Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In 1943, it was made a capital offense to abort an "Aryan" fetus. The Nazis loved them some breeding.
This is true and easily verifiable. Hitler loved and sought to protect unborn Aryan babies. At the same time he encouraged abortion to limit the growth of populations he considered undesirable.
The lesson to be learned from this, and from more recent events in China, is: any government that has the ability to prohibit abortion also has the ability to mandate abortion.
That's why we want to keep government out of the business of regulating pregnancy.
I don't believe that in vitro fertilization should be done. I'm fairly certain your question was not an honest one, but rather an attempt to catch pro-lifers being hypocritical. Sorry, but this pro-lifer is not going to fall for it. Yes, it absolutely should be illegal to freeze a human being. People who cannot get pregnant naturally or through drug therapies and such should adopt. Creating several embryos with the express knowledge that most of them aren't going to survive is barbaric, especially given the amount of children in foster care and orphanages that could use homes. It's not quite as inhumane as late term abortions but it is still a barbaric devaluing of human life that has no place in a civilized society.
It's a completely honest question. I don't need to catch anyone. You gave an honest answer. Thank you. The hypocrisy is already apparent. Have you ever seen demonstrations for the frozen unborn? I haven't. There's the hypocrisy.
No, the actual science is "that the fetus need the mother's body to survive", but "if the mother is not willing she has the right to terminate" is your emotions. That part is not fact, it is opinion. So therefore, your earlier snide remark about basing an argument on emotion rather than science applies to yourself as well.
Carrying a pregnancy and giving birth would severely impact my physical and financial well being, every facet of my life....that is not emotion.....that is FACT.
You getting all worked up about someone else's medical decisions that have no impact on your life is nothing but emotion on your part......FACT.
What if that mother was 9 months pregnant and had to make the same life and death decision? Would you value the 6 year old more than the baby?
Again, it isn't impossible for women to receive cancer treatment while pregnant. At the 9 month mark, personally, I'd opt for a c-section and then continue on with treatment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagogeorge
Really, the only distinction is the autonomous part, even though a six year old really isn't autonomous from the parents.
Not in my opinion. I place more value on my already living, breathing, autonomous children than I do any others I may have in the future.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagogeorge
Right, she would rather be dead.
We don't know how she'll feel. Research survivors' guilt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagogeorge
You keep saying fetus, but at some point it wont be. Come back in 6 years when this fetus is 6 and the older brother is 12. At that point, I would love for someone to tell that little girl then that her mom made the wrong decision, and should have aborted her.
1. I didn't say mom should have aborted her. I said mom should have opted for cancer treatment.
2. At the point this story began and when mom found out about the cancer, the baby was a fetus.
Mom laid down her life for his little sister! It's your unwillingness to accept that FACT that from conception to death (hopefully at old age), it is FULLY HUMAN.
The left's constant attempts to dehumanize a pre-born BABY by using the scientific term "fetus" is losing its power as we learn more and more about the BABY in the womb.
BTW, we don't "rejoice" over what is likely her fate, but we don't badger a woman who is DYING and condemn her for the SACRIFICE she is making for the unborn daughter she loves.
Why the hell can't you honor her CHOICE or at least shut the hell up about it.
I'm not badgering her. I'm commenting on a debate forum.
I do honor her choice. I do not agree with it.
I will not shut the hell up to satisfy the sensitivities of people who don't like opposing points of view.
That was the philosophy of the National SOCIALISTS in the 1930s. Among the first to be "terminated" were the deformed, the severely handicapped and the retarded. They needed the State to survive, so if "Mother Germany" was not willing to support these useless eaters, the State has the right to Terminate.
Please don't confuse the name of the party with the ideology they actually followed.
As I said upthread, often those unfamiliar with history make the mistake in believing Nazis were leftist socialists. They were not. As a matter of fact the true socialists of Germany were 100% Hitler's policies and even his election.
Mother Germany? Have you ever owned a history book?
Oh good catch!
If you are calling Nazi Germany "MOTHER" Germany, you truly do not understand the history of Nazism in that country.
It was called Father Germany by Hitler and the other Nazis for a very distinct and telling reason!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
