What I am flaming about is that this group does not want to just protest at abortion clinics this time. They want to also protest several bookstores, ie Barnes and Nobles(for selling 'kiddie porn'), and some of the local gay establishments. The organizers have lost the point of their original protest. This is no longer about being anti-abortion, and pro-life. It has now turned into a Pro-Christian, anti-everthing else protest.
This is exactly why I am pro-choice. It sickens me that people like this who INSIST on forcing their beliefs on others. And now, I no longer can ignore it from a distance...It is now in my own backyard.
------------------
Jeff Raven - Having more fun than any human being should be allowed to have
[This message was edited by Jeff Raven on April 17, 1999.]
------------------
"Okay, so I'm not "SANE" so to speak, but uh... I'm the lovable kind of psycho"
http://solareclipse.net/
Besides that, abortion is cowardice. It happens because people have unprotected sex, but even then, condoms can't guarantee 100% protection from pregnancy (not to mention all those other STDs). It is no excuse to take a life if people can't handle the responsibility that comes with sex (to accomodate those who must mention rape victims, they're only 1-3% of all women who get abortions). Abortion is a surgical process that has physical risks, including making a women sterile for the rest of her years. Oftentimes the process doesn't get rid of all the body parts that the "doctor" cut up, so an arm or a leg might wind up "coming out" later. I've even heard that, after having the abortion, a woman still delivered her baby--without an arm.
------------------
"I have come to the conclusion that one man is called a disgrace, that two are called a law firm, and that three on the law become a congress! And by God I have had this Congress!"
--John Adams, "1776"
The first protest made the issue clear and out in the open. Now, people SHOULD be putting their energies in fixing it...not going off to rattle more chains and pissing people off.
Believe me, these "Operation Save America" people are not going to be welcomed here. The Pro-choice community, the gay community, and even the local pro-life people aren't happy about it. But, I suppose we'll have to put up with it, tolerate them as much as we can.
------------------
Jeff Raven - Having more fun than any human being should be allowed to have
------------------
"I have come to the conclusion that one man is called a disgrace, that two are called a law firm, and that three on the law become a congress! And by God I have had this Congress!"
--John Adams, "1776"
University of Buffalo(where I attend school) promotes diversity, and one of the groups holds a large fair to help people coming out.
------------------
Jeff Raven - Having more fun than any human being should be allowed to have
------------------
"I'm sick, like Nixon was sick, my defeated heart keeps beating on. I won't die, like Chucky won't die."
--
They Might Be Giants
There is just too many people on this planet. It's nice to know that someone out there is doing their share of keeping the population down. What's few dead babies and doctors anyway? There's plenty to go around. We are not in any shortage of either.
If people want to protest, let them. If they are in your way, use one of the best things to come out of Isreal, the Uzi, and mow them down.
Abortion. Ban it.
Why kill just the fetus when you can kill the mother and fetus with a cloths-hanger? That way we will get rid of a lot of irresponcible and stupid people.
It took me a long time and more than one philosophy and ethics courses before I came up with my current stance, which is:
Uncertainty.
Personally, I don't like abortion. I'd never ask someone or encourage someone to get one. I'm not really sure why, though.
Don't get me wrong, I don't believe in some mythical "sanctity of life" nonsense. Life is life, whether you're a human or Mr. J.H. Paramecium. I don't believe that "life" begins at conception or that any "soul" enters the body or that an early-stage embryo is a "person." (Twinning usually occurs long after conception, so when is the extra soul added?),so my reason isn't religious.
I've seen the pictures the anti-folks use, and they are graphic. They're also from a very small percentage of actual abortions. (In fact, I have my doubts about the people that would actually dig aroud looking for that stuff, but that's another thing.) Most abortions occur before there's appreciable differentiation. So that's not my reason, either.
I don't really know what my reason is. It just is.
I also know that all things considered, I'm glad I will never be put in a position to have to make that choice. I will never be a woman. I will never become pregnant. I will, most likely, never have to raise a child, especially not on my own. I will never have to worry about bearing a child that might kill me in the birthing. Or be severely disabled. And for THOSE reasons, what someone who IS in that position chooses is none of my damned business.
Nor is it those "Save America" people's. Let them keep busy seeing that all the unwanted babies, the orphanage kids, the Down's Syndrome and other disabled kids, are adopted. Then, maybe, they can talk.
No, on second thought, put them to work on poverty next.
------------------
*I only SEEM Normal*
How long is "long"? The embryos of twins (I assume you're talking about identical twins, since fraternal ones are separate all the time) should've been split shortly after conception while they were still cell-like. I'm just trying to get this cleared up, not arguing.
so my reason isn't religious.
Read my longer post again. There is no mention of religion. I do not stand by my point because Christianity says so.
I've seen the pictures the anti-folks use, and they are graphic. They're also from a very small percentage of actual abortions.
So what happens in the "larger percentage"?
(In fact, I have my doubts about the people that would actually dig aroud looking for that stuff, but that's another thing.)
For the abortion video I saw, its people took the bodies from the trash bins in the back of abortion clinics. They just throw them away like any other trash.
Most abortions occur before there's appreciable differentiation.
Most abortions occur at 3 months into pregnancy. The heart starts beating on day 22. By the 3rd month the baby has some movement, and some argue that it can feel pain. It has all the appearances of a regular person, just smaller in size. It is not a blob of tissue.
So that's not my reason, either. I don't really know what my reason is. It just is.I also know that all things considered, I'm glad I will never be put in a position to have to make that choice. I will never be a woman. I will never become pregnant. I will, most likely, never have to raise a child, especially not on my own. I will never have to worry about bearing a child that might kill me in the birthing.
But it might be someone you care about, which could arguably hurt more.
Or be severely disabled. And for THOSE reasons, what someone who IS in that position chooses is none of my damned business.
You're damned lucky and damned ungrateful for your own birth. And that's not completely true. If and when you're married, you'd have to help your wife make that decision. You also forget that some moron boyfriends who cannot take the responsibilities of their actions force their girlfriends to get the abortion. And some parents who cannot face the humiliation force their daughters to get the abortion.
Nor is it those "Save America" people's. Let them keep busy seeing that all the unwanted babies,
There would be no unwanted babies if people were more responsible.
the orphanage kids, the Down's Syndrome and other disabled kids, are adopted.
There are actually not enough babies out there for adoption. Through conventional methods (ie, through an agency instead of privately), a couple could wait years to adopt a baby in the US. The reason is that too many pregnant young (and able) women are aborting their fetuses instead of putting them up for adoption, so those older couples who have come to want kids but can't conceive outnumber the orphaned babies.
Then, maybe, they can talk. No, on second thought, put them to work on poverty next.
Now THAT would be a very good idea indeed.
------------------
"I have come to the conclusion that one man is called a disgrace, that two are called a law firm, and that three on the law become a congress! And by God I have had this Congress!"
--John Adams, "1776"
[This message was edited by Tora Ziyal on April 20, 1999.]
------------------
Down for Upgrade
------------------
Jeff Raven - Having more fun than any human being should be allowed to have
I also have an innate distrust of anyone who feels a person or society needs "saved". A logical argument to support a viewpoint needs no threat of violence to support it. Indeed, it only serves to undermine it.
The "tagging on" of other crusades that Jeff descibed is also a nasty development. Pretty soon you reach a stage where you're doing nothing less than imposing a complete worldview on people, instead of convincing them on one issue. And that way lies the medieval notion of the "enlightened" versus the heathen.
------------------
"I AM THE SPIDER!!!!"
- Vic Reeves
I disapprove of abortion and I agree wholeheartedly with Ziyal. It's not a popular opinion, and it's hard to defend it, and it's a shame one has to defend the right to live in this world.
My country has gone through an emotional discussion some time ago when abortion was going to be generally legalized. The most heard argument from the free choice people, maybe their only one was something like this: "We are against abortion as well, but it's not up to us (the legislation) to eventually decide it". In my opinion such a statement is comfortable, cowardly, popular, hypocritical. Liberalism is about increasing the amount of personal freedom, but it is misused or even automatically turns into selfishness much too often. Each individual has a responsibility for their families and friends, for peace and democracy, for social justice and for our planet and finally to care of their children, no matter if "wanted" or not.
------------------
I'm a doctor, not a bricklayer. (McCoy in "Devil in the Dark")
www.uni-siegen.de/~ihe/bs/startrek/
I'll get back to you on when twinning takes place.. I THINK that what I read yesterday said 7 to 14 weeks, but I could have that wrong. Yes, I meant identical.
As a small point of order, assuming I DO marry the woman I love, I will still never be faced with that decision. She can't have kids, having endured a full hysterectomy at 24, due to damage caused by the abuse inflicted upon her as a child by her mother.
*hopes nobody else is "saved" into that fate, but I guess that's a roll of the dice*
------------------
*I only SEEM Normal*
I wonder if the pope knows what a woman is anyway.. he almost makes me as sick as the serb soldiers.
Can anyone point me towards a retail point for anti-pope bumper stickers? Oh no, I don't have a car..
First your argument about non believingthat life gegins at conception falls down on one point. At what point is it life? When it's born? A minute before it's born? A day? A week? When do you draw the line between 'ball of cells' and 'living creature'?
First: If you did marry someone who couldn't conceive, would you adopt? And wouldn't you be grateful that someone who didn't want their baby was prepared for someone else to have it, rather than having it killed?
And how do you measure 'disability'? This person has Down's Syndrome-abort it. This embryo has only one arm- abort it. This baby is blind-abort it. This baby will be retarded-abort it. This feotus will havea low IQ-abort it. This child will have asthma-abort it.
The arguments towards legalised abortion in this counrty were very similar to those for legalising cannabis right now. Government control, eliminating risk (from unqualified people/contaminated cannabis) and so on.
They thought that if abortion was legalised, the government could control and educate people about it. And do you want to know how much the abortion rate has gone up by since then?
And as Tora said, only around 3% are rape victims. Others just use it as a drive through.
------------------
'My rigid grill structure...'
-Dinobot
An invalid question. Before we can answer that question, we must first answer all of these: What is life? What is intelligence? Is all life to have the same rights, regardless of the level of physical or mental development? Is a tuna equal to a dolphin? Can you use "life" as a qualification for "rights" without being hypocritical, if you eat meat? Or plants, for that matter? Does a ball of cells that may one day be a human have more rights than a ball of cells that may one day be a gopher? Or a sequoia tree? Does a being that cannot survive without a life support system have an inherent right TO that life support system?
An odd analogy: If you woke up one morning and found that you'd been hooked up to a comatose person and were using your blood and bodily nutrients to keep them alive, would you have a moral obligation to stay hooked up?
"Life begins at conception" is a meaningless sound bite. Of COURSE life (basic as it may be) begins at conception. The question is where do we believe we get the moral obligation to keep that life alive? Nature does not recognize conceptions, or there wouldn't be such a thing as spontaneous miscarriages.
There exists as yet no agreement of when a being achieves "personhood."
>First: If you did marry someone who couldn't conceive, would you adopt? And wouldn't you be grateful that someone who didn't want their baby was prepared for someone else to have it, rather than having it killed?
No, I wouldn't adopt. I am not suited to be a parent, due to my economic condition and responsibility level, and am well aware of the fact. Given the choice, I'd rather not try. (That said, were it to, by some miracle - and it would HAVE to be a legitimate miracle, in her case - be thrust upon me, as it were, I'd do my damnedest to be a good father, and would never even consider suggesting abortion. Again, that wouldn't truly be MY decision to make. It'd be hers, and I'd stand by her no matter what.
Oh, and incidentally, I was somewhat off about twinning. It usually happens at 7-14 DAYS, not weeks. Which still shoots down the belief that the soul and identity as an individual exists at conception.
I'll skip mentioning those that do not fully separate, except to wonder how many people they count as.
I didn't want to get drawn into this argument. I just wanted to say what I thought. Foolish me for disagreeing. You wanna light the fire now? This stake is getting cold.
------------------
*I only SEEM Normal*
------------------
"I'm sick, like Nixon was sick, my defeated heart keeps beating on. I won't die, like Chucky won't die."
--
They Might Be Giants
------------------
I'm a doctor, not a bricklayer. (McCoy in "Devil in the Dark")
www.uni-siegen.de/~ihe/bs/startrek/
------------------
"I'm sick, like Nixon was sick, my defeated heart keeps beating on. I won't die, like Chucky won't die."
--
They Might Be Giants
quote:
Does a ball of cells that may one day be a
human have more rights than a ball of cells that may one day be a gopher?..........
quote:
Of COURSE life (basic as it may be) begins at conception. The question is where do we believe we get the moral obligation to keep that life alive? Nature does not recognize conceptions, or there wouldn't be such a thing as spontaneous miscarriages.There exists as yet no agreement of when a being achieves "personhood."
In working out an opinion on this issue I concluded that it all hinged on whether the aborted fetus should be endowed with human rights (and therefore spared), or regarded as genetic material (and thus can be destroyed with no moral problems). As you say, we need to know at what point in a human's development it becomes due human rights.
At the stage where it can survive independently from the mother?
This is unacceptable, as the case of premature babies now demonstrates. Unaided, they would die, but with the aid of medical tech they can be given life support. Noone would advocate the termination of a premature baby in an incubator. Miscarriages demonstrate how a failure of the support system can end the life of the fetus. But also babies can die of heart defects after birth, or cot death, etc. Nature reserves the right to terminate the existance of ALL lifeforms regardless of age or physiological independence. Indeed, it will do so to all of us. "Keeping a life alive" is also a different thing to atively bringing about its end.
At some specific stage in its development during pregnancy?
eg. First sign of brain and/or activity therein; first heartbeat, etc.
This is a very tricky line to draw. What level of development is enough to qualify for protection? Many would argue heatedly over varying definitions, each supplying valid arguments to support different positions. This makes this criterion highly contentious and open to later revisions as understanding of the fetal devlopment improves.
"4 weeks"?
An arbitrary deadline based on an integral number of days divisible by 7 is ludicrous. No scientific method is involved, and thus a more rigorous determination is necessary.
Conclusion
This is very serious matter. If you want to allow abortions you require a moral standpoint from which this is justifiable, as the default interpretation would be in the murder of a human life, albeit a very young one.
You asked what the difference between a frog fetus and a human fetus is. The DNA is the answer. The best scientific transition I can think of between the unimportant biological material and the protection-deserving new life form is the step at which a new, unique human DNA code is created.
Using this code, the cells require no further chemical information, merely replicating and dividing, taking in matter to fuel this process from the mother's support system. The process of growth & development inside the womb does not end with birth, as both the mental and physical growth continues until adult stage.
This new DNA code is totally unique, and cannot be recreated by another chemical process. Since it is our DNA that defines our individuality as human beings, and our individuality is the central reason why we hold human life sacred, this seems a logical "transition point" to me.
When does the new DNA appear? Conception.
Ergo, the line is drawn there. Corrolaries being that embryos should be endowed with right-to-life, and there should be no moral implications to fiddling with sperms and eggs provided they never meet and are able to form new DNA.
(This means no moral objection to contraceptive methods)
Well, that's what I think.
------------------
"I AM THE SPIDER!!!!"
- Vic Reeves
------------------
'My rigid grill structure...'
-Dinobot
DNA is not a human being, DNA can be altered to still be human, but be very different, is this a new human being with all the equivilant rights?
I don't know the answer to many of the questions associated with abortion. But I do know that violent demonstrations and partisan politics are not the ways to resolve them.
>"It's the POTENTIAL for life. A gopher fetus will end up as a gopher, which isn't judged to be sentient by most people. A human fetus will end up as a human."
Er.. a gopher is still alive. I must assume, then, that you're not talking about the potential for LIFE, but rather the potential for SENTIENCE.
In that case...
What IS sentience?
(And if you follow the Picard-expressed concept, in "Measure of a Man," then what are Intelligence, Self-Awareness, and Consciousness?)
And can we find human beings who do not possess sentience or the further "potential" for it? Probably. The comatose, the brain-damaged, the severely disabled. Does this lack then delete their rights?
Can we find animals that appear to possess some degree of sentience? Possibly. Some animal-rights advocates (I am not one of them) believe that all warm-blooded animals are "sentient."
>" Since it is our DNA that defines our individuality as human beings"
Is it? Identical twins have identical DNA. Yet they are EACH individuals. Therefore, individuality is not present at conception.
------------------
*I only SEEM Normal*
We need to define what it is about humans that makes it a crime to kill one. Some would distinguish us by our "sentience", others by our "souls" (if you believe in them). It may be a bit metaphysical, but I prefer the idea of "souls", that is to say some spiritual extension of our consciousness that coexists with our physical presence. Sentience falls down as a definition because there are living adult humans who are not sentient, eg. severly mentally handicapped, the comatose. These cases are kept alive because of the hope that they may one day become sentient once more, i.e. their potential for sentience is considered sufficient justification for endowing them human rights. And if you respect potentiality in one case, it would be hypocritical not to apply it elsewhere.
------------------
"I AM THE SPIDER!!!!"
- Vic Reeves
I almost never existed. I was born into this world after survivng many unsuccessful (and different) abortive attempts.
When my mother first told me this, I didn't understand why she wouldn't want me, and she explained to me that though she DID want _ME_, it was the other things that went with it at the time. She knew that there was no way she could support me, or take care of me right. She thought abortion was her only way out. But she never loved me any less.
You think abortion is just a quick way out for people, but you're wrong. Life is sacred. These women, under different circumstances, might have carried their children.
Most of you are men, and have not been faced, in the same way, with an unexpected pregnancy. You have no idea the trouble this causes for us. You have no idea, the position it puts us in. There are very few options, and without a partner to help it gets even worse. These women have the right to make the choice that is going to be best for them.
What's best for them depends on where they grow up and what they've been taught. If you've grown up all your life with people around you who just abort thier children, then you're going to think it's right, and that you can do it too.
I am pro-life. But I am also pro-choice.
I have never been put in this situation, and I hope I never will be. But if I WAS, I would like to think that I would still have the right to choose, despite the morals involved.
Walk a mile in thier shoes, before you judge them.
As the song by Everlast states "They call her a killer, they call her a sinner, they call her a whore... but god forbid you ever have to walk a mile in her shoes, 'cause then you really might know what it's like to have to CHOOSE."
As for the moral issue, THAT'S BETWEEN THE PERSON WHO ABORTS THIER CHILD, AND THAT PERSON'S GOD.
It is not for us to say what is moral according to what religion or what doctrine or etc. Everyone's beliefs are different. You can't take away a person's rights just because You think the God is going to get pissed off. It's not your job to worry about wether or not someone else pisses off the God, just worry about yourself.
So that's what I say. I'm pro life, pro family, pro choice. Because there are circumstances beyond our control, and sometimes that IS the only choice for people, WETHER WE LIKE IT OR NOT.
------------------
"Telling the truth was his death sentence" - Maria Theresa Tula
She was born with part of her brain and most of her abdominal organs outside her body. She lived for about 20 minutes.
Life. What a beautiful choice.
--------------
On the tombstone of an infant:
"It is so soon that I am done for,
I wonder what I was begun for."
What's your point with this, First? They were presented with a choice, and they chose not to abort. The results might have been sad, but they had made the choice. Maybe there was a hope that it'll come out all right. If it were me, I'd probably abort it if I were 100% sure it's not gonna live.
------------------
"I have come to the conclusion that one man is called a disgrace, that two are called a law firm, and that three on the law become a congress! And by God I have had this Congress!"
--John Adams, "1776"
Test can pinpoint an extra chromosome. How did they miss that?
------------------
'Those are the headlines. Happy now?'
-Chris Morris.
Babies who were diagnosed with defects turn out perfectly normal & vice versa. Not 100% of the time, of course, but if there is any chance in the unborn child's favor, many parents will take it.
Some children are born with Downs' syndrome. If you didn't know your child had this until it was born, would you regret not having an abortion or would you love this child with all your heart? If you haven't considered questions like that you shouldn't consider having children until you have.
The problem with abortion, from my perspective, is that it is promoted by some as a safe and convenient alternative to contraception. The best method of contraception is abstinence, but the second best, the condom, prevents many sexually transmitted diseases, in addition to it's primary function. Abortion is a surgical procedure. The survival rate is quite good, but not as good as the survival rate of condom users. I am certain that no-one has ever been killed by properly using a condom.
(Upon reflection, I suppose some may complain as if proper condom use is fatal. Rest assured it is not.)
Unprotected sex, unless engaged in with the clear understanding that children may result, is irresponsible.
--Baloo
------------------
That's my story and I'm stickin' to it!
[This message was edited by Baloo on April 25, 1999.]