If you are against Abortion, why are there......

[syracusa]

Quote by: SVMc So, you are not concerned with human life then you are simply concerned with punishing people?

SVMc, gotta say you're awsome!
I am not as passionate and "dry logic"a debater as you are (maybe because I don't care for "dry logic" devoid of human feelings; after all, I am an "emotional woman" as Pale Rider labeled me... what do I know?)... but I am hearing ya! I like it the way you nail it right in the head.

Hope Pale Rider is enjoying your style better than he enjoys mine.

[syracusa]

Quote by: SVMc This is just a personal issue but I always have an issue with people who devalue persons who are mentally and physically challenged. True, a child with special needs will require more support from the parents physically, emotionally and financially. However, persons with disabilities can and do still contribute to their families and to society.

I know... and I understand what you mean. I would never EVER look down upon or devalue a severly handicapped person (Down syndrome,etc) whose parents chose to give birth to him/her even knowing that he/she would be handicapped in this way.

However, like you said - this is a very personal decision. I, personally, would not want to give birth to a human with this type of characteristics, in the kind of world we live in.

Whether we like it or not, such people still have it much worse than what we call "normal" people. I, as a parent, would also have it sooooo much worse than parents of what society calls "normal/healthy" children. Is this selfish?
I don't think that wanting a "normal", healthy child who doesn't suffer - is selfish.

I just don't think that giving birth to a handicapped child would be in the best interst of that child or my family.
Besides I have a limit on the number of children I can have. It's called 2. If I decided to give birth to a Down syndrome child (or other type of problem), this child would steal the place from what could be ANOTHER healthy, "normal" child of mine.

I only have 2 slots. Lord help me have two "normal" children!
For now...I just received my AFP tests back...and thank Good Heaven, they are fine. Huge sigh of relief for now.

[Pale RIder]

SVMc:

I would suggest that since it is you who is making the outrageous assertion that the offspring of two humans is not human, the onus is upon you to offer some proof to support your "opinion".

But here are a few words for you:

Hunter Baker, Storming the Gates of Massive Cultural Investment: Reconsidering Roe in Light of Its Flawed Foundation and Undesirable Consequences, 14 REGENT U. L. REV. 35, 44–46 (2002) (noting that “[i]n reality, the question has long been answered” and “[a]ll metaphysical higgledy-piggledy simply creates a comforting sense of plausible deniability about when life begins”).

STEDMAN’S CONCISE MEDICAL DICTIONARY FOR THE HEALTH PROFESSIONS 143, 963
(John H. Dirckx, M.D., ed., 3rd ed. 1997) (defining “zygote” as “[t]he diploid cell resulting from union of a sperm and an ovum” and defining “cell” as “[t]he smallest unit of living structure capable of independent existence”) (emphasis added).

Interesting reading - Murphy S. Klasing, The Death of an Unborn Child: Jurisprudential Inconsistencies in Wrongful Death, Criminal Homicide, and Abortion Cases, 22 PEPP. L. REV. 933, 974 (1995) (quoting Clarke D. Forsythe, Homicide of the Unborn Child: The Born Alive Rule and Other Legal Anachronisms, 21 VAL. U. L. REV. 563, 608–09 (1987));

See also Nealis v. Baird, 996 P.2d 438, 453 (Okla. 1999) (“Contemporary scientific precepts accept as a given that human life begins at conception.” (citing KEITH L. MOORE & T.V.N. PERSAUD, THE DEVELOPING HUMAN 14 (5th ed. 1993); SUSAN TUCKER BLACKBURN & DONNA LEE LOPER, MATERNAL, FETAL AND NEONATAL PHYSIOLOGY: A CLINICAL PERSPECTIVE 49 (1992); MICHAEL R. HARRISON ET AL., THE UNBORN PATIENT: PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT 14 (1984); DALE RUSSELL DUNNIHOO, M.D., PH.D., FUNDAMENTALS OF GYNECOLOGY AND OBSTETRICS 286–99 (1990);

LOUIS HELLMAN ET AL., WILLIAMS OBSTETRICS 199 (14th ed. 1971)); Baker, supra note 37, at 46 (noting that the proposition that an unborn child is a human being from conception is “supported by standard textbooks on embryology or human biology” (citing T.W. SADLER, LANGMAN’S MEDICAL EMBRYOLOGY (John N. Gardner ed., 6th ed. 1990));

Kelly J. Hollowell, Defining a Person Under the Fourteenth Amendment: A Constitutionally and Scientifically Based Analysis, 14 REGENT U. L. REV. 67, 86–92 (2001–2002) (examining the biological nature of unborn children and concluding that “human life begins at conception”);

Aaron Wagner, Comment, Texas Two-Step: Serving Up Fetal Rights by Side-Stepping Roe v. Wade Has Set the Table for Another Showdown on Fetal Personhood in Texas and Beyond, 32 TEX. TECH L. REV. 1085, 1141 (2001) (“[T]he scientific community is in agreement that a fetus is a human from the moment of conception.”).

Not only is it a life, but, “by its intrinsic biological nature,” it is a human life from the moment of conception, for “it can be nothing else.”Klasing, supra note 39, at 974 (quoting E. BLECHSCHMIDT, THE BEGINNING OF HUMAN LIFE 16–17 (1977)).


French geneticist Dr. Jerome L. LeJeune testified before a United States Senate subcommittee in 1981: “To accept the fact that after fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being is no longer a matter of taste or opinion. The human nature of the human being from conception to old age is not a metaphysical contention, it is plain experimental evidence.”

Id. at 10 (statement of Dr. Jerome L. LeJeune, University Rene Descartes). Dr. LeJeune
further testified:

“But when does a person begin? I will try to give the most precise answer to that question actually available to science. Modern biology teaches us that ancestors are united to their progeny by a continuous material link, for it is from the fertilization of the female cell—the ovum—by the male cell—the spermatozoa—that a new member emerges.”

“Life has a very, very long history, but each individual has a very neat beginning—the moment of its conception.”

“Even more impressive, during the maturation of the reproductive cells, the genetic information is reshuffled in so many ways that each conceptus receives an entirely original combination which has never occurred before and will never again. Each conceptus is unique and thus irreplaceable.”

“In his life capsule, the amniotic bag, the early being is just as viable as an astronaut on the Moon in his space suit. Refueling with vital fluids is required from the mother ship. ”

“At two months of age, the human being is less than one thumb’s length from the head to the rump. He would fit at ease in a nutshell, but everything is there—hands, feet, head, organs, brain—all are in place. His heart has been beating for a month already. Looking closely, you would see the palm creases, and a fortune teller would read the good adventure of that tiny person. With a good magnifier, the finger prints could be detected. Every document is available for a national identity card.”

That the “offspring of human parents cannot reasonably be considered to be [something] other than a human being” was also recognized by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court in Commonwealth v. Cass, 467 N.E.2d 1324, 1325 (Mass. 1984).

“This] is the first time I have found myself having to argue the unarguable. I have
never encountered in my reading of the scientific literature—long before I became
concerned with abortion, euthanasia, and so on—anyone who has argued that life did
not begin at the moment of conception or that it was not a human conception if it
resulted from the fertilization of a human egg by a human sperm. As far as I know,
there has been no argument about these matters.” The Human Life Bill, supra note 42, at 21 (statement of Professor Hymie Gordon, Mayo Clinic).

While I appreciate the time that you took in providing all the "scientific" quotes, I must tell you that they are laughable. Imagine, a bunch of pro choice scientist deferring to philosophers, mystics, gypsies or whoever else for some mystical answer as to the beginning of life rather than simply step up to the plate and say what they know.

The left, those who believe that the answers to everything lie in science refusing to accept the scientific realities of this discussion and looking to philosophers for answers. Newsflash - if you are going to accept the determination of philosophers on this one, then you have made the arguments of religious scholars just as valid as any other.

I did find this one interesting:
Biologists tell us that all life comes from pre-existing life. In other words, life does not begin, it is transmitted. The human egg and sperm are both living, human cells. At conception, two previously existing living things come together to form another living thing. Therefore, fertilization is not the beginning of human life, but is a significant step in its continuity.
Source: Harold J. Morowitz and James S. Trefil, The Facts of Life: Science and the Abortion Controversy, Oxford University Press, New York, 1992, pp.47-51, 62, 80, 119, 157-9.

He knows the truth, but can't bring himself to actually say it, so he plays with words. If the unborn is simply a step in the continuity of human life, then it is, by definition, human life.

and this one:

There is no "moment of conception"; conception is not a momentary event but a multi-step process which happens over a 24 hour period. Up to two weeks later, a twin zygote can form by breaking away from the first. Pregnancy is not considered to begin until the fertilized egg implants in the woman's uterus, approximately two weeks after fertilization.

Source: Nan Chase, "Abortion: A Long History Can't Be Stopped", Vancouver Sun, May 1, 1989.
Source: James C. Mohr, Abortion in America: The Origins and Evolution of National Policy, Oxford University Press, New York, 1978.

What he doesn't note is that as soon as the chromosomes of sperm and egg have fused, the new being can be readily identified as male or female. The new being exists and whether or not it has implanted itself is irrelavent to its existence.

I apologize for being late with a response, but spring turkey season is in here, and until it is over, much of my spare time will be devoted to that pursuit. I will attempt to be as punctual with my responses as possible.

[tripimollee]

Ok, Pale Rider, I see your supporting evidence. I understand your point. But that does not in anyway deter me from the possibility that I just may have to have an abortion in a few weeks, if the test today tells me that I am pregnant. As long as the "astronaut" inside is dependent on me, the "mother ship", it is not an individual human being. I used a condom, the condom broke. Plan B is not available in my area, and as it was the day after my period had ended, I thought there was little chance I could be pregnant. So now, as an 18 year old young woman who is really just getting started with her life, if I discover that I am, in fact pregnant, a safe, clinical abortion is my first choice in dealing with this crisis. As I said, this child may be fully formed at 2 months, though I would only be about 3 weeks, but it is still dependent on my body to survive- it cannot function on its own. Therefore, it is a part of my body, and a part of my body that I would really rather not have right now. I am at a junior Ivy League school, I am bursting with potential, and at this point in time I have literally no money to support the child, and the man I slept with is not someone who I am in a stable relationship with. Even carrying the child for nine months and then giving it up for adoption is not an option- call me selfish, but I really cannot let anything mess up my life right now. I am choosing my life over the one that may be growing inside of me- and I stand by my choice 100%. If someone were to tell me that I had no control over what I was going to do with this growing bundle of cells in my body, and that THEY had the rights to it, I would laugh in their face and say, "Get real, buddy!" So you see, Pale Rider, abortion isn't your choice, but that doesn't mean you can take away MY choice.

[Pale RIder]

"Safe" isn't really the word that I would use to describe abortion. A large number of doctors wouldn't use that word either. It is a shame that an innocent has to die because you relied on a birth control method that fails 1 out of every 10 uses with someone you weren't in a stable relationship with. You have control. You get to do whatever you wan't to do. But the things that we do when we really do have control speak volumes about what sort of people we really are. There are people who would happily pay all your medical expenses in order to adopt that little human you may be carrying and give it a life full of love. In this case, you really are killing an innocent simply because it is not convenient. I hope you aren't pregnant, but if you are and you kill your child, I hope that you will eventually find some peace.

Physical

Women face a number of possible physical complications as a result of legal abortion including hemorrhage requiring transfusion, perforation of the uterus, cardiac arrest, endotoxic shock, major unintended surgery, infection resulting in hospitalization, convulsions, undiagnosed ectopic (tubal) pregnancy, cervical laceration, uterine rupture, and death.1


Seventeen percent of women participating in a study on the effects of abortion reported that they have "experienced physical complications (e.g., abnormal bleeding or pelvic infection) since their abortion." Based on reported abortion statistics, this represents 200,000 women annually experiencing physical complications after an abortion.2


Abortion can adversely affect later pregnancies. A recent literature review concluded that abortion is a risk factor for placenta previa (where the placenta implants over the cervix, causing hemorrhaging) and preterm delivery with subsequent pregnancies. 3


Research has found that women having abortions are more likely to have a low birth-weight baby in a later pregnancy.4


Abortion can increase your chance of having an ectopic (or tubal) pregnancy in the future.5


Research published in the Journal of the American Medical Association found that having multiple abortions increases a woman's chance of having a miscarriage in a later pregnancy.6


All women, especially young teenagers, are at risk for damage to their cervix during an abortion, which can lead to complications with later pregnancies.7


Abortion puts a woman at increased risk for complications in later pregnancies. Medical research states that, "Complications such as bleeding in the first and third trimesters, abnormal presentations and premature rupture of the membranes, abruptio placentae, fetal distress, low birth weight, short gestation, and major malformations occurred more often among women with a history of two or more induced abortions."8


Abortion can increase your risk for breast cancer. A review analyzing 23 studies on breast cancer and abortion states that 17 of those studies indicate an increased risk of breast cancer among women having an abortion.9


Existing evidence of an abortion-breast cancer connection prompted the New England Journal of Medicine to publish a February 2000 review of breast cancer research, which lists abortion as a risk factor.10


Emotional

A recent literature review concluded that abortio is a risk factor for "mood disorders substancial enough to provike attempts of self-harm."11


Women who ended their first pregnancy by abortion are five times more likely to report subsequent substance abuse than women who carried the pregnancy to term and four times more likely to report substance abuse compared to those whose first pregnancy ended naturally.12


Research published in the prestigious Archives of General Psychiatry acknowledges that many women experience post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) after an abortion. In one of the longest-running studies conducted on women after abortion, researchers found that over time, relief and positive emotions relating to the abortion declined and negative emotions increased. PTSD symptoms include dreams or flashbacks to the abortion, a general numbing of responsiveness not present before the abortion, and difficulty falling asleep.


In the same study, a survey of women two years after their abortions found that 28 percent of women were either indifferent about or dissatisfied with their abortion decision and 31 percent said they were uncertain or would not have an abortion again.13


The circumstances surrounding an abortion decision can impact a woman, as well. According to research published in the American Journal of Psychiatry, "Abortion for medical or genetic indications, a history of psychiatric contact before the abortion, and mid-trimester abortions often result in more distress afterward. When women experience significant ambivalence about the decision or when the decision is not freely made, the results are also more likely to be negative."14


After an abortion, women can experience psychological reactions ranging from guilt feelings, nervous symptoms, sleep disturbance and regrets. Also, as many as 10 percent of women "experience serious psychiatric problems following abortion."15


As many as 60 percent of women having an abortion experience some level of emotional distress afterwards. In 30 percent of women, the distress is classified as severe.16


A Finnish study of suicide after pregnancy found that:
"The suicide rate after an abortion was three times the general suicide rate and six times that associated with birth"


Suicides were more common after a miscarriage "and especially after an induced abortion" than in the general population


An increased risk of suicide after an abortion indicates either common risk factors for both suicide and abortion, or harmful effects of induced abortion on mental health.17


Welch researchers examined abortion and suicide and concluded, "our data suggest that a deterioration in mental health may be a consequential side effect of induced abortion."18


A study of couples involved in first-trimester abortions in Canada found that abortion can be highly distressful for both men and women. Researchers found that both before and after the abortion, "study couples were found to be much more distressed than control[s] couples. High levels of distress among women correlated with fear of [the abortion negative effects on the relationship, unsatisfying relationships, and not having had a previous child. 19

1Warren Hern, Abortion Practices, (Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott Company, 1990), p. 175-193.
2Brenda Major, et al., "Psychological Responses of Women After First- Trimester Abortions," Archives of General Psychology 57 (August 2000): 777-784.
3 John Thorp, et al, “Long-term physical and psychological health consequences of induced abortion: Review of the evidence,� Obstetrical and Gynecological Survey, January 2003, 58 (1): 67-79.
4Weijin Zhou, et al., "Induced Abortion and Low Birth Weight in the Following Pregnancy," International Journal of Epidemiology 29 (1) (2000): 100-106; Weijin Zhou, et al., "Induced Abortion and Subsequent Pregnancy Duration," Obstetrics and Gynecology Vol. 94, No. 6 (1999): 948-53.
5Anna Kalandidi, et al., "Induced Abortions, Contraceptive Practices, and Tobacco Smoking as Risk Factors for Ectopic Pregnancy in Athens, Greece," British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology Vol. 98, No. 2 (1991): 207-13; Ann A. Levin, et al., "Ectopic Pregnancy and Prior Induced Abortion," American Journal of Public Health 72 (March 1982): 253-256.
6Ann A. Levin, "Association of Induced Abortion with Subsequent Pregnancy Loss," Journal of the American Medical Association Vol. 243, No. 24 (1980): 2495-99.
7Kenneth Schultz, et al., "Measures to Prevent Cervical Injury During Suction Curettage Abortion," The Lancet, (May 28, 1983): 1182-1184.
8Shari Linn, et al., "The Relationship Between Induced Abortion and Outcome of Subsequent Pregnancies," American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology Vol. 146, No. 2 (1983): 136-140.
9Joel Brind, et al., "Induced Abortion as an Independent Risk Factor for Breast Cancer: A Comprehensive Review and Meta-Analysis," Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 50 (1996): 481-496. For more information on this topic, go to http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com and http://www.bcpinstitute.org
10Katrina Armstrong, et al., "Assessing the Risk of Breast Cancer," New England Journal of Medicine Vol. 342, No. 8 (2000): 564-571.
< 11John Thorp, et al., Long-term physical and psychological health consequences of induced abortion: Review of the evidence, Obstetrical and Gynecological Survey, January 2003, 58 (1): 67-79.
12David Reardon, et al., "Abortion and Subsequent Substance Abuse," American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse Vol. 26, No. 1 (2000): 61-75.
13Major, Archives of General Psychology, 2000.
14Paul Dagg, "The Psychological Sequelae of Therapeutic Abortion”Denied and Completed," American Journal of Psychiatry Vol. 148, No. 5 (1991): 583-584.
15J.R. Ashton, "The Psychosocial Outcome of Induced Abortion," British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 87 (December 1980): 1120-1122.
16Hanna Soderberg, et al., "Emotional Distress Following Induced Abortion: A Study of its Incidence and Determinants Among Abortees in Malno, Sweden," European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology Vol. 79, No. 2 (1998): 173-8.
17Mika Gissler, et al., "Suicides After Pregnancy in Finland, 1987-94: Register Linkage Study," British Medical Journal 313 (1996): 1431-1434.
18Christopher Morgan, "Mental Health may Deteriorate as a Direct Efect of Induced Abortion," British Medical Journal 314 (1997): 902.
19Pierre Lauzon, et al., Emotional distress among couples involved in first-trimester induced abortions,� Canadian Family Physician, October, 2000, 46:2033-2040.

.

[Pale RIder]

By the way, its DNA would clearly show what sex it is, and that it is indeed not part of your body. Telling yourself such lies before hand, has a large psychological effect after the act. If you want to minimize your post abortion distress, don't lie to yourself. Go to the clinic with the attitude that you just don't have a problem with killing a helpless, innocent human being because it is inconvenient to you right now. The truth isn't always pretty, but it is the truth

[tripimollee]

Thank the goddess I am not preggers, #1. #2, Pale Rider, a clinical abortion is a LOT safer than a coathanger abortion, which is what women who want an abortion would be left with were clinical abortions to be outlawed. Abortion will probably never go away. As long as there are pregnancies, there are going to be abortions, legal or not. #3, you make it seem as though this were a matter I took lightly. Au contraire. The fact that I may have had a burgeoning life inside of me was something that both fascinated me and terrified me- and only made me realize further the value of life. MY life, in particular. As I said, I am just getting started in the world. To carry the child to term and deliver it would have an irreversible impact on my future, which I have no plans whatsoever of screwing up. I appreciate your vast research on the topic of abortion. Your post was quite impressive. However, I have no plans for children in the future either, and if I were to go through an abortion and then have pregnancy complications later on, I would then adopt. It IS a shame that my birth control failed me- but it is also a shame that I cannot afford anything better, and abstinence is not always an appealing option. Granted, abstinence is the best option- but why deny myself pleasure while I can still enjoy it? It's not like I am stupid about it either- I am selective and always make sure that I have a back up plan, that my partner is clean, and that I am not going to regret it. I am realistic- in an ideal world, everyone who couldn't support a child would be abstinent, and/or contraceptives would be handed out free by the government, but this is far from an ideal world. Even good people make mistakes- lust is not a sin, it is human nature. I am a good person- considering abortion as an option doesn't make me a bad person. I do not consider it killing an innocent- that is your view, not mine. I see it as a bundle of growing cells, you see it as a child. We each have our views. And, by the way, DNA may show what sex it is, but as it CANNOT SURVIVE WITHOUT my body, it is STILL PART of my body. It is not a lie. It is my view. Just because I don't share YOUR views does NOT mean that it is a lie. And I certainly did not appreciate the bitterness and sarcasm in, "Go to the clinic with the attitude that you just don't have a problem with killing a helpless, innocent human being because it is inconvenient to you right now." I do not see it as a helpless human being. YOU do. DO not impose your views on me. Your views are not THE TRUTH, they are opinions. I do not lie to myself ever, as it is a waste of time and I always know the truth anyway, so what would be the point? No one is forcing YOU to get an abortion. In the case that you are a man, you will never need to even consider it. So leave womens issues to women!

[Pale RIder]

It is not a part of your body. It is dependent upon you, but most certainly not part of your body. And all sociopaths create a fantasy that allows them to kill without actually admitting to themselves that they are killers. And my view is based in rock solid science. My view is the accepted medical and scientific fact. Your view is a fabrication designed specifically to help you escape the guilt that good people feel when they are doing the wrong thing.

[syracusa]

Quote by: tripimollee . Abortion will probably never go away.

PROBABLY? Try SURELY!

I am watching...I am watching on the side, I just canot stand debating with people who use text-book "dry logics" but no heart and no real-life common-sense.
I'll leave the two of you to danse with Pale Rider !

[syracusa]

Quote by: Pale RIder And all sociopaths create a fantasy that allows them to kill without actually admitting to themselves that they are killers. And my view is based in rock solid science. My view is the accepted medical and scientific fact.

Wow!!
Now he took it one step further and resorts to calling people who don't agree with him sociopaths ...while again, emphasizing his own ABSOLUTE, CORRECT, INDESTRUCTIBLE view! .

Pale Rider...since you are so in love with all those "scientific facts",,,you know ...there are some "scientific facts" that came up with a name for people with a psychological profile like yourself.

Eric R. Rudolph anybody?
Are you sure he's not one of those? Boy...some people are scary.

[tripimollee]

Quote by: Pale RIder It is not a part of your body. It is dependent upon you, but most certainly not part of your body. And all sociopaths create a fantasy that allows them to kill without actually admitting to themselves that they are killers. And my view is based in rock solid science. My view is the accepted medical and scientific fact. Your view is a fabrication designed specifically to help you escape the guilt that good people feel when they are doing the wrong thing.

if it is growing out of my body, how is it not part of my body? And I am CERTAINLY NOT a sociopath. Nice try. And there is no one accepted medical scientific definition, that is why we have this debate, genius.

[tripimollee]

Quote by: Pale RIder It is not a part of your body. It is dependent upon you, but most certainly not part of your body. And all sociopaths create a fantasy that allows them to kill without actually admitting to themselves that they are killers. And my view is based in rock solid science. My view is the accepted medical and scientific fact. Your view is a fabrication designed specifically to help you escape the guilt that good people feel when they are doing the wrong thing.

oh, and also- i do view it as killing. It is killing a mass of cells in my body that I would rather not have there. And I am a good person, and I feel no guilt. Chew on that bone.

[Pale RIder]

Quote by: syracusa PROBABLY? Try SURELY! I am watching...I am watching on the side, I just canot stand debating with people who use text-book "dry logics" but no heart and no real-life common-sense. I'll leave the two of you to danse with Pale Rider !

My guess is that you don't like having the lies that you tell yourself exposed for what they are. The truth is what it is. There is nothing dry about it. You guys on the left use exactly the same sort of "dry" science in order to prove global warming, evolution, that there is no God, and whatever else you believe that you can prove with science. But in this case, the science proves you patently wrong, so you have no interest in science. Such hypocrites.

Quote by: syracusa Eric R. Rudolph anybody? Are you sure he's not one of those? Boy...some people are scary.

Typical. Grab the most extreme lunatic that you can find and paint everyone who opposes abortion with the same brush. This sort of vacuous thinking is why the left is hemorrhaging its political power across the country.

[Pale RIder]

Quote by: tripimollee if it is growing out of my body, how is it not part of my body? And I am CERTAINLY NOT a sociopath. Nice try. And there is no one accepted medical scientific definition, that is why we have this debate, genius.

Do you really need a bio 101 lesson? I guess that you think that conjoined twins are really just one grotesquely malformed person as well, don't you?

And ask any sociopath if he is a sociopath, and he will tell you that he most certainly not.

And there is one accepted medical scientific definition, and then there are the definitions as posted by SVMc in which scientists defer to mystics and gypsies for an opinion on when life starts rather than simply step up and state biological fact. It is particularly sad when scientists are slaves to a political agenda and serve the agenda rather than scientific fact. The same sort of behavior applies in the global warming debate. Regularly scientists are caught fabricating in order to further the political agenda.

Quote by: tripimollee oh, and also- i do view it as killing. It is killing a mass of cells in my body that I would rather not have there. And I am a good person, and I feel no guilt. Chew on that bone.

Just the story you tell yourself.

You said that if you were to have problems concieving in the future because of a past abortion that you would just adopt. The fact is that you would be adopting the child of a good person. Good people do the right thing even if it isn't convenient for them, even if it is painful, emotionally or physically, even if they and all their friends tell them to do the easy thing. That is what good people do.

And it is very revealing that feel the need to try to convince me that you are a good person. You have topld me that you are a good person several times now. You know that I see your story for the fabrication that it is, yet you tell it to me anyway. It is far more important to you that other people believe that you are a good person than whether you actually are a good person. More clinical behavior.

[syracusa]

Pale Rider,

You are the reason why I will vote against the right until the end of my days.
"Good people" are not people who simply follow rules. Right and wrong are subjective notions.

Good people are those who follow their hearts and do not shove their worldviews down other people's throats. I repeat - you are NOT a good person. You can tell yourself this fabricated story over and over again.
You think you are "good" because you follow a rule that YOU came up with. It doesn't work that way.

Stay out of my way and I will stay out of yours.
This is how wars start and I am in no mood for war (you seem to be...aren't the likes of you always?...)

So as of this moment I will quit this thread - but make no mistake about it, you have just managed to consolidate my resolve to NEVER (and I mean NEVER !!!!!) vote for someone or some party supported by people like you.

Your mentality and way of looking at life and people are responsible for the most horrific attrocities that were ever committed in this world.
From the Spanish Inquisition to the Nazi crimes - they all believed that they had the ABSOLUTE TRUTH in their hands and they were all absolutely convinced they were doing THE RIGHT THING.

I am only following my heart and making choices for myself. You Mister are downright sick if you think you can make choices in my place.
Go make your own choices and just disappear back into the Hell you came from!!!!!

[Pale RIder]

And you, syracusa are the reason that I will never support the left. Good and bad are not realative terms. There most certainly is right and wrong and you can bet that when one has to ignore scientific fact in order to defend one's position, one is in the wrong.

And as to horrific attrocities, the inquisition might have taken 10,000 lives, the corpses that lie at the feet of leftist thinking number close to 200 million. Hell, there are 40 million little corpses lying at the feet of the pro choice movement alone, just in this country in the past 40 years. Telling that you can't see the terrible hypocricy in your own position.

The funny thing is that when asked, I offer up actual evidence to support my position, to evidence that proves that my position is founded in fact. Even though probably wasn't deliberate, even the "evidence" that SVMc posted bolstered my position. What do you offer? Nothing of substance. Self righteous rants, second rate insult, empty accusations. If that is what you have, then I agree that it is best that you run away from this thread. You aren't up to actual debate. Maybe you are better suited for blogs where you can offer up an opinion, but aren't really challenged to support it.

[tripimollee]

Quote by: Pale RIder Do you really need a bio 101 lesson? I guess that you think that conjoined twins are really just one grotesquely malformed person as well, don't you? And ask any sociopath if he is a sociopath, and he will tell you that he most certainly not. And there is one accepted medical scientific definition, and then there are the definitions as posted by SVMc in which scientists defer to mystics and gypsies for an opinion on when life starts rather than simply step up and state biological fact. It is particularly sad when scientists are slaves to a political agenda and serve the agenda rather than scientific fact. The same sort of behavior applies in the global warming debate. Regularly scientists are caught fabricating in order to further the political agenda. Just the story you tell yourself. You said that if you were to have problems concieving in the future because of a past abortion that you would just adopt. The fact is that you would be adopting the child of a good person. Good people do the right thing even if it isn't convenient for them, even if it is painful, emotionally or physically, even if they and all their friends tell them to do the easy thing. That is what good people do. And it is very revealing that feel the need to try to convince me that you are a good person. You have topld me that you are a good person several times now. You know that I see your story for the fabrication that it is, yet you tell it to me anyway. It is far more important to you that other people believe that you are a good person than whether you actually are a good person. More clinical behavior.

I only repeat the fact that i am a good person because you keep telling me that i am somehow defective, and a sociopath, and that i am a liar....wake up, dear! Just because your views are not my views, and you are apparently, for whatever psychological reason, unable to accept that my views are merely different, don't expect me to bow and curtsy and apologize for my opinions. Don't expect me to change my mind, merely because you have turned this debate into a scathing ad hominem argument. And don't you EVER expect me, or any other young woman, to relinquish control of her body just because you cannot tolerate opinions other than your own.

[Pale RIder]

I don't expect for you to do anything other than what a bad person would do. No good person would kill an innocent child. Simple as that.

Do you believe that the people who owned slaves, and beat them, and worked them unmercifully in the fields, and broke up their families, and killed them when they felt it necessary were also good people just because they were doing a thing that the law said that they could do?

How about the middle easterners who kill their wives and daughters because they somehow embarrassed the family? Are they good people? They are, after all, doing what their law says that they can do?

[tripimollee]

Quote by: Pale RIder I don't expect for you to do anything other than what a bad person would do. No good person would kill an innocent child. Simple as that. Do you believe that the people who owned slaves, and beat them, and worked them unmercifully in the fields, and broke up their families, and killed them when they felt it necessary were also good people just because they were doing a thing that the law said that they could do? How about the middle easterners who kill their wives and daughters because they somehow embarrassed the family? Are they good people? They are, after all, doing what their law says that they can do?

Now you are bringing things COMPLETELY unrelated into the debate. You are ONCE AGAIN imposing your view of murder on the rest of us. I would never kill a child. I would never kill a human, nor would I condone it. I think it is despicable. No one who kills a human is a good person, unless it was a freak accident that couldn't be avoided. However, I do not see a clump of cells as a human. It has the potential to be a human, but it is not one. In my view. Your view is different. That's fine. But you MAY NOT force your views on me. And those laws in the Middle East are outrageous and should be taken away- but that is because the people being killed are indisputably living humans. I do not, for THE last time, see a clump of cells as a freakin human! Deal with it! I am not forcing abortion on anyone, do not force anti choice on me! And do not even THINK of calling me HYPOCRITE, because the examples you brought up compared with abortion are apples and oranges.