Abortion - is it wrong?

[Drolefille]

Because the intent is the same as that of the mother and the doctor.

Not in their mind it isn't.

Would you consider a surgeon to have the same intent as a mugger with a knife?

 

[-Peacemaker-]

Yes it's wrong. But it's a necessary evil if we are to worship sex as promiscuity results in the unwanted consequences

 

[Walkntune]

Not in their mind it isn't.

Would you consider a surgeon to have the same intent as a mugger with a knife?

If the intent is to end the life of a fetus then the intent is to end the life of a fetus.
If the mother wants it done it is perfectly fine and acceptable but if not then it is considered murder.
My question is why should it be considered murder?

 

[Drolefille]

If the intent is to end the life of a fetus then the intent is to end the life of a fetus.
If the mother wants it done it is perfectly fine and acceptable but if not then it is considered murder.
My question is why should it be considered murder?

If the intent is to cut into you, then the intent is to cut into you right? Should a surgeon be charged with assault with a deadly weapon or a mugger treated as a a life-saving hero?

After all the intent is the same right?

 

[Walkntune]

If the intent is to cut into you, then the intent is to cut into you right? Should a surgeon be charged with assault with a deadly weapon or a mugger treated as a a life-saving hero?

After all the intent is the same right?

In this case the doctor and mugger have to different intents.The mugger means harm while the doctor means to save. But in the case with the fetus the intent is exactly the same, to end the life of the fetus.

 

[Drolefille]

In this case the doctor and mugger have to different intents.The mugger means harm while the doctor means to save. But in the case with the fetus the intent is exactly the same, to end the life of the fetus.

If you're going to reduce the intent down to ending a fetus's life then you might as well reduce the intent to cutting someone open.

As I said previously:

The mother wants to remove a fetus because she doesn't want to have a baby later. The doctor wants to assist the mother in doing so in the safest way possible for her patient, the mother.
This isn't the same as injuring the mother with the intent of causing her body to abort the baby.

The result is the death of the fetus, the intent is not that simple.
Just as the result of a surgery cut and an assault are both bleeding, but reducing the intent to "making a cut" may be some form of truth, but it isn't the whole truth.

 

[Walkntune]

If you're going to reduce the intent down to ending a fetus's life then you might as well reduce the intent to cutting someone open.

As I said previously:


The result is the death of the fetus, the intent is not that simple.
Just as the result of a surgery cut and an assault are both bleeding, but reducing the intent to "making a cut" may be some form of truth, but it isn't the whole truth.

If the muggers intention of cutting her is to kill the fetus and the doctors intentio0n is to cut her to kill the fetus,tell me the difference in the intent?The doctor may be much more steril and precise and experienced but that doesn't change intent.Of course the mugger is going against the mothers permission and and I am not saying the mugger should not be charged with assault.My questionb is why murder charges?
My personal belief is the action is evil in both cases but the logic used in defense of abortion is the fact that its a fetus and not a child.So why does this logic not stand up the same with the mugger and he just be charged with assault on the woman?
You can kind of taste how evil abortion feels to those who are pro-life also.

 

[Drolefille]

I am not saying the mugger should not be charged with assault.
My personal belief is the action is evil in both cases but the logic used in defense of abortion is the fact that its a fetus and not a child.So why does this logic not stand up the same with the mugger and he just be charged with assault on the woman?
You can kind of taste how evil abortion feels to those who are pro-life also.

Because the complete intent is different. Plain and simple. I think your belief is letting you reduce the intent down to the death and ignore the rest of it. But without the rest of it, you're not truly getting the intent.

I don't taste anything evil, and I'm not sure I'm understanding your last sentence.

 

[Walkntune]

Because the complete intent is different. Plain and simple. I think your belief is letting you reduce the intent down to the death and ignore the rest of it. But without the rest of it, you're not truly getting the intent.

I don't taste anything evil, and I'm not sure I'm understanding your last sentence.

I reposted this because I edited it.
If the muggers intention of cutting her is to kill the fetus and the doctors intentio0n is to cut her to kill the fetus,tell me the difference in the intent?The doctor may be much more steril and precise and experienced but that doesn't change intent.Of course the mugger is going against the mothers permission and and I am not saying the mugger should not be charged with assault.My questionb is why murder charges?
My personal belief is the action is evil in both cases but the logic used in defense of abortion is the fact that its a fetus and not a child.So why does this logic not stand up the same with the mugger and he just be charged with assault on the woman?
If you say the intent is different please share why they are different if it is not to kill the fetus.

 

[Walkntune]

Because the complete intent is different. Plain and simple. I think your belief is letting you reduce the intent down to the death and ignore the rest of it. But without the rest of it, you're not truly getting the intent.

I don't taste anything evil, and I'm not sure I'm understanding your last sentence.

Of course if there is a murder charge then this charge is reduced down to the intent of the death.

 

[Drolefille]

You're ignoring the full extent of the intent of all parties. As long as you do so you're over-simplifying in a way that supports your position.

Problem is, it isn't that simple.

 

[Walkntune]

You're ignoring the full extent of the intent of all parties. As long as you do so you're over-simplifying in a way that supports your position.

Problem is, it isn't that simple.

No. I understand the difference of the mothers permission which justifies the charge of assault.

 

[gnosticx]

no i dont think its wrong, could be regetful either way later in life depending on ur current or future circumstances and any operation or curette does some damage.....spiritually its that regret later on that could do you damage so youd have to be very clear on why your doing this...all the best.

 

[Alceste]

Who created the life you are taking?

If you say YOU did....it's your call.

If you say God did....it's not.

I'm pretty old and have known many girls who had abortions.

They were never the same, afterwards..............

I'm pretty old too and have known many women who had children - if you think abortion changes a woman you should get to know a mom.

 

[Alceste]

I don't think in terms of moral absolutes. Given that a large proportion of women always have done and always will do whatever they can think of to end an unwanted pregnancy, the best policy is one that allows us to do so safely. A vote against safe abortion is a vote for "accidental" falls down the stairs, pregnant teenage girls getting themselves repeatedly punched in the abdomen, trips to dodgy back-alley abortion clinics, douching with all sorts of horrific substances, girls shoving coat hangers up themselves... It's barbaric.

I know the anti-choice organisations love to believe the result of success in their campaign would be millions of happy mothers tearfully thanking them for making it impossible to choose the "wrong" path, but that's pure fantasy. The result would be millions of bruised, burned and / or butchered young girls and millions more impoverished, dysfunctional families fraught with resentment and abuse.

As far as good and evil go, that picture doesn't look "good" to me at all. In the best of all possible worlds, all children would be wanted by someone, and loved.

 

[Antiochian]

Consider the lives that get snuffed out in war. Abortion can't be any more evil than that. I support a woman's right to choose.

 

[Me Myself]

I don't think in terms of moral absolutes. Given that a large proportion of women always have done and always will do whatever they can think of to end an unwanted pregnancy, the best policy is one that allows us to do so safely. A vote against safe abortion is a vote for "accidental" falls down the stairs, pregnant teenage girls getting themselves repeatedly punched in the abdomen, trips to dodgy back-alley abortion clinics, douching with all sorts of horrific substances, girls shoving coat hangers up themselves... It's barbaric.

I know the anti-choice organisations love to believe the result of success in their campaign would be millions of happy mothers tearfully thanking them for making it impossible to choose the "wrong" path, but that's pure fantasy. The result would be millions of bruised, burned and / or butchered young girls and millions more impoverished, dysfunctional families fraught with resentment and abuse.

As far as good and evil go, that picture doesn't look "good" to me at all. In the best of all possible worlds, all children would be wanted by someone, and loved.

But all of this talks about "legality " of abortion. The thing is that abortion itself is to deem a life as "inconvinient" and then killing it.

The body is not only of the mother´s from the moment is not only of the mother´s.

 

[St Giordano Bruno]

It is only wrong if it is performed badly such is putting the mother through a lot of unnecessary pain or worse still endangering her life by unqualified practitioners of it pulling out the old wire coat hanger technique or lots of alcohol and a scolding hot bath technique such as in the bad old days of back yard abortions. Some people are all too eager to resurrect those bad old days.

 

[Drolefille]

But all of this talks about "legality " of abortion. The thing is that abortion itself is to deem a life as "inconvinient" and then killing it.

The body is not only of the mother´s from the moment is not only of the mother´s.

So it is ethical to force a mother to host another being in her body against her will?

Her DNA stays the same, it's still her body.

 

[outhouse]

No matter how you slice it

Its PRO CHOICE and its going to stay that way.


Deal with it.