"180" Holocaust and Abortion Porpaganda (Graphic Content)

It was good talking to you too, Raymond. And thanks, you're a smart kid too!! But seriously, I truly admire what you've done for your family and can only hope that I would make the same decisions as you if I'm to face similar circumstances in the future. You're certainly the most responsible 24 year old I've ever met!

lol Worthy effort... worthy effort.

 

How is this not locked ?

 

I knew you were going to do that.

 

Just saying i know a girl that got raped so she aborted the baby. Go ahead and say it was a gift and she should have made the best of it. I'm sure you really understand.

 

The situation of rape doesn't change the fact that it's an innocent life in that womb. Punish the rapist with death, but not the child. We can't judge the baby for a life it has not yet lived.

I'd expand more, but I'm off to bed, gentlemen.... Please keep discussion civil and intellectual!! It'd be nice to find that this thread wasn't nuked in my absence when I wake up tomorrow.

 

so , the mother , the victim in the attack , should be forced to carry the rapist's and her biological child to term and deliver it ?

sorry , but Fuck That BS

 

Please lock this thread. There is no logic here.

 

^

I'd let the woman decide whether to terminate the rape pregnancy.

The gall to tell a raped woman she it's punishing the child??

"The nerve of some people" - Richard Thompson

 

Well said. I can't believe people can say anything against that argument

 

If you don't know who adolf hitler is by like age 13 you had a very shitty education.

 

OK, I just want to try and put a stop to that misnomer that the German people didn't know what was going on, because it's not true:

**I'm a Holocaust historian with a focus on post-war memory politics (i.e. how the countries changed and fabricated stories about involvement in the Holocaust)

Anyways, basically the bulk of those killed in the Holocaust (60%) died in a very short window from May 1942 to March 1943. This was the industrial genocide, first perpetrated by the Einstatzgruppen in mass shootings, and later in the gas chambers at five death camps located throughout Poland.

We know for a fact that the bulk of the German population knew about the Holocaust by the spring of 1943. How do we know?

1) Most of the pictures you see today of the Holocaust in progress, i.e. shootings, naked people being driven to the gas chambers, piles of dead bodies came from soldiers on leave from the front who watched the killings like spectators, and then sent the pictures they took back to the homefront.

2) The smell of the death camps was horrific, and could be smelled for 50 miles. Over 90% of the German population lived within 50 miles of a concentration camp.

3) The Einstatzgruppen, who were the primary perpetrators of the initial killings, routinely were rotated in and out of duty, going back to the homefront, where they were quite open about what was going on.

There are other reasons, but these are three of the biggest. One of Germany's great fallback positions afterwards was "we didn't know" It's not true, but somehow has become acceptable in the retelling of the history.

If you really want to learn about the Holocaust, the book Ordinary Men by Christopher Browning is stunning. He basically examines how ordinary soldiers and volunteers could perpetrate such a crime, and concludes that the German society of 1940 was not particularly different from our society, his point being that if they could be made to do such a thing, so could we.

 

Oh cool...a pro lifer. who the Shit are you to decide what a woman does with her body?

 

Alright, gentlemen, I'm going to do my best to logically explain my point of view on this subject, since I'm probably starting to look like a Bible-thumping, chauvanistic monster to some of you.

First of all, Is it not true that you all believe it is ok to have an abortion because the fetus is not yet a lifeform and still apart of the woman's body; or maybe better defined as a parasite living off the woman? And then once that fetus is born, it becomes a baby with basic human rights?

If that is the case, you must then believe that is perfectly, morally acceptable for a woman to use abortion as a family planning tool in whatever case imaginable. Since the fetus does not yet pocess the rights to basic human rights (which includes life) until it is born, you must believe it is perfectly moral for a woman to have an abortion if she finds out the fetus will most likely have a handicap? or be a certain gender? or whatever reason she decides, because it's simply not a human deserving of rights yet, correct?

If you have even the slightest twist in your heart that says, "hmmm that's not very cool for a woman to have an abortion 10 days before the due date simply because the doctor told her that there's a risk that the child will have down syndrome or will be blind".... Then all I have to ask is WHY? Why do you have the feeling that that may be kinda screwed up morally when you really believe that it is not yet a life? If you believe that there are certain situations that may be in a dark area as far as morality goes (I'm not talking about if it should be legal or not) than how do we know where to draw the line? How do you define when it is morally ok for a woman to abort her baby? In what situation? At what point in the pregnancy?

Maybe it's acceptable to have an abortion before 22 weeks after fertalization? At which point is generally considered to be the beginning of viability for the fetus outside the womb. Maybe it's acceptable to have an abortion before 16 weeks? At which point the mother can begin to feel the fetus kicking (even though the fetus was in almost perpetual motion before), when the eyelids have completely covered the eyes, and fine hairs have begun to cover the entire body. Maybe it's acceptable to have an abortion at 10 weeks? At which point the fetus' fingernails, toenails and unique fingerprints all appear. Maybe it's acceptable to have an abortion at 9 weeks? At which point fetuses are capable of sucking their thumb, swallowing amniotic fluid, grasping objects, responding to touch and even doing backward and forward somersaults. Even the uterus can be recognized in female fetuses and external genitalia become more recognizable. Maybe it's acceptable to have an abortion at 8 weeks? At which point every organ is present and in place. Maybe 3 weeks when the heart starts to beat? And there's a lot more... Come on guys, give me a number or a situation and the reasoning behind your choice. At which point or in which case is it morally acceptable, in your minds, does a fetus all of a sudden deserve basic human rights?

I think that most of us can grasp the idea that that fetus is indeed an individual lifeform even before birth.... So I think that we should actually be discussing at which point in the life of that fetus or baby or toddler that it becomes deserving of basic human rights. When does the life of a human being really begin to matter?

Hello, good friend. I know how much you adore this thread.

And, uuuhhh...... I'm not deciding what a woman does with her body.

Scientifically, the embryo and fetus is a seperate human being.

Check it out. Quoting some smart people here...


Peter Singer, contemporary philosopher and public abortion advocate, writes in his book "Practical Ethics":

Professor Micheline Matthews-Roth of Harvard University Medical School:

Dr. Alfred M. Bongioanni, a Professor of Pediatrics and Obstetrics at the University of Pennsylvania:

Dr. Jerome LeJeune, a Professor of Genetics, University of Descartes:

Professor Hymie Gordon, Mayo Clinic:

Dr. Watson A. Bowes, University of Colorado Medical School:

Biologically speaking, every abortion at every point in a pregnancy ends the life of a genetically-distinct human being.

This isn't 1973 anymore buddy.... Whether or not life begins at conception is no longer subjective.

 

I gave a situation and the reason should be obvious. No rapist deserves to pass on their genes. Noone likes abortions but they are a necessary part of life.

 

Why doesn't anyone like abortions?

Why are they a necessary part of life?

 

I'm leaving this thread

 

Bye.

Can you explain why, before you go?

 

Because , like most political and / or religious threads , there is very little reason or discussion to be had , only division , polarization and butthurt

 

why should a woman be forced to have the child of a rapist?
will the woman not hold resentment towards the child, as he/she will be a constant reminder of the rape?

I'm not in favour of abortion as a crude form of birth control, but if a woman does not want to have a child she should not be forced to.

 

I always try to bring 100% reason and discussion to these kind of threads. I don't see why your leaving now. I love these threads becasue I can ignore the namecalling and cheapshots and can instead grow from the actual discussion. I always embrace the opportunity to discuss these subjects because they temper my worldview.

Simply because it is a child. A living human being. Why kill it for the crime of it's father? You are essentially judging and convicting the child of a crime, are you not?

It is an extremely painful situation and it's hard to tell what is the right thing to do.

Every victim of a crime is affected in ways that cannot be controlled; emotional and physical. It shouldn't be an option to kill the baby. And the emotional pain caused by rape is probably much worse than the pain caused by 9 months of pregnancy, no?

And to your last statement, I simply request that you list you reasoning for your conclusions. WHY so you believe it's wrong to use abortion as a crude form of birth control? WHY should a woman have the right to not have that child if it is already alive in the womb?