This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Abortion Debate
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
393249
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
@Gore - Well... I would like to hear what a 'biolgoical' process is. Is it breathing? That is just an automated chemical reaction within a body of elements. And what about 'self sustaining'. In reality, nothing on earth is completely autonomous. Your definition is flawed. Anything you specify as belonging to 'life' I can point out as happening outside of what we would call 'life'. You can give me crude definitions, but what we understand as 'life' is a concept, and is not something scientific... yet.
Also, I don't understand what the document signing has to do with this. Why is the mother the authority on the life and death of her children, born or unborn? What makes that ok? Because your dictionary defines 'life' as a biological process?
@Vanstorm - Why does someone have to decide to 'draw the line'? The line of what? When murder is not murder or life is not life? WHO is the authority on that and why? What kind of person could make that distinction and still sleep soundly at night. I propose that no one makes that distinction.
Post by
260787
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
393249
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
260787
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
@Gore - I don't think you can successfully turn anything in this thread into a joke. Sorry.
@Van - So, what if:
I am stuck on a boat with my son. I only have enough water for one of us to survive until we are rescued. I know that if he lives, I won't. So, at that point, would it be acceptible to break his neck to promote my own survival? I am of the mentality, that I will give him water for as long as I can before I die, hopeing that he will make it alive. My own life becomes inconsequential. It is too bad that parents put themselves first.
2nd point: Again, I'll tell this story.... My wife and I were faced with the situation you describe. There was the possibility that the pregnancy, in the 1st trimester, could have killed my wife. We decided that faceing death itself was a better fate than having our children's blood on our hands. We did not abort. She had a miscarriage later. The baby's life ended naturally, when it was supposed to. He died at the end of his life, not when we decided to abort him. My wife could have died, but she faced the possibility with her chin up, and bravery in her eyes. He didn't quite make it into the third trimester. His name was Jacob.
I think I've shed a little light on how fervantly I oppose abortion.
Post by
273605
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
If
NO
(pro-choice stance):
What about the life lost?
I don't believe it is technically a life, seeing as how any brain has yet to develop, and there are no cognitive functions. It is, for all intents and purposes, a mixture of chemicals
Why is the difference between abortion and murder?
Murder is the willing intent to kill another human being for personal gain. Abortion is choosing not to procreate.
What about statistics showing damage to mother's psyche?
I am unaware of any such statistics, but I would be interested in reading them.
Why does the government have a right to deny an inaliable right to life?
This question seems improperly phrased. The government isn't denying any right. They're allowing people to choose not to procreate. They are very different concepts.
Also - by the logic that a base mixture of chemicals is a potential human being - all sperm and egg cells are potential human beings as well. Having a period or using birth control could be considered killing babies, by said logic. Great points! I don't have an answer for you though. Anyone else care to field these questions?
Post by
273605
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
260787
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
393249
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
@dragon - I understand where you are coming from. I would like you to, while you may not agree with what I am about to say, at least entertain it in your mind. Your very energetic and you have a sharp mind, so mull this over: Is it possible that abortion might be unacceptible in any circumstance. If you reach the conclusion that that is a possibility, how can we entertain any justifications on abortion if we have no difinitve scientific proof that it is acceptible?
Post by
273605
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
@van - The moral weight of abortion should make it so incomprehesible, that legal questions on it are a cut and dry 'no'. The fact that there is still legal questions means that my moral 'compass' and the rest of society's moral 'compass' are so completely off from eachother, it is amazing that I am able to function amicably within this culture.
But, I digress. Take the fact that it is your child out of the boat equasion and you have now changed the situation so it doesnt even resemble abortion. Besides, you didn't answer the question of if it should be ok or not.
Post by
260787
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
@dragon - I understand where you are coming from. I would like you to, while you may not agree with what I am about to say, at least entertain it in your mind. Your very energetic and you have a sharp mind, so mull this over: Is it possible that abortion might be unacceptible in any circumstance. If you reach the conclusion that that is a possibility, how can we entertain any justifications on abortion if we have no difinitve scientific proof that it is acceptible?
I don't think it's for anyone else to judge whether a situation is acceptable or unacceptable for abortion. I think it really is the choice of the mother. Really, I can't pass such judgement on something that I have yet to experience, and certainly not as a male.
As a human being, you have a responsibility to form a judgement about this. Let us imagine for a moment that scientific proof came out that abortion was murder. How would you feel about the 'non judgemental' stance, especially considering the number of abortions performed in the US?
In turn, it is only fair to reverse the question onto me... so...
@MyTie - If scientific proof came out that abortion was not murder, how would you feel about your position. Answer: I would feel sorry for making such a big deal out of something so small. I would have to apologize to women publically. However, I would still be able to sleep at night.
Post by
MyTie
@Gore - Murder in moral ambiguous self defense is a debate worthy topic, however, we are talking specifically about the offspring of the one doing the murder, especially when it is unkown whether or not the unborn is technically 'life'.
It is an interesting topic yes, but it threatens to go offtopic from abortion.
Post by
273605
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
260787
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
273605
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.