English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

For pro choice people, i don't know what they do with the fetuses anymore but they use to just dump them in the garbage. Now would you complain or protest if fetus became a meal, if they took the dead fetuses and made them a meal and people ate them? Why would you get mad for, womans choice to get rid of the embryo, she does not want em, so they make them into a meal. Besides according to pro choice logic, it is not alive, nor is it a human, so it's not cannibalism.

Now pro life people, why is it that you are hell bent on not allowing abortions, the kid should be born, but then complain that people are on welfare and using up federal aid? You know some people can't afford children, so you support the unborn, but once you're born you're on your own.

2006-08-01 04:57:03 · 51 answers · asked by Fiesty Redhead 2 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

51 answers

where the hell do you stand? Your question is anti-both sides, if that's even possible.
There are alot of things I don't want to eat, not because I'm not a cannibal. But just because I find them disgusting. But, hey if they want to serve them up, they had better label them properly, and not try to feed them to us like chopped meat. I'm sure that some weird people would jump at the chance to eat one. yuck.

2006-08-01 05:04:37 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 4

I am both. I believe ferociously in a woman's right to choose abortion if that is what she feels is right for her. My choice has always been not to have an abortion if I had ever gotten pregnant, because I am not strong enough to live with the guilt I would feel. I have great respect for the women who have gone through this and live with that guilt every day.

I also believe that fetuses do not become spiritual "human beings" (i.e., with the soul intact) until birth. They can see and hear and feel, perhaps, but the soul is not present until right before birth. If you believe that the soul is present from the moment of conception, imagine starting a fire with two matches and nothing else (the fire metaphorically being the "Divine Spark," or soul, and the two matches being the sperm and the egg). It would burn out almost immediately for lack of fuel. In the same way that you prepare charcoal briquets or wood for a fire before you add the flame, the human body has to be physically and emotionally ready for the addition of the Soul. And I believe the power of the Divine spark is so great that it would kill or overpower any fetus if it were to arrive too early. Therefore it is my belief that having an abortion within the safety time-limits set by doctors is not murder--it is not killing a human soul.

I don't know where the idea of eating fetuses comes from within you, but you sound really angry. You might want to look at why that is.

2006-08-01 05:18:14 · answer #2 · answered by Banba 3 · 0 0

I'm pro-life. There are several things that are left out of your sequence. First, no one has to have sex (rape is a special case that I do not believe you're asking about so I left it out). Sex is optional. Also, having a child does not mean definite financial difficulty. Adoption is a choice often over looked.

Lastly, it seems a broad generalization to add extra topics such as welfare and federal aid to the pro-life view. Abortion is not helping people get off welfare or federal aid. I see very little connection between them, though I would be interested in any study you know of to relate the two.

2006-08-01 05:15:58 · answer #3 · answered by Joshua 2 · 0 0

--
I am definantly pro-choice. Some people just weren't meant to have children. Think of what will happen to those children that are born to parents that don't really want them around. Neglect, probably already living in a bad neighborhood, probably won't continue education or graduate high school for that matter, join gangs, drug/alcohol abuse, abuse by parent(s), and etc.

Sure aborting a baby may seem immoral. I don't disagree with that. Looking at it in a logical and economical way (like the way society works), then some babies are just meant to be aborted.
Abortion NEEDS to exist; although new rules and conditions need to be put into place. -Although the first one is extreme I am aware.- A.)Aborter must have tubes tied off. Male impregnator must also become fixed. -Now let's think about this, the USA is AWFULLY leniant when it comes to just about everything; other countries just DON'T screw around, they'll probably cut your private area off in a similar case. So I think that is very fair. It reminds them that if they want to make a huge mistake, then yes abortion will alter them forever and with the added bonus of never having the privalege to have kids ever again.- B.) Condoms should just be available ANYWHERE and at a EXTREME low cost as it is. C.) Sex education needs some funding increase; I took sex ed. in 6th grade, gee that didn't really do a whole lot. It needs to be taken at the peak of all those teens wanting to "experiment", early on in high school and then again in 11th grade. It's very important all this information offered STICKS TO THEM or else an STD might.

These are just my opinions; you can agree or disagree, or just agree to disagree. I'm not out to make anyone change their minds. :-)

Justin

2006-08-01 05:13:41 · answer #4 · answered by Justin 1 · 0 0

I'm pro choice because it's completely impractical to expect a 12 year old girl who has been raped by a family member to be forced to bring up the child, or even go through the trauma of giving birth, even if it becomes adopted, etc.
It IS sad that a life must sometimes be taken, but life is NOT fair, nor perfect. I don't agree with using abortion as a means of birth control though, only in certain circumstances.
What gets me about those who think abortions should be illegal is the fact they spend all their energies on this when THOUSANDS of children are dying worldwide from abuse, starvation, etc. Can't they concentrate on the kids who are actually suffering NOW? Or is that too much like real work...

Thank you, Ron K...I have heeded your warning that you are satan. Fool.

As for pro-lifers...what a bunch of hypocrites! Are they all vegans? I think not. Just in need of forcing their opinions onto others because they can't accept the harsh realities of life.

2006-08-01 05:06:59 · answer #5 · answered by googlywotsit 5 · 1 0

pro life.....if you can't handle having a baby.....
use protection. Simple as that. If he uses a condom great, but the girl should have some sort of proteccion as well. 2 is better than 1.
Besides federal aid has nothing to due with it. I had a child that I originally didn't plan to have. But I don't believe in abortion. I already had a 3 month old when I got pregnant again. Then my man left.....I had a job working as a CNA in a nursing home. I worked full time raised my son while I was pregnant and when the 2nd son was born I stayed home on welfare for 6 weeks to nurse my child, and guess what happened after............ I GOT OFF MY *** AND WENT BACK TO WORK FULL TIME.
People today are lazy. They rather take assistance than work and they rather kill a potential person than to spend time and effort to raising them. However, they'll use their energy, effort and time to having sex right.
Grow Up.

2006-08-01 05:06:58 · answer #6 · answered by bella_mexicana_rellena 2 · 0 0

Abortion should be between the mother, the child, and the good Lord above. I am not saying everytime you screw a guy and end up with his baby to go and have an abortion, but for like rape victims, incist, and if the mother will die then yes. Now I don't know about actually eating the fetus, but we could use it to find new cures and stuff in the medical field. I just don't think a bunch of shriveled d*ck old men in the government should make a law for a mother. Either way if a woman don't want a baby she will find away to get rid of it!

2006-08-01 05:05:10 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Icarus seems to have hit on the crux of the question. It is a question of rights. The woman's rights vs the child's rights.
Should a woman have the right to kill her baby (let's quit depersonalizing the little guy, what she is carrying is a baby, plain and simple) because the child is an inconvenience to her at this time? Then, why should we prosecute any parent for killing or abusing their children? Isn't it about their rights? The kids belong to them, don't they? They have the right to kill them before they are born, why not afterwards? If they want to beat them, starve them, molest them, or even make a meal out of them, whose business is it but their own? I mean, if you're gonna be pro-choice, be pro-CHOICE!!
Once you give one person the right to kill another person because he/she is an inconvenience, why not the right to euthanize our old people? Our disabled people? After all, isn't their existence an inconvenience to the rest of us? Shouldn't we have the right to choose our rights over theirs?


OH, and I am getting rather tired of my neighbor, always coming over just when I've climbed into the shower......

EDIT: You know what really amazes me is people who can look at the flat tummy of a woman who just found out she is pregnant, and predicting what the child's life will be like if she has it. LOL, Justin, if you are such a psychc, why haven't YOU won the lottery yet??

2006-08-01 05:09:55 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I am pro-choice: I would object to the sanitary implications
of eating genetically human flesh. As far as the body's
physiological defenses are concerned, it would be cannibalism
though fetuses are likely to be more sterile than other sources
of human flesh.

PLUS - lets get real here - aborting a child is a major trauma
to most women. Why would we put them through more pain
than they are already going through?

There are lots of sources of meat on this planet - this seems
pretty low-yield high-cost to me.

We're not quite at the age of Soilent Green - not yet.

2006-08-01 05:04:30 · answer #9 · answered by Elana 7 · 0 0

I'm pro life....there are people that have babies that can't afford them....but they shouldn't murder them !! I do think that people shouldn't be on the welfare books indefinitely....it should be there to help families get on their feet, get training and be able to support the children....You're right that there are usually more people around for the unborn than the poor children in our country. Most churches will help families to assure the children have basic necessities. I have kids in my church who's families don't have a lot of extra, and I'm always watching out at garage sales ( my favorite past time) for the extra things for the kids...A nice name brand backpack or pair of shoes...when I'm getting my kids school things, I'll grab extra and give the kids gift bags from "a friend" .....There's a lot more good people out there doing things with out fan fair than you may know !!!

2006-08-01 05:14:49 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Gosh thanks for that most appetizing mental image right at lunch time on the east coast.

It doesn't matter if you see the fetus as a viable human or not eating it is still an act of cannibalism. It is the same as cutting off your arm and feeding it to someone. It is not a viable human being but it was part of one.
OK

Now as for the debate. Every woman that has killed her unborn child knows the anguish that follows her all the days of her life. she terminated the life of her child she knows it she feels it in her being. Any woman who has suffered a miscarriage knows the same pain and anguish but not the guilt. Only those who abort their children know this special agony.

I pray for them that they can somehow find peace.

2006-08-01 05:12:45 · answer #11 · answered by ♂ Randy W. ♂ 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers