Abortion and why it's wrong

a reply to: TechUnique

Boy did you just open a can of worms.

originally posted by: krosnos
I agree it is wrong but I will never attempt to dictate what another does with their own body.

But what gives the mother the right to decide what happens to the child's body?
Has the child agreed to be aborted? If not, the mother is acting upon the body of another person without that person's consent.

a reply to: TechUnique

A whim?

Must be nice to criticize something you never had to do. You don't know why these women do it, and to say it is just a whim says alot of the ignorance of the subject.

a reply to: TechUnique

No, I just find it interesting that lately you've been posting these kinds of threads to bring traffic to your videos.

a reply to: TechUnique

I'm personally against abortion simply because the rights of the unborn child are being ignored or placed secondarily over the rights of the mother.

Basically, her rights to abort are infringing on the rights of the unborn child.

But that's just me.

I applaud your courage of starting a thread like this here. Be ready to be assailed.

SnF and a healthy respect for your opinion.

Cheers

I wonder do you believe the body shuts down while a girl is being raped...

Ooo! Oooo! I have a solution to the abortion "problem..."

Every person who feels it is wrong may offer to support a woman considering abortion through her pregnancy (and in the case of life threatening complications, then offer to pay some agreed upon amount in case of death or loss of future income) and may also then adopt the little baby when it is born... problem solved!

If they do not wish to commit to such a financial burden, then it is asked that they keep their shallow judgements and unrealistic expectations to themselves.

Not every child is conceived to a loving parent or decent circumstances... some circumstances are outright hellish... and if it were really God's will that every baby be born, then abortion wouldn't be possible... right?

Few people are truly "for" abortion... but see it as a reality, a right, and, at times, a necessity.

Edit: and why stop at fetuses? Why don't people care about people when they are older? There are many millions of children and adults who are starving and miserable right now... likely within a few miles of where you are... why not start there, and then the abortions will lessen as poverty and ignorance is eradicated.

a reply to: TechUnique

Does over population mean anything to you?

[Quote] A business built on the back of child murder. Leaves a horrible taste in the back of my mouth. [Quote]
-- You may be showing signs of ignorance...how do you think the United States, Europe, South America was built? Smiles and Hand shakes?

Children are still being murdered...in sweat shops....in India....starving children begging on the streets of U.S.,

Beside, stem-cell research has shown amazing results every-time.& time again.

How many kids can you afford to raise? and still live comfortably? Now lets add two more "unexpected children" to your birth tubes and house hold....would you still regret not making that choice? or enjoy living in poverty? Do you have money for contraceptives pills? Condoms? Tube tieing?

I don't have the time to cite every-which-way your opinion is rude, shows ignorance, & lack of empathy.

Be a Christian, not Speak Christian. Just think, everyone has it rough.... Tolerance.

You thread, IMO seems like your asking for Trolls....

What about getting an abortion cause the child is male and the mother doesn't want to contribute to the patriarchy?

This always comes down to where you think life starts.

I don't think it starts at conception which is why I am pro choice.

I can respect your position and what you're trying to accomplish with this thread, but it is a pointless fight.

Abortion will always happen, whether it's legal or not, and a person must maintain sovereignty over their own body or we open the doors for the "state" to legislate more controls over an individual's right to choose what happens with their body.

Abortion Rates Are Higher In Countries Where Procedure Is Illegal, Study Finds

I'd say that the pro-lifers are on the wrong side of the argument if their goal is to reduce abortions.

LONDON -- Abortion rates are higher in countries where the procedure is illegal and nearly half of all abortions worldwide are unsafe, with the vast majority in developing countries, a new study concludes.

Experts couldn't say whether more liberal laws led to fewer procedures, but said good access to birth control in those countries resulted in fewer unwanted pregnancies.

a reply to: TechUnique

What if a woman is raped by her own father and becomes pregnant as a result? Would do you think she should do?

originally posted by: MonkeyFishFrog
a reply to: TechUnique

No, I just find it interesting that lately you've been posting these kinds of threads to bring traffic to your videos.

I get plenty of traffic to my videos without this site. One of my videos has got 750,000+ views and I doubt even 200 of those views came from this site.

Who pissed you off this morning?

originally posted by: Rozmer
a reply to: TechUnique
I wonder do you believe the body shuts down while a girl is being raped...

OMG I LOVE THIS Topic!

I think the OP should put this to the test and document someone who was rapped, and Preach to them that they have to keep their rapist baby as a reminder of how sexy they were looking that day they were rapped and not dress like that again..or else....

I'm not 100% sorry about my rant towards the OP.
a reply to: GENERAL EYES

originally posted by: introvert
I can respect your position and what you're trying to accomplish with this thread, but it is a pointless fight.

If my video serves the purpose of saving just one babies life then it is 1000000000x worth the half a day I spent making it.

If it doesn't then at least I tried.

a reply to: TechUnique

Being "pretty sure" isn't good enough.

A lot of Pro-Life advocates will conveniently leave out vital statistics that don't coincide with the findings they wish to present.

I'm a huge proponant of Surrogate Mothers and Private-Party Adoptions. Sadly, I do not qualify for either option due to finances and my husband is not the sort who desires children.

Is that to say there aren't women and girls of loose morals who use abortion as last minute birth control? Sure there are. To deny that fact would be absolute folly. Late term abortions of healthy babies is an absolutely detestable practice and I cannot express my absolute disdain for such.

But the fact of the matter remains - if Hardcore Pro-Lifers got their way, there would be no alternative available for women who faced the tragic decision I - and others like me - had to make in the case of our nonviable fetuses.

The fact that idealistic and healthy breeders and the aforementioned Pro-Lifers discount the positions of women in positions such as my own - and rape victims - in favor of thinking all women as being "irresponsible baby murderers" is distressing, and continues to be a bane when it comes to this highly personal reality for those of us not blessed by circumstance.

What I'm getting at here is there is much more to the issue of healthy babies and loving families than most Pro-Lifers ever take into consideration because they are so blindsided by the blessings of their own lives they neglect to realize that not everyone is as fortunate out there.

But sweeping legislation and hard-line law making seems to be the tour-de-force.

Amazing how blind some can be to the larger picture that doesn't affect them.
For shame.

Medical Testimony
A new human being comes into existence during the process of fertilization.

www.abort73.com...

Faye Wattleton, the longest reigning president of the largest abortion provider in the United States—Planned Parenthood—argued as far back as 1997 that everyone already knows that abortion kills. She proclaims the following in an interview with Ms. Magazine:

I think we have deluded ourselves into believing that people don't know that abortion is killing. So any pretense that abortion is not killing is a signal of our ambivalence, a signal that we cannot say yes, it kills a fetus.1

On the other side of the pond, Ann Furedi, the chief executive of the largest independent abortion provider in the UK, said this in a 2008 debate:

We can accept that the embryo is a living thing in the fact that it has a beating heart, that it has its own genetic system within it. It’s clearly human in the sense that it’s not a gerbil, and we can recognize that it is human life.2

Naomi Wolf, a prominent feminist author and abortion supporter, makes a similar concession when she writes:

Clinging to a rhetoric about abortion in which there is no life and no death, we entangle our beliefs in a series of self-delusions, fibs and evasions. And we risk becoming precisely what our critics charge us with being: callous, selfish and casually destructive men and women who share a cheapened view of human life...we need to contextualize the fight to defend abortion rights within a moral framework that admits that the death of a fetus is a real death.3

David Boonin, in his book, A Defense of Abortion, makes this startling admission:

In the top drawer of my desk, I keep [a picture of my son]. This picture was taken on September 7, 1993, 24 weeks before he was born. The sonogram image is murky, but it reveals clear enough a small head tilted back slightly, and an arm raised up and bent, with the hand pointing back toward the face and the thumb extended out toward the mouth. There is no doubt in my mind that this picture, too, shows [my son] at a very early stage in his physical development. And there is no question that the position I defend in this book entails that it would have been morally permissible to end his life at this point.4

Peter Singer, contemporary philosopher and public abortion advocate, joins the chorus in his book, Practical Ethics. He writes:

It is possible to give ‘human being’ a precise meaning. We can use it as equivalent to ‘member of the species Homo sapiens’. Whether a being is a member of a given species is something that can be determined scientifically, by an examination of the nature of the chromosomes in the cells of living organisms. In this sense there is no doubt that from the first moments of its existence an embryo conceived from human sperm and eggs is a human being.5

Bernard Nathanson co-founded one of the most influential abortion advocacy groups in the world (NARAL) and once served as medical director for the largest abortion clinic in America. In 1974, he wrote an article for the New England Journal of Medicine in which he states, "There is no longer serious doubt in my mind that human life exists within the womb from the very onset of pregnancy..."6 Some years later, he would reiterate:

There is simply no doubt that even the early embryo is a human being. All its genetic coding and all its features are indisputably human. As to being, there is no doubt that it exists, is alive, is self-directed, and is not the the same being as the mother–and is therefore a unified whole.7

Don't miss the significance of these acknowledgements. Prominent defenders of abortion rights publicly admit that abortion kills human beings. They are not saying that abortion is morally defensible because it doesn't kill a distinct human entity. They are admitting that abortion does kill a distinct human entity, but argue it is morally defensible anyway. We'll get to their arguments later, but the point here is this: There is simply no debate among honest, informed people that abortion kills distinctly human beings.

The problem is, Roe vs. Wade, the landmark 1973 verdict which legalized abortion in the U.S. is actually built on the claim that there's no way to say for certain whether or not abortion kills because no one can say for certain when life begins. Justice Harry Blackmun, who authored the majority opinion wrote:

The judiciary, at this point in the development of man's knowledge, is not in a position to... resolve the difficult question of when life begins... since those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus.8

Justice Blackmun's assertion is a ridiculous one, at least as it applies to the field of medicine. Dr. Nathanson had this to say about the ruling:

Of course, I was pleased with Justice Harry Blackmun's abortion decisions, which were an unbelievably sweeping triumph for our cause, far broader than our 1970 victory in New York or the advances since then. I was pleased with Blackmun's conclusions, that is. I could not plumb the ethical or medical reasoning that had produced the conclusions. Our final victory had been propped up on a misreading of obstetrics, gynecology, and embryology, and that's a dangerous way to win.9

Dr. Nathanson would eventually abandon his support for elective abortion and note that "the basics [of prenatal development] were well-known to human embryology at the time the U.S. Supreme Court issued its 1973 rulings, even though the rulings made no use of them."9 In biological terms, life's beginning is a settled fact. Individual human life begins at fertilization, and there are all sorts of authoritative, public resources to prove this. Consider the evidence below:

a reply to: TechUnique

Can you address the other questions people have?

I'll re ask mine.

How do you feel about those that have been raped and when does life start in your mind?

This is my opinion on abortion.
I think that abortion is actually a microcosm of our already low morals and self-control as a society. Maybe my view is rather simplistic, but if you aren't ready to have a child, then don't have sex, pure and simple. Why should your own self pleasure take precedent over the possibility of destroying another human life?

Rape, Incest and life of the mother are the only times I can understand abortion, and even then, I wouldn't support late-term unless life of the mother and baby were at high risk levels.