It's factually not murder.
For one, as long as it's legal, it's never murder. That's the first one.
Secondly, if it were to be made illegal, the problems with it being called "murder" would be prolific, as murder is defined like so:
Killing carried out with pre-meditated, malicious intent. It's not that.
The victim has to be a human being, it's not a human being.
It's not murder. It's killing, not murder. Because? Because not all killing is murder.
There.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
It's factually not murder.For one, as long as it's legal, it's never murder. That's the first one.
Secondly, if it were to be made illegal, the problems with it being called "murder" would be prolific, as murder is defined like so:
Killing carried out with pre-meditated, malicious intent. It's not that.
The victim has to be a human being, it's not a human being.
It's not murder. It's killing, not murder. Because? Because not all killing is murder.
There.
-AC
I follow you and I actually believe the same...as evidenced in my opinion in my previous post.
Wait, I missed this one. This is a cracker:
Originally posted by sithsaber408
1. Because abortion is not the "wasting of potential human life" like you call contraception (life that has not yet been formed, mind you) but rather is the elimination of life that has been formed and is now it's own separate entity. It is the ending of what has started, not the prevention of what hasn't started.
I laugh at the idea that you believe a group of cells is a separate anything. It's not even separate or independent when it comes out, much less when the thing is in there.
Also, it is the prevention of what hasn't started. Factually a human life, born in the form of a human baby, has not started. You prevent this with abortion. ABORTion, you abort the development.
You don't actually know much really, do you?
-AC
Originally posted by sithsaber408
And yeah, you got me Cap. I'm first to admit that I'm not perfect and have screwed plenty of times in my life. 😛I respect alot of your opinions and have come to value your input on things. What's your response to some of my thoughts on the biological end of the issue? (I trust I won't get a John Connor/pearl necklace response from you.)
I do not think that any amount of preaching at children is going to prevent them from having sex before they get married. I can only assume you enjoyed the sex you had before you got married. And now that you have experienced that, you see fit to tell others you were wrong for experiencing it, despite it having led you to a place where you identified it as wrong. Telling a person they must enter into a life long contract with a person at such a young age simply to satisfy a sexual urge only leads to more divorce.
It's the same reason that abstinence education fails, miserably, when it's used to combat the spread of AIDS. "Don't have sex!" only results in those peopple getting AIDS. "Use a condom if you're gonna do it", and providing the condom, is a much more effective education since telling people not to do it simply doesn't work. And it's often the same people who cry about kids and condoms who want to protest abortion.
As for biology, I think it's funny how biology is only considered when it's the child's. Biology is just as important when considering the wishes of the mother. It's her body, it's her descision.
People who stand outside clinics and spit and curse women who walk through those doors are standing there offering mothers who don't go through with it a free 2nd hand crib or a box of baby clothes, but why aren't they also there for the women who do? Because it's all about the protestor, not the baby. They don't comfort the woman who comes out after the abortion, they spit at her and tell her she's going to hell. They ignore the very harsh reality that 99% of women endure after deciding to go through with an abortion. And that descision is typically made after a lot of contemplation. Too many people think these women go in for this painful and life-changing procedure as an after thought, like it was a descision reached as simply as it is to flush the toilet after they've gone to the bathroom.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Wait, I missed this one. This is a cracker:I laugh at the idea that you believe a group of cells is a separate anything. It's not even separate or independent when it comes out, much less when the thing is in there.
Also, it is the prevention of what hasn't started. Factually a human life, born in the form of a human baby, has not started. You prevent this with abortion. ABORTion, you abort the development.
You don't actually know much really, do you?
-AC
I follow your logic with this point. It would appear that you subscribe, even if unknowingly, to an anti-holistic perspective on this...sort of...the sum of the parts do not equal a legitimate human life until what point, in your opinion? (It would appear that you don't think it is a legitimate human life until they are actually born...am I right?)
I think the woman should ultimately be allowed to abort at whatever stage she chooses, I really see it as her body and her decision. Realistically though, I am not opposed to limits if there has to be some, just as long as they are not based on personal opinion and especially religion.
I haven't come to a conclusion as to where I would stand realistically on these limits, so my idea of when it's a human being isn't relevant. Because like I said, ideally it would be entirely up to her, but people argue (Understandably) for the difference between a baby in the womb, then coming out a week later.
That is legitimate debate territory though, this ENTIRE abortion business is ridiculous. If you wanna debate, debate the later stages.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Did you not read everything else I said?"You fight for the right to life of a foetus, but if that foetus is born as a girl who grows up in this alleged land of the free because you forced her into the world, and wants an abortion of her own, you're pretty sharp at ticking her off the "right to freedom of life" list aren't you? You only give a shit when they honestly don't matter, because you do not care about life, or right to it. You care about what you believe and making as many women adhere to that as possible, cos you're utterly mental".
That pretty much sums you up, but I'll ask, for a laugh:
What if you force a woman to give birth, not have the abortion she wanted, and the girl you fought for, the girl who's FREEDOM you fought for, grows up and wants an abortion? Would you oppress her? Answer bearing in mind the following:
You fight for foetuses because they can't choose, and you want them to have the right to life, so answering "Yes." would essentially mean you don't believe in what you say.
Answering no...well that puts you in the crapper as well.
-AC
1.) No I wouldn't support the grown girl wanting an abortion. That doesn't put me in any "crapper."
2.) You're arguing my thoughts and feelings, what I believe ....again.
I've yet to see you disprove/refute the biological points that I made about conception of a human zygote from sperm and egg having all the characteristics of a human life (which we deem as defendable and having the right to live.).
Last chance, or I'm gonna consider it a forfeit. (maybe I'll get the moderators to do a poll of who people think won, because all you're doing is dodging.)
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
There's a difference between being ALIVE and having A LIFE. A cell is ALIVE, a tree is ALIVE, sperm is ALIVE. They do not have LIVES, like humans do. So your points are kind of irrelevant.And a foetus/embryo and a human being. One is a human foetus, the other is a human being. The two are not equal, do not assume that your freedom of personal belief somehow negates science, Pez.
Yes, it's ALIVE though.
That's what you said matters. If anything ALIVE matters, I'd assume you don't masturbate and waste sperm.
Your personal beliefs do not negate science. I am concerned that you feel they do. A foetus is not a human being, it's a human foetus. Cells that will POSSIBLY become a human foetus are..."human" cells, they are not human beings. You cannot give something equal rights to what you feel it could potentially become, science does not work like that.
What the hell are you on about? Children do not have the rights of human adults because they are not human adults. They have the rights of human BEINGS because that's what they are. Human foetuses, contrary to your "I'll ignore science." belief, are not human beings. Cells are not foetuses, they are not human, they are entirely different organisms. You about to become a father, or being a father, has clouded your judgement. You're ignoring science in favour of your personal beliefs. If that's how you feel, then you're being stupid.
You feel the opposite of scientific proof, it's not a matter of opinion.
-AC
Lol as for the being alive and habving a life thing...it's all bullcrap semantics.. I can't believe you would be so presumptious to say It doesn't have a life.
Look Either the fetus is a person or not. Either we know what it is or we don't. This leaves only 4 possibilities when having an abortion:
1. A fetus is not a person and we know this. This has NEVER been any evidence to support this.
2. A fetus is a person, and we still have an abortion. Killing an innocent person knowingly is murder.
3. A fetus is a person, and we do not know that. Killing a person without knowing or intending to is manslaughter. It's like shooting at a sudden movement in a bush which may be a deer or another hunter.
4. A fetus is not a person, and we do not know that. If the hunter didn't know for sure and shot anyway, it is criminal negligence, even if no one was killed."
Abortion might be three things-- murder, manslaughter, or criminal negligence-- each of which is not debated but instinctively condemned.
--Choices, by Peter Kreeft
Just because I don't believe what science does does not make me wrong. Scientists can be wrong just like anyone else, plus I have never seen any evidence to suggest that a fetus is not a person. We are flesh and cells too. The only thing we have that an unborn baby doesn't is experience and physical maturity.
Regardless of having a life or being alive or whatever...After 9 weeks, unborn babies can feel pain, yet 48% of all abortions are done after this point. {US Department of Health & Human Services}
Even if it was 25% (I am a little weary of statistics, so take the 48% for what you will) does that make it any better? Anything that can feel pain shouldn't have to unnecessarily whether it be a human or anything else living. Killing cow for meat is one thing, but killing a baby because it's easier doesn't make it right, no matter how much science you have to make it seem so. Personally you don't really have any right to call me stupid. I'd rather be stupid and have compassion and a conscience, than be a cold hearted robot.
Man, I really hate trying to think about this stuff and rationlize or make it logical in my mind.
My opinion is its a human life when they are able to be born and survive without machines...around the 7 month mark. Babies, currently, cannot be legally aborted at the 7 month mark. I believe it is the five month mark that is the cutoff.
Since that is my opinion, then it is definitely NOT murder to get an abortion, in anyway shape or form...the baby isn't developed enough to be called a human life. However, as the developing life approaches the five month mark, it becomes more and more like a human and it becomes harder for me to allow the killing of the developing life without feeling that it is wrong.
Can the life decide on its own? NO! It can't decide until it even understands life at like 4 or 5 years old...or maybe 8. Its not like we can ask the child if it wants to be aborted.
This has all probably been discussed in great lengths, already.
Don't be an idiot have get pregnant or get our girl pregnant UNLESS you want a child. Spermacide...condom...day after pill...bla bla bla...act mature.
I hope that in the future, we can alter human genetic data to prevent a pregnancy from even happening UNLESS a female takes a chemical that allows her to get pregnant. In other words, she would have to deliberately want to get pregnant. Then abortion wouldn't be nearly a discussion.
Originally posted by Pezmerga
You talk as if science is unfallible.
I talk as if science is infallible against "Well I believe...", because it is. "I believe I can fly.", you can believe that all you want, but you can't.
You can believe cells are equal to human foetuses, and foetuses to human beings all you want...but you're wrong.
Originally posted by Pezmerga
Lol as for the being alive and habving a life thing...it's all bullcrap semantics.. I can't believe you would be so presumptious to say It doesn't have a life.
It doesn't. It's sustained, kept, housed and created by a host being. It's no more alive than a man in a coma, less so, in fact. Alive, not "living" in the sense that you or I are.
Originally posted by Pezmerga
Look Either the fetus is a person or not. Either we know what it is or we don't. This leaves only 4 possibilities when having an abortion:1. A fetus is not a person and we know this. This has NEVER been any evidence to support this.
2. A fetus is a person, and we still have an abortion. Killing an innocent person knowingly is murder.
No it's not. Killing someone with malicious and murderous intent, is murder. Killing someone by accident is manslaughter, abortion is nothing to do with any of those.
Originally posted by Pezmerga
3. A fetus is a person, and we do not know that. Killing a person without knowing or intending to is manslaughter. It's like shooting at a sudden movement in a bush which may be a deer or another hunter.
4. A fetus is not a person, and we do not know that. If the hunter didn't know for sure and shot anyway, it is criminal negligence, even if no one was killed."
Abortion might be three things-- murder, manslaughter, or criminal negligence-- each of which is not debated but instinctively condemned.
--Choices, by Peter Kreeft
It's factually not murder, I'm not sure why people have such hard times grasping that. It fits none of the qualifications of murder. Even if foetuses were human beings, it would still not be murder.
It's frivolous killing if you WANT to call it anything derogatory.
Originally posted by Pezmerga
Just because I don't believe what science does does not make me wrong. Scientists can be wrong just like anyone else, plus I have never seen any evidence to suggest that a fetus is not a person.
Because you do not want to.
Originally posted by Pezmerga
We are flesh and cells too. The only thing we have that an unborn baby doesn't is experience and physical maturity.
A life, a conscious, developed mind...earned knowledge. Lots of stuff that a foetus doesn't have, including the little fact of; being a human being, not a human foetus.
Originally posted by Pezmerga
Regardless of having a life or being alive or whatever...After 9 weeks, unborn babies can feel pain, yet 48% of all abortions are done after this point. {US Department of Health & Human Services}Even if it was 25% (I am a little weary of statistics, so take the 48% for what you will) does that make it any better? Anything that can feel pain shouldn't have to unnecessarily whether it be a human or anything else living. Killing cow for meat is one thing, but killing a baby because it's easier doesn't make it right, no matter how much science you have to make it seem so.
No matter how much science? So basically you're saying "It's wrong, despite science."? I think abortion is neither right nor wrong, it just IS. You may disagree or agree with the reasons behind abortion, but abortion is not the problem. You have an issue with people.
I think it's up to the living, breathing human being who created the bloody thing, because it is. You cannot say "Oh but for rape it's ok.", because it's still the same foetus that you believe feels pain and shouldn't be gotten rid of because it's easier.
Originally posted by Pezmerga
Personally you don't really have any right to call me stupid. I'd rather be stupid and have compassion and a conscience, than be a cold hearted robot.
And that...is why you fail.
I'm not a cold-hearted robot, I'm not the one outside abortion clinics abusing women. I live my life and love most of the people in it, what another woman does with a foetus is factually none of my business, or yours.
-AC