Abortion

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
There are a lot of things we'd like, what's your point?

You don't like the fact that women WILL use abortion as birth control, I don't either, but in supporting the woman's right to choose you must accept that she MIGHT choose to do that. You don't have to agree, but you must accept that she MIGHT.

You can't let her "freely" choose and then say "Except that, you can't do that."

-AC

You are right, what I can do is stop supporting abortion rights. There are a lot people out there in the real world, how feel just like I do.

So what do we do? Change the law back and forth until we are dizzy? In the middle is where we will end up in the end.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
First of all, it doesn't matter at what point most are perforned, the problematic bit is the legal cut off point, which is past 12 weeks in most western countries.

The point at which most abortions are performed certainly does matter. If approximately 90% of abortions are performed before the commencement of heartbeat and brainwave activity, and before the point at which having an abortion is unlawful, the issue is the remaining 10% of abortions.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Secondly, you state that as if all scientists are united on the definition, they are not. Heck, medicine is not 100% on defining the point of death yet, so your basic premise there it a tad faulty.

The dispute is whether to consider electrical brainwave activity in the neo-cortex alone or the whole brain when defining death. There is no disagreement that the permanent suspension of electrical brainwave activity is the end of consciousness, person-hood, and life.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Thirdly... with science having absolutely NO way to prove any of this, all statements about when it is and is not illegal are pretty much guesswork, and if a religious type wants to guess at zero weeks, citing philisophical beliefs about the nature of what life is... science is not in a very good position to contradict.

The very nature of what life (in the sense of being a human) is and when it starts is a big big mystery that science is still trying hard to unravel.

Science has absolutely no way to prove that the moment heartbeat, respiration, and brain activity irreversibly ceases is the moment that one is truly dead, but medical and legal experts are satisfied with this consensus.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
I think people should remember that the legal cut-off points in most countries are based on one outdated factor- the point at which it was thought the foetus could not survive on its own; any further, and then it could, and then the abortion becomes illegal.

Now science has advanced and premature babies before the cut-off point are becoming viable. This throws the legal argument into chaos, because it is based on a false premise.

This is why the moment life begins should be established as the commencement of heartbeat and electrical brainwave activity, and not fetal viability outside of the womb.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
...This is why the moment life begins should be established as the commencement of heartbeat and electrical brainwave activity, and not fetal viability outside of the womb.

I think that is reasonable.

a matruing baby in a womb{after about 7} months cries, listens to sounds n music, sucks its thumb, sees light through its sumwhat transparent eyelids, kicks when hes uneasy, sleeps when hes at ease, tastes ambionic fluid out of curiosity, decides whether hes gonna be right handed or left and even DREAMS, supportem by REMs sleep. all of these facts have come to lightdue to sumwhat recent scientifically FAMOUS AND ACCEPTED in depth studies done by scientists unsin today's tech. it was all SHOWN on the discovery channel. i guess it brings new light to the BABY DOESNT HAVE A CONCIONCE BEFORE BIRHT thing.

Capitalising words, phrases and referencing R.E.M doesn't make it any more factual.

If it were this thread would be here.

-AC

Originally posted by Bardock42
It wouldn'T matter certainly..but it would be wrong...since a fetus is not a human.

In your opinion, only.

I'd certainly rather adhere to that opinion than your overly stupid "Killing = Murder" opinion. Which is also, to make a noteworthy point, factually incorrect.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
The point and fact is: In utero it's not murder, it's not killing a baby. Whatever happens in the womb, not outside of.

Not all abortions occur in utero. What about late term abortions? You think they all occur in utero? Dr. David Grundman is an abortion doctor here in Australia. He often does late terminations. He drags the baby outof the mother, so the head is still inside, then stabs the baby in the head, inserts a tube, and sucks the babys brains out, it's skull collapses, and the child head ends up looking like a deflated balloon.

Is this not murder? The child has surely been born, he/she is certainly not in utero.

Originally posted by Makedde
Not all abortions occur in utero. What about late term abortions? You think they all occur in utero? Dr. David Grundman is an abortion doctor here in Australia. He often does late terminations. He drags the baby outof the mother, so the head is still inside, then stabs the baby in the head, inserts a tube, and sucks the babys brains out, it's skull collapses, and the child head ends up looking like a deflated balloon.

Is this not murder? The child has surely been born, he/she is certainly not in utero.

So you quote me referring to what happens IN UTERO, then refer to the complete opposite and ask me?

Hence why I said: Whatever happens in the womb, not outside of, is not murder.

I swear I feel like I have to explain everything to you ninety times before you vaguely set upon a rational train of thought.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Hence why I said: Whatever happens in the womb, not outside of, is not murder.

So the children killed in this way are being murdered, correct?

Originally posted by Makedde
So the children killed in this way are being murdered, correct?

In accordance of UK law, no. Manslaughter at worst. We're not discussing that, we're discussing the common abortion which happens in utero, and that is not murder.

Typical anti-abortionist, take the debate everywhere but the relevant places.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
In accordance of UK law, no. Manslaughter at worst. We're not discussing that, we're discussing the common abortion which happens in utero, and that is not murder.

Typical anti-abortionist, take the debate everywhere but the relevant places.

-AC

We are not just discussing in utero abortion, we are discussing all abortion. Not every child aborted is sucked out of it's mothers womb, you know.

Originally posted by Makedde
We are not just discussing in utero abortion, we are discussing all abortion. Not every child aborted is sucked out of it's mothers womb, you know.

A) Most of what you just said made no sense.

B) Yes, I am. I don't know what you're discussing. You and a few others have seemingly spiralled into uncommon practices. I'm not.

I'm discussing the common abortion, although since you're dumb enough to believe killing = murder, there's not much sense to be spoken to you is there?

-AC

Abortion should be murder when a baby has it's brains sucked out. We can discuss other methods of abortion, or are you too afraid to?

Originally posted by Makedde
Abortion should be murder when a baby has it's brains sucked out. We can discuss other methods of abortion, or are you too afraid to?

Afraid to? No, because I live in the UK were abortion isn't murder.

What you think it should be and what it is are two factually different things, and as I've said before, you believe all killing is murder. Yet you hypocritically support euthanasia, the idea you still have validity is outlandish.

-AC

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I don't want the issue to be black or white. I don't have a good answer, but I would like for people to stop, drawing lines in the sand and start coming up with compromises. But maybe I’m asking too much.

On the other hand we have the , "You can't get an abortion because I believe it's wrong" Pro-life deal. Here, people get the beliefs of others forced down their throats. Doesn't sound like a compromise to me.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Afraid to? No, because I live in the UK were abortion isn't murder.

What you think it should be and what it is are two factually different things, and as I've said before, you believe all killing is murder. Yet you hypocritically support euthanasia, the idea you still have validity is outlandish.

-AC

I don't believe all killing is murder, I believe all abortion is murder. You are a hypocrite yourself, you rat me out, saying that if am against abortion I should also be against euthanasia, and you yourself admit to being in support of abortion, but against the death penalty. So who is the hypocrite here?

Originally posted by Makedde
I don't believe all killing is murder, I believe all abortion is murder. You are a hypocrite yourself, you rat me out, saying that if am against abortion I should also be against euthanasia, and you yourself admit to being in support of abortion, but against the death penalty. So who is the hypocrite here?

You said previously "Killing = Murder". End of that debate. So you've changed your mind, admirable. Although debating fact gets you nowhere.

You WERE previously a hypocrite. You previously held the belief that all killing equalled murder, which would- for those viewing at home- include euthanasia. You've shifted your debate.

Second, Ush already (fairly) asked me the question on the death penalty and I explained myself openly. That doesn't make me a hypocrite and you have obviously not thought about it by trying to bring it in.

You dislike abortion, fine. Solution? Don't have one. Abortion is:

A) Nothing to do with you.

B) Not murder.

We're clear? Good.

-AC

You are a hypocrite.

End of story.

Originally posted by Makedde
You are a hypocrite.

End of story.

Good luck with that.

-AC