Iostream

Just because abortion is murder doesn't necessarily mean that it is unjustified all the time. Sometimes plain old murder is justifiable, and it is the same with abortion. The following is an example of when manslaughter is justifiable:

A woman gets kidnapped. She knows her captors plan on murdering her. While they are sleeping she notices a gun within her reach. Grabbing this gun and killing her captors, and then escaping would be completely justified because her other option is to stay there and die. Now here is the parallel situation for abortion:

A teenage girl gets raped and having the baby would kill her tiny little body, unable to bear a child yet. She chooses to kill her captor (unfortunately, the baby does in some cases take the role of the captor, even unwillingly). Her other option is to stay there and die. Just like the previous example.

Here is another example of justifiable manslaughter:

A girl is abused by her step father as a child, and she becomes very disfuncitional. He is basically ruining her life. She knows it will only get worse as she becomes a young woman. So she kills him. Here is the parallel situation for abortion:

A woman gets raped and empregnated. She knows it's going to ruin her life. She is a college student and if she has the baby she will have to quit school to take care of the baby. Instead of allowing this to happen, she aborts the child.

Now, here is an example of UNjustifiable manslaughter:

A woman kills a man for "getting her addicted to heroine". He introduced her to the drug, so she kills him, blaming him for her addiction. Even though it's completely her fault she's addicted for willingly injecting the drug the first time. Here's the parallel situation for abortion:

A woman aborts a child she knows will ruin her life, even though it's completely her fault for having the child because she willingly had sex and created it

Here's another example of UNjustifiable manslaughter:

A person kills a random person because the victim happened to be in the other person's way, and it was simply more convenient to murder him than to say "excuse me" or go around him. Here's the parallel situation for abortion:

A prostiture has sex with random strangers who pay money. She gets pregnant often and just aborts the baby because it is much more convenient than having the baby and taking care of it.


Basically, abortion and manslaughter are the same things, but that doesn't necessarily mean they are both wrong all the time. Sometimes, manslaughter is necessary, and it is the same thing with abortion. However, sometimes manslaugther is completely unnecessary and uncalled for and it is the same thing with abortion. Abortion is murder but murder can be a positive thing. So all the pro-life people who say abortion is murder are correct. But then those people get torn a new asshole when they realize that just because their statement "abortion is murder" is correct, it doesn't necessarily imply that, "murder is wrong and an abomination, in every occurance". No. What about wars? People get trained to kill every day in the military by the same government that makes it illegal to commit murder. Why is that? Because murder is wrong sometimes and right sometimes.

But WHEN is murder okay? When the person that is getting murdered is holding the murderer against his/her will. When the person getting murdered infringes upon the murderer's free will, that makes it okay for the murderer to commit the murder.

And when is abortion okay? When the baby is created against the mother's will. When the mother was raped and the baby created unwillingly, she may remove it.

I would call myself pro-life. But not pro-life as in "all babies created should live". More like pro-life in a sense that "all babies willingly created by their mother's should live" and "all mothers with unwillingly created babies should not have to ruin their own lives, they should also have the chance to live even if that means aborting the baby". I guess it would be called pro-life mothers included.

__________________
How can people understand all the secrets of the universe if they can't even understand each other?

coogabooga

That's debatable. According to some state laws it isn't murder and is rightfully legal. To some, abortion is not murder.

Now I understand what you mean by justifiable/unjustifiable manslaughter/murder, but how, in the court of law, can this be proven since there are so many extenuating circumstances? I feel that your way just makes law that much more confusing and can lead to more unfair outcomes.

__________________
Coogabooga

The Silent Force

Without quoting your entire post, there is a huge difference between the termination of a non sentient, dependant being, and a living, breathing, independant person.

Manslaughter is justifiable in some instances, as is murder. Abortion is always justifiable, because it is legal.

__________________
It's So Easy To Destroy And Condemn
The Ones You Do Not Understand
Do You Ever Wonder If It's Justified?

Iostream

Wait, the fact that it's legal automatically makes it justifiable? No. Just because something is allowed by a government doesn't make it justifiable. Hitler's genocide, at the time that it occurred, was perfectly legal in his country, because he owned and he was the government. Legality does not imply justifiability.

Now, on to the next topic. Just because a zygote is a non-sentient, dependent being, doesn't mean it's not going to eventually become a living, breathing, independent person.

Anyway, if my hybrid pro-life-choice abortion stance offended anyone I am sorry. I was just trying to come up with a way that more people could live, without taking away the woman's rights, because being alive, and able to breathe, thrive, and make choices, is the greatest gift.

I have failed at devising a plausible solution that is good for the zygote and the mother. Perhaps scientific research will eventually lead to the invention of an artificial womb. Instead of aborting fetuses, they could be "transported". Well, I don't know. My hybrid stance failed. It won't be successful until a significant majority can accept is as reasonable stance, when pro-life and pro-choice people can accept it as their compromise. I need to perfect it.

__________________
How can people understand all the secrets of the universe if they can't even understand each other?

Shiva_TD

A fetus in the womb is not a human being but merely a potential human being and could be equated to a seed and the fruit that could eventually be the result of that seed. They are neither the same nor equal. This concept that the "seed" equals the "fruit" is an extremely misguided ideal that fails from any logical examination.

What a woman does with her own body is her business and nobody elses. From a medical or scientific standpoin an abortion is no different than surgically removing a cancer. It is the removal of unwanted cells and nothing more.

scotsgait

Thankfully, some of us view it from a moral standpoint.

__________________
Scotsgait has got a new look. Gaun an hae a neb at it !

Darkseid

Watch your words here boys, women don't want to give up their right to do whatever they wish. Even though it is just a self-proclaimed right, not decreed by anyone of superior authority to legitimize it.

It is pointless to argue about it. Women want to kill children or whoever they wish, giving up this power makes them feel weak and vulnerable.

Hey Silent Force, how much of a turn is it to you when a child screams his or her last breath?

Honestly, I'm repulsed by the whole idea, but what repulses me more is that women get turned on by the whole idea. Oh and there are women turned on by the whole idea. There is a whole forum and site on the internet dedicated to this whole thing that women go to. Fictional it sounds, but as real as we landing on the moon it is.

Oh yeah and here is something else, if you make any decision that would allow abortion for its only legitimate cases, then surely one feminist here will certainly make a case that we should just castrate men. Obviously, it is just man's fault that women have children at all, even if a man is raped in his sleep like that one fictional tale of Hercules where Hercules gets raped in his sleep by the woman who ends up marrying and she bears him a son. Even though he ended up with that very same woman, the same case isn't always the same when it comes to rape cases of women impregnating themselves as they do in Africa and certain Latin and Sinic communities.

One honest truth from this is: Women want power, keep their power, hold no responsibility for what they do with that power, and will fight to the death to keep that power even on an online forum such as this. And no one will want to stop them.

Come 2012, things will be different, because there are people that don't approve of what they do, have the power to stop them, and will stop them showwing just how much of a self-defeatable argument it is to say "Oh we can kill our babies and there is nothing you can do about it." Keep saying that until 2012 and will see who is still saying that.

Hey can anyone tell me where I can make a bet about that remark? Because I bet I can get some money off it.

Wrong analogy. Fruit is not a plant, it is part of a plant. To say that a seed becomes a fruit, is to say that a child become a womb or a brain or a foot even.

Also, it is wrong to say that a fetus isn't a human. A human fetus is a human, because it is a human fetus. It is the fetus of a human, what doesn't make a human? What you are talking about is a fully matured human, but even a baby or a child of eight years isn't a fully grown human being. Should such also be abortioned? Maybe we should have things like they were during the Roman times when the father could just kill off all of his offspring if he chooses, except lets give that right to women and just have all the men castrated thus giving the right to murder to women and bringing humanity into extinction, because there is no penis juice to fertilize any eggs to insure further population.

"Fetuses are food, we must eat them all!" As repulsive as it sounds, there actually is such a thing on the internet.

Again fruit and seed is the wrong analogy. Also some plants which make seeds don't become plants that have fruit nor make fruit nor are fruit.

Yes even if there is nothing stating that we have any right to whatever we do to ourselves, we should just do so, because obviously your argument inrefutable.

Except when you have cancer, you don't have a living being inside you that you are nursing and making into a living being. No I say, neglect female responsibility (the responsibility to mother a child) and kill the damn thing. Curse being given such gift of maturity and responsibility. Nay I say to that, right?

Maybe god or nature should have given men the right to give birth to children, like a seahorse, at least we won't aborted it nor probably have any children knowwing we'll have to carry the damn thing for nine months. After all, it is just mostly men that have be arguing for fetuses to exist rather than be terminated, because women rather have men castrated than hold any personal responsibility. Women hold any responsibility to anything, that's a laugh. More reason against women's rights it all point out to. Can't be responsible, then why have any rights? Isn't the point to having a right to something is because you'll be responsible with it not for some sort of irrefutable reason that cannot even be reasoned into why it is a reason?

I just proven that you can degrade women just by saying that they should be allowed to abort their own offspring. Because when you are allowed to kill someone or should I say "something," then what does that say about being a parent? If you could just kill your children nilly-willy, then you are no different than those fish, birds, and lizards that eat their own children after they are hatched. Then what message is that saying about us being any different than animals?

You know what? Instead of just allowing one specific gender the right to terminate this entire species, maybe we should focus on how to mature away from this childish viewpoint of irresponsibility?

Well there is one good thing that does happen given the

Who here wants to be responsible and not be equated as a child?

Here is something to think about, sky surrounds the earth much like a woman's womb surrounds a child does that make the earth a part of the sky just as you claim a child is a part of a woman rather than a seperate entity that could be born outside of its parent like some have?

I'd say based on scientific research that since children do not have to be born in their mother's womb that fetuses are not dependable and that women have no right to say that they are just taking care of their own body just by terminating an innocent fetus that is not at all endangering its "host." Fetuses need to be taken into account in the same manner as two people be taken into account as a seperate entity though they share the same qualities as either individual prior to fusing together. As for what women should do with them? Obviously moral guidance is the key to this issue.

I know quite well a woman or feminist supporting man is going to try and irritate me with laughter and cheap insults, but it does make a good case to further prove my own viewpoint about what I'm talking about. All responses will just prove my point, unless they hold true merit to them, which will probably be those that ignore, congratulate, or reason my own. I'd like to see more of those after this comment, but I doubt it knowwing my experience of refuting feminazism and the implications it has

Drace290

Sorry for making a new account, I just need to finish what I'd started and ended hopefully. Sorry for attacking women's right activists. But my intention was just to attack those that have attacked me so many times needlessly, endlessly, and inrefutably.

It is justifiable.

The Silent Force

If a child 'screamed' his or her last breath, that child would have been born, and killing it would obviously be murder.
Unless you are one of these weirdo pro - lifers who believes PBA are done everyday, and that the fetus is actually flailing it's arms and legs while the abortion is performed.

We have forums for abortion because women like having support.
Ever notice that there are more pro - choice forums out there than pro - life forums? Does that tell you something, buddy?

Why not. Pro - lifers such as yourself deserve to be castrated for holding such out of date and archiac opinions.

And men like yourself want to conrol womens bodies, isn't that right? So basically you are saying that only men have the right to make decisions when it comes to a woman and her body?

No, just a cluster of cells.

A fetus is not a living being. How many times does that have to be explained to you?

Like men would give birth? Hahahaha. Sure they would.
Men have right to argue against abortion - men are not the ones who have to carry a fetus for nine months, they are not the ones who have to suffer through pregnancy, they are not the ones who have to labour in agony for hours on end.
Sure, men should have babies. I'd like to see it.

__________________
It's So Easy To Destroy And Condemn
The Ones You Do Not Understand
Do You Ever Wonder If It's Justified?

Shiva_TD

Just because some people have an opinion about morality does not make it so. An opinion is an opinion and not a fact. I have no moral issues related to what a woman does with her own body. Typically a fetus cannot live outside of the womb and as such does not constitute a human being entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Roe v Wade took this into consideration. The woman has sovereign rights over her body. As a fetus matures it gains the rights of a person. By the third trimester the fetus approaches the point where it can live independently from the mother and it gains rights. Roe v Wade balanced the rights of the fetus with the rights of the woman and is perhaps reflects the most wisdom ever displayed by the Supreme Court.