[CHANDLERS WISH]

This is a very good question here.

I will be the first to say that I do not know at what point in the development of an unborn child (for some reason I cannot stand the term fetus and never have) becomes more than just a group of cells and is what everyone would consider as a person. No matter what anyone believes we and scientist just do not know for an absolute fact as we have no proof.

With that being said, I will bring up the debate on circumcision. One of the biggest issues with it is that it is performed on the individual without their consent/input.

The aborted child has no say so here.

I have always been of the opinion that if it is something that you really don't have all the answers to it is better to stay away from it just to be on the "safe side".

Bottom line on this is that we as individuals have to do what our conscience(s) will allow.

True, who truthfully knows? Scientists say one thing, then another.

And as an individual, there is no right or wrong at the end of the day, rather your decision, or other's that sway you.. But - A- decision.

Damd - sorry.... But, fact is what ever belief someone has they have, as you do.. as someone else does. And, as a parent does, regardless again, as to whether the other sibling agrees or not, that was not his/her choice but based on what he/she is told, feels, believes, that is also an individual choice.

I actually admire people who have STRONG beliefs, what ever those beliefs are.

Some are assassinated for such beliefs, lets face it, they put it out there and someone disagrees and shoots them dead.. "I had a dream"...

But as Fallen 1 said, regardless of "her beliefs" it is a choice if you can live with it, then that was your choice.

We live in a world where all breaks lose, all things happen that we agree and disagree with, why? Because we are individuals and we have our own minds our own beliefs. Our fathers and their fathers may believe in something different. Are we swayed on their beliefs, ultimately, if we have faith in them and believe in them, but ultimately, we will make our own decisions, based on what we "think"..

And that..........is the "beauty" of having your own mind... Being able to make your own decision, and forget facts/science/parents/grandparents/ their thoughts/ beliefs but that of our own.

[anonymouswhitefemale]

I don't know where exactly you are from, but where I am at there is a huge movement to censor anything that will discourage a woman for getting an abortion.

I don't know where you're from, but all we ever see is christian fools waving banners around outside abortion clinics.

You are absolutley right I have never and will never be in that position.

Because you're a man?

Besides isn't giving a person the right of abortion judging that the life that is about to be killed is less significant?

It's less "judging" and more "rationalising". A living, breathing, self aware entity who has experienced life is more important than a cluster of cells. Sure, time would make it as significant, but without that time, it remains insignificant.

As for what a fetus is you are correct. It not being a person, not correct. However, the statistics are irrelevant as my arguements are directed at the significance of life no matter what the stage of development the person is in.

Are you sure about that? You have proof, right?

Well, just in terms of people who know more about the subject than I (obviously searching the internet yourself on the subject would throw up many more):

][/FONT]The emotive photographs, taken with new fourdimensional imaging technology, have created a misleading impression that foetuses become viable and potentially self-aware at a much earlier stage than is actually the case, according to experts on foetal development. The 4-D scanning technique, developed by Stuart Campbell, of the Create Health Clinic in London, has helped to revive abortion as a political issue since he published his first images two years ago.
The pictures showed foetuses of 12 weeks’ gestation, bouncing and kicking in the womb, before the mother is usually aware of such movement. At 16 weeks, they can be seen sucking thumbs and yawning, and at 18 weeks opening their eyes.
Although Professor Campbell insisted that the images did not mean that the foetal brain was consciously controlling these movements, they were seized on by anti-abortion campaigners to demand a reduction in the time limit on terminations. At present, abortion is allowed until 24 weeks of pregnancy, except in the case of severe foetal abnormalities or danger to maternal health. The 4-D scans of much younger foetuses, along with advances in treating premature babies that allow a few to survive births as early as 23 weeks, have led to calls for that limit to be cut.
The Archbishops of Canterbury and Westminster have both said that the law should be revisited. Michael Howard, the former Conservative leader, said last year that he would back a 20-week limit, and Tony Blair is also thought to support a review.
Doctors and researchers, however, said yesterday that the images had confused the public about the real state of the science.
“I had two reactions when I saw those photographs,” said Donald Peebles, of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology at University College London. “One was that this was a fantastic piece of technology that showed very clearly what we knew already about the foetus in a way that was comprehensible to the public.
“But there was also a temptation to associate these movements — sucking a thumb, gasping as if talking — with adult movements, to think it is sucking its thumb because it is happy. It’s that feeling which I think is extraordinarily dangerous.”
Though the foetus clearly looks human by 12 weeks, proper sensory development takes place much later, he said. There was a risk that the pictures would make people assume that foetuses have more advanced brains than is the case.
“The neurons in the brain might be in their final positions by about halfway through the pregnancy, but that in no way means they function in an adult way. These images don’t tell me anything I haven’t known for 30 years with ultrasound scans. We know what it looks like, and that it moves continuously. I don’t think in a scientific sense this sheds any new light on the debate.”
Huseyin Mehmet, Reader in Developmental Neurobiology at Imperial College London, said: “Personification of the foetus at that age is dangerous. Scans that look at the structure of the foetal brain at 23 to 24 weeks show that the human brain is extremely immature. It is the period between 24 and 40 weeks that is largely responsible for brain development. I was worried when I saw those images. To suggest that an early foetus in utero has those kind of human qualities of being able to suck its thumb and move, that it meets the biological definition of being really viable outside the uterus, is very difficult indeed.”
John Watts, Professor of Neonatal Paediatrics at University College Hospital in London, said. “It is clear that a vast amount of activity is happening mainly in the last three months of pregnancy. We will never know at what point foetal consciousness and awareness start. But the link between cortex and the rest of the body doesn’t come into play until 23 to 24 weeks, when the first connections are created.”

That is not correct. Sperm will never grow into anything more than what it already is. -continue below-

"under the right conditions", those conditions being burrying it's head in an egg, in a healthy womb.

This was an error on my part when I had assumed that you did know the difference between sex cells and a zygote. Sex cells are male sperm and female eggs. A zygote is the result of the fussion or ferilization of these two cells. Sperm in your body are produced then are expelled or they die and are reabsorbed. You are loosing millions of sperms cells all of the time and more are created to replace the ones lost. Sex cells are not people they will never become people. They are the essential ingrediants of a zygote. Which if allowed, will grow into a child then into an adult.

Oops, my bad, I got my biology terminology I learnt 8 years ago muddled up. But the point remains, each of these sex-cells has no rights and is by no means alive, but a life equal to an adult human suddenly springs from two of them merging?

This is why I asked if you are your father? Are you your mother? Your sex cells belong to you just like all the cells in your body except they contain half of your genetic code. A zygote is not the father or the mother. It's genetic code is unique to itself, yes it got that code from a father and mother but their code is not like it's code. It is a seperate entity. A person. Underdeveloped, yes.

Are you saying that to be alive you have to be unique? I think Dolly the sheep would complain about that. But yes, fine, it's a human in gestation. I absolutely don't agree that it's a "person".

No it does not. Killing a life does not negate it from happening. Think of a fire. Abortion is a fire extinguisher. You have a fire, you use a fire extinguisher and put it out. You killed it. Contraception is the removal of the fuel that would start a fire. By which the fire never takes place. With abortion life had already began and it was killed, snuffed, extinguished.

Let's ammend your example a little here. One day, two components in a machine start rubbing together creating friction. The heat from this friction builds and builds, until there is a spark, and then a fire. Abortion is oiling or fixing the machine, after the heat has started to build through friction but before even a spark of fire is realised.

Are you grasping here? Why now? What has transpired at whichever point you are talking about that makes it different now?

No, I'm not grasping. To take a quote snippet from the quote above: " It is the period between 24 and 40 weeks that is largely responsible for brain development."

As much as I admire science and the scientific method, scientist don't know everything. They are constantly discovering and redefining things.

Is that what you'll say when a doctor prescribes you a life-saving medicine? Nothing in the world is certain. Nothing. Except perhaps "cogito ergo sum" and mathematics.

I am not saying that your statistics are wrong but they are irrelavent. Abortion is wrong regardless how far along the person is.

That is because you don't understand the development of the foetus. At day one, a foetus is not equally comparable to an 8 month old. If you would agree that a foetus isn't a person until it's brain has developed, then it becomes a point of preventing a life from happening rather than murdering one.

Refering to the 99.8% effectivness of BC. Lets do some math, lets say you had sex everday for a year and practice proper birth control. 365 X .002 = 0.73% that you got some one pregnant for that year. Here is something else though, a women is not fertile a whole year or even a whole month. So there are days when possible conception is absolutley zero. So its actually less than .73%.

The Pill is 92-99.7% effective as birth control.

Wel,l 92-99.7% is a heIl of a lot lower than 99.8%. And that is just for the pill...

Barrier Methods: Typical rate | Lowest rate
Male Latex Condom1	14%	3%
Diaphragm2	20%	6%
Vaginal Sponge (no previous births)3	20%	9%
Vaginal Sponge (previous births)3	40%	20%
Cervical Cap (no previous births)2	20%	9%
Cervical Cap (previous births)2	40%	26%
Female Condom	21%	5%

The above is based on a year. So suddenly, accidental pregnacies DO happen and gosh, it happens more than 0.02% of the time. I'd also like to point out, given the scope of your argument, that these statistics of pregancy are irrelvent. Does the fact that you were unlucky change the fact that in your eyes you're murdering "people"?

Why can't you answer the question I possed?
[original question]
Hypothetically, would you support your mother aborting you? I can't imagine anyone wanting someone with that amount of control over their life... their existence.

I'm not a hypocrite, I'd live under the conditions everyone else would. I may not like the fact that if I'd have been aborted that I wouldn't exist, but I support her choice. After all, how much of a bigger part did "fate" play in my existance anyway. If my mother never met my father one day because her bus was 2 minutes late I wouldn't exist either.

As for your example, you had three brothers, one was viewed not fit and killed. Further this example show a possible glimpse of the future of selective breeding. With the mapping of the genitic code it is going to be possible for doctors to test an unborn baby and tell the would be parents what the child will look like. So what if they wanted a child with blue eyes? Currently they will be allowed to abort and try again, and again, and again, until they get what they want. Playing God for a lack of a better term. However, if a God does exist I would hate to think that s/he or it would would view a life so trivial.

So I can assume that you wouldn't support abortion even if (as in my example) the baby will live a half-life of pain and suffering, before it dies unhappy.

And designer babies aren't going to happen like that, nobody enjoys nullifying foetuses, it's not something that's going to replace going to the cinema. If anything, the DNA of the foetus (well, zygote I guess) would be manipulated, it wouldn't be done through trial and error.

-cont- Your example also shows another person enforcing their beliefs of what would be best for another individual. Now refering to the scientist remark, how about a world where "scientist knows best" and abortion is a tool used to weed out the hadicapped? As a teen I enjoyed watching Star Trek TNG, a particular episode had to do with a people who lived in a biosphere. A community that was genitcally controlled. Any embryo that was found to have any flaws would have been destroyed. As it turned out, this biosphere was saved by the technology that allowed Geordi (a blind man) to see. His line "Who gave them the right to decide whether or not I should be here... whether or not I might have something to contribute? " That concept, that logic, that is the essence of my arguement. People speak pro-choice it's not a choice for the ones who has the most to loose. Who asked them what they want. Where are their rights. Right to decide, what about the right to live?

Yep, seen it. And yeah, so Geordie gets upset that in this society he wouldn't have existed, and oh the irony, because of him, they all live. What a neatly wrapped moral. If that society didn't happen to be so cr4p as to need Geordie to save them in the first place, and if he had never turned up there, it'd arguably be a better society. It is better for people not to suffer when they don't have to. Taking the example back to my brother, he has difficulty thinking about him being aborted for being unviable, or whatever, although I know that if he had a child with the same condition that he would abort it.

[damd]

This isn't just some mere cluster of cells that you and I have in our body. They have purpose. They are building to become more than what it already is.

Correction-
This isn't just some mere cluster of cells like what you and I have in our body. They have purpose. They are building to become more than what it already is.

[CHANDLERS WISH]

No I was merely illustrating that a mother has no "individual claim" to the zygote, fetus, baby whatever...

You know that got me thinking. Most of the debate here is based on the "Mother" and her decision/choice... Not true. If there was a poll, it would be interesting to find out from those whom "made a mistake", or those whom "established serious problems with their baby to be", serious ones, how much discussions were made, and ultimately who decided.

In other words. There are those who and i agree, don't care, just get pregnant and say doesn't matter, I'll just get an abortion, you know of one who has had 6, sad... very sad...

But, those who for reasons UN-be-known to them, or naivety from not being taught, or establishing serious problems with their baby if they were to carry it to full term, ALL, in that situation would be devastated, not know which way to go, as they haven't got " ah stuff it I'll kill it" in their mind, which we have established.

However, those type of persons, would speak to Doctors, Husbands, Boyfriends, Family, loads of people. And, therefore, the decision isn't the to be Mother's, in most cases, it would be a joint decision made by the to be mother and to be father as in reality, it would have been "their baby" if they chose to go the full term, not hers.

Just an observation as it seems to be those who don't agree with abortion full stop, blame constantly the would be mother, as it's not only her fault, but also her who "chooses'.....

I don't agree that is factual.

That is a correct assumption. If the child can reach an age where s/he can make it's own choice that life is to unbearable then let them end it.

Euthanasia? Hang themself? Imagine that soul, fully developed, spent years on the planet, at least usually to teenage years, suffering going through pain, watching others do things he/she can't, then they take their own life, end it.

As a Mother, i could not live with myself, knowing my son'/daughter KILLED themselves because they wished that they were never born..

Imagine that child left a note... I hate you for bringing me into the world, i have suffered all my life.

The psychological damage to those parents, those words spoken, the knowledge and then they have to live with themselves until they die, in pain, and suffering. Left wondering if they in-deed did the wrong thing, as spoken by a child, their child.

Why would GOD want that? Both parties, lives their lives in pain and suffering until they die?

I doubt it. Doesn't make sense as to why we were put on this planet to start with, we were put on here to love one another, till death do us part.

Extreme example but done to make a point.

[damd]

CW,
I would like to see the results of that poll if one is ever conducted.

Euthanasia? Hang themself? Imagine that soul, fully developed, spent years on the planet, at least usually to teenage years, suffering going through pain, watching others do things he/she can't, then they take their own life, end it.

As a Mother, i could not live with myself, knowing my son'/daughter KILLED themselves because they wished that they were never born..

Imagine that child left a note... I hate you for bringing me into the world, i have suffered all my life.

The psychological damage to those parents, those words spoken, the knowledge and then they have to live with themselves until they die, in pain, and suffering. Left wondering if they in-deed did the wrong thing, as spoken by a child, their child.

Why would GOD want that? Both parties, lives their lives in pain and suffering until they die?

I doubt it. Doesn't make sense as to why we were put on this planet to start with, we were put on here to love one another, till death do us part.

Extreme example but done to make a point.

I am not against euthanasia as long it's an informed decision and made by the person. I do think there is a major difference between euthanasia and suicide although the result is the same. One being someone chosing to end there physical suffering another, well there are many reasons why a person commits would commit suicide. Usually you can judge one being a purposeful death while the other is a waste.

As for your example, I am assuming this person is in a simular situation as Anon's brother? I pose this to you then....

Have you ever been "in love" with someone and then that relationship ended. You did not want it to but the person just left. It's the old "It's better to have loved and lost, then not to have loved at all." I view the same with this life. It's better to have live then not at all. Even if it was a cr*ppy life. Who knows what is out there after we are gone. This might be it, right now, yours, mine this might be all that there is. Even if it was cr*p that is all that they had.

A bum living on the streets, living in a cardboard box with nothing but junk. Then one day someone comes by and sweeps it up and hauls it off to the dump. They just robbed this person of everything because someone else viewed it as junk.

For a real life example... My wifes best friend gave birth to a child that was born with a heart defect about 2 years ago. He basically had only half a heart. They discovered the problem early during an ultrasound. The doctors were presurring her to have an abortion. They told her that the baby probably would not make it full term and even if it chances are that it would not survive to it's first birthday. If the child had any small chance of living it was going to need surgery and more likely need a heart transplant and finding a donor was going to be difficult. So why put yourself through all of that just get an abortion they suggested. Needless to say her pregnancy was agonizing, not knowing what grim future laid in front of her child. I believed the did a c-section early and with in hours of his birth he had his first of two surgeries. He was born to a loving family who loved him although they did not get to hold him much because he was on life support with tubes and lines running all over his body. He lived for one month. They did not regret their decision not to have an abortion. Their son lived for a month. A month filled with love. That is all their son will ever know.

[CHANDLERS WISH]

CW,
I would like to see the results of that poll if one is ever conducted.

Me to, too be honest, as ultimately, people feel it's the Woman's choice at the end of it, as it's her body. And, yes, logically, it makes sense, i just feel that it would be interesting to see, how many said, well actually, it was the boyfriends, he made, me, or actually it was joint, we both decided. I am only saying that it can't be assumed that it is ultimately the woman who made the final choice.

Just an observation noted that's all, on the posts to date.



I am not against euthanasia as long it's an informed decision and made by the person. I do think there is a major difference between euthanasia and suicide although the result is the same. One being someone chosing to end there physical suffering another, well there are many reasons why a person commits would commit suicide. Usually you can judge one being a purposeful death while the other is a waste.

But even for the purpose of suffering, it's still a waste.


As for your example, I am assuming this person is in a simular situation as Anon's brother? I pose this to you then....

Have you ever been "in love" with someone and then that relationship ended. You did not want it to but the person just left. It's the old "It's better to have loved and lost, then not to have loved at all." I view the same with this life.

I don't disagree at all... And, i would hope that those parents even if they were told straight out "i hate you for having me" as per my example, and the example was only based on thinking, not Anon's brother, that they receive enough support for them to believe that scenario... I do also believe better to have loved, than not at all in that context...

Again, i am purely saying, have we ever considered that scenario and what those parents will then go through for the rest of their lives.

Thoughts, nothing more.

It's better to have live then not at all. Even if it was a cr*ppy life. Who knows what is out there after we are gone. This might be it, right now, yours, mine this might be all that there is. Even if it was cr*p that is all that they had.

A bum living on the streets, living in a cardboard box with nothing but junk. Then one day someone comes by and sweeps it up and hauls it off to the dump. They just robbed this person of everything because someone else viewed it as junk.



For a real life example... My wifes best friend gave birth to a child that was born with a heart defect about 2 years ago. He basically had only half a heart. They discovered the problem early during an ultrasound. The doctors were presurring her to have an abortion. They told her that the baby probably would not make it full term and even if it chances are that it would not survive to it's first birthday. If the child had any small chance of living it was going to need surgery and more likely need a heart transplant and finding a donor was going to be difficult. So why put yourself through all of that just get an abortion they suggested. Needless to say her pregnancy was agonizing, not knowing what grim future laid in front of her child. I believed the did a c-section early and with in hours of his birth he had his first of two surgeries. He was born to a loving family who loved him although they did not get to hold him much because he was on life support with tubes and lines running all over his body. He lived for one month. They did not regret their decision not to have an abortion. Their son lived for a month. A month filled with love. That is all their son will ever know.

But see, i'm not dis-agreeing with you. If i was told that there was a chance, through surgery, and it was 50/50 i'd take the chance.. And, i would then feel the better to have loved, than not at all.

I as you know, just feel that mistakes can happen and you have to live with your choice. I often as a youth discussed if i was to have a child and they were retarded for instance, and i knew would i have that child. The answer is yes.

I simply saw to things that i wanted to bring up on the thread, for debating discussions.

CW

[damd]

Wow-harsh and not true. The way in which i read Anons post - was that he has a brother now with a terminal illness...he didnt mention anything about an abortion being carried out within his family....

Let me give you a better example. My brother has a terminal disease, which nowadays could have been picked up very early and the foetus aborted, and another attempt made. That would mean that the brother I love today would never have existed, but another one would have. It's a very difficult thing to process. However, it's just the mysteries of life. As an objective onlooker, it would be the better option.

I apologize Anon for I had just caught my error. I did indeed misread what you had posted. I thought you were speaking hypothetically.. I'm sorry.

[anonymouswhitefemale]

For a real life example... My wifes best friend gave birth to a child that was born with a heart defect about 2 years ago. He basically had only half a heart. They discovered the problem early during an ultrasound. The doctors were presurring her to have an abortion. They told her that the baby probably would not make it full term and even if it chances are that it would not survive to it's first birthday. If the child had any small chance of living it was going to need surgery and more likely need a heart transplant and finding a donor was going to be difficult. So why put yourself through all of that just get an abortion they suggested. Needless to say her pregnancy was agonizing, not knowing what grim future laid in front of her child. I believed the did a c-section early and with in hours of his birth he had his first of two surgeries. He was born to a loving family who loved him although they did not get to hold him much because he was on life support with tubes and lines running all over his body. He lived for one month. They did not regret their decision not to have an abortion. Their son lived for a month. A month filled with love. That is all their son will ever know.

See, the problem that I see with this, aside from the fact that all the baby really saw was suffering (it was too young to understand that some people it didn't know "loved" it and that this force was stronger than the pain etc. The MAIN problem being that it was relatively speaking quite a waste of a heart, that would have saved someone else. You know, until we can master cloning, organs are nigh on impossible to get, and to bring a life into the world for a half-shot at life with a transplanted organ doesn't seem to make sense to me.

[miffed23]

Here is something else though, a women is not fertile a whole year or even a whole month.

The bold statement isnt correct - a woman is fertile for approximately 72 days a year...so she is fertile for much more than a whole month, thats what i was getting at.... although im not entirely sure why....

Anyhoo, youre not going to back down, neither am i... you have your beliefs and i have mine

But, i am curious to know, what you would do if your daughter - (i gather you have 2 children, so lets be hypothetical and assume one is female...) told you that she was pregnant and didnt want to keep the baby for her own personal reasons...How would you react? Surely, youre role as a father would be to support your child in her decision? What do you think?

[damd]

See, the problem that I see with this, aside from the fact that all the baby really saw was suffering (it was too young to understand that some people it didn't know "loved" it and that this force was stronger than the pain etc. The MAIN problem being that it was relatively speaking quite a waste of a heart, that would have saved someone else. You know, until we can master cloning, organs are nigh on impossible to get, and to bring a life into the world for a half-shot at life with a transplanted organ doesn't seem to make sense to me.

I guess it is as the arguement the other way is to me.

As for your comment about it didn't know love, I like not to think so. Babies I can speak about mine, never cease to amaze me. You might think that they do not understand you but their minds are like sponges, they absorb everything. It does not take long for a baby to make a connection between screaming and getting what it wants, let it be food, a change, a burp, or just to be held. Emotions are a complicated thing and maybe baby's brains are not as developed to process all that goes into an emotion but I do believe that they do have them. I know that they can show anger at a very young age I do have to believe that they can feel love as well.

Last, a heart was never wasted as he never recieved a donor. His odds were never 50/50 I believe they were more 10/90 that he would not live a year. The point was that his parents gave him that 10% and gave him the best chance he could at life. And they loved him. If she would have had an abortion, they would never have met him, never touched him, that even though their time with him was full of sorrow they loved him every minute of it and would never trade it in for anything.

The bold statement isnt correct - a woman is fertile for approximately 72 days a year...so she is fertile for much more than a whole month, thats what i was getting at.... although im not entirely sure why....

Anyhoo, youre not going to back down, neither am i... you have your beliefs and i have mine

But, i am curious to know, what you would do if your daughter - (i gather you have 2 children, so lets be hypothetical and assume one is female...) told you that she was pregnant and didnt want to keep the baby for her own personal reasons...How would you react? Surely, youre role as a father would be to support your child in her decision? What do you think?

Actually it wasn't a bold statement as it was more an error in grammer. I should have said the whole year or even the whole month (a whole month? whatever) as I was reffering that I woman was not fertile all 30 or 31 days in a month.

As for the hypothetical scenario... First I hope never to face that situation. I am sure the subject of abortion will come up in her upbringing and I hope that I can install into her that abortions are wrong that more than just murder like all crimes against children it a crime against the most innocent. That it will rob someone of a life of experiences that no one knows what this person could have become. That the victim here even though is a stranger would be her own flesh and blood.

So if she still has an abortion, then I would be extremely disappointed but it would never change my love for her.