Isn't it the saddest of ironies that so many people who will throw red paint on someone's fur coat to protest the "innocent killing" of ANIMALS will also march on behalf of a woman's right to kill her own CHILD?
When and why did our societly start placing more value on the lives of animals over the lives of humans?
2006-10-12 03:46:01 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Dearest sad Danielle: That GLOB OF CELLS in my womb had a BEATING HEART from my very first doctor's visit.
2006-10-12 03:56:25 · update #1
Typical double standard
2006-10-12 03:47:44 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋
sure, i'm professional-existence and that i'm a vegan and an animal activist. To me, the linked fee of human and animal existence is equivalent, so killing animals at a slaughterhouse and unborn babies in a scientific institution are suitable. there's a great sort of discussion on no rely if or not the fetuses experience soreness, properly they in all probability can such as you pronounced, however the factor is it extremely is a existence that has started and ethically should not be stopped. notably with maximum of risk-free adoption courses obtainable right this moment, its nonetheless her selection no rely if she desires to maintain the toddler or not save the toddler, its in basic terms much less detrimental. Rape sufferers, i desire could evaluate adoption. in the top people are animals, so we prefer risk-free practices rules preserving us alive (or people who could replace into alive) too. in basic terms my opinion, although.
2016-10-16 02:52:09 · answer #2 · answered by goodgion 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
a human doesnt have a soul until after it is born. whats really sad is christian fundamentalists telling people what to do then giving the defensive rebuttal of " Im just telling you what the bible says"
YOu want my personal opinion? an animals life is more precious than a childs because animals dont nuke people or make hateful comments to others that dont agree with them. Also animals have a soul and christians are heartless bastards for saying that they do not.
2006-10-12 04:10:14 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
What's tragically ironic to me is that people like you go ballistic over a glob of cells in a womb while totally ignoring the misery and mistreatment of creatures such as cats and dogs whose short, miserable lives are ended by the hundreds of thousands in so-called "shelters" every single day. Arrogant self-righteous human animals make me physically sick and ashamed sometimes to be one of them.
P.S. An embryo has neither a heart nor a brain; it has tissue in position which might or might not develop into a heart, a brain. The innocent dogs, cats, etc. who are killed through human indifference and stupidity have hearts, brains, needs, fears and emotions very similar to the human animal. And yes, humans ARE animals. They're just the only ones who kill each other for fun (with the exception of murderous chimpanzees, with whom we share over 98% of our DNA).
2006-10-12 03:54:08 · answer #4 · answered by Sweetchild Danielle 7 · 6⤊ 3⤋
I am an animal rights person. Any animal that is living should be protected. I am pro choice. I do not have the right to make that decision for another woman under any circumstances. If my cat told me she did not want to carry and deliver her kittens, I would allow her to have an abortion because that would be her body and her choice.
2006-10-12 03:54:27 · answer #5 · answered by Gorgeoustxwoman2013 7 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Humans are much more destructive than any animal. We are parasites to the earth. Our lives are not worth more than another animals--if there is any difference in worth, then we are worth less.
Every unborn child has the potential to be a serial killer, rapist, terrorist, etc., just as the have the same potential of being a hero.
2006-10-12 03:53:13 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋
Pro-abortion is a misnomer. Try pro-choice instead.
Anyone who would try to take freedom of choice from a pregnant woman is exhibiting a God complex.
I will defend a woman's right to choose, and I will defend an animal's right to live. If that make's me a hypocrite, so be it. You see where I'm coming from.
2006-10-12 03:51:21 · answer #7 · answered by . 5 · 6⤊ 2⤋
Being behind a 'cause' is a social phenomena. Half of pro-animalists have some form of animal product on them or in them.
2006-10-12 03:48:09 · answer #8 · answered by TCFKAYM 4 · 3⤊ 2⤋
WOW, I can't answer this, but you have an excellent point.
However, my sister is very involved in wildlife rescue (her site: www.ucarerescue.com), and is also very much anti-abortion.
Please don't stereotype people.
I do agree with you though that many of the extremists are pro-choice.
2006-10-12 03:52:34 · answer #9 · answered by The_Cricket: Thinking Pink! 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Well you make a good point (even if your grammar is horrible) I can't understand why people feel that the live of a dog or monkey is more important than a defenseless unborn baby.
2006-10-12 03:50:27 · answer #10 · answered by Ethan M 5 · 3⤊ 3⤋