Abortion, Legal or Illiegal, poll and debate? Options

[Slayer of Cliffracers]

This is my position........

Abortion, unless done purely for the purposes of offsetting an imediate threat to the mother's life (choice 2) is murder by definition. Murder is the deliberate and pre-meditated killing of another human that is not done in self-defense. Upon what definition does a human fetus not constitute a human. It is the form taken by a human life at a certain stage of it's growth and development, it is not any other species therefore it is a human life. To draw an arbitery line in the sand at a certain point of the growth and development of a human life is ridiculous.

Sure the embryo at very early stages of it's development isn't conscious, but so what? Are we to excuse everyone who kills his victims say when in deep sleep, or while knocked out, on the basic that since they aren't presently conscious, they aren't officially human. The position of the embryo is exactly the same as the sleeping person, though they aren't conscious at present they will become so at a later point as their development reaches whatever mysterious point that they need to get too to become conscious. The fetus is thus 100% alive and 100% human and the process of abortion makes it 100% dead and 100% human, hence abortion is murder.

What about the other pro-abortion argument that the embryo/fetus constitutes a part of the woman's body. This doesn't make sense either. The embryo/fetus has a seperate genetic code (unless it's a clone) from it's mother and though it is totally dependant on it's mother for everything still constitutes a seperate entity inside the mothers body. If the fetus is considered part of the mother, that would mean that she can logically claim to be a bacterium, a virus, an intestinal worm or an ameoba, as all of these could also be inside her, along with millions of other parisites.

So abortion is murder.

[Konji]

Having an abortion may ruin one life, but keeping it might ruin two.

[Slayer of Cliffracers]

Having an abortion may ruin one life, but keeping it might ruin two.

Wrong, an abortion ends one life, but keeping it (might) ruin two. Which is worse, murder or the possibility of a less than entirely rosy life.

Seriously though, I fail to grasp Doomed One's logic on the murder thing or on the "illiegal abortions thing either". What you're basicly saying is that just beacause some murderers get their heads smashed in by their victims in the process of murdering them, we should legalise murder. This is the logic of what is bieng said. The argument goes like this.........

Why have risky dangerous illegal murders with the attendant risks to the murderers life when we can make murder legal and have NHS squads drug the victims, drag them into ambulences, take them to the NHS "life wards" where there lives can be ended in an orginised and disciplined manner which minimises the risk to the murderers life, rather than having risky and dangeus illiegal murders that pose a threat to the murderers life.

Remember, we're not talking thousands, we're talking millions of lives here, a mass murder comparable to what Hitler, Stalin and Mao did. Even if a few hundred girls every year die each year from the consequences of their actions, then we're talking a comparitively small number. And morally they are choosing to break the law of their own free will, laws put in place to keep people from having abortions, so it's hardly as though they are innocents is it? They may be motivated by strong feelings to kill their own unborn children, but so are many murderers motivated by strong feelings to kill their (already born) victims.

This post has been edited by Slayer of Cliffracers: Aug 3 2005, 11:29 AM

[Sinder Velvin]

What you're basicly saying is that just beacause some murderers get their heads smashed in by their victims in the process of murdering them, we should legalise murder.  This is the logic of what is bieng said.

That is not what he is saying. Please do not twist his words.