Reply With Quote
We don't sentence 13 year olds to death for murder now. Why would we start?
death penalty for 13 yr olds.... !!!
We don't sentence 13 year olds to death for murder now. Why would we start?
Just my two cents worth. How come we have so many
children killed by the youth of today? And why do we
prosecute them? Could it be that these young folks think
there isn't much difference between the unborn and the
born? I personally think that is the problem. Women do
use abortion as a means of birth control. And that is a fact.
Why I have no idea. But human life has become cheap
in one lifetime. What a shame.
It would obviously be handled as murder, no different if I ran into a hospital and gunned down a newborn baby, which for some reason has more rights than the fetus 7 days before it.
Waiting for logic on why it's OK to terminate 3 month fetuses but not 11 month fetuses or 5 day old infants or any aged person with the same sentience and self-awareness of said 3 month fetus.
Do you really think that abortion as a means of birth control is something new to this lifetime? What about all of the abortions that happened before things like hormonal birth control were invented? Herbally induced abortions have been happening for thousands of years, and I have a hard time thinking that life is thought of as cheaper today than it was in times past. Do you really think that human nature has changed all that much? The main difference between abortion in times past and now is that now it is safer and more accessible. Had you given women in most other points in history the same choice that women today have, the likelihood is that they would be making similar choices to today's women.
There is a reason that we can have classic literature and philosophy that has been consistently relevant for hundreds of years, and that is because it addresses perpetual human nature. Human nature doesn't change, our perceptions of it do as we acquire experience and age, which is why we should not be so narrow-minded as to think that the world can only be how we think of it.
Pick up a couple of history books and consider the fact that very little of what we face is actually "new". Every generation thinks that the next generation is going to ruin the world, when either it's been ruined all along or has yet to become so. The world is startlingly consistent, and human life is as cheap as it has always been.
The difference being there was a stigma attached in the
past. It was not condoned. It is now and there is no
stigma attached. Like having children out of wedlock is
no longer consider out of the ordinary.
stigma or not birth control has always been a realization ray. and yes by definiton abortion is birth control however to attirbute all women who get them is because they are s who like to have irresponsible sex is small minded.
I think your small mind is showing. I have never made
the statement that all who get abortions are " s".
And God only knows that many women become
pregnant for other reasons other than irresponsible sex.
My statement was why I thought life has become
cheap. In just the last day, two stories have been
published about women and multiple deaths of
children found in trash bags. Daily, you read about
young people who kill kids. And I still maintain that
many young folks see little difference between doing
away with a child before birth or after birth.
You won't find me disagreeing with you that life has becomed cheapened but I don't think you can claim abortion is the basis for this. We have teenagers killing other teens because they looked at them wrong. people killing eachother over 5.00... I certainly don't agree with your notion that young folks not knowing the difference between abortion and infanticide (sp?) is somehow connected.
If youre saying life has slowly become more cheap than in the past, I would argue that statement to the very end.
Life is at an all-time premium high in comparison to times of yore. Comparison between now and ancient times (Rome, Feudal Japan, etc.)? Does this even require a response?
Middle Ages? Pleeeeeeease.
Comparison to early colonial times (Spain into LatAm, early colonies of America, etc)? Does this need an answer?
Comparison to early century 20th century? This does require an answer. The early 20th century is romanticized for its simpler time. When in fact, some of the highest death total due to war, famine, disease and hunger ravaged all over the world, even the lowly non-superpower USA has the inlfuenza outbreak, WW1 and WW2, Hitler, Muslim expansion into Africa. It could possibly be described as the bloodiest period of human history for no other reason than our technological advances allowed us to kill each other on a much wider scale.
Our society, our world, our value of human life is at an ALL-TIME high. Its not really up for debate. Because you may feel abortion should be illegal, does not mean we as a society have devalued life. Its quite the opposite when compared to not only our national history, but human history. Its not even close.
See my last post. This isnt even a debate if youre asking about how much value human life has now in comparison to times past.
Exactly what I am talking GGA. Life has been cheapened
in just my lifetime. When I was young, believe it or not,
but in my home county, here in Texas. We had one
person commit murder and it wasn't in my home county,
but in the adjoining county in a robbery of a gas station.
They caught the guy the next day. And you know the
the rest of the story. Justice was taken care of in
short order. Old sparky was put to good use.
Killing was just not an option. Kicking butt was not
un-heard of, but not really the way things went either.
Normally, things were settled in so other fashion.
I might add lawyers were not really in great demand
either.
"WHO ARE WE TO TELL A WOMAN WHAT TO DO WITH THEIR BODIES!!?"
Well, we have laws against drug use, don't we? Isn't that telling people what they may not do with their bodies?
We have laws against pros ution in most of the country. Isn't that telling people what they may not do with their bodies?
If you attempt suicide and live through it, you might be prosecuted. Isn't that telling people what to do with their bodies?
Now, if your position on these matters is a purely libertarian position and you believe that the state should never be involved in matters like these, well then congrats on consistency. Just don't try to argue that there is no precedent for the law to limit what one is able to do with their bodies, because that precedent certainly exists.
More population = more crime, and if you are as old as you allude yourself to be then perhaps you and a few Native Americans were the only folks in said county back in the day...
Are you seriously saying that life is cheaper now than it was when slavery was openly tolerated? When stolen Africans worked the salt flats in the Caribbean until they died because it was cheaper to buy new slaves than to take good enough care of them until they could reproduce? Life is cheaper now than it was when soldiers were giving Indians blankets intentionally laced with smallpox and killing the buffalo with the express purpose of starving the natives out? These are all things that are part of our history, of your history, in the Americas.
Perhaps you only learned to read ten years ago, or have been living in Nell's cabin, it's the only explanation for the obliviousness of your opinion.
Abortion is a form of birth control, any way you look at it, whether you are pro-choice or pro-life. The number of women for whom it as their sole method is a MUCH smaller percentage in reality than it seems to be in your mind. Most women who do not want children in their immediate future try to avoid becoming pregnant in the first place, and the ones who do not have other forms of birth control are usually either uneducated about them (an argument in favor of comprehensive sex education in school) or those who find other methods unavailable to them (because they are in an abusive situation or any other myriad reasons). That being said, while I cannot speak for every woman, the women I know who have not used it as their sole method do not consider life cheap.
No stigma attached? Are you blind/deaf/re ed?
Ray is 94
He must be 294 if his lifetime encompasses when slavery was legal and Native Americans were being exterminated.
Define viable.
20 years ago a baby at 28 weeks gestation wouldn't make it; now it has a 95% chance.
Can we hook it up to a machine, or does it have to breathe on its own?
What about children who go full term, but can't make it without intervention? Can the momma just say, "nevermind, let it die, I'll try for a better one?"
You are on a slippery slope.
If I am forced to define what I mean by viable is when a baby can survive outside the womb...
the reason I say this is because if the baby is viable then the woman would not have to abort. they could deliver the baby and put him/her up for adoption... in the end I just feel it should be the women's choice to carry the child. I am not in favor of late term procedures rather I would prefer everything taken care in the first 9 to 12 weeks.
So, tell me this, GGA; why should the fate of an unborn child hinge on what you, or anyone else for that matter, is or is not in favor of?
How 'bout a definitive definition of when human life begins and is, therefore, endowed with the fundamental and cons utionally protected rights afforded all people?
why should a women be forced to carry a child that she may not want or be able to rear and raise..because you feel bad?
I have what I feel the best way to decide this issue..
Allow only women to vote on this once and for all... I think that the people who are most affected by pregnancy and everything that goes along with should decide. people like you and me don't have standing on the issue since we will not have to face making this decision...so we should not have a vote..if a majority of women want to make abortion illegal I will support the law.. if the majority of women decide to keep their choice then you would have to live with it.. I think the only fair way to decide this issue to leave men out of it.
in your opinion.
if my wife's life was ever in danger do to her pregnancy i would never have wanted to have a child, and i don't give a if you think that's immoral because you are never going to get pregnant
I think you're phrasing that question all wrong. Aside from rape, resulting in pregnancy, no one is forcing a woman to carry a child. She voluntarily engaged in a practice known to cause pregnancy and, therefore, my question is, why should a woman be allowed to casually create and destroy human life?
See, you once again miss the point of the anti-abortion argument. The person most affected by this decision is in the womb. What you propose, to me anyway, is akin to allowing a murderer to decide if murder should be legal.
I don't see it as murder.
I have another question for you.
If using embryonic stem cells for research is murdering a baby then what is throwing them away? Wouldn't that be 'killing' the exact same cells that you don't want to use for research?
Abortion on demand is another step for liberating women from men and it helps keep the minority population in check. All in all, it's very useful.
No, I am not as described above. And history as I have
described it, is in my lifetime. And the history as you have
described it exist in this time and age. So maybe you
should just calm down a bit. We are talking about NOW
in the United States.
There is very little stigma attached to having an abortion
in this day and time. That is a fact. As a matter of fact
on the the "radical" Christians, as some describe them,
are the only ones who do publicly attach a stigma.
SRJ said what is very apparent to many. We tell people
all the time what they can do with their bodies. Like
buckle up, Smoking is bad, trans-fat is bad. And now,
New York City is telling people they should breast feed.
Get the kids off the bottle. There are many laws passed
the tell you what you can and cant do that has to do
with your body. Reach back into history as you wish,
but you damn sure better be prepared to look to the
present when you do. History to most, including me,
starts when you are born. The rest is just words in a
book, and we have learned, those can be changed with
time and outlook....
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions