| Jan 17 @ 11:37 PM |
How do you feel about Pro-Choice vs Pro-Life?
|
|
LipGlossQueen9
Posts: 10,079
|
Not only that, the father should have rights too.
Not if he's a rapist.
If he's a rapist he should have no say in anything.
|
|
  |
|
| Jan 18 @ 12:02 AM |
How do you feel about Pro-Choice vs Pro-Life? |
|
kattsmeow
Posts: 21,230
|
Most are not rapist though. Matter of fact, they will never know that they had a chance to be a father.
|
| |
|
| Jan 18 @ 12:05 AM |
How do you feel about Pro-Choice vs Pro-Life?
|
|
nah12
Posts: 3,973
|
 thegoodideaman ...so true!
IMO those pro this VS pro that groups are nothing short of someone trying to force their thoughts and beliefs on others without having any real answers for their version of how everyone should do as i say because I said so.
Example: Adoption, sure those babies could be given up for adoption but in the real world how many are and how many are abused or killed that were unwanted before or after birth? Look at our own countries idea of what a child’s life is really worth. How many times in the last 60 days has a child been abused, murdered, used for sexual pleasure or entertainment by our all knowing idealist society? Yeah, sure, tell me more how that child should be born so it can be subject to that type of life with no one there except the one that walked away after they said you have to be born just because that person lives in the i know best world of because i said so, because god said so, because it’s morally right or it's what's best for you
 Who knows, maybe if we drop our own idealistic ideas of what’s best for everyone and look for real world solutions and try to improve things rather than pass judgment things would improve…….yeah I know, like that’s ever gonna happen right???…….
|
|
| |
|
| Jan 18 @ 12:43 AM |
How do you feel about Pro-Choice vs Pro-Life? |
|
MinnieSoda
Posts: 53
|
I fell the same way about this topic, as I feel about murder.
|
| |
|
| Jan 18 @ 1:26 AM |
How do you feel about Pro-Choice vs Pro-Life?
|
|
Paralegal_at_Law
Posts: 5,066
|
Not having a Uterus, I've adopted the "it's none of my F'n Business" Stance on the topic...
Whethr one has a uterus or not, is not the governing matter. I have adopted the position that in response to the question, "Am I my brother's keeper?" the humanitarian answer is that brotherhood requires us to possess a duty to do what is best for all of us as having an interest in the survival and exhaltation of our highest and best potential.
Accordingly, a woman who is of sound mind and that is pregnant and does not want to bring that child to term can unilatterally during her first trimester choose to terminate her pregnancy on demand; that is her exclusive right, and it is a personal decision with the previso that technology shall maintain the life of the fetus, when terminating the conception-mother's pregnancy.
That embryo should be transplanted either directly into the womb of a surrogate birth mother, from the waiting list of women who earnestly wish to birth babies, or into an artificial womb until a suitable birth mother can be located. Perhaps an option may evolve in the future to freeze the embryo for a period of time, say up to five years, to allow embryonic-grandparents or the conception father the right to claim the fetus and by consent of his spouse, have the embryonic transplant done so that the conception father who will be married to the birth mother, will be able to raise his child in a loving home.
The conception mother would identify the putative father(s) of the embryo and then "sign off on" and "voluntarily waive and terminate her parental rights;" Or, if the conception father who is confirmed by DNA evidence (other than a rapist -- with the conception mother having filed a timely police report) does not claim the embryo, it could then be implanted into the womb of a foster mother who would be paid a stipend to bring the baby to term. I am sure that there would be a giant waiting list of foreign-born surrogate birth mothers who would bear an American child, especially since any next generation child born of the frozen embryo baby who grows up and conceives another child would qualify for instant "derivitive citizenship" by reason that their mother or father was an American citizen. With up to 20,000,000 illegal alien Mexicans in the USA, that demonstrates how many foreigners would be willing to do whatever it takes to be lawfully admitted to America. Obviously, a woman who is transplanted and is pregnant with an American embryo should be granted priority and expedited entry into the USA, including a stipend as a foster parent of the embryonic transplanted fetus. Imprisoned volunteer surrogate moms should also obtain early parole.
A woman's uterus is her own and she is sovereign over it; the embryo is of her body, but that lifeform is NOT her life. It is a separate and equal individual who also enjoys co-equal rights to life, liberty, and the persuit of happiness.
By voluntarily terminating and waiving her partental rights, she should enjoy the shield of her privacy. In like manner the partental rights of the conception father should become pre-eminant once the conception mother abdicates her motherhood and bow out of the scene. If the DNA confirmed conception father also voluntarily terminatesand waives his parental rights to the unborn embryo, then the state division of family services should place the embryo with a foster surrogate birth mother who can either claim her rights to raise the child as the birth mother, or place the baby, when born for adoption -- so that caring and loving acoptive parents will nurture the child as the legal parents of the baby.
There is no reason why the termination of a woman's pregnancy must mandate the death of the fetus. Like a heart-transplant, that fetus can be sustained and transferred into a grateful and loving person's life.
A woman who wants to abort her baby loses all say in the matter of the life of the embryo that is terminally removed from her uterus with prejudice to any of her parental rights. She gets what she wants and needs, to become un-pregnant.
But the conception father and also the surrogate birth mothers also have rights, as do the unborn child. The governing law that is proposed here, is not only to preserve the right of the conception mother to terminate her pregnancy, but also to thereafter, take the course of action with respect to what is in the best interests of the child.
After the first trimester, a pregnancy should only be terminated for rape, incest, to save the life of the mother, or when the child is deformed or grotesquely impaired. That is the state of where the law should be, and towards these ends I pledge, my life, my fortune, and my sacred honor.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all life has inviolable rights endowed by our creator. and that includes no summary termination of any life without due process of law. The state has an over-riding interest to balance the rights of the conception mother and father and also the rights of the conceived child and its surrogate and foster mother or adoptive parents. No one should dictate in these matters in a capricious and arbitrary manner. The embryo should have legal counsel appointed from the office of the county public administrator as its guardian ad litem, from the moment when the conception mother opts to terminate her pregnancy.
The Utopia-American viewpoint. JMO
[Edited o
|
|
| |
|
| Jan 18 @ 11:04 AM |
How do you feel about Pro-Choice vs Pro-Life? |
|
DiamondRain
Posts: 4,865
|
At the point where human life is no longer considered sacred, human civilization ceases to exist.
Anything that erodes this concept, or blurs the line, is undertaken at great peril.
.
|
| |
|
| Jan 18 @ 12:30 PM |
How do you feel about Pro-Choice vs Pro-Life?
|
|
pamdemonium
Posts: 14,503
|
At the point where human life is no longer considered sacred, human civilization ceases to exist.
Like in war? 
|
|
| |
|
| Jan 18 @ 12:42 PM |
How do you feel about Pro-Choice vs Pro-Life? |
|
Nightowl001
Posts: 4,087
|
Hate to tell you this, DR, but that view is not shared by approximately 4 billion of the people on this planet. It is only the Judeo-Christian world that considers life "sacred" above anything else. Life is not considered particularly sacred, nor has it been, throughout most of China's more-ancient-than-our civilization, which has been around for approximately 5,000 years. To say that when human life is not held sacred civilization ceases to exist makes a nice bumper sticker, but it has no grounding in the reality of the world.
|
| |
|
| Jan 18 @ 12:55 PM |
How do you feel about Pro-Choice vs Pro-Life?
|
|
yashaenka
Posts: 4,489
|
What you say about China is true for the last 50 years or so under Communist rule. But it is unsupported before that even 2,500 years ago life in China was based on right living, family and a high moral code. In 1AD with the introduction of Ch'an it only became more so as 90% of Chinese embraced Buddhism unless you want to claim the Buddha had no belief in life and further Daojia developed at the same time which was the religious form of Taoism which embraced life. Most Chinese embraced Buddhism, Confucianisms and both the Religious and Philosophical forms of Taoism,
No form of forced abortion was ever forced on the Chinese and it was not socially acceptable to get an abortion until modern times. They did limit children [the Communist] to one per family but taught both abstinence and forms of birth control to limit population growth. Sorry but your words about China cannot withstand the facts.
|
|
| |
|
| Jan 18 @ 1:05 PM |
How do you feel about Pro-Choice vs Pro-Life? |
|
DiamondRain
Posts: 4,865
|
.
[Edited on 1/18/2008 2:57 PM]
|
| |
|
| Jan 18 @ 1:11 PM |
How do you feel about Pro-Choice vs Pro-Life?
|
|
yashaenka
Posts: 4,489
|
It is only the Judeo-Christian world that considers life "sacred" above anything else. Life is not considered particularly sacred, nor has it been, throughout most of China's more-ancient-than-our civilization, which has been around for approximately 5,000 years. I was responding to this and a society cannot be based as a civilization or not because of human rights.
If you did that and applied that rule it would say only in America does civilizational exist because it was the first nation to be based on human rights. Europe did not have any human rights until the last two centuries, right along with other geographical areas.
|
|
| |
|
| Jan 18 @ 1:17 PM |
How do you feel about Pro-Choice vs Pro-Life? |
|
DiamondRain
Posts: 4,865
|
.
[Edited on 1/18/2008 2:55 PM]
|
| |
|
| Jan 18 @ 1:24 PM |
How do you feel about Pro-Choice vs Pro-Life?
|
|
Nightowl001
Posts: 4,087
|
*sigh*. I'm not going to hijack this thread getting into a discussion of ancient civilizations, but read history. Life among the ancient Chinese civilizations may have had elements who adhered to a strict moral code, but sacrosanctity of life wasn't in it. It was quite acceptable for feudal lords to wipe out the entire kingdom of a neighbor simply to increase their holdings. The ancient Greeks and Romans and Egyptians all had highly developed (for the time) civilizations, or social orders and rules of conduct. But that didn't prevent leaving deformed children out in the wilderness to die of exposure rather than being cared for, or having slaves who killed each other for the entertainment of their owners and the masses. The idea that life in and of itself is sacred is a relatively modern philosophy.
Edited to add: Incidentally, probably the oldest organized large-scale religion to give credence to the idea that life itself was Sacred was Hinduism, and sacredness wasn't restricted to human life.
[Edited on 1/18/2008 1:45 PM]
|
|
| |
|
| Jan 18 @ 1:40 PM |
How do you feel about Pro-Choice vs Pro-Life? |
|
Loreli
Posts: 20,161
|
One thing I have wondered...
if a woman knows she never wants kids, why doesn't she take responsibility for the body she wants to be responsible for-hers.
Get tubes tied, etc.
If one doesn't take responsibility for their own body first, they WILL end up pregnant (unless partner has had vasectomy)
Abortion isn't an "after the fact" birth control.
Then again, if 2 people do not care about their responsibilities FIRST when they don't want children, they probably won't be responsible for a child. I wonder what proven statistics there are on adopted child abuse vs natural born abuse.
And if our nation is so abusive to children, as said above, maybe foreign adoption should be outlawed.
|
| |
|
| Jan 18 @ 2:03 PM |
How do you feel about Pro-Choice vs Pro-Life?
|
|
yashaenka
Posts: 4,489
|
|
|
| |
|
| Jan 18 @ 2:16 PM |
How do you feel about Pro-Choice vs Pro-Life? |
|
yashaenka
Posts: 4,489
|
Not to belabor the point Night but Holistic Medicine was introduced into China long before any other country. Your only speaking of the 500 year wars within China back in the 500BC era. The Warlord era ended after that.
It was not the Chinese who had all the wars external to them that killed millions of people that was from Europe and the Middle East that form of genocide was introduced from 500BC onward. Revisionist history is entertaining but not factual. China was invaded two times in their ancient history not counting the Japanese in the modern era. Both of those barbarian invaders became assimulated into their culture and simply vanished as an outside influence.
So go back and study all of the known world of those times before stating things that are not true.
|
| |
|
| Jan 18 @ 2:21 PM |
How do you feel about Pro-Choice vs Pro-Life?
|
|
yashaenka
Posts: 4,489
|
I suppose that depends on how you define human rights.
Well on this thread we define human rights as the right to be born and the right to life. But you cannot base the definition of human rights with an American brush we have only existed for 300 years and been in hundreds of wars in that short time.
|
|
| |
|
| Jan 18 @ 2:39 PM |
How do you feel about Pro-Choice vs Pro-Life? |
|
Nightowl001
Posts: 4,087
|
Yashenko, I agree that I was only speaking of the 500-years-wars. I sent you a private message regarding clarification.
|
| |
|
| Jan 18 @ 3:03 PM |
How do you feel about Pro-Choice vs Pro-Life?
|
|
DiamondRain
Posts: 4,865
|
Well on this thread we define human rights as the right to be born and the right to life. But you cannot base the definition of human rights with an American brush we have only existed for 300 years and been in hundreds of wars in that short time.
I agree with this.
It seems to me that there is a lot of dancing around the central point whenever there is a discussion about abortion.
The central point is whether or not the child in the womb is a separate, innocent life as worthy of the right to not be killed by someone else as any other human being.
I think just about everyone would agree that the child is entitled to these rights if they are a separate person.
The disagreement arises because some people consider the child to be part of the mother and others don't.
Also, if the child IS a separate life, does the child's right to live outweigh the mother's right to not be forced to carry it?
.
===part 2
Suppose you argue that the child is part of the mother because it could not live without the umbilical cord. The child needs this attachment to the mother in order to provide life sustaining blood and nutrition.
So as long as the child is not viable on its own, without that cord, it isn't capable of living a separate life, and therefore is not entitled the same right to live as adults.
What then do you make of people in hospitals who are attached to life sustaining machines?
Since their lives could not be sustained without the cords, do they too lose their right to life?
PS: This part is easily rebutted, but I think it raises some important questions anyway.
.
[Edited on 1/18/2008 3:21 PM]
|
|
| |
|
| Jan 18 @ 3:45 PM |
How do you feel about Pro-Choice vs Pro-Life? |
|
lefthandedluckie
Posts: 5,023
|
A fetus can not live outside the mothers body until many months have passed! Until then it is totally dependant on the female for its life and no one else! If the female wants to abort that fetus she can!
The fetus is not "viable" until "IT" can breath and take nourishment on its own to sustain its life!
|
| |
|
|
|
|