Abortion.

Originally Posted by 100%

I'd say it's wrong to have an abortion because that's killing another human. And if you don't want to have kids, just wear a condom. If it's rape, just put the kid in some adoption place if you can't stand it. (even though you'll have to pay all the medical expenses) Or, just carry a gun and have a conceal and carry license. That's what I go by.

You must be a fucking retard to think that rape victims shouldn't have an abortion option. Condoms don't always work either.
-------------------------

Abortion in the US isn't even disputed, its legal, and it has no mass amount of victims that can complain about it.

If it was illegal here is the questions.
1. Do people just go elsewhere to get an abortion.
2. Wouldn't abortions put more money in the economy?
3. Ethics aside, if they are just going to go elsewhere, might as well do it there.
4. Ethics based: Arguments against abortion are always from people who have a completely biased view. Abortions aren't killing anything any more than a womans period. This shit is just pathetic that people argue "its a baby" but fuck, they don't want it.

Originally Posted by Empire

4. Ethics based: Arguments against abortion are always from people who have a completely biased view. Abortions aren't killing anything any more than a womans period. This shit is just pathetic that people argue "its a baby" but fuck, they don't want it.

This shit is just pathetic that people argue, 'it's a human, even if he's a jew', but fuck it, Hitler didn't want them.

Not to want something does not give you whatsoever the right to destroy or kill it. Especially if it's another human's life. Now the question is not 'When does life begin' but 'When does that life become a human being?'. Thing is, the embryo is, nowadays, called 'youngest form of life' in the scientific fields. It obviouslt cannot surivive in its own, but it is still the youngest form of human life.

Nevertheless, it becomes a matter of perspective (isn't moral all bout that in this society, anyways?). If you believe life begins as soon as the ovum meets the sperm, then you might be pro-life. If you believe life begins as soon as the backbone is formed (14 days), then you might be in either side of the argument. If you believe life begins after the first heartbeat, then you might be pro-choice.

Perspective. It makes or breaks everything.

Originally Posted by Sir Nathan

This shit is just pathetic that people argue, 'it's a human, even if he's a jew', but fuck it, Hitler didn't want them.

Not to want something does not give you whatsoever the right to destroy or kill it. Especially if it's another human's life. Now the question is not 'When does life begin' but 'When does that life become a human being?'. Thing is, the embryo is, nowadays, called 'youngest form of life' in the scientific fields. It obviouslt cannot surivive in its own, but it is still the youngest form of human life.

Nevertheless, it becomes a matter of perspective (isn't moral all bout that in this society, anyways?). If you believe life begins as soon as the ovum meets the sperm, then you might be pro-life. If you believe life begins as soon as the backbone is formed (14 days), then you might be in either side of the argument. If you believe life begins after the first heartbeat, then you might be pro-choice.

Perspective. It makes or breaks everything.

Comparing an abortion to the holocaust lol. Some fucked up perspective you got.

Honestly, people get waaaay too into the "when does it begin". Lets just say it begins at "egg/sperm contact", because no one gives a fuck about this part anyway. "When it begins" is pointless to argue, because its only argued when abortion is already legal.
----------------------------

The most important part, "is abortion wrong"?

I say no.
What makes abortion wrong?
*Please i'd love to hear this.*
-------------------------
There is also the hypocrisy, none of these anti-abortionist are willing for transplants, adoption or any accommodating AFTER the birth.

Not to mention labor pains/giving birth, raising a child on minimum wage, all that shit.

IF you paid attention, you don't just get paid for being off work with a kid during childbirth. It also cost money for the hospital bill, money I might add that most people don't have. That being said, pro-life or w/e doesn't support them in the hospital either.

Its a completely biased view. They don't care enough for the baby to actually help, but they care enough to annoy/stop people from doing an abortion.
-----------------------------------

Feel free to argue, but no one really cares because your essay or w/e is on an answer already decided by your teacher.

Originally Posted by Sir Nathan

This shit is just pathetic that people argue, 'it's a human, even if he's a jew', but fuck it, Hitler didn't want them.

Not to want something does not give you whatsoever the right to destroy or kill it. Especially if it's another human's life. Now the question is not 'When does life begin' but 'When does that life become a human being?'. Thing is, the embryo is, nowadays, called 'youngest form of life' in the scientific fields. It obviouslt cannot surivive in its own, but it is still the youngest form of human life.

Nevertheless, it becomes a matter of perspective (isn't moral all bout that in this society, anyways?). If you believe life begins as soon as the ovum meets the sperm, then you might be pro-life. If you believe life begins as soon as the backbone is formed (14 days), then you might be in either side of the argument. If you believe life begins after the first heartbeat, then you might be pro-choice.

Perspective. It makes or breaks everything.

Do you step on/squish ants? Or are you so caught up in your own morals that you must remove it with due diligence not to kill it. Because ants have more cognitive processes then an embryo. An ants is aware of it's own existence. An embryo isn't. Cognitive function, and neural operation only begins during the fetal stage.

In my opinion abortion is fine up until the viability age which is around about 5 months into the gestational period. After that there is a chance that the fetus may be deemed viable.

Originally Posted by Empire

Comparing an abortion to the holocaust lol. Some fucked up perspective you got.

Honestly, people get waaaay too into the "when does it begin". Lets just say it begins at "egg/sperm contact", because no one gives a fuck about this part anyway. "When it begins" is pointless to argue, because its only argued when abortion is already legal.
----------------------------

The most important part, "is abortion wrong"?

I say no.
What makes abortion wrong?
*Please i'd love to hear this.*
-------------------------
There is also the hypocrisy, none of these anti-abortionist are willing for transplants, adoption or any accommodating AFTER the birth.

Not to mention labor pains/giving birth, raising a child on minimum wage, all that shit.

IF you paid attention, you don't just get paid for being off work with a kid during childbirth. It also cost money for the hospital bill, money I might add that most people don't have. That being said, pro-life or w/e doesn't support them in the hospital either.

Its a completely biased view. They don't care enough for the baby to actually help, but they care enough to annoy/stop people from doing an abortion.
-----------------------------------

Feel free to argue, but no one really cares because your essay or w/e is on an answer already decided by your teacher.

Comparing the holocaust with abortion? You create a scenario were life begins at 'egg/sprem contact'. Therefore, in abortion they're ending a life. You don't have to be a genius to know that the end of a life is death, and that if a human commits or produces this event, it's called killing someone. Let's say the 6 million people murdered during the holocaust count only the people who died durin 1939 until 1943. That's 4 years. 4/6 = 1.5 per year. In the USA there are 1.3 million abortions per year. 1.5 and 1.3. I believe there's room for comparison.

'Is abortion wrong?'
Wrong. Funny word. However you look at it, almost in everyone's mind, killing someone is wrong. You say life begins at sperm/egg contact, hence making abortion the killing of someone. (not so hard to analyze in my opinion).

Hypocresy? You state none of these anti-abortionists are willing for adoption, transplants, or ANY acommodating after the birth. Generalizing much? And how'd you even know?

So your solution the lack of money for the sustainability of a child is, taking in count your definition of the start of life as egg/sprem contact, killing him/she? Might as well kill every kid who's parents don't have money for education or food.

My essay is due friday, and I didn't create this thread in order to get advices on what stand to take. I just thought it was a very interesting and complicated topic to debate about.

@Doc Ants are not self aware.
Your thought might lead you to 'ah well, I step on ants and eat chicken, therefore it is viable/acceptable that I kill somebody. I mean, we're all animals somehow.'

T

Originally Posted by Sir Nathan

Comparing the holocaust with abortion? You create a scenario were life begins at 'egg/sprem contact'. Therefore, in abortion they're ending a life. You don't have to be a genius to know that the end of a life is death, and that if a human commits or produces this event, it's called killing someone. Let's say the 6 million people murdered during the holocaust count only the people who died durin 1939 until 1943. That's 4 years. 4/6 = 1.5 per year. In the USA there are 1.3 million abortions per year. 1.5 and 1.3. I believe there's room for comparison.

'Is abortion wrong?'
Wrong. Funny word. However you look at it, almost in everyone's mind, killing someone is wrong. You say life begins at sperm/egg contact, hence making abortion the killing of someone. (not so hard to analyze in my opinion).

Hypocresy? You state none of these anti-abortionists are willing for adoption, transplants, or ANY acommodating after the birth. Generalizing much? And how'd you even know?

So your solution the lack of money for the sustainability of a child is, taking in count your definition of the start of life as egg/sprem contact, killing him/she? Might as well kill every kid who's parents don't have money for education or food.

My essay is due friday, and I didn't create this thread in order to get advices on what stand to take. I just thought it was a very interesting and complicated topic to debate about.

@Doc Ants are not self aware.
Your thought might lead you to 'ah well, I step on ants and eat chicken, therefore it is viable/acceptable that I kill somebody. I mean, we're all animals somehow.'

T

How do you know that they are not self-aware? Are you an ant? Recent experiments show that Ants do in fact think and they respond to their surroundings. Which is far more than what an embryo can do.

To quote you if I may,

Originally Posted by Sir Nathan

Not to want something does not give you whatsoever the right to destroy or kill it. Especially if it's another human's life. Thing is, the embryo is, nowadays, called 'youngest form of life' in the scientific fields.

Am I correct in saying that your point here is that just because you do not want something doesn't give you the right to destroy it. This extends to all forms of life, considering you went out of your way to specify the gravity of destroying human life rather than just concerning human life in the first statement. Then by progression of thought one cay say that killing an ant is wrong, coming under the precedent that destroying life is wrong.

As for the embryo being called the "youngest form of life". That has to be the most pathetic basis for an argument against abortion. I can say sperm is the buildings blocks of life therefore contraception should not be allowed, yet you would claim that as preposterous. Life does not mean human, nor does it mean viable, or self-aware. Life does not make them a person.

Originally Posted by Sir Nathan

My essay is due friday, and I didn't create this thread in order to get advices on what stand to take. I just thought it was a very interesting and complicated topic to debate about.

The premise of a debate is to exchange opinions on two opposite stances. To want a debate and not want opinions on what stand to take is contradictory. You were better off not posting anything at all.

Originally Posted by Sir Nathan

Comparing the holocaust with abortion? You create a scenario were life begins at 'egg/sprem contact'. Therefore, in abortion they're ending a life. You don't have to be a genius to know that the end of a life is death, and that if a human commits or produces this event, it's called killing someone. Let's say the 6 million people murdered during the holocaust count only the people who died durin 1939 until 1943. That's 4 years. 4/6 = 1.5 per year. In the USA there are 1.3 million abortions per year. 1.5 and 1.3. I believe there's room for comparison.

'Is abortion wrong?'
Wrong. Funny word. However you look at it, almost in everyone's mind, killing someone is wrong. You say life begins at sperm/egg contact, hence making abortion the killing of someone. (not so hard to analyze in my opinion).

Hypocresy? You state none of these anti-abortionists are willing for adoption, transplants, or ANY acommodating after the birth. Generalizing much? And how'd you even know?

So your solution the lack of money for the sustainability of a child is, taking in count your definition of the start of life as egg/sprem contact, killing him/she? Might as well kill every kid who's parents don't have money for education or food.

My essay is due friday, and I didn't create this thread in order to get advices on what stand to take. I just thought it was a very interesting and complicated topic to debate about.

@Doc Ants are not self aware.
Your thought might lead you to 'ah well, I step on ants and eat chicken, therefore it is viable/acceptable that I kill somebody. I mean, we're all animals somehow.'

T

@Sir Nathan

1. Abortions are the same use as contraceptives. It isn't "killing" any more than a morning after pill or condoms or pms. Its nothing like actual murder, and to be honest, you don't understand the severity of murder vs. an abortion.

2. Most abortions are done by low income women. Why? Because they can't afford a kid most of the time. So why don't they just not have a sex? Its not like every time someone has sex they are planning on having a kid.

3. Abortions done before brain activity is the same as pms. Are you really saying that every women on the planet is a mass murderer?

Originally Posted by 100%

I'd say it's wrong to have an abortion because that's killing another human. And if you don't want to have kids, just wear a condom. If it's rape, just put the kid in some adoption place if you can't stand it. (even though you'll have to pay all the medical expenses) Or, just carry a gun and have a conceal and carry license. That's what I go by.

Unless you're using a condom made of steel, your point of view about them is completely wrong. Just beacuse you carry a gun, also, doesn't mean you're going to be able to use it. What if the rapist jumps out behind you and completely overpowers you? We're talking about women here. Statistically, women are weaker than men. Rapists take advantage of that. Do you think you'll be able to grab a gun out from your purse when he's bear-hugging you?

Or if he just uses drugs........

I don't feel abortion is right, its cruel. Your killing another human.

Originally Posted by Gaz

I don't feel abortion is right, its cruel. Your killing another human.

Why is that wrong?

(i'm going somewhere with this)
Because the stupid "its not technically a baby" or "it technically is" is a stupid pointless argument, and we all know anti-abortionist don't give two shits once its born.

In Malta if you do an abortion you will be sued for first degree murder

Originally Posted by Brownie

In Malta if you do an abortion you will be sued for first degree murder

That's nice, in the us its legal.'

Well if abortion is murder than is a miscarriage suicide?

i was a failed abortion

Post a Reply

Tags for this Thread