mothcorrupteth
Orthodox Christian
So is that the right and only way to look at it?
Abortion - your views.
- Thread starter Davey Gaga
- Start date
- Tagged users None
bequiaboit
Blue Mage
Despite being brought up in a religious family and going to a Christian private school, I'm actually pro-choice. Female rape victims should be able to choose, after all, they did not choose to get raped. Also parents who know that their children inherited a fatal disease or acquired a deadly disease.
I'm not for abortion, I'm for the choice.
I'm not for abortion, I'm for the choice.
I'm kinda split in the middle on this one.
If a woman is raped, then she should be able to get an abortion because she didn't have a choice in the matter.
If the woman is just having sex and she gets pregnant, then she should have to keep the child. If she doesn't want the kid yet or the couple is not ready, then use protection.
If this offends anyone, I'm sorry. I'm just saying what I believe.
If a woman is raped, then she should be able to get an abortion because she didn't have a choice in the matter.
If the woman is just having sex and she gets pregnant, then she should have to keep the child. If she doesn't want the kid yet or the couple is not ready, then use protection.
If this offends anyone, I'm sorry. I'm just saying what I believe.
im all for abortion. if the women who is pregnant and dosen't want to have the kid, i think she should have the choice to abort especially if its early on when the fetus is really small and not like 5-6 months old. in my opinion, its not that bad if the is like in the first few weeks, maybe a month since the fetus is still small and i don't really considered it a real person yet but thats just me. and beside i think there's way too much people living already, just look at all the homeless, kids without parents/places to live, theres not enough food already, the economy is bad and can't support a lot of people. but thats just my opinion and if i offended anyone, im sorry
I think I pretty much agree with this. Abortion shouldn't be used as a contraceptive method. Though I do think that the "allowance" of abortion should be pushed further than just for rape victims. It should also include those that will have defects, health issues (both physical and mental) and so on.
As for people who were too careless to use protection, well what can I say? It is their own fault.
Though I always get the feeling that there are a lot of misconceptions and myths about abortion. Such as foetuses being able to feel pain from the start, which is utter crap considering the neocortex is not formed until early in the third trimester, which is required for pain reception. Then there's myths such as women who have abortions will get breast cancer, which again is complete utter crap.
But I just think those as Pro-Life activists spinning lies...
Hm. Generally, I'm not supportive of abortion, no matter at which state of pregnancy. To me, it translates into murder, and the thoughts of the process itself is already enough to disgust me. Whatever it is, to me, the foetus deserves to live, just as much as all of us.
No matter the reason, I think abortion isn't the best method, compared to other methods of contraception- particularly the ultimate method, abstinence. Then, there are cases where the girl was raped and got pregnant unconditionally.
To those, I'd rather the girl gave birth and put the baby up for adoption more than abortion... Then again, these are my views. The girl may not want to give birth to a child whose father is a rapist, understandably.
No matter the reason, I think abortion isn't the best method, compared to other methods of contraception- particularly the ultimate method, abstinence. Then, there are cases where the girl was raped and got pregnant unconditionally.
To those, I'd rather the girl gave birth and put the baby up for adoption more than abortion... Then again, these are my views. The girl may not want to give birth to a child whose father is a rapist, understandably.
First of all I know these are your opinions and you are entitled to them.
I take it part of your views/opinions are based on your religious beliefs (I'm just assuming based on the way you spoke about the matter), but what happens when a 9 year old girl is raped by her step father who get's her pregnant. Who then has an abortion and is condemned by the Catholic Church, as well as those involved.
Obviously I am not saying you agree with this but it happens and religious views are usually a big part of abortion and matters like this should be brought up in the discussion.
Anyway, my point being, do you still hold the opinion that this 9 year old child (who ran a very high risk of dying without the abortion) should have went through with the birth and then given the child up for adoption?
Yeah. My opinions were influenced by religious belief.
.. Right then, once again, in my honest opinion..
Albeit cruel, my stand remains the same. I still think that the girl should go on to deliver the child, even if the risk is present. No matter how slight, there is a chance of survival which could save both lives. It beats killing a life for certain.
Then there may be an argument that says that they would be literally taking their own lives by doing so- which may end up killing both lives, I presume. Once again, albeit the cruelty, I would think it's the thought that counts. Something along the lines of an attempt to deliver a life which failed, unfortunately.
Having said that, I have to concede that it'll probably be for the better if the girl suffer condemnations or whatever and survived. No point delivering a child which she may not feel obliged to take care of, or even have the capability to take care of.
Nevertheless, I stand firmly by my views now. I can't give a definite statement about following the said views when the situations calls for a judgment from myself though. Quite a touchy subject where the appropriate response varies from person to person.
.. Right then, once again, in my honest opinion..
Albeit cruel, my stand remains the same. I still think that the girl should go on to deliver the child, even if the risk is present. No matter how slight, there is a chance of survival which could save both lives. It beats killing a life for certain.
Then there may be an argument that says that they would be literally taking their own lives by doing so- which may end up killing both lives, I presume. Once again, albeit the cruelty, I would think it's the thought that counts. Something along the lines of an attempt to deliver a life which failed, unfortunately.
Having said that, I have to concede that it'll probably be for the better if the girl suffer condemnations or whatever and survived. No point delivering a child which she may not feel obliged to take care of, or even have the capability to take care of.
Nevertheless, I stand firmly by my views now. I can't give a definite statement about following the said views when the situations calls for a judgment from myself though. Quite a touchy subject where the appropriate response varies from person to person.
I just want to say a few things before I continue with this, I am not trying to change your mind/beliefs/opinions, I understand you're entitled to those. And If I come across as being aggressive/angry I do apologise, it is not intentional.
While yes there maybe a chance if both survive the birth but there are a number of matters that you need to remember where these situations occur. It is not as black and white as chance of survival or not.
First of all the girl is a child herself whom hasn't even hit her teens. If the girl didn't give it up for adoption, she has no life experiences and will not be able to legally get a job, never mind hold one. She won't even have qualifications to get a job once she come's of an age where she can acquire one because she more than likely would of had to drop out of school. So with money problems there is a very high chance that they would be living in poverty for the rest of their lives.
And even if she did give it up there would be so many health ramifications that chances are both are going to live the rest of their lives suffering and in pain.
Statistically, Teen pregnancies are more often than not likely to have many complications not only with the mother but also the child. And with the fact that this 9 year old is not even a teen and still has so many years for her body to develop, makes the ramifications of her pregnancy a huge percentage higher than that of a teen. Babies born from Teen's are often afflicted with underdeveloped organs, vision loss and severely premature. There is also a good chance that being so under developed will cause the child to have severe mental retardation.
Then you have the girls problems. Pelvic bones do not reach their maximum size until about the age of 18; therefore, the pelvis of the teenage mother may not have grown enough to allow vaginal delivery of a normal-size baby. A cesarean section would have been need, which in itself brings it's own risks. The mothers organs are also still developing, the pressure and strain of carrying a child around could severely damage her growth, paving way to many future complications.
And these are just some of the matters/problems if both survived. As you can tell there are so many risk and such a big chance of complications that neither would likely "have a life".
And I don't think the girl did not "feel obliged to take care of, or even have the capability to take care of" the child. But more so felt that she did not want to risk her own life and destroying her's (and probably her families) future... and that is if she even understood what all of this means, she was 9 year old after all.
I just think it is wreckless to suggest that the girl should go through all that and torisk her life for a something that probably would not even live to see 24 hours IF it did survive.
While yes there maybe a chance if both survive the birth but there are a number of matters that you need to remember where these situations occur. It is not as black and white as chance of survival or not.
First of all the girl is a child herself whom hasn't even hit her teens. If the girl didn't give it up for adoption, she has no life experiences and will not be able to legally get a job, never mind hold one. She won't even have qualifications to get a job once she come's of an age where she can acquire one because she more than likely would of had to drop out of school. So with money problems there is a very high chance that they would be living in poverty for the rest of their lives.
And even if she did give it up there would be so many health ramifications that chances are both are going to live the rest of their lives suffering and in pain.
Statistically, Teen pregnancies are more often than not likely to have many complications not only with the mother but also the child. And with the fact that this 9 year old is not even a teen and still has so many years for her body to develop, makes the ramifications of her pregnancy a huge percentage higher than that of a teen. Babies born from Teen's are often afflicted with underdeveloped organs, vision loss and severely premature. There is also a good chance that being so under developed will cause the child to have severe mental retardation.
Then you have the girls problems. Pelvic bones do not reach their maximum size until about the age of 18; therefore, the pelvis of the teenage mother may not have grown enough to allow vaginal delivery of a normal-size baby. A cesarean section would have been need, which in itself brings it's own risks. The mothers organs are also still developing, the pressure and strain of carrying a child around could severely damage her growth, paving way to many future complications.
And these are just some of the matters/problems if both survived. As you can tell there are so many risk and such a big chance of complications that neither would likely "have a life".
And I don't think the girl did not "feel obliged to take care of, or even have the capability to take care of" the child. But more so felt that she did not want to risk her own life and destroying her's (and probably her families) future... and that is if she even understood what all of this means, she was 9 year old after all.
I just think it is wreckless to suggest that the girl should go through all that and torisk her life for a something that probably would not even live to see 24 hours IF it did survive.
Last edited:
StarGirl87
Ex-Soldier
This is a VERY touchy debate subject. I'm going to express my opinion and I don't mean to offend but some things people say really annoy me.
For those that are against abortion, and feel that it's murder and killing a human. Let me refer you to these images...
Would you feel sad if this was killed? Can you distinguish this as being a human?
How about this? ....
Or this? ....
The people against it only seem to care whether a person is alive, not whether they're really living or having a good quality of life. All they'll say is "Put the baby up for adoption as long as s/he is allowed to live!" but after that they don't care what happens to them. What about the child feeling unwanted/unloved by their parents? Also I don't know about you, but going through pregnancy and childbirth only to give my baby away would be heartbreaking and even more of a difficult decision to make. That will effect you a whole lot more than aborting. You can't expect a woman to go through one of the hardest situations in the world - The ordeal of pregnancy, the excruciating pains of childbirth, not to mention the complications and chance of death, etc. And that's the easy part, after going through all that and bonding with the baby, you will bond with him/her even more after they are born, a bond like no other. How can you expect/force the mother to give that baby away??
The people against abortion would also say to ignore the risks and go ahead anyway as 'God' would have intended. Even if mother or baby may die. So they'd rather the chance of the mother and baby dieing just so the embryo (underdeveloped baby) gets to grow and possibly live?!
Just goes to show what kind of people are against it in the first place - ignorant, small minded, deluded, uncompassionate people. What ever happened to choice?
The fact some people still think women, actually even very young girls (teens or younger) should STILL go through and have a rapist's child... DISGUSTS me. Like I said, shows what kind of people are against it in the first place.
For those that are against abortion, and feel that it's murder and killing a human. Let me refer you to these images...
Would you feel sad if this was killed? Can you distinguish this as being a human?
How about this? ....
Or this? ....
I can tell you that the second embryo is the human. I doubt most people would be able to tell that though. So just because it will GROW into a human, doesn't mean it's human and deserves the same treatment as us. So it's not murder, it shouldn't be considered murder like you would to a fully grown living feeling recognizable intelligent human being.
People make too much of a fuss about it. Go worry about the born humans and animals. They're more important. Instead of tiny embryos.
What if the woman had a miscarriage by not taking care of herself properly? Would you still believe she killed someone? Or because it happened 'naturally' that 'God' wanted this to happen and it's fine? ...
Do people hold funerals for a baby that wasn't even born? Do people consider it a human life that has been murdered and taken away? The same way people think of a born/fully formed human? No! So don't say it's 'murder'.
I understand that the baby's genes have all been decided already as an embryo and it's forming into a person, that it's still a life and it'll be taken away. But it's just not the same thing as taking a life of a fully formed, fully grown human. It's an unfortunate thing to do, but then it's a lot worse to be born unwanted/uncared for. So I understand why people wouldn't like it, but it's the woman's body at the end of the day, and there are so many different circumstances. It's immature and cruel to simply say "It's murder" "She should be made to have the baby and ruin her life" Grow up! If you care for life so much what about the real important lives of the currently living?? Of the mother??
I'm sure the women that have gone through abortion have had to deal with one of the most difficult decisions of their lives and will always remember/regret it. They've dealt with enough, they don't need to feel even more bad unnecessarily.
It should never be something done as a form of birth control, a lot of people are very stupid when it comes to contraception. But sometimes it happens. There are so many circumstances that may not be your fault. We should all have the choice. Even if it became illegal, women will still try and do it themselves, possibly harming themselves in the process. It's always been that way.
People make too much of a fuss about it. Go worry about the born humans and animals. They're more important. Instead of tiny embryos.
What if the woman had a miscarriage by not taking care of herself properly? Would you still believe she killed someone? Or because it happened 'naturally' that 'God' wanted this to happen and it's fine? ...
Do people hold funerals for a baby that wasn't even born? Do people consider it a human life that has been murdered and taken away? The same way people think of a born/fully formed human? No! So don't say it's 'murder'.
I understand that the baby's genes have all been decided already as an embryo and it's forming into a person, that it's still a life and it'll be taken away. But it's just not the same thing as taking a life of a fully formed, fully grown human. It's an unfortunate thing to do, but then it's a lot worse to be born unwanted/uncared for. So I understand why people wouldn't like it, but it's the woman's body at the end of the day, and there are so many different circumstances. It's immature and cruel to simply say "It's murder" "She should be made to have the baby and ruin her life" Grow up! If you care for life so much what about the real important lives of the currently living?? Of the mother??
I'm sure the women that have gone through abortion have had to deal with one of the most difficult decisions of their lives and will always remember/regret it. They've dealt with enough, they don't need to feel even more bad unnecessarily.
It should never be something done as a form of birth control, a lot of people are very stupid when it comes to contraception. But sometimes it happens. There are so many circumstances that may not be your fault. We should all have the choice. Even if it became illegal, women will still try and do it themselves, possibly harming themselves in the process. It's always been that way.
The people against it only seem to care whether a person is alive, not whether they're really living or having a good quality of life. All they'll say is "Put the baby up for adoption as long as s/he is allowed to live!" but after that they don't care what happens to them. What about the child feeling unwanted/unloved by their parents? Also I don't know about you, but going through pregnancy and childbirth only to give my baby away would be heartbreaking and even more of a difficult decision to make. That will effect you a whole lot more than aborting. You can't expect a woman to go through one of the hardest situations in the world - The ordeal of pregnancy, the excruciating pains of childbirth, not to mention the complications and chance of death, etc. And that's the easy part, after going through all that and bonding with the baby, you will bond with him/her even more after they are born, a bond like no other. How can you expect/force the mother to give that baby away??
The people against abortion would also say to ignore the risks and go ahead anyway as 'God' would have intended. Even if mother or baby may die. So they'd rather the chance of the mother and baby dieing just so the embryo (underdeveloped baby) gets to grow and possibly live?!
Just goes to show what kind of people are against it in the first place - ignorant, small minded, deluded, uncompassionate people. What ever happened to choice?The fact some people still think women, actually even very young girls (teens or younger) should STILL go through and have a rapist's child... DISGUSTS me. Like I said, shows what kind of people are against it in the first place.
Last edited:
StarGirl87 you make some very good points about embryo's being fully formed human. People don't seem to realise that up until a certain period after the abortion limit, fetus' are never conscious. So along with what I mentioned earlier about the not yet developed neocortex, they will never feel a thing.
And to add to the fully formed human/living from the start argument. Sperm is a living organism. So using contraceptives is killing off a living organism that has life from the very start before it even reaches a females egg. It may not be the same as an embryo, but the same principles of life vs abortion still applies. Maybe we should also make contraceptives and masturbation illegal.
And while we are on the topic of allowing a fetus/newborn to suffer for the purpose of life.
Has anyone ever seen a premature, disabled, heroin baby suffer from withdrawal? I have and it was one of the most awful experiences I ever had. Imagine holding this small child that screams none-stop because all it is going through an experience no child should ever go through. I don't know if it would of been any easier if the child was as physically and mental well as the average newborn. I doubt it though...
The child was taken from it's mother and put up for adoption, but of course being disabled, in the future the child would never be able to look after itself and it would need constant attention, being fed by a carer, bathed, had it's bottom wiped, well into adulthood (if it ever makes it that far). Not to mention suffers from HIV and had a number of other health problems (weak heart, underdeveloped lungs).
If Pro-life people still hold the opinion that this child should not have been aborted then you are as selfish, careless and sadistic as the heroin addict mother. You would really call that having a real life?
And to add to the fully formed human/living from the start argument. Sperm is a living organism. So using contraceptives is killing off a living organism that has life from the very start before it even reaches a females egg. It may not be the same as an embryo, but the same principles of life vs abortion still applies. Maybe we should also make contraceptives and masturbation illegal.
And while we are on the topic of allowing a fetus/newborn to suffer for the purpose of life.
Has anyone ever seen a premature, disabled, heroin baby suffer from withdrawal? I have and it was one of the most awful experiences I ever had. Imagine holding this small child that screams none-stop because all it is going through an experience no child should ever go through. I don't know if it would of been any easier if the child was as physically and mental well as the average newborn. I doubt it though...
The child was taken from it's mother and put up for adoption, but of course being disabled, in the future the child would never be able to look after itself and it would need constant attention, being fed by a carer, bathed, had it's bottom wiped, well into adulthood (if it ever makes it that far). Not to mention suffers from HIV and had a number of other health problems (weak heart, underdeveloped lungs).
If Pro-life people still hold the opinion that this child should not have been aborted then you are as selfish, careless and sadistic as the heroin addict mother. You would really call that having a real life?
I used to think that this question was so easy to answer... A women should be able to get an abortion if she wants to.... it is her body after all. But then I thought, how about all those reckless women? The ones who have had three, or four abortions? Should they be allowed to continue to have abortions? But then... what about the teenagers who made a mistake, just that one time... Should they have to suffer a from a law that denies them from redeming themselves?
As you can tell.... I'm kinda stuck in the middle..
As you can tell.... I'm kinda stuck in the middle..
It's absolutely fine to have an opinion, but I think it's completely absurd for one to think that their way of thinking is the right way, and everyone should follow that. It's fine for an individual to disagree completely with abortion, but if a woman wants one then so be it. You have no right to tell that woman what to do. You do, however, have a right to make a decision of your own. If you didn't use protection, if the condom broke, if you got raped, etc. and became pregnant, you have the right to decide whether or not you want to abort. You just can't try to decide for someone else.
Last edited:
Some one give this lady a prize. No, I'm frigging serious, some one needs to.
It's okay to be pro-life (sure, I'll probably hate you but so what?), and it's okay to be pro-choice. I prefer pro-choice because I believe it should be left up to the Mother and the Father if they are going to have a kid. I like the fact that the choice is there, and it is up to the parents. They can choose to have it, or they can choose not to have it. It's that simple.
Then here comes a pro-lifer that just says no. They don't care about the situation you are in, they don't care about your views or beliefs, they just say no.
Who the hell are they to choose for you? They say it's murder, where as it's not, they say that it's bad because God doesn't like it. Who said anything about God being real? A lot of people don't share that view.
Why should it be left in the hands of a select few to tell the rest of the world what they can and cannot do with their lives? Let the choice remain there instead of trying to take it away and make people have kids that they can't afford.
"But there is always adoption."
So the mother would have to go through the labor pains, the process of buying new clothes, paying for hospital visits and what not all for the sake of a child she is going to just give away? I don't think so.
As previously stated, the decision shouldn't be left up to anyone else but the couple having the child. Deal with it.
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2006
- Messages
- 2,925
- Age
- 41
- Location
- Nashville, TN
- Gil
- 25
- FFXIV
- Shu
- FFXIV Server
- Lamia
I think I've said this once before, but since I sincerly hate this thread because all it is, is one big common sense thing.. but abortion is nothing new. The only people who are giving opinions for "no abortion" it seems either are male or slightly brain washed to think otherwise. In which if you are male, you are entitled to an opinion but it deemed one of man's laws to not speak it.
Instead of reposting the same stuff I've said before - I'll do something different, this is a guys perspective.
I know in my life I've had a couple of close calls and I think if you are having sexual activities that is almost a normal occurrence. As a guy if I were to get a girl (if I wasn't engaged) pregnant, then I would probably be scared as hell. If I was too young, and knew how to acknowledge the responsibility that I had at that time (obviously being very little) then I would say it would be the girl's choice.
Now if it were in a marriage and she got pregnant... well it would be very different. I think the guy in that situation would need a strong say in if they should keep it or not. I mean accidents do happen, and if abortion wasn't there.. we would have a lot of illegitimate children out there. Hell I'm not even too fond of babies, now that might sound like I'm an animal, but I have my reasons. I don't find them cute. I find their cries to be unnerving. I mean I'm good with kids past the 2 year mark.
As soon as they can walk and talk.. and that might sound very irresponsible of me.. but who are you to effin judge? So when it all comes down to it, if i were 12.. I would have probably would never cut communication with the girl, but abortion is really hard mentally. It would be a strain on us both, but very much more so for the girl. I would hope in all my years of living though that I never have to see a kid get aborted.
I don't "Support abortion" per se because of the mental damages, but if the person is unfit, has been raped, or whatever else.. then it is up to them.
Instead of reposting the same stuff I've said before - I'll do something different, this is a guys perspective.
I know in my life I've had a couple of close calls and I think if you are having sexual activities that is almost a normal occurrence. As a guy if I were to get a girl (if I wasn't engaged) pregnant, then I would probably be scared as hell. If I was too young, and knew how to acknowledge the responsibility that I had at that time (obviously being very little) then I would say it would be the girl's choice.
Now if it were in a marriage and she got pregnant... well it would be very different. I think the guy in that situation would need a strong say in if they should keep it or not. I mean accidents do happen, and if abortion wasn't there.. we would have a lot of illegitimate children out there. Hell I'm not even too fond of babies, now that might sound like I'm an animal, but I have my reasons. I don't find them cute. I find their cries to be unnerving. I mean I'm good with kids past the 2 year mark.
As soon as they can walk and talk.. and that might sound very irresponsible of me.. but who are you to effin judge? So when it all comes down to it, if i were 12.. I would have probably would never cut communication with the girl, but abortion is really hard mentally. It would be a strain on us both, but very much more so for the girl. I would hope in all my years of living though that I never have to see a kid get aborted.
I don't "Support abortion" per se because of the mental damages, but if the person is unfit, has been raped, or whatever else.. then it is up to them.
mothcorrupteth
Orthodox Christian
Okay. Now I feel better about the Jew I anaesthetized, then disemboweled, then dismembered, then urinated on. After all, he never felt a thing, was never conscious. That way, when some self-righteous bigot from the Religious Right pickets in front of where I've put said Jew's head on stake in my lawn, I can appeal to the fact that he technically lost his "humanity" for the five minutes I was at work with a hacksaw, a Smith & Wesson, and the Forty I drank for breakfast. Technically, it shouldn't matter whether he would potentially regain consciousness in a couple hours, just like it shouldn't matter whether a fetus would potentially gain consciousness later in its development.
No, of course not. Just like I wouldn't consider Blacks as having real lives, either, given that so many of them grow up below the poverty line in gang- and drug-ridden urban slums. That's why I think it's okay to round them up into poison gas chambers. I think it's quite selfless and compassionate of me to put them out of their socioeconomic misery. The only problem is those bleeding-hearted Christians who oppose my right to choose what's good for someone else and force it on them. It's freedoms like that that make this country great.
I can see where you're coming from with the "male" thing, given that men are always wrong (or so I've inferred from my interactions with my wife), but claiming that your opponent is "brainwashed" is just another way of saying, "He holds an opinion so different from mine; I cannot fathom how any intelligent thinking person can arrive at such an opinion and so, in my arrogance, I am forced to conclude that said person is not actually thinking for himself." You see, any Joe Blow can claim that his opponent is "brainwashed," but regardless of whether it's true, the illustrious Mr. Blow has won nothing in the argument unless he can prove that there's a good reason why his opponent's putative "brainwashing" makes his opinions invalid. Without that, the rhetoric of "thinking for oneself" is nothing but an irrelevant propaganda tactic that could just as easily be employed against him.
Last edited:
Masquerade
Seeker of the Truth
I would have to say that I support abortion, even though I think it's despicable if a pregnant woman got one just because she didn't want a baby. Aren't there myriad ways of preventing that? Regardless, it is the woman's choice because most of them who do want to get abortions turn out not to be fit mothers. Besides, it's not like the fetus is wasted--it goes towards stem cell research which benefits society. Even without being born into the world, the baby ends up saving many people through the use of its stem cells for research. Of course one could argue that it would be better if it had a choice to donate the stem cells, but it would never be able to make that choice in time. Unfortunately, aborted babies are martyrs, but Joan of Arc was a martyr and she was a saint. Despite what we speculate, the law deems it legal, so it's going to keep happening. We might as well make the best of it.
It amuses me greatly that I managed to provoke such a response from someone that obviously did not read my post correctly and the ones that came before it.
It amuses me more that you compare the persecution of Jews to abortion. I'd love to be able to tell you that the comparison is uncanny but unfortunately you have taken so much of my post out of context that it makes me just smile, almost on the verge of laughter. I'll try to explain the my point of "conciousness" to you but some how I highly doubt you will read it correctly and just see the bits that you want to see, just so you can try and attack my post with your sarcastic and witty reply.
Of course you're never going to agree or even accept my opinion for that matter so my replies are pretty much fruitless, but nether less I shall humour you (or annoy you?) with this.
Anyway, the conciousness I referred to wasn't that of the same of drugging a man till their concious is subdued. What I was referring too was actually that the brain is so underdeveloped at that stage, it isn't even active yet. Yes their brain is developing and something is there but nothing is going on.
And the difference between the Jew you hypothetically murdered is the fact that the Jew had already developed, had been living their life and had previously held conciousness. However, a fetus that is aborted never reaches any of this. Like I said it's brain is practically non existent and what is there doesn't work.
Why does it matter? An aborted fetus has no movement, brain activity and underdeveloped features. Why should it be classed as a living being rather than a lump of underdeveloped flesh? If we started life at conception, we would be 9 month old at birth. Now you tell me why it matters so much to you that a lump of flesh that resembles Seahorse more than human with no evident life inside of it.
As for you're reference to "Blacks", you obviously haven't been around a person so disabled they pray every day for their life to end, just like that child I mentioned more than likely will be doing. Your comparison to the stereotypical view on African American's is just as amusing as your comparison with Jews. Again there are so many differences between the severely ill baby I held and the people you satirically described. You obviously choose not to see any of them.
Obviously you think of no-one but yourself, but I say keep using sarcasm and wit as a defence mechanism, it is greatly amusing!
B
Bun
Aaaactually, as much as I am pro-choice, I have to call you out on there. The brain of a fetus may be underdeveloped, but it still responds to outside and inside stimuli, which - to me - counts as brain activity. If you understand how the brain works, you would have realized this in the first place, but apparently you didn't.
A little more legitimate, but the fetus doesn't always remain the size and shape of a seahorse. xD
I gotta say, comparing the execution of a Jew (or any human being for that matter; why narrow it down to just them?) is certainly different than aborting a fetus. Firstly, the fetus has had no outside contact with the world other than muffled conversation. Therefore, it probably has little to no idea (as the brain is still developing) what is going on around it or what that signifies. It hasn't had a chance to live as, say, a fully grown Jewish man or woman with friends and family and experiences. In this case, calling a person a Jew and comparing their life to an unborn fetus isn't fair because that's like comparing a caterpillar to a butterfly (not even, because the caterpillar is born, just in a different form). That person who has come to be raised or accepting of the Jewish faith has obviously had enough life experience to want to call themselves a Jew. The fetus has not.
Last edited:
Actually I have never seen any research a papers that claim the Brain has enough activity to be responsive within the Embryogenesis period (0-12 weeks). In fact as there is no Neocortex and the Thalmus does not connect until around week 26, without the Thalmus the brain cannot interpret anything and cannot allow the body to move. So as such physical response is not possible. In fact as the Thalmus' main function is interpret and relay sensory information, not being developed/disconnected would suggest that any sort of stimuli would not evoke any response.
Of course I am not denying that a fetus will never have Brain activity until birth, really everything we are discussing (concerning brain activity) is very debatable on both sides. There is just little evidence out there to prove to me that there is and can be brain activity during the (usual) abortion limit of 0-12 weeks and if there was there is no indiction of whether the brain can respond in anyway to any sort of stimuli during this period.
Of course I am not denying that a fetus will never have Brain activity until birth, really everything we are discussing (concerning brain activity) is very debatable on both sides. There is just little evidence out there to prove to me that there is and can be brain activity during the (usual) abortion limit of 0-12 weeks and if there was there is no indiction of whether the brain can respond in anyway to any sort of stimuli during this period.
Last edited: