The Abortion Issue

[GWB]

Well, that sounds like that describes me (shrugging shoulders).

I respect your honesty. Why should anyone try to sugarcoat it? You either support murder of pre-born babies or you don't.

[GWB]

That's only partially true, Pruney. True, the demand for "white, healthy" babies is higher than demand. Unfortunately, that's not what we have a surplus of.

Who's fault is that? The white people? I think not. I have seen far more white people with adopted babies of color than the other way around.

[TaoMaas]

Who's fault is that? The white people? I think not. I have seen far more white people with adopted babies of color than the other way around.

I never said it was anybody's fault. I just said that this is the way it is.

[traxx]

At the same time, I don't think that anyone here views anyone else here as uncaring and not valuing life.

I would have to say if someone is viewing a baby in the womb as a glob of cells that sounds pretty uncaring to me.

Some approach this issue strictly from a religious standpoint, some from an intellectual position.

Read dumb, religious people vs. enlightened, intellectual people. That's a rather pointed statement.

I keep reading these posts that say there are not enough people to adopt the unwanted babies. How do we know that? Where are these statistics coming from? I don't think we do know that for a fact because we haven't been given the opportunity.

And to say that people only want healthy, white babies is just a statement pulled out of the air with nothing to back it up. For instance: Some of my inlaws adopted the baby of a drug addict while full knowing what problems could arise. They already had four children of their own. They did this out of compassion not because they thought it'd be neat to have a cute little puppy to list on Craigslist later. And they love this boy who's grown into a nearly self sufficient young man. I think we're underestimating the compassion of people.

I'm with Mallen, I think we need less government in our lives and especially less of the government telling us how to live our lives. I want to be able to do what I want with my hard earned money instead of throwing it away in Social Security as well as many other things. But when it comes to human life, I think the government has a right and a duty to protect those who can't protect themselves.

I read articles saying that scientist have found life on Mars. I read further and find that the life they found is a single celled organism but it's still considered life. So if that's considered life, then how can we not consider a baby life from conception. Not only is it life but it is human life since it is the offspring of two humans.

I often hear of the decision to keep the baby or abort the baby. But the decision has already been made when the man and the women decided to have sex. The idea to abort is an after decision CYA. If you don't want children remove the factors that cause pregnancy.

[OKCMallen]

I would have to say if someone is viewing a baby in the womb as a glob of cells that sounds pretty uncaring to me.

You do realize that a "baby in the womb" is, indeed, a glob of cells for a period of time?

OK, what if a woman recklessly causes herself to miscarry. What if she intentionally causes a miscarriage? Does the government put her in jail at that point? Under your scheme, it sounds like you'd say yes.

[Karried]

I asked this before as well... if a technician drops a test tube or a petri dish on the floor, with a fertilized egg in it, causing it to spill and be rendered useless .... did he just murder a baby?

[Caboose]

Actually, the discussion and points made ARE pragmatic, logical and relevant. I don't think you are using these words correctly. Because we can't figure out precisely when life should be defined as "beginning", the arguments and discussions are even MORE relevant. What you mean is that, since we can't agree on a foundational principle, the argument can't be logically concluded. That doesn't mean that relevance, pragmatics, and logic are thrown out the window. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.


(I'm going to hell for that one...)

No, I am using the words exactly correctly.

Look. You are making arguments A, B, and C. The only way these arguments make any kind of sense at all is if you ASSUME that statement 1 is correct.

Some other guy is making arguments X, Y, and Z. The only way those arguments make any kind of sense at all is if you ASSUME statement 2 is correct.

Statement 1 and Statement 2 directly contradict each other and neither is supported by anything other than emotion and whim.

So until you either find a way to prove either Statement 1 or Statement 2... or come up with a Statement 3 that supersedes them, then ALL arguments based on the Statement 1 or Statement 2 being true are illogical and are not pragmatic. They are in fact a waste of time, because no matter how eloquently you argue points A, B, and C, (or X,Y, and z) I know that the premise that they are founded upon is just a wild damn guess.

Thats why no one has EVER changed their mind after these conversations. You are going to continue to believe Statement 1 for no good reason out of pure faith or emotional whim and the other side is going to continue believing Statement 2 for the same bad reasons.

[OKCMallen]

I surmised correctly, I see. You're not entirely wrong. You're mostly right there, actually. But, still, a bit wrong. You don't toss logic out the window for the fun of it. It's not magically irrelevant. These are the only things we have to work with in the very concrete discussion.

[USG '60]

If "WE" cannot "prove" conclusively when life begins, then it is incumbant upon individuals faceing the problem to make their decisions on what they believe to be true. If you believe that a fetus is a human being and you abort one, then you have to live with the guilt. If you do not believe it is human then you will just possibly live with a mild anxiety wondering what it may have been. I think a lot of religious people are just frustrated that there is no punishment where THEY see SIN. It gets under their skin and eats at them and they end up wanting to DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. Sin should be punished so by damn if God won't do it then let's have the gov't do it. I don't think we should be playing God.

All of the great religions have strictures for murder, theft and cruelty, etc. That is part of being civilized. Granted sometimes the rules are different if the murder was of "one of them." But basically it is what makes us civilized. All cultures have had and do have abortions and usually without consequence, as it is considered best for the family or the whole group.

There was an rh factor problem in our family. Each birth my mom gave was harder. Our doctor was Dr Curtis Berry of Norman (after whom Berry Rd was name). In the early forties your doc was nearly a member of the family. When my little brother (the 3rd child) was born, Dr Berry told mom and dad that there was nothing that could be done to save the lives of mom or the baby and he sent them home to die with those who love them. A neighbor lady had just given birth 4 days earlier and she asked to see if her nursing the baby would save its life. It did and mom suffered greatly but survived also. Dr Berry pled with them to NOT have another baby or it would surely kill mom and probably the baby that time, too. The rhythm method let them down and mom got pregnant again. Mom was a devout Southern Baptist and considered aborting a sin, but she prayed long and hard about it and finally decided that her three existing children and her very loving husband would suffer greatly if she died. She went to the clinic and Dr Berry did it then and there. Mom died 4 months ago just before turning 94. She was a huge influence on hundreds of people in her life. She was a pilar in her church and welcomed needy people into our home many times. She was a saint like person until she died.

I would like for some of you who enjoy sitting in judgement to tell me what you think should have happened to my mom or Dr Berry (who is still a legend in Norman) legally. Mom suffered emotionally and physically for her "sin" but was able to rise above it and fulfill her destiny as a wonderful mom, wife, citizen and Christian.

Jump right in.

[Prunepicker]

I asked this before as well... if a technician drops a test tube or a petri dish on the
floor, with a fertilized egg in it, causing it to spill and be rendered useless... did
he just murder a baby?

No more than someone accidentally killing a pregnant woman's baby in a wreck.

[Karried]

If "WE" cannot "prove" conclusively when life begins, then it is incumbant upon individuals facing the problem to make their decisions on what they believe to be true. If you believe that a fetus is a human being and you abort one, then you have to live with the guilt. If you do not believe it is human then you will just possibly live with a mild anxiety wondering what it may have been. I think a lot of religious people are just frustrated that there is no punishment where THEY see SIN. It gets under their skin and eats at them and they end up wanting to DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. Sin should be punished so by damn if God won't do it then let's have the gov't do it. I don't think we should be playing God.

Amen

[bandnerd]

Very nice story (well, not "nice" but you get my drift, I'm sure) USG. I think it is very easy for those who have never had to experience such a life event to point fingers and judge.

There was a song I was listening to this morning, and the whole thing is about why you shouldn't judge others because you don't know what they've been through. It's not a new song, but I think the theme is one we can all learn a lesson from.

[PennyQuilts]

All that is very true. Unfortunately, there's not enough of those folks to handle the number of kids available.

This is simply not true.

[TaoMaas]

This is simply not true.

Really? Every kid up for adoption has found a home?

[traxx]

You do realize that a "baby in the womb" is, indeed, a glob of cells for a period of time?

OK, what if a woman recklessly causes herself to miscarry. What if she intentionally causes a miscarriage? Does the government put her in jail at that point? Under your scheme, it sounds like you'd say yes.

We're all a glob of cells right now if you want to get technical about it.

Interesting how you call it my scheme. As if I'm scheming something and not being completely honest or forthcoming.

It's just like the guy in the paper today who is being brought up on charges of murdering a 5 month old baby due to shaken baby syndrome. Let's suppose for argument's sake that he's guilty. He didn't put a gun to its head but he was reckless and careless with the child, intentionally. It's the same outcome. It's just that the baby in the womb is given less rights because it's not breathing air but instead breathing amniotic fluid.

Another thing. Those that are against abortion on here are not judging. We just want the same justice and protection for a child in the womb that is afforded for a child out of the womb.

[Prunepicker]

I think it is very easy for those who have never had to experience such a life
event to point fingers and judge.

One does not need to walk in someone's shoes to know the difference between
right or wrong.

It's a great feel good adage but it doesn't hold water

[Prunepicker]

... We're all a glob of cells right now if you want to get technical about it...

I'm curious. Have these cells become anything but a human being? Have any
become tomatoes or fire hydrants?

[Prunepicker]

Another thing. Those that are against abortion on here are not judging. We just
want the same justice and protection for a child in the womb that is afforded for a
child out of the womb.

As I mentioned in an earlier thread, all pre-born children should have a trial by
jury and if found guilty and deserving of the death penalty they should have every
opportunity to have an appeal.

Just like real criminals have.

[USG '60]

Prune, just so I can understand more clearly, would you please, tell me how you think such a trial would have gone in the case of my would-have-been sibling.

[Prunepicker]

Prune, just so I can understand more clearly, would you please, tell me how you
think such a trial would have gone in the case of my would-have-been sibling.

It would go to court like any other trial and the woman seeking the abortion
would hire a lawyer and try prove that the life of the child needs terminated. Of
course there'd have to be a court date set. Then the evidence would have to be
gathered. If the baby is found worthy of being sentenced to death the the baby's
lawyer would naturally file for an appeal. Another court date would be set...

[bretthexum]

Every one already knows who will end up bearing the burden of these babies. That is not really changing anyone's positions. This is not a money issue for most.

As for "me first" right wingers, what are you refering to? How about the "me first" lagabouts who bring more babies into the world than they can afford and who don't pay taxes sufficient to cover the benefits they receive. Where is the logic or fairness of accusing the ones who foot the bill for others with being selfish while giving a pass to the ones who are getting more than they give?

This is pointless to debate. You have your position, I have mine. I just think it's very hypocritical that the same people who want to save these babies don't give a sh*t once they're born. Where do you think the money is going to come from when we have 1.2 million extra babies born each year? We all know that most of these babies would be born into lower income families. And Prune is living in a fantasyland if he thinks that there is a waiting list of millions of potential parents looking for babies.

[Prunepicker]

I just think it's very hypocritical that the same people who want to save these
babies don't give a sh*t once they're born.

Not true. Nor am I in a fantasy land.

Remember, facts prove that conservatives give far above liberals when it comes
to caring for people. Liberals think it's the government's job.

Talk about hypocritical. Look at the left.

[bretthexum]

Not true. Nor am I in a fantasy land.

Remember, facts prove that conservatives give far above liberals when it comes
to caring for people. Liberals think it's the government's job.

Talk about hypocritical. Look at the left.

Aren't you the one who said we should abolish welfare? I agree - it's abused and people are lazy. But seriously - if these babies are being forced to be born who's going to pay the way? Obviously the parents won't give a crap if they wanted to abort them in the first place.

[Prunepicker]

Aren't you the one who said we should abolish welfare?

Yes. Get rid of it completely.

But seriously - if these babies are being forced to be born who's going to pay
the way? Obviously the parents won't give a crap if they wanted to abort them
in the first place.

Their parents are the ones who pay the way. Government funded
irresponsibility, aka the democrat vote program, should be done away with. If
these irresponsible people don't get a free ride or paid for having children, via
the democrat vote program, and have to responsible for their mistakes then it
only makes sense that they'll take the necessary means to not have children
they don't want.

It's not ignorance, it's greed.

Abortion isn't an option.

[nik4411]

Well, actually, it is.