But the argument wasn’t over at what point a child comes into existence. I choose conception, however if you choose an arbitrary point, and the child is beyond that point does that make a difference to you? So for me, it is pretty cut and dry. After conception, abortion is murder. But that wasn’t the argument.
This board done?
- Thread starter TAV31
- Start date
So see unlike you I do not believe life starts at conception. Life ends when the heart stop beating. How can life be alive if there is no heart beat. So for me it’s a heart beat. I do not view abortion before that point as “murdering a child.” It can’t be murdering a child if it wasn’t a child to begin with. So yes your question is not as clear cut as you make it out to seem.
I also guess we shouldn’t care about the psychological well being of the mother either. You have no idea what kind of emotional anguish that would go with carrying a baby for 9 months that you didn’t ask for. That was created in you by a vial act and a rapist. It’s not enough that you have it in your memory you have to see it in a mirror every day. Not to mention all kinds of complications come along with that pregnancy. There should be a way out of that situation.
Wasn't a child to begin with? What happens the vast majority of the time if "modern medicine" doesn't manually intervene?
I agree it's a complicated subject. However, life is not predictated on society's external detection of a heartbeat.
Last edited:
This is an awesome move. Especially for the lower and middle classes with limited access to higher education. Hopefully more states follow suit. This guy gets it.
Teaching a course that could increase a student's chance of success after leaving school... what a novel idea. Whoever has been in charge of education in this country should be embarassed.
Long overdue. I always want to intervene when I hear a car salesmen ask a new customer what their monthly budget is.
We can agree to disagree on that. I do not live a child is a child at conception. What happens to that fertilized egg if something happens to the mother if medicine doesn’t intervene most of the time. Hell that can be said all the way to 24 weeks.
Maybe they can come up with a class that gives examples of how hard work can pay off. That's another subject getting lost. It would be a nice change to feel like my tax dollars are being better spent. Speaking of, how about a class devoted to taxes? I sure could have used that as a teen. Thanks for nothing education! Lol
Well, it's not going to turn into a dog or a cat or a cow. Conception is a clear line of demarcation. The DNA of both parents are present and growth begins immediately. You're saying that without a heartbeat there's no life present. People have had their hearts stopped before and been resuscitated. Why work on someone who has no life?
The embryo can’t not survive on its on. It needs the mother. I’m sorry but you will never convince me otherwise. I am not one to believe that life starts a conception just because it will turn into a life. It could very well be aborted by the body and a high percentage of pregnancies are. Conception is not a demarcation or when life starts because this is even a highly debated topic amoungst biologist. There is a reason we call a fertilized egg an embryo and not a baby.
I didn't want to touch this one, but I always do a double take when the "he/she can't live on their own" as a threshold.
If you've had children, you know they can't survive on their own for months after birth. So I don't like that as a threshold.
Conception is hard, because of the state of the baby for weeks after that. I think some people are settling in to fight over the heartbeat as the threshold, and I think that one may find traction.
Me personally though, I go with conception though.
I will agree with “ survive on their own” is a bad definition. The medical term would be viable.
However, a baby can survive without the mother being alive as long as the pregnancy is viable. They don’t need THEIR mother to survive once out of the womb after the viable threshold. Right now that is 24 weeks. Granted chances of survival at that time is low but possible.
A born baby cannot survive on its own either. I'm not trying to convince you, well maybe I was. But it's my opinion. Yes, it's a debate for biological ethicists because some of them are OK with killing babies in very horrible ways. They're monsters. That's my opinion also.
Also need to remember that none of us voted for abortion. When seven guys wearing robes made their decision they overturned the laws in all 50 states. The people had spoken through their elected officials. The people were overturned by 7 unelected flawed human beings.
I don’t understand what you are saying. Are you implying that it’s murder unless you have a good reason, then it’s not? Because I’m saying it’s murder whether it’s personal or not.
I respect your yor position, but as a physician, I have good reason to believe the way I do as well. Rape is horrible and whether it spawns a new life or not, the mother will forever deal with pain and anguish. Allowing ger to have an abortion doesn’t fix that. My point is that you have to decide whether you believe abortion is taking a human life. If you don’t believe it is, then ok that’s your belief. But you can’t use the method in which the child was conceived to determine whether abortion is right or wrong. That’s what I am saying. Not having money to pay for something doesn’t justify stealing.
If I shoot someone randomly on the street it’s murder. If someone walks through my door unannounced and I shoot them it’s self defense. I shot someone in both instances. One was murder. One was not.
Now get back to my example. I asked you if someone raped your wife would you make her go through with the the pregnancy. I asked you this question bc laws are black and white. The problem is this is a gray area. There are 32,000 of these pregnancies each year. Some kept, some aborted but I think you could understand why a woman would not want to keep this “blessing.”
No woman should be forced to keep a child for your moral benefit, especially in a situation such as rape, incest, or if a medical professional has determined the mothers life is in danger. In these situations a woman should have a right to choose and you have no right to intervene in that process
I don’t like abortion and I don’t think it should be used as a contraceptive, but I’m also not going to beat a drum on here about it.
Seriously of all the things you could talk about you come on here and post this?
You're talking about isolated cases though. The majority are using it as a contraceptive.
It's a complicated subject but do believe birth starts at conception. The one stat that always sticks out to me is that there's reportedly millions of Americans on a waiting list who want to adopt any ethnicity. The good news is that the abortion rate has been dropping over the past decade.
Of course I can understand, but that doesn’t a change a single thing about what I said. Regardless of the scenerio if you believe abortion is murder, it’s murder regardless. You certainly can’t claim self defense as the child didn’t break into the uterus. If you say “well the sperm did,” ok, but that would be the same as me saying that you broke into my house, so I’m justified in killing your son. Makes no sense. To answer you question, my wife has had a hysterectomy, so it’s
Impossible and so the answer is easy. No I wouldn’t encourage her to get an abortion because she isn’t pregnant. If it’s just a scenerio and pregnancy were possible, it would absolutely suck, but it doesn’t change my belief. No, I would not encourage her to have an abortion, and I know my wife, and she wouldn’t have one. That’s my freaking point. It’s not my “moral benefit.” Let me refer to back to the statement that started this discussion. I said that you had to decide if killing a baby was a crime, and I didn’t tell you what your belief should be, just that you had to decide. If it’s a crime, then it’s a crime regardless of how the baby came into existence. If you think killing babies is ok, then fine, that’s your choice, but it can’t go both ways. I find it so hypocritical when someone kills a pregnant woman and gets charged with a double homicide. It’s as if the child life only has worth if the mother decides it has worth. Not just hypocritical but the epitome of narcissism.
Good luck to you brother. I have had enough of the abortion debate. I’m not going to change your mind and you’re not going to change mine. As stated I don’t believe in abortion in a lot of cases but there are some where it should happen.
My wife and I should not raise a kid with a 18 year connection with a rapist so you can sleep better at night. Luckily we don’t have to, but you want that to happen.
While I think we align in this somewhat, I mentioned that over 30,000 of these cases happen per year. That’s too many to just disregard. That’s 100 a day.
I do not believe there are an abundance of people looking to adopt. There are a lot more kids being raised by the government than parents on an adoption list and it’s not even close.
True. There's definitely a bunch of moving parts. Most estimates have a 2 million wait list in America for adoption of American babies. Also, foster care is commonly used as a holding facility when there's any legal entanglement.
I think he's more worried about the child not getting killed vs your feelings. But could have misread his post.
I’m sorry that my morals aren’t conditional. I in no way forced them on you or criticized you for the way you believe. I simply said it should be an easy decision on whether you consider abortion killing a child or not. You are the one that tried to make it personal with your impossible hypothetical. Don’t go virtue signaling by saying “Luckily we don’t have to, but you want that to happen.” That’s disgusting any way you look at it. I don’t want rape or abortion you fool. And as far as your statement “i don’t believe in abortion, but there are some where it should happen,” is the problem with people like you. You have beliefs with no guiding principles. I have more respect for someone who is pro-abortion than someone like you who doesn’t have the spine to take a stand on anything.
Let's flip the script on this debate. Why is abortion legal, yet they make it almost impossible for older people to exit who have painful/debilitating chronic physical or mental conditions? Why should they have to endure the medical system process before death? There are medications now where it's a single pill and you just fall asleep. Why is the burden on them to stay alive when we allow young mothers to abort a new life due to a bad decision?
Once you're here, you're here until you've endured max suffering, max payout to healthcare and your body completely fails. No exceptions. If you want to go, it has to be in some gruesome fashion (suicide). Makes no sense. I don't fear death, but I do fear losing my mind or toiling away in a hospital.
Once you're here, you're here until you've endured max suffering, max payout to healthcare and your body completely fails. No exceptions. If you want to go, it has to be in some gruesome fashion (suicide). Makes no sense. I don't fear death, but I do fear losing my mind or toiling away in a hospital.
I am all for assisted suicide. You have a terminally I’ll sickness, why should you have to suffer. I totally agree.
Most people would say it’s wrong because as Christian’s we believe suicide is an unforgivable sin ( I know it’s debatable). But In America people believe in different things and in my opinion we should not govern by our religious beliefs.
Excellent point. I often wonder this myself - especially people with no family left who are suffering. There are a few states like Oregon that allow assisted death, but it can be quite a process even then. In Charleston, there's an underground market from the pill you mentioned and it goes for top dollar. The demand is driven by the rich who want a decent way out. The pill could be obtained OTC in some areas Mexico but has been limited because of this nutty adminstration's efforts to suppress Ivermectin and other meds over the past year.
No honestly I think it’s better. Mods are more relaxed which I like. We can have political and belief discussions without mods. Also like the people that are left.
This is logical.
My mind immediately went down another tangent. The death penalty is argued against as inhumane, and some argue against its practice because of no way to apply it without it being cruel or painful.
I always think of the way they put pets to sleep, and this euthanasia, as mentioned, being remarkably peaceful.
It seems this disproves that particular anti-death penalty argument.
/tangent
Cannabis or CBD helps most fill that gap but you have to find the right fit. Once you do, pain and sleep issues which come along with aging and disease are minimized. It's become super popular among the elderly, as most pain meds have terrible feedback loops and side effects. It should be approved in all states. Medical industry lobbyists need to get out of the way.
Well put, in all.
I also agree that accusing someone of wanting rape or abortion is reprehensible. Or at least it should be, for a normal decent person.
I definitely agree that assisted suicide should be legal as long as the person making the decision is mentally competent.
If someone is terminally ill, I believe that person should have the right to end their life at a time of their choosing. It eliminates pain and suffering. It helps eliminate the burden of expensive hospital stays and a longer drawn out death process for the families.
“United States of America….looks like another silent night. While we’re sung to sleep by philosophies that save the trees and kill the children”…..best line from a song ever.
Similar threads
