Originally posted by

Chris Pick

Thats right, because everyone that goes into planned parent hood is getting an abortion.. What a great assumption. As one of the few less than conservatives that attended A&M. The last thing that is needed is more church or prayer outside of church. I quite frankly don't care for organized religion, but that is your opinion, and you are free to practice that. I don't stand outside your church and tell you that your god is a falacy, or something else. While it is my right to do this under the 1st amendment, I actually have some respect for other peoples beliefs. Try and respect theirs.

While I was a Freshman, a fellow fish was devistated when his mother (who had complications in the past), got pregnant. She went to her church to ask for guidance. The church and congregation insisted that she not have an abortion. The risk of going full term for his mom was like 90% risk of death, and 80% risk for the baby. He had 2 other younger siblings still in school. His dad was out of the picture. Well she decided to follow the church and go thru with the pregnancy. His mom and the newborn both died. He had to drop out of Texas A&M and go and look after his two younger siblings. After he withdrew from A&M we never heard from him again.

Too bad his mom had not had an abortion and would have been there for her two younger children to help raise them. Now they grow up without a mom.

Chris, I'm only going to respond to a few things you mention in this post. Though I could go on, I don't feel this is the place to have a full blown religious and human rights discussion. I'm doubtful that you read the entire story. You're angry because you think Coalition for Life "assumes" abortion is the only thing Planned Parenthood is there for:
"`We're here to not only offer alternatives to abortion, but also to all of their services,' he said. `Without abortions, planned parenthood would have no other services. They survive on abortions.'

Carney said the coalition does not support individuals visiting Planned Parenthood for free or reduced medical care.

`There's reduced and free health care options across the Brazos Valley. Women don't have to come to Planned Parenthood. That's one of the goals for the coalition for life,' he said."

As you can see Coalition for Life is not ignorant and they are not there to disrespect the religions of other people. They are not out there shouting prayers or telling these young women that they are doomed. Their message is a message of hope and peace. The only people who talk to the people going into the clinic are the sidewalk counselors and their main purpose is to offer alternative health care, not preach about religion. Unless the patients themselves bring up religion, the focus is on caring for the patient in the best way and place possible.

The matter of abortion is not a matter of religious belief. I have seen numerous people outside the clinic who oppose abortion because they respect human life. This issue reaches far beyond religion, it is a matter of respecting the rights of all; big or small. And from your post, I would think that was something you would support. So please, while I will respect your beliefs, I ask that you "try and respect" their lives.

Originally posted by

Ryan

I have a question, as an unbiased observer comparing the 2 articles. In this particular one, it says that the Coalition is against all of the services provided by PPH and that without abortion, PPH would not be able to offer any other services. However, in the other article the director of PPH says that abortion is only 6% of their business and that they also offer screenings for women like mammograms, pap smears, etc.

So, is the executive director of the Coaliton confused or misinformed or what? Do you believe that if no abortions were performed, that the place would not be able to make rent and thus go out of business? I'm just curious.

I am not speaking for the Coalition as I am not a member, but the Coalition is confused, actually confused is the wrong word, they are ignorant. It's important that I use the word ignorant because it indicates that they ignore the facts and espouse whatever theories advance their views best. Planned parenthood makes little to no money off abortions, or any of their services for that matter, if you'll look into their national funding which trickles down to the local affiliates most of the money comes from large private grants and funds which have been set up to ensure the continued operation of the clinics. They operate, in general at a loss, this I know from discussions with severl PPH directors nationaly, and are kept alive by the funding vehicles set up nationally, not from local services provided. The other problem I have here, just to go off on a slight tangent, is that the Coalition thinks PPH is the only place abortions are performed in BCS, and its not. You can arange this procedure at two of the major hospitals in the area and smaller clinics are also capable of performing the procedure. So I guess it comes down to why is the Coalition against PPH when others in the area perform abortions as well. The reason is PPH is the "low hanging fruit" to target. Rather than mount a real offensive to the issue through diving into the economically disadvantaged areas, classrooms from elementary to the colleges, and using the same tactics at the local hospitals its just easier to symbolically stand in front of PPH rather than try and actually fix the problem. In order to justify their lipservice to the issue they throw things around like with out abortions PPH would be gone. And that's what this is lipservice. They don't stop and say are we actually pursuing avenues to get results in this area, they just say stand and pray here and you'll save all these people. If you want an interesting read, google lawsuits and the Bryan PPH protestors and see how many times the protestors, they change the name of the organization after each lawsuit, have been sued. They usually get sued for this one stunt they love to pull which is setting up a video camera to capture the license plate numbers of cars that enter then cross referencing those plates with the DMV and sending a post card to parents saying congratulations on this date your daughter recieved an abortion. The problem here is that not everyone recieved an abortion and they would do it on days that the abortionist, they use an out of town Dr. that comes in once a month usually on saturday, wasn't even present. This is why I have a problem when they say they are doing things peacefully, this doesn't seem peaceful nor does it seem like a good reflection of the kind of person Jesus is. But its important to understand they are not there for the people going into the clinic or the unborn children, if they were they would do more in the community than just stand infront of PPH as mentioned above. They aren't there to advance the teachings of Jesus, evidenced by the fact that Jesus stood as a beacon for the world to follow while these people aren't beacons but rogue activists. If your asking yourself WWJD, I don't think you'd come up with the answer of an enraging postcard that is most of the time a complete fabrication, that whole thou shalt not lie thing kinda forbids that, just a thought. So I conclude that the reason they do what they do is for their own ego. So that at the end of the day they can pat themselves on the back and say "we are doing all we can and making a real differenc in the world" even though that's not true. I would challenge them to consult the 11th commandment "don't kid thy self".

Originally posted by

Ryan

I have a question, as an unbiased observer comparing the 2 articles. In this particular one, it says that the Coalition is against all of the services provided by PPH and that without abortion, PPH would not be able to offer any other services. However, in the other article the director of PPH says that abortion is only 6% of their business and that they also offer screenings for women like mammograms, pap smears, etc.

So, is the executive director of the Coaliton confused or misinformed or what? Do you believe that if no abortions were performed, that the place would not be able to make rent and thus go out of business? I'm just curious.

The 1997-1998 Planned Parenthood Revenue report shows income of $544 million. PP's February 2000 report showed that its profits nearly tripled during 1999. It generated profites of $125.8 million on gross income of $660 million, which included contributions and government funding. A third of their income came from clinic operations, and of that $58.8 million -- more than one of every four dollars earned -- came from performing abortions.

Planned Parenthood has 850 clinics, in which the # of abortions increased from 139,000 in 1995 to almost 168,000 in 1999. "During a time when the the number of abortions nationally has steadily decreased, Planned Parenthood is performing more, not fewer abortions. Planned Parenthood is the largest abortion provider in America.

This organization has tremendous vested interests in marketing abortions.

Sources:
My immediate source is a well-documented book by Randy Alcorn intelligently addressing points raised by proabortion activists.

His source on this topic is as follows:

Lynn Vincent, "Profiting from Losses," WORLD, 22 April 2000, 36.

If you are going to cite something, cite the original source, not a "well documented book".

By you quoting the bible and calling it the truth, you are automatically denying everybody elses point of view. That's exactly what all these people are doing. So, yes her goal is to go out and make people angry since they don't believe in her "truth".

Live and let live, why can't it just be that easy in this life. Everyone should be able to live their lives how they want without having some know-it-alls in their face because they don't agree.

Originally posted by

Jacob

I think the comment, "If you're not making somebody angry, then you're not really being a Christian at some point." does not mean that he is out trying to make people angry. I think the point is that if a person is speaking the truth, someone will be offended because it is convicting to them. (2 Corinthians 2:15-16)

Thank you Cara. You brought up the only valid arguments on this page. Abortion is not a religious issue, it is a human rights issue. Yes it is a morality issue but that does not warrant it being a religious issue. Other laws prohibit things such as murder,robbery, white collar crime, those are prohibited because they arent "right." The issue is when does a fetus become a life? Is it it when it has two feet, two hands, a beating heart and brain waves? Or when the fetus hits the air does it suddenly become a human being? If thats the case then when are all born at different times 9 months, 7 months ,or 24 weeks which is the earlist a baby can be born and survive right now? IF its when it has a beating heart thats 21 days, 10 fingers and toes then thats 28 days, brain waves and a fully developed human being than thats 40 days. At this point a fetus will respond to stimulus of pain. ALL of these are before the earliest abortions take place. In the last 6 and 1/2 months of pregnancy there are NO new developments. So if we did want to classify the beginning of human life as a heartbeat and brainwaves, since that is by law what we classify death as. Then it is an INDISPUTABLE fact that each and every surgical abortion in the United States today stops a beating heart and measurable brain waves. Personhood is not a matter of size, skill or degree of intelligence. As the great Dr. Seuss says " A person is a person no matter how small."

I believe 150% that every woman should be able to do whatever she wants with her body that does not hurt another person. So say if your prochoice for abortion, you argue that a woman can kill her baby because its part of her body. Well then I guess you think its okay for a man to rape a woman because its his body and he can do what he wants with it? There is a reason rape is illegal, it hurts another person... the same thing abortion does as I've just established every abortion stops a heartbeat. Many prochoice arguments say that the fetus is part of the woman until it is born, however that is completely false. A fetus is living inside the woman. There are instances where a mom dies and a baby lives; or a baby dies and the mom lives, showing that they are separate human beings. They both have separate genetic codes. Another instance, when a mother has a son, is she now male because she has a son? No shes still a female, proving they are separate human beings.
The best defense against abortion is allowing woman to have control over the bodies, education should be key... whether that be birth control, sex ed, or abstinence.

If there is uncertainty about when human life begins, the benefit of the doubt should go to preserving life. If a hunter is uncertain whether a movement in the brush is caused by a person, does his uncertainty warrant him to fire? If we find someone who might be dead or alive, what action do we take, assume hes dead and walk away or try and save him?

To whoever said that adoption is not the answer, why was there a show yesterday on Oprah where women are going halfway around the world to buy babies??? Infertility in the US is at an ALL TIME HIGH! Many women spend thousands of dollars to become pregnant and adopt, please every baby is a "wanted" baby!

To go to why Coalition for Life protests in front of Planned Parenthood, they are the leader in abortions in America. And contrary to the article yesterday, they DO profit on abortion, look it up! There are other places to get the same services you can get at Planned Parenthood for less! My major problem with Planned Parenthood besides the fact that they preform abortions, is that they are the most racist public institution I believe there is. Their founder Margaret Sanger was part of the White Supremacist movement. Another founder assisted Adolf Hitler in World War II in eliminating the Nazi's. These were the ideals Planned Parenthood were founded on. In the beginning Margaret Sanger promoted abortion to black sororities. Why are 78% of Planned Parenthood's in inner city "ghettos?" Some might say this is the past... NO its not. Thats the really scary part... just a couple of months ago in California. A newspaper reporter played an angry father who was mad about affirmative action and his white son not getting into college. He said he was an avid supporter of Planned Parenthood and would like to make a donation for an abortion. He asked if he could make one for a black baby, not only did they agree. They said that was excellent, awesome, a " a great idea." This happened in April, what a shame!

There are many things to be prochoice about such as religion, politics, lifestyles, sexuality, killing another human being is not!

Originally posted by

jordan

Abortion is a human rights issue, as in the right of a human female to determine how she is going to take care of her body for the next nine months and take care of her expenses for the next 18 years. The issue is when a grown woman's right to make her own decisions is worth more than an inconvenient mass of cells that has absolutely no consciousness yet. Religious people tend to appeal to an innate idea of a "soul" that exists in a fetus, but this idea is useless to anyone looking for an objective definition of life.

In anticipation of other proposed solutions, telling people to stop having sex will never work, no matter what you think god wrote down in a book two thousand years ago. People are going to keep having sex, and in any case telling women to stop after they're pregnant is minimally helpful. All of history proves this trend.

Suggesting foster care is inconsiderate of the woman and potential child. As someone involved in foster care for the past ten years, I can say with some authority that it is not a good solution to the problem of dealing with unwanted children, and it still allows a significant burden to be placed on the woman for nine months.

I suggest the Coalition focus more on prayer, that way they can continue to think they are accomplishing something when they are merely muttering to themselves. Also that will minimize their intrusion into other peoples' personal business.

First this was an elloquant defense of your point of view. But you fail to call a spade a spade in several instances. I don't agree that a fetus is part of the mother necessarily, it is seperate and as you pointed out a male fetus does not mean the mother all of a sudden becomes male. However it is a dependent organism in that it requires the mother to provide it with life, and that you can't argue. I want to expound on every point you made as I feel some good and meaningful debate could come of it, but I don't have that kind of time on my hands so I will get to my resolution of the problem which is what I believe all debate should strive for. You say the fetus is its own seperate person as is the mother, fine then induces birth at 1 month or whenever the mother wants an abortion and seperate them in the physical sense. That way if the child dies its nature not murder in your eyes. If the kid is a fighter and lives then have it grow up until its old enough to work off its debt that was required to feed it through an IV and such and set it free. This could probably be accomplished by age 8 or so, or as you point out there are tons of women that want babies so have them foot the bill. In this solution there is no act of violence from one person to another, the organisms (fetus and adult female) would be physically seperated since they are "seperate" humans to begin with, and the adult female doesn't have to go through the nine months and tons of expenses needed to carry the fetus to term, everyone wins. Your thoughts (though something tells me your against it)?

Originally posted by

jordan

Abortion is a human rights issue, as in the right of a human female to determine how she is going to take care of her body for the next nine months and take care of her expenses for the next 18 years. The issue is when a grown woman's right to make her own decisions is worth more than an inconvenient mass of cells that has absolutely no consciousness yet. Religious people tend to appeal to an innate idea of a "soul" that exists in a fetus, but this idea is useless to anyone looking for an objective definition of life.

In anticipation of other proposed solutions, telling people to stop having sex will never work, no matter what you think god wrote down in a book two thousand years ago. People are going to keep having sex, and in any case telling women to stop after they're pregnant is minimally helpful. All of history proves this trend.

Suggesting foster care is inconsiderate of the woman and potential child. As someone involved in foster care for the past ten years, I can say with some authority that it is not a good solution to the problem of dealing with unwanted children, and it still allows a significant burden to be placed on the woman for nine months.

I suggest the Coalition focus more on prayer, that way they can continue to think they are accomplishing something when they are merely muttering to themselves. Also that will minimize their intrusion into other peoples' personal business.

First off you are very misinformed to think that a child in the womb is a blob of cells. This argument could have been valid back in the 70's with lack of technology in which we have today, but we now know (as scientists have proved) that life begins at conception. I am a pro-life activist and I have many friends who are atheists meaning this has nothing to do with Religion. This is a human's life at stake. Look it up.

Ashley, you mind posting some scientific studies that prove that life begins at conception? Not arguing right now, I just want to some.

On another point, when you mean "a human's life is at stake", are you simply looking on whether they are alive or dead or have you looked into the future life of that unwanted child?

Originally posted by

jordan

Abortion is a human rights issue, as in the right of a human female to determine how she is going to take care of her body for the next nine months and take care of her expenses for the next 18 years. The issue is when a grown woman's right to make her own decisions is worth more than an inconvenient mass of cells that has absolutely no consciousness yet. Religious people tend to appeal to an innate idea of a "soul" that exists in a fetus, but this idea is useless to anyone looking for an objective definition of life.

In anticipation of other proposed solutions, telling people to stop having sex will never work, no matter what you think god wrote down in a book two thousand years ago. People are going to keep having sex, and in any case telling women to stop after they're pregnant is minimally helpful. All of history proves this trend.

Suggesting foster care is inconsiderate of the woman and potential child. As someone involved in foster care for the past ten years, I can say with some authority that it is not a good solution to the problem of dealing with unwanted children, and it still allows a significant burden to be placed on the woman for nine months.

I suggest the Coalition focus more on prayer, that way they can continue to think they are accomplishing something when they are merely muttering to themselves. Also that will minimize their intrusion into other peoples' personal business.

I'm interested in what miracle technology now allows scientists to definitively say that life begins at conception. If there was such a sweeping generalization, there would be no debate. The last several academic articles I've read on the issue, dating even since the 70's, suggest that this is a moot point. My argument was on the basis of consciousness, which is as valid a definition of human life as any other, and you can't tell me that a fetus has a significantly developed consciousness to be worth more than that of a grown woman. Since we have resorted to lamely telling eachother to do more research, I would suggest you read the introduction to Hofstadter's "I am a strange loop". He is a very engaging cognitive scientist and might be more successful at conveying these ideas to people unfamiliar with them.

All you did there was take our argument and attempted to use it against us and it didn't work. There is a line between agreeing and respecting. I disagree with this people but you won't see me standing in front of their churches protesting them. Why because I respect their opinion. They on the other hand do not respect that others have a different point of view. Why else would they go around protesting. They can distribute flyers, talk on radio programs, build a website, do something else but don't literally get in people's faces in an attempt to belittle them. That's too far.

Originally posted by

respect other's beliefs? really!?!?!

Without taking a stand on the issue here, I would like to point out the hypocracy of the pro-choicer's statements about "respecting other's beliefs." If you really felt that way, then you would not be "interfering" with people who believe it is the right thing to stand outside of an abortion clinic and pray. But since you are right in your own eyes and everyone who believes otherwise is wrong, then you can tell others not to interfere with people's beliefs that are different from their own while you yourself are violating your own command. Please think about that before you write a response.

by the way, I think its funny that all pro-choice comments are on the pro-life article and all the pro-life comments are on the pro-choice article. No one's views are going uncontested.

Originally posted by

belittling and too far....?

How is standing outside on a public sidewalk getting in people's faces? You might not know this, but there is a metal fence with metal sheets across the bars in the front of the clinic. There is no way humanly possible to get in a patient's face with a metal gate between the sidewalk and the parking lot. Plus, sidewalk counselors offer suggestions of other places to go for health care other than this clinic on non-abortion days, so, ultimately if somebody comes up to the counselors it is their choice, which was not forced upon them in any way. Also, suggesting other places to go is in no way belittling. That would be like taking a friend's suggestion of going to a different hair salon or restaurant other than the one you picked as belittling. That just doesn't make sense to me, personally. So, in conclusion I believe that nothing is being taken too far.

Man, reading your post makes me feel so sad for humanity. No really. It makes me very depressed to know that there are people like you and McClung and Carney who believe a ton of crap and turn a blind eye to real issues. I planned on writing out a well thought out response, but it wouldn't do any good. You're all going to keep your dogmatic views about some nonexistent deity no matter what I say.

The argument was never that planned parenthood was a church. The article states that the protesters are primarily funded by churches so YES this IS a religion issue. I apologize if I am wrong, but the odds are that you are a christian and that you were raised in a loving family who was able to afford to take care of you.

Pro-lifers attempt to ignore the fact that there are thousands of kids in foster care who are shuffled from home to home with no stability in their lives. They do not have a loving home and many probably ask themselves why the hell this is happenning to them. THAT is a human rights issue. Nobody will ever be able to adopt all these kids. To say that it is better to add another kid to the system than to allow the mother to prevent the suffering which she knows is coming is wrong. Then there are the hundreds more who suffer child abuse by incompetent mothers. Then if the mother decides to have the child, she is forced to raise it with diminishing assistance from the governement. You can't have it both ways.

At the end, it is not YOUR life that is going to be affected, it is the would-be life of that child and that woman. You should feel guilty that you support the potential suffering of all these kids instead of allowing the mother to decide what is best for them.

You want less abortions, go out and advocate for protected sex, it is the only way to prevent this situation.

Originally posted by

Cara

I am surprised that several people have expressed annoyance by saying they should stand outside 'other people's churches' and protest. Planned Parenthood is not a church. I don't see how protesting the issue of abortion is protesting religion.

Abortion IS a human rights issue. It is a comparison between a baby's right to life and a mother's right to a certain lifestyle - it is reasonable for society to expect an adult to live temporarily with an inconvenience if the only alternative is killing a child (as Randy Alcorn puts it. He has a great book about these issues, which addresses the points made in these comments)

Cases in which the mother is at risk are few and far in between, compared to the number of abortions that occur on a daily basis in the U.S.

To oppose abortion is not fundamentally a religiously-influenced decision. All laws impose moral viewpoints on others - a man does not have the right to do what he wants with his body when it comes to raping a woman. A parent does not have the right to abuse a child. It IS society's business when it is an innocent person whose rights are being trampled on.

The true question here is whether a fetus - a tiny developing human - is alive. Is it a person? Under the 14th amendment, the U.S. Constitution protects all persons from being robbed of life, liberty, or property.

How is personhood defined? By whether the being in question is a human being. Is a developing child a human being? Is it a person? Does size make the difference in personhood? We have to draw an arbitrary line to say that it does. Does intelligence, or ability to take care of oneself, define personhood? A person with Downs syndrome is a valuable addition to a human family (ask any family who has a child with Downs syndrome), and is most definitely a person. The unborn, at 10 weeks, have brainwaves and a heart beat. Why is that enough to protect a person in a coma, but not a child in the womb?

As the Supreme Court said in its decision in Roe v. Wade: "If the suggestion of personhood [of the unborn] is established, the appellant's [proabortion] case, of course, collapses, for the fetus's right to life is then guaranteed specifically by the [fourteenth] amendment."

If we are uncertain when life begins, shouldn't the benefit of the doubt go to preserving life?

Originally posted by

Cara

I am surprised that several people have expressed annoyance by saying they should stand outside 'other people's churches' and protest. Planned Parenthood is not a church. I don't see how protesting the issue of abortion is protesting religion.

Abortion IS a human rights issue. It is a comparison between a baby's right to life and a mother's right to a certain lifestyle - it is reasonable for society to expect an adult to live temporarily with an inconvenience if the only alternative is killing a child (as Randy Alcorn puts it. He has a great book about these issues, which addresses the points made in these comments)

Cases in which the mother is at risk are few and far in between, compared to the number of abortions that occur on a daily basis in the U.S.

To oppose abortion is not fundamentally a religiously-influenced decision. All laws impose moral viewpoints on others - a man does not have the right to do what he wants with his body when it comes to raping a woman. A parent does not have the right to abuse a child. It IS society's business when it is an innocent person whose rights are being trampled on.

The true question here is whether a fetus - a tiny developing human - is alive. Is it a person? Under the 14th amendment, the U.S. Constitution protects all persons from being robbed of life, liberty, or property.

How is personhood defined? By whether the being in question is a human being. Is a developing child a human being? Is it a person? Does size make the difference in personhood? We have to draw an arbitrary line to say that it does. Does intelligence, or ability to take care of oneself, define personhood? A person with Downs syndrome is a valuable addition to a human family (ask any family who has a child with Downs syndrome), and is most definitely a person. The unborn, at 10 weeks, have brainwaves and a heart beat. Why is that enough to protect a person in a coma, but not a child in the womb?

As the Supreme Court said in its decision in Roe v. Wade: "If the suggestion of personhood [of the unborn] is established, the appellant's [proabortion] case, of course, collapses, for the fetus's right to life is then guaranteed specifically by the [fourteenth] amendment."

If we are uncertain when life begins, shouldn't the benefit of the doubt go to preserving life?

You are right. Maybe we should go out and shoot the kids in foster care. I'm sure they would rather be dead. Let's take a poll and ask them if they would preferred have been aborted. That would be informative! We should ask the kids what they think.

Originally posted by

Cara

I am surprised that several people have expressed annoyance by saying they should stand outside 'other people's churches' and protest. Planned Parenthood is not a church. I don't see how protesting the issue of abortion is protesting religion.

Abortion IS a human rights issue. It is a comparison between a baby's right to life and a mother's right to a certain lifestyle - it is reasonable for society to expect an adult to live temporarily with an inconvenience if the only alternative is killing a child (as Randy Alcorn puts it. He has a great book about these issues, which addresses the points made in these comments)

Cases in which the mother is at risk are few and far in between, compared to the number of abortions that occur on a daily basis in the U.S.

To oppose abortion is not fundamentally a religiously-influenced decision. All laws impose moral viewpoints on others - a man does not have the right to do what he wants with his body when it comes to raping a woman. A parent does not have the right to abuse a child. It IS society's business when it is an innocent person whose rights are being trampled on.

The true question here is whether a fetus - a tiny developing human - is alive. Is it a person? Under the 14th amendment, the U.S. Constitution protects all persons from being robbed of life, liberty, or property.

How is personhood defined? By whether the being in question is a human being. Is a developing child a human being? Is it a person? Does size make the difference in personhood? We have to draw an arbitrary line to say that it does. Does intelligence, or ability to take care of oneself, define personhood? A person with Downs syndrome is a valuable addition to a human family (ask any family who has a child with Downs syndrome), and is most definitely a person. The unborn, at 10 weeks, have brainwaves and a heart beat. Why is that enough to protect a person in a coma, but not a child in the womb?

As the Supreme Court said in its decision in Roe v. Wade: "If the suggestion of personhood [of the unborn] is established, the appellant's [proabortion] case, of course, collapses, for the fetus's right to life is then guaranteed specifically by the [fourteenth] amendment."

If we are uncertain when life begins, shouldn't the benefit of the doubt go to preserving life?

Additionally:

Eddie Murphy was a foster child.
Marilyn Monroe was a foster child (although I think she supports your theory)
Alexander Hamilton, one of the Founding Fathers, was adopted.
Aaron Parchem - Adopted, went to the Olympics in 2006 in figure skating (pairs)

What about this story about Kate Adie-

"Adie is especially famous for her reports from war zones (Turkey, Lebanon, the Gulf War, China, the former Yugoslavia, etc.). Her mother became pregnant while her husband was away at war and Adie was adopted as a baby by a pharmacist and his wife in Sunderland. She had a very happy childhood as an only child. She graduated from the University of Sunderland, where she is now an Honorary Professor of Broadcasting and Journalism. She has traced and met her birth family, and they have an excellent continuing relationship."

The point is, can we honestly, morally decide who deserves to live, and who doesn't? Who will have a miserable life, and who won't? What about all the kids that come from the kind of families some of us envy, and end up in drugs, crime, committing suicide?

Killing foster kids was not the path I was going for. They've already begun their lives, and at the end of that struggle they will hopefully be better adults who will make rational choices. I haven't met my brothers but two times my entire life because of the dumb decisions of our mother. Not being raised by our biological parents has affected each of us differently.

Just because not every foster kid wishes they were dead, doesn't mean we need to prevent from having the choice of stopping the situation. It is THEIR life, NOT YOURS. You're life is not the same as the person next to you. Let them be and allow them to make their own choices on THEIR OWN. It is not going to affect YOU at the end.

Originally posted by

Cara

I am surprised that several people have expressed annoyance by saying they should stand outside 'other people's churches' and protest. Planned Parenthood is not a church. I don't see how protesting the issue of abortion is protesting religion.

Abortion IS a human rights issue. It is a comparison between a baby's right to life and a mother's right to a certain lifestyle - it is reasonable for society to expect an adult to live temporarily with an inconvenience if the only alternative is killing a child (as Randy Alcorn puts it. He has a great book about these issues, which addresses the points made in these comments)

Cases in which the mother is at risk are few and far in between, compared to the number of abortions that occur on a daily basis in the U.S.

To oppose abortion is not fundamentally a religiously-influenced decision. All laws impose moral viewpoints on others - a man does not have the right to do what he wants with his body when it comes to raping a woman. A parent does not have the right to abuse a child. It IS society's business when it is an innocent person whose rights are being trampled on.

The true question here is whether a fetus - a tiny developing human - is alive. Is it a person? Under the 14th amendment, the U.S. Constitution protects all persons from being robbed of life, liberty, or property.

How is personhood defined? By whether the being in question is a human being. Is a developing child a human being? Is it a person? Does size make the difference in personhood? We have to draw an arbitrary line to say that it does. Does intelligence, or ability to take care of oneself, define personhood? A person with Downs syndrome is a valuable addition to a human family (ask any family who has a child with Downs syndrome), and is most definitely a person. The unborn, at 10 weeks, have brainwaves and a heart beat. Why is that enough to protect a person in a coma, but not a child in the womb?

As the Supreme Court said in its decision in Roe v. Wade: "If the suggestion of personhood [of the unborn] is established, the appellant's [proabortion] case, of course, collapses, for the fetus's right to life is then guaranteed specifically by the [fourteenth] amendment."

If we are uncertain when life begins, shouldn't the benefit of the doubt go to preserving life?

These are just some thoughts and figures.

I am by no means an expert in the child welfare system, but from my general knowledge and research, I understand that most children are put into foster care because an incident of child abuse or neglect is believed by a CPS worker to have occurred.

From: the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Report; National Study on Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting, The American Humane Association, 1981 and 1991; 1977 Analysis of Child Abuse and Neglect Research, U.S. Dept. of H.E.W., 1978......

...It is shown that in the first ten years after the legalization of abortion in America, child abuse increased over 500 percent.

This can be verified in the Report of the National Center of Child Abuse and Neglect, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1973-1982.

The above reports present the following statistics: child abuse cases in the US were estimated at 167,000 in 1973. That number was 929,000 in 1982.

You could say that dramatic rise is due to better reporting of child abuse cases. However, experts agree that the actual incidence of child abuse has risen sharply, along with a better reporting system.

Why do abortion and abuse positively correlate?

It could be that abortion encourages a "child-as-commodity" viewpoint in society. Children are things to be brought into a person's life when convenient, and pregnancies may be disposed of otherwise. If children are viewed as expendable before birth, they will be viewed as expendable after birth. This is lamentable in all ways.

A mother can look at her screaming child and think, "I could have aborted you." Even worse - "I should have aborted you."

If abortion leads to increased child abuse (a notion well supported by the statistics of the other countries that have legalized abortion), for whatever reason, and child abuse leads to foster care, then there will be more children in foster care.

Originally posted by

Cara

I am surprised that several people have expressed annoyance by saying they should stand outside 'other people's churches' and protest. Planned Parenthood is not a church. I don't see how protesting the issue of abortion is protesting religion.

Abortion IS a human rights issue. It is a comparison between a baby's right to life and a mother's right to a certain lifestyle - it is reasonable for society to expect an adult to live temporarily with an inconvenience if the only alternative is killing a child (as Randy Alcorn puts it. He has a great book about these issues, which addresses the points made in these comments)

Cases in which the mother is at risk are few and far in between, compared to the number of abortions that occur on a daily basis in the U.S.

To oppose abortion is not fundamentally a religiously-influenced decision. All laws impose moral viewpoints on others - a man does not have the right to do what he wants with his body when it comes to raping a woman. A parent does not have the right to abuse a child. It IS society's business when it is an innocent person whose rights are being trampled on.

The true question here is whether a fetus - a tiny developing human - is alive. Is it a person? Under the 14th amendment, the U.S. Constitution protects all persons from being robbed of life, liberty, or property.

How is personhood defined? By whether the being in question is a human being. Is a developing child a human being? Is it a person? Does size make the difference in personhood? We have to draw an arbitrary line to say that it does. Does intelligence, or ability to take care of oneself, define personhood? A person with Downs syndrome is a valuable addition to a human family (ask any family who has a child with Downs syndrome), and is most definitely a person. The unborn, at 10 weeks, have brainwaves and a heart beat. Why is that enough to protect a person in a coma, but not a child in the womb?

As the Supreme Court said in its decision in Roe v. Wade: "If the suggestion of personhood [of the unborn] is established, the appellant's [proabortion] case, of course, collapses, for the fetus's right to life is then guaranteed specifically by the [fourteenth] amendment."

If we are uncertain when life begins, shouldn't the benefit of the doubt go to preserving life?

Originally posted by

Sam

"I am the way and the truth and the life.
No one comes to the Father except through me" (John 14:6).

For any pregnant moms whom are having a hard time with this decision, or any surprised dads whom didn't expect a child at this point in time, please just consider reading the information the Coalition for Life gives out. Get informed about your options.

We live a very care-free life in America these days. It would be nice to see communities banding together to take care of the children and the less privileged. Suffering is not fun, but without it we do not understand the truly happier times of our lives.

I do stand and pray. And I will support you. I'm not here to judge, I'm only trying to be part of the solution and will work with whomever desires the best for the moms, the dads, and the babies.

Originally posted by

Ashleigh

Thank you Cara. You brought up the only valid arguments on this page. Abortion is not a religious issue, it is a human rights issue. Yes it is a morality issue but that does not warrant it being a religious issue. Other laws prohibit things such as murder,robbery, white collar crime, those are prohibited because they arent "right." The issue is when does a fetus become a life? Is it it when it has two feet, two hands, a beating heart and brain waves? Or when the fetus hits the air does it suddenly become a human being? If thats the case then when are all born at different times 9 months, 7 months ,or 24 weeks which is the earlist a baby can be born and survive right now? IF its when it has a beating heart thats 21 days, 10 fingers and toes then thats 28 days, brain waves and a fully developed human being than thats 40 days. At this point a fetus will respond to stimulus of pain. ALL of these are before the earliest abortions take place. In the last 6 and 1/2 months of pregnancy there are NO new developments. So if we did want to classify the beginning of human life as a heartbeat and brainwaves, since that is by law what we classify death as. Then it is an INDISPUTABLE fact that each and every surgical abortion in the United States today stops a beating heart and measurable brain waves. Personhood is not a matter of size, skill or degree of intelligence. As the great Dr. Seuss says " A person is a person no matter how small."

I believe 150% that every woman should be able to do whatever she wants with her body that does not hurt another person. So say if your prochoice for abortion, you argue that a woman can kill her baby because its part of her body. Well then I guess you think its okay for a man to rape a woman because its his body and he can do what he wants with it? There is a reason rape is illegal, it hurts another person... the same thing abortion does as I've just established every abortion stops a heartbeat. Many prochoice arguments say that the fetus is part of the woman until it is born, however that is completely false. A fetus is living inside the woman. There are instances where a mom dies and a baby lives; or a baby dies and the mom lives, showing that they are separate human beings. They both have separate genetic codes. Another instance, when a mother has a son, is she now male because she has a son? No shes still a female, proving they are separate human beings.
The best defense against abortion is allowing woman to have control over the bodies, education should be key... whether that be birth control, sex ed, or abstinence.

If there is uncertainty about when human life begins, the benefit of the doubt should go to preserving life. If a hunter is uncertain whether a movement in the brush is caused by a person, does his uncertainty warrant him to fire? If we find someone who might be dead or alive, what action do we take, assume hes dead and walk away or try and save him?

To whoever said that adoption is not the answer, why was there a show yesterday on Oprah where women are going halfway around the world to buy babies??? Infertility in the US is at an ALL TIME HIGH! Many women spend thousands of dollars to become pregnant and adopt, please every baby is a "wanted" baby!

To go to why Coalition for Life protests in front of Planned Parenthood, they are the leader in abortions in America. And contrary ti the article yesterday, they DO profit on abortion, look it up! There are other places to get the same services you can get at Planned Parenthood for less! My major problem with Planned Parenthood besides the fact that they preform abortions, is that they are the most racist public institution I believe there is. Their founder Margaret Sanger was part of the White Supremacist movement. Another founder assisted Adolf Hitler in World War II in eliminating the Nazi's. These were the ideals Planned Parenthood were founded on. In the beginning Margaret Sanger promoted abortion to black sororities. Why are 78% of Planned Parenthood's in inner city "ghettos?" Some might say this is the past... NO its not. Thats the really scary part... just a couple of months ago in California. A newspaper reporter played an angry father who was mad about affirmative action and his white son not getting into college. He said he was an avid supporter of Planned Parenthood and would like to make a donation for an abortion. He asked if he could make one for a black baby, not only did they agree. They said that was excellent, awesome, a " a great idea." This happened in April, what a shame!

There are many things to be prochoice about such as religion, politics, lifestyles, sexuality, killing another human being is not!

I am confused you say that your views against planned parenthood and abortion are human rights driven, but you must bring up the race card in huh i am confused...?

Furthermore, I believe that 78% of planned parenthood locations are selected based on need such as high teen pregnancy rates and low income areas where the services provided by planned parenthood might be put to good use (this mostly includes the 94% of the non abortion services). If there was a planned parenthood in the woodlands or any other high end neighborhood in the state I am pretty sure very few people would use it.

Additionally, to the people who keep harping that abortion is a human rights issue i agree, but in this specific forum we are responding to a religious organizations view's that specifically said they feel bad for the aborted babies from a religious stand point. Therefore, based on the original article i would say that religion is fair game. You throw religion on my plate using it as part of the argument against abortion. To effectively argue against you i therefore must address all points brought against me and my feelings.

Lastly, comparing abortion to saying that a man can rape someone else is completely different in my eyes. A mother and her baby are physically attached as one human being until the umbilical cord is cut where as when a man rapes a women the man is physically not attached to the women. Just because you paint an apple orange does not make it an orange is the down and dirty of it.

Just a thought... a fetus has a unique genetic identity from the moment it is conceived. The odds of that particular DNA combination in the zygote occurring once again in the time span our species will occupy the planet (especially considering that, with recombination and independent assortment etc., 8 million different combinations are possible from one male and female alone - check an intro to biology book) are nil. Distinct genetic identities and separate growth do not argue for "one human being."

Originally posted by

Ashleigh

Thank you Cara. You brought up the only valid arguments on this page. Abortion is not a religious issue, it is a human rights issue. Yes it is a morality issue but that does not warrant it being a religious issue. Other laws prohibit things such as murder,robbery, white collar crime, those are prohibited because they arent "right." The issue is when does a fetus become a life? Is it it when it has two feet, two hands, a beating heart and brain waves? Or when the fetus hits the air does it suddenly become a human being? If thats the case then when are all born at different times 9 months, 7 months ,or 24 weeks which is the earlist a baby can be born and survive right now? IF its when it has a beating heart thats 21 days, 10 fingers and toes then thats 28 days, brain waves and a fully developed human being than thats 40 days. At this point a fetus will respond to stimulus of pain. ALL of these are before the earliest abortions take place. In the last 6 and 1/2 months of pregnancy there are NO new developments. So if we did want to classify the beginning of human life as a heartbeat and brainwaves, since that is by law what we classify death as. Then it is an INDISPUTABLE fact that each and every surgical abortion in the United States today stops a beating heart and measurable brain waves. Personhood is not a matter of size, skill or degree of intelligence. As the great Dr. Seuss says " A person is a person no matter how small."

I believe 150% that every woman should be able to do whatever she wants with her body that does not hurt another person. So say if your prochoice for abortion, you argue that a woman can kill her baby because its part of her body. Well then I guess you think its okay for a man to rape a woman because its his body and he can do what he wants with it? There is a reason rape is illegal, it hurts another person... the same thing abortion does as I've just established every abortion stops a heartbeat. Many prochoice arguments say that the fetus is part of the woman until it is born, however that is completely false. A fetus is living inside the woman. There are instances where a mom dies and a baby lives; or a baby dies and the mom lives, showing that they are separate human beings. They both have separate genetic codes. Another instance, when a mother has a son, is she now male because she has a son? No shes still a female, proving they are separate human beings.
The best defense against abortion is allowing woman to have control over the bodies, education should be key... whether that be birth control, sex ed, or abstinence.

If there is uncertainty about when human life begins, the benefit of the doubt should go to preserving life. If a hunter is uncertain whether a movement in the brush is caused by a person, does his uncertainty warrant him to fire? If we find someone who might be dead or alive, what action do we take, assume hes dead and walk away or try and save him?

To whoever said that adoption is not the answer, why was there a show yesterday on Oprah where women are going halfway around the world to buy babies??? Infertility in the US is at an ALL TIME HIGH! Many women spend thousands of dollars to become pregnant and adopt, please every baby is a "wanted" baby!

To go to why Coalition for Life protests in front of Planned Parenthood, they are the leader in abortions in America. And contrary ti the article yesterday, they DO profit on abortion, look it up! There are other places to get the same services you can get at Planned Parenthood for less! My major problem with Planned Parenthood besides the fact that they preform abortions, is that they are the most racist public institution I believe there is. Their founder Margaret Sanger was part of the White Supremacist movement. Another founder assisted Adolf Hitler in World War II in eliminating the Nazi's. These were the ideals Planned Parenthood were founded on. In the beginning Margaret Sanger promoted abortion to black sororities. Why are 78% of Planned Parenthood's in inner city "ghettos?" Some might say this is the past... NO its not. Thats the really scary part... just a couple of months ago in California. A newspaper reporter played an angry father who was mad about affirmative action and his white son not getting into college. He said he was an avid supporter of Planned Parenthood and would like to make a donation for an abortion. He asked if he could make one for a black baby, not only did they agree. They said that was excellent, awesome, a " a great idea." This happened in April, what a shame!

There are many things to be prochoice about such as religion, politics, lifestyles, sexuality, killing another human being is not!

Way to bring race up. That was uncalled for. Don't act as if nobody else but those from the "ghetto" do this. Many people from country girls to rich suburban girls have done this too.

Then again...you did quote Dr. Suess so I guess we can throw this and any of your further arguments out the window.

Originally posted by

Ashleigh

Thank you Cara. You brought up the only valid arguments on this page. Abortion is not a religious issue, it is a human rights issue. Yes it is a morality issue but that does not warrant it being a religious issue. Other laws prohibit things such as murder,robbery, white collar crime, those are prohibited because they arent "right." The issue is when does a fetus become a life? Is it it when it has two feet, two hands, a beating heart and brain waves? Or when the fetus hits the air does it suddenly become a human being? If thats the case then when are all born at different times 9 months, 7 months ,or 24 weeks which is the earlist a baby can be born and survive right now? IF its when it has a beating heart thats 21 days, 10 fingers and toes then thats 28 days, brain waves and a fully developed human being than thats 40 days. At this point a fetus will respond to stimulus of pain. ALL of these are before the earliest abortions take place. In the last 6 and 1/2 months of pregnancy there are NO new developments. So if we did want to classify the beginning of human life as a heartbeat and brainwaves, since that is by law what we classify death as. Then it is an INDISPUTABLE fact that each and every surgical abortion in the United States today stops a beating heart and measurable brain waves. Personhood is not a matter of size, skill or degree of intelligence. As the great Dr. Seuss says " A person is a person no matter how small."

I believe 150% that every woman should be able to do whatever she wants with her body that does not hurt another person. So say if your prochoice for abortion, you argue that a woman can kill her baby because its part of her body. Well then I guess you think its okay for a man to rape a woman because its his body and he can do what he wants with it? There is a reason rape is illegal, it hurts another person... the same thing abortion does as I've just established every abortion stops a heartbeat. Many prochoice arguments say that the fetus is part of the woman until it is born, however that is completely false. A fetus is living inside the woman. There are instances where a mom dies and a baby lives; or a baby dies and the mom lives, showing that they are separate human beings. They both have separate genetic codes. Another instance, when a mother has a son, is she now male because she has a son? No shes still a female, proving they are separate human beings.
The best defense against abortion is allowing woman to have control over the bodies, education should be key... whether that be birth control, sex ed, or abstinence.

If there is uncertainty about when human life begins, the benefit of the doubt should go to preserving life. If a hunter is uncertain whether a movement in the brush is caused by a person, does his uncertainty warrant him to fire? If we find someone who might be dead or alive, what action do we take, assume hes dead and walk away or try and save him?

To whoever said that adoption is not the answer, why was there a show yesterday on Oprah where women are going halfway around the world to buy babies??? Infertility in the US is at an ALL TIME HIGH! Many women spend thousands of dollars to become pregnant and adopt, please every baby is a "wanted" baby!

To go to why Coalition for Life protests in front of Planned Parenthood, they are the leader in abortions in America. And contrary ti the article yesterday, they DO profit on abortion, look it up! There are other places to get the same services you can get at Planned Parenthood for less! My major problem with Planned Parenthood besides the fact that they preform abortions, is that they are the most racist public institution I believe there is. Their founder Margaret Sanger was part of the White Supremacist movement. Another founder assisted Adolf Hitler in World War II in eliminating the Nazi's. These were the ideals Planned Parenthood were founded on. In the beginning Margaret Sanger promoted abortion to black sororities. Why are 78% of Planned Parenthood's in inner city "ghettos?" Some might say this is the past... NO its not. Thats the really scary part... just a couple of months ago in California. A newspaper reporter played an angry father who was mad about affirmative action and his white son not getting into college. He said he was an avid supporter of Planned Parenthood and would like to make a donation for an abortion. He asked if he could make one for a black baby, not only did they agree. They said that was excellent, awesome, a " a great idea." This happened in April, what a shame!

There are many things to be prochoice about such as religion, politics, lifestyles, sexuality, killing another human being is not!

I posted this verbatim earlier. Although I'm not going to lie, this time I spell checked it.

The 1997-1998 Planned Parenthood Revenue report shows income of $544 million. PP's February 2000 report showed that its profits nearly tripled during 1999. It generated profits of $125.8 million on gross income of $660 million, which included contributions and government funding. A third of their income came from clinic operations, and of that $58.8 million -- more than one of every four dollars earned -- came from performing abortions.

Planned Parenthood has 850 clinics, in which the # of abortions increased from 139,000 in 1995 to almost 168,000 in 1999. "During a time when the the number of abortions nationally has steadily decreased, Planned Parenthood is performing more, not fewer abortions." Planned Parenthood is the largest abortion provider in America.

This organization has tremendous vested interests in marketing abortions.

Sources:
My immediate source is a well-documented book by Randy Alcorn intelligently addressing points raised by proabortion activists.

His source on this topic is as follows:

Lynn Vincent, "Profiting from Losses," WORLD, 22 April 2000, 36.

Originally posted by

Clark Saunders

Ok...here is the deal. I don't like abortions...most people don't like them, but a lot of people accept to be in practice. Most likely, if we made medically licensed abortions illegal, they would still be performed in unorthodoxed ways. Anyway...the thing that upsets me as a christian, is seeing all these people protesting a company that only consists of 6% abortion procedures. If we protested every organization that did 6% or more AWFUL things opposed to all the bad things, we would run out of people to stand outside and protest. Also, Abortions are also done in hospitals...and you don't see people protesting hospitals do you? While you stand there wasting your time and mine, you could be out feeding the homeless, visiting prisoners, doing charity work...or many other USEFUL PRODUCTIVE things. You can pray about the act of abortition and how you wish more people would stop...and thats great and I'm cool with that. But...don't sit there with a video camera out there protesting when probably half of the people out there are doing it for THEIR OWN SELF rather than for the cause of others.

Just my two cents...agree or disagree with it...I really don't care. As a Christian, I just wish those people would find something more productive to do with their time...just like people protesting the "DaVinci Code" Movie...give me a break...

Clark Saunders "07

Dude, if you're going to protest, count me in. These hypocrites need to stop butting into other people's lifes. Live and let live. (nobody turn that quote into a "live begins at conception" argument-its a dumb point).

Originally posted by

Chris P

Well lets take this all one step further for the pro-life group. Since you insist that a baby is a person at conception. Then any mother who drinks wine at the catholic church during communion a day after conception must be tried in our judicial system for attempted murder.

Once again, give me a break. Let me belive in what I want to belive in, and quit trying to push your views on me. I am going to start going down to the local church and start pushing pregnancy tests on EVERY woman before communion to make sure they are not trying to kill their little one.

Oh yeah, Baptists think alchohol is the devil drink, so they must be trying to kill the baby.

There are different points of views, and the only one pro life can agree on is to try pressure more people to follow their views. I am no sheep and I will not be swayed by my own personal opinion. Nor am I trying to say that abortion is right. Actually I think it is wrong. BUT I think it is the RIGHT of the Mother (and Father aka parent not GOD) to make that decision.

On another note. I have seen those signs at churches about 1800abortion or something. That says abortion does not just affect you, it affects your baby also.. I guess these people are so short sighted to not even consider the dad as being affected.

Let me rephrase my comment so you understand it.
I would not ask my wife to have an abortion, and I married a woman who felt the same way. I don't know if I could live with the what-ifs. But it is not MY Decision to decide what someone ELSE does.

Quite frankly, I don't think life begins until a baby can survive on its own, or with the help of medical assistance by way of pre-me. I don't expect you to have the same idea on when life begins, but don't tell me that my concept of when life begins is wrong, because it won't change my mind and I will ignore your concept as you ignore mine.

Being Pro Choice does not mean you accept abortion, nor does it mean you condone it. It means you allow the parents to interpret when life begins, and make choices accordingly.

If you want to go with the brain waves and heart beat, go ahead perform an emergency c-section and tell me if a 10 week old fetus can survive? The answer is NO. And for your informaion we "KILL" people in the hospital all the time, why are you not protesting all the people that pull the "PLUG" on all the coma patients. They have heart beats, and possibly some brain activity, but are for the most part comatose. Actually, have they proved that a 10 week old fetus has brain activity? I am just wondering how they hook the sensors up to its head? Please provide me with some scientific proof on this.

If you want to keep suggesting at coneception is murder, then any woman who has a drink, smokes, or does anything to endanger the fetus should be put in jail for child endangerment charges... PERIOD!

Your comment on if I am prochoice I am proabortion is insane. I think I spelled out how I can be prochoice and personally feel that abortion is wrong. Actually I think abortion (FOR ME) is wrong, but if you think you can have an abortion or need one go ahead, but the death penalty, and pulling the plug is fine.. How about that? I don't see it as murder, I see it more like smoking cigarettes. I would not subject myself to smoking, but if someone else wants to smoke, go ahead.

Originally posted by

Ashleigh

Okay, again isnt murder against the law? So you think abortion is wrong, but its up to the parents to decide to murder their baby? If your prochoice your proabortion, period. If you think its wrong, then you agree with the fact that it is murdering a baby which is against the law. You must not discriminate whether a person has rights determined on its location, correct? And I don't believe anyone disagreed with my statement that after 40 days a fetus is a person. That is if we use the same definition, given by law of what death is --no heartbeat or brainwaves-- correct. So please explain to me, how you justify abortion? So a mother (and father) can live as they wish? I guess our society really created this thought of mind, if you have a problem, you kill it, or lie about it, or deny it... and its alright. I believe when you take someone else's life, you've gone too far.

And as for the race issue, as a white female, yes I am going to bring it into the picture. How in the world can you think that planned parenthoods intentions are okay? I refuse to support any racist organization... that openly want to abort black babies. Look up the documents of the founding of Planned Parenthood--- they are White Supremeist. It was wrong then, it is wrong now. I'm bringing attention to something that is never brought up in the media, the past and present racist nature of Planned Parenthood. If A&M made comments such as these, it would be everywhere. I don't believe it's right that these things are not covered.

Your mother loved you and was willing to put her life in a tough situation to raise you. Congratulations.

You need to realize that not everybody is willing to do this. This is not a fake world where everything goes the way we wish it did. Thats the actual problem here. Pro-lifers see this life with a big smile and pretend everything is fine and dandy. I personally see the reality and see that there are women who are not fit to raise children. At the end it was your mothers choice not to abort you, she faced hardships but she had the determination to do it. There are people out there who don't have that determination or will. You say your mother does not regret having you. There are mothers who do. Is it sad? Of course, but the fact is that they are there. You can't just close your eyes and say they aren't. Why do you want to force a child into that type of unwelcoming environment?

I understand that there are parents who wish they could have there own but can't and are more than willing to adopt. That is an amazing thing to do. Unfortunately, there aren't enough of them. If there were, there would be no need for foster homes.

Just because the woman has the choice does not mean she is going to have an abortion. Your mother is a great example. Please take the vail off your eyes and see that not everybody's situation and opinion is the same. There no reason to FORCE a certain thing upon everybody because you personally disagree with it. Leave it up to each individual.

If you don't like abortions, don't have one. If you want them to become illegal, then gather each child who is born from a parent who doesn't want them and raise them on your own. THEN you will have the authority to say that they will be loved in this world.

Originally posted by

Ashleigh

I cant believe you compared smoking to abortion. Smoking is hurting one's own body, abortion is hurting your own and killing a fetus. Yes they have proved that a fetus has brain waves at 40 days. I can provide you names of books and such that show the documentation of the growth of a fetus. If you believe that a person doesnt become a person until it can survive on its own. Then thats at 23 weeks and about 40 percent of abortions happen after that. So should that be legal? So is that what defines a person " surviving on ones own." So someone hooked up to life support is no longer a "person." I'm confused? I think there are some really hard questions to answer, but until we can definately define what a person is, when one becomes a person, and at what point is abortion murder. Then as I said before we should protect life until you can prove otherwise.

And for your information, I think that euthanasia and the death penalty are both equally as awful as abortion. I protest both of those as well, I believe no one should take another's life, because as again what I said before one can do what one wishes with their body until the point they hurt another.

And being Prochoice on abortion is being proabortion. It means you think its okay for other people to kill their babies.

I was born when my mother was 15, does that mean because she was pregnant, unmarried and I would interfere with her future. You would have been okay, if she would have choosen to murder me? Does my life mean less than yours. I don't believe it does. Even though my mother faced difficult circumstances, I know she would not regret having me for the world. Yes it was hard financially when I was growing up, but would I rather be dead. Hell no!

Asleigh, we now have a common ground we can agree on. The adoption and foster systems in this country are bad. I also agree on proper sex education, access to birth control, and proper health insurance in this country. If people on either side would just come to terms on this and work towards a better future, I would be pro-life.

Abortion is a terrible situation, and I really don't want to seem like life is a terrible experience. However, at the present moment, only the woman (and man if appropriate) has the ability to say what is in the immediate best interest of that child. Until she is offered an absolute best alternative (i.e. there will be always be parents waiting for the child prior to the birth instead of being sent directly to a foster home after birth in hopes of finding a suitable parent) it is best to allow that person to make her own choice. Until we get to the point where abortion is not a necessary alternative, abortion should still be a choice.

Originally posted by

Ashleigh

Actually there enough willing individuals in this world to adopt or foster a kid, which i understand is not always a good situation. Too many couples are going to China, Eastern Europe, and Russia to adopt and not adopting from the United States. Our adoption policies make it incredibly hard and long adoption process. I believe that these policies need to be revamped so there aren't as many kids in foster homes. Foster homes are an issue in themselves, although they are a great idea and sometimes they have awesome results. Sometimes they have awful results and can screw up a child, I wish I knew the answer to this. But I have no suggestions on this as I'm not an expert. It does need to changed as well, and foster homes must be under stricter regulations. However, no matter how bad of situation anyone is in I think they would have rather lived is what I'm saying.
babies have been aborted, it is the largest genocide of any kind. Abortion is the most popular surgery preformed on adult human beings. 1 in every 4 pregnancies end in abortion. These stats are absolutely mind boggling. Abortion can be prevented by proper sex education, access to birth control, and proper health insurance in this country. There are plenty of free clinics around, Hope Pregnancy here in BCS offers the same services as Planned parenthood but at free or reduced rates. Planned Parenthood jacks up all their prices in order to subsidize abortion. Anyways, bottom line is abortion is murder. It does not matter where a person is they should not be discriminated on location whether they have the right to live. All human beings have the right to live whether they be on life support, in jail or in the womb. The Constitution states that all Americans have the right to live, therefore euthanasia, the death penalty and abortion all do not follow the laws that our founding fathers set for us. But I guess nothing our country does now days follows the Constitution from war without proper cause, the Patriot Act, red light cameras, etc... It's quite a dpressing state we are in...

I'd been waiting for you to do. You have been outright fibbing about your information or you've been handed a bucket of crap. You posted earlier how profitable abortions are for these clinics (without proper citings by the way) and now in this article you just said they jack up the price of everything else to subsidize abortions. Which is it? Actually don't answer the fact of the matter is either one or both are propoganda and not supported by an facts that you personally have evidence of. Please don't espouse what you want the truth to be as fact. Aggies don't lie, cheat, steal or tolerate those who do! Intentionally misrepresenting statistics or representing information as fact with out any knowledge as to the truth of the matter is a LIE. Don't put your own integrity on the line just to make a point, its not worth it.

Originally posted by

Ashleigh

Actually there enough willing individuals in this world to adopt or foster a kid, which i understand is not always a good situation. Too many couples are going to China, Eastern Europe, and Russia to adopt and not adopting from the United States. Our adoption policies make it incredibly hard and long adoption process. I believe that these policies need to be revamped so there aren't as many kids in foster homes. Foster homes are an issue in themselves, although they are a great idea and sometimes they have awesome results. Sometimes they have awful results and can screw up a child, I wish I knew the answer to this. But I have no suggestions on this as I'm not an expert. It does need to changed as well, and foster homes must be under stricter regulations. However, no matter how bad of situation anyone is in I think they would have rather lived is what I'm saying.
babies have been aborted, it is the largest genocide of any kind. Abortion is the most popular surgery preformed on adult human beings. 1 in every 4 pregnancies end in abortion. These stats are absolutely mind boggling. Abortion can be prevented by proper sex education, access to birth control, and proper health insurance in this country. There are plenty of free clinics around, Hope Pregnancy here in BCS offers the same services as Planned parenthood but at free or reduced rates. Planned Parenthood jacks up all their prices in order to subsidize abortion. Anyways, bottom line is abortion is murder. It does not matter where a person is they should not be discriminated on location whether they have the right to live. All human beings have the right to live whether they be on life support, in jail or in the womb. The Constitution states that all Americans have the right to live, therefore euthanasia, the death penalty and abortion all do not follow the laws that our founding fathers set for us. But I guess nothing our country does now days follows the Constitution from war without proper cause, the Patriot Act, red light cameras, etc... It's quite a dpressing state we are in...