Abortion

Natasha Whittam wrote:

bwfc1874 wrote:Not what I said is it, you need to learn to read. My point is it isn't possible to go to uni and give the child all of their attention

You don't get it do you. Your friends killed their baby because they didn't have the time to devote to it. They weren't thinking about getting a puppy, they had already created a baby.

Decent people would have put their lives on hold to bring up the child THEY created rather than do the easy thing and have an abortion.

No they hadn't created a baby, they had fertilized an egg as I see it. To be honest I think you're just dim, your only argument is 'killers', which is completely out of order, but my guess is your one of those people who loves to throw it about on the internet, to make up for how boring your real life is. Not a chance would you dare be so insensitive and rude if you came across somebody who had an abortion in the real world.

To be honest I don't know who you think you are, it's so arrogant to condemn these people as killers when they have every right; by law, to make their own choice, and you have zero understanding of the situation they were in.

Anyway your against it, I'm not. No point in trying to reason with you any further is there. You stick to trying to be a good catholic, and I'll enjoy not being.

bwfc1874 wrote:

No they hadn't created a baby, they had fertilized an egg as I see it. To be honest I think you're just dim, your only argument is 'killers', which is completely out of order, but my guess is your one of those people who loves to throw it about on the internet, to make up for how boring your real life is. Not a chance would you dare be so insensitive and rude if you came across somebody who had an abortion in the real world.

To be honest I don't know who you think you are, it's so arrogant to condemn these people as killers when they have every right; by law, to make their own choice, and you have zero understanding of the situation they were in.

Anyway your against it, I'm not. No point in trying to reason with you any further is there. You stick to trying to be a good catholic, and I'll enjoy not being.

Strange post, I'm not catholic.

Maybe my language is a bit over the top but I do tire of people trying to justify abortion by saying things like "it wasn't the right time" or "it's better for the child not to be born into this situation".

It may well be legal but it doesn't make it right. Generally abortion is for stupid people who couldn't keep it in their pants, and then didn't have the balls to stick with their responsibility.

Natasha Whittam wrote:
It may well be legal but it doesn't make it right. Generally abortion is for stupid people who couldn't keep it in their pants, and then didn't have the balls to stick with their responsibility.

I think if people use 2 means of contraception in combination, both man and woman, and the man also 'withdraws' it's a bit of a copout to say that. They have taken responsibility for their actions already by taking all those steps to avoid pregnancies. Sometimes in life there are mitigating circumstances, not all unwanted pregnancies are Jeremy Kyle-seque, sometimes people do all they can to avoid it.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

It may well be legal but it doesn't make it right. Generally abortion is for stupid people who couldn't keep it in their pants

I enjoy you use of the word generally. So what about those 'non-general' cases when protection was used but failed?

Also if they are stupid like you say s=then surely they arn't ready to support a child?

It is immoral to force a woman to have a child.

Lofty_Love wrote:

It is immoral to force a woman to have a child.

No, it's immoral to kill an innocent child. If a woman is stupid enough to get herself pregnant she should have the baby - if she wants to give it up for adoption then fine.

We seem to be moving to a culture of not taking responsibility for our actions.

i don't agree with natasha on this subject in general but i do agree abortion has become an easy way out for people too stupid to realise the consequences of their actions.

The bible states that the punishment for taking the LORDS name in vain is stoning.

I think that tells you everything you need to know should you be following it as a source of your moral compass.

not-so-plain-jayne wrote:i don't agree with natasha on this subject in general but i do agree abortion has become an easy way out for people too stupid to realise the consequences of their actions.

Agreed. It's not just for "people who can't keep it in their pants", it's used by women who are too stupid to take the necessary precautions (including the morning after pill).

Hipster_Nebula wrote:The bible states that the punishment for taking the LORDS name in vain is stoning.

I think that tells you everything you need to know should you be following it as a source of your moral compass.

Why are you trying to turn this into a religious argument?

Natasha Whittam wrote:

Hipster_Nebula wrote:The bible states that the punishment for taking the LORDS name in vain is stoning.

I think that tells you everything you need to know should you be following it as a source of your moral compass.

Why are you trying to turn this into a religious argument?

I'm merely pointing out that religion should have no place in the discussion.

Hipster_Nebula wrote:

I'm merely pointing out that religion should have no place in the discussion.

I agree, but some bugger called me a catholic.

Anybody interested in meeting up to stone Hipster?

largehat wrote:

Angry Dad wrote:One of my sisters murdered her unborn child. She is catholic yet she still killed it. I cant work out how women live with themselves knowing they killed their baby. Say mrs x has the baby instead of killing it then at 3 yrs old someone violates it and murders it how would she feel then its the same baby just at a different stage. She would say how could someone do such a terrible thing ,how could they kill my baby. But its ok for her to do it when its at its most vulnerable and dependant on its mother for life, but hey its freedom of choice for her right. Maybe on another day baby i might let you live or not.

Do you not think you sound self-righteous considering you think that people should live out their lives in agony and yet you'd put a dog out if its misery?

And also, you don't need a biology lesson, but a baby doesn't appear in a woman's womb at the point of ejaculation. It isn't a baby for many weeks. So your analogy doesn't work.

LH where did i say i,d let someone suffer or that i,d put a dog out of its misery and where did i say that a baby appears in a womans womb at the point of ejaculation? and no i am not fucking selfrighteous. Tell a woman that becomes pregnant after desperatley trying for years that its not a human thing or her baby but fuck all that can be scraped away like a piece of mould. I can see you want to play the arsehole again and i am more than happy to accommodate you so lets get started. You better start by checking my spelling and punctuation like last time.

Lofty_Love wrote:

Angry Dad wrote:One of my sisters murdered her unborn child. She is catholic yet she still killed it.

Do you hold the belief you have because your Catholic?

Who said i was catholic? I DONT have the right to end a life and neither does any other human being.

No, actually, Angry, you've got it Pete Tong, I just want to discuss a serious topic in a serious way. If I can't do that with you, I'll live. I think describing every abortion as murder and saying nobody has the right to end a life, even if someone they love is suffering, sounds a bit self-righteous and I stand by that view. Have a strop about it if you must.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

Hipster_Nebula wrote:

I'm merely pointing out that religion should have no place in the discussion.

I agree

You called it a sin earlier

Surely each case has to be judged on its merits ? Blanketing all abortions under the ' murder ' umbrella is totally wrong in my opinion. Circumstances alter cases.

It's an emotive topic, people use emotive language I suppose. I don't honestly think comparing an 8 week old aborted foetus to a 2 year old baby is particularly reasonable but people draw the line in different places.

Amos mentioned cellular activity constituting life, Angry Dad (I think) believes a new foetus is a baby too.

I guess I would draw the line somewhere such as the time a baby has a consciousness or feels pain. I did a quick Google search and apparently they feel pain at 20 weeks onwards. It's a difficult one and everyone has their own view on when the cut off should be and what circumstances, if any, are acceptable.