Could abortion be considered a double standard?

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: DenyObfuscation

A fetus is a fetus until birth. What's your point?

You do know it's an embryo for the first 8 weeks, right?

Yep.

ETA: Not to be too picky but of course embryo begins at 4 days(?) after fertilization. It's just a stage of development of a human being, like fetus, infant, and toddler etc.

originally posted by: DenyObfuscation
So when does sentience become present?

I am not an obstetrician or neurologist, but it does not take hundreds of hours wasted in lectures to understand that it is not at the point of conception nor when in an embryonic state.

A fetus is a fetus until birth. What's your point?

Well, actually, a foetus is a foetus -...the systematic dumbing down of the English language for the sake of the sugar addled U.S. notwithstanding - and my point is that any anti abortion blanket declaration is asinine when dealing with a 'grey' area such as pregnancy.

In other words, go ahead and argue for a ceiling on how far into a pregnancy a child may be legally aborted; legitimate medical compulsion aside. But, to advocate for the complete prohibition of said action, is the thing of brain rotten god botherers whose opinions are as relevant to this debate as they were in the creation of the Internet.

a reply to: WanderingSage
Yes. Their are three individuals involved. I think both parents should sit down and have a long talk be for any final choice.

originally posted by: PresidentHeston

originally posted by: DenyObfuscation
So when does sentience become present?

I am not an obstetrician or neurologist, but it does not take hundreds of hours wasted in lectures to understand that it is not at the point of conception nor when in an embryonic state.

A fetus is a fetus until birth. What's your point?

Well, actually, a foetus is a foetus -...the systematic dumbing down of the English language for the sake of the sugar addled U.S. notwithstanding - and my point is that any anti abortion blanket declaration is asinine when dealing with a 'grey' area such as pregnancy.

In other words, go ahead and argue for a ceiling on how far into a pregnancy a child may be legally aborted; legitimate medical compulsion aside. But, to advocate for the complete prohibition of said action, is the thing of brain rotten god botherers whose opinions are as relevant to this debate as they were in the creation of the Internet.

Can you not bash others over petty differences? I'm sure that's a manners violation right there, at least in some form.

You going to bash us for other words too?

Neighbor
Color
etc.

Pretty much made the rest of what you said meaningless.

a reply to: bangoli

Actually, there are two individuals and a non-sentient symbiote with no self-determination (in the early stages of pregnancy) entirely dependent on one of those individuals for development.

Agreed that ideally there should be measured discussion between the two individuals, but sometimes that's not possible (especially if a compromise can’t be reached) and in the end the decision rests with the person who is going to be subjecting her body and mind to the risks (and potential joys) of pregnancy.

originally posted by: DenyObfuscation

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: DenyObfuscation

A fetus is a fetus until birth. What's your point?

You do know it's an embryo for the first 8 weeks, right?

Yep.

ETA: Not to be too picky but of course embryo begins at 4 days(?) after fertilization. It's just a stage of development of a human being, like fetus, infant, and toddler etc.

Feeding my LIVING children takes priority over a bunch of undeveloped cells.

ALL LIVING children deserve priority.

a reply to: WanderingSage

I think you're dead on. They get to murder if they are not ready to be responsible, but men are forced by the government to give almost everything they own and get punished harshly for non-payment, if missed for a few months. Also, when women discuss the abortion, they say things like, "A woman has a choice what to do with her body", but what they're NOT doing...is giving the child a voice.

Bad things happen sometimes, but one can only have hope that there will be some good that comes out of it, however some just choose to turn to the darker side of the situation. So, it's not just the woman's body that should be taken into consideration. I find that to be incredibly vain and self-absorbent.

originally posted by: IlluminatiTechnician


Bad things happen sometimes, but one can only have hope that there will be some good that comes out of it.

There are good things that come out of it.

Check out this thread.

However, given your remarks (somewhat confused, I must say), I won't hold my breath for any insight or rational comments.

FYI, a foetus is not a child.

originally posted by: aorAki

originally posted by: IlluminatiTechnician


Bad things happen sometimes, but one can only have hope that there will be some good that comes out of it.

There are good things that come out of it.

Check out this thread.

However, given your remarks (somewhat confused, I must say), I won't hold my breath for any insight or rational comments.

FYI, a foetus is not a child.

Here is proof that a fetus IS alive and Is a child (hyper link keeps kicking me off iPad so here:
(Video shows arms and legs of fetus moving, outside of the body, while taken from the womb)
www.infowars.com...

Some would say that a "child" is a good thing, no matter what happened. The child is not bad and doesn't deserve to be murdered just because someone was raped. Besides,most of the reasons the children are aborted (just a fancy word for murder) is simply because young girls do stupid things and then regret it the net day and don't want to get in trouble with their parents. I can't count the times I have heard this story.

BTW, a FETUS is not a full grown child but it IS the start of life and without the intervention of those who seem to not have a soul, would grow up to be the same as you and me....a living, breathing human being. It all starts the same in the womb until full term and then wala....a life arrives. Anyone who stops this process by cutting this growing human into separate parts is a murderer. If it has any life at all, heart beat...reaction to stimuli etc. It is alive.

Again...all humans start and finish the same in the womb...those who stop this process and cease the process of life for that individual are murderers, because the fetus, child, human being not yet at full term (whatever you want to call it to be able to sleep at night), stop the process and it's murder because you are not letting the human inside have a choice on whether he can live or not. I am afraid hat YOUR outlook is the skewed outlook. To minimize a human being that will one day have a life, a job, feed his or her own kids, love and share emotions and have beliefs...all the things that you are now privy to, when YOU were once deduced to a "fetus", is a very shallow and calloused way to refer to a being that (if left undisturbed) could be one of the best things offered to the world. There are many celebrities that have brought lots of joy to the world that were born out of wedlock, had they been killed the world might not have ever seen some of the best entertainment to date.

You were a fetus once you know...and what are you now?

originally posted by: 0zzymand0s
a reply to: EverydayInVA

Guys go after spousal support all the time when the woman earns a lot more than they do. And sometimes even when they don't.


And there is nothing "jacked up" about our society. Socially -- things have never been better for women, gays, or minorities in general. The only people who ever complain are white males, and only because everyone else is almost treated fairly now, and that kinda sucks for them.

Tough luck, that.

You forgot to say strait white males.

But hay I just love all the attitude I get from folks, that don't even know me, simply because I am white and male. Its become a maximum bigotry. Affixing all manner of prejudice on gender and skin color.

originally posted by: poncho1982
You going to bash us for other words too?
Neighbor
Color
etc.
Pretty much made the rest of what you said meaningless.

If you do not see the rich tapestry of societal dumbing down - an example of which indeed happens to be the removal of letters from words in order to make it easier (i.e., less neural pathway creation) to sound out - because you're blinded by umbrage, thereby vindicating my very point, then it seems this very system is working just as intended.

Good luck with Alzheimer's.

a reply to: puzzlesphere

I apologize for that post. As a general rule I don't participate in discussions concerning abortion. There are
interesting viewpoints on both sides, I have nothing new to add, and beyond appreciating something genuinely
new or interesting simply by reading it I feel my .02 is a waste.

Sometimes I stay logged in overnight. I have a drunk who lives with me. I specifically ask him/her to stay off of my computer and that post was the first thing they did after drinking . I know it's not THAT big a deal , but when I saw "their" where a "there" should have been I knew right away that the drunk had made the post.