This is the type of abortionist mother I’d be pitting. I’m not arguing against her choice, but it is selfish to completely ignore her husband in this major decision in her life without any chance for an appeal on his part or an opportunity to support and share in her decision.
Ummm…amongst the people in her church group? Would they be as supportive had she said “I had an abortion years back, and while I don’t like abortion, viewed in the long run it was the best decision I could have made at the time.”?
I completely understand your position, but I disagree with it. I just honestly don’t think a father should have equal rights in the matter. While dads are more hands on today in terms of grunt work (changing/washing/staying home with sick babes/etc.) moms still do the lion’s share and when couples split up it’s still usually the mom who has primary custody, so it’s going to affect her life a lot more than his.
Now that said, if I were straight and married I’d hope my wife would come to me in the matter for my input, but if we totally disagreed (I wanted to keep it and she did not) I think with her body she should have veto power over my decision. Of course this is the “over 40” and already with kids scenario; if we were 30 and had no kids it might cause a divorce, but I still think she has 51%+ vote in the matter.
PS- This isn’t related to Dutchman’s comments but to Dio’s and others: if you feel it’s a clump of cells or a “bloodclot”, I’m curious: if a defective product or a traffic accident for which she was not a fault or a medication or whatever causes a woman who is carrying a wanted unborn child to have a miscarriage in the first trimester, do you believe the person responsible should be liable for damages beyond medical treatment?
Personally I’d feel the responsible party was responsible for manslaughter for the unborn child. I realize this seems at odds with saying that I don’t feel a first trimester abortion is murder, but… I guess it’s the gray area for me.
Aside, but, I mentioned in another thread that McCain’s position on abortion alone is enough to keep me from voting for him. While he says he would not actively seek to reverse Roe v. Wade, and that he finds the souls of children born of rape and incest to be less deserving of life (an exception I’ve never understood from those who are otherwise against abortion on moral grounds) he has said he would appoint pro-Life justices and that he would prosecute any abortionist (but not the mother [?]) if Roe v. Wade were to be overturned (just google McCain abortion for a cite).
This is lunacy to me, as well as the utmost in hypocrisy. McCain is an adulterer who remarried after divorce; now that doesn’t bother me in the least as far as him as a candidate- I couldn’t care less if the president had a harem of six men and twelve women as long as they were consenting adults and I thought s/he was the best person for the job- but it pisses me off that he tries to inflict his Christian morality on others.
I don’t know if McCain is born again, but he has called America a Christian nation and said it’s founded on Christian principals, etc… This pisses me with regards to his moral objections to abortion: the Bible says nothing against abortion, and it sure as hell isn’t because they didn’t know what it was (abortifacients have been known in almost every society for thousands of years, and in the Bible it was pretty clear that human life began at birth). The Sermon on the Mount, the Wise Men, and the raising of Lazarus from the dead appear in one Gospel each and the Gospels can’t agree on Christ’s last words, but three of the Gospels quote Jesus saying remarriage after divorce is immoral and the equivalent of adultery (not my opinion, just citing scripture). That’s why it really pisses me off so tremendously when McCain, Reagan, and other Christian politicians who are on their second marriage seem to care that abortion is unChristian.
You don’t even have to go to the divorce card. McCain actually is an adulterer in the usual sense of the word. He began his relationship with his current wife while he was still married to his last wife.
ETA not that I care, but if he was a Democrat…
Stop mischaracterizing your own posts. You keep saying that a man has lost nothing if his wife miscarries. That is factually incorrect. And it’s unbelievably insensitive. Mind bogglingly insensitive.
I think he meant the man has physically/materially lost nothing, as one it wasn’t in his body and two it’s just a ‘bloodclot’. Anyway, I’m sure he’ll be by soon to speak for himself.
OK, so here’s my views on abortion. I think that the clump of cells is a person. I dont think there needs to be a heart or a brain for it to be a person of some stage. I view being human as a process beginning with the egg and the sperm uniting, not beginning at birth. With that said, there’s definitely a difference between a baby and a zygote/embryo/fetus. I realize that may be a logical inconsistency, because if they are both persons then what’s the difference? Honestly I dont know. I think about it though… why does the birthing process mean so much? Why is it a human one second after that and not before? When would a fetus become a person? When it has a heart? When it roughly resembles a human? When it implants? When it has sentience? Do babies have sentience?
Anyway, as for the legality of abortion, I dont think it’s the government’s job to legislate morality. Also, if abortion is criminalized, it will still happen, and it won’t be pretty. I think society needs education about abortion and sex in general, not a demonization of it.
I’m also a believing Catholic, but I don’t use that to debate in any form, because I don’t believe in forcing my religious views onto other people. In conclusion, I’m not a woman so I dont even know if I have the right to have a super-strong opinion on abortion. The issue really makes my head hurt after a while, and it makes me sad.
Oh, and the OP. Ummm, I’d probably think along Sampiro’s line, but I’d like to think I’d be less hasty to judge. I probably would judge though.
I doubt he meant that, but even if he did, that’s a stupid thing to say. What difference does it make if the embryo or fetus isn’t part of his body?
Let’s follow this logic to where it leads us. A farmer plants his field with seed. A week later, a the rains flood the fields and wash the seeds away. According to Dio’s logic, the farmer has lost nothing since the crop was just a potential. It wasn’t part of his body, so the farmer has lost nothing. No different than if he had a computer simulation of a farm, and the hard drive crashed.
So we get to the same place, but I get there faster. I WIN! 
Thanks for clarifying 
However, I’ll still have to disagree with you, assuming you’re still talking about Christian women. If both of them are indeed Bible-believing Christians then the first woman is making a factually correct statement (within the context of Christian beliefs) when she tells the second one that abortion is a sin. The fact that the first woman has already violated those principles does not invalidate her statement, or even deprive her of the right to make the statement. It’s technically no different from the violent, criminal gang member who cleans up his act and builds himself a better life (Christian or not) going out and talking to other, still-active gang members and trying to tell them that a life of crime leads to grief and to get out while they still can.
I’m afraid I may be turning this into a semantics debate, though 
There is some seriously fucked up reasoning in that article.
…by telling us that they shouldn’t feel the way they do.
Correct people when they make mistakes with the facts all that you like. Argue with their opinions. But leave them their feelings. You have no choice anyway. You are not an authority on what they should feel! It’s obvious that you are simply projecting your own temporary indifference as a desireable standard.
And in this case, I’m not even sure you are a very good judge of what “reality” is. Pregnancy is no dream. I can’t help but think of a friend who had her ribs tickled from the inside. And you are the only one who backtracked to define the fetus referred to as 6-8 week old. Certainly that’s when most miscarriages happen. But it is arguably not when parents are likely to be most aware of miscarriages happening.
Babies are lost right up until the day of expected delivery. My mother-in-law and father-in-law lost a child at delivery. They spoke with love of that child by name until their deaths some sixty years later. And I’ve known other couples with similar tender feelings. Don’t tell me they were drama queens. These were strong people born in the early part of the 20th Century. Tough as nails.
I’m not criticizing your feelings, but your thinking about other people’s feelings is wrong. Now and forever, world without end. Amen.
And the pope does D & C’s in his spare time.
Yah I don’t think I"m explaining quite correctly what I mean.
I do know people change and I can see someone telling another person, “X is a sin and I know I did it myself but I was wrong: it’s a sin.” I guess it’s the self-righteous attitude (and of course not everyone has this, and it doesn’t apply just to abortions): “Yes I did it BUT YOU MUST NOT!!! It’s evil and terrible and yes I was screwing my boyfriend even though we weren’t married BUT IT WAS DIFFERENT WITH ME, WE WERE IN LOOOOOOVE!!! And yes I had an abortion but I DIDN’T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO DO AND YOU DOOOOOOO!!! And my parents would have kicked me out if they knew I was pregnant BUT YOURS WON’T MIND!!! See how I couldn’t do anything else at the time but it’s EASY FOR YOU TO JUST HAVE THIS BABY!!!”
That is what I cannot stand.
I’m not trying to slam either religious people or people who did something themselves and regret it and tell other people of their regret.
Alcorn does agree with abortion when the mother’s life is threatened and there is no chance in hell of the fetus surviving the pregnancy. If it’s a choice between treating a cancer striken pregnant woman, his first choice would be to delay treatment until after the baby is born. Ectopic pregnancies can be ended, but that’s about it.
He does not think abortions should be performed if the woman’s health is at risk (So what if she has to lie in bed for six months. Do it!) or even in cases of rape (The pre-born shouldn’t die for something his father did) or incest. The line in the book that really set my toes a tapping was “I support stricter penalties for rapists then the pro-abortion people I know.” No sites to back it up, of course.
Is this the Pit or Great Debates? 4 pages of arguing with Diogenes the Cynic? Who gives a fuck about his feelings or should I say lack of feelings? Lets go back to pitting two-faced bible thumping bitches who do one thing and preach another!
From his prior posts, it seems clear that he simply has a very unusual emotional reaction to pregnancy.
Rather than thinking about his child being inside his wife, his reaction is more along the lines of his wife having a medical condition that causes her belly to grow. Then, some months later, the condition clears and he’s presented with a baby that he now treats as a loving father.
There’s nothing inherently wrong with having unusual reactions to these sorts of things, but he’s also posting here as if:
a) his reaction is normal
b) it’s the reaction all men should have
c) anyone who feels differently is a drama queen
Well, in the Catholic Church, the Eighth Commandment does not refer to comitting perjury, but to lying. Read any “Examination of Conscience Before Confession” if you don’t believe me.
Can you expound on this a little bit?
I’m not arguing with you - I think this might be handy information to have the next time I get mobbed by old people outside an abortion clinic (not that I plan on visiting another anytime soon).
Which specific part of the Bible deals with abortion?