Good news? (Abortions)

I don't know. Everything in our body is alive. Our cells, our organs, including our friendly bacteria in our stomach. Eating wrong food will murder those friendly bacteria.
 
Dixie said:
Maybe the life starts when the sperm and egg are joined and are planted into the wall of the uterine, is that where the line is??
Click to expand...

Dixie this is really what the ENTIRE debate is about. If one believes there
is no God then one can just eliminate the life that gets in the way or is inconvenient, or malformed, or not perfect, like not having all of ones senses
intact.

But if life starts at conception, the moment the sperm joins the egg,
and if there is a God, then we can not dismiss life so carelessly.

If a society will not protect its most defenseless, its most vulnerable,
its weakest, then in the long run, none of us will be safe. Weather
there is a God or not.
 
jillio said:
Well, if we are going to call the product of conception at the stage that is no more than two cells life, and confer on it all the rights that a child who has been carried to term and birthed, then where do we stop? If it is life when it is two cells, why isn't it life when it is sperm or egg?
Click to expand...


Actually before implantation, on day 3 of fertilization there are
8 cells, on day 4 there can be anywhere from 10 to 30 cells and
implantation has still not occurred. The where do we stop it
argument goes the other way as well. What is so special about
a 20 min trip down the birth canal that confers legal human
status on a baby? And exactly when does the baby become
viable? Why can I not decide at the moment of birth that I
don't want this child? Or 2 days later, or ten? Where does it stop?
The not fully human argument was used to prevent slaves from
being freed. I believe they were granted 2/3 of a person rights. So
there slave owners could at least get some representation for them.
Where does it stop? We MUST protect the defenseless.
 
As you may be surprised to hear this, I am actually against abortion unless there's medical conditions for it such as mother's life in danger or rape situation.

But since people will always find a way to go through abortion, I would rather there be a safe place for them to do it than somewhere in dirty back alley.
 
Silentwolfdog said:
As you may be surprised to hear this, I am actually against abortion unless there's medical conditions for it such as mother's life in danger or rape situation.

But since people will always find a way to go through abortion, I would rather there be a safe place for them to do it than somewhere in dirty back alley.
Click to expand...

No one wants women forced into dangerous activities like this.
I feel the society as a whole will be better off if the babies are
left to live their lives. No matter what the circumstances of
conception. I speak from the experiance of having
been sexually assaulted while in the military, conceiving a child by that assault, carrying that child to term and raising that child, with my
husbands help. I could not have aborted an innocent life. I
could not have lived with myself if I had done that. I am
better off for it and my child is better off. She is 30 now
with a family of her own. We are to quick to make these
decisions thinking we know what would be best for everyone.
If I had played God and aborted that child I would not be the
same woman I am today. I took a negative and made it a
positive. I am saying it is up to us to take these women and
lovingly help them give that new life meaning. Through
adoption, or keeping the child.
 
fredfam1 said:
No one wants women forced into dangerous activities like this. I feel the society as a whole will be better off if the babies are left to live their lives. No matter what the circumstances of conception. I speak from the experiance of having been sexually assaulted while in the military, conceiving a child by that assault, carrying that child to term and raising that child, with my husbands help. I could not have aborted an innocent life. I could not have lived with myself if I had done that. I am better off for it and my child is better off. She is 30 now with a family of her own. We are to quick to make these decisions thinking we know what would be best for everyone. If I had played God and aborted that child I would not be the same woman I am today. I took a negative and made it a positive. I am saying it is up to us to take these women and lovingly help them give that new life meaning. Through adoption, or keeping the child.
Click to expand...

I'm glad you have a terrific husband who helped you get through such a terrible experience and that your daughter is all grown up and is a person you and everybody in the family can be proud of despite how she was conceived. You managed to keep positive through all these years. That's just how I feel and I know many women who feel the same way you do regarding babies being innocent.

That's quite something to be proud of!
 
Banjo said:
I'm glad you have a terrific husband who helped you get through such a terrible experience and that your daughter is all grown up and is a person you and everybody in the family can be proud of despite how she was conceived. You managed to keep positive through all these years. That's just how I feel and I know many women who feel the same way you do regarding babies being innocent.

That's quite something to be proud of!
Click to expand...

I am very blessed. I have been married 25 years, have had
6 more children, (raising my last 3 now) and all are doing
great. I have a wonderful husband!
 
What about miscarried embryos or fetuses? That is natural abortion. What about eggs that got fertilized but don't implant? Those go byebye too. Is there anyone responsible for those? Are there any people who have funerals for those eggs?

The whole system of having one egg each month and millions of sperm discharged at once doesn't look very well designed if you value each cell as a potential life because that's wasting millions of potentials. It would not be wasteful if it was just one egg and one big sperm replacement.

It seems like some people would want to keep anything between a fertilized egg and a naturally viable fetus alive once the technology was developed to do that. Then what about every one of ours cells in the future when cloning technology gets perfected to be a reliable method of making good quality human babies? If we scratch our noses in the future when such technology exists, then we'd be destroying many potential lives.

Why have a very seriously disabled baby that can't talk or do much of anything if you could get rid of that one to free up resources for healthy kids you could have in the future? Keeping a very seriously disabled one alive sucks up resources and tells the healthy future-kids "No, we are too busy taking care of this seriously disabled and retarded kid to bother giving you the chance to simply exist," or "We're having less of you healthy kids because of this resource suck-up so one or more of you will have to never be alive." If you were not taking care of such a baby you could've avoided having, you'd have more time to work with any healthy kids you have and other people on the planet. So it's stealing resources and energy from more productive uses.
 
RedFox said:
Why have a very seriously disabled baby that can't talk or do much of anything if you could get rid of that one to free up resources for healthy kids you could have in the future? Keeping a very seriously disabled one alive sucks up resources and tells the healthy future-kids "No, we are too busy taking care of this seriously disabled and retarded kid to bother giving you the chance to simply exist," or "We're having less of you healthy kids because of this resource suck-up so one or more of you will have to never be alive." If you were not taking care of such a baby you could've avoided having, you'd have more time to work with any healthy kids you have and other people on the planet. So it's stealing resources and energy from more productive uses.
Click to expand...


...
...
...
...

I seriously hope that's your idea of a VERY sick joke.
 
fredfam1 said:
Actually before implantation, on day 3 of fertilization there are
8 cells, on day 4 there can be anywhere from 10 to 30 cells and
implantation has still not occurred. The where do we stop it
argument goes the other way as well. What is so special about
a 20 min trip down the birth canal that confers legal human
status on a baby? And exactly when does the baby become
viable? Why can I not decide at the moment of birth that I
don't want this child? Or 2 days later, or ten? Where does it stop?
The not fully human argument was used to prevent slaves from
being freed. I believe they were granted 2/3 of a person rights. So
there slave owners could at least get some representation for them.
Where does it stop? We MUST protect the defenseless.
Click to expand...

So the pro-lifers must defend the defenseless?

Give me a break!

How can one be a pro-lifer when they go around killing the doctors that are providing the medical procedures as well as bombing abortion clinics, killing live people?!

That isn't being a pro-lifer, it's being a hypocrite.
 
Byrdie714 said:
So the pro-lifers must defend the defenseless?

Give me a break!

How can one be a pro-lifer when they go around killing the doctors that are providing the medical procedures as well as bombing abortion clinics, killing live people?!

That isn't being a pro-lifer, it's being a hypocrite.
Click to expand...
Of the millions of pro-life people, how many actually kill doctors or bomb clinics? How many approve of that behavior? I don't, and I know most other pro-life people don't approve of those crimes.

You can condemn those individuals who actually do that but not those who also condemn that behavior.
 
Reba said:
Of the millions of pro-life people, how many actually kill doctors or bomb clinics? How many approve of that behavior? I don't, and I know most other pro-life people don't approve of those crimes.

You can condemn those individuals who actually do that but not those who also condemn that behavior.
Click to expand...

Yet they call themselves pro-lifers.....
 
Byrdie714 said:
So the pro-lifers must defend the defenseless?

Give me a break!

How can one be a pro-lifer when they go around killing the doctors that are providing the medical procedures as well as bombing abortion clinics, killing live people?!

That isn't being a pro-lifer, it's being a hypocrite.
Click to expand...

When I say it is wrong to murder an inocent preborn child then
it is wrong to murder the man who killed it without due process. I would never condone murdering any one without due process. Let the baby
murderer be tried in court first. He is hardly defenseless.
 
RedFox said:
What about miscarried embryos or fetuses? That is natural abortion. What about eggs that got fertilized but don't implant? Those go byebye too. Is there anyone responsible for those? Are there any people who have funerals for those eggs?

The whole system of having one egg each month and millions of sperm discharged at once doesn't look very well designed if you value each cell as a potential life because that's wasting millions of potentials. It would not be wasteful if it was just one egg and one big sperm replacement.

It seems like some people would want to keep anything between a fertilized egg and a naturally viable fetus alive once the technology was developed to do that. Then what about every one of ours cells in the future when cloning technology gets perfected to be a reliable method of making good quality human babies? If we scratch our noses in the future when such technology exists, then we'd be destroying many potential lives.

Why have a very seriously disabled baby that can't talk or do much of anything if you could get rid of that one to free up resources for healthy kids you could have in the future? Keeping a very seriously disabled one alive sucks up resources and tells the healthy future-kids "No, we are too busy taking care of this seriously disabled and retarded kid to bother giving you the chance to simply exist," or "We're having less of you healthy kids because of this resource suck-up so one or more of you will have to never be alive." If you were not taking care of such a baby you could've avoided having, you'd have more time to work with any healthy kids you have and other people on the planet. So it's stealing resources and energy from more productive uses.
Click to expand...

I have had two miscarriages at 4 months each. I fully expect to meet
those created beings in the next life. But even if one does not believe
in the here after, how does that even fit into this discussion? With out
God that would be considered to be a natural selection process, done
without mans help.(unlike abortion which is different from miscarriage) Creatures die all the time naturally. Most people I
hear say, "Oh well, it was probably defective and for the best."

Human life only has "potential" before the egg and sperm combine.
After that union the life is now Human, no mater how small.

And keeping a disabled kid tells the other kids we value ALL life.

Aborting a defective one tells other kids, "Its a good thing you
were born perfect or this could be you!" It could also say, "Don't
screw up or you could be next."
 
Back
Top