Respect for human life is one reason we are fighting terrorists overseas and not here.Its the reason we wanted the butcher of thousands taken out of power in Iraq.Its the reason we went after the murderers of thousands in the World Trade Center.Its the reason we fight the fanatics who kill hundreds along with themselves by blowing themselves up & killing innocent men,women & children.Respect for human life goes hand in hand with Democracy and the freedom of poeple currently ruled by communist & extemist religious fanatical warlords.You dont see that? You dont have a problem with that as long as your President agrees with your views on abortion?

C3RVETTE said: You dont have a problem with that as long as your President agrees with your views on abortion?

for the record I never stated that I was going to vote for anyone based on my pro-choice beliefs. I thought the numerous smilies and the constant derision of both bush and kerry made this clear.

I do feel that life begins at viability, not conception. I do not agree with late term abortions, i define those as taking place when the fetus is potentially viable. The only one I was involved with occurred at three weeks, ie a tiny shapeless cluster of cells.

as for lives lost. no one gives a damn about 30,000 people dying a month in uganda or some other third world $hithole. and these are actual people, not fetuses. a fetus is not a child, it is a potential child.

The one thing that always confused me is that you dont ever see pro-life/anti-choice vegans. If you truly belive that taking a life is wrong then stop eating meat. Who is to say that a cow doesnt have a "soul".

also I cont understand the large number of people who are pro-life and for the death penalty. you cant have it both ways. Im both pro-choice and pro-capital punishment. I think we dont use it enough. I also think it should be public, even televised perhaps.

The same people who are "pro-life" are usually also against welfare. Yet if crack-mothers who are defacto wards of the state were to get more abortions and didnt create more wards of the state then we would save money. Also the idea that forcing a mother to have an unwanted child who is going to grow up to rob, beat, and/or rape your daughter isnt very smart. sure, you can execute them afterward, but why not nip in the bud.

How many of you have at some point in your life gotten drunk, woke up with someone you didnt know and prayed like mad that she didnt wind up pregnant. If you can say youve never been in this situation than your are definitely a better man than I.

by the way, there have been unsafe abortions for nearly as long as people have existed. you can force a miscarriage by drinking, drugging, throwing yourself down a flight of stairs, and a myraid of other methods. Taking away a legal safe choice is going to do nothing but drive it underground just like we tried during prohibition.

|UPDATED|10/21/2004 5:28:37 AM (AZT)|/UPDATED|

C3RVETTE said: Respect for human life is one reason we are fighting terrorists overseas and not here.Its the reason we wanted the butcher of thousands taken out of power in Iraq.Its the reason we went after the murderers of thousands in the World Trade Center.Its the reason we fight the fanatics who kill hundreds along with themselves by blowing themselves up & killing innocent men,women & children.Respect for human life goes hand in hand with Democracy and the freedom of poeple currently ruled by communist & extemist religious fanatical warlords.You dont see that? You dont have a problem with that as long as your President agrees with your views on abortion?

as I stated above, if we dont care about genocide in africa, why should we care that sodamn insane murdered 20 thousand of his own people. we pick and choose when, where and whose lives are important.

when we overthrew the british, the american revolutionaries used tactics that would be considered terrorist by todays standards. when the french resistance was trying to expel the occupying nazi's they used tactics that would considered terrorist. we propped up the sandinistas (sp?) who were basically terrorists. we maintain a dialog with chechnyen separitists and state that russia is persecuting them and yet they are indisputably terrorists. they killed 300 people (many of them children) in a school a month or so ago.

this hypocrisy is ridiculous.

First off my wife and I tried for three years before seeking the help of a fertility specialists which resulted in us having twins.

Secondly if you think that "Ball of cells" is not a life, then remember this, just 4 weeks after the egg becomes fertilized the baby's organs start to form and by six weeks a the head is starting to form ears and the body is starting to form legs and arms. Thats less then a month and a half.

So is it a life? Absolutely, anything that is dividing and growing is a life. Thats like saying a plant seed is not a life form. But we plant them and expect them to grow. You give that plant seed respect as its dividing and growing to form a plant, but not an embryo. I don't get some people.

Lastly, I understand there are some pregancies that may not be wanted like in rape, incest, threatens the life of the mother etc that should be aborted, but a majority of the abortions could be avoided and many of them come from prostitutes.

In stead of abortion clinics we should have sterilization clinics where people can get vasectomies and tubal ligations. Now that technology has caught up where these can be reversed should someone decide they want to have a child they want to keep.

I'm also a firm believer that we need to overhaul our adoption laws. So its affordable for people to adopt and make it easier for mothers to put babies up for adoption.

Who said anything about not caring about Africa? We have sent aid & troops in the past & we send aid & troops in the present.We cannot fight injustice everywhere in the world at one time,nor should we.What sre doing now relates to OUR national defense & safety.I guess you think we have unlimited resources,and our troops are super heroes.Its close,but not quite.As I said before,I normally vote Republican,but I dont agree totally with some if their poilicys-2 of which are abortion & the death penalty

I feel it will be helpful to start with my basic premises as I deal with some of the fundamental issues regarding the abortion controversy.

When two rights conflict with each other the most fundamental and important right should prevail.

The right to life is the most basic and important right that we have.

It is a scientific fact that this is a unique individual human life. It is not just cells or a parasite. This means that we are not simply talking about some "thing" we can treat as property. This is an issue concerning a human life. Based on this undeniable fact the right to life applies and must be weighed in against all other considerations.

Abortion is the most extreme, permanent and devastatingly violent solution, for the unborn child, to a clearly temporary situation - i.e. the location and dependence of that unborn child. Dependence also continues into early childhood and this "being dependent" argument would easily justify infanticide.

When we are faced with a choice we must always choose the lesser of two evils. Does it really need to be mentioned that carrying a beautiful, new life to term regardless of the circumstances or difficulties is clearly less evil than the selfish act of abortion?

For myself the issue can be decided at this point. The pro-life view is the most reasonable and moral position one can take. I realize, however, there are a number of objections and I will examine a few of these now.

The main argument for legalized abortion has to do with a woman's control over her body. Certainly this right is very important but is it enough to override the fundamental right to life? When one thinks about it, this right to control ones body is not absolute. No one would agree that a woman has the right to beat someone to death simply because she uses her fists which are a part of her body. In this case a persons right to life outweighs a woman's right in regard to her own body. The example illustrates that this right is not absolute and is completely dependent on what it is that one is doing with their body. The important question really is - should a woman's control over her body extend to "this"? In this case we are talking about abortion. As science has shown this is a unique human individual's life. This situation is the same as our example and the right to life is still the more fundamental and important right and must therefore prevail.

Some might say it is better to allow abortion then to have so many unwanted children in the world. But how does not living such a life benefit the child? Whatever answer is given it will never be experienced by this unique child who now no longer exists and never will. There is also no value whatsoever to not existing - it is just nothing - life has value in and of itself no matter the supposed lack of quality and besides that, always has the chance for redemption. This thinking is selfish because we are the only ones who would experience any so-called "benefit" i.e. we don't have to see someone "suffer". If taken to its logical conclusions this justification could lead to any other defenseless group of people lacking "quality" in their lives being "removed" so we don't have to see them.

As for the argument that unwanted children are more prone to become criminals - better to abort them before that happens - are we not innocent until it is proven we have committed the crime? I guess not, as long as you are in the womb according to this argument. Additionally, an aborted child will never be a doctor, a loving father or mother a great humanitarian etc. Those unwanted children who have become criminals - while sad - certainly are not sentenced to death that easily and they still have the possibility of changing their lives. Allowing abortion because of the mere possibility of becoming a criminal would seem to mean its permissible to use the death penalty for a lot more than just murder if taken to its logical and frightening conclusions. Abortion for this reason just takes us off the hook for showing love and concern to these unwanted children - but that would be more time consuming and difficult and not always successful and, quite frankly, just not as convenient for us.

What about the argument that this is a private act? But that really is not true, no person is an oasis unto themselves. The unborn child will in fact affect society if the pregnancy is not terminated. The absence of that person is therefore also a loss to society. Furthermore, we as a society must accept an arbitrary definition of what is human and allowed to have moral value to allow this so called "private" act. This affects all of us in ways that will some day be frighteningly apparent should we become part of some helpless group that society decides it is convenient to dismiss as lacking humanity and moral value. But then it will be to late.

Finally, while I have addressed some of the arguments against being pro-life on their own terms and they clearly do not stand, I once again return to my original premise and scientific fact. This is a unique human life and the right to life is clearly more fundamental and important than any of the rights or arguments that have just been examined. But maybe I have unfairly stacked the cards in my favor. I admit the definition of life in my premise is the strength of my argument. What if we could define life in such a way that abortion is permissible? There are people who are attempting to do just that. But this means they have already determined that abortion is permissible. Their attempts at redefining human life do not prove that abortion should be permissible but rather only provide evidence of the lengths they will go to in removing such obstacles. We want the power of abortion, so lets just ignore the irritating facts and redefine being human. Didn't we have enough of such actions with the Nazi's or slave owners? Shouldn't we be more concerned with the truth of the matter rather than with artificial definitions that makes things more convenient for us? The strength of the pro-life position is not because of some clever definition of life. Rather the facts force us to acknowledge that this is a unique individual human life, whose helplessness in the womb can either motivate us to compassion, nurturing and protection or be used as an excuse and opportunity to exercise our deadly power.

This was not written by me but by Mark K. Sprengel (abortionfacts.com)but it echo's my own view of the abortion topic. Sorry for the length but this is a matter of life or death. - Tom.

To Ben and Jon: I am more than happy to discuss these issues further with you in private via email. (Tumarr@hotmail.com) I have no bad feelings towards either one of you and wish that this will not put a block between us. I simply feel that the truth needs to be exposed and I cannot remain silent on such a grave matter.

Speaking of Kerrys voting record,which is what I started this thread on,& not the abortion issue...do you believe that frickin horsehead Kerry out there prancing around a field in hunting gear and A FIREARM in front of TV cameras! He goes out there for a photo op I assume to impress sportsmen & hunters in America,and if he had it his way,the whole damn 2nd Amendment would be repealed,& guns & ammo banned! Check out his record on this.He thinks the American people are stupid,& are just pawns for his game.What an arsehole!

I find it funny that he was bashing bush on the fact that he didn't sign the extension to ban assault weapons in america, and then he does what is clearly a photo op, to show the sportsman in america that I support your views. What he doesn't seem to understand is most of these guys are the ones that own those types of guns and he said he would have signed the extension if he were president. IMOO this is his way of saying sportsman I've got your back....... WAY BACK!. Just until I'm in office.

Also I forgot to say that I hold nothing said in any of these topics against anyone. Everone has a right to their opinions and views. Even though we don't share the same road on every issue there are several intersections in life where our roads do cross and we see things eye to eye. Isn't that what america was founded on, the right to freedom of speech.

I have my views on abortion, polotics, guns and other topics. Most of the time I keep them to myself, but there are certain ones that strike a cord with me that I have to speak out on. I also like seeing other sides think and how they come to their logic on those issues.

I don't understand why anyone or country would not want a free democracy.