Birth control = abortion...epic fail

[MidnightPanther99]

Yeah, so apparently George W Bush decided that sex should only be practiced to have babies because he is trying to change the definition of abortion so that birth control will count as an abortion.

Yeah too bad the definiton for <b>Abort</b> stands as follows, "to fail, cease, or stop at an early or premature stage." How can you <i>change</i> the definition of a word. Who does he think he is, Merriam fricking Webster?!
If birth control prevents a pregnancy from even happening, you can't stop something that hasn't even been started. Right?
--------------------------------------------------

If a man masterbates and gets sperm on his hand, is that an abortion then?
The sperm could have been a potential life.

Are condoms abortion? They prevent pregnancies.

Is alcohol an abortion? It can cause a miscarriage.

Are car accidents abortions? They can cause miscarriages.

If you pull-out while having sex. Is that an abortion?

If you have oral or anal sex. Are you having an abortion?

Are sperm banks and egg donor facilities really abortion clinics?

Is smoking an abortion? It can cause miscarriages.

Is fast food an abortion? If you eat too much you could have a heart attack while you're pregnant and die before giving birth.

....etc etc etc

[zxtwou2]

i don't see a link saying GW wants to change the definition. most other conservatives (i consider myself a conservative indipendant) will agree that birth control is good....and abortion is bad. abortion is the decision to terminate...birth control is the decision to prevent creating a life that you would have to either rasie, or kill via abortion.

[SoCalZX2]

Yeah, provide a link if you're gonna make a sensationalist claim like this.

[Buster]

I think your tinfoil hat got too close to the microwave.


Get this garbage from Daily Kos, MoveOn.org or Democrat Underground? Or is it from your own imagination?

[Buster]

Now the Day After Pill, RU486 does actually perform an abortion. It kills a fertilized egg and causes your body to expel the young fetus, but you never mentioned that. It's not really birth control, it's more of a way to undo a mistake. Hence, it's controversy.

If THAT is what he's talking about, I agree with him that it is abortion (murder) and should be banned. People need to learn personal responsibility instead of killing babies and calling them mistakes. Abortion should be outlawed. You do not have to keep the child, there are more willing couples out there who can't have a child of their own that would gladly adopt the baby you created. This is one of the reasons we "import" so many Chinese children, because far too many American children are murdered every year. Plus, adopting a child from China helps save them from the forced murders that their Communist Government requires to control their population.

[af3ll]

What if a woman is raped and becomes pregnant? How can you say she shouldn't be allowed to have an abortion?

[Buster]

There's THAT argument.

I believe...NO.

The baby did not choose to be created and now is a living human being. He/she should not be murdered because of someone else's crime.

Instead of abortion clinics, we should have clinics to council and help women through these kinds of situations and to help the child find a good home.

I do not believe there is such a thing as "pro choice". Except for the uncommon exceptions as you brought up, the majority of pregnancies are results of having consensual sex. THAT was the choice made. Once you create a baby, planned or not, you already made your choice and now are responsible for a life. Whether you want the baby or not, you have a moral responsibility to either provide for the baby or find someone who will.

So while I'm pro-life, I support choice. You can choose to have sex or not. Sex creates babies, while it is pleasurable, it exists to create more humans.

No one is "pro-choice", they're pro-abortion. You either support it or you don't. It is too important and black/white issue to pretend you're in the middle and support "the choice for someone to do it". If you support it at all, you're pro-abortion, not "pro choice".

[af3ll]

So let's say some dickless wonder rapes your wife and gets her pregnant. You're going to sit there and let her have that kid?

I'm pro-choice. Who am I to tell a woman she can't choose to have an abortion or not? It's not my body going through pregnancy. She should be able to choose since this is a free country the last time I checked.

[zxtwou2]

well...my body is going through hell raising a 3 year old. i have no energy, i'm gaining weight, i get no sleep. since my body is going through hell...maybe i should just kill him.

(sarcastic btw...i love my kid more than anyone could imagine)

[af3ll]

You get what I'm saying though. Men do not go through as much as women. Granted I've never gotten a girl pregnant (that I know of).

[zxtwou2]

no, i don't get what you are saying...other than the rape situation...in which i support the day after pill. once a child has a heartbeat...i think it's way too late. way too many people use abortion as a form of "whoops..what do i do now". women have a choice to use birth control..or not open their legs...period. there's their choice...abortion isn't to be used as a remedy for a poor decision. health risks to the mother, rape victims, a few other circumstances i can see...but that's it.

[Buster]

So let's say some dickless wonder rapes your wife and gets her pregnant. You're going to sit there and let her have that kid?

I'm pro-choice. Who am I to tell a woman she can't choose to have an abortion or not? It's not my body going through pregnancy. She should be able to choose since this is a free country the last time I checked.

It would be tragic, but we both agree we would NOT kill an innocent child.

You're pro-abortion. You completely missed the point.

Yes, it's a free country, we're guaranteed "LIFE, liberty and the and the pursuit of happiness."

Abortion is murder than steals the "life" part. The baby did not make someone be irresponsible. The baby deserves to live.

[Buster]

You brought up important points, zxtwou2. Often UNreported are the negative outcomes of abortion on women.

Most suffer from severe depression leading to many suicides and many have physical problems after abortions, including losing the ability to have children in the future when they may choose to.

[Buster]

You get what I'm saying though. Men do not go through as much as women. Granted I've never gotten a girl pregnant (that I know of).

Which is probably the reason you do not yet understand the realities of creating a life. Once you do, unless you have some moral deficiencies, you learn the value of human life.

A lot of people like to bash Mitt Romney and others who once were pro-abortion and now are pro-life, calling them dishonest or "flip-floppers" because they don't want any pro-life candidates to succeed. He stated that once he had children of his own, it opened his eyes to what abortion really is and he matured to now oppose abortion.

Someday, maybe you will find the joy of being a father too.

[af3ll]

You guys aren't getting it. How are we (men) allowed to tell women what they can do?

[af3ll]

Someday, maybe you will find the joy of being a father too.
When I'm ready yes. My kid will kick your kid's ass.

[Buster]

When I'm ready yes. My kid will kick your kid's ass.

Not if my kid is 15 and yours is 2. :D

[Buster]

You guys aren't getting it. How are we (men) allowed to tell women what they can do?

We can tell women not to have sex with us.

If you make the CHOICE to, you are also responsible for the life you helped create.

That's the point. With sex, the choice was made. With choices come responsibilities for the consequences.

Some women cry "it's my body!". Yes it is. You chose to have sex with it. Now there is another living body inside you that also should be respected and has the right to live.

[zxtwou2]

You guys aren't getting it. How are we (men) allowed to tell women what they can do?

and what right do women have to commit murder?

[Buster]

^

Good question. :)

[jess]

You brought up important points, zxtwou2. Often UNreported are the negative outcomes of abortion on women.

Most suffer from severe depression leading to many suicides and many have physical problems after abortions, including losing the ability to have children in the future when they may choose to.

That's not what he was getting at.....I think he was explaining more along the lines of 'it's either the baby or the mom lives, you make the choice...'





And I think there is a difference between 'pro-choice' and 'pro-abortion'....that's really all I have to say.

This is one of those topics that everyone has their opinion, and it doesn't matter what you say, nobody's opinion is going to change....so there's really no point in arguing it, lol.

[random_hero]

So let's say some dickless wonder rapes your wife and gets her pregnant. You're going to sit there and let her have that kid?

I'm pro-choice. Who am I to tell a woman she can't choose to have an abortion or not? It's not my body going through pregnancy. She should be able to choose since this is a free country the last time I checked.


:beer:

[zxtwou2]

like i said..i'm pro choice.....the choice that the woman can close her legs/use birth control.

[J-Dizzle!]

You brought up important points, zxtwou2. Often UNreported are the negative outcomes of abortion on women.

Most suffer from severe depression leading to many suicides and many have physical problems after abortions, including losing the ability to have children in the future when they may choose to.

Just had to point out that this is actually wrong... statistically, women generally do not regret their decision to abort or become depressed. This is usually because the LEGAL way to have an abortion in most states is a fairly involving process where doctors are required by law to make sure you are fully aware of every option, significant others are aware, and that the women is committed to her decision.

I don't think I'd ever have an abortion, not that I would ever willingly put myself in a position where I'd feel compelled to need one, but I also support women's rights to choose UP TO A CERTAIN POINT (viability).

[Fordboy]

ok so then you are saying that she should have the kid, and what have another homeless child, living on the streets because the parents where to young to afford the baby or because his life was disturbed being switched from orphanage to orphanage or foster home to foster home. why put a child through that suffering of not knowing their parents or not going up with a dad or mom. when good old science has come up with a way to eliminate the headaches, and the pain. since this a free country a woman should have the choice to keep it or get an abortion. no one else should be given that right to make that decision for her. if she wants it her decision is to prepare for a baby and get ready for whats to come, but say its a 15 year old girl who fooled around one time and got pregnant, how is that 15 year old going to live the rest of her life, never finish school, always work paycheck to paycheck, what??? no one knows what types of situations people are in so why should people make the decision for them. something just doesnt seem right there to me.

[MidnightPanther99]

Sorry, I forgot to post it. Yeah, I got it in some email from Moveon.org. Prolly should have put this in a less ostentatious part of the forum. My fault for being an idiot.

[ilarson007]

Yeah, us Catholics can't use birth control or do abortion... It's immoral. I won't say anything about birth control, but abortion is murder.

[Fordboy]

im catholic and pretty much die hard growing up, 15 years as an alter server, my dad is a usher, my priests know me by name and we chat sometimes, im confirmed and will probably get married in the catholic church, and ive been catholic my whole life going to the same church, hell i even went to a catholic high school. that still doesnt mean i cant disagree alittle. who is the church to say what a person should do in their life. i understand preaching it and maybe giving some guidance but that doesnt mean you have to listen to them. after all, they arnt in your position or situation, and they probably dont know what you are dealing with in your life because priests are suppose to practice celebacy.

but instead or going around frisking boys if you know what i mean

[JC'szx2]

You guys aren't getting it. How are we (men) allowed to tell women what they can do?

because its my God given right to do so!









with her permision of course :winkyface:

[zxtwou2]

I also support women's rights to choose UP TO A CERTAIN POINT (viability).

me too...the choice to keep her legs closed or use birth control. if a woman can't accept full responsibility for having sex, what makes you think she's making good decisions in the first place. with abortion, it's a bad decision that takes away a life.

[Fordboy]

and you think putting a child in the arms of a irresponsible person is a good decision?

[JenzZx2]

I skimmed the thread.. so forgive me if I missed something important, BUT

I don't agree that birth control = abortion.

I guess you could say I'm pro-choice up to a point. I feel rape cases definitely should be up to the victim, I feel incestuous rape cases should be mandatory. If testing confirms severe genetic defects, chromosomal abnormalities, or another severely debilitating disorder it should be pro-choice particularly in the first trimester.

After that, I'm pro-adoption.

I can say that as a mother now, knowing what it's like to "grow" a baby, and knowing several people who are unable to have children of their own. There is no way I could ever terminate a pregnancy.

[Fordboy]

but even with adoption dont you think that kinda sucks for the kid to know their parents gave them up? think about it, depressions issues later in life can occur. mentally that would have to suck for a kid, and besides kids up for adoption arnt always taken, why do you think there are foster homes, and orphanages.

[J-Dizzle!]

me too...the choice to keep her legs closed or use birth control. if a woman can't accept full responsibility for having sex, what makes you think she's making good decisions in the first place. with abortion, it's a bad decision that takes away a life.

I don't think you understood what I was saying...

[J-Dizzle!]

Also the "choice to keep her legs closed" joke is a little old.

And I'd like to add that it's a little bit of a double standard that while women must bear a huge burden for 9 months+ depending on whether or not they decide to keep the child, but men oftentimes can just disappear out of the baby's life without investing even one day in its life or development.

It's easy for a man to say he's "pro-life" under the circumstances. Yeah, yeah I know there are lots of families here with kids and commitment and loyalty and all that but you have to think demographics... I'm willing to bet that the main group of women that choose to abort (underage females with few resources) are not in the same boat as you all are.

[SoCalZX2]

Also the "choice to keep her legs closed" joke is a little old.

And I'd like to add that it's a little bit of a double standard that while women must bear a huge burden for 9 months+ depending on whether or not they decide to keep the child, but men oftentimes can just disappear out of the baby's life without investing even one day in its life or development.

It's easy for a man to say he's "pro-life" under the circumstances. Yeah, yeah I know there are lots of families here with kids and commitment and loyalty and all that but you have to think demographics... I'm willing to bet that the main group of women that choose to abort (underage females with few resources) are not in the same boat as you all are.

You're most likely 100% correct about that. But they still didn't HAVE to have sex in the first place. So using that as an excuse is about as old as saying they should have kept their legs closed.

Today's youth doesn't believe that life has many consequences. Which is in fact not true.

Demographics or not, keeping ones legs closed is a sure fire way to avoid every having to make a decision as to terminate or not. I had several scares when I was younger, and I can't recall 1x that it ever crossed my mind personally to bail or to abort. It's ultimately the decision of the child bearer, but to make that decision without consulting the other affected party is another bad choice.

IMHO, super extreme cases should be conceded, but those are generally very rare (or so I'd believe until someone provides numbers otherwise). But if some 16 y/o makes a decision to have sex, protected or not (because BC is not abortion), then the consequences of those actions need to be seen through, and the child given up for adoption.

But thats my .02 on the subject.

[J-Dizzle!]

I agree that if a man impregnates a woman and they end up pregnant, they should have the child and contribute equally to its life.

I also believe that the government has no right to make the decision for that man and that woman.

[Fordboy]

again this all comes down to someone making decisions for someone else. thats like someone telling you, you have to marry someone by an arraingment or you have to be skinny to fit in. thats basically someone else telling you how to run your life. in a sense this can all be looked at as racism or discrimination which i thought america was not. but i guess it is. people are discriminating against others for abortion, for a choice that isnt right for someone else to make for you.

[RedRacer99]

no, what pisses me off is these whores that screw around and use abortions to erase "mistakes" and then keep on screwing around. bang bang bang *oops, i'm pregnant, don't want the responsibility of being a parent, just wanna PARTY!* bang bang bang. or guys who do the same thing. it's bullshit. the wrong people abuse it and the right people will feel guilty as shit for the decision. i know a woman personally who has had three abortions and two kids from two different fathers... you think this is rare???

i used to support abortion only if the woman was raped, but you guys brought up a good point. just stick through it, have the kid, and give it to a loving family. it's a long and expensive process to give up a kid, but that's your decision. when you have sex, you are taking a RISK. when you drive, you are taking a RISK. when you smoke, you are taking a RISK. man up to your fucking decisions and take responsibilities for them. i have sex with my gf unprotected, i know its stupid to you guys, but thats our personal choice. we're smart about it and careful but i'm not going to be like a lot of american dipshits and say "oops, i messed up, get an abortion and we'll pretend like this never happened". how many kids anymore are planned? we have enough shitty parents in this world, we don't need any more. sex is great grand and wonderful but so is having a few beers. if you can't do it responsibly and willing to take care of your "risks", don't do it and keep your legs closed. it's that fucking simple. guys, take care of your shit and if you want to be risky like i am, you better man up if you knock the girl up. ladies, if you get pregnant, you take care of that kid. quit being a whore and grow up to your mistakes. many people DESERVE kids so they can learn to be a bit more responsible for their actions and often makes decent human beings out of most idiots. on the other hand, many people don't deserve kids, so should quit fucking so much...

/rant

[Fordboy]

no, what pisses me off is these whores that screw around and use abortions to erase "mistakes" and then keep on screwing around. bang bang bang *oops, i'm pregnant, don't want the responsibility of being a parent, just wanna PARTY!* bang bang bang. or guys who do the same thing. it's bullshit. the wrong people abuse it and the right people will feel guilty as shit for the decision. i know a woman personally who has had three abortions and two kids from two different fathers... you think this is rare???

i used to support abortion only if the woman was raped, but you guys brought up a good point. just stick through it, have the kid, and give it to a loving family. it's a long and expensive process to give up a kid, but that's your decision. when you have sex, you are taking a RISK. when you drive, you are taking a RISK. when you smoke, you are taking a RISK. man up to your fucking decisions and take responsibilities for them. i have sex with my gf unprotected, i know its stupid to you guys, but thats our personal choice. we're smart about it and careful but i'm not going to be like a lot of american dipshits and say "oops, i messed up, get an abortion and we'll pretend like this never happened". how many kids anymore are planned? we have enough shitty parents in this world, we don't need any more. sex is great grand and wonderful but so is having a few beers. if you can't do it responsibly and willing to take care of your "risks", don't do it and keep your legs closed. it's that fucking simple. guys, take care of your shit and if you want to be risky like i am, you better man up if you knock the girl up. ladies, if you get pregnant, you take care of that kid. quit being a whore and grow up to your mistakes. many people DESERVE kids so they can learn to be a bit more responsible for their actions and often makes decent human beings out of most idiots. on the other hand, many people don't deserve kids, so should quit fucking so much...

/rant



exactly if its a personal choice to do that then its a personal choice to have an abortion, no one should be able to to have a say in the matter

[RedRacer99]

um no... because that's not taking responsibility for your actions. lets say you fire a gun into the woods because you enjoy firing a gun... one of those bullets happens to strike a hunter or a child in the woods or on the other side of the woods. should you be punished or do as you say, should it just be called an accident because i enjoy firing a gun carelessly into the woods??

[phosphite]

I think G.W. has been doing too little "presidenting" and too much watching Monty Python.

Because

Every sperm is sacred.
Every sperm is great.
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.

Let the heathen spill theirs
On the dusty ground.
God shall make them pay for
Each sperm that can't be found.

Every sperm is wanted.
Every sperm is good.
Every sperm is needed
In your neighbourhood!

[jess]

How many of you have ever gotten a speeding ticket, then somehow gotten out of paying the ticket, or had it removed from your record?

It was your choice to speed, pay the consequences....or no?

Millions of people speed around every single day, that's a personal choice. I've seen many stories on here of how to NOT pay a ticket. (and no, I'm not really trying to compare abortion to speeding, but where do we draw the line with 'you made your bed, now lie in it'?)



And this has been brought up in various places on the forums over the years.....we've seen you men talk about if YOU ever have daughters how you'll buy guns and threaten boyfriends...you've got dicks, you know how it is.......why is any of that necessary, it's HER choice after all, eh?

[JenzZx2]

I can't believe you guys are saying rape victims should not be allowed to choose. Do you know how mentally, and emotionally scarring it is to be raped? Much less have to carry a reminder of that rape in your body for 9 months? Carrying a baby isn't like baking a cake, it pushes a woman's body to it's limits. It's physically and emotionally tolling, it's painful, and you're body is never the same anymore.

Imagine being butt raped by a bunch of dudes who thought you looked good walking down the street, having to carry his sperm around in your ass for 9 months while it grew to the size of a basketball, then (for comaprisons sake) had to push something the size of an grapefruit out of your weiner hole, spent weeks bleeding, and putting on your man face while the stitches from your hole that got torn 3 inches heals, and was then left with stretch marks, saggy pecs, and a weiner that's never quite the same. Things that will be a constant reminder (for much longer than 9 months) of the night you got gang banged by a bunch of dirty, aids infested, crack addicts that thought you should have a piece of them.

No thanks.

[SoCalZX2]

I can't believe you guys are saying rape victims should not be allowed to choose. Do you know how mentally, and emotionally scarring it is to be raped? Much less have to carry a reminder of that rape in your body for 9 months? Carrying a baby isn't like baking a cake, it pushes a woman's body to it's limits. It's physically and emotionally tolling, it's painful, and you're body is never the same anymore.

Imagine being butt raped by a bunch of dudes who thought you looked good walking down the street, having to carry his sperm around in your ass for 9 months while it grew to the size of a basketball, then (for comaprisons sake) had to push something the size of an grapefruit out of your weiner hole, spent weeks bleeding, and putting on your man face while the stitches from your hole that got torn 3 inches heals, and was then left with stretch marks, saggy pecs, and a weiner that's never quite the same. Things that will be a constant reminder (for much longer than 9 months) of the night you got gang banged by a bunch of dirty, aids infested, crack addicts that thought you should have a piece of them.

No thanks.

This is what I agree with for abortion as a choice... I'm wholeheartedly against abortion, except in cases as mentioned above.

Jess, I love ya girl, but thats a very poor comparison. I see your point behind it, but getting out of a speeding ticket doesn't come close to comparing to ending the life of a child.

[Buster]

Just had to point out that this is actually wrong... statistically, women generally do not regret their decision to abort or become depressed.


Sorry...there are plenty of studies and evidence of it. I would not make this up. Because of the highly-political nature of the issue of abortion, not many studies have funds appropriated by Congress and often the results of studies that are conducted are not discussed as it would damage a lot of people's argument for supporting it.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/621005/abortion_depression_suicide.html

http://www.abortionfacts.com/reardon/post_abortion_syndrome_character.asp

http://www.afterabortion.org/news/depressionbmj.html

http://www.gerrymkaye.org/depressioninabortion.html

http://www.cwfa.org/articles/6461/CWA/life/index.htm

[jess]

Well, I was struggling to come up with something. And I just feel if you want to preach 'you made a choice, deal with it'....then that should go for EVERY situation.



To be honest, I don't think I'm pro-choice or pro-life.....so I probably shouldn't even be in this thread.

[Buster]

You're most likely 100% correct about that. But they still didn't HAVE to have sex in the first place. So using that as an excuse is about as old as saying they should have kept their legs closed.

Today's youth doesn't believe that life has many consequences. Which is in fact not true.

Demographics or not, keeping ones legs closed is a sure fire way to avoid every having to make a decision as to terminate or not. I had several scares when I was younger, and I can't recall 1x that it ever crossed my mind personally to bail or to abort. It's ultimately the decision of the child bearer, but to make that decision without consulting the other affected party is another bad choice.

IMHO, super extreme cases should be conceded, but those are generally very rare (or so I'd believe until someone provides numbers otherwise). But if some 16 y/o makes a decision to have sex, protected or not (because BC is not abortion), then the consequences of those actions need to be seen through, and the child given up for adoption.

But thats my .02 on the subject.


Good post.

Everyone wants "rights" but do not want responsibility.

[Buster]

Well, I was struggling to come up with something. And I just feel if you want to preach 'you made a choice, deal with it'....then that should go for EVERY situation.



I agree.


For sex, speeding, eating that super-spicy burrito...you get consequences for your choices and actions.

It also applies to freedom of speech. Everyone whines "I can say it because it's my right!"

Yes you can say whatever you want, but you also have to realize there are consequences for your choice of words. Threaten someone, you can go to jail or get beaten. Say something stupid and you'll get a backlash or at least just corrected. People CAN say whatever they choose to, but other people ALSO have the right to disagree and there are words that can get you in trouble legally.

[SoCalZX2]

Well, I was struggling to come up with something. And I just feel if you want to preach 'you made a choice, deal with it'....then that should go for EVERY situation.

To be honest, I don't think I'm pro-choice or pro-life.....so I probably shouldn't even be in this thread.

I don't necessarily disagree with you there ;) I've paid for all my speeding tickets, because I was speeding. I knew the possible consequences of my actions and dealt with it appropriately.

I'm about 99.99999999999999999999999999999999999% Pro-Life, saved for those extreme cases mentioned above.

[JonsZX2SR]

Part of the problem with this thread is some people consider abortion a form of birth control of last resort.

To some extent I agree with the Pro-life philosophy but here are two questions to consider.

1. If one's personal beliefs, either religious, agnostic or atheistic does not consider abortion wrong or consider it murder, do people who support Pro-Life for religious reasons have the right to force their beliefs on others ?? This seems like a conflict with the freedom to practice one's own religion on others. People can make the argument that freedom of religion does not allow polygamy, the right to murder others, etc. so boundaries need to be drawn on the argument.

What i would like to see is a good debate, not just an attempt to shout down the other side with I'm right, you're wrong approach.

2. If one believes abortion is a taking of a human life, exactly when does that life come into existence. Some believe that spirit comes into existenmce at the moment of conception, others at a point called the 'quickening' when the fetus becomes aware, still others do not consider it human until the moment of actual birth.

Given evidence, such as 24-26 week premature babies (I have a cousin born at 26 weeks) who certainly being human, and the unlikely idea that any kind of consciousness exists in a 3-4 weel old mass of undiffernetiated cells, one could argue that a human form comes into existsnce sometime between 4 and 24 weeks.

Besides the extremes, many who favor Pro-Life want to ban all abortions, even 1st trimester and RU486, while many who favor Pro-Choice want to see no restrictions on abortion even wll into the 3rd trimester.

My personal belief is that once a human being comes into form, sometime between the 9-12th week abortions should not be allowed. I do find 3rd trimester abortions to be particularly troubling, because these are not just developing fetuses, but viable humans.

However, I do not have any problems with very early abortions before the 11th week. Obviously the woman has to have her act together and make an early decision. Procratinantion or inability to decide should be no excuse to allow a later abortion.

While I do think there should be laws barring abortions past the 16th or 18th week except for extenuation circumstances.

As for early abortions, I think it should be up to the individual. Pro-Lifers should avoid abortions, Pro-Choicers should decide individually and neither side should try to impose their beliefs on the others.

One thing I will fight tooth and nail are attempts by either group to force their beliefs on others.

[SoCalZX2]

My personal opinion on the subject is that life begins @ conception. If we're to have the understanding that Amoebas are a living organism (and a single celled), why can we not have the same thought of a human being at it's literal earliest stage? IMHO, just because it doesn't look like you or me yet, doesn't negate the fact that it is alive.

But thats just me ;)

[zxtwou2]

Well, I was struggling to come up with something. And I just feel if you want to preach 'you made a choice, deal with it'....then that should go for EVERY situation.



To be honest, I don't think I'm pro-choice or pro-life.....so I probably shouldn't even be in this thread.

wholeheartedly agreed. but people this day in age won't accept personal responsibility, and will always look for ways to not have consequences for their actions.

[random_hero]

IMO - if the woman wants to, she should be able to. How can you tell someone what to do, or not to? In the end, if a woman really wants to abort the baby there are many more ways of doing it; they are simply not as safe or healthy as the dr. route.

[Pacmanjoe]

IMO - if the woman wants to, she should be able to. How can you tell someone what to do, or not to? In the end, if a woman really wants to abort the baby there are many more ways of doing it; they are simply not as safe or healthy as the dr. route.

So if I want to kill you I should be able to.

[random_hero]

I should hope that you are able to.

[zxtwou2]

I should hope that you are able to.

you want him to be able to kill you without consequences???

[SoCalZX2]

IMO - if the woman wants to, she should be able to. How can you tell someone what to do, or not to? In the end, if a woman really wants to abort the baby there are many more ways of doing it; they are simply not as safe or healthy as the dr. route.

In certain instances, this is a true statement. I just don't think that it's right "ok" in all situations. A very crude and not overly appropriate way to think of it is "You do the crime, you should do the time". Unless of course you were forced into a situation in which you ended up pregnant, and then you should have the choice.

I just don't agree w/ people that want to have the fun of sexual intercourse, but no personal responsibility of what that action was literally created for. I've never been a fan of abortion, but as I've grown up in life, my view on sex has changed too. I mean, I don't even view it the same as I did last year.

[Fordboy]

i believe a child isnt alive until actual birth, i know there is a heart beat and what not but if you think about it, its all because of the umbilical cord connected from the mother, what the mother eats they get, like if the woman did crack there are crack babies. etc. and a child isnt alive i believe until birth because when i child is born you have to hit it for it to start breathing on its own. hench the crying all the time at birth

[SoCalZX2]

i believe a child isnt alive until actual birth, i know there is a heart beat and what not but if you think about it, its all because of the umbilical cord connected from the mother, what the mother eats they get, like if the woman did crack there are crack babies. etc. and a child isnt alive i believe until birth because when i child is born you have to hit it for it to start breathing on its own. hench the crying all the time at birth

Umm no... They suction the goo out, but my kid was not hit when he was born.

[J-Dizzle!]

Sorry...there are plenty of studies and evidence of it. I would not make this up. Because of the highly-political nature of the issue of abortion, not many studies have funds appropriated by Congress and often the results of studies that are conducted are not discussed as it would damage a lot of people's argument for supporting it.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/621005/abortion_depression_suicide.html

http://www.abortionfacts.com/reardon/post_abortion_syndrome_character.asp

http://www.afterabortion.org/news/depressionbmj.html

http://www.gerrymkaye.org/depressioninabortion.html

http://www.cwfa.org/articles/6461/CWA/life/index.htm


A) a lot of these websites are very biased.
B) even in some of the less biased articles the statistics showed that less than half of women become depressed
C) for the people that DO become depressed nothing is stated about the context in which they made the decision to have the abortion except for one of the cases in which she was FORCED to have the abortion despite not wanting it.
D) I agree that if an abortion is not done correctly (i.e. the LEGAL, right way) and if the woman does not have social support she is very susceptible to depression. However, if there were not such negative social connotations for a women (i.e. people looking down on them or ostracizing them for the decision they made) then the rate of depression would decrease even more.

BUT I can see even from this website that people will never allow that to happen unfortunately and therefore depression rates will continue at their current rate.

I took a class that delved pretty deeply into this subject... the text that went over it is called More Than the Law: Behavioral and Social Facts in Legal Decision Making by Peter English and Bruce Sales.

Since I can't point to a website for information I'll write in excerpt:

"[...] There is research on the pyschological consequences on minors and adults. Not surprisingly, minors have been shown to experience more adverse effects than adults, but the effects are much more profound if the minor lacks social support. For example, teens who have had abortions may experience problems concerning sexuality and parenting as they get older if counseling is not provided. Different results were found by Zabin, Hirsch, and Emerson when they compared a group of adolescents who had abortions with a group of adolescents wo decided to have their babies. They followed the girls for two years and administred a variety of of psychological tests to them every six months. The researchers found that both groups experienced very little negative psychological change over the course of the study. However, minors in the abortion group did do better educationally and economically than the minors who went through with their pregnancies. Finally, recent research has made direct comparisons between minors and adults on their psychological adjustment to abortion. One month after their abortion, adolescents reported being less satisfied and feeling less benefit than adults with their decision to abort, due primarily to less efficient coping strategies and parental conflict. However, when the same women were surveyed again two years later, there were no adjustment differences between adolescents and adults. At no time were adolescents found to be more depressed than adults."

These and other studies were used when the Supreme Court was reviewing a case. If it's good enough for the Supreme Court, it's good enough for me.

[Fordboy]

Umm no... They suction the goo out, but my kid was not hit when he was born.

i thought they hit the baby on the butt or back or something?

[J-Dizzle!]

^Lol I think you should stop talking now.

[SoCalZX2]

i thought they hit the baby on the butt or back or something?

They used to, until they found it was unnecessary to do so. Children are very capable of starting to breath on their own. The crying could be for many reasons... but IMHO going from a nice toasty 98.6+ deg "oven" to the real world @ like 70deg in an instant would be enough for me to cry :p

[random_hero]

Shitty. I was just going start looking into this. Baby puncher sounds like a fun job =(

[SoCalZX2]

Shitty. I was just going start looking into this. Baby puncher sounds like a fun job =(

HAHAHAHAHAHA.

[Fordboy]

^Lol I think you should stop talking now.

why???, i was still correct on the fact that a baby cant breath while in the mother it only is able to breath through the mom, so really having an abortion is just killing something that is apart of you.

[phosphite]

For some reason, many people don't realize that childbirth itself is dangerous and can be fatal; babies just don't pop out themselves. While it's true that nowadays medical care makes it much more likely for a mother to survive, it also costs money to have a baby delivered, and if you need a C-section (which is very common for safety) it leaves you with a large scar.

Rape for some women can mean be a death sentence, and leave them with physical scars, as well as the mental scarring that goes along with it. Meanwhile the person who raped will likely get a slap on the wrist, and could possibly demand visitation rights later in life (people have sued for visitation rights for donating their sperm/eggs).

[af3ll]

A) a lot of these websites are very biased.

Hey Buster never posts anything biased.

These and other studies were used when the Supreme Court was reviewing a case. If it's good enough for the Supreme Court, it's good enough for me.
I agree with you.

[SoCalZX2]

For some reason, many people don't realize that childbirth itself is dangerous and can be fatal; babies just don't pop out themselves. While it's true that nowadays medical care makes it much more likely for a mother to survive, it also costs money to have a baby delivered, and if you need a C-section (which is very common for safety) it leaves you with a large scar.


It costs quite a bit of money to have a child... (I think we're up to almost 200k because Christopher was in NICU... thank God for insurance) but I'm not sure the bearing it has on the convo... If it's such an inconvenience, then one shouldn't be performing the act that creates the possibility.

As for the C-Section they are pretty common (IIRC 2/3 are cesarean these days) and yes, it does leave a scar, but if done properly, and cared for properly afterwards, it's not a large scar. I don't notice my wifes, and it's usually done on the bikini line as well.

I know those of us that don't really support abortion seem to be rude and trying to put our "beliefs" on others. But It just doesn't make sense when it just takes small measures to prevent, or have a high probability to prevent the pregnancy. So the things you brought up (save for rape, or other extreme situations which have been conceded), just don't make any sense for it to be a "good" reason to terminate a life.

Of course as Jon posted out, the real question is "when it becomes a life", which is another debate, but I've stated my opinion on that, and someone else has stated theirs.

[SoCalZX2]

Hey Buster never posts anything biased.


This has nothing to do with the conversation, and personal attacks should be left out of it.

Edit:
Sarcasm is always intended as a deliberate attack hidden in a "funny" shell so it's not direct.

[af3ll]

This has nothing to do with the conversation, and personal attacks should be left out of it.

Edit:
Sarcasm is always intended as a deliberate attack hidden in a "funny" shell so it's not direct.
Thanks Mr. Serious Guy.

[SoCalZX2]

It's a serious topic, no need to be rude. Really...

Edit:

Buster gets knocked for his comments all the time, so why shouldn't you or anyone else who is being rude for no reason?

[Fordboy]

It costs quite a bit of money to have a child... (I think we're up to almost 200k because Christopher was in NICU... thank God for insurance) but I'm not sure the bearing it has on the convo... If it's such an inconvenience, then one shouldn't be performing the act that creates the possibility.

As for the C-Section they are pretty common (IIRC 2/3 are cesarean these days) and yes, it does leave a scar, but if done properly, and cared for properly afterwards, it's not a large scar. I don't notice my wifes, and it's usually done on the bikini line as well.

I know those of us that don't really support abortion seem to be rude and trying to put our "beliefs" on others. But It just doesn't make sense when it just takes small measures to prevent, or have a high probability to prevent the pregnancy. So the things you brought up (save for rape, or other extreme situations which have been conceded), just don't make any sense for it to be a "good" reason to terminate a life.

Of course as Jon posted out, the real question is "when it becomes a life", which is another debate, but I've stated my opinion on that, and someone else has stated theirs.

i agree 100% thats why they invent condoms and birth control, and the shot. but then where does having the tubes tied or the guy being fixed come into play because i know alot of people who have had to do that because of a illness of somesort. isnt that killing potential life just like an abortion. exactly what it is potential because lets say someone doesnt have an abortion they can always lose it with a miscarrage

[J-Dizzle!]

Hey Buster never posts anything biased.


LOL



As far as when "life begins" I believe that it happens at the point of viability... Most state lawmakers believe it to be viability too.

[Fordboy]

let me get the term viability right so you are saying life begins at birth correct when the baby is capable of living on its own outside the uterus

[SoCalZX2]

i agree 100% thats why they invent condoms and birth control, and the shot. but then where does having the tubes tied or the guy being fixed come into play because i know alot of people who have had to do that because of a illness of some sort. isn't that killing potential life just like an abortion. exactly what it is potential because lets say someone doesn't have an abortion they can always lose it with a miscarriage

Thats not killing potential life lol. Medical reasons for survival is totally different than terminated a growing and living being...
IIRC a man having his tubes tied can be undone, so thats technically another form of BC. The thing with BC, is it's either A) not widely used, or B) used incorrectly. Safe sex isn't safe if the measures you're using aren't being used properly.


Ask anyone who's had a miscarriage. It's a traumatic experience that leaves many emotional scars for a long time, if not life. That also wasn't a personal choice to terminate a living being such as abortion is.

Justine - we'll just have to agree to disagree on "life" than.

[SoCalZX2]

let me get the term viability right so you are saying life begins at birth correct when the baby is capable of living on its own outside the uterus

I believe Viability is when a fetus has everything it needs to sustain itself, even with help from machines. Like my buddies baby who was born @ 33 weeks was a "viable" fetus though still developing.

Fetus are still developing until week 36/37, after that it's pure growth. But being a viable fetus means it can sustain life, and has all it's parts (heart, lungs, brain, etc...) even if it needs help until it has fully developed.

[J-Dizzle!]

let me get the term viability right so you are saying life begins at birth correct when the baby is capable of living on its own outside the uterus

Viability is when the fetus is CAPABLE of living outside the uterus. A baby can be fully capable of living outside the uterus and still decide she wants to chill in the womb for a few more weeks.

[SoCalZX2]

By that definition, do you believe that babies born early are not viable fetus? Even though they have all the components they need, but haven't had time to develop and need help to sustain life?

Or did I misunderstand your statement?

[J-Dizzle!]

Are babies born early capable of living? Yes... they might need help but they're still capable.

I thought you and I had the same definition... only yours was stated better. Did I miss something?

[SoCalZX2]

No I was just curious because I apparently misread your statement.

My apologies :)

[jess]

I don't know the 'weeks' exactly or whatever, but my brothers were born I want to say 3 months early, they had a lot of problems....I want to say one's heart wasn't fully developed and the other didn't have all of his skin, nor were his lungs fully developed......and they are fine now, (a few scars from surgeries, but they're grown men, lol)....I mean, in that condition one might think that they WOULDN'T be able to survive.....but babies are tough creatures, even in the womb how do you make the decision of when they are to be considered 'viable'.....that could even be different from fetus to fetus, baby to baby. Some people can survive things that others can't.



I was in a museum once....can't remember which, maybe in Chicago, and they had a big long hallway with little containers of fetuses at every week of the pregnancy....from miscarriages I'm assuming. Either way, maybe they should have a hallway like that at abortion clinics....let a woman walk down the hallway before they make a decision.

I haven't really been able to eat shrimp since then, lol. The little shrimpies remind me of a baby fetus, lol.

[RedRacer99]

i was born into this world not breathing. at birth, your oxygen supply switches from the cord to pulling in from the environment. mine never did that, so i was immediately hooked up to an oxygen machine. my mother didn't get to hold me for the first time until i was over three months old.. i missed my first christmas and my mother still has the stocking-shaped baby blanket that the hospital gave her for christmas. still folded, never used... birthing is complicated, but it's what we go through as a result of our actions. but erasing a life simply because you do not want to create, is just insanity, i'm sorry. you can try to prevent it, but if you create, you take care of that embryo until it forms into a healthy neonate. the world's overpopulated as it is, but i know it will be a cold day in hell before people stop having sex.

[zxtwou2]

i was born blue, also....had the cord around my neck 3 times.

[JonsZX2SR]

My personal opinion on the subject is that life begins @ conception. If we're to have the understanding that Amoebas are a living organism (and a single celled), why can we not have the same thought of a human being at it's literal earliest stage? IMHO, just because it doesn't look like you or me yet, doesn't negate the fact that it is alive.

But thats just me ;)

Agreed, but that isn't the key question. Killing an amoeba or other single celled organism isn't considered murder by most faiths or belief systems. Just because life begins (recognizing the sperm and ova are already alive) isn't a strong argument against abortion.

The question is when does the life achieve human form, awareness, the 'quickening' or infusion of human spirit. I do not believe this happens at conception, but I do believe it occurs well before the 23 week.

If Pro-lifers want to believe that the human spirit is imfused at the moment of conception that is fine, but unless they can prove this argument I do not believe they have any kind of right to impose this religious beliefs on others.

On the other hand viable, thinking children exist around 22, 23, 24 weeks and many have gone on to grow into adult humans. The evidence is overwhelming the fetus has achieve snetient human form at this point. I argue on this basis these should be protected as any other human.

The questions is where to draw the line, after conception but before the 23 rd week ??

[SoCalZX2]

An amoeba is still a life form... that was my point. Sentient or not, you're taking the ability to become sentient away from a life form.

I'm not even putting my religious belief into it (though I am Christian, and hold that belief). It's just my opinion though that life is @ conception, not based on "having a soul", but based on the fact it is immediately a multi-celled organism that is growing 100% of the time, and by removing it like you would an infection, you're denying that life form the chance to grow.

That again is me.

[AZN_ZX2]

I think it should be allowed in certain circumstances. Someone being raped, or a baby that will have a severe condition etc. I think there should be special approval for an abortion to go through as well.

If an abortion is going to be done it should be done very early in the pregnancy.

As an adoptee and with a sister as an adoptee I think that adoption can be a good option, but it should be avoided if possible. In many orphanages children don't get the attention they need. Many foster parents and parents who adopt abuse the children. Also if a child has some sort of physical or mental problem they are less likely to be adopted.

I know that if I was in a woman's shoe's I would want the freedom to choose for myself and my future. Not necessarily I'd say I would abort a child, but I wouldn't want someone else telling me no I can't

If you outlaw abortion this could also result in infants being left on the roadside, or people attempting to perform their own "abortion"

[Sir William]

why???, i was still correct on the fact that a baby cant breath while in the mother it only is able to breath through the mom, so really having an abortion is just killing something that is apart of you.


First off I will state that I am Pro Choice.

Now, let's deal with this argument..... which is very weak and can be rebutted in one simple statement.

A body part is described as having the same genetic code as the rest of the body. The fetus is not part of the mother’s body. Its genetic code differs totally from the mother.

[mechtech]

I kinda want to get back to the original erroneous post about GW and the blanket statement about birth control and abortion.
He did not state what you stated, and therefore your whole resultant thinking is wrong.
Or may I misquote you and add to it [to support my own agenda] as fact?

[RedRacer99]

i like cheese

[JonsZX2SR]

An amoeba is still a life form... that was my point. Sentient or not, you're taking the ability to become sentient away from a life form.

Do you use pesticides, anti-microbial detergents or wipes or eat food that were once living beings ?? If so you are taking away the ability to become sentient from a life form. Jains (a derivative of Hinduism) try to go to this extreme. I'm not saying it is unreasonable, but it should be a matter of choice not law.

Sperm and ova are alive and have the potential to unite and to become a sentient being. If you use contraception, masturbate or engage in oral sex you prevent these from reaching their potential.

I hear you argument, but disagree that terminating something that has the potential to become sentient is the same as terminating something that is sentient.

If you want to argue that the small mass of cells is alreday human and deserves the same protection as an alreday viable fetus then do so. I don't buy the 'has potential' to argument. I don't believe these is a human spirit present until the moment of 'quickening' or infusion of spirit into the body and terminating an early fetus is not murder because that spirit is not present.

If you want to convince me then you will have to argue that the very early fetus is human, not just has the potential. The same is true for laws. Laws shouldn't be passed to force the religious beliefs of some on the rest of us.

As for late term abortions you won't get any arguments from me, there is considerable proof that late term (23 weeks and beyond) are neurologically functioning humans and there is considerable evidence that at 15 or 16 weeks a human neural system si already active.

For me the gray area is somewhere between 7-8 weeks and 15 weeks.

[SoCalZX2]

I'm sorry, but I'll never put any animal on par with a human. There are only a sparse few species that would remotely come close to the brainpower of a human (I'm talking over all intelligence, not "fight / flight" mentality that any animal has. Instinct is different than intelligence).

I'm not going to argue any point Jon, solely because I'm not here to try and change anyones opinion on the topic. I have been merely pointing out my opinion on it, and responding to others posts.

On the topic of your post, I do not feel that by eating animals, or their byproducts that we are keeping them from becoming sentient. I would easily believe that 90%+ of animals react solely on instinct, which IMHO does not a sentient being make.

Where as the growing of a human fetus at any stage has the potential and is infact "striving" to become sentient on a daily basis, and the end result is of course a completely formed human child.

Again, I'm not trying to change your mind, and if you believe that after the "quickening" is turning point, then so be it. We'll just have to agree to disagree, and thats ok :)

[jess]

I think it should be allowed in certain circumstances. Someone being raped, or a baby that will have a severe condition etc. I think there should be special approval for an abortion to go through as well.

If an abortion is going to be done it should be done very early in the pregnancy.

As an adoptee and with a sister as an adoptee I think that adoption can be a good option, but it should be avoided if possible. In many orphanages children don't get the attention they need. Many foster parents and parents who adopt abuse the children. Also if a child has some sort of physical or mental problem they are less likely to be adopted.

I know that if I was in a woman's shoe's I would want the freedom to choose for myself and my future. Not necessarily I'd say I would abort a child, but I wouldn't want someone else telling me no I can't

If you outlaw abortion this could also result in infants being left on the roadside, or people attempting to perform their own "abortion"


There is a girl that I know (she worked next door to my old work) and apparently a few years ago (before I ever knew her, I actually didn't know this until quite awhile after I knew the girl) she had a baby, and killed him when he was 9 days old. She spent, I want to say, not even 2 years in jail....and the charges are about to be removed from her record. Apparently even killing an infant doesn't get you too much punishment.

But anyway, outlawing abortion would probably cause an INCREASE in these acts.

[Mike]

My feelings on this are simple.

Abortion= Murder= FAIL AT LIFE!!!!!


Birth Control= Smart Chicks= Worryless Sex. :)

[RedRacer99]

or or even better.. find some other means to enjoy your relationship than shagging like rabbits and then freaking out because you think she may or may not be preggos. it's like driving without your seatbelt, one day you will get caught.

[JonsZX2SR]

You haven't changed my mind. My opinion is laws should not be enacted to force beliefs which are solely of a religious nature on others. People can debate the morality of aborting a very early fetus without a human nervous system or when a spirit is infused into the fetus ad infinitum without reaching a conclusion.

I respect your beliefs and hope you would follow them, but I also respect the freedom of others to hold differing beliefs. That is why I oppose laws governing early abortions while believing that at some point (well after conception) the fetus becomes human and should be protected.

I find the positions of both the Pro-Life and Pro-Choice groups too extreme. However, I think neither has the right to force their will on each other or the rest of us.

[SMusser]

I will start out by saying that I am pro-life. Under certain circumstances that were previously mentioned, the morning after pill is a reasonable choice. Beyond those few circumstances, there is really no excuse for abortion. The argument that women should have the choice to have an abortion if signs show that the child may have certain disorders is ridiculous. Who are we to decide wether or not to take the gamble because there is a chance that a child might not be "normal"?

[AZN_ZX2]

You haven't changed my mind. My opinion is laws should not be enacted to force beliefs which are solely of a religious nature on others. People can debate the morality of aborting a very early fetus without a human nervous system or when a spirit is infused into the fetus ad infinitum without reaching a conclusion.

I respect your beliefs and hope you would follow them, but I also respect the freedom of others to hold differing beliefs. That is why I oppose laws governing early abortions while believing that at some point (well after conception) the fetus becomes human and should be protected.

I find the positions of both the Pro-Life and Pro-Choice groups too extreme. However, I think neither has the right to force their will on each other or the rest of us.

I agree that would be a very bias law, but I wouldn't be surprised if people were naive enough to not see that and have such a law enforced.

[SoCalZX2]

You haven't changed my mind. My opinion is laws should not be enacted to force beliefs which are solely of a religious nature on others. People can debate the morality of aborting a very early fetus without a human nervous system or when a spirit is infused into the fetus ad infinitum without reaching a conclusion.

I respect your beliefs and hope you would follow them, but I also respect the freedom of others to hold differing beliefs. That is why I oppose laws governing early abortions while believing that at some point (well after conception) the fetus becomes human and should be protected.

I find the positions of both the Pro-Life and Pro-Choice groups too extreme. However, I think neither has the right to force their will on each other or the rest of us.

I agree that would be a very bias law, but I wouldn't be surprised if people were naive enough to not see that and have such a law enforced.

Being pro - life doesn't necessarily stem from being religious. So to say that all people who are pro life and would like abortions banned (except for extreme circumstances) are enforcing a religious belief on others is completely false and very judgmental of those people. All laws are nothing more than beliefs about how certain things should happen. They don't necessarily stem from a religious belief. One doesn't necessarily have to be a christian, or catholic or have even read the bible to be a Pro-Life advocate. So it's unfair and bias of you to label it as a "solely religious law" when it's not.

[J-Dizzle!]

Being pro - life doesn't necessarily stem from being religious. So to say that all people who are pro life and would like abortions banned (except for extreme circumstances) are enforcing a religious belief on others is completely false and very judgmental of those people. All laws are nothing more than beliefs about how certain things should happen. They don't necessarily stem from a religious belief. One doesn't necessarily have to be a christian, or catholic or have even read the bible to be a Pro-Life advocate. So it's unfair and bias of you to label it as a "solely religious law" when it's not.


Most of the time they DO stem from religious beliefs though. The reason this debate is such a hot topic is because it very much is based on religious beliefs. If there were not religions based on the belief that killing is a sin then people would not be so opposed to abortion.

Personally, I don't think I believe in "spirits" or heaven and hell, so I can't say that I think it's sinful to abort a fetus for any other reason than that I look down on people who aren't responsible during sex and happen to become pregnant.

You've stated throughout this debate that you oppose abortion because you think it is life, or has the potential to become a sentient being... and it seems you think killing something like that is inherently wrong. That belief, whether or not you think so, is inherently based on your religious beliefs that killing is wrong.

I believe in the death penalty not because I have this sense of "an eye for an eye" or anything, but because I think our prison systems are too overcrowded to support murderers and the best place for them to go is in the ground to save ME, a law-abiding, non-murdering, tax payer, money.

AND I believe that a woman should have the right to choose when aborting not because I want to condone her acts of irresponsibility but because it's HER body and HER life until the fetus is viable...

[SoCalZX2]

Most of the time they DO stem from religious beliefs though. The reason this debate is such a hot topic is because it very much is based on religious beliefs. If there were not religions based on the belief that killing is a sin then people would not be so opposed to abortion.

Personally, I don't think I believe in "spirits" or heaven and hell, so I can't say that I think it's sinful to abort a fetus for any other reason than that I look down on people who aren't responsible during sex and happen to become pregnant.

You've stated throughout this debate that you oppose abortion because you think it is life, or has the potential to become a sentient being... and it seems you think killing something like that is inherently wrong. That belief, whether or not you think so, is inherently based on your religious beliefs that killing is wrong.

I believe in the death penalty not because I have this sense of "an eye for an eye" or anything, but because I think our prison systems are too overcrowded to support murderers and the best place for them to go is in the ground to save ME, a law-abiding, non-murdering, tax payer, money.

AND I believe that a woman should have the right to choose when aborting not because I want to condone her acts of irresponsibility but because it's HER body and HER life until the fetus is viable...

Umm no. Again, you don't have to be religious to believe that killing a human is wrong... I see what your saying, but it's false... Just because I happen to be a Christian, doesn't mean that ALL of my thoughts come from the bible. Please give me a little credit for having my own thoughts and not just being a mindless sheep.

I haven't once quoted scripture or the 10 commandments to support or bolster my opinion on this topic.

I haven't said it's a sin or anything. You're just putting it on my religious beliefs and taking away any of my own thoughts that I've poured out here.

I'm getting really sick and tired of being told I'm forcing my beliefs on people because I oppose certain things. I have not once in this debate brought up my Christianity... The people who think I believe what I believe are the ones bringing my my religious affiliation because that is all they have left to fall back on.

Instead of debating my post, everyone is pointing to "well you're a Christian, so thats why you believe that", yet I'm the one track minded person here who doesn't have any original thought of my own? (not putting words in anyones mouth, but that's what is being implied)

Killing w/o any bias towards a commandment IS wrong. It doesn't take a Christian to see that. How many agnostics or athiests also believe that killing or murder is wrong? I'd be willing to bet a lot of people that have no religious affiliation believe that killing / murder is wrong... So how is it solely based on a religious belief? It's not...

I tried VERY hard to not bring religion beliefs into the discussion since it's ok for everyone but Christians to have their own opinion on topics. So I discussed this from a secular view, and when there was no more "debating" about it, out of no where pops up the fact that I'm a Christian, and we apparently can't have an original thought...

[J-Dizzle!]

Umm no. Again, you don't have to be religious to believe that killing a human is wrong... I see what your saying, but it's false... Just because I happen to be a Christian, doesn't mean that ALL of my thoughts come from the bible. Please give me a little credit for having my own thoughts and not just being a mindless sheep.

I haven't once quoted scripture or the 10 commandments to support or bolster my opinion on this topic.

I haven't said it's a sin or anything. You're just putting it on my religious beliefs and taking away any of my own thoughts that I've poured out here.

I'm getting really sick and tired of being told I'm forcing my beliefs on people because I oppose certain things. I have not once in this debate brought up my Christianity... The people who think I believe what I believe are the ones bringing my my religious affiliation because that is all they have left to fall back on.

Instead of debating my post, everyone is pointing to "well you're a Christian, so thats why you believe that", yet I'm the one track minded person here who doesn't have any original thought of my own? (not putting words in anyones mouth, but that's what is being implied)

Killing w/o any bias towards a commandment IS wrong. It doesn't take a Christian to see that. How many agnostics or athiests also believe that killing or murder is wrong? I'd be willing to bet a lot of people that have no religious affiliation believe that killing / murder is wrong... So how is it solely based on a religious belief? It's not...

I tried VERY hard to not bring religion beliefs into the discussion since it's ok for everyone but Christians to have their own opinion on topics. So I discussed this from a secular view, and when there was no more "debating" about it, out of no where pops up the fact that I'm a Christian, and we apparently can't have an original thought...

I never said that... you're just taking it the wrong way. Before Christianity there were still religious beliefs that killing was wrong. That's the way the world works... not murdering keeps order in the world.

Killing people is socially acceptable in some circumstances... war and the death penalty are practiced throughout the world.

Murder is generally NOT accepted.

So where is the line drawn in abortion? Can it be classified under "murder"? I don't think it's murder, I don't think there is mal-intent when aborting a fetus like there is in murder. So... maybe killing for some socially (if mildly) acceptable cause, like forgiving a man and woman for being irresponsible, like allowing them to have a child the RIGHT way... a way in which the child would have a better chance at education and the family would have a chance to live a better lifestyle where every day isn't a struggle to stay afloat?

[SoCalZX2]

I never said that YOU personally said that I was forcing my beliefs... So I didn't take anything the wrong way. But thats Jons staple line on topics that have any HINT of religion in them.

If you're going to use the example of "prior to Christianity, there was still religios beliefs" (which is true), than EVERY rule / law is based on a religion and people need to stop singling out Christianity (which is often done here).

In the past on other topics, the people here who have a Christian belief system are constantly hounded and basically censored on heated topics, because we're just "pushing our religion on people", but it's not considered the same when the world is pushing it's beliefs on us, funny how that works.

I told Jon many posts ago, I'm not trying to change anyones opinion on this topic, but that I was merely stating mine, and responding to peoples posts. Yet, leave it to people to still bring up Christianity and forcing of beliefs (when it wasn't a topic of the conversation to begin with).

Killing I shouldn't have brought up, because I'm not opposed to capitol punishment, nor am I opposed to killing when necessary (I.E. for survival in non murder situations).

My view on the irresponsibility point is that with abortion, life now comes with no consequences... You mess up, just "get it taken care of", don't learn from your problems, just fix it the easy way... Well, I've got news for the world... Life ISN'T easy. There ARE consequences to actions, and there shouldn't be an easy fix to any self created issue.

[J-Dizzle!]

I never said that YOU personally said that I was forcing my beliefs... So I didn't take anything the wrong way. But thats Jons staple line on topics that have any HINT of religion in them.

If you're going to use the example of "prior to Christianity, there was still religios beliefs" (which is true), than EVERY rule / law is based on a religion and people need to stop singling out Christianity (which is often done here).

In the past on other topics, the people here who have a Christian belief system are constantly hounded and basically censored on heated topics, because we're just "pushing our religion on people", but it's not considered the same when the world is pushing it's beliefs on us, funny how that works.

I told Jon many posts ago, I'm not trying to change anyones opinion on this topic, but that I was merely stating mine, and responding to peoples posts. Yet, leave it to people to still bring up Christianity and forcing of beliefs (when it wasn't a topic of the conversation to begin with).

Ok, I understand but it just seems like you bring it up more than anyone because you write the most about it or maybe you're feel more defensive because you're more religious than the rest of us. Either way you shouldn't let him bother you... if he's singling you out then take it as a compliment that maybe he values your opinion because its so different from his own. He seems to enjoy a good debate and it's hard to do that when everyone is like, "yeah good point" and "yeah QFT" or "^^^ what he said", you know?


Killing I shouldn't have brought up, because I'm not opposed to capitol punishment, nor am I opposed to killing when necessary (I.E. for survival in non murder situations).

My view on the irresponsibility point is that with abortion, life now comes with no consequences... You mess up, just "get it taken care of", don't learn from your problems, just fix it the easy way... Well, I've got news for the world... Life ISN'T easy. There ARE consequences to actions, and there shouldn't be an easy fix to any self created issue.


But here's the thing... NOT aborting comes with consequences too. The consequences I brought up were that instead of a child growing up in a financially secure, emotionally stable home, he or she would more likely be growing up in a split family home where the mother or parents are unable to provide for the baby the way it deserves. Or it is growing up in foster care, not knowing his family. There are some great cases of children growing up well in adoption... but there are A LOT of not-so-good cases too. Would YOU want to take the chance if it were the child you brought into this world?

[SoCalZX2]

Are there more cases of people coming up in bad foster care? Or more for people coming up in good foster care? I honestly don't know.

For me personally (and I believe my wife as well) that we would bear the child and give them up for adoption instead of aborting. But that is just how we view it. There are so many quality people that are able to adopt, that I just couldn't fathom not providing the opportunity of living to the child. (I will admit that for a personal choice, my beliefs do play a role since it's me personally, but they don't on my overall view of the topic).

As for your first bit, I know Jon thinks I have a brain ;) He's said so himself that I have comments worth responding to. Which is nice, but when the response seems the same, just slightly reworded based on the topic, what kind of debate is that? So whats the incentive for me to post my opinion if I'm going to receive the same retort?

(btw, I'm glad you and I kept this side convo civil, I do appreciate your opinion and views, we just disagree on some things which is cool :) lol)

[J-Dizzle!]

Are there more cases of people coming up in bad foster care? Or more for people coming up in good foster care? I honestly don't know.

I know AZN said he was adopted and seemed to point that while he had it a little easier than others that's not always the case:



As an adoptee and with a sister as an adoptee I think that adoption can be a good option, but it should be avoided if possible. In many orphanages children don't get the attention they need. Many foster parents and parents who adopt abuse the children. Also if a child has some sort of physical or mental problem they are less likely to be adopted.

I know that if I was in a woman's shoe's I would want the freedom to choose for myself and my future. Not necessarily I'd say I would abort a child, but I wouldn't want someone else telling me no I can't

If you outlaw abortion this could also result in infants being left on the roadside, or people attempting to perform their own "abortion"



For me personally (and I believe my wife as well) that we would bear the child and give them up for adoption instead of aborting. But that is just how we view it. There are so many quality people that are able to adopt, that I just couldn't fathom not providing the opportunity of living to the child. (I will admit that for a personal choice, my beliefs do play a role since it's me personally, but they don't on my overall view of the topic).

While there are a lot of quality people, if I allowed the fetus to become more than a cluster of cells trying to form a human I'd feel very attached to it and I don't know if I'd be able to handle not knowing if the child was getting abused, passed around from orphanage to orphanage, etc.

Besides, there are SO MANY homeless children in the world. We need to take care of them before we start unloading even more into government care and saying, "Here, take care of my little problem."


As for your first bit, I know Jon thinks I have a brain ;) He's said so himself that I have comments worth responding to. Which is nice, but when the response seems the same, just slightly reworded based on the topic, what kind of debate is that? So whats the incentive for me to post my opinion if I'm going to receive the same retort? Haha, I notice this but you should find a way to rebut it so that he has to find a new argument to latch onto. I would but I agree with him lol.


(btw, I'm glad you and I kept this side convo civil, I do appreciate your opinion and views, we just disagree on some things which is cool :) lol)

Most people don't know this, but it actually IS possible to argue an emotional topic without having a hissy fit! Lol glad we are able to prove it.

[SoCalZX2]

I know AZN said he was adopted and seemed to point that while he had it a little easier than others that's not always the case.

While there are a lot of quality people, if I allowed the fetus to become more than a cluster of cells trying to form a human I'd feel very attached to it and I don't know if I'd be able to handle not knowing if the child was getting abused, passed around from orphanage to orphanage, etc.

Besides, there are SO MANY homeless children in the world. We need to take care of them before we start unloading even more into government care and saying, "Here, take care of my little problem."


I completely agree with all of this. But I think my biggest problem is the fact that "safe" sex isn't widely practiced, or practiced improperly. Instead of keeping it in ones pants, people just wanna screw like rabbits w/o considering the consequences of doing so.. STDs, Pregnancies... things like that.

I understand the becoming attached, because even though I didn't carry Christopher for 9 months, I was along for the journey and made every Dr appt and loved seeing every movement. So I can see how that feeling is amplified for the female as they are the oven.

This is where things get a bit more political for me than just an abortion topic. Because I'm a BIG fan of personal responsibility (which has to do with way more than just finances or sex). So, I just shudder at the lack of personal responsibility of the general populous and think that if people actually had to deal with the consequences of their actions, that things would be less likely to happen.

I know there are foster home horror stories, and I hope they reform that process and get the right people who have the right hearts to be adopting. That way, we'll have less horror stories, and more success stories. I'm just on the side of it being a better option than abortion.

[jess]

Thomas, you say that you and your wife agree that you would never abort a fetus............but you're married and in a secure relationship. I would guess that most abortions are not performed under those circumstances.


And also, I don't know too much about adoption, but I do know that it is a lot more difficult to adopt an American child than it is to adopt from over-seas. Not only is the process quicker, it's also cheaper (I want to say about HALF the price) to adopt internationally. I know a couple who were trying to adopt an American baby, but there were too many hurdles and issues and they ended up adopting from somewhere in Asia. Those are good people, and even they had problems.

I don't know that a 15 year old girl would really look at adoption more closely if things were perhaps made better in that area. But perhaps that is something that should be considered as well.

[SoCalZX2]

Thomas, you say that you and your wife agree that you would never abort a fetus............but you're married and in a secure relationship. I would guess that most abortions are not performed under those circumstances.


And also, I don't know too much about adoption, but I do know that it is a lot more difficult to adopt an American child than it is to adopt from over-seas. Not only is the process quicker, it's also cheaper (I want to say about HALF the price) to adopt internationally. I know a couple who were trying to adopt an American baby, but there were too many hurdles and issues and they ended up adopting from somewhere in Asia. Those are good people, and even they had problems.

I don't know that a 15 year old girl would really look at adoption more closely if things were perhaps made better in that area. But perhaps that is something that should be considered as well.

Then that is something that needs to be worked on to make it a better and more viable option.

As for Lisa and I, when we had our first couple of 'scares', we weren't married, and were more like the general populous with regards to less than safe sex practices and screwing like rabbits. So while it's easy to pass of that we're married, we weren't always married, and I know for ME and I believe she felt the same way, that abortion wouldn't have been the way we would have gone back then...

[J-Dizzle!]

I completely agree with all of this. But I think my biggest problem is the fact that "safe" sex isn't widely practiced, or practiced improperly. Instead of keeping it in ones pants, people just wanna screw like rabbits w/o considering the consequences of doing so.. STDs, Pregnancies... things like that.

But here it seems like you are a Pro-life advocate as a punishment for the parents for having unprotected sex. This seems like a pretty tough lesson not just for the parents, but for the kids as well. Probably even tougher for the kids. Why force a child to grow up underpriviledged because the parents were too stupid to wrap it up? I'd think that making the decision to have an abortion, and having to live with that decision, is punishment enough for a couple.

[SoCalZX2]

It's not always a tough decision though Justine. I know someone who has personally had 2 abortions and is "meh" about it. I'm sure not all people are like that... especially if they've waited to make the decision and real growth has started. I don't know how far along this person was that has had 2. I just know that she hasn't learned anything from it, which is my concern.

If you learn nothing from an event, was there any value to it? To bring in another poor description, if you get a speeding ticket, or get into an accident and continue to speed, or drive recklessly, and get more tickets or get into more accidents what has been learned? If someone has an easy way out and you learn nothing, then you're more likely to repeat the poor skill or performance and wind up in the same situation.

So lets move on to finding a better way to educate the younger crowd that will allow them to make better decisions and hopefully avoid having to make a decision to abort or not.

There are certain forced learning situations, in the aforementioned ticket/accident scenario, they will eventually take your license away, or you may wreck and permanently damage yourself or a friend. So why can't the mistake of acting inappropriately come with the same possible permanent consequences?

I know there is a big difference between tickets / accidents / children. But the principal of learning is the same across the boundaries of those areas. History repeats itself when learning is not achieved.

[J-Dizzle!]

It's not always a tough decision though Justine. I know someone who has personally had 2 abortions and is "meh" about it. I'm sure not all people are like that... especially if they've waited to make the decision and real growth has started. I don't know how far along this person was that has had 2. I just know that she hasn't learned anything from it, which is my concern.

If you learn nothing from an event, was there any value to it? To bring in another poor description, if you get a speeding ticket, or get into an accident and continue to speed, or drive recklessly, and get more tickets or get into more accidents what has been learned? If someone has an easy way out and you learn nothing, then you're more likely to repeat the poor skill or performance and wind up in the same situation.

So lets move on to finding a better way to educate the younger crowd that will allow them to make better decisions and hopefully avoid having to make a decision to abort or not.

There are certain forced learning situations, in the aforementioned ticket/accident scenario, they will eventually take your license away, or you may wreck and permanently damage yourself or a friend. So why can't the mistake of acting inappropriately come with the same possible permanent consequences?

I know there is a big difference between tickets / accidents / children. But the principal of learning is the same across the boundaries of those areas. History repeats itself when learning is not achieved.


I see your point, and it's a good one so there's not much I can say except the few exceptions of people who take nothing from having multiple abortions, or who take nothing from getting multiple speeding tickets should be just that... exceptions to the general rule. I got a speeding ticket and rarely speed now. I know a girl who has only had one abortion and I doubt she'd do it again. There will always be people who break the rules because they have no regard for morality or common law. But in general, rules and morality DO keep people from doing bad things. Just because a few people are different doesn't mean the majority can't or won't conform.

[TheCrazyGuy]

My personal belief is that once a human being comes into form, sometime between the 9-12th week abortions should not be allowed. I do find 3rd trimester abortions to be particularly troubling, because these are not just developing fetuses, but viable humans.

However, I do not have any problems with very early abortions before the 11th week. Obviously the woman has to have her act together and make an early decision. Procratinantion or inability to decide should be no excuse to allow a later abortion.

Freakish how we think such similar things. I've long said that viable fetus abortion should be outlawed completely, except in the extreme circumstance regarding the health of the mother. If it's kicking, it's alive. The "choice" element of my being in part pro-choice should only apply in the first trimester, and preferably in the first couple weeks of conception. The female body spontaneously aborts newly formed zygotes (many peoples' definition of life) all the time.

Now, do I believe that anything is going to change in our laws right now? Not a chance.

Now, to read the rest of the thread.

[TheCrazyGuy]

My personal opinion on the subject is that life begins @ conception. If we're to have the understanding that Amoebas are a living organism (and a single celled), why can we not have the same thought of a human being at it's literal earliest stage? IMHO, just because it doesn't look like you or me yet, doesn't negate the fact that it is alive.


Do you think that when you spray your germy toilet with lysol? Do you think that when you smash spiders or set out mousetraps?

[RedRacer99]

i think china had the right idea with restricting child births.

[SoCalZX2]

Do you think that when you spray your germy toilet with lysol? Do you think that when you smash spiders or set out mousetraps?

I would hope you're not being serious w/ this question. If you are, well, you obviously didn't get the point of my post. A little less sarcasm would have been warranted too.

[AZN_ZX2]

i think china had the right idea with restricting child births.

It was well meant, but since carrying on the family name is very important in their culture everyone wants a boy. So there are more cases of parents having a girl first and hiding her, or simply getting rid of her and trying again to have a boy. I think they are attempting to move away from this.

Being pro - life doesn't necessarily stem from being religious. So to say that all people who are pro life and would like abortions banned (except for extreme circumstances) are enforcing a religious belief on others is completely false and very judgmental of those people. All laws are nothing more than beliefs about how certain things should happen. They don't necessarily stem from a religious belief. One doesn't necessarily have to be a christian, or catholic or have even read the bible to be a Pro-Life advocate. So it's unfair and bias of you to label it as a "solely religious law" when it's not.

I agree it isn't based solely on religion. I was just speaking in terms of if it was based solely on religion. Sorry if you thought I meant otherwise.

I know AZN said he was adopted and seemed to point that while he had it a little easier than others that's not always the case:






While there are a lot of quality people, if I allowed the fetus to become more than a cluster of cells trying to form a human I'd feel very attached to it and I don't know if I'd be able to handle not knowing if the child was getting abused, passed around from orphanage to orphanage, etc.

Besides, there are SO MANY homeless children in the world. We need to take care of them before we start unloading even more into government care and saying, "Here, take care of my little problem."

Haha, I notice this but you should find a way to rebut it so that he has to find a new argument to latch onto. I would but I agree with him lol.



Most people don't know this, but it actually IS possible to argue an emotional topic without having a hissy fit! Lol glad we are able to prove it.

I was very lucky. I don't know which is more good or bad cases, but I know Vietnam has recently stopped allowing babies to be adopted because of the children being adopted into abusive or negligent families. There is also the problem of adoption agencies simply giving the child to people for the money.

[jess]

I don't believe that changes in laws on this will change......ever.

Restricting who can get abortions (rape victims, high risk pregnancies, etc) what would really come of this? Allowing 'certain' people to get abortions would mean that the medications/materials needed to perform abortions would be available, and with I don't know...the internet, anyone can get their hands on almost anything.

OR, girls will attempt abortions in other ways. This could result in either a successful abortion, but harm to the mother, OR just harming a fetus resulting in birth defects......that doesn't seem like it's saving anything.

Not only that, I would imagine that there would be an increase in false reports of carnal knowledge and rape. When I worked with the public I would occasionally check the list of registered sex offenders...just out of curiosity, and it honestly amazed me how many of the men on there were 18, 19, 20 years old. I'm sorry, but I have a feeling that many (not all) of those guys were in consensual relationships and just pissed off the wrong girl/parents.

Now, if you are a 16 year old girl, get knocked up, and the only way you can get an abortion is to claim you were raped......I'd imagine there would be quite a bit of that happening. Girls can be bitches....especially young ones..we know this..


It could get tossed back and forth all day long the rights/wrongs on this topic, but even if things were to be changed, people always find ways to 'work' the system, or get around things....it won't make any of this just 'disappear'

[AZN_ZX2]

I don't believe that changes in laws on this will change......ever.

Restricting who can get abortions (rape victims, high risk pregnancies, etc) what would really come of this? Allowing 'certain' people to get abortions would mean that the medications/materials needed to perform abortions would be available, and with I don't know...the internet, anyone can get their hands on almost anything.

OR, girls will attempt abortions in other ways. This could result in either a successful abortion, but harm to the mother, OR just harming a fetus resulting in birth defects......that doesn't seem like it's saving anything.

Not only that, I would imagine that there would be an increase in false reports of carnal knowledge and rape. When I worked with the public I would occasionally check the list of registered sex offenders...just out of curiosity, and it honestly amazed me how many of the men on there were 18, 19, 20 years old. I'm sorry, but I have a feeling that many (not all) of those guys were in consensual relationships and just pissed off the wrong girl/parents.

Now, if you are a 16 year old girl, get knocked up, and the only way you can get an abortion is to claim you were raped......I'd imagine there would be quite a bit of that happening. Girls can be bitches....especially young ones..we know this..


It could get tossed back and forth all day long the rights/wrongs on this topic, but even if things were to be changed, people always find ways to 'work' the system, or get around things....it won't make any of this just 'disappear'

Yay well said

[SoCalZX2]

I don't believe that changes in laws on this will change......ever.

Restricting who can get abortions (rape victims, high risk pregnancies, etc) what would really come of this? Allowing 'certain' people to get abortions would mean that the medications/materials needed to perform abortions would be available, and with I don't know...the internet, anyone can get their hands on almost anything.

OR, girls will attempt abortions in other ways. This could result in either a successful abortion, but harm to the mother, OR just harming a fetus resulting in birth defects......that doesn't seem like it's saving anything.

Not only that, I would imagine that there would be an increase in false reports of carnal knowledge and rape. When I worked with the public I would occasionally check the list of registered sex offenders...just out of curiosity, and it honestly amazed me how many of the men on there were 18, 19, 20 years old. I'm sorry, but I have a feeling that many (not all) of those guys were in consensual relationships and just pissed off the wrong girl/parents.

Now, if you are a 16 year old girl, get knocked up, and the only way you can get an abortion is to claim you were raped......I'd imagine there would be quite a bit of that happening. Girls can be bitches....especially young ones..we know this..


It could get tossed back and forth all day long the rights/wrongs on this topic, but even if things were to be changed, people always find ways to 'work' the system, or get around things....it won't make any of this just 'disappear'

I don't disagree with you on anything you really typed out.... But stupidity will happen in spite of current laws or any other laws... Stupid people are generally just that... stupid.

I wouldn't be surprised if you were right about the increased claims of rape and what not, but again, that is pointing to a larger problem which is the lack of personal responsibility as a whole, rather than for this one indescresion.

[TheCrazyGuy]

I would hope you're not being serious w/ this question. If you are, well, you obviously didn't get the point of my post. A little less sarcasm would have been warranted too.

Are you serious?! You made the argument that a zygote should be treated with the same respect as a paramesium. To which I responded, "how much respect do YOU give to a paramesium?"

"Sarcasm" be damned, you need to address the point instead of waffling and trying to make me feel bad (a thoroughly pointless goal, I assure you).

[SoCalZX2]

Actually I wasn't trying to make anyone feel bad.

I also didn't say that a parasite was on par w/ a human fetus at all. The similarities stop @ the fact they are invisibile to the naked eye. The human fetus is growing, changing, evolving. A parasite isn't. So no, I don't get all mushy when I'm cleaning, or making my house safer for my son.

You need to be less of a dick when making a post. Especially since I hadn't been rude or sarcastic to anyone else here (and now I have). Instead of reading into my post and thinking I was trying to make you feel bad, you should have just posed a serious question in a serious manner instead of injecting it with stupidity and sarcasm.

If you had actually read my previous posts, you could have deduced that I do not feel that anything up the food chain, well above parasites and germs are on the same level as a human.

So instead of trying to make an invalid point, and argument, you should have just read the previous comments as the answer was already on the table. But it has now been spelled out for you.

[SoCalZX2]

As an oh by the way...

Attacking the credibility of your question, isn't "waffling" or avoiding the topic. I was genuinely curious as to the validity of the question given the fact the answer was on the table.

At least when Jon debates me, he does so on substance. Where as you were using sarcasm, and unfounded rudeness with little to no substance or serious though. So I had every reason to check the validity of your question. You may think like him, but you certainly don't type like him.

[TheCrazyGuy]

I wasn't trying to be a dick. You brought out the dick in me when you gave me the whole "I hope you're not serious" and "please don't hurt my feelings with your mean sarcasm" lines.

Seriously. I say one line in response to you and you gett butt hurt at me? I noticed you didn't respond in kind to this statement:

An amoeba is still a life form... that was my point. Sentient or not, you're taking the ability to become sentient away from a life form.


I said the exact same thing that he did and yet I am the one that felt the wrath of socal. You went over the top in defending Buster (the one liner was very clever btw) and you are going over the top with me.

[TheCrazyGuy]

As an oh by the way...

I was rebutting your presumption on substance. Simply because I use a different approach (irony) and don't form my posts into full fledged introduction, body, and conclusion paragraphs doesn't make my points any less valid.

I do like Jon's introduction, body, and conclusion paragraphs, btw. I just don't feel like writing them most of the time.

[SoCalZX2]

The wrath of socal? lol :D

As for me bring out the dick in you, thats funny. You chose to respond the way you did. I was merely making a point about how ludicrous the statement was. How could you possibly have thought that I was comparing germs and rats to the human fetus? I ask that sincerely because I made the point to make sure people didn't think I was putting those life forms and organisms on the same level of a human (whether full grown or a fetus).

Your question had no point based on substance. It was purely a jab based on a previous comment of mine about amoeba's being a living organism. You can try and hide it under whatever pretense you wish, but there was nothing more than sarcasm or irony in that post.

My thoughts on that subject were very clearly laid out in other posts.

While you don't have to string together have a page of comment, you should lace your comments / questions with a less abrasive approach, and quit blaming others for your reactions to posts. You didn't hurt my feelings, nor did I say you ever did.

We can sit here and go back and forth, or we can move on. I'd prefer the latter myself.

[TheCrazyGuy]

You'll see no objection from me. You saw no substance where there was substance. You responded in kind, then were surprised when I was a dick.

Moving right along.

[TheCrazyGuy]

you should lace your comments / questions with a less abrasive approach, and quit blaming others for your reactions to posts.

I will, however, point out, that this is the definition of irony. I am certainly NOT the one here getting butt hurt over sarcasm because I'm NOT THE ONE POINTING IT OUT ALL OVER THE DAMN PLACE. You say you're feelings aren't hurt? Then quit talking about it!

[SoCalZX2]

I will, however, point out, that this is the definition of irony. I am certainly NOT the one here getting butt hurt over sarcasm because I'm NOT THE ONE POINTING IT OUT ALL OVER THE DAMN PLACE. You say you're feelings aren't hurt? Then quit talking about it!

Pointing it out doesn't mean I'm butt hurt :p

sar·casm
n.

1. A cutting, often ironic remark intended to wound.
2. A form of wit that is marked by the use of sarcastic language and is intended to make its victim the butt of contempt or ridicule.

The literal definition of the word means you're not debating on substance, but just trying to make a jab at the person you're being sarcastic to. You say you're debating on substance using Irony / sarcasm. Well, by definition, you CAN'T debate on substance using those. Well, you can't debate well using those.

You wanna keep going? Or would you like to continue with this line of debate. I sincerely hope you don't think my continuing to call you out about poor debating skills as me being butt hurt. On the contrary, you're the one typing in caps (yelling) and now "waffling" by avoiding the topic and trying to make it seem like I'm the one who's upset.