What should abortion laws be?

FA_Q2 · #1 (**permalink**) 12-18-2009, 11:09 AM

All right, I am sure this has been done many times before and will be done many times again but I am new here so bear with me. A LOT of the debates here are being hijacked by abortion/anti abortion sentiments (some of which I am guilty of myself). I think this deserves its own thread. I know it will be difficult but at least try to keep the flaming down as that is where these arguments tend to boil down to.

My personal settlements on this issue are that abortion should be allowed within the first three months of pregnancy and no later than that. I do not prescribe to the right of a woman to do with her body as she pleases at the expense of an unborn child. I believe this, the paramount argument for abortionists, is insanely flawed as it does not take into account any of the right the child has.

The first issue I take is the definition that seems to be the norm. The word fetus is largely used by abortionists to separate an unborn child from being human. Ending the life of a fetus is somehow not the same as ending the life of a unborn child. This is ridiculous. The question rises, when does life begin? It always makes me incredibly angry when abortionists claim that the fetus is not human until the umbilical cord is cut or the child takes their first breath. Both of these assertions are insane and have no bearing on whether or not the child deserves full rights. We can and SHOULD all agree that neither of these are good definitions of when life begins though they are good black and white lines in a legal definition sense. As I stated in another thread, we define “human” by terms such as self-awareness, consciousness, feelings and terms such as those, not by the fact we can breathe. A child certainly has those characteristics long before birth except for self-awareness and that usually does not come for several months after birth.

The second issue I have is with personal responsibility. I know that here is where a lot of people get angry but the fact is a child is NOT a surprise. We know why it happens and how it occurs and there are MANY ways to avoid this outcome. Condoms, birth control, surgery (if you are done with children), the day after pill, spermicidal creams and there is even a male birth control pill that is coming next year. Before you scream at how the pill is not 100% effective realize that you CAN use more than 1 type at a time and they are all EXTREMLY effective if used properly. If you fail to educate yourself on the proper use then that goes right back to personal responsibility. If you fool around then you have to pay the consequences. This is not a hard concept and is the reason our society is falling into ruin. I want to do as I please without working for it, paying for it or living with the consequences of it is a sign of this generation and the very thing that will bring this entire country to ruin. The idea that you do not have to pay the piper for practicing unsafe sex falls into that same attitude, the attitude of entitlement. Then there is also the point that if the woman can give up her responsibility to bring the child into this world then why can’t the father have the right to give up his finical responsibility after it is born? If you have a right to decide what happens to your body, I should have the right to decide what happens to my livelihood!

On the other side of the issue, I believe that abortion should be allowed within the first trimester because I still believe that there are times when the lesser of two evils must be addressed. Abortions are going to occur and I prefer them happening in a safe and clean environment of a hospital. It is also the best way to educate and council those undergoing an abortion and take statistical data. Mandatory counseling (much the same as many states death with dignity laws require) should be part of the process. Brain activity starts mid to late in the first trimester and to me that defines when the mass of cells begins is journey from a growth to a full blown human. There is no actual line in the sand that can be scientifically drawn but I believe that the first trimester gives enough safe room that real brain activity has not begun and a woman has plenty of time go through the abortion. Of course, abortion must be allowed for extreme circumstances such as threat to life.

Also, the argument that life begins at conception is somewhat flawed as well. Certainly, the “potential” for life has begun but a single fertilized embryonic egg holds absolutely no similarity with human life. The sentiment that life starts there is wholly religious to me.

If a woman fails to abort in the first trimester, then the child should be given protection. At that point, an abortion should be considered manslaughter at the least. I know there will be doctors that would circumvent the law and women that will try as well but with charges that high it would limit it. There is a large gray aria here for problems like substance addiction but I will not get into that now as this post is long enough and I am tired. Please give me your thoughts.

JD_2B · #2 (**permalink**) 12-18-2009, 09:28 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by FA_Q2

The first issue I take is the definition that seems to be the norm. The word fetus is largely used by abortionists to separate an unborn child from being human. Ending the life of a fetus is somehow not the same as ending the life of a unborn child. This is ridiculous. The question rises, when does life begin? It always makes me incredibly angry when abortionists claim that the fetus is not human until the umbilical cord is cut or the child takes their first breath.

So, my assertion that it is not a *person* until the moment it takes it's first breath makes you angry? Oh and please do not confuse "person" with "human". I do not claim that a fetus is not human. It most certainly is HUMAN, it simply is not A PERSON.

Quote:

Both of these assertions are insane and have no bearing on whether or not the child deserves full rights. We can and SHOULD all agree that neither of these are good definitions of when life begins though they are good black and white lines in a legal definition sense. As I stated in another thread, we define “human” by terms such as self-awareness, consciousness, feelings and terms such as those, not by the fact we can breathe. A child certainly has those characteristics long before birth except for self-awareness and that usually does not come for several months after birth.

To say that a fetus is A PERSON, is to entitle it to rights that are impossible to enforce for it. The non-viable fetus is subjected to every danger that it's PERSON, THE WOMAN carrier is subjected to experiencing, including death, injury, and destruction by the organism's outside world. For a fetus, the outside world is everything beyond the uterus, and of course, everything that is introduced TO the uterus, which happens to be by the choice OF said carrier woman. So, if she smokes Crack, or has HIV, or even has a few drinks one night- the fetus is subjected to die as a result. If the woman is hit by a car, in a train, ship, or plane wreck, or is caught in a bad storm and electrocuted, even, that fetus is ABSOLUTELY not going to have any opportunity to get away. The FETUS does not have a livelihood to protect- there is nobody to hold it, to cuddle it, to talk to it, or to nurture it. All there is, is the woman who carries it. THIS is why the fetus is considered a part of the woman's body- because it is contained within it- and is also why a fetus will never have independent rights, because it IS CONTAINED IN SOMEONE'S BODY.
Before an egg hatches, it is NOT A CHICK. It is STILL an egg, dude. Got it?
You really do not know what characteristics a fetus has before birth anyways. It is impossible for us to currently make any absolutes on what may or may not be going through a fetus' mind, if anything really does. We all know they have a nervous system, and once they have a cerebral cortex, we know that they certainly have the equipment available to think.. But just like having ovaries or testicles does not mean that the thing is capable of reproduction (as a fetus), we cannot say for certain that having any other equipment serves any actual purpose before birth.
FYI- I consider it to be at the point of taking it's first breath, because the bible defines it that way. Before it takes that essential first breath, it can feasibly go BACK INSIDE and still grow a little longer. Once it takes that breath, there is no possible way it can survive in the uterus. This is proof positive to me that breathing is the number one essential to life. When a person stops breathing, they die NOT because their heart stops. Their heart STOPS because there is no longer a FUNCTION for it. The heart is responsible for carrying oxygen to the various cells and tissues, using the component Blood to deliver that oxygen. This is health 101, man. I am not trying to demean you in any way, but I think that certain things need to be cleared up to you, before we can continue this conversation in an intelligent manner, when you discount breathing as though it is a non-issue to life. I find that pretty ridiculous, myself.

Quote:

The second issue I have is with personal responsibility. I know that here is where a lot of people get angry but the fact is a child is NOT a surprise. We know why it happens and how it occurs and there are MANY ways to avoid this outcome. Condoms, birth control, surgery (if you are done with children), the day after pill, spermicidal creams and there is even a male birth control pill that is coming next year. Before you scream at how the pill is not 100% effective realize that you CAN use more than 1 type at a time and they are all EXTREMLY effective if used properly. If you fail to educate yourself on the proper use then that goes right back to personal responsibility.

That is absolutely ridiculous. It takes TWO people to make a fucking baby. TWO people have to screw to get that sperm in there, to say hi there and hello to the Egg Flavor of the Month. I have more to say on this shit.. Because it is absolutely positively INANE.

Quote:

If you fool around then you have to pay the consequences. This is not a hard concept and is the reason our society is falling into ruin. I want to do as I please without working for it, paying for it or living with the consequences of it is a sign of this generation and the very thing that will bring this entire country to ruin. The idea that you do not have to pay the piper for practicing unsafe sex falls into that same attitude, the attitude of entitlement. Then there is also the point that if the woman can give up her responsibility to bring the child into this world then why can’t the father have the right to give up his finical responsibility after it is born? If you have a right to decide what happens to your body, I should have the right to decide what happens to my livelihood!

Well, in that case, if you smoke the lowest tar, highest filtered cigaretted, and get lung cancer, or you break your arm as a result of riding a bike (even when using safety equipment)- then it is your own damn fault, and you should also not seek medical treatment. You knew the risks, and now you must face the consequences. /sarcasm

Sorry, guy, but people do a great many things for recreation. The pleasure is worth the risks- 99.99999% of the time. I can't personally use birth control. I am allergic. It gives me hives, and makes me hemmorhage like crazy. So for me, I am stuck with condoms. I don't always fucking have one of those. Tough shit.
If you see someone without a helmet, riding a bike or a skateboard, do you tell them that a head injury would be something they just have to forego medical treatment for, and live with their risky behavior for the rest of their lives? No, you do not. Well. I hope not, anyways. ;-) Same goes with pregnancy. When something negatively affects your body that you could have probably controlled better, you might regret that you were careless.. but I promise you- you will not be regretting seeing a Doctor for treatment. Nope. No way..
Furthermore, it STILL takes two to tango. Don't want kids? Dont have sex with a woman who is not ready to have a baby. Don't want to pay child support? Dont have sex until you have enough money to support those munchkins. PERSONAL FUCKING RESPONSIBILITY DOES GO BOTH WAYS. We are NOT your SEXUAL GATEKEEPERS.

Quote:

On the other side of the issue, I believe that abortion should be allowed within the first trimester because I still believe that there are times when the lesser of two evils must be addressed. Abortions are going to occur and I prefer them happening in a safe and clean environment of a hospital.

Well, unfortunately most hospitals are religiously based, usually Catholic, and they typically do not offer abortion on demand. Some offer life saving abortions, and rarely, you find one that will do it if you had a case of rape or incest. Hospitals being the only places to get abortions would be horrible.. a VERY big injustice to the American People. Perhaps the county health department can have their own abortion clinics, as well- Oh but wait- that will make everyone think that government funding is paying for them. And on the same token, you sure don't want abortions paying your government official's bi-weekly check, either, now would ya. Gosh. What a predicament.

Quote:

It is also the best way to educate and council those undergoing an abortion and take statistical data. Mandatory counseling (much the same as many states death with dignity laws require) should be part of the process.

Oh noooo.. We do not need anyone EDUCATING us on abortion or what is happening inside of our bodies. Good grief. Will Big Brother EVER take a LOAD OFF??? Hey as long as you are advocating for the babysitting of adult citizens, why not force all moms and dads to take a 100 hour course in parenting and healthy relationships, child bonding, etc. That would certainly help to cure the current child ABUSE trend.. ONE IN FIVE. YES.
A huge number, compared to the number of abortions every year. I digress though.. We don't need to be fucking SCHOOLED. We KNOW we don't want the fucking baby, and all you would be doing is delaying us in getting it. That paired with your First Trimester rule, and nobody would ever get to the clinics in time. So how, then, DO you actually SUPPORT first trimester abortion, in the first place???? I don't buy it. I think you are just saying that to make yourself look a little better. Read the children's book "The Wolf and the Kids". It is about a wolf who dresses in sheeps clothing, and then eats an entire family of goats. The mom goat comes home, finds the wolf asleep, and slices his stomach open, freeing her still alive "kids", and then shoves rocks in his tummy and sews him back up. Good versus Evil. Good RULES. ALWAYS.

Quote:

Brain activity starts mid to late in the first trimester and to me that defines when the mass of cells begins is journey from a growth to a full blown human. There is no actual line in the sand that can be scientifically drawn but I believe that the first trimester gives enough safe room that real brain activity has not begun and a woman has plenty of time go through the abortion. Of course, abortion must be allowed for extreme circumstances such as threat to life.

The cerebral cortex doesn't come into the picture until late in the second trimester, though.. and again, having the equipment does not guarantee use of that equipment, as I have already illustrated with the ovaries and testacles.
Also- What is it with you "pro lifers", who always, without fail, are more than happy to "allow" (or maybe encourage- that is societally closer to the right definition) a woman who has already experienced a great deal of pain, to go and commit "murder", on the "human person" she is carrying? Is a woman being on her death bed, being raped, or molested by a family member, just one big BONER MOMENT for you folks?? It is not enough that you call pro choicers like me who have had an abortion "baby killers" who "dehumanize" the FETUS (the scientifically accurate term, btw) by calling it a fetus- You guys have to revictimize women who might not actually WANT to abort by creating some sociological standard of "deservance" to this "right to life" that you speak of- and act as though no woman SHOULD want a baby if it was the product of rape. That is LOOOOOOWWWWWW.
It's MADNESS, it is ABUSE, it is a form of MIND CONTROL, and it is not AT ALL being PRO anything. Y'all say "rape" and "incest", and even "near death" as if they are ALL experiences that a LITTLE BITTY WEAK ASS WOMAN cannot possibly endure or survive. Get fucking over yourselves.
That argument is the WEAKEST SHIT I HAVE HEARD, AS OF YET.

Quote:

Also, the argument that life begins at conception is somewhat flawed as well. Certainly, the “potential” for life has begun but a single fertilized embryonic egg holds absolutely no similarity with human life. The sentiment that life starts there is wholly religious to me.

I really don't understand where you got this from. The bible does not say anywhere within it, that life begins while we are in the uterus. That is just something I like to call a LEAP, like most false religious teachings tend to be. Also, it works into the whole circular logic issue, but I will save that argument for later in the discussion.

Quote:

If a woman fails to abort in the first trimester, then the child should be given protection. At that point, an abortion should be considered manslaughter at the least. I know there will be doctors that would circumvent the law and women that will try as well but with charges that high it would limit it. There is a large gray aria here for problems like substance addiction but I will not get into that now as this post is long enough and I am tired. Please give me your thoughts.

Ohhhh So all we have to do is get hooked on CRACK or something, and we are in the clear, because we are SUCH WEAK LITTLE BITCHES and only the DUMBEST MOST FUCKED UP BITCHES should be allowed to avoid prosecution for "killing" their "protected" offspring??

You are a TOTAL misogynist. Did you know that???

☭proletarian☭ · #3 (**permalink**) 12-18-2009, 09:36 PM

I support abortion up to 6 weeks after conception. This is based on the evidence I've seen which suggests that the regions of the brain which give rise to sentience develop possibly as early as 7 weeks after conception. Once this occurs, we are dealing with a sentient mind- a true person. Prior o the emergence of the mind capable of perceiving its own existence and/or the world around it , we are dealing with a living entity that possesses no selfhood. Thus, ending the life of such a creature is fundamentally the same as letting the body of the braindead die- the individual does not exist as such and the tissue itself possesses only sentimental value in its association in our minds with the individual.

This being said, finding information on fetal brain development has been difficult and I remain open to evidence indicating a different timeline.

☭proletarian☭ · #4 (**permalink**) 12-18-2009, 09:39 PM

APPENDIX:I also support abortion as a necessary, if undesirable, option in medical emergencies threaten the life of mother and/or child (it's better to save one life than to allow two to die)

AllieBaba · #5 (**permalink**) 12-18-2009, 11:50 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by JD_2B

Quote: Originally Posted by FA_Q2

The first issue I take is the definition that seems to be the norm. The word fetus is largely used by abortionists to separate an unborn child from being human. Ending the life of a fetus is somehow not the same as ending the life of a unborn child. This is ridiculous. The question rises, when does life begin? It always makes me incredibly angry when abortionists claim that the fetus is not human until the umbilical cord is cut or the child takes their first breath.

So, my assertion that it is not a *person* until the moment it takes it's first breath makes you angry? Oh and please do not confuse "person" with "human". I do not claim that a fetus is not human. It most certainly is HUMAN, it simply is not A PERSON.

Quote:

Both of these assertions are insane and have no bearing on whether or not the child deserves full rights. We can and SHOULD all agree that neither of these are good definitions of when life begins though they are good black and white lines in a legal definition sense. As I stated in another thread, we define “human” by terms such as self-awareness, consciousness, feelings and terms such as those, not by the fact we can breathe. A child certainly has those characteristics long before birth except for self-awareness and that usually does not come for several months after birth.

To say that a fetus is A PERSON, is to entitle it to rights that are impossible to enforce for it. The non-viable fetus is subjected to every danger that it's PERSON, THE WOMAN carrier is subjected to experiencing, including death, injury, and destruction by the organism's outside world. For a fetus, the outside world is everything beyond the uterus, and of course, everything that is introduced TO the uterus, which happens to be by the choice OF said carrier woman. So, if she smokes Crack, or has HIV, or even has a few drinks one night- the fetus is subjected to die as a result. If the woman is hit by a car, in a train, ship, or plane wreck, or is caught in a bad storm and electrocuted, even, that fetus is ABSOLUTELY not going to have any opportunity to get away. The FETUS does not have a livelihood to protect- there is nobody to hold it, to cuddle it, to talk to it, or to nurture it. All there is, is the woman who carries it. THIS is why the fetus is considered a part of the woman's body- because it is contained within it- and is also why a fetus will never have independent rights, because it IS CONTAINED IN SOMEONE'S BODY.
Before an egg hatches, it is NOT A CHICK. It is STILL an egg, dude. Got it?
You really do not know what characteristics a fetus has before birth anyways. It is impossible for us to currently make any absolutes on what may or may not be going through a fetus' mind, if anything really does. We all know they have a nervous system, and once they have a cerebral cortex, we know that they certainly have the equipment available to think.. But just like having ovaries or testicles does not mean that the thing is capable of reproduction (as a fetus), we cannot say for certain that having any other equipment serves any actual purpose before birth.
FYI- I consider it to be at the point of taking it's first breath, because the bible defines it that way. Before it takes that essential first breath, it can feasibly go BACK INSIDE and still grow a little longer. Once it takes that breath, there is no possible way it can survive in the uterus. This is proof positive to me that breathing is the number one essential to life. When a person stops breathing, they die NOT because their heart stops. Their heart STOPS because there is no longer a FUNCTION for it. The heart is responsible for carrying oxygen to the various cells and tissues, using the component Blood to deliver that oxygen. This is health 101, man. I am not trying to demean you in any way, but I think that certain things need to be cleared up to you, before we can continue this conversation in an intelligent manner, when you discount breathing as though it is a non-issue to life. I find that pretty ridiculous, myself.

That is absolutely ridiculous. It takes TWO people to make a fucking baby. TWO people have to screw to get that sperm in there, to say hi there and hello to the Egg Flavor of the Month. I have more to say on this shit.. Because it is absolutely positively INANE.

Well, in that case, if you smoke the lowest tar, highest filtered cigaretted, and get lung cancer, or you break your arm as a result of riding a bike (even when using safety equipment)- then it is your own damn fault, and you should also not seek medical treatment. You knew the risks, and now you must face the consequences. /sarcasm

Sorry, guy, but people do a great many things for recreation. The pleasure is worth the risks- 99.99999% of the time. I can't personally use birth control. I am allergic. It gives me hives, and makes me hemmorhage like crazy. So for me, I am stuck with condoms. I don't always fucking have one of those. Tough shit.
If you see someone without a helmet, riding a bike or a skateboard, do you tell them that a head injury would be something they just have to forego medical treatment for, and live with their risky behavior for the rest of their lives? No, you do not. Well. I hope not, anyways. ;-) Same goes with pregnancy. When something negatively affects your body that you could have probably controlled better, you might regret that you were careless.. but I promise you- you will not be regretting seeing a Doctor for treatment. Nope. No way..
Furthermore, it STILL takes two to tango. Don't want kids? Dont have sex with a woman who is not ready to have a baby. Don't want to pay child support? Dont have sex until you have enough money to support those munchkins. PERSONAL FUCKING RESPONSIBILITY DOES GO BOTH WAYS. We are NOT your SEXUAL GATEKEEPERS.

Well, unfortunately most hospitals are religiously based, usually Catholic, and they typically do not offer abortion on demand. Some offer life saving abortions, and rarely, you find one that will do it if you had a case of rape or incest. Hospitals being the only places to get abortions would be horrible.. a VERY big injustice to the American People. Perhaps the county health department can have their own abortion clinics, as well- Oh but wait- that will make everyone think that government funding is paying for them. And on the same token, you sure don't want abortions paying your government official's bi-weekly check, either, now would ya. Gosh. What a predicament.

Oh noooo.. We do not need anyone EDUCATING us on abortion or what is happening inside of our bodies. Good grief. Will Big Brother EVER take a LOAD OFF??? Hey as long as you are advocating for the babysitting of adult citizens, why not force all moms and dads to take a 100 hour course in parenting and healthy relationships, child bonding, etc. That would certainly help to cure the current child ABUSE trend.. ONE IN FIVE. YES.
A huge number, compared to the number of abortions every year. I digress though.. We don't need to be fucking SCHOOLED. We KNOW we don't want the fucking baby, and all you would be doing is delaying us in getting it. That paired with your First Trimester rule, and nobody would ever get to the clinics in time. So how, then, DO you actually SUPPORT first trimester abortion, in the first place???? I don't buy it. I think you are just saying that to make yourself look a little better. Read the children's book "The Wolf and the Kids". It is about a wolf who dresses in sheeps clothing, and then eats an entire family of goats. The mom goat comes home, finds the wolf asleep, and slices his stomach open, freeing her still alive "kids", and then shoves rocks in his tummy and sews him back up. Good versus Evil. Good RULES. ALWAYS.

The cerebral cortex doesn't come into the picture until late in the second trimester, though.. and again, having the equipment does not guarantee use of that equipment, as I have already illustrated with the ovaries and testacles.
Also- What is it with you "pro lifers", who always, without fail, are more than happy to "allow" (or maybe encourage- that is societally closer to the right definition) a woman who has already experienced a great deal of pain, to go and commit "murder", on the "human person" she is carrying? Is a woman being on her death bed, being raped, or molested by a family member, just one big BONER MOMENT for you folks?? It is not enough that you call pro choicers like me who have had an abortion "baby killers" who "dehumanize" the FETUS (the scientifically accurate term, btw) by calling it a fetus- You guys have to revictimize women who might not actually WANT to abort by creating some sociological standard of "deservance" to this "right to life" that you speak of- and act as though no woman SHOULD want a baby if it was the product of rape. That is LOOOOOOWWWWWW.
It's MADNESS, it is ABUSE, it is a form of MIND CONTROL, and it is not AT ALL being PRO anything. Y'all say "rape" and "incest", and even "near death" as if they are ALL experiences that a LITTLE BITTY WEAK ASS WOMAN cannot possibly endure or survive. Get fucking over yourselves.
That argument is the WEAKEST SHIT I HAVE HEARD, AS OF YET.

Quote:

Also, the argument that life begins at conception is somewhat flawed as well. Certainly, the “potential” for life has begun but a single fertilized embryonic egg holds absolutely no similarity with human life. The sentiment that life starts there is wholly religious to me.

I really don't understand where you got this from. The bible does not say anywhere within it, that life begins while we are in the uterus. That is just something I like to call a LEAP, like most false religious teachings tend to be. Also, it works into the whole circular logic issue, but I will save that argument for later in the discussion.

Quote:

If a woman fails to abort in the first trimester, then the child should be given protection. At that point, an abortion should be considered manslaughter at the least. I know there will be doctors that would circumvent the law and women that will try as well but with charges that high it would limit it. There is a large gray aria here for problems like substance addiction but I will not get into that now as this post is long enough and I am tired. Please give me your thoughts.

Ohhhh So all we have to do is get hooked on CRACK or something, and we are in the clear, because we are SUCH WEAK LITTLE BITCHES and only the DUMBEST MOST FUCKED UP BITCHES should be allowed to avoid prosecution for "killing" their "protected" offspring??

You are a TOTAL misogynist. Did you know that???

And you're a baby hater. Did you know that?

AllieBaba · #6 (**permalink**) 12-18-2009, 11:54 PM

btw..this baby never took a breath. So technically, it wasn't a person, by your reasoning:

Mother won&#39t be charged with baby&#39s death because of law loophole | WSLS 10

☭proletarian☭ · #7 (**permalink**) 12-19-2009, 12:07 AM

Quote: Originally Posted by JD_2B

[
So, my assertion that it is not a *person* until the moment it takes it's first breath makes you angry? Oh and please do not confuse "person" with "human". I do not claim that a fetus is not human. It most certainly is HUMAN, it simply is not A PERSON.

Define 'person'

Quote:

To say that a fetus is A PERSON, is to entitle it to rights that are impossible to enforce for it.

How so?

Quote:

The non-viable fetus is subjected to every danger that it's PERSON, THE WOMAN carrier is subjected to experiencing,

sounds like any child under the age of 3
\

Quote:

So, if she smokes Crack, or has HIV, or even has a few drinks one night- the fetus is subjected to die as a result.

And a piece of shit waste of life of a female can jeopardize her six year-year-old and sell her baby for crack. What's your point?

Quote:

The FETUS does not have a livelihood to protect

Good to know the unem

Quote:

Before an egg hatches, it is NOT A CHICK. It is STILL an egg, dude.

Chick is a technical term. Baby is not. Just so ya know... They don't change species upon birthing/hatching, either. You've yet to demonstrate any fundamental cghange to the nature of the entity in question at the time of birth/first breath/cutting the umbilical cord.

Quote:

FYI- I consider it to be at the point of taking it's first breath, because the bible defines it that way

Well... if that's your reasoning, we know to never take you seriously again

Quote:

. This is proof positive to me that breathing is the number one essential to life.

Yet it was alive before it started breathing....

that's called 'fail' on your part

Quote:

When a person stops breathing, they die NOT because their heart stops.
Their heart STOPS because there is no longer a FUNCTION for it.

Wrong, dumbass. They die due to oxygen deprivation, which causes cellular death on an epidemic scale. If the blood is artificially oxygenated by some means, there's no problem. We can safely add medicine and biology to the list of things you know nothing about.

Quote:

That is absolutely ridiculous. It takes TWO people to make a fucking baby.

Not necessarily. Ever heard of parthenogenesis?

Quote:

If you see someone without a helmet, riding a bike or a skateboard, do you tell them that a head injury would be something they just have to forego medical treatment for, and live with their risky behavior for the rest of their lives?

When I choose to ride a bike without a helmet, I accept the the risk that I might fall and split my head open. I will then have to live with any consequences of my decision. What's your point?

Quote:

Well, unfortunately most hospitals are religiously based, usually Catholic,

?!

I don't know where you live, but my experience has been different. Then again, I usually go to training hospitals run by the universities or regional hospitals funded by the State.

Quote:

again, having the equipment does not guarantee use of that equipment, as I have already illustrated with

-your posts, which prove that possessing a brain doesn't mean it's fully operational.

Quote:

Also- What is it with you "pro lifers",

As opposed to pro-deathers?

Quote:

who always, without fail, are more than happy to "allow" (or maybe encourage- that is societally closer to the right definition) a woman who has already experienced a great deal of pain, to go and commit "murder", on the "human person" she is carrying? Is a woman being on her death bed, being raped, or molested by a family member, just one big BONER MOMENT for you folks??

seriously, wtf are you talking about?

☭proletarian☭ · #8 (**permalink**) 12-19-2009, 12:08 AM

Quote: Originally Posted by AllieBaba

btw..this baby never took a breath. So technically, it wasn't a person, by your reasoning:

Mother won&#39t be charged with baby&#39s death because of law loophole | WSLS 10

Did she ever explain what fundamental aspect of the entity's being changed from the millisecond before it began to inhale to the millisecond when inhalation began?

AllieBaba · #9 (**permalink**) 12-19-2009, 12:10 AM

Well it doesn't matter because if it's PREVENTED from ever sucking air, then it's not a PERSON.

My 2nd boy wasn't breathing when he was born. I guess we should have offed him.

☭proletarian☭ · #10 (**permalink**) 12-19-2009, 12:14 AM

Does that mean I'm not a person when I hold my breath or I chokw?

OH MY GOD, JD'S CHOKING!!

Relax... it's not like it's a person anymore; just let it die

BUT SHE'S-!

it. Not she. Is it breathing?

well, no...

I rest my case

*JD chokes to death*

**Care4all** · #11 (**permalink**) 12-19-2009, 12:48 AM

Quote: Originally Posted by ☭proletarian☭

Does that mean I'm not a person when I hold my breath or I chokw?

OH MY GOD, JD'S CHOKING!!

Relax... it's not like it's a person anymore; just let it die

BUT SHE'S-!

it. Not she. Is it breathing?

well, no...

I rest my case

*JD chokes to death*

But can one really choke to death or stop breathing, IF they had never taken their first breath in the first place? I'm not certain your scenario of JD really fits the argument she was trying to give? Nice try though....

(now don't go all batty on me.....I am not saying that I agree with her...just saying....)

Care

☭proletarian☭ · #12 (**permalink**) 12-19-2009, 12:50 AM

She said breathing air is a necessary condition for personhood

☭proletarian☭ · #13 (**permalink**) 12-19-2009, 12:53 AM

And one can suffocate if one never begins to breathe- in fact that's the very danger of not starting to breathe x.o The end result is exactly the same.

**Care4all** · #14 (**permalink**) 12-19-2009, 01:11 AM

I thought she said the baby taking its first breath, gives the baby person-hood....the breath of life....and all, including protections, that comes with such, under the law....I presume she meant?

Until the baby is BORN, which is when it takes its first breath after delivery....only then a certificate of live birth is given...if the baby to be does NOT take its first breath, under the law it is considered stillborn-delivered dead...I believe? And under the law, she would be correct in her assumptions on person-hood.

You can't deduct the child on your taxes, until they take their first breath when being birthed....you get no recognition under the law for this child to be, unless it is BORN...takes its first breath.

Having said all of THAT....

She is wrong imo on so many levels....

A mother losing her baby during pregnancy is as great a loss as losing a child that has taken its first breath, then died.

Couples expecting a child, relate to their child to be, as their baby....attachments are made with this other human before it takes its first breath.

How can one say a fetus is not alive when it is kicking you while in your womb?

There is much more to it than the law, that we live under.

care

JD_2B · #15 (**permalink**) 12-19-2009, 11:41 PM

[quote=☭proletarian☭;1823190]

Quote: Originally Posted by JD_2B

[
So, my assertion that it is not a *person* until the moment it takes it's first breath makes you angry? Oh and please do not confuse "person" with "human". I do not claim that a fetus is not human. It most certainly is HUMAN, it simply is not A PERSON.

Define 'person'

Quote:

To say that a fetus is A PERSON, is to entitle it to rights that are impossible to enforce for it.

How so?

Because women have miscarriages and stillbirths all the fucking time, moron. As long as you call me names, I will call you names, also. If that is all you can do here, lol..
It is impossible to ensure that ALL women even KNOW they are pregnant, also. You CANT enforce rights for all fetuses. That is ridiculous. So ridiculous.. How the fuck can a FETUS have fucking RIGHTS as an idividual when all it is is something that lives pretty much in a COCOON??? Pah-lease.
Plus, what are you going to do, sit there are charge women with accidental homicide charges when they jump on a trampoline and later lose the 5 week gestated embryo? ...or child neglect when they get beat up by their husbands and lose the pregnancy status? Give it up, man. That is insane. Fetuses are NOT people. They are humans, but they do not have the capacity of individualism, and cannot be considered individuals, because of that simple very REAL fact.

Quote:

sounds like any child under the age of 3

And a piece of shit waste of life of a female can jeopardize her six year-year-old and sell her baby for crack. What's your point?

That would be negligence towards an actual person. There are societal protections that can help this be avoided. There is little we can do while a fetus is INSIDE of the crackwhore's stomach. Any neighbor can come over and rescue a BORN baby. Nobody can reach in and shelter a fetus.
Reality check for all of ya.. Goodness.

Quote:

Chick is a technical term. Baby is not. Just so ya know... They don't change species upon birthing/hatching, either. You've yet to demonstrate any fundamental cghange to the nature of the entity in question at the time of birth/first breath/cutting the umbilical cord.

Like it isn't obvious.. They become an entity of their own. The only reason they are cared for, is because society nurtures it after that point, until it can do things on its own. You don't feed your kids when they are 10, if they can feed themselves.. You don't hold the bottle for the baby when it is two- and generally the baby won't even want you to do this for it.
A BABY can be swept up and away by someone else, like I said before. This is a VERY fundamental change in the nature of fetus- to baby. Fetuses cannot be fully protected from anything. They are completely at the mercy of whatever happens to the mother, and that is not a hateful thing to say- that is REALITY. That means that there are things that are outside of even the mother's control. Got it???

Quote:

Well... if that's your reasoning, we know to never take you seriously again

I never took you seriously to begin with. So we will never be even, I reckon.. =)

Quote:

Yet it was alive before it started breathing....

that's called 'fail' on your part

No- it was GROWING. Lots of stuff grows and is not alive. Again- when you have to be pregnant, you can think of it as a baby, an individual, etc.. whatever you want. Just don't dictate to me what I have to think. I might think of it either way.. it all depends on whether I want to be pregnant or not. If all of your pregnancies are planned, or wanted- then more power to you. Unfortunately, 50% of all women in the world experience one unplanned pregnancy in their life. I do hope that you will be the luckier half. God only knows, we don't need more overly sheltered, spoiled, and coddled brats in the world. We need kids that will be like MY boy!! He is being raised to be a man, not a punk assed entitled little prick like so many other boys are raised. No thanks!! =)

Quote:

Wrong, dumbass. They die due to oxygen deprivation, which causes cellular death on an epidemic scale. If the blood is artificially oxygenated by some means, there's no problem. We can safely add medicine and biology to the list of things you know nothing about.

When someone lacks air, (like I said) they lack oxygen to the blood stream, causing the heart to stop (like I said). A person's cells continue to die even after the heart stops.
I would like to hear how you intend to artificially oxygenate a fetus's blood resource.. Please feel free to go into depth about this new technique that nobody else has ever heard of, apparently. ;-)

Quote:

Not necessarily. Ever heard of parthenogenesis?

I said it takes two people to make a baby. Strawman arguments like this one will not get you anywhere here.

Quote:

When I choose to ride a bike without a helmet, I accept the the risk that I might fall and split my head open. I will then have to live with any consequences of my decision. What's your point?

Without medical treatment.. Live with it without treating the head injury. Try to follow along here.

Quote:

I don't know where you live, but my experience has been different. Then again, I usually go to training hospitals run by the universities or regional hospitals funded by the State.

Yeah there are lots of regular hospitals, but something between 20 and 30% of hospitals are owned by or partnered with religiously affiliated hospitals and are, as a result, opposed to abortion. Even the secular partnered hospitals will often stop terminating pregnancies once a merger happens.

Quote:

Also- What is it with you "pro lifers",

As opposed to pro-deathers?

Quote:

who always, without fail, are more than happy to "allow" (or maybe encourage- that is societally closer to the right definition) a woman who has already experienced a great deal of pain, to go and commit "murder", on the "human person" she is carrying? Is a woman being on her death bed, being raped, or molested by a family member, just one big BONER MOMENT for you folks??

seriously, wtf are you talking about?

Why is it SOOO murderous for a woman to choose to want to end a pregnancy for any OTHER reason, beyond those that include her being abused terribly or on the brink of death?? It seems to me that there must be some underlying condition in people who insist that a woman be hurt badly or hurting badly to make this kind of decision for herself, and it be excusable.
Its sick, this condition- and it is called misogyny. It is such a shame, how far we have come, and how so few people have anything even remotely related to a true appreciation for women's autonomy. (women's rights, that is)