BrainWithAGun
Registered Member
GAA! Enough! Abortion is wrong and evil. It should never ne legalized under any circumstances.
dammit
dammit
Originally posted by one_raven
What about the potential father?
Originally posted by one_raven
Of course not, but since he is the potential father and you did accept the inherent responsibilty of having sex with him, he should be allowed to have a say in whether HE should be allowed to raise that child.
Originally posted by airavata
when the mother carries the foetus inside her, the foetus is not a seperate life. it s a part of the mother, if the mother dies, it dies. a person should be able to have control over any part of his body. if a person can cut off his hand or foot, why not carry out an abortion. it's the mother's wish entirely, and if she so wishes, who are we to say no? however, if the mother had consentual sex with the father and THEN she wants to abort then it should be taken to court-- because the child is the father's as much as it is her's.
Originally posted by Agent Smith
Even if raped....abortion is still moraly wrong. Your robbing the life of a young person. Your killing a person. Not property, not onlya "clump of cells" but a human being. It's just a human that hasnt been fully developed yet. I dont see a difference between abortion and just killing a homeless man since they are both "unwanted"
Using threats to try and make us change our opinion is disgusting, low, and pathetic. Get a life.Those of you who are for abortion... see you hell. (no doubt)
You wouldn't be able to ask that question, would you? That is an appeal to fear. If you were aborted, you wouldn't know about it.Had my mother aborted me.. where would I be?
When the kid pops out, the father has a say (50%). Before that, he has NO say. The mother is the one carrying it.If teh fetus is nothing more than another body part of the mother, then what does the father have to do with it?
Why? The hand doesn't belong to the father.Should a woman get her mate's permission to cut her hand off?
That's not what I meant and you know it. Stop playing games. As long as the child is 'inside' the mother, it is part of her body. Therefore, she is the one who makes the decisions about what will happen to the child.Mountainhare, you make the implication that the life of the child belongs to the mother. Therefore, everyone walking around today is, what "owned" by another person?
I don't believe in the quantity of life, I believe in the quality. Better to live 5 good years than 50 in misery.Your agreeance with such a statement would indicate that you believe that life itself isn't a valuable thing.
That depends which human you are talking about. I think that rapists lives are worth far less than those of cattle.It seems here that to you human life is worth about as much as cattle.
The Nazi's religious beliefs, and severe brain defects, led to them committing genocide.however it also allowed for the Nazis to commit genocide.
Now would you support Hitler in such a viewpoint?
Well, I don't agree. It's a thing which the woman carries around. Sure, it has potential. So does a single sperm. Are you one of those people who believes that 'every sperm is sacred'?The point that I'm trying to make is that I believe human life has an inherent value and must be protected. Once the sperm meets an egg this would be a human life.
Tis a saddening sight to see that our society will continue to repress and restrict a woman's rights. It is HER body. Not yours. Not mine. Not the child's. HERS. HER BODY. HER CHOICE.Tis a saddening site to see that our society would destroy a human life
*rolls eyes* I don't see the unborn baby as a 'human life'. It is still part of the mother.A more important life, and as mountainhare says perhaps it'll save that woman's reputation, well there you have it reputation saver I suppose in that instance anything would be considered right?