Well that is exactly the problem. These so-called 'pro-choice' people take the unilateral position that abortion is good for society. You will NEVER hear them say pregnancy is GOOD for society, in fact, right here on this Forum they have said pregnancy is 'dangerous,' that a developing human fetus is not 'human' nor is it 'life.' They shun life like a cockroach runs from light.
No one needs to defend pregnancy as a choice, because no one is attempting to make it illegal. Whatever choice the woman makes is supported by pro-choicers, whether it is birth or abortion.
Oh please....Ann Furedi is the chief executive of BPAS, the UK's largest independent abortion provider. She has worked in pro-choice organizations for over 20 years. Hardly what one would call objective.
That's a load of crap....Abortion is pushed by pro-choicers, the evidence exists right here on this Forum with the title of the OP and countless posts about how 'dangerous' pregnancy is. PP is an ABORTION provider and the stats (that I provided along with citation) prove it. I have never proposed making abortion illegal, that's something you conjured up. The reality is, that you people cannot morally support your own pro-abortion pushing position so you cloak it in 'pro-choice' which is nothing but disingenuous propaganda.
For a BIG change why don't you PROVE I said that...??? Go ahead , there's my post you quoted.....show me where in that post I said what you claim....
Why would I feel compelled to prove that a particular zygote would become a burden on society ? The simple answer is we don't know the future. You can not prove that a zygote will not become the next Hitler. What is possible is that society might have been benefited by Jeffry Dahmer not being born. What is also true is that children born into dysfunctional environments have a higher probability of becoming the next Dahmer. At the end of the day you do not have to worry about future potential because it is not your choice to make. Regardless of morality, the fact of the matter is that kids sometimes get pregnant. My claim ( that it is a benefit to allow these kids to have an abortion has the potential to improve both the life of the woman and the boyfriend) is in no way invalidated by your comment. You should read your own links It goes on to claim that in the future the population "may" decline. Great ! Fantastic ! If abortion and better contraception methods and better education can help all the better ! Why would we teach kids a lie ? " a zygote is developing human" I have asked you to provide a valid argument that shows why your claim "a zygote is a human" is true. If you cant show that your claim is true, why on earth should we be teaching children that this claim is true? Why don't we just tell children the truth and let them decide for themselves. Facts: The Zygote is a single human cell The Zygote cell will never be part of the structure of a living human The DNA in the zygote is in the process of creating human. The blueprints for this potential human are coded in the DNA but not a single cell in the structure has yet been laid. As the process that the zygote has initiated progresses, like any construction project the longer you wait the more of that construction gets completed. With this in mind we can teach children to abort quickly before much of the structure is in place. If there is some doubt (condom breaks) go get the morning after pill as soon as possible and so on. This is proper and truthful education.
Where did anyone say that a fetus wasn't human? No Pro-Choicer said that. A human fetus is human, just not A human.
If you actually knew anything about comprehensive sex education you would also know that a great deal of emphasis is placed on NOT having sexual intercourse. There is nothing immoral about defending yourself from a non-consented intrusion on your autonomy. Furthermore YOUR moral views have no bearing on any other person, why should YOUR moral views dictate how others live their life. Abortion has it's place in society, it always has and where exactly does it state that abortion is a "good thing" or is this yet again another made up thing by you. Where does it say that abortion is good for society, it actually says "Abortion is a social good". Social pertains to the individual, society pertains to groups of people ergo what you stated could be re-written as Abortion is good for the entire population. Where as the OP could be re-written as Abortion is an individual good you attempt to change the meaning of the OP is noted. I have a question for you, though I expect you will ignore it as you seem to do with anything contrary to your opinion. Can you explain why 6 of the top 10 states with the highest teenage births (most resulting in single parents) have the most restrictive sex education in schools? After all you are saying that teaching abstinence until marriage would reduce abortion.
No, the only morals that matter are the morals of the woman who decides to have an abortion or not.... YOU , of course, didn't even think of that....
If the facts are documented, and they are, it is objective. Just google Romania Decree 770. From http://www.academia.edu/3614502/Soc...mania_s_Abortion_Ban_under_Ceauşescu_s_Regime In 1945, Romania, under the leadership of the Communist Party, became an ally of the Soviet Union. This alliance brought many social and economicupheavals, of which the criminalization of abortion under NicolaeCeauescu’s regime stands as one of the most impactful. To achieve the demographic goals of the state,Ceauescu criminalized abortion in 1966, demanding that each family have at least four children. In the 23 yearsthat ensued (1966-1989), the policies enforced were among the most brutal in the world, resulting in serious socioeconomic consequences for the Romanian people.Decree 770, which came into being on October 1 1966, instituted severe measures and punishments with the goal of eradicating abortion, effectively subordinating the people to the power of the state, with the first becoming the property of the latter. While Gheorghiu-Dej nationalized the means of production, Ceauescu nationalized the means of reproduction (Kligman, 199. The new law created mechanisms of absolute control over people’s reproductive lives: gynechological exams became mandatory for women in their fertile years, and childless couples over the age of 25 were charged a celibacy tax (Scarlat, 2005; Kligman, 199. Romania’s laws, which had previously been among the world’s most liberal, hadnow become so oppressive that the country saw its fertility rate jump from 1.9 to 3.7 children per woman (Pop-Eleches, 2005). The resulting cohort experienced a period of overpopulation of schools, hospitals and publicservices, along with a lack of investment in the infrastructure that was needed to take in the sudden population growth.
Abortion is a great idea as long as you're not the fetus being aborted...am I right? Proponents of it were lucky to have a Mom who wanted them. This is the ony crime the fetus is guilty of...they are not wanted. A fetus is a living entity, a human being in the most fragile and vulnerable stage of it's existence. It is surgically removed from the womb and killed. I fail to see that as a "social good." To imply otherwise is sociopathic. Sociopaths are incapable of feeling empathy towards other living beings....I'd venture to say this defines those who view abortion as a "social good." Abortion is the murder of the UNWANTED. This is the crime of the fetus....this is the death sentence imposed upon them...they are not wanted. It is an action based solely on self-interest. There is no "social good" in killing...particularly for those being killed.
Also to add forthwith... "I don't want a child" Understandable...this is a huge decision with life altering implications... Ok. Now how is a child made? Sexual intercourse between a man and a woman. Ok. Outside of rape or incest...in most instances a man and woman consent to sexual intercourse. They choose to engage in a behavior with a possibility of creating a new life. It's therefore preventable. Would a woman make out with a man with a herpes cold sore on his lip? Doing so would mean a pretty good chance they are going to get that virus themselves. They take a risk. Abortion merely mitigates the risk...it removes any possibility of having to bring a child to term and raise said child. The issue is, by the time an aborition is requried...a child is in fact... involved. A separate life is involved....it is too late now. The decision was made, the risk was taken...oh wait. Well a fetus isn't really human, they can't feel pain, they are just tissue really...it's ok to kill it. Really it is. Do you hear yourselves? This is all about avoiding responsibility...it is all about risk aversion..when the proper path is simply not to engage in risky sexual intercourse if you don't want a child. There is nothing wrong with not wanting a child. What is wrong is KILLING the child once it is in fact an established liviing entity in the womb. Abortion is merely a means to sustain the pleasureful activity of sexual intercourse without assuming any responsibilty for it's consequences. The motive of abortion is pleasure. Hedonism Sex is great, I'm not going to stop having sex, and I'm willing to kill to keep having sex. That's the argument. Well sorry, but that is PATHETIC... Pathetic.
Dr. Bernard Nathanson is an admitted liar who became a pro-life activist, so yes, he is biased and his opinion is not a documented fact. Then you slapped up a cut and paste of Russian abortion stats unrelated to the discussion, I guess you thought it was a good diversion to keep me busy.
We don't know that. There is no way of our knowing what its life might be like. The woman has the best knowledge of that. Your entire post is based on your belief that the embryo (in most cases) is a person. It's a personal belief, and should not be used as a basis for laws to take away the rights and freedom of others, or for judging those who disagree with you.
WTF is "PROCREATIONAL sex? HOW is it different from any other sex act like RECREATIONAL sex???? And why can't you answer that question??? Ya, you say it's penis in vagina...so? HOW is that different from just plain having sex...WHY do you label it PRO creational sex....
Everyone makes decisions based on self interest...why do think it's OK for you but not for pregnant women??
Because that's how humans procreate. How is it you people do not know this? No wonder the abortion rate is so high...
Here's a shocker: Logical fallacies aren't based on my morals. They're logical fallacy. If all you can say is "you don't dictate to me," it's a rather childish retort. "You aren't the boss of me!!" Seriously? How about a reasoned explanation of your views and a rebuttal of what I said? - - - Updated - - - It means you have sex for the purpose of having a child as a result. Isn't it obvious? - - - Updated - - - How about looking beyond one's selfish interests and have enough basic decency to not have a convenience abortion when you can be humane enough to give the kid a chance and give it away at birth? Why is that too much to ask?
Yeah you call him a liar because he admits to cooking pro-choice stats. Apparently you cannot refute my Russian stats so you call them 'unrelated' typical of you.
