Killing a baby =/= killing an adult

When it comes to the anti-abortion argument... where do you draw the line? Wouldn't a woman menstruating be killing a possible child? Should we outlaw menstruation and masturbation because they kill potential children?

It should be a choice. People should be able to choose whether or not they want to abort their children. Especially in the cases of rape.foxhound_fox

Biology will teach you that menstruating is naturally occuring. Not something done by choice. Extremely bad analogy.:lol:

As for aborting children....there does come a point when you definitely have a viable baby by everyone's definition....so no....it shouldn't be a choice.

And FYI...the percentage of abortions done due to rape are negligible. It's not a deciding factor in most.;)

Abortion = easy way out

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]When it comes to the anti-abortion argument... where do you draw the line? Wouldn't a woman menstruating be killing a possible child? Should we outlaw menstruation and masturbation because they kill potential children?

It should be a choice. People should be able to choose whether or not they want to abort their children. Especially in the cases of rape.LJSEXAY

Biology will teach you that menstruating is naturally occuring. Not something done by choice. Extremely bad analogy.:lol:

As for aborting children....there does come a point when you definitely have a viable baby by everyone's definition....so no....it shouldn't be a choice.

And FYI...the percentage of abortions done due to rape are negligible. It's not a deciding factor in most.;)

I was reading about how a bunch of senators, including Barack Obama, voted not to sign a bill will was for protecting babies who were attempted to be aborted, but the abortion failed and the baby was born. So, in reality, the definition of legitimate birth is very different between one side to another.

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]When it comes to the anti-abortion argument... where do you draw the line? Wouldn't a woman menstruating be killing a possible child? Should we outlaw menstruation and masturbation because they kill potential children?

It should be a choice. People should be able to choose whether or not they want to abort their children. Especially in the cases of rape.commander55

Your wisdom is very wise. I agree.

yep i agree too

After reading through this entire thread, I have a few thoughts. I'm not going to attempt to sway anyone's opinion with this either. These are just some things to think about.

The argument for abortion is that there seems to be a question as to when life begins. Some have said that since a fetus can't reason and function, and all it does is grow so therefore it isn't alive. My response would be, what does a tree do? All it does is grow. It doesn't reason and think. Does that mean it isn't alive? I know a tree is different than a human, but just indulge the conclusion.

Another thing that was said was that since a fetus can't take care of itself and survive without assistance, it's not a human life. What about grown adults that have brain damage? They can't function or survive by themselves without assistance. Does that mean they are not humans? Should we just kill them, because after all, they would just be a nuisance to take care of. (sarcasm intended).

My opinion is that abortion should not be a quick fix. There also should be no absolutes. If a sexual assault occurs, or if delivery would cause the mother to die, abortion should be undertaken. With any other circumstance, there are plenty of options for the mother and father to explore that doesn't involved terminating the pregnancy.

After reading through this entire thread, I have a few thoughts. I'm not going to attempt to sway anyone's opinion with this either. These are just some things to think about.

The argument for abortion is that there seems to be a question as to when life begins. Some have said that since a fetus can't reason and function, and all it does is grow so therefore it isn't alive. My response would be, what does a tree do? All it does is grow. It doesn't reason and think. Does that mean it isn't alive? I know a tree is different than a human, but just indulge the conclusion.

Another thing that was said was that since a fetus can't take care of itself and survive without assistance, it's not a human life. What about grown adults that have brain damage? They can't function or survive by themselves without assistance. Does that mean they are not humans? Should we just kill them, because after all, they would just be a nuisance to take care of. (sarcasm intended).

My opinion is that abortion should not be a quick fix. There also should be no absolutes. If a sexual assault occurs, or if delivery would cause the mother to die, abortion should be undertaken. With any other circumstance, there are plenty of options for the mother and father to explore that doesn't involved terminating the pregnancy.

FragStains

Very good...well thought out post. I'm not used to the serious Frag though.

[QUOTE="FragStains"]

After reading through this entire thread, I have a few thoughts. I'm not going to attempt to sway anyone's opinion with this either. These are just some things to think about.

The argument for abortion is that there seems to be a question as to when life begins. Some have said that since a fetus can't reason and function, and all it does is grow so therefore it isn't alive. My response would be, what does a tree do? All it does is grow. It doesn't reason and think. Does that mean it isn't alive? I know a tree is different than a human, but just indulge the conclusion.

Another thing that was said was that since a fetus can't take care of itself and survive without assistance, it's not a human life. What about grown adults that have brain damage? They can't function or survive by themselves without assistance. Does that mean they are not humans? Should we just kill them, because after all, they would just be a nuisance to take care of. (sarcasm intended).

My opinion is that abortion should not be a quick fix. There also should be no absolutes. If a sexual assault occurs, or if delivery would cause the mother to die, abortion should be undertaken. With any other circumstance, there are plenty of options for the mother and father to explore that doesn't involved terminating the pregnancy.

LJS9502_basic

Very good...well thought out post. I'm not used to the serious Frag though.

Yeah, anyone with morals knows it's worse.

A baby is the closest thing you can get to a perfect human. They aren't born without sin, since everyone has original sin, but a baby is the most un-corrupted thing on the planet.

In a slight twist of irony, you ever notice how so many people oppose the death penalty but support abortion?:roll:

MarineJcksn

You ever notice how so many that oppose abortion support the death penalty? Your point?

Thank Jack Nicolson for your sig, he'd appreciate it I'm sure. Good movie though....

Ok personally I believe abortions are a good thing, not in the sense that killing babies is good but in the sense that if it were not legal they would still be happening anyway, just in a highly unsafe back alley or by killing the baby once it is born or worse abusing the kid because you didn't want it. Thing is young people are going to be having sex, accidents happen and people are going to be getting raped, unwanted pregnancies will be occurring and the mother may be wanting to get rid of the child, sure you may think it is amoral or whatever and kids should stop sleeping around but that doesn't change the fact it happens and is going to continue happening. Sure adoption is an option but really adoption agencies are already overfilling with unwanted children because of unplanned pregnancies that I don't really think it's a viable option.

Abortions are necessary, simple as that and until a perfect contraceptive is developed they will continue to be necessary and you can continue to argue the "moralities" of abortions until you're blue in the face, it wont stop them happening, nor should it.

Ok personally I believe abortions are a good thing, not in the sense that killing babies is good but in the sense that if it were not legal they would still be happening anyway, just in a highly unsafe back alley or by killing the baby once it is born or worse abusing the kid because you didn't want it. Thing is young people are going to be having sex, accidents happen and people are going to be getting raped, unwanted pregnancies will be occurring and the mother may be wanting to get rid of the child, sure you may think it is amoral or whatever and kids should stop sleeping around but that doesn't change the fact it happens and is going to continue happening. Sure adoption is an option but really adoption agencies are already overfilling with unwanted children because of unplanned pregnancies that I don't really think it's a viable option.

Abortions are necessary, simple as that and until a perfect contraceptive is developed they will continue to be necessary and you can continue to argue the "moralities" of abortions until you're blue in the face, it wont stop them happening, nor should it.

bean-with-bacon

Your confusing abortion with the difference between legality and illegality. Abortion itself is not dependent on law. Abortion should not be the solution to unsafe sex....it's not birth control. If you aren't in a position to have and care for a child....don't create one. There are items sold that prevent such incidents to a high degree of happening.

Abortion would only be necessary in the case that a life need be saved. Other than that...they are NOT a necessity.

Our first long term memories aren't formed until we're over a year old. Does that mean that you aren't an adult until you have your first long term memory? The line can swing both ways. The same government that charges a murder with a double homicide when a woman is pregnant tells mothers it's ok for HER to kill your unborn child.

No wonder we have such problems with this debate.

So which ruling is correct? Does it matter if the child is unwanted? If a child IS unwanted AND we decide the unborn child has no rights then logically it would be ok to kill every child at an orphanage because they are unwanted and therefore have no rights.

Now the TC says that a fetus doesn't experience life immediately and brain function doesn't start for a few weeks. A cycle is 28 days (4 weeks). You don't know your pregnant until around the end of the cycle and it's impossible to tell when conception occured unless you only have sex 1 time in your cycle (and even then you can't be 100% sure). So in order to have a constant we have to go with 4 weeks. Now if brain function starts in 2 weeks, that means the couple has 2 weeks to get tested, look at the options, make the decision, schedule the appointment, and have the procedure in order to have an abortion before the brain starts to function (not to be mistaken with life starting because we don't have an answer for that).

If someone told you that you had 2 weeks to decide what job you wanted to do for the rest of your life, with absolutely no notice, you'd have a hard time. Imagine trying to decide on whether to terminate a life!

How many rembrants, picassos, and mozarts have been aborted? How can we weigh the value of a life unlived? The possibilities are infinite and thus the value is infinite. Abortion is wrong. Giving the man no say is also wrong, but thats a different debate.

Technically when the initial stage of development, sperms are killed. Millions in fact. But maybe since it has not been fertilised, I don't think they can be considered a living being but rather a cell.

And foetus on the other hand, depending on the stages of development is a lump of growing and dividing cells.

So I guess I shouldn't feel as bad when a child gets molested, because it's not an adult.

It's human life. An innocent life.

It's okay to hit babies too, because they won't remember it later(the same reason why it's okay to circumcise them).Erasorn

Exactly. Plus, their bodies are perfect for punting.

[QUOTE="Erasorn"]It's okay to hit babies too, because they won't remember it later(the same reason why it's okay to circumcise them).guynamedbilly

Exactly. Plus, their bodies are perfect for punting.

And they're great punching bags for when you're angry.

Abortion isn't killing a baby, it's killing a non-developed fetus.Shiggums

A developing fetus....is a baby just not in the finished form.

You wouldn't be saying that if you were the baby in the abortion.Aquat1cF1sh

but see, fetuses have no conciousness, they have no idea what's going on. so if i was that fetus, i wouldn't know who i am, what i am, where i was, etc.

[QUOTE="Aquat1cF1sh"]You wouldn't be saying that if you were the baby in the abortion.KGB32

but see, fetuses have no conciousness, they have no idea what's going on. so if i was that fetus, i wouldn't know who i am, what i am, where i was, etc.

That should not be a determining factor in deciding life. Some people are in such a state.

[QUOTE="Aquat1cF1sh"]You wouldn't be saying that if you were the baby in the abortion.KGB32

but see, fetuses have no conciousness, they have no idea what's going on. so if i was that fetus, i wouldn't know who i am, what i am, where i was, etc.

That is why I am for abortion. If a baby dies, it's not like many people spent years getting to know that person and getting attached to their unique personality. It's not like it was contributing to society like an adult does. NOTICE I am not saying killing a baby is okay, I just don't think someone should get more/same punishment for killing a baby than killing an adult.massiv-damage

Using that logic, is it ok to kill someone because they're lonely?

Abortion should be each persons decision but there should be more thought put into it other than an easy way out.

[QUOTE="Aquat1cF1sh"]You wouldn't be saying that if you were the baby in the abortion.KGB32

but see, fetuses have no conciousness, they have no idea what's going on. so if i was that fetus, i wouldn't know who i am, what i am, where i was, etc.

Except for the fact that babies show signs of conciousness in development. They are not simply lumps of flesh. They are partially sentient.

[QUOTE="bean-with-bacon"]

Ok personally I believe abortions are a good thing, not in the sense that killing babies is good but in the sense that if it were not legal they would still be happening anyway, just in a highly unsafe back alley or by killing the baby once it is born or worse abusing the kid because you didn't want it. Thing is young people are going to be having sex, accidents happen and people are going to be getting raped, unwanted pregnancies will be occurring and the mother may be wanting to get rid of the child, sure you may think it is amoral or whatever and kids should stop sleeping around but that doesn't change the fact it happens and is going to continue happening. Sure adoption is an option but really adoption agencies are already overfilling with unwanted children because of unplanned pregnancies that I don't really think it's a viable option.

Abortions are necessary, simple as that and until a perfect contraceptive is developed they will continue to be necessary and you can continue to argue the "moralities" of abortions until you're blue in the face, it wont stop them happening, nor should it.

LJS9502_basic

Your confusing abortion with the difference between legality and illegality. Abortion itself is not dependent on law. Abortion should not be the solution to unsafe sex....it's not birth control. If you aren't in a position to have and care for a child....don't create one. There are items sold that prevent such incidents to a high degree of happening.

Abortion would only be necessary in the case that a life need be saved. Other than that...they are NOT a necessity.

You completely missed my point. Yes abortion is not a contraceptive, nor should it be used like one. You say if people aren't in a position to care for a child then they shouldn't create one, I agree with you but it's not as freaking simple as that. Unplanned pregnancies are going to continue happening, that's a fact and the parents are going to continue wanting abortions, they are a necessity, unless of course you consider back alleys abortions and overflowing adoption agencies a satisfactory alternative.

[QUOTE="KGB32"]

[QUOTE="Aquat1cF1sh"]You wouldn't be saying that if you were the baby in the abortion.LJS9502_basic

but see, fetuses have no conciousness, they have no idea what's going on. so if i was that fetus, i wouldn't know who i am, what i am, where i was, etc.

That should not be a determining factor in deciding life. Some people are in such a state.

Frankly people in a vegetative state (if that's what you were talking about) should be allowed to die, it's not fair keeping them that way.

Its a fetus... its not even conciously aware... it essentially has no environmental input or stimuli to process... It's a parasite. Kill it.MythofSisyphus

The funny (or sad) thing is that in the US abortion is according to the law only legalized for emergency situations, so 95% of the people who do it are breaking the law.blackngold29

Also, a large acreditation organization for the OBGYN has stated in their code of ethics that if you aren't willing to perform an operation, you are morally obligated to direct the patient to someone who will within a timely period. Bush wrote up a letter on the disapproval and there was an issue on whether a doctor who didn't comply would remain acredited.

The group decided that despite the fact that they didn't agree, they couldn't do anything to the people who refused. Personally, I find it disgusting that a group so close to our birthing process would set up such a system, but I'm sure that bean-with-bacon's reasoning is the biggest drive to do so (or at least I hope so).

Slightly off-topic, but still surprisingly on...has anyone here read(seen) "The Cider House Rules"?

It takes on the issue that bean-and-bacon brought up. "If it's going to happen anyway, why not make it a safer process."

This arguement doesn't work for illegal drugs, but is socially acceptable in this instance. I wonder where the difference is.

It's okay to hit babies too, because they won't remember it later(the same reason why it's okay to circumcise them).Erasorn

I sure as hell know that Ive been cirumsized now :P

The thread title is quite true.

The baby is much easier,since it can't fight back.

That's some rather distasteful reasoning you have there,though.

Killing human = wrongblacktorn

[QUOTE="blacktorn"]Killing human = wrongblackngold29

Depends on the circumstance.

[QUOTE="blackngold29"][QUOTE="blacktorn"]Killing human = wrongjames28893

Depends on the circumstance.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="bean-with-bacon"]

Ok personally I believe abortions are a good thing, not in the sense that killing babies is good but in the sense that if it were not legal they would still be happening anyway, just in a highly unsafe back alley or by killing the baby once it is born or worse abusing the kid because you didn't want it. Thing is young people are going to be having sex, accidents happen and people are going to be getting raped, unwanted pregnancies will be occurring and the mother may be wanting to get rid of the child, sure you may think it is amoral or whatever and kids should stop sleeping around but that doesn't change the fact it happens and is going to continue happening. Sure adoption is an option but really adoption agencies are already overfilling with unwanted children because of unplanned pregnancies that I don't really think it's a viable option.

Abortions are necessary, simple as that and until a perfect contraceptive is developed they will continue to be necessary and you can continue to argue the "moralities" of abortions until you're blue in the face, it wont stop them happening, nor should it.

bean-with-bacon

Your confusing abortion with the difference between legality and illegality. Abortion itself is not dependent on law. Abortion should not be the solution to unsafe sex....it's not birth control. If you aren't in a position to have and care for a child....don't create one. There are items sold that prevent such incidents to a high degree of happening.

Abortion would only be necessary in the case that a life need be saved. Other than that...they are NOT a necessity.

You completely missed my point. Yes abortion is not a contraceptive, nor should it be used like one. You say if people aren't in a position to care for a child then they shouldn't create one, I agree with you but it's not as freaking simple as that. Unplanned pregnancies are going to continue happening, that's a fact and the parents are going to continue wanting abortions, they are a necessity, unless of course you consider back alleys abortions and overflowing adoption agencies a satisfactory alternative.

Abortion is abortion no matter who or where they are done. I don't understand your persisting in that point as though it matters. Overflowing adoption agencies? People are adopting from other countries because there isn't enough babies.

Again...abortion is NOT a necessity..it's a convenience. There is a difference.

Abortion is abortion no matter who or where they are done. I don't understand your persisting in that point as though it matters. Overflowing adoption agencies? People are adopting from other countries because there isn't enough babies.

Again...abortion is NOT a necessity..it's a convenience. There is a difference.

LJS9502_basic

They actually do that because it's cheaper.

Frankly people in a vegetative state (if that's what you were talking about) should be allowed to die, it's not fair keeping them that way.

james28893

[QUOTE="james28893"]

Frankly people in a vegetative state (if that's what you were talking about) should be allowed to die, it's not fair keeping them that way.

LJS9502_basic

Chances are that they wouldn't want to remain in a veetative state for the rest of their lives and if nothing can be done for them, they should be allowed to die.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="james28893"]

Frankly people in a vegetative state (if that's what you were talking about) should be allowed to die, it's not fair keeping them that way.

james28893

Chances are that they wouldn't want to remain in a veetative state for the rest of their lives and if nothing can be done for them, they should be allowed to die.

You just reiterated the same point. We get it. Those inconvenient to sociey don't deserve to live.:|

[QUOTE="james28893"]

Frankly people in a vegetative state (if that's what you were talking about) should be allowed to die, it's not fair keeping them that way.

LJS9502_basic

I guess their family could decide. If your family member was living in misery wouldn't you like to decide on whether you should put an end to their misery or not?

[QUOTE="james28893"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="james28893"]

Frankly people in a vegetative state (if that's what you were talking about) should be allowed to die, it's not fair keeping them that way.

LJS9502_basic

Chances are that they wouldn't want to remain in a veetative state for the rest of their lives and if nothing can be done for them, they should be allowed to die.

You just reiterated the same point. We get it. Those inconvenient to sociey don't deserve to live.:

Those inconvenient to society should be helped, or attempt to help themselves so that they are no longer inconvenient to society, if nothing can be done for them, or if they themselves can't do anything, then yes perhaps they ought to die.

I guess their family could decide. If your family member was living in misery wouldn't you like to decide on whether you should put an end to their misery or not?

flowdee79

They aren't necessarily in misery.;)

That's a slippery slope. Who is to say that the family always has the best interests?

but the baby shouldn't suffer from the adults mistake..SkyFlakez

I agree but they would be oblivious to it as they aren't concious as a foetus.

Those inconvenient to society should be helped, or attempt to help themselves so that they are no longer inconvenient to society, if nothing can be done for them, or if they themselves can't do anything, then yes perhaps they ought to die.

james28893

So life is valueless to you? And society as a whole does not have the best interests of the individual in mind...rather their own.

[QUOTE="flowdee79"]

I guess their family could decide. If your family member was living in misery wouldn't you like to decide on whether you should put an end to their misery or not?

LJS9502_basic

They aren't necessarily in misery.;)

That's a slippery slope. Who is to say that the family always has the best interests?

The doctor ;).

Fetus does not equate to the baby.. The United States government sees it as that for the first trimester, that it is not a human life yet.sSubZerOo

Legal =/= moral.