Quote:
Originally posted by brianna
Quote:
Originally posted by Shades
Quote:
|
Trust the people that actually own the womb to do what is right for them.
|
No. That assumes that the people who own the womb are responsible, and trying to argue that all women are responsible would be like saying all men are nice guys. That's not reality. Try swapping other words for womb in there and see how it sounds: guns, cars, liquor, corporations.
|
none of the things you listed are body parts. do you honestly think that my uterus is equivalant to you liquor?
|
Two things...First of all, if that doesn't do you any good, try "fist"...but, in my opinion, the logic is bad, anyways.
Quote:
|
it makes no difference if a woman is responsible or stupid or cruel it's her womb. it's her body. i don't see anyone advocating castration for men who father illigitamate children.
|
*raises hand* I am in favor of it, and the laws are starting to go that way, too, observe:
Deadbeat Dads Offered Jail or Vasectomy
I am usually a clever smartass, in person and online, but I'm just gonna try to weigh in with a voice of reason here. Bear with me.
Everyone agrees that it is absolutely imperitive that we fight to protect life, babies espcially. In our society, one of the most vile crimes is killing a child, and, regardless of the amount of justification or rationalization, noone would say it is a womans right to smother her newborn baby.
However, it is also important that we not lose any personal freedom. The government should not have any control over our personal lives, if the only person affected is ourselves. It woudl be an outrage if condoms were made illegal, or if a government decided that people weren't allowed to have their wisdom teeth removed. It is essential to our society that we don't allow legislation to take away these very important pieces of personal freedom.
Almost everyone will agree with those two basic facts: We need to not kill babies, and the government needs to not tell us what to do with our bodies. At this point, schools of thought diverge.
Everyone who contemplates the issue has to believe one of three things. Either a fetus becomes a person at conception, a fetus becomes a person at birth, or a fetus becomes a person sometime inbetween. I do not foresee that there will ever be any way to 'prove' scientifically that one way of thinking way is more accurate than the rest, so it ultimately comes down to an educated opinion around which people form personal beliefs.
Any time personal beliefs are the foundation of an argument, it is very difficult, and almost pointless to debate it. There is very little anyone can say that will convince someone with one belief to join another school of thought, since all sides are based on opinions (albeit opinions that can be backed up by facts).
This entire post was a very roundabout way of answering the original question.
If you believe that life occurs at some point after conception, and you could theoretically abort before that point, then, IMHO, you have no ground to argue anything except that having multiple abortions or using abortions as birthcontrol is dangerous, ineffecient, and expensive--not that it is wrong.
If you believe that life begins at conception, then any abortion is too many.
I suppose you could theoretically believe that abortion is wrong, except in cases of _____, but I never understood people with that arguement...the circumstances don't change the point at which you believe life occurs, so how does it matter?
I apologize if this is considered flamebait, I just don't understand people who try to argue about abortion.