Women's Lives Before Politics

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
61

[quote]Grneyes wrote:

[quote]HG Thrower wrote:

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
It’s regrettable that Women’s Health will always be intertwined with the very divisive issue of abortion…

Mufasa[/quote]

It’s been purposely framed that way so that anyone who opposes abortion is automatically wrong because then they oppose “Women’s Health”, don’t care about women, etc.

The REAL crux of the issue is when is a fetus a person. All the other arguments are irrelevant. From my perspective, I like to look at the consequences if each side is wrong. If the pro-life crowd is wrong and fetuses are just a blob of cells, then some unwanted babies are born. If the pro-choice crowd is wrong and fetuses are a human being, then you are sanctioning the murder of innocent babies. Since I’m not God, and I don’t know the answer for sure, I’d rather err on the side of caution. Show me a pro-choice activist who can tell you with exact certainty when a fetus becomes a person and I’ll show you a liar.[/quote]

Show me ANYONE who says with exact certainty when a fetus becomes a person and I’ll show you a liar. The truth is, no one can say when. Pro-lifers have their “truth”, pro-choicers have their “truth” and pro-abortionists have their “truth” and NEVER will the three ever agree. It’s medical science vs. religious views and NEVER will those two ever agree either.
[/quote]

Medical sciece favors the view that the fetus is human through out gestation. It’s a living human organism, I challenge you to find a single shred of scientific evidence to the contrary.

Your viewpoint is odd in your claim that you don’t know when human life begins. Wouldn’t that be handy information to know before you decide to kill said human organism?
I mean, in your view, it’s a craps shoot. So you have a 50/ 50 shot that you are committing murder with an abortion, but that’s a chance your willing to take?

62

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Grneyes wrote:

[quote]HG Thrower wrote:

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
It’s regrettable that Women’s Health will always be intertwined with the very divisive issue of abortion…

Mufasa[/quote]

It’s been purposely framed that way so that anyone who opposes abortion is automatically wrong because then they oppose “Women’s Health”, don’t care about women, etc.

The REAL crux of the issue is when is a fetus a person. All the other arguments are irrelevant. From my perspective, I like to look at the consequences if each side is wrong. If the pro-life crowd is wrong and fetuses are just a blob of cells, then some unwanted babies are born. If the pro-choice crowd is wrong and fetuses are a human being, then you are sanctioning the murder of innocent babies. Since I’m not God, and I don’t know the answer for sure, I’d rather err on the side of caution. Show me a pro-choice activist who can tell you with exact certainty when a fetus becomes a person and I’ll show you a liar.[/quote]

Show me ANYONE who says with exact certainty when a fetus becomes a person and I’ll show you a liar. The truth is, no one can say when. Pro-lifers have their “truth”, pro-choicers have their “truth” and pro-abortionists have their “truth” and NEVER will the three ever agree. It’s medical science vs. religious views and NEVER will those two ever agree either.
[/quote]

Medical sciece favors the view that the fetus is human through out gestation. It’s a living human organism, I challenge you to find a single shred of scientific evidence to the contrary.

Your viewpoint is odd in your claim that you don’t know when human life begins. Wouldn’t that be handy information to know before you decide to kill said human organism?
I mean, in your view, it’s a craps shoot. So you have a 50/ 50 shot that you are committing murder with an abortion, but that’s a chance your willing to take? [/quote]

I have never, and will never consider abortion murder. I am pro-choice, with the caveat that I would not have an abortion or condone an abortion except under extreme conditions. I don’t believe in them being used as birth control, as I had a friend in high school who DID use them as birth control (she was a very good negative role model on why NOT to have sex).

One of the main arguments for/against abortion is when is a human life started? At conception? When it’s still a mass of cells and doesn’t resemble a human at all? Or when the brain is formed? When the heartbeat can be first heard? Is it still murder if there’s no resemblance of human life? Is it still murder if it’s discovered the baby won’t survive pregnancy? Or life after birth? Or are you just preventing needless suffering of the baby and parents? Are you being merciful in stopping something that can’t possibly survive?

63

[quote]Grneyes wrote:
One of the main arguments for/against abortion is when is a human life started?[/quote]

We already know this…

How in the world do people take a pro-choice position without having cracked open a bio/A&P textbook. With such an end result, how does someone not even bother doing a smidgen of bio 101 research. A human embryo is an individual human organism already traversing it’s individual life cycle. Embryo=individual organism. The term embryo merely refers to one stage of an already existing individual organism’s life cycle. Period. Organism= an individual life. Human Embryo=an individual human life. Again, how does anyone possibly take a pro-choice position without having looked this stuff up?!

64

[quote]Grneyes wrote:

Show me ANYONE who says with exact certainty when a fetus becomes a person and I’ll show you a liar. The truth is, no one can say when. Pro-lifers have their “truth”, pro-choicers have their “truth” and pro-abortionists have their “truth” and NEVER will the three ever agree. It’s medical science vs. religious views and NEVER will those two ever agree either.
[/quote]

You make an excellent point, the line cannot be drawn with any realistic precision - and based precisely on that point, there’s no reason to have any confidence that an individual woman should unilaterally draw that line any more than anyone else. If you believe that, then you have refuted your own position, because you are conceding that someone does, in fact, have the authority to draw that line (and as arbitrarily as she would like).

The very idea that an individual gets to decide - at her sole convenience - exactly when a fetus become a person is downright creepy and in direct contravention to the idea you state, that anyone has exact certainty. No one does. Abortion is a sui generis problem without clean, easy answers. The best we can all hope for is to err on side or other.

And that is precisely why am I (basically) pro-life - not because I am certain, but because I am so uncertain.

65

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Grneyes wrote:
One of the main arguments for/against abortion is when is a human life started?[/quote]

We already know this…

How in the world do people take a pro-choice position without having cracked open a bio/A&P textbook. With such an end result, how does someone not even bother doing a smidgen of bio 101 research. A human embryo is an individual human organism already traversing it’s individual life cycle. Embryo=individual organism. The term embryo merely refers to one stage of an already existing individual organism’s life cycle. Period. Organism= an individual life. Human Embryo=an individual human life. Again, how does anyone possibly take a pro-choice position without having looked this stuff up?!

[/quote]

They have.

It just does not end there and you know that perfectly well.

66

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

[quote]Grneyes wrote:

Show me ANYONE who says with exact certainty when a fetus becomes a person and I’ll show you a liar. The truth is, no one can say when. Pro-lifers have their “truth”, pro-choicers have their “truth” and pro-abortionists have their “truth” and NEVER will the three ever agree. It’s medical science vs. religious views and NEVER will those two ever agree either.
[/quote]

You make an excellent point, the line cannot be drawn with any realistic precision - and based precisely on that point, there’s no reason to have any confidence that an individual woman should unilaterally draw that line any more than anyone else. If you believe that, then you have refuted your own position, because you are conceding that someone does, in fact, have the authority to draw that line (and as arbitrarily as she would like).

The very idea that an individual gets to decide - at her sole convenience - exactly when a fetus become a person is downright creepy and in direct contravention to the idea you state, that anyone has exact certainty. No one does. Abortion is a sui generis problem without clean, easy answers. The best we can all hope for is to err on side or other.

And that is precisely why am I (basically) pro-life - not because I am certain, but because I am so uncertain.[/quote]

Well, the very idea that this is decided for someone else is even more creepy, so there.

67

[quote]orion wrote:

Well, the very idea that this is decided for someone else is even more creepy, so there. [/quote]

Incorrect: because of the presence of another human life (at some point), someone other than the individual has a stake in and must take responsibility for deciding in order to protect that human life.

Which is exactly why it is, and remains, illegal to abort fourth trimester fetuses.

68

[quote]orion wrote:

They have.[/quote]

Apparently not, as seen in the first question.

69

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

[quote]Grneyes wrote:

Show me ANYONE who says with exact certainty when a fetus becomes a person and I’ll show you a liar. The truth is, no one can say when. Pro-lifers have their “truth”, pro-choicers have their “truth” and pro-abortionists have their “truth” and NEVER will the three ever agree. It’s medical science vs. religious views and NEVER will those two ever agree either.
[/quote]

You make an excellent point, the line cannot be drawn with any realistic precision - and based precisely on that point, there’s no reason to have any confidence that an individual woman should unilaterally draw that line any more than anyone else. If you believe that, then you have refuted your own position, because you are conceding that someone does, in fact, have the authority to draw that line (and as arbitrarily as she would like).

The very idea that an individual gets to decide - at her sole convenience - exactly when a fetus become a person is downright creepy and in direct contravention to the idea you state, that anyone has exact certainty. No one does. Abortion is a sui generis problem without clean, easy answers. The best we can all hope for is to err on side or other.

And that is precisely why am I (basically) pro-life - not because I am certain, but because I am so uncertain.[/quote]

Well, the very idea that this is decided for someone else is even more creepy, so there. [/quote]

Orion, you’d allow an infant to die of neglect for the sake of property rights. Let’s not talk about others being creepy.

70

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

Well, the very idea that this is decided for someone else is even more creepy, so there. [/quote]

Incorrect: because of the presence of another human life (at some point), someone other than the individual has a stake in and must take responsibility for deciding in order to protect that human life.

Which is exactly why it is, and remains, illegal to abort fourth trimester fetuses.[/quote]

Really?

I thought partial birth abortions were alive and well in the US?

71

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

[quote]Grneyes wrote:

Show me ANYONE who says with exact certainty when a fetus becomes a person and I’ll show you a liar. The truth is, no one can say when. Pro-lifers have their “truth”, pro-choicers have their “truth” and pro-abortionists have their “truth” and NEVER will the three ever agree. It’s medical science vs. religious views and NEVER will those two ever agree either.
[/quote]

You make an excellent point, the line cannot be drawn with any realistic precision - and based precisely on that point, there’s no reason to have any confidence that an individual woman should unilaterally draw that line any more than anyone else. If you believe that, then you have refuted your own position, because you are conceding that someone does, in fact, have the authority to draw that line (and as arbitrarily as she would like).

The very idea that an individual gets to decide - at her sole convenience - exactly when a fetus become a person is downright creepy and in direct contravention to the idea you state, that anyone has exact certainty. No one does. Abortion is a sui generis problem without clean, easy answers. The best we can all hope for is to err on side or other.

And that is precisely why am I (basically) pro-life - not because I am certain, but because I am so uncertain.[/quote]

Well, the very idea that this is decided for someone else is even more creepy, so there. [/quote]

Orion, you’d allow an infant to die of neglect for the sake of property rights. Let’s not talk about others being creepy.
[/quote]

Since the whole “infant” question is in question I would encourage you to check your premises.

72

[quote]orion wrote:

I thought partial birth abortions were alive and well in the US?[/quote]

Well, then - we’ll just chalk that up to one more thing you simply don’t know about American politics and law.

73

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

I thought partial birth abortions were alive and well in the US?[/quote]

Well, then - we’ll just chalk that up to one more thing you simply don’t know about American politics and law.[/quote]

Well, seem you can abort fetuses at a later stage, you just cannot use a certain method.

That is bound to have a huge impact, no doubt…

74

[quote]Grneyes wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Grneyes wrote:

[quote]HG Thrower wrote:

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
It’s regrettable that Women’s Health will always be intertwined with the very divisive issue of abortion…

Mufasa[/quote]

It’s been purposely framed that way so that anyone who opposes abortion is automatically wrong because then they oppose “Women’s Health”, don’t care about women, etc.

The REAL crux of the issue is when is a fetus a person. All the other arguments are irrelevant. From my perspective, I like to look at the consequences if each side is wrong. If the pro-life crowd is wrong and fetuses are just a blob of cells, then some unwanted babies are born. If the pro-choice crowd is wrong and fetuses are a human being, then you are sanctioning the murder of innocent babies. Since I’m not God, and I don’t know the answer for sure, I’d rather err on the side of caution. Show me a pro-choice activist who can tell you with exact certainty when a fetus becomes a person and I’ll show you a liar.[/quote]

Show me ANYONE who says with exact certainty when a fetus becomes a person and I’ll show you a liar. The truth is, no one can say when. Pro-lifers have their “truth”, pro-choicers have their “truth” and pro-abortionists have their “truth” and NEVER will the three ever agree. It’s medical science vs. religious views and NEVER will those two ever agree either.
[/quote]

Medical sciece favors the view that the fetus is human through out gestation. It’s a living human organism, I challenge you to find a single shred of scientific evidence to the contrary.

Your viewpoint is odd in your claim that you don’t know when human life begins. Wouldn’t that be handy information to know before you decide to kill said human organism?
I mean, in your view, it’s a craps shoot. So you have a 50/ 50 shot that you are committing murder with an abortion, but that’s a chance your willing to take? [/quote]

I have never, and will never consider abortion murder. I am pro-choice, with the caveat that I would not have an abortion or condone an abortion except under extreme conditions. I don’t believe in them being used as birth control, as I had a friend in high school who DID use them as birth control (she was a very good negative role model on why NOT to have sex).

One of the main arguments for/against abortion is when is a human life started? At conception? When it’s still a mass of cells and doesn’t resemble a human at all? Or when the brain is formed? When the heartbeat can be first heard? Is it still murder if there’s no resemblance of human life? Is it still murder if it’s discovered the baby won’t survive pregnancy? Or life after birth? Or are you just preventing needless suffering of the baby and parents? Are you being merciful in stopping something that can’t possibly survive?
[/quote]

Whoa, why the caveat? If there is nothing wrong with abortion, why would you not have one? If there is nothing wrong with it, than you should be having as many as you like with out issue. So if there is nothing wrong with abortion, why wouldn’t you just have them when ever?

I hate this cop-out…“I am pro-choice, but I wouldn’t have an abortion.” Bullshit. You won’t have an abortion because you know it’s wrong even if you are unable to articulate why.

The only argument surrounding abortion is human life. The rest are red herrings and strawmen…The whole, “You’re against women!” bullshit is just a pathetic lacquer used to try and hide the sheer of a morally repugnant act.

There is no discernible break in the human life cycle between conception and death. Nothing make it suddenly human, it is what it is. It’s a living human organism just like you and me, it just has fewer cells. Looks don’t make something what it is, you and I are a clump of cells, just a bigger clump.

See to say that the fetus isn’t a human life is to say that even if your mother had aborted you, you still would have a chance to exist, because what makes you, you, comes in sometimes later. Well, that’s bullshit. If your mother had an abortion, you wouldn’t be and you never would be again.

75

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

[quote]Grneyes wrote:

Show me ANYONE who says with exact certainty when a fetus becomes a person and I’ll show you a liar. The truth is, no one can say when. Pro-lifers have their “truth”, pro-choicers have their “truth” and pro-abortionists have their “truth” and NEVER will the three ever agree. It’s medical science vs. religious views and NEVER will those two ever agree either.
[/quote]

You make an excellent point, the line cannot be drawn with any realistic precision - and based precisely on that point, there’s no reason to have any confidence that an individual woman should unilaterally draw that line any more than anyone else. If you believe that, then you have refuted your own position, because you are conceding that someone does, in fact, have the authority to draw that line (and as arbitrarily as she would like).

The very idea that an individual gets to decide - at her sole convenience - exactly when a fetus become a person is downright creepy and in direct contravention to the idea you state, that anyone has exact certainty. No one does. Abortion is a sui generis problem without clean, easy answers. The best we can all hope for is to err on side or other.

And that is precisely why am I (basically) pro-life - not because I am certain, but because I am so uncertain.[/quote]

I think that line can be drawn with pretty good precision. Once the egg is fully fertalized, it is a human organism, where as prior to that, neither part are on their own human organisms. Even if you still consider that line fuzzy, you are talking a matter of hours, not days or weeks.

76

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

Well, the very idea that this is decided for someone else is even more creepy, so there. [/quote]

Incorrect: because of the presence of another human life (at some point), someone other than the individual has a stake in and must take responsibility for deciding in order to protect that human life.

Which is exactly why it is, and remains, illegal to abort fourth trimester fetuses.[/quote]

Really?

I thought partial birth abortions were alive and well in the US?[/quote]

Only if you subsequently blow them out of a cannon…

77

[quote]orion wrote:

Well, seem you can abort fetuses at a later stage, you just cannot use a certain method.

That is bound to have a huge impact, no doubt…[/quote]

Uh no, a “fourth trimester fetus” is a child that has been born. Women don’t have four trimesters - they are called trimesters for a reason.

The point was that when a human life is in the balance, society doesn’t defer to the choice of the individual responsible for that child - which is why “aborting” a born child is homicide.

78

[quote]pat wrote:

I think that line can be drawn with pretty good precision. Once the egg is fully fertalized, it is a human organism, where as prior to that, neither part are on their own human organisms. Even if you still consider that line fuzzy, you are talking a matter of hours, not days or weeks. [/quote]

Ok, so at any point after the egg is fully fertilized, if a woman miscarries, should the event be investigated as a possible homicide or for the involvement of foul play?

79

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

I think that line can be drawn with pretty good precision. Once the egg is fully fertalized, it is a human organism, where as prior to that, neither part are on their own human organisms. Even if you still consider that line fuzzy, you are talking a matter of hours, not days or weeks. [/quote]

Ok, so at any point after the egg is fully fertilized, if a woman miscarries, should the event be investigated as a possible homicide or for the involvement of foul play?[/quote]

In as much as the tsunami should be investigated for criminal activity for killing half a million people.

Just because nature can do things doesn’t mean you can do the same thing. Because a volcano erupts and wipes out a village, that isn’t permission to wipe out villages.

Nature kills people all the time. Doesn’t mean we can.

80

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

I think that line can be drawn with pretty good precision. Once the egg is fully fertalized, it is a human organism, where as prior to that, neither part are on their own human organisms. Even if you still consider that line fuzzy, you are talking a matter of hours, not days or weeks. [/quote]

Ok, so at any point after the egg is fully fertilized, if a woman miscarries, should the event be investigated as a possible homicide or for the involvement of foul play?[/quote]

In as much as the tsunami should be investigated for criminal activity for killing half a million people.

Just because nature can do things doesn’t mean you can do the same thing. Because a volcano erupts and wipes out a village, that isn’t permission to wipe out villages.

Nature kills people all the time. Doesn’t mean we can.[/quote]

This.