The abortion debate

[Hawk]

Abortion is not a choice,but it is a murder of the first degree.

'Murder in the first degree' is legal parlance. As of this post, your calims are not truthful or accurate.

Abortion is homicide. Homicide and murder are not equivalent terms. Educate yourself before posting again

Are you a lawyer? As far as I know, If I kill my neighbor it's murder. So if you kill an unborn child, it's also murder. Why the **** you gotta play word games with a new member? Gettin' a kick out of it, or because you just want to give a pro lifer some shit?

Abortion is murder and there is no doubts.Besides,saying abortion is a violent crime,it is a vile deadly sin against God Who made us.God hates abortions and all the unrepented workers of iniquity who dare to commit such evil things before Him.Psalm 5:4-5.God deals angry with unrepented sinners every day.Psalm 7:11.

 

[renoite]

its worng and the way i see it it is a choice to take that unborn child's life anyway you look at

 

[jblue1978]

Seriously, why is this even a discussion? Any God fearing person knows that it's murder... Oh, I forgot, America is phasing out God because now MAN has all the answers. Wow, I feel smarter already reading this thread... I think I'm gonna kill my mother now and think nothing of it... You must be out of your ******* minds here! The only reason you are able to be here is because you mother didn't decide to KILL YOU!... But I guess from what you are saying, she sure had the right to make you a bloody mush bag in the trash... Get some ******* value for LIFE man..... It just shows how much you like your own life, and it probably SUCKS!!

 

[renoite]

Jesus seems to have elevated "hurting a child" to an all new level ---of heinous crimes...

This molesting or murdering of children surely carries over to those who assist in hurting children; they can't escape the culpability. Like so-called "doctors", "nurses" and others involved in this wide scale abortion crime. Speaking of hurting children, Jesus said,

Luke 17:1-2



look up what your doing ijust did it should make you cry have some feeling that your doing this to a baby or thinking its your right what about that babyies right what kind of people are you to think its ok i know what kind of person i am and that person is not harming any child rather its born or not a baby yet it is a baby maybe not the baby dont have hands yet but he will and notice i didnt say thing or it cause the baby is just that a baby

 

[jblue1978]

OMFG..... that was the best argument I have ever read.....! WOW..... Getting smarter, let me tell ya

 

[renoite]

uction Aspiration: The cervix is the donut shaped organ at the entrance of the uterus that holds the baby inside during pregnancy. The doctor will force open the cervix (dilation), and then insert a hollow plastic tube with a knife-like edge into the uterus. The abortionist then scrapes the uterus with this tube, and the unborn child is sucked out by a machine attached to the other end of the tube. Great care must be taken to prevent the uterus from being perforated or torn during this abortion procedure.

Dilation and Curettage or D & C: This abortion is similar to the suction aspiration method except that a curette (loop-shaped steel knife) is used instead of a plastic tube. The unborn child is scraped out instead of sucked out.

Dilation and Evacuation or D & E: This abortion is the same as a dilation and curettage but done after 12 weeks. The unborn child is torn apart, and the pieces are pulled out using a forceps. The fetal head must be crushed in order to pass through the cervix.

The final step of the above abortion methods is for the nurse to reassemble the parts of the fetus on a table to make sure that all of the products of conception have been removed. If any body parts or fragments of the placenta are left inside the woman, she is likely to develop a serious infection.

and this is ok

 

[renoite]

Salt Poisoning or Saline Abortion: A concentrated salt solution is injected into the amniotic fluid through the mother's abdominal wall. It takes about an hour for the unborn child to die after his skin has been chemically burned and after swallowing and breathing the salt solution. The mother delivers a dead or dying child about 24 hours later. This method is dangerous and is rarely performed any more.

Partial Birth Abortion (D & X): The mother is given drugs to induce labor. The abortionist turns the unborn child so that it comes down the birth canal feet first. When all but the head is delivered, the abortionist plunges a scissors or similar instrument into the back of the neck at the base of the skull, inserts a tube, then sucks out the child's brain to collapse the skull, all with no anesthesia, then completes the delivery of the deceased baby.


Mifepristone (formerly RU-486) sometimes called The Abortion Pill: First a steroid drug is taken orally which either destroys the placenta or prevents it from being formed. Then a prostaglandin drug is taken to induce the uterus to contract and vaginally deliver the unborn child, who is too young and too small to survive. This combination is called the Abortion Pill.

see it says the baby is to young and small to live outside of his mother it doesnt say its not a baby

 

[jblue1978]

uction Aspiration: The cervix is the donut shaped organ at the entrance of the uterus that holds the baby inside during pregnancy. The doctor will force open the cervix (dilation), and then insert a hollow plastic tube with a knife-like edge into the uterus. The abortionist then scrapes the uterus with this tube, and the unborn child is sucked out by a machine attached to the other end of the tube. Great care must be taken to prevent the uterus from being perforated or torn during this abortion procedure.

Dilation and Curettage or D & C: This abortion is similar to the suction aspiration method except that a curette (loop-shaped steel knife) is used instead of a plastic tube. The unborn child is scraped out instead of sucked out.

Dilation and Evacuation or D & E: This abortion is the same as a dilation and curettage but done after 12 weeks. The unborn child is torn apart, and the pieces are pulled out using a forceps. The fetal head must be crushed in order to pass through the cervix.

The final step of the above abortion methods is for the nurse to reassemble the parts of the fetus on a table to make sure that all of the products of conception have been removed. If any body parts or fragments of the placenta are left inside the woman, she is likely to develop a serious infection.

and this is ok
Reply With Quote

wow.... now that sounds like fun..... I think I EVERY woman should go whoring around, get pregnate, then have that done on a wkly basis.... Since it's all good with everyone... Plus, I have to pay for it out of my taxes because statistics show that it's mostly the DIRTBAGS with no ******* life getting this done... Where the hell do they sign up? Hell I think we should PROMOTE IT!!!

Anyone that supports this ought to have their head SMASHED so we can fit it through a ******* tube leading to a trash can...

 

[renoite]

thats right dont every woman want to do this to there child

 

[DavidS]

Abortion is not a choice,but it is a murder of the first degree.God gave us no rights to take away innocent human life.

Define "human life."

Every jerked off, Hawk? All those little sperm... oh, goobye human life. So long. So sorry that that the owner of your little spermies decided he needed to sit down, watch some porn of some lesbian cheerleading sisters havin' a grand ol' time and decided to KILL millions of potential human lives just like that. So sorry.

 

[renoite]

your telling me killing a child unborn or not is ok i just so many videos and pictures google it and see if its ok


pulling legs and arms and smashed them in to a jar is that ok to you what kind of human are you to think its ok understand i said think because its not ok i saw a video just now and i cryed said thats not ok to do that to a human life how can you not think its not ok anyone with a human heart cant look at that and not cry and not think its not ok i just dont understand how somone can think in such a evil way you made a choice to lay in a bed and have sex knowing you can get pg. so why all the harm to a unborn child when that child had no say the baby is saying


HELP ME why are you doing this what did i do so worng dont you love me that hurts mommy why are you doing this

why harm a child i mean no reason to you say its up to the woman its up them to choose rather or not to kill a child or keep him/her why can that child have a voice
if they did and said why are you killing us it hurts stop it... would you then stop or keep on doing it or agreeing to it I love children and if i get pg you can know that child is going to live im going to see that smile frist laugh frist step teach him/her to ride a bike and kiss that knee when he/her falls down and be there at prome and there wedding im not taking away that right from that baby so what gives you the right to take that right away

 

[JBeukema]

[

Abortion is a crime.

That's not true. Some abortions are crimes, but not all. Learn what the **** you're talking about or shut the **** up.

If a woman is pregnant and she doesn't want her child,she must to turn her infant to orphanage from which the child will be adopted to good caring hands.

Not true. there is no law or even social pressure stating she must. Again, learn what the **** you're talking about or shut the **** up.

Are you a lawyer? As far as I know, If I kill my neighbor it's murder.

How does it feel to be so stupid? Or maybe you''re just trolling again. Either way, shut the **** up. Killing your neighbor =/= murder. They are not equivalent terms. In some instances, homicide is murder by law. In others, such as self-defense, accidental deaths, or certain other extenuating circumstances, homicide is deemed justifiable and not murder. In other instances, unjustifiable homicide is deemed manslaughter. You don't know what you're talking about, so kindly shut your trap while the smart people discuss the matter at hand.

So if you kill an unborn child, it's also murder.

Legally, that's not necessarily true. If you intend to argue that it should be deemed murder, and seek to use the term in that sense, then you must present your argument and make a clear distinction between the different uses of the term.

Why the **** you gotta play word games with a new member? Gettin' a kick out of it,

It's not word games, you moron/ Semantics are extremely important when discussing this matter.

or because you just want to give a pro lifer some shit?

You're a ******* moron. My position regarding this matter is well-known

it is a vile deadly sin against God Who made us.

Demonstrate the following:
YOUR GOD EXISTS
'sin' exists
'sin' can be deadly
abortion is a deadly sin

Until then , stfu

Seriously, why is this even a discussion? Any God fearing person knows that it's murder...

Troll or religious moron- either way, shut the **** up

Where'd all the trolls come from?

I'm curious about their IPs and whether USMB uses proxy protection (i doubt it)

thats right dont every woman want to do this to there child

SHUT THE **** UP OR POST IN ******* ENGLISH! STUPID IS NOT AN ACCEPTABLE DIALECT IN WHICH TO POST!

Define "human life."

In the strictest sense, human life is that which is both alive and genetically human. However, I think everyone here with a brainn will agree that we are actually speaking of '"a"' human life'- or a living human- that which is a separate and distinct organism, alive and genetically human. Unless specified otherwise, I will generally use 'human life' in this sense. Unless otherwise stated, I will assume others are using the term the same way.

Every jerked off, Hawk? All those little sperm... oh, goobye human life

Surely you agree that 'human life' ion the strictest sense is not at issue. Your arm is 'human' and the cells are alive- but you may do to your own body what you wish. Only a human life- as described above- is relevant to the discussion

So long. So sorry that that the owner of your little spermies decided he needed to sit down, watch some porn of some lesbian cheerleading sisters havin' a grand ol' time and decided to KILL millions of potential human lives just like that. So sorry.

Something is human or not human. there's no such thing as 'potential' in the sense you use it. Technically, every oxygen molecule could become part of a living human being. that means nothing, however. A human being comes into existence when the germ cells merge to form a new distinct organism with a complete* genome. At that point, and never before, can you point to anything and say with any honesty credibility 'this is a distinct organism (regardless of whteher it is involved in a parasitic relationship with another organism) and it is genetically human and it is alive- therefore it is a human life (again, as calrified above).

*'whole or functioning, for want of a better term. In no way am I implying that those with genetic defects, who lack any gene, or not human

 

[Hawk]

I feel sorry for abortion doctor George Tiller,but he got what he deserves.The price for huge sin is death.Thou you shall not kill.The children are pure as a clean christal before The Lord especially the preborn.George Tiller is now in Hell.Eternity is left.To deluded women and radical feminists.You must repent and seek Jesus into your lives,or otherwise you will spend your eternity in Hell for your rebelion against God.Remember that God is not mocked,Galatians 6:7.

 

[Pyrite]

Surely you agree that 'human life' ion the strictest sense is not at issue. Your arm is 'human' and the cells are alive- but you may do to your own body what you wish. Only a human life- as described above- is relevant to the discussion

So long. So sorry that that the owner of your little spermies decided he needed to sit down, watch some porn of some lesbian cheerleading sisters havin' a grand ol' time and decided to KILL millions of potential human lives just like that. So sorry.

Something is human or not human. there's no such thing as 'potential' in the sense you use it. Technically, every oxygen molecule could become part of a living human being. that means nothing, however. A human being comes into existence when the germ cells merge to form a new distinct organism with a complete* genome. At that point, and never before, can you point to anything and say with any honesty credibility 'this is a distinct organism (regardless of whteher it is involved in a parasitic relationship with another organism) and it is genetically human and it is alive- therefore it is a human life (again, as calrified above).

*'whole or functioning, for want of a better term. In no way am I implying that those with genetic defects, who lack any gene, or not human

See, to me it's whether something is a "person" that matters more than it's genome. A human body born with only enough of a brain to keep it's blood flowing would not, to me, be a person, and would be disposable, as a first-trimester fetus is.

 

[JBeukema]

See, to me it's whether something is a "person" that matters more than it's genome.

Define 'person'. Explain how to identify 'personhood'. Is it human life or 'personhood' that must be defended? Why? Does the destruction of one 'personhood' as another forms (the changing nature of a man's character and mental makeup, for instance) constitute death and a new birth of a new 'person'? If so, can the latter be held responsible for the latter? How can we determine whether we are dealing with the same 'person'? Is treating DID (formerly known as MPD) murder, as it destroys one or more 'personhoods'? Since the brain does not develop into any sense of 'maturity' or to anything one can call 'full development' into the late teens and young infants seem to have little ability for 'higher' thought or intelligence as it comes to form, are they not 'people'? Just how much 'intelligence' grants person hood and how is it to be measured? Does sentience or intelligence define 'personhood'? If the former, then why are other species not granted suffrage? If the former, then i repeat my question from earlier and ask whether those of lower intelligence should be euthanized or denied equal protection/rights. You do realize that to admit something is alive and human, and then determine which humans lives are worthy of life is eugenics, correct? What is your eugenic philosophy? How do you determine what humans are worthy of life and which are not? By what reason does ending the life of a growing child for one's own convenience justifiable and at what point and by what reasoning does it cease to be so?

 

[KittenKoder]

I feel sorry for abortion doctor George Tiller,but he got what he deserves.The price for huge sin is death.Thou you shall not kill.The children are pure as a clean christal before The Lord especially the preborn.George Tiller is now in Hell.Eternity is left.To deluded women and radical feminists.You must repent and seek Jesus into your lives,or otherwise you will spend your eternity in Hell for your rebelion against God.Remember that God is not mocked,Galatians 6:7.

... and yet according to that same book you are suppose to stone the innocent children to death when they sass their parents ... even if they don't know the difference.

 

[Pyrite]

See, to me it's whether something is a "person" that matters more than it's genome.

Define 'person'. Explain how to identify 'personhood'. Is it human life or 'personhood' that must be defended? Why? Does the destruction of one 'personhood' as another forms (the changing nature of a man's character and mental makeup, for instance) constitute death and a new birth of a new 'person'? If so, can the latter be held responsible for the latter? How can we determine whether we are dealing with the same 'person'? Is treating DID (formerly known as MPD) murder, as it destroys one or more 'personhoods'? Since the brain does not develop into any sense of 'maturity' or to anything one can call 'full development' into the late teens and young infants seem to have little ability for 'higher' thought or intelligence as it comes to form, are they not 'people'? Just how much 'intelligence' grants person hood and how is it to be measured? Does sentience or intelligence define 'personhood'? If the former, then why are other species not granted suffrage? If the former, then i repeat my question from earlier and ask whether those of lower intelligence should be euthanized or denied equal protection/rights. You do realize that to admit something is alive and human, and then determine which humans lives are worthy of life is eugenics, correct? What is your eugenic philosophy? How do you determine what humans are worthy of life and which are not? By what reason does ending the life of a growing child for one's own convenience justifiable and at what point and by what reasoning does it cease to be so?

Is a tumor, which is human flesh with a different genetic code from it's host body, a "human life", and thus should be protected?


I'm not talking about intelligence, but about abstract thoughts and ideas, as you refer to it, sentience. If a thing is not sentient, even a human body, then it is not a person, and is no more important than any other collection of cells.

Ending the life of a first trimester fetus, which is not yet a person, is justifiable at any point at which the potential mother no longer wishes to carry it. It is a clump of cells, not a person, and thus deserves no special consideration.

The potential for future personhood of a fetus is only slightly more than the potential for future personhood contained in your sperm and in the nearest woman to you's eggs. If potential for personhood must be allowed in all cases to become a person, then you would be morally obligated, by force, if necessary, to impregnante as many women as possible, so that none of your sperm, or their eggs, would be wasted.

 

[renoite]

Oh your big on the english yourself **** this **** that wow....... talk about being smart of the conversation the topic at hand is aborting and killing little babyies and what would you know about it anyways being a male..... do you want to bash me some more about nothing or talk about the topic your choice

 

[renoite]

Rather its only enough brain to keep blood flow well it has a brian and blood flow so what do you call that. and it would have more to the baby if you didnt abort him/her

 

[code1211]

See, to me it's whether something is a "person" that matters more than it's genome.

Define 'person'. Explain how to identify 'personhood'. Is it human life or 'personhood' that must be defended? Why? Does the destruction of one 'personhood' as another forms (the changing nature of a man's character and mental makeup, for instance) constitute death and a new birth of a new 'person'? If so, can the latter be held responsible for the latter? How can we determine whether we are dealing with the same 'person'? Is treating DID (formerly known as MPD) murder, as it destroys one or more 'personhoods'? Since the brain does not develop into any sense of 'maturity' or to anything one can call 'full development' into the late teens and young infants seem to have little ability for 'higher' thought or intelligence as it comes to form, are they not 'people'? Just how much 'intelligence' grants person hood and how is it to be measured? Does sentience or intelligence define 'personhood'? If the former, then why are other species not granted suffrage? If the former, then i repeat my question from earlier and ask whether those of lower intelligence should be euthanized or denied equal protection/rights. You do realize that to admit something is alive and human, and then determine which humans lives are worthy of life is eugenics, correct? What is your eugenic philosophy? How do you determine what humans are worthy of life and which are not? By what reason does ending the life of a growing child for one's own convenience justifiable and at what point and by what reasoning does it cease to be so?

Is a tumor, which is human flesh with a different genetic code from it's host body, a "human life", and thus should be protected?


I'm not talking about intelligence, but about abstract thoughts and ideas, as you refer to it, sentience. If a thing is not sentient, even a human body, then it is not a person, and is no more important than any other collection of cells.

Ending the life of a first trimester fetus, which is not yet a person, is justifiable at any point at which the potential mother no longer wishes to carry it. It is a clump of cells, not a person, and thus deserves no special consideration.

The potential for future personhood of a fetus is only slightly more than the potential for future personhood contained in your sperm and in the nearest woman to you's eggs. If potential for personhood must be allowed in all cases to become a person, then you would be morally obligated, by force, if necessary, to impregnante as many women as possible, so that none of your sperm, or their eggs, would be wasted.

The potential for personhood is immeasurably greater than the separted sperm and egg. The separated sperm and egg will never, ever, ever become a person. If they would, men would be giving birth with some frequency.

They don't. Your case is empty.

Regarding the quality of thought: I know that dogs and cats dream as I've seen them trying to run while asleep, snorting or moaning. People also dream. When people sleep, they are not planning on a conscious level or when in a coma or when unconscious.

Are these not conscious folks also candidates for abortion?

Any response to this is a rationalization. A human life is percolating in the womb. Abortion is an act of convenience and that is why the law is in force. The is no moral justification for abortion. It's simply too inconvenient to not do it for those who choose to do it.