why abortion is good.

[Simon Cowell of the RR]

You don't understand Christianity, clearly. Using the Christian argument, the child has a soul and is made in God's image and likeness, and therefore has human value. That's the Christian view, and that's why Christianity is pro-life. However, no secular person accepts this, so we've been avoiding using it for the most part and quite honestly, i don't expect many who read this to accept it. So the pro-life side will have to use other arguments.

Except Christianity holds no such belief. For one, Christianity is atheistic, so the idea of "God's image and likeness" is absolutely alien to Christianity.

[Four-sided Triangles]

I see three unalienable rights. One of them is life. None of them are not sex without consequences, and none are the ability to murder your child because you "control your body". In fact, the control of one's body is not even mentioned, so I do not see where your logic comes from.

Now, I do see where it says that I can destroy the US government if it infringes upon my rights, but since the US government as already thrown that one out, I'd say that Jefferson's "unalienable rights" are as alienable than any.

If you don't have control over your own body, then you have no liberty.

Also, no child is being killed. What is being killed is a fetus. Fetuses are not self-aware. They are not able to value their own existence. They are not people. There is no reasonable metaphysics under which they could possibly be seen as people.

[Mavorpen]

You're missing the point. A fetus is not a human. If it is unwanted and unintentional, they have the right to do whatever they want with their body. You're trying to take away rights they would have naturally in the world. These natural rights are also UNALIENABLE rights, meaning they cannot be taken away.

[quote=Thomas Jefferson, the Declaration of Independence]We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

I see three unalienable rights. One of them is life. None of them are not sex without consequences, and none are the ability to murder your child because you "control your body". In fact, the control of one's body is not even mentioned, so I do not see where your logic comes from.

Now, I do see where it says that I can destroy the US government if it infringes upon my rights, but since the US government as already thrown that one out, I'd say that Jefferson's "unalienable rights" are as alienable than any.

Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness are the three unalienable rights. A fetus can challenge two of those. It can take the life away from the mother as well as happiness. Making abortion illegal takes away Liberty. Period. Perhaps if you actually opened your mind, you would see this easy to understand logic without need of explanation.

[Simon Cowell of the RR]

Yes, people have the right to life, once they have it.
Fetusi are not people, they are fetusi.
They are also not alive, by the biological definition.
The problem with these abortion threads is that we just go in circles, with new anti-abortion people every time, presenting the same ignorant and obsolete arguments.

[Libete]

That right there my friend, what you just said in 3 sentences could very well have not been toped by my pastor in a sermon.

But it's not relevant! Abortion is justifiable because an unwanted unborn fetus is no more than a parasite, and since the mother has total control over her own body she's entitled to expel it just like she's entitled to expel any other parasite. If you were a Christian, you'd know this.

Please do tell the difference between an unwanted baby and a wanted one? What makes a wanted baby different than an unwanted baby, or parasite, as you called it? Just the mother's attitude toward it? if that's the case, then you're argument's moot because I know multiple families who would LOVE to adopt these unwanted "parasites". And what about the baby's rights to its own body? Its right to live? And I have no idea how you can think that, in order to be a Christian, you have to be pro-choice.

[Farnhamia]

But it's not relevant! Abortion is justifiable because an unwanted unborn fetus is no more than a parasite, and since the mother has total control over her own body she's entitled to expel it just like she's entitled to expel any other parasite. If you were a Christian, you'd know this.

Please do tell the difference between an unwanted baby and a wanted one? What makes a wanted baby different than an unwanted baby, or parasite, as you called it? Just the mother's attitude toward it? if that's the case, then you're argument's moot because I know multiple families who would LOVE to adopt these unwanted "parasites". And what about the baby's rights to its own body? Its right to live? And I have no idea how you can think that, in order to be a Christian, you have to be pro-choice.

It's not a "baby." You know that as well as we do. And why should a woman have to go through nine months of pregnancy just to satisfy your morality? It's none of your business what I do with my reproductive system.

[Ninjopolis]

I see three unalienable rights. One of them is life. None of them are not sex without consequences, and none are the ability to murder your child because you "control your body". In fact, the control of one's body is not even mentioned, so I do not see where your logic comes from.

Now, I do see where it says that I can destroy the US government if it infringes upon my rights, but since the US government as already thrown that one out, I'd say that Jefferson's "unalienable rights" are as alienable than any.

Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness are the three unalienable rights. A fetus can challenge two of those. It can take the life away from the mother as well as happiness. Making abortion illegal takes away Liberty. Period. Perhaps if you actually opened your mind, you would see this easy to understand logic without need of explanation.

Except if you take away the life of the baby, you're violating its right to life.

[Norstal]

Please do tell the difference between an unwanted baby and a wanted one? What makes a wanted baby different than an unwanted baby, or parasite, as you called it? Just the mother's attitude toward it? if that's the case, then you're argument's moot because I know multiple families who would LOVE to adopt these unwanted "parasites". And what about the baby's rights to its own body? Its right to live? And I have no idea how you can think that, in order to be a Christian, you have to be pro-choice.

It's not a "baby." You know that as well as we do. And why should a woman have to go through nine months of pregnancy just to satisfy your morality? It's none of your business what I do with my reproductive system.

You might be a Goddess Farn, but the anti-abortion police have total control over women's bodies.

Or so I've been told.

[Norstal]

Except if you take away the life of the baby, you're violating its right to life.

Who gave them its rights?

[Utoza (Ancient)]

If Abortion is murder, then birth control is genocide.

[Ninjopolis]

Please do tell the difference between an unwanted baby and a wanted one? What makes a wanted baby different than an unwanted baby, or parasite, as you called it? Just the mother's attitude toward it? if that's the case, then you're argument's moot because I know multiple families who would LOVE to adopt these unwanted "parasites". And what about the baby's rights to its own body? Its right to live? And I have no idea how you can think that, in order to be a Christian, you have to be pro-choice.

It's not a "baby." You know that as well as we do. And why should a woman have to go through nine months of pregnancy just to satisfy your morality? It's none of your business what I do with my reproductive system.

It is a baby. That's the point- the being in the uterus is a human, and therefore there's no reason to kill it. It's not your reproductive system- it's another person's life.

[Libete]

Please do tell the difference between an unwanted baby and a wanted one? What makes a wanted baby different than an unwanted baby, or parasite, as you called it? Just the mother's attitude toward it? if that's the case, then you're argument's moot because I know multiple families who would LOVE to adopt these unwanted "parasites". And what about the baby's rights to its own body? Its right to live? And I have no idea how you can think that, in order to be a Christian, you have to be pro-choice.

It's not a "baby." You know that as well as we do. And why should a woman have to go through nine months of pregnancy just to satisfy your morality? It's none of your business what I do with my reproductive system.

So does it just magically become a baby when it's out of the mother?
And as far as your reproduction system goes, there's a simply solution to killing FETUSES, babies, whatever.: Use protection. *gasp* what an amazing idea!
Why should a FETUS be killed just because the couple were too lazy to use protection?

[Ninjopolis]

Except if you take away the life of the baby, you're violating its right to life.

Who gave them its rights?

As a person, it has rights just like you and me. The problem is that now its rights aren't being protected like they should be.

[Libete]

It's not a "baby." You know that as well as we do. And why should a woman have to go through nine months of pregnancy just to satisfy your morality? It's none of your business what I do with my reproductive system.

It is a baby. That's the point- the being in the uterus is a human, and therefore there's no reason to kill it. It's not your reproductive system- it's another person's life.

Forget what I said. I like this better. ^

[Norstal]

It is a baby. That's the point- the being in the uterus is a human, and therefore there's no reason to kill it. It's not your reproductive system- it's another person's life.

1. It's not a person.
2. There are reasons to kill it. See ectopic pregnancy.

[Norstal]

It's not a "baby." You know that as well as we do. And why should a woman have to go through nine months of pregnancy just to satisfy your morality? It's none of your business what I do with my reproductive system.

So does it just magically become a baby when it's out of the mother?
And as far as your reproduction system goes, there's a simply solution to killing FETUSES, babies, whatever.: Use protection. *gasp* what an amazing idea!
Why should a FETUS be killed just because the couple were too lazy to use protection?

So a fetus just magically has the right to live?

[Desperate Measures]

But it's not relevant! Abortion is justifiable because an unwanted unborn fetus is no more than a parasite, and since the mother has total control over her own body she's entitled to expel it just like she's entitled to expel any other parasite. If you were a Christian, you'd know this.

Please do tell the difference between an unwanted baby and a wanted one? What makes a wanted baby different than an unwanted baby, or parasite, as you called it? Just the mother's attitude toward it? if that's the case, then you're argument's moot because I know multiple families who would LOVE to adopt these unwanted "parasites". And what about the baby's rights to its own body? Its right to live? And I have no idea how you can think that, in order to be a Christian, you have to be pro-choice.

I've got 114,000+ in the United States (2009) alone. Tell your friends to get crackin'.
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/stat ... ng2009.pdf

[Norstal]

As a person, it has rights just like you and me. The problem is that now its rights aren't being protected like they should be.

Who gave them personhood?

[Ninjopolis]

It is a baby. That's the point- the being in the uterus is a human, and therefore there's no reason to kill it. It's not your reproductive system- it's another person's life.

1. It's not a person.
2. There are reasons to kill it. See ectopic pregnancy.

1. It's a homo sapiens, so it is a human being. If any other human being has rights, so should an unborn child.
2. There's no reason to kill it. There are perfectly viable options to abortion that should be used as substitutes to allow the child to live.

[Libete]

So does it just magically become a baby when it's out of the mother?
And as far as your reproduction system goes, there's a simply solution to killing FETUSES, babies, whatever.: Use protection. *gasp* what an amazing idea!
Why should a FETUS be killed just because the couple were too lazy to use protection?

So a fetus just magically has the right to live?

That's like saying a human magically has a right to live. OBVIOUSLY they do.

[Norstal]

So a fetus just magically has the right to live?

That's like saying a human magically has a right to live. OBVIOUSLY they do.

Who gave them those rights?

[Ninjopolis]

So a fetus just magically has the right to live?

That's like saying a human magically has a right to live. OBVIOUSLY they do.

Well, he IS sort of right....

It's not magic.

[Libete]

Please do tell the difference between an unwanted baby and a wanted one? What makes a wanted baby different than an unwanted baby, or parasite, as you called it? Just the mother's attitude toward it? if that's the case, then you're argument's moot because I know multiple families who would LOVE to adopt these unwanted "parasites". And what about the baby's rights to its own body? Its right to live? And I have no idea how you can think that, in order to be a Christian, you have to be pro-choice.

I've got 114,000+ in the United States (2009) alone. Tell your friends to get crackin'.
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/stat ... ng2009.pdf

Fix the Child protective Services. Make it easier for good parents to adopt. Then we wouldn't have so many kids up for adoption. And that still doesn't make killing them right.

[Norstal]

1. It's not a person.
2. There are reasons to kill it. See ectopic pregnancy.

1. It's a homo sapiens, so it is a human being. If any other human being has rights, so should an unborn child.

The genus of a species does not provide personhood to a mass of cells. This is why we separate politics and biology. Try again.

2. There's no reason to kill it. There are perfectly viable options to abortion that should be used as substitutes to allow the child to live.

Ectopic pregnancy can potentially kill the mother and child.

So congrats. You now have a dead baby and mother!

[Four-sided Triangles]

1. It's a homo sapiens, so it is a human being. If any other human being has rights, so should an unborn child.
2. There's no reason to kill it. There are perfectly viable options to abortion that should be used as substitutes to allow the child to live.

1. It's a homo sapiens, therefore it's a person? No, that's speciest and just plain metaphysically unfounded. It is not self-aware. It is not capable of valuing its own existence. It does not get rights. Rights only belong to beings with enough cognitive capacity for those rights to make sense.

2. You don't know what an ectopic pregnancy is, do you? The pregnancy is guaranteed to fail and result in a dead fetus. Without an abortion, an ectopic pregnancy will also kill the mother.