Well, i hold a BELIEF too - that liberty is right up there with life, and that
forced pregnancy or mandatory maternity is not liberty, and they sure arent in the
constitution,
Thats out of line with our values. Lotta xtians on the pro choice side. When xtian and American values conflict (and they do, often ) hexl wants American values
Basically the pro-choice argument is The fetus isn't a person,but even if it were it doesn't matter because the woman's right to control her body is more important than the fetus's right to exist. The pro-life argument is that abortion is immoral and promotes immoral behavior BUT even if it doesn't the unborn babie's RIGHT to exist temporarily outweighs the woman's right to absolute control of her body. So far I find the pro-life argument more compelling, But I'm still somewhat open minded.
I am a Christian and I do not believe in abortion, but I just wanted to tell you how much this video broke my heart. I do believe life begins at conception but what you said is so true about how we do not stand together. We are meant to be ONE body UNITED in Christ, sadly we are not. Thankfully, grace is given not because we are worthy but because we have accepted the worthiness of Christ. I pray and yearn for the day when we stand united declaring Jesus and truly live as he lived.
@Marijo0990 says: I am a Christian and I do not believe in abortion,
~~~~~~~~~~~
Then youre NOT a christian because youre going against Gods wishes, that abortion is allowed. Its why its NEVER mentioned in the bible as a sin. Dont lie in the name of God, I hear the punishment will be harsh!
@LittleMisLateBloomer Polling data on the differences in opinion on the subject compared to how religious the person is seems to undermine your claim. Maybe it's just correlation and not causation, but I highly doubt it.
@Zaunstar ..... i'm sorry but public opinion has nothing to do with the actual debate over this issue. Yes, there may be some who identify themselves as religious who tend to prefer a particular side, but that does NOT mean that the issue they are taking a stance on is a RELIGIOUS ISSUE. Abortion is about one question, and one question only: Is what is inside a woman during a pregnancy, a living human being. Answer me that, and this entire issue is resolved.
@Hexl702 You are confusing two different things here. An issue can be of particular interest to a group of people, but that does not make that issue ABOUT that group.
Although many pro life people are also religious in some sense, the belief they hold (that the thing inside of a woman's womb during pregnancy is a living, growing human being, that by default, IS protected under our constitutional Right To Life) That position can be defended and supported 100% by SCIENCE and LOGIC alone.
I wish your mother would have aborted you in a late term abortion. It would have been funny ,and great to watch . oh well Your life is not worth anything any ways .I wish your mom decided to suck your brains out lol .your life is not worth anything anyways, as you say.... Pro choice is great ....
@davidnco1 My Mom had that choice, and I'm glad I'm here, but I am still glad the choice was hers. None of your over-emotional nonsense will change that for me.
@MrPr0glitcher says: your insane i guess this is what atheism does to you
~~~~~~~~~~
LOL, The findings of a study, which was published in the March 2010 issue of Social Psychology Quarterly indicates that atheists tend to have IQs about 6 points higher than believers
Oh, you poor, pitiful little darling who has NOTHING to fight back with, so you attempt a guilt trip???LOLOL... dont you know you cant make strong, intelligent, self assured women feel guilty about ANY well thought out decision they make? To get the results your dying for, you have to say that to weak, whimpy prolifers, w/ no self assuredness & no decision making skills. They will boohoo all day, you'll LOVE it.
@MrPr0glitcher says: i could tell that your a girl, i could also tell that you probably had an abortion,
~~~~~~~~~~ Why are you saying THAT, sweetheart?? is it because youre trying to aviod responding to my responses to my comments that make you look like an aidiot?? LOLOL, it didnt work...you still look like an idiot.
@Zaunstar Your mother also had that choice 5 minutes after you left her body. And again 3 weeks later... and 1 year, 3 years and all throughout your childhood. If at any point during that time in your life she had decided that you were too much of a burden, would you have showed the same indifference and disregard for your own right to live?
@LittleMisLateBloomer So I'm supposed to think abortion is wrong because she shouldn't have been able to kill me as a teenager? That argument is almost too ridiculous to address. Come on, really?
@Zaunstar Yes...please, tell me what the difference was between you 5 minutes before birth, and 5 minutes after? (keep in mind that it is legal in the US. to have an abortion even in the 9th month, just so long as you do it when the head is still inside the mother.) Answer me this and you'll see the point i'm trying to convay...
@LittleMisLateBloomer 5 minutes before birth is viable. My "line" is roughly viability outside the womb. Not a perfect absolute line that I know the religious are more in favor of, but a definite line. I'm telling you my line is well before either of these. Sure, there is always a gray area around any line, the line at which "bluish-green" becomes "greenish-blue" for instance. Regardless of this, it is ultimately up to the woman until viability in my view.
@Zaunstar Yes...please, tell me what the difference was between you 5 minutes before birth, and 5 minutes after? (keep in mind that it is legal in the US. to have an abortion even in the 9th month, just so long as you do it when the head is still inside the mother.) Answer me this and you'll see the point i'm trying to convay...
Viability is also not a marker of when it's not okay to abort. Viability just simply means an organism can thrive in a given environment. Because a ten week old fetus is not viable outside of the womb doesn't detract from the fetus possessing life. It just marks a stage in its development as an organism, from birth to death.
I support abortions in cases of rape, incest and a risk to the mother's health. Otherwise, human sexuality has responsibility. There are consequences for what you do.
@sunsetfear I agree with your first paragraph... but i'm confused as to why you directly contradict yourself in the second one. :(
Seriously, you said, and i quote: "Because a ten week old fetus is not viable outside of the womb doesn't detract from the fetus possessing life."
Okay.... so it sounds to me like you believe that the unborn possesses LIFE.. and that viability is not a method of determining that child's life worth. So now that we've established THAT.. how can u have exceptions?
Every reputable medical textbook defines life beginning at the moment of conception. Therefore, the life of that organism begins at the joining of the sperm and egg and ends at death. Any cessation between those two markers means that the organism has died. You may try to disguise that the human embryo is simply a mass of cells that somehow is the property of the woman to decide its fate, but at the moment of conception a unique human identity is created that is killed by abortion.
The real question is not about whether a woman has the right to abort. The question is whether or not what she is aborting is a human. If anyone wants to have a logical, philisophical, non-religous approach to proving abortion to be wrong then comment back to this post.
@drumguy132 in my opinion the question is "whether a woman has the right to abort". We all know the embryo or fetus is human, but does this human have the right to override a woman's rights?
@ittakesnogenius If we can all agree that the fetus is a human then what makes aborting the fetus any different from killing a toddler? We have a law against that and it is called murder. So just to repeat.. You are saying that a fetus is a human and there should possibly be a "right" of a woman to take the life of that fetus/human?
@drumguy132 ah no, it isn't that simple. We could liken an embryo to a toddler if the embryo was biologically independent, which we all know it isn't, hence the viabillity argument. A toddler is merely socially dependent, and social dependence we can chose, biological we cannot.
@ittakesnogenius So to repeat now more specifically what you claim: "If a human is not completely biologically independent, then the life of that human can be taken away from it." If am not mistaken this is your claim. If so I must ask one further question. Does our biological independence make us more human?
@drumguy132 the level of how "human" someone is doesn't change, and doesn't matter in this case. What matters is that a woman shouldn't have to go through a pregnancy just because she happens to get pregnant, and that a pregnancy should be optional, not a punishment. You should be able to chose your responsibilities, especially life-altering ones like these.
@ittakesnogenius We're starting to go down rabbit holes but i will follow. Thank you for bringing up responsibilty. We all know that sex produces children.Therefor, we know that if we engage in sex then there is always a risk of the gril becoming pregnant. Sex is a life altering choice and if one feels themselves responisble enough to take part in the activity then the person should also be responsible for the actions that possibly can transcend from it.
@drumguy132 it's a faulty assumption to make that all people who have sex know the responsibility that comes with it, or actually are able to take that responsibility. 14 year olds have sex, that doesn't mean they are responsible, or know that they have to be in order to have sex.
And adults that have sex aren't breeding machines. Sex is a healthy part of a relationship, and not everyone wants children in their relationship, then or ever.
@ittakesnogenius First point: I agree that there might be some kids who aren't fully up to date on sexual activities, which i believe that the proprtion of the ones who are to the ones that aren't is heavily lopsided on the side of the ones that are, but that should not in case justify the killing of a human to correct the mistakes made my another. Second point: If adults choose to have sex but do not want kids then they are wanting the best of both worlds. I would love to get..
@ittakesnogenius continued: a 100 on all of my Math grades without getting suspended, but i cannot. If adults want to have sex but never want to have kids then there are plenty of surgeries out there that can make that happen. If they might want to have kids later but want sex now then it is impossible to get around the risk of getting someone or becoming pregnant. (Ex. I want to get to work on time and I am running late. I speed to get their and avoid getting in trouble but sti
@drumguy132 continued: still ran the risk of getting a ticket. It is just an inevitible factor that, as long as ones reproductive organs are functioning properly, then sex runs the risk of pregnancy.
@ittakesnogeniusYou say that the level of how human someone is does not change, which implies that a 42 year old man is just as human as an unborn child. We can dig from that that an unborn child has just as many rights as any other human. As far as level of biological dependence goes, that is not significant at all in the case of abortion. If an unborn baby doesn't have the right to live because of its level of dependency then a person on insulin should be treated the same way
@drumguy132 just because you are human doesn't mean you have rights. You need to be biologically independent as an individual to have rights.
And you are not understanding what I'm saying. Taking insulin is social dependence. They don't have to live inside someone as a parasite in order to survive, they need a shot of insulin which is provided through a socially constructed society.
@ittakesnogenius But it is because of their biological nature that they are dependent. And now you are comparing a human life with a parasite. You are in fact missing the point. A person level of dependence does not or should not govern the degree of which they are human. You are trying to warp the point in fact. Stated bluntly, a fetus is a human, which we both can agree. From that and just that alone what evidence do you have to justify taking that human life. If you argue for
@ittakesnogenius size:a fetus is smaller than an adult, but so is a toddler, if you argue for level of development: a fetus is less developed than an adult, but a toddler is less developed than a teenager, if you argue for environment:a fetus is in a womb, but how does one’s location change his or her nature? if you argue for dependency:a fetus is not viable on its own, however neither is a toddler or a person on insulin
@ittakesnogenius Yes a toddler can be cared for by anyone, therfor making him dependent upon them just as a fetus. A person on insulin can survive only if he has the insulin,making him completely and fully dependent for his life. The point is not that he can give himself the medication, it is the fact that he needs it in the first place to live, just as a fetus needs the proper nutrition in the womb to live. A fetus can not live on its own. A four month old child cannot either.
@drumguy132 (2nd pt) and I'm not saying dependency. I'm saying SOCIAL dependence and BIOLOGICAL dependence. What is it that is so hard to get with this? Is it that you know you can't argue against it?
@ittakesnogenius It is not that I can't argue against it, it is because it is irrelevant to argue for or against it. You are the one off from the point. Every time I say that a fetus is a human therfor why should the killing of it be justified you stray with biological and social independence. They are both irrelevant to the question. So will you answer this question:"If an unborn child at any point in pregnancy is a human being then why should the ending of that life be legal?"
@drumguy132 I'm answering the question, so it is relevant. It should stay legal because it is biologically dependent on the mother, and the mother doesn't have a choice to give the pregnancy to someone else. A baby you can give to someone else. You can chose to end an embryo's life because it is dependent soley on the mother, and therefor she should have to chose, but a baby can be given to anyone to take care of, so it's illegal
@ittakesnogenius Because a fetus needs a woman's body for survival does not detract from it being a unique, human individual. The new human zygote has a genetic composition that is absolutely unique to itself, different from any other human that has ever existed, including that of its mother. Life begins at conception and needs a particular environment to survive. Whether you abort 1 week in or 30 weeks in, you are terminating the life of the individual that would otherwise survive.
@sunsetfear in my opinion as long as the zygote/embryo/fetus depends on a single person for its survival, the person carrying this zygote/emrbyo/fetus should be able to say if she wants to do it or not. If you were able to transfer these embryos/fetuses to another woman, or in some other way be able to keep it alive outside of the womb, I would be against abortion. But now it is not possible.
@ittakesnogenius I understand your opinion, but I have to disagree. It's dependency doesn't take away from the fact that a completely unique human being has been created that is defined as a life by all reputable medical textbooks. Yes, it would be great if we could transfer, but that's the responsibility the woman takes when she decides to become sexually active; there is a chance that through her actions, a human being will originate. With choice comes consequences.
@sunsetfear No, it's the responsibility of BOTH of the people having sex.
And you seem like you just want to punish the woman for having sex, rather than wanting the fetus to be born. Plus, just because you have sex doesn't mean you're ready for the responsibility to have sex. It's easy to have sex, it's hard to go through a pregnancy and be a parent. Just because someone can have sex, doesn't mean they can parent
@ittakesnogenius Oh my apologies for the first point- didn't see I came across that way, I agree with you wholeheartedly. It is the responsibility of both.
I'm not punishing the woman for having sex, its a matter of responsibility You said it yourself, sex is easy, but parenting is not. With having sex, there is an inherent chance of a human life being created. There are many contraceptive options which are narrowing the chance of a human being created, but until the probability is zero (cont)
@sunsetfear says: I'm not punishing the woman for having sex, its a matter of responsibility
~~~~~~~~~~~ Abortion is all about being responsible, too. It may be plan "b", but it serves the same purpose as birth control, which is saving unwanted babies from being born, right?
@ittakesnogenius One must be cautious that their sexual activities may lead to very big consequences. Sexual activity is pleasurable and healthy, but with everything comes consequences for what you do. That's why the consequences of sexual activity should be stressed. If it happens, whether you intended or not, you have created life and now are responsible.
@sunsetfear I'm speaking about young kids here, and peole with a slow mental development. Many people believe "it won't happen to them", plenty of people get shocked when they get pregnant on birth control. But just because there are consequences, doesn't mean you should have to live your whole life with them. Especially when it is such a small mistake.
@ittakesnogenius I think you are a mistake from the way you type to bad your mother did not give you a late term abortion .....lol sorry just my opinion
@davidnco1 yes, I was a "mistake", or accident depending on how you word it. But my mother wanted to have me, so she had me. And tell you what? I'm a *great* person, just because I support choice you wish me dead? You wanted me to be aborted? How pro-life is that? Wishing someone to be aborted is just as anti-choice, but the other way around: wanting to force someone to have an abortion.
@sunsetfear says: It's dependency doesn't take away from the fact that a completely unique human being has been created that is defined as a life by all reputable medical textbooks.
~~~~~~~~~~~~ This is ONLY about rights of people,the law, the 5th, 9th, 13th, & 14th Amend.,The Universal Dec. of Human Rights, The Supreme Court, social custom & necessity, Roe v. Wade & NO science
@ittakesnogenius Now if a woman is raped or faces incest, then an abortion is completely understandable. However, reproduction entails a responsibility that through sex, an individual will be created and live on. A woman creates a human being when the sperm meets the egg, so she should be held accountable when she practices sex. That's the risk you take when you become sexually active.
@ittakesnogenius Now if a woman is raped or faces incest, then an abortion is completely understandable. However, reproduction entails a responsibility that through sex, an individual will be created and live on. A woman creates a human being when the sperm meets the egg, so she should be held accountable when she practices sex. That's the risk you take when you become sexually active.
wtf? this isnt even about abortion. this is just some atheist with his head up his ass bashing religion (especially the catholic churh) and saying a few comments on abortion here and there.
It's very nice to see a man speak out on the topic of abortion, a man that believes that women are able to make their own choices over their own bodies. Thank you for this video!!
@Hexl702 men aren't the ones going through pregnancy, birth or an abortion. I believe women who are nice should consider the man's opinion, but ultimately she's the one that has to chose because it is her body :) I know it seems unfair that you don't get to chose, but when you can get pregnant, you will be able to :)
@ittakesnogenius ""men arent the ones going through w/ pregnancy""
Ive said it myself 34898489 times : ) ! A man cant split the pregnancy 50/50 with a woman.
But, men can certainly weigh in on whether it should be legal/ illegal. Men decided Roe and male politicians defend the right to choose, and regular guys everywhere can certainly agree.
@Hexl702 excatly. Men said "it's the woman's choice" by making that law. As long as a woman doesn't want to go through an abortion: she will have the baby. As long as the woman doesn't want to be pregnant: she has an abortion. Men can help decide when the woman isn't sure, or before conception. But ultimately it will always be in the woman's hands.
@lolzors93 It's not a matter of not being human, it's a matter of what rights a fetus has. I don't believe a fetus young enough to be non-viable has a right to life.
@lolzors93 Once you reach age 21, you have the right to drink. At 18, you can vote. At viability, you have the right to life, but NOT before then. Before then, I believe the woman has the choice. I understand that you disagree. There are reasonable people on both sides, but you do not get to impose YOUR decision on a woman.
@Zaunstar So you believe that the baby is not able to sustain itself and that since it depends on others to live it is not a viable living being? So what about a premature baby that cannot live without an incubator? What about those who are dependent on insulin shots? What about coma victims? The mother should understand that if she is having sex, a pregnancy might occur. You cannot murder someone else for making your own mistakes. She should be mature enough to understand the consequences.
@lolzors93 Your arguments are complete garbage. I told you what I think of the rights of a fetus. Then you throw a million different what ifs that are not a fetus, and ask me if they should have the right to life. Yes to all of them. Either debate like an adult, or don't argue at all. You don't get to decide. You will probably never get to decide. It isn't your decision. It isn't mine either.
@lolzors93 Viability and dependency are not the same thing. A bedridden but perfectly mentally capable elderly person is dependent but viable. Once we pass a stage where we are viable, we then have a right to life. Sure there is sometimes a small gray area there, and that's OK. This is not nearly as complicated as you want it to be. There is no form of adult that it's OK to murder, so no need to bother with those arguments.
@Zaunstar Viability means an organism can live and grow independently and successfully. Do not use viability as a reason because based on your own words and logic it is not. Your argument makes no sense! An elderly person on life support is the one and only true parallel for the abortion argument. And you just said that they have a right to life. I tell you this, selfishness and ungodliness are not good qualities to have. Repent! And fall in love with the only person who can give you true love!
@lolzors93 I already told you once you pass viability, it doesn't matter. I explained it to you twice. You either understand or you don't, and apparently you don't. You're just another Christian parroting the "party line". Learn to think for yourself.
@Zaunstar The point I'm trying to make is that some people never pass viability. People who are diabetic cannot live independently. Therefore they are not viable ever!
@lolzors93 biological vs social independence is diffenet. A viable fetus, regardless if it needs social assistance such as medicine or surgery, is viable in that it can survive without living in the womb - i.e biologically independent. A 20 week fetus cannot survive outside of the womb even with assistance from doctors and nurses (social) dependence, but can survive inside a womb (biological dependence).
abortions are neccesary in some cases, but i dont think someone should be given a choice over someone's life. you could say " its only a fetus" but if you were to have an abortion, then you would keep that baby from being born alive. i would say that can be considered killing. are anti abortion atheists common?
@tarrance958 My mother could have had an abortion. It would have been her right. I'm glad I was born, but I did not ask to be born, and I was not "owed" the right to be born.
@tarrance958 What is worng? I can't find that word in the dictionary. If my parents had an abortion, I would not have known to even care. If I got an abortion then I am a muder? Do you mean mother? Mother fucker maybe? Oh, murderer, you left out a few letters that matter there. Stupid people shouldn't have kids.
All the pro lifers are also not considering that children die on a daily basis all over the world from starvation, but since it doesn't occur here they see every new born as a sacred child of God. Those people who also say its not the woman's choice don't realize that women could easily just make it a dumpster baby or harm themselves physically due to emotional stress put on her by her christian fanatic friends and family.
@Athenation2010 Ok, so you're saying that every mother would throw baby in the dumpster? As a Catholic, I believe that the developing baby, or the "fetus" is a person. It is a gift from God. What i don't believe in, is forcing the mother to keep the baby after its born, there is adoption in this world. Simply take the money that the gov't gives to the abortion clinics, and put it into adoption centers.
@Athenation2010 Why do you also have to say everything that's wrong in this world, is caused by Christians?
First, I believe that each person should only have sexual relations with one person in their life time, unless their called to another vocation or their spouse dies, then they can remarry.
Second, If people shared what they had and worked for a common good, like Christians teach, then there would be no starvation and no one would go without the necessities.
@Athenation2010 Now I will admit, that Christians and Catholics do deserve some blame due to the fact that we are human and we aren't perfect. We don't always share what we have, and sometimes people divorce and get remarried. But we don't deserve all of the blame as you put out. Besides, the Catholic Church is the biggest giver in the world, how can you criticize and call it our fault when we do all of this good?
@Athenation2010 You make the assumption that if you're pro-life, then you must be a christian fanatic. I am not religious. I am pro-life. Your argument therefore doesn't hold any weight
People approach the abortion debate from the wrong direction. They start with a zygote, go forward, and ask "When does this zygote obtain human rights?" This will never work, as neither of them have common ground. However, most will agree that Zaunstar and I both have a right to life, so we have common ground. What we should do is start from a person and go backwards and ask, "When does this person lose his rights?"
@david52875 It is generally accepted that the person will never lose his rights, so the question becomes, when, going backwards in my development from person to zygote, did I cease to be a person? To answer this question, we do need to know the definition of person. The problem is, in the course of history, people have arbitrarily defined "personhood" in ways that oppress others.
@david52875 In Dread Scott vs Stanford, the Supreme court ruled that blacks were "creatures of Inferior order", that they "had no rights a white man ought to respect." They justified this by creating an arbitrary, subjective definition of "person." It is obvious to us that this was wrong, however, it would be just as fruitless arguing with the Supreme court as a proabortionist who says a fetus is not a "person" according to their arbitrary definition of "person".
b. if there is no objective (OBJECTIVE!) deference between me and a fetus that would result in it losing its rights, then a fetus has a right to life.
c. there is no objective, non-arbitrary difference between me and a fetus that would result in a fetus losing rights.
@david52875 You haven't even made the slightest effort at showing point B to be correct. You simply defined it as objectively true. Same with C. You'll need to do a lot better than that.
@Zaunstar It is self evidently true. Say there are two people who's only difference between each other is their hair color. We both agree that one person has rights. It is plainly obvious that, unless their status as a person somehow depends on hair color, then it follows that they have the same rights.
@david52875 I tell you that you can't just define it as objectively true and then you tell me it's self-evidently true? *sigh*
Hair color is not state of development. A 13 year old can't drink legally, no matter their hair color. Age can and does determine rights, if you want to think of "minus several months" as an age, which I do not.
"If I have rights now, and I didn't have rights when I was a fetus, then there is a difference between me now, and me then, that would warrant the denial of my rights?"
@Zaunstar It does not matter that hair color is not a state of development, I'm saying that if a person has a right at time t1, and does not have a time at t0, then something about the person must have changed that relates to rights. I'm not talking about age, the reason our age starts at birth is arbitrary and mostly for convenience. I'm talking about going from a fully developed human, back to the fetus.
@david52875 Sorry, i made a typo. what I meant was "I'm saying that if a person has a right to life at time t1, and does not have a right to life at time t0, then something about the person must have changed that relates to rights. "
@Zaunstar My point was that, if you go back through my existence and say "at this point, you ceased to be a person and had no rights before it", then you need to provide an objective reason as to why I lost my rights at this point, and it cannot be based on an arbitrary definition of person, or your subjective moral values.
@Zaunstar but now that I think about it, I could have better phrased my argument like this:
a. If I lose my rights at the point going backwards in my life when, say, my heart stops beating, then there is an objective difference between me then, and me now, that somehow relates to who possess rights.
b. Unless it can proven that this objective difference exists, then legally, I had the same rights as a fetus as I do now.
It depends on what you consider a human. Something that cannot think, move, feel pain, or see. I do not think that is a human. If I am ever in a hospital bed, not able to think or use any one of my senses, kill me. I would have nothing to live for. I would not even be human anymore.
@suburbiasurvivor: I, like you, don't like abortion at all. But in the crazy world we live in I would hate to tell that gang rape survivor, or that 9 year old pregnant girl that she MUST have the baby. I dont think the two wrongs make it right, but I understand the emotion or perspective of someone in an extreme situation, and I believe that in those cases, depending on the situation, abortion may be considered, especially if it is the first few weeks of pregnancy. Just my thoughts...
Finally a somewhat intelligent discusison about the topic. I am very pro life. I understand the need for abortion in today's society but I don't think its right. I think abortions should be left for extreme circumstances such as rape, child molestations, or the very rare cases where it is a life or death health concern for the mom. At the very least, they should be limited to the first weeks after conception, not at 20 weeks, which is half way through the pregnancy.
@1garrison1845 I personally disagree. I am Pro-Life and even in the case of rape, I don't believe two wrongs make a right. Also, Child Molestation very rarely results in a pregnancy since children have generally not yet gone through puberty. I believe that all human beings deserve the rights that come with being legally recognized as a person by the government. And by definition a zygotes, embryos, and fetuses are human beings only at early stages of development.
@Godisgood2051 I'm not sure how many times I need to explain to you that a fetus is not considered the same as a baby, both by law and by those that support abortion rights. Apparently once more I have to explain this. This is why the issue is so "sticky".
@Zaunstar yes, but that "clump of cells" has human genes just like you and me, so saying the developing baby is not a human is saying that we aren't human.
Plus, women, if you don't want the baby CLOSE YOUR LEGS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Don't kill the baby just because you don't want it. There are plenty of people who cannot have children and will adopt.
@Godisgood2051 That's a moronic position to take. I know women personally that were married and already had kids, but had an abortion because they did not want another. That "close your legs" line would be pretty insulting to most women, even ones that might otherwise agree with you on the issue.
@Zaunstar Well, if you don't want to take the chance of getting pregnant, then don't have the sex. There is no "safe sex". When ever you have sexual intercourse, you are taking your chances.
And, in what I believe and you won't agree, a child is a gift from God Himself, and if you have an abortion, that is taking that gift and pretty much shoving it back into His face.
Plus, why did you avoid my human gene fact? Can you not counter it?
@Godisgood2051 So you say, but of course what if a woman is raped? Well, tough luck for her then, right? Oh boy, well the whole god thing is something else we disagree on. If you think there is a big daddy in the sky that is doing all this, then go ahead and let him stop it then. Sure, there are human genes there. That still does not help with the "rights" issue.
@Zaunstar God does everything for a reason. He won't put you through anything He knows you aren't strong enough to take. So your point is invalid. If its His will, then let it be done.
I do feel bad for the women, but abortion is not the answer.
This is how it was back in the 40's. When they had an issue, they bit the bullet and ran with it. We don't call them the greatest generation of Americans for nothing.
These days we are lazy, when we have a trouble, we try to find ways around it. Its sad
@greycloud24 Sorry, but God does not agree with killing babies. He gives the baby as a gift and people decide to kill it. That is their sad decision, not God's.
@Godisgood2051 if the baby is a gift than so is the abortion. you see a sperm must meet up with an oocyte to cause pregnancy. this is an act of people not god. but if it is an act of god, than so is everything else the people do. you can't have it both ways. you can't say that the actions of people are gods fault, but the actions of people are not gods fault. you can't say that natural laws are gods fault, but natural laws are not gods fault. if pregnancy is a gift from god, than so is abortion.
@greycloud24 God gave us the gift of sex, but only married couples should carry it out. God gave us the gift of knowledge, but we as human beings often abuse that gift with abortion and contraception. As I said, since a baby is a gift, abortion and contraception pretty much shove that gift back into His face. You can think of it as alcohol, some is good, but too much is bad.
Besides, abortion is the taking of a human life, so it disrespects life in general, and disrespects God.
@Godisgood2051 ok, that is fine. lets assume for a second that abortion is a complete disrespect for your god. but not everyone worships that god, and those that don't believe in that god are not doing anything wrong in their own mind. because we have the first amendment in america, it should still be legal to disrespect any given god in pursuit of following another god (or no god). if your god is the right god, than the people will pay for their sins after they have died.
@Godisgood2051 its a bundle of cells that will eventually replicate and differentiate into a proto-human that will become a human being upon birth (and thus the celebration of birthdays, the filing of birth certificates and the citizenship of place of birth). but depending on what phase of development it is in, it is either a proto-human (viable to survive outside the womb but not yet born) or it is a bundle of cells developing into a proto-human.
@greycloud24 But aren't those human cells, just like you and I?
A baby is developed, not put together. remember that.
They are not put together piece by piece.
Embryology books teach that from conception, that "clump of cells" is a full, and complete human.
Their like an old camera. You take the picture and wait for it to develop. Just because you can't see the picture yet, doesn't mean its not there. It just hasn't showed up yet.
@Godisgood2051 that clump of cells is not a human, if it were than we could remove it, place it on a chair give it some milk and it would be fine. life is not a black and white thing, and nothing about life is black and white. is a caterpillar a butterfly? what about when it is in a cocoon? we like to label things, but our definitions are black and white, while life itself is not. part of the definition of being human is person hood, and we grant this at birth.
@Godisgood2051 life does not start at conception. it takes a living human sperm and a living human oocyte (both human cells) to create a human embryo (a different living cell). life starts long before conception, and if either parent is dead than they will not create the living oocyte or sperm. life is a cycle, with no true beginning. the question shouldn't be "why are we killing human beings", the real question is "why do we have unwanted pregnancies"? we should address the real issue.
@Godisgood2051 There is a point in development where there is a right to life. Many people do not believe conception is it. You do. It's a very basic difference, that perfectly good people disagree on, and so it will likely continue to be the choice of the woman in most of the developed world, as I believe it should be.
Studies within the first few weeks after the abortion have found that between 40 and 60 percent of women questioned report negative reactions. Within 8 weeks after their abortions, 55% expressed guilt, 44% complained of nervous disorders, 36% had experienced sleep disturbances, 31% had regrets about their decision, and 11% had been prescribed psychotropic medicine by their family doctor.
@Godisgood2051 I wonder if they bothered to do a study on the effects of unplanned pregnancies that they did plan on bringing to term. I dout it, somehow. Nobody said abortion was easy or consequence-free for the woman making the decision, but neither is pregnancy or having a baby early in life and dramatically altering the course of their lives, not necessarily for the better.
w w w.abortionfacts. com /literature/literature_928YC.asp
type this into the address, I had to space a few things so I could get the address on here, the health risks may surprise you. This site is NOT biased, it gives both pro-life and pro-choice arguments so you can't say its slanted.
@LittleMisLateBloomer "" IS protected ""
What do yo mean by "protected" - protected with some kind of force over the woman,
so that she's compelled to undergo all 9 months even when she doesnt want to?
A law ? - WHAT law, whats it look like, whats the crime and whats the punishment?
Hexl702 2 days ago
@LittleMisLateBloomer ""the BELIEF they hold ""
Well, i hold a BELIEF too - that liberty is right up there with life, and that
forced pregnancy or mandatory maternity is not liberty, and they sure arent in the
constitution,
Thats out of line with our values. Lotta xtians on the pro choice side. When xtian and American values conflict (and they do, often ) hexl wants American values
to prevail.
Hexl702 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Basically the pro-choice argument is The fetus isn't a person,but even if it were it doesn't matter because the woman's right to control her body is more important than the fetus's right to exist. The pro-life argument is that abortion is immoral and promotes immoral behavior BUT even if it doesn't the unborn babie's RIGHT to exist temporarily outweighs the woman's right to absolute control of her body. So far I find the pro-life argument more compelling, But I'm still somewhat open minded.
sobriquet1999 3 days ago
Comment removed
MrPr0glitcher 1 week ago
@Marijo0990 Lol. You yearn for the day that everyone will accept the fact that zombies are real?
M1NDC0N7R0L 2 weeks ago
I am a Christian and I do not believe in abortion, but I just wanted to tell you how much this video broke my heart. I do believe life begins at conception but what you said is so true about how we do not stand together. We are meant to be ONE body UNITED in Christ, sadly we are not. Thankfully, grace is given not because we are worthy but because we have accepted the worthiness of Christ. I pray and yearn for the day when we stand united declaring Jesus and truly live as he lived.
Marijo0990 2 weeks ago
@Marijo0990 says: I am a Christian and I do not believe in abortion,
~~~~~~~~~~~
Then youre NOT a christian because youre going against Gods wishes, that abortion is allowed. Its why its NEVER mentioned in the bible as a sin. Dont lie in the name of God, I hear the punishment will be harsh!
Sueezee1 1 week ago
Why did you make this entire video about religion?
The pro life position has NOTHING to do with religion.
LittleMisLateBloomer 3 weeks ago
@LittleMisLateBloomer Polling data on the differences in opinion on the subject compared to how religious the person is seems to undermine your claim. Maybe it's just correlation and not causation, but I highly doubt it.
Zaunstar 3 weeks ago
@Zaunstar do you think a fetus should be aborted at 8.5 months, if the mother wants to abort it? Why or why not?
debunker300 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@debunker300 says: do you think a fetus should be aborted at 8.5 months, if the mother wants to abort it?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
do you think we should let you speak in here? Should your personal freedom be taken from YOU?
Sueezee2 5 days ago
@Zaunstar ..... i'm sorry but public opinion has nothing to do with the actual debate over this issue. Yes, there may be some who identify themselves as religious who tend to prefer a particular side, but that does NOT mean that the issue they are taking a stance on is a RELIGIOUS ISSUE. Abortion is about one question, and one question only: Is what is inside a woman during a pregnancy, a living human being. Answer me that, and this entire issue is resolved.
LittleMisLateBloomer 2 days ago
@LittleMisLateBloomer It has to do with life.
PaintingPropaganda 3 weeks ago
@LittleMisLateBloomer ""Pro lite position has NOTHING to do with religion"
Ideally it shouldnt. America is officially a secular nation.
But lets not be naive, either. Church hierarchies everywhere use their fear filled
religions to play on people's emotions. Hell, if you make it a matter of people fearing for their very soul if they support choice.. ..
Hexl702 3 weeks ago
@Hexl702 You are confusing two different things here. An issue can be of particular interest to a group of people, but that does not make that issue ABOUT that group.
Although many pro life people are also religious in some sense, the belief they hold (that the thing inside of a woman's womb during pregnancy is a living, growing human being, that by default, IS protected under our constitutional Right To Life) That position can be defended and supported 100% by SCIENCE and LOGIC alone.
LittleMisLateBloomer 2 days ago
@LittleMisLateBloomer
Maybe yer a newbie, but hexl has been found on 8348984389 forums telling
people that religion has nothing to do with abortion, and I wish religion WOUILDNT rear its ugly head.
Whenever religion comes into the picture - pushing, shoving
fights hell even WAR breaks out. Religion brings out the worst in everybody
:: points to forum ::
Hexl702 2 days ago
I wish your mother would have aborted you in a late term abortion. It would have been funny ,and great to watch . oh well Your life is not worth anything any ways .I wish your mom decided to suck your brains out lol .your life is not worth anything anyways, as you say.... Pro choice is great ....
davidnco1 4 weeks ago
@davidnco1 My Mom had that choice, and I'm glad I'm here, but I am still glad the choice was hers. None of your over-emotional nonsense will change that for me.
Zaunstar 3 weeks ago 5
@Zaunstar lol your insane i guess this is what atheism does to you
MrPr0glitcher 2 weeks ago
@MrPr0glitcher says: your insane i guess this is what atheism does to you
~~~~~~~~~~
LOL, The findings of a study, which was published in the March 2010 issue of Social Psychology Quarterly indicates that atheists tend to have IQs about 6 points higher than believers
Sueezee1 1 week ago
@Sueezee1 dosent look like it, u fucks are lucky that your `whore mothers didnt get an abortion.
MrPr0glitcher 1 week ago
@MrPr0glitcher says: u fucks are lucky that your `whore mothers didnt get an abortion.
~~~~~~~~~~~ Youre lucky you wernt shot between the eyes yesterday and died...but who gives a shit TODAY, right sweetie? get smarter!!
Sueezee1 1 week ago
@Sueezee1 i could tell that your a girl, i could also tell that you probably had an abortion,
MrPr0glitcher 1 week ago
@MrPr0glitcher says:you probably had an abortion,
~~~~~~~~~
Oh, you poor, pitiful little darling who has NOTHING to fight back with, so you attempt a guilt trip???LOLOL... dont you know you cant make strong, intelligent, self assured women feel guilty about ANY well thought out decision they make? To get the results your dying for, you have to say that to weak, whimpy prolifers, w/ no self assuredness & no decision making skills. They will boohoo all day, you'll LOVE it.
Sueezee1 1 week ago
@Sueezee1 why would you go against god?
MrPr0glitcher 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrPr0glitcher says: why would you go against god?
~~~~~~~~~~~ Gods prochoice. Yeeeeeeehaww!!!
Sueezee2 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrPr0glitcher says: i could tell that your a girl, i could also tell that you probably had an abortion,
~~~~~~~~~~ Why are you saying THAT, sweetheart?? is it because youre trying to aviod responding to my responses to my comments that make you look like an aidiot?? LOLOL, it didnt work...you still look like an idiot.
Sueezee1 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrPr0glitcher says: u fucks are lucky that your `whore mothers didnt get an abortion.
~~~~~~~~~~~
LMFAO. we wouldnt have cared if we WERE aborted, you eggplant.. God, i love people who have CHOSEN to be ignorant.
Sueezee1 1 week ago
@Zaunstar Your mother also had that choice 5 minutes after you left her body. And again 3 weeks later... and 1 year, 3 years and all throughout your childhood. If at any point during that time in your life she had decided that you were too much of a burden, would you have showed the same indifference and disregard for your own right to live?
LittleMisLateBloomer 2 days ago
@LittleMisLateBloomer So I'm supposed to think abortion is wrong because she shouldn't have been able to kill me as a teenager? That argument is almost too ridiculous to address. Come on, really?
Zaunstar 2 days ago
@Zaunstar Yes...please, tell me what the difference was between you 5 minutes before birth, and 5 minutes after? (keep in mind that it is legal in the US. to have an abortion even in the 9th month, just so long as you do it when the head is still inside the mother.) Answer me this and you'll see the point i'm trying to convay...
LittleMisLateBloomer 2 days ago
@LittleMisLateBloomer 5 minutes before birth is viable. My "line" is roughly viability outside the womb. Not a perfect absolute line that I know the religious are more in favor of, but a definite line. I'm telling you my line is well before either of these. Sure, there is always a gray area around any line, the line at which "bluish-green" becomes "greenish-blue" for instance. Regardless of this, it is ultimately up to the woman until viability in my view.
Zaunstar 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Zaunstar Yes...please, tell me what the difference was between you 5 minutes before birth, and 5 minutes after? (keep in mind that it is legal in the US. to have an abortion even in the 9th month, just so long as you do it when the head is still inside the mother.) Answer me this and you'll see the point i'm trying to convay...
LittleMisLateBloomer 2 days ago
@davidnco1 Here is what I think:
Where do you draw the line between people or organizations that you can help & those who are too internally corrupt & compromised?
PaintingPropaganda 3 weeks ago
@davidnco1 so abortion is a good thing as long as you assume that all of the babies being aborted will grow up to be pro-choice, correct?
muffinsareemocupcake 1 week ago
@davidnco1 Very interesting how you are so against abortion, yet you wish that his mother had terminated the pregnancy. Cognitive dissonance much?
rattlehead9127 1 week ago
@davidnco1 You are really good at being a hater you must be religous.
isis1933 5 days ago
Viability is also not a marker of when it's not okay to abort. Viability just simply means an organism can thrive in a given environment. Because a ten week old fetus is not viable outside of the womb doesn't detract from the fetus possessing life. It just marks a stage in its development as an organism, from birth to death.
I support abortions in cases of rape, incest and a risk to the mother's health. Otherwise, human sexuality has responsibility. There are consequences for what you do.
sunsetfear 1 month ago
@sunsetfear well, a 10 week old fetus can't survive outside a uterus. So that's why it's okay before then.
ittakesnogenius 1 month ago
@sunsetfear I agree with your first paragraph... but i'm confused as to why you directly contradict yourself in the second one. :(
Seriously, you said, and i quote: "Because a ten week old fetus is not viable outside of the womb doesn't detract from the fetus possessing life."
Okay.... so it sounds to me like you believe that the unborn possesses LIFE.. and that viability is not a method of determining that child's life worth. So now that we've established THAT.. how can u have exceptions?
LittleMisLateBloomer 2 days ago
Every reputable medical textbook defines life beginning at the moment of conception. Therefore, the life of that organism begins at the joining of the sperm and egg and ends at death. Any cessation between those two markers means that the organism has died. You may try to disguise that the human embryo is simply a mass of cells that somehow is the property of the woman to decide its fate, but at the moment of conception a unique human identity is created that is killed by abortion.
sunsetfear 1 month ago
@sunsetfear Exactly.
LittleMisLateBloomer 2 days ago
The real question is not about whether a woman has the right to abort. The question is whether or not what she is aborting is a human. If anyone wants to have a logical, philisophical, non-religous approach to proving abortion to be wrong then comment back to this post.
drumguy132 1 month ago
@drumguy132 in my opinion the question is "whether a woman has the right to abort". We all know the embryo or fetus is human, but does this human have the right to override a woman's rights?
ittakesnogenius 1 month ago
@ittakesnogenius If we can all agree that the fetus is a human then what makes aborting the fetus any different from killing a toddler? We have a law against that and it is called murder. So just to repeat.. You are saying that a fetus is a human and there should possibly be a "right" of a woman to take the life of that fetus/human?
drumguy132 1 month ago
@drumguy132 ah no, it isn't that simple. We could liken an embryo to a toddler if the embryo was biologically independent, which we all know it isn't, hence the viabillity argument. A toddler is merely socially dependent, and social dependence we can chose, biological we cannot.
ittakesnogenius 1 month ago
@ittakesnogenius So to repeat now more specifically what you claim: "If a human is not completely biologically independent, then the life of that human can be taken away from it." If am not mistaken this is your claim. If so I must ask one further question. Does our biological independence make us more human?
drumguy132 1 month ago
@drumguy132 the level of how "human" someone is doesn't change, and doesn't matter in this case. What matters is that a woman shouldn't have to go through a pregnancy just because she happens to get pregnant, and that a pregnancy should be optional, not a punishment. You should be able to chose your responsibilities, especially life-altering ones like these.
ittakesnogenius 1 month ago
@ittakesnogenius We're starting to go down rabbit holes but i will follow. Thank you for bringing up responsibilty. We all know that sex produces children.Therefor, we know that if we engage in sex then there is always a risk of the gril becoming pregnant. Sex is a life altering choice and if one feels themselves responisble enough to take part in the activity then the person should also be responsible for the actions that possibly can transcend from it.
drumguy132 1 month ago
@drumguy132 it's a faulty assumption to make that all people who have sex know the responsibility that comes with it, or actually are able to take that responsibility. 14 year olds have sex, that doesn't mean they are responsible, or know that they have to be in order to have sex.
And adults that have sex aren't breeding machines. Sex is a healthy part of a relationship, and not everyone wants children in their relationship, then or ever.
ittakesnogenius 1 month ago
@ittakesnogenius First point: I agree that there might be some kids who aren't fully up to date on sexual activities, which i believe that the proprtion of the ones who are to the ones that aren't is heavily lopsided on the side of the ones that are, but that should not in case justify the killing of a human to correct the mistakes made my another. Second point: If adults choose to have sex but do not want kids then they are wanting the best of both worlds. I would love to get..
drumguy132 1 month ago
@ittakesnogenius continued: a 100 on all of my Math grades without getting suspended, but i cannot. If adults want to have sex but never want to have kids then there are plenty of surgeries out there that can make that happen. If they might want to have kids later but want sex now then it is impossible to get around the risk of getting someone or becoming pregnant. (Ex. I want to get to work on time and I am running late. I speed to get their and avoid getting in trouble but sti
drumguy132 1 month ago
@drumguy132 continued: still ran the risk of getting a ticket. It is just an inevitible factor that, as long as ones reproductive organs are functioning properly, then sex runs the risk of pregnancy.
drumguy132 1 month ago
@ittakesnogeniusYou say that the level of how human someone is does not change, which implies that a 42 year old man is just as human as an unborn child. We can dig from that that an unborn child has just as many rights as any other human. As far as level of biological dependence goes, that is not significant at all in the case of abortion. If an unborn baby doesn't have the right to live because of its level of dependency then a person on insulin should be treated the same way
drumguy132 1 month ago
@drumguy132 just because you are human doesn't mean you have rights. You need to be biologically independent as an individual to have rights.
And you are not understanding what I'm saying. Taking insulin is social dependence. They don't have to live inside someone as a parasite in order to survive, they need a shot of insulin which is provided through a socially constructed society.
ittakesnogenius 1 month ago
@ittakesnogenius But it is because of their biological nature that they are dependent. And now you are comparing a human life with a parasite. You are in fact missing the point. A person level of dependence does not or should not govern the degree of which they are human. You are trying to warp the point in fact. Stated bluntly, a fetus is a human, which we both can agree. From that and just that alone what evidence do you have to justify taking that human life. If you argue for
drumguy132 1 month ago
@ittakesnogenius size:a fetus is smaller than an adult, but so is a toddler, if you argue for level of development: a fetus is less developed than an adult, but a toddler is less developed than a teenager, if you argue for environment:a fetus is in a womb, but how does one’s location change his or her nature? if you argue for dependency:a fetus is not viable on its own, however neither is a toddler or a person on insulin
drumguy132 1 month ago
@drumguy132 I'm not arguing anything of that. Stick to what we're talking about
A toddler can be cared for by anyone - an embryo cannot, a person on insulin can even administer it himself - an embryo cannot.
ittakesnogenius 1 month ago
@ittakesnogenius Yes a toddler can be cared for by anyone, therfor making him dependent upon them just as a fetus. A person on insulin can survive only if he has the insulin,making him completely and fully dependent for his life. The point is not that he can give himself the medication, it is the fact that he needs it in the first place to live, just as a fetus needs the proper nutrition in the womb to live. A fetus can not live on its own. A four month old child cannot either.
drumguy132 1 month ago
@drumguy132 (2nd pt) and I'm not saying dependency. I'm saying SOCIAL dependence and BIOLOGICAL dependence. What is it that is so hard to get with this? Is it that you know you can't argue against it?
ittakesnogenius 1 month ago
@ittakesnogenius It is not that I can't argue against it, it is because it is irrelevant to argue for or against it. You are the one off from the point. Every time I say that a fetus is a human therfor why should the killing of it be justified you stray with biological and social independence. They are both irrelevant to the question. So will you answer this question:"If an unborn child at any point in pregnancy is a human being then why should the ending of that life be legal?"
drumguy132 1 month ago
@drumguy132 I'm answering the question, so it is relevant. It should stay legal because it is biologically dependent on the mother, and the mother doesn't have a choice to give the pregnancy to someone else. A baby you can give to someone else. You can chose to end an embryo's life because it is dependent soley on the mother, and therefor she should have to chose, but a baby can be given to anyone to take care of, so it's illegal
ittakesnogenius 1 month ago
@ittakesnogenius Because a fetus needs a woman's body for survival does not detract from it being a unique, human individual. The new human zygote has a genetic composition that is absolutely unique to itself, different from any other human that has ever existed, including that of its mother. Life begins at conception and needs a particular environment to survive. Whether you abort 1 week in or 30 weeks in, you are terminating the life of the individual that would otherwise survive.
sunsetfear 1 month ago
@sunsetfear in my opinion as long as the zygote/embryo/fetus depends on a single person for its survival, the person carrying this zygote/emrbyo/fetus should be able to say if she wants to do it or not. If you were able to transfer these embryos/fetuses to another woman, or in some other way be able to keep it alive outside of the womb, I would be against abortion. But now it is not possible.
ittakesnogenius 1 month ago
@ittakesnogenius I understand your opinion, but I have to disagree. It's dependency doesn't take away from the fact that a completely unique human being has been created that is defined as a life by all reputable medical textbooks. Yes, it would be great if we could transfer, but that's the responsibility the woman takes when she decides to become sexually active; there is a chance that through her actions, a human being will originate. With choice comes consequences.
sunsetfear 1 month ago
@sunsetfear No, it's the responsibility of BOTH of the people having sex.
And you seem like you just want to punish the woman for having sex, rather than wanting the fetus to be born. Plus, just because you have sex doesn't mean you're ready for the responsibility to have sex. It's easy to have sex, it's hard to go through a pregnancy and be a parent. Just because someone can have sex, doesn't mean they can parent
ittakesnogenius 1 month ago
@ittakesnogenius Oh my apologies for the first point- didn't see I came across that way, I agree with you wholeheartedly. It is the responsibility of both.
I'm not punishing the woman for having sex, its a matter of responsibility You said it yourself, sex is easy, but parenting is not. With having sex, there is an inherent chance of a human life being created. There are many contraceptive options which are narrowing the chance of a human being created, but until the probability is zero (cont)
sunsetfear 1 month ago
@sunsetfear says: I'm not punishing the woman for having sex, its a matter of responsibility
~~~~~~~~~~~ Abortion is all about being responsible, too. It may be plan "b", but it serves the same purpose as birth control, which is saving unwanted babies from being born, right?
Sueezee1 1 week ago
@ittakesnogenius One must be cautious that their sexual activities may lead to very big consequences. Sexual activity is pleasurable and healthy, but with everything comes consequences for what you do. That's why the consequences of sexual activity should be stressed. If it happens, whether you intended or not, you have created life and now are responsible.
sunsetfear 1 month ago
@sunsetfear I'm speaking about young kids here, and peole with a slow mental development. Many people believe "it won't happen to them", plenty of people get shocked when they get pregnant on birth control. But just because there are consequences, doesn't mean you should have to live your whole life with them. Especially when it is such a small mistake.
ittakesnogenius 4 weeks ago
@ittakesnogenius I think you are a mistake your mother made the wrong decision not to abort you lmfao
davidnco1 4 weeks ago
@ittakesnogenius I think you are a mistake from the way you type to bad your mother did not give you a late term abortion .....lol sorry just my opinion
davidnco1 4 weeks ago
@davidnco1 yes, I was a "mistake", or accident depending on how you word it. But my mother wanted to have me, so she had me. And tell you what? I'm a *great* person, just because I support choice you wish me dead? You wanted me to be aborted? How pro-life is that? Wishing someone to be aborted is just as anti-choice, but the other way around: wanting to force someone to have an abortion.
*slow clap*
ittakesnogenius 3 weeks ago
@davidnco1
Oh, look, its the MEAN WIDDLE KID. Taking a break from the Helen Keller videos?
Hexl702 3 weeks ago
@sunsetfear says: One must be cautious that their sexual activities
~~~~~~~~~~~
Why? because YOU dont agree with abortion?
Sueezee1 1 week ago
@sunsetfear says: It's dependency doesn't take away from the fact that a completely unique human being has been created that is defined as a life by all reputable medical textbooks.
~~~~~~~~~~~~ This is ONLY about rights of people,the law, the 5th, 9th, 13th, & 14th Amend.,The Universal Dec. of Human Rights, The Supreme Court, social custom & necessity, Roe v. Wade & NO science
Sueezee1 1 week ago
@ittakesnogenius Now if a woman is raped or faces incest, then an abortion is completely understandable. However, reproduction entails a responsibility that through sex, an individual will be created and live on. A woman creates a human being when the sperm meets the egg, so she should be held accountable when she practices sex. That's the risk you take when you become sexually active.
sunsetfear 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@sunsetfear says; A woman creates a human being when the sperm meets the egg, so she should be held accountable when she practices sex.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Why cant you see abortion as being responsible and accountable? Isnt that odd?
Sueezee1 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ittakesnogenius Now if a woman is raped or faces incest, then an abortion is completely understandable. However, reproduction entails a responsibility that through sex, an individual will be created and live on. A woman creates a human being when the sperm meets the egg, so she should be held accountable when she practices sex. That's the risk you take when you become sexually active.
sunsetfear 1 month ago
wtf? this isnt even about abortion. this is just some atheist with his head up his ass bashing religion (especially the catholic churh) and saying a few comments on abortion here and there.
Asimo44 1 month ago
It's very nice to see a man speak out on the topic of abortion, a man that believes that women are able to make their own choices over their own bodies. Thank you for this video!!
ittakesnogenius 1 month ago
@ittakesnogenius
Yes, a lotta guys are with us in this fight. . Women should never say things like "men have no say in abortion"
Hexl702 1 month ago
@Hexl702 men aren't the ones going through pregnancy, birth or an abortion. I believe women who are nice should consider the man's opinion, but ultimately she's the one that has to chose because it is her body :) I know it seems unfair that you don't get to chose, but when you can get pregnant, you will be able to :)
ittakesnogenius 1 month ago
@ittakesnogenius ""men arent the ones going through w/ pregnancy""
Ive said it myself 34898489 times : ) ! A man cant split the pregnancy 50/50 with a woman.
But, men can certainly weigh in on whether it should be legal/ illegal. Men decided Roe and male politicians defend the right to choose, and regular guys everywhere can certainly agree.
Hexl702 3 weeks ago
@Hexl702 excatly. Men said "it's the woman's choice" by making that law. As long as a woman doesn't want to go through an abortion: she will have the baby. As long as the woman doesn't want to be pregnant: she has an abortion. Men can help decide when the woman isn't sure, or before conception. But ultimately it will always be in the woman's hands.
ittakesnogenius 3 weeks ago
No one speaks better on this issue than Ray Comfort. Watch his documentary "180"
JagCreed4 1 month ago
What makes an unborn baby not human?
lolzors93 1 month ago
@lolzors93 It's not a matter of not being human, it's a matter of what rights a fetus has. I don't believe a fetus young enough to be non-viable has a right to life.
Zaunstar 1 month ago
@Zaunstar So let me ask you this. If there was a 4 year old daughter that the mother did not want any longer could she kill her?
lolzors93 1 month ago
@lolzors93 Once you reach age 21, you have the right to drink. At 18, you can vote. At viability, you have the right to life, but NOT before then. Before then, I believe the woman has the choice. I understand that you disagree. There are reasonable people on both sides, but you do not get to impose YOUR decision on a woman.
Zaunstar 1 month ago
@Zaunstar So you believe that the baby is not able to sustain itself and that since it depends on others to live it is not a viable living being? So what about a premature baby that cannot live without an incubator? What about those who are dependent on insulin shots? What about coma victims? The mother should understand that if she is having sex, a pregnancy might occur. You cannot murder someone else for making your own mistakes. She should be mature enough to understand the consequences.
lolzors93 1 month ago
@lolzors93 Your arguments are complete garbage. I told you what I think of the rights of a fetus. Then you throw a million different what ifs that are not a fetus, and ask me if they should have the right to life. Yes to all of them. Either debate like an adult, or don't argue at all. You don't get to decide. You will probably never get to decide. It isn't your decision. It isn't mine either.
Zaunstar 1 month ago
@Zaunstar So the dependency level for a human is not the measuring tool for when you can murder it. Therefore, its viability is not the issue.
lolzors93 1 month ago
@lolzors93 Viability and dependency are not the same thing. A bedridden but perfectly mentally capable elderly person is dependent but viable. Once we pass a stage where we are viable, we then have a right to life. Sure there is sometimes a small gray area there, and that's OK. This is not nearly as complicated as you want it to be. There is no form of adult that it's OK to murder, so no need to bother with those arguments.
Zaunstar 1 month ago
@Zaunstar Viability means an organism can live and grow independently and successfully. Do not use viability as a reason because based on your own words and logic it is not. Your argument makes no sense! An elderly person on life support is the one and only true parallel for the abortion argument. And you just said that they have a right to life. I tell you this, selfishness and ungodliness are not good qualities to have. Repent! And fall in love with the only person who can give you true love!
lolzors93 1 month ago
@lolzors93 I already told you once you pass viability, it doesn't matter. I explained it to you twice. You either understand or you don't, and apparently you don't. You're just another Christian parroting the "party line". Learn to think for yourself.
Zaunstar 1 month ago
@Zaunstar The point I'm trying to make is that some people never pass viability. People who are diabetic cannot live independently. Therefore they are not viable ever!
lolzors93 1 month ago
@lolzors93 biological vs social independence is diffenet. A viable fetus, regardless if it needs social assistance such as medicine or surgery, is viable in that it can survive without living in the womb - i.e biologically independent. A 20 week fetus cannot survive outside of the womb even with assistance from doctors and nurses (social) dependence, but can survive inside a womb (biological dependence).
ittakesnogenius 1 month ago
@Zaunstar Oh, and I'm talking about people who are born diabetic! Just to make that clear
lolzors93 1 month ago
abortions are neccesary in some cases, but i dont think someone should be given a choice over someone's life. you could say " its only a fetus" but if you were to have an abortion, then you would keep that baby from being born alive. i would say that can be considered killing. are anti abortion atheists common?
A1pHACHARg3 1 month ago
@A1pHACHARg3 Not particularly common, no.
Zaunstar 1 month ago
@Zaunstar ah. what should be done in order to receive a promotion in this fine army of animals that are both crocodile, and duck?
A1pHACHARg3 1 month ago
@A1pHACHARg3 Just give some thought to the issues. No tithing required!
Zaunstar 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@A1pHACHARg3 says: but i dont think someone should be given a choice over someone's life.
~~~~~~~~~ That means you dont think women should have the choice to give birth?
Sueezee1 1 month ago
"Gentlemens relish" Too funny! Great vid and great points!
Einsteinian99 2 months ago in playlist Liked videos
abortion is worng what if your parents killed u if u ever got oneu are a muder
tarrance958 2 months ago
@tarrance958 My mother could have had an abortion. It would have been her right. I'm glad I was born, but I did not ask to be born, and I was not "owed" the right to be born.
Zaunstar 2 months ago 5
@Zaunstar I wish your mother gave you a partial birth abortion ...one less person in the world lol
davidnco1 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@tarrance958 says: hat if your parents killed
~~~~~~~~
OMG..if our parenst did that.................................WE WOLDNT BE HERE & WE WOULDNT GIVE A DAMN. Do you have ANY idea why? LOLOL
Sueezee1 1 month ago
@tarrance958 What is worng? I can't find that word in the dictionary. If my parents had an abortion, I would not have known to even care. If I got an abortion then I am a muder? Do you mean mother? Mother fucker maybe? Oh, murderer, you left out a few letters that matter there. Stupid people shouldn't have kids.
bedcatlucre 1 month ago
All the pro lifers are also not considering that children die on a daily basis all over the world from starvation, but since it doesn't occur here they see every new born as a sacred child of God. Those people who also say its not the woman's choice don't realize that women could easily just make it a dumpster baby or harm themselves physically due to emotional stress put on her by her christian fanatic friends and family.
Athenation2010 2 months ago 3
@Athenation2010 Ok, so you're saying that every mother would throw baby in the dumpster? As a Catholic, I believe that the developing baby, or the "fetus" is a person. It is a gift from God. What i don't believe in, is forcing the mother to keep the baby after its born, there is adoption in this world. Simply take the money that the gov't gives to the abortion clinics, and put it into adoption centers.
Godisgood2051 2 months ago
@Athenation2010 Why do you also have to say everything that's wrong in this world, is caused by Christians?
First, I believe that each person should only have sexual relations with one person in their life time, unless their called to another vocation or their spouse dies, then they can remarry.
Second, If people shared what they had and worked for a common good, like Christians teach, then there would be no starvation and no one would go without the necessities.
Godisgood2051 2 months ago
@Athenation2010 Now I will admit, that Christians and Catholics do deserve some blame due to the fact that we are human and we aren't perfect. We don't always share what we have, and sometimes people divorce and get remarried. But we don't deserve all of the blame as you put out. Besides, the Catholic Church is the biggest giver in the world, how can you criticize and call it our fault when we do all of this good?
Godisgood2051 2 months ago
@Godisgood2051 LOL
bedcatlucre 1 month ago
@Athenation2010 You make the assumption that if you're pro-life, then you must be a christian fanatic. I am not religious. I am pro-life. Your argument therefore doesn't hold any weight
sunsetfear 1 month ago
@Athenation2010 To bad you your mother did not give you a partial birth abortion . would have saved us tax payers money long live pro choice
davidnco1 4 weeks ago
People approach the abortion debate from the wrong direction. They start with a zygote, go forward, and ask "When does this zygote obtain human rights?" This will never work, as neither of them have common ground. However, most will agree that Zaunstar and I both have a right to life, so we have common ground. What we should do is start from a person and go backwards and ask, "When does this person lose his rights?"
david52875 2 months ago
@david52875 It is generally accepted that the person will never lose his rights, so the question becomes, when, going backwards in my development from person to zygote, did I cease to be a person? To answer this question, we do need to know the definition of person. The problem is, in the course of history, people have arbitrarily defined "personhood" in ways that oppress others.
david52875 2 months ago
@david52875 In Dread Scott vs Stanford, the Supreme court ruled that blacks were "creatures of Inferior order", that they "had no rights a white man ought to respect." They justified this by creating an arbitrary, subjective definition of "person." It is obvious to us that this was wrong, however, it would be just as fruitless arguing with the Supreme court as a proabortionist who says a fetus is not a "person" according to their arbitrary definition of "person".
david52875 2 months ago
@david52875 So my argument is as follows:
a. I have a right to life
b. if there is no objective (OBJECTIVE!) deference between me and a fetus that would result in it losing its rights, then a fetus has a right to life.
c. there is no objective, non-arbitrary difference between me and a fetus that would result in a fetus losing rights.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
d. therefore, a fetus has a right to life.
david52875 2 months ago
@david52875 You haven't even made the slightest effort at showing point B to be correct. You simply defined it as objectively true. Same with C. You'll need to do a lot better than that.
Zaunstar 2 months ago
@Zaunstar It is self evidently true. Say there are two people who's only difference between each other is their hair color. We both agree that one person has rights. It is plainly obvious that, unless their status as a person somehow depends on hair color, then it follows that they have the same rights.
david52875 2 months ago
@david52875 I tell you that you can't just define it as objectively true and then you tell me it's self-evidently true? *sigh*
Hair color is not state of development. A 13 year old can't drink legally, no matter their hair color. Age can and does determine rights, if you want to think of "minus several months" as an age, which I do not.
Zaunstar 2 months ago
@Zaunstar So you deny the statement:
"If I have rights now, and I didn't have rights when I was a fetus, then there is a difference between me now, and me then, that would warrant the denial of my rights?"
Because this is a self evidently true statement.
david52875 2 months ago
@Zaunstar It does not matter that hair color is not a state of development, I'm saying that if a person has a right at time t1, and does not have a time at t0, then something about the person must have changed that relates to rights. I'm not talking about age, the reason our age starts at birth is arbitrary and mostly for convenience. I'm talking about going from a fully developed human, back to the fetus.
david52875 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@david52875 Sorry, i made a typo. what I meant was "I'm saying that if a person has a right to life at time t1, and does not have a right to life at time t0, then something about the person must have changed that relates to rights. "
david52875 2 months ago
@Zaunstar My point was that, if you go back through my existence and say "at this point, you ceased to be a person and had no rights before it", then you need to provide an objective reason as to why I lost my rights at this point, and it cannot be based on an arbitrary definition of person, or your subjective moral values.
david52875 2 months ago
@Zaunstar but now that I think about it, I could have better phrased my argument like this:
a. If I lose my rights at the point going backwards in my life when, say, my heart stops beating, then there is an objective difference between me then, and me now, that somehow relates to who possess rights.
b. Unless it can proven that this objective difference exists, then legally, I had the same rights as a fetus as I do now.
c. I have a right to life now
david52875 2 months ago
@david52875 d. therefore, unless you can objectively prove this difference exists, i had a right to life when I was a fetus.
david52875 2 months ago
It depends on what you consider a human. Something that cannot think, move, feel pain, or see. I do not think that is a human. If I am ever in a hospital bed, not able to think or use any one of my senses, kill me. I would have nothing to live for. I would not even be human anymore.
mrvideogamevideos 2 months ago
@suburbiasurvivor: I, like you, don't like abortion at all. But in the crazy world we live in I would hate to tell that gang rape survivor, or that 9 year old pregnant girl that she MUST have the baby. I dont think the two wrongs make it right, but I understand the emotion or perspective of someone in an extreme situation, and I believe that in those cases, depending on the situation, abortion may be considered, especially if it is the first few weeks of pregnancy. Just my thoughts...
1garrison1845 3 months ago
Finally a somewhat intelligent discusison about the topic. I am very pro life. I understand the need for abortion in today's society but I don't think its right. I think abortions should be left for extreme circumstances such as rape, child molestations, or the very rare cases where it is a life or death health concern for the mom. At the very least, they should be limited to the first weeks after conception, not at 20 weeks, which is half way through the pregnancy.
1garrison1845 3 months ago
@1garrison1845 I personally disagree. I am Pro-Life and even in the case of rape, I don't believe two wrongs make a right. Also, Child Molestation very rarely results in a pregnancy since children have generally not yet gone through puberty. I believe that all human beings deserve the rights that come with being legally recognized as a person by the government. And by definition a zygotes, embryos, and fetuses are human beings only at early stages of development.
SuburbiaSurvivor 3 months ago
ok, well obviously you agree with the murder of babies and don't want to change so I'll just leave that between you and God.
Godisgood2051 3 months ago
@Godisgood2051 I'm not sure how many times I need to explain to you that a fetus is not considered the same as a baby, both by law and by those that support abortion rights. Apparently once more I have to explain this. This is why the issue is so "sticky".
Zaunstar 3 months ago
@Zaunstar yes, but that "clump of cells" has human genes just like you and me, so saying the developing baby is not a human is saying that we aren't human.
Plus, women, if you don't want the baby CLOSE YOUR LEGS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Don't kill the baby just because you don't want it. There are plenty of people who cannot have children and will adopt.
Godisgood2051 3 months ago
@Godisgood2051 That's a moronic position to take. I know women personally that were married and already had kids, but had an abortion because they did not want another. That "close your legs" line would be pretty insulting to most women, even ones that might otherwise agree with you on the issue.
Zaunstar 3 months ago
@Zaunstar Well, if you don't want to take the chance of getting pregnant, then don't have the sex. There is no "safe sex". When ever you have sexual intercourse, you are taking your chances.
And, in what I believe and you won't agree, a child is a gift from God Himself, and if you have an abortion, that is taking that gift and pretty much shoving it back into His face.
Plus, why did you avoid my human gene fact? Can you not counter it?
Godisgood2051 3 months ago
@Godisgood2051 So you say, but of course what if a woman is raped? Well, tough luck for her then, right? Oh boy, well the whole god thing is something else we disagree on. If you think there is a big daddy in the sky that is doing all this, then go ahead and let him stop it then. Sure, there are human genes there. That still does not help with the "rights" issue.
Zaunstar 3 months ago
@Zaunstar God does everything for a reason. He won't put you through anything He knows you aren't strong enough to take. So your point is invalid. If its His will, then let it be done.
I do feel bad for the women, but abortion is not the answer.
This is how it was back in the 40's. When they had an issue, they bit the bullet and ran with it. We don't call them the greatest generation of Americans for nothing.
These days we are lazy, when we have a trouble, we try to find ways around it. Its sad
Godisgood2051 3 months ago
@Godisgood2051 if god is all powerful than every abortion that occurs is his will.
greycloud24 3 months ago
@greycloud24 Sorry, but God does not agree with killing babies. He gives the baby as a gift and people decide to kill it. That is their sad decision, not God's.
Godisgood2051 3 months ago
@Godisgood2051 if the baby is a gift than so is the abortion. you see a sperm must meet up with an oocyte to cause pregnancy. this is an act of people not god. but if it is an act of god, than so is everything else the people do. you can't have it both ways. you can't say that the actions of people are gods fault, but the actions of people are not gods fault. you can't say that natural laws are gods fault, but natural laws are not gods fault. if pregnancy is a gift from god, than so is abortion.
greycloud24 3 months ago
@greycloud24 God gave us the gift of sex, but only married couples should carry it out. God gave us the gift of knowledge, but we as human beings often abuse that gift with abortion and contraception. As I said, since a baby is a gift, abortion and contraception pretty much shove that gift back into His face. You can think of it as alcohol, some is good, but too much is bad.
Besides, abortion is the taking of a human life, so it disrespects life in general, and disrespects God.
Godisgood2051 3 months ago
@Godisgood2051 ok, that is fine. lets assume for a second that abortion is a complete disrespect for your god. but not everyone worships that god, and those that don't believe in that god are not doing anything wrong in their own mind. because we have the first amendment in america, it should still be legal to disrespect any given god in pursuit of following another god (or no god). if your god is the right god, than the people will pay for their sins after they have died.
greycloud24 3 months ago
@greycloud24 May i ask you what that thing in the mother?
I already know all the scientific terms for it. Just explain what it is to me.
Godisgood2051 3 months ago
@Godisgood2051 its a bundle of cells that will eventually replicate and differentiate into a proto-human that will become a human being upon birth (and thus the celebration of birthdays, the filing of birth certificates and the citizenship of place of birth). but depending on what phase of development it is in, it is either a proto-human (viable to survive outside the womb but not yet born) or it is a bundle of cells developing into a proto-human.
greycloud24 3 months ago
@greycloud24 But aren't those human cells, just like you and I?
A baby is developed, not put together. remember that.
They are not put together piece by piece.
Embryology books teach that from conception, that "clump of cells" is a full, and complete human.
Their like an old camera. You take the picture and wait for it to develop. Just because you can't see the picture yet, doesn't mean its not there. It just hasn't showed up yet.
Godisgood2051 3 months ago
@Godisgood2051 that clump of cells is not a human, if it were than we could remove it, place it on a chair give it some milk and it would be fine. life is not a black and white thing, and nothing about life is black and white. is a caterpillar a butterfly? what about when it is in a cocoon? we like to label things, but our definitions are black and white, while life itself is not. part of the definition of being human is person hood, and we grant this at birth.
greycloud24 3 months ago
@greycloud24 So what you are saying is that life has to be independent.
Why don't we kill babies because they rely on their mothers?
We don't kill them, so why would kill the baby in the mother?
So if its not life. Then what is it?
Godisgood2051 3 months ago
@greycloud24 So also, your saying that an object travels 8 inches and becomes life. That makes sense how?
When you walk out of a building, you are still the same person as you were on the inside. What changed?
Your location, you didn't change.
Does that mean that we can kill you just because you are in the building? of course not.
Same with the baby, Its still the same human on the inside as it is on the outside. Its location change, but the baby didn't.
Why are we killing human beings?
Godisgood2051 3 months ago
@Godisgood2051 life does not start at conception. it takes a living human sperm and a living human oocyte (both human cells) to create a human embryo (a different living cell). life starts long before conception, and if either parent is dead than they will not create the living oocyte or sperm. life is a cycle, with no true beginning. the question shouldn't be "why are we killing human beings", the real question is "why do we have unwanted pregnancies"? we should address the real issue.
greycloud24 3 months ago
@greycloud24 Good, you realized that it is life, and that it should be protected.
And true, the second question is the real issue.
Godisgood2051 3 months ago
@Zaunstar You are calling me a moron?
Type in "Abortion - this is a suction abortion" in the search box
Watch this video, its horrifying. This is only at 12 weeks.
THE HEART IS BEATING!!!!
Now explain to me how this is a clump of cells.
Now explain to me how this is not life.
Now explain to me how this is not human.
And explain to me how this is not murder.
and you support this?
now tell me who's the moron...
Godisgood2051 3 months ago
may i ask, how do you justify abortion? How do you justify killing a human life?
Godisgood2051 3 months ago
@Godisgood2051 There is a point in development where there is a right to life. Many people do not believe conception is it. You do. It's a very basic difference, that perfectly good people disagree on, and so it will likely continue to be the choice of the woman in most of the developed world, as I believe it should be.
Zaunstar 3 months ago
Mental side effects stated on the same site:
Studies within the first few weeks after the abortion have found that between 40 and 60 percent of women questioned report negative reactions. Within 8 weeks after their abortions, 55% expressed guilt, 44% complained of nervous disorders, 36% had experienced sleep disturbances, 31% had regrets about their decision, and 11% had been prescribed psychotropic medicine by their family doctor.
Godisgood2051 3 months ago
@Godisgood2051 I wonder if they bothered to do a study on the effects of unplanned pregnancies that they did plan on bringing to term. I dout it, somehow. Nobody said abortion was easy or consequence-free for the woman making the decision, but neither is pregnancy or having a baby early in life and dramatically altering the course of their lives, not necessarily for the better.
Zaunstar 3 months ago
w w w.abortionfacts. com /literature/literature_928YC.asp
type this into the address, I had to space a few things so I could get the address on here, the health risks may surprise you. This site is NOT biased, it gives both pro-life and pro-choice arguments so you can't say its slanted.
Godisgood2051 3 months ago