Why abortion is legal - why it is not wrong, murder or genocide., page 20

Pages: << 17 18 19 20 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 79 times

reply posted on 16-3-2011 @ 04:33 PM by Dendro

reply to post by jennybee35

No, the best moral choice is the driver never getting in the car in the first place.

At least that's the argument a lot of members here seem to have.

edit on 16-3-2011 by Dendro because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 16-3-2011 @ 04:56 PM by Serizawa

Originally posted by jennybee35
reply to post by My_Reality

Claiming human life more valuable or important than other life forms.

So, given the choice between saving a human child or a chicken from a car careening out of control, you would choose the chicken? Really? Because it's life is just as important as a human's, right?

A human being would be able to change the world for better or worse, We can interact and relate more closely to each other..So the human life it is. Whereas saving a single chicken may not affect more than a few individuals nutrition levels, Or it could also save a starving child or two.....this is a very tricky subject. IMO its the guilt that matters the most, I wouldn't feel as much guilt if I cause the death of a chicken as compared to that of a human.

reply posted on 9-6-2011 @ 03:51 PM by YayMayorBee

The only point I like to make regarding abortion is this.

I dont like the thought of making it illegal because those who are for making it illegal usually have an a sub-clause that states unless the pregnancy is due to rape or incest.

There have been only a few studies done on rape and rape victims. What alarms me is many of these studies conclude that about 35% to 50% of all rape victims lied about the rape when given a polygraph test.

If abortion becomes illegal with the sub-clause allowing rape victims to have abortions, I believe women who are in fear of being outcast by friends/family/religious beliefs will lie about their pregnancy even more and innocent men will be used as scape goats.

reply posted on 9-6-2011 @ 04:17 PM by SevenBeans

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
Ummm, yeah, not one of those sources proves the beginning of life. In fact, they specifically use terms like 'develop' 'primordium' and 'fertilized', none of which denote life.

It's established fact that a brand new life begins at conception (seriously this is BIO 101 and you can find it in the first chapter of most BIO textbooks), the only debate is about when that life becomes worthy of protection.

reply posted on 9-6-2011 @ 04:23 PM by Maslo

Originally posted by SevenBeans

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
Ummm, yeah, not one of those sources proves the beginning of life. In fact, they specifically use terms like 'develop' 'primordium' and 'fertilized', none of which denote life.

It's established fact that a brand new life begins at conception (seriously this is BIO 101 and you can find it in the first chapter of most BIO textbooks), the only debate is about when that life becomes worthy of protection.

No, it is not. A brand new life began billions of years ago in some primordial organic goo, not at conception..

reply posted on 9-6-2011 @ 04:31 PM by SevenBeans

Originally posted by Maslo
No, it is not. A brand new life began billions of years ago in some primordial organic goo, not at conception..

"From the moment a baby is conceived, it bears the indelible stamp of a separate distinct personality, an individual different from all other individuals." Ultrasound pioneer, Sir William Liley, M.D. 1967.

"After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into existence. This is no longer a matter of taste or opinion. Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception." Dr. Jerome Lejeune, genetics professor at the University of Descartes, Paris. He discovered the Down syndrome chromosome.

"It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception." Professor M. Matthews-Roth, Harvard University Medical School.

"By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception." Professor Hymie Gordon, Mayo Clinic.

reply posted on 9-6-2011 @ 04:57 PM by destination now

reply to post by SevenBeans

And by natural selection(not a decision made by the potential mother/father) 40% of these unique conceptions will end in miscarriage...

And who pays for the children left to rot in care homes because they are not wanted?

No, it is not right, and responsibility should lie with both man and woman regarding preventing an unwanted pregnancy, but life is not as simple as that, and the life of the unborn child should be considered as it does not seem fair to condem an unwanted and cast off child to a life of potential misery...

I also have to ask if you would consider adopting/fostering a (potentialy disabled) child of drug/alcohol dependent parents who would have opted for abortion but couldn't because of the law and as such hand the child over to the authorities? (and even with the legislation to allow abortion these kids are still born and still cast off and very few people will take them on)

reply posted on 9-6-2011 @ 05:14 PM by TheOrangeBrood

If you're going to force 'morals' on young women to bear a child just to put it up for adoption...

...At least don't also be evangelical enough to make gay people not receive the same financial benefits of marriage to keep your kids alive.

...Unless you're just that "righteous".

reply posted on 10-6-2011 @ 05:33 AM by SevenBeans

Originally posted by destination now
And by natural selection(not a decision made by the potential mother/father) 40% of these unique conceptions will end in miscarriage...

Lots die naturally so it's okay to kill?

Originally posted by destination now
I also have to ask if you would consider adopting/fostering a (potentialy disabled) child of drug/alcohol dependent parents who would have opted for abortion but couldn't because of the law and as such hand the child over to the authorities? (and even with the legislation to allow abortion these kids are still born and still cast off and very few people will take them on)

Yes. Not an issue in the vast majority of abortions anyway.

reply posted on 7-7-2011 @ 04:01 AM by byteshertz

reply to post by destination now

Good post

Star!

reply posted on 4-8-2011 @ 01:32 AM by Reddymnd

reply posted on 4-8-2011 @ 08:01 AM by aero56

reply to post by HoldTheBeans

It's so schizophrenic. Abortions are legal, but if a woman is pregnant and killed, along with the fetus, murder charges are filed.

reply posted on 4-8-2011 @ 09:13 AM by Maslo

Originally posted by aero56
reply to post by HoldTheBeans

It's so schizophrenic. Abortions are legal, but if a woman is pregnant and killed, along with the fetus, murder charges are filed.

Not necessarily, it depends on the state, in about half of them feticide is not considered murder.

upload.wikimedia.org...

Pages: << 17 18 19 20 >> ^^TOP^^