A question for pro-lifers...

[daphillenium]

Yes, but its the same kind of life that is attached to a machine. That life ONLY exists at the expense of someone else.

Disgusting

So you don't agree that a fetus is alive ONLY because of another person?

You must have been born without brains.

Well that argument to me doesn't seem valid. You could argue that a 1,2,3,4, or 5 year old is ONLY alive because of another person.

I heard a good point a few months ago.

If a physician performs malpractice on a pregnant woman and the baby dies the woman can sue because the doc killed her baby. So in that case the child has "rights."

The same goes for someone punching a woman or hitting her to the point the baby dies. The child has "rights" in that situation as well right?

Well why is it when a child is not wanted, those rights go out the window.

I didn't explain it as good as whoever it was that I heard, but hopefully you get the point.

 

[thanatos144]

Progressives are so caught up in their love of eugenics they use any excuse to kill the undesirables.

 

[Sinjorri]

There are no babies killed in abortion. It is either an embryo or a fetus. If you think an 8 week old embryo is a baby, you are wrong. Its a stage of life - embryo, fetus, newborn, toddler, teenager, adult.

We are always human, but we still go through stages of life.

Then you agree that a life is taken in abortion

Yes, but its the same kind of life that is attached to a machine. That life ONLY exists at the expense of someone else.

i just pity you at this point, eitehr you really believe that, or you are just showing people how immature you are. Either way i hope you grow up, and i mean that because the person who was aborted wont get that chance.

 

[californiafats]

Could a 6 month old baby petition to not be murdered?

That doesn’t make any sense.

A baby doesn’t depend solely on its mother at that point, it’s legally a person, unlike a fetus or embryo.

Prior to birth, should the ‘unborn’ and mother have the same rights, there’s no other choice but to force the mother to maintain a pregnancy she doesn’t want, violating her right to privacy.

There is no logical, consistent, or legal solution to the ‘unborn’ and mother having ‘equal rights’ – it’s Constitutionally impossible.

Consequently one can only assume your position is abortion should be banned by the state, from conception to birth.

I dont want to argue whether a fetus is a baby ,frankly because I dont think it is. However, the premise of the thread is, if you accept that a fetus is a baby, why is abortion acceptable in the cases of rape/incest.

"Acceptable" is too broad a concept. "Tolerable" would be more like it.

 

[AmyNation]

I don't know about rape/incest. I think about that child growing up and doing great things in society but then again that child could grow up to be Hitler or Pol Pot. I can't answer this question until I'm in that situation.

What about abortion to save the mothers life? I think I can support this, but again, I've never been in that situation and pray that I never am, and again, what if the child were to growup and cure cancer?

What I want to know is why the father has no say one way or the other? If the father wants the child but the mother don't, the father has no say. If the father doesn't want the child but the mother does, the father has no say and he's on the hook for child support. The father should have some say, but he doesn't.

I think i mentioned this in another thread but...

I think fathers should be able to opt out. Any unmarried woman who finds herself with child should be required to serve the prospective father with papers within her 1st trimester, asking if he wants to become a parent. He can then either step up and agree, or sever all ties to any future child. That way the mother can make an informed decision, she can either abort or go forward knowing she will be a single parent.

At what point is a baby a life? You are saying that a baby is only alive once he/she is born?

A more accurate question would be, at what point is that life a person? And my answer to tha would be the moment it has a functioning brain.

 

[Shelzin]

My opinion... That's all this is. Not directed at anybody, but it's pretty easy to see a circle jerk here.

I don't believe that dependency on surviving is a valid argument to be making in regards to abortion. I believe it should be about if you are killing a person or not. Not fetus, not a baby, no bullshit like that. A person.

IN which now the discussion become when is someone a person?

We already know that LIFE really doesn't mean anything to most people in this thread that are pro-choice. But killing a person does matter. As said by someone yeah... Killing a 1 year old is murder... Nobody questions that. Why? Because it's a person. A very young person... But a person. And actually I'm not sure person is a good term to use, but I haven't found one better as of yet. And a fetus is not a person until they start having the thing that separates us from other animals.

Just... My thoughts. Feel free not to respond to me in any fashion... Just... Trying to get rid of the circle jerk.

I don’t think it is a “circle jerk” rather something that will never be agreed upon because of a difference in views on whether abortion is murder or no different than a woman deciding to go on a diet.

I obviously disagree.

But look at it this way, if I were to suggest we go and offer free neutering to everyone do you think I would probably be called racist seeing most people wanting to do it would end up being the poor and minorities. But we are ok with offering free abortions regardless of the fact that most people doing it are the poor and the minorities.

I wouldn't. Hell... It would actually make some sense to promote if you are pro-life. I wouldn't fight it myself.

How is it no one sees it for what it is and that is a way to reduce the numbers. I always remembered seeing the MTV thing with “are you afraid of a black America?” Of course not, because they keep aborting at alarming rates and killing each other with gang violence.

*blink*blink*

How is it that so many blacks are for this? It is beyond me and I would think it would gain the racist label for Democrats but hey I never pretend this world is a just place.

I admit... I never thought of this issue as being racial. And... Honestly... I still don't.

Good day to you.

 

[Shelzin]

I don't know about rape/incest. I think about that child growing up and doing great things in society but then again that child could grow up to be Hitler or Pol Pot. I can't answer this question until I'm in that situation.

What about abortion to save the mothers life? I think I can support this, but again, I've never been in that situation and pray that I never am, and again, what if the child were to growup and cure cancer?

What I want to know is why the father has no say one way or the other? If the father wants the child but the mother don't, the father has no say. If the father doesn't want the child but the mother does, the father has no say and he's on the hook for child support. The father should have some say, but he doesn't.

I think i mentioned this in another thread but...

I think fathers should be able to opt out. Any unmarried woman who finds herself with child should be required to serve the prospective father with papers within her 1st trimester, asking if he wants to become a parent. He can then either step up and agree, or sever all ties to any future child. That way the mother can make an informed decision, she can either abort or go forward knowing she will be a single parent.

At what point is a baby a life? You are saying that a baby is only alive once he/she is born?

OH... You haven't read the whole thread... I guess that makes some sense now.

 

[lukelk]

Fist off, planned parenthood does NOT receive tax dollars,SECOND planned parenthood does not preform the abortion, what they do is refer you to a clinique that does, try not watching fox news before you go off on those statements

 

[thanatos144]

Fist off, planned parenthood does NOT receive tax dollars,SECOND planned parenthood does not preform the abortion, what they do is refer you to a clinique that does, try not watching fox news before you go off on those statements

You ne3ed to learn the truth or stop lying so fucking much.

 

[californiafats]

Pro-lifers, should be rigid in their beliefs. Thats what I dont get. If you think a fetus is a baby, what possible reason( except obviously the life of the mother/fetus) could be acceptable for killing that baby?

Face it tool.
We don't all fit in the little boxes people like you like to cram everyone into.
End Of Thread...

Again, this is the part I dont get. We are not discussing taxes, prostitution or the war on drugs. If your position is abortion is the murder of an innocent baby, how can you have "acceptable murder"?

I'm afraid you display one of the flaws too typical of liberals. You say that pro-lifers should be rigid in their beliefs. Nonsense. Non-liberals know that it's very seldom that one hard-and-fast rule can apply to all situations.

You ask, "...how can you have acceptable murder? In the same way that states have laws that allow the execution of criminals, exceptions to the murder laws can be made (no, fetuses are not criminals).

Non-liberals know that competing interests have to be balanced in real life. The interest of an illegal alien parent wanting to be with it's offspring needs to be balanced against society's interest in having controlled immigration, for example. The simplistic liberal mind says parent and child have the immutable right to be together so neither should be subject to the law.

Similarly, the person who believes that a fetus has the right to grow into a live baby knows that that right sometimes has to be balanced against the rights of the woman. We're not mindless automatons.

 

[AmyNation]

Fist off, planned parenthood does NOT receive tax dollars,SECOND planned parenthood does not preform the abortion, what they do is refer you to a clinique that does, try not watching fox news before you go off on those statements

What do you call all the title x funding they get?

 

[AmyNation]

Face it tool.
We don't all fit in the little boxes people like you like to cram everyone into.
End Of Thread...

Again, this is the part I dont get. We are not discussing taxes, prostitution or the war on drugs. If your position is abortion is the murder of an innocent baby, how can you have "acceptable murder"?

I'm afraid you display one of the flaws too typical of liberals. You say that pro-lifers should be rigid in their beliefs. Nonsense. Non-liberals know that it's very seldom that one hard-and-fast rule can apply to all situations.

You ask, "...how can you have acceptable murder? In the same way that states have laws that allow the execution of criminals, exceptions to the murder laws can be made (no, fetuses are not criminals).

Non-liberals know that competing interests have to be balanced in real life. The interest of an illegal alien parent wanting to be with it's offspring needs to be balanced against society's interest in having controlled immigration, for example. The simplistic liberal mind says parent and child have the immutable right to be together so neither should be subject to the law.

Similarly, the person who believes that a fetus has the right to grow into a live baby knows that that right sometimes has to be balanced against the rights of the woman. We're not mindless automatons.

Ive seen a few responses to the op, which is appreciated. So far, they have mostly been, "because I feel bad for the woman" and "because it's a step in chipping away abortion rights".

I still don't understand how anyone who believes a fetus is a person, agrees that some women have the right to murder that person. *shurg* I think it will remain something that confuses me.

 

[miami_thomas]

That doesn’t make any sense.

A baby doesn’t depend solely on its mother at that point, it’s legally a person, unlike a fetus or embryo.

Prior to birth, should the ‘unborn’ and mother have the same rights, there’s no other choice but to force the mother to maintain a pregnancy she doesn’t want, violating her right to privacy.

There is no logical, consistent, or legal solution to the ‘unborn’ and mother having ‘equal rights’ – it’s Constitutionally impossible.

Consequently one can only assume your position is abortion should be banned by the state, from conception to birth.

I dont want to argue whether a fetus is a baby ,frankly because I dont think it is. However, the premise of the thread is, if you accept that a fetus is a baby, why is abortion acceptable in the cases of rape/incest.

"Acceptable" is too broad a concept. "Tolerable" would be more like it.

Also how do you know someone is actually raped or just claiming rape in order to get an abortion?

 

[miami_thomas]

Ive seen a few responses to the op, which is appreciated. So far, they have mostly been, "because I feel bad for the woman" and "because it's a step in chipping away abortion rights".

I still don't understand how anyone who believes a fetus is a person, agrees that some women have the right to murder that person. *shurg* I think it will remain something that confuses me.

It comes from the mentality that Liberals somehow have created called "Compromise". That is that conservatives need to always compromise their views to include Liberal ideas. Notice that this is a one way street. Conservatives need to modify their views but not the other way around. This way we can always slowly move further and further left even when a conservative runs the government. They call it winning the independents.

 

[daphillenium]

I think i mentioned this in another thread but...

I think fathers should be able to opt out. Any unmarried woman who finds herself with child should be required to serve the prospective father with papers within her 1st trimester, asking if he wants to become a parent. He can then either step up and agree, or sever all ties to any future child. That way the mother can make an informed decision, she can either abort or go forward knowing she will be a single parent.

At what point is a baby a life? You are saying that a baby is only alive once he/she is born?

A more accurate question would be, at what point is that life a person? And my answer to tha would be the moment it has a functioning brain.

tru

 

[californiafats]

Again, this is the part I dont get. We are not discussing taxes, prostitution or the war on drugs. If your position is abortion is the murder of an innocent baby, how can you have "acceptable murder"?

I'm afraid you display one of the flaws too typical of liberals. You say that pro-lifers should be rigid in their beliefs. Nonsense. Non-liberals know that it's very seldom that one hard-and-fast rule can apply to all situations.

You ask, "...how can you have acceptable murder? In the same way that states have laws that allow the execution of criminals, exceptions to the murder laws can be made (no, fetuses are not criminals).

Non-liberals know that competing interests have to be balanced in real life. The interest of an illegal alien parent wanting to be with it's offspring needs to be balanced against society's interest in having controlled immigration, for example. The simplistic liberal mind says parent and child have the immutable right to be together so neither should be subject to the law.

Similarly, the person who believes that a fetus has the right to grow into a live baby knows that that right sometimes has to be balanced against the rights of the woman. We're not mindless automatons.

Ive seen a few responses to the op, which is appreciated. So far, they have mostly been, "because I feel bad for the woman" and "because it's a step in chipping away abortion rights".

I still don't understand how anyone who believes a fetus is a person, agrees that some women have the right to murder that person. *shurg* I think it will remain something that confuses me.

I read all of the posts in the thread up to the one I posted, and I have to say that I think your confusion is, unfortunately, part of your ideology. From reading the comments to you and your responses to them, I believe you can't grasp that people who disagree with you on the subject in general can think clearly enough to understand that no "rule" can be without exception. The typical liberal mind just can't seem to accept that.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

It doesn't sound correct because it isn't. There are no babies killed in abortion.

If that is what you need to keep telling yourself, to make yourself feel better.

It's what you guys tell yourselves as well.

No one has a funeral for a miscarriage... we dont' treat tampons as potential crime scenes.

When abortion was illegal, it wasn't because there was a concern for babies, it was because these women were offending public morality... except they never threw them in jail. Rarely threw the abortionists in jail, either.

Wow, the blatant stupidity of this post is amazing. Hard to believe anyone who could type this is smart enough to breathe.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I think i mentioned this in another thread but...

I think fathers should be able to opt out. Any unmarried woman who finds herself with child should be required to serve the prospective father with papers within her 1st trimester, asking if he wants to become a parent. He can then either step up and agree, or sever all ties to any future child. That way the mother can make an informed decision, she can either abort or go forward knowing she will be a single parent.

At what point is a baby a life? You are saying that a baby is only alive once he/she is born?

Pretty much. While it is in the womb it is alive because it is attached to another person. That is basically life support.

Strangely enough, doctors disagree with you.

 

[koshergrl]

I think i mentioned this in another thread but...

I think fathers should be able to opt out. Any unmarried woman who finds herself with child should be required to serve the prospective father with papers within her 1st trimester, asking if he wants to become a parent. He can then either step up and agree, or sever all ties to any future child. That way the mother can make an informed decision, she can either abort or go forward knowing she will be a single parent.

At what point is a baby a life? You are saying that a baby is only alive once he/she is born?

Pretty much. While it is in the womb it is alive because it is attached to another person. That is basically life support.

Men are convicted of murder for killing unborn babies all the time.

You need to educate yourself.

 

[AmyNation]

I'm afraid you display one of the flaws too typical of liberals. You say that pro-lifers should be rigid in their beliefs. Nonsense. Non-liberals know that it's very seldom that one hard-and-fast rule can apply to all situations.

You ask, "...how can you have acceptable murder? In the same way that states have laws that allow the execution of criminals, exceptions to the murder laws can be made (no, fetuses are not criminals).

Non-liberals know that competing interests have to be balanced in real life. The interest of an illegal alien parent wanting to be with it's offspring needs to be balanced against society's interest in having controlled immigration, for example. The simplistic liberal mind says parent and child have the immutable right to be together so neither should be subject to the law.

Similarly, the person who believes that a fetus has the right to grow into a live baby knows that that right sometimes has to be balanced against the rights of the woman. We're not mindless automatons.

Ive seen a few responses to the op, which is appreciated. So far, they have mostly been, "because I feel bad for the woman" and "because it's a step in chipping away abortion rights".

I still don't understand how anyone who believes a fetus is a person, agrees that some women have the right to murder that person. *shurg* I think it will remain something that confuses me.

I read all of the posts in the thread up to the one I posted, and I have to say that I think your confusion is, unfortunately, part of your ideology. From reading the comments to you and your responses to them, I believe you can't grasp that people who disagree with you on the subject in general can think clearly enough to understand that no "rule" can be without exception. The typical liberal mind just can't seem to accept that.

Or perhaps pro-life supports recognize that there is indeed a substantial difference between a fetus and a baby they just don't want to admit that they are more anti-abortion than they are pro-life.

But I understand the need to dismiss the hypocrisy as something "I just can't understand" when you fail to justify your position.