From: CHESSRL2002@YAHOO.COM
Lets make this topic more simple.
- Is a fetus a life form capable of becoming human? Yes or No? Who cares
if it is only a few months away? The process is Alive and started.
-Every woman has a right over everything what happens in her body? Yes
or no? Swallow a diamond or drugs and it is her body property? Tell that
to the law.
-Is a fetus an extension of the mother or another life inhabiting her
body? Are the genes the same? Is the life blueprint the same? Or are
they of different people?
-A fetus can smile months before its born. What does that tell you?
-If you can take away a life which the mother thinks it will be a burden
to her by labeling it non-human then why condemn Hitler who took away
the lives of Jews inside Germany who he labeled as non-human and thought
they would be a burden for other Germans? After all, it is the same
style of thinking isn't it?
A pro-choice Jewish doctor might say the Jews were fully aware of dying
and that was the horror. I bet when you stuff the life out of anything
physically alive, there is a buried struggle to stay alive, a slient
horror. But one, not voiced. Pro-choice advocates should sign a paper, I
will not blame Hitler for his killing, because I believe the same,
signed below - _____________ name of unfeeling asshole.
Steve S. wrote:
>
> I would say the truth is somewhere in-between. It's been my impression (as a
> man) that some significant percentage of women struggle with their decision
> to have had an abortion for many years afterwards. Partly the whole issue is
> confused because of lack of knowledge about reincarnation, i.e., when it is
> that the person in their subtle body enters the developing fetus. Depending
> on how you define "murder", it would be murder after that point, supposing
> you could determine what that point was. Whether the child was in the womb
> or not would not be the most relevant determinant. However, there is still
> the link of the mother to the incoming person and the destiny and
> relationship cut short (at least temporarily), and that's an issue to be
> taken seriously, as well. It would be something like arranging for an old
> friend to visit you from a far country, and they get half-way there and you
> cut off their funding. There could be good reasons for that but it wouldn't
> be something to do lightly.
>
> As for choice, once the incoming person has become established in the fetus,
> it's a person just as much as after it's born, in my opinion, and we don't
> allow people to "choose" infanticide these days, though that has been legal
> in other societies in history. Even today a few women do choose this method
> of "abortion", and perhaps some of them don't have any regret about it, but
> that argument doesn't necessarily make it right.
>
> I would be particularly concerned about late pregnancy abortions, because
> these fetuses may be housing newly-incarnated, conscious persons.
> Steve S.
>
> "Crowfoot" wrote in message
> news:bkpsf4$i9d$1@iruka.swcp.com...
> > > in article 3F6D0CD2.2DF5@netzero.com, nancy at nancyOrange@netzero.com
> > > wrote
> > > on 9/20/03 7:28 PM:
> > >
> > > > Because you're a man you miss the most important argument
> > > > against abortion. Men can never understand the emotional damage a
> woman
> > > > suffers after her abortion. Once the life of the baby is destroyed we
> > > > feel as murderers. When it is too late the denial beomes our only
> > > > defense.
> >
> > Speak for yourself. Sorry you feel badly about abortion, but I know
> > many women, including my own two younger sisters, who have had abortions
> > and have suffered no ill effects in the years since.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
