Do you agree with abortion/euthanasia?

[Ascaris]

Who was angry?

Science has told us time and time again that human life begins at fertilisation. You can argue with our beliefs all you want, but you can't argue with human DNA being formed and gaining life.

Reference it. Show me a link that says human life does begin at fertilisation.

A person shouldn't be able to choose the wrong thing.

Because a handful of people say it is wrong does not mean it's wrong.

Who flamed you? If it was me then I'm sorry you've misread my post, I had no intention to. But you cannot expect to talk about this without any arguments and everyone just getting along.

Welcome to a debate. The entire point is to argue.

Doctors said about my cousin when she was born that she would not live beyond the age of 12. She lived to 17 years of age and is the most wonderful and pure person I have known in my life.

Your view would probably have had her killed before she even had the chance to experience life as we know it.

We don't want to kill 'babies' as you say. We feel that it should be up to the mother. If the mother wants to raise the child, cool. If she doesn't, that's cool as well.

I know, it's terrible that some people seem to be destined to live terrible lives, especially those born with unfortunate deformities and the like. But if they're going to die, then let it occur naturally - why should blood be spilt unnecessarily?

Why don't you let it be their choice. Why do you have to interfere in their lives. If they don't want to suffer, they can put a painless end to their lives if they want to. You don't have to decide anything for them.

You had to respond to my post in the quote, didn't you? Not that I should be responding to this since your post just winds up being so immature near the end, and your latest post in this thread is just pathetic.

Because references to my immaturity is totally relevant to the topic at hand.

You've misread my words - I meant to ask those people with the rare genetic disorder , not an unborn child.

So, I never said no. If a person can decide if they want to live or not, by all means they should.

No, but I imagine it's better than being, I dunno... dead.

Again, you have no right to tell them what to do. It has to be their choice.

So because the child is unwanted, we should kill it? We should kill all unwanted children for the simple crime of being unwanted. However, you are wrong. There are always those who want a child but cannot have one - there are even those that specifically want children who have conditions such as Downs Syndrome and so on. What you don't want may just be what another is seeking.

Oh... well done. You completely took my post out of context and twisted it to benefit your argument.

No, we should not kill unwanted children. We are talking about fetuses, we are talking about abortion. It the mother doesn't want to have a child why should she be forced to?

As for those people who want to have a child, adoption centers are drowning with children. They would be doing a great thing in adoption one of them.

There's always a chance for things to improve in life. In death that's it, no buts.

Fetuses 'die' before they are born. They don't get a chance to experience life, they don't want to experience life, they won't miss life.

Did I mention America? I don't live in America. Don't assume things, and there is a problem wherever there is legalised abortion.

You're talking about developed nations. It's a very one-sided view of things as not every nation on Earth is developed. Abortion is a world wide issue.

No, I was saying that what the person does with their life doesn't make them anymore or less valuable. A life is a life.

Fetus =/= Alive.

Sorry, did I fall asleep and miss when killing another person became a moral act?

Fetus =/= Alive.

I didn't say not to have sex. I said you have to accept the consequences for your actions.

No, you are saying "If you can't take care of a baby, don't have sex." Which is pretty much the same thing.

Abortion is not the only option. That's half the problem with this. Women think that there's no way out other than abortion and so are pretty much forced into killing their unborn child. Beautiful combo huh?

Stupido you much? When did I ever say that adoption was the only option? Where are you getting these ridiculous facts from?

I had to specifically quote this part because it's just a ridiculous statement.

1. The only difference between abortions back then and now is that they now go through the front door.

What does that have to do with anything?

2. The mother always faces the risk of being harmed by an abortion, where ever it's performed.

The idiocy of the above statement is nearly equal to this: "Why get a heart surgery at a respected hospital when you can get one at a back alley for ten dollars. The person has the same risk of dying anyway.

3. Isn't the purpose of an abortion to fatally harm an unborn human child? lol roffle lmao.

Haha haha it's so funny. Forcing the mother to go to back alleys to have an abortion that could potentially kill her is absolutely hilarious.

You are so naive. Things change. The required amount of suffering will decrease, or doctor's will exaggerate the suffering of a patient, family members my push the patient, and so on.

Family members encourage the patient to die?

ROFLMAO! You are being so hypocritical right about now, so perfectly naive. What makes you think relatives will condemn their own family member to death?

The baby is human. Human, human human.

You are in denial. It doesn't display all the seven signs of life.

Just look at it's neck! (Invader Zim reference, had to be done).

What?

Killing the child in the womb is exactly the same as killing an adult.

So far this is all you've said in this debate without even providing evidence to back it up.

Sarcasm or do I have to take that seriously? lol.

That's where euthanasia will go. Again, you are naive. Ugh, so naive that you think a mother always talks over the abortion with others.

And you are incredibly naive in thinking that mothers who abort are immoral and irresponsible.

But back to the religion thing: no one mentioned it, not once. It was simply stated in an attempt to undermine the pro-life argument, even though secular societies outlaw murder and would probably agree on the scientific fact that human life begins at fertilisation.

It wasn't even indented towards you. There are people who believe abortion is wrong because of their religion. Why are you making a big deal out of it.

And excuse me, 'scientific fact'? Here you are again making statements without backing them up in the slightest.

So what if he's black? He just said it'd be good if there were more black children aborted.

I was worried people would call him racist.

Then give it up. Killing is not fine.

Was I posting as a moderator? Sure, I have the pretty badge and the different coloured name, but I was posting as a member. In addition, there is nothing wrong with my post anyway.

"Killing the people for the good of the people" should be the pro-abortion/euthanasia slogan.

You put too much value to the life of a parasite.

It is alive.
It is human.

It is alive.
It is a severely underdeveloped human which does not give it the same rights as you or me.

It's not potential life - it is alive. All it needs is a chance to grow.

No, it is not alive during the first two trimesters which is when abortions usually take place. Let's take another look at the seven signs of life.

1. Movement: Does the fetus show this? No.
2. Respiration: It does.
3. Sensitivity: It's not sensitive.
4. Growth: It grows.
5. Reproduction: The cells reproduce.
6. Excretion: It excretes through the mother.
7. Nutrition: it gets nutrition from the mother.

5 out of 7. A fetus is not alive.

What is a fetus then? How can it not be human? We all started out as a little clump of cells, and we all developed and grew for 9 months until we were born.

So?

You were a fetus as some point...Take a second and think. You have a wonderful chance at life, a chance to go out and experience the world and all the great things it has.

That's because both my parents were financially secure, could support me and wanted me. Trust me, I'd rather be dead than spend my life in an orphanage or in poverty.

But you're simultaneously saying that other people, who have not yet had the chance to develop fully, are not worthy of life simple because they haven't been born yet?

People, no. Fetus, yes.

It should be the mother's choice. I'm not denying them anything.

You're a hypocrite.

First rule of debating: Attack the argument, not the arguer.

You were exactly the same as all of those babies that have been unceremoniously ripped from their mother's womb. And yet, you deny that the very same thing that you were at some point has any significance? That is sad...

Okay, let's say my parents did decide to abort me. Would I care?

No.


Here's something I have to say to all pro-lifes out there: We are not for killing babies. We don't encourage murder. We feel that it's the mother's choice and we don't have any right to tell them it's right or wrong. And neither do you. So, kindly, for the sake of all the mothers to-be out and fetuses out there, mind your own beeswax.

Do you honestly think condemning abortion will stop women from wanting to have it?

 

[Sublime]

Ugh, this thread again?

I'm not gonna bother putting my heart and soul into a post in this thread like the last one, but I agree with everything Watch That Pin, Drifloon! has said.

Also,

DO NOT EQUATE THE LIFE OF A FETUS TO A LIVING, BREATHING HUMAN BEING!

I do. I always have. I always will.

 

[Corvus of the Black Night]

Whatever. I think that we should just respect eachothers opinion on it rather than trying to start a fight. This topic began as a school project, not as a flame war, so let's end it that way.

 

[(Dusty<3)]

I'm going with everything Ascaris just said.
We were born with free will. We were'nt born with chains around our feet that sent electrical pulses to our brains telling us what to do and what not to do.
Yes, a life is VERY valuable, I understand and know that. NOTHING is more precious. Yet I don't go around with signs and guns or bats attacking anything that supports abortion or anything relevant to it.
There is a thing called self-control, and i CHOOSE to use it.

What I'm TRYING to get at, choice > life. You choose to live or die. No one but your own self can keep you breathing.

 

[Sublime]

1. Movement: Does the fetus show this? No. ...What. The human fetus moves throughout it's entire development.
2. Respiration: It does.
3. Sensitivity: It's not sensitive. It's actually Stimuli, not sensitivity. The fetus does react to a stimulus. As obviously seen in that video Ray posted a few posts up.
4. Growth: It grows.
5. Reproduction: The cells reproduce.
6. Excretion: It excretes through the mother.
7. Nutrition: it gets nutrition from the mother.

5 out of 7. A fetus is not alive.

Looks like a good 7/7 for me.

But this thread is going nowhere fast. Just like the last one.
The few Pro-Lifers versus the many Pro-Choicers.
I'll leave now before I get too into this argument defending my opinions.

 

[Lynx1]

I'm glad this topic was made, I'm very passionate about the subject.

I am pro-choice. I support abortion up until a certain time because a fetus isn't a sentient being, and shouldn't trump a woman's rights.
I think it would be a lot easier to find a solution to this hot topic if there weren't so many myths regarding people from both sides.

"People use abortions as a form of birth control!"
"Only whores get abortions!"
"You're not a Christian if you're pro-choice!"
"All pro-lifers are Bible-thumpers with no sympathy!"
"There are only religious reasons to be pro-life!"
"Pro-lifers don't allow any exceptions!"

Granted there are certainly idiots using abortions as birth control, and there are indeed many pro-life Christians, it is not okay to generalize.

The most prominant myth of all, I believe, is that being pro-choice means that you're pro-abortion. That is far from the case. At age 17, I don't think I could even bring myself to get one if I were to become pregnant. However, I think people should have the right to do what they want with their bodies. Before the second trimester, the baby-to-be is a clump of cells without pain receptors, ergo, part of their body.

I do wish pro-lifers would stop saying adoption is the solution to not being able to raise a baby. It's not. Most children in adoption homes are there until they're 18, and then they're let onto the streets. (And then there are also the pro-lifers that are against single parents and gay parents adopting kids. I can't believe there are people who are okay with the above scenerio rather than seeing the child raised in a household with someone that loves them. It's very contradicting.)

Another option would be forcing a girl to raise a child without a high school or college education, a minimum wage at Burger King, and no help from the father or parents. That'll show that whore for daring to be sexually active.

Also, what about hunting? I know lots of pro-life people who hunt. Look at Sarah Palin for example. She hates the idea of someone aborting a zygote, but has no problem putting a gun to a moose's head. That's just it. We only care about our own lives, we don't care about any other form of life because our ego is the size of Texas. We think we're the only ones who matter and have any kind of importance. Pro-lifers talk about women wanting to get rid of a pregnancy because it's an "inconvenience", but have no problem chopping off a snake's head if it so much as wanders into the backyard because... it's an inconvenience. It's wrong to abort a mass of tissue that doesn't feel, think or care that's it's being aborted, but it's okay to slaughter something for no good reason that CAN feel pain and suffer? I do value the life of a human over the life of say, a fly, but at the time when abortion is legal, it isn't a human yet.

I truly believe that if abortion were to become illegal, there would be a lot of abortions performed illegally. There are parallels between sex education and abortion-- I also know many pro-lifers who would like abstinance only education taught in schools, claiming that there would be less need for abortions if it were so. Studies show the opposite, and that in areas where there is abstinance only sex education, there is a significantly higher rate of teen pregnancy than there is in areas that teach all kinds of sex education. Would not allowing abortions have the same effect, possibly making there be MORE illegal abortions in places where it is outlawed than there would be legally under other circumstances? Maybe the best way to limit abortions is to allow them. (Because yes, both sides would like that!)


I'm also sick of seeing pro-choice women depicted as heartless murderers. I've seen many artistic depictions of women throwing babies off cliffs, and tossing dolls up in the air-- these are suppost to symbolize abortion. It's not like that, folks. Nobody wants to have an abortion, it doesn't matter whether they're pro-choice or pro-life. Their hormones are wired to be emotionally attached to that little fetus. It's not an easy thing to go through, and it's not a decision made overnight.

I know quite a few pro-lifers who are okay with rape victims having abortions, and women who would have their life on the line if they were to go through with the birth. Here's a question directed at you guys, if you agree with this: Why? Yes, rape is a horrible thing to go through, but isn't it the fetus that you care about? Why should the fetus have to pay the price? (I'm not saying I think this-- I want to hear what you have to say.)

On an ending note, I think both sides of the fence should be willing to talk, and hopefully compromise with each other. It won't be dealt with until then.

Disclaimer: Yes, I know not all pro-lifers hunt, not all of them believe the same things, and not all of them pose adoption as the only solution. I enjoy playing Devil's Adovocate.

 

[Corvus of the Black Night]

Wow, I love you now, Lynx. I would admit that I was running short on words, but it seems you read my mind and spoke it.

One point to repeat (as I love to repeat myself), it isn't your uterus so don't make decisions for it. That's how I feel. Sure, a fetus is alive. But is it human? Does it have a soul, a mind? Like the rest of its body, the fetus's mind develops like a flower. But a bud is not a flower, so should a fetus be a human? To repeat myself again, as some do not seem to understand...

POTENTIAL =/= ACTUALITY.

When this potential becomes an actuality is the real debate here, as when the bud of the brain blooms into the flower of the mind. I believe it is after the second trimester, which is after when abortions take place. Obviously pro-lifers don't, and thus the argument begins.

And I NEVER said a fetus isn't alive. Don't make crap up.

A thing I've been noticing from pro-lifers - honestly, people who are pro-choice aren't so because they absolutely love abortion (like Lynx said). It's not like a woman who decides to have an abortion does it happily in 20 seconds. When I grow older, I may have children for myself. Will I abort them just for fun? NO. In fact, the only reason why I would abort a child is if I could not be able to rear the child due to some extreme financial crisis within my family.

People who are pro-choice are not murderers. We simply feel that we should have a decision in the matter. Whether or not we actually go through with this decision is ours and ours to decide. I am not killing anyone or anything for being pro-choice - rather than rip on us for being pro-choice, why don't you rip on those for having abortions? But ironically, you feel SYMPATHY for them. Why? According to your logic, they just killed their child. So why feel sympathy for the mother?

Simply because we want the right to a decision does not mean we will decide to do it ourselves.

SO STOP CALLING US MURDERERS.

At Watch that Pin, Driffloon! - I am not easily swayed by emotional appeals (as I am logical and find them rather transparent), so please give me some logical reasons why I should change my opinion.

 

[Lynx1]

Glad to be loved. :P
It's amazing how ignorant some people are. Both sides have very strong and good reasons for feeling the way they do.

I agree that potential is different than actuality. Da Vinci would have a very difficult time selling a blank canvas and claiming that "The potential is there!".

 

[(Dusty<3)]

I wouldn't call it ignorance Lynx, I would just call it a matter of opinion. Which is basically what we're trying to enforce, no?

 

[Corvus of the Black Night]

Well, I think that Lynx is refering to the fact that this has become more of an argument of "I'm right and you're wrong, and this is why you're wrong so suck it" rather than "I believe that I'm right and I understand why you believe you are right, however, these are the errors in your argument; therefore, you cannot be correct."

I crave logical appeals and all I've been seeing are things appealing to my emotions. Which is squat when trying to prove yourself in such an argument. I rarely ever rely on the use of emotions to appeal to the hearts of debaters, not because I'm emotionless, but because I feel that it makes more sense to debate with logic rather than something so volatile as emotion.

 

[Lynx1]

I wouldn't call it ignorance Lynx, I would just call it a matter of opinion. Which is basically what we're trying to enforce, no?

I wasn't refering to people having opinions, I was refering to those that make blind judgements without knowing the other half of the arguement. Everyone is indeed entitled to their own opinion.

 

[(Dusty<3)]

And you've missed y point.
Either way, this thread HAS gone nowhere.
So it may just be best if Went *whom Ive seen in the 'people viewing thread' for quite some time* should just close this place.
If people want to dish it out, they should do it at some other place. Maybe a debate website.
._.

 

[Gymnotide]

Doctors said about my cousin when she was born that she would not live beyond the age of 12. She lived to 17 years of age and is the most wonderful and pure person I have known in my life.

Your view would probably have had her killed before she even had the chance to experience life as we know it.

I know, it's terrible that some people seem to be destined to live terrible lives, especially those born with unfortunate deformities and the like. But if they're going to die, then let it occur naturally - why should blood be spilt unnecessarily?

By "not for long" I mean as soon as it leaves the womb.
It spontaneously combusts and turns into a caterpillar.

What if you absolutely know the baby cannot survive outside the mother?

 

[Lynx1]

How have I missed your point?
Did you really expect the answer to such a hot topic to appear in the midst of some random Pokemon forum? This is simply discussion, it doesn't HAVE to go anywhere. This is how people hear what the other side has to say. I don't see why a thread should be closed just for prompting discussion.

 

[(Dusty<3)]

Because, Lynx, it's turned into an unessecary arguement that not only upsets those who participate, but others who happen to stumble across this thread. A heated arguement shouldn't be open for something that is "discussed" in millions of other places.
So that is my OPINION about this uneeded thread. It WAS nice of the thread author to ask, but it isn't pleasant for others to try to argue with those who post here.

 

[Lucent]

Because, Lynx, it's turned into an unessecary arguement that not only upsets those who participate, but others who happen to stumble across this thread. A heated arguement shouldn't be open for something that is "discussed" in millions of other places.
So that is my OPINION about this uneeded thread. It WAS nice of the thread author to ask, but it isn't pleasant for others to try to argue with those who post here.

You do know there have been other threads relating to abortion and the like, riiiiight, Dusty?

But my opinion stands. I think abortion is wrong, and I've given many points about it in previous threads on the topic.

Overall, I say only do it if you're like, a child, or if you know you'll die giving birth. If you believe you're gonna be fine though, and even if the father doesn't really care about you, go ahead and have the child (or children), just find a nice family to raise them!

But yeah. I could say more on this topic, but...

 

[Azonic]

No, it is not alive during the first two trimesters which is when abortions usually take place. Let's take another look at the seven signs of life.

1. Movement: Does the fetus show this? No.
2. Respiration: It does.
3. Sensitivity: It's not sensitive.
4. Growth: It grows.
5. Reproduction: The cells reproduce.
6. Excretion: It excretes through the mother.
7. Nutrition: it gets nutrition from the mother.

5 out of 7. A fetus is not alive.

Okay, plants aren't alive anymore. Bacteria isn't alive anymore.

Each of your body cells are alive. The egg and the sperm are even alive before it forms a baby.

Why don't you ask yourself:
1. How does it breathe if it's not alive?
2. How does it grow if it's not alive?
3. How do the cells reproduce if it's not alive?

I'd like to see a rock breathe, grow, and reproduce.

 

[Corvus of the Black Night]

However, it's important to point out that not all life breathes, such as bacteria.

It's hard to define life, hmm?

 

[Ascaris]

However, it's important to point out that not all life breathes, such as bacteria.

It's hard to define life, hmm?

Yes. I agree with this. My argument is faulty o_o;;

 

[(Dusty<3)]

Yes. I agree with this. My argument is faulty o_o;;

All arguements are faulty. Not just yours.
._.