People sometimes can have strange justifications for abortion

[CNCIBC9]

I got into an argument a while ago with an old friend (who ironically I met in our catholic school) about life beginning at conception. Strange thing was, that I wasn’t even trying to argue that life begins at conception. I could have, of course, but I didn’t even delve that deep into the topic because his line of reasoning for life NOT beginning at conception was ridiculously flawed.

His “point” was that “People that say life begins at conception are dumb. Why do people eat eggs for breakfast then? Youre killing a chicken by doing that!”

I thought that way of thinking was absurd. Even diregarding the fact of whether or not you’re killing a chicken by eating eggs, the two situations aren’t even remotely comparable! Chickens are chickens. Humans are humans. Big difference! We eat full grown chickens all the time, eating a human at any stage of development is obviously a heinous act.

I just don’t understand how someone could even think of that as a possible justification for life not beginning at conception. It makes little sense to me and leaves me more than a little frightened about our race as a whole (other people posted on his blog agreeing with him).

Comparing chickens to humans, sheeeeesh

 

[Benedictus]

His “point” was that “People that say life begins at conception are dumb. Why do people eat eggs for breakfast then? Youre killing a chicken by doing that!”

Maybe that argument would make sense to a vegetarian, but since most of us each chicken anyways… I don’t see why it matters if you’re killing a chicken or not.

I believe the chicken eggs you get from the grocery store are not fertilized anyways.

 

[CNCIBC9]

Maybe that argument would make sense to a vegetarian, but since most of us each chicken anyways… I don’t see why it matters if you’re killing a chicken or not.

I believe the chicken eggs you get from the grocery store are not fertilized anyways.

Yeah exactly. And I’m almost positive grocery store eggs aren’t fertilized, but I didn’t even bring that up because even assuming it was, the argument is still preposterous.

 

[dafalax]

I believe the chicken eggs you get from the grocery store are not fertilized anyways.

Ah contrere, mon frere. Sometimes they are. As a child i asked my mommy what that white stuff floating around the yolk in the albumen was. She said, “Chicken sperm.” She’s old and grew up on a farm. I tend to believe her for better or gross.
Anyway, the comparison between chickens and humans is silly. If the egg is fertilized and development has begun, then yes it’s a chicken growing in an egg instead of a uterus. I’m still going to scramble it and eat it and maintain that life also begins at conception in humans and should be protected from that point on.

 

[Firefox]

Ah contrere, mon frere. Sometimes they are. As a child i asked my mommy what that white stuff floating around the yolk in the albumen was. She said, “Chicken sperm.” She’s old and grew up on a farm. I tend to believe her for better or gross.

She’s flat wrong. I checked just to be sure, that’s the chalazae, the cords that keep the yolk from floating or sinking, I’m not sure which…

Yeah, that’s a pretty bad argument for abortion right there…

 

[YADA]

I think he sounds like someone who just realized that eggs come form chickens.

Wait until he finds out that hamburger comes from cows

 

[Hastrman]

I got into an argument a while ago with an old friend (who ironically I met in our catholic school) about life beginning at conception. Strange thing was, that I wasn’t even trying to argue that life begins at conception. I could have, of course, but I didn’t even delve that deep into the topic because his line of reasoning for life NOT beginning at conception was ridiculously flawed.

His “point” was that “People that say life begins at conception are dumb. Why do people eat eggs for breakfast then? Youre killing a chicken by doing that!”

Just out of curiosity, when you went to school with this Nobel laureate, did he get there on a short bus?

That may well be the single stupidest thing any human has ever said.

 

[vern_humphrey]

One of the things you’re up against is that people who have had abortions will go to any lengths to deny the truth about what they’ve done.

Hang around these forums long enough, and see how many times someone on the pro-aboriton side gives “a friend” as an example of why abortion is necessary.

That’s also why parental non-notification is so important to the pro-abortion side. They get some young school girl at her most vulnerable, whisk her away for an abortion, then callously throw her back into the same environment where she got pregnant in the first place. They don’t care about helping her, they care about recruiting her.

 

[Linda_Marie]

Well, here is is officially - chickens are more important than human embryos.

Congressional Cmte: Chickens More Important Than Secret Abortions
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
February 8, 2007

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) – A Congressional committee on Wednesday voted against an amendment that would prohibit taking teenagers out of state for secret abortions without their parents’ knowledge. The committee eventually decided protecting chickens was more important than protecting children.

“I recognize we are meeting here today to consider a bill to protect chickens,” Sensenbrenner said in a statement given to LifeNews.com. “But isn’t protecting our nation’s young women, like Mr. Carroll’s daughter, and their unborn equally, if not more important, than our dinner entrйe?”

“Without this amendment, we will be giving more protection to chickens than we will be giving to minor children, their parents and their unborn baby,” he said.

lifenews.com/nat2921.html

 

[vern_humphrey]

Here in Stone County, Arkansas, we are struggling to open a Crisis Pregnancy Center.

Yet we have an Animal Shelter going up – some local activists donated the land, there is grant money and lots of volunteers to staff it.

A stray dog is apparently more important than a human infant.

 

[vern_humphrey]

A Congressional committee on Wednesday voted against an amendment that would prohibit taking teenagers out of state for secret abortions without their parents’ knowledge.

Let’s examine this. Why is it important that it be legal to take children out of state for abortions without the parents knowing about it?

The pro-abortionists will say, “It’s for her protection?”

Really? Let’s examine that proposition.

First of all, an underage girl who pregnant is the victim of rape. Certainly statutory rape and very possibly rape by coersion or force. So the first step in proteting her is to identify and deal with the rapist – so he can’t victimize her or other girls again. What do these laws do to find and bing rapists to justice? Nothing! They conceal the crime and protect the rapist.

Secondly, an underage girl who pregnant has far more problems than the simple fact of her pregnancy! Things like drug abuse, alcohol abuse, physical or psychological coersiion, psychological problems and so on. She needs help! But who will give it to her? Not her parents – her problems have been concealed from them!

Third, in many cases the best protection for a child in trouble is to get them out of the environment. Is that what happens here? Not on your nelly! She’s thrown back into the same environment where she came from – to be victimized again and again.

So, since the children get neither help nor protection, just what is the justification for taking children out of state for abortions without the parents knowing about it?

The justification is recruitment. A young girl is seized at her most vulnerable and pressured – sometimes virtually frog-marched to the abortionist. And for the rest of her life she will face a horrible dilemma: she must either face herself in the mirror and admit to herself she killed her own child, or she must defend abortion as a positive good!

Who cares how screwed up she is? Who cares about her pain? Who cares about her future life? The important thing is that she will likely defend abortions now that she’s had one.