PRO

Where Your Ideas can change Minds

Please visit our new forum at

http://www.4forums.com

CON


YouDebate.com Forum
» back to YouDebate.com
Register | Profile | Log In | Lost Password | Active Users | Help | Board Rules | Search | FAQ |
Custom Search
» You are not logged in.   log in | register

  YouDebate.com Forum
   Abortion Debates
     Abortion

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
Multiple pages for this topic [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

    
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Which brings us back to abstinence... which is the goal all along.  Abstinence prevents pregnancy.  It prevents STDs.  It prevents abortion.

P.S.  This....
So you think abortion should be banned, therefore you are condoning highly dangerous backstreet abortions that not only still result in an abortion but also a great deal of harm for the woman having the abortion.

is the most ludicrous thing I've ever read.  You're saying that I'm condoning something illegal by calling for it to be illegal.  Did you even read what you wrote?  That's like saying that making meth illegal I'm condoning the people who sell it illegally.  That's absurd.  Not condoning legal abortion and not condoning illegal abortion are not mutually exclusive.  Saying it is wrong to murder does not condone illegal murder.  Sheesh.  Where do you come up with such flights of fancy?


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 7:32 PM on November 7, 2006 | IP
jenns

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

So you think that if safe abortions by doctors in a sterile and clean environment using appropriate equipment is banned then desperate women will not find other, more dangerous ways of getting an abortion?

Is that what you think?

Why is it a "flight of fancy" as you put it to assume that by banning abortions in hospitals you are accepting the fact that women will simply go elsewhere for abortions, legal or not?

Abstinence is a ''goal" is it?

It also prevents freedom and promotes repression. And repression never leads to hugs and kittens and rainbows.

Look at the victorians, socially possibly the most repressed eras in the history of England, and they were very much for "family values" and abstinence, and look at the way they were living, the amount of prostitutes and drugs and murder and corruption and so on around at that time. They even had to hide table legs because men got overexcited by them. Really really really don't want to go back to that era thankyou very much.

I think we need more education etc in schools about contraception, because that is then accepting that people have sex and is simply making them safer, but we cannot just say "don't have sex" and leave it there because then people will obviously not abide by this and nor should they, they're free to make their own choices.



-------
theres no fun in fundamentalism
 


Posts: 64 | Posted: 06:06 AM on November 8, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Laws against murder and thievery also prevent freedom.  Not all that you are "able" to do is good for you, or for others.  We ban crack cocaine and, yes, people find ways to obtain it illegally.  Does that mean the ban on crack cocaine condones the illegal use of it?  You can't be serious.  Just because you have no self-control does not mean that self-control is a bad thing.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 9:29 PM on November 8, 2006 | IP
jenns

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

But crack cocaine can damage a human being's health, and leads to more dangerous drugs and so on... abortion, obviously, does not do this. In some cases it PROTECTS health. And in all other cases it protects the life of a female in a non-physical sense. Abortion only becomes dangerous when it becomes illegal. Unlike cocaine which is dangerous wether legal or not. If you legalise cocaine, yes, more people may die as a result, if you make abortion illegal, more people will die. Get it?

Also, the banning of abortion will result in a clear class divide. All that will happen is that those women that can afford to travel to the UK or to wherever will do so, and those in poverty will be placed in a desperate situation of being forced into going through a pregnancy and then forced labour, and then who knows what will happen to the child? So by saying you want abortion made illegal that only counts for the poor, right?

Yes, the "right" thing to do would be to put it up for adoption after you have been forced through a pregnancy, etc etc. But this will result in god knows how many children up for adoption (seeing as one quarter of pregnancies end in abortion) and women even ditching or killing the babies once born, as these will be desperate women that have been forced through nine months of pregnancy and the agony and trauma of labour (which if you think about it must be indescribably worse in an unwanted pregnancy), maybe even a birth with complications or any number of other things, providing of course thet have not already attempted a backstreet abortion. And let's not forget that on top of this these females may be 11, 12, 13 years old, and may have been raped, and THEN have to go through a pregnancy. I for one would not be in a sane frame of mind if this had happened to me.

It all sounds lovely so far doesn't it?

A few facts also:
· World-wide, around one quarter of pregnancies end in abortion - nearly half are illegal.

· 70,000 women world-wide die each year from back-street abortions.

Why do you want to make it more?

Also, this means it is likely you will know someone who has had abortion, whether its your mother, daughter, sister, aunt, friend, wife, girlfriend.... Does it make any difference if you know someone who has been through it? Do you still think of someone you love as a cold-blooded murderer for simply protecting their own life in whatever sense of the word?


Also, what do you think the punishment should be for women who choose to have an abortion? Do you think it should be death?


(Edited by jenns 11/9/2006 at 12:43 PM).


-------
theres no fun in fundamentalism
 


Posts: 64 | Posted: 08:21 AM on November 9, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Or, perhaps without the ability to use abortion as a "birth control" people will actually be more responsible.  Why you'd want to kill a child because of your own irresponsibility I can't fathom.  

Now when there are medical complications that mean either the mother or child are going to die it is obviously the moral responsibility to save the person with the greatest chance of survival.  If that requires the sacrifice of the child, then that is completely understandable (although most women would rather save their child than themselves).

No, it does not make any difference to me whether someone I know has committed murder or not.  The fact that I might be emotionally attached to the perpetrator does not change the fact that they murdered someone.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 7:40 PM on November 9, 2006 | IP
jenns

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

It's not killing a child. These are groups of cells that are simply being removed, like a tumour or something. thats how I've heard someone who'd had an abortion describe it.

So you agree that abortion is necessary when the mother's life is in danger?

At least that's something.

Although you did have to ruin it by saying "most women would rather save their child than themselves"

Oh would they?

And how do you know this little gem of knowledge?

Or perhaps this is just what YOU think women should think?

Because our lives are really that worthless and once we've carried out our duty then we become irrelevant.

Have you read "The Handmaid's Tale"? I recommend it.


-------
theres no fun in fundamentalism
 


Posts: 64 | Posted: 3:59 PM on November 10, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Of course, everyone has read it.  What it has to do with a woman choosing to protect the life of her own child as opposed to sacrificing them for her own life, I'm not sure.  I've never met (personally) any mother that wouldn't give up her own life for her children.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 4:50 PM on November 10, 2006 | IP
TRIGGER

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Of course Jenns you do realize that the greater majoriy of abortions are not for saving the mothers life... Almost all abortions are for making it so you don't pay for your mistakes, you make the innocent child pay. Life is so much easier when you can have someone else pay for your indisgressions..


-------
MACHINE GUNS? go to WWW.hansonshoot.com
 


Posts: 127 | Posted: 9:43 PM on November 10, 2006 | IP
jenns

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

No. All abortions are protecting the life of a female who does not feel as though she is ready to go through a pregnancy as well as dealing with a child at the end of it. The ethical focus when a pregnancy is unwanted should always be on the woman and not the foetus.

You want to lower the amount of abortions and stop battling over this? Then fight unwanted pregnancies - not through abstinence programmes or religious classes, but through comprehensive sex education and better education over birth control. But I believe this will never be possible as, please correct me if I'm wrong but I have heard of no increase since, the fund for family planning has been frozen at $278m in the US. And yet Bush  sought $360m for a new programme to enrol single women in marriage preparation courses. Hmmmm. Priorities, priorities....

Which makes me think that the abortion debate is not about babies. It's about control, about power, about who can tell whom what to do, about who despises whom and their lifestyle.

It seems you are completely fired up with loathing for permissive, Godless lefties who don't even get nervous when threatened with eternal damnation since they don't believe in it (which must be terribly frustrating for you). It makes me think that "innocent children" are superficial to being power-mad, and the right seems to relish the prospect of telling the heathens what they can and cannot do.

Having a baby rather than an early abortion is much more dangerous - life-threatening complications, including maternal death, are five to 10 times more frequent.

So you think the US should ban abortion still? Just LOOK AT THE FACTS.... the death and injury toll for abortion is only significant in countries where abortion is illegal or severely restricted, as in Kenya, where some 30% to 50% of maternal deaths are a result of unsafe abortion.

Nearly 70,000 women and girls died last year because they went to back-street abortionists. Hundreds of thousands of others suffered serious injuries.

We need to keep choices open for women, otherwise this is what happens. Do you want this?

And "The Handmaids Tale" has everything to do with this.

"When it was published in the U.K. they said, 'Jolly good story.' Canada said, 'It couldn't happen here.' In the U.S. they said, 'How long have we got?' and I heard about graffiti on the sea wall in Venice Beach that said, 'The Handmaid's Tale is here.' German readers said it was a parallel to their own history. An Iranian reader said, 'This is my life.'"

"The Handmaid's Tale" centres upon a dystopian society where women are kept as reproductive machines, and a pregnancy is a celebrated event and you are hanged if caught taking any kind of contracepetive, let alone attempting to access an abortion. Yes it is a very exaggerated view but it is a warning for us all if this backtrack into the past continues.

By the way by "indisgressions"? Do you mean indiscretion? Spelling mistakes aside, just call it sex. It's not dirty. And it's not an indiscretion. Why should we be ashamed?



(Edited by jenns 11/11/2006 at 09:46 AM).


-------
theres no fun in fundamentalism
 


Posts: 64 | Posted: 06:11 AM on November 11, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Why are you so against abstinence?  It would eliminate the need for abortion.  It would eliminate AIDs and other STDs within a generation.  I'm sure you'll call me an idealist, to which I'll reply "why lower your standards?".  You may not expect more of people because you fear you'll be disappointed (note, I said "may").  I expect more of people, and though I'm disappointed, people usually rise to the level of expecation.  The less you expect, the less they'll rise.  I don't know if you have a job or not, but just look around you.  The more your boss expects of you, the more that gets done.  MOST people don't do much more than what is expected.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 10:04 AM on November 11, 2006 | IP
jenns

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

But that is like saying lets not teach children that its wrong to kill, lets just expect them to not do it then punish them when they do.

Yes, I do think your an idealist. And we've all got ideals, I know I have.

But with something like this I think we cannot simply leave an important thing such as people's lives up to the fact that they will "do the right thing", we have to contend with the fact that they will not.

Therefore, I think from a very realistic view, that education is the answer. The more a men and women knows about contraception from a relatively early age they will know how to be as safe as possible when they start having sex and this will prevent unwanted pregnancies.

I think it is very idealistic even if everyone followed an abstinence programme that we could eliminate AIDs and STIs. Do you mean from the world? Because in LEDCs there are so many people dying, and not just because they aren't educated, but because it's in their very being, being passed on to their children and so forth. And these people need help as well as education, they need the drugs that will help them survive, help their children survive.

But Bush has let the funding drop for these countries. The same as he let the funding drop for women to have safe abortions in places such as Nigeria where a woman can be stoned to death for attempting an abortion and the death rate due to the banning of abortions there is stupidly high. These are the countries that need America's funding. And it makes me sadder than you can ever imagine.

But again I digress, but no, I do not believe we can wipe out AIDs in a generation.


-------
theres no fun in fundamentalism
 


Posts: 64 | Posted: 2:46 PM on November 11, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Um, teaching kids abstinence is like not teaching children that its wrong to kill?  I thought it was exactly teaching kids not to kill.  Don't murder.  Don't have sex with anyone except your spouse.  How are those diametrically opposed?

As for America's funding, we've been doing too much for too long as it is.  This country has a deficit.  I have no problem with America spending its surplus on other countries, but right now we don't have a surplus.  In fact, I'd be surprised if we don't have the highest amount of debt in the world.




-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 3:11 PM on November 11, 2006 | IP
jenns

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

So you think we should kids nothing except "do not have sex with anyone except your spouse" and that will work, end of STIs, AIDs, unwanted pregnancies.

That really is delving into the realms of fantasy.

If kids in my school were told that, they would laugh in your face, because teenagers do have sex.

I have seen some of the pro-abstinence advertising from the US, and it is an understatement to say that I really was not impressed. Many of the campaigns are absurdly scaremongering, which puts teens who inevitably do have sex less likely to seek medical help for treatable conditions, therefore worsening the conditions, therefore completely going against your "we can cure STIs in a decade" thoery. Second, most of the dumb slogans (like "If you don't aim to please, don't aim to tease") put the onus on girls to act as gatekeepers to sexual experience, which is misogynistic and utterly wrong.

Teenagers these days (and I should know, being one and all) do not want restrictions, they need guidance and education to ensure their safety. A survey of American boys between the ages of 15 and 19 showed that half of them have received oral sex from a girl without generally regarding it as "sex". Research has also shown that there is no consensus among teenagers as to what constitutes abstinence. It is a pity, this, because medical experts insist that oral sex, while it won't make a girl pregnant, can transmit sexual diseases of most kinds, including AIDs.

So how can teenagers stop doing something they are too ill-educated on to stop doing?

Mr Bush spends a third of the funding for Africa to deal with Aids in Africa to promote abstinence there, that could otherwise have been used on education, drugs, clinic, equipment, and an endless list of essentials.

Promoting abstinence in countries where women have no control over their bodies, over who they marry, where rape is rife... etc.

Yes, enough money to start stupidly expensive wars though. Same goes for the UK.

How can you ever say you've done "too much"? Look at the pictures you see of little children with swollen bellies with all their relatives buried, and you think too much has been done?

Dropping the debt would be a start.


-------
theres no fun in fundamentalism
 


Posts: 64 | Posted: 7:53 PM on November 11, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

1)  There are many things that you teach kids to categorically not do.  A kid may be angry, but you teach them that it's not ok to beat somebody up "just because they have an urge".  You teach them not to steal "just because they have an urge".  You teach them not to cuss "just because they have an urge".  Yet when someone tries to teach them not to have sex "just because they have an urge" all of a sudden you're being unreasonable.  Maturity is about self-control.  Unfortunately, most people don't grow up before they've already done something stupid.  It used to be that people were proud to say that they saved themselves for their spouse, now they are considered losers.  In a day and age when you have to boil people before its safe to sleep with them, I'm surprised there isn't more abstinence going around.  Guess alot of people think a few minutes (or longer ) of pleasure is worth the chance of dieing from some disease.  I like sex, but it isn't worthy getting AIDs over and no contraceptive is 100% effective.  I guess some people would rather die a slow painful death than actually practice a little self-control.

2) I'm not saying that we've done "too much" in the idea that we've given more than what was needed.  I'm saying we've given "too much" in that we haven't been fiscally responsible to ourselves.  There are hungry and homeless right here in America and yet we've spent countless billions of dollars in aid to Mexico, Japan, Israel, Sudan and myriad other countries.  We need to get our own monetary affairs in order if we're going to continue to aid others.  The government seems to think that there is an unending supply of money.  We spend more on the interest on our debt than some countries make in a year.  That's not being responsible.  If we paid off our debt, all that money that's going just to pay off the interest could be used to aid the countries who need it.  


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 8:24 PM on November 11, 2006 | IP
jenns

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

"Self denial is not a virtue: it is only the effect of prudence on rascality."

But when two consenting adults want to have sex, and do so, this is not the same as having the urge to murder, as with a murder or stealing etc the result of the urge is the harm of someone else (and no, you cannot use the example of STIs and say that this is also true of sex because sex is consensual and therefore if an unwanted pregnancy occurs it is the responisibility of both of those involved).

You cannot teach people not to do something natural and human, sex is part of life. Restrictions on sexual activity for extended periods of time are harmful. Psychological theories show that sexual oppression leads to various behavioral problems. As well as this, being told they cannot have sex deprives people of experience they may need in order to form an understanding of their own feelings and their compatibility with others. After all sex is an important part of any relationship.

"J.M. Prescott, in a cross-cultural investigation published in The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists (1975) found that societies forbidding premarital sex are plagued by acts of rage and tend to have higher rates of crime and violence. Prescott also found a link between sexual repression and aggression, insensitivity, criminal behavior, and a greater likelihood of killing and torturing enemies."

As with abortion, if we say to people they cannot have sex, again as in the Victorian age, they will continue doing so but not as openly, so they will be to embarrassed to buy comdoms, or go to the STI clinic, or ask the doctor if they can begin taking the pill. And the result will be MORE STIs and unwanted pregnancies. To use the example of the Victorians, they were so stupidly repressed that table legs had to be hidden, and look at the number of STIs and unwanted pregnancies then!! It was not low because people were told they could not have sex, quite the opposite, it was very very high. Partly due to no sex education and very basic if any contraception, and due to the number of prostitutes which was the largest number ever in England, because people were still having sex, it was just that it wasn't openly. So they could tell themselves that they were decent moralists and so on all the while spreading syphalis like wildfire.

We  are in a day and age where we have the facilities to make sex safer than it has ever been, why not educate people on them? Young people are rightly more liberated than ever before, and the 60s ensured sexual freedom, therefore it is not going to return to the way it was.

Also.... I see your point about the funding issue, but Bush is still wasting money on things such as marriage guidance for young women, the Iraq war, abstinence programmes in Africa and so on, it makes me think that sometimes money isn't being used entirely responsibly.

(Edited by jenns 11/12/2006 at 06:52 AM).


-------
theres no fun in fundamentalism
 


Posts: 64 | Posted: 06:49 AM on November 12, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Money is rarely used responsibly.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 08:59 AM on November 12, 2006 | IP
jenns

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Sadly, you are correct.


-------
theres no fun in fundamentalism
 


Posts: 64 | Posted: 10:47 AM on November 12, 2006 | IP
bcarpe

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

On whether it is a person or not and whether it matters or not:

I see 2 possibilities:
1.The baby is a person
2.The baby is not a person

And 2 other independent possibilities:
1.We know whether it is a person or not
2.We don't know whether it is a person or not

combined, there are 4 possibilities:
1.The baby is a person and we know it
2.The baby is a person and we don't know it
3.The baby is not a person and we know it is not a person
4.The baby is not a person and we don't know whether or not it is a person

Assuming that killing a person is murder (which I'll try to prove to be true in this case later),
1.If the baby is a person, we know it's a person, and we kill it anyway, it's certainly murder
2.If the baby is a person and we know it might be and we kill it, it's involuntary manslaughter
3.If the baby is a person and we know it is not a person, then it is okay.
4.If the baby is not a person and we don't know whether or not it is a person and we kill it, it's criminal negligence.

So in case someone can prove that an unborn child is not a person, abortion should be illegal.
(that argument was taken from a book by Peter Kreeft)

And why is it murder to kill a person in this case? Well killing a person is generally considered murder, except in two cases that I can think of:
1. It was an accident, and you had no choice as to whether or not that person died
2. Self-defense

The first case does not apply because all abortions are intentional. The baby being created may have been by accident, but the baby being killed never is.

The second case usually doesn't apply. It may be permissible when the mother's life is in danger. However, in all other cases, it is safer to carry a baby to term than to abort (Think about it. Which was the mother's body designed to do? Carry the baby or have her cervix forced open and a vacuum pushed inside?). So the self-defensive approach would be to fight off the one trying to perform the abortion.

I've heard an argument for it being legal in cases of rape. I don't see how this applies. Regardless of how the person came into being, it is still a person and killing it intentionally is still murder.

I've heard an argument for keeping it legal because women would have them illegally anyways, and having it legal would keep it safe. First of all, abortion is never safe. Abortion is the act of killing a person. So as long as everything goes according to plan, someone dies. And as I said before, the cervix wasn't meant to be forced open and a vacuum pushed in. Second of all, why would you want to make murder safe for murderers? If anything, the fact that it would be more dangerous would be a good thing, because it's a deterrant to the abortion and another level of protection for the baby.

I've also heard that it isn't good for the child, because sometimes the mother can't take care of the child. And I don't see how people can even try to get away with this argument. Which would be worse? Not having 3 full meals per day or being killed? And there's always the option of adoption anyway.

I've heard that the pro-life stance is anti-women. The most pro-life people I know are women, and the number 1 reason world-wide for abortions is that the baby is a girl, not a boy. Really, abortion is the most sexist atrocity in history.
 


Posts: 3 | Posted: 5:34 PM on December 20, 2006 | IP
bcarpe

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I'm 1 month away from know from experience that not all teenagers have sex (that is, I'm 1 month away from being a 20-year-old-virgin). It's plenty possible. And I haven't noticed any ill side-effects (no drugs, no thievery, no murder, no cheating on exams). And I'm very much looking forward to having a marriage that lasts 'til death, much more than I can say than the average sexually active single.
 


Posts: 3 | Posted: 5:49 PM on December 20, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Once most people lose their virginity they then have to downplay its importance to justify themselves.  Very few people are willing to admin their own weaknesses.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 07:59 AM on December 21, 2006 | IP
Shadow

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

In my opinion abortion should be legal. I know someone who at the age of 13 got pregnant. Now i know that it was stupid and she shudnt have done that, but the sex was the past. I thought and still do think that an abortion would be the only way out. Or a misscariage. Because not even how would her and her boyfriends life be, but how would the childs life be. It would have a high chance of a mental retardation, or deformity. And then what. Do yu think a 13 who just learned to take care of herself, should be taking care of a baby. NO. And to add to that, if her parents ever found out that she had a baby they would beet her like crazy. I know this because they used to beat her just for having a boyfriend. Beet her so much that she would come to skool with bruises...well thats all i have to say right now...PcE
 


Posts: 1 | Posted: 3:28 PM on May 9, 2007 | IP
gabbyhayes

|      |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

calves have a heartbeat. Are they people?

If you can come up with a single statement attributed to God or Jesus decrying abortion, I'll send you a Fudgsicle. There isn't one. If it were indeed the very central focus of religion or christ, it would have been mentioned over and over. Clearly it wasn't. Beware of anyone who links anti-choice to christianity. Christianity is ALL ABOUT CHOICE. No christian (real christian, anyway) would judge you for having an abortion. You make your own decisions about your life. Jesus loves you whatever you choose to do. Same with homosexuality. It didn't even make the top ten commandments. It can't matter to God. Jesus didn't tell you to put up with your neighbor, even if he's a total perve. He said you must love your neighbor. And condemning him for what he believes he must do is not loving, regardless of what your minister tells you.

Generally speaking, if you are in a pew of a church that harangues on abortion and homosexuality, you have wandered into an anti-christian church. You need to think very hard about finding some people who take Christ and the commandments seriously.
 


Posts: 2 | Posted: 12:03 PM on May 28, 2007 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Galatians 6:1


Exodus 21:22-25

I Corinthians 6:9-10



-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 8:10 PM on May 29, 2007 | IP
george34

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Making abortion legal because you think it's safer than a woman doing it on her own is like having the government produce pure heroin for drug addicts so they don't go out and buy tainted heroin from dealers. Making something terrible legal so that people don't go around doing it ILLEGALLY? I think you can see the flaw in that winner of a concept.
 


Posts: 1 | Posted: 7:59 PM on October 5, 2007 | IP
SilverStar

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Couldn't agree more. In abortion one has a difficult question, is the babies life more important than the mothers?


-------
Darkside Enterprises were the impossible meets possible.

Tread softy and carry a big stick, preferably an AT4
 


Posts: 681 | Posted: 8:11 PM on October 5, 2007 | IP
The Voice

|      |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Abortion is taking a life that GOD created and throwing it into a eternity which we don't know, therefore condeming the baby to either Heaven or Hell. We will never know which (in my opinion) until we die so as far as I'm concerned, it is worse then murder.


-------
John 1:23 KJV
 


Posts: 6 | Posted: 4:17 PM on October 11, 2007 | IP
SilverStar

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I believe that God wants us all t go to heaven, I do not believe that a baby would go to hell because it was aboted. I do believe that abortion is murder. I also find t funny that we are killing the baby born out of rape, but we don't kill the rapist, and to state that a child would rather be dead than alive is absurd.


-------
Darkside Enterprises were the impossible meets possible.

Tread softy and carry a big stick, preferably an AT4
 


Posts: 681 | Posted: 11:22 PM on October 11, 2007 | IP
Nazanin

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

There is an abortion debate taking place here which is biased (by numbers) towards pro-choice and pro-abortion.  They won't accept religious arguments (fair enough, I'm not religious myself.)

http://www.richarddawkins.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=22746&p=455007#p455007

I am against abortion in all but extreme circumstances.  A fetus is a baby and a living human being.  
 


Posts: 1 | Posted: 10:21 AM on October 17, 2007 | IP
SilverStar

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I agree


-------
Darkside Enterprises were the impossible meets possible.

Tread softy and carry a big stick, preferably an AT4
 


Posts: 681 | Posted: 9:58 PM on October 18, 2007 | IP
thefantasea

|      |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Dear Alexander the Great,

You confess complete ignorance of the scientific side of the question.  That's too bad because the entire question is one of science; specifically biology and embryology.

One who has the educational and experienial first hand knowledge of the subject has this to say:


"April 12, 2005

Fritz Baumgartner, Md

There is no more pivotal moment in the subsequent growth and development of a human being than when 23 chromosomes of the father join with 23 chromosomes of the mother to form a unique, 46-chromosomed individual, with a gender, who had previously simply not existed. Period. No debate.

There is no more appropriate moment to begin calling a human "human" than the moment of fertilization. And don't let anyone tell you otherwise, because it would be a degradation of factual embryology to say it would be any other moment. For example, some pro-abortion zealots and even, shockingly, some disingenuous physicians claim it is the moment of primitive notochord formation (nonsense!) or, even more absurdly, the moment of implantation. (It defies sanity to claim that the implantation of a developing blastocyst onto a uterine wall defines humanity more than does the completion of an entirely new DNA map, which defines a new organism's existence).

And to say that "size" is a determinant of humanity, of course, is an unscientific reason to deny an embryo his or her human status.  In any event, it is an embryological reality, which no embryology textbook on earth denies, that at the moment of fertilization a new human being is formed."

If you wish, you can read the rest of Dr. Baumgartner's remarks at the following link.

http://www.prolife.com/life_begins.html

While the internet is rife with similar comments from the scientific community, I have yet to see qualified comments denying that life begins at conception.

If you, or anyone else can cite a refutation by a scientifically qualified source, I'd be happy to see it.  (Surprised. too.)


-------
The Fantasea is Me
 


Posts: 2 | Posted: 5:31 PM on October 27, 2007 | IP
thefantasea

|      |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

The question can never be settled on the basis of religion or emotional opinion.

My advice to all who oppose abortion to stop using arguments based upon religion or emotion.  These arguments are easily defeated by secularists who simply cite "the law".  Until "the law" changes, abortion on demand will be with us.

On the other hand, begin using arguments having a basis in science which postulates that human life begins at conception.

All one has to do to learn more about the subject is to google on the words  --   when does life begin.  Investing an hour reading some of the writings will greatly increase one's ability to make arguments which are difficult for the "choicers" to refute with facts.


-------
The Fantasea is Me
 


Posts: 2 | Posted: 5:54 PM on October 27, 2007 | IP
SilverStar

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I agree.


-------
Darkside Enterprises were the impossible meets possible.

Tread softy and carry a big stick, preferably an AT4
 


Posts: 681 | Posted: 1:00 PM on October 30, 2007 | IP
adoptionNOTabortion

|     |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

To Alexander... If you believe in abortion, euthanasia and the death penalty... why would abortion not be an act that should be penalized with the death penalty? If any murder is premeditated, abortion is definitely one of them.

It's bad enough that our generation is so promiscuous. I have slept with my share of people before having serious relationships. I never got pregnant...if I had, I would have stood up and taken it like a responsible adult should. I would have kept the baby or given it up for adoption. Why should my mistake, whether it was not using protection or a failed use of protection, result in the death of a poor innocent baby? If you are a serious drug addict, find a way to quit! Give the baby up for adoption and then go back to a world of drugs. If you are raped, that is not the baby's fault! It shouldn't be a reminder of the hideous act, it should be seen as an act of fate, that this baby was meant to live for some reason. Give the baby up for adoption! I am not totally against abortion for these preceding reasons. If you do get one, at least get one within the first 4 weeks of conception! I am more concerned with the people who don't know any better and figure that just because they "mistakenly?" had sex without protection and got pregnant, that they feel ok about having an abortion. If you are old enough to have sex, you are old enough to suffer the consequences. Have the baby!!! Give it up for adoption if you have to!!! Please don't take an innocent life...
 


Posts: 5 | Posted: 3:29 PM on November 11, 2007 | IP
adoptionNOTabortion

|     |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I just also want to add this website. It is by a husband and wife who believe in adoption over abortion. It has information about the different types of abortion and shows pictures of how the fetus looks after 7 weeks of pregnancy. This is why, if you feel it is absolutely neccessary to have an abortion, please do it earlier. Not that it should be done at all...but the fetus can feel pain by 8 weeks! They just can't cry! Here are two website links. The first is about abortion and how the fetus looks at the beginning stages. The second link is about when the baby can feel pain. Hope this will give a little insight to those considering abortions later than 8 weeks...

http://abortionno.org/Resources/pictures.html

http://www.abortionfacts.com/online_books/love_them_both/why_cant_we_love_them_both_14.asp
 


Posts: 5 | Posted: 4:03 PM on November 11, 2007 | IP
SilverStar

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I don’t know why any one would chose abortion over adoption.


-------
Darkside Enterprises were the impossible meets possible.

Tread softy and carry a big stick, preferably an AT4
 


Posts: 681 | Posted: 7:13 PM on November 22, 2007 | IP
Existantia

|     |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Typically when it is said "Once you get pregnant, it's YOUR responsibility" the truth of the matter is that there are a lot of women out there who are unsupported in their pregnancy. It is also the responsibility of the one who got her pregnant, but the male has the ability to walk away. Also, depending on her culture or religious upbringing, she may be looked down upon. We say to her "oh well, its your fault you chose it." yes, she did, but realize how much extra she goes through and how her male counterpart doesn't have to if he so chooses. That child also, if she is not ready, may not be properly taken care of physically/emotionally/mentally. He may face complications through his life and this is all placed on the mother. So I say, let the mother decide. It is her body. It may not always be JUST on her shoulders, but she is bearing the child. A woman has the right to decide what goes in and comes out of her body. No one else can make that decision for her. And just because one woman whos had an abortion and felt bad about it after doesnt mean she should preach to other women why they shouldnt. That was her experience and everyone has a different one. I like how adament people are about saving these fetuses from being aborted but when the mom has the child, a lot of times no one is there to support them. So let's just let those women decide what they want for their life.


-------
"Dr.Frink, Dr.Frink, make ya laugh, make ya think....hoyyyven!!"
 


Posts: 6 | Posted: 1:02 PM on March 25, 2008 | IP
Existantia

|     |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

"P.S.  This....
So you think abortion should be banned, therefore you are condoning highly dangerous backstreet abortions that not only still result in an abortion but also a great deal of harm for the woman having the abortion. "

I absolutely agree with this. The sooner we acknowledge that unwanted pregnancies occur and that women will get abortions anyways, the sooner we can protect them from harm. We have to address our societal beliefs people. A lot of women experiencing unwanted pregnancies are subject to cultural/religious dogma.


-------
"Dr.Frink, Dr.Frink, make ya laugh, make ya think....hoyyyven!!"
 


Posts: 6 | Posted: 1:07 PM on March 25, 2008 | IP
SilverStar

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

No I am only condoning adoption. You are talking as if the only option was to kill some one.


-------
Darkside Enterprises were the impossible meets possible.

Tread softy and carry a big stick, preferably an AT4
 


Posts: 681 | Posted: 08:10 AM on March 27, 2008 | IP
tasha1011

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:


Opponents of abortion believe that the individual is destroying the innocent embryo's right to living. I however wrote an article from a pro-life point of view. Should Abortion Be Prohibited? Read my article and tell me what you think

http://www.suite101.com/content/should-abortion-be-prohibited-a284606
 


Posts: 3 | Posted: 7:29 PM on October 9, 2010 | IP
Apoapsis

|     |       Report Post



Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from tasha1011 at 7:29 PM on October 9, 2010 :

Opponents of abortion believe that the individual is destroying the innocent embryo's right to living. I however wrote an article from a pro-life point of view. Should Abortion Be Prohibited? Read my article and tell me what you think

http://www.suite101.com/content/should-abortion-be-prohibited-a284606


Is taking a pill to prevent pregnancy the same as abortion?



-------
Pogge:” This is the volume of a sphere with a 62 kilometer (about 39 miles) radius, which is considerably smaller than the 2,000 mile radius of the Earth.”
Wikipedia:” For Earth, the mean radius is 6,371.009 km(≈3,958.761 mi; ≈3,440.069 nmi).”
Wisp to Lester (on Pogge): Do you admit he was wrong about the basics?
Lester: No

 


Posts: 1747 | Posted: 12:25 AM on October 11, 2010 | IP
    
Multiple pages for this topic [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 ]

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
Multiple pages for this topic [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

Topic options: Lock topic | Unlock topic | Make Topic Sticky | Remove Sticky | Delete thread | Move thread | Merge thread

 

© YouDebate.com
Powered by: ScareCrow version 2.12
© 2001 Jonathan Bravata. All rights reserved.