Abortion is evil? WHY?

I thought I'd provide a thread for lifers to actually take the time to explain why fetuses are entitled to a right to life, ethically/morally speaking.

I'm fairly fed up with the majority of the pro-life people blathering on about how innocent and needy the damn fetuses are but they can never explain why or justify themselves. In fact, I have been called evil by some yet these people have NEVER attempted, let alone successfully, to articulate a basic justification of that assertion.

So lifers, what is the position you have and why?

 

For the same reason that killing newborn babies is evil.

Is it okay to kill a sleeping newborn baby? The baby does not possess consciousness, after all, right ?
And they are incapable of taking care of themselves. They are entirely dependant on a female mammal to provide them with nourishing milk.

Besides, our society hardly needs any more of these unwanted infants. There are too many people already, isn't this what pro-choicers tell us? And someone would have to take care of these babies. So better to terminate them. After all, they're not really people. They can't talk, they can't reason, they can't even walk. Can you prove they are people? No, I didn't think so.

 

And what reason is that? Jesus on a (*)(*)(*)(*)ing crucifix - can you ever actually give a reason???

The whole point is you tell me - you dont ask me questions! Not yet at least.

So can you actually answer the question directly or can you only ever talk about other crap and side step the simply inquiry?

Please tell me, if you think abortion is wrong, why?????????

Answer that question and I will continue as I have always done in answering yours.

 

Any argument pro-lifers try to give, you will just try to pull apart. Most supporters of abortion will do whatever it takes to try to convince themselves and others that the fetus is not a person. But the thing is, in their desperate attempt to justify the non-humanity of the fetus, they take their logic to ridiculous conclusions. The blatent inconsistencies of their position readily become apparent when one tries to apply their warped logic to other situations, when the woman is not aborting her unwanted unborn baby.

So I can only pose this question: Are there any arguments you can use to justify the non-humanity of a fetus which cannot also be applied to a newborn baby? Or do you think a newborn baby is not a person either?

If you want to kill a baby in the womb, the burden is on you to prove it's not a person. I will not try to convince you that killing innocent people is wrong, but I will note that your moral position carries an uncanny resemblance to that held by the nazis.

 

NOW YOU UNDERSTAND HOW DEBATING WORKS! HOORAY!

By person you mean human being? I believe a fetus is a human being.

"ridiculous" is quite subjective. For example, I believe Christianity to be very ridiculous, but millions of others do not. A good debater is someone who can quickly address the ridiculous to show how it is so, not simple label opposing arguments as ridiculous and then run away from explanation, as you are fond of doing.

Where are the inconsistencies in my position?

Mate, this is childish. Like I've said, I will answer all your questions, as I have in the past, but YOU need to FIRST tell me WHY abortion is WRONG. You do that, and you will receive as many answers from as you seek.

 

We don't have to prove anything. The law is on our side - YOU have to prove the law is wrong.

 

Actually the law says it is murder.

 

Where? Roe V Wade says it isnt in the US.

 

You believe a fetus is a human being and you are asking why abortion is wrong?!?

There are no inconsistencies, you should be locked up, as you are obviously a psycopath and potential danger to society.

You are being the childish one. It is ridiculous and unreasonable to expect me to expound upon why killing an innocent person is wrong. Ethicists, theologians, and philosophers have written long treatises on the subject attempting to answer it.

Or we can just prove that there was never actually an adequately compelling reason for the law in the first place. With the law gone, we can treat abortion like the murder it is, albeit perhaps a murder committed under special circumstances.

 

And how well did THAT work in ending abortions?????

And thank you, too, for provong that for the ANTI-CHOICERS it's ALL and ONLY about punishing women who have sex (jealousy reigns supreme )

 

No it doesn't.

 

YES! How hard is this for you to get?!?

What makes you say that? I question the very foundation and most basic premise of your position and the only thing you can say is "you're a psychopath"? How pathetic.

Why is it unreasonable? Is it not the most basic belief inherit in your position? Why cant you defend it????

And they have all justified it in there own way. Other ethicists, theologians, and philosophers have also written long treatises however, disputing this assertion and have proven it false or lacking in compelling substance. Consequently, if you say you think the lifer position is completely correct you should have no problem telling me why, without a shadow of a doubt, why human life is utterly sacred and must always be defended. I see no compelling reason to believe that.

The law? That's completely irrelevant.

If there is no law mate, there can be no murder since only the law can proscribe what actions be considered murder. Such a stupid claim you have made.

 

Abortion is the willful denial of experience to an eminent conscious being. It is theft of the most flagrant kind. It is rank individualism that claims the utmost dominance over another being before they are able to speak for themselves. It is perhaps one of the most selfish acts in existence but it is part of life and a key counterpart of selfless action.

 

and that is purely your opinion with no evidence to support it .. care to provide some?

 

There is no speculation here. All KNOWN intelligent life begins as a fetus. Unless you know of another way or have created AI please tell me how this is an opinion.

 

Prove it.

Point 1 - A fetus is not a conscious being, a being is only conscious when the necessary parts of the brain are developed, this does not happen in a fetus until at least the third trimester.

Point 2 - It is theft of the most flagrant kind to steal, under law, the uterus of a female - which is what pro-lifers want.

Point 3 - And yet you advocate dominance of the female of our species

Point 4 - To call it selfish is to be ignorant of the facts, you do not know the reasons why each individual chooses the path they take.

Point 5 - No act is selfless.

 

To the best of OUR knowledge the fetus is the ONLY way to create intelligent life. It is up to YOU to find another way not me.

 

So you believe that a fetus is of high rank, why?
What makes a human fetus have any higher standing than any other animal, because you can be sure that nature doesn't treat us as "special"

Well a fetus does have a lot of similarities to a parasite, and what would you call taking away the choice of a woman as to what inhabits her uterus without her consent if not theft.

You want abortion illegal by law, that takes away her individual right to autonomy . .You are trying to use the law to dominate the female.

Well if you are like the majority of pro-lifers in here then destroying oneself for another makes the journey into heaven that much easier, and I wonder how many people who have done this actually thought they were going to die in the process, or did they hold out for even the slightest hope they would live and as such become hero's.

and yet we destroy intelligent life everyday and that doesn't seem to bother pro-lifers.

This whole "intelligent" life argument is just a sideshow, if this was the goal then ALL life would be protected, including those awaiting executions, those who go to war and those killed in so called "defensive" measures .. it is a hypocritical argument.

The fetus doesn't even qualify as intelligent life.

 

You make a lot of sweeping generalizations. All life is sacred but you are naive if you think that there is no difference between human intelligence and the rest of the animal kingdom. We are ALL consumers of energy, every plant you eat, every meal you ingest is you exerting your supremacy over another life form so that you can continue to breath. At least you are consistent in your stated supremacy over other life forms, including your own species. It is a selfish act and there is NOTHING you can say to change that fact. nothing. nothing.

If not stop eating and breathing, after all, other life is just as important as yours.

 

I would gladly give my life to save the life of my 6 yr old son. I would not do this for any vain attempt to be considered a hero, nor to achieve immortality. It is simply an action out of love for my son and my selfless act to protect his life. I would not want him to suffer so terribly and so I would gladly suffer in his place.

 

Lol .. you accuse me of making sweeping generalizations then proceed to produce your own.

Why is all life sacred, saying it is doesn't make it so.

and you also avoided answering any item I said .. typical.

 

and that is your choice .. see how it works, you get to make the choice, something you want to remove from women.

The underlying reasons why you would sacrifice yourself for your son is because on the sub-conscience level you are protecting your investment . .the investment of your future genetic continuation, just as any other animal will protect its young, or do you think that all animals have the capacity to know, understand and feel love?

 

Of course a baby has "significant brain function". This is something a fetus does not have until after 20 weeks or so. In the early stages of pregnancy a baby does not even have a brain.

Of course you can prove a baby is a person. Do a taxonomical analysis and you will find out they possess all the required characteristics of Homo sapiens. This is something that can not be said for the entity in the early stages of pregnancy.

 

Perhaps in the later stages the Fetus could be classified as a living human but certainly not in the early stages.

 

The fetus is not the beginning.

Regardless why is the beginning of something important ?

Why is the single cell at conception important ?

Further, "intelligent life" is generally expendible. We eat all kinds of intelligent life for food.