Debate time for me, LT, and anyone else compotent. Stemcell research and abortion

I'm bored (and I promised LT a debate, sort of) so I want to see what you guys think about stemcell research and abortion. I personally am pro-both. I dont think it is killing a fully sentient child if it is done early enough, especially stemcell. Post your feelings if you will.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sedater18

I'm bored (and I promised LT a debate, sort of) so I want to see what you guys think about stemcell research and abortion. I personally am pro-both. I dont think it is killing a fully sentient child if it is done early enough, especially stemcell. Post your feelings if you will.

---

Adult stem-cell lines,have been found to be more promising than fetal lines,as well as more numerous.

As for abortion,it's murder--plain and simple...the soul enters at conception.

The main reason women get abortions,is because they have failed to be personally accountable for their sexual promiscuity.

i dont know much about stem cell research so i really dont have an opinion as far as that goes. i am, however, pro-choice. i am disgusted by women who use abortion as a form of birth control, but that is not always the case. women who conceive due to a rape or women who find out that having the baby could kill them should have the choice above all. but, i cant judge the women who get abortions for other reasons only because ive never been there - so that leaves me at pro-choice.

i just think, personally, that adoption is always the best option if you don't think you could care for a child like you should.

then again i also think that if you arent responsible enough to have a baby you shouldnt be having sex (especially unprotected) in the first place.

Quote:

---

Adult stem-cell lines,have been found to be more promising than fetal lines

---

hah no, they haven't. Where did you hear this? From the voices in your head? A fetal line isn't what I was talking about anyway, I was talking about embryonic stem cells. Embryonic stem cells are harvested from the inner cell mass of the blastocyst 7 to 10 days after fertilization. Fetal stem cells are taken from the germline that will make up the gonads of aborted fetuses. Umbilical cord blood contains stem cells similar to those found in bone marrow, and up to ten times as many of stem cells can be harvested from a placenta as from cord blood. Thats alot of stem cells if you put the last to together with the embryonic ones, or the fetal ones. Embryonic stem cells are more promising then adult stem cells because adult stem cells can't be made to form dopamine producing neurons, where as embryonic can. Stem cells which originate from embryos are seen to have the most potential because of their totipotent propertiesâ??they are able to grow into any of the 200 cell types in the body. Adult stem cells have not yet been identified in all vital organs. In some tissues like the brain, although stem cells exist, they are not very active, and thus do not readily respond to cell injury or damage. Scientists are now also exploring ways in which they can induce the stem cells already present to grow and make the right cell types to replace the damaged ones. Although scientists can grow these cells in culture dishes, they can do so only for a limited time.

Quote:

---

As for abortion,it's murder--plain and simple...the soul enters at conception.

---

"The soul enters the body at conception" Don't let your religion get in the way of your thoughts. Every major religion has commited murder countless times, to get rid of things they don't want. Romans killed christians (I don't know if there is a real name for the religion of rome before christianity, I think everyone just calls it roman mythology.) Muslims killed christians, christians killed muslims, everybody killed jews, jews kill muslims, hindus kill muslims, muslims kill hindus...etc.

Quote:

---

The main reason women get abortions,is because they have failed to be personally accountable for their sexual promiscuity.

---

No shit? Well I'll be damned, never would have thought about that. Some women get abortions because their husband left them after they became pregnant and they have no money/no way to get it, she doesn't think she is going to be able to just give it to an orphanage after she sees it's face. Oh here are some people that could('ve) be(en) saved by embryonic stem cell research.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Torog

Adult stem-cell lines,have been found to be more promising than fetal lines,as well as more numerous.

As for abortion,it's murder--plain and simple...the soul enters at conception.

The main reason women get abortions,is because they have failed to be personally accountable for their sexual promiscuity.

---

Plain and simple huh? Show me your plain and simple proof that a soul enters at conception? I say it does later in pregnancy. You are saying a splitting cell has a soul. You can't argue this. There is no way to prove your point or mine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Torog

Adult stem-cell lines,have been found to be more promising than fetal lines,as well as more numerous.

As for abortion,it's murder--plain and simple...the soul enters at conception.

---

Thats if you believe in souls.. Not everyone has that belief, so it shouldnt be called 'murder' when the person or persons doing it dont believe it to be murder..

as far as im concerned, it should be an individual choice.. it should be legal, definately, just like weed should be, because i think each and everyone one of us has the right to choose.. if you disagree with weed, and its legal, it doesnt mean you have to start getting high.. if abortions are legal, it doesnt mean you have to get an abortion if you disagree with it..

torog, i know you may say that abortion is killing a life, but the lives of many young pregnant women have been spared because they had the right to choose..

i am for early abortions and DEFINATLY for stem cell research, and Torog, you are like most republicans i know, you seem to think that somewhere in the constitution its written that the bible is law, and i agree with everyone else, THERE IS NO PROOF OF 'SOULS'!!!!!!!! Torog, you are one of those people responsible for lack of medicine and technology, our horrible economy, over crouded prisons, and millions of dead soldiers, and i hope you rot in hell

LT this makes me feel bad

Even though I told LT I'd stay away from here, I'd like to repeat some of the prior posts and say that the whole 'soul entering at conception' is a matter of belief and opinion. What kind of evidence do you have to back up such a hard claim, Torog?

...Other than what your 'good book' and your God tell you, of course.

On the abortion issue I would have to say for me there is no choice, I too believe the soul is present from the very spark of life :)
But I also believe that not everyone has the same life as me, or beliefs, or network of support, friends and family etc. so it's not for me to say what's right for anyone other than myself and mine. So I'm Pro-Choice :)

On the stem cell research, I say go for it - anything to help the living. You can be damn sure if one of my kids was sick I'd want them to have as many answers, options and expertise as is available.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clevemire

Even though I told LT I'd stay away from here, I'd like to repeat some of the prior posts and say that the whole 'soul entering at conception' is a matter of belief and opinion. What kind of evidence do you have to back up such a hard claim, Torog?

...Other than what your 'good book' and your God tell you, of course.

---

Until an instrument is devised that can detect the energy of the soul,no one can prove it with solid evidence,but I do believe that I 'felt' something very different,on the day that I concieved my daughter,and other folks have reported similar experiences as well.

In regards to abortion,I don't believe that woman has the 'right' to treat her unborn child as though it were a part of her body,that once the child's cells begin to grow,it becomes an independent life,that deserves protection and respect..and a woman has no more authority to end her child's life-than she would any adult's life. Once a child is concieved,the mother then becomes a vessel,to carry a Blessing from God,and she should put aside her own ego and wants,because the conception of the child,is greater than her and she should do all that she can,to nurture the child until it's born.

Torog I'm with you! You others that are for murder, lack of a soul belief and a person has the right to choose need some help and have issues. In my state when a expecting mother is murdered, the killer is charged with two deaths (no matter how far along she is). Why? Maybe because its two lifes that were murdered??? Late term abortion is a midevil act and it blows my mind here today in the 21st. century we're still engaged. Stem sell research as I understand, would take decades to make something good from it, whereas only weeks to make something bad come from it. However I am still open for learning on this issue; but thats what I have learned so far.

All people have a soul. Some decent others not. The colors are starting to show on some here I see however. Abortion should only happen when a mom is at risk ONLY. There are tons of people wanting children that can't.

Phresh as it gets. You seem to be a work of art. "Torog, you are one of those people responsible for lack of medicine and technology, our horrible economy, over crouded prisons, and millions of dead soldiers, and i hope you rot in hell."

Medicine is advanced here in our great country The United States of America, and we're the leader in technology too, and our economy is at record reports on doing well. In some case's we're braking records (horrible economy; you're listening to the BBC and CBS to much). Over crouded prisons are because in most parts, liberals are to blame becasue states can't afford building or funding expansion because of other social funding programs. Finally millions of dead soldiers~ What~ Where? Get your facts right before you tell someone to rot in hell. This is the problem with you whack jobs, you people act first that ask questions, which is the reason changes for better that much longer!!!! Bring it on.....

I am against abortion, but I think it is a moral decision for the "two" people involved except in special cases, and I don't want to force my morals with law, so I am pro choice. A life, whether it has a soul or not, begins at the seperation of the first cell. Or even at the moment a sperm enters the egg for that matter. What point in life is it ok to snuff life out? I don't believe it is any different to kill a child out side of the body then it is to kill one inside the body. People can say that it is not a life inside the body until a certian term or a certain feature shows up on the child, but the fact remains that it is the begining of a life. It is the most fragle part of life. It is the begining. Stem cell I could care less about. I would not want to see a factory pumping out fetuses though. That would indeed be a disgusting and extremely offencive thing to me. I could argue that abortion is murder, as it is, but that usualy puts me in a bind with being pro-choice. I get stuck on the murder being force against another. If it is wrong to kill another human, and punishable, then killing a fetuse would be the same as killing an old man. Every time this issue comes up I thank god I never killed my kids, and I don't even believe in a god.

Toker

The Abortion Referendum in Ireland
By Phil Mitchinson

"It is a paradox that so much passion and energy should be invested on behalf of the unborn in a state that is confronted daily with its failure to provide for the weakest and most vulnerable of its living. The elderly and dying are jostled about on hospital trolleys. The disabled and their helpers struggle for basic rights. The accident and emergency system is daily and nightly in crisis at the hospitals." (Irish Times editorial, March 5, 2002)

To have an abortion has been a criminal offence in Ireland since 1861. The referendum which has just taken place however, was not aimed at changing that to grant women the right to have an abortion. In recent years there has been some extremely limited reform introduced to allow victims of rape whose own lives are endangered by the threat of suicide arising from their experience of that horrific and violent crime, to legally get an abortion. Now, in 2002 this so-called civilised western democracy, a fully signed-up member of the EU, has attempted to reverse even this.

Almost ten years to the day since 10,000 people marched to demand the right of a young teenage rape victim to have an abortion, the people of Ireland were asked to vote in a referendum for an amendment which would have ruled out the risk of suicide being an acceptable medical reason to allow an abortion to go ahead.

With a turnout of over 40%, this reactionary amendment has been rejected, though only by a narrow majority of just 10,000 votes. To have passed this referendum would have been a major step backwards - a cruel blow to one of the most vulnerable sections of society. Therefore the No vote was important. However, it solves nothing for thousands of women in Ireland. It simply maintains the status quo.

Approximately 7,000 Irish abortions take place every year in Britain. This referendum will not change that. If the government were serious about reducing the number of unwanted or "crisis pregnancies", they would make a start by investing seriously in a programme of education and provide access to information, contraception, etc. They have consistently failed to do even this. There is no chance of them getting to grips with the real social problems at the heart of all the difficulties confronting ordinary working people in Ireland. Decent affordable housing, full employment on a living wage, better education and health services - these are the rights we must fight for. Inevitably such a fight will bring us into conflict with the capitalist system which has clearly demonstrated in its best period, the lengthy economic boom which saw the press label Ireland the Celtic Tiger, that it cannot afford these basics of civilisation for the majority.

The referendum result illustrates that a sea change is taking place in public opinion. Current abortion legislation in Ireland stems from an amendment to the constitution in 1983 which asserts: "The state acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right."

After certain struggles over the right to distribute information describing how to get an abortion abroad in the 1980s, Ireland signed up to the Maastricht Treaty on European union after receiving an assurance that this would not affect the country's strict abortion laws. Many readers outside of Ireland may be unaware of these strict laws, so we will quote them here even though these references might make the text a little laborious.

Then in 1992 came the X case. Justice Costello granted an injunction in the High Court preventing a 14-year-old girl, pregnant as a result of rape, from travelling to the UK for an abortion. The matter had come to the attention of the Attorney General when the GardaÃ* were consulted about getting DNA samples in anticipation of criminal charges. He obtained the injunction to prevent her travelling. There followed an appeal in the Supreme Court.

By a majority of three to two, the court found that, if there was a real and substantial risk to the life, as distinct from the health, of the mother, and that this risk could only be averted by the termination of her pregnancy, this would be lawful. It accepted that there was a real danger that she would commit suicide if she had to carry the child to full term, and that this therefore constituted a real risk to her life. The court lifted the injunction.

The constitution was amended again at the end of 1992 to read:

"The State acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right.

"This subsection shall not limit freedom to travel between the State and another state.

"This subsection shall not limit freedom to obtain or make available, in the State, subject to such conditions as may be laid down by law, information relating to services lawfully available in another state."

In other words the law on abortion could not prevent someone from travelling abroad, or prevent them reading about abortion. It did not however, make it legal to travel abroad to have an abortion.

This was followed in 1997 by the C case. In the C case another raped and pregnant teenager - in the care of the Eastern Health Board - sought an abortion in the UK. This case differed from the X case in that the victim's parents opposed her decision to travel to the UK for an abortion. They had sought an injunction preventing the board from taking her to the UK. Basing themselves on the judgement in the X case the court ruled that she could travel. However, the judge also commented: "The amended Constitution does not now confer a right to abortion outside of Ireland. It merely prevents injunctions against travelling for that purpose."

Even after these changes, which are barely even a minimum of a civilised approach, women remain a long way from obtaining the right to have an abortion in Ireland. These raped teenagers, left suicidal by the trauma they experienced, were allowed to travel to the UK for an abortion.

Recent polls have consistently demonstrated that most people now believe that the option of abortion should be available to women at least in certain circumstances. A poll in Ireland on Sunday (October 2001) showed that 49% of women and men want access to abortion to be made easier rather than harder. This shift in opinion is particularly marked among the young and among women. Sixty percent of women aged 18-34 believe that there should be easier access to abortion facilities.

A poll in the Irish Independent (December 2001) showed that only one in five voters backed a total ban on abortion and that 44 percent backed the Supreme Court's decision in the X case.

Now we have the result of the real poll, the referendum. Notably the No vote was much higher in the main urban centres, especially in Dublin where all 11 constituencies rejected the amendment. This was repeated in other cities like Cork, Limerick and Galway. Meanwhile there was a substantial majority voting Yes in many rural areas. There were complaints too that whilst campaigning is not permitted in or around polling booths many people were confronted by copies of the bible on the registration table in polling stations.

The main purpose of this referendum was an attempt to roll back the Supreme Court ruling by specifically excluding suicide risk as grounds for an abortion. They have failed. The referendum proposed to add two new sub-sections to Article 40.3.3 of the Constitution, quoted above, which asserts the equal right to life of the mother and the unborn. A new Article 40.3.4 stated: "In particular, the life of the unborn in the womb shall be protected in accordance with the provisions of the Protection of Human Life in Pregnancy Act, 2002." Another new Article, 40.3.5, proposed that this Act could not be changed unless approved by the people in a new referendum. The main provisions of this "Protection of Human Life in Pregnancy Bill" were: The threat of suicide, based on the X case, would be removed as a ground for abortion; Abortion will be defined as the intentional destruction by any means of unborn human life after implantation in the womb (this definition presumes that the IUD and the morning-after pill would be legally protected, yet there is no doubt that had the amendment been carried there would have been legal challenges about the use of these forms of contraception); A procedure carried out by a medical practitioner at an approved place to prevent a real and substantial risk of the loss of a woman's life, other than by self-destruction, will not be regarded as an abortion; Anyone aiding or procuring an abortion will be liable for up to 12 years' imprisonment.

The government claimed that if the so-called loophole whereby suicidal women were entitled to an abortion was not closed, then women, presumably with the collusion of the mental health profession, would literally be queuing up to pretend that they were suicidal in order to obtain abortions for a myriad of "social reasons". This type of filthy scare mongering is nothing new.

At the time of the X case there was a disgusting smear campaign against the victim. A book published by Human Life International, The X Case: How Abortion was Brought to Ireland, claimed to reveal the "lies and manipulation" behind the case. Father Michael Cleary, on his Dublin local radio talk show in June 1993, claimed that the X case was "a modelâ?¦planned deliberately to test the amendment" and that there was a great deal of organisation behind it.

The meaning of this was clear: the victim (a 14-year-old girl who had been raped, remember) was a liar acting out a role on behalf of sinister pro-abortion forces. What a nauseating mixture of reaction and cynicism! This same outlook, couched in the more subtle language of legalese, was behind the proposed constitutional amendment which has now been rejected.

Michael McDowell, the Attorney General who drafted the amendment, has explicitly stated that women will lie about rape simply to get an abortion.

In July 2000 he was reported as saying that allowing women who have been made pregnant as a result of rape to have abortions "might lead to a series of false accusations of rape if the means of access to abortion in Ireland were to be made an accusation of rape."

"It might be thought there would be a temptation to characterise sexual intercourse on an occasion giving rise to a pregnancy as non-consensual with a view to availing of that right."

The Attorney General is a "civilised" man and his language is much more polite than that of Father Michael Cleary. But the view of women is the same. They are manipulative liars who will make false accusations of rape simply in order to get an abortion. The vicious slur on the victim in the X case is made vaguer but it remains at the core of the amendment.

So rape is left out of the legal equation because in the words of our civilised friend the Attorney General, women would make up allegations. Similarly they wanted to remove the threat of suicide from the equation because girls and women would cynically and falsely claim to be suicidal.

As the Irish Times asked on March 5: "Has any Western democracy ever been asked to enshrine such a bleak, cruel view of half of its citizens into its fundamental law?" So much for so-called civilisation. What an illustration of the failure of the Irish bourgeoisie to take society forward in the eighty years since independence.

In fact the proposal to discard a woman's possible suicide as a basis for abortion is nothing short of barbaric. Both the young women in the X and C cases were suicidal because of the circumstances surrounding their pregnancies. Their lives had literally been torn apart. And they are not the only ones to have suffered in this way. Incidentally, ten years on and the perpetrator of that heinous crime has again been convicted of raping a teenage girl.

The Irish government has exposed its reactionary hypocrisy. Their position is that such problems must be exported out of sight. A section of the Irish establishment have more or less accepted that abortion is "tolerable", provided the Irish women who have abortions get them abroad. So essentially the only time you can have an abortion is when it is not an abortion but a life-saving operation, or when it is abroad, where a blind eye can be turned.

This whole approach is disgustingly dishonest.

The government claims that its legislation will give legal protection to "medical procedures" (i.e. abortions) carried out to "prevent a real and substantial risk of loss of the woman's life". In reality, abortions which are necessary to save women's lives are carried out regularly in Irish hospitals under the constitutional provision guaranteeing women an "equal right to life". The freedom to travel and to receive information is hardly something to brag about and, in any case, these basic democratic rights were already won in the 1992 abortion referendum.

Moreover, it is important to make the distinction between the freedom to travel and the right to travel. Freedom to travel means little to a woman who cannot afford hundreds of euros to go to get an abortion in Britain. This clearly discriminates against women on the basis of their class. Working-class women are therefore oppressed on two levels - firstly as workers, like the rest of us - but also as women, and we have seen here the attitude the ruling class displays towards women.

Clearly, neither the government nor the so-called pro-life groups give a damn about women, some of whom could be the victims of terrible crimes. Ahern now declares that there will be no new legislation until after a new election. The government has cynically used this referendum to hold on to the support of their coalition partners and to play to the prejudices of what they see as their bedrock support in these forthcoming elections.

Abortion for tens of thousands of women in Ireland already has been or will be a reality. Legislation should not be introduced that denies that reality. On the contrary, women who find themselves in the position of requiring an abortion, for whatever reason, should get assistance not a tar brush and feathers.

There are very many reasons, medical, social and economic why women feel that they can't go through with a pregnancy and therefore abortion should be legalised. Contrary to the despicable opinions expressed by the ruling class, women are not going to treat abortion in a light-minded manner. There must be the right to have an abortion; that doesn't mean we want women to have abortions. The women facing such a choice undoubtedly "want" an abortion least of all. There is no right to choose in a society that does not provide women or anyone else with the right to a job, the right to a home, the right to education and a decent life. The reactionaries who present a woman's right to abortion as a choice similar to selecting different goods from a supermarket shelf are very keen on the right to life before birth, and on the right to life after death; what they care less about it seems is the right of the majority to live while they are alive.

No-one can pretend that abortion is a good thing. We want a society free from the desperate social conditions, the poverty, the lack of housing, adequate childcare and so on which leads to unwanted pregnancy. More, we want a society where the relations between men and women are freed from the impositions of economics. A society where humanity can flourish, no longer restricted by the constraints imposed by prejudice and oppression. We want a society where the right of abortion would increasingly not need to be used. We are fighting for such a socialist society. Until it is established however, we must fight too for every basic right and reform which can improve the conditions of life for ordinary working people.

The southern bourgeoisie stands absolutely condemned for its complete inability to develop Irish society. The result of this referendum demonstrates that a return to the restrictions of the past will not be tolerated by ordinary Irish men and women. In fact, there is a growing desire for social change in Ireland which cannot be satisfied by the capitalist system.

This system uses a million and one devices to hold back, deceive and divide the working class. It ruthlessly uses religion, race and gender for this purpose. Capitalism is a system mired in exploitation and oppression. The exploitation and oppression of women is inextricably linked to the class system. It can only be ended by a wholesale transformation of society and the building of a new socialist world.

March 8, 2002

Sorry for second post but it does explain some of the points raised in my previous one :o

Dervala to Ireland: Grow up
Ten years ago, the X Case made news in Ireland and around the world. A 14-year-old girl was made pregnant by a neighbor who had been abusing her for two years. Her horrified parents planned to take her to Britain for an abortion, and asked the local Gardai if they should keep sample tissue for DNA evidence. Instead, the Attorney General, Harry Whelehan, decided that under Irelandâ??s constitution he had a duty to prevent her from traveling for an abortion. The High Court supported him, but the Supreme Court overturned the case and ruled that pregnant women had the right to travel for an abortion in cases where the life of the mother was threatened, including by suicide.

The rapist was a trusted family friend, and the father of the girl's best friend. Ireland is a country of ironies: she was left in his care when her parents went on a religious pilgrimage to Lourdes. He was a prominent businessman, but in order to protect the victimâ??s identity his name was not revealed at the time the case emerged. We did learn that he blustered and tried to pin the rape and pregnancy on a teenage boy in the neighborhood. The victim was brainwashed as surely as Lolita, fretting in her diary that if she ever got pregnant she would have to say it was A. (the neighbor boy) because otherwise the real father would go to jail since she was underage.

In 1994, he was sentenced to 14 years in jail. He was released after three years. Transcripts the appeal show clearly what an Old Boys club Ireland still is. The judge dwelled on how much this man had suffered by losing his business (subtext: he is One of Us). He acknowledged that the man had tried to pin his crime on an innocent teenager, but said it was irrelevant to the case. The defending barrister pointed out that, bad as his crimes were, it wasnâ??t rape, exactly, though she was twelve years old when it started. The judge seemed satisfied on this point, and stated that he was unlikely to offend again. We donâ??t know what evidence he had to support this opinion, but can guess it was because he was One of Us, and they are tempting little hussies, they are.

After his release he was granted a taxi licence. Within a year, he picked up a fare, a fifteen year old girl.
â??Youâ??re a lovely looking girl,â?� he told, and then he drove her to an alley where there were no security cameras and raped her repeatedly.
Irish girls and women are coolheadedâ??we have to be. She memorized his badge number, and they tracked him down.
On Thursday, this man was sentenced again. To just three more years.

On the same day, Ireland voted on a referendum that proposed to roll back the Supreme Court decision made following the X Case ten years before. The government sought to get rid of the provision that allowed suicidal women to travel for an abortionâ??a weird law that had local Health Boards paying the fare for young women to get Manchester abortions. The referendum also proposed a sentence of up to 12 years for anyone who procured an abortion, or helped procure one. It was not lost on the public that the X Case man got six years for his two rapes, but his victims could have got 24 years between them. The referendum was defeated, but by just ten thousand votes. Oddly, some of the most rabid pro-lifers campaigned for a No vote, believing that the proposed amendment did not go far enough to protect the unborn. I like to think it was their votes that tipped the balance.

Meanwhile, another rape victim, beaten black and blue by a man she met at a party, had to listen in court while the crime was described as â??a social rape.â?? Like croquet.

I hear the ugly, booming tones of these men who run the country in the judgments and the legislation I read. Their world is changing, and they are almost wily enough to stay ahead of the game. Schedule a referendum midweek, so the huge student population wonâ??t be at home to vote. Distract the country with philosophical debates on the rights of the Unborn, so that the reality of how we treat the Born can be glossed over. Allow another country to clean up our messes, like a butcher in Buddhist Tibet.

But the world is changing, like it or not. One in nine Irish pregnancies ends in an abortion in Britain, according to estimates published in the Irish Times. Mr. Judge, Mr. Attorney General, Mr. Taoiseach: that means your daughters, your sisters, your girlfriends, your wives, your fourteen-year-old next-door neighbors are traveling for the abortions they canâ??t get at home. Theyâ??re just not telling you.

Thanks for that Lulu.. Torog, I dont see how you can argue with that. Abortion is, and always will be, a horrible thing. But sometimes it is necessary. The law, in all our countries, need to change. I mean, like Lulu's post said, the rapist got six years in jail for two rapes, but both of the victims would have got 12 years in jail each for having an abortion as a result of those rapes! That, my friends, is sickening. Nobody can disagree that that is dispicable.

The ONLY reason modern society views abortion as wrong (the same reason it views drug taking, using the 'F word', homosexuality, and most of the other 'sins' as wrong) is because the Bible says they are wrong.. If the bible did not exist, then the question of wether these things would be right or wrong would not exist, because we would make our own choice, and it would hopefully have been the right one. But anyway, you don't believe in abortion because of your religious brainwashing, but that in no way means you have to impose those beliefs on others, and it certainly doesnt mean those beliefs should be the law! And even if you believe they should, should women not get the right to choose? Surely "murdering" the life of an unborn baby justifies saving the life of the unborn baby and the mother????

peace

http://maddox.xmission.com/c.cgi?u=regressive

Every female on BCP is committing abortion. Birth Control Pills prevent implantation of a fertilized egg (ie, a bit of a problem for those life begins at fert). Going to stop morning after pills too? Deformed or chromosomal abhorations are to be kept also? Will the government that forces their birth also pay for their survival. Borderline survivals of premature chromosomally healthy children run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars just for their immediate survival. Who will take all the unwanted children, there are already hundreds of thousands. Viable life does not begin until around the 3rd trimester. So apparently these slave women forced into conscription by UnCosntitutional laws to carry a parasitic fetus, have no control over their lives or bodies? Who will be financially responsible for those that die or become vegetables, due to this conscription? Denying Constitutional Rights always produces more harm than benefit.

Ed Ward, MD :(

:) babies are neat little critters, but heres a phrase we're all familiar with..POPULATION EXPLOSION! :eek:
Yay...anyway, i believe we all have souls, including animals. :rolleyes:

Thanks Lulu. Yes if it's risking the health of the mother to be, and a rape victim, especially a young girl, I agree the removal of the unborn in the earlier stage should be. All other reasons are barbaric and should be deemed murder and he/she that commits this act should be punished by the laws set by trial.

Quote:

---

Every female on BCP is committing abortion. Birth Control Pills prevent implantation of a fertilized egg (ie, a bit of a problem for those life begins at fert). Going to stop morning after pills too? Deformed or chromosomal abhorations are to be kept also? Will the government that forces their birth also pay for their survival. Borderline survivals of premature chromosomally healthy children run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars just for their immediate survival. Who will take all the unwanted children, there are already hundreds of thousands. Viable life does not begin until around the 3rd trimester. So apparently these slave women forced into conscription by UnCosntitutional laws to carry a parasitic fetus, have no control over their lives or bodies? Who will be financially responsible for those that die or become vegetables, due to this conscription? Denying Constitutional Rights always produces more harm than benefit.

---

Very well put. You pretty much said exactly what I was trying to articulate.

ok so this is my argument over the justification of abortion, just with a lot more letters.


The world's population is now about 5.9 billion and it is still expanding very rapidly, despite a marginal slowing over the last couple of years. Every day we share the Earth and its resources with 250,000 more people than the day before; every year, there are about another 90 million mouths to feed.
It is the equivalent of adding a Philadelphia to the world population every week; a Los Angeles every two weeks; a Mexico every year; and a US and Canada every three years.

http://www.dhushara.com/book/diversit/bomb.htm

"Viable life does not begin until around the 3rd trimester."

What is it that makes a life viable?

"Every female on BCP is committing abortion. Birth Control Pills prevent implantation of a fertilized egg (ie, a bit of a problem for those life begins at fert)".

Yes, they are self aborting a child if they use the morning after pill. If left alone a child would grow. If it is not aborting a life, what is it like clipping a toe nail or something?

"Going to stop morning after pills too?"

Maybe even rubbers too! Actualy, I think the morning after pill is the best way to go if your going to abort a child.

"Deformed or chromosomal abhorations are to be kept also?"

Yes Hitler, ever retards. No really though, if it can be proven that the child is going to be severly deformed or retarted, then the best thing to do may be to end the life before it has a chance to suffer.

"Will the government that forces their birth also pay for their survival."

No, the Tax payers would. Just like they do now. Say, why not just kill all the people the government has to pay for. Shit yeah, that would do away with welfare once and for all. Killing people because the government might have to pay to help them survive is not exactly something I wish to get started doing. It seems rather owellian to me. It reminds me of something Lenin might do, or hitler to for that matter.

"Borderline survivals of premature chromosomally healthy children run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars just for their immediate survival. Who will take all the unwanted children, there are already hundreds of thousands."

Who decides if the child is to deformed to live? Would you have the government force these abortions? If the government was going to have to pay, do you think it should be able to kill the life if it wants to, or do you think that should be left up to mom and dad?

"Viable life does not begin until around the 3rd trimester. "

Says you. I say different. I say without the fert of the egg, you would have no life. It is undeniable that life starts at the fert of the egg. There is no life before that happens, there is no life without that happing. To me, that means life begins there. I guess to you the begining of a horse race is a couple yards after they start running. For me the race begins when they jump out of the gate.

"So apparently these slave women forced into conscription by UnCosntitutional laws to carry a parasitic fetus, have no control over their lives or bodies?"

No one forced them to get fucked. Well, unless it was rape, but that falls under special conditions. Could you please tell me how come these girls figure is more importent then the lives of a child? Parasite??? Your kidding right? Do you have any children? Do you consider yourself a parasite?

Our government is in place to secure and keep secure our Freedoms and rights. It doesn't do that anymore, but that is the intent of it. Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness are unalienable rights. Life is to be protected as strictly as liberty. As you can see, both are under constent attack. What constitutional right does a women have to kill a child?

"Who will be financially responsible for those that die or become vegetables, due to this conscription?"

Money is not more importent then life. If you think it is, then you have a serious problem. You seem like maybe your the type that would let a pet die if it was going to cost you to have it cured. Are you that kind of person? Your trying to make this out to be about anything but healthy babies. I think you know good and well that most aborted children are perfectly healthy children. I guess you think that a person aborting a life because they just don't feel like having a child, or they don't want to get fat, or some other vain reason is a constitutional right also? Well I don't think it is. If the constitution protects anyone, it is the unborn childs right to life that it protects.

"Denying Constitutional Rights always produces more harm than benefit."

I won't argue with you on that. I will argue that your denying the childs right to life by killing it. I'm thinking a persons whole life is a little more importent then a few months of being prego. No one forced them to get fucked, remeber that? You are forcing the child to die though, and that is wrong.

Have you ever had an abortion? My sister had a few, and I can tell ya that it trumatized her every time. I couldn't let that happen to someone that was a part of me, and I now have 4 kids that do nothing but make my life worth living. You can tell yourself that it's ok to do it, and that it is not a life, but I think deep down inside you know that it is a life.

Toker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Torog

Until an instrument is devised that can detect the energy of the soul,no one can prove it with solid evidence,but I do believe that I 'felt' something very different,on the day that I concieved my daughter,and other folks have reported similar experiences as well.

---

I see. Even though I have no children, I have concieved before (eventually lost to miscarriage), and I never felt anything. But then again, maybe I'm heartless. Who knows...
I still believe it's a matter of opinion as to when real life/soul is present.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Torog

In regards to abortion,I don't believe that woman has the 'right' to treat her unborn child as though it were a part of her body,that once the child's cells begin to grow,it becomes an independent life,that deserves protection and respect..and a woman has no more authority to end her child's life-than she would any adult's life. Once a child is concieved,the mother then becomes a vessel,to carry a Blessing from God,and she should put aside her own ego and wants,because the conception of the child,is greater than her and she should do all that she can,to nurture the child until it's born.

---

Even though I don't agree with this, I respect your reasoning behind it. Personally though, I don't hold any life in higher regard than any other (baby/child or not), but that's just me. So of course, I am pro-choice. This world is becoming vastly overpopulated as it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HiGuy

You others that are for murder, lack of a soul belief and a person has the right to choose need some help and have issues.

---

I'm sorry that you believe that everyone that does not see eye to eye with you 'has issues'. You must be one important person, if we are to base all of our beliefs with yours in order to be mentally stable.
But... I think I'll stick with my own thoughts, thank you.

Abortion is always going to happen. Although I am a religious man, I believe we need sensible laws and resrictions on it that are not mixed with religous beliefs. I would rather have a pro-choice country than a no-choice country where women have to resort to dangerous methods for abortion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sawleaf

Abortion is always going to happen. Although I am a religious man, I believe we need sensible laws and resrictions on it that are not mixed with religous beliefs. I would rather have a pro-choice country than a no-choice country where women have to resort to dangerous methods for abortion.

---

Agreed, but in England you can have an abortion up to 24weeks gestation.
My friends daughter was born at 22weeks and is now a bouncing ,screaming, "normal" :) 6yr old little girl.
I have seen images of 24wk gest. aborted fetuses, most with decapitated heads lying beside them in pics (sorry for horrific details) because they couldn't be aborted intact. This is barbaric :mad:

ya lulu...late term abortions are crude and inhumane. we can do better and i think few people that knew a little about it would disagree, too. ( isn't there a "morning after" shot or something that will terminate the pregnancy in it's embroyonic state? ) :confused:

The morning after pill works up to 72hours after intercourse and in some countries there is an abortion pill that can be used up to 9weeks (I think)but I'm unsure of the details.

"Even though I have no children, I have concieved before (eventually lost to miscarriage), and I never felt anything. But then again, maybe I'm heartless. Who knows..."

You did not kill the baby, it died. There is a difference.

Toker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Libertarian Toker

"Even though I have no children, I have concieved before (eventually lost to miscarriage), and I never felt anything. But then again, maybe I'm heartless. Who knows..."

You did not kill the baby, it died. There is a difference.

Toker

---

Well yes, you're right about that.
I probably worded that incorrectly. Trust me, I felt nothing but sorrow when my girlfriend had to go in for the DNC procedure...

I meant to say that I never felt anything at the time of conception. No new life or soul or anything, as Torog stated. But now that I think about it, I guess that's a matter of spirituality to begin with, which is something that I am not into. So who knows, really...

Ah, this kind of talk is depressing me. I could use a fat joint right here and now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Torog

Until an instrument is devised that can detect the energy of the soul,no one can prove it with solid evidence,but I do believe that I 'felt' something very different,on the day that I concieved my daughter,and other folks have reported similar experiences as well...

---

that thing you felt was a hard on, followed by you blowin your load in your wifes cooch, its called sex

heheh, that made me laugh