Abortion....According to KingRaw

Watermark said:
Ever heard of anencephaly? It's whenever a baby is born literally without a brain, except for the a stem which does rudimentary things required for life sustainment. They cannot feel, or think, and usually they die because of starvation (trying to make them live for a long period of time would be fruitless, being that their brainstem is literally exposed and they would die of infection). This is basically the state an embryo is in. While I can see how some people would feel it's wrong to just outright end the development of the life, I just can't see how you could really consider that a "person" under normal terms. I'd rather just leave the issue up to the mother.
Click to expand...


Rare case that should not be considered in defining the killing of the other 99.999%. That's like saying we shouldn't have laws for speeding since I might have to rush my child to the hospital someday.

Okay, is the person on life support who is brain dead still considered a person?
 
firemedic227 said:
See, this is a MORAL question. The question is "what is human". If a human is defined as human in all stages of development (as I quoted from the textbooks before) then the human should have the same protections in all stages.
Click to expand...


And I already answered your question and disagreed with your views.


firemedic227 said:
You say that if the parents decide that it would be better off not being born then why then should they not be able to kill it at two years old because they feel it is having a horrible life?
Click to expand...


And we're back to this argument again. Before you go nuts on this topic, let me explain my viewpoint again. At the certain point of pregnancy, the fetus is considered valuable life just like a 2 year old or a 20 year old. From that point on, the fetus has just the same rights to life as you or I. There is no advancing level of value when you get older. From the point I already stated over and over again is where it begins. It stays the same from there on.
 
firemedic227 said:
Rare case that should not be considered in defining the killing of the other 99.999%. That's like saying we shouldn't have laws for speeding since I might have to rush my child to the hospital someday.
Click to expand...

I think you misread me. I didn't say that we should have abortion because of inheritable disease, I was using that specific disease to illustrate the state of an embryo.

firemedic227 said:
Okay, is the person on life support who is brain dead still considered a person?
Click to expand...

No. Once the brain has reached brain death there's nothing that can be done to revive them. The machines can pump their organs and keep the rest of their organs alive, but their not really there anymore. My grandfather's brain died, and he was kept alive by machines until we gave them the DNR order. He wasn't there, and you could tell it.
 
firemedic227 said:
Rare case that should not be considered in defining the killing of the other 99.999%. That's like saying we shouldn't have laws for speeding since I might have to rush my child to the hospital someday.

Okay, is the person on life support who is brain dead still considered a person?
Click to expand...
No, they are human life, but they are not a "person" all portions that would show that they are more than a meat casing for a person is gone.
 
KingRaw! said:
And I already answered your question and disagreed with your views.





And we're back to this argument again. Before you go nuts on this topic, let me explain my viewpoint again. At the certain point of pregnancy, the fetus is considered valuable life just like a 2 year old or a 20 year old. From that point on, the fetus has just the same rights to life as you or I. There is no advancing level of value when you get older. From the point I already stated over and over again is where it begins. It stays the same from there on.
Click to expand...

Okay then is your view grounded in scientific FACT or just your own personal moral structure? See there is nothing to biologically back up your opinion.
 
Watermark said:
I think you misread me. I didn't say that we should have abortion because of inheritable disease, I was using that specific disease to illustrate the state of an embryo.
Click to expand...


Okay. I just didn't want to get off track appealing to the extreme emotional cases. Again, the extreme emotional cases are the smoke in mirrors I am talking about that many pro-choicers appeal to to sway the argument.
 
You're right. An 8 week old fetus is life. A 4 week old fetus is life. A 1 second old fetus is life. But plants are life too. So are dogs and cats. It is a moral stand for an athiest like me.
 
firemedic227 said:
Okay. I just didn't want to get off track appealing to the extreme emotional cases. Again, the extreme emotional cases are the smoke in mirrors I am talking about that many pro-choicers appeal to to sway the argument.
Click to expand...


So an overwhelming majority of people who have abortions just get them for a form of birth control or convenience?
 
So instead of using a condom or a birth control pill, they spend anywhere from $300 to $5000 to have an abortion and take the following risks of side affects just for "convenience".


Risks and Discomforts of a Surgical Abortion


Pain and/or cramping

Nausea

Vomiting

Diarrhea

Reaction to local anesthetic

Infection - many physicians prescribe antibiotics to prevent infections, serious infection occurs in 3% of women

Heavy Bleeding - 1-2% of women will have serious bleeding (more than a normal menstrual period)

Continued Pregnancy - may occur if pregnancy is tubal or ectopic (a fertilized egg has implanted outside the uterus), requires major surgery

Retained Tissue - requires a repeat of the suction procedure

Perforation or puncture of the uterus - rare, but requires surgical repair

Sterility - very rare, may occur due to serious infection, bleeding, or damage to the uterus

Death - extremely rare


Risks and Discomforts of a Medical Abortion (RU 486 & MTX)

Incomplete abortion requiring a later surgical abortion

Allergic reaction

Infection

Heavy bleeding

Undetected ectopic (a fertilized egg has implanted outside the uterus pregnancy)

Death**


Along with Mental and Psychological


Feelings after an abortion vary from woman to woman. Some women may feel relief, while others may feel guilt or anger. Though post-abortion syndrome is not officially recognized, many women often have long-lasting emotional problems following an abortion.
 
Last edited:
KingRaw! said:
So instead of using a condom or a birth control pill, they spend anywhere from $300 to $5000 to have an abortion and take the following risks of side affects just for "convenience".


Risks and Discomforts of a Surgical Abortion


Pain and/or cramping

Nausea

Vomiting

Diarrhea

Reaction to local anesthetic

Infection - many physicians prescribe antibiotics to prevent infections, serious infection occurs in 3% of women

Heavy Bleeding - 1-2% of women will have serious bleeding (more than a normal menstrual period)

Continued Pregnancy - may occur if pregnancy is tubal or ectopic (a fertilized egg has implanted outside the uterus), requires major surgery

Retained Tissue - requires a repeat of the suction procedure

Perforation or puncture of the uterus - rare, but requires surgical repair

Sterility - very rare, may occur due to serious infection, bleeding, or damage to the uterus

Death - extremely rare


Risks and Discomforts of a Medical Abortion (RU 486 & MTX)

Incomplete abortion requiring a later surgical abortion

Allergic reaction

Infection

Heavy bleeding

Undetected ectopic (a fertilized egg has implanted outside the uterus pregnancy)

Death**


Along with Mental and Psychological


Feelings after an abortion vary from woman to woman. Some women may feel relief, while others may feel guilt or anger. Though post-abortion syndrome is not officially recognized, many women often have long-lasting emotional problems following an abortion.
Click to expand...

What is your point? You are quoting side effects and consequences of the abortion but that does not address the reason for it. When I say convenience I mean that they killed the baby for reasons other than the child was a result of the "rape, incest, life of the mother....".
 
Did you know that over 60% of abortions are among women who have had one or more children?


Did you know that 88% of all abortions happen during the first trimester?
 
firemedic227 said:
What is your point? You are quoting side effects and consequences of the abortion but that does not address the reason for it. When I say convenience I mean that they killed the baby for reasons other than the child was a result of the "rape, incest, life of the mother....".
Click to expand...


So to you, convenience also includes poverty, extreme poverty, AIDs, abusive parents, drug addicted parents, other children you have suffering from poverty, ruining the mothers life etc?



"I mean some breast implants have side effects too but side effects have nothing to do with the reason they got them."


I listed the side effects because only an idiot with an IQ under 80 would get an abortion as a form of birth control. Not to mention the costs of abortion compared to birth control.
 
firemedic227 said:
So if you are poor, have a disease, abusive parents, drug addicted parents, (mothers life is in danger is less than 1% of the abortion cases according to the CDC.) or whatever else you quoted....then that means that you do not warrant equal protection as a human being?
Click to expand...
Actually the reason you don't warrant equal protection at this point is that the constitution says so.

14 Amendment

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

But even without that, do you argue that anencephalic babies are persons? That they are capable of personhood. Western Civilization is very Cartesian, Ergo Cogito Sum therefore anencephalic babies cannot, philisophically be persons because they have no cerebrum or cerebellum only a brain stem. At some point the fetus gets to that point, but 8 weeks gestation does not a PERSON make. At best a possible person.

Now if we do grant the unborn personhood and equal protection are you going to support laws that will not only punish the abortionist but also prosecute and punish the woman that seeks to abort the "person"

And if a pregnant woman has a miscarriage, should we not call it an unattended death because IF foul play was involved the mother almost certainly will be the suspect and therefore her word cannot be taken as ipso facto the truth.

There are tons of unintended consequences that you biological authoritarians have never considered.

People guilty of vehicular homicide if they cause a woman to miscarry through driving neglegently.

Children born premature due to the bad but not criminal acts of it's mother. Have to appoint a Guardian Ad Lietem and then sue mom for not taking her vitamins and not going to the doctor.

This is not arguing ad absurdium either. With actual born children, vehicular homicide is a very real possibility and if a mother is negligent enough during pregnancy states move to remove the children at birth. So all I am doing to carrying the law to it's logical conclusions based upon existing law.
 
KingRaw! said:
Did you know that over 60% of abortions are among women who have had one or more children?


Did you know that 88% of all abortions happen during the first trimester?
Click to expand...


Yes and your point is? Do either of these statics mean it's right or okay to kill?

On average, women give at least 3 reasons for choosing abortion: 3/4 say that having a baby would interfere with work, school or other responsibilities; about 3/4 say they cannot afford a child; and 1/2 say they do not want to be a single parent or are having problems with their husband or partner (AGI)

This gets back to the question...what is human? If killing a human is not right then if a fetus is human then why does it not get the same rights as a human?
 
"I mean some breast implants have side effects too but side effects have nothing to do with the reason they got them."


Well on average, women give four reasons for choosing abortion.

1)concern for or responsibility to other individuals

2)they cannot afford a child

3)having a baby would interfere with work, school or the ability to care for dependents

4)they do not want to be a single parent or are having problems with their husband or partner.
 
firemedic227 said:
Yes and your point is? Do either of these statics mean it's right or okay to kill?

On average, women give at least 3 reasons for choosing abortion: 3/4 say that having a baby would interfere with work, school or other responsibilities; about 3/4 say they cannot afford a child; and 1/2 say they do not want to be a single parent or are having problems with their husband or partner (AGI)

This gets back to the question...what is human? If killing a human is not right then if a fetus is human then why does it not get the same rights as a human?
Click to expand...
There is not even biblical support for this position. Quickening did not happen for 40 days. No quickening. no soul. No soul, god didn't care, if he ever did.
 
KingRaw! said:
"I mean some breast implants have side effects too but side effects have nothing to do with the reason they got them."


Well on average, women give four reasons for choosing abortion.

1)concern for or responsibility to other individuals

2)they cannot afford a child

3)having a baby would interfere with work, school or the ability to care for dependents

4)they do not want to be a single parent or are having problems with their husband or partner.
Click to expand...

So these reasons justify killing? If that is the case then we should be able to kill our children at any stage if the fetus is considered human. Back to the question...What is human? Is all human life "valuable"?

"It is the penetration of the ovum by a spermatozoan and resultant mingling of the nuclear material that each brings to the union that constitutes the culmination of the process of fertilization and marks the initiation of the life of a new individual." (Bradley M. Patten, Human Embryology, 3rd ed., New York: McGraw Hill, 1968, page 43.)

"Every time a sperm cell and ovum unite a new being is created which is alive and will continue to live unless its death is brought about by some specific condition." (E. L. Potter and J. M. Craig, Pathology of the Fetus and the Infant, 3rd ed., Chicago: Year Book Medical Publishers, 1975, page vii.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top