Posted February 4, 2013 There is an argument, that could be said, that at some points, bringing death is more moral than forcing life to continue. /She says, still believing that since G-d said abortion is not murder, it's not murder, that you can't murder something lacking a soul. Share this post Link to post
Posted February 4, 2013 Silently looks at everyone around her hoping not to be flamed with arguing responses. I for one, would probably never get an abortion, even if it costed my life. I would just be so upset about even the thought of killing anything (omg one time I killed a fly and then started crying over it) that I just could not think about doing that. If I could not support it I would give it away to someone who could. Yes all of you people might be like "It is not killing it because it does not have a soul" but, it will have a soul if it lives, depriving something of getting a soul is worse than killing something with a soul from my point of view. But I mean... its the person`s choice I guess... Share this post Link to post
Posted February 4, 2013 Silently looks at everyone around her hoping not to be flamed with arguing responses. I for one, would probably never get an abortion, even if it costed my life. I would just be so upset about even the thought of killing anything (omg one time I killed a fly and then started crying over it) that I just could not think about doing that. If I could not support it I would give it away to someone who could. Yes all of you people might be like "It is not killing it because it does not have a soul" but, it will have a soul if it lives, depriving something of getting a soul is worse than killing something with a soul from my point of view. But I mean... its the person`s choice I guess... I don't see why you'd get angry responses. I mean, if you'd rather die than abort (which I don't understand, since if YOU die, so does the fetus), that's your choice. The problem comes in when you force other people to make the same choice. But as long as you don't try to force other people to not abort because you don't like it, then that's your choice. But, though, just because you give it up doesn't mean it will go to a loving home--a saddening number of kids who are put into the system never get families and just bounce around until they die or age out, whichever comes first. Personally, I don't think it's worse to stop it from getting a soul than killing something with a soul, but hey--if you think that, that's cool so long as you don't force people to do it your way. :3 Share this post Link to post
Posted February 4, 2013 Silently looks at everyone around her hoping not to be flamed with arguing responses. I for one, would probably never get an abortion, even if it costed my life. I would just be so upset about even the thought of killing anything (omg one time I killed a fly and then started crying over it) that I just could not think about doing that. If I could not support it I would give it away to someone who could. Yes all of you people might be like "It is not killing it because it does not have a soul" but, it will have a soul if it lives, depriving something of getting a soul is worse than killing something with a soul from my point of view. But I mean... its the person`s choice I guess... That's the beautiful thing about pro-choice. It says nothing about what you would do in the situation, just that you believe everyone should have their own choice. A pro-choice person could be a celibate, a victim of rape, someone with children, someone who has had an abortion, someone who has miscarried, someone who has adopted, someone who doesn't want kids, male to female to anything else, straight to gay to anything else, a teacher, doctor, lawyer, janitor, secretary, or whatever else. ^^ I respect your choice, though I do hope, of course, that you are never put in that situation and that if you do get pregnant it's when you're ready and all will go and end well. :3 Share this post Link to post
Posted February 4, 2013 I for one, would probably never get an abortion, even if it costed my life. Personally? Neither would I, unless I was in a situation where the Talmud commanded it. That doesn't mean I think others shouldn't. If I could not support it I would give it away to someone who could. Sadly, most people who cannot support it, cannot afford that. it will have a soul if it lives, If it goes on to become human, which is not guaranteed. A fetus can become many things. Would you feel the same way if it became a tumor? It would still be alive in that case. depriving something of getting a soul is worse than killing something with a soul from my point of view. Which is fine, really. I disagree, but that's your prerogative to think that. I personally think that it would be worse to force a woman to have her body violated for nine months against her will. I saw what my wife went through when she was raped, and she loved our daughter from the word go. I can't imagine a woman going through a pregnancy that she hated or thought was evil for nine months. The suicide rate for women who believe they can't/shouldn't have abortions is climbing in the US. Share this post Link to post
Posted February 4, 2013 Silently looks at everyone around her hoping not to be flamed with arguing responses. I for one, would probably never get an abortion, even if it costed my life. I would just be so upset about even the thought of killing anything (omg one time I killed a fly and then started crying over it) that I just could not think about doing that. If I could not support it I would give it away to someone who could. Yes all of you people might be like "It is not killing it because it does not have a soul" but, it will have a soul if it lives, depriving something of getting a soul is worse than killing something with a soul from my point of view. Nope! No anger or flames. It's pro-choice, not pro-everyone-should-get-an-abortion-always-yeaaaah. And that choice can include keeping the pregnancy under any situation. That's why it kinda makes me giggle when anti-abortion activists use phrases like,"This person chose life! They're awesome!" because well...that's the idea. You can choose! Hee. Share this post Link to post
Posted February 4, 2013 Silently looks at everyone around her hoping not to be flamed with arguing responses. I for one, would probably never get an abortion, even if it costed my life. I would just be so upset about even the thought of killing anything (omg one time I killed a fly and then started crying over it) that I just could not think about doing that. If I could not support it I would give it away to someone who could. Yes all of you people might be like "It is not killing it because it does not have a soul" but, it will have a soul if it lives, depriving something of getting a soul is worse than killing something with a soul from my point of view. But I mean... its the person`s choice I guess... So long as you don't expect everyone else to follow that belief then no, no flames here. Share this post Link to post
Posted February 4, 2013 Silently looks at everyone around her hoping not to be flamed with arguing responses. I for one, would probably never get an abortion, even if it costed my life. I would just be so upset about even the thought of killing anything (omg one time I killed a fly and then started crying over it) that I just could not think about doing that. If I could not support it I would give it away to someone who could. Yes all of you people might be like "It is not killing it because it does not have a soul" but, it will have a soul if it lives, depriving something of getting a soul is worse than killing something with a soul from my point of view. But I mean... its the person`s choice I guess... Even if you came into this thread screaming about the evil of those who had a abortion, I doubt you'd be flamed. We'd probably argue the points you made, but we wouldn't flame. Though I disagree with several of your points I am happy to let you have them, just so long as I may continue disagreeing and taking any course of reproductive action I see fit. As Socky and others said, that's the great thing about choice. I love children and spent my whole summer working with them, but if I was raped I would not keep the child. If I became pregnant at all, even through my own choice, I would not keep the child. I have a low pain tolerance and would much prefer to adopt a child that is already existing and needs a home, then bring another one into this world. Share this post Link to post
Posted February 4, 2013 I think until the baby is born, its your choice to make whether to keep it or not. Share this post Link to post
Posted February 5, 2013 Look, the thing is that we can't KNOW if it's human or not. Would you gamble human lives? It's like betting that if you throw a knife blindly in an orchestra, you won't hit someone. You don't have to know the ice on a lake is thin for you to tell children to get off it. It's a risk that's really not worth taking. Share this post Link to post
Posted February 5, 2013 Look, the thing is that we can't KNOW if it's human or not. Would you gamble human lives? It's like betting that if you throw a knife blindly in an orchestra, you won't hit someone. You don't have to know the ice on a lake is thin for you to tell children to get off it. It's a risk that's really not worth taking. Are you talking about tumor cells, or are you talking about fetus vs. baby? Share this post Link to post
Posted February 5, 2013 Look, the thing is that we can't KNOW if it's human or not. If it does not have anything to think with, it cannot think, thusly it is not a person yet. An early fetus certainly does not have a brain, thusly it definitely is not a person. Share this post Link to post
Posted February 5, 2013 Look, the thing is that we can't KNOW if it's human or not. Would you gamble human lives? It's like betting that if you throw a knife blindly in an orchestra, you won't hit someone. You don't have to know the ice on a lake is thin for you to tell children to get off it. It's a risk that's really not worth taking. Is it fair to gamble with a child's life in forcing it to be born and then hoping it happens to be one of the few adopted, rather than suffer through the torment of the foster system? For me, since G-d says it doesn't have a soul yet, the answer is, the moral decision would be to abort. Share this post Link to post
Posted February 5, 2013 Look, the thing is that we can't KNOW if it's human or not. Would you gamble human lives? It's like betting that if you throw a knife blindly in an orchestra, you won't hit someone. You don't have to know the ice on a lake is thin for you to tell children to get off it. It's a risk that's really not worth taking. Scientifically speaking it is not human, it is something that will become human one day, maybe, if it doesn't become a tumor. And honestly in my mind an existing human life takes precedence over something that might become a human life. Share this post Link to post
Posted February 5, 2013 Would you gamble human lives? Yes. It's part of the job. Share this post Link to post
Posted February 5, 2013 Look, the thing is that we can't KNOW if it's human or not. Would you gamble human lives? It's like betting that if you throw a knife blindly in an orchestra, you won't hit someone. You don't have to know the ice on a lake is thin for you to tell children to get off it. It's a risk that's really not worth taking. Is it really gambling with a human life if the mother would harm herself to get rid of it, possibly killing herself and it to destroy what she views as an evil parasite? Share this post Link to post
Posted February 5, 2013 (edited) Look, the thing is that we can't KNOW if it's human or not. Would you gamble human lives? It's like betting that if you throw a knife blindly in an orchestra, you won't hit someone. You don't have to know the ice on a lake is thin for you to tell children to get off it. It's a risk that's really not worth taking. Using your own example: there's a lake with potentially thin ice (you don't know the thickness). A woman has gone out onto the surface, and is scared or otherwise unable to come back on her own. Would you gamble on thin ice to go out and rescue her? Or is it her fault for getting herself into that situation in the first place, and she should just suck it up and deal with it? (What if she was pushed?) The problem with treating a fetus as a potential human life just because "we don't know" is that you're completely ignoring the mother. Is her safety/mental well-being/economic situation worth less than the life of something that might (or, more importantly, might not) be a person? If you honestly believe it's a person, then that's where the true argument is, and I'm not saying that you shouldn't believe that. But saying it's a human, and should be given the same rights as a human, is absolutely not erring on the side of caution. I believe that until it can be proven that a fetus has some form of "soul", the mother's rights are more important than the life of the fetus. Would you gamble human lives? Would you gamble human rights for something that might not be a human life? Edited February 5, 2013 by hydrargyrum Share this post Link to post
Posted February 5, 2013 Look, the thing is that we can't KNOW if it's human or not. Would you gamble human lives? It's like betting that if you throw a knife blindly in an orchestra, you won't hit someone. You don't have to know the ice on a lake is thin for you to tell children to get off it. It's a risk that's really not worth taking. The thing is we actually *can* know. Seriously. Or are you really telling me that something lacking a brain, a heart and lungs is human? If you actually look at fetal development it's pretty easy to see that what you are talking about is not yet anything resembling a person. It's not got a developed gender before 13 weeks, and it wouldn't be able to breath air on it's own until 27 weeks. Your orchestra analogy is completely inaccurate. The orchestra *do* have brains, they *can* breate air, and they *do* have heartbeats you can hear with a stethascope. At the stages where elective abortion is legal a fetus in no way resembled an adult, or even a child. Share this post Link to post
Posted February 19, 2013 (edited) Breaking news! fetusses are officially organs! Seriously? How is somebody so ignorant of proven science as to call a fetus an organ ? The scary thing is that things like this are said by politicians... Since this is my first post in the thread, I'd like to clarify that I'm very strongly pro-choice. Edited February 20, 2013 by PieMaster Share this post Link to post
Posted February 19, 2013 The link doesn't work for me--makes me try to download something... Are you meaning what Mary Sue said? Can I just say I love that her name is Mary Sue? But, uh... If it's an organ... than wouldn't an abortion be considered and elective body modification process to remove it, kind of in the same way elective breast reduction or enhancement is done? And removing it would be no different from removing the appendix or something? Since the fetus isn't a VITAL organ, wouldn't that make the removal of it even less objectionable? Share this post Link to post
Posted February 19, 2013 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-22...omans-body.html This might be the article Pie was trying to post :3 And reading through it I've become very confused on what this woman's stance actually is, since I understand from the article she's anti-choice and yet she's saying a fetus is an organ...big "wat" moment here.... Share this post Link to post
Posted February 19, 2013 So wait... a fetus is a person, but only if it doesn't inconvenience pro-lifers? And now it's not a person but an organ? Whaaat. I've given up trying to understand their stance... Share this post Link to post
Posted February 19, 2013 Breaking news! fetusses are officially organs! Seriously? How is somebody so ignorant of proven science as to call a fetus an organ ? The scary thing is that things like this are said by politicians... Since this is my first post in the thread, I'd like to clarify that I'm very strongly pro-choice. Oh gosh *facepalms* How illogical can one get? ... Good for you Share this post Link to post
Posted February 19, 2013 (edited) Sweet! Since fetuses are now organs (because SCIENCE!), does that mean this whole debate is done? After all, generally speaking, people are allowed to do WTF ever they want with their own internal organs, so there should be no more issues, yeah? A great big ol' WAT? from this corner of the internet, too. Also, just so Mary Sue (wow, her name is Mary Sue? I am trying really really hard not to make any jokes about that) knows, skin is the largest organ. Edited February 19, 2013 by LascielsShadow Share this post Link to post
Posted February 19, 2013 ...and it is idiots like that who ruin the pro-life's case. I am pro-life. I can assure you, my views are not that of the imbeciles who seem to be the only pro-lifers the newspapers will publish. The majority of society seems to be pro-choice, so it seems the newspapers never actually publish valid opinions from moderate pro-lifers, only the extremist ones, while visa versa for pro-choicers. To make it clear: I am fine with contraception. I am fine with aborting if it would harm the women during the pregnancy or the birth. If they can't take care of the child, I believe it should be given up to adoption (babies get adopted incredibly quickly, remember that.) I do not believe that a fetus is an organ. But please, don't hold an entire ideal responsible for what a few extremists think. Share this post Link to post
Recommended Posts