Sunday, December 20, 2009

Um... okay.

You're now chatting with a random stranger. Say hi!
You: What is your opinion on abortion?
Stranger: Well..
Stranger: I don't endorse it.
You: Why not?
Stranger: It's taking life away.
Stranger: Who are you to take life away?
You: Do you think it should be legal?
Stranger: The mother?
Stranger: It should it. It's a subjective matter.
Stranger: be*.
You: What about child abuse. Is that a subjective matter?
Stranger: The government shouldn't judge for the parent.
Stranger: That should be illegal. I speak from experience.
You: Why should it be illegal?
You: Is that not also a subjective matter?
Stranger: That pertains to the well being of the public. That should be the government's priority.
You: What about infanticide?
Stranger: Pardon?
Stranger: You raise a good question though.
You: Should infanticide be legal?
Stranger: What is "infanticide"?
You: infanticide
(n.) One who commits the crime of infanticide; one who kills an infant.
(n.) The murder of an infant born alive; the murder or killing of a newly born or young child; child murder.
Stranger: It's murder. Be it an infant or not. They are still human beings.
Stranger: Prospective children, adults, elders.
You: What makes the unborn child any different?
You: Why should he not be protected?
Stranger: The unborn child could have still been killed before birth. Complications, etc. An infant could also be a still-born. That falls into someone else's hands, really.
You: What?
Stranger: It means, the fate of what happens to the Child is not up to the government.
You: Are you arguing that because the unborn child can die naturally, it is okay to kill him?
Stranger: Let me gather my thoughts for a moment.
You: I would like to point out that some nations have very high infant mortality rates.
You: Are infants not deserving of rights?
Stranger: Which are not necessarily due to infanticide or whatnot.
You: And because earthquakes happen, does that make nuking cities okay?
Stranger: Infants deserve rights because they have no voice to speak up with.
Stranger: They cannot protect themselves and so they need protection.
You: Neither does the unborn baby.
Stranger: The unborn baby has not been brough to life yet.
Stranger: t*.
You: Then how does he grow? Why does he need food?
Stranger: It hasn't started.
Stranger: Who ever spoke about what has happened before life? And what does that matter?
Stranger: The point is, unborn babies should be protected, but not by the law.
You: Life is defined by growth by metabolism.
Stranger: As I said, the matter was subjective.
You: Infanticide is also subjective.
You: So is slavery.
Stranger: Yes. But is life not existent in say South Africa?
You: What is your point?
Stranger: Where people cannot afford nutrition and have died due to that specific reason.
Stranger: What is yours?
You: I'm trying to understand your opinion.
You: I am literally confused.
Stranger: It's not a fixed opinion, I'll tell you that.
Stranger: I'm confused as well. I don't know what to go with.
You: Then you should always err on the side of life.
Stranger: The parent may or may not have the right to kill the baby, they might not be able to provide for it and hence they do not want their child to suffer.
You: Let's say I have a toddler in front of me.
You: He's my son.
Stranger: Yes..
You: And I've been fired for my job and can't feed him.
You: Can I shoot him?
Stranger: No that would be inhumane.
Stranger: Monstrous.
Stranger: Illegal.
You: Why?
Stranger: The child cannot defend himself, now can he?
You: Okay then.
Stranger: You have all the advantage, he's never been given a chance. Maybe you should wait until he's 18 then try to shoot him.
Stranger: You're clearly overpowering the child.
You: But I cannot provide for him and don't want him to suffer.
Stranger: You give him up for someone else who can.
Stranger: You make it your number one priority to find him a decent home that will care for him. How about that?
You: Why, then, would this same protection against violence have not applied when he was in an even more vulnerable, defenseless state?
You: It seems to me that you do not consider the unborn to be fully human.
Stranger: Words seem to fail me. I am utterly sorry.
Stranger: You are very right.
You: The law of biogenesis states that they must be human, because of their human parentage.
Stranger: They are human.
You: So why do they not deserve legal protection from violence?
Stranger: They should not be killed, for any reason.
Stranger: Infants?
You: The unborn.
Stranger: I'm trying to think here.
Stranger: I haven't given this matter much though.
Stranger: Are you doing a questionnare or something of that sort?
Stranger: t*.
You: Nope, I'm just extremely bored.
Stranger: Oh fuck you have got to be kidding me.
You: Yeah, I have nothing to do.
You: No new posts on any of the forums I frequent or the blogs I read.
Stranger: Well it was thought-provoking. It was a pretty decent debate, on your part, I must say.
You: Thank you.
Stranger: Intriguing, really.
You: Do you mind if I post this on my blog?
Stranger: This..?
Stranger: If you mean the conversation, then not at all.
You: This chat.
You: Great!
Stranger: No problem.
You: I'm shocked at how gramattically correct we've been.
You: ^gramatically
Stranger: Can you not leave, for a little while? I'm actually enjoying this intellectual conversation.
You: Sure.
You: Nothing else to do. :P
Stranger: Oh yeah, right.
You: First time I've met someone here in the "squishy middle".
You: Hehe.
You: So, you think abortion is wrong because it kills defenseless babies, right?
Your conversational partner has disconnected.