would cure all forms of cancer, but you don't know which one, would you stop abortion/stem cell research?
***Lets see how fast MY question gets deleted because I favor pro-life.
2007-08-26 23:41:46 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
****?- Wow you just didn't answer my qustion. I didn't expect that! <=Sarcasm
It must be great to answer a question with a question while never addressing my question! You get a cookie!
2007-08-26 23:57:21 · update #1
yellowdog- Another person that won't answer my question. Who would have guessed?
2007-08-27 00:02:24 · update #2
Haggesitze- Another person avoiding the question. Thats 0 for 3! Way to go people! Good work!
2007-08-27 00:05:54 · update #3
Midnight&Moonlight- You win the grand prize after 3 attempts someone finally answered the question.
Glad to see you would still abort babies even if it ment saving even more lives through a cancer cure!
2007-08-27 00:10:21 · update #4
Anti-shriz- What? Yeah that makes sence!
2007-08-27 00:11:59 · update #5
Ash- 1 for 6, thanks for not answering buddy!
2007-08-27 00:12:57 · update #6
Rogerramjet- Tighten you foil hat buddy the cosmic rays are getting to you.
2007-08-27 00:15:31 · update #7
Westhill- Clicketty clack wippity wop. Boo beep boo boop. Another person avoding a direct answer, thanks. And yes i do know that it is embroys that are destroyed to harvest stem cells but that dosen't exactly fit in the the question line does it?
2007-08-27 00:31:54 · update #8
Jenny- Thank you for you wish that this question wont get deleted but thats up to the power that be. But you just another person avoding the question. Im just not having any luck I guess some questions of principle are way to difficult for some people. Thank you to those who actually answered my question, all one of you!
2007-08-27 00:35:17 · update #9
Murder is Murder people
To answer your question i have always been pro life and think abortion should be banned period
2007-08-27 02:01:29 · answer #1 · answered by crazy_devil_dan 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
What about If ONE child in all the aborted babies or embryonic stem celss were to become another Hitler or Stalin or Pol Pot ?
I am not REALLY partaking in a debate with you re this... I have been 100% Pro-life at one point of my life .. and then i did a 180' and became Pro-Choice ( and not because you may think that I had an abortion, I haven't and at this stage of my life I doubt I will).....
BUT now ..even though I support LEGAL abortion as oppossed to Illeagal ... I can see many points on both sides ... and how ridiculous they can be .. SUCH as the suggestion YOU put forward .. because It can be countered with something like I put forward..
BUT in fairness to you .... the one PRO-CHOICE arguement that gets the same response from me is .. " BUT IT ISN'T HUMAN" ... well of COURSE it is ..
I hope your question doesn't get deleted ,, Both sides have a right to have their say....
2007-08-27 00:30:16 · answer #2 · answered by ll_jenny_ll here AND I'M BAC 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Basically, you're saying that lives which could be valuable to society are lost when women have legal abortions, and this is undoubtedly true. But you can't totally ignore the downside if Roe v. Wade is overturned.
Consider the lives of women that would be lost to infection and bleeding from the inevitable, botched, illegal abortions that would be performed. Couldn't one of these women be a med student who would have found the cure for cancer. Consider the lives that never come into being because of the back alley abortions that render women incapable of bearing any children. At a time when abortion was still illegal in most of the states, the Roe Court was able to see the individual human and societal costs of these laws and balance this against the costs to society of allowing women the legal option of an abortion.
By the way, embryonic stem cells are no more capable of becoming babies than the skin cells you lose on your keyboard when you post here every day. Your hand dander is hardly human life.
2007-08-27 00:26:00 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
Really you shouldn't deny a child its right to live no matter what its not the baby's fault that it was brought into this world. I can see the only case being incest rape because the baby wouldn't turn out right and the huge trauma for the Mother.
But i think its horrible when people abort baby's just because there too irresponsible to take care of them or had them when there teens.
2007-08-27 00:42:22 · answer #4 · answered by alex_cheevey 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
specific, I oppose it besides. the reason i think of is by using fact public help and using public money demands public action. and then there is the "slippery slope" that began with birth control, then abortion, then manipulations like "in vitro", cloning and something related to destruction of embryos. So in that experience, combating at abortion aids in combating different unethical practices. you additionally should understand, there is know-how in contact in expertise the technique. So scientists and church leaders have a particular criminal accountability to protest. And my church leaders like bishops do protest the practices you stated. it could be extreme high quality to pay attention extra however. yet you will no longer see the suggestions interior the information very plenty which keeps consciences uninformed. And who is going to protest in the event that they think of of it as a thank you to have little ones and shop lives. It sounds helpful. wish that facilitates.
2016-10-09 07:47:40 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, I would not stop abortion/stem cell research.
2007-08-27 02:33:36 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, because it is far more likely that one of those aborted fetuses would had grown up to murder me.
Thank you for showing why we should encourage more abortions.
WAhhhhh....you know that there are tens of thousands of aborted fetuses who would had been future murderers, that's a fact!
And it is also a fact no one can cure all cancers. So I hope my answer encourages an abortion, thank you!
2007-08-27 00:13:58 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
No.
You can apply that same argument with many other scenarios.
Like a drunk driver who kills a child who has been arrested 10 other times. Did we do enough to protect that one child? No, we didn't.
Or the child sex offender that keeps getting released from prison, only to rape and killl her by burying her alive? Who is to say she wouldn't not have been that one child who grew up to be that doctor?
Yes, I would love to cut the number of abortions in this country to as few as possible. But making it illegal isn't going to do it.
Education will.
Birth control will.
2007-08-27 00:04:47 · answer #8 · answered by midnight&moonlight'smom 4 · 4⤊ 3⤋
Abortion is a horrible, terrible thing to consider. The only thing worse is taking away a woman's right to make her own health care decisions.
The government forcing a woman to not have an abortion is just as bad as the government forcing a woman to have one.
2007-08-26 23:57:34 · answer #9 · answered by yellowdog 1 · 6⤊ 3⤋
What if the born child never gets to realize her potential because her mother gets only minimal support, let alone the money to send her to university?
All these hypothetical questions are moot. People who support enforced pregnancy are usually the same people who want to deny single mothers any support, so this question is especially nonsensical.
2007-08-27 00:03:51 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 3⤋