Welcome! Sign in to access your account. New user?

User: dan

2002-01-24
0
43
0
dansays.com

Messages

Click through to message forum for reply and admin options.
Posted in What's your view on abortion? on 2002-06-03 07:19:16

I would dispute that it does, indeed, boil down to what you've said. You forget those of us who believe that abortion is wrong because it prevents an imminent human life. Even if it's not murder (though I believe it is), you are preventing a developing human being who will, in the vast majority of cases, lead a human life if given the same fundamental chances that we were. This is a view not vulnerable to scientific arguments against the status of a fetus as a living organism and/or person. ========== In Reply To ========== It will never be resolved for one major reason: Pro-Choice people always equate the views of Pro-Lifers as religious, and therefore they say Pro-Lifers are advocating a dissolution to this country's separation of church and state philosophy. (Although the common phrase "God bless America" isn't exactly a separation of church and state, now is it?) We live in a fallible country with an extremely fallible government. But the thing is that the views of Pro-Lifers aren't necessarily a religious thing; it's a moral thing and problem of science. Science says that a fetus is not a living organism because it can't survive without the mother, therefore it's not murder. So this whole topic is moot until we Pro-Lifers can prove scientifically that a fetus is just as much a human being as a baby brought to full term. I believe abortion is morally and ethically wrong, but trying to push your beliefs on someone else without scientific proof (especially in America, we're the most damn stubborn people in the world when it comes to freedom of opinion) isn't going to do any good.

I know I'm equating pro-life beliefs with religion with my next statement, but I'm trying to prove a point. Pushing off the belief of pro-life is the same as a religious evangelist. I find offense at the blatant push of Christians all over America to throw Jesus in our faces. If an Asian-American that was Buddhist was constantly bombarding you with Buddha phraseology and asking for donations, would you be annoyed? Probably. The same holds true for this issue. Pro-Lifers are annoyed with Pro-Choicers pushing their beliefs without scientific foundation and vice versa. We need to stop talking about "it's wrong in the eyes of God" and prove that a fetus is a life, or we'll never get them to see how wrong abortion is.

If I offended anybody with this, I apologize. But I find it really all does boil down to what I've said.

Posted in What's your view on abortion? on 2002-06-03 07:01:02

Nobody would deny you the right to believe what you will...but in the name of all that is good, do not let your beliefs cause the murder of an innocent. As a doctor (assuming you are a medical doctor), I would hope you would harken back to your Hippocratic Oath... "Do no harm". As for your misplaced metaphor, we who would try to convince you not to kill or support those who do are more like firefighters saving children from a burning building than Inquisitors trying to burn you. ========== In Reply To ========== Why do I not have the right to decide for myself that a fetus has no rights? I've thought it over. I've read the liturature. I have a doctor's degree. I am intelligent. I can come to any reasonalbe conclusion I deem appropriate. You may believe what you believe. That is your right. I will believe what I believe. That is my right. Do not tell me what I can and cannot think. Do not tell me what I cannot believe. Do not try to control my brain. Do not force your view of life on me. I will not force my veiw of life on you. Your concept of intellectual freedom when out with the Inquistion (run by the Holy Catholic Church and its infallible Pope where thousands where burned at the stake for what they thought and believed). Sorry I, and all people, will "summarily" decide what they think. Cut out the mind control. Its sick. Your view as to how I can and cannot think is a violation of basic human rights. Sorry, your concept of mind control went out with The Reformation. It will not come back.

The days of The Holy Office (the Inquistion) are over. We think as we please. Thank you.

Posted in What's your view on abortion? on 2002-06-03 06:45:02

We have to deal with the lives that are or will be, not with those that could have been. We can't just have an infinite number of children just pop up. That makes no sense. ========== In Reply To ========== Sure, abortion is taking a human life, but that life wouldn't even exist in the first place had the woman not become pregnant...what's the difference between living for a few months and then being killed and not existing at all? Is the second situation really that much better?

Posted in What's your view on abortion? on 2002-06-03 06:41:58

Let me turn your question back around: Who are we to make a life-ending choice FOR someone else? By disallowing abortion, we're not making any choice, we're simply removing an artificial, destructive, and callous choice that should not be considered in the first place. As for not knowing what it's like, that I grant you. However, I do know that I would die, walk through hell, and shake the devil's hand before killing an innocent person, especially if that innocent person was my own child. I doubt pregnancy is as bad as all that. By saying women "should" have the same freedom that men do, you must assume that men also "should" have that freedom. In my opinion, men should not, and neither should women. Besides, I think that women have some recourse under the law to hold men partially responsible for their pregnancy (child support, etc.). As for the war comment, what's to say that a given child will not be a peacemaker as opposed to a soldier. Perhaps that person that never was might have been that best friend that cheered you up when you were feeling sad. Guess we'll never know, though, because he or she never got the chance. ========== In Reply To ========== ...All sarcasm aside - who are we to make a life-altering choice FOR someone else? I also would like to say that it's a choice you can't even imagine having to make. I can't even imagine having to make it, although it is possible that I'll have to someday should I choose to become sexually active. Men can have sex with whomever they choose with no consequences, and women deserve that same freedom. That means that some women will have abortions. OH NO!!!!! What will this already overpopulated world be like without one more miserable human to fight in our wars? What an abominable idea.

Posted in What's your view on abortion? on 2002-06-03 06:17:59

Forgive me for saying so, but this is kinda dumb. If men could have children, they wouldn't have any moral right to kill their children either. You can't change morals any more or less than you can change human anatomy. With great power (such as the ability to birth children) comes great responsibility (the responsibility not to kill them). ========== In Reply To ========== The notion that one adult has a right to decide the fate of another adult's body baffles me. Maybe I would be more compelled to agree with those who feel that the government has a say in whether a woman should stay pregnant or not if the govermnet was willing to fund the pregnancy and the financial cost of raising the child. Further, our society promotes personal freedom and the notion that every adult is free to engage in sexual activities. The mere nature of a woman's physiology leaves her not only at greater responsibility , but also at greater burden if for whatever reason her precations failed(that is, that she became pregnant despite taking precautions, which is not as uncommon as some may think). A law prohibiting abortion would not only pose intervention into one's personal choices and physiology, but would socially stigmatise women as a subpopulation, because the law would apply only to that segment of the population. Kindly bear in mind that the addition of child into one's life is not a simple change by any stretch of the imagination. One's life changes completely as a consequence of becoming a parent; further, raising a child healthfully and responsibly is an incredibly demanding task that many people can't master. In forcing this subpopulation to keep all fetuses, the government will cause an incredible change in the lives of many women who, like many others, merely engaged in a sexual act (once again, methods of prevention prove faulty more frequently than you might imagine). Further, the government will take upon itself neither the physical and emotional burden of pregnancy nor the change in one's life resulting from the responsibility of raising a child--to adulthood (and to those proponents of adoption, think of the social and psychological burden of giving one's child away--society does not look kindly enough upon those mothers who give their children to adoption for this to be a simple solution by any stretch of the imagination). This burden, again, by its very nature, will be the fate of only one segment of society: women. The mere notion that the govermnet will be free to place such a restrictive burden on the lives of only women is unsettling.