Repost: Abortion

Here is What is simvastatin something I Ranitidine hydrochloride wrote a Lamictal rash symptoms while back Flomax 0.2mg - 60 caps but I wanted to get it back to the front page.

Abortion is an issue that I feel very strongly about. But I am not alone. I would wager that nearly everyone who takes one side or the other defends it vehemently. So, I wanted to take my side and defend it the best that I can. To even start talking about abortion, you have to set up some definitions. What constitutes a person? A human-being? We have Phenergan with codeine come along Tetracyclines way in science, genetic science Benicar 20caps - 90 bottle more specifically. When you Metoclopramide 10 mg look at a person, what is generally thought of as who they are, is their life experiences, their friends, what they have accomplished, and the list goes on. People would say that these things make up who you are. But I think that these things only give meaning to who you are. Who you are is much more basic than that. At the point of conception a miraculous thing happens. Two half sets of chromosomes come together to form one unique set of genes. At the moment the zygote is formed, a new person is formed. It is not the mother or the father, but a unique combination of both that has everything it needs to be what you and I are: a person. There is nothing else needed. This is what constitutes a person or a human. Not an ambiguous time between this trimester and that trimester, but a definite time: conception. And when we are dealing with person’s life, there is no room to mince words about when they become a person.

Life begins at conception. This is a perfectly valid definition of when life begins. The only reason that I can think of for people to argue that it is not is that they don’t want it to be this. It would inconvenience their life and possibly cause them to have to be more responsible when they make decisions. It would also imply that they were committing murder by aborting a baby. Therefore, it is not the baby they are worried about, it is their life and their decisions they are concerned with. This is a very selfish way of life.

Now that I have established when life begins, I want to draw a parallel between two events that are separated by time, but very much alike: Slavery and Abortion. Slavery is argued as the worst case of human rights violations in our nation’s history. I would not disagree. But I would assert that there is something going on in today’s society that rivals even the human rights violations of slavery: Abortion. Some of you might be asking why I would make this statement. After all, in the “enlightened” society that we live in, how could there be anything as bad as slavery going on? I want to present some parallels for you that I have found between slavery and abortion to make it clear that there are an estimated 1.4 million “human rights violations” (to be more specific, murders) per year in America.

During the time when slavery was accepted throughout our society, a slave was considered the property of the slave owner. As property, the slave was subject to whatever it was the owner wanted. Even to the point where the owner could kill the slave and not face any repercussions for that action except the loss of property. In the same way, a baby that is still inside the mother is considered the mother’s property to do with as she pleases. If the mother deems it necessary, for many different reasons, to abort the baby, she will not face any legal repercussions for that action.

Another parallel that can be drawn is that during the days of slavery, a slave was not considered a full person. By law they were considered 3/5s of a person when the census was taken. They were thought to be inferior, which has been proven totally false. In the same way, a baby that is still in its mother’s womb is not considered a person in cases of abortion. The baby is considered even less of a person than the slave was. And since it is not considered a person it can be killed without any sort of legal ramification, just as it happened in early America to slaves.

Yet another comparison that can be made between abortion and slavery is that they are and were considered an issue of convenience. It was convenient for the slave owner to have the slave. The slaves made the owner rich while earning nothing for themselves of any real value. Having that much cheap manpower was very convenient. In the same way, abortion is considered an issue of convenience. If a woman gets pregnant unintentionally, it is more convenient to abort than to carry to term. But the question should not be what is more convenient but what is right. Since that baby is a person as I have defined above, then it would be wrong to kill it out of convenience.

The final parallel I wanted to discuss is how society viewed slavery and how it views abortion now. During the time when slavery was legal, it was viewed by most as, at least, a necessary evil. That was the way society worked so that was the way it had to be. In the same way, abortion is viewed by the majority and, more importantly, by our law makers as a necessary evil. It is viewed as a necessary part of rights issues for the mother but my question to that is: why do we think it is acceptable to trample the rights of some to gain rights for others? If the baby is a human, it has rights, just like the mother does, but the rights of the mother should not interfere with the rights of the baby in her womb.

A question that I know will come up is, “What about rape victims? They don’t deserve to have to carry a baby to term that was forced on them by a violent act.” My simple answer to that is that the baby is just as much at fault as the victim: zero. Why commit another violent act to amend the first?

Abortion is a problem that is staring right at us, so what should we do? Should we look away and ignore it? I think not. We must stare back at it and find an answer. If we do nothing we will be just as guilty as those who continued fostering slavery. Then what is the answer to this monumental problem?

The answer is, what I define and call, being “pro-choice”. I am very much for free choice, but not when it comes to the life of a human being that is not guilty of any crime whatsoever. So, to me, the choice is not whether to keep or kill the baby. The choice that supersedes that question is the choice of whether or not to commit the act that brings about a new person: sex. This is the choice that comes first. When two people decide to engage in sexual activity they are deciding to take the risk of bringing a new life into the world. Many would argue that my way limits a woman’s equality with a man because men can go out and engage in sexual activity as much as they wants to and just walk away when the woman gets pregnant. It may be true that many men might do exactly this, but that doesn’t mean that their action is right. Just because a man might do something wrong (walk away from his responsibility) does not mean that we should lessen the responsibility of the woman just to make things “equal”. When you take an action, it obligates you to do certain things. This is called responsibility. When will we as a society take responsibility for our actions? When will we get past the idea that all things have to be “equal”? Why not focus instead on what is right? Why do we keep committing wrong acts (killing babies) just because we don’t want a limit on our sexual activity? Which is more important? A life, or our short term “happiness”? When will we as a society do what we did when we abolished slavery and claim to do now: stand up for the least among us who cannot stand up for themselves?

Brian