Abortion

[Shuuda]

Why is it nobody else thinks this thread has outlived its purpose? I don't think we absolutly need a flame war to close a thread that has obiously outlived its purpose.

If you have a problem with the thread, try PMing a mod about it. Do not ask for a lock just because people are calling you out on your nonsense.

Now, to be on topic: I do not think we should ban abortion because there is no point, it will not stop women getting them.

Edited November 21, 2008 by Shuuda

[Phoenix Wright]

Some facts.

Bibliography usually goes at the end, but I'm an exception.

Produced By: Life Dynamics Inc.

(Address goes here)

(Phone Number goes here)

LifeDynamics.com

ProlifeAmerica.com

Photo courtesy of:

Center For Bio-Ethical Reform

Mission Hills, California.

Now the facts:

Every Day more than 3000 American babies, exactly like the ones shown here, are killed by legalized abortion. (I'm not posting the pic though)

Virtually None of these abortions are performed on women who became pregnant through rape or incest.

Virtually None of these abortions are performed because the babies are unhealthy or handicapped.

Virtually None of these abortions are performed because pregnancies threaten the lives or health of the mothers.

Almost every abortion performed in America is an elective procedure done on a perfectly healthy woman and a perfectly healthy baby for non-medical reasons.

Edited November 21, 2008 by Citrusman

[FionordeQuester]

Please tell me you are not serious even considering that as even remotely true.

Everyone with a brain knows that creationism is a joke.

Why yes, I do think it is "remotely" true. And your overgeneralizing, you know that right? Also, did you know that Charles Darwin was a christian? Sure, he was at first, he did get a bit skeptical after a series of tragedies in his life, but he himself said that he didn't renounce God, but said, quote, "Agnostic is the correct definition to my state of mind". Agnostic has a lot of meanings, but it basically means that he either "did not know if God existed or not, but would not judge, cuz there's not enough evidence for either side", "he doesn't know if God exists, but he believes he does", "he doesn't know whether God exists, and doesn't think anyone else does either", or "I don't know whether he does or not, but if there is one, they don't give a damn about us, so it's not even worth wondering anyways".

Either way though, whether he believed in God or not, there can be no dispute that he once believed in God as the one who layed down the law in the universe. So no, creationism is not a joke (even if you think so), it would have barely any supporters if it did, and there are plently of smart people who believe in creationism. So if they do, it must have some credibility.

I'm sorry, as much as I do not agree with Shuuda's way of saying things, I do agree with his point in this case. Besides, Religion should not be brought into a secular thread. Plus it's an ignorant statement he made that is based on faith, not proof. This thread is based on logical thinking based on proof and facts - religion is based on faith, so no proof is needed.

Uh huh. And your trying to say that we should use logic, and logic only, to decide whether abortion is right or not? First off, there's no way to use only logic over a right or wrong issue. Because logic is not what's used in right or wrong, emotion is. So this is not a thread based only on opinion and facts, it's one based on opinions, facts, and emotion. So people can use whatever argument they want against abortion, they can say it violates laws, or it violates religious ideas. And things like responsibility? Sure, they are not required to care for their child under the law, but any emotional mother could say it's their responsibiliy as a mother to take care of a child. What exactly is the responsibility of a mother? We don't know exactly, but there are plently of opinions out there, and you'd be hard pressed to answer that with just logic.

And actually, Religion does need logic behind it...and to get the logic, take a look through whatever gospel you read, and try to find a passage that supports your opinion.

Animals don't have souls. Humans do. Can we please stop talking about animals?

Yes they do. If they didn't, they wouldn't even have any emotions. It's just that the emotions they feel are much more basic. Don't they feel anger when a strange animal trespasses on their territory? Don't they feel love and rage when protecting their young? Don't they feel longing when they need a mate? How about when they are seperated from their mother, and cry out for her. Isn't that an example of sadness? Don't cats feel curious when they investigate something? How about fear when they are being hunted?

They do to have a soul, they have too much emotion within them not to in my opinion.

Edited November 22, 2008 by FionordeQuester

[Phoenix Wright]

Please tell me you are not serious even considering that as even remotely true.

Everyone with a brain knows that creationism is a joke.

Why yes, I do think it is "remotely" true. And your overgeneralizing, you know that right? Also, did you know that Charles Darwin was a christian? Sure, he was at first, he did get a bit skeptical after a series of tragedies in his life, but he himself said that he didn't renounce God, but said, quote, "Agnostic is the correct definition to my state of mind". Agnostic has a lot of meanings, but it basically means that he either "did not know if God existed or not, but would not judge, cuz there's not enough evidence for either side", "he doesn't know if God exists, but he believes he does", "he doesn't know whether God exists, and doesn't think anyone else does either", or "I don't know whether he does or not, but if there is one, they don't give a damn about us, so it's not even worth wondering anyways".

Either way though, whether he believed in God or not, there can be no dispute that he once believed in God as the one who layed down the law in the universe. So no, creationism is not a joke (even if you think so), it would have barely any supporters if it did, and there are plently of smart people who believe in creationism. So if they do, it must have some credibility.

I'm sorry, as much as I do not agree with Shuuda's way of saying things, I do agree with his point in this case. Besides, Religion should not be brought into a secular thread. Plus it's an ignorant statement he made that is based on faith, not proof. This thread is based on logical thinking based on proof and facts - religion is based on faith, so no proof is needed.

Uh huh. And your trying to say that we should use logic, and logic only, to decide whether abortion is right or not? First off, there's no way to use only logic over a right or wrong issue. Because logic is not what's used in right or wrong, emotion is. So this is not a thread based only on opinion and facts, it's one based on opinions, facts, and emotion. So people can use whatever argument they want against abortion, they can say it violates laws, or it violates religious ideas. And things like responsibility? Sure, they are not required to care for their child under the law, but any emotional mother could say it's their responsibiliy as a mother to take care of a child. What exactly is the responsibility of a mother? We don't know exactly, but there are plently of opinions out there, and you'd be hard pressed to answer that with just logic.

And actually, Religion does need logic behind it...and to get the logic, take a look through whatever gospel you read, and try to find a passage that supports your opinion.

Animals don't have souls. Humans do. Can we please stop talking about animals?

Yes they do. If they didn't, they wouldn't even have any emotions. It's just that the emotions they feel are much more basic. Don't they feel anger when a strange animal trespasses on their territory? Don't they feel love and rage when protecting their young? Don't they feel longing when they need a mate? How about when they are seperated from their mother, and cry out for her. Isn't that an example of sadness? Don't cats feel curious when they investigate something? How about fear when they are being hunted?

They do to have a soul, they have too much emotion within them not to in my opinion.

I agree with almost everything you said man. Good job, 5000000000x better than anything I could have ever done.

If humans have souls, but there is no God, what is the point of a soul? Same for animals, if you are religious you should KNOW people and animals aren't doomed from the start.

[Esau of Isaac]

Some facts.

Bibliography usually goes at the end, but I'm an exception.

Produced By: Life Dynamics Inc.

(Address goes here)

(Phone Number goes here)

LifeDynamics.com

ProlifeAmerica.com

Photo courtesy of:

Center For Bio-Ethical Reform

Mission Hills, California.

Now the facts:

Every Day more than 3000 American babies, exactly like the ones shown here, are killed by legalized abortion. (I'm not posting the pic though)

Virtually None of these abortions are performed on women who became pregnant through rape or incest.

Virtually None of these abortions are performed because the babies are unhealthy or handicapped.

Virtually None of these abortions are performed because pregnancies threaten the lives or health of the mothers.

Almost every abortion performed in America is an elective procedure done on a perfectly healthy woman and a perfectly healthy baby for non-medical reasons.

And why should we give a shit?

You keep hammering these points home, but they're all transparent at best, since you haven't shown any reasoning why any of this is inherently disgusting and wrong.

Why yes, I do think it is "remotely" true. And your overgeneralizing, you know that right? Also, did you know that Charles Darwin was a christian? Sure, he was at first, he did get a bit skeptical after a series of tragedies in his life, but he himself said that he didn't renounce God, but said, quote, "Agnostic is the correct definition to my state of mind". Agnostic has a lot of meanings, but it basically means that he either "did not know if God existed or not, but would not judge, cuz there's not enough evidence for either side", "he doesn't know if God exists, but he believes he does", "he doesn't know whether God exists, and doesn't think anyone else does either", or "I don't know whether he does or not, but if there is one, they don't give a damn about us, so it's not even worth wondering anyways".

Even if you were correct about his religious affiliations, it would mean nothing at all.

Either way though, whether he believed in God or not, there can be no dispute that he once believed in God as the one who layed down the law in the universe. So no, creationism is not a joke (even if you think so), it would have barely any supporters if it did, and there are plently of smart people who believe in creationism. So if they do, it must have some credibility.

Creationism is an absolute joke, and it is based on trying to disprove evolutionary models and failing spectacularly.

I challenge you to expound on Creationism and its explanation for our world with logical explanations and evidence.

Uh huh. And your trying to say that we should use logic, and logic only, to decide whether abortion is right or not?

Is there something wrong with using logic and reasoning?

First off, there's no way to use only logic over a right or wrong issue. Because logic is not what's used in right or wrong, emotion is. So this is not a thread based only on opinion and facts, it's one based on opinions, facts, and emotion. So people can use whatever argument they want against abortion, they can say it violates laws, or it violates religious ideas. And things like responsibility? Sure, they are not required to care for their child under the law, but any emotional mother could say it's their responsibiliy as a mother to take care of a child. What exactly is the responsibility of a mother? We don't know exactly, but there are plently of opinions out there, and you'd be hard pressed to answer that with just logic.

Logic can be utilized in this discussion, and the mass amount of arguments that relate to banning abortion are all appeals to emotion, which are in fact forms of fallacious argumentation.

If humans have souls, but there is no God, what is the point of a soul? Same for animals, if you are religious you should KNOW people and animals aren't doomed from the start.

Where was it shown that humans have souls?

[Judge Judy]

Where was it shown that humans have souls?

....Good point O_O

I never thought of it that way.

[FionordeQuester]

Is there something wrong with using logic and reasoning?

Of course not. I never said that there was anything wrong with using logic, I said that logic isn't the only thing that should be considered in an issue like abortion. The person I responded to, said something along the lines of "religious beliefs should not be brought into a secular discussion, and only facts and logic should have any relelvance". I'm saying, that in an issue like this, emotional feelings should not be ruled out.

Logic can be utilized in this discussion, and the mass amount of arguments that relate to banning abortion are all appeals to emotion, which are in fact forms of fallacious argumentation.

Fallacious? Hell no, cuz fallacious means false and has no relevance to it right? How can we be logical when we're deciding whether or not a potential infant gets to live? We value that human life, we love that human life contained within the stomach of a woman, and so, we're willing to say all sorts of things, like "something that valuable should not have to be killed just because a mother was too irresponsible to stop it", or "it should be put into an orphanage".

Don't you understand why the Pro-Life supporters try to stop abortion anyway they can? They're trying to find a way to rescue that unborn baby. And it's an awful thing, to know that some pure, completely innocent baby, who has not even had a chance to do anything to be ashamed of, has to be slain because their mother screwed them over by being irresponsible. Yes, I know, that's not often the case, but Pro-Life people usually try to argue that abortions shouldn't be allowed unless in case of Rape, Incest, or Child Birth complications that cause death, so you should know what I mean.

So in anycase, with emotional support, we appeal to how much value people place on children. When we appeal to it sucessfully, they are all the more motivated to take a stand against abortion.

So to say that emotion should be ruled out (as you strongly imply), is like saying that your own humanity should be ruled out when your trying to decide whether to make slaves out of the villagers of your own kingdom. From a purely logical stand point, sure. They can't tell you that they don't want to, you don't even have to pay them for anything, your army is stopping them from revolting, and you get more food, drink, and moola!!

Does that mean you should? Hell no!! Cuz that's awful, that's wrong, you don't need to cuz your already doing good enough as it is, and it should violate your sense of decency.

In case I didn't make myself clear enough, I'll be glad to explain anew.

Creationism is an absolute joke, and it is based on trying to disprove evolutionary models and failing spectacularly.

Really? Cuz last I checked that was called "Intelligent Design", now that theory is an absolute joke! But that's not what creationism is, according to "Dictionary.com", it refers to the Genesis, and describes where God created everything.

Creationism isn't a scientific theory. It's simply refers to how God made everything. No, trust me, I'm a complete and utter believer in Evolution. The theory is just about perfect! And you know what? I think God was the one who created Evolution. What better way is there to create a self sustaining world full of life, variety, and beauty, then Evolution?

I challenge you to expound on Creationism and its explanation for our world with logical explanations and evidence.

Okey doke, sounds like a challenge, but just one question before I start, the Hadean eon was known as the eon of the very first rocks. Now, on the third day of the Genesis, God said he created the dry land. Would you count the rocks as part of the dry land?

Also, how long does it take to create a star assuming everything that is needed to make a star is just beginning to create it?

[bunny: spider bitten]

Virtually None of these abortions are performed because the babies are unhealthy or handicapped.

This one isn't worth a whole bunch. I mean, most babies can't be determined to be mentally handicapped at that stage - They don't even have a brain. They could easily have all ended up mentally handicapped if they lived.

Virtually None of these abortions are performed because pregnancies threaten the lives or health of the mothers.

This one is also hard to use as backing. A baby doesn't do much damage to the body during the stages it can legally and safely be aborted.

[Chalis]

Words to be familiar with:

Propaganda

Misconception

Conjuncture

Contradiction

LifeDynamics.com

ProlifeAmerica.com

Someone please tell me I'm not the only one seeing the irony in this.

Last time I checked, it was illegal for doctors to say anything about the patient, and whether or not these women are victimized from rape or incest, their child having a defect or hurting the mother, was completely up to the women themselves to give up the information.

Propaganda is something to be wary of, no matter which side you're on.

The abortion controversy has another twist. Planned Parenthood and others in the abortion clinic business make their money by selling abortions, birth control pills, pregnancy tests and treatments for sexually transmitted diseases. But in order to push sales to minors, NAF & Planned Parenthood abortion clinics have been ignoring child abuse reporting laws and promising to conceal statutory rape and ongoing child sexual molestation.

We have over 800 tape recordings that show how Planned Parenthood and NAF abortion workers secure business from victims of statutory rape by undermining parental authority, encouraging children to lie and promising minors that their employees will ignore mandatory reporting laws. Hundreds of Planned Parenthood clinic and National Abortion Federation clinic employees have been caught on tape expressing their willingness to conceal the statutory rape of a 13-year-old girl by a 22-year-old man. Even though many of these Planned Parenthood and NAF employees openly acknowledged that statutory rape is a crime and that they are required by law to report it, they made it clear that they do not abide by the law.

Where did this come from? LifeDynamics.com of course! It's on the front page!

I believe the Conflict Theory takes play here.

There is another law that just so happens to protect and require nurses and doctors to go through, are you ready to hear this?

Patient confidentiality.

And so what if they're having abortions just to go on with their lives? I don't quite remember anyone mourning for someone they never knew or something that could have been someone. If they have the money for it and just don't want a (or another) child interfering, then just go for it. Adopting out takes much legal documents that, yes, people are too lazy to fill out or might even get attached to the child before that time comes.

It might be a little too much to handle but this is a fact that will continue throughout history--unless you want to strip away rights from living people who already have a place in society.

So no, creationism is not a joke (even if you think so), it would have barely any supporters if it did, and there are plenty of smart people who believe in creationism. So if they do, it must have some credibility.

Common misconception.

Albert Einstein did not believe in God in a "personal" sense and discounted the existence of a creator. Einstein was, in fact, a rationalistic pantheist and follower of Baruch Spinoza. Many people misinterpreted his words in public, to which Einstein himself responded by saying: "It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."

And actually, Religion does need logic behind it...and to get the logic, take a look through whatever gospel you read, and try to find a passage that supports your opinion.

Not logic, but an opinion from the older times by a very old, very dead, and very wise people in a certain group that happened to share a similar belief.

I concur that religion has nothing to do with these kinds of topics because face it; most laws sprung up and were derived from religion.

Even though many Christians have adopted abortion as a cornerstone principal to abolish as part of their religious principals, nowhere in the Bible is abortion indicated as being against God's will or prohibited. In fact, according to the Bible (specifically, the book of Leviticus, which contains many laws not accepted by most modern Christians), killing a fetus is considered a property crime.

A property crime against the mother. If the mother wants to break in to a house she owns and is completely entitled in her name, it is not a crime. If the mother wants to abort her fetus, it is not a crime.

In the end this is all nothing but conjecture, but then again everything is. Follow what you believe full-heartedly or your credibility is lost.

[bunny: spider bitten]

Last time I checked, it was illegal for doctors to say anything about the patient, and whether or not these women are victimized from rape or incest, their child having a defect or hurting the mother, was completely up to the women themselves to give up the information.

Anything about a specific patient. It's not illegal to state that 80% of AIDS tests that you've performed have been positive, in theory. It also depends on what the patient signs.

[Crystal Shards]

Really? Cuz last I checked that was called "Intelligent Design", now that theory is an absolute joke! But that's not what creationism is, according to "Dictionary.com", it refers to the Genesis, and describes where God created everything.

Creationism isn't a scientific theory. It's simply refers to how God made everything. No, trust me, I'm a complete and utter believer in Evolution. The theory is just about perfect! And you know what? I think God was the one who created Evolution. What better way is there to create a self sustaining world full of life, variety, and beauty, then Evolution?

This made me laugh so hard.

[FionordeQuester]

Why? Is it really that funny that God might have engineered Evolution? Cuz I don't get the joke.

And about Intelligent Design, I'll admit, I may not know exactly what it is, but if it was created specifically to discredit Evolution, there's no way it can be that solid.

Edited November 22, 2008 by FionordeQuester

[lolDeath]

Why? Is it really that funny that God might have engineered Evolution? Cuz I don't get the joke.

Well there are a few things that could be funny to someone about it. The one that makes me chuckle is that when one major part of Christianity is pretty much disproven (we can debate evolution if you want, but it has been observed in nature, game over) it becomes "Yeah.. but God did it!".

[FionordeQuester]

Hmm...and what major part of christianity has been disproven?

[lolDeath]

"God made Adam and Eve. WE WERE JUST HERE, WE DID NOT EVOLVE FROM MONKEYS."

At least I consider it major.

[bunny: spider bitten]

Intelligent design and the concept that God engineered the universe/evolution are the same thing.

Saying you think the former is 'an absolute joke' and the latter is what you 'think' is rather dumb.

Creationism vs. Intelligent design is how much God did. Intelligent design is simply the 'a wizard did it' concept to destroy odds placed against something like the Evolution or the Big Bang. Creationism is when God creates everything that isn't a human construct. The issue with Creationism as stated in the bible is that everything appeared at once. Which is what makes it retarded. And if that's not the case, where is God making new things now and what the hell is he making?

Honestly, intelligent design really only exists so you can ignore these long odds until they can be drastically improved or removed altogether. It really sucks to understand just what happened and to find out that, at the time, the chances of the event were less than a millionth of a percent.

Edited November 22, 2008 by bunny

[FionordeQuester]

Hm...you know, the odd thing about that whole "evolving from monkeys" thing is because of what ended up happening with us. You see, going in accordance with the whole "we and monkeys evolved from man apes" thing, our "ancestors" (going in accordance with your theory), all had 48 chromosomes. We humans however only have 46.

According to what we know about chromosomes, we should've suffered a great loss in brain and bodily function, but instead, we became the most dominant species on Earth.

Science says that two of our pairs of chromosomes fused, but to me, I wonder "why did that even happen in the first place?".

I dunno, I don't think it's been disproven, although I admit, you do have a valid point.

[lolDeath]

*gets on knees*

Please get back on topic now that we have that sorted out.

[Phoenix Wright]

And why should we give a shit?

You keep hammering these points home, but they're all transparent at best, since you haven't shown any reasoning why any of this is inherently disgusting and wrong.

Even if you were correct about his religious affiliations, it would mean nothing at all.

Creationism is an absolute joke, and it is based on trying to disprove evolutionary models and failing spectacularly.

I challenge you to expound on Creationism and its explanation for our world with logical explanations and evidence.

Is there something wrong with using logic and reasoning?

Logic can be utilized in this discussion, and the mass amount of arguments that relate to banning abortion are all appeals to emotion, which are in fact forms of fallacious argumentation.

Where was it shown that humans have souls?

I was actually talking to Fionorde.

[FionordeQuester]

Creationism is when God creates everything that isn't a human construct. The issue with Creationism as stated in the bible is that everything appeared at once. Which is what makes it retarded. And if that's not the case, where is God making new things now and what the hell is he making?

Well, one thing to understand is that the whole "seven days" concept may be very misleading to a literal thinker. To God, a "day" could mean like a thousand or a million years (he is an immortal after all). And I don't really think that he did it with one simple mental command, I think he had to literally spend millions of years reshaping the world, laying down the laws it is governed by, and trying to build a perfect world. Remember, on the seventh day, he rested, not because he was tired or anything, but because he though that he had done enough, and it was time to sit back and enjoy his work. He did put a heck of a lot of careful thought into the world after all.

Honestly, intelligent design really only exists so you can ignore these long odds until they can be drastically improved or removed altogether. It really sucks to understand just what happened and to find out that, at the time, the chances of the event were less than a millionth of a percent.

Which is exactly why I will never support intelligent design, it tries to prolong the truth with denial. If there is a definite truth, I'm going to research it, and look into it, and then if it turns out that my religion really is a fraud, then I'm pretty much going to stop arguing against atheists, then pray and pray that somehow God really does exist, cuz the concept of not having an eternal heaven to look forward to after death really bites. But until that happens, I'll always look for ways that Christianity really does have a chance of being real, cuz I believe in it, and I love it, and until that definite evidence exists, there's no reason for me not to believe it.

Edited November 22, 2008 by FionordeQuester

[FionordeQuester]

Please get back on topic now that we have that sorted out.

Ok, fine, I'll have a post on Abortion as soon as I can, if someone responds to my previous posts though, I'll have to adress them before I continue. Thank you for understanding if you do in fact understand.

[Phoenix Wright]

"God made Adam and Eve. WE WERE JUST HERE, WE DID NOT EVOLVE FROM MONKEYS."

At least I consider it major.

I always found these things weird:

If we did evolve from monkeys, why are they still here? -That is a serious question

If humans really are at the top of the food chain, is there a reason why NO OTHER animal shows signs of evolving, even remotely like a human?

Why do we show no signs of evolving farther? I mean, our bodies are wonderful, but they could be better, right? The only organ to completely repair itself is the liver. Why not the heart, or BRAIN?

Why do humans only use 7-10% of their brain? Or is that just a myth, as I've heard that too.

[Nintenlord]

If we did evolve from monkeys, why are they still here? -That is a serious question

Because we didn't evolve from modern monkeys. Modern monkeys and us have common ancestors. The monkeys we evolved from do no longer exist in the same form as they did in the day.

If humans really are at the top of the food chain, is there a reason why NO OTHER animal shows signs of evolving, even remotely like a human?

Because we really haven't evolved that much compared to animals, if at all. Our current progress is "mental evolution"(not the best way to describe it, but it should get the point done).

Why do we show no signs of evolving farther? I mean, our bodies are wonderful, but they could be better, right? The only organ to completely repair itself is the liver. Why not the heart, or BRAIN?

Because being able to repair an organ like brain has no practical use, since it takes huge amount of resources aka food and water and we would be seriously incapacitated during the repairs. And then there's the fact that modern science has stopped human evolution since there is little to none "survival of the fittest" going on around here where human lives are at stake.

Why do humans only use 7-10% of their brain? Or is that just a myth, as I've heard that too.

Because using more of our brains would just use absurd amounts of our limited energy resources and would therefore be detrimental for us in the struggle for survival.

To be on topic, women have right to choose, parent(s) would end up forcing their believes on the baby anyway, adoption system sucks, etc.

Edited November 22, 2008 by Nintenlord

[Chalis]

I always found these things weird:

If we did evolve from monkeys, why are they still here? -That is a serious question

If humans really are at the top of the food chain, is there a reason why NO OTHER animal shows signs of evolving, even remotely like a human?

Why do we show no signs of evolving farther? I mean, our bodies are wonderful, but they could be better, right? The only organ to completely repair itself is the liver. Why not the heart, or BRAIN?

Why do humans only use 7-10% of their brain? Or is that just a myth, as I've heard that too.

You should really read up on common misconceptions.

[Phoenix Wright]

Because we didn't evolve from modern monkeys. Modern monkeys and us have common ancestors. The monkeys we evolved from do no longer exist in the same form as they did in the day.

Because we really haven't evolved that much compared to animals, if at all. Our current progress is "mental evolution"(not the best way to describe it, but it should get the point done).

Because being able to repair an organ like brain has no practical use, since it takes huge amount of resources aka food and water and we would be seriously incapacitated during the repairs. And then there's the fact that modern science has stopped human evolution since there is little to none "survival of the fittest" going on around here where human lives are at stake.

Because using more of our brains would just use absurd amounts of our limited energy resources and would therefore be detrimental for us in the struggle for survival.

To be on topic, women have right to choose, parent(s) would end up forcing their believes on the baby anyway, abortion system sucks, etc.

I don't agree with any of that. The birds are supposedly evolved dinosaurs, thus disproving the theory that dinosaurs became instinct. There are no more dinosaurs, which means there should be no more monkeys. We are far superior to monkeys, in that, they should have evolved the exact same as us, not branching off.

Because we really haven't evolved that much compared to animals, if at all. Our current progress is "mental evolution"(not the best way to describe it, but it should get the point done).

That didn't answer my question. I didn't ask how we were, I asked why other animals weren't evolving to be like us.

Because being able to repair an organ like brain has no practical use, since it takes huge amount of resources aka food and water and we would be seriously incapacitated during the repairs. And then there's the fact that modern science has stopped human evolution since there is little to none "survival of the fittest" going on around here where human lives are at stake.

What about the liver? That would take huge amounts of energy. If the human species really does evolve, then our most important organ should be able to repair itself with efficiency. Our bodies are great fat holders, because we eat too much. Our skin takes constant abuse, yet it doesn't show a sign of strengthening farther.

Because using more of our brains would just use absurd amounts of our limited energy resources and would therefore be detrimental for us in the struggle for survival.

Yeah, because all the unneeded body fat we have in our bodies make our energy limited. We have the energy.

For me to be on topic:

@Esau: Dude, what are you talking about? That IS important to everything! All you've been saying basically is that the ones who have been raped deserve to have an abortion, when VIRTUALLY NONE are pregnant that way.