I have a genuine question for the pro-lifers who believe abortion is murder.
What about miscarriages?
If we're defining a fetus as a life, and defining terminating that fetus with being the same as killing you or killing me or killing any other person on the street, then what does that make miscarriages? Are you now claiming that my mother, when she miscarried before she had me, is guilty of manslaughter? Should she be jailed now?
And if not, then why is the accidental termination of a fetus different from the accidental termination of any other person's life?
Oh, give me a break. What a stupid argument. People die of natural causes at virtually any age, and for a variety of reasons. And sometimes that happens during pregnancy. Miscarriage is unavoidable (in most cases).
Comparing a natural death to one that is carried out with malice and forethought is beyond ludicrous....
Someone dying of old age is not the same as someone's death being caused by someone else accidentally running into them with their car. In this case, a miscarriage is more like the latter.
So I repeat: how is a miscarriage different to a pedestrian who isn't looking where he's going walking into the path of my car and being hit?
I think I speak for everyone here when I say "huh?"
What part of miscarriage is a natural function don't you get? People die. Sometimes it is when they are very old, sometimes when they are very young. Babies die in cribs of natural causes all the time.
An unhealthy unborn baby that dies naturally is light years removed from an abortionist taking sharp instruments and dismembering one in the almighty name of choice....
Using gory descriptions of abortion is a ridiculous method to try and win this debate. I could just as easily give you gory descriptions of women who kill themselves in back alleys in desperation because abortion is illegal and they feel trapped.
Just keeping it real. If you don't like the imagery, then perhaps you should rethink what it is that you are so wholeheartedly endorsing.....
I am endorsing women not being forced into dirty, back alley clinics where they know they will die. I am endorsing women not begging their boyfriends to hit them violently in the stomach with a baseball bat. I am endorsing women not throwing themselves down stairs. I am endorsing women not killing themselves because they cannot go through nine months of financial difficulty, lost employment and physical pain. I endorse this because I like women, and I see them as complete human beings. Not baby machines who need to be punished for daring to have sex.
See, we can both use silly over the top rhetoric.
Only the most heartless among us would view a baby as a punishment. Congratulations, you sound just like your god, Barack Obama....
At least he's not a hypocrit, like your gods.
think Mike Pence...
ALL have had no problem with abortion, when it suits them. It's politics baby. And real nasty to use women for it. If you aks me (shout-out to Russsshhhhh)
Obama is consistant. Yours are not. They are acting superior...do as we say, not as we do.
Being a man, you will never know the stress pregnancy puts on a woman's body and life. It is not "heartless" to recognize this. It is, however, heartless to ignore it and hold a woman hostage in her own body for nine months.
Um, I don't think you will find very many women who consider pregnancy being "held hostage". At least not women who are worthy of the title......
(Pre-note: I'm not against abortion necessarily, I'm just devil's advocating to show the idiocy in argument that was used)
I wish I could be a woman. Then I could murder things and claim that I'm immune to legal recourse because "you're not a woman".
That'd be great.
Tax collector comes... BOOM! "but, you don't understand how much stress paying taxes causes on a woman's body!!"
Dad gets mad at me for failing a test... BOOM! "but you don't understand how much a period makes me crazy, you damned man!!"
(Post note: I just want to point out how pointless her argument was)
comparing a death caused by malice to abortion is ludicrous.
Are you claiming that, if you got struck by lightning, the clouds should be thrown in jail?
Are you claiming that women, like clouds, are not sentient beings?
... wow, you really know how to completely miss points.
you said that if a natural act -- a miscarriage, which can happen for countless completely non-mother related reasons -- should be punishable as murder.
BUT THEN! You claim that if another completely natural act -- a lightning bolt, which can happen for countless completely non-manmade reasons -- should NOT be punishable as murder.
In fact, you didn't even make that claim, you just completely twisted logic and reason because you already had a point in mind.
Anyway, good luck with that whole "logic and reason have no place in debates" thing.
You are using a weak rationalization to push your pro-abortion agenda.
A miscarried fetus is a no-fault, unavoidable death. It's not an accident, and it's not on purpose. It is a natural phenomenon which is completely out of anyone’s control.
Tell me this, if a cancer patient dies early in life, would you think it was suicide?
Actually, you would be wrong as per usual. Miscarriage is an accident. It always is, unless a person forces a miscarriage to come to pass. If a person doesn't choose to force it to happen, then it IS an accident.
Ofcourse you think I'm wrong. Most progressives do.
Most progressives do? Dude, it would be nice if YOU would stay out of other people's life and mind your own damn business.
"I endorse this because I like women, and I see them as complete human beings. Not baby machines who need to be punished for daring to have sex."
OH! Good left Hook!!!
And fyi richie...the one who is punished is the baby....
There are more than enough unwanted babies around the world.
For you to force more, when you do nothing to help once they get here, is not "Real", it's "Real" inhumane.
And even if you did help, it's still not your call.
Sorry you are jealous...My body, My call.
You don't like abortion? Don't have one. End of story.
Think of ways you can help the kids stuck in the slave-sex trade...instead of how you can bring more here, to throw on the dump-heap..
Wild exaggerations and hyperbole do nothing to bolster your argument, LMC (and you know it's getting extreme when I label anything from LMC as "wild", since most of it is already off the deep end...)
Oh, you are jealous?.....I KNEW it!
It's no hyperbole or exageration (sp, I KNOW!)
Kids who are unwanted and live on the streets are oft-times recruited into the sex trade/drug trade/slavery trade.
They HAVE no other choice, as so many countries offer no help whatsoever.
Thanks for wanting to add ours to that list!
So for abortion to be outlawed is wrong, but when someone like Michele Bachmann puts up and takes in 23 "unwanted" children, you viciously attack her motives for doing so without a shred of proof to back it up.
I personally think Bachmann's adoption is a wonderful thing, and adopting 23 children is a great thing to do. I may not like her politics but I can admire her choices when it comes to adoption. Unfortunately there are too many children waiting to be adopted, and it's a shame some people think we should make that problem worse by forcing women to give birth to children who they will not keep.
Surely if anyone doesn't approve of abortion, then they don't need to have one. Why all the whinging on and interfering from the pro-lifers?
That's what I wanna know.....916 bills to stop it????
Perhaps it is because some of us believe that as a civilized nation, we can do better than legally condoning the murder of the unborn.
Sticking YOUR nose into other people's life, shows you don't know your place in this world. Plain and simple.
There is of course the argument that you are sticking your nose into someone else's life, namely the unborn child....but I guess since they can't fight back or argue the point, then it is acceptable, right?
Actually Billy, you've still not addressed one of my most previous posts- Did YOU have a choice in being born?
Since YOU didn't, then you have no right to argue others DO.
The number of hoops you jump through to try and gain some high ground is truly astounding.
Of course nobody has a choice in being born, or being aborted. The question is whether or not unborn children have the RIGHT to be born. I believe they do. Obviously you disagree.
Actually, I'm trying to get you to understand that people have their life and you have your life. I don't want to tell you how to live your life, but I do want to point out that YOU don't have a right to tell others how to live their life, especially, if you don't want them to tell you how to live your life.
I not arguing that at all. I think the decision is not YOURS to make, but is the woman's decision. Thus, see your way out of their life.
Any man of good conscience would seek to rescue someone who was being abused or murdered. Hence the pro-life movement.
We believe in erring on the side of life. You believe in throwing away life in the name of choice and convenience. So you'll forgive me if your comments don't exactly shake my moral foundation......
BS. It's the religious arses who are imposing their ridiculous religious beliefs, where they do not belong. Nothing new.
You don't even understand morality or it's foundation, so please. Go learn something would you.
This is not about religion. It is about life, which is something that should be preserved. Obviously the thought disgusts you...my sympathies....
It doesn't disgust me and I would hope that you would STOP putting words into my mouth. If you don't want me to do it to you, then STOP doing it to me.
And, yes it is all about religion and if you cannot see that, then you are blinder than a bat.
It's the religious majority who are trying to control what people do with their life. Just as you are attempting.
The protection of the life already living is what matters and the future of that life has priority.
Civilised countries allow abortion almost without exception. You'll notice that it is almost ubiquitous across the developed world. (countries allowing abortion in blue):
Perhaps then, legal abortion is more ethical than not allowing it? That would seem to be the case...
I would geuss that this is why:
"a widespread "invisible" network, organized into cells, and populated by elite, politically ambitious fundamentalists; Sharlet is present when a leader tells a dozen men living there, "You guys are here to learn how to rule the world."
A main part of ruling is controlling and demoralizing women. Look at Saudi Arabia, the taliban. Controlling women by religious doctrine.
Sex is bad---unless you're a man.
Women should be barefoot and pregnant.
They have been a stealth movement here in America, until recently...with the fundamentalist Christians (so-called) now running the House,
Look for more attempts to demonize women, people of color, unions, poor people...anything NOT white, male, Judeo-Christian, and rich.
It's scary, because you know as they were whipping slaves and owning women, they did it in the name of the Lord.
It is also relevant to note that, with the exception of Eastern Europe and China, which have other factors (poor access to other forms of birth control in Eastern Europe and the one child policy in China) driving a high abortion rate, countries where abortion is legal have substantially lower abortion rates than countries where abortion is not. Western Europe has (with a couple exceptions) the most liberal abortion laws in the world and also the lowest abortion rate by far - half that of North America and 1/3 to 1/5 that of Latin America, Africa, and other regions in the developing world, where abortions are overwhelming illegal.
The main difference is that in Western Europe and the US, 0.2-1.2 women die per 100,000 abortions. In countries where abortion is illegal, the mortality rate averages 330 per 100,000 abortions, and complications from unsafe abortion are second only to complications from childbirth as the leading killer of women and girls of childbearing age.
Abortions are going to happen whether they're legal or not. The question for pro-life advocates becomes, do you want abortion to end one life or two? If, like any decent human being, you'd rather it only ended one, then fight to keep abortion legal, but rare by improving access to comprehensive sex ed, reliable birth control, and support programs for women in abusive relationships, low income women, and other women in high risk categories.
Abortion is a legal medical procedure that was developed to give Women an alternate choice.
Being pregnant has only ONE outcome, regardless of anything else going on in their life. Abortion maintains a woman's right of choice and freedom of choice. Thus, giving them more than ONE option.
Arguing whether or not it's murder of a baby/fetus/child is foolish, ignorant and just distortion.
A baby is a descriptive word for a stage of pregnancy.
A fetus is another descriptive word for a stage of pregnancy.
A child is the result of birth, the end of pregnancy.
You want to argue if you're destroying a human organism? Then, yes you would be correct. It is destroying what would turn out to be a child(end result).
And, as I said in the other thread on this topic- YOU didn't have a choice in being born, so you shouldn't be arguing that others DO have a choice.
A baby/fetus or organism cannot have the right to be born, because it's not a conscious choice it ever gets to make.
just a shot in the dark here, but perhaps what we're realy after here is the argument that in some states a driver can be charged with not only killing a woman in an mva, but that same driver can be charged for the death of an unborn child as well,.. these laws were first concieved (pun intended) to heap more punishment on drivers who cause death due to negligence, theyve been hi-jacked by pro lifers to promote the cause of giving leagal rights to the unborn,... its all been cleverly done by all involed.
i'm pro-life,.. i am soo pro-life that i piss off pro-lifers to no end.... however,....i dont want abortion made illeagal,... i just want it to happen a whole lot less,... i want it to be the tragic last resort that it should be,... not the much praised right(of passge) that it has become.
yes children are born into squaller and poverty, they are abused, neglected, used and rejected, they are unloved, unwanted and uncared for,.... however,... to say that preventing births would solve this problem is like saying that eliinating females from the planet would iliminate rape,.... it would darn sure iliminate the species in short order, then we could spend our last remaining days discussing homosexuality,.... and forcable sodomy,... but it wouldnt be rape would it.
those who would do evil, will do evil..... even on the wanted loved priveledged and children
I agree with you whole-heartedly. Although I'm on the other side of the divide regarding abortion (i.e. I'm in no way a pro-lifer) I'd always like to see every other option explored first.
Sex education should be taught at an early age and condoms and other contraception freely available.
This is why I have been depressed by the Vatican's stance (until very recently) where they effectively outlawed safe sex and made abortion a massive sin too. It leaves catholics (the worlds largest religion) in a very tight spot indeed.
maybe thats why catholics are the worlds largest religion?! ha!
the vatican will never change its stance on abortion, ever, the catholic and the protestant will just have to accept it or move on,... the stance of birthcotroll is adifferent matter. natural family planning is taugh and taught well in many parishes,.. and the bennifits of this practice are beyond simple birth controll. the problem the church has with atificial birhcontroll is that chemical methods can act as an abortafacient (spelling?) and mechanical methods fail,... both means remove personal responsability from the equation in the emotional and spiritual sense.
the catholic church has been around for 2000 years, it grows and changes with the times, if not shifting on the winds of public opinionas we might wish.
for the catholic church, life begins when sperm cell and egg cell meet, which is of course absurd, that is why even IUD or copper T is not allowed as contraception, because that contraceptive method allows the union of egg and sperm cell, but prohibit it from settling in the uterus. They call IUD and other modern method of contraception abortifacients, you are right.
only natural family planning (rhythm, basal and mucus) which goes against woman's natural hormonal cycle. They love to make love when they are fertile and these methods prevent that "joy", LOL
the life-abortion-birthcontroll question within the catholic church are derived from the churches aproach to sex ,.... this sets the church at odds with the world from the start.
if the union of sperm and egg are not the begining of life,....what is? i'm not being sarcastic or arguementative, i want to know how you define or identify the moment at wich life begins
I would say that the point at which life begins is the point at which a baby can survive outside of the womb. Until that point there is no true independent life.
The limit in the Uk is 24 weeks - is this consistent with the US? Having said that, 90 odd percent of abortions happen before the 12th week.
Yeah, babies don't look remotely human before that. I've thought about this because it obviously IS human, no one has given birth to a tomato, a fish, or a raccoon. Though one of my boys asked me if I'd make this one (his younger brother) a kitten since we had enough boys already!
there is no legly binding deffinition in the states,.... there in lies the problem.
med science keeps pushing the envelope as to how far along the pregnancy has to be for te baby to surive outside the womb.... it makes it hard to pin it down in the legal sense.
my nieghbor is 89, born premature, he fit in the palm of his fathers hand and was kept in a shoe box next to the wood stove for months. he also is MR and had a stroke in his 20's that affeted his speach and left side. he was still harnessing his team untill 4 years ago.
At 25 weeks, if the baby were to be born, it's chances of survival with very good medical care (assuming a developed country) would nudge 50%. At 24 weeks it's 39% and at 22 weeks it's around only 15%. (at 22 or 23 weeks a doctor would not make intensive efforts to keep the baby alive).
There should be a scientifically established reason for a date and that should be made part of the statute if abuses are not to occur. In my opinion.
I'd also be surprised if your neighbour was birn at or around 24 weeks and survived if this was 89 years ago!
its ok I understand, it is just my opinion that when a fetus reach its viability, then it has its own life.
In relation to this topic, I am strongly advocating educating the youth about sexual health (I wrote a hub about it - sex education among the youth), and giving them access to safe contraceptive method with parents consent.
i respec your answer, but in todays med world,... and the ever shifting "moment of viability",... where does life begin?
and if a medical advancement moves it back to 20 weeks from the previously accepted 24 weeks,.... did we magicaly change the moment of life through our awsom intelect,.... or was it life at 20 weeks all along?
and so on and so forth through each medical advance,......?
it will change and I will follow that too. if they can survive by one month, the better. The truth is that this topic is really close to my heart because being a demographer (I used to work in academic setting conducting and analyzing population related researches). Abortion is illegal and clandestine in the country where I came from b4 migrating here, plus it is 92 percent Catholic.
In that country, every year, there are 25 cases per 1000 women who are resorting to induced and unsafe abortion because (1)modern methods are not allowed and natural family planning is not that effective (needs education for women), (2) the young women who are mostly vulnerable to commit to unsafe abortions are put to shame - family pressure, so they resort to abortion on their own which is very risky (they are often rushed to hospitals when they bleed). (3) parents don't discuss it with their children and moreso in school.
We interviewed almost 4,000 plus women (600 plus women - they were rushed to hospital after performing abortion themselves), plus 3,300 women who are household based and we got their experiences/stories, without knowledge on modern methods usually these women resort to risky abortions.
i think that we would all agree that knowledge i power,.. and education is the answer,...
think you and i would also agree that the church has a lt of growing up to do as well, but she will only grow as fast as she can.
in fact, i think th whole world could use a lot of growing up,... and well placed compassion.
my friend, we are truely not ennemies here, we agree on all that matters.
The thing is that by outlawing abortion you won't actually prevent it.
Instead you will condemn many women to dangerous practices, often not only losing the foetus but the mother as well.
You can argue that women shouldn't have illegal abortions, but just the same as arguing that they shouldn't have sex, they will.
And surely this is the ultimate in government control, which many of you pro lifers argue against.
like shit, abortion happens! Why? for various reasons, because we are not perfect individual as what pro lifers assume.
Women specially the youth (young girls) risk their lives when they perform clandestine abortion on their own due to many reasons.
BTW, unsafe abortion is usually clandestine. Unsafe abortion can be induced abortion as against spontaneous (miscarriage). Induced abortion is when you do something to abort fetus.
"Unsafe abortion is a significant cause of maternal mortality and morbidity in the world. Most unsafe abortions occur where abortion is illegal, or in developing countries where affordable well-trained medical practitioners are not readily available, or where modern contraceptives are unavailable. About one in eight pregnancy-related deaths worldwide are associated with unsafe abortion." Source : wikipedia
Since it happens as we know it why not facilitate to make it safer for women.
how about war, gov't even finance it - and it kills people.
Abortion which is law in America is - the legalization of murder of an unborn fetus(child).
Miscarriages on the other hand is actually an incomplete pregenacy. By this medical people state that in order for a pregenacy to come to birth - there are certain steps from the moment of conception that must take place - a miscarriage is when any of these steps fails to complete itself/themselves.
The fetus does not completely attach to the walls of the uterus and is not attached to those life giving substances - in time as the fetus grows and because and because it's not completely attached - the uterus expels the fetus and a miscarriage results - my mom had 3 miscarriages before I was born.
I find this issue to be one in which men should have NO ability to influence, as they are 9 times out of 10 the instigating party anyway!
As a Man I personally believe ALL WOMEN - Irrespective of position or religion should have the ability to make their own choices on such issues!
Be as ProLife as you wish, without the hollow judgment of others!
Would it not be more ProLife and ProActive to direct the energy towards child molestation and abduction?
Even directing the energy into education would be more beneficial.
Nice post PD.
So according to your logic, as a man I should have no opinion on the subject of rape, since women are most often the victims.....even though I believe rape is a horrendous crime and the perpetrators should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.
See how stupid this argument sounds when you apply it elsewhere?
And again, many of you want the man to step up and take responsibility for the baby he helped to make, unless of course the woman chooses abortion, and then his wishes are thrown out like an old shoe. You can't have it both ways....
It is YOUR mistake trying to apply it elsewhere.
Only because you don't like having the fallacy of your argument illustrated.....
Again, you are fighting a battle you fail to understand. It wasn't my argument. DUH!
DUH - what a clever and thought provoking response.....like I should have expected more.....
Again, you're still over-stepping your authority as a citizen of humanity, but apparently your level of misunderstanding is getting in your own way. Seriously, check your ego at the door would you.
You'll understand if I don't take lessons in humanity from somebody who endorses abortion......
I'm not endorsing abortion. But, you're inability to see beyond yourself cannot see that.
I am however, tell you it is NOT YOUR RIGHT to interfere in someone else life. It's NONE of your business to begin with.
Kind of odd to say it's no one's business to 'mind someone else's business'. Isn't that exactly what laws are?
Yes, but isn't that another argument for another thread. Laws, certain laws, have no need for existing and/or do exist because other people are trying to control other people.
Some laws, like abortion(if illegal), would be completely unenforceable beyond all comprehension. Back alley abortions would still happen and most likely cause more damage than anything else.
And you'll understand if I don't take lessons in humanity from somebody who endorses the right of people to carry the means of instant death for everybody, including unborn foetus's.
A baby is a means of instant death? Okay, we've officially crossed the line into lunacy with that one.....I was wondering who would push it over the edge.....congrats, John.....
I wondered what he meant by that too. Maybe he's thinking of the Antichrist!
Good gosh, I thought I was debating with intelligent people!
A gun is a means of instant death!
Um, John? We're discussing abortion here, not gun ownership. Glad to be able to help out....
Yeah, you're on the wrong thread there mate!
Clearly you are a very insecure male, that also finds a need to invent greater presence by showing his prowess of having absolutely no understanding of what I said!
You're complaining about nature, the natural world, the way things work. "...holding a woman hostage to her body..." are you serious?
If the girls and women who get backstreeet abortions die, then they won't have to suffer, right? Just like those unwanted children don't have to suffer when you kill them.
If it's okay to kill a baby because you don't want it, isn't it okay to kill a mentally ill child who is dangerous?
Death is way better for many babies than being born in their circumstances but to claim someone has a "right" because they don't like the results of nature is absurd. I would love to be able to decide whenever I do or don't have kids without counting on the luck of the draw but that's not how it works. No sex, no baby - unless you're like the biblical Mary and then...
by Paul Swendson 9 years ago
Is it possible for pro-life and pro-choice people to find any common ground? Too often, the argument becomes fixated on the morality and legality of abortion, which are both worthwhile topics. But in the end, I think that almost all Americans would like to reduce the number of abortions. So why...
by J.R. Smith 9 years ago
what are your thoughts on this one?
by Dawn Bostick 10 years ago
Do you believe that abortion is murder or is it just a choice?
by JRs 5 years ago
Is abortion about women’s right or is it about the right to life?I get so mixed up in that debate, it would seem that the right to life outweighs any right of personal choice, but many see it much different. What is your opinion about abortion? What supersedes what? Do men have a right to a choice...
by Grace Marguerite Williams 6 years ago
NEVER, EVER understand about a woman's unmitigated right to choose & control her reproductive destiny?
by brittvan22 7 years ago
There has been rowe v. wade, etc. Is abortion clear cut murder or do you think there are special cases and exceptions?
Copyright © 2020 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
HubPages Inc, a part of Maven Inc.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|