Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

All your opinions are all very well, but I don't know why these arguments still come up on internet forums. Its a controversial issue. Both sides have valid arguments. Its all just a matter of beliefs.
Also, some points are fine in theory, but not practice. For example, saying the wise thing to do if you're raped is go an report it, is all very well, but how can you say that when you yourself wouldn't be put in that position? Being raped is something only the victim can relate to. It's not as easy as go to police station, report, end of.
People have their reasons for abortion, no matter if the majority view that reason as valid or invalid.
I'm pro-choice and always have been. I being female, personally, if it happened to me, I'd get an abortion. Its not a decision I'd make lightly, but face it. People make mistakes. Some of which are excuseable and some which are not.
Its all very well a man saying abortion is just wrong and thats it. A woman who aborts her baby is a murderer. Put the shoe on the other foot. Would you still say that if it happened to you?
Birth control isn't a quick fix either, nothing is 100% effective against pregnancy. So, you're saying if a woman who has used the appropriate birth control and just happens to be one of those unlucky percent that the condom fails etc, she should have to carry a kid for nine months? I just personally wouldn't do it.

Like I said, subjects like abortion are pointless on internet forums. There is no right or wrong answer, or solution. And just because a majority has one view, doesn't mean that view is right.

At 3/30/08 08:05 PM, Heatherrrr wrote: All your opinions are all very well, but I don't know why these arguments still come up on internet forums. Its a controversial issue. Both sides have valid arguments. Its all just a matter of beliefs.

Do you have a basis for any of these claims? Just because there are two sides, doesn't mean that they both have valid arguments - or that it's a matter of beliefs. The scientific evidence, combined with the general precedent in US law definitively shows that placing restrictions on abortions does not violate a woman's right to privacy, as was originally ruled in Roe vs. Wade.

The original liberal justices of Roe vs. Wade were swayed by what's called the "Golden Mean" fallacy, and assumed that just because people could be shown to believe that the fetus never achieved any person hood - even though there existed no strong basis for these claims.

Also, some points are fine in theory, but not practice. For example, saying the wise thing to do if you're raped is go an report it, is all very well, but how can you say that when you yourself wouldn't be put in that position? Being raped is something only the victim can relate to. It's not as easy as go to police station, report, end of.

By that logic, I shouldn't be able to study equations that model airplane function, since I'm not a pilot - and I shouldn't study or analyze the effects of alcohol, because I'm not an alcoholic.

People have their reasons for abortion, no matter if the majority view that reason as valid or invalid.

This is completely irrelevant to US law. In fact, this is probably true in all criminal cases. Of course the criminal has a "reason", but is that reason ethical?

I'm pro-choice and always have been. I being female, personally, if it happened to me, I'd get an abortion. Its not a decision I'd make lightly, but face it. People make mistakes. Some of which are excuseable and some which are not.

You're forgetting that the fetus undergoes development while in the womb - and the poor ethics of abortion have nothing to do with the woman's health or behavior, they have to do with the death of the fetus.

Its all very well a man saying abortion is just wrong and thats it. A woman who aborts her baby is a murderer. Put the shoe on the other foot. Would you still say that if it happened to you?

Yes. If I went out and killed someone, they'd call me a murderer. Generally, I think that standard should be applied to all persons (note that I don't consider an embryo to be a person, only a fetus).

Birth control isn't a quick fix either, nothing is 100% effective against pregnancy. So, you're saying if a woman who has used the appropriate birth control and just happens to be one of those unlucky percent that the condom fails etc, she should have to carry a kid for nine months? I just personally wouldn't do it.

Right, but by that logic it should be legal to kill your born children - obviously it's not.

Like I said, subjects like abortion are pointless on internet forums. There is no right or wrong answer, or solution. And just because a majority has one view, doesn't mean that view is right.

Yes, there's a solution, and there is a right answer. And when the majority comes to a conclusion based on evidence, more likely than not that position is right.

At 4/1/08 06:24 AM, Al6200 wrote: Yes, there's a solution, and there is a right answer. And when the majority comes to a conclusion based on evidence, more likely than not that position is right.

If things where so simple, then religion would die out any day now. I'm not purely flaming religion. Just face it, There are more than one religion, yet they can't all be true. That means the majority of people in the world follows a religion that is false, no matter if one turns out to be true. (at the very best, 33% could turn out to be right, but never the majority)

Yet, we haven't yet seen people look at the evidence and come to this conclusion just yet.

I say that whoever thinks abortion is murder are dipshits. Seriously, they are not human beings yet when they are aborted, merely some baby-shaped mass we'd call a fetus. If it's not developed into something that would be illegal to abort, it's not finished forming and is not even alive yet. So technically dicing up something which is not really what people would see as alive is not in the same universe as murder

At 6/10/08 01:21 PM, Jaredcatz wrote: I say that whoever thinks abortion is murder are dipshits.

Are we now?

Seriously, they are not human beings yet when they are aborted, merely some baby-shaped mass we'd call a fetus.

With a brain, heart, lungs, etc. Are you just a human shaped mass that we'd call a human?

If it's not developed into something that would be illegal to abort,

What a beautiful circular argument. It should be legal to abort a fetus because it's legal to abort.

it's not finished forming and is not even alive yet. So technically dicing up something which is not really what people would see as alive is not in the same universe as murder

It's obviously alive, and it's obviously not finished developing yet. But a 20 year old kid isn't finished developing yet, but they still have a right to life.

At 6/11/08 12:11 PM, Al6200 wrote:

stuff

You sir, are an idiot.

Roe v. Wade was one of the best decisions the supreme sourt has made, we need not to overturn it..we need to keep it how it is

At 6/11/08 03:25 PM, Sillyking44 wrote: Roe v. Wade was one of the best decisions the supreme sourt has made, we need not to overturn it..we need to keep it how it is

court*

At 6/11/08 02:26 PM, Jaredcatz wrote:

At 6/11/08 12:11 PM, Al6200 wrote:

stuff

You sir, are an idiot.

Even though I don't agree with Al6200 arguments, you just made a big ass out of yourself. If you can't have a proper discussion/debate, then get the fuck out. Simply saying that somebody is an idiot is not a valid response.

At 6/11/08 02:26 PM, Jaredcatz wrote:

At 6/11/08 12:11 PM, Al6200 wrote:

stuff

You sir, are an idiot.

Paging Idiot-finder, this is Imperator paging Idiot-finder......

At 3/30/08 11:46 AM, Bobby444 wrote: You're right. Life is better than death.

I beg to differ.

Frankly, I don't really care much for the Pro-Life or Pro-Choice movements at this point. The Pro-Life people would have you believe that all abortions are done by 8 months with a fully formed baby, and the Pro-Choice people would have you believe that all abortions are done on fertilized eggs.

Both are EXTREMELY atypical scenarios for abortion, and neither stance is going to get anywhere.

Furthermore, I think what we first need to do is ban third trimester abortions where the mother's health isn't threatened. That will take away a lot of the ammunition from the radical Pro-Life crowd (they won't be able to show gory pictures of late term abortions), and if the Pro-Choice groups try to block it - they'll be exposed incredibly cruel and heartless (who thinks that a 7 month old fetus shouldn't have the right to life?)

At that point the radical groups will be taken out of the picture and we'll be able to make a compromise that gives women the right to choose what they do with their bodies unless the fetus has sufficient brain development to warrant child-status.

**** Abortion. I make love with a girl.She gets pregnant, but she doesn't want the kid, so she wants an abortion.If I didn't want the kid I would take it.I would make sure that the baby would be born and I'll stand by the girl when she is in labor.I will then break up with the girl, because I have no love for someone who would be willing to kill something before it's born.I would take care of the kid until it's 18 years of age.That would be my punishment for not being careful.Hopefully the punishment would be enjoyable.

At 6/12/08 05:15 AM, GunnerX86 wrote: **** Abortion. I make love with a girl.She gets pregnant, but she doesn't want the kid, so she wants an abortion.If I didn't want the kid I would take it.I would make sure that the baby would be born and I'll stand by the girl when she is in labor.I will then break up with the girl, because I have no love for someone who would be willing to kill something before it's born.I would take care of the kid until it's 18 years of age.That would be my punishment for not being careful.Hopefully the punishment would be enjoyable.

I think eating salty food is immoral. I'm going to punish myself for eating salty food. And then force everybody around me to follow these salt rules too.

At 6/11/08 04:16 PM, Al6200 wrote: ......

I am just wondering, since you feel that an embryo has a right to live, if you think other measures of birth control should be ilegalized as well for example:

after morning pill

spiral (I am not sure if this is the correct english word; its a metal object in the womb which allows conception but does not allow the settlement of the embryo)

also I assume you think an embryo cannot be considered as (mature) life but as a possibility to life, a step on the road to life.
but arent all antoconception methods unethical then? a sperm or egg cell also have a high potential of becoming life, certain things must happen before it is able to be independent. you feel the line must be put at the moment the two cells combine, but the embryo is far from independent at that moment.

At 6/12/08 06:17 AM, Tomsan wrote:

At 6/11/08 04:16 PM, Al6200 wrote: ......

I am just wondering, since you feel that an embryo has a right to live, if you think other measures of birth control should be ilegalized as well for example:

Actually, not am embryo. A fetus. I don't believe that an embryo has the right to life, since it doesn't have a very developed brain. An embryo isn't really a person:

Embryo:

http://library.thinkquest.org/C0122429/p ictures/embryo.gif

Fetus:

http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/arts/humss /bioethic/images/fetus.jpg

after morning pill

I don't oppose that. At that point the "child" is just a fertilized egg (or a group of them), and we can take those off of adult persons and not consider them to be whole new people.

spiral (I am not sure if this is the correct english word; its a metal object in the womb which allows conception but does not allow the settlement of the embryo)

Again in this case we're talking about a single stem cell that just doesn't attach to the wall. The stem cell doesn't have a brain, the stem cell doesn't think, the stem cell isn't really a person.

also I assume you think an embryo cannot be considered as (mature) life but as a possibility to life, a step on the road to life.

Yes, I consider it to be an intermediate stage. But it within itself shouldn't get the right to life of an adult.

but arent all antoconception methods unethical then? a sperm or egg cell also have a high potential of becoming life, certain things must happen before it is able to be independent. you feel the line must be put at the moment the two cells combine, but the embryo is far from independent at that moment.

That's why I don't think stem cells have a right to life.

At 6/12/08 08:52 AM, Al6200 wrote: That's why I don't think stem cells have a right to life.

I take it from this that you are for stem cell research?

This proves that you aren't really much of a pro-lifer. I'd say you are just on the line, accepting abortion but not too late. This is a stance many pro-choice have too (including me).

I am a Conservative,but i to agree with abortion somewhat.I dont think it should be used as birth control for teens who think it ok to have sex befor marriage,but if the child has a disease of something that would cause them to live there life in pain and nothing can be done for it,then I believe it should be given as an option to the parents if they want to do it.

At 6/12/08 11:05 AM, Drakim wrote:

I take it from this that you are for stem cell research?

If it's productive, then yes, we should continue stem cell research.

This proves that you aren't really much of a pro-lifer.

I'm not terribly happy with either side.

I'd say you are just on the line, accepting abortion but not too late. This is a stance many pro-choice have too (including me).

I'm really not Pro-Life or Pro-Choice. I don't think that living things have an inherit right to life - nor do I think that women have an inherit right to kill their dependents. But if the embryo / stem cell is too young to think, than there's really no moral conflict - the woman should be able to do whatever she wants.

abortion is murder. murder is against the law. the murder of humans who havent even gotten a chance at life is sick and disgusting. instead of killing them, just put them in orphaniges. (its 2 in the morning so i cant spell things like that)

At 6/14/08 01:41 AM, mindlessdestruction2 wrote: abortion is murder. murder is against the law. the murder of humans who havent even gotten a chance at life is sick and disgusting. instead of killing them, just put them in orphaniges. (its 2 in the morning so i cant spell things like that)

I'm afraid that your logic falls short at the very first sentence. Did you for example know that 30%, that's about out of three, pregnancies are ended of natural causes? That means God is the biggest abortionist of them all! :D (and a murderer who breaks the law on a daily basis. D:)

What gives you any right at all to say that women should not have an abortion?
What gives you the right to force others to do as you would?
You are no American, no patriot, no republican, no democrat. You're a tyrannical dick.

Personally I'm against it, as soon as the cells begin dividing there is life being created, but I'm not gonna impose my views on others, if someone wants one that's their choice, there's nothing I can do about that, hopefully the decision that the mother makes will be the right decision

I would never ever abort. But i think it is necessary in certain cases.

At 6/14/08 05:45 AM, Drakim wrote:

I'm afraid that your logic falls short at the very first sentence. Did you for example know that 30%, that's about out of three, pregnancies are ended of natural causes? That means God is the biggest abortionist of them all! :D (and a murderer who breaks the law on a daily basis. D:)

I'm afraid that logic falls short too. If I killed someone, would it make sense for me to say in court "But hurricanes kill way more people than I do. God is the biggest murderer of all". How is it relevant if a good number of pregnancies are ended of natural causes?

At 6/16/08 10:34 AM, Al6200 wrote:

At 6/14/08 05:45 AM, Drakim wrote:

I'm afraid that your logic falls short at the very first sentence. Did you for example know that 30%, that's about out of three, pregnancies are ended of natural causes? That means God is the biggest abortionist of them all! :D (and a murderer who breaks the law on a daily basis. D:)

I'm afraid that logic falls short too. If I killed someone, would it make sense for me to say in court "But hurricanes kill way more people than I do. God is the biggest murderer of all". How is it relevant if a good number of pregnancies are ended of natural causes?

Well, there is one big diffrence. Those 30% doesn't happen because women fall down stairs. It's natural, as a result of our design.

A hurricate is obviously not part of how humans "work", and the death isn't natural despite it's cause being natural forces.

My point was more that if you label all abortions murder, then you are in deep shit, because our bodies naturally murder 30% of all pregnancies. (the fetus is safe when it reaches a certain development stage, kinda like how we don't allow abortions after a period of time. Not quite sure if the limits match, but you get the idea.)

Long ass topic. Wow.

At 6/17/08 02:29 AM, Drakim wrote:

Well, there is one big diffrence. Those 30% doesn't happen because women fall down stairs. It's natural, as a result of our design.

Wait, they miscarry as part of their design? That makes sense - how? Miscarriage is an error in the design, just as much as the inability to survive hurricanes is an error in our design.

By that logic, since humans get cancer as part of our design (it's a natural problem with a decentralized system like an animal), humans don't have any right to life.

A hurricate is obviously not part of how humans "work", and the death isn't natural despite it's cause being natural forces.

Whether it's natural or not is totally irrelevant. Does an infant lose their right to life becaue of the risk of sudden infant death syndrome. To teenagers not have a right to life because of the risk of meningitis. Does an adult lose their right to life because they could get cancer.

Your argument makes no sense at all.

My point was more that if you label all abortions murder, then you are in deep shit, because our bodies naturally murder 30% of all pregnancies. (the fetus is safe when it reaches a certain development stage, kinda like how we don't allow abortions after a period of time. Not quite sure if the limits match, but you get the idea.)

It's not murder if it's an accident, or if it happened because of some force outside of your control. That's like me passing on the flu to you, with me taking every step to prevent it, murder.

Also, a young human is arguably not safe until they reach full adulthood. A toddler won't survive long without constant care from the parents, and still stands a decent chance of dying naturally, yet toddlers still have a right to life.

Abortion should remain legal. This is the land of the free and if we Americans continue to create more and more ways to limit our freedoms of choice then it wont remain. People who don't believe in abortion can choose not to get one and people who believe its okay may choose to get one, if people make abortion illegal then they are no better then tyrants because all that does is force one persons ideals on another person. one of the most powerful reasons that i believe in America is because of my freedom to make choices, and if America becomes a country that forces its moral view on its citizens then why should i believe in it?

Hey, I just made a video about my opinion on abortion.
Watch it here and subscribe: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_omyQ339 0c