Heroic Robb's Real Argument Against Pro-Life on Abortion

[tncdel]

The title of this video is a complete oxymoron. For it is impossible that anyone could be a hero who advocates the brutal mass-murders of innocent unborn babies. Such a person is a VILLAIN to be despised, not a hero.

[AZAP28]

The beauty of choice is that we all have it. You choose your path, I choose mine. Don't impose your beliefs on me, and I won't on you. Talking, explaining, educating is one thing. Badgering, fighting, trying to prove the other wrong when there is a difference of opinion is another. Abortion is a debate that will always exist. One belief is not better than the other. Realistically they both have good points, but that's why it should be left to the pregnant woman to choose.

[tncdel]

@AZAP28, "Choice" is a pro-abortion euphemism for MURDER. To say one is "pro-choice" is the same as "pro-abortion." In fact ALL murderers are "pro-choice." Not just murderers of unborn babies. If someone robs you and shoots you dead with a gun, he made a "choice" to kill you. Therefore: "pro-choice."

[AZAP28]

@tncdel CHOICE is about having the right to choose... that can mean CHOOSING to keep your pregnancy, CHOOSING to give your child up for adoption once it's born or, yes, CHOOSING abortion. I am for having the choice. Not having someone to choose for me. Imagine being forced to have an abortion against your desires. How awful that would be, it's not right! Now why should a woman be forced to keep a pregnancy? It's awful being forced either way. Hence: the beauty of choice!

[tncdel]

@AZAP28, ALL murderers are "pro-choice." If a robber sticks you up and shoots you dead, he made a "choice" to kill you too. But NO ONE has the right morally to take human life except in self-defense or in defense of others. Don't confuse what's legal with what's moral. For it was once legal to kill any man, woman or child ... as long as they were black slaves.

Morally, a woman has a right to make the "choice" only to kill herself, not someone else.

[AZAP28]

@tncdel You don't even know what being "PRO-CHOICE" is?? It's advocating the right to choose what to do in reference to a pregnancy. Holding the right to choose which avenue to take after finding out you're pregnant. Whether that 'choice' is pregnancy, termination or adoption.

But I suppose what you really want to hear is that YOU are right & I am wrong. Hmm, yeah... not so much.

[tncdel]

@AZAP28, it's not me who doesn't know. Apparently it's YOU. "Choice" is a euphemism for murder. The Nazis called murder "cleansing." Cleansing. Choice. Same thing, different holocausts.

How about "which avenue to take" after giving birth. If a woman makes a "choice" to kill her kid 2 years old, it is still a "choice." In fact if a robber sticks you up and shoots you dead, he is "pro-choice" too. For all murderers make a "choice."

[AZAP28]

@tncdel There's a huge difference in terminating a pregnancy before 12wks gestation when it has only begun development of what will potentially be a human being, vs ending the life of a child who has completed the development, been BORN, lives outside the womb, breathing on it's own, learning, functioning separate from it's mother. You're an idiot to say it's the same thing. Can that 6, 8 or 12wk fetus survive outside the womb? No. Why? Because it's not human, it's not formed.

[tncdel]

@AZAP28, I had intended to close this out with you, but saw after my last post this nonsense you posted. So pardon me for chomping down on it like a Rottweiler does a juicy steak. :)~ Please tell me you were just joking when you said, "it's not human." I'd certainly hate to think you were that incredibly stupid. Like it came from a pig or a grasshopper? What else could the offspring of humans be ... other than also human? DUH!

And how could a 2 year old survive BY ITSELF "outside the womb?"

[AZAP28]

@tncdel You can't deny there's a difference between a 12wk old fetus (or younger) and a full term baby or as mentioned one already born and separate from it's mother who has taken it's first breath of life. Yes, a 2yr old requires help to survive but it doesn't have to rely on the mother alone.

[tncdel]

@AZAP28, if not it's mother, a 2 year old surely isn't viable on its own. What you are quibbling about mainly is trying to come up with excuses to rationalize taking HUMAN LIFE. All I'm saying is that, from conception to death by old age, human life is going through its developmental stages that we have arbitrarily assigned to label it differently. But it's still human life. And we should accord EQUAL RESPECT to all human life, since we all passed through that same first 9 months.

[AZAP28]

@tncdel Clearly choice goes beyond the abortion debate, but we're talking about being pro choice where abortion is concerned, what to do with a pregnancy. Let's not get off topic with talking about a robber who chooses to kill. If that's what you wanna talk about then you are prochoice to, when you CHOOSE to do anything at all. But we're talking about pregnancy & having the right to choose what to do with that pregnancy.

[tncdel]

@AZAP28, I was entirely ON POINT. Not wandering off the topic, which I expanded to include ALL murders, not just those murdered after being born.

YOU are the one wandering. We're not talking about "pregnancy," per se. At least not in the sense of a woman's responsibility to safeguard her unborn baby AFTER she made a choice to become pregnant, either deliberately or carelessly or recklessly [nonetheless THAT was her choice]. If rape, murdering an innocent baby for it isn't morally justifiable.

[AZAP28]

@tncdel It would be wonderful if things were as cut & dry as you make it seem. Abortion happens for many reasons & your opinion is not going to stop it. I don't think there's anything wrong with trying to help someone choose a different path other than abortion, but not by comparing her to Hitler, calling her a murderer or the way you come across. If you're going to advocate life, do it with class & help the women who feel helpless, hopeless & afraid.

[tncdel]

@AZAP28, you need to stop confusing "theory" and idealistic values with real-world application. By the same token that even though criminal law bans all other types of murders, those laws won't stop murders. People will always break laws. But the fact that it's a crime to murder someone is simply a deterrent, adding one more thing in the mix to POSSIBLY stop a potential murderer from going ahead with the murder. Same too if we pass a law banning abortion. Of course there will still be abortions.

[tncdel]

P.S.

It's also NOT about "what to do with a pregnancy." It's about what NOT to do TO the baby. The woman's right to choose should extend only to her own life, not someone else's. If you are impervious to logical argument, let's just call an end to this back-and-forth banter right now. I've got more meaningful things to do with my time. Hopefully a seed of moral responsibility has germinated in your brain from our discourse, but I won't hold my breath, since it seems like you lack the ability.

[AZAP28]

@tncdel Again, your belief, your opinion. Doesn't make it right & everyone else wrong. You are entitled to yours & other's are entitled to theirs. But ppl like you refuse to allow it. Who the hell are you to put that on anyone else? I don't think by any means abortion is the ANSWER, but I don't think that you or I have the right to choose that for anyone else but the person in the position to choose.

Belief & opinion do NOT give you the right to decide anything for anyone other than yourself.

[tncdel]

@AZAP28, BINGO! Without realizing it you argued exactly the point I was making; namely: that NO ONE has the right to decide anything for anyone other than herself. NOT her unborn baby. Well put! :)

[AZAP28]

@tncdel The embryo/fetus cannot make any decisions so it's up to the woman to decide for it. What I was referring to was that you can't decide what I will do, and I can't decide what you will do. & neither of us have the right to say the other is wrong for what we choose to do.

There IS a difference as the pregnancy progresses... but in the early stages of development, it's not 'alive' the way you & I are. We are functioning human beings, an embryo/fetus isn't even formed to function yet.

[tncdel]

@AZAP28, in the same way as a court appoints a guardian to serve the best interests of a young child abused by a parent, so too one should be appointed who will protect the unborn baby from a homicidal female parent. You're just trying to find excuses to rationalize and justify something that cannot morally be rationalized or justified. Bottomline: Labels notwithstanding, it is HUMAN LIFE. Not from a cat or dog, but the offspring of HUMANS. And it deserves respect as such, regardless of stage.

[AZAP28]

@tncdel I don't agree with you... not in the first trimester. And you don't have to agree with me either. You have made your points & I have made mine, I don't feel yours are right OR wrong, I just don't agree with it. You can say what you want, it doesn't change my mind, just like I'm not changing yours. That's the beauty of choice & personal opinion. But you will most likely have something to say to suggest that's wrong. Anyway...

[tncdel]

@AZAP28, let's call it a draw and leave it there.

[AZAP28]

@tncdel Oh & someone as judgmental as you I would think would be against adoption too? Do you consider that to be abandoning your child? And if not, why not? As for your stupid reference to the Holocaust, it's horse shit. You cannot compare lives that have been lived & people who have taken the breath of life to an embryo that could never ever survive outside the womb b/c it hasn't developed into a 'human' and isn't capable of breathing etc. Anyway, your opinion is yours & mine is mine. Period.

[tncdel]

@AZAP28, you're quite talented at making unfounded assumptions, aren't you? Typical, "If A equals B, then A equals C too" type [ILL] logic. Sorry, but I'll let you figure out what I meant by that. If I have to explain it to you, that's like having to explain a joke to someone with no sense of humor.

[taffygirlgood]

I know I said I wouldnt reply but BWAhahahaha!!!! FAT BLOND! LMAO!

Im not blond retard......Im a fat redhead... & I'de rather be 700 lbs & unable to wipe my ass, than to be a baby killer..... Im fat...I can lose weight... Your stupid & immoral. That for you, is forever. Hahaha.....

[blizzard7006]

actually no. I seem pretty smarter tahn you because i dino't have to stoop to insults to maintain a a conversation. But i have no choice because not much is expected from a fat red ass red head. I'm more moral than you'd ever be. Total libertarian here. You're against women who want legislation over their body, and probably anyone else. So blonde red head who cares, you're fat,stupid, and immature.." hahaahahahah" Dumbass.

[taffygirlgood]

Thats the best you could come up with after 2 months? Pathetic. Why dont you go think on it for 6 months & maybe your retarded insults will be coherent & spelled correctly...... But I wont hold my breath.

[blizzard7006]

....why do you need to hold your breath..you look like your full of hot air anyways. Seriously I'm so over your crap that you spew. From the start you want nothing but trouble and shit. And it's pretty easy to attack ones spelling when they don't got nothing to say any more. Yea I'm the pathetic one alright. As if.

[taffygirlgood]

I do blv I also said something about it not being coherent.... "when they dont got nothing to say".... Yes the mark of intelligence there. & Just what am I "spewing?" I havent spoken with you in 2 months. Sorry dipshit, but you are the one TRYING to start something here...... Now, like I said, go back & think on it for a few more months & it MIGHT be coherent & spelled correctly. Because right now its a big fail.

[blizzard7006]

sorry meant to say YOU don't got nothing important to say. You call people" sick bitch." Suddenly you want to feel all intelligent now when they stoop to your level. Attacking syntax while not even putting proper apostrophes and commas where they should belong. I don't see anything coherent coming from your fat dumbass or how spelling holds signifcant baring on intelligence. I don't need months to finish this. I've wasted my time with you long enough, with the name calling and insults. (cont)

[blizzard7006]

this conversation came to an end a while back anyways. I don't even want to continue a conversation with someone who looks like they barely can maintain the human form. BYE.

[ashatbulaparanormal]

@taffygirlgood Lady, before you start calling people names,you may want to re-validated what your talking about.Adoption Agencies sell Children and adoptive parents buy them simple as that.This is no better then abortion,but you support adoption,therefor you support of selling humans.the only thing adoptive parents should have to pay is court cost,lawyer fee and paper filing,that is less then a $1,000.00,not $40,000.00 and up.

[ashatbulaparanormal]

Adoption Agencies make a profit of $35,000.00 or more off these children.The United States has a high demand for babies,but adoptive parents can't afford their rates,this is why most seek other countries for babies,its cheaper,with no waiting or hassles.Adoption Agencies don't want women to abort,use birth control or keep their babies,this is why they brain wash, badger and yes even trick women into giving them up,not for the child sake,but for the sake of making a profit off these infants.

[taffygirlgood]

@ashatbulaparanormal ... I agree that adoption costs are way out of line, but to say that adoption is the same as abortion? Yeah...Lets see. The cost of adoption is just too high, so I think I'll give my unborn an 18 hr bath in saline solution (burn her till she dies) Or I guess I cld have her ripped limb from limb & have her head crushed...Because we all know that a torturous & horrific death is the same as having a LIFE with people who can AFFORD the adoption cost. Fucking moron.

[ashatbulaparanormal]

@taffygirlgood Lady, I never compared,nor did I say the two are the same,so your the moron.I said adoption is no better then abortion,fucking learn how to read. Adoption is nothing more then babies marketing brokers and will do what ever it to get these infants.Birth mothers don't see a dime off their children,adoption agencies do.Selling children is slavery and adoption Agencies sells children,adoptive parents buy them and you support buying and selling of infants

[taffygirlgood]

@ashatbulaparanormal "This is no better than abortion"....So in point of fact you are putting the mutilation & death of defenseless human being in the same category as an expensive adoption. You then go on to make an even MORE moronic statment by saying these adopted children are SLAVES. You ARE a moron, you will say anything to defend the slaughter of children no matter how ridiculous it is. I love a good debate, but there is no point in arguing with a retard...Bye!

[ashatbulaparanormal]

@taffygirlgood Gee,look who calling the kettle black.You can't even have an adult debate without playground name calling.I agree debating with school children is not worth my time or effort.

[ashatbulaparanormal]

@taffygirlgood Now I see why you support adoption Agencies and the selling of infants.Now which of you is going to badger that woman into giving up her baby,you or them.I'm guessing you are,your so good at making people feel like their worthless and your so superior then the rest of us.I also see you hate Obama as well,now I know why.Miss those days when you can buy a good black man or woman,don't you? -continue-

[ashatbulaparanormal]

You have your own kids,leave other woman's children alone.If you wanted more kids,then maybe you and your husband shouldn't have gotten yourselves fixed.Now you want to steal other woman's kids.Now I see why your so against woman having a right to choose,this way you can verity of babies to pick from.You human buyer.Adoption Agencies sells children and you want to buy a child.You are one sick puppy! hey folks I'm against abortion,but I'm all for selling babies to the highest bidder!

[taffygirlgood]

it is not "natural" for a woman to kill or want to kill her child. The simple fact is only 1% of abortions are Rape/incest..yeah lumped together..& only 6% are for health reasons, that means 93% of these abortions are for social reasons...in 2008 47% of abortions were by woman who had at least one other that year...abortion isnt the ONLY option, stop acting as tho we are taking away the only choice women have.

[blizzard7006]

@taffygirlgood. Yea abortion isn't the only option. Theres giving your child up for adoption or raising it yourself. But be real, once you give birth to a new born infant you develop a conncetion between the baby. So how can you just give it up, why would you want to. But that is of course after conception, abortion is the most responsible decision after conception. Adoption is second.

[taffygirlgood]

Yes there is a connection, yes you moore than likely will love your child..yes you will feel pain & loss if you give your child up. So to avoid all of your potential pain...you KILL your child. Its ripped apart by suction, or sliced apart by a sharp curved knife...or its manual pulled apart one limb at a time, with plyer like tools, spine snapped...head crushed...OR its burned alive with saline salution & takes 18-24hrs to die......cont

[blizzard7006]

two it isn't a child until it is considered a person and teh fetus has established personhood. So you can't kill things or masses of tissue you can only kill people. Fetuses aren't people until they have established the neo cortex, otherwise feeling sorry for a 1st trimester fetus is the moral equivalent for feeling sorry for a plant or skin cells.

[taffygirlgood]

humane??? So its humane to tear a child LIMB FROM LIMB? Or torture him for 18-24 hours being burned alive? & I hate to inform you BUT...by 6wks they have arms & legs & MOVE on their own...by 12 wks they FEEL pain & brain waves can be messured.... by 5 months the child is starting to remember, learn & THINK! To say that being burned alive or dismembered is humane...is just sick. Keep lying to yourself.

[blizzard7006]

1) need for attacks on a debate that is uncivliiezed and leads nowhere. 2) you might want to take another look at a biology book or some medical credentials. The neo cortex is established by 22-24 weeks which is the defining line for pain. They aren't even aware of conciousness or existence and pain receptors aren't devloped yet. The 1st trimester abortion is being responsible and humane dealing on what you said about being dismembered etc.3) I don't lie to anybody especially not myself.

[taffygirlgood]

Stating that tearing a child limb from limb or burning them alive ...saying this is sick, is an attack??? & YOU might want to put the book down & read the latest info. But pain or no pain aside. These are children..the fact remains that YOU would be willing to do this to your OWN child, rather than give that child a life with a family who wld love him...That you would put your child thru that, to spare YOURSELF the pain of adoption....MAKES YOU SICK!

[blizzard7006]

oh my goodness. Calm down. "MAKES YOU SICK! " is a savage attack and shows you're incapable of having a civlized conversation among the decent."Keep lying to yourself" is another ad-hominem attack. If you can't dwbate w/o insults then there is no longer need to enlighten you on a topic. Children are ppl, get in touch with terminology. Babies have established personhood. You're applying your moral opinions which aren't facts out of nowhere. "I would be willing to tear a child limb from limb"

[taffygirlgood]

HOLY SHIT!!! Did you just call yourself DECENT????? You who speaks of tearing the limbs off, snapping the spine & crushing the head of a child? Did you really just call yourself DECENT??? Yeah, your a head case. I wont reply.

[blizzard7006]

tehre you go I'm not interested on soemone who presents no facs and sticks to insults. i'm not going to lower my standards to raise yours.

[blizzard7006]

funny how you present yourself and call me a head case. You don't matter, don't reply i don't care you brought no facts or credentials and points fingers. You're a very fat blonde by the way. How's that for an attack.

[blizzard7006]

If i want 2 have a baby i would simply keep it. people don't get pregnant just 2 get an abortion. If i don't want a baby not my choice it's my ladies. W/e decision she makes I'm by her & i won't force my views on her or force her 2 keep something she doesn't feel prepared for emotional and financial wise. if we have a child there is no way in hell we r giving it up for adoption. Those have unimaginable emotional consequences, abortion doesn't. Just aftermath of savage attacks from 3rd person

[taffygirlgood]

Whats more twisted is you speak of choosing death over life & say that its humane...humane for whom? In what world do you live in, where death is more humane than life...you speak as if the subject were a sick dog. The fact is...its humane for YOU...So that YOU wldnt have to give your child to someone else. & just how sick is it...that its more warm & fuzzy for you to kill your own child...than let it live.... Here is an attack...SICK BITCH!

[taffygirlgood]

Tell me....how wld you like to take an 18 hour bath in battery acid?....If obama has his way...Partial birth abortion will be back...7-9 mo baby..DOC induces early labor...delivers baby feet 1st, leaving head in the vagina. Takes scissors & punches whole in the base of the skull, widens the whole..then incerts a suction tube & suctions babys brains until death..THEN delivers the dead child....yes that is soooo much better. torture an infant to death, instead of YOU feeling any pain or loss. YEAH

[blizzard7006]

well tahts terrbile part on the PBA part. But other abortions are actually humane.

[angelshoulders]

Pro-life Americans should vigorously oppose any federal health care reform legislation that does not explicitly exclude abortion from the scope of any government-defined or government-mandated package of health care services.Go to National Right to Life and with just a click you can let your senators and congressmen know how you feel. They represent US and then forward the form to everyone you know. We can turn this thing around. UNITE!

[stfuyouall]

bravo! =)

[CinnaBear21]

Great video. I'm pro-choice and this makes more sense than the way pro-lifers think. =3

[heroikrobb]

Thanks, please watch my other vids to get a better understanding.

[FoxmanPhD]

Would you say that a Fetus in the 9th Month of pregnency isn't human? If so, why? Also, if the government can't tell us what to do with our bodies, then do you support the full legalization of all drugs, prostitution, suicide, and selling of organs for profit? If one of you friends was about to commit suicide, do you believe the police should stop him/her?

[AcolyteoftheMonster]

The Fetus is human; whether or not it's a life is another matter. I support the full legalization of drugs, prostitution, and the selling of organs for profit. Suicide is another matter, as it gives me pause as to whether or not the person is not denying his own rights due to a measure of insanity. I won't say make it illegal and the government should discourage suicide, however I won't advocate locking botched suicides up.

[Headhunter004]

Sorry, no, it's not a human, it lacks all the sensory systems and functions and numerous parts of the human organ system in order to be called a human. If anything, it's the opposite of what you said: it's a life, not a human. NOTE: just because it's a life doesn't make it human.

[phyco18]

So i was a unicorn fetus? No, i was a human before i was born. If some one is missing an organ or a limb does that make them any less of a human?

Ok. so several points on the video.

1. What right is it to kill your own baby? How in hell does killing an unborn baby fall under human nature? Human nature is to love and nurture your child, or at least used to be.

2- If someone gets raped, and by chance gets pregnant, does the possible child become any less of a child.

[heroikrobb]

You forget that creation of a human is not spontaneous as you view it. Killing an unborn 'baby' is different than killing a newborn baby because of physiological reasons. You can't claim that an unborn 'baby' is human until it is born because you're missing the developmental stage of the formation of an organism vs. growth of the organism.

As for rape, there are many forces against the mother such as an adoptive couple who wants to raise the child, when they probably hired the rapist in a way

[phyco18]

Well don't our teeth form later in life? Does that make us not human until after those things are are fully formed?

Are you saying couples that are seeking a child to adopt set a rape hit on a certain girl?

[heroikrobb]

You do not understand about rape at all. A rapist will attack any girl. A couple is willing to raise a baby from anybody, including out of rape. It is unfortunate you support this act. It is not based on one certain girl, but any girl, just like how the rapist commits an act. As for teeth, this is merely convenience more than a necessity for an organism because babies do not use teeth to eat. You don't understand enough about human physiology about what body parts are really need to live.

[phyco18]

i thought you were saying that the couples hired a rapist to get a girl pregnant. I do understand rape.

So what if someone misdevelops or is born without a stomach or bladder or kidneys?

[Headhunter004]

1) No, the complete and total lack of capacity for life makes one not a human person by nature and logic, which an embryo/fetus is COMPLETELY incapable of prior to 24 weeks.

2) First of all, a non-viable clump of non-sentient cells is NOT a "baby", and secondly, a woman is NOT under ANY obligation to carry, let alone raise a child contrary to popular "pro-life" belief.

3) The nature of the fetus is irrelevant, the only thing that matters is that it has NO right to use her body against her will.

[phyco18]

1- are you saying that the growing and developing human cells are actually dead?

2-i'm pretty sure nature dictates a mother carry the child in the majority of species, including humans.

3- So should we change the way we reproduce? and how is the nature of fetuses irrelevent?

[heroikrobb]

I think that what pro-life relies heavily on is the medical advancements and the reliances of these for humans who are being born. Take away these things for just a minute and see who true humans are. If a newborn cannot survive outside the womb, it is premature and is unworthy to live life because that is the REAL way life works.

[phyco18]

So there is someone on life support, you take away the life support and they will die. they are unable to sustain life with out the aid of another

[heroikrobb]

That is a different situation because we are dealing with someone who lived on their own body systems to live independently in contrast to an unborn offspring.

[phyco18]

but they can no longer live independently, whereas an unborn baby is developing the necessities to.

[heroikrobb]

But the fact is that the independent person needs a machine that is not necessary for ordinary survival. In a way, it is trying to cheat natural death.

And I am starting to see that pro-lifers are nothing more than humanists. They care about every human person no matter what. And Catholics have strayed away from God to this human nature and have forgotten moral codes of conduct. Because there is such an organization of caring for humans, they forgot God and have looked at materialistic values

[phyco18]

What circumstances should a human not be cared about?

[heroikrobb]

When we realize what we are doing to a rape victim. Also extremely violent people who care to only raise hell on this earth and are viewed as getting away with whatever acts they committed without getting punished accordingly. And also the fact that if someone kills another person and that person wanted their rights upheld and preserved. It is injustice if we do not serve people the right away and the majority of society agrees with it and it is permissable.

[phyco18]

"And also the fact that if someone kills another person and that person wanted their rights upheld and preserved."

I'm a little confused by your point here.

"it is injustice if we do not serve people the right away and the majority of society agrees with it and it is permissable."

So how are we serving the unborn child justly?

[heroikrobb]

If a person was concerned of being killed and wanted true justice if it happened, the killer would be given the death penalty, no exceptions.

It depends on the reality and logic of a situation. Because the unborn haven't experienced life outside the womb and met with other unborns, they have no outside world experience and medical technology can't measure interaction between the two.

When it comes to rape, the vast majority will choose abortion because it's moral to force pregnancy.

[phyco18]

1% person of all abortions are preformed on victims of rape,incest, etc.

(on your last paragraph do you mean immoral?)

[heroikrobb]

Sorry, yes it is immoral. Pro-life fails to account for victims emotions, attitudes, situation, peers, you name it. There are indeed some victims who are angry at the situation that they are in a tormented rage. I understand rage all too well when one person feels isolated from society. You can't convince them sometimes, and you don't want to punish the victim.

[phyco18]

Its ok. and. The suicide rate for people who have had abortions is troug the roof, they also often have psychological issues.

[heroikrobb]

It's unfortunate because they don't get the right quality counseling they need to cope. Pro-life doesn't do enough so they just try to abolish the problem. I went on to Wisconsin's Right to Life site and found out 48% of women go on to have another abortion. That tells me that there is nothing wrong with half of the abortive populace because they can cope with abortion.

[phyco18]

but the other, greater half can't

[heroikrobb]

But this is roughly half and half, and the decision needs to be available because we know there are women who can do this. There are also women who only needed to do it once and went along just fine with the abortion.

[phyco18]

But how would we know which ones can and can't cope? We really can't

Also less than 5%percent of rapists get the girl pregnant

[angelshoulders]

8. Emotional Impact- Watch particularly for the following signs:

Health risks of an abortion include and are not limited to:::Guilt, Anger, Anxiety, Depression, Suicidal Thoughts, Actual suicide attempts

Anniversary Grief, Flashbacks of Abortion, Sexual Dysfunction, Relationship Problems, Eating Disorders, Alcohol and Drug Abuse, Psychological Reactions

[ashatbulaparanormal]

@heroikrobb Pro-life is brain washed by the Adoption Agencies.These Agencies need to babies to make $40,000.00 per child a year,can't do that if women are,aborting,using birth control or simply keeping their child.Adoption Agencies are nothing more then black marketing babies and will do anything to get these babies.

[ashatbulaparanormal]

Adoptive parents are just as guilty as the Adoption Agencies. They demand and pay a large sum of money and adoption agencies fulfill. buying and selling children is just as bad as aborting them.I will stop these Adoption Agencies and their selling of children to make themselves a profit.Adoptive parents need to be arrested and charged with buying humans.Slavery was suppose to be outlawed in the late 1800's,but it hasn't.

[angelshoulders]

According to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, in 2005, 1.21 million abortions took place in the United States. Some 42,350 of these occurred on women who were 16 to 20 weeks pregnant; over 13,310 occurred on women who were 21 weeks or more into their pregnancy. According to CDC government data, over 64,000 abortions in a year are performed on women who had had three or more previous abortions.

[iluvnero]

ALRITE SERIOUSLY CONCIOUS PEOPLE SHOULD HAVE THE RITE TO CHOOS WHAT THEY WANT TO DO DO LIFERS EVER MASTERBATE? WHERE DO YOU DRAW THE LINE? SPERM ARE ALIVE SO HEY YOU SHOULD FIND A MOTHER FOR EACH SPERM SO IT DONT GOTA DIE RITE?

DO U EVER HAVE PERIODS?

WELL THEN UNDER YOUR philosophy TECHNICALLY ITS YOUR RESPONSABILITY TO GO OUT AND GET KNOCKED UP EVERY TIME AN EGG DROPS SO IT DONT DIE

[heroikrobb]

I am only talking about unborn children and not post natal.

[eallen001]

I like sugar-coating things... things taste better that way.

[eallen001]

sorry for the misunderstanding.

[heroikrobb]

"I stand up for what is right."

So what is right? There can and have been situations where abortions were right. What if you were a doctor that was forced to only choose who could live: an unconscious woman dying or the unborn child (1)? I would always choose the woman because we can replace the unborn child.

[eallen001]

I'm not looking for followers, in fact you are stating almost exactly what I said to you... not everyone has to follow you. And they have that right as long as they do it in a reasonable way. Your "truth" is nothing more then your opinion.

[eallen001]

I appreciate that, but you are wrong in saying that it is not a debate. Because it obviously really is a debate, and yes its about life. The debate revolves largely around what exactly is LIFE and at what point does that LIFE have rights. While you think that you have the clear-cut answer, there are others out there who 100% disagree with you, so yes, it is in fact, a debate.

[eallen001]

and you know, a dictionary doesnt determine right from wrong, it is merely a meaning of a word that is commonly used under certain conditions. I also read that abortion is terminating a pregnancy. You know, what classifies a pregnancy? What is alive?  Are we going to keep looking up what Websters dictionary is to determine our rules to live by?

[eallen001]

There are different ways the people look at this. Some people can look up definitions from a dictionary to support their argument, other people act on instinct, including parental instinct, and religions beliefs. My whole position here is that anyone who truly thinks that they are RIGHT and the other side is WRONG for having an honest belief about something as critical as this should not really even be allowed in the argument. Discussion, not partisanship is what brings understanding.

[musicphan1]

Suck it out if you don't want to have it, just fucking suck it out. Who cares? It's no one else's business, not Pat Robertson's, nor John McCain, not John Hagge the Fagge, not Fred Phellps, not George Bush, no one's business. If you try to make it your business, then you have too much fucking time on your hands. If abortion is banned, I think I'll go back to school to become an Ob/Gyn and scrape out uteruses for a living, just to spite pro-lifers. And I won't be a killer, I'll be a saint.

[heroikrobb]

I believe a fetus is incapable of rights until it can actually live by itself, not be supported by the mother's body. If you can't clothe a person, they don't have rights. yes, you can clothe animals, I have seen them before. You have to have some form of access and communication with somebody in order for them to be considered alive. Keeping a fetus alive is silly if one does not want to take care of it anymore, and I am fine with that, it is not my business.

[eallen001]

Technically the first statement in the dicionary under "alive" says "having life". And the dictionary defines life in one sense as "the condition that distinguishes organisms from inorganic objects and dead organisms, being manifested by growth through metabolism, reproduction, and the power of adaptation to environment through changes originating internally."

So by definition a fetus would be "alive". Again i'm not saying you're wrong, its just a matter of interpretation by a person.

[heroikrobb]

Hello there. It has been a while since we have met. I would like to see pro-choice win once and for all, because pro-life is wrong. We can always replace a fetus. Sure, it is a human life, but what if a person need embryonic stem cells and it was the only option that was actually effective? The well-being of many is far more important than one being. We can use multiple stem cells from an embryo, at least that is what I think. But well-being is more important than just life.

[prettyprettypoo]

That's the deal. They don't need EMBRYONIC stem cells. The found more treatments (77 last time I checked) with ADULT stem cells (as opposed to 0,zip,nada,zilch with embryonic stem cells). So why would people be so desperate to kill human life when they don't have to? It's because if they give in to those dastardly pro-lifers, they're scared to death the next step will be overturning roe v wade. That's all it's about.

[eallen001]

It is really an issue that will absolutely never ever get resolved because the issue revolves around a persons beliefs/values as opposed to facts. Like many topics of this nature, both sides can use facts to back up their argument, but at the end of the day, those facts only contribute to a persons belief one way or the other. They don't create an absolute right or wrong. Perhaps in your mind they do, and that's fine.

[musicphan1]

Yeah, but too many douchebags think that a mass of cells have rights. If you are against abortion, don't have one, pure and simple.

[eallen001]

I wish it was that simple. That's like saying that if you are against killing people, don't kill someone. While you might believe that is a sufficient argument, it's not with millions of other people. Oh and we are all a mass of cells, so maybe we don't all have rights? There are different ways of looking at what's "alive" and what isn't. People on both sides think they have the clear answer that everyone should follow. That is a foolish way of thinking. This is a hot debate for a reason

[eallen001]

heroikrobb I respect your opinion, but I do hope that you understand that a topic like this doesn't have a right/wrong side per-say. Ultimately we have to understand that there are reasons that people believe what they do. Stating that something is not alive simply because it is not born and does not have fully developed features is your right, but there are very valid arguments on both sides of this debate. A Pro-Life supporter could make many legit claims to say that a fetus is alive

[ladydi5319]

By 9 weeks the embryo now develops into a fetus where all the existing organs simply grow and develop until born. Your statement about killing a zygote is false. Abortions are performed in the embryonic and fetal stages. So if an unborn baby is not alive, then why do you have to kill it? It would not be called abortion would it? You are trying to turn a natural biological function of human development that has been medically and scientifically proven and twist it around as being false.

[ladydi5319]

Wow! This is pure propaganda and proves the US education system is definitely failing to teach our kids American history and medical science making the youth of today totally ignorant! However, with the internet there is no excuse for this blatant refusal to acquire the honest truth and knowledge. Go to any on line medical or science encyclopedia and research the documented medical scientific facts on human life and development!

[prettyprettypoo]

Amen!

[heroikrobb]

Let me teach you something. Life begins at the moment of conception, BUT to do that, there are cells that produce an organism. Cells are alive at that time. But get this, cells are still alive even after a person has been dead for hours and even days.

Now, what do an unborn child and a deceased person have in common? They do not have a beating heart over a period of time. What is the basic makeup of life? Cells.

[heroikrobb]

The problem is that you are saying that it is murder if you kill a zygote, ok? So are you going to consider murder for someone that has been dead for a few hours? It just would not make sense. Without cells, we cannot be alive. But the same would go true if we did not have a conscious ability to perform certain functions. Therefore, you cannot consider an unborn to be alive, and "taking the life away" would not be a plausible clause. Therefore, I remain strongly firm on my choice.

[ladydi5319]

A zygote is the medical term for the earliest developing stage of a human being and only lasts 8 days before becoming a blastocyst. After 3 weeks it develops into an embryo characterized by the formation of most internal organs and external body structures. During this stage, the area that will become the brain and spinal cord (neural tube) begins to develop. The heart and major blood vessels begin to develop by about day 16 or 17. The heart begins to pump fluid through blood vessels by day 20.

[ladydi5319]

What is your Pathology source that states that cells are alive after you have been dead for hours and even days? And what type of cells those are because we shed dead cells everyday.

Also include the source regarding the beating heart comparison between an unborn child and a dead person.

[heroikrobb]

I never said ALL cells, just some of the cells. What I am referring to is the destruction of all cells.

And there are more than just skin cells. Every organ in our bodies has cells. There would still be cells alive even if a person does die. Become educated more before you say a person that dies has cells that die too.

It is more technical to say that there is cellular activity going on rather than actual human life.

And one thing, where do you get all of this info?

[ladydi5319]

All my research was done on-line at Merck Manual Medical Library and Medicine Plus.

You are young, impressionable and our future. Please do yourself and the next generation a favor and research all the medical and scientific facts for yourself. It may be your own child's life in question one day. True education lies in oneself. Even this mother of 3 has learned more by debating the issue and enlightening others of the truth and knowledge that can be attained at the click of a mouse.

[thealphacrow]

A cells in a cadaver are decaying. Cells in the womb are generating.

The heart beat begins on the 21st day after conception. What is the corpse doing?

I have watched my baby daughter jumping around and stretching her arms and legs at 11 weeks conceived. It is murder to kill a human. It is wrong to stop the generation of a human. Eugenics is also wrong. So is Invetro. So is cloning. So is EMBRYONIC stem cell research.

[heroikrobb]

It is not wrong to do any of those. I don't value any human life inside of the womb because we can replace them. Would you watch your wife die just for doctors to protect the baby's life, all because of a law that does not make sense? A woman can always have another baby if she wants, but if she dies for a single baby's life, it would not have been worth it.

[thealphacrow]

State a case where an abortion needed to be preformed to save a woman's life.

There are none. NONE!

Read a medical text book some time and stop listening to false emotional pro-choice propaganda.

Our OBGYN says that there is never a reason to preform an abortion.

Dr. Ron Paul (OBGYN) says that there is never a reason to preform an abortion.

Dr. Bernard Nathenson says that there is never a reason to preform an abortion. (Former abortion doctor)

[Eirelav111]

No abortions were performed to save a womans life? I'm afraid you're full of shit my friend.

[thealphacrow]

You haven't sited anything except an expletive. Why?

If I am full of it then so is Our OBGYN and Ron Paul, and Dr. Nathanson, and Norma McCorvey, and Alveda King, and Janet Smith, and the whole 2000 year old catholic church.

Where do you draw your sources?

[heroikrobb]

Also, cells in the cadaver are still alive. So what if cells in the womb are generating. There are cells that die in the unborn child.

As for jumping around, I find that to be absurd. A baby is just sitting there, maybe spasming unconsciously.

Embryonic stem cell research is wrong only after we find alternatives that work as well/better than stem cells. Without research, we cannot find a better alternative. We must conduct research to find the best alternative IF there is one.

[prettyprettypoo]

Treatments found using adult stem cells and umbilical cord blood: 77

Treatments found using embryonic stem cells: 0

21stcenturysciencetech(dot)com­/articles/winter01/stem_cell(d­ot)html

[heroikrobb]

That is simply because you guys got it illegalized. I am not stupid. Embryos have a greater chance of replicating a certain set of cells, but remember that they may be used for cures, not just treatments.

[prettyprettypoo]

Not true. It's legal. It's just that the government won't pay for it. There's been plenty of research using embryos and there still is and NOTHING has come of it. You apparently didn't read the web page I posted nor any of the other million pages or books which say the same thing.

[thealphacrow]

It is not illegal to do embryonic stem cell research in this country. Where do you get that?

[thealphacrow]

Why can't adult stem cells be used for cures? What's your logic?

Is umbilical cord stem cell research a joke?

I think you have a skewed addenda.

the score is 0 to 77

your excuse is false, it's not illegal in America.

Private investors are choosing adult stem cell research because it has science behind it, and not empty promises of cures.

Do opinions trump facts now?

[thealphacrow]

Watch the ultrasound video of my 11 week old baby girl.

Are you also against letting women see an ultrasound before they get an abortion?

My little girl jumps and stretches her arms and legs.

She starts moving when I sing to her at night.

Abortion kills human life.

[heroikrobb]

I am against them being forced to see an ultrasound, but I am not against any doctor recommendations vs. requirements. It is up to the pregnant woman what she wants to do.

[thealphacrow]

It's up to us as a body of people to realize that the choice is to have sex or not. We need to be responsible with sex and not kill what sex creates. You can not kill a human baby. You can't be angry at a society that defends human babies at the moment of conception. Pro choice doesn't even have a definition on where life begins. You have your opinion and 12 other people have 12 other opinions.

Pro-Life is unified, scientific and logical. It is a HUMAN fetus at conception.

Fetus is Latin for..?

[heroikrobb]

Can I interact with a fetus? No I cannot. Can I interact with an embryo? No, I cannot. Can I interact with a zygote? No, I cannot.

That alone tells you that you can't declare an unborn child alive unless it can fully interact. It must be able to react to the outside world fully before becoming a living creature.

You have your terms wrong. It cannot be a human fetus at conception. Get it straight, it is a zygote, and there is technically no human life present within a zygote.

[thealphacrow]

I had 2 ideas going, I was trying to emphasize HUMAN. Those cells are not going to develop into a duck or an aardvark.

My 2nd idea was that Fetus means developing human. Fetus starts at 8 weeks. The ultrasound of my daughter is at 11. The majority of abortions happen in those weeks.

I did make a mistake in my words. "It is a HUMAN fetus at conception."

You still haven't sited an instance where an abortion needed to be preformed. Can't find anything?

[heroikrobb]

Abortion is needed in rapes, incest attacks, mortal complications of the mother, unplanned pregnancies just to name a few.

I also believe in one thing: well-being. The mother has far more importance of well-being than an unborn child does. All the child does is just sit there, react on occasion, and take in nutrients when necessary. The mother has to take care of this child as well as the father, and they also have to do a lot 24/7 besides raising an unborn child.

[heroikrobb]

The mother/father must raise money to have a home, do hobbies, live a healthy life, interact with society, and the list can go on. The unborn child doesn't need to do that. The mother and father can terminate the life of an unborn child if they need to for the sake of their well-being. Their well-being is far more important than the baby's. If the mother can't take care of the unborn child because a situation occurs, the only option is to abort, since the importance is well-being of the mom.

[hajhaj1992]

so mentally and physically challenged people that cannot interact, talk, walk, smile, anything are not human beings, is that what you say!

[heroikrobb]

Not necessarily. These people can still see, react, touch, feel, smell, anything they can do with the necessary senses they have.

[unofficalactor]

Great Video! Well thought out!

[prettyprettypoo]

Wow, using your thinking, I should be able to kill my whole family and get away with it. Talk about being irrational.

[heroikrobb]

You are misinterpreting my reason. I don't support killing live people, only those that are unborn. Unborn children are just candidates for life, not necessarily alive in my opinion.

You can't adopt an unborn child because that would be taking the unborn child away from the mother's womb and killing the child in the process. And since you are raising an unborn child, if the woman doesn't want to raise the unborn child, she can't put it up for adoption, so abortion would be the only answer.

[prettyprettypoo]

And like I have said before, women make agreements ALL THE TIME with couples who want a child to carry the child to term for the couple to adopt. As for "unborn children" not being alive, apparently you are smarter than all those scientists.

[heroikrobb]

Couples are one thing, although that they too should have the option should something arise unexpectedly. Forcing single women to raise an unborn child in minimal survival conditions is unacceptable. Now you have the woman and the unborn child in danger. If the child can't be raised when it is unborn, how is the woman supposed to even take care of herself if she has to raise the child? Indeed, an unborn child is a parasite because the woman needs to do more to support herself to survive.

[prettyprettypoo]

Oh, come off it. Crap, there's ALWAYS another option. You actually have to look first. There's group homes all over this town that take in pregnant women. That's just a BS cop-out. There is NO excuse to kill a kid but just plain irresponsibility.

[heroikrobb]

There has to be alternatives when there are none of these "group homes" available in near by places. You see, a woman being single has to make all of the decisions when she is alone. She has to earn money for her living expenses. I myself would not approve of such an alternative to not aborting a child.

And not only that, you violate the mother's right to live her own life. Unborn children can be replaced because they are just candidates to live, but decisions can affect a mother forever.

[prettyprettypoo]

So you're smarter than ALL those scientists who rightfully say life begins at conception. Not "a blob of tissue", life. And once again, group homes are not even close to the only option. Ever heard of DHS? There is ALWAYS another option. It is a hell of a lot easier than finding an abortion doctor.