By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Johann on 17 January 2009

I do not believe that a fetus is a human life at all. At least not in the early stages. I guess I'm pro-choice. But I'm actually pro-euthanasia as well, so that says a lot about my regard for human life, heh?



Quem disse que a boca é tua?

Qual é, Dadinho...?

Dadinho é o caralho! Meu nome agora é Zé Pequeno!

Around the Network
Neos on 17 January 2009

pro choice.



Neos - "If I'm posting in this thread it's just for the lulz."
Tag by the one and only Fkusumot!

 

mrstickball on 17 January 2009
akuma587 said:
mrstickball said:
Murdering a baby should never be an option.

Just because she does not get an abortion does not mean the kid has to live a bad life by a bad mother - she can always give the baby up for adoption, and be adopted by able, loving parents.

I am pro-life to the nth degree. I plan on having no natural kids in favor of adopting as many kids as possible for that said reason. All pro-lifers should live by that mantra, and adopt as many kids as possible. 90%+ of all abortions are done not for health, but the fact the kid is unwanted. Pro-lifers need to work to change adoption laws, and destroy abortion by making it the most illogical choice by ensuring the baby is wanted - even if not by it's natural mother.

At one time in history, blacks were considered less than humans too - property - just like unborn babies. This argument is one in the same. Cut it any way you want, but when your terminating life that can exist outside the womb, your still killing a human.

And it's also a shame that in hospitals (as well as everywhere), so much respect is placed on the expecting mother - warnings are posted everywhere to ensure that no ill effects are transferred on the baby. Despite this, we still murder them if the mother has a change of heart. Babies aren't property. They're people.

Do you have any idea how poorly run the adoption and foster care system is?  Its just plain pathetic.  I'd almost rather be aborted myself than have to go through what some of those kids do.

At least you plan on adopting kids, so you are sticking to your guns.  You are practicing what you preach, so I can't fault you for that.

I don't think the argument that blacks and fetuses don't have constitutionally protected rights is anything the same...one is based on racism and pseudo-science whereas the other is based on personal choice and a person's due process rights.  We don't prosecute people for drinking alcohol while they are pregnant and doing whatever else they want to their body, even if it causes a miscarriage.  How is abortion any different?

I also don't see why people think that science is necessarily on their side either who are pro-life.  I mean scientifically speaking, life doesn't begin at conception.  The egg and the sperm were both alive already.  There was no magical transformation from living to dead.  Its just two cells that turn into a glob of cells that will grow into a larger organism.  Development begins at conception, but life doesn't begin at conception.

Did you notice that in my post, I said that 'Pro-lifers need to work to change adoption laws'? I understand that adoption laws are poor, as well as the system that the kids are in. If abortions are correlated with poor adoption/foster care, then it's paramount that those laws are changed to ensure that human life isn't snuffed out for selfish reasons.

If life doesn't begin at conception, when does it begin? Does it begin when the baby's heart beats at ~9 weeks? Is it when the thalamus develops and the baby can feel the pain at 8 weeks (of which, most abortions happen around that time. It's not like the baby doesn't know what's going on when it's getting ripped apart)? Is it at around the time of the youngest surviving premature baby at 21 weeks? I don't get how it's scientific to say that a fetus isn't a human, and property of someone when it's inside the womb, and magically gains all the rights as a nation's citizen when it's delivered.

When should the cutoff be to when you can legally smash a baby in the face with a hammer to kill it? 6 months? 1 year? Before it leaves the hospital? Say your pro choice, but answer that question for me, 'cuz I'd really like to know.

 



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

AE86 on 17 January 2009

The more the pro-lifers preach, the more I want to smash a fetus.



Neos on 17 January 2009
AE86 said:
The more the pro-lifers preach, the more I want to smash a fetus.

LOL, you should really edit that =P

 



Neos - "If I'm posting in this thread it's just for the lulz."
Tag by the one and only Fkusumot!

 

Around the Network
AE86 on 17 January 2009
Neos said:
AE86 said:
The more the pro-lifers preach, the more I want to smash a fetus.

LOL, you should really edit that =P

 

 

Meh, it was a joke, but people can take it as they will. I think I'll go have a nice stem cell sandwich.



PS360ForTheWin on 17 January 2009

Thanks for all your respsonses guys, Update

Pro-Choice = 43
Pro-Life = 18



Nintendo Fan Girl on 17 January 2009

pro life!!



iclim4 on 17 January 2009

Final-Fan said:
If you would like to learn more about the arguments on both sides of the debate (since you seem receptive to such arguments), then I recommend you read this thread.  It contains most or all of the arguments in the thread you read, plus rebuttals, plus completely different arguments.  In particular the claim that fetuses are aware at 11-12 weeks is rebutted, IIRC.

[edit:  or maybe not ... thankfully I can glean the answer right from posts between the two threads.  Brainwaves activity isn't till 18 weeks and even totally brain dead people can have similar reactions to stimuli.  Therefore it seems clear that whether or not the fetus reacts to being poked there is no true awareness.]

Well here is something that shows how receptive I am to your thread.

@Akuma
It wasn't the law that persuaded me.
It was the talk about responsibility for one's own actions.
Having sex, asking her partner to wear a condom, taking birth control pills, etc those are all her actions and ways to prevent something she doesn't want to happen.
If she gets pregnant because of not taking the proper precautions and/or having too much sex(she knows the "consequences" of this activity yet she still keeps doing it) then the onus is hers to bear.
There should not be a reset button for her mistakes, if she doesn't think she's ready then do the proper precautions or just not have sex. You wont die if you stop having sex.. If she fails at that then she has to take responsibility.

What happened to the days of Virtue?
Discipline? Responsibility? Commitment?

People really do need to stop and think about the consequences of their actions.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------                         iclim4 - "The Friends Thread changed my life!" (Pervert Alert!)                                            Tags? 

jv103 on 17 January 2009
iclim4 said:

Final-Fan said:
If you would like to learn more about the arguments on both sides of the debate (since you seem receptive to such arguments), then I recommend you read this thread.  It contains most or all of the arguments in the thread you read, plus rebuttals, plus completely different arguments.  In particular the claim that fetuses are aware at 11-12 weeks is rebutted, IIRC.

[edit:  or maybe not ... thankfully I can glean the answer right from posts between the two threads.  Brainwaves activity isn't till 18 weeks and even totally brain dead people can have similar reactions to stimuli.  Therefore it seems clear that whether or not the fetus reacts to being poked there is no true awareness.]

Well here is something that shows how receptive I am to your thread.

@Akuma
It wasn't the law that persuaded me.
It was the talk about responsibility for one's own actions.
Having sex, asking her partner to wear a condom, taking birth control pills, etc those are all her actions and ways to prevent something she doesn't want to happen.
If she gets pregnant because of not taking the proper precautions and/or having too much sex(she knows the "consequences" of this activity yet she still keeps doing it) then the onus is hers to bear.
There should not be a reset button for her mistakes, if she doesn't think she's ready then do the proper precautions or just not have sex. You wont die if you stop having sex.. If she fails at that then she has to take responsibility.

What happened to the days of Virtue?
Discipline? Responsibility? Commitment?

People really do need to stop and think about the consequences of their actions.

They never existed except in the nostalgic mind.