Abortion: Putting A Face On The Issue

The fetus is either alive or not.

you would make a horrible mother.

I'm getting the point, I disagree with the conclusion drawn from it, however.

The point I made was some of the pro-abortionist have more respect for the lives of cats than human fetuses. Not a red herring at all.

After death, several tissues are still alive, some for several hours after death, however they are not capable of independent life.
The issue is not whether it is alive, but whether it is viable.

There are at least 15 countries where the age of consent for females is 13 or under. Just thought I'd throw that out there.

Why, because I wouldn't kill my baby?

How do you punish the child for the acts of the parent?

No. Because you're not capable of independant thought.

Yes it is. You have no point. You see, people who are pro-choice have more respect for the person who is faced with the decision. Anti-choice people make false arguments and judge the people who are faced with such a decision.

Why would you punish a woman for something she didn't want?

It's not a child, Kevn. You're arguments that it is a child are completely invalid.

So, then I may assume that because you and others supporting unlimited abortion rights are atheists or agnostics, you believe in abortion rights because of your beliefs concerning God. Your belief system is what leads you to your conclusions, right?

Along with Lucifer's comment, I'd also like to bring up cases of permanent vegatative states, where the body is alive yet the brain (except for the basest survival functions) is gone. Does that constitute life?

When a fetus during the first trimester depends completely and totally upon the mother for its growth, development and very existance - when it is completely unable to survive independantly of the mother - does that constitute life, or just the potential for life?

The discussion of "where does life begin" is one that every person answers for themselves, because there is no definitive answer. Being as such, its highly irresponsible and overtly judgemental to subject others to laws based on your own personal morality in the matter.

For the record, I think current laws regarding a woman's pregnancy counting as a seperate count in cases of attack or manslaughter are just as poorly thought out.

Ever hear of original sin? (sorry, couldn't resist).

My jacksonian "look to your own back yard first" sense is tingling I'm aware there are tons of bad things going on in the world, but I'm mostly discussing this from a perspective of America, given that this discussion started a thread or two back with an attempt to overturn Roe V Wade.

I am one of the few who don't fall for the group think. And you say I'm not capable of independent thought? You must be kidding.

/me applauds


Also, you all realize that you are arguing with someone who is ignorant (Hi, Kevn). The dude didn't even know how to spell his first name ffs.

wow.. just.... wow.

Sweetie, read every thread I have posted to, I am clearly a minority voice. You, on the other hand, follow the line of the group, almost word for word.

Kevn, just a friendly little tip for you... using the word "sweetie" to address someone in a thread about women's rights isn't going to help your case any.

Laugh hard, then prove me wrong. Oh, I forgot, you just snicker without any backing in fact.

I laugh because you wouldn't even pass the Turing Test.

Sweetie is an endearing term. If it upsets a woman to be called sweetie imagine how they would feel if I called them what I was really thinking. lol