Abortion as seen through a perspective of civil rights.

page: 1
38
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 02:42 PM
link   
Men have rights.
Women have rights.
Blacks have rights.
Asians have rights.
Hispanics have rights.
Gays have rights.
Transgender people have rights.Christians have rights.
Islamists have rights.
Hebraic followers have rights.
Animals have rights.


Unborn children do not.

Arguments go about defending abortion because;
Men have no say, it's no-ones business but the womans.
Women have the RIGHT to do whatever they want with their body.
It's the law.

I'd like to address these points from a civil rights perspective. Because I feel that it is a civil rights issue. The rights to life, liberty, and the pusuit of happiness.


We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

en.wikipedia.org...
This is from the second section from the Declaration of Independence.


Lets look at these points.

Men have no say.

If only people of colour fought for civil rights, then how effective would it have been? If caucasians never marched at Selma, supported the rights of people even though they didn't have a dog in this fight how convincing would it have been? Men have as much of a right to protest and fight for the rights of the unborn as anyone does.

Women have the RIGHT to do whatever they want with their body.

Yes. Yes they do. To a point. We are bound by current law NOT to do certain things to our own bodies. When it comes to pregnancy, there exists a duality as the womans body shares a part of her body with another individual for a short time. A woman has a right, but her right should end where the rights of the unborn baby begins. Currently the law favours the rights of the woman and ignores the rights of the unborn. Which brings me to . . . . . . .

It's the law.

I've lost count of the times people have said, "It's the law, get over it."
Well, it was the law that whites could kill blacks and get away with it. I'm glad people didn't get over it.
It was the law that women could not vote. I'm glad people didn't just get over it.
It was the law that blacks had to sit in the back of the bus. I'm glad Rosa Parks didn't just get over it.

Isn't it time for people not to "just get over it?" Isn'tit time for people to stand up, once again, and fight for the rights of a group that doesn't yet have a voice? People march for gays. People march for animals.
Those same people spit on those that march for the unborn.

It's not a religious thing. Sure, people who are religious support the rights of the unborn. During the civil rights era, it was the white churches that stood up for blacks.

I can also see the argument when the life of the mother is at stake. Incest and abortion are also valid arguments for abortion. I'm not here to get lost in the details or strawmen to argue the point, however.

Just take the time and try to see this issue through the lens of civil rights.

As a small point, I will try to answer any and all serious queries. But it is late. So please be patient.
I press the "post" button with some trepidation, but I stand by my beliefs.
Cheers,
beez




posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 02:53 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Beezer, I understand what you are saying, but don't you think that the fact the government dictates to us humans what we can and cannot do to our own bodies, make us like farm animals on their wealthy ranches?

A rancher is responsible for his/her flock to produce or sustain their family. So what business is it to the government to make sure we do what "they" want with our own bodies? It makes me feel so dirty and less than human to think some "goverment dictator" has a right to tell me what I can and cannot do with my own body.......baaaahhhhh

Abortion has become just another division tactice that one party is for and the other party is against. It is nothing more than an agenda to separate us.

My question to those on the religious right is simply this, "If abortion is so wrong, then why do you also stand against birth control?".

It is a slippery slope when one belief overshadows another in the name of democracy, therefore we all must abide by the mob rule mentality, when in fact our Constitution pretty much grants us the freedom to do as we will with our own body.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 02:59 PM
link   
This argument is never going to go away. Those that believe abortion is no more than getting a mole removed, will always argue that it's her body to do with as she pleases. She will never "see" (for better or worse) that another human life is in her hands to decide whether it lives or doesn't live on.

Sorry....edited to add: If she cannot see the life, she cannot contemplate its rights.
edit on 23-8-2012 by queenofswords because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by seeker1963
 


I'm trying to frame this in a way that focuses on the rights of the unborn. Not to discuss the politics. The governmental issues, except to say that the unborn have no rights and should have the same rights as anyone else.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by queenofswords
This argument is never going to go away. Those that believe abortion is no more than getting a mole removed, will always argue that it's her body to do with as she pleases. She will never "see" (for better or worse) that another human life is in her hands to decide whether it lives or doesn't live on.


I agree. And thank you for your perspective.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 03:06 PM
link   
*To clarify, I disagree with abortion. Personally, I don't believe there are many occasions where it is warranted. Rape & incest certainly are. Mother's life in danger I believe valid. I also believe in certain circumstances that proof of major deformity or diseases that severely limit the quality of life of individuals *should* be legal. I have a lot of mentally handicapped folk in my family, so please don't make the conversation about the above. Otherwise as far as abortion is concerned...live with your choices. And I mean like 1st trimester only..none of this late term crap*

What it comes down to fundamentally, is that the government, nor anybody else for that matter, has a right to tell you what to do with your own body.

Now that's not to say that I don't think that men have no say. Of course, they have provided half the genetic material that makes up this child. At least pregnancies resulting from consensual sex from both partners, must be treated with equal legal rights.

But I will discuss this from a legal perspective.

You cannot legislate life. Legislating the lives of people is not the job of the government. Not when it comes to issues like these. It's just far too gray to make a black and white decision.

Sorry I guess my thoughts on this are all over the place today.

I guess what I'm saying is, I would prefer it not be legal other than issues outlined above, but I do also believe in personal freedom. I don't get to inject my personal morality unto society. Neither should anybody else.

~Tenth



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 03:06 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 



I'm trying to frame this in a way that focuses on the rights of the unborn. Not to discuss the politics. The governmental issues, except to say that the unborn have no rights and should have the same rights as anyone else.


Understood, I have my opposing opinions when a woman should or should not be allowed to have an abortion myself. However, is it for me to say? The woman has to live with the choice she makes. A man doesn't have to carry the baby for 9 months and then who's to say if he will even be there to take care of the child when it is born?

I guess I am trying to say, that I don't like anyone telling me what to do with my body, so why should my opinion or beliefs dictate to someone else what is right and what is wrong for them to do with theirs.......

edit on 23-8-2012 by seeker1963 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 03:08 PM
link   
So an unborn rights overrides a mother's rights.

Which means of course that if complications happens in pregnancy that threatens the mother's life, she should die rather than to threaten the unborn life. She has no rights, after all, she is just a vessel to carry the unborn.

Because the unborn rights overrides the mother rights'.

Which of course means that the unborn is more important than the mother and the mother should be reduced to a second class citizen.

At least until the unborn is born. Then they can both have equal rights.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 03:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower


But I will discuss this from a legal perspective.

You cannot legislate life. Legislating the lives of people is not the job of the government. Not when it comes to issues like these. It's just far too gray to make a black and white decision.



You can't legislate life, but you can legislate rights. Thi is just as important a civil rights issue as anything I've seen before.
To my viewpoint, arguing FOR abortion is just as similar to arguing for Jim Crow laws, because it is denying very basic civil rights.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by seeker1963
reply to post by beezzer
 



I'm trying to frame this in a way that focuses on the rights of the unborn. Not to discuss the politics. The governmental issues, except to say that the unborn have no rights and should have the same rights as anyone else.


Understood, I have my opposing opinions when a woman should or should not be allowed to have an abortion myself. However, is it for me to say? The woman has to live with the choice she makes. A man doesn't have to carry the baby for 9 months and then who's to say if he will even be there to take care of the child when it is born?

I guess I am trying to say, that I don't like anyone telling me what to do with my body, so why should my opinion or beliefs dictate to someone else what is right and what is wrong for them to do with theirs.......

edit on 23-8-2012 by seeker1963 because: (no reason given)


I tried to address those points in my OP. Everyone has a stake in the debate on civil rights.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone
So an unborn rights overrides a mother's rights.

Which means of course that if complications happens in pregnancy that threatens the mother's life, she should die rather than to threaten the unborn life. She has no rights, after all, she is just a vessel to carry the unborn.

Because the unborn rights overrides the mother rights'.

Which of course means that the unborn is more important than the mother and the mother should be reduced to a second class citizen.

At least until the unborn is born. Then they can both have equal rights.





I didn't say that. Please re-read the OP.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 03:16 PM
link   
In order to give the unborn rights you have to take away the mothers.

Which also conflicts with parental rights.

If you believe in parental rights, you can not give the unborn rights, because parental rights also gives the parents the right to choose to not be a parent.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


One has to ask if the unborn are actually deserving of having rights. It's a strange concept to me honestly.

It's too hard a decision for me to make, or even have much of an opinion on other than what I've already stated.

~Tenth



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone
In order to give the unborn rights you have to take away the mothers.

Which also conflicts with parental rights.

If you believe in parental rights, you can not give the unborn rights, because parental rights also gives the parents the right to choose to not be a parent.

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. These "conflicts" are the same "conflicts" that proponents of segregation brought up as well.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 03:19 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 





I've lost count of the times people have said, "It's the law, get over it."
Well, it was the law that whites could kill blacks and get away with it. I'm glad people didn't get over it.
It was the law that women could not vote. I'm glad people didn't just get over it.
It was the law that blacks had to sit in the back of the bus. I'm glad Rosa Parks didn't just get over it.

Isn't it time for people not to "just get over it?" Isn'tit time for people to stand up, once again, and fight for the rights of a group that doesn't yet have a voice? People march for gays. People march for animals.
Those same people spit on those that march for the unborn.


Great points, and with modern technology there are many people that are starting to question if indeed abortion is actually murder,
So some physicians claims it is not murder, in fact the majority of physicians believe abortion is murder, why nor err on the side of caution?

How would an abortion supporter feel if one day modern technology proved without a shadow of a doubt, they were wrong?

I imagine they would keep insisting all the experts are wrong, Why? because they would have to admit that they had the blood of the most innocent on their hands, they wouldn't want to admit it now would they?

Fewer People Are Identifying As 'Pro-Choice' Than Ever Before

Read more: www.businessinsider.com...


This poll comes on the heels of a separate Gallup poll released yesterday. That poll found that just 38 percent of Americans found abortion to be "morally acceptable," compared with 51 percent that said it was "morally wrong." That has also held steady over the past year.

That poll also showed the strong gap in moral acceptability between political parties—52 percent of Democrats said it was morally acceptable vs. only 22 percent of Republicans.

The key shift in the "pro-choice" poll today is among Independents. Incredibly, they swung 16 points—10 points down in "pro-choice," six points up in "pro-life."

Read more: www.businessinsider.com...


They are going to have to live with it one day, in this life or the next, mark my words.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by beezzer
 


One has to ask if the unborn are actually deserving of having rights. It's a strange concept to me honestly.



Do black people deserve rights?
Do gay people deserve rights?

All I'm asking is that the same consideration be given to those human individuals that have yet to be born.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Yes, you did.

I just stated it plainly.

Because if the unborn have the right to be born, it takes away the mother's right to choose. You can't have it both ways. It has to be either or.

And if you take away her right to choose, then that reduces her to a second class citizen.

Rights are conferred at birth for this reason, because of this conflict of rights.

And if you take her right away to choose, then you will also take away parental rights, and therefore enable the government to be able to choose who gets to be a parent or not, and will allow parents to be regulated, much in the same way marriage is regulated.

Do you really want that? Those are the ramifications of giving the unborn rights o be born.

Personally, I want the government out of our lives. it's too intrusive as it is.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


Well said.

How many people regretted their behaviour during the era of civil rights?

I see striking similarities.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 03:23 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


As the saying goes: Everyone who is FOR abortion has ALREADY been born

hmmmm



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone
In order to give the unborn rights you have to take away the mothers.

Which also conflicts with parental rights.

If you believe in parental rights, you can not give the unborn rights, because parental rights also gives the parents the right to choose to not be a parent.



The unborn already have rights under certain circumstances, if a baby is murdered in the womb by an attack on the mother he is accused of murdering the unborn,

There's is no way to get around this.





top topics
 
38
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join