who supports right to choose

[BJean 16]

Thanks for the permission, Trell. For the record, I was responding to the tone of your entire post - not just one word that I used when defending my beliefs.

I'm not attacking you, nor have I meant to sound as if I am attacking you for anything you've posted. I was just disagreeing and I meant for it to be a respectful disagreement. It actually had much more to do with my own feelings than your post. In fact on the positive side, I was glad that your post gave me the opportunity to state what I think.

I do tend to sound harsh when I do not feel harshly at all. I apologize if you thought I had hard feelings toward you because I sure do not. Just because we disagree on an issue, even this very important issue, does not mean that we can't have respect for each other and in fact, enjoy each others posts on other threads. Doncha think? :thumbup:

[Jesusislove 26]

Hi, yeah, like I said before I agree to disagree. Laugh.

[BJean 16]

That's cool.

[TommyO 5]

Here we go with the black and white thinking again, try to think in the grey and you may be able to grasp the concept. There are no facts, there are are only beliefs and yours are different than mine. I am not interested in being forced into compliance with your right wing, narrow minded views of how the world should be run. I understand how it may seem like mental gynastics to you but it seems quite simple to me.

I love ice cream and I like cars but I would never buy a car made out of ice cream. I defer to Snuffy's skin analogy to answer your provocation. Skin is alive and it is human skin but it is not a human being, A fetus is not a human life it is a human fetus. This, it seems to me, is a very simple concept.

[BJean 16]

Good analogy, Tommy and snuffy. Makes perfect sense to us because it jibes with our beliefs. To others, they'll continue to be obtuse about it, although I really I think they understand, they just don't like it because of their beliefs.

Back to square one and your point that this is not a black and white issue. (All mention of slavery aside) There are many shades of grey and many different beliefs, none of which have anything to do with skin color.

Slavery is used to provoke feelings of disgust and it definitely does. But to equate a clump of undeveloped cells to a person who has been enslaved is a very hurtful analogy as far as I'm concerned. Frankly that whole argument makes me extremely unhappy. There are too many ways that it can be misunderstood and misused. Besides, as far as many of us believe, it's back to what I said above, who owns and is responsible for a clump of undeveloped cells buried deep within a woman's body is not the same as one person owning another person and using a whip on them to instill fear and pain.

[snuffy65 1]

Slavery is used to provoke feelings of disgust and it definitely does. But to equate a clump of undeveloped cells to a person who has been enslaved is a very hurtful analogy as far as I'm concerned. Frankly that whole argument makes me extremely unhappy. There are too many ways that it can be misunderstood and misused. Besides, as far as many of us believe, it's back to what I said above, who owns and is responsible for a clump of undeveloped cells buried deep within a woman's body is not the same as one person owning another person and using a whip on them to instill fear and pain.

To be fair and hopefully alleviate your unhappiness I don't think they were comparing black people and fetus'es. But rather comparing the arguements for pro-slavery and pro-choice. The analogy comes into play when people argued black people could be slaves since they are not a human being. Like wise, pro-choice people say women can get abortions since the fetus is not a human being.

Now with that said. I could see why they would compare slavery with abortions as equal evils, Because they believe human beings are being murdered everyday legally.

Of course Hindu believe cows are sacred and that rats hold the souls of the fallen. But I don't see many hindus in front of Mc Donalds shooting managers when they come out. :glare:

[gadgetlady 4]

Here we go with the black and white thinking again, try to think in the grey and you may be able to grasp the concept. There are no facts, there are are only beliefs and yours are different than mine. I am not interested in being forced into compliance with your right wing, narrow minded views of how the world should be run. I understand how it may seem like mental gynastics to you but it seems quite simple to me.

It's pretty funny how you're so black and white in your portrayal of me. Am I black and white on this issue? Absolutely, yes. There is no gray in the question of whether it's acceptable to wantonly kill innocent people at any stage of life, from fetal to elderly. Does that mean I don't understand the plight of mothers who are pregnant and don't want to be? Of course not! You don't know me; you don't know if I've ever been pregnant without wanting to be, if I've ever had a pregnancy scare and considered abortion, or even if I've had an abortion! You don't know the friends I have who have had abortions or carried their babies to term. You can continue to portray me as narrow-minded, but it's a bit narrow-minded of you to do so because you just plain don't know me.

Skin is alive and it is human skin but it is not a human being, A fetus is not a human life it is a human fetus. This, it seems to me, is a very simple concept.

Skin is not a life. It is a body part.

A fetus is a human being at a particular stage of development in life, just as is an infant, a toddler, an adolescent, a teenager, and so forth. It's a very early stage, but it's all in the progression from conception to death.

[BJean 16]

Oh yeah. I remember the original rationale. I also get the mental picture that it conjurs up. It is wrong on so many levels that we could discuss it for a month. I am sorry that I even mentioned it again. I had told myself to give it as little play as possible and then I went and did it. Bad girl, no bone. :glare:

[BJean 16]

There is a big, big, big, vital difference between a fertilized egg and an infant, toddler, teenager, adult, old person or a human being dead and smoldering in the grave.

If you use the terms human and life, it can describe all kinds of human life. It doesn't have to be limited to the entire human being, i.e., infant, but rather it can describe living tissue, as in skin, bones, organs, or even hearts. There are all kinds of human life as differentiated from other forms of life on this planet, such as dogs, cats, cows, horses, Hindu rats, etc.

It really all boils down to whether one believes that a particular sect of people should force another group of people to, in each and every case of fertilized eggs, create babies.

[gadgetlady 4]

There is a big, big, big, vital difference between a fertilized egg and an infant, toddler, teenager, adult, old person or a human being dead and smoldering in the grave.

There are lots of differences to all stages of life. It doesn't mean they're not life; it just means they're different stages.

It really all boils down to whether one believes that a particular sect of people should force another group of people to, in each and every case of fertilized eggs, create babies.

:Dancing_biggrin::glare: No one's forcing or trying to force anyone to create babies. The babies are already created, or there'd be no reason for abortion!

[BJean 16]

You're right about the stages thing. You're wrong about creating babies. Babies aren't babies until they are babies. They're human tissue. If they were babies, we wouldn't be having this discussion. People absolutely do want to control women.

Women are controlled in many ways as it is. The matter of choice of whether to have a baby should not be in the hands of anyone but them.

[gadgetlady 4]

Babies aren't babies until they are babies.

And toddlers aren't toddlers until they're toddlers. And adults aren't adults until they're adults. It is a continuum. Life isn't a title bestowed at birth (which for some babies might be 9 months after conception and for others might be 6 -- how arbitrary is that?). Life just plain IS. If you choose to define it as non-life, that doesn't make it so. It just makes your definition wrong.

They're human tissue.

As are you.

[BJean 16]

I'm glad we agree on the stages thing.

But there are many forms of life. They aren't all necessarily babies.

But this is a debate that is irrelevant. Women will choose whether you believe it is within their rights or not.

Our real differences stem from that. You believe that a woman should not be able to choose to terminate an unwanted pregnancy that she cannot bear to go through. You have already decided that none of the extenuating circumstances matter at all. All that matters to you is that there is a law passed that agrees with your belief system.

[snuffy65 1]

Skin is not a life. It is a body part.

A fetus is a human being at a particular stage of development in life, just as is an infant, a toddler, an adolescent, a teenager, and so forth. It's a very early stage, but it's all in the progression from conception to death.

But this is your belief. Not scientific fact, which is why I used the skin analogy because every scientific definition of life that supports your argument would in turn make living skin "life".

The FACTS are this. Scientifically we know and can define what "living" tissue is. however, no scientist will make the claim that they know what the phenomenon "life" is or how it is defined.

Now given the very small differences between "living" tissue and a fetus and add the number of social and ethical dilemmas of declaring life starts at conception. I think we are better off with the current court decision.

I don't mind anyone arguing differently. But please (not directed at gadget) stop making claims that a 8 week old fetus IS life and rather say its your belief. Because "life" has not been defined.

Me and other pro-choice people mostly "believe" that life doesn't start till later on. Which is why we say "we don't want to impose our beliefs on other people".

[MrsFlipFlops 2]

There are no facts, there are are only beliefs and yours are different than mine. I am not interested in being forced into compliance with your right wing, narrow minded views of how the world should be run. I understand how it may seem like mental gynastics to you but it seems quite simple to me.

I tend to believe that the people on the forum are too sensitive and get offended when there was no offense meant. I mean that on both sides of the board... but to be honest I'm getting sick and tired of you being purposefully beligerent. You are being intentional with attempt at barbs. Stop being insulting and try having a conversation. Your comments don't bring anything to the conversation except hostility. The clever barbs that I think of while reading your comments I keep to myself because they're not productive to the conversation. Seriously, I'm interested in hearing about your views, but when you behave this way, I kind of just scroll over your comment until I get to a comment of substance.