Its funny how pro-lifers avoid to give an explanation when people say "fetuses are not infants" and it gets scary when you say "it's an indertermined mass of cells" and they reply with "ITS THE SAME, ITS A LIFE: ITS A BABY, ABORTION IS MURDER!!". An indetermined mass of cells is just that. It is "life" as much as a liver or a kidney. It means, its "worse" to kill a rat than a fetus. Comparing a fetus to an unborn baby is seriously deranged. Not all life is important: a simple animal is more a of a life than a fetus. If someone get rid of their cancerous organ they're also killing something. That's why the pro-lifer motto "All life is very important" is dumb. It's somewhat strange that some individuals think (real) people are important just because they're a mass of cell with a human DNA. It doesn't even matter if they have a basic nervous system or not and even less if they have a mind.
Instead of attacking my religion why don't you use some intellect and actually back up what you beleive?
Just because they might have their "best interests" at heart does not make it right. If a mother robs an elderly man to feed her child at home, does that make it right? No, it does not. You cannot use your born children as a free pass to do as you please. Agreed, at least you have some humanity. Oh but they can and they do! That is the problem. It is commonly known a very minute percentage of abortions are for rape, incest, or danger of the mother, it just does not happen that often in this day and age. You look at an array of polls on why women have had abortions, and you will see my point. I have already stated I support an abortion if the mother's life is at stake, I don't know many people who would argue otherwise. So, why not make that the exception, instead of letting people have a third trimester abortion freely? It seems that we agree on this, but you don't want to support legislation to make it so, correct me if I am wrong. LOL.....ok....you win, feticide. But there are some fetuses that have more human like actions than some born people, such as people in vegetative states and what not. My point is, is that they are just as human as you and I, they are only in devolopment. Again, no one has been able to tell me by what magical alchemy a fetus is deemed, "Human"--it even retains the same species class from the moment of conception, when the egg and sperm fertilize and create a unique life. Yes. Although, I should state that I would advise a woman who was raped NOT to have an abortion, it is only going to increase the trauma. No, and that is a poor assesment of my logic. The fact is the criminal came into your house, on your property, (which is a crime in of itself) and raped you. I don't care if you had your doors wide open, you were still raped, and thus, it was not your fault. That takes the whole meaning of the word "rape" out of meaning, with your scenario. Oh shut up. I have based my facts on medical research from NON religious sources. The only "religious" sources I have used is on the issue of rape pregnancies. With regards to it, I suppose it could be argued either way, but I am more inclined to beleive it would heal and show a possible positive outcome, as opposed to having a surgeon perform and abortion on you, and have the trauma of that on top of the rape trauma as well. Do you follow me?
So, If I want to sell my daughter into slavery to a third world nation, I can do that? Please show me where children are property of the parents, where are you living the 16th century?
I tend to be more quiet on abortion than other hot political issues, I feel like arguing over abortion is pretty much women's territory, as they're the ones who are affected by it. On one side I hear the rants for the sanctity of, uh, fetal life, and on the other it's about liberating the would-be childbearer. I guess I'm pro-choice, though I'm against abortions in the late stage. I just think this decision is best left to the individual, and allows people to free themselves of the child-bearing responsibility of sex, if they so wish. Abortion and birth control are what gave birth to the whole sexual revolution.
Who's avoiding the explainations here? Not a single one of you have EVER explained exactly at what stage a "fetus" becomes an "infant." Any woman who's ever carried a child in her belly and has heard her child's heartbeat and has seen them moving on her first ultrasound knows that it is alive, it's just at a different stage of life. You wanna talk about scary? what's scary is the fact that so many people wanna use that lame ass "indetermined mass of cells" line....either you know your full of bullshit, or you really are just that clueless. Ask any OB/GYN about it, I hardly think you'd find one that'll tell you that crap. So unless you plan on getting an abortion within the first 2 weeks (next to impossible, since most women don't even find out till they're at least a month) you are not simply flushing away a chunk of cells. "Comparing a fetus to an unborn baby is seriously deranged." Umm, WTF do you think a fetus is, dude? I think someone needs to take reproduction 101 again. CANCER doesn't have a heartbeat, CANCER doesn't suck its thumb in the womb, CANCER doesn't have brainwaves, and CANCER doesn't cry. A FETUS does all of the above, and more. Apparently someone also needs some lessons in biology. Again, until you find out some REAL facts, don't go running your mouth about things you don't know about. Here is a real week by week development chart of a "fetus" aka baby, maybe you should educate yourself about the differences between a "lump of cells" and a developing baby. That goes for anyone else hear that would like to argue for abortion using bullshit pro-abortion propaganda. I can respect people who hold a valid, pro-choice opinion on the matter, but I can't stand idiots who think they know something and wanna run their mouth about it. Sorry for the rant.
Here's an idea to protect the mother. Don't have an abortion. According to the pro-abortionist logic, if a baby is still in the womb, it's not a person. Just wait until the baby comes out, and at that very instant, kill it. One moment it's a "fetus", the next it's human? That doesn't make sense. What difference should a few seconds make?
It is a man's issue as well. Just becasue I am a man I should not have a say? That's sexist. Should I not have a say on weather serial killers should get the death penalty or not, just becasue no one in my family or myself was murdered? Besides, it takes a man to get the woman pregnant, thus, it is an issue for males as well.
No one should be able to use their born children as a free pass. But, you should be able to make decisions that are in their best interests, and whether or not to have an abortion is one of them. This is a fact sheet on abortion. If you scroll down, you will find that 1% of abortions are done at 21 or more weeks. That isn't even the third trimester yet, which starts at 24 weeks. Is it safe to assume that 1% is the minute percentage you were talking about that is done for the health of the mother? (Or perhaps severe fetal abnormalities detected late in pregnancy.) I am not arguing for third trimester abortions of a healthy fetus, mind you, just trying to perhaps change your mind about a woman happily carrying a pregnancy for 8 months and then deciding to abort. That is just silly. Oh, I agree with you that a fetus has human like actions; of course, it is human. It's not a dog! But until it's born, it is effectively leeching off the mother, and it is her right to not have another being using her body for life support. In your opinion. She might feel loads better after it! You can't make that assessment for someone. But it was my fault that my house was so accessible to the rapist. Would it be wrong of me to use force to get the intruder out of my house? Just like it would be my fault that I left my body accessible to conception, and want to use force to get the intruder out of my body. I will not, thank you very much. My facts are based on medical research as well, as far as fetal development and abortion statistics are concerned. You and I have a very different perspective on rape pregnancies, however. I would never, ever dream of recommending a woman carry to term after being violated in the worst way possible. Not only would it wreak havoc on her body, but also her mind.
this is funny, im almost changin my mind just cus i dont want you to have children. how can you possibly, with a rational mind, believe that? thats off the hook. it reminds me of the time i got this girl preggers and our relief when we found out that she wasn't having a baby, she ended up having a rat. thank god, we ended up letting it go in the wild.
i like your thinking that it's the woman choise. but a late term abortion is sometimes the one that is used to save the woman's life from complications. so put your self in that persons shoes and walk a mile. ahh. now theres some thing to think about. loose two lives or sacrafice the unborn one with no memories of a physical life outside the womb so the other can survive. and wat of the father of this child? do you think he could live with himself to let both of them go? to live alone, to move on to another existance? or let the unborn go and start again if possible? my only concern with abortion is the methods can do serious harm to a woman. that this fictious couple may need to adopt. to bring happiness to a lonely life already in thins cruel sick world on britney spears and george bush. and lets not forget twiggy.
i think in terms of saving a mother from death due to complications of childbirth through late term abortion is kinda crazy. why do they automatically have to kill the child? why can't they deliver very early then do everything they can to save the baby's life? i was forced to deliver early, because i was dying, ecclamptic, but i held on a long as possible, then when my baby was delivered by emergency c-section the docs went to work to keep her well. she's fine, hale and hearty. she potty trained herself today. if i'd aborted, like several people told me to, it wouldn't have just been a clump of cells, it woulda been her. just my two cents.
I'm pro-choice AND pro-life, and I'm pro quality of life. I think abortion is a sad fact of life, and I think women do need to be able to choose whether or not to terminate an unplanned pregnancy. A lot of pro-lifers preach about how abortion is murder, and a woman who is too young/was raped/doesn't have the means to raise a child can just put it up for adoption... but adoption is a double edged sword; there are good arrangements as well as ones that turn out wrong, but adoption has negative consequences (for both the child and biological mother). Basically, if you're pro-life, then how do you suggest we look after all the kids who are unwanted by their parents? Are YOU going to look after them all? I have a problem with kids being aborted at 8 months and things like that, but at the same time, how can you tell a woman "you HAVE to have that baby and look after it and raise, you don't have a choice"? I don't think you can say that to any woman. You can say "she'll manage", but you never really know what its like for her in that situation. It's their choice, and yes, a lot of the time they will just have backyard abortions anyway. And that worries me, because they have rights too. It may not be fair that she's not letting the child have a chance at life, but in a way it isn't fair that she was born with a functioning set of reproductive organs (and many women are still uninformed about contraception). Life isn't fair a lot of the time. I don't think abortion is the same as murder at all.
There's the issue of personal responsiblity. I mean, as far as that goes, the women who dump their newborns into trashcans directly after birth aren't really doing anything so different than the women who get abortions. The only difference is you actually get to SEE the victim when it's in a dumpster. my ex-mother-in-law had 3 kids she never took care of. She also had at least 4 abortions in her lifetime. An ex room mate of mine had at least 3. The shit is completely unregulated. I think that people who get an abortion should be placed on mandatory birth control afterwards, and I think there should be some sort of repercussions for women who get pregnant again. I'm a little torn on what they should be, but as I see it, you KNOW what happens when you have sex. A one-time mistake can be excused, but repeated mistakes should not be tolerated. People with AIDS go to jail for knowingly having unprotected sex and potentially ruining the lives of others, why should this not be applied to people who repeatedly become pregnant with unwanted babies?
Abortion is ugly but necessary, as has been mentioned over and over in this thread we don't want anyone to have kids they don't want, can't afford, and are not ready to take care of. On the other hand, the big issue in the news now, "late term abortions" what is, too late? I think once a fetus would be able to survive outside the mother, it becomes a person and should not be aborted, except to save the life of the mother, about three or four months, plenty of time to know you're pregnant and make a decision to keep or abort.
a Judge in california just removed the ban on late term abortions saying that the "womans right to choose is paramount and that any suffering a fetus may suffer is irrelevant". How horrible is that. i guess its ok for mothers to drink and do drugs while pregnant since its their right to choose and any suffering the kid may endure doesnt matter. What a brilliant ruling.
It's not horrible at all. The ban needed to be overturned. It was so vague in it's wording it provided no exemption for the health of the mother - a case in which most people agree an option for abortion should be left open. Personally, I don't think it's all right at all for mothers to drink and do drugs while they are pregnant, but some do, and it's not illegal. Wrong, perhaps, but nothing they can be punished for. And that is the way it should stay. If we started regulating what a woman can or can not do while pregnant, where would it end?
