|
|
Post by Archaix on Sept 12, 2007 15:49:01 GMT -5
Women should have the right to choose what happens to their bodies and so should have the right to abort. This. |
|
|
|
Post by numnar on Sept 13, 2007 9:34:29 GMT -5
are you agreeing with me?
|
|
|
|
Post by Archaix on Sept 13, 2007 11:42:31 GMT -5
Yes. I'm pretty much saying, 'this is what I'm saying'.
|
|
|
|
Post by numnar on Sept 13, 2007 12:52:18 GMT -5
jolly good
|
|
|
|
Post by Casinecro on Dec 22, 2007 9:45:03 GMT -5
NONONONONOOOOO abortion is wrong. I understand, y'know, there's all kinds of under-aged nuaghtiness out there, but if a single more-or-less jobless mother can't and won't keep a child, just give it to an orphanage. Killing an unborn baby is just as bad as killing a already-born baby. I mean, I'm not the type of guy who's gonna go out there and protest about it, but I just think it's not fair to prematurely end a life. (p.s., these statements are not made on any religious grounds, and P.s.s. I know that this thread is old, but I wanta post oon it anyway)
|
|
|
|
Post by owtopia on Dec 22, 2007 21:49:09 GMT -5
Abortion is the devil's work! In fact, I am going on some Christian protest march in Washington DC to pressure the government into banning abortion. Murder is murder, from when a person is first conceived to when a person dies. If a mother doesn't want the child, there are plenty of people who would adopt him/her.
And, casi, these old threads are being revived anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by deutschgarten on Dec 22, 2007 22:46:45 GMT -5
But what if the adopters are a gay couple, I'm sure next you'll go and protest that too.  What is it with Christians and limiting freedoms? I mean technically the fetus is a part of the mother so shouldn't the mother be able to chose if it dies or not? I think she should have that choice. If abortion is banned then the government has just told every woman on the planet that they don't get to chose what happens to their own bodies. |
|
|
|
Post by Casinecro on Dec 23, 2007 11:17:26 GMT -5
Is suicide not also illegal? I geuss you're right, Deutsch, it is his/her own decision to do what she wants to her own body. But, I think that everybody needs to understand that every life can make a deference. Unless you believe in fate, the child that Ms. Havinunderaged Sex just killed prematurely could have ended world hunger or created world peace. Everyone and everything dezerves a chance to do something to the world, so killing born babies (different topic) is so increadibly sick and wrong....
But I degress. The point is, as I said before, if killing yourself is illegal, than killing fetuses should be even MORE illegal.
|
|
|
|
Post by spartacus on Dec 23, 2007 18:15:18 GMT -5
I wouldn't want my girlfriend or a family member to have an abortion, but I have no right to tell others (including my gf or family) whether or not they can do so. With the world's population being as out of control as it is, I think making women go through with unwanted pregnancies not only infringes on their rights, but it puts undue burden on the world and its resources. As great as some adoptive parents are, there are still not enough out there. The shortage will be exponentially greater if abortion was illegal. Deutsch also has a good point regarding gay couples. These same Christians who oppose abortion are usually the same ones who oppose gay marriage and adoptions. I have known several gay couples with children, and have found that they are often more loving and caring parents than the majority of "straight" couples.
If anti-Choice people are so intent on not allowing abortion, I feel that they should take responsibility for the results of their actions by adopting at least one child. It is easy to say "someone will adopt the baby," but that is just passing the problem on to someone else. What about crack babies and those affected by alcoholism or tobacco? Who will take care of those babies? And what happens when an unwanted and uncared for child grows up and commits crimes? Ironically, it is the same Christian anti-Choice people who cry for capital punishment or longer prison terms. I'm not saying all anti-Choice people are for capital punishment, but I find it inconsistent that right-wingers who oppose legal abortion tend to be the same ones who want the death penalty and also supported war in Iraq.
Even though I personally find abortion repugnant, I also see it as a necessary evil that ultimately benefits society, the mother, and even the fetus, which is generally saved from a life of misery.
Even though it is somewhat off-topic, I also think suicide should not be illegal.
|
|
|
|
Post by strashki on Dec 23, 2007 21:37:30 GMT -5
There is no doubt that if I knocked up some chick, there would be an abortion. Now, or anytime in my life. I don't think people fully realize that during the legal time to abort a fetus, you are essentially killing a grain of rice. I mean, I don't like abortion, no one likes abortion but it's necessary and important.
Adoption isn't all that great either. I know two people who've been adopted. One was adopted by an abusive heroin junkie and was sexually abused. The other was adopted by a woman with 12 other foster kids. The women kept the kids just so that she could get government support checks. Both were neglected and abused. One wishes that she was aborted and has attempted suicide twice.
All I'm saying is, abortion is important. I wouldn't go as far as calling it evil, but rather bad. Suicide should also be legal.
|
|
|
|
Post by Casinecro on Dec 24, 2007 7:54:14 GMT -5
Whoah, that's messed up, yo.That's part about the adoptions... wow. 'Scuse me, I need to go bathe in acid be fore I get back on topic....
Anywho, in here brings out the fine line between the government doing what's right, and what's possibly not as right, but would make more people happy. It's sad that some sickos adopt kids to abuse them, or with ill intentions, but I know several kids who have been adopted, and they're actually kinda well off and pretty sharp. I wish that there was some kinda law about some officials coming to the house later on, like an inspector, y'know. But that's another debate. For another time.
|
|
|
|
Post by deutschgarten on Dec 25, 2007 12:00:49 GMT -5
Another great point.
Why spare them from a life of poverty and suffering when some rich guy could make millions when they die in a war using that same rich guy's company's weapons. At least that's what Dick Cheney, LB Johnson and a few other republicans have done.
Or better yet we'll let them live until they eventually are so poor that they have to steal to survive. Then we can put them in jail for life or execute them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Neo Nibu on Dec 26, 2007 23:03:47 GMT -5
Well any parent that would deny their child life saving medical treatment are just plan cruel.
I personally see the life of the child equal to the life of the parent.
Would you think it evil to kill a one year old? Why not an unborn? I see very little difference other than age and experience.
"Studies have shown that suicide and depression among teenage mothers is much higher among those who give birth then those that abort."
Studies have also shown a high rate of suicide and depression among parents who have abortions, along with an increased change of breast cancer along with other illnesses.
This debate really boils down to one thing, is it a life or not?
|
|
|
|
Post by owtopia on Dec 30, 2007 20:54:06 GMT -5
As I may have stated before, I think that life is life from the 1st cell of it's existance to the last second of death. Then again, that's my and the Christian Churches's opinion. You people can believe what you want.
|
|
|
|
Post by Casinecro on Dec 31, 2007 10:43:46 GMT -5
While I would prefer to keep religion out of this discussion, I suppose that Owtopia has a point. A human life is always a human life, no matter how unwanted or how many cells. I think that The Church just kinda needs to lay off of what people do in there free time. I think abortion is wrong because it's just...wrong to take an unborn life, but at the same time it's wrong to say that a woman can't go and "kill her fetus" so that she can have a better life.
|
|
|
|
Post by Republicas Gloria on Jan 2, 2008 20:12:28 GMT -5
Well sort of the fetus is connected to the female... It has a soul though.
I do not believe abortion is always the best plan (unless its a lose-lose situation, the baby and the mother most likely dies, then to save one person instead of killing 2 there is no doubt its okay). I think we should hit the root cause and instead of banning it (and it will still happen or mothers will commit suicide because they can't abort) help those mothers out with the baby, the fix is Socialism. But it should stay legal, the government is no religion according to people (although I doubt that when the entire government is Christian ran), and the seperation of Church and State was actually a reccommendation from Thomas Jefferson.
Summary: keep it legal but give aid
|
|
|
|
Post by deutschgarten on Jan 6, 2008 20:45:43 GMT -5
You're gonna have to give me a source on this information.
My view on this debate is mainly that the already born person's life (the mother's) is the one the government should be concerned with. not the unborn, whom may not even be successfully born or born into an environment that will let them succeed.
|
|
|
|
Post by spartacus on Jan 7, 2008 22:19:17 GMT -5
What a certain religion says about abortion is irrelevant if you are talking about the law, unless of course you live in Iran. That kind of source is only applicable if you are arguing with other Christians - to me, you might as well just quote Mother Goose or the Flying Spaghetti Monster, as both are about as valid and truthful as the Church and the Bible in my opinion. Plus, as Primus pointed out, there is a seperation of church and state, so one cannot and should not influence the other.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kardas on Jan 13, 2008 22:12:10 GMT -5
I think it should be legal, but I'm not voting yet. The debate here has made me indecisive. I would suggest though to not be against something because your religion is.
|
|
|
|
Post by chalcidice on Jun 21, 2008 17:28:03 GMT -5
In my opinion, the anti-abortion folks are trying to legislate religion. Saying a fetus has a "soul" is a religious/moral statement. I believe in a healthy division between religion and state. If a mother believes that her fetus has a soul, then fine she can decide to not have an abortion. If she believes that her fetus is a mass of cells that has not reached the threshold of sentient life, then I see no reason to bar her from having an abortion if she chooses to have one.
The argument that a fetus is "a life" needs some scrutiny. How are you defining "life"? Would that definition apply to an egg right after it's been fertilized? I have a hard time thinking of a fertilized egg as having the same rights as a person. Furthermore, some forms of birth control work by not allowing the fertilized egg to implant inside the mother's womb. Are these forms of birth control actually murdering a fetus? What about when a couple uses birth control that inhibits the sperm from reaching the egg, for example a condom? Isn't that condom keeping a life from getting a toehold?
This also gets into a difficult area when you talk about in vitro fertilization. Generally, in vitro clinics fertilize many eggs and use only the few that look most viable. Is the in vitro clinic committing murder when it decides to discard the remaining fertilized eggs? Should the mother be forced to actually carry all those eggs to term - say, right after each other? She'd be a virtual baby factory.
Bottom line for me: when a fetus becomes a human is a religious/moral judgement. I think it should be the mother who ultimately resolves that dilemna, not the state.
|
|
" -Archaix
