Pro life?
Printed From: Tippmann Paintball
Category: News And Views
Forum Name: Thoughts and Opinions
Forum Description: Got something you need to say?
URL: http://www.tippmannsports.com/forum/wwf77a/forum_posts.asp?TID=180897
Printed Date: 29 December 2025 at 6:41am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Pro life?
Posted By: Linus
Subject: Pro life?
Date Posted: 20 March 2009 at 5:50pm
|
My view has always been pro-life, excluding certain circumstances, one of which I encountered yesterday at work.
We had to transport a 49 y/o female with all this from birth; Severe mental retardation Severe spastic quadriplegia Status epileptics (epilepsy / seizures) Hypertension (high blood pressure) Diabetes Asthma G-tube J-tube Severe contractures in all 4 extremeties. The whole time during transport, she would have seizures along with her spasms. Not an inkling of normal thought, no control over any part of her body, EVER, in 49 years. This is one of those times where I think abortion is a very valid option. Really, think about it, 49 years of just being there, being nothing more then a money drain, having no life, not knowing happiness, laughter, life, love, food, water, tv, friends, family, pleasure, or even thoughts of your own. You just sit there all day, every day, for 49 years, shaking. I'm not saying abort kids with retardation or birth defects, but there has to be a limit? Is there not a point where human compassion does include taking a life, and not just keeping it? ------------- 
|
Replies:
Posted By: choopie911
Date Posted: 20 March 2009 at 5:51pm
| So now you're ok with assisted suicide? Did you not realize that cases like this,and worse, existed when you were bashing the pro-choice folks? |
Posted By: High Voltage
Date Posted: 20 March 2009 at 5:52pm
|
In b4 splitting hairs.
------------- 
|
Posted By: Linus
Date Posted: 20 March 2009 at 5:55pm
And I direct you to my very first sentence in this very post. But alas, it will turn out just like the police one, where no matter my view, either in-line or against your very own, in your mind, I have to always be wrong. So be it, but just read the very last sentence, and reflect on that. -------------
|
choopie911 wrote:Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 20 March 2009 at 5:57pm
|
I see an interesting question brought about from this thread. What should we do in the case of mentally handicapped individuals as concerning legalized assisted suicide? |
Posted By: Linus
Date Posted: 20 March 2009 at 6:03pm
Technically, if assisted suicide were to ever become legal for the masses, the mentally handicapped would not be able to partake in it for that very reason--- mentally handicapped. In todays laws, mentally retarded people have no say in their health care decisions, even if they are only slightly handicapped, which I wholey agree with because they don't have the mental capacity to decide. Which brings an even better question; Should those with POA have the authority to decide? -------------
|
Posted By: pb125
Date Posted: 20 March 2009 at 6:03pm
|
wait are you an emt or something
------------- 
|
Posted By: Linus
Date Posted: 20 March 2009 at 6:05pm
Only when I want to be better then someone else on an internet forum. -------------
|
Posted By: pb125
Date Posted: 20 March 2009 at 6:05pm
|
oh okay, i would have never guessed.
-------------
|
Posted By: Linus
Date Posted: 20 March 2009 at 6:08pm
Yeah, I try not to make it obvious at all, I only post about it in every 3rd topic or so. You know, keep it on the down-low. -------------
|
Posted By: rednekk98
Date Posted: 20 March 2009 at 8:57pm
| Topic is misleading, you're talking about euthanasia, not abortion. |
Posted By: Enmity
Date Posted: 20 March 2009 at 9:27pm
|
I love mudkipz ohh and I have always been pro-choice, especially in situations such as that, although that is not abortion, that is assisted suicide, which I am actually against. |
Posted By: Linus
Date Posted: 20 March 2009 at 11:06pm
I don't know how the both of you thought I was speaking of assisted suicide, when I explicitly mention abortion, and abortion only. I know the difference. And if you must go on the assisted suicide run, I already commented on that as well. -------------
|
Posted By: Uncle Rudder
Date Posted: 20 March 2009 at 11:24pm
|
Being mentally hadicapped doesn't make you any less of a human being.
------------- 
|
Posted By: Skillet42565
Date Posted: 20 March 2009 at 11:27pm
Wrong. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Gatyr
Date Posted: 20 March 2009 at 11:28pm
Can I ask what you think makes us human? ------------- 
|
Posted By: Uncle Rudder
Date Posted: 20 March 2009 at 11:29pm
I'd love to hear you say that to a parent a mentally handicaped child. -------------
|
Posted By: Tolgak
Date Posted: 20 March 2009 at 11:29pm
Nobody's arguing that the patient wasn't a human. The problem is that in such cases, the patient's mind is operating on pure life-support mode. It's a level that's below operating on instinct. If such a person does experience senses, he would have no means of making sense of them. Even with a smidgen of consciousness and thought in there, living decades under the conditions Linus described is nothing but torture. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Skillet42565
Date Posted: 20 March 2009 at 11:34pm
I don't care about retarded children OR their parents. -------------
|
Posted By: Tical3.0
Date Posted: 20 March 2009 at 11:36pm
|
Posted By: GI JOES SON
Date Posted: 20 March 2009 at 11:36pm
| i;ve always been pro-choice. call it nationalism but.....i believe that everyone is entitled to do what they want to, provided its not breaking a law. robbing a bank is obviously a no no. but i really never understood how people could make laws about people controlling their bodies, as to what they can and cannot do. if you want to go smoke a rock, by all means. go for it. |
Posted By: Skillet42565
Date Posted: 20 March 2009 at 11:37pm
Well, we lack souls, similar to the mentally challenged, but we're not retarded. -------------
|
Posted By: Tical3.0
Date Posted: 20 March 2009 at 11:40pm
|
Posted By: GI JOES SON
Date Posted: 20 March 2009 at 11:46pm
|
this is really taking a turn for the worse... i have to agree with linus on this one, i think that the women is basically doing nothing but living to suffer. having constant siezures and other ailments, including not being able to care for yourself even at the age of 49 must really suck, whether the person can realize it or not. |
Posted By: scotchyscotch
Date Posted: 21 March 2009 at 12:23am
|
I have a few friends who have went went for the abortion option, I would not think any less of them, Until you have been in a situation that needs your opinion then stay out of it. |
Posted By: Kayback
Date Posted: 21 March 2009 at 2:26am
|
What Scotty said.
You ask what gives one the right to decide for others? What gives YOU the right to decide for ME, hippie? You don't want abortions, don't get them. With 6.75 BILLION people on the planet do you really think that the world will miss one more foetus? KBK |
Posted By: Hysteria
Date Posted: 21 March 2009 at 3:39am
Every fetus brings us that much closer to the day we answer to our robot overlords. Asian fetuses count as 2 non-Asian fetuses when it comes to this, too. |
Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 21 March 2009 at 4:10am
I don't believe that abortion should be outlawed completely, but used as a medical alternative for a dangerous pregnancy, as in one that will mentally or physically harm the mother / child.
Otherwise, while yes in numbers it is much better to kill a fetus than to bring an unwanted child into the world, where does this logic end? When does grandpa become to old and unproductive to be allowed to live?
And of course we could all go round and round all day whether or not a fetus should be considered a living person, but what can't be argued is that a fetus is just as much a part of the life process as becoming a teenager, becoming elderly, and dying.
Just my .02, and of course it's a hotly debated subject, but I honestly have yet to see an argument that convinces me otherwise. ------------- 
|
Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 21 March 2009 at 4:11am
|
Oh, and on topic, I have no standing on the woman's condition, because I've never been there. That's a hard decision to make. -------------
|
Posted By: Kayback
Date Posted: 21 March 2009 at 7:36am
|
My comment was directed at the people who don't want others to terminate mentally or physically handicapped foetuses. We have too many people on this planet. Productive or not. If the baby is born physically or mentally handicapped, then fine. But what's wrong with others who don't want their offspring to be handicapped? It isn't like they can have a bunch of others until they get it right. There are too many people on the planet. I also don't get the "What about granddad?" argument. Smarter people are debating what makes a human human, and when is a foetus a person. I don't know if a foetus is a person. However granddad is a person. He has been for many years. Hence his granddad status. Besides, it is likely he isn't expanding the population any more, and he is probably gonna die soon anyway :p KBK |
Posted By: carl_the_sniper
Date Posted: 21 March 2009 at 10:26am
|
There are people that seem to be grouping them together into the pro life/choice movements... abortion =/= doctor assisted suicide.
------------- <just say no to unnecessarily sexualized sigs> |
Posted By: Eville
Date Posted: 21 March 2009 at 11:49am
HOWEVER! he IS Kentuckian which makes him 72% retard. |
Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 21 March 2009 at 1:22pm
I'm not saying the fetus is more human than granddad, but just as basic of a part of the human life cycle. What begins with a fetus ends as grandpa, and in my personal opinion you can't deem one more important thant he other.
-------------
|
Posted By: MeanMan
Date Posted: 21 March 2009 at 1:30pm
|
I'm reading Freakonomics now, and the book keeps going back to the idea of abortions reduce crime. How the kids not growing up in a bad environment makes him less likely to be a criminal, and he sites how most abortions are from poor/bad environment families. The reduction of crime in the 90s was due to abortions being allowed from Roe v Wade. It's a crazy book so far, but it makes sense. The criminal simply aren't around 20 years later.
Just something to think about. I don't really have an opinion yet. ------------- 
hybrid-sniper~"To be honest, if I see a player still using an Impulse I'm going to question their motives." |
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 21 March 2009 at 6:17pm
Most retarded logic ever. ------------- Que pasa? 
|
Posted By: choopie911
Date Posted: 21 March 2009 at 6:23pm
Actually it kind of makes sense. |
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 21 March 2009 at 6:24pm
A guy on my crew team was reading a book last week which said that when people who are HIV free have sex more often, AIDs is transferred less. I won't explain the specific of the logic, but it was basically the same argument you're making. Which doesn't make it any less wrong, or stupid. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: StormyKnight
Date Posted: 21 March 2009 at 6:25pm
And you could easily kill the next Mozart, the doctor that cures cancer/aids, the scientist that puts the climate change myth to rest or the perfect stripper. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Tical3.0
Date Posted: 21 March 2009 at 11:34pm
| mmmm. the perfect stripper.... |
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 22 March 2009 at 8:22am
|
Posted By: StormyKnight
Date Posted: 22 March 2009 at 9:38am
Which I'm pretty sure thats what the original post was about. -------------
|
Posted By: Linus
Date Posted: 22 March 2009 at 11:33am
|
Eh, original post was about abortion for severely handicapped babies... not abortions for all unwanted children or euthanasia for old people.
But that just shows how far off base we go in topics. -------------
|
Posted By: MeanMan
Date Posted: 22 March 2009 at 11:48am
|
Its the tippmann forum, thread hijacking is the way of life. -------------
hybrid-sniper~"To be honest, if I see a player still using an Impulse I'm going to question their motives." |
Posted By: You Wont See Me
Date Posted: 22 March 2009 at 11:49am
Those that had an opinion on the subject voiced them. Those that didn't have an opinion or didn't want to get involved in an intellectual debate still had to do something to up their post count.  +1 ------------- A-5 E-Grip JCS Dual Trigger DOP X-CORE 8 stage x-chamber Lapco Bigshot 14" Beadblasted Optional setup: R/T Dead on Blade trigger |
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 22 March 2009 at 5:49pm
|
After having children, and going through the whole preganancy thing twice with my wife, I tend to be a whole lot less pro-choice than I used to be. I have a feeling that may be the case with a lot of people. I am against abortion as a form of birth control. Personally, I knew of a girl that had at least two abortions that I knew of. I felt this was wrong. However, I have always been in favor of abortions for special circumstances such as rape, incest, and perceptable problems with the fetus. Not everyone is equipped to deal with a severely handicapped dependent for the rest of their lives, nor should they be forced to. If the parents choose, and we have the capabilities to do so, I don't see a problem terminating the pregnancy. I am against having abortions for perceived issues such as gender selection. Unfortunately, there is no way to control what the mother is thinking, so we would simply have to trust in her judgement. I am 100% against any abortions in third trimester or partial birth abortions, unless the mothers life is in endangered.
|
Posted By: carl_the_sniper
Date Posted: 22 March 2009 at 8:45pm
|
I'm sorry but i've never understood people who can be against abortion normally but make exceptions for certain circumstances such as rape. As much as i'd like to think otherwise, it's a one way or the other kind of thing with no middle ground.
------------- <just say no to unnecessarily sexualized sigs> |
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 22 March 2009 at 8:51pm
This is full of logical, factual statements that certainly do not require more adequate support. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 22 March 2009 at 8:54pm
Yeah because getting raped wasn't enough punishment. Let's make the victims have to go through pregnancy too. ------------- Que pasa?
|
Posted By: Linus
Date Posted: 22 March 2009 at 9:00pm
Having consenting, unprotected sex and getting preggo is your own damn fault. Getting raped and getting preggo is not your fault. -------------
|
Posted By: carl_the_sniper
Date Posted: 22 March 2009 at 9:05pm
|
When I consider abortion, I consider the life that would be. If we only considered the mother, then the abortion debate would be a no brainer but since we clearly consider the child, it must be a one way or the other thing. I hope that is coherant enough. ------------- <just say no to unnecessarily sexualized sigs> |
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 22 March 2009 at 9:12pm
It's coherent enough to tell me that it is not a black and white issue. In the case of rape, the mother is to be considered over the "life that would be" ------------- Que pasa?
|
Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 22 March 2009 at 9:47pm
I think you're thinking on the right track, but I'll tell you my point of view and see if it helps.
Being pro-life is about protecting the value of life in society, not about preventing death or "saving babies". So for me being pro life is just as much being pro life for the mother as it is for the baby.
I don't comment on the rape discussion because I think I can safely say the number of teen or pre teen boys on this forum have never had a rape related pregnancy, and can not in any way understand the emotions that go through the mother's mind. Pregnancies are emotional nightmares for many girls, so how much more so for a mother that has been raped?
For me pot is a black and white issue. Either it should be completely legal, or completely illegal. All the "complications" to legalizing pot can be summed up as red tape, for the most part. But abortion is a discussion of the value of the human reproductive process, and the right to terminate that process at need or will. There is no black and white, because to put it bluntly life sucks, and has a way of throwing things at you that just aren't fair and force you to make an unfair decision.
As far as the 16 year old that gets knocked up and just doesn't want the baby-I'm sorry to be cruel, but there was a way to prevent that in the first place. I'm sure there are many of us on this forum that weren't completely planned, but our mothers, or whoever raised us, stood up and played the role. And there are many people on this forum who are going far in their life, and have done or will do great things for society.
-------------
|
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 22 March 2009 at 10:08pm
I just so happen to be a twin -- my parents wanted 3 kids, but they got a surprise. So, I personally agree with this statement very much. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: carl_the_sniper
Date Posted: 22 March 2009 at 10:43pm
Why?
This is a fair point, I hadn't considered it this way. What a conservative way to look at the issue though. Nothing wrong with that but for me, the abortion debate has always been specifically about the life of the child not the values that it represents. ------------- <just say no to unnecessarily sexualized sigs> |
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 22 March 2009 at 10:55pm
Because she didn't have a choice. You can't hold people responsible for crap they didn't do. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: Tolgak
Date Posted: 22 March 2009 at 11:18pm
Also, the mother is the "life that is" while the child is the "life that might not be." In order to favor the preservation of life, you must work with the odds to allow the most life possible. The pro-life movement doesn't ever consider the mother's life. -------------
|
Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 23 March 2009 at 12:29am
Thats partially why the anti abortion crowd rarely gets their point across. They choose to argue whether or not a fetus is the same value to society as a child, instead of arguing the importance the fetus holds in the life process.
There's no arguing a fetus can't function as a human being, but on the same coin, as I side, it's no less important to the life process of a human being. -------------
|
Posted By: Kayback
Date Posted: 23 March 2009 at 3:09am
|
Six point seven billion people.
It is a naughty-word-for-poopy way to do birth control, but SIX POINT SEVEN BILLION. The next Mozart or the guy who discovers how to end world poverty might be terminated yes, but it is more than likely they have already been born and are living is abject poverty. There are roughly 1 billion children on the planet living is poverty. That's 1/2 of all the children on the planet. There is more chance said prodigy is going to be born into poverty than aborted. For the "you got knocked up, you deal with it" crowd, this has never happened to you has it? I agree wholeheartedly, there are other methods, but sometimes those fail. I honestly don't think much of those who use abortions as a get out of jail free card. I've known some women like that. However I also know some women who've had abortions because they made the decision that one mistake shouldn't be be backed up with a string of others. Just because your body is capable of producing a baby, it doesn't mean you are capable of looking after said baby. KBK |
Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 23 March 2009 at 3:49am
There is a 100% way to prevent having a baby-don't do the nasty.
Of course in our society suggesting abstinence if you can't afford a baby is out of line.
I had a pregnancy scare a year or so back with my girlfriend involving a broken condom-we spen alot of time talking, and before resuming our sex life we made sure that in the event that an accident happened, we had an emergency plan.
For those that don't have emergency plans-they should be more careful.
And there are plenty of options in this society, morning after pills, adoption programs, hell you can even drop your baby off at the local hospital or fire department in some areas if you don't want it.
So again, yes population is out of hand, but I don't see abortion as the end all cure.
What really gets me are the girls who are on their second, third, etc etc abortions...there are more than you think. One of my best friends had to take his sister to her third abortion the other day, and I know of at least two other girls who have had more than two abortions. At some point as a society we have to enforce the value of human life, in my opinion.
-------------
|
Posted By: Kayback
Date Posted: 23 March 2009 at 4:15am
|
You're ok with Morning after pills but not abortion?
Pot, meet Mr Black, the kettle. Adoption and abandonment are ok however they revolve around one thing. Carrying the baby to term. 9 months out of your life. 9 months of caring for the child, 9 months of missing school (if you are still that young), messing with your studdies, messing with your job. Then there is the expense of having the baby, coupled with the risk. I know it is a long shot, but it is a shorter shot than abortion killing the next Messiah, what about dancers and models? Carrying a baby to term could destroy their careers. Abortion isn't an end all cure to overpopulation, but it isn't going to increase the population is it? Emergency plans are just that. How to control an emergency. IMHO accidental pregnancy can fall under that topic. After your second abortion it isn't accidental any more. But if you keep clinics open for anyone, they should be open to all. KBK |
Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 23 March 2009 at 4:29am
If having a baby is going to devastate your life that hard, then abstinance or using a more efficient protection seems to do the trick.
Which is why I don't think abortion should be an option for all.
Pregnancy is very easily avoided, is it not? Sure everybody makes mistakes, but we all have to pay for those mistakes, that's what happens. Terminating a human life should not be an option unless another life is in danger, or the mother's mental / physical well being is in danger.
All that being said, I'm arguing a moral point here. Abortion is here, probably here to stay, and I'm not fighting it. My opinion wouldn't change anything, and to be honest I doubt I'd try to change it. Just like war, it's dirty but in the end, as you said, it serves an overall purpose.
I just think it's a shame that so many in this country would rather stop a human life that close their legs.
-------------
|
Posted By: Tolgak
Date Posted: 23 March 2009 at 7:51am
-------------
|
Posted By: Darur
Date Posted: 23 March 2009 at 8:00am
As long as we're gonna keep making dumb blanket statements and generalizations, the pro-choice crowd never seems to care about the fetus and all seem anti-death penalty. Funny, ain't it? ------------- Real Men play Tuba [IMG]http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/1859/newsmall6xz.jpg"> PH33R TEH 1337 Dwarf! http://www.tippmann.com/forum/wwf77a/log_off_user.asp" rel="nofollow - DONT CLICK ME!!1 |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 23 March 2009 at 8:12am
|
relative morality!
Whoo hoo public education has proven its worth...
No absolutes, no rules, no fixed morality. Just let it flow with public opinion...
Octomom is the poster child for relative morality...
Good thing abortion is legal, to keep kids from doing stuff like this in America...
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=92186 - http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=92186
...... (look at my post count number, 666....)  ------------- They tremble at my name... 
|
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 23 March 2009 at 8:52am
|
Wow, that article is so full of fail. I think the only way it could have been any more biased is if it had actually referred to the girls as "adulterous whores". It really isn't even worth responding to.
As for public education.. I wonder how many of these girls were from Christian households? Perhaps, their parents should be blamed for making the girls feel like this was their only option? Maybe if they hadn't felt they needed to hide the problem from their judgemental parents, they could have been open about it and gotten the situation resolved correctly. Kind of like blaming the Public School system for your kids being fat, when they only eat one meal a day there. it couldn't possibly be the 20 HoHo's a day they eat while sitting on the couch playing video games at home.
And how the hell does Octomom even relate to this?
Lastly... " Only Sith deal in absolutes".
|
Posted By: Linus
Date Posted: 23 March 2009 at 11:06am
Actually, I have yet to see a pro-lifer who doesn't agree that if the pregnancy puts the mothers life in danger, the abortion is ok. But if you want to try the death penalty thing; why do many pro-choice oppose the death penalty? The baby has yet to do something wrong, while the offender has done something so wrong he has been found deserving of death. Funny, ain't it? -------------
|
Posted By: High Voltage
Date Posted: 23 March 2009 at 11:26am
|
So is a cop more important than an unborn baby? Or what about the unborn baby of a cop, I bet that's the one that trumps all else.
-------------
|
Posted By: Linus
Date Posted: 23 March 2009 at 12:00pm
Purple. -------------
|
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 23 March 2009 at 12:51pm
| Do not tell me of your purple. There is only red or blue here. |
Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 23 March 2009 at 2:03pm
|
I think I covered that at least a million times in my first few posts in this thread.
Who the hell suggested abstinence only? I wasn't talking about teaching I was talking about the teenagers who are screwing like rabbits with no backup plan for an unexpected pregnancy. If by high school you haven't figured out where babies come from, I feel sorry for you. I don't think abstinence should be taught by the schools at all, I think that RESPONSIBILITY should be taught by the parents. If you're not responsible enough to financially or physically support a new life, maybe you're not responsible enough to be having sex. And arguing what a sex ed class should teach and attaching pregnancy statistics brings up another statistic-if your kids are getting their morals from their school system, you're a miserable failure as a parent. Yeah, I said it.
The ironic part of this part is that I clarified it very distinctly in an earlier post when Carl asked about it. Instead of going over it again, I suggest you read what I said about being pro life.
As far as the death penalty goes, that's ridiculous to even add to this discussion. The death penalty is a matter of punishment for crime committed by a knowing, willing adult. For the record I'm actually anti-death penalty, and have become so in recent months, but that doesn't in any way affect my opinion of abortions.
-------------
|
Posted By: Eville
Date Posted: 23 March 2009 at 6:58pm
 |
Posted By: choopie911
Date Posted: 23 March 2009 at 7:08pm
| What if the unborn baby's mom is a cop, but the dad is a demented killer? |
Posted By: Kayback
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 4:46am
|
Aren't all cops demented killers though?
There are plenty of methods to terminate unwanted pregnancies. And they have been around for years. Quite a few "toxic" substances will kill a foetus and only marginally poison the parent. People have been doing it for centuries. It is not surprising. Incidently, I haven't seen a decent study done yet on the promiscuity of "kids" with regards the the availability of contraceptives and abstinence only communities. Heck when I was a teenager, it was quite difficult for a girl to get on contraceptives. (note I'm not saying it is the woman's responsibility, just that the pill, patch and the injection are some of the most effective methods out there). So we used condoms. To be "extra safe" I generally used ones with Nonoxynol-9. However the only only scare I ever had was when I was with my first long time GF, who was also on the pill. The pill is great, but still has between a 0.5 and 10% failure rate. Condoms, spermicide and the pill and there is still a chance it could happen. We were both in our early 20's, still working at establishing our careers, she was still studying. There is no way we could have provided adequately for the kid and still built a better life than we had. Was abortion the only option? No. Was abortion the safest, quickest, least disruptive method? Yes. Would abortion have been considered a last ditch emergency procedure? Yes. Would abortion have been an easy choice? No. Fortunately it didn't come to that. She was just madly late. I still don't get how anti's feel it is alright to dictate to others what they can and can't do with their lives, and the lives of their unborn foetuses. Personally I happen to be very pro death penalty. I can see why there are reservations about it, but honestly what are the chances innocent people will be put to death? If you've proven you are so incapable of living amongst civilized society you should be removed from it. Permanently. Why should you get board and lodging and 3 meals a day and free health care when so many more deserving people can't? Society has a bunch of rules. Live by them and you are welcome. Don't and you get voted off the island. While we don't have anywhere to send you just yet (Those bloody uppity Australians stopped that :) ) we may as well get rid of you. There are some extenuating circumstances where you can kill another person and not receive the death penalty, that is for the court to debate. However I oppose keeping people around in jail on death row "long enough to find religion and turn their lives around". Too late. You should have done that before you murdered. No matter how long you wait those dead people are not going to be able to turn their lives around. Not until Z-day anyway. I do realize there is a semi double standard here, on one hand I don't want others to decide for me, but I want to be able to decide for other. However that's how the legal process works. Any crazy idea you have, you can get it passed into law if you work hard at it and get enough support for it to be voted on. You can. You can also change the laws you don't like. At the moment we have this set of rules, live by it or get punished. Stop complaining when you do get punished. KBK |
Posted By: clownshooter
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 9:33am
|
Relative to the original thread I pose this question. How does Steve Hawking fit into this?
Another conundrum if you will. I believe for purposes of Roe Vs. Wade the SCOTUS determined that a fetus is not a person or alive so to speak. Therefore if an individual kills or causes the death of a pregnant woman the individual is charged with two counts of murder or two counts of manslaughter. How can this be since a fetus is not considered a person.
BTW I am not espousing any particular opinion, I'm simply revealing the gray areas and contradictions of this issue. |
Posted By: Robby_of_PBH
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 10:41am
| Personally I think there could be exceptions, but ONLY under the ABSOLUTE WORST circumstances. |
Posted By: StormyKnight
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 10:53am
Yeah! And forget about the innocent life that has no say in the matter too! -------------
|
Posted By: Tical3.0
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 10:58am
|
Posted By: StormyKnight
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 10:58am
Yeah, that pesky 9 months of inconvenience out of 70 some odd years is nothing. -------------
|
Posted By: StormyKnight
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 11:12am
 -------------
|
Posted By: gh0st
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 12:10pm
|
If you allow someone to have an abortion under certain circumstances, you have to allow it to be done in all cases. I don't have a stance on the issue, but I don't see what's so wrong with killing a baby who has no sort of mental capacity to realize they're even alive.
-------------  |
Posted By: Linus
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 2:58pm
1) You're allowed to kill people in circumstances but not all. Should we allow murderers to walk free? Self defense / preservation =/= fixing a problem. 2) Babies up to 8-12 months don't have much mental capacity either, and children up to 8 years or so don't even understand what being alive means. -------------
|
Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 3:45pm
I chose not to include the rest of your post because there were several different roads I didn't want to get off on just to keep on topic, but I did read it, and I respect your opinions on all of it, more so than most on this issue.
That being said, I think it again comes down to protecting human life as a process, not as an individual. I think that there should be an inherint respect for human life, not from a moral or religious standpoint (see long ass thread :P) but from the standpoint that respect of life is crucial to the survival of a race. It's the core belief that keeps man alive, and keeps him from destroying himself.
I'm not one of these people that says gays and abortion are going to stop reproduction (read: 9 billion people prediction), but I think, just like was discussed in the religion thread, there is a certain inner moral compass that society, aside from religion, should embrace for its own well being.
I see your point that abortion really in most respects is a double positive. It prevents the mother and father from uneccessary hardship, and it keeps society from inheriting another empty load.
But putting this into perspective this way, lets compare the fetus to the elderly. The fetus, in comparison is far more valuable than the elderly to society. The elderly have run their course, and more a large portion of them, are now just living off of resources. They will rarely, if never, do any more good for society in their life. So why not go for euthanizing the elderly?
Then we could go into the handicapped, the wellfare dependent, the homeless, and the outright lazy. Wouldn't it be better for society that we just shot them and be done? I mean, a bullet comes out to pocket change, but these people are costing us lots and lots of money.
-------------
|
Posted By: Eville
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 4:01pm
| i dont care one way or the other, i just want the law to take a solid stance. if someone can be charged with murder for killing someones fetus, then the mom/abortion clinic should be as well. if they just want to leave abortion legal, they need to come up with a different charge for killing someone elses fetus. |
Posted By: Peter Parker
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 4:21pm
|
I could be wrong, but I think that is how the law used to be in most states. I think it is only fairly recently that kicking mommy in the baby bump is murder, and only due to heavy lobbying from the pro-life crowd.
------------- "E Pluribus Unum" does not mean "Every man for himself". Pop Quiz: What do all the Framers of the Constitution have in common? |
Posted By: Linus
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 4:52pm
|
Food for thought-
Speaking solely in generalities, pro-life tends to be pro-capital punishment, while pro-choice tends to be anti-capital punishment. Strange. -------------
|
Posted By: Eville
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 4:56pm
OMG UR RITE! ITS ALMOST AS IF SOME PEOPLE DONT CONSIDER A FETUS TO BE A LIVING THING! |
Posted By: StormyKnight
Date Posted: 25 March 2009 at 7:41am
Soooo, its ok to kill a baby up until the point it knows it's alive. Hmmmm... Do you know, by chance, what age that is give or take? -------------
|
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 25 March 2009 at 9:14am
You knew what he meant.
Why argue wordings? ------------- Que pasa?
|
Posted By: StormyKnight
Date Posted: 25 March 2009 at 10:59am
No - I don't. For the sake of clarity I would like to know exactly what he meant. I don't assume to know what he means just as you shouldn't assume that I know what he meant. If it teaches him to be more precise with his wording, so much the better.
For the same reason we argue politics, religion, morality, values and ideas. This is what this forum is about, is it not? -------------
|
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 25 March 2009 at 11:16am
|
If you want to bring "mental capacity" into the mix...
Then a bunch of guys that post here would be in trouble...
hmm. maybe I'll start using that when guys post dumb stuff...
ABORT. ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: Eville
Date Posted: 25 March 2009 at 11:24am
it is in your best interest that that isnt a policy. |