I mean, her body is being violated. Shouldn't she have a say in what happens to her body? what about her right to "choose"?
2007-01-07 03:25:25 · 10 answers · asked by 4 Shades of Blue 4 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
anti-life people love to convieniently say it's not a person yet. by whose definition?
2007-01-07 03:33:04 · update #1
Shalom Arrows,
Its not your body, it is not of your own until you cease being temporal. What has Paul given concerning this?
Or know ye not that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit which is in you, which ye have from God? and ye are not your own; for ye were bought with a price: glorify God therefore in your body.(The First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians 6:19-20)
By getting abortion you commit the sin of destroying a potentiality or a opportunity. Your choices are not without effect for what ever a man sows shall he so reap, the law is everything returns to its source of origin. Remember you are on loan until you awake out of your drunken slumber and return to the kingdom of origination. Until then you will be subject to corrective action by the God of this world.
Peace
Aza
2007-01-07 03:37:56 · answer #1 · answered by Aza 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I understand what you are saying. What it comes down to with me and a lot of other people is that the fetus is INSIDE my body, therefore it belongs to me just like my heart, stomach, lungs, etc.. Even if I believe that a fetus is a tiny person with rights, I still feel that my rights override the rights of the fetus because it is INSIDE me, living off of me and it is an extension of my body. Without me, there is no fetus so I come first. (I'm not arguing with you, it's just how I personally feel when it comes to ME)
It would be very interesting if there could be a procedure done where they could remove a fetus (no matter how small) and transplant it into the body of another woman. That way, I could remove something I didn't exactly want yet I wouldn't have to deal with the question of 'is it murder?' I'd probably chose that sort of thing over an abortion.
2007-01-07 11:52:20 · answer #2 · answered by Pico 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The whole abortion issue is nothing but an excuse for irresponsible people (men and women) to have unrestricted sex. When the contraceptive methods fail then the second option is to murder the child within the womb so the sex continues without the botheration of children. What they do not know is that there are terrible reactions for doing this. The laws of material nature are very strict and unequivocal.
2007-01-07 11:36:12 · answer #3 · answered by edcaimo 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
What 'rights', you are begging the question, when does a fetus have rights, I say at viability, you may say conception others may say at birth.
Edit:
So argue the definition, thats what the whole debate is about. And I'll bet I'm more pro-life than you on any other topic than abortion.
2007-01-07 11:28:18 · answer #4 · answered by fourmorebeers 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Gender isn't detirmined for a fetus for quite a while, most abortions are preformed before it gets to that stage.
2007-01-07 11:37:47 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Wha...? Great, another feminist who doesn't even care about the lives of men. I'm just -so- glad we have a woman as speaker of the house. Yay! Progress, progress, everywhere, and not a drop to drink.
2007-01-07 11:35:27 · answer #6 · answered by Kilroy 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Abortion is the hilarious procedure in which a soon-to-be ugly baby is instead destroyed before it has a chance to wreak havoc on the world.
Contrary to popular belief, abortion is actually a life saving procedure. The rate of aborted babies that went on to commit murder is 0%, a percentage significantly lower than the rate of unaborted babies.
Someone who is pro-life is someone who is against abortion in any and all cases. They believe that a zygote has all the rights of a grown adult human, unless of course that adult is a pregnant woman, who has no right to decide what happens in her body.
Ironically, people who are pro-life are in favor of the death penalty and killing people in Iraq.
2007-01-07 11:28:37 · answer #7 · answered by acgsk 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋
It doesn't have any. Sorry.
The notion that personhood begins in the womb is a recent invention. For proof of this you need look no further than when we have traditionally named new humans.
2007-01-07 11:37:13 · answer #8 · answered by mullah robertson 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Unborn rights are as valid as unborn.
No abortion allowed.
NO.
2007-01-07 11:33:12 · answer #9 · answered by whynotaskdon 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Ooh nice semantic trick... see, she's not a full human yet, just like an acorn is not a tree. It's easy once you try!!
2007-01-07 11:28:54 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 4⤋