Abortion.What do you think about it?

Eorl wrote:

All such definitions are arbitrary, and the current right to life in the USA is granted at birth...but it varies around the world of course.

Personally, I'd like to minimise abortions as much as possible, and keep as many as possible in the first tri-mester. But I definately wouldn't attempt to do that by making it illegal. I can't condone slavery for any reason.

But apparently you can condone killing.

0 Replies

Apparently. (I'm not even a vegetarian)

But so do you. You still support the death penalty.

0 Replies

Eorl wrote:

Apparently. (I'm not even a vegetarian)

But so do you. You still support the death penalty.

Yep, I do.

As we've previously discussed:

There's a big difference between a guilty party convicted of a heinous crime and given due process in the courts, plus appeals before execution.............

................and killing an innocent who is not charged nor convicted of any crime large or small, has no due process and no appeal, in fact no legal standing in the court whatsoever.

Do you not see the difference?

Yet you want to call it 'slavery' when one is required to abstain from killing an innocent party. What a ludicrous misuse of terms.

Are you 'enslaved' when you drive your car and are not allowed to run over pedestrians?

The semantic games that the pro-abortion side plays are simply pathetic. It's apparently all you've got.

You cite no medical evidence or support for your contention that the unborn is not a living human being.

In fact, so twisted is your view of life that you won't even admit that a child once it is born is a living human being, Eorl.

Are you also in favor of killing the disabled, the aged or any other 'undesirable' group in society for their 'crime' of existence?

0 Replies

real life wrote:

Eorl wrote:
Apparently. (I'm not even a vegetarian)

But so do you. You still support the death penalty.

Yep, I do.

Do you not see the difference?

Sure I do. Is all human life sacred or not? Only "innocents" ? You have a problem with "Thou shalt not kill"?

real life wrote:

[

Yet you want to call it 'slavery' when one is required to abstain from killing an innocent party. What a ludicrous misuse of terms.

Are you 'enslaved' when you drive your car and are not allowed to run over pedestrians?

The semantic games that the pro-abortion side plays are simply pathetic. It's apparently all you've got.

You cite no medical evidence or support for your contention that the unborn is not a living human being.

In fact, so twisted is your view of life that you won't even admit that a child once it is born is a living human being, Eorl.

Are you also in favor of killing the disabled, the aged or any other 'undesirable' group in society for their 'crime' of existence?

Hey, you're the one who feels justified killing people.

Semantic games huh? You should know. "required to abstain" is a certainly a gentle way of saying "forced on pain of death".

Being required to prove something isn't something by your definition isn't possible. But of course, you know that. I say a foetus is a foetus.Can you prove that a foetus is NOT a foetus. No you can't.

Just another reminder: I'm not in favour of killing anybody, I'm not even in favour of abortion. I'm just much less in favour of having it outlawed especially when the death penalty is the punishment.

Tell me again, how far would you go, if you could, to ensure abortions never happen?

I see your view as the twisted one. The "left" side of politics, the humanitarians, amnesty international, women's rights advocates and the vast majority of the civilised world are on my side here. I know that doesn't make me right, but "twisted" is a term that implies that my view is skewed from the norm, and that is not the case.

0 Replies

Quote:

There's a big difference between a guilty party ... and killing an innocent ... Do you not see the difference?

RL,

I don't want to change the subject, but...
Who are we to judge? (Maybe a better question is) Do we, humans, have the ability to judge the true value of another (human) life?

0 Replies

echi wrote:

Quote:
There's a big difference between a guilty party ... and killing an innocent ... Do you not see the difference?

RL,

I don't want to change the subject, but...
Who are we to judge? (Maybe a better question is) Do we, humans, have the ability to judge the true value of another (human) life?

True , I do not want to derail the thread although there are some who would like nothing better.

Perhaps a capital punishment thread can be started, (or an old one recycled) if you are interested, but it is probably not a subject that I would participate in to a great degree.

I'll simply say this:

When someone is judged guilty of a heinous crime, it is not IMHO a statement regarding the value of their entire life, but rather about the particular incident in question.

Capital punishment is about punishment for heinous crime(s) committed and the protection of society.

We judge that the lives of the many are to be protected; and that, as a last resort , sometimes capital punishment is used to do that.

0 Replies

Eorl wrote:

real life wrote:
Eorl wrote:
Apparently. (I'm not even a vegetarian)

But so do you. You still support the death penalty.

Yep, I do.

Do you not see the difference?

Sure I do. Is all human life sacred or not? Only "innocents" ?

Life is sacred. So is freedom.

Sometimes freedom is forfeited due to crimes committed. Same thing with life.

Eorl wrote:

You have a problem with "Thou shalt not kill"?

A literal translation is 'You shall not murder'. The verse does not issue a prohibition against capital punishment, as is clear from the context. But I can hardly expect you to keep it in context.

Eorl wrote:

real life wrote:

Yet you want to call it 'slavery' when one is required to abstain from killing an innocent party. What a ludicrous misuse of terms.

Are you 'enslaved' when you drive your car and are not allowed to run over pedestrians?

The semantic games that the pro-abortion side plays are simply pathetic. It's apparently all you've got.

You cite no medical evidence or support for your contention that the unborn is not a living human being.

In fact, so twisted is your view of life that you won't even admit that a child once it is born is a living human being, Eorl.

Are you also in favor of killing the disabled, the aged or any other 'undesirable' group in society for their 'crime' of existence?

Hey, you're the one who feels justified killing people.

Semantic games huh? You should know. "required to abstain" is a certainly a gentle way of saying "forced on pain of death".

Being required to prove something isn't something by your definition isn't possible. But of course, you know that. I say a foetus is a foetus.Can you prove that a foetus is NOT a foetus. No you can't.

And I wouldn't attempt to. A fetus is a fetus.

Can you prove a fetus is not a living human being? No you can't.

The word 'fetus' is simply a descriptive word used of a particular stage of growth. Compare to words like: toddler, infant, baby, youth, teenager, youngster.

By your logic, a 'boy' could never be a 'student', nor could a 'youth' ever be a 'son', nor could a teenager be a 'daughter' ---- simply because different words are used!

But that doesn't mean that an infant is not a living human being, (although you argue that he/she is not.)

That doesn't mean that a toddler is not a living human being, (though it seems possible that you'll deny that also.)

Yes it is you who play semantics with this topic.

Eorl wrote:

Just another reminder: I'm not in favour of killing anybody, I'm not even in favour of abortion. I'm just much less in favour of having it outlawed especially when the death penalty is the punishment.

I have not suggested 'forced on pain of death' as a penalty for performing abortions, and you should know your charge is absolutely false. But the fact that you shamelessly state it is evidence enough that you are without anything reasonable to say.

You want to claim the 'majority' of the civilized world in support of your position, but this also is false.

0 Replies

It all comes down to what you yourself believes. I personally don't THINK I would ever get an abortion, because I don't think I could ever kill my own baby. HOWEVER...there are circumstances in which I could UNDERSTAND why someone would do it. Such as in cases of incest and/or rape. Just because I could understand it, doesn't mean that I would agree with it. But I could be empathetic towards it. I do not, however, agree with girls getting abortions just because they can't keep their freaking legs closed. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime, so to speak.

0 Replies

ShadowRaven66669 wrote:

It all comes down to what you yourself believes. I personally don't THINK I would ever get an abortion, because I don't think I could ever kill my own baby. HOWEVER...there are circumstances in which I could UNDERSTAND why someone would do it. Such as in cases of incest and/or rape. Just because I could understand it, doesn't mean that I would agree with it. But I could be empathetic towards it. I do not, however, agree with girls getting abortions just because they can't keep their freaking legs closed. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime, so to speak.

A fetus stops being human (and has the right to no longer exist) if their existence was based upon incest and/or rape? This is the line of reasoning you're using here to justify the termination of a pregnancy?

0 Replies

Yes, this is the sum of the pro-abortion position.

If the mother wants the child, he/she has a right to live.

If the mother doesn't want the child, he/she doesn't.

It's that simple.

It puts human rights at the whim of an individual instead of delineated and thus protected by law.

We become a nation , not of law, but of (wo)men.

0 Replies

...and your assumption, as always real life, assumes that a foetus is a complete human being, and has equal rights to that of the mother. In this I think you are wrong, as does the law, the majority of medical profession, and most of the civilized world.

You also seem willfully unprepared to discuss the consequences of your proposed abolition of abortion.

Let me ask again....

Should abortion doctors be executed?
Should aborting mothers be executed?
Should pregnant women who have had an abortion be locked up just in case?
Should ALL women be locked up just in case?
Should girls of age 16 be allowed abortions?....how about 14?...how about 12?
Should the abortion of one foetus be allowed to save the lives of others in multiple births?
Should a woman who drinks alcohol during pregnancy, and has a misscarriage, be charged with manslaughter?
Should every misscarriage (perhaps 50% of all conceptions) be treated as a possible suspicious death?
Should every misscarriage (perhaps 50% of all conceptions) be treated as a family death....even the ones we don't even know were aborted?
Should we be able to get life insurance on the foetus after a positive pregnancy test?

0 Replies

Eorl,

I think I've told you on a number of occasions that I favor the repeal of Roe v Wade and the reinstatement of the state laws regarding abortion that existed prior.

0 Replies

Not intending to threadjack here RL - however if you don't mind - I would enjoy offering my $.02 on eorl's post.

...and your assumption, as always real life, assumes that a foetus is a complete human being, and has equal rights to that of the mother.

"I don't think the debate is about an assumption of equal rights - but a basic right to live; and/or not be killed, however you choose to look at it." Equal rights to that of the mother infers that a fetus, infant, toddler should be allowed to vote, be drafted, drink alcohol, etc. Is that reasonable?

Let me ask again....

Should abortion doctors be executed?

"Not for me to decide about execution. Prosecution is a more appropriate label though and allowing a jury of peers to decide on consequences."

Should aborting mothers be executed?

"See above."

Should pregnant women who have had an abortion be locked up just in case?

"Just in case of what?"

Should ALL women be locked up just in case?

"Just in case of what?"

Should girls of age 16 be allowed abortions?....how about 14?...how about 12?

"10, 6, 4, 2?"

Should the abortion of one foetus be allowed to save the lives of others in multiple births?

"Do you mean if one fetus is sick? Maimed? What do you mean? Related question for you: If you had the time/ability to rescue only one of two children in a house-fire and one was badly burned & very near death - and the other was unharmed - which would you choose to rescue?"

Should a woman who drinks alcohol during pregnancy, and has a misscarriage, be charged with manslaughter?

"What does this have to do with pro abortion/pro life?"

Should every misscarriage (perhaps 50% of all conceptions) be treated as a possible suspicious death?

"What does this have to do with pro abortion/pro life?"

Should every misscarriage (perhaps 50% of all conceptions) be treated as a family death....even the ones we don't even know were aborted?

"What does this have to do with pro abortion/pro life?"

Should we be able to get life insurance on the foetus after a positive pregnancy test?

"What does this have to do with pro abortion/pro life?"

0 Replies

<-- Infinite Laughter.

RL, Baddog1 - Abortion is legal, it's going to stay that way, as it should. You won't win the legality arguement. period. If you want to help get rid of abortion, there are other political issues still up in the air that could use your attention.

Abortions will go down in number (and life in general will improve for all US citizens) if you do the following.

-Support child care programs
-Raise the minimum wage
-Get better funding to schools, and provide better sexual health education
-Stand up for pregnant mothers via combating negitive cultral stigmas
-Support Adoption programs

Abortion should not be illegal. If you want to make a difference fight for people instead of against them, you'll do much better.

And if you are just stubborn, I'll offer this as advice. If you are going to continue to argue for making abortion illeagal, stop using propaganda like: "Abortionist," "Pro-Abortion," "Abortioners" or any other variation thereof. Using words like this makes you seem unintellegent. If you anybody to take any creedence in your arguement, you have to protect your own credibility, and sounding like a fool isn't working for you.

If you are going to convince any pro-choice person that they should be pro-life (I could be a jerk and say anti-choice) person, you are going to have to convince them that making this change is in someway for their good. You're not doing a good job of that right now. The closest you come is saying that someone else getting an abortion has a negitive effect on you, which is a claim that nobody is buying.

Convince me that making abortion is for my good. If not, you're whole stance isn't about us (our culture/USA/humans), it is about you.

0 Replies

Deist TKO:

<-- Infinite Laughter. Yes - same here.

RL, Baddog1 - Abortion is legal, it's going to stay that way, as it should. In your opinion and others who believe as you do. Hey - it's America - we can believe as you wish without worry of consequence. You won't win the legality arguement. period. Not trying. If you want to help get rid of abortion, there are other political issues still up in the air that could use your attention. I will never "get rid of abortion", no matter my motive, method, desire, perseverance, etc.

Abortions will go down in number (and life in general will improve for all US citizens) if you do the following.

-Support child care programs Already do this and agree 100%.
-Raise the minimum wage What impact will this have on abortion?
-Get better funding to schools, and provide better sexual health education Agree 100%.
-Stand up for pregnant mothers via combating negitive cultral stigmas Please explain your thoughts in more detail here.
-Support Adoption programs Already do this and agree 100%.

How about some more:
-Get rid of welfare!
-Provide poignant and clear descriptions/photo's/videos/testimonials of what abortion does to the unborn and also to the psyche of Moms over the course of say 1 year, 5 years, 10 years and so on
-Implement legislation that provides for "Dad" to have a say in the decision to abort or not. (After all, w/o a sperm - there can be no fetus!!!)
-Implement legislation that outlines more reasonable guidelines for abortion than simply a whim/inconvenience, etc. Require psychological counseling for both Mom & Dad prior to making this decision.
-Require DNA confirmation of Dad.

Abortion should not be illegal. Is this an open-ended opinion? If you want to make a difference fight for people instead of against them, you'll do much better. Now we go back to "is a fetus a person". It always goes back to the same thing. I do fight for people - unborn people! Not unborn chickens, or unborn clumps of cells, but unborn people! Have you ever met someone who was never a fetus?

And if you are just stubborn, I'll offer this as advice. If you are going to continue to argue for making abortion illeagal, stop using propaganda like: "Abortionist," "Pro-Abortion," "Abortioners" or any other variation thereof. Using words like this makes you seem unintellegent. If you anybody to take any creedence in your arguement, you have to protect your own credibility, and sounding like a fool isn't working for you. Wow Deist - hitting a little below the belt aren't you? Attacking a person's character is always a sign of losing control. My IQ level has very little to do with the issue at hand - as does yours! "Pro-abortion" is about as accurate as it gets. What would your preference be on this matter?

If you are going to convince any pro-choice person that they should be pro-life (I could be a jerk and say anti-choice) person, you are going to have to convince them that making this change is in someway for their good. For the record - "anti-choice" does not bother me at all. "Pro-choice", IMHO is an oxymoron - simply because the unborn human is given no choice on whether to live or die! I suppose one could say that; "Potential-parent who is pro-choice" would be an appropriate label - but that seems to be a bit wordy! You're not doing a good job of that right now. The closest you come is saying that someone else getting an abortion has a negitive effect on you, which is a claim that nobody is buying. I am unconcerned whether anyone is buying my thoughts or not! My interest on this subject stems from the negative effect that abortion has had on my sister's life. She is 46 years old and the decision she made when she was 18 has left a long-lasting effect on her life. (And according to her - the same effect is felt by friends that she knows who made the same choice.) It is from her that I learned about the level of "humanness" that a fetus possesses and the details surrounding them.

Convince me that making abortion is for my good. If not, you're whole stance isn't about us (our culture/USA/humans), it is about you. My stand on abortion is not as self-serving as you're describing here. I suppose it has more to do with compassion for another living soul(s) than for my good. I am convinced that I will not affect your stand on abortion - nor should I. That is a decision that only you can make - or not. I am definitely stubborn about many issues; however I don't feel this is one of them. Compassionate - yes, but not stubborn.

0 Replies

I'm notsaying that anyone is actually unintellegent, but if you sound like a fool, you lose all credibility. I'm sure you and RL are educated individuals.

How does getting rid of welfare help?

As for how the minimum wage increase can help, it helps enable parents to keep a pregnacy through term. If you think long term finances aren't a factor your wrong.

And if you aren't advocating for abortion to become illeagal, and that you want people to just be able to make educated descisions, I'm with you. very much so. I've stated several times, that I would never have an abortion, but I believe that taking away that choice is dangerous. I'd love to limit how and where you can get an abortion. I'd love to provide resourses such as counseling for mother's/couples who are concidering it.

What RL doesn't understand and I hope you do is the seperation of morality and legality. Things that are illeagal aren't illegal because they are imoral in nature, it is because they threaten the fabric of our society/culture. Look for instance at what is not illeagal. It's not illeagal for me to call a person a rasist name, but I don't. I don't because I elect not to; to be a decent person; to show welcome and unity towards others. I think we can agree that the MORAL thing to do is not can people names, but it is not the platform of law that should decide or control that. It is ourselves.

Theft is illegal because if it weren't order would collapse, the same for murder. Abortion being leagal doesn't threaten our society. It's personal. It can be done for the right reasons, it can be done for the wrong reasons, but it the person alone who must choose and live with that choice.

I don't know the circumstances of your sister's abortion, and I'm sorry to hear that she has regret for her choice. But what your sister may have needed is not for abortion to be banned (so it wasn't an option), but instead information and support so that she could have felt enable to keep the child. This may sound rough, (and I genuinely don't want to offend you.) but from what you have said, SHE feels guilt, but is resentful of the fact that SHE had a choice. I certainly hope that you can acknowledge that thecircumstances of each pregnancy are absoluly unique.

Again, I am sorry to hear about her distress over her choice.

0 Replies

Oh and to address the whole Pro-abortion, abortionist thing.

Pro abortion would be the stance that anytime you have prenancy, someone would ask you have concidered the benifits of abortion. It's a ridiculous idea., and far serarated from pro-choice.

Why do I take offence to the term? Because I'm not Pro-abortion, I'd never do it, but I am VERY pro-choice and a advocate for protecting our culture from fascist principles. I've said before that if we lived in a culture were abortions were mandatory (say you could only have one child) I'd be advocating for pro-choice (as in the choice to keep your child) then as well.

It's not about the issue of abortion to me, it never has, it's about the dangers of standardizing values and equating morality with legality. While abortion is legal, the choice to not abort is still legal too.

I'm not Pro-abortion, I'm pro-choice, I'm Anti-Fascism, I'm Pro-Culture, I'm Pro-rights.

0 Replies

baddog1: "Now we go back to "is a fetus a person". It always goes back to the same thing."

Does anybody disagree with this statement?

0 Replies

I sure don't echi. I've said it often enough.

0 Replies

Diest TKO wrote:

<-- Infinite Laughter.

RL, Baddog1 - Abortion is legal, it's going to stay that way, as it should. You won't win the legality arguement. period.

We differ in our opinion on that. Abortion is being restricted more and more. The proabortion side is losing ground fast.

Diest TKO wrote:

If you want to help get rid of abortion, there are other political issues still up in the air that could use your attention.

Thanks for your concern. I'll spend my time where I see best. If what I am doing is futile as you seem to suggest above, shouldn't you wish to see me spin my wheels and waste my time more?

Hint: Never take suggestions from your opposition. The Yankees don't call the Red Sox dugout and say 'What do you think we should do?'

Diest TKO wrote:

Abortions will go down in number (and life in general will improve for all US citizens) if you do the following.

-Support child care programs

So abortions are done because you can't get free babysitting?

Diest TKO wrote:

-Raise the minimum wage

How much must one make before he/she becomes unwilling to kill his/her child?

Diest TKO wrote:

-Get better funding to schools,

Public schools will use anything as an excuse to ask for money, won't they?

Diest TKO wrote:

and provide better sexual health education

Are you seriously suggesting that people do not know that having sex may get them pregnant?

Diest TKO wrote:

-Stand up for pregnant mothers via combating negitive cultral stigmas

Pregnant mothers are generally treated very well , but your issue is with those who don't want to be pregnant.

Diest TKO wrote:

-Support Adoption programs

I do. Do you?

Diest TKO wrote:

Abortion should not be illegal.

No, it is the killing of a living human being, unless you have medical evidence to the contrary. This is THE key point which is generally ignored or lied about by the pro-abortion crowd.

Diest TKO wrote:

If you want to make a difference fight for people instead of against them, you'll do much better.

And if you are just stubborn, I'll offer this as advice. If you are going to continue to argue for making abortion illeagal, stop using propaganda like: "Abortionist," "Pro-Abortion," "Abortioners" or any other variation thereof. Using words like this makes you seem unintellegent.

Perhaps you should check around a little before you accuse someone of being unintelligent.

From http://www.merriamwebster.com

Quote:

proabortion
One entry found for proabortion.
Main Entry: pro·abor·tion
Pronunciation: "prO-&-'bor-sh&n
Function: adjective
: favoring the legalization of abortion
- pro-abor·tion·ist /-sh(&-)nist/ noun

abortionist

Main Entry: abor·tion·ist
Pronunciation: -sh(&-)nist
Function: noun
: one who induces abortions

What seems to be your problem with these words, other than the fact that they aren't fuzzy euphemisms like 'prochoice', but instead make it clear what you favor?

Diest TKO wrote:

If you anybody to take any creedence in your arguement, you have to protect your own credibility, and sounding like a fool isn't working for you.

OK, well, public opinion is moving in the pro-life direction , especially among the up and coming generation, so again, see above regarding taking advice from one's opponent.

Diest TKO wrote:

If you are going to convince any pro-choice person that they should be pro-life (I could be a jerk and say anti-choice) person,

You're not a jerk. I am antichoice. Some choices are not and should not be considered valid. I am not offended in the least by the term. I am proud of it.

Diest TKO wrote:

you are going to have to convince them that making this change is in someway for their good. You're not doing a good job of that right now. The closest you come is saying that someone else getting an abortion has a negitive effect on you, which is a claim that nobody is buying.

No, when we make theft illegal , we don't need to convince thieves that being honest is for their good. We make theft illegal to protect the victims of theft.

When we make rape illegal , we don't need to convince rapists that not raping is for their good. We make rape illegal to protect the victims of rape.

Diest TKO wrote:

Convince me that making abortion is for my good. If not, you're whole stance isn't about us (our culture/USA/humans), it is about you.

No, I've already been born. Making abortion illegal won't benefit me.

0 Replies

Abortion.What do you think about it?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know