January 22, 2007
-
Roe v. Wade Part 2
Are people who are pro-life being manipulative when they use an ultrasound picture of a fetus (baby) to make their point?
Are people who are pro-life being manipulative when they use an ultrasound picture of a fetus (baby) to make their point?
Comments (233)
Of course not.
I guess we all use the necessary tools available.
no
Ahh– my first first!!
whats manipulative about it?
argh; no.
No, they’re just using technology.
No. What those images are, are the FACTS.
no…they are only showing there is a life within the womb and the heart begin beating very early in pregnancy
No.
no.
no
eh, they moreso make themselves look uneducated & stupid. kinda like when they use fake abortion photos of a cut up baby & say all abortions look like this. meanwhile only less than 1% of abortions look like that.
they only show the life that could be, not the point they wish to make. i for one believe the woman has the right to choose whether to keep her child or not. no one should tell others how to live their life. you have to think of all the situations that the parent could be going through.
yes.
if you saw a baby seal, wouldn’t you want to save the seals more? children aren’t all cuteness and pretty faces. Its like using “cuteness factor” to prove your point, which isn’t really a valid point in a debate.
Yes. People are also manipulative when they call a fetus “baby”.
A fetus is post-embryonic, pre-birth. A baby is post-birth. The end.
That depends, if they are showing a three month or older fetus and then trying to act like it is youger, then yes. If not, then no, they can show whatever they want to make their point. but it should be factual and I don’t think they have the right to stand in front of clinics and attack women with their pictures. I believe in making informed choices, but not by force.
how is that being manipulative ??
sure they are
is there anything wrong w/ that?
how else do you convince people to come to your side of the argument unless you manipulate them?
in a way they could be. but both sides do a fair amount of manipulating.
Interesting question…
Larry doesn’t think so…
Larry also doesn’t think this is going to be a very love-filled topic…
HUGS FOR EVERYONE!!!
Larry loves you all very much.
No!
Do you consider presenting factual evidence to be manipulative?
Not at all.
I think we all unknowingly give our point of view on certain situations through our actions and words
No one ever means to, but your morals are a part of you so of course they will be shown some how
-Jayne
No, pro-baby death people are being manipulative when they refuse to look at those pictures. Abortion clinics don’t even tell woman the serious emotional trauma of having an abortion.
No. I don’t think they are trying to manipulate, or even win over. Usually the reaction is the person becoming infuriated. Everybody knows what an aborted baby is… a corpse. As a result, I think it is usually taken as the pro-lifer insulting the intelligence of the pro-choicer or the person who hasn’t made up their mind.
I guess it is manipulative… like trying change a discussion to a fight.
No not at all.
I’m sorry… I thought you meant a picture of a dead baby to make their point about abortion. I mis-read you.
No more than the Young Underground used real facts about death camps to tell the truth in Nazi Germany…
No more than abolitionists told horror stories of what really went on the South…
No more than pacificts who show gruesome war footage…
The truth is the truth. It’s never manipulation. Lies are manipulation. Pro-choice is manipulation through fear, selfishness, and ignorance.
no
Ultrasound pictures? Not really. Showing pictures of aborted babies? Yes, sir.
“what’s manipulative about it?”
Just what I was going to ask.. until I read a couple other comments. Honestly, I think it’s ignorant to NOT see an ultrasound picture and just imagine the baby, or “fetus”, as a blob of un-developed tissue.
It’s just showing what is…that can’t be manipulative because that is what a baby inside a mother looks like. Guess what! It’s a baby!
-Josh
Oh, and RYC: thanks.. I think
no, showing photos of aborted babies is. showing an ultrasound picture of a baby is a much less ugly way of showing a fact.
No. They are defending the fetus’ life, so whats wrong with showing pictures of him/her?
I wouldn’t go that far.
Only if truth can be considered manipulation…
lol i beleive u got this from MOiII
and yes
both ways though
Somewhat… but then again, are advocating the potential harm to fetuses when more ultrasounds than are necessary are taken? There were quite a few debates going on about that a while ago.
Appeals to emotions are classic debate tactics. For example, how many people would really donate to childrens charities if they didn’t actually see videos of children that seem impoverished and undernourished? As unromantic as it seems, the truth is that far less people would.
Not manipulative, just stupid. Using a picture of a fetus proves very little about its state of being. I could show you an equally adorable picture of a baby carved from wood, and it wouldn’t make anyone like trees any more.
Yes.
Everyone’s saying it’s “actual evidence”. OK, except there’s nothing being said; they’re just abusing people’s response to cuteness.
Don’t get me started about them dragging their kids out on the streets to parade around these pictures. Those are the offspring I feel bad for.
Emotionally so, yes. But so is showing a picture of a dead child or telling stories of women who has been forced (possibly against their own will) to get an illegal abortion.
Oh, and as a response to faerieshadow’s question “Do you consider presenting factual evidence to be manipulative?”
Yes, I do. No matter what side of any argument you are on, facts can be (and are) manipulated everywhere. This one, the example of a fetus, is merely a argument of definition that people can deem as “fact.”
I’m torn. Partly yes and partly no.
Nah. It’s just really annoying. I don’t want to see the little devil, even if I looked like him.
Are the pro-choice crowd being manipulative when they show growth charts in abortion clinics that were proven to be fraudulent a hundred years ago? Oh wait the answer to that one is yes.
I can’t see how showing a picture of a baby is manipulative, it’s a picture of a baby. If it has that much effect on you that you have problems with it, why are you all for killing him/her if their mom wants to?
What’s so bad about manipulation? I assume that if someone really cares about an issue, he/she WILL want to manipulate me. I have no problem with that. What bugs me is when people are dishonest in their attempt to influence me.
Yes, but every side of everything is manipulative. It’s naive to think otherwise.
I think they cross the line when they make posters with pictures of aborted fetuses.
It makes me sick how they use images like that to scare people into being pro-life.
I’m pro-life and I would never use fear to sway someone. I have my opinion, and others have theirs.
nope
And really, it is being manipulative because the aborted fetus rarely resembles a baby at that stage. But everything is manipulative.
um, no?!
it’s simply the truth and nothing but it.
Well yeah, considering a picture of a fetus does not persuade nor dissuade abortion. It’s just a picture of an unborn child.
They can’t manipulate my opinion.
Candy
Yes; but I don’t think that kind of manipulation is at all bad. It’s called persuasion by most people.
Interesting how upset people get over semantics.
No.
I like faerieshadow’s reply:
“Do you consider presenting factual evidence to be manipulative?”
Not unless they alter the pictures somehow, or lie about when they were taken,etc.
Well, yeah. But EVERYONE is manipulative when they’re trying to make a point. That’s the only way to be convincing — squash the opposing view, manipulate your side!
not any more than any other group of people are… its the truth though, its not like theyre making it up
Yes. People are also manipulative when they call a fetus “baby”.
A fetus is post-embryonic, pre-birth. A baby is post-birth. The end.
Posted 1/22/2007 7:37 PM by FlyingLike_aCementKite
I agree.
Not to mention that before 5 months (I think), A FETUS CANNOT LIVE OUTSIDE OF THE MOTHER, SO IT’S NOT ALIVE TO BEGIN WITH!
Sheesh, these pro-lifers need to re-take biology.
if that is manipulative, so is refusing to show them. People deserve to know exactly what they’re doing before they make a choice.
I am pro-choice. I choose not to have sex outside of marriage in the first place. Wow, I never knew birth control and planned parenthood could be so simple!
No. Facts = facts.
everyone uses propaganda to their advantage, even if they dont realize it, just more finger pointing…
Not at all, just showing that it is a baby and not a “thing” or a “mass of tissue” is presenting the facts, straight and simple.
If someone feels like it’s not fair to show them what they’re killing, perhaps they should reconsider what they’re doing and think about the fact that they ARE killing a child.
You bet your boots, they are!
Yes.
Just because it looks like a baby, doesn’t mean it’s a baby.
A baby is post-birth. A fetus is pre-birth, post-embryonic.
It is alive in my books, but it is NOT a baby. Not yet, at least.
I think pro-choice folks could do the same thing using pics of kids beaten to death by abusive parents.
Lots of people just shouldn’t have kids.
no, they’re just proving their point
not really manipulative
No!
uh no. it is there…i dont even see how that could be construed as manipulative
No. It’s making information that is available to everyone more available.
Haha if anyone has a basis for calling it manipulative, then it proves the fallacy of being pro-choice. If it’s just matter then how can it be manipulative? It only carries weight because it shows very clearly what the truth is.
-Jared
The truth can be very persuasive.
not at all, because its showing the FACTS. a woman deserves to know exactly who it is she is killing. it isnt a blob of tissue. it is a living, breathing, growing HUMAN BEING.
I would say yes…..but people have there own opions I for one am pro-choice
It wouldn’t change my opinion looking at a fetus that is only at 10 weeks gestation, or 3 for that matter. I have ultrasound pictures of both of my pregnancies at approximately 10-11 weeks and those pictures are of my children. Not just some foreign fetus.
kind of like those morons who put out those disgusting pictures saying abortion is murder. God, imagine if you had an abortion and you walked to work one day and some guy is screaming with these disgusting pictures that you have murdered someone…jesus christ, imagine how you would feel
yes
Derek
How about I show you guys a picture of a woman receiving an abortion coathanger style? Would that be manipulative?
manipulative might be too strong of a word…
something like that, though, yeah
I think that in this case, “manipulation” is called for.
All information is manipulative, or it wouldn’t be much use, would it?
Of course not.
challenge__xo IS NOW TAKING SIGN-UPS!
Please read the last entry, Sign Up, and Subscribe.
I am still taking suggestions.
Thank You, <3 Kitty.
not sure I’m getting what could possibly be manipulative about…
pro-choice people using rape as the scape goat–now that’s manipulation…look at some statistics, less than 1% of abortions are due to rape..
no
ryc: it’s crazy but it seems he does. i thought for sure his stance on the issue would be identical to mine. i didnt like the idea at all, but the more you protest, the more they do. kids.
Reality is hard for some people to take. They would rather not know that there is a living being in their body. A child waiting to be born.
No, it’s FACT! I hope cold hard facts manipulate people’s opinions (in the RIGHT direction, too).
Arguments ARE manipulation. On the other hand, half the pro-life arguments are complete bullshit. And those pictures are going to be pretty meaningless unless the fetus is a lot more developed than when abortion occurs. So it’s probably pretty misleading.
These protestors came to my town, with their kids, right? And they [and the kids] are waving these big, glossy signs with pictures of bits of babies speared on forks and knives – all very graphic, bloody, burned pieces, etc. If they’re so worried about kids maybe they shouldn’t be showing that shit too the little 5 and 6 year olds they’ve got waving it, and all the other kids driving by in their parents car. People like that are fucking sick.
Another thing: if your going to insist that everyone has every baby they conceive – why don’t you actually TEACH BIRTH CONTROL. Because your good little Christian girls are NOT waiting. Duh.
nope.
Here’s a good one:
ABORTION – The only way Conservatives DON’T approve of killing people.
[Those pictures from the last post are WAY past abortion].
Good point Dan.
Dan I removed you from myspace because I have done away with my myspace; kindof
no
and if it is manipulative, didn’t those pictures look like a baby? I clearly saw a face. So I’d rather being manipulative than murderous.
yes and no. anyone with a heart would feel remorse for a small child-fetus. but pro-choicers also have real facts to bring against a picture of something inside a womb.
I guess, you could call it propaganda.
The thing is, pro-choice people dont go around showing pictures of crack babys and such to show their point. I think that this is one issue the public needs to get out of. To quote my father:
If you’ve had an abortion-You can have an opinion
If you’ve adopted a child- You can have an opinion
If you’re a man- STFU!
no, it’s just the facts! The picture shown on the ultrasound is what’s inside!
How about I show you guys a picture of a woman receiving an abortion coathanger style? Would that be manipulative?
Posted 1/22/2007 8:40 PM by jimmyjazz86
I would love to see a pro-choice person do that at a debate. After that we’ll show the number of people in the world and ask if we need anymore
Yes.
Yes. It’s meant to pull at your heartstrings, rather than looking at the reality of the World Out There and the circumstances under which so many women see abortion as their only option.
No. It’s a picture. They didn’t skew statistics or anything.
Not really. I guess they’re just supporting their idea by using evidence.
maybe, why not?
somewhat. the reason we feel emotional over foetuses is the reason we feel emotional about monkies: they LOOK human.
eh, they moreso make themselves look uneducated & stupid. kinda like when they use fake abortion photos of a cut up baby & say all abortions look like this. meanwhile only less than 1% of abortions look like that.
Posted 1/22/2007 7:33 PM by AbandonBliss
Ok, sorry, I am doing the very thing I hate about other people and I am going to copy and paste someone elses comment to make a point.
I studied the different types of ways you can have an abortion (in a very difficult biology class) and they are all ridiculously gruesome. Something people would freak out about if you did it to animal babies.
This agruement is a moral issue and since most people don’t want to have the burden of morals they are going to believe that abortions are ok any ways, with or without photos and good reasons to ban them.
They do have christian organizations that will try and find your kid a family if you cannot afford him, and they can always get government aid. Really there is no excuse to give up on a baby just because it is difficult. Unless you are a mother of nine and you are going to die if you have this particular baby you should not have an excuse.
You do not have a choice when it comes to killing another human, why should killing a form of life be any different unless it could be life threatening to the mother?
someone else made a good point, too, that those ‘photos’ are far past the legal time period in which an abortion can be performed.
at that stage, our foetuses resemble fish as much as they do humans.
They are using factual evidence to support their logic.
No. Fake abortion pictures is what I hope I’ve seen because seeing cut up aborted babies is so depressing.
All is fair in war.
Yes if manipulation is defined as causing you to pull your head out of your uh I mean the sand and face the truth. No if manipulation is defined as twisting the facts to suit your position.
If showing evidence to prove a point is manipulative, then yes.
Duh.
Uhh, no comment about the whole q..
But no, I won’t hold that dude against it..
I thought it was qutie funny, actually… Not what he said, but the fact that he actually took the time to comment me…
Love me or hate me, it’s still an obsession. :] (That’s from a Lady Sovereign song..)
Yes definitely.
They are trying to humanize to provoke sympathy.
Do you consider presenting factual evidence to be manipulative?
Posted 1/22/2007 7:44 PM by faerieshadow
It’s not exactly factual considering many people have different opinions on when a fetus/baby/egg is considered to be alive. In some religions, people believe things without a soul do not go to heaven, including animals and fetuses.
But if they want to persuade others to join their group, then they’re doing it the right away.
As said earlier–if the pictures ARE past the legal abortion stage, yes.
If not–something to think about, but manipulative nonetheless.
Fact: It’s a baby fetus.
Fact: it might be past first trimester.
Fact: It is all a part of propaganda for an interest group agenda that probably will not benefit humanity.
Many things are facts, but many of those can also be taken out of context to mislead public.
I steer away from politics for a reason–there’re bullshitting on all sides.
One side in particular, maybe, but it’s everywhere.
No they’re being realistic and showing the reality of the situation. I don’t think that is manipulation at all.
They could also show pictures of babies cut up and shrivled up from an abortion they just went through.
That might be a TAD manipulative.
Maybe.
But no. Showing pictures of babies in the womb is not manipulative.
Yes. They are using any means necessary to make their point. Even going so far as to guilt trip the opposing party or (in radical cases) picketing outside clinics and harassing the people going in, as if those people didnt already have enough on their minds.
Hows about everyone mind their own business and let people do what they need to do. How about that.
It is a bit manipulative, but they’re trying to get their point across. I do think that they should think more about it though. It’s not always a bad thing. If the kid’s going to have some disease that will kill them anyway and make their life be one of suffering.. they don’t deserve to have to live it.
If they wanted to be manipulative they would show what an aborted fetus looks like . . . And what is the big deal about a National Pro Life day? They could have a National Pro Choice day and no one would blink . . . ridiculous!
Oh, and just for the record . . I gave a baby up for adoption, so I CAN have an opinion . . .LOL
Both sides manipulate. Both sides of every case ever thought up have used manipulation. Manipulation is part of making a political case. Propaganda manipulates. Facts used as propaganda manipulate. Even straight facts change people’s minds, influence them, manipulate them.
Nope
The truth in the pictures is not manipulative, it does not allow for the murders of innocent life, to think of it as an unviable tissue mass….
No, just pointing out the facts
Indeed, the burqinis have their charm
Regarding the current question: no, it’s just a picture of a fetus that might be aborted.
Mmm…in a way. They’re just trying to pull at ‘heart strings’, but being as how I have no heart, umm…such images have no effect on me besides disgust.
um, more than a little.
but at the same time, it sometimes makes people consider needless abortions if they think about that child AS a child and not as some random tumor growing in them or something.
just a thought.
No.
And I am aggravated at these comments about no body being formed. Doesn’t anyone know anything baout abortions? You do realize they are required to COUNT body parts right? Granted there are many times when there isn’t much to count but to have a heartbeat, doesn’t there have to be a heart? And btw it’s usually there around the 18th day. Meaning by the time the girl REALIZES she’s pregnant and gets the balls to check it out, most likely her kid’s heart is pounding away.
Course I’m biased. I worked at Women’s Resource Center. At planned parenthood they told the girls there was no heartbeat. The screen was pointed away from them so they couldn’t see and most of them were too scared to ask anything. Just basic questions which were then answered by rehearsed lies (for the most part.)
I remember one girl. She went to PPhood and they told her there wasn’t a heart beat. The next day she came into the Women’s Resource Center and we SHOWED her the heart beat. She was three weeks pregnant. I was irate. How could you lie to someone about a beating heart?
“Nobody should be able to tell others what to do with their life.”
This means that you can’t tell a baby “DIE” because it’s not your life.
butthead.
Roflroflroflrofl Dan! I love how you subliminally enter your opinion IN PARENTHESIS AFTER THE TRUE STATEMENT. And uh, no it doesn’t annoy me, because what they’re still showing me is a fetus, nothing has changed. Just because it may look somewhat close to a human being, it isn’t a baby yet.
“”Nobody should be able to tell others what to do with their life.”
This means that you can’t tell a baby “DIE” because it’s not your life.
butthead.”
Alright first of all, leave the insults back in your first grade classroom. Second of all, it’s not a fucking baby, it’s a fetus. True abortions take place before a certain point.
Plus, giving birth could be even more fatal to the NOW (after it is born) baby. Is it supposed to grow up if the parents can’t protect it? What if the mother dies during birth? Eh? The main issue here is the right of the women, and their right to choose what goes on with their own body.
Is it manipulative to show pictures of a horrible car wreck where the driver had been drinking and driving in order to convince people not to drink and drive? This is reality, folks, and if you can capture it in a photo in order to save someone’s life then let’s get out the cameras!
“If they wanted to be manipulative they would show what an aborted fetus looks like . . . And what is the big deal about a National Pro Life day? They could have a National Pro Choice day and no one would blink . . . ridiculous!”
No one would blink? I beg to differ. If I were to go marching down the streets waving my pro-choice banners, WANNA FUCKING GUESS HOW MANY PEOPLE WOULD CALL ME A MURDERER THAT DAY?!! It’s sickening to think that they’d label me as such when I’m more pro-life than they’d ever be. I APOLOGIZE if the life I am for is not of a fetus, but of a FULL GROWN WOMAN.
Show me the percentage of mothers who die during birth. In America it’s such a small amount that it’s ridiculous to even cite it in an argument.
“Is it manipulative to show pictures of a horrible car wreck where the driver had been drinking and driving in order to convince people not to drink and drive? This is reality, folks, and if you can capture it in a photo in order to save someone’s life then let’s get out the cameras!”
This is why I say it isn’t necessary manipulative. But if someone were to go and say, “in this picture, the drunk driver hit an innocent little girl crossing the street,” when in reality, the guy hit a fire hydrant, sure, that’s a bit manipulative. It’s a fetus.
“Show me the percentage of mothers who die during birth. In America it’s such a small amount that it’s ridiculous to even cite it in an argument.”
So small amounts shouldn’t matter? Plus, with abortion being illegal, that number would skyrocket. Whether you like it or not, and whether it’s legal or not, some women will be in such a need to get an abortion that they will go to any means necessary to obtain one. Ever heard of back-alley abortions? Yeah. Ever wonder why pro-choicers hold up signs with a big red line crossing through a coat hanger? Yeah. Making abortion illegal would cause these deaths to become an even greater number.
Wow you’re just chopping everyone down today aren’t you WishingOnKarma? Yet you want to challenge me on first grade behavior. Put-downs are no fun for anyone, you could probably remember that. And if you’re truly wishing on karma, then you should realize that all of this negative energy is creating momentum for you to move down in your caste.
I agree.
Not to mention that before 5 months (I think), A FETUS CANNOT LIVE OUTSIDE OF THE MOTHER, SO IT’S NOT ALIVE TO BEGIN WITH!
Sheesh, these pro-lifers need to re-take biology.
Posted 1/22/2007 8:18 PM by A_Fragile_Wonder
Do you realize that you just acknowledged it as a living being, then contradicted yourself?
As for the question, I think that depends on the information presented alongside the photo. The photo itself doesn’t say much, other than, “Hey, look, I’m a developing human!”
You said that it’s so small it shouldn’t matter. I said it’s so small that it’s ridiculous to cite it in an argument for killing babies, because that’s what it is. It’s killing babies. Let me ask you this, what is the “fetus” going to grow to be if it’s given a full term and allowed to enter the world? Is it going to be a watch? Is it going to be a 2×4? It’s going to be a person, just like you, just like me. You’re concerned about one person’s selfishness and disregarding another person’s WHOLE life.
I don’t think you can legislate morality past a certain point. I think that the idea in this world is of “I’m more important than you, and since I’m bigger than you, I win.” It’s selfishness in the highest form; taking the life of another for your own personal benefit.
No- just telling like it is!
ugh just…
if you don’t approve of an abortion, just don’t have one.
To call other people murderers for their own beliefs, necessities, etc. shows how immature you are. Oh, and stop using damn religion as a crutch. Make your own statements, don’t paraphrase the Bible. An omnipotent being strumming a harp in the clouds doesn’t scare me into making decisions about my life. (And the fetus, if it is considered to have its own “life” which it doesn’t)
Yeah, this kinda trickles in from the last post, but whatever.
Mother Theresa–”It is a poverty that a child should die so we may live as we please.”
I saw this on a bumper sticker, once–”As a former fetus, I oppose abortion.”
Concise ways to say what This_Is_Important said.
Ahhh the always there “Dont call me a murderer because of my beliefs” argument.
Fine, if I decide to follow strict satanism, and kill your parents or kids, I INSIST that you don’t “call me a murderer for my beliefs.” And yes I’ve heard the “well that’s not the same” argument, but you know what, from a purely logical point of view it is.
You know what, I’ll even make it EXACTLY the same. If I decide to be a canibal later in life and I eat my own kid/kids, I’ll tell you to not judge me for my beliefs. How bout that, oh mighty morally superior for not telling others what to do, one.
“Wow you’re just chopping everyone down today aren’t you WishingOnKarma? Yet you want to challenge me on first grade behavior. Put-downs are no fun for anyone, you could probably remember that. And if you’re truly wishing on karma, then you should realize that all of this negative energy is creating momentum for you to move down in your caste.”
Who am I putting down? I’m simply stating something. I didn’t use names like “butthead.”
Negative energy = not from me.
And don’t even bring SELFISHNESS into this. The right a woman has to CHOOSE WHAT GOES ON IN HER OWN BODY IS NOT BEING SELFISH. It’s being fair. And no, it is NOT a baby. Sure, it’ll become one someday. But technically then, wouldn’t killing.. sperm be considered murder? If a seed will one day become a flower, does it still smell nice and is it still beautiful? Just because it’ll be one SOMEDAY, doesn’t mean it is NOW.
And Mother Theresa? Pffft. A child isn’t dying so someone else can live their life as they please. A fetus is being aborted so someone can live their life, period. This is ridiculous. And as a former and current woman, I oppose taking our right to choose.
In the words of an amazing singer who got an abortion…
“I passed their handheld signs
went through their picket lines
they gathered when they saw me coming
they shouted when they saw me cross
I said why don’t you go home
just leave me alone
I’m just another woman lost
you are like fish in the water
who don’t know that they are wet
as far as I can tell
the world isn’t perfect yet
his bored eyes were obscene
on his denim thighs a magazine
I wish he’d never come here with me
in fact I wish he’d never come near me
I wish his shoulder
wasn’t touching mine
I am growing older
waiting in this line
some of lifes best lessons
are learned at the worst times
under the fierce flourescent
she offered her hand for me to hold
she offered stability and calm
and I was crushing her palm
through the pinch pull wincing
my smile unconvincing
on that sterile battlefield that sees
only casualties
never heros”
NOW IF YOU’LL EXCUSE ME… I have four midterms I must study for.
Really. There are alternatives to abortion. Like not having sex in the first place, or having the baby and giving him or her up for adoption. Ending a life (or depending on you point of view, what is going to be a life) is just selfish. I understand if you’re young and scared, but that shouldn’t make someone immediately think “ABORTION!”
Look! Those are choices!
Sperm isn’t life. It carries DNA. There is a difference. You show me a sperm cell that turns into a baby all by itself, and I’ll shut up.
I think pro-choice folks could do the same thing using pics of kids beaten to death by abusive parents.
Lots of people just shouldn’t have kids.
Posted 1/22/2007 8:27 PM by Breath_Of_Dawn
That’s a little harsh and lots of people aren’t smart enough to know that they shouldn’t have kids. Or be dumb enough to get themselves pregnant. But yeah, lots of people shouldn’t have kids.
Sperm isn’t life. It carries DNA. There is a difference. You show me a sperm cell that turns into a baby all by itself, and I’ll shut up.
Whoops. Pardon my double post.
“Really. There are alternatives to abortion. Like not having sex in the first place, or having the baby and giving him or her up for adoption. Ending a life (or depending on you point of view, what is going to be a life) is just selfish. I understand if you’re young and scared, but that shouldn’t make someone immediately think “ABORTION!”"
And this is why I hate educations that only teach about abstinence. Whether you like it or not, kids are going to have sex. It’s in their nature to. Now, whether or not they use a condom is one thing, etc. But things happen, condoms break, surprises occur. One way or another, people are going to pregnant. Abstinence can’t and will not work for many people, and huzzah to those who keep it it, but honestly now. Most teenagers wouldn’t be able to.
Most people DON’T immediately think “ABORTION!” Most people probably immediately think, “oh shit, what now?” But that’s the entire point. The thing we need is having it AS A CHOICEEEE. That’s the whole point here, fella. You don’t need to get one if you don’t want one/disagree with it morally. But for those who NEED them, they should be legal.
GRAR WHY DO YOU DISTRACT ME FROM MY STUDYINGGGGG
NO,not at all.They even showed my sister the image of the brain tumor they were removing from her .Women shoul know what they are terminating,it is a life.
People don’t need them. There’s adoption. Did you just ignore that part?
I have a question for you, Dan–are people who are pro-choice being close-minded when they ignore other options?
I would also like to point out on this post:
“I agree.
Not to mention that before 5 months (I think), A FETUS CANNOT LIVE OUTSIDE OF THE MOTHER, SO IT’S NOT ALIVE TO BEGIN WITH!
Sheesh, these pro-lifers need to re-take biology.
Posted 1/22/2007 8:18 PM by A_Fragile_Wonder”
Do you realize how many children are born early and cannot live outside of the mother without aid, but we aid the child artificially, ‘save it’ persay, and it lives to become… a woman, perhaps? Let us not forget the other side of things when presenting such an argument!
Oops! Forgot to respond about adoption, my b! Honestly just forgot to talk about it. That’s not a good sign. I still have to study…
Well anyway. I’m sure adoption would be a great CHOICE for some. And yet, in other cases, abortion would be another great CHOICE. What if something were going to go wrong during childbirth and there were dangers for the mother? And what if the mother couldn’t stand carrying around a fetus for nine months, giving birth to it, seeing it, and then giving it away just like that?
And pro-choicers don’t ignore other options. If anyone ignores options, it would be the people who are trying to ban one whole option in this issue!
If people stood around saying “What if?” all the time, nothing would get done. And I like how you put that–”what if the mother couldn’t stand carrying around a fetus for nine months?” If that’s not selfish, I don’t know what is. I’m sorry if someone else’s life inconveniences you. :/
wishing on karma you are being foolish.
Also, saying that kids are just going to have sex is just excusing juvenile behavior. Kids don’t learn that there are consequences to their actions. Instead, they grow up thinking that they can do whatever they want, and screw anybody else. It also denies their decision making abilities–after all, we teens are just sex-crazed animals, am I right?
Make good use of your resources.
yes and no. no, in that the pictures are real, and it is important to understand and accept the reality of one’s actions (i still went ahead and had the necessary-for-me procedure). yes, in that often the pictures are as emotionally wrenching as possible, deliberately chosen for the maximum impact, not just a random picture of a random fetus.
No. It’s growing, and without alot of help, it’ll come into the world to be a productive citizen that pays into social security, that is, unless it’s mother is a whore who decides she’s not “ready” for responsibility.
“If people stood around saying “What if?” all the time, nothing would get done. And I like how you put that–”what if the mother couldn’t stand carrying around a fetus for nine months?” If that’s not selfish, I don’t know what is. I’m sorry if someone else’s life inconveniences you. :/”
No, it’s not selfish, because that wasn’t the end of the sentence. It’s not carrying it around for nine months that’s tough (although it is), it’s carrying it around for nine months and still trying to have the heart to give it up after all that. That, my friend, is not selfishness, it is human nature and emotion.
“wishing on karma you are being foolish.”
Thanks for supporting your decision, darling.
“Also, saying that kids are just going to have sex is just excusing juvenile behavior. Kids don’t learn that there are consequences to their actions. Instead, they grow up thinking that they can do whatever they want, and screw anybody else. It also denies their decision making abilities–after all, we teens are just sex-crazed animals, am I right?”
Uh. You are right.
And kids learn about consequences of sex in health all through middle school and high school, yet they still do it.
lol, does it matter? I think this question is munipulative! BAH!
“No. It’s growing, and without alot of help, it’ll come into the world to be a productive citizen that pays into social security, that is, unless it’s mother is a whore who decides she’s not “ready” for responsibility.”
Where do you get the authority to call women who get abortions whores? Not all women who accidentally get pregnant are whores. They may be in love and be sleeping with only one man, when a condomn breaks. Or something. You don’t have to be a whore to get pregnant.
In all honesty folks, this debate completely ruined my day. And it’s only five minutes into the day.
With that being said, I must take my leave. It’s 12:05 in the morning and I still have loads of work to do for these fucking midterms. I’d love to stay and chat and exercise my freedom of choice, but it seems as though whatever I say will not open your eyes in any way. Whatever. You’re entitled to your opinions, so I’M ENTITLED TO MINE.
Goodnight.
It is selfishness. Humans are selfish. Also, I was being sarcastic earlier. Teens are only in any sense “sex-crazed animals” because they never learn responsibility for their actions, which lies at the heart of the whole matter. We don’t avoid behaviors with certain consequences because they feel good, and when, lo and behold, nature takes its course, we just make the problem go away instead of accepting responsibility. That. Is. Selfish.
Of course it’s manipulative, and there’s nothing wrong with that. Manipulation is the stuff of argument. How they do so determines how valid and how rational the argument is.
Go Cat fan! Go! Go! *Woot* *Woot* Well put & Well spoken. The ONLY thing I will agree w/ wishingonkarma on is that birthparents who do choose adoption for their child/children are very unselfish. Our kiddos are adopted and we are so blessed to have them. I know it was an incredibly hard decision for her to make. There are SO many childless families that would give their eye teeth for a baby. Even those little babies who have special needs there are families who feel led to only take special needs children. That I know to be a fact! I like to compare a baby in the womb to a small child say about 3yrs. old. That baby girl in the womb is just a baby. Once born she has some more growing to do to become a young lady then one day she becomes a woman. Same way with that 3 yr. old -there is some growing and maturing to be done to reach that next phase in her life. Unfortunately, because some choose to murder them they (babies) don’t get to have a chance to reach that next phase of their life let alone choice to live. It was made for them. Where is the pro-choice for the babies?
Manipulative… I woudln’t go as far as to call it that, but it definately is misdirection.
abortion is only legal until 12 weeks at most states, during which time the fetus looks more like an alien than baby. so when they use a photo like the one you posted earlier of a baby probably in the 3rd trimester – yes, that would be manipulative.
Are people being manipulative when they show a house to sell it?
The word manipulative has such negative connotations. Everyone who has an opinion is manipulative to a degree when arguing his/her point.
nah i dun think thats manipulative. i think angelina jolie is manipultive.:D
im pro abortion btw. i think we shud have a choice, but of course if i was to get pregnant and i cant have it, abortion is not my 1st option. id like to have a baby though(when i have a steady job), babies are AWESOME.
When you’re making a point, aren’t you trying to manipulate someone into seeing your point and seeing it your way anyway? Isn’t that the idea?
When they use a picture of a baby in a later stage, yes. Like you did, kind of.
At least show the people what they’re actually aborting in that time and stage. It makes a point, but the thing is – the baby isn’t even at that stage during abortion!
And no, I’m not a total pro-choicer. I’m just making a point.
No.
no
So say someone was on trial for murder, would the prosocuter showing pictures of the victims be manipulative?
No, it’s called “science.” Years ago, people COULD say they didn’t know what a fetus looked like while it was still developing, but now they absolutely cannot. The ultrasound SHOULD trump that, but some people are totally ignorant. Unless people claim an ultrasound machine is an evil pro-life tool…
No, but they are when they show those grotesque mutilated pictures on the streets while protesting for passing children to see…
why is it only baby once its out? what has so drastically changed in the last half of the pregnancy.
premature births occur up to 4 months early. are those babies still fetuses? when does it stop being “just a fetus”?
I think it goes for the emotional appeal. However, I’m not sure that that is inappropriate. Perhaps it can help people remember we’re discussing humans. I think people try to downplay the human aspect of the fetus so it’s not as abrasive of an idea.
You can show me a pig get slaughtered, and I’ll still order bacon.
Factual information though it is, they do use it selectively and only when they want to pull at the heartstrings of people who take their opinions from the TV and not from a book or asking hard questions.
’nuff said…
Losers!
Of course they are to get their point across
no because people need to see what they’re killing.
Babies aren’t 2-D in the womb.
No, killing sperm wouldn’t be considered murder because sperm alone could never become a human life. That’s probably the dumbest question you’ve asked so far.
yes and no.
Yes – in a strict definition: to manipulate is any attempt to control or influence. so any time anyone wishes to change your mind about an issue, they’re attempting to manipulate you.
No – in a connotative way: manipulate has almost become synonymous with deceptive or trick, in that way using an ultrasound photo, presenting a picture of what abortion is aborting (killing, destroying, use whatever word you wish – I doubt you’ll find one that connotates warm fuzzies), is not deceptive or tricky, it’s fact. it’s saying “this is what you kill.” period.
btw, abortion as a moral issue – I’m against it completely. I think it’s wrong. I would never never never do it, even if my life was in danger of being ended.
I happen to currently vote pro-choice, because I have always believed that abortion, because it physically involves a yet unborn human, is ultimately a moral issue that shouldn’t be legislated. (and I am rethinking that opinion)
while we’re on the subject, why do so many pro-life legislation people spend so much time preaching abortion is wrong when they could be spending time preaching “sex outside of a situation where a child would be accepted” is wrong? convincing people of that idea would in itself prevent a large number of abortions because it would prevent a large number of unwanted pregnancies!
Yes, because in our screwed up society, facts are manipulation if they don’t agree with your pre-concieved bias
how is that being manipulative? manipulation = using media to showcase crap like fame academy.
Just a teensy-weensy bit.
no. they’re being truthful.
No.
Human beings are curious and always want to see the newest technology. Only those who are in favor of killing those babies in the womb would be upset to see the baby that is being killed.
Well in a way. They are trying to appeal to human nature. Sometimes human nature isn’t the best thing to use while making a decison. That’s why we have reason.
No…it’s only showing the truth of what the abortionists are killing. It’s not only “the products of conception,” a “lifeless blob” a “terminated pregnancy” – all terminology to keep people’s heads buried in the sand so they won’t feel guilty about what they’re choosing. It’s a human baby, no matter what the age.
“Yes. People are also manipulative when they call a fetus “baby”.
A fetus is post-embryonic, pre-birth. A baby is post-birth. The end.
Posted 1/22/2007 7:37 PM by FlyingLike_aCementKite”
How is a fetus not a baby?
If a woman is pregnant (and wants the child) and gets hurt, she would most likely cry “my baby!” not “my fetus!”
According to Heritage House ’76 (http://www.hh76.com/lit/9438ms.pdf):
After 24 days after conception, the baby’s heart begins to beat.
After 30 days, blood flows in veins separate from the mother’s blood.
After 43 days, brain waves are recorded.
After 8 weeks, every organ is present: the heart beats sturdily, stomach produces digestive juices, liver makes blood cells, kidneys start to function, and tastebuds form.
After 11 weeks, the baby urinates and makes many facial expressions.
After 13 weeks, reflexes are vigorous, vocal chords are formed, and sex organs are apparent.
After 6 months, hair grows on eyebrows, head, and eyelashes; some are born.
After 7 months, the mother’s voice is recognizable.
After 9 months, the baby triggers labor and is born.
If you’re not a human baby in the womb, then what are you?
does showing evidence at a murder trial make the prosecutor manipulative??
“It is selfishness. Humans are selfish. Also, I was being sarcastic earlier. Teens are only in any sense “sex-crazed animals” because they never learn responsibility for their actions, which lies at the heart of the whole matter. We don’t avoid behaviors with certain consequences because they feel good, and when, lo and behold, nature takes its course, we just make the problem go away instead of accepting responsibility. That. Is. Selfish.”
Shit. I’m back. Anywho. Now you’re implying that getting pregnant is a horrible thing, and having the baby should be the consequence that people deal with? “Yes Billy, you are a consequence to me and daddy.” Oh geez. Come on.
“There are SO many childless families that would give their eye teeth for a baby.”
And at that statement, I say HA! No no.. better yet.. I say.. ROFL! Hehe. Anyway. Seriously though, I’m sure there are great people out there who are just waiting there to adopt. And yet I know there is a GREAT number MORE of children who are still WAITING to be adopted. Should we just fill up the adoption homes until they burst? If there are so many childless families out there who want to adopt, why don’t they? Why must they wait for a child to come to them instead of them being aborted? Why can’t they just take a child already in need of a family?
“When they use a picture of a baby in a later stage, yes. Like you did, kind of.
At least show the people what they’re actually aborting in that time and stage. It makes a point, but the thing is – the baby isn’t even at that stage during abortion!
And no, I’m not a total pro-choicer. I’m just making a point.”
Right!! People see pictures of fetuses after eight months and go crazy about abortions, when true abortions would NEVER take place that late during pregnancy. Geez.
“why is it only baby once its out? what has so drastically changed in the last half of the pregnancy.
premature births occur up to 4 months early. are those babies still fetuses? when does it stop being “just a fetus”?”
Obviously there are reasons that babies come out premature. And once it’s out, and can breathe on it’s own and such, sure, it’s a baby. But when it’s inside a woman and connected to her and part of her, then it’s still the woman’s body with a fetus inside of it.
“Babies aren’t 2-D in the womb.”
Babies aren’t in the womb. Period.
“No, killing sperm wouldn’t be considered murder because sperm alone could never become a human life. That’s probably the dumbest question you’ve asked so far.”
And you said I was being insulting? Relax, seriously. But in all honesty, a fetus wouldn’t be able to become a human life on it’s own, either. It needs the MOTHER to support it. Which is why this whole damn issue is entirely about a woman’s right to choose.
This is just getting sickening. Every post I make draws more negative attention to me. I don’t need eight people telling me I’m wrong, alright? I’ll never give in to your tyrannical laws on MY body, so don’t even try. The fact here is that it’s a woman’s body, and a woman must have a right to have a say in what goes on in her body.
See you never, everybody.
No.
A little.
I believe that pro-lifers should keep their fat, over-inflated heads out of other people’s business.
Fetus’ are fetus’ until they exit the womb, which is when they become the baby.
So, I think they should just shut their mouths. It is the woman, and only the woman’s choice.
YES! BECAUSE THIS IS NOT A PICTURE OF THE FETUS WHEN IT WOULD ACTUALLY BE ABORTED! THIS IS A PICTURE OF AN ALMOST FULLY DEVELOPED BABY!
the information, in this case, ISNT TRUE!
Surely we are wise enough to know all the facts before we take a stand, right? Presenting the other side of the story — the baby in the womb — is simply presenting the other half of the picture.
I just think they use the ultrasounds to show you it LOOKS like a baby, so OBVIOUSLY they have a point.
Just because it looks like a baby does not mean it’s a baby yet.
yes.
“Now you’re implying that getting pregnant is a horrible thing, and having the baby should be the consequence that people deal with? “Yes Billy, you are a consequence to me and daddy.” Oh geez. Come on.”
I didn’t say that. What I said was that people should be responsible for their actions. If, as you say, they are in absolutely no position to have a baby, then they should give it up for adoption and not take it out on something that in the normal course of time would become a human being.
“But in all honesty, a fetus wouldn’t be able to become a human life on it’s own, either. It needs the MOTHER to support it. Which is why this whole damn issue is entirely about a woman’s right to choose.”
Actually, it does become a human life on it’s own, it just needs a little extra help to grow and develop. A one-year-old totally relies on his mother to survive. The only difference I see is that one is inside and the other is outside. It’s just the next step in the growth process.
“The fact here is that it’s a woman’s body, and a woman must have a right to have a say in what goes on in her body.”
The fact is that she already made a choice. That’s been one of my big points all along. If you don’t want a baby, then don’t get into a position where you could get one. Things can and will go wrong all the time, even when you think you’ve covered all the bases.
Also, you’re arguing semantics when you determine when a baby becomes a baby. It sounds to me as if you just need something else to tell you that you’re right.
“I didn’t say that. What I said was that people should be responsible for their actions. If, as you say, they are in absolutely no position to have a baby, then they should give it up for adoption and not take it out on something that in the normal course of time would become a human being.”
Ah, but obviously you can’t trust me with a choice, so how are you to trust me with a child? And adoption? Stressful on the emotions, yikes. Carrying around a fetus for nine months just knowing that you’re gonna give it up. And why don’t we overpopulate the adoption agencies some more.
“Actually, it does become a human life on it’s own, it just needs a little extra help to grow and develop. A one-year-old totally relies on his mother to survive. The only difference I see is that one is inside and the other is outside. It’s just the next step in the growth process.”
I’m sure if they tried to raise a fetus in some science laboratory, they probably could. But a fetus that isn’t for the purpose of a science experiment, one that is inside a real human being, relies on that human being. It’s a part of that human being’s body.
“The fact is that she already made a choice. That’s been one of my big points all along. If you don’t want a baby, then don’t get into a position where you could get one. Things can and will go wrong all the time, even when you think you’ve covered all the bases.”
Hello, that’s been one of my big points, too. You can teach abstinence or you could you all the protection you want. People are going to have sex no matter what, and many of those people will get pregnant. There’s no way to stop that.
“Also, you’re arguing semantics when you determine when a baby becomes a baby. It sounds to me as if you just need something else to tell you that you’re right.”
What? I don’t need anything to tell me I’m right. I have enough faith in my opinion to state points myself, thanks.
not any more than the ones who are not prolife
i don’t think so.
“Ah, but obviously you can’t trust me with a choice, so how are you to trust me with a child? And adoption? Stressful on the emotions, yikes. Carrying around a fetus for nine months just knowing that you’re gonna give it up. And why don’t we overpopulate the adoption agencies some more.”
I don’t trust you with a child. That’s why I keep saying to give the child up for adoption. Abortions are stressful on the emotions, too. And what’s so stressful about adoption if you don’t want a kid in the first place?
“I’m sure if they tried to raise a fetus in some science laboratory, they probably could. But a fetus that isn’t for the purpose of a science experiment, one that is inside a real human being, relies on that human being. It’s a part of that human being’s body.”
You completely missed my point.
“Hello, that’s been one of my big points, too. You can teach abstinence or you could you all the protection you want. People are going to have sex no matter what, and many of those people will get pregnant. There’s no way to stop that.”
You just completely ignored what I said, as well as denying the freedom of choice you’ve been preaching so hard about. She had a choice to have sex. It’s not an involuntary reaction. Sex = baby. That’s basic biology. You know that, you don’t want a baby, and you know that all the protection in the world isn’t a total gaurantee, but you’re still going to go ahead and do it? It’s irresponsible and selfish. You’re just having sex because it feels good, which is no reason to have sex. And if you do love the person you’re sleeping with, then what’s the big deal about a baby? That’s the ultimate statment of love, an inseperable mix of the parents.
“I don’t need anything to tell me I’m right.”
That’s fine, but you’re still arguing semantics. Your definition was completely arbitrary.
Aren’t you glad your mother chose life for you?
“I don’t trust you with a child. That’s why I keep saying to give the child up for adoption. Abortions are stressful on the emotions, too. And what’s so stressful about adoption if you don’t want a kid in the first place?”
That’s the entire point. People who can’t take care of their kids go all the way, full term, and give it up for adoption. But entirely because you spent nine whole months out of your life supporting this fetus and future baby, and then you give birth to it, and see it? That’s a bit tough.
And in no way did I say abortion wasn’t stressful. Of course it is. Didn’t you read a few posts back when I quoted a singer? She said.. “on that sterile battlefield that sees only casualties and never heroes, my heart hit absolute zero.”
So if both choices are emotionally stressful, why can’t there BE a choice?
“You completely missed my point.”
Then be a dear and explain it again, no? We’ll get no where if you completely bash what I said and give no back up. You stated that technically, a fetus doesn’t need to rely on the mother, and I said why it technically, does. Er. Yeah. There you go.
“You just completely ignored what I said, as well as denying the freedom of choice you’ve been preaching so hard about. She had a choice to have sex. It’s not an involuntary reaction. Sex = baby. That’s basic biology. You know that, you don’t want a baby, and you know that all the protection in the world isn’t a total gaurantee, but you’re still going to go ahead and do it? It’s irresponsible and selfish. You’re just having sex because it feels good, which is no reason to have sex. And if you do love the person you’re sleeping with, then what’s the big deal about a baby? That’s the ultimate statment of love, an inseperable mix of the parents.”
For the people that get an abortion just because they don’t feel like having a baby yet, and it was with their true love or whatever, sure, that’s iffy. But there are so many cases when the women need the choice to an abortion. You can’t just get rid of abortion by saying “just don’t have sex.” What about rape cases? And what about the large majority of teenagers who JUST WON’T LISTEN TO THE ABSTINENCE POLICY? Of course there’s a choice on having sex or not. And some people make the wrong choice. But the choice to have sex is still out there, so people still do it.
If you’d like to continue this, go to my own site, I assume. I’m tired of wasting an extra ten minutes to find this site and look at all the comments and find the ones to respond to.
I’d appreciate it if we ended it now, however. I’m in the middle of midterms and this constantly-checking-to-see-who-blatantly-said-I-was-wrong thing is getting rather annoying. To be fair, you have have the last point. Make your point, I’ll come back to read it tomorrow or Thursday, and I’ll tell you to have a nice day.
Even before you see the ultrasound, you can hear the heartbeat, sometimes as early as 9-10 weeks. I can’t argue with that either. And no, it’s not manipulative. The comment about the cuteness factor…are you for real???? Ultra sound pictures are not cute. I had one Monday and my 11 week old baby (yes, baby, not fetus) looked like a gummy bear to me. But that doesn’t negate the fact that I know there is a child in my womb. Babies aren’t even cute when they are first born. They have to get cleaned up before that happens!
Nope. Since when is using legitimate evidence for a case manipulative?
Not at all, show me videos of ultrasounds, show me videos of abortions performed with a rusty spoon.
I’ll show you negelcted abused children and insist you keep your mind off my body. A smaller evil to prevent a greater one.
Who will shoulder the national burden? All must take a turn someday.
[ no.. it's amazing how some people don't
think about the consequences of their actions.
i'm not saying all, or even most, of those who
have abortions don't think about what they're
doing, but i would be willing to put money on
the fact that the uneducated or ill-informed who
might opt for an abortion don't know what's
going on inside their bodies or perhaps they have
some disillusion about how the baby forms and
they really don't think that their action will have
any effect on anyone but themselves. the pro-life
groups aren't manipulating anything. they're simply
showing the facts: this is what has formed in your
body, and if you have an abortion, you will be
doing away with this new life. ]
> Yes, but look at the cause….. Worthwhile, I’d say, But I’m still pro-choice…. And, YES, to faerieshadow, It can be used to manipulate, the reality/irony of using truth to manipulate be damned! It depends on the context of the use and the subject.
Peace