Who disagrees with Paul that life beings at conception?

[ThePieSwindler]

I also disagree with Ron.

Does life begin at conception? Technically speaking.... yes. It's just as much alive as the bacteria on your stale leftovers, or the skin cells you constantly shed. Is it a human? Hardly.

I consider it a human when it has a brain, even a primitive one. I think therefore I am.

I'm pro-choice up until the formation of a brain. I would hope pro-lifers would at least provide exceptions for incest, rape, mortality risk to mother, a fetus that is genetically "incompatible with life", and those living at the poverty level who have no means to support a child, thus letting the pregnancy continue would be a burden to society.

See heres the thing. You are arguing an interesting semantics battle here. First off, i dont think ANYONE (not even very conservative christians i know) would force a mother to die for her child, so thats really a strawman - of course, as Ron Paul says, the vast majority of the time that is not needed if the right conditions and tools are present. As far as life beginning at conception, the simple fact that it has 1) human DNA and 2) has the capacity to, in literally a couple of weeks, develop a brain, that makes the person uniquely human with a unique identity. All a brain is is a collection of those cells that have that DNA that have begun to diversify from stem cells.

I am completely against a federal ban on abortion, however, for two reasons. One, i believe that following the constitution and not federalizing abortion on principle alone is more important than the specific issue. Second, abortions will always be performed, so at the very least allow it to be a possibility, even if its harder to attain one (like, you have to drive to another state). Plus, i hesitate to put a one size fits all legislation because there MIGHT be a RARE case where the mother needs an abortion, or where rape has occured and the mother did not voluntary assume the risk of conception, thus i do believe she has the right to abort because she never "assigned" that assumed contract. Essentially, Ron Paul's stance on the issue to leave it up to the states is the best way to go for both sides, because if something is federalized, espcially in the form of a court ruling, then when some pro life judges come in and a case is brought before them, they might "take away" the "precious right" to abortion. Leaving it to the states prevents that dilemma.

 

[Eric21ND]

This is such a divisive issue that really distracts from more important things. Basically intelligent people can disagree on both sides. I'm pro choice, and I agree with Ron Paul on nearly every other issue, but this one really choked me up for a while. Ron Paul's personal position is pro-life but he wouldn't dictate that to the states. That's how I mediate it. Let's be honest nothing is really going to change in this country. I believe abortion is here to stay. Left up to the states, the majority would allow it anyway.

 

[RockEnds]

I've always been pro-choice. Dr. Paul's pro-life position perplexed me for quite some time. I've never based my vote on abortion. I'm sick to death of hearing about abortion. Since Dr. Paul made it a central issue, I had to think about it. After reviewing the issue, I realized Dr. Paul may well be correct.

If our rights are derived from a Creator, we possess our rights from the moment of Creation. If our rights are granted by government, we attain them at birth through citizenship. I think I'm going to have to change my pro-choice stance.

I'm not at all religious. I don't claim to understand the essence of the 'Creator', but I understand the essence of Liberty. I think Dr. Paul has a point. It's impossible to preserve liberty without preserving life from the moment of conception. Maybe it's not a matter of right or wrong; maybe it's a matter of Rights or privileges.

At the very least, I appreciate the opportunity to engage in a little critical thinking. Most politicians don't have that to offer!

 

[max]

Let me get this straight. People are OK with america going bankrupt and a financial collapse.

TYhey are OK with being taxed to death.

Ther are OK with our troops dying for nothing.

They are OK with sleazy crooks and liars

just as long as their candidate is "pro-choice"???...Have you pro-choicers" ever heard of friggin birth control?????

Unfriggin believable

 

[mconder]

Technically, wouldn't you all agree that life begins even before the egg if fertilized. I mean the sperm seems to have some element of self determination. At what point would I call it a human life. I'd prefer to err on the side of caution and say it begins at conception, lest I enter into that "at what point do you call it life" argument, both sides having valid points to make. The women generally has a choice in the matter before she becomes pregnant. That is where the woman's choice in all this begins and ends...to get pregnant or not to get pregnant, that is the question. Isn't it? Of course there are those who are rapped or the pregnancy threatens the life of the mother, in which cases I would favor the woman making the decision.

 

[max]

Technically, wouldn't you all agree that life begins even before the egg if fertilized. I mean the sperm seems to have some element of self determination.

at the exact moment of conception...everything you are today was determined (physically that is...but also some eklements of your personality too)

You should check out some of the videos of actual abortions..gruesome stuff. Thats how I became pro-life.

But regardless of what side of this issue u are on....i agree that people who base the entire reason for voting for or against a candidate on abortion are goofy.

If RP was pro-abortion...I'd still vote for him

 

[stevedasbach]

I agree that it's a state issue -- the bill he introduced simply provided the means to return the issue to the states.

IMO, if that happens, virtally every state will keep abortion legal during the first trimester with few if any restrictions, and virtually all will outlaw it post-viability with some special circumstance exceptions. There will be a lot of variation between states on how second trimester abortions are treated.

 

[Man from La Mancha]

Technically, wouldn't you all agree that life begins even before the egg if fertilized. I mean the sperm seems to have some element of self determination. At what point would I call it a human life. I'd prefer to err on the side of caution and say it begins at conception, lest I enter into that "at what point do you call it life" argument, both sides having valid points to make. The women generally has a choice in the matter before she becomes pregnant. That is where the woman's choice in all this begins and ends...to get pregnant or not to get pregnant, that is the question. Isn't it? Of course there are those who are rapped or the pregnancy threatens the life of the mother, in which cases I would favor the woman making the decision.

Really, I don't have much sympathy for most woman over this. In this day and age there are many ways of birth control including not doing it. True the man is involved but who makes the final choice and bears the most consequences. Other than rape it is the woman. Killing a starting life is such a cruel and callus thing to do. All women have pro choice, just go oral. Doesn't bother me what ever she would like.

.

 

[Electric Church]

I'd agree life begins at conception, but I'm very much pro-choice. I feel that decision is between the woman and God.

The decision is the woman's not God's. God has already made a decision which is proved by the evidence of conception. The decision is the woman's: to decide to allow the child to live and be born or to decide to kill the child before birth. God lets her decide to do anything she wants.

 

[mconder]

God has already made a decision which is proved by the evidence of conception.

Would it be fair to say that when we nuked Hiroshima that God had already made the decision? I mean the laws of physics were out there and it just sort of like...happened.

 

[Politeia]

An interesting statistic

So far as I am aware, not one of the pro-abortion* partisans I have heard or read has ever been aborted emself. Not a very balanced sample.

*(I detest the euphemisms commonly used by both sides on the question: the issue is abortion, not "choice" or "life".)

 

[Man from La Mancha]

The decision is the woman's not God's. God has already made a decision which is proved by the evidence of conception. The decision is the woman's: to decide to allow the child to live and be born or to decide to kill the child before birth. God lets her decide to do anything she wants.

Where does does God say this and using that logic why not kill it after it is born if it is the womans choice, because as Ron pointed out it is illegal to kill it before it is born as when the mother is mudered. I'm not a Church goer or into any religious or atheists texts opinions?.

.

 

[LibertyOfOne]

I believe that abortion needs to be stopped at all costs. We have to do everything in our power to find a way to stop the unnecessary termination of unwanted pregnancy. I am outraged at the politicians for taking advantage of us all to get our votes without any real intent to solve the terrible issue of a woman going in for surgery to stop the birth of a child.

I am pro choice.

You don't see the contradiction in your statement?

 

[ladyliberty]

Abortion in any form at any stage of pregnancy is murder. Period. End of Sentence.

Dr. Paul witnessed/observed an abortion performed when he was in med school and the infant that was alive and crying was dropped into a bucket and thrown out like garbage. If you don't think it is murder, then maybe you ought to witness it for yourself and then you might change your mind.

As far as what the Bible says - "Thou shalt not kill."

 

[quickmike]

blah blah blah blah............... compared to all the other problems facing the country right now, this is by far the least of our problems. I cant believe anyone on either side of this issue would put its importance above all else when choosing who to vote for in a presidential election. Sure life is important, but like RP says, its a state issue.

 

[LibertyOfOne]

This is nothing but a wedge issue. Once the dollar takes its final dive the last thing you would care about is abortions.

 

[Politeia]

I cant believe anyone on either side of this issue would put its importance above all else when choosing who to vote for in a presidential election.

Actually, there are many who do, and will. And, like it or not, it is a fundamental -- the fundamental -- issue. Note that the classic formulation of rights does not say, "Liberty, Property, and Life": Neither Liberty nor Property is possible without Life, and as Dr. Paul says, a culture which claims to value the first two while waffling on the third is in a state of denial which must, sooner or later, be fatal.

It was interesting to hear Dr. Paul defending himself from an attack from fanatical Christians on this issue in a recent radio interview; it may not have occurred to people on this forum that he may lose votes from some quarters because he's seen as too soft on it. He's doing the best he can with an issue that is ultimately non-compromisable. There's no such thing as a little bit dead.

 

[ladyliberty]

I have been anti-abortion since the day I got my voter's registration card when I was 18. I will NEVER vote, have NEVER voted, for any politician who declares themselves to be so-called "pro-choice" or "pro-abortion" - if they have so little regard for innocent human lives, how much do they care about what happens to the rest of us?

Abortion was invented in the concentration camps of WWII by Nazi physicians who wanted to perform all sorts of horrible experiments on their imprisoned subjects, whom they felt were less than human and certainly not worthy of life.

There are far too many methods to actually prevent unwanted pregnancies - up to an including sterilization - that does not result in the murder of a human being. Why should a drunken party and irresponsibility result in the death of a human being?

America is the only country I know of that murders its own babies and yet adopts Chinese and Hungarian babies.

 

[quickmike]

Well Ill tell ya what. When our country is bankrupt and the government goes belly up, you can bet your ass that nobody will be enforcing abortion laws either way. So the way I see it, it wont matter what the abortion laws are unless we get our house in order financially first. All the abortion or anti abortion laws in the world wont have a dimes worth of value with no government to enforce them. Get your priorities straight folks, or were in for some BAD times here in america. If you feel the need to argue with me on this point................. go back and read the first few sentences in this post until it sinks in.

 

[inibo]

Every time this issue is raised I will post this link:

http://www.l4l.org/library/mythfact.html

I did not like it the first time I read it because it made me question my position on the issue. It also made me realize my position was based on shaky premises. If some one can refute it using scientific evidence, logic and reason--not opinions--I'd be happy to listen it because I still don't like it. I don't like getting old either, but there is nothing I can do about it.

Truth, like reality, is that which does not go away because you stop believing it.