People who are against abortion

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: queenofswords

Yea, except that isn't true. In fact, the opposite is true. Abortion USED to be looked upon as reprehensible and immoral. It was even illegal up until the 1970's. Then that changed with Roe v Wade.

It did change, but unless you've missed it, public opinion is changing back to the side of abortion is immoral and reprehensible again.

That is mainly because technology has both allowed more people to see what actually is inside the womb and that it is alive and responsive as well as allowing more and more premature babies to survive at younger ages all the time.

It really doesn't take a whole lot of logical thought to realize that the ONLY difference between a premie in the NICU and the "fetus" at some PP clinics is the convenience of the mother and not any other factor. And for most humans, that's a sickening realization.

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: queenofswords

Yea, except that isn't true. In fact, the opposite is true. Abortion USED to be looked upon as reprehensible and immoral. It was even illegal up until the 1970's. Then that changed with Roe v Wade.

It did change, but unless you've missed it, public opinion is changing back to the side of abortion is immoral and reprehensible again.

No it isn't.

Opinions About Abortion Haven't Changed Since Roe v. Wade

Most Americans Don’t Want To Defund Planned Parenthood

That is mainly because technology has both allowed more people to see what actually is inside the womb and that it is alive and responsive as well as allowing more and more premature babies to survive at younger ages all the time.

No, it's mainly because you made that claim up on the spot.

It really doesn't take a whole lot of logical thought to realize that the ONLY difference between a premie in the NICU and the "fetus" at some PP clinics is the convenience of the mother and not any other factor. And for most humans, that's a sickening realization.

It apparently DOES take logical thought, because you are completely wrong about public perceptions. I mean pro-life people apparently can't put enough logical circuits together in their heads to learn that Planned Parenthood doesn't and can't fund abortions with tax money, yet they continue to demand that PP be defunded.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Krazysh0t

This only holds true if abortion remains legal. If you make abortion illegal then you aren't staying out of a woman's womb

Did anyone say ANYTHING about making it illegal ?

No.

That's the premises of the OP...

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Krazy off topic here but I really want to know. Do you think abortion is right?

I'm not asking if it's legal, I mean personally do you believe it's morally right.

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: queenofswords

Yea, except that isn't true. In fact, the opposite is true. Abortion USED to be looked upon as reprehensible and immoral. It was even illegal up until the 1970's. Then that changed with Roe v Wade.

It did change, but unless you've missed it, public opinion is changing back to the side of abortion is immoral and reprehensible again.

That is mainly because technology has both allowed more people to see what actually is inside the womb and that it is alive and responsive as well as allowing more and more premature babies to survive at younger ages all the time.

It really doesn't take a whole lot of logical thought to realize that the ONLY difference between a premie in the NICU and the "fetus" at some PP clinics is the convenience of the mother and not any other factor. And for most humans, that's a sickening realization.

I totally agree. I know people that used to think abortion was no big deal, just getting rid of a glob of tissue and cells that would eventually turn into a human. They now know because of advanced technology, as you stated, that it is so much more than that and the thought of sucking that emerging life out as if it was nothing but a bit of debris has become reprehensible to them.

I don't always trust so-called studies such as those done by left-wing groups. They might ask five hundred women, but those 500 women are probably their readers and supporters. meh. Real life conversations with a wide range of philosophically diverse women is much more reliable, don't you think?

originally posted by: Bennyzilla
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Krazy off topic here but I really want to know. Do you think abortion is right?

I'm not asking if it's legal, I mean personally do you believe it's morally right.

I'm 30, at this point in my life if I were to get a girl pregnant, I'd try to prevent her from having the abortion and try to take care of it. Though when I was younger, I wouldn't have hesitated to push her to get the abortion.

As far as morally, I think it isn't a good decision, but taking care of a child is a HUGE task that requires time, dedication, and a LOT of money, so if I don't have those things I'm not against going against morals to get the abortion.

a reply to: queenofswords

So studies aren't good enough because the sample size may be invalid, but personal anecdotes are perfectly fine? Lol. That is the most ridiculous thing I've read.

As far as morally, I think it isn't a good decision, but taking care of a child is a HUGE task that requires time, dedication, and a LOT of money, so if I don't have those things I'm not against going against morals to get the abortion.

Un-freakin'-believable! We will shake our heads in disgust at this kind of attitude one day! Economic reasons were also part of the excuse to own slaves.

originally posted by: ketsuko

It really doesn't take a whole lot of logical thought to realize that the ONLY difference between a premie in the NICU and the "fetus" at some PP clinics is the convenience of the mother and not any other factor. And for most humans, that's a sickening realization.

No, the difference between a premie in the NICU and a third trimester aborted fetus is that the mother would have died if she had it or the fetus itself was dying or horribly deformed. A first trimester fetus (which is the vast majority of abortions) would have ZERO chance of survival if delivered, so nothing in common with the premie there.

I love how you use the word convenience, when for the most part, women have abortions because they have no support and no way of physically, financially or emotionally taking adequate care of the child. That's a little more of a dire situation than just "inconvenience".

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Thanks for the thoughtful response as always.

originally posted by: queenofswords

As far as morally, I think it isn't a good decision, but taking care of a child is a HUGE task that requires time, dedication, and a LOT of money, so if I don't have those things I'm not against going against morals to get the abortion.

Un-freakin'-believable! We will shake our heads in disgust at this kind of attitude one day! Economic reasons were also part of the excuse to own slaves.

Yea, except women have been making decisions like this for years regardless if abortion was illegal or not. Though this is why I don't offer my opinion on this subject, your opinion about how -I- think about abortions is irrelevant and unnecessary. Feel free to continue to dislike me though. I really don't care.

originally posted by: Bennyzilla
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Thanks for the thoughtful response as always.

Yea... I wish you would have sent me that U2U though... I really don't like putting my personal opinions about touchy subjects like this out into ATS, because then people start judging me by them instead of my reasoning.

Side?

Wins?

This isn't about sides or winning.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I realized that when people started coming at you. Next time for sure.

My mistake.

a reply to: Bennyzilla

Oh well. Everyone gets one.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Bluntone22
Why would you think because they didn't want to have a baby they will automatically neglect the baby?

The best way to take care of this is to make adoption easier. Give up your baby to somebody that wants it and move on with life.

Either way it ain't gunna happen.

Adoption can't be easier if there aren't enough families willing to take in the children. There is already a surplus of adoptable children in our country WITH abortion being legal. Do you think that number will magically drop if abortions were made illegal?

I know 2 families that adopted foreign children because of the difficulty of adopting American children. There are people that want kids but can't get them.

At abortion rallys I carry my "Pro-Anchor Baby Fetus!" sign.
It confuses right wingers.

a reply to: queenofswords

You do realize that abortions have been performed since the beginning of time, or at least from the time they figured out how to end an unwanted pregnancy. This is not a modern medical discovery. In fact, it why some women were considered witches in the middle ages.

originally posted by: queenofswords

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: queenofswords

Yea, except that isn't true. In fact, the opposite is true. Abortion USED to be looked upon as reprehensible and immoral. It was even illegal up until the 1970's. Then that changed with Roe v Wade.

Again, I disagree. You wait! There will come a time when we will look back at the sanctioned genocide of emerging life and shake our heads at the inhumanity of it and wonder at the cultural and social climate that would have allowed that kind of behavior. We will be as sickened by it as we are today of the period of slavery.

The global trend is the exact opposite. The days women had to risk health to get dangerous backroom abortions are what people look back at and are sickened. Society does not tend to go backwards. Ad that to that organized religion dying at record rates and in fact in the future opposition to abortion will be even more marginalized than it is already.

Let me change it up a bit -

"I have wondered something about those people who are against the people who choose to kill their kids. I would never attempt to dictate to another human being who they can and cannot kill.
If you're against killing babies and then claiming it's "for the child", then why do most of you say that someone elses kid is not my problem?
You cannot force the mother of this unwanted child to take care of that child she does not want then turn around and say you refuse to foot the bill for this unwanted child.
Let's say your side wins (hypothetical scenario) where no-one is allowed to kill kids anymore, then just what is supposed to happen to those kids (now alive! UHG!) "

Insane psycho bable, and this is why so many are against abortion.