Justifying Abortion

[Subduction Zone]

I've been told by ones that volunteer at the Pregnancy Help Center that the above is hardly never seen.
M

I think you meant to say "hardly ever seen". The language you used implies that it happens most of the time. And yes, such cases are very rare, but so are late term abortions. In fact only 1.2% of all abortions took place after 21 weeks. That means only 1.2% were in the last half of the second trimester or later. 91% were 13 weeks or less. Well within the first trimester:

CDCs Abortion Surveillance System FAQs | CDC

 

[Subduction Zone]

Whether you in your clinical mind want to call them a 'fetus' and not a 'baby' makes no difference. They are a human life no matter the label. You call them fetus to justify killing them. You might want some cold, clinical discussion but you know very well abortion is not and never will be that kind of argument.
As a mother, I know a baby starts to show it's personality before birth. Ask any women who has had a few children.

Psalm 139
For you created my inmost being;
you knit me together in my mother’s womb.
14 I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made;
your works are wonderful,
I know that full well.
15 My frame was not hidden from you
when I was made in the secret place,
when I was woven together in the depths of the earth.
16 Your eyes saw my unformed body;
all the days ordained for me were written in your book
before one of them came to be.

This is enough for me to know that abortion is wrong.

Sorry but this is once again an emotional and not a rational argument. Those fail in courts of law and quite often in legislatures. And your misapplied verse fails to. That is a claim of an individual and does not apply to the general population.

 

[Belk]

You are totally out of your depth on this one. If you are a christian you are born again. If you are not born again, you are not a christian. As Jesus said " Except a man be born again he cannot see the kingdom of God."

And your claim about christians is ridiculous as I doubt if you know even 1% of the christians on the earth, so you have no idea what they fail at.

A statement like that is no different to me saying all atheists are complete idiots, which is totally unprovable. At best all I can say is that the atheists that I have met seem to be complete idiots.

The first is a lie the second isn't.

You might wish to review the rules you agreed to when joining the site. They tend to take the one about claiming others are not Christian seriously.

 

[artie annie]

You might wish to review the rules you agreed to when joining the site. They tend to take the one about claiming others are not Christian seriously.

Thankyou Belk. The person who that post was directed at said he was an atheist.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Thankyou Belk. The person who that post was directed at said he was an atheist.

You do not seem to realize that your post could be interpreted by many Christians that you were claiming that they were not true Christians. Belk knows that I am an atheist. He understood who your post could offend, it was not me.

 

[artie annie]

You do not seem to realize that your post could be interpreted by many Christians that you were claiming that they were not true Christians. Belk knows that I am an atheist. He understood who your post could offend, it was not me.

All I did was quote scripture. I did not know that was forbidden.

 

[Subduction Zone]

All I did was quote scripture. I did not know that was forbidden.

It was your personal interpretation of scripture that could offend other Christians. If one claims that a Christian that does not agree with your particular interpretation is "not a real Christian" you could get in trouble here.

For example, I am fairly sure that you reject the fact of evolution. What do you think of a Christian that accepts evolution?

 

[artie annie]

It was your personal interpretation of scripture that could offend other Christians. If one claims that a Christian that does not agree with your particular interpretation is "not a real Christian" you could get in trouble here.

For example, I am fairly sure that you reject the fact of evolution. What do you think of a Christian that accepts evolution?

I don't.

 

[artie annie]

Where have I ever used "mumbo jumbo" ? I explained to you quite clearly your errors in terminology and you had no answer. You may have heard the arguments against your beliefs but it is rather clear that you have not heard them.

Also you need to prove your claim about Planned Parenthood never showing an ultrasound to prospective parents. They do much more than abortions. You are probably confused. I am betting that they will not allow tyrants to force them to show an ultrasound. There is a big difference.

Now do you think that you can form a rational and not an emotional argument?

Now do you think you can answer the two questions I asked you which you seem too be evading at every turn.

 

[artie annie]

Sorry but this is once again an emotional and not a rational argument. Those fail in courts of law and quite often in legislatures. And your misapplied verse fails to. That is a claim of an individual and does not apply to the general population.

What is rational about murdering an innocent baby in the womb?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don't.

I am sorry, but that makes no sense. You do realize that worldwide most Christians accept evolution, don't you?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Spoken as only an atheist can. I know everything and you know nothing. I will give you 10 out of 10 for that.

I did not say that or imply that. You appear to have a bit of an inferiority complex. Christians often make the error of assuming that because atheists do not believe in the Bible that they do not understand it. That is far from the truth.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Now do you think you can answer the two questions I asked you which you seem too be evading at every turn.

I answered your questions quite clearly. You simply did not like the answer.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So every atheist became an atheist because they critically analysed the bible and its flaws. here we go again. I know everything and you know nothing.

When are you going to answer the two questions I asked you?

Not all of them. You appear to go all or nothing far to often. That is a logical fallacy called a black and white fallacy. I am sure that there are some atheists that become atheists for poor reasons. Most though have reasoned this out rather well.

And I answered your questions for you. Why did you not accept the answers?

 

[Subduction Zone]

What is rational about murdering an innocent baby in the womb?

This has already been explained to you. That is an impossibility. No one is stuffing a baby back into the womb after it was born to kill it. Your definitions are flawed because they are only your personal definitions. You are as much as admitting that you cannot reason rationally. Trust me, there are rational arguments against abortion. You will never convince a person that can reason using irrational arguments.

 

[artie annie]

I have had 24 hours to think about what our resident gynaecologist expert has told us about making a baby. Now as I understand him/her, two people hopefully a husband and wife, share their love for each other and make a baby. Only according to our resident expert, it is not a baby it is an IT.

This IT is nothing more than an IT until the moment they are born. As the mother's womb begins to grow in size, it is accomodating an IT and apparently if she has an ultrasound and sees a baby in her womb she is deluded because what she is looking at is an IT which is not a baby.

She might have the doctor check the heartbeat with his stethoscope to make sure all is OK but again she is deluded because an IT does not have a heartbeat. Only babies have heartbeats and as this is not a baby, no such heartbeat exists.

So, the mother is deluded by the ultrasound and is deluded by the doctor and his stethoscope.

So, if it is not a baby, it is an IT what is IT that is inside the womb that is growing bigger and bigger and heavier all the time. Unfortunately, our resident expert can't tell us what the IT is except that it is not a baby.

So to all you mothers and and potential mothers out there, you are not carrying your baby in your womb, you are carrying an IT and what that IT is, well its anyones guess.

So don't tell people the baby is due in six weeks time because that is a lie. You have to say that IT is due in six weeks time.

So when can you start calling IT your baby? Apparently according to our resident expert it is when IT is born and not a moment before. It becomes a baby when the doctor has delivered the IT and not a moment before.

Our resident expert obviously believes in miracles because whatever the IT is, as it comes out of the womb, it morphs into a baby. Apparently it turns into a baby in the birth canal because I am not aware of anyone giving birth to an IT.

So there you have it. Our resident expert has it all sorted and you mothers can forget the idea that you are carrying a baby in the womb. It ain't so. You are carrying an IT in your womb.

So far, he/she has refused to tell me what an IT is. Perhaps you will have better luck.

 

[artie annie]

Not all of them. You appear to go all or nothing far to often. That is a logical fallacy called a black and white fallacy. I am sure that there are some atheists that become atheists for poor reasons. Most though have reasoned this out rather well.

And I answered your questions for you. Why did you not accept the answers?

Not all of them? But you said they did.

 

[VirOptimus]

I have had 24 hours to think about what our resident gynaecologist expert has told us about making a baby. Now as I understand him/her, two people hopefully a husband and wife, share their love for each other and make a baby. Only according to our resident expert, it is not a baby it is an IT.

This IT is nothing more than an IT until the moment they are born. As the mother's womb begins to grow in size, it is accomodating an IT and apparently if she has an ultrasound and sees a baby in her womb she is deluded because what she is looking at is an IT which is not a baby.

She might have the doctor check the heartbeat with his stethoscope to make sure all is OK but again she is deluded because an IT does not have a heartbeat. Only babies have heartbeats and as this is not a baby, no such heartbeat exists.

So, the mother is deluded by the ultrasound and is deluded by the doctor and his stethoscope.

So, if it is not a baby, it is an IT what is IT that is inside the womb that is growing bigger and bigger and heavier all the time. Unfortunately, our resident expert can't tell us what the IT is except that it is not a baby.

So to all you mothers and and potential mothers out there, you are not carrying your baby in your womb, you are carrying an IT and what that IT is, well its anyones guess.

So don't tell people the baby is due in six weeks time because that is a lie. You have to say that IT is due in six weeks time.

So when can you start calling IT your baby? Apparently according to our resident expert it is when IT is born and not a moment before. It becomes a baby when the doctor has delivered the IT and not a moment before.

Our resident expert obviously believes in miracles because whatever the IT is, as it comes out of the womb, it morphs into a baby. Apparently it turns into a baby in the birth canal because I am not aware of anyone giving birth to an IT.

So there you have it. Our resident expert has it all sorted and you mothers can forget the idea that you are carrying a baby in the womb. It ain't so. You are carrying an IT in your womb.

So far, he/she has refused to tell me what an IT is. Perhaps you will have better luck.

What an incredibly dishonest post.

Words have meanings, its a fetus before birth and an baby after, is that so hard to understand?

And if you dislike abortions, dont have one. Problem solved.

 

[artie annie]

This has already been explained to you. That is an impossibility. No one is stuffing a baby back into the womb after it was born to kill it. Your definitions are flawed because they are only your personal definitions. You are as much as admitting that you cannot reason rationally. Trust me, there are rational arguments against abortion. You will never convince a person that can reason using irrational arguments.

If that is the case, why don't you use some rational arguments. So far all you have given us is mumbo jumbo.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I have had 24 hours to think about what our resident gynaecologist expert has told us about making a baby. Now as I understand him/her, two people hopefully a husband and wife, share their love for each other and make a baby. Only according to our resident expert, it is not a baby it is an IT.

This IT is nothing more than an IT until the moment they are born. As the mother's womb begins to grow in size, it is accomodating an IT and apparently if she has an ultrasound and sees a baby in her womb she is deluded because what she is looking at is an IT which is not a baby.

She might have the doctor check the heartbeat with his stethoscope to make sure all is OK but again she is deluded because an IT does not have a heartbeat. Only babies have heartbeats and as this is not a baby, no such heartbeat exists.

So, the mother is deluded by the ultrasound and is deluded by the doctor and his stethoscope.

So, if it is not a baby, it is an IT what is IT that is inside the womb that is growing bigger and bigger and heavier all the time. Unfortunately, our resident expert can't tell us what the IT is except that it is not a baby.

So to all you mothers and and potential mothers out there, you are not carrying your baby in your womb, you are carrying an IT and what that IT is, well its anyones guess.

So don't tell people the baby is due in six weeks time because that is a lie. You have to say that IT is due in six weeks time.

So when can you start calling IT your baby? Apparently according to our resident expert it is when IT is born and not a moment before. It becomes a baby when the doctor has delivered the IT and not a moment before.

Our resident expert obviously believes in miracles because whatever the IT is, as it comes out of the womb, it morphs into a baby. Apparently it turns into a baby in the birth canal because I am not aware of anyone giving birth to an IT.

So there you have it. Our resident expert has it all sorted and you mothers can forget the idea that you are carrying a baby in the womb. It ain't so. You are carrying an IT in your womb.

So far, he/she has refused to tell me what an IT is. Perhaps you will have better luck.

You are still using failed emotional arguments. Fetuses have heartbeats too. That is enough to refute your claim.