Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Cheli said:There is no CHILD to consider. The embryo would not have an opinion on whether or not it surives as it has no sentience. This is a redundant point..
Cheli said:Isn't there a pro-choice argument like this that uses the analogy of forcing somebody to share a kidney with a famous violinist? I can;t remember how it goes off-hand.
HouseApe said:So why is the life of a cell with human DNA more important than the liberty of a human woman?
truth_restorer said:The essence of my point here is that they are both equal as far as their humanity goes because both are living complete human DNA. Living, growing, human DNA = human life. We are all just human DNA of a lesser or greater age. Seeing the unborn child as a "human being", on a par with yourself is a prerequisite to any desire or ability to carry it to term. Without such a conception of it as the full human that it is, there would be no incentive to follow through to term. So, the definitional issue is the operative issue; the threshhold issue.
Shalom
No... the answer does change, as it was not meant as a lesson in chronology. Your response to why the answer still doesnt change still has to do with chronology. Your still missing the point.Jerusha_Girl said:Ok... But the answer still doesn't change... If she was in danger of being aborted, she'd be a fetus, and if she were a fetus, she wouldn't know if she was being aborted.
The point is that if she can hardly make correct sensible decisions for herself, why should she be allowed to make the decision wether to end someone elses life, a life she created with the help of the father. And the arguement that 'its her body' is laughable, as it is as much the fathers creation and child as it is the mothers. How selfish can one get!?!?!? Thinking about her own pleasure got the women into the situation in the first place, now concern for her own comfort is her excuse to kill an innocent life.... disgusting and shameless.Jerusha_Girl said:So she's too dumb to be able to make a medical choice for herself, she's too stupid and irresponsible to decide if she wants a baby or not... But you're OK with giving her a baby? If you think, at 16, you can't possibly know what's best for you, why on earth would you want to add a child to that situation? If she doesn't know what's best for herself, how can she know what's best for someboedy else??
Its not an insult, simply an observation brought about by the views and opinions you expressed with your posts. Me calling you a selfish idiot would be an insult, but im giving you the benefit of the doubt. Again chronology is not the determining factor in wisdom. You could be twice my age and still be inexperianced by not having learned from your life experiances.Jerusha_Girl said:Your insult is noted, and considering how it's completely irrelevant to the situation and the discussion that's being had, I'm going to assume that you have nothing else of importance to say and move on. In my "inexperiance", I've come to learn that when people resort to insults as a means to forward a conversation, they have nothing else of weight to add to the discussion, so it's best to move on. Though I am slightly curious with what "experiance" you've had in the 3 years longer you've been on earth than I have, since saying somebody is ignorant because of their age when that person is in your own age group... Well... You can understand it's more than slightly baffling.
Jerusha_Girl said:You are right, I am shocked at how little people value life. Until just now, I didn't know there were people who valued life so little that they'd ask women to carry a pregnancy that resulted from a disgusting crime for 9 months.
That's like saying that the suvivor of an attempted murder should let the guy who tried to kill him live in his house for 9 months, and if he doesn't, he's immoral.
I don't know why life is considered so sacred. God gave us dominion over the earth. And included in that dominion is the right of a woman over her body. Atleast in my opinion. Maybe not yours. Who knows which one of us is right? Maybe god does. I can't see a merciful deity banishing a fetus to hell. It's practically a free ride to heaven! Wish my mom's had aborted mejesusfreak3786 said:How is that not respecting life? Do you actualy think that by destroying life, you value it? That makes no sense, a woman can give birth and be no worse for the wear, I know I've done it, death is death.....it's final.
Seeking... said:For you it is. For me it is not.
I don't view human life as neccesarily sacred.
non viable human fetus is not equal to adult human host
If you can survive without being in a parasitic relationship with another human; you have rights. If you must have a host to survive - you only have the rights that host grants you because their rights take precedence over yours.
In A Perfect World said:I don't know why life is considered so sacred. God gave us dominion over the earth. And included in that dominion is the right of a woman over her body. Atleast in my opinion. Maybe not yours. Who knows which one of us is right? Maybe god does. I can't see a merciful deity banishing a fetus to hell. It's practically a free ride to heaven! Wish my mom's had aborted me
Jerusha_Girl said:I don't think that it's respectful of life to force a rape victim to be pregnant by her rapist. You might pat yourself on the back for being "respectful to life" by making sure a pregnancy is seen through to birth, but do you think for a second about the life that is already damaged (if not destroyed) by the act that created the pregnancy and how forcing her to carry the product of the rape against her will could damage her further?
Now that is silly. Normal pregnancies, wanted pregnancies, can be difficult and painful, and leave the mother "worse for the wear." I know my sister was just about torn apart by her planned pregnancy. She's the only woman I know who actually lost weight with her pregnancy instead of gained.
A pregnancy from a rape is certainly not a normal pregnancy, and the woman is probably entering the pregnancy "the worse for the wear." How can you expect that a woman enter the pregnancy "the worse for wear," but finish it being a-ok?
You can't compare normal pregnancies to a rape pregnancy. You can compare that scene from "Alien" where Sigorney Weaver realizes that she has an alien inside of her that will probably kill her mentally before it ever does anything to her physically to a rape pregnancy.
Ok... So what did the woman do? If the fetus didn't do anything, what did the woman do to deserve having her rape extended by 9 months? Are we actually going to say that if she didn't want to get pregnant, she shouldn't have gotten raped?
1 or 2 weeks? My words were "life altering", therefor the remaining span of the life being altered till its end. Where do you found your asumptions on my attitude towards rape victims? Have you read post #75? I dont remember formulating a blanket solution to rape victims and the abortions brought about by these.Jerusha_Girl said:The cavalier attitude you take to rape is really scary to me. You treat it as if you get raped, you are really upset or damaged for a week or two, and then you move on like there's no problem.
If you're trying to get me to feel bad for a non-sentinant fetus who is only in the woman because of a violent crime being aborted, it's not going to work. My concern is for the woman, the aware, living, breathing person who has to somehow figure out how to go on with her life... A prospect that's increasingly difficult when you know that there are people out there who are more than willing to right off your experience and trauma in order to fawn all over the "loss" of a pregnancy that was created through a crime against both society and God.
You talk of the foetus as if it has an actual opinion on the matte. It doesn't. It has no idea what is going on. This has nothing to do with the "choice" of a foetus. It can't make choices and at the early stage at which foetus produced through rape are aborted, wouldn't even be aware of the abortion.Sadly thousands of women are raped each day, the incedent is without a doubt life altering, but most live to fight another day, the fetuses are not so lucky even though just as the mother they had no choice in the matter.
truth_restorer said:Because the life of innocent human being is worth more than our freedom to do what we want with it to suit us. It is not your whole liberty at issue per se in it's entirety, as you miscategorize it, but simply your liberty in this instance, and it is this lesser loss of freedom versus the death of another.
Shalom
Cheli said:As George Carlin said, "Life is sacred? Who said so? God? If you read history you'll see that god is one of the leading causes of death!"
Jerusha_Girl said:[/color]
The product of a rapist isn't sacred when it's in the body of somebody else as the result of a crime.
I've told my fiance, who's also pro-choice, that if I were to get pregnant with him by accident, I wouldn't get an abortion and that truthfully, there were very few reasons I'd get an abortion. However, I told him, that if I got pregnant by rape, I'd run, not walk to the nearest abortion clinic and stay there until I got an abortion. If I couldn't get an abortion, my next stop would be the I89 bridge over the Conneticut River.
I cannot think of a worse torture than being pregnant by not only somebody who isn't your husband, boyfriend, or significant other, but by somebody who felt it was OK to violate your rights and your body by having sex with you against your will.
And if you were to ask a majority of women who were raped and got pregnant if they want to keep a pregnancy created through a rape by a rapist, I doubt many would say "yes." I think the opinion of the women who was already violated once outweighs that of a third party, unrelated person.
Jerusha_Girl said:That's like saying that the suvivor of an attempted murder should let the guy who tried to kill him live in his house for 9 months, and if he doesn't, he's immoral.
And if the father files for custody of the kid? And in the end the woman was forced to carry his child, which he took from her anyway. What happens if the kid gets adopted and later finds out she is the product of rape? Wouldn't that be emotionally scaring? Would a woman regret having the baby in the first place? Yes - the argument swings both ways.Steve_SandbachBaptist_UK said:The mother might also suffer long term effects from having an abortion and may regret it later in life. If she has the child, she can at least put it up for adoption to a caring foster family. It's not ideal but its much better than having no life at all.
Jerusha_Girl said:I always love it when people say "I'm not against" or "I approve of." You do realize that is sort of silly, right? None of us are sitting here waiting for decision from you as to if we can have sex with our spouses or boyfriends or girlfriends, and according to the Bible, it isn't your opinion that you should be preaching.
In A Perfect World said:And if the father files for custody of the kid? And in the end the woman was forced to carry his child, which he took from her anyway. What happens if the kid gets adopted and later finds out she is the product of rape? Wouldn't that be emotionally scaring? Would a woman regret having the baby in the first place? Yes - the argument swings both ways.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?