I think that it is totally acceptable. Wanting an abortion proves that the parents don't want the baby. If you have a kid that you don't want, you are less likely to be a true parent to him/her, and more of a forced caretaker. I personally see late abortion as wrong, but when it is just a small cluster of cells, I see no harm in it.
I'm really curious to know what the strict anti abortionists think about using condoms.
[QUOTE=ManningQB18;26911451]I think that it is totally acceptable. Wanting an abortion proves that the parents don't want the baby. If you have a kid that you don't want, you are less likely to be a true parent to him/her, and more of a forced caretaker. I personally see late abortion as wrong, but when it is just a small cluster of cells, I see no harm in it.
I'm really curious to know what the strict anti abortionists think about using condoms.[/QUOTE]
A shitload of strict anti-abortionists are also advocates of abstinence-only programs, which if I remember correctly, aren't effective.
Rip that shit OUT
If abortion was legal, Hitler could have been aborted. Hitler, guys. Hitler.
If you're against abortion, you're for Hitler.
Kill all them babies.
[QUOTE=Treybuchet;26912353]Kill all them babies.[/QUOTE]
There flesh can cure cancer
This thread needs to know the difference between human and a person. All humans and everything human is just a group of cells, whether it's an old man, an unborn child or skin cells found in dust. There is no denying, an unborn child is an individual human, he has his own DNA which is human. So using logic we've come to the conclusion that an unborn child is a human individual from conception to death. But would destroying old worn out cells be murder, no murder is the intentional taking of a [b]person's[/b] life.
A person is considered to be a highly concious living animal that can feel pain and have cognitive thoughts, arguably not all persons are humans, some of the high apes and marine mammals could be considered persons. Destroying a person's life is immoral, so the only question we should be asking is when does a human child become a person? That is the point that abortion is wrong.
The estimates for when an unborn child becomes a person ranges from conception to 6 months after birth, but most professionals give it in a range of 8 weeks to a few days before birth. In order to make definitive legislation on abortion we need to spend money on finding out at what stage in a human's development does it become a person.
It's stupid if a teenager gets one because they just wanted to have a little fun.
Show them what happens when they screw up, don't sugarcoat it.
[QUOTE=mrryanchisholm;26912832]It's stupid if a teenager gets one because they just wanted to have a little fun.
Show them what happens when they screw up, don't sugarcoat it.[/QUOTE]
Why, an abortion isn't exactly an easy way out.
[QUOTE=mrryanchisholm;26912832]It's stupid if a teenager gets one because they just wanted to have a little fun.
Show them what happens when they screw up, don't sugarcoat it.[/QUOTE]
so you want to ruin the life of a child and a teenager to show them a lesson.
[QUOTE=mrryanchisholm;26912832]It's stupid if a teenager gets one because they just wanted to have a little fun.
Show them what happens when they screw up, don't sugarcoat it.[/QUOTE]
Sorry but I think forcing the girl to shove out a football sized clump of bones out of her vagina is cruel and unusual punishment
[QUOTE=mrryanchisholm;26912832]Show them what happens when they screw up, don't sugarcoat it.[/QUOTE]
by this logic, should we be taking airbags and seatbelts out of cars?
if someone screws up enough to crash their car, they should face the consequences, right?
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPLc9HAt-_I[/media]
As for my opinion. I am for abortion. Abortions just for fun not so much though.
I don't care they rip apart living creatures. Kids pull legs from spiders too.
[QUOTE=sami-elite;26913542]Abortions just for fun not so much though.[/QUOTE]
I didnt know abortion was fun.
As long as it's not too late, I'm okay with it
Tasty.
Pro-choicers often make the argument that it's all about the freedom of action of the woman. However, it would still be freedom of action if we allowed women to kill their children if they are costing too much. It is NEVER, EVER morally acceptable to allow individuals to be stripped of their right to life.
[QUOTE=Derubermensch;26914077]Pro-choicers often make the argument that it's all about the freedom of action of the woman. However, it would still be freedom of action if we allowed women to kill their children if they are costing too much. It is NEVER, EVER morally acceptable to allow individuals to be stripped of their right to life.[/QUOTE]
a fetus is not an individual, smart one
and you're comparing a being which is capable of conscious thought to a being that is basically just a clump of cells
[QUOTE=Doriol;26914127]a fetus is not an individual, smart one
and you're comparing a being which is capable of conscious thought to a being that is basically just a clump of cells[/QUOTE]
A fetus is a human being like you and me. It may not be as big as one of us, but it is still a human being.
By the way, according to your argument it is perfectly acceptable to kill people who are extremely mentally challenged under the basis that "they aren't capable of conscious thought".
No matter how old or young someone is, or how intelligible they are, does not change the fact that they are a person.
[QUOTE=Derubermensch;26914199]A fetus is a human being like you and me. It may not be as big as one of us, but it is still a human being.
By the way, according to your argument it is perfectly acceptable to kill people who are extremely mentally challenged under the basis that "they aren't capable of conscious thought".
No matter how old or young someone is, or how intelligible they are, does not change the fact that they are a person.[/QUOTE]
It is a human being, but it isn't a person. A person is someone with cognitive function, memories, feelings, ideas. A fetus has none of those.
[QUOTE=I Broke The Sun!;26914274]It is a human being, but it isn't a person. A person is someone with cognitive function, memories, feelings, ideas. A fetus has none of those.[/QUOTE]
Does it make a difference?
[QUOTE=I Broke The Sun!;26914274]It is a human being, but it isn't a person. A person is someone with cognitive function, memories, feelings, ideas. A fetus has none of those.[/QUOTE]
word to this. Like that quote said a while back, it's the equivalent to referring to the loss of a hand as a 'death'
[QUOTE=strayebyrd;26914323]word to this. Like that quote said a while back, it's the equivalent to referring to the loss of a hand as a 'death'[/QUOTE]
Only this is a completely different entity, not a part of yourself. It has a different set of genes than it's mother, and the entire organism is destroyed in the process. It is death.
[QUOTE=I Broke The Sun!;26914274]It is a human being, but it isn't a person. A person is someone with cognitive function, memories, feelings, ideas. A fetus has none of those.[/QUOTE]
Whether or not it has those 'abilities' doesn't make it anything lesser than a person like you or me.
[QUOTE=Derubermensch;26914364]Only this is a completely different entity, not a part of yourself. It has a different set of genes than it's mother, and the entire organism is destroyed in the process. It is death.[/QUOTE]
But the fact remains that the foetus lacks personhood, meaning that it isn't classified as murder
[QUOTE=Derubermensch;26914077]Pro-choicers often make the argument that it's all about the freedom of action of the woman. However, it would still be freedom of action if we allowed women to kill their children if they are costing too much. It is NEVER, EVER morally acceptable to allow individuals to be stripped of their right to life.[/QUOTE]
I never used finance in my reasoning. I am just against making a woman who is capable of feeling pain and suffering have to go through such an ordeal for an unconcious and undeveloped human. You can't support the rights of both and to take away the rights of someone's body while she's fully aware of it and can feel all the suffering seems more cruel to me than ending the life of something that doesn't even realise it's living.
[QUOTE=Derubermensch;26914199]A fetus is a human being like you and me. It may not be as big as one of us, but it is still a human being.
By the way, according to your argument it is perfectly acceptable to kill people who are extremely mentally challenged under the basis that "they aren't capable of conscious thought".
No matter how old or young someone is, or how intelligible they are, does not change the fact that they are a person.[/QUOTE]
so do you call people who masterbate are murders?
Since the mother is the one who feeds it. its not really murder as it is not wanting to take care of it.
I think trying to classify things as "humans" or "people" is just skirting around the issue. If it isn't capable of rational, conscious thought, I don't see the moral problem in killing it.
You could argue that a fetus after 8 or so months it may be capable of taking input. maybe it listens to the voices of it's parents, and starts making some basic decisions and memories. In which case, I would agree that killing it would be immoral, but we don't have any conclusive evidence that they aren't just unconscious in the womb until birth.
For mandatory abortion.
[QUOTE=imasillypiggy;26914522]so do you call people who masterbate are murders?
Since the mother is the one who feeds it. its not really murder as it is not wanting to take care of it.[/QUOTE]
Semen is just a bodily fluid. However, if it is bonded with an egg it immediately becomes an entirely different entity. My personal belief is that until the sperm has bonded with the egg, it is merely a part of your body. When it has a different DNA structure than you, it is not a "clump of cells" like shedding skin or losing a finger.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
