• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Abortion: A persons right to choose

turnthesuckdown said:
governments should have no bearing on the moral nor ethical decisions of the people. governements were created to keep order and organize state resources for the betterment of its people. how does allowing a woman the choice to erase a mistake that could ruin her life hamper the rest of society? wouldnt allowing the woman a better economic future if she so wishes , only benefit whatever nation?

i think that all pro life advocates since they are oh so feverent about their crusade for the preservation of life should just adopt the babies that would other wise be aborted. then they would be strapped down by the effects of such babies.

anyone can have sex if they want to and the result of that should be left to them to decide what to do with. why should the government care in the first place?

abortion helps overpopulation and allows those women a better economic future which are both in turn beneficial to the nation

What a nice jucy post......damn, Navy got my first choice responce....hmm....

How about this:
turnthesuckdown said:
...governements were created to keep order and organize state resources for the betterment of its people...

According to our constitution, this government was formed "in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty".

Let’s explore that, shall we?

In this voter's opinion, valuing and preserving life promotes a more perfect union, as does chastity outside of marriage.

Justice should be established for both a mother and her unborn, to say nothing of the father of the child. An unwanted child, a child of rape or incest is still endowed by it's Creator with the unalienable right to life just as it's mother retains her unalienable right to liberty; So to say that it is acceptable for one's right to be violated is to make the violation of the other's rights equally acceptable.

Surly the absence of unwanted pregnancies, STDs', casual disregard for one's children and a dislike for the opposite gender contributes to domestic tranquility.

Everyone disserves the protection of the constitution. Singling out one's own child to be exempt from that protection is counter to common defense.

I don't think I need to point out that having one's arms, legs and head removed from one's body does nothing for one's welfare.

Killing one's own child is not a blessing, so it is not a liberty afforded by the constitution. Being allowed to make choices, from what your favorite color is, your friends, your job, etc, is a blessing, and being killed before you are even born is to be denied all such blessings, all such choices.

I wish you well here.
 
Last edited:
ngdawg said:
Which is why you are anti-choice without saying so as you refer to the procedure as 'murder', whether it's masked as a hypothesis or anything else.

Ir you've read any of my posts you would know i am not anti-choice. I'm only against choices that result in the death of an innocent human being.


ngdawg said:
Your 'if' isn't a question, first off, it's your opinion. Why is thinking I have a right to my OWN body's usages wrong? You sure don't have a right to it, nor do you have a say how I use it. Even if I prostituted, the most I'd get is a desk ticket and a weekend in the slammer. (which is stupid-prostitution should be legal, but that's another thread)

I just wanted to stop here to tell you that I agree, prostituion should be legal. I'm not going to get into a big debate about this, but prostituion doesn't harm anyone except the woman who chooses to do it. But I believe that abortion hurst not only the woman but also kills a little child.

ngdawg said:
Oh, and you can't 'prove' an opinion wrong if there's reasonable law or fact behind it. In fact, you can't prove any opinion wrong because...well, they're opinions. They become debatable statements when facts are used. If I think the current law is ok as it stands, that's it.
Now, what the hell were you asking anyway? Oh yea.. nope.

I'm not trying to prove your opinion wrong. I am trying to show you that your argument for your opinion is illogical.


I've got a simple question for you. Do you think that all drugs should be legal, because we have the right to choose what we put into our bodies?
 
Stace said:
Peralin, what I have to wonder is why you keep going on about whether or not the fetus is a human being. There is no argument there. We're obviously discussing human fetuses, certainly not dogs or pigs and such. The real question is personhood.

Ok, have it your way, Stace. Just replace "human being" and "child" with "personhood" or whatever makes you happy. word choice doesn't reall ymater that much, because my point still stands.
 
ngdawg said:
That's the problem with 'what if'...it's not a real situation....and it's why I avoid it.

It doesn't have to be a real situation! All I'm trying to say is that abortion can be banned without the mother losing her rights. Since it can be banned without taking away more than one right, why are we arguing about the rights of the mother? It's irrealevant, because her rights wouldn't be taken away! So people who say they are "pro-choice" are actually pro-abortion, becuase abortion can be banned without the mother losing more than one right.

The only purpose served by my "what if" idea is to show you that abortion can be banned without the mother losing her rights. Do you see that now? That she would lose no rights except the right to abort?

You are avoiding this because you see a flaw in your logic. This is not a deep "what if". It simply shows that the rights of the mother are irrelevant, because they would not be lost.

Now, if you decide to shift your position and argue that the woman should have the right to kill her FEZ whether it is a (person or child or insert your own word here) or not, that would shift the debate. But I don't think you think that way. I think less than half of anti-abortion people think that way. I would hope so, at least.
 
My opinion is Abortion is murder. Its okay to kill your unborn child ...a child that did not chose to concived but was so its okay to kill it? Any way you look at it is a dead baby.Right? So why is it illeagle to kill a lets say a newborn. Women who throw thier babies in the trash or anyting else. Shouldnt they just be allowed to do it right? thats what happens to the dead babies they are just thrown in the trash. How does that make sense? Or if some one shoots a pregnant woman and they both die.... then the people just murderd 2 people right?
 
I guess I can't say I'm surprised the pro-choicers opted not to respond to my post. It's a losing issue for them and they know it.
 
Suction Aspiration

the most common method of abortion during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. General or local anaesthesia is given to the mother and her cervix is quickly dilated. A suction curette (hollow tube with a knife-edged tip) is inserted into the womb. This instrument is then connected to a vacuum machine by a transparent tube. The vacuum suction, 29 times more powerful than a household vacuum cleaner, tears the fetus and placenta into small pieces which are sucked through the tube into a bottle and discarded.

Dilation and Curettage (D&C)

This method is similar to the suction method with the added insertion of a hook shaped knife (curette) which cuts the baby into pieces. The pieces are scraped out through the cervix and discarded [Note: This abortion method should not be confused with a therapeutic D&C done for reasons other than pregancy.]

Dilation and Evacuation (D&E)

This method is used up to 18 weeks' gestation. Instead of the loop-shaped knife used in D&C abortions, a pair of forceps is inserted into the womb to grasp part of the fetus. The teeth of the forceps twist and tear the bones of the unborn child. This process is repeated until the fetus is totally dismembered and removed. Usually the spine must be snapped and the skull crushed in order to remove them.

Salt Poisoning (Saline Injection):

Used after 16 weeks (four months) when enough fluid has accumulated. A long needle injects a strong salt solution through the mother's abdomen into the baby's sac. The baby swallows this fluid and is poisoned by it. It also acts as a corrosive, burning off the outer layer of skin. It normally takes somewhat over an hour for the baby to die from this. Within 24 hours, labor will usually set in and the mother will give birth to a dead or dying baby. (There have been many cases of these babies being born alive. They are usually left unattended to die. However, a few have survived and later been adopted.)

Prostaglandin Chemical Abortion: click for larger image

This form of abortion uses chemicals developed by the Upjohn Pharmaceutical Co. which cause the uterus to contract intensely, pushing out the developing baby. The contractions are more violent than normal, natural contractions, so the unborn baby is frequently killed by them -- some have even been decapitated. Many, however, have also been born alive.

Hysterotomy or Caesarean Section:

Used mainly in the last three months of pregnancy, the womb is entered by surgery through the wall of the abdomen. The technique is similar to a Caesarean delivery, except that the umbilical cord is usually cut while the baby is still in the womb, thus cutting off his oxygen supply and causing him to suffocate. Sometimes the baby is removed alive and simply left in a corner to die of neglect or exposure.

You tell me that this is okay? These babies suffer. Dont they. If you dont want a baby dont have sex as easy as that. Or im all for birth control this makes me so sick and what even makes me more sick is the people that can kill thier babies the people that preform the abortion and then the people who say its alright Abortion is tourture
 
Congratulations are in order, to the Pro-Life crowd on this board. I have decided that you are all right, Its obvious your logic and message must shine thru the Fog of this complex Issue. After a Year of getting called everything from Pro-Abortion ....to Murderer, I have decided not to fight the labels anymore, regardless of my actual beliefs. To this end, I will now accept your definition of myself as a Pro-Abortion activist.
Its rather fascinating to ponder what you all actual mean to accomplish with your style of communication. If your intent is to sway people who were like myself (Dont think abortion is good) to help you in some way, and become more involved in a movement to limit abortion, you have instead done the opposite. Rather than making your "Side" in this debate seem righteous, you have managed to push virtually any fence sitters further away from you.
I for one, have now made my descision to walk in opposition to your cause, Your debate skills, and Comprehension are appreciated in this.
 
Ethereal said:
I guess I can't say I'm surprised the pro-choicers opted not to respond to my post. It's a losing issue for them and they know it.

Interesting that you would make such a sweeping statement. For me, I don't care to respond to your post. It's that simple.
 
DanielleO said:
Suction Aspiration

the most common method of abortion during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. General or local anaesthesia is given to the mother and her cervix is quickly dilated. A suction curette (hollow tube with a knife-edged tip) is inserted into the womb. This instrument is then connected to a vacuum machine by a transparent tube. The vacuum suction, 29 times more powerful than a household vacuum cleaner, tears the fetus and placenta into small pieces which are sucked through the tube into a bottle and discarded.

Dilation and Curettage (D&C)

This method is similar to the suction method with the added insertion of a hook shaped knife (curette) which cuts the baby into pieces. The pieces are scraped out through the cervix and discarded [Note: This abortion method should not be confused with a therapeutic D&C done for reasons other than pregancy.]

Dilation and Evacuation (D&E)

This method is used up to 18 weeks' gestation. Instead of the loop-shaped knife used in D&C abortions, a pair of forceps is inserted into the womb to grasp part of the fetus. The teeth of the forceps twist and tear the bones of the unborn child. This process is repeated until the fetus is totally dismembered and removed. Usually the spine must be snapped and the skull crushed in order to remove them.

Salt Poisoning (Saline Injection):

Used after 16 weeks (four months) when enough fluid has accumulated. A long needle injects a strong salt solution through the mother's abdomen into the baby's sac. The baby swallows this fluid and is poisoned by it. It also acts as a corrosive, burning off the outer layer of skin. It normally takes somewhat over an hour for the baby to die from this. Within 24 hours, labor will usually set in and the mother will give birth to a dead or dying baby. (There have been many cases of these babies being born alive. They are usually left unattended to die. However, a few have survived and later been adopted.)

Prostaglandin Chemical Abortion: click for larger image

This form of abortion uses chemicals developed by the Upjohn Pharmaceutical Co. which cause the uterus to contract intensely, pushing out the developing baby. The contractions are more violent than normal, natural contractions, so the unborn baby is frequently killed by them -- some have even been decapitated. Many, however, have also been born alive.

Hysterotomy or Caesarean Section:

Used mainly in the last three months of pregnancy, the womb is entered by surgery through the wall of the abdomen. The technique is similar to a Caesarean delivery, except that the umbilical cord is usually cut while the baby is still in the womb, thus cutting off his oxygen supply and causing him to suffocate. Sometimes the baby is removed alive and simply left in a corner to die of neglect or exposure.

You tell me that this is okay? These babies suffer. Dont they. If you dont want a baby dont have sex as easy as that. Or im all for birth control this makes me so sick and what even makes me more sick is the people that can kill thier babies the people that preform the abortion and then the people who say its alright Abortion is tourture

Oh cut the dramatics, will you? I think that people who get all worked up over this issue are just wasting energy. Abortions will continue to happen throughout our lifetimes. Deal with it.
 
Congratulations are in order, to the Pro-Life crowd on this board. I have decided that you are all right, Its obvious your logic and message must shine thru the Fog of this complex Issue. After a Year of getting called everything from Pro-Abortion ....to Murderer, I have decided not to fight the labels anymore, regardless of my actual beliefs. To this end, I will now accept your definition of myself as a Pro-Abortion activist.
Its rather fascinating to ponder what you all actual mean to accomplish with your style of communication. If your intent is to sway people who were like myself (Dont think abortion is good) to help you in some way, and become more involved in a movement to limit abortion, you have instead done the opposite. Rather than making your "Side" in this debate seem righteous, you have managed to push virtually any fence sitters further away from you.
I for one, have now made my descision to walk in opposition to your cause, Your debate skills, and Comprehension are appreciated in this.

Interesting that you would make such a sweeping statement. For me, I don't care to respond to your post. It's that simple.

Two classic cop outs.

We manage to offend Tecoyah's sensitivities and he subsequently issues a Fatwah against the pro-life crowd. Look out everyone! Tecoyah will unleash a slew of emotionally charged outbursts about how big of stupid-heads we are but what we won't do is make an attempt to actually debate the issue at hand. That's awfully mature.

And then we have the ironical aps who tells me she didn't feel like responding to one of my posts by responding to one of my posts.

I'd simply like to debate the topic at hand but for some crazy reason the pro-choice crowd evades it by sticking their noses in the air and declaring themselves too dignified to respond. Oh well. Can't say I blame you for not wanting to be exposed.
 
Ethereal said:
Two classic cop outs.

We manage to offend Tecoyah's sensitivities and he subsequently issues a Fatwah against the pro-life crowd. Look out everyone! Tecoyah will unleash a slew of emotionally charged outbursts about how big of stupid-heads we are but what we won't do is make an attempt to actually debate the issue at hand. That's awfully mature.

And then we have the ironical aps who tells me she didn't feel like responding to one of my posts by responding to one of my posts.

I'd simply like to debate the topic at hand but for some crazy reason the pro-choice crowd evades it by sticking their noses in the air and declaring themselves too dignified to respond. Oh well. Can't say I blame you for not wanting to be exposed.

I responded only because you made such a ridiculous conclusion. Additionally, I was addressing the post you wondered why none of us pro-choicers were responding to. It didn't mean that I don't care to respond to all your posts--just that one in particular. I support a woman's right to choose, and I don't care if you think you have "exposed" me. You're just into the theatrics, which I am so not interested in. Buh-bye :2wave:
 
I responded only because you made such a ridiculous conclusion.

It seems kind of silly to waste your time on posts that come to a ridiculous conclusion. Perhaps you should dedicate your time to adressing more substanitive posts. And by the way, I take this as proof that my original post did not come to any ridiculous conclusions about the pro-choice illogic as you did not see a need to respond to it.
 
Ethereal said:
It seems kind of silly to waste your time on posts that come to a ridiculous conclusion. Perhaps you should dedicate your time to adressing more substanitive posts. And by the way, I take this as proof that my original post did not come to any ridiculous conclusions about the pro-choice illogic as you did not see a need to respond to it.

LOL Whatever makes you feel better about yourself. :lol:
 
Ethereal said:
It seems kind of silly to waste your time on posts that come to a ridiculous conclusion. Perhaps you should dedicate your time to adressing more substanitive posts. And by the way, I take this as proof that my original post did not come to any ridiculous conclusions about the pro-choice illogic as you did not see a need to respond to it.

You just contradicted yourself. First you say that it seems kind of silly to waste your time on posts that come to a ridiculous conclusion. Then you say that your original post didn't come to any ridiculous conclusions because....no one wasted their time responding to it.

Logic says that if it's silly to waste your time on posts that come to a ridiculous conclusion, and no one bothered to respond to your post, well, you must have come to a ridiculous conclusion. :doh
 
Would you want to be burnt alive?
Would you want you neck to be broke and your skull crushed?
Would you was to be poisoned?

I'm against abortion and i have my own right to be and i always will be. Im not Christian or any other religion. I was raised Christian but i dont read the bible i dont go to church and i dont talk religion.

My mother had an abortion and it was a choice that she did make. She was in one of the cases that perhaps she could have died if she didnt. Then i wouldnt be here. So how doesnt that make me want to be for abortion? Because i still feel that abortion is murder. How can any one say that a baby is nothing. They cant think,that cant not want to die. They cant feel pain. How could one want to kill somthing move inside thier body and still hate it so much they much rather it die? Im not speaken on any other belif other then being a mother my self. I couldnt hurt my baby. I love my son very much. You hear about how oh sos-n-so was to young to have a baby they couldnt care for it. My cousin was 16 when she got pregnant her family turned thier back on her but you know what she wasa single parent at age 16 and shes got a healthy baby boy that is 3 already ....Any mother has to learn to be a mother...I did and so did she and so can somany more women out there. Why not give life to so many women and men out there who want to have children but cant? its so strange that a young girl could get pregnant and kill her baby and i know there is so many differnt reasons women have abortions.... but still there is always other ways I think adoption is the better way to go... If a women can allow her baby to die then why cant a terminally ill person or old person cant have euthenasia?

Andrea Yates-drowned HER kids
Dena Schlosser-cut her babies arms off


they killed thier own kids why was it a crime if abortion isnt? Mothers who get abortions and mothers who kill thier kids its all a crime
 
You just contradicted yourself. First you say that it seems kind of silly to waste your time on posts that come to a ridiculous conclusion. Then you say that your original post didn't come to any ridiculous conclusions because....no one wasted their time responding to it.

Logic says that if it's silly to waste your time on posts that come to a ridiculous conclusion, and no one bothered to respond to your post, well, you must have come to a ridiculous conclusion.

Or...it was a joke.
 
aps said:
Oh cut the dramatics, will you? I think that people who get all worked up over this issue are just wasting energy. Abortions will continue to happen throughout our lifetimes. Deal with it.

Killing in the womb (is what I call it) will happen but I just hope that the unnecessary killing will stop.............
 
Repeating the old argument, but here it goes... The point of debate has left the building unless both sides are (at the very least) willing to aknowledge where the other is coming from, the first step to recognizing that your position may be wrong. Here, we have two sides, unwilling to back down a smidgen, and convinced that the other is either immoral and gutless or idealistic and over-religious, or something of the like.
 
Repeating the old argument, but here it goes... The point of debate has left the building unless both sides are (at the very least) willing to aknowledge where the other is coming from, the first step to recognizing that your position may be wrong. Here, we have two sides, unwilling to back down a smidgen, and convinced that the other is either immoral and gutless or idealistic and over-religious, or something of the like.

It's very simple. All the pro-choicers have to do to get the pro-life side to concede the whole argument is to prove to us that the unborn are not people, but they cannot therefore they avoid the issue entirely
 
Ethereal said:
It's very simple. All the pro-choicers have to do to get the pro-life side to concede the whole argument is to prove to us that the unborn are not people, but they cannot therefore they avoid the issue entirely
What if I tell you I don't care if it is a "people" ?

I don't grant you the right to invade another human's body against their will, so why would I grant it to your "people".

People or not, it can't stay if its not welcome so byebye.

Mom can tell this other human to get the hell out whenever she likes.

With no current invitation, this "Human" it is a trespasser at least, a sexual batterer at worst.

The best this gets you is, you turn a fetus into a "people" killed for tresspassing and sexual battery.
 
Ethereal said:
It's very simple. All the pro-lifers have to do to get the pro-choice side to concede the whole argument is to prove to us that the unborn are people, but they cannot therefore they avoid the issue entirely

Couldnt resist........
 
What if I tell you I don't care if it is a "people" ?

I would take it as a validation that most pro-choicers care nothing for the sanctity of human life.

I don't grant you the right to invade another human's body against their will, so why would I grant it to your "people".

People or not, it can't stay if its not welcome so byebye.

Mom can tell this other human to get the hell out whenever she likes.

With no current invitation, this "Human" it is a trespasser at least, a sexual batterer at worst.

The best this gets you is, you turn a fetus into a "people" killed for tresspassing and sexual battery.

This has to be the dumbest argument I've ever heard coming from the pro-choice camp.

So, you're putting the burden of responsibility on the unborn for being conceived despite the fact they had no choice in the matter? Talk about being wrecklessly irresponsible and childish. You said in another thread all the responsibility falls on the woman to control what is deposited in her womb and now you totally reverse yourself by saying she is completely absolved of that responsibility. Which one is it? Either she's responsible for what is deposited in her or she's not.

Secondly, there are laws against neglect and child abuse so it stands to reason the same standards would be applied to pregnant women if abortion were illegal. There are laws against starving your children or denying them appropriate health care. You can't deny your child food because you don't feel like sharing your nutrients with them so why should it be any different for pregnant women? Oh, because it fits the pro-choice agenda perfectly.

I can't believe you're able to decieve yourself into putting the burden of responsibility on the unborn. That's like blaming a woman for being raped.

Couldnt resist........

It's a debate forum.
 
Ethereal said:
It's a debate forum.


Then debate it.........

"Originally Posted by Ethereal
It's very simple. All the pro-lifers have to do to get the pro-choice side to concede the whole argument is to prove to us that the unborn are people, but they cannot therefore they avoid the issue entirely"



All you need to do is Prove to me a six month old Fetus is a person.

I await your fact filled reply.
 
Back
Top Bottom