only exception is when a mother's life is in danger. Letting a mother die from pregnancy would be morally wrong.

Also let's face it, abortion is not universally recognized as "killing a person". So let's compare things that are comparable and stay accurate.

You're contradicting yourself now. I have you quoted as saying:

Both results in the deaths of actual people.

In reference to Abortion and Guns.

Well for a pernickety person correcting me about those "thousands", you are very imprecise and inexact here: The least when you are giving some stats and details is to explain what exactly are they dealing about and which population is concerned.

You seemed to have no trouble knowing basically instantly that they were about the US:

these stats are only showing US figures

It's not necessary to restate the subject of your conversation if you are reasonably sure that your conversational partner is competent enough to actually remember what you're talking about.

Abortion has no practical uses? For you on religious grounds certainly there is no practical uses at all, but without abortion and uncontrolled births what would happen? Hundred of thousands of unwanted babies = potential orphans (knowing how the US system is wrecked about orphanages, see Disposable Children or rehoming unwanted children at will), potential children raised without love because unwanted. What about the ones discovering they would have babies that would have a horrible life (congenital deseases which make life unbearable).

Abortion has no practical uses. There may be practical benefits resulting from abortions, but abortion will always entail killing a human, which is my point. Guns do have uses that do not entail killing a human, which is why I've worded it the way I dd.

And "this is why it's so easy to accept guns and reject abortion": frankly let me doubt about that, guns are not universally accepted in most of the developed nations (excepted the US and few others), whereas abortion is widely accepted in those developed nations (with the exception of very few country, the only country I heard where it is indeed illegal is Ireland for religious reasons, but I heard that many debates started lately about it even there).

I was not suggesting that these views are widely held, although in the US they pretty much are, which if you'll remember is the topic of our conversation. Rather, I was directly responding to something that you said:

what I find hypocritical here is that some people here are against abortion but still in favor of death penalty/generalization of firearms that also causes many deaths. If you want to be consistent in your views, you should be in favor/against any of them.

Edited 5/26/2016 20:12:30

Another argument is that the mother has the entire decision on whether a baby is considered human or not. In today's society, killing a WANTED baby is murder, while killing an UNWANTED baby is a common surgical procedure. No one should decide whether something is considered human or not.

The pro-abortion argument is the same one used by slave owners in the US in the 1800s: If it's on my property, I can do whatever I want with it. Disgusting

In Medieval Times, abortion was allowed by the church. Early abortions do not hurt anybody as the fetus has no soul.

"developed nation" doesn't actually apply to anything

A developed country, industrialized country, or "more economically developed country" (MEDC), is a sovereign state that has a highly developed economy and advanced technological infrastructure relative to other less industrialized nations. Most commonly, the criteria for evaluating the degree of economic development are gross domestic product (GDP), gross national product (GNP), the per capita income, level of industrialization, amount of widespread infrastructure and general standard of living.

This is a pretty simple argument. If someone kills a live human without moral justification(self-defense), it is murder. A baby is alive. Therefore abortion is murder.

Rapists should be tracked down and put in prison with harsh sentences. But even if a woman is raped, the baby is still a live human. Killing it would be murder.

"Killing babies" is a spurious claim as it can barely be considered as a feticide. Gosh, we do not kill babies at birth, but well many people here (unsurprisingly all Americans from a very particular area) tend to have very biased political claims on this very topic. I truly wonder why.

Some of you here are talking in place of those women that chose abortion, do you honestly believe it is an unconsidered choice for them?
And without abortion as I pointed out earlier, it would lead to situations where millions of children that were unwanted, would potentially be abandoned/raised without love from their parents.

(unsurprisingly all Americans from a very particular area)

Me and my entire family are actually "from" up north, just an FYI.

It makes good workers for factories.