If a girl is raped and pregnant, should she keep the baby?

Post Reply New Topic

It is Greek for uterus...

Actually a more likely and plausible reason is that people want to be able to look the other way and not feel guilty. They dehumanize the people being enslaved, rounded up and loaded onto train cars, etc. so they don't feel guilty about killing fellow human beings.

No matter how much you try to dance around the issue, every fetus is a child, for that matter every embryo is a child from the moment there is first brain activity. If you would like to say life begins with the first heartbeat, that's fine by me, cause that's even before the first detectable brain activity.

I pose this question to you Oodain and Lecks yet again since Lecks didn't have the courtesy to answer the question.

Here is a good counter argument, Lecks would you like to have never been born? That is essentially what you are advocating about the kids, that they apparently don't deserve in your mind to live.

What makes it that you deserved to live and they did not?

Maybe the only reason you are alive is cause your parents didn't know you would have autism, have you ever stopped and considered that?


All you people have done is prove my point, you are locked into a particular mindset to the point you can't even look at the facts, you guys claim I can't think for myself, in all reality maybe you should look in a mirror sometime, cause I am thinking for myself, but it looks like you quite frankly are not.

The Religious Right cannot deny that they want to end welfare as we know it which means cutting off pregnant women from food stamps. Also conservatives want to destroy the the Women , Infants and Children supplemental food program.

Actually, I want the government out of welfare because they are a bunch of incompetitent idiots.

Churches and local charities do a much better job at helping the needy than a bunch of government lackeys.

It's not really a religious thing, though. If we're talking about Christians, you have to understand that Christian ideals are all about helping the marginalized.

The problem is really political and economic, not religious. Capitalists are upset that so much tax money has to be given to help people who are marginalized not because they cannot help being marginalized, but rather because their marginalization is essentially self-inflicted and maintained. "Welfare mommas" do not WANT to work. They fall into bad habits and ultimately into poor health, at which point they have to claim disability when the reality is if they'd take better care of themselves and work to earn a living, they wouldn't end up with the health problems! It's overeating and sedentary lifestyle that is responsible for the problems.

You could legitimately make the case that ignorance is the cause of their problems--they are unaware of how to fix the problem and might have made better choices with education. Well, this is true. But they LIKE the lifestyle and don't want to get out of it. And they encourage their children to do the same. All the education in the world isn't going to change the minds of the willful dregs of society.

What's left, then is to remove the motivation for the behavior, and that means removing the money.

I have a lawyer friend who operates under two rules of life:
1. It's all about the money and the honey.
2. Never...ever...EVER reward bad behavior.

Nope.

Terminating a potential person does not count as an evil.

In addition, we could make the same argument for forced organ donation. We could argue that it's your body integrity vs their life. We could argue that the lesser of the evils is you being forced to donate a kidney.

We don't do this, because the issue is not reducible to weighing up 'evils'. The fact that one person has rights is not a reason to take away other people's rights.

The child is a person as soon as the first brain activity occurs.

Additionally, we aren't talking about organ donation because none of the woman's organs leave her body.

Nope. Fetal brains don't even have the necessary wiring to be conscious and feel until somewhere around 20-22ish weeks.

We may not be talking about donation in the context of REMOVAL, but we are certainly talking functional donation. We are talking donating the use of her blood, nutrients from her own body, and various whole body systems.

This is not something we force on people in any other context. I see no reason to make an exception for abortion just because some people can't move past the idea of 'killing a baby.'

And you know what...if I ever find out I'm pregnant, I'm aborting it, and there is nothing in the world you can do about it.

Well actually if you live in Mississippi, most abortions will probably be illegal, depending on which way the vote goes in November.

<===Lives in Mississippi

1066 replies to discuss the obvious......

That AngelRho lives in Mississippi?

The child is a person, but that's off topic to the discussion.

It is good to see that even you would agree that it is completely idiotic to consider zygotes people (right after conception). Regarding brain "activity". Electrical impulses inside the brain is something found easily in hens and bunnies and rats , aka things that is pretty much legal to kill and are not considered people. We should worry about the first human thoughts. It is hard to believe that would happen before the first 26-ish weeks, for reasons that we have already mentioned and that only you are making a big effort to ignore.


Rather funny coming from you. Any evidence for the mass feminazi conspiracy to change definitions in all medical sources?

---------------

You know what? I noticed something!. Albeit the pro-lifers love to argue about how they are doing this for the live of human beings and to keep everyone responsible. The more I come to understand people like Inuyasha, the more it looks like envy against the idea of people having sex. It is actually sort of like sexual frustration causing a lot of anger and hysteria. Want me to try to justify this claim? It is easy in the case of Inuyasha. Take the following bits I found in another post.



See? That discussion is not really about abortion, it is about contraception in general. And Inuyasha seems to jump into the same sort of outrage against the idea of a condom as he does against abortion. Why would somebody be (morally) against condoms?

Clearly, if the guy was really pro-life and thought (like he claimed many times) that sperm are not nearly as important as fetuses. Then he would love condoms, because many of the condoms used would prevent abortions to be needed. So, what's up with him?

See this :





As you can see, Inuyasha believes he is commendable or even heroic for practicing abstinence and likes putting himself in a high horse for that. He criticizes people who have sex, even responsible sex because of the idea that they wouldn't sacrifice themselves and go towards this frustrating sexual repression that Inuyasha finds in his own abstinence.

Inuyasha, you should really get laid.

A zygote might not have brain activity, but an embryo does.

The brain, spinal cord, and heart are the first organs to develop. The brain takes the longest amount of time, but I'm not going to play the one second they aren't a person and next second they are game. I'm going to go with the hard line, that once the first brain activity occurs, we are talking about a person. The simplicity of the activity is irrelevant considering new neurons are created at an astronomical rate, and a newborn actually has more neurons than an an adult human.

So?