If you're old enough to conceive a child, and to have sex, you should be able to take care of a child.
That's how you'll have children hated by their parents, abused, neglected and miserable in general. Raising them is not and easy task. Even parents who wanted them and were prepared for them often have serious problems and doubt their choice deep inside. I doubt that people who say that (if you're basically 18 yeas old or older you automatically should have them even if you don't want to) have children's interests at heart.
I support it, as long as the girl isn't taking advantage of it. One or two abortions in her life, i think is acceptable, anymore than that is just ho'ish in my opinion.
Both are great. No serious, it's good sh*t. It's always good to have options, especially if you don't want your country to be like Ireland in that matter.
You might think it's wrong, awful and all that - that's your opinion and your business. Preach it, teach it - don't care. I don't have a problem with that, your thoughts are your own. In return I ask the same of you. But if you feel the need to take the right to decide from other people - that's when the real problems start.
This argument gets tossed around so often, and it's really just completely unfair to the child. Who are you to say what their life would be like? Why is it that people insist on trying to decide whether or not someone else's life is worth living? It makes no sense to do that outside of extreme cases.
I mean really, of course there are less than fortunate people in the world. That doesn't mean that these people don't value their own lives/ want to live.
If you're old enough to conceive a child, and to have sex, you should be able to take care of a child.
That's how you'll have ch… moreildren hated by their parents, abused, neglected and miserable in general. Raising them is not and easy task. Even parents who wanted them and were prepared for them often have serious problems and doubt their choice deep inside. I doubt that people who say that (if you're basically 18 yeas old or older you automatically should have them even if you don't want to) have children's interests at heart.
Stops idiotic people to reproduce idiotic offsprings.
Have you ever considered the term PMS? That is very common on young adults who can'… moret keep their penis inside their pants.
The world is overpppulated, so I don't know why people would even want to stop abortion.
Yeah, don't mind nine monts of feeling awful and possibly even messing up your doby for the rest of your life for a kid that won't even be yours. After all, it's not like your own health and well-being even matter.
Plus, I don't know where you live, but in some countries it's impossible to "simply put it up for adoption". It's not simple at all in mine, for example. You'll have to go through seven bureaucratic hells if you want to do it properly (and not just leave him in the dumpster or something like that so no one will know who his parents are), you still will have to pay for 18 years, your every living relative will know what you did and even your boss will too. On top of that, in some cases that child will have a right to claim part of your house (to sell it) or right to live there. And that's not to mention that everyone will blame you for that and judge you especially if your child is healthy.
Seeing as those against abortion pretty much see it as murder, I don't think you should be surprised that they would want to have a say on your supposed "right" to decide. It's nothing personal at all, people against abortion simply don't believe that abortion is a "right".
Both are great. No serious, it's good sh*t. It's always good to have options, especially if you don't want your country to be like Ireland i… moren that matter.
You might think it's wrong, awful and all that - that's your opinion and your business. Preach it, teach it - don't care. I don't have a problem with that, your thoughts are your own. In return I ask the same of you. But if you feel the need to take the right to decide from other people - that's when the real problems start.
Being a human being isn't defined by having the ability to move, speak, and think. It's not even debatable that you're killing a developing human being. Regardless of what stage of life it is at, it is still a human being. We all had to start somewhere.
And even in downplaying what you're physically destroying exactly, this doesn't change that you're still taking a human life away, considering an aborted child would have otherwise had a future ahead of it. If you were not to intervene with nature, they would be born and ready to live out their life. Stopping that from happening is the equivalent of taking something from them. Their early stage of development does not justify this by any means.
Well life's not fair, in some cases even "murders" are 100% legal. They should just deal with it. Until the day where we can just pick a fetus/embryo and place it somehwere to grow outside a person's body - it's a right.
Seeing as those against abortion pretty much see it as murder, I don't think you should be surprised that they would want to have a say on y… moreour supposed "right" to decide. It's nothing personal at all, people against abortion simply don't believe that abortion is a "right".
Well despite that I don't even want children and won't have any, if I had one I wouldn't want him to have a sh-tty childhood. I would want him to be loved by his parents. Because that is the first thing every child need. It's essential. Yeah, yeah, he could be loved by his grandparents, his friends, his spouse, his own kids. But he still won't be loved by his parents, and very often for many people it's a real and serious problem that will affect their life, not only their childhood. We have a saying that if you didn't have a bicycle as a kid but now you have a bmw, that doesn't change the fact that you didn't have that bicycle. Yes, maybe later, when they're older, some people won't care that much that their parents didn't love them. But some will. And I wouldn't want to be that person who made my own child miserable if I were in a situation like that.
I don't care about other people and their children tho. If they're ok with it - I won't say "here have an abortion because you're not psyched about having a child". It's their choice to make and they will live with it. There should be no pressure one way or another.
This argument gets tossed around so often, and it's really just completely unfair to the child. Who are you to say what their life would be … morelike? Why is it that people insist on trying to decide whether or not someone else's life is worth living? It makes no sense to do that outside of extreme cases.
I mean really, of course there are less than fortunate people in the world. That doesn't mean that these people don't value their own lives/ want to live.
I'm not sure that saying that "they should just deal with it" is a valid argument against people speaking out against something that they deem to be monstrous. As reasonable, rational human beings, the idea that it should be within our rights to snuff out human life is pretty unfounded. Pro life individuals do not believe that it should be a "right" to kill unborn children. Nothing unreasonable about that.
Well life's not fair, in some cases even "murders" are 100% legal. They should just deal with it. Until the day where we can just pick a fetus/embryo and place it somehwere to grow outside a person's body - it's a right.
Again, it is not up to us decide whether or not someone else's life is worth living. As I said above, of course there are people that are born into less than ideal circumstances. That doesn't mean that these people do not go on to value their own lives. I understand wanting to shield your child from life difficulties, but that shouldn't justify outright killing them.
Well despite that I don't even want children and won't have any, if I had one I wouldn't want him to have a sh-tty childhood. I would want h… moreim to be loved by his parents. Because that is the first thing every child need. It's essential. Yeah, yeah, he could be loved by his grandparents, his friends, his spouse, his own kids. But he still won't be loved by his parents, and very often for many people it's a real and serious problem that will affect their life, not only their childhood. We have a saying that if you didn't have a bicycle as a kid but now you have a bmw, that doesn't change the fact that you didn't have that bicycle. Yes, maybe later, when they're older, some people won't care that much that their parents didn't love them. But some will. And I wouldn't want to be that person who made my own child miserable if I were in a situation like that.
I don't care about other people and their children tho. If they're ok with it - I won't… [view original content]
And pro-choice individuals think that everyone should have a choice. As a reasonable and artional human being you can't deny that those parties just simply cannot agree on one solution that will benefit both. So until then, one of them will have to deal with it.
I'm not sure that saying that "they should just deal with it" is a valid argument against people speaking out against something that they de… moreem to be monstrous. As reasonable, rational human beings, the idea that it should be within our rights to snuff out human life is pretty unfounded. Pro life individuals do not believe that it should be a "right" to kill unborn children. Nothing unreasonable about that.
I don't think you're getting my point. You more or less stated that you take issue with people speaking out against someone's "right to choose", so I simply explained why it's not unreasonable for pro life individuals to be up in arms about the issue, considering they see it as the immoral killing of human beings. Of course they're going to speak out against the issue when they see it that way. The idea that a mutual agreement supposedly cannot be reached is not a reasonable basis for not speaking out for what you believe to be wrong. It is not a reasonable basis for trying to bring about change. If people were to follow your logic here, we would still have things such as slavery.
As someone who is pro life, I absolutely believe this topic should be discussed, and I encourage others to speak out against abortion.
And pro-choice individuals think that everyone should have a choice. As a reasonable and artional human being you can't deny that those part… moreies just simply cannot agree on one solution that will benefit both. So until then, one of them will have to deal with it.
Again, it is not up to us decide whether or not someone else's life is worth living.
Sure it is. Even if we forget about psychological traumas - it will be your money and your life you'll have to sacrifice for someone you don't care for or hate even. As I already said, if there was a way to raise it outside a person's body and without making that person spend an insane amount of money for 18 years in a row - it would've been not our choice and right to decide. But since we're officially responsible for his health (both mental and physical), well-being and everything he does until he turns 16-18 that's not an argument.
Again, it is not up to us decide whether or not someone else's life is worth living. As I said above, of course there are people that are bo… morern into less than ideal circumstances. That doesn't mean that these people do not go on to value their own lives. I understand wanting to shield your child from life difficulties, but that shouldn't justify outright killing them.
I don't have an issue with people speaking against it. I said I have an issue with people who want to take away that option from others, aka ban abortions.
I don't think you're getting my point. You more or less stated that you take issue with people speaking out against someone's "right to choo… morese", so I simply explained why it's not unreasonable for pro life individuals to be up in arms about the issue, considering they see it as the immoral killing of human beings. Of course they're going to speak out against the issue when they see it that way. The idea that a mutual agreement supposedly cannot be reached is not a reasonable basis for not speaking out for what you believe to be wrong. It is not a reasonable basis for trying to bring about change. If people were to follow your logic here, we would still have things such as slavery.
As someone who is pro life, I absolutely believe this topic should be discussed, and I encourage others to speak out against abortion.
it will be your money and your life you'll have to sacrifice for someone you don't care for. As I already said, if there was a way to raise it outside a person's body and without making that person spend an insane amount of money for 18 years in a row - it would've been not our choice and right to decide. But since we're officially responsible for his health (both mental and physical), well-being and everything he does until he turns 16-18 that's not an argument.
Adoption exists. If you don't want to/ can't care for the child, then give them up to someone who can. And either way, you're still using selfish reasoning to justify robbing someone of their life. I don't see how anyone could see that as justifiable.
Again, it is not up to us decide whether or not someone else's life is worth living.
Sure it is. Even if we forget about psychologic… moreal traumas - it will be your money and your life you'll have to sacrifice for someone you don't care for or hate even. As I already said, if there was a way to raise it outside a person's body and without making that person spend an insane amount of money for 18 years in a row - it would've been not our choice and right to decide. But since we're officially responsible for his health (both mental and physical), well-being and everything he does until he turns 16-18 that's not an argument.
Being a human being isn't defined by having the ability to move, speak, and think. It's not even debatable that you're killing a developing … morehuman being. Regardless of what stage of life it is at, it is still a human being. We all had to start somewhere.
And even in downplaying what you're physically destroying exactly, this doesn't change that you're still taking a human life away, considering an aborted child would have otherwise had a future ahead of it. If you were not to intervene with nature, they would be born and ready to live out their life. Stopping that from happening is the equivalent of taking something from them. Their early stage of development does not justify this by any means.
I guess I just really don't understand how you could say that you're fine with people pushing the pro life agenda but then turn around and have a huge problem with them actively working on said agenda. It all kind of ties together in my opinion. When I speak against abortion, I'm not doing it without reason. I do it to convince others. The more people speaking out against it, the easier it is to bring about change.
I don't have an issue with people speaking against it. I said I have an issue with people who want to take away that option from others, aka ban abortions.
Read what I wrote on the first page in this thread please, I don't think I should copy-paste it here. It's not always that simple and it's not always an option that won't turn your life into nightmare. On top of that, even sterilization is illegal where I live if you're not 35 years old or if you don't have at least 2 children already. And even if you're both 35 and have children, majority of doctors will still deny you that.
Everyone is selfish and everything we do is selfish. Wanting to live is selfish. Wanting to die is selfish. Wanting to be loved is selfish. Wanting to have a good education in the decent college is selfish. Wanting a decent salary is selfish. Wanting to have a family and kids is selfish. I won't care if someone calls me selfish. I would rather have my life, money and health the way I like it than some public approval.
it will be your money and your life you'll have to sacrifice for someone you don't care for. As I already said, if there was a way to raise … moreit outside a person's body and without making that person spend an insane amount of money for 18 years in a row - it would've been not our choice and right to decide. But since we're officially responsible for his health (both mental and physical), well-being and everything he does until he turns 16-18 that's not an argument.
Adoption exists. If you don't want to/ can't care for the child, then give them up to someone who can. And either way, you're still using selfish reasoning to justify robbing someone of their life. I don't see how anyone could see that as justifiable.
Based on your logic here, we should just be able to kill anyone. Go bomb a city. Who cares about the people who are murdered in the process? it helps lower the population.. right? You realize how messed up that line of thinking is, correct? And of course we value the protection of our fellow human beings over other animals. The fact that humans eat other animals doesn't justify killing someone. Society =/= nature.
in short, you'd prefer the world to overpopulate.
Mind you that the amount of land available for residential usage is limited, and so are… more the products for daily human consumption.
Quite ironic when you say that abortion is wrong but not consider the fact that humans eat animals. Which is no different than a human baby.
No it's not. You don't see pro-choice people making everyone around them have abortions. Why the heck should there be pro-life activists making people keep the unwanted children? Forcing them to do so?
It's the same thing with vegans. You can educate people and be positive about your life or just bomb farms and ruin famous people's clothes. The second group needs a figh-five. In the face. With a chair.
I guess I just really don't understand how you could say that you're fine with people pushing the pro life agenda but then turn around and h… moreave a huge problem with them actively working on said agenda. It all kind of ties together in my opinion. When I speak against abortion, I'm not doing it without reason. I do it to convince others. The more people speaking out against it, the easier it is to bring about change.
Alright, so adoption may not be viable in every single circumstance in terms of making life easier on the parents. Obviously if it isn't viable, then that still goes back to my original argument of the parent's poor situation not being justification for killing someone (bolded for emphasis). I was strictly talking about situations where it is actually a viable option (seems rather odd that I would have reason to argue for anything else).
Everyone is selfish and everything we do is selfish. Wanting to live is selfish. Wanting to die is selfish. Wanting to be loved is selfish. Wanting to have a good education in the decent college is selfish. Wanting a decent salary is selfish. Wanting to have a family and kids is selfish. I won't care if someone calls me selfish. I would rather have my life, money and health the way I like it than some public approval.
That simply isn't a very rational mindset. Using that logic, you could try and justify any selfish behavior, period. In determining right from wrong, it is important to look at selflessness, and not harming someone else in order to benefit yourself. Killing someone to make things easier on yourself is obviously quite selfish, and immoral by our standards as civilized human beings. It's nothing more than convenient murder.
Read what I wrote on the first page in this thread please, I don't think I should copy-paste it here. It's not always that simple and it's n… moreot always an option that won't turn your life into nightmare. On top of that, even sterilization is illegal where I live if you're not 35 years old or if you don't have at least 2 children already. And even if you're both 35 and have children, majority of doctors will still deny you that.
Everyone is selfish and everything we do is selfish. Wanting to live is selfish. Wanting to die is selfish. Wanting to be loved is selfish. Wanting to have a good education in the decent college is selfish. Wanting a decent salary is selfish. Wanting to have a family and kids is selfish. I won't care if someone calls me selfish. I would rather have my life, money and health the way I like it than some public approval.
What is the actual point in a person being pro life if they're not wanting to push the pro life agenda? If they don't want to have a say in what people can do in terms of abortions, then that would obviously make them pro choice.
It all kind of ties together in my opinion
No it's not. You don't see pro-choice people making everyone around them have abortions. … moreWhy the heck should there be pro-life activists making people keep the unwanted children? Forcing them to do so?
It's the same thing with vegans. You can educate people and be positive about your life or just bomb farms and ruin famous people's clothes. The second group needs a figh-five. In the face. With a chair.
What is the actual point in a person being pro life if they're not wanting to push the pro life agenda? If they don't want to have a say in what people can do in terms of abortions, then that would obviously make them pro choice.
I'm not really sure why you would think I'm pretending to not understand what you meant. I'm simply saying that speaking out about pro life ties in with pushing the pro life agenda, for reasons I have already explained above. So again, I'm just not really sure why up above you had stated that you were okay with people "preaching" pro life ideas, but then went on to condemn the pro life agenda. This is why I made my original comment.
As an atheist and biologist I don't see a murder in it no matter how many times you say that. I don't see the point of discussing it further (well, at least not now, maybe later) because there are no new arguments while the old ones were discussed to death and old as ... you know what.
Alright, so adoption may not be viable in every single circumstance in terms of making life easier on the parents. Obviously if it isn't via… moreble, then that still goes back to my original argument of the parent's poor situation not being justification for killing someone (bolded for emphasis). I was strictly talking about situations where it is actually a viable option (seems rather odd that I would have reason to argue for anything else).
Everyone is selfish and everything we do is selfish. Wanting to live is selfish. Wanting to die is selfish. Wanting to be loved is selfish. Wanting to have a good education in the decent college is selfish. Wanting a decent salary is selfish. Wanting to have a family and kids is selfish. I won't care if someone calls me selfish. I would rather have my life, money and health the way I like it than some public approval.
That simply isn't a very rational mindset. Using that logic, you could try and… [view original content]
Did you know that evil people like Hitler, Stalin, Kim Jong-un, and such were at one point babies?
Did you know that Thomas Edison, Mahatma Gandhi, Albert Einstein, John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr., Aristotle and Abe Lincoln were all at one point babies Did you know that you were, at one point, a baby?
I don't think this is the reasoning to justify abortion. You can't know what will become of a person unless you let them live. It could also be someone that in the grand scheme of things didn't mean much.
I hate babies.
Anyhow, I feel that as long as it's done early enough it's fine. The one requirement for personhood is sentience which fet… moreuses don't have until later. We have seven billion people on this planet, we can afford to prevent some births. Plus, I hate babies.
Did you know that evil people like Hitler, Stalin, Kim Jong-un, and such were at one point babies?
EDIT: Yes, I know I was at one point a baby. That is the joke. Anyhow, my other points (sentience, large population already) still stand.
I hate babies.
Anyhow, I feel that as long as it's done early enough it's fine. The one requirement for personhood is sentience which fet… moreuses don't have until later. We have seven billion people on this planet, we can afford to prevent some births. Plus, I hate babies.
Did you know that evil people like Hitler, Stalin, Kim Jong-un, and such were at one point babies?
EDIT: Yes, I know I was at one point a baby. That is the joke. Anyhow, my other points (sentience, large population already) still stand.
Simple: We don't care if you don't like abortion, until we, the people who are pro-choice, can decide.
If you can choose then you don't have to do it, but you can. So both sides can do what they want.
(In my opinion no one has right to decide what you do with your OWN body. Someone who is already the part of the civilization is more valueable the someone who is not.)
I'm not really sure why you would think I'm pretending to not understand what you meant. I'm simply saying that speaking out about pro life … moreties in with pushing the pro life agenda, for reasons I have already explained above. So again, I'm just not really sure why up above you had stated that you were okay with people "preaching" pro life ideas, but then went on to condemn the pro life agenda. This is why I made my original comment.
Simple: We don't care if you don't like abortion, until we, the people who are pro-choice, can decide.
If you can choose then you don't h… moreave to do it, but you can. So both sides can do what they want.
(In my opinion no one has right to decide what you do with your OWN body. Someone who is already the part of the civilization is more valueable the someone who is not.)
Did you know that evil people like Hitler, Stalin, Kim Jong-un, and such were at one point babies?
Did you know that Thomas Edison, … moreMahatma Gandhi, Albert Einstein, John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr., Aristotle and Abe Lincoln were all at one point babies Did you know that you were, at one point, a baby?
I don't think this is the reasoning to justify abortion. You can't know what will become of a person unless you let them live. It could also be someone that in the grand scheme of things didn't mean much.
It's a given that pro choice individuals don't care about pro lifers not liking abortion. What are you even saying this in response to..?
… more In my opinion no one has right to decide what you do with your OWN body.
If only it were actually an issue of strictly one person's body, this would be more of a valid point.
It doesn't even necessarily need to have anything to do with religion or biology. Common sense tells us that an individual is losing their life, and that they are losing that life for the sole benefit of the parent(s). The fetus, regardless of you not wanting to see it as a living human being, is a developing human that will be born into the world if left to it's natural course. By killing the fetus, you are disrupting the natural development of the human being, and robbing it of the life that it would have otherwise had if not for interference. This fact combined with any number of the self benefiting reasons commonly used to try and justify abortion is what leads people to see the procedure in the bad light that they do.
As for not wanting to beat old arguments to death, I can understand that. I just felt a need to get some pro life opinions out there, considering the overwhelming pro choice presence
As an atheist and biologist I don't see a murder in it no matter how many times you say that. I don't see the point of discussing it further… more (well, at least not now, maybe later) because there are no new arguments while the old ones were discussed to death and old as ... you know what.
How can you just say that though? What is it about their stage of development that justifies removing their right to live? Just because? Obviously we all had to start somewhere, it doesn't make any sense at all to use stage of development to magically wave away someone's right to be born; they're still a developing human being. Why is it that people insist on using stage of development as a crutch for defending pro choice? It doesn't even really matter if you want to downplay the actual physical being that you are dealing with, you are still taking away someone's life by having an abortion, as the aborted baby would have otherwise been born and been free to live out their life. That life has as much value as any person that is already born.
It has everything to do with it. Because once you understoond the process, you will know that that tiny fetus here is no different on his early stage from a bunch of your other cells and there's nothing special about it (truth be told, there's nothing special about human life either - if there was, there would be no wars). It can potentially become a human, but so do billions others spermatozoa and eggs. It can "die" and dissolve on it's own due to stress and other circumstances, and that often happens when a couple is trying to make a baby. Quite a number of them reduce to nothing before you know. And you won't even know you were pregnant and won't cry a river about it - as you don't cry every month or every time you masturbate (depending on your gender).
It doesn't even necessarily need to have anything to do with religion or biology. Common sense tells us that an individual is losing their l… moreife, and that they are losing that life for the sole benefit of the parent(s). The fetus, regardless of you not wanting to see it as a living human being, is a developing human that will be born into the world if left to it's natural course. By killing the fetus, you are disrupting the natural development of the human being, and robbing it of the life that it would have otherwise had if not for interference. This fact combined with any number of the self benefiting reasons commonly used to try and justify abortion is what leads people to see the procedure in the bad light that they do.
As for not wanting to beat old arguments to death, I can understand that. I just felt a need to get some pro life opinions out there, considering the overwhelming pro choice presence
Comments
That's how you'll have children hated by their parents, abused, neglected and miserable in general. Raising them is not and easy task. Even parents who wanted them and were prepared for them often have serious problems and doubt their choice deep inside. I doubt that people who say that (if you're basically 18 yeas old or older you automatically should have them even if you don't want to) have children's interests at heart.
I support it, as long as the girl isn't taking advantage of it. One or two abortions in her life, i think is acceptable, anymore than that is just ho'ish in my opinion.
Both are great. No serious, it's good sh*t. It's always good to have options, especially if you don't want your country to be like Ireland in that matter.
You might think it's wrong, awful and all that - that's your opinion and your business. Preach it, teach it - don't care. I don't have a problem with that, your thoughts are your own. In return I ask the same of you. But if you feel the need to take the right to decide from other people - that's when the real problems start.
This argument gets tossed around so often, and it's really just completely unfair to the child. Who are you to say what their life would be like? Why is it that people insist on trying to decide whether or not someone else's life is worth living? It makes no sense to do that outside of extreme cases.
I mean really, of course there are less than fortunate people in the world. That doesn't mean that these people don't value their own lives/ want to live.
Does population count justify killing human beings?
Yeah, don't mind nine monts of feeling awful and possibly even messing up your doby for the rest of your life for a kid that won't even be yours. After all, it's not like your own health and well-being even matter.
Plus, I don't know where you live, but in some countries it's impossible to "simply put it up for adoption". It's not simple at all in mine, for example. You'll have to go through seven bureaucratic hells if you want to do it properly (and not just leave him in the dumpster or something like that so no one will know who his parents are), you still will have to pay for 18 years, your every living relative will know what you did and even your boss will too. On top of that, in some cases that child will have a right to claim part of your house (to sell it) or right to live there. And that's not to mention that everyone will blame you for that and judge you especially if your child is healthy.
Simple, huh?
Seeing as those against abortion pretty much see it as murder, I don't think you should be surprised that they would want to have a say on your supposed "right" to decide. It's nothing personal at all, people against abortion simply don't believe that abortion is a "right".
It's not a human being.
Since it does not have the ability to move, speak and think.
Being a human being isn't defined by having the ability to move, speak, and think. It's not even debatable that you're killing a developing human being. Regardless of what stage of life it is at, it is still a human being. We all had to start somewhere.
And even in downplaying what you're physically destroying exactly, this doesn't change that you're still taking a human life away, considering an aborted child would have otherwise had a future ahead of it. If you were not to intervene with nature, they would be born and ready to live out their life. Stopping that from happening is the equivalent of taking something from them. Their early stage of development does not justify this by any means.
Well life's not fair, in some cases even "murders" are 100% legal. They should just deal with it. Until the day where we can just pick a fetus/embryo and place it somehwere to grow outside a person's body - it's a right.
Well despite that I don't even want children and won't have any, if I had one I wouldn't want him to have a sh-tty childhood. I would want him to be loved by his parents. Because that is the first thing every child need. It's essential. Yeah, yeah, he could be loved by his grandparents, his friends, his spouse, his own kids. But he still won't be loved by his parents, and very often for many people it's a real and serious problem that will affect their life, not only their childhood. We have a saying that if you didn't have a bicycle as a kid but now you have a bmw, that doesn't change the fact that you didn't have that bicycle. Yes, maybe later, when they're older, some people won't care that much that their parents didn't love them. But some will. And I wouldn't want to be that person who made my own child miserable if I were in a situation like that.
I don't care about other people and their children tho. If they're ok with it - I won't say "here have an abortion because you're not psyched about having a child". It's their choice to make and they will live with it. There should be no pressure one way or another.
I'm not sure that saying that "they should just deal with it" is a valid argument against people speaking out against something that they deem to be monstrous. As reasonable, rational human beings, the idea that it should be within our rights to snuff out human life is pretty unfounded. Pro life individuals do not believe that it should be a "right" to kill unborn children. Nothing unreasonable about that.
Again, it is not up to us decide whether or not someone else's life is worth living. As I said above, of course there are people that are born into less than ideal circumstances. That doesn't mean that these people do not go on to value their own lives. I understand wanting to shield your child from life difficulties, but that shouldn't justify outright killing them.
And pro-choice individuals think that everyone should have a choice. As a reasonable and artional human being you can't deny that those parties just simply cannot agree on one solution that will benefit both. So until then, one of them will have to deal with it.
I don't think you're getting my point. You more or less stated that you take issue with people speaking out against someone's "right to choose", so I simply explained why it's not unreasonable for pro life individuals to be up in arms about the issue, considering they see it as the immoral killing of human beings. Of course they're going to speak out against the issue when they see it that way. The idea that a mutual agreement supposedly cannot be reached is not a reasonable basis for not speaking out for what you believe to be wrong. It is not a reasonable basis for trying to bring about change. If people were to follow your logic here, we would still have things such as slavery.
As someone who is pro life, I absolutely believe this topic should be discussed, and I encourage others to speak out against abortion.
Sure it is. Even if we forget about psychological traumas - it will be your money and your life you'll have to sacrifice for someone you don't care for or hate even. As I already said, if there was a way to raise it outside a person's body and without making that person spend an insane amount of money for 18 years in a row - it would've been not our choice and right to decide. But since we're officially responsible for his health (both mental and physical), well-being and everything he does until he turns 16-18 that's not an argument.
I don't have an issue with people speaking against it. I said I have an issue with people who want to take away that option from others, aka ban abortions.
Adoption exists. If you don't want to/ can't care for the child, then give them up to someone who can. And either way, you're still using selfish reasoning to justify robbing someone of their life. I don't see how anyone could see that as justifiable.
in short, you'd prefer the world to overpopulate.
Mind you that the amount of land available for residential usage is limited, and so are the products for daily human consumption.
Quite ironic when you say that abortion is wrong but not consider the fact that humans eat animals. Which is no different than a human baby.
I guess I just really don't understand how you could say that you're fine with people pushing the pro life agenda but then turn around and have a huge problem with them actively working on said agenda. It all kind of ties together in my opinion. When I speak against abortion, I'm not doing it without reason. I do it to convince others. The more people speaking out against it, the easier it is to bring about change.
Read what I wrote on the first page in this thread please, I don't think I should copy-paste it here. It's not always that simple and it's not always an option that won't turn your life into nightmare. On top of that, even sterilization is illegal where I live if you're not 35 years old or if you don't have at least 2 children already. And even if you're both 35 and have children, majority of doctors will still deny you that.
Everyone is selfish and everything we do is selfish. Wanting to live is selfish. Wanting to die is selfish. Wanting to be loved is selfish. Wanting to have a good education in the decent college is selfish. Wanting a decent salary is selfish. Wanting to have a family and kids is selfish. I won't care if someone calls me selfish. I would rather have my life, money and health the way I like it than some public approval.
Based on your logic here, we should just be able to kill anyone. Go bomb a city. Who cares about the people who are murdered in the process? it helps lower the population.. right? You realize how messed up that line of thinking is, correct? And of course we value the protection of our fellow human beings over other animals. The fact that humans eat other animals doesn't justify killing someone. Society =/= nature.
No it's not. You don't see pro-choice people making everyone around them have abortions. Why the heck should there be pro-life activists making people keep the unwanted children? Forcing them to do so?
It's the same thing with vegans. You can educate people and be positive about your life or just bomb farms and ruin famous people's clothes. The second group needs a figh-five. In the face. With a chair.
Alright, so adoption may not be viable in every single circumstance in terms of making life easier on the parents. Obviously if it isn't viable, then that still goes back to my original argument of the parent's poor situation not being justification for killing someone (bolded for emphasis). I was strictly talking about situations where it is actually a viable option (seems rather odd that I would have reason to argue for anything else).
That simply isn't a very rational mindset. Using that logic, you could try and justify any selfish behavior, period. In determining right from wrong, it is important to look at selflessness, and not harming someone else in order to benefit yourself. Killing someone to make things easier on yourself is obviously quite selfish, and immoral by our standards as civilized human beings. It's nothing more than convenient murder.
What is the actual point in a person being pro life if they're not wanting to push the pro life agenda? If they don't want to have a say in what people can do in terms of abortions, then that would obviously make them pro choice.
Don't pretend you didn't get what I meant.
I'm not really sure why you would think I'm pretending to not understand what you meant. I'm simply saying that speaking out about pro life ties in with pushing the pro life agenda, for reasons I have already explained above. So again, I'm just not really sure why up above you had stated that you were okay with people "preaching" pro life ideas, but then went on to condemn the pro life agenda. This is why I made my original comment.
As an atheist and biologist I don't see a murder in it no matter how many times you say that. I don't see the point of discussing it further (well, at least not now, maybe later) because there are no new arguments while the old ones were discussed to death and old as ... you know what.
Did you know that Thomas Edison, Mahatma Gandhi, Albert Einstein, John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr., Aristotle and Abe Lincoln were all at one point babies Did you know that you were, at one point, a baby?
I don't think this is the reasoning to justify abortion. You can't know what will become of a person unless you let them live. It could also be someone that in the grand scheme of things didn't mean much.
lol people are pro-life till the kids actually born, then they wanna get mad when bitches need welfare. Fuck outta here with that republican shit.
Did you know that everybody was a baby at one point?
Simple: We don't care if you don't like abortion, until we, the people who are pro-choice, can decide.
If you can choose then you don't have to do it, but you can. So both sides can do what they want.
(In my opinion no one has right to decide what you do with your OWN body. Someone who is already the part of the civilization is more valueable the someone who is not.)
It's a given that pro choice individuals don't care about pro lifers not liking abortion. What are you even saying this in response to..?
If only it were actually an issue of strictly one person's body, this would be more of a valid point.
If we don't let them live we know exactly what will become of them, nothing.
EDIT: On a side note: Thomas Edison was a prick and should have been aborted, same with JFK.
Yes.
No way! This is new, I don't know what to make of this new information.
You are not a person before your birth. Ergo: You have no rights.
A person with rights>festus.
It doesn't even necessarily need to have anything to do with religion or biology. Common sense tells us that an individual is losing their life, and that they are losing that life for the sole benefit of the parent(s). The fetus, regardless of you not wanting to see it as a living human being, is a developing human that will be born into the world if left to it's natural course. By killing the fetus, you are disrupting the natural development of the human being, and robbing it of the life that it would have otherwise had if not for interference. This fact combined with any number of the self benefiting reasons commonly used to try and justify abortion is what leads people to see the procedure in the bad light that they do.
As for not wanting to beat old arguments to death, I can understand that. I just felt a need to get some pro life opinions out there, considering the overwhelming pro choice presence
How can you just say that though? What is it about their stage of development that justifies removing their right to live? Just because? Obviously we all had to start somewhere, it doesn't make any sense at all to use stage of development to magically wave away someone's right to be born; they're still a developing human being. Why is it that people insist on using stage of development as a crutch for defending pro choice? It doesn't even really matter if you want to downplay the actual physical being that you are dealing with, you are still taking away someone's life by having an abortion, as the aborted baby would have otherwise been born and been free to live out their life. That life has as much value as any person that is already born.
It has everything to do with it. Because once you understoond the process, you will know that that tiny fetus here is no different on his early stage from a bunch of your other cells and there's nothing special about it (truth be told, there's nothing special about human life either - if there was, there would be no wars). It can potentially become a human, but so do billions others spermatozoa and eggs. It can "die" and dissolve on it's own due to stress and other circumstances, and that often happens when a couple is trying to make a baby. Quite a number of them reduce to nothing before you know. And you won't even know you were pregnant and won't cry a river about it - as you don't cry every month or every time you masturbate (depending on your gender).