Classical music and abortion...
No, lets get serious. I think that abortion is more OK than classical music. Even though someone would now say that if there were no classical music, there wouldn't been Pink Floyd either. I don't give a damn. I like few classical pieces: Claire De Lune and Ich Ruf Zu Dir Herr Jesu Christ but thats all.
I think woman is aloud to make abortion if she doesn't want that child. But if it will become "monthly" they should advice woman to be castrated. I think it's worse to that mother to give a birth to a child she doesn't want.
Location: Edinburgh or Aberdeen depending on the time of year
Postby David Smith »
The woman should be able to abort, although i would think she'd have to discuss it with her partner first. Although ultimatly she gets the last say in it.
Keith Jordan wrote:I agree with you mosespa in certain conditions but we must protect the unborn. A woman should have the right to do what she wants to her body but should not have the right to do what she likes to anothers body: namely that poor little child inside her. Again, under certain conditions where the baby hasn't developed much or the child is the result of unconsenting sex.
My sentiments exactly. I am EXTREMELY opposed to abortion. And if anyone wants to know exactly WHY I feel so strongly, feel free to PM or email or something. I have my reasons.
What I find always most amusing about the debate is the silent majority. Look at the poll, and tell me what the general opinion appears to be. Seperatly, read all the posts, without the poll, and tell me what you think the concensus is here.
People who are pro-life are generally ready to jump up and speak their morals or beliefs. On the other hand, pro-choice generally feel just as strong, but know there is little point arguing with a mostly spiritual point of view.
I support choice over enforcement. I don't see how anyone else can speak for anyone but themselves. If you don't think it's right, don't do it yourself, and feel free to let others how you feel, and by all means, don't support it. People on the choice side of this debate never think someone should have an abortion to just promote that right, and they are not angry with those who would decide to have a baby under horrible conditions.
I look at the poll on this set of posts, and the silent majority has spoken again.
madcap69 wrote:Maybe they should ask the baby first?
I don't know if you know this, since I just found out myself, but unborn do not actually speak. This is part of the problem. If the baby could speak, I don't think there would be any debate at all.
why is that? the baby is just as much the man's child and created by the man, he should have some say in what happens
Yes, it is....Are you, or will you take TOTAL responsibility for the child once it is born??? This means that the mother will NOT be in the child's life at all.
That is what happens to many girls/women who decide to have the child, rather than abort. The father disappears forever.
[quote="Keith Jordan"][quote="Tommy"]why is that? the baby is just as much the man's child and created by the man, he should have some say in what happens[/quote]
The other parent of the child should certainly have a say in the matter. Ity is the mans job to look after and protect his woman and child. It is the womans decision though at the end og the day as it is her body. No human being should have the control of anothers body. That is against the fundamental human rights of a human being in my opinion.[/quote]
But isn't she going to have control over the babys body.
dove wrote:Yes, it is....Are you, or will you take TOTAL responsibility for the child once it is born??? This means that the mother will NOT be in the child's life at all.
im not worried about this at the moment, i dont have a girlfriend and im not sexually active
Location: In the editing bay...working on the final cut...
Postby mosespa »
Something that is being overlooked here...and I can't believe I haven't mentioned this yet...is that "Pro-choice" does NOT mean "Pro-abortion."
While it is true that "Pro-life" means "anit-abortion" it is NOT true that "Pro-choice" means "anti-life."
I don't think any pro-choicer in their right minds would say that abortion isn't wrong in some way...but that's not the point. The point is that people who are "Pro-choice" are in favor of letting the person involved be allowed to make the decision for themselves.
In a way, "pro-choice" people are also "pro-life"...making decisions for oneself is a very precious thing...I would say that it's as precious as life itself, and that a life lived under compulsion isn't much of a life at all.
The ability to choose is perhaps the most important element of freedom.
So, therefore, those who are "pro-life" to the extent that they feel no one should be allowed to choose abortion could then be called "anti-choice," which would then seem to be "anti-liberty," which could just as effectively be called "anti-life."
So...in summation, "Pro-life" equals "Anti-life."
Yes...it's a contradiction, but so are a lot of fundamental dogmatic beliefs, if you investigate them closely enough.
In the end, everything is a contradiction. If there are two sides to every story, they must then contradict each other in some way...and yet, both sides can be said to be true.
This is the nature of duality. And we live in a world of duality.
It is said that the "dimension" in which "God" lives is one of unity and is above the duality...it is said that this is beyond human comprehension.
That we live in a world of duality in which two opposing ideas are both fundamentally true should be beyond human comprehension, I think.
I'm from Holland, we have a abortian-law for a long time.
My opinion is that a woman must have the oportunity to do(?) an abort. I think it should not be a decision you should make fast but consider it for some time, also with the father.
For example, when the child is mentally handicapped, some people would say that he would not have a happy life (I'm not saying it's my opinion) so they must have the opportunity to abort.
