[speechlesstx]

You show me a fetus that is a walking, talking, thinking, breathing, individual human being and then we will talk about it's rights.

In the mean time, we have a mother that is a walking, talking, thinking, breathing, individual and technically a bundle of cells multiplying and splitting within her body.

I could show you a fetus with fingers, toes and a beating heart but it wouldn't matter. You're convinced that life inside is just "a bundle of cells."

So like you said, it's not "really a kid" as you so delicately put it. It's not "really a kid" or any other kind of person until it is able to survive outside the moms body. That is when the "rights" begin if you want to break it down to rights.

Like I said before, I think that's a very selfish attitude. I believe it's a child and I believe you'd have to admit that it's intended destiny is to become someone's child, not someone's medical waste.

[tomder55]

I am calling it as I see it. If I was playing the shock card I'd say that no one has a right to snuff a baby ,or off a baby or perform a coup de grace on a baby . Actually I am not even playing the shock card when I call it genocide and infanticide.

[NeedKarma]

I am calling it as I see it. If I was playing the shock card I'd say that no one has a right to snuff a baby ,or off a baby or perform a coup de grace on a baby . Actually I am not even playing the shock card when I call it genocide and infanticide.

So why aren't the women being arrested?

[speechlesstx]

How timely...

Harsanyi: Abortion debate changing

By David Harsanyi
Posted: 05/27/2009 01:00:00 AM MDT

As an atheist and a secular kind of guy, I practice moral relativism regularly. Still, I've always struggled mightily with the ethics and politics of abortion. Apparently, I'm not alone.

A new Gallup poll claims that for the first time since 1995, when the question was first asked by the organization, most Americans consider themselves to be "pro-life" rather than "pro-choice."

The straightforward question asked of participants was this: "With respect to the abortion issue, would you consider yourself to be pro-choice or pro-life?" Fifty-one percent responded that they were pro-life and 42 percent said they were pro-choice. These percentages are the reverse found in the same poll in 2006.

What happened? Is it possible that the nation has undergone a gigantic attitudinal shift on the fundamental issue of abortion in only three years' time? Logically, it seems that the entire framing of the debate has become antiquated and far too simplistic for the questions we face. Anecdotally, I would say it's possible.

I know I've changed my views.

After a life of being pro-choice, I began to seriously ponder the question. I oppose the death penalty because there is a slim chance that an innocent person might be executed and I don't believe the state should have the authority to take a citizen's life. So don't I owe an nascent human life at least the same deference? Just in case?

You may not consider a fetus a "human life" in early pregnancy, though it has its own DNA and medical science continues to find ways to keep the fetus viable outside the womb earlier and earlier.

But it's difficult to understand how those who harp about the importance of "science" in public policy can draw an arbitrary timeline in the pregnancy, defining when human life is worth saving and when it can be terminated.

The more I thought about it, the creepier the issue got.

Newsweek, for instance, recently reported that 90 percent of women whose fetuses test positive for Down syndrome choose an abortion. Another survey showed only a small percentage of mothers even used the test. So what happens when 90 percent of parents test their fetuses? Does it mean the end of the disease or are we stepping perilously close to eugenics?

What about future DNA tests that can detect any "defects" in a fetus? What happens when we can use abortion to weed out the blind, mentally ill, the ugly, or any other any "undesirable" human being?

Recently, Sweden's National Board of Health and Welfare ruled that women are permitted to abort their children based on the sex of the fetus. In the United States, a woman can have an abortion for nearly any reason she chooses. In fact, a health exemption for the mother allows abortions to be performed virtually on demand.

If you oppose selective abortions, but not abortion overall, I wonder why? How is terminating the fetus because it's the wrong sex any worse than terminating the fetus for convenience's sake? The fate of the fetus does not change, only the reasoning for its extinction does.

Now, I happen to believe (as the civil libertarian and pro-life activist Nat Hentoff once noted) that the right to life and liberty is the foundation of a moral society. Then again, I also believe a government ban on abortion would only criminalize the procedure and do little to mitigate the amount of abortions.

Obviously, these are a few of the complex and uncomfortable issues to ponder. So maybe this poll tells us that the dynamics of the abortion debate are about to change, that Americans are getting past the politics and into the morality of the issue.

Then again, it's entirely possible that I'm just projecting.

Honesty in the debate, how refreshing.

[NeedKarma]

Honesty in the debate, how refreshing.

He's a right-winger like you. That's not refreshing, that's you agreeing with you. Kind of like you and tom here.

[cozyk]

Abortion... It's not for Speech
It's not for Tom
It's not for David Harsanya
And it's not even for me with 99% of scenarios I can imagine.


BUT, who are we to say it's not for someone else. Both times I was pregnant, I started calling it "my baby" from the beginning. That is how I FELT about my pregnancies. Not everyone feels the same and you are trying to force your feelings down someone else's throat.

I referred to the fetus as cells earlier because technically and scientifically that is what it is. It has no thoughts, feelings, concepts, awareness, or fears. It just exist. It lives off your body like any other growth in your body.

What gives it an identity is what we project on to it. I gave my children an identity when they were no larger that the tip of a needle but that was ME and MY emotional connection. It had nothing to do with them or what they consented to.

I had a friend whose mom got pregnant with her when she was 16. The mom considered abortion, but ended up not aborting and married the guy. This was 1959, so it wasn't that people didn't get abortions, they just got unsafe, unregulated, unclean, abortions. Sometimes it worked, sometimes they were butchered and rendered sterile, and sometimes they even died.

My friend said to me one day. " I'm glad she did not get an abortion because I wouldn't be here. " BUT, I looked at it this way. If you were never born, then you never had the consciousness to know you were never born. So how could "you" miss it when you never knew you were a "you".

It's not like you are out there , floating around the heavens saying, dog gone it, I was supposed to be living down there in that total chaos called earth. It's more like a piece of paper has no idea that it is a piece of paper. They have an equal amount of awareness.

Well, let me finish my story of my friend, Renae. Her Mom dropped out of high school. They got married. Eventually had another daughter 3 years later. Mom and Dad were never happy because they felt forced to be together. They resented Renae, because she was the cause of this train wreck. (in their eyes) Mom ended up having an affair. While she was out late with her boyfriend, her husband dropped dead in their kitchen of a heart attack. Mom came home and found him on the floor. He was to turn 50 in 2 more days. Mean while, he had been seeing other women too. Fifteen years later, Mom dies of cancer from smoking, tanning, and basically partying too hard as she was trying to make up for her youth that she missed. Sadly, they were never really happy since they married to have their baby, my friend Renae. Today, Renae has one living family member left. Her sister Dedi. Renae and Dedi haven't spoken since their mom died about 7 years ago. Some sort of spat over their moms estate. Yes, it turned out really well for everyone involved didn't it? Everyone is miserable.

How do I know all this. We grew up together. Renae and I were best friends and our mothers were best friends. What my mom did not tell me, Renae did.

Speech, did you daughter have a "safe" above board abortion? Or did she have to go to some butcher that would do it without any regulations?

[Skell]

Steve,

Can I ask does your belief system (religion and subsequently on abortion) stem from the situation with your daughter? Or did you hold these beliefs prior to her illness and abortion?

[galveston]

It is a medical fact that babies respond to stimuli long before birth.

It is also true that for several months to maybe 2 years, they don't walk, talk, or reason.

Shall we then decide that if they don't talk or walk, we can kill them??

[NeedKarma]

It is also true that for several months to maybe 2 years, they don't walk, talk, or reason.

Thus is incorrect of course.

[galveston]

Thus is incorrect of course.

Baloney! We raised 5 and not one of them walked before 12 months. And they sure weren't talking at 6 months.

[Dare81]

Every year some 45 million pregnancies, out of a total of 175 million, end in abortion. Nearly half of those abortions (20 million) are medically unsafe, resulting in the deaths of nearly 80,000 women a year and a much larger number suffering infection, injury, and trauma. Thus the legality of abortion and the availability of medically safe abortion are public health issues. Criminalizing abortion does not save babies; it kills mothers.

[Dare81]

I could show you a fetus with fingers, toes and a beating heart but it wouldn't matter. You're convinced that life inside is just "a bundle of cells."



Like I said before, I think that's a very selfish attitude. I believe it's a child and I believe you'd have to admit that it's intended destiny is to become someone's child, not someone's medical waste.

The concept of destiny is one asscoiated with God.If God wanted the baby to be somone's child then he can stop him from becoming medical waste.Let God worry about the child's destiny, you can just worry about yourself for now

[cozyk]

It is a medical fact that babies respond to stimuli long before birth.

So does your knee cap.It's called reflexes. So does a chicken with his head cut off. It's called involuntary muscle.

It is also true that for several months to maybe 2 years, they don't walk, talk, or reason.

Shall we then decide that if they don't talk or walk, we can kill them??

Your argument is so asinine that it doesn't even deserve a counter argument. You put things out there that not one person in the universe would agree to. Kill 2 year olds, Ridiculous. Is it because you can't come up with any thing better?

[inthebox]

How many times you been pregnant Tom?[/QUOTE]

I know we were all once fetuses, we had life though not yet born.
It is only by the grace of being born and not aborted that there is a "Choice" to then decide between life and death.




G&P

[inthebox]

I referred to the fetus as cells earlier because technically and scientifically that is what it is. It has no thoughts, feelings, concepts, awareness, or fears. It just exist. It lives off of your body like any other growth in your body.

So a fetus is the equivalent of cancer?

That is the ultimate in relativism.



G&P

[cozyk]

So a fetus is the equivalent of cancer?

That is the ultimate in relativism.



G&P

Out of everything that I had to say, you pull out this one line and try to make something of it. Unbelievable. Get back to me when you have something of relevance to add.

[inthebox]

Your words -- Some don't matter? Or when you actually look at what you are saying, and its implications, it is to harsh to admit you actually wrote it?


Oh, by the way. I have adopted and am raising 3 kids.
Anyone who has been through the process knows it takes a lot of time, a lot of money, a lot of emotion, a lot of legal know how.




G&P

[cozyk]

why is that relevant ? Are you saying that because I can't experience pregnancy that

I am therefore disqualified to have an opinion ?

If that is true then where is the legitimacy to Obama's opinions on pregnancy ?

That's the whole point. You do have an opinion, I have an opinion, Obama has an opinion. Pro choice says you are entitled to it. Pro-life says you are not. With pro-life, whatever
Your opinion, belief, soul searching result is, it's taken away from you.

How is that so hard to understand?

[speechlesstx]

He's a right-winger like you. That's not refreshing, that's you agreeing with you. Kinda like you and tom here.

How many right-wingers like me and tom are "an atheist and a secular kinda guy" that practices "moral relativism regularly?" Maybe the Canadian health care system has something to help you with those jerking knees.

[tomder55]

Yes I do think that murder should not be a choice .