*Highwaystar101 lightens the mood*

Just to expand upon what luinil said about sexual education ...

There are a variety of people who each have a variety of problems with how sexual education is currently being taught. There are some people who believe that it should become a much more open (and some would say radically liberalized) education, and there are some people who want it to become more conservative in some fashion. In many cases, people just want the message that abstinence is the best choice for teenagers (because so much of their lives depends on the decisions you make between the ages of 13 and 21) along with a full education about sexually transmitted diseases and birth control; often these people are upset that too much time is spent (in their opinion) promoting the lifestyles of a collection of minority groups rather than focusing on the fundimentals that they are expected to teach.

Certainly, there are people who believe that abstinence-only education should be taught but they are actually a small minority of the people who have problems with current sexual education.

they just happen to be one of the loudest!

and i agree i think more resources should be spent on teaching this method, but not at teh expense of othe rmethods, b/c kids will be kids and experiment with things

but the tragic thing is since sex has become such a media main stay kids know far more dangerious things to experiment then many of our parents

Yes children can be a blessing, or a curse, depends on the situation.

For the baby to feel pain it will need to not ony have developed the ability to feel pain in the brain, but also have functioning nerves spanning its body and consciousness to feel such a thing. I don't believe those conditions are met till 15-20 weeks.

@mesoteto

That's the whole point, protecting that lump of cells is as ridiculous as protecting early fetuses on the basis of them being anything other than cells.

you missed the point, you cant jump to the extreme in a case to invalidate the original argument

if that was a valid way to argue then nothing in the world would ever be done..clean your room, no mom b/c what if in the course of cleaning i make a misstep and fall and break my neck..okay johnny you win

you need to drink water, no b/c what if i drink like five gallons and get water poisoning, okay don't drink water

Except that I drew pretty clear cut comparisons between the 2 lumps of cells and both were quite similar. In fact one had mobility while one didn't. And both are potentially human later on.

What does feeling have to do with living?  What it be fine if I was shot in the head as long as I felt no pain during the event?  I do not understand this objection: ''It'll make the mother happy!" It will also make the baby dead.  Furthermore, if some action that you could that would make you happy (or not sad), and would also harm or kill someone else, why shouldn't you be stopped (is this what you meant by "controlling her body" this whole time?  I thought you were referring to the fetus as "her body")?

once again you cant say a +b =c so a=c

I'm going to answer this even though its not directed at me cos I think its sorta important.

I think its somewhere between 26-30 weeks, thats about where certain connections in the brain start to develop and before that there really isn't too much going on in there. However I think abortion should be prevented slightly before that, the law should cut it off somewhere between 20-24 weeks.

And this is where the real clash of Pro-life and Pro-Choice lies. When do we give the baby the right to life. The Pro-Life group believes it starts at Day 0. Several of the reasons they believe that are founded in religion, to be sure, but there are non-religious Pro-Lifers as well.
The Pro-Choice group believes it starts sometime after Day 0. They don't all agree on when life starts (nor do the "self-titled" Pro-Lifers either I might add), but they believe that up until that point, it should be the choice of the woman to abort.

The reason the clash is so vehement, lies in the fact that we are talking about life and the ending of life, and ostensibly what many consider murder. The view that life begins at Day 0 would tend to see abortion as murder and such a heinous crime, because the baby has no chance to defend itself, and can make no choices about it's own future. Therefore the people who can do something should.

The question I must ask is this, do you know for 100% certain that the baby doesn't do what you think beforehand, or maybe your definition of when life begins is based on faulty assumptions? Could you be wrong? What if life really does begin at Day 0?

My take on those questions is this, Where else can we deem it the creation of life, and therefore a human? imho there is no other option. Take it for what you will.