Artful Dodger: If the life of the female carrying the baby is ruined through your law...

I don't see you or lemon really answering that. The baby seems to have more rights than the mother to be in your scenario.

If it was a incest rape, the baby was (via scans) shown to be massively deformed... you'd still insist she carries it to term?

This is real life.. not some fairy tale, where everyone lives happily ever after.

" There are thousands of loving homes waiting for a child should the woman not want to raise the child herself."

Guaranteed? No prospects of divorce?? ... some Hollywood star gonna decide they'll adopt yet another baby like AJ likes to do because she can pay off the parents to have what she wants!!

(V): You'd have to explain to me how a woman's life could be ruined by giving birth. And then you'd have to clarify how that "ruined" life (of the mother). How does killing the unborn child do any "good" to the situation.

And what if the scans showed a perfectly healthy baby girl?

Artful Dodger: "And what if the scans showed a perfectly healthy baby girl?"

I've been discovered as being liberal, so there's really no point in pretending anymore. And so the answer to your point is a girl is not a woman. Doesn't matter whether she is a baby or a 12 year old girl, a girl is simply a girl... period. Girls are females, they are not women. We respect women, but this does not necessarily mean we respect females.

Only we liberals are able to understand this.

Iamon lyme: Obama supports letting babies who survive an abortion - die without any attempt at medical care.

Artful Dodger: You really think I'm gonna post real horror stories on this board? Of memory scars, things that'll make you wish you could take a 'pill' to wipe the last hour of what you've heard/read.

.... besides.. It'll just get deleted.

(V): there are sad stories in every aspect of life. But the vast majority of abortion are only horror stories to the unborn.

Artful Dodger: Really... so everyone concerned feels nothing.. especially considering the development of the nervous system, all the indications are that those that who are actually living as independent beings will feel more.

ie you are not making any sense.

(V):" so everyone concerned feels nothing.."
*Um, what do you mean by this?

" especially considering the development of the nervous system,"
*Do you mean in the unborn child? Explain

" all the indications are that those that who are actually living as independent beings will feel more."
*explain

Artful Dodger: The mother to be feels nothing, the father to be (if it's a normal relationship) feels nothing... so you are saying

"Do you mean in the unborn child? Explain"

Basic biology.. look it up yourself.

(V): feels nothing about killing their child?

And the baby feels tremendous pain in an abortion.

Artful Dodger: Really... if you want to think that, go ahead. It makes your case easier for you to 'be the moral one' .... ... that it has nothing to do with real life is irrelevant to you.

"And the baby feels tremendous pain in an abortion."

At what age of development? Please get your basic facts right, it stops all this BS.

(V): killing the unborn has nothing to do with real life?

Artful Dodger: Is the BS about pain ended?

(V): Fetal pain is not bs. Doesn't matter in the larger picture because it's morally wrong to take the life of an innocent human being without just cause.

Artful Dodger: It is bs until the foetus reaches a certain age of development, which is 24 weeks. Before that the brain has no connections to be able to feel pain, nor does the baby have the capability of being concious.

After 24 weeks the baby is in a chemical environment in the uterus, that induces a continuous sleep-like unconsciousness or sedation. But that only applies to late abortions for basically saving the woman's life, or if scans show up serious abnormalities.

That is.. how it is in the UK.

what happens in your mind if by chance you hit a no win situation?

... If the mother has the baby, the mother dies. The only option is an abortion. One will dies either way!!

(V): It's morally wrong to kill an innocent human being.
The unborn are innocent human beings.
It's immoral to kill them.
Abortion kills them.
Therefore, abortion is morally wrong.

Artful Dodger: Avoiding .. .. or dodging!!

So.. you'd let the mum die just to have the kid... One innocent dies, one lives. It's not a perfect world.

"It's morally wrong to kill an innocent human being."

So why no gun control?

(V): I never said I'd let the mom die. That would violate the principle I just laid out. The vast majority of abortions are done for trivial reasons.

Artful Dodger: Well then, to save the mother.. an abortion is needed?

Like in most ectopic pregnancies. Except for a small number of cases, it is fatal for the mother to attempt to carry the baby to term. If your law was in place, both mother and baby die. Your morals therefore kills two innocents. Unfortunately, ectopic pregnancies are a fact of life and you cannot dispute how serious the health risks are.

"The vast majority of abortions are done for trivial reasons."

I doubt such a choice is taken as being a trivial matter by those involved.

(V): The life of the mother is the only exception I'd make.

And to the baby being killed, I suspect they'd feel the mother's reasons are trivial. What possible reason could a woman have to abort a human being (killing it) other than trivial reasons?

The reasons most frequently cited were that having a child would interfere with a woman’s education, work
or ability to care for dependents (74%); -- this is a trivial reason for killing a human being. Give the child up for adoption. It's a human life for God's sake!

that she could not afford a baby now (73%); -- trivial-this is no reason to kill an innocent human being. And that 73% can find plenty of financial help for pre and postnatal care AND adoption is always an option. We don't kill our children because they are costly.

and that she did not want to be a single mother or was having relationship problems (48%). -- Apparently these women haven't heard of adoption...another trivial selfish reason.

Nearly four in 10 women said they had completed their childbearing, --trivial - it's too late once you're pregnant. Have the baby and give it up for adoption. The alternative is to kill it.

and almost one-third were not ready to have a child. -- then don't have sex duh. Again, adoption. Killing the unborn is NOT the answer for ANY reason except for the life of the mother. And then it's the mother's decision. But aborting your child because you'll miss a year of school? Trivial, shameful, and barbaric.

Artful Dodger: The figures show that there are not enough families wanting to adopt now, for every family/parent wishing to adopt there are 2.5 times as many children waiting.. sometimes for years.

The figures also show that children who have a disability are far more unlikely to be adopted.

So in the end, the state is having to pay for foster care for years, and you want to add more into the system.

Many families think about adoption, not many actually go through to actually adopting.

(V): Killing the unborn is not the answer. There is no question about the fact that a human being, innocent of any wrong doing, is being killed simply for the convenience of another. Arguments for abortion run from the simplistic to the complex but in every case, they attempt to justify the killing of a vulnerable, innocent, human being.

Artful Dodger: Regardless... you can't dictate by law if someone can or cannot have an abortion. It's like when being gay was illegal...

... I still remember Rock Hudson being such a macho man in films!!

(V): "you can't dictate by law if someone can or cannot have an abortion."

because???

Artful Dodger: Well, try free will for a start. It seems if a divine creator objected to babies dying... they wouldn't. It seems in the scheme of things... it happens.

That is.. by you and lamons version of how things work.

(V): They aren't just dying, they are being killed.

Artful Dodger: Doesn't make any difference.

There are instances of God killing Children in the OT.

(V): So now you are saying God is on your side in the war against babies... and free will is evidence He approves your cause?

I don't think you need God's permission or help with this, because babies put up very little resistance. Babies can't fight back... well, not enough for it to become a problem for you. Some of them have survived the ongoing holocaust, but their numbers are very small and you are still the victors in this battle. So pat yourselves on the back and praise one another for victories in an ongoing battle against the enemy.

You know who your enemy is, but they are very small and defenseless, so you will undoubtedly win and the god of your war will reward you with hundreds of virgins.
FYI, not all of them will be pretty, and not all of them will be female.. so prepare yourself for a few surprises when you get there.

Iamon lyme: No.

btw... Hell, it's a myth. A German word used by lazy translators, not at all present in the original texts.

anyway.. I beat up the devil years ago. Lordi made a song about it!!

(V): "I beat up the devil years ago."

Really? Wow. You beat up what you believe to be an imaginary being years ago... I must admit I am impressed.

By the way, I beat up Mike Tyson and Rocky Balboa at the same time and with both my hands tied behind my back.

Iamon lyme: I don't believe the devil is a fake, I just know the rightful context.. rather than some easy fall guy that you can blame for whenever you are bad, or as a bogey man to frighten people into being good.

Like that preacher who blamed the devil for making him sleep with prostitutes some years back. Or more recently a preacher saying the world is gonna end and needing all his flocks assets to spread the word... ...

... as one scholar on the Bible said.. The date of the end of the world was in 2005. It didn't happen.

Anyway... can't one joke. Lordi made a nice song called "It's snows in Hell" .. it's a play on how men take the Lords name in vain in overusing the Bible... Saying "the devil is gonna get you, you're gonna burn" and all that crap.

"I beat up Mike Tyson and Rocky Balboa"

I beat up Diablo.. the prime eViL

(V): Are you saying (or implying) you beat the "real devil"? I don't know if that is what you mean because you are still talking about an imaginary devil... and are blaming your fake devil on people you think are trying to scare others.

I see you have much to say about what you say I and some others say, but don't have much to say about anything actually said. If that's your game then sure, I can bs along with you and make stuff up if it amuses you. I can play along for as long as it amuses me... but truth be told, it doesn't. Pulling fake arguments out of the air and telling people what they think (instead of listening) is what it is.

Iamon lyme: No.

"Pulling fake arguments out of the air and telling people what they think (instead of listening) is what it is."

You do that alot.

(V): LoL

I will continue to read and post messages, but I leave the soap opera part for others to enjoy.

Artful Dodger: I watched that clip where one abortion survivor talks about it. For someone to understand they were not wanted is difficult enough, but having to live with the knowledge their mother wanted them dead seems almost unimaginable. In situations like that, learning to forgive does more for the one who does the forgiving than for the people being forgiven... but in the long run I believe it works out better for all concerned.

Iamon lyme: Interesting how those who favor abortion don't make the connection vis-a-vis abortion survior and the human being. If a human being can talk about being an abortion survivor, then it's clear that human beings are being killed in abortions.

Artful Dodger: I can't watch actual abortion pictures or clips, it's too disturbing. I clicked on a link you put up showing an abortion but I had to stop watching it. I think for some people if they see that it will drive the point home, but for others it doesn't seem to mean anything. And listening to an actual survivor of abortion would I think make it clear just "what" (or who) it is that is being aborted. But again, for some people it seems to mean nothing.

I thought people who became outraged over animal abuse, but didn't bat an eye over babies being tormented and killed, I used to think they were shameless hypocrites. But now I have a different take on that, because even a hypocrite is able to know the difference between what he says and what he does. Anyone who thinks it's okay to kill babies but is outraged over animal abuse has actually gone a step or two beyond hypocrisy... feeling empathy towards animals but no empathy towards people (especially baby people) borders on the pathological. When I see this kind of disconnect among otherwise normally well ballanced people, I know something has gone terribly wrong in our society. Normal has been re-defined to mean something else... the distinction between normal and seriously abnormal behaviour has become blurred.

Iamon lyme: Most people won't take the time to watch this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7y2KsU_dhwI

Artful Dodger: I did take the time to watch that whole thing. Very moving. And I think it cleared up my ambiguity towards abortion. (Never something I supported, but at the same time I thought there might be times when it is ok for certain people. Never a choice I would make, but didn't feel I could make the moral decision for someone else) I would say that I would absolutely support getting rid of roe v wade.

However, I would NOT have watched the whole thing if about 7 minutes of the last 10 minutes had been at the beginning. (The whole heaven/hell bible "stuff" that I find abhorrent, personally) Glad it was at the end, because I would turned it off right away because that stuff annoys me.

Just me, and don't bother trying to say I'm wrong in my non bible stance, because it won't matter. LOL.

But thank you for posting that. Most of it was very thought provoking.

rod03801: the guy is a minister so it didn't surprise me the he included the sinner part. But maybe he did that after getting a sense of her receptiveness. But I actually agree with you. I have argued with other Christians and told them moral arguments can stand on their own without mention of God. Proof of this is the site atheists for life.

rod03801: http://www.godlessprolifers.org/home.html
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2008/11/28/no-god-and-no-abortions.html
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pro-life-atheists-invade-the-american-atheist-convention

Just posting to support my contention that the moral argument against abortion is not a religious one.