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.
the choice to kill, yes its a legal choice. it was legal in germany to wipe out the jews. legal does not make a genocide right
You are right, genocide is awful. I am very involved in supporting relief work in Rwanda. I support Doctors Without Borders, and a shoe collection charity for the refugee camps, and we send my kids old books to kids there. I imagine as the genocide also bothers you so much you are supportive of relief work there right?
Of course you say that it allows you to hide and mask the fact of what you are doing to a developing human, marginalize people so you do not have to deal with the reality.
No different then avoiding reality through drugs
You can call it whatever you want for all I care, until it can breathe for itself and have any chance of surviving on it's own, it's not viable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjtwet
You do not know when a fetus can live outside of the womb. You do know if you kill it with saline and rip a body apart the person will die. So what arbitrary week in a pregnancy are you going to use to declare it a life
I let science and medical research answer that, I believe it's generally around 24 weeks at this point, but even then, the child is at great risk of suffering from a multitude of severe handicaps, increasing it to 28 weeks generally help. That said, the law states 24 weeks, and even that number is only possible do to the same advances in the Medical field, that also allows for safe abortions.
That said, the great majority of abortions happen well before that time, when there's no question that the fetus can't make it on it's own. The proven viable body takes precedence over the one we know for a fact can't sustain life on it's own.
You are right, genocide is awful. I am very involved in supporting relief work in Rwanda. I support Doctors Without Borders, and a shoe collection charity for the refugee camps, and we send my kids old books to kids there. I imagine as the genocide also bothers you so much you are supportive of relief work there right?
i work with groups to stop the genocide at home. Perhaps if we would stop our genocide others would stop theirs. So yes i work with groups trying to stop the genocides.
I am glad you work with trying to stop other countries genocide, while ignoring the one we commit
You are right, genocide is awful. I am very involved in supporting relief work in Rwanda. I support Doctors Without Borders, and a shoe collection charity for the refugee camps, and we send my kids old books to kids there. I imagine as the genocide also bothers you so much you are supportive of relief work there right?
No, they are not! They march for the "unborn", Zimbochick! Case closed! Why would they feed and clothed the needy "children" here? That's a perfect world. Leave the prolife rally, then go feed hungry children.
You can call it whatever you want for all I care, until it can breathe for itself and have any chance of surviving on it's own, it's not viable.
I let science and medical research answer that, I believe it's generally around 24 weeks at this point, but even then, the child is at great risk of suffering from a multitude of severe handicaps, increasing it to 28 weeks generally help. That said, the law states 24 weeks, and even that number is only possible do to the same advances in the Medical field, that also allows for safe abortions.
That said, the great majority of abortions happen well before that time, when there's no question that the fetus can't make it on it's own. The proven viable body takes precedence over the one we know for a fact can't sustain life on it's own.
1) cant breath on his.her own until it is born. Cant be born if you kill.
So your first answer would suggest you believe birth is the point you do not kill humans. So if it was one day before birth at 26 weeks it would be OK to kill him/her because the woman can choose to do so?
2) you then say about 24 weeks . So at 23 weeks and 6 days the person is OK to kill but one day later it is not.
So you are picking arbitrary times to call a human life . You do so no more or less then those that believe conception and implanting into the uterus is a arbitrary time.
So there is a chance both of us are wrong about the unborn being life. the differences are when you choose to see it as life. If you are wrong we have committed genocide. If i am wrong we have allowed people to have life
i work with groups to stop the genocide at home. Perhaps if we would stop our genocide others would stop theirs. So yes i work with groups trying to stop the genocides.
I am glad you work with trying to stop other countries genocide, while ignoring the one we commit
I have spent my entire adult life working with children and pregnant women. I'm of the belief that if I can help the suffering of a child I will do whatever I can. So you are saying that a 1 inch embryo is more worthy of saving than a child who has thoughts, and feelings, and memories, and will probably die or have a bad life because people are investing so much time and money on the embro and giving little thought to them. Interesting selective rationalization.
1) cant breath on his.her own until it is born. Cant be born if you kill.
So your first answer would suggest you believe birth is the point you do not kill humans. So if it was one day before birth at 26 weeks it would be OK to kill him/her because the woman can choose to do so?
2) you then say about 24 weeks . So at 23 weeks and 6 days the person is OK to kill but one day later it is not.
So you are picking arbitrary times to call a human life . You do so no more or less then those that believe conception and implanting into the uterus is a arbitrary time.
So there is a chance both of us are wrong about the unborn being life. the differences are when you choose to see it as life. If you are wrong we have committed genocide. If i am wrong we have allowed people to have life
Though when a fetus is viable is not an absolute date, legislation has to be based on the best possible information at any given time, allowing for the obvious delay in implementation of said legislation.
What we know, based on very extensive studies is that life, though partially sustainable after 22 weeks, nearly all the fetuses die or suffer from severe handicaps, that often kills them in their first couple of years of life. Before week 20 life isn't sustainable. That is all fact, proven my very conclusive scientific studies. And forgive me if I'm more prone to believe experts than a pro-life fighter, discussing online.
It is of course a warranted discussion, to discuss at what point we should set the limit for regular abortion.
I'm not 100% up to date on current legislation in the US, in Norway, my home country, regular abortion is allowed up to and including week 12, at this point they consider the fetus to be so far evolved that the pregnancy should be terminated naturally. If they discover severe defects on the fetus, or it poses a danger to the host (mother), or other circumstances apply, abortion can be made an option also after this date. This seems to me like reasonable legislation, as most people will know of their pregnancy within 3 months, and have ample time to decide the course of action, but of course, if there are severe defects, the child will be born dead, or it poses great risk to the mother, abortion also after this time must be allowable. Same goes for rape victims etc.
You also underestimate the ramifications if you are wrong, you say that the result is simply more babies, but fact is, it's not that simple, and I think you're aware of that.
And although it is arbitrary to the discussion, I do find it hard to reconcile this fight for the unborn when you look at the human suffering, and more specifically children's suffering in the world today. I think it's a much better use of energy to fight for those already born than a fetus in the first trimester.
I have spent my entire adult life working with children and pregnant women. I'm of the belief that if I can help the suffering of a child I will do whatever I can. So you are saying that a 1 inch embryo is more worthy of saving than a child who has thoughts, and feelings, and memories, and will probably die or have a bad life because people are investing so much time and money on the embro and giving little thought to them. Interesting selective rationalization.
So you favor killing them because they might havd a rough early life.
our president had a rough early life things worked out ok for him. Why do you think others do not deserve the same chance. You can not predict what a child might be.
So you favor killing them because they might havd a rough early life.
our president had a rough early life things worked out ok for him. Why do you think others do not deserve the same chance. You can not predict what a child might be.
I have to give you kudos for the most ingenious twist of my statement. Your ability to rationalize your complete disregard for the already born is staggering and horrifying. I would rather there was no need for abortion, but there is. Sorry if it doesn't suit your agenda that I am way more invested in helping out actual ready-born children in need than 1 inch embryos. I'm funny that way.
My kids were both assigned abortion as a topic in their debate classes in high school. Funny how even the 15 year olds could see that it didn't fall under the category of "genocide". AND they all learned a lot about spinning and lying and misdirection and emotional appeal. It was a good class.
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.