Abortion and why it's wrong

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

okay, I've looked around the web and read a little about this claim that the taxpayers are being forced to pay for abortions... still at a loss as to how and where??
is this the age old argument that has been going on for years where some claim that planned parenthood is using taxpayer money to abortions although well if it's true, they should be prosecuted because by law, they are to keep the funds separate, or is it a new argument that is similar to this age old argument that the same thing is supposedly happening in the obamacare system? or maybe you are having a problem with abortions that are medically necessary are being paid for??
who knows maybe I missed it entirely...


www.nationaljournal.com...

gee it seems that obamacare has served more to get abortion coverage, paid for my the person wanting it, removed from the plans more than opening up the taxpayer funds for it!!!
unless of course, it's being done illegally and well, the answer to that doesn't need more legislation or anything, it just needs better enforcement on the laws on the books!

it's an insurance coverage, a product on the market, since when do the consumers get to demand to the businesses how that product is put together, we can either buy it or not!! god you're like someone who walks into a mcdonalds and thinks they are going to get a t-bone steak and then starts griping because it's not on their menu.

a reply to: xizd1

If you will re-read my post, I said it was my opinion, so I'm not sure what you are going on about. Killing a lump of cells, such as your heart, is murder.

The definition of "murder" is the deliberate killing of a person. "A lump of cells, such as your heart" cannot be "killed". Only a living being can be killed. Your heart is not a living being. It is an organ. A fetal mass is not a living being either. In the most technical of terms, it is a parasitic form...it cannot survive without a host.

murder
noun mur·der ˈmər-dər
: the crime of deliberately killing a person

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Do you even have any idea who was it that started this trend of having murderers, rapists, etc get free tv, free internet, free education, etc, etc, instead of getting the death penalty for murder, and rape among other hinous crimes?...

What am I asking, it seems obvious that you have no idea how this "trend" started and who was it that asked for it.

I was unaware that taxpayers being responsible for housing inmates and taking up the slack for others in society who either cannot or refuse to contribute their fair share was a "trend". If it is, it's been a popular one for quite some time now. Please, enlighten us with your wisdom: who in fact was it who "started this trend". Please, impart upon us your knowledge so that we can be cool kids too. Who was it that "asked for it"?

Could you enlighten me how is it that millions of people who do not want to be FORCED to pay for the abortion of OTHER WOMEN equals to trying to impose our views on the pro-abortion crowd?...

Once again, if your assertion (which is a crock of malarkey, "btw") that any of us are being forced to pay for elective abortion were actually anything other than a product of your own overactive imagination, how would it be any different than paying for the college education of a convicted child rapist? Other than being a whole hell of a lot cheaper, that is.

You can not want to be "forced to pay for the abortion of other women" (no worries though...because you are not in fact doing any such thing), all you want. Have fun with that. It only becomes an issue when you start accusing people of "murder" and any combination of the other preposterous things you've been spouting off about. If you don't want people to argue with your asinine claims, then refrain from sharing them with the group.

We're all still waiting for your answer as to how you have come to the conclusion that you are somehow personally responsible for the cost of all the abortions, as you have continued to insist upon. Stop teasing us now...inquiring minds want to know.

a reply to: tigertatzen

I've refrained from this thread, as I've pretty much debated all I had to debate in the other thread of the same topic. I'll make one post in this thread and I wanted to spend the effort to address the properties of a fetus.

Even as full grown humans, we are still a mass of cells and are a parasitic lifeform that cannot survive without our host (earth). So in that respect, we are no different than a fetus except that we are further developed. That said, conciousness and sentience are unable to definitively proven. There is no scientific method to tell when a fetus gains sentience or consciousness. Science has in no way proven definitively that a fetus is, or is not, a child.

So my point is that saying a fetus isn't alive or isn't a baby is nothing more than an emotional justification to make it easier to accept the choice to pursue an abortion.

Just as saying a fetus is alive and is a baby is nothing more than an emotional justification to stand with their beliefs whether they're religious or personal based.

You can pull up ten research articles claiming that a fetus isn't a child. I can pull up ten research articles that counter that and claim that a fetus is a child.

Until the science behind it gets better, all we have is emotional debate and a relative "right vs wrong" battle that will never end.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Nobody is being forced to pay for other people's abortion.

And, as has been pointed out again and again, to claim that abortion is murder is a hyperbolic lie.

Umm...what do you call it then when insurance, employers and taxes pay for abortion? While I am pro-choice, I would say this. While abortion is a personal choice that any woman should be allowed to make...her choice to have a optional medical operation should not relinquish my right to say I don't want to pay for it. I also shouldn't have to pay for a poor person's seventh child they decided to have or any other decision. Our tax dollars to support the poor are there for necessities. When the choice is life or death...tax dollars are fine. But when the choice is dealing with your mistake...I won't always agree with that.

a reply to: EternalSolace

I cannot argue with your logic. When you present it that way, you are absolutely correct...we are all parasites.

You can say that the terms we give to things in the material world are nothing more than emotional justifications, and in the context that you present the argument, once again, you are correct. But in a discussion that is at its very core based on the material world, the physical existence, not a lot of people are going to understand or agree with your logic, because they are emotionally driven, all humans are. Even though it actually simplifies the issue, people would use it as a tool for complicating things further instead.

I also agree with you that the battle will never end, because "right vs wrong" is open to interpretation and based on individual perception and experience. Even more depressing is the fact that by the time we do reach such a level of existence that we can process things like this without the emotional factor, none of the people arguing about it here will even be around to see it. On this plane at least.

well, people murder animals all the time and they are not persons. Murder should be defined as deliberately killing something that is alive or deliberately taking the life of another living thing.

How does someone determine what is alive and what's not?

alive
ə-ˈlīv
adjective
: having life : living : not dead
: continuing to exist
: not yet defeated : still having a chance to win or succeed
Full Definition
1 :having life :not dead or inanimate
2 a :still in existence, force, or operation :active
b :still active in competition with a chance of victory

Alive Definition

So when looking at it like this, getting an abortion would be considered murder. Even if the child couldn't survive outside of the womb it is still a living thing. It exists.

Just my thoughts..


a reply to: tigertatzen

a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

Umm...what do you call it then when insurance, employers and taxes pay for abortion? While I am pro-choice, I would say this. While abortion is a personal choice that any woman should be allowed to make...her choice to have a optional medical operation should not relinquish my right to say I don't want to pay for it. I also shouldn't have to pay for a poor person's seventh child they decided to have or any other decision. Our tax dollars to support the poor are there for necessities. When the choice is life or death...tax dollars are fine. But when the choice is dealing with your mistake...I won't always agree with that.

Federal funds are not used to cover the cost of abortions except in the case of a life-threatening medical emergency. If the person is not able to pay for the procedure, they don't have it done. And insurance will not pay for elective abortions anyway. Only medically necessary intervention, such as endangerment of the pregnant woman's life, etc. Elective abortions are an out-of-pocket expense, always have been.

a reply to: PageLC14

So when looking at it like this, getting an abortion would be considered murder. Even if the child couldn't survive outside of the womb it is still a living thing. It exists.

Just my thoughts..


a reply to: tigertatzen

I do see your point, I honestly do. But a houseplant is, by that definition, "alive". So should my irresponsible, English Ivy- killing sister be accused of murder because she forgot to water my plant and it died while I was out of town? Some people, who believe that plants feel pain and even have sentience, would say yes. But the law, which does not classify a plant as having rights because it is not a feeling, thinking being does not agree with them.

Killing an animal inhumanely is a felony punishable by prison time in all 50 states, and you know why? Because animals feel, and think. Embryonic and fetal masses do not. After a certain age, where the fetus would be capable of sustaining life outside the womb, it becomes an actual baby, and the law uses this measure as a rule by which to set its standards. Therefore, it is not "murder" to terminate an early pregnancy, any more than it is murder to wash sperm or menstrual blood down a shower drain.

Yea, I get what you're saying.

I just like to look at things from all sides, ya know? And there are so many different sides to this subject. That's why I believe in a persons right to choose how they live their life as long as they aren't breaking any laws or causing harm to other people. And that goes for pretty much anything not just abortion.


a reply to: tigertatzen

edit on 10-7-2015 by PageLC14 because: (no reason given)

a reply to: WeAreAWAKE
show me where they are!!!
first, are the insurance companies obligated to provide abortions in their coverage by the state? I don't believe they are but you are welcome to prove me wrong!!
some companies have chosen to include that coverage in their insuance plans....and they have, heck they did before obamacare. and well, it's their product to develope as they wish right, heck most conservative fight tooth and nail when it comes to any gov't meddling that causes regulaltions on the business sector!
but well, the gov't did do a little meddling and well since tax money is being used to pay for these plans now, the insurance companies have to segregate that tax money and make sure it isn't used to pay for the abortion coverage. just like planned parenthood is obligated to do.
now, I couldn't go into a resturant and demand that they cook a meal that isn't on their menu could I? could I go into a store and demand they sell me a product that they don't carry? no, and I would propose to you that when it comes to insurance products, you are just as much at the mercy of the insurance companies, they chose what they want to insure, and they chose what they don't want to cover. if you don't like it, shop elsewhere!

There has been accusations that planned parenthood has used taxpayer money for abortions but well I searched I don't see where it was ever proven in a court of law. Maybe I missed it and you could help me out?? I mean the accusations have been flying around for decades, but well, it seems that that is all they are is accusations. Why weren't these accusations ever investigated and taken to court and proven? My guess is that they are either unsubstaiated, or even the republicans don't want to cut the flow of funds to their buddies at the other end of the flow!

but that is planned parenthood, and well we are talking about something much more obtuse! Insurance.....ya know we all throw our money into a pot and well if we need to take some out, maybe we will be lucky and get to. But there is no way to know just exactly the money I put in was spent on! so how can you prove that funds used to buy insurance, that was supposed to be segregated and not used to cover abortions was actually used to pay for an abortion?

originally posted by: PageLC14So when looking at it like this, getting an abortion would be considered murder. Even if the child couldn't survive outside of the womb it is still a living thing. It exists.

Indeed. So do flies - people swat flies, nobody says that's murder. People breathe - and their immune systems kill off myriads of bacteria. Nobody says that's murder. People kill calves, chickens, pigs, cows.. they like the eat their meat. Is it murder? I don't think so. People walk - and kill insects, worms, bacteria while doing it. Is that murder? By your definition it is. Not by mine.

The generic rule is to respect life.

But that does not say we always have to maintain life.

I don't know. If it were possible to communicate with a cow I wonder how it would feel about us killing them for food.

Haha

a reply to: ForteanOrg

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Nobody is being forced to pay for other people's abortion.

And, as has been pointed out again and again, to claim that abortion is murder is a hyperbolic lie.

That's a lie.

Pro-Life Family No Longer Forced to Pay Obamacare ‘Abortion Surcharge’

by Dr. Susan Berry10 Dec 2014

When a pro-life family in Connecticut found that their state Obamacare exchange only offered plans that included abortion coverage, they filed a lawsuit against federal and state officials because they could not purchase a plan that did not require its participants to pay for the elective abortions of others. Last month, the Bracy Family dismissed its lawsuit after the addition of health plans to the exchange that will not require them to pay for abortions.
...

www.breitbart.com...

Those people are not alone, millions of Americans have been forced, or are being still forced to pay for abortion, and many of those people don't even know it.

Throughout debate and final passage of Obamacare, the president and liberal allies in Congress assured the American people that the expansive healthcare law would not fund elective abortions.

“(U)nder our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions,”President Obama declared in 2009.

Today, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) confirms that’s just another broken promise. Here are three things you need to know about abortion and Obamacare:

1. Obamacare sends federal taxpayer dollars to health plans that include coverage of elective abortion.

The GAO identified 1,036 Obamacare exchange plans across the country that cover elective abortion while remaining eligible for taxpayer subsidies. As Heritage Foundation and others predicted when Obamacare was passed, federal taxpayers in all 50 states are now footing the bill for subsidies for the purchase of health plans that cover abortion.
...

3. Insurers are hiding the ball when it comes to abortion coverage.

Many individuals and families who would otherwise object to paying for abortion coverage may not even be aware that they’re signing up for a plan that includes elective abortion.

This year, in five states, (Connecticut, Hawaii, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and Vermont) there are no abortion-free plans offered on the exchanges. In 15 other states, where between 2 and 98 percent of exchange plans include elective abortion coverage, individuals will have to wade through summary of benefits materials, insurers’ websites or call individual insurance issuers to figure out which plan is abortion-free.

Even then, the GAO report shows, as many as “[e]leven issuers indicated that consumers shopping for [exchange plans] do not have access to such information.”

Groups on both sides of the abortion debate have complained about the severe lack of transparency on abortion coverage in Obamacare exchanges. The inability to choose an abortion-free plan in some states’exchanges, coupled with the mandatory abortion surcharge, has led at least one family to file a federal lawsuit over Obamacare’s serious infringement on their conscience rights.
...

dailysignal.com...

And another source.

Watch: Obamacare Forces Taxpayers to Cover Abortion on Demand, GAO Report Confirms
Sep 17, 2014
Press Release

Washington, DC — U.S. Representative Randy Hultgren (IL-14) today criticized the White House and health insurance companies following a report from the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office (GAO) confirming that under the President’s health care law—Obamacare—taxpayer dollars are subsidizing more than 1,000 plans nationwide that cover elective abortion, contrary to promises made by the President and Democratic leaders when the law was passed in 2009. Rep. Hultgren was not serving in the House when Obamacare became law, but at the time, many Members of Congress and their constituents raised concerns that there were not adequate safeguards preventing taxpayer-funded abortion, a suspicion confirmed by the GAO report.
...

hultgren.house.gov...

originally posted by: ForteanOrg

Indeed. So do flies - people swat flies, nobody says that's murder. People breathe - and their immune systems kill off myriads of bacteria. Nobody says that's murder. People kill calves, chickens, pigs, cows.. they like the eat their meat. Is it murder? I don't think so. People walk - and kill insects, worms, bacteria while doing it. Is that murder? By your definition it is. Not by mine.

The generic rule is to respect life.

But that does not say we always have to maintain life.

Really?... you are trying to compare human fetus and babies with flies or viruses, or even animals??...

I wonder, are you one of those people who believes that murderers should be given another chance instead of getting the death penalty when there is proof they committed murder?

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

When a pro-life family in Connecticut found that their state Obamacare exchange only offered plans that included abortion coverage, they filed a lawsuit against federal and state officials because they could not purchase a plan that did not require its participants to pay for the elective abortions of others. Last month, the Bracy Family dismissed its lawsuit after the addition of health plans to the exchange that will not require them to pay for abortions.

Can't you read? You're talking about plans that include abortion coverage that some people don't want to pay for. The Bracy family didn't want to buy an insurance plan that covered abortion for them! Their suit wasn't about paying for someone else's abortion!

Obamacare sends federal taxpayer dollars to health plans that include coverage of elective abortion.

Twisting of facts. Federal fund do not cover elective abortions, but they may cover abortions for incest, rape and to save the mothers life. Do you have a problem with that too? Too bad for you! That has nothing to do with Obamacare.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

I wonder, are you one of those people who believes that murderers should be given another chance instead of getting the death penalty when there is proof they committed murder?

I wonder, since you think that abortion is murder, do you support the death penalty for women who get abortions?

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

so, why is it that business can have the freedom to be exempt from having to provide plans that provide birth control and such, but well the people do not agains?? thought they were to be treated as people, and yet it seems I was right all along, they wanted rights that weren't extended to the people!! they wanted rights above that of the people!!!

so I guess now we are gonna have to adapt all the insurance plans so that the employees have the same rights that have been extended to the businesses. and well we can kiss any coverage for women's reproductive needs goodbye!!!!

that is, of course, if you believe that the recipients of the subsidies on the exchanges should also have rights above that of those who are actually having to go through the non-subsidized channels that sill exist, namely employee provided insurance! who are still being told that they should just be greatful for what their employer is providing them!!!

as far as the insurance that has abortion covered that is being offered on the exchanges, well...

Groups on both sides of the abortion debate have complained about the severe lack of transparency on abortion coverage in Obamacare exchanges. The inability to choose an abortion-free plan in some states’exchanges, coupled with the mandatory abortion surcharge, has led at least one family to file a federal lawsuit over Obamacare’s serious infringement on their conscience rights.

I think that that mandatory abortion surcharge is there to ensure that taxmoney isn't being paid for the coverage!
so what this all boils down to is what I have been saying since hobby lobby!! They screwed up!!! They granted more religious freedoms to business (who were only to be granted the same freedoms that were granted to the people, not better freedoms) without realizing that the people themselves didn't have the same right!

dbut what do you want from a monstrous health care law that has been bandaided and bandaged to such extremes just to make up for the fact that "they had to pass it to find out what was in it".

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

confirming that under the President’s health care law—Obamacare—taxpayer dollars are subsidizing more than 1,000 plans nationwide that cover elective abortion

Get it through your head! Federal fund do not pay for abortion! The funds that you're talking about do not pay for abortions. Do you think that no one should be able to purchase abortion insurance? Just because a hospital, clinic, insurance company offer these services, that doesn't mean that when you use their service you're paying for that service. When you go the dentist, you're not paying for someone else's root canal!

Planned Parenthood is federally funded, but they don't use any federal fund to administer abortion services!