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.

 

Hello Mr. president, Abortion Is Murder! Life Begins At Fertilization! That's A Fact [snip]!

page: 17
25
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 




Dumping off your responsibility is never the most responsible choice.


Dumping off the responsibility would be delivering the child and then giving it away, not abortion. Abortion ends responsibility, not dumps it on someone other.


The same logic.


If you new how many people are going to 3rd world countries to get kids out of orphanages because the "wait period" for a newborn in this country is 15 plus years you would understand what a bogus argument that really is.




posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by sad_eyed_lady

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 




Dumping off your responsibility is never the most responsible choice.


Dumping off the responsibility would be delivering the child and then giving it away, not abortion. Abortion ends responsibility, not dumps it on someone other.


The same logic.


If you new how many people are going to 3rd world countries to get kids out of orphanages because the "wait period" for a newborn in this country is 15 plus years you would understand what a bogus argument that really is.


Which is good. This way they are compelled to take care of the abandoned children that are already born and would otherwise not have a good life, instead of forcing other women to make more children for them.

There is enough abandoned children on this Earth to adopt. No need force women to make new unwanted babies and displace those 3rd world kids, just because some people want their precious new child to be white.


edit on 27/1/12 by Maslo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 01:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Maslo
 


This bs about a good life really is just that. bs. You don't have the right to say you have a good life or you shouldn't be born. If just one person has a crap upbringing but does something with their lives, then there's no logic to your statement. And such people do exist.


You have no right to say what is a good life, or who should or should not be parents. Neither does the government have the right to set ethics. The government takes reports of abuse, and investigates. Nothing else. States decide standards and abuse, and prosecutions.
edit on 27-1-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by dadgad
Who gives a damn about abortion.


The majority of U.S. citizens are Pro-Life. You are right in that the MSM doesn't give a damn as the largest annual march in D.C., the March for Life, this past Monday got diddy-squat coverage. A statement from Obama about how great abortion rights made big news.

bigjournalism.com...


All your moralistic crap has no value.


Sounds like a argument Hitler could make.

Not my body, not my business. We are talking about two bodies, not just the mother's.
The Jews weren't me so it was OK that they got gassed.


Stop messing with people their lives and get a hobby you hypocritical hag.


Name calling makes you look really pathetic. If you say "Who gives a damn about abortion" and you don't give a damn then why did you even post?

edit on 1/27/2012 by sad_eyed_lady because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 01:45 PM
link   
When did life begin for the Iraqi child sitting in the van with her father moments before an apache helicopter opens fire? Or the innocent men, women, and children sitting in a mosque moments before an airstrike. Where is the call from Pro-lifers to end war?

When did life begin for the small calf who grows up in a small pen, only to be treated with cruelty and eventual death? Where is the call from pro-lifers to end the cruel butchering of animals?

When did life begin for the creatures living on a sea floor before being covered by oil? Where is the call from pro-lifers to end drilling?

Pro-LIFE? Everyone is pro-life. Sometimes, a pro-lifer is faced with a tough choice.



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maslo

Even if they will be wanted, I dont think anyone but the rightful owner of the fetus (the woman) has a right to decide its fate. Should we ban contraception, just because some of the resulting children might be wanted in the future?


Nobody owns another unless you are talking slavery. I am a mother, but I do not own my children. I can not kill my child and have that be just fine and dandy, not yet anyway.

Does that sound barbaric? Well go watch the documentary of an ultrasound of the abortion procedure on an 11 week old fetus and watch the baby flinch in pain and tell me that is not barbaric. it is called "The Silent Scream."
edit on 1/27/2012 by sad_eyed_lady because: (no reason given)

edit on 1/27/2012 by sad_eyed_lady because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 01:56 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.



Do people think that by banning abortion that abortion will stop?

It wont.

What will happen is that women who want abortions will start going to shady places to get them, which will harm women. It will cause deaths. Hundreds and hundreds of deaths.

I may not agree with abortion, but it's not my place ( because of a religious belief, political social or otherwise) to tell somebody else what to do.

Freedom is choice. Freedom is not having anybody decide what is good and what isn't for you.

Nobody has the right to tell you what to do, unless of course you are infringing on the rights of other people.

You all REALLY need to take a good hard look at yourselves and wonder if you want your freedom taken from you, in any context.

If the answer is no, then why are you attempting to do it to somebody else?

~Tenth

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by sad_eyed_lady
 





Nobody owns another unless you are talking slavery. I am a mother, but I do not own my children. I can not kill my child and have that be just fine and dandy, not yet anyway.


A foetus is not "another". It is a thing. You do not own your children, I agree. But you do own your pet, for example. A foetus is even lower than a pet. It is comparable to a carrot growing in my garden.




Does that sound barbaric? Well go watch the documentary of an ultrasound of the abortion procedure on an 11 week old fetus and watch the baby flinch in pain and tell me that is not barbaric. it is called "The Silent Scream."


I have seen it. It is a biased movie, 12 week old foetus does not feel any pain. Read the criticism here:

silent scream

I am indeed against late-term abortion, tough.
edit on 27/1/12 by Maslo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by beezzer
 


Remember what I said way back?

The issue of abortion is nothing more and nothing less than an issue of individualism. You can either be owned, or lead. Some people want to own others. For whatever warped view.

Oh well. I've seen ATS slowly but surely grow in "pro life" numbers. My honest opinion is that Malso is a dinosaur of 60s mentality on morality. A proven failed viewpoint responsible for a great deal of the social woes of the day.

It'll only be 10-20 years before it starts going downhill.



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:14 PM
link   
So the gist of the thread is the Government doesn't have the right to intervene in the Personal lives of Americans but only when it pertains to abortion.

Any other issue it's A-ok.

That is the pro abortion argument in a nutshell.



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
So the gist of the thread is the Government doesn't have the right to intervene in the Personal lives of Americans but only when it pertains to abortion.

Any other issue it's A-ok.

That is the pro abortion argument in a nutshell.



What?
The only ones who want government intervention (government ban on something) are pro-lifers. No intervention means pro-choice, since thats the default state. Government restricts freedoms or leaves them alone, not gives them.

Are the prolifers trying to deny that restricting abortion by law would be government intervention now? Thats ridiculous..



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:28 PM
link   
Hi, I had mixed feelings about abortion until recently, I believed in some cases it was acceptable, this was until someone showed me a video that helped me make my mind up without question.

www.youtube.com...

the way the interviewee in the above youtube video puts his point across is amazing and it is seriously thought provoking,

Please try giving it a watch, it might help clear things up for anyone who has mixed feelings on the subject, or it might not....

Thank you
edit on 27-1-2012 by Minnie1985 because: forgot to attach the youtube link, oops

edit on 27-1-2012 by Minnie1985 because: attached the wrong link, i amaze my self sometimes with my own stupidity lol



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Maslo
 


Banning is not government intervention.

If it was, then law by its existence is government intervention.


You know this is one of many times when you so coyly twist the meaning and definition of things to meet your own standards, and what I get the gist of is that others are beginning to take notice of it as well. You honestly need to stop being such a manipulative person. It's bad taste.



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


Banning is government intervention, and yes, all legislation IS by definition government intervention. Thats a fact.

What is it, if its not so?



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:39 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 

Same could be said for thieves, murderers, and rapists. I mean, what's the difference? Any one of the aforementioned might get killed or injured doing what they do. So should the government protect their right to do it? Should it be a right?


If you are honestly willing to risk your own life to destroy another one, in my book, you are the least among humanity. There is no excuse for such an action and everything that happens because you do this is by all means on your own hands. I honestly would not feel saddened nor feel empathy for their loss, for they showed no empathy to the life they willingly gambled with for short term pleasure.

Now we can look at cases of rape and the like and realize that a real an actual action against someone's will was done. But if you just wanted sex, were dumb and got pregnant, then go ahead and try to kill it, and in doing so risk your own health....nope. Not a shred of pity from me.
edit on 27-1-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:40 PM
link   
I think it comes down to what we want in a society. I think that women should have the right to choose, but same with the man, it should be equal. I don't believe it to be killing humans, any more than flushing sperm or eggs down the toilet. So where do you draw the line? It tends to get ridiculous, I mean there are millions upon millions of people dying daily, due to diseases like cancer and aides, when we've figured out cures to them ages ago with stem cell research. If we wanted to we could cure cancer, and aides, Now if I was a fetus, I would gladly give up my life for that. And then we are going to start to have to worry about population control. Soon our world will not be able to sustain us, and millions of living thinking, breathing, independent, loved, humans will die due to starvation, and other horrible deaths, it doesn't make sense to me to save every human life, when we are just postponing there death to a more horrible one later. As long as we try to dictate what other people do with THEIR BODIES, then we will always have conflict.



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Maslo
 


Intervention occurs to restore something. Hence the term "intervention".


There is no intervention with the law, for the law does not restore, it protects.

You are twisting the term to justify your own views.
edit on 27-1-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:42 PM
link   
It would be ideal if every women who had sex...
...wanted to have a baby to the person she has sex with...
...or that she had the financial. emotional, spiritual ability to raise, nurture it...
...but the reality is this is not always the case.

I think that while an embryo is part of and dependant on the womens body...
...it is for her alone to decide.

I think the problem with this debate is that it is all about what another person should do...
...but the only question is 'what would I do if the embryo was in me'...
...men are by nature eliminated from asking that question...
...only a women can ask that question...
...and only the women in whose body the embryo resides can ask and answer that question.
edit on 27/1/12 by troubleshooter because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by troubleshooter
 


I don't see why that's true.

If you're a male rapist, you should be castrated. Simple as that. Should women be out from such a question as that? I don't see why.

It's simple. If the population says that an undeniable case of rape should be punished with castration, let it be done. If a population says that abortion is murder and should be banned, let it be done.
edit on 27-1-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-1-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by Maslo
 


Intervention occurs to restore something. Hence the term "intervention".


Intervention does not occur to "restore" something.

In-ter-ven-tion:
- the act or fact of intervening

Intervene: to take a decisive or intrusive role (in) in order to modify or determine events or their outcome

Where is restore?



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join