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
    

    
tester

|      |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

SHOULD ABORTION IN THE FIRST TRIMESTER BE OUTLAWED?

http://www.youdebate.com/DEBATES/ABORTION_DEBATE.HTM

(Edited by %1034120543%.)
 


Posts: 2 | Posted: 7:34 PM on April 29, 2002 | IP
maria

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
0

Rate this post:

If it has a heartbeat, I as a human being, say it's alive


-------
DSR
 


Posts: 12 | Posted: 04:58 AM on June 13, 2002 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

In response to the person that used Exodus 21:22 to show that God does not put importance on the life of the unborn, this person needs to research further.  This scripture in the King James Version (most reliable because translated from the original Greek), states that "...and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her yet no mischief follow..."  This does not indicate that the child died, but in the Greek, I am told, "depart" actually means to live.  It is assumed by most "pro-choice" people who have no familarity with the bible, that this passages means the baby died, and it is used often in abortion debates.  Actually "no mischief follow" would indicate that there was no death.
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 12:30 PM on August 18, 2002 | IP
Exxoss

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
-1

Rate this post:

Yes.  You should only get an abortion within the first week.  Otherwise, your screwed, so shut up and get an adoption!  You should be allowed to kill a living thing thaqt is inside you and already began developing majorly.


-------
I am Exxoss, come to save you all from your impending doom!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

-Exxoss
 


Posts: 438 | Posted: 4:06 PM on September 24, 2002 | IP
Xenjael

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

the way i look at a living being is when u no it thinks intelligently like a human
 


Posts: 83 | Posted: 9:03 PM on September 24, 2002 | IP
Exxoss

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Does a newborn think like a fully grown human?  No, they do not know the same concepts as a fully grown adult.  THerefore, it does not matter how old, if you don't want to put up the baby for adoption, then abort it right when it's concieved!


-------
I am Exxoss, come to save you all from your impending doom!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

-Exxoss
 


Posts: 438 | Posted: 08:58 AM on September 25, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
0

Rate this post:

this argument should not be about when it is alive. who cares?! we kill living things all the time. the question is, is it sentient (self-aware)? there is no brain function up to a point, and up to that point it should be okay to abort. When it really comes down to it, neither side can prove their argument scientifically, so we should default to whatever is best for society at large. if abortion were illegal, women would be getting abortions anyway in unsafe environments and many women (and their fetuses) would die. i suppose that's the utilitarian model, but it hits the nail on the head.


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 06:06 AM on September 26, 2002 | IP
Exxoss

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

But it doesn't change the fact that the baby is alive.


-------
I am Exxoss, come to save you all from your impending doom!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

-Exxoss
 


Posts: 438 | Posted: 09:00 AM on September 26, 2002 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Would you rather have all these unwanted babies growing up in a wirld already stressed by a growing population. The baby isn't concious in the mother's womb during the first trimester, and if you really think about it, the baby would be better off aborted and not knowing than growing up feeling unwanted and unloved
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 10:33 AM on September 26, 2002 | IP
Exxoss

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Yes!!!  The population can grow, with all the freaking industrialization occuring.  Apartments and adoption rates went up 27% in the past 2 years.


-------
I am Exxoss, come to save you all from your impending doom!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

-Exxoss
 


Posts: 438 | Posted: 10:37 AM on September 26, 2002 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Using overpopulation as an excuss for abortion is just foolish, would we turn our head if someone wanted to murder another person because we are overpopulated and that person might not feel loved right now?

Dr. Bernard Nathanson,  a former abortion "doctor" sayed:

"I am deeply troubled by my own increasing certainty that I have in fact presided over 60,000 deaths.  There is no longer serious doubt in my mind that human life exists from the very onset of pregnancy"
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 10:20 PM on October 8, 2002 | IP
Sakata

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
-1

Rate this post:

Why did my post show up as "Guest"?


-------
No time for mediocrity.

People call me a Bible-Thumping reactionist ...and I'm proud to bear the name.
 


Posts: 293 | Posted: 7:55 PM on October 9, 2002 | IP
Exxoss

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

(Umm, just so ya know, I'm on yer side! lol.)  And that doctor was probably sad that he had 'killed' many babies.  Once the baby is in you, you can find out.  Use birth control pills or a condom if your going to have sex.  Otherwisse its yer own darn fault.  At most get an abortion in the first week.  After that, no.  The baby is already your responsability.


-------
I am Exxoss, come to save you all from your impending doom!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

-Exxoss
 


Posts: 438 | Posted: 08:43 AM on October 11, 2002 | IP
thistownwilleatu

|       |       Report Post



Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
0

Rate this post:

At what point does a "fetus" transform to a person, or baby?  Is it after the first week?  Let's say the 3rd day at 2:34 pm.  That can be the time that it goes from a chunk of meat to a human being with a personality and a soul.  Or maybe when it gets fingers and a heartbeat and begins to appeal to our "to cute to kill" factor?  What is the difference between me killing you now, or killing you before you had the chance to become what I know now.  I'm sorry, call it narrow-minded or whatever, but we were all "icky, ugly" little fetus, I don't even see the argument.


-------
"The greatest evil is not done in those sordid dens of evil that Dickens loved to paint ... but is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted) in clear, carpeted, warmed, well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices." - Thomas Merton

"I thank my God for every remembrance of you." - Paul
 


Posts: 341 | Posted: 3:30 PM on October 11, 2002 | IP
Sakata

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
0

Rate this post:

Bravo, well said.


-------
No time for mediocrity.

People call me a Bible-Thumping reactionist ...and I'm proud to bear the name.
 


Posts: 293 | Posted: 8:45 PM on October 11, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

thistownwilleatu,
How bad would you feel about scraping some cells off the inside of your cheek with a cue tip and throwing them away? That is about as sophisticated biologically a fetus is up to a certain point (I have no clue about science so don't ask me when). By the way, you casually threw the word "soul" in there. Should abortion laws in a secular society (by that I mean, not that we don't have religous people, but that we ascribe to the tenet of Separation of church and State) be decided based on YOUR belief in a soul?


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 08:59 AM on October 14, 2002 | IP
thistownwilleatu

|       |       Report Post



Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Your addressing one of the most amazing and mysterious traits of human development as if it was a flaw, an excuse.  The fact of the matter is that this little cluster of cells in two short weeks will have heartbeat, limbs, and a brain, while the lining of my mouth will never be anything but the lining of my mouth.  You're taking the easy way out.

As for my usage of the word soul, it was not used in a religious text.  I merely meant personality and character, the things that set us apart from plants and other animals.  If you're going to approach it from a biological perspective, what are we as we are now?  Nothing more than a "big" clump of cells.  How are we so much different?  Bach, Einstein, you, me, and John Lennon all started a cluster of cells; it's about potential.


-------
"The greatest evil is not done in those sordid dens of evil that Dickens loved to paint ... but is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted) in clear, carpeted, warmed, well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices." - Thomas Merton

"I thank my God for every remembrance of you." - Paul
 


Posts: 341 | Posted: 09:22 AM on October 14, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

i get it, I really do. but just to say potential is not enough. do u believe in the death penalty, in euthanasia? what are the necessary criteria for NOT killing someone. give them (u did, you said "potential"), but then u must also give a logical argument for why those criteria make a difference. why NOT kill a fetus? why NOT kill a murderer? why NOT kill someone on life support. why NOT kill yourself? why NOT kill someone who cuts in front of you at the convenience store? all these questions have possible answers, but you haven't provided one yet.


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 06:17 AM on October 15, 2002 | IP
thistownwilleatu

|       |       Report Post



Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

When you're talking about a human life the more important question is WHY kill?  WHY kill a murderer?  WHY kill someone who cuts in front of you in line?  Not why not.  Going around life asking why not is just a feeble attempt to justify one's actions.  


-------
"The greatest evil is not done in those sordid dens of evil that Dickens loved to paint ... but is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted) in clear, carpeted, warmed, well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices." - Thomas Merton

"I thank my God for every remembrance of you." - Paul
 


Posts: 341 | Posted: 11:03 AM on October 15, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

what u said is based on absolutely no logic. you say things just because they come naturally, without thinking as to what rationale lies behind them. whatever, i will indulge your assumption that the real question is WHY KILL, although there is no basis for it. Devil's advocate: a person should kill when they want to, out of need, out of desire, out of percieved desire or need, whatever. There, i answered why kill. Now answer why not kill. you see, you think the burden of proof is on the person who wants to murderer, but do you place a burden of proof on someone who wants to walk across the street? no you say, why shouldn't this person be able to walk across the street? same with murder. you don't treat this differently in a logical debate just because your whole life you've assumed it to be obvious. WHY NOT KILL?


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 10:24 AM on October 16, 2002 | IP
thistownwilleatu

|       |       Report Post



Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

You know, when it comes down to life in the real world, all those logic courses that you took in college, or wherever are pretty useless.  I understand that your trying to approach this on an "intellectual" level, in "logical" ways.  The difference lies in your definition of logic and mine.  In what you say you completely dismiss the presence of a universal right and wrong, a "moral code" if you will.  Apparently every single person holds the born ability to decide for himself what his version of "right and wrong" and say screw the other 4 billion people on this earth.  
Here's my "logic", a moral code does indeed exist, some call it instinct, some call it the end result of a mentality, and some call it God, but regardless of what it is, it does exist.  You ask why I state it maybe "just because my whole life I've seen it as obvious."  There is a reason for that...mankind has had a couple of thousand years to form the foundation of this moral code. It's been tested for thouands of years.  Our ancestors and us have seen the effects, the pros and cons,  what happens if a person is allowed to shoot someone on a whim.  The result is chaos.  We would shoot each other into extinction.
Now after such an educated, philosophical as yours, I suppose this sounds kind of down to earth, but my friend, I'm afraid that's where we find ourselves forced to live, down here on earth, and more often than not common sense is a lot more valuable than spewing textbook logic.  I've taken that course and read that book too.  


-------
"The greatest evil is not done in those sordid dens of evil that Dickens loved to paint ... but is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted) in clear, carpeted, warmed, well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices." - Thomas Merton

"I thank my God for every remembrance of you." - Paul
 


Posts: 341 | Posted: 12:53 AM on October 18, 2002 | IP
squirt1983

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

First of all, who are we to decide who lives and dies?? We are not God and we need to stop playing like we are!!  Second, who was it that thought they were adult enough to 1)have sex, and 2)not use protection, whether it be the pill or a condom??? It was the adult in the situation who made those choices/mistakes.  If you think you are adult enough to have sex WITHOUT protection, then you should be adult enough to face your own consequences and not take the easy way out, for example, killing a baby who did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WRONG???  
And by the way:  a baby is a living, breathing, functioning, and developing human being from the MOMENT of CONCEPTION!!!             -Jeni


-------
Happiness is wetting your pants--the whole world can see it, but only you can feel its warmth.
-Author Unknown
 


Posts: 41 | Posted: 01:15 AM on October 18, 2002 | IP
Sakata

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Welcome to the boards,  I was kinda hoping for a pro-choice so we could have some debates here again, but hey, it good to know not all the world is sick and twisted!


-------
No time for mediocrity.

People call me a Bible-Thumping reactionist ...and I'm proud to bear the name.
 


Posts: 293 | Posted: 01:19 AM on October 18, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

actually thistownwilleatu...
i don't think you did read the same book as me, or else you would know the statement, "I believe in a univeral morality" does not rest on its own two feet. and you do not have a different logic than me. There is only logic, and illogic. We can have different opinions, but you must still use the same methodology (that is logic) to arrive at them. that's the first thing i wanted to say. second, you contradicted yourself. you said it morality was universal and then you said it was formed over years by mankind. which is it, universal, or a concept reached by a majority? third, your argument that you should not kill because it would cause mass extinction and chaos does not hold up. or maybe it was my fault, i did not phrase my question clearly. My question, why should you, or I (as individuals) not kill? When you are in a room alone with a person you hate, or want to get rid of for some reason, why not shoot them? if you shoot that person and no one ever knows it was a murder, surely it wouldn't set a precedent. in fact, it would not affect the world in any different way than if that person left the room unharmed and walked in front of a truck. dead is dead. finally, dismissing logic as only for classrooms seems kind of silly to me. The values and system of this country are as much grounded in the logical arguments of John Stuart Mill and John Locke as they are in the feel-good nonsense of Judeo-Christian faith.


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 06:34 AM on October 18, 2002 | IP
thistownwilleatu

|       |       Report Post



Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I don't have a lot of time so here's what I believe, that people base their actions on 3 things:  born instincts, the "herd instincts", and yes a universal moral code.  You probably say that this moral code and my herd instincts are one in the same, but consider this:

You are alone on an island, your actions will never be seen or heard of by anyone but you.  your sitting on a peer and you hear the sound of a man drowning.  At this point 2 forces are brought to conflict: your instincts which are always in the interest of self preservation and say "forget it, save your own skin"  and than the herd instinct which says we "ought" to go help him.  We as humans are animals.  In an animal, when 2 instincts clash the stronger always wins, name me a example in nature and i will shut up.  But in us, humans, the weaker usually wins.  There is something besides the herd instinct telling us it is what we ought to do.  
As for why we should not kill....human beings were given the skill of reasoning for a purpose.  It all comes down to empathy, we've all pissed someone off, as in your example, but we don't want to or think its fair that we should die for it.  Part of being a part of the species is the ability to connect with your fellow humans.  And you state that it wouldnt all lead to chaos, if there was no right and wrong and I could shoot someone on any grounds, who would live past 15?  And I'm not saying that logic is useless by any means, I am simply saying that just as real life should be grounded in logic, logic should be grounded in real life.  


-------
"The greatest evil is not done in those sordid dens of evil that Dickens loved to paint ... but is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted) in clear, carpeted, warmed, well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices." - Thomas Merton

"I thank my God for every remembrance of you." - Paul
 


Posts: 341 | Posted: 8:59 PM on October 18, 2002 | IP
thistownwilleatu

|       |       Report Post



Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

And just when I thought that 2 people on the board could actually have a respectful disagreement and still appreciate the other you have to throw in my "feel-good nonsense faith".  I have never criticized your agnostisism, why do you feel the need to attack?


-------
"The greatest evil is not done in those sordid dens of evil that Dickens loved to paint ... but is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted) in clear, carpeted, warmed, well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices." - Thomas Merton

"I thank my God for every remembrance of you." - Paul
 


Posts: 341 | Posted: 9:01 PM on October 18, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

okay okay sorry about the feel-good nonsense thing. so...1. you are assuming two things in your island analogy. first, that the herd mentality is the weaker. i might say, GUILT is an overwhelming force in driving human action. or, one could say, that human beings have two instincts, one like all biologicals is self-preservation. the other, which makes sense evolution wise, is instinct towards group preservation. most animals fight to protect their young, and many also fight to protect members of same herd or flock or pod, whatever. but with humans, we have something else, we have reason, which can allow us to be aware of instinct and to circumvent it, and ignore the herd mentality/instinct, and instead prosper as individuals (I am not promoting this, just positing as counter-possibility). second assumption was that people would jump in to save the drowning person. i'm sure you know about how they say if u are being attacked, don't cry "help!". cause no one will come. instead call "fire!", and people will come running. Why is that do you think?
2. i think u misunderstood my statement about chaos. i am not talking about changing the world so that everyone runs around killing. i am saying, in the real world, why should YOU (you, thistown) not kill (or I, Alex, one person). How would my single act of murder create chaos in the world. It would not. Especially if no one knew I did it.


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 11:51 PM on October 18, 2002 | IP
Cool-Hand-Dave

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

alexander,
why kill?  good question.  why kill just because you feel like it or just because you can't control you emotions?  why kill and lose the one thing that sets humans apart from every other thing on this earth?  humans have the ability to control their instincts.  they have the ability to suppress basic desires and carnal instincts, and to think things through.  sure, you can give in to this hate or whatever it is that makes you want to kill and then kill somebody in secret and no one may ever find out.  but what happens when everybody else starts to kill someone in secret when they feel hate or feel competition coming on?  we all feel hate and anger at very young ages.  so because we are so inclined to kill the things we hate and the things that provide wouldn't we all die very young?  and don't take this the wrong way because i am not prejudiced but just trying to make a point, but supposing you lived long enough to feel sexual desires, wouldn't you have been killed very quickly because you are homosexual?



-------
Cool Hand Dave
 


Posts: 134 | Posted: 12:40 AM on October 21, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I think so far no one has understood my question. If I killed someone in secret, how could that act cause other people to kill other people in secret. How could an act they don't know about influence them to kill???? Answer this very specific question. I go to a person's house, and he pisses me off, so I decide I WANT to kill him. My decision is now, do I, let's say, poison him and make it look like a heart attack, or do i refrain from doing so? Give me a moral argument, if there is any. You can't say it is immoral because it would create chaos or hat-inspired competition, because people would just think it is a heart attack. and please do not waste my time with saying it is wrong to kill because there exists a right to live, because that is a circular statement. the right to live means a right not to be killed, which in effect says you should not kill because people should not be killed. That is not saying anything. PLEASE PLEASE answer the question correctly. and by the way, cool dave, I honestly didn't understand your point about me being homosexual. Don't worry, I won't be offended, but could you please say it again more clearly?


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 01:44 AM on October 21, 2002 | IP
Cool-Hand-Dave

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

i will try to answer you question a specifically as i can alexander.  if you secretly murder someone (and by the way i am assuming based on your previous arguments that it is ok to murder) what is to say that (since murder is not looked down upon) other people won't be secretly killing each other.  no, maybe nobody did know that you did it and no, maybe your individual murder wouldn't affect other people's ideas, but that would be because everybody was already killing off the people the didn't like.  and if you are referring to today's society just as it is then when people just come upon a dead body, they do tests and autopsies to determine the cause of death and they would discover that it was not a heart attack, but poison. then, in today's society, they would conduct a murder investigation.  so either way, i really don't see the validity of your statement.  and now to answer your other question.  supposing we are in the society where murdering isn't looked down upon or people are murdered in secret places in secret ways or whatever.  i think it would be safe to say that most homosexual people would have been killed by closed-minded, heterosexual bigots.  you would know this better than me, but aren't there people in society who hate you enough to kill you just because you are gay?



-------
Cool Hand Dave
 


Posts: 134 | Posted: 09:15 AM on October 21, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Trust me, I know all too well how dangerous some heterosexual bigots are, enough to have used "be matthew shepherd-ed" as a verb. and I am not endorsing a world where everyone kills each other. i will never murder someone, not because i think there is a mral argument against it, but simply because I knwo i would feel really guilty (and no, feeling bad about something is not an indicator of it being morally wrong). now, i still think you are not getting my point. if one more person was killed, even if people found out about it, would not drive millions of people to kill. an analogy would be this. when i decide to vote for President, I know really my vote will have no bearing on the outcome, because no president has ever won by one vote. now, all decisions in economics theory are made on the margin, thus, how much output (profit) will i yield from one more unit of input (another hour of work)? my decision to kill is made on the margin. that murder will not turn the world into a chaotic hell. murders go on all the time already. also, if your main point against my argument is that with forensic today no one could get away with murder and thus keep it secret, causing everyone to find out about it and then magically all want to kill each other, then waht about before the advent of forensics?? is murder being a moral wrong just a recent development? what about 300 or 500 or 2,000 years ago? was it ok to do it then when it was easy to keep it secret? how about this: you and one other person are the only ones left on earth. you kill that person. was it morally wrong? no is left to know about it, no one to learn from its example and create more chaos. Do you see my point? Your argument does not hold up. Can u think of another one?


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 01:11 AM on October 22, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

HUH? I'm sorry, was that a "yeah" or "nay" to my argument? Oh, I get it, Monty Python...I guess you weren't giving me your support there...


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 02:09 AM on October 22, 2002 | IP
Cool-Hand-Dave

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

i suppose alexander the point i should be trying to make is that we DO and always have lived in a world where morals are a huge part of life.  murder is presently considered a moral wrong, and 2,000 years ago murder was considered a moral wrong.  and if guilt is not a moral indicator, then please enlighten me.  sure, it's a chemical reaction, but what triggers it.  why is it there?  


-------
Cool Hand Dave
 


Posts: 134 | Posted: 12:43 PM on October 22, 2002 | IP
madbilly

|      |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

once again i will say that there is a difference between murder and killing. Murder is in cold blood for no reason. Killing is in defence or in executing a convicted murderer. I have never meet an aborted child who said "i shure am glad i was murdered as a zygote". How can you put an age on how old someone must be before it is too late to murder them. Our society seems to have a problem with un wanted pregnancies. To abort is to fix a lifestyle that apparently people want to live but forgo the consequences. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction just remember that the wages of sin is death and it says in the bible that thou shall not commit murder. abortion is murder it is taking the life of a living creature that is human. With the animal rights activist and vegetarians and peole against killing animals it seems as if animals have more rights that unborn human children. Animals arent aware of there being and neither you might say is a zygote but if it is considered wrong by these activist to kill animals why is it okay to kill babies. we need to understand that a child and an animal are two different things and that a child has every right to live. it is not the childs fault that the mother is a whore and doesnt practice safe sex....and yes i said a whore...i dont care to be offensive to women who abort...people say bad things about adolph hitler and he was a murdere as well as these sicko whores who will kill there children so that they can continue to live their lifestyle of lust and sex.


-------
my name is madbilly....what did you expect me to be happy when my name says Mad in it...
 


Posts: 451 | Posted: 3:16 PM on October 22, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I am going to ignore madbilly's comment. he isn't too smart.
as for cool-hand dave:
you just totally gave up to my argument with your last post. you were trying to make arguments for why we should not kill, could not come up with any, so you resigned yourself to saying essentially, "killing is wrong because today's society and yesterday's society says it's wrong." that means nothing. that's like saying, "it just is, man!" there is no logic to that. this is an important question, because if no one on this forum can even answer the basic question of why it is wrong to kill, how can you presume to address the nuances of whether it is wrong or not to kill a fetus? as for your comment about gult being an indicator of immorality, then what about when there is no guilt? when you don't feel guilty about something, is it okay? doesn't that make morality totally subjective? hemingway said the same thing, but it's bull. did hitler feel bad about the holocaust? does falwell feel bad about blaming gays and secularists for 9/11? did manson feel bad? I do think guilt about killing can be an indicator of 2 things: 1. social conditioning (get slapped reaching for the cookie jar enough times you'll learn there's a negative stigma attached to that behavior) and 2. a biological imperative to sustain the species (like a protect the herd mentality, which is sometimes superceded by instinct for SELF-preservation). neither of these point to a "wrong".


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 11:51 PM on November 5, 2002 | IP
madbilly

|      |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

im not to smart....good comment im shure you have so much room to speak


-------
my name is madbilly....what did you expect me to be happy when my name says Mad in it...
 


Posts: 451 | Posted: 01:54 AM on November 6, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

madbilly:
you said, "I have never meet an aborted child who said 'i shure am glad i was murdered as a zygote'". have you ever met an aborted child who said anything?? what is the point of saying that other than stupid dramatic flair? you called the woman who wants an abortion a whore, but never thought to say anything about the man. I wonder why. also, even if you think abortion is immoral, i honestly think if you equate these women to Hitler you have no concept of moral theory. you cannot logically equate the moral callousness of murdering millions of people because of their race with people engaging in a practice whose morality is controversial but certainly not as obvious an affront to human dignity. to be honest, I remain undecided about abortion. but I don't think people who get abortions are callous killers, it just doesn't add up in my common sense to equate them with that. i can tell you love to say shocking, politically incorrect things. fantastic. you think abortion is wholesale genocide but you seem to have no problem suggesting turning all of palestine into the stone age because of what SOME palestinians do. try being consistent in your ethical analysis.



-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 05:41 AM on November 6, 2002 | IP
madbilly

|      |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

the unborn child doesnt have a choice the palestinians do...what about the men you say? well that makes them man whores if they get a girl pregenant and to abort is only to escape the problems that they created.


-------
my name is madbilly....what did you expect me to be happy when my name says Mad in it...
 


Posts: 451 | Posted: 10:09 AM on November 6, 2002 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

You can define "life" however you want to suit your beliefs, but if you take the term "human life" literally, life begins at conception.  The cells are growing, and the fetus has unique, human DNA.  We can only justify abortion because we are not strongly connected with the fetus and have never seen more than a fuzzy picture on a TV screen.
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 9:05 PM on November 7, 2002 | IP
locagirl

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

no no no no it should not be outlawed. the baby cant think, it does not know that it is being killed.  we're overpopulated, if it harms no one, why can't abortion be performed, with the consent of the baby's parents?  im sure the baby is thinking "dont kill me!" no, seriously, not old enough to think that... i definately think that abortion during the first trimester SHOULD BE ALLOWED.
 


Posts: 60 | Posted: 3:15 PM on November 8, 2002 | IP
thistownwilleatu

|       |       Report Post



Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Our hospitals are overcrowded....so let's just go through and every coma patients life support.  They aren't thinking, they won't know they are being killed.  What's the difference.  That the coma patient may wake up? and THEN he would have wanted to live?  Well the baby WILL be born, and will want to live.


-------
"The greatest evil is not done in those sordid dens of evil that Dickens loved to paint ... but is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted) in clear, carpeted, warmed, well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices." - Thomas Merton

"I thank my God for every remembrance of you." - Paul
 


Posts: 341 | Posted: 5:19 PM on November 8, 2002 | IP
kc2gwx

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

locagirl, we are nowhere near overpopulated, and abortion does harm people. It deprieves the child of life (do you think you have a right to live now? Why should you not have that right when you were just concieved?). It hurts the mother, who has emotional scars her whole life. I have read of women getting abortions when their husbands wanted the child. In those cases, the husband is hurt. It hurts those who want to adopt, but can't because there are not enough children at the time. It hurts sisters, mothers, children, brothers, doctors, nurses, and just about anyone.

To say that abortion is ok when it is still young is ridiculous. "They aren't thinking, they won't know they are being killed." This applies to babies as well. 'Babies don't really think, they just lie there and cry. They won't know when they are killed. Let's kill them, they are a hassle.' This is what you are really saying. Is it more wrong to kill a 20-year old than it is to kill a 3-year old? Of course not!!!!


-------
Sam, KC2GWX
 


Posts: 101 | Posted: 5:48 PM on November 8, 2002 | IP
locagirl

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

you realize that abortions take place because the mother and father want to have them? "it hurts the mother...the husband is hurt" then why the hell would they have an abortion in the first place.  in many cases of abortion the mother is a teenager who DOES NOT WANT to have the baby.  the father might be unwilling to help raise the child. THEY WANT AN ABORTION!!!! thats why theyre having it!

and as for adoption, regardless of how many babies there are the process will take a long time.  they don't just say, "o theres a baby. u can have that if u want" they make sure the parents would be good parents, etc. etc.
 


Posts: 60 | Posted: 11:16 AM on November 9, 2002 | IP
kc2gwx

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I didn't say that the Father ALWAYS wants the child. I simply said that in certain cases, this has happened.

"in many cases of abortion the mother is a teenager who DOES NOT WANT to have the baby."

So?  Are you saying that if you want to have an abortion it won't hurt you emotionaly later? It does. Tremendously. There are so many stories of women who are deeply hurt emotionaly years after having an abortion.

Some Q&A about abortion


-------
Sam, KC2GWX
 


Posts: 101 | Posted: 11:44 AM on November 9, 2002 | IP
locagirl

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

i feel aweful i am preventing a new life by not going a f---ing my neighbor right now. there is a line, and the difference is where we choose to draw it.

if the mother is emotionally scarred than she was dumb to have the abortion in the first place. she is going to be emotionally scarred if she gives the child up for adoption too! and if you think the government is smarter than the citizen, and the citizen can't make the decision on her own, let's switch to anarchy!
 


Posts: 60 | Posted: 1:46 PM on November 10, 2002 | IP
squirt1983

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

First of all, if the mother and father don't want the baby, then they shouldn't have had sex.  simple as that.
If they were going to have sex, then use protection, DUH!!!
If they thought that they were responsible enough to have sex, they should think about the consequences, and deal with them, not take the easy way out and kill the baby, who did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WRONG!!!
As for adoption, I will agree that it scars the mother.  But as someone who got pregnant(I was raped) and chose NOT to kill the baby, but to let it live, I am much more content to know that I let that baby live.  For all I know, she could be the first woman president and I could've killed her!!  Even though I didn't choose to have sex, I chose to face my consequences.
Every time I start to regret giving my baby up for adoption, I think about the choice I made to let her live, and to make two people very, very happy to raise my baby.  My baby can now have a full and happy life because I made that choice.  


-------
Happiness is wetting your pants--the whole world can see it, but only you can feel its warmth.
-Author Unknown
 


Posts: 41 | Posted: 04:30 AM on November 11, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Your kid could just as likely become a serial killer. There's no point in predicting how the child will end up. And how can people compare a fetus to a born baby??? Someone said:

To say that abortion is ok when it is still young is ridiculous. "They aren't thinking, they won't know they are being killed." This applies to babies as well. 'Babies don't really think, they just lie there and cry. They won't know when they are killed. Let's kill them, they are a hassle.' This is what you are really saying. Is it more wrong to kill a 20-year old than it is to kill a 3-year old? Of course not!!!! [/i]

I don't get it. Babies do think, and they do feel pain. A fetus doesn't. The difference in that respect at least is obvious.


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 05:48 AM on November 11, 2002 | IP
locagirl

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

thank you alexanderthe great.  your baby could become president? what becomes of the baby has more to do with how it is raised than the genes.
 


Posts: 60 | Posted: 12:38 PM on November 11, 2002 | IP
FreedomFighter13

|      |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
-1

Rate this post:

Quote from Exxoss at 4:06 PM on September 24, 2002 :
Yes.  You should only get an abortion within the first week.  Otherwise, your screwed, so shut up and get an adoption!  You should be allowed to kill a living thing thaqt is inside you and already began developing majorly.

You are a loser and need to get help crack smoking idiot. Youre a disgrace to the human race! Burn in hell!! Love Kathryn!





-------
None of you can anger me now, I'm in love and happy as a clam!
 


Posts: 34 | Posted: 12:54 PM on November 11, 2002 | IP
Cool-Hand-Dave

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

i think everybody should check out some of the abortion facts on this site:

http://abortiontv.com/AnswersToProChoice.htm#The%20Fetus%20is%20part%20of




-------
Cool Hand Dave
 


Posts: 134 | Posted: 4:14 PM on November 11, 2002 | 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.