LilLove wrote:

QUOTE:
I tend to be very scientific, as a reasult my idea of "human" is to have a nervous system.

Too me that doesn't make sense, because as most people with a training in the biological sciences know, having a nervous system does not necessarily define an organism as human. Many species have nervous systems... I just can't get on board with the pro-choice thing, because nothing makes sense about the arguments still. Hmmm... Interesting point, but I'm still looking for a compelling argument from the other side. Thank you for you input, though! I do appreciate it.

The point is that nobody asks questions about killing animals which have a lot more conciousness and are a lot more affected by being killed than an embryo which is completely obilivious that it is even alive at least in the early stages.

I do not agree with abortions at a late stage unless there ar emedical reasons but as in most civilised countries is the norm I think up to 3 months is o.k.

It is no more murder to kill an embryo of that size than it is to kill a jellyfish or a tadpole. I must admit I can't stand animals being killed much but if they are animals that are very primitive then it is much less of an issue. E.g. How many ants do you think you ave stood on in your life? Spiders squashed? Cockroaches? Flies swatted.

To a certain point in the pregnancy there is no difference. Humans are just another type of animal. We aren't special. Sorry.
Yes people should avoid getting pregnant if they don't a baby but no they aren't murderers for aborting something the size of a frog, with the mental capacity of a jellyfish.

This is what I believe- animals are for food, thus they have to be killed. Humainly please. God loves the unborn, thus I do not believe in killing them.

God shouldn't come into this argument theoretically. He doesn't exist, there was never any proof that he existed and even if he did I think he would love newborn calves and lambs just as much as he loved newborn babies. Besides which if god loved them sooo much there would be no miscarraiges and everyone would be fertile and last of all we aren

That is the way I see it.


I don't eat meat so I can according to your argument call you murderers for killing something unecessarily?

Meat is not necessary for human survival or nourishment nor is it the most economical solution. The production of meat for first world countries requires so much pasture (to feed the cows) that third world countries are missing out on the wheat that could have been grown on those same pastures. It is a fact.

I don't mean to diverge but the argument that animals are for food just does not cut it. The have the right to live as much as we do so unless you are a strict vegan don't think you are any better than someone who has an abortion.


Abortions are fine, meat eating is fine. They are completely comparable. They are both lifestyle decisions. You eat meat because you like it and another person may abort a child because she doesn't want to be responsible for it. Both situations involve killing neither of them should be considered murder.

I don't eat meat because I don't like it and can't stand the thought of biting into flesh not because I think it is wrong. But it is a perfectly fair comparison.

I believe what the Bible says on all issues, that's all.

Vienna wrote:

QUOTE:
God shouldn't come into this argument theoretically. He doesn't exist, there was never any proof that he existed and even if he did I think he would love newborn calves and lambs just as much as he loved newborn babies. Besides which if god loved them sooo much there would be no miscarraiges and everyone would be fertile and last of all we aren

That is the way I see it.


I don't eat meat so I can according to your argument call you murderers for killing something unecessarily?

Meat is not necessary for human survival or nourishment nor is it the most economical solution. The production of meat for first world countries requires so much pasture (to feed the cows) that third world countries are missing out on the wheat that could have been grown on those same pastures. It is a fact.

I don't mean to diverge but the argument that animals are for food just does not cut it. The have the right to live as much as we do so unless you are a strict vegan don't think you are any better than someone who has an abortion.


Abortions are fine, meat eating is fine. They are completely comparable. They are both lifestyle decisions. You eat meat because you like it and another person may abort a child because she doesn't want to be responsible for it. Both situations involve killing neither of them should be considered murder.

I don't eat meat because I don't like it and can't stand the thought of biting into flesh not because I think it is wrong. But it is a perfectly fair comparison.

Kay its called faith when you believe somthing even tho you can't see it!