Pro Life versus Pro Choice Debate

[beafedor]

To all Pro-Choicers, Humanists on this thread, please listen to a real story:

16 years ago, I started College and I got pregnant and my boyfriend said: “You have to get rid of that”. I was in shock because I thought we would get married and raise our family. If I could have had my way, that was my CHOICE. But he rejected me and our child. All my friends were advising a quick fix abortion. I was too ashamed and scared to turn to my parents. I thought they would reject me too My boyfriend paid for the abortion and I knew in my heart it was wrong, I didn’t want it, until the last minute I was hoping that HE would change HIS mind and so that we could have our child. But he didn’t. The abortion traumatized me greatly. I’m still suffering form the consequences. No it was not MY choice but HIS.
After that I went from abusive relationship to abusive relationship, was depressed and suicidal with anxiety disorder.

I had a second abortion 7 years later. The father was abusive, a drug addict and twice my age. I wanted to have my baby, I really wanted to, I never wanted to abort. I had a job and a place to live. But I was afraid that the father would abuse our son or take him away from me. I wanted my child to live but I was so scared and there again my good friends were advising the quick fix abortion. So I did the very thing that I didn’t want to do and I’m still paying dearly for it.

Unfortunately, there millions of stories similar to mine. This tragedy happens everyday.
Really my friends, you are fighting the wrong fight if you are standing for the “woman’s right to choose”. There is no such a thing. Abortion hasn’t empowered women. All that abortion does is to take a life and to harm a mother. That and Planned Parenthood making more money.

And thank you for your encouragements Gakroeger

 

[wi11ow]

First off, thankyou for the kind welcome.
Secondly, I appologize if my response is somewhat jumbled, there are several posts to reply to and Im doing it as I come to them

SteveGC:

The problem is that there is no universal (widely agreed upon) definition of “human being”. That’s stating the obvious, of course, but it speaks the clearest about why we can’t resolve this issue. Being a devout Catholic, admittedly I am not as focused on the scientific data which supports the arguments that a bonafide human being exists at conception, opting rather to rest my belief on when the Church declares life begins. But I do know that the gist of the scientific data points us to a reality which should be understandable by people of all beliefs…that there is nothing in this world that a fertilized ovum (from the instant of conception) will develop into except a human being. It won’t be a monkey, a dog, or any sort of lump of unorganized cells. It can only develop into a human being.

I realize that there is no universal standard for what defines a “human being” nor is there a clearly defined transition point between “cell cluster” and a “being”. My argument wasnt that the cells wont develop into a human being left to there own devices rather that the cells themselves are NOT as of yet a human being. They are human cells no more no less. They do have a unique DNA code for a unique being they can develop into but my hair, liver, kidney, brain and saliva contain a unique DNA code for a unique being “myself” in this case.

The existance of a unique DNA code does not make a human being though. We can edit DNA sequences or recombine DNA in the lab, the fact that the created strand exists outside of a human cell doesnt negate the fact the strand is code for a unique human being, nor does the fact that the DNA itself is human, but its not a human being, its just human cellular code.

SteveGC:

Because if you abort a zygote even a nanosecond after conception, you have terminated the life of a human being

Im curious what you consider to be life? Would the death of one of my stem cells (as capable of forming into a full human being as an ovum under favourable conditions) count as murder as well? or is it just the extinguishment of an entire DNA code?

SteveGC:

you have destroyed it’s natural, inevitable progression and development into one. I know you’ve essentially said that a zygote’s capacity to develop into a human being is insignificant, but is it really? Think about it for a minute…except for your intervention, this organism will be a person…

she’s done this because the fetus was excluded from being labeled a “human being”, but the fact remains that she’s destroyed the natural, inevitable development of it into one. That reality can be backed up all the way to the very instant of conception. One nanosecond old is no different than 20 weeks old, in terms of the natural course of that life.

So the question is more about the loss of potental for human life, rather then human life itself?

Abortion isnt the only method by which pregnancies are terminated and most often its due to “natural” cause. I realize natural causes are often considered “gods will”, but human intervention is not the only reason by which the development of the fetus into a human child is prevented or perverted.

SteveGC:

What this essentially is saying is that at 20 weeks or earlier, you can justify abortion because…why?..because the baby can’t live on it’s own? This is a problem I find with the pro-choice crowd…they argue that a fetus is the “property” of the mother, that despite it being a distinct life of it’s own, because it is dependent on the mother’s biology to survive and develop, that the mother is somehow able to be responsible in determining if that life should cease, or continue…and if it reaches a stage (such as 21 weeks) wherein the baby could potentially be born and somehow survive, then abortion is wrong.

Im saying that one must draw the line somewhere, most people choose birth and I disagree with that approach. I dont think that birth confers any special status or privilage to the child, its a formality nothing more so far as I am concerned.

Since I dont consider a freshly fertalized egg a human being, and I consider the fetus to become human before birth the transition must occur in the interceding 9 months. Since I have no degree in reproductive science, I am positing a place for that line at the time in which a child can continue to develop outside its mothers body. Would you prefer that I say a medical examination should be done to determine the suitability of the fetus to further develop outside its mother on a case by case bases?

A counter example, why is it okay to drink at 21 but not the day before your 21st birthday? or voting? or marriage? or sexual consent? There is no real or defensable reason to put the definitive line at any specific age and there will always be exceptions to the rule, I know many people more mature and informed in there teens then most adults when it comes to politics but 16 year olds cant vote.

 

[wi11ow]

SteveGC:

Speaking from personal experience, I would say that there is definitely grieving and a periods of mourning, to various degrees. Some do hold informal funerals, but typically because there is no tangible remains, there is no practical burial.

I’m not doubting the sense of loss involved and I do feel for those who have experienced a miscarrage, especially late in there pregnancy. It is the loss of there potential child and a feeling of empathy for the sorrow of the parents I feel. I do not morn the loss of life, rather what potential life has been lost.

However, I disagree that there is very rarely any remains, albiet not visually pleasent there are remains unless its VERY early in the pregnancy. Perhaps the hospital wont release the remains as in most cases I believe they cremate stillborn fetus’ in the hospital incinerator.

CWBetts:

Both artificial contraception and abortion are self centered. Sexuality is a gift. In is enjoyable, but that is not the purpose, however tat is exactly what contraception perverts the purpose to. The marital act is an act of deep love drawing two people together with the potential of making a new life. Birth control turns it into an act of self love with the goal of achieving the greatest amount of pleasure

I don’t think we are going to agree on the purposes of sex in our species. Its not soley about procreation. If that were the case then even catholic methods of “birth control” or family planning would be immoral as well.

The existance of a catholic model of family planning represents an admission by the catholic church of the need or desire for sex within marrage without procreation. The intent through timing to prevent children is just that an attempt to prevent children. The fact that it is not 100% successful or reliable means that your playing a game of roulette, but does not change your intentions. Saying “well if god wants me to have a child she will get pregnant despite my efforts” is a cop out, much like saying “well if god wants me to have a child the condom will break”

Sex is meant as an expression of intense emotion and a means for connection between two people, married or otherwise and is rarely a self centered activity outside of masterbation. The fact that one chooses to engage in sex with contraception does not reduce the love one feels for there partner, nor does it change the sexual experience.

 

[wi11ow]

Caramel:

Fertilized ova that fail to attach to the uterine wall are still human beings. Their lives are short. It is not a regular menstruation if a fertilized ovum is flushed from the woman’s body. It is a spontaneous abortion.

So god aborts to? (sorry I will try to be polite) In either case “spontaneous abortions” account for about 25%+ of miscarrages, far more then will ever be aborted medically. However there is very little concern for the loss of embryonic life in early pregnancy amoung those who experience them. Most occuring before the mother even knows shes pregnant or experienced a misscarrage.

Most abortions occur within this same period, the first 11-12 weeks before the embryo transitions to a fetus, and prior to the first 14 weeks the development of much of the organs has yet to be completed.

Caramel:

I am confused here. You state that it is not a “being” and in the next sentence you say it is a living organism. Are you referring to an embryo? It’s difficult for me to understand exactly what you are trying to say here. Each fertilized ovum, from the moment of conception has enough genetic information to guide it through the rest of its life. How can a living organism not be a “being?”

Is the H1N1 virus a living being?, or the germs on my toilet seat? are the fleas on the cats in the ally outside beings in the same sense that we are beings? Something can be alive, but not a living being. Sponges are alive.

caramel:

I don’t think that anyone would call a cluster of liver cells a “living organism.”

But the cluster of liver cells is alive and grows and reproduces itself, it also contains all the genetic information required to make a full human being, or another liver.

caramel:

But at six and a half weeks past conception the embryo has a liver, heart, brain, has all the internal organs that other human beings have. She has a mouth, lips, the beginning of milk teeth. She has had decipherable brain waves present since 40 days
after conception.

babycenter.com/2_inside-pregnancy-weeks-1-to-9_10302602.bc a 3d look at the first 1-9 weeks of pregnancy
babycenter.com/fetal-development-images-6-weeks
babycenter.com/fetal-development-images-7-weeks
babycenter.com/fetal-development-images-8-weeks
babycenter.com/fetal-development-images-9-weeks
babycenter.com/fetal-development-images-10-weeks
babycenter.com/fetal-development-images-11-weeks

According to this site on fetal development, by six and a half weeks it doesnt have fully formed or functioning organs. The heart is still outside the body the brain doesnt properly function and the whole thing is smaller then a grape, it does still have a tail though. The zygote doesnt even reach the fetal stage of development until 12 weeks.

Organs and movements you describe dont develop until 10-14 weeks, but still it doesnt have all the internal organs or features of fully developed human being (including a nervous system) until weeks 15-20 and by week 21-25 it becomes viable outside the uterus, and contains all the features of a full human being.

eileen.250x.com/Main/Einstein/Brain_Waves.htm
perhaps this article which explains the origin of the myth that a fetus has a functioning brain at 6.5-8 weeks would interest you? It seems that claim has been floating around for almost 50 years and is quite wrong.

One original source for the claim is Dr. Hannibal Hamlin’s “Life or Death by EEG.” This is a speech that was read before the Section on Nervous and Mental Diseases at the 113th Annual Convention of the American Medical Association in June 1964, and was printed in the Journal of the American Medical Association, October 12, 1964 (Vol 190, No 2, pages 112-114). Many claims reference it

Another source for the “40 days” claim is John R. Goldenring’s “Development of the Fetal Brain,” a letter published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 1982.

Note that both those sources are routinely cited in various pro life literature, and both are opinion peices rather then research papers which have not been subjected to peer review. In fact both sources are relying on previous research, incorrectly in atleast one case, instead of there own and are just giving a personal opinion on that research. Your claim is incorrect, much like the claims of functional organ development by 6.5 weeks.

Caramel:

if you take this baby and leave her on a table she will die

If you leave a newborn on a table it will die, or a premature birth, or a late baby. It may still require an incubator, but it can survive outside the womb. This is not true of fetus’ younger then this because of a lack of fetal development in terms of organs etc

 

[wi11ow]

gakroeger:

I’m sorry, but you are stating personal opinion as scientific fact. If you are going to state opinion please state it is your opinion, if you are going to state something as fact, please attach a reference to support your fact. We have another pro choice person on this thread who also frequently states opinion as fact and refuses to read anything that does not agree with his/her opinion.

I was unaware I claimed it to be a scientific fact instead of an opinion, and I mislike your tone. I’m not trying to troll your boards or anything but dislike the loosely veiled implication that I am mis informed, ignorant or wrong in this reguard.

Perhaps you could provide sources that are not from Christian think tanks? generally papers like this have a predetermined conclusion and try to bend the applicable research to fit there preconceptions. Bad science.

In the case of the Westchester Institute, they start from the premise that the zygote is a human being but fail to defend there position.

Your second link provides only quotations without making a point.

The third link is, like the second, a collection of quotes without making a point (also hard to read sideways). Its simply restating your position that “life” begins at conception.

Neither of the last two links claims that the zygote is a human being though, just that it is a “life” and an identifiably seperate organism from its combining parts. I’m perhaps being obtuse because I never claimed that the cells are not alive, just that they are not a “human being” at that stage in development.

gakroeger:

Also, the reason most experts believe the crime rate has reduced in recent years is not because the population has become more aware of morality, but because the incarceration rate has increased. More criminals are in jail

You accuse me of a failure to site sources, and yet you put forth the opinion of “most experts” but fail to site or name a single one. Links to book reviews dont count or do much to support your opinion in this matter. I can find reviews on books that explain why the holocaust was a lie, doesnt make it true.

In response to the increase in incarceration rates in the US, most experts I have heard link this trend to the changes in the draconian US narcotics policy and get tough on crime laws that send first time offenders to prison.

Secondly, I was refering to crime rates in Canada not the US. I am unfamiliar with most US crime statistics. We have not had the giant increase in incarceration rates in the last 30 years but our crime rates for almost all violent crimes has been on a steady decline for about a decade now.

cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/10/06/vital-signs-violent-crime-community-report380.html?ref=rss

gakroeger:

So, in your opinion, the 40 million abortions in the United States since 1973 had no impact on our population?

You missed my point, I never said the extra 40+ million wouldnt effect the US population. I said that abortion isnt the only reason that the US has a need for immigration or lower birth rate as you seem to contend.

gakroeger:

You really need to learn the facts of abortion. Contraceptives are a main cause of abortion. 54% of all abortions are the result of failed contraceptives.

This is what I mean, your calling me uninformed and ignorant because I disagree with you, and yet you fail to site your sources yet again while trying to claim an opinion as fact.

The idea that many abortions are performed due to a failure of contraceptives makes sense, but then people inclined to use contraceptives are more inclined to get an abortion then those who dont. This does not mean that contraceptives increase abortion rates though, your logic is flawed.

… wow really long post…

 

[fix]

The existance of a catholic model of family planning represents an admission by the catholic church of the need or desire for sex within marrage without procreation. The intent through timing to prevent children is just that an attempt to prevent children. The fact that it is not 100% successful or reliable means that your playing a game of roulette, but does not change your intentions. Saying “well if god wants me to have a child she will get pregnant despite my efforts” is a cop out, much like saying “well if god wants me to have a child the condom will break”

I have to say this is a misrepresentation of Catholic teaching. If you want to oppose Her teaching it would help if you correctly stated what that teaching is first.

 

[wi11ow]

perhaps you could enlighten me because thats the conclusion I seem to be drawing

 

[remjsmom76]

Reading this post is like feeding me more amo! Just recently I came across a video of a 12 yr old who was competing in a speech cometition and her topic is Abortion. I dont have the link but its a good speech. This girl had so many problems at first. They told her no at first, that she coulnt use that topic, but then they said that she will not advance to the next level, then she did, then a judge got up and walked out because her speech “offended” that judge, yet she still won the competition and is now in the next level of rounds.

So I posted this on my facebook, a friend loved it, and she reposted the video and one of her friends put her “2 cents in”. She said the didnt think this kid new what she was talking about. This kid was being fed as to what and how to think and that we just need to wait till she is 16 or older and she “WILL” change her mind. That there is not possible way this girl would know what the heck she is talking about and how in the world is a 12 yr old concerned about this topic. Like saying…“This kid is to young to care or even know or even make a change on this issue”.

I got upset. My oldest is 12. She is very pro life. WHY? not because we are catholic, not because I “feed it to her”. When I got pregnant with her I was 20 my husband was about to turn 19. We were going to college, we didnt have money. HIS FAMILY offered me money to have an abortion. They insisted, and said it was in our best intrest. Well you can imagine I DIDNT GET THAT ABORTION…my daughter is a 12 yr old, cheerleader, athletic, VERY WELL ARTICULATED, staright A student. She sings at church, she plays guitar, drums and piano. She is a budding artist, loves to draw, paint, scrapbook and sew…she is a mini me…lol. She knows what happened when she was concieved. She knows I got pregnant beofre I got married and she knows her dads family wanted me to get rid of her. She understand that SHE wouldnt be here if I fell into the “preassure” so I let this lady know that yes a 12 yr old COULD BE CONCERNED about this situation. We dont know if maybe her own mother considered abortion with her or not? It is possible for a young child to be the great voice for the world.

So Im glad I came across this post, it just adds more fule to my fire! Thanks!

 

[fix]

perhaps you could enlighten me because thats the conclusion I seem to be drawing

The Church teaches that a couple may space children for a short while, or indefinitely, if needed for just reasons. The issue is that the act has two aspects that may not be separated. She does not say that each act must have a chance of conception only that the act must be oriented toward life.

As you know the female cycle already has intrinsic to it days that will not allow conception at all. That does not mean that intercourse on these days is non procreative because the unaltered act is still oriented toward life or unitive and procreative.

The issue of contraception is much different from NFP. The intent may be the same in many cases, that is to not have a child, but the means are much different. With NFP the act is still correctly ordered. With contraception the act is changed, no matter the emotions involved.

 

[gakroeger]

I was unaware I claimed it to be a scientific fact instead of an opinion, and I mislike your tone. I’m not trying to troll your boards or anything but dislike the loosely veiled implication that I am mis informed, ignorant or wrong in this reguard.

Perhaps you could provide sources that are not from Christian think tanks? generally papers like this have a predetermined conclusion and try to bend the applicable research to fit there preconceptions. Bad science.

In the case of the Westchester Institute, they start from the premise that the zygote is a human being but fail to defend there position.

Your second link provides only quotations without making a point.

The third link is, like the second, a collection of quotes without making a point (also hard to read sideways). Its simply restating your position that “life” begins at conception.

Neither of the last two links claims that the zygote is a human being though, just that it is a “life” and an identifiably seperate organism from its combining parts. I’m perhaps being obtuse because I never claimed that the cells are not alive, just that they are not a “human being” at that stage in development.

Forgive me, it gets very frustrating debating with pro choice people who refuse to consider any material that is not from one of their left wing propaganda sites. Every time I present factual information, it is dismissed out of hand because the pro choice person does not like the message regardless of its truthfulness. The first link you did not like because you did not like the message, the second two links that you call quotes were not quotes they were references to many sites (some maybe even you would accept) however, you obviously wrote them off without even realizing they were references and not quotes.

On the third link if you right click on the document you can rotate it so you do not have to stand on your head….

Maybe reading some of the real life situations such as by beafedor you might get a picture of what is actually happening in the real world with the pro choice movement…….

You accuse me of a failure to site sources, and yet you put forth the opinion of “most experts” but fail to site or name a single one. Links to book reviews dont count or do much to support your opinion in this matter. I can find reviews on books that explain why the holocaust was a lie, doesnt make it true.

In response to the increase in incarceration rates in the US, most experts I have heard link this trend to the changes in the draconian US narcotics policy and get tough on crime laws that send first time offenders to prison.

Apparently you did not bother to read the links

 

[Caramel]

Reading this post is like feeding me more amo! Just recently I came across a video of a 12 yr old who was competing in a speech cometition and her topic is Abortion. I dont have the link but its a good speech. This girl had so many problems at first. They told her no at first, that she coulnt use that topic, but then they said that she will not advance to the next level, then she did, then a judge got up and walked out because her speech “offended” that judge, yet she still won the competition and is now in the next level of rounds.

So I posted this on my facebook, a friend loved it, and she reposted the video and one of her friends put her “2 cents in”. She said the didnt think this kid new what she was talking about. This kid was being fed as to what and how to think and that we just need to wait till she is 16 or older and she “WILL” change her mind. That there is not possible way this girl would know what the heck she is talking about and how in the world is a 12 yr old concerned about this topic. Like saying…“This kid is to young to care or even know or even make a change on this issue”.

I got upset. My oldest is 12. She is very pro life. WHY? not because we are catholic, not because I “feed it to her”. When I got pregnant with her I was 20 my husband was about to turn 19. We were going to college, we didnt have money. HIS FAMILY offered me money to have an abortion. They insisted, and said it was in our best intrest. Well you can imagine I DIDNT GET THAT ABORTION…my daughter is a 12 yr old, cheerleader, athletic, VERY WELL ARTICULATED, staright A student. She sings at church, she plays guitar, drums and piano. She is a budding artist, loves to draw, paint, scrapbook and sew…she is a mini me…lol. She knows what happened when she was concieved. She knows I got pregnant beofre I got married and she knows her dads family wanted me to get rid of her. She understand that SHE wouldnt be here if I fell into the “preassure” so I let this lady know that yes a 12 yr old COULD BE CONCERNED about this situation. We dont know if maybe her own mother considered abortion with her or not? It is possible for a young child to be the great voice for the world.

So Im glad I came across this post, it just adds more fule to my fire! Thanks!

You are very very welcome!! I am curious - is it the entire thread, part of the thread, or an individual post that you are happy with?? If it’s a single post, could you please give me the number?? It would help me so much!!

Thanks!!

 

[gakroeger]

Reading this post is like feeding me more amo! Just recently I came across a video of a 12 yr old who was competing in a speech cometition and her topic is Abortion. I dont have the link but its a good speech. This girl had so many problems at first. They told her no at first, that she coulnt use that topic, but then they said that she will not advance to the next level, then she did, then a judge got up and walked out because her speech “offended” that judge, yet she still won the competition and is now in the next level of rounds.

So I posted this on my facebook, a friend loved it, and she reposted the video and one of her friends put her “2 cents in”. She said the didnt think this kid new what she was talking about. This kid was being fed as to what and how to think and that we just need to wait till she is 16 or older and she “WILL” change her mind. That there is not possible way this girl would know what the heck she is talking about and how in the world is a 12 yr old concerned about this topic. Like saying…“This kid is to young to care or even know or even make a change on this issue”.

I got upset. My oldest is 12. She is very pro life. WHY? not because we are catholic, not because I “feed it to her”. When I got pregnant with her I was 20 my husband was about to turn 19. We were going to college, we didnt have money. HIS FAMILY offered me money to have an abortion. They insisted, and said it was in our best intrest. Well you can imagine I DIDNT GET THAT ABORTION…my daughter is a 12 yr old, cheerleader, athletic, VERY WELL ARTICULATED, staright A student. She sings at church, she plays guitar, drums and piano. She is a budding artist, loves to draw, paint, scrapbook and sew…she is a mini me…lol. She knows what happened when she was concieved. She knows I got pregnant beofre I got married and she knows her dads family wanted me to get rid of her. She understand that SHE wouldnt be here if I fell into the “preassure” so I let this lady know that yes a 12 yr old COULD BE CONCERNED about this situation. We dont know if maybe her own mother considered abortion with her or not? It is possible for a young child to be the great voice for the world.

So Im glad I came across this post, it just adds more fule to my fire! Thanks!

Hi Priscilla

I also saw that video it was awesome. Maybe someone can find a link to it and post it.

I am sure most of us have heard University of Florida quarterback Tim Tebow’s story. In case you haven’t here is a link to one of the articles about it.

Click here

 

[wi11ow]

This is where the cop out lays. If your intentionally only having sex on days which are not inducive to reproduction, the non fertile days in a womans cycle, you are intentionally preventing the creation of a child. or attempting to, this is equivilant to the use of contraceptives. The catholic method actually listed as a barrier contraceptive on several sites, only in this case the barrier is time instead of laytex. Is your argument that regular intercourse is somehow more natural in the absense of laytex? how about other forms of non barrier contraceptives that prevent release of eggs for example.

In either event the purpose is the same, to prevent the creation of a child during intercourse.

im curious what you consider a “just” reason to postpone having children or spacing your children

 

[wi11ow]

Forgive me, it gets very frustrating debating with pro choice people who refuse to consider any material that is not from one of their left wing propaganda sites. Every time I present factual information, it is dismissed out of hand because the pro choice person does not like the message regardless of its truthfulness. The first link you did not like because you did not like the message, the second two links that you call quotes were not quotes they were references to many sites (some maybe even you would accept) however, you obviously wrote them off without even realizing they were references and not quotes.

Read all three and I’m not impressed, I dont reject the first link out of hand due to the source, although I think your source is very bias as I stated. I reject the first source because I dont find anything meaningful in its claims, all three links make the same claim that the zygote is a human being from the point of fertilization based on DNA, the fact the produced zygote is different then both contributing parts (ovum/sperm) etc. Its not anything that hasnt been mentioned in the thread several times over.

The second is a collection of quotes, yes quotes with book sources for the quotes, but quotes devorced from there context none the less. But again nothing that hasnt been stated here before.

The third was also a collection of quotes and book sources for the quotes, but not a single website reference between them

I also reviewed the links you put forth about the crime stats in the US, and the first one you liked was A BOOK REVIEW and I’m sorry but book reviews dont mean anything to me. Find me a talk by the author or a few articles BY the author himself to explain his point if your going to claim he is an expert.

 

[gmcbroom]

What is the purpose of the Pro Life movement in the USA? Is it to end abortions or reduce the amount done?

Is it to outlaw abortions done in the United States?

Since it seems to be primarily used as a political tool to cause change in political parties does that undermine the anti abortion message?

 

[John_Pascendi]

Its a dark day when animals get treated better then developing babies…of course that movement is PC and thus explains it!Consider out of those 50million abortions ,that most would have been good decent people…a few even at genius level…in fact ,who knows one of those aborted might have curred Rock Hudsons disease…ie : aids…as well as other diseases…or maybe hit a grandslam homer in a world series game,or wrote a lovely love song,or painted on a piece of canvas a work of art that will live forever…but no,we must never think of that…just twist and turn,react with a smirk when a teevee host takes advantage of some female workers or a president in the oval office does the same…boys will be boys wont they? The tomb of the unknown soldier fits in here…Pas

 

[SteveGC]

I realize that there is no universal standard for what defines a “human being” nor is there a clearly defined transition point between “cell cluster” and a “being”. My argument wasnt that the cells wont develop into a human being left to there own devices rather that the cells themselves are NOT as of yet a human being. They are human cells no more no less. They do have a unique DNA code for a unique being they can develop into but my hair, liver, kidney, brain and saliva contain a unique DNA code for a unique being “myself” in this case.

The existance of a unique DNA code does not make a human being though. We can edit DNA sequences or recombine DNA in the lab, the fact that the created strand exists outside of a human cell doesnt negate the fact the strand is code for a unique human being, nor does the fact that the DNA itself is human, but its not a human being, its just human cellular code.

Im curious what you consider to be life? Would the death of one of my stem cells (as capable of forming into a full human being as an ovum under favourable conditions) count as murder as well? or is it just the extinguishment of an entire DNA code?

The extinguishment of a fertilized egg is murder. There are other problems with the deliberate termination of independent female or male sex cells, beyond the scope of the discussion of murder. But, I’m suggesting to you that life, as valuable as yours is today, exists at the very instant an ovum is fertilized. Not quite following your DNA argument…you seem to suggest that the DNA present in the fertilized ovum is not the same DNA present during later development of the embryo? At any rate, I’m not sure why you would want to disconnect the existence of human cells from human being…not sure why anyone would rationalize that human cells don’t make a human being. I mean, if you acknowledge that at the moment of conception, there exist cells which are the initial cells which make up a distinct human, why not call those cells a human being? and thus, why not protect that human being as if it were your child just birthed? It’s not a matter of considering it the “potential” for human life…it IS human life. What else could happen to those human cells? To remove those distinct human cells is to remove human life…regardless of the fact that nature could intervene in that cellular developoment to effectively cease their existence…nature could do that to every human, regardless of their developmental stage (I could die tomorrow of natural causes). The deliberate termination is called murder. The point is that if it is agreed upon that what exists at the moment of conception is the very initial life of a distinct human’s cells, why are we not calling those cells a human being? I cannot fathom why there is argument about that.

A counter example, why is it okay to drink at 21 but not the day before your 21st birthday? or voting? or marriage? or sexual consent? There is no real or defensable reason to put the definitive line at any specific age and there will always be exceptions to the rule, I know many people more mature and informed in there teens then most adults when it comes to politics but 16 year olds cant vote.

Not really a realistic analogy. Whether or not something LIVES is a far cry from whether or not someone drinks, votes, consents to sex, or gets married. I mean, if we equate living with all those things, I can’t argue that murder is not ok regardless of the victim’s age.

 

[Worthy5]

QUOTE=fix;5878229]Nice misdirection, but not buying it. The pro life position is not “grandstanding”, it is a simple position that advocates common sense.

You do not have to buy the a strand of the pro-choice position but what you cannot accept that there is a reasonable pro-choice position to take, given the need to limit govt power, use other means to address the problem and put emphasis on the women’s duty. That is why it looks like you are grandstanding.

Why does a two year old not get the same treatment you advocate for the unborn child? The two year old is dependent on the mother as well.

We have covered this. Because the early fetus is not a two year old–how is that. The govt makes classifications all the time to carry out the numerous policy goals society has.

If you really cared about the issue you would admit it is unjust that the law allows for the taking of innocent life and admit the connection is central to the issue.

So does that mean you " care " more than I do—that sounds like political liberal feel good stuff. You assume outlawing all abortions under all circumstances, I presume, as the best way to " disallow" them from occuring----that is not necessarily the case, Govt can select a variety of means to address the problem esp given that limits on govtr power is an important goal as well.

If we outlaw all abortions and lock women and doctors up for such acts are you going to volunteer at the local prosecutor or jail facility to help process all these new criminals? Every new law, has its real costs to it.

I do not mean to be flip but the costs of govt action is a part of this discussion given that the posts started to malign the term “pro-choice” and veered away from when life begins.

 

[fix]

This is where the cop out lays. If your intentionally only having sex on days which are not inducive to reproduction, the non fertile days in a womans cycle, you are intentionally preventing the creation of a child. or attempting to, this is equivilant to the use of contraceptives.

As I said the means are different.

The catholic method actually listed as a barrier contraceptive on several sites, only in this case the barrier is time instead of laytex.

How is abstaining equal to engaging in the act with latex? In the first there is no act and in the second one acts with the intent and means to frustrate.

Is your argument that regular intercourse is somehow more natural in the absense of laytex?

It is morally different, yes. The marital act is a physical and moral act.

how about other forms of non barrier contraceptives that prevent release of eggs for example.

They change the very nature of the act. You no longer have the marital act.

In either event the purpose is the same, to prevent the creation of a child during intercourse.

The intent may be the same, but how that is accomplished is very different.

im curious what you consider a “just” reason to postpone having children or spacing your children

Well that will vary with the couple. Certainly, one obvious example would be a female who is at hight risk for serious complications if pregnant.

 

[beafedor]

Reading this post is like feeding me more amo! Just recently I came across a video of a 12 yr old who was competing in a speech cometition and her topic is Abortion. I dont have the link but its a good speech. This girl had so many problems at first. They told her no at first, that she coulnt use that topic, but then they said that she will not advance to the next level, then she did, then a judge got up and walked out because her speech “offended” that judge, yet she still won the competition and is now in the next level of rounds.

So I posted this on my facebook, a friend loved it, and she reposted the video and one of her friends put her “2 cents in”. She said the didnt think this kid new what she was talking about. This kid was being fed as to what and how to think and that we just need to wait till she is 16 or older and she “WILL” change her mind. That there is not possible way this girl would know what the heck she is talking about and how in the world is a 12 yr old concerned about this topic. Like saying…“This kid is to young to care or even know or even make a change on this issue”.

I got upset. My oldest is 12. She is very pro life. WHY? not because we are catholic, not because I “feed it to her”. When I got pregnant with her I was 20 my husband was about to turn 19. We were going to college, we didnt have money. HIS FAMILY offered me money to have an abortion. They insisted, and said it was in our best intrest. Well you can imagine I DIDNT GET THAT ABORTION…my daughter is a 12 yr old, cheerleader, athletic, VERY WELL ARTICULATED, staright A student. She sings at church, she plays guitar, drums and piano. She is a budding artist, loves to draw, paint, scrapbook and sew…she is a mini me…lol. She knows what happened when she was concieved. She knows I got pregnant beofre I got married and she knows her dads family wanted me to get rid of her. She understand that SHE wouldnt be here if I fell into the “preassure” so I let this lady know that yes a 12 yr old COULD BE CONCERNED about this situation. We dont know if maybe her own mother considered abortion with her or not? It is possible for a young child to be the great voice for the world.

So Im glad I came across this post, it just adds more fule to my fire! Thanks!

Wow Priscillia thank you for posting this. I wish I had had the courage to stand up for my kids and to resist the pressure as you did. Alicia should be 15 and Gabriel 8.