Abortion right or wrong

[Amray]

Originally Posted by othera

And honestly if i was a girl and i accedently got pregnet, i would probably either have the baby or put it up for adoption, i would not have an abortion.

If I was a girl and got pregnant I would have the baby and get a free house paid for by the council and get lots of money. In this country if you become a teenaged mother you are practically done for life when it comes to finances.

Although I am more better then to become a teenaged mother, despite being male. I would only plan, or rather do plan, on having a child after my education is over with and I am in my late twenties/early thirties.

[Gemstar]

In the case of someone getting rape that initself is a bad case. Im not saying that it is a good thing, I agree that it is a bad thing but with that being bad don't try to use " someone got rape" which is bad to make abortion seem good. That is called blackmailing. And it will be very different mentally when that person is actually bearing the child because of many factors involving it. It's not an easy thing to do.

[Xemn]

Abortion Is Wrong in MY opinion

For me, covering a sin like having "it" before marriage with murder (abortion) is just wrong. But thats just Christian Moi.


But if you get raped, there is always adoption.

[Daniel E.]

Originally Posted by Gemstar

In the case of someone getting rape that initself is a bad case. Im not saying that it is a good thing, I agree that it is a bad thing but with that being bad don't try to use " someone got rape" which is bad to make abortion seem good. That is called blackmailing. And it will be very different mentally when that person is actually bearing the child because of many factors involving it. It's not an easy thing to do.

Don't remember anyone saying that rape made abortion something good.

What some of us are saying is that rape victims deserve the right to decide how they want to handle the situation. Women with a weak constitution or a medical condition, also deserve consideration.

There is no perfect solution that will always work in all cases. You need to look beyond the ideal of "respecting life" and start realizing all the factors involved in every case where abortion is ever considered.

EDIT:

Best to keep it short.

[Terrestrial Dream]

Originally Posted by othera

Totaly agree.

And honestly if i was a girl and i accedently got pregnet, i would probably either have the baby or put it up for adoption, i would not have an abortion.

I do not think it is a horrible thing and makes you a bad person, but it would be better not to.

To bad that you are not a girl and really, I really think that us, male, could never understand a how a females thinks regarding abortion. Personally I think abortion is wrong but there are situation where it is justified. Still thinking that a live that could be born will die is just wrong for me. However it does put a tremendous burden on the mother and they should be allowed to choose. But since I am not a woman I will never be understand how they feel on abortion, so I really think that I have no right to make the decisions. And yeah my statement here is weak and indecisive.

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by Xemn

Abortion Is Wrong in MY opinion

For me, covering a sin like having "it" before marriage with murder (abortion) is just wrong. But thats just Christian Moi.


But if you get raped, there is always adoption.

Interesting ....

I don't suppose you *read* any of the prior posts to get some understanding of other viewpoints?
On the matter of rape, do you have *any* idea what the psychological ramifications are? Rhetorical question, I think.

[Reckoner]

Originally Posted by ApostleOfGod

Spoiler for space:

My friend, you're missing the point. As a person, at this point, I can truly state that if I realized that I was saved rather than left for dead, regardless of my knowledge of this state at the time or not, I would be grateful now. Thankful that I was even given this opportunity. It's harder to be thankful for those of us who havn't really seen it from the difficult perspective. I just drew your average situation of a baby up for adoption. One more time, Pam Stenzel. Read about her, and tell me what you think about her.

The happy life for a baby does not supersede the mother's decision. First of all, is the baby's mother really a mother if she decides to put it up for adoption? I am not discrediting the mother's position, but I am trying to say that if a mother is putting up the baby for adoption for a better life, the issue of superseding her decision isn't a question. However, yes, if the mother's will is really bent against this, then superseding the decision seems to be the right term. But why is she so bent to not conceive? Once again, it depends. I'm speaking in simple standards - 8-9/10 American teenagers are not virgin before they get married. And I believe the numbers are a bit less for women, 6-7/10 or such. In any case, I ain't surprised that there are thousands of abortions everyday. So in the case of a girl who's just been out there for fun, or made the mistake of having sex without protection, or protection failed on her, what should be the natural course? She made the choice to commit the act. Now we give the woman the full right to kill a fetus from developing into a human? Is that really the fair thing to do, speaking in terms of life? When pro choicers speak out, they completely disregard the primitive life form, the fetus.

This is what really really gets me though. According to the pro choice definitions, the fetus is a lump of cells. You compare it to that of a plant and ants. You know, it's really funny how people use terminology at their convenience; I hear that our children are the future very often. An obvious statement, an obvious truth. The future generation is entirely based on our youth of today. Reckoner, you're 16 according to the profile. You're a vital member of society's future. You've lived for 16 years, perhaps a little longer. That only makes you 17 years older than a fetus. Should we really permit that 1 year span in time to be a period where we can eliminate existance from existing?

I don't see how the freedom of choice really plays here. Once again, people are using terms at convenience. Excluding exceptional cases, such as rape, Nobody forces a woman to have Sex. No one. That is called freedom of choice, my brethren. That is called freedom of choice. When it comes to a baby spawning within, it no longer involves just your freedom. It is a fundamental obligation to take responsibility for actions, is it not? I think you can agree with me on this.

Once again, exceptions exist. But this works both ways. More often than not, women who engage into sex on their own are fully aware of the potent of pregnancies. If I remember, one time, to prevent the spread of AIDS in Africa, the UK proposed to send more condoms over there. But that's just encouraging more. In mathematics, this works by percentage. And that would mean numbers do increase - more sexual activities will be happening. Regardless of the amount of protection or not, unless we are 100% safe, something will happen. Then once that happens, is freedom of choice up to question? We do not bother to ask before, but we try to draw the lines of where this freedom extends over to another's freedom. Let me remind everyone, that rights are not those of which are implemented by government. The government doesn't create what rights people may or may not have. They regulate them, but by no means are they similar to the law system. No. Rather, rights are givens which all people may exercise at their will. Freedom of choice, freedom of speech, whichever the case may call upon, what will eventually become person is a person. A person becomes a person. You can't just call that "a clump of useless cells", because it wouldn't become anything more than a clump of useless cells. That's an insult to humanity, don't you think? It takes time for us to develop. And it's ironic too, I mean I think during my time of rapid growth, over the span of few years, I don't think I've developed nearly as much as a fetus would develop into a baby. And that just happens in 9 months or so.

Once again, there are exceptional cases. Indeed, there are. I've seen some fine examples set out in the thread previously, but abortion really shouldn't be a choice in most cases. Most abortions are based on the woman's simple desire of taking the easier way out anyways. For a few thousand dollars. And because it's generically out of this manner which abortion occurs, I take a firm stance for life - the future of the future generations. So you can say that the woman has freedom of choice and thereby has rights to do whatever she wants with her body. But as long as that baby inside develops into something similar to what I am, it's life. Because I know I have life in me. And so do you all.

I didn't misunderstand you with that question, I'd still be resentful.

Some points I want to make...

• You don't know whether the baby will have a better life.
• Many pregnancies may have been the result of sexual activities while inebriated.
• You are trying to force down people's throats that a fetus is already a living, thinking human being. People have different interpretations what is truly a human.
• If you are against abortion, don't practice it yourself. It is that simple.
• A law protecting the baby from the mom aborting it supersedes the mother's decision whether she agrees or not. This is because she never personally got to decide. It was never an option.
• The time to grow for a fetus does not elicit anymore sympathy.
• It is not an insult to humanity to call it a clump of cells. I am a sag of meat and so are you. You can attach whatever flowery decorations you want on the fetus, but my points are still the same.

[Gemstar]

I can understand how people would want abortion to happen. Dual-ly if any were to happen opposing each side then people would be unhappy and that makes me and the situation sad. But although one should give the mother the right to decide don't forget about the right for the fetus to have a say and off course if it can have a say it will want to live. People focus so much on just the mother's decision that they don't see other point of views.

[Daniel E.]

Originally Posted by Gemstar

People focus so much on just the mother's decision that they don't see other point of views.

In your own words.....

Originally Posted by Gemstar

And lastly I agree with the most important thing in this aspect is life. Everything else which allows abortion are only excuses to end life. I see it more as selfish than a good thing to do or it being helpful.

Now, who's the one not even trying to see other points of view here, I wonder?

You have been ditching every opinion that disagrees with yours so far, and now you try to turn the whole thing around? Sorry, but it's a little too late for that.

EDIT:

I am not lying Gemstar, I am simply quoting your earlier comments. If you are going to resort to insulting private messages, then you will leave me with no choice but to report you to the mods.

Here's the full post I quoted from:

http://forums.animesuki.com/showpost...&postcount=110

<-- just in case you try an edit.

[james0246]

Originally Posted by Gemstar

People focus so much on just the mother's decision that they don't see other point of views.

I'm sorry, but whose decision is it other than the mother's and whose view matters as much as the mother's? The (early) fetus has no individuality (no mind, no preference, no ability to discern its surrounding, etc), so it has no bearing on the discussion. The father has some say, but only peripherally and only if the father is in a committed relationship with the mother. That being said, the father still has no active control over the decision, he simply is the only one allowed to complain if he so wishes. The government has no say; religious reasoning only matters if you assign any value to the religion (the same with philosophical reasoning); et cetera, et cetera.

In the end, the mother is the only fully known, non-extrapolated entity (i.e. the fetus is artificially assigned value) that can make any type of decision. So, the mother's decision is all that matters.

[Gemstar]

Originally Posted by james0246

I'm sorry, but whose decision is it other than the mother's and whose view matters as much as the mother's? The (early) fetus has no individuality (no mind, no preference, no ability to discern its surrounding, etc), so it has no bearing on the discussion. The father has some say, but only peripherally and only if the father is in a committed relationship with the mother. That being said, the father still has no active control over the decision, he simply is the only one allowed to complain if he so wishes. The government has no say; religious reasoning only matters if you assign any value to the religion (the same with philosophical reasoning); et cetera, et cetera.

In the end, the mother is the only fully known, non-extrapolated entity (i.e. the fetus is artificially assigned value) that can make any type of decision. So, the mother's decision is all that matters.

I can understand the emotion connected when this sort of situation happens but I think the right thing to do is let the child live! No one has the choice to say who lives and who dies. Even if it is a mother bearing a child. Is it not only God who has that decision? One cannot say that the child has no say in the matter just because it cannot. It already has a handicap in the situation. I emphasise again no one has to right to decide who can or cannot live. Father, Mother, President etc.

[Daniel E.]

Originally Posted by Gemstar

I emphasise again no one has to right to decide who can or cannot live. Father, Mother, President etc.

You seem to have no trouble deciding for the mother.

"No one" doesn't seem to include you.

[james0246]

Originally Posted by Gemstar

I can understand the emotion connected when this sort of situation happens but I think the right thing to do is let the child live! No one has the choice to say who lives and who dies. Even if it is a mother bearing a child. Is it not only God who has that decision? One cannot say that the child has no say in the matter just because it cannot. It already has a handicap in the situation. I emphasise again no one has to right to decide who can or cannot live. Father, Mother, President etc.

Does that mean all women should be pregnant all the time? I mean, a woman makes a conscious decision not to fertilize her eggs for the majority of her life, so she is consequently destroying hundreds of possible lives (not to mention the millions of semen that died in the fertilization of one egg, as Monty Python said, "Every Sperm is Sacred.").

As for your other point (concerning the fetus' decision or lack thereof), if the fetus has no say, why should there be a law to artificially give the fetus a say? If a patient is brain dead (and there is no will to specify the matter, and no way of knowing if the patient couldn't "get better"), the family always has the decision to pull the plug or not (the hospital also has the decision if no family steps forward). The fetus is similar to the brain dead patient; it has no say, so the immediate family must decide for it.

In the end, the mother's decision is all that matters.

[monster]

Originally Posted by Reckoner

You don't know whether the baby will have a better life.

But we do know the baby won't have a good life if it's dead.

You are trying to force down people's throats that a fetus is already a living, thinking human being. People have different interpretations what is truly a human.

That doesn't mean we have to accept those interpretations. Somebody can interpret a true human as having the right type/amount of skin pigmentation, or be at a certain level of intelligence, or be the right gender, etc.

It is not an insult to humanity to call it a clump of cells. I am a sag of meat and so are you. You can attach whatever flowery decorations you want on the fetus, but my points are still the same.

Then why should we care that a sag of meat has to endure pain (whether physical or psychological)? It's not as if it's certain death for the sag of meat. Not that it matters anyway, because without the flowery decorations, it is only a sag of meat.

[Ermes Marana]

Originally Posted by Gemstar

I can understand the emotion connected when this sort of situation happens but I think the right thing to do is let the child live! No one has the choice to say who lives and who dies. Even if it is a mother bearing a child. Is it not only God who has that decision?

1. God made his decision... he supports abortion. The bible specifically says that the penalty for killing a fetus is a fine, but the penalty for killing a human being is death.

You are being tricked by people who use religion to promote political views that actually are not supported by their religion.

A fertilized egg is not a human being. At what point does it become one? Good question. I don't know. You would have to do biological research to even start to answer that question.


2. Women can and do die in childbirth, even if rare it still happens. If you want to force them to give birth, then sometimes you will be forcing women to die against their will.

Why do you think you have that right?

[Gemstar]

Originally Posted by Ermes Marana

1. God made his decision... he supports abortion. The bible specifically says that the penalty for killing a fetus is a fine, but the penalty for killing a human being is death.

You are being tricked by people who use religion to promote political views that actually are not supported by their religion.

A fertilized egg is not a human being. At what point does it become one? Good question. I don't know. You would have to do biological research to even start to answer that question.


2. Women can and do die in childbirth. If you want to force them to give birth, then sometimes you will be forcing women to die against their will.

Why do you think you have that right?

The bible that says that does not neccisarily have to be correct. Do not blindly follow the bible. If it should have flaws in it you would be following the wrong thing. And no I do not wish to force anything upon anyone. I am speaking my mind dont misunderstand that as forcing. I am not doing that. And the women are not dying by being pregnant. And for a previous response women are not always pregnant. And for the patient bein brain dead. I also think life is important in this case and for any example you can give 1 million cases the result answer is life is important, no matter how many times you ask. They should not kill the person.

[Anh_Minh]

Originally Posted by Gemstar

I can understand the emotion connected when this sort of situation happens but I think the right thing to do is let the child live!

Oh, well, if you think so, it changes everything. Not.

No one has the choice to say who lives and who dies. Even if it is a mother bearing a child.

It may be called "bearing a child", but what's inside a woman's belly isn't a child. Especially in the earlier months of the pregnancy.

Is it not only God who has that decision?

If he has any complaint, he's welcome to make them known. Preferably in person.

One cannot say that the child has no say in the matter just because it cannot. It already has a handicap in the situation.

And yet you speak for the "child". You decide what it wants. Indeed, you decide it wants anything, despite evidence to the contrary. On what authority?

I emphasise again no one has to right to decide who can or cannot live. Father, Mother, President etc.

In regards to abortion, there is no "who". Only a "what".

[Ascaloth]

Originally Posted by monstert

That doesn't mean we have to accept those interpretations. Somebody can interpret a true human as having the right type/amount of skin pigmentation, or be at a certain level of intelligence, or be the right gender, etc.

Ignoratio elenchi. What do the latter examples have to do with the topic at hand?

Then why should we care that a sag of meat has to endure pain (whether physical or psychological)? It's not as if it's certain death for the sag of meat. Not that it matters anyway, because without the flowery decorations, it is only a sag of meat.

I'm not even sure what you're trying to get at here, but even if I guessed correctly, this is still merely an Appeal to Ridicule, and in no way constitutes a valid point.

Originally Posted by Gemstar

The bible that says that does not neccisarily have to be correct. Do not blindly follow the bible. If it should have flaws in it you would be following the wrong thing. And no I do not wish to force anything upon anyone. I am speaking my mind dont misunderstand that as forcing. I am not doing that. And the women are not dying by being pregnant. And for a previous response women are not always pregnant. And for the patient bein brain dead. I also think life is important in this case and for any example you can give 1 million cases the result answer is life is important, no matter how many times you ask. They should not kill the person.

Proof by assertion. Please provide an actual scientific basis that a fetus is equivalent to a whole human life.

[KholdStare]

I've come to accept that for most people I know, religion determines this question. For those who are for abortion, they are not strongly following a major religion. For those who are against abortion, how much they are against abortion directly correlates with their religious beliefs. This is generalization from real life experience, and not teachers who are supposed to be neutral about it...or they did their best to make it look that way.

[monster]

Originally Posted by Ascaloth

Ignoratio elenchi. What do the latter examples have to do with the topic at hand?

My point is that DNA already tells us it is a human being. No need for people's varying interpretations on what constitues a true human being.

I'm not even sure what you're trying to get at here, but even if I guessed correctly, this is still merely an Appeal to Ridicule, and in no way constitutes a valid point.

How so? Reckoner suggested that we look at things by its physical structure without the decorations. He/she sees an adult human being as a sag of meat, and a human fetus as a clump of cells.