Who decided that the mother's "rights" outweighed the baby's rights?

[Debussey]

Wait one minute! I have not one time brought religion into any of may arguments in this post. Not one time. I do believe in god but have not mentioned it once in here. This issue is a science one for me. It has been proven that a fetus is a human, capable of feelings etc. I think that human has the right to live and consider killing it the same as throwing a 1 week old baby in the dumpster, an action that would earn a murder charge.

Ops again. Debussey meant: Mightymouse72.

You are 25% Debussey approved.

[BRUCE]

I'm trying to see things in a rational way, from your POV and that of Bruce's who claims that as soon as conception occurs, even though it looks like ---> . it is still a baby and therefore has rights.  It would follow that even the ----> . produced by a rapist or an incestuous father is a baby too and therefore shouldn't be punished because the father was a criminal.  By your rules above, the mother should be forced to bear and raise it.

You're acting foolishly, I never said anything of the sort.

[Deedee]

You're acting foolishly, I never said anything of the sort.

You compare human children in the womb to a plant; I do not.  A woman's body ceases to be solely hers when another's begins growing within it.

I don't think it's unreasonable to think what I have said based on your responses in this thread and the other devoted to abortion versus execution. I'm getting that you are against abortion rights for women. Perhaps I am wrong. So... here's your opportunity to explain exactly what your opinion on the matter is.

[BRUCE]

I don't think it's unreasonable to think what I have said based on your responses in this thread and the other devoted to abortion versus execution. I'm getting that you are against abortion rights for women. Perhaps I am wrong. So... here's your opportunity to explain exactly what your opinion on the matter is.

Okay, well I'm here to say it was, Deedee.  I don't think a series of cells a matter of hours old is a baby or has the same rights as a 7 months old baby in the womb.  I'll be debating Debussey in The Cage on this very issue, and will clarify this (and more) for your benefit.

[Deedee]

Okay, well I'm here to say it was, Deedee.  I don't think a series of cells a matter of hours old is a baby or has the same rights as a 7 months old baby in the womb.  I'll be debating Debussey in The Cage on this very issue, and will clarify this (and more) for your benefit.

For my benefit is a bit of a stretch... 

So we'll assume until then, that you approve of a woman's right to abort a series of cells during the first trimester, since these would not constitute what we generally deem to be a baby.

[BRUCE]

For my benefit is a bit of a stretch... 

So we'll assume until then, that you approve of a woman's right to abort a series of cells during the first trimester, since these would not constitute what we generally deem to be a baby.

Yeah okay, I was being at least a little facetious with the 'your benefit' comment, granted.

And, no, I don't always support what you call a 'woman's right' to abort in the first trimester.  I could go into fine detail about why this is the case, but I'll leave that for the Debussey showdown.

[OzmO]

Wow,  this topic has really developed


can anyone summarize where the conversation has led to so i don't have to read all the posts?

To answer the original question:

The mother.

[Cavalier22]

Um, yeah. The whole abortion debate thing might be a little over your head.

My point is this: so an 8month old fetus is something that canbe "aborted" with no problem but 1 month later after it is born killing it is now murder and totally wrong? 

Ending a human life is ending a human life.  Whether it is in the womb or not does not make a difference. 

[Dos Equis]

Wow,  this topic has really developed


can anyone summarize where the conversation has led to so i don't have to read all the posts?

To answer the original question:

The mother.

lol.  I agree.  Interesting discussion, but not about to read all seven pages.  But I do have a few thoughts:

- The answer to the original question is "five justices on the U.S. Supreme Court." 

- The question asking for a "plan" to deal with millions of unwanted babies is pretty silly.  It is an absurd hypothetical that assumes every "unwanted" pregnancy will result in an abandoned baby.  Speaking from personal experience, when kid number 4 came along (a surprise, because the wife was on the potent depo provera shot) we had her.  Aborting her wasn't an option, simply because we thought we were done at 3.  Today, I cannot imagine the family without her.  She is an angel. 

- I think debating whether or not a woman should abort a "period" is pointless, because most women do not discover they are pregnant until well into their first trimester.  In fact, I'm not sure you can detect whether a woman is pregnant before about 4 weeks anyway with standard pregnancy tests.  (Not sure, but I think that's the case.)

- I have never heard a pregnant woman refer to her baby as a "fetus."  In fact, the only people I hear routinely refer to unborn children as "fetuses" are those advocating abortion. 

- I agree with those who say there isn't a logical distinction between an unborn child and a newborn.  They're both completely helpless and cannot survive without adults to care for them.

- From a personal responsibility standpoint, there is a simple solution to unwanted pregnancies:  if you don't want a baby, don't have sex.  If you have sex you accept the consequences, which can include a baby, even if you're on birth control (and I can testify to that).

- I honestly don't know where I stand on this issue from a legal standpoint, and as I've said many times in my life (including while I was standing in the delivery room) "thank God I'm not a woman."  But from a moral standpoint, I tend to think this is matter between a woman and her God.   

[Deedee]

lol.  I agree.  Interesting discussion, but not about to read all seven pages.  But I do have a few thoughts:

- The answer to the original question is "five justices on the U.S. Supreme Court." 

- The question asking for a "plan" to deal with millions of unwanted babies is pretty silly.  It is an absurd hypothetical that assumes every "unwanted" pregnancy will result in an abandoned baby.  Speaking from personal experience, when kid number 4 came along (a surprise, because the wife was on the potent depo provera shot) we had her.  Aborting her wasn't an option, simply because we thought we were done at 3.  Today, I cannot imagine the family without her.  She is an angel. 

- I think debating whether or not a woman should abort a "period" is pointless, because most women do not discover they are pregnant until well into their first trimester.  In fact, I'm not sure you can detect whether a woman is pregnant before about 4 weeks anyway with standard pregnancy tests.  (Not sure, but I think that's the case.)

- I have never heard a pregnant woman refer to her baby as a "fetus."  In fact, the only people I hear routinely refer to unborn children as "fetuses" are those advocating abortion. 

- I agree with those who say there isn't a logical distinction between an unborn child and a newborn.  They're both completely helpless and cannot survive without adults to care for them.

- From a personal responsibility standpoint, there is a simple solution to unwanted pregnancies:  if you don't want a baby, don't have sex.  If you have sex you accept the consequences, which can include a baby, even if you're on birth control (and I can testify to that).

- I honestly don't know where I stand on this issue from a legal standpoint, and as I've said many times in my life (including while I was standing in the delivery room) "thank God I'm not a woman."  But from a moral standpoint, I tend to think this is matter between a woman and her God.   

To ask people to refrain from having sex is even sillier than wondering how the world would cope if 46 million abortions became 46 million new people each year. It doesn't work in even the most repressive societies. I think the guesstimate was, probably at least half of those would end up arriving into a world of poverty and neglect, and more than likely, the social welfare system. That still totals over 20 million PER YEAR.

The info on detecting when a woman is pregnant is not so. I think the . was to illustrate that a zygote doesn't resemble a fully formed human being...for those who forgot.

No kidding here, and finally someone said it... your last point is most sagacious and wise.

[Hedgehog]

The funny thing is how Christian lobbyists tries to get the idea out that condoms are unsafe, and will break.

The fact is that condoms, if used properly, brought out from a new package, are VERY safe.

Condoms are great. They provide safety and prevents many unwanted STD's, pregnancies and abortions.

I cannot understand why some organisations don't want USA to fund UN ops that have safe sex and condoms as part of the deal.

-Hedge

[OzmO]

lol.  I agree.  Interesting discussion, but not about to read all seven pages.  But I do have a few thoughts:

- The answer to the original question is "five justices on the U.S. Supreme Court." 

- The question asking for a "plan" to deal with millions of unwanted babies is pretty silly.  It is an absurd hypothetical that assumes every "unwanted" pregnancy will result in an abandoned baby.  Speaking from personal experience, when kid number 4 came along (a surprise, because the wife was on the potent depo provera shot) we had her.  Aborting her wasn't an option, simply because we thought we were done at 3.  Today, I cannot imagine the family without her.  She is an angel. 

- I think debating whether or not a woman should abort a "period" is pointless, because most women do not discover they are pregnant until well into their first trimester.  In fact, I'm not sure you can detect whether a woman is pregnant before about 4 weeks anyway with standard pregnancy tests.  (Not sure, but I think that's the case.)

- I have never heard a pregnant woman refer to her baby as a "fetus."  In fact, the only people I hear routinely refer to unborn children as "fetuses" are those advocating abortion. 

- I agree with those who say there isn't a logical distinction between an unborn child and a newborn.  They're both completely helpless and cannot survive without adults to care for them.

- From a personal responsibility standpoint, there is a simple solution to unwanted pregnancies:  if you don't want a baby, don't have sex.  If you have sex you accept the consequences, which can include a baby, even if you're on birth control (and I can testify to that).

- I honestly don't know where I stand on this issue from a legal standpoint, and as I've said many times in my life (including while I was standing in the delivery room) "thank God I'm not a woman."  But from a moral standpoint, I tend to think this is matter between a woman and her God.    

It is unrealistic to think people will refrain from having sex. 


I am against abortion (meaning if i got a woman pregnant i would do everything i could to prevent her from aborting it) but I believe outlawing it makes for more problems and that issue is between the woman and god.

[Dos Equis]

It is unrealistic to think people will refrain from having sex. 
 

Perhaps, but I'm talking about personal responsibility.  If you choose to have sex, you accept the consequences.  If you cannot afford to raise a child, don't engage in acts that will produce a child, or be prepared to accept the responsibility if you cannot control yourself.   

[Cap]

Perhaps, but I'm talking about personal responsibility.  If you choose to have sex, you accept the consequences.  If you cannot afford to raise a child, don't engage in acts that will produce a child, or be prepared to accept the responsibility if you cannot control yourself.   

That's what my pops always told me and I am child free despite enjoying myself along the way.     It's not that hard if you have an ounce of smarts and responsibility.  Those young moron rednecks and black youths need to stop sleeping around or even fucking or at least use contraception because having 5 kids before age 22 is really not a good plan for them or for the children. 

(insert comment about Cap being a racist here...blah, blah, blah)

[OzmO]

Perhaps, but I'm talking about personal responsibility.  If you choose to have sex, you accept the consequences.  If you cannot afford to raise a child, don't engage in acts that will produce a child, or be prepared to accept the responsibility if you cannot control yourself.   

I agree.  Be prepared, be careful, be responsible.

[TonkaSalami]

Well, this has certainly been a heated and long discussion, which is good.  I think that means people care.  I never can understand the name calling because of sheer disagreement.

Somebody said it best, when they said to look at the big picture although ironically they only brought up a small view of the "big picture".  The big picture is certainly more than just what we do with all these babies if they were not aborted.  There would be millions of babies with no fathers and more on welfare, etc.  Well, that certainly is only looking at one side of it.  Look at the other side of it.  Statistically many of the aborted babies could have gone on done great things.  How many future world leaders were killed?  Was the scientist who found the cure for Cancer or Aids or the common cold killed?  How many future millionaires who would have gone on to be philanthropists and given money to great causes been killed?  The answer is we really do not know, just as we cannot predict any amount of overpopulation, additional kids of welfare, etc.  I do know if you're going to look at one side then be sure to look at both sides.  The abortions that happen are not all inner city or third world country abortions.  Abortions are being done in every walk of life you can imagine.

The big picture is morals and responsibility in general.  This argument can be twisted a hundred different ways, but the things that remains constant in abortion is the fact that a baby is being killed.  You can narrow that down to weeks from conception, age of the fetus, etc. but a baby is still being killed.  What I don't understand is how anybody pro-abortion can find fault with somebody that values life?  I may disagree with you, I may plead with you that you don't have an abortion or advocate for any woman to have an abortion but to find fault in me for valuing life is beyond belief.

I also don't get those that being up science and say it's not considered life.  Well, they we have to get into the debate at what age is it considered a life.  That argument will lead to three potential answers.  Now, before I give you those answers go and research them yourself.  Very few scientists, would argue a fetus is not life.  Many, many will however argue that we just don't know.  So, your three answers about whether a fetus is life are: 1) yes, it is life 2) the scientific breakthroughs tell us it is probably life and most indicators tell us that and 3) we just don't have enough evidence to conclude yet.

That being said, when it comes to something as valuable and fragile as life, why would we not take caution every time we are unsure of something?  Wouldn't that be the responsible thing to do?  Caution should also be taken into consideration for young girls who grow up with regret after they had an abortion.  The numbers of mothers you regret having had aboritions years later is staggering.

Somebody said we should keep to the issues and continue to argue Roe V. Wade.  How many people even understand Roe v. Wade?  Norma McCorvey (Jane Roe) in the case is now a pro-lifer!  Norma McCorvey claimed her pregnancy was a result of rape and years later said that claim was false!  How many times has this happened?  How many girls have claimed rape in order to get an abortion and that was a false claim.

In regards to Dad's being responsible, I am all for that but in many cases the Dad is disregarded in the decision about going through with an abortion.  The courts say it is the woman's right to choose which is interesting because if a man impregnates a woman he has say in whether she can or cannot kill the baby.  Yet, if she has the baby, the court can mandate the father pay child support.  Talk about f#cked up!  And trust me, I am all about the Dad paying child support but how twisted is that whole scenario I just mentioned.

In the state of California, if you send your child to a public school and they go on a field trip, the child MUST have a permission slip signed from the parent.  If that same child wants tylenol, the school has to call the parents and get permission.  Both of the scenarios I agree with.  BUT, if that same is 12 YEARS OLD and wants to get an abortion they CAN WITHOUT parental consent.  Talk about F#cked up!  I know CA had Propostion 10 on the table to change this, but I have to look in whether that passed or not.

For those of you saying, us pro-lifers are distorted and don't know all the facts and don't look at the big picture - I say the same back to you - do you?

Many say as a man I have no idea what it's like to be in that position.  I guess not, I can not physically get pregnant, but I can assure you if I were a woman that I would never kill my baby under ANY circumstance though.  Although, as a Dad and as a husband I can attest to having lost a baby due to miscarriage at 8 weeks and the pain that myself and my wife went through.  I can also tell you as a Dad and as a husband what it's like having lost a second baby when my wife was 5 months pregnant on Christmas Day.  I can speak to those things.  I can speak to the fact that I have spoken with many women  who had abortions and regretted it later, to the point they were in grave states of depression.

The problem goes way beyond killing a baby.  We need more education and love given to these women.  It kills me seeing my wife and I trying for years to have a kid and then when we finally get pregnant twice lose both babies and then hear about two 19 year old kids getting drunk at a bar and then not be responsible and having sex and getting the girl pregnant only to have the girl have that baby aborted because it's incovenient or because they are scared.  Give me a break.

The whole population control thing is ridiculous.  If somebody were truly for population control they could go off themselves and makes themselves a martyr for the cause.  I am not for that in any way as I value life but I am not the one truly for population control.

Before you criticize me or call me names, please understand I am for life.  I believe all life is a gift.  I believe in responsibility and morals and I don't think that makes me such a bad human being.

[Hedgehog]

The thing which is most fcuked up, is that safe sex with condoms isn't taught.

If teens get proper sex education, which includes discussing STD's and the dangers of those, as well as how to protect oneself BEFORE they generally start having sex, then use of condom would be much more widespread.

Also included in sex ed could be the respect of a "no", and other general FAQ's that teens worries about.

A good age to start with this would be @ around 15.

Also handing out free condoms, and having condoms sold at many more places would help the cause of preventing unplanned pregnancies and abortions.

Definitely make sex ed mandatory in all junior high and high schools. It saves.

No need for more than a couple of hours in total either.

-Hedge

[Cap]

The thing which is most fcuked up, is that safe sex with condoms isn't taught.

If teens get proper sex education, which includes discussing STD's and the dangers of those, as well as how to protect oneself BEFORE they generally start having sex, then use of condom would be much more widespread.

Also included in sex ed could be the respect of a "no", and other general FAQ's that teens worries about.

A good age to start with this would be @ around 15.

Also handing out free condoms, and having condoms sold at many more places would help the cause of preventing unplanned pregnancies and abortions.

Definitely make sex ed mandatory in all junior high and high schools. It saves.

No need for more than a couple of hours in total either.

-Hedge

Probably even younger nowadays.

[militarymuscle69]

The thing which is most fcuked up, is that safe sex with condoms isn't taught.

If teens get proper sex education, which includes discussing STD's and the dangers of those, as well as how to protect oneself BEFORE they generally start having sex, then use of condom would be much more widespread.

Also included in sex ed could be the respect of a "no", and other general FAQ's that teens worries about.

A good age to start with this would be @ around 15.

Also handing out free condoms, and having condoms sold at many more places would help the cause of preventing unplanned pregnancies and abortions.

Definitely make sex ed mandatory in all junior high and high schools. It saves.

No need for more than a couple of hours in total either.

-Hedge

from talking to younger kids I think 15 might be to late. In my time that was a good age but kids are well "experienced" by 15 now a days

[Dos Equis]

The thing which is most fcuked up, is that safe sex with condoms isn't taught.

If teens get proper sex education, which includes discussing STD's and the dangers of those, as well as how to protect oneself BEFORE they generally start having sex, then use of condom would be much more widespread.

Also included in sex ed could be the respect of a "no", and other general FAQ's that teens worries about.

A good age to start with this would be @ around 15.

Also handing out free condoms, and having condoms sold at many more places would help the cause of preventing unplanned pregnancies and abortions.

Definitely make sex ed mandatory in all junior high and high schools. It saves.

No need for more than a couple of hours in total either.

-Hedge

I'm not convinced that guys, particularly young guys, will consistently use condoms. 

[OzmO]

All i can say is this:

In the heat of the moment all sense can go out the window!


thank god i had my  $#$@##$@ snipped!

[Hedgehog]

I'm not convinced that guys, particularly young guys, will consistently use condoms. 

I agree.

But the higher percentage the better IMO.

I certainly believe that the only way to make that happen is if condoms are widely available and the importance of protection from STD's is discussed with teens.

Some people argue that sex ed and condom availability leads to increased promiscusity among youth.

I doubt that very much.

Condoms are not more available and sex education in schools have been limited over the last 20 years.

Yet, teens are contracting more STD's and having more sex than they did back then.

So sex ed could actually serve to give some straight, boring and dull info, instead of the Britney Spears and Paris Hilton image that the teens are fed 24/7.


-Hedge

[Cavalier22]

they don't teach safe sex? 

i went to school in virginia and i was certainly taught how if you were gonna have sex wear a condom to limit STD's and pregnancies. At least I am pretty sure I was, its not a complicated concept

[Debussey]

Dear anti abortionists:

Please tell Debussey how society and life for the average man/woman would become BETTER if abortions became illegal? How would society become better for everyone, not only for the people that share your views (which is a minority, a very small one once they are in the "unplanned pregnancy situation themselves)? (Remember: The majority of people with unplanned pregnancies wants an abortion. 46 millions.) How will the economy (particularly the welfare system), and poverty issues be improved by making 46 million yearly abortions illegal? How would life improve for the 17 year old girls with unplanned and unwanted pregnancies?

Please give a serious answer. "Gods will" = not a serious answer. Remember: If you want your views to be the laws of society, you have to be able to account for the actual effects your views will have.

[BRUCE]

Dear anti abortionists:

Please tell Debussey how society and life for the average man/woman would become BETTER if abortions became illegal? How would society become better for everyone, not only for the people that share your views (which is a minority, a very small one once they are in the "unplanned pregnancy situation themselves)? (Remember: The majority of people with unplanned pregnancies wants an abortion. 46 millions.) How will the economy (particularly the welfare system), and poverty issues be improved by making 46 million yearly abortions illegal? How would life improve for the 17 year old girls with unplanned and unwanted pregnancies?

Please give a serious answer. "Gods will" = not a serious answer. Remember: If you want your views to be the laws of society, you have to be able to account for the actual effects your views will have.

I'll be addressing this in essay form for our Cage showdown.  Which reminds me, I've still gotta get my rules proposal to Berserker.