Abortion ultrasound tossed

[OUHOMER]

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20090818_11_0_OKLAHO116418&rss_lnk=11


Didn't make much since to me to make some have an ultrasound, if they going to have an abortion anyway.

I did not start this thread to debate abortion.

If your for it great, if your against it great, but i thought it was a silly law, there to intimidate women.

[delhalew]

Well, I can tell you what they're thinking. I'll bet the idea is having an ultrasound will lower abortions by a large percentage.

Having now had two children, I can pinpoint the ultrasound as the point when it became REAL.

[OUHOMER]

I am sure thats why they do it, Right? or Wrong?

[delhalew]

My daughters ultrasound was my wallpaper on my cellphone for a long time. My son shot us the bird in his. For anyone other than a total sociopath see it as a real live human would have to make it harder to abort.

I guess then question is should it be an easy out. Or should it be heart breaking and gut wrenching? I know how I feel.

[landrun]

... but i thought it was a silly law, there to intimidate women.

I think that's the debate. Woman who have had abortions are the staunches pro-life activists there are. They argue that it should be done to educate woman. Why not give them the whole story? Let them know the truth (those images are real...not put there by some right wing nut) and enable them to make an informed decision rather than just being 'counseled' into having an abortion by organizations that make millions of dollars from it.

[yermom]

young women need to be thinking about college and partying without a baby dragging them down instead of the tiny human shaped tissue that is being vacuumed out of them

[Crucifax Autumn]

Better than turning out like this:

kRj-S8Aklcw

[delhalew]

Don't even get me started on dumpster babies. Darwin is asleep on the job.

[Crucifax Autumn]

One look out the window tells me Darwin was wrong!

[MR2-Sooner86]

I just want to make this clear. I am against abortion in any way, shape, or form.

However, I am all for the killing of babies.

[Crucifax Autumn]

I'm more of an advocate for the killing of teens, but yeah, same principle!

[Okla-homey]

Its really quite simple. Haven't any of you people seen Juno? Your Right To Choose Infanticide crowd realizes once Miss Thang sees the real-live human baby growing inside her on the ultrasound monitor, it's a lot tougher for her to pull the trigger to kill it.

[MR2-Sooner86]

I'm more of an advocate for the killing of teens, but yeah, same principle!

Hey I'm no longer one so have at it.

[Crucifax Autumn]

You could actually abort 98% of the teens in Vegas with no negative effect on society.

[Okla-homey]

You could actually abort 98% of the teens in Vegas with no negative effect on society.

Back in the old days, a big honking war came long every generation or so that culled the herd by eliminating a lot of the bedwetters and not-so-brights. Nowadays, we gotta put up with 'em. And their spawn. ;)

[Crucifax Autumn]

That's the problem...most of the teens already have a full herd of "spawn" that they drag behind them to the welfare office and their dealer's house.

[KABOOKIE]

Oh yeah! Dr. Tiller is still dead.

[olevetonahill]

young women need to be thinking about college and partying without a baby dragging them down instead of the tiny human shaped tissue that is being vacuumed out of them
Jusr talked a young friend of mine (18)
There are 6 girls in his High school class Knocked up (his class has 50 total)
Pre 73 ya mite have ONE in a Class of 600

Don't even get me started on dumpster babies. Darwin is asleep on the job.

Yup the Throwaways are the worst IMHO
The ease of Abortion has lowered the stigma of abortion . Plus the Welfare has eased the economic impact :mad:
Hell These lil girls today are ****in like Rabbits
Back in Da day we had to beg fer that shat, now they just give it up to anyone :eek:

[Crucifax Autumn]

And that's why I'm working on a machine to reverse aging!

[delhalew]

Jusr talked a young friend of mine (18)
There are 6 girls in his High school class Knocked up (his class has 50 total)
Pre 73 ya mite have ONE in a Class of 600


Yup the Throwaways are the worst IMHO
The ease of Abortion has lowered the stigma of abortion . Plus the Welfare has eased the economic impact :mad:
Hell These lil girls today are ****in like Rabbits
Back in Da day we had to beg fer that shat, now they just give it up to anyone :eek:

Yeah, you better believe I think about that having a two year old girl. Somehow I gotta teach her 1)sex isn't like a handshake, and abortion is a poor substitute for birth control and/or common sense. That's a tall order. I vividly remember being a teenager.

[Collier11]

In most cases, Abortion is a cowards way out just like suicide...we have become a country of excuses and quick fixes and very few that can actually make a difference give a ****

[OUDoc]

Back in the old days, a big honking war came long every generation or so that culled the herd by eliminating a lot of the bedwetters and not-so-brights. Nowadays, we gotta put up with 'em. And their spawn. ;)
That's pretty ****ing harsh.

[Harry Beanbag]

That's pretty ****ing harsh.

It is, but I think it may have some merit to it.

[OUDoc]

It is, but I think it may have some merit to it.

Harry-
I would hope you are referring to the ultrasound/abortion part of this discussion and not what I actually quoted above. Homey's quote smacks of Hitler.



Homey-
For someone who's seen and done as much as you claim, and for someone who spouts about being Christian as much as you do, you're very callous towards others with disabilities.
You're a father who obviously loves his daughter, we read about her all the time. Would you feel any less love if she were a “bedwetter” or a “not-so-bright”, especially knowing there are morons out there who think as you do? How would you feel if people you knew suggested that we need more wars so we can send your daughter off and “cull the herd”? Would you send her off to die so she won't have a chance to “spawn” and embarrass you? And what are you saying of the military you're so proud of, that only the “not-so-bright” serve?
I assume your daughter will find a husband and start a family some day. God forbid she has a child with a disability. I assume you wouldn't love that grandchild and would continue your crusade to rid the world of people who aren't like you.
If this seems personal, it is. It's personal to all the parents of disabled children and people who are disabled. You think any of us asked for this? Life's hard enough when you can blend in with everyone else. Think about how hard it is when you stand out.
We've butted heads on this before and I can't believe you continue to say **** like this in public. You have no idea how hard it is to have a child with a disability. Every day is a struggle for all of us. People like you make that job even harder.
You deserve this to come back to haunt you some day, Homey. And that's something I shouldn't wish on anyone.

[Okla-homey]

Harry-
I would hope you are referring to the ultrasound/abortion part of this discussion and not what I actually quoted above. Homey's quote smacks of Hitler.



Homey-
For someone who's seen and done as much as you claim, and for someone who spouts about being Christian as much as you do, you're very callous towards others with disabilities.
You're a father who obviously loves his daughter, we read about her all the time. Would you feel any less love if she were a “bedwetter” or a “not-so-bright”, especially knowing there are morons out there who think as you do? How would you feel if people you knew suggested that we need more wars so we can send your daughter off and “cull the herd”? Would you send her off to die so she won't have a chance to “spawn” and embarrass you? And what are you saying of the military you're so proud of, that only the “not-so-bright” serve?
I assume your daughter will find a husband and start a family some day. God forbid she has a child with a disability. I assume you wouldn't love that grandchild and would continue your crusade to rid the world of people who aren't like you.
If this seems personal, it is. It's personal to all the parents of disabled children and people who are disabled. You think any of us asked for this? Life's hard enough when you can blend in with everyone else. Think about how hard it is when you stand out.
We've butted heads on this before and I can't believe you continue to say **** like this in public. You have no idea how hard it is to have a child with a disability. Every day is a struggle for all of us. People like you make that job even harder.
You deserve this to come back to haunt you some day, Homey. And that's something I shouldn't wish on anyone.

Not intended to offend. Sorry. I made an offhand comment about about "population control" generally in a historical context. It's indisputable that for eons of human history, droughts, famines, ice ages, wars and epidemics kept unsupportable population growth in check. We aren't plagued (no pun intended) by those anymore.

Thus, we tend to have a lot of folks walking around who are pure consumers of finite resources who produce little if anything. It's just a fact. Perhaps we'll have to deal with it eventually, however, before that happens, nature will probably come up with some other way to reboot humanity. She always has.

[OklahomaTuba]

Back in the old days, a big honking war came long every generation or so that culled the herd by eliminating a lot of the bedwetters and not-so-brights. Nowadays, we gotta put up with 'em. And their spawn. ;)And we wonder how Obama got elected...:D

[adoniijahsooner]

We know that infants enter the kingdom, for we are convinced that all of our race who die in infancy are included in the election of grace, and partake in the redemption wrought out by our Lord Jesus. Whatever some may think, we believe that the whole spirit and tone of the word of God, as well as the nature of God himself, lead us to believe that all who leave this world as babes are saved.

C.H. Spurgeon

[Oldnslo]

I cannot believe how gullible the American public is.

Are there really people who believe that abortion is never NEVER the right thing to do? Even in cases of rape or incest? Really?

Is there really someone out there who believes that abortion is simply a choice? A CHOICE?

Both sides of the argument have done a wonderful job of marginalizing the other. Unfortunately, what's lost in the process is all of the compassion.

[badger]

Never had an abortion, but I've seen and heard enough on it to know that it's something I would probably never consider, regardless of the circumstances... and that I wouldn't want someone else making the decision for me, unless I was incapacitated.

[yermom]

sure there are exceptions, but what are the percentages?

no one i know that's had an abortion had one for rape or incest reasons

[Collier11]

Is there really someone out there who believes that abortion is simply a choice? A CHOICE? What the hell is it if it isnt a choice?

Both sides of the argument have done a wonderful job of marginalizing the other. Unfortunately, what's lost in the process is all of the compassion.

Compassion for who? Certainly not the baby!

This is just an example of the attitude that is all wrong with this situation. I respect the fact that you are entitled to your opinion but I also think you are being way too easy on those who CHOOSE to do this horrible thing

[Harry Beanbag]

I cannot believe how gullible the American public is.

Are there really people who believe that abortion is never NEVER the right thing to do? Even in cases of rape or incest? Really?

Is there really someone out there who believes that abortion is simply a choice? A CHOICE?

Both sides of the argument have done a wonderful job of marginalizing the other. Unfortunately, what's lost in the process is all of the compassion.


Since nobody is forced to get one, even in the case of rape or incest, then yes it most certainly is a choice.

But I agree with you there at the end, compassion for the murdered babies does seem to be lacking by many.

[soonervegas]

In most cases, Abortion is a cowards way out

As someone who made this decision at 21 yrs old with his 17 yr old girlfriend, you are absolutely right. It's cowardice.

I still think about it sometimes when I watch my 5 year old and 2 year old running around (and how I wish I had bigger balls at 21). Pro-abortion is a flawed and selfish argument, dumpster babies or not.

[Collier11]

and I certainly understand that at certain ages or stages in life it would be really hard to raise a baby but it shouldnt be about convenience or money EVAR!

[mdklatt]

Compassion for who? Certainly not the baby!


This argument is meaningless if you don't think a fetus is morally equivalent to a baby.

[KC//CRIMSON]

I did not start this thread to debate abortion.

Good luck with this.

[Harry Beanbag]

This argument is meaningless if you don't think a fetus is morally equivalent to a baby.

Obviously, people who would murder their own baby have little thought of morality.

[Collier11]

This argument is meaningless if you don't think a fetus is morally equivalent to a baby.

convenient excuse isnt it

[Pricetag]

Obviously, people who would murder their own baby have little thought of morality.
Easy there, killer. Do you not know a single person who has been part of one? Are they really all Godless heathens?

[NormanPride]

I don't think I've ever seen an argument about abortion where one side actually listens to the other.

[Collier11]

Easy there, killer. Do you not know a single person who has been part of one? Are they really all Godless heathens?

no, just mainly selfish

[JLEW1818]

i don't see how people could live with themselves if having one.

The people who support it, also like to keep murderers and people who rape and kill young children, alive

I’ll never understand

[virginiasooner]

I'll start listening to the anti-abortion folks when they come out for affordable birth control and comprehensive sex education. But they're even against that! And now there's talk that after they manage to overturn Roe v. Wade their next target is Griswold v. Connecticut (married couples can use birth control). If the anti-abortion crowd is against BIRTH CONTROL, then their only goal is to punish women for having (and enjoying) sex without the benefit of clergy.

[JLEW1818]

well maybe worthless people should not be in America

that's always been my thought

[Pricetag]

I'll start listening to the anti-abortion folks when they come out for affordable birth control and comprehensive sex education.
In addition to that, prenatal care needs to be made available to pregnant women who would give their child up for adoption. There should be a lot more adoptions than abortions, IMO, but the people who would force a woman to carry a pregnancy to term had better be ready to look out for that baby.

[Harry Beanbag]

Easy there, killer. Do you not know a single person who has been part of one? Are they really all Godless heathens?

Yes, I know a woman who had one. She wasn't married and it wasn't "convenient" at the time to have a baby. I don't know if she was a Godless heathen or not, but morality had nothing to do with her decision.

Now, what point, if any, were you trying to prove?

[tbl]

My niece is a living example of what ultrasound can do to save a life. My sister was in the abortion clinic and was reading a brochure a pro-life lady had given her outside, she saw the ultrasound, and ultimately couldn't go through with it.

If she hadn't been saved, my son and daughter couldn't have mauled her at my nephews graduation, not to mention the other countless joys she's brought into the lives of everyone around her.
http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b162/fixinchitlins/TheKidsSummer090147.jpg

[Harry Beanbag]

I'll start listening to the anti-abortion folks when they come out for affordable birth control and comprehensive sex education. But they're even against that!

Are condoms really that expensive? Aren't there places that hand them out like lollipops?

What exactly is your definition of comprehensive sex education?

Who's they?

[tbl]

I'll start listening to the anti-abortion folks when they come out for affordable birth control and comprehensive sex education. But they're even against that! And now there's talk that after they manage to overturn Roe v. Wade their next target is Griswold v. Connecticut (married couples can use birth control). If the anti-abortion crowd is against BIRTH CONTROL, then their only goal is to punish women for having (and enjoying) sex without the benefit of clergy.

What does this have to do with protecting the life of an innocent human being? The issue is not birth control or what you claim pro-lifers are for/against. The issue is whether abortion is murder or not. Your argument is weak sauce and bears no relevance to the issue at hand. Please try again.

Instead of rehashing all this stuff again, here's what I posted last time that most of us pro-lifers can agree on.
http://www.soonerfans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=131741&page=9

[Pricetag]

Yes, I know a woman who had one. She wasn't married and it wasn't "convenient" at the time to have a baby. I don't know if she was a Godless heathen or not, but morality had nothing to do with her decision.

Now, what point, if any, were you trying to prove?
Did she say actually say that, that morality had nothing to do with it?

I guess my point is that there are plenty of good people out there who have had abortions. None of us can possibly understand the circumstances that folks who have made this decision were in. They deal with the consequences of their decision over the course of their life, and even after depending upon their beliefs. It doesn't do a damn bit of good to sit on high horses and brand them cowardly or amoral. As long as people continue to act that way, there will always be another side to this debate.

[Harry Beanbag]

Did she say actually say that, that morality had nothing to do with it?

I guess my point is that there are plenty of good people out there who have had abortions. None of us can possibly understand the circumstances that folks who have made this decision were in. They deal with the consequences of their decision over the course of their life, and even after depending upon their beliefs. It doesn't do a damn bit of good to sit on high horses and brand them cowardly or amoral. As long as people continue to act that way, there will always be another side to this debate.

So being against the murder of babies is sitting on a high horse? Wow, talk about skewed morals.

[KC//CRIMSON]

nm.

[JLEW1818]

just a bad situation that wont ever be fixed.. people just have to be more responsible, which is basically impossible

[C&CDean]

Here's what I've learned about this topic in my 52+ years on this planet:

I was directly involved in more than one abortion during my teen/early adult years. Yes, the aborted child/ren was/were mine.

Abortion is as wrong as anything on this planet can be wrong. Some of you argue that "good people have abortions all the time." I consider myself a good person, but that's a seriously flawed/weak argument. I am a good person who made some seriously wrong choices that ended up in the death/s of human beings. Some day I will face my maker and have to atone for those sins. This worries me. A lot.

If you have never been personally involved in an abortion (I don't mean your friend had one, or you know somebody who had one, I mean you have had one or been the parent of an aborted child) then you really need to shut your filthy hole on the topic. It's easy to go "it's a woman's choice, everybody else should just STFU." It's easy to be a liberal sheeple and do the "it's not viable until xxx days/weeks/months" dance. It's easy to be a person who has by the grace of God not been touched by this terrible act, and then set there and talk about it like you actually know something about it.

Here's the deal. If you've had one, and you believe it was righteous/justified/a good thing/would do it again, then all I can say is you're a hideous sociopath who is no different than any other murdering scum sitting on death row. Yeah, I know, you pacify your guilty conscious by protesting the execution of convicted killers. I'm kinda thinking your behavior (coddling killers while killing babies) is indicative of your twisted and horribly broken moral compass.

If making some 16 year old kid see a picture of her live baby in her womb saves even one child from being murdered then in reality, it has saved two children. The 16 year old and her baby. I'd have to say that's a win-win. And please, spare me the "well she's poor and can't afford it" argument. It doesn't hold a single ounce of water in this debate.

[Collier11]

Are condoms really that expensive? Aren't there places that hand them out like lollipops?

What exactly is your definition of comprehensive sex education?

Who's they?

Come on Harry, he just doesnt want the ones having sex or their parents to have to accept any personal responsibility

[Collier11]

well said Dean...just dont get the people who try and justify it, especially since most have never touched the issue personally

[My Opinion Matters]

I think most would agree that in a perfect world there would be no abortions. Unfortunately perfect world fantasies don't translate into the real world very well.

[Collier11]

Doesnt have to be a perfect world, just need more people that are willing to be responsible for their actions. Then again, that is a pretty big reach as well

[Harry Beanbag]

I think most would agree that in a perfect world there would be no abortions. Unfortunately perfect world fantasies don't translate into the real world very well.

Yep, here in the real world they are legal and paid for by taxpayers like you and me.

[soonervegas]

Well put Dean.

I would add to my previous comments that the pro life contingent needs to get off their high horse about abstenence and get a clue. Teens/young adults have sex.... and ALOT of it.

I did, you did, your children will. Get over it.

If they are going to war we might as well equip them with as much education, pills, balloons, etc. as possible and quite sticking our heads in the sand. (and have a supportive atmosphere when they screw that up) I think it would help....

[Harry Beanbag]

Responsible behavior doesn't start with, end, or even have to include abstinence at all.

I'm not sure what the war comment is supposed to mean, but education, pills, balloons, etc. have nothing to do with legalized murder.

[Pricetag]

well said Dean...just dont get the people who try and justify it, especially since most have never touched the issue personally
He was talking about the other side, too. It is just as easy to talk the talk without walking the walk on both sides.

[yermom]

well, that's the problem. the pro-lifers are generally the same ones that think sex ed doesn't belong in schools, etc...

once the kids have loaded weapons, they are generally gonna end up going to war at some point :)

[C&CDean]

Yes, I was talking about both sides yapping about it without really knowing about it.

However, based on personal experience and a lot of years to reflect, the pro-life side is the winner in this argument, and it ain't even close. No matter how uppity/holier than thou they come across. Plain and simple, pro-life is just doing what is morally right. Nothing more, nothing less. Killing a child who didn't even ask to be conceived - especially for convenience - is morally depraved.

[Collier11]

He was talking about the other side, too. It is just as easy to talk the talk without walking the walk on both sides.

I know exactly what he was saying and what he said backed up what I said

[Harry Beanbag]

Abortion deaths since Roe v. Wade-49,551,703

Deaths from other causes in the U.S. during the same time period:

Heart Disease-26,000,000
Cancer-18,000,000
Murder-720.000
AIDS-600,000
Auto accidents-1,500,000

[Collier11]

Stupid idiot teens having sex before they know what the hell they are doing and the consequences of it because their parents are too chicken sh*t to talk to them about it... A JILLION!!!

This is a big big part of the problem

[Harry Beanbag]

well, that's the problem. the pro-lifers are generally the same ones that think sex ed doesn't belong in schools, etc...

Oh, they certainly make up a portion of the pro-lifers, and the most vocal, but I doubt it's the majority.



once the kids have loaded weapons, they are generally gonna end up going to war at some point :)

In that case, I totally understand. :)

[yermom]

i mean the ones leading the movement, not the average rational ones, like me :D

[soonervegas]

I think the 1st step for both sides should be:

Let's put something into place to limit this as much as possible. What can we agree to....realizing both sides will have to give a little.

If 10 puppies are about to drown in a pool I am not going to stand their and debate the best way to save all 10. Your going to jump in and save as many as possible.

That maybe a horrible analogy.

[Harry Beanbag]

I think the 1st step for both sides should be:

Let's put something into place to limit this as much as possible. What can we agree to....realizing both sides will have to give a little.

If 10 puppies are about to drown in a pool I am not going to stand their and debate the best way to save all 10. Your going to jump in and save as many as possible.

That maybe a horrible analogy.

Yes, yes it is.

What is your idea to limit legalized murder?

[Collier11]

The easy answer is to treat it like any other murder, that would be my choice

[tbl]

Since when do these teen kids having sex not realize that the act can and will result in pregnancy if unprotected? I was a teen in the early 90's, never went to a single sex ed class, didn't have anybody talk to me about it, and I knew full well the consequences. Yeah, sex ed will fix the problem... :rolleyes:

You think maybe these kids think "it feels better this way, and if I slip up and get pregnant, I could always have an abortion"? Think that might play into the mindset? Hmmmmmm....

You make abortion illegal (simply because it IS murder and should be illegal anyway), and I guarantee you the teen pregnancy rates drop through the floor. Even if they didn't, it honestly bears no relevance to saving the lives of children.

[delhalew]

I have a hard time believing this ultrasound did not pass in OK despite the procedural problems. If they put it up on its own they might get it.


Right, I forgot an abortion clinic blocked it.

[Pricetag]

I think the 1st step for both sides should be:

Let's put something into place to limit this as much as possible. What can we agree to....realizing both sides will have to give a little.
I think everyone would agree that adoption is the best possible result of an unwanted pregnancy that stays unwanted.

I've already said in this thread that if all pregnancies are to be carried to term by law, then prenatal care must be made available to mothers who are not covered by insurance. You cannot claim to care about these unborn children and be willing to deny them proper care in utero.

I don't know how much of a support system the mothers would need. Tolerating them socially (especially in school and such) is a good start. I don't know who pays the cost of the birth--maybe the adoptive family, but making the mother fiscally responsible might also discourage further pregnancies.

After that, it's all about supply and demand as far as adoptions go. Are there enough people out there to give all these babies a caring home? Are we willing to allow single people or homosexuals to adopt? If there are not enough families out there, what happens to the extra babies?

[OUMallen]

If you want to make abortion illegal, fine, give it a shot. I'll argue hard and play by the rules. But to force someone to have an ultrasound, or else withhold a perfectly legal voluntary medical procedure, is a gross intrusion onto personal liberty.

[OUMallen]

Abortion deaths since Roe v. Wade-49,551,703

Deaths from other causes in the U.S. during the same time period:

Heart Disease-26,000,000
Cancer-18,000,000
Murder-720.000
AIDS-600,000
Auto accidents-1,500,000

Where did these stats come from? Wow.

[KABOOKIE]

If you want to make abortion illegal, fine, give it a shot. I'll argue hard and play by the rules. But to force someone to have an ultrasound, or else withhold a perfectly legal voluntary medical procedure, is a gross intrusion onto personal liberty.

Medical procedure? That's what Dr Tiller got. :rolleyes:

[Harry Beanbag]

Where did these stats come from? Wow.

All over the internet. The abortion figure was a median one that I found, I saw it listed anywhere from 38-55 million. The other stats are available out there if you look around and have a calculator handy. Suffice it to say, abortion is by far the leading cause of death in the United States, nearly 2-1 over the next highest one. Of course it's never reported as such. Sobering to look at it that way, huh?

[Collier11]

But to force someone to have an ultrasound, or else withhold a perfectly legal voluntary medical procedure, is a gross intrusion onto personal liberty.

Again, so worried about hurting someones feelers but no regard for the human life that is at stake

[Harry Beanbag]

If you want to make abortion illegal, fine, give it a shot. I'll argue hard and play by the rules. But to force someone to have an ultrasound, or else withhold a perfectly legal voluntary medical procedure, is a gross intrusion onto personal liberty.


I doubt the baby is volunteering for the "procedure", just saying.

[Harry Beanbag]

I've already said in this thread that if all pregnancies are to be carried to term by law, then prenatal care must be made available to mothers who are not covered by insurance. You cannot claim to care about these unborn children and be willing to deny them proper care in utero.

Does Medicaid pay for it? I don't know, but I would think they would.

[mdklatt]

convenient excuse isnt it

Do you think abortion should be illegal in all cases (no exceptions for rape, incest, or life of the mother) and that IVF should also be illegal in cases where they implant an excess amount of embryos to guarantee implantation?

[OUMallen]

I doubt the baby is volunteering for the "procedure", just saying.

You're throwing a pathos argument at a logos debate.

Abortion is legal. Forcing an individual to do something they don't want to do to obtain what is legal is about as unAmerican as it gets vis-a-vis individual liberty. What is we forced them to listen to pro-life counselors for 30 minutes first? What if we otherwise coerced them?

I'm 100% pro-choice. However, I'm also 100% states' rights on the issue. If Oklahoma wants to make abortion illegal, I think we should be able to do that. I wouldn't agree, but I respect the right to do so. For now, though, it IS legal. Let the people have their legal right to an abortion.

Keep the gubment's hands off our individuals, for better or for worse. Pro-lifers on this one are funny to me because anytime a "liberal" or "democrat" spending bill comes up they scream: HOW WILL YOU PAY FOR THAT! YOU CAN'T! But when it comes to pro-life, the shoe is on the other foot: are all these pro-lifers going to band together to help pay for these children? THat's a dollars and cents argument applied to an emotional issue, I'm aware, but still...it's intellectually dishonest.

[Collier11]

Do you think abortion should be illegal in all cases (no exceptions for rape, incest, or life of the mother) and that IVF should also be illegal in cases where they implant an excess amount of embryos to guarantee implantation?

I would hope abortion wouldnt happen in any case but I can concede that in some cases it may be necessary even though I dont like it.

Tell me this, in the case of rape...why does that baby not deserve the right to live, why not adoption?

Incest im not really sure what I think, I lean towards ok but not sure

[KABOOKIE]

You're throwing a pathos argument at a logos debate.

Abortion is legal. Forcing an individual to do something they don't want to do to obtain what is legal is about as unAmerican as it gets vis-a-vis individual liberty. What is we forced them to listen to pro-life counselors for 30 minutes first? What if we otherwise coerced them?

I'm 100% pro-choice. However, I'm also 100% states' rights on the issue. If Oklahoma wants to make abortion illegal, I think we should be able to do that. I wouldn't agree, but I respect the right to do so. For now, though, it IS legal. Let the people have their legal right to an abortion.

Keep the gubment's hands off our individuals, for better or for worse. Pro-lifers on this one are funny to me because anytime a "liberal" or "democrat" spending bill comes up they scream: HOW WILL YOU PAY FOR THAT! YOU CAN'T! But when it comes to pro-life, the shoe is on the other foot: are all these pro-lifers going to band together to help pay for these children? THat's a dollars and cents argument applied to an emotional issue, I'm aware, but still...it's intellectually dishonest.

Spoken like an 1860's slave owner. They're taking our rights away. N*ggers aren't human beings!

[yermom]

You're throwing a pathos argument at a logos debate.

Abortion is legal. Forcing an individual to do something they don't want to do to obtain what is legal is about as unAmerican as it gets vis-a-vis individual liberty. What is we forced them to listen to pro-life counselors for 30 minutes first? What if we otherwise coerced them?

I'm 100% pro-choice. However, I'm also 100% states' rights on the issue. If Oklahoma wants to make abortion illegal, I think we should be able to do that. I wouldn't agree, but I respect the right to do so. For now, though, it IS legal. Let the people have their legal right to an abortion.

Keep the gubment's hands off our individuals, for better or for worse. Pro-lifers on this one are funny to me because anytime a "liberal" or "democrat" spending bill comes up they scream: HOW WILL YOU PAY FOR THAT! YOU CAN'T! But when it comes to pro-life, the shoe is on the other foot: are all these pro-lifers going to band together to help pay for these children? THat's a dollars and cents argument applied to an emotional issue, I'm aware, but still...it's intellectually dishonest.



just because it's legal doesn't mean it's right. it used to be legal to buy and sell people in this country too before we decided it was morally reprehensible

lots of things don't make sense when money is applied.

it's expensive to take care of disabled and elderly people too

[OUMallen]

Again, so worried about hurting someones feelers but no regard for the human life that is at stake

You think feelers are being hurt; I think that's the government controlling individual liberty.

[OUMallen]

Spoken like an 1860's slave owner. They're taking our rights away. N*ggers aren't human beings!

Not the same; not even close. The only thing the government needs to worry about is leaving us to individual debate the morality of abortion. Not dictate it.

No one cared to ask me, but I'll make my further point: my choice would be life. I'm an adopted individual, myself.

[yermom]

what about the individual liberty of the fetus?

[Collier11]

You think feelers are being hurt; I think that's the government controlling individual liberty.

I think killing a human being has nothing to do with a persons rights unless you are talking about the babies rights

[mdklatt]

I would hope abortion wouldnt happen in any case but I can concede that in some cases it may be necessary even though I dont like it.

Tell me this, in the case of rape...why does that baby not deserve the right to live, why not adoption?

Incest im not really sure what I think, I lean towards ok but not sure

If somebody said it would be okay to kill a two month-old baby in the case of incest, that's obviously a ludicrous statement that nobody would agree with. But you say you're (maybe) okay if the the word "baby" is replaced with "fetus". So you too are (maybe) making a moral distinction between a fetus and a baby.

I'm on the fence about the whole thing. I don't think there's a moral equivalent between a zygote and a baby, but I'm not sure where to draw the line. If I truly did think they were the same, then the only exception I would make would be for the life of the mother on the basis of self-defense.

[JLEW1818]

OU- Idaho St game set for 6 PM, that is all

[OUMallen]

just because it's legal doesn't mean it's right. it used to be legal to buy and sell people in this country too before we decided it was morally reprehensible

lots of things don't make sense when money is applied.

it's expensive to take care of disabled and elderly people too

I totally agree. But the government shouldn't be forcing people to watch ultrasounds to obtain a legal optional medical procedure. We can argue abortion til we're blue in the face, and if you win, I'll happily play by the rules because, well, I believe in rules.

However, to allow abortions with one hand, and then allow the government to force someone to undergo an ultrasound first is ridiculous and is an invasion of personal libtery.

[yermom]

If somebody said it would be okay to kill a two month-old baby in the case of incest, that's obviously a ludicrous statement that nobody would agree with. But you say you're (maybe) okay if the the word "baby" is replaced with "fetus". So you too are (maybe) making a moral distinction between a fetus and a baby.

I'm on the fence about the whole thing. I don't think there's a moral equivalent between a zygote and a baby, but I'm not sure where to draw the line. If I truly did think they were the same, then the only exception I would make would be for the life of the mother on the basis of self-defense.

that's about where i am, other than if the baby isn't going to survive outside the womb.

but things like rape, while ****ty isn't the baby's fault. incest and birth defects, etc... is where it starts getting murky for me. things like aborting Down's kids seems pretty Hitleresque

i don't really see much difference between smothering a two month old and aborting a fetus

[OUMallen]

what about the individual liberty of the fetus?

I think it's obvious to everyone with half a brain stem that a fetus's rights are far less than the mother's.

[mdklatt]

that's about where i am, other than if the baby isn't going to survive outside the womb.


Yeah, that too.

[yermom]

I totally agree. But the government shouldn't be forcing people to watch ultrasounds to obtain a legal optional medical procedure. We can argue abortion til we're blue in the face, and if you win, I'll happily play by the rules because, well, I believe in rules.

However, to allow abortions with one hand, and then allow the government to force someone to undergo an ultrasound first is ridiculous and is an invasion of personal libtery.

i can kinda see your point, but i think it trivializes the "procedure"

[mdklatt]

I think it's obvious to everyone with half a brain stem that a fetus's rights are far less than the mother's.

Well, no, not if you think a zygote and baby are morally equivalent. That's the whole disconnect in this argument and it results in strawmen on both sides.

Baby killing is wrong...if you think a fetus and a baby are exactly the same thing.

Abortion is a just a medical procedure...if you think a fetus and a baby are not the same thing at all.

Nobody--well, almost nobody--thinks a gamete is a human being. Nobody thinks a newborn baby isn't a human being. Hell, I don't think anybody thinks even a late-term fetus isn't a human being. So the question is, where do draw the line?

[KABOOKIE]

I think it's obvious to everyone with half a brain stem that a fetus's rights are far less than the mother's.

How so? Mr. Slave owner thought the same thing of his "property"

[Collier11]

If somebody said it would be okay to kill a two month-old baby in the case of incest, that's obviously a ludicrous statement that nobody would agree with. But you say you're (maybe) okay if the the word "baby" is replaced with "fetus". So you too are (maybe) making a moral distinction between a fetus and a baby.

I'm on the fence about the whole thing. I don't think there's a moral equivalent between a zygote and a baby, but I'm not sure where to draw the line. If I truly did think they were the same, then the only exception I would make would be for the life of the mother on the basis of self-defense.

Im not making any moral distinction, I said I dont know when it comes to incest

I think a baby is a baby from the time of inception, im very clear on that

[Collier11]

I think it's obvious to everyone with half a brain stem that a fetus's rights are far less than the mother's.

I think you are rediculous when it comes to this subject, no ones life is more important than anothers

[mdklatt]

I think a baby is a baby from the time of inception, im very clear on that

Then there should be absolutely no question in your mind that abortion in the case of incest is wrong. If a two-month old fetus and a two-month old baby are exactly the same to you, then supporting abortions in the case of incest would be the same as saying you support killing a two-month old baby that was the result of incest.

[JLEW1818]

mack brown is incest

[Collier11]

Then there should be absolutely no question in your mind that abortion in the case of incest is wrong. If a two-month old fetus and a two-month old baby are exactly the same to you, then supporting abortions in the case of incest would be the same as saying you support killing a two-month old baby that was the result of incest.

I see what you are trying to do here and it isnt going to work bud, saying I dont know does not in any way mean I support

[mdklatt]

I see what you are trying to do here and it isnt going to work bud, saying I dont know does not in any way mean I support

How can you not know? If you really think a zygote and a baby are the same thing, then there is no question.

[Collier11]

I know where my morals and my beliefs lie, not sure if you can say the same based on your opinions thus far, not judging just saying I dont know...murdering a child is wrong, plain and simple.

Let me spell this out for you since you dont seem to be very sharp tonight

Murder is wrong...Correct? Murder is a Sin if you are a Christian...Correct?

Are you following? Just making sure...

Is murdering still wrong if it means you are getting rid of a child molester or a serial killer, etc? Yes! Is it sometimes necessary? Yes!

So again, is murdering a child for any reason wrong, YES! Is it necessary in some cases, I dont believe so!

What about Incest, the child could be born with extreme retardation, deformations, no value of life, is abortion ok in that case? I dont know! I think it is wrong, I think there are other alternatives and it is still not anyones place to decide if that baby should live, maybe that baby will still be happy despite anything wrong that could come of it, who knows. I dont know enough about it...if I was pressed I would say absolutely not a valid reason

[tbl]

Collier - I gotta go against you on this one. MD makes an excellent point in regards to the incest issue.

Also, how can you determine what is the value of life? Extremely retarded, conceived in incest, or deformed humans are no longer human? Saying "I don't know" is the same as saying you don't know if they're human beings. If you're gonna make a stand holmes, let's make a stand.

I am pro-life. In all cases, the baby is a baby and should not be murdered.

The ONLY time I believe an abortion is a possible alternative is if the life of the mother and child are absolutely at risk and there is no chance the baby could survive the birth. From a medical standpoint, I'm not sure how that ever happens considering C-Sections and other emergency surgeries, but regardless I believe that would probably limit abortions to 15-20 a year... maybe less.

Abortion on demand and cases where the Mothers "mental" health are "at risk" is absolutely repulsive. No different than throwing a child off of a bridge or throwing them in a dumpster. It's evil, and there's no other way to put it.

[JLEW1818]

how the **** do u have so many post

[Collier11]

Collier - I gotta go against you on this one. MD makes an excellent point in regards to the incest issue.

Also, how can you determine what is the value of life? Extremely retarded, conceived in incest, or deformed humans are no longer human? Saying "I don't know" is the same as saying you don't know if they're human beings. If you're gonna make a stand holmes, let's make a stand.

I am pro-life. In all cases, the baby is a baby and should not be murdered.

The ONLY time I believe an abortion is a possible alternative is if the life of the mother and child are absolutely at risk and there is no chance the baby could survive the birth. From a medical standpoint, I'm not sure how that ever happens considering C-Sections and other emergency surgeries, but regardless I believe that would probably limit abortions to 15-20 a year... maybe less.

Abortion on demand and cases where the Mothers "mental" health are "at risk" is absolutely repulsive. No different than throwing a child off of a bridge or throwing them in a dumpster. It's evil, and there's no other way to put it.

Guess you didnt read my last post did you, I said NO! I said I dont know at the time cus I never had really thought about it, regardless if it is any easy answer or not I still like to think about it clearly

[mdklatt]

What about Incest, the child could be born with extreme retardation, deformations, no value of life, is abortion ok in that case? I dont know!

If it's just a matter of retardation or other abnormalities and not actual viability, then we're back to where we started. If you think a fetus and a baby are exactly the same thing, then if it might be okay--you said you don't know--to abort a fetus that would have no quality of life then it might be okay to kill a baby that would have no quality of life. In other words, if you think it's definitely not okay to kill a baby for Reason X then you have to think it's not okay to abort a fetus for Reason X because you think a baby and a fetus are the same thing.

I'm not making a value judgment, I'm pointing out the logical implications of your position that personhood starts at conception.

EDIT: I think we're getting hung up in definition of "wrong" vs. "illegal". If you think killing a baby for Reason X should be illegal than you should absolutely think aborting a fetus for Reason X should also be illegal.

[Collier11]

Pay tention!

[OUMallen]

Well, no, not if you think a zygote and baby are morally equivalent. That's the whole disconnect in this argument and it results in strawmen on both sides.

Baby killing is wrong...if you think a fetus and a baby are exactly the same thing.

Abortion is a just a medical procedure...if you think a fetus and a baby are not the same thing at all.

Nobody--well, almost nobody--thinks a gamete is a human being. Nobody thinks a newborn baby isn't a human being. Hell, I don't think anybody thinks even a late-term fetus isn't a human being. So the question is, where do draw the line?

The crux of the issue. I personally think a compromise is in order where all first trimester abortions are legal.

That's because I think calling a zygote and a baby the same thing is insulting.

[Collier11]

Insulting to whom?

[mdklatt]

The crux of the issue. I personally think a compromise is in order where all first trimester abortions are legal.

That's because I think calling a zygote and a baby the same thing is insulting.

Defining the line at conception is deceptively alluring to me. Unless you're going to wait until actual birth, conception seems like the obvious place to do it. An isolated sperm or egg are never going to become a person, but put them together and you've got a new organism with a human genome. On the other hand, I just can't think that a microscopic clump of cells is equivalent to a person.

[OUMallen]

How so? Mr. Slave owner thought the same thing of his "property"

Do you need it explained?

A globule of cells is not the same thing as a self-aware person.

[OUMallen]

MD- You're right. My idea requires a hardline, arbitrary decision...conception is more intuitive and easier to define, but I think less effective as to what would work well for society on this difficult issue.

[OUMallen]

Insulting to whom?

Self-aware human beings. Or are phytoplankton the same thing too?

[OUMallen]

ANYWAY, let's get back on topic.

Does anyone really think the gov't shoul dbe allowed to force people to have this?

What about food stamps...do we force people to starve for a day or two before granting them what they have a right to just so they appreciate the gravity of the situation more?

[Collier11]

They can force everything else on us we dont want, trillion dollar bailouts, government run health care, why not? :D

[Harry Beanbag]

All this zygote talk is irrelevant. A woman won't even know she's pregnant when it is in the zygote stage.

And a baby carried to full term won't survive by itself outside the womb any more than a embryo at 8 weeks. I saw my son's heartbeat at 5 weeks, he was alive. On life support, yes, but alive nonetheless. Only the lack of human intervention and killing it let him turn into the most precious thing in the world to me.

And on the incest issue, there has been incest going on for all of human history and the rest of the animal kingdom. They're still human beings.

[C&CDean]

Self-aware human beings. Or are phytoplankton the same thing too?

mdklatt has been making some reasonable, rational, intelligent comments on this topic. You? Not so much.

You keep throwing out the same old "zygote/phytoplankton/single-celled amoeba" and seem to think that any rational human being should understand that these things cannot possibly be alive/feeling/etc. You seem to think that a human who has lived long enough to be "self-aware" trumps a human who has not. Guess what? I know a whole bunch of teenagers and young adults who don't have a clue about "self-awareness." You're fairly condescending about it too.

Where you're completely missing the boat is how you're trying to say one human (based on the amount of time they've been "alive") is more important than another. That's a ****ed up argument. A human is a human - I don't care what stage of development they're at - zygote to geriatric.

Where I'm sure my opinion differs from yours even more is when the "self-aware" human decides to kill/rape/maim other humans then that human should be aborted, post partem.

[Harry Beanbag]

ANYWAY, let's get back on topic.

Does anyone really think the gov't shoul dbe allowed to force people to have this?

I don't see a problem with it. Think of it as advanced sex education that others have talked about in this thread.



What about food stamps...do we force people to starve for a day or two before granting them what they have a right to just so they appreciate the gravity of the situation more?

I'll have to think about that one. :) Since there won't be any killin' going on, it's probably ok too.

[OUMallen]

mdklatt has been making some reasonable, rational, intelligent comments on this topic. You? Not so much.

You keep throwing out the same old "zygote/phytoplankton/single-celled amoeba" and seem to think that any rational human being should understand that these things cannot possibly be alive/feeling/etc. You seem to think that a human who has lived long enough to be "self-aware" trumps a human who has not. Guess what? I know a whole bunch of teenagers and young adults who don't have a clue about "self-awareness." You're fairly condescending about it too.

Where you're completely missing the boat is how you're trying to say one human (based on the amount of time they've been "alive") is more important than another. That's a ****ed up argument. A human is a human - I don't care what stage of development they're at - zygote to geriatric.

Where I'm sure my opinion differs from yours even more is when the "self-aware" human decides to kill/rape/maim other humans then that human should be aborted, post partem.

There's no need for you to ever respond to any post of mine. Ever. In any thread. Seriously. You've made it clear you don't like me, and I know I don't like you...hell, I'm not sure I'd even like you in real life. You're always patronizing and insulting and you don't even bother to comprehend any point I make that happens to be above a 3rd grade level. Just leave me be dude, seriously. Put me on your ignore list or whatever and I'll make sure not to bother you either.

[OUMallen]

They can force everything else on us we dont want, trillion dollar bailouts, government run health care, why not? :D

Which is actually a decent point! They're allowed to tax cigarettes into the ground to promote a government-backed issue: no smoking...seems similar! Also, withholding our tax money unless we conform to federal standards (speed limits, drinking age)....so your point has a lot of merit.

But the difference there (I think) is that there's a tangible cost to society (healthcare for lung cancer for example) that we all have to pay. There's a more obvious societal interest there. As far as forcing a woman to have a child they don't want, there's not as much of a societal issue as far as governing...except many of those children will end up on welfare.

It's a hard line to draw and your point is a good one with which I struggle to find the right answer.

[C&CDean]

There's no need for you to ever respond to any post of mine. Ever. In any thread. Seriously. You've made it clear you don't like me, and I know I don't like you...hell, I'm not sure I'd even like you in real life. You're always patronizing and insulting and you don't even bother to comprehend any point I make that happens to be above a 3rd grade level. Just leave me be dude, seriously. Put me on your ignore list or whatever and I'll make sure not to bother you either.

You just can't help yourself, can you? I believe you started the whole "patronizing and insulting" deal when you said people who can't see the difference between a zygote and a baby are clueless (or whatever the hell you said). You think that trying to describe murder as "science" makes you smarter than a 3rd grader. How about just saying "I believe a fetus doesn't = a baby" and leave it at that? You insulted people, you got insulted back, and you went off like a whiney little bitch right here.

And trust me, you'd like me in real life. I'm delicious.

[mdklatt]

ANYWAY, let's get back on topic.

Does anyone really think the gov't shoul dbe allowed to force people to have this?


Since it's a completely legal medical procedure as things stand, absolutely not. Who would pay for these ultrasounds anyway?

[Harry Beanbag]

And trust me, you'd like me in real life. I'm delicious.

Mmmmm....bacon.

[Veritas]

I didn't read through this thread, but does this mean that we're still going to be blending defenseless babies? I hope so.

Babies suck. They're just so inconvenient. And who ever really expects sex to lead to one?

[Harry Beanbag]

Since it's a completely legal medical procedure as things stand, absolutely not. Who would pay for these ultrasounds anyway?

Planned Parenthood spent over $300 million of government funds to perform abortions last year, maybe they can spare some change to offer a little hope maybe?

[mdklatt]

As far as forcing a woman to have a child they don't want, there's not as much of a societal issue as far as governing...except many of those children will end up on welfare.


Well, no, again. If you think a zygote and a baby are the same thing, then the protection of citizens is a societal and government issue.

[JohnnyMack]

You there, yes you.

Let's say you're away on a business trip. That evening two big bad bubbas are walking home from a bar because their car wouldn't start. As they're walking down your street they see the light on in the front room and notice your dear pretty little wife straightening up at the end of a long day. These two goons run up your sidewalk, kick your front door and take turns pummeling and raping your best friend. Once last kick in the face knocks her out and they run off into the night.

Abortion is an unfortunate and necessary evil.

[Harry Beanbag]

You there, yes you.

Let's say you're away on a business trip. That evening two big bad bubbas are walking home from a bar because their car wouldn't start. As they're walking down your street they see the light on in the front room and notice your dear pretty little wife straightening up at the end of a long day. These two goons run up your sidewalk, kick your front door and take turns pummeling and raping your best friend. Once last kick in the face knocks her out and they run off into the night.

Abortion is an unfortunate and necessary evil.

There would be two other murders in that case. Justifiable homicides.

[mdklatt]

All this zygote talk is irrelevant.

Not if you're talking about the people who go ape**** over Plan B. Their position is apparently that as soon as the sperm and egg get together, *BOOM*, US citizen.

[Veritas]

You there, yes you.

Let's say you're away on a business trip. That evening two big bad bubbas are walking home from a bar because their car wouldn't start. As they're walking down your street they see the light on in the front room and notice your dear pretty little wife straightening up at the end of a long day. These two goons run up your sidewalk, kick your front door and take turns pummeling and raping your best friend. Once last kick in the face knocks her out and they run off into the night.
I'd want to know why my best friend was over hanging out with my wife when I'm out of town on business. ;)

[Collier11]

You there, yes you.

Let's say you're away on a business trip. That evening two big bad bubbas are walking home from a bar because their car wouldn't start. As they're walking down your street they see the light on in the front room and notice your dear pretty little wife straightening up at the end of a long day. These two goons run up your sidewalk, kick your front door and take turns pummeling and raping your best friend. Once last kick in the face knocks her out and they run off into the night.

Abortion is an unfortunate and necessary evil.

what makes that abortion necessary to you, how is it the childs fault?

[Harry Beanbag]

Not if you're talking about the people who go ape**** over Plan B. Their position is apparently that as soon as the sperm and egg get together, *BOOM*, US citizen.

Misinformation there. Plan B is not an abortion, it's prevention.


Plan B® One-Step is intended to prevent pregnancy after known or suspected contraceptive failure or unprotected intercourse.

Plan B® One-Step isn't effective if you're already pregnant, and it won't terminate an existing pregnancy. Plan B® One-Step does not protect against HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). Side effects may include changes in your period, nausea, lower abdominal pain, fatigue, headache, and dizziness. If your period is more than a week late, you may be pregnant. You should not take Plan B® One-Step if you are already pregnant. Plan B® One-Step should not be used as a routine birth control, as it is not as effective. If you have severe abdominal pain, you may have an ectopic pregnancy, and should get immediate medical help. You are encouraged to report negative side effects of prescription drugs to the FDA at www.fda.gov/medwatch (http://www.fda.gov/medwatch) or call 1-800-FDA-1088. Click here (http://www.planbonestep.com/pdf/PlanBOneStepFullProductInformation.pdf) for full product information

http://www.planbonestep.com/

[Collier11]

Not if you're talking about the people who go ape**** over Plan B. Their position is apparently that as soon as the sperm and egg get together, *BOOM*, US citizen.

My position as a God fearing Christian (im not pushing my religious views, just explaining them) is that life is life, a baby is a baby...conception equals life!

[mdklatt]

Misinformation there. Plan B is not an abortion, it's prevention.

I agree, but why is it so controversial among the anti-abortion crowd? Don't you remember the uproar over pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions on "moral grounds"? Either their moral objection involves around sincerely believing that a fertilized egg that hasn't been implanted yet is still a human being, or (more likely, I think) they're letting they're puritanical flag fly.

OH NOES! IF PEOPLE CAN HAVE SEX WITHOUT GETTING PREGNANT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE SEX!

[mdklatt]

My position as a God fearing Christian (im not pushing my religious views, just explaining them) is that life is life, a baby is a baby...conception equals life!

What's your definition of conception?

[Collier11]

Once the life is created

[mdklatt]

Once the life is created

What does that even mean? A sperm is alive. Is masturbation murder? Does "life" happen before or after implantation?

[JohnnyMack]

What does that even mean? A sperm is alive. Is masturbation murder? Does "life" happen before or after implantation?

We'd all get the chair. Every last one of us.

[yermom]

What does that even mean? A sperm is alive. Is masturbation murder? Does "life" happen before or after implantation?

U0kJHQpvgB8

[Collier11]

What does that even mean? A sperm is alive. Is masturbation murder? Does "life" happen before or after implantation?

I would say after, im not an extremist...I think once the girl is pregnant it is a baby


We'd all get the chair. Every last one of us.

I pray that I dont get judged for that at the Pearly Gates :O

[jkjsooner]

My daughters ultrasound was my wallpaper on my cellphone for a long time. My son shot us the bird in his. For anyone other than a total sociopath see it as a real live human would have to make it harder to abort.


First, I have to say that my wife is pregnant and our first ultrasound was an amazing experience. However, I think at that point it was more about me than the fetus. Your average rat has more self awareness and intelligence than the fetus does at that point. While I was celebrating the joy that I saw and how much I loved it, I'm sure a large part of me was celebrating what that fetus would become even if I attributed much of those emotions to what the fetus was at that point.

That brings up the big question. Is it about what it is or what it is to become? At a 12 week ultrasound it might not make any difference. A single celled fertilized egg might be a different matter altogether. Some would say it has no more awareness than bacteria while others would argue that its potential is what is important.

Either way, I think the sociopath comment is a little harsh.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying abortion is right. I'm just saying there are different ways to look at it and different ways to rationalize it. It doesn't take a sociopath to choose the abortion route.

[Veritas]

We'd all get the chair. Every last one of us.
U0kJHQpvgB8

[KABOOKIE]

What does that even mean? A sperm is alive. Is masturbation murder? Does "life" happen before or after implantation?


We'd all get the chair. Every last one of us.

U0kJHQpvgB8

[Veritas]

LOL. Borderline retarded minds think alike.

[yermom]

don't pull me down on your level :mad:

[Veritas]

don't pull me down on your level :mad:
But does it give you migraine headache thinking down to it?

[Harry Beanbag]

I agree, but why is it so controversial among the anti-abortion crowd?

I know some Churches don't like contraception, is it the same people? I don't know, but since it isn't abortion and is prevention instead, it's a red herring in the abortion argument as far as I'm concerned.



Don't you remember the uproar over pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions on "moral grounds"? Either their moral objection involves around sincerely believing that a fertilized egg that hasn't been implanted yet is still a human being, or (more likely, I think) they're letting they're puritanical flag fly.

No, I honestly don't remember it. Before we had our boy, I tried to stay out of the whole abortion deal and ignore it as much as possible. Ignorance or puritanical, whatever, I think they are separate issues.

[jkjsooner]

The ONLY time I believe an abortion is a possible alternative is if the life of the mother and child are absolutely at risk and there is no chance the baby could survive the birth. From a medical standpoint, I'm not sure how that ever happens considering C-Sections and other emergency surgeries, but regardless I believe that would probably limit abortions to 15-20 a year... maybe less.


Ectopic pregnancies happen all the time. The condition will kill the mother.

I know you'll say, "Well ectopic babies can't survive." Either way, we end the fetus's life before it would naturally end.

[tbl]

The zygote or fetus at early stages of development, still has all the DNA and genetic function that makes it a human being and it will grow into a fully functional, self aware member of society, if allowed to live.

Seriously... If your definition of what it means to be human is based on self awareness and being fully functional, then you have to deduct that severely retarded humans are actually not humans and should be gassed. Like it or not, that is the logical step your argument takes.

To compare killing a sperm or an egg with killing an implanted egg is foolishness and there is no parallel between the two. Weak argument, so let's please not use that one anymore. Once the two join together, a unique individual is created with his/her own DNA, blood type, and all the genetic imprint necessary to determine if this boy will be blue eyed with athletic ability or a girl that has red hair and will only be 4'11" as an adult.

A human is a human, no matter how old or young they are. Every single person on this planet started off in the zygote stage, and had their Mom decided to murder them at that point, they would have ceased to exist, just like if somebody murdered them at 2 years old.

With that, I'm going to attempt to end my time in this thread. Since logic escapes the pro-choice crowd and they're stuck with nothing but empty rhetoric and shallow arguments, I give you a solid facepalm.
http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b162/fixinchitlins/facepalm.jpg

[tbl]

Ectopic pregnancies happen all the time. The condition will kill the mother.

I know you'll say, "Well ectopic babies can't survive." Either way, we end the fetus's life before it would naturally end.

I was more referring to late term abortions, but you are correct that ectopic pregnancies happen often and endanger the mothers life as well as the baby having zero chance at survival. However, they qualify under the exemption I stated, so next...

[jkjsooner]

The zygote or fetus at early stages of development, still has all the DNA and genetic function that makes it a human being and it will grow into a fully functional, self aware member of society, if allowed to live.

Seriously... If your definition of what it means to be human is based on self awareness and being fully functional, then you have to deduct that severely retarded humans are actually not humans and should be gassed. Like it or not, that is the logical step your argument takes.
[/IMG]


I think awareness is a better term than self awareness. Self awareness implies some form of contemplation about ones self. Awareness does not.

So DNA is the only factor? My sister (after about 10 miscarriages) had a procedure where they took a fetus at about 7 cells and separated one to do genetic testing. Putting aside the moral arguments about what would happen if the test resulted in genetic problems, what about the one cell that they destroyed? Could you argue that once you separated it from the others it became a unique individual that was then murdered?

What about stem cells that we get from the umbilical cord? What if those could be implanted into a uterus and grow into a baby? Is it murder that we don't try to implant all million of them.

I may be wrong about the science on that last one but I'm trying to make a point that the more we learn the more it becomes very tricky. If you just say a cell with a human DNA is a baby then you open a big can of worms.

[Harry Beanbag]

I think awareness is a better term than self awareness. Self awareness implies some form of contemplation about ones self. Awareness does not.

So DNA is the only factor? My sister (after about 10 miscarriages) had a procedure where they took a fetus at about 7 cells and separated one to do genetic testing. Putting aside the moral arguments about what would happen if the test resulted in genetic problems, what about the one cell that they destroyed? Could you argue that once you separated it from the others it became a unique individual that was then murdered?

What about stem cells that we get from the umbilical cord? What if those could be implanted into a uterus and grow into a baby? Is it murder that we don't try to implant all million of them.

I may be wrong about the science on that last one but I'm trying to make a point that the more we learn the more it becomes very tricky. If you just say a cell with a human DNA is a baby then you open a big can of worms.


You're obfuscating the issue, and I think you know it.

[Pricetag]

You're obfuscating the issue, and I think you know it.
This is a silly statement. He's stating his opinion, just like you. To imply that he's intentionally muddying the waters is to imply that he really knows that you are right, but he's continuing to argue anyway.

[olevetonahill]

[youtube]j4XT-l-_3y0[/youtube[

[olevetonahill]

Screw here ya go do it the old fashioned way :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4XT-l-_3y0

[jkjsooner]

You're obfuscating the issue, and I think you know it.

I think my points are relevant. They're relevant on whether you think that embryos created via IVF are human just as much as those that have already been implanted in the uterus.

Some researches are working on way to turn adult stem cells into non-differentiated embryonic stem cells via some means. That is in an effort to save the unused IVF embryos. I could be wrong but it's possible that they're merely creating embryos in a lab just as the IVF guys were doing.

The point is that defining a human merely on potential or DNA is becomming more and more tricky as science advances.

[jkjsooner]

A human is a human, no matter how old or young they are. Every single person on this planet started off in the zygote stage, and had their Mom decided to murder them at that point, they would have ceased to exist, just like if somebody murdered them at 2 years old.

With that, I'm going to attempt to end my time in this thread. Since logic escapes the pro-choice crowd and they're stuck with nothing but empty rhetoric and shallow arguments, I give you a solid facepalm.
http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b162/fixinchitlins/facepalm.jpg

Point 1: Just because we're arguing with you doesn't mean we're pro-choice. I just like to argue and I'll jump in when I think someone is being illogical or if I think they're oversimplifying things. In plenty of threads I'll bring up points on both sides if I think those points need to be made.

Point 2: Outside of a few pro-choice freaks, for most this is about defining what is a human life and what is not. If we all agreed on that definition there would be little argument. Debating what constitutes a human life is relevant and not everyone is going to agree with you and just because they disagree doesn't make their arguments shallow.

[Harry Beanbag]

This is a silly statement. He's stating his opinion, just like you. To imply that he's intentionally muddying the waters is to imply that he really knows that you are right, but he's continuing to argue anyway.

No it isn't. He's taking the simple act of conception, sperm meets egg to create human life, and throwing out recent scientific experiments and attempting to equate them to the conception of a human being. Intentionally muddying the waters? Yeah, I think so, maybe not maliciously though. He is overcomplicating a simple, if not miraculous, natural phenomenon.

tbl was giving the hand to the ridiculous assertion that somebody made comparing a sperm and an egg to a human embryo by saying an embryo has a full set of DNA which will make it a human being. jkj jumped on the DNA aspect and added some unrelated to conception procedures.

Was I implying that he knows I'm right? Of course not, everyone has an opinion on this subject, regardless of how wrong they may be. ;)

[Sooner_Bob]

well, that's the problem. the pro-lifers are generally the same ones that think sex ed doesn't belong in schools, etc...

once the kids have loaded weapons, they are generally gonna end up going to war at some point :)

As long as they teach abstinence as an option I'm ok with sex ed in schools. As long as my kid can't take it unless I say she can and we as parents have the opportunity to review the material that is covered.


I most definitely remember walking around with a loaded weapon . . . ;)

[Sooner_Bob]

ANYWAY, let's get back on topic.

Does anyone really think the gov't shoul dbe allowed to force people to have this?



If it is being paid for by funds other than her own I don't have a problem with the mother being forced to view an ultrasound.

[Oldnslo]

The "life begins at conception" argument is a problem. If that is the case, then what of spontaneous miscarrage? Is the ending of that "life" a sin? A crime?

No. No, it isn't.

Since recorded history, law has recognized "quickening". The feeling has always been that there is a point before which, it ain't a life and after which, it is. "The quick and the dead" has NOTHING to do with how fast one can draw a gun.

I've been appointed to represent victims of crime. One of which was a 13 year old girl who had been impregnated by her father. He happened to be a Baptist minister, but that's really beside the point. She gave birth to her child, and the baby was a wonderful bit of evidence in Dude's criminal trial, but the toll that entire experience took on my client was crushing.

Crushing.

I will readily agree that abortion as a first-choice of birth control is abhorrent. I also believe that the percentage of abortions which is first-choice birth control is miniscule.

Which is worse: to allow some abortions which are reprehensible or to force a rape or incest victims from having to bring her attacker's fetus to term?

What of the profoundly disabled? I have also represented care providers. There are people who are full grown, who are utterly unable to care for themselves. Can't communicate. We don't even know if THEY know you're in the room, or if they care. I shudder to think what those parents experienced. Would I have made the same decision as they did?

I don't know.

And neither do you. Not until you're faced with it. You think you know, but you don't.

It's really easy to make decisions from on high. Step down in some of the mud with me and tell me if your vision is still so clear. Stand with me as you're telling someone that her life is forever ****ed because her father couldn't keep his dick out of her.

At the risk of repeating myself: the first victim of this debate is compassion.

[JohnnyMack]

^ This.

Game, set, match, Old lawyer dude.

[Collier11]

DIS A GREE OLD JM DUDE

[C&CDean]

The "life begins at conception" argument is a problem. If that is the case, then what of spontaneous miscarrage? Is the ending of that "life" a sin? A crime?

No. No, it isn't.

Since recorded history, law has recognized "quickening". The feeling has always been that there is a point before which, it ain't a life and after which, it is. "The quick and the dead" has NOTHING to do with how fast one can draw a gun.

I've been appointed to represent victims of crime. One of which was a 13 year old girl who had been impregnated by her father. He happened to be a Baptist minister, but that's really beside the point. She gave birth to her child, and the baby was a wonderful bit of evidence in Dude's criminal trial, but the toll that entire experience took on my client was crushing.

Crushing.

I will readily agree that abortion as a first-choice of birth control is abhorrent. I also believe that the percentage of abortions which is first-choice birth control is miniscule.

Which is worse: to allow some abortions which are reprehensible or to force a rape or incest victims from having to bring her attacker's fetus to term?

What of the profoundly disabled? I have also represented care providers. There are people who are full grown, who are utterly unable to care for themselves. Can't communicate. We don't even know if THEY know you're in the room, or if they care. I shudder to think what those parents experienced. Would I have made the same decision as they did?

I don't know.

And neither do you. Not until you're faced with it. You think you know, but you don't.

It's really easy to make decisions from on high. Step down in some of the mud with me and tell me if your vision is still so clear. Stand with me as you're telling someone that her life is forever ****ed because her father couldn't keep his dick out of her.

At the risk of repeating myself: the first victim of this debate is compassion.
Very well stated. Only one problem though. You are claiming that the number of abortions as a primary means of birth control are "miniscule." Answer me this, do you really believe there are more abortions due to incest or rape than for birth control purposes? Really? Without researching, I would be willing to bet you a OSU orange Bikerfox spandex riding suit that the birth controllers outnumber the incest/rapees 1,000 - 1. Or maybe even more. Wanna bet?

[Pricetag]

Very well stated. Only one problem though. You are claiming that the number of abortions as a primary means of birth control are "miniscule." Answer me this, do you really believe there are more abortions due to incest or rape than for birth control purposes? Really? Without researching, I would be willing to bet you a OSU orange Bikerfox spandex riding suit that the birth controllers outnumber the incest/rapees 1,000 - 1. Or maybe even more. Wanna bet?
I think he means that most of them are a second-tier, when the "three percent bloody ineffective" comes up.

[C&CDean]

Also, in the case of your client, if she keeps that kid herself it doesn't stand a chance, and neither does she. How does she explain to the child (someday) that grandpa is daddy? You don't. This is one of those cases where adoption would be best I'm thinking.

[C&CDean]

I think he means that most of them are a second-tier, when the "three percent bloody ineffective" comes up.

I think both of you would be surprised at the number of young girls who spread their legs - and the number of young boys who jump right on that **** - both knowing that she is not on the pill, they're not using a rubber, and that if she ends up knocked up, she doesn't even have to tell her mom or dad. She can just run down to the local Genghis Kahn the butcher abortion clinic and have it sliced and diced and she's back in her 8th grade class by noon. A month later she's humping like a rabbit in the back seat of some other boyfriend's car.

[Harry Beanbag]

Very well stated. Only one problem though. You are claiming that the number of abortions as a primary means of birth control are "miniscule." Answer me this, do you really believe there are more abortions due to incest or rape than for birth control purposes? Really? Without researching, I would be willing to bet you a OSU orange Bikerfox spandex riding suit that the birth controllers outnumber the incest/rapees 1,000 - 1. Or maybe even more. Wanna bet?

^ This.

Game, set, match, Old railroad spike taint dude.

[Sooner_Bob]

The "life begins at conception" argument is a problem. If that is the case, then what of spontaneous miscarrage? Is the ending of that "life" a sin? A crime?

No. No, it isn't.



Then why even bring up miscarriages? Unless the woman is trying to cause a miscarriage, a natural death is not a sin or a crime.




Which is worse: to allow some abortions which are reprehensible or to force a rape or incest victims from having to bring her attacker's fetus to term?


While I may be against abortions I feel that a woman deserves the right to make the choice in any case of rape or incest.




What of the profoundly disabled? I have also represented care providers. There are people who are full grown, who are utterly unable to care for themselves. Can't communicate. We don't even know if THEY know you're in the room, or if they care. I shudder to think what those parents experienced. Would I have made the same decision as they did?

I don't know.



That is most definitely a hard situation to try and put yourself in . . .

[Harry Beanbag]

The "life begins at conception" argument is a problem. If that is the case, then what of spontaneous miscarrage? Is the ending of that "life" a sin? A crime?

No. No, it isn't.


It's called Nature is it not? Not really the same thing as intentionally cutting a baby into pieces with instruments then vacuuming them out.

[Harry Beanbag]

That is most definitely a hard situation to try and put yourself in . . .


Yes, it would be. I hope nobody on this board or their families have to deal with that. I can't imagine the pain that would cause.

[Oldnslo]

Very well stated. Only one problem though. You are claiming that the number of abortions as a primary means of birth control are "miniscule." Answer me this, do you really believe there are more abortions due to incest or rape than for birth control purposes? Really? Without researching, I would be willing to bet you a OSU orange Bikerfox spandex riding suit that the birth controllers outnumber the incest/rapees 1,000 - 1. Or maybe even more. Wanna bet?

Snot the point, Brotherman. As much as some do not want ANY girl to have ANY abortion EVER, I'm saying that sometimes it's tolerable. Needed. Understandable.

Is abortion wrong? The easy, gut-cinch answer is a loud and resounding YES! Does that mean that it should be illegal in all circumstances?

Well, I don't think so.

There are those who will say that adoption is the answer.

Well, I don't think so. Not all the time. Not so that abortion should be illegal in all circumstances. I certainly don't think that a victim should be forced to carry her attacker's fetus to term. Talk to someone who has been the victim of a violent crime. Talk to them about how those few seconds changed them. I've seen decorated war vets reduced to whimpering pups when discussing how some punk with a pissant .380 got the drop on them in a robbery.

Then carry those seconds (or here, minutes) of terror and shame into months. And then carry that through forcing the victim to go through giving birth.

No, thank you.

Are there other circumstances where abortion may be... understandable? With the profoundly disabled? With a child who has some incurable genetic syndrome? (there's another story about another family I could tell)

I think we can all agree that abortion should be restricted. But illegal... I just can't do that. I am not nearly so wise as to make all these decisions for all these people.

[C&CDean]

Again, well stated.

Just for ****s and grins, I'd like to assign someone the task of researching some stats on this deal. How many abortions annually take place due to incest and rape? I'd bet it's much less than 1% of all abortions. You make some good arguments for abortion in those cases though. I have to give you that.

[Harry Beanbag]

I don't think there are too many people arguing against the choice in the instance of rape, and I can't imagine the emotional pain involved in a pregnancy such as that. The number of abortions performed in those cases is miniscule compared to other reasons however.

[Pricetag]

Again, well stated.

Just for ****s and grins, I'd like to assign someone the task of researching some stats on this deal. How many abortions annually take place due to incest and rape? I'd bet it's much less than 1% of all abortions. You make some good arguments for abortion in those cases though. I have to give you that.
Another good stat to have would be the number of abortions that result from people who couldn't care less what the consequences are versus the number of folks who are actively trying not to conceive. It's a lot easier to not care about the people when you assume that they are all the former case.

[Harry Beanbag]

Again, well stated.

Just for ****s and grins, I'd like to assign someone the task of researching some stats on this deal. How many abortions annually take place due to incest and rape? I'd bet it's much less than 1% of all abortions. You make some good arguments for abortion in those cases though. I have to give you that.

I actually just found something that said 1% for rape and incest last year. That comes out to about 12,000. I also saw something that said abortions for rape accounted for 1 out of 2500 abortions, which would be around 500.

No time to post links, but they are readily available.

[jkjsooner]

Snot the point, Brotherman. As much as some do not want ANY girl to have ANY abortion EVER, I'm saying that sometimes it's tolerable. Needed. Understandable.

Is abortion wrong? The easy, gut-cinch answer is a loud and resounding YES! Does that mean that it should be illegal in all circumstances?

Well, I don't think so.

There are those who will say that adoption is the answer.

Well, I don't think so. Not all the time. Not so that abortion should be illegal in all circumstances. I certainly don't think that a victim should be forced to carry her attacker's fetus to term. Talk to someone who has been the victim of a violent crime. Talk to them about how those few seconds changed them. I've seen decorated war vets reduced to whimpering pups when discussing how some punk with a pissant .380 got the drop on them in a robbery.

Then carry those seconds (or here, minutes) of terror and shame into months. And then carry that through forcing the victim to go through giving birth.

No, thank you.

Are there other circumstances where abortion may be... understandable? With the profoundly disabled? With a child who has some incurable genetic syndrome? (there's another story about another family I could tell)

I think we can all agree that abortion should be restricted. But illegal... I just can't do that. I am not nearly so wise as to make all these decisions for all these people.

I knew someone who had a fetus with a large section of replicated genes in a chromosome that controls brain development. I'm not sure if it was considered a trisomy or not. Either way, it was an extremely rare case. They sent it to the Mayo clinic and nobody had ever seen that condition before. The best they could figure is that the baby would not have a functioning brain and if it survived until birth it would die almost immediately. They made what they believe was a compassionate decision to let the baby go. This wasn't a case of aborting a Downs Syndrome child. They would have loved to have had a Downs child at that point. This would have been a child who, if it was aware of anything, would have suffered through its short life.

This isn't the first person who I've known who had to make that decision. It's hard and very unfair to be put in that position. All we can ask of them is to do what they feel is the right thing for the child/fetus.

[JohnnyMack]

Again, well stated.

Just for ****s and grins, I'd like to assign someone the task of researching some stats on this deal. How many abortions annually take place due to incest and rape? I'd bet it's much less than 1% of all abortions. You make some good arguments for abortion in those cases though. I have to give you that.

Holy crap now we have homework around here? This place sucks.

[yermom]

JM gets an F

[delhalew]

I totally agree. But the government shouldn't be forcing people to watch ultrasounds to obtain a legal optional medical procedure. We can argue abortion til we're blue in the face, and if you win, I'll happily play by the rules because, well, I believe in rules.

However, to allow abortions with one hand, and then allow the government to force someone to undergo an ultrasound first is ridiculous and is an invasion of personal libtery.

It's not right to require someone to make an informed decision? All an ultrasound does is show you what you're doing. If you can sleep at night after that, good for you.

I dare someone to watch an ultrasound and deny that the fetus is a living human. A fetus has personality even in the womb. My son behaves differently than my daughter did when was in the womb.

Don't believe me though, let these hoochie's see an ultrasound before they make a life and death decision.:(

[sooner ngintunr]

nevermind, not going to chime in now.

Dean summed it up pretty well. Old n Slo too.

[CK Sooner]

This abortion stuff is crazy.

[olevetonahill]

This abortion stuff is crazy.

The Debates about it are whats Crazy to me
Oldnslo pretty much nailed it fer me
I aint got a Dog in this fight sos Im stayin outta it
My Kids are grown . my Grand kids are growing . I have 2 Granddaughters that Might bring me into the fray sometime in the future .

[tbl]

Snot the point, Brotherman. As much as some do not want ANY girl to have ANY abortion EVER, I'm saying that sometimes it's tolerable. Needed. Understandable.

Is abortion wrong? The easy, gut-cinch answer is a loud and resounding YES! Does that mean that it should be illegal in all circumstances?

Well, I don't think so.

There are those who will say that adoption is the answer.

Well, I don't think so. Not all the time. Not so that abortion should be illegal in all circumstances. I certainly don't think that a victim should be forced to carry her attacker's fetus to term. Talk to someone who has been the victim of a violent crime. Talk to them about how those few seconds changed them. I've seen decorated war vets reduced to whimpering pups when discussing how some punk with a pissant .380 got the drop on them in a robbery.

Then carry those seconds (or here, minutes) of terror and shame into months. And then carry that through forcing the victim to go through giving birth.

No, thank you.

Are there other circumstances where abortion may be... understandable? With the profoundly disabled? With a child who has some incurable genetic syndrome? (there's another story about another family I could tell)

I think we can all agree that abortion should be restricted. But illegal... I just can't do that. I am not nearly so wise as to make all these decisions for all these people.

So under your assumption, the rape victim would heal from the attack much easier if she didn't carry the baby to term. If it wasn't for the baby, she would have healed from the rape but now she has to carry it around for months then possibly raise the child? Right... since being raped isn't traumatic enough, she now has to deal with killing an innocent child (and if you don't think women feel this way when they abort their children, you are sorely mistaken). Killing the child doesn't take away the trauma of the rape.

Here are some real life stories from women that were raped and had their children and also testimonies of children that are the product of rape and are grateful their mothers didn't make the decision to murder them.

http://www.prolifeblogs.com/articles/archives/2009/02/abortion_after.php


I'm not minimizing the traumatic experience of the 13 year old girl you referred to... it's a horrible situation and I feel deeply for her... but how in the flip do you think an abortion would have made things better? Who are you to say such a thing? Do you think it would've been better for that kid that was born perfectly healthy to be murdered?

With the profoundly disabled, according to your definition their life is not valuable now, so why not kill them now? Am I misunderstanding what you're saying?

Also, there are MANY families that carried their terminal babies to term, got to spend a few precious moments with them (even if they were stillborn), and are eternally grateful for that short time. Could they have made the decision to murder their child instead? Sure... but they would have missed the joy of holding them and gone through the grieving process without infanticide. Everybody would agree that both sets of parents mourn and grieve over their lost children... which would you rather be?
http://www.nowilaymedowntosleep.org/medical/
http://www.nowilaymedowntosleep.org/what_to_expect/

Murdering a child is murdering a child. I'm not sure why that is such a complicated moral issue or why there is even an argument over this. It makes me sick to my stomach... literally.

[JohnnyMack]

Wait. You think the 13 year old girl who was raped by her father should have kept the baby? Seriously?

[Frozen Sooner]

I know where my morals and my beliefs lie, not sure if you can say the same based on your opinions thus far, not judging just saying I dont know...murdering a child is wrong, plain and simple.

Let me spell this out for you since you dont seem to be very sharp tonight

Murder is wrong...Correct? Murder is a Sin if you are a Christian...Correct?

Are you following? Just making sure...

Is murdering still wrong if it means you are getting rid of a child molester or a serial killer, etc? Yes! Is it sometimes necessary? Yes!

So again, is murdering a child for any reason wrong, YES! Is it necessary in some cases, I dont believe so!

What about Incest, the child could be born with extreme retardation, deformations, no value of life, is abortion ok in that case? I dont know! I think it is wrong, I think there are other alternatives and it is still not anyones place to decide if that baby should live, maybe that baby will still be happy despite anything wrong that could come of it, who knows. I dont know enough about it...if I was pressed I would say absolutely not a valid reason

Murder is the unlawful and intentional killing of another without mitigating circumstance or excuse.

Calling abortion murder is technically inaccurate. Just sayin'.

[jkjsooner]

So under your assumption, the rape victim would heal from the attack much easier if she didn't carry the baby to term. If it wasn't for the baby, she would have healed from the rape but now she has to carry it around for months then possibly raise the child?

Nobody said she "would have healed." Rape is a traumatic experience and nobody heals easily no matter what the circumstances are after the rape. Don't oversimplify it.

I would argue that for some people the act of carrying around the fetus as a daily reminder to everyone can be very traumatic. Sometimes victims can't even speak of their attack in a court of law because of the emotional impact it has on them. Do you think it's easy for them to carry around the evidence of the event?

Take the 13 year old case and it seems almost absurd that you would expect that child to walk around 8th grade for 9 nine months showing everyone exactly what happened to her. If she chooses to do that, great. She's a wonderful person. I don't think it's up to us to make that decision for her.




Right... since being raped isn't traumatic enough, she now has to deal with killing an innocent child (and if you don't think women feel this way when they abort their children, you are sorely mistaken).

I would let the victims make up their mind on which is more traumatic.




Here are some real life stories from women that were raped and had their children and also testimonies of children that are the product of rape and are grateful their mothers didn't make the decision to murder them.


Good for them. It's a big world and you cn find plenty of cases that fit your stand.

Do you expect the children to wish that they had never been born? Ask them if they're happy their mother was raped? Kind of a sticky question isn't it?


but how in the flip do you think an abortion would have made things better?

Pretty easy for most of us to understand that a 13 year old carrying evidence of rape/incest for all others to see and mock (13 year olds are very cruel if you don't remember) could add significantly to the trauma.



With the profoundly disabled, according to your definition their life is not valuable now, so why not kill them now? Am I misunderstanding what you're saying?


Yes, you are. You sure have a way of distorting our words. Many people make their decisions based on what they feel is best for the baby. Nobody said the life isn't valuable. We're saying that those people make what they feel is a compassionate decision. I've never been in that position myself but I know how hard it is.



Also, there are MANY families that carried their terminal babies to term, got to spend a few precious moments with them (even if they were stillborn), and are eternally grateful for that short time.

That's great. It's wonderful for them. My friend got to hold her baby after they removed it and she's very grateful for the moment she had with it. It was severely deformed and the brain was not developing. She now feel that baby is healthy in heaven and she considers it part of her family. While it was a very tough decision, she and her husband feel that they made the ethical decision.

I close by asking you to be careful in making assumptions about what we're saying. You seem to hear what you want to hear so that you can label us in a way that is convenient to your beliefs.

[yermom]

you are pretty dismissive yourself. why is euthanasia better in the womb? it's morally okay to prevent suffering, but not end it?

can you imagine having this conversation with a child from a rape?

[Collier11]

Murder is the unlawful and intentional killing of another without mitigating circumstance or excuse.

Calling abortion murder is technically inaccurate. Just sayin'.

So somehow when you get an abortion you are just accidentally having that doctor kill your baby :confused: :rolleyes:

[GrapevineSooner]

So somehow when you get an abortion you are just accidentally having that doctor kill your baby :confused: :rolleyes:

An abortion sometimes carries mitigating circumstances.

Like rape, incest, or ectopic pregnancy.

Therein lies the difference.

[Veritas]

I did not start this thread to debate abortion.
http://blogs.mysanantonio.com/weblogs/atlarge/epic_fail.jpg

[yermom]

So somehow when you get an abortion you are just accidentally having that doctor kill your baby :confused: :rolleyes:

the difference is the law part. it's not illegal, so murder isn't the right word

[Turd_Ferguson]

the difference is the law part. it's not illegal, so murder isn't the right wordbecause murder makes it sound bad:confused:

[yermom]

Froz is just working on his lawyer conversion ;)

[KABOOKIE]

Murder is the unlawful and intentional killing of another without mitigating circumstance or excuse.

Calling abortion murder is technically inaccurate. Just sayin'.

And I'll refer back to a previous point.... A plantation owner wasn't technically murdering a slave. He was reducing inventory.

[KABOOKIE]

Froz is just working on his scumbag lawyer conversion ;)


99.98%! ;)

[LilSooner]

10 pages and yall haven't figured this **** out yet? I'm highly disappointed in you boys.

I'm pretty sure there are much more pressing issues in this world other than what a woman decides to do with her own body. Besides I'm am damn near positive that the law has already had their say on this one and none of you knuckleheads are going to be to change the law. But nice try.

[KABOOKIE]

10 pages and yall haven't figured this **** out yet? I'm highly disappointed in you boys.

I'm pretty sure there are much more pressing issues in this world other than what a woman decides to do with her own body. Besides I'm am damn near positive that the law has already had their say on this one and none of you knuckleheads are going to be to change the law. But nice try.

:rolleyes:


Slavery was legal too. It's my right!

Just because you are set in your ignorance doesn't mean I won't fight for the rights of those who have no voice.

[LilSooner]

Just because you guys are arguing about something you can't change that makes me the dumb one?

Wow. Pot meet kettle.

And if you so ready to fight for the ones who don't have a voice how but you fight for the children who are on this earth who are being abused or live their lives in a foster home. That seems like a much more productive use of ones time instead of arguing on the internets.

[KABOOKIE]

Just because you guys are arguing about something you can't change that makes me the dumb one?

Wow. Pot meet kettle.

Oh, I didn't say you were dumb.

[LilSooner]

Again 11 pages and you are no further along than when you started.

[KABOOKIE]

Again 11 pages and you are no further along than when you started.

There's some stubborn people out there.

[LilSooner]

On soonerfans? I'm shocked, completely shocked! You boys could argue about the damn color of the sky.

[Turd_Ferguson]

We are at 11 pages. Pay tention.:D

[Frozen Sooner]

And I'll refer back to a previous point.... A plantation owner wasn't technically murdering a slave. He was reducing inventory.

Actually, I don't believe it was lawful to kill your own slave. I could be wrong on that.

Calling it murder is rhetoric and inaccurate. Doesn't say anything to whether it's moral or right, simply that it's not murder if it's lawful.

[Frozen Sooner]

So somehow when you get an abortion you are just accidentally having that doctor kill your baby :confused: :rolleyes:

I even bolded the relevant word for you.

[Frozen Sooner]

99.98%! ;)

To be fair, I had a head start.

[KABOOKIE]

On soonerfans? I'm shocked, completely shocked! You boys could argue about the damn color of the sky.

And you women would still think it's your right to destroy it.

[KABOOKIE]

Actually, I don't believe it was lawful to kill your own slave. I could be wrong on that.

Calling it murder is rhetoric and inaccurate. Doesn't say anything to whether it's moral or right, simply that it's not murder if it's lawful.

Yes, we know the difference between whats moral/ethically right vs. "legal."

Hitler had lawyers working overtime too! ;)

[LilSooner]

And you women would still think it's your right to destroy it.

Wow. Your a peach aren't you.

Well guess what if you wouldn't stick it in anything with an opening this probably wouldn't be an issue now wouldn't it.

And you would have to find something else to be super judgmental over.

[Frozen Sooner]

Yes, we know the difference between whats moral/ethically right vs. "legal."

Hitler had lawyers working overtime too! ;)

There's a pretty relevant quote from MLK regarding this:

We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was "legal" and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was "illegal."

Apparently those who keep saying "Abortion is murder" don't know the difference between morally/ethically right and legal.

Again, calling it murder is inaccurate, no matter how much you want to use the word to stigmatize people who perform this lawful act.

[KABOOKIE]

Wow. Your a peach aren't you.

Well guess what if you wouldn't stick it in anything with an opening this probably wouldn't be an issue now wouldn't it.

And you would have to find something else to be super judgmental over.

Hahaha! It's the man's fault I need an abortion. Talk about judgemental.

[Collier11]

Just because you guys are arguing about something you can't change that makes me the dumb one?

Wow. Pot meet kettle.

And if you so ready to fight for the ones who don't have a voice how but you fight for the children who are on this earth who are being abused or live their lives in a foster home. That seems like a much more productive use of ones time instead of arguing on the internets.


Who says it cant be changed...it may take time but there are changes that can be made



Again 11 pages and you are no further along than when you started.

Who really cares, its a interesting and thus far fairly respectful discussion, go away and we will alert you when a resolution has been met. Sound good? ;)

[Frozen Sooner]

You need an abortion?

[KABOOKIE]

There's a pretty relevant quote from MLK regarding this:

We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was "legal" and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was "illegal."

Apparently those who keep saying "Abortion is murder" don't know the difference between morally/ethically right and legal.

Again, calling it murder is inaccurate, no matter how much you want to use the word to stigmatize people who perform this lawful act.

And your point is? I'd rather someone be technically inaccurate than morally and ethically on the wrong side of an issue.

[Collier11]

Actually, I don't believe it was lawful to kill your own slave. I could be wrong on that.

Calling it murder is rhetoric and inaccurate. Doesn't say anything to whether it's moral or right, simply that it's not murder if it's lawful.

I think calling it murder is completely accurate, what else do you call killing a defensless child/human being?

[Frozen Sooner]

I think calling it murder is completely accurate, what else do you call killing a defensless child/human being?

Lawful. Thus not murder. What aren't you getting out of this?

Murder is the unlawful killing of another person without justification or excuse.

I mean, if you want you could call it "toaster," but you'd be just as mistaken.

[Collier11]

An abortion sometimes carries mitigating circumstances.

Like rape, incest, or ectopic pregnancy.

Therein lies the difference.

So because the child was born out of circumstances that are not ideal, the child should be terminated?


the difference is the law part. it's not illegal, so murder isn't the right word

I understand what their point is, I just dont agree with it just cus abortion happens to be "legal", it is still murder

[Frozen Sooner]

And your point is? I'd rather someone be technically inaccurate than morally and ethically on the wrong side of an issue.

My point is that calling it murder is inaccurate. And now you're begging the question.

[Frozen Sooner]

I understand what their point is, I just dont agree with it just cus abortion happens to be "legal", it is still murder

Then you don't understand what "murder" means. Words have meanings.

[Collier11]

Lawful. Thus not murder. What aren't you getting out of this?

Murder is the unlawful killing of another person without justification or excuse.

I mean, if you want you could call it "toaster," but you'd be just as mistaken.

See above

[Curly Bill]

Am I the only conservative that doesn't think it's OK for the govt to take over health care, private industry and the like, and neither is it OK for the govt to tell a woman what she can do with her body?

[Frozen Sooner]

See above

See definition of murder.

[LilSooner]

Simple fact no sex, no baby. No need for the discussion. Pretty simple huh.

[Collier11]

Then you don't understand what "murder" means. Words have meanings.

Words are words, dont be ignorant. I completely understand what murder means, if you want to win the argument then I will concede that by law, murder is something that is illegal and abortion is not, there are ya happy? ;)

My point is that when you are killing a defenseless child, it is never ok and it should be considered murder, in MY MIND it is murder because of the way I view abortion. Is that better?

[Collier11]

Am I the only conservative that doesn't think it's OK for the govt to take over health care, private industry and the like, and neither is it OK for the govt to tell a woman what she can do with her body?

Curly come on now, the government can tell you it is not ok to kill another human being, just not one that hasnt been born yet cus of the womans rights? Give me a break, I think that is weak sauce!

I still love ya though ;)

[Veritas]

Am I the only conservative that doesn't think it's OK for the govt to take over health care, private industry and the like, and neither is it OK for the govt to tell a woman what she can do with her body?
I'd fall into that category. I'm pro-life, but abortion isn't on my radar of important issues.

[Frozen Sooner]

Words are words, dont be ignorant. I completely understand what murder means, if you want to win the argument then I will concede that by law, murder is something that is illegal and abortion is not, there are ya happy? ;)

My point is that when you are killing a defenseless child, it is never ok and it should be considered murder, in MY MIND it is murder because of the way I view abortion. Is that better?

You're misusing a word but calling me ignorant? Oooooo-kay... ;)

If your argument is that abortion is killing a child and as such should be unlawful and thus murder, then you have a good argument. You could also make an appeal to natural law or moral law, claiming that even though abortion is legal by statute it is illegal by moral law (though you're begging for someone to generalize that to calling executions murder, etc.)

Your second paragraph begs the question significantly. I don't know of any pro-abortion arguments that concede one of your assumptions.

[Collier11]

See definition of murder.

Moral compass should be more meaningful than dictionary, the fact that you are arguing the technicality of the exact definition is weak and laughable

[Collier11]

You're misusing a word but calling me ignorant? Oooooo-kay... ;)

If your argument is that abortion is killing a child and as such should be unlawful and thus murder, then you have a good argument.

Your second paragraph begs the question significantly.

Thats exactly what I am arguing and you knew that all along, you are just being difficult ;)

[Curly Bill]

Curly come on now, the government can tell you it is not ok to kill another human being, just not one that hasnt been born yet cus of the womans rights? Give me a break, I think that is weak sauce!

I still love ya though ;)

I appreciate the thought, but I'm about as opposed to you as one can be on this argument. I don't know why you guys are even arguing it, no one has ever convinced someone on the other side to change sides.

(OK, maybe it has happened, but not often) ;)


...and yeah, if ya wanna know the truth: I don't call it a human until it comes out kicking and screaming.

[LilSooner]

Moral compass should be more meaningful than dictionary, the fact that you are arguing the technicality of the exact definition is weak and laughable


Dude he is going to be lawyer what do you expect?

Love ya Froze.

[Collier11]

I agree and understand that we arent going to win the argument or convince anyone to change their mind on either side but it is nice to have the argument from time to time, especially when it has surprisingly stayed fairly civil.

Itd be a much better discussion if we were all drunk though ;)

[Veritas]

The fact that *any* of you are getting your panties in a wad about a semantic issue is weak and laughable. It's almost like everybody is completely mortgaged to the correctness of their own opinion and holds no interest in objectively examining the opinions of others.

[Frozen Sooner]

Moral compass should be more meaningful than dictionary, the fact that you are arguing the technicality of the exact definition is weak and laughable

My moral compass says that killing you isn't murder.

Hey, this is a fun game! We can make anything illegal or legal by our own moral compass!

WORDS HAVE MEANINGS. The fact that you're tossing around a word whose meaning escaped you is "weak and laughable."

What if I called you a rapist for having premarital sex?

[Collier11]

I think your gauge on this conversation thus far is off then, abortion isnt something that is just easily accepted but I think we are all being pretty considerate even in complete disagreement

[Curly Bill]

The fact that *any* of you are getting your panties in a wad about a semantic issue is weak and laughable. It's almost like everybody is completely mortgaged to the correctness of their own opinion and holds no interest in objectively examining the opinions of others.

It's been my experience on this issue that the only opinions that matter are one's own.

[Frozen Sooner]

Thats exactly what I am arguing and you knew that all along, you are just being difficult ;)

Meh. I just don't like it when people misuse words. :D

For the record, I have the same problem with the "Meat is murder" idiot crowd. Except Moz.

[Collier11]

My moral compass says that killing you isn't murder.

Hey, this is a fun game! We can make anything illegal or legal by our own moral compass!

WORDS HAVE MEANINGS. The fact that you're tossing around a word whose meaning escaped you is "weak and laughable."

What if I called you a rapist for having premarital sex?

Diff is that the word doesnt even apply, in this case murder could apply and may well at some point in our lives...it may not also though

And what are you doing watching me have premarital sex anyway?

[Veritas]

It's been my experience on this issue that the only opinions that matter are one's own.
It's been my experience that the measure of a man's intelligence is the degree to which he agrees with you (the royal you). :D

[Curly Bill]

Meh. I just don't like it when people misuse words. :D

Dude seriously, you're training to be a lawyer. :P

[Collier11]

Meh. I just don't like it when people misuse words. :D

well hell, your name is Frozen Sooner, are you actually Frozen??? Cus if not, that is a complete misuse of the word and disrespectful to all frozen people including the late great Ted Williams and Encino Man

[Frozen Sooner]

Diff is that the word doesnt even apply, in this case murder could apply and may well at some point in our lives...it may not also though

And what are you doing watching me have premarital sex anyway?

Sure it applies. You penetrated a woman with a foreign object. By my moral compass unless you're married that's rape. It may not be the legal definition of rape, but my moral compass it is. ;)

Or to make it less extreme, can you call someone a batterer because they hugged you?

[Frozen Sooner]

well hell, your name is Frozen Sooner, are you actually Frozen??? Cus if not, that is a complete misuse of the word and disrespectful to all frozen people including the late great Ted Williams and Encino Man

Touche (please draw accent in your head.) However, I am happy to admit that the "Frozen" part is hyperbole. Are you willing to say the same for your use of "murder"?

[Frozen Sooner]

And I'm happy that I've completely derailed this murder of a thread.