View Full Version : Bash Pro-Abortionists
kirby101
03-27-2005, 01:41 PM
Ok, perhaps I may be a bit old fashioned, however how screwed up is abortion? I mean, I can understand a few special cases, such as rape victim or if it is going to kill the mother, however, offering it out to the public, so that any woman who doesn't want to take responsibility for their actions can just go and kill it off is just... retarded.
I mean, people say that it is the "woman's choice." It was the woman's choice to have sex. It was the woman's choice to do this that and the other. However, once pregnant, women should not be given the choice to have an abortion, except in the special cases. If they want an abortion, they should have to go to a doctor to get a medical examination, or in a case of rape, an attorney. If there is going to be no medical draw backs, or the rapist is found innocent, then they will have to deal with it. They should stick it out. Then if they don't want to deal with it, put the child up for adoption.
In my personal opinion, anyone who thinks it is ok to go into some alley, have sex, and then have the option of opting out, just because they don't want to, is a retard. I am very much against violence, especially to younger children, and even if you're just killing that "little bundle of cells," you are destroying the chance at a new life. This is something that NO ONE has the right to do.
Ok, I feel better. If you have an argument against me, post it. Then I can rip your argument to shreds. MUAHAHAHAHAHA
Djeuve
03-27-2005, 02:05 PM
I mean, people say that it is the "woman's choice." It was the woman's choice to have sex.
Interesting point, never really thought of it that way. I usually tend to be on the general "pro-choice" side of things, but I've usually avoided this issue with the lame excuse that "Hey, I'm a guy! Nothing do do with me, eh?"
I'm all about people reaching for their highest potential, though (as you probably already guessed, kirby). And, those lives do have the chance to really bring something to society in the future...
B'ah, I can't really decide on the issue. It pulls too hard on two values which I deeply believe in, but, from opposite directions.
Thanks for some new light on the subject, though...:bunny:
Well, I'll leave the abortion argument alone...
..but something I DO believe in is using aborted fetuses for stem cell research. I mean, talk about "reaching your fullest potential". Using the bundle of living cells in an attempt to cure disease is a much better than just tossing them in the garbage. I mean, either way, they've already been aborted and aren't going to live.
dont argue with this guy
04-11-2005, 06:35 PM
yeah im a supporter of stem cell research too...i think in the long run it will really save more lives and cure many diseases. as for abortion, i think it is wrong to abort your baby except if you are a rape victim, if its incest, or it is putting the mothers life at risk.
Djeuve
04-11-2005, 06:39 PM
Hey...what if, hypothetically, we could catch a general glimpse of the child's future, or at least tendencies...
Would it be right to abort them if we knew they would (most probably) become destructive, murderous dictators?
I've always leaned more towards the idea that people become who they are because of what happens to them outside the womb, so in my opinion there would be no way of knowing what a baby might become. I mean, I know you are speaking hypothetically, but the whole thought just creeps out a little...verging on the "engineering a perfect society" thing.
But, since you brought it up...if your child was forecast as becoming a murderous dictator, would you abort it? Or would you try to change it?
Sicander
04-11-2005, 07:08 PM
What most people don't know, and what the media wont tell you is that pig stem cells are insagnificantly less affective than human stem cells. The researce could progress easily useing them instead. But alot of the pro choice people have used steam cell research as a foothold for thier argument. I am all for stem cell research but lets use the other methods we have to do it. Pig stem cells and also stem cells found in other places of the body are just as viable as fetus stem cells and much more prevalent and easy to use.
Also on the topic of forcasting a childs future. See the mocie Gattica. Its a good one. I liked it alot.
Djeuve
04-11-2005, 07:09 PM
Ah! Blasphemy! Asking for my own opinion!...
Actually, that's the reason I asked others, since I thought about it and am undecided. I don't want many people to die, but the child would be mine, therefore a part of me... I would want to care for it and try to teach it good values ( as I see them, of course...)
But if it was inevitable, I don't know what I would do.
Consider another way. You don't know the potential of a child unless it gets a life to live...might turn out to be something fantastic, unremarkable, or incredibly evil...
Yeah, I'm all for ANY kind of stem cell research. I just think that for people who DO get abortions, whether it's right or not (or if it's a case that the mothers health was in danger) that those women should be encouraged and able to donate their aborted fetuses towards stem cell research.
I don't think it's right to use stem cell research in the pro-abortionist debate. But as it is right now, there are laws forbidding the use of aborted fetuses in scientific research, even though these fetuses will just be thrown out and die anyway...and that's what I don't agree with. In my opinion we should be using all the resources we can to try to further this very promising line of reseach.
As for you Djeuve...
Good point. I don't like the idea of killing something that is part of me either. Plus, I think any child of mine would be super kick-ass...if I do say so myself ;) So, I'm not sure if I could ever bring myself to abort a child...though, perhaps if I was in the situation where I had been raped, I might think differently.
ski2bfree
04-11-2005, 08:08 PM
What most people don't know, and what the media wont tell you is that pig stem cells are insagnificantly less affective than human stem cells. The researce could progress easily useing them instead. But alot of the pro choice people have used steam cell research as a foothold for thier argument. I am all for stem cell research but lets use the other methods we have to do it. Pig stem cells and also stem cells found in other places of the body are just as viable as fetus stem cells and much more prevalent and easy to use. Not entirely true. And it skirts the fact that the reason stem cell research is not being performed on a larger scale is due to the lack of funding. There are alternate methods of research that are being conducted though, such as the topic of neurogenesis. Neurogenesis is a process whereby new neurons are born in the adult brain and has never really been studied until recently, due to a dogma in biology that no new neurons are born after birth. The problem is, not much is known about neurogenesis; many researchers are apprehensive about studying it because of the reputation that early neurogenesis researcher obtained from challenging that dogma.
"Stem cell research" is an overly broad term if you ask me.
The kind of research that's hotly contested is "Embryonic stem cells"
However, there are stem cells elsewhere in the body. There are ones in the umbilical (sp?) cord at birth. Bones have stem cells in them, as bone is constantly regenerating.
And a fun piece of trivia--the nose has a lot of stem cells. Did you know that every 30 days or so, new olfactory bulbs are created to replace old ones? These new ones come from stem cells too.
GoingNova
04-11-2005, 10:26 PM
Not entirely true. And it skirts the fact that the reason stem cell research is not being performed on a larger scale is due to the lack of funding.
Well, the reason, I believe, is that there is a lack of funding proves that the stem cell research itself is not the "Answer to the world's problems" as some people (not you ski :eusa_ange) would have you believe. In a capitalist society, if human stem cell research were truly a viable means to cure so many things, investors would be falling over themselves to throw money at it, knowing it would reap HUGE profits for them. They are not, there is a lack of funding, so that proves that it offers, at best, a POSSIBILITY of hope, but it is not the cure all so many would have you believe. That is why they want the government to dump billions into it: no companies will.
Sicander eluded to, and I believe he is correct, that many pro-choice people have hitched their support wagon to it, because they see the banning of ANYTHING because it is "some form of life" as a danger to the banning of abortion. That is why they were against Scott Peterson getting charged with two counts of murder, one for Lacy and one for Connor. The NRA employs the same logic when it comes to gun control: they see the banning of ANY weapon as the first step to the banning of all weapons. Without choosing a side, I will say that both sides are correct: the first step in banning anything is to start with something small or minor at first. If you want to cook a crab the easiest way to do it is to put him in a pot with cold water, and turn on the fire. If you try to put him into a pot with boiling water, he is going to fight you, but if you slowly make the water warmer and warmer, you will get no fight, and before you know it, you are cooked! :eusa_shif Likewise, if you just outright said, GIVE ME ALL THE GUNS, or NO MORE ABORTIONS, people in this country would be outraged. So you do it a little at a time, building a case for each new step using logic from the last step. That is how it works.
I love your crab analogy GoingNova! It's very astute. As a German history buff, I could refer to many an extreme case of that method of government in action.
It's part of the reason why I think it's important for people to think about all the implications of a new government policy before lending their support to it.
Regarding the whole "lack of funding" argument.
Go to a researcher in almost any discipline and they'll complain to you that there's a lack of funding. On occasion it's true. However, most of the time I think it's more an effect of "big eyes". People wanting to get more money for their own research.
The latter is usually true when it comes to Gov't sponsored funding. It is a competative process (grant money allocation that is), so naturally, there's rivalry and a desire for more money.
Just something to keep in the back of your head
ski2bfree
04-12-2005, 10:07 AM
I agree. It's true that a lot of researchers are after that big government grant. In my experience, I've found that it's mostly because they love seeing their names in scientific journals. But a lot of government organizations that normally hand out grants are wary about giving them out for stem cell research because of the political controversy over the topic.
Nightwolf04
04-12-2005, 10:30 AM
I'm not entirely sure what I think of abortion. Though I do agree it is stupid to be letting women take the idea of abortion when they ahd sex in teh first palce. If you don' protect yourself then obviously this is going to happen!?!? but also in teh special cases like if it could kill the mother etc then yes I'm sure that could be fine. But I not sure this is right but your still in effect a part of you and someone else, isn't that murder? but still women are allowed to do it because their too erm I don't know weak to look after a child when it is their fault they had sex in the first place.
sorry if that sounds wrong :)
GoingNova
04-12-2005, 11:25 AM
I'm not entirely sure what I think of abortion. Though I do agree it is stupid to be letting women take the idea of abortion when they ahd sex in teh first palce. If you don' protect yourself then obviously this is going to happen!?!? but also in teh special cases like if it could kill the mother etc then yes I'm sure that could be fine. But I not sure this is right but your still in effect a part of you and someone else, isn't that murder? but still women are allowed to do it because their too erm I don't know weak to look after a child when it is their fault they had sex in the first place.
sorry if that sounds wrong :)
Nightwolf, and to a couple of our younger members, it is very nice that you are so polite and apologetic, but you don't have to be sorry for being "wrong". :eusa_ange Your opinion is just that, YOUR opinion. If you think it is wrong, and want to change your mind, that is fine, but you are always entitled to your opinion, and just because someone else might think it is wrong, does not mean it is wrong. I am not sure I am saying this correctly, and I am certainly not angry that you keep saying sorry, I guess I am trying to let you know that your opinions are just as "right" as mine. :eusa_ange
Now, back to the topic at hand. I believe that life begins the moment the egg and the sperm combine and are no longer an egg or a sperm, but a zygote. To me, it is simple, if you leave it alone, it grows into a child, therefore it is a child, just at an earlier stage of development. That is my opinion. Am I against abortion? Yes. I think no matter what the circumstances are, you are killing an innocent child. The mother being raped, which oh my GOD in heaven is a horrible thing and my heart goes out to the poor woman who was raped, still does not change the fact that baby inside of her is innocent, and had nothing to do with what was done to her.
As far as I am concerned, being in a postion where you are contemplating an abortion is a horrendous situation. I really feel bad for women in this situation. It is a very hard decision to make, and one that will remain with them for the rest of their lives.
Rascal
04-12-2005, 11:59 AM
i have to say that i agree with nova on this one. i just had this conversation with a friend recently and i started out on the other side, i was pro-abortion in most any case except for absurd ones (like in china where fetuses are aborted based on their sex). after about 1/2 an hour of trying to defend myself, and with every statement i made sounding to myself like an idiot, i came around. i basically tried from the standpoint that a fetus is not a human yet. but i couldn't keep that up for long, because as nova says the fetus becomes a human, and while it may not have the mental capacities yet it will some day. i also tried for the circumstance approach, but the child is completely innocent. a woman getting raped is absolutely terrible and reprehensible and if they get pregnant because of that it is, well, i have no words but you get the idea. however, the child is not at fault and is not it's future what is important at that point?
Djeuve
04-12-2005, 12:50 PM
True, but how would the woman feel if she was to bear a child born from rape, from some stranger who gave her a horrible experience...?
She would be constantly reminded of it...
On the other side, I read an article once of a mother who kept such a child, and became very close with her daughter.
I think it depends on the individual, and the circumstances...
Well, there is always the option of putting the kid up for adoption...but that can also be a traumatic experience. I don't know...it's a tough call in my opinion.
Rascal
04-12-2005, 01:04 PM
i agree djeuve that the mother would be constantly reminded of an absolutely traumatic experience every day. but might that not spur her motherly senses into trying to raise the best child possible and to ensure that it was brought up properly and that they would never do that to another human being? not speaking from personal experience at all, or anything close to it, just from what i think, but in time that wound would heal (at least to an acceptable level), and how then would the mother feel if she also knew that she had ended a childs life?
ski2bfree
04-12-2005, 01:04 PM
In case you're interested in the demographics, liberal "Blue States" showed a much greater decrease in abortion rates from 1992-2000. "Red states" had a decrease of 3% in abortion rates while "Blue States" had a decrease of 8%.
There's a problem with the "She had sex, so it's her fault" argument. Many of the people who get abortions live in suburban, religious districts in which health education does not take a high priority. Many of these girls know very little if anything about birth control. 9 of the top 10 states for teen pregnancy are red states, in case you want an example.
GoingNova
04-12-2005, 01:09 PM
True, but how would the woman feel if she was to bear a child born from rape, from some stranger who gave her a horrible experience...?
She would be constantly reminded of it...
On the other side, I read an article once of a mother who kept such a child, and became very close with her daughter.
I think it depends on the individual, and the circumstances...
Djeuve, you are 100% Correct, it would be horrible for the mother, and quite frankly I do not believe anyone should judge her. It is her choice. However, what we are saying here is basically because it would be very difficult, traumatic even, for one person, we are justified in killing another. I just can't make it any blunter. The ONLY acceptable argument really is the whole "is it a baby or not" argument, to which I say, I defy anyone to watch a sonogram even as early as one month and tell me that is not a little human inside there.
On a side note, this is a very personal issue to me. Long story short, everytime my wife gets pregnant (so far only one time), there is a chance the child will have a terminal disease. The life expectancy of a child born with this disease is 4-6 years. Needless to say, abortion was brought up and discussed. Ultimately, my wife and I never had to make the decision, as my son, THANK GOD, did not have the disease, but I just wanted to say that I am speaking from pseudo-experience. My decision was to keep the baby NO MATTER WHAT disease he had, no matter how short his life expectancy was.
greyscale42
04-17-2005, 06:01 PM
Another one for the archives. :)
Long story short, everytime my wife gets pregnant (so far only one time), there is a chance the child will have a terminal disease. The life expectancy of a child born with this disease is 4-6 years. Needless to say, abortion was brought up and discussed. Ultimately, my wife and I never had to make the decision, as my son, THANK GOD, did not have the disease, but I just wanted to say that I am speaking from pseudo-experience. My decision was to keep the baby NO MATTER WHAT disease he had, no matter how short his life expectancy was.
There are certain ethnic groups/populations that due to their history and what not have higher odds of carrying genes for certain terminal illnesses.
A perfect example is Ashkenazi Jews and Tay-Sachs disease. So the question is often asked and debated, is it right to have the child born knowing that they'll only live 2-3 years?
(I'm just throwing the question out there open ended)
Or what if you find out that your future child will have Huntington's Disease...the disorder doesn't usually present itself until ones 30s, but it is a debilitating (sp?) and terminal disorder. Again--what do you do in said situation?
GoingNova
04-18-2005, 01:03 AM
My decision was to keep the baby NO MATTER WHAT disease he had, no matter how short his life expectancy was.
I stand by that decision.
Djeuve
04-18-2005, 06:01 AM
That's probably one of life's ultimate choices:
One's personal choice, or the right for another to have a choice at all?
Freedom of choice is not universal...for one person to have a choice can mean another will not have any.
Again, touchy subject...
avswild
04-19-2005, 06:39 PM
I am one of those women that you say "go in an alley and have sex" and then have an abortion because they dont want the resposability of a child. Only I did not go into an ally. My fiancee and I got pregnant and we both decided to abort the fetus. And to those of you that think that abortion is murder you are wrong. I saw the ultra sound before hand and it was nothing bigger then a golf ball. It cant think, feel, hear, or anything like that. I believe what I did was the right thing to do because we could not afford to have a child at that time. Adoption is out of the question I would not even think of someone else rasing my child. I AM PRO-CHOICE all the way
Sicander
04-19-2005, 07:07 PM
Personally I believe that no matter wheather you think it is a baby or a fetus one thing is true either way, a life is withheld. That fetus in others opinion may not me human, but it will be if it is not aborted. So by the action of abortion you are withholding a human life. Personally I believe it is human from conception. The moment the first chemical reason happens, it is human. But regardless of what your personal opinions are you cannot deny the fact that that fetus that you are aborting will naturally progress into a child and be born. I don't think it is our right to deny that life. By that action one Less human will be in the world in nine months. Its not an issue in believing in fate or providence or whatever, its science, the natural progression from conception is to birth, unless some abberation or unnatural event occurs. Thats why I say it is murder and should be outright banned. A person has the choice to have sex in a consensual relationship. If you don't want to have a kid don't have sex or if you must go get sterilized. You have options not to have a kid without abortion. In the event of rape don't punish the innocent party. I personally believe rape should be a crime punishable by death or at least a life sentence, and not these stupid 40 year life sentences an actual till you die life sentence. Address the cause of the problem, don't just treat the symptoms, cure the disease!
GoingNova
04-19-2005, 08:19 PM
avswild, welcome. Folks, tread lightly please. We are all entitled to an opinion, and so far we have all been civil. This is a VERY personal topic, and I know people on both sides feel very deeply about this issue. I respect that, and I hope we can continue this debate in the civil manner it has been conducted thus far.
On a side note, avswild, I admire your coming out and sharing your personal experience here. I hope that just because there are members here that might disagree with you in this particular issue, that you do not let that stop you from being a part of our family here.
Relaxin
04-19-2005, 11:47 PM
I am one of those women that you say "go in an alley and have sex" and then have an abortion because they dont want the resposability of a child. Only I did not go into an ally. My fiancee and I got pregnant and we both decided to abort the fetus. And to those of you that think that abortion is murder you are wrong. I saw the ultra sound before hand and it was nothing bigger then a golf ball. It cant think, feel, hear, or anything like that. I believe what I did was the right thing to do because we could not afford to have a child at that time. Adoption is out of the question I would not even think of someone else rasing my child. I AM PRO-CHOICE all the way
I believe that you are wrong, regardless of the fact that the baby is unfeeling, unhearing, or unthinking, it is STILL just that, a baby. That child inside of you was human: heart forming, brain forming, eating, learning, growing, and as for the discussion of adoption, that's a totally different topic.
ski2bfree
04-20-2005, 11:43 AM
I believe that you are wrong, regardless of the fact that the baby is unfeeling, unhearing, or unthinking, it is STILL just that, a baby. That child inside of you was human: heart forming, brain forming, eating, learning, growing, and as for the discussion of adoption, that's a totally different topic.
Ever seen a fetus that size? It's not just unfeeling, unhearing, and unthinking. It doesn't even have the capacity to begin forming the organs that it would require to perform those functions. A fetus in such early stages is basically three layers of cells with a little notochord running down the middle. It's not until 18 days after conception that the notochord begins releasing hormones that direct stem cells to differentiate and specialize. At 24 days, neural cells are starting to organize themselves into a neural fold. They're still not specialized as neural cells though. Synapses have not even begun forming. The neural tube is still open at both ends. No real specialization of cells or completion of organs can be seen until just after the first trimester. Aborting a fetus before then is not murdering a child, it's preventing a child from developing by getting rid of the tissue that it would eventually form from.
Sicander
04-20-2005, 02:10 PM
Did you read my argument? It doesnt matter what it is or how formed it its. If you do not interfear it WILL be a child and that is why I think its wrong.
CrazyNurse
04-28-2005, 04:35 AM
As to answer the initail question of "How screwed up is abortion?" I only believe in abortion if and only if you're a rape victim or the resulting pregnancy would be harmful for the mother. Abortion is MURDER. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. Women these days use abortion as a means of birth control. It's pretty simple, if you don't want a child don't have SEX!!! If you're still going to have sex use a contraceptive. There are millions of men and women around this world that cannot have children, yet everyday there are thousands of women that murder an innocent child. I don't see how one could live with themselves after making that kind of decision. I know I couldn't.:eusa_snoo
I could never do it, either, Crazy. Nor can I look at the beginning of life in such clinical terms. You've done something special - created life - a phenominal power the Big Guy gave you. I know there are tons of unwanted babies that come into this world every day. I know also there are tons or "mistakes" that happen every day. Why banner the child as "illegitimate" - isn't it the PARENT (incubator is a better word) that is illegitamate? I'll never say I know the answer to anything, especially something as important as this issue. I just know how I feel.