Abortions. Love 'em or hate 'em?

[Joe Redifer]

So whatchu think about abortions?

Personally, I think they are pretty neat.  I think people should be able to have them.  Hell I almost want them required because we are so damned overpopulated.  But for those people who want to do away with abortions, you are god damn shit eaters.  Why not just do away with unwanted pregnacies instead?  I know I'd rather treat the cause than the symptom, but then again I don't lick ballsacks for breakfast.

Hooray abortions!

[nat]

I'm 100% pro-abortion.

[Tatsujin]

there are some fundamental questions to clear @ 1st.

1. up to which month an abortions is justifiable?
2. how many brats does those "shaggers" already own?
3. in which country do they live?
4. how much income do they have for living?
5. do they deserve any kids at all?
6. [space for own questions]

[Joe Redifer]

1. This is a good question, actually.  Personally I do not like late-term abortions.  If you can't make up your mind in the beginning, just have the abortion now and worry about it later.  If you are so indecisive that you need to have a late term abortion, then you should be shot in the face which will kill you and your baby.

2. Usually too many when they should have none.

3. Who cares?

4. Who cares, but usually not enough to own a kid.

5.  I only wish children on my enemies.

6. [space for future answer]

[Keranu]

I support them as long as it's done early enough. People should also not be so damn retarded though.

[Turbo D]

I'm for it. If someone wants to destroy their fetus, that is on them. haha.

[termis]

What difference does (or more specially, *should*) it make whether its done very early or very late?

[guyjin]

Abortions are awesome! everyone should have a couple!

[albinoMithos]

I'm for abortions as long as captain falcon is allowed to falcon punch repeat offenders as a way of aborting the kid.

[Zeon]

What difference does (or more specially, *should*) it make whether its done very early or very late?

This has always baffled me too. What is the difference between a just fertilized egg and a fetus 1 or 2 months away from being born? They are one I the same, they cannot survive outside of the womb and are not fully developed yet. The ONLY difference is one resembles a human more, and to say such gibberish as:

1. This is a good question, actually.  Personally I do not like late-term abortions.  If you can't make up your mind in the beginning, just have the abortion now and worry about it later.  If you are so indecisive that you need to have a late term abortion, then you should be shot in the face which will kill you and your baby.

is completely nonsensical and retarded. Killing an unborn fetus is the same no matter what stage it is in, why is it somehow magically not wrong to kill it off right away, but the second it starts to look human, it's all oh no you are a baby killer and a monster!

I repeat there is no difference in killing a fetus early on and killing it later. Anyone who says so is either ignorant, stubborn, and/or doesn't want to come to terms with facts. To think it's a ok that you kill early but not later makes no damn sense. Is a fertilized egg living? Yes! Is it any less living or deserving of life than a nearly ready to come out fetus? Hell no! If you kill a living human regardless of being fully developed yet, is it murder? I sure as hell think it is.

If you are for abortions fine, I don't agree but I'm not going to stop anyone, I wish I could but I can't and won't. Seriously though, this wishy washy half way attitude needs to stop. As far as I am concerned if you are for abortions you should be for it at all stages of the fetus developing. Anything less is bullshit. Nobody can provide sound evidence that at any one point in the womb a fetus becomes human. There isn't a mystical magical day that it suddenly becomes human and it is from then on wrong to kill it. Sorry to say it's wrong from day one.

If you think a fetus at any point is human and should not be aborted you admit a fetus is a living being with the fundamental right of life. As it has been established there is fundamentally no difference in the living state of a fetus at any point of development, you must also see how this attitude is rubbish.

[nikdog]

there are some fundamental questions to clear @ 1st.

1. up to which month an abortions is justifiable?
2. how many brats does those "shaggers" already own?
3. in which country do they live?
4. how much income do they have for living?
5. do they deserve any kids at all?
6. [space for own questions]

1.all
2.0
3.all
4.any
5.who cares
6.i'm drunk

[Tatsujin]

most people differentiate between a fetus which his heart already started beating or one which doesn't beat yet. if it makes sense to differentiate between a just fructified egg or an almost developed human being is everyones own desicion. but those who do not, they also shoudn't wank arond or use any preventions.

[esteban]

Abort this thread!

[Tatsujin]

 

[NecroPhile]

I approve a early term abortions, especially when there are severe birth defects, the mother's health is endangered, or in the case of rape/incest victims.

What is the difference between a just fertilized egg and a fetus 1 or 2 months away from being born? They are one I the same, they cannot survive outside of the womb and are not fully developed yet.

Wrong.  Many preterm babies are born every day, many of which survive.  In fact, by the 24th week of gestation, they have a 50/50 chance of surviving outside the womb, with those chances steadily improving as the fetus nears full term.

I repeat there is no difference in killing a fetus early on and killing it later. Anyone who says so is either ignorant, stubborn, and/or doesn't want to come to terms with facts. To think it's a ok that you kill early but not later makes no damn sense. Is a fertilized egg living? Yes! Is it any less living or deserving of life than a nearly ready to come out fetus? Hell no! If you kill a living human regardless of being fully developed yet, is it murder? I sure as hell think it is.

If you can't see the difference between a handful of cells and a baby, then perhaps it is you that is ignorant, stubborn, or unable to come to terms with the facts (what you think does not equal fact).  A fertilized egg is no more alive than the sperm and ovum it consists of, so does that mean that I'm committing millions of tiny murders every time a fire a load into a mouth/rectum/condom/fist?  I think not.

If you think a fetus at any point is human and should not be aborted you admit a fetus is a living being with the fundamental right of life. As it has been established there is fundamentally no difference in the living state of a fetus at any point of development, you must also see how this attitude is rubbish.

Established by whom?  According to the medical world, a fetus isn't even a fetus until the 8th week of gestation - a fertilized egg is just a fertilized egg until implantation, at which point it is an embryo.  Considering this fact, it's not too hard to understand why some people approve of abortions, but only up to a certain point in time.

[albinoMithos]

It may sound bad to some, but honestly I think abortions are up to the people who want them.  It's not the state's business to interfere unless it endangers the welfare of the country.  Save the moral high ground bullshit for other more important things, not unborn globs of cells or hell humans.  It's just not important.

[DJLobo]

One of the fun parts of my high school education was watching a video of abortions being performed. The logic behind it was if you see how awful the procedure is, you won't support abortion. As for abortion, it should be up to the woman and what they think is best. But, I think if a woman has had a lot of them, she should be sterilized. If you're having too many unwanted fetuses/kids/whatever, then maybe you shouldn't be able to make more of them.

[Joe Redifer]

I repeat there is no difference in killing a fetus early on and killing it later.

Are you religious?  You DO know that religion is for god damn ignorant and intolerant fucktards, right?  As a non-religious person, I am highly tolerant.  But religious people are idiots and should be burned alive.

Anyway, I approve of killing anything under 21 years old.

[Zeon]

I approve a early term abortions, especially when there are severe birth defects, the mother's health is endangered, or in the case of rape/incest victims.

If there are severe birth defects would the baby not have an extremely high chance of dying? How accurately can you determine said defects when the fetus is not in a state of being human. Does a just born infant who dies suffer anymore than a fetus who is killed? How the hell would anyone know? Does a human that comes about from rape deserve to live any less than one that was not?

What is the difference between a just fertilized egg and a fetus 1 or 2 months away from being born? They are one I the same, they cannot survive outside of the womb and are not fully developed yet.

Wrong.  Many preterm babies are born every day, many of which survive.  In fact, by the 24th week of gestation, they have a 50/50 chance of surviving outside the womb, with those chances steadily improving as the fetus nears full term.

I repeat there is no difference in killing a fetus early on and killing it later. Anyone who says so is either ignorant, stubborn, and/or doesn't want to come to terms with facts. To think it's a ok that you kill early but not later makes no damn sense. Is a fertilized egg living? Yes! Is it any less living or deserving of life than a nearly ready to come out fetus? Hell no! If you kill a living human regardless of being fully developed yet, is it murder? I sure as hell think it is.

If you can't see the difference between a handful of cells and a baby, then perhaps it is you that is ignorant, stubborn, or unable to come to terms with the facts (what you think does not equal fact).  A fertilized egg is no more alive than the sperm and ovum it consists of, so does that mean that I'm committing millions of tiny murders every time a fire a load into a mouth/rectum/condom/fist?  I think not.

And your point being? There is also a chance they will die. Would a fertilized egg not become this if left alone? Sure a separate sperm and egg are living cells, however they will never be nothing more than what the are, the fertilized egg on the other hand is alive and will become human if not killed.

If you think a fetus at any point is human and should not be aborted you admit a fetus is a living being with the fundamental right of life. As it has been established there is fundamentally no difference in the living state of a fetus at any point of development, you must also see how this attitude is rubbish.

Established by whom?  According to the medical world, a fetus isn't even a fetus until the 8th week of gestation - a fertilized egg is just a fertilized egg until implantation, at which point it is an embryo.  Considering this fact, it's not too hard to understand why some people approve of abortions, but only up to a certain point in time.

And what you or a group of individuals think does not make it fact either. Hell many times the majority is dead wrong. Wasn't slavery once considered an acceptable practice? There are many organizations who do studies and put out facts, some considered official. Guess what? Sometimes they are wrong, and previous "facts" are refuted. In the history of medicine many "cures" to diseases were actually poisons. Here is a fact nobody can deny: just because an official organization says so doesn't mean it is fact. Here's the thing: a lot of it comes down to interpretation by a group of people that others put their faith and esteem in. What defines a living human? Well it depends on who you talk to, expert or not.

Does that make me the expert? No. Does it make your position any more factual or true than mine? Hell no! Don't delude yourself.

It may sound bad to some, but honestly I think abortions are up to the people who want them.  It's not the state's business to interfere unless it endangers the welfare of the country.  Save the moral high ground bullshit for other more important things, not unborn globs of cells or hell humans.  It's just not important.

An excellent point Mithos. I agree. I have my beliefs, but I do not believe in forcing them upon others. Yes there are other more pressing issues to discuss, but when the topic is brought up I will put in my two cents. Take em or leave them.

I repeat there is no difference in killing a fetus early on and killing it later.

Are you religious?  You DO know that religion is for god damn ignorant and intolerant fucktards, right?  As a non-religious person, I am highly tolerant.  But religious people are idiots and should be burned alive.

Anyway, I approve of killing anything under 21 years old.

I am 99% sure Joe's response was sarcastic, either way the following points still stand:

A better question is does that even matter? If you are such a tolerant person as you purport to be, then it wouldn't. I will say this:

I have my beliefs
Others have theirs
I have the right to express my beliefs
Others have a right to agree or disagree
I have no right to try and force my beliefs upon others
Others have no right to enforce their beliefs on me

Not once did I say don't allow people to abort, or that I'm going to stop others from doing so. I am expressing my beliefs and you all are expressing yours. A belief is only a belief if you truly believe it is right or wrong. To use purported facts as a crutch to get out of having a belief, because "science proves it and that makes it correct" or any other nonsense is pathetic. You have to believe the stuff you say is true. It's a thread on abortion what do you expect? You'll have at least one dissenter if not many more, I however am not afraid to speak up and express my beliefs on the subject.

With that said, carry on 

[Joe Redifer]

I have my beliefs

Yes.

Others have theirs

Yes.

I have the right to express my beliefs

I do, but you do not.

Others have a right to agree or disagree

Only to disagree.

I have no right to try and force my beliefs upon others

Correct.

Others have no right to enforce their beliefs on me

Yes they do.

[Zeon]

I have my beliefs

Yes.

Others have theirs

Yes.

I have the right to express my beliefs

I do, but you do not.

Others have a right to agree or disagree

Only to disagree.

I have no right to try and force my beliefs upon others

Correct.

Others have no right to enforce their beliefs on me

Yes they do.

My what a contrary little bastard you are 

[NecroPhile]

If there are severe birth defects would the baby not have an extremely high chance of dying?

Not necessarily, but I fail to see how that is relevant anyway.  Is it a good thing to live a horrid and painful life, as long as it's short but not unnaturally so?  I take it you're against euthanasia as well.

How accurately can you determine said defects when the fetus is not in a state of being human.

Many medical problems can be accurately detected (and sometimes treated) in the womb.  Are you trying to argue that they can't?

Does a human that comes about from rape deserve to live any less than one that was not?

That goes back to the mental health of the mother and it being more important than a bundle of cells.

And your point being? There is also a chance they will die. Would a fertilized egg not become this if left alone? Sure a separate sperm and egg are living cells, however they will never be nothing more than what the are, the fertilized egg on the other hand is alive and will become human if not killed.

My point being that those sperm cells are capable of producing a human life and are no more (or less) important than a fertilized egg, so they're also being 'murdered' when not used for procreation purposes.  An in vitro fertilized egg is substantially identical to a traditionally fertilized egg and differs only in its location, yet your definition of human life curiously precludes it.  An ectopic pregnancy has zero chance of coming to term, and it's estimated that most fertilized eggs (as high as 80%, depending on who you ask) fail to become implanted, so it is far from a forgone conclusion that a fertilized egg will become a walking, talking human being.  Why not count sperm?  It only requires one extra step to become a fertilized egg, which requires one extra step to become an embryo and have a chance at becoming a baby.

And what you or a group of individuals think does not make it fact either. Hell many times the majority is dead wrong. Wasn't slavery once considered an acceptable practice? There are many organizations who do studies and put out facts, some considered official. Guess what? Sometimes they are wrong, and previous "facts" are refuted. In the history of medicine many "cures" to diseases were actually poisons. Here is a fact nobody can deny: just because an official organization says so doesn't mean it is fact.

I was pointing out that it is an undeniable fact (objectively obtained through observation) that there is more than one stage to the procreation process, and that there are definite biological differences between a fertilized egg, an embryo, and a fetus.  This has nothing to do with the question of when life begins; as you said, that answer is open to interpretation.

Does that make me the expert? No. Does it make your position any more factual or true than mine? Hell no! Don't delude yourself.

Funny, you're the one that intimated that it is a fact that life begins at conception.

You'll have at least one dissenter if not many more, I however am not afraid to speak up and express my beliefs on the subject.

Nothing wrong with that.  I love a good philosophical discussion and I find this thread far more interesting and thought provoking than 90% of the tripe found in the gutters of Fighting Street.

[quoth09]

This all goes hand in hand, same street on a different day in reference to religion, as well as throw some ethics in the pot.

Most people opposed to it are the same ones that think a raped woman shouldn't be allowed to have an abortion. It's all about controlling other people's lives, because they can't control their own. It's also about whether or not a life form can live outside of the body on it's own, independently.

Just like stem cell research. All of these people bitching and crying after Obama passed it to be allowed. That is probably the best thing he could have ever done, and I didn't even want to see him get in office. The only people that are against it are religious fanatics or people bitching about their tax dollars being used on something they don't support, which goes back to religious fanatics. Anyone that isn't all gung ho for Jesus or whatever, should have no qualms about this research being done, because the thing is, if your taxes weren't being spent on that, they would be being spent on numerous other worthless things that you would be bitching about anyway. At least something good is being done with the money for a change.

I will laugh if they cure cancer in a year or find a cure for diabetes or AIDS as well. Then when it is found, the state that banned the research in their state can go without, which I believe it was Oklahoma. When that time comes, I don't think the people in that state should benefit from the research in any way, and when they ask why they can't get an injection shot because their child is dying for whatever disease, they can be directed to their local government official that thinks they can control people's lives in that aspect.

[OldRover]

Adding my two cents into the mix here...

People who oppose abortions have probably never been put in the position of having to choose. The only reason I know this is because I was once one of them...I opposed it for no obvious reason outside of the dogma I had drilled into my head growing up. But there are many logical reasons for having an abortion, for which I don't feel like getting into now since it would take too long. But if there's one absolute truth, it's this: if you don't believe in abortion, don't have one.

[Duo_R]

One of the fun parts of  your high school education? Dude you are one sick puppy, "chasing tail" was a fun part of high school, not watching abortion videos.

I agree on the sterilized part.....it's the people having the babies that are the problem, not the poor fetuses that have dumb shits for parents.

One of the fun parts of my high school education was watching a video of abortions being performed. The logic behind it was if you see how awful the procedure is, you won't support abortion. As for abortion, it should be up to the woman and what they think is best. But, I think if a woman has had a lot of them, she should be sterilized. If you're having too many unwanted fetuses/kids/whatever, then maybe you shouldn't be able to make more of them.

[termis]

"Where life starts" can be debated, but I don't believe there is any denying that one of the reasons why abortion can stay legal is because abortion doesn't get rid of anything that's observable (to the naked eye).  That is, a person who is pro-choice simply doesn't feel guilty in getting rid of something they can't see.  I'd be willing to bet that if humans were like say, kangaroos, and the embryos have to live outside the human body & people can observe this embryo with the naked eye [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kangaroo#Adaptations ], then there'd be lot more pro-life folks.

Most people opposed to it are the same ones that think a raped woman shouldn't be allowed to have an abortion. It's all about controlling other people's lives, because they can't control their own. It's also about whether or not a life form can live outside of the body on it's own, independently.

I'd highly doubt that particular statement -- Those are people on the extreme end of the argument.  I think most people who are against abortion probably could see cases for exceptions, because as with many controversial topics, things are not always black & white. 

I'm generally against abortion, and as mentioned in another thread, I'm by no means religious.  I know plenty of other people who think the way I do, so don't equate "against abortion = religious freaks". 

I came to my conclusion after thinking about this topic for a while, and what I came up with was, "As a human race, how exactly does allowing abortion exactly advance the human kind?"  I heard a lot argument about the money savings & potential social problems that could be thwarted through abortion, but $$$ figures are not what I'm talking about.  (If it came down to saving money, why not euthanize unwanted babies?  It'll practically have the same cost-savings as aborting unwanted fetuses)

Essentially, I can't see how trivializing a human life (at an early stage or not) as something that we can be proud of years and years down the line.

People who oppose abortions have probably never been put in the position of having to choose.

Good point there, though my point about "getting rid of an unobservable" argument stands.

[DJLobo]

One of the fun parts of  your high school education? Dude you are one sick puppy, "chasing tail" was a fun part of high school, not watching abortion videos.

I agree on the sterilized part.....it's the people having the babies that are the problem, not the poor fetuses that have dumb shits for parents.

One of the fun parts of my high school education was watching a video of abortions being performed. The logic behind it was if you see how awful the procedure is, you won't support abortion. As for abortion, it should be up to the woman and what they think is best. But, I think if a woman has had a lot of them, she should be sterilized. If you're having too many unwanted fetuses/kids/whatever, then maybe you shouldn't be able to make more of them.

Duo_R, I should have put "fun parts" in quotes, cause that part was supposed to sarcastic. You had to get your parents to sign a form to watch it. Trust me, nobody who watched that video made it the entire way through. Everybody either had their eyes shut or their head on their desk. BTW, I went to a religious all-male high school, so "chasing tail" was not an option on school grounds. Had to go off-campus for that. 

[Joe Redifer]

I had to watch abortion videos in high school as well.  I went to a Catholic school and that would be the reason.  They don't want you to have sex before marriage or use any form of birth control.  The church needs to realize that people have sex for fun and get over it.

[guyjin]

I went to a Catholic school

I'm sorry.

[Joe Redifer]

Yeah, but I made some great friends there that I still have today.  We don't run around lovin' god or anything.

[NecroPhile]

We don't run around lovin' god or anything.

Nope, just each other. 

[Joe Redifer]

We aren't that liberal!

[Duo_R]

well that explains more. Seriously, i don't know how one could go to an all male school. Those friggin Catholics, are kinda intense sometimes.    I started at Baptist in elementary and they are pretty strict, but I changed to a general Christian school in Junior high, and in high school I went public school. I think that was actually not a bad way to go for me personally.

Duo_R, I should have put "fun parts" in quotes, cause that part was supposed to sarcastic. You had to get your parents to sign a form to watch it. Trust me, nobody who watched that video made it the entire way through. Everybody either had their eyes shut or their head on their desk. BTW, I went to a religious all-male high school, so "chasing tail" was not an option on school grounds. Had to go off-campus for that.  Smile