Abortion

Started by Victor Von Doom787 pages

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Again, this is spectacular ignorance of the point.

Do you respect the rights of murderers to choose to murder their victims?

The Pro-Life people think there is moral equivalence between that and abortion, so want it illegal, just as with murder and assault. It has absolutely nothing to do with choice at all; it is a deeply moral matter.

There is a point in society where we say 'No' to someone's choice because it is considered morally wrong to allow it. Pro-Life people think abortion is on the 'No' side of that line and want the laws changed and/or kept (as appropriate) to reflect that. Simple as that. It's not a totally unreasonable view and you cannot simply reject it because you think they should allow choice; to do that you would have to establish that it is a morally acceptable choice, and science cannot do that; it is all opinion.

I have little doubt that even if science COULD prove it, religion would not agree, but that is besides the point.

That's a fair summation of the pro-life side, but I don't think what Ya Krunk'd said was 'spectacular ignorance' of that argument; it was simply the opposing view.

I agree with AC...yet again.

Pro-lifers find abortion morally wrong. I find taking away someone's ability to choose to do something that is harmless to those around her is morally wrong.

Try to make a law including both of those morals.

OH SHIT! We already have one!? NO WAI.

Our current law states that a woman has the right to CHOOSE. Therefore if the woman finds abortion morally wrong, SHE DOESN'T HAVE TO GET AN ABORTION.

How could this be!? A law already exists that supports both having and NOT having an abortion?? NOOOO MY BRAIN IS EXPLODING! ITS JUST TOO LOGICAL

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Who is the mother of this thread, so we can ask for this thread to be aborted. 😆
😂

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Again, this is spectacular ignorance of the point.

Do you respect the rights of murderers to choose to murder their victims?

The Pro-Life people think there is moral equivalence between that and abortion, so want it illegal, just as with murder and assault. It has absolutely nothing to do with choice at all; it is a deeply moral matter.

There is a point in society where we say 'No' to someone's choice because it is considered morally wrong to allow it. Pro-Life people think abortion is on the 'No' side of that line and want the laws changed and/or kept (as appropriate) to reflect that. Simple as that. It's not a totally unreasonable view and you cannot simply reject it because you think they should allow choice; to do that you would have to establish that it is a morally acceptable choice, and science cannot do that; it is all opinion.

I have little doubt that even if science COULD prove it, religion would not agree, but that is besides the point.

People would keep on aborting if it were out lawed. Abortion related fatalities would rise, too, for mother and child. Is it moral to allow these deaths? Are these deaths not as important? Outlaw abortion and things will get worse.
Also, Is it moral to allow 300,000 people die in the Sudan and not do a thing about it? There are many other things to be moral about than abortion.

abortion is illegal in ireland, yet young women would regularly travel to england to have the procedure done... making it illegal anywhere else wont make a difference...

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Again, this is spectacular ignorance of the point.

Do you respect the rights of murderers to choose to murder their victims?

The Pro-Life people think there is moral equivalence between that and abortion, so want it illegal, just as with murder and assault. It has absolutely nothing to do with choice at all; it is a deeply moral matter.


Originally posted by soleran30
See Ush you are going to have to say that again just slower because some people just have such a hard time understanding what you just said there🙂

What I am having a difficult time understanding is how Ushgarak, and others, relate abortion to a wholly separate crime that infringes upon someone's rights.

I also don't get why some people actually believe their morals or opinions matter at all here.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Don't forget about the effects of abortion either:

THE ABORTION / SUICIDE CONNECTION

David C. Reardon, Ph.D.

In the 1960's, when abortions were available only for "therapeutic" reasons, it was not uncommon for persons with the means and know-how to obtain an abortion on psychiatric grounds. In some states, all that was necessary was to find an agreeable psychiatrist willing to diagnose every woman with a problem pregnancy as "suicidal."

Yet all the studies done on this issue show that pregnancy is actually correlated with a dramatic decreased rate of suicide compared to non-pregnant women. This has led some psychiatrists to suggest that pregnancy somehow serves a psychologically protective role. The presence of another person to "live for" appears to reduce the suicidal impulses of a mentally disturbed or deeply depressed woman.(1)

Although pregnancy weakens suicidal impulses, there is strong evidence that abortion dramatically increases the risk of suicide. According to a 1986 study by researchers at the University of Minnesota, a teenage girl is 10 times more likely to attempt suicide if she has had an abortion in the last six months than is a comparable teenage girl who has not had an abortion.(2) Other studies have found similar statistical significance between a history of abortion and suicide attempts among adults. Thus, the actual data suggests that abortion is far more likely to drive an unstable woman to suicide than is pregnancy and childbirth.

This abortion/suicide link is well known among professionals who counsel suicidal persons. For example, Meta Uchtman, director of the Cincinnati chapter of Suiciders Anonymous, reported that in a 35 month period her group worked with 4000 women, of whom 1800 or more had abortions. Of those who had abortions, 1400 were between the ages of 15 and 24, the age group with the fastest growing suicide rate in the country.

Sometimes a post-abortion suicide attempt is an impulsive act of despair. For example, 18-year-old "Susan" writes: "Two days after the abortion I wrote a suicide note to my parents and boyfriend. I just couldn't fathom how I could possibly live with the knowledge of what I had done. I killed my own baby! I went down to the basement and figured out how to shoot my father's pistol. Hysterical and crying I put the barrel of the gun into my mouth. All of a sudden I heard someone upstairs. For some reason my father had stopped by to pick up something. I stopped what I was doing and went upstairs. He saw that I was upset and asked me if I wanted to have lunch with him at noon. I felt I at least owed him lunch. By the time lunch was over I was too scared to do it."

Other times, the suicidal impulses result from years of repression, depression, and lost self-esteem. A 1987 study of women who suffered from post-abortion trauma found that 60 percent had experienced suicidal ideation, 28 percent had attempted suicide, and 18 percent had attempted suicide more than once, often several years after the event.(3)

Sadly, in at least one documented case, an 18-year-old committed suicide three days after having a suction abortion because of guilt feelings over having "killed her baby." Later examination of the clinic's records revealed that she had not actually been pregnant.

Perhaps one reason for the strong abortion/suicide link exists in the fact that in many ways abortion is like suicide. A person who threatens suicide is actually crying out for help. So are women who contemplate abortion. Both are in a state of despair. Both are lonely. Both feel faced by insurmountable odds.

Some "right-to-die" groups argue that we should legalize suicide and even create suicide clinics where facilitators would ease people through their suicide decisions. If we did so, there would be no shortage of desperate people willing to exercise their "freedom to choose." Promised a "quick, easy and painless" solution to their problems, suicide rates would skyrocket just as abortion rates did in the 1970's.

Like the suicide clinics described above, abortion clinics also exploit desperate people. They promise to release clients from the darkness of their despair. They appeal to our consumer society's demand for instant solutions to all our problems. They pose as places of compassion, but they are actually reaping huge profits through the harvest of the lonely, frightened, and confused people who are "unwanted" by society. In place of life, they offer the "compassion" of death.

Granting the wish for suicide or abortion is not an aid to desperate people. It is abandonment. It is a false compassion that protects us from getting entangled in the "personal problems" of others. It is "cheap love."

To those who look deeply, and care deeply, it is clear that people who express a desire for suicide or abortion are really crying out for help. They are crying out for the support and encouragement to choose life, cherish life, and rejoice in life. They are crying out for an infusion of hope.

Just as a suicidal person is crying out for help when she tells others she wishes she were dead, so a woman who is distressed over a pregnancy is crying out for help when she tells others she is considering abortion. In both cases, the desperate person is reaching out in the hope that someone will announce they truly care, and will truly help them. They need to see the value of life, their own as well as their child's, reflected in the love of those who would help them preserve that life. They need to hear that they are strong enough to triumph in the life that is theirs, and that whenever they grow weak, we will be there to strengthen them and even carry them.

This requires us to engage in "costly love," a love that demands a real sacrifice of time, energy, and resources. Anything less, they will interpret as "You don't really care." Anything less, and they will be right.

The validity of this point is questionable. In the case of suicidal rate among girls who had had abortions, why do they kill themselves? It is even said above ""I killed my baby"". So they believe that they themselves killed a living person. Is that true? That is up to the moral stance of each individual. But then, as is also posted above, "Other times, the suicidal impulses result from years of repression, depression, and lost self-esteem. " So in such low mental state, how can they possibly believe in their own opinion. And since abortion is now legal, then the loudest outcry is from those who believe that abortion is the same as murder.

I'll assume that the argument raised against my point would be that 'Well they wouldn't feel bad if abortion wasn't wrong'. But what defines right and wrong? Such terms are not really defined, they are again based on opinions. So the whole process is a dangerous cycle. Girls feel bad about abortions because the media, and most churches, are filled with the message that abortion is bad. Those who believe that feel their opinion must be right, for the girls themselves feel bad about it.

Not exactly a fair situation, is it?

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Again, this is spectacular ignorance of the point.

Oooo, a cheap shot! Good stuff! It's always good to go for something trite when someone flummoxes you in another thread! See here for details...

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Do you respect the rights of murderers to choose to murder their victims?

The Pro-Life people think there is moral equivalence between that and abortion, so want it illegal, just as with murder and assault. It has absolutely nothing to do with choice at all; it is a deeply moral matter.

It's great to be aware of the other side of the argument, but it's a mistake to give it credability when it is patently incorrect; abortion doesn't equate to murder.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
There is a point in society where we say 'No' to someone's choice because it is considered morally wrong to allow it. Pro-Life people think abortion is on the 'No' side of that line and want the laws changed and/or kept (as appropriate) to reflect that. Simple as that. It's not a totally unreasonable view and you cannot simply reject it because you think they should allow choice; to do that you would have to establish that it is a morally acceptable choice, and science cannot do that; it is all opinion.

You are arguing the case of the 'moral-prescriptivists' in their belief that individuals should not be responsible for their own decisions. Bit silly that, seeing as humanity is in a constant process of development, allowing people greater freedom of choices.

Women deserve freedom to choose, its when they choose that can be disturbing.........................wow so many "camps" on this.

Morality does come into play on abortion, when it comes into play I believe is the significant factor.............wow pro freedom and responsibility !

Morals are subjective. What you believe to be immoral- in this case third trimesters- may not be so to others. So to forcefully take away a choice based on what the majority thinks is immoral, when it has nothing to do with them, is wrong.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Morals are subjective. What you believe to be immoral- in this case third trimesters- may not be so to others. So to forcefully take away a choice based on what the majority thinks is immoral, when it has nothing to do with them, is wrong.

-AC

I Have great news AC I just found out today most rules and laws are made by a majority vote! Yeah thats right its crazy if the majority are against it then it doesn't go into affect however should the opposite be true then it does go into affect!

I suppose "group think" or majority rules might suck in your mind for choices but I prefer it rather then 1 person just making rules. As I said we'll see where the cards fall in the future for abortions and I certainly hope at least in the USA we don't get a bunch of chumps deciding abortions are wrong from day 1 and making them illegal because I don't feel thats the correct answer to this either.

Originally posted by soleran30
I Have great news AC I just found out today most rules and laws are made by a majority vote! Yeah thats right its crazy if the majority are against it then it doesn't go into affect however should the opposite be true then it does go into affect!

I suppose "group think" or majority rules might suck in your mind for choices but I prefer it rather then 1 person just making rules. As I said we'll see where the cards fall in the future for abortions and I certainly hope at least in the USA we don't get a bunch of chumps deciding abortions are wrong from day 1 and making them illegal because I don't feel thats the correct answer to this either.

I'm quite aware of that, what you aren't aware of is this:

It's not one person making rules is it? No. It's keeping a rule that allows women to do whatever they choose with their own body, harming NO-ONE else. You are trying to enforce a law that takes away a female choice even though it doesn't infringe upon you in any realistic way. Morals? Those are yours and yours alone. If a band is making rock music and it infringes upon your morals, does that mean they should be banned? No, because it doesn't effect you.

-AC

We already have a new definition of someone in the third trimester so they are harming an individual. Just because I alone am presenting this doesn't mean I am the only one with these morals. I am the only one speaking out about these morals.

Abortions just like anything and everything else should be allowed freedoms not all freedoms but some.

Although still be careful we are talking about abortion laws, and not murder laws.

Originally posted by soleran30
We already have a new definition of someone in the third trimester so they are harming an individual. Just because I alone am presenting this doesn't mean I am the only one with these morals. I am the only one speaking out about these morals.

Abortions just like anything and everything else should be allowed freedoms not all freedoms but some.

Why are you harping on a point I'm already aware of? Who gives a shit if you're the only one with the morals or not? I never hinted to the former, I'm saying that you have no right going around applying your morals to other people. If you think you do I suggest that you stop telling me I'm living in my own world, because you're quite obviously living in your own.

-AC

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Who is the mother of this thread, so we can ask for this thread to be aborted. 😆

lol ... good one 😎

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Go back through the last three pages.

fcuking hell!!! get a life!!! three pages!!!! it took me years just to scroll down to the bottom of the page!!

Originally posted by sithsaber408
[B56 days[/B]-all body systems are present; he reacts to pain.
[/B]

Actually, the fetus doesn't have whats called a 'cerebral cortex' until later on. The baby feels nothing (so I've been told) when he or she is aborted. I've been told that the cerebral cortex develops at around 6 months, however I don't believe this to be correct, because babies born at 22 weeks, well before 6 months, can feel pain, so I'd guess it develops at around the forth month...after 5 months the baby is given an anesetic to prevent pain, but before that, nothing, and the baby may be able to feel pain. I don't know. I hope not. 😕

Originally posted by G a n n o n
Somebody explain to me how abortion is not murder.

Because the stupid law is pro choice and says it isn't and wants everyone else to think the way it does.

The law sucks, anyway, I don't give a damn about the law.

Originally posted by Makedde
The law sucks, anyway, I don't give a damn about the law.

Yeah, probably the final nail in the coffin that buried your credibility.

-AC