Political Vibe: What is your view on abortion?

Avatar image for comicstooge
#151 Posted by ComicStooge (22063 posts) - - Show Bio

Pro-life, dude.

Avatar image for Eeshaan1685
#152 Posted by Eeshaan1685 (3517 posts) - - Show Bio

I am against abortion. Unless it is necessary in extreme circumstances such as a victim of rape or a fatal illness caused by carrying the child.

Avatar image for erik
#153 Edited by Erik (32502 posts) - - Show Bio

@erik: Don't attack Christians attack their concept of an all-knowing, all-loving God. Think about it, God is said to know the number of hairs on your head and everything about you from before you ever existed, before your parents ever got together. Extrapolate that out further and we find that God also knows which babies will be aborted, which babies will have awful lives, and which babies will never see him as their one true god and thus be condemned to hell. Since everything happens according to God's plan, this means that he specifically created babies to be aborted, he created babies to live horrible awful lives, and he created babies to condemn to hell. There is another side of this, God put a loophole into the system that would allow anyone who was without knowledge of sin instant admittance into heaven. This means that every aborted baby gets a free ticket into heaven without having to go through the awful part of living with us heathens and potentially being condemned to hell. God is very much so pro-choice why else would He have designed a perfect means of absolution? Trying to suggest otherwise just flies in the face of His plan and makes the Pro-Life Christians nothing more than false prophets. Why else is there no mention of a stance on abortion in the Bible?

This post would get a +1 from me if CV had the feature. Instead I'll just say, well done.

Avatar image for saren
#154 Edited by Saren (27941 posts) - - Show Bio

There is another side of this, God put a loophole into the system that would allow anyone who was without knowledge of sin instant admittance into heaven. This means that every aborted baby gets a free ticket into heaven without having to go through the awful part of living with us heathens and potentially being condemned to hell.

Not really. Catholic doctrine says that all are born with original sin, and only by overcoming original sin can one attain "beatific vision" which is secret code for heaven. The usual way original sin is overcome is via baptism, and for obvious reasons, most aborted fetuses aren't baptized. There's a lot of debate about it based on ancient texts written by people we rationally shouldn't care about because we're the products of centuries' worth of political, social and psychological evolution from those times, but for some reason we care anyway. St. Augustine said babies that were not baptized would burn in hell, while St. Thomas said they go to "limbo" instead. It's a pretty gray area that most theologians dance around. Most of the time they just offer arguments like trusting in God's infinite mercy yada yada yada.

"Pro-life" always struck me as such a nefariously chosen term, as if automatically categorizing opponents as "pro-death". You might as well be pro-choice; it's not like banning abortions is going to stop them from happening. It'll just kill a lot of women who try unsafe/unofficial methods in addition to all the fetuses conservatives QQ about.

Avatar image for explodingpineapple
#155 Posted by explodingpineapple (951 posts) - - Show Bio

@erik: I am not saying Christians can not do bad things. We are not perfect. I am stating that just because someone claims to be Christian does not mean that they are.

It is true that people will do whatever, I am pro life. I wish people would not have an abortion or kill the kid in any way. No matter how they kill the baby I wish that they wouldn't. So I am not for making it just a common choice. This is what I believe.

Avatar image for erik
#156 Edited by Erik (32502 posts) - - Show Bio

@explodingpineapple: Abortions don't kill babies. A fetus is not a kid or a baby, that's why there is the distinction. If you remove your religious belief, there is no logical reason to deny abortions to a person that wants one. To do otherwise is to impose your religious beliefs onto them. As a future physician, I must respect your beliefs when treating you. But I will be darned if I am going to let you tell me how to treat a different patient based on your religious beliefs.

Avatar image for diredrill
#157 Posted by DireDrill (2483 posts) - - Show Bio

@explodingpineapple: Are you a woman? Well if not I suppose you may want to start following Matthew 7:15. You really can't use Christianity as a motivation for your stance. The Bible simply does not support your stance. There is no place where it is stated that God is pro-life. I'll give you some time to find it but you know I am right.

@saren: Catholic Doctrine is about as Christian as the Book of Mormon. Perhaps you are forgetting the awesome Revelations 22:18 that says that any man who adds to what the Bible says is wrong and will suffer for it. Catholic Doctrine is an addition so thus it is wrong.

Also, you think that all the children that God murdered in the 10th Plague did not get into Heaven? That's effed up.

Avatar image for saren
#158 Edited by Saren (27941 posts) - - Show Bio

@diredrill said:

@saren: Catholic Doctrine is about as Christian as the Book of Mormon. Perhaps you are forgetting the awesome Revelations 22:18 that says that any man who adds to what the Bible says is wrong and will suffer for it. Catholic Doctrine is an addition so thus it is wrong.

Also, you think that all the children that God murdered in the 10th Plague did not get into Heaven? That's effed up.

Considering there are over 1.2 billion Catholics worldwide and they're the main opponents of abortion on the grounds that it violates religion doctrine, good luck explaining that they're technically not Christian. You really think any of them are going to buy that argument, or that the Bible hasn't always been selectively interpreted according to convenience?

I don't believe anything of the sort. I don't care who went to imaginary realms of peace and tranquility and who didn't. I'm just telling you what Catholic doctrine says. I'm pro-choice, in case that was unclear.

Avatar image for cainpanell
#159 Posted by CainPanell (23760 posts) - - Show Bio

I don't believe god gives a sh!t, but I also am not sure if it's right to do.

Honestly both sides have completely correct arguments

Avatar image for diredrill
#160 Posted by DireDrill (2483 posts) - - Show Bio

@saren: Every Mormon also identifies as Christian but they are clearly in violation of Revelations 22:18. Doesn't matter if they buy it or not, we can instantly dismiss their claims of Christianity should they try and use that as an argument. They are defying their own religious texts by supporting Catholic Doctrine. They have to make a choice, either they believe the Bible or they believe Catholic Doctrine because one completely invalidates the other. Most Christians, catholic or not, will automatically choose Bible over Catholic Doctrine. Once that takes place, they then have to deal with the fact that there is nothing in the Bible to support their stance. I am not trying to argue with you specifically, I just want to make Pro-Choice supporters more effective against those using religion as their crutch. I apologize if I came off as hostile.

Avatar image for saren
#161 Edited by Saren (27941 posts) - - Show Bio

@saren: Every Mormon also identifies as Christian but they are clearly in violation of Revelations 22:18. Doesn't matter if they buy it or not, we can instantly dismiss their claims of Christianity should they try and use that as an argument. They are defying their own religious texts by supporting Catholic Doctrine. They have to make a choice, either they believe the Bible or they believe Catholic Doctrine because one completely invalidates the other. Most Christians, catholic or not, will automatically choose Bible over Catholic Doctrine. Once that takes place, they then have to deal with the fact that there is nothing in the Bible to support their stance. I am not trying to argue with you specifically, I just want to make Pro-Choice supporters more effective against those using religion as their crutch. I apologize if I came off as hostile.

Here's the thing: people will simply think up ways around inconvenient scripture if they have to. For Revelations 22:18, for example, they simply claim the passage only applies to the Book of Revelations rather than the whole Bible.

Avatar image for bushwhacker_
#162 Edited by Bushwhacker_ (597 posts) - - Show Bio

Ah don't think too much of it. Ah actually don't like it too much.

But ah reckon it ain't my spot to decide if someone can have an abortion or not.

Keep your pants on, folks. or wrap it up.

Avatar image for diredrill
#163 Posted by DireDrill (2483 posts) - - Show Bio

@saren: That verse was meant to ensure the completeness of the Bible, without it the Bible could be endlessly amended making it useless as a guide. It also serves to punish anyone who would dare take something out of the Bible. Only God can make any changes to the Bible. Anyone claiming to do so now is merely a false prophet.

Avatar image for raiiyn
#164 Posted by Raiiyn (3682 posts) - - Show Bio

@erik said:

@explodingpineapple: Abortions don't kill babies. A fetus is not a kid or a baby, that's why there is the distinction. If you remove your religious belief, there is no logical reason to deny abortions to a person that wants one. To do otherwise is to impose your religious beliefs onto them. As a future physician, I must respect your beliefs when treating you. But I will be darned if I am going to let you tell me how to treat a different patient based on your religious beliefs.

What if I don't have religious beliefs and still believe that this is murder? A fetus is the beginning of human life any way you want to look at it and whether you see it as a parasite or not.

I'm not against abortion in certain cases, i.e. both you and the baby are in danger or even just one of you, or even if the baby is a product of rape. But having an abortion just because you don't want to have a child is horrific to me. The thought that children don't even get the chance at life because someone can't handle responsibility... If you're unprepared to be a parent, give it up for adoption, wrap it up, take the pill or don't have sex. There are other options.

Though, I may be a tad biased as I have seen too many women and teenagers use it as a form of birth control. I find that to be taking advantage of a medical procedure that should be in place to benefit people's health and not their wallet.

Avatar image for explodingpineapple
#165 Posted by explodingpineapple (951 posts) - - Show Bio

@raiiyn: You don't have to be religious to be against it.

Avatar image for raiiyn
#166 Posted by Raiiyn (3682 posts) - - Show Bio

@explodingpineapple: I agree. I said that specifically in response to Erik as he wrote "If you remove your religious belief, there is no logical reason to deny abortions to a person that wants one."

Avatar image for erik
#167 Edited by Erik (32502 posts) - - Show Bio

@raiiyn:

What if I don't have religious beliefs and still believe that this is murder? A fetus is the beginning of human life any way you want to look at it and whether you see it as a parasite or not.

  • Well then you are probably not being honest with yourself as to your beliefs because your logic makes no sense from a medical or scientific point of view. A fetus isn't the beginning of a life. It's a developing assemblage of cells. It in no way resembles human life, nor consciousness at that stage. It's no more a murder than cracking an egg for an omelette.

I'm not against abortion in certain cases, i.e. both you and the baby are in danger or even just one of you, or even if the baby is a product of rape. But having an abortion just because you don't want to have a child is horrific to me.

  • Personal view rooted in some sort of faith.

The thought that children don't even get the chance at life because someone can't handle responsibility... If you're unprepared to be a parent, give it up for adoption, wrap it up, take the pill or don't have sex. There are other options.

  • Those are options you choose to allow yourself. Which is fine by me. But your opinion isn't based on a whole lot of study in the realm of Human Sexuality. Most people that think abortions are baby murders are the ones that are less likely to have abortions anyway. They are also less likely to use protection. This isn't always the case but much of the time, those that get abortions were already using some kind of contraceptive. So our argument is flawed as it isn't even applicable as an alternative. Odds are those options were already in use.

Though, I may be a tad biased as I have seen too many women and teenagers use it as a form of birth control.

  • LOL no. $25 for a 30 day pack of birth control (that's assuming it's not just free, which any woman has access to in states that have PP) as opposed to an abortion which can run from $400 - $2,000 depending on the methods and how far into the pregnancy the woman is.

I find that to be taking advantage of a medical procedure that should be in place to benefit people's health and not their wallet.

  • The problem I find with your argument is that you require us to define when life starts. Sans any magical voodoo, we have only what science and medicine can tell us and that is that an embryo is not a life, nor is a fetus, and depending on what specialist you are talking to (some neurologist claim the baby brain isn't capable of thought for a few weeks after birth), neither is a baby that has just been born. Your position requires that we accept that babies with anencephaly have a "life". They are alive in the sense that their hearts are pumping, they breathe, and they have otherwise fully functional organ systems. But they have no life. I have no idea why we should assume that a collection of a few hundred cells should be considered a life when we take this into account.
Avatar image for raiiyn
#168 Posted by Raiiyn (3682 posts) - - Show Bio

@erik said:

@raiiyn:

What if I don't have religious beliefs and still believe that this is murder? A fetus is the beginning of human life any way you want to look at it and whether you see it as a parasite or not.

  • Well then you are probably not being honest with yourself as to your beliefs because your logic makes no sense from a medical or scientific point of view. A fetus isn't the beginning of a life. It's a developing assemblage of cells. It in no way resembles human life, nor consciousness at that stage. It's no more a murder than cracking an egg for an omelette.

I'm not against abortion in certain cases, i.e. both you and the baby are in danger or even just one of you, or even if the baby is a product of rape. But having an abortion just because you don't want to have a child is horrific to me.

  • Personal view rooted in some sort of faith.

The thought that children don't even get the chance at life because someone can't handle responsibility... If you're unprepared to be a parent, give it up for adoption, wrap it up, take the pill or don't have sex. There are other options.

  • Those are options you choose to allow yourself. Which is fine by me. But your opinion isn't based on a whole lot of study in the realm of Human Sexuality. Most people that think abortions are baby murders are the ones that are less likely to have abortions anyway. This isn't always the case but much of the time, those that get abortions were already using some kind of contraceptive. So our argument is flawed as it isn't even applicable as an alternative. Odds are those options were already in use.

Though, I may be a tad biased as I have seen too many women and teenagers use it as a form of birth control.

  • LOL no. $25 for a 30 day pack of birth control (that's assuming it's not just free, which any woman has access to in states that have PP) as opposed to an abortion which can run from $400 - $2,000 depending on the methods and how far into the pregnancy the woman is.

I find that to be taking advantage of a medical procedure that should be in place to benefit people's health and not their wallet.

  • The problem I find with your argument is that you require us to define when life starts. Sans any magical voodoo, we have only what science and medicine can tell us and that is that an embryo is not a life, nor is a fetus, and depending on what specialist you are talking to (some neurologist claim the baby brain isn't capable of thought for a few weeks after birth), neither is a baby that has just been born. Your position requires that we accept that babies with anencephaly have a "life". They are alive in the sense that their hearts are pumping, they breathe, and they have otherwise fully functional organ systems. But they have no life. I have no idea why we should assume that a collection of a few hundred cells should be considered a life when we take this into account.

Well, I come from Canada and they're free here. Plus depending where you live, the government pays for part of your BC. I pay less then 10$ a month and I don't have private insurance. So yes, the privilege gets abused. Hell, I know several people that have had multiple abortions in the same year. Also, I listed adoption as an alternative. You don't have to even look at the kid if you're that against having a child, but there are thousands of men and women out there who would kill to have a kid and can't no matter how hard they try. And the saddest part is how much more expensive it is to try to have one in comparison to getting rid of one. In vitro is like 20K a shot. I know people who have spent upwards of 100K to have a child, some of whom still could not.

And no offence, but you're coming across as, for lack of a better word, heartless, in the beginning of your argument here. I understand that you are looking at this from a scientific point of view, but especially since you're going to be a doctor, I would hope you would have a little more empathy for human emotions?

Many mother's will tell you how they can tell when they're pregnant before tests and pregnant woman, for the most part, view their little fetus as a life already. Usually when speaking about their pregnancy they're even known to say things such as "it's amazing to feel this human life growing inside of me." From a cold and scientific standpoint, sure, it's easier to define the start of life as brainwave usage, etc. but I think that other things should be taken into account here.

Its a subject that imo, simply can't be viewed from a purely scientific point of view. Though I do understand where you are coming from in defining where human life really starts. It's a convoluted subject.

Avatar image for erik
#169 Edited by Erik (32502 posts) - - Show Bio

@raiiyn said:

Well, I come from Canada and they're free here. Plus depending where you live, the government pays for part of your BC. I pay less then 10$ a month and I don't have private insurance. So yes, the privilege gets abused. Hell, I know several people that have had multiple abortions in the same year. Also, I listed adoption as an alternative. You don't have to even look at the kid if you're that against having a child, but there are thousands of men and women out there who would kill to have a kid and can't no matter how hard they try. And the saddest part is how much more expensive it is to try to have one in comparison to getting rid of one. In vitro is like 20K a shot. I know people who have spent upwards of 100K to have a child, some of whom still could not.

And no offence, but you're coming across as, for lack of a better word, heartless, in the beginning of your argument here. I understand that you are looking at this from a scientific point of view, but especially since you're going to be a doctor, I would hope you would have a little more empathy for human emotions?

Many mother's will tell you how they can tell when they're pregnant before tests and pregnant woman, for the most part, view their little fetus as a life already. Usually when speaking about their pregnancy they're even known to say things such as "it's amazing to feel this human life growing inside of me." From a cold and scientific standpoint, sure, it's easier to define the start of life as brainwave usage, etc. but I think that other things should be taken into account here.

Its a subject that imo, simply can't be viewed from a purely scientific point of view. Though I do understand where you are coming from in defining where human life really starts. It's a convoluted subject.

  • There are plenty of children in orphanages, so it's not like abortion has taken away a person's ability to adopt.
  • Birth control is not an abortion, so the use of birth control (even on the government's dime) is not abusing abortion. If however, some women in your area actually are getting several abortions within the same year, then that's just idiocy of the individual and the population as a whole should not be penalized for the actions of the one.
  • Some women do not choose to allow a pregnancy to ruin their body. You shouldn't be allowed to have a say over what someone else does with their own body.
  • Well... that's a doctor for you. If you want a doctor with empathy for human emotions, you get an OBGYN or someone in pediatrics. That is not my path.
  • That is a personal experience that the woman has as an individual. The woman in your example hardly speaks for all women and it is even less something that could be considered evidence for life.
  • It's a subject that legally speaking, should only be viewed from a medical and scientific point of view, to ensure that no one's rights are reduced in favor of one viewpoint over another. Those that don't want it, don't have to use it. Just like how we don't force someone to take antivenom after he/she mishandled a venomous snake at their religious gathering. It's about respecting autonomy of an individual.
Avatar image for raiiyn
#170 Posted by Raiiyn (3682 posts) - - Show Bio

@erik said:

@raiiyn said:

Well, I come from Canada and they're free here. Plus depending where you live, the government pays for part of your BC. I pay less then 10$ a month and I don't have private insurance. So yes, the privilege gets abused. Hell, I know several people that have had multiple abortions in the same year. Also, I listed adoption as an alternative. You don't have to even look at the kid if you're that against having a child, but there are thousands of men and women out there who would kill to have a kid and can't no matter how hard they try. And the saddest part is how much more expensive it is to try to have one in comparison to getting rid of one. In vitro is like 20K a shot. I know people who have spent upwards of 100K to have a child, some of whom still could not.

And no offence, but you're coming across as, for lack of a better word, heartless, in the beginning of your argument here. I understand that you are looking at this from a scientific point of view, but especially since you're going to be a doctor, I would hope you would have a little more empathy for human emotions?

Many mother's will tell you how they can tell when they're pregnant before tests and pregnant woman, for the most part, view their little fetus as a life already. Usually when speaking about their pregnancy they're even known to say things such as "it's amazing to feel this human life growing inside of me." From a cold and scientific standpoint, sure, it's easier to define the start of life as brainwave usage, etc. but I think that other things should be taken into account here.

Its a subject that imo, simply can't be viewed from a purely scientific point of view. Though I do understand where you are coming from in defining where human life really starts. It's a convoluted subject.

  • There are plenty of children in orphanages, so it's not like abortion has taken away a person's ability to adopt.
  • Birth control is not an abortion, so the use of birth control (even on the government's dime) is not abusing abortion. If however, some women in your area actually are getting several abortions within the same year, then that's just idiocy of the individual and the population as a whole should not be penalized for the actions of the one.
  • Some women do not choose to allow a pregnancy to ruin their body. You shouldn't be allowed to have a say over what someone else does with their own body.
  • Well... that's a doctor for you. If you want a doctor with empathy for human emotions, you get an OBGYN or someone in pediatrics. That is not my path.
  • That is a personal experience that the woman has as an individual. The woman in your example hardly speaks for all women and it is even less something that could be considered evidence for life.

True, but that doesn't change the fact that putting a child up for adoption is preferable to abortion to me.

I didn't say BC was abortion... Or that it was abusing abortion... And it's more than just some. It's teenage girls answer to their "problem" half the time. So, it's not about the population being penalized for the actions of the one, it's about the population not being able to handle the kind of responsibility that comes with this decision.

It's more than just what someone does what their own body. That body is not just theirs anymore. There is another life growing inside of it. (again, I am sure that you will contest me with a fetus is not alive as of yet however I don't see it from that perspective.) They have a responsibility. I find it akin to whether a pregnant woman should be allowed to smoke or drink for that matter when pregnant. Would you say that it's her body so her choice then? No, because there is a fetus inside of it and those things can cause harm to the child when born. I don't see why abortion should be any different. Harm is being caused to the child.

If you don't mind me asking, what exactly will you be practicing? I mean, there are various other types of practitioners I would hope would have empathy. Surgeons, e.r. drs, general family drs, etc.

I didn't refer to one woman. I speak of women in general. I have been around a large number of pregnant women. Comes with the European territory. Large families and groups of family friends. And it's not just how women view their pregnancy. I can name seven woman I know of varying ages that have mentioned that they regret the abortions they have had and that it distresses them emotionally. In fact, I have an aunt who had an abortion at 19 and now, after having children and living her life, she looks back at it with a great deal of sadness and regret.

Abortion has it's downsides. I am sure that you won't understand or rather see it from my point of view as you are too rooted in a scientific perspective for that, so it looks like we'll have to agree to disagree here. :)

Avatar image for erik
#171 Posted by Erik (32502 posts) - - Show Bio

@raiiyn:

  • I have no problem with you preferring adoption to abortion. What you might choose to do with your body is of no concern to me.
  • You used anecdotal evidence of the cost of birth control, then said that it was evidence of how abortion is abused. I may have misunderstood your meaning but to me, that is how it reads. Saying abortion is the solution for half of teenage pregnancies is a rather aggressive claim. I would need statistical data to back up such a claim of fact. Also, talking about people not being able to handle the responsibility of a decision, while using teen-pregnancies as your evidence to back up your position is rather absurd. They're teenagers. In any case, if these teen-moms can handle the decision of aborting the pregnancy, I don't see the problem.
  • Wrong. The body never stops being theirs. Does your body stop being yours when you have a flu? How about when you have a tick or tapeworm? Something is trying to make the woman's body a home but that doesn't mean the woman forfeits her rights to her body.
  • I don't find the two to be equivalent at all. In one case, you have a woman that does not want to have a child and very responsibly terminates the pregnancy. In the other, you have a woman that obviously wants to go through with the pregnancy and is acting in a decidedly irresponsible manner. And yes, even though I would find it unsavory that the woman is choosing to visit disease on a future child, it remains her body. Being an irresponsible parent is not the same thing as a responsible adult. You can't logically equate the two.
  • We all come out of the gate as general physicians or surgeons but I will be going back to specialize in cardiac/pulmonary surgery.
  • You don't speak for women in general. I could probably find at least one woman that believes their body is their own for every woman you think is nothing more than a host for a future baby. Besides, you are using skewed data as you are using women that choose to keep their baby and have formed some make-believe bond with it. Also, anecdotes are not evidence. Why do you think it's not welcome in science?
  • I am rooted in a scientific perspective. Shame on me, I suppose. The only downsides I can even think of would be the results of personal belief and therefore, would be on a case-by-case, very subjective basis. You can't apply that to everyone.
Avatar image for marvel_boy2241
#173 Posted by marvel_boy2241 (2548 posts) - - Show Bio

Um it's quite simple really. If you feel like it's something you want to do then do it. If you think abortion is wrong then don't do it. Either way don't force you views on others. Bada-bing Bada-boom no?

Avatar image for OverLordArhas
#174 Posted by OverLordArhas (7927 posts) - - Show Bio

Bump

Let us continue here.

Saren is a party pooper. ;p

Avatar image for matthewparker
#175 Posted by MatthewParker (4562 posts) - - Show Bio

Bump

Let us continue here.

Saren is a party pooper. ;p

tell me about it lol. there other mod had no problem with it.

Avatar image for innervenom123
#176 Posted by InnerVenom123 (29886 posts) - - Show Bio

We have an abortion thread.

Incredible.

Avatar image for matthewparker
#177 Edited by MatthewParker (4562 posts) - - Show Bio
Avatar image for erik
#178 Posted by Erik (32502 posts) - - Show Bio
Avatar image for matthewparker
#179 Edited by MatthewParker (4562 posts) - - Show Bio

@erik said:

@matthewparker: Then you are wrong. A baby is not a fetus.

? what do you mean? i mean what was that in response to? the article?

Avatar image for erik
#180 Edited by Erik (32502 posts) - - Show Bio

@erik said:

@matthewparker: Then you are wrong. A baby is not a fetus.

? what do you mean? i mean what was that in response to? the article?

How did you get confused when I specifically explained what you were wrong about? A baby is not a fetus. A fetus is not a baby.

Avatar image for OverLordArhas
#181 Posted by OverLordArhas (7927 posts) - - Show Bio
Avatar image for wolverine008
#182 Posted by Wolverine008 (51027 posts) - - Show Bio

I personally don't like abortion and would never put myself in a position where a child of mine would get aborted, but I don't think we really have a right to limit someone's want for an abortion.

Avatar image for matthewparker
#183 Posted by MatthewParker (4562 posts) - - Show Bio
Avatar image for erik
#184 Posted by Erik (32502 posts) - - Show Bio
Avatar image for matthewparker
#185 Posted by MatthewParker (4562 posts) - - Show Bio
Avatar image for OverLordArhas
#186 Posted by OverLordArhas (7927 posts) - - Show Bio
Avatar image for erik
#187 Posted by Erik (32502 posts) - - Show Bio

@erik said:

I read that drivel. I'm honestly surprised there wasn't a Sarah McLachlan song playing in the background.

did you see the pics also? also i dont know who sarah McLachlan is, lol.

I saw the pics. Kind of hard not to, considering the author made sure to post them nearly every other paragraph. It's a blog designed to influence opinion. No facts support it whatsoever. Just anecdotal nonsense and an urging to call some anti-abortion number with the promise that, "They have no political opinion." It's manipulative and it barely bothers to hide that fact.

Anyone swayed by an article like that probably isn't going to have a kid that is head of their class either.

Avatar image for matthewparker
#188 Posted by MatthewParker (4562 posts) - - Show Bio

@matthewparker:

That is another form of sympathy bait.

Idk man i stumbled upon that article while i was looking for a pic of a 9 weeks old fetus. The fact that thats happening to millions of those poor little guys make me very sympathetic, and theres nothing wrong with that.

Avatar image for eisenfauste
#189 Posted by Eisenfauste (17366 posts) - - Show Bio

@erik: @matthewparker Could you guys please not keep quoting each others response because I keep getting notifications to this thread and I really don't want to.

Avatar image for jaken7
#190 Posted by JakeN7 (15180 posts) - - Show Bio
Avatar image for matthewparker
#191 Posted by MatthewParker (4562 posts) - - Show Bio

@jaken7 said:

@matthewparker: Looks like a weird, creepy, translucent alien to me.

Please read the article, and share your opinion. and sorry! ill stop quoting.

Avatar image for OverLordArhas
#192 Posted by OverLordArhas (7927 posts) - - Show Bio
Avatar image for matthewparker
#193 Posted by MatthewParker (4562 posts) - - Show Bio

@OverLordArhas said:

@jaken7 said:

@matthewparker: Looks like a weird, creepy, translucent alien to me.

With ribs.

sorry for quoting again, but this is for both of you. How can you be so jaded? thats obviously a miniature human being.

Avatar image for erik
#194 Posted by Erik (32502 posts) - - Show Bio

@matthewparker: It's not a miniature human being. It is a fetus. A collection of cells, nothing more at this point.

Avatar image for OverLordArhas
#195 Edited by OverLordArhas (7927 posts) - - Show Bio

@matthewparker:

A human being to be called as such should have all the faculties available to it otherwise it is not.

Avatar image for jaken7
#196 Edited by JakeN7 (15180 posts) - - Show Bio

@matthewparker: You can quote all you want, Eisenfauste just didn't want you quoting the comment where he gets called out, because that gives him another notification.

Anyways, welcome to differing viewpoints. It looks like it's on its way to eventually developing into a human, but as it is, it's a freaky alien thing.

Also, what do you the think the size of that is? More than microscopic, but probably less than the naked eye could see (going off of how tiny premies are when they're prematurely born months and months later). Are there any pictures of a 9 week old fetus out of the womb? Hmm...wonder why not.

Avatar image for OverLordArhas
#197 Posted by OverLordArhas (7927 posts) - - Show Bio

@OverLordArhas said:

@jaken7 said:

@matthewparker: Looks like a weird, creepy, translucent alien to me.

With ribs.

sorry for quoting again, but this is for both of you. How can you be so jaded? thats obviously a miniature human being.

Well I'm EVIL and Jake is a Fanboy. ;p

Avatar image for jaken7
#198 Posted by JakeN7 (15180 posts) - - Show Bio
Avatar image for matthewparker
#199 Posted by MatthewParker (4562 posts) - - Show Bio

@matthewparker said:

@OverLordArhas said:

@jaken7 said:

@matthewparker: Looks like a weird, creepy, translucent alien to me.

With ribs.

sorry for quoting again, but this is for both of you. How can you be so jaded? thats obviously a miniature human being.

Well I'm EVIL and Jake is a Fanboy. ;p

Youre not evil, and a fan boy of what? death?

Avatar image for jaken7
#200 Posted by JakeN7 (15180 posts) - - Show Bio

@matthewparker: No. A fanboy of women's rights. The right to choose, and the right to be in control of her own body.