I think that abortion at a certain stage is a little more on the gray side. Specifically those using RU 486 (morning after pill) at this point of development theres no way to tell whether the cells will be viable. Many times women will have a miscarriage at this point and never know. However with abortions further along in the process (most especially partial born abortions) it's obvious whether the child with thrive or not. I think if things are normal with the newborn it is much more humane to put them up for adoption considering the couples out there who can't seem to have children on their own who would love to adopt. But then again you also have those who adopt or harbor foster children for a check. Definitely a tough issue but I have to say that no matter the law people are still going to make the same choices and I would prefer a woman using a clinical pathway to terminate a pregnancy rather than throw a newborn in a dumpster or try and abort with a coat hanger.
-
Hello, this board in now turned off and no new posting.
Please REGISTER at Anabolic Steroid Forums, and become a member of our NEW community!
-
Check Out IronMag Labs® KSM-66 Max - Recovery and Anabolic Growth Complex
Abortion
- Thread starter JOEBIALEK
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2005
- Messages
- 317
- Reaction score
- 4
- Points
- 0
Not sure why this argument is still flying around in this thread. Everyone believes what they want to, and you'll never really change their minds, no matter how long you try. 
A poll would probably be much more interesting, just to see which way IM (collectively) leans.
A poll would probably be much more interesting, just to see which way IM (collectively) leans.
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2005
- Messages
- 14,833
- Reaction score
- 1,676
- Points
- 113
- Age
- 43
- Location
- In my imagination.
Not sure why this argument is still flying around in this thread. Everyone believes what they want to, and you'll never really change their minds, no matter how long you try.
A poll would probably be much more interesting, just to see which way IM (collectively) leans.
I know I know. I have an impulse control problem. The abortion debate iisthe sore tooth that you can't stop rubbing your tongue across. You its going to hurt but you keep doing it for no reason.
You're wrong. When a sperm and egg unite, the human DNA is formed. The comparison you've made demonstrates a serious lack of understanding of simple biology. There is absolutely no question that once the sperm/egg unite it is human life. Apparently though, since at that very moment, and for some weeks afterwards, the life does not have certain characteristics that your or I have, it is not deserving of the right to life. Each time an unborn human is killed an innocent, unique human is destroyed.
A life of suffering? How do you define suffering? That is very subjective. Having crappy parents or being put in a foster home is a life of suffering? There's plenty of people who can rise out of such cirumstances and have a wonderful, enjoyable life. Dave Thomas was adopted. He's the founder of Wendy's, who's done so much good for people (particularly for adoption causes). Just one example. Should such people be denied the chance to live and possibly give a great deal to the world because they're an inconveinence? I wonder if he wished he didn't exist, I wonder if the masses of people, especially children, that he helped wished he didn't exist?
A life of suffering? How do you define suffering? That is very subjective. Having crappy parents or being put in a foster home is a life of suffering? There's plenty of people who can rise out of such cirumstances and have a wonderful, enjoyable life. Dave Thomas was adopted. He's the founder of Wendy's, who's done so much good for people (particularly for adoption causes). Just one example. Should such people be denied the chance to live and possibly give a great deal to the world because they're an inconveinence? I wonder if he wished he didn't exist, I wonder if the masses of people, especially children, that he helped wished he didn't exist?
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2005
- Messages
- 14,833
- Reaction score
- 1,676
- Points
- 113
- Age
- 43
- Location
- In my imagination.
Bla bla bla, I'm taking IRMs advice and exiting this discussion. I have more interesting stuff to do...like shoving my thumbs into my eyeballs until I see pretty geometric designs on the back of my eyelid.
Not sure who you're addressing but I do certainly understand the biology and chemistry of human life. I spent a year as a chem major and am in my 3rd year as a nursing student. I've had numerous classes related to this sort of thing (anatomy, pathophysiology, physiology, micro biology, pre and neonatal nursing, etc.). Amongst 100s of hours of clinical experience I can say that I'm not an expert but have a pretty clear understanding. What you're debating is simply when life is certifiable which can't even be decided definitively by most physicians and medical boards.
Hell yes. I love doing that.
Notice how silly this sounds?
You know what's really sick? Forcing a virtuous young student with a perfectly charming girlfriend to have a child at the age of 15. Forcing them to halt their education, much of their future and their social life. Forcing this by law.
But IRM is right. Our points of view are crystal and none of the involved parties is going to change his mind.
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2004
- Messages
- 32,369
- Reaction score
- 2,936
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 52
- Location
- In a van, down by the river...
Your life isn't my life...soooo...can I kill you now?
whats silly would be your use of the word virtuous in this circumstance
ive got to agree here. you have a valid arguement. i do think the people adopting children are pro-life though
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2005
- Messages
- 11,812
- Reaction score
- 213
- Points
- 63
- Age
- 45
pro-choice here. I think there are already to many people in this country. A child brought up without love is worse then the child not being born at all. IMO.
I have a better idea. Why not go ask the foster kids themselves?
You can't honestly think they'd prefer to never have been born...
I can.
From a Christian point of view this question shows a severe misunderstanding on the purpose of mortality. But that is just not the topic at hand, and way too much of a tangeant to be benificial to this topic. things such as pain, suffering, evil, are all part of the purpose of us being born. to understand pleasure you must know pain. to know the good we must experience evil.
I recognise it will make the discussion much better to keep Christianity out of it. That is a matter of faith. not to be discussed here. But truthfully for the majority of pro-lifers out there Christian beliefs are so tied to this topic that it is hard to separate the two
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2002
- Messages
- 4,213
- Reaction score
- 8
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 40
Socrates said this long before monotheism was even an idea in this world.
unless your Christian and believe Adam and Eve were monotheistic. but i guess thats not really the point either is it?
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2005
- Messages
- 14,833
- Reaction score
- 1,676
- Points
- 113
- Age
- 43
- Location
- In my imagination.
Ok, I'll jump back in the thread for this one comment, then I'm jumping back out, but only because you actually listen to what is being said. I don't know what the numbers are of pro-lifers and pro-choicers that adopt. I know lots of liberal pro-choicers who have adopted. Well, to be honest, almost every family I know who adopted were liberal, moderate, are libertarian.
That doesn't mean anything other than I find myself associating with more liberal or moderate people, so naturally those are the people I would notice adopting. Honestly, I would bet that the numbers are pretty close to 50/50 since nobody is going to adopt based on their political beliefs. If you adopt, it is probably because the family can't have one of their own, and would like to raise a child. Since the country is pretty balanced on the political spectrum, I would guess the same would be true for families adopting children.
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2005
- Messages
- 14,833
- Reaction score
- 1,676
- Points
- 113
- Age
- 43
- Location
- In my imagination.
Read the post again.
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2002
- Messages
- 4,213
- Reaction score
- 8
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 40
Touche. I forgot how crazy some religious people are. I recently provided an orthodox jewish girl with some stuff to read about Zoroastrianism. All she said was, "i don't care, Judaism was the first and only religion ever made." or some such BS.
Sorry for bringing the thread off subject. I will just say that sometimes abortions really are necessary and that i'm sure there are lots of kids out there who are so miserable they would rather have not existed.
yes, instances of abortion being needed to save the life of the mother are legit. i dont ague this point. i have a problem with couples deciding not to take responsibility for choices they have made and natural consequences that follow.
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2005
- Messages
- 11,812
- Reaction score
- 213
- Points
- 63
- Age
- 45
Im serious when I ask this...
Why isnt ok that when two people fuck for the pleasure and not the reproduction, that they decide to have an abortion? Cuz its "murder?"
Do you ever think that answer alone sounds demented?
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2002
- Messages
- 4,213
- Reaction score
- 8
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 40
If i'm following your train of thought properly, i totally agree.
The whole abortion argument, to me, is an argument over the potential for life. So taking the fertilized egg-becoming-a-human a step further, each load that a man shoots into a rubber, or anywhere but into the vagina can be considered murder because each load is a potential life that will never be. Its almost like a slippery slope argument, if we ban abortions because there is a potential for life, we should go all the way and arrest people for wasting eggs/sperm because they each could potentially become a human life. Sex for pleasure should then be illegal etc.
I'm terrible at verbalizing my feelings, but i hope i got my point across.
no, I dont see it as demented at all. i dont have a problem when people fuck for pleasure. sex should be for pleasure. sex is not just for reproduction. you need to remember though that i'm an individual that believes and practices that sex should be reserved for within the bonds of marriage. I dont expect everyone to follow that. ive said that before. I also started on this thread by saying I dont expect nor want roe vs wade overturned. but a concieved child is just that. I dont accept the "they are better off not exisiting arguement" and I dont like the idea of cowards not taking responsibility for the natural consequences of choices they make.
