Why support it if you cannot stomach it?

[S.A.M.]

I would be very surprised to see someone who is squeamish about needles in a protest for more blood drives.

However, that is different from war or abortion where the casualties have no choice. So yes, I think everyone who wants others to go to war or have an abortion should make an informed choice. Not a stab in the dark.

 

[Bells]

I would be very surprised to see someone who is squeamish about needles in a protest for more blood drives

Why wouldn't they be demanding more blood drives? Lots of people who are squeamish about needles also recognise the importance of donating blood... so long as they do not have to do it.

 

[S.A.M.]

Yeah, but unlike war or abortion, the consequent people have a choice.

 

[Bells]

However, that is different from war or abortion where the casualties have no choice. So yes, I think everyone who wants others to go to war or have an abortion should make an informed choice. Not a stab in the dark.

An informed choice? And what would that be? You don't think pro-war people or pro-choice people know what happens? So bombard them with images of dead people or aborted fetuses, just in case they think it's all magical fairytales and pixie-dust?

 

[S.A.M.]

An informed choice? And what would that be? You don't think pro-war people or pro-choice people know what happens? So bombard them with images of dead people or aborted fetuses, just in case they think it's all magical fairytales and pixie-dust?

That the victims should also have a say in their choice? Or is that a perverted notion?

 

[Simon Anders]

I've received PMs from people regarding "shocking" images. While I understand the shock value of such images, I find it odd, for instance that people who do not consider a fetus as alive would find the products of conception as "shocking". Or people who support war would find images of war "shocking".

If you cannot even look at it, how do you support it?

A few issues are raised here
1) if they are simply saying they are shocked, this can be an accurate description of their reactions. One can be shocked by things and yet still think that policies and actions that led to those shocking images were the best choices.
Heck, the first time I saw images of a birth I was shocked. I am not against birth.
2) If they are saying they are shocked and by this mean that they should not be shown, that is a different message.

 

[S.A.M.]

A few issues are raised here
1) if they are simply saying they are shocked, this can be an accurate description of their reactions. One can be shocked by things and yet still think that policies and actions that led to those shocking images were the best choices.
Heck, the first time I saw images of a birth I was shocked. I am not against birth.
2) If they are saying they are shocked and by this mean that they should not be shown, that is a different message.

The images were edited so the second meaning is the correct one.

 

[Bells]

That the victims should also have a say in their choice? Or is that a perverted notion?

If they were able to have a choice, they would no longer be victims. I know it's harsh, but that is the reality of life.

You dissect animals, don't you? Do you think they should be given a choice in whether you kill them and then slice and dice them?

The images were edited so the second meaning is the correct one.

No, the images were removed but any links to said images remained, with warning of its graphic nature, so that people could choose for themselves as to whether they looked at it or not.

 

[S.A.M.]

If they were able to have a choice, they would no longer be victims. I know it's harsh, but that is the reality of life.

You dissect animals, don't you? Do you think they should be given a choice in whether you kill them and then slice and dice them?

No, but I don't pretend they are not alive either. I make a choice to consciously kill them for my purpose. Similarly, I do not believe that women will stop having abortions and getting rid of unwanted pregnancies if we were to suddenly discover that fetuses do feel pain during the 8-12 weeks when most abortions are performed. Hence in the same way, I think that women should make a choice to have or not have the child they are carrying. It would be nice if they buried the fetus instead of leaving it to be incinerated with medical trash, but that is just my opinion.

No, the images were removed but any links to said images remained, with warning of its graphic nature, so that people could choose for themselves as to whether they looked at it or not.

Not all of them.

 

[Bells]

No, but I don't pretend they are not alive either. I make a choice to consciously kill them for my purpose.

So you find it acceptable to end another life for your own purpose? Just as warmongers accept that people will die as a result of war and women who have abortions accept that their fetuses will cease to exist once they have their abortion... that the bunch of cells that can one day become a child will be destroyed.

I would imagine most would not consider to be alive as you or I are "alive". But merely as a bunch of cells is alive. There is a difference.

Similarly, I do not believe that women will stop having abortions and getting rid of unwanted pregnancies if we were to suddenly discover that fetuses do feel pain during the 8-12 weeks when most abortions are performed.

No they probably will not. Just as people will not stop killing and then dissecting animals even though they know those animals feel fear and pain. Vicious circle, isn't it?

Hence in the same way, I think that women should make a choice to have or not have the child they are carrying. It would be nice if they buried the fetus instead of leaving it to be incinerated with medical trash, but that is just my opinion.

Many women who miscarry naturally also do not bury their aborted fetuses.

Not all of them.

If there was no link supplied, then yes, the images were removed and a note left in the post as to why it was removed.

 

[Eidolan]

Why ever not? As Cutsie pointed out above, do you think a person squeamish about needles would not 'enable' someone to give them an injection or draw their blood when they deem it medically necessary?

Squeamish people are able to 'enable' a lot of very gory things, so long as they do not have to look at it. Just as a woman who is pro-choice may not want to have the images of aborted or miscarried fetuses jammed down her throat simply because she thinks women should have the right to choose... You don't know whether she would have an abortion or not, or whether she agrees or disagrees with the procedure on a personal level. She might very well be the type of person who would never have an abortion, but she thinks that women should have the right to choose. She might also think that a 12 week old fetus is not "alive" as she is alive, because of the simple fact that at 12 weeks, the fetus is not viable in any way, shape or form.. ie. it would not survive outside of the woman's womb, does not mean that she would abort every single pregnancy she happened to have or whether she agrees with it. Pro-choice is not about telling women to abort their pregnancies because the fetus is not alive. Pro-choice is about women having the right to choose for their own bodies and themselves. And frankly, you have no right to try to drive the point home by showing them images of aborted fetuses in an attempt to tell them they are ideologically wrong.

I am pro-choice and I also believe that a 12 week old fetus is not "alive", for the simple reason I stated above. Does that mean I would have an abortion for an unwanted pregnancy? No. I honestly don't think I could ever do it. But that does not give me the right to impose my own personal beliefs or stance on the matter upon other women. While abortion is not right for me, does not mean it is not something that might be important or essential for another woman and it should be up to her to decide for herself, without being pressured from either side of the fence. And frankly, I find it downright insulting to have pictures of abortions being used as a tool to protest against abortion. It is highly hypocritical for pro-lifers, who value human life as being sacred and important, to then use the images of what they consider a destroyed or murdered life to further their political and personal beliefs.

So yes Sam, some people are squeamish and do not wish to see graphic photos of abortions, regardless of where they stand on the matter.

I agree with this, but there are many people who do not live in the real world and should be exposed to reality. In particular, I think many Americans should see some pictures of what dead soldiers look like.

 

[S.A.M.]

So you find it acceptable to end another life for your own purpose? Just as warmongers accept that people will die as a result of war and women who have abortions accept that their fetuses will cease to exist once they have their abortion... that the bunch of cells that can one day become a child will be destroyed.

I would imagine most would not consider to be alive as you or I are "alive". But merely as a bunch of cells is alive. There is a difference.

Especially to the child who is a victim of war or abortion; IMO, not counting/considering the victims is dishonorable, and has less justification than the act you enable, whatever it may be.

 

[kenworth]

That's because they are arrogant.

explain.

 

[kenworth]

So you're fine with it, as long as someone else is doing the blowing to bits, gutting and decapitation on your behalf? You don't want to see or know what is happening?

well...you've just reiterated your original,fairly stupid point without responding to what i said.
i think its important to know whats happening i dont think its particularly important to see it,if you had your way entire nations would have PTSD.

on another topic i really hope you arent like this in real life.you are like the characters from nathan barely who try to trick people into being offended by something that is not offensive,not clever,very childish and very unattractive.

 

[S.A.M.]

well...you've just reiterated your original,fairly stupid point without responding to what i said.
i think its important to know whats happening i dont think its particularly important to see it,if you had your way entire nations would have PTSD.

on another topic i really hope you arent like this in real life.you are like the characters from nathan barely who try to trick people into being offended by something that is not offensive,not clever,very childish and very unattractive.

Except when presented as images, apparently. Then they are "shocking"

 

[kenworth]

Except when presented as images, apparently. Then they are "shocking"

no,then u are just being the kid crying for attention and willing to get it anyway they can without having to commit to reasonable discourse.

 

[Bells]

Especially to the child who is a victim of war or abortion; IMO, not counting/considering the victims is dishonorable, and has less justification than the act you enable, whatever it may be.

Who says they do discount them outright?

Who says they do not acknowledge the deaths of people in war or fetuses as a result of artificial abortions?

I would imagine that someone who completely discounts or fails to acknowledge the deaths caused by a war as being someone without remorse and without feeling.

Just as women who have abortions usually have to get counseling before and after the event.

 

[S.A.M.]

no,then u are just being the kid crying for attention and willing to get it anyway they can without having to commit to reasonable discourse.

By presenting the consequences to those who enable the acts?

Who says they do discount them outright?

Who says they do not acknowledge the deaths of people in war or fetuses as a result of artificial abortions?

I would imagine that someone who completely discounts or fails to acknowledge the deaths caused by a war as being someone without remorse and without feeling.

Just as women who have abortions usually have to get counseling before and after the event.

I do not consider throwing out fetuses with trash as an acknowledgement. Nor do I consider not counting the victims of war or mislabeling them as "insurgents" "militants" etc as acknowledgement. Does anyone know [or even remotely care] how many people have died in the wars they enabled? We keep better records of the cells we store.

 

[kenworth]

By presenting the consequences to those who enable the acts?

no,because you know it is the end to any rational discourse on the subject of war.
from that point on you are just talking about emotions.
its very easy when involved in a discussion about,say, iraq to pull up a picture of a kid with horrific injuries from an american bomb and then just scream "do you agree with that?do you?" thus ending the discussion and making it seem like you have "won".
funnily enough,not many people do that............i wonder why.

 

[S.A.M.]

no,because you know it is the end to any rational discourse on the subject of war.
from that point on you are just talking about emotions.
its very easy when involved in a discussion about,say, iraq to pull up a picture of a kid with horrific injuries from an american bomb and then just scream "do you agree with that?do you?" thus ending the discussion and making it seem like you have "won".
funnily enough,not many people do that............i wonder why.

Sure, without your enabling the war, that child along with "we don't do body count" others, would be alive and well.