Jump to content
Bear

Abortion

Recommended Posts

I can't even bring myself to watch the video. Comparing the Holocaust to abortion is just so... Wrong, it actually makes me tear up a bit. The Holocaust killed about 11 million people who were undeniably people. They could think and feel. While abortion is sad, it does not even come close to the ballpark of the Holocaust.

 

@Infinis: I believe the number was actually 11 million. It was 6 million Jews, but he also prosecuted (is that the right word?) gays, Rrom people, politcal opponnents, etc.

Share this post


Link to post

I can't even bring myself to watch the video. Comparing the Holocaust to abortion is just so... Wrong, it actually makes me tear up a bit. The Holocaust killed about 11 million people who were undeniably people. They could think and feel. While abortion is sad, it does not even come close to the ballpark of the Holocaust.

Do not watch it; stick with those instincts! It is awful. I watched it once because I wanted to formulate some response of the whole thing or something. But just no. It's absolutely awful and not even worth the time.

 

It's basically some guy attacking people on the street and totally demeaning the experience of the Holocaust and tearing people up emotionally and calling them Nazis' if they think otherwise.

 

It ruined me emotionally for quite some time watching him treat so many people and their memories and experiences with complete disrespect.

Edited by SockPuppet Strangler

Share this post


Link to post

I mention heartbeat because some people say 'it's a baby when it's heart starts beating', yet abortions are legal up to full term.

 

Millions of babies are killed in abortions mills. Millions of people were killed in the holocaust.

 

You seem to have your opinions set, though. I have mine.

 

Also Sock, that is opinionated. But to each their own. Just don't try to bombard me with hate, please. And don't even say it's not hate, but you're going to anyway because that's how these 'conversations' work.

Edited by Whitefire

Share this post


Link to post

Is THAT what the video's about? Oh god, I'm glad I decided against watching it. Trying to compare that to a woman removing a bunch of cells from her own body that could easily be miscarriaged or absorbed or turn into a tumor is just... ugh

 

My breathing started freaking out when I read about it, god knows what would happen if I actually watched the video. ;__;

Edited by Switch

Share this post


Link to post
I mention heartbeat because some people say 'it's a baby when it's heart starts beating', yet abortions are legal up to full term.

No, the argument is over personhood. A baby has personhood. A pregnant woman has personhood. An embryo or fetus does not.

 

Millions of babies are killed in abortions mills. Millions of people were killed in the holocaust.

 

Abortion mill, really? That's utterly offensive. =\

 

Abortion does not kill babies.

 

Fetus/embryo =/= baby.

 

Have you ever spoken to anybody who survived the Holocaust? You should. You'd see how disgusting a comparison that is.

 

Also Sock, that is opinionated. But to each their own. Just don't try to bombard me with hate, please. And don't even say it's not hate, but you're going to anyway because that's how these 'conversations' work.

 

It's one thing to be pro-life. I'm perfectly fine having conversations and discussions and debates about abortion.

 

It's another to make harmful, cruel, and malicious comparisons. That video you posted is harmful to people.

 

What would you even do if some guy came up to you with a video camera, and led you through a conversation that would end in him calling you a Nazi if you disagreed with him? Of course you would want to protect yourself. That would be an awful experience. And what if he had happened across a Holocaust survivor?

Share this post


Link to post

I mention heartbeat because some people say 'it's a baby when it's heart starts beating', yet abortions are legal up to full term.

 

Millions of babies are killed in abortions mills. Millions of people were killed in the holocaust.

 

You seem to have your opinions set, though. I have mine.

 

Also Sock, that is opinionated. But to each their own. Just don't try to bombard me with hate, please. And don't even say it's not hate, but you're going to anyway because that's how these 'conversations' work.

Personally, I believe it is a baby only late in pregnancy, when it can survive outside of the womb. Because of this, I am very against late-term abortions, except in extreme circumstances.

 

It's fine that you have you're opinion about abortion, but I just can't wrap my head around comparing abortion to the Holocaust. These were established people, and they were not only killed, but tortured emotionally, mentally, and physically. The whole thing is just... awful. DX

 

Sock wrapped up my feelings much better than I can.

Edited by satyr76

Share this post


Link to post

Thank you for insulting the video and then calling me offensive. I'm done, this is going nowhere and is ultimately futile. I have not nor will I change my view on this matter.

Share this post


Link to post

It depends on where you live--not everywhere allows abortions past various dates.

 

And there are a massive number of reasons people choose to abort other than "it's my body, my choice, and I don't want it". Perhaps the fetus isn't viable, perhaps it would be born with complications that, quite honestly, the parents do not have the resources to handle. Or perhaps it will kill the mother to give birth to it. Or perhaps the mother has a crippling phobia of pregnancy--that baby ain't gonna get born of the mother offs herself, after all.

 

Those are all very good reasons to abort. (Though I personally feel that just not wanting to have your body treated as nothing more than an incubator is a damn good reason, and whatever reason a person has is none of my business)

Share this post


Link to post

I mention heartbeat because some people say 'it's a baby when it's heart starts beating', yet abortions are legal up to full term.

 

Millions of babies are killed in abortions mills. Millions of people were killed in the holocaust.

 

You seem to have your opinions set, though. I have mine.

 

Also Sock, that is opinionated. But to each their own. Just don't try to bombard me with hate, please. And don't even say it's not hate, but you're going to anyway because that's how these 'conversations' work.

Whitefire while it can be allowed up until the due date it rarely is the case. Most Late term abortions or second term abortions are for medical reasons so the child won't suffer.

 

This link here I used when doing a trail case for high school about George Tiller. (RIP)

 

stories from both sides. Haven't read through them all but it looks like another site I used with more stories can't be sure though

 

EDIT: Was wrong about that last site. It talks about women who have given birth to children and thought about third term abortion, but it gives a different spin on it. For women who can go through with a doomed or most likely doomed pregnancy have a ton of strength but there are reasons. So for now I'm leaving the link.

Edited by brairtrainer

Share this post


Link to post
Thank you for insulting the video and then calling me offensive. I'm done, this is going nowhere and is ultimately futile. I have not nor will I change my view on this matter.

Nobody was calling you offensive. o_O They were calling the VIDEO offensive--huge difference as you are not a video but a person.

 

Something that compares the Holocaust to abortion IS horribly, horribly offensive.

Share this post


Link to post

Doing more searching trying to find links I used for my project, and came across this.

 

http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2009/06...-you-can-help-0 has several people who talk about their reasons including a couple who's child had Cat Eye Syndrome and the kidneys were begining to fail.

 

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/0...-dana-weinstein another story that talks about the bans of late term abortion, and a woman who had one

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

Whitefire, before you compare anything to the Holocaust, or endorse anything which compares things to the Holocaust, I'd recommend you watch Shoah. It's a 10-hour-long Holocaust documentary that includes interviews with survivors and former concentration camp workers.

 

It's impossible to describe the emotional impact it has. To simply say "you won't get through it without being blinded by tears" almost demeans it.

 

Genocide is just not at all comparable to a legal procedure that you disagree with. You are welcome to your views and you are within your rights to think that abortion is wrong and to argue over the definition of when life begins.

 

But please don't compare abortion to the Holocaust. It's just not the same thing at all.

Edited by inlaterdays

Share this post


Link to post

Sock, could you take the link down please? It's massively triggering.

 

Whitefire-you are wrong.

 

And a couple at our church has waited months/years to adopt, so don't try to pass off any 'unwanted children' stuff on me. Heck, they're adopting again.

 

I didn't know a family could possibly care for hundreds and thousands of people at once! That's amazing!

 

Millions of babies are killed in abortions mills. Millions of people were killed in the holocaust.

 

Millions of humanoisld species were killed during the ice age, so ice age=abortion=holocaust? Hmmmm.

Edited by ylangylang

Share this post


Link to post
Thank you for insulting the video and then calling me offensive. I'm done, this is going nowhere and is ultimately futile. I have not nor will I change my view on this matter.

Well aren't you a precious little martyr. You poor thing- all you did was spit on the memory of eleven million dead and millions more tortured to score a cheap point. Your right. How dare we call that offensive. dry.gif

Share this post


Link to post

Thank you for insulting the video and then calling me offensive. I'm done, this is going nowhere and is ultimately futile. I have not nor will I change my view on this matter.

First off, no one was offending you.

 

Your video is actually offending US.

 

Babies aren't killed, fetuses are.

 

Beating heartbeat at one month? So? Shinytomato DID say that a tumor formed from a fetus can have a heart beat. Along with lungs aswell and can feel pain. And no, she isn't making this up. She is a LISCENCED midwife in several countries and is a social worker who sees more in one day than many people do in a week, dealing with kids in the system who commit suicide almost every day and still stays strong. Is this a big difference to you?

 

I have not nor will I change my view on this matter.

 

This is the reason why abortion is becoming more and more narrow. Pro-birthers refuse to look at facts and only use morals.

Edited by GhostChilli

Share this post


Link to post

Hey guys, I think she gets the point. You don't like the video, it's offensive. She's gone. You're all saying the same thing... Dogpiling on her isn't going to convince her of your position.

 

 

This is the reason why abortion is becoming more and more narrow. Pro-birthers refuse to look at facts and only use morals.

 

I've looked at facts. People have told me these facts. You've told me these facts, Shiny has told me these facts. I've been berated and ridiculed for my position. But I'm not changing it. I'm unabashedly, openly, completely pro-life because I believe it is morally wrong to terminate human life. Yes, it's a firm, closed minded, unchanging position. Oh well, shucks, looks like people can have opinions.

Share this post


Link to post

Hey guys, I think she gets the point. You don't like the video, it's offensive. She's gone. You're all saying the same thing... Dogpiling on her isn't going to convince her of your position.

 

 

 

 

I've looked at facts. People have told me these facts. You've told me these facts, Shiny has told me these facts. I've been berated and ridiculed for my position. But I'm not changing it. I'm unabashedly, openly, completely pro-life because I believe it is morally wrong to terminate human life. Yes, it's a firm, closed minded, unchanging position. Oh well, shucks, looks like people can have opinions.

You're being silly. You can have your opinions, there's nothing wrong with that because it's your mind and thought. Crossing the line is when you want to control others and force your morals onto them. As in, the screaming pro-birthers outside of clinics.

 

You've looked at the facts, that's good. You being pro-life isn't something I can change because it's not in my power, it's in yours.

Edited by GhostChilli

Share this post


Link to post
You're being silly. You can have your opinions, there's nothing wrong with that because it's your mind and thought. Crossing the line is when you want to control others and force your morals onto them. As in, the screaming pro-birthers outside of clinics.

 

You being pro-life isn't something I can change because it's not in my power, it's in yours.

I strongly disagree with the way most people go about anti-abortion protests. I've seen some pretty disgusting displays of moral superiority and arrogance. They don't void the pro-life position any more than disgusting, hateful, arrogant pro-choicers void yours.

 

 

I'm having difficulty constructing a coherent reply to the rest that doesn't sound arrogant, so I'm going to sleep on this rather than stick my foot in my mouth. I don't know that replying will do any good anyways, you all know what I believe.

Share this post


Link to post

I've looked at facts. People have told me these facts. You've told me these facts, Shiny has told me these facts. I've been berated and ridiculed for my position. But I'm not changing it. I'm unabashedly, openly, completely pro-life because I believe it is morally wrong to terminate human life. Yes, it's a firm, closed minded, unchanging position. Oh well, shucks, looks like people can have opinions.

To me it's different because you actually know the facts and you willingly became educated about this topic, those facts just didn't change your position about abortion and that's totally fine. Whereas this other poster is posting a bunch of things that are incorrect and then leaving instead of sticking around trying to learn something because she doesn't want to change her opinion. It just drives me crazy when people turn down information in favor of protecting their opinions.

 

Being educated and still being firm in your original opinion, whatever that opinion is, is a lot more admirable than choosing to be ignorant because you don't want your opinion to change.

Share this post


Link to post
While I personally have no problems with a gay couple raising children, I know from personal experience that some people don't think gay couples wold make good parents, or that they might "mess up" the child or lead them down the wrong path, or it might have a bad impression on the kid(s) and make the kids gay too.

 

Ah. There's that argument again.

I know you personally don't hold those views, so this is just my response to people who do;

 

Every time I see something like this, I shake my head and laugh.

Yes, okay. Sure I'll admit it. I'm a lesbian, and I was raised in a lesbian household. Big deal. My birth mother is one of those lesbians, who's to say I didn't inherit it genetically? No one "teaches" you to be gay, that's utterly absurd. When I was little, I always thought that I had to be straight because I didn't want to be "that" kid that was the shining golden trophy for people with thoughts like that. I didn't want to be the one that made people point their fingers at my moms and accuse them for raising me to be homosexual. God that really hits home.

When I was little, I did what was expected of little girls in society, what my friends did. I saw a boy that looked cute and declared to myself that I liked him. I did this for years too, even believing it from time to time. I was so scared that I was going to be that ammunition against my moms.

 

Lo and behold! I am. I am that rough 2% of children out of a homosexual household that, indeed, is also homosexual.

 

But what about the percentage of gay children that come from straight households? Where's the accusatory finger then? What about all the children that get put up for adoption or abused or neglected in straight households? What about all the loving, ready families of devoted gay couples that have everything you could ever possibly hope for a child to have growing up?

 

I don't buy into the "a child needs a mother and a father" for a "perfect" childhood bull****. There's no such thing. The success of the child will always vary from family to family, no matter WHO raised that child. Sure, yes, there are gay households unfit for raising children. There are just as many, probably more, unfit straight households.

 

A sexuality of the parent does not determine their ability to parent. A sexuality does not make a person. It does not affect their moral character, their ability to differentiate between right or wrong or if they can hold a job or what kind of car they own. THERE IS NO CORRELATION.

 

/hazeh is angry

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

The comparison to the Holocaust is unfair. Not only is it unfair, it's inappropriate, disrespectful to the victims, the survivors and their families, and it cheapens not only the lived experiences of those that suffered, it also understates the complexity of the political and psychological climate that it occurred in.

 

Quite frankly, genocide is like genocide. I acknowledge that the Holocaust was vastly different in terms of scale, but Rwanda was 'like' the Holocaust. Srbrenica in Bosnia was 'like' the Holocaust. The actions Pol Pot's Khmer Rogue in Cambodia were 'like' the Holocaust. Genocide occurs when an ethnic, racial, religious or national group is targeted by an organisation (government or otherwise) for the purposes of extermination.

 

The comparison is NOT accurate, as to my knowledge, not only is there is no central organisation actively targeting foetuses for extermination (as abortion services are provided by different providers), but as foetuses are not an ethnic, racial, religious or national group. It is factually incorrect to compare the two, and for people to be offended by the glib way that someone uses the pain, suffering and deaths of millions of people to score points on a completely different topic is perfectly legitimate. And, as always, people have the right to say that they find the comparison offensive - after all, this is a space that was demarcated specifically for the sharing of opinions and feelings on this topic. The premise that abortion = genocide was introduced and has been communally rebuffed.

 

To communally reject and/or accept an idea requires multiple opinions as to the validity of the premise, so as to establish the accepted facts of the continuing debate. @Philpot, with all due respect, I don't think this constituted a 'dogpile'.

 

-

 

Disclaimer: I am personally pro-choice. I believe that abortion is a medical decision between a woman and her doctor, and as such should not be a matter of public condemnation or shaming, and that reproductive services (such as IVF, abortion, adoption, contraception) should be widely available. In particular, I believe that abortion should be available at a woman's election up until foetal viability - that is, until the foetus is able to survive independently outside the woman's body. I recognise that there have been leaps and bounds in prenatal medicine in recent years and as such, past 24 weeks foetal viability should be assessed on a case by case basis, taking into consideration quality of life and the woman's wishes.

 

I am also an Australian who finds the US healthcare system (which seems to be the one being argued the most here) a bit baffling - please let me know if I accidentally misrepresent anything important.

 

-

 

With all due respect to all involved in this debate (and I in no way mean that in a trite or flippant manner), the 'abortion debate' is never going to be settled. What's more, most of the debate hinges on definitions. The pro-life faction argues that personhood begins at conception - and that therefore, a foetus is a human life. The pro-choice faction argues that until foetal viability, a fertilised ovum not a human life.

 

These two positions cannot be reconciled, and are diametrically opposed to each other.

 

So let's look at some of the assumptions that each side makes. (And I'm going to try to keep my language as non-biased as possible, but personally I am pro-choice and my explorations of this topic have been structured in a certain way - I am not deliberately attempting to make my language inaccessible to any side of this conversation).

 

Pro-life:

 

Personhood begins at conception;

The killing of a person is morally wrong;

Therefore, the killing of a foetus is morally wrong.

 

Pro-choice:

 

A foetus gains personhood after foetal viability (that is, after it can survive independently of the mother);

The morality of killing a person is not applicable to abortion;

Therefore, abortion is not morally wrong.

 

There are a LOT of things that can be unpacked from these assumptions. So, off the top of my head, here goes (and I would honestly like to hear from both sides on this):

 

The inalienability of a person's right to their own body - does a person own their body absolutely? Does a foetus' right to survive trump the bodily integrity of the woman carrying it? If a person owns their body absolutely and no one else has the right to its use, can we say that a woman is morally obligated to let the foetus use her body? Is this like saying that someone in renal failure is obligated to a compatible kidney from anyone off the street? (This is a rough simplification of Judith Jarvis Thomson's Violinist thought experiment, and I highly recommend reading it in full, as I am probably not doing it justice).

 

Scientific bias re: foetal experiences of pain, viability, quality of life - is there a truly objective manner of collecting scientific fact, or are the focus of the scientist and the way in which the data presented always going to colour the way in which it is interpreted? Does personal belief mean that it is impossible to interpret information impartially? Do we think that wider circulation of accurate information as to conception, DNA, pregnancy, contraception, sex etc etc would make a difference to opinions on abortion? What information would you like to see circulated more? Why?

 

The government - where is the line at which the government should be involved with our bodies? Should it be possible to legislate access to medical procedures? Should the government subsidise reproductive services (IVF and abortion both)? Is it fair to attempt to impose personal morality systems into legislative processes?

 

Morality - are the terms in which this debate is currently being conducted constructive? Do we have the right to judge others based on our personal concepts of morality? Does the conduct of others effect us personally? Do we have a duty to maintain a collective morality? Is this a secular or religious debate? Are the use of the worst examples (eg late term abortion, abortion clinic attacks) really constructive to the debate - is it fair to judge either side through the outliers of that side's behaviour?

 

Practical realities: What should happen? Should reproductive services be banned or subsided? Should reproductive services be privatised? What would be the best case scenario that could exist for both ideologies to come to an agreement on? In an ideal world - what happens?

Share this post


Link to post

 

Pro-life:

 

Personhood begins at conception;

The killing of a person is morally wrong;

Therefore, the killing of a foetus is morally wrong.

 

Pro-choice:

 

A foetus gains personhood after foetal viability (that is, after it can survive independently of the mother);

The morality of killing a person is not applicable to abortion;

Therefore, abortion is not morally wrong.

 

There are a LOT of things that can be unpacked from these assumptions. So, off the top of my head, here goes (and I would honestly like to hear from both sides on this):

 

The inalienability of a person's right to their own body - does a person own their body absolutely? Does a foetus' right to survive trump the bodily integrity of the woman carrying it? If a person owns their body absolutely and no one else has the right to its use, can we say that a woman is morally obligated to let the foetus use her body? Is this like saying that someone in renal failure is obligated to a compatible kidney from anyone off the street? (This is a rough simplification of Judith Jarvis Thomson's Violinist thought experiment, and I highly recommend reading it in full, as I am probably not doing it justice).

 

Scientific bias re: foetal experiences of pain, viability, quality of life - is there a truly objective manner of collecting scientific fact, or are the focus of the scientist and the way in which the data presented always going to colour the way in which it is interpreted? Does personal belief mean that it is impossible to interpret information impartially? Do we think that wider circulation of accurate information as to conception, DNA, pregnancy, contraception, sex etc etc would make a difference to opinions on abortion? What information would you like to see circulated more? Why?

 

The government - where is the line at which the government should be involved with our bodies? Should it be possible to legislate access to medical procedures? Should the government subsidise reproductive services (IVF and abortion both)? Is it fair to attempt to impose personal morality systems into legislative processes?

 

Morality - are the terms in which this debate is currently being conducted constructive? Do we have the right to judge others based on our personal concepts of morality? Does the conduct of others effect us personally? Do we have a duty to maintain a collective morality? Is this a secular or religious debate? Are the use of the worst examples (eg late term abortion, abortion clinic attacks) really constructive to the debate - is it fair to judge either side through the outliers of that side's behaviour?

 

Practical realities: What should happen? Should reproductive services be banned or subsided? Should reproductive services be privatised? What would be the best case scenario that could exist for both ideologies to come to an agreement on? In an ideal world - what happens?

The problem is really the morals colliding. Pro-lifers with those morals believe that they should be everyone morals and of course people don't have the same and this is where it collides. Not to mention the ones in office have these morals and are able to pass the laws dry.gif

Share this post


Link to post

Thank you for insulting the video and then calling me offensive. I'm done, this is going nowhere and is ultimately futile. I have not nor will I change my view on this matter.

Whitefire anything using the Holocaust as a argument is absolutely disgusting and horrific. I don't care if it's for abortion or some other thing. That is a truly horrific time to use as a form of a argument against something. Millions of people died because of one mans views. That is nothing even CLOSE to abortion. It doesn't compare that adults, growing children and babies were killed, tortured and used for experiments (if I recall correctly) to aborting a fetus.

 

Edit: Ugh my mind is not here anymore. :/

Edited by demonicvampiregirl

Share this post


Link to post
I mention heartbeat because some people say 'it's a baby when it's heart starts beating', yet abortions are legal up to full term.

 

Millions of babies are killed in abortions mills. Millions of people were killed in the holocaust.

 

You seem to have your opinions set, though. I have mine.

 

Also Sock, that is opinionated. But to each their own. Just don't try to bombard me with hate, please. And don't even say it's not hate, but you're going to anyway because that's how these 'conversations' work.

I was adopted from one of the first places to be affected by the Holocaust. Don't you /dare/ try that censorkip.gif* on me. I'm being forced to write a /story/ about the stupid thing. I don't want to, but I have no choice.

 

Abortions are the person's ultimate decision, and that's just what the people around them have to live with.

Share this post


Link to post

Wow. Comparing abortion to the holocaust? Might as well compare the holocaust to pouring water on an anthill. Living things died, right? Many of them?

 

Same harm done, right? Right?

/sarcasm

 

Aborting an unborn infant is so, so, so far off from the genocide that was the holocaust - massive murder, torture, experimentation of people who were alive, intelligent, aware beings. They had memories and lives and bonds. On the other hand, the 'babies' being aborted are more often than not clumps of cells, mere fetuses, and their 'life' consists of the fact that they are physically developing organisms whose cells multiply. And yet that is being compared to the children and adults who were killed in the holocaust.

 

Erm... I'm not sure what point I'm making here. That just disturbed me enough that I had to poke in here for a moment. Just had to make a comment on the current topic at hand.

Edited by glamoursea2

Share this post


Link to post

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.