There is Everything Wrong with Abortion
LightForce

Rockford, MI

#227838 Mar 27, 2013
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
A pregnant woman can have the fetus expelled from her uterus because it's her right to do so if she chooses. End of story. And it is also a very moral decision to do so.
Your comment contradicts itself. You are stating that the self-interest of the parent is a moral thing to do, when morallity actually is when you act in the interest of others.Your idea of what is in the best interest of the child, seems to be more in the self-interest of the parent.

Judged:

17

17

17

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
LightForce

Rockford, MI

#227839 Mar 27, 2013
mamma-san wrote:
<quoted text>
No. It's not the inferiority of the child.
It's knowing that you can not or will not be the parent that born human being deserves, for the rest of it's life.
You continue to only focus on it's existence during it's first nine months, in utero. You continue to ignore the FACT that it must be supported, nurtured, fed, and loved for the next (minimum) 18 years.
You continue to ignore the fact that having a child should be a conscious choice and a decision made with forethought.
It's a CHILD. Not a truck or a bagel. People should be at least as much thought into bringing a child into the world as they do what kind of bagel to buy.
With your logic, nothing matters but that it's a human. That it is a human being is NOT enough reason to do it.
You seem like a very practical person, but if we only did what is practical we could easily discount the importance of everybody that does not serve our purpose. I could see some of your points if we were talking about a bagel, but since we are talking about a living human person and not a bagel there shouldn't be any decision involved in it. Practicality is in the eye of the beholder. For instance, the benificiary of a life insurance policy may see it as practical to kill granny. A large corporation might see it as practical to stop all help for the poor so that overall workers wages will eventually go down. If being a human being is not enough reason to live, then we could just go around arbitrarily killing anybody that we might percieve as a nuisance, or is useless to us, which coincidentally is the equivalent of what abortion usually is.
LightForce

Rockford, MI

#227840 Mar 27, 2013
NWmoon wrote:
<quoted text>Nope, it's a wad of goo that may or may not develop even if it's wanted and cherished. WAD OF GOO. Cells with no sentience or life of its own. And none of YOUR business since it is NOT your uterus, not your body and not your pregnancy.
When it is, then you can make your own decision about it, but that won't change the fact that it is just a wad of goo and potential at that stage, and not a child.
What is potential about the life of a human being? There is no such thing as a potential life. The “wad of goo” develops very quickly after conception and can soon be very easily recognized as a living, human person. This “wad of goo” angle might apply only before most women even know they are pregnant. What about the “wad of goo” that survives an abortion, are they any less of a person simply because they are unwanted by the parent? At best, your argument is illogical. The future of any of us, regardless of the stage of our physical development is not guaranteed, but neither is it inherently any less valuable than any another.

Judged:

16

15

15

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
LightForce

Rockford, MI

#227841 Mar 27, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>Laws establishing 'personhood' for fetuses, will cause great harm to women. Therefore, they will never be passed.
If they couldn't even get it done in Mississippi, don't expect it to fly in Oregon, Vermont, or any other state.
Anti-abortionists need to learn from the pro-abortion movement in that they have been able to promote the idea of killing your unborn child to the point that a large portion of society now considers it as a socially acceptable thing to do. This distorted view of morallity that is ingrained into the minds of a lot of people can only be corrected in just the same manner that Planned Parenthood and their allies were able to instill it, a little at a time – but this time simply by telling the truth instead of by deception and distortion. So what we really need to do is to just stand up and tell the emporer that he has no clothes on so-to-speak.

If we view some human life as unimportant, it will ultimately have a far greater negative affect on women than if we assume that we are all created equally, and instill that value into society. You can see the results every minute of every day of the idea that not all human life is important, but thankfully more and more people are seeing the degradation that pro-abortion ideas result in, and are finding it in their hearts to become the voice of the voiceless, and of the unwanted. We should realize that the seed we spread today is the tree that grows tommorrow.
LightForce

Rockford, MI

#227842 Mar 27, 2013
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
And you are ignoring the fact that there are several distinct differences between being a live sentient being and a cluster of newly formed cells that ARE a part of my body. There is no such thing as a preborn child. There is a fetus and then there is a child. What was expelled from my uterus was not a child. I should know because I've seen children. I know what they look like. What came out of my uterus was not a child, it was barely a fetus. And your last statement is impossible. You could say the same that it never had the choice to be evil or not evil, so that makes it evil. What an idiotic thing to say...lol.
If you kill a fetus at any point in it's development it ends the life of a person. You can't kill a POTENTIAL life, and nobody would ever have the desire to kill something that isn't there.

1. Sentience does not = person.
2. Being IN your body does not = being a Part of your body.
3. A fetus is a child. Is the survivor of an abortion any less of a child simply because they are “unwanted”? There are many “unwanted” adult people, but does that make them any less of a person?
4. Being “unwanted” does not = not being a person.
5. A preborn child is innocent in the same way that you or I may be innocent because of our ignorance.
LightForce

Rockford, MI

#227843 Mar 27, 2013
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
It becomes a person when its no longer in my body. Period. You can drone on and on all you want about this issue, but it won't be outlawed. Abortion has always happened and will always happen until the end of mankind. The government will never overturn Roe v. Wade because they understand that in doing so, more harm than good would come of that decision. For the very same reason that the 2nd amendment will never be repealed despite the loss of life. You're very naive to believe otherwise.
I'm sorry, but if I become pregnant and I decide to have another abortion for whatever reason I choose to, I will. Actually, I'm not sorry because I am the only one capable of making the best decision for me. I do not regret any decisions I've made in the past and I'm glad I was legally able to obtain a safe end to my unwanted pregnancy.
Is that the same thing as saying that it is not a person as long as it is in my house?

Despite your analogy, the second ammendment is there only to protect ourselves when our lives and freedom are in danger, and it would be opposite of the spirit of that ammendment to go around arbitrarily shooting people with the pretense that they might someday hurt you, or if they just simply get in your way.
LightForce

Rockford, MI

#227844 Mar 27, 2013
tony1003 wrote:
<quoted text>
You live in cloud cuckoo land. All you write is wrong both biologically and in law. There is no such thing as a "pre-born baby" and 12 days after conception it is called a zygote - it is not a baby/child in any form. Abortion is legal - there is nothing to "rub in".
Sentient is not something an entity chooses - it is either sentient or it is not. A foetus is not sentient, however much you wish it was. Suggest a dictionary might help you in the use of correct vocabulary.
Apparently there is a place called “Cloud Cuckoo-land” where sentience is not an option, and preborn children and zygotes go to be aborted.

You never answered the question either.

“Ignore the trolls”

Since: Oct 08

Bath, UK

#227845 Mar 28, 2013
LightForce wrote:
<quoted text>
Apparently there is a place called “Cloud Cuckoo-land” where sentience is not an option, and preborn children and zygotes go to be aborted.
You never answered the question either.
As already posted - no such thing as a pre-born child - look in any medical book and see if you can find the term. I always ignore stupid questions, especially from people clearly lacking any knowledge of either biology or the law.

Judged:

15

15

14

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Becoming a better me!”

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#227846 Mar 28, 2013
LightForce wrote:
<quoted text>
You seem like a very practical person, but if we only did what is practical we could easily discount the importance of everybody that does not serve our purpose. I could see some of your points if we were talking about a bagel, but since we are talking about a living human person and not a bagel there shouldn't be any decision involved in it. Practicality is in the eye of the beholder. For instance, the benificiary of a life insurance policy may see it as practical to kill granny. A large corporation might see it as practical to stop all help for the poor so that overall workers wages will eventually go down. If being a human being is not enough reason to live, then we could just go around arbitrarily killing anybody that we might percieve as a nuisance, or is useless to us, which coincidentally is the equivalent of what abortion usually is.
Again, you are deliberately ignoring the difference between "granny" who is a living, breathing, independent individual and a zygote small than the head of a pin that cannot be seen with the naked eye.

I am not advocating killing every human being. Read the next paragraph word for word:

I am saying that the needs and wishes of the woman who is pregnant and doesn't want to be take precedence over the z/e/f in her uterus that cannot possibly live outside of it for even a second.

Stop twisting my words and running down bunny trails.

“Becoming a better me!”

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#227847 Mar 28, 2013
LightForce wrote:
<quoted text>
If you kill a fetus at any point in it's development it ends the life of a person. You can't kill a POTENTIAL life, and nobody would ever have the desire to kill something that isn't there.
1. Sentience does not = person.
2. Being IN your body does not = being a Part of your body.
3. A fetus is a child. Is the survivor of an abortion any less of a child simply because they are “unwanted”? There are many “unwanted” adult people, but does that make them any less of a person?
4. Being “unwanted” does not = not being a person.
5. A preborn child is innocent in the same way that you or I may be innocent because of our ignorance.
2. Being IN my body DOES in fact equal being part of my body. There is an umbilical cord attached to MY body and to the body of the fetus. So long as that fetus cannot live OUTSIDE the very specific conditions of my uterus, which requires that umbilical cord, it IS a part of my body.

AND, since that fetus, if allowed to grow to full term, comes OUTSIDE my body, you are damned skippy it's part of my body. Tell any woman who's given birth that the fetus wasn't part of her body. Better yet, tell her that while she's in hard labor. I get to watch though.

3. A fetus is NOT a child. Are you a toddler? Is a teenager an infant? The United States Government defines personhood as the moment the fetus is expelled from the woman's vagina. Look it up. That's a solid fact.

4. No one here defines unwanted as not being a person. Please stop being a drama queen and work with facts here.

5. Pre-born child? Is that like "pre-dead Senior Citizen?" Puh-leeeeze.

Drama Queen antics do NOT win logical arguments.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#227848 Mar 28, 2013
LightForce wrote:
<quoted text>
Your comment contradicts itself. You are stating that the self-interest of the parent is a moral thing to do, when morallity actually is when you act in the interest of others.Your idea of what is in the best interest of the child, seems to be more in the self-interest of the parent.
The poster's comment does not contradict ITSELF - it contradicts YOUR morality. If a woman knows she cannot raise a child, it would be immoral, in my view, for her to bring it into the world to starve, or be abused, neglected, abandoned, or any of a host of other things.

But, since once the child IS born, it's 'no longer your concern', that sort of thing doesn't bother you as much, as the law allowing her to make her own decision on the matter does.

I think it's your morality that should be in question here. There are 6.79 BILLION humans in the world already. Why not try to make life better for them, rather than add to the misery by deliberately causing more of it?

Since: Sep 07

Location hidden

#227849 Mar 28, 2013
mamma-san wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, you are deliberately ignoring the difference between "granny" who is a living, breathing, independent individual and a zygote small than the head of a pin that cannot be seen with the naked eye.
I am not advocating killing every human being. Read the next paragraph word for word:
I am saying that the needs and wishes of the woman who is pregnant and doesn't want to be take precedence over the z/e/f in her uterus that cannot possibly live outside of it for even a second.
Stop twisting my words and running down bunny trails.
In other words pure selfishness on the mothers part.Why do you keep going back from zef,to baby?
Just because you didn't want your child?
You are very confused honey.

Judged:

20

20

20

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Becoming a better me!”

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#227850 Mar 28, 2013
Life is Precious wrote:
<quoted text> In other words pure selfishness on the mothers part.Why do you keep going back from zef,to baby?
Just because you didn't want your child?
You are very confused honey.
No. You are just a silly old twatwaffle who has a fascination with my uterus and the events of my life 27 years ago.

Must be that your own life is lacking that you must focus on my past.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#227852 Mar 28, 2013
Life is Precious wrote:
<quoted text> In other words pure selfishness on the mothers part.Why do you keep going back from zef,to baby?
Just because you didn't want your child?
You are very confused honey.
Selfishness is a prime result of the survival instinct.

My 'pure selfishness' saved my life. I have no regrets, shame, guilt, or bitterness about that.

Sorry if that confuses and/or frustrates you, but not very.

“Ignorance is bliss.”

Since: May 11

Hightstown, NJ

#227853 Mar 28, 2013
LightForce wrote:
<quoted text>
Your comment contradicts itself. You are stating that the self-interest of the parent is a moral thing to do, when morallity actually is when you act in the interest of others.Your idea of what is in the best interest of the child, seems to be more in the self-interest of the parent.
No, my comment doesn't contradict itself because a pregnant woman is not a parent. She would be a parent-to-be. And either way, the best interest of the mother is almost always considered over the fetus. If a pregnant woman is dying, they do their best to save her life first and foremost. Then if they can save the fetus, great. If not, the woman lives.

“Ignorance is bliss.”

Since: May 11

Hightstown, NJ

#227854 Mar 28, 2013
LightForce wrote:
<quoted text>
Anti-abortionists need to learn from the pro-abortion movement in that they have been able to promote the idea of killing your unborn child to the point that a large portion of society now considers it as a socially acceptable thing to do. This distorted view of morallity that is ingrained into the minds of a lot of people can only be corrected in just the same manner that Planned Parenthood and their allies were able to instill it, a little at a time – but this time simply by telling the truth instead of by deception and distortion. So what we really need to do is to just stand up and tell the emporer that he has no clothes on so-to-speak.
If we view some human life as unimportant, it will ultimately have a far greater negative affect on women than if we assume that we are all created equally, and instill that value into society. You can see the results every minute of every day of the idea that not all human life is important, but thankfully more and more people are seeing the degradation that pro-abortion ideas result in, and are finding it in their hearts to become the voice of the voiceless, and of the unwanted. We should realize that the seed we spread today is the tree that grows tommorrow.
There is no pro-abortion movement. I dare you to try and prove there is.

“Ignorance is bliss.”

Since: May 11

Hightstown, NJ

#227855 Mar 28, 2013
LightForce wrote:
<quoted text>
If you kill a fetus at any point in it's development it ends the life of a person. You can't kill a POTENTIAL life, and nobody would ever have the desire to kill something that isn't there.
1. Sentience does not = person.
2. Being IN your body does not = being a Part of your body.
3. A fetus is a child. Is the survivor of an abortion any less of a child simply because they are “unwanted”? There are many “unwanted” adult people, but does that make them any less of a person?
4. Being “unwanted” does not = not being a person.
5. A preborn child is innocent in the same way that you or I may be innocent because of our ignorance.
That you consider a 6-wk-old fetus a person in your opinion. It is not a person. People have certain qualities that a piece of flesh within a uterus does not have. You still choose to ignore there are vast differences between a fetus in the early stages of pregnancy and an actual child. A fetus is not a child. It most certainly is potential life because it is not alive. Sentience is one of the defining qualities of a person. Just one, not the only.

You keep using the argument of late-term pregnancies to bolster your argument because you know there is a big difference between being two months pregnant and 7 months pregnant. Not one person on this thread advocates late-term abortion, so your argument is null and void. An unwanted pregnancy is the early stages is perfectly acceptable.

A fetus is not capable of innocence. It is not innocent or malevolent. Saying it is doesn't make it so. Something would have to have a brain and the capability to be either to be defined one way or another.

Judged:

30

30

30

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Ignorance is bliss.”

Since: May 11

Hightstown, NJ

#227856 Mar 28, 2013
LightForce wrote:
<quoted text>
Is that the same thing as saying that it is not a person as long as it is in my house?
Despite your analogy, the second ammendment is there only to protect ourselves when our lives and freedom are in danger, and it would be opposite of the spirit of that ammendment to go around arbitrarily shooting people with the pretense that they might someday hurt you, or if they just simply get in your way.
Last time I checked, my house was not a person. You people always resort to these absurd idiotic analogies because you know your argument doesn't hold water. My body is mine. I can choose to share it with whomever and whatever I choose. If I decide I don't want to use my body to grow a child, I won't. It is also my right while I'm pregnant to smoke, drink, use drugs and eat bad foods. If I am pregnant and walking down the street with a cigarette, I cannot be arrested. Because it is MY body. The fetus inside does not have rights.

The second amendment is up for interpretation. Either way, the constitution guarantees my right to an abortion if I so choose to have one. I have the right to protect myself, my body, my future and have an abortion for any other reason I see fit.

Judged:

30

30

28

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Ignorance is bliss.”

Since: May 11

Hightstown, NJ

#227857 Mar 28, 2013
Life is Precious wrote:
<quoted text> In other words pure selfishness on the mothers part.Why do you keep going back from zef,to baby?
Just because you didn't want your child?
You are very confused honey.
You can call having abortion anything you want. Either way, a woman still has the right to have one.

There are lots of women who don't want their children. There are some women who give birth and still don't want their children.

Judged:

29

29

27

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“IMAGINE no religion!”

Since: Feb 09

usa

#227858 Mar 28, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>Fundies eventually get to the threats.
Always.
^5

this one in particular is vile and nasty.

who gave birth to a daughter and beat her so badly, the child is brain dead, but 35 yrs old and on life support.

Judged:

28

28

28

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 12 min Slaughterhouse 100,537
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 1 hr Sky Writer 31 184,288
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 2 hr guest 670,351
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 4 hr another viewer 980,168
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 4 hr Jehowa Witness 46,179
Treating others with respect 5 hr UnderstandPeople 14
Do any attractive cougars or milfs want to trad... (Dec '11) 7 hr Seejay 4
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 19 hr Pegasus 286,455
More from around the web