Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

So... they go to heaven right? Then it would be in their best interest, we'd be doing them a favor to abort them.

True.
We'd be being very kind if we aborted every baby. Theoretically they'd all go to heaven, which is theoretically paradise, so.... you get my drift.

My views on abortion and very simple...despite the massive amounts that I have to say about it. You see, my situation is simple, I have a penis, therefore I refuse to take any stance on this subject. I realize that this forces me into the pro-choice category, but I assure I believe that this should be decided by the women. Why? because men, although technically half responsible for the childs being there, do not, in the end, half to go through any surgical operations, any such medical dilemma at all. Simply put, MEN don't have to force a small delicate child, the size of a watermelon, between their hips through very small holes that expand quite painfully.
Now I know what you're saying, what if she goes throught with it and he afford to support the child, my response is, TOO FUCKING BAD. Perhaps you should have considered this before-hand. The guy should accept the responsibility of their actions. I'm not saying that it isn't the womans fault, but don't forget, it is your seed, you're half of the equation, the lazy half in fact. The man doesn't have to carry the child around. "But what if it's an accident?" Once again, "SUCKS FOR YOU!!!" I'm sorry but, you just got unlucky, deal with it.
To sum it up, I don't care what the guy does, whether it's support the child, pay for the abortion, or marry her. That's up to him. Just don't force a descision on her. That is the LAST thing she'll need.

it should be legal.i think that its the womans choice she has to live with it. and if a man is radical on the subject he has no say and the woman does have to live with her decsion. if it was the man having babies then it would be his decsion. but so many people disagree with the subject that i dont' think that it will ever be illegal. i dont' think it would go over people would go across the world to do it where its legal. it would get out of hand

At 1/17/03 02:24 PM, Dr_Arbitrary wrote: So... they go to heaven right? Then it would be in their best interest, we'd be doing them a favor to abort them.

Theoretically, yes. If you ONLY take into consideration the future of the baby.

Theologically, the problem with abortion isn't the baby, or where the baby ends up. It's the moral and ethical question of, 'When is it right to play God, and take a life?' Who are we to decide when or where or how a human life is taken?

That's the crux. But believe it or not, I'm pro-choice. Not for myself, mind you. I couldn't do that, because it goes against my moral and ethical judgement. But I'm not about to place judgement on others for what they do, and try to gauge where their eternal lives are going to be spent. The responsibility of that sort of judgement rests upon the shoulders of Christ.

I also do not think abortion should be made illegal. It isn't right to have our government tell us what we can do with our own bodies. And the bottom line is this: the moment abortion becomes illegal, the safety of a medical environment is lost. Whether or not abortion is right or wrong isn't the only question. It's whether or not we're willing to put the life of the mother in danger, as well. I personally don't wish to go back in time, to the era of coat-hanger abortions and women dying because some butcher tried to help her get rid of her child.

At 1/18/03 12:17 PM, House_Of_Leaves wrote:

It's the moral and ethical question of, 'When is it right to play God, and take a life?' Who are we to decide when or where or how a human life is taken?

The US does this with every execution, every time it goes to war.
People are turning a blind eye to so many things and focusing it on so few. They are so similar, but people make them out to be so different.

Yeah, hasn't anyone noticed that mankind has BEEN "playing god"?

Hell(hehe), in the bible we are given that ability.
(through executions and such)

We do it everytime we kill anything, build useless buildings, divert streams, destroy whole animal population, SAVE OUR OWN LIVES (yeah you know, with medicine, and surgery and cures for diesease), and even when we form governments with law systems! Isn't that gods job?

Humans have the most conceited perception of everything, we act as though we are the pinnacle of all creation, like they'll be nothing beyond us. And in this frame of thought we play God, and try to control nature all the time. There is a man who's figured out how to literally make rain. The morality of "playing god" is not the issue, and if it is, then the whole human race has some thinking to do!

If you notice, I never said it was any different. ;)

We all play God sometimes. We do it when we step on insects, when we become doctors, in almost every aspect. But really...that's more free will than anything.

I stuck to abortion, because that's the thread topic. Taking it completely off topic would be rude.

I'll leave it at that. If you care to start a 'when do we play God' thread, I'd be happy to discuss it there.

At 1/17/03 04:23 PM, NuclearOops wrote:

"...To sum it up, I don't care what the guy does, whether it's support the child, pay for the abortion, or marry her. That's up to him. Just don't force a descision on her. That is the LAST thing she'll need."

I don't agree with you 100%. I think its a man's child to and he should atleast be able to voice his opinion about whether or not his son/daughter lives or dies.

BUT I want to THANK YOU for having the balls, the brains, the heart to take accountablity!!! My respect for you is through the roof. I hope you find a girl as nice and wise as you are.

you all are just jealous of my Voting power damn guys dont hate me for it lol im just better than you guys.
Im pro choice btw womans choice to do what she wants with her body no question

Didn't I already condemn you?
Oh well. I comdemn thou again!

At 1/17/03 04:23 PM, NuclearOops wrote: To sum it up, I don't care what the guy does, whether it's support the child, pay for the abortion, or marry her. That's up to him. Just don't force a descision on her. That is the LAST thing she'll need.

As a woman, I would like to thank you because it isn't everyday you see a man who take responsiblity, especially in situations like this. I could only hope more men would be like you, because there are too many fatherless children in this world.

Now, I have just finished reading all of these replies , the whole three pages and I have one thing to say to MOST of you.... YOU PEOPLE MAKE ME SICK!! It is mind-boggling to think that most of you people can think that it is OK to kill an innocent child. Calling it a parasite... REALLY now. The connection between a mother and an infant is a beautiful thing that was specifically created to not be broken. It continues on throughout one's life (usually, even now most of you still probly have strong connections to your mothers, it's a natural survival instinct. So what if it's not "sentient"? I agree that it is GOING to be a human person and to take that away is like murder. Now of course, I am against those who murder doctors who perform abortions, that's just going a little too far. Now I aknowledge a lot of good points that were made such as "why put it through a miserable life if it is going to be given to an orphanage," and so on but shouldn't it at least be given a chance. Now as for the people who are against "playing God" I believe that if we weren't meant to discover technologies that would alter our lifespan and those of other organisms, than God wouldn't of let us. Since He is all powerful, souldn't He be able to just cause something to happen so that we wouldn't develop these technologies? Now I went into all of these topics briefly, and I probly forgot a few, but rest asured you will be seeing much more of me around here now so watch out. Oh, and for those of you who think governments control us too much, I leave you with this classic paradox: "You cannot have freedom without Law." Think about it, if you can't figure it out I guess I'll just have to explain it in my next posting....

That was the most closed-minded argument I have ever read. Congrats, you've beaten Calmius.
You call the fetus a child? How can it be a child when it has no eyes, no discernable human shape, etc. How call it human? It's as human as sperm cells. You use the same "It's going to be" reasoning that others have tried.
By that reasoning, masturbation should be illegal because those sperm cells are "going" to be humans".
Using condoms should be illegal because those sperm where "going" to be humans.
Depo-Provera should be illegal. That egg was "going" to be a human.
The fact is that it is future tense and unknown. There is a posibility it will be a human, after the possibility that the egg is fertilized. 9 months afterwards, it is born, and then it is human.
You can't use "going to be" arguments. Read back in the posts, they've been flamed to a crisp.

You call the connection beautiful. Maybe I'll email you a painting of my leg's tendons cut open. They're so BEAUTIFUL.
You mentioned my calling the fetus a parasite, but offer no arguments to back it up that it's not, other than "REALLY now".
Come to think of it, you've offered no arguments whatsoever. Just a bunch of mindless opinionated drivel.
And you say you'll explain it in your next post? Just mail it to us. We'd rather you never post again.

At 1/12/03 04:32 PM, Jazz_Mazter wrote:

Remember... only half the people who walk into an abortion clinic come out alive.

Twins, triplets, etc. skew that statistic a bit. :D

Okay, okay. I'm not going to get into an argument with you where we just exchange insults, but you're not going to stop me from posting messages. The only reason why I couldn't back up any of my opinions was because I had too many thingsto speak out against. So, I guess first I should let you know that a baby only begins its process of growth after conception, sperm can't concieve themselves. Now I never said that I supported a tota ban on abortions, but anyway. As for the parasite topic, a parasite is an organism that invades the body, and plants itself there feeding off the host. A baby is supposed to e there. The female body is designed to carry a baby, a parasite is something that was designed to invade another organisms body to get food, shelter, etc. Well, thats all I can write for now.

Where's claimus, we could have a contest or something.

Seriously though, it's bad form to insult people. It's just a good way to alienate people who can one day become an ally.

Welcome to the Politics board DurinsBane. I advise you, ALWAYS back up your statements with some form of argument. If you can't, don't even make the statement, it will just make you regret it later.

Anyway, the issue is simple

The fetus is inside the mother.
It's humanity is debated.
The issues are:
it might become human someday, so it has the rights of humans (some say yes, others no)
It is human right now (some say yes, others no)
Humans have the right not to be killed for no reason (most say yes)

I think that the fetus is not human. This is because it does not have the fundamental properties that are associated with humanity. The major property is "reason" Other associated ideas are, concept formation, thought, sentience. Obviously, the fetus does not have any of these properties.

The second issue is, even though the baby is not human, it has the same rights because it will one day be human. I disagree, potential entities do not have the same rights as actual beings. In 1999 Al Gore was a potential president, should Gore have had the same rights as the president?

Basically, any reasonable argument on abortion MUST be on one of these two topics. Anything else is trivial details.

I apoligize for insulting you, Durinsbane, I've just seen a large number of people wander in here off the general forums, post some stupid stuff and never be heard from again.
If you're seriously here to stay, I welcome you.

But the fetus is essentially a parasite. It hasn't invaded the body, per se, unless concieved through rape, but it lives off the woman.
If she doesn't want it there, and doesn't want to have the child it is no different than a parasite, because, though it hasn't invaded the body, it is there against the will of the host organism.
It also is still debateable if it is human or not. I personally say it isn't human. Until it's born and out of the mother, it's not human, in my opinion.
I back this up by explaining the fact that it is not sentient, it doesn't have all the human features, it is not living off itself, and it is living off of a human.
Thanks for joining us here at the Politics Forums.

Why do you name yourself after a Balrog, Durin's Bain? Just out of interest.

People place way too much negative connotation on the word "parasite". It's just a biological term, people, get a grip, I think we're old enough to speak like big people here.

What makes us into little people for using the word parasite? "Cmon, people. Stop using the word "and". It's so 2002."

Your appologies are accepted, as I now realize that I myself was a little harsh in my first posting(thank you "doctor"). Oh, and Slizor, why not? Its good to know that some people know what Durin's Bane is though.
Now anyways, I still don't see how a fetus is a parasite. It was meant to be there and the woman's body supplies it with the nutrients it needs. A parasite designs itself to work around the body's natural defensive mechanisms in order to steal bodily resources. I suppose that if a woman doesn't want it there, she should have the right to take it away and be done with it. Now, I'd usually start with my "going-to-be" routine but no one seems to be buying that.
It is not true though that a fetus doesn't resemble a human being, in only about a month visible signs of arms, hands, legs, eyes, and even ears begin to form. Lots of research has been done on how babies react to certain sounds when still in development (i.e. hearing piano music while in the womb, then growing up to be a great pianist), I'll have to look for some to post so I'm not going to leave you empty handed.
Oh, and I already have had experience in formal debate before and I have read all three pages on this so you don't really need to list everything out for me. Thanks anyway though Doc. I realize that you see I'm new and you just want to help me.

I think that explicitly stating it like that makes it easier for us to separate the wheat from the chaff. People who post saying "abortion is evil" without adressing either of the issues I mentioned have obviously not embraced reason.

I think that Parasite has too many negative associations to be an effective analogy.

Also, it doesn't matter if the baby responds to stimulus. There's a big difference between percieving something and forming a concept. Animals can percieve the world. Only man can form concepts.

Like a caterpillar is not yet a butterfly, the fetus is not yet a human. Caterpillars are not welcome in many gardens, eating at their leaves in order for it to one day become a beautiful butterfly. Butterflies are more tolerated in gardens. However, that does not deter from the fact that the leaves are taken as it is a caterpillar, an annoyance to many gardeners, thus we allow pesticides. So too a fetus does deplete the reserves of it's mother. Yes, one day it may become a human, but nonetheless in the meantime it is still causing morning sickness, bloating, cramps, and other negative side effects of childbearing...thus we allow the abortion.

When I refer to a parasite, I refer to it solely in essence. I refer to it as a parasite, referring to it from the point of view of a woman who desires it to not be there. Once it is not welcome, it is as good as a parasite. It doesn't have to work around the body's systems, because they interact with it naturally, but it is still not welcome by the host.
If the host does not want this "parasite" in her, then she should have every right to have it removed, or, because we cannot remove it without it dying, an abortion.

Welcome, one of Melkor. May your passage to Zirakzigil be slow in coming.

Bahhh!!! Must smoosh Elves!
Well, when it comes down to it, no matter how much we disagree, the decision must ultimately come down to the woman. I think they're the ones who should make the choice, with input from the father if he cares of course. I guess the government should really have no right to say wether a woman should ruin her life or not, if that's what the situation would result in.

Finally, something we agree on. The government has no place governing the womb of a woman. She decides what goes in, she decides what goes out.

Im against abortion in all cases except rape , but i also think people have rights to their bodies. They have to be responsible.

Yes, now that we have some common grounds, I think that we have finally come to an agreement. Although I am still against abortion, it is not for me to decide. The women should have complete rights over what goes on with their bodies.