U.N. Report Advocates Abortion, Attacks Christians

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 10 2005 @ 02:11 AM
link   
The self defense argument just doesn't hold Otts, I'll tell you why. n the last 20 years over 32 mllion children have been aborted, Now unless there are over 1.6 million rapes a year which end in pregnancy most are done becuase it would inconvienince the mother.
Hell even hitler didn't kill that many.




posted on Mar, 10 2005 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
they have shown that the 'fetus' has feelings and emotions , that should be good enough.


- "They have shown" to demonstrate a degree of response and a degree of reaction ed that is all.

You wish to claim these are "feelings" and "emotions" but those are merely the terms you and those who support your side of this debate wish to claim.

You want to claim the undeveloped and underdeveloped have full emotional responses and reactions but there are very very many who do not agree with this interpretation at all.

It is not a proven matter, how could it be?

.......and I take it that in a foetus where there is no such response and reaction you'll feel perfectly happy about abortion then, hmmm?
Yeah right.


but 90% of abortions are for birth control and conveinence, if we could at least stop those.


- According to you.
This wouldn't be one of those 76.987% of statistics are made up on the spot to support a particular case now would it?


......and even if you were able to dictate that women - many of whom would be incapable of adequate child support - must be forced to bear children they do not wish to have, what then?
Being the right-winger that you are you surely do not advocate anything but a life of support-free misery.


And it is all up to the mother


- Ha! Who was not expecting that!?
No surprises there then.



unless it comes time to pay for things then the father has a 50% share if not more but no say so in the life of his child, whats fair and right about that?


- It's not the father who faces the consequences.
Calcium loss, wrecked backs and the entire trauma of childbirth to name a few.

Wise up ed.



posted on Mar, 10 2005 @ 08:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by sminkeypinkeyWise up ed.



Well wise up or grow up?

It is a piece of non living , non living flesh to you.......fine.


Abort your kids and that gene of yours will not be passed down.


IT IS A LIFE, A HUMAN LIFE, WITH FEELINGS!


And 99.989425678% of Fetus's when asked prefer to not be murdered and to be given a chance at life.......which in itself is a miracle.



posted on Mar, 11 2005 @ 05:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
Well wise up or grow up?


- Tune in and wise up is my comment ed.
A short session of huff and puff does not give a guy the right to dictate the rest of a womans life.

Get over it.


It is a piece of non living , non living flesh to you.......fine.


- You see this is actually a lie.

I have never said a foetus is non living flesh.

I have, however, said that it is not yet a developed human being and that treating one as if it were is, IMO, wrong.


Abort your kids and that gene of yours will not be passed down.


- My genes have passed on alright ed, don't you be worrying about that.
Strangely enough a significant proportion of abortions are performed on women, in stable relationships, who already have families and who do not want (usually for financial reasons) any more kids.

How does fundy evangelicalism view the 'just say no' arguement when it comes to 'conjugal rights', hmmm?
Sadly there is no form of contraception that is 100% effective.


IT IS A LIFE, A HUMAN LIFE, WITH FEELINGS!


- ed mate, all the capital letters in the world don't alter the fact that it is a very undeveloped human life and not the same as a born live human life.


And 99.989425678% of Fetus's when asked prefer to not be murdered and to be given a chance at life.......which in itself is a miracle.


-
stats huh?
I don't deny life is amazing.

But living, for many, isn't about about gazing around ourselves in a state of amazed bliss.
Sadly the practicalities and realities and consequences of life are inescapable too.

I have yet to meet an abortion enthusiast, but nevertheless whilst I can respect the personal opinion of those that see abortion as wrong for them I also fully respect the view of those who see it as the least worst option and right for them.

I also do not think people have the right to dicatate others behaviour in this either.
If you don't like abortion, great, make sure you never have one then.

(and as for the arguement that some public money is spent on this?
What?
There's a sh*tload of deeply objectional stuff my tax money goes toward.)

[edit on 11-3-2005 by sminkeypinkey]



posted on Mar, 11 2005 @ 05:30 AM
link   
Tell me sminkey, at what point in yor opinion does an unborn chld deserve the same rghts and protections as those who are born?



posted on Mar, 11 2005 @ 05:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by mwm1331
Tell me sminkey, at what point in yor opinion does an unborn chld deserve the same rghts and protections as those who are born?


- That's a much more interesting question.

Personally I would say that this is obviously a variable that is never going to be decided or agreed universally.

For instance; if one is the proudly expectant parents it will be from the first moment of pregnancy being confirmed.

On the other hand if one is the expectant deeply unwilling parent it will possibly never 'deserve' the same status.

That being the case these 'rights' are always going to be seen by some as applying from the moment of conception by some and at or close to the moment of birth for others.



posted on Mar, 11 2005 @ 05:54 AM
link   
One of my problems with current abortion laws sminkey is the arbitrary nature of the cut off.
Currently the cutoff is 24 weeks I beleve, my problem is what abot the fetus that s 23 weeks and 6 days?
I think we can both agree that there are no fundamental dfferences or devolpments that happen or change in that 24 hour period correct?
So why does that 24 hour period mean the difference between lfe and death?
Now to be fair we either need to legalise all abortions up to the moment of delvery or outlaw all abortions period.
But to say that a fetus is just a bundle of cells one day, and a unborn child the very next just doesn't make sense.



posted on Mar, 11 2005 @ 06:06 AM
link   
I suppose this is simply an example of the nature of law mwm.

I don't really see how it can operate differently as it often must define in absolute terms which (as with so many subjects) leaves it wide open to this kind of reasonable criticism at the 'margin'.
But that will always be so irrespective of where that margin actually is.

The line was decided on the basis of best available advice and here it is.
It's not perfection and never will be as with all human constructs but it is the best compromise we can devise in the circumstances.

(But if you look back in this tread a little you will see the figures I've quoted showing that - in the case of the UK anyway - the great majority of abortions are performed at or before 10 - 13 wks.)



posted on Mar, 12 2005 @ 05:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by mwm1331
But to say that a fetus is just a bundle of cells one day, and a unborn child



Well,




I think he would beg to differ with a description of a parasitic bunch of cells wouldn't you?



posted on Mar, 12 2005 @ 07:19 PM
link   
I particularly like the way the little fella grabbed his finger. I bet his little arm would pull back if it were a plan paranthood butcher cutting the little hand off. That is what they get paid to do! Not bad for a bunch of cells. Kinda like like a petri dish, Not


[edit on 12-3-2005 by Reaganwasourgreatest]



posted on Mar, 12 2005 @ 09:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Reaganwasourgreatest I bet his little arm would pull back if it were a plan paranthood butcher cutting the little hand off. That is what they get paid to do! Not bad for a bunch of cells. Kinda like like a petri dish, Not


What? Cutting the hand off? No, that is not what they do, they DRILL its skull and then suck out the brains, but it is just cells, they have no feelings no pain, no joy, no sadness, no feelings at all.

What you see in the picture is just a nervous system reflex, you know like when you fart.....



posted on Mar, 13 2005 @ 08:11 AM
link   
You can attempt to shock all you like ed but it still doesn't alter the fact that an undeveloped unborn feotus (at 10 or 13wks or even 24wks) is not the same as a developed live person.

Sorry and all but there you are, that's just the facts of the matter and we aren't for changing our laws any time soon over it either.

(What you guys try to do in todays 'Christian' Fundamentalist states of America is entirely your affair but I suspect when it comes to it even there you lot are in the minority too)



posted on Mar, 13 2005 @ 06:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
You can attempt to shock all you like ed but it still doesn't alter the fact that an undeveloped unborn feotus (at 10 or 13wks or even 24wks) is not the same as a developed live person.


Well no kidding, you mean the Lakers will not be drafting fetus's for the NBA? Of course they differ, but they still are human and still have feelings. It amazes me how the turdblossom left can say that a fetus has no feelings and can be killed, but yet here in California the turdblossom crowd wishes to ban fishing cause it hurts the fish's feelings when you drop it in a deep fryer! Go figure...



posted on Mar, 13 2005 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
Of course they differ, but they still are human and still have feelings.


- This is just a line.
Propaganda.

You can continue to insist they do all you like but you have no way of proving this and you are going against the facts of bodily development.


It amazes me how the turdblossom left can say that a fetus has no feelings and can be killed


- WTF is this "turdblossom" BS?
Are you like 5yrs old or something and incapable of talking a subject over without some sort of smug self satisfying insulting nonsense?

Seriously, you surprise me with that kind of infantilism ed.

Anyhoo.....

Mostly because at such an early stage (when abortion is permitted) we can be certain that so much of the brains development has not yet happened etc etc.


but yet here in California the turdblossom crowd wishes to ban fishing cause it hurts the fish's feelings when you drop it in a deep fryer! Go figure...


- No, this is simply not so. Come on ed, you know better than this.

They are referring to animal cruelty. They believe that killing and cruelty to a live developed born animal (or in this case a fish) is wrong and should be stopped.

I disagree with their view but frankly I see it as little different to many anti-abortionists in terms of the, for some, irrational justifying their fascist instincts and extremist desire to force others to their view on a subject.
Just because they hold extreme and utterly absolutist views.

(......and since when were all those into 'animal rights' of the left - or that extreme - anyway?

I suppose Bhuddists are a bunch of lefties now, hmmm?

The idea that 'all life is sacred' - wow get the irony there! - is a marxist concept is it?
:lol



posted on Mar, 13 2005 @ 08:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey

- WTF is this "turdblossom" BS?
Are you like 5yrs old or something and incapable of talking a subject over without some sort of smug self satisfying insulting nonsense?

Seriously, you surprise me with that kind of infantilism ed.


Funny you should say that. It seems that turdblossom was mentioned by a Mod as an acceptable term to use and since people were mad at me for calling them liberal or leftists or treehuggers, I just lumped them all together and used someone else's creation as it seemed fitting.

Now you have it , the rest of the story........

As for no feelings? So what week would you make this claim?



posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 06:58 AM
link   
I could care less what a mod said about the turd thing ed; it's a sad small and very childish insult you've 'snuck through'; how amusing (well, maybe for all of 5 - 10 seconds) but is that what you want this place descending to?

Wise up.


Originally posted by edsinger

As for no feelings? So what week would you make this claim?


- That was partly how come 24wks was settled upon in the UK a while back.
That and the ability to - in an extreme minority of cases - maintain the life of a desparately premature baby born at that point.

(but as I have already mentioned when born at that age even if they do survive it is not a case of living a normal life from then on for at least 50%)

I can also turn this question back to you, at what week can you say brain development is such that feelings and emotions are possible?

Certainly in view of the fact that the great majority of UK abortions are performed at 10wks and over 85% by 13wks are you claiming a 10 - 13wk old foetus has sufficient brain development to experience these "feelings" and "emotions"?

(

87% of abortions were carried out at under 13 weeks gestation; 58% were at under 10 weeks

www.publications.doh.gov.uk... )

(......and as for your repeated use of the abortion pictures?
What did you think ed?
Do you think some people don't know the whole business is unpleasant?
Do you not see a degree of hypocrisy in claiming to feel revulsion with abortion yet only being too keen to post lurid pics as often as possible? Was the once not sufficient?

Maybe you could post some other horrid looking pics of some other surgical proceedures, do you think that would put people off of them?


......and for all that a recognisable body outline is hardly showing the whole story regarding the issue of development and consciousness.)



posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 07:14 AM
link   


from www.soul.org.nz...
A foetus has a distinctive human genetic code of its own from the moment of conception and from eight weeks gestation it has the bodily form and appearance of a human being. And is protected by the amnionic sac, filled with fluid, inside the child moves and swims. From eight weeks gestation it has all its human organs, organ structures and systems present and functioning.

“Nothing changes from that point except size and refinement of working parts, changes that continue through adulthood.”[8]

Though a small percentage of abortions do happen before, it is between eight and 12 weeks that over 90% of New Zealand abortions take place.Foetus eight weeks.

8 weeks (2 months g.a.)
At eight weeks the unborn child is called a foetus and is approximately half an inch long. The arms and legs have formed, and lengthened, fingers and toes have developed - fingerprints already engraved on them. Veins are clearly visible, kidneys and liver are functioning. The nostrils are plugged up with protective material and the eyelids and palms of the hands are sensitive to touch. Milk teeth are budding in the gums and ears may bear a family resemblance.

“If eyelids is stroked, child squirms. If palm is stroked, fingers close into a small fist.” [9]

9 weeks
The foetus will bend it fingers around an object placed in the palm of it’s hand, finger nails are forming and it can even suck it’s thumb.

“All structures completed; only development and growth from now on.”[10]

10 weeksFoetus ten weeks, picture approximately life size.
The body is sensitive to touch and the foetus is now capable of squinting, puckering up it’s brow and frowning. If the forehead is touched the foetus will turn his head away. Arm movement, bending from the elbow and wrist, happen independently of each other. Now the foetus swallows the embryonic fluid. The heart is almost completely developed and resembles very closely that of a new born baby.

11 weeks
Foetus eleven weeks.The foetus is now more than 7 cm long and bones and ribs are forming quickly. It makes complex facial expressions and can even smile. The foetus urinates and fingernails have started to form.

Soon, as the fetus’ living quarters get more cramped and as it gains strength, the mother will begin to feel the sharp kick and thrust of a foot, knee or elbow.[11]

12 weeks Foetus twelve weeks.
The foetus is now between 8 -10 cm long and a coating of vernix coreosa covers the skin protecting it from the lengthy exposure to the fluid. The vocal cords are complete and the foetus can (and does) sometimes cry (silently due to the lack of air). Activity has become vigorous and distinctly individual behavioural patterns are apparent. The foetus is capable of kicking it’s legs, turning feet, curling and fanning toes, making a fist, moving it’s thumbs independently of the fingers, bending the wrist, turning its head, opening and closing the mouth, pressing the lips tightly together making complex facial expressions. The foetus swallows regularly, practises it’s breathing and can urinate. The brain is now fully formed and most scientists agree the foetus can feel pain (many scientiists claim pain sensation occurs as early as 8 weeks). The eyelids cover the eyes; they will not open until the seventh month in order to protect the optical nerve fibres. The foetus sleeps, wakes and exercises.

back to top

The Second Trimester

13 weeks (3 months g.a.) Foetus fourteen weeks.
The foetus is approximately 12 -13 cm long. The nose, lips and ears are easily recognisable and the facial features resemble the parents. Reflexes are strong and movements are graceful and flowing. Sex organs are visible and primitive sperm and egg cells are present. Fine hair has begun to grow on the head and the sex of the foetus is easily discernible.

Sminkey it may be interesting for you to take note of the bolded quote. Contrry to your belief, by week 8 the fetus is a whole human, whle some devolpment and growth is still ongong, it is a complete human with all organs and systems.


Now tell me again how this fetus is not human?



additional sources
www.spucscotland.org...
www.askbaby.com...
www.spuc.org.uk...

[edit on 14-3-2005 by mwm1331]

[edit on 14-3-2005 by mwm1331]



posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 08:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by mwm1331
Now tell me again how this fetus is not human?


- Why would I ever do that?

Just what species do you imagine I'm supposed to think a human foetus to be other than human, hmmm?

I do not doubt for one moment that the basis for a human being exists from the moment of conception.
I do not dispute that recognisable body parts are there and begining to function.
I do not dispute that reflex movements and measurable reactions to stimulii are observable either although interpreting these as 'feelings' or extrapolating them to the extent of conscious 'emotion' is simply a matter of faith and chosen belief as far as I am concerned.

......and what?

I do however contest that this potential human life - even though alive - should be treated as if it were the same as a born living human being.

I do not believe it to be so.
I do not believe it to be an aware conscious developed life with 'rights' that should come before those of the born living.

I will agree that when the time of it being able to survive independantly comes (we in the UK have said this is at 24wks currently) that the matter changes and abortion should be illegal.
I will also agree that as medical technology moves on this time limit may be subject to change (in the UK it used to be 28wk and there is currently talk of reducing it to 22 or 20wks).

I doubt we will end up agreeing on this but I will be honesy with you mwm I am not swayed in the slightest by anything you, ed or any of the anti-abortion crowd have said on this issue so far.......

..... and I am quite certain the reverse holds true too.

(BTW mwm I do not give people like spuc the slightest credibility in this debate, they are simply an anti-abortion pressure group, have been for decades, and have been shown to pick and chose, slant and spin as well as the best of them.)



[edit on 14-3-2005 by sminkeypinkey]



posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 08:53 AM
link   
Sminkey I am not saying the fetus should have more rights than a born child or a born adult human, I am saying it deserves the same rights.

How can you honeslty feel that a Mothers right not to be inconveninced is greater than the right of a fetus to live?
Does it bother you at all that we value a womans social life more than a human?

Your orginal argument was that a fetus is not developed enough to survive outside of the womb, but neither can an infant unless someone takes care of it.

Lock a newborn in a closet for a week and it dies. It to is "parasitic" in nature.

However long before a fetus is legally protected it has all organs and systems assoiciated with a fully developed human.
It has reflex responses as well as a demonstrable abillity to ineract with its environment.

The human bran after birth is still devolping, it does not fully develop untill 16 or so.
physically the human body does not finish developing untill after puberty.

Yet no one would argue abortion should be legal untill the 868th week

You seem to place so much emphasis on the fact that the fetus is still developing yet disregard the fact that it will continue to do so untill about 15-16.

The fact is I was able to proive that between the 8th and 13th week when most aboertions are performed a fetus s nearly complete.
Up to and including all organs and systems.
In other words it is a complete human by that point.
Not partial, complete.
That is what is being killed a complete human being.
anything else is semantics.



posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 09:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by mwm1331
Sminkey I am not saying the fetus should have more rights than a born child or a born adult human, I am saying it deserves the same rights.


- OK, but to be clear I don't see this as you saying a foetus should have 'more rights'.

I am simply saying that consideration of the rights of the born living must come long before those of the unborn.


How can you honeslty feel that a Mothers right not to be inconveninced is greater than the right of a fetus to live?


- You may feel inclined to describe utterly blighted lives as mere inconvenience mwm but I do not.

I do not see a sub 24wk foetus as 'a child''. A potential child yes, of course, but not actually a child.

Therefore halting that development and destroying that foetus - even though the proceedure may be surrounded with possible lifelong emotional issues for mother/those concerned - is nothing like equivelent to 'murder for convenience' etc etc to me.

Sorry but it just isn't.

All things considered I still say that abortion is the least worst outcome in some circumstances and should therefore be legal with some limitations applied........

.....although not those that actually have the practical effect of making it impossible to obtain (it looks as though some in the USA are so dishonest on the matter as to try and pull that little 'dodge').


Does it bother you at all that we value a womans social life more than a human?


- Actually mwm I am bothered so much more by the callous disregard we have about the living conditions and standards of most live human beings in the world, including very young born live children.

When a society spends more feeding it's pets than it does giving to the world's starving children there is something very wrong with it IMO.

For (so many of your/our) political parties/representitves to ignore that but spend vast amounts of passion, time and effort argueing for banning abortion seems to me to be somewhat incredible if not downright deeply suspect.



Your orginal argument was that a fetus is not developed enough to survive outside of the womb, but neither can an infant unless someone takes care of it.


- Oh come on, that is nothing like analogous. A sub-24wk old foetus cannot survive even mere moments alone.


Lock a newborn in a closet for a week and it dies. It to is "parasitic" in nature.


- Again this is a daft point IMO.

Lock anyone in a closet without water for much more than a week and we all can die, we are all parasitic in that manner.

What is that supposed to prove?


However long before a fetus is legally protected it has all organs and systems assoiciated with a fully developed human.
It has reflex responses as well as a demonstrable abillity to ineract with its environment.


- Ok fair enough but these are all potentials, to try and claim this means we are talking about a conscious person - whos rights should come before the born conscious living - is IMO absurd.


The human bran after birth is still devolping, it does not fully develop untill 16 or so.
physically the human body does not finish developing untill after puberty.

Yet no one would argue abortion should be legal untill the 868th week


- This is silly. Of course the brain and body continue to develop, and what?
The state of (un)development of the foetus at less than 24wks is so early that you cannot possibly equate it with a live conscious person.


You seem to place so much emphasis on the fact that the fetus is still developing yet disregard the fact that it will continue to do so untill about 15-16.


- That is because the development before birth is so enormous behind what will come later.


The fact is I was able to proive that between the 8th and 13th week when most aboertions are performed a fetus s nearly complete.
Up to and including all organs and systems.
In other words it is a complete human by that point.
Not partial, complete.
That is what is being killed a complete human being.
anything else is semantics.


- Sorry mwm I do not think you 'proved' anything of the sort.

Like I said, an outline and the earliest stages of physical development are nothing like the same as a conscious developed human being.
It is far from 'complete'.
(On can only claim it 'complete' if you utterly ignore the importance of gestational development.
I do not do that.)

To claim otherwise is IMO mere semantics.......

......or an almost religious-like belief.
You are entitled to your opinions of course, if you ever get a majority of opinion you might even be able to force your beliefs on many others but for the moment I and those like me are the majority (and we will not be forcing you to do anything).

If you don't feel abortion is right for you great don't have one, for those that do the possibility is there.





top topics
 
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join