Pro Choice or Pro Life

[SRhyse]

Originally Posted by TheViolletteHeart

Well, if the parents were married (or if they were one of those couples who agree to be together forever but don't think they have to prove their love by getting married), then heck yes the man should have some say.

However, if it was say...two teenagers, a boyfriend and a girlfriend, then the boy has no say because they aren't in a committed relationship. In that kind of case, forget the whole "their baby" concept; it's his sperm, but it's her egg and her body. The girl instantly wins in who gets to decide.

You seem to be really fixated on the fact that the chick gets fat during pregnancy, and therefor deserves special treatment. Her jeans no longer fitting, while distressing to both her and the fabric, are not the issue .

I'm not seeing anything different in the above two situations in regards to the baby, which is what's at issue in both. Are you trying to say babies made when their parents are in a formal relationship are granted superpowers and must be preserved, necessitating the turning of 2 keys to abort it? Or that men are inferior to women until they agree to marry them? Because that makes even less sense than your argument, which has yet to surface .

If you're trying to say 'there are situations where the woman should have all the say,' then I'd start with something like a rape or occupational sex (prostitute) situation, and work out from there. Even then, it's a slippery slope, as you'll see .

[Maikeru D. Shinigami]

Originally Posted by Aurega

So if some girl you've never met decided to have an abortion, you should get involved and tell her she can't?

Seriously it's their body and their lives that will be affected, not yours. seriously, if you think you should have something to say, move to North Korea or something. Western countries promote the freedom to choose what you want to do with your own life.

I would be just as bad as someone coming to you, saying you HAVE to have a baby, then proceeding to rape you and force you to have birth. Do you want that?

I can't actually have the baby because I'm a guy. But if I was and was in that situation I would suck it up and have the child and take care of it the way a loving parent should.

This is different then other types of issues, when you allow people to choose they abuse the law and kill off an innocent child, killing is immoral, and shouldn't be allowed. Maybe before the child is technically alive I can except but there should be a point of no return.

[SRhyse]

Originally Posted by Maikeru Shinigami

Mercy killings should only be allowed if the victim has consented to death, and nobody should be able to tell the doctor not to kill them.

In most cases, the victim can't communicate, as in vegetable people. What then?

[Maikeru D. Shinigami]

Originally Posted by SRhyse

In most cases, the victim can't communicate, as in vegetable people. What then?

Usually they have decided beforehand, if they have decided do as they say. If not, the husband or wife can decide. If the husband or wife is dead, then you move onto the children, if they don't have any move on to siblings. And so on.

[SRhyse]

Originally Posted by Maikeru Shinigami

killing is immoral, and shouldn't be allowed.

So we shouldn't have gone to World War 2, and rape victims aren't allowed to defend themselves?

Originally Posted by Maikeru Shinigami

Maybe before the child is technically alive I can except but there should be a point of no return.

It should be around 60 years of age. That's about the point you find out if they're going to wet the bed until the day the die.

[Nick Tasogare]

Originally Posted by Maikeru Shinigami

Mercy killings should only be allowed if the victim has consented to death, and nobody should be able to tell the doctor not to kill them.

You basically just gave me the definition of a DNR...

I'm talking about people who are in so much pain, but are dying excruciatingly slow, and they can't say a thing about it. If you KNOW they are in pain, and it is unbearable, I say you should kill them, it is the merciful thing to do, hence, Mercy Killing.

[TheViolletteHeart]

Originally Posted by SRhyse

You seem to be really fixated on the fact that the chick gets fat during pregnancy, and therefor deserves special treatment. Her jeans no longer fitting, while distressing to both her and the fabric, are not the issue .

I'm not seeing anything different in the above two situations in regards to the baby, which is what's at issue in both. Are you trying to say babies made when their parents are in a formal relationship are granted superpowers and must be preserved, necessitating the turning of 2 keys to abort it? Or that men are inferior to women until they agree to marry them? Because that makes even less sense than your argument, which has yet to surface .

If you're trying to say 'there are situations where the woman should have all the say,' then I'd start with something like a rape or occupational sex (prostitute) situation, and work out from there. Even then, it's a slippery slope, as you'll see .

I never said anything about getting fat! It's the pain the woman goes through! And if the two aren't in a commited relationship, it's not their child because they probably aren't going to stay together. Granted, there is a high rate of divorce, but a married/commited couple are more likely to stay together than a simple highschool boyfriend-girlfriend relationship!

Men and women are equal, it's just that in a situation where the two people in the relationship aren't likely going to be together for long, the woman should have the say because it's better for her not to have to feel the pain if she doesn't want to for someone she might not be with for an extensive period of time!

Oh, and congradulations! You've have made me type with more than two fingers!

[<Aurega?>]

Originally Posted by Maikeru Shinigami

I can't actually have the baby because I'm a guy. But if I was and was in that situation I would suck it up and have the child and take care of it the way a loving parent should.

This is different then other types of issues, when you allow people to choose they abuse the law and kill off an innocent child, killing is immoral, and shouldn't be allowed. Maybe before the child is technically alive I can except but there should be a point of no return.

And yet every country trains people in the military to take lives as there is no tomorrow.

Seriously, if you want to live in a world where there are no deaths, perhaps in the afterlife it's gonna be like that. But in the world we live in, death is a part of our lives.

Currently, there is a point of no return for abortions. After that, the only exceptions are if the mother's life is in danger or if it was the result of a rape and the mother have been unable to get an abortion before that.

PS: Rice! I need you in the chatbox!

[SRhyse]

Originally Posted by Maikeru Shinigami

Usually they have decided beforehand

This is actually very rare, which is why the issue arises at all. Most people don't take the time to think about what would happen if they were rendered incapable of speaking, unless they have a family history of it, which is the vast minority.

[Maikeru D. Shinigami]

So we shouldn't have gone to World War 2, and rape victims aren't allowed to defend themselves?

I am totally against wars and think all countries should stop being so stuck up and actually stop being dumb.
Rape victims can defend themselves if the baby isn't technically living yet.

[Nick Tasogare]

When they decide beforehand, isn't that basically a DNR?

[<Aurega?>]

Originally Posted by Maikeru Shinigami

So we shouldn't have gone to World War 2, and rape victims aren't allowed to defend themselves?

I am totally against wars and think all countries should stop being so stuck up and actually stop being dumb.
Rape victims can defend themselves if the baby isn't technically living yet.

Ahh, but conflicts have happened every since humans were out hunting wild animals for a living. Groups of people would fight over food, clothing, houses etc. It's all a part of being greedy and want to enforce your views onto others. When you can't make others agree with you, it's simply so much better to just eliminate them. If they are dead, they can't oppose you right?

Look at animals, they fight each other too. It's a survival instinct, that will never be gone. Might as well embrace it and make sure it's other people who dies, not you.

[Maikeru D. Shinigami]

Originally Posted by Aurega

And yet every country trains people in the military to take lives as there is no tomorrow.

Seriously, if you want to live in a world where there are no deaths, perhaps in the afterlife it's gonna be like that. But in the world we live in, death is a part of our lives.

Currently, there is a point of no return for abortions. After that, the only exceptions are if the mother's life is in danger or if it was the result of a rape and the mother have been unable to get an abortion before that.

PS: Rice! I need you in the chatbox!

I hate wars it is completely stupid the way wars happens, guns should have never been invented.

I know death happens, but it shouldn't be up to people to decide when the innocent people should die. If you are criminal sure kill them, but innocent people should be allowed to live.

[Maikeru D. Shinigami]

Originally Posted by Aurega

Ahh, but conflicts have happened every since humans were out hunting wild animals for a living. Groups of people would fight over food, clothing, houses etc. It's all a part of being greedy and want to enforce your views onto others. When you can't make others agree with you, it's simply so much better to just eliminate them. If they are dead, they can't oppose you right?

Look at animals, they fight each other too. It's a survival instinct, that will never be gone. Might as well embrace it and make sure it's other people who dies, not you.

I understand it will never go away, but my opinions is that it is totally dumb and immoral, people need to get over themselves.

[Vivi]

I really think it depends...
if it gets created due to rape then I think it might be ok.
But if if happens due to "OOOHH FORGOT CONDOM" then live with it then its your fault and ya have to live with this responsibility instead of complaining and take its chance to live a real life.

[Sabra Kusabana]

Originally Posted by SRhyse

I'd be interested in hearing whether any Pro Life people are in favor of animal euthanization. (When they put them to sleep).

I am against euthanization of animals, unless they are ill in some way that is or would soon cause them more pain to live thru. To me personally animals are no less then humans, in alot of ways they are more, because they are pure in their lives. They don't do some many things that humans do, but that makes them something more to me, instead of less. Maybe it's because of my personal conditions, but I am more against the 'putting down' of animals then I am against abortion.

You wanted to know how one of us felt, there you go.

[<Aurega?>]

Originally Posted by Maikeru Shinigami

I hate wars it is completely stupid the way wars happens, guns should have never been invented.

I know death happens, but it shouldn't be up to people to decide when the innocent people should die. If you are criminal sure kill them, but innocent people should be allowed to live.

But it's only you, and you're insignificant you know. Wars will always happen, because we have limited resources and endless greed.

Also, many people don't consider a baby "alive" before it can live on its own outside the mother's body.

[SRhyse]

Originally Posted by TheViolletteHeart

It's the pain the woman goes through!

9 months of stomach cramps earns you the right to decide who lives and dies?

Originally Posted by TheViolletteHeart

Men and women are equal, it's just that in a situation where the two people in the relationship aren't likely going to be together for long, the woman should have the say because it's better for her not to have to feel the pain if she doesn't want to for someone she might not be with for an extensive period of time!

This has to do with the baby living or dying how? The baby will continue living in the absence of both parents. I've seen it happen, trust me. My Mom's in SoCal and I'm still going. We're not like ants, where you kill the queen and they all bug out. Even then, they keep going .

It's not about whether or not she thinks the dude is 'the one,' either . As a pregnant woman would say: "Screw her, it's about the baby."

You seem to have confused the relationship of the parents with the life of the baby. There are situations where it's relevant, but you have yet to realize them. I gave you some hints before .

[Maikeru D. Shinigami]

Originally Posted by Aurega

But it's only you, and you're insignificant you know. Wars will always happen, because we have limited resources and endless greed.

Also, many people don't consider a baby "alive" before it can live on its own outside the mother's body.

As long as I am alive I am not insignificant, my opinion matters and I'll be damned if someone tells me I'm not allowed to have it. As I already said I didn't say it's not going to stop just that I am against wars.

Well I consider the baby living before then once it starts getting it's organs it is alive.

[Nick Tasogare]

Originally Posted by Sabra Kusabana

I am against euthanization of animals, unless they are ill in some way that is or would soon cause them more pain to live thru. To me personally animals are no less then humans, in alot of ways they are more, because they are pure in their lives. They don't do some many things that humans do, but that makes them something more to me, instead of less. Maybe it's because of my personal conditions, but I am more against the 'putting down' of animals then I am against abortion.

You wanted to know how one of us felt, there you go.

I agree with this. If this were facebook, I would like this status.