What I don't understand about the arguement for Abortion.

I'm a little curious, Sara - when does it stop being a fetus and becomes a human?

Also, if a fetus is not a human, then what it is? A dog? Cat? Spongebob?

Trogool said:

Oh yeah, trolololol

Click to expand...

Does this make it easier for you to advocate for abortion knowing that we are born with a sin nature?

SaraJarvis said:

Oh, God, I can't resist. One more before bed.

Of COURSE it is living, sweetie! It isn't a baby, though! What my point is, is that it hasn't reached full development, and it therefore is not inhumane to abort.

You keep repeating your opinion; it's ignorant. Abortion wouldn't be legal if it was murder.

Click to expand...

Why do you keep bringing up "murder"? I never said it was murder.

I have to keep bring up my argument because you arguments are neither scientific or logical.

mathetes123 said:

Does this make it easier for you to advocate for abortion knowing that we are born with a sin nature?

Click to expand...

I'm not saying one way or the other. I'm just amused at how conveniently people drop the doctrine of Original Sin.

Of course, I am assuming most Christians here believe in original sin.

Trogool said:

You do realize that science is published in journals, not books, right?

Fetuses and embryos don't have human rights.

Click to expand...

S ience is published in books and journals. I am sure you used a science book in school.

In some states the taking of the life of a pregnant mother counts as two charges of murder.

Trogool said:

You do realize that science is published in journals, not books, right?

Fetuses and embryos don't have human rights.

Click to expand...

Yes I do.

They have all the same rights as you do except in the case of abortion. Why should the unborn lose it's rights because it's inconvenient for the mother to be pregnant?

Trogool said:

I'm not saying one way or the other. I'm just amused at how conveniently people drop the doctrine of Original Sin.

Of course, I am assuming most Christians here believe in original sin.

Click to expand...

I believe in original sin and that we are born with a sin nature inherited from Adam.

I'll just reply to all in one, shall I?

You're going off science books from school? Well, that makes you educated. The reason that I mention journals, is because journals have a LOT more to them than a human biology book taught to children.

The fetus becomes a child as it grows in the womb, obviously. A fetus doesn't have a consciousness. It doesn't have the capacity to feel pain, or have human emotions.

Trogool is right. You're saying that "babies" in the womb are innocent, but obviously not, if you believe in original sin!

Also, if a fetus is not a human, then what it is? A dog? Cat? Spongebob?

Click to expand...

A spongebob? I'm sorry, I thought that this was an intellectual debate.

Ask a nurse that has assisted with these inhumane procedures who watch the monitors and see the reaction of the 'fetus' about whether a 'fetus' feels pain.

You mentioned that earlier, my dear. As was stated; that was a late course abortion, obviously because things have gone wrong. The fetus wouldn't be feeling pain, anyway, because it's heart would already have been stopped by a pill. Sorry to burst that bubble.

Trogool said:

Quick, lets reference the doctrine of original sin and do a check on whether fetuses are really "innocent human beings"

St. Augustine says no.

Click to expand...

Quick, let's reference the law and do a check on whether the unborn are innocent of any crime worthy of death. Yup, truly "innocent human beings".

TomZzyzx said:

Quick, let's reference the law and do a check on whether the unborn are innocent of any crime worthy of death. Yup, truly "innocent human beings".

Click to expand...

You can’t have it both ways! Selective reading is such an amusing thing to witness.

SaraJarvis said:

I'll just reply to all in one, shall I?

You're going off science books from school? Well, that makes you educated. The reason that I mention journals, is because journals have a LOT more to them than a human biology book taught to children.

The fetus becomes a child as it grows in the womb, obviously. A fetus doesn't have a consciousness. It doesn't have the capacity to feel pain, or have human emotions.

Trogool is right. You're saying that "babies" in the womb are innocent, but obviously not, if you believe in original sin!

A spongebob? I'm sorry, I thought that this was an intellectual debate.

Click to expand...

Nobody said they're going off science books from school. Talk about grasping at straws.

I see you're not trying to argue that the unborn are not human beings anymore. glad we got over that hump.

The unborn are at one stage of development, a baby at another stage, a child at another stage, an adult at still another. At no time during development, from conception to death, do we ever lose our designation as human beings.

SaraJarvis said:

You can’t have it both ways! Selective reading is such an amusing thing to witness.

Click to expand...

What do you mean "both ways"? Remember I never mentioned God or original sin.

TomZzyzx said:

Nobody said they're going off science books from school. Talk about grasping at straws.

I see you're not trying to argue that the unborn are not human beings anymore. glad we got over that hump.

The unborn are at one stage of development, a baby at another stage, a child at another stage, an adult at still another. At no time during development, from conception to death, do we ever lose our designation as human beings.

Click to expand...

Well, considering the limited knowledge of science here, and the mention of science books (I doubt any of you have read a proper one, you can’t have done else your argument would be more developed), then it’s hardly grasping at straws.

No, what I am saying is that they are of human DNA. Call them humans if you will, that is just you being a pedant. It is still only a fetus, with no conscience, emotions, or senses. It may be of human genetics, but it is NOT a fully fledged human being. Talk about twisting arguments.
Go away and read some scientific articles on abortion. Let it sink in. Come back, and then tell me what you think.

What do you mean "both ways"? Remember I never mentioned God or original sin.

Click to expand...

Fair enough, if you don't believe in original sin, then I apologise. However, there are others here who claim to believe in original sin, yet keep calling unborn babies innocent. Just doesn't add up.

SaraJarvis said:

Well, considering the limited knowledge of science here, and the mention of science books (I doubt any of you have read a proper one, you can’t have done else your argument would be more developed), then it’s hardly grasping at straws.

No, what I am saying is that they are of human DNA. Call them humans if you will, that is just you being a pedant. It is still only a fetus, with no conscience, emotions, or senses. It may be of human genetics, but it is NOT a fully fledged human being. Talk about twisting arguments.
Go away and read some scientific articles on abortion. Let it sink in. Come back, and then tell me what you think.

Fair enough, if you don't believe in original sin, then I apologise. However, there are others here who claim to believe in original sin, yet keep calling unborn babies innocent. Just doesn't add up.

Click to expand...

There is no such thing as a "fully fledged human being". Either 100 percent human or not. lack of "conscience, emotions, or senses" does not make any one less of a human being, otherwise you would have to add a lot of other people into your made up group of "NOT a fully fledged human beings", including some mentally disabled, or people in a coma.

"Go away"? I've noticed when some people are losing an argument they tend to be rude or condescending.

Give me a link to "scientific articles on abortion" and I'll be happy to read them. And then I'll give you a link to some scientific articles on abortion.

TomZzyzx said:

There is no such thing as a "fully fledged human being". Either 100 percent human or not. lack of "conscience, emotions, or senses" does not make any one less of a human being, otherwise you would have to add a lot of other people into your made up group of "NOT a fully fledged human beings", including some mentally disabled, or people in a coma.

"Go away"? I've noticed when some people are losing an argument they tend to be rude or condescending.

Give me a link to "scientific articles on abortion" and I'll be happy to read them. And then I'll give you a link to some scientific articles on abortion.

Click to expand...

Mentally disabled people still have feelings, as do people in a coma. If you hurt them, they would feel it. Their brains are not cut off. A fetus does not have that sort of consciousness.

I don’t mean that as “go away”, in a rude way. I simply mean go and read some articles. I can’t send you links, I’m afraid; I don’t have enough posts. However, I’m sure that if you google it and have a decent read on some scientific, medical sites, you’ll find that what I’m saying is true. Your scientific articles on abortion will obviously be filled with the nonsense that pro-life people believe. I’ve read them. They’re fear-mongering drivel. Absolutely not true. Sorry.

SaraJarvis said:

Mentally disabled people still have feelings, as do people in a coma. If you hurt them, they would feel it. Their brains are not cut off. A fetus does not have that sort of consciousness.

I don’t mean that as “go away”, in a rude way. I simply mean go and read some articles. I can’t send you links, I’m afraid; I don’t have enough posts. However, I’m sure that if you google it and have a decent read on some scientific, medical sites, you’ll find that what I’m saying is true. Your scientific articles on abortion will obviously be filled with the nonsense that pro-life people believe. I’ve read them. They’re fear-mongering drivel. Absolutely not true. Sorry.

Click to expand...

Wow, really? You think my scientific articles would be "filled with the nonsense that pro-life people believe" but your articles would not be filled with the nonsense that pro-choice people believe? I see you lump all pro-life advocates together, being neither fair nor open minded.

Why don't you tell me what your "scientific articles on abortion" say. And we'll start from there. Or maybe not.

But that's ok. You now know that nobody argues that the unborn are not human beings. So now you have find a new argument that will try and justify the killing of innocent human beings, also known as abortion.

TomZzyzx said:

Wow, really? You think my scientific articles would be "filled with the nonsense that pro-life people believe" but your articles would not be filled with the nonsense that pro-choice people believe? I see you lump all pro-life advocates together, being neither fair nor open minded.

Why don't you tell me what your "scientific articles on abortion" say. And we'll start from there. Or maybe not.

But that's ok. You now know that nobody argues that the unborn are not human beings. So now you have find a new argument that will try and justify the killing of innocent human beings, also known as abortion.

Click to expand...

Well, that’s what you’re arguing, so I’m getting that impression! My scientific articles on abortion (how can you argue with science? Are you a doctor?) explain that a fetus is just a fetus. As I keep telling you. It obviously has human DNA (I have never said otherwise), but it is not a baby. I have HAD an abortion, you seem to forget this. I had the process explained to me, and then had it happen to me. Sorry, but a tiny thing the size of a 50p, with no shape at all, is not a person. It is not a baby. It is a fetus.

Do you believe that you have a right to tell women what to do with their bodies?

Nope, as I keep telling you; they are made of human DNA, but they’re not actual human beings. I’m sorry, but a fetus just doesn’t count as a person. I’m very open-minded, but I just can’t believe stupid argument, based on age-old patriarchal scripture. My body, my womb, my life. Simple as that.

Wow, wish I didn't come into the conversation so late. I have some points I would like to address.

1. Abortion IS a women's health issue. Pregnancy does affect a woman's health. I'm not just talking about the complications during pregnancy that can arise and harm the woman's life. I'm talking about long term health affects as a result of pregnancy. I have never had to worry about diabetes before because I was never at risk for it. I am now a type II diabetic as a result of the gestational diabetes I developed during my first two pregnancies. I've also never had to worry about high blood pressure and, in fact, was always told by my doctors how great my blood pressure was. I am now being monitored because my blood pressure is rising as a result of this pregnancy and my type II diabetes.

2. Partial birth abortions and late term abortions are rare and illegal except in the cases that the woman's life is at risk. Also, not everything that "qualifies" as a late term abortion is "actually" a late term abortion. This happened to a good friend of mine from high school. Her body began to shut down due to her pregnancy. Her womb became too hostile for her son to survive and he had a better chance of survival outside of the womb. Unfortunately he didn't survive and because he was born before age of viability his death was listed as a late term abortion, even though the procedure was done to try and SAVE his life, not end it.

3. As far as a pregnancy from rape goes, the mother should not be obligated to carry on with that pregnancy. It's asinine to think that should have to go through with it. That pregnancy was forced on her during a vicious and violent attack. I commend mother's who are able to continue a pregnancy under such circumstances, but to say that all woman should risk physical and psychological well being for that pregnancy is wrong.

4. The difference between the unborn and born is this. The unborn's survival is contingent solely on the body of the mother. The mother is directly affected by the pregnancy. Her body is placed at risk and can be damaged to keep the unborn alive. While a newborn baby is still dependent on others, it is not solely dependent on the mother, nor is her body being affected and possibly damaged by it. That is where the line is drawn.

5. The bottom line is, is that the decision for abortion lies with the woman and her doctor, no one else. No one else is being affected by that pregnancy. If we really want to cut down abortion rates, making it illegal is not the answer. Proper education is. It's no coincidence that most states that have comprehensive sex education taught in their schools have lower rates of abortion and teen pregnancy on average than states that teach abstinence-only.