Abortion, Genocide, what’s THE difference?!?!?!?!?.... do you condone murder???

Originally posted by spolcyc
The only two occurrences I can see are when the mother is practically guaranteed to die due to birth of the child, and when a girl can prove she was raped and becomes pregnant. Even though if I was a girl in that situation I would put the baby up for adoption, saving a gift from god and allowing a family who can't conceive on their own the gift of a child.

Great - - - then don't get an abortion.

I am so sick of "other people's" believes - - - infringing on my Rights.

You people are pathetic. An unborn fetus is a pre-born adult human being. Don't get this confused. A fetus may not resemble a human at its earliest stages, however it is most definitely a predisposed human life. If that human was developed enough to speak, I guarantee you it wouldn't cry "kill me!"

Lets put it this way:
Its not as much as what the fetus is currently, but what it will become. So lets argue, what will the fetus become? A human? A doctor who cures cancer? the president? Most likely any of those, and definitely the first. So If a fetus is automatically developed into a human, and there is NO DOUBT in anyone's mind that this will be the case; then the obvious response would be to treat this child like a human. A pre-human.

It must have rights like a human, for it will be a human; no matter what the cause.

The rape argument is a poor fallacy, I've known hundreds of individuals that came from an upbringing with a childhood similar to a bastard child that are much more driven and healthy characteristically. In a world where utility is sanctioned, a utilitarian viewpoint would say that the potential in this pre-human to be is much greater than the women giving birth. Thus keeping the child, logically would (and should) be a social progressive absolute.

In a case where the women may die if she gave birth, I would go as far as saying the child should live first, given the success ratio lifespan wise in contrast to the two humans. Chance for a successful scientist, engineer, etc are much higher in the unborn versus the current women.

Anyone who argues that the unborn child is worth more to this world than the pregnant mother (especially one of unsound mind enough to choice abortion) is a complete idiotic buffoon, who apparently has to foresight into humanity's future.

Great - - - then don't get an abortion. I am so sick of "other people's" believes - - - infringing on my Rights.

You are obviously a fool. Your rights against the Child's rights. If the ultimatum is death for one, and nothing but "raising the child" for the other. Then you are a selfish individual for even arguing your case.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Freenrgy2
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Didn't take long to bring up Hitler. Good for you.

Someday, my friend, someday this will be a reality.

Don't ya love it?




Then they throw around communism - - - like they have any clue what it really means.

You have a problem with me bringing reality into the picture? I heartily recommend you do actual research before popping off some silly comment. Here I've started it for you:
"(when Adolf Hitler was 18 years old). Before the German program began, at least seventeen U.S. states (including California) had 'forced sterilization' laws. Before 1930 there were 200-600 forced sterilizations per year (in the U.S.A.) but in the 1930s the rate jumped to 2,000-4,000 per year. (1)

Who 'Inspired' the architects of the German Sterilization law?

"The leaders in the German sterilization movement state repeatedly that their legislation was formulated after careful study of the California experiment as reported by Mr. Gosney and Dr. [Paul] Popenoe. It would have been impossible, they say, to understake such a venture involving some 1 million people without drawing heavily upon previous experience elsewhere." (2) Who is Dr. Paul Popenoe? He was a leader in the U.S. eugenics movement and wrote (1933) the article 'Eugenic Sterilization' in the journal (BCR) that Margaret Sanger started. How many Americans did Dr. Popenoe estimate should be subjected to sterilization? Between five million and ten million Americans. "The situation [in the U.S.A] will grow worse instead of better if steps are not taken to control the reproduction of mentally handicapped. Eugenic sterilization represents one such step that is practicable, humanitarian, and certain in its results." (3)"
"Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, made Lothrop Stoddard a board member of the forerunner to PP (the Birth Control League). Why was the Birth Control League reconstituted as Planned Parenthood? The 'Nazi smell' of BCL was so bad, that some 'cosmetics' were required.

High Praise from Adolf Hitler

Margaret Sanger was a prominent proponent of eugenics and forced sterilization. Stefan Kuhl writes:


In 1934 one of Hitler's staff members wrote to Leon Whitney of the American Eugenics Society and asked in the name of the Fuhrer for a copy of Whitney's recently published book, The Case for Sterilization. Whitney complied immediately, and shortly thereafter received a personal letter of thanks from Adolf Hitler. In his unpublished autobiography, Whitney reported a conversation he had with Madison Grant about the letter from the Fuhrer. Because he thought Grant might be interested in Hitler's letter he showed it to him during their next meeting. Grant only smiled, reached for a folder on his desk, and gave Whitney a letter from Hitler to read. In this, Hitler thanked Grant for writing The Passing of the Great Race and said that "the book was his Bible." Whitney concluded that, following Hitler's actions, one could believe it. (unpublished autobiography of Leon F. Whitney, written in 1971, Whitney Papers, APS, 204-5) (6)"

www.spectacle.org...

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


Who was sterilized?

In the US.

Ya'll ni$$a's be posting in a troll thread.

Originally posted by DocEmrick
I'm pro-choice. That's all there is to say. Most pro-life are unintelligent bible beating morons who have no understanding of the true nature of the universe. If a soul chooses a life plan that includes being killed early in the womb, it's likely that that soul is paying a karmaic debt of some kind.

Perhaps karma for aborting life in a previous life.......

I actually agree with you, unlike the gun thread you authored, yes, in my opinion, abortion should only be a legally viable option in the face of brutal rape and possibly if the mother's chances for survival of the pregnancy are very low (even if other alternatives will not significantly increase her likelihood of survival), and that's about it in my mind. If the child will be deformed or retarded, it's still akin to murder. Everything else, no matter how you want to dress and position it is about selfishness and concepts of convenience over the most basic fundamental concepts of morality.

Originally posted by ScorpioRising
Late term abortion: 24 weeks is way too late...

Abortion in general: I don't believe in abortion for birth control but as many others have pointed out there are a ton of other viable reasons for having one. I'm not Anti-abortion but I'm not Pro-life either. It is down to the mother and father (if he's actually stuck around) to make that decision. Whether we agree with it or not is irrelevant.

All of you vehemently spouting off 'baby killers' and demanding it become illegal are talking about taking away a persons rights. Just like if I started calling all deer hunters murderers and demanding deer hunting be illegal. I would be taking away their rights.

Are any of you pro-lifers vegetarians? I mean, killing is killing is it not? Whether its a non-formed potential person or a happily clucking chicken.

Awww cmon you don't expect pro lifers to kill innocent vegetables to survive do you?

Originally posted by Annee
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Who was sterilized?

In the US.

...lots of people... the physically handicapped... the mentally ill (some of which were just very tired housewives with abusive husbands or husbands that wanted a divorce sanctioned)... many were simply poor and uneducated people... in some cases, if there was one offspring with, lets say, downs syndrome they would sterilize that child and their siblings... indigenous women were still being sterilized without their consent in the mid-70s...

reply to post by kevinunknown

I have to agree with you on this one. Abortion is murder no matter how you look at it. It isn't the right of the mother to decide whether or not the child she carries should live. We are all born with free will and it is our God-given right to decide what to do with our lives and we shouldn't impede or undermine anothers right to be given that choice either. Someones response on here was "well what about the victims of rape who get pregnant?" Let me ask you this "Is it right to punish the child for the sins of the father the child who has done nothing wrong and is innocent? should we hand that child a death sentence for doing nothing wrong? should we just murder the child for the mistakes of the father?" There is no reason in my mind good enough to murder an unborn innocent child. If you make a mistake and get pregnant then its your responsibility. You make your bed then you lie in it. There is no justice in abortion its just plain murder.

reply to post by kevinunknown




I am a liberal who believes as do conservatives that the life of a human soul in a body begins at conception. The liberal part of me, however, will not presume to tell other people what to believe or will not allow that I force my view on others. Any complaint that I might have is voiced to my lawmakers and to a forum such as this.

The idea of people wanting to inject religion into this argument is too close to the "separation" arguments and is ill advised. I believe that the laws regarding abortion should be clearly defined, compassionate and that they should be executed with wisdom. This is an area of concern that very emotional people should stay from.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Freenrgy2
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Didn't take long to bring up Hitler. Good for you.

Someday, my friend, someday this will be a reality.

Don't ya love it?




Then they throw around communism - - - like they have any clue what it really means.

And do you know what communism means? How about a simple definition...centralized control of the means of production by the State. The additional "genocide" and imprisonment of even more in the Russian gulags than Hitler's camps is not even necessarily figured in.
Alright, now, are you ready for me to bring in Charles Darwin as well?
www.canadafreepress.com...
By Fred Gielow Monday, January 11, 2010
“The history of PP [Planned Parenthood] cannot be studied without first considering the American Eugenics Society (AES). After the Civil War, many wealthy, former slave owners sought a solution to what they deemed the ‘Negro Problem.’ The first idea was to send all former slaves back to Africa. It was termed ‘colonization’ and was abandoned shortly after its conception. Then Francis Galton, cousin to Charles Darwin, birthed the idea and coined the term ‘eugenics.’
"“Sanger quickly began what she designated the “Negro Project.” [. . .] Sanger’s project led to the American Birth Control League (ABCL). The driving concept was to diminish the birth and fertility rates of blacks to remain consistently below replacement until they were extinct. In 1929 Margaret Sanger’s reputation for racism and her well-known desire to end the lives of all blacks earned her an invitation to speak at a Ku Klux Klan meeting. [. . .]

“Sanger believed, as many of her associates did, that those on welfare should be given a choice: accept sterilization for yourself and children or no longer receive governmental assistance. [. . .]

“She also moved for everyone to be forced to apply for a birth permit. She desired the U.S. government to decide who could have a child and who could not..."

Wanna argue some more?

Originally posted by Freenrgy2
I would condone some form of medical sterilization until such time as an individual or couple can meet guidelines that would establish a 'right to reproduce'.

...thats a horrible idea... who would establish the guidelines?... the government?... no, no, no... theres already too much government dictates in our lives and, besides, the government is fickled and not known for being unbiased... "establish a right to reproduce"?... move to china...

I am not unsympathetic to women that have to make the decision to abort, however I have a hard time comprehending the necessity of abortion when most know how babies are born, and then there are those that use abortion for birth control, there is no reason for abortion, we all know what causes it, contraceptives are available, abstinence is an option.

I am not talking about rape, incest, or the health issues of the child or the mother,

I had my last child at 38, i was in poor health, and had a high risk pregnancy, the first words out of the doctors mouth were, are you sure you don't want an abortion?

Of course I didn't, what ever happen to maternal instinct, abortion is a selfish act, we live in a throw away society, and we have become insensitive.

Since Roe vs Wade, it is estimated that 52 Million babies have been aborted, that is genocide.
Are you telling me the abortion of 52 million babies was necessary?

We have been conditioned to accept this as normal and morally acceptable.

The second I knew I was pregnant, I felt the bond with my children, I knew them, before they were ever born.

We have lost touch with reality.

If someone is "PRO LIFE" people think they are the ones with the issue, imagine that.

reply to post by Annee


I cant believe what i just read Annee, you really think that way. Thats one of the most ignorant things i have ever heard i mean be pro choice thats your decision but dont be a complete idiot. And its as much my buisness as being pro choice is your buisness.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus



Awww cmon you don't expect pro lifers to kill innocent vegetables to survive do you?

Ooops silly me, how could I forget the plight of the poor little Turnips

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Freenrgy2
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Didn't take long to bring up Hitler. Good for you.

Someday, my friend, someday this will be a reality.

Don't ya love it?

Then they throw around communism - - - like they have any clue what it really means.

And I guess that "they" also do not know of the depopulation and eugenics ideas of Thomas malthus either...

"THOMAS R. MALTHUS

THE MALTHUSIAN PRINCIPLE

"The power of population is indefinitely greater than the power in the earth to produce subsistence for man. Population, when unchecked, increases in a geometrical ratio. Subsistence increases only in an arithmetical ratio. A slight acquaintance with numbers will shew the immensity of the first power in comparison of the second. By that law of our nature which makes food necessary to the life of man, the effects of these two unequal powers must be kept equal. This implies a strong and constantly operating check on population from the difficulty of subsistence. This difficulty must fall somewhere and must necessarily be severely felt by a large portion of mankind." Source: T. Robert Malthus, "An Essay on the Principle of Population" (1798), Chapter One

"THE NEED FOR FAMILY PLANNING

"But as from the laws of our nature some check to population must exist, it is better that it should be checked from a foresight of the difficulties attending a family and the fear of dependent poverty than that it should be encouraged, only to be repressed afterwards by want and sickness."

Source: T. Robert Malthus, An Essay on the Principle of Population (1798), Chapter Five

want more?

Originally posted by Annee
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Who was sterilized?

In the US.

Yes please see my later posts. Also, ever hear of the Negro Project? See my post on that as well.

reply to post by Somehumanbeing

Tell me..when is a new plant "alive"??? Do you not think plants are "alive"???

Yes.

Well...you answered one of my questions. How about the other one...when is a plant alive???

I have answered all your questions for your replies, I do not understand why you cannot comprehend that. Do you wish for me to do it in line-by-line format like this? I do not have time to do it in such exclusive detail unfortunately.

Well, no you haven't...you have danced around them just like you did with my above two questions. I could go back and copy/paste all the questions I asked you...but I see it as a pointless task because you have already shown you unwillingness to participate in a two way discussion. This has been you interrogating me...me responding to each and every question you ask...and you ignoring or dodging my quesitons and moving to a different topic.

I don't appreciate it.

Herein lies the resulting problem.

You believe a life is a life regardless, yes?
I believe a life is a life when there is a form of sentience - even if it is primitive.

You have shown me scientific evidence promoting the existence of a living being without sentience, of which I have shown you a scenario and scientific evidence for what happens upon brain death (loss of sentience).

For me to convince you otherwise to my point of view would drift from a scientific stand-point to that of the nature of a religious nature.

I was under the impression we were having a scientific discussion...I have never brought up religion...why are you???

As previously stated this is purely an argument of life vs sentience.
...
What seems to be more relevant of discussion here, is WHEN human sentience begins; which of I have read, begins around the 10 week marker. Prior to human sentience, you are not murdering a human life, you are destroying an collection of cells without sentience, just as you leave sperm cells to die upon masturbation and the proceeding ejaculation.

No no no no no no. Please don't try to move the goalposts here.

This discussion started about when HUMAN LIFE BEGAN.

Sentience was not brought up until I brought it up in my previous post. Please dont try to shift the topic.

We were discussing when the biological process of life began...NOTHING about sentience was discussed until I pointed out that you seem to be getting the two confused.


You keep shifting the discussion...and you still haven't answered the majority of my questions. It's hard to have a debate with someone who continually moves the goalposts and shifts the topics to their liking.

reply to post by Freenrgy2


You people are totaly missing the point, quit focusing on the slut, to answer yes she was a slut whether she got pregnant or not,but thats not the point the point was the majority of abortions are due to iresponsability and ignorance. These children have a right to life whether its a good life or not, its not your decision to end it. By your standards everyone with bad parents should just be killed. This country, no this world does not have any responsibility for ones actions anymore.