Abortion Is A Nice Way Of Saying Destruction.

» Home » Society

Even if you don't care about the fetus or child-to-be (if all goes well).

Stranger

07 Oct 2008 18:11

(What's this?)

Add to Firefox

RSS

The same way that "prochoice" is a nice way for saying "prodeath"

created

14 Dec 2008 02:12

1 Comment

Exactly. One would have to be a blithering idiot to say either.

justsumguy

21 Dec 2008 19:27

Comment

I don't agree with abortion, but I can at least understand wanting to get it done if you're like, a rape victim, or if it's incest. Or if you already know the baby is going to be totally screwed up and you think it would be happier dead than alive.

chaotickat

10 Oct 2008 00:08

1 Comment

Very simple. I think almost everyone would agree that a product of your examples of rape and incest should not be allowed to be killed if he or she is 2 years old. It has nothing to do with rape and incest.

The "screwed up" and "happier dead than alive" at 2 years of age is a euthanasia debate. Totally different.

The abortion of a fetus is debatable on one aspect...whether or not it is a person...as compared to a 2 year old.

justsumguy

10 Oct 2008 00:21

Comment

I am against abortion, and yet it is the choice of the mother. Having a baby is a big deal and some can't handle it. If it be teen pregnancy, financial problems, health risks, or anything else. It's killing a child and yet it is seen to be okay in our community. Sometimes it would be better for the baby to not live in a horrible mess of a life, but that doesn't mean the baby has no right to live. But I think it's really wrong when a mother just decides to get an abortion because it would distract or mess up the schedule in her life.

mm2real

07 Oct 2008 23:42

11 Comments

It's killing a child to you. It's not killing a child to other people. The rest has nothing to do with it.

justsumguy

09 Oct 2008 23:33

Comment

No! Killing something is killing something. Killing can be good or bad. Murder is killing another human being (we are talking law here).

In other words, what you're saying is, "it's ending the chance that a possible human being might be born". No, it does not a create a human child. A human child developes.

It may have been a human child. It may have not.

Most women could have many more children than they do. Everytime they skip a possible pregnancy cycle they are "killing" the chance of a possible human child being born. Think of the millions of human children who have not been born because of this.

I'm sorry, but the argument is silly. I understand you're wanting to stop the possibility of children being killed. Do what you can to help prevent this possibility. There's certainly things you can do through education and social programs to help.

Accusing people of murder and trying to eliminate peoples choices regarding their life based on the possibility that they maybe doing something wrong is a horrible thing to do.

Comment

I am not accusing someone of murder, I'm not saying that It's horrible for a person to get an abortion. What I'm saying is that when a male and female have sex, the male transports sperm into the womans egg, right? Which then new cells are born from those and they divide into more and more cells, which create arms, legs, lungs, a head, and a baby. What else do you think is going to pop out? The cookie monster?? It's a "human baby" lol

And by getting an abortion it is ending that life form or the life of that baby. To say it in another way , you are "killing" the chance of a baby being born.

And like i said at the top, "  	I am against abortion, and yet it is the choice of the mother. Having a baby is a big deal and some can't handle it. If it be teen pregnancy, financial problems, health risks, or anything else."

I can see why people get abortions and I have nothing against them. It's just that I think it is wrong to end a life of a human child.

So I never accused anyone of murder, all I said, was that abortion was  killing a baby. and I'm not saying it's a bad or good thing, because I can see both sides of the story. It's just a little over the top with the methods they use.

Comment

Abortion is a fancy dressed up way of making MURDER sound like a scientifically medically acceptable so-called "Procedure".

Children are a gift from God Almighty.
Those who do not respect children are a profanity in the face of the God who created them; and us all.

Those who will not defend the innocents have no b@lls at all.

Scorpion

07 Oct 2008 19:18

10 Comments

Would Jesus say "b@lls" or something improper?

Stranger

08 Oct 2008 01:27

Comment

Because s-t-e-p-h voted on the wrong side, I just want to vote in my own debate to even things a little.

Stranger

07 Oct 2008 19:01

Add a Comment

And just to throw my hat in and tip the scales possibly...

Abortion should not be related to destruction for the simple fact that using the word destruction to relate to abortion is a fear tactic; are you using fear to control the judgment of others? That is a slippery slope...

Damien

10 Oct 2008 18:03

7 Comments

A fear tactic, you say. I didn't even think about that. I can't control others' judgement, nor do I try. You vote that abortion isn't destruction, it seems. You fail to even attempt to say how.

Stranger

10 Oct 2008 19:15

Comment

The problem is your question is hiding an underlying fact; it is up to the perception of the person reading this question to define if abortion really means destruction but what if I admit that abortion is a nice way of saying destruction? That only means that our definition of the word is the same; it does not mean that abortion is right or wrong. If I were to admit that abortion is a nice way of saying destruction, it would be in the sense that the shell of the conscious is being destroyed; there was no life to destroy. If an abortion takes place and that fetus has gained some sort of consciousness, then it really doesn't matter what you call it because you've killed a living thing.

What it comes right down to is that you're simply trying to attach a stronger sense of emotion to abortion by calling it destruction. Instead of destruction, why don't you call it killing? Aren't you technically killing that shell that the human conscious was going to exist in? Why use the word destruction? Isn't using the word destruction simply for dramatic effect to get your point across?

Comment

If the fetus is not yet considered a sentient being, then it wouldn't be considered human correct? If the fetus is merely a shell, awaiting for the consciousness to exist, then would it really be considered human? When people kill animals, is that considered murder as well?

My issue with this whole debate is that the original question isn't even asking if abortion is right or wrong; it is merely stating that abortion can be related to or is destruction. So what if I agree that abortion is murder or destruction? What then? Is the destruction of a fetus that does not have a conscious really murder? Why don't we say the fetus is terminated because murder would be hard to push and destruction is similar to obliteration or demolition which is (in a more popular sense) applied to inanimate objects rather than living cells.

But again, arguing whether or not abortion can be called destruction is just a cover for the real issue, which is already paraded across this web site: is abortion right or wrong?

Comment

Abortion is saying the act of aborting.

It is a nice way of saying destruction according to Stranger.

As with most words, abort is used in different ways. Few dictionaries link it to the word destruction. The mission was destructed. The volcanic eruption caused the abortion of Pompeii.

Nah...I'm going with destruction saying destruction and abortion saying abortion.

justsumguy

09 Oct 2008 23:31

12 Comments

Is a fetus a group of cells? CELLS ARE ALIVE. to "abort" the group of cells is to destroy the life. Obviously, I'm not saying we should avoid killing any living cell. I mean the group of cells that are in the process of becoming one of us.

Stranger

09 Oct 2008 23:52

Comment

Ok Stranger. Let's play. You asked for it...

I'll go with a full bag...

If humans exist only to live and die I could care less about abortion. I believe we are eternal so I'll address the issue.

If God wants someone to exist, they will exist. There is nothing you, the pope, Billy Graham, the Anti-Christ, an alien, a terrorist, or anything in this universe...including Satan can do about it.

If you were to be born, and your living cells were aborted as a fetus, you would be born from a batch of other living cells.

Better yet, you may have been destined for eternal seperation from God. There are many pro-lifers who believe in Hell and that most people who live will go to Hell. They also believe babies who die go to Heaven.

So maybe we should abort all babies. Then we assure everyone goes to Heaven.

These are absurd arguments but they are no more absurd than yours. You don't know when God introduced me into being. You have no right to accuse anyone of near murder unless you have evidence. Accusing people of murder is not an intellectual game. It's not a play on words. It's not something that should be done based on beliefs.

You don't want to have an abortion? Don't have one. There is nobody pushing for legislation that would force you or your family and friends to have an abortion.

And remember...saying I was me when I was a fetus way out of your realm of knowledge. At least you're not saying it was when the sperm fertilized the egg....that's way beyond your pay scale.

Comment

The exact point when one's personhood begins, I do not know.  I suppose it's when the sperm and egg unite. But that's just the physical aspect of a person, so I'm not set.
"It's not something that should be done based on beliefs." Everything is done based on beliefs. What you mean is "without evidence." But there is evidence that a fetus is alive and would be a completely developed person if it was not destroyed (and if circumstances permit).

I have the right to say it's like murder since there is evidence to support my claim.
Do you have the right to sentence countless incomplete persons to destruction because you do not want to acknowledge their personhood, small as it is?

Legislation against abortion is for the life of the unborn. That's noble. That's justified (though I'm not for all such legislation since there are big problems with some).

I was once a sperm and egg together. The sperm or egg by themselves would not become me. Only together is there an iota of personhood. But it was the physical me in the smallest way. It was my vessel starting out. Sure, the physical is not all there is to a p