Abortion

[DeletedUser]

Do you believe abortion is acceptable or inacceptable. Is it murder even if the babies are too small to know anything about it? Here's what I believe. I believe that it is inacceptable. No matter how small the baby is, it is still alive and killing a baby is murder. America is far too uncaring about life. If abortion is now acceptable and accepted, will killing old people who can't take care of themselves be next? Or will it be cripples and those that are mentally ill? So what is the difference in killing a two month old undeveloped baby that is still in the womb, versus killing a baby that has been born for two months. The difference is that you don't see the baby when it is in the womb, and you might feel comfortable with abortion in that case. But most people wouldn't kill a baby when it is has been born for two months already because they've seen it and it is so full of life. And after it has been born killing it would be murder. So my question to you is, what is the difference?

 

[DeletedUser]

Meh, pro-life and pro-choice are overrated, kinda like fascism and communism. Allowing abortion for any reason at any stage during the pregnancy would be just as silly as banning abortion under all circumstances. (Gift from God, anyone?)

What distinguishes human beings, special and sacred, from all other animals is our brain capacity. The brain doesn't begin to form in a foetus until the fifth week, and doesn't reach full infant size until late in the pregnancy... roughly aligns with Roe vs Wade's increasing level of protection for the child as its mental capacity increases from that of a pea to a Japanese monkey.

Woo, moderate.

 

[DeletedUser]

So what exactly is your opinion?

 

[DeletedUser]

In my opinion, being against abortion is anti-woman. To want to or to vote for making abortion illegal is anti-woman. It's the mother's decision whether or not she wants to keep the baby, and it is out of the question for others to deny them the right to do so.

I can understand it when people say that they'd never choose abortion. But that doesn't mean that others should be stripped of the choice. You can do what you want, and let others do what they want.

As for the OP, why stop at just the fetus? Reverse the process of life and what you get is a sperm and an egg. Two masses of cells that combine to create a zygote that then eventually develops into the fetus, which is still a mass of cells (up to a certain point I suppose). So if you consider the mass of cells a life, and you are against getting rid of it, then shouldn't it be the same for eggs and sperm cells? Clearly, they fall into the same category, really. You have a mass of cells that combines with a mass of cells, and in the end you get another mass of cells. Life doesn't suddenly appear. The mass of cells develops, grows, and eventually becomes aware, either through the development of a brain or thoughts. So at some point you can begin to say that the mass of cells is a life form, and at that point you can then say that abortion is similar to murder in that you are ending a life. But if you somehow still hold that life is present in the zygote ("no matter how small the baby is"), then by extension sperm and eggs fit in that category as well, and so you should be just as much against masturbation as you are against abortion. And if you are, well then I suppose I have nothing more to say. But if you aren't, then there's some discrepancy in your view.

In the end, we can all disagree on when we first consider the fetus to be alive. For me, I'd agree most with allowing abortion up to a certain point. But even though I believe that, it's almost irrelevant considering I am not a woman and my views should not decide what a woman can or cannot do with her own body.

 

[DeletedUser]

There is a difference in cells and human life. Literally humans are only a mass of cells, but what sets them apart from animals and other life is that they were created with a soul. When the sperm meets with an egg cell it immediately gains a soul which makes it human, therefore killing the "mass of cells" is killing a baby.

 

[DeletedUser34]

funny how this topic comes up now...considering it wasn't a few days ago I was having to sit through a similar discussion, and all I could do was say, hmmmm...ok.

My opinion on abortion is:
I am pro life, but I am also pro choice.

The pro-choice part of me - It is a woman's choice in which to take this action. It is not my responsiblity to enforce my value system or religious beliefs on another person.

The pro-life part of me - I think it depends on when a fetus becomes a human. I have heard many arguments that the soul begins at conception, and yet the bible tells me there is a point of accountability that comes much later than birth....Years in fact. So that argument to me is a bit square. To say that a baby becomes human at conception when they aren't firing all levels to me is a bit of a stretch. I look at it like this, (as most people use religion in this fight) If God knew a baby wasn't all there enough to give them accountability, then their soul is actually a pointless question as all souls go to heaven prior.

I am dead set against using abortion as a form of birth control. Be responsible or suffer the consequenses...unless of course there is a danger. I don't believe abortion should be used irresponsibly.

Since my ethical/moral/religious code dictates abortion is wrong, I understand, not everyone has those same values. I don't particularly want my tax dollars going to fund them. If you make them legal, but make those who want them actually pay for them, I am all for it. But I don't want to participate in the activity, even indirectly.

 

[DeletedUser3]

And here's where the discussion meets the tether. Those who advocate against abortion, do you consider abortion acceptable when the woman's life is endangered?

 

[DeletedUser]

If the woman's life is endangered and only way for her to live is to have an abortion, then I believe it is acceptable.

 

[DeletedUser3]

If the woman's life is endangered and only way for her to live is to have an abortion, then I believe it is acceptable.

So only if her life is in "obvious" danger? A little late actually, as the default response to such things is exactly that, and the women die almost every time. Alright, let's touch one more thing and then I'll play.

What if a woman's health is in danger?

 

[DeletedUser]

If its just her health then I'm still against it as she will eventually recover.

 

[DeletedUser3]

If its just her health then I'm still against it as she will eventually recover.

Oh really? So people recover from diabetes, high blood pressure, cancer, strokes, etc? Fascinating.

Every year 1.7 million women in the United States suffer pregnancy complications that have adverse and usually permanent effects on their health.

 

[DeletedUser]

Ok, first part, women don't get that from pregnancy, and second part, I am still against it as it is still killing human life and since the child is unable to defend itself I would call it murder. Btw, I'm not judging anyone. I'll let God do that.

 

[DeletedUser]

My stance: Pro legal abortion, pro-women's rights, men back off and deal with it and what relevance the bible has beats me.

 

[DeletedUser3]

Ok, first part, women don't get that from pregnancy

You are incorrect, grossly incorrect. This demonstrates you need to research this issue, as you are basing your decision without consideration of the woman.

As I stated, 1.7 million women in the United States suffer a pregnancy complication that has an adverse and usually permanent effect on their health (according to CDC & WHO). Listed in reports are diabetes, high blood pressure, cancer, strokes, and other permanent medical complications that result from pregnancy.

You also do not realize that 529,000 women die every year for attempting pregnancy. ~ http://www.who.int/features/qa/12/en/index.html

and second part, I am still against it as it is still killing human life and since the child is unable to defend itself I would call it murder.

Interesting. According to WHO, escalated anti-abortion efforts are a co-conspirator in the tripling of maternal deaths in the United States over a span of just 15 years ~ http://www.who.int/pmnch/topics/maternal/20100402_ihmearticle.pdf

So, would you call that murder?

Btw, I'm not judging anyone. I'll let God do that.

And yet, that's exactly what you are doing.

Women die during pregnancy largely for risks that were not detected and/or posed sudden death. The simple fact is, pregnancy is very risky. In the U.S. alone, it is over three times more risky than driving (in many countries it is over 100 times more dangerous) and driving carries with it substantial risks but nobody forces you to drive. It's a choice to risk your life behind the wheel.

I am largely concerned by the myopic, male perception of the issue. A total disconnect, a complete failure to recognize just how dangerous pregnancy is, how unpredictable, and just how wrong it is to "force" a woman to take such risks against her will, particularly when a man undergoes no risk and will, statistically, not likely take responsibility either. Impugning upon the laws of the Nation, and then claiming you do not impose judgement, seems to be an even greater disconnect than mere ignorance of the facts in this case, particularly when women's lives are lost by the intrusion.

Respectfully, I think it is reasonable to assert that it is a demonstration of cognitive dissonance.

 

[DeletedUser]

I am not judging anyone. I am stating my beliefs based on what I have read out of the Bible and what my parents told me. And it is a woman's choice most of the time whether she becomes pregnant or not or it is because of a choice she made that she is pregnant. And if it isn't her decision, it is because of rape or that she didn't have the will power to say no.

 

[DeletedUser3]

I read the Bible aplenty. It does not address this issue as you may think. In fact, it is quite in contradiction. Nonetheless, if you wish to make this a religious argument, I will need to end the discussion. Just to address your soul argument, do you think women don't have souls that you should endanger their lives by forcing them to full term against their will?

Is the life of a woman less than?

And it is a woman's choice most of the time whether she becomes pregnant or not or it is because of a choice she made that she is pregnant. And if it isn't her decision, it is because of rape or that she didn't have the will power to say no.

So your argument is that it is a woman's fault for becoming pregnant? So going full term is punishment to a woman? So you think it is right to punish someone, to potentially kill them?

Let me ask you this... where does the man take responsibility?

Perhaps if a woman dies of a pregnancy, we could impose laws that require the man to die as well? Or perhaps, if a woman suffers a stroke, or gains high blood pressure, or epilepsy, or cancer, we should likewise subject the man to this by legal decree?

 

[DeletedUser34]

Kirk,
I have always found it funny when people used the bible as their sole back up on a moral issue and expected that argument to hold any water against those who don't believe in the bible.

You started this debate based solely off of a faith/dogma based standard, and didn't take into account that to those that don't believe in the sanctity of the bible, that is the most foolish thing ever.

what kind of debate does that bring about? That is pissing in the wind. And rather pointless. Only religious people who bring this topic up, and even then, they only do so to force feed religion down a non believers throat and think they are hiding their agenda. I am a Christian, (lately I suck at it) but to my bones I am, and even I think to do so is pretty darn low.

 

[DeletedUser]

Allright, I did make a mistake by jumping into this without backing up my argument and not heading it out right. I believe abortion is wrong and I'm still not sure what you believe. I will come back with this some other time when I've got it backed up a lot better. But for now I will admit defeat in this argument and pronounce you victor of this debate. I tried using the Bible to back it up. That was wrong and low and I'm sorry. The reason I brought it into this debate was because you had so much information and I knew I couldn't back my belief up with good solid facts so I tried using the Bible to do that. Once again I am sorry but I will be back. Now if we could get this thread closed it would be great. And Hellstrom, you are welcome to rub it in or fire some parting shots if you like.

Sincerely,
Kirk55

 

[DeletedUser34]

Allright, I did make a mistake by jumping into this without backing up my argument and not heading it out right. I believe abortion is wrong and I'm still not sure what you believe.

if you are talking to me, I think abortion is wrong. If you are talking to Hell, I think it is pretty obvious he is pro-choice.

edit:
Using the bible isn't low...ummmm I do it all the time to rationalize MY feelings, what is low, is not admitting to the real agenda being brought forth.

 

[Liberty]

In my opinion, being against abortion is anti-woman.

In my opinion, it's pro-innocent life.

To want to or to vote for making abortion illegal is anti-woman. It's the mother's decision whether or not she wants to keep the baby, and it is out of the question for others to deny them the right to do so.

I can understand it when people say that they'd never choose abortion. But that doesn't mean that others should be stripped of the choice. You can do what you want, and let others do what they want.

I would agree with you, if it wasn't for this thing called the baby. Who will stand up for its rights?

The Mother has a lot of rights. She has the right to keep her legs closed and not to do the act that has been known for millions of years to cause babies. She has the right to buy herself birth control pills and take them. In fact, she has the right to use all manner of birth control. In fact, if there is an oopsy moment, I think most states allow the morning after pill.

So, if she doesn't exercise those rights and finds herself pregnant later on, the decision is not only hers at that point. The other life in her has rights too and yes, she may just have to trouble herself for a few months to give that life a chance. She can always give the baby up for adoption afterwards.