Abortion = Immoral?

Question

First off, I tend to vote Democrat and could not be more against the Iraq War. Visit some other discussions on this site. You’ll see that I have big issues with conservative political policies. Secondly, Lawful does NOT = Right nor does it = correct! Your argument for relative morality I will agree does make sense on a grand scale. Peoples’ sense of morals can differ and still fall within the acceptable societal norm. However, for specific issues, morals are not relative, but concretely static! One of those morals is the right to live your life without it being intentionally taken away from you by another human being. Imagine your reaction if you were having a discussion with someone and they told you, with all sincerity, that they didn’t think killing or ending human life was morally wrong. Would you consider this person moral? Would you still talk to this person? My bet is that you would not. An overwhelming majority of people would think that this person was off their rocker and would avoid them like the plague. Furthermore, I still get a kick out of fellow debaters trying to discount my argument because they say I’ve based my belief on my religion. I have done no such thing (I haven’t gone to church regularly in years). I’ve used deductive logic, with science and the basic moral principle that I just mentioned above concerning right to life as my benchmarks, to form my conclusion. Science tells us that at conception, a living human cell is formed. It begins a process called mitosis, which is the process of cell division, or growth. Science also tells us that dead cells cannot divide and grow. If these cells are human cells, and they are growing, then from the above we can logically conclude that we do, in fact, have human life. And if we can, from above, mutually agree that human life has the right to complete their existence without being eliminated in an intentional way (society’s basic agreement on right to life), then we can conclude that abortion is morally wrong. It’s not a hard argument to follow. I do appreciate your history lesson with regards to the Courts rulings (I’m aware of the Court’s rulings, thank you), but again, they don’t really apply in our discussion unless you’re arguing that they’ve ruled on morality here. Which by the way, contradict your entire argument. I never argued that abortion was illegal, or that women didn’t have the legal right to have them done. What I did was say they didn’t have the moral right. What I did was call them immoral, based on irrefutable scientific fact, an irrefutable and binding societal contract to not end human life, and deductive reasoning. That’s actually ironic when you think about it. Here we have, as I said above, far left liberals arguing ethics and moral standards when it comes to economic and political matters, such as minimum wage fairness, characteristics of the free market, CEO golden parachutes, gaps in compensation between the elitists and proletariats, and desired government intervention during the oil price surge ( just to name a few). Yet, they can’t see how their own argument and position in this discussion is violating the most basic societal contract. There’s HUGE inconsistency on the left when it comes to a discussion about morals. But the real kicker is this: while there are pro lifers out there that are whacked and clearly have gone off the deep end, many pro lifers cite the same arguments I have, and we get accused of trying to set up a sectarian form of government to push our religious beliefs. And on the other hand, you have the pro choicers who contend that life doesn’t begin until birth. Of what are they basing that on in this MORAL argument? Science rejects their claim. So what then are they basing it on? The only thing that’s left is…faith.

Answer 1

Yes, of course abortion is immoral. It's always immoral to kill innocent human beings, whether in Iraq or in the womb. It is a simple, undeniable biological fact that every abortion kills a human being, but "pro-choicers" aren't willing to address this fact. They prefer to dance around the issue.

Your logic is excellent. Keep up the good work.

Anyone needing information on abortion should visit http://Abort73.com

Answer 2

I first have to say that I am 50 years old. When I was young abortions were sometimes performed in back alley clinics and the like. But the reports were that there were only 500- 1000, per year. The real truth will never be known. That being said. The promoters of Abortion argued that due to rape and incest, abortions should be made legal. They argued that women who were victims of these crimes should have a way out. There were also constant mentionings of women who could lose their lives during an abortion. Shortly after abortion was made legal, the numbers started to skyrocket. I know of girls in the late 70's and 80's that had 4-6 abortions and started using abortion as contraception. Its really easy for anyone to look at an abortion and either film or pictures and realize that its a human body being torn to pieces. You can catch things on health channels like penile implants, breast implants, sex change reconstruction, but will never see an abortion. The truth is ugly and to actually see one will stop a persons breathing for a moment. Abortion is convienent, not morally right. That little human should have rights. If someone kills a pregnant mother, they can be charged with the death of the mother and baby, but if a woman says this is not a good time for me, she can have the babies head crushed and the infants body sucked out with a vacuum and the deeds over. Keep in mind that there are an average of 5,000 aboutions each day in the USA. at $500-$600 each, and the babys body (fetal tissue they call it) can then be resold to labratories. The abortion industry is a huge money train. If in the 70's when abortion became legal anyone would have known the extent and amount of abortions to be conducted, it would never have passed. Just some facts.

Answer 3

hmmm, I read the first few sentences, but I stopped when it became apparent that you weren't actually asking a question...
First off, I personally am pro choice. I think it is easier for men to see this as an issue of morals because men don't get pregnant, and if they get a woman pregnant, they are not always there to do with the consequences. Is it moral to give birth to a child you cannot afford to feed, clothe or take care of? Is it moral to give birth to a baby only to deposit it elsewhere? While I can understand religious and moral objections, I think many of these are made without consideration to the life or wellness of the mother. Is abortion moral if the life of the mother is endangered - for example, think of the female closest to you. If giving birth meant a serious risk to her life, would you insist on her doing so, simply because the alternative would be immoral? To me the issue isn't so cut and dry, as when life begins or not, and perhaps that is because I'm not religious.
I certainly do not believe abortion should be used a contraceptive measure and I am sure that most people who go through the horribly difficult and emotionally painful procedure would agree. It is generally a decision reached after much consideration or medical advice.
As for this eating foetus and placenta thing, just because a certain minority do it, does not mean it is common practice in every abortion, I don't think it warrants a "rethink", its hardly relevant to normal abortive procedure. In fact I would go so far as to say, such nonsense only furthers people's ignorance of the issue.

Answer 4

while i do understand ur point im not with you on this one....if a woman was to be raped that would b her choice to end that pregnancy or not. i cant speak for that woman but i dont think that i could carry a baby to term only to give it up for adoption, so for me the best thing to do would be to end it. thats a lot of emotional pain to go threw. now, what if that woman who was pregnant was told that if she carries this baby she will die??? what if she has 3 other kids at home that also need her??? is she just to go ahead and carry this baby knowing that as soon as she goes into labor her kids will no longer have a mother?? there is a lot more to it than what you are getting it. yes everybodys morals are wrong but its the choice that they make. they are the ones who have to deal with the outcome on their own. i dont think that is fair for the government to make a decision like that for everybody. they are not living the life that this person who decides to have an abortion is living so they need shut the hell up and get out!!!! whateva the woman decides to do its on her shoulders now so let it be....

Answer 5

You really have a rambling illogical explanation for your fantasy ideas regarding abortion. Nothing that you say is sensible or logical.
Nothing you say is irrefutable. Nothing you say has been thought out clearly or expressed with evidence beyond your own personal belief.
Humans are social animals. Those of us with the ability to reason know that if we bring in 1000 people to eat the rations designed for 10 people, then all 1000 will die. So we set up rules to protect the many at the expense of the few. We send soldiers to fight our wars. We sacrifice the few for the many every day. It is the real world. Your theory that life is the most important aspect of our existence fails, because if we put too many hands in the pot , we all die. What man has is --- the right for the many to live ---and the duty of a few to die. It is a very moral and honorable system that has built a very wise world. ----What you ask is suicide and genocide.
You would kill us all to save the baby of a rapist.
Rape produces children, to allow the children of rapist to come into the world, promotes rape. You are simply a person unable to reason. Or, you are a rapist, or the supporter of rapists.
Not allowing a woman to make her own decisions about her own destiny promotes fasism. Thugs such as yourself would run the world if we allow the state or people such as yourself to rule over the lives of women.
Scientist have no clue what human "life" is or what comprises the "soul" of a human. Only fools could claim that "human life" is nothing more than cell matter. Life is the force that makes us human, not the cells that make up our bodies. ( I really hate to use the words "fool" and "thug", however, they do fit nicely.)
Humans were born with a brain to use to determine when it is best for the human race to alter their personal "life" for the good of the race. If you take away the ability of a human to contribute to the wellbeing of the race, then you have deminished the power of the individual at the expense of the race.
I find it very dangerous that you are willing to diminish my life so that you may enrich your own life. You want rapist, and abusers to be able to diminish the ability of the earth to support the children that are planned and wanted. You want to force your beilef ---that you cannot even support with logic and reason---- on those of us that raised wanted and loved children. You want to bring into the world children that will not be loved or supported. You are a seriously ill person.
There is no right to life as you claim. Every person dies. No one lives beyond 120 years of life, not even you. There is however a continous spectrum of humans, one replacing another through out time. When one dies, another is born. However, using your dangerous ideas, a person has a "right to life" that has never existed through out history. Therefore, no person should be allowed to die. We would then be compelled to save every person on death's bed and support them until we no longer have the means to support ourselves or them. Right to life is a foolish wish. It has never existed and never will exist.
It is not moral to save one fetus to promote facism, rape, and an end of the many to save the few. You are a very immoral and foolish person. Perhaps you will some day understand why most people do not think that your position on abortion is very bright.
If you think you have even one logical proof that supports you position, please let me know and I will show you your error. Please answer without rambling. Number your fantasies so that I may answer without rambling.

Answer 6

Abortion is immoral simply based on your analasys. I also think that it is compleetly ironic that it is pro -choice and pro-life. Does that mean that pro-choice people are anti-life! That is funny. Really I am all freedom. But the right to life does come before the right to liberty if you know anything about the constitution.

Answer 7

I didn't read much of that, all I know and I swear by this, is that in China they have birth control, families are only allowed to have one child and if they have a second one they get taxed heavly.

As a result they do late abortions in their hospitals, and for nutrients they eat the baby or FEATOUS!

SICK! look at some of the scenes on there, type in eat abortion and china and then re-think!

Answer 8

It is immoral, bc life begins at conception.