.
.
n/a [img]http://www.slobodnasrpska.org/slike/natalitet/poruka_crkve.jpg[/img] http://www.nrlc.org/ http://www.ohiolife.org/ http://www.rtl.org/ http://www.roevwade.org/ . Ȍ http://www.svetosavlje.org/biblioteka/Porodica/DrAdasevic.htm www.bsn.org.yu Click on " ،" (on the left) and then see "." http://www.belakuga.narod.ru/ ,
elena_
quote:
Originally posted by edo
za mene e ubistvo .......za vas bash me briga so e:)
Dojdi vo Polska tuka abortusot e zabranet so zakon (za tebe moze i raj na zemja) ...hehehe....pa zatoa sekoj den naogaat eden kup mali bebinja zadaveni, zavitkani u nekoja kesa i frleni u kanta za gubre...Rodi me majko pa frli me na buniste ti teknuva....hehehehe Ako nekoj bide faten na delo togas sleduva kazna zatvor i odzemanje na lekarska licenca za izvrsitelot na krivicnoto delo t.e. dokorot i ogromna paricna kazna pa i zatvor za majkata ... I radi tie pricini "zaglavenite" devojki si praat vikend izleti od drugata strna na granicata t.e. vo Ceska i uzivaat vo ubavinite sto taa im gi nudi po ssto se vrakaat doma "odglaveni" i spremni za novi predizvici sto im gi nosi zivotot.....heheh p.s. ne e smesno za placenje e....hehehhee
n/a OK, Elena, Thanks for letting me know about Poland. This gives me hope we could get it banned eventually in the Balkan Christian countries too. In my opinion, punishing only the mother is discrimination against women. Therefore, I would punish both the father and the mother. Since you seem to approve of abortion, I would be very thankful if you could answer to the two questions I gave above. Thanks.
elena_ sekoj ima pravo na izbor i zabranata na abortusot e bolna rabota .... Therefore, I would punish both the father and the mother hehehehe...a so ako nema father izvini, a taa devojka nema sredstva da go izcuva toa dete....so praime togas????
Ania` I don't know whether I can say this better in English or in Macedonia, but I'll give it a try in English anyway... ok so dear Voin It seems to me that you are a practicing christian, therefore you have some set rules about life implied by christian religion. Some churches, as the catholic church of Poland have very big influence in setting the laws in one country. But when this comes into play, the dominant religion (in this case christianity) imposes some laws that I (say, not baptised, officialy atheist, even tough I see myself as an agnostic) don't have to respect since the only reason given about why should I respect them is that they are catholic and therefore good by default. This is the most important thing that bothers me about Poland so, if you are a christian you are supposed to believe that fetus is a human being. I am not a christian and I am more keen to believe that fetus is a fetus. When two people make a belja and the woman is pregnant she may see her pregnanncy as a blessing or as a curse. If she is happily married, has a loving husband, a house, car, job and a dog than there is no reason for her (and the prospectous father) not to be happy about the news. However, if the girl is 14, raped, tortured, than the news that she is pregnant may be unbearable.I know that this is an extreme situation but such things also happen in todays brutal world. But, it can even get worse. If that girl has the "luck" to live in Poland, the church and the people behind it, take her the right to choose whether she may try to forget about the situation or live with the product of her rape till the end of her days. Of course, the girl may choose to have the baby anyway,because she happens to think that the fetus does not deserve to be killed, but that's more an exeption than a rule. I personally am against me having an abortion because I know that I could not live with it. For me, abortion is a trauma that nobody wants to live with. I know how it looks like and I don't want to do such a thing to my potential fetus. for somebody else, abortion may look scary, but the aim behind it too big to decide for anything else....I want that person to have the right to make her own choice. I don't have the right and you dont' have the right also. Nobody has the right to decide what to do with something that is in one's body. Nobody has the right to call that thing human (until it is 5-6 months old) if she claims and it is scientifically defined as a fetus. No church has the right to make that decision for her, with all the respect towards the church. it is not a matter of life and death it is a matter of having a choise if the woman can do it let her do it, it is her choice, it is her body, not yours so stay away from her. If you don't let her she will do it anyway, she may die, she may never be able to have a child again, she will have to go to another country, go to somebody without a degree, go to a butcher. But she will do it anyway, and it is because of you that she will suffer more than she deserves to suffer. You are making her suffer more than she can bear. you may tell her that this is bad,you may explain, you may have right, tell her about what she can do with the baby, she may listen to you and change her mind. But she will change her mind for herself, it will be again her decision. In my opinion, abortion has to be legal, even tough we must not treat it as a means of anticonception. We must do everything to make it safe and not to let the unwanted pregnancy happen in first place. and leave god out of this. " , " (evangelie po Matej)
elena_ Zaboravi da raskazes za toa crkovniot vesnik so go najdovme kaj tebe pred zgrada za Valentajn i za site poucni raboti sto bea napisani tamu....hehehehhe
Ania` leleeeeeeeej kaj mi e da citiram malce da se posmeeme, aj drug pat
edo za mene e ubistvo .......za vas bash me briga so e:)
n/a <b>Ever since conception () there exists a genetically unique and unrepeatable human organism.</b> Mackica: You do not have to have an abortion ever. Children are not brought by storks (Decu ne donose rode.) There are ways in which you can stop conception, such as contraception. Then, you can chose not to have sex besides with your husband. Also, you can give the child for adoption. Two questions for the people who support abortion: 1.) Some say that children that are given for adoption do not have a good life. But, if you could choose, would you choose a bad life or no life at all? 2.) I assume you agree that killing living humans is wrong. So, when do you think that a child becomes alive?
OooOo ako abortusot e ubistvo, togash drkanjeto e masakar.
sapeski !!!!
RaGeAnGeL looooooooool e stvarno e lud[:D][:D][:D][:D]
sapeski .
dimkoska Poradi komunistickiot period, Mislam deka samo mal procent od naselenieto od Bivsa Jugoslavija ja ima procitano Biblijata. Toa e pricina zosto ovaa tema ne gi razmrduva nasite setila
MaCkiCa` Nekogash mora da se abortira..... ubistvo/ne-ubistvo, toa ti e!!!!!
fio , , .
pr1nc Temava bi trebalo da bide malku po ozbilna. Nekade na sredina sum so mislenjeto dali treba da se abortira ili ne,no sepak koga bi trebalo da odberam samo edno resenie,mislam deka navistina abortusot e ubistvo. Mackica,dzvakaj DUREX za da ne ostanes trudna.A ako vekje ostanes,soberi hrabrost i rodi go deteto,daj mu super zivot itn. Pozdrav
RaGeAnGeL princ ako veke go rodi i tatkoto prevzema odgovornost za negovo gledanje...ili vie samo znajt kejf da si prajte?
SunLight
quote:
Originally posted by fio
, , .
za brzo vreme:)
n/a Sekoj ima pravo na izbor, but you can not choose whether to kill a human being or not. Laws should guarantee freedom, but as long as you do not infringe on the freedom of others, in this case the right of the unborn child to life. Decu ne donose rode - each child has a father. If the mother doesn't want to say who the father is, do a police investigation (ask her friends whom she was socializing with and then do blood group, DNA testing). If after then you don't find the father, which is going to be rare!, then perhaps don't punish mother either. If the girl has no money to support the child than it should be given for adoption or state-provided centers for raising orphans. P.S. You didn't answer my questions.
elena_ ti pod raka so polskite svestenici i u Radio Marija (katolicko radio) audicii in live da praite ....heehhe p.s.i'll answer it some other time....
sapeski
quote:
Originally posted by vojinst
Therefore, I would punish both the father and the mother.
Which dictator do you admire? [:)]
Sunshine vojinst, you managed to contradict yourself in such a short post. ~ Laws should guarantee freedom, but as long as you do not infringe on the freedom of others ~ ~ do a police investigation (ask her friends whom she was socializing with and then do blood group, DNA testing)~ Also, you are talking about abortion, so your question is all wrong. ~ So, when do you think that a child becomes alive?~ A child becomes alive when it's born. There are stages during woman's pregnancy, but non of them is called child. I forgot the word used at the time of conception, but at 4 to 8 weeks is called an embryo and after that is called fetus until birth. Medicine, law, philosophy, and biology are not able to agree if the fetus is a human being or not, let alone common people. There will never be an agreement because of the subjective and unscientific nature of this issue, so it makes sense to leave it up to the women, since without a question they are human beings and without dispute have rights. ~ Sekoj ima pravo na izbor, but you can not choose whether to kill a human being or not.~ It seems like you have decided that the fetus is a human being. Take a few steps back and let's start from the begining. The first thing that stands out is that the fetus is absolutely dependent on a woman's body for survival. Second, to be a human being you must be a separate individual, which disqualifies it by default since the fetus is in somebody else's body. Also, fetuses have no legal rights. If it's proven that a fetus is a human being then they will have to be given legal rights which will also oblige them to taxes and they will have to be counted at censuses. Ridiculous? There are so many other facts that it will take me days to list them. This whole pro-choice vs. pro-life debate it's somewhat fascinating to me. So please explain this to me: you are willing to deny human rights of women (which is by no doubt a human being), for the human rights of an embryo (which has so many open questions whether is a human being or not)?
Strelec I agree!:)
n/a Dear Sunshine and others,
quote:
Originally posted by Sunshine
vojinst, you managed to contradict yourself in such a short post. ~ Laws should guarantee freedom, but as long as you do not infringe on the freedom of others ~ ~ do a police investigation (ask her friends whom she was socializing with and then do blood group, DNA testing)~
Let me clarify: I believe that people should be free. However, neither I nor most of others think that people should, for example, be free to murder their neighbours in order to take their apartment away. In such situations, we all agree the police should investigate, the court should sentence, effectively infringing on the freedom of the murderer. By agreeing to this what we are doing is agreeing to infringe on the freedoms of those who infringe on the freedoms of others (in this case the freedom of one's neighbour to live).
quote:
Also, you are talking about abortion, so your question is all wrong. ~ So, when do you think that a child becomes alive?~ A child becomes alive when it's born. There are stages during woman's pregnancy, but non of them is called child. I forgot the word used at the time of conception, but at 4 to 8 weeks is called an embryo and after that is called fetus until birth. Medicine, law, philosophy, and biology are not able to agree if the fetus is a human being or not, let alone common people. There will never be an agreement because of the subjective and unscientific nature of this issue, so it makes sense to leave it up to the women, since without a question they are human beings and without dispute have rights.
You could do it, and it happened in wars, to take a knife and open the stomach of a woman in the 7th, 8th month of pregnancy. The "thing" I would call unborn child sees the light of the day and can survive. For me, this is a reason good enough to consider a 7th, 8th month 'thing' a human being. Saying that medicine, law, philosophy, and biology do not agree on this just means people do not agree on this. I agree, otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion, nor would the communists legalize abortion in the former Yugoslavia in the first place. In any case, I think that those who do not consider for a human being an unborn "thing" that is going to become a child are wrong.
quote:
~ Sekoj ima pravo na izbor, but you can not choose whether to kill a human being or not.~ It seems like you have decided that the fetus is a human being. Take a few steps back and let's start from the begining. The first thing that stands out is that the fetus is absolutely dependent on a woman's body for survival.
Children before the age of 3, if not even older, are absolutely dependent on adults for survival.
quote:
Second, to be a human being you must be a separate individual, which disqualifies it by default since the fetus is in somebody else's body.
Just as I have decided that it is a human being, it seems that you have decided that it is not. You define a human being as someone who lives outside of one's body, and our discussion simply becomes meaningless after that point. I disagree with this definition, partly because of the reason I give above for 7th,8th month unborn "things."
quote:
Also, fetuses have no legal rights. If it's proven that a fetus is a human being then they will have to be given legal rights which will also oblige them to taxes and they will have to be counted at censuses. Ridiculous?
They do have them in some countries, like Poland as Elena says. This is clearly dependent upon the people of the country. Not ridiculous. Do little children pay taxes? Do men younger than 18 serve the military? Do elderly pay old age pension contribution? The answer is no, and it shows that rights and obligations change within one's lifetime. The unborn cannot have any obligations, but should have rights.
quote:
There are so many other facts that it will take me days to list them. This whole pro-choice vs. pro-life debate it's somewhat fascinating to me. So please explain this to me: you are willing to deny human rights of women (which is by no doubt a human being), for the human rights of an embryo (which has so many open questions whether is a human being or not)?
Is right to an abortion human right? If you consider un unborn child a human being, than such a 'right' is effectively commiting crime. Plus, fertile women are old enough to bear the responsibility for their behaviour. If they got pregnant (could have avoided this in numerous ways) than they should bear the consequences of their actions for at least 9 months rather than kill for convenience. What you may say is missing from my argument is a proof that unborn 'things', since conception, are human beings, and that such human beings have the right to live. I will try to show why I believe it is a human organism, and I will leave it for the conscience of the forum members to decide whether it should be allowed to live or not. Let me then answer to my question number 2.) Opening up women, as with Caesarian cut, yields babies, living human beings. 5 minutes ago, still in mothers stomach, kicking left and right, the "thing" was alive in my opinion. What about 5 minutes before that? Well it could have changed a bit, but the thing is the same thing, right? 5 minutes ago, 5 minutes ago etc. all the way to the time of conception. Before that, things were different. You have separate male and female cells, while after conception and genetical recombination you have an organism that has a unique genetical code determining how it is going to grow. It is unique, it knows what to do, and it just needs the love and suport of its mother to succeed. A baby can't play soccer, while an embryo can't cry, but it is a growing organism and I am pretty sure that it is not a monkey. Hey, I probably didn't persuade many of you guys. I didn't expect it either. I will be happy if a changed at least one mother's mind and saved one life. I would be a good enough reason to have lived for.
n/a The question we are discussing is more that of hearth than mind, in my opinion. I give a link here to pictures of unborn "things" after abortion. WARNING (THESE PICTURES LOOK BAD): http://www.ohiolife.org/abortion/photos.asp However, if you or your partner are ever contemplating abortion, I believe that you should see them. After seeing these pictures, I believe you will think twice whether to support abortion. P.S. Earlier in the discussion, I had put these pictures directly into discusion post, but the moderators have taken them down quickly. I agree thay look bad, but hope that moderators will keep my post this time, given that I added a warning sign. Thanks.
OooOo Vojinst, Gledam deka si UZHASNO protiv abortusot, moeto prashanje e dali si KOMPLETNO protiv abortusot ili postoi nekoja granica kade shto se bi se soglasil na abortus?
n/a For cases when tests show that the child is with some deformations, I think they shouldn't abort it but help it live as God given and for as long as God pleases. Even if someone raped a woman for example I would advise her to give birth to the child, because the child is not to be blamed for who its father is. However, if the woman does not agree, and is most likely to go crazy because of this and likely kill herself, then PERHAPS I would approve of abortion. Better to lose only the child than both the woman and the child. To summ it up, I would approve of abortion only if mother's life is otherwise endangered with a very high probability.
OooOo Would you approve even though if a rapist is a psycho or mentally distracted OR if the rapist raped a 14 year old girl?
n/a
quote:
only if mother's life is otherwise endangered with a very high probability
OooOo you said: only if mother's life is otherwise endangered with a very high probability And I can't see an answer there, because it's not mother's life endangered, the kid is going to be screwed in the head, because of the rapist mentally distracted illness. And answer this one please -> OR if the rapist raped a 14 year old girl? (there are many 14 or 15 year old pregnant "women" and their life isn't endangered). Are you saying that 14 year old kid should have a kid??
n/a
quote:
Originally posted by OooOo
you said: only if mother's life is otherwise endangered with a very high probability And I can't see an answer there, because it's not mother's life endangered, the kid is going to be screwed in the head, because of the rapist mentally distracted illness.
Yes, but the kid would still have a life, and I still consider it alive in mother's stomach. Do you think that crazy people are not worth of living? The Nazis used to kill all crazy people to construct a superior race, but I do not think we should do it.
quote:
And answer this one please -> OR if the rapist raped a 14 year old girl? (there are many 14 or 15 year old pregnant "women" and their life isn't endangered). Are you saying that 14 year old kid should have a kid??
Yes, this is what I am saying. Because the life of the child is still a human life. The girl should give the child for adoption if she or her parents are unable to take care of it, but should not abort/kill it. OooOo, the principle I am using is that the unborn child is a human being since conception, and that its life should be taken away only if otherwise another life is going to be lost. Only a life is worth sacrificing a life, nothing else. Best regards,
OooOo
quote:
Originally posted by vojinst
Yes, but the kid would still have a life, and I still consider it alive in mother's stomach. Do you think that crazy people are not worth of living? The Nazis used to kill all crazy people to construct a superior race, but I do not think we should do it.
Are you out of your mind??? Why would a mother carry such a thing IF SHE KNOWS that the rapist was mentally ill??
quote:
Yes, this is what I am saying. Because the life of the child is still a human life. The girl should give the child for adoption if she or her parents are unable to take care of it, but should not abort/kill it.
I would like to see your reaction, if that happens to your 14 year old daughter. Thank you for your explanation, however I can't and I don't agree with you at all. So there is no point for me to continue this discussion. [:)] Regards,
n/a
quote:
Originally posted by OooOo Are you out of your mind??? Why would a mother carry such a thing IF SHE KNOWS that the rapist was mentally ill??
Once a mentally ill child is born, why do their parents usually keep them alive?
quote:
Thank you for your explanation, however I can't and I don't agree with you at all. So there is no point for me to continue this discussion.
How about the general case, not your 'special' situations?
quote:
[:)]
[:)]
OooOo
quote:
Originally posted by vojinst
Once a mentally ill child is born, why do their parents usually keep them alive?
That's gods will, previous case was different and please don't mix them. Bolje sprechiti nego lechiti. And don't get me wrong, I feel sorry for those children that are born like that.
quote:
How about the general case, not your 'special' situations?
It hurts when it's yours, right? And when it happens on our skin, then we all have different opinions. Cheers,
Sunshine
quote:
Originally posted by vojinst Let me clarify: I believe that people should be free. However, neither I nor most cof others think that people should, for example, be free to murder their neighbours in order to take their apartment away. In such situations, we all agree the police should investigate, the court should sentence, effectively infringing on the freedom of the murderer. By agreeing to this what we are doing is agreeing to infringe on the freedoms of those who infringe on the freedoms of others (in this case the freedom of one's neighbour to live).
While in all democratic countries murdering your neighbor is a crime, abortion is not. Even in the countries where abortion is against the law, it is considered a misdemeanor and it caries much lesser punishment than murder.
quote:
You could do it, and it happened in wars, to take a knife and open the stomach of a woman in the 7th, 8th month of pregnancy. The "thing" I would call unborn child sees the light of the day and can survive. For me, this is a reason good enough to consider a 7th, 8th month 'thing' a human being.
I was not talking about wars, but normal living conditions. I assume in wars it was not the choice of the women for somebody to take a knife and rip her stomach. I am talking about women choosing abortion, not some sick person making the decision for them. As much as I am all for women making their own choice, I am not saying that I will be supporting a woman having an abortion this late in the pregnancy unless there is a medical problem or the mothers life is in danger. For me a woman who has an abortion this late in the pregnancy just because she changed her mind is probably chemically imbalanced and I would recommend a good psychiatrist. On the other hand, it is the womans body and its up to her to make the decision. I dont see how beneficial is for a country to enforce a law that would prevent abortions. The resentment of not having a choice can just result in looking for different ways to go around the law...drugs, alcohol and poor nutrition, just to name a few.
quote:
Saying that medicine, law, philosophy, and biology do not agree on this just means people do not agree on this. I agree, otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion, nor would the communists legalize abortion in the former Yugoslavia in the first place. In any case, I think that those who do not consider for a human being an unborn "thing" that is going to become a child are wrong.
Everybody is entitled to his or her own opinion that is why we have this forum. I am not trying to prove that your opinion is wrong, so please do not allude that people that dont share your opinion have a wrong one. I have researched the topic and have come to my own conclusions. Not everything is black and white.
quote:
Children before the age of 3, if not even older, are absolutely dependent on adults for survival.
Yes, absolutely dependent on adults, not one specific adult. Children before the age of 3 or older do not depend on a woman body exclusively. Only one person (the pregnant woman) can care for the fetus, while a child can be brought up by any adult (aunt, grandma, adoptive parents etc.).
quote:
Just as I have decided that it is a human being, it seems that you have decided that it is not. You define a human being as someone who lives outside of one's body, and our discussion simply becomes meaningless after that point. I disagree with this definition, partly because of the reason I give above for 7th,8th month unborn "things."
Ok this is misunderstanding. I did not make up this definition (human being is a separate individual) just to fit my post. Its actually found in dictionaries and thesauruses. Of course, its your choice whether youll agree or not.
quote:
They do have them in some countries, like Poland as Elena says. This is clearly dependent upon the people of the country.
I was not aware. Can you please list some of the legal rights that fetuses are entitled to? I am not being sarcastic, just interested to learn about them.
quote:
Not ridiculous. Do little children pay taxes? Do men younger than 18 serve the military? Do elderly pay old age pension contribution? The answer is no, and it shows that rights and obligations change within one's lifetime. The unborn cannot have any obligations, but should have rights.
Children dont pay taxes, but when I do my taxes can I claim my unborn fetus as a dependent? A child has a right to a Social Security/Insurance Card, so can we get the same for fetuses? Also, fetuses are incapable of having constitutional rights.
quote:
Is right to an abortion human right?
Yes it is...at least in Canada pregnant women have special rights over their bodies.
quote:
If you consider un unborn child a human being, than such a 'right' is effectively commiting crime. Plus, fertile women are old enough to bear the responsibility for their behaviour. If they got pregnant (could have avoided this in numerous ways) than they should bear the consequences of their actions for at least 9 months rather than kill for convenience.
Until pregnancy is 100% preventable there will be unexpected pregnancies and abortions. Other than being celibate, it can happen even to the most careful people, so your comment that it could have been avoided it is not full proof. I am sure you have heard of broken condoms, women getting pregnant even when they are on the pill, spirals not placed properly etc. Also, not all fertile women are old enough to bear the responsibility. It might matter for pregnancy, but for motherhood age is not defining factor. Also mental state plays a key factor and some women cant bear the "consequences" (not even for 9 months).
quote:
What you may say is missing from my argument is a proof that unborn 'things', since conception, are human beings, and that such human beings have the right to live. I will try to show why I believe it is a human organism, and I will leave it for the conscience of the forum members to decide whether it should be allowed to live or not. Let me then answer to my question number 2.) Opening up women, as with Caesarian cut, yields babies, living human beings. 5 minutes ago, still in mothers stomach, kicking left and right, the "thing" was alive in my opinion. What about 5 minutes before that? Well it could have changed a bit, but the thing is the same thing, right? 5 minutes ago, 5 minutes ago etc. all the way to the time of conception. Before that, things were different. You have separate male and female cells, while after conception and genetical recombination you have an organism that has a unique genetical code determining how it is going to grow. It is unique, it knows what to do, and it just needs the love and suport of its mother to succeed.
You forgot to mention cutting of the umbilical cord. That is when the baby takes its first breath on it's own. And you are saying, "could have change a bit"? It changes a lot. This is the moment where the fetus is actually becoming a human being. It no longer matters what the woman eats, drinks, whether she is healthy or sick, stressed or happy. It has no direct impact on the fetus now child that is born. Human being at conception? And what if the embryo splits in two (sometimes it can split and then join again)? Is that a human being, then human beings, then human being again? And what do we say there were two human beings and then combined into one? I am interested to hear what your thoughts are on suicide. If we dont have the right to choose, then what about the people that decide to die? Should we write a law against it? And then, who do we blame and punish? The mental illness that drove the person to commit suicide, maybe the parents, the neighbors, God? After all, bad life is better than no life, so why should we let them kill themselves? Can we really make one law for such personal things and apply it to everybody?