View Single Post
January 19th, 2011, 03:11 PM
KiwiMommy's Avatar
KiwiMommy KiwiMommy is offline
Ashlynn's Mama
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: New England
Posts: 3,863
A valid reason would be the woman's desire to not carry a child to term. Do you think a woman should be forced to carry a child to term? Should she be jailed if she doesn't want to carry it to term?
Technically if she REALLY didn't want to carry the child to term, she'd find a way, but I never said a woman should be FORCED to carry to term. I just stated that I didn't support abortions for that reason.

Yes, all those things make up a person... and more. The issue is when do those things all come together to make a person whose well-being should be taken into account. A brain which is incapable of processing anything probably doesn't need to be taken into account.
Why exactly should a brain incapable of processing anything need to be taken into account? You didn't say why you don't think they should. Or you probably don't think should, is what I should say.

I know of no evidence for the existence of souls. To use "souls" as an argument it needs to be presented as an assertion, not a question.
I know of no evidence, either, but depending on someone's views, they may believe in them, and I felt that their possible existence should be stated in my views. If there was an existence of souls, when exactly would they be there? At birth? Conception?
In what sense does a fertilized egg deserve anything? Take it back a step further. Does an unfertilized egg deserve to be fertilized?
Of course an unfertilized egg deserves to be fertilized! But the point of the matter is that NATURE decides if and when an egg will be fertilized. Who are we to play mother nature and decide if a child should or should not be allowed to have life?

You can't use the terms "child" and "cells" interchangeably. Unnecessarily destroying a person would be wrong, but perhaps destroying some cells would not.
I fully agree with your statement. But I believe that a child is a child the moment of conception, therefore I consider it destroying a child. The "Cells" bit was for those who believe that the child is just a "bundle of cells". Which may be true at conception, but the child quickly becomes something with a heart, body, head, etc. Do cells have a heart? No.
For some women that may be the case, but for others the abortion choice hurts less. Who best to make that decision than the affected woman?
So what you're saying is that only some women feel guilt for taking the life of something that they had created? That only some wish they could carry the child to term and raise it? I know of nobody who doesn't feel any guilt for their choice. They may move on and act like it doesn't bother them, but it still does. They took a life into their own hands and destroyed it.

Reply With Quote