Abortion is murder

[PinstripesAndPithHelmets]

AshtrayKitten says that killing a half-formed mass of cells with the potential to be born human is murder, and no pissing and moaning about life support or trimesters is going to override that. Attempting to engage him on those grounds is bound to end in stalemate or failure. Personally, I don't give a damn if someone wants to abort their fetus.

Call it murder, call it barbarism, call it what you like, but if the mother is contemplating terminating the pregnancy then there are likely some very strong doubts in her mind that will likely carry over into the child rearing process.

Economics is another issue: Is the mother capable of sufficiently caring for the child? That's a question that can only be answered on a case-by-case basis, but should play heavily into the mother's decision to carry the fetus to term.

No one should bring a child into this world that doesn't want it, or isn't financially prepared to care for it. If either one of those two conditions is unfulfilled, loose-fire the thing.

[Albert Mond]

Originally Posted by AshtrayKitten

This doesn't refute anything I've put forward.

You said that human life begins at conception. If a fetus can grow while dead, then being conceived hardly makes a 'living' human fetus alive.

[AshtrayKitten]

Originally Posted by Albert Mond

You said that human life begins at conception. If a fetus can grow while dead, then being conceived hardly makes a 'living' human fetus alive.

An excellent, thought-provoking statement. Here's why it's wrong:

We have a headless fetus growing in the womb. The cells that make it up are alive, but it certainly can't be considered a living human if it develops and is born without a head. We might be able to plug the husk into a machine and the remaining parts would function as they would in a healthy person. What we consider a human life is gone but it's still technically living. What is it?

What needs to be defined here is death.

If you remove someone's arm, s/he is still considered to be alive. If you cut off his or her head, they're considered dead. The 'death' doesn't immediately spread throughout the body; cells will continue to function until deprived of whatever it was that essential component helped to supply. Eventually, every part of the body will decompose. But those parts, like arms and legs, might not matter in the living-or-dead status of an organism.

The same goes for our fetus. That a headless fetus can continue to grow is of no consequence. Whether or not what's left grows or decomposes (or runs around like a decapped chicken does), the tenure of the human life is over.

[Alarica]

Originally Posted by Alarica

Murder is taking a life. Abortion's are generally done up until the 24th week of gestation. This is because after the 24th week, the foetus becomes viable. Which means that it has a good chance of survival with medical intervention. Before this it isnt viable and is only 'alive' because the mothers body is keeping it alive. Up until the 12th week, abortions are done for free on the NHS (no idea about other countries, so appologies). 12-24 weeks you have to pay to have it done privately in a clinic, UNLESS it is recommended by a medical team, usually because the mothers life is at risk. After 24wks it is classed as selective termination and usually related to multiple pregnancies.

The old abortion being murder issue is seriously outdated. Mainly because women have the right to do what they want with their bodies. The only time i disagree with them, is when girls go shagging around unprotected, get knocked up and then see an abortion as the easy way out. I dont agree with it being caled murder though

Seriously you fucking moron, if you are going to ask me something atleast have the intelligence to read what i've already posted.

Abortion LAWS were put in place for a reason. Yes, in a medical case i do agree with abortions for most of the reasons a woman may choose to have 1. I DO NOT agree with them, as someone else said, when it is simply viewed as an easy way out by girls who screw around having unprotected sex.

And as i said also, already. Without abortion being an option there would be more and more babies brought into the world unwanted and either MURDERED or dumped. China was my example because they actually have orphanages with a specific room called the dying room where they put the kids who the staff dont have time and cant be bothered to make a little more effort for, and they are left to die.

So those who are saying abortion is absolutely wrong will therefore agree that it is ok to dump a helpless baby after it is born and in a lot of cases, leave it to die?

I happen to think fox hunting is cruel, but it is necessary and should be done in a more humane way.

And bacteria doesnt have a brain (i swear some of you dont either), so in the arguement about killing before brain life begins, it has no point. Bacteria doesnt and will never have a brain, so you are clutching at straws to feed your opinion in this 'discussion'. Abortion isnt murder and more than a foetus knoting its umbilical cord and cutting off its life support, is fucking suicide

[Alarica]

Originally Posted by AshtrayKitten

An excellent, thought-provoking statement. Here's why it's wrong:

We have a headless fetus growing in the womb. The cells that make it up are alive, but it certainly can't be considered a living human if it develops and is born without a head. We might be able to plug the husk into a machine and the remaining parts would function as they would in a healthy person. What we consider a human life is gone but it's still technically living. What is it?

What needs to be defined here is death.

If you remove someone's arm, s/he is still considered to be alive. If you cut off his or her head, they're considered dead. The 'death' doesn't immediately spread throughout the body; cells will continue to function until deprived of whatever it was that essential component helped to supply. Eventually, every part of the body will decompose. But those parts, like arms and legs, might not matter in the living-or-dead status of an organism.

The same goes for our fetus. That a headless fetus can continue to grow is of no consequence. Whether or not what's left grows or decomposes (or runs around like a decapped chicken does), the tenure of the human life is over.

Death of the headless foetus would occur as soon as it was delivered because there isnt a brain there to take over the bodys functions. And thats just gross plugging in!! Besides you are then getting into a completely different ethical debate. What purpose would keeping a body with no head or brain or even the most primal of functions, serve? Other than spare parts for someone whos own body is failing. Which ok will serve in theory to preserve more lives but the headlessness could have been a result of infection with syphalis.

[Solumina]

How is fox hunting necessary? I'm from hunt country and around there people go on drag hunts, no foxes, no cruelty, and all of the fun/rush/whatever that comes with a real fox hunt

[Alarica]

I dont know how it is for you where you live, but where i am there are loads of farms and dense woodland, and foxes (obviously). The foxes are deemed as pests because they scare, kill and carry disease. If the farmers dont keep fox numbers down the problem gets out of hand. In the UK the grey squirrel is classed as vermin and they are shot too.

Thats my point though. Everyone will always have their own opinion on the great to live or die, end or preserve life debate.

On the Abortion issue though, i have a friend whos had 3, and not on medical grounds, purely because she didnt want to make the blokes wear condoms and told them she was on the pill. THAT is when i dont agree with abortion. I have a friend with several kids and neither her nor her husband work. No reason they cant either. Is it right they had so many kids they cannot financially support and have to rely on state benefits? The same as a large number of 14yr old girls who get pregnant? You could argue they have to have the baby and face their responsibility but the harsh reality is, only a small number of them actually want the baby and make good parents.

[$haDe]

Wow... wow..wow

Hold on a second, guys.

Let's take it that half-life forms are human being.


How different will it make between

- parents, who in charge of taking care of their kids, allowed other people to 'kill' their very own children.

and

- judge that give death to a serial killer, whose life is completely controlled by the law at that moment.


See the difference ?

They, both, have to died without defending themselves.

ps. A serial killer knows what he did, though.

[viscus]

Originally Posted by Alarica

On the Abortion issue though, i have a friend whos had 3, and not on medical grounds, purely because she didnt want to make the blokes wear condoms and told them she was on the pill.

That's pretty asinine. Aren't condoms/pills cheaper and easier? They don't run the risk of permanently damaging your reproductive system either.

[Ra_star]

Prochoice and prolife activists live in different worlds, and the scope of their lives, as both adults and children, fortifies them in their belief that their own views on abortion are the more correct, the more moral, and more reasonable.

When added to this is the fact that should "the other side" win, one group of women will see the very real devaluation of their lives and life resources, it is not surprising that the abortion debate has generated so much heat and so little light.

Of course, no woman wants an abortion as she wants an ice cream or a new pair of shoes. She wants an abortion as an animal caught in a trap wants to gnaw off its own leg.

Too many women are forced into poverty, by their menfolk, by their parents, should they not be given the choice?

And besides, if men were the ones getting pregnant, abortions would be easier to get than food poisoning in Moscow.

[$haDe]

Originally Posted by PinstripesAndPithHelmets

No one should bring a child into this world that doesn't want it, or isn't financially prepared to care for it. If either one of those two conditions is unfulfilled, loose-fire the thing.

I strongly believed that I've said this, already.

[Alarica]

Originally Posted by viscus

That's pretty asinine. Aren't condoms/pills cheaper and easier? They don't run the risk of permanently damaging your reproductive system either.

Absolutely, and they are free in the uk aswell, my friend has no excuse but i'm sick of telling her. Seems she uses the 'we got carried away' excuse too often and views abortions as a form of birth control. Thats when i think they are done far too easily

[Maggoty Anne]

Originally Posted by $haDe

Let's take it that half-life forms are human being.

Argh! I have millions of people in my pants! And in my hair! Get them off!





Really, outlawing abortion is pointless. Last time I was put in the spyche ward, (for observation after a medicine change,) my roomate was a total bitch. I found out why. She had been knocked up by her boyfreind (this was when I was 14, the same age as her) and she had given herself an abortion in the psyche ward. Why? Because if her parents found out they wouldn't let her. They would have forced her to carry it to term. I told her she was a fucking idiot, and she said she'd be fine. She'd done it before. I don't know what happened to her, but she was rushed to the ER for the complications it caused, and she didn't come back. This isn't an isolated incident. One 16 year old had herboyfreind beat her in the stomach with a baseball bat, because she needed her pro-life parents' permission to have a proper one.

If we were to stop giving women access to safe, legal abortions performed by medical professionals, they'll get them with coathangers. They'll have their boyfreinds beat them with baseball bats. This has been happening forever, and it always will. The only thing we can do is ensure the mother's health isn't compromised.


The only thing worse than having an abortion is being told you can't get one.

[Albert Mond]

Originally Posted by Maggoty Anne

Really, outlawing abortion is pointless. Last time I was put in the spyche ward, (for observation after a medicine change,) my roomate was a total bitch. I found out why. She had been knocked up by her boyfreind (this was when I was 14, the same age as her) and she had given herself an abortion in the psyche ward. Why? Because if her parents found out they wouldn't let her. They would have forced her to carry it to term. I told her she was a fucking idiot, and she said she'd be fine. She'd done it before. I don't know what happened to her, but she was rushed to the ER for the complications it caused, and she didn't come back. This isn't an isolated incident. One 16 year old had herboyfreind beat her in the stomach with a baseball bat, because she needed her pro-life parents' permission to have a proper one.

Every story you get from a psyche ward is priceless.

[$haDe]

Originally Posted by Maggoty Anne

The only thing worse than having an abortion is being told you can't get one.

Undeniable.


I won't say that I understand how women feel about abortion...

But ripping your child out of your stomach is pretty bad.

[PinstripesAndPithHelmets]

Originally Posted by $haDe

I strongly believed that I've said this, already.

I strongly believe that, even if I had needed to read the entire thread to make my post, which I didn't, I wouldn't have been able to decipher your writing.

[$haDe]

-_-, I've studied English for 2 years.

What did you expected ?


Anyway, it's here

Originally Posted by $haDe

Because of ...even if parents didn't kill their children while they're still in the wombs, Raised them without care and attention are considered to be a murder, too.

ps. Murder with further damage to the society.

[Utho]

I believe I´d share the point Ra_star made.
This topic is emotionally incredibly charged, and I - personally - feel that this is a decission that can only be trusted to the person concerned with it; the woman that wants a fruit/child aborted. - I, as a guy, would not want to bear the responibility/stress that comes with such a decission.

The example/point Maggoty Anne gave confirmed me in this.

[Underwater Ophelia]

Originally Posted by Alarica

I have a friend with several kids and neither her nor her husband work. No reason they cant either. Is it right they had so many kids they cannot financially support and have to rely on state benefits?

No, but the solution to this problem isn't abortion, it's taking the children away from them and cutting off the government help.
You could easily give the kids to a stable family who wants them.

Yes, I realize that sometimes it's hard to find that, but it's too late now.

Before it was too late, the answer wouldn't have been abortion, the answer would have been birth control and a condom, or sterilization.

[Raptor]

Originally Posted by AshtrayKitten

This makes sense. Even if the sky is blue, some people might recognize it as being pink.

Colours are arbitrary names, you could formally declare blue as pink and pink as blue. Then the sky would be pink. But what's the point, it still looks the same as it did before, and it's still 480nm wavelength or whatever it is.

That's pretty much how I see your argument here, as far as I can tell you don't want to change anything other than the word people use. What's the objective of that? You're already free to call it what you want, as is everyone else.

Or are you putting forward arguments for pro life in order to try to convince people not to have abortions, while leaving the law alone so that they still have the choice? If that's the case then they can still call abortion by whatever term they see fit.

[Alarica]

Originally Posted by Underwater Ophelia

No, but the solution to this problem isn't abortion, it's taking the children away from them and cutting off the government help.
You could easily give the kids to a stable family who wants them.

Yes, I realize that sometimes it's hard to find that, but it's too late now.

Before it was too late, the answer wouldn't have been abortion, the answer would have been birth control and a condom, or sterilization.

In an ideal world, i would absolutely agree with you on giving the kids to stable homes, the problem is that once born they have to go somewhere until homes are found. Usually foster care or childrens homes. Both of which are still funded by the government.

For centuries women were having abortions illegally or doing them themselves, when birth control wasnt an option.

[Underwater Ophelia]

Originally Posted by Alarica

In an ideal world, i would absolutely agree with you on giving the kids to stable homes, the problem is that once born they have to go somewhere until homes are found. Usually foster care or childrens homes. Both of which are still funded by the government.

Oh, I know that.
I didn't mean to say that the government shouldn't fund those things, I meant to say that the parents should stop getting money from the government.

[Alarica]

I see, and agree. As long as 1 parent is able to work, they should be forced to find a job and support their family when they insist on adding to it

[Bat Attack]

Originally Posted by Alarica

My question wasnt aimed at you, so unless you posted the original thread, put your ego away. If you did post the original post in the thread then by all means answer me with a near intelligent response

I repeat again, this is a FORUM, meaning ANYONE can answer.
Also, perhaps you should make it more clear next time, as to who it is aimed at.

[Alarica]

Originally Posted by Bat Attack

I repeat again, this is a FORUM, meaning ANYONE can answer.
Also, perhaps you should make it more clear next time, as to who it is aimed at.

Child, please. Get over it now. You spat your dummy out, i responded, now let it go.