Ferret

Cheers to stepping outside the sexist church!

I wouldn’t call god or evolution sexist, I would however, call you sexist! Nice straw man by the way- slavery. Show me one fetus that is a sentient human cognizant of being owned by another. Just one. Your argument is ludicrous. Its ignorant to think that making it illegal will end it or even have much effect on the numbers- do your research.

The problem w/people like you, the anti-choice people, is your inability or flat-out unwillingness to deal with the reality that women are capable of making moral, rational, emotional decisions about whether to be the host body for embryos that have the potential to become human beings. We don’t need old white men in positions of power to tell us what to do with our bodies.

More than 30% of all pregnancies end in miscarriage, so it seems that god’s solution a significant part of the time is infanticide- as you call it. Your way is misogynistic and ignorant.

But the real reason I was coming to comment Kim is that I too wished I could have been an alter-boy or something and had the WHOLE MASS memorized. Still do actually even though I so rarely go it isn’t even funny. It always drove me nuts when I knew what the priest was supposed to say better than he did and would get lost trying to read it out of the book. I was like jeez you do this every day HOW DO YOU NOT KNOW THIS BY NOW!!!!! And they wonder why people get fed up with the church.

Thanks for linking to me
Ferret

Perhaps, we should have made slavery safer and more humane? Maybe offered education to the slave-owning class?

The problem with the pro-choice/pro-abortion movement is its inability or flat-out unwillingness to deal with the reality that TWO humans are present in a pregnant woman.

You can argue that God or evolution (or both) are sexist, forcing child-bearing on women, but reality is what it is. An impregnated woman carries within her body another distinct human being.

We can agree that unplanned and unwanted pregnancies are a problem. Where we differ is in our answers to this problem. Your answer is infanticide.

My argument is that pro-lifers wanting to make it illegal is not the best way to reduce abortion. We disagree on how to make sure it happens less. If you look at studies around the world- making it illegal is ineffective- we’ve tried that here. I believe women have the right and the moral ability to make decisions about their bodies. Perhaps people should debate about when the cut off should be? But not providing proper sex education and making it illegal is the stupidest decision- a proven failure.

Nice strawman.

Kim said:

“…early term abortions- just blastocytes- not a baby.”

According to wikipedia, “Early-term surgical abortion is a simple procedure which is safer than childbirth when performed before the 16th week.”

At 22 days, a human embryo has a heart that beats with the child’s own blood, often a different type than the mothers’.

At week 6, a human has detectable brain waves; mouth and lips are present; fingernails are forming.

At week 8, every human organ is in place, bones begin to replace cartilage, and fingerprints begin to form. The human can begin to hear.

At week 12, a human fetus has all of the parts necessary to experience pain, including nerves, spinal cord, and thalamus. Vocal cords are complete. The human fetus can suck its thumb.

By week 16 (the tail-end of the “early term”), bone marrow is now beginning to form. The heart is pumping 25 quarts of blood a day.

Just blastocytes, eh?

http://blatzkrieg.wordpress.com/2008/06/19/baby-survives-abortion-attains-personhood-from-mothers-delight/