There is Everything Wrong with Abortion

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

#230500 May 20, 2013
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> Haven't asked in a while. Was thinking about it but had a flashback. I work with men many of whom pay child support and have to deal with ex's and children and all the problems associated. The long hours they have to work and the pressure they endure.
<quoted text> Glad its working out for you and hubby.
<quoted text> Women and the police. I am not, i repeat not going to get stuck paying child support for the next 20 years to some female. Let some other jerk off knock her up and pay her bills for her.
So maybe you just need to meet the right guy...

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

#230501 May 20, 2013
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> In biblical context a lot of these things we bring on ourselves because of disobedience. Deut. 28 is divided into two categories of blessings and curses. Sickness, enslavement, and general misery passed down to children is in the curses section. What you are defining above could be the result of legal abortion unless you assume these conditions were around for all of human history. You would have to prove that. Obedience brings blessings which includes healthy children. These are not absolutes but themes. Anytime a culture breaks the laws of God like ours does then there are negative consequences which follow and when the offenses reach a certain level there is judgement. Like most non believers you blame God for things we bring on ourselves. Now you do not have to believe it to understand it. I think that is the reason many oppose abortion as practiced. We are called to be a voice for the helpless and to attempt to hold back judgement by resisting evil. Legal abortion as practiced is clearly evil and will bring consequences.
Hey, just look at what happened today in Oklahoma City as a result of all the abortions performed there...

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

#230502 May 20, 2013
LightForce wrote:
<quoted text>
Why is wife beating wrong and abortion OK?
Wife beating harms a human being. Abortion doesn't.

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

#230503 May 20, 2013
wihangam wrote:
<quoted text>Article 4.1 of American Convention of Human Rights states that "Every person has the right to have his life respected. This right shall be protected by law and, in general, from the moment of conception”.
Unborn Victims of Violence Act recognizes an assault on a pregnant woman to be an assault against two lives. Apart from this, unborn children may be bequeathed property.
So, it is incorrect to say that fetuses have no rights till they are born.
#1 The United States of America has not ratified that convention. All the nations that signed are south of our borders.

#2 By having an abortion, the woman is permitting the fetus to exercise its "right" to freedom of movement under Article 22.

#3 Non-persons do not have rights. Ink on paper cannot magically transform a non-person into a person.

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

#230504 May 20, 2013
Jenji wrote:
I will put in my two cents worth this way... an ounce of prevention, is worth a pound of cure! When I started having sex as a tween I had one prego scare and that's all it took! I went to mom and dad, they took me in and I got an IUC implant. I didn't want a baby, and I would never have got an abortion, so I thought it through for all of about 10 seconds and then went and got a preventive fix offered by modern medical science! I have zero sympathy for "accidentally pregnant" girls.
Zero sympathy? Zero brains.

Sex as a tween? Where were your parents? Didn't they teach you anything? Like the fact that ALL forms of birth control can and do fail?

Frankly, I'd be very surprised if you ever thought of ANYTHING for an entire 10 seconds...

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#230506 May 20, 2013
Liam R wrote:
<quoted text>
Zero sympathy? Zero brains.
Sex as a tween? Where were your parents? Didn't they teach you anything? Like the fact that ALL forms of birth control can and do fail?
Frankly, I'd be very surprised if you ever thought of ANYTHING for an entire 10 seconds...
Well said.
The Advocate

Mexico, Mexico

#230509 May 20, 2013
LightForce wrote:
<quoted text>
Why is wife beating wrong and abortion OK?
Explain again WHY you think it's ok to abuse your spouse...

You're disgusting...

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#230510 May 20, 2013
Liam R wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey, just look at what happened today in Oklahoma City as a result of all the abortions performed there...
Tornadoes seem to have a hard-on for places like churches, schools, and trailer parks....we lost 57 Oklahomans today, and almost half of them were elementary schoolkids.

But god sees the fall of every sparrow...and their parents' pain is just part of the vast eternal plan.

Those kids must have been horrible sinners, huh??

“What is it”

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#230511 May 20, 2013
mamma-san wrote:
<quoted text>You need to do some research.
Whoa! Patronizing. Are we? Well you need to calm down. I believe I made it clear that I was making a very limited point. You cannot defy law of the land lady. Fetuses DO have certain Legal rights. And I DID write that in simple English.
mamma-san wrote:
<quoted text>In America, a fetus is NOT considered a human being until a certain point in gestation, that point differs by state.
Very true. But why are you telling me this? I daresay I am qualified enough to understand law better than others. I read law you see.
mamma-san wrote:
<quoted text>It's simply proved by the fact that a woman who has an abortion is not prosecuted.
What is proved here is you either lack comprehension of issues of you did not care to read what I wrote in your haste to debunk me. Show me where have I advocated for or against abortion? You sound like a fundamentalist to me.
mamma-san wrote:
<quoted text>If it were considered a living human being, she would be arrested, as would the doctor.
Again. You don’t need to tell me. I know it better.
mamma-san wrote:
<quoted text>I suggest you look into taking a Critical Thinking class.
I suggest you look into getting basic education and English Comprehension classes.

“What is it”

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#230512 May 20, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>So what happens if the fetus is miscarried??
Nothing much. Except increased medical bills.
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>How is a fetus competent to accept said bequest?
Fetus is NOT competent to accept any bequest until it’s born. However, that does not take away the fact that law recognizes bequests made in favor of fetuses. And any right inherently possesses right to decline or a possibility that a situation may never arise where the right may be claimed.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#230513 May 20, 2013
pbfa wrote:
<quoted text>
There are no "babies" involved in abortion. A zef is removed from a woman who has decided not to carry a pregnancy to term, as is her right.
Murder is an illegal act against a born person.
Abortion is the legal termination of a pregnancy. They are two different acts, and are only considered the same thing by dishonest, inaccurate PLM folks.
Glad I could help clarify things for you. Imprecise and inaccurate language fails every time.
Very well said.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#230514 May 20, 2013
How do these people that oppose abortion feel about a rape victims?

“What is it”

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#230515 May 20, 2013
Liam R wrote:
<quoted text>The United States of America has not ratified that convention. All the nations that signed are south of our borders.
True. However, Unborn victims of violence Act is pretty much US of A Law.
Liam R wrote:
<quoted text>By having an abortion, the woman is permitting the fetus to exercise its "right" to freedom of movement under Article 22
Kindly explain. I did not understand what you meant to say.
Liam R wrote:
<quoted text>Non-persons do not have rights.
They sure don’t. But law recognized certain rights of fetuses. It is a fact.
Liam R wrote:
<quoted text>Ink on paper cannot magically transform a non-person into a person.
Again very true. However allow me to reiterate that this does not change the fact that law recognizes bequests made in favor of fetuses.(Subject to the mother’s right to abort and of course the baby being born subsequently.)

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#230516 May 20, 2013
wihangam wrote:
<quoted text>True. However, Unborn victims of violence Act is pretty much US of A Law.
<quoted text>Kindly explain. I did not understand what you meant to say.
<quoted text>They sure don’t. But law recognized certain rights of fetuses. It is a fact.
<quoted text>Again very true. However allow me to reiterate that this does not change the fact that law recognizes bequests made in favor of fetuses.(Subject to the mother’s right to abort and of course the baby being born subsequently.)
Do you have a point, or are you just blatting on in the hopes someone will find one in all this?
Fetal rights are not recognized in law. The fact that a fetus can be a POTENTIAL beneficiary of a will, does not give the fetus any rights whatsoever.
Now, if you have a point, other than 'I read law, and that makes me feel smarter than you', go ahead and make it....but so far that's all ya got.

“What is it”

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#230517 May 20, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>Do you have a point,
Oh I made my point clear enough to be understood by a four year old. Pretending ignorance however is your prerogative.
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>Fetal rights are not recognized in law.
Refer to Unborn Victims of Violence Act 2004. This law recognizes a child in utero as a legal victim, if he or she is injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb"
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>The fact that a fetus can be a POTENTIAL beneficiary of a will, does not give the fetus any rights whatsoever.
Again refer to the above mentioned law. And I am reiterating for your benefit, law DOES recognize certain rights of fetuses.
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>Now, if you have a point, other than 'I read law
It is not a point to be made neither it is open to any argument. It is a fact. Plain and simple.
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>and that makes me feel smarter than you
Suffering from inferiority complex is the second worst thing in the world. Worst of course is what you did. Advertising to unknown people like me that you suffer from inferiority complex.
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>go ahead and make it
Again, I have made my point very clear. To feign ignorance is your prerogative.
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>but so far that's all ya got
Let me decide what I got dear.

I wish you luck and Compassion.

“Becoming a better me!”

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#230518 May 21, 2013
wihangam wrote:
<quoted text>Whoa! Patronizing. Are we? Well you need to calm down. I believe I made it clear that I was making a very limited point. You cannot defy law of the land lady. Fetuses DO have certain Legal rights. And I DID write that in simple English.
<quoted text> Very true. But why are you telling me this? I daresay I am qualified enough to understand law better than others. I read law you see.
<quoted text>What is proved here is you either lack comprehension of issues of you did not care to read what I wrote in your haste to debunk me. Show me where have I advocated for or against abortion? You sound like a fundamentalist to me.
<quoted text> Again. You don’t need to tell me. I know it better.
<quoted text>I suggest you look into getting basic education and English Comprehension classes.
You came on here simply to make a point that a fetus can inherit property? For someone who has "read law" you made a very ambiguous statement that was really neither here nor there. as someone pointed out, I can leave my estate to my cats; that doesn't make them people.

Your posts were inane, and added nothing to the debate.

My reading comprehension skills are just fine, thank you.Perhaps you should work on your writing skills to better let us all know you're only adding superfluous information that applies to cats, dogs, and gerbils as well as a fetus.

“Becoming a better me!”

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#230519 May 21, 2013
wihangam wrote:
<quoted text>True. However, Unborn victims of violence Act is pretty much US of A Law.
<quoted text>Kindly explain. I did not understand what you meant to say.
<quoted text>They sure don’t. But law recognized certain rights of fetuses. It is a fact.
<quoted text>Again very true. However allow me to reiterate that this does not change the fact that law recognizes bequests made in favor of fetuses.(Subject to the mother’s right to abort and of course the baby being born subsequently.)
For someone who has "read law" you keep referring to the Unborn Victims of Violence Cat in a very offhand manner.

It specifically refers to an unborn infant who was injured or killed during injury to it's mother. It protects her right to have her child (one of the three choices).

What about it? We are all familiar with it, probably more so than you.

Your only purpose in posting on this forum seems to be to brag about how you have "read law." And? Your point is?

When you post deliberately vague posts and then turn on people because they responded to those posts, accusing them of not knowing this or that about you...well...it tells us that you are all about YOU.

Kindly go play in another sandbox unless you have some valid arguments to make regarding the topic, which is NOT about you and your studies.

“What is it”

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#230520 May 21, 2013
mamma-san wrote:
<quoted text>You came on here simply to make a point that a fetus can inherit property?
Nope. I pointed out that contrary to what some posters wrote that fetuses do not have ANY rights, the situation is pretty different.
mamma-san wrote:
<quoted text>For someone who has "read law" you made a very ambiguous statement that was really neither here nor there.
For somebody who has posted so many comments here, you come across to be very incompetent to participate in a useful debate.
mamma-san wrote:
<quoted text>as someone pointed out, I can leave my estate to my cats; that doesn't make them people.
Of course it does not. In the very same manner that just because you say so, fetuses do not cease to be human beings.
mamma-san wrote:
<quoted text>Your posts were inane, and added nothing to the debate.
You don’t seem to be intelligent enough to pass judgments on others.
mamma-san wrote:
<quoted text>My reading comprehension skills are just fine
Thank you for clarifying on that one. I have my doubts though.
mamma-san wrote:
<quoted text>Perhaps you should work on your writing skills
Oh they are just fine. When I need free advice, I’ll ask for it.
mamma-san wrote:
<quoted text>you're only adding superfluous information that applies to cats, dogs, and gerbils as well as a fetus.
I made a pointed reference. If you didn’t understand it, that’s okay. Don’t feel sad. A lot of people have no talent. Besides, let me give you an example, Gravity acts on ALL the bodies including cats, dogs as well as a fetus. Can you discard somebody pointing out effects of gravity on a fetus by stating that the statement is vague?

Think about it.

Since: Sep 07

Location hidden

#230521 May 21, 2013
mamma-san wrote:
<quoted text>
Is your name on a pew in Westboro Baptist Church?
Never heard of that church.
Is your name on the Dennys sign,Taco Bell sign,geez I could go on and on.
By the way abortion is killing an unborn child in the womb.
Just trying to stay on subject.

Since: Sep 07

Location hidden

#230522 May 21, 2013
mamma-san wrote:
<quoted text>
What it comes down to is that a woman has autonomy over her body. You have deflected that argument repeatedly.
You have also never addressed the fact that every pregnancy brought to term results in a human being that requires care, nurturing, love, food, warmth, shelter, etc... for the rest of it's life. If a woman knows she cannot provide that for the child, and knows she cannot give the child up for adoption, she is showing responsibility by having an abortion.
No she isn't. She is being selfish and taking the easy way out. Circumstances change every day,

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
Should Black People Forgive White People for Sl... (Jun '07) 52 min gundee123 5,020
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 59 min Marge 658,723
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 1 hr Joe Fortuna 70,894
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 1 hr bad bob 183,463
Donald Chump: "Not paying federal taxes makes m... 2 hr Doctor REALITY 2
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 2 hr nanoanomaly 974,735
Worldclassk-9.com ripped me off for $4500 (Jan '10) 3 hr BAMF K9 94
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 5 hr onemale 282,986
More from around the web