If you really want to reduce unwanted pregnancy and abortion, make the father completely responsible for the baby. If he wants to marry the mother (and she agrees), then we are done. If he doesn't want to marry her, she becomes a surragate mother, he pays her 50,000 to have the baby, and he has the responsibility for the baby (2000/month to the mom).
Otherwise, we just continue with the dad bailing, mom going on welfare or aborting. Bad choices for her.
What makes up a human being? Is a human being a human without a soul? Does the soul die when the body ceases to function? If the soul survives is it trapped in the body? If the soul leaves the body then is it really death or a transitional alternate life?
what about the 14 year old girl that gets raped and soon finds out she is pregnant..though crude this can and DOES happen. abortion doesnt have to be something that any pregnant woman can get, and obviously is an absolute last resort. btu should this hypothetical girl have to go through this whole pregnancy being constantly reminded of what happened to her that night, get the stretch marks that will remind her forever, and not to mention the lack of schooling due to pregnancy side effects
LIFE STARTS AT CONCEPTION?? AT BIRTH? WHO CARES!!! IF a woman wants to kill a fetus (or whatever the hell you want to call it) then shes gonna do it. The quesiton is WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT?? Are you going to force a woman to have a baby?? YOULL NEVER DO IT!! NEVER!! IT WILL BE CALLED FACISM!! You cant say taking care of a sick person is immoral with state money, but then turn around and say oh but taking care of a fetus is moral. Its qualifying who lives and who dies!
Development- Completely wrong. A fetus has the potential to become a human-being. A born baby is a human being.
Location-A developing fetus cannot live outside of a mother until a certain stage which then requires a C-section. A zygote is part of the mothers body and cannot grow in Aruba or in Mississippi outside of its mother.
Reliance-Diabetics can shoot up their own medication. They can also choose to take the medicine or not. A growing fetus is literally part of the mothers body.
Tell me good sir, what happens if every baby ever conceived is born and reaches adult hood? Do you know what happens to a society when overpopulation trumps the local resources? One last thing, why do you believe that you are qualified to classify life and also tell someone else how to live theirs? Please respond, I would love to hear good answers.
@ReddAngry You assume overpopulation occurs in a free society, but that is illogical, and has been shown that people are having less and less children in america, so the overall rate is lowering, so the function that representes population is flatlining.
When population gets higher, demand rises, and prices rise according to supply and demand, which causes people to, oh, I don't know, have less children? Abortion is a false and unneccessary substitute.
Why not month 5 minus a day. Well why not? Is it inconvient to your argument? If the child has the right to its own life at n=5 months, then why not n= 5 months - 1 day? There is no set of logical axioms that can show the significance of 5 months without causing socrates paradox.
@HowardSternn So your logic is only based on what feels good? You just ignore mathematics and socrates paradox for convience. You are fine with children being killed because it feels right to you, not because it is logical or not?
Also, please respond to the question. If the child has the right to its life at month 5, why not 5 months minus a day?
@HowardSternn Sir, that's mathemetical error and something for statistics, I am talking about mathematical induction and socrites paradox which shows for all cases or none. Give or take is a horrible answer when we are talking about killing someone.
@Sueezee1 a fetus is someone, according to socrites paradox. A fetus at one day before birth is a person, and if a fetus is a person at any point, then the fetus is a person the day before (There exists no point in which a fetus goes from non-person to person except conception, but before, the fetus didn't exist yet) Therefore, by induction, we must conclude that the fetus is a person during the entire pregancy. To deny this is to cause socrites paradox.
@bdg323 says: There exists no point in which a fetus goes from non-person to person except conception,
~~~~~~~~~ OH really, lets see..a NON person is a is one who lacks, loses, or is forcibly denied social or legal status, especially basic human rights, or who effectively ceases to have a record, or never had a record of their existence within a society from a point of view of traceability, documentation, or existence. "Person" is just the opposite...so there is a point.
@Sueezee1 I didn't know slaves weren't people. (Forcibly denied social or legal status). Also, are people we don't know exist non-people who have no rights? Also, why does social status mean anything in this argument. My rights depend on how you view me? As for legal status, do i not have rights if I live in anarchy? Society does not determine my rights either. You also have failed to put in a day, a time, a point in which the status changes. So no, your argument doesn't work.
@bdg323 says: You are fine with children being killed because it feels right to you,
~~~~~~~~~~ "Children" arent being killed, and abortion is about choice...because it feels right for the woman, not because it feels right to anyone else.
@Sueezee1 I gave a mathematical argument as to why a fetus (From now, I shall call it a child or baby) has the right to its life, and his response was "FIve months sounds about right to me" To which I responded "You are fine with children being killed because it feels right to you, not because it is logical or not?". I gave my reasons why children are being killed, you have not responded. To deny that the children have the right to life is to cause socrites paradox.
@voceangeli......I don't think your second argument is valid either. A newborn baby most certainly IS phisically dependant. It cannot eat, clean, or transport itself without the aid of another being. And in all honosty, product baby food and milk is a luxury and a blessing. The baby's original food reliance is on the mother's breast milk. That's why women have breasts. So in reality, a newly BORN baby differs little from an UNBORN baby. It's just outside the womb. So would you kill a born baby?
@voceangeli.......See but you just said it right there. It's one PERSON living inside of another person. It's not a parasite or some kind of harmful bug or something. It's a living person, and therefore it's murder. And yes, if a tiny little person cut into you while you slept and attatched himself to your insides, I would agree that you would have the right to take defensive actions. But that has absolutely nothing to do with unborn babies, which are made from the careless CHOICE of having sex.
The second part where your argument falls apart is the dependence factor. You fail to make the distinction between PHYSICAL dependence and SOCIAL dependence. A baby that has been born or that is viable is socially dependent on someone to take care of it it, but they aren't physically dependent. A diabetic is also socially dependent on getting medicine, but doesn't require the use of someone else's body.
Your arguments fall completely apart when two ideas are added. First, in terms of location, you respond with locations outside of other people. The location is not irrelevant if one person is occupying another persons body. The location of Aruba and my stomach are not the same morally and it does affect the morality of the argument. If a tiny little person cut into you while you slept and attached himself to your insides, you would have the right to remove that little person from your body.
Wow, you know you have a big voice and possibly alot of influence. Would you mind getting some murderers out of prison? I mean abortion is the killing of unborn humans and you don't think that is wrong so what is wrong with letting out all the other murderers? I hope you use your radio voice to make it happen. You will make a lot of pro-choicers happy in the process.
@ccrg109 In reality my favorite cousin is actually an intern for Howard Stern and for your info Howard is fir the Death Penalty not for letting them out of prison.
@HowardSternn It is a human being in the earliest stages of development, with its own unique DNA, gender and physical characteristics all determined. As early as 18 days there is a beating heart.
@HowardSternn Define group! You yourself are also a group of cells and tissue, interconnected to make a body, just like the child! Your argument could extend to making it okay for people to murder you, because 'It is not Murder it is just Tissue and a group of cells'
Pro-abortionists cannot ethically justify the murders of innocent unborn babies. So they try to avoid the fact that it is HUMAN LIFE from the moment of conception by quibbling about irrelevant mostly arbitrary terminology. People who lack compassion for others essentially say, "Well, I made it safely past my first 9 months of life, so now I needn't consider anyone else's first 9 months of life as being as important to them as it was to me."
"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."
even animals care for thier young. But some humans kill thiers and leave them like they r nothing. i just dont understand. I had a very hard life as a young child but i never lost my soul . I belive if u have sex u know u can get pregnant 1 and 1 is 2 . People need to wake up and start thinking before the act.
Your 3 arguments fall apart on the first part which makes your other 2 points null and void. I don't think you know what people mean by "fully developed". They don't mean fully developed adult, that would be silly and would show that your arguments are all based on nit picking the exact meaning of words. By fully developed they mean to the stage that the fetus could live without the mother if it was taken out. A fully developed baby, not adult.
at 11 weeks your baby forms a life long prefferance for the left or right hand... they form their personalities on the inside
with me my first kid HATED chicken and i couldnt eat it without throwing it up... she was almost 2 before she would touch it... (they can taste your food thru the amniotic fluid!) national geographic inside the womb- for ppl who are gonna ask where i got the info ;)
just because they havent been born doesn't mean they aren't a person
The standard argument is NOT that an embryo isn't human, or that it's not fully developed, An embryo IS human in the same way that an egg is the stage of a chickens life, and an acorn is a stage of an oak tree's life. An embryo or fetus is not a PERSON. Location; comparing being in some campus to being in a woman's womb is an obvious nonsense. Inside the womb you are an embryo or fetus, outside the womb you are a person. if the location doesnt matter, being removed from the womb wouldnt matter.
reliance, another one I've never heard. again the comparison between an unwilling host woman and insulin is a nonsense. An embryo or fetus is parasitic in nature, in his scenario, the woman is a drug and the diabetic is the embryo??? anew born baby does NOT have to rely on its mother, another person (or even ape in the case of Tarzan;-) ) could raise a baby not an embryo or fetus. being reliant on a specific person is extremely signifigant if that person will not support you.
Unwilling host woman? The woman is a drug? An embryo/ fetus is parasitic? You make it sound as though it isn't natural. Pregnancy is highly natural regardless of the circumstances it comes about.
Why do you use Anti-Choice. Its not like we are against choice. We are against the killing of an innocent baby. Not to mention we identify ourselves as Pro-life. In a matter of fact we are for more choice than you are. you want to give one person the ability to make a choice which will end the life of another human. and we wan that other human to beable to live to make an infinite amount of choices. So you are for 1 new choice we are for giving lets call it even 100000 choices. God Bless
Abortion is murder..You are terminating the life of a human being..It is homicide....Plain & simple..Life is a miracle...Save the babies...Gerard Paul
You don't understand that a non-entity is not entitled to "rights". There is no actual victim involved in the case of abortion, there is a victim involved, with rights, in the case of rape or murder. The only reason you believe the the fetus is a "baby" and should have rights is because it is a teaching of your religion. A free America will no longer be free when religious beliefs become laws that govern all of society.
I am only responding to your video because you seem to be on the verge of a logical thought. I have a few questions for you that may help complete the thought...At what point in a pregnancy do you believe abortion should be unlawful? Why should abortion be unlawful from the point in the pregnancy you have chosen? Do your views come from a belief in God or a higher power? Do you support making birth control unlawful in this country? I will resopnd to your answers if you have the courage to post.
Abortion should be unlawful during every stage of the pregnancy, because the embryo/fetus is a distinct living being which has a fundamental right to life. Yes, my belief is based on the God of the Bible.
While I believe that birth control is unwise and should not be necessary (as all sex should happen within marriage), I recognize that people who are not born again may not have a desire or enough self-control to adhere to God's standards for sexual purity.
I assume this includes abortion at the fertilisation stage when the egg and sperm become a zygote...How is destroying a zygote diffrent than destroying one egg and one sperm (as in the case of birth control) when a zygote is one egg and one sperm. If you have ever used birth control with you wife, are you not just as much a murderer as somone that had an abortion in the zygote stage? Both the zygote and the egg/sperm are human, both have a chance to become a being if left to the course of nature
It is oblivious that there is no difference between the egg/sperm and the zygote. The same matter, in the same form, exists the second before conception and the second after conception. The only difference between the two stages of the egg and sperm is that after conception the egg and the sperm would be in the same location. ;) The only way to justify that abortion is wrong in the zygote stage, is to base the reasoning solely upon the teachings of your religion.
Given your basis for for your reasoning, the question arisesWhy do you feel like you have the right to enforce, by law, the teachings of your religion? Do you not believe in America? Freedom of religion? If you are an American, why would you force other "free people" to follow your religous beliefs?
There are no biblical verses that deal specifically with the question of abortion.
If you believe that every distinct living being has a fundamental right to life, how do you reconcile that belief with the fact that you are destroying millions of bacteria with every breath you take?
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.
None of your little factoids here have any bearing on the question of whether an embryo is a human being nor of what the bible god has to say about abortion.
You are committing the logical fallacy of non sequitur.
A broken condom? The partners have to be prepared for this. Underaged sex? Fine, the parents might be able to pull it off and raise him/her decently. Product of rape? I don't think so. Its not fair on the mother or the child. All the mother will see is the face of the rapist causing her psychological trauma and the baby will see itself as worthless and unwanted. It may not be the case but "logic" shows otherwise. If this case is still fair, explain away.
It doesn't matter if both the parent and child are almost certainly in hell for 18 years as long as they're alive we as a society can call ourselves moral. The rape was not one simple action of the father its effects are lifelong on the mother and child. In most cases (as sane societies look out for the greater good) what good can come from an unwanted child being born into a world of rejection?
The good that comes is fact that murder is not committed, whereas in your solution you murder the child because of the sin of one of his or her parents.
And you seem to have forgotten the possibility of adoption.
I live in England, if you look over recent headlines you will see the adoption is unsuccessful here. The fetus is not a child, children have identities, self awareness and free will. The fetus is a dice with 5 faces saying unhappy life. If the fetus has a right to life why is it unreasonable for the mother to have a right to not be in this situation.
It's not as simple as you percieve it to be the mother's life could be ruined what if she was in a realtionship, finishing school and trying to hold down a job? Why should she sacrifice the quality of her own life to this extent for an accidental life?
The fetus is not a child. It has no identity, no sense of self or anything else. Your misinterpreting my solution. I could equivalently say your solution is to ruin the mother's life as punishment for something the father did. Ruination of life with greater potential to serve humanity (the mother's) is a greater loss than termination of life with less potential (the fetus').
How on earth can we consider & support our own mother killing us because we were the product of rape? Does this mean anyone is superior to someone who is the product of rape? I cannot exchange one tragic event with one ten times worse!A women is never more degraded than when she agrees to destroy her own child. Demand full funding for non-violent crisis pregnancy programs. Abortion is a cheap and disrespectful solution. Help your pregnant sisters in any way you can!!
I have 12 adopted children and thank you, yes!! I have taken into my home many pregnant women and coached them as they gave the gift of life to their precious, innocent, defenseless babies & have cried my tears of joy!! I have supported them & their babies,I have given of my time & energy for these young mothers,the miracle they share,the joy I receive is more than you will ever know!!
amb,,,you mean I am not the one killing my precious unborn baby don't you! I am not the one that owns a slave, I'm not the one gassing the Jews!! I am not the one dehumanizing life around me, isn't that what you mean?
Sorry angel but no, you're a propagandist and no scientist. Before 24 months a fetus can't feel pain, if that ever was an argument. Your Tim Staples is a BIG LIAR or understands nothing about biology and nervous system. i would think the latter option, anti choicers are usually not very good in biology.
I had the pleasure of Tim Staples (convert from Protestant to Catholic) give a talk here in Texas. He stated that there was a study done on embryos at 31 days and scientist found that the? embryo can feel pain based on the electrical pulses that are present. These electrical pulses were identical to human outside of the womb who felt pain. I thought that was interesting.Might want to keep current & throw away the outdated biology books.
Looks like Tim Staples is a pseudo scientist having a clear agenda. Nope I'm not throwing my biology books to your beliefs. You're entitled to your belief i'm entitled to mine. You have no reason to impose your views on mine.
Pain requires specific cells not just electricity or pulses!
amb.. believe it or not, science is progressing forward, you should try to keep up. I do not impose my beliefs on you or anyone else,I will however, try to get you to see facts.
angel, I'm not the one killing babies either, i don't own slave, i don't gass jews, and I never said a fetus is not a human life. A fetus is just an advanced stage of developpment compared to sperm and ovum, still... no person, thus has no rights, compared to an actual woman who wants to get an abortion.
amb..You are indeed killing babies by condoning and supporting women who kill their unborn.You can dehumanize all you want, but that is what you are,an advanced stage of development from the combination of an ovum & sperm! Does that make you less human or worthy of life!??
if i'm just an advanced stage and you think all stages are equal in value, don't you cry for each ovum or sperm lost? Do you say murder for each menstruation of masturbation? Ovum and sperm are also stages of human life!
You do need to keep current on your science & biology. Menstruation is a sloughing of the lining of the uterus when no fertilized egg has attached to the lining. Masturbation is the ejaculation of sperm by artificial forced stimulation.Separate from the ovum.Life begins when a sperm is fused with an ovum and embedded into the lining of the uterus.Now do you understand,I thought we all learned this is health ed around the 3'rd grade.
If life begins at the point you stated, that must mean the sperm and the egg are not alive.
Ridiculous!
Life is already in existence prior to conception; it is passed through the sperm and egg. Conception is only one stage of life in the reproductive cycle. At every point in the reproductive cycle there must be life for the cycle to continue. You have simply let you religion select a point in that cycle for you to say, ending the cycle is wrong, and now push that religious belief on others.
amb..the fact that you condone & support mothers killing their infants, you are standing by cheer leading! The ovum or sperm by itself is not a life.They need to fuse in order to create a life.You are a product of that fusion,just advanced,
mmh no angel I don't support mothers killing ANY infants. YOU are cheer leading your God followers ilk. Sorry but sperm and ovum are alive. Life isn't a criteria to ban abortion anyway, otherwise it would also be illegal to unplug braindead persons that are still alive.
And yes prolifers want to impose their beliefs. If you don't like abortion, don't have one! But YOU want me not to have one and I want to have the choice.
So, according to you, it does not matter what actions were taken prior to the fusion.
Ridiculous!
Your existence today is an advanced development of an egg and a sperm. The complete genetic code that lead to the development of you, was contained in one egg and one sperm. If either were destroyed at any point, due to actions by the mother or the father, regardless of weather fertilization has occurred, it would have ended the development of you.
It is ridiculous to argue this point...DNA does not make an individual. This flawed concept of an individual is what is fundamentally wrong with your ideology
green..If DNA does not amke an individual & my ideology is fundamentally wrong, what does it take, in your expert opinion,to make an new individual human life?? I'm sure all the biologists,embryologists,scientists await your answer with baited breath,since so far,anything any of them has said is poo pooed by your kind!!!
Thank you for showing your level of understanding so quickly.
DNA does not create or define an individual.
If you believe that DNA creates an individual, then you are stating that identical twins (that have not experienced copy errors) are if fact only one existence. You would be saying that identical twins are not two individuals but in fact only one individual, since they have the same DNA. Ill say again Ridiculous!
What defines an individual is creativity and experiences. Original thoughts, personality, memories, likes, dislikes, opinions; these make an individual this is humanity.
I dare you to quote any scientist who claims that DNA makes an individual. All standard definitions of DNA specify that DNA merely provides the code used in the creation of a new organism. In mammals, the organism created when a sperm and ovum unite is a parasite on the host until expelled from the body. Only then does it beging to experience the world on its own terms and thus take on individual existence.
What is it about humans that separates us from the animal kingdom? I believe it is our superior ability to reason abstractly, come to conclusions, express those conclusions, influence our environment, and also the ability to communicate through language. You are? a human if you have these abilities (older children and adults) or will develop these abilities (infants). By my definition the fetus is human because it will develop these abilities.
You are saying that a fetus is a human in its present state, because it will be a human (have the attributes of a human) in its future state.
...by saying that the fetus will be a human in its future state, when it acquires the attributes of a human, you are also saying that the fetus is not a human in its present state because it presently does not have the attributes of a human...I agree...
green...I ask you again.Why do you favorite all pro-life video's on your site?? And then claim to defend a mothers right to kill her precious, innocent,defenseless baby?? I would dare to say you are pro-life and are playing devils advocate to sharpen our skills!!
green...I began to realize that the conversation was running in circles,neither of us getting to any particular point, and truthfully I have better things to do. Redundancy just bores me, call it what you want.
green..The difference between you and I is that when I speak, it is not an argument, I state the facts & some of what I believe while you try to confuse the issue with smoke & mirrors. Abortion is the difference between a human life and a human death,, not an argument.
The difference between you and I is that I do not let my heart/religion control my decision making process. I rely on facts, reason and logic.
My arguments are facts as well; facts that are evident by using your facts and then applying logic.
I question you for your facts, and then show you why your facts prove your own conclusion wrong. You can not argue with me because you prove yourself wrong...
Abortions is not a "choice" for anyone who is truly against violence&killing. Abortion is a human rights issue.Sometimes I wonder how we can condemn those that commit human rights violations in the middle east/ East Asia/Africa, when we take 1,000s of innocent lives everyday.I RESPECT LIFE FROM CONCEPTION TO NATURAL DEATH! The difference between you and I is YOU DO NOT RESPECT LIFE OR WOMEN.
Unless you have a soapbox for the protection of my ear...its alive and human. Unless you stand for the protection of the egg/sperm...they are alive, human, and can develop into a human individual if no one aborts the reproductive process. You have simply let your religion decide, what is a "human right violation".
You do not respect women...
You support a religion that tells women how to dress, not to speak in church, not to show their hair, to serve their men. LoL!
Sorry, but although at coception a new human life is born. The egg and sperm are not alive on there own but are a part of a person..they are like any other body part of a person and it isn't concidered mureder to destroy them.
Liberty should be given to all people. But it is everyones responsibility to say that when one person's choices lead to the killing of another, at this point your liberty ends.
By your definition, a fetus merely has the potential to develop into a human being. In your own words, "the fetus is human because it will develop these abilities." You don't understand the use of the future tense in the English language, do you?
Science shows that the capacity to reason abstractly does not develop until after the cerebral develops to a certain stage. The fetal brain does not emit the brain waves associated with these higher functions prior to the 26th week.
okay, tangle up this argument then... Theres stages in a cell's life to lead up to a humans life. Sperm- Fertilized egg- Fetus- Baby- Infant- Child- Teenager- etc etc- Only until it develops a self awareness through brain development after 24 weeks taking the course of evolution from the stage of a fetus to a baby. Destroying a fetus is not murder.. Destroying a baby is murder.. Argue that one smart guy-
And yes, a fetus is human but not a human being, as it has no functioning cortex before 24 wks.
Member that a braindead person is considered dead when their heart is still beating. Our cortex only makes us human beings, otherwise it's only organic life...
I find no non-arbitrary reason to abridge the pre-existing rights of the embryo. It is scientifically demonstrably a Living Human Individual (it's not dead or inert and operates on its environment therefore it is alive, the DNA sequence is Human, and it's DNA pattern is distinctive from it's parents), I can not find a non-arbitrary reason (such as it doesn't have friends yet, it isn't productive yet, it depends on others) to abridge it's rights.
A functional cortex is anything but arbitrary, one can only display humanity with a functional cortex even if it's partly functional. Doctors unplug braindead ppl even though they show every sign of life. Cortex gives sentience and cognitive abilities.
Right..."God says its a baby so all other reasons must be arbitrary".This is a demonstration of the logical sequence that pro-lifers use to resolve this dispute.
Some may justify abortion saying: "The baby isn't going to feel anything during the abortion" Qualia; in this case the sensation of pain can not be communicated. The baby feels pain the first day out of the womb-there is evidence for that-so why would it be any different when the baby is inside the womb? This is the slaughter of the inoccent and none of your "righteous "talk is going to change that.
angel, your question "baby feels pain, so why not the fetus?" just shows that you understand nothing about the process of pain. No wonder you cannot grasp the concept of sentience then.
A fetus before 29 months doesn't have what it requires to feel pain.
I had the pleasure of Tim Staples (convert from Protestant to Catholic) give a talk here in Texas. He stated that there was a study done on embryos at 31 days and scientist found that the? embryo can feel pain based on the electrical pulses that are present. These electrical pulses were identical to human outside of the womb who felt pain. I thought that was interesting
Absolutely not, What I am trying to convey what a ridiculous argument sentience is and to point out that all these ppl out here seem to think they have all the answers. Please do tell the embryologist,biologist,chemists,scientists in all fields what you think, they wait with baited breath for your knowledge.
"In 2005 in the United states, a meta-analysis of existing experiments published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) concluded that the available evidence indicates fetal perception of pain is unlikely before the third trimester, and that electroencephalography suggests the capacity for functional pain perception in premature infants probably does not exist before 29 or 30 weeks" -Wikipedia
pin..like I said, sentience is a RED HERRING and you are just blowing smoke. We can all see through that.Sentience does not make a human less worth of protection and life, The baby is alive,and growing.
You have failed to demonstrate your point. I say that sentience, far from being a red herring, is the only point distinguishing human beings from most other life forms.
Putting your words in all caps does nothing to enhance your argument.
Abortions are done mostly for non-medical reasons. As the abortion industry itself admits on the website of the Alan Guttmacher Institute,"3/4 say they cannot afford a child;3/4 say that having a baby would interfere with work,school or the ability to care for dependents;& half say they do not want to be a single parent or are having problems with their husband or partner."
"...The abortion-rights folks know it, the anti-abortion folks know it, and so probably, does everyone else. One of the facts of abortion is that women enter abortion clinics to kill their fetuses. It is a form of killing ...you're ending a life." Ron Fitzsimmons, Executive Director, National Coalition of Abortion Providers, New York Times, 26 February 1997
What a big load of crap, lol, and so easy to debunk...
About relying on something, we all rely on food to survive, but no born human being rely on ONE PARTICULAR other human being for its survival, it's called being viable.
Location: obviously it's an important part. If it wasn't for being in another human being and depending solely on it, there would be no abortion.
amb..what about those in coma's,the elderly,the handicapped,infants,all dependent on someone? Also,who caused he existence of this baby?You argue again that any "person" who is dependant on another "person" loses their "person" Status. Strands of hair do not grow into people, they are not living human individuals (Which should be obvious), the embryo is a complete living human individual. That's science, and "splitting hairs" is just delusion.
ang...Those in coma have an active cortex (EEG), a fetus under 24 weeks doesn't. Did you read my post, none of those you mentioned depend on ONE PARTICULAR person (feeds off a person). You're twisting my word, (typically pro life), i never said, one dependant on another lose the "person" status. One who has no functional cortex isn't a person. Yes, the embryo is a living human, but there's nothing wrong with abortion as long as fetus has no functional cortex.
amb..YOU are wrong (typical pro-deather) LOL I had the pleasure of meeting Tim Staples(convert from Protestant to Catholic)give a talk here in Texas.He stated that there was a study done on embryos at 31 DAYS and scientist found that the embryo can feel pain based on the electrical pulses that are present.These electrical pulses were identical to human outside of the womb who felt pain.I thought that was interesting
amb..Even though they will almost certainly be able to recover to full function in time? I think a majority of people would find slaying that person unjust, and insist that care be provided. Certainly when someone is found unconscious there is no reason to regard their human rights impaired, even though for a period they are not "Sentient", neither should the rights of the unborn be abridged for this reason.
amb...Say a human falls unconscious, or goes into a coma. Certainly our society has a debate about continuing support for persons not expected to recover from a coma, but what if the prognosis said that they would have a 100% chance of recovery within 9 months if support were maintained (or even 85%, certainly pregnancy isn't a 100% chance of success)? Would it be ethical to say the person just because they are for the time being not "sentient" or otherwise capable of caring for themselves?
angel "sentient" is one way to express that a fetus isn't a person, the best definition for a person, is to have an active cortex (for a human of course). Only feti and braindead persons don't meet the criteria for being persons, thus can be put to death without any kind of guilt.
An unborn baby is unborn therefore not a life worth living that is more important than the woman carrying the child. Don't email me stupid questions I won't answer them.
Abortion is not a belief, it's the murder of a baby and the injury; emotional, physical and even sometimes spiritual, to the mother. Please DO NOT FORGET, MOST women do not want abortion...they are threatened with violence, abandonment and no support and 'forced with no CHOICEyou can't kill a child just to save your own skin. that's pretty self evident for those already born, but when we're talking about people we can't readily see without ultrasound, it's easy to rationalize
It is your belief that the fetus is a "baby". You dont understand that a non-entity is not entitled to "rights". Obviously you dont understand civil liberties or you would understand that it is the pro-life movement wishing to limit civil liberties. Why do you even post a comment as if you have some point to argue? The M.O. of the pro-life movement is to just say my belief should be your law.
green...Slaves were non-entities, Jews were non-entities and were killed too. And the fact that the fetus,embryo is not an entity is a belief too!! Prove it is not! I am for the civil liberties of the precious,innocent blood of our defenseless babies. Just as I am all ppl of all races, genders, nationalities, the HUMAN RACE!
An entity is something that has a distinct, separate existence.
Go ahead start your dumbass arguements as to why the fetus is its own entity. I will refute the arguements one by one until all you can say is no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, God says so. You think you are diffrent but you PL's are all the same. This usually takes me about ten days on youtube or about an hour face to face...go ahead...start with the new DNA code...or anywhere you like.
Dehumanization green!Calling the baby an entity makes it no less human life and worthy!Your RED HERRINGS are superficial and show a total lack of humanity towards the human race. So, begin your redundant comments and hopefully I can change your mind.LOL
No one said that the cluster of cells inside the woman is not human tissue. The question is...at what point the mass of cells becomes its own separate existence. So the question I pose to you is...When does the zygote/embryo/fetus become its own separate existence and why do you pick that particular point in the human reproductive cycle to say so? The red herrings comment is just a red herring for your closed mind, thanks to your ridiculous religion.
It is you that is degrading humanity by not understanding what humanity is. If you continually label things "human" that do not possess the unique characteristics of humanity, than you dilute the uniqueness of humanity, and therefore degrade what it means to be human.
This guy is an idiot. An unborn baby is NOT a life worth living if the mother does not want to let the life continue living. The mother's choice and rights come first. Killing a baby in a womb is totally different then killing a baby outside. I am fine with it being called killing if it's referring to an unborn baby. They are not people yet and have NO rights. I had an abortion and I am fine with it.
First of all you r fine with yr abortion because u r brain dead. Then to say its not worth living yr life if your mother doesnt like you wtf yr life should be lived on how u view it not one other person. And to say that an unborn has NO rights is pathetic. Like the producer of this video stated, it shouldnt matter how old or where the baby is it shoudl still get rights. To say since yr a certain age u shouldnt have rights is unbelivable, like u u dumb ass.
If you really want to reduce unwanted pregnancy and abortion, make the father completely responsible for the baby. If he wants to marry the mother (and she agrees), then we are done. If he doesn't want to marry her, she becomes a surragate mother, he pays her 50,000 to have the baby, and he has the responsibility for the baby (2000/month to the mom).
Otherwise, we just continue with the dad bailing, mom going on welfare or aborting. Bad choices for her.
jim121254 3 days ago
What makes up a human being? Is a human being a human without a soul? Does the soul die when the body ceases to function? If the soul survives is it trapped in the body? If the soul leaves the body then is it really death or a transitional alternate life?
wonbyamile 3 months ago
what about the 14 year old girl that gets raped and soon finds out she is pregnant..though crude this can and DOES happen. abortion doesnt have to be something that any pregnant woman can get, and obviously is an absolute last resort. btu should this hypothetical girl have to go through this whole pregnancy being constantly reminded of what happened to her that night, get the stretch marks that will remind her forever, and not to mention the lack of schooling due to pregnancy side effects
shanesmrf 3 months ago
It's hard being pro-life. But I have to be - because it is true.
I wish there were good arguments for abortion! But there are none.
TheHardout2005 4 months ago
LIFE STARTS AT CONCEPTION?? AT BIRTH? WHO CARES!!! IF a woman wants to kill a fetus (or whatever the hell you want to call it) then shes gonna do it. The quesiton is WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT?? Are you going to force a woman to have a baby?? YOULL NEVER DO IT!! NEVER!! IT WILL BE CALLED FACISM!! You cant say taking care of a sick person is immoral with state money, but then turn around and say oh but taking care of a fetus is moral. Its qualifying who lives and who dies!
vidfreak56 7 months ago
Development- Completely wrong. A fetus has the potential to become a human-being. A born baby is a human being.
Location-A developing fetus cannot live outside of a mother until a certain stage which then requires a C-section. A zygote is part of the mothers body and cannot grow in Aruba or in Mississippi outside of its mother.
Reliance-Diabetics can shoot up their own medication. They can also choose to take the medicine or not. A growing fetus is literally part of the mothers body.
scenecore12 8 months ago
Tell me good sir, what happens if every baby ever conceived is born and reaches adult hood? Do you know what happens to a society when overpopulation trumps the local resources? One last thing, why do you believe that you are qualified to classify life and also tell someone else how to live theirs? Please respond, I would love to hear good answers.
ReddAngry 10 months ago
@ReddAngry You assume overpopulation occurs in a free society, but that is illogical, and has been shown that people are having less and less children in america, so the overall rate is lowering, so the function that representes population is flatlining.
When population gets higher, demand rises, and prices rise according to supply and demand, which causes people to, oh, I don't know, have less children? Abortion is a false and unneccessary substitute.
bdg323 6 months ago
Life begins in the 5th month
HowardSternn 10 months ago
@HowardSternn You just caused socrates paradox
Why not month 5 minus a day. Well why not? Is it inconvient to your argument? If the child has the right to its own life at n=5 months, then why not n= 5 months - 1 day? There is no set of logical axioms that can show the significance of 5 months without causing socrates paradox.
bdg323 6 months ago
@bdg323 FIve months sounds about right to me
HowardSternn 6 months ago
@HowardSternn So your logic is only based on what feels good? You just ignore mathematics and socrates paradox for convience. You are fine with children being killed because it feels right to you, not because it is logical or not?
Also, please respond to the question. If the child has the right to its life at month 5, why not 5 months minus a day?
bdg323 6 months ago
@bdg323 sorry, socrites paradox, or, the paradox of the heap
bdg323 6 months ago
@bdg323 Give or take a day is just fine. like in a 65 MPH road and you go maybe 67MPH they usually will give a Pass.
HowardSternn 6 months ago
@HowardSternn Sir, that's mathemetical error and something for statistics, I am talking about mathematical induction and socrites paradox which shows for all cases or none. Give or take is a horrible answer when we are talking about killing someone.
bdg323 6 months ago
@bdg323 says: Give or take is a horrible answer when we are talking about killing someone.
~~~~~~~~~~ A fteus isnt a "someone".. insinuating a person. YOu just cant seem to get this terminology right, can you?
Sueezee1 5 months ago
@Sueezee1 a fetus is someone, according to socrites paradox. A fetus at one day before birth is a person, and if a fetus is a person at any point, then the fetus is a person the day before (There exists no point in which a fetus goes from non-person to person except conception, but before, the fetus didn't exist yet) Therefore, by induction, we must conclude that the fetus is a person during the entire pregancy. To deny this is to cause socrites paradox.
bdg323 5 months ago
@bdg323 says: There exists no point in which a fetus goes from non-person to person except conception,
~~~~~~~~~ OH really, lets see..a NON person is a is one who lacks, loses, or is forcibly denied social or legal status, especially basic human rights, or who effectively ceases to have a record, or never had a record of their existence within a society from a point of view of traceability, documentation, or existence. "Person" is just the opposite...so there is a point.
Sueezee1 5 months ago
@Sueezee1 I didn't know slaves weren't people. (Forcibly denied social or legal status). Also, are people we don't know exist non-people who have no rights? Also, why does social status mean anything in this argument. My rights depend on how you view me? As for legal status, do i not have rights if I live in anarchy? Society does not determine my rights either. You also have failed to put in a day, a time, a point in which the status changes. So no, your argument doesn't work.
bdg323 5 months ago
Comment removed
Sueezee1 5 months ago
@bdg323 says: we must conclude that the fetus is a person during the entire pregancy.
~~~~~~~~~
Oh, ok, (smile)
Sueezee1 5 months ago
@bdg323 says: You are fine with children being killed because it feels right to you,
~~~~~~~~~~ "Children" arent being killed, and abortion is about choice...because it feels right for the woman, not because it feels right to anyone else.
Sueezee1 5 months ago
@Sueezee1 I gave a mathematical argument as to why a fetus (From now, I shall call it a child or baby) has the right to its life, and his response was "FIve months sounds about right to me" To which I responded "You are fine with children being killed because it feels right to you, not because it is logical or not?". I gave my reasons why children are being killed, you have not responded. To deny that the children have the right to life is to cause socrites paradox.
bdg323 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@bdg323 says: gave a mathematical argument as to why a fetus (From now, I shall call it a child or baby) has the right to its life,
~~~~~~~~~~ yet it failed you....
Sueezee1 5 months ago
@bdg323 says: I gave my reasons why children are being killed, you have not responded
~~~~~~~~~~ Probably because I dont give a damn a about probirthers insane ideas.
Sueezee1 5 months ago
@Sueezee1 I didn't know mathematics was an insane idea.
Also, pro-life, not pro-birther.
bdg323 5 months ago
he is equating diabetes with being a fetus...i'd say there's something wrong with that argument.
TheHuntress144 10 months ago
@voceangeli......I don't think your second argument is valid either. A newborn baby most certainly IS phisically dependant. It cannot eat, clean, or transport itself without the aid of another being. And in all honosty, product baby food and milk is a luxury and a blessing. The baby's original food reliance is on the mother's breast milk. That's why women have breasts. So in reality, a newly BORN baby differs little from an UNBORN baby. It's just outside the womb. So would you kill a born baby?
izamication 11 months ago
@voceangeli.......See but you just said it right there. It's one PERSON living inside of another person. It's not a parasite or some kind of harmful bug or something. It's a living person, and therefore it's murder. And yes, if a tiny little person cut into you while you slept and attatched himself to your insides, I would agree that you would have the right to take defensive actions. But that has absolutely nothing to do with unborn babies, which are made from the careless CHOICE of having sex.
izamication 11 months ago
The second part where your argument falls apart is the dependence factor. You fail to make the distinction between PHYSICAL dependence and SOCIAL dependence. A baby that has been born or that is viable is socially dependent on someone to take care of it it, but they aren't physically dependent. A diabetic is also socially dependent on getting medicine, but doesn't require the use of someone else's body.
voceangeli 1 year ago
Your arguments fall completely apart when two ideas are added. First, in terms of location, you respond with locations outside of other people. The location is not irrelevant if one person is occupying another persons body. The location of Aruba and my stomach are not the same morally and it does affect the morality of the argument. If a tiny little person cut into you while you slept and attached himself to your insides, you would have the right to remove that little person from your body.
voceangeli 1 year ago
Pro Lifers just love big Gov control of peoples personal and private lives
HowardSternn 1 year ago
@HowardSternn Completely irrelevant to the real issue: Is the fetus a human being or not? If he/she is human, then abortion is murder.
ChrisHobeck 1 year ago
@ChrisHobeck It might but science has yet to prove it. It still has no SSI so still can't call it a Human.
HowardSternn 1 year ago
@HowardSternn Howard Stern a pro-choicer?
Wow, you know you have a big voice and possibly alot of influence. Would you mind getting some murderers out of prison? I mean abortion is the killing of unborn humans and you don't think that is wrong so what is wrong with letting out all the other murderers? I hope you use your radio voice to make it happen. You will make a lot of pro-choicers happy in the process.
ccrg109 1 year ago
@ccrg109 In reality my favorite cousin is actually an intern for Howard Stern and for your info Howard is fir the Death Penalty not for letting them out of prison.
Bababoooey
HowardSternn 1 year ago
@HowardSternn I gotcha. Well then good for him. I did not know that.
ccrg109 1 year ago
@HowardSternn Murder doesn't become acceptable just because it's done in private.
KnightOwl2006 10 months ago
@KnightOwl2006 It is not Murder it is just Tissue and a group of cells
HowardSternn 10 months ago
@HowardSternn It is a human being in the earliest stages of development, with its own unique DNA, gender and physical characteristics all determined. As early as 18 days there is a beating heart.
KnightOwl2006 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@HowardSternn Define group! You yourself are also a group of cells and tissue, interconnected to make a body, just like the child! Your argument could extend to making it okay for people to murder you, because 'It is not Murder it is just Tissue and a group of cells'
bdg323 6 months ago
Pro-abortionists cannot ethically justify the murders of innocent unborn babies. So they try to avoid the fact that it is HUMAN LIFE from the moment of conception by quibbling about irrelevant mostly arbitrary terminology. People who lack compassion for others essentially say, "Well, I made it safely past my first 9 months of life, so now I needn't consider anyone else's first 9 months of life as being as important to them as it was to me."
tncdel 1 year ago
"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."
tncdel 1 year ago
abortion is murder because murder is deliberately taking a human life
redsox1899 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
abortion is murder because every person has the right to live
redsox1899 1 year ago
abortion should be illegal because every person should have the right to live
redsox1899 1 year ago
@redsox1899 and every woman should have the right to choose what she wants to do with her own body
broooziy 1 year ago
@broooziy Does that include the woman who is in the womb?
ChrisHobeck 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ChrisHobeck maybe you need to read again what i wrote, i said every woman, what part of that statement do you not understand?
broooziy 1 year ago
@ChrisHobeck try reading what i said again, 'every woman should have the right" what part of that dont you understand???
broooziy 1 year ago
even animals care for thier young. But some humans kill thiers and leave them like they r nothing. i just dont understand. I had a very hard life as a young child but i never lost my soul . I belive if u have sex u know u can get pregnant 1 and 1 is 2 . People need to wake up and start thinking before the act.
taramama3 1 year ago
Your 3 arguments fall apart on the first part which makes your other 2 points null and void. I don't think you know what people mean by "fully developed". They don't mean fully developed adult, that would be silly and would show that your arguments are all based on nit picking the exact meaning of words. By fully developed they mean to the stage that the fetus could live without the mother if it was taken out. A fully developed baby, not adult.
olelumpy 1 year ago
at 11 weeks your baby forms a life long prefferance for the left or right hand... they form their personalities on the inside
with me my first kid HATED chicken and i couldnt eat it without throwing it up... she was almost 2 before she would touch it... (they can taste your food thru the amniotic fluid!) national geographic inside the womb- for ppl who are gonna ask where i got the info ;)
just because they havent been born doesn't mean they aren't a person
great vid
xXaudraXannXx 2 years ago
typical anti-choicer, inventing arguments, so you can do a (not very good job) of debunking them.
prolieinternationaI 2 years ago
So what's wrong with the statements he makes?
ChrisHobeck 2 years ago
The standard argument is NOT that an embryo isn't human, or that it's not fully developed, An embryo IS human in the same way that an egg is the stage of a chickens life, and an acorn is a stage of an oak tree's life. An embryo or fetus is not a PERSON. Location; comparing being in some campus to being in a woman's womb is an obvious nonsense. Inside the womb you are an embryo or fetus, outside the womb you are a person. if the location doesnt matter, being removed from the womb wouldnt matter.
prolieinternationaI 2 years ago
reliance, another one I've never heard. again the comparison between an unwilling host woman and insulin is a nonsense. An embryo or fetus is parasitic in nature, in his scenario, the woman is a drug and the diabetic is the embryo??? anew born baby does NOT have to rely on its mother, another person (or even ape in the case of Tarzan;-) ) could raise a baby not an embryo or fetus. being reliant on a specific person is extremely signifigant if that person will not support you.
prolieinternationaI 2 years ago
Unwilling host woman? The woman is a drug? An embryo/ fetus is parasitic? You make it sound as though it isn't natural. Pregnancy is highly natural regardless of the circumstances it comes about.
Sengatsu 2 years ago
Why do you use Anti-Choice. Its not like we are against choice. We are against the killing of an innocent baby. Not to mention we identify ourselves as Pro-life. In a matter of fact we are for more choice than you are. you want to give one person the ability to make a choice which will end the life of another human. and we wan that other human to beable to live to make an infinite amount of choices. So you are for 1 new choice we are for giving lets call it even 100000 choices. God Bless
nomyturn 2 years ago 2
Excellent points made, thanks for posting and keep up the good work!
Merlin2Stage2Speed 2 years ago
such good points out in this vid :)
stevienickslover 2 years ago
I find it funny when pro-abortionists use the "it's her body".....what they forget is that as soon as the child is created its THEIR body too......
11visionary11 2 years ago
Awesome!!!!!!!!!!
stopbabykilling 2 years ago
Abortion is murder..You are terminating the life of a human being..It is homicide....Plain & simple..Life is a miracle...Save the babies...Gerard Paul
theprolifeguy 2 years ago
great vid :) x
stevienickslover 2 years ago
You don't understand that a non-entity is not entitled to "rights". There is no actual victim involved in the case of abortion, there is a victim involved, with rights, in the case of rape or murder. The only reason you believe the the fetus is a "baby" and should have rights is because it is a teaching of your religion. A free America will no longer be free when religious beliefs become laws that govern all of society.
greenlabel60 2 years ago 2
I am only responding to your video because you seem to be on the verge of a logical thought. I have a few questions for you that may help complete the thought...At what point in a pregnancy do you believe abortion should be unlawful? Why should abortion be unlawful from the point in the pregnancy you have chosen? Do your views come from a belief in God or a higher power? Do you support making birth control unlawful in this country? I will resopnd to your answers if you have the courage to post.
greenlabel60 2 years ago
Abortion should be unlawful during every stage of the pregnancy, because the embryo/fetus is a distinct living being which has a fundamental right to life. Yes, my belief is based on the God of the Bible.
While I believe that birth control is unwise and should not be necessary (as all sex should happen within marriage), I recognize that people who are not born again may not have a desire or enough self-control to adhere to God's standards for sexual purity.
ChrisHobeck 2 years ago
I assume this includes abortion at the fertilisation stage when the egg and sperm become a zygote...How is destroying a zygote diffrent than destroying one egg and one sperm (as in the case of birth control) when a zygote is one egg and one sperm. If you have ever used birth control with you wife, are you not just as much a murderer as somone that had an abortion in the zygote stage? Both the zygote and the egg/sperm are human, both have a chance to become a being if left to the course of nature
greenlabel60 2 years ago
It is oblivious that there is no difference between the egg/sperm and the zygote. The same matter, in the same form, exists the second before conception and the second after conception. The only difference between the two stages of the egg and sperm is that after conception the egg and the sperm would be in the same location. ;) The only way to justify that abortion is wrong in the zygote stage, is to base the reasoning solely upon the teachings of your religion.
greenlabel60 2 years ago
Given your basis for for your reasoning, the question arisesWhy do you feel like you have the right to enforce, by law, the teachings of your religion? Do you not believe in America? Freedom of religion? If you are an American, why would you force other "free people" to follow your religous beliefs?
greenlabel60 2 years ago
There are no biblical verses that deal specifically with the question of abortion.
If you believe that every distinct living being has a fundamental right to life, how do you reconcile that belief with the fact that you are destroying millions of bacteria with every breath you take?
pirbird14 2 years ago
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.
angelshoulders 2 years ago
None of your little factoids here have any bearing on the question of whether an embryo is a human being nor of what the bible god has to say about abortion.
You are committing the logical fallacy of non sequitur.
pirbird14 2 years ago
Abortion is extremely circumstantial.
A broken condom? The partners have to be prepared for this. Underaged sex? Fine, the parents might be able to pull it off and raise him/her decently. Product of rape? I don't think so. Its not fair on the mother or the child. All the mother will see is the face of the rapist causing her psychological trauma and the baby will see itself as worthless and unwanted. It may not be the case but "logic" shows otherwise. If this case is still fair, explain away.
Curse274 2 years ago
So in the case of rape, your solution is to kill the child because of something one of his or her parents did.
ChrisHobeck 2 years ago
It doesn't matter if both the parent and child are almost certainly in hell for 18 years as long as they're alive we as a society can call ourselves moral. The rape was not one simple action of the father its effects are lifelong on the mother and child. In most cases (as sane societies look out for the greater good) what good can come from an unwanted child being born into a world of rejection?
Curse274 2 years ago
The good that comes is fact that murder is not committed, whereas in your solution you murder the child because of the sin of one of his or her parents.
And you seem to have forgotten the possibility of adoption.
ChrisHobeck 2 years ago
I live in England, if you look over recent headlines you will see the adoption is unsuccessful here. The fetus is not a child, children have identities, self awareness and free will. The fetus is a dice with 5 faces saying unhappy life. If the fetus has a right to life why is it unreasonable for the mother to have a right to not be in this situation.
Curse274 2 years ago
It's not as simple as you percieve it to be the mother's life could be ruined what if she was in a realtionship, finishing school and trying to hold down a job? Why should she sacrifice the quality of her own life to this extent for an accidental life?
Curse274 2 years ago
So your solution is to murder the child as a punishment for something he or she did not do.
ChrisHobeck 2 years ago
The fetus is not a child. It has no identity, no sense of self or anything else. Your misinterpreting my solution. I could equivalently say your solution is to ruin the mother's life as punishment for something the father did. Ruination of life with greater potential to serve humanity (the mother's) is a greater loss than termination of life with less potential (the fetus').
Curse274 2 years ago
How on earth can we consider & support our own mother killing us because we were the product of rape? Does this mean anyone is superior to someone who is the product of rape? I cannot exchange one tragic event with one ten times worse!A women is never more degraded than when she agrees to destroy her own child. Demand full funding for non-violent crisis pregnancy programs. Abortion is a cheap and disrespectful solution. Help your pregnant sisters in any way you can!!
angelshoulders 2 years ago
angel
"A women is never more degraded than when she agrees to destroy her own child. "
Only your opinion, you're not the one who's getting an abortion.
"Help your pregnant sister" talk is cheap, are you willing to adopt unwantd kids? There are many in foster homes;
ambrocal 2 years ago
I have 12 adopted children and thank you, yes!! I have taken into my home many pregnant women and coached them as they gave the gift of life to their precious, innocent, defenseless babies & have cried my tears of joy!! I have supported them & their babies,I have given of my time & energy for these young mothers,the miracle they share,the joy I receive is more than you will ever know!!
angelshoulders 2 years ago
amb,,,you mean I am not the one killing my precious unborn baby don't you! I am not the one that owns a slave, I'm not the one gassing the Jews!! I am not the one dehumanizing life around me, isn't that what you mean?
angelshoulders 2 years ago
Sorry angel but no, you're a propagandist and no scientist. Before 24 months a fetus can't feel pain, if that ever was an argument. Your Tim Staples is a BIG LIAR or understands nothing about biology and nervous system. i would think the latter option, anti choicers are usually not very good in biology.
ambrocal 2 years ago
I had the pleasure of Tim Staples (convert from Protestant to Catholic) give a talk here in Texas. He stated that there was a study done on embryos at 31 days and scientist found that the? embryo can feel pain based on the electrical pulses that are present. These electrical pulses were identical to human outside of the womb who felt pain. I thought that was interesting.Might want to keep current & throw away the outdated biology books.
angelshoulders 2 years ago
Looks like Tim Staples is a pseudo scientist having a clear agenda. Nope I'm not throwing my biology books to your beliefs. You're entitled to your belief i'm entitled to mine. You have no reason to impose your views on mine.
Pain requires specific cells not just electricity or pulses!
ambrocal 2 years ago
amb.. believe it or not, science is progressing forward, you should try to keep up. I do not impose my beliefs on you or anyone else,I will however, try to get you to see facts.
angelshoulders 2 years ago
angel, I'm not the one killing babies either, i don't own slave, i don't gass jews, and I never said a fetus is not a human life. A fetus is just an advanced stage of developpment compared to sperm and ovum, still... no person, thus has no rights, compared to an actual woman who wants to get an abortion.
ambrocal 2 years ago
amb..You are indeed killing babies by condoning and supporting women who kill their unborn.You can dehumanize all you want, but that is what you are,an advanced stage of development from the combination of an ovum & sperm! Does that make you less human or worthy of life!??
angelshoulders 2 years ago
if i'm just an advanced stage and you think all stages are equal in value, don't you cry for each ovum or sperm lost? Do you say murder for each menstruation of masturbation? Ovum and sperm are also stages of human life!
ambrocal 2 years ago
You do need to keep current on your science & biology. Menstruation is a sloughing of the lining of the uterus when no fertilized egg has attached to the lining. Masturbation is the ejaculation of sperm by artificial forced stimulation.Separate from the ovum.Life begins when a sperm is fused with an ovum and embedded into the lining of the uterus.Now do you understand,I thought we all learned this is health ed around the 3'rd grade.
angelshoulders 2 years ago
Hahaha you're in no position to give me ANY biology lesson angel, really not, lol, you're funny!
I know what menstruation, ovum and sperm are, and i also know what makes a person: an active cortex. No cortex, no person, ok for abortion.
ambrocal 2 years ago
If life begins at the point you stated, that must mean the sperm and the egg are not alive.
Ridiculous!
Life is already in existence prior to conception; it is passed through the sperm and egg. Conception is only one stage of life in the reproductive cycle. At every point in the reproductive cycle there must be life for the cycle to continue. You have simply let you religion select a point in that cycle for you to say, ending the cycle is wrong, and now push that religious belief on others.
greenlabel60 2 years ago 2
amb..the fact that you condone & support mothers killing their infants, you are standing by cheer leading! The ovum or sperm by itself is not a life.They need to fuse in order to create a life.You are a product of that fusion,just advanced,
angelshoulders 2 years ago
mmh no angel I don't support mothers killing ANY infants. YOU are cheer leading your God followers ilk. Sorry but sperm and ovum are alive. Life isn't a criteria to ban abortion anyway, otherwise it would also be illegal to unplug braindead persons that are still alive.
And yes prolifers want to impose their beliefs. If you don't like abortion, don't have one! But YOU want me not to have one and I want to have the choice.
ambrocal 2 years ago
So, according to you, it does not matter what actions were taken prior to the fusion.
Ridiculous!
Your existence today is an advanced development of an egg and a sperm. The complete genetic code that lead to the development of you, was contained in one egg and one sperm. If either were destroyed at any point, due to actions by the mother or the father, regardless of weather fertilization has occurred, it would have ended the development of you.
greenlabel60 2 years ago 2
It is ridiculous to argue this point...DNA does not make an individual. This flawed concept of an individual is what is fundamentally wrong with your ideology
greenlabel60 2 years ago
green..If DNA does not amke an individual & my ideology is fundamentally wrong, what does it take, in your expert opinion,to make an new individual human life?? I'm sure all the biologists,embryologists,scientists await your answer with baited breath,since so far,anything any of them has said is poo pooed by your kind!!!
angelshoulders 2 years ago
Thank you for showing your level of understanding so quickly.
DNA does not create or define an individual.
If you believe that DNA creates an individual, then you are stating that identical twins (that have not experienced copy errors) are if fact only one existence. You would be saying that identical twins are not two individuals but in fact only one individual, since they have the same DNA. Ill say again Ridiculous!
greenlabel60 2 years ago 3
What defines an individual is creativity and experiences. Original thoughts, personality, memories, likes, dislikes, opinions; these make an individual this is humanity.
greenlabel60 2 years ago 5
@greenlabel60 So... what are you saying? That infants are not individuals and thus not human? I am confused.
amanda2324 5 months ago
I dare you to quote any scientist who claims that DNA makes an individual. All standard definitions of DNA specify that DNA merely provides the code used in the creation of a new organism. In mammals, the organism created when a sperm and ovum unite is a parasite on the host until expelled from the body. Only then does it beging to experience the world on its own terms and thus take on individual existence.
pirbird14 2 years ago
What is it about humans that separates us from the animal kingdom? I believe it is our superior ability to reason abstractly, come to conclusions, express those conclusions, influence our environment, and also the ability to communicate through language. You are? a human if you have these abilities (older children and adults) or will develop these abilities (infants). By my definition the fetus is human because it will develop these abilities.
angelshoulders 2 years ago
You are saying that a fetus is a human in its present state, because it will be a human (have the attributes of a human) in its future state.
...by saying that the fetus will be a human in its future state, when it acquires the attributes of a human, you are also saying that the fetus is not a human in its present state because it presently does not have the attributes of a human...I agree...
greenlabel60 2 years ago
green...I ask you again.Why do you favorite all pro-life video's on your site?? And then claim to defend a mothers right to kill her precious, innocent,defenseless baby?? I would dare to say you are pro-life and are playing devils advocate to sharpen our skills!!
angelshoulders 2 years ago
Dont be silly...
greenlabel60 2 years ago
Why do you censor my comments on your page? Why do you pro-lifers hate or fear a two sided discussion?
greenlabel60 2 years ago
green...I began to realize that the conversation was running in circles,neither of us getting to any particular point, and truthfully I have better things to do. Redundancy just bores me, call it what you want.
angelshoulders 2 years ago 2
Ya...or maybe...THE TRUTH HURTS YOU ARGUMENT!
greenlabel60 2 years ago
green..The difference between you and I is that when I speak, it is not an argument, I state the facts & some of what I believe while you try to confuse the issue with smoke & mirrors. Abortion is the difference between a human life and a human death,, not an argument.
angelshoulders 2 years ago
The difference between you and I is that I do not let my heart/religion control my decision making process. I rely on facts, reason and logic.
My arguments are facts as well; facts that are evident by using your facts and then applying logic.
I question you for your facts, and then show you why your facts prove your own conclusion wrong. You can not argue with me because you prove yourself wrong...
What human life is entitled to liberty? Why?
Is all human life entitled to liberty? Why?
greenlabel60 2 years ago
Abortions is not a "choice" for anyone who is truly against violence&killing. Abortion is a human rights issue.Sometimes I wonder how we can condemn those that commit human rights violations in the middle east/ East Asia/Africa, when we take 1,000s of innocent lives everyday.I RESPECT LIFE FROM CONCEPTION TO NATURAL DEATH! The difference between you and I is YOU DO NOT RESPECT LIFE OR WOMEN.
angelshoulders 2 years ago
You do not respect life...
Unless you have a soapbox for the protection of my ear...its alive and human. Unless you stand for the protection of the egg/sperm...they are alive, human, and can develop into a human individual if no one aborts the reproductive process. You have simply let your religion decide, what is a "human right violation".
You do not respect women...
You support a religion that tells women how to dress, not to speak in church, not to show their hair, to serve their men. LoL!
greenlabel60 2 years ago
Sorry, but although at coception a new human life is born. The egg and sperm are not alive on there own but are a part of a person..they are like any other body part of a person and it isn't concidered mureder to destroy them.
nomyturn 2 years ago
@nomyturn However the moment they connect through sex, the cells start to multiply and the new life begins to grow.
ccrg109 1 year ago
I recommend you all go to greenlabel60 page, you will find he really is prolife and playing devil's advocate!
angelshoulders 2 years ago 3
Liberty should be given to all people. But it is everyones responsibility to say that when one person's choices lead to the killing of another, at this point your liberty ends.
nomyturn 2 years ago 5
reading the comments and it is kinda going in circles with him/her
stevienickslover 2 years ago
By your definition, a fetus merely has the potential to develop into a human being. In your own words, "the fetus is human because it will develop these abilities." You don't understand the use of the future tense in the English language, do you?
Science shows that the capacity to reason abstractly does not develop until after the cerebral develops to a certain stage. The fetal brain does not emit the brain waves associated with these higher functions prior to the 26th week.
pirbird14 2 years ago
this guy is a fucking douche
Diannakw 2 years ago
What is specifically faulty with his argument?
ChrisHobeck 2 years ago
GoggledSniper 2 years ago
cont...
And yes, a fetus is human but not a human being, as it has no functioning cortex before 24 wks.
Member that a braindead person is considered dead when their heart is still beating. Our cortex only makes us human beings, otherwise it's only organic life...
ambrocal 2 years ago
I find no non-arbitrary reason to abridge the pre-existing rights of the embryo. It is scientifically demonstrably a Living Human Individual (it's not dead or inert and operates on its environment therefore it is alive, the DNA sequence is Human, and it's DNA pattern is distinctive from it's parents), I can not find a non-arbitrary reason (such as it doesn't have friends yet, it isn't productive yet, it depends on others) to abridge it's rights.
angelshoulders 2 years ago
A functional cortex is anything but arbitrary, one can only display humanity with a functional cortex even if it's partly functional. Doctors unplug braindead ppl even though they show every sign of life. Cortex gives sentience and cognitive abilities.
ambrocal 2 years ago
Right..."God says its a baby so all other reasons must be arbitrary".This is a demonstration of the logical sequence that pro-lifers use to resolve this dispute.
greenlabel60 2 years ago
Some may justify abortion saying: "The baby isn't going to feel anything during the abortion" Qualia; in this case the sensation of pain can not be communicated. The baby feels pain the first day out of the womb-there is evidence for that-so why would it be any different when the baby is inside the womb? This is the slaughter of the inoccent and none of your "righteous "talk is going to change that.
angelshoulders 2 years ago
angel, your question "baby feels pain, so why not the fetus?" just shows that you understand nothing about the process of pain. No wonder you cannot grasp the concept of sentience then.
A fetus before 29 months doesn't have what it requires to feel pain.
ambrocal 2 years ago
I had the pleasure of Tim Staples (convert from Protestant to Catholic) give a talk here in Texas. He stated that there was a study done on embryos at 31 days and scientist found that the? embryo can feel pain based on the electrical pulses that are present. These electrical pulses were identical to human outside of the womb who felt pain. I thought that was interesting
angelshoulders 2 years ago
So, you are ok with abortion as long as it occurs within the first 31 days? Is that what you are saying by posting this comment?
greenlabel60 2 years ago 2
Absolutely not, What I am trying to convey what a ridiculous argument sentience is and to point out that all these ppl out here seem to think they have all the answers. Please do tell the embryologist,biologist,chemists,scientists in all fields what you think, they wait with baited breath for your knowledge.
angelshoulders 2 years ago
Are you ready to cry out "God says so" yet?
greenlabel60 2 years ago 2
Which is why humans are supposed to be superior to animals, but are we!?
angelshoulders 2 years ago
"In 2005 in the United states, a meta-analysis of existing experiments published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) concluded that the available evidence indicates fetal perception of pain is unlikely before the third trimester, and that electroencephalography suggests the capacity for functional pain perception in premature infants probably does not exist before 29 or 30 weeks" -Wikipedia
pirbird14 2 years ago
pin..like I said, sentience is a RED HERRING and you are just blowing smoke. We can all see through that.Sentience does not make a human less worth of protection and life, The baby is alive,and growing.
angelshoulders 2 years ago
You have failed to demonstrate your point. I say that sentience, far from being a red herring, is the only point distinguishing human beings from most other life forms.
Putting your words in all caps does nothing to enhance your argument.
pirbird14 2 years ago
Abortions are done mostly for non-medical reasons. As the abortion industry itself admits on the website of the Alan Guttmacher Institute,"3/4 say they cannot afford a child;3/4 say that having a baby would interfere with work,school or the ability to care for dependents;& half say they do not want to be a single parent or are having problems with their husband or partner."
angelshoulders 2 years ago
"...The abortion-rights folks know it, the anti-abortion folks know it, and so probably, does everyone else. One of the facts of abortion is that women enter abortion clinics to kill their fetuses. It is a form of killing ...you're ending a life." Ron Fitzsimmons, Executive Director, National Coalition of Abortion Providers, New York Times, 26 February 1997
angelshoulders 2 years ago
What a big load of crap, lol, and so easy to debunk...
About relying on something, we all rely on food to survive, but no born human being rely on ONE PARTICULAR other human being for its survival, it's called being viable.
Location: obviously it's an important part. If it wasn't for being in another human being and depending solely on it, there would be no abortion.
Cont....
ambrocal 2 years ago
amb..what about those in coma's,the elderly,the handicapped,infants,all dependent on someone? Also,who caused he existence of this baby?You argue again that any "person" who is dependant on another "person" loses their "person" Status. Strands of hair do not grow into people, they are not living human individuals (Which should be obvious), the embryo is a complete living human individual. That's science, and "splitting hairs" is just delusion.
angelshoulders 2 years ago
ang...Those in coma have an active cortex (EEG), a fetus under 24 weeks doesn't. Did you read my post, none of those you mentioned depend on ONE PARTICULAR person (feeds off a person). You're twisting my word, (typically pro life), i never said, one dependant on another lose the "person" status. One who has no functional cortex isn't a person. Yes, the embryo is a living human, but there's nothing wrong with abortion as long as fetus has no functional cortex.
ambrocal 2 years ago
amb..YOU are wrong (typical pro-deather) LOL I had the pleasure of meeting Tim Staples(convert from Protestant to Catholic)give a talk here in Texas.He stated that there was a study done on embryos at 31 DAYS and scientist found that the embryo can feel pain based on the electrical pulses that are present.These electrical pulses were identical to human outside of the womb who felt pain.I thought that was interesting
angelshoulders 2 years ago
amb..Even though they will almost certainly be able to recover to full function in time? I think a majority of people would find slaying that person unjust, and insist that care be provided. Certainly when someone is found unconscious there is no reason to regard their human rights impaired, even though for a period they are not "Sentient", neither should the rights of the unborn be abridged for this reason.
angelshoulders 2 years ago
amb...Say a human falls unconscious, or goes into a coma. Certainly our society has a debate about continuing support for persons not expected to recover from a coma, but what if the prognosis said that they would have a 100% chance of recovery within 9 months if support were maintained (or even 85%, certainly pregnancy isn't a 100% chance of success)? Would it be ethical to say the person just because they are for the time being not "sentient" or otherwise capable of caring for themselves?
angelshoulders 2 years ago
angel "sentient" is one way to express that a fetus isn't a person, the best definition for a person, is to have an active cortex (for a human of course). Only feti and braindead persons don't meet the criteria for being persons, thus can be put to death without any kind of guilt.
ambrocal 2 years ago
Thank you for the video. ( :
HerAwesomenessXO 2 years ago
An unborn baby is unborn therefore not a life worth living that is more important than the woman carrying the child. Don't email me stupid questions I won't answer them.
hamiltonhottie00 2 years ago
Abortion is not a belief, it's the murder of a baby and the injury; emotional, physical and even sometimes spiritual, to the mother. Please DO NOT FORGET, MOST women do not want abortion...they are threatened with violence, abandonment and no support and 'forced with no CHOICEyou can't kill a child just to save your own skin. that's pretty self evident for those already born, but when we're talking about people we can't readily see without ultrasound, it's easy to rationalize
angelshoulders 2 years ago
It is your belief that the fetus is a "baby". You dont understand that a non-entity is not entitled to "rights". Obviously you dont understand civil liberties or you would understand that it is the pro-life movement wishing to limit civil liberties. Why do you even post a comment as if you have some point to argue? The M.O. of the pro-life movement is to just say my belief should be your law.
greenlabel60 2 years ago
green...Slaves were non-entities, Jews were non-entities and were killed too. And the fact that the fetus,embryo is not an entity is a belief too!! Prove it is not! I am for the civil liberties of the precious,innocent blood of our defenseless babies. Just as I am all ppl of all races, genders, nationalities, the HUMAN RACE!
angelshoulders 2 years ago
Wow, you are in need of an education...
An entity is something that has a distinct, separate existence.
Go ahead start your dumbass arguements as to why the fetus is its own entity. I will refute the arguements one by one until all you can say is no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, God says so. You think you are diffrent but you PL's are all the same. This usually takes me about ten days on youtube or about an hour face to face...go ahead...start with the new DNA code...or anywhere you like.
greenlabel60 2 years ago
Dehumanization green!Calling the baby an entity makes it no less human life and worthy!Your RED HERRINGS are superficial and show a total lack of humanity towards the human race. So, begin your redundant comments and hopefully I can change your mind.LOL
angelshoulders 2 years ago
No one said that the cluster of cells inside the woman is not human tissue. The question is...at what point the mass of cells becomes its own separate existence. So the question I pose to you is...When does the zygote/embryo/fetus become its own separate existence and why do you pick that particular point in the human reproductive cycle to say so? The red herrings comment is just a red herring for your closed mind, thanks to your ridiculous religion.
greenlabel60 2 years ago
Comment removed
greenlabel60 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It is you that is degrading humanity by not understanding what humanity is. If you continually label things "human" that do not possess the unique characteristics of humanity, than you dilute the uniqueness of humanity, and therefore degrade what it means to be human.
greenlabel60 2 years ago
This guy is an idiot. An unborn baby is NOT a life worth living if the mother does not want to let the life continue living. The mother's choice and rights come first. Killing a baby in a womb is totally different then killing a baby outside. I am fine with it being called killing if it's referring to an unborn baby. They are not people yet and have NO rights. I had an abortion and I am fine with it.
hamiltonhottie00 2 years ago
Why are the unborn not people yet? What stands them apart?
ChrisHobeck 2 years ago
First of all you r fine with yr abortion because u r brain dead. Then to say its not worth living yr life if your mother doesnt like you wtf yr life should be lived on how u view it not one other person. And to say that an unborn has NO rights is pathetic. Like the producer of this video stated, it shouldnt matter how old or where the baby is it shoudl still get rights. To say since yr a certain age u shouldnt have rights is unbelivable, like u u dumb ass.
MrStuballa999 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I'm a big fan of Todd. Thanks For posting this.
shardoin 3 years ago
What is disappointing is that you actually believe what youre saying...
vmcparlin 3 years ago
Well, the real question, "Is it right?" You can be sincere, and yet be sincerely wrong.
ChrisHobeck 3 years ago