Abortion as Murder.

[Jroc]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkDiIdPq2Dw"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkDiIdPq2Dw[/ame]

 

[Cervantes22]

I got this charming neg rep message from High Gravity:

"Fuck you you stupid ignorant XXXX , I said that shit weeks ago and I stand by everything that I said, go take your useless bullshit rhetoric and shove it up your shithole and your XXXX you stupid bitch."

Just thought I'd share that for anyone who still thought HG had any moral authority to judge ANYONE else for their opinions, motivations, or real-life actions.

Clearly, HG hates women and deep down, hates himself for his position on abortion. I now suspect that he has paid for someone to have an abortion, probably just to protect himself from the expense of child support, and now feels that he must tear down, abuse, and denigrate anyone who disagrees with him in order to run from the knowledge that he's a heartless, self-centered baby murderer.

Personally, I intend to let him rot in the self-imposed hell of his own lack of character, decency, or morality by putting him on ignore from this moment forward. Spew all the hatred and vitriol and abuse of women that you like, HG. It's just you listening now, and I hope it doesn't help soothe your guilt one iota, because you deserve to hate yourself.

FLUSH!

Ooh, another Miss Cleo moment where you tell us all about the private life and actions of an anonymous poster on the Internet.

While you're at it, can you give me Saturday's Powerball numbers?

 

[BrianH]

The big problem with this issue is that people who are uneducated on the biology and embryology need to draw their lines in the sand at extreme points that are over simplified, regardless of actual processes. As someone else mentioned, a very large percentage of conceptions are naturally aborted, and no one even realized the woman is pregnant. To claim the destruction of any conception is murder denies our very biology.

The other issue is that the term "murder" is always reduced to a black and white issue by most people, instead of analyzed in an ethical perspective. What does "murder" mean and imply exactly? Does it apply in self-defense? Neglect? Does it apply to animals? Plants? Bacteria? Does intention matter? Does it apply if it allows for release from pain? ETHICS are generally not considered by people who discuss abortion in terms of "murder," as that term tells me the person is just jumping on a loaded word instead of making strong arguments on the actual topic.

People die naturally also...By this example it's ok to "abort" people as well.

 

[Intense]

The big problem with this issue is that people who are uneducated on the biology and embryology need to draw their lines in the sand at extreme points that are over simplified, regardless of actual processes. As someone else mentioned, a very large percentage of conceptions are naturally aborted, and no one even realized the woman is pregnant. To claim the destruction of any conception is murder denies our very biology.

The other issue is that the term "murder" is always reduced to a black and white issue by most people, instead of analyzed in an ethical perspective. What does "murder" mean and imply exactly? Does it apply in self-defense? Neglect? Does it apply to animals? Plants? Bacteria? Does intention matter? Does it apply if it allows for release from pain? ETHICS are generally not considered by people who discuss abortion in terms of "murder," as that term tells me the person is just jumping on a loaded word instead of making strong arguments on the actual topic.

You seem to be going way out on a limb equating the unintentional loss of a Pregnancy, to the Intentional Abortion. Lets distinguish between what is beyond our control from that which we have total control of. Abortion is the Intentional taking of a Life, Nothing less.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The solid majority of centrist America

You are probably right with that statement..."centrists"

believes in federally regulated and limited abortions.

Limited? I don't see it Then you are not looking Jroc. Look at the polling over the last ten years; it is common knowledge.

Don't like it? Take it up with the Roman Catholic SCOTUS majority, who will turn the naysayer's collective ass out into the alley through the back door.

I'm not Catholic Doesn't matter; you are bound by SCOTUS decisions

The mother's life takes priority when it comes to an either or situation. That's the law.

I agree, read the whole thread and you would have known I agree with that.

Then you are a person of common sense and balance

 

[SmarterThanHick]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkDiIdPq2Dw

yeah those types of videos are always ridiculous. anthropomorphizing a fetus and saying it is "crying" with "mommy" is just sad. If we want to discuss this topic in a rational manner, we need to step past such emotional gags and anecdotal exaggerations. I am interested how the author thought a fetus cries though.

People die naturally also...By this example it's ok to "abort" people as well.

You completely missed the point, being that conception cannot be considered a definitive line in the sand based on our very biology. Sperm, egg, and embryo are all created and destroyed without any outside interference. Claiming any one of those three is somehow a no-turning-back point just lacks insight. That point alone says nothing about the right and wrong of abortion whatsoever.

Again, the policy makers and judges who make decisions on these matters do so in a reasonable manner and have the capacity to analyze individual aspects of the issue. I recommend you attempt the same.

You seem to be going way out on a limb equating the unintentional loss of a Pregnancy, to the Intentional Abortion. Lets distinguish between what is beyond our control from that which we have total control of.

Oh? Where did I state that? I must have missed myself equating those two. I made two points in the previous post:
1) Our biology does not definitively establish life with creation of sperm, egg, or embryo.
2) People reduce this topic to knee jerk reactions and keywords instead of discussing the ethics.

Abortion is the Intentional taking of a Life, Nothing less.

ETHICS are generally not considered by people who discuss abortion in terms of "murder," as that term tells me the person is just jumping on a loaded word instead of making strong arguments on the actual topic.

You can replace "murder" with "taking of a life" in my above quote.

 

[BrianH]

The big problem with this issue is that people who are uneducated on the biology and embryology need to draw their lines in the sand at extreme points that are over simplified, regardless of actual processes. As someone else mentioned, a very large percentage of conceptions are naturally aborted, and no one even realized the woman is pregnant. To claim the destruction of any conception is murder denies our very biology.

The other issue is that the term "murder" is always reduced to a black and white issue by most people, instead of analyzed in an ethical perspective. What does "murder" mean and imply exactly? Does it apply in self-defense? Neglect? Does it apply to animals? Plants? Bacteria? Does intention matter? Does it apply if it allows for release from pain? ETHICS are generally not considered by people who discuss abortion in terms of "murder," as that term tells me the person is just jumping on a loaded word instead of making strong arguments on the actual topic.

There's a big difference between things "naturally" happenning and intentional things. If a fetus naturally aborts, then that's one thing, but someone ending a viable pregnancy is another. People die of natural causes all of the time, but if it comes to be that grandma was given a highly toxic substance to speed up her death, then it's homicide.

 

[Father Time]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkDiIdPq2Dw

That is so cheesy it makes me want to throw up.

 

[JakeStarkey]

An abortion is a homicide, yes; a murder ipso facto, no.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

People die of natural causes all of the time, but if it comes to be that grandma was given a highly toxic substance to speed up her death, then it's homicide.

Or it's called the double effect, and it is done by healthcare providers in specific situations, and it is legal.

Again this is a perfect example of people reducing all the complexity of a topic into these black and white issues instead of analyzing the ethics of the matter.

An abortion is a homicide, yes; a murder ipso facto, no.

same point as before. we can analyze the ethical issue, or we can throw some term that may or may not apply at it and call it a day. Do you want to be lay person who will never understand why policy disagrees with you? Or are you ready to delve into ethical reasoning?

To both of the above people I quoted, let's start with this: is ALL murder unethical without any exception?

 

[JakeStarkey]

STH, murder is a legal term. Abortion is not, ipso facto, murder. If the choice becomes either or in terms of health and life, mother or fetus, than the mother, as the wellspring of life, becomes paramount.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

so while you haven't quite answered the question, I take it your answer is no. You gave one good example of where it doesn't apply. Let's look into that more. Should a mother be given the choice to save the fetus instead of herself if desired? Can you elaborate more as to your reasoning why the mother would have priority? A fetus can grow to be a wellspring of life as well, after all.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Do not expect to answer for me, STH, when you can't answer for yourself. The mother is more important than fetus if the mother's health or life is endangered. If it comes to a choice, mom wins out every time.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

I'm trying to find your reasoning, not put words in your mouth. Correct me if I interpret you incorrectly. So you stated "the mother is more important." Can I take it to mean that you do not believe her life is equal to that of the fetus? Why is that?

 

[JakeStarkey]

I have explained above. Look it up. When a mother's health and or life is endangered, the mother's life is more important than that of the fetus is it becomes a choice of one or the other.

 

[Charles_Main]

I am very Torn on the issue of Abortion.

It makes me sick to know that many times it is abused and used as belated Birth Control, but I also recognize it has a place, and there are times it is the best option.

As far as it being murder or not. I will say only this. There have been cases where someone killed a woman who was pregnant, and the person was charged with 2 counts of Murder. I have always found it strange. If you can get another count of murder for killing a woman who is pregnant. Then how is Abortion legal?

 

[Charles_Main]

I have explained above. Look it up. When a mother's health and or life is endangered, the mother's life is more important than that of the fetus is it becomes a choice of one or the other.

One could actually argue, strictly from a logic stand point. That the unborn child has it's whole life to live, and contribute, and therefor is the more valuable life.

 

[JakeStarkey]

One could argue that, I agree, Charles. I would disagree. However, if a mother made the choice to give up her life for the unborn child to live, I would not interfere with that.

 

[Jroc]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkDiIdPq2Dw

yeah those types of videos are always ridiculous. anthropomorphizing a fetus and saying it is "crying" with "mommy" is just sad. If we want to discuss this topic in a rational manner, we need to step past such emotional gags and anecdotal exaggerations. I am interested how the author thought a fetus cries though.

Well... that video does two things, Drives home this point I made.

That’s the key word isn't it...a women probably wont know she is pregnant till after four weeks, So I don't see were "at conception" really matters. unless you have a problem with birth control pills, I have no problem with them. Even morning after pills, but that’s just me others do.

And it pisses people off as evident here..

That is so cheesy it makes me want to throw up.

Plus I like the song.. I could have used a video of the fetus itself, but I've had good luck with that one .

 

[SmarterThanHick]

I have explained above. Look it up. When a mother's health and or life is endangered, the mother's life is more important than that of the fetus is it becomes a choice of one or the other.

OK so we've established that you have some belief that a fetus's life is of lesser value than a living person.

However, if a mother made the choice to give up her life for the unborn child to live, I would not interfere with that.

And here we've established that you believe it should be the woman's CHOICE to decide for herself, free from outside interference and restriction from other people.

Interesting to see both of the above two conclusions were made by you. You see pro-choice proponents believe the exact same thing, to differing degrees regarding the life value of a fetus. Same idea though. The only question is where you draw the line in the sand, and why.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkDiIdPq2Dw

yeah those types of videos are always ridiculous. anthropomorphizing a fetus and saying it is "crying" with "mommy" is just sad. If we want to discuss this topic in a rational manner, we need to step past such emotional gags and anecdotal exaggerations. I am interested how the author thought a fetus cries though.

Well... that video does two things, Drives home this point I made.

The point that pro-life groups are ridiculous and need to resort in misleading or false propaganda?