6
   

Abortion. Right or Murder?

 
 
Reply Wed 18 May, 2016 10:24 pm
People keep telling me that abortions are ok, but how can you justify killing a child?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Question • Score: 6 • Views: 6,035 • Replies: 85

 
edgarblythe
 
  7  
Reply Wed 18 May, 2016 10:44 pm
When the fetus is old enough to be a fully formed person, it would be justifiable to call it murder. When it is young enough to still be forming, it is not yet a person. Otherwise, we have to decide where the incomplete person being killed is murder. Back to sperm and egg, or what?

Very few persons "like" abortion, but they will always happen, in unsafe conditions with no doctor, or in clean clinics with doctors. Why not let a woman and her physician decide and lets butt out?
lmac2017
 
  0  
Reply Wed 18 May, 2016 10:58 pm
@edgarblythe,
So then to clarify, it is murder when the child is a fully formed person and up until then it's just tissue?
0 Replies
 
lmac2017
 
  0  
Reply Wed 18 May, 2016 11:12 pm
@edgarblythe,
What justification says that just because a baby isn't fully formed, it has no human value?
edgarblythe
 
  10  
Reply Wed 18 May, 2016 11:24 pm
@lmac2017,
I tell you it is an issue between doctor and woman and the law. Not your business at all.
lmac2017
 
  0  
Reply Wed 18 May, 2016 11:26 pm
@edgarblythe,
So the mother has the right to decide whether her child lives or dies?
roger
 
  9  
Reply Wed 18 May, 2016 11:30 pm
@lmac2017,
Yes, and you do not have the right to require a woman be a human incubator.

Edit: you said "child". It isn't.
lmac2017
 
  0  
Reply Wed 18 May, 2016 11:38 pm
@roger,
Isn't that all arbitrary though? It's ok because one second the child is not a human but if we do it 15 minute later than the child is?
fresco
 
  3  
Reply Wed 18 May, 2016 11:54 pm
@lmac2017,
Question: Are you a vegetarian ?
If not, you are agreeing with the killing of lifeforms with 'consciousness' less then that of 'a human person'. The morality of 'abortion=murder' is a half baked religious notion based on a chauvinistic concept of 'humans as a special case'.
All 'morality' ultimately tends to equate to 'social expediency' as evidenced by its variance in times of 'war'. Moral decisions are made with an eye on being able to 'live with oneself' - that self being a product of parochial socialization and shifting contexts.


Ragman
 
  4  
Reply Thu 19 May, 2016 01:10 am
@lmac2017,
No one 'likes' abortion. Just as the term pro-life is misguided distortion and a misnomer. Both sides of the debate are pro-life.

Because what the definition of 'child' is where you err. What is in the womb is a fetus until a certain point in the development (near the end of second trimester).

If you are talking about USA, understand that there's a legal distinction when and if the contents of the womb are/were removed and it can sustain life on its own ... is the legal definition of what ends the status as a fetus.

Perhaps your interest is to ignore legal matters and only discuss the religious portion of this debate. I can't help you there. You may continue to believe and follow what your religion tells you. Calling the end of a pregnancy the act of murder is more often than not an inflammatory attempt and a tactic of religious anti-abortionists .
izzythepush
 
  7  
Reply Thu 19 May, 2016 01:30 am
@lmac2017,
Going by that logic masturbation is murder.


You have no right to tell anyone else what to do with their body.
FOUND SOUL
 
  2  
Reply Thu 19 May, 2016 02:11 am
@izzythepush,
Sorry that it kills you to do it mate Wink
izzythepush
 
  3  
Reply Thu 19 May, 2016 02:44 am
@FOUND SOUL,
Only on public transport.
0 Replies
 
lmac2017
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 19 May, 2016 08:56 am
@fresco,
With that logic, you must be a member of PETA. A human life is potential. It's not just a body, it's a a soul. How is it that if someone went into a panda and killed it's young, the entire western world would be outraged, yet we do the same on a daily basis with humans who are infinitely more valuable. Humans should be more important to us if only because we're human. Animals don't give us that benefit so why should we give it to them?
lmac2017
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 19 May, 2016 08:57 am
@Ragman,
Shouldn't the law and morality be connected? We can't separate them and retain order can we?
lmac2017
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 19 May, 2016 08:58 am
@izzythepush,
You only have 1 piece of the puzzle there dude. Life starts at conception.
lmac2017
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 19 May, 2016 08:59 am
@izzythepush,
And by that logic we cannot tell a man he can't do drugs, we can't tell a woman she can't be a prostitute, we can't say that it is wrong to lie, we can't make any claim about morality because a person has the right to do what they want with their body.
Linkat
 
  4  
Reply Thu 19 May, 2016 09:56 am
@lmac2017,
Reasonable people do not support killing a child.

The controversy is whether you believe a fetus is a child or not. If one believes a fetus is not a child, but the potential to become a child - it is not killing a child. If you believe a fetus is a child then obviously abortion would be wrong.

izzythepush
 
  6  
Reply Thu 19 May, 2016 10:03 am
@lmac2017,
Yes they do. People make their own decisions in life, just like you chose to be what you are. What gets me about you godsquad is that you go on and on about the rights of the unborn child without giving a monkeys about the welfare of the born child.

What's the real scandal is the children dying of starvation and preventable diseases, not a few cells being terminated.

Quote:
One child dies every 20 seconds from a disease preventable by vaccine.


http://www.unicef.org/immunization/index_bigpicture.html

Your false morality is all about telling other people what to do, it has absolutely nothing to do with the welfare of women and children.
Debra Law
 
  4  
Reply Thu 19 May, 2016 10:39 am
@lmac2017,
lmac2017 wrote:

People keep telling me that abortions are ok, but how can you justify killing a child?


Your question reflects your own misunderstanding of our form of government.

Our nation is a constitutional republic, not a pure democracy. In other words, you may not use (or abuse) the power of the state to impose your morals on everyone else in society.

If you experience an unwanted pregnancy, then you ... as an individual ... have the right to determine for yourself whether you will end or continue that pregnancy. In making that decision, you may consider your own sense of morality. If you believe terminating the pregnancy is immoral, then that belief will be an important consideration when you determine your own course of conduct. You don't have the right, however, to impose your sense of morality on your fellow citizens.

Years ago in a "60 Minutes" interview, Justice Scalia said the following:

Quote:
"What is the connection between your Catholicism, your Jesuit education, and your judicial philosophy?" Stahl asks.

"It has nothing to do with how I decide cases," Scalia replies. "My job is to interpret the Constitution accurately. And indeed, there are anti-abortion people who think that the constitution requires a state to prohibit abortion. They say that the Equal Protection Clause requires that you treat a helpless human being that's still in the womb the way you treat other human beings. I think that's wrong. I think when the Constitution says that persons are entitled to equal protection of the laws, I think it clearly means walking-around persons,"


http://www.cbsnews.com/news/justice-scalia-on-the-record/2/

Thus, the decision whether to terminate a pregnancy or carry it to term belongs to the pregnant individual. Only when the fetus is viable, i.e., capable of surviving outside the womb, then the State has a legitimate interest in preserving that life.

If the law was otherwise ... if the state had the power over procreation ... then the state would have the power to prohibit abortions or require abortions depending on the legitimate interests of the state. It would be a power pendulum that swings both ways. Thus, like China, a state could have a legitimate concern for over-population and institute a one-child only law.

But, the state does not have that power.


 

Related Topics

Is the fetus in the womb a human being? - Question by kellirosej
Abortion - Discussion by Finn dAbuzz
Higher Learning? - Discussion by coldjoint
Motivation of Abortion Protesters - Question by gollum
People Wonder Why . . . - Question by plainoldme
God Damnit, Texas. - Discussion by DrewDad
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Abortion. Right or Murder?
Copyright © 2017 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/19/2017 at 07:17:01