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.

 

2nd Trimester Abortions, What Is Your Stance On Them?

page: 10
11
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 07:37 PM
link   
I think it is murder!




posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 07:39 PM
link   
reply to post by RealSpoke
 


I think your sig is very relevant on this particular thread



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 07:39 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


Wow, here we go....what defines a person? Should the "Rights" of a potential "person" outweigh the Rights of an actual person? The controversay is based on religious beliefs. Religious beliefs that not everyone subscribes to. So, the religious people want to force their beliefs on women who may not share the same belief system? That's crazy, if you ask me. Talk about having your Freedom and Rights trampled on. We're talking about each individual woman's Right to control her own body. Each woman inherently has her own Reproductive Rights. The decision should lie solely with each woman, based on her own individual beliefs and experiences. Does anyone really want to have the government dictate what you can and can't do with your own body?

Christians say they value "life" above everything else. Except when it comes to killing Muslims, that is. Or criminals on Death Row. Or the children born into poverty, who then cannot properly be cared for and educated. Or doctors who provide birth control for women. Or anyone whom they disagree with. Not all, but most "christians" are very judgemental, hypocritical, and tend towrds being Moral Relativists.

“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” - M.Ghandi



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 08:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by moonzoo7
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


Wow, here we go....what defines a person? Should the "Rights" of a potential "person" outweigh the Rights of an actual person? The controversay is based on religious beliefs. Religious beliefs that not everyone subscribes to. So, the religious people want to force their beliefs on women who may not share the same belief system? That's crazy, if you ask me. Talk about having your Freedom and Rights trampled on. We're talking about each individual woman's Right to control her own body. Each woman inherently has her own Reproductive Rights. The decision should lie solely with each woman, based on her own individual beliefs and experiences. Does anyone really want to have the government dictate what you can and can't do with your own body?

Christians say they value "life" above everything else. Except when it comes to killing Muslims, that is. Or criminals on Death Row. Or the children born into poverty, who then cannot properly be cared for and educated. Or doctors who provide birth control for women. Or anyone whom they disagree with. Not all, but most "christians" are very judgemental, hypocritical, and tend towrds being Moral Relativists.

“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” - M.Ghandi


Good post. Its a sorta "riding the whore of babylon" kinda thing. Or "road to hell paved by good intentions". Laws that perscribe punishment to enforce good ideas quickly turn satanic in the odd situations. That's why going byond the 10 commandments with BORN people steps too far. And yea I don't like seat belt laws, helmet laws and especially hate seeing my tax money going into advertizing and lobbying - that's corrupt... click it or ticket? Click this! (internet tough guy concept)



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 08:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by yamammasamonkey
I think it is murder!


And I think that simplistic attitude ignores the reality of a women's situation while encouraging satanic politicians to add even more deadly consequences to compound her problems.



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 08:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by moonzoo7
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


Wow, here we go....what defines a person?


BIRTH



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 08:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

Originally posted by onthedownlow
We have been trying so hard to create accountability among the young men in society, but we sell our souls so that our young women will not be held accountable. Why, to women that claim to crave equality, do they desire a double standard that removes accountability from their choices. Abortion has nothing to do with rights, and everything to do with hypocrisy.



Excuse me but im not sure that im following what your saying, society has changed on the responsibility part (for example, here in the UK they encourage both sexes to use protection) When a girl gets pregnant her blame is not down-played, but neither is the boys...
And Abortion IS a right. By law in fact. And even if it was illegal (which it has been in the past) backstreet abortions would only rise in numbers and put more women at risk.

But do please explain what you mean in your OP.


As a citizen of ther United States, my rights are outlined in the Bill of Rights. Abortion is not a right, yet it is currently legal. The thing about rights, they are equally applied to all, and at no point can a male choose to terminate an unwanted pregnancy (that would be wrong on many levels). Advocates for womens rights would argue that inequality exists, but I would argue that they are creating inequality. We all understand how babies are made, just as we understand the consequences of driving under the influence- yet, one demands accountability and the other suggests that there should be none. This is hypocracy, plain as day. I believe that abortion is wrong, and I don't believe that it should be used to avoid accountability- although, I do believe that any women who are not willing participants in the act that culminates in the pregnancy need not maintain accountability.



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 08:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by onthedownlow

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

Originally posted by onthedownlow
We have been trying so hard to create accountability among the young men in society, but we sell our souls so that our young women will not be held accountable. Why, to women that claim to crave equality, do they desire a double standard that removes accountability from their choices. Abortion has nothing to do with rights, and everything to do with hypocrisy.



Excuse me but im not sure that im following what your saying, society has changed on the responsibility part (for example, here in the UK they encourage both sexes to use protection) When a girl gets pregnant her blame is not down-played, but neither is the boys...
And Abortion IS a right. By law in fact. And even if it was illegal (which it has been in the past) backstreet abortions would only rise in numbers and put more women at risk.

But do please explain what you mean in your OP.


As a citizen of ther United States, my rights are outlined in the Bill of Rights. Abortion is not a right, yet it is currently legal. The thing about rights, they are equally applied to all, and at no point can a male choose to terminate an unwanted pregnancy (that would be wrong on many levels). Advocates for womens rights would argue that inequality exists, but I would argue that they are creating inequality. We all understand how babies are made, just as we understand the consequences of driving under the influence- yet, one demands accountability and the other suggests that there should be none. This is hypocracy, plain as day. I believe that abortion is wrong, and I don't believe that it should be used to avoid accountability- although, I do believe that any women who are not willing participants in the act that culminates in the pregnancy need not maintain accountability.


Don't like abortion? DON't Have one.

But keep you're blunt laws away from my wife. If she needs medical services it would suck to have them unavailable due to your attitude. I find it offensive that you'd cheer on the legalists...

Pharisees!




posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 09:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Maslo
 


Abortion does not conform to the legal definition of murder, but I would hate to be a person who assessed the treatment of human life based on the law. Fetal growth is indeed human life; it is as essential to the development of a person as the growth that occurs after birth.

What is the difference between withdrawing life support from a brain dead patient and aborting an unborn child? A person who is brain dead does not have the potential to lead a productive life, whereas an unborn child does.

There is also a difference of perspective in how the decisions are made. A loved one who consents to withdraw life support typically asks: What would be best for my loved one? A woman who consents to an abortion typically asks: What would be best for me?

The idea of abortion as an act of kindness to the unborn child obscures a truth: most women who abort an unplanned pregnancy do not fear for the unborn child; they fear for themselves.

If a woman does not wish to be a mother, she can surrender the child for adoption. The option is always there.









edit on 20-3-2012 by SlowlyLonely because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-3-2012 by SlowlyLonely because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-3-2012 by SlowlyLonely because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-3-2012 by SlowlyLonely because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-3-2012 by SlowlyLonely because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by SlowlyLonely
reply to post by Maslo
 


Abortion does not conform to the legal definition of murder, but I would hate to be a person who assessed the treatment of human life based on the law. Fetal growth is indeed human life; it is not less essential to the development of a person than the growth that occurs after birth is.

What is the difference between withdrawing life support from a brain dead patient and aborting an unborn child? A person who is brain dead does not have the potential to lead a productive life, whereas an unborn child does.

There is also a difference of perspective in how the decisions are made. A loved one who consents to withdraw life support typically asks: What would be best for my loved one? A woman who consents to an abortion typically asks: What would be best for me?

The idea that abortion is an act of kindness to the unborn child obscures a truth: most women who experience an unplanned pregnancy do not fear for the unborn child; they fear for themselves.

If a woman does not wish to be a mother, she can give the child up for adoption. The option is always there.


More simple minded justification to usurp authority over a woman's womb. Another War On Woman soldier.

My wife has health concerns - and NO WAY do I trust elected officials or even doctors to decide for her whether or not a medical procedure is available to her. Only she has that right (or me only if she weren't able to make it herself). But instead you're cheering on authoritarianism over a woman's self control. Not cool.

Keep the laws off of women.



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 09:51 PM
link   
reply to post by reitze
 


My response has nothing to do with the usurpation of a woman's authority over her womb. Abortion, I assume, will continue to be legal; and even if Roe Vs. Wade were repealed, women would still have abortions. Regardless of what the law says, a woman will always have authority over her womb.

However, my hope is that women will exercise that authority with respect for human life, not merely with respect for what philosophers or politicos define as a "person."





edit on 20-3-2012 by SlowlyLonely because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-3-2012 by SlowlyLonely because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 10:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by SlowlyLonely
reply to post by reitze
 


My response has nothing to do with the usurpation of a woman's authority over her womb. Abortion, I assume, will continue to be legal; and even if Roe Vs. Wade were repealed, women would still have abortions. Regardless of what the law says, a woman will always have authority over her womb.

However, my hope is that women will exercise that authority with respect for human life, not merely respect for what philosophers or politicos define as a "person."

edit on 20-3-2012 by SlowlyLonely because: (no reason given)


Good till you go voting for some Pharisee such as Satin'orium. Meanwhile never mind the man behind the curtain who just declared martial law (NDAA) and SOPA, ACTA... Fascists? Commies?

It would be nice to have more people awake to the power/authoritianism going on where the DEM/REPs make deals to enslave everyone. What a mess we're in.



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 03:39 AM
link   
reply to post by reitze
 





The siamese twin thing? well if 1 head is vital and the other head is not then it would be up to the ruling head whether or not to cut off the other, just like I could cut off some body part if I felt it necessary.


Makes sense. But in case of pregnancy, a foetus is indeed viable after some 6th month (and this will be pushed further with advancements in medicine). So what would your position be in case of siamese twins when both are viable, and can be separated without killing the other one? This is the correct analogy for late-term pregnancy.

I would never agree with such siamese twin having the right to murder its brother, just because they are still biologically connected with an already largely obsolete connection. And the same thing applies to pregnancy.
edit on 21/3/12 by Maslo because: (no reason given)

edit on 21/3/12 by Maslo because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 06:19 AM
link   
I say we force abortions on anyone who gets pregnant and live below a certain level (because they, on the average, will be horrible parents and further erode society with their ignorant and dependent offspring).

I further say that we should put abortions on the menu. Sure they are tender and succulent! Feed them to the homeless and poor. Hell, they could almost feed themselves if that was the case, right? Less money out of my pocket if they would just start eating their own rather than raising them to be a bigger burden to me that their parents were.....



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 06:31 AM
link   
I favor legalizing abortion up through the 99th trimester.



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 10:28 AM
link   
A lot of people are under two misconceptions and those that hold the real power, whomever or whatever they are, are cold, calculating and very intelligent want these misconceptions to flourish and bloom.

1) Once the sperm and egg marry, join in union whom are we to say that he/she is not a life form deserving of the utmost respect and how in the hell do any of you out there really know when a soul, the central essence of our life force enters that union of "cells"? As of yet, we have no way of knowing when the soul enters the body.

2) No, that baby and it is a baby, does not only belong to the "mother". He/she is a living being and part of a family. DNA and chromosome wise, he/she is a physical part of the father, the mother's mother and father (maternal grandparents), the paternal grandparents and so on.

One person posted that the woman should carry to full term and then strangle the infant at birth in full view of all family members.

I agree.

Being the paternal grandmother, I would literally and I mean literally kill anyone that would harm a hair on my son's daughter, my beloved and precious granddaughter.

The first thing the Nazi's did to kill the Jews, the first thing the Southern Plantation owners did to enslave the blacks, the first thing the Egyptians did to enslave the Jews and all the other mass cruelties this species has perpetrated upon each other, such as enslavement, mass murder and dismantling of the family unit is to classify some of us as "not human".

That is the first legal step to ensure you are allowed to murder another, you deem them “not human”.

That is the way TPTB manipulate us into killing each other off.

The minute my son and now ex daughter in law sat us down and told us we would be grandparents, my heart leaped with joy.

I told my precious granddaughter many times, "I loved you even before we met, I loved and wanted you when you were no bigger than a seed and I will love you for all eternity."

No, I use to believe and in previous posts have stated, I have no right to tell the rest of you what to do or not do as long as YOU HARM NONE.

That is the the golden rule many have chosen to forget because it may cause an inconvenient disruption in your life having to pay for your carelessness.

If you took and got in your car and put a blindfold on or drank a six pack and then proceeded to drive and smashed into another car - you would be held legally liable. You chose to not take the proper precautions and must now face up to the consequences of your irresponsibility.

We're not talking about cars here folks, cars are not important, they absolutely do not have souls, they are not a living life form.

In my state the Grandparents, particularly the paternal Grandparents (and even the father who makes up 50% of that baby's DNA, have absolutely no rights).

The State sees our children as property of the mother, like a car, a house, your plasma TV. The court does not recognize my granddaughter or will talk to her until she reaches 12 years of age.

I know because we have hired the best lawyers at the tune of $28,000 in order to be allowed the privilege to be semi involved in my granddaughter’s life.

There are simple solutions, better solutions than abortion.

Abortion is wrong. We need to find other solutions but not abortion.

I am not even a religious person and I can see how VERY WRONG on so many levels the taking of a human life is.

Thou shall not kill, .no loop holes, no exclusion clauses.

TPTB have already worked their black magic upon most of you good people. And yes I believe most of you are good, most people want to live and let live and play nice be fair and live and let live.

I will repeat that one phrase, and let live.

But, TPTB know that if they are able to split up the family unit, which is the strongest weapon we humans have against whomever has enslaved us, they will win the war and yes we have been at war since humanity came into being. By who or what, a small group of inbred, psychopathic narcissists or other worldly beings, who knows?

Think back, ever watch Roots, I know most Americans with some African Heritage have. What did the evil White Man do? He would sell off family members, (tear the family unit apart).

Why?

Simple, one of the most effective war strategies, divide and conquer.

That is what is happening now and it's worked so far very well.

No, my granddaughter belongs not only to her mother she belongs to her father, her maternal and paternal grandparents, my parents, my husband’s parents and so on.

There are simple solutions to not getting pregnant if you don't want to and no I do not want to hear excuses, if you are not ready to have a child and are very fertile than either use double protection, don't have sex or be ready going into the act of sexual intercourse with the intent of if you both make a child you both will either adopt him/her out or both raise him/her. Discuss this first. It’s a important matter. Hell people discuss what they will wear tomorrow, where they will eat at next Saturday but not what if we have sex and make a child?

The golden rule: Do unto others EXACTLY as you would have them do unto you.

Would you want to be torn apart, poisoned or any of the other methods we have of murder?

We now use fancy terms to mask our evil deeds, to ease our conscious, to not take full responsibility.

Everyone reading this has been allotted the gift of life, yet many of you would deny that right to another because their “creators” were not cautious enough.

That baby and yes, it is a baby belongs to each and every person in that family.
What has humanity sunk to? It seems the smarter we become the colder our hearts. This is not progress this is degradation.
This is mass murder on a grand scale.
If humanity is regressing back to a savage, heartless beast than I pray that we as a species die out. My husband says, "Let the ones that are heartless kill their own, the ones with heart will live".

Well I have to speak for those that cannot yet speak, they silently scream while they are being ripped apart.

Be prepared, if you play you pay - don't dishonor those who gave you physical life by denying life to their legacy and our children are our legacy, our most precious legacy.

TPTB have now already separated man from woman as almost 50% of “marriages” now end in divorce.

They are now going for the most sacred of all unions, that of a mother and child.

For you men and women who have never carried a baby full term, maybe for some of you that are not sensitive, there is no privilege more sacred than to carry a life within you for 9 months, none.

If you chose to not raise that baby, give him/her to someone who will at least give them life.

I would take my granddaughter in a heartbeat if asked to. I would give my life without hesitation to ensure her survival and while I don’t even step on bugs or hardly eat any meat, I would again without hesitation kill anyone trying to harm her and again I mean that in a very literal sense.

The minute I walked into the hospital room and saw my granddaughter in her little plastic box on wheels, I cried. I did not expect to, but it was the same feeling within my heart I experienced when each of my three sons were placed in my arms for the first time.

A piece of my heart, a large chunk.

I feel sorry for those of you that have lost your gentle goodness of heart. Many of you have become exactly what the manipulators of this planet want you to be, savage slaves.

I chose my ATS name for a reason. Like in the B horror movies, maybe, possibly not all of us walking around are totally human.

Again, for the third time I ask, what happens to those dismembered pieces of human flesh, bone and blood that end up in the trash cans?

I would be curious if someone, a real good investigative journalist would follow up on that.

Who buys this “waste product”????

And my guess, and I really have a gut feeling, we would all be very surprised to know the truth as this one question, no one has replied to yet remains unanswered.

Think these babies just end up in a landfill?

Have we ever been told the truth about most things?

The more important something is, it seems the more lies we are fed.

We need to stop killing each other as well as using all these fancy terms we use to justify our brutality.

We need to grow up and take full responsibility for ourselves.

We don’t, not with our planet, those that we have allowed to “lead” us and now with our children.

edit on 21-3-2012 by ofhumandescent because: grammar



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by reitze
 



The siamese twin thing? well if 1 head is vital and the other head is not then it would be up to the ruling head whether or not to cut off the other, just like I could cut off some body part if I felt it necessary.

Makes sense. But in case of pregnancy, a foetus is indeed viable after some 6th month (and this will be pushed further with advancements in medicine). So what would your position be in case of siamese twins when both are viable, and can be separated without killing the other one? This is the correct analogy for late-term pregnancy.
I would never agree with such siamese twin having the right to murder its brother, just because they are still biologically connected with an already largely obsolete connection. And the same thing applies to pregnancy.
edit on 21/3/12 by Maslo because: (no reason given)

edit on 21/3/12 by Maslo because: (no reason given)


Now you're re-defining your question into one of co-habitation. The fetus isn't a sibling, its contained within a mom. So again regulations controlling the mom interfere. If God can trust mom's to make the right decision - that's good enough for me. Fists and sticks have existed as long as pregnancy too. So like God (I hope) I favor citizenship,...

Birth = Beginning of Person-hood, Citizenship, independent exisitance

Prior to that leave it up to mom lest you interfere in HER sacred domain.



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 10:33 AM
link   
All abortions are a murder. Fact. All parties voluntarily involved are killers.

Where is the rights of the unborn person.



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 11:10 AM
link   
reply to post by ofhumandescent
 




and how in the hell do any of you out there really know when a soul, the central essence of our life force enters that union of "cells"? As of yet, we have no way of knowing when the soul enters the body.


We have, with science:

Functional maturity of the cerebral cortex is suggested by fetal and a neonatal electroencephalographic patterns, studies of cerebral metabolism, and the behavioral development of neonates. First, intermittent electroencephalograpic bursts in both cerebral hemispheres are first seen at 20 weeks gestation; they become sustained at 22 weeks and bilaterally synchronous at 26 to 27 weeks.

PAIN AND ITS EFFECTS IN THE HUMAN NEONATE AND FETUS

"soul" = mind
No brainwaves, no mind.



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 11:38 AM
link   
reply to post by reitze
 




The fetus isn't a sibling, its contained within a mom. So again regulations controlling the mom interfere.


All right. I guess we will have to agree to disagree. I think some minimal level of regulation and interference is absolutely justified to protect those contained within others. Anarchy is unacceptable when there are two people already.



If God can trust mom's to make the right decision - that's good enough for me.


Except that there is no god, and even if we assume one, then you dont know his mind.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join