I know abortion kills a child; its still mothers option
40%
[ 10 ]
abortion DOES NOT kill a child; that's ludicrous
32%
[ 8 ]
abortion kills a child, but is ok only sometimes
8%
[ 2 ]
abortion kills a child; that's why its all wrong!
20%
[ 5 ]
Total Votes : 25
Author
Message
aochriss
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 30 Apr 2008 Posts: 742
Thanks: 93
Thanked:175
Posted: 05-17-08 12:49pm
Let's here your answer.
|
diamondsz
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 Posts: 3333 Location: , Candyland-Canada
Thanks: 98
Thanked:159
Posted: 06-02-08 08:36am
jujujellybean
wrote:
poopoopoo
wrote:
If someone is 8 weeks
pregnant, and you ask how many children
they have, the answer is NONE. So how does
abortion involve killing a child?
Oh...I guess every time someone has an
abortion, they go down to the local school
and shoot
one?
Yes, that's because they are not caring
for it physically, even though it is
living in the mother. Because child
literally means human fetus, according to
dictionary.com!!!
Child:
1. a person between birth and full growth;
a boy or girl: books for children.
2. a son or daughter: All my children are
married.
3. a baby or infant.
4. a human fetus.
How does abortion involve killing a child:
IT IS A CHILD according to the dictionary.
therefore when you have an abortion, you
kill a child.
Hmmm...no...because a fetus is a child it
kills a child. End of
story.
child is a name or stage it has reached,
although you may call it james legally
james doesnt become his name until you
fill out the paperwork for him/her.
Scientifically it is called it a fetus,
you may call it as you choose but
scietifically a fetus become a infant when
it is born.
an embryo is unable to feel, it cannot
think much less survive on its own but it
is full of living cells
A baby/infant is capable of thinking,
surviving, breathing and it is full of
living cells
There is a big difference between the two
so why should they considered the same
within thats stage of development, a sperm
has the potential of making a possible
pregnancy but men still jack off.
I don't care for semantics. We can say
child, an extreme pro-choicer can say
parasite... all of these words are
accurate. We have the freedom to CHOOSE
which terms we want to use. I don't care
if you don't like it. Either suck it up,
continue the debate, or get stuck in the
mud.
|
cmyked
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 28 Apr 2008 Posts: 294
Thanks: 50
Thanked:4
Posted: 06-02-08 10:45am
NeutralUsername
wrote:
Not all abortions occur at the embryonic
stage. So, an abortion CAN entail more
than that picture of a dead embryo. The
bigger the unborn human, the more you will
see.
90% of abortions occur between the weeks
of 6 and 12. At week 10 the unborn is
considered a fetus. So the most common
abortions happen to embryos and fetuses.
Joined: 02 May 2008 Posts: 363 Location: , United States
Thanks: 17
Thanked:2
Posted: 06-03-08 15:03pm
diamondsz
wrote:
jujujellybean
wrote:
poopoopoo
wrote:
If someone is 8 weeks
pregnant, and you ask how many children
they have, the answer is NONE. So how does
abortion involve killing a child?
Oh...I guess every time someone has an
abortion, they go down to the local school
and shoot
one?
Yes, that's because they are not caring
for it physically, even though it is
living in the mother. Because child
literally means human fetus, according to
dictionary.com!!!
Child:
1. a person between birth and full growth;
a boy or girl: books for children.
2. a son or daughter: All my children are
married.
3. a baby or infant.
4. a human fetus.
How does abortion involve killing a child:
IT IS A CHILD according to the dictionary.
therefore when you have an abortion, you
kill a child.
Hmmm...no...because a fetus is a child it
kills a child. End of
story.
child is a name or stage it has reached,
although you may call it james legally
james doesnt become his name until you
fill out the paperwork for him/her.
Scientifically it is called it a fetus,
you may call it as you choose but
scietifically a fetus become a infant when
it is born.
an embryo is unable to feel, it cannot
think much less survive on its own but it
is full of living cells
A baby/infant is capable of thinking,
surviving, breathing and it is full of
living cells
There is a big difference between the two
so why should they considered the same
within thats stage of development, a sperm
has the potential of making a possible
pregnancy but men still jack
off.
You're right, an infant and a fetus are
two different stages. But a baby is
nothing like an adult. An adolescent is
very different than an old person. All
stages are different from each other.
Sperm has nothing to do with this, by the
way. No one was a sperm. But, everyone
came from the union of a sperm and an
egg.
People don't always use the same type of
stage, depending on your culture or where
you live (laws, for example). Some people
consider a baby to be from birth to 1 year
old. Others may believe that the baby
stage is from birth to 3 years old. Some
people consider teenagers children, while
others don't see it that way. I don't know
what the big deal is in calling a fetus a
baby. It IS a young human.
|
oopoopoop
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 18 Mar 2004 Posts: 1519 Location: ,
Thanks: 78
Thanked:5
Posted: 06-03-08 16:51pm
You can say an abortion kills a child, and
in your understanding you are right. I can
say it kills a parasite, and in my
understanding I am right. Dictionaries are
wonderful things.
|
cmyked
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 28 Apr 2008 Posts: 294
Thanks: 50
Thanked:4
Posted: 06-03-08 17:25pm
Yes, that's very true. I'll never debate
THAT issue. I will however debate that we
should be using these wrong terms at all.
Instead, I am mostly horrified by the
inhumanity I see pro-choicers express
towards the fetus. I've been there myself,
done that, called it a parasite, a cancer,
called "it" all kinds of things. I'm done
with the cliches, I'm done with the things
that have been said over and over. They
ring hollow to me. They don't "work"
anymore for me.
Even moreso, I can sit here and say
abortion kills an unborn child... and I
don't feel my stance is being compromised.
I don't have to dehumanize the fetus. In
fact, I feel humanizing it is important.
It MATTERS.
Why are you aborting? Is it just because
you don't want to be pregnant? Are you
really that shallow? Stretch marks got ya
down? I know better. I know you think
about that child and I know it matters to
you. If I ever aborted it would be for
myself AND the unborn child inside of me.
As much as I believe you nitpick many
posts, this one rings so true to me. I've
been meaning to ask you why you're
pro-choice because you often seemingly
play the devils advocate in this place,
but you've summed up your beliefs quite
eloquently.
Thank you Devil's advocate is
important, I think. It may seem annoying,
but it does make people think, or so I
hope!
|
Birch
Supporter
Joined: 07 Nov 2005 Posts: 4159 Location: Bliss,
Thanks: 159
Thanked:16
Posted: 06-03-08 19:51pm
cmyked
wrote:
...Why are you aborting? Is
it just because you don't want to be
pregnant? Are you really that shallow?
Stretch marks got ya down? I know better.
I know you think about that child and I
know it matters to you. If I ever aborted
it would be for myself AND the unborn
child inside of
me.
Hmm.
How do you identify yourself on the
abortion issue?
|
cmyked
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 28 Apr 2008 Posts: 294
Thanks: 50
Thanked:4
Posted: 06-03-08 21:21pm
Pro-choice, for the most part.
|
aochriss
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 30 Apr 2008 Posts: 742
Thanks: 93
Thanked:175
Posted: 06-04-08 00:46am
cmyked
wrote:
NeutralUsername
wrote:
Not all abortions occur at the embryonic
stage. So, an abortion CAN entail more
than that picture of a dead embryo. The
bigger the unborn human, the more you will
see.
90% of abortions occur between the weeks
of 6 and 12. At week 10 the unborn is
considered a fetus. So the most common
abortions happen to embryos and
fetuses.
Newer data shows vast majority of abortion
involve embryos.
For a long time, nearly 90% of abortions
in the U.S. have taken place in the first
trimester, but in recent years, women having an
abortion have been able to do so earlier
and earlier in the first trimester.
Currently, more than six in 10 abortions
occur within the first eight weeks of
pregnancy, and almost three in 10 take
place at six weeks or earlier,”
says Rachel Jones, lead researcher on the
new survey. “Medication abortion, which
provides women with an additional option
early in pregnancy, clearly reinforces
this very positive trend.”
http://
www.guttmacher.org/media/nr/2008/01/17/ind
ex.html
|
oopoopoop
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 18 Mar 2004 Posts: 1519 Location: ,
Thanks: 78
Thanked:5
Posted: 06-04-08 05:26am
cmyked
wrote:
Yes, that's very true. I'll
never debate THAT issue. I will however
debate that we should be using these wrong
terms at all.
Instead, I am mostly horrified by the
inhumanity I see pro-choicers express
towards the fetus. I've been there myself,
done that, called it a parasite, a cancer,
called "it" all kinds of things. I'm done
with the cliches, I'm done with the things
that have been said over and over. They
ring hollow to me. They don't "work"
anymore for me.
Even moreso, I can sit here and say
abortion kills an unborn child... and I
don't feel my stance is being compromised.
I don't have to dehumanize the fetus. In
fact, I feel humanizing it is important.
It MATTERS.
Why are you aborting? Is it just because
you don't want to be pregnant? Are you
really that shallow? Stretch marks got ya
down? I know better. I know you think
about that child and I know it matters to
you. If I ever aborted it would be for
myself AND the unborn child inside of
me.
I am happy to agree that abortion kills
(by removing from its host) an unborn
child. But I wouldn't care -- I would have
not emotional attachment, and would still
consider it an invasive parasite, because
I simply do not want it inside me. I would
not want an unborn child inside me, any
more than I would want a tapeworm or a
cancerous tumour inside me.
Do you really see that not wanting to be
pregnant as being "shallow"? The idea is
so totally revolting to me, that I would
seriously risk doing damage to myself to
get it out. There are a lot of reasons to
not want to be pregnant, and worrying
about stretchmarks doesn't really rank up
there.
|
aochriss
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 30 Apr 2008 Posts: 742
Thanks: 93
Thanked:175
Posted: 06-04-08 06:10am
cmyked
wrote:
Yes, that's very true. I'll
never debate THAT issue. I will however
debate that we should be using these wrong
terms at all.
Instead, I am mostly horrified by the
inhumanity I see pro-choicers express
towards the fetus. I've been there myself,
done that, called it a parasite, a cancer,
called "it" all kinds of things. I'm done
with the cliches, I'm done with the things
that have been said over and over. They
ring hollow to me. They don't "work"
anymore for me.
Even moreso, I can sit here and say
abortion kills an unborn child... and I
don't feel my stance is being compromised.
I don't have to dehumanize the fetus. In
fact, I feel humanizing it is important.
It MATTERS.
Why are you aborting? Is it just because
you don't want to be pregnant? Are you
really that shallow? Stretch marks got ya
down? I know better. I know you think
about that child and I know it matters to
you. If I ever aborted it would be for
myself AND the unborn child inside of
me.
Eiri?
Quote:
Even moreso, I can sit here and say
abortion kills an unborn child... and I
don't feel my stance is being compromised.
I don't have to dehumanize the fetus. In
fact, I feel humanizing it is important.
It MATTERS.
IT MATTERS to YOU, not to everyone else.
Maybe some people, but not everyone.
Quote:
Why are you
aborting? Is it just because you don't
want to be pregnant? Are you really that
shallow? Stretch marks got ya down?
This is a very ignorant statement.
Pregnancy is not easy to endure, even when
it is much wanted. Childbirth is agony
even when done by a person's own free
will. It's difficult to imagine how much
emotional and physical torment would be
involved to have to go through those
things by force.
Quote:
I know better. I know you think about that
child and I know it matters to you.
How can you possibly know what goes on in
other people's minds? How can you think
people would think of "that child" when
it's a fertilized egg or an embryo? For
some people who do not desire pregnancy,
the difference between an egg and a
fertilized egg is zero.
Quote:
If I ever aborted it would be for myself
AND the unborn child inside of
me.
Ok? It doesn't seem like you want that to
be a legal choice. Maybe you just don't
want it to be a legal choice for those
sluts who don't want stretch marks, but
you do want the choice for people like you
who would only choose abortion for moral,
upstanding reasons.
Yes, that's very true. I'll
never debate THAT issue. I will however
debate that we should be using these wrong
terms at all.
Instead, I am mostly horrified by the
inhumanity I see pro-choicers express
towards the fetus. I've been there myself,
done that, called it a parasite, a cancer,
called "it" all kinds of things. I'm done
with the cliches, I'm done with the things
that have been said over and over. They
ring hollow to me. They don't "work"
anymore for me.
Even moreso, I can sit here and say
abortion kills an unborn child... and I
don't feel my stance is being compromised.
I don't have to dehumanize the fetus. In
fact, I feel humanizing it is important.
It MATTERS.
Why are you aborting? Is it just because
you don't want to be pregnant? Are you
really that shallow? Stretch marks got ya
down? I know better. I know you think
about that child and I know it matters to
you. If I ever aborted it would be for
myself AND the unborn child inside of
me.
I am happy to agree that abortion kills
(by removing from its host) an unborn
child. But I wouldn't care -- I would have
not emotional attachment, and would still
consider it an invasive parasite, because
I simply do not want it inside me. I would
not want an unborn child inside me, any
more than I would want a tapeworm or a
cancerous tumour inside me.
Okay, but do you actually consider that
unborn child to be as revolting as cancer?
I guess I just can't understand reviling
something like that wen I know it's a
baby. A small one? Yes. Does it look like
an alien or some snot? Yes, amusingly so.
It even has a tail, and gills. But it is
still a baby to me no matter what it looks
like. I've had pregnancy scares, I'm sure
many of us have. I knew abortion was the
right answer (thank God I never had to go
through it), but that's because I
considered the potential child as well as
myself.
I just find it hard to believe some
pro-choicers who rant about the parasitic
evil embryo. As a pro-lifer would say, it
really seems as if they are trying to
prove to THEMSELVES that they don't care
about it, when maybe they actually do.
Quote:
Do you really see
that not wanting to be pregnant as being
"shallow"? The idea is so totally
revolting to me, that I would seriously
risk doing damage to myself to get it out.
There are a lot of reasons to not want to
be pregnant, and worrying about
stretchmarks doesn't really rank up
there.
I see "just" not wanting to be pregnant as
shallow, because I believe the unborn
matters and is part of the abortion
equation. I KNOW women actually think
about the unborn inside of them.
And to be 100% honest... be offended if
you wish... but I'd really consider
therapy if I considered pregnancy that
revolting. Would I have hurt myself to end
a pregnancy a year or two ago? YES. But
NOT because I found the pregnancy itself
disgusting. I find pregnancy to be
beautiful. I would have been horrified of
the situation... It's hard to explain. I'd
be horrified *I* was pregnant and in the
state of being pregnant, but not actually
horrified about "pregnancy".
|
cmyked
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 28 Apr 2008 Posts: 294
Thanks: 50
Thanked:4
Posted: 06-04-08 18:22pm
Also, I'm not going to read propoganda
from either side of this debate. I've been
in it enough years to know how I feel
about the issue. I've flip flopped and
dealt with my own ethics enough to be
solid in my stance and to finally not feel
FAKE about it.
|
Birch
Supporter
Joined: 07 Nov 2005 Posts: 4159 Location: Bliss,
Thanks: 159
Thanked:16
Posted: 06-04-08 21:31pm
I found pregnancy pretty revolting. So
revolting, in fact, that I had to run to
the bathroom every ten minutes. No
exaggeration. Not so beautiful.
Anyone seen the movie 'Alien'?
|
oopoopoop
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 18 Mar 2004 Posts: 1519 Location: ,
Thanks: 78
Thanked:5
Posted: 06-05-08 03:51am
cmyked
wrote:
Okay, but do you actually consider that
unborn child to be as revolting as cancer?
I guess I just can't understand reviling
something like that wen I know it's a
baby. A small one? Yes. Does it look like
an alien or some snot? Yes, amusingly so.
It even has a tail, and gills. But it is
still a baby to me no matter what it looks
like. I've had pregnancy scares, I'm sure
many of us have. I knew abortion was the
right answer (thank God I never had to go
through it), but that's because I
considered the potential child as well as
myself.
I just find it hard to believe some
pro-choicers who rant about the parasitic
evil embryo. As a pro-lifer would say, it
really seems as if they are trying to
prove to THEMSELVES that they don't care
about it, when maybe they actually do.
...
And to be 100% honest... be offended if
you wish... but I'd really consider
therapy if I considered pregnancy that
revolting. Would I have hurt myself to end
a pregnancy a year or two ago? YES. But
NOT because I found the pregnancy itself
disgusting. I find pregnancy to be
beautiful. I would have been horrified of
the situation... It's hard to explain. I'd
be horrified *I* was pregnant and in the
state of being pregnant, but not actually
horrified about
"pregnancy".
Yes, I would hate the idea of pregnancy as
much as cancer. I do not want anything
growing inside me and leeching off my
body. Therapy would be a good idea if,
feeling like that about pregnancy, I
actually WANTED a child. Obviously, there
would be a conflict there. I could see if
someone loved children, and was revolted
by pregnancy, there might be a point --
but it's like having a fear of flying, but
not wanting to go anywhere. But since I
don't want a child (and in fact, actively
DO NOT want, and have never wanted one),
what would be the point?
And just because *I* don't want to be
pregnant, doesn't mean that I don't think
anyone else should be. I don't want to
look at their pregnant bellies, but if
they don't mind being that way, it's no
problem for me.
|
Darkmoon
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 08 Dec 2007 Posts: 439 Location: ,
Thanks: 98
Thanked:56
Posted: 06-05-08 04:13am
Being obsessive over other people's wants
and fears is a sign that you need therapy.
|
Moo
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 20 Feb 2006 Posts: 1066 Location: London
Thanks: 21
Thanked:111
Posted: 06-05-08 04:20am
cmyked
wrote:
I see "just" not wanting to
be pregnant as shallow, because I believe
the unborn matters and is part of the
abortion equation. I KNOW women actually
think about the unborn inside of them.
I can't imagine for many people it's as
simple as just not wanting to be pregnant
- there are reasons behind why women don't
wish to be pregnant (for example when I
aborted I didn't want to be pregnant
because I was at uni/too young etc... a
whole host of reasons as opposed to just
not wanting to be pregnant for the hell of
it). And yes, I thought about the
potential child before I made my decision
but I don't think that means every woman
does - we're all different and all think
about things in different ways so I
honestly can't say that all women think
about the z/e/f/potential baby before
aborting.
Devil's advocate is
important, I think. It may seem annoying,
but it does make people think, or so I
hope!
