Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Abortion Unfiltered
Options
Comments
-
How can you call someone who does the research to find the facts lazy? You say you have no opinion about abortion, but apathy is not an excuse to allow others to suffer. "Evil flourishes when good men do nothing." Yet that is what you seem to be advocating. The differnece between a child killed by abortion and the child killed by starvation is just alittle bit of time. Both suffer, and as members of the same species, we have the responsibility to care for both. Either you stand up for those who can't defend themselves, or you are part of the group who causes the suffering. That is for you to decide.
oh gods,here we go,i'm out,i've been working all day and am in no mood for this.0 -
then i will. And i'll disagree with your belief,and you with mine. Circles as usual. There are scientists that will disagree with your scientists,religious folk that will disagree with your religious folk,and philosophers that will disagree with yours.
As regards the unborn, when he/she pulls away from the needle in pain as I described above, this is not opinion, it is observable scientific fact.0 -
Phototoxin wrote: »but you are a bunch of cells.. so if I kill your bunches of cells surely I will kill you..
I would say that that imagery is more appropraite to a sperm and egg. But even then the tadpole has a full set of frog dna the sperm or the egg alone doenst.
Conception is after the sperm and egg combine, which in turn yields the DNA genetically unique to the new human individual. No one is saying the egg or sperm by themselves are living human beings. Going back to the tadploe example, the organism is a frog. The tadpole is a stage in the frog's life. Hence the tadpole example is erroneous science. When you were 2 yrs old, you did not look or act the way you do now. That also was a stage in your life. However, you were no less a person then, just because you still had to grow and learn. SAme thing with a child who has not been born, and who must grow and learn to become an adult.0 -
How can you call someone who does the research to find the facts lazy? You say you have no opinion about abortion, but apathy is not an excuse to allow others to suffer. "Evil flourishes when good men do nothing." Yet that is what you seem to be advocating. The difference between a child killed by abortion and the child killed by starvation is just a little bit of time. Both suffer, and as members of the same species, we have the responsibility to care for both. Either you stand up for those who can't defend themselves, or you are part of the group who causes the suffering. That is for you to decide.
When someone says that they're going to post their opinion, and their opinion is supported by "facts" from a single website with a particular agenda, it's lazy, or at the very best it's a poorly supported argument. And that goes for someone putting an opposing view across too, I'm not picking on the OP specifically.
As for apathy, where do you see me saying I'm apathetic about the issue. What I did say is that I have no strong opinions either way, which doesn't mean I'm apathetic, but rather I am open to be convinced by either side if one of them can put forward a compelling enough argument to me. So far neither has so I've no real opinion on the matter.
And as for the bits about "advocating evil" and being "part of the group that causes the suffering", that's just sanctimonious bullshít and I take great exception to it. If that's the best argument you can put forward i want no further part in this discussion. I'm off to bed.0 -
When someone says that they're going to post their opinion, and their opinion is supported by "facts" from a single website with a particular agenda, it's lazy, or at the very best it's a poorly supported argument. And that goes for someone putting an opposing view across too, I'm not picking on the OP specifically.
As for apathy, where do you see me saying I'm apathetic about the issue. What I did say is that I have no strong opinions either way, which doesn't mean I'm apathetic, but rather I am open to be convinced by either side if one of them can put forward a compelling enough argument to me. So far neither has so I've no real opinion on the matter.
And as for the bits about "advocating evil" and being "part of the group that causes the suffering", that's just sanctimonious bullshít and I take great exception to it. If that's the best argument you can put forward i want no further part in this discussion. I'm off to bed.
Actually it was the founding fathers of this country who say that those who have the ability to make things right have the responsibility to do so. Not quite the same wording, but the same meaning. I'm not trying to offend you, but I do think that when you won't study the facts and come to a logical conclusion, then you do not have the right to call someone lazy, because they start an discussion from one website. That may be only one resource, but at least it's a beginning. He stated his opinion, then backed it up with a resource. He was looking for a legitamate discussion on the issue. You obviously have specific questions or views about this issue, or you wouldn't be posting here. So instead of insulting the person, why don't you just ask your questions or post your opinions about the issue, so they can be discussed respectively. What facts do you believe? When do you think you became a living person with rights? Because the law defined Black Americans as non persons, did it make it right? I can't imagine that you would think it was ok to watch a one month old baby get torn to death. What about a newborn? Do you know anyone who has been pregnant. (Did you know them while they were pregnant?) I have 3 children, and I could tell the difference between their personalities, before they were born. My oldest loved to have her back rubbed. I would rub my belly, and she would push against my hand. My second one withdrew, if I rubbed my belly. She was very ticklish after she was born. These are personal insights beyond the scientific evidence. What possible argument is there, that there is a difference between a child that is born and one that is not born. Beyond all that, do you know anyone who has had an abortion. I mean really know them? Do they talk about the nightmares? Do they tell you about the anger that they feel towards those they feel pressured them into it? I also work with women who have had abortions. Over half of them have seriously thought of suicide. Most feel as though they were pressured into it by the father of their child or their own parents. I recently met someone whose parents kicked her out of her house and told her she could not come back unless she had an abortion. Instead of giving in, she went and lived with other homeless people. She ended up giving birth to her daughter in the woods. Thankfully both survived. At the very least, if you decide you are pro-choice, then at least support the woman's right to give birth and not jus t the right to have an abortion... Just some things to think about.0 -
Advertisement
-
It really is a pity that yourself and Ultravid have decided to attempt to justify pro-life. I love discussing this topic with the likes of Zulu and Sam Vimes. Makes for interesting and logical debate......
"baby murdering is evil rabble rabble rabble......." and "half the women i know who had abortions wanted to die....." do nothing but damage your cause IMO.0 -
It really is a pity that yourself and Ultravid have decided to attempt to justify pro-life. I love discussing this topic with the likes of Zulu and Sam Vimes. Makes for interesting and logical debate.
"baby murdering is evil rabble rabble rabble......." and "half the women i know who had abortions wanted to die....." do nothing but damage your cause IMO.
What would you like to justify? Pro-abortion? All I have seen thus far on this thread is that the unborn is a human person, a unique, human individual from conception, with strong scientific evidence to support this conclusion, and therefore to kill him/her is gravely wrong and an obvious injustice. Would you like to try and justify it for us?
You could also reply to quinn's post, rather than just weakly dismiss it as you have just done without considering what she has said, and her first-hand experience of what abortion is and what it does to women, nevermind unborn babies.0 -
Nah im just pro-choice in most cases. And for every scientific document you can quote saying that an unborn is a human person, i could probably quote one that says it isnt so thats a bit of a standoff. Ergo im not killing what everyone believes to be a person.What would you like to justify? Pro-abortion? All I have seen thus far on this thread is that the unborn is a human person, a unique, human individual from conception, with strong scientific evidence to support this conclusion, and therefore to kill him/her is gravely wrong and an obvious injustice. Would you like to try and justify it for us?
I wonder Ultravid are you friends with anyone who has had an abortion?I already know from bQuinn that he is or has been. WHich would mean that he befriended a murderer in his eyes no? Maybe you dont believe its murder as convictionally as you say it is?0 -
Nah im just pro-choice in most cases. And for every scientific document you can quote saying that an unborn is a human person, i could probably quote one that says it isnt so thats a bit of a standoff. Ergo im not killing what everyone believes to be a person.
I wonder Ultravid are you friends with anyone who has had an abortion?I already know from bQuinn that he is or has been. WHich would mean that he befriended a murderer in his eyes no? Maybe you dont believe its murder as convictionally as you say it is?
If we aren't sure (I believe I have shown that we are through science) that it is a human person, wouldn't it be best to err on the side of caution and give this life, this human life, the protection afforded to all other human life?
I don't know quinn, but I'm guessing she has experience working as some kind of councillor to those who've had abortions. Though I will let her reply to that question herself as I am speculating, as are you when you suggest she was complicit in abortion, which yes, I hold is murder.
This is relevant to what you've just said:
from: http://www.prolifephysicians.org/lifebegins.htm“Yeah,” the pro-choice attorney rebuts, “but is it a person?”
In Roe vs. Wade, Justice Harry Blackmun noted, “The appellee and certain amici argue that the fetus is a ‘person’ within the language and meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment. In support of this, they outline at length and in detail the well-known facts of fetal development. If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant's case, of course, collapses, for the fetus' right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the (Fourteenth) Amendment.”
According to Webster’s Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary, a person is “a human being.” Attempts to render an entire class of human beings as “non-persons” based upon arbitrary qualities such as age and place of residence in order to discriminate against them is immoral and unjust.
History is full of infamous examples of governments legalizing the discrimination of an entire class of human beings by rendering them “non-persons.” Jews were rendered “sub-humans” in Germany in the 1940’s and colonial slaveowners bought and sold Africans as “property.” As a matter of fact, the Supreme Court in 1857 ruled that Dred Scott, a black slave, was not a “person” with rights but the “property” of his master. Was the Court wrong then? Of course! The Supreme Court of 1973 that legalized abortion nationwide with its Roe v. Wade decision was just as immoral and unjust. They dehumanized an entire class of human beings in order to legitimize wholesale discrimination against them. Abortion may go down in history as the greatest human rights abuse of all time.
Can I ask you to refute the science I have presented showing human life starts at conception?0 -
To Mena: the evidence is in the link, which shows the testimony of countless medical experts and medical school textbooks. It's all there. The science is saying human life begins at conception.
The link again, is here:
http://abort73.com/index.php?/abortion/medical_testimony
Scroll down - you can see the books, the quotes - this is what the student doctors are taught about human life.
Countless? I counted 20 or so.
**deleted**
As to my own opinion on abortion, I'm pro-choice. I'd never opt for that method myself, but I would never presume to lecture anyone else on what they must/must not do.0 -
Advertisement
-
Countless? I counted 20 or so.
**deleted**
As to my own opinion on abortion, I'm pro-choice. I'd never opt for that method myself, but I would never presume to lecture anyone else on what they must/must not do.
Can you prove, using science, that human life does not begin at conception? Can you refute the science I have presented in my links and in my posts?0 -
Can you prove, using science, that human life does not begin at conception? Can you refute the science I have presented in my links and in my posts?
Yeah hang on a second...ill get my test tubes out and stick on a cup of coffee.^^
No one in pro-choice debates that human life starts at conception.....or earlier even(A sperm is human life at an earlier stage)
What I debate is the "importance" of "human life". Why do you class "human" life as being so important? That you could become so enraged at the abortion of the unborn yet not bat an eyelid or care about the slaughter of animals on a massive scale. What is it that makes us more special than those creatures?0 -
-
-
-
-
As regards the unborn, when he/she pulls away from the needle in pain as I described above, this is not opinion, it is observable scientific fact.
Do they scream 'ow' and cower in a corner of the womb as well?
Your views here are very black and white and you've avoided all of that grey in between the two.
I wouldn't question that basic life starts at conception but the choice to have an abortion is not as simple as you'd like to convey it as. People choose abortion for many reasons be it as a result of threats to the life of the mother (which i'd rate much more over that of a collection of cells) or due to circumstances such as rape or incest.0 -
To Virgil: Do you believe human life doesn't really matter? Is my life no more valuable than that of a snail?
Not until you acquire what it is that separates us and animals. But then you're not an unborn child are you?
Humans are easily inferior to a VAST amount of animals in a number of ways.
I cant run as fast as a large cat, i cant see as accurately as a bird of prey, im not as strong or agile as a gorrila.But i still classify myself as more important.
I beleive that i(and you), are superior to a snail because we're more intelligent.A gift bestowed upon us by our brain and the consciousness formed by it.
Is there another way to differenciate ourselves from animals?The fact that something is "human life" or potentially human life doesnt hold great importance to me.
Do you believe killing a body without a brain to be immoral?It is "Human life" after all no?0 -
Can I ask you to refute the science I have presented showing human life starts at conception?
Biologist Scott Gilbert maintains that "Current perspectives on when human life begins range from fertilization to gastrulation to birth and even after... Contemporary scientific literature proposes a variety of answers to the question of when human life begins."
Source
So can we please start referring to opinions as such and facts as such?0 -
Do they scream 'ow' and cower in a corner of the womb as well?
Your views here are very black and white and you've avoided all of that grey in between the two.
I wouldn't question that basic life starts at conception but the choice to have an abortion is not as simple as you'd like to convey it as. People choose abortion for many reasons be it as a result of threats to the life of the mother (which i'd rate much more over that of a collection of cells) or due to circumstances such as rape or incest.
It's amazing you really have so little knowledge of why women who have abortions 'choose them'. Ultravid guessed right when he said I have counseled women who have had abortions. Because of the field I'm in, I also meet many other women who have had abortions (and men who participated). You say they choose abortions, because of danger to their life, or because their child was conceived through rape or incest. I am a biochemist, have done plenty of medicla research and within the last 5 yrs have gone into the social field of helping women who feel forced into having an abortion. Less than 3% of abortions are due to the reasons you say. Look at any study. A group in NY did a random, confidential survey of women on in NYC. Of those who had an abortion, 92% said they felt forced into it by someone else. SO whose right to choose is it?? If the woman did not want to choose it, the baby obviously did not choose it, then maybe it's the men who are choosing it so they can have their way without any consequences. People have been lied to so much, that many are convinced that women really want this freedom of choice. Yet, why is it that those who say they are 'pro-choice' are not the ones protecting a woman who chooses to give birth to her baby??0 -
Advertisement
-
For those who claim we don't know when life begins, then we should obviously err on the side of life. If we say we don't know if life begins at conception or not, then we must admit that it is possible that life begins at conception and that life is human and thus a person.
I invite, as part of this discussion thread, all of you to go to www.abortionno.org and defend what you see there.
Please do actually click on the link and view the presentations there. If you are at work, please do it later today. Then come back and let us discuss what we have seen and read.0 -
92% eh?.....
Thats quite a staggering statistic.
Care to give a link to it?
ALso in your eyes you have counseled murderers yeah? I wonder do you truly beleive that?
We know when life supposedly begins. You still ahvent answered my last post and have instead decided to pretty much repost a point youve made before.ultravid wrote:For those who claim we don't know when life begins, then we should obviously err on the side of life. If we say we don't know if life begins at conception or not, then we must admit that it is possible that life begins at conception and that life is human and thus a person.
I invite, as part of this discussion thread, all of you to go to www.abortionno.org and defend what you see there.
Please do actually click on the link and view the presentations there. If you are at work, please do it later today. Then come back and let us discuss what we have seen and read.0 -
No one in pro-choice debates that human life starts at conception.....or earlier even(A sperm is human life at an earlier stage)
What I debate is the "importance" of "human life". Why do you class "human" life as being so important? That you could become so enraged at the abortion of the unborn yet not bat an eyelid or care about the slaughter of animals on a massive scale. What is it that makes us more special than those creatures?
I am discussing the massive slaughter of human life here and animal rights is another topic altogether. When, in your opinion, is human life worthy of being protected? Is it at some point before birth, at birth or at sometime after birth or never?0 -
Humans are easily inferior to a VAST amount of animals in a number of ways.
I cant run as fast as a large cat, i cant see as accurately as a bird of prey, im not as strong or agile as a gorrila.But i still classify myself as more important.
I beleive that i(and you), are superior to a snail because we're more intelligent.A gift bestowed upon us by our brain and the consciousness formed by it.
Is there another way to differenciate ourselves from animals?The fact that something is "human life" or potentially human life doesnt hold great importance to me.
Do you believe killing a body without a brain to be immoral?It is "Human life" after all no?
You're going outside the realm of what's relevant. The constitution says all persons are guaranteed the right to life. Animals are obviously living creatures, not protected by the constitution. We are not discussing the importance of animal life, that's just a vain attempt to change the subject. If you want a religious discussion on levels of importance, that's a different thread. The constitution says all persons have the right to life. A unique human being begins at the moment of conception. (No, a sperm is not human, it only has 23 chromosomes and will never grow and develop...) From the moment of conception, until death that human being will continue to grow (yes as adults we are still growing, as we replace skin, bones, and other tissues...) and learn. The rate of learning varies through the stages, but brain activity actually begins by 2 weeks after conception.
Why do you not care about protecting your fellow man?? I really want to know why it is so important to you to protect this 'freedom of abortion'? What makes this so important to you, that you would argue it on a forum?? I really want to know.0 -
Pro-choicers, protecting womens right to choose,and attacking women who don't have abortions since 1782. Ridiculous comments guarantee ridiculous retorts0
-
And i am trying to question why you value humans over animals?I am discussing the massive slaughter of human life here and animal rights is another topic altogether. When, in your opinion, is human life worthy of being protected? Is it at some point before birth, at birth or at sometime after birth or never?
Ive already said when i value human life.
But ill say it again.
When our brain is developed or in a state of developing higher brain functions(responsible for the state that is personhood). Once this happens id err on the side of life aswell.
Unfortunately this doesnt happen at the point of conception.
You still havent answered my question though.
Do you consider killing a human body without a brain to be immoral?After all it is human life.0 -
Ultravid I wanted to address some points you made previously.If you reject science what do you base your opinion on?
The moment egg and sperm unite, you have a new individual human being who begins to grow and develop at that moment. By 18-21 days the heart will begin to beat. By 6 wks, they will move on their own, and respond (draw away from) a needle if stuck during an amniocentesis. Solomen and Berg, as well as Curtis are leading college Biology texts. Both say conception is the beginning of the human life cycle. You can argue the rights of the person all you want, but facts are facts, human life begins at conception.
Well it is a life cycle. So technically there is no beginning. Just like Mitosis has no beginning, wow never thought i could use that word in a relevant analogy. And if you think that human life begins at conception (which is absurd because that means a single cell is a human life, so what we are comprised of billions of human lives?) well you also think that nature is the biggest abortionist of all (god if you believe in god), after all many conceived eggs are actually aborted naturally by the women, this prevents alot of future miscarriages. Human life may begin when two gametes combine and become a single cell, that does not make that single cell a human.As regards the unborn, when he/she pulls away from the needle in pain as I described above, this is not opinion, it is observable scientific fact.
Yes but that is only at far along stages.For those who claim we don't know when life begins, then we should obviously err on the side of life. If we say we don't know if life begins at conception or not, then we must admit that it is possible that life begins at conception and that life is human and thus a person.
No I don't think it matters. I do not think it is important when life "begins" ( I mean beyond the first non replicating organic compounds becoming replicating, does it really begin? More continue) I think the more important questions are
Does it feel pain and when?
When is it alive, when can it think?
And at these points we should deeply consider before we consider killing it. And even then there may be good reasons to abort.
The mother may be in high probability of negatively affecting her own health. And as a result would leave behind a devastated partner and an motherless child/children.
On a personal note, the doctors told my mother to abort me I was a health risk and she could have died. I think my mother should have aborted me, I would have been okay with it, I as her child and the child of a father and two brothers would rather have died than killed my mother. Did you ever think the fetus would prefer to be aborted?0 -
Do they scream 'ow' and cower in a corner of the womb as well?
Your views here are very black and white and you've avoided all of that grey in between the two.
I wouldn't question that basic life starts at conception but the choice to have an abortion is not as simple as you'd like to convey it as. People choose abortion for many reasons be it as a result of threats to the life of the mother (which i'd rate much more over that of a collection of cells) or due to circumstances such as rape or incest.
Why do you think an abortion should happen because of rape or incest? Do you put the rapest life above the life of the child? I happen to be a result of a rape, and I am appalled by the fact that you believe that I should of been murdered because of who my father was.
You call a fetus a bunch of cells, you do understand that we are all a bunch of cells so what is your point? The case of a mothers life in danger is a very rare case and most people will agree that in cases such as when the child is in the felopen tube something must be done because both patients are in danger of death.0 -
Not until you acquire what it is that separates us and animals. But then you're not an unborn child are you?
Humans are easily inferior to a VAST amount of animals in a number of ways.
I cant run as fast as a large cat, i cant see as accurately as a bird of prey, im not as strong or agile as a gorrila.But i still classify myself as more important.
I beleive that i(and you), are superior to a snail because we're more intelligent.A gift bestowed upon us by our brain and the consciousness formed by it.
Is there another way to differenciate ourselves from animals?The fact that something is "human life" or potentially human life doesnt hold great importance to me.
Do you believe killing a body without a brain to be immoral?It is "Human life" after all no?
You do understand that an unborn child does have a brain right?0 -
Advertisement
-
Unfiltered Abortion you say! I normally drink the filtered kind, what kinda affect will it have on my waist line if I switch?0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement