Abortion questions...?

I've been living in quebec my whole life. I know how society and the government approaches this issue, and I know that someone wanting to bring to terms an unwanted pregnancy will have trouble getting the ressources needed. Question-begging epithet much ?Why do you want to kill babies ?

So far no one other than you has even mentioned killing babies.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

What you "know" means nothing. Show us evidence that this is true. Show us evidence that the Quebec government wants "to kill babies". You make assertion after assertion but are woefully lacking in presenting any evidence for these assertions.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

Even in that discussion, I'd ask the same question, get the same answer, and then it would become pointless to have even brought it up.The question would be: Why is it not immoral to jerkoff, but it is immoral to destroy a zygote that is practically the same thing as sperm? If you can't tell me for sure if that sperm has a soul or if it's the zygote that has the soul, or in fact the emryo, or further down the line with the fetus, then why bring it up at all? That would be irrelevant because it has the potential to unite with another creating a zygote - and then that zygote has the potential to develop into an embryo - and that embryo has the potential to develop into a fetus, yada, yada, yada. A break anywhere in that process ends the potential of the next process that follows.A zygote only has the potential to be an embryo.- Oni

It's not a simple thing. I think that laws must be an outflow of the moral views of a society.You see this whenever there is a law change. Society started viewing the thing as right before the law was adapted to fit this. Not the other way around. Changing a law cannot somehow force the people to start seeing things as right or wrong.So it's a tricky question. In a society where abortion isn't seen as wrong anymore, can I really want to make it illegal, knowing that ultimately it won't change anything and probably the same amount of abortions will be done, only differences being that they will be done elsewhere, or underground ?According to me, in a perfect world, abortion would be illegal. But then again, in a perfect world, there wouldn't be need for any abortion, right ?So for me the socially moral aspect of it is much more important then the legal aspect. If society where to change and that abortion wouldn't even be considered an option anymore because of the moral worldview of a person, then the legal change would step in and reinforce an already present perception in the society.

It was an example of how I could also resort to stupid question-beggin epithet. Sorry if that wasn't clear enough

I would agree, but only when they are made aware of it. For the most part, I spend my day day thinking about myself, my children, then sometimes my family, further down the list would be my friends. The further you get away from my DNA the less amount of importance I give you in my daily concerns.Now, sure, if you told me some kid got shot in Africa by some warlord, I'd feel empathy and care. If you told me Haitians are suffering from an earthquake, I'd feel bad and donate some cash.But, my point is that, unless you tell me, I wouldn't concern myself (or in my foul language "give a shit") about Africa, Haiti or anyone else during the course of my day. I agree, but only when they're made aware of it.Lets set up a fake example:(A girl, lets call her Maria, is 16 years old and in highschool. She's poor, from a single parent home, and they barely have enough to feed themselves. Maria works nights after school to help feed her siblings and tries her best to get to her school work; most of the time she barely has the energy to do it. Because of that, Maria is failing in school, will probabaly never go to college and more than likely will follow in her parent's footstep.)Now truthfully, and there are many women in the US like this, how many times a day does any pro-life person concern themselves with Maria's current living situation and struggles? zero?How many times a day do pro-life people think about her siblings who barely eat? zero?How many times a day do pro-life people concern themselves with Maria's mother who works 3 jobs to suport the kids she didn't abort? fucking zero!Now, lets add to this that poor little Maria gets pregnant. She realizes the struggles she has to live with, both now and in the future if she gives birth, so, Maria decides to have an abortion. Boom! All of a sudden every pro-life asshole has an issue with Maria's decision? All of a sudden every pro-life, self-righteous clown pretends to care for the tiny collection of cells in Maria's womb? Remember though, fuck Maria, her mother, her starving siblings and her future...but that zygote, fuck yeah, they all love that zygote. Really? Bullshit!Can you see, at least in this (very common) example how fake, self-righteous, hypocritical and outright shameful the argument from a pro-lifer becomes?Maria's mother didn't have an abortion, and no one made an effort to help her. Her kids go hungry, and no one made an effort to help her. Maria works nights and can't get to her school work, but no effort was made to help her.Now Maria has to make a decision for her life and her future concerning a collection of cells in her stomach, and this is the precise moment when everyone wants to NOW pay attention to Maria and judge her? But where the fuck were they when her and her mother and her siblings needed them? Where? They were busy paying attention to their own lives. Well, go right back to doing that when she's pregnant then because their concern for her tiny zygote is self-righteous and transparent.- Oni

If you support free speech does that make you pro-flagburning?The questions surrounding the availability of abortion are quite different from the questions as to whether someone should get an abortion.

I am not obliged to prove anything to you. I call it as I see it, I live here, this is my personnal view on how it happens here, and you are free to believe me or not.The Quebec government pays between 5000 and 10 000 dollars to send late abortion cases to Kansas. Not because it is illegal here, but because we don't havethe equipment for these late abortions. This some one time unique case; each and every woman who wants a late-abortion will have this service offered to her. (http://www.quebecoislibre.org/04/041015-4.htm)If you really think these kind of ressources are deployed for a young woman who wants to keep the child instead, but can't because of financial reasons, then you are fooling yourself.

No, but I guess it makes you pro-freespeech.I'm giving you the freakin' definition of the word. You're not humpty-dumpty and words don't mean what you want them to mean. Sorry to burst everyone's bubble here, but there is nothing pejorative about calling someone pro-abortion.If you are for abortions to be legal. Then you are pro-abortion. It's as simple as that. There is nothing in calling someone pro-abortion that mean they rejoice at the idea of abortions. It simply means that person thinks it should be legal.

I don't think they must be. The speed limit in Missouri is 70 mph and in Illinois its 65 mph. I don't think that has anything to do with a difference in the moral views of the societies. The "lag time" is also simply a result of the necessary judicial process(es). Laws need to be made for a reason so it makes sense that they would follow rather than lead. Agreed. So you think it should remain legal, then? I do even though I don't consider it a moral thing to do (although I suppose it could be in some situations). Fair enough.

You're a part of society. Your approach is part of the problem. You're one of those who is failing to provide the resources.Maybe your Christian community needs to focus some of its efforts closer to home. Instead of complaining about the choices that women make, maybe you need to make the alternatives more attractive.

---

"I'm Rory Bellows, I tell you! And I got a lot of corroborating evidence... over here... by the throttle!"

I'm still seeing a difference between the potential of a diploid to develop into a person and the lack of the potential of a haploid to without another haploid to join with. Because they're not practically the same thing. If that's the person's reason for holding their particular moral position, and they're comfortable without being able to pinpoint the emergence of the soul, then that's gonna be their reason regardless.It doesn't really matter that you don't like it That's different from an argument about the legality because a legal argument requires more justification than a moral one.

If you call somebody something they don't want to be called, that is perjorative (as well as rude).Despite your handy-dandy dictionary definition, I for one am decidedly NOT pro-abortion. I am decidedly ANTI-abortion. But I'm also anti-telling-people-how-to-run-their-lives.I'm pro-keeping-my-nose-out-of-other-people's-business. I'm pro-choice.

---

"I'm Rory Bellows, I tell you! And I got a lot of corroborating evidence... over here... by the throttle!"

Oni,Wow.You got to me.Well done.