For those of you who support abortion...

[LEaSH]

Wow, that's something to brag about!

You said, "Usually people that don't see it as murder are trying to make themselves feel better, probably from lifes prior decisions."

I get what you're going after, but I've not been there.

Now someone give me a fetus...

 

[LEaSH]

There are a few rabid pro-lifers on my Facebook friends list. It makes me laugh a bit when they support errant bombings and drone attacks that kill many innocent children in other countries but the thought of a single abortion makes them put 47 exclamation points after a not-so-well thought out comment.

And you have a 6,662 post count. So I'm watching you.

 

[UncleMike]

There are a few rabid pro-lifers on my Facebook friends list. It makes me laugh a bit when they support errant bombings and drone attacks that kill many innocent children in other countries but the thought of a single abortion makes them put 47 exclamation points after a not-so-well thought out comment.

I don't recall anyone in this thread supporting such actions.
The topic here is the murder of innocent babies.
Not the evils of war or the actions of a military force.

 

[lucky4034]

So by your argument I would assume that you are a supporter of Eugenics? These are part and parcel a large part of the reasoning supporters use.

Do I support going around and rounding up the weak and killing them? No...

Do I value human existence (myself included)? Not really....

What I'm going to say is going to likely **** off a lot of people and I'm sure appall everyone else.


To me humans are pathetic... by far the most vile creature on this planet and in all likelihood the universe. We selfishly destroy everything for our own vanity and then complain when its gone. We're so smart that every time the world invents a new way to kill us (think HIV or Cancer), we quickly invent a new way to profit from the cure. We are getting so good at avoiding natural death that its projected that in 2013, the first human to live to 150 years old will be born. Thats a scary thought....

And yet... for some strange reason in our thirst for life, we keep inventing new ways to cause death. Nuclear bombs, biological warfare, chemical warfare....

"Save the babies... Kill the Muslims"​

That should be this forums motto btw....

I don't know... I'm sure I could ramble on forever in thought, trying to make sense of the world... but as far as I can tell, it'd be a waste of time because humans just aren't logical creatures. We simply invent our own standards and morals that regulate the way we live and we adhere to them and pretend they are logical or that they aren't completely selfish. I totally get why everyone is quick to believe that God invented everything on Earth for humans to dispose of as they see fit... because that is exactly what we do.

I know the first thing someone is going to say: "If you hate humans so much, why don't you kill yourself?"

I've asked myself that many times actually... (keep in mind I've never considered killing myself, so please don't send me a PM trying to talk me off of the ledge. To clarify, I have pondered why I think humans are parasitic and what is it that drives me to live).

The reason I strive to live and will do everything in my power to survive is because I am selfish. Self preservation and procreation are the basis for every organisms existence.

I accept that humans are parasitic.... I also do not blame humans, or myself for being selfish or for exploiting all of the resources that surround us. Afterall, that should be the goal of any species. To expand and preserve and to pass along the greatest genome as possible.... I'll do whatever it takes to live, but from a global perspective, I recognize that humans are destructive.

I guess from a species standpoint, Eugenics could be a valuable tool, but from a personal standpoint... my only goal is to live the most enjoyable life I can and hope to pass along my genes to a healthy offspring and raise them the best I can so they can do the same.

This world is pretty screwed up... Its difficult enough for anyone to live a full and happy life and I don't see any point in making it harder on anyone. I don't support Eugenics... I don't want to see people rounded up and destroyed or tinkered with. I want to live to be 100+ years old and want to enjoy every single breath between now and then.

 

[Shadow8088]

Lucky, if I could rep you any more today, I would. Multiple times.

 

[TheRude1]

I drove an Ambulance for Riley children's Hospital for about 7 yrs and I have seen more than most people and things that pictures can not describe.



That's all I can say about that without violating the rules of the forum

 

[Bunnykid68]

What do you think you would've done if she terminated your flesh and blood?

The only thing I could have, cried and moved on.

 

[7urtle]

My guess is that a lot of these abortions are from people that used protection that failed, this was their backup method. Or it is cheaper and easier than using birth control of any kind

my friend works at walgreens and sells the morning after pill to the same people every month...most of the time

 

[steveh_131]

my friend works at walgreens and sells the morning after pill to the same people every month...most of the time

Not sure what your point is, but I would like to point out that the morning after pill is not an abortion pill.

 

[SOCOM242]

Do I support going around and rounding up the weak and killing them? No...

Do I value human existence (myself included)? Not really....

What I'm going to say is going to likely **** off a lot of people and I'm sure appall everyone else.


To me humans are pathetic... by far the most vile creature on this planet and in all likelihood the universe. We selfishly destroy everything for our own vanity and then complain when its gone. We're so smart that every time the world invents a new way to kill us (think HIV or Cancer), we quickly invent a new way to profit from the cure. We are getting so good at avoiding natural death that its projected that in 2013, the first human to live to 150 years old will be born. Thats a scary thought....

And yet... for some strange reason in our thirst for life, we keep inventing new ways to cause death. Nuclear bombs, biological warfare, chemical warfare....

"Save the babies... Kill the Muslims"​

That should be this forums motto btw....

I don't know... I'm sure I could ramble on forever in thought, trying to make sense of the world... but as far as I can tell, it'd be a waste of time because humans just aren't logical creatures. We simply invent our own standards and morals that regulate the way we live and we adhere to them and pretend they are logical or that they aren't completely selfish. I totally get why everyone is quick to believe that God invented everything on Earth for humans to dispose of as they see fit... because that is exactly what we do.

I know the first thing someone is going to say: "If you hate humans so much, why don't you kill yourself?"

I've asked myself that many times actually... (keep in mind I've never considered killing myself, so please don't send me a PM trying to talk me off of the ledge. To clarify, I have pondered why I think humans are parasitic and what is it that drives me to live).

The reason I strive to live and will do everything in my power to survive is because I am selfish. Self preservation and procreation are the basis for every organisms existence.

I accept that humans are parasitic.... I also do not blame humans, or myself for being selfish or for exploiting all of the resources that surround us. Afterall, that should be the goal of any species. To expand and preserve and to pass along the greatest genome as possible.... I'll do whatever it takes to live, but from a global perspective, I recognize that humans are destructive.

I guess from a species standpoint, Eugenics could be a valuable tool, but from a personal standpoint... my only goal is to live the most enjoyable life I can and hope to pass along my genes to a healthy offspring and raise them the best I can so they can do the same.

This world is pretty screwed up... Its difficult enough for anyone to live a full and happy life and I don't see any point in making it harder on anyone. I don't support Eugenics... I don't want to see people rounded up and destroyed or tinkered with. I want to live to be 100+ years old and want to enjoy every single breath between now and then.

If this isn't a cry for help I don't know what is...

 

[SOCOM242]

What this topic ultimately boils down to are these two questions: does a person believe that the life inside a woman is a human being with rights, and are people willing to face the consequences of their actions.

Abortion, no matter how you frame it, is the termination of a burgeoning life. Whether two weeks after conception or two months, what you are doing is choosing to kill a developing person. That's just a fact. Your choice to do this or not is ultimately something you will have to live with for the rest of your life. Don't downplay it, laugh it off, or change subjects; you are choosing to kill your child when you choose to commit abortion.

 

[lucky4034]

What this topic ultimately boils down to are these two questions: does a person believe that the life inside a woman is a human being with rights, and are people willing to face the consequences of their actions.

Abortion, no matter how you frame it, is the termination of a burgeoning life. Whether two weeks after conception or two months, what you are doing is choosing to kill a developing person. That's just a fact. Your choice to do this or not is ultimately something you will have to live with for the rest of your life. Don't downplay it, laugh it off, or change subjects; you are choosing to kill your child when you choose to commit abortion.

Correct... if you choose to have an abortion it is a decision that YOU will have to live with for the rest of your life. If you chose to have sex and get pregnant, that is a CHOICE that YOU will have to live with for the rest of YOUR life.

If YOU chose to HAVE a baby and can't take care of it properly, it then becomes a CHOICE that EVERYONE ELSE is going to have to live with. If 1.3 million people a year make that choice or 43 million people worldwide make that choice... the strain on society becomes unmanageable and we all suffer.

All we can debate is whether the Utilitarian course of action outweighs the wishes of Religion?

Teach your kids abstinence... teach your kids responsibility and safe sex. Which ever one fits into your belief system best.

 

[qmikep]

There is a moment when the sperm penetrates the egg. There is a moment when the child draws its first breath outside its mother's body. Somewhere in between a lump of cells becomes a human being with rights.

I have no problem with the morning after pill, which ends a pregnancy after conception.

I have a problem with an elective abortion on a baby that can live outside the womb.

I don't understand the people who say that a fertilized egg is the exact same as an adult human.

I don't understand the people who say that an almost born baby is the same as a microscopic grouping of cells.

Somewhere in between lies a reasonable policy.

+1

 

[cordex]

To those of you who keep pointing at rape/incest/medical necessity: that argument isn't really your point. Very few pro-abortionists would approve of the casual killing of a child after they are born for any reason - even if they were conceived when the mother was raped by her brother, a Nazi GOP lawyer. Moreover, very few of those who play the rape card, the incest card or the medical necessity card want to limit abortion to cases of rape, incest or medical necessity. It's a foot-in-the-door towards a more general policy of allowing abortion.

What it all comes down to is the fact that anti-abortion types and pro-abortion types have a fundamentally different understanding of when life becomes a human person. Indeed, there is a whole continuum of understanding on that subject.

Correct... if you choose to have an abortion it is a decision that YOU will have to live with for the rest of your life. If you chose to have sex and get pregnant, that is a CHOICE that YOU will have to live with for the rest of YOUR life.

This is true. However it is also true that if you kill your 3 year old child it is a CHOICE that YOU will have to live with the rest of YOUR life. Even so, most of us can agree that the murder of a 3 year old is clearly wrong and should be punished by the government.

If YOU chose to HAVE a baby and can't take care of it properly, it then becomes a CHOICE that EVERYONE ELSE is going to have to live with. If 1.3 million people a year make that choice or 43 million people worldwide make that choice... the strain on society becomes unmanageable and we all suffer.

All we can debate is whether the Utilitarian course of action outweighs the wishes of Religion?

You're making too much of the religious aspect, I think. While religious people have their objections to abortion, there are sound moral objections to it absent religion as well. For that matter, I don't think you honestly believe the utilitarian position you offer.

You seem to be making the argument that because a baby isn't wanted by its mother, its chances of being a productive member of society are diminished. This much is likely true, but then you go on to imply that because they are less likely to become middle-class taxpayers with two cars and a dog that they should have less of a claim to life. As a society we don't typically sanction the killing of people for sheer convenience or cost savings. What changes once the baby is born that suddenly eliminates that cold cost/benefit calculation?

Do you believe that we should simply kill people that some arbiter determined could become a net drain on society? If so, why should that be limited by age? Indeed, if we knew for a fact an adult was a persistent drain on society, wouldn't it be more moral to kill them as a known offender rather than a baby who simply has a higher chance to become a drain? For those of us who - misanthropic though we may be - don't view humanity as an unwanted parasite to be eliminated without thought, the thought of killing people simply because they're inefficient or inconvenient is repugnant.

If you don't believe that being a financial burden on society should be a capital offense, then the utilitarian debate is an unrelated non sequitur that has no bearing on the issue.

What makes abortion such a difficult topic is that it is entirely a question of degree, and any line you draw for the appropriateness of the termination of life is utterly arbitrary.

When you're holding a newly born infant in your arms, there is no rational question of it being a person. It's clearly an independent human life, thus deserving of all the legal and moral protections that are inherent to our society, even (perhaps especially) if mommy doesn't want it. We can all agree on that, right?

So now we get down to the completely arbitrary decision of when "personhood" begins.

Is a baby that is fully capable of surviving outside the womb but is not yet born a person?
Is a baby that is capable of surviving outside the womb with only minor medical attention but is not yet born a person?
Is a baby that is a mere 22 weeks along but still capable of surviving outside of the womb with intensive medical care a person?
Is a baby with brain activity a person?
Is a baby with a beating heart a person?
Is a freshly implanted embryo a person?
Is a zygote a person?
Is an unfertilized egg and a sperm with a good running start and a determined look a person?

What it comes down to is that there is no clear answer on this. There is no clear point that Science Says™ someone is a person and deserving of legal protection but before that they're just a mass of cells to be vacuumed up and thrown away at will. It is an arbitrary distinction on which there is very little agreement even within the pro- and anti-abortion groups.

You can try to make practical arguments on how Utopian society becomes when women can have abortions on a whim. You can try to claim how unfair it is for a woman to have to carry a baby to term. You can point to rape and incest as your foot in the door. You can talk about "her body, her choice" and "freedom to choose" and so forth, but those are all simply intended as distractions from the basic issue, because the distractions are easy. The real issue isn't.

 

[Bunnykid68]

It should be OK to destroy eagle eggs then shouldn't it? Not really a bird yet.

 

[giovani]

It should be OK to destroy eagle eggs then shouldn't it? Not really a bird yet.

I don't know but i did step on a baby bunnny once

 

[JetGirl]

If i have something inside of my body, say......
A baby
A bullet
A cancerous tumor
A scalpel left there by a surgion

I and I alone should make the decision as to when and where it gets removed and no one else.

That is my position on abortion.

My personal belief is that from conception, it's a baby.
However, I'm not about to put a gun to anyone's head in the name of the State and tell you what you can or can not do to yourself or your own unborn baby. That is between you and your Maker. And it will be.
In the same vein, I don't wish to be [STRIKE] taxed [/STRIKE] penalized through healthcare into paying for someone else's [STRIKE]abortions/contraception[/STRIKE] "family planning".
There are so many viable options that don't include killing off your kid.

Then why do so many people adopt from overseas? Worked with a guy and all 6 of his kids are from overseas. I know at least one member here that has been trying to adopt for quite some time now.

Apparently there really are not 115,000 kids ready to be adopted or at least the powers that be really do not want to adopt them out for whatever reason.

Having an overseas adoption in the family, I can tell you that with those types of adoption...once it's done, it's done. With American adoption, comes tons of red tape and the possibility that somewhere down the road, your new son or daughter can still be ripped from you due to some loophole or other.

It should be OK to destroy eagle eggs then shouldn't it? Not really a bird yet.

I was just going for that...and you posted it. I'd rep you if it wasn't so soon from the last time.

 

[tyrajam]

To those of you who keep pointing at rape/incest/medical necessity: that argument isn't really your point. Very few pro-abortionists would approve of the casual killing of a child after they are born for any reason - even if they were conceived when the mother was raped by her brother, a Nazi GOP lawyer. Moreover, very few of those who play the rape card, the incest card or the medical necessity card want to limit abortion to cases of rape, incest or medical necessity. It's a foot-in-the-door towards a more general policy of allowing abortion.

What it all comes down to is the fact that anti-abortion types and pro-abortion types have a fundamentally different understanding of when life becomes a human person. Indeed, there is a whole continuum of understanding on that subject.

This is true. However it is also true that if you kill your 3 year old child it is a CHOICE that YOU will have to live with the rest of YOUR life. Even so, most of us can agree that the murder of a 3 year old is clearly wrong and should be punished by the government.

You're making too much of the religious aspect, I think. While religious people have their objections to abortion, there are sound moral objections to it absent religion as well. For that matter, I don't think you honestly believe the utilitarian position you offer.

You seem to be making the argument that because a baby isn't wanted by its mother, its chances of being a productive member of society are diminished. This much is likely true, but then you go on to imply that because they are less likely to become middle-class taxpayers with two cars and a dog that they should have less of a claim to life. As a society we don't typically sanction the killing of people for sheer convenience or cost savings. What changes once the baby is born that suddenly eliminates that cold cost/benefit calculation?

Do you believe that we should simply kill people that some arbiter determined could become a net drain on society? If so, why should that be limited by age? Indeed, if we knew for a fact an adult was a persistent drain on society, wouldn't it be more moral to kill them as a known offender rather than a baby who simply has a higher chance to become a drain? For those of us who - misanthropic though we may be - don't view humanity as an unwanted parasite to be eliminated without thought, the thought of killing people simply because they're inefficient or inconvenient is repugnant.

If you don't believe that being a financial burden on society should be a capital offense, then the utilitarian debate is an unrelated non sequitur that has no bearing on the issue.

What makes abortion such a difficult topic is that it is entirely a question of degree, and any line you draw for the appropriateness of the termination of life is utterly arbitrary.

When you're holding a newly born infant in your arms, there is no rational question of it being a person. It's clearly an independent human life, thus deserving of all the legal and moral protections that are inherent to our society, even (perhaps especially) if mommy doesn't want it. We can all agree on that, right?

So now we get down to the completely arbitrary decision of when "personhood" begins.

Is a baby that is fully capable of surviving outside the womb but is not yet born a person?
Is a baby that is capable of surviving outside the womb with only minor medical attention but is not yet born a person?
Is a baby that is a mere 22 weeks along but still capable of surviving outside of the womb with intensive medical care a person?
Is a baby with brain activity a person?
Is a baby with a beating heart a person?
Is a freshly implanted embryo a person?
Is a zygote a person?
Is an unfertilized egg and a sperm with a good running start and a determined look a person?

What it comes down to is that there is no clear answer on this. There is no clear point that Science Says™ someone is a person and deserving of legal protection but before that they're just a mass of cells to be vacuumed up and thrown away at will. It is an arbitrary distinction on which there is very little agreement even within the pro- and anti-abortion groups.

You can try to make practical arguments on how Utopian society becomes when women can have abortions on a whim. You can try to claim how unfair it is for a woman to have to carry a baby to term. You can point to rape and incest as your foot in the door. You can talk about "her body, her choice" and "freedom to choose" and so forth, but those are all simply intended as distractions from the basic issue, because the distractions are easy. The real issue isn't.

+∞
I think everything written after this post is going to be superfluous

 

[ModernGunner]

LOL...

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

My personal belief is that from conception, it's a baby.
However, I'm not about to put a gun to anyone's head in the name of the State and tell you what you can or can not do to yourself or your own unborn baby. That is between you and your Maker. And it will be.

I'm just curious...Is this stance limited to unborn babies? Should there be no role, for any level of government, that establishes laws regarding what parents can and/or cannot do to their children?