Page 16 of 17 FirstFirst ... 614151617 LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 168

Thread: Abortions - Pro Choice or Pro Life?

  1. #151
    William's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    20
    Userbars
    0
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked
    3/3
    DL/UL
    6/0
    Mentioned
    Never
    Time Online
    3h 45m
    Avg. Time Online
    N/A
    I'm pro-life all the way. Caring for a baby is hard, and maybe some adoption agencies don't run smoothly. But there are many that do. Yes it is hard financially, physically, and mentally. And that is why, we need to help those who are in crisis pregnancies. In cases of rape, the community has to aid the woman to help care for her baby, as obviously, many of these victims cannot take care of a child all by themselves. Sometimes, the community does not offer to help, but that doesn't mean you should just stop there. In terms of the difficulty of the pregnancy term, we need to help the victim get through it. It is very tough, especially if one was still in school. People are always willing to help.

    For the argument about the child not living a good life, we cannot say that we don't want the child to live a life that they don't deserve. We can't decide that. Only the child can. Why do we have so much support in suicide prevention? Because no matter what, a person is always a person. They should not die, just because they have a hard life. After all, who knows, maybe that child will be the happiest kid in the world, because he takes value in not having many material possessions. As they say, money is not everything, and happiness comes from the heart.
    I know many kids who hardly have anything. I'm talking families with 11 kids, who can't afford to privilege their children. But I've never seen them sad in there life.

    And for the argument about a woman's choice/right, let's take the example of a kidney. If someone were to die without a kidney, you do not have the obligation to give them one of your kidneys because your kidney was designed for you. Yes, you CAN still live with one kidney, BUT there are complications in doing so, and thus, we can say, that you have the right over your own kidney. Now for the uterus, if you took the uterus out, one wouldn't be affected at all. Why? Because the uterus wasn't designed for you. It was designed for someone else: the baby.

    Finally, if one does not think a baby is a human until after it has left the womb, you will gladly realize the argument comes from science. A baby isn't a bunch of cells, it is a bunch of HUMAN cells. Human cells develop into a human, because it was essentially a human to begin with. No other thing, can develop into a human because it is not a human. Ive heard many arguments about an acorn and an acorn tree, but it is faulty. An acorn and an acorn tree are essentially the same. No other seed will develop into an acorn tree, only the acorn. Also, if there's any ambiguity, let's take this example. Say you were on a boat with a polarized camera and you saw the lochness monster. You immediately snap a picture, and it comes out black because it takes a bit of time to develop. You then go to your friend and tell them that you have a picture of the lochness monster. They see black, laugh at you, rip it up, and throw it overboard. The picture of the lochness monster was always there, it just hadn't developed yet.

  2. #152
    Brittanee's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    759
    Userbars
    6
    Thanks
    402
    Thanked
    278/143
    DL/UL
    65/0
    Mentioned
    103 times
    Time Online
    32d 6h 48m
    Avg. Time Online
    11m
    Pro-Choice.

    Also, I don't believe men have the right to vote or even debate about women's rights.
    They don't have to go through any of it, so they should have no say.

    DER HUMPINK

  3. #153
    William's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    20
    Userbars
    0
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked
    3/3
    DL/UL
    6/0
    Mentioned
    Never
    Time Online
    3h 45m
    Avg. Time Online
    N/A
    Thats like saying non-jews have no right to debate about the holocaust, or non-North Koreans have no right to debate about the North Korean leader, our non-men have no right to debate about men's rights. That logic contradicts the purpose of debate. Doesn't it make sense that we all have the right to argue for what we think is right?
    Last edited by William; 10-20-2012 at 10:29 PM.

  4. #154
    Brittanee's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    759
    Userbars
    6
    Thanks
    402
    Thanked
    278/143
    DL/UL
    65/0
    Mentioned
    103 times
    Time Online
    32d 6h 48m
    Avg. Time Online
    11m
    Men aren't oppressed, first of all.
    Secondly, men should not get to vote on what a woman does with her own body.
    They don't own woman.
    It shouldn't even be an issue.

    Just like gay rights, people shouldn't have the right to vote on what gay people are doing with their lives.

    It's not affecting your life. It isn't hurting you.

    DER HUMPINK

  5. #155
    Chi's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    453
    Userbars
    10
    Thanks
    246
    Thanked
    415/109
    DL/UL
    54/0
    Mentioned
    83 times
    Time Online
    13d 20h 11m
    Avg. Time Online
    4m
    Quote Originally Posted by William View Post
    I'm pro-life all the way. Caring for a baby is hard, and maybe some adoption agencies don't run smoothly. But there are many that do. Yes it is hard financially, physically, and mentally. And that is why, we need to help those who are in crisis pregnancies. In cases of rape, the community has to aid the woman to help care for her baby, as obviously, many of these victims cannot take care of a child all by themselves. Sometimes, the community does not offer to help, but that doesn't mean you should just stop there. In terms of the difficulty of the pregnancy term, we need to help the victim get through it. It is very tough, especially if one was still in school. People are always willing to help.
    You want a rape victim do keep the fking child of a possible psychopath? Not only do you know know the medical history of the father in most cases if there is truly something wrong with him in most cases there will be a genetic factor to it. So now you have a mother who hates the baby who hates here life because she isn't allowed to get an abortion and so instead she commits suicide and kills them both. OR she waits and gives birth, hates herself or the child, potentially disowns the child causing the child extreme environmental and psychological harm or kills herself anyway or does something worst.

    The womb will naturally abort a foetus if needed, because there was something wrong genetically. Why can't a woman, with a brain who can assess the situation choose to abort an undeveloped and not living foetus when she knows that environmentally she cannot support the child (Nature and Nurture are important). A foetus that is removed from the womb either naturally or by the mothers choice before week 21 is not a living thing. It is no more than the stem cells in your spinal cord, or the stem cells in the umbilical cord or sperm cells in the testes (and ovum in the ovaries). It doesn't have a functioning brain, it cannot live independently it is just a parasite.

    Believe it or not, whether you agree or disagree without a functioning brain you are not living. You are dead anyway. There is no such thing as spirit that keeps you alive, you are a shell and the only reason that one individual may continue living without a functioning brain is because people keep them alive through medical sources. If it was the 17th century they would be dead.Therefore until the foetus has a functioning brain (23 weeks gestation) it is no more a human than a corpse is.

    Finally - It doesn't effect you so why block people that need this procedure. You can be pro-life in your own time but that was your choice and therefore you should be pro-choice.

  6. #156
    Brittanee's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    759
    Userbars
    6
    Thanks
    402
    Thanked
    278/143
    DL/UL
    65/0
    Mentioned
    103 times
    Time Online
    32d 6h 48m
    Avg. Time Online
    11m
    Also, with places to get an abortion, those who truly feel they need one will have somewhere to go. Otherwise, they're going to find someone to do it for them, someone who doesn't know what they're doing and they could possibly harm the woman. Or they'll try to do it themselves.

    Just because the option of abortion is there, doesn't mean everyone will go get one, but at least there are safe places to go.

    DER HUMPINK

  7. #157
    William's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    20
    Userbars
    0
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked
    3/3
    DL/UL
    6/0
    Mentioned
    Never
    Time Online
    3h 45m
    Avg. Time Online
    N/A
    Quote Originally Posted by Chi View Post
    So now you have a mother who hates the baby who hates here life because she isn't allowed to get an abortion and so instead she commits suicide and kills them both. OR she waits and gives birth, hates herself or the child, potentially disowns the child causing the child extreme environmental and psychological harm or kills herself anyway or does something worst.
    You can't predict the future.
    Why punish the child because of the crime of the father?

    Also, scientists agree that life begins at conception, also referred to as fertilization. Drs. Keith Moore and T. Persaud’s embryology textbook used by medical students at the University of British Columbia confirms this:

    Human development begins at fertilization [emphasis in original], the process during which a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoon) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell, the zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell is the beginning of embryonic development. The zygote, just visible to the unaided eye as a tiny speck, contains chromosomes and genes (units of genetic information) that are derived from the mother and father. The unicellular organism, or zygote, divides many times and becomes progressively transformed into a multicellular human being through cell division, migration, growth, and differentiation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Chi View Post
    Finally - It doesn't effect you so why block people that need this procedure. You can be pro-life in your own time but that was your choice and therefore you should be pro-choice.
    What about the holocaust. If it didn't affect us personally, should we have just stood by and let it happen?

    Quote Originally Posted by Chi View Post
    Believe it or not, whether you agree or disagree without a functioning brain you are not living.
    Whether I agree or disagree, that is so? How does that convince me in the slightest?

    Quote Originally Posted by Chi View Post
    It doesn't have a functioning brain, it cannot live independently it is just a parasite.
    If you went into a coma, there's no telling when you would recover. You wouldn't be able to live independently, but that doesn't make them parasites. Also, patients can have a temporarily flat EEG, but shortly after, have a functioning brain again. In that time frame, would that person be not human? Would we be allowed to kill them?
    Last edited by William; 10-23-2012 at 12:44 AM.

  8. #158
    Brittanee's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    759
    Userbars
    6
    Thanks
    402
    Thanked
    278/143
    DL/UL
    65/0
    Mentioned
    103 times
    Time Online
    32d 6h 48m
    Avg. Time Online
    11m
    You keep using the Holocaust as an example. A lot of that, no one even knew that was happening until the camps were found. They were just rumors.

    Abortion and the Holocaust are two totally different things. Those people were already born. They weren't a danger to someone's health or well-being.

    DER HUMPINK

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Brittanee For This Useful Post:

    Meagan (10-23-2012),Reese (10-23-2012)

  10. #159
    William's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    20
    Userbars
    0
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked
    3/3
    DL/UL
    6/0
    Mentioned
    Never
    Time Online
    3h 45m
    Avg. Time Online
    N/A
    Quote Originally Posted by Brittanee View Post
    They weren't a danger to someone's health or well-being.
    Exactly. That's what Im trying to get at. They weren't exactly life threatening which is why they shouldn't have been killed. Yet Hitler thought they were life threatening, which was obviously wrong. He thought he was doing a favor to the human race by getting rid of them, and he thought his life and well being would be horrible with them.

  11. #160
    Brittanee's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    759
    Userbars
    6
    Thanks
    402
    Thanked
    278/143
    DL/UL
    65/0
    Mentioned
    103 times
    Time Online
    32d 6h 48m
    Avg. Time Online
    11m
    Pregnancies can be a danger to a person's well being or health or life. If it is such a risk, there should be a way to terminate the pregnancy to save the life of the person who is already alive. This has absolutely nothing to do with the holocaust and it's a ridiculous defense.

    DER HUMPINK

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •