Anti-life crowd outraged that the unborn are cared for.

[Lincoln]

Well on that note, I am going to bed. Good night.

[JohnM2433]

Lincoln, what Lemmy was pointing out is that it's two-faced to say that you want to save the unborn because it's unfair to deny them the choice of whether to live and then turn around and deny them that right yourself if one of them wants to kill himself. What you actually support, if I'm correct, is keeping people alive whether they want to be or not. Don't misrepresent your position. (Strangely enough, those who support the death penalty but oppose legal suicide would grant convicted murderes a right they would deny to law-abiding citizens -- the right to death.)

Also, chickens have embryos and fetuses which develop in chicken eggs. Obviously these are different from human embryos and fetuses. It has nothing to do with whether humans beget chickens or vice versa. Sheesh.

But there shouldn't even be a fertilized ovum in the eggs you buy at the store. Those are laid by hens kept separate from roosters, and thus they (the eggs) never get fertilized. At least that was my impression.

[Gatekeeper]

Heh. I predict it won't take terribly long for a pro-life activist to use the legislation as a springboard for some sort of effort to further control access to abortion. Tis human nature.

Gatekeeper

[ckweb]

My thoughts . . . just because I've never posted on the issue of abortion to date . . .

Aside from rape and the miniscule odds that widely available birth control doesn't work, women always have a choice whether or not to become pregnant. If a woman becomes pregnant (in circumstances other than those mentioned), she has made her choice in my opinion. Why should a woman have the right to exercise power over another life after the real choice was made?

Moreover, a growing number of scientific/medical studies show that abortions can lead to higher risk of breast cancer, infertility, various other physical conditions, as well as psychological difficulties. At the very least, women should be properly informed of the risks they take when having an abortion, which to my knowledge is not often happening.

There are irresponsible advocates of pro-life. No doubt! But, pro-life should not equal anti-choice. The goal of pro-life is empowering women to take responsibility for their minds and bodies so that they never find themselves in the position of having an unwanted pregnancy. Pro-life empowers women to make choices; it simply asks of them that they make those choices before another life becomes involved.

[CapitanGarlic]

I say, only women should be allowed to debate/vote on this argument. I'm sure it's easy for a guy to say that pregnancies should be carried to term, and then the child should be cared for, but often he has no part in it.


...but if you must know, I'm pro-choice.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I say, only women should be allowed to debate/vote on this argument.

Does that mean men should only be allowed to debate/vote on prostate cancer?

[CapitanGarlic]

Cancer is different, though...it's universally thought of as bad(I hope ). Abortion is a debatable issue, however, so only the persons actually involved in it should be considered.

[CyberGnu]

Cancer is different, though...it's universally thought of as bad

What?!!! Cancer-cells are alive, man!!! And you want to kill them? You dirty dirty anti-lifer, you!!!!

[GeneralTacticus]

Excellent point Gnu (and I swore I would never say this...).

[CyberGnu]

:P

[Urban Ranger]

Death is inevitable, all we do is just hasten its arrival. What's wrong with that?

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
Death is inevitable, all we do is just hasten its arrival. What's wrong with that?

So you're agreed then that we should hasten it's arrival for Saddam Hussein?

[Lincoln]

"What you actually support, if I'm correct, is keeping people alive whether they want to be or not."

No, I support letting innocent life in on the decision making process instead of silencing him while we debate the issue. Why not let the baby be born and then when he is old enough to decide if he wants to live you can include him in the deabate instead of killing him first and asking questions later?

If you are talking about the pros and cons of euthenasia then that is another issue but why do you exclude the innocent from that debate? Are you more qualified than she is to decide for her? Like I said before. The pro-choice crowd uses that term while they deny the choice to the innocent. A better discription of their position would be anti-choice for the innocent and pro-choice for those with power over him. So in other words you are in favor of more power for the powerful and no voice for the powerless and innocent. That is in a nut shell is selfishness, and that is the basis of the entire abortion movement.

[JohnM2433]

Huh? What I said was, if you support a person's right to decide whether to live or not, you support the right to suicide. If you don't support the right to death, you may still support the right to life (for some people), but you certainly don't support the right of a person to choose between life and death for him- or herself. Don't confuse the two, or act like they're the same. They're not.

If that's still not clear: You say "I support letting innocent life in on the decision making process". But if you won't let the innocent life kill it/him/herself when and if it/he/she wants to, you don't support this at all -- you won't give the person the right to decide whether or not to live, only the right to life. Now do you see what I'm saying? If you don't give people this choice -- for themselves, not for their unborn children -- then you don't support greater freedom for anyone on this issue.

How am I excluding the innocent from the euthenasia debate?

And by the way, the terms both camps of the abortion debate use to describe themselves are inaccurate. You can oppose gun rights, increased immigration, drug legalization, and school vouchers and still be "pro-choice". You can favor war, guns, and the death penalty and still be "pro-life". The "pro-life" crowd can accurately be described as "anti-abortion", and I would hope they would have no problem with that, as they feel that abortion is bad. However, it would be misleading to call the "pro-choice" crowd "pro-abortion", as they don't necessarily favor more abortion, just the right to it. Calling them "pro-abortion" (or "anti-life") is like saying the Confederacy was "pro-slavery". And saying that the Civil War was fought over slavery is like saying that the American Revolution was fought over taxes, IMO. "Pro-abortion-rights" is cumbersome, though. There should be a better term, but I have no idea what it would be.

One final note: Opposition to stem cell reseach is decidedly not "pro-life". In the case of cloning, the only life taken is one that wouldn't even have existed had the research not been done. Otherwise, the embryo was going to be discarded anyway, so its life is not shortened when it is destroyed. Either way, the embryo is not robbed of life it otherwise would have had. But if the research does not take place, people will likely die who otherwise would have been saved. One columnist wrote a piece on how Bush has supported in-vitro fertilization as a means for infertile couples to have children. Yet this procedure is the very one in which embryos are created and then discarded! So did Bush

1. Play the issue simply for political points when he favored IVF?
2. Play the issue simply for political points when he set limits on federal funding for stem-cell research?
3. Just not know what the hell he was taling about?

[joseph1944]

Originally posted by GePap
Again, i don't think a fetus is a Human being, so terminating its life is not murder.

Well, if the fetus is not a human than it would not become a human.
This is great, you are alive and yet you would denied another his or her life.
A bullies will pick on a smaller person because if he pick on a person his size he might loose. So you and your kind will pick on an unborn baby because they cannot fight back.
One day the people who committed abortion (Murder in first degree) will face God, and God help them when they do.
BTW I have never kill anyone.