Pro-life vs. Pro-Choice

[__earth]

Which side do you stand and why?

[__earth]

Which side do you stand and why?

[luke]

err .. do you mind explaining both of them?

[luke]

err .. do you mind explaining both of them?

[wesleyanne]

err .. do you mind explaining both of them?

using abortion as a classic example, pro-life would be against aborting the child, while pro-choice would say that its ok to abort the child and that its up to the mother's decision.

for me, i dont really have a strong stand on this. im kinda in the middle, if thats possible. my opinions tend to differ deoending on the situation....

[wesleyanne]

err .. do you mind explaining both of them?

using abortion as a classic example, pro-life would be against aborting the child, while pro-choice would say that its ok to abort the child and that its up to the mother's decision.

for me, i dont really have a strong stand on this. im kinda in the middle, if thats possible. my opinions tend to differ deoending on the situation....

[wwhong]

i think i lean more towards pro-choice then. taking abortion as example, yes it's really cruel to end a baby's life provided the baby never did anything wrong and the parents have no right to take away his/her life. but if the parents cannot afford to support the child for any reasons, then is it a right choice to bring the baby to this world and suffer? isn't that more cruel?

[wwhong]

i think i lean more towards pro-choice then. taking abortion as example, yes it's really cruel to end a baby's life provided the baby never did anything wrong and the parents have no right to take away his/her life. but if the parents cannot afford to support the child for any reasons, then is it a right choice to bring the baby to this world and suffer? isn't that more cruel?

[wesleyanne]

yeah i do agree, once again depending on the situation:) but that aside, i dont think its wise to start a debate on abortion, considering its been a neverending debate that still carries on till this very day between pro-lifers and pro-choicers :) and honestly, i think no one can or probably will ever reach a mutual decision...

[wesleyanne]

yeah i do agree, once again depending on the situation:) but that aside, i dont think its wise to start a debate on abortion, considering its been a neverending debate that still carries on till this very day between pro-lifers and pro-choicers :) and honestly, i think no one can or probably will ever reach a mutual decision...

[littlebigone]

pro-life and pro-choice debate is really a matter of life and death...literally. I know that some abortion clinics have their doctors come in with bullet-proof vests.

on the situation where the parents can't afford to get the child, then I think they have to be responsible enough to at least give the baby up for adoption.

[littlebigone]

pro-life and pro-choice debate is really a matter of life and death...literally. I know that some abortion clinics have their doctors come in with bullet-proof vests.

on the situation where the parents can't afford to get the child, then I think they have to be responsible enough to at least give the baby up for adoption.

[el_empty]

on the situation where the parents can't afford to get the child, then I think they have to be responsible enough to at least give the baby up for adoption.

there're a lot more children waiting to be adopted than parents wanting to adopt.

[el_empty]

on the situation where the parents can't afford to get the child, then I think they have to be responsible enough to at least give the baby up for adoption.

there're a lot more children waiting to be adopted than parents wanting to adopt.

The problem with both pro-choice and pro-life is that both are extreme positions.

The main issue, I believe, is where one should draw the line. For instance, when and under what conditions should abortion be allowed?

Some pro-life activist are so extreme that they consider using sexual contraceptive as preventing potentially "meaningful" life from forming - hence, "killing" a baby that would have been borned otherwise.

On the other hand, if you're totally pro-choice, you would think that aborting a baby that's a week due to pregnancy would be morally OK and should be legal. But what's the difference between a baby a week due and a baby that's born? Would you then argue that the mother reserves the right to kill her newborn child if she doesn't like it?

Back to the main question: When and under what conditions should abortions be allowed? That should be the debate here.

The problem with both pro-choice and pro-life is that both are extreme positions.

The main issue, I believe, is where one should draw the line. For instance, when and under what conditions should abortion be allowed?

Some pro-life activist are so extreme that they consider using sexual contraceptive as preventing potentially "meaningful" life from forming - hence, "killing" a baby that would have been borned otherwise.

On the other hand, if you're totally pro-choice, you would think that aborting a baby that's a week due to pregnancy would be morally OK and should be legal. But what's the difference between a baby a week due and a baby that's born? Would you then argue that the mother reserves the right to kill her newborn child if she doesn't like it?

Back to the main question: When and under what conditions should abortions be allowed? That should be the debate here.

[Thirdshifter]

to all the pro-life, If you think a fetus is more important then a women, try get a fetus to wash the shit stain out of your underwear- for no pay and no pension.

When most of these pro-life people had experienced pregnancy, labor pain and raising few kids on minimum wage then i'll be glad to hear what they'll say about abortion.

[Thirdshifter]

to all the pro-life, If you think a fetus is more important then a women, try get a fetus to wash the shit stain out of your underwear- for no pay and no pension.

When most of these pro-life people had experienced pregnancy, labor pain and raising few kids on minimum wage then i'll be glad to hear what they'll say about abortion.

[chiunlin]

Besides abortion, there is also the euthanasia issue that concerns the pro-life and pro-choice supporters.

Here's a website containing the argument for and against euthanasia and the point of view of various religions.
Some of the arguments are also applicable to abortion.

[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/ethics/sanctity_life/deathindex.shtml

[chiunlin]

Besides abortion, there is also the euthanasia issue that concerns the pro-life and pro-choice supporters.

Here's a website containing the argument for and against euthanasia and the point of view of various religions.
Some of the arguments are also applicable to abortion.

[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/ethics/sanctity_life/deathindex.shtml

[__earth]

with regard to euthanasia, im totally pro-choice. We have no rights to impose our moral on others. If somebody wanted to die, its his/her choice. Our moral is irrelevent.

concerning abortion, im pretty much divided. I'm pro-choice in most cases but when the fetus is alive, maybe when his/her/its heart is already pumping, maybe abortion could be considered as killing. Otherwise, I believe it should be legal. Against, our moral is irrelevent.

disgressing, but i want to stress that i strongly believe the irrelevance of moral is the key to a free society. we do need to have moral but we cannot impose it on others. doing so is communism/fundamentalism.

furthermore, fetus is "private property", not public good like the environment.

[__earth]

with regard to euthanasia, im totally pro-choice. We have no rights to impose our moral on others. If somebody wanted to die, its his/her choice. Our moral is irrelevent.

concerning abortion, im pretty much divided. I'm pro-choice in most cases but when the fetus is alive, maybe when his/her/its heart is already pumping, maybe abortion could be considered as killing. Otherwise, I believe it should be legal. Against, our moral is irrelevent.

disgressing, but i want to stress that i strongly believe the irrelevance of moral is the key to a free society. we do need to have moral but we cannot impose it on others. doing so is communism/fundamentalism.

furthermore, fetus is "private property", not public good like the environment.

[littlebigone]

furthermore, fetus is "private property", not public good like the environment.

so it's okay for my mum to shoot me in the head if I don't clean up my room? since I'm also "private property" albeit my mom has owned me for a few years.

[littlebigone]

furthermore, fetus is "private property", not public good like the environment.

so it's okay for my mum to shoot me in the head if I don't clean up my room? since I'm also "private property" albeit my mom has owned me for a few years.

[littlebigone]

How about those morning after pills? Is that also a possible pro-life, pro-choice debate?

[littlebigone]

How about those morning after pills? Is that also a possible pro-life, pro-choice debate?

[__earth]

furthermore, fetus is "private property", not public good like the environment.

so it's okay for my mum to shoot me in the head if I don't clean up my room? since I'm also "private property" albeit my mom has owned me for a few years.

your mom does not own you :)
if you mom owns you, that means you're a slave.

[__earth]

furthermore, fetus is "private property", not public good like the environment.

so it's okay for my mum to shoot me in the head if I don't clean up my room? since I'm also "private property" albeit my mom has owned me for a few years.

your mom does not own you :)
if you mom owns you, that means you're a slave.

[qedx]

i am pro-life but i think foetuses can be harvested for food to feed the famished

[qedx]

i am pro-life but i think foetuses can be harvested for food to feed the famished

[__earth]

i am pro-life but i think foetuses can be harvested for food to feed the famished

err, that sounds like cannibalism. :cry:

[__earth]

i am pro-life but i think foetuses can be harvested for food to feed the famished

err, that sounds like cannibalism. :cry:

[qedx]

no its philantrophy(sp?) use Man to feed Man. besides, if they are gonna be aborted, no one wants them anyway. theyd have better use as burgers

[qedx]

no its philantrophy(sp?) use Man to feed Man. besides, if they are gonna be aborted, no one wants them anyway. theyd have better use as burgers

[littlebigone]

I think that;s sick. However, it;s okay to use dead babies to make hamburgers. Rite?

[littlebigone]

I think that;s sick. However, it;s okay to use dead babies to make hamburgers. Rite?

[__earth]

you guys have singlehandedly redefined and take the word sick to a new level. :D

i really hope you guys are joking.

[__earth]

you guys have singlehandedly redefined and take the word sick to a new level. :D

i really hope you guys are joking.

[littlebigone]

Ever heard this dead baby joke?

What's the difference between a thousand dead babies and a cadillac?

[littlebigone]

Ever heard this dead baby joke?

What's the difference between a thousand dead babies and a cadillac?

[qedx]

ever wonder why bigmacs are cheap?

[qedx]

ever wonder why bigmacs are cheap?

[littlebigone]

errr.....no


ever wondered why you would put a baby feet first into a blender?




























so you could hear it scream.

[littlebigone]

errr.....no


ever wondered why you would put a baby feet first into a blender?




























so you could hear it scream.

[littlebigone]

back to the topic, there are more votes for pro-choice than pro-life. What sways your opinions that way? So far most people have been saying that it's a matter of drawing the line. Or maybe I've been reading the posts wrong.

[littlebigone]

back to the topic, there are more votes for pro-choice than pro-life. What sways your opinions that way? So far most people have been saying that it's a matter of drawing the line. Or maybe I've been reading the posts wrong.

[wawa]

I think littlebigone puts it very aptly,
it's a matter of drawing the line

it depends on the situation and also the people involved. No hard and fast rule, I think.

[wawa]

I think littlebigone puts it very aptly,
it's a matter of drawing the line

it depends on the situation and also the people involved. No hard and fast rule, I think.

[topdog]

baby back ribs, anyone?

sorry...

[topdog]

baby back ribs, anyone?

sorry...

[qedx]

here's a good one http://bash.org/?239870

[qedx]

here's a good one http://bash.org/?239870

[Panda]

pro-life? Pro-choice? It depends

For me, I think we should see whether we are in what situation!

If a cancer patient is nearly die and there is no way for the doctor to cure him? What for the doctor wants to prolong his suffering by giving him all sorts of "poison"? He should choose to die instantly by commiting "suicide".

For women who want to abort their babies, I disagree with them. They are killing innocent life.

Then I have one question to ask. Have anyone of you heard of the stem cells research? By extracting stem cells from the embryos, the embryos will die. Do you think you should pro life or pro choice in that case? Just be rational, stem cells can be used to cure many diseases such as parkinson and cancer. Just see the benefit of it. I am definitely agree with the stem cells research. I just one to know what others think of that.
By the way? Your prolife or prochoice here is very confusing. You can say that you pro the life of the people suffering from diseases or the embryos. In that matter, whose life should we pro? Human or embryos?......

[Panda]

pro-life? Pro-choice? It depends

For me, I think we should see whether we are in what situation!

If a cancer patient is nearly die and there is no way for the doctor to cure him? What for the doctor wants to prolong his suffering by giving him all sorts of "poison"? He should choose to die instantly by commiting "suicide".

For women who want to abort their babies, I disagree with them. They are killing innocent life.

Then I have one question to ask. Have anyone of you heard of the stem cells research? By extracting stem cells from the embryos, the embryos will die. Do you think you should pro life or pro choice in that case? Just be rational, stem cells can be used to cure many diseases such as parkinson and cancer. Just see the benefit of it. I am definitely agree with the stem cells research. I just one to know what others think of that.
By the way? Your prolife or prochoice here is very confusing. You can say that you pro the life of the people suffering from diseases or the embryos. In that matter, whose life should we pro? Human or embryos?......

[topdog]

so pro-choice people, are you absolutely certain that embryos are not considered human?

[topdog]

so pro-choice people, are you absolutely certain that embryos are not considered human?

[topdog]

also, i think that pro-life and pro-choice here refers to the two differing opinions on the legality and morality of abortion. correct me if i'm wrong, but i don't think euthanasia falls under this discussion.

[topdog]

also, i think that pro-life and pro-choice here refers to the two differing opinions on the legality and morality of abortion. correct me if i'm wrong, but i don't think euthanasia falls under this discussion.

[__earth]

latest development

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040326/ap_on_go_co/fetus_rights&cid=512&ncid=716

[theT]

i believe in choices though i dont really understand these terms pro life and pro choice

but we should know bout the pro and cons of our choice. at least we should be informed about it. Then it's up to us to make the decision. Like drugs should be legalized. but i'm not gonna talk about it now. Euthanasia too.

as for abortion, sometimes it's necessary. But dont take it for granted. Like to have abortion a lot of times. For god sake pills and implants are cheaper.

Sometimes you just have to see it.

[Ic3b3rg]

basically i believe that it depends on the situation.....
why? because i think it seems inhumane ,.... the way they pull out the foetuses.....sometimes almost fully developed foetuses.... sometimes twisting the heads off 8O

however.... we must understand that of all ppl....mothers...ppl who are pregnant...are the ones who understand most the feeling of another human growing and living inside them.... they DO feel the heart-wrenching feeling of deciding to terminate the life of another whom they love...so i think that very few mothers would want to have abortion unless the situation is really unavoidable......i.e. the mother is underage so it jeopardizes her health( esp for rape victims)......

so, when the situation is unavoidable, we should give the mothers themselves the liberty to undergo adoption.....we should remember that they suffer enough dilemma and indecision without us sticking our noses into their lives..... it should be ultimately their choice.....

from another perspective: if the mothers do not want the children.... who will love them?.... sure they can put them up for adoption....but nobody can ensure that the babies will grow up in love and care...... our world has enough children living alone.... in poverty..... and worst of all.... without love......

therefore...i believe in PRO CHOICE....yes it may seem...and sound inhumane....but we must keep in mind tht mothers... are NOT inhumane.... give them the liberty to make their choices....

[ElansarGelmir]

i think i am the pro-choice. I think when the fetus is still in the mother's womb, it's not exactly alive. Like what _Earth has said, the heart hasn't started pumping, the lung hasn't expand or relax, the muscle didn't even move - it's like an instrument waiting for a force or power to enter it so that it could be alive. This is what i think.

Secondly, if i know that my fetus is diagnosed with a serious cancer like llymphoma or a hole in the heart, do you want to see your own child suffer at such young age? Even though u have the money to pay for the medical bill, but can you mitigate the suffering of your child when he or she is borned? And it actually pains us to see our child has to suffer ....

[CyberJaya]

If you're muslim or catholic then you're pro life otherwise you're pro choice.

[littlebigone]

If you're muslim or catholic then you're pro life otherwise you're pro choice.\

I don't think that's a fair statement. I don't think you need to be affliated with any religion to make your personal choice of your stance. Hell there maybe also a group of people who are indifferent to this argument.

Did you guys read about the lady a few weeks ago who chose not to do a C section because she was afraid of the scars. Doctors told her that her babies(twins) would die if she didn't have one. But she decided against it anyway. Just an extreme version of pro-choice.

[__earth]

If you're muslim or catholic then you're pro life otherwise you're pro choice.

actually, no. if you are a conservative, then probably you're pro life.
otherwise, you're probably pro choice or don't care at all.

I agree with littlebigone. You don't have to belong to any group in order to form some opinion.

[Ic3b3rg]

we must keep in mind tht mothers... are NOT inhumane.... give them the liberty to make their choices....

Did you guys read about the lady a few weeks ago who chose not to do a C section because she was afraid of the scars. Doctors told her that her babies(twins) would die if she didn't have one. But she decided against it anyway. Just an extreme version of pro-choice.

ok...i take tht back.....
we must keep in mind tht MOST mothers... are NOT inhumane.... give them the liberty to make their choices....

[Ic3b3rg]

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/04/25/abortion.protest.ap/index.html

[Ic3b3rg]

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/23/kerry.abortion/index.html

[SpRInG]

i think i am the pro-choice. I think when the fetus is still in the mother's womb, it's not exactly alive. Like what _Earth has said, the heart hasn't started pumping, the lung hasn't expand or relax, the muscle didn't even move - it's like an instrument waiting for a force or power to enter it so that it could be alive. This is what i think.

Secondly, if i know that my fetus is diagnosed with a serious cancer like llymphoma or a hole in the heart, do you want to see your own child suffer at such young age? Even though u have the money to pay for the medical bill, but can you mitigate the suffering of your child when he or she is borned? And it actually pains us to see our child has to suffer ....

now, u are very wrong that the fetus is not exactly alive... the fetus IS alive, for goodness sake.. have you ever wondered, if you were the fetus? Then you will never exist today, if your mother was a pro-choicer

secondly, well, it's not the issue of whether i wan to see my own child suffer at such young age or not, but rather it's an issue of whether or not to bring them into this world... u simply have no right to disallow the baby to be born into this world... but well, of course, legally you do have the right, but, think about it, ask your conscience, will you not feel guilty after you make decision to abort the baby?

[SpRInG]

Well, this is just a little bit something for those to say it's okay to have abortion to ponder upon:

Is it okay to take a fertilized egg between a man and a woman and place it in the womb of a dog?

If you say no, then why? If it is not human then it doesn't matter, right?

If you say no because it will become a human then you admit that it has human nature and is alive. If it is human in nature and alive, then you do not have the right to abort it, am i not right?

[aquila]

i think ppl often forget about RESPONSIBILITY when debating abt abortions...

bush's partial birth act is excellent in this sense... he allows abortions only in certain circumstances... eg after the girl has been raped, health issues and etc.

i think the "girls just wanna have fun" and women liberation/feminism movement have gone too far... true we want freedom but where does one draw the line between freedom and irresponsibility...

u can say that the mugger should be free to mug ppl... if you're pro-choice... i mean if you know you're gonna get pregnant after a one night stand and you are certainly not married yet, for goodness' sake, use a condom! it'll protect you from stds as well

[SpRInG]

but even that, condoms may prove to fail... the question is, why do that at the first place? some people claimed to be pro-choice, but well, have they never think - they have a choice to say no also, right? then, is that not pro-choice?

[ElansarGelmir]

i think i am the pro-choice. I think when the fetus is still in the mother's womb, it's not exactly alive. Like what _Earth has said, the heart hasn't started pumping, the lung hasn't expand or relax, the muscle didn't even move - it's like an instrument waiting for a force or power to enter it so that it could be alive. This is what i think.

Secondly, if i know that my fetus is diagnosed with a serious cancer like llymphoma or a hole in the heart, do you want to see your own child suffer at such young age? Even though u have the money to pay for the medical bill, but can you mitigate the suffering of your child when he or she is borned? And it actually pains us to see our child has to suffer ....

now, u are very wrong that the fetus is not exactly alive... the fetus IS alive, for goodness sake.. have you ever wondered, if you were the fetus? Then you will never exist today, if your mother was a pro-choicer

secondly, well, it's not the issue of whether i wan to see my own child suffer at such young age or not, but rather it's an issue of whether or not to bring them into this world... u simply have no right to disallow the baby to be born into this world... but well, of course, legally you do have the right, but, think about it, ask your conscience, will you not feel guilty after you make decision to abort the baby?

I don't know how you think, or have you put yourself into the shoes of the less fortunate... Easy for you to say coz you are borned with the least defect, but let's say if u're the phoetus and you are diagnosed with lymphoma . . . Do you still want to be delivered and undergo chemotheraphy which may be proven to fail at times, seeing your parents shedding tears everyday hoping and hoping that you will make it through this age of an infant? I know this woman, she was pregnant with the phoetus when the doctor diagnosed there's a hole in the phoetus heart... She still deliver the baby, and months later, the baby's brain was damaged due to toxification, and since then, she's been on the wheel chair and ... gosh... i dun think i want to go on elaborating on it anymore... it's just a pity sight to be told . . .

[Randomphantom]

I would say that pro-life in respect to abortion and euthanasia. I wouldn't want to be the person to end anyones life. I used 'want' because given the circumstances eg what elansargelmir has so graphically described, another choice might have been made against my personal beliefs and will.

I don't know that does this apply to other situations too where you are the 3rd party. FI, if you were a close friend of the mother in question, would you encourage her? enforce your opinion? Because it is largely the choice/responsibility of the mother/patient.

Euthanasia sounds like suicide to me. When we see someone(eg a friend) going to jump do we discourage him? Or just do not care-after all it is his life his choice? And he might be in even more distress then the ailing patient in euthanasia situations. Do we say "oh its better to end your toubles right here" I don't think so

Another parellel I might draw: When you see a nation's infighting, and you have sufficient military force to stop this, do you let the people fight on (pro choice) or you involved in stopping the fight to prevent needless dying (pro life)?

[ElansarGelmir]

I don't know that does this apply to other situations too where you are the 3rd party. FI, if you were a close friend of the mother in question, would you encourage her? enforce your opinion? Because it is largely the choice/responsibility of the mother/patient.



Hmm... I dun think I would push her to do the things which I think it's right (coz it's her child), but what I want to draw here is that I understand and don't blame her if she opts for abortion . . . However, if she wants to keep the baby, it's still fine with me . . .

[SpRInG]

I don't know how you think, or have you put yourself into the shoes of the less fortunate... Easy for you to say coz you are borned with the least defect, but let's say if u're the phoetus and you are diagnosed with lymphoma . . . Do you still want to be delivered and undergo chemotheraphy which may be proven to fail at times, seeing your parents shedding tears everyday hoping and hoping that you will make it through this age of an infant? I know this woman, she was pregnant with the phoetus when the doctor diagnosed there's a hole in the phoetus heart... She still deliver the baby, and months later, the baby's brain was damaged due to toxification, and since then, she's been on the wheel chair and ... gosh... i dun think i want to go on elaborating on it anymore... it's just a pity sight to be told . . .

well, i will tell you, even if i'm the phoetus, i will still want to be delivered. Actually, this should never be the question at the very first place.

In fact, if you were the phoetus, what will you do? Shout out to your parents "Hey, I don't want to be born, I don't want to see you suffer, and i don't want to suffer also. So, abort me! Abort me, you hear me? abort me! is that what you're going to do?" in this case, it is life you're talking about, if you were aware at that very moment, is that not same as commiting suicide? Justified by saying that well, my parents aborted me, so i din kill myself. Is taht what you're trying to say?

For me, i would say that as a selfish act. Life is not something which u say you want, you can have and you don't want, you can just take it away. Are you aware of that?

[BioTEch_GizMo]

I don't know how you think, or have you put yourself into the shoes of the less fortunate... Easy for you to say coz you are borned with the least defect, but let's say if u're the phoetus and you are diagnosed with lymphoma . . . Do you still want to be delivered and undergo chemotheraphy which may be proven to fail at times, seeing your parents shedding tears everyday hoping and hoping that you will make it through this age of an infant? I know this woman, she was pregnant with the phoetus when the doctor diagnosed there's a hole in the phoetus heart... She still deliver the baby, and months later, the baby's brain was damaged due to toxification, and since then, she's been on the wheel chair and ... gosh... i dun think i want to go on elaborating on it anymore... it's just a pity sight to be told . . .

well, i will tell you, even if i'm the phoetus, i will still want to be delivered. Actually, this should never be the question at the very first place.

In fact, if you were the phoetus, what will you do? Shout out to your parents "Hey, I don't want to be born, I don't want to see you suffer, and i don't want to suffer also. So, abort me! Abort me, you hear me? abort me! is that what you're going to do?" in this case, it is life you're talking about, if you were aware at that very moment, is that not same as commiting suicide? Justified by saying that well, my parents aborted me, so i din kill myself. Is taht what you're trying to say?

For me, i would say that as a selfish act. Life is not something which u say you want, you can have and you don't want, you can just take it away. Are you aware of that?

It is quite true...we do not have the right to abort babies with health defects. Even if the defects have been detected, and the parents agree to abort the child, will the child agree? Most children want to be born, and they feel glad that they are alive even though they are diagnosed with many types of illnesses. I read somewhere in the newspaper or sth about a research on children who were born with illnesses or defects. Most of them said that they were thankful they were alive, even though they could not move or had to suffer a lot. Life is beautiful even though you are not. So it's not whether the parents want to abort the baby, but rather whether the baby wants to be aborted or not.

Regarding abortion due to rape or any unforseen circumstances, what we should argue now is when does the soul enter the fertilized egg? When does human personhood begin? Does the soul enter when the heart starts beating or the brain starts sending impulses, or does it begin when the sperm fertilizes the egg. The soul is abstract and undefined. We do not know how to detect its presence so how do we really justify that we have killed a person (an unborn baby).

For pro-lifers, it might not be so certain that the soul enters the fertilized egg straight away. The embryo that developed later might not even have a soul, not to mention a life. On the other hand, for pro-choicers, can u really say that life does not enter earlier? In the fertilization stage? The embryonic stage? The fetal stage?

I dread to think that i will have to make a choice between the two extremes and i hope i will not have to face such tough decision. Both have the disadvantage of destryoing an innocent life.

However, one thing for certain: It is DEFINITELY CRUEL to end the life of a baby when it starts to feel and think. Try imagining someone breaking ur bones one by one until you die an excruciating death.

The only way this issue on abortion can be resolved is when we locate the instance when a soul enters a potential human in development. For the time being, I would not dare to say that i take a stand, but to make it safe, keep it pro-life. You wont want to kill someone when you think you didn't, and later realize your mistake.

REGRET is one of the most painful things in life.

[SpRInG]

regarding this pregnancy due to rape... i have a strong reason to believe that we should still not abort the baby....

first, did the baby do anything wrong? Then why should the life of the baby be sacrificed because of the indignity suffered against the woman?

but hmm... it's kinda different set of things that we're talking about. why should we focus on when does life really come into the baby? at which stage is the baby really alive? I think today, debates are still going on about which stage that the baby is considered alive... but let's consider this point:

Why do we want to take chance, risk? Why do we go into such trouble of finding out about when life's really life?

[ElansarGelmir]

Hmm... What about those who are in conditions that do not allow the a mother to deliver the fetus, such as she is diagnosed with tumor in her kidney half way through her pregnancy or she was found to be HIV positive? Can she be subjected to undergo abortion if so?

[SpRInG]

again, HIV, is taht a good reason why abortion should be supported?

are you kidding me? why can't the doctors diagnose it earlier? why must it in the middle of pregnancy that the mother was diagnosed with kidney tumor?

[ElansarGelmir]

again, HIV, is taht a good reason why abortion should be supported?

are you kidding me? why can't the doctors diagnose it earlier? why must it in the middle of pregnancy that the mother was diagnosed with kidney tumor?

I dunno... You can't assume things to be alright and go the way everyone wants it to be. Things do happen, kua... Maybe she was 2 to 3 months pregnant, she went to the doc, the doc gave her a good and bad news. She's pregnant, and she got a tumor in her womb. And she needs to undergo operation badly.

Hmm... about the HIV positive child... i dunno about it, but i think somehow i would be cruel to bring him/her to the world...

[SpRInG]

hmmm.... cruel? ic.... then allowing the mother to just abort the baby and disregarding all the guilt that the mother may suffer... so that's not cruel..... interesting.....

[ElansarGelmir]

hmmm.... cruel? ic.... then allowing the mother to just abort the baby and disregarding all the guilt that the mother may suffer... so that's not cruel..... interesting.....

Maybe the baby wants to live... yeah... we know that. But i'll feel more guilty bringing her to the world and see her suffering ... But then, we must depend on certain circumstances. Not everything is absolute, so says Madam Ranee.

[__earth]

hmmm.... cruel? ic.... then allowing the mother to just abort the baby and disregarding all the guilt that the mother may suffer... so that's not cruel..... interesting.....

abortion could be done in the stage where the fetus has not developed fully yet. In that case, the fetus is not alive yet.

[topdog]

theres' no black and white in this matter, only shades of gray (i know, annoying cliche, but still true). i feel that abortion should be legalized only in extenuating circumstances. if it's not legalized, women who are desperate and at their wits end may still find ways to end their pregnancy, like getting a backdoor abortionist to do it or worse, doing it themselves. that is even more dangerous.

regarding this pregnancy due to rape... i have a strong reason to believe that we should still not abort the baby....

first, did the baby do anything wrong? Then why should the life of the baby be sacrificed because of the indignity suffered against the woman?

it's easy to say all this when you have no personal connection to unfortunate women like the hypothetical rape victim we often talk about. if you can help all rape victims (especially poor or underaged ones) by supporting them morally and financially throughout their pregnancy and after they deliver the baby, and help them raise the child, then you are in a position to argue that a rape victim should keep the child. otherwise, you are just being condescending, even sanctimonious.

i don't support abortion as a human right per se. for instance, if guy and girl get frisky and forget to use protection and guy ends up knocking girl up, they have no right to abort. if you're irresponsible you've no farking right.

but in extenuating circumstances, the best interest of the victim should be paramount. if abortion is in the best interest of the victim, then it should be legalized. but then, that's not to say that abortion should be performed anytime, even for extenuating circumstances. if the woman is too late into her pregnancy, it would be too dangerous to abort. that's why it's important to detect as soon as possible.

[ElansarGelmir]

Well Spring, if you have an aunt who has to undergo abortion coz she had a tumor in her kidney while she was still having her child, then maybe you will think twice. My aunt cried for months for giving up her baby, but there's no other option to this. It's either her or the baby (or maybe neither).

[oshmelvin]

Well Spring, if you have an aunt who has to undergo abortion coz she had a tumor in her kidney while she was still having her child, then maybe you will think twice. My aunt cried for months for giving up her baby, but there's no other option to this. It's either her or the baby (or maybe neither).

Elansar, your aunt did the right thing. Having a child in her womb would endanger her own life and could endanger the baby's life as well. Since the child-embryo is still at the beginning stage of life, he or she is not a human being yet at this stage, he or she is just a cluster of cells. He has not developed any nervous system and thus will not be able to feel any pain or suffering. So in my opinion, aborting the child at this stage of life and at this circumstance is not considered an inhumane act but rather an act of priority, priority to protect her own life and the priority to rid the child-embryo off any suffering should anything happen to her if she hadn't given up the baby. I'm sorry for your aunt.

[ElansarGelmir]

Thanks though. But i'm not trying to promote my aunt here. Just want to give an example that it's not totally wrong to undergo abortion, given some circumstances.

[oshmelvin]

Regarding my stand whether i'm pro-choice or pro-life, it depends on the situation. For abortion at an early stage of life (embryo), i'm pro-choice if the circumstances aren't right for example financial constraints or if the pregnant mother contracted aids or other diseases which will then be passed on to the child. But for the case of abandoning babies to die after they've already been born, and also surgically removing (aborting) fetuses which have already taken on the form of a baby but with some defects, I'm strongly against it (pro-life stand, because the baby might still stand a chance to live even with these defects). For the case of euthanasia, I am pro-life if the doctors are sure that the disease can be cured. What if the person says that he wants to die strictly because of his current condition. You tend to make a hasty decision when you're in pain and suffering. If the doctors are against it and they do not want to perform euthanasia and then this person gradually gets better and his pain gradually decreases, he might actually look back and be grateful for the doctors' decision. Should they have followed what he wanted, he would already be dead probably regretting in the after life. But I am definately pro-choice when it comes to incurable diseases like aids or final stage cancer. That is because there is already no hope for that person and he's better off dead (not suffering). A person can be pro-life but they must also look at the circumstances and not just stick to their stand all the time without considering the other person's difficulties and suffering.

[ElansarGelmir]

Do you remember the Hong Kong guy (sorry i can't remember his name, due to bad memory) who was bed ridden since 21? Anyone has the article on this? He was practising somersaults for his Uni graduation, and somehow there was a flaw, and ended up paralyzed from his neck and all the way down to his body. And he had been lying on his bed for 13 or 14 years, with a tube stuck in his throat for respiration and can do nothing but staring at the ceiling fan the whole day. He asked his life to be ended . . .

What do you guys think about this? It's pitiful enough to hear him in this state, or to look at him, and to be in his shoes?

[oshmelvin]

Do you remember the Hong Kong guy (sorry i can't remember his name, due to bad memory) who was bed ridden since 21? Anyone has the article on this? He was practising somersaults for his Uni graduation, and somehow there was a flaw, and ended up paralyzed from his neck down all the way down to his body. And he had been lying on his bed for 13 or 14 years, with a tube stuck in his throat for respiration and can do nothing but staring at the ceiling fan the whole day. He asked his life to be ended . . .

What do you guys think about this? It's pitiful enough to hear him in this state, or to look at him, and to be in his shoes?

I haven't read this news before but anyway, it is hard to live your life in bed for 13 or 14 years. I pity him. I would respect his decision for his life to be ended. In this, i'm pro-choice because he was not making a hasty decision because he had been in an immobile state for 13 or 14 years and had suffered a lot throughout that duration. He had already considered his options, to live and to suffer (unfortunately his problem cannot be resolved through science) or to ease his suffering forever. Nothing could help him even if he prolongs his life.

[oshmelvin]

Do you remember the Hong Kong guy (sorry i can't remember his name, due to bad memory) who was bed ridden since 21? Anyone has the article on this? He was practising somersaults for his Uni graduation, and somehow there was a flaw, and ended up paralyzed from his neck down all the way down to his body. And he had been lying on his bed for 13 or 14 years, with a tube stuck in his throat for respiration and can do nothing but staring at the ceiling fan the whole day. He asked his life to be ended . . .

What do you guys think about this? It's pitiful enough to hear him in this state, or to look at him, and to be in his shoes?

I haven't read this news before but anyway, it is hard to live your life in bed for 13 or 14 years. I pity him. I would respect his decision for his life to be ended. In this, i'm pro-choice because he was not making a hasty decision because he had been in an immobile state for 13 or 14 years and had suffered a lot throughout that duration. He had already considered his options, to live and to suffer (unfortunately his problem cannot be resolved through science) or to ease his suffering forever. Nothing could help him even if he prolongs his life.

[SpRInG]

yes, it is pitiful to hear him in that condition, but that should not justify him ending his life by his own will, right or not?

[chiunlin]

If I were in his shoes, I would defintely choose to die.
But consider the following argument:
Religious viewpoint: Life is sacred. Your life is not your own but God's. So you have no right to decide when it should end. Besides, it's bad for karma.
Scientific viewpoint: With current rate of progress, perhaps in ten years time, a cure will be found. By that time, he will be around 45 years, which means that he might live productively for a few decades.
Society viewpoint: Does people around him approve him of it? If euthanasia is performed, what will it lead to in the future? He must be responsible not only for himself, but also to the society who has supported him for the past 14 years.

[ElansarGelmir]

If I were in his shoes, I would defintely choose to die.
But consider the following argument:
Religious viewpoint: Life is sacred. Your life is not your own but God's. So you have no right to decide when it should end. Besides, it's bad for karma.
Scientific viewpoint: With current rate of progress, perhaps in ten years time, a cure will be found. By that time, he will be around 45 years, which means that he might live productively for a few decades.
Society viewpoint: Does people around him approve him of it? If euthanasia is performed, what will it lead to in the future? He must be responsible not only for himself, but also to the society who has supported him for the past 14 years.

Why do we always pass our judgements on others, when we do not understand how they feel. Yeah, the society says he shouldn't die, coz it pains his loved ones. But do you know that it pains him to see his loved ones worrying about him everyday? It pains him not to meet the girl that he loves, it pains him that he can't live like others, worst of all, it pains him that he's useless in this state. We always tell them, be patient, be patient, but that guy had struggled for 13 years with a false hope everyday that the doc will have him out of the bed again... It has been for 13 years for him not moving around... If everyone wishes to judge others because of what they believe is right or wrong, and not considering their plight and suffering and other circumstances, I believe mercy, understanding and love won't appear in the dictionary anymore.

[chiunlin]

Well, it's true that in such circumstances, we must be blind to their sufferings. Allowing euthanasia? Do you have any idea what that will lead to? Once a euthanasia has been done, the precedent is set and many will follow. This is the slippery slope argument and bear in mind that once euthanasia become more common, it won't be long before it is legalized and that's when all the trouble starts.

In this case, I believe in a utilitarian viewpoint, we must consider the effect of a single action on the whole and judge its short as well as long-term effect. The fine line between what is right and what is wrong must never be blurred.

[oshmelvin]

Well, it's true that in such circumstances, we must be blind to their sufferings. Allowing euthanasia? Do you have any idea what that will lead to? Once a euthanasia has been done, the precedent is set and many will follow. This is the slippery slope argument and bear in mind that once euthanasia become more common, it won't be long before it is legalized and that's when all the trouble starts.

In this case, I believe in a utilitarian viewpoint, we must consider the effect of a single action on the whole and judge its short as well as long-term effect. The fine line between what is right and what is wrong must never be blurred.

I think euthanasia should be legalized. It's not that once it's legalized many people will be able to opt for euthanasia as an escape route. Laws have conditions so only those who are really in need of euthanasia and fit the conditions will be given that option. The conditions should consider the period of an illness that a person has been suffering from and also take into account whether it is curable or not. :D

[ElansarGelmir]

Well, it's true that in such circumstances, we must be blind to their sufferings. Allowing euthanasia? Do you have any idea what that will lead to? Once a euthanasia has been done, the precedent is set and many will follow. This is the slippery slope argument and bear in mind that once euthanasia become more common, it won't be long before it is legalized and that's when all the trouble starts.

In this case, I believe in a utilitarian viewpoint, we must consider the effect of a single action on the whole and judge its short as well as long-term effect. The fine line between what is right and what is wrong must never be blurred.

For those who do not wish to end other's life (if they have already suffered for a long stretch of period), i hope that you can help to find ways to assuage their pains and sufferings, and not just bluntly pointing out what's right or what's wrong. If you can do that, then you have the right to say that he shouldn't end his life. Else, if you do not allow him to end his own torment, and just let him keep living in suffer without helping him, you are just being a blind and heartless hero wannabes.

[BioTEch_GizMo]

I thought this thread was supposed to be about abortion...but anyway since you brought the subject of euthanasia let me enlighten you with these facts:

1) Darn ElansarGelmir i though u were christian...dun you know that suffering is part and parcel of life? The Hong Kong guy u mentioned about, he was suffering and he is alive and he is still CONSCIOUS?! Dont you think that being conscious and allowing yourself to be euthanized, it's just like SUICIDE? Wat say do you have on UR OWN LIFE? Is this life YOURS? NO...it's GOD-GIVEN...you have TOTALLY NO RIGHT to end your own life, whether or not you are suffering like hell. ONce a person is born, whether he suffers a lot in this life or not, he should not end his life. Suicide is never the easy way out.

2) If the person is unconscious and his death is to be decided by someone else, think about this... If this person is religiously inclined, will he want to be euthanised? Even though it hurts you to see that this person is suffering so much, that does not mean he wants his life to be ended.

It depends really... if you have a religion that prohibits you from ending your own life, regardless of the stakes, then you shouldn't...otherwise, it's up to u...it's your life.

[SpRInG]

yea, i totally agree with BioTEch_GizMo...

yea, just to reinforce, actually, the religion, actually does not really to say prohibit, because it cannot stop you from doing what you want, but of course it tells you not to do it, for your own sake... yea, situations are just being manipulated by man themselves to justify for their own desires.... mostly i see is in the name of easing their sufferings... but are these really wise steps? Or in other words, are these really the righteous steps?

But well, if you want to choose to go against it, nobody can stop you. After all, you claim to own yourself. But dont' say i don't remind you, your life is given by God. So just think about it!

[chiunlin]

I think euthanasia should be legalized. It's not that once it's legalized many people will be able to opt for euthanasia as an escape route. Laws have conditions so only those who are really in need of euthanasia and fit the conditions will be given that option. The conditions should consider the period of an illness that a person has been suffering from and also take into account whether it is curable or not. :D

Now, let me ask you, how do you define those who are really in need? Besides , are you sure that all patients who satisfy the condition don't want to live? What if they are pressured by doctors, families or financial problems to choose euthanasia? Apart from that, have doctors' prognosis ever been 100% accurate? My point is that it is easy to legalize euthanasia, but it is never possible to regulate it to prevent it from being misuse.

[__earth]

Here is a question for the pro-life.

If a horse is in great pain in the wild, would you kill it out of mercy or would you leave the horse out of mercy?

[littlebigone]

I'd just leave it to save my bullet for the natives.

[SpRInG]

i would leave the horse lor.... and oh yea, talking about animal is another story altogether.... compared to discussing about human life

[__earth]

I'd just leave it to save my bullet for the natives.

Maybe I would do the same too! LOL!

i would leave the horse lor.... and oh yea, talking about animal is another story altogether.... compared to discussing about human life

yeah its difference indeed. a horse couldn't ask for euthanasia but a human could.

why there must some other ppl set moral on the sufferer?

[ElansarGelmir]

I thought this thread was supposed to be about abortion...but anyway since you brought the subject of euthanasia let me enlighten you with these facts:

1) Darn ElansarGelmir i though u were christian...dun you know that suffering is part and parcel of life? The Hong Kong guy u mentioned about, he was suffering and he is alive and he is still CONSCIOUS?! Dont you think that being conscious and allowing yourself to be euthanized, it's just like SUICIDE? Wat say do you have on UR OWN LIFE? Is this life YOURS? NO...it's GOD-GIVEN...you have TOTALLY NO RIGHT to end your own life, whether or not you are suffering like hell. ONce a person is born, whether he suffers a lot in this life or not, he should not end his life. Suicide is never the easy way out.

2) If the person is unconscious and his death is to be decided by someone else, think about this... If this person is religiously inclined, will he want to be euthanised? Even though it hurts you to see that this person is suffering so much, that does not mean he wants his life to be ended.

It depends really... if you have a religion that prohibits you from ending your own life, regardless of the stakes, then you shouldn't...otherwise, it's up to u...it's your life.

Religion? i agree that we must value our lives, the soul that God breathed into us. However, does God ask us, or command us to pass our judgement on others? I didn't say that I will want to end his life, but since he choose to do it, why don't we just let him do that? Do you think you are being righteous by passing your judgement on others? If he wants to end his suffering, I won't stop him, coz the pain is unbearable. Let God decide on what to do with him... I can't decide for God what's absolutely right and what's absolutely wrong... Maybe God has other plans and absolve him? I can't tell. We can't judge others like God does, coz in the end, all judgements are in God's hand, not ours.

[ElansarGelmir]

I will get some anaesthetic for it to ease its pain... Who say we need to end its life, just because of excruciating pain...?

[SpRInG]

Well, it's true that in such circumstances, we must be blind to their sufferings. Allowing euthanasia? Do you have any idea what that will lead to? Once a euthanasia has been done, the precedent is set and many will follow. This is the slippery slope argument and bear in mind that once euthanasia become more common, it won't be long before it is legalized and that's when all the trouble starts.

In this case, I believe in a utilitarian viewpoint, we must consider the effect of a single action on the whole and judge its short as well as long-term effect. The fine line between what is right and what is wrong must never be blurred.

For those who do not wish to end other's life (if they have already suffered for a long stretch of period), i hope that you can help to find ways to assuage their pains and sufferings, and not just bluntly pointing out what's right or what's wrong. If you can do that, then you have the right to say that he shouldn't end his life. Else, if you do not allow him to end his own torment, and just let him keep living in suffer without helping him, you are just being a blind and heartless hero wannabes.

so, hmm.. u said anesthetic huh.... does the passage above reflect your meaning of the usage of anesthetic?

[qedx]

-_- if you want to suicide do it yourself la. why have to ask doctor to do it?

[littlebigone]

I wonder how doctors feel about euthanasia. Like they'll be the ones killing the sick person, so do they feel remorse or would they feel like they are helping the person.

I think that euthanasia is stupid. I think that if you want to commit suicide, then grow some balls and do it instead of putting the responsibility on someone elses shoulder.

However, I think that if it's the case of patients on life support who are brain dead, then I say that with the families consent go ahead and pull the plug. or better still, cut the patient open and take all the important organs, then pull the plug.

For the rest of them, I hope they're not afraid of heights.

[x3on_2]

I wonder how doctors feel about euthanasia. Like they'll be the ones killing the sick person, so do they feel remorse or would they feel like they are helping the person.

I think that euthanasia is stupid. I think that if you want to commit suicide, then grow some balls and do it instead of putting the responsibility on someone elses shoulder.

However, I think that if it's the case of patients on life support who are brain dead, then I say that with the families consent go ahead and pull the plug. or better still, cut the patient open and take all the important organs, then pull the plug.

For the rest of them, I hope they're not afraid of heights.


I think I would agree to this. Well,imagine this situation ; an old lady is suffering from chronic illness that is beyond all help. i.e AIDS or severe SARS case. What would you do?
In my opinion, this "case" can be viewed by 3 type of person.

Type 1 : A doctor would most likely try his very best with all his knowledge about the disease in order to prolong the life of the ill. This is what I call "survival of the fittest". Why would we react towards a syringe before it actually gets into our flesh? Its because the brain tells us to reject anything that tries to harm us(without knowing that the serum would cure us)

Type 2 : A researcher would most probably not end her life as she would be very useful to him as a source of research for curing this disease. According to Sun Tzu's Art of War, "Better to lose a soldier than to lose an army"

Type 3 : A layman would most likely end her life as most people couldn't bear watching her suffer.

Hence, I would support pro-life in this matter.

[Ic3b3rg]

Do you think you are being righteous by passing your judgement on others? If he wants to end his suffering, I won't stop him, coz the pain is unbearable. Let God decide on what to do with him... I can't decide for God what's absolutely right and what's absolutely wrong... Maybe God has other plans and absolve him? I can't tell. We can't judge others like God does, coz in the end, all judgements are in God's hand, not ours.



i agree...

i think that it is not in our power to judge other people and their actions because we do not even know how much sins we have committed .... who knows whether God would accept him and punish the others?

[SpRInG]

Do you think you are being righteous by passing your judgement on others? If he wants to end his suffering, I won't stop him, coz the pain is unbearable. Let God decide on what to do with him... I can't decide for God what's absolutely right and what's absolutely wrong... Maybe God has other plans and absolve him? I can't tell. We can't judge others like God does, coz in the end, all judgements are in God's hand, not ours.



i agree...

i think that it is not in our power to judge other people and their actions because we do not even know how much sins we have committed .... who knows whether God would accept him and punish the others?

yes, i do agree on the part that we do not even know how much sins we have committed.. but that does not stop us from stopping others from sinning, right?

[ElansarGelmir]

so, hmm.. u said anesthetic huh.... does the passage above reflect your meaning of the usage of anesthetic?

I mean the horse thingy ler... Forgot to put reference. Sorry...

[oshmelvin]

Besides , are you sure that all patients who satisfy the condition don't want to live? What if they are pressured by doctors, families or financial problems to choose euthanasia? Apart from that, have doctors' prognosis ever been 100% accurate? My point is that it is easy to legalize euthanasia, but it is never possible to regulate it to prevent it from being misuse.

It is up to the patients to make their choice. The law will not only restrict you to one option that is to perform euthanasia. Let me ask you this, how many doctors do you know that actually wants their patients to die. None. Families too. No doctor will encourage you to perform euthanasia unless if that's what you really really want and it is the last resort. The accuracy of a doctor's prognosis can vary from one doctor to another. Most patients with terminal diseases are being treated by more than one doctor. So, the chances of coming up with an inaccurate prognosis is reduced. It is up to the medical force to prevent it from being misused.