Abortion
Golan 26 Apr 2007
Blaat85, on 26 Apr 2007, 19:08, said:
Blaat85, on 26 Apr 2007, 19:22, said:
What allows the government to force a pregnant women into this is the fact that it doesn´t decide about her fate, but about the fate of both of them.
Blaat85, on 26 Apr 2007, 19:46, said:
Blaat85, on 26 Apr 2007, 19:46, said:
Blaat85, on 26 Apr 2007, 19:37, said:
Edited by Golan, 26 April 2007 - 19:52.
Athena 26 Apr 2007
Golan, on 26 Apr 2007, 21:51, said:
Golan, on 26 Apr 2007, 21:51, said:
Blaat85, on 26 Apr 2007, 19:22, said:
Golan, on 26 Apr 2007, 21:51, said:
Golan, on 26 Apr 2007, 21:51, said:
Blaat85, on 26 Apr 2007, 19:46, said:
Golan, on 26 Apr 2007, 21:51, said:
Edited by Blaat85, 26 April 2007 - 19:58.
Golan 26 Apr 2007
Blaat85, on 26 Apr 2007, 19:54, said:
Blaat85, on 26 Apr 2007, 19:54, said:
Killing an unborn usually leaves behind a live-long feeling of guilt. While the consequences of not aborting a child can be determined at ease by a woman, she´ll usually having to live through "what if I did not kill him/her?"-depressions, complexs of not having had the right to judge about her child´s life etc. .
Blaat85, on 26 Apr 2007, 19:54, said:
Golan, on 26 Apr 2007, 21:51, said:
Also, keep in mind that many pre-natal diagnostics can´t be apllied in the earlier stages of a pregnancy, so this isn´t necessarily bound to medical emergencies.
Blaat85, on 26 Apr 2007, 19:54, said:
Blaat85, on 26 Apr 2007, 19:54, said:
I´m probably gonna get lynched for this comment (otherwise, I formulated it really badly) but hey, life´s risky. If you accept its risks, accept the consequences aswell.
Edited by Golan, 26 April 2007 - 20:23.
Whitey 26 Apr 2007
Quote
QUOTE(Golan @ 26 Apr 2007, 21:51)
He´s talking about aborting a highly developed foetus. Somewhen after 7th month I´d guess. This one is usually done only when there are medical concerns.
Normally that is not allowed unless in emergency cases as you say. So I don't think we need to discuss it much.
I think we do. As Leatherneck stated this would have allmost have apllied to him [Leatherneck, if you think this is too personal too discuss then please say so], so it´s not like it would be a negligible mistake.
Sorry, wasn't implying that I almost underwent a partial-birth abortion, but I was certainly well-developed enough to the point that it would still have to be quite brutal.
Anyway, abortions leave a lot of lasting effects including chances of failed future births among others. THe emotional scarring is less immediate, but still worse, according to a few sources that I once used to argue this in debate.
And Blaat, what are you talking about? Abortions done pretty much the same all over (in the West atleast). Are you inferring that they go through a ton of risks to insert drugs into the fetus? Because I could be wrong, but I'm fairly certain that would be more dangerous than well, most of that "stuff".
A child is a human being, and this can best be expressed in the following manner: When the child grows, it may even kill its own parents, proving that the parents do note have complete control of the hcild. Not to sound brutal but it is true, children become their own person, unattached but emotionally to their parents.
What is ONE day of pain for a careless person to perhaps give birth to the next Ghandi? (Or Hitler, but that is what the fall of facism is for)
AllStarZ 26 Apr 2007
Its cute you know? You're talking about pain to a child and to a human being, and potential. How many Iraqis has your mess killed? How many potential intellectuals have gotten killed? There are more of your ilk supporting more actions against countries like Iran, which would result in more bloodshed.
Furthermore, besides preceding the child, what other relation is there between a foetus or child? And it all depends on your definition of humanity, whether it is upon conception, upon sentience, upon birth. What makes a human a human? The ability to speak? The ability to make decisions? Its chromosomes?
And consider this. What happens if during pre-birth examinations, the child had a serious physical or mental defect which it would carry with it for its entire life? Furthermore what would happen if it were physically unable to survive outside the mother? Then it'll be dead anyways.
Edited by AllStarZ, 26 April 2007 - 21:37.
Whitey 27 Apr 2007
2: Just shut up. Totally different. We aren't murdering the babies SPECIFICALLY so that their mothers can live.
3: Human DNA makes for a human... a nervous system makes for pain.
4: There are obviously those rare conditions. But if it would otherwise be perfectly healthy, why PURPOSELY kill it?
BillyChaka 27 Apr 2007
AllStarZ 27 Apr 2007
Sgt. Nuker 27 Apr 2007
BillyChaka, on 26 Apr 2007, 20:22, said:
To say someone is "better off dead" is a completely selfish way to look at another's life. That baby deserves to have a life, regardless if it'll have a defect (physical or mental). There is treatment nowadays and facilities to help kids with disabilities.
It still flabbergasts me that everyone that is pro-choice is alive to begin with. You all talk about how people should have a choice on whether or not that baby gets to live so the woman doesn't have to deal with the pain. You all should go to your parents and thank them for 1). not aborting you when they had the chance, and 2). thank your mother especially for dealing with the pain of birth. Don't give me this "what if" nonsense. You're alive because your parents didn't dare think of aborting you. Shame on you for being pro-choice. It's a slap in the face to your parents to say "I'm pro-choice because I want to decide whether or not my child or someone else's child lives". How selfish is that? How can someone be self righteous enough to say that?
For the most part, it isn't those women who've been raped that abort their child. It's those who're careless and can't keep their legs shut. If you don't want to care for a child, don't have sex, it's as simple as that.
I will, and forever will be, PRO-LIFE. Nothing that has been said, or will be said will change this fact.
Regards,
Nuker
Dr. Strangelove 27 Apr 2007
Fact: A cow in the slaughter house suffers much more pain than a baby does in any type of abortion in any situation.
If you don't think aborting in any situation is moral(with the notable exceptions of rape and emergancies), you should really give a damn when somebody swats a fly on the wall because
Fact: Flies have about 10X as many braincells as 30 day old fetuses.
And a concluding statement:
Descions not to have an abortion gave us Joseph stalin, Adolf Hilter, Mao Zedong, Pol Pot, Himler, Nero...
That was my counter to the continually used "human potential argument".
SEMI pro choice
Sgt. Nuker 27 Apr 2007
I do respect the values of others, but this is where I draw the line. I will always support life over choice.
Regards,
Nuker
Overdose 27 Apr 2007
I can never honestly find a reason within me to decide on a question that regards a gender that I'm not even a part of. I just can't tell someone how to run their life in such a profound way. Women alone should be the ones who have any say on this, especially if she's a single pregnant mother. Until I'm a father, I can't really comment on this.
If all women gathered in the world and took a majority stance on this I'd be happy with either decision.
CodeCat 27 Apr 2007
Athena 27 Apr 2007
Major Nuker, on 27 Apr 2007, 02:34, said:
Major Nuker, on 27 Apr 2007, 02:34, said:
CodeCat 27 Apr 2007
Mathias 27 Apr 2007
Major Nuker said:
No, I am alive because my parents wanted to have a child to care for and cherish. Because they PLANNED to spend the next 18 years of their life on raising and supporting a new human being. This, however, is usually not true for those who choose to have an abortion.
Najor Muker said:
At times like these, I understand why there can't be ideologies without war.
Edited by Mathias, 27 April 2007 - 12:53.
Sgt. Nuker 27 Apr 2007
@Blaat: Yes I know it takes two to tango. Tell me where in my argument that I say it doesn't.
To all who refuted my "you're alive because your parents didn't dare think of aborting you", congratulations, you've just said the same thing I have. By saying you were planned and cherished is the same thing as saying abortion was as far as far can be from your parent's minds.
And this whole thing about males not having a say in the matter: bull. you're the other half of the equation. Yes the woman has to carry the child and deal with the birthing, but since it does take "two to tango", the guy DOES have half the say.
@The Outsider: So how do you know a cow in the slaughter house suffers more than a baby targeted for abortion? Have you asked the cow or baby how much pain it was in? (yes, this question is absurd, but it exists just like abortion).
By the way, Happy Pro-Life T-shirt Day .
Regards,
Nuker
Edited by Major Nuker, 27 April 2007 - 13:32.
Athena 27 Apr 2007
Major Nuker, on 27 Apr 2007, 15:04, said:
Sgt. Nuker 27 Apr 2007
Abortion = the easy way out.
LCPL Carrow 27 Apr 2007
Mathias said:
Emphasis added
So don't have sex! If you don't want to risk a baby, then don't perform the act that makes them! Duh! Rocket science FTW!
@ Blaat: In the US, if you father a baby, you are responsible for the financial well-being of it and its mother, regardless of your marital status, and if you are older than 16 but the girl isn't, then you have to find a way to do that from inside jail, because that's where statutory rape will land you. Males don't have it easy, at least not in a non-socialist society.
@ food/fly on the wall argument: What, prithee, is that food or that fly on the wall ever going to amount to? What would it even have the potential to amount to? Your arguments are void because a fly is never going to accomplish any great achievement, nor is a cow, or a pig, or a chicken, or a corn plant, or a wheat plant, or a...you get the picture. It's not that human life is necessarily more important than other life, but human lives are the ones with the ability and the potential to affect the world. I'd just love to see a double whopper with cheese find a cure for cancer or aids.
EDIT:
@ Blaat's newest post: As I was reading the topic, I decided that I was gonna say to "keep it in your pants," but Nuker beat me to it with a statement that says the same thing, just in reference to the opposite gender. By no means is it only the women that are to blame for anything related to this debate, but that is also why it shouldn't be only the woman's choice whether or not to abort a baby. It's the dad's kid, too. He DID have an equal part - "fault" I think you said - in creating it, did he not?
Edited by LCPL Carrow, 27 April 2007 - 13:23.
Mathias 27 Apr 2007
Sgt. Nuker 27 Apr 2007
Regards,
Nuker
TehKiller 27 Apr 2007
Edited by TehKiller, 27 April 2007 - 15:41.