Anybody out there "pro-choice"?

[MarysGirls]

Should I have been aborted? well I can;t say I should have been…but I can;t say I shouldn;t have been either. If my mother had chosen to deny me life it would have mattered little actually nothing to me as I simply would not exist. Also as I understand it murder is a legal term a fetus is not considered a person…so it is not considered murder to kill it. Now personally I think that in the early term stages that while abortion is certainly a sad thing it is little more then killing a few cells.

Again, you say that the fetus is not a baby. I’ve asked this before, but, since you didn’t answer I’ll ask again. Are you willing to open your mind and seriously consider a logical argument against your assumption that the fetus is only “a few cells”? Please answer.

 

[po18guy]

If that is the case, then pro-life=pro-bombing abortion clinics… It make no logical sense. Please do not stereotype.

Not exactly. Pro-abortion people support others who choose to abort. Pro-lifers DO NOT support violence. They are campaigning directly against the most horrendous form of violence on earth. Those such as Curtis Beseda, who are violent are nothing more than common criminals. He is where he belongs.

 

[Calliso]

Again, you say that the fetus is not a baby. I’ve asked this before, but, since you didn’t answer I’ll ask again. Are you willing to open your mind and seriously consider a logical argument against your assumption that the fetus is only “a few cells”? Please answer.

Ok I am willing to hear your argument. I should clarify something I do believe that the fetus is human…but that is different from the legal term of personhood which I do not believe a early fetus is or should be.

 

[MarysGirls]

Ok I am willing to hear your argument. I should clarify something I do believe that the fetus is human…but that is different from the legal term of personhood which I do not believe a early fetus is or should be.

My bad. Perhaps you could explain that a bit better? What do you mean by the “legal term of personhood”?

 

[royal_archer]

Should I have been aborted? well I can;t say I should have been…but I can;t say I shouldn;t have been either. If my mother had chosen to deny me life it would have mattered little actually nothing to me as I simply would not exist. Also as I understand it murder is a legal term a fetus is not considered a person…so it is not considered murder to kill it. Now personally I think that in the early term stages that while abortion is certainly a sad thing it is little more then killing a few cells.

On what basis do you deny their person hood? are you saying their minimal size is justification to kill them?

 

[Calliso]

My bad. Perhaps you could explain that a bit better? What do you mean by the “legal term of personhood”?

Interestingly enough I am soo tired I decided to look up an official defination of legal personhood and what not * I cant think straight right now lol* and found it actually encompasses far more then I realized…but anyway answers.com/topic/personhood actually I think I may have used the wrong term.

The Western legal concept of a person as a citizen of the state with both legal rights and responsibilities

But basically as I have understanded it or at least the way I use it…is a person is basically a human being with legal rights and responsiblities. Course it is a pretty complicated subject. There has even been talk of granting the other great apes personhood or instance and therefore certain rights.

Interesting wiki article too en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Person

Of course this all doesn;t mean that definations couldn;t change…that one day for instance a fetus of any stage could be called a person and therefore have legal rights. Of course then I think there would be another problem…because both the woman and the fetus would have rights…whose would you protect?

 

[royal_archer]

If that is the case, then pro-life=pro-bombing abortion clinics… It make no logical sense. Please do not stereotype.

No, if you had an urge to support the bombing of abortion clinics and in other areas were anti life, it may be that you are pro -bombing abortion clinics. Bombing these butcher shops, even in the midle of the night, is putting people at risk and is by default not pro life.

like wise abortion is by default anti choice since it robs the child of their choice to live. It also robs the father of there choice to be in their childs life.

 

[po18guy]

Ok I am willing to hear your argument. I should clarify something I do believe that the fetus is human…but that is different from the legal term of personhood which I do not believe a early fetus is or should be.

Once conception occurs, unique DNA is formed, which defines every attribute of the person. Any legal argument is per se 100% arbitrary. Life did not begin in a court, and it should not be trifled with there. It should only be defended in that venue.

 

[Calliso]

On what basis do you deny their person hood? are you saying their minimal size is justification to kill them?

It;s not the size that matters it;s more then lack of any capablity of sentience. They have not developed the brain and nervous system capacity to have that in the earliest of stages. Now later on in the later term it does get more into a gray area which is a big reason why I donlt support late term abortions. But at the same time…giving zygotes and embryoes and early term fetus’s the rights of personhood…is something that just doesn;t quite seem right to me. I mean it;s one thing when you are talking about a viable fetus…it is quite another imo when your talking abuot a fertilized egg.

 

[royal_archer]

Interestingly enough I am soo tired I decided to look up an official defination of legal personhood and what not * I cant think straight right now lol* and found it actually encompasses far more then I realized…but anyway answers.com/topic/personhood actually I think I may have used the wrong term.

The Western legal concept of a person as a citizen of the state with both legal rights and responsibilities

But basically as I have understanded it or at least the way I use it…is a person is basically a human being with legal rights and responsiblities. Course it is a pretty complicated subject. There has even been talk of granting the other great apes personhood or instance and therefore certain rights.

Interesting wiki article too en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Person

Of course this all doesn;t mean that definations couldn;t change…that one day for instance a fetus of any stage could be called a person and therefore have legal rights. Of course then I think there would be another problem…because both the woman and the fetus would have rights…whose would you protect?

I have the right to drive down the road at the full speed limit, you have a right to cross the road in safety. Laws set priorities and compromises. You have to use the crosswalk and I have to slow down if you are in the crosswalk.

The infringement on a mothers rights is proportional to the impact on the child who is an innocent bystander.

In the medical realm if you grant medical aid to someone and then stop when you have the capabiltity to continue and when there is no one who is there to take over, you are liable for that person’s worsening condition. For instance: if you come upon a crash and put direct preasure on a wound but later learn that the person you are helping caused the crash and hurt someone you care about and as a result you stop the direct preasure allowing the person to blead to death. In such a scenario you could be held liable. If you start rendering aid to a bystander and later just decide to stop, you can be held liable.

As a bystander you do not have a duty to act. but once you act as a care taker you incur that duty. A mother is a care giver to that child. It is the mother’s duty to continue with that care until the child can be transfered to at least an equal caregiver.

With the medical analogy as a starting point for case law, you could say that the mother has a duty to act until it impacts her safety.

 

[royal_archer]

It;s not the size that matters it;s more then lack of any capablity of sentience. They have not developed the brain and nervous system capacity to have that in the earliest of stages. Now later on in the later term it does get more into a gray area which is a big reason why I donlt support late term abortions. But at the same time…giving zygotes and embryoes and early term fetus’s the rights of personhood…is something that just doesn;t quite seem right to me. I mean it;s one thing when you are talking about a viable fetus…it is quite another imo when your talking abuot a fertilized egg.

First, are you actively trying to fight prenatal murders that occur after point x in development?

Do you believe killing the child before point x should have any consequences?

For instance the governement penalizes smokers with a several dollar a pack tax as a means of discouraging behavior that effects no one other than the individual. Do you think something like this would be appropriate for killing the child early in term? Or are you against ciggarette taxes as a violation of peoples right to choose?

 

[SteveGC]

It;s not the size that matters it;s more then lack of any capablity of sentience. They have not developed the brain and nervous system capacity to have that in the earliest of stages. Now later on in the later term it does get more into a gray area which is a big reason why I donlt support late term abortions. But at the same time…giving zygotes and embryoes and early term fetus’s the rights of personhood…is something that just doesn;t quite seem right to me. I mean it;s one thing when you are talking about a viable fetus…it is quite another imo when your talking abuot a fertilized egg.

I really want to implore you to reconsider your beliefs on this. Would you not agree that a “fertilized egg”, which even you have called “human”, can only develop into one thing, and one thing only…and that is a “viable fetus”? I mean, assuming there’s not a natural miscarriage…there’s only one path for these “cells” to take, no? A fully developed “late term” baby. No other future for those zygotes and embryoes, right?

Now just absorb that for a moment. Really think about it. Keep your notions of “legality of personhood” out of it for a minute. And then tell me it’s not murder when we purposefully terminate these “cells” any time between conception and “late term”. Tell me that these cells don’t have the right to life such as that of any other persons on earth.

God Bless

 

[AHapka]

In the medical realm if you grant medical aid to someone and then stop when you have the capabiltity to continue and when there is no one who is there to take over, you are liable for that person’s worsening condition. For instance: if you come upon a crash and put direct preasure on a wound but later learn that the person you are helping caused the crash and hurt someone you care about and as a result you stop the direct preasure allowing the person to blead to death. In such a scenario you could be held liable. If you start rendering aid to a bystander and later just decide to stop, you can be held liable.

As a bystander you do not have a duty to act. but once you act as a care taker you incur that duty.

In most states (Wisconsin is one of them) good samaritan laws exist where a bystander who assists someone in good faith cannot be held liable.

895.48(1):
The statute provides in relevant part: “Any person who renders emergency care at the scene of any emergency or accident in good faith shall be immune from civil liability for his or her acts or omissions in rendering such emergency care.”

 

[elts1956]

Yep I agree though one thing different for me I am a woman lol. Also I should note from what I understand at least I think this way. We do see the fetus as a life. The question is it a life worthy of personhood and protection under the law.? And at the stage mentioned in the article I find it to be a very grey area. But the fact of the matter is most abortions take place far far sooner.

If one admits to the dignity and sanctity of each human life from conception to natural death, then whether that life is protected under the law, or not, is not what gives each of us dignity and our lives sanctified. The fact we are all human, in and out of the womb, is what gives us the Right To Life.

 

[s4angel]

I was reading through these posts… I am a single mother of five thats right five children my youngest will be a year next month. I have been demoted at work for being pregnant and when I tried to fight back by complaining to my EEO I was called pretty much a “loose woman”. This did not just happen once but 3 times not only that but when I was forced from my job because of the extreme hostile work environment I had to go on welfare and was told by the welfare lady that I should not have any more children. I have been treated horribly by perfect strangers when I have had to call for an ambulance for my dad because I hadn’t been able to vacume my floor that day or get the dishes clean (these strangers were EMTs) Peoples eyes bulge when I tell them I have five children ( I think its funny)

My first child Joey had trisomy 18 and died soon after his birth so in reality I had six children but you would not believe some of the heartless and cold things people said to me. Like “why are you still pregnant?”

I understand why some would seek an abortion especialy those who may not be strong in thier belief that this is indeed a child a human being, someone who can not defend themselves we are not animals we do not abandon the weak. This abortion thing is an abomination it is not a choice, instead it is an act of terror against those who can not stand for themselves and what is worse it is an act of violence against us woman and our bodies. yes a woman is pregnant for 9 months, yes physical and emotional changes accure during that time as well as after and yes unfortunatly woman are discriminated against when they do become pregnant and it is very real and in that fragile emotional state it does have a profound effect on us to know that people see us in that state as less than instead of more of.

If we allow others to take away the one gift that was given to all woman and twist it then we have lost that which made us woman. (I dont know how better to put this) What if instead of denying ourselves the god given status of life bearers we instead embrace it and embrace others no matter how they got to that state or what the cost may be. What if the world saw children as something more than baggage. What if we insisted instead on the right to be fertile, the right to be mothers?

 

[fix]

If that is the case, then pro-life=pro-bombing abortion clinics… It make no logical sense. Please do not stereotype.

No, your position makes no logical sense. Pro “choice” is pro abortion. Such a person endorses the “right” to kill an innocent person even if they themselves will not do it.

Pro choice on rape is pro rape. Pro choice on genocide is pro genocide, and on and on.

Pro life does not support killing innocent persons via bombs, scalpels, or anything else.

 

[NCSue]

Re: pro-choice/pro-life issues…

I ran into a story in Our Sunday Visitor that was somewhat of an update on “mercy killing”, which is gaining popuarity and which becoming accepted by some courts/legislatures. I did a bit more research on the topic and posted about it today at acts17verse28.blogspot.com/2009/05/euthanasia-path-to-dignity.html.

I’d be interested in hearing what your opinions are on care at the end of life. Is there ever a time when you believe that “mercy killing” is justifiable? How do you feel about withholding nutrition (tube feedings) from someone who is unable to eat? Is it ever OK to take someone off a ventilator? What about “living wills” - do you believe that it’s a good idea to have one? Do you? Do you believe that the medical community is (or should be) legally bound to honor living wills? Should there be legal penalties is the next of kin or the medical community doesn’t abide by the instructions in the document?

All interesting questions. I’d like to hear from you.

 

[KingTheoden]

the time that I believe it is acceptable is when the life of the mother or the life of the mother and the fetus are very much in danger - I say this because I had to make this choice

There are many that would argue that this is not an abortion. it is no different than any other c-sectionor induced labor where required to save the mother but at risk to the child. It sounds like you went with the procedure that granted all the greatest chance of survival.

I agree with Royal Archer.

Annie, my understanding is that you did absolutely nothing wrong. Of course in that situation, which I am sure was not just physically terrible but emotionally hurtful, you were perfectly right in the procedure proformed.

However, I don’t think that really counts as ‘an abortion’ because it lacked the intent and motivation that go with abortion. You did not plan on your body having some kind of horrible reaction, nor did you induce it.

So, there is no question of abortion here. I forget what the procedure is called, but there is a separate medical term.

The tricky part is that pro-abortion people often say we need abortion for a case such as yours; for the health of the mother. The truth is that what procedure you sadly had to endure to my knowledge was never illegal, nor would it be any sooner than foot amputations would be proscribed by law.

To PP and NARAL, ‘health of the mother’ includes emotional state and whether or not she has a ‘supportive family climate.’ That’s the trick that the pro-choice movement plays.

 

[Calliso]

I really want to implore you to reconsider your beliefs on this. Would you not agree that a “fertilized egg”, which even you have called “human”, can only develop into one thing, and one thing only…and that is a “viable fetus”? I mean, assuming there’s not a natural miscarriage…there’s only one path for these “cells” to take, no? A fully developed “late term” baby. No other future for those zygotes and embryoes, right?

Now just absorb that for a moment. Really think about it. Keep your notions of “legality of personhood” out of it for a minute. And then tell me it’s not murder when we purposefully terminate these “cells” any time between conception and “late term”. Tell me that these cells don’t have the right to life such as that of any other persons on earth.

God Bless

Even after thinking about it the way you asked me too I still don;t think those cells aka the early term fetus /embryo have the same right to life as any other person on earth.

 

[MarysGirls]

Interestingly enough I am soo tired I decided to look up an official defination of legal personhood and what not * I cant think straight right now lol* and found it actually encompasses far more then I realized…but anyway answers.com/topic/personhood actually I think I may have used the wrong term.

The Western legal concept of a person as a citizen of the state with both legal rights and responsibilities

But basically as I have understanded it or at least the way I use it…is a person is basically a human being with legal rights and responsiblities. Course it is a pretty complicated subject. There has even been talk of granting the other great apes personhood or instance and therefore certain rights.

Interesting wiki article too en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Person

Of course this all doesn;t mean that definations couldn;t change…that one day for instance a fetus of any stage could be called a person and therefore have legal rights. Of course then I think there would be another problem…because both the woman and the fetus would have rights…whose would you protect?

I think I was more tired than you. I went to sleep before replying.
Anyway personhood, as I have always thought of it, is much more simple. A person is anyone who has a soul. Do you agree with this definition?
My argument on behalf of the fetus is the following:
Scientific and medical studies show that there are only four differences between the fetus and a newborn.

1. Size.
   If someone’s size effects how much of a person they are, than I’m in trouble because I’m
   shorter than most people. Am I less human because of it?
2. Level of Development.
   If someone’s level of development effects how much of a person they are, than those of
   us with a lower IQ are less human than others. Also, a four-year-old girl isn’t fully
   developed. She doesn’t even have a repreductive system yet. Is she less human
   because of it?
3. Enviroment.
   If where you are effects who you are than all of us are in trouble. Last night I rolled over
   in bed - am I less human because of it? Of course not. Than how does travelling down
   the birth canal magically change the fetus into a baby?
4. Dependency.
   If someone’s level of dependency effects who they are than some of the people on this
   site are not human and we may kill them because some of the people are dependent on
   insulin, pacemakers, medication, etc.

I wish all pro-abortionists would consider this. Because, whether they realize it or not, it could mean life or death for an innocent child. Please choose life.