What if?

[marblehead]

And besides, it's Moot.

And the OP isn't?

 

[Shemjaza]

What would you do if you were visited by an angel who said that you had been chosen to go back.

Go back where you ask? Into the womb. And then, what if, once inside your mother's womb, you were told that your mother did not want you. That she would visit an abortion clinic tomorrow and you would be killed.

Would you go back into the womb and still cling to your belief that abortion is permissible or acceptable? That you would not be allowed to live the life you've lived, loved the people you've loved and been loved by?

What if?

**This question is obviously directed to those who are pro-choice.

And it's not meant to lead into a debate, we already have plenty of those threads. Just answer the question. Yes or no.

I wouldn't go back.

But if this scenario is what abortion actually was (the destruction of a self aware person with feelings, identity and relationships) then I would possibly be against abortion too.

But this is nothing like abortion, an embryo may have the DNA of a human being, but it has no mind, emotions, memories or identity; so it isn't a person and thus doesn't equate with the poor angel cursed individual in your thought experiment.

 

[Uphill Battle]

And the OP isn't?

If so, why did you bother to post?

Either you prove my point that mockery will lead the way, or you have very little else to occupy you!

 

[gwenmead]

I'm not going to answer yes or no on demand, but that's because I honestly don't know what I'd do, not because I'm trying to be stroppy about it.

I'm an adult and I like my life now, and it's getting better in a lot of ways. So, knowing I would be aborted if I returned, I might not go back.

On the other hand, I was raised by a woman who was not wanted by her own mother, and I saw the effects of it in her - one of which was that she sought to have a baby in order to satisfy her own unmet need for unconditional love. (She wanted "a baby", but she did not want a new human being, individual and separate from her own demands.)

So I might indeed go back, since my birth was not by my own choice anyway, and sometimes I would rather return to oblivion than be raised by a selfish narcissist again.

My position on abortion does not change, either way.

 

[marblehead]

If so, why did you bother to post?

Either you prove my point that mockery will lead the way, or you have very little else to occupy you!

What do you mean by your point?

What do you mean by "very little else to occupy you"?

 

[justanobserver]

What would you do if you were visited by an angel who said that you had been chosen to go back.

Go back where you ask? Into the womb. And then, what if, once inside your mother's womb, you were told that your mother did not want you. That she would visit an abortion clinic tomorrow and you would be killed.

Would you go back into the womb and still cling to your belief that abortion is permissible or acceptable? That you would not be allowed to live the life you've lived, loved the people you've loved and been loved by?

What if?

**This question is obviously directed to those who are pro-choice.

And it's not meant to lead into a debate, we already have plenty of those threads. Just answer the question. Yes or no.

Well ma'am, the logical answer based solely on your scenario is "no". One would not return to something knowing that they will die unless they have a death wish to begin with.

Now if your scenario involved some hypothetical of returning to the womb to be physically reborn into a "do-over" as in living a different life, I could add some thoughts that would just be musings of a dream. but thats all it would be.

But I dont deal with the woulda/coulda/shoulda/what ifs - my life went where it did, good, bad, very bad, life and death, paece, war, etc. Cant change it so I dont think about it. And I definately dont give any thought to the movie Its Beautiful Life - its not reality. Jimmy Stewart did a good acting in it but its just a feel good movie that avoids reality.

 

[Uphill Battle]

What do you mean by your point?

What do you mean by "very little else to occupy you"?

your post #4, followed by my post #5.

Simple really. Either you respond to an OP you think is moot for the purpose of mockery, (my point, in post 5)

or you have too much time on your hands.

That is what I meant.

 

[WalkingforHim]

I didn't ask what a fetus would do. I asked what YOU as an adult would do if you were asked to go back into the womb of a mother who didn't want a baby.

Which is rediculous if you want to try and argue against abortion. Fetuses still in the womb have no concept of life on the other side, yet you try to pretend like this is a "Look Who's Talking" movie and babies are just like little thinking adults except they're in drooling, craping, little baby bodies.

 

[flicka]

In this story abortion isn't even the issue. The angel is telling you he has come to kill you. What do you choose?
The means of death is irrelevant since you are already alive..dead is dead.

 

[marblehead]

you're only going to get the question mocked or dodged. Good luck though.

your post #4, followed by my post #5.

Simple really. Either you respond to an OP you think is moot for the purpose of mockery, (my point, in post 5)

or you have too much time on your hands.

That is what I meant.

Your point has been disproven, the question isn't only being mocked or dodged.

So, because I didn't respond to the OP by answering the
question that equates to me having too much time on my hands?

You didn't respond to the OP by answering the question, does that mean you have too much time on your hands?

What is the point of trying to prove that someone has too much time on their hands?

 

[Uphill Battle]

Your point has been disproven, the question isn't only being mocked or dodged.

So, because I didn't respond to the OP by answering the
question that equates to me having too much time on my hands?

You didn't respond to the OP by answering the question, does that mean you have too much time on your hands?

What is the point of trying to prove that someone has too much time on their hands?

forget it.

Wasting my time.

And I didn't answer the OP, as it was for prochoice.

Let's let this dog lie.

 

[variant]

No, I wouldn’t go back, I consider suicide to be an inappropriate choice.

I don't see the point of likening what would be self determined suicide by a fully developed rational being, to the coerced termination of an undeveloped pre-rational being.

Apples and Oranges?

 

[TeddyKGB]

Now that is flagrant fallacy in the most fatuous form.

Fortunately, fingering fatuous fallacies fully fails to free the OP from flailing at phantoms.

 

[Uphill Battle]

Fortunately, fingering fatuous fallacies fully fails to free the OP from flailing at phantoms.

almost! how about figments? that'd work.

 

[Job_s_First_Son]

What would you do if you were visited by an angel who said that you had been chosen to go back.

Go back where you ask? Into the womb. And then, what if, once inside your mother's womb, you were told that your mother did not want you. That she would visit an abortion clinic tomorrow and you would be killed.

Would you go back into the womb and still cling to your belief that abortion is permissible or acceptable? That you would not be allowed to live the life you've lived, loved the people you've loved and been loved by?

What if?

**This question is obviously directed to those who are pro-choice.

And it's not meant to lead into a debate, we already have plenty of those threads. Just answer the question. Yes or no.




"You slaughtered my children and offered them up to idols by causing them to pass through the fire. And besides all all your abominations and harlotries, you did not remember the days of your youth when you were naked and bare and squirming in your blood" (Ezekiel 16:21,22).

I wouldn't go back.

But if this scenario is what abortion actually was (the destruction of a self aware person with feelings, identity and relationships) then I would possibly be against abortion too.

But this is nothing like abortion, an embryo may have the DNA of a human being, but it has no mind, emotions, memories or identity; so it isn't a person and thus doesn't equate with the poor angel cursed individual in your thought experiment.

loveiseverywhere,
What are you thoughts on some of the more serious replies to you post? What was the goal of you OP? To have people think about abortion they way you look at it or learn more about the different pro-choice views on abortion?

Basically did you learn anything from this to help you argue your point more effectively?

Thanks.

PS- I would not go back assuming I would keep my mental capacities.

 

[Obsequey]

No, I wouldn't choose to go back.

Am I pro-choice? Yes.

 

[Tenka]

What if?

What would you do if you were visited by an angel who said that you had been chosen to go back.

Go back where you ask? Into the womb. And then, what if, once inside your mother's womb, you were told that your mother did not want you. That she would visit an abortion clinic tomorrow and you would be killed.

Would you go back into the womb and still cling to your belief that abortion is permissible or acceptable? That you would not be allowed to live the life you've lived, loved the people you've loved and been loved by?

Before me, my mother had another baby, a girl, she knew that the birth would be difficult because my mother cannot give birth naturally it would require a cesarean but still she chose to carry the baby.
Your God, if it exists decided that my parents should not keep her. She died when she was very young.

I'm supposed to see evil in the termination of a clump of cells but love and wisdom in the painful death of a baby girl?

 

[JGG]

What would you do if you were visited by an angel who said that you had been chosen to go back.

Go back where you ask? Into the womb. And then, what if, once inside your mother's womb, you were told that your mother did not want you. That she would visit an abortion clinic tomorrow and you would be killed.

Would you go back into the womb and still cling to your belief that abortion is permissible or acceptable? That you would not be allowed to live the life you've lived, loved the people you've loved and been loved by?

What if?

**This question is obviously directed to those who are pro-choice.

And it's not meant to lead into a debate, we already have plenty of those threads. Just answer the question. Yes or no.

I don't get it, why do I want to go back in the womb exactly? Assuming the angel has "commanded" me to do go back in the womb only to be killed do I really have a choice?

How is this any different from an angel saying "is it okay if I command your parents to have sex on Wednesday instead of Tuesday?"

 

[loveiseverywhere]

loveiseverywhere,
What are you thoughts on some of the more serious replies to you post? What was the goal of you OP? To have people think about abortion they way you look at it or learn more about the different pro-choice views on abortion?

Basically did you learn anything from this to help you argue your point more effectively?

Thanks.

PS- I would not go back assuming I would keep my mental capacities.

I probably should have given more thought to my post in which I was trying to illustrate something, but did not get my point across. I'm not trying to change anyone's opinion because I don't have that kind of power. What I do have is the ability to illustrate what I see as an abuse of power (on the mother's part) to kill an unborn child.

If you say it's not murder then what is it? We can all agree that a fetus, given enough time and under normal conditions will grow into a baby and be born into the world. That is a living thing. It has a heartbeat and is alive inside the womb. Some say it's a parasite living off the mother, but aren't we parasites living off the resources of the earth? We can't live unless we eat food and usually that means growing vegetables and grains and killing animals to eat. We all need something outside of ourselves to live, whether we are a fetus or an adult. Some say it's a woman's body and it's her choice, but I think if she's going to have sex then she needs to be prepared for the results. It's not like women aren't aware that sex leads to pregnancy. And if they "accidently" (no pregnancy is an accident...you opened your legs and performed an action which resulted in a fertilized egg. The egg didn't just fertilize itself.) get pregnant then they should be willing to face the responsibility. If a woman is not ready for that responsibility but still wants to have sex, then by all means get on birth control and use a condom. Teenagers are a different matter, I'm really not sure what the answer is for them since they seem to be led by their hormones and emotions instead of their brains.
I don't have all the answers and I may be wrong, but I'd rather err on the side of an innocent life than to be wrong and end up in hell for it. If you don't believe in God or Jesus and think religion should stay out of it then I don't have an answer to that either, I'll have to think about it and get back to you.

All I know is I had an abortion when I was 14 and it really screwed me up for a long time. I ended up numbing the pain with alcohol and drugs. I am lucky to be in recovery now, but the ONLY reason I got sober was because of this person:

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a312/divinedesign21/December20060401.jpg



When I found out I was pregnant with my daughter I was not in any position whatsoever to have a child. I didn't even have a job. But I put myself on the backburner and figured out a way to bring her into the world and give her a happy life. I now have a job I love and my daughter has brought so much joy into my mom's life and she has helped me and my mother heal a long history of strife by uniting us as a family. That little girl has brought more happiness than I could have imagined possible. I got off my butt and did what it took to make it work because I knew it was my responsibility. I got myself pregnant and I accepted the results. If I hadn't, I would probably be dead.

 

[mpshiel]

For someone who is "not trying to change anyone opinion" you seem to have spent a great deal of time doing just that. I understand that your viewpoint is backed by personal experience but you could just as easily be a person saying: "At 14, I had only ever done what I was told to do and when I got pregnant I was told there was no choice, I was going to have a daughter. After my parents kicked me out, I started drinking and I moved in with a physical abusive man to survive, and I took that out on my child - beating it and breaking bones which resulted in the child being taken away by family services I can now say that......."

The problem is that as much as people against abortion would like to make this into an absolutely crystal clear situation - it isn't - How can you ask a person to "go back" to being a bunch of split DNA strands which haven't even created organs yet, much less a brain - you might as well be asking people to "go back" to being a carbon atom or a sperm. If you want to talk about "responsibility" then why not address why it is that the US is the number one per captia western country with unwanted pregnancies. And why is it when countries like the UK have 6,000 children up for adoption, when EU countries have so few children up for adoption people (including Canadians) are trying to get US children, of whom there is over 1/2 million waiting to be adopted - but they aren't the right age, or colour, or from the right background, or have the physical conditions to make them "desirable" - Is the US as a "Christian" country going to be "responsible"?

And then we get to the incredibly high rate of rape, sexual abuse and incest - which will occur to around 400,000 US women THIS YEAR ALONE. Currently, most states have what is known as an "incest clause" which means that if you are raped by your father or sibling, then they will serve little to no time at all (for the good of the family) - you can go to RAAIN or other sites if you wish to learn more - but yet, I don't see groups of protest lead from Christian organizations outside governor mansions holding up signs with pictures of 8, 9 and 11 year old girls, blood pouring out of thier ripped genetalia - nor, when presenting these cases is the question of rape and incest generally considered at all - if we are to talk about RESPONSIBILITY - do we want little girls to make sure that "daddy's" baby is brought to term? Well, apparently the good christian folks in South Dakota do find it crystal clear - since thier criminalization of abortion criminalizes women who are raped and victims of incest right along with anyone else (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/22/AR2006022202424.html).

The problem is that the whole subject's taboo nature makes it so that we have a nation which is avoiding responsibility by not addressing the problem in it's entirety - where groups and (depending who is in power) semi-government agencies say that God wants those divided cells to become a child, regardless - yet does not ensure that the woman in that position is secure for the next 9 months, has enough to eat for the next 9 months, is able to physically or emotionally take care of themselves much less an infant nor are currently willing to step in and ensure a standard quality of life for all these infants they have fought so hard to have be born in the first place - a policy which tells 2 day old babies, "Hey I got you here, it's all up to you now" is either one which is playing "See no evil; take no responsibility", is one that is calloused and carrying more about being "right" than actual humans or just a combination of naive and willing ignorance.

If an angel showed up and told me I was going to be a fetus to prove some sort of point to people - I would tell the angel to grow up and spend a little more time helping out the wretched lives of the children who were already here first.