Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Bronk on August 31, 2008, 10:54:00 AM
-
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=18647
To summarize.
The woman is induced, the child is born, and they let it die?
I'd say that goes a bit beyond abortion. But why am I not surprised that osama bama is all for it?
-
wtf :huh
-
wtf :huh
how the hell does a child survive late term abortion? If one should ever be so lucky then why shouldn't it have human rights after it has survived?
Obama is articulate and thoughtful and wrong on this.
-
Appearing thoughtful for national television is nothing more than that, appearing. The time to formulate one's values, beliefs, and opinions is every waking minute of every day when not posing before the cameras. If you don't know what you believe about the major issues then you have no business being potus.
-
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2008/08/30/michelle-obamas-sacred-proabort-quote-apparently-sacrilege-report (http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2008/08/30/michelle-obamas-sacred-proabort-quote-apparently-sacrilege-report)
"That Barack Obama and the Democratic Party is in trouble on abortion is inarguable. Obama has been caught red-handed lying about his past positions and votes on Illinois' Born Alive Infant Protection Act laws, appearing indifferent as to when anyone wishing to eliminate their baby completes the task. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has generated outrage from Catholic bishops and practitioners with her ignorant comments about the history of the Church's opposition to abortion. John McCain's nomination of prolife walk-the-walker Sarah Palin has made the contrast between the two parties' positions as obvious as I've ever seen it."
-
Obama spoke against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act in 2001, 2002, and never called to vote in 2003 when it came across the Health and Human Services Committee, which Obama himself chaired.
When asked if this legislation would pass, Obama stated that he would have voted for the Born Alive Infant Protection Act in Illinois had it been worded the same as the federal bill.
But guess what...Obama stopped his committee from adding the federal wording to the Illinois bill.
Talk about an agenda.
-
Abortion is the same thing except the human being is killed in the womb of his or her mother usually ..
how can you separate one act of murder from another?
the left is all about every form of this outrageous act ...
-
If the child is born isn't that, by the smallest definition possible, life? And yet they feel it's ok to let it die? Wooot! Kill the children, save the mass-murders!
-
i dont understand eaither... dont they brake babies skull open and use like a power drill in its brain... u cant survive that =/
-BigBOBCH
-
Incest? Rape? Mothers life threatened by the pregnancy, yes.
Keep your legs closed and the dog in the house if your not willing to own up to it. Birth control for casual reasons should stop at the moment of conception.
But then again, if the woman does not want to carry through to term how can anyone other than God prevent it from ending intentionally.
-
Incest? Rape? Mothers life threatened by the pregnancy, yes.
Keep your legs closed and the dog in the house if your not willing to own up to it. Birth control for casual reasons should stop at the moment of conception...
My thoughts as well.
-
Obama's a politician... a liberal politician. Part of their playbook last time I checked.
-
how the hell does a child survive late term abortion? If one should ever be so lucky then why shouldn't it have human rights after it has survived?
Google for abortion survivors, and yes they should.
-
this is a good example of Obama!
the father is responsible from the moment of conception,, but the mother is not responsible till birth!
if someone kills the woman and she is pregnant that person gets charged with two murders in some states,
yet the woman can kill that same unborn child at anytime until birth with no consequence what so ever!
McCain says both are responsible from the moment of conception![/i]
-
Unless its an animal if it cant vote it doesnt have rights as far as liberal politicians are concerned.
-
Unless its an animal if it cant vote it doesnt have rights as far as liberal politicians are concerned.
Whales. Greenpeace. Sierra Club. PETA
... NAMBLA.
:D
-
But then again, if the woman does not want to carry through to term how can anyone other than God prevent it from ending intentionally.
Then why does God let horrible things happen to people? This leads me to believe there either is no god, God doesn't care to micromanage every single person's life out of 6 billion or it's god's will that horrible things happen. God gave us brains for a good reason, so use it and don't refer to God's will every time you're faced with a hard decision. Who has told you that God is against abortion or human intervention? As far as I know, there's no Jesus around to pass the word to us mortals, just priests who think they are speaking the word of god when in truth they're still looking for the word from god. So, when talking of abortion, I can as well say it's god will that abortion should happen - god has not tried to stop it from happening, just mere mortals have.
Should god be pissed off I'm sure he'll send a clear word to us. Until then we should use our brains and common sense instead of referring to a possible opinion of someone absent from the discussion. Maybe the whole point of Jesus was to open our minds and not be so damn narrow minded.
-
...I can as well say it's god will that abortion should happen - god has not tried to stop it from happening, just mere mortals have.
Maybe God's way of trying to stop it is to enlist mere mortals to stop it.
God gave man free will...what man does with that free will is up to him, but he will be held accountable for it by God.
-
Maybe God's way of trying to stop it is to enlist mere mortals to stop it.
Or perhaps the ones for abortion are the ones following the God's will. That's what I was trying to hint there..
There's no telling of who's really following the ways of God in this matter, simply claiming to be the one for God is not the same as true.
God gave man free will...what man does with that free will is up to him, but he will be held accountable for it by God.
In their narrowmindness the jews executed Jesus and are still waiting for a jesus. All this was done in the name of God by mere mortals who believed they were enlisted by God to rid this person who they believed was a blasphemer. Apparently they were wrong and are still waiting in denial of the past.
The catholic church was in wrong as well for centuries in their personal greed, yet they were claiming to be the holiest men on earth following God's will. Be careful, if you want to be a zelous follower of God, because defending your own personal belief with God's name can be a sin. You shall not make wrongful use of the name of your God
-
I'm in a bit of a sensitive place at the moment regarding this issue but Here goes.
Abortion is the same thing except the human being is killed in the womb of his or her mother usually ..
how can you separate one act of murder from another?
the left is all about every form of this outrageous act ...
While I disagree with late term abortion, I fully endorse the Womans' right of choice in this matter. If she has not decided by the time the widely accepted window has expired then she should IMO carry full term and adopt out if she no longer wishes to raise the child. There are many many reasons why a woman can fall pregnant with an unwanted pregnancy. Pardon my saying this, but who the hell are you to dictate to anyone their rights of choice inside reasonable boundaries?
If the child is born isn't that, by the smallest definition possible, life? And yet they feel it's ok to let it die? Wooot! Kill the children, save the mass-murders!
Diablo, yes if the child is born living then it IS life. Every effort must be made to preserve that life. As for the rest of your post...
i dont understand eaither... dont they brake babies skull open and use like a power drill in its brain... u cant survive that =/
Are you really that naive? You seriously need to do some reading and/or get some help regarding this issue.
-
Unless its an animal if it cant vote it doesnt have rights as far as liberal politicians are concerned.
Well said.
-
Fishu any comment on the topic at hand? The child is born, the child is alive, they just let it die. That's not abortion, that's murder.
-
Was it born alive?
Reminds me on those vegan parents who fed exclusively soya milk to their newborn, starving it to death in some weeks.
That was listed as murder if my memory serves me.
I thought this one had a second abortion. What is a fetus like anyway after surviving one abortion???
-
Was it born alive?
Reminds me on those vegan parents who fed exclusively soya milk to their newborn, starving it to death in some weeks.
That was listed as murder if my memory serves me.
I thought this one had a second abortion. What is a fetus like anyway after surviving one abortion???
Read the link provided.
-
Fishu any comment on the topic at hand? The child is born, the child is alive, they just let it die. That's not abortion, that's murder.
The topic seems to be alot about abortion in general too. However, on the original topic, there should be a limit somewhere around 20 weeks which after it's not possible to make abortion unless the mother's health is in danger. Perhaps also extend the time if severe abnormalities have been detected in the child after the 20 weeks. I do not ever wish to see my child suffer from severe abnormalities for years before dying "naturally" (modern medicine and technology can really extend the "natural process" beyond the levels of torture). For the same reasons I'm also advocate of the right for euthanasia by severely ill people. Life is definitely not about extended suffering with the help of technology.
-
The right to choose also gives you the right not to choose
Tronsky
-
Then why does God let horrible things happen to people? This leads me to believe there either is no god, God doesn't care to micromanage every single person's life out of 6 billion or it's god's will that horrible things happen. God gave us brains for a good reason, so use it and don't refer to God's will every time you're faced with a hard decision. Who has told you that God is against abortion or human intervention? As far as I know, there's no Jesus around to pass the word to us mortals, just priests who think they are speaking the word of god when in truth they're still looking for the word from god. So, when talking of abortion, I can as well say it's god will that abortion should happen - god has not tried to stop it from happening, just mere mortals have.
Should god be pissed off I'm sure he'll send a clear word to us. Until then we should use our brains and common sense instead of referring to a possible opinion of someone absent from the discussion. Maybe the whole point of Jesus was to open our minds and not be so damn narrow minded.
Or maybe there's no such thing as "horrible".
-
Or maybe there's no such thing as "horrible".
Which would mean God wouldn't give a crap whether we do abortions or not. Then again the 10 commendments are pretty much there to prevent people from doing horrible things to each other.
-
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=18647
To summarize.
The woman is induced, the child is born, and they let it die?
I'd say that goes a bit beyond abortion. But why am I not surprised that osama bama is all for it?
Abortion is a great option to have and i support it 100%, but this one is abit on the freaky side.
-
Abortion is a great option to have and i support it 100%, but this one is abit on the freaky side.
So your fine with this?
-
I am pro choice.
But without getting into that arguement. (Lets face it. We arent going to change each others minds on the issue)
I do want to say that if the child was born it is indeed alive. To terminate it once it has left the womb is even by my definition.
murder. and I would stand shoulder to shoulder with any of you all here.
That being said.
the only difference between Bronks Website and the one Gunthr put up.
Is Bronks admits on the front page its conservative leaning
Gunthrs site is conservative leaning also.
Its just advertises itself as combating liberal media bias
Right bias is as bad as left bias.
Speaking of Bias
According to the The Center for Media and Public Affairs
(CMPA) is a nonpartisan research and educational organization which conducts scientific studies of the news and entertainment media.
http://www.cmpa.com/index.html
MEDIA BASH BARACK (NOT A TYPO)
Study Finds Obama Faring Worse On TV News Than McCain
-
So your fine with this?
Im fine with regular abortions yes
-
Im fine with regular abortions yes
Thats not what I was asking. Your fine with with letting the baby die out of the womb?
-
In Australia, at least, abortions are not performed by many people past 16 weeks. At this stage of the pregnancy the foetus is not viable outside the womb and, as far as I am concerned, is not to be considered as a person.
This is a huge philosophical can of worms but for me, it is quite simple. If the pregnancy is viable outside the womb then it is too late to abort. If not, it is the woman's choice.
-
I am pro choice.
But without getting into that arguement. (Lets face it. We arent going to change each others minds on the issue)
I do want to say that if the child was born it is indeed alive. To terminate it once it has left the womb is even by my definition.
murder. and I would stand shoulder to shoulder with any of you all here.
That being said.
the only difference between Bronks Website and the one Gunthr put up.
Is Bronks admits on the front page its conservative leaning
Gunthrs site is conservative leaning also.
Its just advertises itself as combating liberal media bias
Right bias is as bad as left bias.
Speaking of Bias
According to the The Center for Media and Public Affairs
(CMPA) is a nonpartisan research and educational organization which conducts scientific studies of the news and entertainment media.
http://www.cmpa.com/index.html
MEDIA BASH BARACK (NOT A TYPO)
Study Finds Obama Faring Worse On TV News Than McCain
So your saying he didn't vote no 2x and kill it again in committee? If the right wing bias is wrong please enlighten me with info otherwise.
-
Thats not what I was asking. Your fine with with letting the baby die out of the womb?
If the "baby" is "killed" within the same timeframe as a normal abortion would be performed then yes why not.
-
If the "baby" is "killed" within the same timeframe as a normal abortion would be performed then yes why not.
So the born child does not have the right to live? When does it, 2, 5, 45?
-
So the born child does not have the right to live? When does it, 2, 5, 45?
How old is this """child""", and what are the rules in the US for when you can abort a "child"? Sorry, but i saw the name of the site you linked to so i wont read it.
-edit- imo if the "baby" was taken out within the first trimester and then "killed" i would be fine with it.
-
How old is this """child""", and what are the rules in the US for when you can abort a "child"? Sorry, but i saw the name of the site you linked to so i wont read it
Your choice not to read it. My niece was born premature and because of modern medicine she is alive. So your good with murdering a child. ]
Right, now I know where you stand.
-
Your choice not to read it. My niece was born premature and because of modern medicine she is alive. So your good with murdering a child. Right now I know where you stand.
Yup im fine with "murder" that takes place in the first trimester. Maybe later too in extreme cases.
-
Yup im fine with "murder" that takes place in the first trimester. Maybe later too in extreme cases.
This why you should read the link. It's about LATE term abortions.
-
This why you should read the link. It's about LATE term abortions.
Well then as i asumed i had already answered your question when i said i was ok with abortion within the legal timeframe. If it is performed inside or outside of the womb is not of relevance to me. May I ask when it was performed?
Id also like to add that when i said that i am pro abortions later than the first trimester then it should be extreme medical reasons like danger to the mom or a serious flaw with the blob (fetus).
-
According to the The Center for Media and Public Affairs
(CMPA) is a nonpartisan research and educational organization which conducts scientific studies of the news and entertainment media.
http://www.cmpa.com/index.html
MEDIA BASH BARACK (NOT A TYPO)
Study Finds Obama Faring Worse On TV News Than McCain
So reporting facts is a bad thing?
Are you trying to say that things reported about Obama are not be believed because some study reports that Obama is faring worse than McCain as far as negative media?
He killed the Illinois bill twice and totally ignored it when it was brought to the committee he chaired. What does the site you posted have to do with these facts?
-
So your saying he didn't vote no 2x and kill it again in committee? If the right wing bias is wrong please enlighten me with info otherwise.
No.
Im saying you used a right wing website to support a right wing view.
Particularly a website that on its face seems to be positioning itself to be unbias with names like "Media research Center" "NEWSBUSTERS"
Then it exposes itself as being a right bias media with the term
“Exposing & Combating Liberal Media Bias”
Not exactly an unbias source.
Right wing media bias is as bad as left wing media bias.
Why not just report without bias. Or expose the bias on both sides?
That would kinda add to their credibility more.
For that matter I could start a website doing the same thing.
Give it a cute little name like. "The Center for Media Research"
And put my own little spin on stories to suit my view. (hmmmm)
It wouldnt make me credible
Im not defending his alleged vote (Havent had the time or inclination to verify it)
But there are any number of reasons why he may not have voted in favor of that particular bill.
Or any legislator on any bill
What else was tacked onto the bill?
Often things are brought forward for a vote that include other neat little christmas tree type items that doesnt get much attention.
Course when the media or political opposition gets ahold of it and spins their own story to it...
Again I havent had time to t look into the thing so I dont know
-
So reporting facts is a bad thing?
Are you trying to say that things reported about Obama are not be believed because some study reports that Obama is faring worse than McCain as far as negative media?
He killed the Illinois bill twice and totally ignored it when it was brought to the committee he chaired. What does the site you posted have to do with these facts?
Im not saying that at all.
Gunthr posting a link from a website that says
"“Exposing & Combating Liberal Media Bias”
Im just pointing out that according to an actual unbias independant group. the "Liberal Media" is currently giving Obama more bad press then McCain
-
No.
Im saying you used a right wing website to support a right wing view.
Particularly a website that on its face seems to be positioning itself to be unbias with names like "Media research Center" "NEWSBUSTERS"
Then it exposes itself as being a right bias media with the term
“Exposing & Combating Liberal Media Bias”
Not exactly an unbias source.
Right wing media bias is as bad as left wing media bias.
Why not just report without bias. Or expose the bias on both sides?
That would kinda add to their credibility more.
Can facts have a bias?
-
Your choice not to read it. My niece was born premature and because of modern medicine she is alive. So your good with murdering a child. ]
Right, now I know where you stand.
In the future we can continue growing a fetus in a jar. We'll be also able to create childs from the get go in a jar. There really has to be a fair limit to abortion regardless of the modern medicine, because eventually the chance for abortion would be nil - anything would survive. This is the same reason why I'm for euthanasia as well. For the elderly the modern medicine will eventually be nothing but years of torture on the brink of death. For the women it will limit their options against unwanted pregnancy, which could result in an unwanted child (or the parent could be unable to upkeep a child financially) and that's not a good thing on the long run. You don't wish a bad childhood for anyone.
-
Can facts have a bias?
Only if its conservative.
-
I support abortion, to an extent. I think if a women is raped she should have the choice of if she wants to have the child or if she does not want to have that child. But, I do think if you want an abortion on a child that was purposely created, I don't think that should be allowed. It was the couples choice, they should have to live with it.
-
In the future we can continue growing a fetus in a jar. We'll be also able to create childs from the get go in a jar. There really has to be a fair limit to abortion regardless of the modern medicine, because eventually the chance for abortion would be nil - anything would survive. This is the same reason why I'm for euthanasia as well. For the elderly the modern medicine will eventually be nothing but years of torture on the brink of death. For the women it will limit their options against unwanted pregnancy, which could result in an unwanted child (or the parent could be unable to upkeep a child financially) and that's not a good thing on the long run. You don't wish a bad childhood for anyone.
Well you'd have to plan on growing that fetus now wouldn't you. So now you want to grow em just to abort them? Kinda throws that whole unplanned thing right out the window now doesn't it.
-
So now you want to grow em just to abort them?
Hehe now that sounds like the masterplan of an evil genious. :lol
-
fishu.. please tell me how you would determine if a fetus will have a good life or not.
Do you use the climate computers or something special?
lazs
-
If you can look a child in the eye and tell them youre not "good" enough for life your a monster.
http://www.abortionno.org/Resources/pictures.html (http://www.abortionno.org/Resources/pictures.html)
-
Can facts have a bias?
They can be spun that way to amplify a point out of proportion
Both sides do it.
Again I have NOT looked deeply into this issue. so I dont know how accurate it is..or isnt or if there were other mitigating factors or not.
It may be very well 1,000,000 % accurate
Again I DONT KNOW.
But a left or right wing site that puts forth a story that is only spun their way I view with an eye of suspicion.
I'd feel the same way if CNN came out with a similar story on McCain. or Palin and "troopergate" for example.
They are only going to tell the story in a way that makes the other side look at its worst.
Thats not to say eithr side will lie.
They just tend to leave some of the details out.
-
In the future we can continue growing a fetus in a jar. We'll be also able to create childs from the get go in a jar. There really has to be a fair limit to abortion regardless of the modern medicine, because eventually the chance for abortion would be nil - anything would survive. This is the same reason why I'm for euthanasia as well. For the elderly the modern medicine will eventually be nothing but years of torture on the brink of death. For the women it will limit their options against unwanted pregnancy, which could result in an unwanted child (or the parent could be unable to upkeep a child financially) and that's not a good thing on the long run. You don't wish a bad childhood for anyone.
I'll have to look for the story.
But I remember reading a while back that we are scientifically on the verge of creating life from scratch.
Now THAT is going to make for some interesting arguements.
-
I am pretty sure that in theory we can grow an "life" in a jar in theory but keeping the life sustained is the problem.
-
We teach our children not to hit or hurt other children (at least some of us do). We insist that adults don't hurt or murder other adults too. Should we respond to adults killing their unborn children any differently?
For those who hold life in low regard it's simply a matter of choice and any busy body who would tell them otherwise must be a religious fanatic seeking to impose their own will and morality. For those who consider life the ultimate gift it's something that must be protected while innocent and unable to yet exercise it's own free will from those who are ignorant or irresponsible.
-
We teach our children not to hit or hurt other children (at least some of us do). We insist that adults don't hurt or murder other adults too. Should we respond to adults killing their unborn children any differently?
They are killing BORN children.
-
Which would mean God wouldn't give a crap whether we do abortions or not.
I don't see how you go from what I said to that.
Then again the 10 commendments are pretty much there to prevent people from doing horrible things to each other.
Horrible is an anthropomorphism. I think the commandments are more like guidelines, ideals for man to reach for. Better is the enemy of good, etc.
-
I hesitate to prod an old dog laying dead beside the road... but
In the future we can continue growing a fetus in a jar. We'll be also able to create childs from the get go in a jar. There really has to be a fair limit to abortion regardless of the modern medicine, because eventually the chance for abortion would be nil - anything would survive. This is the same reason why I'm for euthanasia as well. For the elderly the modern medicine will eventually be nothing but years of torture on the brink of death. For the women it will limit their options against unwanted pregnancy, which could result in an unwanted child (or the parent could be unable to upkeep a child financially) and that's not a good thing on the long run. You don't wish a bad childhood for anyone. - Fishu
Fishu, with all due respect, the devalueing of human life is what we have come to expect from countries with socialist tendancies and Finland has built one of the most extensive welfare states in the world. Once you make the decision that not all human life is equal, and embrace casual abortion as a national policy, euthanasia becomes an easy extension of that. I wonder where that path will eventually take your country... maybe those decisions will one day be made centrally, by buearaucrats. No thanks.
-
You are not by any chanse a chrisitan conservative are you Gunthr? :rofl :rofl :rofl
-
Id also like to add that when i said that i am pro abortions later than the first trimester then it should be extreme medical reasons like danger to the mom or a serious flaw with the blob (fetus).
Look up some photos of unborn children, even at 5 weeks it is no longer just a *blob*. At 5 weeks its arms and legs are already beginning to develop, its circulatory system (including the heart) is already functional. The rest of the internal organs are starting to develop as well. That's just at 5 weeks.
-
Consciousness ought to be the criteria, not the peripheral body.
-
Consciousness ought to be the criteria, not the peripheral body.
Does that mean we need to abort about half the participants on this bbs? I get to pick which half.
-
Consciousness ought to be the criteria, not the peripheral body.
what moot said
-
Consciousness ought to be the criteria, not the peripheral body.
When is consciousness present?
-
When is consciousness present?
You dont know when your conscious? :lol
-
When is consciousness present?
My wife had an ultra sound at 4 months with our last child. As the technician moved the ultra sound device around on my wifes stomach, we could see our daughter moving her head so she could look right where the ultra sound was coming from. I'd say she was exhibiting consciousness then.
-
You dont know when your conscious? :lol
Thanks for attempting to contribute to the discussion.
Perhaps I was not clear in what I was asking.
When is consciousness present in a fetus? Do you know?
-
Incest? Rape? Mothers life threatened by the pregnancy, yes.
Keep your legs closed and the dog in the house if your not willing to own up to it. Birth control for casual reasons should stop at the moment of conception.
But then again, if the woman does not want to carry through to term how can anyone other than God prevent it from ending intentionally.
WOW! The first thing you have ever said I can fully agree with :aok
EDIT: I'm scared! :uhoh
-
In the future we can continue growing a fetus in a jar. We'll be also able to create childs from the get go in a jar. There really has to be a fair limit to abortion regardless of the modern medicine, because eventually the chance for abortion would be nil - anything would survive. This is the same reason why I'm for euthanasia as well. For the elderly the modern medicine will eventually be nothing but years of torture on the brink of death. For the women it will limit their options against unwanted pregnancy, which could result in an unwanted child (or the parent could be unable to upkeep a child financially) and that's not a good thing on the long run. You don't wish a bad childhood for anyone.
Indeed. The prerequisite for life should be the ability to naturally survive outside the womb. It seems to be the easiest way to draw a line. As I understand it, the legal line is currently drawn at birth... I think this overlooks the viable life that it is contained within the woman during the later stages of pregnancy. At later stages there is no excuse for not knowing that you're pregnant and there is no going back. Threat to the mother's life or future well-being should be the only legal reason once the pregnancy reaches natural viability outside of the womb (IE with minimal interference from technology to keep it alive).
Thanks for attempting to contribute to the discussion.
Perhaps I was not clear in what I was asking.
When is consciousness present in a fetus? Do you know?
Consciousness is a problematic requirement of life. For example, if consciousness is the ability to feel pain then abortions would have to performed quite early in the pregnancy due to the basic formation of the brain cells....I won't get scientific at this stage but you can see where I'm taking this...If consciousness is 'awareness' then this awareness leads to autonomy and autonomy leads to the euthanasia of the mentally disabled at birth, then those with acquired brain injuries..... etc etc. I don't believe that link myself, but it is evident that the link can be made and that people will make it (as some have already here).
I'd be interested to see how people defined consciousness and where they considered that present during a pregnancy.
Interesting philosophical discussion, guys. :salute
-
I believe that it should be the women’s right up until Birth. Up until that point she should be able to give it up. I don’t consider it a child until it can survive outside a women.
With newer and newer technology rather then abortion can she give deliver it early and let the hospital start caring for it? I am all for that.
Of course that would be socialized healthcare, Letting the government care for this child.
I do consider abortion wrong over all but I don’t believe I should make people Follow what I believe is moral when it is their body.
-
Thanks for attempting to contribute to the discussion.
Perhaps I was not clear in what I was asking.
When is consciousness present in a fetus? Do you know?
Define consciousness.
All these arguments attempt to side step the issue, A women's right to choose comes b4 conception, after that she is a caretaker of the yet unborn child. Personal concerns come to an end at the point of conception. The time to choose is in the planning of a sexual lifestyle and this is where anti abortion people drop the ball.
Education and information, birth control concepts and products need to be available, family planning and a basic knowledge of the human body need to taught and made required in our education system. If it were then abortion would no longer be an issue.
In any case abortion is wrong and should be made illegal.
-
Consciousness is a problematic criteria (understatement) but it's the only one I'd buy and would support in choosing a stance on abortion.
And it's not a side step to the argument at all. It's the same sort of pragmatic brass tacks as coming to the conclusion that agnosticism is the only responsible stance on religion/God... Saying that a kid is worth killing because he unconvenienced the mother but wasn't able to survive on his own is wrong. There's a conscious human in that lump of flesh and it deserves the same rights as anyone else as e.g. in the US Declaration of Independence.. "inalienable rights".
-
Yanksfan, such an 'open and shut' understanding of abortion leaves out so many reasonable justifications for abortion.
Abnormal pregnancies can cause the irreversible infertility of the woman and even death. Who are you to tell them that abortion is wrong? I know for certain that I would be 100% for abortion if my partner's life was at risk due to the pregnancy. She is irreplaceable... an unborn foetus is.
While we're on the subject, who are you to tell the woman who already has 3 children and fell pregnant to her husband because her contraceptive pill failed due to an illness that she must have another child even though she cannot afford the health risks of an older aged pregnancy or even the financial burden of another child?
Sure, there are a small percentage of women who should just be sterilised because they are impossibly stupid... but the vast majority of women who have abortions are women who have already had children years before and had a slip with their contraception (the pill is very easy to interfere with, for example... condoms break...etc).... then there are rape victims... 14 year old girls.... women who will face terrible health problems if they continue with the pregnancy.... deformed foetuses.... etc.
There are SO many reasons for abortion that I cannot begin to address them all here. I will say that the general attitude that you display glimpses of toward the issue reminds me very strongly of the misinformed souls who harass women outside abortion clinics in 'foetus suits' (which are completely scientifically false). These disgusting vermin prey on very troubled women with absolutely no consideration of what the individual may be going through.
My partner is a nurse at one of these clinics and the watermelon that she and her patients have to deal with on a daily basis from these vermin disgusts me.
Basically, you have no right to dictate such black and white terms to women in this situation. You have no right to force another person into a lifetime commitment because of your moral beliefs. Morals are subjective and thus so is your opinion. One subjective opinion has no greater weight than another.
- This is not a personal attack and I mean no offence to anyone. -
:salute
-
Bottom line on this subject.Heres a 8 week old baby in the womb.
(http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c261/Kaw1000/baby.jpg)
See the fingers and toes...see the eyes?? it is alive?? Does it move around? The answer is yes
Their are many people who can't have babys,instead of killing it, give the baby
up for adoption!
-
There are things in this world that happen without reason, nothing is as clear as we would like it to be. I do not agree with abortions, but it's not my place to tell others what they can believe. All I can do is educate mine and hope for the best. Being Pro Choice means, you can choose not too.
-
I believe that it should be the women’s right up until Birth. Up until that point she should be able to give it up. I don’t consider it a child until it can survive outside a women.
With newer and newer technology rather then abortion can she give deliver it early and let the hospital start caring for it? I am all for that.
Of course that would be socialized healthcare, Letting the government care for this child.
I do consider abortion wrong over all but I don’t believe I should make people Follow what I believe is moral when it is their body.
To me, and this of course is just my opinion.
The problem with Anti abortion people is they inject their christian morals into the debate as if those without religion have no morals, this and the fact that they are also opposed (for the most part) to family planning makes their efforts self defeating as their position alienates those that don't share their faith.
There is no argument that would change my mind as to the legitimacy of ending a helpless life, abortion is wrong, it is however a product of our inability to communicate openly and fairly our views accross political and religious lines. And a failure of our leaders to in act an education system which would elevate the discussion above the level of a political debate.
-
Bottom line on this subject.Heres a 8 week old baby in the womb.
(http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c261/Kaw1000/baby.jpg)
See the fingers and toes...see the eyes?? it is alive?? Does it move around? The answer is yes
Their are many people who can't have babys,instead of killing it, give the baby
up for adoption!
That is a big ask for a rape victim, a young teen, an older woman who already has a family etc etc. It's all too easy to sit here with a noodle between our legs and say "She should have the baby, abortion is just plain wrong!". Strap the uteris on and see how that changes things.
Pregnancy is not the detached process that our male instincts would have some of us believe.
-
X if your Mom had the same thoughts you have about abortion...where would you be??
In a plastic bag, thats where...wake up.
-
Yanksfan, such an 'open and shut' understanding of abortion leaves out so many reasonable justifications for abortion.
Abnormal pregnancies can cause the irreversible infertility of the woman and even death. Who are you to tell them that abortion is wrong? I know for certain that I would be 100% for abortion if my partner's life was at risk due to the pregnancy. She is irreplaceable... an unborn foetus is.
While we're on the subject, who are you to tell the woman who already has 3 children and fell pregnant to her husband because her contraceptive pill failed due to an illness that she must have another child even though she cannot afford the health risks of an older aged pregnancy or even the financial burden of another child?
Sure, there are a small percentage of women who should just be sterilised because they are impossibly stupid... but the vast majority of women who have abortions are women who have already had children years before and had a slip with their contraception (the pill is very easy to interfere with, for example... condoms break...etc).... then there are rape victims... 14 year old girls.... women who will face terrible health problems if they continue with the pregnancy.... deformed foetuses.... etc.
There are SO many reasons for abortion that I cannot begin to address them all here. I will say that the general attitude that you display glimpses of toward the issue reminds me very strongly of the misinformed souls who harass women outside abortion clinics in 'foetus suits' (which are completely scientifically false). These disgusting vermin prey on very troubled women with absolutely no consideration of what the individual may be going through.
My partner is a nurse at one of these clinics and the watermelon that she and her patients have to deal with on a daily basis from these vermin disgusts me.
Basically, you have no right to dictate such black and white terms to women in this situation. You have no right to force another person into a lifetime commitment because of your moral beliefs. Morals are subjective and thus so is your opinion. One subjective opinion has no greater weight than another.
- This is not a personal attack and I mean no offence to anyone. -
:salute
No offence taken,
i don't mean to say that there are no cases in which ending a pregnancy isn't justifiable, rape, health concerns yes, sad but true these can be justified, however, personal choice comes with personal responsibility sometimes the price is high.
Failed contraceptives are a chance you take when you engage in a physical relationship, once you have had children and decide you want no more or if you just don't want any to begin with, there are plenty of "NON-permanent" and permanent products and procedures that can be used to ensure near 100%, perhaps not 100% as nothing in life is, that conception will not occur.
Negligence on the part of a couple in this area is not a legitimate excuse for abortion. personal responsibility and self education is the key.
Education,Education,Education,Education,
once a couple conceives, the choose has been made. now they must take responsibility.
-
There are things in this world that happen without reason
e.g.?
-
Bottom line on this subject.Heres a 8 week old baby in the womb.
See the fingers and toes...see the eyes?? it is alive?? Does it move around? The answer is yes
Their are many people who can't have babys,instead of killing it, give the baby
up for adoption!
Why not adopt some of the children that are not babies on in the system. It is not like we have a shortage of children with out parrents....
-
Why not adopt some of the children that are not babies on in the system. It is not like we have a shortage of children with out parrents....
Very true.
-
X if your Mom had the same thoughts you have about abortion...where would you be??
In a plastic bag, thats where...wake up.
Why? I was a completely normal preganancy. I see no argument here.
There are plenty of "NON-permanent" and permanent products and procedures that can be used to ensure near 100%, perhaps not 100% as nothing in life is, that conception will not occur.
Negligence on the part of a couple in this area is not a legitimate excuse for abortion. personal responsibility and self education is the key.
I agree that carelessness is no excuse... though I do question the idea of encouraging stupid people to breed..... :lol
The only non-permanent contraceptive methods are various types of the pill, a sustained release hormone implant, condoms and abstinence. All of these have side-effects and only one is 99.9% effective (the sustained release implant). The contraceptive pill can be affected by antibiotics, vomiting and diarrhoea among other things. It is entirely possible for a woman who takes her pill with military precision to fall pregnant due to one of these health upsets. Should she be forced to bare a child because she ate a bad burrito? (An outside example, to be sure, but I think my point is clear). As for abstinence... well, the side-effect of that is no sex. :lol
As far as surgery goes, vasectomy is not as easily reversible as is commonly believed and the female alternative is even worse and far more invasive. Neither of these options should be considered lightly and are not suitable for the majority of people who have abortions.
Like I said, mate, I agree totally on the carelessness thing but abortions due to carelessness are the exception, not the rule. Mrs Arch sees plenty of girls come through theatre because they were too stupid to take the pill or just didn't bother but they are definitely a minority and are so incredibly irresponsible and stupid that they shouldn't be trusted with even bringing a child to full term, let alone raising it.
If you saw some of the patients that come through her clinic...... Well, I'll put it this way, the doctors there are doing society a service. That sounds harsh but there is no other way to put it, some people just are not fit to breed.
-
You are not by any chanse a chrisitan conservative are you Gunthr? - Nilsen
I think we human beings have a knack for seeing what we want to see, especially when there is a substantial payoff in convenience if you can rationalize casual abortion.
Personally, I believe that human life begins shortly after fertilization, when the chromosomes combine and determine the unique traits of a human being. I'm reluctant to force my opinions on anyone else, however.
I'm not attacking Fishu. I'm pointing out that dehumanising human life and valuing some human life less than other human life is a slippery slope. Casual abortion > murdering unwanted babies taken out alive > euthanasia > what's next? killing retards? Defectives? Cripples? These are good questions to ask of a society.
Fishu makes my point with his own statement.
-
Why? I was a completely normal preganancy. I see no argument here.
I agree that carelessness is no excuse... though I do question the idea of encouraging stupid people to breed..... :lol
The only non-permanent contraceptive methods are various types of the pill, a sustained release hormone implant, condoms and abstinence. All of these have side-effects and only one is 99.9% effective (the sustained release implant). The contraceptive pill can be affected by antibiotics, vomiting and diarrhoea among other things. It is entirely possible for a woman who takes her pill with military precision to fall pregnant due to one of these health upsets. Should she be forced to bare a child because she ate a bad burrito? (An outside example, to be sure, but I think my point is clear). As for abstinence... well, the side-effect of that is no sex. :lol
As far as surgery goes, vasectomy is not as easily reversible as is commonly believed and the female alternative is even worse and far more invasive. Neither of these options should be considered lightly and are not suitable for the majority of people who have abortions.
Like I said, mate, I agree totally on the carelessness thing but abortions due to carelessness are the exception, not the rule. Mrs Arch sees plenty of girls come through theatre because they were too stupid to take the pill or just didn't bother but they are definitely a minority and are so incredibly irresponsible and stupid that they shouldn't be trusted with even bringing a child to full term, let alone raising it.
If you saw some of the patients that come through her clinic...... Well, I'll put it this way, the doctors there are doing society a service. That sounds harsh but there is no other way to put it, some people just are not fit to breed.
Point taken,
My real point here is that all the things you have mentioned, are part of what one should realize when making the "choice" as to weather to have sex for business or pleasure. Realizing that there is a risk of conception no matter what prevention you choose is all part of it.
If you happen to fall into that 1% possibility that conception occurs it's no different then that less then 1% chance your plane will crash, you decided the risk was to low to worry about. now you must take responsibility for that decision. If the plane goes down, your going with it. black and white.
we keep making excuses for what about this or what about that.
The fact is we need "Education", not only by those who may become pregnant but also by those who may decide what is allowable as far as ending a yet to be born child's life b4 it has a chance.
We also need an overall sense of "Responsibility" once someone has decided on their preferred method of birth controll and know the risks, they need to take responsibility for those decisions, once they find themselves among the 1% group.
Ending a life after you have made poor choices is wrong.
-
To me, and this of course is just my opinion.
The problem with Anti abortion people is they inject their christian morals into the debate as if those without religion have no morals, this and the fact that they are also opposed (for the most part) to family planning makes their efforts self defeating as their position alienates those that don't share their faith.
There is no argument that would change my mind as to the legitimacy of ending a helpless life, abortion is wrong, it is however a product of our inability to communicate openly and fairly our views accross political and religious lines. And a failure of our leaders to in act an education system which would elevate the discussion above the level of a political debate.
For those who believe that baby's life should not be protected by law the matter is political and about choice. For those who believe an unborn child has a right to life it is much more than just politics.
To answer someone else's comment about not having a stake in this I say you are wrong. We are all affected by how we treat our innocent and helpless. I lost my first wife in childbirth many years ago. We both knew there was a slight risk but neither of us ever considered abortion. My youngest daughter is now 32 and has 3 beautiful children of her own. I wouldn't change it if I could.
-
All these arguments attempt to side step the issue, A women's right to choose comes b4 conception, after that she is a caretaker of the yet unborn child. Personal concerns come to an end at the point of conception. The time to choose is in the planning of a sexual lifestyle and this is where anti abortion people drop the ball.
Education and information, birth control concepts and products need to be available, family planning and a basic knowledge of the human body need to taught and made required in our education system. If it were then abortion would no longer be an issue.
The first choice coming before conception is a concept that is largely ignored in these threads, even though it is a very simple truth. Birth control products (such as condoms) are available in any drug store. With the advent of the 24 hour super market most of which have pharmacies these days, contraceptives are available 24/7. Yet people choose to do without, or simply don't plan ahead.
-
but the vast majority of women who have abortions are women who have already had children years before and had a slip with their contraception
http://erlc.com/article/abortion-statistics
Fifty-two percent of U.S. women obtaining abortions are younger than 25: Women aged 20-24 obtain 33 percent of all abortions, and teenagers obtain 19 percent.
Hardly a vast majority of older women as you are implying.
Each year, 2 out of every 100 women aged 15-44 have an abortion; 48 percent of them have had at least one previous abortion.
Nearly half of all women who had an abortion last year, had already had at least one. Many of these women are using abortion as a form of birth control.
Try googling for failed abortion. 354,000 hits in .24 seconds. That's 354,000 reasons against abortion imo, can you come up with just as many for abortion?
-
Point taken,
My real point here is that all the things you have mentioned, are part of what one should realize when making the "choice" as to weather to have sex for business or pleasure. Realizing that there is a risk of conception no matter what prevention you choose is all part of it.
That's fair enough. It's also where hedonism takes over as the driving factor in the decision making process, for me. Because I view it as the prevention of life rather than the taking of a life it is easy for me to rationalise my pleasure seeking over anything else here. It all depends on where you draw the line of life when abortion is concerned. Some zealots consider masturbation morally corrupt because the sperm die and a life is prevented. I think this ridiculous, but I like sex a lot so I'm not about to subscribe to something that will prevent me from doing that.
Selfish and self-important, of course, but I do not think that a life of abstaining from the pinnacle of closeness to the woman I plan to spend the rest of my life with is anything to be overlooked.
We use a method of contraception called 'implanon' and it is a sustained release hormone in the form of a stick roughly the size of a match that is implanted just below the surface of the skin on the inside of her upper arm. It is inserted with a large syringe and requires a local anesthetic. This needs to be replaced every 3 years and is 99.9% effective as it avoids all of the problems of the digestive system that the pill can encounter. I believe it works the same way the pill does, by fooling the body into thinking it is pregnant so that no eggs are released. The constant presence of this hormone can cause irregular spotting or bleeding (IE. there is no regular period) but some women don't bleed at all or very irregularly, which is a bonus (no period = no monthly demon woman symptoms :lol). So far we've found this to be the best method and that is the only form of contraception that we use.
If she still got pregnant after all that.... well, I would want to be making an appointment.
Abortion is such a tricky issue. People have such vastly different moral compasses. So long as it's legal, I suppose :aok
:salute
-
Incest? Rape? Mothers life threatened by the pregnancy, yes.
Keep your legs closed and the dog in the house if your not willing to own up to it. Birth control for casual reasons should stop at the moment of conception.
But then again, if the woman does not want to carry through to term how can anyone other than God prevent it from ending intentionally.
What I find interesting is that I just don't see the criticisms of the man in this. The woman doesn't get pregnant by herself. The man should be using contraception or should make sure the woman is before taking the risk of getting her pregnant.
Maybe the man should keep his pants on.
All too often, the man is trying to seduce the woman into having sex without regard to the consequences. He has his fun and leaves the woman to fend for herself when she gets pregnant. (not in all cases obviously).
It's just too easy to point at others and say "It's your fault!" rather than saying "It's our fault."
-
The first choice coming before conception is a concept that is largely ignored in these threads, even though it is a very simple truth. Birth control products (such as condoms) are available in any drug store. With the advent of the 24 hour super market most of which have pharmacies these days, contraceptives are available 24/7. Yet people choose to do without, or simply don't plan ahead.
There are day after pills, as well as pills like RU486 but plenty of people use adequate precautions and a pregnancy can still be a result. But still you're right a little pre-planning wouldn't go astray.
What I find interesting is that I just don't see the criticisms of the man in this. The woman doesn't get pregnant by herself. The man should be using contraception or should make sure the woman is before taking the risk of getting her pregnant.
Maybe the man should keep his pants on.
All too often, the man is trying to seduce the woman into having sex without regard to the consequences. He has his fun and leaves the woman to fend for herself when she gets pregnant. (not in all cases obviously).
It's just too easy to point at others and say "It's your fault!" rather than saying "It's our fault."
I can't believe how many "men" on this board only have sex for the intent of procreation only!
Its also good to see that everyone who is strongly pro-life here also supports increases in social welfare and services to support all these "lives" they're so intent on saving.
Tronsky
-
There are day after pills
I don't think the day after pill is available here in the US.
Its also good to see that everyone who is strongly pro-life here also supports increases in social welfare and services to support all these "lives" they're so intent on saving.
There are many couples that want to have children but that can't for various reasons. Why can't those people adopt these unwanted children instead of killing them via abortion?
-
I don't think the day after pill is available here in the US.
IIRC 'the day after pill' is no different to taking 5 of the regular dual-hormone contraceptive pills. I'll double check that in a minute but I'm pretty sure that is the same thing.
-
I don't think the day after pill is available here in the US.
There are many couples that want to have children but that can't for various reasons. Why can't those people adopt these unwanted children instead of killing them via abortion?
There must be plenty of kids looking for good homes now
I can't believe the morning after pill isn't available...I would've thought it would've been a fairly common thing?
Tronsky
-
There must be plenty of kids looking for good homes now
I can't believe the morning after pill isn't available...I would've thought it would've been a fairly common thing?
Tronsky
Many couples desire infants to adopt, since abortion was legalized the availability of infants for adoption had dropped dramatically.
The FDA has to approve every single drug here in America, and that can take forever. Well, not forever, but years and years.