Quote:

Original post by Alpha_ProgDes Let me clarify my position since you're having a hard time understanding. Letting the Internet make decisions on life and death is stupid. With that said, I didn't know that you could have an abortion at 5 months or even 4 months. Those sonograms clearly depict a human being. In my opinion, to abort that child is wrong. But at 1 month, when just it's a clump of cells, makes it, as you say, a medical procedure. So I'm okay with that.

I think you would be surprised at how developed a fetus is at 1 month. At the BODIES exhibit (which I highly recommend if you can see it), they had a section on pregnancy and fetal growth. They have test tubes with different developments during the first trimester. I was amazed at how quickly life grows. Essentially, at 6 weeks the fetus is a raisin sized human being (head, eyes, fingers, toes, and without that "tadpolish" look).

Quote:

Original post by ChurchSkiz Quote: Original post by Alpha_ProgDes Let me clarify my position since you're having a hard time understanding. Letting the Internet make decisions on life and death is stupid. With that said, I didn't know that you could have an abortion at 5 months or even 4 months. Those sonograms clearly depict a human being. In my opinion, to abort that child is wrong. But at 1 month, when just it's a clump of cells, makes it, as you say, a medical procedure. So I'm okay with that. I think you would be surprised at how developed a fetus is at 1 month. At the BODIES exhibit (which I highly recommend if you can see it), they had a section on pregnancy and fetal growth. They have test tubes with different developments during the first trimester. I was amazed at how quickly life grows. Essentially, at 6 weeks the fetus is a raisin sized human being (head, eyes, fingers, toes, and without that "tadpolish" look).

I have held an 18-week-old foetus in my hand (things have a way of not always working out the way you planned). It appears to be a very tiny copy of a human body, except the head is a little out of proportion and most of its mass is in the form of a large amorphous and unsightly mass called a placenta, which most of us lose shortly after birth.

No human delivered before 25 weeks has ever been viable. In Canada, elective abortions can only be considered prior to that time. I think after that it requires a committee to meet or something.

Quote:

Original post by tstrimp Quote: Original post by Mithrandir Quote: Original post by LessBread It seems to me that militant pro-lifers in the USA ought to be picketing governors demanding the commutation of death sentences, picketing legislatures demanding the repeal of capital punishment, demanding the passage of laws requiring health insurance companies to cover all forms of birth control and demanding the swift passage of universal health care on the grounds that it tends to cut the abortion rate (Universal health care tends to cut the abortion rate, March 14, 2010). And picketing Congress and the White House demanding better health and safety standards, better pollution controls, and an end to war. "Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed." (Eisenhower on the Opportunity Cost of Defense Spending) That they don't do any of this betrays the complete dishonesty of their movement. There's a saying I hear often; "They are only pro-life before birth; after you're born you're on your own." That and fetuses have never raped and killed people. Comparing abortion to capital punishment is silly at best.

Well I believe Canada and Western European countries have abandoned captial punishment and concentrate more on reform. But I could be wrong about the reform part.

In any case, pro-life is pro-life. Not pro-life with caveats.

Quote:

Original post by Bregma No human delivered before 25 weeks has ever been viable.

FYI, Pre-term births at 21 weeks

Quote:

Original post by Alpha_ProgDes In any case, pro-life is pro-life. Not pro-life with caveats.

Just because you say it, doesn't make it true. Pro-life generally refers specifically to an anti-elective abortion stance. Most rational people are able to make the distinction between taking an innocent life (how the pro-lifers view a pregnancy, no matter how far developed) versus executing a convicted murderer.

Quote:

Original post by tstrimp Quote: Original post by Mithrandir There's a saying I hear often; "They are only pro-life before birth; after you're born you're on your own." That and fetuses have never raped and killed people. Comparing abortion to capital punishment is silly at best.

No, not really.

Not really here either.

Wow, I never knew that unborn fetuses started the invasion of Iraq and exonerated death row inmates. Clearly they are a threat and we should probably abort them all, just to be safe.

Got any other strawmen?

Quote:

Original post by tstrimp Wow, I never knew that unborn fetuses started the invasion of Iraq and exonerated death row inmates. Clearly they are a threat and we should probably abort them all, just to be safe.

Stop being an idiot. The point of my post was that people who are the most vocally pro-life, are also highly in favor of unjust wars like the Iraq war, which destroyed hundreds of thousands of lives.

Ergo, they only care about life before people are born; not after.


Every single time I challenge a "pro-lifer" on their war stance, they justify it by saying they're all terrorists and muslims, and therefore they deserve to die. I guess you could call that viewpoint Pro-"Life", but to act all high and mighty and pretend that abortion is murder, whereas actual murder is not, is the epitome of hypocrisy.

Quote:

Original post by tstrimp Quote: Original post by Mithrandir Quote: Original post by LessBread It seems to me that militant pro-lifers in the USA ought to be picketing governors demanding the commutation of death sentences, picketing legislatures demanding the repeal of capital punishment, demanding the passage of laws requiring health insurance companies to cover all forms of birth control and demanding the swift passage of universal health care on the grounds that it tends to cut the abortion rate (Universal health care tends to cut the abortion rate, March 14, 2010). And picketing Congress and the White House demanding better health and safety standards, better pollution controls, and an end to war. "Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed." (Eisenhower on the Opportunity Cost of Defense Spending) That they don't do any of this betrays the complete dishonesty of their movement. There's a saying I hear often; "They are only pro-life before birth; after you're born you're on your own." That and fetuses have never raped and killed people. Comparing abortion to capital punishment is silly at best. That being said, I agree with pretty much all of the rest of Less's post. Abstinence only birth control and being completely pro-life is a recipe for disaster. I'm all for having free condoms available in middle and highschools, but I know the religious right would see that as encouraging pre-marital sex.

Just to make a note of it, I wasn't comparing abortion to capital punishment any more than I was comparing it to health and safety regulations. My point was that if you're going to call yourself "pro-life" then you ought to pursue agendas that support all life and not just the life of the unborn.

Here's some news on the abstinence only education front: Mississippi: In search of a solution to teen pregnancy

Quote:

... According to the Centers for Disease Control, Mississippi’s teen birth rate is 66 per thousand teenagers, the highest in the nation. The national average is 42. Experts here say many factors contribute to the state’s high birth rate, including poverty, culture and a one-dimensional sex-education program in schools. It likely would take years for any solutions to bring that number down, but experts said teenagers need more information about birth control and more involvement by parents, schools and communities. Connie Jo Williams is the director of the Early Beginnings program in the Pascagoula School District. Twice a month she meets with teens at Gautier and Pascagoula high schools who either are pregnant or have children. Williams tells the students about resources for diapers and formula and helps them deal with the issues associated with being a teen mother. She said children need more information, at a younger age, to prevent the pregnancies. “The timing of the urge is natural. The timing of the consequence is not,” she said. “My true gut feeling is that we need to offer a comprehensive sex-education program in our schools. We’re doing an injustice in my mind by not providing this information.” ... Sex education is part of the health curriculum, and students learn about reproduction from conception to birth, but the only form of birth control they are taught is abstinence. School boards can vote to teach other forms of birth control in their district, but for the curriculum to change statewide, the Department of Education needs a bill passed by the Legislature. Rep. John Mayo, D-Clarksdale, hopes he can help with that in January. Mayo has drafted legislation for the 2011 session that would change the state’s health curriculum to include other forms of birth control besides abstinence, but not abortion. He made the same proposal at this year’s session, and it passed the House but not the Senate. Mayo refuses to give up on the issue. “I believe the state should provide the information,” he said. “What you do with it is up to you, but information is not deadly.” ... State education Superintendent Tom Burnham doesn’t necessarily agree the curriculum needs to be changed throughout Mississippi. Department of Education spokesman Pete Smith said Burnham believes this issue should be decided in each district. “Local districts can make the determination about what they need,” Smith said. “Schools and communities should decide whether more-comprehensive sex education needs to be taught. It should be based on the individual district’s needs, not one law for the whole state.” ...

Quote:

Original post by Mithrandir Every single time I challenge a "pro-lifer" on their war stance, they justify it by saying they're all terrorists and muslims, and therefore they deserve to die. I guess you could call that viewpoint Pro-"Life", but to act all high and mighty and pretend that abortion is murder, whereas actual murder is not, is the epitome of hypocrisy.

I never knew you had talked to a few of them, and they told you that's how it was. Clearly then you're an expert on the beliefs of pro-life supporters and saying that pro-lifers only care about the unborn is in no way as ignorant as the extensive list of "pro-lifers" you have interviewed who view all muslims as terrorists who should be killed.