|
Post by 80s Child on Mar 1, 2002 23:27:43 GMT -5
*feels herself getting angry* *forces herself to stay calm* It is NOT the saving of a child, and is very much an invasion of my womb. It is a stack of cells, with no soul, no nothing. Only when it is capable of surviving on its own and is not leeching away things from me does it become a child. And as for the religious side, get yer rosaries or whatever other religious symbols away from my ovaries.
|
|
pastel_pink
New Member
http://totallyo utspoken.com - Sometimes, it's okay to blab.
Posts: 10
|
Post by pastel_pink on Mar 2, 2002 0:08:36 GMT -5
It looks like some people think that women who have abortions are heartless. They are not. Maybe there are some, but certainly not all. My own mother had an abortion, a child that should have been born after me, but the risks were high, and she could have lost her life. Up until 16 or 17, I was pro-life. When she told me, I flipped out on her, but after listening to her, I understood. I became pro-choice that very day. I can't imagine my life without her. I love her very much, and to have lost her would have been absolutely devasting. The fetus would not have survived anyway. After this, God blessed my parents with my beautiful little sister whom I love very much.
I understand that many abortions do not turn out this way. It is usually personal choice that has nothing to do with health. Still, I feel that it's an option that women have and should have. If they suffer from their choice, it's okay - it was their choice. They need to seek help and healing. But to suffer because other people are forcing you to live with by their ethics and beliefs is wrong. We are all different, have different religions, personal convictions, and traditions. Whose to say that abortion is wrong? The god in one's religion? What if someone does not believe in the same god? They may not believe in God at all. It's selfish to force others to live in your footsteps. The world does not revolve around one person.
"God will sit in judgement of her action, and not I."
Great point. I wish some people would understand that before opening their mouth. There are two types of people that I do not respect. They are those who are ignorant, disrespectful, and judgemental.
But at the same time, that statement struck me as odd. Okay, I agree that God will be the one to judge. But he will not just judge her, but he will judge all of us. There is no such thing as a "little sin". A sin is a sin is a sin. He will judge sins equally. A lie is a sin. So is robbery. And homocide. If you earnestly repent to Him, he will forgive, no matter what the sin is. He loves all people. I don't think that He will judge her any differently from the way he will judge all of us. He is fair.
No one can say that a fetus will be born. You never know. You can miscarry for a variety of reason. This is why a fetus is considered potential life. And furthermore, I believe that a womans' rights take precedence over a fetus, who is only potential life. A lot of people shoot back at me by saying "how would you feel if your mother aborted you?". My response is that if God wanted me to be in this world, he would have sent me in a another form.
But I understand where the pro-life stand comes from. And the fights over pro-lifers and choicers is basically from a conflict of conceptualization. The pro-life concept is that a fetus is a life, and that the life should be protected, and that life starts at conception - therefore, it is murder. The pro-choice concept is that a fetus is not a life, and that life starts at birth, at the first breath, and that before that, a fetus is not considered a person or a life.
So when pro-lifers want to ban abortion, it is like saying "live as I live, believe what I believe, your opinions are wrong, you are not entitled to have your own thoughts and conceptualization." CONCEPTUALIZATION. Their concept of life is different from the pro-life concept of life. So abortion, to pro-choicers, is not wrong.
It's okay to be pro-life. You are holding on to your beliefs and would try to never do anything to go against your beliefs. But taking a practice away because you are against it is wrong. And taking a choice away from those who think differently is wrong. That is why abortion is legal in our country. We have the freedom to believe what we want to believe. Whether to believe that life starts that conception, or that life starts at birth is up to you.
|
|
|
Post by NaruNarusegawa on Mar 3, 2002 3:17:10 GMT -5
"It is NOT the saving of a child, and is very much an invasion of my womb. It is a stack of cells, with no soul, no nothing."
Have you seen a picture of a child inside the mother? It has arms, legs, a head, little fingers, and little toes. How is THAT a "stack of cells"?
"Only when it is capable of surviving on its own and is not leeching away things from me does it become a child."
Some disabled kids can't survive on their own, does that mean they're not children?
"It's selfish to force others to live in your footsteps. The world does not revolve around one person."
I think it's pretty selfish to decide that another life doesn't deserve to live because they're an "inconvience" in your life.
That excludes cases of health issues, like with your Mother.
"So when pro-lifers want to ban abortion, it is like saying "live as I live, believe what I believe, your opinions are wrong, you are not entitled to have your own thoughts and conceptualization."
Wanting to ban almost anything is saying the same thing. In some cultures a 20 year old having a 13 year old for sex is considered "okay" yet because some people who lived in this country felt that wasn't right decided to make it a law saying you can't do that.
There are people who think murder is okay. I know someone who said it wasn't a law he'd love to kill a few hundred people. But because some people who thought we should live as "they live" made that against the law too, and happen most of us agree to it.
"CONCEPTUALIZATION. Their concept of life is different from the pro-life concept of life. So abortion, to pro-choicers, is not wrong."
True, to pro-choice people it's not wrong, and to pro-life people putting restrictions on it isn't wrong. "But taking a practice away because you are against it is wrong."
Then so people were wrong to put a law on murder because they were against it? Or put a law on molestation because they were against it?
"And taking a choice away from those who think differently is wrong."
Then that would go on many levels involving many other laws.
"That is why abortion is legal in our country. We have the freedom to believe what we want to believe. Whether to believe that life starts that conception, or that life starts at birth is up to you."
True, and we have freedom of speech also to believe anything we want no matter how wrong someone else thinks it is. That goes for both sides.
|
|
|
Post by sunny.side.up on Mar 3, 2002 4:17:21 GMT -5
>>Some disabled kids can't survive on their own, does that mean they're not children?<< I think she meant that the fetus needs the mother's *body* to survive, it can't eat and all that by itself. (pastel_pink - I'm sorry if that's not what you meant at all ) >>Then so people were wrong to put a law on murder because they were against it? Or put a law on molestation because they were against it?<< Murder and molestation are very different from abortion. A fetus is a potential life. I don't think anyone, at least not anyone in their right minds, would be against a law against murder or molestation, while the opinions about abortion are much more devided. ~*Esther*~
|
|
pastel_pink
New Member
http://totallyo utspoken.com - Sometimes, it's okay to blab.
Posts: 10
|
Post by pastel_pink on Mar 3, 2002 10:29:55 GMT -5
"I think she meant that the fetus needs the mother's *body* to survive, it can't eat and all that by itself. (pastel_pink - I'm sorry if that's not what you meant at all )" Actually, that wasn't part of my post, but thank you for the clarification. And I agree with Esther that abortion is much more divided than the other situations mentioned. That was a weak argument. Those crimes that were mentioned are committed against live human beings. So those crimes have nothing to do with the concept of life. Everyone can agree that a child, woman, or man is a human being. Therefore, rape, molestation, etc. are considered illegal because it is harm done to another human being. But we are well divided in the definition of life. As I've said 10000 times, prolifers believe that life starts at conception, and prochoicers believe that life starts at birth. "True, to pro-choice people it's not wrong, and to pro-life people putting restrictions on it isn't wrong." The pro-life cause isn't about putting restrictions on it. It's about banning abortion. They are two totally different things. Banning abortion is telling pro-choicers that their concept of life is wrong. >>"It's selfish to force others to live in your footsteps. The world does not revolve around one person."<< "I think it's pretty selfish to decide that another life doesn't deserve to live because they're an "inconvience" in your life." I see that my point was totally missed. Anyone can say that forcing others to believe in what you believe is wrong and selfish. But when you say that it's selfish to not let potential life live, that's completely off topic of what was said. Does no one understand the differences in the concept of life? To you and other pro-lifers, it is wrong simply because you believe it is a life. Therefore it is selfish to deny life. That's understood. But to others, this is NOT the case. Life starts at birth by our definition. By whose definition should I have to live by but my own? Being pro-choice is being able to choose an option based on which concept of life is believed by the individual. If you're against this definition, you don't have to have an abortion. No one is forcing you to do so. As so, no one should force someone to NOT have an abortion because it is like telling them that they are not allowed to believe in their concept of life. It really disappoints me when people compare the use of drugs, murder, rape, etc. to abortion, saying that these criminals have acted on their beliefs. It is true that they acted on their beliefs. But these crimes have nothing to do with the concept of life. Abortion is based on the concept of life, so it is a whole different ball game. And I'll say this simply with no hard feelings: Please don't quote me out of context. And I will do the same. Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by sunny.side.up on Mar 3, 2002 11:13:38 GMT -5
Oops... lol. I meant to say that to whoever posted about that... But I can't find the post. ~*Esther*~
|
|
|
Post by 80s Child on Mar 3, 2002 12:17:02 GMT -5
That was my post, but anywho... The difference between a disabled child and a fetus is that one is still inside of me. I have nothing against disabled children; in fact some of my own cousins are disabled, and I love them all the same. What I meant was, as sunny_snowflake clarified, that the fetus is completely dependent on me. When I eat, it eats. When I breathe, it breathes. And vice versa, if I don't do these things, it doesn't either. Now, I am not pro-abortion. If someone gets pregnant and makes the choice to carry that fetus to term and turn it into an actual baby, I have no problem with that. I don't like the adoption system much, but I wouldn't stop someone from putting their child on it, because that's their choice. Same thing if they chose to raise a child on their own. It's all about CHOICE here people. I don't see a fetus as a viable life, but that doesn't necessarily meant that I don't value pregnancy, because after pregnancy, a new life comes into the world. Get what I'm saying here?
|
|
|
Post by Cassiopeia on Mar 3, 2002 12:43:50 GMT -5
>>No one can say that a fetus will be born. You never know. You can miscarry for a variety of reason. This is why a fetus is considered potential life. <<
Alright, I'm pro-choice, but I see a flaw in this argument. Of course there's no garuntee that a fetus will be born. Birth would be one part of it's life cycle, and we all know that life can end at any time. We are not immortal. I could get cancer tomorrow and die before my 20th birthday. Does that mean that a person would be justified in murdering me because there's no garuntee that I will live into my 70's? That would apply for everyone, born and unborn, wouldn't it? Now, I'm not comparing abortion to murder. This was simply an example that I used to explain the invalidity of your statement.
The concept of when life begins is extremely controversial. At conception, there is clearly a life being created. It consists of living cells, and therefore it is living. However, as Sarah stated, it is completely dependent upon the mother until about 6th months. In my opinion, it is the mother who is keeping it alive, and therefore she should be the one to decide whether or not to terminate the pregnancy. I feel that until that fetus can live on it's own, it is still just a part of the woman, not a separate life.
Would I ever get an abortion? That I am not sure of. As of now, I don't want children. Becoming pregnant is probably one of the worst things that could happen to me. But I'm not in that situation, so I can't say for sure whether I would have an abortion. I am not sexually active yet, but when I do decide to have sex, I will take all the precautions I can. I will use at least two forms of birth control to help insure that I won't get pregnant. And I hope it will be successful. By the time I'm in my 30's, I think I will know for sure whether or not I want to have kids (right now I don't want them, but I don't know if I will always feel that way). If I decide I don't want children, I will have a tubal ligation. An abortion is not something that I want. I do know that if I did have one, it would be within the first trimester.
|
|
|
Post by NaruNarusegawa on Mar 3, 2002 19:40:29 GMT -5
"Those crimes that were mentioned are committed against live human beings. So those crimes have nothing to do with the concept of life. Everyone can agree that a child, woman, or man is a human being. Therefore, rape, molestation, etc. are considered illegal because it is harm done to another human being."
True, and I believe stabbing something inside a baby's brain that's almost born due to partial birth abortions is pretty much harming another human being in my opinion.
"The pro-life cause isn't about putting restrictions on it. It's about banning abortion. They are two totally different things. Banning abortion is telling pro-choicers that their concept of life is wrong."
I know a lot of pro-life people who don't want abortion banned, they want it restricted so not every slut go can out fuck 3 guys in one night, and get an abortion. Or some 15 year old who was horny and had sex, but now she's "too young" for the baby, but she's not too young for sex? ugh. In cases like those I'm *VERY* against the abortion, but that's me.
"As so, no one should force someone to NOT have an abortion because it is like telling them that they are not allowed to believe in their concept of life."
No, it's pretty much telling them to be mature, and face the consequences of *their actions*.
*disclaimer* That comment excludes rape, cases where the mother could die, and that stuff.
No hard feelings either. =)
And my appologies if I've misquoted you, I will try not to do that again.
"Alright, I'm pro-choice, but I see a flaw in this argument. Of course there's no garuntee that a fetus will be born. Birth would be one part of it's life cycle, and we all know that life can end at any time. We are not immortal. I could get cancer tomorrow and die before my 20th birthday. Does that mean that a person would be justified in murdering me because there's no garuntee that I will live into my 70's? That would apply for everyone, born and unborn, wouldn't it? Now, I'm not comparing abortion to murder. This was simply an example that I used to explain the invalidity of your statement."
That is a good point.
"In my opinion, it is the mother who is keeping it alive, and therefore she should be the one to decide whether or not to terminate the pregnancy."
Okay, with that comment in mind. I'm going to bring in another subject, although I have a feeling I won't have the majority opinion on it.
What does people think about child support?
My opinion: Speaking on the idea from pro-choices that the baby is *their body* and *their decision* then *they* should be the one paying for he/she.
To give the Father no rights in the matter because it's inside you, and then turn around once it comes out and say the father who just had no rights should pay for it, is being so hypocritical, and one sided to me.
|
|
pastel_pink
New Member
http://totallyo utspoken.com - Sometimes, it's okay to blab.
Posts: 10
|
Post by pastel_pink on Mar 3, 2002 21:49:18 GMT -5
The so-called partial birth abortion is not common. It is very, very rare. And most fetuses are aborted before 12 weeks. They don't have developed brains either. Even pro-choicers don't agree with that.
Naru, maybe you are not looking to ban abortions, but most pro-life orgs and activists are out to do just that. Some real religious ones want to ban abortion in all cases, including rape, incest, and endangerment to the mother.
I'm tired, so that's all I'm gonna say. >yawn<
Good night.
|
|
|
Post by girlpoet21 on Mar 4, 2002 0:58:52 GMT -5
naru-You've got some awesome posts on here and I really commend you for them. Pastel- When life starts is not so much a religious issue, but a scientific one. I'm supposed to be getting some information in pretty soon on that, but I have a feeling I wouldn't be believed anyways. When I get that though, I will be posting. What makes something human, pastel? Pre-born babies have a heartbeat after 18-22 days, brainwaves, fingerprints, can feel, all of that, but they're not human? If something has a heartbeat, how is it not alive? If it is alive, how is it not wrong to kill it? Banning abortion is not necessarily telling pro-choicers their concept of life is wrong. It's telling them it's wong tro kill that life. I know many pro-choicers who believe that it is alive from conception but who still believe that it's their right to kill them. I have a serious problem with that. It disappoints, tears me up, that people choose to kill their beautiful babies. I as a proudly pro-life person am and will keep on working to get abortion banned. I don't make exceptions for rape or incest, as it is killing and killing is not right in either of these cases. Actually partial birth abortion is pretty common. According to Ron Fitzsimmons, executive director of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, there are 4,000-5,000 partial birth abortions performed every year. That is not rare. He also stated that "in the vast majority of cases, that procedure is performed on a healthy mother with a healthy fetus" which debunks the myth that it's only, or even in the majority of cases used to protect the life or health of the mother. Reporters from the Hackensack New Jersey Record and the Washington Post also disproved that myth. As for really religious people trying to ban abortion, while I am religious (Christian), I know many Atheists, Agnostics, United Methodists, Lutheran, Pentecostal, all kinds of religions or people who are not religious who believe that abortion should be banned in ALL cases. cassi- Good point.
|
|
|
Post by sunny.side.up on Mar 4, 2002 11:41:21 GMT -5
>>Banning abortion is not necessarily telling pro-choicers their concept of life is wrong. It's telling them it's wong tro kill that life.<<
To pro-choicers it's not life. And banning abortion is not just 'telling' them that it's wrong to kill 'that life', it's making them live by your rules and morals.
And also... I wonder, why do most/some of you think it's ok to kill animals in order to eat them, or to kill rabbits because they are 'overpopulated', etc. etc., but in the mean time are making such a big deal out of abortion of an unborn *fetus*, a human fetus, while there is no species/race/whatever that is so much overpopulated as humans? Why is human life thought of as so much more important than any other life on this planet?
~*Esther*~
|
|
IAmMe
Junior Member
Need a kick?
Posts: 143
|
Post by IAmMe on Mar 4, 2002 14:00:45 GMT -5
I'm all pro-choice. A woman's body is a woman's right, and no one should be able to dictate what's wrong and what's right, and expect others to obey.
<<If a women doesn't want a baby, why did she go take the chance of getting pregnent in the 1st place?>> Condoms only guarantee about 97% protection. It's not rare for women to fall pregnant even if they use all forms of protection.
<<Some real religious ones want to ban abortion in all cases, including rape, incest, and endangerment to the mother.>> What gives them the right to decide? Their beliefs may prevent themselves from abortion, but is it so necessary for them to apply their religion to others'?
|
|
|
Post by pettyluv on Mar 4, 2002 14:19:19 GMT -5
<<And also... I wonder, why do most/some of you think it's ok to kill animals in order to eat them, or to kill rabbits because they are 'overpopulated', etc. etc., but in the mean time are making such a big deal out of abortion of an unborn *fetus*, a human fetus, while there is no species/race/whatever that is so much overpopulated as humans? Why is human life thought of as so much more important than any other life on this planet? >>
Alright, alright now. A human life is vastly different than that of an animal. We as humans have dominion over the beasts. A rabbit cannot reason, it does not think, its life is not worth that of a living human at what ever stage of exsistance. As far as I am concerned, animals serve there own purpose in nature, but I am not concerned when they are reasonably hunted by man. Man is quite a wonderful creature and to pit him at the level of a beast is really quite absurd.
|
|
|
Post by girlpoet21 on Mar 4, 2002 21:51:39 GMT -5
Pettyluv- Annie-Religion has something to do with abortion for some people but not most. Not most pro-lifers that I know. Like I said before, there are people of all religions, or who aren't religious who believe that abortion should be banned. Noone is forcing their religion on anyone because this is not really a religious issue. For me it's a mixture of things. Religion and basic morality tell me it's wrong to kill someone. Science and doctors tell me it's a life. "no one should be able to dictate what's wrong and what's right, and expect others to obey." So if I believe that it's okay to kill a person who's visiting me because they're in my house, eating my food, sleeping in one of my rooms, drinking my water, that's okay? Noone should tell me not to or that it's wrong? No offense, but that line just doesn't work.
|
|