It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by FlyersFan
Originally posted by Annee
To make statements religion is not the main force behind anti-abortion - - is ludicrous in my opinion.
My reasons are two fold.
#1 - Science.
I've seen the ultrasound videos of preborn babies sucking their thumbs, opening and closing their eyes, and playing with the cords. I've seen the scientific data that says preborn children feel pain during pre-birth surgeries .. like to fix spinabiffida .... I've heard records of a preborn babys heart beat. That's a human heart beat.
#2 - Yes .. #2 is for karmic/religious reasons.
But they are based upon reason #1. Reason #1 - science - tells me that the preborn person is really a person with his or her own heartbeat and his or her own levels of pain. Knowing those things are why my reason #2 kicks in.
Originally posted by fooffstarr
Originally posted by truthquest
reply to post by fooffstarr
Its easily possible to be pro-life and non-religious. You simply need to have a position that all living humans deserve all rights regardless of their stage of development.
I agree.
But is it possible to be pro-choice and religious?
As I said in my OP, I have no personal views on this matter at the moment. I haven't had the need or information to form an opinion.
In general terms I am pro life, as far as capital punishment etc goes. But that is not because of any religious beliefs (or in my case lack there of). I just don't like to see harm come to other people. But as was pointed out to me in a torture thread the other day, you don't know what you believe until you are really put on the spot and it effects you.
But the abortion issue specifically has not entered my mind a lot.
I'm enjoying reading all the posts and absorbing some of the views and facts coming out.
Originally posted by Annee
What part of majority do you not understand?
Originally posted by FredT
Im curious about how many of the "Pro Lifers" support the death penalty?
Originally posted by FlyersFan
Originally posted by Annee
What part of majority do you not understand?
SNOTTY!
This is a discussion board. I'm NICELY discussing my own reasons for being anti-abortion. You seriously need to chill out.
Originally posted by Jess_Undefined
Im still trying to make a decision on this myself. Im leaning way more to pro-life. I think incest and rape victims should definetly be able to choose. Other than that...dont kill your god d*mn child. When you have sex you always take the risk of getting pregnant.
Originally posted by Jess_Undefined
reply to post by drwizardphd
Thank you for clearing that up with me because I did not know that! =]
And I agree definetly. Its very sick and you must be a pretty heartless human being to be able to do such a thing like its a trip to the mall.
The overwhelming majority of all abortions, (95%), are done as a means of birth control.
Only 1% are performed because of rape or incest;
1% because of fetal abnormalities;
3% due to the mother's health problems.
Change in Pro-Life Vs. Pro-Abortion over the last 5 years
"With respect to the abortion issue, would you consider yourself to be pro-choice or pro-life?"
what about bringing children into a world when they’re not wanted.
There’s a major difference between and unwanted pregnancy and an unwanted child. Every child is wanted by someone. There are currently 200,000 couples in the US desperately seeking to adopt, yet less than 25,000 babies available each year. Demand is so great, that couples are forced to adopt in China and Russia, often spending more than $20,000 to do so.
Having more unwanted children results in greater child abuse.
In the first 10 years after abortion was legalize, child abuse increased by over 500%. Is it any wonder? Isn’t it easy to conclude that "if it’s OK to abuse our unwanted children by killing them, then why not our "born" children?" Studies also have shown that child abuse is more frequent among mothers who have previously had an abortion.
Further, most abused children were wanted by their parents. A study conducted by professor Edward Lenoski of the University of California concluded that 91% of abused children were from planned pregnancies. In society, 64% of pregnancies are planned – concluding that among abused children, a significantly higher percentage were wanted children compared to the percentage of wanted children in society at large.
If abortion were made illegal, there would still be many abortions.
There are laws against rape, burglary, armed robbery and illegal drug dealing, yet every one of these crimes continues to happen in our society. Does the fact that these crimes still happen inspire us to make them legal? Clearly not, as laws should exist to discourage bad things from happening. Laws concerning abortion have significantly influenced whether women choose to have abortions. In one survey, 72 percent said they would definitely not have sought an abortion if having one were illegal.
If abortion is made illegal, thousands of women will die from back alley and clothes hanger abortions.
This is a favorite myth put forth by pro-abortionists. Prior to legalization, 90 percent of abortions were done by physicians in their offices, not in back alleys. Further, women still suffer and die from "legal" abortions in America
What about a woman who is pregnant due to rape or incest?
Less than 1% of all abortions are due to rape or incest. Furthermore, since conception doesn’t occur immediately after intercourse, pregnancy can be prevented in nearly all rape cases by medical treatments including the morning after pill (MAP).
Nearly all the women interviewed in a recent survey said they regretted aborting the babies conceived via rape or incest. Of those giving an opinion, more than 90 percent said they would discourage other victims of sexual violence from having an abortion (see report)
Finally, if you found out today that your biological father had raped your mother, would you feel you no longer had a right to live?
www.abortiontv.com...
Originally posted by Con Science
Dont let the semantics fool you Drwizard is obfuscating the two meanings. The says Pro choice doresn't mean pro abortion but then tells you what Pro Life is and that we don't allow for mitigating circumstances. What you need to do is look at what they DO not what they say they are about.
Originally posted by drwizardphd
I'm not obfuscating anything
Do you feel that in a situation where the mother is told she will die if she goes through with the pregnancy, that an abortion is a legitimate procedure to save the mothers life?
Do you feel that in a situation where the baby will assuredly not survive the birth process, such as an anencephalic fetus, that an abortion would be a legitimate way to terminate the pregnancy?
If you answered "yes" to any of these questions, you are in fact pro-choice.
3. Do you believe that in situations where the mother is raped, and becomes pregnant, that an abortion would be a legitimate way to terminate the pregnancy?
Do you believe that in situations where contraceptives were used, but failed, that an early-term abortion of the embryo, before it develops into a fetus, is a legitimate way to terminate the pregnancy?
Unlike the (likely fabricated) data from your very biased source,
Abortion is simply not a practical method of birth control, when you look at its cost compared to other contraceptives. When you consider the moral implications of having an abortion, the costs become even greater.
Us "pro-abortion" people, as you like to put it, recognize that there is a legitimate reason to keep abortion as an available medical procedure for women who need it, such as in the above circumstances. We're not "baby killers".
And yes, the entire basis of the pro-life argument is the illegality of abortion and the dissolution of abortion clinics, which would make abortion unavailable to mothers who would potentially have to resort to it for various reasons
ABORTION-CONTRACEPTION CONNECTION - ABORTION INDUSTRY COMMENTS
Pro-abortion Alan Guttmacher Institute has repeatedly reported on major surveys that show 56%-58% of all women having abortions were using contraception the month they became pregnant.
Alan Guttmacher [former President of Planned Parenthood] stated, "...when abortion is easily obtainable, contraception is neither actively nor diligently used...there would be no reward for the woman who practices contraception...Abortion on demand relieves the husband of all responsibility; he simply becomes a coital animal." [Rutgers Law Review 22, 1968]
Alan Guttmacher Institute researcher Stanley K. Henshaw: “Contraceptive users appear to have been more motivated to prevent births than were nonusers.”
Alan Guttmacher Institute researcher Stan E. Weed: “[F]or every 1000 teens between 15-19 years of age enrolled in family planning clinics, we can expect between 50 to 120 more pregnancies.”
Infamous “sexologist” Alfred Kinsey, 1955: “At the risk of being repetitious, I would remind the group that we have found the highest frequency of induced abortions in the groups which, in general, most frequently uses contraception.”
Sociologist Lionel Tiger, 1999: “With effective contraception controlled by women, there are still more abortions than ever…[C]ontraception causes abortion.”
National Survey of Family Growth- Contraceptive failure rates show 7% for the pill, 16% for the condom, 22% for the diaphragm, and 30% for spermicide. Figures are even higher for unmarried people.
British Abortionist Judith Bury, Brook Advisory Centres, 1981: “...women...have come to request [abortions] when contraception fails. There is overwhelming evidence that, contrary to what you might expect, the provision [availability] of contraception leads to an increase in the abortion rate.” ["Sex Education for Bureaucrats," The Scotsman, 29June1981]
Planned Parenthood's Frederick S. Jaffe, in Abortion Politics, admitted that "...even if everyone were to practice contraception, and use the most effective medically prescribed methods, there would still be a very large number of unwanted pregnancies."
"...even if women use 95 percent-effective contraception, seven out of 10 will eventually face an unwanted pregnancy," reported "The Successful Animal", Science 86.
Abortionist and international contraception promoter Malcolm Potts [former director of Planned Parenthood of England] 1976 (even as early as 1973) quoted in Sex and Social Engineering by Valerie Riches.- “As people turn to contraception, there will be a rise, not a fall, in the abortion rate...”.
In Abortion, he noted, "...those who use contraception are more likely than those who do not to resort to induced abortion..."
At another time he said, "No society has controlled its fertility...without recourse to a significant number of abortions." [Malcolm Potts, "Fertility Rights," The Guardian, 25April1979]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ www.physiciansforlife.org...
Originally posted by Con Science
Options=pro-life
choices=pro death
Originally posted by drwizardphd
Options and choices are the same thing.
You are pro-choice.
I'm not going to argue with someone who can't see that simple fact, so I am done with this. Good day, enjoy being pro-choice.
Originally posted by blueorder
I am delighted with this, a sign of a nation which is turning its back on the 1960s generation.
JUst as a thought, could this change be linked to immigration trends- ie, immigrants tend to come from nations (whether Asia, Latin America) where religion is more embedded in family life?
Originally posted by Con Science
What are you saying? that only immigrants value life? or is this some immature juvenile attempt to disparage religion with some cute little talking point while insulting immigrants.?
Originally posted by conspiracyrus
the only thing i have to say on this issue is that polls will change just like you change your underwear. I think that the only thing that will remain constant is the freedom we have been given (in this regard) with choice. There are plenty of reasons why an abortion is much better than the alternative, and the same is to be said of adoption and foster care. I will not debate either, The fact remains that there are uses to both sides ...
Now please please please forgive me but the population of earth is at its highest ever and we have seen that the current growth is beyond manageability and in the same regard some adoptive families and more than accounted for foster families are absolutely ABUSIVE and i wish it was a mental abuse. Some horror stories ive encountered include molestation, rape , and forced prostitution.
On the other hand I am absolutely sure that some couples would more than be blessed by a child. However these couples are few and far between and i am sad to say that they are few and far between ... I guess in my opinion, I wish that drug standards forced on working americans would be placed on prospective families ( seeing as almost 90pct of abuse on a minor adopted or not) happens with parents who are infact "hardcore" drug users
Originally posted by blueorder
Originally posted by Con Science
What are you saying? that only immigrants value life? or is this some immature juvenile attempt to disparage religion with some cute little talking point while insulting immigrants.?
My post was made as a sincere one, and the tone of your response is unwarranted nor does it make any sense.
I support this change in public opinion against abortion, and Im suggesting that those of a religious persuasion would be more likely to feel like this, so one reason could be the immigration situation over the last 15 years- if anything you could interpret that as pro religion and immigration
If you are looking a fight, take it elswhere
Originally posted by Con Science
Well I guess that all depends on whether you were a parent during the sixties or one of the sexual revolution. My apologies as I couldn't tell and is why asked as a QUESTION, so as not to be presumptuous.
using religion and immigration in a thread like this is another reason I had doubts because immigration or hispanics have had a sharp spike in abortion stats recently.
Again my sincere apologies