<p>Be civil folks! Is an abortion equal to the termination of another human being's life? This is a "hot button" issue so I am curious to hear what people's opinions are, especially the younger generation.</p>
<p>No. Not at all.</p>
<p>There's no REAL argument against abortion that isn't stemmed through religion, either.
I get that you (general you) have your own beliefs, just don't force them on me. I want a CHOICE.</p>
<p>Depends whether you consider a fetus to be "alive."
Some people argue it is, others argue it isn't, others don't give a crap either way.</p>
<p>Personally, I haven't decided a stance on it, yet.</p>
<p>Yea, abortion is murder. You don't know who that baby will turn out to be.</p>
<p>Yea, abortion is murder. You don't know who that baby will turn out to be.</p>
<p>Yeah, he might be the next Hitler or Stalin.</p>
<p>Threads like this are pointless and only cause problems. Will everyone here keep posting and let another argument start? I really hope not.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I get that you (general you) have your own beliefs, just don't force them on me. I want a CHOICE.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I believe murdering a 20-year-old is wrong, and I don't believe you have a choice in that matter. Why should my opinion change because the victim is a baby?</p>
<p>The "victim" is a FETUS aka: a cluster of cells. NOT a baby.</p>
<p>Yes, abortion is murder, if you define murder as the killing of a human being (i.e. anything with 46 chromosomes).</p>
<p>No, murder is not a big deal. It gets done all the time. Wars. Death penalties. Self-defense. Abortion should be legal.</p>
<p>The issue with abortion is not about whether murdering babies is wrong or not. Practically everyone can agree that murder=bad. The real issue with abortion, and this is what people debate about, is whether or not a fetus counts as a human life. Those who are pro-choice feel that a fetus is not yet a human being and thus can be "disposed of." Pro-choicers are not for baby killing. Pro-lifers on the other hand view a fetus to be a human being who can think, feel among other things. Because of this belief, they believe that abortion is akin to murder. </p>
<p>If it was undeniably proved one way or the other whether or not a fetus/embryo is a conscious being capable of feeling, the entire abortion argument would cease to exist and abortion would either be made completely legal or a felony depending on the proof.</p>
<p>what's the difference whether it is in the womb and whether it is out of the womb? is the womb some magical barrier whereby anything inside is a free-for-all butcher fest but, oh no, once it leaves the womb and is now considered a bonafide "baby", touch a hair on that thing and its a crime against humanity.</p>
<p>the hypocrisy stinks to high heaven.</p>
<p>
[quote]
what's the difference whether it is in the womb and whether it is out of the womb? is the womb some magical barrier whereby anything inside is a free-for-all butcher fest but, oh no, once it leaves the womb and is now considered a bonafide "baby", touch a hair on that thing and its a crime against humanity.</p>
<p>the hypocrisy stinks to high heaven.
[/quote]
Once a baby leaves the womb, what possible benefit can there be to its death? No months of pregnancy avoided, no pain of childbirth spared... not even the medical expenses. To kill a human being with no reason or benefit is best left avoided. It is bad practice for a society which seeks to remain stable, and once the child begins having thoughts and self-awareness a few years into its life, it becomes a heinous crime against another human being, citizen of whichever country is prosecuting for the crime (or not, if the murderer gets prosecuted by some other country).</p>
<p>when the fetus is in the early stages of development: no it is not murder.</p>
<p>when the fetus has developed enough that it has a good chance of survival outside the womb (with some medical help): I wouldn't call it "murder," but i think it's wrong.</p>
<p>i'm pro-choice. that does not mean i'm pro-abortion. it should be avoided at all cost, but every woman should always have the option.</p>
<p>
[quote]
i'm pro-choice. that does not mean i'm pro-abortion.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>But pro-life is anti-abortion, and you're anti-pro-life, meaning you're anti-anti-abortion, the anti's cancel out and you're pro-abortion?</p>
<p>
[quote]
i'm pro-choice. that does not mean i'm pro-abortion.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>But pro-life is anti-abortion, and you're anti-pro-life, meaning you're anti-anti-abortion, the anti's cancel out and you're pro-abortion?</p>
<p>These heated arguments have led me to believe one thing. those subjects which are controversial (ie, murder, alcoholics, pornography, abortion) always stir controversy because the subject itself is deemed to be undesired by society. i don't care if this deeming is derived from religion or not, point being it has had a problem throughout many years. as such, if its considered amoral, then it is, because society would not consider it to be in the first place. i'm not saying that abortion is murder, just specifiying how society has reacted on these deviant issues. so, point being, and for the sake of the ARGUMENT--not what I'm saying---abortion is wrong, just as is pornography, murder, homosexuality, alcoholism, and theft. (I can't believe i just said this).</p>
<p>I'm pro-choice, but for the sake of the argument and to provide a holistic view of what I was intending to say in this issue, under the scope of these controversial topics, it is not in conjuction with the "essence" of society to be considered necessary for human survival. therefore its wrong.</p>
<p>nonononnono</p>
<p>Hypocrisy reminds me of partial-birth abortion rights. I shaped my view opposing abortion last year when I read "Life Unworthy of Life" for a claas project. It's about when the German govt last century defined who had no right to live. I'm very uncomfortable when anyone, especially a politcian, is given the power to judge who is human or sub-human for purpose of granting permission to destroy life. I think we need to be careful and show tolerance considering the range of views in society defining human life.</p>
<p>It is murder, depending on whether you regard the aberration as legally alive. Of course, if the creature is a threat to the mother, or an inconvenience, we would just call it a parasite or sex debris, whereafter abortion becomes cleansing.</p>
<p>A decent resolution to the issue could be as follows: allow legal life for a foetus/newborn to begin when, and only when, someone claims (explicitly, or implicitly via adoption/taking it home) the responsibility of facilitating the life of the foetus/newborn. </p>
<p>That way, I can decide whether I made a mistake in giving birth to a child, or perhaps I can go ahead and give birth out of fear of complications arising from abortion; in what follows, I would have the aberration slain. Interestingly, the above ideological solution is particularly convenient in that I can decide to mature some foeti for the purposes of potentially torturous experimentation. I have never encountered such a solution so elegant as the second block of text in this post.</p>
<p>The usual reaction to this statement involves positing sarcasm, so I declare that the above is very sincere. Newborns shouldn't have ANY rights until someone agrees to facilitate such rights, just as murder of a right-entitled human is an implicit forfeiture of the right to life (via the death penalty) in many countries.</p>
<p>Abortion....?</p>
<p>I'd just run away to Mexico....hell i wouldn't take no baby...</p>