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.
If something is immoral does it become moral if only done rarely?
Again, abortions are only done at extremely late stages for serious health issues to the mother or for a non-viable fetus. Neither situation is immoral.
Facts are the majority of the democrats dont support late term abortion, 80% of americans dont, and that includes democrats who identify as pro-life. The bills in NY, and OR are not for unrestricted abortion they need the sign off of a physician. Most democrats are ok with the RvW timeline for abortions.
I imagine 90% of people who post in this board know the facts, this is just circular virtue signaling from both sides. You know where you can abort babies as much as you want right before they are born, Israel.
Again, abortions are only done at extremely late stages for serious health issues to the mother or for a non-viable fetus. Neither situation is immoral.
I tend to think its more akin to euthanasia, if the reason why you can thave an abortion is becsue of teh development of the fetus, the fact that the baby is sick is irrelevant, and should be treated as euthanasia. I have no problem with revamping the laws there.
Facts are the majority of the democrats dont support late term abortion, 80% of americans dont, and that includes democrats who identify as pro-life. The bills in NY, and OR are not for unrestricted abortion they need the sign off of a physician. Most democrats are ok with the RvW timeline for abortions.
I imagine 90% of people who post in this board know the facts, this is just circular virtue signaling from both sides. You know where you can abort babies as much as you want right before they are born, Israel.
I'm left-leaning and my best friend is right-leaning. We just had a discussion on this topic today and she is more focused on the rights of the woman than I am being a leftist. For me it all comes down to when would it be murder to terminate a pregnancy. We ended up with the same answer but we took different paths there.
Barbara Bush had something to say on the topic if anyone is interested.
“When does the soul enter the body is the #1 question,†she wrote. “Not when does life begin, as life begins in a flower or an animal with the first cell. So the question is does the life begin (soul entering the body) at conception or at the moment the first breath is taken? If the answer to that question is at conception, then abortion is murder. If the answer to that question is the moment the first breath is taken, then abortion is not murder.â€
I don't agree with her, I think that's too late to stop the process. Her perspective was colored by losing her daughter at the age of three.
Quote:
Judging from both the birth and death of Robin Bush, I have decided that that almost religious experience, that thin line between birth, the first breath that she took, was when the soul, the spirit, that special thing that separates man or woman from animals + plants entered her little body. I was conscious at her birth and I was with her at her death. (As was G.B.) An even stronger impression remains with me of that moment, 27 years ago [when she died]. Of course, extreme grief, but that has softened. I vividly remember that split second, that thin line between breathing and not breathing, the complete knowledge that her soul had left and only the body remained.
I believe that the principle that the government should have no say in reproduction, that individuals have a right to privacy of their own bodies - is more important than the life of an individual fetus.
Just like the pro gun lobby believes that the right to keep and bear arm is more important than the life of an individual gunshot victim.
Just like anyone who believes in due process places that principle above the individual lives of potential future victims if a guilt person goes free because their due process rights were violated.
Just like anyone who supported the Civil War or World War II believed that the principles fought for in those conflicts were more important that the lives of individual soldiers.
Ouch..... that would be food for thought. And yet, quite a few of them were probably planned and I imagine many them have mamas that love them anyway that are glad they got to have that flawed child in their life.
I recall reading some time ago about a study indicating that most abused and battered children were "wanted" by their parents. The idea that easy access to abortion will prevent child abuse turns out not to be the case, at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by L8Gr8Apost8
Barbara Bush had something to say on the topic if anyone is interested.
I don't agree with her reasoning at all (that the soul enters the body at the first breath and exits at the last breath). Someone can stop breathing (say, they are drowning) but be resuscitated and recover fully if only a minute or two has passed. Clearly, their soul didn't leave just because they stopped breathing. There is something else that has to happen before a person is dead, besides lack of breath. And I would certainly argue that an unborn human has a soul even before it breathes.
I recall reading some time ago about a study indicating that most abused and battered children were "wanted" by their parents. The idea that easy access to abortion will prevent child abuse turns out not to be the case, at all.
I don't agree with her reasoning at all (that the soul enters the body at the first breath and exits at the last breath). Someone can stop breathing (say, they are drowning) but be resuscitated and recover fully if only a minute or two has passed. Clearly, their soul didn't leave just because they stopped breathing. There is something else that has to happen before a person is dead, besides lack of breath. And I would certainly argue that an unborn human has a soul even before it breathes.
Yeah, neither do I since I'm a materialist and all so I don't agree there is such a thing as a soul. I get what she means by the word soul, I would just switch it up for consciousness. Since we don't yet understand the nature of consciousness I don't have a definitive line. I'm comfortable speculating that a being would have to have a certain amount of connections in their brains to have consciousness.
If you believe in a soul when do you think it enters the body? If someone is brain dead where is their soul? I know a lot of believers put stock in NDEs. That would put the soul leaving the body before physical death.
A relative wanted her baby. The whole family was excited waiting for the first grandchild.
At 7months, the baby was dead. No heartbeat no nothing. She had to carry a dead baby until it nearly killed her due to these bat **** crazy people.
Her mom would support very late term abortion because what they all had to through due to the medical facilities in their town.
Huh? If the baby dies naturally it's not an abortion. You're saying her ob refused to induce labor for a dead baby because that would be an "abortion"? Something is wrong with your story.
Yeah, neither do I since I'm a materialist and all so I don't agree there is such a thing as a soul. I get what she means by the word soul, I would just switch it up for consciousness. Since we don't yet understand the nature of consciousness I don't have a definitive line. I'm comfortable speculating that a being would have to have a certain amount of connections in their brains to have consciousness.
If you believe in a soul when do you think it enters the body? If someone is brain dead where is their soul? I know a lot of believers put stock in NDEs. That would put the soul leaving the body before physical death.
I do believe in a soul, but I don't know that it is or will ever be possible to pinpoint the exact moment when it enters or leaves the body. We know that when a person is dead, they have no heartbeat and no brainwaves, and cannot be resuscitated. That is clear. I'm not in favor of keeping a brain dead person "alive" by machine; if there is no hope of recovery then we need to let the body go.
But how this applies to the unborn is not so clear. Trying to measure the point at which a fetus has enough brainwaves to consider that it has a "consciousness" seems futile. Stating that a fetus doesn't deserve protection because it's not alive, or it's not a person, until it's born seems very wrong to me. I think it is by far preferable to err on the side of caution. At the moment of conception, there is a new being, however tiny, with its own distinct DNA and cells that are immediately growing and dividing and differentiating. It is clearly alive, and alive in a way that a sperm and an egg are not. From that point until death is nothing but a continuum as far as I am concerned.
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.
