Pro-Life, My take

[Bac]

Despite there already being a abortion topic this warrants a post of its own as for not wanted to derail old topics.

DISCLAIMER: every ounce of the arguments I make in this thread are OPINIONS. I have reached these conclusions on my own and have no "evidence" to enforce my views. I am merely posting this because I seek others takes on MY views, and hopefully some people who are against my views will speak up(sadly not very likely as there seems to be a strong liberal base here).

So abortion is a big deal. After going through the issue in my Ethics in Society course I really started thinking hard about both sides of the issue. In doing so I have come up with the following arguments against the Pro-Lifers stance. First however perhaps a short lesson to make sure we are all on the same page.

The abortion debate centers around life. Whether life is being taken, whether we have the right to take that life, when life begins. Pro-Lifers- mainly- abortion is killing, life starts at conception. Pro-Choicers-mainly- abortion is the womens right, life doesn't start till later than conception.

With that out of the way what follows is my idea of Pro-Lifers in general.
First perhaps, an example I used in class to help show my idea in a gritty fashion. Say you're in a classroom. A man enters with a 3 year old kid held by the arm. He then proceeds to draw a knife and begins to attempt to kill that 3 year old. Now, the important part. Every SANE human being should/would do everything in their power to prevent this 3 year old from getting killed. Now relating this to abortion-I have decided on 3 groups that Pro-Lifers fit in.

1. They do not actually believe what they say they believe and are merely going along with it because of various reasons(political/religions/traditions) This group i believe holds the vast majority of Pro-lifers for reasons i will get into later

2. They are *******. Plain and simple. They allow what they see as mass genocide (to babies) to happen on a global and local scale without doing "anything" about it.

3. They are in prison for firebombing an abortion clinic. These people have faith in their convictions and I must give them at least a little nod for that.

So... I attempted to put myself into the mindset of a Pro-lifer(I urge you to try to do the same) and this is what I see. Mass genocide worst then the holocaust being committed. Child slaughterhouses around the nation being funded by the government. In these slaughterhouses babies are torn to pieces by murderers who then proceed to leave the "clinic" and drive away with no repercussions. A president who not only morally agrees with babies being slaughtered, but will enforce that "right" with laws in order to protect the murderers wellbeing.

After that I put myself in the position of a Pro-Lifer who lives near an abortion clinic. The only similar situation I can make up for pro-choicers to relate to this situation is as follows. There's a building near where you live called the culling building. Here every week 10s to 100s of little kids/babies are brought and killed. Day after day after day. If something like this was happening their would be a revolt. Nation wide there would be dead doctors and bombed buildings all over the place. If I lived by a place like that I would not hesitate to take a bat or gun inside the place in an attempt to save babies lives.

So what do we hear of people doing? Staging peaceful protests? Are you ****ing kidding me? Holding a sign, and chanting a slogan outside of a place where you know babies are being killed as you speak? I call bull****. Look at my first example with the 3 year old. Would a proper response be to take a magic marker and proceed to make a sign that says "don't kill 3 year olds!" while hes standing there stabbing the kid? Again my argument is that any SANE individual would attempt to everything in their power to prevent innocents(especially babies) from being killed for no reason.

So with this being my take on a pro-lifers world the only logical assumption i can make is number 1. The vast majority of self-proclaimed pro-lifers DO NOT actually believe what they are saying. They merely say "oh yea abortion is killing and so on" because they want to fit in and not cause a stir in their church/family/school ect... This is fine. I don't have a big problem with these people, they aren't doing anything that deserves my hatred besides telling a little white lie.

The pro-lifers that i have no clue how to explain are the protesters. The peaceful, but ****ing annoying as hell protesters. The ones that stand at abortion clinics and colleges, with signs(preferably held by their 5 year old daughter) with a huge picture of a dead fetus(usually preying on peoples lack of knowledge about what the vast majority of abortions actually look like). I cannot wrap my head around what they are doing. They (say) they believe that kids are being slaughtered...and they hold peaceful protests... Where the hell are the murdered doctors and the bombed buildings. Scare tactics work wonders in these cases. I don't understand why they don't start killing doctors...I'm pretty sure there wouldn't be many volunteers any more at clinics if that started happening en masse.

Those pro-lifers who are in prison for killing/kidnapping/destruction of property. I cant fault them for believing they are saving lives. Because I would do the same in their situation. I think the vast majority of us would do the same. Of course I think they're ****ing nuts, but that's because I'm pro-choice.

Anyways yea, so i just wanted to hear what everyone thinks of this view. Especially would like to hear some Pro-lifers opinions.

A possible counter to my argument that i could gather is the classic case of the women who was assaulted in plain site and no-one did anything. Deferral of responsibility or something along those lines. This may apply to some extent, but i don't think it covers the fact that this has been going on for decades not a one time event.

-Im sure ill edit this for clarity/grammar/ect..., just wanted to get something down before i head to class- also plan on adding something on the pro-lifers side of the argument later that im surprised they haven't exploited before

Thoughts/Opinions/Criticism all welcome

 

[w!zard]

the thing is, most abortions is just killing a bundle of cells. it doesn't matter that is has potential to grow into a person, it isn't. just as you wouldn't treat a child as an adult because they all have potential to grow into one, you don't treat a bundle of cells as a kid with feelings and a life.

i doubt you're against breaking leaves off trees or even stepping on a bug, so how is abortion any different?

 

[Bac]

....@ wizard...all I can surmise is that you didn't read anything I wrote- I am not at all against abortion, I was stating my views on Pro-Lifers, and what I believe are the inherent flaws in their way of going about things in relation to abortion. IDK maybe i wasn't clear- I really wasn't looking for this to be Abortion is good/bad(there is already a thread for that) this is supposed to be solely on MY view of pro-lifers and what you guys think of it.

 

[handsockpuppet]

This is the Debate Hall (well, technically Proving Grounds but they're similar). You do not post solely opinions, and you do not create a thread to show your opinions without something to debate. "What you guys think of it?" How are we supposed to debate that? Whether or not we like your opinions? And I think debating on abortion is a better topic than debating about pro-lifers, but maybe that's just me. Plus, it almost seems some of this stuff is contradictory, like you saying you're not at all against abortion but sensationalizing the context with pro-life thoughts. An example is number two. Not only is it calling abortion a mass genocide, but it's also calling the people who don't blow up clinics *******.

"2. They are *******. Plain and simple. They allow what they see as mass genocide (to babies) to happen on a global and local scale without doing "anything" about it."

...And you could have at least backed up you opinions by something.

 

[KrazyGlue]

With that out of the way what follows is my idea of Pro-Lifers in general.
First perhaps, an example I used in class to help show my idea in a gritty fashion. Say you're in a classroom. A man enters with a 3 year old kid held by the arm. He then proceeds to draw a knife and begins to attempt to kill that 3 year old. Now, the important part. Every SANE human being should/would do everything in their power to prevent this 3 year old from getting killed. Now relating this to abortion-I have decided on 3 groups that Pro-Lifers fit in.

Well, 3 year olds and embryos aren't really comparable; the embryo doesn't feel pain and has no brain to tell itself that it is against the action. But I see where you're going with this.

1. They do not actually believe what they say they believe and are merely going along with it because of various reasons(political/religions/traditions) This group i believe holds the vast majority of Pro-lifers for reasons i will get into later

2. They are *******. Plain and simple. They allow what they see as mass genocide (to babies) to happen on a global and local scale without doing "anything" about it.

3. They are in prison for firebombing an abortion clinic. These people have faith in their convictions and I must give them at least a little nod for that.

Well, that's a bit offensive. While I disagree with pro-lifers, that's a bit unfair to them.

So... I attempted to put myself into the mindset of a Pro-lifer(I urge you to try to do the same) and this is what I see. Mass genocide worst then the holocaust being committed. Child slaughterhouses around the nation being funded by the government. In these slaughterhouses babies are torn to pieces by murderers who then proceed to leave the "clinic" and drive away with no repercussions. A president who not only morally agrees with babies being slaughtered, but will enforce that "right" with laws in order to protect the murderers wellbeing.

Again, children that think and feel pain are different from embryos. And painlessly removing a few cells that would potentially develop into an under loved, underprivileged child is a lot less bad than torturing and killing thousands of people just because of their religion (the holocaust).

So what do we hear of people doing? Staging peaceful protests? Are you ****ing kidding me? Holding a sign, and chanting a slogan outside of a place where you know babies are being killed as you speak? I call bull****. Look at my first example with the 3 year old. Would a proper response be to take a magic marker and proceed to make a sign that says "don't kill 3 year olds!" while hes standing there stabbing the kid? Again my argument is that any SANE individual would attempt to everything in their power to prevent innocents(especially babies) from being killed for no reason.

So what are pro-lifers supposed to do, kill all the doctors? Plus, hate to sound like a broken record, but stabbing a thinking, feeling kid is different from painlessly removing some cells.

Those pro-lifers who are in prison for killing/kidnapping/destruction of property. I cant fault them for believing they are saving lives. Because I would do the same in their situation. I think the vast majority of us would do the same. Of course I think they're ****ing nuts, but that's because I'm pro-choice.

Pretty funny.

_______________________________________

So... yeah. That's what I've got for now. My main points would be (as a pro-choicer):

1. Embryos can't think or feel pain.

2. Abortion is often because a mother isn't ready for the child, so why doom the kid to a depressing life?

3. Stem cell research is huge. It could be the key to solving many terrible diseases.

 

[handsockpuppet]

This may be off topic, but to try to start a debate here...

So... yeah. That's what I've got for now. My main points would be (as a pro-choicer):

1. Embryos can't think or feel pain.

2. Abortion is often because a mother isn't ready for the child, so why doom the kid to a depressing life?

3. Stem cell research is huge. It could be the key to solving many terrible diseases.

1) First, I'd like to see a source that says they can't feel pain (because I honestly don't know). Secondly, one of the reasons why killing a kid rather than an adult (note: I said one) is because kids have their whole life ahead of them. they can be anything they want to be. this applies for Embryos too; on a normal course, they will be born and lead a life.

2) Adoption. I wouldn't say I'm pro-life exactly, though I do believe abortion is usually not the answer, but I am pro-adoption. Orphans can still lead normal lives, and maybe one day that mother will be ready for kids.

3) Anything could be a key to solving terrible diseases. I agree stem cell research is huge, but I thought stem cells were more for replacing other cells, like if someone had a back problem you could fix it with stem cells (correct me if I'm wrong). Though it does run into some moral issues, using the cells of murdered babies (yes murdered. killed purposely with an intent). While I can't say I don't want people using cells from embryos that were going to die from abortion anyway, in some ways I just feel it's promoting abortion.

 

[w!zard]

1) First, I'd like to see a source that says they can't feel pain (because I honestly don't know).

no nerve cells, undeveloped brain

Secondly, one of the reasons why killing a kid rather than an adult (note: I said one) is because kids have their whole life ahead of them. they can be anything they want to be. this applies for Embryos too; on a normal course, they will be born and lead a life.

kids have their whole lives ahead of them... to become just like the adult that was sacrificed for them. this isn't a valid reason because the kid could become ANYTHING, and there is a good chance it will become worse than the adult. since there's no way to know, neither should be preferred over the other. potential means nothing. treat something as what it is, not what it *could* become

3) Anything could be a key to solving terrible diseases. I agree stem cell research is huge, but I thought stem cells were more for replacing other cells, like if someone had a back problem you could fix it with stem cells (correct me if I'm wrong). Though it does run into some moral issues, using the cells of murdered babies (yes murdered. killed purposely with an intent). While I can't say I don't want people using cells from embryos that were going to die from abortion anyway, in some ways I just feel it's promoting abortion.

again, you make the mistake of calling a sack of cells a baby. it's not a baby and should not be treated as such, just as kids are not adults and should not be treated as one.

 

[Disfunkshunal]

i am a pro-choice and so far the only one.

ok so i guess ill be the first one to cite examples

Abortionfacts.com
Day 1: Conception: Of the 200,000,000 sperm that try to penetrate the mother’s egg cell, only one succeeds.2 At that very moment, a new and unique individual is formed. All of the inherited features of this new person are already set – whether it’s a boy or girl, the color of the eyes, the color of the hair, the dimples of the cheeks and the cleft of the chin. He or she is smaller than a grain of sugar, but the instructions are present for all that this person will ever become

Day 18-20:The foundations of the brain, spinal cord, and nervous system are laid

Day 21:The heart begins to beat,7 unsurely at first, gaining strength day by day. The heart beats 70 times per minute at first, reaching a maximum of 170-190 at seven weeks, and slowing a bit to 160-180 at 9 weeks.8 A day later the eyes begin to develop. The earliest stages of the ears are now present.9

8 Weeks:The baby is now well-proportioned, and about the size of a thumb. Every organ is present. The liver is making blood, the kidneys function, and the heart beats steadily. The skull, elbows, and knees are forming. Of the 4500 structures in the adult body, 4000 are already present.25 The skeleton of the arms and legs and the spine begins to stiffen as bone cells are added.26

this isnt everything that was said i skipped around a little bit.

Ok krazy glue, by atleast two months this seems like murder to me. If something has all human organs present, blood, working kidneys, and most importantly a beating heart, its human isnt it?
Embroyos aren't the people you see walking down the street everyday but they are humans nonetheless. Lets say you get an abortion before 8 weeks but after 3. the embroyo still has a beating heart! Without an organ punping blood through our viens would we be alive? No! As soon as the heart dies, you die. So maybe they cant feel the pain but they are still being killed.
According to my source, the brain, equally if not more important than the heart, is formed right before 3 weeks. Maybe im missing something but unless you know immeadiately that you're pregant, before you even hit 3 weeks! an abortion is killing someone.

"Abortion is often because a mother isn't ready for the child, so why doom the kid to a depressing life"

Except in the rare case of ****, its the mothers fault for getting pregant in the first place. There is one sure way to never get pregnant and that's dont have sex. Have you ever heard the saying 'you made your bed, now you have to lay in it'. This means you are responsible for your own actions and have to except any and all consequences. If for whatever you cant keep the child, maybe your a minor, dont kill it, but instead give it up for adoption. Adoption isnt exactly a happy ending either because the child may go through life forever wondering who his/her parents are(if they never come back for him/her) but this is a better solution than murder. The only time i think abortion should even be considered is when having the child will either result in the death of the child him/herself or the mother.
Also here is an intersting piece of information, in the U.S if you murder a pregnant women you are charged with murdering two people.

in response to the OP about protest, the people do what they can to peacefully protest. THese people want to see abortion illegal but going about this in a violent way wont end good.
Think about this, you are a father of 3 kids and against abortion, you here there is a protest going on and you join in. Of course you could always light the place of business and induce a conflagaration, but how will it end?
1) you get arrested
2)you leave your 3 kids and wife
3)you are found guilty and arrested
Well, well, well. You've managed to abandon your family, lose your job, and do time which all could have been avoided if you protested by the rules. You see my point?
some people have too much riding on one little bad mistake when there is a good equivalent

 

[w!zard]

the embryo has no brain activity until about the 6th week. since the brain is the only part of a human that defines someone (you can have a heart, kidney, leg, arm, eye, etc. replaced, but the person is still considered the same person. this is not so for the brain), it shouldn't be considered "murder" until at least then.

 

[RDK]

That quote from Abortionfacts.com is ridiculous for several reasons.

Abortionfacts.com
Day 1: Conception: Of the 200,000,000 sperm that try to penetrate the mother’s egg cell, only one succeeds.2 At that very moment, a new and unique individual is formed.

Each and every one of those sperm cells are unique and individual before they penetrate the egg. What's your point? Somehow it makes a difference after the fact?

All of the inherited features of this new person are already set – whether it’s a boy or girl, the color of the eyes, the color of the hair, the dimples of the cheeks and the cleft of the chin. He or she is smaller than a grain of sugar, but the instructions are present for all that this person will ever become

Also untrue. Genetics account for a very small portion of what you would probably consider a "person". A lot of it is situational (the environment acting on those genes).

Haven't you ever heard the phrase "He's a product of his environment?" It's a tad deterministic, I know, but it's applicable. The science behind the genetics is where that term came from.

Day 18-20:The foundations of the brain, spinal cord, and nervous system are laid

And yet they are not fully the brain, spinal cord, and nervous system. Hence "fetus".

 

[KrazyGlue]

no nerve cells, undeveloped brain

Yup.

kids have their whole lives ahead of them... to become just like the adult that was sacrificed for them. this isn't a valid reason because the kid could become ANYTHING, and there is a good chance it will become worse than the adult. since there's no way to know, neither should be preferred over the other. potential means nothing. treat something as what it is, not what it *could* become

Agreed. The other problem is that you can't always rely on the adoption system. There are plenty of people who grow up in orphanages, living mediocre lives, and never get adopted. They'll often struggle as an adult, due to less-than-normal education and lack of parental support. If they get adopted, then they have a decent chance of leading a normal lifestyle, but they are still often troubled about not knowing their parents.

I'm not saying they're doomed to have an unhappy life, but the sad reality is that many of them do.

again, you make the mistake of calling a sack of cells a baby. it's not a baby and should not be treated as such, just as kids are not adults and should not be treated as one.

Yeah, they're not fully developed yet.

And yes, stem cell research is used mostly used for replacing nonexistant or malfunctioning cells, but that is often the main problem of certain diseases. For example, take Parkinson's disease, a degenerative brain disease that heavily impairs motor skills, speech, etc. Stem cells can differentiate into the brain cells needed, and help the person out. They can also be used to help fight many forms of cancer. It's pretty impressive.

But I guess that's a different debate; the stem cell debate is more about what happens after the embryo has been aborted.

 

[Bac]

hmmm... so.....I don't really understand what... exactly you guys are thinking you're accomplishing. There was already an abortion debate thread. I made this one for the exact reason that it is not supposed to turn into a debate on whether abortion is right/wrong or whatever. As for my op not leading to "debate" exactly, who cares? Discussion can be just as rewarding if not more rewarding then "debate". If DISCUSSION is not allowed in this place then close at will, otherwise don't dismantle the other abortion thread by hijacking this one.

As far as the example that a man with kids couldn't risk his family, while accurate, doesn't apply to the big picture. The vast majority vast vast, of "pro-lifers" stage or take part in no protests whatsoever be them peaceful or not

KrazyGlue-
"So what are pro-lifers supposed to do, kill all the doctors? Plus, hate to sound like a broken record, but stabbing a thinking, feeling kid is different from painlessly removing some cells."

This is what YOU believe. For a Pro-Lifer they really aren't so different. The embryo has just as much right to "life" as the child does. YOU do not consider the embryo life, they do. Thats why it makes no sense for them to not respond in the same fashion.

 

[RDK]

hmmm... so.....I don't really understand what... exactly you guys are thinking you're accomplishing. There was already an abortion debate thread. I made this one for the exact reason that it is not supposed to turn into a debate on whether abortion is right/wrong or whatever. As for my op not leading to "debate" exactly, who cares? Discussion can be just as rewarding if not more rewarding then "debate". If DISCUSSION is not allowed in this place then close at will, otherwise don't dismantle the other abortion thread by hijacking this one.

Considering that this is called "The Debate Hall", it's probably important that there is some form of debating going on. If there's nothing to debate, then discussion isn't even possible.

 

[KrazyGlue]

This is what YOU believe. For a Pro-Lifer they really aren't so different. The embryo has just as much right to "life" as the child does. YOU do not consider the embryo life, they do. Thats why it makes no sense for them to not respond in the same fashion.

What I was focusing on is that the embryo has no nerves or brain, so it doesn't feel any pain or negative emotions. And I'm pretty sure the vast majority of pro-lifers are sane enough to not go around assassinating doctors because they perceive them as murderers.

And yeah, this needs to be a debate since that's what the whole purpose of this subforum is.

 

[Disfunkshunal]

the embryo has no brain activity until about the 6th week. since the brain is the only part of a human that defines someone (you can have a heart, kidney, leg, arm, eye, etc. replaced, but the person is still considered the same person. this is not so for the brain), it shouldn't be considered "murder" until at least then.

OK but still no everyone gers an abortian within the first 6 weeks and murder sometimes is commited

That quote from Abortionfacts.com is ridiculous for several reasons.

Also untrue. Genetics account for a very small portion of what you would probably consider a "person". A lot of it is situational (the environment acting on those genes).

Haven't you ever heard the phrase "He's a product of his environment?" It's a tad deterministic, I know, but it's applicable. The science behind the genetics is where that term came from.

The specific things they mention do have to do with genetics. Unless in the case of a mutation, when you are born you will start out with qualities and then as you grow the ebvironment will affect you.

And yet they are not fully the brain, spinal cord, and nervous system. Hence "fetus".

this has been addrssed

Agreed. The other problem is that you can't always rely on the adoption system. There are plenty of people who grow up in orphanages, living mediocre lives, and never get adopted. They'll often struggle as an adult, due to less-than-normal education and lack of parental support. If they get adopted, then they have a decent chance of leading a normal lifestyle, but they are still often troubled about not knowing their parents.

Can you show me a source where you got this?

I'm not saying they're doomed to have an unhappy life, but the sad reality is that many of them do.

 

[RDK]

The specific things they mention do have to do with genetics. Unless in the case of a mutation, when you are born you will start out with qualities and then as you grow the ebvironment will affect you.

I think you would agree that there's more to a person than eye color, hair color, and whether or not they have dimples.

 

[KrazyGlue]

@Toon Diddy: "OK but still no everyone gers an abortian within the first 6 weeks and murder sometimes is commited"

The baby has almost nothing after 6 weeks. The brain and nervous system are not fully developed after 28 weeks; after this point abortion becomes illegal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetus ("Viability" section, which is #3)
http://plus.aol.com/aol/reference/abortion/abortion?flv=1 (it's no longer abotion after 28 weeks)


Abortion is also sometimes used for females who have suffered **** and aren't able to support the child. In addition to that, sometimes it saves the mothers life or is used when a child would be born with a painful terminal illness in order to save them from suffering.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion (under "Induced Abortion")



"Can you show me a source where you got this?"

It's nor really something you need a source for, just common sense. If you want an example, use this link: http://www.geocities.com/fnoac/ (the smaller text)