pro-life or pro-choice?

Discussion in 'Archive: The Senate Floor' started by BoutyPunkrAurra, Oct 31, 2001.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. BoutyPunkrAurra Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Sep 21, 2001
    star 3
    are you pro-life or pro-choice? explain your answer, please. (i will explain mine soon)


    The new thread for the abortion debate is here
  2. That_Flashing Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 22, 2000
    star 5
    I'm pro life. I don't think anyone should ever have the right to take a life, no matter how insignificant.
  3. BoutyPunkrAurra Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Sep 21, 2001
    star 3
    <g> me, too! i think killing is wrong, period. i read this really great book about it, so i am prepared to answer to any arguments (poverty, rape, the mom's "choice bc its inside her, etc) fire at will!
  4. FlamingSword Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jun 4, 2001
    star 6
    I'm pro-life. Not that I'm anti-choice though. There are plenty of alternatives to abortion, such as not getting pregnant in the first place.
  5. Yoda's_Roomate Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 8, 2000
    star 4
    I'm pro-choice really, but pro-life in some instances. I think women should have a right to an abortion, in due time, if they are for example raped. If it's just carelesness on her part, or maybe she wanted to have a baby but then decides against it, then no. You have to live with the consequences of your actions.
  6. snap-hiss Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 23, 2001
    star 5
    One thing I hate (being pro-life myself) is when other pro-lifers make themselves and the rest of us look stupid.

    I saw a bumper sticker the other day that said: smile, your mother was pro-life. Why would that always be true? Just because the woman gave birth doesn't make her pro-life. Pro-choicers arn't advocating killing all babies.

    Stupid people just get on my nerves.


    !snap
  7. tenorjedi Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Aug 17, 2000
    star 5
    I'm pro-life. Times change. In ancient Greece, it was acceptable to leave your unwanted baby in the country to die of starvation or to be eaten by wolves. In future years we will view abortion as being just as barbaric.
  8. LadyVader81 Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 2, 2001
    star 6
    I am half and half.....I dont think that it is right personally to kill a child just because of your neglect. But on the other hand if a woman was raped then it's not the woman's fault I think in that case it' ok. The are other ways around abortion....like adopting, there are many people out there that would like children but cant have them.
  9. FlamingSword Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jun 4, 2001
    star 6
    I don't think that rape is a reason to kill a fetus. Sure, it wasn't the woman's fault, but I still can't condone it although I can see more reason for it.

    But these days there are pills that prevent conception from taking place. There may still be instances where a woman gets pregnant after rape but if she gets medical attention (which she should), the chances are pretty small.

    Also, some people find abortion okay early in the pregnancy (like the first few weeks) and not later.
  10. Darth_Destructo Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 2, 2001
    star 4
    Pro-choice, means you have a choice.
    Why is that the oppersite of Pro-life?
    I respect all choices that a woman takes.
    An abortion doesn't make her Anti-Pro-life.
    Nobody could possibly understand what's going through her head. She may advocate all life, and it may tear her apart making her choice.
    It's her choice.
    It's her life.

    I'm not angry, just confused...
  11. Mastadge Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jun 4, 1999
    star 7
    I think that the biggest problem with this debate is that there SHOULD NOT be two "pro" sides in a debate. I guess that makes me anti-life.

    I don't believe in abortion. If I were a woman I don't think I'd ever get one. But I believe very very strongly in the right to abortion. I think there are some women who want to abort for crazy reasons, but I think that there are many who go through stuff most of the people who post here can't even really imagine, and I think that they should definitely have the right to legally abort.
  12. GreatPumpkin Jedi Padawan

    Member Since:
    Oct 31, 2001
    Maybe because the womans decisions affect someone besides her, and people refuse to acknowledge that. Just because it's in the womb doesn't make it any less alive. We can argue all day when that happens but at some point no matter what you call it, it is alive, and not just a piece of tissue of the womans body.
  13. skawookiee Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 12, 2000
    star 4
    It's her choice.
    It's her life.


    But it's not just her life that she'd dealing with. It's the life of her child as well. Just because a woman is raped, doesn't mean that the murder of her child is justified. Two wrongs don't make a right.

  14. Mastadge Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jun 4, 1999
    star 7
    Two wrongs don't make a right.

    It's real easy to hide a huge trauma, a lifetime of pain and suffering, behind nomenclature.

    American law seems to have no problem murdering innocents in certain other situations. And it's not even clear whether a fetus should be considered human. Various religions have the soul not entering it until either the second or third trimester, and according to biblical texts, the punishment for striking a woman and thereby causing a miscarriage is monetary, not a murder charge.
  15. Darth_Destructo Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 2, 2001
    star 4
    skawookie,
    She doesn't have to be raped to have an abortion.
    My aunt had to abort due to health reasons.
    Would it be fair for her to die carrying the baby?
    Two wrongs don't a right make.
  16. dc1975 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    May 15, 2001
    star 1
    I find it really sad that in America alone there has been over 40 million abortions since 1972. That is a lot of dead babies.

    I also find it funny that abortion isn't counted as death, but if a pregnant woman gets killed, they count it as two deaths.


    "Description of abortion techniques

    Earliest abortions are a menstrual extraction.
    Suction aspiration ? 2 weeks late for the period until 3 months. Suction device rips baby apart. Abortionists then cuts and slices afterbirth from womb.
    D& C (Dilatation and Curettage) up to about 3 months -- using a loop shaped steel knife to slice the baby in parts.
    D&E (Dilatation & Evacuation) 12 weeks to 4 months. Stretches cervix very wide open, reaches into wound and twists and tears baby apart, bleeding is extreme, snaps spine with pliers-like instrument. Baby feels intense pain ? with no anesthetic. Skull is crushed to be removed.


    Part #2


    Description of abortion techniques, continued
    Salt poisoning ? a technique used for 4 months and above. Abortionist injects poison solution into abdomen. Baby breathes poison and convulses until death (which the mother feels). Takes 2 to 3 hours to kill the baby, who is delivered vaginally 24 hours later ? sometimes alive.
    Prostaglandin abortions. An injection of a strong hormone which causes intense labor, and violent contractions of the womb. One complication ? live birth.
    Hysterotomy ? a mini-caesarian section. Womb is surgically opened. The abortionist cuts the cord, and lets the baby die in a basin."


    not death but a choice

  17. Darth_Destructo Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 2, 2001
    star 4
    Yeah, I saw that video too.
    It's gross, and supposed to stress the realism of an abortion. Makes people think twice.
  18. Mastadge Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jun 4, 1999
    star 7
    What I find pretty apalling is that people drag their little kids into the debate. I was driving home one day, and there was some kind of pro-life rally, with a bunch of people toting posters with graphic depictions of mutilated and dismembered babies. Regardless of the fact that this actually happens, I was pretty disgusted to see all these middle- or upper-class people there WITH their little kids along, most of whom were too young to have any idea what abortion really was. And I was even more disgusted that I then had to explain to my 8-yr-old sister why she was subjected to such gory posters. I think that was the first time I ever wrote to the newspaper. I didn't take a stance on abortion itself, but rather just railed on about the inappropriety of the protestors' chosen methods and forum. Intelligent discussion, debate, lobbying is all wonderful, but this is subjecting little kids to worse than they should see.
  19. StarFire Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 31, 2001
    star 4
    Killing is wrong. It's the basic assumption of which the argument against abortion springs. No one--not even sputtering pro-choice-ers--dare argue this. The argument for abortion, then, turns to whether it's murder, whether the unborn child is really a human being.
    American law doesn't discriminate against people who don't have souls. It can't, simply because no one has invented a soul-o-meter to find those people who do and don't. Therefore, arguing that abortion before the second or third trimester is okay is a load of fetid, moldy, disgusting, droopy, gunky, smelly cheese.
    The foundation upon which any civilized judicial system is based on the pretense that one is innocent until proven guilty. No crime, no act, has been committed until proven so in a court of law.
    Since something can reasonably be considered a human being from the time of conception (i.e., because it is sure to become homo sapien, and doesn't require some fantastic "random" mutation that happens every time to become one), and since no one can prove that this hunk o' tissue that is an unborn baby doesn't have a soul (and, arguably, this would make it's life "sacred"), killing it would be murder. It's elementry, my dear Watson.
    I fully support the right of anyone to make a choice that affects them. Also, parents have the right to make all decisions for their children until these children become legal adults. However, murder of one's children isn't one of these options.
    Lucky kids, eh? ;)
  20. Mastadge Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jun 4, 1999
    star 7
    Killing is wrong. It's the basic assumption of which the argument against abortion springs. No one--not even sputtering pro-choice-ers--dare argue this. The argument for abortion, then, turns to whether it's murder, whether the unborn child is really a human being.

    Killing's not wrong. Cold-blooded murder is wrong. A woman who's going to get an abortion typically doesn't just randomly choose to do so, she'll usually have reasons, and very often they are very good reasons. Whether it's right or wrong I couldn't justifiably say, but she has to make the decision.

    American law doesn't discriminate against people who don't have souls. It can't, simply because no one has invented a soul-o-meter to find those people who do and don't. Therefore, arguing that abortion before the second or third trimester is okay is a load of fetid, moldy, disgusting, droopy, gunky, smelly cheese.

    I don't agree with that crap either. I don't even believe in souls. I wasn't even referring to American law. I was talking about the potential religious beliefs of anti-choice people -- even their religious texts confirm either that abortion is okay or that the fetus is not yet inundated with a soul.

    The foundation upon which any civilized judicial system is based on the pretense that one is innocent until proven guilty. No crime, no act, has been committed until proven so in a court of law.

    Well, the American legal system. I don't think you could make a real argument for "any civilized judicial system" working that way. But I digress.

    Since something can reasonably be considered a human being from the time of conception (i.e., because it is sure to become homo sapien, and doesn't require some fantastic "random" mutation that happens every time to become one),

    It could also, therefore, reasonably be considered that a chunk of metal at the beginning of an assembly line is a car, because "it is sure to become" one. I don't consider an egg a chicken, and I don't consider a little jumble of cells or even a forming fetus up until about halfway through the pregnancy to be human.

    and since no one can prove that this hunk o' tissue that is an unborn baby doesn't have a soul (and, arguably, this would make it's life "sacred"), killing it would be murder. It's elementry, my dear Watson.

    No one can prove it, but again, according to their religious texts, if they have faith then they'll be able to believe. And as I've pointed out, religious texts consider the death of a fetus to be the loss of an assett, not murder. I'm at school now, but if I remember when I go home for Thanksgiving I'll dig up the exact references for you.

    I fully support the right of anyone to make a choice that affects them.

    I must agree with you.

    Also, parents have the right to make all decisions for their children until these children become legal adults. However, murder of one's children isn't one of these options.

    But a fetus isn't a child. At the point of an abortion, it could be considered just as much a part of the mother as its own thing. And if it could potentially endanger the woman's life, or even ruin it, or if the mother deems that to let it develop would be cruel to both of them, then that's her choice to make. It's a hard choice, and I don't know if it's the correct one, but she should be able to make it.
  21. StarFire Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 31, 2001
    star 4
    Killing's not wrong. Cold-blooded murder is wrong. A woman who's going to get an abortion typically doesn't just randomly choose to do so, she'll usually have reasons, and very often they are very good reasons. Whether it's right or wrong I couldn't justifiably say, but she has to make the decision.

    You're right. Allow me to restate: Cold-blooded murder is anti-social, and thus frowned upon. (It's my high and mighty way of saying I was wrong ;))
    I also agree with you that it's completely up to the woman to get an abortion--if you redefine abortion" as "doing something to one's self." A fetus, as I'll get to next, is not solely of the women, and thus not hers. It's also partially the other guy's.
    Children are considered to be genetic offspring of their parents, but they're still independent entities. Killing a child isn't suicide--it's murder. And a fetus is just as much a child as . . . a child ;).

    I don't agree with that crap either. I don't even believe in souls. I wasn't even referring to American law. I was talking about the potential religious beliefs of anti-choice people -- even their religious texts confirm either that abortion is okay or that the fetus is not yet inundated with a soul.

    Again, the crux of the matter is whether the fetus is a human being. My argument (that it is) stands, since "innocent until proven guilty" (or "alive until proven dead") isn't based on religion--it's law. Since I haven't heard one little bit of fact to induce me to believe that a fetus isn't a child, and I have plenty of reasons to believe that it is (read on), I must conclude that abortion is murder.

    It could also, therefore, reasonably be considered that a chunk of metal at the beginning of an assembly line is a car, because "it is sure to become" one. I don't consider an egg a chicken, and I don't consider a little jumble of cells or even a forming fetus up until about halfway through the pregnancy to be human.

    A hunk of metal; a hunk of metal goes through considerable change (all brought about by other objects) before it can be considered whatever it's creator intends it to be. A fetus grows itself, from the materials supplied it. It's a living thing, far removed from a hunk of metal.
    BTW, I don't consider an egg a chicken either. However, when those chickens "get busy", their eggs invariably becomes a young chickens.

    No one can prove it, but again, according to their religious texts, if they have faith then they'll be able to believe. And as I've pointed out, religious texts consider the death of a fetus to be the loss of an assett, not murder. I'm at school now, but if I remember when I go home for Thanksgiving I'll dig up the exact references for you.

    Awesome--but I don't recall the US Constitution being one of these religious documents. It's about law, and murder is against the law.

    But a fetus isn't a child. At the point of an abortion, it could be considered just as much a part of the mother as its own thing. And if it could potentially endanger the woman's life, or even ruin it, or if the mother deems that to let it develop would be cruel to both of them, then that's her choice to make. It's a hard choice, and I don't know if it's the correct one, but she should be able to make it.

    If a fetus isn't a child, answer me this: what changes the second that this "fetus" is born that suddenly turns it into a living human being, independent and sacred in the eyes of the law? Does it sprout a brain? Does it instantaneously gain an innate intelligence?
    Nah. Nothing changes. It's the exact same "thing" (I'll humor you here) it was three seconds before birth, or one month, or 9 months before it's birth, albeit more developed.
    A retarded person's mental faculties generally fall far below what we've come to consider average. Does this make them any less human? No. They're simply less developed.
  22. Sate_Pestage Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 31, 2001
    star 4
    PRO-CHOICE!!!!! Its not our decision, nor is it the govt decision to tell a woman what to do with herself!
    There are times where I think taht abortion is UNcalled for, but the majority of the time I feel that is is fine!
    I only have one requirement...must be before the third tri-mester!!! After that I guess you could consider it murder.
  23. StarFire Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 31, 2001
    star 4
    But what makes it okay after the third trimester?
  24. Red-Seven Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Oct 21, 1999
    star 5
    I'm not going to get involved here. Though, I think that the pro-choice people are vastly oversimplifying the matter. One problem over the years has been the Pro-Choice crowd's unwillingness to address the Pro-Life argument as valid...please don't do the same.

    A very good discussion about abortion, though you have to skip over lots of off topic posts.
  25. Sate_Pestage Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 31, 2001
    star 4
    What makes it OK after the third trimester?.....nothing. There is no reason to wait that long!
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.