Here I am not talking about the artificial surgical or the newer medical interventions to intentionally abort but is it wrong to harm a foetus in any way? Some background: Known facts - most abnormal development occurs in the first weeks of growth when the organs are forming Many substances will disrupt that formation Most women do not know that they are pregnant for at least 3-4 weeks after the pregnancy has started So, who is most to "Blame" (if blame there be) for harming the foetus Young homeless girl background of abuse now on multiple illegal drugs Type 1 Diabetic on insulin but poorly controlled as she keeps "forgetting" to take her insulin (the worse the control the greater the risk of abnormality) The thirty something young exec who keeps on top of her job by doing weekend coke The twenty something company rep who has company lunches with two glasses of wine each day The young epileptic who has to take Anti-epileptic drugs - knowing that they are detrimental to any baby she might conceive
I am sort of betting that the more ardent pro-lifers are not going to answer on this thread because it has them going to a place they do not wan to go
Like most Americans I think, and especially women I've met. Being pro-choice does not mean that you find abortion a moral activity. Ask just about any woman and they will say they are pro-choice because it's her body, but abortion itself is a terrible act to commit. It's still considered murder by most women, even if they want to have the ability to choose to commit it. Maybe Aussies just don't give a (*)(*)(*)(*), but Americans do which is why we have fetal protection laws. The Constitution says a woman's body is her own to deal with, but at no point does it say society itself has to legitimize her decision and in America, it's not legitimized or approved of, simply tolerated. Maybe in Australia it's not immoral, but I'm not surprised because the entire Eurozone culture seems to have a serious moral depravity when it comes to certain subjects.
If your choice is to abort, it doesn't matter. If your choice is to give birth, you are obligated to give the child the best start in life that you can. It is wrong to deliberately risk damaging your potential child.
Since most have now admitted that a fetus is an actual human being and not a "potential" one, what is the real difference between killing the fetus and killing a newborn?
Daddy can't read to you little girls right now, read the "Abortion is a Homicide" thread for yourselves. http://www.politicalforum.com/abortion/193599-abortion-homicide.html
Morality is an individual choice, and not a single individual woman ever once told me that abortion was moral, simply that it's a choice a woman makes and very hard one, and most feel guilt for the act. Why feel guilty is there is no immorality? Freedom does not equate morality. Because most people in America, no matter what their stance, still believe that fetus is a life and deserves to be protected, as long as the mother wants to carry that child that is. Well thanks for your opinion. Ohio has a fetal protection law. If a drunk driver for instance gets into an accident with a pregnant woman and her fetus dies.. that drunk driver faces negligent vehicular homicide as if that fetus were a full baby. MANY states have them. Same is true if a domestic violence situation results in the death of a fetus, that domestically violent partner(not necessarily a man in this day and age) will face homicide charges as if he had killed a baby. So IYO, something being legal makes it automatically moral? I don't know where you live but that's not the case here in SW Ohio. A woman's right to decide the fate of her own body needs no "law" it's a natural right. [qutoe]Maybe you should look at a map or inform yourself where Australia is before you spew bigotry.[/quote] I know exactly where Australia is and it's distance does not preclude it from being considered part of the Eurozone. I consider Canada a part of the Eurozone, all the Commonwealth nations of the former British Empire are Eurozone countries. By "Eurozone" I mean nations that share cultural, political and lingusitic links to Europe. Certainly Aussies are closer to Europeans than Americans in outlook and view. Do you deny this? Morality is decided by consensus of the mainstream. Currently in America the mainstream is that even if abortion is a legal right granted by the constitution, it is a distasteful act that should only be perfromed under the most dire circumstances is not a decision to be taken lightly. People can scream "appeal to majority" all they want, but abortion is not a logical topic, it's an emotional one and the simple fact is the mainstream America agrees that while a woman's right to her body is inviolate, to abort a fetus is at the least a distasteful act.
The feeling that most women report following abortion is RELIEF. Those very few women who do feel guilt have been listening to right-wingers call women "baby-killers" and "sluts." I am an individual woman and I'm telling you that abortion is a moral act. Depriving someone of freedom does equate immorality, and granting someone freedom is a moral act. Key words: "as long as the mother (pregnant woman) wants to carry that child." . Even pro-choicers agree that fetal homicide laws do not provide any basis for eroding abortion rights. Legality doesn't necessarily correlate with morality, neither does illegality. Unfortunately, some laws have been passed in the past to interfere with women's rights. You're not qualified to proclaim the "mainstream" morality standards of America. In fact, since the American constitution protects individual rights to establish their own moral standards there may not be any such thing. The fact that you find abortion "a distasteful act" doesn't mean American mainstream opinion agrees with you. And I think you will find that women choosing abortion don't really care about "mainstream opinion."
Then everything is moral, because each individual can declare their actions moral. Have they told you that it was immoral? Why do you believe that your anecdotal evidence is also universal or true for all cases. Evidence shows the contrary. Difficulty does not make the difference between morality or the lack of it. I do not know, but explain why guilt translates into immorality. People can feel guilty about any number of things that are not immoral. In and of itself no, but infringement on freedom IS immoral. That is true. And thanks for yours too. OK. Yes... OK, what do all these instances have to do with abortion? It is not as simple as that. Consider this: In Iraq, for the lack of a better example, Saddam made laws that fit his needs with no consideration at all for the people. I am sure we can agree that laws such as those were, if not all, immoral. Now consider laws that congress, the representatives of the people, us in other words, passes laws that WE need and want for OUR benefit. Of course the is no perfect world, but in such a case it is reasonable to conclude that we make laws that are moral. It is my experience, yes now I put forth an anecdotal one, people are people everywhere. They want to live in peace and mind their own business. I go to Ohio quite often, Cleveland, and find the people in their core values much the same as people are in the rest of the country. Actually yes. Been there too for quite a while, loved the place. The Aussies are a breed onto themselves, not that there is anything wrong with that. I could find nothing not to like about them, quite the contrary, but we could differ on that. You said above that it was an individual choice. I do not disagree with that, but that does not make it immoral either. and this too.
At no point did I say they were going to abort - this is not about termination of pregnancy but harm to the foetus In every case cited above there is considerable risk of teratogenisis (foetal harm) What I want people to think about is which of these are acceptable and where the line is
I responded in kind to your posts. Congratulations on projecting all your traits onto me. It is transparent to all who read these posts.
How so? What does your inability to ever address the topic or provide proof for anything you say have to do with my posts? Really? Is that why EVERYONE is asking you to support what you say and is that why you ALWAYS evade or provide idiocy instead?
I only see you frothing at the mouth and asking for what I have already provided. No evidence of "everyone" posting rude insults aimed at me or rabid snarky nonsense, only you!
give it up Whaler .. your lame tactics are getting really old and pretty much consititute trolling at this point. You have no interest in honest debate so perhaps better to find a thread where you can post some credible material.
No frothing at all, just simple request that you back up what you say. The posts are there for everyone to see that EVERY and ANY time you are asked for evidence you deflect, never providing it.
Yet somehow you are never able to show where or what the lie is. This accusation is the one of the typical diversions you use to mask your inability to offer evidence when asked. That is because you are unable to.
