Ol' Blue Eyes. King For A Couple Of Days Age: 35 Gender: Female Posts: 4816
December 19th, 2007 at 02:41am
Kurtni:
Ol' Blue Eyes.:
THe issue I have with adoption is that the system, in many areas, is overflowing with children. I feel like there's way too many kids, and putting more children into the system is just putting a bigger strain on it. Ideally, I'd love for adoption to replace abortion, but some women just can't carry a pregnancy to term because of various health problems, or because of their personal situation.
So... instead of working to improve the adoption system... we should just continue killing unborn children because thats easier? it isn't their fault the adoption system has some flaws (which tend to get exaggerated in abortion debates). Health related complications are one thing, but personal situations involving things like money are a totally different reason. Not having money doesn't affect your ability to carry a pregnancy, it affects what you do afterwards. There are financial aids to help cover doctor expences and after the baby is born there are adoption agencies. There is a chance that adoption might not work out, but does that justify taking away a developing childs right to life?
When you have sex, you accept the fact that you may become pregnant. You can use protection, take birth control, and do everything correctly, but that chance still exists. If you're not ready to accept that, then you shouldn't be having sex. Abortion is unfair and the unjustified depletion of another life purely for convenience. I agree with you, personal situations can make raising a baby very inconvienent, but so can a divorce that leaves a single mom with 3 kids and no child support. Would her personal situation justify something like abortion for the children she already had? Of course not, no one would allow children to be killed purely for convienece, however for some reasons those same morals don't apply to unborn children. The "personal situation" excuse just doesn't cut it in my opinion.
I don't blame the system, I blame the number of children that keep getting dumped into it. I feel that people don't really adopt as much as pro-lifers pretend they do, and it's unfair to expect an already overburdened system to take care of all these children when a woman would opt to abort.
I fully support first-trimester abortions in the event of a personal situation. I think that no woman should have to carry a pregnancy that she doesn't want. Yes, you take precautions when you have sex, but accidents happen, and why should a woman's life be entirely compromised because of an accident?
John Entwistle Great Success! Age: 35 Gender: Female Posts: 55036
December 19th, 2007 at 05:51am
A music video from a band called the Right Brothers. The song is called "Momma, I Wanna Live".
Watch it. It is worth it. It might not change your mind, but it might make you think a little.
Yes, you take precautions when you have sex, but accidents happen, and why should a woman's life be entirely compromised because of an accident?
Because she was fully aware of the fact that the accident could happen. And her life doesn't have to be "entirely compromised."
But by crossing the road you're fully aware that an accident could happen, doesn't stop you from doing so though
I didn't say it should stop you. Try looking at that same analogy from the drivers point of view. When you drive, you accept the fact you could be in a wreck, And you accept the fact that, by law, (here at least) if you hit a pedestrian, you're going to be in some serious trouble, accident or no accident. By doing things like driving, you accept the consequences. Sex should be the same way. In my opinion, you shouldn't get to pick and choose which consequences you have to deal with and which you shouldn't, especially when another life is involved.
I didn't say it should stop you. Try looking at that same analogy from the drivers point of view. When you drive, you accept the fact you could be in a wreck, And you accept the fact that, by law, (here at least) if you hit a pedestrian, you're going to be in some serious trouble, accident or no accident. By doing things like driving, you accept the consequences. Sex should be the same way. In my opinion, you shouldn't get to pick and choose which consequences you have to deal with and which you shouldn't, especially when another life is involved.
I agree, and a lot of other people I know do too, but then the question always comes up about rape. Personally, rape or none, I don't think abortion should be an option anyway, but a lot of people feel differently, as, many times, there is no way for you to prevent rape.
Misanthropist Post Whore Age: 31 Gender: Female Posts: 23279
December 19th, 2007 at 10:59pm
What is up with those trucks that are driving around Calgary (soon to be making their way across the rest of Canada) with gruesome pictures of an aborted fetus blown up on the side?
That's taking the argument a little extreme. There was a quote in the paper (The Winnipeg Sun) that said they wanted to "make abortion unthinkable".
Ol' Blue Eyes. King For A Couple Of Days Age: 35 Gender: Female Posts: 4816
December 20th, 2007 at 04:20am
Misanthropist:
What is up with those trucks that are driving around Calgary (soon to be making their way across the rest of Canada) with gruesome pictures of an aborted fetus blown up on the side?
That's taking the argument a little extreme. There was a quote in the paper (The Winnipeg Sun) that said they wanted to "make abortion unthinkable".
I really resent that type of tactic. First-trimester abortions are nothing like that. It's taking everything out of proportion.
Anji Basket Case Age: 34 Gender: Female Posts: 15914
December 20th, 2007 at 09:40am
Santa:
Kurtni:
I didn't say it should stop you. Try looking at that same analogy from the drivers point of view. When you drive, you accept the fact you could be in a wreck, And you accept the fact that, by law, (here at least) if you hit a pedestrian, you're going to be in some serious trouble, accident or no accident. By doing things like driving, you accept the consequences. Sex should be the same way. In my opinion, you shouldn't get to pick and choose which consequences you have to deal with and which you shouldn't, especially when another life is involved.
I agree, and a lot of other people I know do too, but then the question always comes up about rape. Personally, rape or none, I don't think abortion should be an option anyway, but a lot of people feel differently, as, many times, there is no way for you to prevent rape.
Is there a way to prevent anything and everything? I don't really think so, if you live, stuff's going to happen. Whether it's your fault, or someone else's or your responsibility, or another's; nothing is really preventable.
I get really infuriated by the pro-lifers' arguments of the pro-choice crowd being 'murderers' or 'sluts who don't want to have to take responsibility for their actions', nor do I share their support of adoption in place of abortion.
First of all, pro-choice doesn't necessarily mean pro-abortion. I would never hope to have an abortion, but if I found myself in trouble I would be very grateful for that option. I am on the Pill, and my boyfriend always uses condoms There are a lot of couples like that, and in the very unfortunate case that an accident should happen, is it really fair to deny such people a way out of a potentially devastating situation, after they took every precaution necessary and just had bad luck?
Secondly, abortion cannot be viewed as murder, in the early stages of development. Up to a certain point, a developing zygote is just that- NOT a baby. It simply cannot be called that; it is a ball of undifferentiated cells, indistinguishable from a pig, cow, dog...even that of a patch of skin or lock of hair. Therefore saying early abortions are 'taking a human life' is absurd. Following that logic: cutting your hair is murder, scratching your arm is murder, ejactulation is murder...people need to get a grip on perspective here.
Finally, abortion is not the 'miracle cure' that pro-lifers assume it to be. Childrens' homes are not a good, stable environment for a child to grow up in, and many children spend their whole childhood there, then are turfed out when they hit 18 and often end up homeless and unemployed. Yes, there are some children who are snapped up by loving families, but many are forgotten. Children can be adopted into families that are simply not up to the challenge, or even worse, deliberately abusive and cruel to the child. As a victim of child abuse myself, and knowing many who have gone through even worse than me, I'd rather an unwanted child was terminated before even being aware of its own existence, than have to face a fate like that.
I didn't say it should stop you. Try looking at that same analogy from the drivers point of view. When you drive, you accept the fact you could be in a wreck, And you accept the fact that, by law, (here at least) if you hit a pedestrian, you're going to be in some serious trouble, accident or no accident. By doing things like driving, you accept the consequences. Sex should be the same way. In my opinion, you shouldn't get to pick and choose which consequences you have to deal with and which you shouldn't, especially when another life is involved.
I agree, and a lot of other people I know do too, but then the question always comes up about rape. Personally, rape or none, I don't think abortion should be an option anyway, but a lot of people feel differently, as, many times, there is no way for you to prevent rape.
Is there a way to prevent anything and everything? I don't really think so, if you live, stuff's going to happen. Whether it's your fault, or someone else's or your responsibility, or another's; nothing is really preventable.
Yes, but in the case that someone wasn't raped, they could have very well prevented it. That's fact.
Misanthropist Post Whore Age: 31 Gender: Female Posts: 23279
December 20th, 2007 at 11:50pm
Electric Pussycat:
Secondly, abortion cannot be viewed as murder, in the early stages of development. Up to a certain point, a developing zygote is just that- NOT a baby. It simply cannot be called that; it is a ball of undifferentiated cells, indistinguishable from a pig, cow, dog...even that of a patch of skin or lock of hair. Therefore saying early abortions are 'taking a human life' is absurd. Following that logic: cutting your hair is murder, scratching your arm is murder, ejactulation is murder...people need to get a grip on perspective here.
.
I don't think you can really compare a developing zygote to a lock of hair. They are so different in my mind. The difference? A zygote is going to become a baby, the lock of hair is forever inanimate.
And your whole thing on "scratching your arm is murder" is pretty ridiculous, because that's not the logic people use in abortion debates. We're talking about human lives, or if seen as inanimate for the first few months: potential human lives.
Secondly, abortion cannot be viewed as murder, in the early stages of development. Up to a certain point, a developing zygote is just that- NOT a baby. It simply cannot be called that; it is a ball of undifferentiated cells, indistinguishable from a pig, cow, dog...even that of a patch of skin or lock of hair. Therefore saying early abortions are 'taking a human life' is absurd. Following that logic: cutting your hair is murder, scratching your arm is murder, ejactulation is murder...people need to get a grip on perspective here.
.
I don't think you can really compare a developing zygote to a lock of hair. They are so different in my mind. The difference? A zygote is going to become a baby, the lock of hair is forever inanimate.
And your whole thing on "scratching your arm is murder" is pretty ridiculous, because that's not the logic people use in abortion debates. We're talking about human lives, or if seen as inanimate for the first few months: potential human lives.
Undifferentiated cells.
It is NOT a human life. 'Potential' human lives? Okay then, all sperm are 'potential' human lives, as are eggs. Periods and ejaculation are therefore the same as abortion, by your logic. It's absurd.
Undifferentiated cells.
It is NOT a human life. 'Potential' human lives? Okay then, all sperm are 'potential' human lives, as are eggs. Periods and ejaculation are therefore the same as abortion, by your logic. It's absurd.
But it's alive. There's nothing denying that. It can one day live for itself. You can't just deny it's own right to life because a mere ultrasound can't distinguish it.
Undifferentiated cells.
It is NOT a human life. 'Potential' human lives? Okay then, all sperm are 'potential' human lives, as are eggs. Periods and ejaculation are therefore the same as abortion, by your logic. It's absurd.
But it's alive. There's nothing denying that. It can one day live for itself. You can't just deny it's own right to life because a mere ultrasound can't distinguish it.
A hair follicle is alive, yet you wouldn't defend it's human rights based on that fact alone.
"It can one day live for itself."
Ah but when an abortion would be carried out, it is still in the parasitic stage, where a woman should have the right to say whether it stays or goes.
A hair follicle is alive, yet you wouldn't defend it's human rights based on that fact alone.
"It can one day live for itself."
Ah but when an abortion would be carried out, it is still in the parasitic stage, where a woman should have the right to say whether it stays or goes.
As someone already said though, things like hair are forever stuck the way they are. They won't form mouths, they won't grow hands and feet, and they won't be able to see. A baby can't grow any faster. It's not their fault that they don't have a way to speak for themselves. Irresponsible girls should not be able to make such a decision, because who's to say they would be able to make the right one? I'm not saying that for all, but a lot of girls who get abortions got themselves pregnant. They did have a choice. I don't think it's right to take the "baby's" choice away, simply because it doesn't have enough cells to be called human.
i for one am against abortion. i believe that either way your taking away a childs life no matter how far along you are in the pregnancy. but then again if you were a rape victim i believe you have the right to go and have an abortion, but then again thats what adoptions for.
i contradict myself with this matter because theres pros and cons to it.
i for one am against abortion. i believe that either way your taking away a childs life no matter how far along you are in the pregnancy. but then again if you were a rape victim i believe you have the right to go and have an abortion, but then again thats what adoptions for.
i contradict myself with this matter because theres pros and cons to it.
What I find highly vexing is that people who are strictly against abortion because "no one should ever have the right to take another human's life" usually do find it permissible if the woman was raped. Well, you can't have it both ways. Isn't it highly hypocritical to accuse pro-choice parties of "playing god" by choosing who or what lives and who or what does not, yet they do the exact same thing according to their logic based on how the fetus was conceived?
This sanctity of human life, although the latter term is highly debatable, is the argument "pro-lifers" use most frequently, yet there is such a glaring inconsistency here that I don't even feel it's worthy to argue about medical facts and people's rights before one of the parties doesn't sort their perspective into not quite having the texture of the Grand Canyon.
Anji Basket Case Age: 34 Gender: Female Posts: 15914
December 21st, 2007 at 11:43am
Santa:
Anji:
Santa:
Kurtni:
I didn't say it should stop you. Try looking at that same analogy from the drivers point of view. When you drive, you accept the fact you could be in a wreck, And you accept the fact that, by law, (here at least) if you hit a pedestrian, you're going to be in some serious trouble, accident or no accident. By doing things like driving, you accept the consequences. Sex should be the same way. In my opinion, you shouldn't get to pick and choose which consequences you have to deal with and which you shouldn't, especially when another life is involved.
I agree, and a lot of other people I know do too, but then the question always comes up about rape. Personally, rape or none, I don't think abortion should be an option anyway, but a lot of people feel differently, as, many times, there is no way for you to prevent rape.
Is there a way to prevent anything and everything? I don't really think so, if you live, stuff's going to happen. Whether it's your fault, or someone else's or your responsibility, or another's; nothing is really preventable.
Yes, but in the case that someone wasn't raped, they could have very well prevented it. That's fact.
I thought that you were arguing that even with protection, accidents could still happen. This is all very confusing, I don't know who's thinking what.
