Abortion

Dave":1g1n328e said:
I work with two people who were both born in the '50 before Roe vs Wade. They were both adopted. Had abortion been legal then they might not be here now. One is very much against abortion with the exception of when the woman's life is in danger. The other is in favor of abortion. I have said to him that if it had been legal back then he might not be here now. That argument doesn't seem to bother him in the least.

That is because if his existence had been nullified by an abortion, he would not be here to mourn his non-existence.

Like dying under anesthesia, if you don't wake up, you cannot greive your mortality.
 
Margonme":32vkkh5y said:
"facilitator"
I never cared much for them--they always want to steer a discussion only in the direction they want it to go instead of the direction the participants do, with far too much being left out & as a result the only person happy at the end of the day is the facilitator, and he, primarily because he got his way.
 
greybeard":b678y4jn said:
Margonme":b678y4jn said:
"facilitator"
I never cared much for them--they always want to steer a discussion only in the direction they want it to go instead of the direction the participants do, with far too much being left out & as a result the only person happy at the end of the day is the facilitator, and he, primarily because he got his way.

The flip side to that coin is to check out of the conversation like I'm doing right about.....now.

Bye.
 
greybeard":34rzximm said:
Margonme":34rzximm said:
"facilitator"
I never cared much for them--they always want to steer a discussion only in the direction they want it to go instead of the direction the participants do, with far too much being left out & as a result the only person happy at the end of the day is the facilitator, and he, primarily because he got his way.

I have seen some like that.

Just give me a chance. I am giving it my best. 8)
 
Whether or not one chooses to rationalize or excuse the decision/act, does not change the nature of the act.
Abortion is the taking of a life...that is the nature of the act. Our society has chosen to make exceptions to the criminality of taking a life...Capital punishment, defense of life and sometimes even property and abortion. In the case of capital punishment, it is just that, a punishment for a heinous act against society, it is, today, reserved for exceptional cases only.
Taking a life in the course of Self defense is, again, viewed by society as an extreme and immediate circumstance. Abortion, however, has been deemed to not require the exceptional circumstances that are otherwise applied to the justified taking of a life. Most have chosen to overlook this exception by deeming a fetus something other than a life and the R vs W decision made that easy for them. Still, none of those rationales change the simple fact,that it is still the legal taking of a life.

That SCOTUS decision also happened to have a devastating effect on the rights and responsibilities of fathers, such that our society will likely never recover from the effects.
 
If you don't like or don't want an abortion, don't get one. Otherwise, it's none of your business. Doubly none of your business if you're not female.
 
Since I am woman GP, does that mean that my opinion trumps those of all the men here?
With all due respect, I find that to be a ludicrous suggestion.
There are millions of women out there who bought in to the argument that its not really a baby so go ahead and have your abortion....Only afterward did they discover the lie in the argument.
 
Bestoutwest":1ye4w2zc said:
TexasBred":1ye4w2zc said:
Certainly it's not "full term" but it is very easy to tell that it is human !!!!! To me the mother made her choice on "women's health" when she decided to have unprotected sex.

So does rape count as an OK excuse? What about incest? If the woman is going to die during childbirth, is that still her problem?
They do perform C-sections in your hospitals don't they? Pretty common around here. Very very seldom is the mother in danger of death. You look for the exceptions....very few rape victims get pregnant as a percentage of the whole. Same for incest which by the way is very common in many countries and considered normal behavior by their culture. In Mexico most over half the young girls lose their virginity to their bother or father. So does the family donkey
 
backhoeboogie":2lm36n78 said:
Yes, but a fetus cannot survive outside of the womb until 26 weeks, and that needs massive amounts of medical intervention. So, the real debate becomes when does a fetus become a person?

95% of the adult population cannot survive on their own these days. Send them out on the prairies and they'll need medical attention "intervention" in no time themselves.

Our constitution was drafted by many. Roe V Wade cannot take the words of one or two preparers (or inputters) and speak for all. To quote one person's definition of "person" does not account for the hundreds of signatures.
I agree, however, the Court ruled they have the right to an abortion under the 14th Amendment. 14th amendment is just as much a part of the constitution as the first 10 and just as binding but we don't have 100% agreement even on the first 10.
 
TexasBred":3fxytx80 said:
Bestoutwest":3fxytx80 said:
TexasBred":3fxytx80 said:
Certainly it's not "full term" but it is very easy to tell that it is human !!!!! To me the mother made her choice on "women's health" when she decided to have unprotected sex.

So does rape count as an OK excuse? What about incest? If the woman is going to die during childbirth, is that still her problem?
They do perform C-sections in your hospitals don't they? Pretty common around here. Very very seldom is the mother in danger of death. You look for the exceptions....very few rape victims get pregnant as a percentage of the whole. Same for incest which by the way is very common in many countries and considered normal behavior by their culture. In Mexico most over half the young girls lose their virginity to their bother or father. So does the family donkey

Well, at least the donkey doesn't much care but you have to be kidding about the incest. Seriously, the most primitive cultures consider incest a social taboo.
 
FWIW, In my opinion, the court did not rule on whether a fetus constitutes a life. It appears that they rejected the relevance of the life argument in favor of the privacy argument. They simply used the lack of a consensus within the medical community as the rationale for deciding her privacy trumped the childs right to life as well as any paternal rights...their ruling specifically negated any all paternal rights in reference to the unborn.
 
CottageFarm":1v9mbxy8 said:
Since I am woman GP, does that mean that my opinion trumps those of all the men here?.
It means your decision whether to have an abortion or not have an abortion is yours alone.
 
CottageFarm":1royhtno said:
FWIW, In my opinion, the court did not rule on whether a fetus constitutes a life. It appears that they rejected the relevance of the life argument in favor of the privacy argument. They simply used the lack of a consensus within the medical community as the rationale for deciding her privacy trumped the childs right to life as well as any paternal rights...their ruling specifically negated any all paternal rights in reference to the unborn.

Please forgive the bluntness, you must have read a different case than I did! You did say it was your opinion. I respect that.
 
hurleyjd":wk5z17vu said:
Religious question. Do these fetuses go to heaven. If so might not be a bad thing.
I think they would. No question about it. I'm not sure where I stand on abortion but I'm glad I've never been a part of one.
I feel like some on this site are way over opinionated and are hypocritical. I ignore it for the most part but it does bother me.
 
ohiosteve":1kz9pw3f said:
hurleyjd":1kz9pw3f said:
Religious question. Do these fetuses go to heaven. If so might not be a bad thing.
I think they would. No question about it. I'm not sure where I stand on abortion but I'm glad I've never been a part of one.
I feel like some on this site are way over opinionated and are hypocritical. I ignore it for the most part but it does bother me.

Steve, opinions and commentary is the nature of a media like a forum. Realistically, posts here are not going to be documentaries.

My original post was devoid of opinion. The thread has drifted off into the weeds here and there but that is fine. Everyone has done a good job avoiding politics and religion.
 
Does the Right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, only apply if you make it out of the womb?

Or does the right to Life start at conception, since even though some consider it not an Living organism, it still has the potential of Life as a Human being. So by logical thinking would not the potential of it becoming Life, give it the right to our first right, which is the right to Life? Since you must become Life to be considered Alive.

So there by when you kill an embryo, or fetus, are you not then denying that Life of it's right to Life?

In when denying them their first right, which is to Life, you also devoid them of all other rights.

And so if they are devoid of all rights, then they must not be even Human, or have even the potential of being human. Since being if they had the potential of being human Life, they would have a right to Life.

So the last logical question to ask, would be, what is the value of Human Life?

Is not the value of a Human Life worth the Right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness?

If it not worth those 3 fundamental rights. Then I can see why someone would feel that the Life, or potential Life, of an unborn child, is of no value, and should be discarded at the convenience of the whom ever maybe carrying the devoid object in their womb.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top