The Great Abortion Compromise!

[Bonnie]

If you insist on assuming that all pro-lifers are extremists and formulate your defense to counter them, you appear dishonest to those who will accept abortion as a procedure to be used only to protect the life of another. Hardliners are much more rare than you think. Pro-lifers are generally in favor of anything that will prevent an unwanted pregnancy and most all forms of birth control.

Thank you

 

[Bonnie]

Gem I recognize your being pro-choice, which I disagree with. However, you are the first I've seen actually address what MRI, ultrasound are showing; that the 'foetus' is much more human like than most pro-choice wish to acknowledge.

Kind of reminds me of the end of life, let's say someone's beloved mother. While illness and age have ravaged her body, weight is under 70 pounds. Do you stop encouraging her to eat? Remember, the assumption is this is someone you love, that in the mental areas is within acceptable parameters and not in great pain. (Not going to those issues)

See, a 3 or 5 month old cells in utero is really basically complete, other than for 5-7 pounds.

Absolutely, and Im soo tired of the semantics argument when is life "viable"...... All life is viable

 

[MissileMan]

Its an interesting point. I suppose I could argue that a human can continue to grow and develop if they are "brain dead" which is why the medical community makes the distinction between brain dead and just plain dead in the first place.

No, the determination of dead in the medical community is brain dead, not plain dead.

 

[Annie]

Absolutely, and Im soo tired of the semantics argument when is life "viable"...... All life is viable

With the right care, I agree. A 5 month old fetus is not 'viable' via birth, whether natural or abortion. However, I believe that those under a pound, in 6-7 month have survived.

So how then is abortion justified? Why would it be ok to kill a 5 month gestation, simply because it hasn't attained the weight?

I'm not saying it wouldn't be a 'hardship' on the one with a uterus, but sheesh, a few months and the bearer could turn it over to someone willing to nurture and love it.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

I think that both sides will attempt to capitalize on any bit of information they can that helps their side. A pro-lifer will show pictures of fetuses yawning and smiling and hiccupping in the womb at amazingly early stages of development as proof that abortion is murder while a pro-choicer will tell tales of woman brutalized or woman carrying children that might kill them as proof of why abortion is needed.

It does not change however, the fact that a new life begins when a sperm cell fertilizes an egg cell and that newly created zygote begins to develop. As I stated before - it is, in my opinion, the obvious biological beginning to human life. There is nothing political, nothing religious, nothing pro-life or pro-choice about that fact. It is simply where all humans begin biologically. An entirely new entity created from one man and one woman.

I do not think we should hide from facts because they might give ammunition to a "side" we oppose.

There is nothing weaker about the argument that abortion is stopping a human's development in its earliest stages but that is sometimes necessary than the arguement that it isn't killing anything at all until that magical point where we decide a fetus is worthy of being called a baby so we should be able to abort the fetus at any point for any reason up until that magical point.

In fact, I feel that by honestly answering these types of questions - without hiding from the uncomfortable answers or taking a harder line because we are afraid of extremists - we can come closer to an honest, albeit difficult middle ground.

It is refreshing to hear someone who is willing to be honest about the facts. However, I'd like to know how you justify your argument for abortion now that you admit that pro-choice means the deliberate killing of a person. Are you saying that some people have no right to life? Or that the "right to privacy" means killing someone is a private matter? Or is the deliberate killing of innocent life a subjective value, subject to the whims of those in power?

What do you mean by "middle ground"?

 

[Dr Grump]

It boils down to destroying human life for no reason other than selfish convenience. Spells "murder" in MY book.

And you are certainly entitled to that opinion.....

 

[Dr Grump]

Pro-lifers are generally in favor of anything that will prevent an unwanted pregnancy and most all forms of birth control.

Cool. So you are in favour of condoms being distributed to 16 and 17 year olds at high school. Excellent. Because whether you like it or not, millions of children/kidults - whatever you want to call them - are going to have sex at that age. And unless you want to live in a Hitlerian state, that is NEVER going to change. So draw your line in the sand. I'll give you your "at the moment of concpetion it becomes a human" if you give me "I'll allow my 16 year old daughter to take the pill/my 16 year old son to buy condoms"...Deal?

 

[MissileMan]

It is refreshing to hear someone who is willing to be honest about the facts. However, I'd like to know how you justify your argument for abortion now that you admit that pro-choice means the deliberate killing of a person. Are you saying that some people have no right to life? Or that the "right to privacy" means killing someone is a private matter? Or is the deliberate killing of innocent life a subjective value, subject to the whims of those in power?

What do you mean by "middle ground"?

From what I read in her post, if the Pro-life position were Washington DC and Pro-choice were L.A., her idea of middle ground is the White House.

 

[dilloduck]

Cool. So you are in favour of condoms being distributed to 16 and 17 year olds at high school. Excellent. Because whether you like it or not, millions of children/kidults - whatever you want to call them - are going to have sex at that age. And unless you want to live in a Hitlerian state, that is NEVER going to change. So draw your line in the sand. I'll give you your "at the moment of concpetion it becomes a human" if you give me "I'll allow my 16 year old daughter to take the pill/my 16 year old son to buy condoms"...Deal?

Only if you agree to cease all abortions other than those done to save the life of the mother, and PROVEN rape or incest cases.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Only if you agree to cease all abortions other than those done to save the life of the mother, and PROVEN rape or incest cases.

Heck by the time such cases are proven the baby is already born and crawling around in diapers.

It is awful for a woman to be raped but it is also awful to deliberately kill an innocent child no matter how he came to be in this world. Nine months and it's over for the woman if she chooses to adopt out the child. The rapist however should get a life sentence - with no parole!

If women were forced to have the child I believe our society would get far more SERIOUS about the crime of rape. Women and their families would be screaming bloody murder about it instead of quietly driving over to the abortion clinic. I believe we could essentially eradicate the crime. Why compound one crime with another? The liberal position of being soft on crime goes hand-in-hand with abortion.

 

[Dr Grump]

Only if you agree to cease all abortions other than those done to save the life of the mother, and PROVEN rape or incest cases.

Deal...

 

[Dr Grump]

If women were forced to have the child I believe our society would get far more SERIOUS about the crime of rape.

Spoken like somebody who will never have to deal with those consequences...

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Spoken like somebody who will never have to deal with those consequences...

That's the typical liberal sob sister response. The truth of the matter is that it would be an effective way to deal with the problem of rape. The liberal "method" only follows up a rape with a murder. A fool's game.

You can bet our culture would change very quickly after a few women have to bear the child. Word would get out real quick and the number of rapes would decline dramatically. Both men and women would be more careful.

I would also like to see the key thrown away for child predators as well - on the first offense. This is the best way to protect our women and children - NO TOLERANCE WHATSOEVER for these crimes.

 

[jillian]

That's the typical liberal sob sister response. The truth of the matter is that it would be an effective way to deal with the problem of rape. The liberal "method" only follows up a rape with a murder. A fool's game.

You can bet our culture would change very quickly after a few women have to bear the child. Word would get out real quick and the number of rapes would decline dramatically. Both men and women would be more careful.

I would also like to see the key thrown away for child predators as well - on the first offense. This is the best way to protect our women and children - NO TOLERANCE WHATSOEVER for these crimes.

What a bunch of garbage. So now women are responsible for being raped and should be more careful?

Damn.... you think forcing women to bear children conceived in rape will have a deterrent effect on MEN raping women?

Astounding

 

[ScreamingEagle]

What a bunch of garbage. So now women are responsible for being raped and should be more careful?

Damn.... you think forcing women to bear children conceived in rape will have a deterrent effect on MEN raping women?

Astounding

I believe you underestimate women and their ability to change society. However, as I've already mentioned, the two ideas - abortion and softness on crime - go together in the liberal world. In the conservative world - no abortion and intolerance of crime - would go together.

Of the two worlds, which one protects women and children more?

 

[Dr Grump]

That's the typical liberal sob sister response. The truth of the matter is that it would be an effective way to deal with the problem of rape. The liberal "method" only follows up a rape with a murder. A fool's game.

You can bet our culture would change very quickly after a few women have to bear the child. Word would get out real quick and the number of rapes would decline dramatically. Both men and women would be more careful.

I would also like to see the key thrown away for child predators as well - on the first offense. This is the best way to protect our women and children - NO TOLERANCE WHATSOEVER for these crimes.

Are you freaking serious? Men will stop raping if women get pregnant during the rape and have to have the kid?

And who has ANY tolerance for these crimes?

Your answer to rape is bordering on sick IMO...

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Are you freaking serious? Men will stop raping if women get pregnant during the rape and have to have the kid?

And who has ANY tolerance for these crimes?

Your answer to rape is bordering on sick IMO...

Before Roe v. Wade existed this was how our society operated....not sick at all. Rape was rare.

 

[jillian]

Before Roe v. Wade existed this was how our society operated....not sick at all. Rape was rare.

Rape wasn't rare. Women's willingness to report it was because they were humiliated in Court by dumbfucks who decided that what they wore "caused" them to be raped and they became victims. It's taken decades for that attitude to change and you want to return things to the stone age. Sick.

And just to clarify, women DID have abortions... they just died during them an awful lot. Guess that's ok, too. Huh?

 

[Dr Grump]

Before Roe v. Wade existed this was how our society operated....not sick at all. Rape was rare.

You don't know anythign about the criminal mind do you? So, as soon as Roe vs Wade was passed all these sickos decided "Hey, i can go and rape with impunity now"? They are not even connected in the slightest way. Go ask a rapist if he even considers that aspect when he rapes. Rapists do it for power and personal gratification, nothing else...

 

[jillian]

You don't know anythign about the criminal mind do you? So, as soon as Roe vs Wade was passed all these sickos decided "Hey, i can go and rape with impunity now"? They are not even connected in the slightest way. Go ask a rapist if he even considers that aspect when he rapes. Rapists do it for power and personal gratification, nothing else...

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Dr Grump again.