Abortions.

Yes, perspective is key. Some of us concider human life to be a functioning creature that has thoughts, memories, and emotions..some of us see clumps of unintelligent cells with no mental functions whatsoever as alive.

Us pro choicers and our lower standards XD

^Lower standards? I consider pro-choicers to have higher standards when it comes deciding what constitutes a human being.

But I do agree with the point about perspective and I respect the fact that different people have a different perspective than I do. I may not agree, but I respect the beliefs and opinions of others.

Hmm, today, I did read an interesting point in a nespaper. Currently the cut off is 24 weeks I believe?
Someone had a premature baby at 23 weeks, and it survived. But the mother said that it flinched when she touched it's toes, proving that it feels pain.
So, although pro choice, I think the cut off rate should be lowered to 20 weeks.
it shou;dn't go lower, in my opinion. Because, the test you can get to see if your child will have a severe disability, and will die in labour or hours after, can only be done at 16 weeks, and even then, things take time to think through.

I don't think so. To a prolifer, it seems like anything should ne concidered life.

Nowthem, just because your prochoice doesn't mean you need to believe in the cutoff.

BTW, that is disgusting. I wouldn't be surprised if that baby grew up with severe handicaps.

in addition to my other post, i dont agree with the current cut off point for abortion. It needs to be way lower. my uncle was born at 22 weeks and is now a pretty much healthy 25 year old built like a rugby player!

There will obviously be medical reasons for late abortions, but in my opinion, if you decide too late on that you dont want the baby or change your mind, you should carry on with the pregnancy and give the child up for adoption.

I was sooo pro-life once. Then i had my daughter and realised just how much your whole life changes with having a child. Dont get me wrong, i dont regret having her. It just changed my whole perspective on how easy it isnt.

Sorry, i waffled there a bit.

^ i don't agree with abortion, but i do agree with you on the cutoff.

DIE! DIE! DIE!:

I don't think so. To a prolifer, it seems like anything should ne concidered life.

we don't considered everything to be life, a embryo is a human in extremely early stage, we consider that life.

if someone has a abortion they should at least feel a little guilty about it. i mean you never gave a child, that you created and is developing everyday, a chance at living. if someone walks up to me and says 'you know, i had a abortion, i feel very guilty, it was something i wasn't proud of and I'm very sorry for doing it', i will disagree with her decision and protest against it, but at least I'll respect her for apologizing. my mom and many people i know have done that to me, and i hate and am disgusted with what they did but i still respect them as much as i would've even if i didn't know about it.

I wouldn't at all.

Because I have my period everyy single month ^_^

And those eggs are also possible children of mine. I really don't see the difference at all between my eggs and am embryo, afterall, the eggs are only an early, non complete stage of an embryo. I don't know how you prioritize, but the mental makeup of the two are exactly the same (Up to a point of course)

the thing with the cutoff is... it doesn't account for medical anomalies. it doesn't account for the fact that though someone may have certain developmental problems early in life they can still go on to live normal healthy lives.

that, and the fact that studies have shown that babies that are MUCH earlier in development can in fact have brain activity... and, these babies are already circulating blood... therefore, they circulate blood anf have brain activity. YOU circulate blood and have brain activity... what makes you say that it's okay to kill the babies, but not okay to kill you? seriously... i don't see how pro-choicers can have such a horrible double standard....

but as i've said before... that's just my opinion...

DIE! DIE! DIE!:

I wouldn't at all.

Because I have my period every single month ^_^

And those eggs are also possible children of mine. I really don't see the difference at all between my eggs and am embryo, afterall, the eggs are only an early, non complete stage of an embryo. I don't know how you prioritize, but the mental makeup of the two are exactly the same (Up to a point of course)

-.-' you do know that a period is something our body does on its own, we cant control it. when a woman gets a abortion her body isn't telling her to get a abortion she choosing too. one you cant control or stop on your own (even though I'd love to) and the other is what a woman decides on doing, and in my own opinion its a extremely poor choice.

how the hell can you not see the difference?! a embryo is sperm and egg, two sets of DNA together making a life happen. a egg cant reproduce on its own and a embryo is developing day by day, a egg is NOT, so the difference between them is obvious. a egg is NOT life untill it meets with sperm.

how can you sit there and say you wouldn't feel bad for not giving your child a chance.if you don't even feel a little pinch of guilt for not giving a child a chance, you're not worth my time

Brain activity usually starts around the 20th week. That still gives a fair amount of time for a woman to chose.

And no, im worth MUCH more then, as I have just described it, a thoughtless, emotionless parasite that has no regard for it's life or anyone's around it. What use is it if it has no connection with the outside world in it's mind, or physically. If it doesn't think: I don't give a crap.

GND

abortion is unnatural, but so is medical care as a whole.

How can I not see the difference? Because an embryo and an egg have the same mental state until the 20th week of an embryo's existance.
Because they are both only potential life and nothing more
Because besides the way they are physically developed, they are the same
.
I concider myself a defender if human rights, but embryos arn't humans, they are the possibility of humans. They arn't worth defending, those women who want the abortions are, because they are real people with real feelings, which the embryos are not.

I can sit there and say what I say because I don't concider those things to be worth a nickle and dime until they come out of the body. I don't see why I should feel bad for ridding myself of something that has no value whatsoever.

As a collective, obviously, embryos do have value, given that all humans start as them, but as individuals, they are worthless.

Im not looking to be worth YOUR time. YOUR opinion of me is 100% worthless, sorry for the ego blast.

29 days.
they can tell at 29 days if a baby is going to have serious problems
trust me, i know.

That's not always true, Many serious problems are never caught until it's too late, or it develops inside the womb later in the pregnancy.

AngryMailPerson:

29 days.
they can tell at 29 days if a baby is going to have serious problems
trust me, i know.

Not all pregnancies are the same. Many problems/complications, like DIE DIE DIE said, aren't noticable until the second, maybe third trimester.

I just don't get why someone would have an abortion though. I mean, ya, if you were raped, got pregnant at 16 years or younger or if the baby is going to have problems growing up, like brain damage, no nose, no arms or if the mother will die while going into laber then okay, understandable enough and you should have the option of abortion. But if its something like, a one night stand, or if the women just doesn't want the child, whos to say, someone else wouldn't want it??? I'm sure the child that found out their mother didn't want them would rather be alive, honestly. Whose to say that that 'sack of cells' couldn't make someone elses life worth living for? There's familys out there that need a baby just as much as a baby needs a family. And if it's something like 'medical costs' and doctors etc. well, the family getting the baby usually pays for it. My english teacher adopted two children, both of which their mothers couldn't afford and so him and his wife paid for all the doctors, treatments, etc. Both children know they are adopted, and anytime they talk about how they were adopted they tell them that they were both picked out special because they wanted them. I don't think it's far to take away a life, even if a 'sack of cells' if it could make someone else happy. It just doesn't seem right.

xXYourGunToMyHeadXx:

I just don't get why someone would have an abortion though. I mean, ya, if you were raped, got pregnant at 16 years or younger or if the baby is going to have problems growing up, like brain damage, no nose, no arms or if the mother will die while going into laber then okay, understandable enough and you should have the option of abortion. But if its something like, a one night stand, or if the women just doesn't want the child, whos to say, someone else wouldn't want it??? I'm sure the child that found out their mother didn't want them would rather be alive, honestly. Whose to say that that 'sack of cells' couldn't make someone elses life worth living for? There's familys out there that need a baby just as much as a baby needs a family. And if it's something like 'medical costs' and doctors etc. well, the family getting the baby usually pays for it. My english teacher adopted two children, both of which their mothers couldn't afford and so him and his wife paid for all the doctors, treatments, etc. Both children know they are adopted, and anytime they talk about how they were adopted they tell them that they were both picked out special because they wanted them. I don't think it's far to take away a life, even if a 'sack of cells' if it could make someone else happy. It just doesn't seem right.

Agreed

xXYourGunToMyHeadXx:

I just don't get why someone would have an abortion though. I mean, ya, if you were raped, got pregnant at 16 years or younger or if the baby is going to have problems growing up, like brain damage, no nose, no arms or if the mother will die while going into laber then okay, understandable enough and you should have the option of abortion. But if its something like, a one night stand, or if the women just doesn't want the child, whos to say, someone else wouldn't want it??? I'm sure the child that found out their mother didn't want them would rather be alive, honestly. Whose to say that that 'sack of cells' couldn't make someone elses life worth living for? There's familys out there that need a baby just as much as a baby needs a family. And if it's something like 'medical costs' and doctors etc. well, the family getting the baby usually pays for it. My english teacher adopted two children, both of which their mothers couldn't afford and so him and his wife paid for all the doctors, treatments, etc. Both children know they are adopted, and anytime they talk about how they were adopted they tell them that they were both picked out special because they wanted them. I don't think it's far to take away a life, even if a 'sack of cells' if it could make someone else happy. It just doesn't seem right.

Easier said than done.
Adoption centres are already full of kids too, so bringing in more will do more harm then good.

Simple and Clean:

Easier said than done.
Adoption centres are already full of kids too, so bringing in more will do more harm then good.

Not really. Most people adopting want little babies. Because at the age or 2 a child's personality is already set ((for lack of a better word)). But even if they weren't adopted I'm sure a child would still rather live and go to school ((even if they live in a foster home)) and have a shot at a good life where they could make a difference and possibly even solve the whole problem with foster homes for the kids that will live there after them. You can't just dwell on the 'well what ifs' or the harm that it will do them because most often then never the kid grows up and has a good life or finds a nice family that loves them. At least in a foster home they have a fighting chance.

Thing is, what about the mother who has to carry this kid for 9 months first?
Her rights should be considered higher than that of an embyro surely?

Simple and Clean:

Thing is, what about the mother who has to carry this kid for 9 months first?
Her rights should be considered higher than that of an embyro surely?

Ya, the mother has to carry the child and I know it's no walk in the park, but the fact that in arranged adoptions the adopted parents pay for the mothers health, and all the medical needs she has to recieve and flu shots and they make it as easy as possible during her time of pregnacy. Her rights and saftey are as high as the baby she is caring around in her. I'm sure the mother would rather know that hey, even if she doesn't want the child, it's going to people who obviously do want them, even if its a foster home because they'll go to school and meet people and make friends who are glad they are alive. One of my best friends mothers got pregnant at the age of 19 and didn't want the baby and was planning an abortion, but then changed her mind. Imagine living a life w/o that best friend, even though you'd have no idea about it, deep down subconciously... somehow, people know. What if Goerge Washington's mother got an abortion, not thinking what that child that she was killing and not giving a chance at life would do??? Where would we be??? Almost everything in history would be changed. And for what? Because a mother didn't want her child and didn't even want to give it a fighting chance??