Couldn't find what you looking for?

TRY OUR SEARCH!


I have recently read that abortion can not be performed in every stage of pregnancy. If performed before 6th week it is not a murder and if later it is. Am a bit confused about this. I’m 14 and would like to get clearer explanation about abortion. Is it a murder or not?

Loading...


It’s all about human physiology. Legally abortion is performed at the stage in which fertilized egg does not have eyes, brain and does not look like human being. It is not murder but surgical procedure. It seems to me like your question is a bit pretentious. Do you personally think that abortion is murder? What about women that are not able to raise a child, or were raped or consciously used contraception that failed?
Reply

Loading...

Many feel abortion is murder. Many feel abortion is a choice a woman makes before the fetus is human. It is a matter of opinion.

The saddest part is when women choose abortion and regret it and suffer depression.

My personal belief is that from the moment of conception, a human life is formed. I don't mean that as a judgement of anyone who feels differently or has had an abortion. Our society, in an effort to allow women to make this difficult decision with less regret, has tended to treat abortion as a surgical removal of some unwanted growth. Because women are usually the ones left with the responsibility of raising the child, pro-choice advocates want women who are truely not ready to have children to have a way out.

The heart knows, in the end, what damage has been caused. The mom suffers. It is very sad.

For more info, I would suggest this website:.abort73.com
Reply

Loading...

Im 20 years old and I am going through with deciding on the choice of keeping my baby or not. I once was agianst abortion but until I was in the shoes of someone who is, which is me, I know very well the thoughts and pain that every woman goes through. I am at a confused state and hopefully the path I decide I will not be looked upon. Honestly, I hate others who but into other woman affairs to tell them they're wrong for the decision they make. I despise those who look upon us pregnant woman who decided to get an abortion in the end. No one has the right to tell me or any other woman they are wrong for killing. No one has the right to tell me what I will be feeling in the near future. If regrets, hatred, or any of that sort of feelings are to come upon me later on in life, it is mine and all the woman I speak on their behalves conscience. Who are you to judge us and say we will regret. For some woman or I, the position I am in, only I am aware of. Lastly, all of these hypocrites who think they are right to say we are wrong, I really think should put your mouth where you're ass is. Those of you who tries to lectures me and any other woman on this topic about abortion being wrong, unless you been in my shoes or any other pregnant woman shoes, respond back.
Reply

Loading...

Pro-Life laws and policy are actually sectarian and therefore unconstitutional. Obviously, in so far as each side strives to influence policy in opposite directions, each side seeks to impose their logically conflicting and therefore reciprocally incompatible beliefs upon the other. So, what is the truth? Who is right? At most, only one side or the other.

Class struggle also appears to be a factor in the dispute: Too many spokespersons of the worst Wall Street plutocrats entirely well capable of affording for themselves, gold and platinum plated healthcare with dental, Chiropractic, all options of reproductive care and so much more, now continue to profit so scandalously from having brought the world economy to the brink of ruin, and hardly above blaming the poor most hard hit, now groan and lament at the very suggestion of burdensome reregulation in order curtail abuse or taxes in order to help cope with the damage. The depraved dittoheaded Pro-Lifers in particular, prefer fantasy unborn babies, to actual real life people suffering in desperate need, among other things, of reproductive rights and services. And so I confess that simply cannot take the Pro-Life position seriously and I even find it pernicious. Therefore, I cannot claim to respect their opinions, nor is that owed them. Yet Pro-Life apologist propagandists have much succeeded in undermining the morale of Pro-Choice by demanding of us ever so tactfully to turn the other cheek instead of openly challenging barking mad fairytales about sapient zygotes, consciousness in the womb or "sleeping" potentiality thereof, whatever that means, from the moment of conception! So, where is the rational Empirical evidence to support such extreme paranormal claims? The Pro-Lifers heartlessly and senselessly guilt-trip and seek to oppress distressed and confused women in crisis, denouncing abortion as murder, whereas clearly an actual murder requires an actual victim, not a potential or an essence, whatever that means.

Moreover, in nature, miscarriage, or: spontaneous abortion of exactly such "helpless" zygotes, occurs, usually quite undetected, constantly, all the time! And yet that doesn't seem to bother the Pro-Lifers much at all. After all, we don't intervene only to save people from violence or mishap, but also from entirely natural causes. So, if zygotes are actually to be considered people just like everybody else, why such manifest inconsistency on the part of the Pro-Lifers, if they really believe what they say they do? Why, if I actually believed such an absurdity, I'd demand, as a dire emergency measure, the spiking of the public drinking water supply with medicine to prevent miscarriage!

But returning to reality, safe, legal abortions covered under universal health care, can only be better that coat hangers or the back ally, not to mention the disastrous Global Gag Rule, never mind infant mortality and even infanticide as in days of old. Abortion is a good thing. And in the words of PZ Myers: "Yes, I seriously believe that consciousness is a product of a natural process. I find that the neuroscientists, psychologists, and philosophers who proceed from that premise are the ones who are actually making useful contributions to our understanding of the mind." Indeed, there remains no other viable general hypothesis. And therefore clearly, at conception, no person as yet exists in order to suffer or be murdered, because only into the third trimester will requisite fetal developmental neurology have progressed as minimally necessary for the natural processes underlying awareness and personality at all, never mind whatever necessary input of experience. A zygote, no more than an amoeba or a brick, simply cannot do it, as yet lacking the requisite biological equipment or: "wetware". A zygote is not a person.

And so, as a legal matter of constitutionality no less than of rational Empirical scientific investigation, without religion, Pro-Life demands or assertions regarding alleged civil rights of the unborn and particularly against abortion, simply have no leg to stand upon. "It's a life!" they scream. So, exactly what does it mean to employ the very word: 'life' as a noun that way? Indeed, the obfuscatory pseudoscientific so-called genetic view posits that the initial recombination from two prior sources into a genetically unique individual zygote at fertilization marks the beginning of life in general, and therefore human life specifically. For all such is the typical abuse of the very word: 'life,' in order by implication, to sneak in precepts of the soul and/or Aristotelian potentiality/essence via the proverbial back door. Indeed, literally speaking, if life only means biological activity, then the pseudoscientific so-called genetic view doesn't even really argue against abortion at all. For that matter, without Teleology, which is Theistic, what becomes of the Aristotelian notions of essence and potentiality? Not to mention, incidentally, that life, biological activity, is continuous all throughout the entire process of procreation, generation by generation, actually beginning in the primordial ooze with the transition from prebiotic evolution into biological evolution proper. Semantics aside, fertilization or conception, so called, actually being no more than the inception of the development of a new individual of whichever species, is another matter entirely.

All hence, for purposes of long overdue scientific ontology before the law, indeed retaining no personal recollection of that fateful day, I implore of the Surgeon General Regina Benjamin, a medical determination upon the burning question, pivotal upon so many issues of law and policy, from future revisitation of Roe v. Wade to deadlocked Universal Health Care and the disastrous Global Gag Rule:

Was I conscious at the moment of my own conception?


Please sign online petition at:

And come to think of it, was there any homework assigned that day?

***edited by moderator*** web addresses not allowed
Reply

Loading...

killing is wrong.
Reply

Loading...

life is life and to condone the end of any life is vile. regardless of situation. if you were to murder Hitler the murder itself is a vile act no matter the beneficial results no matter how much suffering he caused before you could kill him and the act would leave you tainted by death corrupted in your very soul by the life you have stolen.

Reply

Loading...