Abortion, the death penalty, and euthanasia , page 2

reply to post by A Fortiori

---

You make a great point about technology. It is a double edged sword. While it has made possible miraculous recoveries when no hope was given it also places a responsibility on the medical community and families involved.

In the end though the preservation of life until all means are exhausted is how it must be if we are to remain a civil society.
_________________________
Back on the topic -

Just a couple of decades ago the thought of euthanizing less than perfect children would have been to horrible to imagine. After just one generation of the willful taking of childrens lives for a convenience serious discussion is taking place about murdering less than perfect children or the elderly. It is a sign that this act of putting so little value on the lives of our own babies is like a disease that is permeating society.

Look at the medical community and how they have reduced us to nothing more than a pile of meat. We have M.D.'s who can actually find it within themselves to crush the skull of a partially born child and murder it simply because the Mother wants their own baby killed and is willing to pay for it. A handful are willing to do this even though they know a C-Section would be better for the Mother and the Child could be spared. It is murder pure and simple.

I've discussed this with three MD's including a Surgeon in my immediate family and they all tell me there is never a legitimate medical reason not to choose a C-Section over a partial birth abortion. They were all sickened by the fact any MD would even consider doing it, let alone that people would actually consider making it legal.

This sickness in our society can not lead to anything good.

reply to post by ModernAcademia

---

While it is certainly true there are many innocent men and women in prison it is also true that a number of guilty men and women have gotten off free of charge.

I think all justice systems are getting better for the most part but they are far from perfect. I do not believe we will ever achieve a perfect justice system anywhere on the planet. The only way to know for sure who committed the crime would be some sort of mind reading machine. In the case of that we would need to consider the right not to incriminate oneself.

Raist

reply to post by thisguyrighthere

---

That is certainly an interesting take on it. But that leads to other questions though.

Should we allow parents that have children that are born and living under their roof to kill the child if they no longer want them?

I ask because certainly if a woman were to abort a perfectly healthy 8 month along baby it is not much different, at least in my opinion.

In a case such as this it might be the mother has a form of mental illness. This could lead to other questions though such as forced sterilization but that is another thread (I’ll work on that one for later lol).

Your view certainly seems harsh in a way and I can almost understand your not wanting to impose on others unless it interferes with you. So I must ask are there any cases in which you would impose on another that was not bothering you? Say if a killer or child abuser were living next door and you knew and had proof, would you report them? I know there are those out there that are this way.

Raist

reply to post by uaocteaou

---

I agree a woman has a right to her body. But it does take two to make the child. Should the father be allowed a say? If so and the father wants the child aborted but the mother does not should he be released from financial responsibility? If the father wants the child and the mother does not he could be forced to pay all financials involved, including the mothers time off from work?

Raist

reply to post by intrepid

---

I agree with adoption over abortion in the case of birth control. I think a great number of society’s worldwide refuse to take responsibility for their actions, thus leading to the world that has become what it is.


Interesting thoughts on the death penalty. I was for it at one time until I came across many interviews of inmates that would rather be dead than keep living in prison for life. I being one that wants punishment for the worst of society to be fitting of them liked the idea of them suffering the life of prison life. Aside from those that would harm children and I already mentioned my regards for them and how they should be dealt with. Again though, my bias against the criminal element shows though.


I am sorry to hear about your grandfather. If you do not mind my asking, was it his choice that should he become like this such a thing would happen before hand or did he decide that during that time? At least he passed peacefully though. Do you think they should allow for people that find out early on they have a terminal illness to go out peacefully or should we make them wait until the end is closer? I ask because what happens when we find out the doctors made a mistake and someone has opted to end their life prematurely?

Raist

reply to post by Raist

---

I'm actually quite encouraged by the responses you are getting. The lack of flags though is likely due to people being fearful of even discussing these topics.

The rift between the Pro-Life and the Pro-Choice crowd will never be bridged. The Pro-Choice crowd is asking others who believe it to be murder to change their mind and condone murder. I don't know how anyone could demand such a thing from another person.

Because this is clearly a individual moral call on everyone's part, my point of view is somewhat different than most Pro-Life people. I think this is not a area the government should get involved in. The Pro-Choice / Pro-Life argument should not be a part of any Party Platform as no member of any Party should be expected to decide such a thing to be a member of a Party.

It is being wrongly used by both corrupt Parties to divide us. No matter what side people are on if they are Partisans they should demand their Party butt out of this topic. They should insist the government not get engaged in this topic. If they don't a point will come where the government forces it on us.

reply to post by Blaine91555

---

Wow, that is certainly two saddening stories you told.

I have heard and had conversations with women that have been through abortions and later regretted it. I believe they also went through a depression as well. I wonder though if it might be that they had a slight amount of doubt prior to the abortion but just tried to ignore it. I have also seen those who have had an abortion and they claim to be happier for it. Though I cannot tell either way as I really did not know how they lived prior to or after the abortion. For all I know they might have been calm relaxed girls prior and are now alcoholics.

I had mostly been in the mode of I would never condone one but if they happen they happen sort of mode most of my life. Then just over 4 years ago my first child, a son, who I have waited for, for many years was still born at 22 weeks. My wife did not know she was pregnant and woke me from a sleep I had been in for two hours after working a night shift.
She was terribly freaking out as you can imagine being that “something” was starting to come out of her. I kept my cool and got us to the hospital knowing in my heart what “it” was. I seen my son later after things had calmed down. I decided at that point I could never imagine someone killing that even while in the womb. He was a little person.

Since that day I decided that abortion was something that should not be done. But I also realized it will happen. So if it must happen I think there should be a time limit set in place that is lower than our current time limits. I do not think it should be any later than 7 weeks. At that point while I understand it is still a child the brain and heart are barely developed and perhaps any pain that might be felt will be less than further along.

Raist

reply to post by StevenDye

---

You bring up an interesting point with rape and abortion. I agree fully with you on the other points of abortion there are many illnesses that will kill the child soon after birth. At the same time I also have seen where a number of doctors were wrong and the child was completely healthy.

With rape though, you are right it is not the child’s fault. I am sure this will catch me some grief but I think unless the mental grief is too much the mother should at least try the adoption route. I have come across a few who say that their child from rape actually helped them get passed the event better. I understand though there are some who would most likely take their own life and at the same time that of the child if they had too.

Euthanasia with you brings out an interesting point as well. I think that you are right that the family should be removed for a set time and also there should be a family meeting as well. Maybe those left behind might better understand the feelings of the dying or visa-versa.

Sorry to hear about your argument with your friend I hope things work out fine.

Raist

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

---

you are right. We have disagreed many times. But I have always thought your posts were pretty well thought out, so I have admired you for that even if we did not always agree.

I think I like your view on the age of consent though some might want to go younger. If so I would not allow lower than 18.
I have always struggled with the idea of euthanasia because of a family member committing suicide and a part of me equating that to the same thing. His reasons were depression and alcohol related but he suffered his own view of worldly torment whether imagined or real. It is that reason that I have always found it difficult to chose a side completely on that issue though I do understand both side quite well.

I think those opposed to it feel they are missing out on the person life and some might be concerned for their souls. I think the majority though just do not want to let their loved ones go.

Thanks for your input. Certainly a day to remember with your agreeing with me.

Raist

reply to post by Bill_Door

---

I have not seen the celebrities or even the rich decide to have an abortion or not. For that I am glad as they are nothing more than selfish (insert foul language here) and should themselves be sterilized so that they never reproduce. I think most of them that do in their situation though try to keep it under cover so that everyone thinks they are great people and so that it does not harm their reputation.


When it comes to the death penalty if I was a juror in a case such as that I would not put in a vote for them to die if I had any doubt what so ever. But seeing as how I am opposed to the death penalty I most likely would not be a juror regardless.
You are right about some crimes though. I have mentioned many times and will continue to do so (yes I understand it is morally wrong, I accept that) that those who harm children should be tortured for the rest of their life. Hopefully in that case it would be a long life.

Raist

reply to post by A Fortiori

---

I never thought about the technology part of abortion.

I think I recall reading/hearing/seeing something about ancient abortions though it might have just been some vague dream I had as well.

I believe you are on to something though with the technology giving us the ability to make the decisions we do today. I guess in the cases of an unwanted child they could have murdered it soon after birth in times far in the past, but I also think that there would be many who might change their minds after seeing their child.

Maybe technology will end up being our downfall because it seems we embrace it before fully understanding all the repercussions.

Also off topic I must say I like this avatar better than you other one

Raist

reply to post by Blaine91555

---

You mentioned letting the newborns die shortly after birth. I have come across this on talk radio before but sadly only caught the very end of the discussion. I did not fully understand what was going on or even the name of the “procedure”.

I did though understand that they were just allowing newborns to die in another area without trying to help them. I was seriously appalled that someone could be so cruel. If you know what this is called or know of some links I would be interested in trying to understand their reasoning. It would also be a nice addition to the thread.

Sometimes my research takes me to things that bother me deep in my soul. I can feel it for days. This would probably be no different, but I also feel a need to try and understand the whys and what exactly it is.

Thanks

Raist

reply to post by Annee

---

That view of abortion though almost seems to be taking the easy road out.

There are many who believe that those who are born are not viable, Hitler being one of them. I highly doubt you agree with his views on human life. Do not worry I am not comparing you to him or saying you agree with him, just pointing to him as a case of point.

What about those who believe that people who are born are not viable?

Also I am not sure it is a good idea to base our laws around beliefs one hundred percent. It would be nice for me if all laws were based around my beliefs but others might not agree. Also if my beliefs could be made into law so could someone else’s. I do not want to live fully under the beliefs of another.

Maybe they should be based more around understanding and beliefs both.

Raist

Originally posted by Raist
reply to post by Annee

---

That view of abortion though almost seems to be taking the easy road out.

I am not telling you what to believe. Just stay out of mine. It is not a cop out. It is not for convenience - it IS my belief.

However - - I believe you asked for opinions - - I gave mine. I am not debating my belief on this thread.

reply to post by TheRedneck

---

As always you simply amaze me with how well you are at writing and wording things my friend.

It seems as if you and I are on pretty much exact agreements on this. Only difference is you worded your post much better than I could have. I hope that I can have your ability some day. I though tend to have trouble working everything out in my head as it all just wants to plot out on the keyboard leaving me with a nice little mess.


I really cannot add anything to your post, as you spelled it out so nicely. All I can say is that I fully agree with you post it is as if you seen the mess on my keyboard and put it all in it’s place.

Thanks

Raist

Wow, I just noticed you were a mod., as well. Congratulations on that. It seems a few on my friends list have reached that status.

reply to post by Raist


TheRedneck

reply to post by Raist

---

Abortion…well it depends on whether you feel that people are just their bodies in this one life, or if there is a soul that is everlasting and enduring which inhabits a body. If the latter then I do not see how that affects anything if an abortion is carried out. The soul will just inhabit a new body. Not only that but if there is agreement to our lives and interactions, these abortions would be part of that plan for people to learn lessons or feel or to have compassion for others.
If this is the only life there is, then that is a different question and becomes trickier. But I would not expect any woman who has been raped to ever have to bear that child. I would not expect someone who knows they cannot cope to bear a child and have that child have an unhappy life. I would not have any man ever having any say or control over a woman having to have a child, as they do not have to go through 9 months bearing it…unless he agrees to his penis being dispensed with in lieu. Although there probably should be a time limit on when one can have an abortion.

Death penalty. Nobody can take the moral high ground whilst wishing to kill in order to avenge the death of another, so I am dead against it. Also, if one wants real revenge then a lifetime in prison is even crueller really, regardless of the comfort levels.

Euthanasia is certainly a slippery slope. Given all the talk over government run health care there is likely to be such events taking place regardless of our feelings. The money for the care has to come from some place and I find it difficult to believe that our government cares about someone who is 80 and not going to be putting money into the tax system.

Please let’s not talk about shortage of money as an argument to condone euthanising people, when that self serving narcissist in power has spent millions just taking his wife on trips, holidays, meals, and flying in lobster while people starve. When more money is spent killing in illegal and ridiculous wars which cost trillions, than in helping the people to live. When trillions go ‘unaccounted’ for the scum to do evil deeds, or when the banks and elite are robbing us blind. There is enough money to keep everyone alive, fed and happy if the administrations and puppet masters of this world did not view the masses as useless animals to be disposed of. We have NO control over where any money is spent so nobody can argue about ‘their’ money being spent.
And although I agree with abortion, feeling that we are first and foremost souls. I also feel that once we are here we have a right to live that life, and nobody has the right to curtail it except ourselves.
If someone really is in so much pain and despair that they want to die that is one thing, but for governments to wish to dispose of the elderly, disabled or terminally ill because it’s cheaper, so they get to cream off even more for themselves is evil beyond compare.
Just a point…someone who is 80 has put far more money into the corrupt system than someone who is 30.…so who actually has more right to treatment with that argument?

As for technology keeping people alive ‘unnaturally’…which would we rather; spending all that money (which is apparently in such a shortage) on technology for bombing the moon in an act of idiocy, or keeping someone alive? Do remember that people have come out of comas after many years of being considered vegetables…and some seem to know what has gone on around them while in the coma…so they would also know they were about to be killed too.

As a side note, which one of those evil buffoons in power was it who wrote a paper suggesting that it was best to allow a child with a disability to actually be born, so that the mother could then see that the child was not normal and then agree to have it killed, so that the mother could then choose to have a ‘normal’ child instead. The thinking being that it was less emotionally upsetting to see the evidence of disability and then kill the child rather than aborting it. Probably the same sicko who felt that an intelligent border collie was of more use than a mentally retarded two year old. What an evil place this world is turning into.

Breaking News: Judge Doesn\'t Rule, Secretary of State Doesn\'t Agree - Obama NOT off
  Posted 17 days ago with 39 member flags

On why America is in denial and Ron Paul will not be elected
  Posted 19 days ago with 21 member flags

Study says racists and conservatives are dumb
  Posted 9 days ago with 16 member flags

As of feb 9th, Canada\'s own version of SOPA: Bill C-11 will kill more of your freedom
  Posted 15 days ago with 11 member flags

Is ‘anti-Canadianism’ the new ‘anti-Americanism?’
  Posted 18 days ago with 8 member flags

Councilman wants sheriff to stop urging people to get pistol permits
  Posted 16 days ago with 7 member flags

Clarification on the definition of "natural born citizen"
  Posted 16 days ago with 7 member flags

ATS is not as awake as it should be. You might still be sleeping...
  Posted 8 days ago with 7 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: