Abortion/ *Note* Thread Closing Shortly! ! !

Turtwig

Mario852 wrote: »

What are skin cells to do with a developing human life?
An embryo is new life, it is not a bunch of not needed skin cells of an organism that can be fully functional without them.

An embryo is about as alive a skin cell. But that's just my interpretation, yours quite obviously, is different.

Mario852

Jernal wrote: »

An embryo is about as alive a skin cell. But that's just my interpretation, yours quite obviously, is different.

'Life' is a very vague expression.
Can you define what you mean by it?

Bannasidhe

Mario852 wrote: »

I don't think I at any age wanted to commit a suicide or regretted that I wasn't aborted. My point is, you guys are taking the advantage of a being (as in life) not (yet) being able to speak for itself.
If you are so pro-choice, wait and see what's the child's opinion, and let it commit the suicide then.

You mean like is done with baptisms? ...oh, wait.....

Mario852

Bannasidhe wrote: »

You mean like is done with baptisms? ...oh, wait.....

I don't quite understand what is baptism to do with this topic, especially while it is in the atheist section.

Bannasidhe

Mario852 wrote: »

I don't quite understand what is baptism to do with this topic.

Waiting until a child can make it's choice known.

Turtwig

Mario852 wrote: »

'Life' is a very vague expression.
Can you define what you mean by it?

Nope I cannot. I can only attempt to explore the question in a such a way as to further understand the question better by guessing solutions.

But I think you'll understand this sentiment. I don't consider the embryo worthy of equal rights of an adult human person because I don't consider it to be a person.

bradknowell

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Indeed, if our existence starts at the moment of conception - why d we officially not exist until the moment of out birth?

Should we be celebrating our birthdays - i.e arrival in the world -nine months earlier than we do?

The hint is in the "birth" day .

Mario852

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Waiting until a child can make it's choice known.

If it is making that choice, then its a sign of it being able to make it.

Bannasidhe

Mario852 wrote: »

If it is making that choice, then its a sign of it being able to make it.

What?

How can a 3 day old make as choice about being baptised?
Or a 3 year old for that matter?

Mario852

bradknowell wrote: »

The hint is in the "birth" day .

So it officially is not existing 5 hour before its birth, but it is 5 hours after?
I have no idea who created this idea, but it makes no sense.

It would still be birthday. But its just a celebration day made by humans, just like christmas.
I think the reason why we don't celebrate conception-day is because we can't really say exactly when it happened.
And also, just as christmas, celebrating birthday is a very old tradition, and it would take a long time to get rid of.

Mario852

Bannasidhe wrote: »

What?

How can a 3 day old make as choice about being baptised?
Or a 3 year old for that matter?

I said nothing about baptism. I am talking about when it is able to make its own choice whether to live or not.
I do now know Why someone came up with the idea of baptism here... I thought abortion, not religion is being discussed here.

Bannasidhe

Mario852 wrote: »

I said nothing about baptism. I am talking about when it is able to make its own choice whether to live or not.
I do now know Why someone came up with the idea of baptism here.

and I am pointing out that talking about fetus being given a choice is nonsense. Do fetus who die in the womb choose not to be born? Did they commit suicide?

We make decisions based on what we think is for the best - both for fetus and children - we do not always extend a choice in the matter - for example baptisms.

Mario852

Bannasidhe wrote: »

and I am pointing out that talking about fetus being given a choice is nonsense. Do fetus who die in the womb choose not to be born? Did they commit suicide?

We make decisions based on what we think is for the best - both for fetus and children - we do not always extend a choice in the matter - for example baptisms.

Unfortunately a fetus isn't able to make this choice, that what I am pointing out.
Also the decision it would make (if i was able to make one) would be to continue its development and not to get killed.
Making a choice of killing it before it has a chance of saying anything isn't very pro-choice.

What makes you think that killing a developing human is a good choice for it?

Bannasidhe

Mario852 wrote: »

Unfortunately a fetus isn't able to make this choice, that what I am pointing out.
Also the decision it would make (if i was able to make one) would be to continue its development and not to get killed.
Making a choice of killing it before it has a chance of saying anything isn't very pro-choice.

What makes you think that killing a developing human is a good choice for it?

What about those fetus who die in the womb?
Did they decide not to continue their development?
Do we get a choice about being conceived?

Mario852

Bannasidhe wrote: »

What about those fetus who die in the womb?
Did they decide not to continue their development?
Do we get a choice about being conceived?

Random events happen that we cannot predict or change.
What we are discussing is a conscious act of killing an embryo, not a random event.
No we don't have a choice of being conceived, but we do have a choice weather to stay alive or not.

Mario852

Life is a process, it has to start and end at some point.
Since we already know that it ends at death, we just need to find where it begins at.

Since saying that it begins at the point of birth would make no sense as a baby 5 minutes before its birth and 5 minutes after isnt very different.

Conception on the other hand is different. At this point, the embryo gets its own unique set of DNA and it able to develop itself through the stages of human development.
So 5 minutes before conception -> two cells that would be unable to become anything more than themselves.
After -> A developing cell with unique characteristics, which will hopefully become a fully grown human, i.e. A new human being.

Bannasidhe

Mario852 wrote: »

Random events happen that we cannot predict or change.
What we are discussing is a conscious act of killing an embryo, not a random event.
No we don't have a choice of being conceived, but we do have a choice weather to stay alive or not.

Do we?
Does that choice extend to after we are born? Does every single child have a choice as to whether they live or die? Are the allowed to exercise that choice freely?
Do they all get a choice about the quality of their lives?

Mario852

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Do we?
Does that choice extend to after we are born? Does every single child have a choice as to whether they live or die? Are the allowed to exercise that choice freely?
Do they all get a choice about the quality of their lives?

As i have said before, the embryo cannot make decision (yet).
And that is not the reason why you can kill it.
It will get a 'choice' when it will start reasoning.

Its not really a choice whether to stay alive, as you can't really make that choice (my bad for describing it that) what i rather meant is the choice whether to kill yourself or not, or to want to exist or not.

MagicMarker

I can't believe I've never heard this argument against abortion before. Let the baby decide, after it's been born, whether it wants to be aborted or not! I mean, it's just genius. I just can't see flaws in that humdinger!

Obliq

I think I shall just quote myself here rather than argue it all again. Hope this helps Mario852, although I was replying to someone else at the time. I am assuming that your personal feelings about the life of the fetus are similar to that person's.

Obliq wrote: »

Your personal feeling that the comfort of the mother cannot outweigh the life of the baby is not shared by me. If a woman is "uncomfortable" about being pregnant (and within that extremely loose term, I'm assuming you include women who are desperate, distressed, terrified, suicidal, horrified, troubled with mental health issues, abused emotionally and physically), in my opinion, compassion for that woman outweighs the "right to life" of a tiny entity who knows nothing about it at all.

Mario852

MagicMarker wrote: »

I can't believe I've never heard this argument against abortion before. Let the baby decide, after it's been born, whether it wants to be aborted or not! I mean, it's just genius. I just can't see flaws in that humdinger!

What I am saying is that you have to let the person being killed (ie. the fetus) give a choice.

You cannot do so when its at its fetal stage so you unfortunately have to wait until it's able to speak for itself. I think the choice the baby would make is quite obvious.
Otherwise you are just deciding about its life (whether it shall exist or not) for him. And taking the advantage of it not being able to reason (yet) and communicate.
Thats not very pro-choice-like.

Mario852

Obliq wrote: »

I think I shall just quote myself here rather than argue it all again. Hope this helps Mario852, although I was replying to someone else at the time. I am assuming that your personal feelings about the life of the fetus are similar to that person's.

Just because the woman doesn't feel like having a baby is not a good reason to kill someone. Its a different case when her life is in danger, I think its better for woman to survive then for both toi die.

In most cases no one forced her to conceive that baby... and now she wants to get rid of the consequences by having a fetus killed.

Obliq

Mario852 wrote: »

Just because the woman doesn't feel like having a baby is not a good reason to kill someone.

Do you kill chickens for food Mario? (and I consider that if you eat them, then you have killed them even if not by your hand). There are reasons to kill sentient beings, food is one of them. Another is my reasoning above (the remainder of my quote, that you left out).

Women get pregnant when they did not mean to. Fact. And if you start spouting the stuff about abstinence from sex, I shall laugh/cry - not sure which yet...

Bannasidhe

Mario852 wrote: »

Just because the woman doesn't feel like having a baby is not a good reason to kill someone. Its a different case when her life is in danger, I think its better for woman to survive then for both toi die.

In most cases no one forced her to conceive that baby... and now she wants to get rid of the consequences by having a fetus killed.

What about the cases where a woman is forced to conceive?

Or where contraception fails? Did that woman choose to conceive?

Malari

Mario852 wrote: »

Just because the woman doesn't feel like having a baby is not a good reason to kill someone. Its a different case when her life is in danger, I think its better for woman to survive then for both toi die.

In most cases no one forced her to conceive that baby... and now she wants to get rid of the consequences by having a fetus killed.

Well I would argue that just because a woman doesn't want to be pregnant IS good enough reason to kill the developing embryo.

kylith

Malari wrote: »

Well I would argue that just because a woman doesn't want to be pregnant IS good enough reason to kill the developing embryo.

I agree. If a woman doesn't want to be pregnant then she will find a way to end that pregnancy, whether or not abortion is legal. How many Irish women died or were left infertile from back-street abortions before they could travel to England? If the ability to get to the UK was taken away then we would see more Irish women take matters into their own hands; take away abortion and more women will die from bad decisions made in panic and fear.

Mario, what would your solution be, for a woman who doesn't want to be pregnant? Should she be forced to endure 9 months of stress and to bear the child? Should she be imprisoned to make sure she doesn't try to end the pregnancy?

Obliq

kylith wrote: »

I agree. If a woman doesn't want to be pregnant then she will find a way to end that pregnancy, whether or not abortion is legal. How many Irish women died or were left infertile from back-street abortions before they could travel to England? If the ability to get to the UK was taken away then we would see more Irish women take matters into their own hands; take away abortion and more women will die from bad decisions made in panic and fear.

Agreed. Terribly sad letter in the Belfast Telegraph yesterday. Do we want this scenario? No, we don[t. (sorrz, kezboard malfunction - z is y and I[ve lost inverted comma[s:o)

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/opinion/letters/new-clinic-offers-proper-help-to-women-16227610.html

old hippy

Mario852 wrote: »

Just because the woman doesn't feel like having a baby is not a good reason to kill someone. Its a different case when her life is in danger, I think its better for woman to survive then for both toi die.

In most cases no one forced her to conceive that baby... and now she wants to get rid of the consequences by having a fetus killed.

There's plenty of good reasons to have an abortion. If you don't like abortion - don't have one. Don't take away choice from the rest of us.

loveisdivine

I think not wanting to have a baby is a great reason to have an abortion.

If I fell pregnant and was forced to keep it, I can assure you that baby would not lead a very happy life. Because I would resent it and I would not want it. When I hear a baby crying that just wont stop all I want to do is shake it till it stops, hardly motherly material eh?

Thats why I have no time for most pro life arguments. Its like they want to keep children alive at any and all cost. Even if the child suffers, well, "at least its alive"! Take Trisomy 18 for instance, any fetus that has this should be aborted immediately, no questions, for the unborn childs sake. Yet people still insist on carrying them and trying to keep them alive. Its supremely selfish, yet the parents insist its all because they love their child.

If I had the capability to talk when I was in the womb, and my mother said "I really dont want you, you are a mistake and my choice would be to not have you" I would have probably agreed. I wouldnt want to be born to parents that dont want me.

And before anyone starts suggesting adoption, women are not walking incubators. I will not continue a pregnancy so I can give it a way. I personally believe that the world is grossly over populated (not an opnion everyone shares) so why would I want to add to that?

Mario852

kylith wrote: »

I agree. If a woman doesn't want to be pregnant then she will find a way to end that pregnancy, whether or not abortion is legal. How many Irish women died or were left infertile from back-street abortions before they could travel to England? If the ability to get to the UK was taken away then we would see more Irish women take matters into their own hands; take away abortion and more women will die from bad decisions made in panic and fear.

Mario, what would your solution be, for a woman who doesn't want to be pregnant? Should she be forced to endure 9 months of stress and to bear the child? Should she be imprisoned to make sure she doesn't try to end the pregnancy?

If a woman is that mentally ill, then someone should take of her, and be treated like other people who are in danger of harming others or themselves.

I know abortion is the easiest way out and that's why you like it so much, but isn't killing a bit too far?