Abortion. The ONLY arguement.

**Percy** · 9th-April-2012

Abortion has become a 'Men's Rights' issue only because, it seems to me, woman have taken all the 'rights' to decisions about it to themselves, denying men a say.

This is commendable. It must be as much a man's issue as a woman's.

But we lose sight of the Real and only legitimate and clear reason why abortion is a great wrong in the first place.

Here that arguement is made clear.

[QUOTE]

Acorns, Aristotle and Abortion

by Bill Muehlenberg

http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2012/04/09/acorns-aristotle-and-abortion/

I wish to speak to the issue of abortion and personhood, but I want to do it in a somewhat roundabout fashion. I want to first look at along-standing line of thought in philosophy which can help throw some light on what we mean by a person, and how that impacts the issue of abortion.
[/QUOTE]

I hope the men here, and the women, can take the time to read all of this short essay.

It is vitally important.

Frankly we will get no-where with the abortion rights issue, vis a vis feminists, women or anyone else if we simply persist in crowing for 'men's rights' to be equal to the false and anti-human 'rights' that women have invented for themselves.

[QUOTE]
The gradualist or functionalist view of personhood of course denies these innate or inherent essential features of personhood. Therefore they offer many possible starting points for when personhood begins, such as animation, viability, birth, and so on. But all seem to be quite arbitrary. Why for example should we say a baby is a person one minute after birth and not one minute before birth?

As William Hurlbut has written: “Zygote, morula, embryo, fetus, child and adult: these are conceptual constructions for convenience of description, not distinct ontological categories. With respect to fundamental moral status therefore, the human being is an embodied being whose intrinsic dignity is inseparable from its full procession of life and always present in its varied stages of emergence.”
[/QUOTE]

**Missy-A** · 9th-April-2012

I can say that I support neither side. I just wouldn't want it being done out of simple convenience. If pro-lifers got their way, they would find a way to ban all possible abortions and would go further into people's personal lives...

This is a decision to be made between the pregnant couple.

**Percy** · 9th-April-2012

I have never heard a 'pro-life' arguement that seeks banning all abortions, nor for imposing on people's personal lives.

But, that is irrelevant to the far more pertinent points raised.

**Dylan MacVillain** · 9th-April-2012

I am an anarchist. I am an atheist. And I am against abortion. I feel that all three positions are compatible as I do not believe in imposing my will on another human being regardless of color, sex, or which side of the womb he is on.

**FloatyBoaty** · 9th-April-2012

To legalize abortion is to legalize contract killing.

A person is alive as long as they have life. From the moment of conception a new and individual life is created. Later, it attaches to the womb in order to sustain itself, not because it is an extension of the mother. A child is the off shoot of TWO people, not one.

The only case in which 1+1=<3
1-1-3-one-plus-one-equals-three-demotivational-posters-1324266787.jpg

**Popadibs** · 9th-April-2012

Quote from Dylan MacVillain

I am an anarchist. I am an atheist. And I am against abortion. I feel that all three positions are compatible as I do not believe in imposing my will on another human being regardless of color, sex, or which side of the womb he is on.

If you or I were to get into a car accident and as a result kill a mother's unborn baby if she intended on giving birth it would count as murder or manslaughter or something due to reckless driving or something. Yet, if a woman chooses to kill that same unborn baby then it isn't considered murder. This is in spite of the fact that in one case it it unintentional and in the other case it is deliberate. This is inconsistent. An unborn is treated as a 'person' when it suits the female and isn't treated as a 'person' when it doesn't suit the female for the unborn to be considered.

**shaazam** · 9th-April-2012

abortion clearly is not just a choice a wimyn makes it is killing a life who might have grown up to be Einstein or Newton or Plato;

but they don't only abort their babies but also all responsibility for any of their dereistic choices - it is their choice you see and ipso fact right

**Percy** · 9th-April-2012

I do not believe in imposing my will on another human

antimisandry.com Abortion. The ONLY arguement.

Abortion does FAR more than impose will on another human. It tears them limb from limb. It stabs them in the back of the neck. It cuts them into pieces and flushes them down the sewers - unless of course the bits are contracted to Pepsi-Cola to create 'flavour' or used to test cosmetics.

**RobYork** · 9th-April-2012

The “TRUTH” which is “HIDDEN” from the general public, is that “TWO” people suffer, when the innocent baby is murdered within the womb of it`s mother.

1. The baby, which is obvious.
2. The woman, as most, if not all of them, suffer serious Psychological problems, for the rest of their lives.

Get this straight !!! they are committing “MURDER” they are not having their toenails cut !!!

Some of these women find it impossible to have a relationship with a man every again, some go the opposite way, and become sexually overactive.

Most, if not all, are burdened with a massive amount of Guilt.

Others go on drugs, or become alcoholics.

Some literally “COMMIT SUICIDE”

DO YOU CARE AT ALL FOR THESE PEOPLE ????