SO yes Controversy: ABORTION

[elpolloloco]

It really puzzles me as to why men are so against it, if they don't go through the whole ordeal. .

How is it puzzling? The basis for the pro-life argument is pretty clear cut. Pro lifers believe that

a) It is wrong to terminate a life unless in self defense.
b) Life begins at conception.

I don't think there should be any haziness on why people are pro-life. If you don't think men have the right to complain, then by that argument, they shouldn't have the right to complain if the mother shoots the baby in the head the second she gives birth. I mean, after-all she's the one that "went through the whole ordeal". Just playing devil's advocate here. I'm not going to give my opinion on the subject.

The argument takes total sense. It's just a matter or whether or not you believe that a fetus is "enough" of a life.

[elpolloloco]

To me these arguments make sense:

pro-life: Life begins at conception, and it's wrong to take a life. Pretty clear cut. Hard to argue with that.
pro-choice: The baby is basically just a mass of cells and not aware. It's more of a hamburger roll than a human. Also makes sense.

The arguments that DON'T make sense are

pro-life: It's wrong to take a life, period. I find that most pro-life people seem to be pro-death penalty or even worse... indifferent to engaging in war. This seems like hypocracy to me. For the record: I am pro-death penalty myself, but if my loved ones were to be murdered, I would likely be my choice to ask the judge not to execute the culprit. I'd prefer the person to life in agony the rest of their life

pro-choice: The baby is just going to be a burden. This argument makes NO SENSE whatsoever. If that argument were valid then by that logic it should be legal to execute your kids until they're 18 years old because they cause annorance, burden, discomfort, etc all the way up until adult-hood.

Like I said, I totally understand and sympathize with BOTH sides when it comes to logical, consistent arguments like the ones above. It comes down to whether or not your own religious beliefs let you consider a fetus a human life with all the same rights a BORN baby should have. This is a pretty grey area.

What I can't stand are arguments for pro-choice people who give a reason WHY abortion should be legal which make no sense: "The mother has to go through it". Well in that case, a single mom has to suffer all her life until the kid turns 18. If you're going to use that argument to justify "murder: then you have to admit it's OK to murder a toddler because a single mother is still suffering and going through hell to raise that kid.

It comes down to one thing: Whether or not it's MURDER or not. You can't justify MURDER by saying the kid is going to be a drain, or it's a scary experience or "it's a woman's choice". If you're pro-choice it comes down to just arguing that it ISN'T murder, plain and simple.

---------- Post added at 03:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:48 PM ----------

It comes down to one thing: Whether or not it's MURDER or not. You can't justify MURDER by saying the kid is going to be a drain, or it's a scary experience or "it's a woman's choice". If you're pro-choice it comes down to just arguing that it ISN'T murder, plain and simple.

That being said. I get furious when I hear about some guy that gets into an accident, killing a pregnant woman and getting charged with killing two people. It's legal for the MOM to kill the unborn baby, but it's MURDER if someone else does it. It makes no sense. The gov't needs to decide IS IT MURDER OR NOT. You can't decide to charge the killing for one person and not for another. The gov't needs to be CONSISTENT or step aside.

In the end, I'm libertarian too. I don't agree with abortion, but I'm not going to lecture anyone. Like ZERO said, it's between you and God. I personally think Rowe vs Wade should be repealed and the STATES themselves should decide on abortion along with other issues dealing with everything from gay marriage, drug legalization to whether or not fireworks should be legal. If you don't like the laws in your state, go move to a state you agree with. It's America. Every topic has people divided down the middle, so why do we all act like the federal gov't has a one-size-fits-all answer for all the issues that pertain to 300,000,000+ people? The states, counties, and cities know whats' best for their own people.

[Steamer]

After your second post pollo I immediately thought of the Civil War. I just can't think of why I did...

[elpolloloco]

After your second post pollo I immediately thought of the Civil War. I just can't think of why I did...

Hah! Was it the states' rights rant? It's funny. You grow up as a kid being taught that the Civil War was about slavery. Then in high school and college they preach that it wasn't about slavery, it was about states rights'!

But in the end, when it's all said and done. It was about slavery.

[Steamer]

Ding ding ding....

Nice mix up of money, rights, and personal views on slavery.

I like to think it was more so about the money in the end that was stemmed from personal opinions on slavery.

States rights... meh. If the feds let states do w/e they want unchecked we wouldn't have a USA. The check/balance system is one hell of a game.