A very Touchy Subject...

[Tommycat]

I'm not going to continue the long post BS as it is simply annoying at this point.

 

Your conclusion assumes that all inseminations result in pregnancy. It assumes that the woman is ovulating. It assumes all sex results in insemination. It also assumes contraceptive failure(the use of which invalidates the conclusion itself). It assumes that both parties are capable of producing a child. That's a lot of assumptions that are not outlined in your (characterization of my) premises.

 

Again, your conclusion is false as evidenced by my own life. I live it. I enjoy it. I make money on it as well.

 

Always take responsibility before, to prevent the need for the after. Should the after come anyway, take responsibility for that as well whatever the outcome. If you are not willing to accept responsibility for the outcome whatever that may be then don't even engage in the act until you are willing to take the risk. I really don't see how that fails to agree with what I said at first. Take precautions, or abstain. Do you believe that people should not take precautions or abstain to lower the number of abortions?

[Achilles]

I'm not going to continue the long post BS as it is simply annoying at this point.

But then you post anyway.

 

Your conclusion assumes that all inseminations result in pregnancy.

No, sir, it doesn't. Your premise clearly states that sex can result in pregnancy. You were also quite emphatic that no method of contraception is 100% effective and that the only way to completely abstain from intercourse.

 

It assumes that the woman is ovulating.

No sir it doesn't. My conclusion has nothing to do with ovulation. If you have suddenly noticed holes in your premises, you're more than welcome to retract them or modify them as you see fit.

 

It assumes all sex results in insemination.

No, sir, it doesn't. Your very first premise is that all sex can result in pregnancy. The problem is with your premise, sir, not my conclusion.

 

It also assumes contraceptive failure(the use of which invalidates the conclusion itself).

Again, as you yourself have pointed out, no method of contraception is 100% effective. This also falls under the first premise.

 

It assumes that both parties are capable of producing a child.

Again, sir, problem with the first premise.

 

That's a lot of assumptions that are not outlined in your (characterization of my) premises.

Considering that I'm quoting you, I'm not sure how it's a characterization.

 

Again, your conclusion is false as evidenced by my own life. I live it. I enjoy it. I make money on it as well.

Huh?

 

Always take responsibility before, to prevent the need for the after. Should the after come anyway, take responsibility for that as well whatever the outcome.

How crude.

 

If you are not willing to accept responsibility for the outcome whatever that may be then don't even engage in the act until you are willing to take the risk.

I guess this is the part where I have to continue guessing at what you mean by "take responsibility".

 

I really don't see how that fails to agree with what I said at first. Take precautions, or abstain.

And I repeat my earlier question:

 

If you take precautions and get pregnant anyways? If you are for abortion, then I don't understand why we are having this discussion. It seems the only reason we would have to disagree is if you do not support abortion.

 

Do you believe that people should not take precautions or abstain to lower the number of abortions?

I believe that people should take precautions and/or abstain for lots of different reasons. I think "to prevent abortions" is pretty low on the list ("to prevent unwanted pregnancy" ranks significantly higher).

[Tommycat]

No, my statements do not equal your conclusion unless you add those assumptions. Therefore your conclusion is false.

[Achilles]

Your premises do not account for those assumptions, therefore the conclusion is correct based on the premises provided. Please see the deductive reasoning link that I provided earlier. Thanks!

[Tommycat]

I'm not in the habit of attempting to prove a negative, You'll have to show how exactly my statements force that and only that conclusion. Otherwise your conclusion is false. Thanks.

[Achilles]

You don't have to, sir. You only have to provide another conclusion which satisfies the premises that you provided.

 

Here they are, for the third time:

 

(Premise 1) People that have sex can get pregnant.

(Premise 2) People should not have sex unless they are willing to take personal responsibility for impregnation by having the child (See posts 125, 148, 158, and 160)

(Conclusion) ?

[Tommycat]

Fine, I thought I said it already, but

 

Conclusion, Have sex for the enjoyment of it despite the risk. Just be prepared for the outcome should it happen. I'm going on 8 years with better than 7 times a week, and no child. Never had the desire for another child either(I already have 2 thanks).

 

Your turn.

[Achilles]

That conclusion does not satisfy the 2nd premise. The conclusion will need to satisfy both premises in order to be considered valid. As I have already stated, we can also modify or remove any premises that you would like at any time. I really do believe that I've said all that I can on the matter. Forcing me into situations where I have to repeat myself will not move the conversation forward. Thanks for your response.

[Tommycat]

No, both premises do not need to be filled. That is YOUR additional requirement. I have never made the distinction that both need be used in conjunction, only you are stating that. Premise 1 is not a definite as it does not occur all the time, and therefore requires assumptions for premise 2 to be required at all times.

 

You only need be prepared for that eventuality. Take precautions before, to lower your risk, but always know there is risk, and make preparations for that risk... Kinda like going on a long trip. Enjoy the ride, but you had better have taken precautions like spare water, tools and a spare tire just in case. Its really quite simple, and you have blown it far out of proportion.

[Achilles]

No, both premises do not need to be filled. That is YOUR additional requirement.

Actually, it has to do with that deductive reasoning thing I keep directing you to.

 

I have never made the distinction that both need be used in conjunction, only you are stating that.

Right, because that's how deductive reasoning works. Hand-waving will not make it magically go away.

 

Premise 1 is not a definite as it does not occur all the time,

So you're changing your stance on premise 1. Great. Now that we've acknowledged that, we no longer need to worry about the conclusion.

 

and therefore requires assumptions for premise 2 to be required at all times.

I'll remind you that it was your argument, sir. *shrugs*

 

You only need be prepared for that eventuality. Take precautions before, to lower your risk, but always know there is risk, and make preparations for that risk... Kinda like going on a long trip. Enjoy the ride, but you had better have taken precautions like spare water, tools and a spare tire just in case. Its really quite simple, and you have blown it far out of proportion.

Are we dropping the first premise or not?

[Tommycat]

So you're changing your stance on premise 1. Great. Now that we've acknowledged that, we no longer need to worry about the conclusion.

 

Are we dropping the first premise or not?

Um, I never said that the first premise was a definite. There is always a chance, but not always. Can does not mean that it does. not all sexual encounters will produce a pregnancy. Therefore it is not a definite. They all have a chance, but that chance can be significantly reduced. I think I've been pretty clear on that.

[Achilles]

Um, I never said that the first premise was a definite.

Of course you did.

 

"Any time you have intercourse you should be ready for the off chance that such an occurance [pregnancy] will happen." (Post #154)

 

plus multiple variants of "I have said and will continue to say that if you have sex then you should be prepared for the possibility of a child." which seems to be in some sort of gray area between premise 1 and premise 2.

 

There is always a chance, but not always.

I hope that it's really late and that I'm just seeing things.

 

(emphasis mine for those watching at home).

 

Can does not mean that it does.

Right, I believe I've acknowledged that previously by italicizing "can" in my summaries.

 

not all sexual encounters will produce a pregnancy.

Thank goodness!

 

Therefore it is not a definite. They all have a chance, but that chance can be significantly reduced. I think I've been pretty clear on that.

I'm sure you have, but I don't know what that has to do with a) the matter at hand or b) the topic of abortion.

[Tommycat]

Sorry, its late, There is always a chance, but not always a result.

 

Perhaps my wording was not precise enough for you.

 

Because premise 1 is not definitive in its outcome, that means that premise 2 only comes into play should several assumptions be made about premise 1.

 

Quit asking relevance on things you asked for clarification on.

[Achilles]

Because premise 1 is not definitive in its outcome, that means that premise 2 only comes into play should several assumptions be made about premise 1.

Premise 1 is yours. You can change it if you'd like or renounce it altogether, but you can't rearrange the rules of deductive reasoning to fit your liking. Thanks.

 

Quit asking relevance on things you asked for clarification on.

I can only question relevance on points that aren't clear? Anything "clear" gets to be relevant?

[Jae Onasi]

Arguing about arguments is off-topic for this thread. Please return to the topic. Thanks.

[Tommycat]

Thanks Jae for the reminder.

 

Perhaps I need to redefine my position and make it as clear as possible.

Disclaimer: For argument's sake lets ignore the 3 pages of back and forth BS and assume that since there is confusion, any discrepancies between this and prior statements made by me are either invalidated, corrected, or whatever floats your boat. Any references to prior statements should be ignored as if it disagrees with the current one, this post should be given preference.

 

Because I personally find abortion distasteful, and would prefer to see the number of abortions reduced, I believe that people should take preventative measures before engaging in sexual activity so as to lessen the need for abortion. I feel that using abortion as a form of birth control in lieu of protection instead of as a last resort for when preventative measures have failed is the wrong way to go about it considering both my moral standpoint and also for medical reasons(risk of infection causing other health risks). Personal responsibility beforehand involves not only contraceptive use, but also discussion with the significant other on what should happen should the contraceptives fail(be cause all methods have a fail point, no matter how slim that margin is), and preparations for the agreed apon actions, which may extend to but are not limited to preparations to either keeping the child, adoption, or having enough cash set aside for the abortion. Personal responsibilities after the pregnancy has been identified can extend to, but not limited to, financial support, emotional support, and moral support. If a person is unable to make that kind of commitment and that level of maturity, they should abstain or seek avenues of being intimate without the possibility of insemination(It is very possible, and I'm being as clean here as possible).

 

I also believe that the perception of abortion as a method of birth control in lieu of pregnancy prevention, has caused many more unexpected children to be born because personal responsibility(as described above) was not taken before and the person, was in some manner unable to get an abortion(be it religious, family, medical, monetary etc).

 

I hope that is clear enough. Any and all questions regarding segments which do not specifically relate to the topic of abortion will be labeled as off topic and ignored unless sent via PM. I've spent 3 pages talking off topic, and will not do so any more.

[Achilles]

Great post! After all these weeks, it's quite nice to see your perspectives laid out with consistency and in one message.

 

A couple of questions:

Because I personally find abortion distasteful, and would prefer to see the number of abortions reduced, I believe that people should take preventative measures before engaging in sexual activity so as to lessen the need for abortion.

Do you believe in the promotion of safe sex for any other reason, such as protection from STDs, precaution against unwanted pregnancy, etc. I acknowledge that since safe sex has absolutely nothing to do with abortion, a response might draw us further off topic once more, but since you introduced the matter I was hoping you'd be willing to clarify. Thanks in advance.

 

I feel that using abortion as a form of birth control in lieu of protection instead of as a last resort for when preventative measures have failed is the wrong way to go about it considering both my moral standpoint and also for medical reasons(risk of infection causing other health risks).

I was wondering if you had any data that showed what percentage of abortions performed were actually related to this premise ("retro-active birth control" for want of a better term).

 

Also, what about abortion for other reasons (i.e. impregnation via rape and/or incest, mother's health at stake, mother's life at stake, gross deformities in the fetus, etc)? Since your redefining post only seems to tackle the topic of abortion as it relates to one very narrow set of conditions, I was hoping you'd be willing to expand upon the others as well.

 

Personal responsibility beforehand involves not only contraceptive use, but also discussion with the significant other on what should happen should the contraceptives fail(be cause all methods have a fail point, no matter how slim that margin is), and preparations for the agreed apon actions, which may extend to but are not limited to preparations to either keeping the child, adoption, or having enough cash set aside for the abortion. Personal responsibilities after the pregnancy has been identified can extend to, but not limited to, financial support, emotional support, and moral support. If a person is unable to make that kind of commitment and that level of maturity, they should abstain or seek avenues of being intimate without the possibility of insemination(It is very possible, and I'm being as clean here as possible).

I think that these are certainly values worth aspiring toward! I wonder how they would apply toward cases of rape or incest. It doesn't seem to me that sex offender's first priority is going to be making some form of "personal responsibility commitment".

 

I also believe that the perception of abortion as a method of birth control in lieu of pregnancy prevention, has caused many more unexpected children to be born because personal responsibility(as described above) was not taken before and the person, was in some manner unable to get an abortion(be it religious, family, medical, monetary etc).

Lastly, I was hoping you would be willing to clarify this statement. You appear to be saying that the perception of abortion as a method of birth control leads to "unexpected" (woman gives birth without being aware that she was pregnant?) children because the woman can't get an abortion. So abortion causes extra babies because mothers can't get abortions? I'm really struggling to follow here, so any clarification you can offer would be greatly appreciated.

 

Thanks!

[Tommycat]

Do you believe in the promotion of safe sex for any other reason, such as protection from STDs, precaution against unwanted pregnancy, etc. I acknowledge that since safe sex has absolutely nothing to do with abortion, a response might draw us further off topic once more, but since you introduced the matter I was hoping you'd be willing to clarify. Thanks in advance.

You are right, It is irrelevant to the discussion at hand. PM me if you need an answer.

 

I was wondering if you had any data that showed what percentage of abortions performed were actually related to this premise ("retro-active birth control" for want of a better term).

Abortion clinics do not keep these types of statistics on hand. Most of what I have is anecdotal evidence.

 

Also, what about abortion for other reasons (i.e. impregnation via rape and/or incest, mother's health at stake, mother's life at stake, gross deformities in the fetus, etc)? Since your redefining post only seems to tackle the topic of abortion as it relates to one very narrow set of conditions, I was hoping you'd be willing to expand upon the others as well.

Irrelevant to my position, as my preference is to reduce the number of abortions, not ban it out right.

 

I think that these are certainly values worth aspiring toward! I wonder how they would apply toward cases of rape or incest. It doesn't seem to me that sex offender's first priority is going to be making some form of "personal responsibility commitment".

Also irrelevant to my position. There was no failure on the part of the victim of a crime.

 

Lastly, I was hoping you would be willing to clarify this statement. You appear to be saying that the perception of abortion as a method of birth control leads to "unexpected" (woman gives birth without being aware that she was pregnant?) children because the woman can't get an abortion. So abortion causes extra babies because mothers can't get abortions? I'm really struggling to follow here, so any clarification you can offer would be greatly appreciated.

Numbers are irrelevant at this point. Persons being willing to fore go the proper due diligence beforehand leads to a child that they were not prepared for(aka unexpected). Abortion causes people to forgo the proper steps before the sexual act, because they feel more secure that there will not be a child. I've heard it from some friends of my son that said simply "Well if she gets pregnant we'll just get an abortion." which I feel sets them up for that eventuality that parental pressure, religious views, monetary issues or even the chance that the future mother would prevent an abortion. Hence extra children from people feeling more comfortable in not taking precautions.