The point here is that you clearly don't understand what and where that "life" begins. Certainly not at conception. Why? Here is what a fertilized egg looks like at the moment of conception:
https://img.webmd.com/dtmcms/live/webmd/consumer_assets/site_images/article_thumbnails/slideshows/conception_slideshow/650x350_conception_slideshow.jpg
Can that live outside a womb? Can that breathe, eat, walk or talk? That's what conception looks like. That cannot live on its own. Neither can this:
https://www.sciencenews.org/sites/default/files/styles/article-main-image-large/public/2016/02/main/blogposts/020116_ti_gene-editing-embryo.jpg?itok=Rp98IeXB
That's when the cells divide. Still can't life outside the womb because guess what, it's not a baby. And don't give me any crap about it being a possible baby. It's not.
Can this live outside the womb:
https://azcdn.multibrand.pgsitecore.com/en-GB/-/media/Pampers/Pampers-UK/Images/Pregnancy-Calendar-2-0/Embryo/700/embryoimage-week08-700.png?v=1-201711081209
No. It can't. it might start to look like something, but at this stage it looks like a cat, dog, or some other embryo. It is not a baby. The heart and brain aren't even developed yet. Religious nuts think it's a heartbeat, but it isn't. It's a muscle being formed. The brain is not even a brain yet. There is nothing that can live outside of the womb and still not a baby. It can't feel because it's spine hasn't developed yet and pain receptors in the brain have not formed. So all this crap about that feeling pain is nonsense. If you'd learn biology instead of reading a book of mythology, you'd understand. Even by the end of the first trimester it still can't feel pain. So again no crap about that feeling pain. Pain receptors aren't even formed until the third trimester so again, a fetus cannot feel pain.
And when talking about third trimester "abortions".... You can't abort in your third trimester. The reason a pregnancy is interrupted is because of developmental issues in the fetus, including birth defects, encephaly (no brain present but a brain stem), various congenital abnormalities, and the life of the mother. And no woman ever makes that decision lightly. Ever!
The point here is that a woman has the right to choose, just like you have the right to choose. If you force women to have pregnancies they don't want that is called slavery. Full stop! For whatever reason a woman aborts, it has nothing whatsoever to do with you. Unless you allow me to make healthcare choices for you in whatever capacity that is, stay the hell out of my business and my healthcare rights.
When you talk of "giving the baby up for adoption", the system can't hold the live children already in the system. Couples want newborns, not six or seven year olds. They will max out of the system before an adoption takes place. So you have an 18 year old who has never been outside the system and doesn't know the slightest thing about being loved or what it's like to be in a family. That gives rise to possible drug use, prostitution, lower intelligence and no ability to get a good paying job, so the cycle renews itself and if that person is a girl, she is more likely to have a child herself that will also likely enter the system. So please feel free to let me know what your solution is to this because I'm all ears.
reply
share
strntz (12225)
6 years ago
You've got so much bullshit there I don't intend to go point to point.
Pick just one and I'll answer it.
reply
share
prometheus1816 (1060)
6 years ago
I stated FACTS you are clearly not capable of understanding because you think it's your way or the highway. You think only you have the right to steer the narrative with your constant bible belting bullshit. So I'm going to state something here for clarity STAY AWAY FROM MY REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS. YOU cannot carry a child. YOU cannot give birth to one. Until you can you have no business telling me or any other women what to do with OUR bodies. FULL ON FRIGGING STOP!!!!!
reply
share
strntz (12225)
6 years ago
I am not a "bible belting" bullshitter. I'm agnostic at best. I don't belong to a church. I don't need anyone to tell me what my conscience knows: abortion simply ends a human life.
Labeling all anti-abortion folks as religious fanatics is a fine way to divert the debate away from the subject. Strawman #1
Making the termination of a pregnancy an argument about female "reproductive rights" is another way to divert the argument away from the subject. Your "reproductive rights" ends a human life no matter how noble the word "rights" is. Is it an even swap? Well...
Strawman #2
Your second strawman, if allowed, would effectively eliminate half the population from the debate leaving just women who all agree that abortions are just fine. But just like your incorrect assumption about my being a religious person, you also mistakenly assume that all anti-abortion people are male. That's wrong. My wife (also not religious) is a strong pro-lifer and is the person who changed my opinion with her scientifically backed logic. So if I was a woman, what would you say? How would you dismiss my opinion? I'll pass along your argument to my wife.
The point here is that a woman has the right to choose, just like you have the right to choose. If you force women to have pregnancies they don't want that is called slavery.
Interesting that you would use slavery (a subject of personal interest to me) as an analogy to abortion "rights". Many people of good will stood idly by and watched the enslavement, torture, and even death of other humans because it didn't involve them. The southern slave owners had their legal right to choose what they did with their property and northerners were told they had no business meddling in something that didn't concern them because they lived in states where slavery wasn't allowed. Some did advocate for the slaves and I'll advocate for the innocent victims of abortion.
And no, yelling "full stop" does not summarily dismiss an argument simply because you don't agree with it.
reply
share
[email protected] (5854)
6 years ago
strntz- I totally feel your passion for this subject. But it's hard to get pro "choicers" to change until they have a true change of heart.
What I find curious (and I am female) is how pro choice women state emphatically that the man (father) has absolutely NO say and NO rights. Yet if they choose to continue the pregnancy, he suddenly HAS the responsibility of supporting his child. hard to have it both ways.
I guess the lesson here for men is to not have sex with a woman unless you are on the same page about possible procreation (the very thing sex was designed to do, not to be just another fun past time).
reply
share
strntz (12225)
6 years ago
I guess the lesson here for men is to not have sex with a woman unless you are on the same page about possible procreation (the very thing sex was designed to do, not to be just another fun past time).
True. In a perfect world, we would all do the logical thing and not let our emotions or instincts take over.
Some day, I may post a short story about something my wife and I went through when we were young regarding this subject. We've never told anybody about this and perhaps the anonymity of the internet may convince me to do so.
reply
share
prometheus1816 (1060)
6 years ago
Well for us progressive women, we believe in taking responsibility for the pregnancy in all ways. If we CHOSE to carry the pregnancy to term, WE take care of it only. I don't agree to trap a man and force him to pay child support. It's my CHOICE to have a baby. It's not my choice to force a man to give me money for a CHOICE I made.
The lesson here for men is to protect himself from causing a pregnancy that way he's not having to pay money for something he doesn't want. Conversely, it's beholden to a woman not to LIE to a man for the sake of her own financial gain. See how that works?
And no, sex was not "designed" solely for procreation. The clitoris has more nerve endings than the penis. That was designed for HER pleasure. Yet religious practices or "traditional" practices would cut that off lest a girl/woman pleasure herself. See I don't believe if a guy masturbates it's wasting a seed. You do you boo. I also do not believe in Female Genital Mutilation done solely to scar a child for life. I also don't believe in honour killings, Sharia Law, or anything that does not allow girls/women to live their lives to their fullest potential. And that includes a pregnancy they are either ill-equipped to handle, or financially incapable of supporting. And eek gads, should an 11 year old be raped by her father, brother, uncle, grandfather, et al and become pregnant. Forcing her to have a baby from rape/incest is inhumane and cruel. But hey, just so long as she fulfills her "god" given right to carry a fetus for your cult, right?
reply
share
strntz (12225)
6 years ago
Why did you reply to me? I'm not religious. I said that earlier and if you want to ready back a few years both here and on IMDB, you'll see other posts where I've said that.
My opinion regarding abortion is based on my morals and conscience.
If you could have someone enter your uterus and rip your baby apart piece by piece because it's not convenient, then that's who you are.
You've totally dehumanized the baby growing inside a mother's womb, which is necessary to convince yourself an abortion is like removing an apendix. My people were dehumanized and forced into slavery. Jews were dehumanized by Nazis and herded into gas chambers.
Any argument about "rights" totally diverts the conversation away from what happens during an abortion. This is strictly a morals issue and no deflecting to "choice" or "rights" changes that, although it attempts to do so.
And I'm going to post the following link to a 6 minute video where an abortion doctor explains to a House committee why he stopped doing them. Pro-abortionists won't watch this but anyone who's on the fence should watch this from a medical doctor who performed some two thousand abortions:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A16gzm9eaa8
reply
share
prometheus1816 (1060)
5 years ago
Don't care to watch your video because it has no presence in my INDEPENDENT MEDICAL DECISIONS BETWEEN MY DOCTOR AND ME! I've not dehumanized the EMBRYO/ZYGOTE. I've used medical science to explain it is not a baby. It will not be a baby until it is fully and totally free of my body. It is necessary for you to convince yourself it's your business because that's what those of religious quackery do. You insert yourself between me and my rights and others so you can feel self-important. That is a fact. Say I'm wrong? I dare you. For whatever reason a woman has an abortion is is, now I know this is hard for you religious whacknuts to understand or comprehend this IT'S NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS. This is not a morals issue. Never was, never will be. It's about denying a woman her personhood just for your types to think that's all we are good for. So like I said to the poster below, keep your effing religion off of my rights. SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE is there for a reason so you and your types cannot impose on us who chose not to be religious, your dogma. Plain and simple.
Video for you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKifAdn8HCQ
I've watched all the videos I need to on people who have no regard for my choice for me personally. I've argued this point to death and the final decision is between my, my partner if I have one, and my DOCTOR not you or your imaginary sky being.
reply
share
strntz (12225)
5 years ago
Again, you are throwing up a strawman that anyone who is against aborting a baby is a religious zealot.
Do me a favor, since you clearly haven't read any of my posts, I ask that you use your strawman religious argument on someone who actually is religious so I don't get flagged.
reply
share
prometheus1816 (1060)
5 years ago
Okay you're not religious. Nice. Fine. I'm a woman. Are you? If not stay the hell out of my medical decisions. If you are keep what you would do out of my life and my rights. You have no idea what I'd CHOOSE if pregnant. The response might surprise you. But the point is it's my body, my choice. Full stop. And that's something you can't quite understand since you only think of your own self and this hypothetical thing that cannot live outside of my body at conception has no rights. My rights as its host are more important than this thing that MIGHT become a baby. And I use that word MIGHT loosely. Until it can live on its own I am the arbiter of its future. Not some numbskull in a conservative office or someone on a message board who clearly doesn't care for MY rights and only cares for a clump of cells. But hey, just so long as you can preach....oh wait, you're not religious. Sure sounds like it.
reply
share
[email protected] (5854)
5 years ago
Well...you started out with a thoughtful reply. But your last paragraph descended into the wildy, over emotional rantings of some pro-choicers. I don't believe in any of the terrible things you cited in your last paragraph such as mutilating women, honor killings or Sharia Law! Cripes! How you can make that giant LEAP from my comment that sex was made for procreation, well... I guess some pro-choicers are very athletic!! haha
Well, of course sex is pleasurable. It's one of Mother nature's sneaky ways of enticing people to do it. Or else after they had that first screaming, pooping, drooling dependent mess, they'd quit!
And I wasn't surprised you'd trot out the old "rape/incest of the eleven year old" argument. Just what pro-lifers "hope" for right?
A pro-choice'rs favorite reduction ad absurdum argument at its finest.
I don't belong to a cult. At the risk of incurring more wrath, I am a Catholic. However I DO have a friend who has invited me to her Fundamentalist church and her pastor definitely thinks we're a cult. So who knows? haha Of course he also thinks drinking alcohol is a major sin. And Lucy Ricardo was demonic because she had RED hair. And don't ASK what he thinks of rock and roll.
I used to be pro-choice in defiance of my Church until I could no longer ignore the science. An embryo is alive and it is definitely human. What else could it be?
And even though you may think some religions think sex is dirty, the Catholic Church definitely does NOT. You can find the Church's beliefs in any catechism. You could probably google it on-line.
The Church maintains that sex is a great gift from God. It's pleasurable of course. But up until modern medicine tinkered around with in-vitro fertilization, it was the ONLY way to create new life! Right? There's no way of getting around that scientific fact.
Men and women should be having "the talk" about what they'd do about an unplanned pregnancy before they take off their clothes. But many don't Yes, let's ALL be responsible. I "see how that works" just fine, thank you very, very much. haha!!
But just because two adults act horny, does not mean that it should be a death sentence for an innocent unborn life. There are thousands of couples waiting in line to adopt "unwanted" babies. Of course it may be easier just to abort it. I suppose your definition of "responsible" is different from mine. Oh well, that's how it goes I guess.
reply
share
prometheus1816 (1060)
5 years ago
My final reply to this topic: MY BODY MY CHOICE. Full stop. And you'd be surprised to know what I'd do if I became pregnant, but certainly not from rape. I will not be tied to that experience for the rest of my life and I would not chose adoption because there are already too many children in the system that will cycle out as damaged adults. So no, giving the kid up for adoption. And again MY BODY MY CHOICE...... Until you religious nuts get that and that there is something called SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE only then will you and yours actually get any move with me. You are not allowed to come in between my medical decisions with counsel from my doctor. Again full stop. I don't come between you and your imaginary sky being, so please, do not come between me and my rights to not be used as a brood mare for some sicko who thinks it's perfectly okay for an ELEVEN YEAR OLD to have to carry her father, brother, uncle, grandfather or priest's molestation.
Video here as to my feelings on this subject: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKifAdn8HCQ
reply
share
strntz (12225)
5 years ago
I used to be pro-choice in defiance of my Church until I could no longer ignore the science. An embryo is alive and it is definitely human. What else could it be?
It's a human life. Full stop.
Some pro-abortionists will argue it's not despite science proving it is.
There are those who try to argue that it's only men and religious folks who are against abortion, while others will concede that it's a life but still demand the right to end the pregnancy anyway. I actually have more respect for them because at least they're being intellectually honest and not trying to build strawmen of males and religious people.
reply
share
fishpan (544)
5 years ago
I was raised Catholic and don't like abortion but I am also a pragmatist.
Abortion predates Christianity. Even if it is made illegal it will still occur and we can go on about the morals etc.
So if we ban it all that will happen is poorer women will either made to carry to term or they will head to less safe methods as the more well off will always find doctors to perform safe procedures for the cash rewards.
Also at present there is no way transfer embryos and the fetus is not viable outside the womb until at least 22 weeks and that is with major medical intervention. So all we are doing with bans is we are telling women who don't want to have these children to gestate them so upsetting their lives (families and work) and making them incur medical costs which I don't see the proposed bans dealing with. That means these women go through mental torment while having a growing human being they don't want inside them.
Now all of this may seem cold and inconsiderate as you can say we are talking about when life begins. But like it or not life is still considered cheap in the world. So unless banning abortion comes with a way to down play the stigma to pregnant women, or shifts the stigma to men who sow their wild oats, has housing, medical costs, counselling and adoption procedures and a stipend to allow family members to keep the children if they want to step up to make it viable then these bills are nothing but pandering to the right. Any ban will also lead to pain, infertility or even the death of the poorer women who have to turn to extreme means to deal with the situation they find themselves in.
reply
share
[email protected] (5854)
5 years ago
Yes fishpan, your argument sounds a lot like the one I used to make. There IS a pragmatic element to it, I agree.
Carrying an unwanted pregnancy is definitely upsetting, I have to agree. But being a baby who is aborted is probably really upsetting to that particular little fetus. Of course, the argument is that it can't really "feel" or "think" yet.
That leads into another troubling area. I work for a company that supports individuals who are physically and/or intellectually handicapped, some quite severely. Here, they have the opportunity to live in a private house and make as many of their decisions as able bodied people. My house is rather easy. All three individuals are physically capable of most tasks. Two hold part time jobs.
But some of the individuals in our service are almost helpless. They can hardly do anything for themselves. They are just the type who are targeted when "quality of life" is questioned. I don't think any of them would choose not to live because they are a burden, a pain and cost a lot medically.
To me, it comes down to valuing all life or not. And yes, some lives are a REAL burden on private individuals and some on society as a whole. But well, I don't have the wisdom to provide all the answers either.
reply
share
fishpan (544)
5 years ago
The problem with that response is kind of like saying
'after they are born, well I don't know'
Because valuing life in the sense that a lot of pro life bills propose is simply not enough in the world as it is today.
Now I'm not saying that having an abortion purely on a disability that doesn't cause pain or danger to the mother is 'right' in any sense. It isn't really but I am also not blind to think that disability isn't a reason abortion occurs.
We don't put enough resource into looking after the disabled, mentally or physically at any age and those who are poor and unsure how to provide - its heart breaking but after a point society as you know doesn't see the disabled adult as such a cute cause as a disabled kid. And that is on society.
We also still allow the death penalty in some areas and some of arguments of 'assisted suicide' for the elderly about quality of life is really about not wanting to burden anyone else. That should not be a reason to ask someone else to help you end it.
If life is life then we need to properly provision for all situations from people with disability to the elderly who may go on for years.
But without provisioning for that and why choices of abortion are made then we are saying life is cheap and all talk about banning abortion is just hypocrisy as we are quite prepared to allow adults to die horrific deaths if they don't cause a fuss over all or is a punishment. As I said we ban abortion it will still happen for poor women without the resources to get safe abortions and/or care for children that they don't have the resources for.
I don't like it, never have but the way to stop abortion is to decrease the numbers happening through less pregnancy and less need for them to occur. Better maternity support, better housing, better adoption, better care for any child with a disability, less stigma, ensuring if the father is safe to be around that he is responsible in all senses of the word, more flexible working, which would lead to more in employment. Without those a knitting needle or a fall down the stairs looks like a decent option because we are saying right now that the majority of things are a private individuals responsibility and a private individual has to have autonomy over their own body to be a private individual.
reply
share
Orcsquisher (11)
6 years ago
[deleted]
prometheus1816 (1060)
6 years ago
That ova still belongs to ME. If someone wants to donate their ova for this purpose, then it's their C-H-O-I-C-E[/b] . See that word again? It's [b]C-H-O-I-C-E[/b] . Something you make everyday when you decide on the milkshake or the smoothie. Steak or chicken. Soup or salad. That's a [b]C-H-O-I-C-E[/b] . But then there's the nature of whether that "life" is actually a life or something else. Then we get into another paradigm altogether. But again if a woman wants to donate to something like that it's her......now say it with me...... [b]C-H-O-I-C-E .
reply
share
Orcsquisher (11)
6 years ago
[deleted]
prometheus1816 (1060)
6 years ago
It's my ova. It came from MY ovary. Prove me wrong? When fertilization occurs, it is dependent on MY for my blood supply, my breath, my eating enough nutrients to supply it with those building blocks. It depends on my state of mind, my resting, my making sure I get enough exercise and the like to NURTURE it and allow it to grow. It is part of me therefore MINE.
And again if that artificial womb is a reality some day, then here's to the women who give up their ova to that. It's still that woman's ova even if it's in a cryogenic freezer for later implantation. And yes, it would still be a women's rights issue if she has not signed over her RIGHTS to that ova. It is her DNA. That DNA is matralinial. Therefore her legacy. Unless you run that thing through a CRISPR and change its genes, only then will it not belong to her.
reply
share
Orcsquisher (11)
6 years ago
[deleted]
prometheus1816 (1060)
6 years ago
I make a CHOICE to eat peas. I make a CHOICE to go to the mall. I make a CHOICE to drink a glass of water. I do NOT make a choice to stub my toe. I do NOT make a choice to be hit by a car. I ARE a choice, but your determination.
reply
share