CDZ Abortion: Moral or Immoral

[OldLady]

Using standard definitions, socially 'moral' in the legal sense - personally immoral. It is a barbaric medical procedure that dehumanizes the 'victim', much as slavery did, a tactic used by most of the worlds cruelest tyrants to justify mass murder and genocide.

Pregnancy - easiest of all STD's to avoid.

What is barbaric is controlling our reproduction, what we allow to happen with our bodies. No one is saying you HAVE TO terminate an unwanted pregnancy if you don't believe in it. However, no one should be able to tell a woman that she MUST reproduce. The current relaxing of employers' duty to provide birth control coverage and the targeted attacks against Planned Parenthood are a double attack on women's right to choose.
Women know if they are ready, willing and able to commit to the enormous responsibility of being a parent. Each woman needs to be free to choose.

Well, keep your legs closed. Most protection works, but let's be honest, most abortions are from careless sex

Did you know most abortions are actually by women who have children? That tells me it is not so much about careless sex as finances.
Women lucky enough to be able to take the Pill can pretty much rest easy about unwanted pregnancies but women like me who couldn't take it--what's left is not all that wonderful. It might work, but if it takes forethought or interrupts the moment, people are going to skip it AT TIMES. Not always, but people are spontaneous at times, and if your birth control can't keep up, you could be screwed. The woman could be screwed, I mean. It is always the woman caught holding the bag.

 

[TNHarley]

what facts?

The fact that abortion kills a human child.

What facts are there that say whether a fetus is a human?
It doesnt meet the criteria for a living organism or human.

Science says so. The fact that if left alone, a human being is born.

science says what? Pretty sure science says its both ways because its SUBJECTIVE. They can NOT agree on whether a fetus is a human "life" or not. Possibly because it doesnt meet criteria for life.

Lots of people in the abortion debate are ignorant of basic biology terminology and science. Of course a fetus meets the criteria of life. The fetal stage is simply one stage of many for the human life cycle.

A fetus can NOT maintain stable homeostasis. Sorry.

 

[Votto]

The fact that abortion kills a human child.

What facts are there that say whether a fetus is a human?
It doesnt meet the criteria for a living organism or human.

Science says so. The fact that if left alone, a human being is born.

science says what? Pretty sure science says its both ways because its SUBJECTIVE. They can NOT agree on whether a fetus is a human "life" or not. Possibly because it doesnt meet criteria for life.

Science can't even come to a consensus on what the definition of life is. Science also believes that life just spontaneously appeared from nonlife, something that can't be observed or duplicated, yet they claim it's science.

Fair enough

How is that fair?

We have the blind leading the blind.

 

[Votto]

The fact that abortion kills a human child.

What facts are there that say whether a fetus is a human?
It doesnt meet the criteria for a living organism or human.

Science says so. The fact that if left alone, a human being is born.

science says what? Pretty sure science says its both ways because its SUBJECTIVE. They can NOT agree on whether a fetus is a human "life" or not. Possibly because it doesnt meet criteria for life.

Lots of people in the abortion debate are ignorant of basic biology terminology and science. Of course a fetus meets the criteria of life. The fetal stage is simply one stage of many for the human life cycle.

A fetus can NOT maintain stable homeostasis. Sorry.

Neither can a welfare recipient.

Do we then kill off all those on government assistance?

 

[Chuz Life]

what facts?

The fact that abortion kills a human child.

What facts are there that say whether a fetus is a human?
It doesnt meet the criteria for a living organism or human.

Science says so. The fact that if left alone, a human being is born.

science says what? Pretty sure science says its both ways because its SUBJECTIVE. They can NOT agree on whether a fetus is a human "life" or not. Possibly because it doesnt meet criteria for life.

Science can't even come to a consensus on what the definition of life is. Science also believes that life just spontaneously appeared from nonlife, something that can't be observed or duplicated, yet they claim it's science.

Yet we somehow manage to define it well enough to enact laws against murder. Even fetal HOMICIDE laws!

Imagine that.

 

[JoeMoma]

The fact that abortion kills a human child.

What facts are there that say whether a fetus is a human?
It doesnt meet the criteria for a living organism or human.

Science says so. The fact that if left alone, a human being is born.

science says what? Pretty sure science says its both ways because its SUBJECTIVE. They can NOT agree on whether a fetus is a human "life" or not. Possibly because it doesnt meet criteria for life.

Lots of people in the abortion debate are ignorant of basic biology terminology and science. Of course a fetus meets the criteria of life. The fetal stage is simply one stage of many for the human life cycle.

A fetus can NOT maintain stable homeostasis. Sorry.

10 Characteristics of Life - What is Life?

4. Living Things Are Homeostatic
Homeostasis is the stable regulation of an organism's internal state. A living organism controls things like temperature, heartbeat, and hydration. Some scientists consider homeostasis to be a sub-characteristic to energy use.

The fetus does control it's own temperature, heartbeat and hydration separate from the mother while living in her womb. A fetus is a separate organism from the mother.

 

[TNHarley]

What facts are there that say whether a fetus is a human?
It doesnt meet the criteria for a living organism or human.

Science says so. The fact that if left alone, a human being is born.

science says what? Pretty sure science says its both ways because its SUBJECTIVE. They can NOT agree on whether a fetus is a human "life" or not. Possibly because it doesnt meet criteria for life.

Science can't even come to a consensus on what the definition of life is. Science also believes that life just spontaneously appeared from nonlife, something that can't be observed or duplicated, yet they claim it's science.

Fair enough

How is that fair?

We have the blind leading the blind.

Science cant even come to an agreement of what life is. I am fine with that if that is your argument

 

[TNHarley]

The fact that abortion kills a human child.

What facts are there that say whether a fetus is a human?
It doesnt meet the criteria for a living organism or human.

Science says so. The fact that if left alone, a human being is born.

science says what? Pretty sure science says its both ways because its SUBJECTIVE. They can NOT agree on whether a fetus is a human "life" or not. Possibly because it doesnt meet criteria for life.

Science can't even come to a consensus on what the definition of life is. Science also believes that life just spontaneously appeared from nonlife, something that can't be observed or duplicated, yet they claim it's science.

Yet we somehow manage to define it well enough to enact laws against murder. Even fetal HOMICIDE laws!

Imagine that.

because congress critters are intelligent scientists! GENIUS
Webster would be so jellies

 

[Chuz Life]

Science says so. The fact that if left alone, a human being is born.

science says what? Pretty sure science says its both ways because its SUBJECTIVE. They can NOT agree on whether a fetus is a human "life" or not. Possibly because it doesnt meet criteria for life.

Garbage. There isn't one single biologist or scientist who is involved in the human body in any way who will deny that if left alone, a human fetus will become a human being. Not one. They will confirm positively that a human fetus has human DNA. The fact that it cannot live outside the mother for at least 28 weeks is irrelevant.

of course it will become a human being. I was referring to basic biology... I was referring to what i said.

It doesnt meet the criteria for a living organism or human

You should selling that denial BULLSHIT to any of those already in prison for murder for illegally killing a child in the womb.

They would gladly pay you top dollar.

Its not bullshit. Its fact. Look at the definitions of those terms.
Someone made that argument last week. It is a good one. BUT that person took the freedom of choice from the mother.
It also has to happen while committing a small list of other crimes IIRC.
Shouldnt abortion be left to the states anyways?

How does your brain allow you to completely miss the signifance of the fact that the charge is MURDER? Does a MURDER CHARGE for denying someone's ability to make a choice make sense to you?

 

[task0778]

Using standard definitions, socially 'moral' in the legal sense - personally immoral. It is a barbaric medical procedure that dehumanizes the 'victim', much as slavery did, a tactic used by most of the worlds cruelest tyrants to justify mass murder and genocide.

Pregnancy - easiest of all STD's to avoid.

What is barbaric is controlling our reproduction, what we allow to happen with our bodies. No one is saying you HAVE TO terminate an unwanted pregnancy if you don't believe in it. However, no one should be able to tell a woman that she MUST reproduce. The current relaxing of employers' duty to provide birth control coverage and the targeted attacks against Planned Parenthood are a double attack on women's right to choose.
Women know if they are ready, willing and able to commit to the enormous responsibility of being a parent. Each woman needs to be free to choose.

I gotta ask in all seriousness cuz I respect your opinion more than most: what about the unborn's right to life? How can you be so cavalier about terminating a life? What's different for that person after birth than before that means his/her life can be ended? The woman can carry the baby to term and give it up and go on with her life but the unborn life is DEAD. The circumstances of conception are certainly not the fault of the fetus/baby, and yet so many have no problem destroying him/her. Hard to understand.

 

[TNHarley]

What facts are there that say whether a fetus is a human?
It doesnt meet the criteria for a living organism or human.

Science says so. The fact that if left alone, a human being is born.

science says what? Pretty sure science says its both ways because its SUBJECTIVE. They can NOT agree on whether a fetus is a human "life" or not. Possibly because it doesnt meet criteria for life.

Lots of people in the abortion debate are ignorant of basic biology terminology and science. Of course a fetus meets the criteria of life. The fetal stage is simply one stage of many for the human life cycle.

A fetus can NOT maintain stable homeostasis. Sorry.

10 Characteristics of Life - What is Life?

4. Living Things Are Homeostatic
Homeostasis is the stable regulation of an organism's internal state. A living organism controls things like temperature, heartbeat, and hydration. Some scientists consider homeostasis to be a sub-characteristic to energy use.

The fetus does control it's own temperature, heartbeat and hydration separate from the mother while living in her womb. A fetus is a separate organism from the mother.

A fetus cant even survive in an incubator if it is younger than 5 months old.
A fetus can NOT survive on its on. It requires its mother HOMEOSTASIS to survive. Not the fetuses because it is non existent. Which, is basic criteria for a living organism.
Even single cell ORGANISMS would die if homeostasis is not stable.

 

[Leo123]

You know, it's really hard to label something as "moral" or "immoral". Why? Because everyone has a different belief system, and morals vary quite a bit from system to system, and culture to culture.

A really easy one, comparing Americans to Europeans. In America, it is considered "immoral" for a woman to walk down a beach topless. A lot of them think that the woman is "loose" or "immoral" for public nudity, even though guys walk around on beaches topless regularly.

However..................

In Europe, there is nothing immoral about a woman walking around topless. Matter of fact, damn near every beach that I've been to over in the Med and in South America is topless, and most women don't wear them. The Europeans don't have any hang ups about public nudity.

The word 'immoral' can only be defined by a population within a culture that agrees on a certain moral code. Taking your example, Europeans judging Americans and Americans judging Europeans each have no moral standing to judge the other. Yet you somehow call the American view a 'hang up." Why is that?

As far as abortion? Well, my belief is that a baby isn't really "alive" until it draws it's first breath. In the Bible, it states that Adam and Eve weren't really alive until God breathed the breath of Life into them, so, I'll take God's example for when a human is "alive".

And..............when you stop breathing, you no longer are alive.

Well...That is what you believe and it is considered immoral by many who do not share your view of morality within the American culture.

 

[Chuz Life]

What facts are there that say whether a fetus is a human?
It doesnt meet the criteria for a living organism or human.

Science says so. The fact that if left alone, a human being is born.

science says what? Pretty sure science says its both ways because its SUBJECTIVE. They can NOT agree on whether a fetus is a human "life" or not. Possibly because it doesnt meet criteria for life.

Science can't even come to a consensus on what the definition of life is. Science also believes that life just spontaneously appeared from nonlife, something that can't be observed or duplicated, yet they claim it's science.

Yet we somehow manage to define it well enough to enact laws against murder. Even fetal HOMICIDE laws!

Imagine that.

because congress critters are intelligent scientists! GENIUS
Webster would be so jellies

Your claim that a human being in the zygote, embryo or fetal stage of their life is not even an organism is destroyed by the fact that even Planned Parenthood says they are.

 

[Leo123]

A fetus cant even survive in an incubator if it is younger than 5 months old.
A fetus can NOT survive on its on. It requires its mother HOMEOSTASIS to survive. Not the fetuses because it is non existent. Which, is basic criteria for a living organism.
Even single cell ORGANISMS would die if homeostasis is not stable.

So why would you remove a perfectly healthy 5 month old fetus from the womb?

 

[MarkDuffy]

Abortion: Moral or Immoral

I consider this poll & thread unfair, so I responded appropriately assuming the OP is Pro-Life Anti-Mom. OP expects the immorals to win, so my vote is to stop that.

Reality is that abortion is neither (or if you insist both). There are both moral and immoral parts to it, but the moral aspects clearly outweigh the immoral. The well being of the woman is paramount and overrides all else. An unwanted child is bad for the child, the parents, the family, the extended family and society. This is the moral imperative. To have a child when the time is correct and the parent is ready especially financially. Education is very important in the modern world and nothing should interfere with that. The immoral part is a fetus dies on purpose.

A woman's responsibility is to insure her future well-being and that of her family. If an unwanted pregnancy interferes with this moral imperative, then end the pregnancy.

The days of a woman's job was in the home married to raise children while the father provided is long gone.

 

[TNHarley]

Science says so. The fact that if left alone, a human being is born.

science says what? Pretty sure science says its both ways because its SUBJECTIVE. They can NOT agree on whether a fetus is a human "life" or not. Possibly because it doesnt meet criteria for life.

Science can't even come to a consensus on what the definition of life is. Science also believes that life just spontaneously appeared from nonlife, something that can't be observed or duplicated, yet they claim it's science.

Yet we somehow manage to define it well enough to enact laws against murder. Even fetal HOMICIDE laws!

Imagine that.

because congress critters are intelligent scientists! GENIUS
Webster would be so jellies

Your claim that a human being in the zygote, embryo or fetal stage of their life is not even an organism is destroyed by the fact that even Planned Parenthood says they are.

oh, so what they say matters now? Lol
Really, who gives a crap what they think? Neither one of us do. For some reason, you are willing to throw away integrity for the sake of argument?
Organisms REQUIRE homeostasis to live. What part about that is not agreed upon in the science community? I would love to know. Politicians dont count

 

[MarkDuffy]

The one thing that boggles my mind about abortion laws is that if a pregnant woman is murdered and both she and the unborn baby dies, the person that commits the murder can be charged with two homicides. Very progressive states(like California) have found people guilty of double homicides in cases like this.

How can a state like California insist that it's just a fetus in cases of abortion but state that it's an "unborn baby" in cases of homicide??

Easy, only a Mother can choose to abort her child. No one else.

 

[Chuz Life]

science says what? Pretty sure science says its both ways because its SUBJECTIVE. They can NOT agree on whether a fetus is a human "life" or not. Possibly because it doesnt meet criteria for life.

Science can't even come to a consensus on what the definition of life is. Science also believes that life just spontaneously appeared from nonlife, something that can't be observed or duplicated, yet they claim it's science.

Yet we somehow manage to define it well enough to enact laws against murder. Even fetal HOMICIDE laws!

Imagine that.

because congress critters are intelligent scientists! GENIUS
Webster would be so jellies

Your claim that a human being in the zygote, embryo or fetal stage of their life is not even an organism is destroyed by the fact that even Planned Parenthood says they are.

oh, so what they say matters now? Lol
Really, who gives a crap what they think? Neither one of us do. For some reason, you are willing to throw away integrity for the sake of argument?
Organisms REQUIRE homeostasis to live. What part about that is not agreed upon in the science community? I would love to know. Politicians dont count

If you can prove that a child in the womb is Not even an organism. . . Why are you not selling you expert testimony to those already doing time for MURDER for killing "children in the womb?"

 

[Votto]

The one thing that boggles my mind about abortion laws is that if a pregnant woman is murdered and both she and the unborn baby dies, the person that commits the murder can be charged with two homicides. Very progressive states(like California) have found people guilty of double homicides in cases like this.

How can a state like California insist that it's just a fetus in cases of abortion but state that it's an "unborn baby" in cases of homicide??

Easy, only a Mother can choose to abort her child. No one else.

Not so, I heard one woman had her boyfriend reach up and rip the fetus out.

 

[MarkDuffy]

The one thing that boggles my mind about abortion laws is that if a pregnant woman is murdered and both she and the unborn baby dies, the person that commits the murder can be charged with two homicides. Very progressive states(like California) have found people guilty of double homicides in cases like this.

How can a state like California insist that it's just a fetus in cases of abortion but state that it's an "unborn baby" in cases of homicide??

Easy, only a Mother can choose to abort her child. No one else.

Not so, I heard one woman had her boyfriend reach up and rip the fetus out.

Uh huh, shuuuuure. Moving right along with your story

"had" ~ She chose