|
ProfMTH (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)
"It does, in fact, imply that."I've told you several times now that I was not commenting on fetal suffering, either implicitly or explicitly. The fact that you continue to beat this dead horse shows that you just can't deal with facts. So have a nice life, Christopmoore. You're wasting my time and yours with nonsensical repetition.
christopmoore (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)
It does, in fact, imply that. You're talking about "preventing the suffering endured" by Kiron by aborting him. I'm saying, you may only be substituting one kind of suffering for another, preventing none.Your argument is flimsy at best, doing nothing to push the pro CHOICE agenda. Pro choice is just that--pro choice. You are touting a pro abortion stance. If Kiron was your son, pro choice says you choose. Since he was not, it's not really any of your business. It's the CHOICE of his parents.
ProfMTH (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)
"That implies that a fetus doesn't suffer...."Actually, it doesn't imply that. I wasn't commenting on fetal suffering of any kind -- assuming, arguendo, that there is any.
christopmoore (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)
You said, "Wouldn't it have been better to prevent the suffering endured both by the family and poor baby Kiron by ending an untenable situation before it had begun?"That implies that a fetus doesn't suffer (or suffers less than baby Kiron did) when aborted. I merely asked for evidence to support this implication.If a fetus does suffer pain and fear during an abortion, then what difference does it make whether Kiron was aborted? He suffers either way. At least he was given a chance.
ProfMTH (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)
First you accuse me of "assuming that abortion eliminates fetal suffering," then you ask me for evidence showing that fetuses do *not* suffer. I'm not quite getting the logic, Christopmoore. In any case, I didn't say any "fetal suffering" would have been eliminated here.
christopmoore (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)
You're assuming that abortion eliminates fetal suffering. What evidence is there that a fetus feels no pain, fear or agony during an abortion?
Arabryder8 (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)
Here's my opinion: How could you live with yourself if you murdered your child when it had a chance of life? The two girls survived and are doing fine. There is always a chance that the child will be fine, and that is a risk you should be willing to take if you decide to have children. Aborting the child would be purely shelfish, because you will have to suffer whether you kill your child or if it dies after birth, so why not give it a chance?
alaskagirllover (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)
Pesonally if it were my baby I would have to say that their is no way id kill it. imagine the mother is going to go though the loss of her child anyway you think of it. and it she aborted it she would not no if her child could have survived. all she would know is she would have to live with that.
heroikrobb (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)
A two headed baby with one body is not a human figure. Therefore it would have been righteous to abort it as soon as possible, and not have to look at these horrors. It is an abomination to the human race!
FarSideofTown (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)
It's certainly a difficult one, when you see the two girls, they, their family etc, do seem happy enough, .... One thing that comes to mind is the survival rate etc, are not those girls something of an exception to the norm?, and doe's it matter how long a life is likely to be?If you asked them are they glad to be alive, I am sure they would say yes, as would their parents,.... yet, I bet most people would favor early termination if/when detected.As I think to be honest would I. |
