What do you think about partial-birth abortions?

[daniel1113]

Originally posted by: glugglug

Originally posted by: daniel1113
There is something that separates humans from other animals, whether you want to call it a soul or something else. I don't really care.

And what makes you think that a dog has no soul?

Either way, there is still something that separates humans from animals, whether you call it a soul, consciousness, or whatever.

 

[Kipper]

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: glugglug

Originally posted by: daniel1113
There is something that separates humans from other animals, whether you want to call it a soul or something else. I don't really care.

And what makes you think that a dog has no soul?

Either way, there is still something that separates humans from animals, whether you call it a soul, consciousness, or whatever.

Humans ARE animals. The best argument for differenciating the two is that to the best of our knowledge, we possess the capacity for rational thought and they do not. In regards to partial-birth abortions, I don't think an emotional reaction to the way it is performed is really a valid way of justifying a ban. You need a more logically sound argument. "It's nasty" barely stands up to any kind if inquiry.

 

[imported_Papi]

Originally posted by: naddicott
What, no poll?

I favor a free market solution. :evil:

If there is demand, there should be a supply. If the bible beaters don't want a partial-birth abortion themselves, they don't have to get one.

Perhaps if there could be an alternate procedure that gets the baby out in a safer manner, we could mandate that procedure and give pro-lifers the option of paying for premie costs at the hospital and adopting the resulting babies.

If I want to pay for a doctor to safely remove something that's in my body that I don't want there, I don't think there should be a law preventing him/her from doing so. By asking for it to be removed, I would consider it reasonable to presume I'm relinquishing any rights to what is being removed. Assuming there is no buyer for the removed thing, I should probably be responsible for an appropriate disposal fee. If the doctor isn't allowed to take it out, there's always the trusty coathanger - it has been done before in the US and goes on regularly elsewhere where doctors aren't allowed to conduct safe medical procedures.

(P.S. Yes this is flame bait. I seriously have no problem with abortions at any stage, however.)

After hearing so much about this topic I decided to look it up, and this reply has got to be the best one here.

However, to each their own.

 

[Tripleshot]

So, we can narrow it down sometime between conception and birth that a fetus acquires the soul that makes it human.

I only step into this to offer an alternative thought, that being that life was breathed into the nostrils of Adam at the creation of man by God, and so why not believe that the soul is breathed into the nostrils of the newborn when that newborn takes its first breath?

I am against abortion, but pro womens right to choose. I will never acquiesce that position because I firmly believe government does not have the right to choose any issue that is so personal to the individual as this. The conscience and moral welfare of those who should be making the decisions are from a human entity with a soul, and a government has no soul. The decision to have an abortion is based on the needs of individuals I may never have contact with, and therefor it is a foreign matter to me and you people, and should be left to the individual and their God to choose the right path. I am not totally up on the subject of partial birth abortions,however I nbelieve it has been held up before on the basis of an exception for the mortal life of the mother being in danger or certain death of the mother if the birth was to procede. If that has been abandoned, then this new law is repugnent to me. If I had to choose between my wifes life and raising an infent on my own, I can assure you, I would choose my wife to remain. She is my soulmate. My heavenly Father can send that soul to another more healthy mother and situation to be born into, and I am convinced that there would be no guilt nor retribution on judgement day for that decision.

If that is not comprehensable to some of you, I am sorry. I do not care to attend this discussion any further. It is just my humble opinion, I offer it for your consumption, not ridicule. Have a nice day.

 

[0roo0roo]

if the soul is given at conception, then twins which split afterwards have only half a soul, or maybe one is souless perhaps? and all those natural abortions aka miscarriages which happen more then you think, mostly seen as heavy flows, a whole lot of wasted souls.

 

[SuperTool]

I think one question is should abortion be legal. That is the political question. If the answer is yes, and currently it is, then the woman with physician advise should be able to decide what is the best way to terminate the pregnancy without political invervention, because at that point it's not a political, but a medical question.
I think it's wrong to allow abortion, but then not letting the doctor and the woman pick the safest way to do it.

 

[Aegion]

Originally posted by: Tripleshot
I only step into this to offer an alternative thought, that being that life was breathed into the nostrils of Adam at the creation of man by God, and so why not believe that the soul is breathed into the nostrils of the newborn when that newborn takes its first breath?

This is actually the Reform Jewish belief. During confirmation class the Rabbi at our temple advised us that according to his interpretation of passages in the Kabballa, abortions are not objectionable from a religious perspective. The reason for this is when several Rabbis are providing commentary on whether a baby being born can be killed in order to save a mothers life, one Rabbi argues that it is permissible because the baby has no soul until it draws its first breath. Since the key distinction between animals and humans is the posession of a soul, there is therefore no difference between fetuses and animals.

Additional arguments citing Judaic law as evidence that the fetus has no soul and is not regarded as a person until it takes its first breath can be found in this pdf document.

http://www.rcrc.org/pdf/jewish%20perspectives.pdf

 

[wirelessenabled]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Just like the Supreme Court has mandated that everyone must have sodomy, soon they will mandate that everyone must have abortions too! Attrocious. And to think, this is the same USSC that gave us that mana from heaven, George Bush! Appalling! Shocking! Can we contact Pat Robertson and get a prayer vigil started against those supreme court justices again? God will make them "retire" if we all pray hard enough.

 

[kage69]

SLAP!

Hrmmmmmmm.

 

[nutxo]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Shad0hawK

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
What do you think about pro-life extremists shooting abortion doctors in the head? Blowing up clinics? Creating public "hit lists" of doctors they plan to kill? Cutting off funding to 3rd-world health orgs that provide life or death care for the world's impoverished? Disgusting.

Stupid thread OP. And your bias is showing.

i i think if we count each murder as an instance of being "wrong" the pro-life extremists were wrong 7 times to the pro choice extremists were wrong around 40 million times.

It's a shame that we weren't wrong 40 million and 1 times

Are those hanger marks on your forehead? It would explain a lot

 

[Fencer128]

Hi,

I think late term abortions are morally questionable - even from a pro-abortion viewpoint. That said I also believe the following:

1. There is no sancity of human life. People (inc. children) die needlessly the world over and the fact is as we're set up at present we really want to be cutting back on reproduction rather than promoting it. Let's not pretend to get worked up over this in the grand scheme of things as they stand today.

2. IMHO the right to live of the mother comes before the right to live of the unborn child. Correct me if I'm wrong, but current legilastion prohibits PBA (I hate that term) even when there is a medical risk to the mother? If so, this should not be the case.

Cheers,

Andy