I'm Pro-Life: Change My Mind

[Nathan.22]

The reason I am Pro life is because I believe that the termination of an innocent human life is of course horrible and that is a moral stance we all should have, so the question is when does life begin? if we want to determine whether abortions should be illegal or not this is the most important question. Me personally, I believe that life begins at conception which is why I'm pro life. I'm interested in hearing other people's opposing positions.

 

[calamity]

The reason I am Pro life is because I believe that the termination of an innocent human life is of course horrible and that is a moral stance we all should have, so the question is when does life begin? if we want to determine whether abortions should be illegal or not this is the most important question. Me personally, I believe that life begins at conception which is why I'm pro life. I'm interested in hearing other people's opposing positions.

Very few people find abortion to be pleasant. However, the rights of the born do supersede those of the unborn, and just because those born are women does not diminish that fact.

 

[CaughtInThe]

abortion, guns, immigrants, christianity, debt and socialism.



get ready to be bombarded for 4 years.

 

[Nathan.22]

Very few people find abortion to be pleasant. However, the rights of the born do supersede those of the unborn, and just because those born are women does not diminish that fact.

Incorrect, the baby that has not yet been born has the exact same right to life as the people who are born. By the sounds of it you would be in favor of abortion until birth? I also did not even bring up women in my reasoning for being pro life so I'm unsure as to why you decided to add that to your point?

 

[Mr Person]

I have never seen a thread framed that way result in anything but its creator announcing that each participating poster has presented an insufficient argument, then acting like this mean the OP starting position must be correct.

At any rate, you're never going to make headway with someone who uses the "life begins at conception" line. It's designed to not budge. It intentionally asks the wrong question. The question is not "can this thing be called life?" My finger can be called life. My cat can be called life. An intestinal parasite can be called life. Yet nobody asks if any of those things have the rights of a person or citizen.

Which gets to the real question: at what point in human development should the constitution grant the full rights of a person-citizen to an entity? The best balancing you're going to find is the one we already have: once a fetus is reasonably viable outside the womb with medical care, it should be treated as a full person under the constitution. But if it can't, there's no point, because it's inevitably dead even with the most state of the art care; at that point, the mother's rights should probably take precedence.




Nevermind that I have no patience on the issue when the same people who insist that the concept of life is so sacred that a fertilized egg should be treated as a full person, but the moment that egg finally has turned into a birthed child, the speaker says "**** 'em. I don't want to pay for that. Slash the safety net!"

 

[Mr Person]

Incorrect, the baby that has not yet been born has the exact same right to life as the people who are born. By the sounds of it you would be in favor of abortion until birth? I also did not even bring up women in my reasoning for being pro life so I'm unsure as to why you decided to add that to your point?

^^
See. That's what I mean when I said "I have never seen a thread framed that way result in anything but its creator announcing that each participating poster has presented an insufficient argument, then acting like this mean the OP starting position must be correct."

There isn't going to be any real debate in this thread. It'll just be this new poster regurgitated the same old crap the people who are pro-life right up until a child is born have always said. And each regurgitation will likely be exactly as smug as the one I'm replying to here.



I mean, just look at that. He asks people for their views, and his response is (1) your belief is not my belief, so you're wrong + (2) you are also wrong to bring up something to support your belief that I did not rely on to support my own belief.

 

[Nathan.22]

^^
See. That's what I mean when I said "I have never seen a thread framed that way result in anything but its creator announcing that each participating poster has presented an insufficient argument, then acting like this mean the OP starting position must be correct."

There isn't going to be any real debate in this thread. It'll just be this new poster regurgitated the same old crap the people who are pro-life right up until a child is born have always said. And each regurgitation will likely be exactly as smug as the one I'm replying to here.



I mean, just look at that. He asks people for their views, and his response is (1) your belief is not my belief, so you're wrong + (2) you are also wrong to bring up something to support your belief that I did not rely on to support my own belief.

I did not say "your belief is not my belief, so you're wrong", I was talking about the idea that due to the baby being unborn meant it had less important rights compared to another life and the second presumption which was incorrect about what I said was " I also did not even bring up women in my reasoning for being pro life so I'm unsure as to why you decided to add that to your point? ". This was a question to the person who made this point as I was unsure as to why this was a point they were bringing up when I did not say that due to the person in hand being a female meant that they're rights should be any less protected.

 

[Nathan.22]

^^
See. That's what I mean when I said "I have never seen a thread framed that way result in anything but its creator announcing that each participating poster has presented an insufficient argument, then acting like this mean the OP starting position must be correct."

There isn't going to be any real debate in this thread. It'll just be this new poster regurgitated the same old crap the people who are pro-life right up until a child is born have always said. And each regurgitation will likely be exactly as smug as the one I'm replying to here.



I mean, just look at that. He asks people for their views, and his response is (1) your belief is not my belief, so you're wrong + (2) you are also wrong to bring up something to support your belief that I did not rely on to support my own belief.

Also I am completely up for a healthy good old fashioned debate, the only who seems to be shutting down the dialogue is yourself, if I am to quote you, " regurgitated the same old crap " then it should be a debate you are familiar with. So why not instead of labelling me smug and suggesting there will be no result in any of this, give it a try and you may change my mind.

 

[ASHES]

I do not oppose your desire to never have an abortion. I hope you never have to. I'd never try to make you have one. Now give pro-choice people the same courtesy by minding your own business if they some day have to make that choice.

 

[Aunt Antifa]

The reason I am Pro life is because I believe that the termination of an innocent human life is of course horrible and that is a moral stance we all should have, so the question is when does life begin? if we want to determine whether abortions should be illegal or not this is the most important question. Me personally, I believe that life begins at conception which is why I'm pro life. I'm interested in hearing other people's opposing positions.

You‘re the one who wants to change settled law. You change our minds.

 

[Nathan.22]

I do not oppose your desire to never have an abortion. I hope you never have to. I'd never try to make you have one. Now give pro-choice people the same courtesy by minding your own business if they some day have to make that choice.

I think that applying this logic can be dangerous, as for example if a slave owner said "just because you oppose owning slaves doesn't mean that I should to so mind your own business and give me the courtesy I'm giving you to not own a slave" this would not be a good reason as to why someone should own slaves. By the way for the record I am not in any comparing abortions to slavery I am just using the same logic for different issues to show the flaws in that logic.

 

[Nathan.22]

You‘re the one who wants to change settled law. You change our minds.

My position is right at the top of this thread " The reason I am Pro life is because I believe that the termination of an innocent human life is of course horrible and that is a moral stance we all should have, so the question is when does life begin? if we want to determine whether abortions should be illegal or not this is the most important question. Me personally, I believe that life begins at conception which is why I'm pro life. I'm interested in hearing other people's opposing positions."

 

[Aunt Antifa]

My position is right at the top of this thread " The reason I am Pro life is because I believe that the termination of an innocent human life is of course horrible and that is a moral stance we all should have, so the question is when does life begin? if we want to determine whether abortions should be illegal or not this is the most important question. Me personally, I believe that life begins at conception which is why I'm pro life. I'm interested in hearing other people's opposing positions."

Right. I get it. But the law of the land is accepted by most Americans. I”m unclear why someone has to plead a case to the losing side.

 

[ASHES]

I think that applying this logic can be dangerous, as for example if a slave owner said "just because you oppose owning slaves doesn't mean that I should to so mind your own business and give me the courtesy I'm giving you to not own a slave" this would not be a good reason as to why someone should own slaves. By the way for the record I am not in any comparing abortions to slavery I am just using the same logic for different issues to show the flaws in that logic.

Apples and oranges. It works for some things, like private medical decisions between a patient and her doctor, but not others, like owning people as property.

 

[Luce]

Incorrect, the baby that has not yet been born has the exact same right to life as the people who are born.

As a matter of law, and as a biblical matter, you are incorrect.

 

[Nathan.22]

As a matter of law, and as a biblical matter, you are incorrect.

Ok, this may be true and I can appreciate this point, but as my personal view I believe that it is a life which should be afforded that right to life which is why I hold the position I do, appreciate the feedback!

 

[Antiwar]

Watch "After Tiller" for free on that video website.

 

[Nathan.22]

Apples and oranges. It works for some things, like private medical decisions between a patient and her doctor, but not others, like owning people as property.

That would be the case if it was just between a doctor and a women but there is a separate life inside the mother which also needs to be considered.

 

[Nathan.22]

Right. I get it. But the law of the land is accepted by most Americans. I”m unclear why someone has to plead a case to the losing side.

Just because this law is accepted by most Americans does not make it right it just makes it a law, and there was a study done which shown in US adults 48% were pro choice 46% were pro life and 6% held no view so it is not an overwhelming majority according to this study.

 

[Aunt Antifa]

Just because this law is accepted by most Americans does not make it right it just makes it a law, and there was a study done which shown in US adults 48% were pro choice 46% were pro life and 6% held no view so it is not an overwhelming majority according to this study.

Nearly 80% support Roe.

 

[ASHES]

That would be the case if it was just between a doctor and a women but there is a separate life inside the mother which also needs to be considered.

Only when you stretch the definition of 'life' to ridiculous ends. Yes, zygotes and fetuses are made of living tissue, but so are mushrooms. None of them are humans. Undisturbed, zygotes may become human beings when they are born.

This is not a chicken just because it has the beginning of a chicken in it.

 

[mrjurrs]

The reason I am Pro life is because I believe that the termination of an innocent human life is of course horrible and that is a moral stance we all should have, so the question is when does life begin? if we want to determine whether abortions should be illegal or not this is the most important question. Me personally, I believe that life begins at conception which is why I'm pro life. I'm interested in hearing other people's opposing positions.

Since you are a male, if you don't believe in a woman's sovereignty over her own body, just don't have sex that can lead to procreation.

 

[Nathan.22]

Since you are a male, if you don't believe in a woman's sovereignty over her own body, just don't have sex that can lead to procreation.

I agree. I will not have sex until I am ready and understand that the consequence of my act may be life.

 

[Nathan.22]

Only when you stretch the definition of 'life' to ridiculous ends. Yes, zygotes and fetuses are made of living tissue, but so are mushrooms. None of them are humans. Undisturbed, zygotes may become human beings when they are born.

This is not a chicken just because it has the beginning of a chicken in it.

View attachment 67314397

yes but it will be a human if left to its natural processes which is why its immoral and wrong

 

[iliveonramen]

The reason I am Pro life is because I believe that the termination of an innocent human life is of course horrible and that is a moral stance we all should have, so the question is when does life begin? if we want to determine whether abortions should be illegal or not this is the most important question. Me personally, I believe that life begins at conception which is why I'm pro life. I'm interested in hearing other people's opposing positions.

Well the gist of it, I don’t believe life begins at conception. That’s the crux of the difference. I don’t believe it’s pro-life to be completely anti-abortion.