Abortion is murder

[NIX]

It isn't guaranteed. Zygotes have a 25% chance of spontaneously aborting before week 6 in the embryonic stage and before the woman even realizes she was pregnant.

It's just like a hit and run on the road when the driver has no idea they've hit and killed someone and they drive off.

 

[Curious George]

Aren't there town ordinances regarding where a corpse/human remains may and may not be laid to rest? And musn't authorities be notified about every human death? Death certificate and all that?

Good point. So abuse of a corpse charges for every woman who flushes!

 

[The Neo Nerd]

The comparison is fine. You are using words such as 'where life is possible'. Life is possible if you don't pull out. Life is impossible if you do pull out. Zygote represents greater possibility, though still not guarantee. One is more likely than another but they are still both potentials. Abortion or pull out both represent eliminating those potentials.

Comparison win.

Pulling out before the point of orgasm is no safe bet.

A guy can ejaculate without orgasming.

 

[Alceste]

So, I thought I'd post this here, as I didn't know where else to post it. Abortion is murder. I actually believe that, and I'd appreciate your thoughts here, on that.

No it isn't.



Whew, that was really taxing mental work, trying to come up with a comparably thoughtful rebuttal to your razor sharp argument. Want to go again? Here, I'll start this time:

Clowns are evil. Thoughts?

 

[Heathen Hammer]

Well, my thoughts: None of it is murder, as abortion is not illegal.

Next, I do not see a fetus as a person. Anything previous to the time it develops a fully formed brainstem, makes it little more than a glob of cells.

Once the point passes where the brainstem is formed and active, I get a bit fuzzy. At this point it is advanced enough to possible be aware, and I hesitate about aborting after this stage, but I realize sometimes it must occur.

In my faith the soul complex does not attach to the physical body until several days after birth, so, let us not bicker about souls and whatnot.

 

[darkendless]

Well, my thoughts: None of it is murder, as abortion is not illegal.

Next, I do not see a fetus as a person. Anything previous to the time it develops a fully formed brainstem, makes it little more than a glob of cells.

Once the point passes where the brainstem is formed and active, I get a bit fuzzy. At this point it is advanced enough to possible be aware, and I hesitate about aborting after this stage, but I realize sometimes it must occur.

I somewhat agree. If the baby cant survive on its own its not alive.

 

[Nerthus]

My opinion has always changed on this topic. I think people need to be careful with the words they use. "Murder" is too emotive, and in my opinion no the right word to be used.

I don't believe it is murder until a baby is born. That is not to say I agree, or disagree with abortion, but it's not murder.

 

[Draka]

Everyone seems to have various points at where they view "life" beginning. It appears I'm one of those odd people that view it beginning at conception itself. I try to look at it from a completely logical and biological POV. At conception you have the formation of a uniquely DNA coded human being. In that, if left to proper natural devices, it will develop as all human beings should and follow the natural development progression human beings do.

We are all in a constant state of development.
From zygote to embryo we are a living human.
From embryo to fetus we are a living human.
From fetus to infant we are a living human.
From infant to baby we are a living human.
From baby to toddler we are a living human.
From toddler to child we are a living human.
From child to adolescent we are a living human.
From adolescent to young adult we are a living human.
From young adult to mature adult we are living human.
From mature adult to elderly adult we are living human.
Until the moment of our death, wherever that may happen along our path of development, we are living developing human beings and that journey begins at the moment of conception.

That is my view on the matter. I know many will disagree with me and perhaps want to debate me on the subject however, this was not posted with intent to debate really, but rather to just give my POV into the conversation for whatever worth it may have.

 

[tytlyf]

Abortion is not murder. The abortion debate in America is driven by religion. Religion should not dictate what the American government does.

Abortion should be legal, it's the woman's choice.

I could see someone like the OP getting pregnant and not wanting the child. Instead of aborting, they'll have the child in some random walmart restroom and leave the baby to die in a trash can.

It seems the OP would prefer the birth then death directly after birth than just solving the issue the easy way. That's disgusting.

 

[waitasec]

Nope. If it's spontaneous, you're not at fault.

so who's gonna pay for the crime of murder then?

 

[Draka]

I know I'm probably going to have so many people jump on me for this, but I just have to ask. Why do people compare a natural miscarriage to an intentional abortion procedure? To me that is like comparing a heart attack to a gun shot through the heart. One is a natural occurrence and the other an intentional act. One is a baby dying of SIDS and the other is smothering the baby with a pillow. Why is a natural cause of death being compared to an intentional cause of death?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I know I'm probably going to have so many people jump on me for this, but I just have to ask. Why do people compare a natural miscarriage to an intentional abortion procedure? To me that is like comparing a heart attack to a gun shot through the heart. One is a natural occurrence and the other an intentional act. One is a baby dying of SIDS and the other is smothering the baby with a pillow. Why is a natural cause of death being compared to an intentional cause of death?

... it's because of the religious (predominantly Christian) arguments going on here. If we assume that the world is unfolding according to the divine plan of an all-knowing, all-powerful god - as is taken as a given when we inject specifically Christian arguments into the discussion - then the things that go on naturally give us an indication of what God wants. In nature, miscarriages happen frequently, so therefore, miscarriages must be part of God's will. This undercuts the anti-abortion argument that God wants every fetus to develop into a baby.

IOW, it would be very strange for God to hate abortion, seeing how he aborts more pregnancies than all the doctors in the world put together.

 

[Draka]

... it's because of the religious (predominantly Christian) arguments going on here. If we assume that the world is unfolding according to the divine plan of an all-knowing, all-powerful god - as is taken as a given when we inject specifically Christian arguments into the discussion - then the things that go on naturally give us an indication of what God wants. In nature, miscarriages happen frequently, so therefore, miscarriages must be part of God's will. This undercuts the anti-abortion argument that God wants every fetus to develop into a baby.

IOW, it would be very strange for God to hate abortion, seeing how he aborts more pregnancies than all the doctors in the world put together.

That makes no sense though. If the things that happen naturally are to give indication of what to do intentionally, then we should smother babies with pillows for babies die of SIDS. We should shoot people through the hearts as people die of heart attacks. We should kill as people die. That argument makes no sense.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

That makes no sense though. If the things that happen naturally are to give indication of what to do intentionally, then we should smother babies with pillows for babies die of SIDS. We should shoot people through the hearts as people die of heart attacks. We should kill as people die. That argument makes no sense.

Maybe I didn't explain it well. Just because God does something doesn't necessarily mean that we should do it too, but the fact that God does do something contradicts any claim that God doesn't want that thing to happen.

The logic behind it is a lot like that old line "if God hates gay people, why did he make so many of them?" Well, if God hates abortion, then why does he do it himself so often?

 

[MysticSang'ha]

I know I'm probably going to have so many people jump on me for this, but I just have to ask. Why do people compare a natural miscarriage to an intentional abortion procedure? To me that is like comparing a heart attack to a gun shot through the heart. One is a natural occurrence and the other an intentional act. One is a baby dying of SIDS and the other is smothering the baby with a pillow. Why is a natural cause of death being compared to an intentional cause of death?

In all cases of the fetus not being carried to term, it is considered the woman's responsibility. That responsibility is then judged whether or not she was complicit in anything considered wrongful or unethical. That's why people are bringing up how complicit is the woman in other cases of a fetus not being carried to term.

 

[Draka]

Maybe I didn't explain it well. Just because God does something doesn't necessarily mean that we should do it too, but the fact that God does do something contradicts any claim that God doesn't want that thing to happen.

The logic behind it is a lot like that old line "if God hates gay people, why did he make so many of them?" Well, if God hates abortion, then why does he do it himself so often?

That's ridiculous though. It's not abortion. It's a natural death. Like any other. You might as well ask "if God hates murder why does he do it himself so often?" as justification for going around killing a bunch of people and pointing to the fact that people die as evidence of your case. Any natural death can be laid on "God" for the blame and the the stupid arguments follow.

 

[Draka]

In all cases of the fetus not being carried to term, it is considered the woman's responsibility. That responsibility is then judged whether or not she was complicit in anything considered wrongful or unethical. That's why people are bringing up how complicit is the woman in other cases of a fetus not being carried to term.

In all cases of the fetus not being carried to term it is considered the woman's responsibility? Since when? Things happen. Sometimes it is just not meant to be. Sometimes she just can't carry it. Sometimes she may be attacked by a third party. It is not always something she is responsible for as it is not something which is always within her control. Which is why a natural death is just that, a natural death.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

In all cases of the fetus not being carried to term it is considered the woman's responsibility? Since when? Things happen. Sometimes it is just not meant to be. Sometimes she just can't carry it. Sometimes she may be attacked by a third party. It is not always something she is responsible for as it is not something which is always within her control. Which is why a natural death is just that, a natural death.

Responsibility. Not fault. Not the same thing, Draka.

I'm well aware of how things just happen. Chromosomal abnormality. Fallopian implantation. I get it. It's still happening inside her body, which is why my argument is that because it's her responsibility, she SHOULD not be demonized when a fetus is not carried to term....whether the termination of the pregnancy was intentional or not.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

So, I thought I'd post this here, as I didn't know where else to post it. Abortion is murder. I actually believe that, and I'd appreciate your thoughts here, on that.

Do you eat eggs, do you eat meat, do you ear vegetables.......do you fumigate for bugs..?


Well if you do these things then your stance is moot because you have to justify why any of these things are acceptable and not abortion....

Now to clarify my position. I think abortion should not be used as a form of birth control. We should be teaching people the various options for birth control. I think that abortion is acceptable in cases of rape, incest and the heath of the mother.

This is strikingly different than Romney. He used to see it this way then he flip flopped. Ryan disagreed with my view totally until recently because it wasn't politically correct.......

 

[Draka]

Responsibility. Not fault. Not the same thing, Draka.

I'm well aware of how things just happen. Chromosomal abnormality. Fallopian implantation. I get it. It's still happening inside her body, which is why my argument is that because it's her responsibility, she SHOULD not be demonized when a fetus is not carried to term....whether the termination of the pregnancy was intentional or not.

Responsibility implies some kind of control. Where she has some control, then yes, she is liable. Where she has none, then she is not liable. She is not liable for natural occurrences such as you noted. She is liable for where she has control, such as if she decides to go on an alcoholic bender or shoot up.