Abortion= WRONG
- Thread starter cma
- Start date
"All of us men should just shut the fuck up and leave this issue to the women. It's their life"
guys are allowed to live and influence lives too you know fraggle
guys do have to put up with alot of stress along with the mothers
(btw, i think that abortion shouldnt be banned, but it should have the consensus of both parents if at all possible)
guys are allowed to live and influence lives too you know fraggle
guys do have to put up with alot of stress along with the mothers
(btw, i think that abortion shouldnt be banned, but it should have the consensus of both parents if at all possible)
Well, sure, it should have consensus. But, what if that's not possible? One of the parents is really religious, or really wants to be a parent, and the other isn't or doesn't? Whose decision would you give priority?
That's such a load of bull. Where do we put the limit on when something is "a potential human being"? Just the simple fact of HAVING a baby is murder -- wait, no -- a massacre. Why? Because for that ONE baby that is created, MILLIONS of "potential human being" sperm are being killed because they weren't able to find the egg. A sperm is as living as a fetus in a womb. Until that baby is brought into this world, outside the womb, and able to experience life, it's nothing like us until then.
Heck, the same, for example, if someone was born and lived in a dark cave all their life (assuming they somehow were able to stay living, heh) and saw and experieced nothing but darkness. Or if someone is born with all their senses gone.. no feel from touch, no smell, no hearing, etc. Heh, I'd say the same thing for people living right now. Those that don't go out and live life but rather just do nothing and are a waste of space on this earth, they should be aborted too so that someone more meaningfull can take their place, heh.
So that's the reason why I don't feel as if there's anything wrong with abortion. That's not to say I want to see people having abortions left and right (except in over-populated areas), but rather the whole "potential human being" is worthless until it IS one, otherwise it's nothing till then. And if you think otherwise, I suggest not ever doing any sexual acts or even have a baby period because millions of "potential human beings" will be massacres all for the sake of created one life. Isn't it ironic that some won't kill an innocent baby to save millions yet will kill millions to save an innocent baby?
- N
Let the women decide how they want their bodies to be used not politics.
i know it used to be commonly thought, but i would have hoped you people would know that the earth isn't flat. once upon a time it was believed that each sperm contained a miniature person, where rules about masturbating and birth control originated. fyi, there isn't. it's not even a full cell, just an incomplete genome with a throw away packaging.
When does the fetus magically become a human being? The birth of the baby does not seem to be a good argument for reasons mentioned by SwedishFish. Hence it seems the most likely non-religious answer would be that the fetus is evolving towards becoming a fully functioning human being from conception--to birth--to puberty--and to adulthood.
You cannot say the fetus is nothing without knowing all the fetus is. Have you created life in your spare time? Do you even know everything there is to know about consciousness?
You cannot say for certain that the fetus is not a human being without knowing everything that makes us a human being.
I'm uncertain what meaning you are implying by this. I think this would be under the ethical consideration of the double effect though.
Until something can live on it's own with it's own survival instinct, it is not a human it's a parasite. Without it's host, it will not live. Until that time, it is up to the host body to decide what to do about the parasite that is inhabiting it's existance. Biologically, we can not change that. And until I have the right to demand that you have a vasectomy, you do not have a right to what happens to my body. It's a double standard, but one we are unable to avoid. No one should be forced to endure physical harm, no matter the source. Some will choose to bear the burden, some will not. But it IS a burden. It does harm. It depleats you. There is no arguement to that. But we all have choices, don't we?
There is a belief that abortion is wrong. But who ultimately pays the price when reckoning day comes? You, or the person who made the choice. You can choose to force your will and morals on others, but that just proves how weak you really are to God. You are not a judge. He is the only judge in the end, and it is not your right to choose the paths of others. Or maybe you are so self-righteous that you believe that you are above the will and judgement of God, hmm? Don't you think that if he wanted to stop it, he could intervene? Or do you not think your God that powerful? Think about these things before you condemn people for your personal values and beliefs. You are not "saving" anyone or anything with your speechs and diatribes, you are only looking like a lost fool that does not know or understand the will of your God.
I am definately pro-choice. And I do think that men have almost as much reproductive rights as women, because it begins before conception. Men can abstain, they can protect themselves, or they can talk at length with their partner about what would be done should an accident occur. All that should happen prior to having sex, or the man recklessly gives up their right to the choice. I find it sad that women claim to be equal, and yet when push comes to shove it's their choice and the man has to pay regardless, either with their own emotion or with money. The only way men can avoid that is by being very careful who they sleep with and how. And to make sure that the woman they are with has the same values and intentions in mind. The choice is still yours, but you have to think with your big head and not your little one.
That said, I think it should all be handled with EQUAL responsibility.
A woman should never make a man pay child support for a child he wanted to abort. He should have to pay the equivalent for what an abortion would cost, and sign away any parental rights. A woman should never expect more in child support than the straight cost of raising a child in the region in which she lives. For instance, if you live in Chicago and it costs $1000 a month to feed, clothe, house and school your child on average, then the man should pay $500 a month. It should not be based on what he makes, and it should not be based on whether or not she wants to raise the child in an affluent neighborhood or spend stupid amounts on clothes and food. If the man wants to have the child, and the woman wants to abort, she should have to pay for the abortion herself and pay pain and suffering to the man. If the man wants to raise the child, and she wants to give it up for adoption, he can pay all the bills and she can sign away her parental rights to him. If the woman wants to put it up for adoption and the man wants to abort, he should still pay what it would have cost for the abortion, plus he should sign the adoption papers relinquishing his rights. I could go on and on. But, there also must be a registry of sorts so that people who have multiple problems (i.e. multiple abortions, multiple children) are treated and possibly held more accountable for their actions on both sides. That is to prevent men from knocking up every woman they meet and demanding abortions to skate out, and women can't keep having children to support themselves on other peoples money.
The thing is that people have to start thinking logically, and women have to stop being so emotional about the whole thing. They are just as at fault, and just as responsible for the pregnancy as the man is and it's about time women step up to the plate and accept that. Can't be treated as equals when you are always a victim.
There is a belief that abortion is wrong. But who ultimately pays the price when reckoning day comes? You, or the person who made the choice. You can choose to force your will and morals on others, but that just proves how weak you really are to God. You are not a judge. He is the only judge in the end, and it is not your right to choose the paths of others. Or maybe you are so self-righteous that you believe that you are above the will and judgement of God, hmm? Don't you think that if he wanted to stop it, he could intervene? Or do you not think your God that powerful? Think about these things before you condemn people for your personal values and beliefs. You are not "saving" anyone or anything with your speechs and diatribes, you are only looking like a lost fool that does not know or understand the will of your God.
I am definately pro-choice. And I do think that men have almost as much reproductive rights as women, because it begins before conception. Men can abstain, they can protect themselves, or they can talk at length with their partner about what would be done should an accident occur. All that should happen prior to having sex, or the man recklessly gives up their right to the choice. I find it sad that women claim to be equal, and yet when push comes to shove it's their choice and the man has to pay regardless, either with their own emotion or with money. The only way men can avoid that is by being very careful who they sleep with and how. And to make sure that the woman they are with has the same values and intentions in mind. The choice is still yours, but you have to think with your big head and not your little one.
That said, I think it should all be handled with EQUAL responsibility.
A woman should never make a man pay child support for a child he wanted to abort. He should have to pay the equivalent for what an abortion would cost, and sign away any parental rights. A woman should never expect more in child support than the straight cost of raising a child in the region in which she lives. For instance, if you live in Chicago and it costs $1000 a month to feed, clothe, house and school your child on average, then the man should pay $500 a month. It should not be based on what he makes, and it should not be based on whether or not she wants to raise the child in an affluent neighborhood or spend stupid amounts on clothes and food. If the man wants to have the child, and the woman wants to abort, she should have to pay for the abortion herself and pay pain and suffering to the man. If the man wants to raise the child, and she wants to give it up for adoption, he can pay all the bills and she can sign away her parental rights to him. If the woman wants to put it up for adoption and the man wants to abort, he should still pay what it would have cost for the abortion, plus he should sign the adoption papers relinquishing his rights. I could go on and on. But, there also must be a registry of sorts so that people who have multiple problems (i.e. multiple abortions, multiple children) are treated and possibly held more accountable for their actions on both sides. That is to prevent men from knocking up every woman they meet and demanding abortions to skate out, and women can't keep having children to support themselves on other peoples money.
The thing is that people have to start thinking logically, and women have to stop being so emotional about the whole thing. They are just as at fault, and just as responsible for the pregnancy as the man is and it's about time women step up to the plate and accept that. Can't be treated as equals when you are always a victim.
No one can live on their own. It's a fact. No one. Not one. Let a baby try to live on its own. It will surely die. Heck, even a grown adult will most likely go crazy after ten years or so.
If abortion is murder, then I too will pay the price for not doing everything that I should have done to stopped it.
What makes you so certain God will not intervene? Anyway, it's clear that God allows alot of evil, murder, and rape to occur without intervening so a theology that does believes God exists should try to answer this question. It's not a completely answered question, but it's often said that God allows evil because there is greater good produced when people turn from their evil.
I have not condemned anyone but abortion is wrong. Just because something someone did is wrong does not make the entire person evil, and even if it did, that person could turn from their evil.
A baby, even a newborn infant will cry for food. It will cry for comfort. It will attempt to move towards warmth. It is trying to survive. I also think that babies in their mid to late second and third trimester also make attempts to survive. They will move towards sound, suck their thumb to curb hunger and move around in the womb to make itself more comfortable. This is what I mean by attempting to live on it's own. At this point, I personally believe that abortion should only be done in circumstances that would cause the death or severe disability to the mother to continue to carry the pregnancy to term.
That is such strawman bullshit that I am not even going respond to that comment. You are fetching.
Really... so do you go to major cities and take down drug kingpins, and gang leaders? Do you go down to the county jail and preach to the men leaving the prison who have a recidivism rate of greater than 73%? What do you do to save the living from certain death? Hmm?
It's easy to sit atop your horse and throw bolts of righteousness down at the evil masses. It's much harder to step down and do something about it. You want to change the world, start with the one that already exists so that the embryeal life you so cherish has a world to live in that isn't a pile of shit.
See, people like you drive me insane with your ignorant banter about fetal rights and yet you do nothing about the drug addicted mothers wandering the streets. You do nothing about mothers who drink. You do nothing to help poor pregnant women get the right nutrition to create a life that is whole and healthy. You are full of shit. You have so many double standards that you really do believe you are God and should intervene on behalf of a fetus that only has a 1/3 chance of making past the first trimester anyway. Only 1 in 3 pregnancies (excluding abortions) actually make it to the first trimester, and yet you feel you somehow have to right to value a life that has bad odds to begin with, then a life that already exists. Do you see the flaw in your logic? Or is the holy banner of righteousness obscuring your view still?
okinrus said:
That is such strawman bullshit that I am not even going respond to that comment. You are fetching.
okinrus said:
Really... so do you go to major cities and take down drug kingpins, and gang leaders? Do you go down to the county jail and preach to the men leaving the prison who have a recidivism rate of greater than 73%? What do you do to save the living from certain death? Hmm?
It's easy to sit atop your horse and throw bolts of righteousness down at the evil masses. It's much harder to step down and do something about it. You want to change the world, start with the one that already exists so that the embryeal life you so cherish has a world to live in that isn't a pile of shit.
See, people like you drive me insane with your ignorant banter about fetal rights and yet you do nothing about the drug addicted mothers wandering the streets. You do nothing about mothers who drink. You do nothing to help poor pregnant women get the right nutrition to create a life that is whole and healthy. You are full of shit. You have so many double standards that you really do believe you are God and should intervene on behalf of a fetus that only has a 1/3 chance of making past the first trimester anyway. Only 1 in 3 pregnancies (excluding abortions) actually make it to the first trimester, and yet you feel you somehow have to right to value a life that has bad odds to begin with, then a life that already exists. Do you see the flaw in your logic? Or is the holy banner of righteousness obscuring your view still?
i dunno if it is that obvious. though the baby can consume food in the outside environment, obtaining that food is another issue. that is, i am fairly sure that newborns don't have complete control over their motor functions... though i could be wrong. but if that is right, it makes it awfully hard for that baby to survive independent of its mother or some care-giving body. if that makes any sense. :bugeye:
So will a cell.
Well, that's better than nothing. I don't think the desire to survive can objectively be classified in law. Obviously, a new born baby will show signs of wanting to survive but this is without understanding death.
I try to take action when it's possible, but I'm quite certain that God may find me guilty of not taking action. My point was not that I'm perfect but that just because something occur does not give us the liberty to do nothing.
I believe recidivism has a lot to do with prisoner's unable to free themselves from the people who engage in illegal conduct. Society's perception and lack of jobs for people with past offenses may also be a cause.
It is you who claim abortion is right, and I claim it is wrong. How am I being anymore righteous than you are?
When have I called anyone evil?
Life must be defended above living conditions.
This is untrue. I give what I have to give. Even so, most pro-liifers do many things beyond defending the unborn's life.
I would suppose you do all these things. If your claiming you are a better person than I am, you may be right. In any case, it's not open for debate. It will just result in you and I bragging about all the good we've done, and it will still not have any bearing on whether abortion is right.
This untrue. When have I said I was God?
This is untrue.
regardless of whether or not you think it is murder, what is your position on what should and should not be law?
I don't think it matters whether a newborn baby could survive without its mother but whether the law requires parents.
There have been studies when children receive inadequate hujman contact. Basically, these children have lasting mental disorders.
http://www.feralchildren.com/en/index.php
There have been studies when children receive inadequate hujman contact. Basically, these children have lasting mental disorders.
http://www.feralchildren.com/en/index.php
so am i to assume you would have people live in squalor and misery so long as they do live? :bugeye:
edit: right, but as to the issue of relevance, persol, would you then say that a fetus or embryo or zygote starts being a person when it stops being a parasite?
That's the point. It can't survive by itself. It CAN survive without it's mother.antifreeze said:
That's just dumb and completely off topic. You don't need your biological mother for human contact. You NEED your biological mother as a young fetus.
Looks like I should have read all the responses before I responded myself
a little more specific than that. Even a 6 month old can be viewed as a parasite. I'm suggesting that an embryo is a person when it stops needing to be a parasite off its biological mother.
Perhaps there is a problem with this definition... but I thought about it for a little while and it seems to make sense.
okinrus said:
And with that, you completely debunk you whole entire arguement. Not only will a zygote do NONE of those things (and this is proven by scientific fact) Everytime you wash, you lose thousands of cells. And if you ejaculate, and a drop spills, there goes 600 or so cells... dead. By your absolutely silly assertion, we commit murder all the time, every day, voluntarily. Your entire premise is not only illogical, but based on a belief that you somehow believe a fetus is more important in every way than the person who carried it. Some righteous man you are. Tell me, where in your holy book is abortion wrong?
Abortion is legal. The majority believes it is right, and you are wrong. This has not changed despite the hordes of self-righteous idiots who storm clinics and hospitals in the name of their God. Oh how I love religion.
And it is a scientific fact that only one in three fertilized eggs makes it to the second trimester. Welcome to science 101.