Pro-choice

[LiberalNation]

"If you can't trust me w ith a choice then how can you trust me with a child." That is what some women are saying about abortion. A woman's right to choose (pro choice) or not to have the choice (pro life) is a very controversial issue in this country right now. The country is divided. What do you think? I believe that abortion should be a legally protected right of women in the U.S.
The choice to have an abortion should be available to a woman who has neither the means nor the education to support herself, let alone a child. Poverty, crime, drug abuse, child abuse, and alcohol abuse are at a higher rate with teenage mothers than any other part of the population. Is that a good thing? No. For those people that believe in Pro life think about this possible situation. Abortion becomes illegal and a teenager becomes pregnant. She abuses drugs and alcohol while she's pregnant. When the baby is born it is addicted to drugs that the mother abused while she was pregnant and is born with fetal alcohol syndrome. The baby must suffer the consequences for the rest of it's life. As if this is not tragic enough we cannot forget the cost to society for not only providing the basic needs for this child but also the enourmous amount of medical care that the child will also need. Is it better for the embryo not to be born at all or for the child to go through that situation. Most women have an abortion because they know they could not support a child. They are being smart by making that decision.
Outlawing abortion will not eliminate the practice. Women that will want an abortion badly enough, will find a way to get one. Most likely when these procedures are done illegally, they will be done in unsafe and unsanitary conditions. Here's another situation. Abortion is made illegal and a woman gets pregnant. She cannot have an abortion legally anymore so she finds a "doctor" that says they know how to perform the procedure. They perform the abortion in unsafe and unsanitary conditions. The woman gets extremely sick with an infection. The cause of the infection, an abortion that was not performed correctly. This would not be better than a woman having a safe abortion legally.
I certainly agree that both sides have a valid argument. However as shown, the consequences of changing the law would be far too severe, than keeping the law the way it is now. ....................

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Pro-choice/Archive_1

[LiberalNation]

Pro-choice describes the political and ethical view that a woman should have control over her fertility and the choice to continue or terminate a pregnancy. This entails the guarantee of reproductive rights, which includes access to sexual education; access to safe and legal abortion, contraception, and fertility treatments; and legal protection from forced abortion. Individuals and organizations who support these positions make up the pro-choice movement.

On the issue of abortion, pro-choice campaigners are opposed by pro-life campaigners who generally argue in terms of fetal rights rather than reproductive rights.

Pro-choice advocates argue whether or not to continue with a pregnancy is an inviolable personal choice, as it involves a woman's body, personal health, and future. They believe that both parents' and children's lives are better when abortions are legal, thus preventing women from going to desperate lengths to obtain illegal abortions. More broadly, pro-choice advocates frame their beliefs in terms of individual liberty, reproductive freedom, and reproductive rights. The first of these terms was widely used to describe many of the political movements of the 19th and 20th centuries (such as in the abolition of slavery in Europe and the United States, and in the spread of popular democracy) whereas the latter terms derive from changing perspectives on sexual freedom and bodily integrity.

Pro-choice individuals often do not consider themselves "pro-abortion" because they consider abortion an issue of bodily autonomy, and find forced abortion to be as legally indefensible as the outlawing of abortion. Indeed, some who are pro-choice consider themselves opposed to some or all abortions on a moral basis, but believe that abortion bans imperil women's health. Others have a practical acceptance of abortion, arguing that abortions would happen in any case but that legal abortion under medically controlled conditions is preferable to illegal back-alley abortion without proper medical supervision.

Some who argue from a philosophical viewpoint believe that an embryo has no rights as it is only a potential and not an actual person and that it should not have rights that override those of the pregnant woman until it is viable.[1]

Pro-choice supporters frequently oppose legislative measures that would require abortion providers to make certain statements (some of which are factually disputed) to patients, because they argue that these measures are intended to make obtaining abortions more difficult. These measures fall under the rubric of abortion-specific "informed consent" or "right to know" laws.[2]

Many pro-choice campaigners also argue that anti-abortion policies would deny women access to comprehensive sex education and contraception, thus increasing, not decreasing, demand for abortion.[3] Proponents of this argument point to cases of areas with limited sex education and contraceptive access that have high abortion rates, either legal, illegal or de facto exported (i.e., where a high proportion of abortions from a state occur outside that state in another country with a more liberal abortion regime). Irish women who visit the United Kingdom for abortions are one example, as were the Belgian women who travelled to France (before Belgium legalized abortion).

Some people who are pro-choice see abortion as a last resort and focus on a number of situations where they feel abortion is a necessary option. Among these situations are those where the woman was raped, her health or life (or that of the fetus) is at risk, contraception was used but failed, or she feels unable to raise a child. Some pro-choice moderates, who would otherwise be willing to accept certain restrictions on abortion, feel that political pragmatism compels them to oppose any such restrictions, as they could be used to form a slippery slope against all abortions.[4]

[KarlMarx]

L.N.

In my opinion, abortion is not a right. The jurists who decided Roe vs. Wade used every trick in the book to arrive at a predetermined decision. I won't go into the moral implications of abortion instead, I'll ask you a couple of questions.

1. The Constitution states, very clearly, that no person shall be deprived of freedom, property or life without the due process of law. That means that you can't be fined, executed or thrown in prison without first having a trial. Tell me just how aborting a baby, who is a person, *not* depriving it of life without due process of law?

2. You probably didn't know this but abortion *was* legal in certain states before the 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision. In fact New York, the state in which I live, allowed abortion as early as 1970. The reason was that it was decided by the voters of this state. What abortion activists won't tell you is that the 10th amendment of the Constitution allows for states to decide on issues like abortion. Roe vs Wade takes from voters the right to decide on abortion in their own state! In essence, Roe vs. Wade is not pro-choice in a sense. So, how does giving the right to terminate a life to a woman trump the rights of millions of voters in a state to decide on that right? A right, I'll repeat, that is clearly stated in the Constitution?

[darin]

More importantly...why are Fathers discriminated against? Fathers have ZERO reproductive rights.

I'd love to see a Congressman or woman with guts-enough to fight for Men's rights...

[PostmodernProphet]

in summary, this argument states, "you should let me kill the child because I am eventually going to kill it anyway"..........

[Monkeybone]

The choice to have an abortion should be available to a woman who has neither the means nor the education to support herself, let alone a child why doesn't she prevent the pregnancy in the first place? She wants to be lazy and not take measures to prevent it, gets knocked up and then decides to kill the baby? Yah... real mature there. Anything after that is mostly just selfish reasons (not all the time).

[BoogyMan]

There is no such thing as pro-choice. You are either pro-muder or you are not. In this case we find people being pro-muder of the most helpless and innocent among us.

Disgusting....

[LiberalNation]

fathers have the reproductive right to use a condom or keep it in their pants. They can't abort so their's your choice.

The fetus has not reached personhood, it is not self aware or a contributing member of society as of yet.

[pete311]

How many of you jack off or menstruate without conception? A sperm and egg have the potential to become a living being, why deny it that opportunity?

"Say you were kidnapped with chloroform and woke up in a van hooked up to another human's circulatory system (you are the dialysis machine). This person needs at least nine months of dialysis to live. Do you disconnect yourself from the person, killing this human, or do you wait it out nine months?"

[pete311]

The fetus has not reached personhood, it is not self aware or a contributing member of society as of yet.

Neither are new borns. Only babies from 6+ months can recognize themselves in the mirror.

[MtnBiker]

it is not self aware or a contributing member of society as of yet.

Wow, so life is contingent on being a contributing member of society? Hmmm, by whose standard? I'm sure there are multitudes of people that could fall under that category by some standards. That has to be the lamest argument for abortion, ever.

[Nukeman]

How many of you jack off or menstruate without conception? A sperm and egg have the potential to become a living being, why deny it that opportunity??"Your not comparing two similar things here. YOU are really not this stupid are you. A fertilized egg is on its way to becoming a full human person it is just a matter of time. By your reasoning anything that does not come into being in an instant must somehow NOT BE REAL.



"Say you were kidnapped with chloroform and woke up in a van hooked up to another human's circulatory system (you are the dialysis machine). This person needs at least nine months of dialysis to live. Do you disconnect yourself from the person, killing this human, or do you wait it out nine months
If it was a family member I would wait it out if I was kidnapped and forced to do it that is another issue entirely....


Neither are new borns. Only babies from 6+ months can recognize themselves in the mirror.

SO your saying we can abort/murder up to and including any child that has NOT reached the age of 6 months post gestation???? YOU are a real sad piece of shit........

[BoogyMan]

fathers have the reproductive right to use a condom or keep it in their pants. They can't abort so their's your choice.

The fetus has not reached personhood, it is not self aware or a contributing member of society as of yet.


Productive member of society yet? Are you kidding me? Is that what is required to stay alive? What happened to the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?

[SassyLady]

fathers have the reproductive right to use a condom or keep it in their pants. They can't abort so their's your choice.

The fetus has not reached personhood, it is not self aware or a contributing member of society as of yet.

Perhaps the fetus is not self-aware but I believe it is fully aware that it is dependent upon its mother to take care of it until it's able to breathe and function on its own. Do you think your responsibility as a mother only begins the minute the baby takes its first breath? That child is dependent on you feeding and protecting it for quite some time after it becomes "self-aware" so why should the first nine months be any different.

It is the mother's responsibility to start protecting and nurturing that child from the beginning ...... I would even argue prior to fertilization .... by preparing their bodies to be a healthy enviornment for the baby's development.

Too many people think of a baby (calling it a fetus is an attempt to dehumanize the fact that it is, in fact, a baby) as some sort of leech that attaches itself to a female for nine months and is, therefore, something alien.

Personally, I think abortion is the first step to condoning dehumanizing each other. After all, if we can kill babies it should easy to walk up to the child on the corner and put a bullet in their head because they are just standing there and not being productive members of society.

[PostmodernProphet]

How many of you jack off or menstruate without conception? A sperm and egg have the potential to become a living being, why deny it that opportunity?

"Say you were kidnapped with chloroform and woke up in a van hooked up to another human's circulatory system (you are the dialysis machine). This person needs at least nine months of dialysis to live. Do you disconnect yourself from the person, killing this human, or do you wait it out nine months?"

if you had studied a bit of biology you might be aware that there is a significant difference between a fetus and a sperm cell.....this particular argument underscores the total ignorance of the left on this issue.....

[PostmodernProphet]

"Say you were kidnapped with chloroform and woke up in a van hooked up to another human's circulatory system (you are the dialysis machine). This person needs at least nine months of dialysis to live. Do you disconnect yourself from the person, killing this human, or do you wait it out nine months?"

regardless of how you came to be this person's dialysis machine, do you have the right to kill her now that your connection is discovered?.....

[LiberalNation]

Wow, so life is contingent on being a contributing member of society? Hmmm, by whose standard? I'm sure there are multitudes of people that could fall under that category by some standards. That has to be the lamest argument for abortion, ever.

read some of Harrison’s articles, she makes the case quite well and before you trot out the vegetables they were once so we grandfather them in. Fetus, no, you also must have some ability or imminent ability to use language and communicate.

[SassyLady]

read some of Harrison’s articles, she makes the case quite well and before you trot out the vegetables they were once so we grandfather them in. Fetus, no, you also must have some ability or imminent ability to use language and communicate.

Libbs - under what circumstances would you, personally, abort a child?

[LiberalNation]

Uncurable disease or defect. I wouldn't want to know if it is a downs baby, too hard of a choice.

[SassyLady]

Uncurable disease or defect. I wouldn't want to know if it is a downs baby, too hard of a choice.

Do you think a child with a disease or a "defect" or has Downs is less of a human than a healthy child? Don't you feel just a little bit like Hitler when you start making those types of judgements about who lives and who dies?

[LiberalNation]

no reason to bring a child into this world to suffer and die and early death, some only live a few hours of pain with these disease. It is mercy to prevent it.

[BoogyMan]

no reason to bring a child into this world to suffer and die and early death, some only live a few hours of pain with these disease. It is mercy to prevent it.

No, it is hubris and MURDER.

[SassyLady]

no reason to bring a child into this world to suffer and die and early death, some only live a few hours of pain with these disease. It is mercy to prevent it.

So, in the name of mercy, you are advocating the murder of all humans who suffer a painful disease or defect..........or just those innocents that you would be responsible for taking care of?

Once again, you are beginning to sound a little like the Hitler regime ... exterminate anything that makes you uncomfortable.

[LiberalNation]

I advocate abortion in these cases and right to a dignified death in adults who choose that.

[LiberalNation]

Question, life of the mother does it trump baby in case of emergency. Who has rights when one must choose between one or the other and how is that not just like abortion. You took away it's life to save your own.

[SassyLady]

Question, life of the mother does it trump baby in case of emergency. Who has rights when one must choose between one or the other and how is that not just like abortion. You took away it's life to save your own.

No, I don't. I don't look away. There is a difference between actively seeking out to end a person's life for personal responsibility and inconvenience issues and the act of self defense.

[BoogyMan]

Question, life of the mother does it trump baby in case of emergency. Who has rights when one must choose between one or the other and how is that not just like abortion. You took away it's life to save your own.

Modern medical science has pretty much destroyed this particular argument.

[LiberalNation]

the mothers mental health is often at risk which is why she chooses abortion. She can't handle another child or a child right now. Better than leaving it in a trashcan to die after birth. A girl at a catholic school around here just did that, she didn't want to get kicked out of school so had it in a bathroom toilet and left it.


and not in the case of cancers and diabetes boogy. Sometimes mother needs treatment now.

[SassyLady]

the mothers mental health is often at risk which is why she chooses abortion. She can't handle another child or a child right now. Better than leaving it in a trashcan to die after birth. A girl at a catholic school around here just did that, she didn't want to get kicked out of school so had it in a bathroom toilet and left it.


and not in the case of cancers and diabetes boogy. Sometimes mother needs treatment now.

Then she should not be putting herself in a situtation that might result in another child........people need to take personal responsibility for the awesome power they have over another individual's right to life. If you feel you cannot take care of a child then don't have sex.

As for leaving it in a toilet .... that just screams about the decline of society .... that after carrying a child for months and then thinking it is a piece of trash to be disposed of! What are we teaching people about the sanctity of a child's life. That they are disposable?

Come on Libbs .... step up and start educating people about their personal responsibility BEFORE the fact ... and not giving them an easy way out AFTER the fact.

[Abbey Marie]

Uncurable disease or defect. I wouldn't want to know if it is a downs baby, too hard of a choice.

This is precisely the reason that my husband and I (yes, a joint decision because it is his child as much as it is mine) decided not to get amnio done. I asked if there was anything they could do if the test revealed a defect, and they admitted there wasn't. The whole point of the test was to enable me to abort if I didn't like the results. Obstetric's dirty little secret.

Btw, I consider myself pro-choice, in the sense that every woman, unless she is raped, has the choice to have sex or not. Once you conceive, the "choice" is no longer only yours.

[pete311]

Your not comparing two similar things here. YOU are really not this stupid are you. A fertilized egg is on its way to becoming a full human person it is just a matter of time. By your reasoning anything that does not come into being in an instant must somehow NOT BE REAL.
Rephrase this because I have no idea what you are talking about.



If it was a family member I would wait it out if I was kidnapped and forced to do it that is another issue entirely....
That thought experiment is analogous to a rape scenario. A mother is held against her will and impregnated. Now she must spend 9 months keeping something she never wanted alive. If you disconnect from the man that kidnapped you then you allow rape victims to abort.



SO your saying we can abort/murder up to and including any child that has NOT reached the age of 6 months post gestation???? YOU are a real sad piece of shit........
insulting me? really? all I was saying is that babies < 6 months don't have self awareness, that is ALL!


if you had studied a bit of biology you might be aware that there is a significant difference between a fetus and a sperm cell.....this particular argument underscores the total ignorance of the left on this issue.....
My argument is philosophical if you had stopped to think about it for a second before insulting me. By wasting eggs and sperm you deprive the possible lives of countless persons. If you are ok with that, what is the difference if you discard one of those that does come into fruition?


regardless of how you came to be this person's dialysis machine, do you have the right to kill her now that your connection is discovered?.....

That is the question, it is very difficult. If you disconnect then you support rape abortions.

[LiberalNation]

As for leaving it in a toilet .... that just screams about the decline of society .... that after carrying a child for months and then thinking it is a piece of trash to be disposed of! What are we teaching people about the sanctity of a child's life. That they are disposable?

Come on Libbs .... step up and start educating people about their personal responsibility BEFORE the fact ... and not giving them an easy way out AFTER the fact.
I wouldn't call abortion an easy out, it is often quite difficult for the expecting mother.


and if she hadn't faced being expelled from the school for getting pregnant it all could have been avoided. They facilitated her actions with their policy.

[Abbey Marie]

...
My argument is philosophical if you had stopped to think about it for a second before insulting me. By wasting eggs and sperm you deprive the possible lives of countless persons. If you are ok with that, what is the difference if you discard one of those that does come into fruition?
...


We are designed with or to produce many more eggs or sperm than we could ever actually use for reproduction. Biologically, the excess is not meant for use; hence menstruation.

[pete311]

We are designed with or to produce many more eggs or sperm than we could ever actually use for reproduction. Biologically, the excess is not meant for use; hence menstruation.

I am speaking from a moral thought experiment, I understand the biology of it.

[Abbey Marie]

I am speaking from a moral thought experiment, I understand the biology of it.

If we are designed this way (for believer's, designed by God), where is the moral dilemma?

[pete311]

If we are designed this way (for believer's, designed by God), where is the moral dilemma?

If that is so, god really designed an inefficient system. Why isn't it 1 to 1? Why all the wasted possibilities? It all depends on which sperm makes it to the egg. Kinda sucks for all the other persons that would have been created with a different sperm.

[SassyLady]

I wouldn't call abortion an easy out, it is often quite difficult for the expecting mother.


and if she hadn't faced being expelled from the school for getting pregnant it all could have been avoided. They facilitated her actions with their policy.

Not an easy decision .... but definitely less responsibility in the long run.

So..........you let the policies of a government institution set your moral integrity? Are you saying that the school is responsible for her decision to kill her baby?

This is precisely what I am saying Libbs ..... what are we teaching our children about the sanctity of life .... when they decide that getting expelled from school is worse than murder?

When society allows the ease of abortion we are teaching that life has no sanctity other than what the government mandates.

So, regardless of what is "legal", one still has a moral responsibility.

[Abbey Marie]

If that is so, god really designed an inefficient system. Why isn't it 1 to 1? Why all the wasted possibilities? It all depends on which sperm makes it to the egg. Kinda sucks for all the other persons that would have been created with a different sperm.

1. Many animals are designed this way. It is an eggcellent (pun intended :)) way to ensure an uninterrupted continuation of the species. In the face of potential extinction, inefficiency seems a small price to pay.

2. Inefficient or not, the point is, there is no moral dilemma in failing to use (in the natural biological way) unfertilized eggs or sperm to procreate.

[Abbey Marie]

Not an easy decision .... but definitely less responsibility in the long run.

So..........you let the policies of a government institution set your moral integrity? Are you saying that the school is responsible for her decision to kill her baby?

This is precisely what I am saying Libbs ..... what are we teaching our children about the sanctity of life .... when they decide that getting expelled from school is worse than murder?

When society allows the ease of abortion we are teaching that life has no sanctity other than what the government mandates.

So, regardless of what is "legal", one still has a moral responsibility.

:clap: Can't rep now...

[SassyLady]

If that is so, god really designed an inefficient system. Why isn't it 1 to 1? Why all the wasted possibilities? It all depends on which sperm makes it to the egg. Kinda sucks for all the other persons that would have been created with a different sperm.

However, pete, the point is what happens after the egg is fertilized....when all the odds have been overcome and a life is created? Are you justifying abortion because all those previous eggs and sperm didn't connect?

[pete311]

However, pete, the point is what happens after the egg is fertilized....when all the odds have been overcome and a life is created? Are you justifying abortion because all those previous eggs and sperm didn't connect?

Sperm are considered alive by cell biologists. One might argue that sperm are part of the life cycle of a human being. I am not arguing for or against abortion. Just adding interesting thought experiments because this issue is not as black or white as some take it.

[SassyLady]

Sperm are considered alive by cell biologists. One might argue that sperm are part of the life cycle of a human being. I am not arguing for or against abortion. Just adding interesting thought experiments because this issue is not as black or white as some take it.

For the baby it is VERY black and white.

A sperm, or an egg, can't create life on their own. Life is created when the two merge....before that, they are just "potential participants". And nature has designed sperm to be produced in the millions knowing that most will not come into contact with an egg.

Tell me pete, have you ever been in the room during an ultrasound or sonogram? It is totally different than seeing a documentary film. I wish there was a program that allowed children of all ages to take field trips to be in the room during one of these procedures. I think it would help kids make a connection with the beginnings of life prior to the birth process.

[pete311]

For the baby it is VERY black and white.
I don't think anyone is for aborting babies.



A sperm, or an egg, can't create life on their own.

A baby can't create life either, only when it reaches puberty. The baby has the potential, but you have disregarded potential for my statement.



Tell me pete, have you ever been in the room during an ultrasound or sonogram?
Not for a pregnancy, but this is an appeal to emotion.

MKP, just so we are clear, would you leave yourself connected to the kidnapper for nine months in my scenario?

[SassyLady]

I don't think anyone is for aborting babies.

Are you speaking for everyone or just yourself? People abort babies all the time.



A baby can't create life either, only when it reaches puberty. The baby has the potential, but you have disregarded potential for my statement.

Which is what? That masturbating for men is the same thing as abortion?



Not for a pregnancy, but this is an appeal to emotion.

ABSOLUTELY!!! How can one not have emotions involved when deciding to create or exterminate a life?



MKP, just so we are clear, would you leave yourself connected to the kidnapper for nine months in my scenario?

Your scenario is flawed .... a woman getting pregnant has not been kidnapped - she made a choice. Let's follow this using your scenario.....if I were told that walking down a certain street could give me tremendous pleasure and once on the other side my life could either 1) go on as it always has; or 2) that there is a chance I will find myself hooked up and sustaining life for another individual for the next nine months ..... and that that individual would be my personal responsibility after the initial nine months for an undetermined amount of time .......... I would certainly have made my decision to live with the consequences of my decision .... prior to making the decision. So, yes, if I made the decision to experience the pleasure knowing that my life might change, I would stay hooked up to that individual.

Of course, I like to think I have moral integrity and have the fortitude to live with the decisions I make, right or wrong.

[SassyLady]

Pete ..... do you think abortions are barbaric?

[pete311]

Are you speaking for everyone or just yourself? People abort babies all the time.
By definition a baby is a small child. Birth to 1 year.



Which is what? That masturbating for men is the same thing as abortion?
I'm not saying that, simply adding interesting considerations to think about.



ABSOLUTELY!!! How can one not have emotions involved when deciding to create or exterminate a life?
For laws to be made there must be objective foundations with logic and evidence.



Your scenario is flawed .... a woman getting pregnant has not been kidnapped - she made a choice.


It's in regards to abortion after a rape. Now answer the question :)

[pete311]

Pete ..... do you think abortions are barbaric?

I have wavered between all stances. At one point I thought it was the mothers right. At one point I was against it due to the preciousness of life and that we must give that life a chance. At one point I was against abortion except for a rape. Right now I am undecided, but learn towards pro life in all cases.

How do you feel about the morning after pill? The egg has been fertilized, but does not attach to the uterus wall.

[SassyLady]

By definition a baby is a small child. Birth to 1 year.

I would say that the women who carry the baby call it a baby long before the birth process ..... regardless of your "book definition".


I'm not saying that, simply adding interesting considerations to think about.

Noted.


For laws to be made there must be objective foundations with logic and evidence.
Which is precisely why America and society is on a downhill slide .... taking the emotions out of decision making is dehumanization at it's best.




It's in regards to abortion after a rape. Now answer the question :)

The baby is not the rapist nor the one at fault. When the mother of the baby can make that distinction she will make the right choice. Personally, I would not detach.

[pete311]

I would say that the women who carry the baby call it a baby long before the birth process ..... regardless of your "book definition".
The world operates on book definitions, get with it. I fail to understand how you think having definitions be subjective would lead to an organized productive world.



Which is precisely why America and society is on a downhill slide .... taking the emotions out of decision making is dehumanization at it's best.

Emotions are not the same person to person. How can you make a law on emotions? Laws based on emotion would create a world of chaos and rulers would decide on matters on however they felt at the moment.



The baby is not the rapist nor the one at fault. When the mother of the baby can make that distinction she will make the right choice. Personally, I would not detach.

It could be that the kidnapper connects you to jesus or buddha, that does not matter. I am glad you are consistent though.

[SassyLady]

I have wavered between all stances. At one point I thought it was the mothers right. At one point I was against it due to the preciousness of life and that we must give that life a chance. At one point I was against abortion except for a rape. Right now I am undecided, but learn towards pro life in all cases.

How do you feel about the morning after pill? The egg has been fertilized, but does not attach to the uterus wall.

You know Pete .... your honesty about how confusing this whole process is have given me a whole new respect for you. It is a confusing process and only because I've been thinking about it for over 40 years can I be so sure of how I feel. I've been pregnant three times - two miscarriages and one full term. One of the miscarriages was due to my own disregard for the awesome responsibility of having a child dependent on my decisions (was competing in rodeo event and fell off horse). The other one was because of my age I had a test done to see if my child was "defective" .... and I had complications which led to a miscarriage. To this day I wonder why I let the doctor talk me into the test ..... I really didn't want to know ... iit didn't really matter and it would not have altered anything. So, I don't talk about these things from lightly or from inexperience of having to make hard decisions.

I also have a daughter and three grandchildren .... and I have to tell you that when I was younger I too wavered between all stances. So has my daughter over the years. We talk about this ad nauseum because she now has an 11 year old daughter who will be faced with choices some day. Believe me ..... it can be a difficult subject to discuss.

The morning after pill ........ once again .... that would be making a decision after the fact. A responsible person needs to make the choice about walking down that street BEFORE they take the first step.

It is all about one's belief about when a life is created isn't it. When do you believe the soul enters the process? At conception, when the brain is developing, when the heart starts beating, when the baby takes it's first breath?

[SassyLady]

The world operates on book definitions, get with it. I fail to understand how you think having definitions be subjective would lead to an organized productive world.

Definitions are a guideline and should be used as such. They also change as society develops and realizes there is more than one definition for a word. As in:

•baby - an unborn child; a human fetus; "I felt healthy and very feminine carrying the baby"; "it was great to feel my baby moving about inside" (found this along with your definition BTW)



Emotions are not the same person to person. How can you make a law on emotions? Laws based on emotion would create a world of chaos and rulers would decide on matters on however they felt at the moment.

Did I say that laws should be based upon emotions only? No, just that emotional appeals should be considered when creating laws. You are taking something to an extreme here pete.



It could be that the kidnapper connects you to jesus or buddha, that does not matter. I am glad you are consistent though.

What??? What does Jesus or Buddha have to do with kidnapping?

[pete311]

The morning after pill ........ once again .... that would be making a decision after the fact. A responsible person needs to make the choice about walking down that street BEFORE they take the first step.
I am certainly an advocate for personal responsibility too.



It is all about one's belief about when a life is created isn't it. When do you believe the soul enters the process? At conception, when the brain is developing, when the heart starts beating, when the baby takes it's first breath?
I don't support the notion of a soul, but that is a debate for another thread :)

[pete311]

Definitions are a guideline and should be used as such. They also change as society develops and realizes there is more than one definition for a word.

True, but there is much less wiggle room in a court of law or science lab.



Did I say that laws should be based upon emotions only? No, just that emotional appeals should be considered when creating laws. You are taking something to an extreme here pete.
hmmm I guess I disagree unless you can give me an example where a judge sends someone to prison because he personally is angry at the murderer.



What??? What does Jesus or Buddha have to do with kidnapping?
I'm saying it doesn't matter who the kidnapper connects you to. It could be to himself or to jesus. That is outside the point. Or is it?

[glockmail]

fathers have the reproductive right to use a condom or keep it in their pants. They can't abort so their's your choice.

The fetus has not reached personhood, it is not self aware or a contributing member of society as of yet.

And women have the choice to keep their panties on, or in the case of bull dykes like yourself, keep the turkey baster in the drawer.

[SassyLady]

True, but there is much less wiggle room in a court of law or science lab.

And once again you make my point. The court of law, and the science lab, are dehumanizing the world by taking out emotional appeal to moral decisions.



hmmm I guess I disagree unless you can give me an example where a judge sends someone to prison because he personally is angry at the murderer.

You are very naive if you think Judges and juries don't send people to prison because of their personal emotions. We like to think the law is objective, but once again, fallible humans are applying the law.



I'm saying it doesn't matter who the kidnapper connects you to. It could be to himself or to jesus. That is outside the point. Or is it?

Following your example .... and based upon what I said .... the decision has already been made prior to walking down the street .... it doesn't matter who the kidnapper connects to .... it was a possible consequence of the original decision ........ so, no, it doesn't matter if it is Jesus, Buddha or the kidnapper.

[pete311]

And once again you make my point. The court of law, and the science lab, are dehumanizing the world by taking out emotional appeal to moral decisions.

Morality is often tied with a religion. The founding fathers wrote the declaration to protect against laws being made in relation to religious morality. You might as well support the Islamic Sharia Law.



You are very naive if you think Judges and juries don't send people to prison because of their personal emotions. We like to think the law is objective, but once again, fallible humans are applying the law.
Certainly some do, but I still think the majority don't. I have two lawyers in my family and they are good.

Following your example .... and based upon what I said .... the decision has already been made prior to walking down the street .... it doesn't matter who the kidnapper connects to .... it was a possible consequence of the original decision ........ so, no, it doesn't matter if it is Jesus, Buddha or the kidnapper.[/QUOTE]

So if you were connected against your will to Hitler you'd feel the same if it were Jesus? No second thoughts to disconnect from Hitler?

[SassyLady]

Morality is often tied with a religion. The founding fathers wrote the declaration to protect against laws being made in relation to religious morality. You might as well support the Islamic Sharia Law.

This is pure bullshit pete and you know it. Morals and values are principles one follows in order to be a productive member of society and does not have to be tied into a religion. That would be like saying atheists have no morals. Since you are so into definitions:

•moral - concerned with principles of right and wrong or conforming to standards of behavior and character based on those principles; "moral sense";



Certainly some do, but I still think the majority don't. I have two lawyers in my family and they are good.

Well, I only have one lawyer and one judge (the dad of the lawyer) and I know for a fact that lawyers have emotional reactions to an event and then work hard at using the law to justify what they want to happen to the culprit.




So if you were connected against your will to Hitler you'd feel the same if it were Jesus? No second thoughts to disconnect from Hitler?

Oh, there will always be second thoughts pete .... my daughter is 33 and I still have second thoughts about the fury I unleashed upon the world by giving birth to her. :laugh2:

[pete311]

This is pure bullshit pete and you know it. Morals and values are principles one follows in order to be a productive member of society and does not have to be tied into a religion. That would be like saying atheists have no morals. Since you are so into definitions:

•moral - concerned with principles of right and wrong or conforming to standards of behavior and character based on those principles; "moral sense";

This is another interesting discussion we can have in another thread. I am atheist, but through being raised in a predominately christian nation, I inherit their morals as they make reasonable sense to me. In India the morals closely follow Hindu and Iran the morals closely follow Islam.



Well, I only have one lawyer and one judge (the dad of the lawyer) and I know for a fact that lawyers have emotional reactions to an event and then work hard at using the law to justify what they want to happen to the culprit.

Certainly, they aren't robots and have personal motivations, but they still operate under the emotionless laws. After all even terrorists get a defense even if the lawyers hates their guts. They took an oath to make sure everyone gets due process and a fair trial.

[Silver]

"If you can't trust me w ith a choice then how can you trust me with a child." That is what some women are saying about abortion. A woman's right to choose (pro choice) or not to have the choice (pro life) is a very controversial issue in this country right now. The country is divided. What do you think? I believe that abortion should be a legally protected right of women in the U.S.
The choice to have an abortion should be available to a woman who has neither the means nor the education to support herself, let alone a child. Poverty, crime, drug abuse, child abuse, and alcohol abuse are at a higher rate with teenage mothers than any other part of the population. Is that a good thing? No. For those people that believe in Pro life think about this possible situation. Abortion becomes illegal and a teenager becomes pregnant. She abuses drugs and alcohol while she's pregnant. When the baby is born it is addicted to drugs that the mother abused while she was pregnant and is born with fetal alcohol syndrome. The baby must suffer the consequences for the rest of it's life. As if this is not tragic enough we cannot forget the cost to society for not only providing the basic needs for this child but also the enourmous amount of medical care that the child will also need. Is it better for the embryo not to be born at all or for the child to go through that situation. Most women have an abortion because they know they could not support a child. They are being smart by making that decision.
Outlawing abortion will not eliminate the practice. Women that will want an abortion badly enough, will find a way to get one. Most likely when these procedures are done illegally, they will be done in unsafe and unsanitary conditions. Here's another situation. Abortion is made illegal and a woman gets pregnant. She cannot have an abortion legally anymore so she finds a "doctor" that says they know how to perform the procedure. They perform the abortion in unsafe and unsanitary conditions. The woman gets extremely sick with an infection. The cause of the infection, an abortion that was not performed correctly. This would not be better than a woman having a safe abortion legally.
I certainly agree that both sides have a valid argument. However as shown, the consequences of changing the law would be far too severe, than keeping the law the way it is now. ....................

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Pro-choice/Archive_1

I didn't read the entire thread, but just thought I'd respond to the first post anyway...

I'll not only agree with the pinheads, I'll go them one step better...
\
Just in case a women don't really know for sure, if they want the responsibility of motherhood, we should let them have a kid on a trial basis....say they try it for 3 months, 6 months, maybe even a year to see if its something them might care to do...if the new mommies don't really like the job, just flush the fuckin' kid down the toilet or put it in the garbage can.....

3,6, 12 months...whats the big deal...the outcome is the same and thats what liberals are really interested in....outcome.....the ends justifies the means....one dead kid that nobody will miss, and the slut can try again next year to see if its a better time.

[LiberalNation]

Women Who Graduated From Private Religious Schools More Likely To Abort

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090601091930.htm

there goes that money for pricey private school, it encourages abortion.

[LiberalNation]

And women have the choice to keep their panties on, or in the case of bull dykes like yourself, keep the turkey baster in the drawer.

and get an abortion, right our bodies trumps right to fetal life by law. :poke:

[LiberalNation]

Women Who Graduated From Private Religious Schools More Likely To Abort

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090601091930.htm

there goes that money for pricey private school, it encourages abortion.

since some don't check last page.......

[PostmodernProphet]

no reason to bring a child into this world to suffer and die and early death, some only live a few hours of pain with these disease. It is mercy to prevent it.

the child has already been brought into the world....you aren't "preventing it"....you're terminating it.....

[PostmodernProphet]

My argument is philosophical if you had stopped to think about it for a second before insulting me. By wasting eggs and sperm you deprive the possible lives of countless persons. If you are ok with that, what is the difference if you discard one of those that does come into fruition?
it's equally absurd philosophically....a sperm or an egg may be a possible life...but a fetus IS a life.....do you understand the difference?.....a sperm cell can die, I can trim my fingernails, I can blow my nose....I cannot kill an unborn child.....

[PostmodernProphet]

If you disconnect then you support rape abortions.

I will trade you rape abortions for the other 98%......

[pete311]

the child has already been brought into the world....you aren't "preventing it"....you're terminating it.....

it is conceivable that medical staff can or will be able to detect such diseases early in development.

[PostmodernProphet]

Sperm are considered alive by cell biologists.

so are the hairs on your head.....should you be charged with manslaughter when you get a haircut?....

[pete311]

it's equally absurd philosophically....a sperm or an egg may be a possible life...but a fetus IS a life.....do you understand the difference?.....a sperm cell can die, I can trim my fingernails, I can blow my nose....I cannot kill an unborn child.....

Sperm are alive and have a life cycle through spermatogenesis. I think we can agree they are part of the precursor to a human being. Without a specific sperm a specific human being can't be born. Why do you stop at fetus when deciding what is worthwhile?

[PostmodernProphet]

By definition a baby is a small child. Birth to 1 year.

the pro-choice have fetus showers....

[pete311]

so are the hairs on your head.....should you be charged with manslaughter when you get a haircut?....

No, hair is non living. Our law specifies persons, but I'm not talking about law, I'm talking about morality.

[PostmodernProphet]

and get an abortion, right our bodies trumps right to fetal life by law. :poke:
how about a compromise....a woman can get an abortion as long as they agree to have one leg removed as well.....

[pete311]

the pro-choice have fetus showers....

it just doesn't sound as cute, that is why

[PostmodernProphet]

it is conceivable that medical staff can or will be able to detect such diseases early in development.

it isn't the disease she was trying to prevent, it was bringing the child into the world that she thought she was preventing......

[PostmodernProphet]

Sperm are alive and have a life cycle through spermatogenesis. I think we can agree they are part of the precursor to a human being. Without a specific sperm a specific human being can't be born. Why do you stop at fetus when deciding what is worthwhile?

a sperm cell is nothing more than an excretion of a human being.....a fetus is not an excretion, it's a human being......I don't stop at "fetus" when deciding what is worthwhile....I stop at human being.....

[PostmodernProphet]

No, hair is non living.

wrong....a hair cell is just as much alive as a sperm cell....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hair_cell

[PostmodernProphet]

it just doesn't sound as cute, that is why

so if I rename a fetus as something cute you would be unable to kill it?....fine, from now on all fetus shall be known as "fluffy bunny".......

[pete311]

it isn't the disease she was trying to prevent, it was bringing the child into the world that she thought she was preventing......
I'm not sure what you are referencing.


a sperm cell is nothing more than an excretion of a human being.....a fetus is not an excretion, it's a human being......I don't stop at "fetus" when deciding what is worthwhile....I stop at human being.....

Excretion is the process of removing waste from cells. I don't think that follows any of this discussion. The sperm cell develops "independently" in the testes via spermatogenesis. The fetus is quite more complex of course, but it certainly is also the product of the two genetics and the mothers body. If the sperm doesn't matter then might I go back in time and change what sperm enters your mothers egg?


wrong....a hair cell is just as much alive as a sperm cell....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hair_cell

Last time I went to the hair stylist they didn't cut my hair cells, but rather the hair filaments. If they cut your hair cells you have a lawsuit to file.

[pete311]

so if I rename a fetus as something cute you would be unable to kill it?....fine, from now on all fetus shall be known as "fluffy bunny".......

I am not for killing a fetus, not sure how you got that impression.

[darin]

fathers have the reproductive right to use a condom or keep it in their pants. They can't abort so their's your choice.


That's sexist of you.

women have the right to take Birth-control measures or keep GUYS out of their pants.

Once the reproduction happens, however, Mens-rights (Men - the last group nobody is trying to protect) go out the window. Sexism.


I wonder if Abortion could be prosecuted as a hate-crime?

[LiberalNation]

hate crime, no the fetus is not a protected minority and typically has no rights to violate. Men should not have the right to control a womens body, we have fought hard for that right and will not yeild it.

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. Yes before a women is allowed to abort a human being, they should be required by law to watch a mid-term abortion in action, in all its true gore.
2. And if after that, then let the laws of this land, Roe-Wade, ruin their life as what they have seen.
3. One dead, one injured: as I read in some ones sig, a lot of truth in it.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[chloe]

fathers have the reproductive right to use a condom or keep it in their pants. They can't abort so their's your choice.

The fetus has not reached personhood, it is not self aware or a contributing member of society as of yet.

The woman has the choice not to have sex and to have her uterus removed or tubes tied or depo shot

the man has the choice not to have sex, wear a condom, have a vascectomy

Once she is impregnated by his sperm they made their choice to create life.

[Abbey Marie]

Sorry bout that,

1. Yes before a women is allowed to abort a human being, they should be required by law to watch a mid-term abortion in action, in all its true gore.
2. And if after that, then let the laws of this land, Roe-Wade, ruin their life as what they have seen.
3. One dead, one injured: as I read in some ones sig, a lot of truth in it.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

That's my sig. And true it is.

[PostmodernProphet]

I'm not sure what you are referencing.


the post I was responding to, when I made the statement you responded to...



Excretion is the process of removing waste from cells. I don't think that follows any of this discussion. The sperm cell develops "independently" in the testes via spermatogenesis. The fetus is quite more complex of course, but it certainly is also the product of the two genetics and the mothers body. If the sperm doesn't matter then might I go back in time and change what sperm enters your mothers egg?
[/quote]
I'm not going to spend any more time with you on a ridiculous argument about whether a sperm cell is the equivalent of a fetus.....scientifically AND morally, it isn't.....any effort by you to pretend it is, is nothing more than an attempt to deflect the discussion onto a sidetrack....

[PostmodernProphet]

I am not for killing a fetus, not sure how you got that impression.

???....so you are opposed to permitting abortion?....

[LiberalNation]

be like Hillary, Anti abortion, pro choice, I am. Legal, safe, and rare.

[PostmodernProphet]

be like Hillary, Anti abortion, pro choice, I am. Legal, safe, and rare.

so we allow people to have a choice, but remove abortion as one of the choices?......okay......

[LiberalNation]

discourage abortion but keep it legal for those who wont be.

[glockmail]

and get an abortion, right our bodies trumps right to fetal life by law. :poke: Ever seen an ultrasound of a 6 month fetus?

[LiberalNation]

says the guy who would drown an innocent kitteh. gtfo

[BoogyMan]

the mothers mental health is often at risk which is why she chooses abortion. She can't handle another child or a child right now. Better than leaving it in a trashcan to die after birth. A girl at a catholic school around here just did that, she didn't want to get kicked out of school so had it in a bathroom toilet and left it.

Because without the ability to murder the child, there is no other option? What you are doing is defending the murder of the child because the parent is afraid of dealing with the consequences. It is a completely bankrupt argument, morally and rationally.


and not in the case of cancers and diabetes boogy. Sometimes mother needs treatment now.

All you have here is an assertion, can you back it up?

Why women have abortions
1% of all abortions occur because of rape or incest; 6% of abortions occur because of potential health problems regarding either the mother or child, and 93% of all abortions occur for social reasons (i.e. the child is unwanted or inconvenient). (http://www.abortionno.org/Resources/fastfacts.html)

[PostmodernProphet]

discourage abortion but keep it legal for those who wont be.

that isn't "anti"-abortion, that's merely permissiveness....

[glockmail]

says the guy who would drown an innocent kitteh. gtfo So you equate a cat with a human? And it wasn't innocent. By shitting on the carpet it was attacking my children.

Again, ever seen an ultrasound of a 6 month fetus?

[LiberalNation]

6months + is later term and illegal. Animals are innocent even if inconvienent at time.

[glockmail]

Yet Lib-Tards abort at 9 months, and keep cats that shit in their houses, apparently.

[LiberalNation]

My cat has pissed on my bed before, she was retrained with a new litter box and pills for the urinary tract infection. A closed door would have kept your cat off the carpet without need of such drastic action.

[revelarts]

My cat has pissed on my bed before, she was retrained with a new litter box and pills for the urinary tract infection. A closed door would have kept your cat off the carpet without need of such drastic action.



soo.. your saying that there are other options for an "Unwanted" Cattastrophy , a cat "Problem", an "Unplanned" cat discharge.
That killing is to DRASTIC of an action for any difficulty a kitten may cause.
If only he had "CLOSED the DOOR" before the cat happened.
That's very reasonable.
I think I might even go so far an agree that Killing the problem cat was immoral. Yeah.
I just don't understand how you defend the abortion of a young Human Being if you clearly see a problem with killing a young cat for being a cat.

[LiberalNation]

cat is a functioning member of society, fetus isn't. cat abortion I am cool with for unwanted kittehs.

[revelarts]

cat is a functioning member of society, fetus isn't. cat abortion I am cool with for unwanted kittehs.

What's non "functional" about a young human. Functional is not a prerequisite for Humanity. There are plenty of humans less than "functional" by some standards.
And what IS "functional" about a Cat??? Modern cats are about the most non "functional" domestic animal I can think of. (except maybe in the Philippines).

[LiberalNation]

my cat kills mice even declawed and brings them to the door to show off.

[BoogyMan]

6months + is later term and illegal. Animals are innocent even if inconvienent at time.

Unborn children are completely innocent, even if inconvenient at times.

[LiberalNation]

No, they have original sin, haven't been baptised yet.

[LiberalNation]

unbaptized babies go to limbo.

[revelarts]

unbaptized babies go to limbo.

umm... and where to people who kill them go?

[LiberalNation]

depends, he who has not sinned and all that. God aborts babies all the time, nearly 50% before the mother even knows she's pregnant.

[revelarts]

unbaptized babies go to limbo.
umm... and where do people who kill them go?

depends, he who has not sinned and all that.
very evasive... but not very convincing in answering the questions.
The "he who has not sinned" verse ends with Jesus telling the woman. "GO and sin NO MORE." Not go and make adultery "safe, legal and rare".



God aborts babies all the time, nearly 50% before the mother even knows she's pregnant.
God aborts us all at some point in our lives LB. There's forgiveness for all sins but he doesn't want us promoting murder and expecting a pass for it at the end of our days.

[glockmail]

My cat has pissed on my bed before, she was retrained with a new litter box and pills for the urinary tract infection. A closed door would have kept your cat off the carpet without need of such drastic action.So your cat had a bladder infection, causing it to piss in the house. Mine didn't soil the house for 6 or 7 years until I had kids, and he did it because he hated them. Closing the door to the basement would have redirected him to another part of the house.


depends, he who has not sinned and all that. God aborts babies all the time, nearly 50% before the mother even knows she's pregnant. You're playing God now?

[darin]

Unborn children are completely innocent, even if inconvenient at times.

...but how can that be if we're born with a sinful nature? Does that sinful nature only apply itself to our souls at the moment of birth?

[LiberalNation]

hated you kids, sounds to me like he just loved the new carpet you put in. Cats get jelous too.

[HogTrash]

I too am "pro-choice"...If the baby's life is the only one at stake, then the choice should be the baby's, after all the baby has the most to lose.

Of course, the baby is helpless and alone in it's struggle for life and cannot defend itself, so anyone who chooses could come forward to speak on it's behalf.

The father, grandparents, siblings, aunts, uncles and cousins could plea a case for the baby's life...Do we kill indescriminately?...Are we not a just and civilized people?

We even afford the worst criminals in the world a lawyer and a fair trial in a court of law before we execute them...Why not extend this courtesy to the most innocent among us?

[actsnoblemartin]

women do have a choice.

whether or not to have sex

whether or not to protect themselves from diseases and pregnancy

If they fail to protect themselves, they shouldnt have the right to murder an innocent child, because they refuse to take personal responsibility for their choices


"If you can't trust me w ith a choice then how can you trust me with a child." That is what some women are saying about abortion. A woman's right to choose (pro choice) or not to have the choice (pro life) is a very controversial issue in this country right now. The country is divided. What do you think? I believe that abortion should be a legally protected right of women in the U.S.
The choice to have an abortion should be available to a woman who has neither the means nor the education to support herself, let alone a child. Poverty, crime, drug abuse, child abuse, and alcohol abuse are at a higher rate with teenage mothers than any other part of the population. Is that a good thing? No. For those people that believe in Pro life think about this possible situation. Abortion becomes illegal and a teenager becomes pregnant. She abuses drugs and alcohol while she's pregnant. When the baby is born it is addicted to drugs that the mother abused while she was pregnant and is born with fetal alcohol syndrome. The baby must suffer the consequences for the rest of it's life. As if this is not tragic enough we cannot forget the cost to society for not only providing the basic needs for this child but also the enourmous amount of medical care that the child will also need. Is it better for the embryo not to be born at all or for the child to go through that situation. Most women have an abortion because they know they could not support a child. They are being smart by making that decision.
Outlawing abortion will not eliminate the practice. Women that will want an abortion badly enough, will find a way to get one. Most likely when these procedures are done illegally, they will be done in unsafe and unsanitary conditions. Here's another situation. Abortion is made illegal and a woman gets pregnant. She cannot have an abortion legally anymore so she finds a "doctor" that says they know how to perform the procedure. They perform the abortion in unsafe and unsanitary conditions. The woman gets extremely sick with an infection. The cause of the infection, an abortion that was not performed correctly. This would not be better than a woman having a safe abortion legally.
I certainly agree that both sides have a valid argument. However as shown, the consequences of changing the law would be far too severe, than keeping the law the way it is now. ....................

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Pro-choice/Archive_1

[glockmail]

Sure Dyke the cat loved the carpet so much he shat on it. :lame2:

[BoogyMan]

...but how can that be if we're born with a sinful nature? Does that sinful nature only apply itself to our souls at the moment of birth?

The Bible describes infants are pure and holy:

Why would Jesus use infants as a model for all believers to imitate in character if they were "utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly inclined to all evil"? Mt 18:1-3; 19:13-14

Paul also used infants as a model of purity for Christians to follow: 1 Cor 14:20

Paul states that he was once spiritually alive but then he sinned & died/was killed: Rom 7:9-11

God said that the king of Tyrus was "blameless in your ways from the day you were created, until unrighteousness was found in you." Ezek 28:15

"God made men upright but they sought devices" Eccl 7:29 (plural can't refer only to Adam)

Newborns do not know the difference between good and evil

God allowed the children to enter Canaan but not the parents: "your little ones who...have no knowledge of good and evil shall enter". Deut 1:34-39

Jacob & Esau, "the twins were not yet born, and had done nothing good or bad" Rom 9:11

Jesus "Before He knows enough to refuse evil and choose good" Isa 7:15-16

Jer 19:2-6 human sacrifices of children to Baal is called the "blood of the innocent"

If newborns do not know "good or evil" yet the Bible says , "Your sins have separated you from your God" (Isa 59:1-2) then newborns must be born united with God.

Total Hereditary Depravity is a debauched and sick doctrine.

[PostmodernProphet]

Those on the left think the Bible promotes abortion......

Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.
Mark 10:14