• ℹ️ Heads up...

    This is a popular topic that is fast moving Guest - before posting, please ensure that you check out the first post in the topic for a quick reminder of guidelines, and importantly a summary of the known facts and information so far. Thanks.

Abortion: Right or Wrong?

BigT - A heartbeat is moving tissue. No more, no less.

Like a plant can't feel or is aware of itself beyond a very primitive manner, a fetus is not a person. It's a pre-person. It is yet to be a person.

When you can prove that an early fetus is cognitively more alive than a sunflower which exists but doesn't have consciousness, I'll start considering it closer to a person.

IanB - The point still stands. Is it murder to kill a living cell of human tissue? No.
 
OI! Do I have to type all in capitals for you to notice a woman talking? We are going round in circles and at the end of the day it is what the WOMAN wants not you guys so why should we listen to you? It's upto us what we do, we've earnt it we are now equals. Women shouldn't have to listen to men who don't have to go through it.
 
Meat Pie said:
BigT - A heartbeat is moving tissue. No more, no less.

Like a plant can't feel or is aware of itself beyond a very primitive manner, a fetus is not a person. It's a pre-person. It is yet to be a person.

When you can prove that an early fetus is cognitively more alive than a sunflower which exists but doesn't have consciousness, I'll start considering it closer to a person.

IanB - The point still stands. Is it murder to kill a living cell of human tissue? No.
Click to expand...

A foetus at 12 weeks Meatpie is not a cell, it looks like a baby with arms and legs and like I've said has a heartbeat that doesnt stop beating until you die, whether it feels pain is errelivant as you can quite easily kill somebody painlessly but that doesn't make it right.

Natalie - I can't take your sexiest comments seriously sorry.
 
BigT said:
Does a strand of hair have a heartbeat? No don't be so silly MP. If you can think of a better word for deliberately killing a human then I'll happily use it, until then it's murder.
Click to expand...

If a small cluster of cells is a human then the fried egg I had for breakfast this morning was a chicken.
 
Sexist! Pah I'm a woman standing up for women and I'm sure sexist comments have been made towards women in this topic? It is our decision what we do with our bodies at the end of the day and you can't stop it, I've been in a controlling relationship and now I've come out of it I've found my voice and you guys can't handle it because it's the truth. Abortion Clinics should be available to use by all women it's upto them if they use them of not, again it's our choice, but the choice should be there.
 
In the eyes of the law, a person is a being that has had the umbilical cord cut and "it has an existence independent of the mother." [Source], and homicide as whole is the unlawful killing of a person. A foetus fits neither description so, therefore, isn't a person and isn't "murdered".

In answer to your question, BigT, I think the term "aborted" or "terminated" should be used instead of the apparently deliberately emotive term "murder". :)

And Nat, a baby, in a normal situation, is joint decision that affects both parents. Both mother and father. To disregard the father completely is a horrible thought.

This topic showed promise last night and now appears to have descended into the standard format of any emotive subject discussed on here! What went wrong?
 
I appreciate that this is a heated topic guys, but try and debate properly without resulting to personal insults or it will just end up with the topic being locked.

I wish people could just debate things properly, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Thanks.
 
To be fair Natalie, whilst I entirely agree with the arguments about the right of women to make decisions over their bodies, if a foetus was a complex being who is concious, has self-awareness, and able to feel, that would be a whole different kettle of fish. At that point consideration of the right of the unborn needs to be considered because they would be a person. However, that isn't the case and therefore people making this claim need to be put right.

BigT - Because it looks like a person it must be a person? So is a painting of a person also a person? What a silly argument. A person is their mind, is their concious, and is their ability to feel; not their physical body.
 
Also if both parents are pro life and are unable to give the baby a decent upbringing adoption is a really good option as their are many couples who can't have children of their own, who will give that child everything. But the option should still be there for the woman to terminate the pregnancy.
 
Natalie said:
I hate the fact that the women's points of views aren't really being discussed,
Click to expand...

I have been using the Red Dwarf Parallel Universe episode logic (see N.B).

So I am trying to see the view point of women. And as i say before its their body, and at the end of the day it up the them what happens to it. I expect everyone to have control over their own body.

May be other posters should look at it from the reversed rolls where it men that get pregnant. it make for interesting thinking.


N.B for though who don't know the episode. the crew end up in a universe where they have female counterparts. Here, women are the masters and superior gender, and the men are fighting for equal rights.Dave and Deb (his counterparts) end up having sex. But in this universe its the men who get pregnant.no precautions were used. Dave end up pregnant.
Click to expand...
 
Natalie said:
OI! Do I have to type all in capitals for you to notice a woman talking? We are going round in circles and at the end of the day it is what the WOMAN wants not you guys so why should we listen to you? It's upto us what we do, we've earnt it we are now equals. Women shouldn't have to listen to men who don't have to go through it.
Click to expand...

^ This.

Abortions are a woman's issue. It's her choice whether she wishes to carry a child or not, and the person that actually goes through everything (ie the woman) should always have the final say on what happens. Without question.

This topic showed promise last night and now appears to have descended into the standard format of any emotive subject discussed on here! What went wrong?
Click to expand...

It 'went wrong' because abortion is an emotive issue anyway. But also because it seems to be men arguing over a woman's issue. Barely any women have really had their say (I'm counting five of us, I think) compared to the guys.
 
I, as a man, will now stop voicing my opinion on this topic. Ladies, it's all yours!

Ashlee, don't you think more girls would have chimed in if they wanted to? Nobody is stopping them.
 
It's not fair to say that men can't discuss an issue because it doesn't directly effect them.

There are issues that I feel strongly about that happen to people thousands of miles away from me, but I still have an opinion on them because I care about people.
 
Meat Pie said:
It's not fair to say that men can't discuss an issue because it doesn't directly effect them.

There are issues that I feel strongly about that happen to people thousands of miles away from me, but I still have an opinion on them because I care about people.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying men shouldn't discuss it, maybe I should have worded it better. But I'm also stating that it is a women's issue at the end of the day.
 
Meat Pie said:
To be fair Natalie, whilst I entirely agree with the arguments about the right of women to make decisions over their bodies, if a foetus was a complex being who is concious, has self-awareness, and able to feel, that would be a whole different kettle of fish. At that point consideration of the right of the unborn needs to be considered because they would be a person. However, that isn't the case and therefore people making this claim need to be put right.

BigT - Because it looks like a person it must be a person? So is a painting of a person also a person? What a silly argument. A person is their mind, is their concious, and is their ability to feel; not their physical body.
Click to expand...

You know Meatpie, I like you even though we hold very different views on things and I often read your posts and think wow I wish I could put up a agrument like that, but even you must see a difference between a painting and living feutus.

Whether we agree or not about the arguments what we are discussing has the potential to be a living person and that person could have been you or I.
Imagine all those years ago if your mother and father were thinking about having a termination at that time, knowbody would of been sticking up for YOU then and then you wouldn't be here now to debate this would you.
And that's my point really, why should the choice of the mother or father come before the choice of the unborn person. It's all of those little meatpies that I'm sticking up for.



Sam - the egg that you ate this morning could of not become a chicken because it would not of been fertilised.
 
Dar said:
In the eyes of the law, a person is a being that has had the umbilical cord cut and "it has an existence independent of the mother." [Source], and homicide as whole is the unlawful killing of a person. A foetus fits neither description so, therefore, isn't a person and isn't "murdered".
Click to expand...

They're not people at the time, until they are born. They have no conscious thought process, they can't decide if they want to be born or not.

However, the parents can decide. If they can't afford a child, they shouldn't have the baby and put it through years of hardship and poverty. To me, that's worse than aborting a foetus in the first place.
 
Dar said:
Dar said:
In the eyes of the law, a person is a being that has had the umbilical cord cut and "it has an existence independent of the mother." [Source], and homicide as whole is the unlawful killing of a person. A foetus fits neither description so, therefore, isn't a person and isn't "murdered".
Click to expand...

They're not people at the time, until they are born. They have no conscious thought process, they can't decide if they want to be born or not.

However, the parents can decide. If they can't afford a child, they shouldn't have the baby and put it through years of hardship and poverty. To me, that's worse than aborting a foetus in the first place.
Click to expand...

But isn't that a sad state of affairs when we let finance come into that sort of decision? And I'm not sure it does in that many cases.
 
Just so the following is not misunderstood I'm going to do this big and bold.... IM PRO CHOICE.

But can people stop saying all abortion is when the foetus is a collection of cells, its just grating at my biology head. A 23 week old foetus looks like a fully formed person, has cognitive function and can feel. I'm not saying that to back the pro-life argument as I said I'm PRO-CHOICE but get the damn foetal development right!

And people should stop being personal.
 
If it's the woman's choice to keep or get rid of the baby, then the father should be able to opt out of having to pay and support that child.

A woman should not be able to request an abortion and provide no justification whatsoever. If it's literally just undesirable, then it should be tough luck, that's life.
 
Not really. Finance is a vital aspect in the decision to have a baby. I grew up with hardly any money and it's not nice.

If you can't afford to maintain a car, you don't get the car to begin with.
If you can't afford to maintain a child, you don't have a child until you can.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top