Date: 2/9/2004 10:58:00 AM
From Authorid: 9130
*yawns*  |
|
Date: 2/9/2004 10:58:00 AM
From Authorid: 9130
I am pro-abortion if the being has not yet formed a brain. |
Date: 2/9/2004 10:58:00 AM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 47162
dizzy lol..what you yawning at?:P  |
|
Date: 2/9/2004 11:01:00 AM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 47162
So human value is based on the presence of a brain? Interesting. IF onehas a brain then they can be given the right to have life. If no brain then they are sub human and should be killed.? yikes! Sounds kinda like hitler, only now the qualifier is a brain, instead of the ethnic status. |
Date: 2/9/2004 11:01:00 AM
From Authorid: 12103
That is a good point and all....But im with dizzy  |
|
Date: 2/9/2004 11:02:00 AM
From Authorid: 9130
If you are in the hospital you can be "unplugged" if you are brain dead. |
|
Date: 2/9/2004 11:04:00 AM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 47162
dizzy good point........BUt that involves a human who has already lived. A baby in the womb who hasn't developed a brain, has the potential to have a brain, the problem is that they haven't developed it yet. So there is a clear distinction between the two. |
|
Date: 2/9/2004 11:05:00 AM
From Authorid: 9130
so? |
|
Date: 2/9/2004 11:07:00 AM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 47162
OK, a adult who is brain dead, and is unplugged has had the chance to live. They never had that chance denied to them. The yet undeveloped child in the womb without the brain, has had the chance to develop a brain, stopped. |
Date: 2/9/2004 11:08:00 AM
From Authorid: 53961
Almost all people are born with brains; unfortunately some prefer not to use them for their intended purpose. Same goes for the heart.  |
|
Date: 2/9/2004 11:10:00 AM
From Authorid: 9130
but it was not yet a human being. just a bundle of cells that was beginning to form. |
Date: 2/9/2004 11:19:00 AM
From Authorid: 24856
***backs*out*slowly***  |
Date: 2/9/2004 11:20:00 AM
From Authorid: 27046
The difference between the kid not being able to live on it's own before birth and after birth is what is defined as viable. A viable life is a life that can survive LIFE FUNCTIONS on their own outside the womb. A fetus is a non-viable life. It's not as simplistic as a 1 year old that can't feed itself or obtain food, but is living and breathing maintaining their own life functions versus a fetus which is not. The two aren't comparable.  |
Date: 2/9/2004 11:22:00 AM
From Authorid: 62478
"Your not a real human till your in my phone book" Bill Hicks. But seriosly I don't feel this is the question we need to be asking/debating. We should be asking, "How many more people are we going to allow to walk the planet?" Has anyone looked around to make sure we are going to have enouf resources to saport all these new people? Water, food, just pure room. There are too many of us now, and we are just growing. But thats just my view :) Deathletgo  |
Date: 2/9/2004 11:38:00 AM
From Authorid: 25556
oh my, this is such a complex discussion. You could go on forever and ever because it involves so many different facets of our life. Personally, I feel that If a woman gets pregnant in result of her own actions and STILL wants get rid of the baby that it should be wrong and she should have to have the baby and give it up for adoption. BUT, to defend that mother I must say that I havent had children yet and if there was a tiny little baby inside of me and was nurtured by my own existance it would be the hardest thing in the world to give that baby up and I would be forced to keep it and hence the child would pry have a screwed up life. I DEFINANTLY feel that an individual should not have the right to have multiply abortions on account of them not using the right prevention. Okay thats all Ill say for now.  |
Date: 2/9/2004 1:00:00 PM
From Authorid: 13729
LOL @ Otter2!.....And Deathletgo has a good point...Even if there were enough QUALIFIED people to care for adopted kids, it would still add to overpopulation, something certain people dont want..........  |
Date: 2/9/2004 1:02:00 PM
From Authorid: 53052
i think by saying "surivive on it's own" means being able to breathe and eat without being directly attached to a person or machines... you could argue that why do you unplug a person with no little to no brain activity, in a coma and is being kept alive on machines.. is that still considered murder?  |
|
Date: 2/9/2004 1:42:00 PM
From Authorid: 25556
hmmm, i dont get the thing about overpopulation. Id feel like crap if I were a child who was aborted because of over population. Thats almost like saying, kill every inmate because taxes are too high or kill the senior citizens because their breathing all the good air. Something to think about. |
Date: 2/9/2004 1:59:00 PM
From Authorid: 7830
This is a subject I remain neutral on. In two situations where I could have had abortions Ive chosen not to and I have one wonderful 16 month old and another child due in a month. But those are my own choices and I dont judge other people for their choices. Truth is, none of us know exactly when a fetus becomes a thinking, feeling person capable of emotion. There have been studies on brainwave activities of fetus's that show they dont exhibit typical newborn thought patterns until 7 months gestation (being in the womb), BUT fetuses are also able to live outside the womb nearly a month before that time. Many people believe that even though brain functions may not be tere yet, that the soul still is there. None of us really know and I dont think we'll ever have the knowledge to rightfully say "youre WRONG for that abortion" until one of us can remember what it was like being in the womb.  |
Date: 2/9/2004 2:02:00 PM
From Authorid: 33925
Its not a matter of surviving on its own R1, its a matter of being able to LIVE..Breathe, function as a human being on its own.  |
Date: 2/9/2004 3:19:00 PM
From Authorid: 8278
i am also pretty neutral on this topic. I don't believe in using abortion as a form of birth control...but I am also not one to judge people on their actions. I believe, if it is legal, than it is the persons right. who am I to tell them what to do? it is something they have to live with. I think there is a big difference between aborting a fetus and killing a 5 year old child. this topic is just so complex...and I am torn on it, so I will exit now =)  |
Date: 2/9/2004 3:39:00 PM
From Authorid: 54987
If abortion is made illegal on the grounds of murder then there can be no exceptions. My own opinion is that a baby becomes an independent funtioning person when it is born and that is when the spirit enters the body of the baby. That is what I beleive. Two spirits cannot inhabit one body. The mother prepares the vehicle for the new born spirit and that is what the fetus is. However, that is my personal belief and I recognise that not everybody agrees so all I can say is that it is a decision for the parents until the child is born. I personally would not want a child aborted at a late stage of pregnancy as I would be thrilled to have someone have my child, but not everyone is like me.  |
Date: 2/9/2004 4:34:00 PM
From Authorid: 38849
My answer, is never. --  |
Date: 2/9/2004 5:49:00 PM
From Authorid: 15070
Wow-impressive question. The answer should be never. But abortion must remain legal & safe. Women are going to have them regardless.  |
Date: 2/9/2004 8:34:00 PM
From Authorid: 16671
God says the LIFE is in the Blood. Thats enough for me to go against abortions, as long as their is blood, there is life.  |
Date: 2/14/2004 3:41:00 PM
From Authorid: 19613
I do not believe it is right, and if i were in the situation would not consider abortion. however i also do not believe it is my place to impose my judgment on another woman. i suppose i am anti-abortion, but pro-choice at the same time. i think free will is the most important thing.  |
