For all you Pro-Choicers

a reply to: Peeple

My post is highlighting the hypocrisy of saying it is ok to kill another living being because it simply does not affect other people. If that is the only requirement then likewise killing a 2 year old could have that same argument.

Sperm are living like skin cells are alive. If you are trying to say there is no difference between sperm and a fertilized egg then I must respectfully tell you to take some biology classes.

Does sperm have it's own unique DNA? Does a fertilized egg?

If your argument is that consciousness determines whether a living being is "human" then I should be able to kill anyone without consciousness, they simply are no longer human.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

False, I am following the science.

If someone committed a crime and they had blood from the perpetrator, what can they do to figure out who the guilty person is?

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Most people make a will they want to be turned off if they ever happen to end up without consciousness and that is perfectly acceptable. Since the fetus is a part of the women's body but without consciousness it's her decision. Not yours. Not in the first case and not in the second.

a reply to: Peeple

And if their will states don't turn it off and keep it going, why do I need to follow it. They have no consciousness, they are not a person. A will without a person behind it isn't worth the paper is printed on. Either they are still a person despite not being conscious, or they aren't.

The fetus is part of the woman's body? So if I do a DNA test of the fetus and the woman they will come back the same?

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Are the bombs made in America, sold to isreal for a nice profit? Just like they are being sold to the Saudis that are killing off kids in whatever country they are committing genocide at the current time?
Not sure if it really matters much if its us dropping the bombs (which we have dropped our fair share of over the past few decades) or if its one of our puppets that we've sold the weapons to for the proxi wars we orchestrate for our benefit.
It still removed much of the credibility if the people proclaiming how life is so sacred are also pushing for wars and making arms deals.
The life of the unborn is not more precious than the lives of the children born. It's not more precious than the women (or child) who's body it dwells in.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

The will is like a testament a decent person would honour it for the consciousness that made it. But practically speaking I guess there isn't a reason to keep the machines running if there's no chance they will come back.

The fetus doesn't have to have the same DNA it can't survive outside the woman's body that's the important part.

a reply to: Peeple

The will is invalid using your logic. The person is dead, living wills only exist as long as a person .. well, is a person. Your logic, no consciousness, no person, ergo living will is invalidated.

Getting back to the topic more and your comment on survival. So whether someone is a person or not is dictated by medical science? At 3 weeks a fetus that can't survive today is not a person, and in 100 years when they can survive due to advances in science they are a person?

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

They're still not a person yet but you could adopt all of them if their potential life is indeed that important to you.

If they'd use human cells for this would that be a person to you? And if not why?

a reply to: Peeple
So now you are changing your definition of person, why is that? Why can't you stick to one definition. This is your 3rd time changing it.

Like I said, respectfully, take a biology class. A cell alone does not a person make. A skin cell is not a person. A muscle cell is not a person. That is why the sperm argument is quite silly.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

I'm not changing my definition at all I'm trying to figure out what yours is. Sperms are alive. Cells are alive.
So what makes a person a person?

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

False, I am following the science.

How does science dictate morality and determine criminal activity?

If a mom decided she really needs a break from her two year old she can hire a sitter for a few hours.
If she is sick and needs rest she can also call a sitter.
If a five year old starts to behave in a manner that endangers a sibling or other members of the family he can be removed from the family for a time, given mental health care hopefully reunited later when it's safe to do so.
If mom just up and decides she just doesn't want the kid anymore she can just abandon it at a hospital, fire station, church, or police station.

But what if a pregnancy is undermining a woman's ability to the point where she can't care for her two year old? Its not like She can drop the unborn child off anywhere in someone's care. And what if its a problem that will last for months and there's no one around she can rely on for help? What if its a choice between terminating a pregnancy or putting a two year old through the tramatic experience of foster care?

If any living breathing person is bugging the heck out of you, doing things that are making you sick, or threatening you, you can remove yourself from their presence. And in some states with stand your ground laws you might even get away with shooting them. That isn't an option when it comes to pregnancy.
That's the difference between a fetus and a two year old!

a reply to: JoeGee

Congratulations on your beautiful wee girl, nothing will come close to making you as happy as you will be bringing her up.

I think the majority of the pro-choice crowd are terrified of having to bring up children, it means less time concentrating on themselves, sacrifice, compromise, responsibility etc.

Glad at least one person has turned the corner.

Abortion is murder of the worst kind, against a completely innocent and defenceless little baby. That little girl would never have had a name, never shown you her smile and never given you the joy you have now should you have killed her before she even had a chance at life. Well done sir, i hope you do everything in your power to be a great dad for her.

a reply to: eletheia

I have 2 scenarios for you.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. A pregnant woman and her partner are expecting a baby, she is 8 months gone and the baby is due in a month. They have decorated the nursery, bought everything they need, have picked name for the baby, can't wait for their arrival.
She is assaulted in the street on the way home from work, lets say someone robbed her for her handbag and she tried to fight them off, as a result of the assault she loses the baby through a miscarriage. She was clearly pregnant to the assailant yet he kicks her in the stomach.

2. A non pregnant woman is assaulted in the street, receives a kick to the stomach and has no other injuries.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Do you think both of these crimes should be punished equally or should we attribute any kind of value at all to the child she was carrying and had already devoted herself to?

originally posted by: Nyiah
a reply to: JoeGee

Dude, unless you're a post-op FtM, you didn't have an abortion yourself.

Also, you were in no position at 16 to take care of YOURSELF competently on your own dime, let alone a baby. Obvious adult with sufficient income today is obvious.

What do you want, a pat on the back and a ticker tape parade? You made choices for a damn good reason each time. Why do you need belly-rubbed & good boy-ed for it now?

Wow seems like the prolifers get what he’s saying and the pro choices don’t. I think that’s the point.
For the OP.. a beautiful child who will give you many years of joy I’m sure.

a reply to: JoeGee

Is there any point whatsoever to your story, other than the fact that it was the right choice for you personally? No? No other point at all? Okay, then.

Does the fact that it was the right choice for you mean that people who were impregnated by a rapist, or by someone who took advantage of them when they were inebriated, or who has a condition that puts their life at risk if they carry through with a pregnancy, should also not consider abortion? Does the fact that it was the right choice for you mean it must necessarily be the right choice for everyone else, as well? No? Every case is different, and your individual case has no bearing whatsoever on the choices of others? No? Okay, then.
I am also a single parent. I also struggle from paycheck to paycheck. However, i'm not smug enough or narcissistic enough to think that my individual circumstance gives me the right to tell others what choices to make or dictate what others should do with their lives and health, or that my individual circumstance is somehow proof of some universal truth that applies in every single circumstance. Unlike, clearly, you.

Congrats on being happy. It doesnt mean that it gives you any authority on the subject or right to dictate to others what they should do with their lives. Thinking otherwise is incredibly smug.

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: MisterSpock
The vast majority of children come at unexpected times, I can't imagine anyone in the past 80 years ever thinking they were mentally and financially ready for the "burden" of having children.

It's one of the obstacles of life. Like anything, waiting until you are "ready" to overcome something you see coming will just leave you never ready.

In the end, the struggle and the reward always is worth the effort. Your daughter is lucky to have such a wonderful father.

The left thinks that sex is a Constitutional right and there should be no consequences for personal actions.

Much less "planning" for having a child.

They are children themselves, mentally.

I think a win/win situation should be that if you identify as Pro-Choice then you should just be sterilized.

After all, as they point out, having a child shouldn't be a burden if you are a child yourself.

This is legitimately one of the sigle most idiotic, uninformed, and just plain disgusting posts i have ever read in my life. I would be embarrassed for you, Lumenari, if you werent clearly such a despicable person.

originally posted by: JoeGee
a reply to: Hazardous1408

Well the point of any rant is that maybe some can learn from my story and they can take responsibility for their fidelity and the consequences, and usher into this world the greatest thing science or god has given us.

Wow. You are even more smug and narcisstic than i realized. Thank you for opening our eyes, as none of us pro-lifers had any idea whatsoever that life was precious or that having a child could be rewarding, until you came along and enlightened us!
Get your head out of your a**. Everyone is aware of these things. Your story doesnt illustrate anything whatsoever that everybody wasnt already fully aware of. Again, your personal circumstances have absolutely no bearing or relation whatsoever to those of other people, and give you zero authority on the subject and zero right to tell others what to do with their own lives and health.

originally posted by: MisterSpock


Spoiler for the sudo intellectual "philosopher". The meaning of life is to reproduce(biologically, we are the only species that attempts to answer an obvious question due to our "superior" sense of consciousness), it drives every species on earth. It's ingrained in the very basis of our consciousness(the bios if you will). I find it a fascinating thought experiment.

It's absolutely hilarious that you are trying to make fun of others for being pseudo intellectuals, when you are so unintelligent that you spelled pseudo as "sudo." How embarrassing.

(Also, what thought experiment? There is nothing even remotely resembling to a thought experiment in your comment. You just repeated something that everyone learns in 7th grade science, the most basic science imaginable, and tried to pass it off as some kind of genius insight. With nothing resembling a thought experiment.
Hey guys, when you heat a liquid it turns into a gas. I find it a fascinating thought experiment! Lol.)

originally posted by: Grenade

I think the majority of the pro-choice crowd are terrified of having to bring up children, it means less time concentrating on themselves, sacrifice, compromise, responsibility etc.

Many pro-choicers (such as myself) ARE parents, you ignorant clown. What an amazingly stupid and ignorant comment. Absurdly ignorant. You should honestly be ashamed of saying something so incredibly uninformed and ignorant.