Abortion

Options
1…910121415…17

Comments

  • bee_boy
    bee_boy Posts: 384
    Dog Loyal wrote:
    I'm with you there, Bee-boy. I'm all for birth control!

    I like it when I'm able to debate a topic like this with someone who, even though doesn't share some of my viewpoints, is smart and civilized enough to respect them. You ma'am, are a dying breed. Thanks a lot for the chat :)
  • Dog Loyal
    Dog Loyal Posts: 336
    bee_boy wrote:
    I like it when I'm able to debate a topic like this with someone who, even though doesn't share some of my viewpoints, is smart and civilized enough to respect them. You ma'am, are a dying breed. Thanks a lot for the chat :)
    Thanks! I was thinking the same thing about you. You're a reasonable person, and someday you'll be a responsible dad.:)
    The kids of today should defend themselves against the Seventies Nineties.
  • bee_boy
    bee_boy Posts: 384
    Dog Loyal wrote:
    Thanks! I was thinking the same thing about you. You're a reasonable person, and someday you'll be a responsible dad.:)

    I just blushed... :D Unfotunatelly not many people my age are as tolerant and empathetic as I am... They can't accept when they're wrong for that matter. We the youth seem to have an irrepresible sense of knowing it all (Including myself).
  • miller8966
    miller8966 Posts: 1,450
    Abortion should be a last resort not the first option
    America...the greatest Country in the world.
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    bee_boy wrote:
    Although I'm Pro-Life, I do see some circumstances where abortion is acceptable, and sometimes even necessary. For instance, if a woman is raped (be it a 16 or a 40 year-old), I can totally see why she wouldn't want to have that baby and therefore, I would consider this a case were abortion is acceptable.

    why is a baby's life less important just becos it was the product of rape? so the woman doesn't want to have it... many other women don't either. why does she get to murder a baby for the sins of its father?
    bee_boy wrote:
    The last of these exceptional circumstances would be when the baby presents development problems that mean that when born, the kid would have to endure much suffering and pain. This too IMO is an acceptable situation for abortion.

    who deciees what is sufficient developmental problems? retardation? schizophrenia?
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    miller8966 wrote:
    Abortion should be a last resort not the first option

    i agree with that. id like to see abortion become unnecessary rather than illegal.
  • bee_boy
    bee_boy Posts: 384
    soulsinging wrote:
    who deciees what is sufficient developmental problems? retardation? schizophrenia?

    1) Retardation is not a development problem that will result in the child suffering and being in pain. Everyone I know that has down syndrome is extremely happy and healthy for that matter.
    2) I don't think you can diagnose a fetus with schizophrenia.
    3) I'm talking about life-threatening conditions and those conditions that will SERIOUSLY affect his/her life.

    Note that I'm not defending these. I wouldn't do it myself if I was a woman (this statement is totally vague since I am not one, and my opinion might change in case I was actually a female) nor would I suggest any of the women I care about to do it. It just seems more understandable if it's under these circumstances IMO.
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    bee_boy wrote:
    1) Retardation is not a development problem that will result in the child suffering and being in pain. Everyone I know that has down syndrome is extremely happy and healthy for that matter.
    2) I don't think you can diagnose a fetus with schizophrenia.
    3) I'm talking about life-threatening conditions and those conditions that will SERIOUSLY affect his/her life.

    Note that I'm not defending these. I wouldn't do it myself if I was a woman (this statement is totally vague since I am not one, and my opinion might change in case I was actually a female) nor would I suggest any of the women I care about to do it. It just seems more understandable if it's under these circumstances IMO.

    but you see the difficulty. how much pain is enough to justify an abortion? who decides? how?

    and you didnt answer my first question... why does an unborn baby have to pay for the sins of its father? it makes no sense to be pro-life, say abortion is killing a baby, and then say that that's ok if the baby's father was a bad man.
  • callen
    callen Posts: 6,388
    miller8966 wrote:
    Abortion should be a last resort not the first option
    I'm thinking...situation arises....you look at all the options and pick one....simple really....and if your a woman..and you got pregnant..and don't want to raise a child...you abort....quite simple really. Not saying decision is easy for the woman to make...but no one....absolutely no one has any right to stick their righteous nose into it. And..while I'm at it....it isn't a person at conception....am I missing something here...please help me understand.

    Now do think this decision should in the first trimester....but I'm thinking thats really the question......when do the cells gain rights.....and it isn't at conception...thats silly.
    10-18-2000 Houston, 04-06-2003 Houston, 6-25-2003 Toronto, 10-8-2004 Kissimmee, 9-4-2005 Calgary, 12-3-05 Sao Paulo, 7-2-2006 Denver, 7-22-06 Gorge, 7-23-2006 Gorge, 9-13-2006 Bern, 6-22-2008 DC, 6-24-2008 MSG, 6-25-2008 MSG
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    callen wrote:
    I'm thinking...situation arises....you look at all the options and pick one....simple really....and if your a woman..and you got pregnant..and don't want to raise a child...you abort....quite simple really. Not saying decision is easy for the woman to make...but no one....absolutely no one has any right to stick their righteous nose into it. And..while I'm at it....it isn't a person at conception....am I missing something here...please help me understand.

    Now do think this decision should in the first trimester....but I'm thinking thats really the question......when do the cells gain rights.....and it isn't at conception...thats silly.

    yes, you are. they think a fetus is a person at conception.
  • bee_boy
    bee_boy Posts: 384
    soulsinging wrote:
    but you see the difficulty. how much pain is enough to justify an abortion? who decides? how?

    and you didnt answer my first question... why does an unborn baby have to pay for the sins of its father? it makes no sense to be pro-life, say abortion is killing a baby, and then say that that's ok if the baby's father was a bad man.

    As idiotic as it may sound, I've debated this with myself several times. And it's extremely hard for me to reach a reasonable conclusion about abortion and rape. Both arguments have good points. In the end I'll always be pro-life, and I'll always despise abortion, but the point here is, how would you feel about carrying and giving birth to the baby of a disgustingly sick person which made a crime out of you... Again, it's too hard to decide that if you haven't been raped, and even more if you're not even a female.
  • bee_boy
    bee_boy Posts: 384
    soulsinging wrote:
    yes, you are. they think a fetus is a person at conception.

    That's when you turn this article towards the theological side of things. Most people base their idea of life according to their religion. Since not everyone is a Catholic or a Jew or a Muslim, no one will ever agree on when does a fetus become a child. From my viewpoint and that of my religion, life begins at conception (altough I constantly question this). But then again, I don't expect everyone to agree with that.
  • Dog Loyal
    Dog Loyal Posts: 336
    soulsinging wrote:
    yes, you are. they think a fetus is a person at conception.
    Yes, and they think a bucket full of acorns is a forest of mighty oaks.

    To call a fertilized egg a "a child" is the equivalent stupidity of calling a newborn "a grown man." They are not the same thing, they do not have the same abilities or rights, and to treat them as the exact same thing is myopic.
    The kids of today should defend themselves against the Seventies Nineties.
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    bee_boy wrote:
    That's when you turn this article towards the theological side of things. Most people base their idea of life according to their religion. Since not everyone is a Catholic or a Jew or a Muslim, no one will ever agree on when does a fetus become a child. From my viewpoint and that of my religion, life begins at conception. But then again, I don't expect everyone to agree with that.

    i dont really have a stance on it. it's a very complicated issue and both sides are full of contradictions. id err on the side of caution normally and say it probly is a "life" at conception, but the practicalities of outlawing abortion mean that we need to deal with it, which was my point earlier about making it unnecessary. i wish pro-lifers would spend more time lobbying for guaranteed health care, pre-natal care, and job protection for mothers, so they could make the decision to keep the baby easier. i wish we taught comprehensive sex ed and gave young people guaranteed, anonymous access to it so that unintended pregnancies decreased. i wish our adoption system were more streamlined so that it wasnt prohibitively expensive and complicated and bounces kids around foster care for years. but outlawing abortion will only create more problems.
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    Dog Loyal wrote:
    Yes, and they think a bucket full of acorns is a forest of mighty oaks.

    To call a fertilized egg a "a child" is the equivalent stupidity of calling a newborn "a grown man." They are not the same thing, they do not have the same abilities or rights, and to treat them as the exact same thing is myopic.

    it's a valid viewpoint and your rhetoric does not help the situation. you treat people who disagree with you like they are stupid when you say things like that. they have a very sensitive and emotional view on the subject that is utterly legitimate and reasonable. to deny and dismiss that with such malicious arrogance as you display that weakens your credibility and your ability to convince them or get them to listen to you.

    i happen to agree with you. but i can completely understand where they are coming from and it is not a ridiculous conclusion.
  • Dog Loyal
    Dog Loyal Posts: 336
    soulsinging wrote:
    i dont really have a stance on it. it's a very complicated issue and both sides are full of contradictions. id err on the side of caution normally and say it probly is a "life" at conception, but the practicalities of outlawing abortion mean that we need to deal with it, which was my point earlier about making it unnecessary. i wish pro-lifers would spend more time lobbying for guaranteed health care, pre-natal care, and job protection for mothers, so they could make the decision to keep the baby easier. i wish we taught comprehensive sex ed and gave young people guaranteed, anonymous access to it so that unintended pregnancies decreased. i wish our adoption system were more streamlined so that it wasnt prohibitively expensive and complicated and bounces kids around foster care for years. but outlawing abortion will only create more problems.
    Nicely said.

    I think it's a form of human life, but one so tenuous that those who are responsible for it should be allowed to decide whether to continue.
    The kids of today should defend themselves against the Seventies Nineties.
  • bee_boy
    bee_boy Posts: 384
    soulsinging wrote:
    but outlawing abortion will only create more problems.

    That's very true. The main thing that is needed is awareness.
  • Dog Loyal
    Dog Loyal Posts: 336
    soulsinging wrote:
    it's a valid viewpoint and your rhetoric does not help the situation. you treat people who disagree with you like they are stupid when you say things like that. they have a very sensitive and emotional view on the subject that is utterly legitimate and reasonable. to deny and dismiss that with such malicious arrogance as you display that weakens your credibility and your ability to convince them or get them to listen to you.

    i happen to agree with you. but i can completely understand where they are coming from and it is not a ridiculous conclusion.
    Geez, did I really need a lecture on "how I treat people?" That they are "sensitive and emotional on the subject" does not mean that I shouldn't be allowed to point out that a clump of cells is not a child.
    The kids of today should defend themselves against the Seventies Nineties.
  • callen
    callen Posts: 6,388
    soulsinging wrote:
    yes, you are. they think a fetus is a person at conception.

    but how....how can a few cells be called a person...can't...thats my issue...so the way that I see it...and as you mentioned in last couple of posts....there is grey area in this..and not an easy answer....BUT...If a person truely feels that its a person at conception they're using their religion...which is logically flawed..hence their argument is flawed.
    10-18-2000 Houston, 04-06-2003 Houston, 6-25-2003 Toronto, 10-8-2004 Kissimmee, 9-4-2005 Calgary, 12-3-05 Sao Paulo, 7-2-2006 Denver, 7-22-06 Gorge, 7-23-2006 Gorge, 9-13-2006 Bern, 6-22-2008 DC, 6-24-2008 MSG, 6-25-2008 MSG
  • bee_boy
    bee_boy Posts: 384
    callen wrote:
    but how....how can a few cells be called a person...can't...thats my issue...so the way that I see it...and as you mentioned in last couple of posts....there is grey area in this..and not an easy answer....BUT...If a person truely feels that its a person at conception they're using their religion...which is logically flawed..hence their argument is flawed.

    How do you define a religion as flawed by using human logic?

Categories