Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Question For Some Of The Pro-life Folks In Here.  
User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Posted (10 years 3 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 2131 times:

I say some cuz I do not think all of you should have to answer these questions:


  • How many of you that are pro-life are so because of some sort of religious implication?


  • Of those that do side with religious implication, what are the chance that you may believe that those who claim 'pro-choice' are non-religious or are actually 'pro-death'?


  • Where does the need tell someone else what they are doing is so wrong, per your beliefs or the like, come from when it is already NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS?


  • Answer this question as either yes or no, can your government make laws to limit your life all while being hypocritical at times?



  • Realizing the potential flames from this matter, I say go for it. As long as you can eventually answer the questions and remain on topic in the end, I do not care.  Big thumbs up


    The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
    33 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
     
    User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
    Reply 1, posted (10 years 3 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2123 times:

    Let me make one thing clear before this thread ends up coming after me, This is one of those cases where there are more than two sides to this story. The fact is that the pro-life camps usually do not address the issue of the carrier (women's life) and the prp-choice folks do not view abortion as the killing of the human fetus. There are actually four issues here at the very least and I hope some of you can recognize that.

    My stance on the matter...pro-choice until the fetus develops intelligence, about 6 weeks into the pregnancy, after that I'm pro-life. It's disgusting to do it after that, being scared to do it before is not an excuse. Just give it up for adoption, at least the lady is prepared for when she wants a kid, ya know?




    The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
    User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8507 posts, RR: 12
    Reply 2, posted (10 years 3 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2123 times:

    1. No, religion doesn't really have anything to do with it, other than the fact that it encourages the belief in the dignity and value of human life.

    2. It's a fact that most of the ardent pro-choice people are not members of mainline religions. They're actually pro-sex, and they want that emergency fallback in case their lifestyle has an unfortunate result.

    3. When Joe Blow murders or rapes Jane Doe, just because I'm not affected by it doesn't mean it's not wrong. Same thing with abortion.

    4. Government is usually extremely hypocritical (mainly the federal gov't here). But they still merrily make their laws. I can't choose to not pay taxes to the IRS without being persecuted for it, but the government can spend all it wants?


    User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8507 posts, RR: 12
    Reply 3, posted (10 years 3 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2116 times:

    You have a sensible position for someone who is pro-choice, Lehpron. After six weeks, surely you could make up your mind.

    Partial birth abortion is an absolutely digusting, abominable practice.

    But if a woman's life really is in danger, then I would consider abortion to be okay. Not in danger just because of mental issues, but if there were genuine physiological problems, then it's a different story.


    User currently offlineSSTjumbo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
    Reply 4, posted (10 years 3 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2117 times:

    1) Me, though some cases I have to let slide, mostly medical cases though I can be convinced elsewhere.

    2) I'm not that prejudgemental. A doesn't always equal B and B doesn't always equal C

    3) Why'd you ask this question when it's none of your business? I'd say freedom of speech, works in all directions.

    4) I tend to be a moral conservative, but I can't figure out how you can be pro life and pro death penalty at the same time and vice versa. I'm pro-life in almost all cases, but I'm also anti death penalty in all cases, though sometimes the evil side of me wants to bludgeon some people. Anyways, I guess that's a quirky stance these days  Insane.


    User currently offlineNormalSpeed From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
    Reply 5, posted (10 years 3 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2102 times:

    "How many of you that are pro-life are so because of some sort of religious implication?"

    My church is definitely pro-life, but that's not why I choose to be. I was adopted. Sure, I've had some rough times in my life, but it sure beats the heck out of being sucked into a sink. To be pro-choice would make me a walking oxymoron.

    "...what are the chance that you may believe that those who claim 'pro-choice' are non-religious or are actually pro-death."

    Well, I'd say that they are definitely not "pro-death," but most likely irreligious. I don't quite understand how the radical left can be for environmental causes, i.e. life, yet unwilling to take measures to preserve humanity. Whenever the value of some endangered animal or plant is placed above that of a human child, there's a big problem with that value system. (Incidentally, I am pro-enviroment as well as pro-life, lest walking oxymoron status apply. Also, I tend to believe in God as well as evolution--and you guys all thought it was one or the other! But I digress.)

    "Where does the need tell someone else what they are doing is so wrong, per your beliefs or the like, come from when it is already NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS?"

    Oh come on. The world is full of people from each side of every issue not minding their own business. That's life. Deal.

    "Answer this question as either yes or no, can your government make laws to limit your life all while being hypocritical at times?"

    Absolutely. Happens every day.

    Anyway, I think I could be considered pro-choice in a way. But I think that the choice should be made well in advance, such as the choice to use contraception, or the choice not to be promiscuous. If an unwanted pregnancy occurs, the baby should be placed for adoption; no human should be sacrificed at the altar of societal whims.

    'Speed


    User currently offlineDeltaGuy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
    Reply 6, posted (10 years 3 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2093 times:

    I'll have to agree with 'Speed and MD90 on this one....

    My Christian beliefs do not TELL me I HAVE to believe in pro life. It just makes me realize how precious life really is, and how much life is to be valued. Some couples try their very hardest, and cannot produce children...while 15 yr old sluts can do it weekly. If you'd like to know my religious views on this, the Bible says that we were made in God's own image...so if you believe that, then you should also believe that abortion is killing one of God's miracles.

    The fact is that people view abortion as their last ditch method of birth control. If you're going to do it dumbasses, do it right...or get steralized. I don't think we'll ever see full first trimester abortion banned, but I CERTAINLY agree with 2nd and 3rd.....3-9 months into a pregnancy is a friggin bad time to figgure out that you don't want a kid. In question of mother's immediate health, well it's either lose the woman you love, or stop it early enough to save her..that I do agree with.

    Going back to the Lacy Peterson mess, do you think that her unborn child was considered a human being, and Scott should face double homicide charges? I certainly do. If it's got a heart, it's living....you may count an unborn animal with a beating heart as living..so why do so many people miss the boat? And the fact that we can't let our cars make too much smog, or can't pollute the plants, or kill certain animals...yet kill the one thing that's most precious on this earth, still baffles me.

    I know this thread is going to get ugly, but there's my .02 on that one. Speed, loved the walking oxymoron analogy. And -90, good job getting here first.  Big grin

    DeltaGuy


    User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
    Reply 7, posted (10 years 3 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2091 times:

    Not minding your own business is different than passing a law that literally make your life everyone's business to the point where you can't live like everyone else. It's like a scarlet letter. It that kind of branding, life?


    The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
    User currently offlineSccutler From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 5509 posts, RR: 28
    Reply 8, posted (10 years 3 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2090 times:

    Lehpron: Excellent commentary!

    +++

    SSTJumbo:

    I also have noted the interesting conundrum you reference (death penalty advocates tend to be the same folks who are abortion opponents); one supposes the justification would be that the felon convicted of a capital crime is destined to die early as a direct consequence of his or her own illegal actions, whereas the unborn fetus has never had the opportunity to make any decisions at all.

    No easy answers, are there?



    ...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
    User currently offlineIMissPiedmont From United States of America, joined May 2001, 6287 posts, RR: 33
    Reply 9, posted (10 years 3 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 2082 times:

    I've always wondered this, why do the anti-abortionists always include the phrase "except instances of rape or incest?" Yet thay also use the term "innocent child."

    Something makes no sense here.

    BTW, I am so anti abortion that I scare myself. The woman needs only keep her knees together.



    Damn, this website is getting worse daily.
    User currently offlineDc10guy From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 2685 posts, RR: 6
    Reply 10, posted (10 years 3 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 2079 times:

    Also, How many pro-lifers are for the death penalty too ???


    Next time try the old "dirty Sanchez" She'll love it !!!
    User currently offlineN6376m From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
    Reply 11, posted (10 years 3 months 3 days ago) and read 2055 times:

    Lehpron,

    I am pro-life and can base my opposition to Roe v. Wade on purely constitutional grounds.

    First of all any attempt to define life and the state's interest in life by reference to viability is fundamentally flawed. As we can all agree, advances in medical technology have drastically pushed up when viability occurs. Pre-term babies regularly survive being born at 30 weeks of age, a figure that was unheard of 30 years ago.

    I have no doubt that within the next 50 years, that number will be pushed down to 20 weeks and at some point 10 weeks and at some point medical technology will allow the fertilization and incubation of a fetus completely outside the womb. Therefore, to say that something is not alive in 2004 but would be considered alive in 2040 is a flawed standard because life is binary condition, it either is one or the other.

    Second, the argument that the mother's life should be respected is also valid. However, why should the fetus/baby's life carry with it any less rights than those afforded to the mother? Before anyone makes the argument that the fetus is part of the mother, answer this?

    If a woman announced that at 12 noon she was going to cut off her hand on the courthouse steps, would the state not have a compelling legal interest in stopping her from doing it? There is no question that her hand (1) is part of her body (2) has no potential for life in and of itself {in fact, it can't survive without the human it is attached to and (3) there is no argument that the hand should have rights independent of the human.

    This being the case, why shouldn't the state have a compelling legal interest in protecting the rights of a fetus that though part of the mother will grow into a separate human being. Why shouldn't the state seek to protect the rights of its citizens - all of them? Particularly those which are most defenseless.

    IMO the right has done a piss poor job at overturn Roe v. Wade precisely because they focus on the morality or the religion of it. We are a country of law and this battle needs to be fought on constitutional principles.

    The Supreme Court itself couldn't point to any specific right that a pregnant woman had in the Constitution. Instead they created this idea of a penumbra of rights acknowledging that no single provision encompassed what they wanted to do.



    User currently offlineGoingboeing From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4875 posts, RR: 16
    Reply 12, posted (10 years 3 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2041 times:

    Yes, my religion plays a role. But I think that there is no clear cut "for or against" answer. I do not believe in abortion as a birth control method. You can get free condoms at planned parenthood or your local health department, women can get free depo shots or birth control pills, or failing any of those, then either the man or woman should satisfy themselves with oral sex and forgo the "big nasty" until such time as they have some sort of birth control. to simply screw without protection and then go "oops, I'm preggers" and off to the abortion clinic...no, ain't right.

    On the other hand there are cases where I feel it CAN be justified...it happened to me and my wife. We go to into the OB-GYN office for the sonogram. The happy chirpy sonogram operator is just so chipper...then suddenly quiets down. She won't say anything except that she needs to get the doctor. The doctor comes in and informs us that our baby does not have a brain. Now...do you let the mother carry a baby that will live maybe 2 minutes after it is born, having a constant reminder every passing day that the baby in her belly is for all intents and purposes already dead? Knowing that the only thing keeping that baby "alive" is the mothers own body? Is the mental anguish the mother has to go thru worth saving an "innocent life"...even though that "life" will end at birth? Is it right that a mother should pray to God that the baby dies inside her rather than getting an abortion? Sorry...that is a case where abortion is warranted.


    User currently offlineUssherd From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2000, 329 posts, RR: 0
    Reply 13, posted (10 years 3 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2018 times:

    Second, the argument that the mother's life should be respected is also valid. However, why should the fetus/baby's life carry with it any less rights than those afforded to the mother? Before anyone makes the argument that the fetus is part of the mother, answer this?

    This being the case, why shouldn't the state have a compelling legal interest in protecting the rights of a fetus that though part of the mother will grow into a separate human being. Why shouldn't the state seek to protect the rights of its citizens - all of them? Particularly those which are most defenseless


    If the fetus puts the mother's life in jeopardy, you could argue that the principle of self defense applies. I believe that "justifiable homicide" is a legally accepted defense.



    Cada loco con su tema...
    User currently offlineGc From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2003, 356 posts, RR: 6
    Reply 14, posted (10 years 3 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2012 times:

    I'm a Christian, but I've been pro life longer. I've understood why abortions have been medically necessary, but they are a small percentage. I don't think that a baby should have to pay for our "lifestyle choices" with it's life. You have sex you need to be prepared for the consequences, even if you use contraception. Maybe God was onto something when he tried to empasise how special it is for two people to make love, even though our society cheapens and trivialises it.



    User currently offlineGc From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2003, 356 posts, RR: 6
    Reply 15, posted (10 years 3 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2009 times:

    Oh, and I'm against the death penalty too.

    User currently offlineN6376m From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
    Reply 16, posted (10 years 3 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2005 times:

    The argument of allowing abortion when the mother's life is in danger is a red herring. I believe that of all abortions performed in the US, less than 1% are medically necessary to protect the life of the mother. I'll try to find that citation and post it later. But to use the exception to defend the rule is a crazy logic for arguing.

    In that situation I do believe that a constitutional analysis should weigh the respective rights.


    User currently offlineUshermittwoch From Germany, joined Jan 2004, 2965 posts, RR: 16
    Reply 17, posted (10 years 3 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1997 times:

    I am totally pro-CHOICE (who would have guessed). But only to a certain extent. It should be illegal to kill the fetus if it can live outside the womb without major assistance. Thus it should be outlawed after about 4,5 months of pregnancy, unless there is a serious threat to the mother's life or the child is severely disabled.

    It is sickening to see mostly MEN make decisions on what is right for a woman to do. But that is another topic.

    What would interest me though is to see how many percent of the men are pro-life and how many percent of the women. I have a feeling that the result will not surprise me.



    Where have all the tri-jets gone...
    User currently offlineGoingboeing From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4875 posts, RR: 16
    Reply 18, posted (10 years 3 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1998 times:

    The argument of allowing abortion when the mother's life is in danger is a red herring. I believe that of all abortions performed in the US, less than 1% are medically necessary to protect the life of the mother. I'll try to find that citation and post it later. But to use the exception to defend the rule is a crazy logic for arguing.

    What about the mental health of a mother who knows that her body is the only thing keeping that baby alive? I'm not talking about a yuppie couple who has an amnio done and finds that the baby has downs syndrome...kids with Down syndrome might be difficult, but they CAN function in society. I'm talking about a couple who find that they baby that they WANTED is, for all intents and purposes DEAD. The only thing keeping that baby "alive" is the mothers body. It is usually considered a "miracle" if babies like that live 5 minutes after birth. Is it right to punish the mother by telling her that aborting it is wrong, and that she should live the next 6 to 7 months with the constant reminder of the baby that has zero chance of living?


    User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
    Reply 19, posted (10 years 3 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 1985 times:

    Also, How many pro-lifers are for the death penalty too ???

    The inverse works quite well too.  Insane







    As for me... I'm personally pro-life.
    But if push-came to shove, I'd vote pro-female-chosen-murder.

    Sad, but I don't see a realistic alternative at this point.


    User currently offlineFlysaa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
    Reply 20, posted (10 years 3 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 1978 times:

    A bumper sticker I saw the other day: "Who said abortion was okay? It sure was'nt God"

    User currently offlineN6376m From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
    Reply 21, posted (10 years 3 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 1963 times:

    Goingboeing,

    Let's explore your line of thought. It seems to me that your argument concedes the notion that the fetus is alive? Am I correct? If so, why shouldn't it have rights?

    If it does, then the issue about abortion is an issue about competing rights. The rights of the baby versus the rights of the mother.

    If it is not alive - and therefore doesn't have rights - doesn't the cutting off the hand example apply? The hand has no rights.

    As for the dead baby inside the mother, then there is no real issue of competing rights. A baby with certain forms of hydrocephallus for example is certain never to be able live. Therefore, with a very high degree of medical certainty, we can say that the baby is not alive and an abortion is permissible because the competing rights need not be reconciled. But what about the 99% of other cases where the fetus is healthy and poses no health risk to the mother?


    User currently offlineGreg From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
    Reply 22, posted (10 years 3 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 1947 times:

    I'm fairly fervent that abortion is soley a woman's issue. And it's their choice what should/could/can be done to their body.

    I've listened to a lot of pleas by men, but they come across as ludicrous since they are not the major party affected by the decisions....

    Clearly, if men had the ability to get pregnant, they'd demand the right to have abortion as an option...


    User currently offlineGoingboeing From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4875 posts, RR: 16
    Reply 23, posted (10 years 3 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 1947 times:

    Let's explore your line of thought. It seems to me that your argument concedes the notion that the fetus is alive? Am I correct? If so, why shouldn't it have rights?

    In the case of an anacephalic baby, I use the term "alive" very loosely. It is only "alive" because the mothers body is feeding it and "helping" it to stay alive. Once it is "born", it immediately dies. Does that mean that the mother should be subjected to several months of mental anguish? Is praying for the fetus to "die" inside any better than aborting it?

    As for the dead baby inside the mother, then there is no real issue of competing rights. A baby with certain forms of hydrocephallus for example is certain never to be able live. Therefore, with a very high degree of medical certainty, we can say that the baby is not alive and an abortion is permissible because the competing rights need not be reconciled. But what about the 99% of other cases where the fetus is healthy and poses no health risk to the mother?

    Which is exactly what I was saying...in an anacephalic baby, the brain does not form. Period. If you read my original post closer, I do not believe that abortion should be used as a birth control tool. There is depo, there is the pill, there are condoms, there is vasectomy and tubal ligation...all of which can greatly reduce or eliminate the risk of pregnancy. F*ck all night if you want. But if a couple f*ck's all night long without taking any kind of protection against becoming pregnant, and she wakes up pregnant, a trip to the abortion clinic is not right, IMHO.

    I also indicated that if a couple uses amnio to find out if the fetus is Down syndrome, it shouldn't be aborted. My wife's cousin has a down syndrome child - we would have welcomed a Down syndrome child. But you can dismiss the "mother's life at risk" argument - If it is as small as you say...but if one bans abortion in ALL cases (which is what many pro-lifers want), then cases like mine would have made my wife and I criminals.


    User currently offlineSjc>sfo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
    Reply 24, posted (10 years 3 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 1945 times:

    Against abortion, and my religion is, to an extent, pro-choice (Judaism). I am also against the death penalty.

    "Where does the need tell someone else what they are doing is so wrong, per your beliefs or the like, come from when it is already NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS?"

    Ridiculous... When people say it's murder they're not just being polemic... they're saying that abortion is the deliberate ending of a life. When is a "life" a life? Only God knows, which is why I find it difficult to grapple with this issue, but I don't see how we can say its ok to go in and make sure it doesn't happen.


    25 Goingboeing : Clearly, if men had the ability to get pregnant, they'd demand the right to have abortion as an option... Sorry, but with all the birth control altern
    26 Post contains links and images L.1011 : First of all, I still can't see how anyone could want to see a human baby vaporized and claim that that's "American" and watch with pained eyes as a c
    27 Goingboeing : Damn...you lost me in that huge cut and paste. No. Your rights end where mine begin. That's what laws are supposed to do. Prevent people from enroachi
    28 MD-90 : L.1011, that is a very interesting picture. It's amazing how the womb can actually be removed and then replaced.
    29 IMissPiedmont : And not a single "pro-life" person has chimed in as to why it's OK to kill a baby in cases of rape or incest. I find that telling. The baby is still i
    30 NormalSpeed : "I have yet to hear anyone do anything but stammer and stutter when faced with this question." Ok, abortion should be only allowed if the mother's lif
    31 Yyz717 : It is supremely ironic that the Western world's most fervent anti-abortion stances are found in the US. Yet, that same overwhelming concern for "life"
    32 Post contains images Lehpron : NOTE: when I talk about a fetus, I am only referring to the creature within the host carrier (mother) that is less than 6 weeks old. As stated before,
    33 N6376m : IMissPiedmont - I'll answer that question after you cite for me what percentage of abortions are undertaken for cases of rape or incest. -76M
    Top Of Page
    Forum Index

    This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

    Printer friendly format

    Similar topics:More similar topics...
    Question For Lord Of The Rings Fans. posted Fri Jan 23 2004 16:28:07 by Thom@s
    A Question For Residents Of The State Of New York posted Mon Aug 5 2002 22:25:33 by NDSchu777
    The Ravings Of A Radical Pro-life Whackjob posted Sun May 21 2006 20:49:29 by LHMARK
    Paying For Use Of The Toilet In Amsterdam posted Tue Nov 29 2005 12:05:02 by BNE
    For All Of The Potheads On Here posted Thu Oct 6 2005 10:04:16 by AAFLT1871
    Some Of The Hostages In Algeria Free posted Wed May 14 2003 12:08:19 by Racko
    Where Are Some Of The Memorable People? posted Sun Nov 5 2006 09:10:56 by Shinkai
    The Blind Community..some Of The Best People? posted Thu Jun 22 2006 16:30:47 by Kazzie
    TBS Ads For Lord Of The Rings--- Hilarious! posted Thu Apr 6 2006 08:23:25 by STLGph
    Bideford One Of The Best NYE Locations In World posted Sat Dec 31 2005 15:23:48 by Pe@rson