Jerry D

The last thread had reached its posting limit, so please continue your discussions on this thread. Thanks.

ROCKSTAR

So our disagreement is techical and I'd be inclined to feel the same way if abortion wasn't used freely.

Again... I respect your opinion. I do not share it and I have strong feelings against the fact that it's your body. The baby is inside you, but it's not you. And it's his own person, from the second it was conceived.

In Fair Verona It opresses if you believe what I believe, which contradicts that the woman has a right to an abortion when it means the elimination of another's life.

*Ledi*

That simply an opinion, and not a fact. Which is why it can't be turned into a law.

ROCKSTAR

DNA is used to convict rapists, killers and all sorts of criminals. Those same people who discovered DNA say that life begins at conception and most of them are atheists and possibly have no opinion on abortion either way.

Seraphina

So that supports your point only because they say life begins at conception. I believe it does indeed begin at conception, but it`s a bundle of cells then, in my opinion life, but not a person. It`s a combination of cells, half of it the woman`s, half of it the man`s, merged together.

Just to make things clear, since I`m new in this thread, I`m pro-choice.

LUv,

Nettie.

In Fair Verona

ROCKSTAR - Yeah, I knew that was what probably what you would think. There's just two sides to every issue and two different ways to look at things.

It's a lose-lose situation because either way somebody is oppressed in some way, but I would rather have it be the zygote than the full-grown woman, merely because I think she feels a deeper pain if she does not want to have the baby. The women also experiences the anguish on a psychological and emotional level, not just physical.

ROCKSTAR

I'm new also.

You just made a great point about "bundle of cells" and I will try to argue with it without sounding crazy.

We are all a bundle of cells, when they die, we die. What makes us different from organisms is our ability to reason.

A baby can't reason because it is not developed yet, but the potential and the material is there. How can we grow up to be adults from nothing? We are human people from the beginning, we're just undeveloped and tender.

I believe, anyway.

J@NeY

I just wanted to ask the anti abortion people what they think of the woman that decides to have a abortion? Does that make that woman a killer??

I would never harm anyone yet I choose to have a abortion due to knowing that there was no way I could raise a child or give it up for adoption. I couldn't go through the pregnacy and I couldn't give that child a life of what I wanted it to have. Hence my reasons.... I was just a child myself and children should raise children. I was already raising two younger brothers and my older brothers were raising me and each other.

ROCKSTAR

In the only way we disagree here is in the fact that I believe that the baby is a 9 month carry unless you keep it. There are willing people that can take care of it for you and love him or her.



I just wish they could have a chance.

Not a killer, no way.

The second part of your post, I don't mean to be absolute so I'll limit myself to saying I respectfully disagree with making decisions for another person.

- annuscka -

Oh? Really? I've never heard that, actually. Not questioning what you said, merely interested Is this something recent or have I just missed something?

But, either way - I suppose I have to believe it if it's scientifically proven, but I still believe in abortion as well. I said it before I think, but I'll say it again - I do definetely not believe in abortion as a sort of birth control, but I think it can be safely said that no one, or very few actually use it as that anyway, not these days.

But I still think that the woman in question knows best. If she knows she can't carry and give birth to a child (bringing it up is secular as adoption exists, not that that's easy either) - then I don't think she should have it. What might make her not able to give birth are things like illnesses, mental and physical, and maybe social problems.

Or if it's very likely that the child might not be healthy, even if the mother is - I mean, if the tests you do early in pregnancy (or, can do at least) - show that there is severe damage or problems in the fetus' genes somewhere, then I think the mother/parents should be able to decide if they want to terminate the pregnancy or not. I know people with disabilities such as DAMP are able to have a nice life in many cases, but I'm no expert - there are cases when the diability is extremely severe, and I think you can tell from those early tests as well.

So, basically I'm saying that IF there are good reasons - like the above mentioned - then I think it's up to the parents and not anyone else.

I don't think abortion should be illegal because of this - maybe restricted, but I don't know how restricted it is in the US these days anyway so that's not really my place.

What I mean with "social problems" is stuff like very low age - I don't think anyone under 15-16, 14 at its absolut lowest, is fit for motherhood (or fatherhood, for that matter). Just because it's physically possible doesn't make it a good idea.

Poverty could of course also be an issue, even if there is social wellfare and all that. But age is really my biggest point - when you're about my age, 17-18 ie, then I think that many, not all of course *could* be parents, and then they should maybe hesitate with an abortion.
But I realize how much having a child might throw your life off tracks, and if you're in the middle of school then it's hardly a good idea in today's society. Meaning that if I now got pregnant, which is really unlikely since I have no boyfriend or similar whatsoever in sight - I would... I don't know what I would do, I'm in 11th grade and could have a bright academic future, but I don't know if I would be able to have an abortion. I have actually asked my mum, hypothetically, what she'd think I should do, and she thought it would be every idea to have the kid. But we have the social abilitis, too. So I don't know.

Allright, that was very messy and rambl-y.

I don't like the "consequenses of your actions" argument very much, mostly because it doesn't consider things like broken brith control and so. Because I do think you're being responsible in your sexual activities if you are protecting yourself - no one can know if you'll be that 1%, or 0,9%. We give smokers with lung cancer treatment too, no? And they have a much bigger risk of cancer than people on birth control to be pregnant. And it costs a lot more than an abortion, for society I mean. So maybe we should illegalize tretment of "self-caused" cancer forms too? (Not what I think is right)

But of course, the bottom line is correct. Having sex=risk of pregnancy. And if you have sex without any birthcontrol but still without intention of getting pregnant, then I think it's irrespeonsible. But having sex with birthcontrol=very very small risk of getting pregnant, and not irresponsible.

I'm not as Christian as you probably are (I am confirmated Protestant and do respect the church, but I can't even name all the commandments... but I try to follow them somewhat) - but I think we still have sort of the same take on this.

Oh, and - @ ROCKSTAR: I think I misunderstood something you said in the last thread and you pointed it out to me, sorry about that if it was my fault. I guess it's trickier than I thought to debate in your 2/3rd language

J@NeY

There are Millions of kids out there already that need a chance, a good home and most of all love. Why add to that, Like I have said before it isn't a person when it is a fetus.

Seraphina

Hehehe, I figured you would say that (and you don`t sound crazy) it`s true that we are all a bundle of cells, however, the bundle of cells is next to nothing, in fact, is only distinguisable (is that a word) from any other animal bundle of cells by DNA, not by ability to reason or anything else human.
But I guess our difference in opinion lies somewhere there, I don`t believe we are human beings with ability to reason at that time, or a person at that time, just some cells thrown together. I think it`s life, but not that it`s a person. Just cells. Not a baby yet. Anyway, that`s what I think .

Okay, hope that makes sense...

LUv,

Nettie.

To add to that: giving birth at a young age like 14, 15 is in fact harmful to both the mother and the baby. Babies are often born too early and their mothers are at greater risk for stuff like hypertension.

- annuscka -

I think my bio teacher told us that the early human DNA is in fact extremely alike other animal's, and that the early human fetus also looks a lot like some other animal's.... not that this actually had anything to add

Seraphina

Yeah, I wasn`t sure about the DNA, I did know about the early fetus though, it`s funny looking at the pictures in the book and then guessing wrong which one the human fetus is .

Lorna

Our DNA is 98.4% identical to the DNA of chimpanzees. We can have blood transfusions from chimps if the blood types match -- which I think would be very cool! I think the primate who's DNA is least like ours is the orang, which is something like 94% identical.

Not really on-topic though so I'll stop.