The Abortion Debate... (1 Viewer)

[girlanachronism]

nope, because i'll actually want it. at the moment i do not want children. they are parasites to me.

 

[kat_mandu]

so what will you consider it at the "embryonic stage"

 

[Not-That-Bright]

No that baby will be a different one

 

[inasero]

the feotus is NOT considered HUMAN until after a certain term in the pregnancy.

you mean before. anyhows, i agree with robert that people can make morally wrong and sinful decisions, but the baby is independent and should have a right to life. At the same time we have to juggle this with the expectations with, say, someone who had not been educated in contraception or been raped. Firstly, the problem with abortion is that it is a quick fix solution to an underlying social problem, recently described in the media as being of 'epidemic proportions'. Secondly, other avenues such as adoption need to be addressed. In fact, one study showed that women having abortions later suffered a higher rate of psychiatric illnesses than those who were convinced to at least give birth to their child (refer to article attached in the following post). Thirdly, as Robert pointed out, is the problem of defining when life starts. Even you Kate are aware of this. If I bite a chunk out of my arm, thereby killing cells, I'm not murdering because these individual cells don't have a collective conscience and capacity to feel pain, so I guess at an early stage, abortion would be much the same thing. However, rather than be wracked with issues of "did I murder, did I not murder", wouldn't it be safer to err on the side of caution and go ahead with the pregnancy?

A former president of the family planning organisation "Planned Parenthood" Alan Guttmacher said "today it is possible for almost any patient to be brought through pregancy alive, unless she suffers from a terminal illness such as cancer or leukæmia. If so, an abortion would be unlikely to prolong, much less save the life of the mother".

who is this dude? What are his credentials? What is the likelihood of him understanding the nature of abortion especially during the 60s when scientific knowledge was not so developed? I think that a small but significant proportion of women are in the situation you just described? Surely then abortion should be justified don't you agree (of course, before a certain time frame well before the current lenient 16 weeks)?

 

[inasero]

here is the file

 

[Generator]

Freedom of choice. It's a woman's body, and it is her choice, and I doubt that any woman would take this in the offhand way that many people seem to imply (not necessarily some of those who have contributed, just a general US bible belt observation). I support the status quo (linking this back to the first post).

 

[+Po1ntDeXt3r+]

sorri inasero... i still believe in abortion as an option..
wat is a better option?

economicalli there isnt anything better and not everyone believes that aborting and taking the life is murder.. despite the intent.. so yer..
i think its an option we need.. not a pleasent one tho

 

[girlanachronism]

FUCK! I GIVE UP! PLEASE TELL ME WHAT TO DO WITH MY BODY, I AM BUT A MERE SUITCASE FOR YOUR GENES!

 

[+Po1ntDeXt3r+]

its a belief.. based on experience..
its to prevent the 'mistake' as u put it so nicely.. it discusses the guilt ppl feel...

honestly.. i think he has every right to believe a 4000- 2000 yr old text.. its as reasonable as my or your justification for abortion..
a sin means its contrary to God's will .. but in christianity there is forgiveness which acknowledges that u made a mistake..

christian views are as valid as ures r.. and not all branches are as strict..

im a christian but i hold liberal views on abortion.. needed but obviously the pregnancy not happening is the ideal situation... so i think ure not totalli being fair

 

[Generator]

Don't go santaslayer on us, Asquithian.

 

[+Po1ntDeXt3r+]

1. its theology not science.. get over that lil difference.. Theology= subjective.. thats wit the several religions
2. if a persons way starts quotin the bible to a person because of a mistake.. it should be that forgiveness and understanding.. anyone who has made a mistake would kno that.. if they do wat u think they do.. they are fuck wits..
3. wats ure basis for this argument? and what is ure belief.. in your opinion how do u think is the right way to make this decision

 

[iamsickofyear12]

Abortion is great. There is no way you can ignore the benefits.

Take the situation of the teenage girl who because she is a dirty whore gets pregnant. Now I have no empathy for her.... But what about the girl who isn't a dirty whore, who despite all precautions accidently becomes pregnant. With a bright future ahead of her this girl's life would be ruined with a child, but abortion gives her the ability to keep that future.

The problem in society at the moment is that not enough people are having abortions. Yes thats right, I said NOT ENOUGH ABORTIONS. Surely you would have noticed the low income families and the way in which they seem to pop out babies like they are piles of cash. Well thats because they kind of are. Although in the end they end up costing a lot more than the government pays for having them, these people are morons and refuse to accept this fact. This country would be a lot better off without these morons doing it.

As for the 'killing of a human being' argument all you anti-abortion people have thats a bunch of crap. I'm sure people have explained why thats the case already and I am sure you haven't listened.

I would like to give all you anti-abortion people a bit of advice. Go light yourself on fire. Not only will you be showing the world how much you really care but will also benefit all the people who aren't against abortion because you will be dead. This woman did it:
http://www.inform.umd.edu/News/Diamondback/archives/2004/11/01/news1.html

Note: I didn't bother reading any of the other posts before posting this, but I am sure people have used the christian arguments against abortion. For those people I just need to say that christianity does not rule the world and so nothing taken from it can be used to justify anything.

 

[+Po1ntDeXt3r+]

I think it speaks for itself...

If it was logical and could be justified it wouldnt require such large leaps of faith and it wouldnt base its whole method on a system of faith...

well i dun agree
oh well i guess
for me there is too much without answers and religion leads in the steaks .. more than my faith in science..

 

[inasero]

I stopped reading when it said from a christian perspective. To justify an abortion stance based on a book written 2000 years ago based on rumours and word of mouth is very sus...

Ok fair 'nuff, I can't expect you to understand or accept my viewpoint since it has a religious grounding, but I think the article has alot to say against abortion which non-religious people might accept. Yes Asqy, it has solid, scientifically grounded evidence if that's what you are looking for. It is written from the perspective of not only Christians, but those who routinely are facd with the decision of whether to perform abortions so don't you think it would be in your interests at least to have a quick glance?

She is being placed in hte position that all relgiions have placed women, pregnant and uneduated.

religion didn't place her in that situation. Personal circumstances did.

 

[inasero]

I stopped reading when it said from a christian perspective. To justify an abortion stance based on a book written 2000 years ago based on rumours and word of mouth is very sus...

Ok fair 'nuff, I can't expect you to understand or accept my viewpoint since it has a religious grounding, but I think the article has alot to say against abortion which non-religious people might accept. Yes Asqy, it has solid, scientifically grounded evidence if that's what you are looking for. It is written from the perspective of not only Christians, but those who routinely are facd with the decision of whether to perform abortions so don't you think it would be in your interests at least to have a quick glance?

She is being placed in hte position that all relgiions have placed women, pregnant and uneduated.

Please, religion didn't place her in that situation. Personal circumstances (unfortunate or otherwise) did.

Then again you can always quote the bible at a 17 year old girl who has made a mistake and gotten pregnant (yes people make a mistakes)...Im sure quoting the bible at such as person is just wonderful...

I'm not a 17 year old pregnant girl and I never will be, but I can imagine the feelings of anxiety, fear, anger and confusion she might be experiencing. Of course she isn't prepared for a baby but that doesn't justify having an abortion now does it? How do you know for sure that her life will be ruined? You never know, perhaps she might be able to put the child up for adoption, let relatives take care of it or even take care of the child herself. When people's pets get pregnant they don't like to maintain so many animals at the same time agreed? So they do the normal thing and put them up for sale, adoption or give them away to the pound at least. We don't resort to the cruel methods or drowning or shotting them these days. We are a civilised society. So why should the situation be any different for Human Beings? In fact, an unborn child should be treated more so with dignity and respect since fundamentally, they are human

If the males life was disrupted as much as the females life as a result of a birth im sure you would see some male pro lifers change their perspective

Perhaps, it's not always easy to fill other people's shoes. However, I know for sure that if I was that oregnant girl, I would see the abortion through. If that girl was my girlfriend I would see it through. I can give you my guarantee on that.

For those people I just need to say that christianity does not rule the world and so nothing taken from it can be used to justify anything.

To me, it does. But even if you didn't believe that, even to millions of other non-chrisitan pro-lifers out there, it doesn't take much imagination or moralistic questioning to see that the baby is a special individual. Wouldn't that alone be a basis against abortion?

economicalli there isnt anything better and not everyone believes that aborting and taking the life is murder.. despite the intent.. so yer..
i think its an option we need.. not a pleasent one tho

You're right in that it's not pleasant. But you know as well as I do that murder is a no-no. It's not cool. Economically it might be the better thing to do. But how can you start thinking in terms of cost-beneft when we are talking about human lives here. There is no comparison.

 

[inasero]

Personal circumstances are a result of religion

How can you say that as a non-Christian, let alone an atheistic person? Also, not everything happens because of God. Somethings happen because we have free choice, free will. A case in example- a Christian girl gets drunk, passes out and is raped by some guys at a party. Now, maybe God caused this to happen, who knows? But more likely this was a consequence of her getting drunk in the first place.

 

[inasero]

If i was better at feminist argument id eat you...im not fermale so its harder for me...since you put the rights of society at large and morals ahead of the mother and the effect it may have on her education.

Maybe your assertion that it's harder for a male to understand feminist theory attests to your lack of "feminist argument"-ative skills. My English teacher was a male AND a feminist- shock!
Secondly, I wasn't suggesting that the needs of society be placed ahead of the individual. Yes, I guess you could call me a leftie but I'm not communist nor do I advocate totalitarianism. As for this:

Personal circumstances are a are result of christianity if that person is christian.

I usually explain it to atheists this way. Ok so I studied "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead" for advanced anglish last year. The way they sum up life is pretty much in accord with my opinion. Rosencrantz is being deported to another country because he's going to be decapitated and he says something along the lines of, "We have the illusion of wandering around on deck as we like, but we are powerless, stemmed in by the currents of the water...". Such is life. We have the illusion of free choice because we have self-governance but at the end of the day, there is a Higher Being who is pulling the strings and dictating what is going to eventuate on a broader scale. R&G were existentialists and even they recognized that. So when something happens, you can't say "It's God's fault, it's Satan's fault, it's religion's fault..." because everything happens because of the choices we make.

 

[inasero]

But please, forget I ever mentioned anything about Christianity because it's not necessary to establish a pro-life argument (perhaps this would sound logical to you then). The one thing which has failed to be explained to be is, abortionists believe that before a certain term, a baby cannot be considered as being 'alive' correct? Even I agree with that. So therefore killing it would be harmless, maybe even beneficial? Correct. The crux of the argument here, I believe, is how can you adequately define when the baby has the capacity for consciousness and to feel pain? To be defined not as a cluster of cells but as a unique Human Being? As of date there have been no scientific studies conducted to establish the exact timeframe. Therefore, by conducting abortions, who knows how many babies have been murdered in all? Now the punchline- since you don't know when the baby becomes human, wouldn't it be safer to err on the side of caution? Just imagine you were the baby, would you want to be killed just because your mother was raped or made silly decisions?

 

[Generator]

It's an abortion, not a murder. Well, that's my view, anyway.

 

[LadyBec]

It's an abortion, not a murder. Well, that's my view, anyway.

finally, a rational comment!