Join Our Community!
Share
Debate Forums > Abortion Debate Forum > A challenging question for pro-lifers (Page 1)
User Profile
Q: A challenging question for pro-lifers
asked by: DamianaRaven on February 28th, 2009
Experienced User
Do you eat meat? If you do, I consider you a hypocrite. I'm tired of hearing that "life is sacred" argument from people who think nothing of gobbling down chickens, cows, fish, eggs, and whatnot when they could just as easily survive on vegetables and tofu. Your Sunday breakfast was some chicken's involuntary abortion and what you did for supper was an even greater outrage to avian nations everywhere!

For those who'll amend that all human life is sacred, why make that distinction? Are humans better than animals? If you can declare that, then why can't I declare that the born are superior to the unborn?

For all those vegan pro-lifers out there... ummm, keep fighting the good fight man!
Did you find this post useful?
|
Replies(31)
User Profile
Darkmoon
replied on February 28th, 2009
Active User, very eHealthy
I can tell you what they're going to say: non-human life doesn't count. Hell, born human life barely counts to some "prolifers".
Did you find this post useful?
|
User Profile
DamianaRaven
replied on February 28th, 2009
Experienced User
Well, I want to see someone "look me in the eye" so to speak and say that. I'm sure a few pro-lifers have already peeked at the question and slunk away quietly, not having a good enough answer.

It's hard to maintain such beliefs without looking like a hypocrite because you'd have to admit the distinction that some life is better and more worthy than others. After that, it's only a short hop to admitting that not all life is sacred after all.
Did you find this post useful?
|
User Profile
diamondsz
replied on February 28th, 2009
Extremely eHealthy
Darkmoon wrote:
I can tell you what they're going to say: non-human life doesn't count. Hell, born human life barely counts to some "prolifers".


52% voted yes on prop8 to make gay marriage illegal but they voted yes on prop 2 to allow domestic/farm animals to have better living conditions(such as limitations on animals in cages etc.) Gay people have less rights than animals and the unborn have more rights than gay people Rolling Eyes !!
Did you find this post useful?
|
User Profile
DamianaRaven
replied on February 28th, 2009
Experienced User
Some people need to cling desperately to their delusions that all human life is precious because... well, they're humans themselves. Deep beneath all that compassion lies a primal fear that if we don't put every aspect of human existence up on a pedestal, then one day someone might decide their lives aren't worth living and their deaths will make the world a better place for all.

I wish I could tell them that their fears are groundless, but I know of a few elderly Jews who can attest to the danger of categorizing and devaluing human existence. I wish there were artificial wombs that could house all these "homeless" fetuses, but I think of a woman's body much like a rental home for the unborn. If the landlord wants you out, you're evicted and forced to fend for yourself. You can feel compassion and even grief for the evicted party, but you can't go around forcing landlords to shelter people because it's cruel not to. My body is my property, more so than that apartment belongs to the landowner, so why should anyone be permitted to occupy it against my will? Squatting is illegal for EVERYONE!

Would my point be better made if all the aborted were carefully removed alive and left for God to decide whether they live or die? Maybe He'll be merciful and perform a miracle!
Did you find this post useful?
|
Avatar
jubijan
replied on March 1st, 2009
New User
I'm a prolifer. I believe in the sanctity of human life. I also believe that a baby is a baby from the moment of conception on, there is no grace period. Life starts at conception. I do not believe that a human's Size, Level of intelligence, Environment, or Development should have any bearing on determining whether it is a fetus or a human child. Moving something from inside to the outside does not change what it is. A puppy is still a puppy inside his mother's womb, why would it not be the same with a human. I have so much more to say on this subject, but my question is why don't you try and put yourself in the place of an unborn infant wouldn't you want a chance at life? Life is too wonderful to not have a chance at it.
Did you find this post useful?
|
User Profile
DamianaRaven
replied on March 1st, 2009
Experienced User
jubijan wrote:
I have so much more to say on this subject, but my question is why don't you try and put yourself in the place of an unborn infant wouldn't you want a chance at life? Life is too wonderful to not have a chance at it.


Nope. I wouldn't want a chance at life any more than I currently yearn for a zweepdozzle. As far as life being wonderful goes, why don't you try and put yourself in the place of a child prostitute (HIV infected for good measure and such miserable creatures do exist!) living in a squalid brothel her whole life, never seeing dime one of her "wages." Wouldn't you want to be spared the horror of every endless abuse you'd endured and trade a doomed existence of pure suffering for a momentary burning sensation and then the glory of God's eternal kingdom?
Did you find this post useful?
|
Avatar
oopoopoop
replied on March 1st, 2009
Extremely eHealthy
I yearn for a zweepdozzle.
Did you find this post useful?
|
User Profile
DamianaRaven
replied on March 1st, 2009
Experienced User
oopoopoop wrote:
I yearn for a zweepdozzle.


LOL - Like life, it sounds pretty cool but unless you know what it really is, are you sure you'd yearn for it? Maybe having one sucks and people would say, "Man, he had everything going for him and then that zweepdozzle came along and ruined it all! Poor guy..."
Did you find this post useful?
|
User Profile
diamondsz
replied on March 1st, 2009
Extremely eHealthy
DamianaRaven wrote:
jubijan wrote:
I have so much more to say on this subject, but my question is why don't you try and put yourself in the place of an unborn infant wouldn't you want a chance at life? Life is too wonderful to not have a chance at it.


Nope. I wouldn't want a chance at life any more than I currently yearn for a zweepdozzle. As far as life being wonderful goes, why don't you try and put yourself in the place of a child prostitute (HIV infected for good measure and such miserable creatures do exist!) living in a squalid brothel her whole life, never seeing dime one of her "wages." ?


Not only prostitues, kids being forced to marry before 16, I met a taxi driver last night who got married to his wife at 14 (hes 34) and has a 17 year old kid(hes from India.)

Kids as well as woman being killed in Jordan "to cleanse the family honor." In Jordan killing is an automatic death penalty except to cleanse the families honor, if a woman does something immoral you can almost get away for it.

Kids holding guns, look at Iraq and Afghanistan as well as other thrid world countries or countries in civil war, kids are being used as soldiers.

My kids father is from the phillipines, birth control is immoral/not provided and these kids rummage through garbage to eat food because parents need to keep popping out kids. Their father comes from a family of 5 and his parents made the equivalent of 60$ cdn a months which bought fresh water, rice and sometimes very oddly meat. They used to go into the Ocean and catch fishes to eat, they lived in a bamboo home until his father got a better job as a university professor later.

Is that a life to live?

I agree with you damiana btw so you don't take me out of context!
Did you find this post useful?
|
User Profile
GreyWolf
replied on March 1st, 2009
Experienced User
Re: A challenging question for pro-lifers
DamianaRaven wrote:
Your Sunday breakfast was some chicken's involuntary abortion and what you did for supper was an even greater outrage to avian nations everywhere!


I can see where you are coming from here, I'm a vegetarian.

Sorry, but the eggs we eat are unfertilized, hence they will never develop into chicks. They are not a "chicken's involuntary abortion" because they would never have developed into an embryo or later a foetus. Hens lay eggs regardless as to whether or not they have been mated by a cockerel. Fertilized eggs are not sold as food. The chickens that lay our eggs have not been mated. If you are trying to compare it to humans, it is the hen's equivalent of a period, as it is voided from the hen's body anyway.

I lean more in favour of pro-choice (but I don't think abortion should be taken lightly).
I must say, I can see where you are coming from. If you have an abortion at the very early stages of pregnancy, then what is being removed is an unaware and non-sentient ball of cells, which is much LESS aware and capable of feeling pain than the animal they are eating would have been.

I don't mean to be offensive or anything and sorry in advance if I come across that way. I'm not attempting to knock anyone's beliefs or anything.
Did you find this post useful?
|
User Profile
diamondsz
replied on March 1st, 2009
Extremely eHealthy
Re: A challenging question for pro-lifers
GreyWolf wrote:
DamianaRaven wrote:
Your Sunday breakfast was some chicken's involuntary abortion and what you did for supper was an even greater outrage to avian nations everywhere!


I can see where you are coming from here, I'm a vegetarian.

Sorry, but the eggs we eat are unfertilized, hence they will never develop into chicks. They are not a "chicken's involuntary abortion" because they would never have developed into an embryo or later a foetus. Hens lay eggs regardless as to whether or not they have been mated by a cockerel. Fertilized eggs are not sold as food. The chickens that lay our eggs have not been mated. If you are trying to compare it to humans, it is the hen's equivalent of a period, as it is voided from the hen's body anyway.

.


Not necessarily, I forget the name of it but people and alot of cultures eat fertilized egg (specifically duck embryo.) The kids father used to eat it all the time and its gross, you can buy this delicacy at most Asian food stores.

Oh btw its called "Balut"
Did you find this post useful?
|
Avatar
oopoopoop
replied on March 1st, 2009
Extremely eHealthy
Re: A challenging question for pro-lifers
GreyWolf wrote:
DamianaRaven wrote:
Your Sunday breakfast was some chicken's involuntary abortion and what you did for supper was an even greater outrage to avian nations everywhere!


I can see where you are coming from here, I'm a vegetarian.

Sorry, but the eggs we eat are unfertilized, hence they will never develop into chicks. They are not a "chicken's involuntary abortion" because they would never have developed into an embryo or later a foetus. Hens lay eggs regardless as to whether or not they have been mated by a cockerel. Fertilized eggs are not sold as food. The chickens that lay our eggs have not been mated. If you are trying to compare it to humans, it is the hen's equivalent of a period, as it is voided from the hen's body anyway.

I lean more in favour of pro-choice (but I don't think abortion should be taken lightly).
I must say, I can see where you are coming from. If you have an abortion at the very early stages of pregnancy, then what is being removed is an unaware and non-sentient ball of cells, which is much LESS aware and capable of feeling pain than the animal they are eating would have been.

I don't mean to be offensive or anything and sorry in advance if I come across that way. I'm not attempting to knock anyone's beliefs or anything.


I keep hens -- and cockerels. And ducks, and a drake. Most of the eggs I eat are fertilised (note -- there is NO difference in the taste or nature of the eggs!)I do someone who is a vegetarian who refuses to keep a cockerel, because she doesn't believe in eating fertile eggs -- I don't know her views on aborting humans, however.

(And it is not the equivalent of a human menstruation, but of ovulation. The oviduct simply ends outside, rather than in a uterus, since young are not gestated internally.)

I do agree that killing and eating a chicken or other animal has far greater impact that aborting an embryo or fetus.
Did you find this post useful?
|
Users who thank oopoopoop for this post: GreyWolf 
User Profile
GreyWolf
replied on March 1st, 2009
Experienced User
Re: A challenging question for pro-lifers
oopoopoop wrote:
GreyWolf wrote:
DamianaRaven wrote:
Your Sunday breakfast was some chicken's involuntary abortion and what you did for supper was an even greater outrage to avian nations everywhere!


I can see where you are coming from here, I'm a vegetarian.

Sorry, but the eggs we eat are unfertilized, hence they will never develop into chicks. They are not a "chicken's involuntary abortion" because they would never have developed into an embryo or later a foetus. Hens lay eggs regardless as to whether or not they have been mated by a cockerel. Fertilized eggs are not sold as food. The chickens that lay our eggs have not been mated. If you are trying to compare it to humans, it is the hen's equivalent of a period, as it is voided from the hen's body anyway.

I lean more in favour of pro-choice (but I don't think abortion should be taken lightly).
I must say, I can see where you are coming from. If you have an abortion at the very early stages of pregnancy, then what is being removed is an unaware and non-sentient ball of cells, which is much LESS aware and capable of feeling pain than the animal they are eating would have been.

I don't mean to be offensive or anything and sorry in advance if I come across that way. I'm not attempting to knock anyone's beliefs or anything.


I keep hens -- and cockerels. And ducks, and a drake. Most of the eggs I eat are fertilised (note -- there is NO difference in the taste or nature of the eggs!)I do someone who is a vegetarian who refuses to keep a cockerel, because she doesn't believe in eating fertile eggs -- I don't know her views on aborting humans, however.

(And it is not the equivalent of a human menstruation, but of ovulation. The oviduct simply ends outside, rather than in a uterus, since young are not gestated internally.)

I do agree that killing and eating a chicken or other animal has far greater impact that aborting an embryo or fetus.


I know there is no noticeable difference between fertilised and unfertilised eggs.

Ok, so I was incorrect on the fertilisation thing. I appologize.

What I stand by however it that it is still not the same as a chicken "abortion". Just because a chicken lays eggs, doesn't mean they are all aborted chicks.

I don't work with chickens but I know enough to know that chickens lay eggs regardless as to whether or not they mate. Just because a chicken lays eggs, does not mean they will all become chicks. It is not the chicken equivalent of an abortion because fertilised or not the chicken will still lay the eggs.

"I do agree that killing and eating a chicken or other animal has far greater impact that aborting an embryo or fetus."

Yes, I agree, I don't fully understand it either.
Did you find this post useful?
|
Avatar
spanishfly
replied on March 1st, 2009
New User
IMO
no matter how you look at it, destroying life of any kind is wrong. none of us is God. Sooo...
However, people have the right to choose. Anyone who tells a woman she HAS to have a baby that she doesn't want has lost his/her mind. Especially when that woman is a victim. But women who continue to have unprotected sex and keep getting knocked up and keep killing these kids are worthless excuses for human beings. Seriously. As far as eating animals...I prefer not to think about what type of meat I'm eating, otherwise, I'd probably become vegan. lol.
Did you find this post useful?
|
Avatar
jubijan
replied on March 1st, 2009
New User
DamianaRaven Wrote:
Nope. I wouldn't want a chance at life any more than I currently yearn for a zweepdozzle. As far as life being wonderful goes, why don't you try and put yourself in the place of a child prostitute (HIV infected for good measure and such miserable creatures do exist!) living in a squalid brothel her whole life, never seeing dime one of her "wages." Wouldn't you want to be spared the horror of every endless abuse you'd endured and trade a doomed existence of pure suffering for a momentary burning sensation and then the glory of God's eternal kingdom?


Question: Should we just kill off anyone who is in pain or has had rough times? Or should we try to change things like child slave labour, arranged marriages for 14 yr old girls? I have friends who were married at the age of fourteen, I spent 4 months in India working with people from all walks of life. They want help, not abortion, euthinasia, and mercy killing. What are you doing to help or are you just mouthing off?! If you think life sucks, why are you still here? There is something that makes you want to live. I have lots of reasons to love this life, even when things don't go my way.

The decision for of pro-life or pro-choice does not start when someone discovers their pregnancy, it starts with their choice to have sex or not. And for those who are pregnant by horrific actions, such as rape, I have only compassion and hurt for them. I cannot understand what they go through but I do recognize the validity and seriousness of the decisions they make. I do not condemn them for their choices.
Did you find this post useful?
|
User Profile
DamianaRaven
replied on March 1st, 2009
Experienced User
jubijan wrote:
What are you doing to help or are you just mouthing off?! If you think life sucks, why are you still here?


I do as much as I can to help, and believe me it's a lot more than just mouthing off on message boards! However, I do think it's low-class to list one's charity contributions in the hopes of gaining some credibility or a few extra smug points. Suffice it to say that I'm involved in the problem of child abuse and human slavery.

Also, you should realize that speaking out is a form of helping when you seek to educate others about one source of the world's problems. Overpopulation has caused more misery that could ever be measured.

jubijan wrote:
Should we just kill off anyone who is in pain or has had rough times?


You like to answer questions with more questions, don't you? You're hoping the audience won't notice that you have no answers while they're watching for mine. Furthermore, it was a childish question. I state that abortion could ease suffering by (for one thing) reducing the number of human being vying for the same limited resources and you pop back with, "If that's so, why don't we just kill everyone who's suffering?" I'll play that game. Let's do it. Let's track down every human that nobody on the planet gives a crap about and shoot them in the back of the head, if it'll suit your analogy. Mercy-killing is not homicide, which is why I'm so vocal about keeping abortion unvilified.

There are too many people on this planet, plain and simple. Unless abortion is permitted, there will be more.
Did you find this post useful?
|
Avatar
NeutralUsername
replied on March 2nd, 2009
Active User, very eHealthy
Re: A challenging question for pro-lifers
DamianaRaven wrote:
Do you eat meat? If you do, I consider you a hypocrite. I'm tired of hearing that "life is sacred" argument from people who think nothing of gobbling down chickens, cows, fish, eggs, and whatnot when they could just as easily survive on vegetables and tofu. Your Sunday breakfast was some chicken's involuntary abortion and what you did for supper was an even greater outrage to avian nations everywhere!

For those who'll amend that all human life is sacred, why make that distinction? Are humans better than animals? If you can declare that, then why can't I declare that the born are superior to the unborn?

For all those vegan pro-lifers out there... ummm, keep fighting the good fight man!


Um, if you're pro-choice for women, shouldn't you be pro-choice for OTHER female animals? I hope you don't eat female animals. Especially if they didn't get to have babies. I hope you don't believe in forced breeding of FEMALE animals. I hope you don't' believe in spaying FEMALE animals. Who are you to decide that a female animal shouldn't be able to mate? I also hope you don't believe in animal abortions.

You may want to think about your ridiculous argument a little more.
Did you find this post useful?
|
User Profile
DamianaRaven
replied on March 2nd, 2009
Experienced User
Re: A challenging question for pro-lifers
NeutralUsername wrote:
Um, if you're pro-choice for women, shouldn't you be pro-choice for OTHER female animals? I hope you don't eat female animals. Especially if they didn't get to have babies. I hope you don't believe in forced breeding of FEMALE animals. I hope you don't' believe in spaying FEMALE animals. Who are you to decide that a female animal shouldn't be able to mate? I also hope you don't believe in animal abortions.

You may want to think about your ridiculous argument a little more.


Ridiculous argument? It looks as if you're challenging that I'm a hypocrite unless I see things the "pro-life" way. I never claimed to care about the rights of animals. I'm pointing out that life ISN'T sacred and that the right to life is an arbitrary and selective hypocrisy. For someone to get worked up over the rights of a fetus (because it's aliiiiive) and then turn around and gobble down slaughtered life at every meal is hypocrisy, plain and simple. I think you're being nasty and confrontational, because since you can't reconcile your beliefs with what I said, you must attack mine. Nice try!
Did you find this post useful?
|
Avatar
NeutralUsername
replied on March 2nd, 2009
Active User, very eHealthy
Re: A challenging question for pro-lifers
DamianaRaven wrote:
NeutralUsername wrote:
Um, if you're pro-choice for women, shouldn't you be pro-choice for OTHER female animals? I hope you don't eat female animals. Especially if they didn't get to have babies. I hope you don't believe in forced breeding of FEMALE animals. I hope you don't' believe in spaying FEMALE animals. Who are you to decide that a female animal shouldn't be able to mate? I also hope you don't believe in animal abortions.

You may want to think about your ridiculous argument a little more.


Ridiculous argument? It looks as if you're challenging that I'm a hypocrite unless I see things the "pro-life" way. I never claimed to care about the rights of animals. I'm pointing out that life ISN'T sacred and that the right to life is an arbitrary and selective hypocrisy. For someone to get worked up over the rights of a fetus (because it's aliiiiive) and then turn around and gobble down slaughtered life at every meal is hypocrisy, plain and simple. I think you're being nasty and confrontational, because since you can't reconcile your beliefs with what I said, you must attack mine. Nice try!


If pro-lifers are hypcrotical for supporting the killing of other animals, then pro-choicers are hypocritical for not supporting the reproductive rights of other born animals!

Hypocrisy would come from both sides, then! Do you not see how ridiculous it is to call pro-lifers hypocrites? Do you at least see the hypocrisy from the pro-choice side, also? I notice you completely ignored my argument!
Did you find this post useful?
|
12 >>
Quick Reply
Search