Abortion is morally WRONG

I think I have realized that people are much more callous and inhuman than ever as I have spent time on this thread. The responses of some of the pro-choice people on here are unbelievable to me. It is just as if they are speaking of killing nothing more than a dandelion that is marring their perfect lawn.

If that is truly the way so many see abortion these days, I think I have lost all hope for humanity. A baby, fetus, collection of human cells, whatever they choose to call it to dehumanize it is being equated to a big, nasty loogie that needs to be wiped from the bottom of their shoe. How utterly inhuman and evil. I wonder how many of them donate to the ASPCA and WWF to save baby seals and puppies and kitties? Just so screwed up it's unreal.

I think that I will bow out now. My stomach, not to mention my spirit, feels sick right now. Good luck to those who think you can help any one of them become human again.

ETA: Yes, I am a sissy. I can see no value in arguing with those who are so grossly de-sensitized to humanity. There is truly no way to pierce the corrosion that seems to have grown around so many hearts and souls.

reply to post by jennybee35


Riveting.

Peace out.

Originally posted by OhZone
Monts says: “Do I need "common sense" and "rationality" for me to be fine with ending someone's life? “
****It isn’t a “someone”. Do you make as much of a fuss over our soldiers who are being killed and maimed everyday? They are the one’s you should be concerned about.
How about the children that our soldiers are killing? What do you have to say about that?
If you think about it, your job of stopping murder is getting bigger and bigger, isn’t it?

What makes a "someone"?
Depends who you are for that one. As far as I'm convinced, a someone is any living organism that the distinct human-species genes. You can say that they are not human until they have a heartbeat, neural activity, sentience, relationships or whatever, but the fact remains that as soon as conception occurs, that little ball of cells is just as genetically human as you or me, and has the same chance for a future life as anyone else does, and could end up being a participant in this debate just like we are.

Why is killing a "someone" wrong?
Because you are ending their life and their future.
You are ending a life by any kind of abortion, and therefore ending the human future that the life would otherwise experience.

Of course all kinds of murder are wrong, and I would never, ever condone it under any circumstances, and if the decision were up to me, I , like probably 95% of the population, would do my best to end all wars.

The thing about abortion is that because I see it as murder, it is one that is EASILY preventable.

The way I see it, it shouldn't be up to the government put limits on it- people in their right moral minds just shouldn't be getting them in the first place.

****Aha, so it comes down to that what you really want is to control our sex lives.
Maybe you should talk to those who have been promoting this sexual freedom thing about that. All TV shows, movies and advertisement has been influencing our young people to practice this sort of life. If you would stop that, you can nip this thing in the bud. You see, you are working on the wrong end of the problem.

In no way does the media ever say that you aren't going to get pregnant from having sex.
In fact, there is a whole bunch of pop culture based on the idea of pregnancy, especially teen pregnancy (Juno?)

The simple fact that every single teenager knows is that the only way you don't have a chance of getting pregnant is by not having sex.

It's as simple as that.

reply to post by jennybee35


I think you are too sensitive and overdramatic. I don't say that to be mean or hurt your feelings, I genuinely believe it does a person well to toughen up a bit.

People who support abortion arn't doing it for some sick desire to kill "babies". Like i've said it's an ethical decision based on the situation and the consequences and the women's right to a choice (Granted, maybe up to a certain point in development) but an educated informed opinion should be offered on the benefits of contraceptive measures as opposed to using abortion as a prime means of baby-prevention.

Jenny, we're not here to offend or to promote baby killing, here's our side of the argument, we're responding to yours.

reply to post by Jack Squat


Toughen up? You have no idea what my life is like, so don't judge me. I don't call being completely gleeful at the thought of abortion being tough. Your comments are the main reason I am not continuing tp try reasoning with the people here. Your glib, horrific responses to a serious life-and-death issue are either because you are a child, or because you are really that callous. Either way, I'm done.

Originally posted by OhZone
Monts says: "As i've said, as soon as conception occurs, then I believe it to be morally wrong for any kind of termination of the life."

Your belief.
Your opinion.
Your idea of what is moral.
That's it.
All yours.
Keep it that way.
Don't try to force it on the rest of us who disagree with you.
Because that is wrong.

You are playing the subjectivist my friend.

Morals cannot be subjective- they must be objective, otherwise anything goes... I should not have used the word "believe". My bad.

If the morals in play are ones concerning murder, the right to life, and the right to choice, are in play, then it is even the more important to be objective.

I could tell you that I think it is ok to kill someone who has an annoying voice.
My belief.
My opinion.
My idea of whats moral.
Don't force your idea of whats right on me.

Therefore don't get in my way when I kill that person.

reply to post by Monts


Please, spare us the objective morality illusion.

The reason we are against killing in society is because most people have empathy and an understanding of pain and suffering, besides it's common for same species to show solidarity. There's not one civilisation on earth that promotes killing each other, that's doesn't mean to say morality is objective.

There are no moral absolutes, for should we trust God? women should be treated as lower beings? Should genocide be allowed in any circumstance? Yes. Oh wait New Testament, changed my mind LOLS GOD.

Objective morality is illusion, as humans we have to be moral, we show solidarity, we benefit, we survive.

Originally posted by Jack Squat
reply to post by Monts

 

edit: Sorry, I forgot to answer your question of when a fetus becomes human. I don't really know... when its fully developed in the womb I guess... but there's stages in between, you can't just jump from fetus to person. As I said before, abortions should be done in the first trimester.

You see... this is the problem in a nutshell.
There seems to be no clear answer as to not only when a fetus becomes human (conception? When it begins to look like a human? Grows a spine? Heartbeat? Neural activity? Birth?), but also what makes us human in the first place (sentience, neural activity, heartbeat, genes, ect.).

As I've made clear, the only logical way to look at it to view a human becoming human from the point of conception when all the genes are present, and becoming a human being from the point of conception, because the genes are all there, and it will keep those genes as it grows over time from present to future; from 1 cell to an old person dying in their bed.

reply to post by Monts


You got any pets? Had any castrated? Dog's spade? If so, you sick pro-choice monster.

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
reply to post by Jack Squat

 

In the words of Christopher Hitchens:

if we regard a collections of cells as life then we are committing genocide everytime a male gets a handjob.

Poor sperm. All those lives that could have been

edit on 24/11/10 by awake_and_aware because: (no reason given)

It depends on the collection of cells.

Sperm are never going to become anything until they fertilize an egg.

Until that happens, the 46 genes that will grow up into a person like you or me are non-existant.
Abortion is about the treatment of those 46 genes in their embryonic cell, which is a fusion of sperm and egg. The sperm cell and egg cease to exist and an entirely new type of cell is present.

reply to post by Monts


So what about just before this stage, even though the 1 sperm has reached the egg and begun development and cell growth? What if the conception/cell collection is terminated then? This is before any clear "embryo" has formed btw

You still mad?

reply to post by Monts


Hey Monts,
I agree with you. In fact, let's get the fetus' opinion. Let's ask him/her (since it is a living being), if him/her would like to live or be brutally sucked out of the womb. I have never had the pleasure of being a parent, but I can honestly tell you and others that abortion is murder. I am Pro-Life. There are too many people, myself included, that would give a great home to a child/children if given the chance.

reply to post by dizzylizzy


Thank you for that.....

reply to post by awake_and_aware


Forgive me if I'm wrong, but the moment that the sperm pierces the egg, doesn't cell division begin? You propose that somehow, in the split second of the sperm penetrating the egg, before cell division begins, one could get rid of it safely? Like with the morning after pill. It is supposed to cause the body to begin menstruation so that fertilization doesn't occur, right?

reply to post by awake_and_aware


This debate isn't about the metaphysical aspect of ethics or whether or not they are objective.
The fact remains, if you see someone killing someone, you aren't going to just say "It's their own belief, opinion, and choice, so I have no right to impose my own beliefs upon them".

If you want to call standing up for the rights of those whom I believe are without defense and are being murdered "imposing my beliefs", then so be it. According to your subjectivity, you thinking that I am "imposing" my "beliefs" on others is an opinion in itself, so don't force it on me. (see how subjectivity is just ridiculous??)

As to your statement about the embryo... I'm not quite sure what the fertilized cell is called (I learned all my scientific terms in french), but the point I'm trying to make is that as soon as the egg receives the sperm's genetic information, then it contains the 46 human genes that make it a distinct creature with it's own unique genetic code.

As soon as this happens, It is a cell with a sentient, human future... therefore terminating it is killing a human being. Although Maslo made it clear what "human being" signifies, according to wikipedia definitions, I find it the phonology interesting, as if you reverse the two words, you get "being human".

"Being Human" should have to do with what physically makes you a human being. The only thing that makes us, as a life form, any different from an amoebic cell is our DNA. Without our own unique DNA, we wouldn't be human, and wouldn't develop sentience.

Again, if that is the case, as soon as you have the fertilized egg, you have the unique set of genes that makes it human.

An interesting argument to make would be what if you could somehow have the technology to find the specific sperm that is most likely to make it to the egg, and then stop that sperm when it is only a few milliseconds away from fertilization.

Again, I don't believe in predicting the future, therefore until the exact moment of fertilization, you could never be sure of which sperm would succeed in fertilizing the egg (the sperm could make it to the egg, but fail to fertilize it), therefore, again, until fertilization happens, there is no "murder" to speak of.

Originally posted by christian39
In fact, let's get the fetus' opinion. Let's ask him/her (since it is a living being), if him/her would like to live or be brutally sucked out of the womb.

As if a fetus could even comprehend the idea.

That's a gross misrepresentation.

reply to post by PieKeeper


A mentally retarded person couldn't understand it either.

reply to post by Bkrmn


You have to understand, its not the child's fault. He/she did not do these terrible things to the woman. Its not the fault of the woman or the child.

reply to post by Monts


Yes, but we know that most mentally challenged people are conscious. Depending on the stage of pregnancy, there are points where an embryo definitely doesn't feel pain, definitely can't think consciously, etc.

You can't really equate an embryo with a conscious, independent person on these grounds.