Jump to content
Bear

Abortion

Recommended Posts

There are kids who wish they had been aborted. Think about that- if someone hates their life that badly, wouldn't you rather all of that suffering never had to happen?

I agree with this ^^

Share this post


Link to post

I disagree. It's human offspring in the developmental process. It can't be anything but human. It's not going to become a cat. It has been argued on this thread that the developmental process can "malfunction" and it can become a tumor or miscarry, but that doesn't change the fact that it WAS a developing human.

 

Tell me then, at what point does a fetus become human? Because your line of reasoning sounds an awful lot like Singer's. And he argues that I should be permitted to kill my offspring until it can declare its will to live. Is it wrong for me to kill a just-born infant? If yes, why was it not wrong for me to kill it 5 minutes before birth? If it was wrong to kill it five minutes before birth, why was it not wrong to kill it a week prior? If it was wrong to kill it a week prior... etc. When is life worth being protected? I believe any line someone can supply about "life is worth protecting now" is completely arbitrary.

 

You’re just drawing the line at conception. An unfertilized egg is capable of becoming human, and it’s possible that a fetus won’t become a person even without abortion, so the distinction isn’t as absolute as you imply it is. An unfertilized human egg is also not going to become a cat.

 

I don’t think we need to be able to pick out the exact moment when abortion is no longer OK in order to have some abortions be OK. Just because there’s a lot of shades of gray doesn’t mean there isn’t black and white at the beginning and end. I don’t think it’s fair to say “well, we can’t draw an exact line of when a fetus becomes a baby, but conception is a clear line, so let’s just call it there”. I like the analogy of day and night: just because we can’t name a precise moment when day becomes night, that doesn’t mean we aren’t capable of distinguishing the two. We don’t need to say that the moment it starts getting a little bit darker is night time “just to be on the safe side”.

 

And just because scientists agree it’s alive, that doesn’t really mean much. Bacteria are alive. So are the plants and animals we eat. Alive =/= a person. To be murder, it must be a person. Just because it’s capable of becoming a person, doesn’t necessarily mean it is one yet.

Share this post


Link to post

If I squish a caterpillar as a caterpillar, or even as a pupa, does not mean I've killed a butterfly. Yes, it could have potentially become a butterfly if I hadn't interfered, or it might have died, or something could have eaten it, etc. But that does not automatically make it a butterfly just because sometime in the foreseeable future it was potentially going to become one.

Share this post


Link to post

Abortion is a prickly subject at best.

 

While I'm very much against them, I'm not pro-life. Banning something doesn't make it go away. Just look at Prohibition or the war on drugs. Outlawing it will only make people turn to dangerous and illegal manners of getting what they want.

 

The argument of "it's not a person" and "it is a person" though isn't a very good one though. Everyone has different definitions of what a person is. To me, human life starts at conception and all humans are people. A fetus is a genetically unique human that is completely separate from it's mother. But if you ask a dozen people what a person is, they'll give you a dozen answers.

 

If anything, the best solution for this is to increase the amount of cheap and readily available birth control. And to educate young people about the subject. It would completely eliminate the amount of abortions but, hopefully, it will lower the need for them.

 

Personally, while I could never get one myself, I don't condemn those who have.

Share this post


Link to post

Yes his plans may be that the child goes to him but it still hurts and you can not tell me that after watching vidioes of medical abortions that even the smallest child in the womb does feel pain.

Coz I'm a nurse, so I actually *know* what happens.

 

Speaking of which, I'm off to see a C-section this morning.

The scienst now are so smart they can kep both child and mother alive.If that mother is unsable they need to keep the child alive and let it live withsome one who would truly love it.

i) How dare you even insinuate that by dying during childbirth the mother doesn't 'truly' love her child? Recognise this quote: "No one has greater love than this, that someone would lay down their life for his friends."

 

ii) No, we can't keep them alive. People die.

Because that "group of cells" is scientifically alive.

So is a vegetable, or bacteria. So when you have dinner or take antibiotics who are you to end that life?

A fetus is a genetically unique human that is completely separate from it's mother.

No, it's a parasite, since by definition it needs to remain completely attached to the mother to survive.

Edited by Kestra15

Share this post


Link to post
No, it's a parasite, since by definition it needs to remain completely attached to the mother to survive.

No, it's a human.

It has human DNA and human cells. And if given the chance, it can develop into a fully functional adult human.

It is just at a stage in development were it needs to take nutrients directly from its mother.

It's no more a parasite that a child or an old person who needs to be fed by their caretakers.

Unless you're talking about "parasite" in the derogatory sense. Then yes, it can be considered that. But so can most people.

Share this post


Link to post

It's not a human. A fetus does not make it a human being. A caterpillar is not a butterfly. Same genetics, different creatures.

 

The clump of cells is not recognized as a human because it does not possess the traits in which would make it human. An operational body, a heart beat, and brain activity. Brain activity being the most important- hence why those who are pronounced brain dead are, in fact, dead and no longer people, despite if their hearts are still pumping from machine intervention.

Share this post


Link to post

No, it's a human.

It has human DNA and human cells. And if given the chance, it can develop into a fully functional adult human.

It is just at a stage in development were it needs to take nutrients directly from its mother.

It's no more a parasite that a child or an old person who needs to be fed by their caretakers.

Unless you're talking about "parasite" in the derogatory sense. Then yes, it can be considered that. But so can most people.

No; actually, a fetus is, scientifically speaking, a parasite. Being human does not preclude it from being such. Taking nutrients directly from its mother makes it one.

 

Parasite; N.: An organism that grows, feeds, and is sheltered on or in a different organism while contributing nothing to the survival of its host.

 

Human, as in possessing human DNA, does not automatically equal person. An acorn is not an oak tree and a tadpole is not a frog.

Edited by LascielsShadow

Share this post


Link to post
It's not a human. A fetus does not make it a human being. A caterpillar is not a butterfly. Same genetics, different creatures.

 

The clump of cells is not recognized as a human because it does not possess the traits in which would make it human. An operational body, a heart beat, and brain activity. Brain activity being the most important- hence why those who are pronounced brain dead are, in fact, dead and no longer people, despite if their hearts are still pumping from machine intervention.

A caterpillar is not a butterfly because those are terms for a particular stage in the species development. They can still be the same species though.

Human is a species, fetus is a stage of development.

And "fetus" usually refers to the later stage of development where it does have a heart beat and brain activity.

No, actually a fetus is, scientifically speaking, a parasite. Being human does not preclude it from being such. Taking nutrients directly from its mother makes it one.

 

Parasite; N.: An organism that grows, feeds, and is sheltered on or in a different organism while contributing nothing to the survival of its host.

While technically true, it is still a human.

 

Share this post


Link to post
It has human DNA and human cells.

So to your nail clippings and so do tumors.

Share this post


Link to post
So to your nail clippings and so do tumors.

But neither of those things can become their own living organism

Share this post


Link to post

An established person is never allowed to use another person's body against their will even if it would save their life. If you want to apply personhood to a fetus, then they should follow the same rules and not be allowed to use a mother's body against her will to save their own life.

Share this post


Link to post

What I don't understand is why people think it's their buisness to interfere with the life of a potential child that's not even theirs .___. I would understand if it was a child that was born hence why we have child services. But aren't abortions mainly done when the unborn is a zygote? I see a lot people on this thread using the word 'fetus' where that's a later stage of development as a previous post has pointed out.

 

Abortions that you haven't had yourself (and some will probably never have them) don't affect you in any way other than making you sad and possibly feeling sorry for the unborn or the mother. Other than that, that's a very forgettable circumstance. It does not affect the person not involved in any way. Nor do I think it's any of their buisness to get involved. In that time frame, you are completely unwanted and they do not, nor do they ever want, your opinion. You're just sticking your nose where it doesn't belong.

 

Some may say that "someone has to speak for the unborn child". If anybody has to, that would be the closest thing to the unborn, which is the mother. A completely uninvolved person would be the furthest thing from it. And I doubt the mother having the abortion would really care about a stranger's opinion. If someone told me it wasn't a good idea to go bungee jumping and I wanted to do it anyway, I'm going to do it. I don't care about your obviously unwanted opinion.

 

Anyway, again I ask, why stick your nose into something where it doesn't belong?

 

(Edit:I apologize for my lack of terminology .w. Zygote is not the correct word but I can't find the word I'm looking for. Just note that when abortions usually take place, it is less than a fetus. In the physical sense.)

Edited by VeeVeeLa

Share this post


Link to post

What I don't understand is why people think it's their buisness to interfere with the life of a potential child that's not even theirs .___. I would understand if it was a child that was born hence why we have child services. But aren't abortions mainly done when the unborn is a zygote? I see a lot people on this thread using the word 'fetus' where that's a later stage of development as a previous post has pointed out.

 

Abortions that you haven't had yourself (and some will probably never have them) don't affect you in any way other than making you sad and possibly feeling sorry for the unborn or the mother. Other than that, that's a very forgettable circumstance. It does not affect the person not involved in any way. Nor do I think it's any of their buisness to get involved. In that time frame, you are completely unwanted and they do not, nor do they ever want, your opinion. You're just sticking your nose where it doesn't belong.

 

Some may say that "someone has to speak for the unborn child". If anybody has to, that would be the closest thing to the unborn, which is the mother. A completely uninvolved person would be the furthest thing from it. And I doubt the mother having the abortion would really care about a stranger's opinion. If someone told me it wasn't a good idea to go bungee jumping and I wanted to do it anyway, I'm going to do it. I don't care about your obviously unwanted opinion.

 

Anyway, again I ask, why stick your nose into something where it doesn't belong?

...No, a zygote is only considered that for a few days, I believe. It's a very brief time period. You'd never know you were pregnant in time to catch it as a zygote.

 

If I remember right a zygote is a single, fertilized cell.

Edited by 7Deadly$ins

Share this post


Link to post
...No, a zygote is only considered that for a few days, I believe. It's a very brief time period. You'd never know you were pregnant in time to catch it as a zygote.

 

If I remember right a zygote is a single, fertilized cell.

Ok, yeah I apologize for my lack of terminology vwv It's been a while since since my Child Development class. I forgot what the rest of the words were.

Share this post


Link to post
...No, a zygote is only considered that for a few days, I believe. It's a very brief time period. You'd never know you were pregnant in time to catch it as a zygote.

 

If I remember right a zygote is a single, fertilized cell.

First few divisions of said, I believe. I tink it becomes a blastocyst for a short while after that, before it becomes an embryo. It doesn't become a fetus until week 10.

Share this post


Link to post

What I don't understand is why people think it's their buisness to interfere with the life of a potential child that's not even theirs .___. I would understand if it was a child that was born hence why we have child services. But aren't abortions mainly done when the unborn is a zygote? I see a lot people on this thread using the word 'fetus' where that's a later stage of development as a previous post has pointed out.

 

Abortions that you haven't had yourself (and some will probably never have them) don't affect you in any way other than making you sad and possibly feeling sorry for the unborn or the mother. Other than that, that's a very forgettable circumstance. It does not affect the person not involved in any way. Nor do I think it's any of their buisness to get involved. In that time frame, you are completely unwanted and they do not, nor do they ever want, your opinion. You're just sticking your nose where it doesn't belong.

 

Some may say that "someone has to speak for the unborn child". If anybody has to, that would be the closest thing to the unborn, which is the mother. A completely uninvolved person would be the furthest thing from it. And I doubt the mother having the abortion would really care about a stranger's opinion. If someone told me it wasn't a good idea to go bungee jumping and I wanted to do it anyway, I'm going to do it. I don't care about your obviously unwanted opinion.

 

Anyway, again I ask, why stick your nose into something where it doesn't belong?

Quite.

 

Any time I get pregnant (not TERRIBLY likely now as I am 68, and had a hysterectomy at 40 anyway xd.png) anyone from the "save all the dear little fertilised cells" group who wants that little whatever-you-want-to-see-it-as takes it on the spot. Anyone that concerned for it can have it. But I do NOT have to harbour it.

 

You want to make that kind of choice for me, you get to raise the whatever. I'm sure it will be delighted to meet you mad.gif

Edited by fuzzbucket

Share this post


Link to post

I think they were saying that an abortion was basically the mother's choice. I don't think they intended it to mean they wanted all the little fertilized cells to grow into babies.

Share this post


Link to post
I think they were saying that an abortion was basically the mother's choice. I don't think they intended it to mean they wanted all the little fertilized cells to grow into babies.

I think the people I refer to meant that no-one gets to have an abortion because from the very second the egg is fertilised, it is a people and as such getting rid of it would be MURDER. I am quite SURE that was what they meant.

 

(I didn't mean VeeVeeLa; I must edit my post; I agree with her !)

Share this post


Link to post

I'm likely to get shot for this point of view but hey...it's a point of view. I'm 37 now....when I was 32 I had my son Kian who is now almost 5 years old. I had probably about the worst pregnancy imaginable. In fact Kian was born 10 weeks early not breathing and I died twice on the table during the emergency c-section. I however was ready to do it all again but I'm very glad I didn't because I likely wouldn't have lived. With that being said.....there are only TWO make that THREE instances I think abortion should be an option....

 

1- The life of the mother and child are seriously at risk and it's a no win situation.

 

2- Cases of rape. I'm sorry but I would not want to be a victim of rape and have to find out I was pregnant and know that I was going to HAVE to give birth to my rapists child.

 

3- Cases of sexual molestation/incest. Why would you even want to make someone a victim of this have to even go there????

Share this post


Link to post

In my opinion,

 

I think abortions should be allowed.

For the following reasons,

 

One, whos buisness is it what you do with your own body or whats growing inside it.

Two, if you are a victim of rape not only would it be horendous to find out you have a thing growing inside you that is part of your rapists DNA but to find out you had to also give birth to it (one of the most painful acts in the world) would be horrid. And if you were to disown or raise the child, you would forever know that part of it isnt truly yours or that theres a child with another family somewhere that is part you and part creep.

Three, if you are physically incapable of caring for the child that hasnt even developped in you yet, you shouldnt have to raise it and give it to someone else.

I would also like to add that whats going on with you personally, does not concern anyone else. Its none of their buisness and woman shouldnt be forced to do something they do not want to do.

 

Again, these are just my opinions try not to bite me :3 disagree if you will but these are just my own personal thoughts.

 

[edit] I dont know why that posted twice sleep.gif

Edited by boscodelta

Share this post


Link to post
In my opinion,

 

I think abortions should be allowed.

For the following reasons,

 

One, whos buisness is it what you do with your own body or whats growing inside it.

Two, if you are a victim of rape not only would it be horendous to find out you have a thing growing inside you that is part of your rapists DNA but to find out you had to also give birth to it (one of the most painful acts in the world) would be horrid. And if you were to disown or raise the child, you would forever know that part of it isnt truly yours or that theres a child with another family somewhere that is part you and part creep.

Three, if you are physically incapable of caring for the child that hasnt even developped in you yet, you shouldnt have to raise it and give it to someone else.

 

Again, these are just my opinions try not to bite me :3 disagree if you will but these are just my own personal thoughts.

Agreed~

I'm very pro-choice.

 

It's really nobody else's business what a woman does with her body. The *only* other person I think should have some say would be the potential father, if he's in the picture, because, well, it's partially his child, too... The woman should always have the final say, though, in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post

It's really nobody else's business what a woman does with her body. The *only* other person I think should have some say would be the potential father, if he's in the picture, because, well, it's partially his child, too... The woman should always have the final say, though, in my opinion.

 

I could understand that completley and I do agree. However if the woman was raped (and thats according to her and not the father or the man is proven guilty, etc etc) then I think it should be 100% the womans choice

Edited by boscodelta

Share this post


Link to post

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.