A friend of mine was raped recently while at work. She just found out that she is pregnant, and has every reason to believe that the child is the product of that rape. Is it right for her to abort the child?

Comments

• I agree with you. No one can advise her, it is very personal to her own conscience and values in regards to abortion and her own life.

  • Report
  

  by FineBalance . on December 14th, 2006

• Absolutely.

  • Report
  

  by AntigoneRising on December 14th, 2006

• Gee, 6 points, and not a NEGATIVE 6 this time either! I am thrilled.

  • Report
  

  by Anonymous on December 14th, 2006

• I wish I cud give u more, I maxed out my points.

  • Report
  

  by FineBalance . on December 14th, 2006

• I agree, and for that reason I have left that to her to make COMPLETELY. I've just been there as a shoulder to cry on. I am pro-life, and this has made me think real hard about my beliefs in a way that is very different for me. I don't know if you all believe in prayer, but if you do, please pray for Candy. She is not just a friend, but also my son's godmother. She is one of the most kind, sincere and compassionate people I have ever known. She deserves better than this.

  • Report
  

  by Metaphiz on December 15th, 2006

• Metaphiz, please take comfort to know that she has friends like you. All she needs is a shoulder to cry on and prayers. It is very painful time for her. Please be assured she will be in my prayers always. I wonder sometime why such pains to such innocent people? Why?

  • Report
  

  by FineBalance . on December 15th, 2006

• Metaphiz, just wanted to let you know I was in the Spiritual Centre this Saturday and offered my prayers for your friend. God bless you both!

  • Report
  

  by FineBalance . on December 20th, 2006

• Very kind of you. Thanks.

  • Report
  

  by Metaphiz on January 22nd, 2007

• Agreed!

  • Report
  

  by Granny on April 5th, 2007

• It's not moral, it's not difficult. It's not a child. It's also less risky to her health and future to abort. The risks of birth and alteration of your life should not be forced upon you.

  • Report
  

  by Halliburton Shill on August 26th, 2007

• No one was trying to "force" anything on her. She had a decision to make, an important one. BTW, she made it on her own. She decided to keep the child.

  • Report
  

  by Metaphiz on August 27th, 2007

• And now every time she looks at the child she will see the rapist. I would not want to be that child.

  • Report
  

  by Prunesquallor on June 17th, 2008

• H: it is moral, it is difficult, it is a child and the risk of her own future health is at much greater risk if she were to have had the abortion.
  Prun: and now every time the child looks at her, he sees the incredible love a mother can have for her child, despite the circumstances of his conception. out of great agony and violence, still greater love came. the mother wins, the rapist loses.

  • Report
  

  by insaner on September 20th, 2008

Comments

• Believe me, I hate that this is even a topic for us right now. We have been like family since I was 8 years old, and it hurts to see her like this. However, I'm having a problem with this logic that because it will be hard or even emotionally painful we should consider ending the child's life. It's like saying, "What chance of a good life does that 3 year old with a birth defect have of a happy life? Perhaps we should end his/her suffering. Besides, the parents will have a hard time raising the kid anyway." I cannot come to terms with the idea that aborting this child is the right thing to do on the grounds that their lives will be difficult. Even if you do not see it as a child yet, does it not have a chance? Do we have the right to deny them that chance because 'technicly' it's just a part of the woman's body and she can do what she wishes with that body? This really sucks! It just breaks my heart to see my Candy go through this and not know what to say to her.

  • Report
  

  by Metaphiz on December 15th, 2006

• I believe that is somebody is supposed to be born, then they will be born and that if there is such a thing as a soul or spirit that it just gets transferred to another baby. With a 3 year old it is a fully formed child with real emotion and exeriences, but as long as its still early days then I do think that in a case like this is would be acceptable. Being raped is a nightmare, but seeing something every day that is a reminder of that would be even worse, she needs to emotionally heal and I think spending the next 9 months pregnant with the rapists child is not the best way to do that. Its a hard decision and one that only she will be able to make, but for her it would be better to decide either way sooner rather than later.

  • Report
  

  by Psyonic on December 15th, 2006

• The same arguement could be made by a murderer that when someone is supposed to die, then they will. They could say, "I was just the instrument." Who's to say that the experience of raising this child won't be an instrument of healing, or that the circumstances of the conception won't lead to a child that grows to do great things. Playing God is a dangerous thing.

  • Report
  

  by Metaphiz on December 15th, 2006

• That child could grow up to be the next mother terasa, but it could grow up to be the next adolf hitler, as I said I think that if a child is meant to be born then it will be born somewhere. Its her choice and one she will have to live with, all you can do is offer advice, BUT if she does decide to have an abortion then it will not be a decision she has made lightly, so please try to help her through it, no matter what she chooses, she needs your support.

  • Report
  

  by Psyonic on December 15th, 2006

• Again, what child?

  • Report
  

  by Wigster78 on April 6th, 2007

• Abortion is murder. It's that simple

  • Report
  

  by mcclisteraf on July 19th, 2007

• It's not a child. Yes, abort it.

  • Report
  

  by Halliburton Shill on August 26th, 2007

• Halliburton, she went through with the pregnancy. What should I tell her now? She should have had an abortion?

  • Report
  

  by Metaphiz on August 27th, 2007

• Um, you need to do your research, halliburton shill, a babies heart starts beating at 4 weeks, which is when most ppl find out they are pg, so does from what I have been told, if a already born person has a heart beat than they are still alive...

  • Report
  

  by Anonymous on April 19th, 2008

• It's not a child. Yes, abort it. Yes, she should have. A fetus isn't a fetus until 8 weeks. It's not viable, meaning able to live on its own, even with all of medical science supporting it, until at least 21 weeks. The actual, youngest fetus to survive so far was just under 22 weeks. I know math is tough for you: 5 months.
  
  What actual research have you performed? Accepting propaganda from anti-abortion extremists?

  • Report
  

  by Halliburton Shill on April 19th, 2008

• No, I have two children of my own, and ask any Mother, When did they consider their baby a baby. Everyone will tell you that as soon as they found out it was their baby. Medically, no they cannot live on their own, and it's ignorant of you to put me down when you do not know anything about me. Morally and mentally for the parents it's a living baby. So even now after she has had it, kept it and loves it, you are saying she should have gotten "rid" of it? Maybe you should just be happy someone didn't just consider you "not alive"!

  • Report
  

  by Anonymous on April 20th, 2008

• All unverifiable. No actual research.

  • Report
  

  by Halliburton Shill on April 20th, 2008

• Well I for one don't need a text book to know right from wrong. Do your own research instead of relying on someone else to do your thinking for you. It might do you some good! This is childish and I am done trying to talk to someone who can't think for himself, and needs someone elses findings to argue their point. Good bye, and I hope you are enlightened some day in your life:)

  • Report
  

  by Anonymous on April 20th, 2008

• I for one prefer a text book because it isn't based on lunatic ravings from some random anti-abortion extremist. It's based on reality. Oh, sorry, that's medical science of real doctors in real hospitals with real patients. Don't want children learning. They may grow up and learn the earth is round.
  .
  The facts remain:
  A fetus isn't a fetus until 8 weeks. It's not viable, meaning able to live on its own, even with all of medical science supporting it, until at least 21 weeks. The actual, youngest fetus to survive so far was just under 22 weeks.

  • Report
  

  by Halliburton Shill on April 20th, 2008

• so functional human beings that depend on machines to live, without which they would die, are NOT humans?? and therefore it would not be immoral to kill them?? appalling.

  • Report
  

  by insaner on September 20th, 2008

Comments

• Agreed. It's not even a child yet. It's also less risky to her health, life, and future to abort. The risks of birth and alteration of your life should not be forced upon you.

  • Report
  

  by Halliburton Shill on August 26th, 2007

Comments

• This is a great answer.

  • Report
  

  by AntigoneRising on December 27th, 2006

• I agree, excellent answer.

  • Report
  

  by muguet on December 27th, 2006

• I'm right with you.

  • Report
  

  by Singingismystyle on April 4th, 2007

• I agree, it is okay for her to have the baby. She just needs to know ALL of her options, including life, abortion and adoption, and any other options she sees fit.

  • Report
  

  by Penny The Wise on July 17th, 2007

• It's better than OK to abort. It's not a child. It's also less risky to her health and future to abort. The risks of birth and alteration of your life should not be forced upon you.

  • Report
  

  by Halliburton Shill on August 26th, 2007

Comments

• But what about the child?

  • Report
  

  by Metaphiz on December 15th, 2006

• I know the child is innocent and all that. It is not the child's fault it was conceived because of rape. But the woman is vicitimized twice because of it. Every woman in this situation must choose for herself what to do. For my mental health and that of my family I would end it. Granted as soon as it happened I would go to the hospital and get whatever drug it is that is supposed to stop conception in the first place.

  • Report
  

  by Anonymoose on December 15th, 2006

• Good points.

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on April 5th, 2007

• What child?

  • Report
  

  by Wigster78 on April 5th, 2007

• Just a side note, women who have been raped (by known or unknown people) have described the process of an abortion much like the rape. They are put in a dehumanized position that they have no control over while something is taken from them. And many women who have abortions have the same post traumatic stress as rape victims. After you start the procedure, you can't say you changed your mind and leave. They wont let you. Just some thoughts to consider.

  • Report
  

  by sheenashark on June 22nd, 2007

• you can change your mind at anytime during a visit to an abortion clinic...you can change your mind when you are on the table and up in the stirrups. so, yes..they will let you change your mind. Women that choose an abortion have all the control, they after all are the ones that made the decision! Clinics that do abortions are womens clinics and are all about the rights and decisions of the women. I know this because I worked in a womens clinic for years. Sorry to butt in here but if we are putting thoughts out there for the world to consider I think they should be a bit more accurate.

  • Report
  

  by APACHEmeansENEMY on July 17th, 2007

• Thank you Chanel. Sheenashark, I believe that what you are saying is incorrect in that they won't let you leave. It's not like it's in some dingy basement in some dirty back alley anymore. It's not a dungeon. It's a clinic and people are treated with respect there. The people who work there, in most situations are going to be respectful and realize that the decision that has been made is a really tough one. It's not an anti-baby factory... As far as how people feel, I can't honestly say that I've ever been raped like that nor been pregnant. That I Don't know about. Do you?

  • Report
  

  by Penny The Wise on July 17th, 2007

• yes, Penny you are right. That is one of the benefits of legalized abortion. Whether one believes in it or not...thats the way it works now, as opposed to how it worked then. And I have never been raped...so I would never, ever presume to tell someone else what they should do about it or the aftermath. Its not my decision to make...thats a VERY good point you bring up.

  • Report
  

  by APACHEmeansENEMY on July 17th, 2007

• Thanks.

  • Report
  

  by Penny The Wise on July 17th, 2007

• I did some more reading and it does look like many doctors are becoming less sympathetic toward abortions and places are more frequently allowing last minute changes of mind, which gives me some hope for humankind. However, the procedure is not discussed in full detail as it should be, proper counseling before and after abortions is still not being done on a regular basis and women are still not thoroughly informed on the physical and emotional risks and side effects of abortions. I still read and see many more women who regret their decision, some that feel it was for the best but awful, and very few that are totally happy about it. And what would happen on the operating table is that nurses would say it was normal to feel nervous but that it would be over soon instead of stopping the procedure and having the women go through more counseling. You can't put the baby back, so better to error on the side of caution. That is disregarding research finding it is generally unhealthy.

  • Report
  

  by sheenashark on July 17th, 2007

• And for the record, I was a single mom for four years. My husband and I did get married and I am pregnant with our third child. My mother had an abortion after my sister and feels strongly that she was coerced into it by the medical staff and ultimately that she murdered her child. She is covered completely by God's grace and is forgiven from it. I have had friends who were molested and raped, none resulting in pregnancies so I can't say I've had heart to hearts with people who've gone through that. I do know the women who have survived those things would not have considered aborting their child though, as it would be their child. I also know that at only 9 weeks pregnant, my little one has all of his or her parts, own heartbeat and it's own little brain waves starting to process this new world. That should be enough to make everyone pause when considering the controversy of abortions. If it isn't, I feel very sad for the state of mankind today.

  • Report
  

  by sheenashark on July 17th, 2007

• Sorry to add one more, but I found this funny: In 1857 the U.S. Supreme Court decided the Dred Scott Decision. By a 7-2 vote it ruled that black people were not "legal persons," that they were the property of the slave owner, who was granted the basic constitutional right to own a slave. Abolitionists protested, to be met with this answer: "We understand you oppose slavery and find it morally offensive. That is your privilege. You don’t have to own a slave if you don’t want to. But, don’t impose your morality on the slave owner. He has the constitutionally protected right to choose to own a slave."
  
  Lincoln's response: "No one has the right to choose to do what is wrong."

  • Report
  

  by sheenashark on July 17th, 2007

• So you think that just because YOU think that something is wrong, NO ONE ELSE should have the ability or right to do it? Thank god you aren't the president, eh? I would not want to give birth to a child that came from that kind of evil and I HAVE that right. *shrug* Whether you like it or not. You haven't been in that situation and you don't know what it feels like. Period. I'm just going to walk away from this one- I can already start to feel the heat.

  • Report
  

  by Penny The Wise on July 17th, 2007

• Very well, I've said all I have to say. If you'd like to read more in depth arguments visit http://www.abortionfacts.com/life_or_choice/pro_choice.asp I feel as strongly about protecting and loving a woman and her child as you do about her right to kill the child growing inside her. Visit http://www.abortionfacts.com/online_books/love_them_both/why_cant_we_love_them_both_29.asp#rape for researched and supported views on pregnancies by rape if you care to know more facts. And if its any consolation, I have a hard time not getting steamed about his issue also. God bless.

  • Report
  

  by sheenashark on July 17th, 2007

• OK here's another thing I have to say. All of you "pro lifers" out there think that we're like the hitler to babies. We're not out to kill every f*cking baby okay? You'll have to excuse my language- this is really one of my hot buttons- I'll TRY to keep it to a minimum. "Pro Choice" is about CHOICE. If you WANT to keep the baby, keep it. If you want to abort it, abort it. If you want to give it up for adoption, do so. But it's not about anti-baby. It's about the CHOICE to do whatever the pregnant woman wants. I know you "pro lifers" seem to tell yourselves that we just want all the babies in the world to die, but its a big, fat, lie and I won't stand for it, ever EVER.

  • Report
  

  by Penny The Wise on July 17th, 2007

• You obviously haven't bothered to really read my posts. So, I'm not going to bother continuing to debate with you.

  • Report
  

  by sheenashark on July 17th, 2007

• Good. Take care. You obviously didn't bother to read my point. All you wanted to do was say that I wanted all the babies in the world to die, and you don't care to change your view. So go, and view the world as you do. Don't trip on your warped perception.

  • Report
  

  by Penny The Wise on July 17th, 2007

• @sheenashark: while you make some worthy points, you also don't see the self-serving nature of your posture. "I am the righteous defender of the unborn" is clearly ego-massaging of a high magnitude. I think if you could get the mirror defogged sufficiently to see your own self-righteousness, you'd back off a bit from the "I have God on my side" stance and accept that there is considerable valid argument on both sides of the debate.
   
  We all hate gray areas -- it's so much nicer to just presume that our abstractions ARE reality. But that isn't really clear thinking.
   
  @Penny: I know you know this, but when the anger boils to that temperature, you can't do any good.

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on July 17th, 2007

• Agreed. I have decided to walk away and leave all as it is. I have had this conversation before, and will probably have it again. But I won't let it go too far. Thanks Stableboy.

  • Report
  

  by Penny The Wise on July 17th, 2007

• Ahhh...stableboy and his ego theories. I don't agree with them, but you are entitled to your opinion as am I and penny wise for that matter. I was not trying to say that pro-choicers want to kill all children. I do strongly believe that abortion benefits noone and should be avoided at all cost. Pennywise is being just as "egotistical" in stating that it is a womans right to choose and he/she is defending her freedoms. And I do have the strong mommy instinct that wants to protect children from harm....all of them if I could and no know in my heart that start well before 22 weeks. Just a mama bear. :) Have a great evening...I need to dwell on something more lighthearted and uplifting before bed....maybe some Louis L'Amour...

  • Report
  

  by sheenashark on July 17th, 2007

• *rolls eyes* Okey doke.

  • Report
  

  by Penny The Wise on July 17th, 2007

• I'm not saying you don't have valid points, I'm saying your judgment is impaired by having painted yourself as heroic for holding this position. This seals up your ears, so you can't hear the valid points made by the other side: to have a BALANCED view of the matter wouldn't glorify yourself... it's too ordinary, too rational, too... boring. The fact that you can't see this merely indicates that self-awareness is not one of your priorities. But it could be.

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on July 18th, 2007

• I have done a lot of research on both sides and have found no arguments that validate the right of someone to take anothers life, especially not that of an innocent child. If you follow the link I left above, they address every argument given by pro-choice supporters. I have had many personal experiences with those involved in abortions and none have been positive. Even abortionists themselves say that it is killing, but the baby is the mothers property and she has a right to do so. Where we disagree is on the value and life of the unborn child. I think all children have a right to live, whether they will be handicapped, of incest, or simply of a mothers bad choices. A child's life has more value than a mothers convenience or temporary discomfort in my book, and many of the time it is mostly convenience. If I am an ego maniac to think babies shouldn't be torn apart in the womb or sprayed with acid until they die, so be it. I know I wouldn't want to die in those ways.

  • Report
  

  by sheenashark on July 18th, 2007

• Also, I have been in many a mothers situation, so to say I don't see their point of view is egotistical on your part. I was faced with being not the first but second child to get pregnant out of marriage with very conservative parents. I was barely finished with my AA. My boyfriend, now husband, was in and out of jail for an old problem and didn't hold a steady job. I was a teenager also and my parents lived over five hours away. The only help I had was that of my sister and she was a single mom herself. I was terrified of what it would be like. Of how to tell everyone. Of whether I would be able to keep my job and support my child. Also, I was technically a virgin (didn't know you could get prego without penetration, silly me) and the thought of giving birth was really frightening. I know what it is like. And I also know I will never regret my son. I have never known anyone that didn't regret killing their child. And I have loved people who have chosen this. It still hurts them

  • Report
  

  by sheenashark on July 18th, 2007

• I'm not disputing your personal experience... but you're using absolutist definitions without any apparent awareness: to say that aborting an embryo... immediately after conception.. is equivalent to killing a viable human -- that's absolutist. There's not a solid justification for equating an embryo with a human, and therefore all succeeding arguments are on shaky ground. Now when the fetus is viable, your arguments have much stronger support. So there's a "sliding scale" of validity between pro-life and pro-choice arguments as the fetus develops. The trouble is, the extremists on this issue want to slide the knob all the way to their side of the scale every time -- that's absolutism, and its not supportable when the whole issue is seen clearly. The primary driving force for absolutism is ego: "I must be right, they must be wrong... my identity depends on this". Absent that force, the mind is much more reasonable in considering all sides.

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on July 18th, 2007

• thanks stableboy...I have alot more to say on this subject...but I think i will keep my mouth shut! i appreciate you taking the time and effort to make these good points.

  • Report
  

  by APACHEmeansENEMY on July 18th, 2007

• 47.2% of abortion occur after 9 weeks of gestation.
  Approximately 1 in 3 children are aborted.
  
  <cut out...we already done this part>
  
  Women should be educated fully on their decision and its risks, ramifications, and outcomes before it is truly their decision. Despite what one may think, it isn't being done consistently yet. And that is something I would fight for that I think we all can agree should become part of legislature. Women deserve to know what they are doing while they still have a chance to change it.
  
  Abortionists quotes on abortion, an interesting read:
  http://www.abortionfacts.com/providers/quotes.asp

  • Report
  

  by sheenashark on July 18th, 2007

• Well I would agree we want to minimize abortion -- certainly I would not argue against awareness, being informed, considering the consequences... etc. I think most reasonable people would agree about that. Where this issue gets into trouble is when the pro-Life faction wants to argue that there is absolutely no right to abortion in the early stages, or when the pro-Choice folk want to argue that a late-term fetus isn't close enough to being human to be protectable.
   
  This is WHY Roe v. Wade is the way it is... the Supreme Court recognized the same issues we're discussing here -- there's a balancing of complex issues involved, as is the case with ALL moral thinking about non-trivial matters. The challenge for all of us is to out grow the adolescent black-and-white level of moral development so we can make better moral decisions. Absolutism IS adolescent-level moral thinking. It should not be allowed to dictate public policy.

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on July 18th, 2007

• Stableboy, you have a flaw in your no black and white reasoning. There are gray areas in people and circumstances, but in actions there are black and white. If your daughter were subjected to a brutal rape, would it be a gray area for you? Not right nor wrong? If the person were mentally unstable and subjected to horrible things as a child, would it change how very evil the action they committed was? The procedure of abortion, the brutality of it, the horror of it, is wrong. Abortionists frequently admit to this. It is killing. It is awful. What makes it gray is what surrounds it. My baby at ten weeks has thriving brain waves, fingers and toes, and beating heart. How can a woman make the decision to kill her child in such a short time? I really don't think you have to worry about abortion being made illegal. I would take a serious look at your all is gray view though. In our hearts we know when something is truly wrong...until we choose to ignore it.

  • Report
  

  by sheenashark on July 18th, 2007

• There is not a flaw in my reasoning, it just conflicts with your viewpoint. You're picking extreme examples to illustrate your point, and stretching them beyond their relevance. You're doing this because you can't attack the basic argument on its own merits: its WRONG to equate the abortion of a nascent embryo with the abortion of a full-term fetus. That is what's wrong... that's absolutist, and the commitment to clinging to that view is actually a commitment to ignoring what is obvious to a clear mind -- why would someone hold to such a commitment in the face of being obviously absurd?
   
  The answer isn't obvious, but I'll re-assert it: when we don't really know who we are, we cling to beliefs to provide our identity. The more absolutist (black and white) those beliefs are, the more it relieves our anxiety about identity. The proper word for this is ego. Adults are supposed to grow out of that kind of thinking. It takes some of us longer than others.

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on July 18th, 2007

• *Claps furiously for Stableboy*

  • Report
  

  by Penny The Wise on July 19th, 2007

• That is your opinion stableboy. You are entitled to it. You have come up with a rationale that makes the world make sense to you and you cling to your ideals as I do to mine. If you were enlightened you would say we must agree to disagree. To say I am immature in my thinking is just as irrational as my saying you are an idiot to not be able to see that some things are right and wrong. I don't think you're an idiot, but I do think you are terrible wrong. You are disregarding the possibility that I too have watched, studied and evaluated the world around me and come to entirely different conclusions as you. You are saying, "I am right, you are wrong, end of story" which ironically proves your theory inaccurate at best. We have different philosophies on life and thankfully we live in a country where that is allowed. You are entitled to think I am immature and I am entitled to think your ideas are irrational. You no longer will debate as you've made up your mind you are right. Take care

  • Report
  

  by sheenashark on July 19th, 2007

• Ok.

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on July 19th, 2007

• Actually, Sheenashark... that's what YOU'RE saynig. YOU are saying that you are right and we are wrong, and that's the end of it. Is your computer backwards? Either way, we will get nowhere as you're not even willing to take a step back and see there might be another side. You're just stuck in your black and white- so YOU have a good day.

  • Report
  

  by Penny The Wise on July 19th, 2007

• Lets not forget! there is also the possibility that no one is right or wrong! that each person is entittled to their own opinion! And agressivley posting paragraph after paragraph of your opinion, links to propaganda and incorrect facts is a blatant disrespect of anothers opinion! give it a rest!

  • Report
  

  by APACHEmeansENEMY on July 19th, 2007

• My last bit, then I think I'm done here: aside from our obvious personality conflicts, the bottom line hasn't changed since the beginning of the conversation: you've not shown any reason to equate a nascent embryo with a developed fetus near birth. These are -- from a common sense standpoint -- obviously very different kinds of "beings". You keep skirting that issue, so I take that as conceding defeat on the central point of the argument. That's what my "Ok" means.

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on July 19th, 2007

• My opinion on that issue is this, from the time a sperm reaches the egg and they combine to create a new dna that is not longer the mother or the father, a unique individual has been created. The spark of life is there. That individual, if killed, will never be again. We have lost a unique human being that will never again have a chance at life. I've heard mothers that are happy about their abortions claiming this child will come to them later. This isn't true to biology or most theology and they are deluding themselves. We are unique as humans from the moment we are created and should be treated with respect and dignity. However, not all conservatives or Christians for that matter agree and that is simply my belief so I don't always like adding it to this debate. It is also the reason I disagree with many forms of birth control as they do not allow implantation if fertilization occurs. That is my conviction and I don't judge others if they disagree.

  • Report
  

  by sheenashark on July 19th, 2007

• So this is precisely the point: of course we all KNEW from the start of the argument that this is merely your "belief" -- a personally chosen position which cannot be grounded solidly in ethical or moral principles which are universal and defensible. So you've been dancing around like a dervish on a hotplate trying to avoid saying what everybody else already knows: you're clinging to an unsupportable view, which is essential to the rest of your argument.
   
  So now it's easy to finish the ego speech -- the moment you ally yourself personally to some viewpoint which is on shaky ground, the mind starts spinning around trying to figure out how to protect that viewpoint -- as if IT were the precious child itself. This has nothing to do with your love of embryos, it's about protecting your personal stance, which you know is on thin ice. Having that exposed is a blow to the ego, and you're smart enough to realize that. Thus all the bluster.

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on July 19th, 2007

• I don't see how what I believe is on shaky ground. It is supported by science itself. And if you go from the doctors view of viability, which is where I differ from others, it is from the time of implantation. You have not at all given me ANY reason to see my viewpoint as invalid or incorrect. I have viewed all the facts and that is the most rational conclusion I can see. But, people also believe humans have no more worth than animals or viruses at any pre-birth stage. People also believe that we are animals that cannot control our sexual urges and abortion should be allowed for this reason. If this were the case, shouldn't rape and murder also be allowed as this is common in the animals kingdom? No...that's wrong...why? Because we aren't animals. We have to have some basis to begin to have a discussion and many people have all sorts of strange beliefs that cannot even begin to have a logical argument.

  • Report
  

  by sheenashark on July 19th, 2007

• So, where is our common ground to begin our debate? What is your belief of the human race? Where do we actually agree? It changes based on each person and only you and I can establish a starting ground which will be different with Penny the wise also. If we wish to reason together and get somewhere it is on an individual basis, but this issue is on a country if not global level. We may come to some agreement, but the debate would start all over with the next person. That is what happens when there are not absolutes. Society crumbles, chaos ensues, and while we all fight to the death for our survival all sense of reason and understanding is lost. Men (and women) truly become animals. To believe otherwise is to ignore history and human behavior. And you still are ignoring the flaws in your ego logic, but of course that is a separate debate and perhaps belongs in its own question. "How does stablebacon know that his views of their not being right or wrong are right?"

  • Report
  

  by sheenashark on July 19th, 2007

• Ok, we're now at the point in the argument where its obvious that it can fragment into a dozen branches. That's bad news for the others on the thread, but its good news for anyone wanting to escape with an unsupported conclusion that is being used as a weapon to punish others... the flurry of new topics provides a smokescreen enabling the escape.
   
  The problem with your take on absolutes (which not coincidentally, is also the problem with your take on embryos), is that its grounded only in a naive ontology. That means that you think a thing either IS or IS NOT in a category in an absolute, binary way. This is naive, because it doesn't map to reality well, and is easy to refute in an infinite number of ways. It's ontology, because it has to do with the "status of being" of something - in this case, is a fertilized egg its "own person"?
   
  The less technical refutation is "give the fertilized egg to a bunch of college science majors, and see how long it takes them...

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on July 20th, 2007

• ...to figure out what it is". And hope nobody accidentally drops their microscope slide and breaks it, because the "soul" will leak out and haunt the lab forever after -- an undead baby who can't move on to the afterlife because another couple couldn't be bothered to wear a condom.
   
  Damn hippies.

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on July 20th, 2007

• Just curious..and this is of the subject (not really) but sheenashark...do you support the war in Iraq?

  • Report
  

  by APACHEmeansENEMY on July 20th, 2007

• *lol* Wow, that is off topic. I think that there was a purpose to be there. I also think that getting rid of biological weapons would be pretty darn easy considering they've buried entire airplanes in the sand and vials are considerable smaller. I think that they have committed atrocities again their own people, especially women and children when not long ago before the faction took rule they were actually working their way into a developing country. The biggest problem I have seen with the war is that it has lacked purpose...what is our ultimate goal FOR these people. I don't see how you can complete anything without that clearly defined. I know many in the military that are there as we speak and they don't show you the progress made and the people helped on the news. They also downplay the horrible crimes against humanity that were occurring.

  • Report
  

  by sheenashark on July 20th, 2007

• It' a mixed hodgepodge full of lies from both parties and I can honestly say I don't know whether I support the continuation of the war on now, but I support our troops 100%. I do know that I would hate to see that country return to being able to treat its OWN people that way it had before.

  • Report
  

  by sheenashark on July 20th, 2007

• And as for stableboy, you and I disagree on absolutes. Just because someone keeps stating the sky is green doesn't make it a fact. Your theory is there are no absolutes. From the time of conception it is no longer either parent, it is a separate human no matter how early in the stage. If someone rips your hair out...even if its a glob of cells...isn't that going to tick you off? Regardless, the question is NOT whether it is human at this stage as it is obviously nothing else, not a monkey or a virus. The question is, Is the child the mother's property? If so, does she have a legal obligation for putting him/her in this position to protect, or does she have a legal right to kill him/her. I'm not diverting the point. That is the point. If we were to go on your theory of no absolutes than ANYTHING can be justified in certain circumstances. I think this theology is ridiculous. I think you lack a property perspective of science, politics and human nature to have this view.

  • Report
  

  by sheenashark on July 20th, 2007

• ok, well i asked..because the womens clinic I work at..which has pro-life supporters protesting out front daily..these are the people that shout "murderer" among various things to the women entering the clinic...well, the majority of them seem to be supporters of the war! i cannot beleive the hypocrisy of that! I agree with your opinion about things not being clearly defined. And the atrocities commited agaisnt women, children and men there(by our country as well as their own)well...its nothing short of murder...and I've never understood why amongst some people that is so accepted!

  • Report
  

  by APACHEmeansENEMY on July 20th, 2007

• You keep reverting to calling me immature as your debating technique and it is irrational and arrogant to an extreme. You assume you are right about this, you are more knowledgeable and wise than I and everyone rallies around you when it supports their cause. I thought better of your before this argument. But now I think you are just as bad a any staunch right wing conservative or far reaching extreme liberal democrat that hasn't a clue why they believe what they believe and so cannot support their beliefs except by repeating them. And in conclusions, if we do decide a mother has the right to kill the child while it resides in her body, than children can be killed right up to when their head is left in the birth canal...which is what is happening now. And their is no medical reason I have ever found anyone to state which has justified such a thing. I'm done, keep calling me immature, and keep calling your sky green. I wish you well but have lost all respect for you from this.

  • Report
  

  by sheenashark on July 20th, 2007

• I do believe chanel that there are times it is necessary to kill. It is awful and noone enjoys it. I do believe if someone is a murderer and has shown no remorse or respect for life, a jury of peers may deem the person unfit for life. To do otherwise would be an attack on the living, as they will continue to murder and disregard life. I don't like war being used as a political ploy. It is a solemn decision to either protect your country to to decide the horrors happening within the country far outreach the horrors of war. I cannot see how either of these circumstances though apply to an innocent unborn child. And as I've said before, there are many thing in abortion that are a horror to the mother as well. At best the industry, which it is, is underregulated. That you don't have to be a doctor to perform it is frightening and that post-op care isn't required is just awful also. Also given the nature counseling by a real counseling should be required before and after.

  • Report
  

  by sheenashark on July 20th, 2007

• I know it isn't a perfect world, in a perfect world people could control their sexual urges for their own benefit to avoid many harsh consequences. Watching judge judy and many court tv shows I rarely see cases that don't involve ex lovers and the hate between them and people I know is extreme. Sex is more than physical. One of the outcomes of sex is std's, mental strife, and, what shouldn't be considered the worst of these, a child. That is the one we can "fix". But saying that is a fix is very short sited for their are life lasting consequences of that decision as well. Men even have side effects of the decision to abort. And there are alternative, I know planned pregnancy here takes in so many mothers and helps them decide what is best for them and their child. I've met many that regret aborting, but not one that regretted their child. And PAS is usually much more severe that PPD. So mother's suffering with PPD need help long before their choose an abotion.

  • Report
  

  by sheenashark on July 20th, 2007

• I had one more comment which is sadly a critique of people on "my side" of the argument. I wish when protesters went they had signs that said, "We we love, protect, support, hug, and be there unconditionally for you AND your child" I wonder how many children would be saved if someone were to offer unconditional love to these mothers. That is what Christ would want. There is still right and wrong, but they should be showing love for the mother and her baby. She needs someone there for her as much as her child needs her to be there for her. Also, having the facts laid out. This is what stage your child is at, have an ultrasound machine available, detail the procedure, then allow her to make her decision. Will it save them all? No. Would it save many a mother and child? I believe so. But I could be wrong there also. The moral, legal, and scientific questions may not matter so much as the personal issue. And it seems laws are built today on peoples whims.

  • Report
  

  by sheenashark on July 20th, 2007

• Ok, seriously? Again with the made up BS!: "At best the industry, which it is, is underregulated. That you don't have to be a doctor to perform it is frightening and that post-op care isn't required is just awful also. Also given the nature counseling by a real counseling should be required before and after."
  You DO have to have a medical degree to perform this operation. I'ts NOT some back alley, dirty place! You just won't get ANYTHING through your skull, you are holding onto things that aren't real. YOU'RE the one calling the sky green, and are reading things that aren't there.
  Also you said it isnt' a perfect world, and you're right. We can't pretend that it is! We have to deal with the things that are going no now, not pretending it isn't happening! True, I disagree with the women who get pregnant and just abort, as if it were nothing. I don't condone that. But in certain circumstances, I feel it's apropriate. Just because *I* may never get one...

  • Report
  

  by Penny The Wise on July 20th, 2007

• doesn't mean that someone else in NEED of an abortion shouldn't get one. There ARE circumstances IMO that justifies an abortion. You just seem to think that we're hitler in a suit walking around, and until YOU, Sheenashark literally type the words "I don't think you're a murdering bastard in a hitler suit" I'll believe that til the day I die. You're just making stuff up so you can beieve your absolutes and, pardon my "french" fuck everyone else! *shakes head* This conversation makes me heated because I see you just holding onto things that don't exist and you refuse to see it even when the truth has presented itself! You link these propaganda sites- just because they're in text and on the internet that doesn't make it real!! Like this: I am a pink bunny...
  *pause*
  Nope, I'm STILL not a pink bunny. It's in text, and it's on the internet- it MUST be real- but I'm just not a pink bunny- fancy that.
  Seriously- It's been a long time since I've seen arrogance like this-

  • Report
  

  by Penny The Wise on July 20th, 2007

• And I've been on AB a while. Either way- you SAY you're reading up, and educating yourself, but have you ever BEEN to a clinic, just to see what it's like, before you draaw your own conclusions? Im sure you picture it covered in blood and babies crying and being burned and thrown about, lieing in piles of other babies right on top of another- doctors chopping people up with machetes- you just make up your own idea and cling to it as if it were to give you eternal life! You read this propaganda BS and call it the truth, but really it's just lies to make people do exactly what you're doing! I'm sorry, but I refuse to continue this conversation. I know when it's time to walk away. And since you're going to cling to your little theories and ideas that are so completely untrue, and refuse to even ACKNOWLEDGE otherwise- There's just no getting through. I'm done. Gone. I'm not doing this anymore. "We're only gonna die from our own arrogance" ~Bad Religion.

  • Report
  

  by Penny The Wise on July 20th, 2007

• @sheenashark: you've completely misunderstood my take on absolutes, but that's understandable... it's easily misunderstood. I'm not saying there's no absolutes at all. I'm saying YOUR concepts cannot be mapped to the absolute, because you don't understand how conceptualization works. That's a topic which will take us far away from the status of an embryo, and the only way it will make any difference and be worth the time is if you were willing to let go of clinging to your belief system and allow another perspective to enter your world. I'm highly doubtful about that ever happening, but I hate to say "never".
   
  Meanwhile, I'm satisfied: you can throw as much baloney and words on this fire as you like, but you're nowhere near the truth yet. Meanwhile, your stance is doing actual damage -- harming others in your self-righteous quest for "absolutes" -- and it will almost surely continue until you die without a serious wake-up call from life. Onward and downward...

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on July 20th, 2007

• I spend time on both sides sites. http://www.fpamg.net/faq.html It is never referred to even as a fetus. It is the "contents of the uterus". There is no emotional counseling. Parents don't have to be involved. They are performed up to 24 weeks...past the time of viability...without question. "It has been our experience that the majority of our patients are relieved after the procedure. However, every patient is unique. If a patient is feeling anger, regret or guilt for an extended period of time, she may want to consider professional counseling. We understand that abortion is a difficult decision for some patients and we remain sensitive to their feelings." They make is sound as though it is a simple decision for most and you are abnormal to have issues with it. THAT is my problem. A lack of full disclosure and options. They should give the number of crisis pregnancy centers if they see a woman is distressed about the abortion and feels she has no options. They don't.

  • Report
  

  by sheenashark on July 20th, 2007

• and how do you know? have you had an abortion?

  • Report
  

  by APACHEmeansENEMY on July 20th, 2007

• I work at a clinic that provides abortion. And I know for a FACT that your FACTS are based on your opinion and completley incorect!

  • Report
  

  by APACHEmeansENEMY on July 20th, 2007

• Profesional counseling? I do the counseling! I am licsensed by the university of california san francisco.

  • Report
  

  by APACHEmeansENEMY on July 20th, 2007

• crisis line? want the number? i can give it to you. Its answered 24 hours a day 7 days a week.

  • Report
  

  by APACHEmeansENEMY on July 20th, 2007

• post-op care? not only is it required..its free!

  • Report
  

  by APACHEmeansENEMY on July 20th, 2007

• dont have to be an M.D? pfft! I bet the doc here would really be bummed that she wasted so much time in medical school!

  • Report
  

  by APACHEmeansENEMY on July 20th, 2007

• They hurry you along and tell you you'll be fine. Both sides are full of propaganda, but at least the sites I've given use the cdc's and states own statistics. And abortion clinics make money. They are a business. To state otherwise is a fallacy. A doctors office makes money also, and they can be good and bad. But abortions are a "medical procedure" and should be performed in a hospital, not a clinic. And how about this one? They are neutral and acknowledge the problems that occur. http://www.choicetolivewith.com/selectabortionclinic.html READ IT. I know YOU don't want all babies dead, and I certainly doubt most abortionists want to annihilate the whole human race, but they don't want abortions to quit occurring. And 1 in 3 children aborted is too high, even if you agree with abortion. There has to be a better way for both mother and child.

  • Report
  

  by sheenashark on July 20th, 2007

• ah..and killing of a fetus is sick and wrong, but killing in other circumstances is valid and acceptable? HYPOCRITE!

  • Report
  

  by APACHEmeansENEMY on July 20th, 2007

• oh..and I'm not quoting ANY propaganda. Im not quoting anything.

  • Report
  

  by APACHEmeansENEMY on July 20th, 2007

• A mother killing a child leaves me sick to my stomach...morning sickness aside. The fact she was not fully made aware it was a child makes me even sicker. She should be informed completely of the stage at which the baby is in its development. If their is a risk of severe depression and harm from the procedure, she should be refused the procedure. I don't even know where to begin the debate. Legally? Morally? Scientifically? What? Where do you want to debate it? But it doesn't matter now does it. Because in our society the birth of a child is a more horrible outcome than the death of that child before birth. I can't stand this debate anymore. As I watch my own stomach grown with my third little one and read about his or her amazing development this argument gets more consuming for me. You all have already won. It is viewed as a womans right to kill her child. Congrats. Enjoy your profession. Enjoy your world.

  • Report
  

  by sheenashark on July 20th, 2007

• I will still continue trying to help mothers before they are in a situation where they feel abortion is the only way out. I've offered my home before, my support, and my love to them. And I've been there when they've finished the abortion and have begun their downward spiral into depression and suicide. I don't lecture them after the fact..what's the point? They need all the love they can get from others now that they are realizing they will never have it from the child they ended. I'm finished and if I can't stay off of this topic I'll close my answerbag account. It's becoming toxic for me to be surrounded here with people so insistent upon killing children, especially as mine are growing around and inisde me.

  • Report
  

  by sheenashark on July 20th, 2007

• GROW THE FUCK UP RETARD. Get over yourself.

  • Report
  

  by Penny The Wise on July 20th, 2007

• Ok, after laying down and praying, I've come to a new calling. I'm not going to debate abortion anymore. I'm not going to fight people like you anymore. I'm going to start my own campaign of love. I think what I've said is right. Women get abortions when they feel there is no other way. Well, I'm going to start a "protesting" campaign that says just what I put before, "We love you, we love you baby, you're not alone, we will support and uplift you both, there is another way, we wont leave you alone anymore" Thank you all for your debates and insights. Maybe we can end the industry of abortion with love. What an uplifting thought. God bless.

  • Report
  

  by sheenashark on July 20th, 2007

• thanks..I do enjoy my profesion. And I enjoy my world. i spend countless hours of my time devoted to volunteer work. Working for a womens clinic is just a small part of the bigger picture of what i do. I did not post one of the things i do so that you could judge me(although i should've expected it)I posted it because you were spewing incorrect propaganda based on fear, judgement and lies.

  • Report
  

  by APACHEmeansENEMY on July 20th, 2007

• if you are starting a campaign of love maybe you should stop being so judgemental.

  • Report
  

  by APACHEmeansENEMY on July 20th, 2007

• people dont respond to militant, aggresive opinion...they respond to patience and understanding...so if you want to make changes in this world...you should think on that.

  • Report
  

  by APACHEmeansENEMY on July 20th, 2007

• *lol* I'm so glad you have patient and understanding people like pannywise on your side of the debate.

  • Report
  

  by sheenashark on July 20th, 2007

• I was speaking to you. no need to be catty...where on earth does being catty get you? I see your campaign of love is already failing.

  • Report
  

  by APACHEmeansENEMY on July 20th, 2007

• Because YOU'RE so patient and understanding? Sure, should I have called you a fucking retard? No. Do I mean it. You bet your hypocritical, judgmental little bippy. ;) I love how you are saying we're immature, but you're like a 6 year old child. Anyway, whatever. You're not worth my time. You've already taken more energy from me than you're worth. So go join your little hypocrites, and start your little campaign. I hope someday you truly feel what these women go through. I hope someday you truly feel pain that rattles your soul. I hope someday you feel the misery that the very people you are judging, feel. Then maybe one day, you just might get it. I doubt even then, but maybe.

  • Report
  

  by Penny The Wise on July 20th, 2007

• and whos debating? i was merely correcting misconceptions that you have and giving a reference for my knowledge.

  • Report
  

  by APACHEmeansENEMY on July 20th, 2007

• @sheenashark: I would certainly support your decision to leave off the abortion debates and start a "love campaign", that's a sound idea. But as long as you're going down that tunnel, I think you'll find that you really can't make much progress on the love campaign until you're truly willing to give up the self-righteousness campaign in your heart. That's where love starts and ends, not with debates about morality, philosophy, and religion. As long as you relate to people on the other side as "those evil abortionists", there really isn't any room in your heart for love -- it gets displaced by hatred and the divisive spirit of clinging to beliefs instead of standing for values.
   
  Life will eventually teach you this if you pay attention to the lessons. But listening to the chatter of your own incessant righteous thoughts will drown that out. This is a challenge we all face...

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on July 20th, 2007

• Just an observation. You all talk about valuing one another's opinion, giving one another an ear on a topic like abortion, and showing tolerance and consideration of the view of others. However, what I see, as I read this threat, is sheenashark simply expressing her point view, and some of the most venomous attacks on that view I have ever had the misfortune of witnessing on AB. Instead of having a calm, thought provoking debate, we get comments like, "GROW THE FUCK UP RETARD". Not only is that completely, and undeniably immature, it is absolutely uncalled for. Your not interested in considering the "pro-life" view, any more the she is in considering yours. Even SB, shockingly, has resorted to off handed remarks, and back-door insults. Whether you agree or not, it all boils down to this, none of you seem to be interested in coming to an understanding of different views, but, rather, a means by which to validate your own. Your not interested in right. You just want to be right.

  • Report
  

  by Metaphiz on July 20th, 2007

• Well that's precisely my point: I don't exempt myself from the "craving to be right"... to me, the job for each person is to keep an eye on this, and rein it in when it gets out of hand (which by the way, I recommend for YOU too!)
   
  It's a human characteristic to cling to viewpoints and assert them with the fierceness that leads to violence. The details of the viewpoint are actually irrelevant to the topic, that's how we define our identity --- or rather, its what we fall into the moment we lose touch with a broader sense of self.
   
  So your point is correct, but not actually news. Its only news when someone first sees it for themselves, and then its news again when they realize its never going away. The tone of your comment suggests that you think YOU are immune somehow!

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on July 20th, 2007

• Does it?

  • Report
  

  by Metaphiz on July 20th, 2007

• The only way to deal with ego effectively is to take responsibility for it: to (a) acknowledge it (b) keep an eye open for it (c) accept that its never going away (d) rein it in when it gets out of hand (e) give it a little bit of rope so it doesn't get suppressed and go underground. This is the same thing one does with a 3-year-old -- you can't kill it or crush its spirit, and you can't hide it away, and you can't let it take over. But to pretend it isn't there or be unaware is to invite disaster.

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on July 20th, 2007

• So yes, there are times in this thread where I let the rope out too far, and had to rein it back in. That happens a lot. My point to sheena is that she seems totally unaware of her own ego and it's footprint on the conversation. That's not BAD, but its a fact. And its a fact that requires attention and practice to deal with.

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on July 20th, 2007

• Yes, you're right. That comment was out of line and I even admitted it previously, but I don't think you read that part. Had you, you probably would have noticed that I had a pretty calm "debate" with this person- except that she was clinging to her false ideals as if it were her only hope. I kept trying to point that out and all she had to say was that I was hitler (in different words) and that I was a baby murderer! But of course, you wouldn't SEE that because you are a pro-lifer too. Otherwise you wouldn't even be ASKING this question. You know what? I don't know why I even continue to read this thread. Every time I do, I just get angrier and angrier that people won't LISTEN! All you want to do is be right, like you said, Patrick. But you're in this just as much with your judgment and your lecture. I'm really starting to think that AB is just nothing but people who want to be right all the time. And this is really proving my thought.

  • Report
  

  by Penny The Wise on July 20th, 2007

• Well Penny, I know Patrick pretty well. I don't think he's as rigid as you're saying. But this is a hotbutton topic, that's why they call it that... everybody gets hot as soon as it gets touched... people accusing each other of murder, people being extremely judgmental, people presuming that their view is absolute truth, etc.

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on July 20th, 2007

• How else would I see the signs of self-righteousness if I didn't struggle with it ourselves. Mirrors that show ugly faces are the chiefest among offenders. However, I was particularly disturbed by the "RETARD" comment. I would like to think that I would not stoop to such a level. Personally, when I find I am getting that hot headed, I tend to withdrawal from the scene long enough to calm down, and return more level headed. Also, I would hope that you, SB, wouldn't stoop to such a level as to answer me with something so adolescent as, "Yeah, but you do it, too, HYPOCRITE!!!" I would hope that, having seen me do the same, you'd care enough to say something. Or would that be considered being judgmental? We are in this life together. Love dictates that we help each other. Two men with bum legs have a better chance of survival than one.

  • Report
  

  by Metaphiz on July 20th, 2007

• I never used the word hypocrite... but your comment was clearly an indicator that you considered yourself above such things... imagine the shock of SB being human? Please. If I have to personally go around AB and break everyone's crystal statuette of me I'll be happy to do so. I've never claimed to be anything but an ordinary person with ordinary ego and an ordinary level of personal shortcomings. The difference between me and some people is that I'm slightly better at acknowledging the reality of my own humanity, instead of pretending that my idealized notions of self are the truth. That provides a little clarity. But please, spare me the shadow of whatever enlightenment you think I have...

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on July 20th, 2007

• And again, I'm acknowledging that. Again, I'm acknowledging that. Ok, do I have to say it again? Yes, it was petulant, and petty and stupid. Okay? And I think what Stableboy is trying to say is that, He's acknowledging that he has an ego too- like YOU pointed out to him. So not we're all saying "Hypocrite!" to each other. Can we get past that point? We all have egos, and we all want to be "right". Well actually I have to admit that what I really wanted to happen was for sheenashark to see that I'm not an effing baby killer and I take EXTREME offense to that. When people cling to this idea that we want every single baby in the world ever to die, and we should just kill them all, it just makes me so freaking angry! Like, RAGE angry. So for me to call her an effing retard, okay, it was stupid. But so was her calling me a baby killer. And she just won't get out of her black and white, absolutist mentality. It's angering that people actually feel this way...

  • Report
  

  by Penny The Wise on July 20th, 2007

• I do believe in CHOICE. But that's another thing that's skipped over. I want people to have OPTIONS. Not just option, but plural. More than one. Whatever THEY want to happen. But again, this is skipped over- because to acknowledge that would like, blow the world up or something. So whatever. Go ahead. Tell me I'm out of line because that comment was. But I don't think Stableboy and I are REALLY that "out of line" here. But of course, and I know this to be true, you have similar opinions as sheenashark on abortion and this type of situation- I've read some of the other comments on this thread. So I see that it would be obvious that you're going to take her side. We're the "Other people". We're "them". So I'm really taking your comments with a grain of salt here. Personally, I think we should all just call it a day and just shut up already. I think at least THAT is something we might all be able to agree on. Maybe?

  • Report
  

  by Penny The Wise on July 20th, 2007

• Well actually this is my favorite kind of argument on AB -- when the whole mess is right out there in the open, and the effect of clinging to beliefs is obvious to all, that's when the value starts to become evident -- what we have here is exactly the same thing that goes on in the Middle East between the Israelis and Palestinians, or between the Catholics and Protestants, or between any two other warring factions...
   
  This is what it is to be human. NOT some idealized notion of how everyone should be nice to each other and free from ego and all loving -- THIS is it. Just this kind of backbiting and self-righteousness all around. THAT is what makes us suffer: clinging to opinions and views AS IF they represented the truth. But the real truth cannot be represented that way -- it refuses to allow itself to be packaged up in neat little systems of ideas.
   
  So we ALL have an obligation to recognize that. That's the ticket out of this kind of mess.

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on July 20th, 2007

• @Penny: For the record, I would take issue with anyone that would call you a "murderer" or imply you can be compared to someone as cruel as Hitler. Although I can only speak on your part as one that has conversed with you on AB, I feel confident in my opinion of you. And that opinion is that you are a very thoughtful, kind, loving person. You are much appreciated here. Am I pro-life? Yes. However, I think it unfair to assume that is the only reason I commented as I did. I commented thus, because I felt that good people that I happen to care about were allowing themselves to get out of hand. Nothing more. Hopefully not, but I would hope that, if I should ever succumb to such a snare, myself, you'd be there to tap on my shoulder, as well.

  • Report
  

  by Metaphiz on July 20th, 2007

• @SB: BTW, see I do stuff outside the Mega-Thread.

  • Report
  

  by Metaphiz on July 20th, 2007

• Yeah, I was looking over your profile. You're not here nearly enough, though. It's disappointing. But now that we're no longer fight-virgins, come on around and fight more often! You should know how I love it by now :)

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on July 20th, 2007

• LOL. Yeah, probably a little too much. Unfortunately, I have a tendency, believe it or not, to avoid confrontation. Perhaps I need some of your warrior spirit.

  • Report
  

  by Metaphiz on July 20th, 2007

• I leave this thread with one final thought; When life is viewed through the lens of love, all things shall become more clear. That's more than just a nifty-fun-time-fluffy thing to say. It's true, just try it. The Sufi poet, Hafiz is quoted as saying, "When all your desires are distilled, you will cast just two votes: to love more, and be happy.", and, as the Apostle John wrote, "Beloved, let us love one another. For love is of God, and everyone that loves is born of God, and knows God."

  • Report
  

  by Metaphiz on July 20th, 2007

• You don't need to leave the thread, and there's nothing wrong with your fluffy quote! Of course its wonderful to "see through the lens of love". The problem is, such notions get idealized and turn into little crystal monuments -- concepts to be clung to instead of living possibilities to be developed toward.
   
  In order to realize "the lens of love", you have to be damn good at confronting and being with "the sh*thole of hate, selfishness, ego, and ignorance"... and that's not what people are interested. We want to paper over our humanity with a veneer of beauty, peace, unconditional love, etc... but you can't get there by walking toward the light. To get there, you have to head straight into hell and stand in the fire of your own separation from the whole. And that's ugly, messy, full of disappointment and mistakes.
   
  The kind of "loving enlightenment" that gets us messed up is like putting in a skylight and then painting it blue because you decide something's...

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on July 20th, 2007

• ...wrong when a cloud goes by. You have to scrape off the idealized blue paint to see the sky, then you see that the clouds ARE part of the sky, not something that has to be eliminated before the "real sky" shows up.

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on July 20th, 2007

• I think this is relevant to all of us, every day: http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/352383

  • Report
  

  by Penny The Wise on July 23rd, 2007

Comments

• correct as usual, there is always a good thing about your answer ;)

  • Report
  

  by Norman_Outside the lines on December 15th, 2006

Comments

• It is relevant, brufred, because someone can apply your logic to justify any crime, whatsoever. A serial rapist is doing, in his mind, what he feels to be right for him. Perhaps he has a traumatic childhood and/or some other reason why he would justify his actions. Can we say that he is wrong? Yes.

  • Report
  

  by JohnDough on January 10th, 2008

Comments

• I dont believe that you have children, think of the pain that this woman might feel if she has to deal with being victimized a second time by being forced to kill her unborn child. I felt my second child move for the first time last week. At 8 weeks. It is a life. It has a heartbeat and organs that function, how can you not see that.

  • Report
  

  by MommaStoney on July 26th, 2008

• I'm 5 months' pregnant right now. I know how pregnancy works. Thanks anyway.

  • Report
  

  by kellygorski on August 6th, 2008

• i feel sorry for your child. If you havnt realized that it is a life by 5 months, you have less compassion that you should.

  • Report
  

  by MommaStoney on August 7th, 2008

Comments

• FYI, all three of those cases account for the minority of abortions - something like 6 or 7%.

  • Report
  

  by muguet on December 27th, 2006

• Where is that figure from, muguet?

  • Report
  

  by lizvelrene on April 4th, 2007

• Looks like the one I got from Planned Parenthood and the Center for Desease Control. Something like 95% of abortions are "convience" based decisions (sorry, it was their term, I hate it too)and not for health reasons or sexual assult.

  • Report
  

  by P. W. Pasobrio loves Marines on July 17th, 2007

Comments

Comments

• What I was going to say. Coming from someone who might have to have a hesterectomi (can't spell it lol) I would love to adopt and I don't like the thought of abortion it is killing a child!

  • Report
  

  by amanda_0517 on December 14th, 2006

• This child is not a child. It has no concious mind. It right now is basically a parasitic organism. Having a baby as you know takes a long time. How could you honestly ask a woman who was raped to bear the burden of a child for nine months? Thats completely unreasonable. Then when she has the baby you want her to give it away. She spent nine months carrying within her a sign of her rape. Nurturing and caring for it, bringing life into the world. What mother could honestly be expected to do this?

  • Report
  

  by Coheed on December 14th, 2006

• But it will become a child...

  • Report
  

  by mcclisteraf on December 14th, 2006

• We have our opinions, and I am not voting any one "down" for theirs...but this "parasitic organism" as you call it has had life from the moment it's heart started beating. If someone has already discovered they are pregnant it has been some time...the child has had time to grow already...so did this child CHOOSE to be born this way? No...so then, why should it be our say whether we kill it then?

  • Report
  

  by Michellek518 on December 14th, 2006

• It would become a child if given the oportunity to feed off the raped mother's body for nine months you are correct but it is not now.

  • Report
  

  by Coheed on December 14th, 2006

• Michelle, the mother did not choose to be raped either. She is the victim not the child.

  • Report
  

  by Coheed on December 14th, 2006

• Look no matter how you put it, it is still murder.

  • Report
  

  by mcclisteraf on December 14th, 2006

• True but that's why she could give it up for adoption and give the baby a chance it's not that babies fault either True she will have to take care of that child for 9 months, but when that child is born she can decide then what to do.

  • Report
  

  by amanda_0517 on December 14th, 2006

• So you saying that it is not a child until birth?? Ask that to any mother who had heard the heartbeat of their child for the first time.

  • Report
  

  by Michellek518 on December 14th, 2006

• Wow...thanks for the bad rating for simply stating an opinion about protecting a life.

  • Report
  

  by Michellek518 on December 14th, 2006

• No it isnt murder. Murder is the taking of an inocent life for malicious reasons. You know and understand full well the conotations of murder hence why you used it to cause a reaction. This is not murder. This is euthanasia. Think of how the child would feel growing up without a father. Think of how messed up the foster care system is. This is both detramental to the child and the mother. But what really gets me as I stated before is how you can possibly expect the mother to bear the burden of a child for nine months after being raped? Explain that to me.

  • Report
  

  by Coheed on December 14th, 2006

• Think of how the child would feel if it was aborted. Oh yeah, it wouldn't feel anything... because it would be dead.

  • Report
  

  by mcclisteraf on December 14th, 2006

• yea that child is a child when it starts having a heart beat it feeds of the mother inside too.

  • Report
  

  by amanda_0517 on December 14th, 2006

• I didnt downrate this answer, it shouldnt be downrated its an opinion. I gave u +3 just now so your not in the negatives.
  
  No the child is not actualy a child until birth. It has no free will and thought untill birth. A heartbeat, while special, has nothing to do with cognition.
  
  You're giving into the ideals of the unborn child more then the thoughts of the mother. It is her choice.

  • Report
  

  by Coheed on December 14th, 2006

• McClister, a child isnt aborted when it has any cognative thought process. It is aborted while it contenues to grow inside the mother. It has no feelings.

  • Report
  

  by Coheed on December 14th, 2006

• I am not saying that I am not sympathetic to the raped mother for bearing the child. I understand it IS a painful experience to live through everyday and relive with the knowledge of this child growing. I know this first hand because a good friend of mine had the exact thing happen to her. Her family shunned her as well as those others around her. But she saw that when given the choice of providing a life to the child she now carried through adoption to a loving family (yes, there are those as well in the fostercare system)...or the other option to kill the 'thing' if you will, growing inside her? It's the lesser of two evils here...it's putting what has happened now before your own needs.

  • Report
  

  by Michellek518 on December 14th, 2006

• No, that is just something people say, so that they don't feel as bad about KILLING someone inside their body. The fact is as amanda said that the "fetus" is still a living being that deserves a chance to live. I will not be changed in my opinion of this.

  • Report
  

  by mcclisteraf on December 14th, 2006

• And I thank you for not downgrading me. I respect your opinion even if I may not agree with it.

  • Report
  

  by Michellek518 on December 14th, 2006

• This is the last thing I will write before going to write my paper,
  
  That is amazing that your friend chose that. I am in no way saying "oh she was raped so kill the child." I am saying that it should be a choice. I think that it isnt the lesser of two evil both for the chance that the mother will suffer and that the child wont get a good home. Euthanasia is the best option if the motehr chooses it.

  • Report
  

  by Coheed on December 14th, 2006

• Coheed: A person is viable at only 28 weeks and sometimes less. It doesn't matter that it is still developing inside the mother. Would you say that the thing growing inside the egg that a chicken laid is in fact a baby chick? We continue to develop even after we are born. It only starts in the womb. We are a living human being whether we are developing inside the womb or outside of it. Abortion is killing a child. As in my answer I am not for abortion, but I can understand when there is good cause for it.

  • Report
  

  by Anonymoose on December 14th, 2006

• Ok Im back for a little bit. Chickens are completely different. Chickens lay eggs. The eggs are the host for the chicken. They have to substain themselves within their little homes. They do not feed off the mother. Chickens do not have a gestation period of nine months.

  • Report
  

  by Coheed on December 14th, 2006

• Don't kill a dead horse. It was dropped. Do you really want to start this debate again.

  • Report
  

  by mcclisteraf on December 14th, 2006

• The expression is don't beat a dead horse just FYI. I'm responding to the last thing posted. I'll post till no one ealse does. Its your choice to respond or not.

  • Report
  

  by Coheed on December 14th, 2006

• lol yeah i just realized that lol what an idiot now I feel stupid...

  • Report
  

  by mcclisteraf on December 14th, 2006

• I still think abortion is wrong.

  • Report
  

  by mcclisteraf on December 14th, 2006

• Didnt mean to make you feel stupid. I think we have both made valid points. I respect your argument.

  • Report
  

  by Coheed on December 14th, 2006

• It's all good. Let's be friends(besides I think we agreed on the whole moon landing thing :) )

  • Report
  

  by mcclisteraf on December 14th, 2006

• Oh yes so true =)

  • Report
  

  by Coheed on December 14th, 2006

• Michelle, there isn't a heartbeat until about 8 weeks (when the embryo becomes a fetus). If it has life from the moment its heart starts beating, and you object to terminating a pregnancy after that point, what about termination before 8 weeks?

  • Report
  

  by lizvelrene on April 4th, 2007

Comments

• You are correct in stating that binary classifications are arbitrary, but the fact of the matter, on a practical level, is that policy considerations exist in the abstract; we don't make laws about individual cases (that would be an unconstitutional Bill of Attainder). So we have to draw lines. As you pointed out, the trimester system is one way of doing it. But is we rely entirely on pure ethics we will arrive at a system that is morally bankrupt. Values inevitably come from a spiritual source, one that language and science can not at this time encompass. The abortion debate comes down to a moral core, one which cannot be decided by patterns and equations. So long as these are two sides to this issue, starting with opposing hypothesis, this issue will never be decided on a rational basis. The question becomes: Where do we look for those moral determinations. There can be only one answer to this question: the people. The people of this coutry must look into their hearts

  • Report
  

  by branciforte3241 on April 5th, 2007

• and decide the status of that child/fetus. And it would seem that we are divided fairly evenly on that issue. But the pro-choice side has a couple strikes against them: abortion is a matter of convenience for them. The pro-life side has nothing to gain from their position. Their argument is pure in intention. So I feel that if we must err, we must err on the side of caution. The possible soul of a child outweighs the possible loss of convenience to a careless mother.

  • Report
  

  by branciforte3241 on April 5th, 2007

• Well you've now absolutized the notion of a "being" as a soul, as well as oversimplified the situation(s) in which mothers find themselves, as well as reducing the mother's right to privacy and self-determination to non-starters, and haven't provided evidence for your assertion that values come from a spiritual source, well as speculated on the motives of both sides in the debate and promoted that speculation to the status of fact. I'm not even sure which of these points to start in on first...

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on April 5th, 2007

• Let's start with privacy. Roe v. Wade was decided on the issue of privacy, but even pro-choice scholars agree that that is a tenuous position at best. But the right to privacy does not trump the right of the child to keep the life it has been given. Can a mother terminate the life of a 1-day-old child? Why then should it be any differant for a 1-day-old fetus/child. The sanctity of that life comes down to a moral decision, one that can not be determined by logic. If the American people decide that this is a human life, then the mother's right to privacy can not overcome that.

  • Report
  

  by branciforte3241 on April 5th, 2007

• And by the way, the claim that the pro-life side has nothing to gain is easy to challenge: they have the same thing to gain that anyone with a viewpoint has -- preservation of their viewpoint and the identity which is coupled to that viewpoint. This is the origin of self-righteousness, and people will die rather than allow certain abstractions to be challenged. A very powerful motive for all of us, in my observation.

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on April 5th, 2007

• Notice in your previous argument that you used the word "child" to identify an unborn fetus. This indicates that you either don't understand my argument about semantics, or disagree but have failed to refute it. That definition is crucial to all the other arguments.

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on April 5th, 2007

• I am saying that the pro-life side has no material gain from supporting their position. It actually puts them at a material disadvantage as more unwanted babies are brought into the world and have to be cared for. Everyone has a viewpoint and identity to maintain, both sides. It is perseverence that permits progress and accomplishment. Why is the pro-life preservation and identity any less valid than the pro-choice one?

  • Report
  

  by branciforte3241 on April 5th, 2007

• Basically, as far as I can see... all of your arguments except the one about values coming from a spiritual source dissolve if one understands my argument about absolutism. I don't think you understand it yet.

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on April 5th, 2007

• Yes, I do use the term "child". Whether it is a child or a glob a cells is exactly the core issue in this argument. Without resolving that distinction, other arguments will never move forward. The distinction is an abstration, certainly, but abstract, policy-level decisions (laws) are by nature, and practicality, based on abstractions. The status of the child/fetus can only be based on a moral determination. And that determination must lie with the people.

  • Report
  

  by branciforte3241 on April 5th, 2007

• Ok, I respect you and I want to do right by you on the issue of absolutism. I'll take some time to get a better understanding of your perspective on that issue.

  • Report
  

  by branciforte3241 on April 5th, 2007

• I agree that policies must be based on abstractions for practicality... but those policies CAN and SHOULD account for the limitations of the abstractions on which they are based, otherwise they fall into absolutism. It's also true that a moral determination must be made, but it is NOT true that a simple binary GOOD/BAD moral determination is required, because the moral determination must ALSO account for the shortcomings of the underlying abstractions. In other words, the "falsity" imposed by abstracting must propagate up through all operations based on the abstraction, or the conclusions are defective. That's why a graded solution, such as selected in Roe v. Wade, is appropriate -- it preserves and honors the distortion imposted by the original abstraction when deciding that a glob of cells is worth protecting as a NOMINAL child. The mistake your making is to keep falling into absolutism at some point up the chain.

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on April 5th, 2007

• Basically, the defect of absolutism is taking a continuum (or other ambiguous or non-dual subject) and fragmenting it into sharp categories, and then reasoning from those categories AS IF the represented reality without distortion... as if they captured absolute truth. An analogy from engineering would be throwing away the margin of error in calculations... if you do enough calculations based on measurements in which the error has been discarded, it's inevitable that the results will be defective. The error term must be propagated through the symbolic operations. Similarly, "taking into account the limitations of abstractions" means to maintain awareness, when performing logic, that the input elements have been distorted by abstraction. In practice this means being suspicious of any sort of binary conclusions with sharp boundaries, and always-this or always-that prescriptions resulting from those conclusions.

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on April 5th, 2007

• Once again, I see how titles tend to cause the most confussion in society. Our struggle for descovering what is moral or not often gets smothered in definitions. My use of words like "child" are merely reflections of my personal views on the subject of abortion. That said, if you feel more comfortable, SB, inserting what you feel to be the "correct" title before answering the question, feel free. However, I don't see any point in debating as to "when" we can call a child a "child". In my opinion, you can call it a "clump of cells", for all I care. It isn't, trully, at the core of my beliefs, a factor in the topic. The interference of the progression of life, however, is. "What hope do they have for happiness?" Is a presumptuous view.

  • Report
  

  by Metaphiz on April 6th, 2007

• Well now you've substituted the abstraction "progression of life" for "child", and made it an absolute thing. Isn't birth control interfering with the progression of life? Where do we draw the boundaries of "progression of life?". In other words, there's no escaping the need to deal with the way in which we've parsed reality into pieces with thought, and the moment we use words to capture those thoughts we're right back in the domain of semantics again. I'm not saying "change the wording", I'm saying "observe the process whereby we discriminate one entity from another, and then notice that we promote our concepts to the status of absolutes".

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on April 6th, 2007

• OK..

  • Report
  

  by Metaphiz on April 6th, 2007

• Hmm... "OK, I understand" or "OK, I'm not interested in arguing this"?

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on April 6th, 2007

• I understand. I see what you mean, in other words, when you talk about "absolutes". You cannot argue a topic that is as diverse from situation to situation as this can be through the lens of an absolute opinion. It takes more wisdom than law. In the situation that I addressed in my Q, I see a woman that is both strong, and wise enough to make the right decission for herself. This is why she has neither asked for, nor have I given her any "advise". I've given her what I can, and that is the comfort of a friend.

  • Report
  

  by Metaphiz on April 6th, 2007

• BTW, she has decided to have the baby, and both the mother, Candy, and the pregnancy are doing well. She is, by far, one of the most amazing women I have ever had the pleasure of knowing.

  • Report
  

  by Metaphiz on April 6th, 2007

• Wow, that's great news! It's easy to forget about the PERSON when getting deeply into these kinds of discussions! :-) Thanks for letting me spout off.

  • Report
  

  by Stableboy on April 6th, 2007

• Not at all. I asked the question because the misfortune of a very close friend spawned in me a struggle between theologies. "Pro-Life" vs. "Pro-Choice". I needed to come to terms with my "Pro-Life" view as it stared into the ugly face of reallity. Your answer and comments have done much to assist me in the effort to discover balance. Thank you.

  • Report
  

  by Metaphiz on April 6th, 2007

Comments

Comments

• Wow! Thanks for the bad rating. I guess what I believe is wrong. Anything else you want to tell me too?

  • Report
  

  by mcclisteraf on December 14th, 2006

• +3, while I dont agree with you it is a valid argument that shouldnt be downrated.

  • Report
  

  by Coheed on December 14th, 2006

• thank you there are a lot of trolls out here today...

  • Report
  

  by mcclisteraf on December 14th, 2006

• I do agree with Coheed on that one. No one should be downgraded for an opinion.

  • Report
  

  by Michellek518 on December 14th, 2006

Comments

• Awesome!!! Had some problems with allergies, but they've seemed to get it under control.
  
  Candy's been getting therapy, and is doing well, loves her little Nickole very much.
  
  She is dealing with a lot of bitterness over the rape (of course), but dealing all the same. Keep her in your prayers (if you do that sort of thing).
  
  Thanks for the concern. Most have just seen this as an opportunity to argue their views. It's nice when someone actually shows concern for wellbeing of others.

  • Report
  

  by Metaphiz on November 16th, 2007

• Nicole was born August 8th at 6:40pm. 8lbs, 10 ounces.

  • Report
  

  by Metaphiz on November 16th, 2007

• I wondered about this a while ago. Thanks for the update :)

  • Report
  

  by Carmella on November 16th, 2007

• I read the Q and decided to see how people reacted. Glad to hear she and the baby are doing well. I admire her for her choice. I don't know what I would do. She must be a very strong woman! Hats off to her!!

  • Report
  

  by Katie on November 16th, 2007

• Amazing how a Negative is turned into a Positive. God is GREAT!

  • Report
  

  by Lord Knows on November 21st, 2007

Comments

• He is jail awaiting trial.

  • Report
  

  by Metaphiz on December 28th, 2006

• I'm glad. He deserves every bit of it.

  • Report
  

  by Singingismystyle on April 4th, 2007

Comments

Comments

Comments

• good, honest answer.

  • Report
  

  by Paulypeanuts on November 16th, 2007

• i always thought most hospitols gave them out in situations like that unless she didnt report it.

  • Report
  

  by lizizhere on December 13th, 2007

Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

• Hey, Jim, they changed that years ago. A rapist can longer assert his parental rights to see that child because the child is considered to be his vicem as well. And no court in the land is going to give a rapist visatation anyways.

  • Report
  

  by P. W. Pasobrio loves Marines on July 17th, 2007

Comments

Comments

• <<If this child is aborted, it will only serve to further victimize the innocent.>> But like someone else said isn't your friend being victimized twice now? She was innocent and everyday that she carries that child is another day she is victimized by what happened to her. She is now having to choice between herself and the baby. Whatever she chooses I hope she decides to do what is best for herself because there are no guarantees she is doing what is right for the kid.

  • Report
  

  by grudge2 on December 15th, 2006

• She is making a choice that effects more than herself.

  • Report
  

  by Metaphiz on December 15th, 2006

• Life can be hard, even at times unbearable, but when we surrender to circumstances we give up hope. Hope in ourselves and others to conquer the greatest obstecles and heartaches. We have that capacity to come out of any situation that life throws at us if we refuse to do otherwise. Candy can overcome her anger and sorrow, her child can overcome the challenge she/he faces in the future, and they both, and perhaps the world, can benefit through their struggle.

  • Report
  

  by Metaphiz on December 28th, 2006

• Metaphiz, not everyone believes that abortion is murder. As a medical professional I believe that a clump of cells is not a person, it is not conscious and it is not an individual with a supposed "right" to be born. Pregnancy is the process of building a baby and that process is not complete until it is a conscious being, either when it is born or when it has a functioning brain. In any case, how is it any more fair to purposely create a child with this awful legacy and with the genes of a rapist? Why do you value a clump of cells over the well-being of your friend? I don't mean to be hostile but I think you should read more about this issue and see what the other side has to say.

  • Report
  

  by lizvelrene on April 4th, 2007

• kabuki, thank you for your comment. It doesn't matter how you, or anyone else views them as a "clump of cells" or not. The fact of the matter is that you are terminating the opportunity for that "clump of cells" to become a living, healthy human being based on a preconceived, and, frankly, presumptuous notion that they, nor the mother have any hope of being happy, strong and even vital members of society. The very fact that there have been several women that have successfuly raised their children under the same circumtances should be enough for us to realize that our ignorance of the future alone forbids us to make such a judgement. We are denying one's FUTURE, regardless of whether or not they are a "clump of cells" or a human being at the stage of pregnancy you are eluding to. You do not have enough information, nor can you, to make such a judgement.

  • Report
  

  by Metaphiz on April 4th, 2007

• But you're overriding the well-being of an existing human being in favor of a potential one. That just does not make sense, especially if it's someone you claim to care about. It's not like we have a population shortage here, we're not desperate for offspring - why not make sure every child is a wanted child? That sounds like a BETTER future to me.

  • Report
  

  by lizvelrene on April 4th, 2007

• My view has more to do with a friend, that I love very much, that is going through the roughest time of her life thus far, and needed some kind of REAL support, not opinions. That's why, instead of having this discussion with her, I decided to take my personal struggle to AB (see my answer to this question). I guess what I am saying is that we need to individually look at abortion with new eyes. Forget the "is it a living human or not?" question, and ask ourselves if we can help both the mother and the child redeem an otherwise tragic event, or should we simply avoid the risk that something bad might happen if the child is allowed to live. No good mother wouldn't give her life vest to their drowning child, thus drowning herself, in order to save the future. She conciders it a worthy sacrifice. It isn't a matter of whether it should be legal or not, nor do we need more people to populate our world, but whether or not it is wise to mess with destiny.

  • Report
  

  by Metaphiz on April 4th, 2007

• I'd also like to add that for most victims of rape that opt for the abortion feel like they were raped a second time. And abortion leave very deep emotional scars, just talk to the women who have had them. Provided they are not completely calloused from the tragedies in their lives, they still hurt when they think about it. And many if not most are coerced into their abortion, if not directly then indirectly by what they think their boyfriends, husbands, family or society would do if they kept the pregnancy...not to mention the abortion clinics themselves. They also aren't allowed to change their mind after they are on the table. Which seems totally wrong since it is an elective "procedure" As for your friend, for her sake I would recommend she not have the abortion for the reasons stated above...for HER well being.

  • Report
  

  by sheenashark on June 22nd, 2007

• This is completely inaccurate- most women do not regret their abortions, particularly following a sexual assault. The most commonly reported feeling is "relief" in all nationwide studies. As many of 1/3 of all women alive today have terminated a pregnancy in their lives. Reproductive clinics do not coerce anyone into abortion, and it is completely untrue that a woman is "not allowed" to change her mind. She is in fact given every chance to change her mind, and often there are mandatory waiting periods for this very reason. These clinics offer many services to the community such as birth control and gyn. exams that contribute to women's health and they have no invested interest in persuading anyone to have an abortion that didn't come in looking for one. The need is great enough as it is. It is not to anyone's well being to be FORCED to bear her rapist's baby. It's a horrific punishment to inflict on anyone, and in my opinion forced pregnancy and its advocates are immoral and ghoulish.

  • Report
  

  by lizvelrene on June 22nd, 2007

Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

• i think she decided to continue with the pregnancy... i wonder how it has gone.. probably a mommy by now

  • Report
  

  by Sheriff Raff -Answerhag on August 26th, 2007

Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

• And "irresponsible actions" should be punished with a baby? So I guess people are right when they say that pro-life people are just out to punish women for having sex.

  • Report
  

  by lizvelrene on April 4th, 2007

• No, we just want them to take responsability and except the consequences of their actions just like the guys have to if she decides to keep it.

  • Report
  

  by P. W. Pasobrio loves Marines on July 17th, 2007

Comments

Comments

• Yes, but you do realize that rape accounts for such a small percentage of abortions - don't you?

  • Report
  

  by muguet on December 27th, 2006

• Yes, but you do realize that rape accounts for such a small percentage of abortions - don't you?

  • Report
  

  by muguet on December 27th, 2006

• And terrorism accounts for a small portion of deaths in the world.

  • Report
  

  by 8 Jan 2004-10 Dec 2009 on December 27th, 2006

• Now if we could only get through their heads to get to the hospital and take the stuff we'd never have to hear about it. And more rapists would be in jail.

  • Report
  

  by P. W. Pasobrio loves Marines on July 17th, 2007

Comments

Comments