It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What Does Abortion Have To Do With Pro-Choice?

page: 17
12
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 03:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
What a wonderful argument.


Funny because it was the exact same argument you just made.


I suppose you just ignore all of the issues you come across?


What are you talking about?




posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 03:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by DaMod
reply to post by Janky Red
 


I think Infanticide like Genocide is everyone's business..

You don't hear people saying the holocaust is none of your business...


again and again and again ..... comparing abortion with genocide ... come on people, please come on .....
it's a real pitty sometimes ...
compare a born living person, be it a child or a adult, a father or a mother, with a unborn embryo ???
a pregnancy, a embryo, a baby that is the fruit of love between a man and a woman, well, super story here !!
everybody happy, nothing to see here, nice world we are living in ....
who wants to kill it ? who wants a abortion here ? do you have to intervene in their love story ?? no NO NO !

Also you do not have to intervene when the embryo is NOT the fruit of a love act !!
it all depends of the fact that the mother wants to be a mother or not !!
if she does not want it, who are you to decide she has to be at all force ??
you do condemn that woman to continue her pregnancy against her own will, against her capacity to accept that pregnancy, against her being completely destroyed by it ... you are a dictator, a slave-driver !!
you are punishing her twice, once being pregnant, once she must keep it !!!

Genocide is about killing born living persons en masse
abortion is the making a stop to the growing of a single one embryo in the womb of the/ by the mother herself,
how can you please compare ..
Tired, tired.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 03:31 AM
link   
Question to those holding a pro-choice position: imagine that we are not talking about a fetus, but for example a siamese twin that needs a sibling to survive. Would you still hold a pro-choice position, meaning that the sibling could choose to disconnect from his dependent siamese twin, even if it would kill the twin?



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 03:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by KitilaniFunny because it was the exact same argument you just made.


My argument was that people who do not want to have kids, should get their tubes tied. Your argument was if you don't want to have an abortion, don't have an abortion.

If you tied your tubes up first, you would never be in the position of deciding on an 'abortion'.


Originally posted by KitilaniWhat are you talking about?


You claim your argument was a 'win/win' in the sense that I should just ignore the issue.

Remember where you said:


Originally posted by KitilaniDon't worry about what I do.


Sorry, but ignoring the issue isn't a 'win'.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 03:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Janky Red
I love it that certain people are so concerned about the well being of a nameless faceless embryo.

But when a person is living, with a name and hungry these PEOPLE are classified as parasites.

No wander America is $#@$#@$

SMALL GOVERNMENT

but give the government the power to force parenthood on people, totalitarian style

and

SAVE THE EMBRYOS!

but may the hungry CHILDREN go $#@% themselves and stop being leaches

You guys are whacked out of all measure of the concept


you are right, some here have more respect for the unborn not wanted embryos ( I tell you that I respect all life, and the embryo of course also, but it's not up to me to decide what the mother decides for herself !! ), so they have more respect for the unborn than for the born children !!!!
they have 200 % more respect for the unborn than they have for the mother in despair and with great difficulties ...
double standard, triple standard !!!
once the baby is born, nobody cares any longer about their health, about their education, about their good life, about the fact their parents cannot give them good food .... no man, once born, the neo-capitalist system cuts off all respect and all help, all solidarity, all human feelings - just a conservativ f**ck up finger to all of us by the powers !!



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 03:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by hideleehoneighborino
Not a big fan of abortion, but if you outlaw abortion, women will still try get them, and they will do so using extreme methods that could cause death or permanent damage. The fact of the matter is that you're extinguishing a potential human life, so I really find it tasteless for women to get like 9 abortions. I am also 100% against taxpayer money going to abortion or abortion clinics. If you want an abortion, fine, pay for it your damn self and next time use a condom or diaphram.


you are right, if a woman really wants a abortion because she cann't stand that pregnancy because rape or incest or extreme difficulties or whatever I really have no right to judge about it anyway, then she will do it at all price with needles or with pseudo medical products or whatever !!!
do you prefer women taking risks with their lifes ???
what woman wants woman does !!!
so better have it in good conditions, it's medical here, not medieval !!!



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 04:39 AM
link   
The fact is a woman can choose to be a mother, but a man is forced to be a father. It doesnt matter if she used birth control or not. The point is the man didnt so he is AT FAULT for the pregnancy. If the woman decides you are a father today and you dont agree then you as a man get to sit in prison with murderers. If the woman decides that she doesnt want to be a mother and that you arent going to be a father then she as a woman gets to kill your child thus becoming the very same type of murderer that you would be sitting next to in prison. There is no time whatsoever where the woman could ever possibly serve prison time because she infact dictates the power of life and death. If the woman says the child inside of her isnt alive then it isnt alive. If however she states that that very same child IS alive well then we have a human being! Lets not even mention the fact that at any given stage of the pregnancy I as I man have absolutely no right to even know if my child was 'terminated'. Even after the child is born the state will fight tooth and nail to keep that child in the custody of the mother. But aww the poor single mothers today. Its such a shame. But nobody ever talks about the single fathers that sacrafise everything to raise their children when the woman decides (again?) that she doesnt want to be a mother. Theres no welfare or child payments for you buddy! NO! And if you screw up the state would rather throw that child in a foster home than see you actually raise your own children!~ All of this and pro choice people have the nerve to call me a control freak? Seriously...



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 05:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
I don't understand how some people can say that being pro-abortion means you are pro-choice and if you are against abortion you are not pro-choice.

How does that make sense?

To me pro-choice = you can do whatever you want to your body

but with Abortion it's not about YOUR body, it's about the body(depending on trimester) inside of you.

You can do whatever you want to your house within property rights as long as you don't hurt the property of your neighbors but does that mean if I am inside of your house you can kill me?

In some cases even when you invited me?


I knew the minute a read the headline that you were a tool and your post confirmed it

It's not because you're against abortions as everyone has a right to opinion but you've tried to hide it behind something else. you tool.

edit on 7-9-2011 by steveknows because:
edit on 7-9-2011 by steveknows because: (no reason given)
extra DIV



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 07:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Akasirus
 


nope. Because human nature has not been observed for long enough to know what is natural. Most species we have eons upon eons of fossil evidence to know their nature. The more intelligent a species, the less we know about its nature. So much so that although we know quite well the nature of lions and mice, we are still discovering the nature of dolphins and apes.

As such, we are more important. because we can do these things. If you think other species can do these things, than by all means go ahead. But just so you know, blatant murder is quite primitive. Animals cannot make condoms or the pill. They cannot willingly know how to stop having sex to no longer have kids.

So yea, say what you want, but it's not true. Because our very existence and way proves it so.

Now maybe in a million years we will have acquired enough data to know what human nature is. Until then, it's practically impossible to predict within 99% accuracy what a human will do outside of normal fight or flight automatic responses. More so does this scale continuous get more difficult to get to the higher up you go in intelligence.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 07:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Kitilani
 


Well like I said. I don't know. But there's more probability we will know with more brains working on it.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 07:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Kitilani
 





Do you not see the importance of that? You are trying to redefine things right there which only adds to the fact that male bias on the abortion issue can so easily be a product of personal distortion.


No, I don't see. Because I quite frankly don't give a damn about what either sex thinks. What either sex thinks is flawed because it is compromised all too often by emotions and personal beliefs in the way of objective thinking.




I did not say the population was the thing that needed to be sustainable. Population is the problem because neither of your "solutions" exist.


We don't have a solution yet. That doesn't mean we should assume there is no solution yet. Most problems as complex as those take a century or more to figure out and we've only been thinking of such things for a few decades.

Furthermore, I do have quite a number of ideas on it. Though I guess you ignored them. I repeat. You can always build underground, in space, or further up. You can also do this for food.




Not at all. Just that one thing you wrote was. I do not use that word often and I am not calling you stupid but of all the crazy things I read on ATS that really rates up there.


Define your terms then. What makes it so?




If you say so. I am not sure what you think you wrote but I read this crap over a couple times and you never answered a thing. Please stop bothering then.


if you do not wish to say what it was, I will continue to.
edit on 7-9-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 07:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by MamaJ
Just because I wouldn't does not mean that another woman will feel the same way. It is her choice once she is raped or if her life will be threatened with a full term pregnancy.


I always find it interesting that people make this allowance for rape. Why can't this be extended to abortion in general?

YOU feel that a fetus is a life.
YOU feel that abortion is murder.

But to use YOUR words: Just because you feel that way, doesn't mean another woman will feel the same way. It's HER choice.


MY OPINION is one should not use any excuse to murder. I mean ....how simple can I put it?? If it was always MY choice there would be no question..hence, no choice to be made.

The fact is... It is NOT my choice if a woman decides to terminate her pregnancy. It is hers. I can reason all day long and still not find a reason to kill a baby. SORRY.




Abortion Worldwide Annually, 46 million babies die from abortion worldwide. That’s approximately one baby being aborted every two seconds. Abortion in the United States An estimated 48 million babies have been aborted since 1973. Approximately 24% of all U.S. pregnancies end in abortion. Characteristics of Women Having Abortions Over half (56%) of all women having abortions between 15-44 are in their 20’s. Nearly eight in 10 U.S. women obtaining an abortion report a religious affiliation. 43% are Protestant 27% are Catholic 8% are other religions 41% of women having abortions are white, 32% are black, and 20% are hispanic.

www.voiceofrevolution.com...




Black and Hispanic women have higher abortion rates than non-Hispanic white women. Black women’s abortion rates are 49 per 1,000, Hispanic women’s are 33 per 1,000 and non-Hispanic white women’s are 13 per 1,000. According to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, the most recurrent characteristics of women having abortions over time are nonwhite, poor and unmarried. Reasons For Abortion 98% Personal Choice (unwanted or inconvenient) 1.7% Life/Health of Mother or Child .3% Rape/Incest Abortion by Gestational Age African American Community According to the CDC, each year 616,074 African Americans are born. 458,500 babies will have died from abortion. 284,877 blacks will have died that same year through anything from natural causes to heart disease. There are 743,377 Africans Americans dying yearly. This number is 127,303 more than those that are born. From 1973 to 2004, nearly 30% of the black population were erased through abortion. Out of the average 4,400 babies dying daily that are reported abortions, an estimated 1,300 are African American. They account for 32% of women having abortions yearly, yet make up only 13% of the American population. African American women are 3 times as likely to have an abortion than other women.



Whether I want it or not....the fact remains .....every 2 seconds an unborn baby is aborted.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 09:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


You have said that morality/ ethics are theoretical inventions (which if it has any value I completely agree with) but then you also claim there is 'objective value' to human life. Please could you explain what seems to be a contradiction here.

Similiarly, your slightly strained desire for objectivity conquering subjectivity on this issue leaves out one quite important element in your argument which is that you show absolutely no allowance for your own opinion being clouded by emotion- you cannot simply deny it and ignore the issue because you cannot know that it isn't, so please do not (even if it only came across that way) presume/ insist you're the oracle of objectivity.


On an unrelated note, I find it strange that people make an allowance for an abortion of a child created by rape. If the objection is to ending a potential life which could turn into a human then this embryo has committed no crime and knows nothing of it- the only factor then would be the feelings of the mother towards it. The fear would be that the mother would not want/ severely dislike the child which is very much the same risks as a non- rape child.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 09:28 AM
link   
reply to post by yes4141
 




On an unrelated note, I find it strange that people make an allowance for an abortion of a child created by rape. If the objection is to ending a potential life which could turn into a human then this embryo has committed no crime and knows nothing of it- the only factor then would be the feelings of the mother towards it. The fear would be that the mother would not want/ severely dislike the child which is very much the same risks as a non- rape child.


Yes THIS. The hypocrisy of people who claim embryo is a human being with a right to live except when it was conceived by rape, like it somehow fundamentally alters the nature of the embryo is astounding. Either something has a full right to live like you and me, then the ONLY scenario which allows you to kill it is when it directly physically threatens you (emotional harm is not enough), or admit it has no right to live, and then I see no logical reason why we should limit the killing only on rape cases.

The only reason I can think of is that they dont care about the embryos at all, and simply want to punish women for sexual irresponsibility, which is a low and malevolent motive.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 09:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maslo
The only reason I can think of is that they dont care about the embryos at all, and simply want to punish women for sexual irresponsibility, which is a low and malevolent motive.


Completely agree! I was trying to say that earlier in the thread, but you said it much better than I.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 09:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Maslo
 


I agree. There is also the element of it potentially empowering women by detaching them from simply being on an animal cycle of breeding. E.g. they are not merely a host to bring children into the world to be utilised by men.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by Maslo
The only reason I can think of is that they dont care about the embryos at all, and simply want to punish women for sexual irresponsibility, which is a low and malevolent motive.


Completely agree! I was trying to say that earlier in the thread, but you said it much better than I.


It's all too easy to agree with cynicism
It's a cop out



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 10:17 AM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


Well, if that's not the reason that people make allowances for rape and incest, then what is? The reason I agree with Maslo is that no one has given a better explanation.

So to those of you who want abortion to be illegal - except in the case of rape or incest - then what are the reasons for these exceptions? What makes a baby of rape any less deserving than a baby from an accidental pregnancy? Where is HIS right to life?
edit on 9/7/2011 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 11:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Well, if that's not the reason that people make allowances for rape and incest, then what is? The reason I agree with Maslo is that no one has given a better explanation.

Cynicism, in it's most illogical manifestation, is not anywhere close to being an explanation.
It is a great way for the opposition to just condemn their opponents by both demonizing them and derailing the topic so they never need to give a valid argument.

I've seen your posts, your more intelligent than that, so why group yourself with such a futile perspective?


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
So to those of you who want abortion to be illegal - except in the case of rape or incest - then what are the reasons for these exceptions? What makes a baby of rape any less deserving than a baby from an accidental pregnancy? Where is HIS right to life?

I am honestly on the fence with that one
I cannot speak for the person who said this however I can say this

Just because I can't eliminate poverty as a whole doesn't mean I shouldn't ever donate to charity or help the needy when I can.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
Cynicism, in it's most illogical manifestation, is not anywhere close to being an explanation.


You have judged Maslo's post to be cynicism. I see it as an attempt to explain the apparent hypocrisy in a particular position - that abortion is wrong and violates the right to life - except in the case of rape or incest, as if babies made of rape or incest somehow deserve to die...

This requires an explanation. If you can't give it, that's fine. But just because you don't have an answer, doesn't mean various attempts at explanation are simply cynicism.



new topics




 
12
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join