Abortion

[socralynnek]

The poll is not neutral. It's suggesting the answer already.
Cause much depends onwhat your definition of "life" is. When does a fetus begin to live?
Does it live already when it's just one cell?
For me, it does live from the moment where the fetus has a slight chance to survive on its own. And from that moment on, I am against abortion.

[Sammy gags]

Please read some more about HIV. I guess all those intravenous drug users are just having too much sex?

HIV passed by IV drugs, by blood transfusion, & breastmilk is barely anything compared 2 ppl passing it by having sex

[jay_a2j]

The poll is not neutral. It's suggesting the answer already.
Cause much depends onwhat your definition of "life" is. When does a fetus begin to live?
Does it live already when it's just one cell?
For me, it does live from the moment where the fetus has a slight chance to survive on its own. And from that moment on, I am against abortion.

So, tha'd be about 2 years old. Wow! A newborn can't survive on its own. If left alone it would die.

[socralynnek]

The poll is not neutral. It's suggesting the answer already.
Cause much depends onwhat your definition of "life" is. When does a fetus begin to live?
Does it live already when it's just one cell?
For me, it does live from the moment where the fetus has a slight chance to survive on its own. And from that moment on, I am against abortion.

So, tha'd be about 2 years old. Wow! A newborn can't survive on its own. If left alone it would die.

Sorry if I didn't make myself clear enough, what i wanted to say is: where it has the chance to survive outside of the womb of the mother if feed and be held warm.

[Jolly Roger]

The soul must be very small if God can breath it in at conception. Is that why no one has ever been able to find it or is it because the soul is invisible or what? Does it bear any relation to soul food or soul music?

[Backglass]

Please read some more about HIV. I guess all those intravenous drug users are just having too much sex?

HIV passed by IV drugs, by blood transfusion, & breastmilk is barely anything compared 2 ppl passing it by having sex

Does that make it any different? Exactly how much is "barely anything". Can you state your source please?

[Sammy gags]

im just saying in general, more ppl have sex than use IV drugs, so most likely it will be spread more by sex
& is it a theory that AIDS is now active in humans because a guy had sex with a monkey? or is it a fact?

[Backglass]

is it a theory that AIDS is now active in humans because a guy had sex with a monkey? or is it a fact?

Urban Legend.

[Mirak]

No, I believe when the sperm fertilizes the egg is when the soul enters the child.

I submit to you, that since the sperm has no soul and that the egg has no soul, by the principle of "you can't get something from nothing" AKA "Life cannot come from non-life" that you can't get a soul out of no soul.

Unless the soul is breathed into the child by God, at conception.

...a whole new dimension to the term blow job...

[Paulicus]

I'm pro-life but what it all ends up being is the parents choice.

Huh? Thats like saying "I am against the death penalty but hey, if the state wants to kill a convict, then ok".

You my friend are pro-choice. (THE HORROR!!!! )

YOU might do something different, but arent going to impose your beliefs on others. Thank You.

If people could control themselves in regards to sex we wouldn't have AIDS now would we.

Please read some more about HIV. I guess all those intravenous drug users are just having too much sex?

As far as the parents choice part goes I also had the babies who end up in dumpters in the sentance after that, which was my point. And AIDS started in Africa, which I'm sure is rampant with drug use like the states And beyond that, arn't more gay's afflicted with HIV than non gays.

[mightyal]

Drug misuse is rife in Africa. In sub-saharan Africa, where the vast majority of AIDS victims live, transmission, is overwhelmingly through heterosexual intercourse. It is only in the first world, that gay sex and intravenous drug-use are the primary vectors.

[cowshrptrn]

I'm pro-life but what it all ends up being is the parents choice.

Huh? Thats like saying "I am against the death penalty but hey, if the state wants to kill a convict, then ok".

You my friend are pro-choice. (THE HORROR!!!! )

YOU might do something different, but arent going to impose your beliefs on others. Thank You.

If people could control themselves in regards to sex we wouldn't have AIDS now would we.

Please read some more about HIV. I guess all those intravenous drug users are just having too much sex?

As far as the parents choice part goes I also had the babies who end up in dumpters in the sentance after that, which was my point. And AIDS started in Africa, which I'm sure is rampant with drug use like the states And beyond that, arn't more gay's afflicted with HIV than non gays.

This jsut shows how ignorant you are of the transmission of AIDS through sex in africa. Usually it just barely borders on consensual. If anyone admits to having aids they are socially shunned, and to rpove they don't have aids they are under societal pressure to have unprotected sex to "prove" they dont' have AIDS. Theres a reason that many Africans aren't using condoms that are being supplied by humanitarian forces: it shwos as a weakness in society. Its not that they're having wild orgies in Africa.

[Paulicus]

I'm pro-life but what it all ends up being is the parents choice.

Huh? Thats like saying "I am against the death penalty but hey, if the state wants to kill a convict, then ok".

You my friend are pro-choice. (THE HORROR!!!! )

YOU might do something different, but arent going to impose your beliefs on others. Thank You.

If people could control themselves in regards to sex we wouldn't have AIDS now would we.

Please read some more about HIV. I guess all those intravenous drug users are just having too much sex?

As far as the parents choice part goes I also had the babies who end up in dumpters in the sentance after that, which was my point. And AIDS started in Africa, which I'm sure is rampant with drug use like the states And beyond that, arn't more gay's afflicted with HIV than non gays.

This jsut shows how ignorant you are of the transmission of AIDS through sex in africa. Usually it just barely borders on consensual. If anyone admits to having aids they are socially shunned, and to rpove they don't have aids they are under societal pressure to have unprotected sex to "prove" they dont' have AIDS. Theres a reason that many Africans aren't using condoms that are being supplied by humanitarian forces: it shwos as a weakness in society. Its not that they're having wild orgies in Africa.

I'm sure if society stepped in and had everyone in the world tested for AIDS in an effort to stop its spread, everyone would be yelling human rights violations.

[Caleb the Cruel]

I am against abortion.
I am just hoping that the Supreme Court will over-turn Roe vs Wade(sp).

[redsoxfan18]

Pro-life because no one has the right to end life but God.

Right now, while I'm not having sex, am I a murderer? Thousands of sperm inside of me are dying as I'm typing this, and all of them could be potential lives. How is that different from a fetus without a functioning brain? Am I killing millions of people each day by not letting them reach an egg? It's not my choice. Even if I was constantly engaging in sexual intercourse, only one of the millions of sperm I ejaculate would be reaching the egg to produce life anyway.

your sperm inside of you hasnt started a life yet so i dont see how u can even start to consider that the same thing

[cowshrptrn]

Well a zygote, and fetus are POTENTIAL lives, they have no nervous system, and are incapable of feeling things, jsut like a sperm or egg are a potential for life. I see how the metaphor slash used is a bit of a stretch, but if you follow his (and my) belief on whether or not a fetus is a life or potential life then it makes sense.

Since whether or not to have an abortion is really what each person believes about the life of a fetus, then it is immoral to legislate and ban it because that would be forcing one group's beliefs onto another groups.

[jay_a2j]

Well a zygote, and fetus are POTENTIAL lives, they have no nervous system, and are incapable of feeling things, jsut like a sperm or egg are a potential for life. I see how the metaphor slash used is a bit of a stretch, but if you follow his (and my) belief on whether or not a fetus is a life or potential life then it makes sense.

Since whether or not to have an abortion is really what each person believes about the life of a fetus, then it is immoral to legislate and ban it because that would be forcing one group's beliefs onto another groups.

Give me a break with the "Potential" life argument! That was no doubt a liberal defined term. Its either life or it isn't life. You can't get life from that which is not living, therefore there is no such thing as "potential life".

[mightyal]

give me a break from this can't get life from non-life argument. It is no doubt an extreme right-wing fundamentalist christian term. It defines all shades of grey as black or white and makes no logical or moral sense.

[jay_a2j]

give me a break from this can't get life from non-life argument. It is no doubt an extreme right-wing fundamentalist christian term. It defines all shades of grey as black or white and makes no logical or moral sense.

get your own material!

[vtmarik]

give me a break from this can't get life from non-life argument. It is no doubt an extreme right-wing fundamentalist christian term. It defines all shades of grey as black or white and makes no logical or moral sense.

Well I've always felt that the reason Christians lash out like they do sometimes is because there's no balance in their pantheon.

Every great pantheon; the egyptians, the greeks, the vikings; all had balance. There were Gods that were good and at least one god that was evil. Now these pantheons derived their worship en masse. Some would ask Odhinn for good fortune in battle, others would ask Aphrodite for success in love. The evil gods served their place, and were understood as a part of the great cosmic order of things. You can't have good without evil, light without dark, etc.

Christianity, unfortunately, does not have this sense of duality and balance. You're either good or you're screwed. This creates a massive amount of pressure and hyper inflates what Freud called the Superego, the societal pressures on the psyche. So anything that isn't clear cut must be eliminated because things are black and white in monothiestic religions such as Christianity and Islam.

Polytheistic and semi-theistic religions don't suffer from this overinflated superego simply because the nature of both the good and evil sides of man are given equal time. And in the case of semi-theists, like the Satanists, there is no debate on the nature of good and evil because it's all a given.


And sperm are alive, so is the ovum. But there's a difference between that which is alive and that which is a person. A bacteria is alive, but when you get a bacterial infection you take antibiotics. A mold is alive, but if it's growing on your bread you toss out the bread. A zygote is alive, but it ain't a fucking person! It's a collection of cells, it doesn't become a person until the brain forms (which psychologists and scientists believe the personality exists). Does a human body with no brain count as a person? No. It may have been a person at some time but it ain't anymore, now it's just meat with a face.

[jay_a2j]

give me a break from this can't get life from non-life argument. It is no doubt an extreme right-wing fundamentalist christian term. It defines all shades of grey as black or white and makes no logical or moral sense.

Well I've always felt that the reason Christians lash out like they do sometimes is because there's no balance in their pantheon.

Every great pantheon; the egyptians, the greeks, the vikings; all had balance. There were Gods that were good and at least one god that was evil. Now these pantheons derived their worship en masse. Some would ask Odhinn for good fortune in battle, others would ask Aphrodite for success in love. The evil gods served their place, and were understood as a part of the great cosmic order of things. You can't have good without evil, light without dark, etc.

Christianity, unfortunately, does not have this sense of duality and balance. You're either good or you're screwed. This creates a massive amount of pressure and hyper inflates what Freud called the Superego, the societal pressures on the psyche. So anything that isn't clear cut must be eliminated because things are black and white in monothiestic religions such as Christianity and Islam.

Polytheistic and semi-theistic religions don't suffer from this overinflated superego simply because the nature of both the good and evil sides of man are given equal time. And in the case of semi-theists, like the Satanists, there is no debate on the nature of good and evil because it's all a given.


And sperm are alive, so is the ovum. But there's a difference between that which is alive and that which is a person. A bacteria is alive, but when you get a bacterial infection you take antibiotics. A mold is alive, but if it's growing on your bread you toss out the bread. A zygote is alive, but it ain't a fucking person! It's a collection of cells, it doesn't become a person until the brain forms (which psychologists and scientists believe the personality exists). Does a human body with no brain count as a person? No. It may have been a person at some time but it ain't anymore, now it's just meat with a face.

Good grief! You want balance? God is Good, Satan is evil. There is your balance. God wants you to accept God. Satan wants you to reject God. In the United states we don't convict a person when there is reasonable doubt (leave OJ out of this). So, if there is reasonable doubt that a zygoat is in fact a human being it is unethical to kill it. (note I said "unethical" not "immoral") The problem arises when there are 50,000 different definitions as to when life starts. (ie. a human being is formed) I stand by "the moment the sperm fertilizes the egg".

[vtmarik]

Good grief! You want balance? God is Good, Satan is evil. There is your balance. God wants you to accept God. Satan wants you to reject God.

If those were equal choices, I'd agree with you. Unfortunately following God leads to paradise and following Satan leads to eternal damnation and punishment. Forgive me for looking at that and not seeing a real balance.

Plus acceptance and rejection aren't balanced ideals. Accepting God while also accepting Satan is tantamount to rejecting God. There's no middle ground in Christianity. Hence, no balance.

As any expert on levers and see-saws can tell you, the two points have to be at a proper distance from a fulcrum to achieve a net torsional force of 0. To reapply this physics lesson to the issue at hand: According to traditional doctrine, there is no fulcrum between Satan and God. There's no generally accepted middle point between the two options, hence no balance.

In the United states we don't convict a person when there is reasonable doubt (leave OJ out of this). So, if there is reasonable doubt that a zygote is in fact a human being it is unethical to kill it. (note I said "unethical" not "immoral") The problem arises when there are 50,000 different definitions as to when life starts. (ie. a human being is formed) I stand by "the moment the sperm fertilizes the egg".

We're not talking about when life starts, we're talking about when life becomes sentient life. Dogs are alive, so are cats, amoeba, and skin cells. What the real issue is when does consciousness arise, when does the animal become a person. The sperm and the egg are alive, so why not say that life starts even before the two meet. It's 100% accurate to say that, and its also irrefutable. However, it's inconvenient to your world-view.

If we're going to talk about the soul and not life, we have to talk about sentience. A cluster of 24 cells in a woman's uterus is no more sentient than a mold. A fetus, no larger than a quarter, is not sentient.

When does the sentience form? I don't know, but it's definitely not in the first 13 weeks.
Source: Conjecture based upon rate of fetal growth. Example available at http://www.wprc.org/fetal.phtml

[jay_a2j]

Why not week 6?????

The embryo is about 1/5 of an inch in length. A primitive heart is beating. Head, mouth, liver, and intestines begin to take shape.

[vtmarik]

Why not week 6?????

The embryo is about 1/5 of an inch in length. A primitive heart is beating. Head, mouth, liver, and intestines begin to take shape.

The head is taking shape, which means that currently there isn't a fully formed brain in there. Animals with brains similar to ours, while not ours, don't seem to have the level of sentience that we have.

Also, can you comprehend the size of 1/5 of an inch? A dime is .7 inches in diameter, 1/5 of an inch is .2 inches.

A dime's diameter is 3.5 times the size of that fetus.

[Gerazan]

Its amazing to me how lightly people refer to life and death until its their own or someone they love whose life is at stake for real.

If it was you in the womb what would be your choice?

Abortion is a procedure that should be used when its necessary and in cases of rape or incest but IMO not just to end a reg pregnancy.

Its legal murder and no matter how much you justify it, if you do it for purely selfish reasons and you have a conscience, you will regret it until you die.

There's an old song with a line in it that goes "Everything that cha do, will come back to you" and theres never been a truer line spoken by anyone.