Why isn't abortion murder?

page: 1
12
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 11:57 AM
link   
I'm trying to figure this one out. I'm a Conservative guy when it comes to economics but fairly liberal when it comes to social issues but I just can't see the logic in a womans right to choose. Why is it a womans right to choose life or death for another human being?

I know people have convinced themselves that a baby in the wound isn't human but again, that's just silly. The process of life begins at conception. When that process is intentionally cut off that's murder whether it's cut off at 2 months after conception or at age 30.

I think there should be exceptions for rape, incest and the life of the mother but those make up a small percentage of cases.

Here's some statistics.


In 2008, approximately 1.21 million abortions took place in the U.S., down from an estimated 1.29 million in 2002, 1.31 million in 2000 and 1.36 million in 1996. From 1973 through 2008, nearly 50 million legal abortions have occurred in the U.S. (AGI).

On average, women give at least 3 reasons for choosing abortion: 3/4 say that having a baby would interfere with work, school or other responsibilities; about 3/4 say they cannot afford a child; and 1/2 say they do not want to be a single parent or are having problems with their husband or partner (AGI).

Only 12% of women included a physical problem with their health among reasons for having an abortion (NAF).

One per cent (of aborting women) reported that they were the survivors of rape (NAF).


www.abort73.com...

So with just rape, incest and the life of the mother, that would be around 6,500,000 abortions and you would save 43,500,000 lives.

Maybe I'm wrong though. Maybe abortion isn't murder but how can you intentionally cut off the process of life and it not be murder whether it's a 30 year old or a baby 2 months after conception?




posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 12:08 PM
link   
You'll probably get a hundred heated answers. Let me try for the quickest possible explanation. It's not murder for two reasons. 1.) The courts decide what murder is, in a technical, legal, sense, and they say it's not. 2.) Both women and men sometimes see aborting the child as an easier choice than giving birth to it. People like to please themselves.


+11 more 
posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by neoholographic
 





I know people have convinced themselves that a baby in the womb isn't human but again, that's just silly. The process of life begins at conception. When that process is intentionally cut off that's murder whether it's cut off at 2 months after conception or at age 30.


Nobody is saying that a fertilized egg isn't human. But an egg, a zygote or a fetus in early development is not a human being. It is a potential human being.

A life doesn't being at conception. The egg and the sperm are already alive and are living things that, when they meet, causes a chemical reaction that provides the blueprint for further human development. A recipe and the ingredients for a cake isn't a cake, yet. Things have to happen first, in order for a cake to be a cake.

edit on 15-1-2013 by windword because: womb



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 12:14 PM
link   
The problem is that if you outlaw the abortion clinic, you will get back street abortions and your jail houses full up with women. Just because you made it illegal doesn't mean women won't still have abortions. I thinks it's best we provide a safe environment in which to let abortions take place. That's just my opinion in this mine field.



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 12:15 PM
link   
im going to answer your question with my question.

Why isnt masturbation illegal?

Why isnt killing animals for food murder?

imo killing. is natural selection at its finest.



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 12:15 PM
link   
Each of us have to make the decision whether it's murder, or not. But it's our decision for our own bodies. The government cannot get involved with decisions like that. We decide whether or not to allow the being to grow in us. It is a very personal decision that is our own to make. It's not up for argument, in my view.



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 12:17 PM
link   
Bringing a Human Being into the world has massive implications, both for the individual and for society.


Humans are expensive, and consume a huge amount of natural resources.



The choice whether or not to keep it is very important, and should never be taken away.




That choice, for whatever reason, can only be made by the Female (or breeding pair) as it is a creature growing in her body.



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 12:18 PM
link   
This could go in circles for a long time with one person saying it isn't a baby and the other that it is. I would encourage you to do some research on child sacrifice and specifically the sacrifice of babies in the history of this world.

I believe there are dark forces at work in this world, more so now than ever. If you break it down you'll see why. They don't believe in the right to 'choose'. We cannot 'choose' anything unless they allow us to. It has nothing to do with the rights of women. When tested they always discriminate against women. Women are not happy with Obama's cabinet appointments. He says he only nominated people that were most qualified and it just so happened that no women were qualified enough. They don't allow women in their masonic lodges. They don't allow women in to Bohemian Grove. It isn't about whether the baby would be better off - clearly it is better off alive than murdered in the womb. They said women would get the operation anyway. Well when we say people will get illegal guns off the street and the black market will make it even more dangerous for law abiding citizens they don't care.

They do not parade around the knifed baby on top of the pyramid like the Aztecs but they are carrying off THE largest mass-murder in the history of the world that we know of. They are doing it 'legally' and with protection from law enforcement.

I've been looking at this stuff for such a long time, its apparent to me but I can see how its difficult for other people to understand why they are doing it. To me they are continuing the practice of child sacrifice. Sacrifice in the ancient culture was to empower via spiritual energy the god in return for their favor in the worldly affairs.
edit on 1/15/2013 by ararisq because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 12:19 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


You can't give "human being" any definition that you see fit.
You said the fertilized egg was human well I have news for you.
There is no difference between human and human being.



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by trysts
Each of us have to make the decision whether it's murder, or not. But it's our decision for our own bodies. The government cannot get involved with decisions like that. We decide whether or not to allow the being to grow in us. It is a very personal decision that is our own to make. It's not up for argument, in my view.


Wish I could give you more than one star.

It is up to each of us to take the responsibility to choose what is right for us. Regardless of what an individual feels about about, for or against, the freedom to make that choice is what it comes down to. Nobody can force someone to have an abortion, but taking away the ability to choose means that the choice is being made for you, and thats not okay.



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by windword
A life doesn't being at conception. The egg and the sperm are already alive and are living things that, when they meet, causes a chemical reaction that provides the blueprint for further human development. A recipe and the ingredients for a cake isn't a cake, yet. Things have to happen first, in order for a cake to be a cake.


Yet some are pushing the 'definition' to be that a human that cannot serve society is not a human. It is a potential-human. Pushing for the allowance to kill a child even up to the age of 12 that cannot faithfully serve humanity. The courts could deem it acceptable and then what would your definition be? That a cake left uneaten is not really a cake at all?



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 12:23 PM
link   
It is murder after 40 - 49 days after conception.

That is when the Pineal gland turns on, and as far as I can tell that is when the spirit/soul/universe WTF ever it is enters the body.
edit on 15-1-2013 by PassiveObserver because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by GmoS719
reply to post by windword
 


You can't give "human being" any definition that you see fit.
You said the fertilized egg was human well I have news for you.
There is no difference between human and human being.


A human being is a sovereign person, with thoughts, emotions hope and dreams and fears. Every cell within your body is human, but a fertilized egg is not a person. It's not a human being.



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by windword
A human being is a sovereign person, with thoughts, emotions hope and dreams and fears. Every cell within your body is human, but a fertilized egg is not a person. It's not a human being.


So if a person is mentally challenged and cannot express their emotions they aren't human? If a person is enslaved by a system of government (not sovereign) then they are not human? Every cell is human, except the ones that grow in the belly of woman and actually become a child?

Do you hear yourself?



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 12:47 PM
link   
Here's a good video.



Again, the process of life begins at the moment of conception. If you intentionally cut off that process it's murder.
Whether it's going from age 30 to 40 or from 2 months after conception to 5 years old.



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by neoholographic
 


See, once again, you are missing the point. It is understood that you feel abortion is murder. By all means, stick to that view. Dont have an abortion.

But the minute you force that view on everyone else, you are taking away their ability to do what you have done-that is, to choose what is the right view for them.

Why would you support restricting freedom?



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 12:50 PM
link   
I think a middle ground is needed to be reached....

For me its 5th month(brain activity).... then again, i don't know anyone that would get abortion after that.... unless life is in danger.


What pisses me off more is that Women have sole rights on the decision, yet 2 people needed to make the baby.

Man wants Baby, Women Don't = Men Lose.

Man Do Not want the baby, Women Want = Men Lose.

This is the current law. A disgustingly biased system.
edit on 1/15/2013 by luciddream because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 12:51 PM
link   
reply to post by neoholographic
 




Again, the process of life begins at the moment of conception. If you intentionally cut off that process it's murder.


Wrong! Life is cycle. There is no "life fairy" that created life were there once wan none. When your mother was your grandmother's womb, the egg that decades later would become you, was already there are able to be fertilized.




posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
 


See, once again, you are missing the point. It is understood that you feel abortion is murder. By all means, stick to that view. Dont have an abortion.

But the minute you force that view on everyone else, you are taking away their ability to do what you have done-that is, to choose what is the right view for them.

Why would you support restricting freedom?


Take that argument and apply it to rape and first-degree murder. Write that up so we can all understand it and then maybe we'll agree.
edit on 1/15/2013 by ararisq because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by ararisq

Originally posted by windword
A life doesn't being at conception. The egg and the sperm are already alive and are living things that, when they meet, causes a chemical reaction that provides the blueprint for further human development. A recipe and the ingredients for a cake isn't a cake, yet. Things have to happen first, in order for a cake to be a cake.


Yet some are pushing the 'definition' to be that a human that cannot serve society is not a human. It is a potential-human. Pushing for the allowance to kill a child even up to the age of 12 that cannot faithfully serve humanity. The courts could deem it acceptable and then what would your definition be? That a cake left uneaten is not really a cake at all?


Who in the world is "pushing" that? Seriously? That's flat out retarded.





top topics
 
12
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join