Page 16 of 22 FirstFirst ... 61415161718 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 217

Thread: Roe v Wade

  1. #151
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,516
    It is only the business of the woman and her provider! All the other arguments are distractions to control a woman's body.

  2. #152
    Senior Member JaneV2.0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    14,568
    Quote Originally Posted by catherine View Post
    As a person who has Catholicism in her DNA (but not on the books), I understand the argument that all life is sacred. This is why I believe:

    • All life is sacred, particularly life that is already here. The lives of the poor and disenfranchised, the lives of the cattle, birds and fish that we depend on for our lives, the trees and plants that sustain us, the microscopic life under the soil that supports everything else. I don't think human life is so special that we can consider our specie as the only "sacred" one.
    • No one wants an abortion. DH was saying "oh, pro-abortionists are going to have a protest"--I told him, "NO ONE is 'pro-abortion.' No one WANTS to have an abortion." I have been in that position and when it is your decision to make it tears you up. But it is YOUR decision. If we're going religious here, God gave us the gift of discernment. That means there is very little black or white in these complex issues, and it should be up to the woman, ultimately, to discern for herself what the outcome should be.
    • Politically speaking, it's interesting that Republicans are all about deregulation until it comes to the lives of women. I believe perceptions are greatly exaggerated by "pro-life" people--the numbers of late-term abortions, the attitudes of women, i.e.,"Hey, today I think I'll go have a manicure and an abortion," the very fuzzy line between what is a "baby" and what is a cluster of non-sentient cells.


    It is a complex issue to be sure.
    Bears repeating. But I'm just a "vessel (uterus reference)," an "old bag (uterus reference). and "hysteric" (uterus reference), not credited for having a working brain. Zygotes and early-term fetuses don't have one either, but they're still considered by many to have more value and agency than their "vessel."

  3. #153
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    9,460
    I think the central moral and legal question is whether you consider the fetus, fertilized embryo, or child to be a human being or just an inconvenient clump of cells.
    I don't particularly consider human life anything special. But should we all go around killing each other? Well society works best when we are not going about murdering each other, when we take care of each other to a degree even, some exceptions may apply, but an unborn baby isn't even part of any society, they haven't even known life. But they can feel pain, well all animals with a nervous system do.
    Trees don't grow on money

  4. #154
    Simpleton Alan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    8,768
    Quote Originally Posted by ApatheticNoMore View Post
    I don't particularly consider human life anything special. But should we all go around killing each other? Well society works best when we are not going about murdering each other, when we take care of each other to a degree even, some exceptions may apply, but an unborn baby isn't even part of any society.
    Do you think there's a difference between, lets say a 35 week old fetus and a one day old baby other than their residence?
    "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein

  5. #155
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    7,540
    Quote Originally Posted by nswef View Post
    It is only the business of the woman and her provider! All the other arguments are distractions to control a woman's body.
    That is a perfectly acceptable argument if you are convinced a fetus isnít human or if you are comfortable with the idea that a mother has the right to kill a fetus regardless of whether it is human or not.

    But I think it is a effort to distract from that position to try to paint people who do consider a fetus to be human life entitled to protection as cartoon villains yearning for a return to the twelfth century. They simply come down on a different side of the question of when human life begins.

  6. #156
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    5,423
    Quote Originally Posted by Alan View Post
    Do you think there's a difference between, lets say a 35 week old fetus and a one day old baby other than their residence?
    Their "residence"? Sorry, Alan, but - in my opinion - your statement has removed any sign of being a human being on the part of the woman and turns her into an inanimate object!

    And, again, in my opinion, the best person to answer that is the particular woman you may be referring to - as I believe every woman would have their own answer depending on their life situation at the time you are asking, what they are doing with their life, who they believe themselves to be at that point in time, etc. *I* personally have no business answering for any other woman.

    I truly don't believe there are simple yes/no answers to any of these questions by any one person - especially someone who will NEVER personally be faced (at least in this time of human evolution) with the decisions involved.
    To give pleasure to a single heart by a single act is better than a thousand heads bowing in prayer." Mahatma Gandhi
    Be nice whenever possible. It's always possible. HH Dalai Lama
    In a world where you can be anything - be kind. Unknown

  7. #157
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    5,041
    The hypocrisy of all this bantering about saving precious human life troubles me. Men murder each other daily and violent wars continue endlessly. We kill death row prisoners. Existing unloved and abused children suffer. I don't think as a collective culture that we value human life at all - only when it becomes political. And as Catherine alluded to, we absolutely do not value non-human forms of life which without, none of us will survive.

  8. #158
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    9,460
    The hypocrisy of all this bantering about saving precious human life troubles me. Men murder each other daily and violent wars continue endlessly. We kill death row prisoners. Existing unloved and abused children suffer. I don't think as a collective culture that we value human life at all - only when it becomes political. And as Catherine alluded to, we absolutely do not value non-human forms of life which without, none of us will survive.
    enough food is produced on earth to feed everyone, just saying. We care about it when it is men very abstractly debating something that for women is not abstract (ok many women may have never personally had to consider abortion, but it's still not abstract).
    Trees don't grow on money

  9. #159
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    7,540
    Quote Originally Posted by pinkytoe View Post
    The hypocrisy of all this bantering about saving precious human life troubles me. Men murder each other daily and violent wars continue endlessly. We kill death row prisoners. Existing unloved and abused children suffer. I don't think as a collective culture that we value human life at all - only when it becomes political. And as Catherine alluded to, we absolutely do not value non-human forms of life which without, none of us will survive.
    If you take the position that a concern for life is somehow invalidated by all those other issues, arenít you saying the same would apply to any life or death policy issues? Could we start shooting people crossing the border illegally and dismiss complaints about it as hypocritical for the same reason?

  10. #160
    Senior Member bae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Offshore
    Posts
    10,615
    Quote Originally Posted by LDAHL View Post
    But I think it is a effort to distract from that position to try to paint people who do consider a fetus to be human life entitled to protection as cartoon villains yearning for a return to the twelfth century. They simply come down on a different side of the question of when human life begins.
    I'm happy to stipulate that human life begins at conception. And I believe both the mother and the child deserve consideration of their interests.

    However, when examining their competing interests and rights, I believe that the mother's should prevail in many circumstances. That analysis is not based on when precisely "human life begins".

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •