Jump to content
Bear

Abortion

Recommended Posts

I don't care what the problem may be the child has a right to live, to grow, to learn, and to defend itself when it is older.

Then you clearly don't truly don't CARE for that (future) child. You just sound force birth.

Share this post


Link to post
Can you PROVE life begins at conception, cause this is quite a revelation.

life begins the moment an egg is fertilized. that's out of the question. whether that life has any meaning, is a rather philosophical question, and you can come up with many different solutions to that question.

 

an abortion usually terminates a life. thats a fact. What people debate is rather whether you should call it murder or not.

 

@kagesora: killing someone old, placed under disability, is that murder? because those people actually had their personhood removed. smile.gif

Share this post


Link to post

"Then you clearly don't truly don't CARE for that (future) child. You just sound force birth."

 

And you clearly just care about one of the two human beings taking place in pregnancy.

Share this post


Link to post

"Then you clearly don't truly don't CARE for that (future) child. You just sound force birth."

 

And you clearly just care about one of the two human beings taking place in pregnancy.

No, because a fetus is not a human being. It just has the potential of becoming a human being. There's a huge difference.

Share this post


Link to post

If someone aborts because the only other option would be to stick it in the system, then yes they do care about the fetus. They are a sparing it a horrendous life.

This has been brought up before, but I feel like I need to mention it again:

Alive =/= fine life

 

Share this post


Link to post

life begins the moment an egg is fertilized. that's out of the question. whether that life has any meaning, is a rather philosophical question, and you can come up with many different solutions to that question.

 

an abortion usually terminates a life. thats a fact. What people debate is rather whether you should call it murder or not.

 

@kagesora: killing someone old, placed under disability, is that murder? because those people actually had their personhood removed. smile.gif

In the context of abortion, "life begins at conception" is almost universally meant in the "personhood beings at conception" sense. So, yes, I'd rather like them to prove their idea of "life begins at conception" unless they're arguing strictly on a "it's alive much like tapeworms are alive" sense.

 

 

And I'm not actually sure what you're asking here? Because my grandpa is old but he's most certainly still a person. o_O

 

Because to me, being a person is defined as being a human that is able to physically exist without the required use of the body of another person to sustain your own. So, somebody who is old or disabled is still a person.

 

But a fetus requires the use of a body that is not their own to survive. It cannot exist without taking control of the body of another. It is therefore a parasite, not a person.

 

 

And you clearly just care about one of the two human beings taking place in pregnancy.

And so do you--you clearly don't truly care for the mother, just the fetus.

 

 

I don't agree with abortion. I believe its murder no matter what. Its proven that life begins at conception and you are killing that baby. They say the mother has the right to kill the child if she doesn't want it, but what about the rights of the child. Just because the child is defenseless and cannot speak for its self yet does not mean it doesn't have rights as well.  I don't care what the problem may be the child has a right to live, to grow, to learn, and to defend itself when it is older.

Prove it. Show me scientific, factual proof that it is a person from the moment of conception.

 

Only you can't, because it doesn't exist.

 

 

You say the child has rights... So, I'm guessing that you're okay with the idea of people being forcibly strapped down and having blood and stuff that they can live without harvested from their bodies against their will provided it will save a life, right? You're totally okay with that?

 

Because that's sort of what an unwanted fetus is doing to a pregnant person--forcibly taking control of their body and using it to sustain itself against their will. If you're not okay with required harvesting of spare parts from other people to save lives, then it's a bit hypocritical to be against abortion on the grounds of "the child has the right to live"

 

 

You say the child has the right to live--but what about me? Don't I have the right to live and defend myself? Because that's what I would consider abortion to be--self-defense against an unwanted parasite that would ruin my life.

Edited by KageSora

Share this post


Link to post

"Then you clearly don't truly don't CARE for that (future) child. You just sound force birth."

 

And you clearly just care about one of the two human beings taking place in pregnancy.

Human being: a person.

 

Person: a human being regarded as an individual.

 

The human condition encompasses the unique features of being human.

It can be described as the unalterable part of humanity that is inherent and innate to human beings and not dependent on factors such as gender, race, culture, or class. It includes concerns such as the meaning of life, the search for gratification, the sense of curiosity, the inevitability of isolation, or awareness regarding the inescapability of death.

 

I don't see two human beings. I only see one human being and an unsentient clump of growing cells that have the potential to become a human being. Which also means that it is not currently a human being, and isn't a person. Which means that since it is not aware, does not think, cannot think, isn't a human being, and is just a clump of growing cells, it is fine to terminate it.

Edited by High Lord November

Share this post


Link to post

"Then you clearly don't truly don't CARE for that (future) child. You just sound force birth."

 

And you clearly just care about one of the two human beings taking place in pregnancy.

Fetus is a parasite. And I can say no I don't care about it. That's why I'd abort it. You can take that however you want. I put MY LIFE, MY HEALTH, AND MY FUNCTIONS BEFORE ANYTHING ELSE If I can't take care of it (and my mental health) I sure as hell ain't gonna keep it. And its pretty hypocritical of you, beings YOU only seem to care for the fetus. wink.gif

 

As High Lord November said

I don't see two human beings. I only see one human being and an unsentient clump of growing cells that have the potential to become a human being. Which also means that it is not currently a human being, and isn't a person. Which means that since it is not aware, does not think, cannot think, isn't a human being, and is just a clump of growing cells, it is fine to terminate it.

Edited by BlightWyvern

Share this post


Link to post

How does one define a person, anyhow?

Share this post


Link to post
How does one define a person, anyhow?

I'll give you my definition:

 

"An individual belonging to the species Homo Sapien (including all subspecies we have yet to find or species that evolve from Homo Sapien) who can survive without physically using another's body to survive EXCLUDING Twins who are born with shared body parts."

 

Now my definition will change when/if we discover sentient life living elsewhere

Share this post


Link to post
How does one define a person, anyhow?

The answer would depend on how one would define “person”. I would argue that the definition ought to revolve around some concept that depends on the development of the nervous system. Some might argue that a person has a nervous system that permits consciousness, or awareness of happiness/suffering, or desires. That’s the difficult part of the question.

 

Regardless of the answer, I think that we we can be reasonably certain that a zygote doesn’t have a well enough developed nervous system to be considered a “person”. ._.

 

Share this post


Link to post

How does one define a person, anyhow?

" I think, therefor I am"

 

Old, disabled or conjoined doesn't matter, they can think, can they?

 

To me, a fetus is either a guest or an intruder, all in the eye of the host. Either they welcome it or they want it removed.

Edited by CatCreature

Share this post


Link to post
How does one define a person, anyhow?

"a human being regarded as an individual."

 

Share this post


Link to post

Okay, I have to be the one to ask: Why does it *matter* if the fetus is a "person" or "human" or not??

 

Even if the fetus is a person/human/whatever, why does it have the right to take over someone's life? Why is ONE life more important then ONE life?

 

Why is it okay to *force* a human being to provide for another human being? Why is it okay to *force* a human being to allow another human being to draw nutrients and LIFE from them? Why is it okay for one human being to latch onto another human being and CAUSE potentially fatal medical problems to that human being?

 

WHY are fetuses more important then the woman carrying them??

 

Because THAT is what anti-abortion, "pro-life", etc is all about. Making abortions illegal is, in fact, making a fetus MORE important then the woman. How is that right??

Share this post


Link to post
Okay, I have to be the one to ask: Why does it *matter* if the fetus is a "person" or "human" or not??

 

Even if the fetus is a person/human/whatever, why does it have the right to take over someone's life? Why is ONE life more important then ONE life?

 

Why is it okay to *force* a human being to provide for another human being? Why is it okay to *force* a human being to allow another human being to draw nutrients and LIFE from them? Why is it okay for one human being to latch onto another human being and CAUSE potentially fatal medical problems to that human being?

 

WHY are fetuses more important then the woman carrying them??

 

Because THAT is what anti-abortion, "pro-life", etc is all about. Making abortions illegal is, in fact, making a fetus MORE important then the woman. How is that right??

Rooted to morals and religion it seems...

Share this post


Link to post

"Okay, I have to be the one to ask: Why does it *matter* if the fetus is a "person" or "human" or not??

 

Even if the fetus is a person/human/whatever, why does it have the right to take over someone's life? Why is ONE life more important then ONE life?

 

Why is it okay to *force* a human being to provide for another human being? Why is it okay to *force* a human being to allow another human being to draw nutrients and LIFE from them? Why is it okay for one human being to latch onto another human being and CAUSE potentially fatal medical problems to that human being?

 

WHY are fetuses more important then the woman carrying them??

 

Because THAT is what anti-abortion, "pro-life", etc is all about. Making abortions illegal is, in fact, making a fetus MORE important then the woman. How is that right??"

 

P1) if it's a clump of cells that aren't human, who cares? If they are it's a serious ethical issue. This is why it's important.

P2) why is it right to create a life form to then later say, "Nope." And terminate its existence. Regardless of it being both created by you, and is another human. Since when is it right to end another life an play God in a matter that toys with the essence of survival and life. Reproduction is one of the main parts of life.

P3) They are both important, however, the fetus cannot speak for itself and therefore we need to either speak or decide for it, again making this a moral issue, like the animal experimentation one.

P4) You seem to know all about free choice, but tell me, do you know what the pro-life movement is REALLY about? Behind all of the political name calling and nonsensical bull****? Because we are about life for ALL HUMANS. Not just the mother, not just the fetus. We think it's wrong to end another being's life! Why is it so hard to understand we believe in life and hope and freedom for everyone! Pro lifers aren't bloodsucking republicans who are trying to screw the mothers, we are trying to give the children they bear a chance at life. Not facing death for reasons they are unknowing of.

 

If you read this, it is at your own risk, this may be taken offensively, so if you continue this disclaimer is proof enough that you made this choice, and I warned you to turn back if you will be offended. Thank you.

So now what do you think about the big bad pro life movement huh? Now you've heard my intro let me really get the point through. I know you're probably skimming through this to find some fault in my saying, and I probably have a few, but skim this: A life is a life. Once a clump of HUMAN cells is created it is alive. It may not be sentient, but it is alive. And you, taking he opera unity away from this defenseless undeveloped human is INHUMANE! Do you understand how terrible abortion is? Or are you just preaching for it because you want every liberty you can get, regardless of what happens in the process. WELL HERE YOU GO, take your freedom! I want you to have it, no really, take your freedom to kill undeveloped innocent life forms to the max. Go ahead, because I want you to know that even though you talk choice and freedom you really bear an intent to forget about the child, forget about the life form that literally can't survive without it's mother. Yes it's a parasite, and yes it's a clump of cells, but it is a HUMAN CLUMP OF CELLS! It is the human parasite! We all are just parasitic clumps of cells. Instead of a mother though, we take from the Earth and other Humans. Welcome to humanity, we are a disease. However, I'm proud to be this disease! I'm a human, thinking, breathing, feeling life form and I'm determined to let everyone else have that same liberty too! Understand?

 

Edit: I'm feeling a bit tired and out of breath after writing this. Feel free to criticize, it's what I expect at this point being a pro lifer. I'll reply eventually, probably not right away though... I'll be watching smile.gif

Edited by Htt71

Share this post


Link to post

We will never agree.

 

To me, potential is not the same thing as being. If I was brain dead, I'd want to be taken off of life support. Just because I had cognitive function at one point and then lost it is no different than if I'd never developed that function in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post

No, we won't ever agree. However, I think we can both agree that both sides have points. Right?

Share this post


Link to post

We disagree too much for that, I'm afraid. It's a complete difference in thought. I can't exactly say, "You have a point" when your point is that a fetus is a person, and I reject that claim.

Share this post


Link to post

Alright. I completely understand where you are coming from, but I won't say it isn't a person. So, agree to disagree?

Edited by Htt71

Share this post


Link to post

So now what do you think about the big bad pro life movement huh? Now you've heard my intro let me really get the point through. I know you're probably skimming through this to find some fault in my saying, and I probably have a few, but skim this: A life is a life. Once a clump of HUMAN cells is created it is alive. It may not be sentient, but it is alive. And you, taking he opera unity away from this defenseless undeveloped human is INHUMANE! Do you understand how terrible abortion is? Or are you just preaching for it because you want every liberty you can get, regardless of what happens in the process. WELL HERE YOU GO, take your freedom! I want you to have it, no really, take your freedom to kill undeveloped innocent life forms to the max. Go ahead, because I want you to know that even though you talk choice and freedom you really bear an intent to forget about the child, forget about the life form that literally can't survive without it's mother. Yes it's a parasite, and yes it's a clump of cells, but it is a HUMAN CLUMP OF CELLS! It is the human parasite! We all are just parasitic clumps of cells. Instead of a mother though, we take from the Earth and other Humans. Welcome to humanity, we are a disease. However, I'm proud to be this disease! I'm a human, thinking, breathing, feeling life form and I'm determined to let everyone else have that same liberty too! Understand?

In a perfect world, all women would have access to birth control, accidents would never happen and no woman would have to be faced with the spectre of an unwanted pregnancy.

 

However, we do not live in a perfect world, and so in the world that we live in, I place more value on the life that is already HERE, on the bodily autonomy of the thinking, feeling person who - for whatever reason - does not want to carry that child to term.

 

Tbh I really find the whole pro-life vs pro-choice debate to be exhausting and pointless, because it allows the view to be clouded and shifted away from the real problem: the reasons why women abort in the first place. Women do not just get pregnant and then abort for kicks, they have a myriad of reasons. Finances, lack of birth control, health reasons, etc. As a society I believe it is our responsibility to help eliminate those reasons because THAT will truly be the step forward that society needs.

 

I honestly find this debate rather simplistic at times because it focuses on the knee-jerk emotional triggers of what is human or not rather than the real issues that cause abortion to be necessary in the first place.

 

(Funnily enough, many, many pro-lifers are also very conservative and are against social nets and welfare and also preach to abstinence and women not even using contraceptives because only women who sleep around even need those to begin with. Religious morals do not play nicely with the realities of the world we live in.)

Share this post


Link to post

"In a perfect world, all women would have access to birth control, accidents would never happen and no woman would have to be faced with the spectre of an unwanted pregnancy."

 

In a perfect world, I agree.

 

"However, we do not live in a perfect world, and so in the world that we live in, I place more value on the life that is already HERE, on the bodily autonomy of the thinking, feeling person who - for whatever reason - does not want to carry that child to term."

 

Actually, studies have shown that babies develop a sense of feeling pain at five months. They can think, kinda, and feel. Honestly I think that's just downright cruel, I mean killing a clump of human cells is wrong, but if it can feel pain... Wow. Although I do understand your point.

 

"Tbh I really find the whole pro-life vs pro-choice debate to be exhausting and pointless, because it allows the view to be clouded and shifted away from the real problem: the reasons why women abort in the first place. Women do not just get pregnant and then abort for kicks, they have a myriad of reasons. Finances, lack of birth control, health reasons, etc. As a society I believe it is our responsibility to help eliminate those reasons because THAT will truly be the step forward that society needs."

 

Finally! Someone who understands! I agree completely!

 

"I honestly find this debate rather simplistic at times because it focuses on the knee-jerk emotional triggers of what is human or not rather than the real issues that cause abortion to be necessary in the first place."

 

Necessity is kinda unfitting, sometimes it isn't necessary, but instead wanted. Though, I does focus on morals a lot. (Wanted in the sense of it happening, not in the sense of enjoying it happening.)

 

"(Funnily enough, many, many pro-lifers are also very conservative and are against social nets and welfare and also preach to abstinence and women not even using contraceptives because only women who sleep around even need those to begin with. Religious morals do not play nicely with the realities of the world we live in.)"

 

Pro-life conservative and proud here! And shocker, I'm catholic. However, I do believe contraceptives and sexual education are the way to go. Abstinence is great! But, you need to balance it with the realities of not being abstinent. Religious morals work, to an extent.

Share this post


Link to post

Actually, studies have shown that babies develop a sense of feeling pain at five months. They can think, kinda, and feel. Honestly I think that's just downright cruel, I mean killing a clump of human cells is wrong, but if it can feel pain... Wow. Although I do understand your point.

Most abortions are done before the 1st trimester, i.e 3 months, try again.

 

Share this post


Link to post

The ability to think comes *much* later than the reflex-response to pain. At 22 weeks, a fetus' ability to feel pain is roughly at par with some plants. Plus, as mentioned, most abortions are done very early, way before 20th week.

 

An abortion done at 3+ months is usually carried through because there is either something seriously wrong with the fetus or both would likely die from continued pregnancy.

Share this post


Link to post

Well, here's my problem: reading the sentences of most pro-"choice" people here have driven me to think that actually, abortions should be a lot MORE regulated, not less.

 

Most if the aeguments used could be continued on for eugenics, killing old and disabled people,

or generally everything thats not considered a "person" under varyung, quite personal, and biased definitions.

Share this post


Link to post

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.