What is the difference between abortion and murder?

[MikaDubbz]

When you get technical about it, you're ending a life either way, sure. But unless you're religious and/or put a lot of stock in the idea of the soul, there is a significant difference between ending a life that has been places, seen things, made memories, and has full intention of being here tomorrow vs, ending the life of something that has no awareness or recognition of anything. If abortion upsets you strictly on the level that you've killed something, then to that same respect I hope you also get upset anytime a bug is squished, because at that point, there really is little difference.

 

[Deleted User]

still it's against christian religion to call an child without his own blood supply living. the bible says living starts and stops with blood.

The Bible also says that all human beings were created in the image of God in the womb, which means before they were born.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

When you get technical about it, you're ending a life either way, sure. But unless you're religious and/or put a lot of stock in the idea of the soul, there is a significant difference between ending a life that has been places, seen things, made memories, and has full intention of being here tomorrow vs, ending the life of something that has no awareness or recognition of anything. If abortion upsets you strictly on the level that you've killed something, then to that same respect I hope you also get upset anytime a bug is squished, because at that point, there really is little difference.

Little difference between a human and a bug? Really? A bug will buzz around dumbly all its short life and die within weeks, but a human fetus can grow into a human being that can enjoy life and live a long time. Why should a woman be able to take that away from her fetus?

 

[notimp]

Number One: Babies aren't parasites.
Number Two: Why does the woman have rights, but not the baby?
Number Three: Abortion is not life-saving! Where does that retarded notion come from? Abortion is life-ending!

Waeeh me not informed, but be emotion! Babies! Killing! Must.. protest on ... online... webforum.

When does a human become a human with unalienable human rights?

Sometime in the mothers womb.

When exactly? At conception? Nope, because there it is a clump of cells - that couldnt be called human yet.
When they got sensory capability? To some extent yes, but as they dont develop all at once - its not clear cut.

So how to approach this?
Humans in stories I know from the middle east are not only known to go to quacks that perform 'in living room operations' just so the don't have to birth a baby, they socially or psychologically dont want to. Many of them die. Women are known to put heavy rocks on their womb in other parts of the world, until they have a miscarriage, just so they dont have to birth a baby they socially or psychologically dont want to.

Bigger issue - its part of their body, and as a state you cant easily regulate peoples actionability over their bodies. Not with force. In most of western legal tradition.

Which brings us back to - but you do it, if you have to saveguard the interests of other human life. Which brings us back to - when does a fetus get inalienable human rights.

Which brings us back to - its not at conception.

How are abortions also saving lives? If a fertilized egg hasnt left the fallopian tube, is starting to develop there, eventually causing in body bleeding and killing the women and the child, f.e.

But also psychological distress, causing extreme harm to both the mother and the child, if f.e. there is absolute rejection of the idea of wanting to identify and care for the child. You are basically ruining two lives at that point, with the counterpoint being, but at least there is one more person - alive, that gets a chance, and positively 'good' people could be caring about the child - you know like MEEEEEEEEE, at which point, the argument gets really creepy, but then - hey you'd save a life argument remains. Not in all cases, btw. because women in severe psychological distress also are known to not always give away their newborns to the stranger of your liking.

But still - you have a point. So we regulate into womens bodies and declare a fetus to become a child, even before they are born, and make abortion illegal in the third trimester.

All questions answered?

But child, and killing, and emotion and --- someone needs to post their outrage on the internets, quickly!

Get likeminded folks, start public protests, realize - that you are not in the majority (wanting to create more births, where the children are hated by their mothers, when they arrive), then read this text again.

To minimize those accurances, in the olden days, the church itself had to come up with a solution, btw. And it was chastity. As a virtue. So basically - behavior modification. As a result, women and men werent 'equal' at all. But hey - babies saved!
--

Now watch all of this getting ignored.

 

[MikaDubbz]

Little difference between a human and a bug? Really? A bug will buzz around dumbly all its short life and die within weeks, but a human fetus can grow into a human being that can enjoy life and live a long time. Why should a woman be able to take that away from her fetus?

Yes, at that point, absolutely, at least before we factor in religious beliefs. That early in the fetus' life there is absolutely room to make the argument that even a bug has more awareness about itself. Yes, the fetus has the potential to be so much more than a bug, obviously, but at that point, it isn't, it simply isn't.

 

[JaapDaniels]

Murder is killing with malicious intent. Capital Punishment is killing for the safety of other people.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------


You clearly haven't developed a functioning brain, since you think abortion should be legal. Does that mean that you shouldn't have any rights?

how old are you, and what is it to you?
this is going nowhere, my brain works fine, but no blood circulation means no life, no brain means no decissions can be made, a mother should always been put first, if a mother is not isn't in anyway gonna be a mother, what is it you call life?
if a mothrer can't proved for herself you wanna have a living baby to only starve lateron with his mother?
a mother can know that a baby doesn't have any chance in life.
you like to think different, but this world isn't a endless beautifull place, some of us have pain, some of us are sick even before they're born, some were forced in life to do things they can't cope with.
(and i'm not talking about my life, but i've seen things i hope you'll never gonna have to see).
a mother should always have the right stop suffering inside her body.
not all suffering is visible, still only the mother should have the right.
i don't think it should be easy to go for abortion, i think a few psychic sessions should go before this option comes to mind.

being nice and understanding to your neighbors, talking with them instead of about them brings you and thier unborn child way further in life.
help a needing person maybe that saves an unborn child, help police (only when it's the right thing to do) to get the streets around you to be safe, and you might've saved a few unborn children.

i live life, and children as much as most people, i'm against playing for god as you see fit.

the right to abortion didn't come over one night talk... and beleve me, most woman who did abortion are struggling every day for what they did is hard.

 

[Deleted User]

Yes, at that point, absolutely, at least before we factor in religious beliefs. That early in the fetus' life there is absolutely room to make the argument that even a bug has more awareness about itself. Yes, the fetus has the potential to be so much more than a bug, obviously, but at that point, it isn't, it simply isn't.

Yes! Precisely! "at that point, it simply isn't"! But it's going to be! So don't kill it!

 

[DiscostewSM]

Abortion is also a money saving cost, as it saves our country hundreds of thousands of dollars on feeding, teaching, clothing, and protecting an unwanted child.

But it is more expensive than being smart by taking necessary precautions to prevent conception, which includes simply not doing what leads to pregnancy. Irresponsibility shouldn't be an excuse to get an abortion with taxpayers money.

 

[MikaDubbz]

Yes! Precisely! "at that point, it simply isn't"! But it's going to be! So don't kill it!

You can argue that all you like. But at that point, again it is no more than a bug. So if you're upset that something with less awareness than a bug has died, then good on you, I can't say that particularly upsets me though. But hey, if you're religious and that kind of thing does upset you, I can understand it from that perspective. But to try and say that ending the life of a fetus that has less awareness than an insect is no different than killing a person who has lived, seen things, made memories, etc. etc. just doesn't equate to me in terms of morality, unless again I was a big proponent for the idea for the idea of the soul.

 

[Deleted User]

and beleve me, most woman who did abortion are struggling every day for what they did is hard.

Yes. The women regret it. They regret killing their children. Because abortion is murder. Why would anyone regret this if all it was was killing a few non-human cells that are equal to bacteria? They wouldn't. They regret their babies' murders.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

But it is more expensive than being smart by taking necessary precautions to prevent conception, which includes simply not doing what leads to pregnancy. Irresponsibility shouldn't be an excuse to get an abortion with taxpayers money.

Yes! If people just wouldn't fuck all the time with no desire for children, then abortion wouldn't even be a thing!

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Hey Mods, please close this thread, as it is getting nowhere because it is full of murder-supporting stubborn brickheads.

 

[notimp]

But it is more expensive than being smart by taking necessary precautions to prevent conception, which includes simply not doing what leads to pregnancy. Irresponsibility shouldn't be an excuse to get an abortion with taxpayers money.

Yeah, link those two together, why dont you..

On the first part correct. Contraception is more cost effective, and no operation, therefore its easier, therefore more people engage in it.

So far so dropdead easy.

- Contraception fails sometime, or with all things human behavior based on a psychological drive, they fail sometimes - at which point you need a contingency - or you are guilt tripping people into not to use contraception "in case something goes wrong".


Which is exactly what you dont want from a societal perspective (reduction of birth rate world wide is not only wanted, but needed, productivity of your societies would be halved with bright women not being in the workforce).

There is simply no avenue left to 'go back on this'.

You would have society fail, at this point - just to save more (not yet) babies.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Yes! If people just wouldn't fuck all the time with no desire for children, then abortion wouldn't even be a thing!

This is an important point - despite being one from the 17th century - logic wise, this really would be needed if you take away contraception and abortions.

Which by default means, men are more powerful again, which at the core, might as well be the main motivation of the author of this message.

If you get none at the moment, dont go messing up society at large in return. You can do it.

 

[JaapDaniels]

Yes. The women regret it. They regret killing their children. Because abortion is murder. Why would anyone regret this if all it was was killing a few non-human cells that are equal to bacteria? They wouldn't. They regret their babies' murders.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------


Yes! If people just wouldn't fuck all the time with no desire for children, then abortion wouldn't even be a thing!

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Hey Mods, please close this thread, as it is getting nowhere because it is full of murder-supporting stubborn brickheads.

no, they don't regret, most of them don't maybe some.
they experience emotions for they the brain is already moving towards a future, so just like when a parent dies they'll experience moments they nevergonna have with this possible child, and that will be there.
some dreams how beautifull they might be are not real, and you know that, still in a dream it makes sence, but you know that in your reallity it's a nightmare.
not having the chance of abortion is in no way warant to a life, here closeby a mother strengled her just born baby the minute it was born.
i wished she didn't, we all did, that was a case where i say it would've been better she got abortion done in the early stage.
this baby breathed a few times, this baby even made noise.

i don't understand some mothers choices, but still it's better they make them.

 

[omgcat]

Yes. The women regret it. They regret killing their children. Because abortion is murder. Why would anyone regret this if all it was was killing a few non-human cells that are equal to bacteria? They wouldn't. They regret their babies' murders.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------


Yes! If people just wouldn't fuck all the time with no desire for children, then abortion wouldn't even be a thing!

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Hey Mods, please close this thread, as it is getting nowhere because it is full of murder-supporting stubborn brickheads.

Asking for a thread to be closed because you didn't get your way and are arguing in bad faith is childish. But I agree, the original question was answered, and all further conversation is about morals, not legality like the original post asked. I'd like to save the thread from 20+ pages of incel whining.

 

[MikaDubbz]

Hey Mods, please close this thread, as it is getting nowhere because it is full of murder-supporting stubborn brickheads.

You started this topic under the guise of a debate. After overwhelming arguments against your stance, now you want the thread shut down? Seem to me that you didn't really want a debate, you just wanted to have others support you in your views and/or to wave a sense of superiority over those that don't agree with you.

 

[VinsCool]

You started this topic under the guise of a debate. After overwhelming arguments against your stance, now you want the thread shut down? Seem to me that you didn't really want a debate, you just wanted to have others support you in your views and/or to wave a sense of superiority over those that don't agree with you.

This is also the conclusion I drew after watching this thread for a little while.

I agree, there is nothing left to discuss now, so it seems like a good time to close it.