michelin89:

Abortion is a right of a woman. It is her body. No one is telling you to abort, but if someone chooses to, that should be the least of our concern.[/b]That law wasn't created after a serene sleep by the legislators. It is there because someone wanted it and others thought it was legitimate. We are free to discuss all the moral implications of abortion, but calling it murder is way out of proportion.

Not to mention that someone thinks spermatozoas and eggs should be treated with gloves because they are potential lives. That is absurd.

A right to kill nevertheless, that is the point we're trying to pass across
slice it anyway you want,color it in flowery language
[b]abortion= killing of a living human with a heartbeat and sucking it out with a hose
let's be frank
have you watched the clip yet?

Just sections. It has a lot of parts. I may have to watch it from the start.

no one said abortion isn't gruesome but it is a necessary evil just like a butcher shop.

~Lady~:

In order for one to be entitled to the rights of a human person, we first need to determine if one is actually human, you were giving me the impression that it is the moral consideration of a human that determines the entitlements to all the rights of a human person.

If you're telling me that moral consideration means entitled to all the rights a human person is, then you're basically saying that 'entitled to all the rights a human person is' determines the entitlements to all the rights of a human person.

See how that doesn't make sense?

I'm under the impression that we're trying to determine what makes a human being

sigh   . . .   I'm saying, from a moral standpoint, what qualifies an entity as a human person. Let me explain. . . We think it is wrong to intentionally run a human being over with a car, and we think it is wrong to intentionally run a dog over with a car. But we think it is more wrong to run a human being over with a car than it is to run a dog over. The reason is that we believe humans are entitled to more moral consideration than  dogs. So, while dogs do have some moral status, humans have more. U probably won't get a life sentence for running a deer over. And while you may be cruel to get involved in dog-fighting (animal cruelty), no-one is going to come looking for you if killed a mosquito that wasn't trying to bite u.

WHen I say "morally human", I am saying, what does it take for an entity to be entitled to the same moral consideration a human person does. The reason why I'm stressing this is that your position asks us to ignore the needs of the pregnant woman, and other persons whose lives may be directly affected by her.

Now I said I will grant that the fetus is a human being because I don't want us to get bogged down on that. Not that I agree with you though. . .At the point of conception all there is is clumps of cells. They are no more a human person than an orange seed is an orange tree.   But you also seem to think that because the fetus is human life, abortion is morally impermissible. You claim this is obvious, and have made several posts to that effect, but u have not demonstrated it.

That a fetus is morally human is just one thing. Another thing is the moral status of abortion. does it follow that because a fetus is human, abortion is always wrong?  What about is situations of despoil? . . . remember, this is because a nine month pregnancy affects more than just the fetus.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lol

krayola,
comparing a fetus to an orange seed is morally crass.

@Krayola
  why do you keep comparing human life to Animal life? for God sake, this topic is about Abortion and not about Human life vs Animal life.

Krayola, have u ever eaten any animal in your life before? and how about plants too, have u ever eaten any kind of plants before since you are good at advocating for plants and animals?

Everyone should please watch that video.

Whats so special about the video?

Every single living cell from amoeba to single cell gamates right down to body cells, tumour cells respond to stimuli.

An amoeba will as well move away from the saline solution so kini big deal?

honeric01:

@Krayola
  why do you keep comparing human life to Animal life? for God sake, this topic is about Abortion and not about Human life vs Animal life.

Krayola, have u ever eaten any animal in your life before? and how about plants too, have u ever eaten any kind of plants before since you are good at advocating for plants and animals?

Besides what your bible says, why is an undeveloped fetus more valuable that an adult animal.

Yes, I do eat animals. But I do not think abortion is always morally wrong, so maybe I don't think terminating animals is always morally wrong either . You are the one that advocates killing one specie and preserving another, so you are the one that has some explaining to do.

Why is it ok to terminate a cow and not a fetus?

The thing is, you guys just like to make arguments that u haven't thought through. You state stuff like it should be obvious, but when u have to explain why you think it, all you come up with is all these nonsensical questions directed at me. You can not make a reasonable argument for what u believe. Someone just called my comparison crass, but did not give a reason. What the hell am i supposed to do with his opinion? One that he has not defended?

Your bible suggests only human life is "sacred", and that is the basis of your stance. But outside of your bible, I want you to explain to me why u think a human fetus has more rights that a fully developed cow, or pig etc. . .

Krayola:

Besides what your bible says, why is an undeveloped fetus more valuable that an adult animal.

Yes, I do eat animals. But I do not think abortion is always morally wrong, so maybe I don't think terminating animals is always morally wrong either . You are the one that advocates killing one specie and preserving another, so you are the one that has some explaining to do.

Why is it ok to terminate a cow and not a fetus?

The thing is, you guys just like to make arguments that u haven't thought through. You state stuff like it should be obvious, but when u have to explain why you think it, all you come up with is all these nonsensical questions directed at me. You can not make a reasonable argument for what u believe. Someone just called my comparison crass, but did not give a reason. What the hell am i supposed to do with his opinion. One that he has not defended?

Your bible suggests only human life is "sacred", and that is the basis of your stance. But outside of your bible, I want you to explain to me why u think a human fetus has more rights that a fully developed cow, or pig etc. . . 

Man, you can't seem to amaze me, lol, gosh!!!, i can't believe this, who's the animal right specialist here? who's been the one preaching and advocating for the animal rights here? i was thinking you live off on sand and soil, so you eat animals and plants too?

man, i have been typing since without bringing in my religion, so where did you get your religions part from? i don't understand you at all, you are fighting for animal rights, yet you eat the same animals you're defending, what should i make of you? by the way, how does animal issue related to aborting of a baby by a woman who knew she was going to get pregnant if she fuks around unprotected? how do they relate?

i just don't understand why some people would go extra mile to try to defend their stand even when it appears that they're shooting themselves on the foot.

now, tell me, if it's okay to terminate a cow, and a baby, why then is it also not okay to terminate you or a baby already born just like a baby in the womb?

Oh those days when I could talk like krayola, old age is a bad thing oh

I love your line of reasoning sha, very unique.

honeric01:

Man, you can't seem to amaze me, lol, gosh!!!, i can't believe this, who's the animal right specialist here? who's been the one preaching and advocating for the animal rights here? i was thinking you live off on sand and soil, so you eat animals and plants too?

man, i have been typing since without bringing in my religion, so where did you get your religions part from?  i don't understand you at all, you are fighting for animal rights, yet you eat the same animals you're defending, what should i make of you? by the way, how does animal issue related to aborting of a baby by a woman who knew she was going to get pregnant if she fuks around unprotected? how do they relate?

i just don't understand why some people would go extra mile to try to defend their stand even when it appears that they're shooting themselves on the foot.

now, tell me, if it's okay to terminate a cow, and a baby, why then is it also not okay to terminate you or a baby already born just like a baby in the womb?

again. . . no response to the what I have said. . .  I'm not an animal rights activist. I'm using animals here because I'm pointing out that u have no problem with killing them because they are not like us. You think their lives are disposable, and that a human fetus' is not. I am asking what type of reasoning leads you to this conclusion.


Why is a human fetus more valuable than an adult animal?

honeric01:

now, tell me, if it's okay to terminate a cow, and a baby, why then is it also not okay to terminate you or a baby already born just like a baby in the womb?

Because, IMO, our humanity is not the core basis of our moral status, but our person-hood.

The word "human being" is used in two different ways in the position u have, and i think you do not see the problem that raises. I will try to point it out so u see the fallacy in your and Lady's argument.  this is the argument u guys are making.

1) It is wrong to kill innocent human beings
2) Fetuses are innocent human beings, therefore
3)it is wrong to kill fetuses

If you are using "human being" in the same sense in both of those premises, one of them is begging the question, and if it is being used in different senses, the conclusion does not follow, at all.

premise (1) seems fine. It is a generally accepted moral position. But only if human being is meant to mean a full member of the "moral community" that is also a human being. This is what I meant when I was saying "morally human", and not being "genetically human".  You position is that because human genes are present in the cell nuclei from conception, a fetus is a human being. But you still have to demonstrate that it is human in the moral sense - The sense in which all full fledged  humans have equal rights and status. The potential for rational thought and other full human features only shows that the fetus MAY potentially become human in the moral sense at some point in the future, but that is about all it can do.

I posted this earlier

IMO, Characteristics of person-hood include sentience, reason (capacity to solve new and relatively complex problems), the capacity to communicate (on indefinitely number of possible contents, and topics), self-awareness, moral agency (capacity to regulate one's own actions through moral principles or ideals), emotionality.

Now, one does not have to have all these together to be considered a person, but my point is that something that has NONE of these characteristics should not be considered a person. I do not believe that a fetus in the early stages of pregnancy has any of the characteristics that make it a candidate for moral consideration  

Please let me know what problems u have with it. And explain why an entity that does not have any of those features should have more rights that one that does.

Chrisbenogor:

Oh those days when I could talk like krayola, old age is a bad thing oh

I love your line of reasoning sha, very unique.

haha thanks. I'm basically remixing a bunch of arguments I've read before.

Abeg give me link make I read na abeg you hear so that me and you an shout together

Krayola:

again. . . no response to the what I have said. . .  I'm not an animal rights activist. I'm using animals here because I'm pointing out that u have no problem with killing them because they are not like us. You think their lives are disposable, and that a human fetus' is not. I am asking what type of reasoning leads you to this conclusion.

   
Why would you use animals as your example? let me ask you a question, do the women survive on killing babies they deliberately allowed in the first place? you are not addressing the main issue here, rather you are defending the cause of the problems we are facing. the cause of the problem is lack of self control which you are not addressing, rather you prefer to defend these women who prefer abortion than prevention.

Krayola:

Why is a human fetus more valuable than an adult animal?

 We partly survive on adult animals that we kill because we eat them to survive, if we had other alternate, we wouldn't need to kill them, if you say we shouldn't kill or eat animals (just few of them are even eaten by humans), you can as well suggest alternatives. a baby is a young adult human in the making while [b]some [/b]adult animals are needed to be killed for our growth and survival.

Krayola:

Because, IMO, our humanity is not the core basis of our moral status, but our person-hood.


The word "human being" is used in two different ways in the position u have, and i think you do not see the problem that raises. I will try to point it out so u see the fallacy in your and Lady's argument.  this is the argument u guys are making.

1) It is wrong to kill innocent human beings
2) Fetuses are innocent human beings, therefore
3)it is wrong to kill fetuses

If you are using "human being" in the same sense in both of those premises, one of them is begging the question, and if it is being used in different senses, the conclusion does not follow, at all.

premise (1) seems fine. It is a generally accepted moral position. But only of human being is meant to mean a full member of the "moral community" that is also a human being. This is what I meant when I was saying "morally human", and not being "genetically human".  You position is that because human genes are present in the cell nuclei from conception, a fetus is a human being. But you still have to demonstrate that it is human in the moral sense - The sense in which all full fledged  humans have equal rights and status. The potential for rational thought and other full human features only shows that the fetus MAY potentially become morally moral sense at some point in the future, but that is about all it can do.

  Yes, in your opinion, but don't you think your opinion does not necessitate the general opinion?, BTW, did you watch that video? that was a 10 week old baby being destroyed, skinned, brutalized and agonizingly killed by the abortionist, the baby responded to the torture by his/her violent movement in the uterus.

YOU ARE YET TO ANSWER MY QUESTION, WHAT STOPS A WOMAN FROM PROTECTING HERSELF FROM GETTING PREGNANT RATHER THAN USING ABORTION TO WIPE OFF THE TRACES OF HER CONSTANT WRONG DOINGS?


If a woman is not ready to nurse a woman, you should as well not have se.xx, use protection or just insists the other party uses protection. if you're matured enough to have se.xx, you should be matured enough to take up your responsibilities.



why would you prefer to classify humans in 2 different ways? are humans different from eachother? is one less human than the other? is a baby less human than an adult?

Chrisbenogor:

Abeg give me link make I read na abeg you hear so that me and you an shout together  

haha.

http://instruct.westvalley.edu/lafave/warren_article.html

http://spot.colorado.edu/~heathwoo/Phil160,Fall02/thomson.htm

Those are the two I can find online. I have a big fat book that I used for a "Moral Issues" course and it pretty much has a s.hitload of arguments from the top comtemporary philosophers on every issue from abortion to sexuality, to free speech, human rights, bio-ethics, name it.

There are also some pretty good arguments against abortion in there too though. . . I just decided to argue for cause it's more fun.  

Here is a link to a pretty good one against abortion. Can't find the article but I found a link to pages from the book I have. It's already on the right page

http://books.google.ca/books?id=o5peQpgSTTIC&pg=RA1-PA83&lpg=RA1-PA83&dq=symmetries+that+emerge+from+the+analysis+of+the+major+arguments&source=bl&ots=x97PI3owDA&sig=x3FnOVP4-g0RTKE0q7L5qUTRpcE&hl=en&ei=nSaJS_GoI9aOtgeJ0PmYDw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CAYQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=symmetries%20that%20emerge%20from%20the%20analysis%20of%20the%20major%20arguments&f=false

@ honeric. try read those links I posted. It has everything I'm going to say there. na ojoro i don dey do since  I posted one that is against abortion too just for you. i dey go watch soccer. 

Krayola:

@ honeric. try read those links I posted. It has everything I'm going to say there. na ojoro i don dey do since  I posted one that is against abortion too just for you.  i dey go watch soccer. 

Chei, see olojoro lol God don catch you lol, i was wondering why you posted some of your comments because some of them really didn't go with some of my comments you quoted lol well na you know sha.


na today we dey play?

honeric01:

Chei, see olojoro lol God don catch you lol, i was wondering why you posted some of your comments because some of them really didn't go with some of my comments you quoted lol well na you know sha.

haha. I juss dey lazy this morning that na why . . .

honeric01:

na today we dey play?

Yes o.

Krayola:

haha. I juss dey lazy this morning that na why . . .

Yes o.

lazy lazy man, where u go last night? u go party?

anyways 3 points for us sha.

hehehehe man city for life
thanks krayola!

krayola,
i see where your coming from. a pity i wont waste time exchanging words with your type.

whether the bible is right or not you'll know eventually only i pray it wont be too late for you.

George_D:

krayola,
i see where your coming from. a pity i wont waste time exchanging words with your type.

whether the bible is right or not you'll know eventually only i pray it wont be too late for you.

haha. my type? Jesus loves u

Hell no!!! how can you compare abortion to murder. Before i continue my comment, i must introduce myself as an Evolutionist, so you will understand that my views are not from the selfish and very narrow moral views expressed by religionists.

From the evolutionary and socio-economic (read  Malthus Population Theory) point of view abortion play a crucial role in modern society.

Here is a snippet from his theory;

Malthus argued that population is held within resource limits by two types of checks: positive checks, which raise the death rate; and preventative ones, which lower the birth rate. The positive checks include hunger, disease and war; the preventative checks, abortion, birth control, prostitution, postponement of marriage, and celibacy.[26] Regarding possibilities for freeing man from these limits, Malthus argued against a variety of imaginable solutions. For example, he satirically criticized the notion that agricultural improvements could expand without limit:

You can read further http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Robert_Malthus

First I believe it is morally wrong to force a woman to go through the trauma of pregnancy and an even greater problem of raising a child, unless she is Physiologically, psychologically, and physically ready and willing. Forget the arguments about self control, when the hormones are overactive, nothing can control sexual activity (unless we have good societal sexual valves like early and easy marriages, other avenues for releasing sexual energies like prosti-tution, condoms usage, etc.) An unwanted child brought into the world today by an unwilling mother or family posses far greater risk to the society at large that having the child aborted in the first place.

We humans - Homo sapiens have been been so successful evolutionarily especially since the last ice age that our population has exploded and infact have put the world ecosystem out of equilibrium. We are beginning to consume more than the ecosystem can provide, even with our improved agriculture. Then there is the energy needs and living space requirements of our exponentially growing population, which will require that we cut down more trees, that are very important for maintaining the worlds temperature and oxygen levels and reducing green house CO2 gas. If our population continues to increase at the present levels, we will hit 12 billion by the end of this century or early next century, which will be twice our present population. So what i am saying is that the number of fetus aborted would have no appreciable impact on human population increase. Further more i want the UN to take population control seriously (like China is trying to do), because the single post important threat to world peace and stability in the long run is population explosion.

People are talking about the morality of killing a fetus, and they term it a living person. If so what about the millions of sperms wasted by the man or the eggs wasted by the woman, would you call that natural murder. The problem is, when can a fetus said to be a legal living entity? Is it on the day of conception? 8 weeks after conception, when there is a heart beat, 6 months after conception when the baby is fully formed or just before birth. I think that question needs to be answered before one can talk of murder.

I like the way Krayola is taking a wider perspective on the issue. Yes animals are vary important in the wider scheme of things and anything that applies to us also applies to animals and plants as well, after all we share this planet together.

evolution, did you say? ha! its amazing how we claim to be enlightened people and yet allow ourselves to be deceived by elusive theories!

George_D:

evolution, did you say? ha! its amazing how we claim to be enlightened people and yet allow ourselves to be deceived by elusive theories!

Evolution, an elusive theory? Are you joking?. Please as an enlighten person, give me an alternative theory to explain the millions of species of living things (flora and fauna) on earth or a university that teaches an alternative theory.

Anyhow we see dis topic morally/religiously abortion is a murder.
For instance abortion is mostly done by unmarried folks i.e BF&G.FRIEND. Morally a guy knows his not going to marry alady yet wants to enjoy sex.In d process unwanted pregnancy comes in&next is abortion.Why shd a guy date a lady for fun?
Abortion is a murder,imagine if a pregnancy is terminated,do we know what d child could become if allowed to survive?
Jeremiah said in d bible,Jeremiah1:5 God addressed him dat b4 'i formed u in d womb,i knew u&i av appointed u a prophet.If he had been aborted would he av become a prophet? If we abort,do we know how many Obamas,clinton,Awolowos,Azikwes,Tafawa balewa dat would be killed?

wirinet:

Evolution, an elusive theory? Are you joking?. Please as an enlighten person, give me an alternative theory to explain the millions of species of living things (flora and fauna) on earth or a university that teaches an alternative theory.

ah! and to think that some people call themselves educated! 

_{shakes head and walks away}

toba:

Anyhow we see dis topic morally/religiously abortion is a murder.
For instance abortion is mostly done by unmarried folks i.e BF&G.FRIEND. Morally a guy knows his not going to marry alady yet wants to enjoy intimacy.In d process unwanted pregnancy comes in&next is abortion.Why shd a guy date a lady for fun?
Abortion is a murder,imagine if a pregnancy is terminated,do we know what d child could become if allowed to survive?
Jeremiah said in d bible,Jeremiah1:5 God addressed him dat b4 'i formed u in d womb,i knew u&i av appointed u a prophet.If he had been aborted would he av become a prophet? If we abort,do we know how many Obamas,clinton,Awolowos,Azikwes,Tafawa balewa dat would be killed?

Abortion is carried out by couples (mainly women), who are unprepared to cater for a pregnancy or a baby, especially in depressed economies like Nigeria. The problem is my friend we become sexually active and want to enjoy intimacy before we are ready for marriage. And most of the time an average person is not ready for marriage until he or she is in their late twenties or even early thirties.  So how do you expect them to suppress their sexual energies from the age of 18 when they are legally allowed to have intimacy.

Those people became great mostly because they had the love and support of their Parents and families, they would have had a difficult time if they were dumped into a gutter.  The consequences of outlawing abortion would be greater than allowing it. I have personally seen a newly born baby float by the Lagos lagoon behind Bar beach, and the memory still hunts me today ,and that was over 10 years ago. My wife said she had seen a new born dumped in a dust bin and covered with ants, while on her way to school when she was younger.luckily the baby was saved and taken to a hospital.

Hi,i think abortion is murder.Atleast you are a taking away a life or a life to be.seriously.

Anne_Marie:

Hi,i think abortion is murder.Atleast you are a taking away a life or a life to be.seriously.

Is it a bad thing to take away a life to be?