Ageism and Fetophobia of the Abortionists

There is rampant ageism and fetophobia oozing from every argument made by the abortionists on this forum.

Why do abortionists hold so much hatred against the fetus?
Just because another person is younger than you, or has a physically smaller body size, their life is worth less than yours?
I am tired of all the discrimination against the unborn. There are even abortionists in this forum who blatently propose that babies in the womb are not even people! Or that the unborn have not established their "personhood", based on the simple fact that they have not passed through the birth canal. This is ageism, pure and simple. And it is hatred. One has to have a lot of hatred to want to vacuum suck their own little developing child against a sharp nozzle, ripping the fetus apart into little pieces while still alive.

Fetophobia — FEAR of the fetus. Abortionists do not like the idea that a woman who engages in sexual intercourse takes the chance of becoming pregnant. Better, they say, to just abort the little life brought into this world. It seems women just want to engage in indiscriminate sex without the consequences, nevermind the ultimate price paid by their baby. Abortionists are afraid, afraid that they might actually have to deal with a pregnancy that resulted from their own actions. Afraid that they will not be allowed to terminate their unwanted fetus, and will be forced to take responsibility.

The fetus is a discriminated against minority. A minority because of its situation (situated in the womb), a minority because of its age. A minority despite the fact that every single person in the world was once a fetus themselves at some point in their life. The life of the fetus needs to be actively and vigorously defended.

The fallacy of the "it's my body defense"
This argument just makes me sick. Women who say they can do whatever they want to their little developing babies because the baby has no rights of its own. But the woman brought the little life into this world, as a result of her own choices. She knew the risks, but decided to engage in hedonistic sexual pleasure anyway. Then when she becomes pregnant, she has the nerve to complain about how it's not fair, having to deal with the responsibility. Not fair? What about being fair to the fetus? Is it fair for a woman to bring a life into this world for her own sexual pleasure, then brutally send the life back out of existence for her own convenience? The fetus is NOT the woman's body. The fetus is an individual person with his own separate blood circulation system, and his own unique DNA signature. Just because the fetus is temporarily reliant on the sustenance naturally provided by the woman's body does not mean the fetus does not have a right to life. Little babies (that have already been born) need sustenance and care to survive also. That does not make them non-people. In fact, in some remote areas of the world, where there is no cow milk available, the little baby absolutely requires the natural sustenance from a woman's breasts for its survival. This fact does not make the baby any less of a human.

It's absolutely unconscionable that mothers are freely allowed to TERMINATE their own little babies in the womb.

Thomas Jefferson, famously wrote in the Declaration of Independence that "all men are created equal" (the word "men" meant all humans - men, women, and children - this was before feminists in academia actively tried to change english grammar). In a modern day equivalent of this, Obama declared in a speech, "The arc of history bends slowly towards justice." And yet, just like Thomas Jefferson who owned slaves, Obama supports abortion. Hypocritical? Perhaps. But Jefferson did, afterall, belong to the Democratic Party.

Abortion will eventually go down as another dark legacy in American history. It might be years, decades, or even another century, but one day mankind will be able to put this awful injustice against its own behind it.

 

It's not about ageism, it is about a woman's right to make extremely personal medical decisions about her own body without the interference of the state.

Oh dear, making assumptions again?

You never did explain your thoughts on the conflict of rights in this situation. A woman's rights conflict with a fetuses rights. Who's rights supercede the other's in this situation? The woman's or the fetuses?

In your opinion when does someone gain personhood? What must one be or accomplish before they can be considered a person? Lemme guess, conception? lol

I say that it is birth and the taking of the first breath of life that establishes an individual person.

You really do assume too much. You have no idea what is going through the mind of a woman who has experienced an unexpected, unplanned or unwanted pregnancy do you? I assure you it has nothing to do with ageism, more along the lines of panic and a 'wtf am I going to do?' mentality.

Sex is a part of life. It will happen a lot and often, there is no doubt about that. It is only human nature to have sexual urges and desires. Why must you demonize sex, a very personal and intimate choice some people make?

It seems that every time a pro-lifer makes mention of how the fetus was conceived it is somehow relevant to the abortion debate like saying a fetus who was conceived through rape or invitro-fertilization is somehow different from one conceived through consensual sex.

If a fetus is deserving of life regardless of how it came into existence, consensual sex, rape, invitro-fertilization, then what is the point of bringing up how it was conceived?

Pro-choicers are afraid that the state will start controlling all women's reproductive choices, not just the right to choose abortion but how they carry to term as well. Remember that fetal personhood harms and affects all pregnant women, those who wish to abort and those who do not.

Aaww, well we'll just have to force women to remain pregnant until viability and then force them to deliver the fetus very early and cause it great harm in it's beginning of life by bringing it into this world too early. That's a much better idea right? Your idea in fact.

What's it like to not only want to FORCE your ideologies on pregnant women but to also FORCE babies to be born into this world far too early and cause them significant physical and mental suffering?

Sooo....what fallacy is it? You never stated which fallacy it falls under. Please share.

No it's freedom and it is a very responsible choice to make if you are not in a position to care for and nurture a child.

Yes he wrote all men are created equal. What makes you think this includes women and children? Women and children most definitely did not have the same rights as men during this time even now they do not have many of the same rights as men. And speaking of which, Jefferson said all men were equal and still had slaves owned by his estate even after his DEATH. Outstanding.

No, I believe abortion will continue in this life and the next just as it has done for millenia. Whether men like it or not women have been making personal reproductive choices for themselves since the beginning of our existence. You will never be able to stop us no matter how hard you try. =)

 

Except these "medical decission" are about brutally attacking the fetus. The effects on the mother's body are only secondary.
You talk about a woman's right. What about the baby's right? Again, you ignore the unborn life. Why do this if not because of the ageist bias your hold?

One would think they should both be accorded equal rights. But let's examine this. The abortion-seeking mother demands the right to not have to be pregnant for the six to eight months after she realises she is pregnant. Whereas the baby's right is the right not to be terminated, the right to the rest of his life. Which one weighs more heavily? Add onto all this the fact that it was the woman who caused, through her own choices, this little life to come into existence and it becomes hard to argue that the mother's rights have any priority in this situation.

What exactly is "personhood"? Sounds like a term you made up to try to justify murder.
If it looks like a baby, it IS a baby! What's so hard to understand about this?

It is obviously not possible for a baby to breathe inside the womb, there is simply no air! Could you breathe inside a womb? No, I didn't think so.

 

So embryos are not babies? Ok, thanks for admitting that, now you have to support first trimester abortion. Even though the argument is stupid, because dolls look like babies, and they are not babies.

No, its exactly the opposite - a term to justify having rights. You cant give rights to everything (that would make the term meaningless), so there have to be criterions by which we decide what has them and what has not. Thats what the whole abortion controversy is about. Not responsibility, not punishing women, not even primarily about bodily rights (they come automatically if the fetus is not a person and the woman is).

And pure speciecism is a pretty poor criterion for rights IMHO. Its absurd to give non-sentient human tissue rights, and similarly, its absurd to deny all rights to intelligent aliens, sentient higher animals and transhumans (mind uploads), just because they dont have (our) DNA.

 

Despite what abortionists would have everyone believe, a fetus is not merely just "human tissue", especially a fetus in its (his) later stages of development.

Brain waves can be detected after only 42 days, so we are not just talking late term abortions here.

 

Brain waves and sentience aren't necessarily hand in hand. This is a debate that we could have until we're blue in the face, trying to determine when something is or isn't human. It is inarguable that the cells used to create an embryo are alive even post conception, so we can't really use life as a gauge, otherwise every time a woman has her period it's accidental manslaughter, and every time a man masturbates it's another holocaust. Hell, by the same metric just scratching your arm is mass murder as it kills hundreds of cells.

We can make arguments like this back and forth for almost any metric. Conception? A largely arbitrary measure, seeing as almost any of the arguments that can apply to pre-conception cells can apply post-conception. Brain activity? That's an easy pathway to push animal rights on as well, yet we hold those distinctly separate from human rights. It seems to me that the most responsible metric we can apply would be viability outside of the womb.

This ties into thee rights debate as well. Before a certain level of development an embryo/fetus has a necessary biological connection to the mother. Without this parasitic relationship, the baby would die. It logically follows that if a woman is granted the rights to her own body, anything that has a necessary relationship to that body shouldn't supersede her individual rights, and as such until the baby becomes viable outside of the womb, the mother has the right to abort.

I won't even go into the overpopulation rant.

 

Brain waves in the cerebral cortex (thats where the mind resides) appear after 5th month.

I dont support abortion in later stages of development.

 

I guess you're talking about electrical impulses which can be detected in plants.

http://eileen.undonet.com/Main/infrmdC/Brain_Waves.htm

Functional maturity of the cerebral cortex is suggested by fetal and neonatal electroencephalographic patterns...First, intermittent electroencephalograpic bursts in both cerebral hemispheres are first seen at 20 weeks gestation; they become sustained at 22 weeks and bilaterally synchronous at 26 to 27 weeks..........

But the human part of the brain—the cortex—is not fully developed, as shown by "brain waves" on an EEG, until very late in gestation; in fact the EEG continues to change and mature into childhood. Indeed, the "individuating" function of a person's brain doesn't start to come into existence until the outer surface of the cortex begins to develop those deep furrows, grooves, and convolutions (sulci and gyri) that make a human brain look like a walnut, unlike the smooth brains of other animals. The furrows and grooves are what enable our brains to have millions more cells and connections between them than other animals, and so create our humanity. And the precise configuration of the grooves and convolutions are part of what determines our individuality; why, for instance, indentical twins have different personalities, and even, perhaps, why Einstein was a genius. However, these structures don't begin to form until the last 2 months of pregnancy.

 

Why is it so hard for some pro-lifers to accept the fact that a lot of people are pro-choice because it's a personal rights and privacy issue, and they don't feel the government, or anyone, has the right to invade a woman's body when she is pregnant? It's really that simple. No grandiose theories about hating fetuses necessary.

 

A post well written that hits the nail on the head. Anders….well done.

 

Pasithea said,

And we all have rights…but do we really want to live by the standard…whats good for you might not be good for me? That can work with other social issues as well.
If you want to own a slave…go ahead but I don't believe its right.
If you want to marry a group of people…go ahead but I don't believe its right.
If you want to rape someone and get away with it…go ahead but I don't believe its right.
If you want to look at child porn…go ahead its your choice…but I don't believe its right.

What you are advocating is to look the other way on an issue that defines society…LIFE. Without it nothing else matters. You only see one life…and two are involved whether you agree with it or not. If there were not two lives…no abortionist would be needed.

The fact is the STATE makes laws that tell us what we can do and what we can't do with our own bodies. Should all laws be stripped based on your opinion that anything dealing with ones body should be their choice? That legalizes a lot of things. How would society handle no laws…?

Yes just like the ones the pro-aborts make…..No woman ever regrets her abortion. The fetus is not really a person. Its not really human. Every women should abortion become illegal would use a coat hanger….and kill themselves.

Ok Rights….????

Should a person be able to sell his own body parts? Should a person be able to sell his body for money…prostituting? Doing drugs? Killing themselves?
The answer to your question all depends on your worldview. If your a godly person…then you see things differently. This is why I still maintain that most people who reject God…are pro-abortion, they see the world through different glasses. And I say MOST here. Count how many pro-aborts here reject god….most do.

It is just so funny isn't it? Your position is so so sad…it reflects on your person. So do you think that an unborns life has less worth than a child who is a year? A child who is six less value than a twenty year old? Based on this a person in their eighties has less worth than a teenager.

Well unborns are operated on all the time while in the womb. And they are human, they are people.

And do you? I have lived it…close to this topic. So whose opinion should we value? LMAO You tell Anders they can't know….and yet you are not any close to the issue. I do know however.

Sure it is natural and feels great. But as responsible people we should be able to control ourselves right? Just because it feels good and natural…does not mean sex in every circumstance is right. How about the married man with sexual urges thinking about his secretary? How about an AIDs infected person wanting intimacy with another non infected person? How about an adult being attracted to a minor child? Yea what about these?

Having babies are a part of nature too…but we are told by the pro-aborts here on this forum that pregnancy is a death sentence, dangerous to do. What a crock of manure.

With sex comes risk…….comes responsibility.

A life is a life…no matter how it was conceived.

They control our bodies as I have mentioned numerous other ways. Abortion was illegal until 1973…and before our government jumped on the immoral bandwagon our nation respected and protected all life. Humanism breathed its evilness on society…and here we are. As I said its a battle really between those who accept God and those who reject God. It colors all other issues…especially moral ones.
Abortion affects more than the woman….it directly affects the unborn whose heart has begun to beat…who has all the things necessary for life…to live. It is killing a living human being. Now you might not think its a person…but science will tell you point blank…it is a human being that is alive. That should be enough for anyone who values life. Your side does not value life.

But you are forcing your beliefs on people as well. Your entire worldview does that? I fight against it because for me your position is evil, dark.

Choices…wow. Do you think that its a responsible choice for a pro-choicer to kill someone with your views because they think you represent murder? Would it be ok to kill abortionists? Do you think its a responsible choice for anyone to take matters into their own hands and do what they believe is moral? Abortion was once illegal. Society was on the side of life. So what happened to morality? Can morality change? Can rape in the future be looked at as something acceptable? Can incest? Child porn? You want a world with no restrictions.

My answer is no. What the guy did to Tiller by killing him was wrong. We can't take matters into our own hands…but we sure as hell can work against evil…and that is what I am doing…working against the pro-death camp every day.

If someone does not want to nurture a child…then they should not have sex…not take the chance to even get pregnant…or get sterilized.

No he me ants the cattle in the fields. LMAO ARe you going to argue that women/ all human beings were not included in the Constitution? LMAO
I am not getting in a discussion about this with you…not here. This is about the unborn you target.

Sure it will…because there are people like you whose position is that its acceptable to kill human beings to solve problems. Women have not been making abortion decisions because prior to 73 it was illegal.
And ya know what……there will always be people who represent goodness and mercy and love…who will fight you. This is why after how many years since Roe….this issue is still up front and center. Why we have people here in your camp who don't think a woman should be able to abort after a certain time…LMAO I just created a thread so people can specifically state their opinions. Lets see who the brave ones are who will pin point and not run…from that question.

 

Then why are some of your group…pro-abort group against late term abortion? Why do they want to deny a woman the rights to her body?I look forward to people stating specifically their stance on this in my newly created thread.

Just give a short answer…all it takes.

 

Because this is an emotional issue and everyone has their own take on it. It's why even the terms pro-life and pro-choice aren't specific enough to cover all the varying opinions on it. If you're someone that opposes abortions in most situations, but not all, you are still pro-choice, but you could also be called pro-life. You call me a pro-abort, yet I am equally happy with women giving birth if that is their choice, which makes me pro-birth(life) just as much as it does pro-choice, which basically means that neither term is completely accurate, or they both are.

 

LMAO hahahahaha heheheheheh LOL LOL Hysterically laughing here….to the point of drooling.

EMOTIONAL ISSUE?

LMAO hahahahaha heheheheheh LOL LOL Hysterically laughing here….to the point of drooling. No I am drooling…bent over in laughter.

IS THERE SOMETHING IMMORAL OR WRONG ABOUT ABORTION? I have been told here by your group….its not emotional that I should not be emotional…that the pro-life position is ONLY based on emotion. And now you have the gall to tell me abortion deals with emotion? You have got to be kidding?

You do NOT WANT LEGAL PROTECTION FOR THE UNBORN…YOU ARE PRO-ABORTION.

I could say…I do not want gays to be able to marry so I want the law as is….but I don't care if they live together. I would guess you would say however I was anti-gay marriage…which would be true. If I had a formal vote I would vote NO. If you could have a formal vote you would vote yes to abortion.

 

You want LEGAL PROTECTION FOR THE UNBORN...YOU ARE PRO-FORCED BIRTH.

 

Yes I want protection for the human life in the womb. I am for people taking responsibility for WHAT THEY HAVE DONE. I BELIEVE OUR GOVERNMENT SHOULD MAKE THIS A LAW BY ALLOWING THE HUMAN CHILD LIFE. That means I am against abortion…I am anti-abortion/anti choice.

 

You think that by allowing people the right to have full medical authority over their own bodies without the interference of the state somehow equals anarchy? How did you ever come to such a conclusion?

Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, YES!!!

Why must you drag religion into it? Everyone has different beliefs, not everyone is going to have a religion or have the same religion as you.

I think a fetuses right to life depends on whether or not the woman intends to bring it to term. If she has deemed that it will have a right to life then that is her choice, it is her body after all, and it should be respected. Anyone who takes that right from her, i.e. causes a miscarriage, should be punished under the law and they often are. I will never believe that a fetuses life should trump a woman's right to her bodily autonomy, however, but I will respect her right to say that it does if that is what she wishes.

My mother was raped at the age of 14. She became pregnant due to the rape, she could not find the strength to live and was prepared to kill herself. My aunt helped her get an abortion and my mother found the strength to go on with life. If my mother had not had an abortion at the age of 14 she would probably not be here today, I would probably not be here today. She probably would have never met my father or had the life experiences that she did or had the three kids she loves today. So I suppose, in a way I owe my own life to abortion, because without her continued existence I would not exist.

Now I am going to ask you a personal question church, you are more than welcome to ignore it of course. Did you have your children after your abortion? If you had not had your abortion do you believe you would have the children and grandchildren you do today or do you think that your life would have taken a different course? I mean because if you think about it we are all extremely lucky to exist purely for the fact that our parents had sex when they did and conceived when they did. The chances of you having the same kids you do now is extremely unlikely had you taken a different path in life and chosen not to abort. But of course that is only if you had the abortion before they were born.

Or how about you don't worry about what these people do in the bedroom and not try and restrict people's right to copulate with whoever they want based on our own moral dogma. I find it just as disgusting and disturbing as you when a man or a woman cheats on their spouse, but as far as I am concerned it is none of my business.

Pregnancy carries with it the risk of death. That is a fact. Every single woman should have a choice as to whether or not she wishes to partake in that risk.

And abortion is a perfectly responsible action to take should pregnancy occur.

Good for you church! Now work on getting your pro-life comrades in line with this consistency! =D

Well you know how the government is, they think they know what's best for us. We need to remove this government control over the individuals of society especially on matters of what medical decisions they make regarding their own lives and health.

Not really. It looks like you don't really know the history of abortion. Abortion was perfectly acceptable until the 'quickening'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_States#History

Do you always isolate pro-life atheists in this manner?

I assure you the fetus does not care whether it lives or dies.

Not really, my position states that we leave it up to the woman and allow her to make her own choices. No force involved.

You may want to go over the history of abortion in the US again and even further expand it to the history of abortion worldwide. Society was never on the side of 'life' in regards to the fetus until they had reached the 'quickening'. And yes, morals change all the time. The Bible says that slavery is acceptable and has various laws regarding how to handle slaves. We as a society have moved on from such stagnant morals and made changes. We are even now slowly learning to accept that there is nothing wrong with being gay and for gay people to marry one another. It will take some time to do away with old moral beliefs but we are slowly making progress.

On a forum...yes, you are doing just a fabulous job. Or do you take to picketing outside clinics on occasion too?

This is not an option for people like myself who wish to have children later on in life. It is also not an option for people who do not want to undergo expensive and unnecessary surgery. Although for those who do not ever want kids and have sought out sterilization, particularly young women, they have great difficulty in finding a doctor who is willing to sterilize them at their age and if they have no children. So it's actually not as easy as it sounds either.

I am going to argue that it took a long time for women to get the rights they do now at the time that was written. Women had to fight for decades until they were even allowed to vote in this country. And I am going to blatantly state that children absolutely do not have the same rights as men and women do now. That is a fact, children cannot drive, they cannot vote, they cannot make their own medical decisions, they cannot drink/smoke, etc. Children simply do not have the same legal standing under the law as adults.

Wrong again! Please, expand your knowledge! Also you cannot ignore the fact that there were illegal abortions before 1973.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_abortion

By the way I had to chop down some of your quoted posts church because the character limit went beyond 10,000, sorry about that. I don't usually do quote chopping if I can help it.

 

I am now going to post the definition of pro-abortion since churchmouse has failed to do so on so many occasions when asked.

pro·abor·tion adj \(&#712prō-ə-ˈbȯr-shən\

Definition of PROABORTION

: favoring the legalization of abortion
—pro·abor·tion·ist noun

http://www.merriam-webster.com/medical/proabortion

By the way, it's the exact same definition as pro-choice.

pro–choice adj \(&#712prō-ˈchȯis\
: favoring the legalization of abortion
—pro–choic·er \-ˈchȯi-sər\ noun

http://www.merriam-webster.com/medical/prochoice

Her definition here:

is simply not true.

I hope this clears that up.

 

"Pro-choice" ?
What about the baby? Oh, I forgot the baby doesn't have a choice.
It is just not possible for the baby to consent to his own abortion.

Besides, women do have a choice. No sex, no pregnancy. It's that simple.
Even when a woman is willing to take the risk, there is a little thing called a CONDOM.
A woman can even have sex with a 98% chance of not getting pregnant. Hell, throw in a morning after pill and that goes up to 99.9% !

I consider myself "pro-choice". Women do have a choice: they should be forced to deal with the consequences.
And the unborn baby deserves to have a say in the matter too. The only way he can be given a choice over his own existence is to be born. When he becomes 18, he can make that decission for himself, whether he wants to be "aborted" or not.

 

Fetuses do not have the mental cognisance to make a choice let alone care about the issue.

First of all, what does it matter how the fetus was conceived? If she was raped and conceived does that make a difference? Do you allow abortion in those instances? And if so, why? What makes a fetus conceived of rape less worthy of life than one conceived via consensual sex?

Second of all no birth control method is 100%. Condoms do break and the morning after pill is expensive, it is around $40 to $50 and you only get one. Also some pharmacists have and will deny a woman the right to purchase the morning after pill. http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/12/20/study-pharmacies-often-deny-access-to-morning-after-pill/

Third of all the morning after pill does not always agree with women's bodies. I took the morning after pill one time and found myself puking and dry heaving for 8 hours straight. Turns out hormonal birth control has a similar effect on me, making me nauseated. Many women experience this with oral contraceptives.

I have been testing out the Nuva Ring at the moment to see if it works for me...so far so good, no nausea or puking thankfully, although I have read online that many women experience 'dryness' due to the Nuva Ring and a few other side affects.

Women deal with the so-called 'consequences' (implication of punishment much?) of sex all the time by choosing to carry to term or choosing to abort.

Not a single fetus has spoken up about the issue so I suppose we are to assume they do not care.

 

And you think that an abortion would "agree" with your body more?

 

Better than pregnancy. My doctor even told me that if I get as nauseous as I do from taking birth control (which tricks your body into thinking it's pregnant to prevent ovulation) then whenever I do have kids someday I will be facing some serious morning sickness day in and day out to the point where I probably won't be able to function on a regular basis.

Apparently I am very sensitive to too much of estrogen or progesterone.

 

Side effects of an abortion:

Nausea
Headache
Vomiting
Diarrhea
Dizziness
Fever and chills
Pain and/or cramping
possible reaction to anesthetic

sometimes there is prolonged Bleeding: Most women will bleed 9-16 days, and 1 in 12 will bleed 30 days or more.

 

Yes, these are all symptoms of abortion. If I get pregnant any time soon, which thankfully I have not yet, but if I do I will rather take on this list of side effects than the much lengthier and riskier one for pregnancy.

http://www.thelizlibrary.org/site-i...#soulhttp://www.thelizlibrary.org/liz/004.htm

 

There is an endless list of potential abortion side effects also, including the chance of death in some instances. I just presented the most common ones.