Abortions - The Truth - The Killing of Unborn Children

[007]

Yes. And just because you think something is imorral it doesn't mean that it should be illegal. What if you got arrested for masturbation? Man everyone in the world would be in jail. And the rest would be liars.

So you're going to use "jerking off" as a comparison for "the killing of the unborn"? Wow. You're pretty far out there today pman...

 

[manu1959]

A significant number of fertilized eggs become non-viable masses that are miscarried by the mother.

so what you are saying then is that since the fertilized egg died it was not yet going to become a human being?

what if the child is still born? dead human being or non-viable mass?

10 bucks says you change the topic yet again

 

[Powerman]

So you're going to use "jerking off" as a comparison for "the killing of the unborn"? Wow. You're pretty far out there today pman...

I didn't say they were equal in magnitude. I just said that they are both things that some people consider immoral. You can't make everything you think is immoral illegal.

 

[007]

I didn't say they were equal in magnitude. I just said that they are both things that some people consider immoral. You can't make everything you think is immoral illegal.

Immoral or not, murder is murder, and it should be against the law to murder the unborn. You don't need to psycho-analyze that. It's basic.

 

[Powerman]

Immoral or not, murder is murder, and it should be against the law to murder the unborn. You don't need to psycho-analyze that. It's basic.

Right but a lot of people don't think it's murder. Assuming everyone thought the same as you then we would probably want to change the laws.

 

[007]

Right but a lot of people don't think it's murder. Assuming everyone thought the same as you then we would probably want to change the laws.

Well, if we used this thread as an indicator of how poeple felt, it would be that "more" people feel the life of the unborn begins at conception. So maybe we SHOULD change the law.

 

[MissileMan]

so what you are saying then is that since the fertilized egg died it was not yet going to become a human being?

What I'm saying is that not all fertilized eggs are going to become human beings. Most do. IMO, the ones that develop into a handful of non-viable cells are not, nor were they ever going to be.

what if the child is still born? dead human being or non-viable mass?

To me, it would depend on the age of the fetus. If you are talking about a full-term still birth, human being.

10 bucks says you change the topic yet again

How would you like to pay for that?

 

[musicman]

I can say with 100% certainty that once born, a person is a human being. You can't say with 100% certainty that a fertilized egg is. You may not agree with my opinion about when a fetus becomes a human being, but I am entitled to that opinion regardless, as you are entitled to yours.

You're entitled to your opinion all day long. You'll agree, though, that current abortion policy - a matter of life and death - is based on just that - opinion?

 

[musicman]

From a moral standpoint is abortion ethical? I don't think it is. But from a reality standpoint making it illegal will not make abortions stop. In the same way that making drugs legal does not stop the use of drugs. If people are going to have abortions I'd rather them get decent medical care. Thus I am pro-choice.

Making rape illegal hasn't stopped rape. Using your logic, if people are going to commit rape, I'd rather they wear condoms. What the hell - they're going to rape anyway. Why try to force some artificial notion of "morality" on them?

 

[musicman]

Right but a lot of people don't think it's murder. Assuming everyone thought the same as you then we would probably want to change the laws.

Oh - you mean put it to a vote? There's an idea. Unfortunately, the crux of the entire abortion debate is that it's been taken out of the people's hands. Judicial fiat has created a constitutional right to abortion on demand. Our opinions don't matter. Pretty slick, huh?

 

[007]

Oh - you mean put it to a vote? There's an idea. Unfortunately, the crux of the entire abortion debate is that it's been taken out of the people's hands. Judicial fiat has created a constitutional right to abortion on demand. Our opinions don't matter. Pretty slick, huh?

We'll see about that. I'd love to see this come before the Supreme Court NOW.

 

[musicman]

We'll see about that. I'd love to see this come before the Supreme Court NOW.

I'm hip. I'd be a little more comfortable if Alito got confirmed first, though.

 

[007]

I'm hip. I'd be a little more comfortable if Alito got confirmed first, though.

Agree. When and if Alito is confirmed, and when and if abortion is once again in front of the Supreme Court, I think history will be made, and we'll be saying b'bye to the wholesale slaughter of the unborn.

I don't think there's a greater issue I'd love to see changed more than this. Stick it right up the death loving liberals ass.

 

[William Joyce]

I think in debates such as this both sides tend to exaggerate to prove their points. The truth about this story may be hard to distiguish but the fact that abortion is simply muder won't change.

Abortion is a physically revolting act. There is no changing that, either. And it should provide a clue as to its moral dimension.

I'm not really a no-abortions-ever-for-any-reason-no-matter-what type, but I generally think they're bad and that states certainly have the right to prohibit them. If you don't like it, you move your baby-killing ass to Massachussetts. You can parade bloody fetuses on pikes in the annual Feminist Day Parade through Boston. Ted Kennedy might say, "Hey, I recognize one of those!"

 

[musicman]

Abortion is a physically revolting act. There is no changing that, either. And it should provide a clue as to its moral dimension.

I'm not really a no-abortions-ever-for-any-reason-no-matter-what type, but I generally think they're bad and that states certainly have the right to prohibit them. If you don't like it, you move your baby-killing ass to Massachussetts. You can parade bloody fetuses on pikes in the annual Feminist Day Parade through Boston. Ted Kennedy might say, "Hey, I recognize one of those!"

:rotflmao: :alco:

 

[007]

Abortion is a physically revolting act. There is no changing that, either. And it should provide a clue as to its moral dimension.

I'm not really a no-abortions-ever-for-any-reason-no-matter-what type, but I generally think they're bad and that states certainly have the right to prohibit them. If you don't like it, you move your baby-killing ass to Massachussetts. You can parade bloody fetuses on pikes in the annual Feminist Day Parade through Boston. Ted Kennedy might say, "Hey, I recognize one of those!"

Sometimes WJ... you crack me up brother...

 

[LuvRPgrl]

So, women should be compelled to obey the rules YOU put forth?

DECIDING when life begins, and making rules are two entirely different things.

 

[LuvRPgrl]

There is a difference between human life and a human being.

Tell me where you can have human life, and not have a human being? Tell me where can you have a human being, and not have human life?

Other than the one celled fetus of course. You cant use that, cuz thats what you are trying to prove by other examples, that it is human life, but not a human being. Which is utter nonsense.

The single cells sexuality is determined, its blood type is determined, its dna is determined, these are things we use to demonstrate that one is a human being, and individuality. There is no way around it. You are using an emotional arguement. That its only a small mass of tissue.

 

[LuvRPgrl]

Common sense would dictate that two cells does not equal a human being. Common sense also dictates that a fetus in the 3rd trimester is a human being. I'm saying that there must be a point in the timeline where the transition takes place.

Baloney. Emotional sense dictates that. Common sense dictates its a person.

You certainly are trying HARD to dodge answering that question, difference between human life and a human being. You gave an example, but not a definition. There is a difference. I thought someone who could get so worked up by the accidental insertion of an "a" into a long sentence, would certainly be able to ascertain the difference between an example, and a definition. We need a definition, if you have one.

As for your idea that at some point in time it becomes a human being, how do you know? How would you define that? Would you be willing to let women get an abortion if you werent sure if it had reached that stage yet? How is it that the time line for allowing abortions just happens to have been drawn at first trimester? What magical act happens at the end of the first trimester?

 

[LuvRPgrl]

Care to point out anyone arguing that a person isn't a human being after birth?

That dim light that just flashed in your skull was the "Oh Shit" indicator! It helps if you read what you are about to post back to yourself and check for the lamp to flash. Yours is dim from overuse. You might want to re-read potential posts several times to be on the safe side.

Yes, actually, there are some professors, I think at Duke, who have published a paper arguing infanticide should be legal into the first year. Seriously.