Why do 'pro lifers' only care about life inside the womb?

You seem to be very strongly against taking another's life. Does that mean you are against abortion or does it mean you're only in favor of taking innocent lives?

 

In my opinion, it is more ethical to prevent a need for a medical procedure of abortion than to simply criminalize abortions.

 

Well, they put the lives of doctor's at risk, by their violent and terrorist actions, for one thing.

They tend to be very pro war, which is another thing.

Will those two examples do, to be going on with, or do you wish for more?

 

What bias?

What I am biased about, if you mean me?

What 'strawman'?

Be specific, give examples and quotes to support your accusation.

 

It would help if you said something to give the image context.

 

Why do pro-deathers care about life a few months out of the womb? It should be the woman's choice whether or not her child lives to be 1 year old.

 

Find your own example. You have the internet, Google something regarding the anti-capitol punishment crowd. The same people that want, need, crave the right to murder an innocent fetus are the ones that want, need, crave to save the lives of those that murder, rape, torture and maim their fellow man.

 

Am I really?

So, what, you think I am 'pro death', do you?

Precisely how am I 'forcing' this perceived (and wrong) 'attitude' onto anyone?

You won't see me hanging around a maternity ward, setting off bombs, to protest.

You won't see me celebrating when yet another manufactured conflict comes to pass.

And, for your information, I have a 2yr old grand daughter, and she is my world. However, if my daughter had decided that she had wanted a termination, I would also have supported her decision in that, as well.

What's wrong with that?

Jack

 

Ha! PERFECT response.

 

Limit the reproduction of minorities - what do you mean?

I really hope that you are not implying that there is some racist agenda in anything that I wrote, if you do think that, please SHOW me where it exists?

Look, as I have said, it is a fact of life that people will have sex,and sometimes those people will fall pregnant. Often, for whatever reason, they feel that they wish to terminate the pregnancy. I do not like it, but I live in the real world. When they wish to terminate, I believe it the most ethical thing to do is what we do - to offer them a correct environment to have said procedure. To do anything else merely places the life of the mother at risk, from unqualified person's. I know this to be fact (not speculation),because that is precisely what did happen, in my country, before the law was changed.

A shift in social attitudes is the way to go, imo.

Britain has (I believe), the most number of terminations done annually, more so than any other country in Europe. Not just in % terms, but in actual terms (consider the fact we do not have the largest population). There must be a reason why this is, and I put it down to social attitudes.

These days, you can even get a morning after pill, at the chemist, that works a full 36 hours after sex, so, imo, there is really no excuse.

Malta and the ROI are the only two countries in Europe in which a person cannot get a termination. However, even they make an exception in the case of rape. Many pro lifers I have heard/read, they do not even make an exception for that - I cannot think of anything more wicked than forcing a women to give birth to the child of a rapist.

Jack

 

Like it or not, it is not legally classed as a 'child', until such a time that it's been born.

But, as I have said time and again, a shift in social attitudes is the way ahead.

I do not have time now, but I would like to determine which country, although abortion is legal and available, has the least number of termination's, every year.

There must be a reason why their number would be comparitively low.

Find out the reason, and copy it.

As an aside, I recall discussing this story, way back (not on here).

I felt it was apt to the thread.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Reprod...e-abortions-suicide-attempts/story?id=8594347

Abortion Addict Confesses 15 Procedures in 16 Years

Irene Vilar worries that her self-described "abortion addiction" will be misunderstood, twisted by the pro-life movement to deny women the right to choose.

Her book, "Impossible Motherhood," which will be released by Other Press on Oct. 6, chronicles her own dark choices: 15 abortions in 16 years, much of it as a married woman.

As press on the book has begun to leak out, Vilar -- a literary agent and editor --- says she has already sensed "an inkling of hatred."

Vilar has scheduled only closed-door interviews and will not do a book tour. At the urging of her husband, they have made sure all public property records do not reflect her name, so she cannot be targeted at their home.

"I am worried about my safety and the hate mail," she told ABCNews.com in a telephone interview as her home-schooled children were at work on a painting project.

"No book like this has ever been written," she told ABCNews.com. "I just imagine the 'baby killer' and I could be a poster child for that kind of fundamentalism. And there are my little kids in all of that."

Today, at 40, the Latina author has two young children, but her troubled past continues to haunt her well into motherhood.

She grew up in the shadow of her notorious grandmother Puerto Rican nationalist Lolita Lebron, who stormed the Capitol steps with a gun in 1954. Lebron served 25 years in jail for the crime until receiving a pardon from President Carter in 1979.

Her mother committed suicide by throwing herself from a moving car when Vilar was 8 and two of her brothers were heroin addicts.

Mass Sterilization in Puerto Rico

Vilar's story is set against the backdrop of the American-led mass sterilization program in her native Puerto Rico from 1955 to 1969, a fitting symbol for her struggle with her own reproduction.

By 1974, 37 percent of all Puerto Rican women of childbearing age had been permanently sterilized in that experiment.

"Women tend to repeat behaviors," Vilar said of herself. Her mother's forced hysterectomy without hormone treatment at the age of 33, led to depression and a Valium addition.

Vilar attended boarding school in New Hampshire and was just 15 when she left for Syracuse University, where she fell in love and later married her first husband, a tyrannical 50-year-old professor.

With a predilection for young women, he bragged that his relationships had never lasted more than five years and that having children killed sexual desire.

She says their emotionally dependent relationship was riddled with shame, self-mutilation and several suicide attempts.


1 in 2 Who Have First Abortion, Have Repeat

Although her personal history is unique, Vilar hopes through her painful memoir to trigger a public discussion on abortion and what leads women -- even after the feminist movement -- to use "procreation as power."

"Everybody is having babies, Hollywood has even developed some sort of motherhood fetish," said Vilar. "Yet, women are repeatedly told that they must be everything but mothers, everything but someone weighed down by motherhood."

About half of all pregnancies in the U.S. are unintended, and 40 percent of these are terminated by abortion -- 854,122 in 2002, the latest year for which data is available, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

 

You cited it.

I questioned it.

The onus is on you to back your own assertion.

 

That is a long and annoying statement and no one should have to read it.

 

and yet the majority of conservative Christians are Pro-Death Penalty. Christians should be more CHrist-like. Of course, if Christ came back most of the Christian right would denounce him as a Socialist Liberal. Read the Bible, almost all of Christ's teaching talked about caring for your fellow man. He specifically mentions the fact that if you are wealthy and do not take care of your fellow human beings then you have no chance to get into Heaven. HOw many people would give away all of their possesions to follow Him if he was here on Earth today?

 

Jack Napier posted:

"They seem to stop caring about the importance of that life, once it has been born."


Taxcutter says:

Every state has statutes prohibiting murder.

 

What?

It was an item pertinent to the thread.

All of that said, no one HAS to read it.

I am assuming that you didn't, right?

 

None I would imagine.

In said bible, Jesus IMPLORES people to sell their possessions, and give the money to the poor. He mentions that twice - that is how important it was.

Yet, today, 'Christians' have replaced the philosophy of Jesus, with their own 'philosophy', and even their own 'god' - that being money.

If Jesus were alive today, my feeling is that the religous and political elites would have him killed, all over again.

I did a thread about precisely this, some time ago.

 

Except, of course, for state sponsored murder.

They rather like that.

 

At what point does cell division and specialization become something we deem worthy of protection? At the one cell? One cell division? A billion cell divisions? What magic occurs at birth that confers legal protection from harm by another on the child? A severed umbilical cord???

I don't have the answers. I do know that any point we choose to pick in human development is an arbitrarily chosen one. I also know that human development is a continuous process that doesn't somehow, as in some quantum jump, finally arrive at some minimally acceptable level of complexity and functionality to produce value in its life where there was none before. It doesn't happen at some hypothetical point called "viability" (whatever the hell that is supposed to mean). Nor does one arrive at any magical step in system cellular functionality (and therefore presumably value) at birth. Nor years after birth. We are in a constant state of flux and anybody's definition of when, after conception, life is worth protecting is arbitrary - it's as valid (or invalid) as any other arbitrarily chosen point in the continuum of human development.

 

why are yall hating on the death sentence, yes jesus did say to forgive and forget and to love thy neighbor, however it also says in the old testiment that if someone commits a murder, they must be killed.

 

People do give to the poor, its called charity. Being liberal and being Jesus are two different things.

 

According to the member on here called 'Protectionist', Christians should dismiss the OT.

If he happens to see this thread, maybe he will offer some comment on that matter.

 

If people give to the poor, why are there so many poor, around the World?

I think it is due to exploitation and greed.

What do you put it down to?

 

I don't have the answers either, so all I can do is choose the point that makes the most sense to me. We have to, because everyone agrees that at SOME point, the life must be protected.

So clearly there is a point where 'cells' become a unique and precious human life.

I say it is at the point where "the blood moves". There obviously is a correct answer, and - because it is so important - until we have figured out a way to define it, we should exercise on the side of caution.

 

Human nature. As the Bible clearly warned: "there will always be poor".

All society can do is provide so much opportunity that those who no longer wish to be poor - and can defeat their own limitations - no longer have to be. It's about time spent being poor for those who wish something else for themselves.