Jump to content
Science Forums

Abortion: Murder


goku

Recommended Posts

My point was simply that human cells do not make a human. Ay what point of development do you think the conceived is a human, a bipedal primate mammal of the genus Homo (H. sapiens)?

if not human cells then what?

the very instant the sperm enters the egg.

So teenagers, even those at their first year of puberty and younger than the age of legal consent should be given no leeway in making any such mistake as having sex without the knowledge of their actions? IOW, some clever 17 or 18 year old boy tricks some 12 or 13 year old girl into something she doesn't understand the implications of and therefore she should forfeit her rights?

she has the right to give the baby away not kill it

 

It doesn't matter that the baby is innocent. You are implying that a woman that has the gamete of another forced on her against her will resulting in an unwanted zygote should have more rights than she does. Do you really think it's just that black and white?

somebody done me wrong, therefore i have the right to kill a baby, not the person that done me wrong, the baby.

wasn't it lincoln that said "my right to through my fist ends where the other persons nose begins"?

when confronted with the innocence of a baby it is always black and white

Of incest you feel the baby's innocence should be enough to force that it be carried to term?
yes
Does it matter if the incest was a result of a father forcing himself illegally on his daughter?
no
Does it matter if the result is some serious deformity?
no
Again, do you think this is really a black and white issue? That the rights of a zygote should be supreme?

black and white

except when the mother or baby could die during the pegnacy, somebody needs to chose which.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then why did you start this thread goku? It doesn't appear like you're looking for debate, you've got your mind made up and closed. You obviously have zero regard for the rights of any woman in the matter if you think that even women which have been forcibly raped against their will should be forced to carry the result to term against their will. You are basically endorsing the idea that any man can force any woman they choose to carry on their lineage, even a girl's own father. It is ideologies like this that hamper the efforts to reduce abortion of viable fetuses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

she has the right to give the baby away not kill it

If the conditions justify it, then yes, I give her the right to kill the baby. Just like killing on self-defense, or like death-penalty.

 

Rape is a good reason. I'm not saying that I'd encourage the woman to necessarily have the abortion, but she must have the right to decide.

somebody done me wrong, therefore i have the right to kill a baby, not the person that done me wrong, the baby.

Who said that the raper would be let free of charges?

 

Oh, and the title of the thread is wrong. Abortion is not murder, it lacks of malice aforethought, and this is in all the cases. Still, it shouldn't be allowed to abort because of irresponsibility at the time of having sex, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

actually, i would include murder. You don't abort without aforethought. The malice part does not require that the murderer intend to do harm, but that the victim be harmed.

You throw out murder when the murderer does not intend to kill (which in this case is only debated by the definition of killing of an unborn.)

 

If you think that sex for the fun of having sex is a good reason for having sex, then you aren't paying any attention to the idea behind procreation. Then if you are only having recreational sex, and the woman becomes pregnant, why should I feel sorry for either one of the participants.

 

Our laws and society are based upon the recognition of privledge and responsibility. By allowing abortion, we remove responsibility. I find it amazing that women want more priveledge (going back to the suffrage movement) and yet don't want any additional responsibilities. Sorry but anatomically, they have those responsibilities. Responsibility comes with the price that you have to use that grey matter and make decisions that aren't easily made. One of those decisions is that if you don't want the responsibility of a child or pregnancy, you have to take away the possibilities (i.e. no recreational sex, no putting yourself in a drunken/drugged state around men who have low morals and may rape you, etc., etc., etc.) Being a man myself, I don't put myself in those situations because I don't want to be taken advantage of either. I saw people drawing all over passed out people, being tied down to cots while passed out, and I'm sure many more and worse thigns were done when I wasn't present.

My choice, not to get mad and blame someone for doing these things if they had happened, but to avoid the situation so it couldn't happen.

You want to not get raped, then do something proactive. Take self-defense classes. Get educated on how to avoid the situation. It will greatly reduce the number.

black and white

except when the mother or baby could die during the pegnacy, somebody needs to chose which.

Black and white, except when it is grey?

No, I think I pointed out above, though maybe i just remember thinking it, that doctors are all too often wrong. How do you decide between the life of the mother and the life of a child. I once heard the following, "what if that child were to be the next Einstein?" How would you know?

Physical deformity? "What if that child were to be the next Hawking?"

Black and white.

 

_

Link to comment
Share on other sites

actually, i would include murder. You don't abort without aforethought. The malice part does not require that the murderer intend to do harm, but that the victim be harmed.

Not true.

 

Definition of malice aforethought

Actual or implied malice existing in or attributed to the intention of one that injures or esp. kills without justification or excuse and usually requiring some degree of deliberation or premeditation or wanton disregard for life (murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought - California Penal Code)

 

You throw out murder when the murderer does not intend to kill (which in this case is only debated by the definition of killing of an unborn.)

 

If you think that sex for the fun of having sex is a good reason for having sex, then you aren't paying any attention to the idea behind procreation. Then if you are only having recreational sex, and the woman becomes pregnant, why should I feel sorry for either one of the participants.

Agree.

 

Our laws and society are based upon the recognition of privledge and responsibility. By allowing abortion, we remove responsibility. I find it amazing that women want more priveledge (going back to the suffrage movement) and yet don't want any additional responsibilities. Sorry but anatomically, they have those responsibilities. Responsibility comes with the price that you have to use that grey matter and make decisions that aren't easily made. One of those decisions is that if you don't want the responsibility of a child or pregnancy, you have to take away the possibilities (i.e. no recreational sex, no putting yourself in a drunken/drugged state around men who have low morals and may rape you, etc., etc., etc.) Being a man myself, I don't put myself in those situations because I don't want to be taken advantage of either. I saw people drawing all over passed out people, being tied down to cots while passed out, and I'm sure many more and worse thigns were done when I wasn't present.

My choice, not to get mad and blame someone for doing these things if they had happened, but to avoid the situation so it couldn't happen.

Agree on here too.

 

You want to not get raped, then do something proactive. Take self-defense classes. Get educated on how to avoid the situation. It will greatly reduce the number.

That's true, in a way. Say you leave your car open in front of the store, and someone steals something from it. Should the person be not charged with theft just because you forgot to lock the car? Being stupid or naive is not against the law. I could be so naive to actually have $200 on my hand at everyone's sight, does that give a thief or a killer the right to steal from me or kill me because I was stupid?

 

Sure, I may bring that upon me, but again, that doesn't free the person of charges.

 

Should I be free of charges just because a woman dressed provocative and I raped her?

Answer: No.

 

Black and white, except when it is grey?

LOL!

No, I think I pointed out above, though maybe i just remember thinking it, that doctors are all too often wrong. How do you decide between the life of the mother and the life of a child. I once heard the following, "what if that child were to be the next Einstein?" How would you know?

Physical deformity? "What if that child were to be the next Hawking?"

Bad argument. The child could be as well be the next Hitler or a serial killer. How would you know?

 

Baseless asumptions do not count as a good argument.

 

Black and white.[/size]

 

_

Not everything is black and white and this is not the exception.

 

 

I'm out of here, this is a touchy subject.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Say you leave your car open in front of the store, and someone steals something from it. Should the person be not charged with theft just because you forgot to lock the car? Being stupid or naive is not against the law. I could be so naive to actually have $200 on my hand at everyone's sight, does that give a thief or a killer the right to steal from me or kill me because I was stupid?

 

Sure, I may bring that upon me, but again, that doesn't free the person of charges.

 

Should I be free of charges just because a woman dressed provocative and I raped her?

Answer: No.

 

Thus in an earlier post, I made the following comment. Please read the entire post, it isn't that long.

I didn't say that the rapist wasn't guilty. I just asked if the "victim" was innocent. Two different questions.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you think that sex for the fun of having sex is a good reason for having sex, then you aren't paying any attention to the idea behind procreation. Then if you are only having recreational sex, and the woman becomes pregnant, why should I feel sorry for either one of the participants.

This doesn't consider the fact that many participants make an active effort with various brith control methods to avoid pregnancy. The whole reason for using birth control is to enable recreational sex without risks. Should that be disallowed too?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I recently heard someone on a PBS show say that if only the catholic church (i'm not catholic) were to allow birth control then unwanted pregnancies and stds in african countries would decrease in a serious way.

 

What is wrong with that statement? The simple fact that the Bible is condemnatory of extramarital sex. How does an STD get passed rapidly among a population if no one is sleeping with multiple partners? I don't have an answer for married partners, on whether or not use of contraceptives would be proper. I do for unmarried, and that would be yes, because unmarried people (according to my belief) should not have sex, therefore what would their need for contraceptives be? I do believe that use of any method that causes a fertilized egg to purposefully be aborted (in my opinion) is murder.

 

One more thing, recreational sex without risk? Never heard of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The simple fact that the Bible is condemnatory of extramarital sex. How does an STD get passed rapidly among a population if no one is sleeping with multiple partners? I don't have an answer for married partners, on whether or not use of contraceptives would be proper. I do for unmarried, and that would be yes, because unmarried people (according to my belief) should not have sex, therefore what would their need for contraceptives be? I do believe that use of any method that causes a fertilized egg to purposefully be aborted (in my opinion) is murder.

It sounds like your position is religious and that everyone should conform to your religious ideology. That ain't gonna happen though. What is your opinion on science helping a majority simply agree that a fetus is a person at some point prior to birth? Wouldn't it be better to gain some ground than none at all. As long as the religious members in the debate keep arguing for all or none there seems to be no movement in rights in favor of the unborn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no such thing as risk free sex, nor should there be, in my opinion. Lowered risk, yes, but it is something that should require responsibility in some way. That does not mean that I think abortion is wrong because people should be held responsible for their actions - that is a terrible reason to have a child, to teach the mother and father a lesson. If the child is unwanted, then he or she should be put up for adoption.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sounds like your position is religious and that everyone should conform to your religious ideology. That ain't gonna happen though. What is your opinion on science helping a majority simply agree that a fetus is a person at some point prior to birth? Wouldn't it be better to gain some ground than none at all. As long as the religious members in the debate keep arguing for all or none there seems to be no movement in rights in favor of the unborn.

everyone should conform, but your right they wont.

what's wrong doctor? everything's fine, we just need to run a few tests to make sure the baby is human. :friday:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

everyone should conform, but your right they wont.

what's wrong doctor? everything's fine, we just need to run a few tests to make sure the baby is human. :friday:

There's gotta be an answer for that.

 

Some people say that it is a human life upon conception and some others until 2-3 months.

 

You may be against abortion due to your religion, but you know those arguments don't hold water in the court.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You may be against abortion due to your religion, but you know those arguments don't hold water in the court.

Yep, the court is not going to completely strip the mother of her rights. I personally think we're at a point though where science can show that life begins before birth. It is hard for me to believe that anyone cannot not see life before birth in this picture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...