Your view on abortion. Atheist welcome.

[Natureman]

I truly believe that the option should be out there for women. i know that theyre taking the life of an UNBORN child, but it should be up to the mother. its the mothers body that the childs in and if she can handle the baby after birth, then maybe the baby shouldnt be brought into a world of suffering and pain. i think that it all depends on the environment the childs going to be born in and what the mother thinks is best.

 

[leahrachelle]

It doesn't have legal rights, and no amount of feeling from you can change that fact. The law does not grant them any rights, responsibilities, or priviledges.

The problem with the law is that it fails to state what a human is

 

[Storm]

The problem with the law is that it fails to state what a human is

Why is that a problem?

 

[Comicaze247]

Just because you don't consider it "life" though, does it have no importance at all?

I never said I felt that way. I wouldn't want my wife/girlfriend to get an abortion, but it is NOT my right to tell her what to do with her body, so I wouldn't stop her. You keep picking extremes with your words. Just because I'm pro-choice doesn't mean I don't think a fetus is important.

In my opinion, in the time when it isn't "alive" yet, it is like a brain-dead person: a vegetable feeding off of life support, i.e. the mother. Yes, it will develop into the person (unless miscarried), but considering all possibilities, it is the mother's choice of what to do with her body.

 

[Comicaze247]

The problem with the law is that it fails to state what a human is

Alright, say that we can't kill a fetus because it's human.
Brain-dead people are human. I guess we can't kill them.

 

[leahrachelle]

Why is that a problem?

Because it then becomes interpreted by 9 judges based on their own opinions.

 

[Storm]

Better than the alternative.

 

[Willamena]

The problem with the law is that it fails to state what a human is

It cannot do that without also failing (miserably) to state what a human is.

 

[DallasApple]

It's not about that, though - atleast in my opinion. I feel that the wombchild (which is what I'm going to call it from now on to avoid further incorrect vocabulary) has legal human rights and so it is no one's right to decide whether it gets to live or not. Neither mine, yours, or the woman's.

So the "wombchild" has legal rights that supercede the mothers?If the "wombchild" has seperate rights then how is it fair I dont being Im the "womb" its in?Im the oxygen and food supply .Im the vessell(my body) to MY detriment to deliever the human with rights into the world safely.

What you are basically saying..Is I LOSE my rights if a "wombchild" is in my body.So I can be hi-jacked by another human because they have rights.As well as IM responsible to provide for the rights that it has because without ME they have no chance and that is their right.

In a nut shell..A woman loses her rights if she is pregnant.Her rights are transferred to a person yet to come.And on top of that the woman provides for the person that is on the way.Including physical distortion ..(never mind..we won't get into the sacrifices a woman makes during pregancy childbirth and beyond)

Love

Dallas

 

[leahrachelle]

Alright, say that we can't kill a fetus because it's human.
Brain-dead people are human. I guess we can't kill them.

Well I don't think that we should - unless they do that consent paper thing saying what they want to happen to them if they're ever in that condition (i forgot what it's called)

 

[leahrachelle]

Better than the alternative.

What is the alternative..?

 

[leahrachelle]

It cannot do that without also failing (miserably) to state what a human is.

You mean isn't?

 

[Storm]

What is the alternative..?

See Willamena's reply.

 

[Willamena]

You mean isn't?

No, I meant is.

 

[leahrachelle]

So the "wombchild" has legal rights that supercede the mothers?If the "wombchild" has seperate rights then how is it fair I dont being Im the "womb" its in?Im the oxygen and food supply .Im the vessell(my body) to MY detriment to deliever the human with rights into the world safely.

What you are basically saying..Is I LOSE my rights if a "wombchild" is in my body.So I can be hi-jacked by another human because they have rights.As well as IM responsible to provide for the rights that it has because without ME they have no chance and that is their right.

In a nut shell..A woman loses her rights if she is pregnant.Her rights are transferred to a person yet to come.And on top of that the woman provides for the person that is on the way.Including physical distortion ..(never mind..we won't get into the sacrifices a woman makes during pregancy childbirth and beyond)

Love

Dallas

I went over my opinion on this before but it was probably in the other thread.. Pretty much the law says that we can do what we want with our own body, BUT when it affects other people, there are limitations. I feel that this is the same here. Yes it is your own body, but it affects others, so no, I don't feel you have the right to do with you want with it.

 

[leahrachelle]

No, I meant is.

I think it can be done

 

[Storm]

How would you do it?

 

[DallasApple]

Well I don't think that we should - unless they do that consent paper thing saying what they want to happen to them if they're ever in that condition (i forgot what it's called)

Sometimes I dont think you are even real.And Im serioulsy not making fun of you.

I think you are referring to a "no ressucitation" order.

But there is a REASON families are allowed to decide in abscnece of the form.The reason is people use their brains and consider many things.

For instance how is a one year old who is brain dead ..only alive on life support to have ever signed that "paper thingy"?

Love

Dallas

 

[Willamena]

I think it can be done

Alright; let's start with that a "human" lives in their mind. From there they gaze out on a world given form in idea.

 

[DallasApple]

I went over my opinion on this before but it was probably in the other thread.. Pretty much the law says that we can do what we want with our own body, BUT when it affects other people, there are limitations. I feel that this is the same here. Yes it is your own body, but it affects others, so no, I don't feel you have the right to do with you want with it.

Well the growing zygote can do what it wants then with its own body.But when it AFFECTS me it has to folllow the rules.Yes it has its own body but it affects me.So no.I dont feel a zygote has the right to do what it wants.Because it is affecting me.It doesnt have the right to do what it wants with me.

Thats "pretty much" what the law says.

Love

Dallas