|
| Thread: Abortion is murder!!! |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 · NEXT» |
|
Ruby
Promising
Known Hero
crazed swede
|
posted June 06, 2004 09:47 PM |
|
|
Abortion is murder!!!
Okay here is something for all you people who actually care about this issue, which is very important now that the presidential election is right behind the corner.
Abortion is murder. This child inside the mother is alive, it is developing a brain, a body, and a heart. A baby is a human even though it may only be a few cells contained.
Well some people say that if the baby is only a cell, it's not gonna matter. It can't feel it right?
The thing is, this baby could grow up, be happy, be a normal child like anyone else. If you can't handle the baby, set it up for adoption. You are killing a person! It's just like you would kill me right now, which u people who disagree with me would if you could.
Well some people say that it's the mothers choice and she has right to do whatever with her body.
OMG! Its not her body for crying out loud! It's the babies body! Don't give me that crap! If that baby had a mouth to speak, I think that he'd want a chance in life. For some people life may suck, but give that little life a chance. ABORTION IS MURDER! 
You ask, why do I bring up this heart breaking issue? Well, we have had a debate with one of our political teachers and he was fine with abortion. I just heard about a story of a child that was taken out of a mother, too old to abort, but had scissors jammed into the back of their head. In abortion, sometimes they actually put the baby's body parts into containers and send them into labs. Oh great. Is this something GOOD? What is going on with the world! I can just start crying right now.
Do you not agree??
____________
The Darker the Sky--
The Brighter the Stars-
|
|
Sir_Stiven
Honorable
Legendary Hero
banned
|
posted June 06, 2004 10:05 PM |
|
|
|
no i think you are wrong.
|
|
Romana
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Thx :D
|
|
posted June 06, 2004 10:30 PM |
|
|
To some extent I have to agree with you Ruby but there are cases in which I think it should be possible.
For instance a baby conceived as a result of rape.
There are also cases when tests before the 3rd month( I think?) prove the baby will be horribly mutilated or diseased in which case I also think it should be possible to end the pregnancy.
Lately I have been thinking about children with down syndrom and what I would do if I knew the baby I was carrying had it.. It's a hard decision to make in any case I think
|
|
Dingo
Responsible
Legendary Hero
God of Dark SPAM
|
|
posted June 06, 2004 11:11 PM |
|
|
Other Side?
____________
The Above Post/Thread/Idea Is CopyRighted by, The Dingo Corp.
|
|
privatehudson
Responsible
Legendary Hero
The Ultimate Badass
|
|
posted June 06, 2004 11:37 PM |
|
|
I, like Romana and (apparently) SS disagree, but I would further add that sometimes, with the problems surrounding adoption and so on there is a further case for the need to be extended to those cases in which the mother is mentally incapable of bearing the child also. The system of adoption in this country is already overloaded, whilst saying "choose adoption" is fine in principle, not much thought tends to go into who would actually adopt all these children.
And whilst obviously the story you mentioned is horrifying, to use it in order to assume that it is the norm and therefore justify banning abortion is just plain wrong. Generally I would say that the choice should be left with the parents involved who have to choose for the child whether the circumstances will permit the child a good life or, for whatever reason not.
____________
We're on an express elevator to Hell, goin' down!
|
|
Ruby
Promising
Known Hero
crazed swede
|
|
posted June 07, 2004 03:45 AM |
|
|
If rape is involved
If there is rape involved in the abortion, dude, the baby is still a baby. It doesn't make this child any different from any other baby. It's just like anyone else.
Adoption is still a great option, greater than killing it.
|
|
Laelth
Famous Hero
Laelth rhymes with stealth.
|
|
posted June 07, 2004 03:59 AM |
|
Edited By: Laelth on 6 Jun 2004
|
I had a 9 oz. steak for dinner. Somebody killed that cow. A fetus is a living, growing human being, sure, and having an abortion kills it. But is it "murder" to kill it? Is it "murder" to kill the cow? (Murder is a crime that carries the death penalty in many of the United States.) The fact is that we kill living things all the time. Sometimes killing living things is justified (carrots, apples, asparagus, shrimp, chicken, fish, cows, and even dogs--when the population at my local animal shelter gets too high, many animals are "euthanized"). It's even justified to kill humans on occasion (self-defense, war, perhaps even assisted suicide). The question is which of any of these killings are we going to call "murder," i.e. deserving of the full penalty of the criminal law. One can choose to call abortion murder or a justified killing, depending on one's own ethics, but let's make one thing very clear. Not all killing is murder. We have yet to decide, finally, what an abortion is, leaglly. So, when somebody says "abortion is murder," what they're really saying is "I think abortion should be a crime that carries the maximum penalty of the law." That's a matter of opinion, obviously, and not a factual statement.
-Laelth
____________
Alan P. Taylor, Attorney at Law, LLC
|
|
Vadskye91
Promising
Supreme Hero
Back again
|
|
posted June 07, 2004 05:14 AM |
|
|
Quote:
If there is rape involved in the abortion, dude, the baby is still a baby. It doesn't make this child any different from any other baby. It's just like anyone else.
Although I am generally Pro-Life, I strongly disagree with this. Forcing a mother to keep a baby that is not her own is just cruel. Not only does the expactant mother have the emotional guilt (could I have stopped that? Is this my fault?) but now she also has to account for a child that she did not want and is not prepared for. The child will not have a father and will always have the sneaking suspicion (that may be true!) that their mother didn't want them. I think that abortion should be allowed in cases such as rape, or if the child is handicapped enough that they could not enjoy a decent life. I think that if the mother was simply stupid enough to have sex outside of marriage and/or before she is emotionally ready to deal with the child then it's her own fault for sacrificing long-term happiness for short-term pleasure.
____________
Knowledge is power...
|
|
privatehudson
Responsible
Legendary Hero
The Ultimate Badass
|
|
posted June 07, 2004 02:01 PM |
|
|
Quote:
If there is rape involved in the abortion, dude, the baby is still a baby. It doesn't make this child any different from any other baby. It's just like anyone else.
Adoption is still a great option, greater than killing it.
Interesting to note that people advocating adoption as an alternative to abortion don't seem to also have much idea about the strain it would put on the adoption process...
____________
We're on an express elevator to Hell, goin' down!
|
|
Shai-Hulud
Known Hero
Sicomor
|
|
posted June 07, 2004 02:16 PM |
|
|
Now let's take it logically! Ruby is more than right. When we are in danger we scream for our life! A fetus can't do that! Ok but abortion are around for 2 milleniums at least and it won't stop even if the law says so! I'll give you an example... In Romania, in the communist period abortion was illegal and if you were caught you could have went to prison...Even though my grandmother did an abortion at her 11'th child and died beacuse of this( she made the abortion herself even if she wasn't a doctor and died beacuse she didn't had an aspirine - the communists asked you what you need for when you bought an aspirine... ). So trough all the arguments that ruby gave I came to the conclusion that abortion should be banned, but not trough the method that the communist did, by helping that mother to raise her child...
My grandmother didn't made that abortion beacuse she was raped or because she had *** one time and she didn't took a pill or something like this, because she didn't had enough food to feed them all and she was to poor...
But study this case! The cells that a fetus has in his first 2 weeks are going to form his organs - heart, brain etc. Those cells can be extracted( and the technolgy exists) so that they could be donated to another person to help him replace his heart for example. In this case the fetus will die. What would you do in this case. A life for another...
|
|
Marelt_Ekiran
Promising
Famous Hero
Watcher of All
|
|
posted June 07, 2004 08:01 PM |
|
|
And besides, where do we draw the line when something is a potential life or not...
Following the same logic, every time a women goes through the menstruation cycle without becoming pregnant, it's murder. Because that egg cell could have become a child. Everytime a male ejaculates, it's a waste of 100-300 million potential lives.
Since everybody would say that the above sounds ridiculous, I can safely assume that fertilization is considered the borderline. So when the egg and the sperm cell come together, then all of a sudden, that combination is life, which is sacred, holy, and whatnot.
Fact is that this world can only support a limited amount of human beings. If that were not the case, then we could just reproduce to infinity and the population of humans would be somewhere in the trillions right now.
So would it not be more logical to bring the children to earth with a better chance of survival and a good life? I don't believe that any mother who aborts a child just does this coldheartedly and for no apparent reason (and if she does, would she have made a good mother?). Usually, the reason is that the mother either can't support the child or does not feel emotionally or physically fit to bring up the child.
In that case, would it not be better to not let the child be born. You would probably do the child no favour by letting it be born in the circumstances named above, and the whole affair would just be a more-than-necesarry strain on society as a whole. The amount of resources spend on that child would better be spend on a child that was desired to come to this earth, and has therefore a much better potential to achieve something...
A last question. Why is the murder of another human being bad? Two reasons:
1) The potential in that person's life was ripped away.
2) The strain on the survivors who knew the victim.
In the above paragraph, I just refuted the first reason when it comes to abortion. As for the second reason, the only person who knows the unborn child at this point in the mother. So I would say that the choice is hers to make.
Before people start summing up their arguments against my statements, let me just inform you of two of my believes:
- Any argument based on religion is null and void.
- Nothing on this earth has a value on it's own. Something must be applied to have a value, and this statement includes life in general.
____________
Perception is everything.
|
|
frostwolf
Famous Hero
livin' in a bottle of vodka
|
|
posted June 07, 2004 11:00 PM |
|
|
By the way, if the fetus had a mouth and could speak, it wouldn't say it wants a chance at life, since beeing less than 9 months old it is not famyliar with the concepts of life and death, and it couldn't talk anyway.
Seriously now, I have nothing against abortion, and there are countless arguments to prove it's not wrong.
For example, the planet is already overpopulated, and any newborn will only lead to a further decrease in the ecologycal balance.
On the other hand, saying that it's a life you're ending is somewhat wrong. It's true, but it's not that big a deal. For example, think about when you kill a bug: you say it's a pity to end a life just because you can. But keeping in mind that the bug does not posses a central nervous system and is incapable of thought, it is safe to assume that it neither does care or want to prevent it's death, as he is unable o know the concept.
The same goes for babyes: at that very young age, you can only talk about an organism, not about an individual. While it may feel pain, it is still incapable of thought, or at least abstract thought, so it can not understand life and death. Also, it would not chose to live since (even it could reason) it is not aware of the outside world. Therefore, ending a life in it's early stage is no more a crime (biologicaly at least) than killing any other animal, even an insect. Also, it is a matter of religion. As I am an atheist I do not belive in christian dogma, and do not necesarily admit the existence of the soul and the sin of destroing it.
There's a lot more on this, I just don't have enough time now.
____________
What can you expect from a world where everybody lives because they're too afraid to commit suicide?
|
|
Svarog
Honorable
Supreme Hero
statue-loving necrophiliac
|
|
posted June 07, 2004 11:38 PM |
|
|
Quote:
A last question. Why is the murder of another human being bad? Two reasons:
1) The potential in that person's life was ripped away.
2) The strain on the survivors who knew the victim.
Hmmm... First, the baby has a potential for life, so you cannot reject your first reason just like that. Hell, even the sperms have potential for life.
If it is left for those who know the victim to decide for his/her life, then it's a cruel ignoring of the basic human right - the right to live. The murder of another human being is bad by itself. Relations with other people are not a factor there.
I'm not against abortion, but the way you 2 are trying to defend it, just doesn't help us. There's a mistake even in the start of your argument - the assumption that the fetus is a person. If it was true, than all the human rights would have to apply to the fetus also, i.e. abortion would be considered murder.
Quote:
For example, the planet is already overpopulated, and any newborn will only lead to a further decrease in the ecologycal balance.
Another silly argument. Then why don't we just kill you instead of the baby?
Quote:
For example, think about when you kill a bug: you say it's a pity to end a life just because you can. But keeping in mind that the bug does not posses a central nervous system and is incapable of thought, it is safe to assume that it neither does care or want to prevent it's death, as he is unable o know the concept.
Bugs posses some suvival instincts so it's not all the same to them whether they live or die. Tryiing to justify killing bugs with ethics is simply impossible, as probably abortion is impossible to fully justify with ethical reasoning, but only with pragmatic one (the side with more benefits wins).
Quote:
The same goes for babyes: at that very young age, you can only talk about an organism, not about an individual.
So that would mean that killing human organisms is fine ethically, which is why I said it can't be justified ethically. However, a life without personality that is -5 months old is objectively less important than the mother's life (personality included in the mum package  ), and also there's the issue about the undesirable conditions that the unwanted baby would grow up.
Pro-life people usually emphasize the fact that the baby is a living thing, but also a human cell is a living thing, impossible to survive on her own, just like the fetus. Like it or not, the fetus is just a group of tissues that cannot survive outside the womb and lack personality, and few would miss those tissues, unlike the mess that could happen in both the mother's and the child's lives, if the baby is born.
____________
The meek shall inherit the earth, but NOT its mineral rights.
|
|
Ruby
Promising
Known Hero
crazed swede
|
|
posted June 08, 2004 01:55 AM |
|
Edited By: Ruby on 7 Jun 2004
|
Sniff** Sniff***
I can die for any of these poor lives. Sometimes I may not enjoy life, but I would give my life for someone else.
____________
The Darker the Sky--
The Brighter the Stars-
|
|
Sir_Stiven
Honorable
Legendary Hero
banned
|
|
posted June 08, 2004 02:15 AM |
|
|
|
bah youre all a set of drama queens, now bring me a beer so i can happily keep enjoying this toss discussion
|
|
Marelt_Ekiran
Promising
Famous Hero
Watcher of All
|
|
posted June 08, 2004 03:39 AM |
|
|
Even though I find it strange of myself, I'm with Sir Stiven on this one.
____________
Perception is everything.
|
|
Vadskye91
Promising
Supreme Hero
Back again
|
|
posted June 08, 2004 05:15 AM |
|
|
To be or not to be...
____________
Knowledge is power...
|
|
Shai-Hulud
Known Hero
Sicomor
|
|
posted June 08, 2004 02:40 PM |
|
|
Oh, really? I baby won't scream if he is in danger... The problem what danger means to him...For us danger is when could get hurt or die.But for a baby...Danger for him is taking his bottle of milk from his mouth, taking his toy from his hand...You are not taking this problem from one perspective...We really don't know what a baby is thinking...Maybe he has also those animal instincts( which by the way we have them to but we manage to keep them in the subconcios) and he is warned from those instincts of the same danger that we percept! Real life danger! You will say this is absolutely absurd. Go for it! I will say one simple thing! Life is absurd!
Oh...By the way nobody related to what I said involving saving a life trough killing another...
Ruby! I'm almost sure you wouldn't give your life for another! You know way...Beacause there are to many to be saved and you wouldn't know where to choose from and you will come to one conclusion(which you will read it below). Go to an hospital with cronichal diseases and you will see so many people that have some many health problems and you will realize that it's better that you stayed alive to help evryone of them. Sacrificing yourself for another is not the brightest solution...If all of us would have taken this model, where would we be today? Lots of people sacrifing for others. Imagine what would have happened if Edison or Benjamin Franklin or Voltaire would have made choosed this solution. We would have been in the BRONZE AGE!
|
|
doomnezeu
Supreme Hero
Miaumiaumiau
|
|
posted June 08, 2004 02:42 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Steven:
bah youre all a set of drama queens, now bring me a beer so i can happily keep enjoying this toss discussion
Vadskye:
To be or not to be...
To beer or not to beer...
____________
|
|
Svarog
Honorable
Supreme Hero
statue-loving necrophiliac
|
|
posted June 08, 2004 02:52 PM |
|
|
Quote:
To beer or not to beer...
To beer. 
____________
The meek shall inherit the earth, but NOT its mineral rights.
|
| |
|
|
