ThunderJam Posted December 17, 2005 Report Posted December 17, 2005 One simple contradiction: A women is murdered while she is pregnant - the murderer is accused with two instances of murder, one for the woman, and one for the unborn child. But, the same woman could have killed her own child through abortion without charges? You can't say that the fetus is not yet considered a life, so its fair to kill it. Courts have really ruled killings of pregnant women as double murders. How can the fetus be considered a life in the murder, but not be considered a life in abortion? If it is a life, it has the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness (at least in the US).
SeVeR Posted December 17, 2005 Report Posted December 17, 2005 (edited) Its because the woman being murdered intends to have the child she is carrying. So being killed is effectively taking two lives. When a woman has an abortion she doesn't intend to have the child and so the child has no potential for life. Consider this example - A doctor carries out an abortion on a woman without her permission. Should this be considered murder or mutilation? I would call it murder because the mother has not chosen to have her child aborted. We have to remember in these things that while the child is in the mothers womb it is a part of the mother . They share the same blood and the same nutrients, the child is effectively an extension of the mother (like a tumor would be) and its fate must lie with the decision of the woman. The mother should always decide whether the child has a potential life or not and after that point any intervention resulting in death of the fetus is murder. Edited December 17, 2005 by SeVeR
LearJett+ Posted December 17, 2005 Report Posted December 17, 2005 1.) It's sad when abortion is used as a form of birth control. 2.) It's funny how you said the opposite of what you meant to say because you forgot to put a space in apart. Heh.
SeVeR Posted December 17, 2005 Report Posted December 17, 2005 (edited) Oh yes, post editted. ...Sometimes i type things the way i say them, which tends to be quickly. Edited December 17, 2005 by SeVeR
ThunderJam Posted December 17, 2005 Report Posted December 17, 2005 You can't say the baby counts as a life jsut because the mother wants it to. As long as the baby is in the same stage of pregnancy, its BS to say "O well this one we will consider a life", "this one over here tho, is worthless, kill it." And your saying the baby is jsut an extension of a mother, have you ever seen pictures of late-term abortions? I have seen videos of it, and i will tell you, it is brutal. If you have seen one, theres no way you can say it is just a bundle of tissue, this is a living, breathing person in the making.
MonteZuma Posted December 19, 2005 Report Posted December 19, 2005 In some countries/states, murder of a pregnant woman does not count as a double homicide. I reckon most of us (pro and anti) agree that: - "It's sad when abortion is used as a form of birth control."We all agree that unwanted pregnancies should (ideally) be avoided in the first place.- late-term abortions are ugly and undesirable The main controversy relates to whether or not 'early-term' abortions should be allowed for unwanted pregnancies. I reckon we have a stalemate on that score. So the next logical question is: Should one group of people (the antis) be allowed to impose their will on another group of people (the pros). I'd be interested to see where the discussion can go on that score only - coz otherwise this debate is just a dead horse flogging contest. My view is that there is not a general consensus either against or in favour of early-term abortions on demand. In such cases, the desire of the individual should take precedence over the desires of special-interest groups with alternative views. Therefore I am pro-choice.
LearJett+ Posted December 19, 2005 Report Posted December 19, 2005 Some people feel that it is murder. Murder should be outlawed, no?
MonteZuma Posted December 19, 2005 Report Posted December 19, 2005 I responded to that exact question in this thread about 50 or 60 posts ago. http://members.cox.net/mysigs/deadhorse.gif
SeVeR Posted December 19, 2005 Report Posted December 19, 2005 And your saying the baby is jsut an extension of a mother, have you ever seen pictures of late-term abortions? I have seen videos of it, and i will tell you, it is brutal. Yes it is brutal. That's because the baby is still an extension of the mother. But anyway, you said "late-term". I think that when the baby becomes aware of it's existence and has a brain large enough to allow it's survival when separated from the mother then it becomes a single life carried by another single life and abortion is equivalent to murder. The problem is when defining life.... and it's probably been discussed alot already. Defining an unaware fetus as life (based on it's potential for life) is no different than defining a protein molecule in a testube. Both have the potential for life but both ar at different points in the chain. You could define an atom of carbon as life by the reasoning of potential life. Therefore you have to define life as something that is aware of it's existence. I personally believe that most anti-abortion people are of that frame of mind because they believe in the sacredness of human-life above all other forms of life. This opinion generally comes with a particular religion that is full of inconsistences and desperate interpretations.
Recommended Posts