Abortion

I feel the same way. Thanks for your opinion.

Hi 2EarnMoney2, Please tell me, seriously, are we living in a Nintendo game here? I gather from your logic that it's OK to send a hit-man around to snuff anyone I like, so long as I first arrange to have their Social Security Number canceled. I have difficulty accepting that we are living in the same dimension. Government red tape does not a human make. And the kiddies in the orphanages are actually real people - where did they come from, I wonder? Nor does an individual's infirmity negate that person's humanity. It's only a hop and a step from THAT line of thought to the fatal injection at age 65. There are any number of regimes which have employed the same train of thinking as you are proposing to legitimize the extermination of whatever sector of the population they found inconvenient. These are slippery slopes of logic indeed. And the first step to going down any of these paths is the notion that its OK to kill other people, and the easiest way to do that is to define our target group of people as "not people". Watch out that you don't some day fall into a group of people who've had your humanity canceled.

amen!!!

Yes, but the point I was making was that you said you didn't want what you believed to deter others from what they want to do. Therefore, you should not wish to deter those that want to rape or murder from so doing because you believe them to be wrong. all the best urban

Secondly, her choice affects not just her but the unborn, which is undeniably human, and since we are all part of humanity, us all. all the best urban

When a woman has an abortion she is making a choice that effects her. Rape and murder do not equal abortion. Sorry.

Hi whymrhymer, You may notice that your use of the term "morality" is the first instance in this thread. That is to say, you introduced morality to the thread. Unfortunately, the law and morality have little if anything to do with each other. The law essentially defines what a person can get away with, in full view of the public. And as you suggest, morality is a subjective issue, if not conducted from a platform of absolutely defined principles and standards (and no, I'm not offering them - go find them for yourself). BUT as to whether a "fetus" is a "baby" or not - that seems somewhat irrelevant to the issue of the humanity of either. A "baby" is not a "teenager" either, nor is a "teenager" a "geriatric", although perhaps some sly dog might be tempted to interchange these terms in a cunning strategy to confuse the issue of just who is human and who is not. Irrespective of the law or prevailing moral standards, I'd be somewhat disturbed if any of these various classes of humans were being killed for convenience. Whoops, my mistake. Fetuses already are. And there's also a body of thought - religious, in fact - that a fetus / child doesn't have a "soul" and so isn't human or living, until it takes it's first breath of air. In which case, it would be perfectly alright to take to the little bugger with a cleaver or chainsaw right up to the point that the doctor slaps his bottom to get him to take his first breath. One supposes that if they held his mouth shut to stop him ever getting his first breath, then he's fair game - feed him to the dogs, whatever, because it's not human and it's not living, so long as it doesn't get that first breath. I'm not quite sure whether the kiddie who hasn't got his first breath is a "fetus" or a "baby". But that's the trouble with semantics. The scope of a definition can be selected to satisfy the desired outcome.

Hi Dodoguy: Lets not start out with an untruth; YOU injected morality into this thread -- a few times in fact. In your response to youngam86: you discussed whether an unborn child is a human being or not and stated that this is "the moral basis for any subsequent discussions". Later you queried "what treatment of human beings is morally permissible." If this is not raising the issue of morality I don't know what is. Nor are the semantics you go on and on about important. I stated the fact, as I understand it, that the term "baby" is only correctly used after a child is born and I truly believe that the only reason pro-lifers use this term is to distort facts by introducing emotion into the discussion. All of this, however, is just a distraction from my main contention -- a contention you did NOT address: Neither the government nor the church nor pro-life organizations have any right to intrude into a woman's biological processes and pregnancy is no more or no less than a biological process. Its really as simple as that -- if an abortion is immoral or a sin or however you want to portray it, so be it. We each have to deal with our actions and the ramifications of those actions on a daily basis. If a woman is pregnant and wants to terminate that pregnancy for whatever reason that should not be a concern of mine or yours. If, however, the government (state, federal or local) steps in and tells that woman that she cannot terminate her pregnancy without becoming a criminal -- THAT should be a major concern for all of us.

Hi ayou82, Thank goodness some rationality has worked it's way into this thread! From my own personal experience, I agree 100% with what you say. The FUNDAMENTAL question that HAS to be asked and answered is whether or not the unborn child is a human being. It completely escapes me how anyone can come to any conclusion but that the unborn child is indeed a human being. I know, unfortunately, that there's a VERY substantial imperative for a great many people to convince themselves that an unborn child is NOT a human being - especially those that want to avoid the responsibilities and social stigma of being pregnant, and even more especially those that have already had an "abortion". I've only ever seen one person face up to the fact, without succumbing to the influence of other people, that she had killed another human being when she had an "abortion". Now THAT took some real guts and personal strength to do. Good for you, ayou82, for stating your views. I agree 100%, and so do heaps of other people. It's a contentious issue, because if an unborn child IS a human being (which it is) then there's a great many people out there who are killing their own children for the sake of convenience. And they don't want to hear that, much less face up to it.

"The FUNDAMENTAL question that HAS to be asked and answered is whether or not the unborn child is a human being. It completely escapes me how anyone can come to any conclusion but that the unborn child is indeed a human being." - Of course that unborn child is a human being..for ME PERSONALLY that goes without saying "I know, unfortunately, that there's a VERY substantial imperative for a great many people to convince themselves that an unborn child is NOT a human being - especially those that want to avoid the responsibilities and social stigma of being pregnant, and even more especially those that have already had an "abortion"." - I've had an abortion as I've stated already...that unborn child was MY child, I've never argued that and never would considering we wanted that baby...it wasnt a question "avoiding responsiblity" or of "social stigma of being prg"..Like I said, we WANTED and were THRILLED about my being pregnant again. Its not always as black and white as so many (if not all) Pro Lifers like to believe it is and until Pro Lifers get a handle on that, they'll never truly understand

" really hate abortion because it only tells one person that she is irresponsible. She dont have the guts to face it" Okay just to make sure I'm understanding what you are saying here...Are you implying that because I had an abortion I'm "irresponsible" and "havent the guts to face it"?? Face WHAT exactly and why assume that I'm irresponsible..

Actually I'm not afraid to stand up for what I believe in. I believe that other people should not be concerned with the reproductive rights of others. I don't think that people should deter someone from doing something they want to do with their body. Thank you for your thought but it would be even better if you answered the question instead of wrongly accusing me of fear.

I didn't acuse you of anything. I just said it sounded that because of the way you worded it. I am against abortion because I think it is wrong to take a human life. Abortion is not something that women just do to themselves. When a woman has an abortion she takes a life that is not her own, therefore it is not something that a woman only does to herself.

Zorrogirl, That is a very important point you raise. There is often regret after an abortion if a woman is not truly convinced that she really wants an abortion. Many woman, and mostly girls, are forced into having abortions -- forced by community standards, peer pressure or parental pressure. That is as wrong as not allowing a woman to have an abortion if she truly wants one. I mentioned "girls" and on that point I should mention that I'm from the old school that says a child's rights are severely limited by his or her parents. A minor should always have either parental permission or the permission of the court system (if the parents are, for whatever reason, no longer in charge of the minor) before having an abortion or an other medical procedure.

"how I wish you could be feel the forceps crushing your skull..." And you call yourself "Pro-life".