Does life begin at conception? I think it does.

[Osborn F Enready]

gopchick said: An unborn should have the same rigths as a born baby.

Why do you say that?
How could that be possible, logically?

A fetus is not independent of the mother, so how could it have individual rights?

How could you legally recognize as an individual, something that is not individual?

How could you legally negate the rights of the mother, to natural abortion by starvation, dehydration, violence?

[Osborn F Enready]

Let me clarify this, for my own piece of minds sake.

A woman is an individual. She has a natural ability to abort a child by her own natural means, all of which are "unsafe" to the wellbeing of the mother.

To truly empower the individual rights, would be to allow an individual woman that same natural right, in a safe and available means.

Abortion is a womans natural right to choose, logically extended into medical expertise. A doctor is an individual, as is the woman, and they have the right to make a free will contract for services rendered, for a fee, if they so choose.

To make a law that outlaws abortion, is attempting to use the law, to remove natural rights of the individual, by the force of government. The Bill of Rights forbids this, as does the Constitution which backs them.

Nature forbids this, since regardless of the law, the individuals can still make free-will agreements, non-disclosed, to do so, with only the health of the woman having the abortion being the victim of the law in nature, and both can be victim to the law by force, via the government, if caught. (placing two people under state sustinence, driving up state burden, due to law, resulting in excessive taxation, excessive court abuse, excessive legal red-tape and bureaucracy)

People are individuals, the most common sense answer agreeable to all without force, is an individual choice.

[syc-sadist]

i chose Other.....pro-choice is not pro-death as the direct opposite to pro-life....pro-choice allows a women a choice over if she is ready for preganaucy birth and raising a child when situations are not always right.


also the mothers life is, for lack of a better word, 'valued' higher then teh child for if the mother was to die, or be unable to cope then their goes chance of children.

and the child she had that really screwed with things won't produce children for a long time.

i do agree a decision should be made early on in the pregnaucy.
and i have no problem with people who choose not to have an abortion.
i simply liek the fact that i have a choice with this life affecting thing and that things arn't twirling out of my control because someone else feels its right for them to make decisions about my blood and bone.

abortions should be discussed between the parents who actually choose to be involved.and decided as such. a women should not feel pressured into it by people outside of her social relationships who have no idea of her situation.

in my opinion....you don't agree wiht it dont do it i respect that

but allow other peopel to make their own decision. you won't influence those people by tellign them ho to do it when they consider free will of such high inportance. but live your life with your own choice and you may change someones mind.....but it will be their choice still :)

[natalieP]

To see whether abolition, at any point in time, is right or wrong, i think we have to decide first when a fetus becomes a human.

To answer this, Baruch Brody gave three premises: If a fetus acquired all the properties essential for being a human, it is a human; Essential properties are the ones that if a human being loses any of them, he or she will go out of existence; If human beings go out of existence, they die.

Now according to what is called brain-death theory, as long as a person's brain continues to function, that person is still in existence, no matter what happened to him or her. If this premise is true, a functioning brain is the only property essential for being a human. Other properties are not essential for being human since the loss of other properties wouldn’t mean that the human being had died. A fetus, therefore, acquires the rights of a human being when it develops a functioning brain.

A functioning brain is usually present at the end of week six, at which point a fetus should be recognized as a human being and I believe after this point of time, abolition is illegal and a crime.

However, prior to this, the decision should be left entirely to the mother. But I would say in cases where the baby might affect the mother's health, there should be discrepancies.

[Fonceai]

"Life" begins at conception. That's a big "duh", as far as I'm concerned.

But here's a story I tell from when my wife was pregnant...

At 11 weeks we went to get an ultrasound. My daughter was sleeping at the time and was small enough for us to see her entire body on the screen. Something about the ultrasound disturbed her, and we watched her wake up, roll over, and fuss around until she settled back to sleep. After she was done fidgeting, she reached up and scratched an itch on the side of her head.

The technician asked us which of us gets agitated and fidgety when they are woken up and we told her that my wife does.

At 11 weeks my daughter had personality.

I seriously have to force myself not to think about people aborting babies twice that far along. I had a relationship with my daughter while she was in the womb. When I would come home and my wife was happy to see me, the increased blood flow was associated with the sound of my voice. Instinct or personality, it really doesn't matter.

That's a person in there.

[pikatore]

Quote by: Fonceai That's a person in there.

My views are based on biological technicalities. At 11 weeks, 'personality' as you know it doesn't exist in the embryo. Once you know WHAT exactly in the in the womb at different points in time, you'll learn why I sound a bit heartless. Remember that i draw the line when a brainwave starts up, thats when I believe the embryo can be considered alive and sentient.

[Fonceai]

I hate to appeal to emotion, but you aren't a parent, are you?

How about I wish a little curse on you...

You and your spouse try for a year to get pregnant. Watch the ultrasound at 11-12 week and have an experience like I had. Then have them tell you that the baby will probably need to be aborted due to some kind of defect or risk to your spouse.

As soon as an egg is fertilized, it contains every genetic marker for every characteristic of a human being, and it is alive.

The presence of brainwaves does not define life.

At 11 weeks I saw response to stimulus. That's life enough for me.

[xyzer]

A fetus is not independent of the mother, so how could it have individual rights? A ONE OR TWO YEAR OLD TODDLER IS NOT INDEPENDENT EITHER? IS IT? How could you legally recognize as an individual, something that is not individual?fonceal covers that one..THE FERTILIZED EGG CONTAINS EVERY GENETIC MARKER NEEDED FOR MATURITY? How could you legally negate the rights of the mother, to natural abortion by starvation, dehydration, violence? THE SAME WAY WE NEGATE THE RIGHT TO TAKE A HUMAN LIFE WITHOUT CAUSE

I dunno? There are arguments and opinions both ways..surest way to solve it is for the two participants to take precaustions before the fact. There are all sorts of contaceptives available people just seem to ignore their use and then have to remedy their actions??? It's a shame!

[gopchick]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Why do you say that? How could that be possible, logically? A fetus is not independent of the mother, so how could it have individual rights? How could you legally recognize as an individual, something that is not individual? How could you legally negate the rights of the mother, to natural abortion by starvation, dehydration, violence?

Yes the only means for a fetus to survive in the womb is via the mother.

However, look at that baby girl who was born at 21 weeks into gestation. An incubator was keeping her alive and continuing to help her develop, right?

She now has "rights" because she was born......so if she has rights becomoing fully developed in an incubator then why not in the womb??

What really is the difference?

[Osborn F Enready]

gopchick said: What really is the difference?

The difference is that one can be legally classified as an individual, and one can't.

The baby placed in the life support system, is an individual, on life support, legally. The parents can name the child, and give it legal identity, etc.

A baby within the mother, is the sole physical burden of the mother, who is an individual carrying a developing child. The mother has a natural right to abort at any time the babies life is in dependence of the mother, as it is not an individual, and nature does this on its own sometimes, as do accidents involving the mother, or purposeful intentions by the mother.

The law should not be used to try to change nature, or the laws of nature, as this only breeds lawbreaking by those under the influence of nature.

Making abortion illegal, is trying to use law to execute moral belief. Morals and beliefs are subjective on this topic, while nature is quite clearly biased toward the rights of the mother.

To me, the more just, less abused system, with the lowest cost and effect socially, and economicly, is to allow the mother to choose while the child is within her.

[gopchick]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready The difference is that one can be legally classified as an individual, and one can't. The baby placed in the life support system, is an individual, on life support, legally. The parents can name the child, and give it legal identity, etc. A baby within the mother, is the sole physical burden of the mother, who is an individual carrying a developing child. The mother has a natural right to abort at any time the babies life is in dependence of the mother, as it is not an individual, and nature does this on its own sometimes, as do accidents involving the mother, or purposeful intentions by the mother. The law should not be used to try to change nature, or the laws of nature, as this only breeds lawbreaking by those under the influence of nature. Making abortion illegal, is trying to use law to execute moral belief. Morals and beliefs are subjective on this topic, while nature is quite clearly biased toward the rights of the mother. To me, the more just, less abused system, with the lowest cost and effect socially, and economicly, is to allow the mother to choose while the child is within her.

A baby is a baby - whether the baby is still developing in the womb or ouside the womb - an BABY cannot make up his/her own mind.

Abortation should be legal because if it is not then you will have woman and young girls going into dark alleys and is more dangerous.

However, if you CHOOSE to have unprotected sex getting pregnant is the consequence of that choice. I am all for educating the society on being a responsible parent then - hey i am not ready for this baby so let me go ahead and have an abortion.

[pikatore]

If the pro-lifer seek to screw up the lives of countless careless teenagers, not to mention the children they would have, than argument is futile.

[Gods_Mercenary]

How would having a baby and then giving it up ruin your life, it's certainly nothing you haven't earned from your mistake.

[gopchick]

Quote by: pikatore If the pro-lifer seek to screw up the lives of countless careless teenagers, not to mention the children they would have, than argument is futile.

Screwing up the lives of teenagers - how did they get themselves in that position in the first place??

Poor guidance - I am for life. Life is a precious gift. One that many people cannot have. One should learn to count thier blessings.

[Osborn F Enready]

gopchick said: A baby is a baby - whether the baby is still developing in the womb or ouside the womb - an BABY cannot make up his/her own mind.

I agree, which I think is another reason it would be foolish to observe a fetus as an individual. Its not possible.

Gods Merc said: How would having a baby and then giving it up ruin your life, it's certainly nothing you haven't earned from your mistake.

That is a subjective, relative opinion Merc. Who is to say what is earned from a mistake, if the woman has the natural ability to prevent birth?

She has that ability.

[Gods_Mercenary]

A way , out of the normal consequence of the mistake. Of course it's subjective, this entire debate is subjective.

[Praxius]

Quote by: gopchick Poor guidance - I am for life. Life is a precious gift. One that many people cannot have. One should learn to count thier blessings.

Exactly, One that many can not have.... you should count your blessings, because you could have been aborted. On the same note, you can't save everybody in the world from everything.... and trying to impose no abortions on everybody because you feel it is wrong, isn't an adiquate substitute for saving a life.

If you feel life is precious and everyone should have the chance to live, then perhaps you should send some of your concentrated passion for life to those who are living in this world now.

[nkariem]

hmmm i just checked the last page and i see topics about abortion, rights of a baby, etc. i did not bother to read all 105 pages.. but to the question at hand: i would come from a religious angle. Yes, a religious angle. by 'life', i am assuming the existence of a soul in the baby? .In islam we believe that the soul enters the foetus at about 3 months i think.
So if for some reason the foetus dies, or there is a miscarriage after this time, then the baby/foetus would be buried as any other person. before this, no.. its not considered a human life as yet.

when it comes to rights, i think that only applies once the child is born.
We cannot just assume that the child will be born.

When it comes to abortion, islamically, we do not condone it, except in the case of rape (i dont know of other reasons at this point, but i can find out).

[gopchick]

Quote by: Praxius Exactly, One that many can not have.... you should count your blessings, because you could have been aborted. On the same note, you can't save everybody in the world from everything.... and trying to impose no abortions on everybody because you feel it is wrong, isn't an adiquate substitute for saving a life. If you feel life is precious and everyone should have the chance to live, then perhaps you should send some of your concentrated passion for life to those who are living in this world now.

and if you feel like life is not so precious then maybe you should be the one to concentrate on those living on the world now so he can understand that life is a blessing and a miracle.

[syc-sadist]

i love my choice.