Abortions - Why so bad?

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: Annee

What does that have to do with ethics.

Who's ethics?

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Quadrivium

And you again prove why some people have the same sadistic, backwards view as Slavers and Nazi's.

People like you.

Hey, what do you call that mass of fleshy, wet thingy, that surrounds and encompasses that tiny sacred "individual entity" that you call a human being?

Um, "A clump of Cells"?
and if they are planning on getting an abortion for convenience, a "parasite".

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Quadrivium

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: Quadrivium

I do not have my fingers in my ears. You can spew whatever fits your fancy.

I flat out DO NOT CARE.

I support women's autonomy over a Zygote.

Is that clear enough for you?

You can move on now. I have nothing else to add.

Hence, you are no better than slavers, who thought a group of humans were property or Nazis, who thought a group of human beings were "less than" human.
How can you not see the similarities?
You refuse to accept the FACT they are human beings.
And You refuse to listen to any proof of that FACT aka "Lalalalaaa, I'm not listening, lalalallalaaaaLA".

Find a new argument.

You sound ridiculous comparing Nazis to abortion.

Choice in reproduction is about personal autonomy.

You find another argument because yours is TOTALLY illogical.
In 99% of abortion cases they FREELY chose to reproduce, WILLFULLY using their "personal autonomy".
Then once they do reproduce, they claim a human is their property or that they are not human, so they can be killed.


Abortion is the premeditated, violent killing of another human being for convenience, in 99% of cases.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: Annee

We have the technology to level cities as well, doesn't make it right.

Are you sole owner of a city?

See?
Are you sole owner of a human being?

Slaver mentality.

a reply to: paraphi
Science has come a long way, in answering the abortion question, since some of these laws were written.
The more we learn, the more we understand that we have made the genocide of an entire group of humans legal, based solely on their environment and stage of development.
Zygote, embryo and fetus are just stages in a human beings development, just as infant, adolescent and adult are.

a reply to: Quadrivium

Science has come a long way, in answering the abortion question

Nonsense! "The Abortion question" is philosophical. It's about ethics, social mores, values and morals.

Science, on the other hand, tells us how safe abortions can be done, for whatever reason at all.

originally posted by: Quadrivium

In 99% of abortion cases they FREELY chose to reproduce, WILLFULLY using their "personal autonomy".

Then once they do reproduce, they claim a human is their property or that they are not human, so they can be killed.

And the problem with that is what? You don't like it?

None of us are going to stop having sex because you don't like it.

Clump of cells "potential human" is not a person. Clump of cells removed prevents further development.

-----------------------------------------

AGAIN -- the world does not need one more unwanted child.

But YOU want to force that. YOU want to force birth of an unwanted child just to say it was born.

What next? Where's your responsibility after another unwanted child is born?

So, now instead of 5 million plus children with immediate need (5000 dying per month) -- we have 5 million plus 1 more -- to make you feel good.

originally posted by: Quadrivium
Abortion is the premeditated, violent killing of another human being for convenience, in 99% of cases.

That statement is problematic on several levels, not least the belief that a fetus is a human being. Defining when a fetus is a separate and distinct individual "human" is a legal dilemma. I am not demeaning your opinion, just saying that in law (in most countries) and in ethics, a fetus is not a human.

I also think that most women don't have abortions because of "convenience". The issue is more complex and difficult than you may want to believe.

Just so that I am not trolled and insulted - because I know that this is an emotive topic - I will declare that a woman has the right to choose, but only in a tight legal framework, which has been developed around ethical and medical considerations. In my earlier posts, you will see that I speak from a UK angle, where such legal frameworks exist and the abortion debate is calm and measured.

a reply to: paraphi

Yet, it's often used as a means of contraception among certain demographics with little to no thought. My main problem is with the extremists who advocate for late term abortion. It's even at the point now that some people are advocating for "abortion" after live birth. Some very prominent and influential individuals might i add.

I know some people who've had abortions, my ex girlfriend being one of them (before i met her). IMO it was irresponsible of them to resort to abortion, both her and the father are very wealthy and could easily have supported the child but "weren't ready for kids". She was on the pill but in her own words, "may have missed one or two days" which probably translates to no contraception. Her lack of general responsibility is the reason i left.

originally posted by: Grenade
My main problem is with the extremists who advocate for late term abortion. It's even at the point now that some people are advocating for "abortion" after live birth. Some very prominent and influential individuals might i add.

I totally agree. It's a poor state of affairs where people argue for infanticide.

I have even seen lawmakers in the US arguing for abortion up to birth, which is an affront to anyone with half a brain. While I will always argue for women's rights to choose, there does need to be care and consideration for the "life to be". This is a symptom of how broken the issue is in the USA. Sad, really, that such polarisation of issues in the States prevents grown up conversations, and the intelligent development of policy.

a reply to: Tipulatedone

Of course misogynistic folks are against it, but it's sometimes necessary when 50% of the time contraceptives don't do their job. Sometimes it's necessary in the case of ectopic pregnancies, sever malformations, or because the girl/woman has been raped or cannot carry a baby to term--for her own reasons.

Forcing a girl/woman to carry a baby to term against her wishes is a gross violation of human rights.

a reply to: paraphi

I totally agree. It's a poor state of affairs where people argue for infanticide.

You know you're dealing with a losing argument when people have to lie to support their stance.

Nobody is advocating for infanticide. Nobody is advocating abortion for a viable, healthy fetus that could be delivered alive.

When a woman's water breaks at 19 weeks, that fetus is doomed. At can't be delivered and survive. Denying the woman medical care because she is not deathly ill enough for medical intervention, risking her health until her body bleeds enough or an infection causes a high enough fever for doctors to intervene because the fetus still has a heart beat is barbaric.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

You sure?

Annee seems to think abortion should be a mothers right and hasn't once made a statement condemning late term abortion.

Can i ask if you even have children?

a reply to: jdottir

50% of the time contraceptives don't do their job? I'd love you to source that figure.

a reply to: Grenade

Annee seems to think abortion should be a mothers right and hasn't once made a statement condemning late term abortion.

For the past 50 years, the law of the land here in the USA was "no abortion on demand after fetal viability". Sometime a fetus never makes it to viability and threatens the life of the mother, as their pregnancy advances. In those cases, late term abortions are needed to save the life of the woman, whose fetus suffer life threatening anomalies.

Whenever doctors determine that a fetus is viable, they will deliver the fetus, usually via C-section, not abort it, to save the life of the woman in distress.

Can i ask if you even have children?

I do.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

I have no issues with anything you've just said. I think you should be careful with which members you ally with, their opinions are far more extreme than your own.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: Sookiechacha

You sure?

Annee seems to think abortion should be a mothers right and hasn't once made a statement condemning late term abortion.

Can i ask if you even have children?

I do not do Extremism.

Extremism is rare and you never know all the real details and facts.

I simply will not go there.

a reply to: Grenade

I find it hard to believe people are even still discussing this. No one ever changed anyone's mind on the topic.

The pro-abortion people don't value human life.

The anti-abortion people believe its murder.

However, it's still legal in most of the US states. So, those who want can breed irresponsibly and get their abortions if they like. Nothing anyone can do about that.

originally posted by: jdottir
. . . 50% of the time contraceptives don't do their job.

I third that!!!

a reply to: TonyS

I'm trying to find common ground now by putting aside my disgust and attempting to understand the mentality.

You're right, no-one is going to 180 on this issue however even small compromises can be valuable.