Substitute slavery for abortion in your argument and you have the CSA’s case for secession. Of course, now that slavery is illegal we have all those secretly held slaves being treated worse that they were before when slavery was safer.
I kind of responded to that before you posted it.
?) I just don’t think there is a right or a wrong in this. I think we need to remember though that different topics have different ways of dealing with them. I don’t think it’s really fair to compare the legalization of rape or slavery to the legalization of abortion, since they are different topics; and need to be examined from different perspectives.Well, I’ll have to agree you didn’t make an argument but you did make some unsupported assertions that merit a response. Rape, slavery, and slaughtering children in the womb have at least one critical fact in common: they are gross violations of human dignity and therefore objectively immoral. Calling murder a “choice” doesn’t change the nature of the deed.I kind of responded to that before you posted it.
Basically, you’ve all already identified the floors in my argument (although I’m not sure it was an argument either way…
None of this is meant to cause offense, I am just contemplating!
That wasnt the case for secession. I know that may seem a bit like nit picking, considering the topic, but lets not get too carried away with things.
Actually slavery is still very much alive and well and still being practiced in the open the way that it used to be in many parts of the world. The major issue with it being that live is worth a lot less now than it used to be so there is no real incentive to look after your slaves as its cheaper to buy new ones.
I am not so sure that I agree with your ‘everything has it’s negatives’ statement. What is the downside of adoption?
“Backstreet Abortions” leading to thousands of deaths are a myth perpetuated by ‘pro-choicers’. In the USA, in 1972:
Source
That is precisely why we need laws to protect innocent human beings from those who don’t see anything wrong with killing someone else. There are those who have the opinion that killing others is okay and the innocent need to be protected from these people.
Well, I just want to jump in and say this whole argument politically anyway hinges on when life becomes life, and right now medically a baby isn’t considered a life until it’s born, or at the very least, not before it’s viable outside the womb. Even though we believe life begins at conception, a large number of people do not and the whole debate with the law is that one group of people can not tell others what to think and create laws that cater to their specific beliefs - and this goes for so many things like what religion to practice, abortion, etc. Let’s use that slavery example. If you say one group is above all else when it comes to making decesions, then you possibly could even be saying (or it could imply) that some people could say their race is superior - and we all know we are equal and no race is superior above any other.
Well yes, I agree that there is no real downside to practicing restraint; some people would argue (although this is not my opinion) that if the pregnancy was conceived due to rape, that is not necessarily because of their immorality or promiscuity.I am not so sure that I agree with your ‘everything has it’s negatives’ statement. What is the downside of adoption?
What is the downside of keeping your clothes on and choosing to do so prior to sexual relations (where the choosing is supposed to take place)?
In the ‘right to choose’, does the baby have a right to choose as well?
Just some questions I pray you ponder. Peace be with you,
Kelly
That is quite horrific how twisted it has become, but I do feel that we’ll never know the exact figure of back street abortions, and the consequences of them. I agree it must be far less than exaggerated pro-choice materials.
There is the “tissue issue” previously mentioned though… it’s not necessarily that they see killing a person as being okay, just that they disagree that the baby or “tissue” (depending on the outlook) is a life. There are medical arguments for and against the classification of life, so inevitably either way someone is going to disagree with such a law!
You’ve really just summed up on what I’ve tried and failed to say!
If it be impossible for you to determine the greater good, why not give the benefit of the doubt to the child?
Wait though you say later that people cannot tell people what to think in order to create laws that cater to others beliefs?
So which is it? Are people allowed to tell me when life begins but I am not allowed to have a say in it?
Unless you are a baby in a woman’s womb… Then you are equal to no one. In fact you are so unequal to anyone else that someone can easily dispose of you.
I agree
Wait, hold up. You said that a baby doesn’t become a human until it is, “born” so what is your gripe about late term abortions? It makes no sense. Either a baby doesn’t become human until birth and therefore late term abortions are no, “biggie” or the opposite is true and early abortions are just as terrible as late ones.
So then like I said to the other poster, lets give the benefit of doubt to the baby. Lets give the benefit of doubt to life.
This isn’t true because you just said that one group believe a baby doesn’t become human until it is born… What if I said a baby doesn’t become human until is has the human ability to talk? Can I then do away with my child up until that point? And don’t tell me what to believe, if I believe a child is not human until it can talk, that is what I believe.
Why should we pray to stop it if they are not human until they are born?
Yes, much better for them to not be around then to find out that their mother made the “choice” to allow them to live.
Is that really the case?
People who want to believe something are very easy to convince.Do you thing there are really women who honestly believe that “blob of tissue spin?” My personal opinion (which may be quite wrong) is that the verdict was well-deserved because even my grade-schooler could sketch a baby if asked to represent the contents of a pregnant woman’s belly. He wouldn’t need a nurse to tell him what’s in there and neither should she!
You would be mistaken if you believe the scientific and medical community is not in agreement that a unique life is present from the moment of conception.
Because a large number of people do not believe something does not make it so.
No, the issue is not to make laws telling others what to think and believe, but to protect the innocent from those who believe it is okay to kill them.
Unfortunately some other do not believe murder (or theft, or rape, or fill in the blank) is wrong.
In what way is a baby not viable from the moment of conception?
And so from the moment of conception they should be protected from being murdered.
Sure they can. They have been doing that since Roe v. Wade.
Of course negative effects are a different order of magnitude compared to murder.
Not everyone grows up with a cushy pillow and happy feelings all their life, but are still happy to be alive regardless of whether someone else wants them or not or whether they feel wanted.
Could you provide one of these medical references please?
It’s a case of “you live your life, I will live my life, and the baby will lose its life”.
Funny how the Hippocratic Oath is so easy forgotten when it comes to abortion.
davia I read your profile and I see that you are Catholic so I understand that these are probably not your views and you are just giving the other side. I still have some comments though.
I am still new to this, so let me try and address each of these. Yes, I believe life begins at conception. Unfortunately like I said others don’t, and while I think everyone should have their say to how the law is shaped, unfortunately I don’t think lawmakers are going to go against women’t “choice” when they will not define life as beginning from conception and that life in the womb has a right to live.
Wait though you say later that people cannot tell people what to think in order to create laws that cater to others beliefs?
Right, but unfortunately the law only goes one way. We can’t have both a law giving this “choice” and one that makes abortion illegal - I mean, how would we even do that? Each religious group would have a different law for themselves?
So which is it? Are people allowed to tell me when life begins but I am not allowed to have a say in it?
No, we definately have a say in it. It’s up to lawmakers to listen or not so that’s why we have to keep on pushing through writing congressmen and through our voting of government officials. I guess that’s why some say it’s my choice to and yours not too. That’s their “say”. I still don’t think we’ll ever get abortion illegal again which is why I say we should pray for women to stop on their own.
Unless you are a baby in a woman’s womb… Then you are equal to no one. In fact you are so unequal to anyone else that someone can easily dispose of you.
I see what you are saying, but in that example, I was talking about races as a whole, not every individual (although I believe that as well). Once again unforunately it goes back to what is considered life by the law. The law doesn’t see the “fetus” as they say as a life in comparison to those already born.
Wait, hold up. You said that a baby doesn’t become a human until it is, “born” so what is your gripe about late term abortions? It makes no sense. Either a baby doesn’t become human until birth and therefore late term abortions are no, “biggie” or the opposite is true and early abortions are just as terrible as late ones.
Well, actually I said the argument centers not just on being born, but also on vwhen there is the ability to live outside the womb. as we see every day there are millions of premature babies that survive even though they are not “full term”. So, that’s why I say I am glad people are seeing that, and that I hope the law will recognize that life “begins” at the very least at viability and that can’t be argued otherwise. A person can argue that a 10 week “fetus” can’t survive, but they can’t argue a 28 weeker couldn’t survive and that surviving baby would obviously have “life”.
So then like I said to the other poster, lets give the benefit of doubt to the baby. Lets give the benefit of doubt to life.
We can do that as Catholics, but athiests may not agree, and the law is going to side with “freedom” and choice. The way the law it set up, they have “freedom” to do what they want with the law and we have “freedom” to do what we want and believe in.
This isn’t true because you just said that one group believe a baby doesn’t become human until it is born… What if I said a baby doesn’t become human until is has the human ability to talk? Can I then do away with my child up until that point? And don’t tell me what to believe, if I believe a child is not human until it can talk, that is what I believe.
well, I am not talking about being human, I am talking about unquestionable proof that there is life, and that is with being born. We may believe it happens much sooner, but not everyone doesIf you did for example believe that, it’s not what the law believes which is like I said the whole center of this arguemnt IMO.
Why should we pray to stop it if they are not human until they are born?
Because I didn’t say they weren’t human or alive, I said others don’t believe it. What they believe may not be the truth, but it has shaped the law to what it is today too.
Yes, much better for them to not be around then to find out that their mother made the “choice” to allow them to live.
They will still know. Yes the mothers who do not recognize life as from conception do not know nor believe this.
God bless
*You too, and like I said I am not trying to offend, just to point out a few points and give another side that many other people seem to believe./*QUOTE]
The science and medical community may be in agreement, but the law is not.
I assure you, people are forced to have abortions – by boy friends, husbands, parents, school nurses and so on.