Killconey

My mistake, Darkblack. I was referring to when you said that you "can't even read the whole thing" and meant it more as a joke than an insult. While I disagree strongly with you, it would be wrong to attack you personally and I appologize.

Now a quick question about your link. It was very helpful, but Assembly of God is a denomination of Christianity rather than the whole. Did this site mean that 59% of Christians are Republicans or just 59% of the Assembly of God denomination are? If just the Assembly of God, where do the Catholics, Methodists, Lutherans and Nazarenes fit in?

__________________
Look out for numbers two and up and they'll look out for you.

Darkblack

Not sure about that. It is a Christian web site but could mean anyone that believes in a god type religion.

Himbo

I think instead of Pro Life groups and Pro Choice groups arguing and spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to fight there "cause" here's what needs to happen. Think about Causality . . taking a problem and tracing it back to its source to see who is at fault. Well let's take all this money from these activists and put it to sex education programs in highschools, more accessible birth control products, etc.

You can fight till the cows come home . . . (it my saying I live on a farm . . wanna fight about it!) and lets focus on prevention before we are faced with the abortion decision. People who think abortion is wrong and want it to be "illegal" hey . .fine . . any woman who doesn't want a baby can go sit in a hottub for 5 hours. You will never stop it. Lets do what we can to prevent it.

that 's my canadian 20 cents . . . . about 2 cents american.

MacGnG

HOW is killing a doctor that works at a free clinic 'pro life'?
how is blowing up an abortion clinics 'pro life'?
how do they JUSTIFY killing the doctor and everyone that works there because "abortion is murder"?!

please explain that. please tell me how it makes sense.

sure you can feel that abortion is wrong but women should have a choice (whatever it maybe).

i was going to give a situation but you all wouldnt like that so... No matter what the situation is, ABORTION IS NOT ANOTHER FORM OF BIRTH CONTROL, but she should still have a choice.

there is no way for me to convince any of you to completely change your views but it is simple: no one should say a woman can't or can, simply let her have the choice.

Pennington

The issue with abortion is whether the unborn are technically people. Everyone has a differant opinion on this and any way you look at it, it becomes a religious issue. The day after conception, the unborn is just a few cells. This could not survive on its own and has yet to take a breath, have a heartbeat, or make a single thought. Is this a human being yet? Thats not for me to decide. Personally, if I were pregnant(I'm a guy btw), I could never have an abortion because i take the stance that the potential for life is precious and should be cherished. If my wife became pregnant and wanted an abortion for whatever reason, I wouldn't stop her but I would tell her that if she had the abortion and prevented my child from being born, I could no longer live with her and I'd get divorced. As for someone elses fetus, they should make their own decisions.

I know people who said that if their wife/girlfriend aborted their child that they would kill them. If they see a fetus as a true human being, I think they are as justified as a father would be in killing the murderer of his child. But in the end, I think it is completly the decision of the parents as science can't tell you what is and isn't a life. Anyone, including the government, whose genetic material isn't envolved should have no say in what happens.

sportsrule101

Something like 1/10000th of 1% would ever support killing an abortion doctor. Its just another case of one individual making a whole group look bad. It boils down to the fact whether or not you think a person becomes an individual at birth or conception. Your decision on the matter makes you either pro-abortion, or pro-life.

__________________
winning isn't everything but
losing isn't anything

Himbo

The Gov't will never make abortions illegal.

You cannot take away an adult's freedom of choice.

Outlawing abortions will not stop the problem. People will always find a different way to get an abortion. If she wants one. . . some how . some way it WILL happen.

Let's educate people about preventing pregnancies and get to the ROOT of the problem . . .un safe sex.

joeinparis

Insofar as I'm entitled to an opinion, I'm pro-choice, or anti-life, or however you want to put it. Some random thoughts:

I wonder if the male posters here who think they can "forbid" a sexual partner to have an abortion would be willing to have the foetus transplanted into an artificial womb in their own bodies? This could be possible in the not-too-distant future.(http://www.nada.kth.se/~asa/Kloning/womb.html)

Currently, right here and now, pro-life women of childbearing age could offer themselves as receptacles for transplanted unwanted foetuses. Why is this not more common? All that money wasted on full-color blow-up pictures of foetuses beside fingernails could be spent on transplants.

Unfortunately, it's some bizarre absolutist concept of LIFE for LIFE's sake that drives the pro-life people; nothing to do with quality of life.

The late and sorely-missed Bill Hicks had a good suggestion:

"I'm not a girl, I'm a guy you know? But at the same time, I tell ya how you can solve this abortion issue right now. Ready? Those unwanted babies that single moms leave in alleys and in dumpsters? Leave about 12 of those on the steps of The Supreme Court. This is over. Like that. "You guys said we had to have them? Then you guys...FUCKING RAISE 'EM." "Raise 'em then, you fucking fucking raise 'em. YOU raise 'em. You said I had to have it? Then it's yours. Fuck. It's yours..Take it"

josobot

For a human to intensionally abort a most innocent human offspring, would seem to border on insanity...like war...like genocide...like suicide...like immaturity...like the lion that kills its own cubs. I can appreciate the dilemmas that may be involved...I have been close to such dilemmas...all would agree it would be better if it did not come to that.

luminus

I firmly stand by the pro-choice arguement. I'm not going to just leave it at that, there is a basis for this desire to hold to such an arguement, and normally, I could say that this basis was simple. It is really, but as this is a philosophy discussion board, I'm sure I'll need just a tad bit more rationalization than average.

My entire problem with the pro-life standpoint is the simple belief that the goverment has the right to legislate a belief system. When it all comes down to it, that's the real issue at stake when politicians debate reproductive rights, it has nothing to do with science, it has nothing to do with protecting individuals, it's a matter of religion. Certainly I agree that, in this case, we enter a moral grey area. Without knowing for a fact when life begins, whether or not there is a human soul, or when consciousness is first attained, we really can't say that we are killing a child by aborting it. Unfortunately, we also don't have the grounds to say that we are NOT killing a child.

What we do have, however, are a few simple facts:
1. The Pro-Life movement is almost entirely based on standard Judeo-Christian dogma, and as such, is asserting the government legislate individual morality to conform to its standards.
2. The Pro-Choice camp does not advocate abortion, it advocates leaving it as an option for the individual to decide (don't like abortion? don't have one).
3. As of yet, science has not determined the existance of a human soul, when consciousness begins, or provided any rational basis for believing anything other than the idea that life begins at birth.
4. Based upon the above three facts, we can infer the following: Advocating a ban on abortion is based upon a belief structure not based on science or fact, but rather the moral authority of an external entity which, as of yet, resists all attempts at direct contact.
5. Banning abortion sets a legal precedent for legislating codes of moral conduct using theology as a basis. This is non-conducive to the basic right of Freedom of Religion.

Thus, I am firmly pro-choice.

Additionally, not that this provides me any moral high ground, I was an adopted child. My mother was, in fact, going to abort me when a friend of hers informed her of the fact that my mother was barren. As a result, she chose instead to give birth to me and pass me on to my mother. In this case, I'm glad she didn't choose to have an abortion, but I'm certainly glad she'd had the option. What if my mother hadn't been there, and I had been raised without a father and with a resentful mother who hadn't the time or the money to take care of me?

MacGnG

You addressed everything, and responded the best way possible.

NOTHING anyone says after this is going to change anyone's mind. this is the compromise that should just be ACCEPTED. even if you disagree, it doesn't matter; just accept these things and live your life as you please.

nothingx

It's interesting to see that many more people here are pro-choice than pro-life. It makes me wonder why this is so, when the general populace seems to be more pro-life. The average IQ of a person that uses the internet regularly is somewhere around 115, well above the general average of 90. Is it because we are smarter? The TFP also has more male members than female... is this the reason? Also, the TFP is often associated with pornography... is it because we have loose morals? What are your thoughts?

Zargix

I was gonna quote that bill hicks thing, but I saw someone already did so.... [what he said]

Pellaz

I haven't seen numbers on this in years, and wouldn't be surprised at all to find that the vast majority of people are pro-choice now, with pro-life groups being much more vocal.

__________________
" ' Big Mouth.
Remember it took three of you to kill me.
A god, a boy, and, last and least, a hero.' "

Himbo

I agree with you Pellaz. Majority is pro choice but the much more vocal group are the pro lifers. Too bad all there protesting will be for nothing.

hobo

If I got a girl pregnant, I would want to keep the child. I would not tell someone else with a child that isn't mine what to do though. I guess that makes me pro-choice.

If 40 million foetuses were aborted that is a lot. Then again, if those 40 million were born as babies, how do you think America would be right now? 40 million unwanted babies sitting in orphanages? on the streets? There are already more orphans than couples that want to adopt, imagine adding 40 million more. What would happen in this case? There wouldn't be enough resources to take care of all the orphans and most, if not all of the 40 million would end up where? Sure ending a potential person's life is bad, but would letting them all be born be better? What it would do is create a huge social burden that would hurt everyone in the country, not just the babies.

Moonduck

Hmm, methinks this left the realm of philosophical discussion a while back. Ah well...

I find myself at odds on the issue. I dislike that, as I am the type of person that like my own positions to be strongly realized. Abortion sends my normal careful construction of rationale into disarray.

I find abortion personally repugnant. The idea is overwhelmingly repulsive. The mechanics are abhorrent, and the result is so morally revolting that my conscious mind shrinks from it. You see, I'm a parent. I have two kids that I adore. The idea that either one of them could've been destroyed on a whim simply sickens me. I've seen what results from conception, and it is a beautiful things, two beautiful things in my case.

However, I find the idea of the govt deciding to restrict abortion, an act so completely not covered by anything in the legal underpinnings of this nation, to be intellectually repugnant. What right has the govt to tell you or I what we can and cannot do with our own bodies? None, says I. It is my body. Tattoos, piercing, drugs, alcohol, suicide, what have you. My body, in the end, is the only thing I can be said to truly possess. An abortion is an act that affects, in the end, your body.

Therein lies the rub. There is another entity involved in an abortion. It's that little blastocyst, bundle of cells, or even foetus growing within that body of yours. It may be your body, but it has a body too. It has existence, of some sort. The question becomes not whether abortion should remain legal, nor whether or not it is your body or not, but when does a foetus have legally protectable rights? When does it have status as an individual, instead of simply an aberration on the uterine wall?

I am not a person to really answer that. I am not a doctor or scientist, I am not a religious man that believes life begins at conception. I do think that if a foetus has a chance of living outside the womb with the wonders of modern medicine, it becomes murder to terminate the pregnancy. That would seem self-evident to me. If the foetus is capable of sustaining independent life, even with the caveat that serious medical treatment is required, I would call it an entity in its' own right. At that point, I would say that the govt does have a responsibility to protect it, and that it has all the rights and duties of a human being.

So, my bottom line is that I find abortion horrid, but feel like the govt has no right to legislate what anyone does to themselves. However, once the foetus is capable of independent existence, you have no more right to harm it than you do to hurt the neighbor kid down the street.

As to giving the prospective father a say, how do you do that? Is there anyone to argue that the father has as much invested in a pregnancy as the mother? Realistically? So if the mother's opinion carries more weight, how does on egive the father a say that is in any way meaningful. As much as I find it 'unfair' that the male has no say in something he helped create, I cannot find a meaningful way to give him a say that does not impinge on the rights of the female.

Lastly, to those concerned about how pro-lifers are unworried about the child once it is born, I say feh. I've seen a number of studies and reports that show that pro-lifers are statistically much more likely to give to charity than their pro-choice counterparts. Pro-lifers do care, they just tend to dislike rampant welfare and the like as they tend to be on the conservative side of the spectrum.

Brdd99boy

Morality and laws of society are two different issues,
you can be moral and violate the law (i.e. a man with starving children who steals from a rich man)
and be immoral and obey the law (a rich man who refuses to help desparate needy people).

Laws in america are the result of political influence and
morality is strictly a cultural thing.

Abortion is an example where both our legal position and our cultural acceptance have changed 180 degrees in recent years.

Abortion is just like gambling, selling alcohol, and prostitution - it is ok legaly and moraly if the majority can agree it is.

josobot

If I remember correctly, Goethe say: God forgives, Man forgets, Nature never forgets. (Nor forgives...I would add.) From an athiestic, purely biological point of view...and trying to maintain the evolutionary/genetic nature of man, abortion would be one of the big evils...except for the possible notion that those who would condone abortion probably represent an inferior parenting gene and do humanity a favor by not reproducing.

curveedv8

Leaving out any religious beliefs - that bunch of cells scraped out of a woman when an abortion is performed in the first tri-mester - it could not survive outside the womb, therefore it's not murder.

Then again, I also believe in euthenasia.

hiredgun

People keep saying things about "moral" issues and how abortion is a moral issue that shouldn't be legislated. Well, no, it's not only a moral issue, it's a legal issue. The unborn child should have the legal right to live, just like a newborn. If a woman cannot violate her child's rights after the child is born, then what gives her the "choice" to do it before it is born?

blackdas

The day all forms of abortion are outlawed is the day I leave this country...

MacGnG

^^^^
no doubt

neoinoakleys

I was almost aborted by my mother and I just have to say that I am still pro-choice.

I think that no one should be forced to have something that they don't want, not good to start or continue a life in that manner.

__________________
It's My Duty to Please That Booty!!

hotzot

Just to let you know josobot, Nature kills alot more fetuses then there are surgical abortions. (they're call miscarriages )Take it from a person who works in a major medical center. We might have 1 to 2 abortions a week(at the most), but up in obstetrics we have about 1-3 misscarriges a day. Just food for thought.

__________________
The Bully Boys are here!

josobot

I am aware of natural abortion...nature's final inspection process...very natural...sometimes errs. Induced abortion or worse rejects what passed nature's inspection.

JamesS

I don't know if this was addressed.

Having to do with those who believe abortion is murder as a result of their Christian beliefs: there is a passage in the Bible that discusses a similiar issue to abortion.

This passage has to do with assault against pregnant women and states that any person who harms a woman so that she loses her child will have to pay a fine to the woman to make up for the loss of the child.

Now, extrapolating from this it becomes clear that the Bible (at least in this instance) treats an unborn child as property, not life, as the penalty for accidentally 'aborting' a fetus is civil and not criminal.

Something to think about.

__________________
The tragedy of life is what dies inside a man while he lives.
-- Albert Schweitzer

mystmarimatt

for my 2 cents, i'm against abortion the act. although i'm for its legalization, see, while i think women using it as a form of birth control is horrendous, (which don't think happens on a regular basis, not a tremendous lot of women get 5 or 6 abortions.) on the same token i do not feel that, say, a 12 tear old girl who is raped and impregnated by her drunken, abusive father should be forced to bear such a burden her entire life. i know i could never in my right mind choose such an action for myself and my signifigant other. but, i'll never tell someone else they can't do it themselves.

__________________
Words of Wisdom:

If you could really get to know someone and know that they weren't lying to you, then you would know the world was real. Because you could agree on things, you could compare notes. That must be why people get married or make Art. So they'll be able to really know something and not go insane.

prosequence

Now this I kinda agree with, we have to stop giving the government the power to make common sense decisions for us.

As I stated before "If you don't want a tree in your yard, don't plant the seed."

Lets eliminate the source not deal with the symptons.
For example: You sneeze and cough, this isn't the actual problem, it's a result of having a cold. So instead of just wiping and woofing down halls, work on getting rid of the cold.

Mael

if someone trespasses on my property, i can get away with shooting that person and killing them. and unwanted fetus is essentially trespassing on the mothers body. she should be able to get rid of it.

cph44

All I'm saying is, if this is how you feel, then you have a strong moral obligation to make your sentiments plain to any girl you plan to sleep with BEFORE you have sex with her. Your opinion imposes a gigantic responsibility on the woman, and she should have the chance to knowingly accept it.

Also, I am happy that our justice system prosecutes vigalantes just like any other criminal.

Xell101

From a philosophical standpoint, it isn't a baby till it passes the 'lump of stem cells' stage.

GarthInPittsburgh

That's really interesting.

Most Christian pro-lifers would probably say that's a part of the bible that you're not supposed to take literally.

__________________
i was going to call 911, but I was downloading a file

hobo

You are right about that.

The bible was meant to be taken literally back in the day, but now that we know how crazy it is, it is said to be metaphorical.

matthew330

It all boils down to a matter of convenience for the mother. It's funny how the whole "my body, my choice" argument is thrown out the window when the woman arbitrarily decides to have the baby. Then the argument becomes "it takes two to tango," and the guys are forced by law to pay child support. Philosophically, I am 100% against abortion, but arguing that would take too long to no avail. You can't argue wholistically with someone who is motivated by selfishness - which is what i think the above example points to.

In addition, I think the overwhelming majority of pro-abortionists are against the idea of abortion as a form of birth control. I think this is in essence an acknowledgement that there is something inherantly wrong with abortion. If they believe as they say they do that an unborn baby is nothing but a "mass of fetal tissue", what then is it that prevents them from supporting abortion as simply a means of birth control?

Ubermensch

Originally posted by rockzilla

"Once my tax dollars go to pay for someone elses mistake, that's when I have the right to an opinion."

Man, thats cold! Once I've paid my tax pounds sterling (!) the government can do what they want with it. If you don't like what the do, don't vote for them. Lobby against them.

Right or wrong, I'd prefer my government to pay for abortions raher than have desperate women cause themselves injury and pain by having dangerous 'back street' procedures.

I'm definately in the pro-choice camp.

__________________
"Man is a rope, fastened between animal and superman - a rope aver an abyss."
Thus spake Zarathustra

matthew330

and about that whole "if it can't live outside the wound, it's a parasite and not really alive" argument. this could apply to newborns, children up to say 16 or 17; retarted adults; adults with down syndrome. By your rationale and definition of life - all of these groups are parasites and not really "alive" in that none are capable of surviving on their own and require the care of another human being.

Mael

you're taking that way out of context. until a baby is like 8 months old, if you remove it from the mother, it will die (without major medical intervention). it is not fully developed. it may be a human being, but it is not a fully developed one and since in order for it to live it must get it's nutrients and oxygen from the mother, it is a parasitic/host relationship that is going on. they are not symbiotic. the baby can't live on it's own outside of the mother. it's that simple.

after it's born, yeah, it still won't survive without the help of other people. it can't feed itself or cloth itself. but first of all, we're not talking about once it's born. if we were, then we'd be talking about all the people having kids that cant' afford to feed and clothe them without assistance from the govt. until the baby leaves the womb, it is analogous to either a parasite (because it leeches everything it needs from its host) or a tumor (an uncontrolled growth in the body).

you're this could apply to group x, y and z doesnt' matter. we're not talking about those groups, and by definition they arent' parasites anyways (at least not in a biological manner, which is what we're talking about).

costello

sperm fertilizes egg = life is created. taking away that life without cause = murder

__________________
"They don't even know what it is to be a fan. Y'know? To truly love some silly little piece of music, or some band, so much that it hurts."

-Almost Famous

Mael

well, that's not really right.

sperm = alive.
egg = alive.

fertized egg = mixture of previously alive things.

at conception, it's just a cell. to call that cell a human life, well, i don't think would be accurate. but i guess that's something that you (you in the general sense) need to decide for yourself. i personally don't see it as being any different than any other cell that will grow and divide, be it bacteria, virus, tumor, stem, etc.

so it's alive, but it's not really a life.