So, let's talk about that new abortion law...

[BADecker]

If you just have to abort, do it the right way... suicide.


When a child is conceived, it is a sacred trust between a man and a woman.

Clearly you're all on the "good" side of moral here.

Telling a woman to suicide rather than to abort...

I guess that rape childe are also the " sacred trust between a man and a woman " Badecker. Obviously.

But rape isn't the thing we are really talking about.

If a woman kills somebody, she should be executed just like anyone else... for murder. The suicide idea is simply the way she should murder her child if she is going to do it at all.

The rapist should be executed whether or not there is an abortion. A smart person will make a signed agreement with the prostitute/slut so that he will have to pay rather than die.

[1715290562]

1715290562

[1715290562]

1715290562

[mOgliE]

But rape isn't the thing we are really talking about.

You're making generalisations hence including all cases.

No abortion in case of rape?
No abortion in case of important health risk for the mother?
No abortion in case of definitive and important physical/mental/genetic malformation of the baby?

[BADecker]

Your claim that babies are not human is laughable and not supportable on any biological or scientific grounds.

Little dolphins or baby elephants are not fully grown either but pointing to a baby elephant and insisting it’s not an elephant is idiocy.

So there is no difference for you between the growth of a baby elephant and a human baby?
And you're the one talking about scientific ground?

The only thing that makes human fully different from animals is self consciousness and the ability to conceive the world outside as a different part from us. Cogito ergo sum.
This is an ability acquired by everyone around the age of 1. Until then, what's the difference between a baby and a dog? You're going to talk about the soul?

Give me one element, just one, that make a human different from an animal and that is developped in a 5 months old and I'll withdraw my claim as you will have brought to my attention an objective element.

Until now all you've done is said how "morally wrong" it is.

Great but your moral means nothing to me.

The difference is that elephants don't abort people. If they did, they should be put to death for murder, just like if they killed any human, or just like any human should for killing another human.

You only have the belief that humans are simply greater animals. There is much evidence that humans have a soul. Your religion that they don't is just another religion.

The evidence is the religions throughout the world. Science has only made some of us THINK that we are superior enough to be able to get out of being religious. Science is blinding us to the reality that we are religious. Science has become our religion when it so blinds us.

[BADecker]

But rape isn't the thing we are really talking about.

You're making generalisations hence including all cases.

No abortion in case of rape?
No abortion in case of important health risk for the mother?
No abortion in case of definitive and important physical/mental/genetic malformation of the baby?

The only time there should be abortion is when it is medically certain that the mother's life is endangered by the birth. Most of these cases, there can be cesareans done to save both mother and child. There is such a thing as adoption if the mother doesn't want the child.

Let death come naturally or by accident - as it does for all of us in old age, if we aren't killed in a car or plane accident first - not by murder. Not by abortion murder.

[Tamilson]

You're making generalisations hence including all cases.
No abortion in case of rape?

I disagree, I guess even a rape victim won't abort the baby if she really have the heart, regardless of what had happened to the mother it's still unjust to kill the baby and don't let him live and isn't his fault, anyway. Just let the baby live.

No abortion in case of important health risk for the mother?
No abortion in case of definitive and important physical/mental/genetic malformation of the baby?

Of course, this will be case to case basis and as what baddecker said, it's medical circumstance.

[darklus123]

I will only support abortion in rare cases and when it is highly needed. It is because there is exactly some random situations in which we feel the need to do it. An example that is in my mind is when the mother and child are both in danger during pregnancy and the only last resort is to give up the unborn baby.

Now when we do talk about fvcking without thinking that being pregnant is really going to happen wil be the fvcking reason to abort a child is just fully bullsh*t. Not because you were given a feedom to decide it makes you right or not being liable for it. That is why we have laws to follow 

[coolcoinz]

I'm against the law and authority telling people what to do with their own bodies, therefore I believe abortion should be legal, just like suicide is. It shouldn't be morally accepted though, and a young woman who gets pregnant and decides to kill the child, because she still wants to have fun, should be treated like human trash and shunned by the society. Every action has consequences. If you murder someone, don't expect a kind word and a pat on the back.
I'm against abortion morally, and wouldn't agree if my woman wanted to do it (unless the pregnancy would endanger her life, or the child was brain dead), but I wouldn't stop someone else from doing it. It's their choice and their life.

[TECSHARE]

I'm against the law and authority telling people what to do with their own bodies, therefore I believe abortion should be legal, just like suicide is. It shouldn't be morally accepted though, and a young woman who gets pregnant and decides to kill the child, because she still wants to have fun, should be treated like human trash and shunned by the society. Every action has consequences. If you murder someone, don't expect a kind word and a pat on the back.
I'm against abortion morally, and wouldn't agree if my woman wanted to do it (unless the pregnancy would endanger her life, or the child was brain dead), but I wouldn't stop someone else from doing it. It's their choice and their life.

Yeah but what about the NEW abortion laws this whole thread is about?

[KingScorpio]

since women are being forced upon all social responsibility of what comes out of their stomach they should be able to decide that themselves.

[TECSHARE]

So does anyone have anything to say about THE NEW ABORTION LAWS WHICH ARE THE ACTUAL TOPIC of discussion?

[KingScorpio]

So does anyone have anything to say about THE NEW ABORTION LAWS WHICH ARE THE ACTUAL TOPIC of discussion?

which abortion law? which country?

my oppinion is fixed, the problem is that women have to carry the financial burden of raising children, if thats the case they should have freedom to do an abortion

[TECSHARE]

So does anyone have anything to say about THE NEW ABORTION LAWS WHICH ARE THE ACTUAL TOPIC of discussion?

which abortion law? which country?

my oppinion is fixed, the problem is that women have to carry the financial burden of raising children, if thats the case they should have freedom to do an abortion

If only there was a convenient thread filled with discussion you could read to answer all of your questions...

[coolcoinz]

Yeah but what about the NEW abortion laws this whole thread is about?

Completely no difference, my point still stands. If someone wants to do it, it's not up to the government to stop them. I wouldn't do it for moral reasons, regardless of the age, although, like I said, if the life of the woman was on the line I wouldn't think twice. The life of the mother should always come before the life of an unborn child, regardless of the stage of development it is in.
And what if the child is disabled and fully developed, you might ask? I'd say it's up to the doctor. They were taught not to do harm and they should be able to refuse to abort a developed pregnancy if they see that it's more of a mother's fancy than a necessity.

[KingScorpio]

So does anyone have anything to say about THE NEW ABORTION LAWS WHICH ARE THE ACTUAL TOPIC of discussion?

which abortion law? which country?

my oppinion is fixed, the problem is that women have to carry the financial burden of raising children, if thats the case they should have freedom to do an abortion

If only there was a convenient thread filled with discussion you could read to answer all of your questions...

this topic started in a way that it is not clear what the legislation is.

[TECSHARE]

Just go away if you aren't going to bother reading the thread or commenting on its actual subject matter.

[KingScorpio]

Just go away if you aren't going to bother reading the thread or commenting on its actual subject matter.

if you want people to respond to your "topic" then write it appropriately, i cant see anywhere which court in which country decided what exactly.

i just asked a simple question which court in which country. and you didnt bothered to answer a simply question, meaning for me you are just rambling with your thread.

when you discuss laws, and legislation write in first sentences

court name, country name, date, decision etc.

thats how discussions about laws always are being held.

[TECSHARE]

Just go away if you aren't going to bother reading the thread or commenting on its actual subject matter.

if you want people to respond to your "topic" then write it appropriately, i cant see anywhere which court in which country decided what exactly.

i just asked a simple question which court in which country. and you didnt bothered to answer a simply question, meaning for me you are just rambling with your thread.

when you discuss laws, and legislation write in first sentences

court name, country name, date, decision etc.

thats how discussions about laws always are being held.

I am very sorry you are too stupid/lazy to read what is already there.

[KingScorpio]

Just go away if you aren't going to bother reading the thread or commenting on its actual subject matter.

if you want people to respond to your "topic" then write it appropriately, i cant see anywhere which court in which country decided what exactly.

i just asked a simple question which court in which country. and you didnt bothered to answer a simply question, meaning for me you are just rambling with your thread.

when you discuss laws, and legislation write in first sentences

court name, country name, date, decision etc.

thats how discussions about laws always are being held.

I am very sorry you are too stupid/lazy to read what is already there.

you should be sorry that you are to stupid to write text according to priority, so people can use your "text" efficiently.

you are here in an international forum, where people from all over the world meet, you have to point out which court even in the headline of this topic, which you didnt.

you have enoguh space in your text in your headline to actually add a countryname or cityname to it. so the audience knows what you are talking about.

but you didnt this looks to me more like a sign of arrogance as if everyone is supposed to care about "your" abortion law.

[TECSHARE]

Just go away if you aren't going to bother reading the thread or commenting on its actual subject matter.

if you want people to respond to your "topic" then write it appropriately, i cant see anywhere which court in which country decided what exactly.

i just asked a simple question which court in which country. and you didnt bothered to answer a simply question, meaning for me you are just rambling with your thread.

when you discuss laws, and legislation write in first sentences

court name, country name, date, decision etc.

thats how discussions about laws always are being held.

I am very sorry you are too stupid/lazy to read what is already there.

you should be sorry that you are to stupid to write text according to priority, so people can use your "text" efficiently.

you are here in an international forum, where people from all over the world meet, you have to point out which court even in the headline of this topic, which you didnt.

you have enoguh space in your text in your headline to actually add a countryname or cityname to it. so the audience knows what you are talking about.

but you didnt this looks to me more like a sign of arrogance as if everyone is supposed to care about "your" abortion law.

Yep, I am arrogant for expecting you to reply to the topic of the thread located in the title. Not my thread BTW, but you are smart, you know that already right? I guess it is my fault you didn't bother reading the thread which is literally about "my" abortion law, which you came here to post about not even bothering to read the thread. It is arrogant of me to expect you to discuss the topic of the thread. Lets talk about the rare endangered narwhal instead.

[KingScorpio]

Just go away if you aren't going to bother reading the thread or commenting on its actual subject matter.

if you want people to respond to your "topic" then write it appropriately, i cant see anywhere which court in which country decided what exactly.

i just asked a simple question which court in which country. and you didnt bothered to answer a simply question, meaning for me you are just rambling with your thread.

when you discuss laws, and legislation write in first sentences

court name, country name, date, decision etc.

thats how discussions about laws always are being held.

I am very sorry you are too stupid/lazy to read what is already there.

you should be sorry that you are to stupid to write text according to priority, so people can use your "text" efficiently.

you are here in an international forum, where people from all over the world meet, you have to point out which court even in the headline of this topic, which you didnt.

you have enoguh space in your text in your headline to actually add a countryname or cityname to it. so the audience knows what you are talking about.

but you didnt this looks to me more like a sign of arrogance as if everyone is supposed to care about "your" abortion law.

Yep, I am arrogant for expecting you to reply to the topic of the thread located in the title. Not my thread BTW, but you are smart, you know that already right? I guess it is my fault you didn't bother reading the thread which is literally about "my" abortion law, which you came here to post about not even bothering to read the thread. It is arrogant of me to expect you to discuss the topic of the thread. Lets talk about the rare endangered narwhal instead.

country of that law into the title!

learn to use language so its useful and helpful not confusing.

and time+ressources draining

for example

So, let's talk about that new abortion law from france