Abortion

[lameassdude]

Do you think women should have the right to abort their child in the first trimesters of pregenancy?

In my opinion i think women should be able to. If you are a teen who want to finish school you should be able to get an abortion. If you are someone who cannot support a child or not give it the proper lifestyle you should be able to get an abortion. If you are raped, and are pregenant you should be able to get an abortion. These are my opinions.

Please disscus(sp?) yours

[ImTheBestPerson]

Amen to that. Why force someone to have a child if they accidentally get pregnant. If i got my girlfriend pregnant id heave the choice up to her and support her either way.

With laws making abortion illeagal we would start hearing more and more about mothers giving birth to their babies in toilets or killing them and disposing of them (which I'm all for!....... Its a joke dont flame me). It should be up to the couple who created the fetus to decide.

[lameassdude]

Amen to that. Why force someone to have a child if they accidentally get pregnant. If i got my girlfriend pregnant id heave the choice up to her and support her either way.

With laws making abortion illeagal we would start hearing more and more about mothers giving birth to their babies in toilets or killing them and disposing of them (which I'm all for!....... Its a joke dont flame me). It should be up to the couple who created the fetus to decide.

You are the best person!!

[tiger army]

I don't wanna sound like an old lady but why doesn't anyone think about adoption. I donno about this accidently getting pregnant, cause pregancy is a cause and affect type of situation. People just don't want to take responsibility for thier actions. As much as i would like to support the easy way out, i just can't bring myself to. I think its cause partial birth abortions is pretty fucked. But this belongs in the old abortion thread......Jesus christ shoot me cause i really sound like a fuckin old lady.

[TexasAggie]

Here's an idea...be responsible. And btw, there is ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENCE between murder and partial birth abortions...(and yes, i know the thread was about abortions in the 1st trimester)

[lameassdude]

I don't wanna sound like an old lady but why doesn't anyone think about adoption. I donno about this accidently getting pregnant, cause pregancy is a cause and affect type of situation. People just don't want to take responsibility for thier actions. As much as i would like to support the easy way out, i just can't bring myself to. I think its cause partial birth abortions is pretty fucked. But this belongs in the old abortion thread......Jesus christ shoot me cause i really sound like a fuckin old lady.

No its ok to have your own opinions, at least you were gracious about it, and not being an ass. I like to know peoples opinions.

I think the partial birth is fucked too, you should have already made the choice if you dont want the child.

[ImTheBestPerson]

This just brings up the old saying "With sex there comes responsibility".

Abortion should be an option though because not all people are responsible. Those people end up getting pregnant through their irresponsibility and then realize they can't deal with having a child. Many are highschool or college girls that if they had to continue through the whole 9 months it would basically ruin their chance in life. Sometimes its not just irresponsibility but a defective contraceptive that causes unwanted pregnancy in which the mother should also have the option for abortion. While i support addoption some people just can't put thier life on hold for the time needed to go through with the pregnancy.

[drowningaugust]

First off, I believe that women should have the right to have an abortion. A friend of mine was raped and got pregnant, and had an abortion. She is a lot better off for having had it.

Secondly, the thing that pisses me off the most about most "pro-lifers" is that they are usually 35-50 year old white men. Who better to see things from the female perspective, right?

[lameassdude]

Exactly this comes across as totally sexist, but men really dont have a right to say anything about abortions.

How about a guy push something as massive as a watermelon come out of his vagina(well you get the point)

[tiger army]

This just brings up the old saying "With sex there comes responsibility".

Abortion should be an option though because not all people are responsible. Those people end up getting pregnant through their irresponsibility and then realize they can't deal with having a child. Many are highschool or college girls that if they had to continue through the whole 9 months it would basically ruin their chance in life. Sometimes its not just irresponsibility but a defective contraceptive that causes unwanted pregnancy in which the mother should also have the option for abortion. While i support addoption some people just can't put thier life on hold for the time needed to go through with the pregnancy.

See Ijust think no one ever pays for thier actions anymore. If you decide not to get an education and take a shitty Mc Donalds job, then hey what the fuck, there's welfare to cover my ass later in life. Even though they were extremely important in post great depression america, social programs have crippled america's morality (i don't want to force my beliefs on you though).
We are to easy on people that attempt nothing in life. Pregnant girl in High School is a easy example for pro choicers to use, but think about all the girls that had kids in high school and still finished. America at one point in time had decent ideologies. Also why should my tax dollars fund abortions. I believe every woman has the coice to get a boob job, but my tax dollars don't fund that. I really wish they did. that would be awsome, but i digress. We could actually put that money into our health care or social security system that everyone moans and groans about. If every woman had to pay for thier own abotion, then i think we would have alot less. People would at least be semi consious about what they are doing. Its just immaturity. btw i'm a 18 year old hispanic dude, not a 30 yr old white guy. I donno where that generlization came from.

[ImTheBestPerson]

I agree with you, if we required payment for abortions the #s of them would decrease greatly. Being the libertarian that I am, I favor the concept of people paying for their abortions, healthcare, living expenses, ext... being
I think that people screwed up (no pun intended) and they should pay for their problems, not taxpayers.

Everyone's opinion on this topic rely's totally upon their morals and most likely wont change unless they are faced with a situation in which an abortion is an easy solution.

[Biohazard456]

Well, one reason I see why people don't want abortion is because, hey, the girl had the kid, she should've known what she was doing when she got pregnant and wanted the child, and if she doesn't want it she's not a good mother.

I also see why they should let them get rid of her baby, if her choice if she wants it or not. Either way is pretty reasonable to me.

[Bubba-E]

Do you think women should have the right to abort their child in the first trimesters of pregenancy?

In my opinion i think women should be able to. If you are a teen who want to finish school you should be able to get an abortion. If you are someone who cannot support a child or not give it the proper lifestyle you should be able to get an abortion. If you are raped, and are pregenant you should be able to get an abortion. These are my opinions.

Please disscus(sp?) yours

i agree with the rape part mostly

if your pregenant (and its not because of rape), then i think they should just deal with there carelessness, as in there punishment for being careless

its so simple, if you dont want a baby, dont have sex :rolleyes:

or just have sex and were a condom, either way :D

[Bajee]

i agree with the rape part mostly

if your pregenant (and its not because of rape), then i think they should just deal with there carelessness, as in there punishment for being careless

its so simple, if you dont want a baby, dont have sex :rolleyes:

or just have sex and were a condom, either way :D
For once I agree with Bubba. The selfishness of killing somebody just so you can keep on having casual sex infuriates me. (see Bubba, im not a liberal)

[Bubba-E]

For once I agree with Bubba. The selfishness of killing somebody just so you can keep on having casual sex infuriates me. (see Bubba, im not a liberal)

ah, alright then

then dont give me stupid neg reps at random

however, i am glad we finaly agreed on sumthin

[lameassdude]

What if you were protected and you used a condom wrong or it breaks?

[quazy50]

i agree with the rape part mostly

if your pregenant (and its not because of rape), then i think they should just deal with there carelessness, as in there punishment for being careless

its so simple, if you dont want a baby, dont have sex :rolleyes:

or just have sex and were a condom, either way :D

yeah i agree. i think if you get raped you should be able to get an abortion, but if you get pregnant and it was consentual sex then you should have to give birth and if u want put the child up for adoption. basically its your fault that u got pregnant because u had sex unless u got raped then you should be allowed to get the abortion because it wasnt your choice to have sex.

to the condom thing. if it breaks then its still your fault because u know that there is that off chance of somethin like this could happen. you still consented to the sex and got pregnant you shouldnt be allowed to have the abortion.

[PsiRedEye22]

If the parents are stupid (as an extreme number of people seem to be in America) I say the baby really SHOULD be aborted. Fuck, if I had the choice as a kid (and if my parents were stupid) I'd rather be aborted than neglected, sold for sex, abused, or whateverthefuck. I think IQ tests should be mandatory before having sex, because casual sex pisses me off to no end when a slut starts crying that she got pregnant for the 8th time this year. Bleh.

Rapie is a TOTALLY different story and shouldn't even be brought up. You have a 100% chance that the father won't be there, abd there's a damn good chance you weren't ready for a kid.

In short, don't be stupid and run the risk of having a kid. Wear protection, and if you enjoy bitching about how it doesn't feel the same with one on, lob your balls off. Problem solved.

[Bajee]

What if you were protected and you used a condom wrong or it breaks?
Its the inherent risk of having sex. If your not prepared to handle a baby, dont have sex. Its like playing with a gun with the safety on, it just might go off in your face.

[puppyroach]

Abortion is a difficult issue. In cases of rape it´s a definite "yes!" if it´s her wish. In other cases... there is a thing called "pre-birth-depression" were a person gets so depressed that she can´t handle her everyday life... there are other problems that can occur also, in terms of medical concerns. Then there´s the group of women that don´t want to have a kid due to education, work and such.

What most guys don´t understand (if I as a guy can express my opinion :)) is that the world puts a greater pressure on women than on men. No man in the world can understand the physical and mental pressure a women recieves from being pregnant: she is demanded to have the kid once she get pregnant, yet a guy can just escpae and don´t give a damn about his girlfriend, she will have problems getting a job, because of the kid (a problem that is there even if she don´t have a kid, but now it only becomes greater), and for a girl in her younger teens, the social security programs aren´t adecuate enough so that she can care for the kid, yet finish her studies. So don´t we as men commit an even greater crime by not taking ANY responsibility towards the women? We are very eager to moralize, but much to often, we are not ready to take responsibility.

If a woman could get a job as easy as a man, despite pregnancy, or have a social protection so she can finish school, and the men would all take their full responsibility at home, sharing the burden 50%, then I believe abortions would decrease. At the same time I do agree that abortion clinics are to gentle in agreing to abortion, otherwise there wouldn´t be so many doing this every year. We do have to demand some responsibility, but it should come from both partners.

[Big D]

This is such a touchy subject...but here's what I have to say.

I like to think of the decision to abort a fetus to be similar to pointing a six shot revolver loaded with one bullet at a person's head...spinning the chamber so you don't know where the bullet is...and pulling the trigger.

If the gun goes off, you are guilty of murder, and should be dealt with accordingly.

But if it doesn't...are you really any better than the person who was unfortunate enough to have committed murder?

I say that while the law would look at them differently, morally, they really are the same...but that is for everyone to decide themselves.

Because I think they are the same, I don't think we have the right to take a chance at murdering an unborn child. I will go on record as saying that I have no idea when a fetus becomes alive...and because I don't know, I don't want to take the chance.

If you are responsible enough to have consensual sex, you should be prepared to deal with the responsibility of becoming pregnant; by not taking a chance at killing a baby. Keep the baby, and have it put up for adoption...there are millions of waiting couples who would love the opportunity.

I should know...my birth mother was a quadriplegic, and was reportedly raped while she was housed in a special institution. She could have very easily terminated the pregnancy, and I would not be here today. I am greatful that she did not...I am happy when I hear that others would not as well.

Please don't use abortions as birth control...and if you're going to have sex, use all the protection you can; and if you do get pregnant, please seriously consider going the 9 months and giving the baby up for adoption.

I'm for charging a higher price for abortions, and for the state to provide special assistance to pregnant women who keep the baby instead of having the abortion. I wish they could be illegal, but we all know that will not stop abortions anyway...illegal abortions will always be available. Also, even though I feel so strongly about abortions...I don't believe I could force women not to have them. I believe education is the key, and would beg on my knees for someone not to have an abortion if that is what it took...

[daveo the great]

ok... the first time any pro lifer goes through a 9 month pregnancy, labor, and raises a kid as a single parent then they can be allowed to talk about why abortion is bad.


its a woman's right to her own body. i believe in first and second trimester abortions.... i beleive it is acceptable until the point where they baby could survive out of the womb. if u havent decided by then... too late. but it still should be the woman's decision. not ANYONE elses.

[quazy50]

ok... the first time any pro lifer goes through a 9 month pregnancy, labor, and raises a kid as a single parent then they can be allowed to talk about why abortion is bad.


its a woman's right to her own body. i believe in first and second trimester abortions.... i beleive it is acceptable until the point where they baby could survive out of the womb. if u havent decided by then... too late. but it still should be the woman's decision. not ANYONE elses.

well just to let u know my mom is a prolifer and she and my dad got divorced when i was 3. she raised me and my brother until they remarried when i was in 6th grade. but yeah i already gave my opinion on this matter i just wanted to share that with you.

[/Tilt/]

I say no to abortion. If you made a human, you should allow it the gift of life. Just because you have a baby, doesnt mean you have to keep it. Adoption is a very real alternative. I know I'd rather be adopted than dead.

[ramittinbawdeep]

i believe abortion should only be an option to those women who have been raped or where tests have shown that the foetus is severely disabled, i am talking about a vegetative state etc where they will have absolute no life at all,not just because they may be disabled etc.

also these people who have abortions because a baby would hold back their lives,jobs etc make me sick to my stomach, if you cant handle the responsibility of having children then you shouldnt be having unprotected sex, in this day and age with all the std's floating around anyone going bareback is asking for trouble so its simple all you do is double up, pill and condom, barrier cream etc, barrier cream esp as the condom can split and the pill not work if u take anti biotics etc

[puppyroach]

i believe abortion should only be an option to those women who have been raped or where tests have shown that the foetus is severely disabled, i am talking about a vegetative state etc where they will have absolute no life at all,not just because they may be disabled etc.

also these people who have abortions because a baby would hold back their lives,jobs etc make me sick to my stomach, if you cant handle the responsibility of having children then you shouldnt be having unprotected sex, in this day and age with all the std's floating around anyone going bareback is asking for trouble so its simple all you do is double up, pill and condom, barrier cream etc, barrier cream esp as the condom can split and the pill not work if u take anti biotics etc

And where does ANY of you discuss the mens role in this? It´s just as important, and fact is, that in alot of the cases, it´s the guy that want the abortion, and where do you discuss this? Where do you invite the women to explain how the male-dominated world put pressure on them, treat them bad, and don´t acknowledge their abilities as human beings? It really just pisses me off... :(

[Big D]

And where does ANY of you discuss the mens role in this? It´s just as important, and fact is, that in alot of the cases, it´s the guy that want the abortion, and where do you discuss this? Where do you invite the women to explain how the male-dominated world put pressure on them, treat them bad, and don´t acknowledge their abilities as human beings? It really just pisses me off... :(I don't get what you're saying here...would you mind being a little more clear for me?

If I get you right, you believe that men are largely responsible for influencing the decision for a woman to get an abortion?...and that its not fair? Just asking...I'd like to understand your point...

Personally, I believe it takes two to make a baby, and that it takes two to make the decision to keep a baby or not. Before I got married, I always discussed my feelings on abortion with my partners, and would not have sex with any woman who would consider an abortion as an alternative to pregnancy. As I went into detail before, my hope is that people choose not to have abortions, and either keep the baby, or put it up for adoption after birth.

Sex is a recreational activity...and pregnancy is a possible consequence. Deciding to have an abortion, and screwing with the possibility that you may be killing a human life just because you had to get your rocks off is a poor solution. We don't know if we are killing babies or not, and I think we have a moral obligation not to take the chance...

...My birth mother very easily could have made that decision, and I wouldn't be here today because of it...

[puppyroach]

I don't get what you're saying here...would you mind being a little more clear for me?
If I get you right, you believe that men are largely responsible for influencing the decision for a woman to get an abortion?...and that its not fair? Just asking...I'd like to understand your point...

Personally, I believe it takes two to make a baby, and that it takes two to make the decision to keep a baby or not. Before I got married, I always discussed my feelings on abortion with my partners, and would not have sex with any woman who would consider an abortion as an alternative to pregnancy. As I went into detail before, my hope is that people choose not to have abortions, and either keep the baby, or put it up for adoption after birth.

Sex is a recreational activity...and pregnancy is a possible consequence. Deciding to have an abortion, and screwing with the possibility that you may be killing a human life just because you had to get your rocks off is a poor solution. We don't know if we are killing babies or not, and I think we have a moral obligation not to take the chance...
...My birth mother very easily could have made that decision, and I wouldn't be here today because of it...

Well, maybe I was unclear, I´m not sure about that. I meant that in alot of cases it´s not the woman carrying the child that wants the abortion, but her partner. I do think both should have influence on the decision, but oh so often when the abortion is carried out, everyone blames the woman, but noone blames the guy who wanted the abortion, which I think is really unfair.

The thing is, it´s the women that get pregnant (duh? :)), and therefore get in the focalpoint of the discussion. But I don´t think this is about women and their decision, I think this is about men and how we behave towards this issue.

There are mostly guys who oppose abortion, and why is that? Why are we the ones moralizing over something we can´t possibly comprehend? I believe men are the ones who force most women into getting an abortion, simply because we prevent them from getting a good job if they give birth, we have the ability of running from our responsibility if she have the child, and we generally put more pressure on women than on ourselves. This is not some way of victimizing women, but it´s how the world sadly works.

And have you thought about this? We can accept that a child commits a crime of some sort, and not held responsible just because they are so young, and haven´t the same concept of what´s right and wrong as adults have. Yet when it comes to pregnancy, we are quick to judge them, saying that a 14-yearold should have the child: "if she got pregnant it´s her own fault". Is it? I would put more blame on the society, where sex and intercourse have such a big place, where there basically has become a competition to lose your virginity as soon as possible.

I do oppose abortion in part, but the debate is often simplified, going into giving judgement over the women that have the abortion, yet the problem involves the whole society: how we look at sex, at women and at responsibility. And before we can fix those problems, we can´t really pass judgement on all the women having abortion, because we are just as guilty of their abortion as they are.

I don´t know if I´m any clearer now, I tried my best... ;)

[Zach]

Just in case some of you don't know, there have probably been about 20 threads in this forum on abortion, each of which eventually started turning into a name calling contest, and each time the same thing happened: the debate turned to one question: is a fetus a living human being? This is the key question because if you prove a fetus IS a living human being, then you can easily argue that abortion is murder. If you prove it isn't a living human, then you can easily argue that abortion is in no way murder.

Looking at it from a strictly biological point of view, one realizes the following:
Sperm is a living organism
An egg is a living organism
At the moment of fertizilation, the embryo receives DNA from the mother and father that will remain the same through that embryo's entire life. Therefore, it's only logical to come to the conclusion that once fertizilation occurs, that embryo is a living human being, and unless you can biologically prove the opposite of what I just said, then abortion IS murder.


Ok, so maybe that's not enough for some of you. For those of you who still have a belief that abortion isn't wrong, this is what I have to say about that:
I don't know about you, but ever since I was a kid, I've been taught by my parents, teachers, bosses, etc. that I need to take responsibility for my actions, and I agree with them 100%. People need to take responsibility for their actions. That means that if some 16-year-old girl got knocked up by her boyfriend, and she wants to have an abortion, that says something about her: she's clearly not ready to take the responsibility of another person, much less responsibility for herself; she almost certainly didn't even consider talking to her boyfriend about what they would do if she got pregnant. Her boyfriend's going to ditch her and she'll be stuck with this child. Who's fault is it? It's obviously her's and her boyfriend's fault.

So you want to let them take the easy way out, just so they can make the same mistake again? Maybe you don't get the picture that since aborion was made legal, over 41 million babies have been killed because of abortions. Maybe you don't know how they abort babies either; they usually use one of 2 methods: either 1) they crush the baby's skull when it's still in the womb, then dump the body parts in a trash bag, or 2) they use a vacuum-like device to suck the baby out, crushing it in the process. Maybe you don't know anything about abortion, and you're making completely over-opinionated, biased arguments because you blindly follow someone preaching about women's rights.

Seriously, everyone needs to be informed about this before they start arguing. Go to www.abortionfacts.com ; they give straight stats without trying to force you to go to one side or another.

[Megalomaniac]

Exactly this comes across as totally sexist, but men really dont have a right to say anything about abortions.

What? Excuse me? If I got a girl pregnant and she said I had no right to say if she kept it, I'd kill her. It's my baby too. Abortion is murder. Murder is illegal. Save a life and destory abortion.

Prove me wrong. Give me proof that abortion is not killing a human. You can't but let's just see you little girls try.

[/Tilt/]

Prove me wrong. Give me proof that abortion is not killing a human. You can't but let's just see you little girls try.
thats the debate. at what point does a fetus become a life?

[Thvggee]

If you can justify removing a tick from your body, you can justify abortion.

[Josina]

Yes I think women should have the right to choose for an abortion. Eventhough I'm against abortion I think it's better then having a child grow up as a 'failed person' and perhaps kill someone.

I got pregnant unplanned and chose to keep the baby, now I'm the happiest mother in the world. But I'm sure there are women out there financially not able to take care of their child. I'm lucky for having a wealthy and involved family.

[BigMattTheHobo]

The government has absolutely no right to regulate what goes in/ out or what lives in your body. It sickens me more of you are not outraged what the government gets away with.

[TexasAggie]

Just in case some of you don't know, there have probably been about 20 threads in this forum on abortion, each of which eventually started turning into a name calling contest, and each time the same thing happened: the debate turned to one question: is a fetus a living human being? This is the key question because if you prove a fetus IS a living human being, then you can easily argue that abortion is murder. If you prove it isn't a living human, then you can easily argue that abortion is in no way murder.

Looking at it from a strictly biological point of view, one realizes the following:
Sperm is a living organism
An egg is a living organism
At the moment of fertizilation, the embryo receives DNA from the mother and father that will remain the same through that embryo's entire life. Therefore, it's only logical to come to the conclusion that once fertizilation occurs, that embryo is a living human being, and unless you can biologically prove the opposite of what I just said, then abortion IS murder.


Ok, so maybe that's not enough for some of you. For those of you who still have a belief that abortion isn't wrong, this is what I have to say about that:
I don't know about you, but ever since I was a kid, I've been taught by my parents, teachers, bosses, etc. that I need to take responsibility for my actions, and I agree with them 100%. People need to take responsibility for their actions. That means that if some 16-year-old girl got knocked up by her boyfriend, and she wants to have an abortion, that says something about her: she's clearly not ready to take the responsibility of another person, much less responsibility for herself; she almost certainly didn't even consider talking to her boyfriend about what they would do if she got pregnant. Her boyfriend's going to ditch her and she'll be stuck with this child. Who's fault is it? It's obviously her's and her boyfriend's fault.

So you want to let them take the easy way out, just so they can make the same mistake again? Maybe you don't get the picture that since aborion was made legal, over 41 million babies have been killed because of abortions. Maybe you don't know how they abort babies either; they usually use one of 2 methods: either 1) they crush the baby's skull when it's still in the womb, then dump the body parts in a trash bag, or 2) they use a vacuum-like device to suck the baby out, crushing it in the process. Maybe you don't know anything about abortion, and you're making completely over-opinionated, biased arguments because you blindly follow someone preaching about women's rights.

Seriously, everyone needs to be informed about this before they start arguing. Go to www.abortionfacts.com ; they give straight stats without trying to force you to go to one side or another.

GREAT POST!!

[TexasAggie]

If you can justify removing a tick from your body, you can justify abortion.

Sooo you think human life is as precious as that of a tick's?????? :rolleyes:

[Thvggee]

I wonder how bad overpopulation will have to get before we start with the mandatory abortions...

[pat99872]

Just in case some of you don't know, there have probably been about 20 threads in this forum on abortion, each of which eventually started turning into a name calling contest, and each time the same thing happened: the debate turned to one question: is a fetus a living human being? This is the key question because if you prove a fetus IS a living human being, then you can easily argue that abortion is murder. If you prove it isn't a living human, then you can easily argue that abortion is in no way murder.

Looking at it from a strictly biological point of view, one realizes the following:
Sperm is a living organism
An egg is a living organism
At the moment of fertizilation, the embryo receives DNA from the mother and father that will remain the same through that embryo's entire life. Therefore, it's only logical to come to the conclusion that once fertizilation occurs, that embryo is a living human being, and unless you can biologically prove the opposite of what I just said, then abortion IS murder.


Ok, so maybe that's not enough for some of you. For those of you who still have a belief that abortion isn't wrong, this is what I have to say about that:
I don't know about you, but ever since I was a kid, I've been taught by my parents, teachers, bosses, etc. that I need to take responsibility for my actions, and I agree with them 100%. People need to take responsibility for their actions. That means that if some 16-year-old girl got knocked up by her boyfriend, and she wants to have an abortion, that says something about her: she's clearly not ready to take the responsibility of another person, much less responsibility for herself; she almost certainly didn't even consider talking to her boyfriend about what they would do if she got pregnant. Her boyfriend's going to ditch her and she'll be stuck with this child. Who's fault is it? It's obviously her's and her boyfriend's fault.

So you want to let them take the easy way out, just so they can make the same mistake again? Maybe you don't get the picture that since aborion was made legal, over 41 million babies have been killed because of abortions. Maybe you don't know how they abort babies either; they usually use one of 2 methods: either 1) they crush the baby's skull when it's still in the womb, then dump the body parts in a trash bag, or 2) they use a vacuum-like device to suck the baby out, crushing it in the process. Maybe you don't know anything about abortion, and you're making completely over-opinionated, biased arguments because you blindly follow someone preaching about women's rights.

Seriously, everyone needs to be informed about this before they start arguing. Go to www.abortionfacts.com ; they give straight stats without trying to force you to go to one side or another.


heh.. just watch g bush make masturbating illegal because sperm is a living organism :rolleyes:

[Thvggee]

Sooo you think human life is as precious as that of a tick's?????? :rolleyes:
Well, a fetus at least.

[TexasAggie]

heh.. just watch g bush make masturbating illegal because sperm is a living organism :rolleyes:

Sperm is nothing until it meets the egg...it has the CAPAPBILITY of life, but it must meet up w/ an egg first.

[Zach]

If you can justify removing a tick from your body, you can justify abortion.
Wow. I can't believe you said that. Are you really serious?

[TexasAggie]

Well, a fetus at least.

I doubt you'd be saying that if it was the "worthless" fetus of a kid that you may one day want to have.

[Zach]

I wonder how bad overpopulation will have to get before we start with the mandatory abortions...
Yea, because we all know that would work just great. :rolleyes:

[tiger army]

one bitch in my politics class claimed that a fetus is a parasite.

[Thvggee]

one bitch in my politics class claimed that a fetus is a parasite.
They have suckers on their palms for a reason.

[malice86]

I think if the girl opens her legs by her choice she needs to take the resonability. if they were raped than do what you want to take care of yourself, but before you do anything you need to think what the outcome might be! :D

[Bajee]

thats the debate. at what point does a fetus become a life?
At conception, but thats not the question. The question is when does it become human.

[Thvggee]

The question is when does it become human.
After becoming a frog, yet before becoming a Mexican. :confused:

[J_Dawg]

What kind of mother throws away her child. Sure the child maybe isn't what you wanted, but their is no excuse for throwing away life. It doesn't matter if it's still in the age of not being able to think, it is already a human, and if you stop it, you stop that child.

What if you were never given life, denied the chance to meet friends, to love, to explore life to its fullest, to feel emotions, to listen to a loser talk, the qualities in which we humans probably all want to feel and share, why must life be denied? No person has the right to someone elses life, it's not their decision.

I don't know, maybe this kid won't be bad after all, if you can look down at it, and forget the scars, it will heal and the future can be as bright as ever.

It'll all turn out for the better...just have a lot of faith, and a whole lot of trust.

[puppyroach]

Well, I´m seriously pro-abortion, but they should be more careful as to accepting a girl wanting abortion, it shouldn´t become a birth-control thing. And as for abortion having to cost more money... doesn´t that shift the powerbalance een more in society, when the poor can´t afford abortion, yet the rich who can care for the kids, won´t have any problem of getting rid of a possible kid?

[Big D]

I wonder how bad overpopulation will have to get before we start with the mandatory abortions...I think mandatory sterilazation would come much before this. They have already instituted voluntary programs in some countries around the world.

[daveo the great]

ok... after an egg is fertalized it becomes a zygote.

after about 10 days i think it becomes an embryo (it gets implanted in the uterus wall)

than after several weeks it becomes a fetus.

not until the 8th month it is human.

if u say "life is sacred" then u better die becuz ur killing when u eat carrots.

if u say "human life is sacred" well... i dont think fetus;s are human until the eith month. it depends on what u call human. is a cow a human? what about a chimpanzee?

i believe that the difference between an animal and a human is sentience... "i think therefore i am" if it CAN contemplate its own existance then it is sentient. and then it is sacred life...

now not even babies can do that... u cant really do that until ur about a year old. but once a baby is born possesses all that ability, but not developed yet.

but if u just take a 5 month fetus and put it there. it will die. it needs the mother. it is a parasite. a fetus CANNOT survive without the mother UNTIL about 7 months. until then it is an extension of the mother. once it is born it is just short of becoming a human. until it is able to survive on its own it is only an extension of the mother.

i think abortion IS about women's rights. its a woman's right to her body. until the baby can live for 10 minutes outside her... it is simply part of her.

[poopchow]

Amen to that. Why force someone to have a child if they accidentally get pregnant. If i got my girlfriend pregnant id heave the choice up to her and support her either way.

With laws making abortion illeagal we would start hearing more and more about mothers giving birth to their babies in toilets or killing them and disposing of them (which I'm all for!....... Its a joke dont flame me). It should be up to the couple who created the fetus to decide.


Shit, well i accidently spilt kool-aid all over my friend...well i dont have enough money to go to a movie AND clean the shirt....hmmm well i guess i have to kill my friend.


People "accidently" kill people while they are driving drunk, dont they get locked up for that?

You people have the most fucked up reasons for allowing abortion.
There is a reason why people say save sex for marriage, and if you cant do that wear a rubber glove over your Mr. Hasselhoff.

[poopchow]

ok... after an egg is fertalized it becomes a zygote.

after about 10 days i think it becomes an embryo (it gets implanted in the uterus wall)

than after several weeks it becomes a fetus.

not until the 8th month it is human.

That is just factually wrong, there have been babies born at 5 months and lived.

if u say "life is sacred" then u better die becuz ur killing when u eat carrots.

if u say "human life is sacred" well... i dont think fetus;s are human until the eith month. it depends on what u call human. is a cow a human? what about a chimpanzee?

i believe that the difference between an animal and a human is sentience... "i think therefore i am" if it CAN contemplate its own existance then it is sentient. and then it is sacred life...

now not even babies can do that... u cant really do that until ur about a year old. but once a baby is born possesses all that ability, but not developed yet.

Is a cow a human....thats funny. Its a scientific fact that cows are humans and chimps arent humans, not even fucked up PETA people believe that.

Ok, so if someone is mentally retarded and is 35 years old living with a caregiver, its ok to go up to him or her, take a knife shove it into his/her head, take a vacuum, stick it into their head, and turn it on? Im just wondering.

but if u just take a 5 month fetus and put it there. it will die. it needs the mother. it is a parasite. a fetus CANNOT survive without the mother UNTIL about 7 months. until then it is an extension of the mother. once it is born it is just short of becoming a human. until it is able to survive on its own it is only an extension of the mother.

i think abortion IS about women's rights. its a woman's right to her body. until the baby can live for 10 minutes outside her... it is simply part of her.

Ok, and 7 month old babies can live on its own, get a job, and own a house....hmmm well thats a relief.

[livingdeadgirl]

Ok, so if someone is mentally retarded and is 35 years old living with a caregiver, its ok to go up to him or her, take a knife shove it into his/her head, take a vacuum, stick it into their head, and turn it on? Im just wondering.

and im just wondering if you realise that 1% of abortions are done that way. and are only done that way in extreme cases. over 90% of all abortions are done in the first 3 months. they are mostly done by pills or surgically. but not surgically the way you described. what you said was a stupid statement. it has nothing to do with anything. you cant compare a 35 yr old mentally disabled person with a fetus.

and that abortionfacts website is just a pro life website. sure they say they talk about both sides but its very one sided.

i think it should be up to girl to make the decision whether she wants to have the baby or not. its her body. and for those people that say abortion is the easy way out, it isnt. abortion is a very hard decision to make. and it isnt cheap. and for that person that said rape shouldnt even be included in the discussion, i think it has every right to be discussed with regards to abortion. ive heard some people say on other forums 'it wasnt the childs fault the girl got raped' well it wasnt the girls fault either. she should have a right to choose abortion if thats what she wants to do.

i dont think abortion is wrong when done during the first 3 months. i think abortion is wrong later in the pregnancy, unless its done for a very good reason.

[nvrsurrender]

i think it should be up to girl to make the decision whether she wants to have the baby or not. its her body. and for those people that say abortion is the easy way out, it isnt. abortion is a very hard decision to make. and it isnt cheap. and for that person that said rape shouldnt even be included in the discussion, i think it has every right to be discussed with regards to abortion. ive heard some people say on other forums 'it wasnt the childs fault the girl got raped' well it wasnt the girls fault either. she should have a right to choose abortion if thats what she wants to do.

i dont think abortion is wrong when done during the first 3 months. i think abortion is wrong later in the pregnancy, unless its done for a very good reason.

I am curious why the father never has any right to decide. That is half his baby also. I understand that he can't carry the child but if the mother goes through with having the child he is expected to pay child support. It just doesn't seem right to say that he has no right to decide then if the mother can kill his kid or not.

I was also wondering what magical thing happens that after 3 months it is wrong to have an abortion.

[puppyroach]

I believe this thread is abit one-minded. Doesn´t anyone think there are more things involved in the abortion-issue, other than when a fetus becomes a life?? Noone seems to discuss WHY people choose to have abortion, HOW the society can change so that the abortion decrease (there must be something wrong when your country has the highest amounts of abortion in the world, togehter with russia) http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004397.html (the figures are quite old, but still fairly valid :)). If you solve the basic issues, causing people to commit abortion, then you can finally get rid of most of the abortions.

[pat99872]

i don't get conservatives... they're all so bitchy about abortion because they kill.. what about the pointless war we went in??

[dead]

I believe this thread is abit one-minded. Doesn´t anyone think there are more things involved in the abortion-issue, other than when a fetus becomes a life?? Noone seems to discuss WHY people choose to have abortion, HOW the society can change so that the abortion decrease (there must be something wrong when your country has the highest amounts of abortion in the world, togehter with russia) http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004397.html (the figures are quite old, but still fairly valid :)). If you solve the basic issues, causing people to commit abortion, then you can finally get rid of most of the abortions.
and what should this easy sollutions be :
americans should work less so that poeple can get in more times with there kids and that they aren't bored so easilly ?
more education about sex on school ?
a nationwide condom campaign ?

your a smooth talker but you don't give any sollutions it are not a few basic issues it's more then that it's just the whole situation where american is in heard off the orgy's by kids you think that can be solved by a few basic sollutions .
sex is promoted by tv no wonder they want to **** it's in almost every video clip.

[Zach]

I believe this thread is abit one-minded. Doesn´t anyone think there are more things involved in the abortion-issue, other than when a fetus becomes a life?? Noone seems to discuss WHY people choose to have abortion, HOW the society can change so that the abortion decrease (there must be something wrong when your country has the highest amounts of abortion in the world, togehter with russia) http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004397.html (the figures are quite old, but still fairly valid :)). If you solve the basic issues, causing people to commit abortion, then you can finally get rid of most of the abortions.
Let me repeat myself. There have been multiple threads about this topic already. They all tend to lead to answering the question of when does life begin. And the reason being that if you can prove that at the moment of fertilization a zygote becomes human life (which I explained in my previous post, so GO READ IT BEFORE YOU SAY ANYTHING ELSE), then you can easily argue that abortion is murder.

And as I already explained, a zygote (not an embryo, my mistake) is human life at the moment of fertilization; it's science. You can't prove that wrong. IT'S A FUCKING SCIENTIFIC FACT THAT A ZYGOTE IS HUMAN LIFE AT THE MOMENT OF FERTILIZATION. I don't know how much clearer about it I can be.

[Big D]

Let me repeat myself. There have been multiple threads about this topic already. They all tend to lead to answering the question of when does life begin. And the reason being that if you can prove that at the moment of fertilization a zygote becomes human life (which I explained in my previous post, so GO READ IT BEFORE YOU SAY ANYTHING ELSE), then you can easily argue that abortion is murder.

And as I already explained, a zygote (not an embryo, my mistake) is human life at the moment of fertilization; it's science. You can't prove that wrong. IT'S A FUCKING SCIENTIFIC FACT THAT A ZYGOTE IS HUMAN LIFE AT THE MOMENT OF FERTILIZATION. I don't know how much clearer about it I can be.The question of when does life begin is a great question...but it is a question who's answer will not be agreed upon.

This question is somewhat irrelevant to my argument. I propose that the question of when life begins is not as important as the FACT that we do not know for certain when life begins.

Because we do not know if we are commiting murder when a fetus is aborted, I believe we have a responsibility to not take the chance.

I stated this before, but again briefly, this is similar to loading a revolver with one bullet, and spinning the chamber to the point that you do not know where the bullet is, and then pointing the gun at another human being's head, and pulling the trigger.

If the gun goes off, you are guilty of murder.

If the gun doesn't go off, are you really any less guilty? You took the same chance of commiting murder, but got lucky. Shouldn't it be wrong to pull the trigger if you don't know if you are going to kill someone or not?

I say it is wrong to take the chance...just as I say it is wrong to tak the chance with a fetus; until we know for sure one way or the other, we should not risk aborting fetuses, only to discover down the line that we were wrong.

Pro-choice? If you choose to have sex, you have made your choice in my opinion. Choose not to have sex, and you won't have to deal with pregnency. Choose to use birth control properly, and you won't have to deal with pregnency most of the time. But if you do get pregnant, it is not fair to take the chance of killing the unborn child because you wanted to experience the pleasures of sex...

[puppyroach]

and what should this easy sollutions be :
americans should work less so that poeple can get in more times with there kids and that they aren't bored so easilly ?
more education about sex on school ?
a nationwide condom campaign ?

your a smooth talker but you don't give any sollutions it are not a few basic issues it's more then that it's just the whole situation where american is in heard off the orgy's by kids you think that can be solved by a few basic sollutions .
sex is promoted by tv no wonder they want to **** it's in almost every video clip.

Well, if you think about it for a while, my beauty talk does in fact have some solutions... especially if you would have read my earlier posts in this thread. The things you discuss (education and stuff) only work do a degree, and surely help alot of young people, but then it kinda dies of.

I´ve stated earlier, that society puts to much pressure on women, and to little pressure on men.

First of, parental responsibilities should be equally shared between men and women, covered by parental insurance.

Second, if ANY woman is supected of losing a job or missing the chance of getting one, based on her being pregnant or just for being a woman, the company in question should be punished.

Regardning the monetary issue: when a woman get pregnant, being under the age of 18, she should have a complete security net, including paid health insurance, because there are so many abortion among the poor parts of the population.

Talking about the mens role in this: there should be even harder for a man to skip his responsibilies, just not by paying shild support, but also being more integrated in future health insurance and schools fees (I don´t know about the rules about this in America, maybe you have them).

Also, there are alot of cases where the men are the driving force behind a womans abortion, simply because of their fear of responsibility, just as for women. Here is where the school comes in: teach more about treating men and women equal, as well as refugees and other minorities, so that people get a chance to earn more respect for each other. I read alot on these pages about: be a wimp=being a pussy, and playing tuff=having balls, these things must end. When we finally get respect for each other, I believe we can get the proper rspect for the life growing inside the woman.

Abortion is a horrible act, and you can talk about it being murder, but what if society foreces people to do this? Where does the society take it´s responsibility? The sonner we find a solution for the underlying factors, the sooner we can stop most of the abortions.

Sorry for the long post, I just had to get that one of my chest...:)

[Zach]

The question of when does life begin is a great question...but it is a question who's answer will not be agreed upon.

This question is somewhat irrelevant to my argument. I propose that the question of when life begins is not as important as the FACT that we do not know for certain when life begins.


Pro-choice? If you choose to have sex, you have made your choice in my opinion. Choose not to have sex, and you won't have to deal with pregnency. Choose to use birth control properly, and you won't have to deal with pregnency most of the time. But if you do get pregnant, it is not fair to take the chance of killing the unborn child because you wanted to experience the pleasures of sex...
Well I wasn't posting in response to something you said. But I still don't know where you're getting "the FACT that we do not know for certain when life begins" statement.

[dead]

Well, if you think about it for a while, my beauty talk does in fact have some solutions... especially if you would have read my earlier posts in this thread. The things you discuss (education and stuff) only work do a degree, and surely help alot of young people, but then it kinda dies of.

I´ve stated earlier, that society puts to much pressure on women, and to little pressure on men.

First of, parental responsibilities should be equally shared between men and women, covered by parental insurance.

Second, if ANY woman is supected of losing a job or missing the chance of getting one, based on her being pregnant or just for being a woman, the company in question should be punished.

Regardning the monetary issue: when a woman get pregnant, being under the age of 18, she should have a complete security net, including paid health insurance, because there are so many abortion among the poor parts of the population.

Talking about the mens role in this: there should be even harder for a man to skip his responsibilies, just not by paying shild support, but also being more integrated in future health insurance and schools fees (I don´t know about the rules about this in America, maybe you have them).

Also, there are alot of cases where the men are the driving force behind a womans abortion, simply because of their fear of responsibility, just as for women. Here is where the school comes in: teach more about treating men and women equal, as well as refugees and other minorities, so that people get a chance to earn more respect for each other. I read alot on these pages about: be a wimp=being a pussy, and playing tuff=having balls, these things must end. When we finally get respect for each other, I believe we can get the proper rspect for the life growing inside the woman.

Abortion is a horrible act, and you can talk about it being murder, but what if society foreces people to do this? Where does the society take it´s responsibility? The sonner we find a solution for the underlying factors, the sooner we can stop most of the abortions.

Sorry for the long post, I just had to get that one of my chest...:)
oke first of al thanx for the intelligent answer.
but i think there are many factors why kids get pregnant
sex is a taboo in america look at the response of janets nipple.
sex is promoted on tv
i don't know how the sexual education is in america but it looks like me it's poor (does anybody live here in the innercity who can educate me a little about the sexual education in america ?;)).
there is little qouelitty time between the kids and the parent so they have their fun outside house or inside when they parents aren't home so there is little social control from their enviroment.

and what you stated about the men / woman your right the mens often don't pay and leaps their responsibility.

i really don't get it why america is so fucked up by things that easilly could be prevented in the past.

and about the monetary issue this is america most poor working poeple are not or under insured .
this is a tottaly money based society you only get thing done in america with money.
so before you want to give the pregnant kids social security i think first a total good social security for the whole america society should been put in place.

I have read sources that abortion is promoted by charity organisations and it's to grazy that there are ads which promote abortion it is the same in my eyes iff they promote a gun to kill their child.

[Big D]

Well I wasn't posting in response to something you said. But I still don't know where you're getting "the FACT that we do not know for certain when life begins" statement.We do not absolutely know when life begins...there are opposing fields of thought that contradict each other, and no absolute proof that is universally accepted as correct exists either way. Two extremes are that life begins at conception...or that life begins at birth; with all types of arguments supporting grey areas in between. I tend to believe that life begins at, or at least very soon after conception, but I can not prove this. If this universal proof existed, we would not be having this conversation...

...therefore, it is a FACT that we do not know for sure...

BTW, a post on this forums is a post to everyone...thats how the forums work. It doesn't really matter who you were responding too...I responded to you...

[poopchow]

and im just wondering if you realise that 1% of abortions are done that way. and are only done that way in extreme cases. over 90% of all abortions are done in the first 3 months. they are mostly done by pills or surgically. but not surgically the way you described. what you said was a stupid statement. it has nothing to do with anything. you cant compare a 35 yr old mentally disabled person with a fetus.

I know how abortions are done, and i think its stupid. life is precious, when you have that abortion you are saying, "i decide to end the potential of greatness this person would have because i dont want the responsibilty" They may not be the next einstien but let them have a chance.


i think it should be up to girl to make the decision whether she wants to have the baby or not. its her body. and for those people that say abortion is the easy way out, it isnt. abortion is a very hard decision to make. and it isnt cheap. and for that person that said rape shouldnt even be included in the discussion, i think it has every right to be discussed with regards to abortion. ive heard some people say on other forums 'it wasnt the childs fault the girl got raped' well it wasnt the girls fault either. she should have a right to choose abortion if thats what she wants to do.

i dont think abortion is wrong when done during the first 3 months. i think abortion is wrong later in the pregnancy, unless its done for a very good reason.

Who decides whats a good reason, and why are you so quick to say that the mother is the victim??? The victim is the at least "potential" human.

[TexasAggie]

i don't get conservatives... they're all so bitchy about abortion because they kill.. what about the pointless war we went in??

You fucktard, this can go either way...ahem...I don't get liberals, they want to kill babies yet are against war.

[Thvggee]

I support the war against babies.

[Big D]

You fucktard, this can go either way...ahem...I don't get liberals, they want to kill babies yet are against war.I consider myself a liberal...and am against abortion, and war. I might add I also oppose the death penalty...any situation where humans are taking other human lives is pretty much a bad thing in my eyes...

[Lestatdelc]

but why doesn't anyone think about adoption.

People do, but the simple fact is women have a right to their own bodies.

I donno about this accidently getting pregnant

So you have no authority to speak about it?

cause pregancy is a cause and affect type of situation.

Unless your name is Mary. ;-)

People just don't want to take responsibility for their actions.

Horse-shit. Terminating an unwanted pregnancy IS taking responsibility for their actions.

As much as i would like to support the easy way out, i just can't bring myself to.

Abortion is not the "easy way out". Surgical abortion (i.e. abortions not done with the RU486 pill) is an invassive medical porcedure.

I think its cause partial birth abortions is pretty fucked.

There is no such thing as a partial birth abortion. If you are referring to late third trimester D & X abortions, those are ONLY done to protect the life or health of the woman and are NOT done as elective abortions but because of serious complications to the woman and/or fetus.

[Lestatdelc]

Here's an idea...be responsible.

Terminating and unwanted pregnancy IS being responsible.

And btw, there is ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENCE between murder and partial birth abortions...

There is no such thing as a "partial birth abortion".

Educate yourself, before you ignorantly spew contrived talking points form anti-abortion groups.

[Lestatdelc]

Many are highschool or college girls

Actually this is untrue. The largest single dempgraphic group of women who have abortions are married women over the age of 20.

[Lestatdelc]

See Ijust think no one ever pays for thier actions anymore. If you decide not to get an education and take a shitty Mc Donalds job, then hey what the fuck, there's welfare to cover my ass later in life.

What fiction. And this has ZERO to do with the issue of legal abortion.

Even though they were extremely important in post great depression america, social programs have crippled america's morality (i don't want to force my beliefs on you though).

Fiction. And this has ZERO to do with the issue of legal abortion.

We are to easy on people that attempt nothing in life.

So you ascribe to the crap for thinking notion that poor people are poor because they are lazy.. right?

Pregnant girl in High School is a easy example for pro choicers to use, but think about all the girls that had kids in high school and still finished.

Very few actually... but more to the point what does that have to do with ANYTHING about the legality of abortion...?

If you want to improve prevention of unwanted pregnancies in the first place, I am all for it.

America at one point in time had decent ideologies.

You mean when women didn't have rights over their own bodies?

You mean of course when you were white male Christian land owners.. right?

Takwe of your revisionist rose-colored glasses.

Also why should my tax dollars fund abortions.

They don't Not a dime of tax dollars pays for abortions.

Educate yourself.

I believe every woman has the coice to get a boob job, but my tax dollars don't fund that.

And that has ANY relevance to the topic how?

[Lestatdelc]

if your pregenant (and its not because of rape), then i think they should just deal with there carelessness, as in there punishment for being careless

Why should anyone be "punished" for pregnancy at all...?

What an backward view.

its so simple, if you dont want a baby, dont have sex

Glad to see you plan on having sex what... 2.5 times in your life,

or just have sex and were a condom, either way :D

Wear a condom...?

That we agree one, also helps prevent the spread of STDs, but you do realize that a significant percentage of unwanted pregnancies are the result of birth control failure, yes...?

Too bad most anti-abortion groups are also against sex-education that includes safe-sex education and proper use of birth control, and instead push foolish "abstinence only" education.

[Lestatdelc]

The selfishness of killing somebody just so you can keep on having casual sex infuriates me

Prior to the third trimester, an abortion is not killing "someone".

[Lestatdelc]

but if you get pregnant and it was consentual sex then you should have to give birth and if u want put the child up for adoption.

So I should be able to force you to donate a kidney agianst your will...?

[Lestatdelc]

I say no to abortion. If you made a human, you should allow it the gift of life. Just because you have a baby, doesnt mean you have to keep it. Adoption is a very real alternative. I know I'd rather be adopted than dead.

Living human tissue without brain function does not a human make.

And abortion to save the life or health of the woman is a must, regardless of trimester.

[Attak]

Abortion. Completely up to the woman. That's all I have to say.

[Lestatdelc]

Looking at it from a strictly biological point of view, one realizes the following:
Sperm is a living organism
An egg is a living organism
At the moment of fertizilation, the embryo receives DNA from the mother and father that will remain the same through that embryo's entire life. Therefore, it's only logical to come to the conclusion that once fertizilation occurs, that embryo is a living human being, and unless you can biologically prove the opposite of what I just said, then abortion IS murder.

A living human cell does not a human being, let alone a person with rights make.

Even unique DNA is not a valid criterion, since genetic twinning an genetic chimeras occurs sometimes naturally, and these do not make a singular person (in the first instance) or two people (in the second).

Having capacity for brain function is the only valid criterion for determining if something is a living human being or not. This is already how we determine when a living human being ceases to be a living human being with rights.

Even then, a life and health exception MUST be present in any laws surrounding this issue.

[Lestatdelc]

Abortion. Completely up to the woman. That's all I have to say.

In the first two trimesters I agree. But anything past the 24th week of gestation, the state can and should put restrictions on abortion that limit abortion to cases where the life or health of the woman are at risk.

[Big D]

People do, but the simple fact is women have a right to their own bodies.I agree...but the discussion about the morality of abortion really centers on the unborn body without a voice inside a woman's body...

I am not saying that a fetus is absolutely alive...I personally believe it is, but I can not support it conclusively...at least not to the point that everyone will accept it. What I am saying is that IF a fetus is alive, THEN a woman should not have the right to abort it (nor shopuld a man support an abortion); because we are no longer talking about just the woman's body...we are also talking about an unborn body as well that should have the right to life...

Again...because we don't really know whether we are killing a person or not, I think we have a responsibility not to take the chance of being wrong......IF that fetus is a person; or is alive by an accepted definition...THEN we are really suggesting that women (and men) can make the decision to commit murder as a matter of convienience...

Just out of curiosity...are there any supporters of the right to have abortions that would support abortions if we absolutely knew we were killing the unborn children...or do most of you believe that the fetus is not alive, and that is why it is okay? Let me know...

[Lestatdelc]

one bitch in my politics class claimed that a fetus is a parasite.

Technically it is true. I disagree with the philosophical and emotional content but from a purely biological aspect it is.

But you misogyny is duly noted.

[Lestatdelc]

I agree...but the discussion about the morality of abortion really centers on the unborn body without a voice inside a woman's body...

Well without a capacity for brain function, it is nothing more than living human tissue. THAT is the real point. At what point does a zygote, embryo, fetus, etc. become a human being with rights, and then how do you balance the conflicting rights of the woman over her own body with that of the the fetus...?

What I am saying is that IF a fetus is alive, THEN a woman should not have the right to abort it (nor shopuld a man support an abortion)

So I have a right to take your kidney without your consent...?

Just out of curiosity...are there any supporters of the right to have abortions that would support abortions if we absolutely knew we were killing the unborn children...or do most of you believe that the fetus is not alive, and that is why it is okay? Let me know...

Not trying to be pedantic, but the question is still a little overly general for me personally to answer definitively, so I will do the best I can in answering several points derived out of it.

If there is a demonstrative threat t the woman's life or health (as determined by a doctor on a case by case basis)... yes.

Because I do not have the right to force someone else to donate a kidney to save my life, or undergo surgery to save my life.

I assert that a zygote.. even sperm are "alive" so the second part of your question is where the quesiton gets ambigious. liver cell is alive, is human, and can even have a unique and seperate DNA, but it is not a living human being with rights.

Brian function (i.e. the capacity for brain function) is the only viable (pun noted) criterion with which we can rightly determine what is and is not a living human being (and hence have inalienable rights under the law).

[limak116]

Sometimes I wonder why abortion is an issue at all. For politicians its merely a way to show whether they are liberal or conservative. Abortion is not an issue. it's something that never will be solved. There's no solution to abortion. If abortion was illegal or became illegal, people would just use coat hangers or leave more babies in dumpsters.

[Big D]

Well without a capacity for brain function, it is nothing more than living human tissue. THAT is the real point. At what point does a zygote, embryo, fetus, etc. become a human being with rights, and then how do you balance the conflicting rights of the woman over her own body with that of the the fetus...?I am alive right now...I am concious of this. As I metioned before, my birth mother was a quadriplegic who was most likely raped in an insitution. I do not state this for sympathy, but to make the point that I very easily could have been aborted...for a variety of reasons.

Because I am alive, and because I am concious of this...I am grateful that I was not aborted.

My question is this...if I had been aborted, would I have assumed conciousness in another body perhaps? Or would that have been my one opportunity to exist as a concious entity?

There is no way to proove either answer either way...this is simply a thought exercise.

My response is that if that really was my one shot at existance, then no one should have the right to have robbed that from me.

If it wasn't my only chance, then I don't have a problem with abortion.

So I have a right to take your kidney without your consent...?No you do not...but you have the right to ask me for it, and if it turned out that I was the only donor that you could receive a kidney from, I would donate it to you.

However...life saving medical science, and the right to be born are similar, yet different topics...

Not trying to be pedantic, but the question is still a little overly general for me personally to answer definitively, so I will do the best I can in answering several points derived out of it.It is general on purpose...

If there is a demonstrative threat t the woman's life or health (as determined by a doctor on a case by case basis)... yes.I do agree with you here.

Because I do not have the right to force someone else to donate a kidney to save my life, or undergo surgery to save my life.I find this argument irrelevant to the discussion...a baby and a kidney may be too different to be compared in this matter. The right to stay alive, and the right to be born are different subjects, although they share a common bond.

I assert that a zygote.. even sperm are "alive" so the second part of your question is where the quesiton gets ambigious. liver cell is alive, is human, and can even have a unique and seperate DNA, but it is not a living human being with rights.Don't fool around with semantics here...I do not wish to debate the meaning of the word "alive."

Assume for the purpose of discussion with me that killing an unborn fetus pertains to conciousness as I described it before, and whether the aborted fetus loses the opportunity to exist, and be a concious human being.

Brian function (i.e. the capacity for brain function) is the only viable (pun noted) criterion with which we can rightly determine what is and is not a living human being (and hence have inalienable rights under the law).The law is irrelevant to me...it is reality that I am concerned with. I agree that brain funtion is important...but we can not know for sure that even this is the determining factor...

If brain activity is the determining factor, then at around 6 weeks, brain activity has been noted. Also, the heart begins to beat at about 18 days...

Again, I don't believe any human being should be allowed to rob a human being of a chance at life. Also, I don't believe that there is conclusive proof that abortions are actually robbing the chance at life....but they might be.

Because they might be, I believe we have an extra responsibility to use abortions as little as possible, and only as a last resort.

[Lestatdelc]

I am alive right now...I am concious of this. As I metioned before, my birth mother was a quadriplegic who was most likely raped in an insitution. I do not state this for sympathy, but to make the point that I very easily could have been aborted...for a variety of reasons.

So what?

Your entire statement above is wholly irrelevant. Your current status and capacity for brain function is not in question. If your biological fathers sperm were prevented from reaching the your mothers ovum, you would not be here either.

So what?

Because I am alive, and because I am concious of this...I am grateful that I was not aborted.

So what...?

If I was aborted I would never have been here and never know it. Same with you.

Meaningless statement.

My question is this...if I had been aborted, would I have assumed conciousness in another body perhaps?

Not one without a functioning brain.. no.

Or would that have been my one opportunity to exist as a concious entity?

Sophists question. If you have no capacity for brain function, no matter what caporal body you point to, you will never have a capacity for conciseness.

So your entire speculative rumination is irrelevant.

There is no way to proove either answer either way...this is simply a thought exercise.

Your question presupposes that there is a "you" outside of consciousness and caporal form. If that is the case (which I agree can't be proven) then the entire issue is moot. If we suppose that "you" can exist in extra caporal form, then "you" will exist wherever "you" are.

"You" could never "be" in corporal form without a functioning brain.

My response is that if that really was my one shot at existance, then no one should have the right to have robbed that from me.

Talk about circular arguing. "You" have no rights as "you" don't exist in caporal form. One could argue then that EVERY single sperm and ovum has a "right" to exist.

If it wasn't my only chance, then I don't have a problem with abortion.

Me: So I have a right to take your kidney without your consent...?

No you do not...but you have the right to ask me for it, and if it turned out that I was the only donor that you could receive a kidney from, I would donate it to you.

Nice to know, but the salient point is that it is YOUR choice and decision and RIGHT to decide that. Also you assume there is a capacity for me to even be capable of asking, what if I was in a coma...?

That said however, the point is that you have rights over your body. Yet those who hold the anti-abortion position claim that the zygote, embryo, etc. has a right to demand full use of a woman's body, regardless of consent.

However...life saving medical science, and the right to be born are similar, yet different topics...

Not really when it comes to whether a person has a right to use another persons body without consent, which is where they whole issue comes from.

Me: Because I do not have the right to force someone else to donate a kidney to save my life, or undergo surgery to save my life.

I find this argument irrelevant to the discussion...a baby and a kidney may be too different to be compared in this matter. The right to stay alive, and the right to be born are different subjects, although they share a common bond.

I am not comparing a "baby" to a kidney, I am pointing out by analogy that I (the fetus) have no right to your kidney, just as a fetus has no right to a woman's uterus, blood, use of lungs, etc.... i.e. her body.

Assume for the purpose of discussion with me that killing an unborn fetus pertains to conciousness as I described it before, and whether the aborted fetus loses the opportunity to exist, and be a concious human being.

Then your description (i.e. definitions) are irrevocably flawed.

The law is irrelevant to me...

Wow, then you have no real world point.

I agree that brain funtion is important...but we can not know for sure that even this is the determining factor...

Sure we can.

It is what define "us". It is the singular aspect of physicality that must be present for us to be a living human being. No other aspect of physicality define "us" as living human beings BUT capacity for brain function. We can be absent any other physiological function and still be a living human being. I am no less a living human being if I am missing a limb, kidney, liver, lung, heart, etc. Capacity for brain function is the seat of what defines us as living human beings.

Barney Clark was no less a living person with an artificial heart. I am no less a living human being if I am hooked up to a ventilator, etc. etc.

Without brian function, we are no longer living human beings. Hence we no longer have any rights.

If brain activity is the determining factor, then at around 6 weeks, brain activity has been noted.


False.

Without functioning synapse and nerve axions and neurons within the brain structure there is no possibility of brain function. Without possibility of brain function there is no possibility of cognition at any level. Don't confuse getting a dipole reading across cell membranes with brain function. You get the same dipole readings from living cells, this is how people claim that plants have "feelings" by hooking up EEGs to a fern.

" Also, the heart begins to beat at about 18 days..."

Heart function is irrelevant to whether something is a living human being or not.

Again, I don't believe any human being should be allowed to rob a human being of a chance at life.

You are talking nonsense. Something that does not exist before exist has no rights.

[poopchow]

The point that everyone can agree upon is that when you have an abortion you are willing to say that i am willing to end whatever good/bad/stupid/dumb/whatever makes someone human-- right here.

If you say life starts when the baby is fully concious or whatever you must agree with my first statement.

If you dont understand that, fuck you. There is your moral decision there.

[Big D]

Your entire statement above is wholly irrelevant. Your current status and capacity for brain function is not in question. If your biological fathers sperm were prevented from reaching the your mothers ovum, you would not be here either.

So what?My point is that I am here...and if this was my only opportunity at life as a human being, then that should not have been taken away from me.

If I was aborted I would never have been here and never know it. Same with you.Just because we wouldn't have known it doesn't make it any less wrong...

Not one without a functioning brain.. no.You presuppose that science has unlocked all the answers to life...which is possible, but not necessarilly true.

My entire argument centers on the fact that we do not know if we are killing a human being, and robbing its one and only chance at existance before it is born...

How could anyone know if at...say 4 weeks of developement...that the fetus does not exist at some primal level of conciousness that we can not conceive of yet? We do not know...

Sophists question. If you have no capacity for brain function, no matter what caporal body you point to, you will never have a capacity for conciseness.A fetus has a developing capacity for brain function, and will develop the capacity for conciousness if it is left to develope.

Your question presupposes that there is a "you" outside of consciousness and caporal form. If that is the case (which I agree can't be proven) then the entire issue is moot. If we suppose that "you" can exist in extra caporal form, then "you" will exist wherever "you" are.My question assumes this only as a possibility.

Talk about circular arguing. "You" have no rights as "you" don't exist in caporal form. One could argue then that EVERY single sperm and ovum has a "right" to exist.I am not speaking about rights under the law here. This goes much further. A fertilized egg will become a human being (barring certain complications with pregnancy). The developing fetus does not posses the same brain functions that a human being does...I say so what. This proves nothing except that it doesn't fit into a presupposed category that human beings created.

Why shouldn't I have rights if I don't exist in a caporal form? Because I can't argue for them?...A fetus will develop the ability if left alone.

Nice to know, but the salient point is that it is YOUR choice and decision and RIGHT to decide that. Also you assume there is a capacity for me to even be capable of asking, what if I was in a coma...?Yes, to donate my kidney...which is different than having the right to commit murder if I felt like it.

I could argue that I wanted to use my body to pick up a gun, point it at your head, and pull the trigger...and that you couldn't tell me not to; I'd argue that because my hand was part of my body, I wanted to use it to grab the gun, and I could use it however I wanted.

There is no way I should be allowed to kill you because I wanted too...to which I also say that if a growing fetus is alive enough by the apropriate definitions, then a woman should not be allowed to kill it.

That said however, the point is that you have rights over your body. Yet those who hold the anti-abortion position claim that the zygote, embryo, etc. has a right to demand full use of a woman's body, regardless of consent.If a woman chooses to have sex...she has given her consent in my eyes.

If a woman was raped...or her life in danger due to child birth...these are situations in which I could not oppose the decision to have an abortion; although I would still hope that an abortion did not occour.

Not really when it comes to whether a person has a right to use another persons body without consent, which is where they whole issue comes from.Again...if the woman had sex on purpose, then that fetus has a right to be there. If you are ready for sex, you should know that pregnancy is a possible consequence.

I am not comparing a "baby" to a kidney, I am pointing out by analogy that I (the fetus) have no right to your kidney, just as a fetus has no right to a woman's uterus, blood, use of lungs, etc.... i.e. her body.Again...it sure does have the right. Especially when it was the womans decision to have sex.

It is what define "us". It is the singular aspect of physicality that must be present for us to be a living human being. No other aspect of physicality define "us" as living human beings BUT capacity for brain function. We can be absent any other physiological function and still be a living human being. I am no less a living human being if I am missing a limb, kidney, liver, lung, heart, etc. Capacity for brain function is the seat of what defines us as living human beings.All I can say is that you are relying on definitions that human beings have created to support your argument. Those definitions of what is alive, or what constutes "US" may be flawed.

Without brian function, we are no longer living human beings. Hence we no longer have any rights.Why? Is this true because someone told you it was true?

Without functioning synapse and nerve axions and neurons within the brain structure there is no possibility of brain function. Without possibility of brain function there is no possibility of cognition at any level. Don't confuse getting a dipole reading across cell membranes with brain function. You get the same dipole readings from living cells, this is how people claim that plants have "feelings" by hooking up EEGs to a fern.I am not confusing it...and there is no possibility of cognition as we understand it today. Who is to say that there is not some level of cognition that we can';t yet understand?

You are talking nonsense. Something that does not exist before exist has no rights.Who are you to judge who or what has rights? Just because a fetus hasn't developed does not mean that it shouldn't have rights...you are relying on pre-existing definitions and laws to support your argument.

When I said that the law is irrelevant to me...I meant that the law is seperate from what is really the truth about existance, and what is really right and wrong.

My hope is that the laws we create properly represent what is right and wrong. Slavery was legal for a long time in the the past...and it was wrong. The law has been corrected.

Abortion might be wrong...and I believe that it is. I can invision humanity looking back on its past in disgust at this time where we permitted abortions with the same distain that we look at slavery...

[Lestatdelc]

My point is that I am here...and if this was my only opportunity at life as a human being, then that should not have been taken away from me.

This is delusional retrograde (time-travel do-over) non-think. Potential "people" that do not exist do not have rights.

Just because we wouldn't have known it doesn't make it any less wrong...

Nonsense. This is analogous to saying if I don't ejaculate into a woman I am denying the potentiality of millions of possible people that may exist in the future tense but do not exist yet. And I posit that a zygote is not a person either, though it potentially can become one, but so what.

Potentiality is 100% irrelevant.

I potentially could mill an adult human being, does that mean I am a murderer?

You are talking circular BS.

You presuppose that science has unlocked all the answers to life...which is possible, but not necessarilly true.

Meaningless overly vague use of terminology. "Life" is a meaningless term without defining it. Liver cells are "life" but we do not give rights nor consider living human cells "persons" simply because they are living human cells. The only practical definition of what is a living human being is a capacity for brain function.

My entire argument centers on the fact that we do not know if we are killing a human being

So taking a brain dead person off life support is murder?

So we have no way of ever knowing if and when people are no longer living?

How could anyone know if at...say 4 weeks of developement...that the fetus does not exist at some primal level of conciousness that we can not conceive of yet?

Because it is wildly speculative theorizing based on nothing and in fact in contradiction of the things we do know. You are theorizing that living human cells without any capacity for brain function is a living human being.

For instance, if you take a zygote, wait until the first cell division... one person or two?

If I remove one of the cells, and place it back in utero and it develops into a full fetus and on to a live birth and fully developed adult, have I killed a person by removing on of those initial cells...?

A fetus has a developing capacity for brain function, and will develop the capacity for conciousness if it is left to develope.

So what?

A zygote in a petrie dish can, if the environment is suitable develop the potential for brain function, but at that stage does not have such capacity, and in a petrie dish never will. But as I showed above, potentiality is irrelevant.


My question assumes this only as a possibility.

And is inherently flawed, because you could just as easily say that a single cell removed form a blastomere (an embryo in the 2-64 cell stage) is a human being. It also could be argued that any living human cell is a human being with rights.

It is a fundamentally flawed proposition as it pertains to the practical realities of human existence.

I am not speaking about rights under the law here.

Then you are talking mental masturbation.

A fertilized egg will become a human being (barring certain complications with pregnancy).

Actually odds are it will not, but again.. so what?

Potentiality is irrelevant.

The developing fetus does not posses the same brain functions that a human being does...I say so what.

The so what is then it is not a living human being, but simply living human tissue and has not rights, most particular any right to "live" and continue to exist.

This proves nothing except that it doesn't fit into a presupposed category that human beings created.

And oen could argue that any living human cell is a human being and thus has a right to liv eand eixst, which is patnetnly absurd.

Why shouldn't I have rights if I don't exist in a caporal form?

Because you are arguing hypotheticals, not reality.

A fetus will develop the ability if left alone.

So what?

Potentiality has no relevance.

And a zygote outside the uterus never will develop into a fetus. So does location determine what is or is not a human being with a right to exist?

Yes, to donate my kidney...which is different than having the right to commit murder if I felt like it.

If my life depends on your donating your kidney, it can just as easily be labeled murder. That said, a fetus prior to have a capacity for brain function is not a living human being, but simply living human tissue which has no rights, to destroying said tissue is not murder any more than having a kidney removed is murder.

I could argue that I wanted to use my body to pick up a gun

Which requires brain function or there is no "you" present and no capacity for volition of anything or even cognition.

point it at your head, and pull the trigger...and that you couldn't tell me not to; I'd argue that because my hand was part of my body, I wanted to use it to grab the gun, and I could use it however I wanted.

And this is relevant how...?

There is no way I should be allowed to kill you because I wanted too...

And this is not at all analogous to the realities of what abortion is or is not prior to the capacity of brain function being attained by the fetus. Preventing living cells form becoming a living human being (which requires brain function) is not analogous to murder. If you predicate your argument on that, then we are all mass murders on a scale unimaginable. On nocturnal emission makes every male on the planet a murderer worse than Hitler.

It is pure hookum.

to which I also say that if a growing fetus is alive enough by the apropriate definitions, then a woman should not be allowed to kill it..

Never really in disagreement. You claim that anything that has the potentiality to become a human being is already one and should have right to exist. I disagree as that is a ludicrous position to stake out. Potential future capacity to have brain function does not make living human cells a living human being.

That is the bright-line I am pointing out.

Once that threshold is crossed, I agree... nobody has a right to destroy the fetus, but life and health exceptions must be allowed.

I am not obligated to saw my arm off to save someone's life, much less sacrifice my life for someone else. I may wish to do so, but I cannot legally, morally or ethically be compelled to do so.

This is why there rightly is, and must be life and health exceptions in restrictions to third trimester (i.e. post capacity for brain function. And the determining authority for such decisions must be the person whose life and health is directly threatened by carrying the fetus to term and the medical doctor.

If a woman chooses to have sex...she has given her consent in my eyes.

So if I somehow saw you masturbating, I could rightly claim that you gave consent for me to compel you to donate your kidney?

Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy. And certainly not "consent" to something that is not even a living human being to use someone else's body.

If a woman was raped...

So if I rape your daughter, you she has the right to kill your wife...?

Not a very consistent position.

or her life in danger due to child birth...these are situations in which I could not oppose the decision to have an abortion.

On that we agree.

CONT.

[Lestatdelc]

CONT.

although I would still hope that an abortion did not occour.

So you would rather risk one persons life to save the potentiality of another person, not another person itself, but the potential of another person...?

Again...if the woman had sex on purpose, then that fetus has a right to be there.

Nonsense.

If you are ready for sex, you should know that pregnancy is a possible consequence.

So what?

An abortion is a viable option to end a pregnancy.

Again...it sure does have the right.

Total crap. I am indisputable a person and I have no right to use someone else's organs at all. Especially without their consent. You are arguing that something which, prior to even having a capacity for brain function (which is a perquisite for being a living human being) has a right that I as an indisputable living person does not have.

Your argument has fully gone off the rails.

All I can say is that you are relying on definitions that human beings have created to support your argument.

Not exactly, i am relying on what we know about and have discovered about human physiology and what we as humans have determined are rights inalienable rights afforded living human beings (i.e. persons).

Those definitions of what is alive, or what constutes "US" may be flawed.

Doubtful as there is very valid arguments and evidence to support these definitions, and if you or others come up with some, more than willing to listen. It is how we arrived at them. We did not simply pull them out of a hat.. What you are positing is shear hypothetical speculation without any evidence to support it.

Why? Is this true because someone told you it was true?

Because brain function is the seat of what defines us. No other aspect of physicality determines what we are as living being than this. It is the seat of cognition. Without that, were are talking only living tissue, which we do not give inalienable rights to. It is what we use to determine what is or is not a living human being.

[bDon't confuse getting a dipole reading across cell membranes with brain function. You get the same dipole readings from living cells, this is how people claim that plants have "feelings" by hooking up EEGs to a fern.[b]

I am not confusing it...and there is no possibility of cognition as we understand it today.

Cool. Was putting that out there premtively as some make eronious claims that EEG signals which show lioving cells menas brain function which is false. Not syaing you were asserting that.

;)

Who is to say that there is not some level of cognition that we can';t yet understand?

Then we deal with that understanding as evidence presents itself.

Who are you to judge who or what has rights?

Human beings define what does and does not have alienable rights under the law.

Just because a fetus hasn't developed does not mean that it shouldn't have rights...you are relying on pre-existing definitions and laws to support your argument.

Again you are talking sophist hookum. What does and does not define a living human being is THE relevant point of the entire issue. I have posited that since brain function is the only perquisite which is need to define what is a living human being or not, having the physical capacity for such is the only viable criterion to define whether a fetus, zygote, etc. is or is not a living human being.

A living human cell in and of itself is not a living human being. Period.

If we define a living human cell as a human being, then we are all mass murderers on an unimaginable scale.

When I said that the law is irrelevant to me...I meant that the law is seperate from what is really the truth about existance, and what is really right and wrong.

And "right" and "wrong" are define by human cognition, which is entirely impossible without brain function.

My hope is that the laws we create properly represent what is right and wrong.

As do we all. But "right" and "wrong" are determined by human moires, thoughts and ethics which are all predicated on cognition. See above.

Slavery was legal for a long time in the the past...and it was wrong. The law has been corrected.

We know that, and bringing that up is a straw-man argument. Nobody has ever asserted here that the law is infallible.

Abortion might be wrong...and I believe that it is.

Understood.

I disagree for the most part, because most abortions are carried out when what is being abortied is not a living human being, just living human tissue.

I can invision humanity looking back on its past in disgust at this time where we permitted abortions with the same distain that we look at slavery...

I can say that I hope for the same thing about denying same-gender marriage.

But there is zero compelling evidence that I have ever been presented that living human cells without the capacity for brain function are living human being and thus have rights.

[Big D]

An abortion is a viable option to end a pregnancy.this is a matter of opinion...

You are arguing that something which, prior to even having a capacity for brain function (which is a perquisite for being a living human being) has a right that I as an indisputable living person does not have.You keep coming back to this...I say we cannot know for sure this is correct, although given current evidence, I certainly believe it is a good argument. That does not preclude other possibilities however.

Your argument has fully gone off the rails.Perhaps it is you who does not understand my argument...I am not speaking in absolutes here. I am simply saying that we do not know for certain that your claim is true.

Not exactly, i am relying on what we know about and have discovered about human physiology and what we as humans have determined are rights inalienable rights afforded living human beings (i.e. persons).What if we haven't discovered something that is in contradiction to your current views...are you suggeting that we have already discovered all there is to know?

Doubtful as there is very valid arguments and evidence to support these definitions, and if you or others come up with some, more than willing to listen.How about life as defined by the joining of a sperm and an egg? Or that life begins when the baby is born, and begins breathing? Oe that life begins when the baby to be receives a soul...there are a multitude of other ideas about when life begins. That a brain must function at a certain capacity is as arbitrary as any of these. There is no conclusive proof...this is little more than a convienient categorization of life that supports your argument.

Because brain function is the seat of what defines us. No other aspect of physicality determines what we are as living being than this. It is the seat of cognition.You are still relying on speculation. Granted...this is the best definition we can come up with at this point, but that does not mean it is correct.

Without that, were are talking only living tissue, which we do not give inalienable rights to. It is what we use to determine what is or is not a living human being.Yes...a legal body has not given the an unborn fetus rights. This does not support your argument...it simply describes the environment in which this debate exists, and the thought processes of the sides involved.

Cool. Was putting that out there premtively as some make eronious claims that EEG signals which show lioving cells menas brain function which is false. Not syaing you were asserting that.Putting it out there as a matter of fact. No, they are not the brain functions that you, and some fields of science claim contitute life...but I still contest that you may be incorrect.

Human beings define what does and does not have alienable rights under the law.Perhaps we do...or perhaps a god does. Or perhaps physics do.

I have posited that since brain function is the only perquisite which is need to define what is a living human being or not, having the physical capacity for such is the only viable criterion to define whether a fetus, zygote, etc. is or is not a living human being.If you posted it...it must be true, right? If a scientist says it to be so...it must be, right? I still contend that the potential for brain function could be just as viable a definition.

A living human cell in and of itself is not a living human being. Period.Agreed. But not all cells are destined to become another human one day. These may be special.

If we define a living human cell as a human being, then we are all mass murderers on an unimaginable scale.Thats not how I define a human being...I only define the cells that will become a human being as human beings.

And "right" and "wrong" are define by human cognition, which is entirely impossible without brain function.Not necessarily...It is very possible that morality is not a human construct, and that we are simply coming to understand it as a race of people.

This statement is unfounded...take for instance that a god did exist; in this circumstance, it would be the god that had created right and wrong. It takes cognition to understand right and wrong, but that does not prove that human beings created it.

As do we all. But "right" and "wrong" are determined by human moires, thoughts and ethics which are all predicated on cognition. See above.Saw it, and argued it. You assume to know too much about this world. Read my sig, and gain some wisdom...

We know that, and bringing that up is a straw-man argument. Nobody has ever asserted here that the law is infallible.It seems that you were refering to legal definitions of human rights as a part of your argument.

I disagree for the most part, because most abortions are carried out when what is being abortied is not a living human being, just living human tissue.I still maintain that we can not know this to be absolutely true...

I can say that I hope for the same thing about denying same-gender marriage.It seems you are in favor of gay marriage?...so am I.

But there is zero compelling evidence that I have ever been presented that living human cells without the capacity for brain function are living human being and thus have rights.They have a potential for the brain function you speak of. As well, brain function may not be the answer.

Your position is not absolute...and can not be. If it were, this debate would not be occuring, as society would reach an understanding of the truth behind when life truly begins.

[puppyroach]

Long posts indeed, and really interesting. But I haven´t seen much discussion as to WHY people consider abortion. Why do you think, is it a profound disrespect for life, or other factors coming into place?

As to the question when life begins:

MOTION -- does it seem to move under its own power? Does it move
with some discernible purpose? (Toward food, away from heat, etc)

REPRODUCTION -- does it have some way of making more of itself,
either through sexual reproduction or by budding or fissioning in
some way?

CONSUMPTION -- does it eat or drink? Does it take in nutrients
in one way or another in order to survive, grow, and eventually
multiply?

GROWTH -- does the organism develop over time, increase in
complexity, until it reaches a mature stage?

STIMULUS RESPONSE -- does the organism respond to external
stimuli, i.e. has a nervous system of some sort to detect
external conditions?

I may have missed a point among these, but I do think they are the necessities for a definition of when life begins, or exist. And a fetus would qualify under all these conditions, therefore bearing the definition of life.

Am I against abortion because of this? No. We live in a complex society, where we have to (sadly) put other variables into the equation, mainly because we are a thinking, emotional and rational being. rape, social status, responsibility, are all things that affect the outcome, and I don´t believe we can conduct a constructive debate if they aren´t taken into account.

[shr00lvlyyy]

Just ask yourself, WWJD
:p :p :p

[Zach]

We do not absolutely know when life begins...there are opposing fields of thought that contradict each other, and no absolute proof that is universally accepted as correct exists either way. Two extremes are that life begins at conception...or that life begins at birth; with all types of arguments supporting grey areas in between. I tend to believe that life begins at, or at least very soon after conception, but I can not prove this. If this universal proof existed, we would not be having this conversation...

...therefore, it is a FACT that we do not know for sure...

BTW, a post on this forums is a post to everyone...thats how the forums work. It doesn't really matter who you were responding too...I responded to you...
Sorry, I know this is sort of a late response, but I've been out of town so I couldn't reply. Anyway, what I meant was that when you posted a reply to my original post, it seemed as if you thought what I originally said was directed specifically to you. It wasn't. That's what I meant when I replied to you. Sorry, I know that sounds kind of confusing.

[Karly]

I know this is all late of me & shit- but WHY IN THE NAME OF ALL THATs GOOD do we continue this discussion? We all know that this is one of those topics that ppl have very strong convictions & feel very passionate about.Lets all agree todisagree on this topic for once & call it a day.

[Lestatdelc]

Secret Court Upholds Federal Ban on Mitotic Cell-Division

AP Wire Services
August 16, 2004

President lauds decision, claiming "this is the only sure way to prevent a biological terrorist attack on our country."

"The US Secret Court has spoken clearly to the international community of scientists and the United Nations Security Council," Bush said in a statement issued after the decision.

When asked if the ruling would have jurisdiction over Karyokinesis, Bush appeared perplexed.

Diaries :: jnourse's diary ::





"Our aim is to eliminate all terroristic threats to the American people," the president countered with a smirk. "We have taken another step towards disarming those who hate America."

"Saddam Hussein and his outlaw regime posed a grave threat to the region, the world, and to the United States. He stock-piled biological matter for decades. Inaction is not an option, we must had disarm all evil regimes of every cell in their unholy possesion," Bush said.

The complete ramifications of this decision remain unknown, but the administration appears willing to accept potential risks. "Liberals are always asking 'what if this, and have you considered that?' But we will not rick America's future as scientists debate."

Critics of the decision note that administration has cleverly hit tw