Abortion, Genocide, what’s THE difference?!?!?!?!?.... do you condone murder???

reply to post by Annee

I think I'm covered to have a real opinion on this subject.

I'm a human...I think I am covered to have a real opinion on the subject of humans killing other humans.

NO - I would not choose to "grow a child" with a Potluck future.

All children have "potluck" futures...no one can foresee the childs life.

reply to post by Annee


Thank you for your honest answer, Annee. I still feel many would choose that option, but I could be wrong.

Originally posted by 27jd
reply to post by Annee

 

Thank you for your honest answer, Annee. I still feel many would choose that option, but I could be wrong.

Well - of course.

And I have read that "they" are getting closer to an artificial womb. Which is great news for many couples.

If it wasn't for the cervical cerclage procedure (practically invented for Sophia Loren who had several miscarriages before this procedure resulted in her first of 2 sons) - - my 17 year old grandson would not be here.

What an amazing thing that would be for woman who can not carry a fetus to term.

Have you ever seen the TV show the "Little Couple"? They are dwarfs. She is too tiny to carry a baby and must use a surrogate. Wouldn't it be amazing if an artificial womb was available. That she didn't need to share her child in another woman's body. But could watch her child grow - - maybe pipe music into the womb - - spend time talking to it - etc.

One thing that would settle this whole debate, is defining when a life begins, when a "soul" is in the fetus.. Hint: It's not when It's a microscopic cluster of cells, IMO.

I'm against abortion when it's a developed fetus. 12 weeks (just throwing a number out there) is more than enough time to make a decision on whether or not you can provide the child with a healthy happy life.

For the Anti-abortion people, when is too late? Is the morning after pill bad? Is birth control bad? Condoms? Could you come to a compromise and choose a length of term that both sides of the issue can agree on? Why don't people have funerals for a miscarried fetus? Why don't people name those "children"?

There is no reason to debate this subject using semantics and philosophical views that vary from person to person. To me, self-awareness is when life begins. An embryo early in development is not self-aware, and has not developed a nervous system in order to feel pain or fear. I've already stated I'm against late term abortion. If somebody feels human life begins at conception, and if they feel human life is more valuable than other life, fine. They shouldn't get an abortion, and if they're male and scared that a woman is going to abort their child, the answer is simple. Don't have sex, or wear a condom, or two if you fear breakage. If you enter into a relationship and decide to have children, but you're afraid she will change her mind and abort the child, make her sign a legal agreement, and sue her if she breaks it. You may get told to F off a couple times, but if the woman is serious about having your child, she shouldn't have a problem.

reply to post by Annee


"Sacred" means whatever you want it to mean. That is why I put quotation marks around it. However, it seems that people think that human life is "special" once it is outside the womb (in that suddenly, the newborn cannot be killed). I am just wondering why this is the case. Thank You for your question, Annee. Did I clarify myself?

Abortion should be totally allowed.
Its CRUEL to force someone to keep the baby they dont want.
The baby is the only one who will suffer, if the parents dont want it, cant afford it, or didnt plan for it.

Also,

A life isn't a life until it opens its eyes and the mind starts processing the real world.
This doesn't occur in the womb, therefore its not murder.
If you smash a chickens egg you dont get dont by the RSPCA.

Yes people will disagree with me, but that's my opinion.

reply to post by jessejamesxx

One thing that would settle this whole debate, is defining when a life begins

YES.

Let's use SCIENCE...how about Biology.

when a "soul" is in the fetus

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

"life" doesn't require a soul...you can't measure a "soul"...no one even knows if "souls" exist.

Hint: It's not when It's a microscopic cluster of cells, IMO.

Hint: Yes it is.

Hint2: Go study biology

I'm against abortion when it's a developed fetus. 12 weeks (just throwing a number out there) is more than enough time to make a decision on whether or not you can provide the child with a healthy happy life.

Yes...just arbitrarily throwing a number out there.

Sorry...I'll stick with using SCIENCE to decide when it is "LIFE".

For the Anti-abortion people, when is too late? Is the morning after pill bad? Is birth control bad? Condoms? Could you come to a compromise and choose a length of term that both sides of the issue can agree on?

The morning after pill and oral contraceptives...in some cases...and probably mostly no. In some cases these pills work by preventing the egg being fertilized...I am fine with that. In other cases, it prevents the fertilized egg from implanting...I am not fine with that.

Condoms...I'm 100% fine with

There is no length of time after sperm fertilizes egg...that is the definition of the begining of life as defined by Biology.

Why don't people have funerals for a miscarried fetus? Why don't people name those "children"?

Some people do have "funerals"...more like services because there is nothing to bury. And yes, some do name their miscarried children.

Now what?

reply to post by jessejamesxx


Some people do not believe in a compromise. It is either "no abortion" or "abortion whenever you want for whatever reason". Also, to bring a soul into the discussion will probably get some people angry, as not everyone believes in souls. Also, scientifically, a "life" definitively begins at conception, as MindSpin has pointed out (this is not a matter of opinion, life does begin at conception).

However, there are people who argue about something called a "personhood", or about "viability", or about any other countless things that affect abortion decisions. This is probably an issue where no compromise will ever be made. There will always be unhappy parties in this subject.

reply to post by 27jd


How about this situation then, 27jd? What if someone kills a human being, but not for no reason.... What if someone kills a human being to eat them? This is not killing for no reason, so theoretically it should be acceptable (Note: I do not condone cannibalism, I am just stating this to make a point). Should cannibalism be allowed? If not, why? I know that it is against social norms to eat people, but why is this the case? Thank You for your response, 27jd.

reply to post by 44247844


Fully agree with what you just said. You completely nailed it. None of our opinions on this matter, is more valid than the next persons. That's why we have to agree to disagree. If somebody truly feels so strongly about the matter, they should challenge the issue on a legal basis. Take their opinion to the courts, and see if they are valid enough to change the laws. Both sides get their chance to present their argument, and it will make a real difference one way or the other.

reply to post by 44247844


Wow. Did you really just go there? Well, first it's against the law to kill another free standing human being. So, that there stops most cannibals from eating other people. There are some people who do want to eat other people, not many, cuz its gross. Like I said, so is eating dogs, cats, horses, etc. I guess that's just social conditioning. Some cultures ate people regularly.

reply to post by 27jd


And then, even if abortion was made illegal, they would still occur. If abortion was made mandatory for every pregnancy, there would also be people who give birth without regards to the law. In the end, no one can force anyone to do anything. However, people will always continue to try to get people to see things their way. That is what the past 67 pages have all been about.

However, I do like getting to know people's viewpoints on controversial subjects, which is why I joined after lurking for quite some time once I saw this thread. As always, I appreciate your input, and anyone else's input to my questions. Thanks again.

Originally posted by 44247844
reply to post by Annee

 

"Sacred" means whatever you want it to mean. That is why I put quotation marks around it. However, it seems that people think that human life is "special" once it is outside the womb (in that suddenly, the newborn cannot be killed). I am just wondering why this is the case. Thank You for your question, Annee. Did I clarify myself?

Ever heard of Cannibalism?

By the way - did you miss my post where I answered your first question(s)? You might want to go back and catch that one.

reply to post by 27jd


See, but that was what I was trying to point out. Why is it against the law to kill people for food, but not to kill other plants and animals for food? Again, I am not condoning cannibalism, but people around the world clearly see something "special" about humans. You are right, in the past, there were people who ate people. They saw other people as they would see any other food. It seems that relatively recently, people decided that people were "different" somehow and not eligible to be eaten. Some people do not even eat people if it meant starving to death. I am just pointing out that people must see something "special" to make humans forbidden as food. Thanks again for your input, 27jd.

Originally posted by 44247844
Also, scientifically, a "life" definitively begins at conception, as MindSpin has pointed out (this is not a matter of opinion, life does begin at conception).

Uh NO! That is not what most scientists state.

Please provide any proof that science states Life begins at conception.

reply to post by 27jd

There is no reason to debate this subject using semantics and philosophical views that vary from person to person.

I totally agree...let's using something non-philosophical and scientific.

Let's use BIOLOGY.

To me, self-awareness is when life begins. An embryo early in development is not self-aware

*facepalm*

Just in case you didn't know....this is a philosophical argument. Maybe you should re-read your first line of your post.

and has not developed a nervous system in order to feel pain or fear.

Life isn't defined by feeling pain or having fear.

There are disorders that block out both...are those people not human?

I've already stated I'm against late term abortion. If somebody feels human life begins at conception, and if they feel human life is more valuable than other life, fine. They shouldn't get an abortion,and if they're male and scared that a woman is going to abort their child, the answer is simple. Don't have sex, or wear a condom, or two if you fear breakage.

If you think this is a valid solution...then you could say the same thing to women...if you don't want to get pregnant, then don't have sex or take extreme caution. And then you have solved 98% of the abortion issue

If you enter into a relationship and decide to have children, but you're afraid she will change her mind and abort the child, make her sign a legal agreement, and sue her if she breaks it. You may get told to F off a couple times, but if the woman is serious about having your child, she shouldn't have a problem.

reply to post by Annee


I already caught that one, Annee. You said that you do not believe in late-term abortions, so my question was not addressed to you. My question is addressed to people who believe that abortion is okay at any point, except for once the baby is outside the womb. And yes, I know of cannibalism, and I am challenging some points that have been brought up in response to my thoughts on cannibalism. Thanks for your response.

Originally posted by 27jd
reply to post by 44247844

 

Wow. Did you really just go there? Well, first it's against the law to kill another free standing human being. So, that there stops most cannibals from eating other people. There are some people who do want to eat other people, not many, cuz its gross. Like I said, so is eating dogs, cats, horses, etc. I guess that's just social conditioning. Some cultures ate people regularly.

He wasn't talking about the law...he was talking about the logical reasoning you were using to defend abortion.

Do you not see the difference?

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by 44247844
Also, scientifically, a "life" definitively begins at conception, as MindSpin has pointed out (this is not a matter of opinion, life does begin at conception).

Uh NO! That is not what most scientists state.

Please provide any proof that science states Life begins at conception.