@jacob: yeah, ok i am sarcastic, especially in the extreme view, but don't say you can't see benifits, at least to mandatoy parenting education if not licensed parenting.

As for dependancy, you are not required(legally) to provide to support to your grandmother, (though not doing so might be a bad choice, you still have the choice) You are not required to provide for your children, though they would survive without you. (their quality of life would likely suffer, and depending on how you abandoned them you may be liable to prosection for endangering them, rather than leaving them in the hands of trained social workers) Again this isn't a choice you should make in all circumstances BUT it is your choice to make.

The only diference with a pregnant woman is that the unborn child/potential human inside her can't survive outside of her. Again I don't say it is a choice she should make, merely one that she should have the right to make.

oh, and yes, i am making a distinction based on whether the fetus can survive, to get around the problematic issue of defining humans based on their cognitive abilities, which i believe would extend rights to life to the great apes, some dolphins, and probably elephants ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=He7Ge7Sogrk )

"Are you saying a mother's life isn't as valuable if she is willing to break the law?"

No, not at all. But I AM saying that no person has the right to terminate another person's life. Let me ask you a question - If you agreed that the "fetus" was, in fact, a human baby then would you still say that it should be legal for her to murder it so that she would not do it in a back-alley situation?

I think at least a large part of the debate hinges on whether or not the fetus is a human, person, baby and I think it is inescapable that it is. If it is not, then we have a whole lot more of those non-persons around that we should be able to kill. And yet, we currently call that murder.

Unfortunately, I'm afraid we are even losing our inhibitions in that arena. The debate is starting to extend to the elderly and disabled. If we continue on that path our country is going to become a scary place to start growing older...

"As for dependancy, you are not required(legally) to provide to support to your grandmother, (though not doing so might be a bad choice, you still have the choice) You are not required to provide for your children, though they would survive without you. (their quality of life would likely suffer, and depending on how you abandoned them you may be liable to prosection for endangering them, rather than leaving them in the hands of trained social workers) Again this isn't a choice you should make in all circumstances BUT it is your choice to make."

You've made my point - there are legal consequences for abdicating your responsibility to care for those that are dependent on you. That doesn't even touch the penalties that would occur if you outright KILLED them.

"Unfortunately, I'm afraid we are even losing our inhibitions in that arena. The debate is starting to extend to the elderly and disabled." Uh oh, I feel a 'death panel' quote coming.

i have a question why is this such a big issue in america and not in other western countries?

bulls eye trim

a fetus is not the same as a human. We use a different word for it, it is obviously different. We ask the question what rights does it deserve, and there is no 'correct' answer to that question.

A fetus is inescapably a part of the process of human life. If you are asking the question 'where do we draw the line?' then you are asking the wrong question, here is no line, it is a fuzzy blur, which humans are less good at dealing with. It's not as simple as saying extend all human rights to this things which is part of the process which all humans go through. Other parts, toddler, child, teenager, adult - all have differeing rights based on the reality of their abilities, and fetuses really can't survive on their own.

oh, it's an issue in ireland. Catholic ireland has outlawed abortion, (thorugh national referendum) and while some in the governement would like to see this changed, they don't want to risk losing another referendum on the issue.

They have however legalised a right to information about abortions available in other countries; and as we have a common travel area with the UK most girls who want to can go on the abortion ferry to an english clinic...

@orathaic whats the connection between Ireland and America specificaly the Republic

"i have a question why is this such a big issue in america and not in other western countries?"

it is an issue in Ireland, but different.

I suppose the difference between america and ireland is that it has become an intensly political issue there, but the difference on population size, and their two party system means things become more polarized.

sorry, just pointing out that it is an issue in Ireland, the republic, (as western country)

All i need do is look down the street to see posters claiming the Lisbon treaty will allow abortions in ireland so we should vote no.

Some of your agruments here are utterly ridiculous. By some of your definitions, human life occurs when the egg is still in the womans body and thus her menstrual cycle every month must be murder, is it not?! That egg was a POTENTIAL life! Just because it happened to not encounter a sperm on its way out does not make it any less a life, right? Give me a break.
A fetus becomes a human when it's umbilical cord is cut from its mother's body. Plain and simple. Until that point, it is attached to her, it is her body, and she chooses what to do with it. Religion and government have no place in a woman's uterus, and neither does a man for that matter. You fellas are lucky enough we let you rent space in our vaginas once and a while, let's not get greedy here.
I think men need to think long and hard about how THEY would react if the roles were reversed and life altering decisions about their bodies were made for them by moronic third parties. I realize there are also pro-life women out there, well...they are just stupid.
Oh, and by the way, being pro-choice does not make someone pro-death. I am pro-responsible decision making, and that includes plan B and/or abortion when necessary.
For those of you wondering, I am a pharmacist. The number of people that I see on a daily basis who should NOT be procreating is staggering not to mention frightening. All I can say is, thank god (see He does have a place in this argument!) there are options.

Abortion is a belief thing, not a debate thing.

@orathaic - by that definition, then a newborn is not a human, nor is an infant, baby, or child. We have different words for them, but they are all still humans just as a fetus is a human. While would we say human fetus for clarity versus pig fetus if it wasn't human?

If you go by the viability standard, then we should be able to pull the plug on anyone on life support as they aren't viable outside their mechanical "womb". Maybe even yank pacemakers as the wearer can't live without it. Viability is also a stupid standard.

My standard is, the moment the unborn child can feel pain, it is alive and therefore the act of abortion is, at a minimum, cruel and unusual punishment. We treat death row inmates with more repect at their executions than the unborn children. At least the killers on death row get a sedative to reduce, if not eliminate, the pain.

@Persephone - so I guess you believe in partial birth abortions? You would allow the baby to be removed completely from the womb and killed while the umbilical cord is still attached? You are a monster! You do realize you don't have to raise the kid after it's out of your body. You can give it up for adoption as there are LOTS of couples out there who can't have children of their own and would love to adopt a newborn baby. But you'd just as soon kill it and think you should be allowed to as long as it's umbilical cord is still attached.

It's official. I think I found someone on this site who I actually would hate if I ever met them in person. I can't conceive of liking a monster who'd use an excuse of "the umbilical cord is still attached" to take a human life.

I'm not sure you quite understand what partial birth abortion is Draugnar.

But this is what I mean, now everyone is calling everyone else names.

how many people are anti abortion but pro capital punishment?because anyone like that should really be put out of their misery

Instead of abortion, adoption! Why is it so hard?

why is so hard to understand that an abortion is nothing but getting rid of some cells thats all, like getting rid of a tumour

@Draugnar: You are an idiot. If I were your mother, I would have partially aborted you.
Love Monster

You fellas are lucky enough we let you rent space in our vaginas once and a while, let's not get greedy here.
"I think men need to think long and hard about how THEY would react if the roles were reversed and life altering decisions about their bodies were made for them by moronic third parties. I realize there are also pro-life women out there, well...they are just stupid."

"It's official. I think I found someone on this site who I actually would hate if I ever met them in person."

"how many people are anti abortion but pro capital punishment?because anyone like that should really be put out of their misery"


This thread is degenerating. I am about to leave now and probably wn't be able to post again until tonight or maybe tomorrow or maybe not until Monday. One more thought:

"Abortion is a belief thing, not a debate thing"
Who has brought religious belief into it? The only people who have done that in this thread are people who are pro-choice who are ridiculing pro-life people. They are ridiculing us on something that has not been sais. Now isn't that rather silly?

There is no doubt that this issue is worthy of debate.

These two posts (and a few others) is why any meaningless discussion of abortion is pointless.
'Instead of abortion, adoption! Why is it so hard?'
'why is so hard to understand that an abortion is nothing but getting rid of some cells thats all, like getting rid of a tumour'

For both of you, its just not that simple. To simplify your belief into one sentence is insulting to yourself. I assume you are more than a two-dimensional person able to form more complete thoughts than that.

To suggest 'just give it up for adoption' as the cure, or 'its just cells' doesn't take into account the 9 months of the life of the mother or the trauma and regret that an abortion may cause to a mother, let alone killing a 'life', even if not human.

Regardless of what you believe, I really hope you have thought deeper than a one sentence answer.

shoud read: that has not been said

"Instead of abortion, adoption! Why is it so hard?"
Adoption rather than abortion is not a no-cost option. Pregnancy is an inconvenient and potentially life-threatening condition, giving birth is a dangerous, painful and potentially life-threatening activity. You might believe that the problems inherent in pregnancy and birth are less bad than the issues of abortion but I'm not sure that you can logically insist that everyone agree with you.

Well, I only read the idiocy of Persephone's post, so that's all I'm going to respond to, and I probably won't read this thread again. (I'm really stretched on time)

What about paternal rights? Are you saying that the father has no claim on the uterus and can get an abortion without the consent of the father? What if the father wants the mother to get an abortion, but the mother wants to have the child? Should the father then have to be responsible for it as well?

It's stupidity to claim that men should have no opinion on the matter, and if you disagree, well, I guess we don't have much to talk about.

Persephone was the one who declared it not to be a human life until the umbilical cord was cut. I do know what partial birth abortion is, but her umbilibal view goes WAY beyond ANY current standard of acceptable abortion and defining human life. THAT is what makes her a monster. My Grandma is 88 years old and requires a respirator 24/7. Is she no longer human because she needs a machine to keep her alive? The woman's womb is a biological machine designed to sustain a life. The dependence or attachment to that machine should not be the defining factor in whther or not the attached organism is a human life or not.

Also: psychologically, both adoption and abortion have serious consequences. This is not to say that either is bad, but just stating a fact. I'm trying to keep my personal beliefs on the matter out of it, and only argue what can be rationally debated.

Also, DJ's last post +1

Paternal rights? You gave those up when you decided to impregnate a woman who would need to resort to abortion because she is either mentally, physically or emotionally unable to have a child. Simple as that.