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

i think that is just so horrible...people yell PRO CHOICE! but why should that be their choice to kill a human being? "its their body?" no it isnt its another human being!! how do these people who have abortions sleep at night? back to my question i know its usually democrats-pro abortion and republicans-pro life , but are their any exceptions for the people running as democrats in 08?

2007-07-18 17:05:29 · 17 answers · asked by LOST_fanatic:)! 4 in Politics & Government Politics

truth seeker-im not talking about war on this question- im talking about abortion

2007-07-18 17:11:52 · update #1

womens rights?
what about a babies life?
i think if a women is mature enough to have sex than she should be mature enough to care for a child.

2007-07-18 17:15:30 · update #2

wow i didnt know so many people were lacking morals...no offense

2007-07-18 17:31:51 · update #3

im not rich, I do believe in the right to protect ourselves from the crimminals- who will always have guns even if they werent legal and if i lived in a dump i still wouldnt kill a child. The responsible thing to do would be to give it up for adoption, not kill it.

2007-07-18 17:35:42 · update #4

17 answers

I would think anyone born after Roe V Wade would consider themselves a survivor and not vote for the so called pro choice candidates.

2007-07-18 17:12:34 · answer #1 · answered by kevin s 6 · 4 2

ABORTION In Catholic morality, abortion is either direct (induced) or indirect. Direct abortion is any destruction of the product of human conception, whether before or after implantation in the womb. A direct abortion is one that is intended either as an end in itself or as a means to an end. As a willful attack on unborn human life, no matter what the motive, direct abortion is always a grave objective evil. Indirect abortion is the foreseen but merely permitted evacuation of a fetus which cannot survive outside the womb. The evacuation is not the intended or directly willed result, but the side effect, of some legitimate procedure. As such it is morally allowable. The essential sinfulness of direct abortion consists in the homicidal intent to kill innocent life. This factor places the controverted question as to precisely when human life begins, outside the ambit of the moral issue; as it also makes the now commonly held Catholic position that human life begins at conception equally outside the heart of the church's teaching about the grave sinfulness of direct abortion. Abortion has been condemned by the Church since apostolic times. The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, composed before A.D. 100, told the faithful "You shall not procure abortion. You shall not destroy a newborn child" (II, 2). Direct abortion and infanticide were from the beginning placed on the same level of malice. Hundreds of ecclesiastical documents from the first century through to the present testify to the same moral doctrine, with such nuances as time, place, and circumstances indicated. The Second Vatican Council declared: "Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception," so that "abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes" (Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, IV, 51). Pope Paul VI confirmed this teaching in 1974. "Respect for human life,' he wrote, "is called for from the time that the process of generation begins. From the time that the ovum is fertilized, a life is begun which is neither that of the father nor of the mother. It is rather the life of a new human being with its own growth. It would never be made human if it were not human already." Consequently, "divine law and natural reason exclude all right to the direct killing of an innocent human being" (Declaration on Procured Abortion, III, 12).

2016-05-17 06:26:29 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

It's not a human being yet until the cells have specialized into their ultimate goal, which occurs during the third trimester.

During the first two trimesters, even referring to the unborn as a fetus isn't correct - it's a blastocyst. Furthermore, that early in the pregnancy the blastocyst would have no chance of survival outside of the womb, which would (scientifically) label it as a parasite - since it's siphoning off what it needs from the host (mother) and returning nothing.

And don't overgeneralize the Republican/Democrat lines. I'm a pro-choice Republican and I know many pro-life Democrats. Your political preference has nothing to do with a lot of your views. Normally, while people may tend to lean one way or another based on their party (since people of like minds tend to congregate together), there are situations where some go against the generally accepted beliefs of the party.

2007-07-18 17:11:08 · answer #3 · answered by theREALtruth.com 6 · 5 3

Republicans suck, so stop being so self righteous. If you were raped in a back alley, you would want an abortion. If you were living in sub standered housing and you were pregnant why bring a baby into a dangerous world. I think that your a rich rifle owner, so screw you republicans im going home!

I would just like to thank Jeremy R for making me laugh, man are you stupid. Oh yeah and a question for jeremy, do you bang all of your cousins or the ones that just look good?

Sincerely
The Democrats!

2007-07-18 17:31:31 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2 3

I'm happy that you have had the kind of life where if you ended up pregnant, you might be scared and worried, but you'd be ok. There are a LOT of women who do not share that luxury. Abortion is not a happy choice, it's not an easy choice. For many women, it's not even a choice. It's the only way. I know to someone like you, that seems impossible and stupid, but trust me, it's true. You never understand what it's like until you've been there yourself.

No one is pro-abortion or pro-killing babies as you so delicately put it. Pro-choicers are trying to protect the rights of women. It is a much more complicated subject than you seem to realize.

2007-07-18 17:11:52 · answer #5 · answered by Elaine 5 · 5 5

Since you appear to have already made up your mind, I'm not going to try and explain why you misunderstand the abortion debate.

No, none of the Democratic candidates are pro-abortion. In fact, I don't know a single person who is pro-abortion.

All of the Democratic candidates are pro-choice. None of them believes that the government should be able to mandate whether and how people have babies. They leave that to countries like China and fundamentalist Republicans who don't believe in personal liberties of freedom of choice.

2007-07-18 17:15:29 · answer #6 · answered by coragryph 7 · 3 4

First, don't expect to get your views respected on Y!A. It doesn't happen. Second, I know Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton and pro-choice.

2007-07-18 17:11:06 · answer #7 · answered by LIGER20498 3 · 1 0

I don't support abortion, but I don't think people who do are monsters. I would kill someone without a second thought if they were stealing from me. This might make me seem monstrous to some, but death is part of life and it always has been. I do think that killing children is quite different from killing criminals, but I don't think that bringing a unwanted child into a painful world is a reasonable solution either.

Check out what this lady is doing to address the problem with her "Addicts Paid to Prevent Pregnancy" program:

http://www.nhregister.com/site/index.cfm?newsid=17601040&BRD=1281&PAG=461&dept_id=517515&rfi=8

2007-07-18 17:34:26 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2 3

A fertilized egg is not a person.

Only in the twisted mind of the far right does a fertilized egg have more rights than an adult woman.

A lot less pain and suffering occurs in the world when you keep abortion legal and make it easily available vs. making it illegal.

The morning-after pill is a great way to lower the abortion rate also. Safer for women, cheaper, and just better all around.

2007-07-18 17:09:48 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 5 5

A Pro-Life Democrat?

I'd say that's like being an prostitute-endorsing Republican, except that Ron Paul would actually do away with prostitution laws.

I wonder why.

But to answer your question, NONE of the Dems are pro-life

2007-07-18 17:10:32 · answer #10 · answered by asshat.mcpoop 4 · 1 5

fedest.com, questions and answers