PDA

View Full Version : Abortion. Should it be legal or not



mrveggieman
06-15-2011, 07:23 AM
Hello readers. I wanted to start this topic because I saw that there was a debate on this on another thread. My spin on the issue is that abortion is wrong and should not be legal unless of case or rape, incest or if the mother's life is in danger. However conservatives don't jump for joy yet. I do also believe that their should be comprehensive manditory sex education in school and the schools as well as health clinics should give out free contraceptives as well as sex education counseling. Mabey if we would invest more in preventing unwanted pregnancies women wouldn't have to chose weather to have an abortion or not.

sanfran22
06-15-2011, 09:21 AM
Wow, I somewhat agree with you on something. As far as the education, not sure how much thats gonna help. Parents need to be parents again and teach their children.

mrveggieman
06-15-2011, 09:42 AM
Wow, I somewhat agree with you on something. As far as the education, not sure how much thats gonna help. Parents need to be parents again and teach their children.


Wow this is indeed a sign of the end times when the two of us can actually agreee on something.:sign0020: Parents do need to be parents but I do have a problem with parents trying to shelter their kids and other kids who are not theirs from the real world by promoting this abstinence only nonsense. If you are teaching kids about the dangers of drugs you are not going to teach them just say no without teaching them about what the drugs are and what damages they do. The same goes for sex. Show them all sides of the spectrum like what happens when you catch an std or what it is like to have an abortion. Also plan field trips to hospitals and have guest speakers who are young unwed mothers and people who have contracted HIV. Tell them that abstinence is the best way to go but if you do here's how to reduce the risk but nothing is 100% guaranteed. I'm not saying go out and show kids XXX movies but be frank and honest with them about sex and truthfully answer any questions that they may have. I would rather the schoolboard not even waste their time or our tax dollars if all they are going to do is promote abstinence only.

Star_Cards
06-15-2011, 09:57 AM
I definitely agree that sex education needs to be increased. No matter if you talk about it or not, the human body is going to go through puberty. There will always be kids that make bad choices when it comes to sex, but I think education and not treating sex as a taboo subject can only help keep some from these mistakes. When going through puberty everyone is going to start to have sexual feelings whether people are talking to them about it or not. It's better to give that knowledge to let them make more informed decisions. Abstinence teaching is all well and good and kids talk about sex at very early ages so you might as well give them all of the correct information as possible.

As far as abortion, I think it should be legal, but I'm not sure I would have or would consider it if I found myself in a position where it would even be considered. I do think there should be strict timing limits to it though as far as when it no longer becomes an option.

scottkoz20
06-15-2011, 10:18 AM
This is one of the few policital topics that I have an EXTREMELY strong opinion on.

Abortion should only be legal for the cases that was mentioned above (rape, incest or danger to the mother's life). As someone that is adopted and also has adopted a child, awareness needs to the possibility of adoption also needs to be educated upon in addition to SexEd.

There are a great many people that do not have the ability to have children for a number of reasons.

Star_Cards
06-15-2011, 10:32 AM
great point on the adoption side. Adoption can be a great option for many people if someone has an unwanted pregnancy.

I'll also add that it's not that hard to have sex and not get a woman pregnant. lol

Side question along the topic lines... do you think shows like MTVs "16 and pregnant" and "Teen Mom" tend to be a good or bad thing?

mrveggieman
06-15-2011, 10:35 AM
great point on the adoption side. Adoption can be a great option for many people if someone has an unwanted pregnancy.

I'll also add that it's not that hard to have sex and not get a woman pregnant. lol

Side question along the topic lines... do you think shows like MTVs "16 and pregnant" and "Teen Mom" tend to be a good or bad thing?

I hate reality tv and refuse to watch any of that garbage. As far if I think these shows are good or bad it depends on the mentality of the viewer. Some girls may watch it and think that it's cute to have a baby at a young age. Others may see that and will not want to touch a baby with a ten foot pole.

scottkoz20
06-15-2011, 10:39 AM
great point on the adoption side. Adoption can be a great option for many people if someone has an unwanted pregnancy.

I'll also add that it's not that hard to have sex and not get a woman pregnant. lol

Side question along the topic lines... do you think shows like MTVs "16 and pregnant" and "Teen Mom" tend to be a good or bad thing?


The act itself is not, but when you fire "blanks"... :whistle:


Those shows make me puke because they tend to glorify being a mother. Nothing like having a "role-model" being a 17 yr.old mom living off the system (but this is a problem with Television at this point which is a different discussion).

Star_Cards
06-15-2011, 01:38 PM
The act itself is not, but when you fire "blanks"... :whistle:


Those shows make me puke because they tend to glorify being a mother. Nothing like having a "role-model" being a 17 yr.old mom living off the system (but this is a problem with Television at this point which is a different discussion).

I've never been tested so I guess I could be firing blanks. lol I'd say odds are that I'm not.

I completely disagree with you about those shows glorifying teenage motherhood/parenthood. I've actually watched both season's of Teen Mom and it does nothing close to glorifying it. These young parents (mothers) have a tough life trying to raise a child at such a young age and sometimes by themselves. I'd think it would be difficult to create a reality show that glorifies teenage parenthood or single teenage parenthood. As far as these girls on the show, most aren't living off of the system or at least not completely as I'm sure some may get some sort of assistance. A lot of them have help from their parents and have jobs and some even go to school.

As far as role models goes, I don't think just because someone is on TV that they are made a role model. Sure these girls and their boyfriends made a mistake, but most of them on the show have battled through a tough situation when some of their BFs ran. The fact that they made a bad decision doesn't mean they can't come back from that and be a role model because of what they do after they've made that error. What they do after the mistake is what you should look at.

I think the show bring a topic to the forefront and makes it a conversation piece more than it typically is. They also toss in Dr Drew to weigh in on things. I find them entertaining but also a large public service announcement.

andrewhoya
06-15-2011, 02:05 PM
scott brought up a great point. If you are aborting for no reason, why even do it? Hundreds of people would love to have a nice, healthy baby. And who knows, maybe something crazy will happen later in your life and your long-lost child somehow saves your lfie.

grosbisous11
06-15-2011, 02:11 PM
This is one of the few policital topics that I have an EXTREMELY strong opinion on.

Abortion should only be legal for the cases that was mentioned above (rape, incest or danger to the mother's life). As someone that is adopted and also has adopted a child, awareness needs to the possibility of adoption also needs to be educated upon in addition to SexEd.

There are a great many people that do not have the ability to have children for a number of reasons.

I like this post above.

Abortion should only be legal in cases above. People who have sex without protection and conceive as a result should not have the right to kill their unborn baby.

*censored*
06-15-2011, 02:20 PM
I'm ok with either way-- keeping it legal, or banning it.

However, I'd agree with the general consensus so far that there needs to be improved sex education. Abstinence-Only has massively backfired. Saying "Use a condom, but you're too young to have one" doesn't work either. The conservative viewpoint often seems to be "If our kids are told not to do it, then they won't," and "If they don't have access to condoms, they won't have sex."

Obviously it doesn't work that way. The ideas and methods of sex education need major reforming and unfortunately a significant sized group of people are digging their heels in wanting to keep a puritanical mindset that doesn't work in the present day.

You have two options: keep it legal or improve sex education. "Neither" is not an option.

habsheaven
06-15-2011, 03:33 PM
I think abortion should be legal. I do not believe in the concept of life beginning at conception. IMO, life begins when an unborn child is fully developed and capable of surviving on it's own. Until that point in development the fetus is "potential life" and is not entitled to the rights of the living; the mother should have 100% control over her body.

Star_Cards
06-15-2011, 04:13 PM
I think abortion should be legal. I do not believe in the concept of life beginning at conception. IMO, life begins when an unborn child is fully developed and capable of surviving on it's own. Until that point in development the fetus is "potential life" and is not entitled to the rights of the living; the mother should have 100% control over her body.

we need a like button.

gatorboymike
06-15-2011, 05:10 PM
Actual person > potential person.

OnePimpTiger
06-15-2011, 07:29 PM
Hello readers. I wanted to start this topic because I saw that there was a debate on this on another thread. My spin on the issue is that abortion is wrong and should not be legal unless of case or rape, incest or if the mother's life is in danger. However conservatives don't jump for joy yet. I do also believe that their should be comprehensive manditory sex education in school and the schools as well as health clinics should give out free contraceptives as well as sex education counseling. Mabey if we would invest more in preventing unwanted pregnancies women wouldn't have to chose weather to have an abortion or not.

We very close to agree on this. The only difference is I do not agree with abortion in any situation, mainly for the reasons noted above re: adoption.


I think abortion should be legal. I do not believe in the concept of life beginning at conception. IMO, life begins when an unborn child is fully developed and capable of surviving on it's own. Until that point in development the fetus is "potential life" and is not entitled to the rights of the living; the mother should have 100% control over her body.

So any time up until the third trimester, you're ok with abortion?

Information on fetal development, abortion and alternatives (http://www.health.state.mn.us/wrtk/handbook.html)


20 WEEKS
...
There is little chance that a baby could survive outside the woman’s body.

22 WEEKS
(24 weeks after the first day of the last normal menstrual period)

Week 22: ...
Changes are occurring in lung development so that some babies are able to survive (with intensive care services).
Surviving babies may have disabilities and require long-term intensive care.

duwal
06-15-2011, 08:09 PM
is there any member on here that is actually female that can weigh in on this? I personally think its the womans choice and the guy should not have a say in the ruling or decision towards a woman going through with the procedure, the woman has to go through with carrying it and all the procedures and body changes and complications to go along with pregnancy.

I also personally think it should be legal no matter what. Not just for the issues like rape, but also where the birth would bring the quality of life down or hardship to the mom or the baby. If there would be no abortions allowed the U.S. would be in a lot worse place. Kids dropping out of high school or college. Families taking on the burden of a kid they aren't ready for or using government programs to give them all assistance to help care for it

andrewhoya
06-15-2011, 08:19 PM
birth would bring the quality of life down or hardship to the mom

What is wrong with adoption, then?

theonedru
06-15-2011, 08:48 PM
What is wrong with adoption, then?

Because then you would be forcing the female to do something against their will they do not want to do, carry a child and give birth to it. Honestly I have no problem with abortion, but then if someone doesnt want kids then get sterilized somehow and problem solved no need for so many abortions.

andrewhoya
06-15-2011, 08:59 PM
Because then you would be forcing the female to do something against their will they do not want to do, carry a child and give birth to it. Honestly I have no problem with abortion, but then if someone doesnt want kids then get sterilized somehow and problem solved no need for so many abortions.

The OP I was replying to said that it would bring down the quality of life for the mother; if they put the baby up for adoption, what would be wrong with just having the kid?

OnePimpTiger
06-15-2011, 10:00 PM
Another aspect I disagree with abortion on is the total lack of personal responsibility. In the instance of rape, this does not apply, as the female most likely has no choice. Other than that and miraculous conception, getting pregnant is the result of a choice. Abortion, while it does have it's own consequences, is a way of avoiding those consequences. Whether you consider it life or potential life, I have a problem of ending someone else's to avoid the responsibilities and consequences of a choice you made.

scottkoz20
06-15-2011, 10:28 PM
another aspect i disagree with abortion on is the total lack of personal responsibility. In the instance of rape, this does not apply, as the female most likely has no choice. Other than that and miraculous conception, getting pregnant is the result of a choice. Abortion, while it does have it's own consequences, is a way of avoiding those consequences. Whether you consider it life or potential life, i have a problem of ending someone else's to avoid the responsibilities and consequences of a choice you made.

+1

*censored*
06-15-2011, 11:59 PM
Condom breaks. Woman gets pregnant. What then?

Star_Cards
06-16-2011, 12:31 AM
Condom breaks. Woman gets pregnant. What then?

well you still know that even with a condom there is a risk of pregnancy.

I will agree with OPT that choosing abortion can be skirting responsibility. Like I said, I really wouldn't see it as a viable option for me personally, but think it should still be legal within a specific about of time of conception.

mrveggieman
06-16-2011, 07:20 AM
Condom breaks. Woman gets pregnant. What then?


She should have used the pill as a backup.

andrewhoya
06-16-2011, 07:24 AM
Condom breaks. Woman gets pregnant. What then?

By engaging in the first place, she would have known there was a risk. If she was not ready to handle the "consequences" she shouldn't have done it in the first place. If you absolutely do not want kids, then you absolutely should not have sex.

*censored*
06-16-2011, 12:28 PM
She should have used the pill as a backup.

That's not 100% effective either. I know a girl who got pregnant while on the pill, used as directed.

So someone is trying to take responsibility for their actions by taking the safest possible ways, and the near-impossible happens, you still believe they should be penalized for it?

That's like saying to someone who gets run over by a drunk driver "Well, he just shouldn't have left the house; there's still that chance that he could get killed by going outside."

andrewhoya
06-16-2011, 02:09 PM
That's not 100% effective either. I know a girl who got pregnant while on the pill, used as directed.

So someone is trying to take responsibility for their actions by taking the safest possible ways, and the near-impossible happens, you still believe they should be penalized for it?

That's like saying to someone who gets run over by a drunk driver "Well, he just shouldn't have left the house; there's still that chance that he could get killed by going outside."

Abstinence or not doing it is the safest way...

mrveggieman
06-16-2011, 02:34 PM
I agree with the previous poster abstinance is still the best way but most of us on here I would assume do not practice abstinance. Each time you have sex you are taking a chance. Just like each time you drive your car, eat dinner, walk out of you house, etc...Unplanned things are bound to happen. However if you know for a fact that you cannot afford a baby you should not be having sex. If I was in a position where I got a woman pregnant that I did not want to have a baby with even though I used a condom and the lady said that she was on the pill I would have to man up and handle mines. Me telling her to have or her chosing an abortion would be the the coward's way out.

habsheaven
06-16-2011, 03:25 PM
I would not categorize any decision of this magnitude as "the coward's way out". For many women to make a decision one way or the other takes a lot of soul searching and self examination.

gatorboymike
06-16-2011, 03:37 PM
Yes, because it's TOTALLY worth it to condemn an innocent child to a life that will be miserable, cruel and probably short, just for the sake of punishing that child's dirtbag parents for being promiscuous. Totally worth it. No question, nope nope.

mrveggieman
06-16-2011, 03:52 PM
I would not categorize any decision of this magnitude as "the coward's way out". For many women to make a decision one way or the other takes a lot of soul searching and self examination.


Even though I hate the decision for someone to kill an unborn child I even hate the fact that a certian element of society wants to take away the right for our us to be educated about sex and our sexual health. I firmly believe that whenever a woman has to chose weather or not to have an abortion we as a society has failed her and her unborn child.

duane1969
06-16-2011, 04:03 PM
I am against it for one simple reason...I am here. My 17 year old mother wanted to have an abortion, but state law prevented it without parental/guardian permission.

If the mother's life is in jeapordy then I can see it, but when it is used as a form of birth control then my opinion is that the woman does not have the "right" to an abortion. She has the right to take birth control, she has the right to require the guy to use protection, she has the right to not have sex at all, she does not have the right to kill an unborn child because she was too lazy or too irresponsible to use her other rights.

habsheaven
06-16-2011, 04:09 PM
I am against it for one simple reason...I am here. My 17 year old mother wanted to have an abortion, but state law prevented it without parental/guardian permission.

If the mother's life is in jeapordy then I can see it, but when it is used as a form of birth control then my opinion is that the woman does not have the "right" to an abortion. She has the right to take birth control, she has the right to require the guy to use protection, she has the right to not have sex at all, she does not have the right to kill an unborn child because she was too lazy or too irresponsible to use her other rights.

Hard to argue with that. I have been blessed with my little sister for the past 41 years because her birth mother chose NOT to abort also. I just don't believe in taking that choice away from a woman.

Star_Cards
06-16-2011, 04:10 PM
I am against it for one simple reason...I am here. My 17 year old mother wanted to have an abortion, but state law prevented it without parental/guardian permission.

If the mother's life is in jeapordy then I can see it, but when it is used as a form of birth control then my opinion is that the woman does not have the "right" to an abortion. She has the right to take birth control, she has the right to require the guy to use protection, she has the right to not have sex at all, she does not have the right to kill an unborn child because she was too lazy or too irresponsible to use her other rights.

good point duane. There are multiple aspects of the argument that I can see.

mrveggieman
06-16-2011, 04:13 PM
Hard to argue with that. I have been blessed with my little sister for the past 41 years because her birth mother chose NOT to abort also. I just don't believe in taking that choice away from a woman.

The woman (and the guy for that matter) has already made their choice when they chose to have unprotected sex.

habsheaven
06-16-2011, 04:21 PM
The woman (and the guy for that matter) has already made their choice when they chose to have unprotected sex.

What choice did they make? Who said they had "unprotected" sex? You are making assumptions.

andrewhoya
06-16-2011, 04:23 PM
What choice did they make? Who said they had "unprotected" sex? You are making assumptions.

Technically, every type of sex is unprotected. There is not a single 100%-protected way of sex.

mrveggieman
06-16-2011, 04:35 PM
What choice did they make? Who said they had "unprotected" sex? You are making assumptions.


You are right and for that I apologize, but like another writer on this forum said every time you have sex it is unprotected because there is no guaranteed way to stop pregnancies, or diseases when having sex.

pantherfan82
06-16-2011, 06:10 PM
abortion should always be legal. not just legal in certain circumstances. its not our place to decide who and under what conditions it would be allowed. each case is different and women may have all kinds of reasons for choosing to abort or not.

condoms should be readily available in schools for kids. they gonna have sex anyway so why not make sure they know how to use condoms so at least they can attemp to prevent pregnancy.

INTIMADATOR2007
06-16-2011, 10:28 PM
I agree with the previous poster abstinance is still the best way but most of us on here I would assume do not practice abstinance. Each time you have sex you are taking a chance. Just like each time you drive your car, eat dinner, walk out of you house, etc...Unplanned things are bound to happen. However if you know for a fact that you cannot afford a baby you should not be having sex. If I was in a position where I got a woman pregnant that I did not want to have a baby with even though I used a condom and the lady said that she was on the pill I would have to man up and handle mines. Me telling her to have or her chosing an abortion would be the the coward's way out.
I can agree with that ..Well said !

ensbergcollector
06-16-2011, 11:46 PM
having quickly read through this, i have a few thoughts.

anyone who thinks the teen mom shows aren't glorifying pregnancy are completely wrong IMO. These girls are on the cover of magazines and are celebrities. For a lot of teenage girls, it looks like an easy way to make money and be famous. A friend of mine works in a town in kansas. In this one town, 3 girls got pregnant and said they did it on purpose to try and get on one of these shows. That is just in one town.

I am on the side that thinks only in cases of rape, incest, health of the mother etc.
Rather than adding to those who talk about adoption etc, i will throw out one that i don't think anyone has yet. What about the father? I am fully aware that the woman is the only one who is inconvenienced during pregnancy. I am also aware that if you think life doesn't count until birth then this argument will mean nothing. However, I have known guys who found out their girlfriends were pregnant and were more than willing to take on full custody and full financial obligation. The women didn't want to so they got abortions. The male has no rights whatsoever. As one who believes life happens at conception, I believe the father should have a say in the matter.

scottkoz20
06-17-2011, 07:01 AM
having quickly read through this, i have a few thoughts.

anyone who thinks the teen mom shows aren't glorifying pregnancy are completely wrong IMO. These girls are on the cover of magazines and are celebrities. For a lot of teenage girls, it looks like an easy way to make money and be famous. A friend of mine works in a town in kansas. In this one town, 3 girls got pregnant and said they did it on purpose to try and get on one of these shows. That is just in one town.

I am on the side that thinks only in cases of rape, incest, health of the mother etc.
Rather than adding to those who talk about adoption etc, i will throw out one that i don't think anyone has yet. What about the father? I am fully aware that the woman is the only one who is inconvenienced during pregnancy. I am also aware that if you think life doesn't count until birth then this argument will mean nothing. However, I have known guys who found out their girlfriends were pregnant and were more than willing to take on full custody and full financial obligation. The women didn't want to so they got abortions. The male has no rights whatsoever. As one who believes life happens at conception, I believe the father should have a say in the matter.


Thank you! That is my point on the shows. I'm sure it was not the intention of the show to make being a teen mom cool, but the other things have done that.

As for the dads. In adoption, the father MUST also waive his rights (in New York this is the law) in allowing a child to be adoption. If the father does not waive, the child can not be placed.

doniceage
06-17-2011, 07:20 AM
Hello readers. I wanted to start this topic because I saw that there was a debate on this on another thread. My spin on the issue is that abortion is wrong and should not be legal unless of case or rape, incest or if the mother's life is in danger. However conservatives don't jump for joy yet. I do also believe that their should be comprehensive manditory sex education in school and the schools as well as health clinics should give out free contraceptives as well as sex education counseling. Mabey if we would invest more in preventing unwanted pregnancies women wouldn't have to chose weather to have an abortion or not.

I agree with you personally from my standpoint:


abortion is wrong and should not be legal unless of case or rape, incest or if the mother's life is in danger.

My problem is this/ What gives me the right to tell someone what to do with their body. I believe in personal choice. Educate, teach, etc. but at the end of the day it personal choice in my book. I do not think their should be any law telling people what they Must Do.

There so much more to debate then just the simple thing question if abortion is wrong or right. Kids quality of life, welfare system, etc.


DON

mrveggieman
06-17-2011, 07:32 AM
I can agree with that ..Well said !

I'm shocked we can actually agree on something but thanks. :sign0020:

mrveggieman
06-17-2011, 07:33 AM
having quickly read through this, i have a few thoughts.

Anyone who thinks the teen mom shows aren't glorifying pregnancy are completely wrong imo. These girls are on the cover of magazines and are celebrities. For a lot of teenage girls, it looks like an easy way to make money and be famous. A friend of mine works in a town in kansas. In this one town, 3 girls got pregnant and said they did it on purpose to try and get on one of these shows. That is just in one town.

I am on the side that thinks only in cases of rape, incest, health of the mother etc.
Rather than adding to those who talk about adoption etc, i will throw out one that i don't think anyone has yet. What about the father? I am fully aware that the woman is the only one who is inconvenienced during pregnancy. I am also aware that if you think life doesn't count until birth then this argument will mean nothing. However, i have known guys who found out their girlfriends were pregnant and were more than willing to take on full custody and full financial obligation. The women didn't want to so they got abortions. The male has no rights whatsoever. As one who believes life happens at conception, i believe the father should have a say in the matter.

+1

habsheaven
06-17-2011, 08:33 AM
having quickly read through this, i have a few thoughts.

anyone who thinks the teen mom shows aren't glorifying pregnancy are completely wrong IMO. These girls are on the cover of magazines and are celebrities. For a lot of teenage girls, it looks like an easy way to make money and be famous. A friend of mine works in a town in kansas. In this one town, 3 girls got pregnant and said they did it on purpose to try and get on one of these shows. That is just in one town.

I am on the side that thinks only in cases of rape, incest, health of the mother etc.
Rather than adding to those who talk about adoption etc, i will throw out one that i don't think anyone has yet. What about the father? I am fully aware that the woman is the only one who is inconvenienced during pregnancy. I am also aware that if you think life doesn't count until birth then this argument will mean nothing. However, I have known guys who found out their girlfriends were pregnant and were more than willing to take on full custody and full financial obligation. The women didn't want to so they got abortions. The male has no rights whatsoever. As one who believes life happens at conception, I believe the father should have a say in the matter.

I think most people will agree with this sentiment however the ultimate say has to remain with the woman.

mrveggieman
06-17-2011, 08:59 AM
I think most people will agree with this sentiment however the ultimate say has to remain with the woman.


Yes we can all agree that the woman has to carry the baby for 9 months but it still takes two to tango just like it takes 2 to raise the child. Whatever decision is made both parents wishes should be considered. If one of the parties involved dosen't want to have a child they should take whatever steps neccessary to avoid getting pregnant or getting someone pregnant.

Star_Cards
06-17-2011, 10:18 AM
anyone who thinks the teen mom shows aren't glorifying pregnancy are completely wrong IMO. These girls are on the cover of magazines and are celebrities. For a lot of teenage girls, it looks like an easy way to make money and be famous. A friend of mine works in a town in kansas. In this one town, 3 girls got pregnant and said they did it on purpose to try and get on one of these shows. That is just in one town.

I get that the girls are celebs, but if you've seen the shows, most of what they go through and even when they are interviewed in the wrap up shows speaks to teenaged parenting being glamourous. I do see that the fact they are on TV leads to the glamorous aspect of things, but the content of the show itself doesn't make being a teenage mother look glamourous. There are some girls that get pregnant to try to get on the show, but I think the good of the show far outweighs the bad. One could even say that the bad is caused by the whole celebrity/reality craze that we are in currently. I guess it's sort of a chicken/egg scenerio so to speak. With anything there are always going to be people making bad decisions for stupid reasons like getting on a TV show, but even if you have 3 girls in a town getting pregnant to get on a show that hardly makes it the norm.

I see it that not everyone watching the show is going to get the message, but I think so many more people do over the people that don't.

Star_Cards
06-17-2011, 10:23 AM
Rather than adding to those who talk about adoption etc, i will throw out one that i don't think anyone has yet. What about the father? I am fully aware that the woman is the only one who is inconvenienced during pregnancy. I am also aware that if you think life doesn't count until birth then this argument will mean nothing. However, I have known guys who found out their girlfriends were pregnant and were more than willing to take on full custody and full financial obligation. The women didn't want to so they got abortions. The male has no rights whatsoever. As one who believes life happens at conception, I believe the father should have a say in the matter.

The father right is tricky for me. I think the father should have a say, but I also see that it is the woman's body. I would hope that if I were ever in that situation that I would have a say in the matter.

Haven't there been instances where men have legally kept women from abortions? Maybe I'm just thinking of a Law and Order episode.

sanfran22
06-17-2011, 10:28 AM
So here's another question I have. If it's ok to have an abortion at any time (because it's not a life until birth). Then how is it right for someone to be charged in a court of law for 2 counts of...

mrveggieman
06-17-2011, 10:33 AM
Good question. I don't have an answer for that one. I actually heard some pro abortion people who were against someone being charged for a second count of murder when they kill a pregnant woman. I...

Star_Cards
06-17-2011, 10:33 AM
great question. First off I don't think abortions should happen at anytime. I'm not 100% on the developmental timeframes, but I think at some point abortion should be off of the table unless there's...

tutall
06-17-2011, 10:37 AM
great question. First off I don't think abortions should happen at anytime. I'm not 100% on the developmental timeframes, but I think at some point abortion should be off of the table unless there's an extenuating circumstance. Although, I'm not sure what that time frame would be exactly.

As far as the charging of murder for two if a pregnant woman is murdered I see it as being different because the woman did not make the choice to end the pregnancy. Even if a person took the life of a woman and her unborn or just the unborn child in the time frame of when I think abortion should be an option, I think that I would still call that murder since the choice was not made by the woman carrying the child.

It's definitely a tricky scenario and it's one that I myself isn't 100% set one either way.

Just playing devils advocate.... It is not the childs decision when the mom kills it off so shouldnt that be murder as well?

And i dont care what any of you say... these pics are of my son about halfway through the pregnancy.... you cant tell me that isnt a person in those picture

Star_Cards
06-17-2011, 11:08 AM
point definitely taken. I get the argument about who's decision it is to make as well, because if a mother kills her baby right after it's born she'd be charged with murder. Had she had an abortion...

habsheaven
06-17-2011, 12:02 PM
I do not know of anyone who claims "it's ok to have an abortion at any time" prior to birth. I am pretty sure there are restrictions based on the developmental stage of the fetus.

duane1969
06-17-2011, 03:44 PM
I do not know of anyone who claims "it's ok to have an abortion at any time" prior to birth. I am pretty sure there are restrictions based on the developmental stage of the fetus.

To this day many abortion activist claim that Roe v. Wade protects their right to 3rd term abortions. Until just a few years ago it was legal to abort a baby, even if labor pains had already started, in nearly every state that allowed abortions.

The only reason that late term/3rd term abortions are banned now is because it was realized by the general public that these babies were essentially being born (except for their head) and then killed. The doctor would literally have a wriggling, crying baby in his hands, with nothing but the head still in the birth canal, and then take it's life by either jamming a rod into the back of it's skull and sucking out it's brain (while still alive) or by giving it a lethal injection.

People go to prison for doing things like that to animals but the law protects them when it is a child.

If you do a little Googling of the term "3rd term abortion" you will see and read more than yourr share of info on the subject. I warn you, it is disturbing.

Star_Cards
06-17-2011, 05:00 PM
I would think that a lot of people that are pro choice would have a deadline into the pregnancy where it's no longer an option. It's that way for me at least.

habsheaven
06-17-2011, 06:53 PM
To this day many abortion activist claim that Roe v. Wade protects their right to 3rd term abortions. Until just a few years ago it was legal to abort a baby, even if labor pains had already started, in nearly every state that allowed abortions.

The only reason that late term/3rd term abortions are banned now is because it was realized by the general public that these babies were essentially being born (except for their head) and then killed. The doctor would literally have a wriggling, crying baby in his hands, with nothing but the head still in the birth canal, and then take it's life by either jamming a rod into the back of it's skull and sucking out it's brain (while still alive) or by giving it a lethal injection.

People go to prison for doing things like that to animals but the law protects them when it is a child.

If you do a little Googling of the term "3rd term abortion" you will see and read more than yourr share of info on the subject. I warn you, it is disturbing.

Have you ever seen a live birth? Just wondering because you have your facts completely wrong. Babies are born head first unless it is a breach which is very dangerous and luckily not that common.

habsheaven
06-17-2011, 06:54 PM
I would think that a lot of people that are pro choice would have a deadline into the pregnancy where it's no longer an option. It's that way for me at least.

Agreed!

themanishere
06-17-2011, 07:07 PM
I would think that a lot of people that are pro choice would have a deadline into the pregnancy where it's no longer an option. It's that way for me at least.

I am pro choice, and I see it this way too.

The beginning of the third trimester is where I would cut it off. If I recall, that's pretty much the earliest stage a baby can typically survive outside of the womb.

ensbergcollector
06-17-2011, 10:54 PM
so for all the people who say a life isn't viable until the baby can live on it's own, what is your attitude toward people who, due to illness, accident, etc. can only live with the help of hospital equipment?
For what it's worth, I am not trying to be sarcastic. It seems to me, those are the same thing.

doniceage
06-18-2011, 02:43 AM
I would think that a lot of people that are pro choice would have a deadline into the pregnancy where it's no longer an option. It's that way for me at least.

I have no deadline where I think we should step in as it not my body to tell someone what to do with their body. As I mentioned before my personal belief does not overide telling someone to do with their body.


so for all the people who say a life isn't viable until the baby can live on it's own, what is your attitude toward people who, due to illness, accident, etc. can only live with the help of hospital equipment?
For what it's worth, I am not trying to be sarcastic. It seems to me, those are the same thing.

I relate to this from another aspect. As some want to say after 3 months you must have the baby or it wrong etc or some timetable differeing for various people.

Would it be any different from the gov't or some entity telling you that you life is not worth saving. As your success rate to recover is not good so we will not perform the surgery. Perhaps they will say you will only live two years and that not worth the cost if they are footing the bill.

One thing great about this country is we have rights to believe and express how we feel. I think instituting a policy to say it wrong or not gets rid of personal choice which is what the country was founded on. Perhaps I am misguided.

DON

REDANDGOLDPRIDE
06-18-2011, 03:18 AM
I'm pro-choice.

And it should be totally legal. I am in favor of a "deadline" for an abortion. As long as it's done before the third trimester like others have said. Honestly, if I were to knock up a girl right now I'm not sure how in favor I would be of it. I don't think I could say "Let's abort it". But I believe people have the right to if they want. Why bring a child onto this earth if you're not going to give it all the attention and care it needs? If abortion would be illegal we'd have a lot more scum bag parents living off the government that might have otherwise gotten an abortion.

I also think if a girl is high-school age she should be strongly advised to get an abortion. It's really sickening to see a 14 year old with a child. It's not fair to the child, or the tax payers of America who will have to pay for everything for it until it more than likely has a kid of its own at 15.. Someone mentioned those Teen Mom shows.. That's just flat out disgusting IMO. Turning 9th grade skanks into celebrities because MTV banks off of their crappy situation.

gatorboymike
06-18-2011, 03:55 AM
so for all the people who say a life isn't viable until the baby can live on it's own, what is your attitude toward people who, due to illness, accident, etc. can only live with the help of hospital equipment?
For what it's worth, I am not trying to be sarcastic. It seems to me, those are the same thing.

If they are conscious and lucid, they should be allowed to choose for themselves whether they live or die. If they're not, that decision falls to their next of kin.

habsheaven
06-18-2011, 07:46 AM
so for all the people who say a life isn't viable until the baby can live on it's own, what is your attitude toward people who, due to illness, accident, etc. can only live with the help of hospital equipment?
For what it's worth, I am not trying to be sarcastic. It seems to me, those are the same thing.

There is a key difference between the two. The unborn child has not reached the point where "life" has been established and therefore has not "earned" (for lack of a better word) the RIGHT to live. The living person who experiences a catastrophic injury has earned that RIGHT.

On a personal note, my mother has suffered from BPSD for the past 7 years. BPSD is short for Behavioral and Psychological Sysptoms of Dementia. My mother's body does not require any medical intervention to live. However, because of the BPSD, she cannot take care of herself in any way. Her condition will continue to deteriorate until the point where her brain can no longer tell her to swallow or breathe.

Some may view my opinion on abortion as a lack of "respect for life". From my perspective I view it as the complete opposite. I cherish life. I cherish REAL life.

andrewhoya
06-18-2011, 10:10 AM
I think instituting a policy to say it wrong or not gets rid of personal choice which is what the country was founded on.

Gay/lesbian people? They don't have personal choice in all 50 states.

tutall
06-18-2011, 02:19 PM
There is a key difference between the two. The unborn child has not reached the point where "life" has been established and therefore has not "earned" (for lack of a better word) the RIGHT to live. The living person who experiences a catastrophic injury has earned that RIGHT.

On a personal note, my mother has suffered from BPSD for the past 7 years. BPSD is short for Behavioral and Psychological Sysptoms of Dementia. My mother's body does not require any medical intervention to live. However, because of the BPSD, she cannot take care of herself in any way. Her condition will continue to deteriorate until the point where her brain can no longer tell her to swallow or breathe.

Some may view my opinion on abortion as a lack of "respect for life". From my perspective I view it as the complete opposite. I cherish life. I cherish REAL life.

are you serious? That child hasnt earned the right to live? The same person who did the acts to make that child are the same people choosing to kill it off.. It is still a person in there... With a face, arms and legs, eyes... It is no different than murder in any form except that some states say it is legal and murder is legal in 0 states.

duane1969
06-18-2011, 09:24 PM
There is a key difference between the two. The unborn child has not reached the point where "life" has been established and therefore has not "earned" (for lack of a better word) the RIGHT to live. The living person who experiences a catastrophic injury has earned that RIGHT.


So if I slip something into a mother's drink that causes her baby to auto-abort but does no physical harm to the mother, I have done nothing wrong? Since those unborn children have no rights then they are protected by no laws and therefore I have done nothing wrong by eliminating them, correct?

Here is where the liberal position usually falls apart. If the mother does not want the baby, she has a right to kill it and we call it abortion, but if the mother does want the baby and someone else kills it we call it murder. What a fallacy.

habsheaven
06-19-2011, 01:57 PM
are you serious? That child hasnt earned the right to live? The same person who did the acts to make that child are the same people choosing to kill it off.. It is still a person in there... With a face, arms and legs, eyes... It is no different than murder in any form except that some states say it is legal and murder is legal in 0 states.

Yes, I am serious. You call it a "child", I call it an "unborn child/fetus". It simply is not a "person" in the eyes of the law. If it were, abortion would be illegal, which it isn't.

habsheaven
06-19-2011, 02:01 PM
So if I slip something into a mother's drink that causes her baby to auto-abort but does no physical harm to the mother, I have done nothing wrong? Since those unborn children have no rights then they are protected by no laws and therefore I have done nothing wrong by eliminating them, correct?

Here is where the liberal position usually falls apart. If the mother does not want the baby, she has a right to kill it and we call it abortion, but if the mother does want the baby and someone else kills it we call it murder. What a fallacy.

No, if you do something to the mother without her consent, you have done something wrong. I would like to see the law on the books that calls it "murder". Can you provide that info?

sanfran22
06-19-2011, 11:18 PM
No, if you do something to the mother without her consent, you have done something wrong. I would like to see the law on the books that calls it "murder". Can you provide that info?
Ummm, here's a start.
http://www.nrlc.org/Unborn_victims/Statehomicidelaws092302.html
Liberals have no foot to stand on in this matter. It either is a life or it isn't You can't have it both ways.

Aikman_TheGreat
06-20-2011, 04:34 AM
I'm glad my mom didn't abort me. I wouldn't be here. If any of your mothers had aborted you, you wouldnt be here to argue on this topic.

habsheaven
06-20-2011, 08:01 AM
Thanks for the link but it is a little misleading. Taken from the intro: <br />
<br />
May 27, 2011 <br />
What appears below is a summary of the laws of the 36 states that recognize the unlawful killing of an...

habsheaven
06-20-2011, 08:04 AM
I'm glad my mom didn't abort me. I wouldn't be here. If any of your mothers had aborted you, you wouldnt be here to argue on this topic.

The argument is not "whether or not we think abortion is good". The argument is, "should it be legal or not". Two totally separate arguments.

mrveggieman
06-20-2011, 08:09 AM
i'm glad my mom didn't abort me. I wouldn't be here. If any of your mothers had aborted you, you wouldnt be here to argue on this topic.


+1

mrveggieman
06-20-2011, 08:11 AM
It trips me out how a grown adult who for whatever reason dosen't want to live any more cannot make the choice to legally end their OWN life but then the law turns around and says that it is ok for someone to legally take the life of an unborn child who cannot speak from him/herself.

andrewhoya
06-20-2011, 08:51 AM
The argument is not "whether or not we think abortion is good". The argument is, "should it be legal or not". Two totally separate arguments.

They are nearly exactly the same thing, if not the exact same thing. Those who think it is good are those who think it should be legal. Those who think it is bad are those who think it should be illegal.

So, no, they are not totally separate, they are nearly identical.

habsheaven
06-20-2011, 09:38 AM
They are nearly exactly the same thing, if not the exact same thing. Those who think it is good are those who think it should be legal. Those who think it is bad are those who think it should be illegal.

So, no, they are not totally separate, they are nearly identical.

How so? Are you telling me what I think? I have made it abundantly clear that I think abortion should be LEGAL. I NEVER said it was a GOOD thing.

I also think TOBACCO should be LEGAL. Are you telling me that because of my position on that, that I think tobacco is GOOD?

CHOICE = GOOD,
what you CHOOSE = open for debate

mrveggieman
06-20-2011, 09:45 AM
How so? Are you telling me what I think? I have made it abundantly clear that I think abortion should be LEGAL. I NEVER said it was a GOOD thing.

I also think TOBACCO should be LEGAL. Are you telling me that because of my position on that, that I think tobacco is GOOD?

CHOICE = GOOD,
what you CHOOSE = open for debate

Choice is indeed a good thing. One can chose to use condoms, diaphrams, birth control pills or not to have sex at all. However once someone else's life is involved it's not just your choice and an unborn child's choices needs to be taken into consideration.

andrewhoya
06-20-2011, 09:46 AM
How so? Are you telling me what I think? I have made it abundantly clear that I think abortion should be LEGAL. I NEVER said it was a GOOD thing.

I also think TOBACCO should be LEGAL. Are you telling me that because of my position on that, that I think tobacco is GOOD?

CHOICE = GOOD,
what you CHOOSE = open for debate

That is a totally different argument. For THIS topic, yes, nearly everyone on here who thinks abortion should be legal believes it is a good thing. Still don't believe me? I'll spend the next hour picking apart your posts to prove that that is truly what you think.

habsheaven
06-20-2011, 09:56 AM
That is a totally different argument. For THIS topic, yes, nearly everyone on here who thinks abortion should be legal believes it is a good thing. Still don't believe me? I'll spend the next hour picking apart your posts to prove that that is truly what you think.

Feel free to waste your time. While your at it, please post up everyone's user names that believe ABORTION is a GOOD thing. You might as well insult them too.

andrewhoya
06-20-2011, 10:01 AM
Feel free to waste your time. While your at it, please post up everyone's user names that believe ABORTION is a GOOD thing. You might as well insult them too.

Won't be wasting my time. And I'd also like to know how I "insulted" you.

andrewhoya
06-20-2011, 10:12 AM
There is a key difference between the two. The unborn child has not reached the point where "life" has been established and therefore has not "earned" (for lack of a better word) the RIGHT to live. The living person who experiences a catastrophic injury has earned that RIGHT.


When I read this, the thought that pops into my head is:
*Alright, if you think that they don't deserve to live (aka haven't earned their life), then I guess that every baby should just get aborted, if they haven't earned their life yet.

So, I guess you are correct. Abortion is good and should be done to every baby since NO baby/babies earn their "right to live". :confused0024:


Yes, I am serious. You call it a "child", I call it an "unborn child/fetus". It simply is not a "person" in the eyes of the law. If it were, abortion would be illegal, which it isn't.

-So, basically you are saying it is 100&#37; okay to freely kill whatever is not a child or person, as long as it is legal?

habsheaven
06-20-2011, 10:19 AM
Won't be wasting my time. And I'd also like to know how I "insulted" you.

Hmmmm ..... Let me see. I am a 45 year old (very opinionated) man that has been discussing issues such as this for the past 30+ years with friends, family, colleagues, etc. And in a mere couple of hours you are going to show me how I TRULY feel about a subject matter based on my posts here.

Insulted? I guess not, when I think about it, it is rather humourous. Again, have at it. Can't wait to see the results of your arrogance.

mrveggieman
06-20-2011, 10:24 AM
Hmmmm ..... Let me see. I am a 45 year old (very opinionated) man that has been discussing issues such as this for the past 30+ years with friends, family, colleagues, etc. And in a mere couple of hours you are going to show me how I TRULY feel about a subject matter based on my posts here.

Insulted? I guess not, when I think about it, it is rather humourous. Again, have at it. Can't wait to see the results of your arrogance.

This reminds me of how me and one of our ultra conservative friends go at it every day on here. Now I get a chance to sit back and watch for a change. :sign0020:

habsheaven
06-20-2011, 10:27 AM
When I read this, the thought that pops into my head is:
*Alright, if you think that they don't deserve to live (aka haven't earned their life), then I guess that every baby should just get aborted, if they haven't earned their life yet.

So, I guess you are correct. Abortion is good and should be done to every baby since NO baby/babies earn their "right to live". :confused0024:

-So, basically you are saying it is 100% okay to freely kill whatever is not a child or person, as long as it is legal?

Wow!!! Now, I KNOW you are wasting your time. You have to try harder. The conclusions you are jumping to here are staggering.

That's right. I think ALL babies should be aborted and the human species will be gone in 120 years.

Star_Cards
06-20-2011, 10:28 AM
It trips me out how a grown adult who for whatever reason dosen't want to live any more cannot make the choice to legally end their OWN life but then the law turns around and says that it is ok for someone to legally take the life of an unborn child who cannot speak from him/herself.

Couldn't agree more. Anyone should have the right to take their own life if they want. In the instances of terminally ill people who are in pain, it's absolutely absurd that what is afforded to a terminally ill pet isn't afforded to them as well.

habsheaven
06-20-2011, 10:28 AM
This reminds me of how me and one of our ultra conservative friends go at it every day on here. Now I get a chance to sit back and watch for a change. :sign0020:

Get your popcorn. This should be good.:party0053:

Star_Cards
06-20-2011, 10:35 AM
They are nearly exactly the same thing, if not the exact same thing. Those who think it is good are those who think it should be legal. Those who think it is bad are those who think it should be illegal.

So, no, they are not totally separate, they are nearly identical.

I couldn't agree less. Just because one person finds something good or not doesn't mean that's how the law should go. I myself would say that right now in my life I would almost 99% never see abortion as an option, but that's not to say that I think it should be illegal. I think people can look at a law and say that it's not something they would do, but there still should be the right to do it. It's kind along the same lines as gay marriage legalities.

Star_Cards
06-20-2011, 10:39 AM
That is a totally different argument. For THIS topic, yes, nearly everyone on here who thinks abortion should be legal believes it is a good thing. Still don't believe me? I'll spend the next hour picking apart your posts to prove that that is truly what you think.

I think it should be legal but I won't deem abortion as a 100% good thing. I think the right needs to be there, but if I knew someone who was pregnant and they came to me for advice or simply saying they were getting an abortion, I would ask them if they had thought about other options.

For me it's about what I think should be legal for the masses and not just what I personally would or wouldn't do.

andrewhoya
06-20-2011, 10:40 AM
Wow!!! Now, I KNOW you are wasting your time. You have to try harder. The conclusions you are jumping to here are staggering.

That's right. I think ALL babies should be aborted and the human species will be gone in 120 years.

Based on the one post, that is what I concluded. You said that babies have not "earned" the right to live.

andrewhoya
06-20-2011, 10:40 AM
I couldn't agree less. Just because one person finds something good or not doesn't mean that's how the law should go. I myself would say that right now in my life I would almost 99% never see abortion as an option, but that's not to say that I think it should be illegal. I think people can look at a law and say that it's not something they would do, but there still should be the right to do it. It's kind along the same lines as gay marriage legalities.


I think it should be legal but I won't deem abortion as a 100% good thing. I think the right needs to be there, but if I knew someone who was pregnant and they came to me for advice or simply saying they were getting an abortion, I would ask them if they had thought about other options.

For me it's about what I think should be legal for the masses and not just what I personally would or wouldn't do.

Point taken.

habsheaven
06-20-2011, 10:46 AM
I couldn't agree less. Just because one person finds something good or not doesn't mean that's how the law should go. I myself would say that right now in my life I would almost 99% never see abortion as an option, but that's not to say that I think it should be illegal. I think people can look at a law and say that it's not something they would do, but there still should be the right to do it. It's kind along the same lines as gay marriage legalities.

Exactly! And if that 1% were to ever occur in your life, I bet you still wouldn't view it as a GOOD thing. More likely, you would view it as the better option in a very difficult circumstance.

habsheaven
06-20-2011, 10:50 AM
Based on the one post, that is what I concluded. You said that babies have not "earned" the right to live.

Well you better start questioning your conclusions. Your ability to "read between the lines" is skewed by your own biases.

Star_Cards
06-20-2011, 10:52 AM
Exactly! And if that 1% were to ever occur in your life, I bet you still wouldn't view it as a GOOD thing. More likely, you would view it as the better option in a very difficult circumstance.

yeah... exactly. perfectly said. I know this to be true for the few women that I know have had abortions. The main one was in an abusive relationship and was in the process of getting out of it. Had she had the baby who knows what would have happened, but more than likely she would have gone back and put both herself and her child into a very bad situation. The actual act was not good, but it put her in a much different place in her life.

andrewhoya
06-20-2011, 10:53 AM
Well you better start questioning your conclusions. Your ability to "read between the lines" is skewed by your own biases.

I'm fine with you thinking that, but IMO, I am not biased towards this subject, like most of the other people debating. We all believe strongly in this topic, and will do/say whatever we can to back up our side as best as we can.

andrewhoya
06-20-2011, 10:55 AM
yeah... exactly. perfectly said. I know this to be true for the few women that I know have had abortions. The main one was in an abusive relationship and was in the process of getting out of it. Had she had the baby who knows what would have happened, but more than likely she would have gone back and put both herself and her child into a very bad situation. The actual act was not good, but it put her in a much different place in her life.

I don't know who they were or what they were like, but if the relationship was truly abusive, then things could have been done about the male, and an adoption likely could have been set up.

habsheaven
06-20-2011, 11:11 AM
I'm fine with you thinking that, but IMO, I am not biased towards this subject, like most of the other people debating. We all believe strongly in this topic, and will do/say whatever we can to back up our side as best as we can.

So what is it that YOU believe? I do not want to assume you believe it should be ILLEGAL because you feel it is BAD. Just as, I do not want you telling me I think it is GOOD because I want it to be LEGAL.

andrewhoya
06-20-2011, 11:13 AM
So what is it that YOU believe? I do not want to assume you believe it should be ILLEGAL because you feel it is BAD. Just as, I do not want you telling me I think it is GOOD because I want it to be LEGAL.

I think it should be illegal because the cons clearly outweigh the pros.

Star_Cards
06-20-2011, 11:24 AM
but even as long as there can be pros is reason enough for me to leave it legal.

andrewhoya
06-20-2011, 11:25 AM
but even as long as there can be pros is reason enough for me to leave it legal.

There are pros for everything that is illegal in the United States.

sanfran22
06-20-2011, 11:29 AM
but even as long as there can be pros is reason enough for me to leave it legal.
That's an insane argument.

sanfran22
06-20-2011, 11:31 AM
Nothing misleading about it. You asked a question, I gave an answer. Is it A crime to kill the unborn in some states??

sanfran22
06-20-2011, 11:33 AM
This reminds me of how me and one of our ultra conservative friends go at it every day on here. Now I get a chance to sit back and watch for a change. :sign0020:
Not for long though....:sign0020::hug:

sanfran22
06-20-2011, 11:34 AM
Wow!!! Now, I KNOW you are wasting your time. You have to try harder. The conclusions you are jumping to here are staggering.

That's right. I think ALL babies should be aborted and the human species will be gone in 120 years.
It will be gone in a hundered if we were all gay:sign0020::sign0020::sign0020:

mrveggieman
06-20-2011, 11:37 AM
Not for long though....:sign0020::hug:

Yeah even though we pretty much have the same views on this topic it won't be long berofe we find something else to butt heads over. :boxing:

habsheaven
06-20-2011, 11:59 AM
I think it should be illegal because the cons clearly outweigh the pros.

Okay, so now I know how you feel and why.

It seems a little too "black & white" for me but that is your choice.

Here is my position on the subject: I feel it should be legal under certain circumstances, not ALL circumstances. For me, it comes down to the RIGHT TO CHOOSE of a woman weighed against the RIGHT TO LIFE of an unborn child.

That is a very GREY area for many people, myself included.

I concede that for those that believe life begins at conception there is very little grey area, and I understand their reasoning for making it illegal.

habsheaven
06-20-2011, 12:02 PM
Okay, I have another question. How many mothers in these states have been charged for having an abortion?

andrewhoya
06-20-2011, 12:02 PM
Okay, so now I know how you feel and why.

It seems a little too "black & white" for me but that is your choice.

Here is my position on the subject: I feel it should be legal under certain circumstances, not ALL circumstances. For me, it comes down to the RIGHT TO CHOOSE of a woman weighed against the RIGHT TO LIFE of an unborn child.

That is a very GREY area for many people, myself included.

I concede that for those that believe life begins at conception there is very little grey area, and I understand their reasoning for making it illegal.

I can see what you are saying, but I do have one...err...."question". If it is about choice, then why doesn't the baby have a choice on whether to live or not?

habsheaven
06-20-2011, 12:13 PM
I can see what you are saying, but I do have one...err...."question". If it is about choice, then why doesn't the baby have a choice on whether to live or not?

I would think it has something to do with the FACT that not all unborn children are PERSONS in the EYES OF THE LAW. Therefore, they cannot have rights. No rights translate to no choice.

andrewhoya
06-20-2011, 12:24 PM
I would think it has something to do with the FACT that not all unborn children are PERSONS in the EYES OF THE LAW. Therefore, they cannot have rights. No rights translate to no choice.

Just because something/somebody has no rights, you are fine with them going through brutal pain? ("Dilation and Evacuation (D&E): Sharp-edged instruments are used to grasp, twist and tear the baby’s body into pieces, which are then removed from the womb." -http://www.mccl.org/Page.aspx?pid=298)

Babies are able to feel it. They jerk around in pain. It is just like setting a wild animal on fire. Sure, they don't have rights, but is it morally right to do it and watch them suffer and die of severe burns?

habsheaven
06-20-2011, 12:43 PM
You asked me a question about CHOICE. I tried to answered it. If you want to post literature about different procedures, you can do so without quoting me on it. If you want a better answer, consult the LEGAL statutes about it. I am FINE with the WOMAN having the CHOICE over the fetus. If you have a problem with the procedures used I invite you to take up that cause and promote changes. You will have much better success in that area.

andrewhoya
06-20-2011, 12:48 PM
You asked me a question about CHOICE. I tried to answered it. If you want to post literature about different procedures, you can do so without quoting me on it. If you want a better answer, consult the LEGAL statutes about it. I am FINE with the WOMAN having the CHOICE over the fetus. If you have a problem with the procedures used I invite you to take up that cause and promote changes. You will have much better success in that area.

In your last post, you said no choice translates to no rights. I based my post on the no rights portion.



If you want a better answer, consult the LEGAL statutes about it.
I'm not looking for a better answer. All I did was post a scientific fact. If you don't like it, then that is fine.

andrewhoya
06-20-2011, 12:53 PM
You asked me a question about CHOICE. I tried to answered it. If you want to post literature about different procedures, you can do so without quoting me on it. If you want a better answer, consult the LEGAL statutes about it. I am FINE with the WOMAN having the CHOICE over the fetus. If you have a problem with the procedures used I invite you to take up that cause and promote changes. You will have much better success in that area.

I am curious on two things.

1. What do you consider as the "pros" of abortion?

2. Are you pro or anti gay rights? (yes, it does relate to this)

habsheaven
06-20-2011, 01:04 PM
You posted a bunch of inflammatory rhetoric, not facts. Much like the rhetoric posted several pages back. If you want to post FACTS about procedures used, I suggest you use the proper terminology, state the differing ages of the fetus involved to provide some context and do not make assumptions about what you can't possibly know.

mrveggieman
06-20-2011, 01:06 PM
I am curious on two things.

1. What do you consider as the "pros" of abortion?

2. Are you pro or anti gay rights? (yes, it does relate to this)


I know the question was not directed to me but I would like to add my 2 cents. I can't speak of any pros of abortion unless it is done to save the mother's life. As far as gay rights I think that homosexuality is not "morally" right but homosexuals should be entitled to every legal protection that everyone else has. I would also like to ask the group about this idea. What if we keep abortion legal but make the stipulation that if a woman has an abortion that is not medically neccessary she must also have a hysteratcemy. (I know that I spelled it wrong but ya'll know what I'm talking about). She should also be required to do community service such as working with abused children and pay a fine based on her income. What do ya'll think?

habsheaven
06-20-2011, 01:07 PM
I am curious on two things.

1. What do you consider as the "pros" of abortion?

2. Are you pro or anti gay rights? (yes, it does relate to this)

There are no PROS to abortion.

I am pro gay rights.

Now please explain the correlation between abortion and gay rights. I am curious to see the link.

sanfran22
06-20-2011, 01:27 PM
That wasn't the question you asked. <br />
So you are ok with the mother not getting charged with anything when she has an abortion, so are you also ok with charging a crime when someone else kills the...

andrewhoya
06-20-2011, 01:29 PM
You posted a bunch of inflammatory rhetoric, not facts. Much like the rhetoric posted several pages back. If you want to post FACTS about procedures used, I suggest you use the proper terminology, state the differing ages of the fetus involved to provide some context and do not make assumptions about what you can't possibly know.

I copied a quote from a webpage, which is why I included the website.

Facts are facts. You don't have to use proper terminology for it to be a fact.

Example:

People are alive.

Homo sapiens are alive.

The top isn't "proper" terminology, but it is still true, no?


I know the question was not directed to me but I would like to add my 2 cents. I can't speak of any pros of abortion unless it is done to save the mother's life. As far as gay rights I think that homosexuality is not "morally" right but homosexuals should be entitled to every legal protection that everyone else has. I would also like to ask the group about this idea. What if we keep abortion legal but make the stipulation that if a woman has an abortion that is not medically neccessary she must also have a hysteratcemy. (I know that I spelled it wrong but ya'll know what I'm talking about). She should also be required to do community service such as working with abused children and pay a fine based on her income. What do ya'll think?

That wouldn't suit me. A baby is still put through torture and is still killed.


There are no PROS to abortion.

I am pro gay rights.

Now please explain the correlation between abortion and gay rights. I am curious to see the link.

You were so set on everyone having choices, I just wanted to make sure it was true for every aspect of "politics".

andrewhoya
06-20-2011, 01:30 PM
+1

habsheaven
06-20-2011, 01:41 PM
It would all depend on the stage of the development the fetus had reached at the time of termination. That was the point I was trying to make in my other post. Your link included this line: <br />
...

sanfran22
06-20-2011, 01:45 PM
Why does it matter? It's either a life or not when conceived....If you go back and look through that link you will see that many of the states charge a crime at any stage.....How can that be? Seems...

sanfran22
06-20-2011, 01:49 PM
I'll just use my state as an example... <br />
<br />
Ohio: At any stage of pre-natal development, if an &quot;unborn member of the species homo sapiens, who is or was carried in the womb of another&quot; is killed, it...

habsheaven
06-20-2011, 01:50 PM
I copied a quote from a webpage, which is why I included the website.

Facts are facts. You don't have to use proper terminology for it to be a fact.

Example:

People are alive.

Homo sapiens are alive.

The top isn't "proper" terminology, but it is still true, no?



No, it isn't necessarily true. Some people are dead.

Seriously though, if you substitute the word "baby" for "fetus" you are distorting the facts. So facts aren't simply facts.

Stating something is like a "animal being burnt alive" is not a fact. Neither the animal or the fetus has ever told us what it is like so you cannot compare the two acts. That is supposition.

In the end, presented in the manner in which you presented it, it is all propaganda.

habsheaven
06-20-2011, 01:55 PM
You may have a point about a double-standard. Again, I am not a legal expert. I have no knowledge of what considerations go into making the laws of different states. It still has no bearing on the...

Star_Cards
06-20-2011, 02:21 PM
I see it as a difference because the person that punched the woman in the stomach wasn't the person carrying the child and legally had the choice to abort it.

andrewhoya
06-20-2011, 02:23 PM
No, it isn't necessarily true. Some people are dead.

Seriously though, if you substitute the word "baby" for "fetus" you are distorting the facts. So facts aren't simply facts.

Stating something is like a "animal being burnt alive" is not a fact. Neither the animal or the fetus has ever told us what it is like so you cannot compare the two acts. That is supposition.

In the end, presented in the manner in which you presented it, it is all propaganda.

Alright, if you want to go that route...

People who breathe are alive.
Homo sapiens who breathe are alive.


And I have a... problem... with the italicized. So, basically, we cannot compare anything where the said person or thing doesn't tell us what it is like?

mrveggieman
06-20-2011, 02:24 PM
Hey ya'll remember this. Just because something is legal dosen't neccessaliry make it right.

habsheaven
06-20-2011, 02:27 PM
Alright, if you want to go that route...

People who breathe are alive.
Homo sapiens who breathe are alive.


And I have a... problem... with the italicized. So, basically, we cannot compare anything where the said person or thing doesn't tell us what it is like?

No you can compare it all you like. You just can't factually call it a FACT.

habsheaven
06-20-2011, 02:29 PM
Hey ya'll remember this. Just because something is legal dosen't neccessaliry make it right.

Examples??

andrewhoya
06-20-2011, 02:30 PM
No you can compare it all you like. You just can't factually call it a FACT.

Aborted babies feel the physical pain of being aborted. That has been SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN. That is a fact, yet not a single one has ever told anyone.

gatorboymike
06-20-2011, 02:35 PM
Lots of red herrings and strawman arguments from the "outlaw everything" crowd.

habsheaven
06-20-2011, 02:36 PM
How was this proven? Enlighten me.

mrveggieman
06-20-2011, 02:38 PM
Examples??

At one time in the United States segregation was legal. Slavery was also legal. Most people would say those activities were not right. Abortion which is the killing of an unborn child through barbaric methods is currently legal in the United States. Even though people owned slaves and tried to justify slavery as well as segregation those laws were eventually deemed unjust and subsequently overturned. People here legally have abortions but those laws can be overturned as well.

andrewhoya
06-20-2011, 02:40 PM
How was this proven? Enlighten me.

Well, I can't provide videos or links to most sites due to vulgar content.... So that knocks out about 95&#37; of my options, http://www.bing.com/search?setmkt=en-US&q=can+babies+feel+abortions

andrewhoya
06-20-2011, 02:41 PM
at one time in the united states segregation was legal. Slavery was also legal. Most people would say those activities were not right. Abortion which is the killing of an unborn child through barbaric methods is currently legal in the united states. Even though people owned slaves and tried to justify slavery as well as segregation those laws were eventually deemed unjust and subsequently overturned. People here legally have abortions but those laws can be overturned as well.

+1000

habsheaven
06-20-2011, 02:42 PM
Well, I can't provide videos or links to most sites due to vulgar content.... So that knocks out about 95% of my options, http://www.bing.com/search?setmkt=en-US&q=can+babies+feel+abortions

Thanks. I will read up on it tonight.

Star_Cards
06-20-2011, 02:46 PM
Examples??

ban against gay marriage is legal but not right.

andrewhoya
06-20-2011, 02:48 PM
ban against gay marriage is legal but not right.

Agree 100%

habsheaven
06-20-2011, 02:48 PM
At one time in the United States segregation was legal. Slavery was also legal. Most people would say those activities were not right. Abortion which is the killing of an unborn child through barbaric methods is currently legal in the United States. Even though people owned slaves and tried to justify slavery as well as segregation those laws were eventually deemed unjust and subsequently overturned. People here legally have abortions but those laws can be overturned as well.

Very true. I was hoping you had more current ones in mind (just trying to make you work for it :winking0071: )but I guess that would have led the topic astray. Society's changing views affecting changes to current laws is a very important concept.

mrveggieman
06-20-2011, 02:57 PM
Very true. I was hoping you had more current ones in mind (just trying to make you work for it :winking0071: )but I guess that would have led the topic astray. Society's changing views affecting changes to current laws is a very important concept.

If I may asks what are Canada's abortion laws. Are they just as if not more liberal than the United States? I am curious.

sanfran22
06-20-2011, 02:57 PM
I see it as a difference because the person that punched the woman in the stomach wasn't the person carrying the child and legally had the choice to abort it.
But according to some, it's not a child......So how can it be punishable by prison in one instance and not the other if it has no rights?

habsheaven
06-20-2011, 03:00 PM
If I may asks what are Canada's abortion laws. Are they just as if not more liberal than the United States? I am curious.

I believe they are more liberal but have never compared the two. Safe to say, in general we are a lot more liberal than the US in all aspects of life despite our current Conservative government.

tutall
06-20-2011, 07:12 PM
Okay, so now I know how you feel and why.

It seems a little too "black & white" for me but that is your choice.

Here is my position on the subject: I feel it should be legal under certain circumstances, not ALL circumstances. For me, it comes down to the RIGHT TO CHOOSE of a woman weighed against the RIGHT TO LIFE of an unborn child.

That is a very GREY area for many people, myself included.

I concede that for those that believe life begins at conception there is very little grey area, and I understand their reasoning for making it illegal.

Where does it end though? I mean... Is it only legal after rape, abuse, or health issues? Do we then set up a board of inspectors to investigate claims? What if it is aborted due to rape but the accused is found innocent? For me there are just too many ways around this and ultimately it would be a joke of a system.

Dont get me wrong.. I am all for peoples rights... but I am also about protecting everyone's rights and while I know current laws may not designate a baby as a "people" to me it is the same thing.

habsheaven
06-20-2011, 07:27 PM
Where does it end though? I mean... Is it only legal after rape, abuse, or health issues? Do we then set up a board of inspectors to investigate claims? What if it is aborted due to rape but the accused is found innocent? For me there are just too many ways around this and ultimately it would be a joke of a system.

Dont get me wrong.. I am all for peoples rights... but I am also about protecting everyone's rights and while I know current laws may not designate a baby as a "people" to me it is the same thing.

For me, it's legal up to a pre-determined developmental stage of the fetus. Before that particular stage, abortion should be legal; after that stage, it should only be legal if the health of the woman is in jeopardy.

mrveggieman
06-20-2011, 10:15 PM
To all those pro-abortion people out there does the desire to terminate a pregnancy out weigh the higher probability of having breast cancer due to having an abortion?

http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/

habsheaven
06-21-2011, 07:47 AM
First, I am not "pro-abortion". I am pro-choice. As for an increased risk for breast cancer, I cannot imagine anyone gives this the slightest consideration when making the choice to end a pregnancy.

mrveggieman
06-21-2011, 08:54 AM
First, I am not "pro-abortion". I am pro-choice. As for an increased risk for breast cancer, I cannot imagine anyone gives this the slightest consideration when making the choice to end a pregnancy.


So sad. So people engage in reckless and irresponsible behavior then turn around and have a procedure that will increase their chances of cancer in order to cover up their irresponsible behavoir. Things that make you go hmmm... :confused0024:

andrewhoya
06-21-2011, 08:56 AM
First, I am not "pro-abortion". I am pro-choice. As for an increased risk for breast cancer, I cannot imagine anyone gives this the slightest consideration when making the choice to end a pregnancy.

I....umm... somehow agree with this :confused0024: That's a first :winking0071:

Most people who are thinking about abortion anyways are likely already pretty much set about it. I don't think anything would change their minds, except for maybe a video of the baby suffering/going through serious pain and agony.

Star_Cards
06-21-2011, 09:18 AM
But according to some, it's not a child......So how can it be punishable by prison in one instance and not the other if it has no rights?

hmm... good point. I think I see it as it's the mother's right. The person that committed the act violates that right. I guess for me I see that the mother carries the fetuses right at that point. As long as it's her that's making the decision then that is where the difference is for me.

Star_Cards
06-21-2011, 09:24 AM
Where does it end though? I mean... Is it only legal after rape, abuse, or health issues? Do we then set up a board of inspectors to investigate claims? What if it is aborted due to rape but the accused is found innocent? For me there are just too many ways around this and ultimately it would be a joke of a system.

Dont get me wrong.. I am all for peoples rights... but I am also about protecting everyone's rights and while I know current laws may not designate a baby as a "people" to me it is the same thing.

If you want to make it illegal or illegal only outside of rape and health issues, this same issue will come up. I believe that a lot of rapes are not reported. How will a woman prove that she was raped and afforded the right to have an abortion? To me that's a reason why it should be left to a personal decision.

Star_Cards
06-21-2011, 09:28 AM
To all those pro-abortion people out there does the desire to terminate a pregnancy out weigh the higher probability of having breast cancer due to having an abortion?

http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/

I'm not pro-abortion. I'm pro-choice. It's about having the right to decide for yourself and not have a majority decide for you just because it's not something they would do personally. As I said before, it's safe to say that I would not choose abortion especially given my financial and educational position at this time, but that doesn't mean I think we should take away that option if it is needed for someone else.

I have never heard anything about the connection between abortion and breast cancer. In that instance it's still up to the woman to choose. People choose to do things everyday that they know could cause cancer. They have the right to choose that if they want.

Star_Cards
06-21-2011, 09:38 AM
So sad. So people engage in reckless and irresponsible behavior then turn around and have a procedure that will increase their chances of cancer in order to cover up their irresponsible behavoir. Things that make you go hmmm... :confused0024:

what exactly is the percentage increase of breast cancer in woman that have abortions to the one's that haven't?

habsheaven
06-21-2011, 09:40 AM
So sad. So people engage in reckless and irresponsible behavior then turn around and have a procedure that will increase their chances of cancer in order to cover up their irresponsible behavoir. Things that make you go hmmm... :confused0024:

Who said anything about "reckless and irresponsible" behaviour. You have to stop assuming that everyone who experiences an unwanted pregnancy is reckless. Accidents happen. That's why they are called accidents.

Not sure why it makes you go hmmm... If I took the time I could find 100's of studies that suggest this, that or the other thing increases your chances of getting cancer. You can't base decisions of this magnitude on any such studies.

andrewhoya
06-21-2011, 09:42 AM
Thanks. I will read up on it tonight.

Were the websites helpful?

Star_Cards
06-21-2011, 09:44 AM
Who said anything about "reckless and irresponsible" behaviour. You have to stop assuming that everyone who experiences an unwanted pregnancy is reckless. Accidents happen. That's why they are called accidents.

Not sure why it makes you go hmmm... If I took the time I could find 100's of studies that suggest this, that or the other thing increases your chances of getting cancer. You can't base decisions of this magnitude on any such studies.

yeah, I found that post a bit odd as well. Classifying sex as reckless and irresponsible across the board is odd for me.

sanfran22
06-21-2011, 10:12 AM
I'm not pro-abortion. I'm pro-choice. It's about having the right to decide for yourself and not have a majority decide for you just because it's not something they would do personally. As I said before, it's safe to say that I would not choose abortion especially given my financial and educational position at this time, but that doesn't mean I think we should take away that option if it is needed for someone else.

I have never heard anything about the connection between abortion and breast cancer. In that instance it's still up to the woman to choose. People choose to do things everyday that they know could cause cancer. They have the right to choose that if they want.
I guess I find abortion incredibly selfish and a cop-out on top of it being wrong.

Star_Cards
06-21-2011, 10:29 AM
I guess I find abortion incredibly selfish and a cop-out on top of it being wrong.

I agree that it can be a cop-out and selfish at times, but that's not across the board.

Let me ask everyone that says it should only be allowed in instances of incest, rape, or if the mother's life is in jeopardy...

take rape first. Who's the person that gets to decide if it's rape or not and how long does this process take to decide? Does there have to be a criminal rape investigation? Not a lot of woman report rape for many factors. Is a woman going to be question by police and the legal system to be allowed to have an abortion when she says she's been raped? I'm curious how people see this process happening.

and as far as the woman's life being in jeopardy... Who makes this call? Does the woman have to get a doctor's note and then have it okayed by the legal system to make sure it's allowed. If so, How long does this approval process take? I don't see a lot of government approval processes happening all that quickly. If the doctor just has to say there's a medical issue before performing an abortion, does the woman have to see multiple doctors to make sure it's life threatening? Will a doctors personal opinions on abortion or employment status come into play when he's deciding to grant the abortion. If so, how long does that take?

I guess my main point is that it's easy to define these situations as something you personally think would be reason you would choose abortion, but how in the heck do they legally come to these conclusions and how long does the investigation process take?

habsheaven
06-21-2011, 10:30 AM
Were the websites helpful?

Yes, they were. I didn't have enough time to research most of them though (had to go visit my mom, which didn't leave a lot of time last night). I will explore it more tonight.

habsheaven
06-21-2011, 10:31 AM
I guess I find abortion incredibly selfish and a cop-out on top of it being wrong.

I agree, just not 100% of the time.

mrveggieman
06-21-2011, 10:38 AM
I guess I find abortion incredibly selfish and a cop-out on top of it being wrong.


Yes the world is coming to an end because I am going to give my good friend sanfran22 a +1. :hug:

mrveggieman
06-21-2011, 10:41 AM
what exactly is the percentage increase of breast cancer in woman that have abortions to the one's that haven't?

Here's the link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_%E2%80%93_breast_cancer_hypothesis

sanfran22
06-21-2011, 10:44 AM
Yes the world is coming to an end because I am going to give my good friend sanfran22 a +1. :hug:
Lol, see conservatives and liberals can be friends....Funny thing is, one of my best friends is a flaming left wing liberal. Talk about irony, lol.

ensbergcollector
06-21-2011, 10:57 AM
Okay, so now I know how you feel and why.

It seems a little too "black & white" for me but that is your choice.

Here is my position on the subject: I feel it should be legal under certain circumstances, not ALL circumstances. For me, it comes down to the RIGHT TO CHOOSE of a woman weighed against the RIGHT TO LIFE of an unborn child.

That is a very GREY area for many people, myself included.

I concede that for those that believe life begins at conception there is very little grey area, and I understand their reasoning for making it illegal.

while i disagree with your stance, i can respect your opinion and I know you are by no means alone in it. However, some of your word choices in this thread have put you in a pretty harsh light. Unborn children haven't earned the right to live yet? and this, a woman's RIGHT To CHOOSE is more important than an unborn child's RIGHT TO LIVE? This is where it becomes an issue for me. When we decide that one person's ability to choose is more important than someone else living.

habsheaven
06-21-2011, 11:08 AM
while i disagree with your stance, i can respect your opinion and I know you are by no means alone in it. However, some of your word choices in this thread have put you in a pretty harsh light. Unborn children haven't earned the right to live yet? and this, a woman's RIGHT To CHOOSE is more important than an unborn child's RIGHT TO LIVE? This is where it becomes an issue for me. When we decide that one person's ability to choose is more important than someone else living.

My words may be a little harsh, but that is the reality of the situation as the law sees it. I didn't make it so. Please don't shoot the messenger.

shortking98
06-21-2011, 11:21 AM
Here's the link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_%E2%80%93_breast_cancer_hypothesis

I don't really want to get into the debate but the link you provided does not say that abortion causes breast cancer as I believe you were stating. This is straight from the wikipedia link you posted:


The abortion-breast cancer hypothesis has been the subject of extensive scientific inquiry, and the scientific community has concluded that abortion does not cause breast cancer. This consensus is supported by major medical bodies,[5] including the World Health Organization,[6] the U.S. National Cancer Institute,[7][8] the American Cancer Society,[9] the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists,[10] and the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.[11]



I'm not going to argue about the merits of the hypothesis and show my ignorance I'm just not sure if you posted the link you intended to post

andrewhoya
06-21-2011, 11:26 AM
I don't really want to get into the debate but the link you provided does not say that abortion causes breast cancer as I believe you were stating. This is straight from the wikipedia link you posted:



I'm not going to argue about the merits of the hypothesis and show my ignorance I'm just not sure if you posted the link you intended to post

That quote says in does not CAUSE breast cancer. The article itself, and the OP, said that the RISK of breast cancer goes up.

mrveggieman
06-21-2011, 11:30 AM
My whole problem with the woman's right to chose argument is that she had the right to chose to use condoms, diaphrams, take or take the pill. I understand that none of those methods are 100&#37; reliable but if she was that hellbent on not getting pregnant she should have either waited to have sex until she was more financially stable to have a baby or do something else for a release besides have sex. I'm sure if the unborn child had a choice he/she would not want to be killed. Abortion is the ultimate form of abuse against women and children.

habsheaven
06-21-2011, 11:38 AM
My whole problem with the woman's right to chose argument is that she had the right to chose to use condoms, diaphrams, take or take the pill. I understand that none of those methods are 100% reliable but if she was that hellbent on not getting pregnant she should have either waited to have sex until she was more financially stable to have a baby or do something else for a release besides have sex. I'm sure if the unborn child had a choice he/she would not want to be killed. Abortion is the ultimate form of abuse against women and children.

Please explain that one.

shortking98
06-21-2011, 11:43 AM
That quote says in does not CAUSE breast cancer. The article itself, and the OP, said that the RISK of breast cancer goes up.
I did not see that anywhere in the article, here is another quote that says there is no increased risk if you want it word for word


This workshop concluded that while some studies reported a statistical correlation between breast cancer and abortion,[14][15][16] the strongest scientific evidence[17] from large prospective cohort studies[18][19] demonstrates that abortion is not associated with an increase in breast cancer risk,[20] and the positive findings were hypothesized to be due to response bias.

mrveggieman
06-21-2011, 11:49 AM
I did not see that anywhere in the article, here is another quote that says there is no increased risk if you want it word for word


Check this link out:

http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/biology/index.htm

mrveggieman
06-21-2011, 11:50 AM
Please explain that one.


If you take an a female child and stick something through her head to kill her that would be considered and act of violence against her, would it not?

shortking98
06-21-2011, 11:51 AM
Check this link out:

http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/biology/index.htm

Saw that one before just wondering why you posted the wiki article that seems to overwhelmingly refute that as further defense of your position?

boba
06-21-2011, 11:52 AM
I just scanned threw this thread and want to get my 2 cents in. I know this isn't a popular stance but I believe that it should be illegal even with the situations of rape or insest. I am a firm believer in the Bible and it clearly states that he formed us and knew us while we were still in the womb. So even if you were raped or otherwise, it is still a human being, ( at its most innocent and helpless state ). And in the case of insest, abortion is actually protecting the father or family member who is committing this sick act, so they can continue to do it, its not protecting the girl at all. I guess what I'm trying to say is that if its a human then its a human, even if it was cased by rape or insest. And lastly, aren't you glad your mom didn't have an abortion?:winking0071:

andrewhoya
06-21-2011, 11:55 AM
I just scanned threw this thread and want to get my 2 cents in. I know this isn't a popular stance but I believe that it should be illegal even with the situations of rape or insest. I am a firm believer in the Bible and it clearly states that he formed us and knew us while we were still in the womb. So even if you were raped or otherwise, it is still a human being, ( at its most innocent and helpless state ). And in the case of insest, abortion is actually protecting the father or family member who is committing this sick act, so they can continue to do it, its not protecting the girl at all. I guess what I'm trying to say is that if its a human then its a human, even if it was cased by rape or insest. And lastly, aren't you glad your mom didn't have an abortion?:winking0071:

I agree 99%; I think it should only be legal if the baby or mother will be in harm's way at any point during the pregnancy.

habsheaven
06-21-2011, 11:58 AM
If you take an a female child and stick something through her head to kill her that would be considered and act of violence against her, would it not?

:frusty: You mentioned women and children. Since we are discussing abortion, I assumed the "children" you mentioned included the female and the male children, and the "women" were adults having the procedure.

Why do you have to make this so hard to have a discussion?

Try again, or retract the darn statement.

mrveggieman
06-21-2011, 12:00 PM
Saw that one before just wondering why you posted the wiki article that seems to overwhelmingly refute that as further defense of your position?


The wiki article was not saying that you are guaranteed to have breast cancer if you have an abortion it was just suggesting it. I have other articles if you would like me to provide them.

shortking98
06-21-2011, 12:08 PM
The wiki article was not saying that you are guaranteed to have breast cancer if you have an abortion it was just suggesting it. I have other articles if you would like me to provide them.

No, the wiki article states that those claims have been rejected by the scientific community, I think you may want to re-read it

mrveggieman
06-21-2011, 12:09 PM
:frusty: You mentioned women and children. Since we are discussing abortion, I assumed the "children" you mentioned included the female and the male children, and the "women" were adults having the procedure.

Why do you have to make this so hard to have a discussion?

Try again, or retract the darn statement.

The children were the unborn babies and the women are the ones having the abortions. Abortion has been linked to other female health issues. Whenever a woman choses to have an abortion we as a society have let her down. Let me know if you need me to clarify my position futher.

boba
06-21-2011, 12:11 PM
Please explain that one.

I think I'll help. Sticking spinal needles, syringes, forceps, scissors, and other death machines into a women to kill a helpless human.

habsheaven
06-21-2011, 12:21 PM
The children were the unborn babies and the women are the ones having the abortions. Abortion has been linked to other female health issues. Whenever a woman choses to have an abortion we as a society have let her down. Let me know if you need me to clarify my position futher.

Okay, so why the other response to the question? Nevermind, I can see you are confused.

I find very demeaning for people to compare actual abuse victims to women who CHOOSE to have abortions and in doing so belittle the actual abuse many women suffer.

I grew up in a small community. I witnessed, on a daily basis, a man abuse his wife in every way imaginable. Daily beatings, violent rages, abusive language, killing of pets, etc. I can only imagine the stuff that she endured behind closed doors.

Just more USELESS RHETORIC!:rant:

habsheaven
06-21-2011, 12:22 PM
I think I'll help. Sticking spinal needles, syringes, forceps, scissors, and other death machines into a women to kill a helpless human.

Sorry, that's useless too.

andrewhoya
06-21-2011, 12:23 PM
I grew up in a small community. I witnessed, on a daily basis, a man abuse his wife in every way imaginable. Daily beatings, violent rages, abusive language, killing of pets, etc. I can only imagine the stuff that she endured behind closed doors.

And, if I may ask, why didn't anyone do something about it?

boba
06-21-2011, 12:25 PM
Sorry, that's useless too.


Wow, how is that useless too, how would you like getting those things stuck into your head? If you don't think thats abuse then there is no point in arguing with you.

habsheaven
06-21-2011, 12:37 PM
And, if I may ask, why didn't anyone do something about it?

I never said no one did anything about it. After several visits from the RCMP which failed to curb the abuse, my parents and a couple other couples in the neighbourhood did take care of it. The women made arrangements for her and her kids and the men ... let's just say ... gave him a piece of their mind. Whatever happened to them in the long run, I do not know, but us neighbourhood kids were not subjected to witnessing that abuse any longer.

habsheaven
06-21-2011, 12:40 PM
Wow, how is that useless too, how would you like getting those things stuck into your head? If you don't think thats abuse then there is no point in arguing with you.

What are you talking about? I was asking him what he considers to be the abuse perpetrated on the WOMEN, not the unborn children.

Try to keep up.

andrewhoya
06-21-2011, 12:42 PM
I never said no one did anything about it. After several visits from the RCMP which failed to curb the abuse, my parents and a couple other couples in the neighbourhood did take care of it. The women made arrangements for her and her kids and the men ... let's just say ... gave him a piece of their mind. Whatever happened to them in the long run, I do not know, but us neighbourhood kids were not subjected to witnessing that abuse any longer.

Sorry, shouldn't have assumed. I figured that by the "daily occurrences", nothing was done.

boba
06-21-2011, 12:49 PM
What are you talking about? I was asking him what he considers to be the abuse perpetrated on the WOMEN, not the unborn children.

Try to keep up.

This is what i stated.

Sticking spinal needles, syringes, forceps, scissors, and other death machines into a women to kill a helpless human.

'" Try to keep up. ":thumb:

habsheaven
06-21-2011, 12:57 PM
This is what i stated.

Sticking spinal needles, syringes, forceps, scissors, and other death machines into a women to kill a helpless human.

'" Try to keep up. ":thumb:

So you are saying that the insertion of these devices into the woman (that she chooses to have done) is abuse to her? I guess I misread it thinking you were talking about the "helpless human".

And this was your response:

Wow, how is that useless too, how would you like getting those things stuck into your head? If you don't think thats abuse then there is no point in arguing with you.

Which only further enforced my belief that you were talking about the "helpless human" again, not the woman making the choice.

You and veggieman are going to have to be a bit more clear in your retorts. No wonder I can't keep up:confused0024:

Star_Cards
06-21-2011, 12:58 PM
I just scanned threw this thread and want to get my 2 cents in. I know this isn't a popular stance but I believe that it should be illegal even with the situations of rape or insest. I am a firm believer in the Bible and it clearly states that he formed us and knew us while we were still in the womb. So even if you were raped or otherwise, it is still a human being, ( at its most innocent and helpless state ). And in the case of insest, abortion is actually protecting the father or family member who is committing this sick act, so they can continue to do it, its not protecting the girl at all. I guess what I'm trying to say is that if its a human then its a human, even if it was cased by rape or insest. And lastly, aren't you glad your mom didn't have an abortion?:winking0071:

My issue with this post starts with this... "am a firm believer in the Bible and it clearly states". Not everyone believes in the bible so it should not be used as a reference to create any law. If you want to argue if abortion should be legal or not the bible has nothing to do with the debate. If you follow the bible and believe it is against abortion that is fine, but it's no reason to create a law for all U.S. citizens to follow. I dismiss any arguments about laws that start with anything close to "it's says so in the bible" or "god says...".

and in the issue of incest, it' wouldn't be performed to protect the family member who is committing the act. It has to do with increased birth defects between people with similar dna... in a nut shell. Not all incest cases are molestation/rape cases either.

habsheaven
06-21-2011, 01:04 PM
My issue with this post starts with this... "am a firm believer in the Bible and it clearly states". Not everyone believes in the bible so it should not be used as a reference to create any law. If you want to argue if abortion should be legal or not the bible has nothing to do with the debate. If you follow the bible and believe it is against abortion that is fine, but it's no reason to create a law for all U.S. citizens to follow. I dismiss any arguments about laws that start with anything close to "it's says so in the bible" or "god says...".

and in the issue of incest, it' wouldn't be performed to protect the family member who is committing the act. It has to do with increased birth defects between people with similar dna... in a nut shell. Not all incest cases are molestation/rape cases either.

In Boba's defence. I interpreted his mention of the Bible as his justification for what/when is a human being, not a "the Bible says it's wrong" type of argument.

mrveggieman
06-21-2011, 01:48 PM
Sorry guys I stepped off here for a little bit for lunch. I missed a lot. If I could speak on the last subtopic regarding the bible, there is a lot of information in the bible. Some of us go by some of the information, some of us don't. In my opinion if we are discussing a topic and the bible says one thing, the koran says something else and state law has a 3rd opinion the bible argument does not carry that much weight. However as far as killing is concerned the bible, koran (please do not come here with your political biases against islam this is not the forum for it please start your own anti-islam forum if you like) as well as state law all prohibit murder/killing. What is abortion? The killing of an unborn child. If you take out the work unborn it would be the killing of a child. I don't think that anyone one here regardless of their political or religious views or lack of them for that matter would be in favor of killing a child would they?

Star_Cards
06-21-2011, 02:18 PM
I had a question that sort of got buried and wanted to post it again.

Let me ask everyone that says it should only be allowed in instances of incest, rape, or if the mother's life is in jeopardy...

take rape first. Who's the person that gets to decide if it's rape or not and how long does this process take to decide? Does there have to be a criminal rape investigation? Not a lot of woman report rape for many factors. Is a woman going to be question by police and the legal system to be allowed to have an abortion when she says she's been raped? I'm curious how people see this process happening.

and as far as the woman's life being in jeopardy... Who makes this call? Does the woman have to get a doctor's note and then have it okayed by the legal system to make sure it's allowed. If so, How long does this approval process take? I don't see a lot of government approval processes happening all that quickly. If the doctor just has to say there's a medical issue before performing an abortion, does the woman have to see multiple doctors to make sure it's life threatening? Will a doctors personal opinions on abortion or employment status come into play when he's deciding to grant the abortion. If so, how long does that take?

I guess my main point is that it's easy to define these situations as something you personally think would be reason you would choose abortion, but how in the heck do they legally come to these conclusions and how long does the investigation process take?

Star_Cards
06-21-2011, 02:25 PM
Sorry guys I stepped off here for a little bit for lunch. I missed a lot. If I could speak on the last subtopic regarding the bible, there is a lot of information in the bible. Some of us go by some of the information, some of us don't. In my opinion if we are discussing a topic and the bible says one thing, the koran says something else and state law has a 3rd opinion the bible argument does not carry that much weight. However as far as killing is concerned the bible, koran (please do not come here with your political biases against islam this is not the forum for it please start your own anti-islam forum if you like) as well as state law all prohibit murder/killing. What is abortion? The killing of an unborn child. If you take out the work unborn it would be the killing of a child. I don't think that anyone one here regardless of their political or religious views or lack of them for that matter would be in favor of killing a child would they?

ah, but you can't take the word "unborn" because it isn't born.

mrveggieman
06-21-2011, 02:29 PM
I had a question that sort of got buried and wanted to post it again.

Let me ask everyone that says it should only be allowed in instances of incest, rape, or if the mother's life is in jeopardy...

take rape first. Who's the person that gets to decide if it's rape or not and how long does this process take to decide? Does there have to be a criminal rape investigation? Not a lot of woman report rape for many factors. Is a woman going to be question by police and the legal system to be allowed to have an abortion when she says she's been raped? I'm curious how people see this process happening.

and as far as the woman's life being in jeopardy... Who makes this call? Does the woman have to get a doctor's note and then have it okayed by the legal system to make sure it's allowed. If so, How long does this approval process take? I don't see a lot of government approval processes happening all that quickly. If the doctor just has to say there's a medical issue before performing an abortion, does the woman have to see multiple doctors to make sure it's life threatening? Will a doctors personal opinions on abortion or employment status come into play when he's deciding to grant the abortion. If so, how long does that take?

I guess my main point is that it's easy to define these situations as something you personally think would be reason you would choose abortion, but how in the heck do they legally come to these conclusions and how long does the investigation process take?


Obviously I'm not an expert on rape but from what little bit that I have heard a woman who is a survivor of a sexual assult would have certian scars that would show that she was assulted assuming that she goes to a hospital after he assult. Also if someone's life is in danger and a dr signs off on it, it should be pretty cut and dry. Most doctors would not sign off on something knowing that their professional livelyhood, reputation and possible freedom is at stake.

mrveggieman
06-21-2011, 02:34 PM
ah, but you can't take the word "unborn" because it isn't born.


The child may not be born in a legal sense because it is still a life. If it wasn't alive it wouldn't be neccessary to abort and kill him/her in the first place because it is impossible to kill something that isn't alive.

Star_Cards
06-21-2011, 02:48 PM
Obviously I'm not an expert on rape but from what little bit that I have heard a woman who is a survivor of a sexual assult would have certian scars that would show that she was assulted assuming that she goes to a hospital after he assult. Also if someone's life is in danger and a dr signs off on it, it should be pretty cut and dry. Most doctors would not sign off on something knowing that their professional livelyhood, reputation and possible freedom is at stake.

true, but not all rape is violent rape. sometimes consensual sex can turn into rape. Do you take the woman's word for it or what?

If you leave it up to the doctor, surely there will be differing opinions. Would there be a overseeing board that has final say?

I guess I ask all of these questions because it's really not as cut and dried as just saying it's okay for rape, health issue, and incest.

Star_Cards
06-21-2011, 02:50 PM
The child may not be born in a legal sense because it is still a life. If it wasn't alive it wouldn't be neccessary to abort and kill him/her in the first place because it is impossible to kill something that isn't alive.

I agree. but it is still unborn.

mrveggieman
06-21-2011, 03:02 PM
I agree. but it is still unborn.


Those unborn children still have pain recepticables. Babies that are aborted often suffer a worse fate than condemed killers.

Star_Cards
06-21-2011, 03:12 PM
at a certain point a fetus has pain receptors. not from conception. I'm not an expert, but it looks like that doesn't start until the second or third month. My stance on abortion being an option is within that early window and wouldn't be past a certain point of development. I would have to say that development of pain would be a factor in when I'd say a cut off would be... I think.

habsheaven
06-21-2011, 03:35 PM
at a certain point a fetus has pain receptors. not from conception. I'm not an expert, but it looks like that doesn't start until the second or third month. My stance on abortion being an option is within that early window and wouldn't be past a certain point of development. I would have to say that development of pain would be a factor in when I'd say a cut off would be... I think.

How so? Are you saying the ability to feel pain takes the unborn child out of the "fetus" stage and into the "life" stage for you? Or are you just uncomfortable with the fact that pain is a factor after a certain stage? Would the introduction of a painless method of abortion change anything for you?

Star_Cards
06-21-2011, 04:03 PM
How so? Are you saying the ability to feel pain takes the unborn child out of the "fetus" stage and into the "life" stage for you? Or are you just uncomfortable with the fact that pain is a factor after a certain stage? Would the introduction of a painless method of abortion change anything for you?

no, not at all. It's still a fetus. I'm saying that if I had to make a decision to consider abortion an option that pain probably would be a factor among others that I would use to weigh my decision. Yes pain makes me a bit uncomfortable, I think and yes a painless method would change that, I believe.

mrveggieman
06-21-2011, 04:40 PM
I'm not sure if they still do this over there but I know several years ago in China in order to fight over population the Chinese encouraged it's citizens to have only 1 child. China even gave the option to kill your child at birth if it is a girl and you want a boy. If the child could be killed in a painless method at birth would that be ok with you? Why or why not?

andrewhoya
06-21-2011, 04:47 PM
I'm not sure if they still do this over there but I know several years ago in China in order to fight over population the Chinese encouraged it's citizens to have only 1 child. China even gave the option to kill your child at birth if it is a girl and you want a boy. If the child could be killed in a painless method at birth would that be ok with you? Why or why not?

No, of course not. Killing a baby is killing a baby, whether they are out of the womb or not. Tons of people would love to have a nice, healthy baby. My aunt/uncle adopted two Chinese girls.

habsheaven
06-21-2011, 06:50 PM
I'm not sure if they still do this over there but I know several years ago in China in order to fight over population the Chinese encouraged it's citizens to have only 1 child. China even gave the option to kill your child at birth if it is a girl and you want a boy. If the child could be killed in a painless method at birth would that be ok with you? Why or why not?

I am not even going to bother correcting the mistakes in this post. I will just say this:

It's questions like this that make me wonder whether or not these 200+ posts are even being read. Surely, you know how both StarCards and I feel about the issue. Surely you have an general understanding of where we are attempting to draw the line.

mrveggieman
06-22-2011, 07:29 AM
I am not even going to bother correcting the mistakes in this post. I will just say this:

It's questions like this that make me wonder whether or not these 200+ posts are even being read. Surely, you know how both StarCards and I feel about the issue. Surely you have an general understanding of where we are attempting to draw the line.

Yes I have been reading the posts on here. I'm trying to get a better understanding on how a life could be considered any less valuable because it is still in the womb compared to a life that has left the womb. A life is a life and no innocent person should have their life taken away from them withouth their consent.

habsheaven
06-22-2011, 07:56 AM
Yes I have been reading the posts on here. I'm trying to get a better understanding on how a life could be considered any less valuable because it is still in the womb compared to a life that has left the womb. A life is a life and no innocent person should have their life taken away from them withouth their consent.

Here's a question for you. How many people do you know that have suffered miscarriages (not stillborns) and ended up naming the fetus and counting it among their children?

There is a reason that you do not know of any. There is a point in time after conception and before birth that society start treating the unborn as a baby. The LAW and the practices/customs/rituals/conventions of actual people clearly indicate that conception is not that point in time. You may not agree with it, but that is the way it is.

habsheaven
06-22-2011, 08:25 AM
Another question. Do you think the grief associated with a miscarriage, a stillborn death or a 6 month old infant's death are the same? In my 45 years, I have seen people experience all three. The grief is not comparable. Why is that?

mrveggieman
06-22-2011, 08:37 AM
Another question. Do you think the grief associated with a miscarriage, a stillborn death or a 6 month old infant's death are the same? In my 45 years, I have seen people experience all three. The grief is not comparable. Why is that?

Different people handle grief in different ways. There is no one size fits all answer to that question.

andrewhoya
06-22-2011, 08:41 AM
different people handle grief in different ways. There is no one size fits all answer to that question.

+1

habsheaven
06-22-2011, 08:46 AM
Different people handle grief in different ways. There is no one size fits all answer to that question.

That's a cop out. What about the other question?

andrewhoya
06-22-2011, 08:47 AM
Do you think the grief associated with a miscarriage, a stillborn death or a 6 month old infant's death are the same?

It all depends on who the mother/father is. Some handle grief differently than others.

habsheaven
06-22-2011, 08:52 AM
It all depends on who the mother/father is. Some handle grief differently than others.

Have you ever attended (or even heard of) a funeral for a stillborn or a miscarriage?

mrveggieman
06-22-2011, 09:03 AM
Have you ever attended (or even heard of) a funeral for a stillborn or a miscarriage?


I have heard of situations of people who had funerals for still born babies. It happens more than you think.

mrveggieman
06-22-2011, 09:05 AM
Here's a question for you. How many people do you know that have suffered miscarriages (not stillborns) and ended up naming the fetus and counting it among their children?

There is a reason that you do not know of any. There is a point in time after conception and before birth that society start treating the unborn as a baby. The LAW and the practices/customs/rituals/conventions of actual people clearly indicate that conception is not that point in time. You may not agree with it, but that is the way it is.

I don't personally know of anyone who has done this. However I just like you do not know everyone or everything so there is no way to know if anyone has done this but I would think that someone has before.

andrewhoya
06-22-2011, 09:17 AM
Have you ever attended (or even heard of) a funeral for a stillborn or a miscarriage?

There are billions of people in the world. I know about 1,000. Odds are, they have happened before and I have heard nothign of it.

habsheaven
06-22-2011, 09:25 AM
The point I am getting at is that the majority of people (by their actions at the time of "death") do not place the same value on a fetus as they do an infant. Despite what they might say.

mrveggieman
06-22-2011, 09:27 AM
The point I am getting at is that the majority of people (by their actions at the time of "death") do not place the same value on a fetus as they do an infant. Despite what they might say.


They may be true with a miscarriage but the majority of people I know of who had still born babies had funerals. But again it is up to the individual.

ensbergcollector
06-22-2011, 11:40 AM
The point I am getting at is that the majority of people (by their actions at the time of "death") do not place the same value on a fetus as they do an infant. Despite what they might say.

not a good argument though. People do not act the same with a child who lived 2 days as one who lived 2 years. Does that mean the 2 day old child isn't as much of a life?

habsheaven
06-22-2011, 11:55 AM
not a good argument though. People do not act the same with a child who lived 2 days as one who lived 2 years. Does that mean the 2 day old child isn't as much of a life?

They act the same when both are given a funeral though.

mrveggieman
06-22-2011, 12:53 PM
They act the same when both are given a funeral though.

Exactly because anytime there is a loss of life for whatever reason people will be sad.

mrveggieman
06-28-2011, 11:09 AM
Let me pose this question to our conservative members. Let's say that abortion is made illegal (I would have no problem with that) with certian exceptions but generally speaking a woman would not be able to go to a planned parenthood clinic to terminate her pregancy becasue she met a guy at a club and had a one night stance. My question to the group would be if abortion would be made illegal what should the gov't or any agent of our society such as schools, churches, non profits, etc due to help prevent unwanted pregnancies as well as what assistance would you provide to struggling mothers?

Tivo32
06-28-2011, 12:52 PM
Let me pose this question to our conservative members. Let's say that abortion is made illegal (I would have no problem with that) with certian exceptions but generally speaking a woman would not be able to go to a planned parenthood clinic to terminate her pregancy becasue she met a guy at a club and had a one night stance. My question to the group would be if abortion would be made illegal what should the gov't or any agent of our society such as schools, churches, non profits, etc due to help prevent unwanted pregnancies as well as what assistance would you provide to struggling mothers?

And this is exactly the question that many Christians do not want to answer. I am a Christian and I have just graduated from Bible college and will be going on staff at a church come September 1 and I can tell you that question is my biggest frustration with fighting the government over abortion laws. Christians for a very long time have wanted to legislate morality. It is specifically seen lately within the context of homosexual marriage and abortion. Alot of people want to stand outside their state senate and picket and scream "abortion is murder" but as soon as a young girl comes to a church and asks for help people close up their wallets and say "oh well the economy is tough, she needs to learn to live with her choices." That makes me absolutely lose my mind. I think if the Evangelical Church in America was to actually back up what they believe by giving money and resources to take care of young and struggling mothers it wouldn't matter if abortion was legal or not, we would see a significant decrease in abortion numbers.

Star_Cards
06-28-2011, 12:55 PM
good points Tivo. My biggest frustration about religion is the extreme need of some to legislate their moralities on the country as a whole. I get that people are passionate about their beliefs, but can't understand why they don't get that everyone doesn't follow the same ideals.

Tivo32
06-28-2011, 01:02 PM
good points Tivo. My biggest frustration about religion is the extreme need of some to legislate their moralities on the country as a whole. I get that people are passionate about their beliefs, but can't understand why they don't get that everyone doesn't follow the same ideals.

And I look throughout history and I never see a time when a government was able to legislate morality. It just won't happen. If enough people truly feel that abortion is wrong and want to change it for the positive, then they should give of themselves (time, resources, energy) to make a positive difference in that. The problem is people are lazy. We want to sit back and say "well the government should fix it" when the government is filled with people who are lazy too. To make a positive change in the world it takes people wanting to truly give of themselves to make that change.

Star_Cards
06-28-2011, 02:15 PM
well, not speaking or abortion, but there are instances where government has legislated morality. I'd say gay marriage is the largest example.

Tivo32
06-28-2011, 02:47 PM
well, not speaking or abortion, but there are instances where government has legislated morality. I'd say gay marriage is the largest example.

In prohibiting it or now the beginning of legalizing it? I think either way we've seen backlashes to both sides.

I guess when I mean "legislate morality" I mean more of having whatever legislation become acceptable to the general public. I think the general public needs to be more or less in agreement of whatever morality before it could truly become legislate. I'm not sure if I'm making sense haha.

mrveggieman
06-29-2011, 07:42 AM
In prohibiting it or now the beginning of legalizing it? I think either way we've seen backlashes to both sides.

I guess when I mean "legislate morality" I mean more of having whatever legislation become acceptable to the general public. I think the general public needs to be more or less in agreement of whatever morality before it could truly become legislate. I'm not sure if I'm making sense haha.

Makes perfect sense to me. Some things should be left up to the gov't, the rest to God.

Star_Cards
06-29-2011, 09:08 AM
Makes perfect sense to me. Some things should be left up to the gov't, the rest to God.

to some people nothing is left up to the same god or no god at at all. If we have that right then no law should reflect the moralities of one specific god.

mrveggieman
06-29-2011, 10:33 AM
to some people nothing is left up to the same god or no god at at all. If we have that right then no law should reflect the moralities of one specific god.


It's just like with the gay marriage issue. It dosen't hurt anyone per se but it is offensive to some religions. So if it does not hurt anyone the law should not interefere but if God dosen't like it then he will deal with it accordingly.

Star_Cards
06-29-2011, 11:28 AM
It's just like with the gay marriage issue. It dosen't hurt anyone per se but it is offensive to some religions. So if it does not hurt anyone the law should not interefere but if God dosen't like it then he will deal with it accordingly.

exactly. I'll never understand why people think gay marriage will effect them in any way. A God should never dictate a law.

mrveggieman
06-29-2011, 11:38 AM
exactly. I'll never understand why people think gay marriage will effect them in any way. A God should never dictate a law.


Some of our laws are based on biblical concepts. Eg Thoult shall not kill, thou shall not steal. Those concepts deal with things that can hurt others. Homosexuality is generally done between 2 consenting adults and only affects the two involved. However religion still frowns upon that. There used to be laws in the united states and in other countries that prohibited homosexuality that have since been overturned.

theonedru
06-29-2011, 12:47 PM
It's just like with the gay marriage issue. It dosen't hurt anyone per se but it is offensive to some religions. So if it does not hurt anyone the law should not interefere but if God dosen't like it then he will deal with it accordingly.

Deuteronomy 22:23-24

King James Version (KJV)

23If a damsel that is (word edited) be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her;

24Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.

This makes me think that God should stay far far away from any decision making because murder is murder and for this reason it is just wrong

Star_Cards
06-29-2011, 01:09 PM
Some of our laws are based on biblical concepts. Eg Thoult shall not kill, thou shall not steal. Those concepts deal with things that can hurt others. Homosexuality is generally done between 2 consenting adults and only affects the two involved. However religion still frowns upon that. There used to be laws in the united states and in other countries that prohibited homosexuality that have since been overturned.

while laws against murder and stealing exist in the bible it also goes against violating the rights of others by the person carrying out the act. Those also stand in a completely non religious view.

Tivo32
06-29-2011, 01:29 PM
I'm not understanding your point. What does the Deuteronomy reference have to do with it?


Deuteronomy 22:23-24

King James Version (KJV)

23If a damsel that is (word edited) be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her;

24Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.

This makes me think that God should stay far far away from any decision making because murder is murder and for this reason it is just wrong

gatorboymike
06-29-2011, 11:44 PM
Problem is so many people are keen to put their own words in "God's" mouth in order to legislate their petty prejudices and psychotic hatreds.

Tivo32
06-29-2011, 11:47 PM
Problem is so many people are keen to put their own words in "God's" mouth in order to legislate their petty prejudices and psychotic hatreds.

That, my friend, is a very very good point.

mrveggieman
06-30-2011, 07:32 AM
problem is so many people are keen to put their own words in "god's" mouth in order to legislate their petty prejudices and psychotic hatreds.


+1

tutall
06-30-2011, 09:35 PM
If you want to make it illegal or illegal only outside of rape and health issues, this same issue will come up. I believe that a lot of rapes are not reported. How will a woman prove that she was raped and afforded the right to have an abortion? To me that's a reason why it should be left to a personal decision.

Thats my point though... I mean it cant just be "sorta" illegal... You either have to make it legal or illegal. Legal in the case of rape, incest, whatever can only be proven so far without a DNA test or a confession so it is a little silly to think that process would actually work.

tutall
06-30-2011, 09:48 PM
Obviously I'm not an expert on rape but from what little bit that I have heard a woman who is a survivor of a sexual assult would have certian scars that would show that she was assulted assuming that she goes to a hospital after he assult. Also if someone's life is in danger and a dr signs off on it, it should be pretty cut and dry. Most doctors would not sign off on something knowing that their professional livelyhood, reputation and possible freedom is at stake.

2 questions here...

First have you ever been involved in the legal system? And if so how long and how simple was your case

Second, Have you ever heard a disability doctor speak about signing off on a disability claim for medicaid? Ithink you would be astonished the amount of fraud that goes on in the medical system.... not saying it isnt a good idea and it could be done, or saying it would be done but those arguments are not good ones because of this.

tutall
06-30-2011, 09:52 PM
Have you ever attended (or even heard of) a funeral for a stillborn or a miscarriage?

Actually... One of my co-workers had pictures done, a funeral, and went pretty far with it... I was a little creeped out by the whole situation but i can tell you it does happen. There is even a local photography studio that specializes in taking the pics... They were featured on the news how it works and why they do it. They said it bring many parents closure on the ordeal

habsheaven
07-01-2011, 08:00 AM
Actually... One of my co-workers had pictures done, a funeral, and went pretty far with it... I was a little creeped out by the whole situation but i can tell you it does happen. There is even a local photography studio that specializes in taking the pics... They were featured on the news how it works and why they do it. They said it bring many parents closure on the ordeal

I am sure it has happened. My point being, the rarity of it happening speaks volumes as to the value we as a society put on that "life". I would submit that taking such actions as you described above would be helpful for many people who have experienced this loss.

mrveggieman
07-01-2011, 08:06 AM
2 questions here...

First have you ever been involved in the legal system? And if so how long and how simple was your case

Second, Have you ever heard a disability doctor speak about signing off on a disability claim for medicaid? Ithink you would be astonished the amount of fraud that goes on in the medical system.... not saying it isnt a good idea and it could be done, or saying it would be done but those arguments are not good ones because of this.

As far as disability I'm sure that there is fraud as with any other aspect of society. That being said we shouldn't just go on and let innocent babies be killed because we are concerned with stopping fraud. If a doctor does sign of on an unneccessary abortion he should be convicted of murder.

tutall
07-01-2011, 08:22 AM
As far as disability I'm sure that there is fraud as with any other aspect of society. That being said we shouldn't just go on and let innocent babies be killed because we are concerned with stopping fraud. If a doctor does sign of on an unneccessary abortion he should be convicted of murder.

My point was really... you have a month or two for this system to work. What if there is a trial for rape and he is convicted, then files an appeal. Can the woman have the abortion before the appeal is final? For the system you speak of to work there would have to be some kind of oversight but it isnt like we are talking an unlimited amount of time here. If there is no oversight, the system doesnt work period. For that reason alone I think really it has to be legal or illegal with no exceptions either way.

tutall
07-01-2011, 08:22 AM
I am sure it has happened. My point being, the rarity of it happening speaks volumes as to the value we as a society put on that "life". I would submit that taking such actions as you described above would be helpful for many people who have experienced this loss.

I knew what you meant and respect the opinion... but I am just saying while a majority may not value the fetus as a life there are people that do

Star_Cards
07-01-2011, 11:39 AM
well said. having abortion only be legal for causes of rape just isn't practice when proving rape. besides, not every woman wants to press charges if they are raped. each person deals with it in...