It is very relevant. The law does not allow such cruelty to animals just because the owner happens to believe such torture might be beneficial in some way.
In some cases it does, in some cases it doesn't. It is legal to test medical and beauty products on animals, because doing so is beneficial to humans. It is legal to raise animals and slaughter them for food, because doing so is beneficial to humans. It is legal to hunt animals that can be a threat to people (such as deer) if they overcrowd an area. However, all of this is a moot point because you guys claim that abortion is MURDER. If you want to argue the merits of animal cruelty laws in another thread, I'll bite. But that doesn't change the fact that the subject of THIS thread is abortion (the murdering of a human, according to you).
What the hell does all this have to do with abortion? Animals v. people. There IS a difference. All you bible thumpers out there should understand this. A fetus is a fetus, a developing conglomeration of cells, much as a tumor. A "baby" is a born human being. If you kill the "baby" it's murder. If you remove the fetus, it's surgery. That is why feti are not called babies. What's so hard to understand about that? I would rather EVERYONE who doesn't want the kid be responsible and take the appropriate action, than those who HAVE the kid, and make him a burden unto us (society). It always gets me, the people who are "against" abortion, but keep having babies they can neither afford nor want. THUNK, THUNK-the sound of unwanted babies hitting the ground, which will eventually rob me, break into my car, or suck up social service money. I just wish EVERYONE who did not want to have the kid got the abortion and saved us all a lot of problems. (thanks to Bill Hicks, RIP).
I'm not a bible thumper and I believe animals and humans have the same rights. Which would be not to get pregnant in the first place... Yes, let's kill off the homeless and unemployed as well. We can't have them bumming off of society. Kill them. Kill all the people in hospitals too who can't afford care. How about the disabled too?
Alright not that I particularly agree with the point I'm making but I need it to make the question relevant; People aren't the only ones who "murder" their offspring. Almost all animals will kill and in many cases eat their offspring in the events that either they or the mother wont survive. And in some cases it seems like the desicion of "I don't want these babies" is eveident even in the animal kingdom. Take hamsters for instance pet hamsters will often eat their offspring for no particular reason. At any rate my question is, would it be any different to you if they ate the fetus afterward? I'm not trying to be sarcastic or anything I honestly want to know since so many here seem to be pro natural course, because then that way it would be something you find occuring naturally. I personally couldn't do the whole abortion thing unless I was going to die as a result of having the child. But otherwise I couldn't kill something just for living.
Oh and could you deal with an abortion? I wont hold it against yeah because I honestly think it's up to you. And lastly if you are anti-abortion would you be willing to take in babies that are not wanted?
That would be like saying anyone who thinks we should do something about the homeless should be willing to take them into their home. I'm not as much for forcing women to give birth to unwanted children as I am for preventing unwanted pregnancy, which is where the religious right goes horribly wrong. They are against educating the youth because they see it as "endorsing" teen sex, when in truth providing education on prevention methods besides abstinence lowers the rate of teen pregnancy. As for the killing of offspring in nature, it's true, it happens, but we are presently quite removed from nature, are we not? (I believe that is unfortunate btw) If we were in a kill or be killed, eat or be eaten society (literally), well, then the circumstances would warrent less civilized behavior. My moral stance changes based on the situation. As society is arranged now though, to kill the unborn is immoral and brutal. There is no reason to condone it.
So a mouse, or a beetle, or a garden slug has the same rights as a human? Interesting. I already said that if you kill someone who's born, it's murder. Your hyperbole changes nothing. Removing fetal tissue does not qualify as murder. The world has enough people. If someone gets in a situation where they may have a child they DO NOT want, I would much rather that person not have the child, than contribute to the morass of social problems that come along with unwanted pregnancies. In an ideal world people who did not want children would not get pregnant, but, as they say, s*it happens. Birth control fails. People make mistakes. Should they be punished for those mistakes for the rest of their lives, or should their children be punished by being forced to be born into poverty, and should society be punished by having to pick up the tab? I say no.
"I'm not a bible thumper and I believe animals and humans have the same rights. Which would be not to get pregnant in the first place... Yes, let's kill off the homeless and unemployed as well. We can't have them bumming off of society. Kill them. Kill all the people in hospitals too who can't afford care. How about the disabled too?" Please! Most people would be perfectly fine with killing off the homeless and the unemployed and the poor...and ect. God knows nobody wants to HELP them or anything crazy like that....and hey, I got pregnant while on birth control...it's definitely not as easy as "oh just don't get pregnant" black and white thinking is incredibly dangerous
Yes, as a species, they do. Open your mind. Do you know anyone who is "poor" who wishes they hadn't been born? I was raised on little, I'm quite happy to be alive. People can do whatever they want. You can go from rags to riches if you want, but I don't particularily think being "poor" is so bad. I enjoy the simple life. Again, open your mind.
I don't know anyone who would be "perfectly fine" with that, what kind of sick losers do you hang out with? My thinking is not black and white, I know there are difficult decisions involved, but life is difficult. But it's also beautiful and everyone who is conceived should have the oppurtunity to experience it.
You should open your mind. All animals are not of the same species. I too was born with little. But my parents wanted the birth to occur. Parents forced to give birth to children they don't want can create broken families, abused children, economic hardships, and drains the social service system, amongst myriad other problems. If you ask someone who is alive, chances are they will say they are glad they were born. However, extricating cells from a womb does not equate to killing a human being. If you are so eager for people to have kids they don't want--you support them and you care for them. I would opt out if I could, but I can't. Unfortunately the government does not give me a choice in the matter.
I'd just like to make a reference to the teens who felt pressured to give birth to children they didn't want. 1. the mother can have a shitty life 2. the baby can end up in a trash can 3. the baby can end up in a toilet 4. the father may not help out at all. 5. the rules of "just dont have sex if you dont want children." will never apply to a majority of todays youths, or even adults. Shit happens. There should always be an option B. ehem. to anyone who is pro-life: we don't care what you would do. no, really, we don't. your life is yours... we don't give a shit how you feel about abortion. We'll make our own decisions if something happens. Fuck off and stop bitching about other peoples decisions. i consider murder to only count as murder when you dispose of a life-form when it is fully developed and capable of living completely on its own. I very much doubt the potential-child gives a damn whether it gets aborted or not. Whens the last time you remember being partially developed and still inside your mother's womb?
The right to life movement is going about their work the wrong way. Instead of banning surgical abortion outright, they should provide better alternatives - such as creating more programs to benifit single mothers, and making the pill over-the-counter. The Catholic pro-lifers I've run across in 12 years in the Catholic school system can see things only from their prospective to the point where they can't negotiate, even if negotiation results in improvement. It's all or nothing for some of these people. For example, when when congress tried to pass the bill that banned 3rd trimester abortions, the court turned it down because there was no loophole for if the mother was in danger. Why couldn't they re-write the bill? Because they're too stubborn to negotiate. Because scoring victories means more to *them than saving fetuses. There has recently been a push to make the day after pill over the counter, but it did not pass the FDA. Why? They're main argument was that girls under sixteen would not no how to administer the pill. Excuse me? Do sixteen year old girls never use advil? Ibprofin? Shit, if they're having sex chances are they know how to swallow. So the right wing pro-lifers need to see sense. You can't close a door without leaving another one open. You can't teach that abortion is wrong without teaching about non-surgical ways of contraception. Their abstinance-only meathods may have done well in the 50s but times have changed, and if these narrow-minded pro-lifers don't realise this, they will change society - for the worse. *awaits a harsh and sarcastic comeback to post* *by THEM I mean the generalized pro-fetus population. Key word is GERERALIZED. DEAL with it.
Yeah the morning after pill can't get approved, but it took VIAGRA like 16 months to fly through the process. And we've all seen what a GREAT job the FDA does in screening potentially dangerous drugs. What a joke!
I'm sorry, I have not taken the time to read the entire argument already going on here, but I was appalled by this statement by the creator of this thread. Is it only women who have unprotected sex now? And you think it's time women take responsibility for other living things lives? Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems many men are the ones who run out on their own "living things lives" after the women do choose to have their children and nurture them. Excuse me, but women are doing the right thing whatever they choose to do, because men cannot be depended on all the time to take care of their business. Every woman should be able to choose on her own what her choice is, and it's no one else's business.
ok.......I'm sure pro-war people don't give a damn that anti-war people are against that brutal/unnecessary activity too, should they stop protesting? I'm sure racist whites in the South didn't care what Yankees thought about slavery either and wished they'd just mind their own business... Sorry, but thankfully, people with morals always speak up and try to make a difference. History is made and humans become more civilized. People like you get left behind. ! *spits out tea* I hope you were high or something when you wrote this. So......you have no problem with the killing of a 9 month old? How about a 2 year old, they are not "fully developed" and I don't know any that can care for themselves. You're pretty sick. Humans require a great amount of time to develop in comparison to other animals due to the size of our brain, we cannot give birth to a fully developed human because the head is too big. Our development therefore must continue largely outside of the womb. Why don't we pull the plug on all the people in hospitals who are in comas then, they won't know. There is this retarded person I know, they should die since they wouldn't really be aware of being killed anyways. ....
