Thread: Abortion: split from stem cell research

Originally Posted by JMS

Only by the help of others, but without that help most children, up to a certain age would not survive!

Also, a number of fully gestated fetus used to die in childbirth because the placenta wouldn't get out of the way, or the mother wouldn't dilate or several other reasons. Now a routine C section gets them out. is such a fully developed infant, stuck in the womb, fair game to kill because they (and often their mother) wouldn't have survived, even with help, fifty years ago? And while we're at it, is the mother with placenta premia [placenta blocking the path out for the baby] no longer human either, because without intervention she'll die in childbirth too? Whether you are a real person isn't tied to whether you can breath without an umbilical cord (or medical device).

Originally Posted by Hutch

I'm sure you know exactly what it means. Believe me your children would survive without you, they may not be as happy and have all their stuff, but they most likely would not die. Lots of children have survived the death of their parents

Have you ever cared for a newborn?

Children have survived the death of their parents, sure. But other caregivers stepped in.

Originally Posted by hoglahoo

Similarly, many children have survived the exiting of the womb - but how is their success or failure at that an indication of their individual human rights?

I, too, don't think that this is the correct "test." Again, that doesn't mean I disagree where that argument gets you (pro choice), just that it is not an intellectaully honest argument. It is tempting, though. A terribly premature infant that likely wouldn't survive without massive medical care...can it be "terminated?" What about that same infant that ABSOLUTELY WILL NOT survive without that care? Same question. I think no! What if it is inside the mother? My PERSONAL belief is that this is PROBABLY after it has become an unborn child, and abortion should only be used in truly extreme cases (mothers life, etc).

As soon as I come to a definitive, unquestionable and demopstrably 100% correct answer to when life begins, I'll be sure to let you all know! It'll be good to get this argument all wrapped up. (of course, i jest...before someone gets really mad!)

Can someone give a real example of a situation where a mother's life is actually endangered (not just inconvienienced) by a pregnancy?

There are 10 million children dying every year of starvation alone. Might wanna consider eliminating that glaring embarrassment, then arguing over abortion.

I say we should leave it all up to the mother... mothers know best.

Cheers,
Jon

[QUOTE]I say we should leave it all up to the mother... mothers know best. /QUOTE]

Mother kills baby by taping pacifier to baby’s mouth

Originally Posted by jonnyjon84

There are 10 million children dying every year of starvation alone. Might wanna consider eliminating that glaring embarrassment, then arguing over abortion.

I say we should leave it all up to the mother... mothers know best.

Cheers,
Jon

I suppose it's the mother's right to choose?

I think we can all, pro-life and pro-choice, agree that there are some rather glaring differences between the murders committed by a (very likely) mentally ill woman and (at least some) abortion.

[quote=flyboy;305044]

I say we should leave it all up to the mother... mothers know best. /QUOTE]

Mother kills baby by taping pacifier to baby’s mouth

What's that quote attributed to Einstein? "The only two things that are infinite are the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe."
Not that I trust this woman carrying a child to term any more than being entrusted to care for it once it is born.....

Originally Posted by Seraphim

I suppose it's the mother's right to choose?

Actually it is, she made a choice and now she'll pay a price.

Now there's a poster child for abortion, the mother that is.