Abortion still under control in Poland

if it was only about her body, we wouldn't have this discussion, berni.
It's about the body inside of her body, we're talking about.

So if i eat a chicken you get to decide over me. ;)
Or is this just some overlord notion of you guys?

bernie123,It's not like people trying to say that you shouldn't get a tattoo or that you must be married.It's not like getting involved with something that's so trivial or coming from that kind of moral stance.

are you comparing eating a chicken with killing an unborn child?

Hmm, maybe we are wasting our time trying to discuss it, berni

Surely anyone who eats eggs and is against abortions is a hypocrite...

Let's say, Marek ( just an example) is a human being and eats chicken eggs and because he's against abortion, he's a hypocrite, right? Hmm, I hope you're laughing with me right now, LOL

What are you talking about?!! I barely understand this ... they would have to be fertilised eggs, wouldn't they? And sorry to say it, but yes, I would value the life of my child over that of a baby chicken, I would.

Anyhow, that would also mean that anyone who eats born chickens is also a hypocrite, because that is also killing something. But this is a bad parallel, and it trivialises the real matter.

So, your happy to kill and eat other living things (you carnivorous murderer!) just because you're peckish, but would deny a woman her right to an abortion? How hypocritical...

<_<

derp?

I will, if required, shout in the streets my right to SLAY (not murder-Im EATING it) a fellow biological non human and EAT it! be it carrot, fish , fowl or beast.

So, are you gonna start on how Lions and other obligate carnivores should be vegan? what of the life that is in the trees that sustain us? The vegetation we eat. So next is pills of fake nutrients that we shall take until we sicken , die and go extinct ? 0 _0. I mean that is where that logic ends at ya know

Was that really the best argument that could be found?

Would I consider an egg "life"? Certainly. But I can easily announce my intent to remove life from something and give the motivation..its material is my sustanence. It is biological imperative that I process it's life to extend my own. Abortion does not fit that category in 80% ? of cases? Motivation for those is: Oops! Must kill for Convenience/quality of consumer lifestyle.

Hardly comparable I would think.
When candy coating of dehumanizing words is removed..abortion is killing a life. No matter if the decision is legalized or not.. approved of or not.

The biggest question is does the mother have the right to take this life out of the world, specially when a majority think one shouldnt remove the life of the most sick and degenrate criminal murderer and instead reap the taxes needed to sustain him. Personally I'd feel better with emptier prisons via death penalty (yes KILLING..but not an innocent new life. Or just consider it- RETROACTIVE ABORTION) and those funds going to Orphanages that actually have tools to RAISE children and FIND them foster families if not permanent love.

Murder is a very personal decision. I cannot make anyone do what I think is right. I just don't want my taxes paying for it.

You just said that you are a: 'biological non human'! Lol:D
Basically, you said it's ok to kill something as long as you eat it.


- so is eating meat. At least the mother doesn't eat the foetus you sick non-human!

*sigh* "fellow biologicals , non-humans". Yes punctuation is important and I didn't catch it..and you did. bravo. Have a trophy. Everybody gets trophies here..even losers.

But it does not change you are really trolly and your argument logic still couldn't win in a Junior High School debate.

To actually be more clear I should have put "fellow biologicals "And Non human in separate sentence. My fault for lazy grammar I suppose. But I didn't realize that I was in junior high again and would get argument and giggling from pounced on single phrase.

Rysavy,I was just getting ready to fry some eggs,but now I'm not so sure.....LOL.Gee;some of the stuff I've heard on this thread lol :).

My argument and logic would destroy yours in any debate. Yes, unfortunately your grammar is very much like your argument, weak and flawed:D

The big question for me as a spiritualist is: does life = a soul?

As in once the life has been triggered has the person who will be allocated that body been inserted - trans warped - born - manifested - introduced. I don't think a word exists to explain what im trying to say but i think you get the idea.

yes it does, and I think the soul exists before coming into the body. So I had a sense of my daughter's presence before she was even conceived. Sounds crazy and you will all just say I am stupid, etc, but I felt it, in the same way that you can feel people after they have died. But it was weird, as it was before she was conceived. She was conceived about a month after that. So you can see why I think abortion is off-limits ...

I guess that settles it.
Oh and btw, how would you have felt, when the state or some weirdos would have forced you to abort, because of their believes?

Thats what i believe, so if the fetus was to result in a spontaneous miscarriage or an abortion the soul would be inserted into another suitable unborn.

...so now we're making conclusions based on unsubstantiated assumptions?

Look, I believe that there is a god and everything is a part of god and that much of existence is just beyond our ability to really grasp but I've NOTHING to back this up.So with regards to when one "gets" a soul (or maybe that should be when a soul gets put here?) or what happens to souls etc, etc, etc, what's wrong with simply saying "we don't know?" Because really, we don't know.

Well, I feel I was forced into it, by the 'convenience / choice / woman's rights over her body / career before motherhood' etc. beliefs of our country, so yes, I do feel astoundingly angry and wronged. But I have learnt to just pocket that somewhere deep inside me now, because it isn't possible to live properly and dwell on something like that.


No, I don't think we are ... I think I was just saying what I thought, as were others, but as you say, it is such a nebulous area that we can't possibly draw any conclusions other than that maybe we don't know everything.


I couldn't go so far as to say that, but I do know that in my opinion, I knew as soon as conception occurred ... it was an extraordinary feeling, and conviction. And I had a vision of her having jumped into her physical self - a bit like jumping on a ski lift. She had made the leap, landed sure-footedly and was now getting on with it.

Of course others will now laugh, mock, say that is all fantastical rubbish ... but I don't care at all, because I have no doubt about what I felt. If you are walking along and bump into a lamp post, you don't doubt that. I feel as certain about this.

But I know I have to stop giving my 'personal' experiences, because they are also dismissed - so I guess let's go to that whole huge body of work & discussion called Catholicisim, or Christianity, or Buddhism, or Islam, or whichever religion you choose ... they all talk about the soul, as far as I know. Hindusim. Reincarnation. It's all there. I am no expert at all, but my experience would suggest to me there is something in it.

me too natasia

That's good : ) Thanks for saying so - otherwise it would just be my 'experience' and not a proven 'fact' ; ) ... but if it happened to you, too ... : )

Yup looks like it, this topic was always going to head in that directoin at some point.


we dont know, but i choose to believe it, well not even believe - its really more of a 'one rational thought' that ive had amongst many unrational occurances which happen in this existance.

Oujia borads, yes ouija boards are not rationally explainable, but i have a firm opinion on how they work, but 'we dont truly know'.

The thing with unrational thoughts and observations is that they can be easily rationalised when one looks up into the sky, providing its not cloudy all rationality goes out the window the minute you look up and wonder. Science can only take us so far for the momnet - so what are we left with?

Natasia,I don't think that your story is rubbish and I won't ridicule you for it either.I can understand how this has helped strengthen your stance on abortion.

Honest self reflection would be nice.

What I've often found is:
-People need to believe they know what's best for everyone else in order to convince themselves they know what's best for themselves.
-People like to say how others should live but do as little as possible to actually live up to their demands for others.
-People who shout about the sins of abortion and the absolute nature of it generally fail to contribute to those in society who are or were closest to the issue- "don't get an abortion and fcuk off after you don't get one cause I ain't got the time or money to help raise your little bastards."

They just can't imagine a world in which an abortion is the more attractive choice to the would be mother. There are people out there who don't have family support, don't have a good job or the prospects of one and like it or not are in a position in life that will see them struggle to ever be anything but living on the edge. Many people here can't imagine a life that is nothing but a struggle because they've never struggled.

There was a case, many years ago, the guy's name is Robert Latimer and he killed his daughter.
Many people argue it was out of compassion- i.e. the most compassionate thing he could do was just end her suffering. Some people, they see nothing but suffering ahead and so they decide it's best stop it before it starts. Who are we to tell them any different if we're not helping them out?

.......anyway, there are some people who walk their talk and they are admirable.

so true Foreigner4, it's a same with a mother to be who convinces herself that the best thing for an unborn child is its death.

well, if anyone would know, it would be her. However we're not talking about mothers here, we're talking about women who are pregnant...unless everyone now refers to pregnant women as mothers. Sorry if I missed out on that one.

I think i understand what you're trying to say but i don't understand why you are saying it.

Yeah, I suppose that may look to be an odd angle on which to approach the subject of the thread, I'm really tired right now and a bit delirious but here goes:

Pointing out the hypocrisy of a group is fundamental to undermining their message and/or inviting members of a group to right their course.
If there is no hypocrisy then at least there's consistency and with consistency there's conviction. I know, I know, there's a caveat to that and lots of foul people have had the conviction necessary to do pretty nasty things. Nonetheless if someone is preaching about moral goodness then they're actions better be in line with their message.

If members of a group claim one thing but then act out of accordance with their demands then, I find it difficult to adopt their views and suggest others come to similar conclusions.

If this makes no sense to you then let me know and I'll respond in a couple days after I hibernate.


I realize what I wrote.


It wasn't that.
I stated a would be mother has a better perspective on her future and what life may or may not hold for her fetus than you do...that clear enough for you?

bernie23, thanks... sometimes I wonder what the point is in writing anything to people when they can't make it through one line of text without getting lost.

what about her child's future? Why not give it a chance to enjoy life, like we all do (more or less, anyway)?


it will be certainly a child if it won't be aborted, period!

No one is talking about her child except you. I believe my response below made that clear.


Not all people enjoy life- you should be thankful that you cannot comprehend that.
Because I cannot pretend to know another's situation better than they do, I would not be arguing for her to do or not to do anything except make the decision she feels is best.


Incorrect. Miscarriages are real facts of life. Infant mortality rates exist not because of imagination but because babies do die before becoming children.