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

reply to post by Gorman91


Yea but an abortion is considered murder, that is your opinion. We ultimately as a society determine what murder is. Murder is not simply the intentional ending of a living organism by another living organism, and if it is please show me where you find this definition and who defines it. You take that little concept away and all of the sudden your arguments don't make sense anymore. Once we determine what is considered a person, and what murder actually is, this discussion goes nowhere.

reply to post by andersensrm


I don't think persons exist. In an age where corporations are people, the word has committed suicide by its users.

The word, to be frank, is an invention designed to separate us from them, and allows a smooth talker to make whom "Us" and "them" are fully by their own will.


Murder is exactly what you said. The willed ending of one life by another. End of story. That's what it is. You want to fabricate the word person over that, be my guess.

Blacks weren't fully people once, Mexicans aren't to some, I'm sure some natives think whites aren't either. The elderly weren't under some beliefs, and in other cultures, you're not a person until you become 13 or something.

"Person" is a social construction. It is a lie. It simply does not exist.

reply to post by Gorman91
After reading numerous post on abortion being murder, I thought I would ask just how the US would stop abortion should it become illegal ? For arguments sake lets say all abortions (including pregnancy as a result of rape or incest) would become illegal in 1 week, just how does the US plan to implement the law ?

OK you have shut the clinics and closed down the Dr's offices but what about the "morning after pill", that stops an egg implanting so is that classed as an abortion ? The egg could have been fertilized so is stopping it implant in the womb an abortion ? If you decide it is, the next step is to ban the "morning after pill" BUT this is where problems start to arise, as the morning after pill is the same formulation is normal contraceptives pills, only in higher doses. All women would have to do is take a treble dose of their normal contraceptive pill to ensure the pregnancy does not implant. So does that mean you should ban the normal contraceptive pill, if it is going to be used as a way to end a pregnancy ?

Now what about herbs that are know to cause miscarriage ? Do you want to ban every single herb that can be linked to miscarriage ? What about a very well known Ulcer drug that can be easily bought (there are even videos on YouTube explaining what the dose should be and when to take it), how do you think big pharmacy companies would react to being told their products were being banned, as I presume you would want to ban any drug that can end pregnancy in case they fall into the wrong hands ?

Maybe you could just limit access to the internet to pro-life groups so that women who wanted abortions could not get access to this information (I doubt that would be Constitutional but I don't think you would let a little matter like that stop you).

What do you intend to do about women who want to travel aboard (Canada has abortion more or less on request, as does the UK, France to name just a couple). Would all women have to take pregnancy test before they left the US to ensure they were not pregnant and leaving the Country just to obtain a termination ? If they were pregnant would they still be allowed to leave and what would happen if they came back and they were no longer pregnant. Would this be OK because the abortions were taking place outside the US or do you want to ban pregnant women from travelling in case they have a termination ?

What would happen if a woman went for a massage (there is a traditional technique for ending a pregnancy in the far east that is a massage of the Uterus). Are you going to ban massage as well.

Just exactly how do pro-life campaigners intend to ensure that abortions no longer take place ? I stated on a previous thread they can shout and scream and stamp their feet all they want, they can threaten eternal damnation and the vengeance of a wrathful imaginary friend in the Sky but what they can't do and will never be able to do is to stop abortion, there are too many ways for it to be carried out and there are too many people who already have the information and would be only too willing to share it with other women, should abortion ever be banned. In a way a feel sorry for them, they are impotent to change the knowledge that is already freely available.

Saying "ban abortions" is easy in practice it would be impossible to carry out. Even if you make it illegal it won't stop, if making things illegal worked the prisons would be empty !

reply to post by cconn487


I dont think he said that I think he said he would let the states decide and get the govt out. And while were at it if a woman wants an abortion she should be able to get one. I am not for it but if there is going to be an unwanted child born to a disfunctional adult or teen then so be it. People are dying in wars, in drug wars, in famine all across this tiny little planet everyday, and frankly looking at the condition of this world we are in who in their right mind would want to bring another human into it. Thats just my cynicism coming out, but Im beginning to question my childrens future. I cannot even fathom what this earth will look like when they have children. Hopefully they can clean the mess that we left for them

reply to post by majel42


lol.

Not my problem.


Let the people decide. It's their community. I presume the federal government doesn't get involved in every single case involving something banned. And plenty of communities manage their own laws perfectly well. I'm sure plenty of police offered their say on if something was actually murder or not at a court, and I don't see this as any different.


Because you created the context, that being all abortions are banned, you create the solution to your fictitious world. Don't spit in my food and call it perfect. You made it, you spit it, you take care of it. I don't deal with systems handed to me that are not what I would want, and somehow I'm expected to explain how they work. HA!

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by andersensrm

 

I don't think persons exist. In an age where corporations are people, the word has committed suicide by its users.

The word, to be frank, is an invention designed to separate us from them, and allows a smooth talker to make whom "Us" and "them" are fully by their own will.


Murder is exactly what you said. The willed ending of one life by another. End of story. That's what it is. You want to fabricate the word person over that, be my guess.

Blacks weren't fully people once, Mexicans aren't to some, I'm sure some natives think whites aren't either. The elderly weren't under some beliefs, and in other cultures, you're not a person until you become 13 or something.

"Person" is a social construction. It is a lie. It simply does not exist.

edit on 31-1-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

edit on 31-1-2012 by Gorman91 because: Le Spelling

Now your playing semantics with the word person and murder. In your definition it is murder to swat a fly, it is murder to kill for food, whether it be plant or animal. We created laws for murder, the killing of other human beings. Murder isn't the killing of any life form, it is the killing of a developed human being. Some cultures may use person as a different word than we use it. Nevertheless they have another word that matches our word for person. So what you are saying really has no merit. If you are racist against somebody, then you don't think they are a person? I don't know how you made sense of that. Person is a social construction it does not exist? I don't get that either, are you saying people don't exist, or the word doesn't exist I don't get it. I am a person, I exist, so a person exists.

reply to post by andersensrm


Developed human being? When is that? The human keeps developing entire decades after birth.

If you kill something, it is murder. There's no getting around that.

We made laws that stated when you do this to end a human life on purpose, it is the bad kind of murder. Murder by itself comes in many varieties and not all come with a crime.

Actually not every culture has a word for person. It's a rather western fabrication. I guess they had to invent the word when they wanted to justify taking over other people and reducing their humanity.

If you don't know what social construction is, you really shouldn't be in this discussion.

reply to post by Gorman91

Developed human being? When is that? The human keeps developing entire decades after birth.

When society decides. And a big part of society believes it is when the foetus has brainwaves or is viable.

If you kill something, it is murder. There's no getting around that.

Thats false. It has to be human, and not braindead, and usualy born or viable or passed some other development treshold, and also unlawful. Murder does not have such simple definition.

If you don't know what social construction is, you really shouldn't be in this discussion.

Murder is a social construct! Oh, the irony.

reply to post by Gorman91


Your spew on this topic shows you have zero empathy for anybody. Male or female. Especially the females. It shows how your trying to be dominant on a thread about a womans issue. I would allmost say with confidence, Your not married, you have no children, no girlfriend. With your attitude toward women, I can see that with clarity.

Trying to stoke a emotional response on a thread about a womans right to her privacy and her right to choose . Is sad at the least. It shows that The Community as you call it, has taken over your thought process. As i have said before, until you grow you some female parts, and are faced with the reality of having to decide to abort or go full term. Anything you or I say . Is a mute point to the woman with that decision to make.

I am glad it is a decision I will never have to make. And I feel for those that have such a decision to make in their lives.. So go ahead an attack the emotion of my post. It least I have some.

reply to post by Maslo


Human life begins at conception. This assertion is supported by the scientific evidence.
For example

"Although life is a continuous process, fertilization is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed.... The combination of 23 chromosomes present in each pronucleus results in 46 chromosomes in the zygote. Thus the diploid number is restored and the embryonic genome is formed. The embryo now exists as a genetic unity."

www.princeton.edu...

What evidence do you have?

Even though the topic has obviously strayed, I thought I would make it clear that Obama has stated that he does not like abortions and never wants to have one. His problem is with dictating other peoples' lives.

I think people here like to forget that before doctors gave abortions, many women would use things such as coat hangers to end their pregnancy for whatever reason. This would often lead to infections and even death.

So which is better? Removing their choice and making it so people try to kill themselves to rid themselves of an unwanted pregnancy, or maintaining their choice in the matter and allowing a trained doctor to safely do the procedure?

Oh wait, some of you think that anyone who gets an abortion is a murderer. So what do you do about all the multitudes of natural abortions, in which the body kills the baby? What do you do about the thousands of children in foster care without a home?

reply to post by openyourmind1262


I have empathy for those whom through no fault of their own were abused.

I feel nothing for idiots whom through their willed actions, seek to destroy a life to allow theirs to keep doing the flawed life they lead. That is the very definition of the scum of the Earth.

It really is that simple.

And your baiting about "I don't have the parts so I can't speak" is really pointless, because then women who can't have kids can't speak. Then transgender people can't speak, then gays can't speak, then anyone but your own socially constructed valued members of society can speak. To hell with that I say. You want a matriarchy, go found one. America is a republic, not a patriarchy, not a matriarchy, and not something with special interests. Unite or die. Die divided if you wish, but you won't see a tear from me. Dividers die by their own hands.

If you want to be an emotional wreck, that's your choice. I prefer the law be on logic, and not emotion.


The fact remains true that if two people decided to have sex, two people should have a say in what happens to the fruits of that labor. If you don't like that, then sucks to be you.

reply to post by Varemia


Why should I have pity for someone risking their own life to kill another? I have no pity on such people. They are disgusting.


If you are raped or your going to die, I can feel for you, because you had no say in your predicament. But if you want to look at the past people whom risked infection to kill their kids, to hell with that. Those people are monsters, and their deaths are welcomed.

reply to post by Deplume



you do realise that example isn't reflective of most abortions, and when I say most I am talking like basically 99.9%- most abortions have sod all to do with a defective baby but a lifestyle "choice" by the mother


They seem to televise most things on tv, well I await them televising abortions, and the public at large can see the foetus/baby, then we will see who thinks life begins at birth...........

reply to post by DenyObfuscation

What evidence do you have?

Evidence for what? I have repeatedly stated that I do think human life in the biological sense begins at conception. I refer you to the page 2 of this thread.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by Varemia

 

Why should I have pity for someone risking their own life to kill another? I have no pity on such people. They are disgusting.


If you are raped or your going to die, I can feel for you, because you had no say in your predicament. But if you want to look at the past people whom risked infection to kill their kids, to hell with that. Those people are monsters, and their deaths are welcomed.

You must really be a sociopath. I don't ever want to be in the same room with a monster like you. My sister lost one of her daughters to a miscarriage. I understand, at least a little, the pain associated with that. You think people who get abortions feel nothing?

reply to post by Gorman91


No, you didn't. You changed the subject and avoided answering my questions directly.

Awe, do you have nothing to say because you know I'm right?

reply to post by Varemia


I don't really care if they feel it. They did it.

reply to post by Believer101

I would like it banned. Because it is wrong. It is murder. But I cannot force someone whom had their rights violated to do something. I can force accepting one's responsibilities, because that's called civilization.

Now you're sure you read my answer right? I mean I'm just assuming you did, because you said so. But you're sure you want to claim I changed the subject or didn't answer the question? Seems pretty clear right there. See I even quoted it for you to save you the trouble of going back a few pages.

reply to post by Maslo

I agree that strictly biologically speaking, human life begins at conception.

Since we agree on this, what have I said that you labeled "only" opinion and semantics?

Abortion kills this human life and therefore should be recognized in the eyes of the law as murder. If the law is changed to reflect this fact then your objection that abortion is lawful has no merit.

I have not presented a religious or moral argument. It is clear and concise logical evidence that laws against murder should should include abortion. Presently the law is in conflict with itself. I recognize this fact and have judged no one. I am not attempting to impose my morality on anyone nor have I given any indication that I even posess any certain morality. I don't believe you can say the same given the fact that your entire argument is based on your own value judgements and the system of morality to which you subscribe.