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.
As has also been stated, every time this question has been asked on this thread, the pro-choice people tend to believe that it is not a life until it is viable.
You cannot kill something that is not a life.
It's a matter of definition.
I agree that it's a matter of definition of life... that's what I have been saying the entire time... but this isn't defined clearly.
What I am saying is that it's very narrow minded to say definitively that it's none of my business if an unborn child is aborted. If a law were created that established the criteria for life, and that life were maliciously ended, it's as much my business as any other method of ending life is.
The argument that it's my body and you want to control me just doesn't fly with me. Control isn't the issue, preservation of liberty is.
I've seen a good argument that our society provides liberty at a graduated rate based upon maturity. We don't afford a 5 year old the same rights as a 14 year old, and a 14 year old the same as an 18 year old. Under this basis, the rights of a child do not trump those of an adult. I can see the reasoning, but I can see the huge slippery slope where it teeters on the edge as well.
I agree that it's a matter of definition of life... that's what I have been saying the entire time... but this isn't defined clearly.
What I am saying is that it's very narrow minded to say definitively that it's none of my business if an unborn child is aborted. If a law were created that established the criteria for life, and that life were maliciously ended, it's as much my business as any other method of ending life is.
The argument that it's my body and you want to control me just doesn't fly with me. Control isn't the issue, preservation of liberty is.
I've seen a good argument that our society provides liberty at a graduated rate based upon maturity. We don't afford a 5 year old the same rights as a 14 year old, and a 14 year old the same as an 18 year old. Under this basis, the rights of a child do not trump those of an adult. I can see the reasoning, but I can see the huge slippery slope where it teeters on the edge as well.
It doesn't have to fly with you.
It is the law of the land.
Are you saying that you want to change the law of the land to meet your definition, your religious definition? That would end liberty. It would then become religious oppression.
Define and live your life as you choose.
Please respect my choice and decision to live how I choose.
No one is asking you to look at the world as I do.
Please provide me the same respect.
It doesn't have to fly with you.
It is the law of the land.
Define and live your life as you choose.
Please respect my choice and decision to live how I choose.
No one is asking you to look at the world as I do.
Please provide me the same respect.
But that's not true, you do ask me to look at the world as you do. While no one can stop me from becoming a mass murderer, I will be held accountable for my actions. The notion that we shouldn't impose our morals on others is short sighted, as most of our laws are based upon such morals.
The problem with 'the law of the land' is that I see it as the SCOTUS legislating from the bench based upon the 14th Amendment, which arguably was never properly introduced nor ratified. While I am stuck with it now, that doesn't mean that I'm not going to try to fight tooth and nail to reclaim power from the federal government which was bound by the 10th Amendment which has gone ignored.
I'd be perfectly happy to leave it up to the states, since it really has nothing to do with the federal government. Some states will choose to allow it, others not... I've got no problem with that whatsoever.
Maybe I'll buy a sign on a billboard to reclaim the Constitution...
Sir,
You can't have it both ways.
George Bush would not have been president of the US in 2000 were it not for SCOTUS. How do you feel about that.
Roe v. Wade was taken to the higher court because it could not be decided at the state level. It was a big enough issue that it warranted a higher level review. It was reviewed, now it is the law of the land.
Sorry you don't agree with it, but there it is. It is the law of the land.
Your viewpoint is based on your religious convictions. When does your viewpoint become religious tyranny?
Its my body and I will do whatever I want to do with it.
No, you cannot do whatever you want with your body. The law restricts what one does with their body when another person could be harmed. For instance, you have the right to harm your own body by binge drinking, but you do not have the right to get behind the wheel, putting others in danger. In reference to abortion, your unborn baby's body is not yours as it has it's own heart, brain, limbs, nervous system, sometimes a different blood type and clearly you don't have a penis, but your baby may.
My position on abortion is this simple: if the unborn are not human beings, then no justification for abortion is needed, but if the unborn are human beings, no justification for abortion is adequate. The Law of Biogensis proves that without a doubt an unborn baby is a human being as it is impossible for two human parents to create anything that is not human. While currently the law has deemed the unborn non-persons, do remember that there was a time that the law also deemed African Americans nonpersons. Simply put, legal doesn't mean right and while you all scream "don't force your morality on me", tell yourself the same in regards to your unborn baby- don't force your morality on theirs!
Sir,
You can't have it both ways.
George Bush would not have been president of the US in 2000 were it not for SCOTUS. How do you feel about that.
Roe v. Wade was taken to the higher court because it could not be decided at the state level. It was a big enough issue that it warranted a higher level review. It was reviewed, now it is the law of the land.
Sorry you don't agree with it, but there it is. It is the law of the land.
Your viewpoint is based on your religious convictions. When does your viewpoint become religious tyranny?
One can believe in the sanctity of life and not be affiliated with a religion. This isn't a religious issue, this is a human rights issue. Need I remind you that just b/c something is the law of the land doesn't mean it is right! The law of the land once deemed African Americans nothing but white mans property, a non-person. The popular slogans were "don't like slavery, don't own a slave." Sounds pretty similiar to "don't like abortion, don't have one."
Abortion is a stain on American culture. The intentional elimination of our defenseless children is repulsive, self-serving and a horrible solution to poverty, women's liberation, child abuse, etc.....
Roe v. Wade was taken to the higher court because it could not be decided at the state level.
That is not true. It could have been decided at the state level if it had been submitted to referendum and the people permitted to vote. That is called democracy. Government by judicial fiat is not democracy. You didn't like the SCOTUS deciding the 2000 presidential election, but you are satisifed with SCOTUS imposing Roe v Wade, without any votes of the people ever having been cast. You are the inconsistent one in this conversation, not twojciac...
If that little mass of cells can live on its own, then it has rights. Until such a time, it is not an unborn baby.
Again, a matter of definition.
We are talking about the right to life until born issue, aren't we?
So degree of dependency determines one's worth and protectibility? Where do we draw the line? Even after birth and for many years after, a baby cannot live on its own. If he/she isn't fed, nurtured and cared for, he/she will die. What about those that depend on insulin and pacemakers, they can't survive on their own either, shall we eliminate them?
As far as being a little mass of cells, a baby has a heartbeat by the time its mother even learns of its existence. Brain waves quickly follow. By the time a baby is aborted, it is a miniature baby with a spine and limbs. The abortion industry would love for people to continue to believe that what women are aborting is nothing but a clump of cells, but that darn technology thing kind of screwed them on that one!
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,330 posts, read 54,411,082 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by JOJOG
.
My position on abortion is this simple: if the unborn are not human beings, then no justification for abortion is needed, but if the unborn are human beings, no justification for abortion is adequate. The Law of Biogensis proves that without a doubt an unborn baby is a human being as it is impossible for two human parents to create anything that is not human. While currently the law has deemed the unborn non-persons, do remember that there was a time that the law also deemed African Americans nonpersons. Simply put, legal doesn't mean right and while you all scream "don't force your morality on me", tell yourself the same in regards to your unborn baby- don't force your morality on theirs!
With all due repect I don't think you've proven anything. Saying something is human is simply not the same as saying something is a human being. A blastocyst or an embryo is no doubt human but I have yet to see a reaoned, logical argument that establishes it as a human being anymore than an acorn is an oak tree. Potential beings and beings are vastly different entities.
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.
