I was just wondering..... (Part Deux)

Is abortion really an atrocity against God?

I was just wondering. I certainly am not trying to stir the pot.

No.

I have no idea, since I am not a believer....but I don't think it's directly positive for christians - Catholics seem more uptight about it, though....

[quote="SpectreFate"]Is abortion really an atrocity against the Gods?
quote]


I fixed that for you..I'm sure you just forgot.

I am not a believer so I have no qualms about it.

murder is murder. God did not give us feotuses [feotus's, feoti?] to eat, so if ya believe that that thing has a heartbeat and feels pain, it is murder. If you don't, then it is not. Personally, I will never have one, so it should not be up to me to make the laws about it. That would be MY decision, if I was in that situation. I think that just the female lawmakers should be able to debate that between themselves. Sounds screw-y, I know. But it is a screw-y subject.

But, as a guy whom has had an ex go behind his back twice and get one - it does hurt the prospective father, as well. The deception made it all the worse.

No!

I could have been a father at 16. Meaning I'd have a kid about to enter college right now. There's no way having a kid at that age would have been a good thing, for anyone. Thus, I am pro-choice.

It's crazy to think about, you know. How would my life be now if we didn't do that. I can't answer that question, of course; just like back then I couldn't answer the question of my own life. Things were not good for me back then. Some days I'm amazed I'm alive, you know. And I didn't struggle with drugs and alcohol. But life was not good, and it wouldn't have been right to bring a child into this world.

"The Great Debate" by Dream Theater has become relevant again due to stem cell research. I'm sure that's the reason this thread was started.

I am pro-life, btw.

Eyesore wrote:

I could have been a father at 16. Meaning I'd have a kid about to enter college right now. There's no way having a kid at that age would have been a good thing, for anyone. Thus, I am pro-choice.

It's crazy to think about, you know. How would my life be now if we didn't do that. I can't answer that question, of course; just like back then I couldn't answer the question of my own life. Things were not good for me back then. Some days I'm amazed I'm alive, you know. And I didn't struggle with drugs and alcohol. But life was not good, and it wouldn't have been right to bring a child into this world.

You sell yourself short. 16 yr olds have been living with that "mistake" for 1000's of years. Many of the greatest humans ever came from that exact situation. I am not saying your personal decision is going to send you to hell, but, at least in retroSPECt, you know that would have been a pretty cool kid, and it would not have killed you to raise it. If you want to talk about evolution, talk about the evolution/adaptation of Eyesore. Not much difference.

I dont think its always an Atrocity to God.I'm Pro-Life but I can see certain situations were abortion may be necessary.I still believe its murder though.

Oooo I am so not touching this one either

thrasher73 wrote:

I dont think its always an Atrocity to God.I'm Pro-Life but I can see certain situations were abortion may be necessary.I still believe its murder though.

I generally take this stance. I believe life starts at inception and terminating that life is murder. Generally I think if your old enough to do the deed then you can be a parent.

I really think instead of arguing and counterarguing over the topic if those who believe like I do took a positive approach to the subject and adopted those children at risk and supported agencies/organizations who promote safe adoption then abortion doctors might have to find another line of work...

Alex

This is one of those issues where I tend to come down on the "liberal" side.

I don't have a problem with abortion as long as the fetus is not viable outside the womb at the time of the abortion. Stuff like RU486 (the "morning after pill") doesn't bother me.

I think until the fetus is viable outside the womb, it's just tissue. I don't think removing a pre-viable fetus is any different than removing an ovary. Hey, both have the "potential" to become life.

What I DO have a major issue with is late term abortions. When a doctor is punching a hole in the head of a totally viable infant, that becomes murder in my book.

Basically, I don't think life begins at conception. I think the POTENTIAL for life begins at conception but that's not the same thing as a living being at that point IMO.

hmmm. I know these threads usually start negative feelings/reactions. I am just super glad this board has intelligent members that always make ya think about different angles. Any member here should be proud that they are a member, simply for that fact.

I love this board for the fact that we can usually discuss things like this and remain civil.

You're right Sax, on most boards this thread would have been locked and deep sixed.

Pro-life, IMO Satan has always tried to kill babies. Since the days of Exodus to today.

tohostudios wrote:

I love this board for the fact that we can usually discuss things like this and remain civil.

You're right Sax, on most boards this thread would have been locked and deep sixed.

I appreciate that too. I have noticed that anyone can be against something but the harder thing is to promote a real alternative to a problem. Being civil lets those interested in solutions make progress...

Alex

I'll be honest, I kinda started this thread as a gag (what's funnier than abortion? ), but am glad peeps are so civil around here.

SpectreFate wrote:

I'll be honest, I kinda started this thread as a gag (what's funnier than abortion? ), but am glad peeps are so civil around here.

i think something must have gotten into the water....

Alex

SAXON1500 wrote:

Any member here should be proud that they are a member, simply for that fact.

I feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

just so we can argue:

SpectreFate wrote:

I'll be honest, I kinda started this thread as a gag (what's funnier than abortion? ), but am glad peeps are so civil around here.

I figured this thread was started facetiously but when I saw serious responses, I decided to weigh in with a serious response as well.

And while we're stirring the pot...

Obama's overturning the Bush laws governing stem cell research is probably the first decision with which I've agreed with the new President.

Provided the experimentation on embryonic stem cells is confined to those embryos which in vitro clinics were only going to destroy anyway, I don't have a problem with it. If it's legal for the clinics to dispose of the embryos as "medical waste" why not see if we can use those embryos to advance cures for all sorts of things?

I totally disagree with creating new embryos just for that purpose, but using embryos that are going to be destroyed anyway...I say go for it.

tohostudios wrote:

And while we're stirring the pot...

Obama's overturning the Bush laws governing stem cell research is probably the first decision with which I've agreed with the new President.

Provided the experimentation on embryonic stem cells is confined to those embryos which in vitro clinics were only going to destroy anyway, I don't have a problem with it. If it's legal for the clinics to dispose of the embryos as "medical waste" why not see if we can use those embryos to advance cures for all sorts of things?

I totally disagree with creating new embryos just for that purpose, but using embryos that are going to be destroyed anyway...I say go for it.

Couldn't have said it better.