Let's say that you are on your way home from school/Work/ a party. And you become raped, and later on after the pain from the rape you find out that you are pregnant. You do not want the child, in fact you hate it. What would you do?
1 Abort it, save the child from your hate and save yourself from all the humilations and pain.
2 Keep the baby, let it be born into the world and your child abuse.
Adoption is cruel and evil, unlike abortion. Due to better medicine not as many die from diseases like smallpox which is unnatural, abortion helps with population control.
Great example of why at any stage for any reason a woman should be able to kill the fetus. Its not by any definition a person and potential people never have any rights that trump actual peoples rights. See my video
first of all animals are protected becuse that speces is probably endanged un like a fetuse were its just a sperm cell growing in side and egg 2 if it is murder then i have killed millions of sperm cells and you cant say that a sperm cell is not human becuse we all know its at least halfe human 3 do you cair for the child after it is born if it is born or dont u give a shit 4 if the child was part of gods plan then god wouldnt of given the mother a resen to abort the baby
@TheCrippledCrow 1. The killing of a human baby in the womb. 2. Nope, not the same as biological life. 3. I don't agree with him here. 4. At contraception between sperm and egg the zygote has all the chromosomes to classify it as human. 5. If the baby is bound to die, save the life that you can. In your case, that's less than 1 % of cases. 6. We're not comparing sins, but if abortion is right or not. Suicide with the baby is 2 lives lost, means technically a greater sin. This is IMO.
I agree that aborition can be a good option. I am against it, having been a fetus once myself, though I will not throw myself into an argument as carelessly as some of the commentors I have seen below. Do not discriminate people for their opinions, we all have the right to choose what we believe.
tour first argument is invalid, it is not arguing weather they are a person, they are not arguing that, it is obvious they are not it is a human in formation, the question is weather it is alive, i can prove that they are not alive. Babies get no air in the womb, no air= no life, i win you lose done, it is a parasite not a person deal with it, this defeats ur next argument, no life no death, no death no murder u lose again, argument 3 loses for the same reason, your 4th is just bad, you lose
the video disproves it's own claim. It list the definition of murder, "the unlawful killing of a human being...". Even if a fetus is a human being, the killing of it is not unlawful as abortion is legal. Therefore, abortion is not murder.
@aislynnmidnight Did you know in Nazi Germany, Hitler killing the jews was not illegal? It was legal for him to do those horrible acts. So I guess Hitler didn't murder anybody since for his country, it was perfectly legal.
WRT abortion, if the fetus is occupying another persons body against her will, then abortion is not murder if it is removed, just as removing a rapist from her body would not be murder if it meant killing him to do it.
@WhereCanIGoFromHere But the bitch had sex. If she got raped, then its totally ok. If she is some crazy teen slut, then the fetus does not have to pay for her mistakes.
@silverespioshadow That makes less than no sense, why is it okay for the fetus to pay for the man's crime of rape but not the promiscuity of the woman? Either the fetus is occupying her body against her will or it isn't. If it is, you either believe that she has the right to remove it or you don't (in other words, you believe that she doesn't have any right to her own body in any circumstance).
@WhereCanIGoFromHere Actually, the fetus should not pay for anything, If it is there, It should stay there. This "Woman has rights over her body" shit is getting quite old.
She had the choice of having sex or not having sex.
Why should the little creature be killed for her stupid mother's mistake? She can always give it into adoption. Which is not cruel like abortion
Actually the conclusion is a failed assumption in argument 2. You assume that the fetus is several things, such as innocent, not infringing on anyone else's rights, not putting anyone in danger, etc). If I said "If the RAPIST is a person and we know it, then killing him to stop him from raping is murder," you would immediately see the conclusion does not follow.
Murder is the taking of the life of another human being through the initiation of physical force. Abortion is not murder, because a fetus is not a human being -- it is a potential human being, i.e. it is part of the woman. The concept murder only applies to the initiation of physical force used to destroy an actual human being, i.e., such as when "pro-life" terrorists bomb abortion clinics.
Here's what you failed to address. Even if all of your assumptions are correct, in no way does that allow you to come to the conclusion that the act ought to be illegal.
lmfao. reckless endangerment, manslaughter, animal rights violations...notice how all these words have legal connotations? THATS BECAUSE THEYRE FUCKING INHERENT TO THE LAW. he did a fucking superb job of linking each of the arguments back to a legal context. while this isnt the best (logically speaking) video ever, he did, at the very least, do a good job of linking the arguments back to his thesis. so sorry bro, he did clearly address that.
Have you ever sat on your foot until it was numb and tingly? That's because you restricted blood flow, causing the blood in your foot to become oxygen poor. If that happened in your brain you'd faint, and if it persisted you would slip into a coma. A fetus has always been in a coma, unless something is wrong, and that's important. A mother may mistake spastic reflexes for conscious movements, but if a fetus truly awoke in the womb, it could cause serious complications.
Would you call an acorn an oak tree? Anyway animals are sentient, maybe not sapient, but sentient, and most animals aren't protected from being killed, only from being tortured and abused. Besides that animals have actually been conscious, but with rare exception a fetus doesn't even get oxygen rich blood to it's brain. We pull the plug on the clinically brain dead all the time (the body could be kept alive on machines for nearly 200 years), but they've actually had identities, a fetus doesn't.
"Abortion is by no means beneficial to society" I strongly differ. You are forgetting a very important thing: why people abort in the first place? BTW Males also participate sometimes in the abortion decision, sometimes impose it physically or mentally over women.
If a teen age kid knowingly takes a chance and gets pregnant, and then wants to abort cause she doesnt want to take the responsability, you can contest her decision, morally. But let me take my time here, to elaborate on my opinion.
3.- is it benefitial to society that so many women die, and children are hurt when ignorant and/or desperate women/couples try to abort by hitting the belly/taking drugs? Again, with such parents chances are this children will never have a home nor family, and will sustain life lasting illness or handicap. Maybe if asked they would reply they want to live anyway, but maybe not. Who is to decide? I say not me, not anyone else, but the parents. Society´s job is to give this idiots some education
@janover73 Well said, you make excellent points. They're all wasted on the unreasonable instinct driven sacks of emotion that most anti-abortionists are, but very well put.
@janover73 Well said, you make excellent points. They're all wasted on the unreasonable instinct driven sacks of emotion that most anti-abortionists are, but very well put.
Your argument is that you believe something, therefor people should agree with you because you might be right,& therefor abortion is by no means benificial to society & everyone should agree with you? Two problems there, one You give no reason to believe your right, your just saying people should agree with you, because you believe something & two, it's a non sequitur, you didn't even address the issue of whether or not it's beneficial to society.
Dustygirl122 is right, WE NEED A PLAN TO STOP ABORTION.
I never have liked abortion and never will for any reason. I understand people wanting it done for reason such as rape and/or incest. But I don't agree with it and will try to encourage any victim of rape and/or incest as much as I can.
Here are a few ways to stop abortion.
1. A condem is cheaper than having an abortion. 2. Wait til your married to have sex. 3.Call an adoption hotline. 4. Go to church, talk to the pastor for help.
@mjt19741 Nothing. But what's wrong with letting a fetus die that is deeply unwanted and will have a horrible life if it were to live? What's wrong with letting women keep their constitutional rights?
@MyPaperBleedsInk Everything. See the fetus actually is human. It is only scientifically CLASSIFIED as nonliving. It is not scientifically PROVEN. You don't know if it will have a horrible life. If the baby is unwanted, adopt it. Every state will pay for everything if the mother is single or if the family can't afford food, diapers and delivery fees. Our parents did not abort us. We are here right now aren't we? Just because it's legal does not mean it's the right thing to do.
@mjt19741 The fetus has the potential to become human.
Don't bring up the whole, "Well you weren't aborted." That's irrelevant and a pathetic argument.
And just because you want to force women through 9 months of carrying a parasite, and then having to go through labor because of your moral issues, doesn't make it the right thing to do either.
@mjt19741 Yeah, I know we weren't aborted. Dur. Why? Because we were actually wanted or our parents thought they could sustain us and provide well enough for us.
@MyPaperBleedsInk Yeah there is. Think abou it. No one here was aborted. We were given the chance to live. An aborted child never had the chance to live.
@mjt19741 And here's your chance to actually think about something. Why was that fetus aborted in the first place? What life would it have had, being unwanted? Being an outcast within it's family? And who's to say it would've even had a life? It could've died early on.
@MyPaperBleedsInk Unwanted children are born everyday. If the mother doesn't want her child, she should give it up for adoption. Yes the world is cruel and we have to live in it. If you think about it, Life is very beautiful too. Every child should have the right to live.
@mjt19741 Yeah, I know we weren't aborted. Dur. Why? Because we were actually wanted or our parents thought they could sustain us and provide well enough for us.
@MyPaperBleedsInk How does that make me a hypocrite? Really you are a hypocrite for saying that. Just because I don't agree with you does not make me a hypocrite. Thank you....
@mjt19741 I didn't say you were a hypocrite... I said it seems as though you're becoming one. Why? Because it seems as though you say you don't support murder or killing of humans and whatnot....yet you also just said you did.
@MyPaperBleedsInk I support the war in Iraq. I support the death penalty. But I don't support abortion. I do however agree with abortion if a woman has unwanted sex such as rape and incest or if it is life threatening. But that's only if she has no other choice but to abort. I don't support that, but I agree with it. So no I am not a hypocrite in the making.
You were comparing abortion to murder. You were comparing the fetus to a human..... and yet you support war and the death penalty...both of which kill many humans.
@MyPaperBleedsInk In war and the death penalty, the person had the choice. Do the crime you do the time and the punishment. In war the soldier had the choice to join or not join. Abortion, the baby never had the choice. Therefore abortion=murder. Inother words it is equal to murder in a legal way.
They did not have a choice...they didn't choose to die. And the punishment tends not to fit the crime in either case.... in times of war the people generally don't commit any crimes. In case of the death penalty most cases are not equivalent and even if they were.... an eye for an eye is not the way to go.
It's not equal to murder in a legal way. You from the U.S.? If so please learn our laws and constitutional rights.
Also, It's not considered a baby at the time it's aborted.
I'm pro abortion, most of these women are not willing to bring up these children. And I think its their right to whatever they want with their body. People say that abortion is wrong, but under certain circumstances. (Aka, rape or incest.) makes it okay, its still abortion and they are contradicting themselves. Its really sad.
@ObiriSakura There is always someone who is willing to bring up a child rather than have him or her killed. The adoption waiting list is quite long. Killing another human through abortion is not doing whatever they want with their body, it is killing someone else's body.
@xalisae I agree that there would be atleast someone to bring up the child if it was born into the world. The fetus realise on its mothers body for 9 months until its birth, so if the mother doesnt want to wait around she has the choice in early pregnancy to abort the baby.
@ObiriSakura A baby actually relies on its mother's body for its survival well after birth as well. Why should the age make any difference as to whether or not a human should be protected by law from being killed?
xa:Why should the age make any difference as to whether or not a human should be protected by law from being killed How would we "protect" fetuses in utero? There are 5 million pregnancies in the US every yr. How do we watch every women to make sure her fetus is protected? AND, what about our right to privacy? Our rights to our bodies & our fetuses?
@Sueezee1 The same way they were protected before Roe VS. Wade and Doe VS. Bolton. Duh. You act as though abortion on demand has always been the norm.
xa: You act as though abortion on demand has always been the norm. It nealry has. Do you abortion was legal & publically advertized in early 1800's(U.S.). It abounded in China in the yr 500 bc. and many other places. Abortion stopped in this country ONLY because of the deaths due to back alley butchers. I ts been legal nearly forever. Early settlers could abortion up to quickening.... So, what are you talking abut?
xa: Just looking up "Abortion in the United States" on Wiki showed how absolutely full of bullshit you are Concerning WHAT?/ Put a damned backquote or wrtie in complete sentences!!!
@Sueezee1 Well, just as someone doesn't have the right to "privately" strangle a toddler, or even "privately" shoot themselves in the head (suicide is actually illegal...) no one would have the right to kill their child in utero. Once again, as I've said before, pre-Roe, women weren't regularly violated in an attempt to protect their unborn children. It would revert to that system. Duh.
Age makes a difference because the mother in question might not be mental mature enough to take on such a thing as a baby in their life, or they see it as a inconvience. Its how the world works these days. You can't just make something illegal like cigarettes or abortion because people need them. I know this sounds stupid, "people needing abortions" but its true, and the fact people say that you're aborting potential scientists or doctors is very stupid because not all of them will be like that.
@ObiriSakura I wasn't talking about the age of the mother. There's another person on the hook in an abortion, they're the one who loses their life in the procedure. The only reason it's alright for a mother to kill her kid in an abortion is because it's too young to cry, or fight, or do anything to prevent its death. And I not only think we shouldn't abort future scientists or doctors, but I also think the guys working at McDonald's are pretty neat too, because they're human beings just like me.
xa: The only reason it's alright for a mother to kill her kid in an abortion is because it's too young to cry, or fight RIGHT.... because fetuse are not living human being able to do that, so it makes them NOT living huiman beings who have rights. So whats your point? Is it that IF they could fight, they couildnt be aborted?/Right dumbass...if they fought thats means they were born & CANT be abotrted anymore... Geeeeezzzz
@Sueezee1 How do you figure they're "not living human being"? They don't have a pulse? Their cells aren't dividing? Their organ systems aren't processing? You're terribly ignorant if you think that. And watch The Silent Scream. Just because you can't see them fight doesn't mean they don't try.
@Sueezee1 Oh, so how human you are depends on your physical capacity...let's be sure to tell that to all the people in wheelchairs and folks in the iron lungs. Watch out guys, Sueezee might abort you!
@xalisae Okay, it seems like this is turning into a argument that will go on and on, so Im just going to say one thing and stop. We have two different opinions, I respect yours and I hope you respect mine aswell.
@xalisae thats a shame, and you know what else is a shame? That in countries like Africa they dont have this kind of technology. Now don't go on saying abortion is still wrong and that babies from those countries deserve live, you're wrong there because most of their mothers have aids and will give this to their children. Not to mention that in some area's that they have no source of clean drinking water or possibly food cause they're that poor and will unlikely survive to their late teens.
@ObiriSakura That's totally off-topic. One can support better conditions for developing countries (where we will finally probably one day find a cure for AIDS, since many children born to positive mothers don't even HAVE signs of the disease, and many who do have VERY diminished cases) AND be opposed to the killing of so many in utero.
@xalisae I only came here to give my own opinion on a subject and then leave it at that. I can see this conversation has quickly turned into a argument that wont stop until someone says so. Im stopping this argument because I dont see why I should be wasting my time talking to a person who obviously has their mind set. And this time I mean it when I say stop, I'm not replying to any of your messages anymore, thank you for your opinion and I hope you live out a nice healthy life.
@ObiriSakura Well, you can't just say "I think it should be legal for a mother to end the life of her child as long as that child is still in the womb." and get upset about someone taking issue with that. It's a very provocative statement to many people, and for good reason.
@xalisae I don't like it when people drag on a argument, especially on Youtube. Now I know the majority of people who think abortion is wrong outweighs the people who think its okay.
The reason why abortion is not illegal in most countries is because you cannot control the desicion of hundreds of thousands of woman around the world. Stop trying to surpress women into having these children when they dont want to. Because its not all about the baby, its also about the mother.
@ObiriSakura I've given birth to 2 children. The mothers inconvenience shouldn't and does not outweigh the entire life of the child. You CAN control the decisions of hundreds of thousands (but, since most women when questioned said that if abortion were illegal they simply wouldn't have one, so it'd really only be hundreds at most) of women. It was done before Roe vs. Wade, and it can be done afterward as well.
Before abortion was legal, more than a million women died during illegal abortions. Both the mother AND the child are dead now. No lives were saved there. Abortion is a terrible thing, but there has to be a plan about eliminating the need for it before we just waltz around and go back to before it was legalized. When women no longer NEED it, then make it illegal. We can't even take care of the kids we have, would you rather have a child starving in the streets or loved up in Heaven?
@dustygirl122 My pleasure. The truth is coming out, slowly but surely, and one day we will help stop the legal execution of over 3,000 prenatal humans every day. Feel free to message me if you want any more information. Be well.
I am not trying to imply that you are lying, but how do we know any statistics are correct then? How do we know 3000 babies a day isn't 300, or any number is correct? Both Pro-Choice and Pro-Life arguments can be built off of lies.
@dustygirl122 Well, you'll find that at the very least I myself try to research as best as possible. The number "3,000 a day" comes from the Guttmacher Institute, which is actually a research arm of Planned Parenthood, which is the nation's largest abortion provider. How would that number be biased if it's coming straight from the abortion provider themselves?
@dustygirl122 Well, thank you, but the only reason I spend so much time gathering information about the subject is that so many human lives are being lost on a daily basis, I want to see them given all the same protection under the law that you or I are currently entitled to. Please consider those who don't have anyone to fight for them, and no way of fighting themselves. Please think about becoming a voice for the voiceless.
I have considered it. I used to be Pro-Life, until my friend got pregnant (rape) and had an abortion cause she was only 14 and she knew she wouldn't have been able to care for her rapist's child and could not find adoptive parents. For now, my views are temporary though. I am Pro-Choice because I do not see any decent plans to stop abortion without having major consequences 100X worse then abortion being legal. When that plan comes, I will be one of the first to support it. Wishing you the best!
xa:always someone who is willing to bring up a child rather than have him or her killed then why are 250,000 foster kids up for adoption today (U.S.), not to mention all the other places to find thrown away kids?
@Sueezee1 Because the adoption/foster care/child protective services systems need to be reformed. It's not the fault of the children that adults can't get their affairs in order, and they shouldn't be punished consequently with death for it, either.
xa: Because the adoption/foster care/child protective services systems need to be reformed Bologna!! U.S. foster care system is the the least expensive type of adoption, usually involving little or NO cost, and states often provide SUBSITIES (help financially) to people who adopt these kids.
xa: shouldn't be punished consequently with death for it So, you prefer they are punished in life???
@Sueezee1 oh yes, and money=quality, right? The waiting lists for adoptions is years-long, also.
Life is not a punishment. I have quite a few adopted friends who will agree with me on that. One recently became a father himself. If you think life is such a punishment, why are you still here? And what gives anyone the right to declare someone else's life so terrible it's not (or assume that it wouldn't be-you don't even know for certain!) worth living?
@Sueezee1 No, you're a liar. I'm telling the truth. Look up "waiting lists" at adoption encyclopedia. The government drags out the adoption process for years. Have you ever smoked? Owned a large breed dog? No adopting for you! It's ridiculous.
Well, the few of my adopted friends who are alive right now appreciate it and don't like the idea that they could've been reduced to a "choice", and scraped out of their mother and thrown in a bucket. "a few" human beings are still human beings.
@Sueezee1 Being a mother doesn't give you some crystal ball to see the future. I don't know what my kids' lives will be like years from now. I didn't know a year ago what they would be like now. And the idea of me strangling my son now because we MIGHT still be in a bad place financially is abhorrent. I don't see why him being in the womb should make that same behavior any more acceptable.
xa: And the idea of me strangling my son now because we MIGHT still be in a bad place financially is abhorrent Holy christ!! Keep you idiot ass away from me... you damned psychopath!!!! You have the mentality of a 8 yr old! no wonder you morons cant make abortion illegal!!! GOOD BYE !!
@Sueezee1 Oh look, personal attacks because you can't back your argument up. Figures.
If my position is that you shouldn't be allowed to kill your child in utero because of financial difficulty or personal whim, extending that to include all children makes sense. The opposite position of course makes no sense, it's ok to kill one's child IF certain conditions are met. I'm glad you're as incensed by the notion as I am! :D
Pro-Lifers, you guys are making a great argument. If you don't mind, I'd like to jump in on the Pro-Choice side here since Suezzee1 seems to have quit or gone to find out what she's talking about. I'll start with the foster care. Yes, there are about 518,000 children in foster care right now without homes. Yes, the US adoption system takes years, but that is not from a lack of available children, it is from a lack of competent lawyers drawing up these legal documents.
Also, you must consider what a mother forced to carry out a pregnancy will do. She obviously does not care for the child, so there is a higher chance she will smoke and drink during pregnancy. The child could be born disabled, and while I am not saying they should be killed just for this, I am saying that there are a lack of parents available to adopt disabled children, and at 3000 more kids a day, the rate of homeless, hungry, and neglected children will go up.
So, if you want to stop abortion, my point is, you need a plan. A plan to prevent all unwanted pregnancies for everyone around the world, a plan on what to do with the children (supposing the mother does not want them) so they grow up with the love they deserve and would have gotten in Heaven (sorry, my religious views) were abortion still legal, and a plan to prevent from major overpopulation (cause unfortunately this is a factor). If you want to debate your point, please feel free to reply. =)
I find it interesting that this video uses animals as an example. There's loads of animals euthanized every year because of over population and excessive quantities of unwanted animals, as long as it is done in a fairly humane manor (putting it to sleep).
I hope the over population issue never reaches that point, but statistically projecting ahead, if no actions are taken, it will eventually. In my opinion producing less people is more humane then killing or sterilizing adults.
@JoesephKatana Not that I necessarily agree with the idea of overpopulation, but I do agree with your sentiment of "producing less people", but that happens through contraception, not abortion. Abortion is terminating a human life which has already begun.
1. I disagree with your statement that animals are non-persons and would ask you to back up your claim.
2. No, it's self defence.
3. No, it's self defence.
4. No, that example is one of an accident.
Conclusion: In what way are thousands of unwanted children being born a benefit to society? In what way is ignoring a woman's right to control her own body beneficial?
This is not about a "woman's right to control her own body". Those who oppose legalized abortion fully support a woman's right to do whatever she likes-with HER body. Abortion, however, impacts the body of another human, permanently depriving that individual of his or HER right to live. Around 50% of all abortion permanently deny a woman the right to live.
Wrong, whether or not the fetus is a person does NOT determine whether or not it is murder. A rapist, for example, is clearly a person, yet it's not murder if a woman kills one in self-defense. That's exactly what an abortion is: self-defense. Since a fetus is a parasitic organism that can have harmful effects on the woman's body, a woman is perfectly entitled to remove it, whether or not it is a person is irrelevant (which it's not). Also, animals don't use other's bodies against their will.
Abortions are, frequently, necessary for the health of either the fetus or the mother, and (it is my belief that) we have no right to interfere with what patients discuss and decide on with the assistance of their doctors.
No educated, moral person would use Abortion as a method of birth control, which I think is what many people are fearful of, unfortunately.
I will agree that a small number of Atheists are pro-life, however, I don't care, and I still disagree with their view.
Umm..no, they are NOT "frequently necessary". And, how would killing someone be necessary for their health? Your first comment is incorrect, and the other part makes no sense.
The vast majority of abortions are preformed on people who have already had previous abortions.
No person should have the right to end another human life in the way abortion does.
The bottom line is whether or not a fetus is a person is irrelevant. One cannot be forced to support another's life with their own body. If someone broke into your home and hooked a person up to your blood supply through an i.v., and that person would die if you unhooked them, don't you still have the right to do so? Would it be murder to unhook them?
I don't think so.
Bottom line is a person cannot be forced to support another life just because your religious beliefs says she should.
i think it's ridiculous when people claim that a fetus is a human being as an objective fact. biology, medicine, law, philosophy, and theology have no consensus on whether a fetus is a human being or not, and neither does society as a whole. there will never be a consensus because of the subjective and unscientific nature of the claim, so we must give the benefit of the doubt to women, who are indisputable human beings with rights.
Do you also think it's ridiculous when people claim that a fetus is not a human being? After all, the same lack of consensus applies.
However, biologically speaking, a fetus has all the qualities of life, and it certainly isn't anything other than human. So, a fetus can objectively be proven to be a human being, in terms of biology. Theology and philosophy are largely irrelevant, since everyone has their own brand. Laws are completely subjective and subject to change, so they should be out too.
biologically speaking embryo is far more primitive than a fish or a bird. anatomically, its brain has yet to develop. so in terms of its capacity for consciousness, it doesn't bear the slightest similarity to a human being. this growth of cells has the potential to become a human being but only if preserved, fed, nurtured, and brought to term by the woman that it depends on
Are you using embryo and fetus interchangeably? Cuz they are very different things. I only ask because you spoke of fetuses in your last comment, so I responded in kind, but now you seem to be switching to embryos. Regardless of brain development, they're still human and still living. As far as similarities go, it certainly has it where it counts, as far as biology goes: its DNA.
Yes, but it does determine whether or not we're human. In the end though, since all of what we are when born comes from our DNA, we really AREN'T "much more than our DNA".
to be a human being is more than merely having human chromosomes and human dna. It is a combination of life, human genetics, consciousness and sufficient autonomy that it can live apart from its biological mother
that is what makes a human being a human being according to most scientists. of course, there are others who just think a human being could just simply be a dna, but i find that ridiculous.
people who are unconscious are still live apart from their mothers' bodies. their bodies grow and develop on their own, and don't require to live off the bodies of other life forms to survive. as long as they are able to regain consciousness/self-awareness, they are still human beings. but like i said, there are many factors that make us human beings. one thing doesn't make us who we are
consciousness is also what separates us from every other animal life form on the planet. we think about ourselves. we use language to describe ourselves. we are aware of ourselves as a part of the greater whole
So, would animals that have a language be considered to have consciousness? There is a species of monkey that uses distinct sounds to indicate the presence of distinct creatures and threats, as well as to announce intentions. Do they perhaps have some sort of limited consciousness?
The law says one thing, God's law says another thing. I think I will follow God, he decides where you will spend eternity. Oh, one more thing, God had plans for your soul before you were even in your Mothers womb. So therefore, you have a soul before your Mother thought about you. To be a human, you have to have a soul. example: The law says I can only kill myself with a knife to my jugular. Would you do that too? Would that be different? This breaks my heart. This is just my opinion.
Your whole argument relies on the basis that a fetus is a person. A fetus is not a person. Animals are protected because they are conscious; a young fetus is not conscious, no more than a plant is conscious. Abortion is more questionable in the third trimester, but for the first two your objection does not apply.
a reaction to stimulus =/= consciousness. consciousness is when someone has an awareness of their environment. own existence, sensations, and thoughts
no. animals dont differentiate between the stimuli coming from inside and those coming from outside their bodies. for that they would have to be aware that they have a body, of which they are not, they also dont think like we do
No? Many animals react to physical localized pain by trying to alleviate pressure on the area in pain. They're also known to treat physical over-heating with submergence in water or shade. Many animals, especially predators, are able to track other things by the sounds they make, and so are obviously aware that the sounds emanate from other things.
humans manifest logic and reason, animals function on instinct. animal consciousness is not entirely understood. scientists do not entirely agree on whether animals are conscious or to what level they are self-aware. some animals show signs of consciousness, but scientists have not yet found proof that animals are as completely self-aware as some people describe them to be
Mm hm. So if many scientists can't be sure about the level of consciousness possessed by many animals, can you be sure about the level of consciousness possessed by a fetus?
Let's say that you are on your way home from school/Work/ a party. And you become raped, and later on after the pain from the rape you find out that you are pregnant. You do not want the child, in fact you hate it. What would you do?
1 Abort it, save the child from your hate and save yourself from all the humilations and pain.
2 Keep the baby, let it be born into the world and your child abuse.
Don't you think that abortion is a better option?
Belladonna300 2 months ago
Comment removed
grafs50 2 months ago in playlist Uploaded videos
Adoption is cruel and evil, unlike abortion. Due to better medicine not as many die from diseases like smallpox which is unnatural, abortion helps with population control.
Great example of why at any stage for any reason a woman should be able to kill the fetus. Its not by any definition a person and potential people never have any rights that trump actual peoples rights. See my video
XXBleedingrose 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Check out my video on abortion and adoption especially if you think you have valid arguments.
XXBleedingrose 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ABORTION IS DISGUSTING AND IMMORAL. IT IS ALSO MURDER!!! ABORTION SHOULD BE ILLEGAL AND ALL ABORTION CLINICS SHOULD BE SHUT DOWN!!!!
28804ecorrell 3 months ago
Abortion is murder.
AikenBruce 3 months ago
first of all animals are protected becuse that speces is probably endanged un like a fetuse were its just a sperm cell growing in side and egg 2 if it is murder then i have killed millions of sperm cells and you cant say that a sperm cell is not human becuse we all know its at least halfe human 3 do you cair for the child after it is born if it is born or dont u give a shit 4 if the child was part of gods plan then god wouldnt of given the mother a resen to abort the baby
Honyi1 4 months ago
You're religious beliefs? And how are you not keeping up with the questions. Lemme narrow it down for you with just six:
1. On what are you basing the fact that abortion is murder?
2. Do you consider removing a tumor to be murder?
3. Why do you consider the soul to be present at conception?
4. Is it murder if there is no guarantee it will be human?
5. Is it murder if the woman would die?
6. If a woman has a choice between suicide and abortion, which is the bigger sin to you?
TheCrippledCrow 6 months ago
@TheCrippledCrow But abortion is not removing a tumor.
silverespioshadow 6 months ago
@silverespioshadow It can be if it turns into one.
TheCrippledCrow 6 months ago
@TheCrippledCrow 1. The killing of a human baby in the womb. 2. Nope, not the same as biological life. 3. I don't agree with him here. 4. At contraception between sperm and egg the zygote has all the chromosomes to classify it as human. 5. If the baby is bound to die, save the life that you can. In your case, that's less than 1 % of cases. 6. We're not comparing sins, but if abortion is right or not. Suicide with the baby is 2 lives lost, means technically a greater sin. This is IMO.
ILOVEHACKEYSACK 5 months ago
@ILOVEHACKEYSACK Go back and read grafitti's statements. We've made all we could here and trumped yalls.
TheCrippledCrow 5 months ago
If abortion can be attributed to murder, then putting animals down should be the same as animal cruelty.
dotmadhack 8 months ago
I agree that aborition can be a good option. I am against it, having been a fetus once myself, though I will not throw myself into an argument as carelessly as some of the commentors I have seen below. Do not discriminate people for their opinions, we all have the right to choose what we believe.
YouDontSay13 8 months ago
Then abortion is ok before the brain and heart develope?? orrr????... What??
tazmetaphor 9 months ago
tour first argument is invalid, it is not arguing weather they are a person, they are not arguing that, it is obvious they are not it is a human in formation, the question is weather it is alive, i can prove that they are not alive. Babies get no air in the womb, no air= no life, i win you lose done, it is a parasite not a person deal with it, this defeats ur next argument, no life no death, no death no murder u lose again, argument 3 loses for the same reason, your 4th is just bad, you lose
strickerman101 10 months ago
@strickerman101 No comment here. Congratulations, you have just reached a whole new level of fail.
silverespioshadow 6 months ago
@silverespioshadow how u know im right so u refuse to say anything against it
strickerman101 5 months ago
the video disproves it's own claim. It list the definition of murder, "the unlawful killing of a human being...". Even if a fetus is a human being, the killing of it is not unlawful as abortion is legal. Therefore, abortion is not murder.
aislynnmidnight 1 year ago 6
@aislynnmidnight Did you know in Nazi Germany, Hitler killing the jews was not illegal? It was legal for him to do those horrible acts. So I guess Hitler didn't murder anybody since for his country, it was perfectly legal.
ILOVEHACKEYSACK 5 months ago
@ILOVEHACKEYSACK Under German law of the time, you are quite correct. Did you actually have a point?
aislynnmidnight 4 months ago
@aislynnmidnight Murder is killing some immorally whet legal or not!!!!
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
WRT abortion, if the fetus is occupying another persons body against her will, then abortion is not murder if it is removed, just as removing a rapist from her body would not be murder if it meant killing him to do it.
WhereCanIGoFromHere 1 year ago
@WhereCanIGoFromHere But the bitch had sex. If she got raped, then its totally ok. If she is some crazy teen slut, then the fetus does not have to pay for her mistakes.
silverespioshadow 8 months ago
@silverespioshadow That makes less than no sense, why is it okay for the fetus to pay for the man's crime of rape but not the promiscuity of the woman? Either the fetus is occupying her body against her will or it isn't. If it is, you either believe that she has the right to remove it or you don't (in other words, you believe that she doesn't have any right to her own body in any circumstance).
WhereCanIGoFromHere 6 months ago
@WhereCanIGoFromHere Actually, the fetus should not pay for anything, If it is there, It should stay there. This "Woman has rights over her body" shit is getting quite old.
She had the choice of having sex or not having sex.
Why should the little creature be killed for her stupid mother's mistake? She can always give it into adoption. Which is not cruel like abortion
silverespioshadow 6 months ago
Comment removed
WhereCanIGoFromHere 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@silverespioshadow Why should the little creature be killed for the rapists immoral crime?
WhereCanIGoFromHere 6 months ago
Actually the conclusion is a failed assumption in argument 2. You assume that the fetus is several things, such as innocent, not infringing on anyone else's rights, not putting anyone in danger, etc). If I said "If the RAPIST is a person and we know it, then killing him to stop him from raping is murder," you would immediately see the conclusion does not follow.
WhereCanIGoFromHere 1 year ago
Murder is the taking of the life of another human being through the initiation of physical force. Abortion is not murder, because a fetus is not a human being -- it is a potential human being, i.e. it is part of the woman. The concept murder only applies to the initiation of physical force used to destroy an actual human being, i.e., such as when "pro-life" terrorists bomb abortion clinics.
madderbass 1 year ago
Abortion is actually a good option
HowardSternn 1 year ago
Here's what you failed to address. Even if all of your assumptions are correct, in no way does that allow you to come to the conclusion that the act ought to be illegal.
618033988749 1 year ago
@618033988749
lmfao. reckless endangerment, manslaughter, animal rights violations...notice how all these words have legal connotations? THATS BECAUSE THEYRE FUCKING INHERENT TO THE LAW. he did a fucking superb job of linking each of the arguments back to a legal context. while this isnt the best (logically speaking) video ever, he did, at the very least, do a good job of linking the arguments back to his thesis. so sorry bro, he did clearly address that.
ilyLaura1 1 year ago
Have you ever sat on your foot until it was numb and tingly? That's because you restricted blood flow, causing the blood in your foot to become oxygen poor. If that happened in your brain you'd faint, and if it persisted you would slip into a coma. A fetus has always been in a coma, unless something is wrong, and that's important. A mother may mistake spastic reflexes for conscious movements, but if a fetus truly awoke in the womb, it could cause serious complications.
GodlessInfinity 1 year ago
Would you call an acorn an oak tree? Anyway animals are sentient, maybe not sapient, but sentient, and most animals aren't protected from being killed, only from being tortured and abused. Besides that animals have actually been conscious, but with rare exception a fetus doesn't even get oxygen rich blood to it's brain. We pull the plug on the clinically brain dead all the time (the body could be kept alive on machines for nearly 200 years), but they've actually had identities, a fetus doesn't.
GodlessInfinity 1 year ago
"Abortion is by no means beneficial to society" I strongly differ. You are forgetting a very important thing: why people abort in the first place? BTW Males also participate sometimes in the abortion decision, sometimes impose it physically or mentally over women.
If a teen age kid knowingly takes a chance and gets pregnant, and then wants to abort cause she doesnt want to take the responsability, you can contest her decision, morally. But let me take my time here, to elaborate on my opinion.
janover73 1 year ago
Comment removed
janover73 1 year ago
3.- is it benefitial to society that so many women die, and children are hurt when ignorant and/or desperate women/couples try to abort by hitting the belly/taking drugs? Again, with such parents chances are this children will never have a home nor family, and will sustain life lasting illness or handicap. Maybe if asked they would reply they want to live anyway, but maybe not. Who is to decide? I say not me, not anyone else, but the parents. Society´s job is to give this idiots some education
janover73 1 year ago
@janover73 Well said, you make excellent points. They're all wasted on the unreasonable instinct driven sacks of emotion that most anti-abortionists are, but very well put.
GodlessInfinity 1 year ago
@janover73 Well said, you make excellent points. They're all wasted on the unreasonable instinct driven sacks of emotion that most anti-abortionists are, but very well put.
GodlessInfinity 1 year ago
I like how 4 what if scenarios = abortion is bad
makes perfect sense
bobplatypus 1 year ago
Your argument is that you believe something, therefor people should agree with you because you might be right,& therefor abortion is by no means benificial to society & everyone should agree with you? Two problems there, one You give no reason to believe your right, your just saying people should agree with you, because you believe something & two, it's a non sequitur, you didn't even address the issue of whether or not it's beneficial to society.
Fuctmentality 1 year ago 4
@Fuctmentality Everone has the right to live all individuals, and individuals arent less then sopciety as a whole!!!
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 That would also be a non sequiter.
Fuctmentality 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I disagree.
Murder is unlawful killing. Abortion is lawful killing. Therefore abortion does not equal murder. Simple circular equation.
MyPaperBleedsInk 1 year ago
I disagree.
Murder is unlawful killing. Abortion is lawful killing. Therefore abortion does not equal murder. Simple circular equation.
MyPaperBleedsInk 1 year ago
Dustygirl122 is right, WE NEED A PLAN TO STOP ABORTION.
I never have liked abortion and never will for any reason. I understand people wanting it done for reason such as rape and/or incest. But I don't agree with it and will try to encourage any victim of rape and/or incest as much as I can.
Here are a few ways to stop abortion.
1. A condem is cheaper than having an abortion. 2. Wait til your married to have sex. 3.Call an adoption hotline. 4. Go to church, talk to the pastor for help.
mjt19741 2 years ago
@mjt19741
1. And it's only 99.9% effective.
2. Being married will not reduce the chances of someone getting an abortion.
3. Adoption is not always the best choice.
4. Don't bring religion into society's issues.
MyPaperBleedsInk 1 year ago
@MyPaperBleedsInk What is wrong with letting the child live?
mjt19741 1 year ago
@mjt19741 Nothing. But what's wrong with letting a fetus die that is deeply unwanted and will have a horrible life if it were to live? What's wrong with letting women keep their constitutional rights?
MyPaperBleedsInk 1 year ago
@MyPaperBleedsInk Everything. See the fetus actually is human. It is only scientifically CLASSIFIED as nonliving. It is not scientifically PROVEN. You don't know if it will have a horrible life. If the baby is unwanted, adopt it. Every state will pay for everything if the mother is single or if the family can't afford food, diapers and delivery fees. Our parents did not abort us. We are here right now aren't we? Just because it's legal does not mean it's the right thing to do.
mjt19741 1 year ago
@mjt19741 The fetus has the potential to become human.
Don't bring up the whole, "Well you weren't aborted." That's irrelevant and a pathetic argument.
And just because you want to force women through 9 months of carrying a parasite, and then having to go through labor because of your moral issues, doesn't make it the right thing to do either.
MyPaperBleedsInk 1 year ago
@MyPaperBleedsInk Think about it: We weren't aborted. We are here to enjoy life. How is that irrelevant and pathertic? Enjoy Life.
mjt19741 1 year ago
@mjt19741 Yeah, I know we weren't aborted. Dur. Why? Because we were actually wanted or our parents thought they could sustain us and provide well enough for us.
MyPaperBleedsInk 1 year ago
@MyPaperBleedsInk Like I said: THINK ABOUT IT.
mjt19741 1 year ago
@mjt19741 There's nothing to think about.
MyPaperBleedsInk 1 year ago
@MyPaperBleedsInk Yeah there is. Think abou it. No one here was aborted. We were given the chance to live. An aborted child never had the chance to live.
mjt19741 1 year ago
@mjt19741 And here's your chance to actually think about something. Why was that fetus aborted in the first place? What life would it have had, being unwanted? Being an outcast within it's family? And who's to say it would've even had a life? It could've died early on.
You can't play the "What if..." game.
MyPaperBleedsInk 1 year ago
@MyPaperBleedsInk Unwanted children are born everyday. If the mother doesn't want her child, she should give it up for adoption. Yes the world is cruel and we have to live in it. If you think about it, Life is very beautiful too. Every child should have the right to live.
mjt19741 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mjt19741 Yeah, I know we weren't aborted. Dur. Why? Because we were actually wanted or our parents thought they could sustain us and provide well enough for us.
MyPaperBleedsInk 1 year ago
@MyPaperBleedsInk Abordtion is equilvilant to murder. Think about it.
Abortion is not legally classified as. Murder is the unlawful killing of a human. Abortion is the killing of the fetus. Therefore ABORTION=MURDER.
mjt19741 1 year ago
@mjt19741 Haha...your logic is soooo off.
Murder = Unlawful killing
Abortion = lawful killing
Therefore Abortion is not equal to murder.
Sorry to disappoint you, but the law of the land, my country's constitution state otherwise then your opinion.
MyPaperBleedsInk 1 year ago
@MyPaperBleedsInk Abortion kills the unborn legally. Murder kills a person illegally. If both of them kill how could abortion not be equal to murder?
mjt19741 1 year ago
@mjt19741 You do not understand that it's a legal term and you can't just twist the definition to fit your views.
With your train of though I hope you also are anti- war and anti- death penalty....
MyPaperBleedsInk 1 year ago
@MyPaperBleedsInk Nope sorry. Pro war, Pro death penalty.
mjt19741 1 year ago
@mjt19741 Ha...of course. Another hypocrite in the making.
MyPaperBleedsInk 1 year ago
@MyPaperBleedsInk How does that make me a hypocrite? Really you are a hypocrite for saying that. Just because I don't agree with you does not make me a hypocrite. Thank you....
mjt19741 1 year ago
@mjt19741 I didn't say you were a hypocrite... I said it seems as though you're becoming one. Why? Because it seems as though you say you don't support murder or killing of humans and whatnot....yet you also just said you did.
MyPaperBleedsInk 1 year ago
@MyPaperBleedsInk I support the war in Iraq. I support the death penalty. But I don't support abortion. I do however agree with abortion if a woman has unwanted sex such as rape and incest or if it is life threatening. But that's only if she has no other choice but to abort. I don't support that, but I agree with it. So no I am not a hypocrite in the making.
mjt19741 1 year ago
@mjt19741
You were comparing abortion to murder. You were comparing the fetus to a human..... and yet you support war and the death penalty...both of which kill many humans.
MyPaperBleedsInk 1 year ago
@MyPaperBleedsInk In war and the death penalty, the person had the choice. Do the crime you do the time and the punishment. In war the soldier had the choice to join or not join. Abortion, the baby never had the choice. Therefore abortion=murder. Inother words it is equal to murder in a legal way.
mjt19741 1 year ago
@mjt19741
They did not have a choice...they didn't choose to die. And the punishment tends not to fit the crime in either case.... in times of war the people generally don't commit any crimes. In case of the death penalty most cases are not equivalent and even if they were.... an eye for an eye is not the way to go.
It's not equal to murder in a legal way. You from the U.S.? If so please learn our laws and constitutional rights.
Also, It's not considered a baby at the time it's aborted.
MyPaperBleedsInk 1 year ago
Comment removed
mjt19741 1 year ago
I'm pro abortion, most of these women are not willing to bring up these children. And I think its their right to whatever they want with their body. People say that abortion is wrong, but under certain circumstances. (Aka, rape or incest.) makes it okay, its still abortion and they are contradicting themselves. Its really sad.
ObiriSakura 2 years ago
@ObiriSakura There is always someone who is willing to bring up a child rather than have him or her killed. The adoption waiting list is quite long. Killing another human through abortion is not doing whatever they want with their body, it is killing someone else's body.
xalisae 2 years ago
@xalisae I agree that there would be atleast someone to bring up the child if it was born into the world. The fetus realise on its mothers body for 9 months until its birth, so if the mother doesnt want to wait around she has the choice in early pregnancy to abort the baby.
ObiriSakura 2 years ago
@ObiriSakura A baby actually relies on its mother's body for its survival well after birth as well. Why should the age make any difference as to whether or not a human should be protected by law from being killed?
xalisae 2 years ago
xa:Why should the age make any difference as to whether or not a human should be protected by law from being killed How would we "protect" fetuses in utero? There are 5 million pregnancies in the US every yr. How do we watch every women to make sure her fetus is protected? AND, what about our right to privacy? Our rights to our bodies & our fetuses?
Sueezee1 2 years ago
@Sueezee1 The same way they were protected before Roe VS. Wade and Doe VS. Bolton. Duh. You act as though abortion on demand has always been the norm.
xalisae 2 years ago
xa: You act as though abortion on demand has always been the norm. It nealry has. Do you abortion was legal & publically advertized in early 1800's(U.S.). It abounded in China in the yr 500 bc. and many other places. Abortion stopped in this country ONLY because of the deaths due to back alley butchers. I ts been legal nearly forever. Early settlers could abortion up to quickening.... So, what are you talking abut?
Sueezee1 2 years ago
@Sueezee1 Oh look, more lies. Just looking up "Abortion in the United States" on Wiki showed how absolutely full of bullshit you are.
xalisae 2 years ago
xa: Just looking up "Abortion in the United States" on Wiki showed how absolutely full of bullshit you are Concerning WHAT?/ Put a damned backquote or wrtie in complete sentences!!!
Sueezee1 2 years ago
@Sueezee1 That is a complete sentence. God, you're dumb as hell. Didn't you get banned?
My statement was in regard to your assertion about the legality of abortion pre-Roe. You're a liar.
xalisae 2 years ago
why are you not answering my questions? Are you avioding them? tyr again
How would we "protect" fetuses in utero?
Sueezee1 2 years ago
@Sueezee1 Just as we protect those individuals who have grown past the fetal stage? With laws penalizing those who would try to harm them?
xalisae 2 years ago
another one:
AND, what about our right to privacy
Sueezee1 2 years ago
@Sueezee1 Well, just as someone doesn't have the right to "privately" strangle a toddler, or even "privately" shoot themselves in the head (suicide is actually illegal...) no one would have the right to kill their child in utero. Once again, as I've said before, pre-Roe, women weren't regularly violated in an attempt to protect their unborn children. It would revert to that system. Duh.
xalisae 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
more:
xa: shouldn't be punished consequently with death for it
So, you prefer they are punished in life???
Sueezee1 2 years ago
Age makes a difference because the mother in question might not be mental mature enough to take on such a thing as a baby in their life, or they see it as a inconvience. Its how the world works these days. You can't just make something illegal like cigarettes or abortion because people need them. I know this sounds stupid, "people needing abortions" but its true, and the fact people say that you're aborting potential scientists or doctors is very stupid because not all of them will be like that.
ObiriSakura 2 years ago
@ObiriSakura I wasn't talking about the age of the mother. There's another person on the hook in an abortion, they're the one who loses their life in the procedure. The only reason it's alright for a mother to kill her kid in an abortion is because it's too young to cry, or fight, or do anything to prevent its death. And I not only think we shouldn't abort future scientists or doctors, but I also think the guys working at McDonald's are pretty neat too, because they're human beings just like me.
xalisae 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
xa: The only reason it's alright for a mother to kill her kid in an abortion is because it's too young to cry, or fight RIGHT.... because fetuse are not living human being able to do that, so it makes them NOT living huiman beings who have rights. So whats your point? Is it that IF they could fight, they couildnt be aborted?/Right dumbass...if they fought thats means they were born & CANT be abotrted anymore... Geeeeezzzz
Sueezee1 2 years ago
@Sueezee1 How do you figure they're "not living human being"? They don't have a pulse? Their cells aren't dividing? Their organ systems aren't processing? You're terribly ignorant if you think that. And watch The Silent Scream. Just because you can't see them fight doesn't mean they don't try.
xalisae 2 years ago
@Sueezee1 Oh, so how human you are depends on your physical capacity...let's be sure to tell that to all the people in wheelchairs and folks in the iron lungs. Watch out guys, Sueezee might abort you!
xalisae 2 years ago
@xalisae Okay, it seems like this is turning into a argument that will go on and on, so Im just going to say one thing and stop. We have two different opinions, I respect yours and I hope you respect mine aswell.
ObiriSakura 2 years ago
@ObiriSakura I'm sorry, but I can't respect an opinion that is helping to end the lives of over 3,000 human beings a day in my country.
xalisae 2 years ago
@xalisae thats a shame, and you know what else is a shame? That in countries like Africa they dont have this kind of technology. Now don't go on saying abortion is still wrong and that babies from those countries deserve live, you're wrong there because most of their mothers have aids and will give this to their children. Not to mention that in some area's that they have no source of clean drinking water or possibly food cause they're that poor and will unlikely survive to their late teens.
ObiriSakura 2 years ago
@ObiriSakura That's totally off-topic. One can support better conditions for developing countries (where we will finally probably one day find a cure for AIDS, since many children born to positive mothers don't even HAVE signs of the disease, and many who do have VERY diminished cases) AND be opposed to the killing of so many in utero.
xalisae 2 years ago
@xalisae I only came here to give my own opinion on a subject and then leave it at that. I can see this conversation has quickly turned into a argument that wont stop until someone says so. Im stopping this argument because I dont see why I should be wasting my time talking to a person who obviously has their mind set. And this time I mean it when I say stop, I'm not replying to any of your messages anymore, thank you for your opinion and I hope you live out a nice healthy life.
ObiriSakura 2 years ago
@ObiriSakura Well, you can't just say "I think it should be legal for a mother to end the life of her child as long as that child is still in the womb." and get upset about someone taking issue with that. It's a very provocative statement to many people, and for good reason.
xalisae 2 years ago
@xalisae I don't like it when people drag on a argument, especially on Youtube. Now I know the majority of people who think abortion is wrong outweighs the people who think its okay.
The reason why abortion is not illegal in most countries is because you cannot control the desicion of hundreds of thousands of woman around the world. Stop trying to surpress women into having these children when they dont want to. Because its not all about the baby, its also about the mother.
ObiriSakura 2 years ago
@ObiriSakura I've given birth to 2 children. The mothers inconvenience shouldn't and does not outweigh the entire life of the child. You CAN control the decisions of hundreds of thousands (but, since most women when questioned said that if abortion were illegal they simply wouldn't have one, so it'd really only be hundreds at most) of women. It was done before Roe vs. Wade, and it can be done afterward as well.
xalisae 2 years ago
Before abortion was legal, more than a million women died during illegal abortions. Both the mother AND the child are dead now. No lives were saved there. Abortion is a terrible thing, but there has to be a plan about eliminating the need for it before we just waltz around and go back to before it was legalized. When women no longer NEED it, then make it illegal. We can't even take care of the kids we have, would you rather have a child starving in the streets or loved up in Heaven?
dustygirl122 2 years ago
@dustygirl122 Dr. Nathanson, co-founder of NARAL: "We aroused
enough sympathy to sell our program of permissive abortion by fabricating the number of
illegal abortions done annually in the U.S. The actual figure was approaching 100,000 but
the figure we gave to the media repeatedly was 1,000,000. Repeating the big lie often
enough convinces the public. The number of women dying from illegal abortions was around
200-250 annually. The figure we constantly fed to the media was 10,000."
xalisae 2 years ago
Really? I did not know that. Perhaps I should research a little more deeply into these things. Thanks for giving me that quote. =)
dustygirl122 2 years ago
@dustygirl122 My pleasure. The truth is coming out, slowly but surely, and one day we will help stop the legal execution of over 3,000 prenatal humans every day. Feel free to message me if you want any more information. Be well.
xalisae 2 years ago
I am not trying to imply that you are lying, but how do we know any statistics are correct then? How do we know 3000 babies a day isn't 300, or any number is correct? Both Pro-Choice and Pro-Life arguments can be built off of lies.
dustygirl122 2 years ago
@dustygirl122 Well, you'll find that at the very least I myself try to research as best as possible. The number "3,000 a day" comes from the Guttmacher Institute, which is actually a research arm of Planned Parenthood, which is the nation's largest abortion provider. How would that number be biased if it's coming straight from the abortion provider themselves?
xalisae 2 years ago
Well, you are certainly well researched! Nice job. =)
dustygirl122 2 years ago
@dustygirl122 Well, thank you, but the only reason I spend so much time gathering information about the subject is that so many human lives are being lost on a daily basis, I want to see them given all the same protection under the law that you or I are currently entitled to. Please consider those who don't have anyone to fight for them, and no way of fighting themselves. Please think about becoming a voice for the voiceless.
xalisae 2 years ago
I have considered it. I used to be Pro-Life, until my friend got pregnant (rape) and had an abortion cause she was only 14 and she knew she wouldn't have been able to care for her rapist's child and could not find adoptive parents. For now, my views are temporary though. I am Pro-Choice because I do not see any decent plans to stop abortion without having major consequences 100X worse then abortion being legal. When that plan comes, I will be one of the first to support it. Wishing you the best!
dustygirl122 2 years ago
xa:always someone who is willing to bring up a child rather than have him or her killed then why are 250,000 foster kids up for adoption today (U.S.), not to mention all the other places to find thrown away kids?
Sueezee1 2 years ago
@Sueezee1 Because the adoption/foster care/child protective services systems need to be reformed. It's not the fault of the children that adults can't get their affairs in order, and they shouldn't be punished consequently with death for it, either.
xalisae 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
xa: Because the adoption/foster care/child protective services systems need to be reformed Bologna!! U.S. foster care system is the the least expensive type of adoption, usually involving little or NO cost, and states often provide SUBSITIES (help financially) to people who adopt these kids.
xa: shouldn't be punished consequently with death for it So, you prefer they are punished in life???
Sueezee1 2 years ago
@Sueezee1 oh yes, and money=quality, right? The waiting lists for adoptions is years-long, also.
Life is not a punishment. I have quite a few adopted friends who will agree with me on that. One recently became a father himself. If you think life is such a punishment, why are you still here? And what gives anyone the right to declare someone else's life so terrible it's not (or assume that it wouldn't be-you don't even know for certain!) worth living?
xalisae 2 years ago
xa: The lists for adoptions is years
Liar. Thats a prolife cop out & LIE to make it look like THAT is the reason kids arent being adopted.
xa:have a few adopted friends the "FEW" of yourdamned friends DONT a statistic make!
xa: why are you still here?
To make you look ignorant.
xa: gives anyone right to declare someone else's life worth living
The mother who KNOWS what its life will be like.Who the hell are YOU to demand its life IS worth living when you dont care?
Sueezee1 2 years ago
@Sueezee1 No, you're a liar. I'm telling the truth. Look up "waiting lists" at adoption encyclopedia. The government drags out the adoption process for years. Have you ever smoked? Owned a large breed dog? No adopting for you! It's ridiculous.
Well, the few of my adopted friends who are alive right now appreciate it and don't like the idea that they could've been reduced to a "choice", and scraped out of their mother and thrown in a bucket. "a few" human beings are still human beings.
xalisae 2 years ago
@Sueezee1 Being a mother doesn't give you some crystal ball to see the future. I don't know what my kids' lives will be like years from now. I didn't know a year ago what they would be like now. And the idea of me strangling my son now because we MIGHT still be in a bad place financially is abhorrent. I don't see why him being in the womb should make that same behavior any more acceptable.
xalisae 2 years ago
xa: And the idea of me strangling my son now because we MIGHT still be in a bad place financially is abhorrent Holy christ!! Keep you idiot ass away from me... you damned psychopath!!!! You have the mentality of a 8 yr old! no wonder you morons cant make abortion illegal!!! GOOD BYE !!
Sueezee1 2 years ago
@Sueezee1 Oh look, personal attacks because you can't back your argument up. Figures.
If my position is that you shouldn't be allowed to kill your child in utero because of financial difficulty or personal whim, extending that to include all children makes sense. The opposite position of course makes no sense, it's ok to kill one's child IF certain conditions are met. I'm glad you're as incensed by the notion as I am! :D
xalisae 2 years ago
Pro-Lifers, you guys are making a great argument. If you don't mind, I'd like to jump in on the Pro-Choice side here since Suezzee1 seems to have quit or gone to find out what she's talking about. I'll start with the foster care. Yes, there are about 518,000 children in foster care right now without homes. Yes, the US adoption system takes years, but that is not from a lack of available children, it is from a lack of competent lawyers drawing up these legal documents.
dustygirl122 2 years ago
Also, you must consider what a mother forced to carry out a pregnancy will do. She obviously does not care for the child, so there is a higher chance she will smoke and drink during pregnancy. The child could be born disabled, and while I am not saying they should be killed just for this, I am saying that there are a lack of parents available to adopt disabled children, and at 3000 more kids a day, the rate of homeless, hungry, and neglected children will go up.
dustygirl122 2 years ago
So, if you want to stop abortion, my point is, you need a plan. A plan to prevent all unwanted pregnancies for everyone around the world, a plan on what to do with the children (supposing the mother does not want them) so they grow up with the love they deserve and would have gotten in Heaven (sorry, my religious views) were abortion still legal, and a plan to prevent from major overpopulation (cause unfortunately this is a factor). If you want to debate your point, please feel free to reply. =)
dustygirl122 2 years ago
love the music man, arguments are of a different type to what I've seen none the less it's for a good cause.
Lichoudaris 2 years ago
I find it interesting that this video uses animals as an example. There's loads of animals euthanized every year because of over population and excessive quantities of unwanted animals, as long as it is done in a fairly humane manor (putting it to sleep).
I hope the over population issue never reaches that point, but statistically projecting ahead, if no actions are taken, it will eventually. In my opinion producing less people is more humane then killing or sterilizing adults.
JoesephKatana 2 years ago
@JoesephKatana Not that I necessarily agree with the idea of overpopulation, but I do agree with your sentiment of "producing less people", but that happens through contraception, not abortion. Abortion is terminating a human life which has already begun.
xalisae 2 years ago
Is abortion the solution to overpopulation?
shmiggen 2 years ago
no, abortion is not the solution to overpopulation; nor should it be considered one. there is no solution unfortunately.
blackrose3226 2 years ago
the members of the supreme court thinks otherwise.
STARWARRRIOR 2 years ago
1. I disagree with your statement that animals are non-persons and would ask you to back up your claim.
2. No, it's self defence.
3. No, it's self defence.
4. No, that example is one of an accident.
Conclusion: In what way are thousands of unwanted children being born a benefit to society? In what way is ignoring a woman's right to control her own body beneficial?
Bumblybee256 2 years ago
This is not about a "woman's right to control her own body". Those who oppose legalized abortion fully support a woman's right to do whatever she likes-with HER body. Abortion, however, impacts the body of another human, permanently depriving that individual of his or HER right to live. Around 50% of all abortion permanently deny a woman the right to live.
xalisae 2 years ago
Wrong, whether or not the fetus is a person does NOT determine whether or not it is murder. A rapist, for example, is clearly a person, yet it's not murder if a woman kills one in self-defense. That's exactly what an abortion is: self-defense. Since a fetus is a parasitic organism that can have harmful effects on the woman's body, a woman is perfectly entitled to remove it, whether or not it is a person is irrelevant (which it's not). Also, animals don't use other's bodies against their will.
Headhunter004 2 years ago
Let's ignore medicinal purposes and declare abortion wrong because of the bible.
Fossilize your thoughts and be a good Christian!!
no1sjester 2 years ago
Not all people oppose abortion on religious grounds. Many atheists are also against abortion on human rights grounds.
xalisae 2 years ago
Abortions are, frequently, necessary for the health of either the fetus or the mother, and (it is my belief that) we have no right to interfere with what patients discuss and decide on with the assistance of their doctors.
No educated, moral person would use Abortion as a method of birth control, which I think is what many people are fearful of, unfortunately.
I will agree that a small number of Atheists are pro-life, however, I don't care, and I still disagree with their view.
no1sjester 2 years ago
Umm..no, they are NOT "frequently necessary". And, how would killing someone be necessary for their health? Your first comment is incorrect, and the other part makes no sense.
The vast majority of abortions are preformed on people who have already had previous abortions.
No person should have the right to end another human life in the way abortion does.
xalisae 2 years ago
This video is INSANE
Note how it sidesteps what happens to unwanted children?
Ever thought of that.
Where do orphans come from..?
Do you think that 16 year olds should have families?
Its not about ooo its murder no its manslaughter no its reckless endangerment
Its about taking the right option.
Anti-Abortionists say every foetus deserves a chance at life, but what life awaits them?
An idyllic happy life? Most likely not.
EclecticSceptic 2 years ago
Comment removed
robat227 2 years ago
The bottom line is whether or not a fetus is a person is irrelevant. One cannot be forced to support another's life with their own body. If someone broke into your home and hooked a person up to your blood supply through an i.v., and that person would die if you unhooked them, don't you still have the right to do so? Would it be murder to unhook them?
I don't think so.
Bottom line is a person cannot be forced to support another life just because your religious beliefs says she should.
cherrymiss72 2 years ago
i think it's ridiculous when people claim that a fetus is a human being as an objective fact. biology, medicine, law, philosophy, and theology have no consensus on whether a fetus is a human being or not, and neither does society as a whole. there will never be a consensus because of the subjective and unscientific nature of the claim, so we must give the benefit of the doubt to women, who are indisputable human beings with rights.
blackrose3226 2 years ago
Do you also think it's ridiculous when people claim that a fetus is not a human being? After all, the same lack of consensus applies.
However, biologically speaking, a fetus has all the qualities of life, and it certainly isn't anything other than human. So, a fetus can objectively be proven to be a human being, in terms of biology. Theology and philosophy are largely irrelevant, since everyone has their own brand. Laws are completely subjective and subject to change, so they should be out too.
Beskargam 2 years ago
biologically speaking embryo is far more primitive than a fish or a bird. anatomically, its brain has yet to develop. so in terms of its capacity for consciousness, it doesn't bear the slightest similarity to a human being. this growth of cells has the potential to become a human being but only if preserved, fed, nurtured, and brought to term by the woman that it depends on
blackrose3226 2 years ago
Are you using embryo and fetus interchangeably? Cuz they are very different things. I only ask because you spoke of fetuses in your last comment, so I responded in kind, but now you seem to be switching to embryos. Regardless of brain development, they're still human and still living. As far as similarities go, it certainly has it where it counts, as far as biology goes: its DNA.
Beskargam 2 years ago
human beings are much more than our dna. dna alone does not make someone a human being
blackrose3226 2 years ago
Yes, but it does determine whether or not we're human. In the end though, since all of what we are when born comes from our DNA, we really AREN'T "much more than our DNA".
Beskargam 2 years ago
to be a human being is more than merely having human chromosomes and human dna. It is a combination of life, human genetics, consciousness and sufficient autonomy that it can live apart from its biological mother
blackrose3226 2 years ago
"It is a combination of life, human genetics, consciousness and sufficient autonomy that it can live apart from its biological mother"
And you think this because?
Beskargam 2 years ago
that is what makes a human being a human being according to most scientists. of course, there are others who just think a human being could just simply be a dna, but i find that ridiculous.
blackrose3226 2 years ago
But people who lose the ability to have any kind of consciousness don't stop being human beings, do they? What about if they lose autonomy?
Beskargam 2 years ago
people who are unconscious are still live apart from their mothers' bodies. their bodies grow and develop on their own, and don't require to live off the bodies of other life forms to survive. as long as they are able to regain consciousness/self-awareness, they are still human beings. but like i said, there are many factors that make us human beings. one thing doesn't make us who we are
blackrose3226 2 years ago
So, missing one of the factors doesn't necessarily make you not a human being?
Beskargam 2 years ago
consciousness is also what separates us from every other animal life form on the planet. we think about ourselves. we use language to describe ourselves. we are aware of ourselves as a part of the greater whole
blackrose3226 2 years ago
So, would animals that have a language be considered to have consciousness? There is a species of monkey that uses distinct sounds to indicate the presence of distinct creatures and threats, as well as to announce intentions. Do they perhaps have some sort of limited consciousness?
Beskargam 2 years ago
thats the thing. there is no common definition that can be used to determine if someone is or is not conscious, or how conscious something is.
blackrose3226 2 years ago
The law says one thing, God's law says another thing. I think I will follow God, he decides where you will spend eternity. Oh, one more thing, God had plans for your soul before you were even in your Mothers womb. So therefore, you have a soul before your Mother thought about you. To be a human, you have to have a soul. example: The law says I can only kill myself with a knife to my jugular. Would you do that too? Would that be different? This breaks my heart. This is just my opinion.
spiderlark 2 years ago
Your whole argument relies on the basis that a fetus is a person. A fetus is not a person. Animals are protected because they are conscious; a young fetus is not conscious, no more than a plant is conscious. Abortion is more questionable in the third trimester, but for the first two your objection does not apply.
MTGandP 2 years ago
If you're making the argument based on consciousness, then it's pretty questionable in the second trimester, too.
Beskargam 2 years ago
consciousness does not occur until after birth
blackrose3226 2 years ago
Define "consciousness" as you understand it. If it includes being aware of one's surroundings and reacting to stimuli, then I disagree.
Beskargam 2 years ago
a reaction to stimulus =/= consciousness. consciousness is when someone has an awareness of their environment. own existence, sensations, and thoughts
blackrose3226 2 years ago
So, do most animals have a consciousness?
Beskargam 2 years ago
no. animals dont differentiate between the stimuli coming from inside and those coming from outside their bodies. for that they would have to be aware that they have a body, of which they are not, they also dont think like we do
blackrose3226 2 years ago
No? Many animals react to physical localized pain by trying to alleviate pressure on the area in pain. They're also known to treat physical over-heating with submergence in water or shade. Many animals, especially predators, are able to track other things by the sounds they make, and so are obviously aware that the sounds emanate from other things.
Beskargam 2 years ago
humans manifest logic and reason, animals function on instinct. animal consciousness is not entirely understood. scientists do not entirely agree on whether animals are conscious or to what level they are self-aware. some animals show signs of consciousness, but scientists have not yet found proof that animals are as completely self-aware as some people describe them to be
blackrose3226 2 years ago
Mm hm. So if many scientists can't be sure about the level of consciousness possessed by many animals, can you be sure about the level of consciousness possessed by a fetus?
Beskargam 2 years ago