Those that are against abortion

reply to post by muse7


Personally yes, you should have that baby.

Don't matter what a book said. You either defend all life to its maximum, or it's a free for all. Compromise is not an option.

Legally you cannot defend it under the American constitution, as the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness must be upheld, and when liberty and happiness are violated to create life, how does that life have a right?

This goes against what I believe, and it is still not yet resolved in my head. Simply put this is what the law states, but I cannot accept that, I am trying to find another way to view it to defend all human life.


And as to those that are going to die from something and that the choice to unplug their life support is in the hands of another, same thing. Can't kill them. If nothing else, it's opportunity for scientists to try to crack the code of the human brain and delve into it like in inception.

reply to post by muse7


If a woman gets raped, it's none of my business. That's between you and the guy who did it and the law. there are plenty of people in the world just waiting in line for a child, that can't have children. men don't get to make a decision on whether they get to pay child support or not....women should have no choices either. It's not YOUR body to do with what you want...the body that matters is the Childs and you have no right to kill a child because you don't want to handle the responsibility. Yeah, it may not be your fault that you got raped, but I bet if the guy who has to pay child support had a say...he would say that he was seduced and lied to and tricked into paying for a kid (usually by the tired old lines, "it will bring us closer together or I forgot the pill" Bull Crap! It's staged because women have 9 months to worry about and they don't even have sex with a guy without considering the negatives of pregnancy and stereotyping...so that means it's a trap.) Furthermore, If women get to make any choices at all regarding the child......so should the guys. Ask around, every guy paying child support for a kid he most likely got trapped into having, would MUCH rather have 9 months of discomfort and one day of pain (which is also a hyperbole, because of the epidural, there is not usually any pain really remembered anymore), than to have 18-20 years of financial hell, and that is if everything goes well. The other alternative is not being able to live or eat or have a home and rotting in and out of jail, having the courts to make you "prove" that you pay each month (while the women have to pay nothing), having your license taken from you by a judge who is pampering women because of a little executive order from John F.(eminist lover) Kennedy, called "affirmative Action" just so a vindictive ex-wife can teach the man a lesson for not spoiling her or letting her have her way all the time. So women are free to cheat, lie, be lazy, say and do what they want in a marriage, because they have nothing to fear if the marriage fails. Men have their hands tied behind their backs and because of "Affirmative Action", they get to be kicked between the legs (figuratively speaking, in some cases) while the government of America hovers over them to make sure they don't retaliate. If they do retaliate, in the least and a woman does not approve, she actually GAINS by having a child and taking the man to court. She get's rewarded for breaking up a family. In some cases the guy has to do nothing at all, his sacrifice is worth her gain as far as she is concerned. This is why women should have NO CHOICE when it comes to having children, no matter what. Because men, get seduced and lied to and ripped off all the time, every day, all over the world and women just sit back and rake in the dough. Because women have the right to murder a child (children that they claim they love, but in reality are only using as battering rams into men's wallets)......men should have the right to say NO as well. I know this will probably get deleted because my posts always do, no one likes the truth , not even here. I will stand by this and fight this "Affirmative Action" junk until by dying breath to bring back to men what was once theirs....Respect and the pride of being able to say "I AM A MAN, AND I CAN SAY NO.....JUST THE SAME AS YOU". This post is on topic, maybe not what you want to see, but on topic.

Originally posted by muse7
Are you also against the woman having an abortion if she gets raped by a family member/complete stranger?

If you're against abortion then that means that the woman should be forced to have the baby, all because your 1000+ year old book says it's an "evil" thing to do. It's a shame how religion still has a choke hold on social issues, especially in America. European countries are light years ahead of us when it comes to gay unions/marriage/abortion etc..Why? Because they have managed to set themselves free from the teachings of an ancient book that was based on nothing more than superstitions that are considered stupid and foolish by the majority of the scientific community.

You should stop making others feel guilty because of their personal decisions, at the end of the day it's THEIR life and not yours you don't know the situation they are in. Some of them don't like the idea of giving up the baby for adoption and they shouldn't be forced into anything because of the stupid beliefs that are still prominent amongst some.

Nearly all abortions take place in the first trimester, when the fetus cannot exist independent of the mother. As it is attached by the placenta and umbilical cord, its health is dependent on her health, and cannot be regarded as a separate entity or as a "person".

edit on 11/10/2011 by muse7 because: (no reason given)

Okay, I am not going to read this whole thread. I can already imagine there is poo being flung in both directions. It is a sensitive issue. I only read the OP and that is what I am responding to.

I think polarized thinking is a big part of this. Right/wrong good/bad - I tend to think between the lines on this one. Every situation is different. Many people probably regret getting an abortion but at the time it may have felt like it was their only option. Then, I'm sure there are some who feel it was the right decision. It all boils down to each and every situation is different. Whether it is the choice to make or not is really a touchy issue. Maybe it is and maybe they will regret it. However, they are the ones who have to live every day with their choice. It is them who make the choice that know. The rest of us who have not had to face that will never know how it feels and we really should just stay out of it. If you are a religious person then you should know that it's your god's place to judge others. Not yours. Doesn't your good book say that he is the one we all answer to and judge not lest ye be judged? So no matter how you look at it (black/white/grey) Unless you have been in the shoes of someone who has had to deal with something like that, then you have no reason to speak on the subject. That's all I have to say.

Originally posted by australian2011
reply to post by TheWalkingFox

 

Looking at this ethically you do come to this realisation, if you do not donate organs upon your own death should you be allowed to have an organ if you need one? If you have a life should you be able to snuff other people's lives?

Obviously you agree with abortion so therefore you agree that parents who are prejudice against people with disabilities should be able to abort their 'possibly' disabled child. And if you go that far then you also believe that that people with disabilities are nothing in this society, and that they do not deserve life.

Your posts seem to imply that God intended for these people to exist just the way they are because it is a "gift", so i propose to you a scenario, a quite simple scenario actually.

Let's picture a person who has inherited a gene/genes that causes this person to develop cancer. This is then a "gift". Obviously if God is real he intended for this person to have this "gift" so wouldn't it be evil to take away this persons "gift" by rendering illegal the medication and treatments that allow this person to live?

A person that has a brain has the ability to decide if they want to live or die. A person that does not have a brain does not have the ability to decide that. Regardless of these capabilities of decision making, this person has a gift provided to him by God, and regardless of his decision, it should be immoral for this person to receive treatment because he is nullifying God's gift.

So returning back to your example of aborting someone that has the possibility of being mentally disabled, yes, he should not be aborted because it is a gift from god, and it doesn't matter if this person has the ability to decide if it wants to live or not because it has no brain activity yet. This transfers over to the person that has cancer, who can decide if he wants to live or not, because he can simply be refused his desire for treatment as it does not affect his decision making capability or "free will" granted to him by God.

Do you condone refusing to help people live just as you condone refusing to spread genes that cause illnesses that are an incredible burden to a possible thinking human being?

reply to post by xxblackoctoberxx

sure, your religion may believe a certain thing and thats fine, but dont try to push that on to everyone else.

Seems like you're pushing a pro abortion agenda on others.

reply to post by Viking9019






If every woman followed your way of thinking they would end up with about 20 children

each...........

Originally posted by Viking9019
reply to post by windword

 

First it takes attraction,then love and then love making which WILL bring about a third being(its the whole point of being attracted to the opposite sex and having sexual urges).
The whole point of attraction and reproduction is to pass on your genes,so could you please tell me why there would be a point of a male and female being together without having children?

Sexual urges are only there to have children and love is only there for the male and female to stay together to bring the child up with the balance between the sexes so they can know their role.

edit on 10/11/11 by Viking9019 because: (no reason given)

Holy Moly! What Victorian model did you pop out of?

That is so shallow and such narrow minded look at the existence of life on this planet. Sex is about pleasure and security. It's a mainstay in society whether people want kids or not. We now have the luxury of exploring each other through sexuality, and do it safely without fear of an unwanted pregnancy.

Birth control does not necessarily prevent pregnancy, as most contraception prevents the fertilized egg from bonding to the uterus, therefore "aborting" as often as once a month. It's puritanical and unrealisitic to ask us to "unring the bell" or "put the Furies back in the box." Not everyone is like you and would abstain from sex unless they want a baby. I think this puritanical sort of thought, these people, just want to keep reinforcing the "curse" of Eden on women. What would the world look like if women were forced to bare every single pregnancy that occured? Is that a kind of slavery and bondage you would be proud of?

It's a wonderful luxury, to be free of unwanted pregnancy, that I doubt you can even begin to understand. Maybe your grandmother can explain it to you, what's its like to be a victim of physiology.

What a horrific scene it would be if these crazy, judgemental prudes got their "Personage Law" and it was deemed that life begins a conception! HORRIFIC!

reply to post by muse7


Dear muse7,

I have an issue with the arguments. I remember when Roe vs. Wade was decided and I remember the arguments and they were insincere. Abortion was not "legalized" so that people could kill babies in order to select the sex of the child. If you believe that people should have abortions for any reason they choose then say so and don't attempt to use the "rape" card unless you are going to limit abortions to cases of rape.

Roe vs. Wade itself was passed by justices who flat out lied. The logic used to justify abortion was that the babies were not "viable" during the first three months and it was 50/50 that they would go to term anyways. Yet, we allow abortions in the ninth month of babies who could live outside the womb on their own at no cost or problem for the mother. You don't need to kill the baby to remove it if the mother does not wish to raise it.

Of course I am against abortion, why would anyone be in favor of it. Tolerate it in certain situations perhaps, but to actually promote it is different. If I smash an eagle's egg I will go to jail. If I hit a pregnant women and the baby dies I may very well be tried for murder. Lets at least be honest and recognize it as a human life. If you wish to justify abortion then limit the abortions to where the justification is. There are even cases of partial birth abortion where the baby is killed as it is being born. At what point in time should killing these humans be illegal is my question and it is as fair for me to ask that as it was for you to ask your question.

reply to post by windword

What would the world look like if women were forced to bare every single pregnancy that occured? Is that a kind of slavery and bondage you would be proud of?

wow I mean your whole post was weird, but this takes the cake...

How's it slavery? If the woman gets pregnant than it's now her responsibility to bare that child (not counting rape, incest, since that's a tough subject in itself) but if someone is irresponsible and has a baby, she always has the option of adoption, I mean that's what it's there for right?

What a horrific scene it would be if these crazy, judgemental prudes got their "Personage Law" and it was deemed that life begins a conception! HORRIFIC!

What ever happen to morals.... I guess you also don't mind having cells extracted from aborted fetus and used in flavoring your food either do you?

reply to post by PutAQuarterIn


I wish I could give you more than one star. Finally someone on this site who looks at more than one side of the situation

Anyonw wants a synopsis of this thread.....

here..


"I'm right"-"no I'm Right"-"No your wrong I'm right"
"No I'm right" -"No I'm right"-"No your dumb I'm right"
"I'm not dumb your dumb, and i'm right"
"I'm right"-"no I'm right"
"you made a spelling error, that means your dumb and I'm right"


synopsis over

Anyways... you are all wrong... we all have the right to opinions.
trying to convince someone else that yours is the right one is never a good path.

I personnally don't care about this issue, either for or against.

reply to post by KingAtlas


Wouldn't that represent most threads on ATS?

reply to post by Nobama


Guess so haha

ah well, let the kids fight in the yard...

Originally posted by Nobama
reply to post by windword

 

What would the world look like if women were forced to bare every single pregnancy that occured? Is that a kind of slavery and bondage you would be proud of?

wow

I mean your whole post was weird, but this takes the cake...

How's it slavery? If the woman gets pregnant than it's now her responsibility to bare that child (not counting rape, incest, since that's a tough subject in itself) but if someone is irresponsible and has a baby, she always has the option of adoption, I mean that's what it's there for right?

What a horrific scene it would be if these crazy, judgemental prudes got their "Personage Law" and it was deemed that life begins a conception! HORRIFIC!

What ever happen to morals....

I guess you also don't mind having cells extracted from aborted fetus and used in flavoring your food either do you?

edit on 10-11-2011 by Nobama because: (no reason given)

I was answering this quote:

First it takes attraction,then love and then love making which WILL bring about a third being(its the whole point of being attracted to the opposite sex and having sexual urges).
The whole point of attraction and reproduction is to pass on your genes,so could you please tell me why there would be a point of a male and female being together without having children?

Sexual urges are only there to have children and love is only there for the male and female to stay together to bring the child up with the balance between the sexes so they can know their role

Do you think that sex is for having children only, and that the sexes should "know their role," and do you think that life begins at conception, therfore all pregnancies must be borne?

Most birth control doesn't prevent conception, it causes an abortion. MOST! To enact a law that acknowledges that a fertilized embryo is a viable human life, and deserves constitutional rights, outlaws MOST birth control and forces women to bare a child that they do not want.

It is slavery to force a woman to have a child to give away, PERIOD!

To reitterate what another poster said, "If men had babies, this wouldn't be an issue."

Originally posted by WhoKnows100

Originally posted by muse7
reply to post by AQuestion

 

I answered your question

and please stop putting words in my mouth. I'm not going to keep repeating everything when it's clear that you can't comprehend what the difference is between a fetus in the first trimester and a living human child.

Actually it is you who believes the myth that a foetus isn't a life, and therefore you can allow yourself to justify the killing of a baby. No woman, happily pregnant, calls their baby a foetus. It's their baby, a life in their womb. Does religion make every one of these women believe that it is a life in their womb? Heck no. And that is why your entire thread is a bash against "religion". Just re-read your post. I used to feel like you until I had a child myself - I bought hook, line and sinker the same myth, a foetus is not a baby. Boy was I dead wrong. Look around you - life isn't valued in society and it shows. God isn't valued, and it shows. Society is in a free for all nosedive because of the worship of SELF.

Can you prove that it is not a myth? Does a woman unhappily pregnant call their baby a fetus? You are just spewing opinion. If you use a condom are you killing thousands of potential babies? We should take Trojan to trial for complicity to mass murder.

If every life is sacred then why is it ok to slaughter animals for consumption? Is that not "taking a life"?

These ban abortion people are nothing more than big govt. hacks who want nothing more than a nanny state telling people what they can and cannot do with there own bodies. It's like they think the govt. should own peoples bodies. I say screw that crap the less govt. intrusion in peoples lives the better.

Because of abortion and society's acceptance of single parenting in the United States, couples that want to adopt cannot because so few babies are placed for adoption

Too bad, if nature doesn't intend for them to have babies then that's the way it is right?

Even if this is true, you have no right to force other people to have children for you. Forced childbirth is tyranny.

reply to post by muse7


On my part it really has NOTHING to do with any 1,000 year old book... It is common sense, and an understanding that the child is NOT AT FAULT for anything that might have happened to the mother...

Killing a baby/fetus is not going to make a rape go away, and the woman wo was raped will have to deal with the consequences of her rape for her entire life...

Killing the baby/fetus is not going to stop rapes worldwide, instead it just keeps devaluing human life all over the globe...

I find it extremely ironic how leftwingers, who are the mayority of the "pro-choice crowd", want to chant about world peace, and claim to want to end all killings in wars yet you all are more than willing to murder babies/fetuses for whatever EXCUSE you want to come up with...

reply to post by muse7


Religion or not, it's still murder.

Originally posted by Evanzsayz
reply to post by muse7

 

Religion or not, it's still murder.

So is killing an animal for food. We do that to.