|
|
Post by Sir Dark on Nov 20, 2009 3:28:42 GMT -5
So...I see we did have a debate on this at one point. It didn't seem to last all that long and was more if IKS's dad did the right thing.
I'm doing an argumentative essay on abortion and am taking a pro-life stance. I'd like to hear what everyone has to say about abortion and why they think that.
Don't just post something that doesn't contribute anything. This is a debate board...go to spam if you want to do that.
Once someone else posts what they think (With something to back it up, be it facts or a story or something), I'll tell you why I'm Pro-life.
|
|
kali
Jedi Knight 
back and on my way to greatness[rs:kali thug916][rs:kali thug916]
Posts: 635
|
Post by kali on Nov 21, 2009 3:08:39 GMT -5
i don't understand, what are you trying to say.
like what do you mean by pro-life or pro-choice?
|
|
|
|
Post by Exp on Nov 21, 2009 3:28:31 GMT -5
While I assume all members will be polite regarding this, I still think this topic is treading very thin ice. Some things linger for a long time behind closed doors...
|
|
|
|
Post by Zigorkhan on Nov 21, 2009 3:47:16 GMT -5
Yeah, although I'm spamming slightly. I agree with Eccentric... I learned a long time ago. When someone is asking if your pro-life or pro-choice. Generally they are not asking you what your opinion actually is. They are looking to re-affirm their own opinion. This is a debate topic that routinely turns ugly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Revan on Nov 21, 2009 4:02:17 GMT -5
lol i find this debate usually simplifies down into one question at least around where i am. is the baby "alive" while still in the mother. if it isnt, then it is still part of the mother and she can do with it what she wants, whereas if it is "alive", then there is no reason to abort, barring extreme medical circumstances of the mother. the varying thing comes as to what the definition of "alive" is.
i personally dont know what definition it should be, however i find the most reasonable to be something along the lines of if the baby can survive on its own without the mother then it is "alive" for this sort of thing, but then i have been through catholic school where conception is the point of life. so honestly im not sure which is right, but if it ever came down to my own child or someone i knew i would have to admit that i would never support abortion as an option. so i guess im just really confused as to my own opinion, but thats normal for me i guess.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sir Dark on Nov 22, 2009 16:36:46 GMT -5
I get what some of you are saying. I'm not trying to reaffirm my beliefs through this debate. I seek only to understand. For awhile, I considered myself to be between the two choices before I started this essay. Through research it does seem that Pro-life, or at least some on that side, support abortion when it comes to rape and incest and when medical problems arise.
So, I guess I'm pro-life. It's hard to explain what my beliefs really are when it comes to when does life begin. I just know after reading about some of the procedures I was physically ill. So, I'm not seeking to say "Your belief is wrong!" By no means am I trying to do that. I just want to know if there is someone on the opposing side that can help me understand their argument better.
Also, if this does start to get towards a flame war....or really ugly....I'm going to lock this and not think anything of it. Please, keep it civil, we're all friends here.
Edit: I originally had choice instead of life. Always seem to type it like that for some reason.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2009 17:18:23 GMT -5
Well, I don't think this is thread necro yet, so...
Yes, I think a human is alive once he/she has feelings/brain activity (proven to be before birth, I think). Therefore, abortion is a form of killing, if not murder. Obviously, if the birth was uncontrollable (extenuating circumstances) or threatens the life of the mother, then abortion is understandable. However, most people just don't want to face the consequences of their actions.
As for the "It's my body" argument: So, this is my house. I can do whatever I want to anyone in my house, right?
What really gets to me, though, is the fact that people expect taxpayers to pay for abortions. Taxpayers are not to blame for babies.
|
|
|
|
Post by South on Dec 2, 2009 19:51:39 GMT -5
A baby has a heart 2 weeks after conception and a moving, heart-beating bloodstream after 4. Most times you can't tell a pregnancy until around 3 to 4 weeks.
Some consider the heart beat and functioning bloodstream a sign of life. I do. As a Christian, I believe that the baby is alive, even in the womb.
|
|
|
|
Post by Revan on Dec 2, 2009 23:53:17 GMT -5
south the only problem i see with your belief is that the baby cannot survive without the mother until somewhere in the third trimester usually. i agree that the heart beat is a sign of life, but i really cannot consider it anything other than an egg until it can survive on its own, and eggs really arent life *points at scrambled eggs*, at least to me... however i still would never choose to do it if i had that body part because am protective of kids even ones that arent born, might be an instinctual thing because i cant even consider actually having to go through an abortion with someone i know...>.<
and IKS you can essentially do "whatever you want" in your house except certain "extenuating circumstances" like murder, rape and stff like that ;p so that kinda argues against your point...>.<
i do however completely agree taxpayers are not responsible for it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sir Ewoksrule91 on Dec 3, 2009 0:15:57 GMT -5
A human has 26 chromosomes, a human egg has 13. At conception it then has 26 so then it is no longer an egg and is now a human. If you can test the DNA and give results as a human then personally I think that is 100% sure that it is alive. Also South you need to post that link that you put on facebook once, about the woman that had like 10 abortions within 10 years... no matter your beliefs no one can support that and say it is ok because it is "her body"... Also that is a bullcrap argument, the baby is half the fathers so why does the woman get the final say?... Yeah she will go through pain when he won't but with painkillers and the fact that most women are more over come with emotion on having a kid than the pain that doesn't equal taking the kid away from him if he wants it...
|
|
|
|
Post by Exp on Dec 3, 2009 0:29:30 GMT -5
I know a woman who will soon have her third abortion... of course it is repulsive.
Anyways I am going to stay neutral, and will not pull out the religion card (not meaning any disrespect, but tying something like this up with religion in a debate is really setting up for a terrible fall).
What I am thinking that if you choose to change the abortion system, you will need to change all systems around it having to do with unwanted children. I really just mean the adoption system. Is there enough room from these children? How are the foster parents? I have an... interesting family, and my life has been heavily influenced by it. What I mean is that my grandpa grew up in multiple foster homes, and his last was very abusive. Well one day his foster brother (biological child) brought home a dalmatian, and the parents said they didn't have the room for it... so they kicked my grandpa out without anywhere to go.
But I digress. Before touching the abortion system and all the controversy surrounding it, there will have to be a massive overhaul of all parent-less childcare services that will have to adapt to either outcom, regardless of abortion being legal or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by Revan on Dec 3, 2009 1:54:15 GMT -5
ewoks i agree that the father should have a say in SOME cases but there are many where it would be a negative result, such as the father is not going to be involved with the child if it is born, why would the father have any say in the matter at all? other than that i agree it should be a group choice, and in my experience with it, it has been a choice between the couple even though legally it didnt have to be.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2009 21:08:43 GMT -5
south the only problem i see with your belief is that the baby cannot survive without the mother until somewhere in the third trimester usually. i agree that the heart beat is a sign of life, but i really cannot consider it anything other than an egg until it can survive on its own, and eggs really arent life *points at scrambled eggs*, at least to me... however i still would never choose to do it if i had that body part because am protective of kids even ones that arent born, might be an instinctual thing because i cant even consider actually having to go through an abortion with someone i know...>.< and IKS you can essentially do "whatever you want" in your house except certain "extenuating circumstances" like murder, rape and stff like that ;p so that kinda argues against your point...>.< i do however completely agree taxpayers are not responsible for it. You most definitely cannot murder someone in your house unless there are extenuating circumstances. Abortion, in plain and simple terms, is killing a baby/fetus/(whatever term you want to use). So, why are abortions allowed for no reason? |
|
|
|
Post by Revan on Dec 3, 2009 22:17:02 GMT -5
iks thats what i meant... that murder and stuff are the extenuating circumstances you cant do whatever you want with...>.< gah i lost my train of thought who knows what i meant...
|
|
