FRIHOSTFORUMSSEARCHFAQTOSBLOGSCOMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


Abortion: Yes or No?





sacrifier
Thought I'd put this up for for debate.

Is Abortion Moral or Not? In other words, are you for or against it?

Personally, I'm pro-abortion. I was quite surprised the first time I discovered people were against it, it just seems to make such good sense.

Why should an unwanted baby be brought into this world? If it's unwanted, undoubtedly it's going to be less loved than one that was wanted. Sometimes the parents simply wouldn't be able to look after it. Sure, they could put it up for adoption, but that means that the mother has to give up 9 months of her life, and put her own life at risk for a child that she won't keep. It just doesn't add up.

Of course, this is not my full argument, I want to save my main points for when we actually get into the discussion, consider this a simple opening

Thoughts, people?
the_mariska
It's that kind of topic that we could deal for ages and never reach a compromise. Definitely against. People have no moral right to kill any other human being. And everyone know exactly where do kids come from, so they should realise that having sex may lead to becoming pregnant.
sacrifier wrote:
Why should an unwanted baby be brought into this world? If it's unwanted, undoubtedly it's going to be less loved than one that was wanted.

Not always. I know a few cases of really wanted and waited for children who were bullied by their paretns as they grew up, and I know unplanned children which do well with their parents now. What is more, if you want to kill a baby just because it may not be happy, you should kill all the population because everyone faces sadness sometimes.
Quote:

Sometimes the parents simply wouldn't be able to look after it. Sure, they could put it up for adoption, but that means that the mother has to give up 9 months of her life, and put her own life at risk for a child that she won't keep. It just doesn't add up.

If the girl feels adult enough to have sex and accidentally becomes pregnant, she should be adult enough to give birth. Why should we punish a baby with death for its parents' mistakes?

Geez, why am I writing so much? I know this won't persuade you and that you won't persuade me... Wink
Pablo Diablo
It's really simple. If as parents, you know that you can't care for the baby and that your lifestyle suggests that having a baby is unhealthy for the mom or the baby, i.e., if you smoke crack, are alcoholic, etc, then the only option your SHOULD consider is abortion.

If there are no health concerns and the question is should I have the baby or not, it's up to you if you want to go through with the 9 months of pregnancy, and if you shoudl keep the baby or put it up for adoption.
Scotty Too Hotty
its simple.....to each his own, who are we to question their jusdgement call, im sure it isnt easy for them
Animal
This is really a tough question...

"Pro-Abortionists" argue that it should be the parent's choice. Why would you bring a baby into the world if you couldn't properly support it? Why would you let a pregnancy 2ruin your life"?

On the other hand, "Anti-Abortionists" will argue that it is morally reprehensible - the baby foetus is alive. It is human and therefore abortion is murder.

It is a tough decision and one that shouldn't be taken lightly (and in most cases, I doubt it would be) but there is no excuse for extreme anti-abortionists to be bombing or damaging abortion clinics based on their beliefs - this is terrorism, like it or not.

I think I'll sit on the fence on this topic - I'll neither declare whether I'm pro-abortion or anti-abortion. I can see the basis of the argument on both sides, but I can only hope I never find myself having to take the decision.
littlemog
i'll stand on no, for all the reasons that people'll usually stand on... but while i wouldn't approve of abortion morally, it's important perhaps not to demand a black/white division but to approach and understand the emotional issues that lead to abortion as a decision.

and it's probably easier to work on preventing such a decision to be made than it is to just divide into 2 camps and go to 'war'. just my 2 cents Smile
Wotac
I think you can't just say that it's right or wrong. Think all the options: what if some girl didn't want to have sex? What if some rapist made one pregnant? I'm sure she doesn't want to keep the baby then, always reminding her about what happened.

On the other hand, I might get some nightmares if I think that I would've been one of those aborted seeds. That's something I can't control myself.

I hope that my thoughts helped out in some way.
Lennon
Ahem....


First comes love
Second comes marriage
Third comes the baby in the golden carriage
Saber
A quote that I have heard before is one reason why I say No to abortion.
"It’s not your right to decide whether they live or die. They deserve a chance!"

For some, my self included think that the baby is alive and it would be murder to abort it.

When people then mention, "what if shes raped?", The only way that I have thought about this is that, I know that it is a very tramatic time if you know or were someone that has been raped.. and its not simple matter, but the baby is not that person who is at fult.

Are you(people in general) willing willing to kill someone that is innocent? There is just something wrong with that. I know there are the nine months that the mother would have to deal with being pregnate and pain but other people dont just go killing someone every year or so.

please comment on what my oppion is.
[FuN]goku
well,,,, it shouldnt be "illegal" to get an abortion,, its really sick yes, but its the persons choice wether to get one or not,, although they shoulda used a condom if they didnt want a baby ¬_¬
ninggdag
I'm pro-abort in the case that the mother could die with the baby, deformations in the fetus, and violation... in other cases i'm anti-abort.

If the mother don't wants the baby, give it in adoption, but abort is not the correct way, in my opinion.
Soulfire
Abortion is legalized murder.

You cannot get around that. Once the sperm penetrates the egg, the cell divides, and in science class you learn that a cell is the smallest living unit, the building blocks of organisms.

Who are we to play God and dictate whether someone gets life or not? We are in no place to determine who should live and who should die, nor should we be. If you don't want a baby, put it up for adoption, the baby will find a family that will love it.

There's no difference in me taking a knife and killing my next door neighbor than you murdering your baby for whatever the reason may be. We all have a right to life, a right that can not be taken away, and it's scary that it is allowed.
beatmasta601
UGH Cool Hehe srry:P
Sappho
Pro-abortion definitely but as i see some of the comments here its pointless to argue with you.
Srs2388
no abortion bottom of the line to me
its murder the only decent reason is if it will kill the mother
Jack_Hammer
It's so much more complicated than Yes, or No.
Soulfire
Jack_Hammer wrote:
It's so much more complicated than Yes, or No.

I feel compelled to agree, at least to some extent.
tribe
HELL NO.

I am 100% against Abortion unless the doc recommends it for medical reasons to save the mother; but other than that no way.

HEY HEY-HO HO-Roe v. Wade has got to go.

Let women take care of their mistakes, they can only learn. Its MURDER of a living being when you use abortion and since I am for the death penalty, you should be put to death. FINAL.

HEY HEY-HO HO-Roe v. Wade has got to go.
phoneix
unless it effects mothers life, i am against abortion...

there are too many ways protection for not to be pregnant...

even may be he/she not born yet but, is a human and it is like killing a human i think Sad
Reaper
Soulfire wrote:
Abortion is legalized murder.

You cannot get around that. Once the sperm penetrates the egg, the cell divides, and in science class you learn that a cell is the smallest living unit, the building blocks of organisms.

Who are we to play God and dictate whether someone gets life or not? We are in no place to determine who should live and who should die, nor should we be. If you don't want a baby, put it up for adoption, the baby will find a family that will love it.

There's no difference in me taking a knife and killing my next door neighbor than you murdering your baby for whatever the reason may be. We all have a right to life, a right that can not be taken away, and it's scary that it is allowed.

Wow yes that makes sense..... so killing the baby at the most basic form, before it can think even think is murder?? Well I stepped on a bug today so I think I will goto the police station and turn myself in for murdering a bug! Because if what you say is true it was a living being just like that unborn fetus so its murder, in fact unless your a vegitarian you yourself have killed a lot of innocent living animals, shame on you! well you get the point that its not really a baby for several months.
As some other people mentioned before, its also the parents right to have an abortion because its still part of their body, its basicly a new flesh thats growing inside of her.
Also not all kids get adopted, hell our world is well over its abuilty to support human life, and were seeing the results of having to pump out more resources then our planet can handle.
lennon wrote:
First comes love
Second comes marriage
Third comes the baby in the golden carriage

..... please keep in mind that this a childrens rhyme, and should be treated as such, nothing more nothing less.
lockwolf
Lets look at is this way, if you were a newborn baby and killed at birth, how would you do if you saw your mom face to face in heaven (or hell, either works). Personally, I would turn around and smack her in the face for not giving me a chance. Think of who these could become if they actually had a chance and were put up for adoption if the mother didn't want to care for her child. We are missing the future presidents, scientists, entrepenures, and lots of other people that are useful to society. Also, if I was a girl and pregnate, (Thank God I'm Neither) then wasting 9 months caring for a future child and just having it die in front of me after all that work would piss me off!
Jayfarer
lockwolf wrote:
Think of who these could become if they actually had a chance and were put up for adoption if the mother didn't want to care for her child. We are missing the future presidents, scientists, entrepenures, and lots of other people that are useful to society.


Or future criminals, dictators, fascists, racists, murderers, etc.

Not that there's a good chance that they will, it's just trying to argue what they could become is ridiculous because there are billions of possibilities, just as many good ones as bad ones.
arch23
Jack_Hammer wrote:
It's so much more complicated than Yes, or No.

Right. Rut the the general atitude should be it could be done if you decide yes. People shpuld be able to prevent suffer and pain when it's the best decision.
joscode
Quote:
Wow yes that makes sense..... so killing the baby at the most basic form, before it can think even think is murder?? Well I stepped on a bug today so I think I will goto the police station and turn myself in for murdering a bug! Because if what you say is true it was a living being just like that unborn fetus so its murder, in fact unless your a vegitarian you yourself have killed a lot of innocent living animals, shame on you! well you get the point that its not really a baby for several months.


The real argument comes down to morals. Once the decision is made, rationalizing comes next. The problem with abortion is that there is no fixed line. The line moves with each generation. Consider if you will that legalized abortion was completely inconcievable (no pun intended) 60 years ago. Can you imagine forum topics in those times. In fact if you would have decalred that in the near future, 11 year old girls would have the right to go to a clinic and have a major surgery without notifying parents you would be ridiculed! Or that parents could reserve the right to have their baby aborted minutes before it's due, by allowing only the body to be delivered, then haveing a doctor stick a sharp object in the back of the head and suction out the brains. Would have thought it possible?

Consider the evolution of abortion. It was originially argued that it should be legalized when the Mother's life is in danger. The next argument was to append legalizing abortion if the mother was raped. After that it was if the child had deformities. After that if it inconvenieced the life of the mother. After that, abortion on demand for whatever reason. After that partial birth abortion. What's next postpartum abortion? Preposterous? Well, it has already happened and is now being documented. You may have seen news articles in December of 2004 about Dutch doctors who admit to have killed babies after they have been born! They sight that the newborns had deformities and that they had little chance at a good quality of life. It has even been proposed by some that a mother should have up to two years AFTER the baby is born to decide if she wants to keep it. Outrages right? Think 70 years into the future. Is this any different than Hitler's ideology? Darwin would be proud of this natural selection.

It is disturbing that the pro-choice movement limits the choice in favor of the mother. What if the unborn child were able to take the mother to court over the mother wanting an abortion? How would the judge determine who's choice is being restricted here. Simply because the unborn child has no advocate, he (or she) loses.

Hey, we know how it works! Unportected sex will probably result in pregnancy. Abortion is the worst type of contraceptive. There is where the choice ends! Anything beyond that is murder. No two ways about it! Try to rationalize taking a human's life with comparing it to an insect if it makes you feel better, but what if that zygote, you advocate should be aborted if the mother so chooses, were you? Where do you stand on this now? Draw a time line from conception to the grave and decide when it's okay to do away with a human life. You will find that the fundamental problem is that there is not fixed line, it moves with each generation.

Quote:
Also not all kids get adopted, hell our world is well over its abuilty to support human life, and were seeing the results of having to pump out more resources then our planet can handle.


There are thousands of parents on waiting lists to adopt. How do you figure that,
Quote:
our world is over well over its abuilty to support human life?
? If you mean overcrowding, did you know that the entire's world population could fit in the State of Texas, and that the it would be less dense that the State of New York? Overcrowding is not a problem. If you mean starving children, the fact is that we have achieved great results in growing food in the worst of conditions. Most studies, and major journal research indicates that the majority of starving nations has little to do with shortages and more to do with dictators who prevent relief efforts from delivering food to those countries.
XSTG
Not against. Not pro-abortion. Just in the middle.

Abortion should be accepted when it's, by example, a teenager that is having a baby, because it would be difficult for her to raise it or something. But if it's just when you're adult and you forget to protect yourself, I think doctors should say: You made it without protection, that's your problem, now raise it by yourself to learn being good parents.

Or, it should be allowed if the woman was (hm.. I don't remember the word)... ah, that's it, abused by another man, in war context or things like that, because she never asked for a baby.

That's my point of view
Da Rossa
I'm against it, definitely. Before some people here figures that this is a religious reason, I first say it is not.

And it is very simple: I've not read all the posts here, but it is obligatory to read the first, so lets expose here:
Quote:
Why should an unwanted baby be brought into this world? If it's unwanted, undoubtedly it's going to be less loved than one that was wanted. Sometimes the parents simply wouldn't be able to look after it. Sure, they could put it up for adoption, but that means that the mother has to give up 9 months of her life, and put her own life at risk for a child that she won't keep. It just doesn't add up.


1 - The baby had not the chance to choose whether to be or not wanted.
2 - The baby did not asked to be born.
3 - Not necessarily it is going to be less loved. Several young parents (not below the age of 20) that did not plan to have a baby further find out that a baby would be the hapiness of their lives and object of reunion of the couple, if they had been broken up.
4 - Are you sure that these 9 months would be a dark period, like you say, in the mother's life? "give 9 months of her life" made me come to this conclusion. Isn't it worthy to wait this time and let the baby be born? Adopted children may be happy.

The stated above explains my points.
mstreet
Personally I am Pro-Choice on this topic. I don't think anyone should have the right to tell anyone what they can or can not do to their body or life for that matter.
Here is my one issue about this though, should a woman have to go through more than one abortion in her life. Accidents do happen but I really don't think it should one's first choice for birthcontrol. There are so many alternatives out there now. It really does a whirlwind to one's system as well.
Bondings
joscode wrote:
Try to rationalize taking a human's life with comparing it to an insect if it makes you feel better, but what if that zygote, you advocate should be aborted if the mother so chooses, were you?

Then the person would never have existed in the first place. If the act of conception would have been postponed for some reason, then the dna would have been completely different anyway.

I don't understand why some people consider a zygote the same person as what it became. Just with slightly different circumstances it would have become a completely different person, ranging from Hitler to Gandhi.

The zygote is human and is living, for sure. However, that human life isn't yet a human person, in my opinion. It is only a person or baby in being. It doesn't have a brain or nervous system, hence does not have any form of personality or thoughts and never had it before.

The zygote/embryo is then still a completely parasital part of the female body, it's a person being created by the female body. Abortion would then only be to stop the support of your body to that zygote/embryo. Aborting after those stages is completely different as the fetus is starting to develop a brain and hence personality. It is also becoming less and less a parasital part of the female body till the birth. I agree that it is very hard to find a limit.
Quote:
Abortion is the worst type of contraceptive.

By definition it's not a contraceptive.
Quote:
What's next postpartum abortion?

Abortion is the termination of a pregnancy by definition. It doesn't have to be caused deliberately, but can also be caused by natural causes. You can't stop a pregnancy after the birth.

All this doesn't change the fact that most people will regret an abortion for the rest of their life. A very good prevention system should be in place and young mothers should be taken care of, and not only financially. Most abortions can be prevented and this should be a better solution than making it illegal.
tidruG
To illegalize abortion is stupid. There are some cases in which abortion is required... such as to save the mother, or because the baby may be born deformed or have very low chances of curvival.

From what it appears, most anti-abortionists are saying that we don't have the right to take life away from an unborn baby... however, we also don't have a right to give birth to a baby if/when we know its life may be one of extreme poverty or suffering.

However, that doesn't make me pro-abortion. Abortion must strictly not be used as a contraceptive measure. It must be used only in extreme cases.

Basically, I too, am on the fence on this one...
to a certain extent, I am pro-choice, but I also know that many people take advantage of that and abuse that... which should be controlled... but not by making abortion illegal.
JessieF
sacrifier wrote:
Thought I'd put this up for for debate.

Is Abortion Moral or Not? In other words, are you for or against it?


I am definately against abortion.

sacrifier wrote:

Personally, I'm pro-abortion. I was quite surprised the first time I discovered people were against it, it just seems to make such good sense.

Why should an unwanted baby be brought into this world? If it's unwanted, undoubtedly it's going to be less loved than one that was wanted. Sometimes the parents simply wouldn't be able to look after it. Sure, they could put it up for adoption, but that means that the mother has to give up 9 months of her life, and put her own life at risk for a child that she won't keep. It just doesn't add up.

Of course, this is not my full argument, I want to save my main points for when we actually get into the discussion, consider this a simple opening

Thoughts, people?


How could murdering someone make such good sense. If you don't want a child, whether you're married or not, you should be careful.

Quote:

What is more, if you want to kill a baby just because it may not be happy, you should kill all the population because everyone faces sadness sometimes.


This is true. I have had my own good and bad times in my life. Those times are apart of life. Without being sad, how could you rejoice in the times of good?

Quote:

Sometimes the parents simply wouldn't be able to look after it. Sure, they could put it up for adoption, but that means that the mother has to give up 9 months of her life, and put her own life at risk for a child that she won't keep. It just doesn't add up.


It does to add up. (Also, if she doesn't want to risk her life she shouldn't even be having sex) There are plenty of couples in the world who really want a child, but are not able to have one for medical reasons. So if you put an unwanted child up for adoption you're giving a miracle to someone else. Why would a child be so unwanted that you would be willing to kill someone. That is just wrong. There are millions of people in the world, there's bound to be some place (someone) the child can(recieve) find love.

Quote:

If the girl feels adult enough to have sex and accidentally becomes pregnant, she should be adult enough to give birth. Why should we punish a baby with death for its parents' mistakes?


Exactly what I said before!


Quote:

It's really simple. If as parents, you know that you can't care for the baby and that your lifestyle suggests that having a baby is unhealthy for the mom or the baby, i.e., if you smoke crack, are alcoholic, etc, then the only option your SHOULD consider is abortion.


That is wrong. You shouldn't even be doing drugs, and you konw whether you're pregnant or not.
even if the baby could devolop wrong, you should give it a chance at life. Just because they become mentally incapable, physically incapable, etc, doesn't mean you should have an arbortion. You don't know how the baby will turn out. If they are mentally incapable, physically incapable, etc, they're still a person, and every person has the right to live.

Quote:

I think you can't just say that it's right or wrong. Think all the options: what if some girl didn't want to have sex? What if some rapist made one pregnant? I'm sure she doesn't want to keep the baby then, always reminding her about what happened.


If a girl is raped, she should have the option to take birth control. If she does end up pregnant, the child is still a human being. She doesn't have to keep it. It isn't the childs fault that their mother was raped. They are an innocent being and shouldn't be punished for it.

Quote:

I'm pro-abort in the case that the mother could die with the baby, deformations in the fetus, and violation... in other cases i'm anti-abort.

If the mother don't wants the baby, give it in adoption, but abort is not the correct way, in my opinion.


You're always risking your life with any child. There's always the possibiity that any woman can die with the baby.

Quote:
Abortion is legalized murder.

You cannot get around that. Once the sperm penetrates the egg, the cell divides, and in science class you learn that a cell is the smallest living unit, the building blocks of organisms.

Who are we to play God and dictate whether someone gets life or not? We are in no place to determine who should live and who should die, nor should we be. If you don't want a baby, put it up for adoption, the baby will find a family that will love it.

There's no difference in me taking a knife and killing my next door neighbor than you murdering your baby for whatever the reason may be. We all have a right to life, a right that can not be taken away, and it's scary that it is allowed.


Exactly.
Quote:
there are too many ways protection for not to be pregnant...

Condoms don't always work. Neither does birth control, and it may also lead to cancer.

Quote:
Because if what you say is true it was a living being just like that unborn fetus so its murder, in fact unless your a vegitarian you yourself have killed a lot of innocent living animals, shame on you! well you get the point that its not really a baby for several months.


One of the purposes of animals were to feed upon another. Take a life, to feed a life. You may see this as: take the life of the child to save the mother, but that is stupid to interpret that out of "Take a life, to feed a life". Would you eat a fetus? No! Would you eat a chicken? Yes. Should you kill an unborn child? No. Would you kill a chicken to eat? Yes.

Quote:
then wasting 9 months caring for a future child and just having it die in front of me after all that work would piss me off!


No, if you were a woman, and this happend to you, you would be greatly depressed. Once a woman sees her child, she wouldn't want to give it up.

Quote:

Not that there's a good chance that they will, it's just trying to argue what they could become is ridiculous because there are billions of possibilities, just as many good ones as bad ones.


It is not ridiculous. Whether they turn out evil or good, they still deserve their chance.
JessieF
Bondings wrote:

The zygote is human and is living, for sure. However, that human life isn't yet a human person, in my opinion. It is only a person or baby in being. It doesn't have a brain or nervous system, hence does not have any form of personality or thoughts and never had it before.


I understand how you see this, but it is still a human. Like I have said (most likely a dozen times) the child still deserves to live. OK, what if it isn't a human person yet. It will become one soon enough, but if you kill it before it is considered a human person, you are still taking away its right to live....
Sappho
JessieF wrote:
Bondings wrote:

The zygote is human and is living, for sure. However, that human life isn't yet a human person, in my opinion. It is only a person or baby in being. It doesn't have a brain or nervous system, hence does not have any form of personality or thoughts and never had it before.


I understand how you see this, but it is still a human. Like I have said (most likely a dozen times) the child still deserves to live. OK, what if it isn't a human person yet. It will become one soon enough, but if you kill it before it is considered a human person, you are still taking away its right to live....


So if men masturbate they kill so many potential human lifes couse if they actually had sex it could be a human person.

I am going to get all of u arrested Very Happy
Bondings
JessieF wrote:
I understand how you see this, but it is still a human. Like I have said (most likely a dozen times) the child still deserves to live. OK, what if it isn't a human person yet. It will become one soon enough, but if you kill it before it is considered a human person, you are still taking away its right to live....

The thing is that with abortion you don't directly kill the embryo, you just stop the support from the mother by removing it from the female body.

The thing is, only persons have the right to live, a potential person isn't one yet, hence doesn't have any rights.

And I wouldn't call it a human, just human is enough. My hand is also human, but not a human.

And Sappho, nice one. Wink
Jeslyn
I'm pro-choice. Doesn't mean I'm for abortions, nor does it mean I'm against abortions. Only that I believe that it's someone's choice to make if they want to have one or if they don't, I'm not going to control their lives with my belief.

There are so many "what-if" situations, that saying a straight out "no" to abortions is absurd.
dan751
Sappho wrote:
So if men masturbate they kill so many potential human lifes couse if they actually had sex it could be a human person.


On top of that, regards intercourse, many of the swimming little creatures, they die anyway.

No matter how you slice it, you're still ending a life if abortion takes place. Though, it may not be legally right to do so, I believe that it's morally wrong.
scottmacgillivary
I am all for abortion. I have a problem with the fact that churches get involved in a subject that they know nothing about. How do they have the right to tell any woman they are going to hell, if they feel they cannot go through with a life changing event. It has been scientifically proven that the fetus feels no pain, and I firmly believe that the mother, not the male dominated church, or the conservative minded individual has the right to choose if they can go through with the pregnancy. For example, if a woman is raped, why should she be further punished for nine months constantly fearing what she will do about the result of some elses crime. What kind of life will that child have? Bombing abortion clinics and making a woman who's been through enough emotional pain go through the endless ranting and ignorant ramblings of religious nuts who have nothing better to do with there time is disgraceful. I thought christianity was about not judging people. Guess I was wrong.
Soulfire
Reaper wrote:
Soulfire wrote:
Abortion is legalized murder.

You cannot get around that. Once the sperm penetrates the egg, the cell divides, and in science class you learn that a cell is the smallest living unit, the building blocks of organisms.

Who are we to play God and dictate whether someone gets life or not? We are in no place to determine who should live and who should die, nor should we be. If you don't want a baby, put it up for adoption, the baby will find a family that will love it.

There's no difference in me taking a knife and killing my next door neighbor than you murdering your baby for whatever the reason may be. We all have a right to life, a right that can not be taken away, and it's scary that it is allowed.

Wow yes that makes sense..... so killing the baby at the most basic form, before it can think even think is murder?? Well I stepped on a bug today so I think I will goto the police station and turn myself in for murdering a bug! Because if what you say is true it was a living being just like that unborn fetus so its murder, in fact unless your a vegitarian you yourself have killed a lot of innocent living animals, shame on you! well you get the point that its not really a baby for several months.
As some other people mentioned before, its also the parents right to have an abortion because its still part of their body, its basicly a new flesh thats growing inside of her.
Also not all kids get adopted, hell our world is well over its abuilty to support human life, and were seeing the results of having to pump out more resources then our planet can handle.
lennon wrote:
First comes love
Second comes marriage
Third comes the baby in the golden carriage

..... please keep in mind that this a childrens rhyme, and should be treated as such, nothing more nothing less.


Don't be foolish (referring to your bug comment). The baby, whether it can think or not, is living. Even you said it's "most basic form of life." That's life, this is black and white, dead and alive. Their body belongs to God, again, whether they believe it or not.

You can believe that fire is cold, but if you touch it, it still burns.

As for adoption... Well, they may not get adopted, but at least they didn't have their right to life stolen from them.
KRONIC
i dont know what all this talk about abortion is all about. this view about abortion should be understood by now as being illegal and immoral!!

i consider abortion as muder since it is like killing a human being. in my opinion life is formed or comes into existance from the point of conception so therefore when the decision of aborting the feotus is raised it is like murder. Evil or Very Mad
lisa33144
I am anti-abortion in most cases. Saber, you argued that a mother should not have to give up 9 months of her life to have the baby just to give it up for adoption. My argument is that the mother should not have gotten pregnant in the first place. She knew the risks when she had sexual intercouse. Of course, there are a few exceptions that I am still unsure about. For example, in the case of unwanted, rape induced pregnancy, I'm leaning towards it being morally permissable for the mother to abort the child since she did not bring on the child herself and it could be a big burden on her life to carry the child. In the case that there is a very high chance that the mother will die if she goes into labor, I also think it could be morally permissable to abort the child. However, in the the average situation that someone wants an abortion, that is, a woman has sex irresponsibly or even if she has sex and then there is a defect in the condom, I think she is morally obligated to have the child and give it up for adoption if she does not want it because she knew the risks of her actions when she had sex.
Snailfox
First of all: Moral is a human emotion, and doesn't exist.
Second: Even though it is, everyone has to follow it, because otherwise things just wouldn't work.
Third: I'm pro-abortion.

I believe that a woman is in control of her own body and is free to do whatever she wants with her baby. I don't think men are at all entitled to speak about the subject.
When I was in 5th grade, my class got a letter from somewhere in Africa, where a woman who had been raped was going to be stoned to death because she was going to have a baby - on the other hand, it was illegal to go through abortion. Fortunately, we sent around a namelist and she survivied.
And since the Roman Catholics believe that abortion is murder, ponder this:
Every time sexual intercourse is carried through, some thousands of sperms are released. One, perchance two survive. Isn't that murder?

Every sperm is sacred
Every sperm is great
If a sperm is wasted
God gets quite irate...

Razz
JessieF
Snailfox wrote:
First of all: Moral is a human emotion, and doesn't exist.
Second: Even though it is, everyone has to follow it, because otherwise things just wouldn't work.
Third: I'm pro-abortion.


It does too exits. It's in your consience. You know right from wrong.

Snailfox wrote:

I believe that a woman is in control of her own body and is free to do whatever she wants with her baby. I don't think men are at all entitled to speak about the subject.


Meaning I can kill my next door neighbor if I wanted to? Right there you are saying it's okay to kill. Even if it is just a zygote you are taking away it's chance to become what it is suppossed to become. You are still taking it's chance away to survive. Even though it may just be a zygote you are still killing, because it is still living.

Snailfox wrote:

When I was in 5th grade, my class got a letter from somewhere in Africa, where a woman who had been raped was going to be stoned to death because she was going to have a baby - on the other hand, it was illegal to go through abortion. Fortunately, we sent around a namelist and she survivied.
And since the Roman Catholics believe that abortion is murder, ponder this:
Every time sexual intercourse is carried through, some thousands of sperms are released. One, perchance two survive. Isn't that murder?

Every sperm is sacred
Every sperm is great
If a sperm is wasted
God gets quite irate...

Razz


Sperm is a cell, it isn't human, yet. It holds genes from the man. It isn't actually going to form into a human until it unites with the womans egg. Then it developes further on. After that, when you try to abort it, you're killing a human. Because then you're taking away it's chance to be something very special. And even if the child grows up to be someone bad, at least you gave them a chance. You can't be sure they'll be someone bad 100%. And everyone deserves a chance.

I am going to bring up another question in this subject.


Should teens be able to choose whether they have an abortion, keep the child, or give it up for adoption, or should their parents choose for them?
rainynightstarz
To me, a fetus is NOT alive, it can not survive for its self, it can not think, eat or do anything. Before it is born, it's not a living organism.

In many cases being pragnant is a huge risk to the mothers life! so Shouldn't a established life be more important then something thats "capable" of being a life?
and many other times the babys have genetic disease, should they live and suffer? Do YOU perfer long pain or no pain at all?

Some people might say, the parents can give it up for adoption... welll there is already MILLIONS of kids in need of adoption, why add to that huge number. one more unwanted baby born, means one more baby orphan with and unhealthy childhood. Unwanted kids or families that can't support kids would mean lower education, higher rate of crime, more people in jail, unsafe neighberhood. gorvernemnt go bankrupt.... many other things that i havn't mentioned

it's simply the parents choice.
Reaper
Soulfire wrote:
Don't be foolish (referring to your bug comment). The baby, whether it can think or not, is living. Even you said it's "most basic form of life." That's life, this is black and white, dead and alive. Their body belongs to God, again, whether they believe it or not.

You can believe that fire is cold, but if you touch it, it still burns.

As for adoption... Well, they may not get adopted, but at least they didn't have their right to life stolen from them.

This still does not disprove the fact that the embryo does not have a personality for several months after you get pregnet. And the human body cant actually tell the difference between hot and cold, your body just senses an extreme temperature change and sends pain signals to your brain, your other senses tell your body if its heat or cold thats doing it. Also religion has nothing to do with it, most people play the religion card when they realize they are losing the debate in order to change the subject. Also having peoples right to live stolen from them?? how dare you! Your religion has probably killed thousands in its name! So you cant really use that as a point of defense buddy.
and joscode you mentioned that you could fit the entire human population in the state of texas, well you could but lets theorize what would happen, week 1 we use up all the food in texas, remember now were in texas so they cant go too far from texas, week 2 people start starving, week 3 people start dropping dead. Now do keep in mind that there are approximently 7 billion people in the entire world and feeding that many people in such a close range to each other would be nearly impossible, its like wild animals really, if the numbers of prey are low then the numbers of predators are low too. So what happens when we run out of food to eat in the little state of texas?? we starve and die.
aerialdreams
This problem is really circumstantial. I mean, I really don't think abortion is right, but I do understand that in some cases it's needed, like when it threatens the mother's life, or in a third world country where it is way too over populated. Other than that, abortion really shouldn't be practiced. First of all, the "parent" should be responsible for their own actions, and not just flaunder themselves everywhere, get pregnant, then abort. It's their fault they got pregnant; I mean, if they didn't want a child, they should have been more cautious. Secondly, no matter what people might say, it is still killing a life. Even if the embryo or fetus is not yet born, the fact is that if left as it is, a life will be produced. So what if it can't feel or survive on its own? Some people have genetic diseases where they can't feel at all (no nerve works) and plenty of people can't live on their own (people with life threatening diseases). Should they be killed too?? It's just not fair to not even give this unborn baby a chance.
bdoneck
Well, I like to stay out of politics and things like this, but I'm on the fence with abortion. I agree with reasons to do it and i also agree with reasons not to do it, but I think that whether or not an abortion should be performed should be up to the child bearer, not the rest of society.

When people argue that its against religion, that just makes me mad because not everyone is christian or even believes in any religion, society should not be based on your religious views because your religion is not the only religion.
DJHicks
as much as im against abortion i do think its right in certain situations such as medical implications etc

i think the emphesis needs to be put on using protection etc rather then having to resort to abortion!
Soulfire
Okay, a lot of people seem to be using the argument "they don't have a brain, they don't have this, they don't have that."

Well, if you kill it, it doesn't have a chance to develop that does it? The scientific definition of a cell is "the smallest unit of life." Life is the keyword there.

Just because we can and are able to do something does not mean we should. Again, who are we to play God? Who are we to dictate who can live and who dies?

If it's a woman's choice to be able to kill her baby, I should have a choice as to whether I want my next door neighbor killed. Although a baby might not think at first, it might not eat or drink, it might not have a personality... it gathers all these things.

You could say that a baby after birth isn't living if you want to define it like you are. It doesn't really have a personality (it's in development), it can't really eat and drink on it's own yet, and the only real thinking it does are the heart, breathing, etc.

It isn't until months after birth that it becomes alive, according to your definitions.
drunkfun
look, if you're having trouble convincing her, just use a coat hanger
MWANGI
I reall think that it should not be legalized unless the female has been raped or something like that.

You were born weren't you. How would you feel if your parents killed you.

That's exactly what I thought you'd say

I know you said that you would feel very very bad and say that it is very unfair...

..That is what the murdered children say after being reincarnated.

I was once aborted, that is why I think that it is very unfair. I was supposed to be born as the kings son in egypt long long time ago and I would have been the king. But that was ages ago and I am almost over it.

Anyway

DON'T ABORT.....IT COULD BE YOU

Thank you very much.

If you have ever been aborted in your previous life then you know what it does to your self-esteem.
Exclamation
Sappho
MWANGI wrote:
I was once aborted, that is why I think that it is very unfair. I was supposed to be born as the kings son in egypt long long time ago and I would have been the king. But that was ages ago and I am almost over it.


Hehehehe. Why always when someone goes to see their past lives is a king, hero or a famous person? Where the hell are all those laborers, miners, workers, just simple common ppl. Smile

Anyway its not goin to change my opinion, if i was aborted or not, wasnt my choise to make but theirs. And i dont really understand what it can make with my self-esteem, its totally unrelated. Confused

And BTW abortion is not killing, its just denying the support which results in death.
dac_nip
definitely NO! it will hunt you forver. Morality, maybe an old virtue and some may say inapplicable these days. But that what makes as humans.. Laughing
Sappho
dac_nip wrote:
definitely NO! it will hunt you forver. Morality, maybe an old virtue and some may say inapplicable these days. But that what makes as humans.. Laughing


Indeed but some of us dont find abortion immoral u know, so there is nothing that will hunt us. If i thought about it as immoral and evil i would be against it u know.
drunkfun
If you get a girl pregnant, and she told you she was on the pill, should she be forced to pay for the abortion if she agrees to or if no abortion, should you have to take care of the baby?

Im all against guys getting girls pregnant then refusing to pay for the abortion or refusing child support, but it works both ways
tidruG
MWANGI wrote:
I was once aborted, that is why I think that it is very unfair. I was supposed to be born as the kings son in egypt long long time ago and I would have been the king. But that was ages ago and I am almost over it.

I was once aborted as in one of my previous lives... I was supposed to come to Earth as a Roman born into slavery who would have been physically and mentally harassed and molested till I commited suicide.

Quote:
If you have ever been aborted in your previous life then you know what it does to your self-esteem.

It did wonders to my self-esteem.

Quote:
You were born weren't you. How would you feel if your parents killed you.

Considering I hadn't started thinking before I was born, I don't think I would have felt anything much.

@Soulfire, have you heard the really really old adage "Mother knows best"...?
If a mother knows that she won't be able to support her baby properly, then she does have the right to abort.
What if the mother looks at her child as a mistake all her life and abuses the child?
(I know I can post many hypothetical situations supporting mothers' choice, and I know you can also post many hypothetical situations against that... in the end, we are driven by our own beliefs, and I don't think either of us will be able to change the other's beliefs.)

Quote:
Well, if you kill it, it doesn't have a chance to develop that does it?

This is true.
This is why I am not all pro-abortion. Some (maybe many) women take advantage of abortion to get rid of an unwanted pregnancy to live a few more years of the "young and free life", which makes me want to send them to prison, but that's the way it is...

There are reasons to support abortion and reasons to be passionately against it. An ideal scenario would be to reach a point in the middle where certain cases of abortion should be allowed and morally accepted, and certain cases where it should be outright condemned. But to illegalize abortion completely is not a solution.
adwya
its easy




noooooooooo Laughing
Soulfire
If the mother can't support the child/mistreats it, she can always put it up for adoption. There are plenty of ways, and she can get help for those kinds of things as well.

I don't see how anyone thinks it is right to take away human life.
drunkfun
George Bush Snr. should have had an abortion, then they should have nuked Texas and the whole world would be a great happy place!
Soulfire
drunkfun wrote:
George Bush Snr. should have had an abortion, then they should have nuked Texas and the whole world would be a great happy place!

[sarcasm]Yes, because it's Bush's fault for everything. Gotta love libbies...[/sarcasm]
falconfx
I'm about 25% pro abortion and 75% against.

I think it would be a solution from abandoning children but it is nevertheless an homicide: in fact, the mother just kill her child, even if he/she hasn't born yet.

Life is life, I think parents' mistakes should be punished, not innocent children.
drunkfun
Soulfire wrote:
drunkfun wrote:
George Bush Snr. should have had an abortion, then they should have nuked Texas and the whole world would be a great happy place!

[sarcasm]Yes, because it's Bush's fault for everything. Gotta love libbies...[/sarcasm]



I'm not a Libby you freagin knob, im Australian and that's better than any political ideal! Even Communism
DecayClan
Abortion should take place if no other solution can be easily found...People should really think about it very carefully, and consider all the other possibilities, but if they still can't find a solution, then abortion is something that they should do.If an unwanted child will bhe born, they might blame it, or themselfes for the rest of their lifes, making them miserable.

Also consider this:"why is the baby unwanted???Money problems?marriage problems???Whatever.All this problems will come up to him head.

I believe that abotion should only take place as the VERY LAST SOLUTION...
Rolling Eyes Crying or Very sad Rolling Eyes something bad, but maybe better in some situations... Crying or Very sad
Reaper
drunkfun wrote:
George Bush Snr. should have had an abortion, then they should have nuked Texas and the whole world would be a great happy place!

Ah yes thats the answer to everything Nuke texas! Oh common we all pretty much know that even if your half way across the world a cloud of radiation could still reach you so gj you just screwed your self too. Keep in mind that for every action there is an equally strong reaction, even if you cant see it. Also last time i checked Australian was not a political Ideal
Soulfire
DecayClan wrote:
Abortion should take place if no other solution can be easily found...People should really think about it very carefully, and consider all the other possibilities, but if they still can't find a solution, then abortion is something that they should do.If an unwanted child will bhe born, they might blame it, or themselfes for the rest of their lifes, making them miserable.

Also consider this:"why is the baby unwanted???Money problems?marriage problems???Whatever.All this problems will come up to him head.

I believe that abotion should only take place as the VERY LAST SOLUTION...
Rolling Eyes Crying or Very sad Rolling Eyes something bad, but maybe better in some situations... Crying or Very sad

The problem is that people don't think about it. They use it as birth control. This is not to say everyone does, but too many people do. I don't see how anyone can think it's moral to kill another person - unborn or not, they're still living.
Mrs Lycos
A question:
How many of you are parents? I'm sure you wouldn't be talking like so about abortion if you had had a baby inside you, or you had seen a baby looking at you and call you dad. I've just recently had my baby girl and that's the most wonderful thing that can ever happen to a person. And I mean person, because then all this thread is about mothers. What about fathers? They are as responsible and have as many rights over the baby than mothers. Here it seems that only mothers can be Parents.
cookienmilo
Definitely a no-no.

In fact, upon fertilisation between the egg and the sperm, life is formed (whether you can see it or not). In fact, within 7 weeks of conception, the facial features are visible, including a mouth and tongue. The eyes have a retina and lens.

Anyway, who are we to say at which stage of the pregnancy it is ok to abort or not? Like it or not, abortion is killing, whether it's 7 weeks or 7 months or 7 years old.
PureSimpleNatural
I am against abortion.

This may be harsh for some people, but if you are not prepared for the consequences of having sexual intercourse, then you are simply not mature enough to have sex! There are many other ways to be intimate with a lover that are safe. And standard contraceptives are no guarantee for anyone wishing not to procreate but wish to be involved in the act of procreation.

I have alot of experience with this. I have been there. I had an unexpected pregnancy when I was 18, even though I thought I was being safe and using contraceptives (pill & condom combined). Shortly after my 19th birthday, I gave birth to a beautiful boy who remains very precious to my heart.

I placed him for adoption, and that was the single most important decision I had ever had to make in my life. My pregnancy was not easy. I struggled. I was trying to remain in school and keep a job. But there was no way that I was going to KILL an innocent human being!

Today, I firmly believe, that abortion is an easy way out for alot of people. I had a friend who did in fact have several abortions because she wanted to remain sexually active and yet not suffer any of the consequences. When she was finally 'ready' to have children, she could not conceive and now it bears heavily in her heart.

You will then strike with the notion of, "What if the child has medical issues...?" Again, I can speak from experience. What makes you say that a child born with limitations could have any less chance of having a fulfilling life? Ask my second son that, I dare you.

He was born with Spina Bifida. For those of you who don't know, it is a neural tube defect that happens in the first month of pregnancy when the spinal column doesn’t close completely. This can cause numerous complications. My son is paralyzed from the waist down, has feeding issues, has difficulty get waste materials out of his body, and is slowly outgrowing the capacity of his lungs.

Do you think this stops him? NO! He is the most content boy I have EVER met! He is HAPPY. He can make the most with what was given him. And most of all, he has the strongest will than all of us on this forum combined. He has touched the hearts of many, and I believe he is here for a reason. At the tender age of 8, he has alot to give and alot to teach us! He will NOT let you feel sorry for him.

Recently, he suffered massive liver failure, and was on life support for three weeks. When most people would have died, he got through it. He's getting better! Obviously, he is not ready to go yet! What if I hadn't even given him that chance, as hard as a life as we look at it? I can't buy the excuse of poor quality of life. His life would have been unbearable for us, but it's not for him, and the other babies who've had medical conditions. They are strong, and who are we to decide that they can't be here?

There's the issue of the rape victim. I won't neglect that. Very serious & careful consideration much be given to these circumstances. Fortunately, it's not as common as Pro-Choice activists would have you believe. Yes, it DOES happen, just not in the numbers they give.

Far more people have abortions out of convenience. Fight me on that if you will, but it's true in this society. Abortion should NEVER be a way to erase the consequences of having sex. Like I opened with, if you don't want to be pregnant or are not ready to have children, don't engage in the very act of having children! It's SIMPLE! Society today should be focusing on abstinence, not acceptance. I'm 31... I've had my children. My husband and I are very loving with each other and intimate. There are ways to express love & affection without intercourse. It's YOUR choice. But you need to be prepared for the consequences.
valkyrie-heavens
I dont really agree with abortion because I have very strong religious values... but it depends on the circumstance. Lets say if u were rapped then i can understand. No one wants to have a child if they dont know who the father is or their extremely young and have hopes for their future. If u were the one that decided to have sex in the first place then thats ur own fault, Your the one who should have to deal with the concequences.


Overall I am against it.
XxGunner
I would say NO to abortion since I think it's wrong and painful way of taking out babies. And I also think that it probably messes up the baby in a way so when it grows up it'll probably be something wrong with the baby either phisically or mentally.

Well thats my part of the story, lets hear some more...
valkyrie-heavens
XxGunner wrote:
I would say NO to abortion since I think it's wrong and painful way of taking out babies. And I also think that it probably messes up the baby in a way so when it grows up it'll probably be something wrong with the baby either phisically or mentally.

Well thats my part of the story, lets hear some more...


abortion means that u kill the baby.... ur thinking of a cesection (or however u spell it)... Sorry, Im not trying to be rude just letting u know cause u learn something new everyday Very Happy.
drunkfun
HAHAHAHHAHAHA Laughing

I was born with an abortion.

And then i got my girlfriend pregnant, so we booted off to mexico and got a c-section
airh3ad
NO..abortion is killing...
naraki
I'd say it depends on scenario. Personally, abortion is wrong but what if a an unfortunate woman was raped by someone else? Or Doctor finds out that a baby has a certain disease or condition which will cause him or her becomes disable later on in life? In that case, I think abortion should be done. Other than that (like a fun loving person who sleeps around and gets pregnant, then decide to go for abortion), I definately disagree.
Hero
I would have to say that I completely agree with naraki. If the woman had not given consent (aka rape) I don't think that she should have to give birth. Putting it up for adoption would work, but I wouldn't disagree with her decision either way.
adamm
yes
Soulfire
A lot of the same points are being repeated, I think the discussion has pretty much ended. It's really hard to pick and choose when something is right and wrong. Saying "Well, in this case it's okay" and "well, she shouldn't if this happened" and whatnot is like having the Christians go through the Bible and pick and choose what they want to believe in.

I know, it's a very back and forth, undecided matter.

But everyone is judged in the end
adwya
nooooooooooooooooooooooo


Laughing
lyndonray
I am definitely pro-choice. People should have that choice as to whether or not its in their best interests to have this baby or not. Sometimes it may be a health issue, where there is a chance the mother will die during birth or there might be serious complications. Other cases could involve pregnancy as a result of being raped.

Abortion should be avoided at all costs and should be the last resort. it should never be a cure for something someone chose not to prevent.
Lennon
The questions you raise are:

1: is the fetus/embryo considered human life, and at what point does life begin.
2: Can Abortion provide medicinal and psychological advantages.
3: Is Pro-Choice, Pro-abortion or Pro-Life the right belief.

1: I believe that a single zygote (sperm + egg = active development) is human life in its simplest form. Fetus and embryo are all more developed human life to me.
2: Abortion and Embryonic Stem Cell Research destroy the development of the human and have other benefits to mother or recipient which is not as valuable as the Stem cell's survival. The advantages are not significant enough.
3: Since I believe in (1), I can only say any loss of human life is not worthwhile to science or to anybody else. One exception, one death instead of a mass death is an unfair but ethical solution. This is only the case for abortion if the mother is at risk of death. I think a new generation is better than keeping alive an older generation, if we were forced to make the choice. Pro-Choice think it's ok to consider the survival of the one instead of the mass, and abortionists consider the mothers right. As Pro-life that I am, I ask to consider the human child development and the potential of a newer generation versus the older generation.

This is my last post as a Junior Frehoster. Applause Dancing Applause Dancing I am now a Senior Frishoster thanks to Frihost.
Reaper
Soulfires right this topic should be locked, were just bringing up facts that we have allready brought up.
Sappho
Lennon wrote:
I think a new generation is better than keeping alive an older generation, if we were forced to make the choice. As Pro-life that I am, I ask to consider the human child development and the potential of a newer generation versus the older generation.


Bold statements i would like to see u when ur loved wife die in situation like that. Rolling Eyes
Vofman
Lemme see, lemme see. For, or against...?

This is an issue that probably will nver be successfully resolved, so I don't think that it amtters what side I'm on.

Wait, scratch that statement. It WILL be resolved. By the stacked Conservative/Republican government.

Good bye, right of choice of what I'd like to do with my life...I'll miss you!
Reaper
I believe lennon ment all those older people who can't take care of themselfs, because right now we have more old people then young people, Sad isn't it??
Lennon
Ethically, which is better, to let one person die so that a crowd is saved, or let the crowd die to save the one you love.

It's a difficult choice, but outside the realm of emotion, you have to consider the ethics, and I think you'd have to save the crowd. Note the pressure and force to make the decision.

When the titanic was going down, women and children were saved first.
Personally, I don't have a wife, and I don't know how I'd react. Maybe think of Luke and Leia Skywalker, born and the mother died in childbirth. Birth of a legend, a new generation. But tragic death is not friendly.
adwya
no..no...no more kill
Sappho
adwya wrote:
no..no...no more kill


Stop spamming u already posted this here once! Atleast try to be constructive next time. :/
*parakiss
definetly against abortion.

Its like not giving someone a chance to live and its killing also

might as well end up in jail
Soulfire
Can you really pick and choose whether it's murder or not? "Well, in this case it is okay.. but not in this scenario." I don't think you can say that, because it's quite black and white. You kill a baby or you don't kill a baby, and I understand that it's quite a hard choice.
gonzo
sacrifier wrote:
T
Personally, I'm pro-abortion.



Are you pro-more-of-this:




(formerly a 10 week old child)
Sappho
Gonzo yes i am pro and u not gonna change my opinion with disgusting pictures. Rolling Eyes

Mods remove the picture and close this thread pls. Or is there anything else that can be added to this discussion, rather than Gonzo's sick pictures?
gonzo
Soulfire
Sappho wrote:
Gonzo yes i am pro and u not gonna change my opinion with disgusting pictures. Rolling Eyes

Mods remove the picture and close this thread pls. Or is there anything else that can be added to this discussion, rather than Gonzo's sick pictures?

He's just showing what you support. The killing of the innocent. The killing of babies.
Lennon
Soulfire wrote:
Sappho wrote:
Gonzo yes i am pro and u not gonna change my opinion with disgusting pictures. Rolling Eyes

Mods remove the picture and close this thread pls. Or is there anything else that can be added to this discussion, rather than Gonzo's sick pictures?

He's just showing what you support. The killing of the innocent. The killing of babies.


just to revise the topic coz it's getting complex, who's saying what.. Gonzo's just showing what you (saffo) support (pro-abortion).

I think what Bondings said was quite interesting, that the embryo is not yet a person but yet human. In that sense, a child is not yet responsible but still has to be corrected and punished. If that's a bad analogy then try agin. It's like saying we're not at war yet, but we're going to kill you.
Yes, the embryo will grow older and have a personality later, it's inevitable, just time before the embryo grows up to think for itself. I think in the sense of rights, it's like saying children should not be punished because they're not aware of the their consequences, where I think they should be punished before they reach the age of reason, because they should grow up properly by good parenting and leadership. In this sence abortion is wrong coz it is bad parenting not giving your baby the chance in life, just coz it hasn't developed properly yet (and it is inevitablly going to develop into a proper human).
gonzo
Soulfire wrote:
Sappho wrote:
Gonzo yes i am pro and u not gonna change my opinion with disgusting pictures. Rolling Eyes

Mods remove the picture and close this thread pls. Or is there anything else that can be added to this discussion, rather than Gonzo's sick pictures?

He's just showing what you support. The killing of the innocent. The killing of babies.



I'm showing the TRUTH of the consequence of the SICK SICK ideology. If slaughtering children is so great you won't be disturbed by the pictures.

The TRUTH can be bothersome.... when you oppose it.

...

If the images are offensive.. HOW MUCH MORE OFFENSIVE IS THE ACTUAL ACT OF SLAUGHTER??!?




Sappho
gonzo wrote:
I'm showing the TRUTH of the consequence of the SICK SICK ideology. If slaughtering children is so great you won't be disturbed by the pictures.

The TRUTH can be bothersome.... when you oppose it.

...

If the images are offensive.. HOW MUCH MORE OFFENSIVE IS THE ACTUAL ACT OF SLAUGHTER??!?


Any pictures depicting a chirurgical procedure are offensive and disturbing and the act isnt.
ChunkyBustout
It's all a matter of freedoms. I myself support a woman's choice to do anything. I'm also in favor of allowing a person to sell an organ if they want. It's their body, they should be able to do with it what they like. I am pretty steadfast in my decisions and no picture of any kind is going to sway me. To not allow the pictures to show an opposing viewpoint violates freedom of speech and if you want to step on someone elses freedom, maybe you don't mind someone stepping on yours? Or maybe just censor it? We can have freedom for all if we stopped discounting the freedoms of others because we really don't care about it or feel its not right. After all, everyone thinks they're right or we wouldn't have so many problems of the world. No one really wanting to compromise. But I digress...
Lennon
gonzo wrote:


I'm showing the TRUTH of the consequence of the SICK SICK ideology. If slaughtering children is so great you won't be disturbed by the pictures.

The TRUTH can be bothersome.... when you oppose it.
If the images are offensive.. HOW MUCH MORE OFFENSIVE IS THE ACTUAL ACT OF SLAUGHTER??!?


You can't upset people like that. If you think people be made more aware, you attach a link, like this, as links are made.
http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/4514/abortionposter37xc.jpg
http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/5946/abortionposter46xs.jpg
In displaying large images like that in the post slows down the page loading in slower computers and you've probably lost them waiting.
Respect, coz some people see that as spamming.
My opinion is that you're absolutely right, it's shocking, I'm 101% prolife, i think that even pro-choice is badly misled, and the images show the real horrer and truth of the situation. But I would like you to change the tags to urls for respecting their belief.
SkullPizza
I personally don't believe in any particular religion so I am fully for abortion considering it's obvious benefits for overall socio-economic stability. There are recent findings that suggest that the reason for the sharp drop in crime in the U.S. in the 1990's was due to the fact that Roe vs. Wade was passed in the 1970's and that a large portion of criminals that would've been alive were killed off before they had a chance to cause havoc.
Reaper
Those photos dont really bug me for several reasons, one I dont have a weak stomach, also all of those photos were modified in photoshop so whos to say that they didn't just throw in some extra blood and dismember the body a little more, also im pretty sure no doctor would put a dime next to an unborn fetus, in fact im pretty sure they wouldnt even allow that in the operating room. due to the potiential of infection.
The act of slaughter? people are murdered killed and raped on a daily basis how about you help them first? hell in other countrys kids starve and drop dead on a daily basis.
Also its not sick if you remove your petty morals of whats considered alive and whats considered dead. It's the mothers choice not yours, your not the one having the kid so stop complaining.
Valleyman
gonzo you're pictures are irrelevant and disgusting. The fact that you have to resort to trying to get us to retch all over out computers, thus disabling our ability to post, says more about you than about us.

gonzo wrote:
I'm showing the TRUTH of the consequence of the SICK SICK ideology. If slaughtering children is so great you won't be disturbed by the pictures.


How about the consequences of your ideology? How about I start posting up pictures of those killed in Iraq, or 3d renderings of hell and the torment of sinners?

Aside from the wonderful "if me why not you?" argument I've got another, better argument: how about surgical pictures? I imagine you support life saving surgery and amputations, do you take time everyday to look through pictures of surgeries and amputees? Would you be willing to watch a 19th century amputation (no anesthetic, remember)? No, I though not. Why? Because the visuals are irrelevant. They are not always pretty, but that has no impact on whether or not the ideology is correct or not.
Blaster
If you don't agree with it then please sign my petion.

http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/petition-sign.cgi?deathof1

And if you don't care then watch this movie.

http://www.precious-life.com/Hard_Truth.html

***Please note some stuff in here you may not want to show in front of children. This movie is rated PG13.***

Movie lenth about 9 Minutes.
gonzo
Valleyman wrote:
gonzo you're pictures are irrelevant and disgusting.


Abortion is disgusting.

Irrelevant is now anything further you might say:




I'll go shake the dust from my shoes.
Lennon
SkullPizza wrote:
There are recent findings that suggest that the reason for the sharp drop in crime in the U.S. in the 1990's was due to the fact that Roe vs. Wade was passed in the 1970's and that a large portion of criminals that would've been alive were killed off before they had a chance to cause havoc.


You can never ever tell how people will develop in life. It's cruel to say our life as scientists, criminals etc is predicted at birth. if my life was predicted I'd have no reason to experience it.
blackheart
JessieF wrote:
Bondings wrote:

The zygote is human and is living, for sure. However, that human life isn't yet a human person, in my opinion. It is only a person or baby in being. It doesn't have a brain or nervous system, hence does not have any form of personality or thoughts and never had it before.


I understand how you see this, but it is still a human. Like I have said (most likely a dozen times) the child still deserves to live. OK, what if it isn't a human person yet. It will become one soon enough, but if you kill it before it is considered a human person, you are still taking away its right to live....


So every woman who chooses not to have baby is technically a murderer because her baby should have been born at somepoint. Rolling Eyes
blackheart


[/quote]

Nof effence my ignorant children - but anyone who didnt already know that abortion looked like that is a moron. I mean, it looks just like birth only the baby is undeveloped. And exactly like a mis-carraige.

So of course those images aren't going to pute people off abortion.

And I mean, it's not like women get pregnant to abort - why would we put ourselves in a situation where we had to?


And one HUGE point I think alot of people are missing is the number of abortions due to rape. I mean, I can understand restriction abortion to special circumstances, but to do so as a whole would just be insenstive and, well, stupid.
Lennon
Lennon wrote:
I think what Bondings said was quite interesting, that the embryo is not yet a person but yet human. In that sense, a child is not yet responsible but still has to be corrected and punished. Yes, the embryo will grow older and have a personality later, it's inevitable, just time before the embryo grows up to think for itself. I think in the sense of rights, it's like saying children should not be punished because they're not aware of the their consequences, where I think they should be punished before they reach the age of reason, because they should grow up properly by good parenting and leadership. In this sence abortion is wrong coz it is bad parenting not giving your baby the chance in life, just coz it hasn't developed properly yet (and it is inevitablly going to develop into a proper human).

ocalhoun wrote:
I'll just throw a random statistic at you...
About 95% of women who have had an abortion would say that they regret doing so within one year.

psycosquirrel wrote:
If I remember the statistics correctly, in the United States, approximately 200 pregnancies are rape-related per year. Yet, OVER 1,370,000 abortions occur annually in the U.S. yearly. So let's do some math... UNDER 0.014% of abortions come from rape-pregnancies, ASSUMING ALL rape victims have an abortion.
Here are some stastics to show the horrors of abortion:

First off, there have been 47,282,293 abortions in the United States alone since Roe Vs Wade in 1973. Many abortions from states such as Alaska, California, New Hampshire and Oklahoma are not even included in this statistic.
In the year 2000 alone, more children died from abortion than Americans died in the Revolutionary
War, the Civil War, World Wars I and II, the Korean, Vietnam and Gulf wars COMBINED. That is a lot of people.
At current rates of abortion, an estimated 43 percent of American women will have at least one abortion by the age of 45.
Worldwide, the lifetime average is about 1 abortion per woman. Think about how many people are dead from this holocaust.

I still hold my case.
blackheart
psycosquirrel wrote:
If I remember the statistics correctly, in the United States, approximately 200 pregnancies are rape-related per year. Yet, OVER 1,370,000 abortions occur annually in the U.S. yearly. So let's do some math... UNDER 0.014% of abortions come from rape-pregnancies, ASSUMING ALL rape victims have an abortion.


And, of course assuming, that ALL rape victims report the crime... let alone admit that they're having a child because of it. MOST rape cases go unreported.

I had a friend (Sally D) who got involved with the wrong people, was forced to have sex with her "boyfriend" by two of his mates (as in quite literally, physically forced) - but couldn't bring herself to tell her mum all that

so just cried a whole heap and told all the "adults" that she'd consensually had sex, and the condom had broken

she had an abortion, and I'm glad for it, but she was one of heaps who's statistic's wrongfully gone to non-rape related abortion.

I'm not saying it's the majority, I'm just saying it's alot. (Also, I live in Australia)


A woman does not have an abortion without good reason - at least where I'm from you have to go through counselling before you make the decision, no matter the situation... (and after).
Lennon
Just don't misinterpret this post plz.

Yes there are good causes for abortion. There are exceptions to these statistics, I agree we'll never know. I think people who go through this kind of scenario deserve respect for doing the right thing.
Only I still don't agree it's the right thing. It's just not good enough reason to kill an innocent unborn developing baby. Adoption, and family support are my recommendations to someone who faces a difficult rape situation.

I agree, the rape statistics are inaccurate, but common sense tells that most unplanned pregnancies are one-night stands, unprotected sex etc., which way outnumber rape.
horseatingweeds
blackheart wrote:
psycosquirrel wrote:
If I remember the statistics correctly, in the United States, approximately 200 pregnancies are rape-related per year. Yet, OVER 1,370,000 abortions occur annually in the U.S. yearly. So let's do some math... UNDER 0.014% of abortions come from rape-pregnancies, ASSUMING ALL rape victims have an abortion.


And, of course assuming, that ALL rape victims report the crime... let alone admit that they're having a child because of it. MOST rape cases go unreported.

I had a friend (Sally D) who got involved with the wrong people, was forced to have sex with her "boyfriend" by two of his mates (as in quite literally, physically forced) - but couldn't bring herself to tell her mum all that

so just cried a whole heap and told all the "adults" that she'd consensually had sex, and the condom had broken

she had an abortion, and I'm glad for it, but she was one of heaps who's statistic's wrongfully gone to non-rape related abortion.

I'm not saying it's the majority, I'm just saying it's alot. (Also, I live in Australia)


A woman does not have an abortion without good reason - at least where I'm from you have to go through counselling before you make the decision, no matter the situation... (and after).


This is a good point. If there where more strict laws governing abortion Sally D or “her friends” would realize a simple abortion is not going to saulve the problem. I can’t imagine holding in a secret like that. I also imagine for these blocks she wasn’t their first and since she has remained silent she won’t be their last.

In the US there are abortion clinics. They just turn people over hand over fist.

I don’t think the question here is to allow or disallow abortions. Regardless if you believe an unborn child is a member of the society or not; it is an entity that is in the process of becoming so. We have a procedure that uses force to disrupt the process. This effectively is removing a citizen from society. For this reason the society does have a say in how and when such a procedure may be implemented.

The real trouble with abortion law, from what I can see, is the legislation. There are enough people, in the US anyway, who believe abortion to be a powerful enough subject that it requires regulation. Our legislators have attempted implementing some law but have failed. Their failure was due to their inability to understand how to properly describe a medical situation. Partial birth abortion is not a medical term. Health exceptions were also not articulated in a way that could hold true and clear medically.

I guess for what I congressmen have in campaigning skills they lack in the area of hiring doctors to help them write law.
Valleyman
gonzo wrote:
Valleyman wrote:
gonzo you're pictures are irrelevant and disgusting.


Abortion is disgusting.

Irrelevant is now anything further you might say:




I'll go shake the dust from my shoes.


Wow, you sure showed me, that picture there really proves something. Namely, that you can't think of a relevant argument against me. If you could, you would have posted it. I love it when people try to ignore the people their debating and the points they make. Sure, it makes you feel superior, but to everyone else it just makes it look like you have no actual arguments.

As much as posts like this annoy me, I'd still like to thank you. You have both given me an oppurtunity to rant about this sort of thing, and something to laugh at.
TonkPilz
Is Abortion Moral? donno, justifyd cant awnser
but i dont feel it shuld be illegal either
to me a person is some one whit life experience and can under stand ther surroundings some ppl call this the soule i call it a person
but acording to ones belifes you shuld be obligatet to choose by your self if you whant to go tru whit an abortion or not

btw those gory Abortion pictures some have posted make them a url tag i just got flamed for somting simeler erlyer to day
its not that i find em disturbing but ther are ppl that have a natural fear of blood. its in are nature to dislike humen blood
blackheart
horseatingweeds wrote:
blackheart wrote:
psycosquirrel wrote:
If I remember the statistics correctly, in the United States, approximately 200 pregnancies are rape-related per year. Yet, OVER 1,370,000 abortions occur annually in the U.S. yearly. So let's do some math... UNDER 0.014% of abortions come from rape-pregnancies, ASSUMING ALL rape victims have an abortion.


And, of course assuming, that ALL rape victims report the crime... let alone admit that they're having a child because of it. MOST rape cases go unreported.

I had a friend (Sally D) who got involved with the wrong people, was forced to have sex with her "boyfriend" by two of his mates (as in quite literally, physically forced) - but couldn't bring herself to tell her mum all that

so just cried a whole heap and told all the "adults" that she'd consensually had sex, and the condom had broken

she had an abortion, and I'm glad for it, but she was one of heaps who's statistic's wrongfully gone to non-rape related abortion.

I'm not saying it's the majority, I'm just saying it's alot. (Also, I live in Australia)


A woman does not have an abortion without good reason - at least where I'm from you have to go through counselling before you make the decision, no matter the situation... (and after).


This is a good point. If there where more strict laws governing abortion Sally D or “her friends” would realize a simple abortion is not going to saulve the problem. I can’t imagine holding in a secret like that. I also imagine for these blocks she wasn’t their first and since she has remained silent she won’t be their last.

In the US there are abortion clinics. They just turn people over hand over fist.

I don’t think the question here is to allow or disallow abortions. Regardless if you believe an unborn child is a member of the society or not; it is an entity that is in the process of becoming so. We have a procedure that uses force to disrupt the process. This effectively is removing a citizen from society. For this reason the society does have a say in how and when such a procedure may be implemented.

The real trouble with abortion law, from what I can see, is the legislation. There are enough people, in the US anyway, who believe abortion to be a powerful enough subject that it requires regulation. Our legislators have attempted implementing some law but have failed. Their failure was due to their inability to understand how to properly describe a medical situation. Partial birth abortion is not a medical term. Health exceptions were also not articulated in a way that could hold true and clear medically.

I guess for what I congressmen have in campaigning skills they lack in the area of hiring doctors to help them write law.


Hell, I don't think she did the right thing. We all wanted her to go forward - but I'm not about to step forward and make a decision for someone.

They were slandered by "under-ground" means, through friends-of-friends, if you will. Under close watch.
We're still hoping she'll "come forward", but unfortunately I'd say it just needs time.
blackheart
And I don't know if anyone here seems to realise this, but there is actually a woman surrounding that foetus.
We're not just talking about the baby here.
heady233
It's not fair for babys that are born but the parents don't have enough money to keep them. How could people do that to babys, It's just cruel. We didn't have to go through that did we? No, we're sitting here typing these posts.
horseatingweeds
blackheart wrote:
And I don't know if anyone here seems to realise this, but there is actually a woman surrounding that foetus.
We're not just talking about the baby here.


Indeed!, often a very scared and confused woman who feels that an abortion is her only way out. I have personally witnessed this part of the abortion (and now thanks to Gonzo I have seen the actuals) and it is quite horrible. These woman (most of them anyway) are haunted for the rest of their lives.

I don’t see limiting abortion as trading the mother for the child. It is rather saving both.
Reaper
TonkPilz wrote:
btw those gory Abortion pictures some have posted make them a url tag i just got flamed for somting simeler erlyer to day
its not that i find em disturbing but ther are ppl that have a natural fear of blood. its in are nature to dislike humen blood

Your right they should show the URL of where they got those from but they wont because they know its from a fanatics site thats very VERY unreliable.
Also Valleyman thats a good point about gonzo he hardly ever directly argues his point of view, he would rather use photoshoped images that other people modified.
SkullPizza
Lennon wrote:
SkullPizza wrote:
There are recent findings that suggest that the reason for the sharp drop in crime in the U.S. in the 1990's was due to the fact that Roe vs. Wade was passed in the 1970's and that a large portion of criminals that would've been alive were killed off before they had a chance to cause havoc.


You can never ever tell how people will develop in life. It's cruel to say our life as scientists, criminals etc is predicted at birth. if my life was predicted I'd have no reason to experience it.


I don't care about what is cruel. I care about what is shown to be factually correct. The fact of the matter is that, on average, if you are born into a broken home or a family that doesn't want you or a drug addict of a mother - your chances of becoming a murderer later in life skyrocket.

of course this is a generality, it does not apply to everyone. but if we have to swat afew flies in order to protect society from itself i say - so be it.
Soulfire
I really don't see how the American legal system is in a place to decide when murder is okay and when it's not.

"Well, you can kill your next door neighbor IF...."
"Well, you can kill your son or daughter IF..."

I really do not support abortion at all, the senseless killing of innocent babies is sickening, but it is not my place to tell you what to do. If you feel proud enough (a deadly sin) to defy God, then do it, you're judged in the after life, and your reward/punishment extends far beyond what happens in this earth.
horseatingweeds
SkullPizza wrote:
Lennon wrote:
SkullPizza wrote:
There are recent findings that suggest that the reason for the sharp drop in crime in the U.S. in the 1990's was due to the fact that Roe vs. Wade was passed in the 1970's and that a large portion of criminals that would've been alive were killed off before they had a chance to cause havoc.


You can never ever tell how people will develop in life. It's cruel to say our life as scientists, criminals etc is predicted at birth. if my life was predicted I'd have no reason to experience it.


I don't care about what is cruel. I care about what is shown to factually correct. The fact of the matter is that on average if you are born into a broken home or a family that doesn't want you or a drug addict of a mother - your chances of becoming a murderer later in life skyrocket.

of course this is a generality, it does not apply to everyone. but if we have to swat aferw flies in order to protect society from itself i say - so be it.


If what you say is true, your case is also valid for euthanasia. This argument for the use of abortion is very poor.
SkullPizza
horseatingweeds wrote:
If what you say is true, your case is also valid for euthanasia. This argument for the use of abortion is very poor.


I guess you could assume something like that without knowing my other points about how a fetus is not a person because it doesn't think.

Euthanasia is where you are killing something with thoughts. Fetus's don't have thoughts.

They have never had to recieve or interpret sensory information. This is the precursor to all thought. They are therefore not human.

You may kill them with this understanding without the need to feel bad about it.

Edit: you should pay attention to your own sig at some point. I think you have some insight there.
horseatingweeds
SkullPizza wrote:
horseatingweeds wrote:
If what you say is true, your case is also valid for euthanasia. This argument for the use of abortion is very poor.


I guess you could assume something like that without knowing my other points about how a fetus is not a person because it doesn't think.

Euthanasia is where you are killing something with thoughts. Fetus's don't have thoughts.

They have never had to recieve of interpret sensory information. This is the precursor to all thought. They are therefore not human.

You may kill them with this understanding without the need to feel bad about it.

Edit: you should pay attention to your own sig at some point. I think you have some insight there.


It is irrelevant whether a fetus thinks or is otherwise considered alive of having rights. This is often a focus of those arguing against abortion regulation. The fact is that an abortion is a procedure that forcefully stops the process of an individual being added to the society.

Upon conception a member of the future society has been created. The abortion removes this eventual citizen from society. For this reason the society has the right to regulate the procedure.
olafsson
It´s just anti-feminine to say that abortion is a nono. Who are you to decide the future of a woman?
Is it better to ruin a life of a woman to save a few weeks old baby. Death is all around, and somehow I just don´t find the life of a fetus to be so precious (to someone who doesn´t/can´t want it).

I grew up on a farm and animals die all the time. Calves, lamb, foles, kittens. Of course it hurts but what can you do. Shit happens. It´s life.

It´s a free world (at least for those who are at this forum) so everyone can just decide for his/her own.
The government should not decide such things for you. It´s just not their call.
olafsson
It´s just anti-feminine to say that abortion is a nono. Who are you to decide the future of a woman?
Is it better to ruin a life of a woman to save a few weeks old baby. Death is all around, and somehow I just don´t find the life of a fetus to be so precious (to someone who doesn´t/can´t want it).

I grew up on a farm and animals die all the time. Calves, lamb, foles, kittens. Of course it hurts but what can you do. Shit happens. It´s life.

It´s a free world (at least for those who are at this forum) so everyone can just decide for his/her own.
The government should not decide such things for you. It´s just not their call.
horseatingweeds
olafsson wrote:
It´s just anti-feminine to say that abortion is a nono. Who are you to decide the future of a woman?
Is it better to ruin a life of a woman to save a few weeks old baby. Death is all around, and somehow I just don´t find the life of a fetus to be so precious (to someone who doesn´t/can´t want it).


Regulating or disallowing abortion is absolutely not anti-feminine. Anti-feminine would be only aborting female fetuses or requiring women to have sex. Who am I to decide? I am the society to which the unborn child will be added, unless though force of abortion or tragedy it is not. It is better not to ruin either life. Life also is all around us.

Quote:
It´s a free world (at least for those who are at this forum) so everyone can just decide for his/her own.
The government should not decide such things for you. It´s just not their call.


The decision is before the sex is had. And it is the government's decision. That’s why we hired them, to govern.
SkullPizza
horseatingweeds wrote:
It is irrelevant whether a fetus thinks or is otherwise considered alive of having rights. This is often a focus of those arguing against abortion regulation. The fact is that an abortion is a procedure that forcefully stops the process of an individual being added to the society.

Upon conception a member of the future society has been created. The abortion removes this eventual citizen from society. For this reason the society has the right to regulate the procedure.


You and I just draw the line as to where something is considered a human being.

In my view something is not human until it starts using it's brain to interpret sensory information. It's just a lump of human tissue. Once it begins to recieve sensory information and use it I will consider it human. I guess that's where I'll draw my line.
Rising
I wish my girlfriend hadn't aborted our child.But she did.I hate her.
horseatingweeds
SkullPizza wrote:


You and I just draw the line as to where something is considered a human being.


I think the difference is more that you are drawing a line.

Quote:
In my view something is not human until it starts using it's brain to interpret sensory information.


I think what you mean here is "In my view a humans are not deserving of human rights until they start using their brain to interpret sensory information."

Quote:
It's just a lump of human tissue. Once it begins to recieve sensory information and use it I will consider it human. I guess that's where I'll draw my line.


This is not the case. After the egg becomes fertilized, I think they call this a zygote, it becomes a thing that, baring destruction and in its natural state, becomes human. No other thing becomes human and human is the only thing this becomes. So in actuality this "thing" IS human.
a.Bird
horseatingweeds wrote:
I think the difference is more that you are drawing a line.

And you are planning on solving matters with as much ambiguity as possible? Is this how you win debates? Lines are drawn to create structure and reasoning, so both parties can have some field of agreement. Don't stray.

horseatingweeds wrote:
Quote:
In my view something is not human until it starts using it's brain to interpret sensory information.
I think what you mean here is "In my view a humans are not deserving of human rights until they start using their brain to interpret sensory information."

I think he knows exactly what he means and you just completely twisted his words. Knock it off.

horseeatingweeds wrote:
Quote:
It's just a lump of human tissue. Once it begins to recieve sensory information and use it I will consider it human. I guess that's where I'll draw my line.
This is not the case. After the egg becomes fertilized, I think they call this a zygote, it becomes a thing that, baring destruction and in its natural state, becomes human. No other thing becomes human and human is the only thing this becomes. So in actuality this "thing" IS human.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zygote:
A zygote (Greek: ζυγωτόν) is a cell that is the result of fertilization. That is, two haploid cells—usually (but not always) an ovum from a female and a sperm cell from a male—merge into a single diploid cell called the zygote (or zygocyte).

What you are referring to is even LESS human than a lump of tissue! Where do you get your information? If you consider a zygote human, the same reasoning can be used to call a sperm cell human, and I'm pretty sure I kill about a million humans everytime I let a load loose in a tube sock.
SkullPizza
horseatingweeds wrote:
This is not the case. After the egg becomes fertilized, I think they call this a zygote, it becomes a thing that, baring destruction and in its natural state, becomes human. No other thing becomes human and human is the only thing this becomes. So in actuality this "thing" IS human.


You can argue your semantics as fact as much as you want. A fetus has to be physically attached to a uterine wall and recieving nutrients through it's belly. I don't know of any humans that need that sort of sustainment in order to grow and survive. So no, I don't think it's a human.


And truth be told I don't really care if, baring destruction, it would become human. I only value life if it thinks and has feelings, which I don't believe that a fetus has.
horseatingweeds
SkullPizza wrote:
horseatingweeds wrote:
This is not the case. After the egg becomes fertilized, I think they call this a zygote, it becomes a thing that, baring destruction and in its natural state, becomes human. No other thing becomes human and human is the only thing this becomes. So in actuality this "thing" IS human.


You can argue your semantics this is not semantics but actuality as fact as much as you want. A fetus has to be physically attached to a uterine wall and recieving nutrients through it's belly. I don't know of any humans that need that sort of sustainment in order to grow and survive. So no, I don't think it's a human.


And truth be told I don't really care if, baring destruction, it would become human. I only value life if it thinks and has feelings, which I don't believe that a fetus has.


So if a human is dependant upon another and or is not conscious, it is not human?

Additionally, your argument for a fetus needing nutrients and such is invalid as so does an infant.

If you really don't care about something then why would you spend time discussing it? If you truly don't care then say so, I enjoy intelligent discussion, but I don't enjoy arguing with a wall.
SkullPizza
horseatingweeds wrote:
So if a human is dependant upon another and or is not conscious, it is not human?

Additionally, your argument for a fetus needing nutrients and such is invalid as so does an infant.

If you really don't care about something then why would you spend time discussing it? If you truly don't care then say so, I enjoy intelligent discussion, but I don't enjoy arguing with a wall.


It's not a human being. It has the potential of becoming a human. A infant isn't physically attached to a person, a fetus is. A fetus can be considered part of a woman. This is not the case for a infant.

And no you weren't arguing with a wall. An unconscious human adult has a developed brain and connections socially with people around him/her - fetus does not.

These opinions are my own and I find them to be true. Infact this debate does bother me because it's just another reason why the United States(my place of birth) is inevitably going to fall behind in the areas of medical science because our president refuses stem cell research to a large degree. This is foolish, our country has long been one of the greatest places for medical care in the world for many procedures. When other countries develop stem cell therapies that will no longer be the case.
rocky
like i said in the other thread i'm pro-abortion - it must be the parents choice (mostly the mother's)

btw in the religion quest for power and imposing the "right God" and the "right path to live" claimed and will claim more lives then abortions (if you can call a fetus that is no more than a leech a "living human")
anyone remember the medieval crusades? teh spanish inquisition? the fundamentalist's "holy war"?
Karo
My position is definitely: NO.
For me it is killing… and the argument of being unwanted is simply not enough to convince me!!! Do you go around murdering people you just don’t want??? Those people are called criminals in most societies, even those considered to be primitive – and actually, THEY are the kind of people society doesn’t want! Who is going to decide who qualifies as “wanted” or “unwanted”? I know there are some circumstances where there is no other option, just as the case of amputating a body part… But I think that if it is just a question of a “miscalculation” ...parents should face the consequences of their acts, just as anyone has to face the problems arisen by any other kind of mistake! It is absolutely unfair for that little innocent being trying to come to this world (whatever your opinion on it is). Ever wondered if you were really planned by your parents??? People should face the problem and find a solution, just as they do in other situations...
Being a woman, and having had a child – in my thirties by the way – makes me a qualified speaker. I did not lead the life of a saint or a nun before having her… I simply took precautions not to get pregnant, that was all. I got pregnant when I wanted to and in spite of being single in a quite “traditional catholic society” (the “first comes love, second comes marriage and third comes the baby in the golden carriage” kind…).
I’m not a catholic, I simply reject the lack of consistency… If abortion is wrong then why accept it for raped nuns??? That’s incongruent on their part…
But of course, I am simply stating my opinion… No way I would impose my principles on others; the bottomline is that I did what I wanted to in spite of what other people thought – the only thing here is that I stuck to my own principles… That is what really matters in the end: being congruent.
Lennon
JUST HOLD ON A MINUTE

This topic has enough definitions of what life is, enough statistsics etc to consider for yourself what the truth is.

At this stage all we are doing is adding opinions to the former, which goes on forever, so I think it's time in this topic to ignore adding opinions and instead keep adding any facts that haven't been mentioned yet. If there's nothing valuable left to add to the discussion it's nearly time to close this topic. Just facts or vote your opinion, discussion of your opinion could go on forever.
horseatingweeds
I have been giving this issue some thought. The argument as to whether or not a fetus or embryo (I will use “unborn” to describe all stages) is human is often part of the discussion of whether or not to allow abortion.

The argument that an unborn is not human is invalid. Nothing but an unborn becomes human and the unborn will become nothing else so what else is it? It is more that a piece of human tissue. No part of my body or anyone else’s can become another human except for this very special cell.

The argument that Skull pizza has presented, that the unborn are less than human lacking the ability to think, is valid. The unborn are in a much less conscious state than a born human.

I think that these arguments are avoiding the actuality. The actuality of an abortion is that it destroys the unborn. Every member of our society was a member of this group and every addition to our society will be a member of this group. So the actuality of abortion is that it is affecting who makes up our society. With this fact abortion can not = Yes. The unborn is more than a piece of a woman’s body in fact it is a piece of our society.

Abortion can not = No either. Abortions, in some cases can be effective in preventing harm to the mother if complications arise.

The main facts are that many members of the society disagree with abortion, abortion affects the society directly, and there are alternatives with regard to preventing pregnancy. The only logical conclusion I can draw is that the society must regulate this procedure.

Other discussions I have had have convinced me that the reason that we currently do not have reasonable regulations on abortion is the fact that our legislature has attempted passing laws without medical exceptions written in medical terms. Partial birth abortion for example is not a medical term and does not “medically” describe and abortion procedure.

Another suspicion I have is that those in power realize that restricting abortion could cause an increase in persons requiring welfare aid. This suspicion is weakened by the fact that those such people are also aware of the huge number of retiring baby boomers in our future that these unborns will be able to assist as well as the fact that individuals that would have an abortion out of convenience would be forced to accept accountability for there actions and make their actions more responsible.
Reaper
Soulfire wrote:
I really don't see how the American legal system is in a place to decide when murder is okay and when it's not.

"Well, you can kill your next door neighbor IF...."
"Well, you can kill your son or daughter IF..."

You can kill your neighbor in self defense if he attacks you and you have no other choice, same holds true with the kid thing. So the legal system has allready decided such things before, how is this any different?? espesially if the baby its self is going to kill you during birth, or maby the kid has some horrible disease and he will drop dead about a year after he or she is born, which would be more humane then? let the kid suffer for a year? or end the kids suffering before he's even human, before he can think or feel pain.
Soulfire
I'm pretty sure it can feel pain, and I said it really wasn't the justice system's place to determine when murder is okay and when it isn't, I know they've done it before. I was just giving an example with the IF thing...
SkullPizza
horseatingweeds wrote:
No part of my body or anyone else’s can become another human except for this very special cell.


You arguement is not without merit. Althought I will point out that this particular point is not entirely true.

You can take a stem cell from a cow fetus and take a sample of you dead skin - extract DNA from this tissue and implant it within the bovine stem cell and theoretically create a human embryo.

So part of what is in all your cells (minus red blood cells because they have no nucleus) has the potential to create a new human being. Where do you draw the line of that potential is another question.
horseatingweeds
SkullPizza wrote:
horseatingweeds wrote:
No part of my body or anyone else’s can become another human except for this very special cell.


You arguement is not without merit. Althought I will point out that this particular point is not entirely true.

You can take a stem cell from a cow fetus and take a sample of you dead skin - extract DNA from this tissue and implant it within the bovine stem cell and theoretically create a human embryo.

So part of what is in all your cells (minus red blood cells because they have no nucleus) has the potential to create a new human being. Where do you draw the line of that potential is another question.


Certainly, and in such amazing event, the society that has supported such technology will be responsible for the human that it has created. I just wish our logic would keep up with our technology. Technology is so fun and easy while logic carries to much accountability and morality.
Pikokola
HELLL NO....

I'm 1001% against Abortion,
It's immoral no matter what do you say, eventhough it's come when you're rapped, it's still your child, aborting will makes you the most immoral people I think, It's same as killing your own child.

In other hand, Aborting can cause a cancer in the womb..
horseatingweeds
Pikokola wrote:
HELLL NO....

I'm 1001% against Abortion,
It's immoral no matter what do you say, eventhough it's come when you're rapped, it's still your child, aborting will makes you the most immoral people I think, It's same as killing your own child.

In other hand, Aborting can cause a cancer in the womb..


Agreed, however with regard to our society exceptions must be made to maintain acceptable law. I do not think it is right to kill a woman to bare her baby, although my wife would certainly die 100,000,000 times to bring use a child even if it meant her death. She is an exception. More of a man than me certainly!!

Regulation of this procedure I think it the key, important for more than simply abortion. Our technology is bringing use further moral questions for which a presidency must be set.
Vrythramax
As to it's morality, I'd like to be able to say that it up the individules beliefs, but since I am Catholic that isn't an option.

I don't like the thought of bringing an unwanted child into the world, but as I see it if you don't want the child you have 2 options available to you:

1.) Abstain from sex.

2.) Place the child up for adoption, there are many couple out there that are unable to have a child of thier own.

There are many young users here that wouldn't be around if thier parents had opted for that course of action.

Speaking stricly as a father, not on my own personal religious beliefs, it's just wrong. If my wife and I had chose abortion instead of having my daughter we would have missed something beatiful.

I'll get off my soapbox now.
Reaper
Pikokola wrote:
HELLL NO....

I'm 1001% against Abortion,
It's immoral no matter what do you say, eventhough it's come when you're rapped, it's still your child, aborting will makes you the most immoral people I think, It's same as killing your own child.

In other hand, Aborting can cause a cancer in the womb..

What doesn't cause cancer today?? and if they did get cancer chances are they had inherited it, or more then likely the cancer was allready there, it just got all the nuetriants the embryo would have gotten.
because cancer is just the uncontrolled division of cells in the body.
Shawnie
I have had the unfortunate experience of an unplanned pregnancy on a couple of occasions. On both occasions I have left the final decision with my partner/s as they would be the one that would have to carry the child.
SkullPizza
Meh people aren't expressing points but simply points of view.

To simply say NO i don't agree with abortion just because isn't getting anyone anywhere. This is a poll this is a discussion. Now make a valid point or move along.

Besides, I don't believe in morals. I believe in empathy. Empathy allows for more flexibility in a given situation. Morals/Ethics do not and are therefore not correct to every situation they may be applied to.
Lennon
Morals Versus Empathy

Morals are right and wrong.
Empathy is really going along with feelings

If I feel like hitting someone, I will
If I think it's wrong to hit someone, I wont.

Now proabortionists and prochoice are missing the basic morality here.
SkullPizza
Lennon wrote:
Morals Versus Empathy

Morals are right and wrong.
Empathy is really going along with feelings

If I feel like hitting someone, I will
If I think it's wrong to hit someone, I wont.

Now proabortionists and prochoice are missing the basic morality here.


Incorrect, empathy is being able to understand another persons emotional point of view and sympathising with it. Something that only goes by it's emotions is not necissarily empathetic.

If you understand another emotional point of view and treat it as if it were your own you are more inclined to do something that makes you and the other happy.

As a human, when you look at someone else frowning it makes you yourself sad to some degree. This depends on how empathetic you are. This is because you are a social creature and as a social creature - who found that your own survival was helped by working together with others like you - you find fruitful to help others because quite often it means that you will get help from others when you are in need.,

It's like we all made an evolutionary pact with eachother in our genes.
NoRemorseMusic
if some people are not allowed to have an abortion they may end of taking the lives of 2 rather than just one. (suicide with a baby inside)
Jeslyn
If someone really does not want to undergo pregnancy or want a child for whatever reason, no law will stop them. They will find a way to get what they want done.
thiamshui
i'm positive about abortion.. if a couple isn't willing to take care of a baby, they should abort it else they will not put in their heart and soul in taking care of him/her when he/she is born.. reduces much pain on the baby's and the parents' side.. however, it is immoral too though as the couple should not have done 'it' at first when they are not mentally prepared for a baby..

however, abortion does shorten the pain and although it is immoral, i feel that it will be beneficial in the long term..
rightclickscott
This is a very delicate topic, and I understand both sides, but being a filthy, heartless, babykilling liberal, I do have accouple things to say.

Abortion is like masturbation, it's wrong and should definetly be done in privacy. The only real, and this is a big difference, that people dont take pleasure in it. It's not like women go out, have unprotected sex, get pregnent, then get an abortion just for sick pleasure. It's a very touchy issue, but just like the gay marriage and the teaching of evolution in school, I think it's a big waste of time to argue about. 1: Noone can ever win when it comes to arguing about abortion. 2: There are much more pressing matters in the world to worry about, such as our economy. America's economy has always been the worst in the world, but lately, it's been at an all time low. Is it because we were attacked? I don't know. Is it because Bush ran all three of the oil companies he was president of into the ground? Don't ask me. I don't want this to become and anti-Bush thread simply because in some respects I feel sorry for the guy. He got taken advantage of by Karl Rove, and was at the wrong place at the wrong time. Then, Rove and his administration started telling him to do things that will relate to the majority of America, God loving red staters... Wait wait wait... What were we talking about again? Oh yeah, a women's body is her own business. Unless she's under aged, intoxicated, or for other various reasons, does not have the capibility to comprihend her situation. That's my stance...
Hobbad
Morals are all in perspective and it's an irrational to try to force yours onto others.

It's the person's choice wether or not to abort.

Leave it be, if you don't believe in it, that's fine, then DON'T HAVE ONE.

It's ridiculous, it's like saying, "Well, since you don't believe my religon, I'm going to restrict your rights and say you can't practice, EVER."

You have to be BORN to get a BIRTH certificate, in order to recieve citizenship. So, technically, the baby does not have rites, yet, according to our country's set rules.

O.O leave it be, it's like restricting gay marriage.

Let them live their life the way they want. If you don't like it try to get it as a law, until then. Stop badgering these women who, you know nothing about, for getting an abortion. It's their own choice, you don't know what their story is, who they are, or where they grew up.
SkullPizza
rightclickscott wrote:
Abortion is like masturbation, it's wrong and should definetly be done in privacy. The only real, and this is a big difference, that people dont take pleasure in it. It's not like women go out, have unprotected sex, get pregnent, then get an abortion just for sick pleasure. It's a very touchy issue, but just like the gay marriage and the teaching of evolution in school, I think it's a big waste of time to argue about.


First of all there is absolutely nothing wrong with masterbation.

And second there is no conflict in scientific circles about evolution at all. All that has happened is that a few crazy scientists are running a public campain to get their views heard because they cannot prove them scientifically. if they can't prove them scientifically it should not be in sceince class.
rightclickscott
And this somehow makes "Intelligent Design" right? Let me ask you something, do you remember in all of your math classes all of those things called "theories?" They cannot be proven, so, why do we teach them? And can intelligent design be proven? No. If anything, Darwin's theory of evolution makes alot more sense than intelligent design. So, what many schools have decided to do is to teach both of the theories, and I am totally fine with that, as long as it as clarified that they are just theories. I believe that nothing should be left out of school, that's why I've gone to seperate high schools and preached Flying Spagetti Monsterism. They say that there should be no child left behind, but they don't seem to be as rational to ideas. That's my stance...

*Edit: Oh, I only used the masturbation analogy because it was funny.
Jack_Hammer
rightclickscott wrote:
And this somehow makes "Intelligent Design" right? Let me ask you something, do you remember in all of your math classes all of those things called "theories?" They cannot be proven, so, why do we teach them? And can intelligent design be proven? No. If anything, Darwin's theory of evolution makes alot more sense than intelligent design. So, what many schools have decided to do is to teach both of the theories, and I am totally fine with that, as long as it as clarified that they are just theories.


Ditto, but not everything can be taught, you learn the most important things or seemed most relivant at the time, I think nis the best method though I don't think that you should have exams in school.
JessieF
KRONIC wrote:
i dont know what all this talk about abortion is all about. this view about abortion should be understood by now as being illegal and immoral!!


Why should it be understood by now that abortion is illegal and immoral when not everyone will agree on the same thing? People have different opinions and different views on life, and how things are.
rightclickscott
Jack_Hammer wrote:
Ditto, but not everything can be taught, you learn the most important things or seemed most relivant at the time, I think nis the best method though I don't think that you should have exams in school.


Well, of course you can't just say "Hey! Here is all of this information! NOW HERE IS YOUR EXAM!!!" The thing is, I believe that they should still be tested on, but not solely test. No tests completly on Darwinism, but actually, what should be done is have questions on each exam about the ideas and debates behind each issue, so that everything distributes equally.
rightclickscott
I forgot what this topic was really about for awhile, so here alittle thing you should contemplate. Abortion is only illegal because America makes is illegal. When you look at every other country in the world, you see that they haven't exactly resolved all of the problems that America has, but they've thrown them aside, realizing that arguing about these kinds of topics cannot make any good come. In the UK, abortion is legalized. Why? Because of how the world will look in the long run. Doing nothing but trying to please a country is not an easy thing, and because of how diverse America is (aside from the deep south), it's not easy to please everyone. But if we disregard it, then we can focus on more important matters, and I've said it before, like the economy, so that America can prosper even more, and become an even better country than it already is. America is the greatest and the worst country in the world, it just depends on what angle you look at it from.
Jack_Hammer
I don't really care what peoples views are as long as they can back it up and can accept critisism.
Ultima1080
Ugh, I'm sick of everyone bringing this shit up saying ABORTION IS WRONG!!!!11111one. Guess what? Not everyone shares your opinion. No one person/government can define what is morally wrong. Sure they can say what is illegal, but they can't say what is morally wrong. You don't believe in abortion? Okay, we get it, but we don't want to hear you're constant bitching. By trying to convert people to your opinion, you are actually simply strengthning their opinions...so you are fighting a losing battle.
idrather_not
I could understand if a women was rapped or was to young to conceive a child, but in most cases today, women are getting abortions because they feel as if though it will interfear with there lifestyle. Well thats bull crap. Women who are prostitues get abortions because it would mean that they wouldn't be able to do there job. Some women are getting abortions because they feel that they could not raise or give it the best lifestyle, well who cares, because the fact of the matter is that you should put your child up for Adoption NOT Abortion. If you feel that you are an unfit mother, than let someone who can raise it be its mother. God put that child here one earth and now your not even going to give it a chance to fight back, instead your just gonna kill it. Americans are always talking about how it was such a tragidey on 9:11 (and don't get me wrong, it was), but the fact of the matter is that ther are more deaths all around the world that are abotions, and some people just over look it. So i say "if your for abotions than you should be for the death of all humans".
rightclickscott
It's not really as simple as that. I would put up a nice bullet point, but I have alot of points I need to get across here...

Ultima1080 wrote:
Ugh, I'm sick of everyone bringing this **** up saying ABORTION IS WRONG!!!!11111one. Guess what? Not everyone shares your opinion. No one person/government can define what is morally wrong. Sure they can say what is illegal, but they can't say what is morally wrong. You don't believe in abortion? Okay, we get it, but we don't want to hear you're constant bitching. By trying to convert people to your opinion, you are actually simply strengthning their opinions...so you are fighting a losing battle.


Although I do agree with you in some respects, you're trying to get your own point across that noon cares about. You have to understand that America is a land built on freedom, and although I do like your ability to express yourself, you have to understand that not everyone will share your opinion and want to debate about this. I've been in plenty of debates, and the best ones are where people are civil, and can end in a nice hand shake aside from people being bloody on the floor (that's happened to me soo many times). So please, let's try to keep this topic civil. It's a delicate issue, so there are bound to be alot of opinions, so if your someone who wants to jump on a bandwagon and agree with what everyone else says without an original point of your own, just please dont post. If you just want to say your stance, go ahead, nobody's stopping you. I know not everyone here agrees with my opinions, I just put them up so people can see the other side of the argument, and to get their mind working on a very hot political topic right now.

idrather_not wrote:
Women who are prostitues get abortions because it would mean that they wouldn't be able to do there job.


If a prostitute gets preagent, then she gets killed. You have to understand that, as bad as it sounds, hookers are meant to have no life of their own if they are owned by a pimp. If they are solo, then they are most likely doing it to support a child. They can't make money if they are not sexy enough. Unless someone has a preagnent fetish. Still, prostitutes don't want to be prostitutes.

Sorry, I'll continue this later....
Hobbad
idrather_not wrote:
well who cares, because the fact of the matter is that you should put your child up for Adoption NOT Abortion. If you feel that you are an unfit mother, than let someone who can raise it be its mother. God put that child here one earth and now your not even going to give it a chance to fight back, instead your just gonna kill it. Americans are always talking about how it was such a tragidey on 9:11 (and don't get me wrong, it was), but the fact of the matter is that ther are more deaths all around the world that are abotions, and some people just over look it. So i say "if your for abotions than you should be for the death of all humans".


1.) Alright if you don't believe in this, then don't have one.

2.) What if someone where to say that they do believe in the "death of all humans".

3.) Since you mentioned God, what if they don't believe in what you do. Or don't believe in god at all. People have diffrent views in their life and perhaps THEY believe that they'd much rather not have a child than do have one. Go through months of pain, and then give up the child because they have to and are forced to. Then have to worry about the child growing up and wondering if they will have the thoughts of "Why did she abandon me?" "She must hate me" Sure, let's give these women all this stress just because, this is what you believe as wrong and they don't.
While your at it, why don't we force everyone to be christan and any one who has a child out of wedlock should be thrown in jail!

4.) This has NOTHING to do with 9:11, stop hiding behind it. There are more people killed around the world in more tragic events than 9:11. I'm tired of people using it as a damned counter point, people died and all you're doing is forgetting the individuals and labeling them all with 9/11!!!!!!!!
rightclickscott
It's also spelled tragedy.

Anyways, the "adoption, not abortion" idea is a fairly good idea, but you have to look at it from a scientific standpoint. This may seem heartless, but, if the child is still alive, then the mother may still have an emotional attachment to it, causing alot of mental damage. Also, the stem cells from aborted fetises help cure uncureable diseases such as Cancer or Sickle Cell Anemia. Stem cells can be turned into any kind of cell, which can replace cancerous cells, or even be used to replace white blood cells for people diagnosed with Luekopenia. They're a real Panacea. So, once again, as wrong as it may sound, abortion really will help not only America, but the entire world in the long run. But these are my ideas. I'm not trying to force my beliefs on anyone, that why after every big opinion post I put, I say: That's my stance...
Related topics
[RESOLVED] Videos?
UK scientists clone human embryo
can a virus cause unrecoverable damage to HD?
frontpage?
Soccer..!!
The downfall of american society
Who knows Knight online passwords
An interesting test...
How to become a millionaire on the internet?
How many time this free space work??
Do You Have A Laptop ?
Changing default cpanel theme to bluelagoon?
forcibly euthanize the elderly: yes or no
Abortion
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> General -> General Chat

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.