What Does An Aborted Fetus Look Like???

[KC]

http://www.abortion.org.au/Gestation%20Sac%206-7%20weeks.jpg

This is the gestational sac from an abortion performed 6 to 7 weeks into a pregnancy.

Source (http://www.abortion.org.au/abortionpictures.htm)

Surprised? Perhaps it's because anti-abortionists are downright liars when it comes to actual pictures of abortions. Many of the common posterfetalchildren of the anti-abortion movement have been shown to be distortions or fabrications, as is shown on this page (http://www.abortion.org.au/abortedfetuses.htm) (warning: this page contains graphic images).

Also, this site contains this page (http://www.abortion.org.au/whenhuman.htm) on when an embryo becomes a human. I found this picture to be very interesting:

http://www.abortion.org.au/foetus.JPG




Thoughts?

[Forward Union]

looks delicious

[KC]

Crap, I think I accidentally posted this in the debate competitions forum. Could someone move this to OI please? I think it would be a good thread for anti-choicers to address.

[Sankofa]

looks delicious

Hey, they do look a little bit like Brine Shrimp...

Who knows? Aborted fetus + a little cocktail sauce = delicacy? :lol:

[Hit The North]

Crap, I think I accidentally posted this in the debate competitions forum. Could someone move this to OI please? I think it would be a good thread for anti-choicers to address.

Certainly.

[Forward Union]

Hey, they do look a little bit like Brine Shrimp...

Who knows? Aborted fetus + a little cocktail sauce = delicacy? :lol:


The first exibit looks like a good spread for my sandwhiches instead of butter.

[AAFCE]

Hey, they do look a little bit like Brine Shrimp...

Who knows? Aborted fetus + a little cocktail sauce = delicacy? :lol:

I feel a bit odd for thinking the same thing at first sight..

[Patchd]

I can see it now;

on Stormfront: "Marxists admit to eating babies!":laugh:

[Sankofa]

I can see it now;

on Stormfront: "Marxists admit to eating babies!":laugh:

Fetis in the morning!
Fetis in the evening!
Fetis for supper time!
:lol:

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Fetis in the morning!
Fetis in the evening!
Fetis for supper time!
:lol:

*slaps Yonkers*

It's spelt foetus, Marx-damnit! How can the techno-fetishist conspiracy expect you to be unwitting pawns when you can't even spell scientific terms correctly? :D

[Sankofa]

*slaps Yonkers*

It's spelt foetus, Marx-damnit! How can the techno-fetishist conspiracy expect you to be unwitting pawns when you can't even spell scientific terms correctly? :D

I blame the English language! Its orthography system leaves much to be desired. :(

[Bud Struggle]

Here's some more pictures. I'll post the link not that actual pictures. They are fairly graphic.

http://www.wickedshepherds.com/ABORTIONPHOTOS.html

[Led Zeppelin]

Meh, I watched the pictures, I really couldn't give less of a shit about aborted fetuses.

[JimmyJazz]

Here's some more pictures. I'll post the link not that actual pictures. They are fairly graphic.

http://www.wickedshepherds.com/ABORTIONPHOTOS.html

They remind me of the victims of U.S. imperialism (http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=iraqi+dead&btnG=Search+Images&gbv=2) in Iraq.

Did you vote for W, Tom? Because he sure turned out to be an awesome "pro-lifer".

http://www.fearbush.com/blog/archives/IraqiDead.jpg

[Bud Struggle]

They remind me of the victims of U.S. imperialism (http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=iraqi+dead&btnG=Search+Images&gbv=2) in Iraq.

Did you vote for W, Tom? Because he sure turned out to be an awesome "pro-lifer".

FWIW: W is one of the great tragedies that has ever happened to the United States--let alone the world. I don't know if you could call him personally "evil" but he certainly brought a lot of evil into this world.

It's going to tak a LONG time to dig out of the hole he's gotten us into. If he was a Liberal, that would have been OK, if he was a real Conservative, that would have been OK--but he was nothing--just a man driven by his own personal demons--and all played out on the world stage.

You or I could be a little wacky and nobody would care--if the President of the United States is a little crazy--thousands die.

And thousands have died.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

FWIW: W is one of the great tragedies that has ever happened to the United States--let alone the world. I don't know if you could call him personally "evil" but he certainly brought a lot of evil into this world.

I get the strong feeling that Bush doesn't truly realise the consequences of his presidency.


It's going to tak a LONG time to dig out of the hole he's gotten us into. If he was a Liberal, that would have been OK, if he was a real Conservative, that would have been OK--but he was nothing--just a man driven by his own personal demons--and all played out on the world stage.

He strikes me as more of a puppet than anything else.

[JimmyJazz]

Tom, my question wasn't whether he's a true Scotsm- er, Conservative, it was whether he's a "pro-lifer" and whether millions of largely religious Americans voted for him on that basis.


And thousands have died.

"thousands"? :lol:

No (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_conflict_in_Iraq_since_2003).

[Bud Struggle]

Tom, my question wasn't whether he's a true Scotsm- er, Conservative, it was whether he's a "pro-lifer" and whether millions of largely religious Americans voted for him on that basis.


He said he was a pro-lifer, he wasn't--he seemed to have lied a bit, but lots of religious Americans voted for him thinking he was and they made a mistake.

[KC]

TomK, it was pointless to post links to pictures that have been shown to be deceptions. Perhaps you missed my OP.

Basically, the website you linked to has zero credibility.

[JimmyJazz]

He said he was a pro-lifer, he wasn't--he seemed to have lied a bit, but lots of religious Americans voted for him thinking he was and they made a mistake.

Sorry, I disagree. I still have connections to fundamentalist Christians I knew when I was younger (I see them on facebook, occasionally in real life, etc.), and lots of them voted McCain based solely on the issue of abortion. They figured he would be more "pro-life" than Obama, and his pick of Palin encouraged them.

Yet, this is the man who sings about bombing Iran to the tune of the Beach Boys. How self-described "pro-lifers" could be so fucking hypocritical and narrow-minded as to vote for him on the abortion issue alone boggles my mind. Frankly, it did even when I was still a Christian.

[Bud Struggle]

TomK, it was pointless to post links to pictures that have been shown to be deceptions. Perhaps you missed my OP.

Basically, the website you linked to has zero credibility.

Indeed I missed that paragraph, my apologies. I certainly didn't think my site wasn't worthwhile. Let me check on this further and get back. I am not a fan of abortion but I had no intention of posting any misinformation.


Sorry, I disagree. I still have connections to fundamentalist Christians I knew when I was younger (I see them on facebook, occasionally in real life, etc.), and lots of them voted McCain based solely on the issue of abortion. They figured he would be more "pro-life" than Obama, and his pick of Palin encouraged them. Well of course, but it's more complicated than that. People did support him because he was pro-like, but in eight years he never did anything that was slightly pro-life, he made the soeeches, people believed him and he did whatever the hell he wanted to do. People voted for Bush because he said he was going to reduce the size of the government--he doubled it. As I said before, he was not a good man in many respects.


Yet, this is the man who sings about bombing Iran to the tune of the Beach Boys. How self-described "pro-lifers" could be so fucking hypocritical and narrow-minded as to vote for him on the abortion issue alone boggles my mind. Frankly, it did even when I was still a Christian.You don't get much choice here in America--the Communist party of the United States supported Obama--was that hypocritical, too? Or was that just because there were only two choices?

[Schrödinger's Cat]

Anti-choice propaganda is funny. I once saw a van that had "LIFE" written on the back. I couldn't help wondering how many soldiers died getting him that gasoline.

[Patchd]

You don't get much choice here in America--the Communist party of the United States supported Obama--was that hypocritical, too?
Of course it was, but their leadership who called for that are a bunch of popular frontist reformist arseholes, who most definitely do not represent the entire revolutionary left, nor do I think they do their own "rank and file" membership any good.

[Dust Bunnies]

No offense Tom but if a factory owner can become a card carrying member then they are certainly not Communist. (I assume you were being serious)

On a side note, I showed my Pro-Life mother the picture of an early abortion (the brownish things floating around in water), she says it was propaganda and I was being gullible. :lol:

Someone make a photo shop with a fetus in the place of a shrimp.

[RedKnight]

No offense Tom but if a factory owner can become a card carrying member then they are certainly not Communist. (I assume you were being serious)

On a side note, I showed my Pro-Life mother the picture of an early abortion (the brownish things floating around in water), she says it was propaganda and I was being gullible. :lol:

Someone make a photo shop with a fetus in the place of a shrimp. The Christian Right tends to repond that way, when they have nothing intelligent to respond back with. I've spent the entire election season trying to correct people's misconceptions of Barack Obama, and that's the response I got.

[Bud Struggle]

No offense Tom but if a factory owner can become a card carrying member then they are certainly not Communist. (I assume you were being serious)


I was making a (not to subtle) point that I paid the $30 (or was it $60?) and I got the card and joined the Communist Party.

Easy as that. :)

[Jazzratt]

On a side note, I showed my Pro-Life mother the picture of an early abortion (the brownish things floating around in water), she says it was propaganda and I was being gullible. :lol:

Yeah because all those pictures of aborted foetuses the anti-choicers like to pull out at all their morbid rallies in front of hospitals aren't propaganda at all. :rolleyes:

[Dust Bunnies]

Its irritating that they call facts propaganda.

Here is a video she showed me (trying to convince me that abortion is "evil" :lol: )

Please note it is Graphic, and is not for those who hate blood. Not to be shown around young children.

www.ObamaMustSee.com (http://www.obamamustsee.com/)


I just laughed at her attempt to convince me.


A Pro-Lifer once said in a poem, "They'll never get to see a sunset or a sunrise." I then responded with, "I never saw a sunset or sunrise though and I'm living."
:lol:

[Jazzratt]

A Pro-Lifer once said in a poem, "They'll never get to see a sunset or a sunrise." I then responded with, "I never saw a sunset or sunrise though and I'm living."
:lol:

You really should, they can be awesome.

Personally I don't much care what an aborted foetus looks like, it's really not going to sway me one way or another and anyone who is swayed by something like that should have their right to an opinion revoked.

[careyprice31]

pro lifers are the funniest, hypocritical, doublethinking people. Rofl. Allow me to offer up an example. prolifers promote adoption as a good and loving choice and alternative to abortion. I'm not going to bash adoption, cause for many people it is wonderful. My friend was adopted by her aunt and uncle because her real mother, her aunt's sister, was too sick at the time to care for a child. But my friend is now 20, loves both her parents and her brother (who's really her cousin but now her brother) and they really love her. She has a great life.

But the thing is adoption isn't the bed of roses prolifers make it out to be, and they will never tell you the truth about doption. Not only that, they say 'there are many parents who would love to adopt your kid' and promote loving adoptive and foster parents wanting your kid

BUT

at the same time many of them wish to exclude great loving couples or people who would make a great parent or parents either because they are single, cohabitate, or are gay couples.

Where's the LOGIC in that, I ask ya? There isn't any.

[Bud Struggle]

pro lifers are the funniest, hypocritical, doublethinking people.

I always love it when you talk nasty to me. :tt1:

Welcome back!

[EseSocialistaSurge]

I always hate it when people who are Pro-Life argue that we should let these babies live yet they dont even bother adopting them! Thats what I think to be a major problem with not having abortions. These babies grow up to be mistreated in orphanages or simply because their parents dont have the money to care for them. They suffer and end up having psychological trauma. So pro-lifers, I suggest you start adopting babies. No point in having a baby live just to suffer.

[spice756]

Its irritating that they call facts propaganda.


Here is a video she showed me (trying to convince me that abortion is "evil" :lol: )

Please note it is Graphic, and is not for those who hate blood. Not to be shown around young children.

www.ObamaMustSee.com (http://www.obamamustsee.com/)


I just laughed at her attempt to convince me.





A Pro-Lifer once said in a poem, "They'll never get to see a sunset or a sunrise." I then responded with, "I never saw a sunset or sunrise though and I'm living."
:lol:

They are the same people who are anti-stem cell do to embryo and fetus it is a religious believe.

No one in there mind think embryo or fetus is baby. A fetus is a stage that an organism (http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organism) goes through before it is born as a baby

http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetus (http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetus)

Embryonic stem cells (ES cells) are stem cells (http://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Stem_cell&action=edit&redlink=1) taken from the inner cell mass (http://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cell_mass&action=edit&redlink=1) of the early stage embryo (http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embryo) known as a blastocyst (http://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Blastocyst&action=edit&redlink=1). Human embryos reach the blastocyst stage 4-5 days after fertilization (http://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Human_fertilization&action=edit&redlink=1), at which time they are made up of 50-150 cells.

Nost all this abortion debate is when does baby have conscience or brain actvity.

The god part is embryo and fetus is leaving thing but we kill dear and bears and other animals.

[redguard2009]

Problem is, many pro-lifers go through phases of self-deprication in which they drum up emotional reactions within themselves. I'm sure that poem, "They'll never get to see a sunset or sunrise", has made many irrational bleeding-heart conservatives shed a tear. Of course, when it comes to the millions of kids starving to death, immaciated beyond anything they could imagine, well, hey, that's the natural order of things.

[RedSonRising]

Most of the attacks on this site towards abortion are simply aimed at hypocritical right-wingers who advocate the protection of an unborn child, while at the same time supporting governments that kill countless innocents.

I consider myself to be Pro-Life. I beleive that Abortion is a tool of the bourgoisie used to exploit women. Instead of removing the issues that cause abortion to become necessary are ignored, and are justified by this "civil liberty" which I beleive is as of now a necessary evil that should not exist in the first place:

1) Rape. Im no expert on statistics on this crime, but I beleive it is similar to instances of crime such as armed robbery, murder, drug use, and other crimes that are related to poverty and instability. If what we preach as revolutionary leftists is true, this crucial element of victimized mothers who choose to abort unplanned and unwanted babies would be eliminated.

2) Contraceptives: In my opinion, they could be much more effective, and as a common need should be given out freely and funded and produced with strong attention to the quality and design of such products.

3) Unprotected Sex among the youth. I beleive that one should take responsibility for their actions, and it just does not seem just for a developing unborn individual to bear the burden for irresponsible parents. Much of this behavior is a result of the deteriorated culture guided by market-induced impulses. Everyone has the right to do what they want with whoever they want, but should be free from media-induced pressures to choose freely.

4) Though I do not equate the life of a feotus to that of a human being, I think that the lack of ability for the contribution of that individual is a severe oppressive force. The right to life is important, I think, and prevention is one thing, while termination after conception is another. I was most impacted by this thought when a sex-education speaker presented in my health class stated "I did not deserve the death penalty because my father was a racist, and I thanked my mother after I met her for loving me enough to give me up." I think that proves we cannot doom unborn children to orphan-life and crime, justifying their termination.

Having made these points, I will point out that I am a nonpracticing Catholic, and promised not to participate in involved religious activities until I read the bible and found it a respectable beleif system in accordance with my family's culture. I am a revolutionary Socialist, beleive in Gay Marriage, detest religious influence in public sectors. I have this beleif from logical utilitarian moral assesment, and do not beleive what I do because of the stance of a corrupt Church institution. Socialism will create a society where such issues, generated by both parties to simulate platform differences and create a false dichotomy of ideology, are solved at the root of their problem and I think the need for abortion will come to an end. Because of the nature of embryonic stem cell research and the use of petri-dish leftovers, I am not opposed to such practices for the betterment of medicinal values. I hope you can all appreciate my opinion and not treat me like a hypocritical republican fundamentalist christian; I respect the sanctity of life is all, and think that the whole debate about where a life begins can be avoided by removing greater ills of society.

[Bud Struggle]

Good post. It seems you violate the official "Party Line" on the subject. Unfortunately there can be no honest debate on the subject unless you are restricted (and then you can debate to your heart's content.)

There is a subtle, though enjoyable, entertainment value to Communism.

[hugsandmarxism]

http://www.abortion.org.au/Gestation%20Sac%206-7%20weeks.jpg

This is the gestational sac from an abortion performed 6 to 7 weeks into a pregnancy.

Hey, if you zoom in close enough, you can almost see its soul! :rolleyes:

Seriously though; this looks like someone blew their nose into this dish here... I want to mail a picture of this to my parent's former pastor. :laugh:

[Jazzratt]

Most of the attacks on this site towards abortion are simply aimed at hypocritical right-wingers who advocate the protection of an unborn child, while at the same time supporting governments that kill countless innocents.


Not really, generally they're against people who consider foetuses human (see pictures) and people who wish women to act as incubators whether they want to or not.



I consider myself to be Pro-Life.


Soon you can also consider yourself restricted. Isn't that nice?



I beleive that Abortion is a tool of the bourgoisie used to exploit women.

I think that belief is laughable and await with a morbid curiousity your defence of it...


Instead of removing the issues that cause abortion to become necessary are ignored, and are justified by this "civil liberty" which I beleive is as of now a necessary evil that should not exist in the first place:

What causes abortion, as well as what you say later, is primarily a woman with a child she does not want gestating inside her. How it got there is irrelevant to issue of whether or not she should be allowed to remove it.


1) Rape. Im no expert on statistics on this crime, but I beleive it is similar to instances of crime such as armed robbery, murder, drug use, and other crimes that are related to poverty and instability. If what we preach as revolutionary leftists is true, this crucial element of victimized mothers who choose to abort unplanned and unwanted babies would be eliminated.


What we "preach as revolutionary leftists" is not, save for some of the more utopian loonies, that all crime will disappear. Certainly crimes of violence and dominance will still exist because people will still have violent tendencies. Rape, therefore, is not just going to be eliminated. Also a pregnant woman is not a "mother", unless they also happen to have children.


2) Contraceptives: In my opinion, they could be much more effective, and as a common need should be given out freely and funded and produced with strong attention to the quality and design of such products.


Short of gelding there can be no 100% guaranteed contraceptive.


3) Unprotected Sex among the youth. I beleive that one should take responsibility for their actions, and it just does not seem just for a developing unborn individual to bear the burden for irresponsible parents.


Why does a born person have to suffer for the mistakes of youth? Undergoing an otherwise unneeded surgical procedure is "consequence" enough for unprotected sex. Squeezing out a kid and then having to deal with it is a disproportionate "punishment" for indiscretion.


Much of this behavior is a result of the deteriorated culture guided by market-induced impulses. Everyone has the right to do what they want with whoever they want, but should be free from media-induced pressures to choose freely.

By media I assume you mean "hormone". Unless you've got evidence that it isn't actually natural for puberty to induce the raging horn and that, in fact, teenagers are somehow magically made into randy buggers by their televisions.


4) Though I do not equate the life of a feotus to that of a human being, I think that the lack of ability for the contribution of that individual is a severe oppressive force. The right to life is important, I think, and prevention is one thing, while termination after conception is another. I was most impacted by this thought when a sex-education speaker presented in my health class stated "I did not deserve the death penalty because my father was a racist, and I thanked my mother after I met her for loving me enough to give me up." I think that proves we cannot doom unborn children to orphan-life and crime, justifying their termination.


And here we get to the meat of your argument. The idea that the "life" of a foetus, a "life" that relies entirely on nutrients leached from the mother, outweighs the importance of the mother as a thinking, acting and contributing member of society. The foetus is unaware and even if it is aware it's in, basically, a sensory deprivation chamber and has experienced/contributed nothing. Arguing from "potential" is stupid too as the potentials of the baby exiting the womb are nigh-on endless. It might cure cancer, it might manufacture anthrax, it might die of fucking cot death within weeks; what it could be doesn't matter.


Having made these points, I will point out that I am a nonpracticing Catholic, and promised not to participate in involved religious activities until I read the bible and found it a respectable beleif system in accordance with my family's culture.


I hope you read the bible with a critical and rational mind. If you do then perhaps you will understand why most atheists (myself included) believe the god of christianity would be unworthy of worship even if it did exist.



I am a revolutionary Socialist, beleive in Gay Marriage, detest religious influence in public sectors. I have this beleif from logical utilitarian moral assesment, and do not beleive what I do because of the stance of a corrupt Church institution. Socialism will create a society where such issues, generated by both parties to simulate platform differences and create a false dichotomy of ideology, are solved at the root of their problem and I think the need for abortion will come to an end.


Until we abandon our fleshy shells (which ain't going to be any time soon) I severely doubt that the need for abortion will come to an end.




Because of the nature of embryonic stem cell research and the use of petri-dish leftovers, I am not opposed to such practices for the betterment of medicinal values.


Um, good on you?




I hope you can all appreciate my opinion and not treat me like a hypocritical republican fundamentalist christian; I respect the sanctity of life is all, and think that the whole debate about where a life begins can be avoided by removing greater ills of society.


Hopefully I didn't treat you as a hypocritical republican christian; it's obvious you're a hypocritical non-practicing catholic socialist. :)

[RedSonRising]

"what it could be doesn't matter."

This I beleive to be the meat of your argument.

I am not a hypocrite at all, I just define life differently than you do. We simply beleieve differently on whether or not to respect an underdeveloped organism, and whether or not abortion will be necessary in a socialist environment. I personally beleive that rape is part of an unnatural behavior that will dissappear with a communal society and that there are other reasons why abortion is not a permanent solution, and you do not. We simply do not agree, I was simply trying to put out there that being a revolutionary leftist does not entail every liberal belief out there. There are reasons for my opinions, which I have stated. To me, an unborn child is simply at a stage of growing, much like a baby or a five year old, and that the difference resides in our own interpretations of what is human. Sure, its easy to get rid of what looks like snot in a tissue, but as soon as it enteres the third trimester and has feet and fingers, we cant touch it. To me that is a waste of life and unnatural, and such a separation is dumb; in 20 years that person could very well have done anything, and those few months defined by our visual and identity-related definitions of a human decide that. If science allowed for men to become pregnant, would everyone just jump out and "fight" for a manmade right made available for technology? I do not think becoming dependent on technology to solve problems that shouldnt be problems in the first place is very unproductive socially and unrevolutionary-like. Sometimes I think if historically leftists had banned abortion and it was a typical right-wing strongpoint, many people would associate the idea with different moral connotations. You dont have to agree, Im just trying to prove that not all pro-lifers are right-wing or even very religious.

[Jazzratt]

"what it could be doesn't matter."

This I beleive to be the meat of your argument.


Then, for fuck's sake, address it.



I am not a hypocrite at all,


You support the emancipation of the working class. Unless it has a vagina. That is hypocritical.




I just define life differently than you do.


So? That doesn't immediately mean that anything you say has merit. Your opinion is not sacrosanct, either defend it or change it don't simply say that you differ - that's simply cowardly.




We simply beleieve differently on whether or not to respect an underdeveloped organism,


Do you eat meat?




and whether or not abortion will be necessary in a socialist environment.


Unless you can ensure that no pregnancy is unwanted your claim that it will be unnecessary is simply utopian conjecture.



I personally beleive that rape is part of an unnatural behavior that will dissappear with a communal society and that there are other reasons why abortion is not a permanent solution, and you do not.

Yes, this is why I am arguing with you, hunchbrain. Simply stating you believe all kinds of nonsense doesn't make any of that nonsense true. Whether or not rape is "unnatural" is neither here nor there, unnatural behaviour patterns are what make us human and will likely continue after the revolution. People will still want to hurt and humiliate others, no matter what system we put in place; anarchism/communism isn't a panacea for all the worlds ills.

As solutions go, getting rid of what is causing the problem (e.g by vacuuming it out of the womb) is pretty fucking permanent, so I'd like you to explain what in all the hells you're gabbling about.


We simply do not agree,


You've already mentioned this. There is no need to point out the obvious and then repeat it.




I was simply trying to put out there that being a revolutionary leftist does not entail every liberal belief out there.


Abortion is not a "liberal belief". Liberals may support access to abortion, but that doesn't make it an exclusively liberal thing. The core of liberal ideology is the free market and minimal interference (the latter meaning some of its views overlap with revolutionary leftist views). Or in the case of America liberal views are based on vaguely limited (but not all that seriously) free markets and selective non-interference.




There are reasons for my opinions, which I have stated.


And I've disagreed with them. Please adress this.



To me, an unborn child is simply at a stage of growing,


And it is a stage at which it is feeding, parasitically, from another organism. It therefore rests with the host organism to decide what should be done with it.



much like a baby or a five year old, and that the difference resides in our own interpretations of what is human.

Whether or not the foetus is "human" is neither here nor there. I don't care if the foetus is human, human looking or nonhuman. It is up to the mother whether or not it is carried to term.


Sure, its easy to get rid of what looks like snot in a tissue, but as soon as it enteres the third trimester and has feet and fingers, we cant touch it.

Why not? What's so special about feet and fingers that they confer human rights? Do amputees, therefore, have fewer rights than the rest of society?


To me that is a waste of life and unnatural, and such a separation is dumb;



Why is it a waste? What is wasted? And why is it being "unnatural" a bad thing?




in 20 years that person could very well have done anything,


Yeah, for example it could have lived for 6 years before getting hit by a train and spent the remaining 14 years decomposing. It could have had an abortion. What the hell does it matter what it could have done?




and those few months defined by our visual and identity-related definitions of a human decide that.


Not really. If it's born it's actions over the next 20 years decide what it's done. If it's aborted then it's irrelavant.




If science allowed for men to become pregnant, would everyone just jump out and "fight" for a manmade right made available for technology?


Could you reword this in a way that actually makes sense? I presume you're asking if people, when presented with such technology would fight for people's right to use it. If that is the case then the answer is "of course they fucking would, what kind of stupid question is that?". If you're asking if men who became pregnant thanks to such technology would fight for the right to go back on their decision I would say "yes, yes and a thousand times yes. If the foetus ain't wanted it ain't wanted no matter how or where it came into being".




I do not think becoming dependent on technology to solve problems that shouldnt be problems in the first place is very unproductive socially and unrevolutionary-like.


What. The. Fuck?


1) Who the bloody hell do you think you are deciding whether or not a problem "should be" a problem?


2) What is "unrevolutionary-like" (:lol:) about using technology, especially as a way of solving problems. Revolutionaries should be pushing for more technology to be used in society, especially to solve problems, rather than less.




Sometimes I think if historically leftists had banned abortion and it was a typical right-wing strongpoint, many people would associate the idea with different moral connotations.


You've got things arse backward. People don't consider abortion to have certain "moral connotations" because of who has traditionally supported it, rather those who have traditionally supported it have done so precisly because it jives with their sense of morality.




You dont have to agree, Im just trying to prove that not all pro-lifers are right-wing or even very religious.


Secular, "leftist" anti-choicers are worse than the rest. They should know far better.

[RedSonRising]

I wish you could discuss without being so offensive. I never insulted you or called you anything, and I don't see why you can't counter me without being such a dick. I dont post just to read elitist responses.

[Kassad]

What I truly love is the massive load of conservatives and "libertarians" who claim to want to get the government out of our personal lives... except in your vagina.

Why don't we start prosecuting women who hit their periods? They're potentially destroying a life by not getting impregnated before that egg leaves their womb. Two to five years in prison for men who masturbate and allow all those potential lives to go to waste. The disregard for life! It sickens me, I say!

[hugsandmarxism]

Ditto.

[RGacky3]

Why don't we start prosecuting women who hit their periods? They're potentially destroying a life by not getting impregnated before that egg leaves their womb. Two to five years in prison for men who masturbate and allow all those potential lives to go to waste. The disregard for life! It sickens me, I say!

left to Nature the egg does'nt become a full grown human, left to nature cum does'nt become a full grown human, a fetus does.


Do you eat meat?

I've never seen a cow become a human.


Whether or not the foetus is "human" is neither here nor there. I don't care if the foetus is human, human looking or nonhuman. It is up to the mother whether or not it is carried to term.

Whether the fetus is a human is the whole issue, the reason you give the mother rights over her own body is because of her rights as a human, if a fetus is a human he has those same rights, saying otherwise would be hypocritical.


If the foetus ain't wanted it ain't wanted no matter how or where it came into being".


Can the same be said about grown people? Why not? If the fetus being a human is either here nor there. If it is, then murder is 100% ok.


Not really, generally they're against people who consider foetuses human (see pictures) and people who wish women to act as incubators whether they want to or not.

A woman has a choice about whether or not she gets preagnant, its her responsibility, no ones asking them to act as incubators, what the law does do is force men to act as atm for women who chose to have children whether or not the man wanted is, ultimately thats niether here nor there, but I don't see many pro-choicers fighting that obvious hypocracy.


And it is a stage at which it is feeding, parasitically, from another organism. It therefore rests with the host organism to decide what should be done with it.


Babies do the same, they breast feed (is it possible for them not too? Yes, but they still need lots of car, the same way its possible for a fetus to grow outside the womb), so do many disabled people, so do sick people, so do many elderly, that does'nt not discount them from personhood.

[Forward Union]

I think it's impossible to come up with a definition of when a "potential life" becomes a "life" Different Foetuses are capable of living outside the body at different times and in different contexts etc.

And I think this language is framing the debate in completely the wrong way. The issue is not whether or not the Foetus is alive or not, the issue is whether a Womans body is public property.

Even if the Foetus is a living thing (which I don't accept anyway) It is still a womans right to remove a living parasite from her body.

There's another issue however.

My Girlfriend asked me what I'd do if she got pregnant, and I replied that I'd go along with whatever her decision was. If she chose to have the baby, I'd help bring it up (though I really would rather not have to) It's entirely her choice. She didn't agree and told me it was my choice as well.

But really, it's not mine. I can voice my opinion, and she can listen to it or not. But ultimately I can't stop her doing anything, including having a kid. But the problem is that this ties me into a commitment forever. It changes my life fundamentally, and I have no say in it at all (And I want to make it clear that I am not arging I should have a say in it)

This is a problem with the bourgeoisie conception of family. The child should be the responsibility of the community to bring up, and a woman's right to choose should not have a detrimental effect on a powerless third party.

[Kassad]

left to Nature the egg does'nt become a full grown human, left to nature cum does'nt become a full grown human, a fetus does.

Big "who cares?" So now the government has the power to legislate over the body of a woman, likely ignoring her financial, social and emotional situation? Ridiculous. It's a small collection of cells. You know, you pro-life people amaze me. You're so worried about potential lives lost before they are born, but what about fully-developed lives? Why not spend your time, you know, feeding and clothing those people who don't have a home? Why don't you give shelter to a baby who is up for adoption? So much care and reverence for an unborn grouping of cells, yet little regard for those already suffering outside the womb.

[Pogue]

I think it's impossible to come up with a definition of when a "potential life" becomes a "life" Different Foetuses are capable of living outside the body at different times and in different contexts etc.

And I think this language is framing the debate in completely the wrong way. The issue is not whether or not the Foetus is alive or not, the issue is whether a Womans body is public property.

Even if the Foetus is a living thing (which I don't accept anyway) It is still a womans right to remove a living parasite from her body.

There's another issue however.

My Girlfriend asked me what I'd do if she got pregnant, and I replied that I'd go along with whatever her decision was. If she chose to have the baby, I'd help bring it up (though I really would rather not have to) It's entirely her choice. She didn't agree and told me it was my choice as well.

But really, it's not mine. I can voice my opinion, and she can listen to it or not. But ultimately I can't stop her doing anything, including having a kid. But the problem is that this ties me into a commitment forever. It changes my life fundamentally, and I have no say in it at all (And I want to make it clear that I am not arging I should have a say in it)

This is a problem with the bourgeoisie conception of family. The child should be the responsibility of the community to bring up, and a woman's right to choose should not have a detrimental effect on a powerless third party.

I know we're both in the IWW and all, but if you get your girlfriend pregnant, don't expect me to babysit or anything. :D

[Ultra-Violence]

I was making a (not to subtle) point that I paid the $30 (or was it $60?) and I got the card and joined the Communist Party.

Easy as that. :)


HOLY SHIT! havent been around revleft for a while but god dang TomK joined the CPUSA! wow

not really fans of them but i guesse its a step in the right direction?

just drop the bullshit and join us TomK we have moltov-cocktails and ak47's with your name on em:thumbup:
---------------------


back on topic that was a fucking fetus are you kidding me all those vids i saw in sunday school were LIES! nother reason to hate the church

[RGacky3]

Big "who cares?" So now the government has the power to legislate over the body of a woman, likely ignoring her financial, social and emotional situation? Ridiculous. It's a small collection of cells. You know, you pro-life people amaze me. You're so worried about potential lives lost before they are born, but what about fully-developed lives? Why not spend your time, you know, feeding and clothing those people who don't have a home? Why don't you give shelter to a baby who is up for adoption? So much care and reverence for an unborn grouping of cells, yet little regard for those already suffering outside the womb.

First of all, as far as I am concerned, thats not true, I'm don't really spend any time doing pro-life stuff, but I do spend time in class struggle.

I regard life for those suffering outside the womb jsut as much as in the womb.

A "Big who cares" can be the exact same response to someon who has little regard for the third world, its not an argument or anything.

I don't think the government should exist, but that does'nt change my objection to abortion considering its murder.

Anyway, It would be nice if you responded logically rather than just doing a "Who Cares."


HOLY SHIT! havent been around revleft for a while but god dang TomK joined the CPUSA! wow

not really fans of them but i guesse its a step in the right direction?

just drop the bullshit and join us TomK we have moltov-cocktails and ak47's with your name on em:thumbup:

He has'nt changed his thinking at all, if anything he's doing it in jest.

[Forward Union]

I know we're both in the IWW and all, but if you get your girlfriend pregnant, don't expect me to babysit or anything. :D

Solidarity forever?

[Pogue]

Solidarity forever?

I'll join a picket line with you, stand against the police with you, occupy a factory with you, donate money to you if you're in prison or sacked for organising, but there is no way I am staying up all night listening to your kids screaming. Don't even mention nappy changing!

[Kassad]

First of all, as far as I am concerned, thats not true, I'm don't really spend any time doing pro-life stuff, but I do spend time in class struggle.

I regard life for those suffering outside the womb jsut as much as in the womb.

A "Big who cares" can be the exact same response to someon who has little regard for the third world, its not an argument or anything.

I don't think the government should exist, but that does'nt change my objection to abortion considering its murder.

Anyway, It would be nice if you responded logically rather than just doing a "Who Cares."

Well, for claiming to be a workers advocate, you sure seem to appreciate the idea of a government reaching inside your body, into your bedroom and into your sex drive and legislating for you. Like I said and what you chose to ignore, you ignore the monetary, social and emotional situations. There's nothing wrong with expressing your affection and love with another human being. Still, if you decide that you are not ready for children, it is your right to decide what to do with your body, since it is your body that will be enduring massive emotional trauma for nine months.

But hey, those old coat-hanger days were great, right? Find a nice, comfortable seat in the back alley and let the metal rod do the work. Forget those clean, safe and convenient hospitals. The government doesn't like you controlling your body.

[RGacky3]

Well, for claiming to be a workers advocate, you sure seem to appreciate the idea of a government reaching inside your body, into your bedroom and into your sex drive and legislating for you. Like I said and what you chose to ignore, you ignore the monetary, social and emotional situations.

Ehem...


I don't think the government should exist, but that does'nt change my objection to abortion considering its murder.


Still, if you decide that you are not ready for children, it is your right to decide what to do with your body, since it is your body that will be enduring massive emotional trauma for nine months.


Let me ask you, if you have a bad liver, because you drank a lot, would it be ok to kill a kid, take his liver, to save yourself trauma?

[Kassad]

A kid is a human being who has a developing conscience, since he has vacated the womb. A fetus in its first trimester does not comprehend its surroundings, nor does it have properly rationalization of worldly situations. Your question is completely irrelevant.

[RGacky3]

A fetus in its first trimester does not comprehend its surroundings, nor does it have properly rationalization of worldly situations. Your question is completely irrelevant.

First of all, how is any of that a requirement for personhood, second, how do you know? Second of all, your argumet would make it acceptable to murder retarded people and babies.

[Kassad]

First of all, how is any of that a requirement for personhood, second, how do you know? Second of all, your argumet would make it acceptable to murder retarded people and babies.

I believe that what makes a human a human is his consistently developing consciousness. It is what separates us from the animals in the world. It's what separates us from any other entity on the planet. Our consciousness helps us rationalize like no other species does.

...No, it wouldn't. Babies and mentally defected humans still rationalize in some form. Babies are consistently learning from the moment they are taken into the world. I guarantee you that if a mentally defected person or a baby does something that hurts them, they will not do it again. A child in the womb does not have that kind of rationalization or that kind of development.

[RGacky3]

Why not let the women who is pregnant decide what best for her?

Ultimately thats what she's going to do, but that does'nt mean that her killing her unborn child is'nt exactly what it is. Also, why not let the doctor in charge of the patient in a coma decide if he's going to live or not? Why not let the dad taking care of the baby decide that either?


A child in the womb does not have that kind of rationalization or that kind of development.

Based on what? Many studies have shown that what happens while a child is in the womb can and does effect the child, meaning the child is reacting. The child in the womb is a developing human, just like a child out of the womb.

[Kassad]

Show me research that a child in the first trimester has the ability to comprehend its environment and surroundings.

[RGacky3]

You did'nt say first trimester to begin with. But about a fetus in the mothers womb its pretty much accepted that once a fetus can hear it can react to outside voices, and I don't see how an fetus's brain would act fundementally different from a humans brain other than not being compleatly developed yet. Unless of coarse as soon as he gets out of the womb some magical last step happens that turns him into a comprehending human.


So the whole world needs to live by your morals? Your way is the right way and everyone else is wrong. Great!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

No they don't, but they should be able to defend their own, or just ignore them, btw, the same argument could be used for EVERY SINGLE MORAL OPINION, like racism is wrong, slavery is wrong, and so on and so forth.

[Kassad]

So that's code for 'I lied, I have no research to back me up at all and I was just hoping you wouldn't call me on it.' Good morning, Vietnam.

[RGacky3]

So that's code for 'I lied, I have no research to back me up at all and I was just hoping you wouldn't call me on it.' Good morning, Vietnam.


No thats code for, I've read it various times before, but I don't have it off hand at the moment, if you want I'll look it up.

Also, that being the case, are there any studies showing that metal development only starts at birth? No there are not, because its not true, because its a rediculous notion.

Also, is murdering people with alshimers murder?


A moral code is compleatly subjective.

Well good job ignoring my post and reiterating your own without responding to mine.

[Robert]

Also, is murdering people with alshimers murder?

Alshimers?

Have you been zhrinkin' agai ["hic"] again, ole pal? How ... zhry ... I ... yam!

[DaughterJones]

He said he was a pro-lifer, he wasn't--he seemed to have lied a bit, but lots of religious Americans voted for him thinking he was and they made a mistake.
I think everyone is a pro-lifer because the alternative would be to be anti-life but the question is when does "life" the type of life people are interested in saving begin ? Frankly, though abortion is a gravely serious choice not to be taken lightly the fetus is likely aborted when it looks like a sea monkey and im not going to grieve or call anyone a murderer over the death of a sea monkey. The sadness comes from the fact that there was a potential life and that it never came to be but that is not criminal every time someone has a menstral cycle and loses an egg that was potential life wasted. I do wish however that people would be more careful and knowledgable with reproductive health then we would rarely need to have this debate.

[Pawn Power]

President Obama signed an executive order yesterday reversing the ban that prohibited funding to international family planning groups that provide abortions.

***

What should punishment should women undergo if abortion was made illegal?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iD97OVJ4PNw

[Killfacer]

like i have shat out my lung

[DaughterJones]

President Obama signed an executive order yesterday reversing the ban that prohibited funding to international family planning groups that provide abortions.

***

What should punishment should women undergo if abortion was made illegal?
iD97OVJ4PNw
I think it is a wonderful question to pose because they never have an answer that satisfies their argument that abortion is murder.

[hugsandmarxism]

President Obama signed an executive order yesterday reversing the ban that prohibited funding to international family planning groups that provide abortions.

***

What should punishment should women undergo if abortion was made illegal?
iD97OVJ4PNw

In the words of Chris Matthews "HAH!" :laugh:

They come up with the stereotypical Christian response, the one their pastor shoves down their throats every Sunday, but haven't thought for about the actual PUNISHMENT for an abortion, and then their argument falls apart, pulled between the "holier than though" arrogance typical of religion and the argument that abortion is murder. Priceless.