Sick & Tired of Pro-choicers Bitching

Abortion takes the life of a developing human.  If you don't like that... then don't support abortion!  I get so sick and tired of Pro-choicers complaining that anti-abortion people "bother" them with the "gruesome" details of abortion... uhh... then don't support it!  Do Pro-choicers know anything about fetal development? 

Seriously...  At 8 weeks gestation a fetus has most of his or her major organs and body systems developing... beating heart since week 4... 10 fingers, 10 toes, 2 arms, 2 legs... etc.... Come on Pro-choicers... you don't like the REALITIES of abortion... then check your stance on the issue and RECONSIDER!

esasif esasif 31-35, F 38 Responses Aug 1, 2009

Your Response


Actually, all humans are "developing humans" - we continue to develop in one way or another until we die. So by that argument, you could be implying that a fetus is the same as any other child/adult. So scenario time:
You're in a fertility clinic with a terrorist, an embryo, & an 8 year old child. The terrorist says you can leave, & take 1 of the "developing humans" with you, before he blows himself & the building up .which would you choose? Would you just flip a coin, because they are both "humans" biologically? What if it was a choice between a child & 10,000 embryos? You could potentially save thousands of humans, all you would have to do is sacrifice that 1 little boy or girl. Based on your argument, you should choose the latter.

I'm not bothered by anyone explaining the "gruesome" details of abortion - it just ****** me off when they pull bullshit out of their ***** because they want to be right for the sake of it. & even more so when these loonies try & use it to take away a right of other people (who are also humans).

& how is the fact that something has organs, limbs & extremities at all relevant? That doesn't make a fetus more of a human.

Developing human beings? So the **** what? Those things don't have any brains don't think what the **** do I care? I've see all the silly anti choice videos etc. I could care less. Removing a fetus is removing a growth like a wart! an embryo is about like slime mold and a fetus is less than a cockroach , a cockroach is a whole creature. Bottom line, Untill it IS it ISN"T ! Show me how and hand be the sucker tube Ill slash up a fetus right here in front of you!

"Due to my life, and my love of it, I will never live solely for the sake of another human being. In that, I neither want nor expect another human being to live solely for the sake of my life."

Is that quote familiar at all? It's the general backbone to the objectivist doctrine. Taken to extremes, it may fall into this argument. I find no fault in the above quote. I will not live/work/donate/etc for the sake of another human being by my choice ( 'by my choice' meaning I will and can if I choose to). Along with that, to me, is the fetus argument in similar lines. Why should a woman carry to term solely "for the sake of the unborn child" just because?

Also along those lines, I find it insufferable that a man can have sex, knowing full and well that there is always some chance of a child occurring from it despite any and all precautions; and if a child comes, he has little to no say in any of the matters if the woman happens to want to abort. That is one of those areas where I can never reach a satisfactory conclusion. On abortion itself, I can and do, however.

So okay, I'm desperately tired of this particular thread. I've said my piece, and you have yours. Unless there's something epic I have to say, I'll take my leave now.

esasif or whatever the hell your name is, the only thing you get is the SHIFT and CAPS LOCK keys. You're all over those buttons.

You present this ridiculous mirage that most of the abortions that happen are late-term abortions, while at the same time insinuating that women of today's society have been brainwashed into using abortion as their preferred method of birth control. Well, which is it?

It's completely stupid to assume that a woman would repeatedly choose abortion as a form of birth control out of convenience. Nothing screams convenience like operations.

Why are the religious right so concerned what goes on in everybody else's bedroom? Why are they so concern what women do with their bodies?

The pro-life people find abortion an abomination until they or a daughter needs one. Then, it is a medical procedure. Unreal.


1st of all- abortion kill another human being. The act of abortion and the definition- is to kill the human being inside the womb.

That is the essence of why abortion is not, was not and will never be about "her body"... because she does not go in to an abortionist and ask him to rip HER body apart. She goes into an abortion clinic, gets a butt load of anesthesia and then asks the abortionist to rip apart her unborn baby's body... period.

?? If this is a tricky concept for you... then I don't know what else to tell you... you may want to reconsider even engaging in conversations on the issue... if you don't get that abortion kill a human fetus (fetus meaning developing human from 8 weeks-birth).

2nd- I COMPLETELY get that you (and other hard-core pro-choicers) DO NOT HAVE A SHRED OF CARE ABOUT THAT UNBORN HUMAN. Really, I get that! You do not have to convince me you could care less- if the human suffers, if you'd like to eat that human for lunch with chips, etc. etc.

And, the truth is that there will ALWAYS be hard-core pro-choicers like you. There will always be people who believe dogs should be kicked, who believe you should be able to drink and drive, who believe you should be able to beat your children or your partner... etc.

It doesn't matter to me that you personally feel it's okay to kill unborn humans. Just like it doesn't matter to me if other people believe the things listed above...

Because, essentially, it comes down to if OUR rights are INFRINGING or TAKING AWAY another's rights. And, that is what abortion does.

Now, when it was legalized, and when Ms. Sanger went on her crusade to get birthcontrol and abortion legalized- she and the health care system and society, in general, may not have had the knowlege of unborn human development- that we have today.

But, today we have the data, proof. We KNOW that the unborn are part of the human family. And that FACT (YES, IT IS A FACT--- unborn humans are human beings) over rides any persons FEELING that they still like abortion.

So, thanks for sharing, but your belief doesn't really surprise me. I GET IT that you will always be willing to choose abortion if needed. But, what I get more than one persons FEELINGS -- are the hard, cold facts of HUMAN LIFE and HUMAN DEVELOPMENT.

"If I had a nickel every time a "pro-choicer" told me it was "their body" I would be a millionaire! GIVE ME A BREAK. HOW MANY TIMES can we hear the same FALSE and ignorant propaganda statements parroted by the pro-abortion movement to COVER UP the reality of what abortion is and what it does?"

Ok, so it's not their body? I see nothing wrong, ignorant, or false with that reasoning. Show me a lie in the "It's my body it's my choice" phrase that gets used so often.

You also keep speaking of the gruesome horrific, INSERT-OH-MY-GOODNESS-ITS-TOO-HORRIFIC-BECAUSE-I-SAY-SO truth and horrors of abortion and such, like nobody on the planet who exists external of your mind has ever considered their actions and what it means and what it is doing to a parasite/potential life/salsa dip; like you are the only person in the world who is not ignorant of the whole "oh but they FEEL!!!" and "oh but they are like little people!!!" and whatever else you systematically fall back towards; I call it the subjective sympathy of life route, you may call it what you will.

What if...*gasp* we know of it all and still say "abort away"?

I am no way saying it's an easy choice (and if it is, well yea, shame on you, abortion shouldn't be just some easy out for you), but it's a choice, and that's what I find PROMINENT and OUTRANKING over ALL other factors (that is a child (potentially or otherwise), that it wiggles and reacts, that it feels pain, that it tastes great with tostitos, etc).

Kind of similar in vein to what I believe Bettyvalentine said, as far as this debate goes "put my baby between two loaves of bread, yum yum".

In that, saying: Yes it's a life, yes it's a parasite also and a potential life with multiple things that may hinder and/or stop the potential life, one of those things is the woman's choice to maintain that baby over the interest of that potential life, not the other way around. No amount "omg but think of the babbies!!!11" alone will convince me otherwise, which seems to be all you have to offer, though more medically educated than average, it still doesn't show why the interest of the baby should automatically override that of the mother/host/salsa maker.

Dear god, this is brilliant.


So please let us know how it goes when you go abort yourself, then...

because I'm assuming you still assert you are doing to to "your body- (your choice)!"


Are you trying to scare others by predicting the worst? As one single mother put it, "Ironically, if abortion weren't legal it wouldn't be such a prevelant choice and there wouldn't be such pressure to have one. Abortion numbers would drop." It is legal today, and the pro abortion movement has turned it into a "trendy choice" by lieing to the public and to women about EXACTLY what that CHOICE is. Again, it goes with the fact that society is becoming more aware and more educated about the life and development of unborn humans.

Since the invention of the ultrasound just 30 years ago - (ironically around the time Roe V. Wade was legalized) people are becoming less able to believe the lies "blob of tissue" and "not a baby". We are DEVELOPING as a country and abortion can't go on as business as usual for too much longer- before technology catches up with it and before fetal viability becomes earlier and earlier, based on technology.

The "personhood" debate HAS had a LONG history in our society and world. Abortion isn't the first time people have tried to convice others that a human isn't a real "person"! You don't have to go back too far in history to remember that personhood has been denied to women in the past, has been denied to perceived other races, to the mentally disabled, and even long ago in many tribal societies, all people who were not from the tribe were conisdered not to have "personhood".

Pro-choicers need to drop the 'personhood' debate because it is ultimately flawed as it has been used on other "less valued" members of society in history. Furthermore, it is baseless and is completely SUBJECTIVE.

Pro-choice supporters need to get with the times. There are no longer so many unknowns about the unborn. We see the unborn not on a "shadowy ultrasound" as pro-choicers puts it, but on crystal clear 3D & 4D ultrasound machines and in the new state of the art medical technlogy that allows us to see perflectly clear images of life developing from conception on.

Finally, it needs to be recognized that it is of NO coincidence that abortion supporters FIGHT the advancement of the prenatal ultrasound technology (to be shared with the general public-unless it's used to guide their abortion devices to find the "best" way to access the unborn as to kill it the most quickly and easily) every step of the way. Case in point- Planned Parenthood put up a huge fuss to get GE's 4D ultrsounds off mainstream TV in 2003... showing touchably clear images of babies in th womb- smiling, sucking their thumbs, yawning etc. Those images ARE THE ENEMY of the pro abortion movment.

justamemory - Why was my comment absurd and over the top? Please explain. esasif and other pro-lifers like to make the case that the parasitic fetus is not just a group of cells, it's a person and it's alive. If it's a person and it's alive and we want to protect it from these evil pro-choice people because it's a person and it's alive, then let's grant it personhood. Let's give it a social security number and allow people to claim it on their taxes as a dependent before it's born.

And yes, if you outlaw abortion, you will not stop abortions, you will stop legal abortions. Women will still abort, whether by poison or by falling. So, if abortion is illegal and a pregnant woman falls, who's to say it wasn't on purpose and she just "murdered" her fetus?


BIGGER yawn.

If I had a nickel every time a "pro-choicer" told me it was "their body" I would be a millionaire! GIVE ME A BREAK. HOW MANY TIMES can we hear the same FALSE and ignorant propaganda statements parroted by the pro-abortion movement to COVER UP the reality of what abortion is and what it does?

ABORTION does not ABORT YOUR BODY.... you got that Betty? (and the many others who, feeling quite pleased with themselves, parrot that phrase so many times it could make you get a little light headed).

UNLESS... you go to an abortionist and ask him to suction YOUR body apart with a gigantic vacuum?? OR UNLESS you go to an abortionist and ask him to fill your lungs with salt/poison and let you drown yourself while you burn your human flesh- inside and out?? OR UNLESS YOU go to an abortionist and ask him to get gigantic sized metal forceps and grap your limbs, arms, legs and rip them off of your body... one limb at a time... until all that's left is your free floating head and then he has to fish around for it, then crush it? OR UNLESS he is going to grab your legs, turn your body over and then jam blunt steel scissors into the base of your skull and then suction out your brains so your head collapses (then of course you die in the process)??

so...Ms. Valentine... when you claim it is YOUR body... I am assuming you go to abortionist and ABORT YOURSELF, right??? Because you say you do it to YOUR BODY... Right???

Or... were you IMPLYING that you feel it is your right to abort and kill the other/separate/unique HUMAN who lives INSIDE your womb?

BECAUSE... (maybe you didn't take basic human biology?) that OTHER human (boy or girl) IS NOT, CAN NOT, and WILL NOT




ps. if the "gruesome" descriptions of the abortion procedures in this post bother you... WELL- DEAL WITH IT. THAT'S WHAT ABORTION IS AND WHAT IT DOES. DON'T LIKE IT? DON'T SUPPORT THE RIGHT TO "CHOOSE" ABORTION. (OTHERWISE, YOU HAVE NO LEG TO STAND ON.)


No, anyone with any sense can tell how over-the-top and exaggerated that statement is.

I know you're trying to explain your view point but your comparison only makes you sound foolish and narrow-minded. You held your own in your other arguments, you sound informed and articulate but people think less of your views when you make ignorant remarks like that.

haha, ok. I'm sure you'll explain why.

"So if a pregnant woman slips and falls and has a miscarriage, should we charge her with involuntary manslaughter?"

The most ignorant comment I've ever seen.

You rail against legalized abortion. Did abortions not occur before 1973?

You say a life is a life is a life. So if a pregnant woman slips and falls and has a miscarriage, should we charge her with involuntary manslaughter? How do we know she fell by accident? hrmmm

Ya, people just CAN'T WAIT to get to 5 months pregnant to have an abortion. haha, sure.


You say, "Pro-lifers are wrong to portray late term abortions as common, since nearly 100% of late term abortions are done to save the life of the mother or because of a traumatic birth defect."

Oh really??? You sure about that??? Listen to what the exec. director of the national coalition of abortion providers has to say about this:

“In the vast majority of cases, the procedure is performed on a healthy mother with a healthy fetus that is 20 weeks or more along. The abortion-rights folks know it, the anti-abortion folks know it, and so, probably, does everyone else.”

- Ron Fitzsimmons

Executive Director for the National

Coalition of Abortion Providers

The New York Times, February 26, 1997


First---You need to not be proud of your knowledge on HUMAN reproduction today... LEARN MORE FOR YOUR TOMORROWS!!! A fetus inside a human is a HUMAN FETUS. A fetus inside a pig is a PIG FETUS. ALL SPECIES REPRODUCE AFTER THEIR OWN KIND... Hence the Law Of Biogenesis! PLEASE learn these basic facts.

Second--Your reading comprehension needs some work... The fetus's nervous system BEGINS to develop at 7 weeks & enough development has occurred by 12 weeks that pain perception is likely. Pain receptors are spread over the body in stages, beginning in week 8 (summarized by Anand, K.J.S., Atlanta). SO... not week 20--- WEEKS 7 & 8 pain perception is beginning!

Third--- Abuse, neglect, abandonment CAN occur at any stage in a child's life... not just during the pregnancy period. If we follow your rational, why don't we let parents kill their child if abuse, neglect, abandonment issues come about at any stage in the child's life???

A completely wanted child in the womb, could end up living a life of abuse, neglect or abandonment! Just because a child is "wanted" for the pregnancy period doesn't ensure them a trouble free life (parents divorce, parents turn to drugs/crime, parents are killed, etc.)

And just because a child is unplanned doesn't mean THEY will live a life of unhappiness or torment, either! MANY MANY unplanned or unwanted children grow up to live amazing and meaningful lives and have very healthy childhoods!!!

Listen, life situations can change, we shouldn't say... you can kill your child in the womb if your life is hard, but when they are born... well you can't. A child is a child. A life is a life. Pregnancy ISN'T the ONLY stressor in life. We don't let people kill children outside the womb, and we shouldn't let people kill baby humans inside the womb either. (especially around the time the fetal period begins at 8 weeks, when the unborn human looks unmistakably HUMAN... with eyes, ears, hands, legs, feet, arms, fingers, etc.)

Fourth-- One of my worst pet peeves about pro-choicers is when they start with the "unless you house the 2,000 "would-be" aborted babies (per day) you should let others kill them. COME ON! Abortion has just been legal for around 35 years... life was working JUST FINE prior to that... there weren't unwanted children laying all over the streets... COME ON!

So...well... let's see... less babies will be aborted---- more social programs are put into effect by congress--- more couples who can't conceive naturally are moved to adopt--- less people risk unprotected sex because abortion isn't as readily available... etc.etc. (And life MOVES ON).

With a decision to NOT kill babies to solve problems, more decisons will be made to help and support it!



I don't mean to intrude on your argument with Joyce, but I just thought I'd point out that in my last comment I was merely pointing out that a fetus that is only a few weeks old will have a heartbeat before they will have a developed nervous system. I couldn't help but notice that you didn't respond to anything else I said in my post but instead chose to go on your Joyce diatribe. Don't let us intrude on your parade, have at it.

I'll also point out that both sides of this issue are guilty of bringing up the extremes in their passionate effort to make their point. Pro-Lifers will bring up late term and partial birth abortions as if they are common, and Pro-choicers tend to bring up the "what if a girl is raped and impregnated by her Dad" scenarios.

Pro-lifers are wrong to portray late term abortions as common, since nearly 100% of late term abortions are done to save the life of the mother or because of a traumatic birth defect.

Pro-choicers should leave the ******/rape scenarios alone, since they are doing the same thing as pro-lifers, they are arguing from the exception.

JOYCE WRITES: Anti-choicers also use the phrase "humanity of the fetus," by which they may mean its biological human qualities, but it's ambiguous, and purposely so. The word "humanity" implies compassionate human emotions and virtues, such as pathos, love, or kindness. The term is cleverly designed to elicit sympathy for a fetus, and assign it human-like qualities it simply does not have. The ability to feel joy, sadness, anger, and hatred are an integral part of our personhood, and we do not learn to develop such sophisticated emotions until we start socially interacting with others. Besides the capacity to experience emotions, we generally think of personhood as possessing the qualities of intelligence, self-awareness, and moral responsibility.[7] Fetuses do not share these characteristics. On a more practical level however, the term "person" is really a legal and social construction. Persons enjoy legal rights and constitutional freedoms, such as the right to assemble, travel, protest, speak, and believe as they wish. Persons have birth certificates and social security numbers. Persons earn income, pay taxes, and vote, or they are registered dependents of those that do. Under this definition, it is an indisputable fact that fetuses are not persons. They are literally incapable of exercising legal personhood in any meaningful way. Although you could call a fetus a "potential person," a potential person cannot have personhood rights either, in the same way that a 6-year old cannot obtain a driver's license just because he's a potential 16-year old. Potential persons have only potential rights, not actual rights.

MY RESPONSE: Here she goes with the "not a person" fallacy again. But she should note that newborn infants (who were fetuses just moments before they were born), the older infant, the young child and the adolescent- don't have any of the "humanity" characteristics she is blaming the fetus for not having!

Young humans don't have the compassionate human emotions and virtues, such as pathos, love or kindness. They don't have the ability to express themselves clearly if they feel joy, sadness, anger or hatred. They cannot demonstrate intelligence, self awareness, and moral responisiblity. They cannot enjoy their rights to assemble, travel, protest, speak and believe as they wish. They don't earn income, pay taxes or vote.

Basically she needs to acknowledge that it isn't only developing unborn humans who cannot yet "demonstrate adequate personhood" (by her exaggerated and irrational definitions) but that it is ALSO born humans- infants, toddlers and even adolescents who demonstrate these inaduequte "personhood" qualities! Would she then suggest that we should be able to kill any humans who are not as mature and "person-ish" as the fully educated adult who has a college degree and brings in 6 figures?

She is being irrational by applying developmentally inappropriate standards to preborn babies, born babies, and even growing children!

From Pro-Choice Canadian Joyce Arthur's "The Fetal Focus Fallacy".

JOYCE WRITES: Another major fallacy perpetrated by the anti-choice is their interchangeable use of the word "person" with the terms "human", "humanity" or "human being". These terms are not synonymous. For example, anti-choicers often confuse the adjective "human" and the noun "human being," giving them the same meaning. I'm struck by the question they often pose to pro-choicers: "But isn't it human?" - as if we think a fetus is really a creature from outer space. If you point out that a fetus consists of human tissue and DNA, anti-choicers triumphantly claim you just conceded it's a human being. Now, a flake of dandruff from my head is human, but it is not a human being, and in this sense, neither is a fertilized egg. Anti-choicers will respond that a fertilized egg is not like dandruff, because the egg consists of a unique set of chromosomes that makes it a distinct human being. But with cloning, a cell from my dandruff is enough to create a new human being. Although it would have my identical genetic make-up, it would still be a unique individual, because human beings are much more than our genes. Also, both a fertilized egg and a cloned cell represent a potential, not an actual human being. It's a worn cliché, but it bears repeating - an acorn isn't an oak tree and the egg you had for breakfast isn't a chicken. So the only objective scientific fact we have is that fertilized eggs are human (the adjective) - not that they are human beings (the noun).

MY RESPONSE: She is comparing apples to oranges here. The embryo and the fetus are developing humans, not just half of the DNA of a human or even having just been fertilized. She needs to learn a bit more about reproduction and embryo development for all species, not just humans. The chicken's egg we eat for breakfast is not even fertilized. There is no way to compare a human with his or her complete DNA to an UNfertilized chicken egg. So, in her rationale it would be like cracking your egg for breakfast and out pops a mini baby chicken in your fying pan (legs, beak , feathers and all) assuming the egg even gets fertilized (although the gestation for the developing chicken is 21 days, not 9 months). Or instead of picking up the acorn to plant- you pick up a mini tree, with the trunk, the branches and leaves.

She is not only giving inaccurate information here but she is also being extremely deceptive and not mentioning what takes place in humans development beyond 0-3 weeks! It needs to be noted that by 4 weeks the developing human is no longer just cells or genetic blueprints (which are amazing in themselves). By the time the woman even gets a positive pregnancy test her developing human's heart is beating! (That's no unfertilized chicken egg you fry for breakfast, I can tell you that.) And the days and weeks after the 4th week- the growth and development is astonishing. Of course she mentions NOTHING of that. She is writing as if all abortions take place on 1 days old zygotes, or a woman's UNfertilized egg (which is the menstrual period, not an abortion, by the way).

Of course an UNfertilzed egg isn't a human yet and an UNfertilized chicken egg isn't a chicken yet... but that is NOT what abortion terminates. Abortion takes the life of a complete genetically programed and GROWING human person. PERIOD. These little humans are NOT unfertilized chicken eggs or acorns. Like I mentioned previously, by the time a woman even discovers she is pregnant her developing human baby has a beating heart and just days after that the baby's major organs are forming! Once again, this is a far cry from an unfertilized chicken egg you eat for breakfast.

Lastly, the "human but NOT a human being" arguement is a smokescreen and a variation of the "not a person" fallacy. There is no such thing as a human who is not a person, a human who is not a human being or a human who is not a "full" human. People have tried these arguements on "lesser" humans throughout history. They are dishonest and irrelovent. More on the way she tries to differentiate between the "noun" and the "adjective" in the next exchange.

Fetuses DON'T feel pain????

Where did you hear this???

Several sources came to this conclusion:

The fetus can feel pain at 20 weeks. This is probably a conservatively late estimate, but it is scientifically solid.

Elements of the pain-conveying system (spino-thalamic system) begin to be assembled at 7 weeks; enough development has occurred by 12-14 weeks that some pain perception is likely, and continues to build through the second trimester. By 20 weeks, the spino- thalamic system is fully established and connected.

There are three different indicators providing evidence that the fetus feels pain.

Anatomical- pain receptors spread over the body in stages:

8-16 weeks- pain impulse connections in the spinal cord link up and reach the thalamus (the brain's reception center):

7-20 weeks (summarized by Anand, K.J.S., Atlanta)

Physiological/Hormonal- fetuses withdraw from painful stimulation- two types of stress hormones, normally released by adults subjected to pain, are released by adults subjected to pain, are releases in massive amounts by the fetus subjected to a needle puncture to draw a blood sample:(a) from 19 weeks onward (N. Fisk; London, England)(b) from 16 weeks onward (J. Partch; Kiel, Germany)

Behavioral- withdraw from pain- change in vital signs A 20-30 week old fetus actually will feel MORE pain than an adult. The period between 20-30 weeks is a uniquely vulnerable time, since the pain system is fully established, yet the higher level pain-modifying system has barely begun to develop.


Another source notes this:

"The question of when "life" begins and ends can be purely viewed from a biological and scientific angle. Life, in a physical sense, is generally determined by a beating heart and brainwave activity, the telltale signs of we count as a living, breathing homo sapien. Without these, you are not living. By Week 9 in a pregnancy, the fetus' heart is beating (and has been beating since around week 4). Also by Week 9, brainwaves are being detected in a fetus. The exact timing may differ slightly in each baby's case, but generally, these two functions are operational by this point in time. According to a survey, 54% who have abortions have them done by 8 weeks, 23% during Weeks 9 and 10, and the remaining 23% after 10 weeks. This is only one survey, but from what I've read elsewhere the percentages generally follow these.

So I would say that 54% of the abortions were "allowable", 23% depend on what the ultrasound shows, and the later 23% should've been denied an abortion."

For More Information:

So let's say that the fetus is indeed human. My question is, do we really value human life above all else? Consider wars. Do we not, as a country and a society, accept that war is sometimes necessary whenever our freedoms are attacked or our way of life threatened? Are not numerous innocent men, women, and children killed in these wars that we wage? Do we not accept this as a necessary evil? Are we not saying that our freedom and way of life is more valuable than life itself? How different is this then from a woman who views an unwanted pregnancy as an affront to her personal rights and freedoms? Has she not the right to terminate this pregnancy to preserve her freedom? Is this just another necessary evil?

I feel that I have a consistent pro-life ethic by being anti war and capital punishment. However, as a pro-lifer put it in another site, the fact of criminals who get the death penalty is that they had rights granted to them and by abusing the rights of others (sometimes viciously,) they lost their rights. Also, soldiers sign up for war and know the greatly increased probability for death. (civilians being killed I don't believe is condoned by anyone.) The fetus however, is not being given the right of personhood AT ALL and that is why some pro-lifers can support war/capital punishment, but not abortion.

I need a dose of education? hahaha, ok.

Just a quick question, can something without a nervous system feel pain? Is there some magical way for a clump of cells (even a clump of cells with a beating heart) to feel pain? If so, I'd be very interested in learning about it, it sounds fascinating. Perhaps the baby's theoretical soul feels pain?

My daughter is 5 weeks old. She was completely planned for, so I did not have to confront that awful choice that so many young and unprepared teenagers have to make once they find out they're pregnant. Like I said before, I am completely pro-choice/anti-abortion. It's an actual group on here, you should look it up. Once I knew my wife was pregnant, we were completely excited and on board for preparations. At no point in the pregnancy could I imagine wanting to get an abortion, but I'm mature enough to realize that not every pregnant couple is in the same situation as my wife and I.

To hear esasif talk about abortion, you would think that pro-choicers just LOVE to have abortions, like we sit around planning trysts just so we can trot down to the clinic to have our parasite ripped apart. This is a disgusting lie, nothing could be farther from the truth. Having an abortion is one of the most difficult choices that anyone ever has to make, and pro-choice people don't make the decision lightly (oh I'm sure there's exceptions, but to characterize an entire group based on a few sociopath members of that group is an infantile argument)

As for your other zinger that you whipped out (why don't pro-choicers want to watch fetuses being aborted?), again that's a dim argument. I would ask a pro-lifer if they ever eat meat. If so, then would they like to watch videos of animals throats being cut and bodies tossed into meat grinders? Would eaters of veal like to see how veal is made? If they don't wanna watch such videos, then how could they possibly still eat meat?

Oh, and I also LOVE the little "pro-abortion" jab you mentioned...Most of the people I know are pro-choice. I've come across and talked with dozens on this site. I have yet to meet anyone that would classify themselves as "pro-abortion".

We are not fans of abortion, we are grown up enough to realize that it should be kept legal and hopefully rare. Outlawing abortion will not decrease abortions, it will decrease the number of safe abortions. Outlawing abortion is as smart as the prohibition movement. In that case it led to masses making moonshine, in abortion's case it would lead to masses attempting self-induced poisonings and other methods coupled with a black market of back alley abortions. Sounds wonderful, doesn't it?

yah, we're done here.....and fyi, you are the only one to how you see it any other way, baffles me.

and with that said, i hope you can at least find sympathy for yourself....because you are indeed bitching and everyone, including you, is ignorant to something (we dont all know everything)

oh, and if you were as correct as you pretend to be, abortion would be illegal

Oh, I am sorry... but asiam and vendett need a MAJOR dose of EDUCATION!!!

Firstly, he or she is 100% HUMAN. According to the law of biogenesis- all life reproduces after it's own kind... and according to EVERY medical reference the unborn are abosolutely human.

You see THIS is what I am refering to. Pro-choicers being so completely ignorant on the key facts. They either ***** about how "gruesome" prolifers signs are with aborted fetuses or they get pissed when someone mentions the unborn human's right to continue his or her life (rather than talk SOLELY about the woman).

This is the mentality that I have NO sympathy for



"...the truth that abortion takes the life of developing humans.' --no one is agruing that.

This is your mentality??? You need help.

"ultrasound is an awesome and this has nothing to do with pro choice"

Ya... SO... seeing the unborn child you rip apart has nothing to do with the child..?? You must be one of those pro-abortion people who believes it's a "BLOB" right? That's where that 4D ultrasound comes in handy... oh no! A blob wouldn't be sucking his thumb, smiling, yawning, kicking, dreaming, sleeping, listening and remembering his mother's voice... oops.... MORE pro-choices LIES being UNCOVERED...

"also, you are assuming we're all uneducated and thats why were pro choice... "

NO, you are SHOWING you are uneducated by your own words.

"the mothers human rights will always take precedence over another persons morality issues."

Look up 'oppression' in the dictionary. Oh, and look up the word fetus, too.

"arent you the one who finds it morally wrong to kill the fetus??"


...bitching bitching bitching. You support and condone the killing of unborn humans and yet you find a way to blame others and ***** at them for it. Classic Pro-abortion behavior.

wow.....the choice is there, perhaps one day you'll accept it...or at the very least, learn to respect those that do.

and fyi, you stated, 'I am sorry if you don't want to believe the truth that abortion takes the life of developing humans.'

--no one is agruing that. the whole point is that its not a viable being with rights of its own until it is living outside of the mother. for instance a woman can have an abortion at 6 months, not a crime...if she gives birth at 6 months, the baby is placed in an incubator and monitored and yada yada yada, my point being, once its outside of its mothers body, it now has its own rights as a real viable human.

also, quit throwing the reality card. you could toss a dozen fetuses at me, i'd still be pro choice......and yes, the 4d ultrasound is an awesome invention, did you know it can also make certain birth defects more visible (obviously not that organ defects). and yes it gives you a better view of what your child looks like, but its also expensive, most people rarely get to use one...and this has nothing to do with pro choice, btw....

also, you are assuming we're all uneducated and thats why were pro choice. we've aged and learned so much more about the human fetus than we ever knew during roe vs wade, yet there are still so many pro choicers....and why is that, because the mothers human rights will always take precedence over another persons morality issues.

why are you talking about someones guru?

oh, and when did your religion come into question?

oh wow, and this comment, 'Again no, YOUR GROUP is TRYING to legislate morality... '

--are you for real. arent you the one who finds it morally wrong to kill the fetus??

You say: pro-choicers are only in support of each and every persons right to choose what they believe." But, you are leaving out ONE critical group of humans... the fetuses and embryo's choice. And you say, "The only thing the pro-choice movement has to stand for is the freedom to choose for ones self and no one else!" Again no, YOUR GROUP is TRYING to legislate morality... you are lobbying for the killing of innocent humans! How in the world can you accuse Pro-lifers of "legislating morality" and "taking away choices" when Pro-Choicers do that THOUSANDS of times a day to innocent humans? Mind blowing, Mind numbing. Or of being "christian" which being religious or non religious has NOTHING to do with abortion and killing other humans.

I am sorry if you don't want to believe the truth that abortion takes the life of developing humans. But if you go to fetal development websites you indeed will see that embryo is a developing human being from conception to 8 weeks. At at 4 weeks when the mom has just gotten a positive pregnancy test her embryo has his or her own BEATING HEART. And you will discover that the term fetus means developing human from 8 weeks until birth. When the "magical" birth happens it turns a worthless fetus into a precious baby! Amazing how that happens isn't it? One minute a human to be torn apart (D&E) and the next, a precious little baby to keep and hold. SUCH A LIE... AND IT'S THE PRO-CHOICE MOVEMENT IN A NUTSHELL.

Listen, I am a nurse, a lamaze teacher and I have every bit of knowledge out there on fetal development. A fetus is a developing human. Period. At 4 weeks an embryo has all of his or internal organs and body systems beginning to develop and then at 12 weeks a fetus has ALL of his or her internal organs and body systems FULLY DEVELOPED!

Don't like it, don't blame me for the facts.

BTW, one of your "guru's" Joyce Arthur- ADMITS that "a fetus has value when the woman carrying it decides it does". THIS IS A TYPE OF MENTAL ILLNESS. To actually believe one's own thoughts can change the biological makeup of other humans. That one minute it's a worthless pile of garbage (to be aborted and thrown away)... and then to believe you have a *thought* and then the next minute it's a precious, valueable human being baby.

The truth is that EVERY human has worth and the gruesome killing of the 8 week fetus and from 8 weeks on, is truly disgusting. That is why I have YET to find a Pro-Choice book/source that will actually SHOW the abortion of the 8 and 12 week fetus and from there on, like the abortion on the 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24 week fetus. NONE. And in the book, "Our bodies, Our selves' the author have a diagram of a suction aspiration abortion in which there is a drawing of a uterus enlarged to accomodate an 11 week fetus - but the uterus is shown having ONLY amniotic fluid inside... they actually left the fetus out of the picture entirely!

Do NO pro-choice people find it extremely ODD and questionable that they are supporting something that NO ONE FROM THEIR SIDE wants to SHOW, TALK ABOUT or ACKNOWLEDGE??? The "secrecy" thing doesn't bother any of you??? I mean, really?

What about the new 4D ultrasound machine that GE invented?... GE put commercials on TV advertising their machines and SHOWING the INCREDIBLE, touchable images of the fetuses they filmed with the new high tech ultrasound machines. Guess who put up a huge fuss and threatened legal action if they DIDN'T the commercials off of American TV???

Yes, The abortion leaders at Planned Parenthood! THEY DON'T WANT PEOPLE TO SEE THE HUMAN FETUSES FOR WHO THEY ARE!!! Because if people were to actually see the human fetuses... abortion would DECREASE DRAMATICALLY!!! And that would threaten their "choice" and the whole premise of Roe v. Wade... and the extreme Pro-choice leaders know that that realization about the unborn would slowly chip away at the whole abortion industry.

BTW- I am liberal, Pro-life and Pro-contraception and NOT religious... so... quit trying to make pro-lifers all prude and christian. IT JUST AINT SO.

i like your logic, though i dont agree with it. yes, the baby will become its own person, but not until it exists outside the mothers body (until then, it only has the potential). dare i say, its almost parasitic, it requires the mother host until birth when it can finally obtain and sustain a life on its own. and until birth, everything that happens is completely at the discretion of the mother. what the baby eats, what it hears, whether it lives or dies.....

the crux for you, is human life in general, but what of the quality of that human life. if you force a woman to keep her baby, do you intend to stand by that babys side and make sure it grows in a loving family and is properly taken care of considering how much concern you took in the babies birth, take that same pride throughout that babies life......most people dont care once the child is born, thats the sad fact

The debate rages on, consistently ignoring the crux of the matter:




Has it no value????

The paradox of babies growing in the womb is this: They're a part of women- but apart from women at the same time...

Make sense?

Without the woman (usually), the babies can't grow- but they're separate entities, wouldn't you agree? Children don't come out as carbon copies of the woman, or the man, which, in penny store logic, means that they're their own people, from the very moment the ***** and egg do the dance.

They don't 'breathe' like we do, but then again neither do FISH- but they DO breathe, right?

I cannot understand how people don't see it as murder- THEY'RE KIDS, FOR CRYING OUT LOUD?

If they aren't, then what are they????

i dont have anything to add, i just liked your comment vendetta, very much so

If pro-lifers were smarter, then there wouldn't be such a fuss over abortion, because they would support policies which actually, you know, reduce the number of abortions. George W Bush is a good example of a good Christian pro-lifer. Why is it that there were more abortions under his terms than under Clinton's, who is one of those evil pro-choicers? Because besides being pro-life, he also supported the idiotic positions that go along with that position, meaning he's for abstinence only sex ed (doesn't work) and he's against providing contraception to all (because of his prudish religious beliefs) and he opposed those things which constitute a safety net for young scared single pregnant women. Pro-life republicans support policies which lead directly to more abortions. I myself am pro-choice/anti-abortion. I believe we should do everything possible to make sure they remain legal, but rare.

'Pro-choicers support the killing of developing and often viable (if not viable in the wombs) developing human beings!!! Now, if that isn't a "side" against human life... I can't tell you what is!'

we dont support killing anyone. we support the right of choice! sorry you dont understand the opposition as well as you'd like to.....simple minded people tend to become confused easily....perhaps the idea of options is too complex for you.

and your scenario again is wrong, you're giving the unborn baby more rights than it has whilst inside the womb. killing a living breathing person is wrong, abortion is not killing a living, breathing person.

it is each womens choice, call it what you will as long as you respect it, or at the very least, agree to disagree and get on with your baby saving life......while i run along killing those innocent little ones, cause you know, thats what i do (note the sarcasm)

the fact that another woman had an abortion and later regretted it is hardly going to change anyones view. someone made a personal choice that affected her personally.....i say, atleast she had the choice. perhaps she made the wrong one, but just because she couldnt decipher the difference, now every womens rights should be taken from them. i dont see how thats a good argument either.