The use of someone's body without their consent... | Page 2 | The Pro-life Guild | Guild Forums

Gaia Guilds

The Pro-life Guild

Back to Guilds

The Pro-life Guild

The use of someone's body without their consent...

Goto Page: [|«] [<] 1 2

Ravenistic

Offline

Posted: Mon May 16, 2005 1:04 pm

lymelady

FragmentedTear

I have read this whole argument and everyone in here is pretty much saying the same thing. Yet I don't understand what this really has to do with a child. A lung is not a baby... it won't grow and have children, ect...

The argument is that the government has no right to force a person to give another the use of their body, even if it is to save a life. It doesn't work though. FreeArsenal has a good point, if a woman creates a need for her body and then doesn't allow the fetus to use it, she is directly responsible for its death and should be held responsible for it, legally.

I agree with that! That's why I usually say a woman who has an abortion should get the penatly of being put into jail. Wouldn't a woman who has an abortion be of the same crime as the woman who murdered all 5 of her children. Though I believe it was crap that she was claimed as 'emotionally distressed'. So some say having an abortion is not murder, but what is it called when you prevent capable life from happening? If you deny something life, that is not yet leaving. If I kill a cocoon, wouldn't that be considered killing the butterfly it will become? *confused*

Posted: Mon May 16, 2005 3:43 pm

Essentially they rationalize it by saying it's non-sentient life. Saying potential and actual is different, and claim there is a difference pretaining to personhood.

It's just their justification, probably one of the main faults with humans today, we overjustify too many things when it comes to individual benefit, and that's why society seems to be continually going down.

I suppose a lot of us support many of the things that lead to individual benefit as well. Problem is, we want to be a society that helps everyone, but there will always be those who only want to help themselves and those only in their own predicament.

Shahada 2

650 Points

Offline

Joy-ish

Offline

Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 10:53 am

kp606

On the note of your last sentence, I couldn't agree more. Pro-choice is morals too. So what if we can't find theirs in a leather clad book called the Bible. It's still someone's idea of life. I don't understand why their's can be legistlated and ours cannot be.

Because, under pro-choice laws, a personal decision under your morals is still posible.
If abortion was outlawed, a person with morals different from pro-life ones could not make their own decision about how to handle her pregnancy.

Posted: Mon Jul 18, 2005 7:55 pm

the way i see it...
is if u go and have sex and u get pregnant...
and then u want an abortion because u dont want this
'parasite', as pro-choicers call them...
in your body or 'using' your body without consent
but only because it doesnt have your consent...
but...by going and having sex and getting pregnant...
i think your giving consent rite there and then that u want a child...

if that makes any sense watsoever
(im really bad at explaining)
ohh well...

~Mystic Angel of Death~

Offline

The Pro-life Guild

Goto Page: [|«] [<] 1 2

Welcome to Gaia! ::

Gaia Guilds

The Pro-life Guild

Quick Reply

More Information