Two cases of violence against pregnant women [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Two cases of violence against pregnant women

Caio_Brasil
02-11-2009, 08:25 PM
Three neonazist skinheads attacked a 3-month pregnant Brazilian lawyer living at Switzerland. They hitted her in many parts of her body and cut her skin in many parts as well. She is out of risk, but the two twins he was going to give birth died.

One day after this tragedy, another 3-month pregnant Brazilian girl, who was entering the university she just got approved, was attacked by a veteran girl of the university. She threw some chemical substance at the newcomer, who got some bad burnings at her body. It seems the baby is alright, fortunatelly.

So, what the fuck goes on the mind of such people? It simply doesn't makes any sense. Each day that passes I feel terribly to see what a disgrace human being can be.

RIP unborn children, hope you find somewhere else a better place than this one where we live.

TMJordan
02-11-2009, 09:28 PM
Its quite simple...

People are fucked.

Nathaliia
02-11-2009, 09:29 PM
Fucked people, I hope they rot in jail, they don't even deserve a capital punishment you know...

GlennMirnyi
02-12-2009, 12:03 AM
Don't get why Europeans still let people like this walk around freely.

safinafan
02-12-2009, 12:16 AM
This fucking cowards deserve a lethal injection. Nothing else. A couple days ago a 6 years old girl was murdered because saw her father be shooted. A 6 years old girl. It's unbelieveable, and the authorities don't give a shit. The internet seems to have a lot of nazi websites and why no one can't stop the acess for this shit? Why? Even dead Hitler is still making victims.

Fizz
02-12-2009, 07:10 AM
RIP unborn children, hope you find somewhere else a better place than this one where we live.

:awww:

I envy those who are dead and gone; they are better than those who are still alive. But better off than either are those who have never been born, who have never seen the injustice that goes in this world. (Ecclesiastes 4,2-3)

shotgun
02-14-2009, 02:43 AM
:eek:

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Switzerland-Brazilian-Paula-Oliveira-May-Have-Made-Up-Miscarriage-And-Skinhead-Attack-Claims/Article/200902215222873

Knife Attack Miscarriage 'Faked'

10:03pm UK, Friday February 13, 2009
A woman who claimed she miscarried twins and suffered knife cuts in a skinhead attack was not pregnant and probably inflicted the injuries on herself, investigators have said.

Paula Oliveira

Police are investigating Paula Oliveira's claim that she was attacked

Paula Oliveira said three neo-Nazis carved the initials of Switzerland's main far-right party into her thighs and stomach during an assault which caused her to lose her unborn babies.

But police have confirmed that the 26-year-old Brazilian, who lives with her Swiss partner in Dubendorf, near Zurich, was not actually pregnant.

And the director of forensic medicine at Zurich University said it was highly likely that she had cut the letters - SVP - into her body herself.

"Any experienced forensic doctor would not hesitate to assume that this was a case of self-infliction," Walter Baer said.

All of the wounds were reachable by hand and none were deep or severe, he said.

He also pointed out that areas of the body which are particularly sensitive for women, including the breasts and navel, had not been injured.

Ms Oliveira told police she was attacked at a station as she returned home from work on Monday.

The alleged incident has been treated as a scandal in the media in Brazil, with leading newspapers speaking of racist "torture" in Switzerland.

Brazilian foreign minister Celso Amorim told a Swiss diplomat of the South American country's "deep concern" over "a case with obvious xenophobic motives".

The Swiss People's Party (SVP) has taken a hard-line stance against immigrants, pushed for tougher asylum laws and wants to make it easier to expel foreign nationals.

But the party is part of Switzerland's broad coalition government and has never had links to neo-Nazism.

GlennMirnyi
02-14-2009, 02:50 AM
She wasn't actually pregnant?

Strange eh?

10K Futures Qualifier
02-14-2009, 03:44 AM
My heart goes out to these women but...

ABORTION IS NOT RIGHT!!!

GlennMirnyi
02-14-2009, 04:03 AM
:haha:

What the hell was that?

Abortion is an inalienable right of women.

Ivanatis
02-14-2009, 07:46 AM
My heart goes out to these women but...

ABORTION IS NOT RIGHT!!!

:eek::cuckoo:

weird story with that pregnant (?) girl, her family wants to prove her pregnancy now

Ilovetheblues_86
02-15-2009, 02:50 AM
:haha:

What the hell was that?

Abortion is an inalienable right of women.

And the rights of the future child? Should not that person deserve to be born?:p

Venle
02-16-2009, 02:13 PM
:o

I have no words, is the world out of its mind? :mad:

Caio_Brasil
02-20-2009, 02:05 AM
What the fuck?

TMJordan
02-20-2009, 03:05 AM
What the fuck?
si4.

GlennMirnyi
02-20-2009, 03:17 AM
And the rights of the future child? Should not that person deserve to be born?:p

The rights of the mother precede the rights of the baby. Especially because not born = not a person = no rights.

I'm sorry, but I don't believe in any religious bullshit, k?

GlennMirnyi
02-20-2009, 03:18 AM
And we all were made to look like fools by this woman.

I wish I could punch her in the face to show her you don't joke around with such a subject.

~*BGT*~
02-20-2009, 05:25 AM
:haha:

What the hell was that?

Abortion is an inalienable right of women.

She also has the right to use protection and take the morning after pill. :p

GlennMirnyi
02-20-2009, 05:51 AM
She also has the right to use protection and take the morning after pill. :p

Your point?

Stupidity is a right too.

GlennMirnyi
02-20-2009, 05:58 AM
She also has the right to use protection and take the morning after pill. :p

Your point?

Stupidity is a right too.

~*BGT*~
02-20-2009, 01:15 PM
Your point?

Stupidity is a right too.

Right, just like it's stupid to have sex without protection and be surprised you're pregnant. :)

Jōris
02-20-2009, 01:57 PM
Now how did this thread about morally impure South Americans with their lying tongues and lips of deceit turn to abortion? Funny though how it's usually Americans who vehemently oppose abortion when American abortion rate is one of the highest in the western world.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0922117.html

~*BGT*~
02-20-2009, 02:03 PM
Now how did this thread about morally impure South Americans with their lying tongues and lips of deceit turn to abortion? Funny though how it's usually Americans who vehemently oppose abortion when American abortion rate is one of the highest in the western world.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0922117.html

Some Americans don't believe in abortion. :shrug: I guess the others more than make up for them. :p

Caio_Brasil
02-20-2009, 02:11 PM
The rights of the mother precede the rights of the baby. Especially because not born = not a person = no rights.

I'm sorry, but I don't believe in any religious bullshit, k?

I don't believe either, but I totally disagree when you say not born is not a person. The baby is already eating and breathing so of course it is a person. For me it's alreaqdy a person when the cells specializations starts.

And we all were made to look like fools by this woman.

I wish I could punch her in the face to show her you don't joke around with such a subject.

Yeah, I got very pissed off with that and she should get a severe punishment, not punching in her face though.

GlennMirnyi
02-20-2009, 07:26 PM
Right, just like it's stupid to have sex without protection and be surprised you're pregnant. :)

That's what I said. But you don't need to keep being stupid after doing something stupid in the first place.

Now how did this thread about morally impure South Americans with their lying tongues and lips of deceit turn to abortion? Funny though how it's usually Americans who vehemently oppose abortion when American abortion rate is one of the highest in the western world.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0922117.html

You're calling all South Americans morally impure? :lol:

I'll take it as sarcasm.

I don't believe either, but I totally disagree when you say not born is not a person. The baby is already eating and breathing so of course it is a person. For me it's alreaqdy a person when the cells specializations starts.



Yeah, I got very pissed off with that and she should get a severe punishment, not punching in her face though.

The talk is very cute and pretty and everything but it's not practical. Because of this talk-talk-talk stance that there are millions and millions of children born into families that have absolutely no condition to give them a decent life or education. We need practical measures, not talk.

Punching her face is light, yeah. Maybe she should be thrown to some real neo-nazis.

shotgun
02-20-2009, 08:22 PM
This reminds me of the football coach (former football player) Mario Sergio once saying, "Brazilians living in Switzerland are, for the most part, not exactly the cream of the crop." :lol:

Jōris
02-20-2009, 08:28 PM
You're calling all South Americans morally impure? :lol:

I'll take it as sarcasm.

Hm, I haven't given it any thought to be honest. I may have been sarcastic there. I can't tell really. You need to know I'm a bit of a moron. I don't know what I'm talking about.

Caio_Brasil
02-20-2009, 11:35 PM
The talk is very cute and pretty and everything but it's not practical. Because of this talk-talk-talk stance that there are millions and millions of children born into families that have absolutely no condition to give them a decent life or education. We need practical measures, not talk.

That's a good argument about abortion, but it's still a person and your argument doesn't invalid this. Imagine if your wife is pregnant and is forced to do an abortion in the 7th month, would you say "it was not a person yet, that's ok"?

GlennMirnyi
02-20-2009, 11:45 PM
Hm, I haven't given it any thought to be honest. I may have been sarcastic there. I can't tell really. You need to know I'm a bit of a moron. I don't know what I'm talking about.

I think you're a bit schizophrenic, mate.

GlennMirnyi
02-20-2009, 11:47 PM
That's a good argument about abortion, but it's still a person and your argument doesn't invalid this. Imagine if your wife is pregnant and is forced to do an abortion in the 7th month, would you say "it was not a person yet, that's ok"?

Why would my "wife" be obliged to abort her pregnancy? I don't intend on having any kids until I can actually give a good life to them and if something happens before that, we'll not wait until the 7th month to abort.

Caio_Brasil
02-20-2009, 11:52 PM
Why would my "wife" be obliged to abort her pregnancy? I don't intend on having any kids until I can actually give a good life to them and if something happens before that, we'll not wait until the 7th month to abort.

I'm talking about forced abortion mate. The discussion I'm trying to have now is about a non-born child being a person or not. You chose the second option and I disagree with it, that's why I made this hypotetic situation.

GlennMirnyi
02-20-2009, 11:58 PM
I'm talking about forced abortion mate. The discussion I'm trying to have now is about a non-born child being a person or not. You chose the second option and I disagree with it, that's why I made this hypotetic situation.

Nobody is talking about forced abortion. I'm talking about making the opportunity available to women. And forced sterilization maybe, after 2 children.

It's a joke abortion is a crime in some places, including Brazil. ;)

Caio_Brasil
02-21-2009, 01:52 AM
Nobody is talking about forced abortion. I'm talking about making the opportunity available to women. And forced sterilization maybe, after 2 children.

It's a joke abortion is a crime in some places, including Brazil. ;)

We are talking about different issues then.

Regarding what you're talking about, I honestly have a hard time having a defined opinion about it. Everytime I stop to think about it I try to create different situations and it always comes to a relativizations problem which is never a good thing.

1)A 25-year old woman has sex with her husband and gets pregnant. In the 5th month of pregnancy she realizes she doesn't want to be a mother. They are a stable family with conditions to raise a child, but she just doesn't feel like being a mother so she decides to abort. Is this fair not to give life to the baby?

2)A 15-year old girl gets abused by a maniac and gets pregnant. Abortion is the obvious choice and that's what she does.

See, how could someone define what is right or wrong here? I have my thoughts on each case and so does everyone has, I suppose. But how can a strict law define what is crime and what isn't. Look, I'm not religious and that's not what I take into consideration. My point is, this issue is so messed up and wish I had a more stable opinion, but I don't.

Curiously, today the TV was broadcasting Juno which is a movie that I love. I know that's a movie and all seems easier, but I think it can make us think about the issue.

GlennMirnyi
02-21-2009, 03:53 AM
We are talking about different issues then.

Regarding what you're talking about, I honestly have a hard time having a defined opinion about it. Everytime I stop to think about it I try to create different situations and it always comes to a relativizations problem which is never a good thing.

1)A 25-year old woman has sex with her husband and gets pregnant. In the 5th month of pregnancy she realizes she doesn't want to be a mother. They are a stable family with conditions to raise a child, but she just doesn't feel like being a mother so she decides to abort. Is this fair not to give life to the baby?

2)A 15-year old girl gets abused by a maniac and gets pregnant. Abortion is the obvious choice and that's what she does.

See, how could someone define what is right or wrong here? I have my thoughts on each case and so does everyone has, I suppose. But how can a strict law define what is crime and what isn't. Look, I'm not religious and that's not what I take into consideration. My point is, this issue is so messed up and wish I had a more stable opinion, but I don't.

Curiously, today the TV was broadcasting Juno which is a movie that I love. I know that's a movie and all seems easier, but I think it can make us think about the issue.

Hmmmmm I'm too practical for this whole month discussion. I don't think an unborn baby has any rights. The mother has the rights, she's the one supporting the baby - it won't live outside of the womb - then it's not a self-sufficient person with rights. I'm all for the right to abortion without any limits, but I can understand why some people have problem with it. That's why I think that prohibiting women from having the right to abortion until the 3rd month is a crime. I can't believe anyone is dumb enough not to see this is important to women.

About ****, I think even a bullshit society like the Brazilians allow women to have an abortion in such a case.

I know I'm not talking on the terms of the law, but I also don't care about it, I'm not a lawyer nor I intend to be one. ;)

Juno is a movie about a silly girl. :p It's cute and everything, but you must be too stupid to want to have a baby when you're in high school.

JolánGagó
02-21-2009, 05:18 AM
Nobody is talking about forced abortion. I'm talking about making the opportunity available to women. And forced sterilization maybe, after 2 children.

Do you support forced sterilization or am I getting you wrong? Well that's pretty fascist if you ask me. Funny you go up in arms for the right of women to abort whatever the circumstances but are ready to deny them (and their men) the right to have as many children as they please.

GlennMirnyi
02-21-2009, 05:34 AM
Do you support forced sterilization or am I getting you wrong? Well that's pretty fascist if you ask me. Funny you go up in arms for the right of women to abort whatever the circumstances but are ready to deny them (and their men) the right to have as many children as they please.

Come live in Brazil - then we'll talk.

Ilovetheblues_86
02-21-2009, 06:13 AM
Hmmmmm I'm too practical for this whole month discussion. I don't think an unborn baby has any rights. The mother has the rights, she's the one supporting the baby - it won't live outside of the womb - then it's not a self-sufficient person with rights. I'm all for the right to abortion without any limits, but I can understand why some people have problem with it. That's why I think that prohibiting women from having the right to abortion until the 3rd month is a crime. I can't believe anyone is dumb enough not to see this is important to women.

About ****, I think even a bullshit society like the Brazilians allow women to have an abortion in such a case.

I know I'm not talking on the terms of the law, but I also don't care about it, I'm not a lawyer nor I intend to be one. ;)

Juno is a movie about a silly girl. :p It's cute and everything, but you must be too stupid to want to have a baby when you're in high school.

Protecting life was always a very important thing in human society because of the wars and diseases and the affraid of the primitive tribes to disappear so a high fertility is always appreciated on more primitive societies in the form of gods or godesses, like Juno (which by the way is Hera´s name, godess of fertility).
However, modern times, lot of people, Brazil. Slums, people getting every time poor, etc.
I agree sometimes it´s better for the children not to be born on a broken family without resources. But since the beginning of the humanity´s life we live in poor conditions, like animals. I don´t think we should deny anyone´s will of survival because of suposed poor conditions or because a mother´s will. The brasilian law defends the rights of the fetus because it understands that we must defend first the probability of life. Leaving room for the abortion could means that everybody who would get pregnant would choose to have oir not a babty. But the thing is that the parents don´t own the life of the children. They have even the need to give the child education and to protect her, because if they leave the child they will respond criminally.
I think that if Brazilian law left room for legality of abortion we would assume that anybody in this country could kill a future child in their belly assuming they have the rights to determine who is going to get a bitrh or not. And this seems very not natural to me, not because it´sa supposed sin, but it would represent we are giving power to deny our own existance.And that should not be the case I think because we don´t owns other life neither the destiny of a mass of cells that could or not become another self being. I think that if a mother doesn´t want a child she should give to adoption after the birth.
However, the law can change as times passes by. If humanity grew a lot without the needed resources, maybe abortion would become a very good thing. But I still don´t think it´s time for that and I really think mothers should give birth and raise their children.:( They need to face the consequenses. It´s good for humans to undertand all act has a price.
What´s important to women and man also? Well, protect yourself, or give birth a child.

Human Rights(1948)

Article 3.

* Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Article 1
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.

Conclusion:All human beings just as siamese twins, cromossmical anomalous(down syndrome), and fetus(he is a human being also with 46 cromossomes) have equal rights=equal right to life.

It may sound like a words game but deep there it has to me the meaning we can´t just put a difference between a human being inside or outside its pre-birth womb. But I understand that life is very dull this days and sometimes it could be better for someone to not be born. Also, we can´t impose our ethic code to other people who doesn´t believe in what we believe. So, I am just saying my opinion, but maybe we can´t deny abortion for people that don´t has the same opinion as me, for example, right?
Anyway if abortion would be legal, it´s not because I think the mother has more rights or the control of her body, but because of a question of choice of personal ethics.

Gustavo e Caio, leiam isso, me pareceu uma opinião bem sensata:
http://www.terra.com.br/istoe/vermelha/143502.htm

GlennMirnyi
02-21-2009, 04:42 PM
Protecting life was always a very important thing in human society because of the wars and diseases and the affraid of the primitive tribes to disappear so a high fertility is always appreciated on more primitive societies in the form of gods or godesses, like Juno (which by the way is Heraīs name, godess of fertility).
However, modern times, lot of people, Brazil. Slums, people getting every time poor, etc.
I agree sometimes itīs better for the children not to be born on a broken family without resources. But since the beginning of the humanityīs life we live in poor conditions, like animals. I donīt think we should deny anyoneīs will of survival because of suposed poor conditions or because a motherīs will. The brasilian law defends the rights of the fetus because it understands that we must defend first the probability of life. Leaving room for the abortion could means that everybody who would get pregnant would choose to have oir not a babty. But the thing is that the parents donīt own the life of the children. They have even the need to give the child education and to protect her, because if they leave the child they will respond criminally.
I think that if Brazilian law left room for legality of abortion we would assume that anybody in this country could kill a future child in their belly assuming they have the rights to determine who is going to get a bitrh or not. And this seems very not natural to me, not because itīsa supposed sin, but it would represent we are giving power to deny our own existance.And that should not be the case I think because we donīt owns other life neither the destiny of a mass of cells that could or not become another self being. I think that if a mother doesnīt want a child she should give to adoption after the birth.
However, the law can change as times passes by. If humanity grew a lot without the needed resources, maybe abortion would become a very good thing. But I still donīt think itīs time for that and I really think mothers should give birth and raise their children.:( They need to face the consequenses. Itīs good for humans to undertand all act has a price.
Whatīs important to women and man also? Well, protect yourself, or give birth a child.

Human Rights(1948)

Article 3.

* Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Article 1
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.

Conclusion:All human beings just as siamese twins, cromossmical anomalous(down syndrome), and fetus(he is a human being also with 46 cromossomes) have equal rights=equal right to life.

It may sound like a words game but deep there it has to me the meaning we canīt just put a difference between a human being inside or outside its pre-birth womb. But I understand that life is very dull this days and sometimes it could be better for someone to not be born. Also, we canīt impose our ethic code to other people who doesnīt believe in what we believe. So, I am just saying my opinion, but maybe we canīt deny abortion for people that donīt has the same opinion as me, for example, right?
Anyway if abortion would be legal, itīs not because I think the mother has more rights or the control of her body, but because of a question of choice of personal ethics.

Gustavo e Caio, leiam isso, me pareceu uma opinião bem sensata:
http://www.terra.com.br/istoe/vermelha/143502.htm

You live in a pink happy world, mate.

This is bullshit. Heavy bullshit. Brazilian law is 150% influenced by the church. This whole "probability of life" is pure crap. Your position is retrograde and paternalistic. I'm sure the 1910 society would be very proud of you.

Let's take point by point then. This is a subject I really like.

1- If you think it's okay to submit someone to be born into a shit life condition and to the high probability of becoming a criminal, then you gotta be kidding me.

2- First and foremost, there's a need to establish when a fetus becomes a human. Will to survive... afff. I'm not gonna put my opinion that parents should have more control over their children here, as it's not pertinent to the subject. What's pertinent is that a human has the right to do whatever he wants to his own body, and until the baby's born, it is part of a woman's body. To deny that right to women is discrimination based on gender and paternalism.

3- Also it's not right to restrict a woman the right to have a safe procedure. Women in a tight spot in their life will go for an abortion anyway. According to the Humans Rights Watch, about 13% of maternal deaths worldwide are blamed on unsafe abortions.

4- The same HRW involves the following human rights into the matter: right to life, rights to health and health care, rights to equality, right to security of a person, right to liberty, right to privacy, right to information, right to be free from cruel, degrading treatment, rights to select the number and spacing of children, rights to enjoy scientific progress and right to freedom of conscience and religion. If you're so protective about human rights, then you should consider those.

5- No person should be obliged to do something by their government, it's an infringement of basic human rights. Nobody must be obliged to "face the consequences" of pregnancy. This is ridiculous. Nobody should have a baby just to "face consequences" - you're dealing with people here. They have objectives, ambitions, plans and they must not be obliged to change them because of some retrograde notion that having sex is wrong and that having a children is a bad consequence of it.

Because of this kind of reasoning that I don't wanna raise my children in Brazil.

Caio_Brasil
02-21-2009, 06:03 PM
2- First and foremost, there's a need to establish when a fetus becomes a human. Will to survive... afff. I'm not gonna put my opinion that parents should have more control over their children here, as it's not pertinent to the subject. What's pertinent is that a human has the right to do whatever he wants to his own body, and until the baby's born, it is part of a woman's body. To deny that right to women is discrimination based on gender and paternalism.

As you said there's a need to establish when a fetus becomes a human, so your final opinion depends on that and I disagree with that.

3- Also it's not right to restrict a woman the right to have a safe procedure. Women in a tight spot in their life will go for an abortion anyway. According to the Humans Rights Watch, about 13% of maternal deaths worldwide are blamed on unsafe abortions.

5- No person should be obliged to do something by their government, it's an infringement of basic human rights. Nobody must be obliged to "face the consequences" of pregnancy. This is ridiculous. Nobody should have a baby just to "face consequences" - you're dealing with people here. They have objectives, ambitions, plans and they must not be obliged to change them because of some retrograde notion that having sex is wrong and that having a children is a bad consequence of it. .

At 3 you brought valid stats to the issue and I also agree with the last sentence you wrote at 5. That is not an acceptable thought in this century, in my opinion.

Ilovetheblues_86
02-21-2009, 09:03 PM
You live in a pink happy world, mate.

1- If you think it's okay to submit someone to be born into a shit life condition and to the high probability of becoming a criminal, then you gotta be kidding me.

2- First and foremost, there's a need to establish when a fetus becomes a human. Will to survive... afff. I'm not gonna put my opinion that parents should have more control over their children here, as it's not pertinent to the subject. What's pertinent is that a human has the right to do whatever he wants to his own body, and until the baby's born, it is part of a woman's body. To deny that right to women is discrimination based on gender and paternalism.

3- Also it's not right to restrict a woman the right to have a safe procedure. Women in a tight spot in their life will go for an abortion anyway. According to the Humans Rights Watch, about 13% of maternal deaths worldwide are blamed on unsafe abortions.

4- The same HRW involves the following human rights into the matter: right to life, rights to health and health care, rights to equality, right to security of a person, right to liberty, right to privacy, right to information, right to be free from cruel, degrading treatment, rights to select the number and spacing of children, rights to enjoy scientific progress and right to freedom of conscience and religion. If you're so protective about human rights, then you should consider those.

5- No person should be obliged to do something by their government, it's an infringement of basic human rights. Nobody must be obliged to "face the consequences" of pregnancy. This is ridiculous. Nobody should have a baby just to "face consequences" - you're dealing with people here. They have objectives, ambitions, plans and they must not be obliged to change them because of some retrograde notion that having sex is wrong and that having a children is a bad consequence of it.

Because of this kind of reasoning that I don't wanna raise my children in Brazil.

1. I agree with you that abortion could even help to make less poor people be born and people with a high probability of shitty life, because some cases are definetely hopeless( like poor pregnantes that live on the streets). In this case I really believe it´s not that wrong, but a person who can sustain somebody even with hard difficulties to abort I still think that it´s not right, because that new person might always have a chance. It´s like the fetus rights are important when there is a probability of his rights when developed be respected too.

2-It´s not paternalism, it´s simply a defense of the fetus life. Just because you are dependant of somebody else´s body then you can be thrown up in the garbage? Don´t you think it´s too much rights for the mother and less for the fetus? How come after the born the baby "suddendly" get rights which some months before he didn´t had?
What´s the difference between a baby-born and a 4-month fetus? Why would a fetus not be an human if his cromological type is similar to a human?

3-What I said is I don´t think abortion is right but we can´t deny other people´s wishes by our ethics, so I think we can liberate abortion because we have so many health problems and because women really abort anyway.

4-This rights the fetus already have too, since I believe life begins on concepction and not when born. A fetus also has right to life, rights to health and health care, rights to equality, right to security of a person, right to liberty, etc, so it´s independent of the mother and not dependant But since we have so many problems for the mother and so many problems with mothers ethics, maybe we should reconsider giving a full-developed person to have the right to abort, only because of our country social problems.

5-Having children is not a bad consequence. That´s why they should not kill this opportunity. I don´t think a person´s plans should be higher than the perspective of a new person borning, that´s why people should protect themselves if they want to have sex with no 9-month prizes after. A person should always be aware of the risks of doing sex cause if they create a new being they can´t deny that human being rights of be born, but we said already that in many cases the woman should have a preponderacy, that´why I´m against abortion but also against its criminalization.;)
The same way a person can´t have denied it´s objectives by having a baby a fetus or a future baby should not have denied life only because it wasn´t on their parent´s plan. This is MY ethics, but we can´t impose this to everyone, like I said.

Edit: I agree with you that abortion could even help to make less poor people be born and people with a highprobability of shitty life, because some cases are definetely hopeless( like poor pregnantes that live on the streets). In this case I really believe it´s not that wrong, but a porrperson who can sustain somebody even with hard difficulties to abort I still think that if she aboprts it´s not right, because that person might always have a chance. It´s like the fetus rights are important when there is a probability of his rights when developed be respected too.

FilipeMB
02-21-2009, 09:33 PM
1. I agree with you that abortion could even help to make less poor people be born and people with a high probability of shitty life, because some cases are definetely hopeless( like poor pregnantes that live on the streets). In this case I really believe itīs not that wrong, but a person who can sustain somebody even with hard difficulties to abort I still think that itīs not right, because that new person might always have a chance. Itīs like the fetus rights are important when there is a probability of his rights when developed be respected too.

I really would like to be as hopeful as you about society. You cannot estimate how difficult will be a life of person. You cannot project how economy and society will react to one more person in the world or how they will be in the future.

5-Having children is not a bad consequence. Thatīs why they should not kill this opportunity. I donīt think a personīs plans should be higher than the perspective of a new person borning, thatīs why people should protect themselves if they want to have sex with no 9-month prizes after. A person should always be aware of the risks of doing sex cause if they create a new being they canīt deny that human being rights of be born, but we said already that in many cases the woman should have a preponderacy, thatīwhy Iīm against abortion but also against its criminalization.;)

It's a bad consequence yes, when he can make father and mother stop studying. It's a bad consequence when father and mother lives on the streets and their son probably will have to work asking money, playing balls or robing. Using drugs maybe.
And please, just answer this people who have at least travelled to brazil once and seen this.

I bolded a part of your post because I disagree a lot with this. You cannot assume people are always aware of risks of sex. Sex is often related to instincts and they might cause difficuties to the process of racionalization of your acts.
If the women wants to keep the children, then keep the children. But if she does not want or it's proven the family has not the structure necessary to the children to develop properly, to have access to school and health system, to be in condition to integrate the world of knowldge, then, please abort.

Ilovetheblues_86
02-21-2009, 09:45 PM
I really would like to be as hopeful as you about society. You cannot estimate how difficult will be a life of person. You cannot project how economy and society will react to one more person in the world or how they will be in the future.



It's a bad consequence yes, when he can make father and mother stop studying. It's a bad consequence when father and mother lives on the streets and their son probably will have to work asking money, playing balls or robing. Using drugs maybe.
And please, just answer this people who have at least travelled to brazil once and seen this.

I bolded a part of your post because I disagree a lot with this. You cannot assume people are always aware of risks of sex. Sex is often related to instincts and they might cause difficuties to the process of racionalization of your acts.
If the women wants to keep the children, then keep the children. But if she does not want or it's proven the family has not the structure necessary to the children to develop properly, to have access to school and health system, to be in condition to integrate the world of knowldge, then, please abort.

1-:confused:I donīt get what you mean. I was about to write the same thing you said that we should give the chance to everyone and we should not abort only because a people is really poor and will have no good life, but c mon you must agree with Glenn Mirnyi when you see homeless people on the streets with naked babies around the streets. This doesnīt get less rights for them to prevent their birth, but I was agreeing with Glenn when I sad there are a lot of people suffering there, just to say Life is not always beautiful and that I understand his vision about poor people.

5-Its a bad consequence for the parents, but if those poor parents were aborted before birth they would have no hoipe to live the same way an aborted child.
Sex is instinct when doing that. Before that is about a question of choice and rationality and the state should use education as a path to bring rationality to people. The children will not be a children always. A children with poor condition can have a great life being a street cleaner and watching football matches on the slums and if you have aborted before she would be dead by now. But Iīm not saying we should deny the right to abortion. I just donīt think itīs right to deny a new life just because yours will get worse. Thatīs called individualism for me.
The world of knowledge has a lot of levels. Its not like integrated or not, we have different levels of knowledge.

All in all it would be really easier to defend abortion because itīs really tempting to defend a peopleīs life against only a mass of cells. But since we should be discussing only about legal problems and not morals and on legal problems I agree with you both about de-criminalization, we should stop discussing because it enters on moral questions and particular to me, religion issues, since I have a kardecist family.

FilipeMB
02-21-2009, 09:59 PM
1-:confused:I donīt get what you mean. I was about to write the same thing you said that we should give the chance to everyone and we should not abort only because a people is really poor and will have no good life, but c mon you must agree with Glenn Mirnyi when you see homeless people on the streets with naked babies around the streets. This doesnīt get less rights for them to prevent their birth, but I was agreeing with Glenn when I sad there are a lot of people suffering there, just to say Life is not always beautiful and that I understand his vision about poor people.

5-Its a bad consequence for the parents, but if those poor parents were aborted before birth they would have no hoipe to live the same way an aborted child.
Sex is instinct when doing that. Before that is about a question of choice and rationality and the state should use education as a path to bring rationality to people. The children will not be a children always. A children with poor condition can have a great life being a street cleaner and watching football matches on the slums and if you have aborted before she would be dead by now. But Iīm not saying we should deny the right to abortion. I just donīt think itīs right to deny a new life just because yours will get worse. Thatīs called individualism for me.
The world of knowledge has a lot of levels. Its not like integrated or not, we have different levels of knowledge.

regarding 5, you know our problem about education and how much it's a matter of politician's will and people's choice. I mean, there are a lot of people who simply don't wanna get educated, they prefer to don't know. I don't want to deny a new life because it will make mine worse. I want this because it's highly probably that it will make all society's life worse. Mainly in Brazil when there aren't spots on school and health for everybody. You could and probably will say: then invest on health and school. It's an utopia in our feudal brazilian politic, as The Guardian said regarding to Sarney.

A chance to everyone should exist when there's a real possibility to everyone to evolve in the society. When there are structure for them to study, to don't have to deal with bad examples near them. It's difficult to a kid with 10yr to see a guy who steals, who kills get a more "succesful life" (aka richier or seeming to be happier) than his dad who works hard everyday to earn near the needed for the family to survive. It's difficult and I admire the children who do not get too much influenced by what some people think it's better.

Ilovetheblues_86
02-21-2009, 10:10 PM
It would be easier if we donīt consider abortion as a bad thing by the other way, as a way of preventing one more person to suffer on a very difficult world and also to ensure the hopes of a good future for the parents
However, like I said, itīs my personal choice to consider this mass of cells of a "done job" that we shouldnīt interrupt. Its a question of believing in destiny, sometimes. Not a done destiny, but a destiny which is basically related to our choices and acts and the risks. Since not everybody should believe in what I or the religion believe, however, Gu is absolutely right when he criticizes brazilian law.

I still think people take sex too much for fun and are less and less concerned about its consequences. Just as drinking might get you drunk, people shoulfd be more responsible when doing sexual acts.:banghead:

FilipeMB
02-21-2009, 10:19 PM
For sure and I believe also in this "destiny" you said, I'm just not too believer. anyway

JolánGagó
02-21-2009, 11:33 PM
5- No person should be obliged to do something by their government, it's an infringement of basic human rights. Nobody must be obliged to "face the consequences" of pregnancy. This is ridiculous. Nobody should have a baby just to "face consequences" - you're dealing with people here. They have objectives, ambitions, plans and they must not be obliged to change them because of some retrograde notion that having sex is wrong and that having a children is a bad consequence of it.

I fully agree. Now go and apply that to your oh-so-very-progressive proposal of forced sterilization. You have serious consistency issues, mate. :p

Caio_Brasil
02-22-2009, 02:47 AM
A chance to everyone should exist when there's a real possibility to everyone to evolve in the society. When there are structure for them to study, to don't have to deal with bad examples near them. It's difficult to a kid with 10yr to see a guy who steals, who kills get a more "succesful life" (aka richier or seeming to be happier) than his dad who works hard everyday to earn near the needed for the family to survive. It's difficult and I admire the children who do not get too much influenced by what some people think it's better.

It can be even worse, the dad can be the bad example as well. My mom teaches at public schools and one of her 6th grade students (11 y.o.) is a drug dealer as well as his father, mother and brother.

GlennMirnyi
02-22-2009, 06:39 AM
I fully agree. Now go and apply that to your oh-so-very-progressive proposal of forced sterilization. You have serious consistency issues, mate. :p

It's a necessary step in a society not yet educated in reproductive issues. Unfortunately, we don't live in a perfect world where poor people know as much as you and I know about protection and birth control. You can't allow people way below the poverty line to spawn 6-7 children that will probably be criminals when they grow up. To give full individual liberties to most of the people, sometimes you have to take some of them off some people.

GlennMirnyi
02-22-2009, 06:49 AM
1. I agree with you that abortion could even help to make less poor people be born and people with a high probability of shitty life, because some cases are definetely hopeless( like poor pregnantes that live on the streets). In this case I really believe itīs not that wrong, but a person who can sustain somebody even with hard difficulties to abort I still think that itīs not right, because that new person might always have a chance. Itīs like the fetus rights are important when there is a probability of his rights when developed be respected too.

2-Itīs not paternalism, itīs simply a defense of the fetus life. Just because you are dependant of somebody elseīs body then you can be thrown up in the garbage? Donīt you think itīs too much rights for the mother and less for the fetus? How come after the born the baby "suddendly" get rights which some months before he didnīt had?
Whatīs the difference between a baby-born and a 4-month fetus? Why would a fetus not be an human if his cromological type is similar to a human?

3-What I said is I donīt think abortion is right but we canīt deny other peopleīs wishes by our ethics, so I think we can liberate abortion because we have so many health problems and because women really abort anyway.

4-This rights the fetus already have too, since I believe life begins on concepction and not when born. A fetus also has right to life, rights to health and health care, rights to equality, right to security of a person, right to liberty, etc, so itīs independent of the mother and not dependant But since we have so many problems for the mother and so many problems with mothers ethics, maybe we should reconsider giving a full-developed person to have the right to abort, only because of our country social problems.

5-Having children is not a bad consequence. Thatīs why they should not kill this opportunity. I donīt think a personīs plans should be higher than the perspective of a new person borning, thatīs why people should protect themselves if they want to have sex with no 9-month prizes after. A person should always be aware of the risks of doing sex cause if they create a new being they canīt deny that human being rights of be born, but we said already that in many cases the woman should have a preponderacy, thatīwhy Iīm against abortion but also against its criminalization.;)
The same way a person canīt have denied itīs objectives by having a baby a fetus or a future baby should not have denied life only because it wasnīt on their parentīs plan. This is MY ethics, but we canīt impose this to everyone, like I said.

Edit: I agree with you that abortion could even help to make less poor people be born and people with a highprobability of shitty life, because some cases are definetely hopeless( like poor pregnantes that live on the streets). In this case I really believe itīs not that wrong, but a porrperson who can sustain somebody even with hard difficulties to abort I still think that if she aboprts itīs not right, because that person might always have a chance. Itīs like the fetus rights are important when there is a probability of his rights when developed be respected too.

Well, according to the laws in most developed countries, like European ones, for instance, the following applies: a fetus isn't a human being because it can't live outside the womb, therefore it has no rights as human yet, but the mother already has rights, so she is allowed to do whatever she wants - it's her life in the first place.

1-:confused:I donīt get what you mean. I was about to write the same thing you said that we should give the chance to everyone and we should not abort only because a people is really poor and will have no good life, but c mon you must agree with Glenn Mirnyi when you see homeless people on the streets with naked babies around the streets. This doesnīt get less rights for them to prevent their birth, but I was agreeing with Glenn when I sad there are a lot of people suffering there, just to say Life is not always beautiful and that I understand his vision about poor people.

5-Its a bad consequence for the parents, but if those poor parents were aborted before birth they would have no hoipe to live the same way an aborted child.
Sex is instinct when doing that. Before that is about a question of choice and rationality and the state should use education as a path to bring rationality to people. The children will not be a children always. A children with poor condition can have a great life being a street cleaner and watching football matches on the slums and if you have aborted before she would be dead by now. But Iīm not saying we should deny the right to abortion. I just donīt think itīs right to deny a new life just because yours will get worse. Thatīs called individualism for me.
The world of knowledge has a lot of levels. Its not like integrated or not, we have different levels of knowledge.

All in all it would be really easier to defend abortion because itīs really tempting to defend a peopleīs life against only a mass of cells. But since we should be discussing only about legal problems and not morals and on legal problems I agree with you both about de-criminalization, we should stop discussing because it enters on moral questions and particular to me, religion issues, since I have a kardecist family.

Individualism is at the base of all human rights...

It would be easier if we donīt consider abortion as a bad thing by the other way, as a way of preventing one more person to suffer on a very difficult world and also to ensure the hopes of a good future for the parents
However, like I said, itīs my personal choice to consider this mass of cells of a "done job" that we shouldnīt interrupt. Its a question of believing in destiny, sometimes. Not a done destiny, but a destiny which is basically related to our choices and acts and the risks. Since not everybody should believe in what I or the religion believe, however, Gu is absolutely right when he criticizes brazilian law.

I still think people take sex too much for fun and are less and less concerned about its consequences. Just as drinking might get you drunk, people shoulfd be more responsible when doing sexual acts.:banghead:

Sex is supposed to be fun. What's wrong about sex? This vision that sex is such a huge deal is absurdly retrograde. Really. Sex is natural and should be regarded that way. It's good, it's fun. Why shouldn't people do it? That's why there's birth control.

Religion has really done an awful job on the minds of people.

JolánGagó
02-22-2009, 07:34 AM
Well, according to the laws in most developed countries, like European ones, for instance, the following applies: a fetus isn't a human being because it can't live outside the womb, therefore it has no rights as human yet

There are limits on the right of abortion, normally it's allowed only in the first 4 months of pregnancy plus minus 2-3 weeks depending on the country.

Ilovetheblues_86
02-22-2009, 11:23 AM
Well, according to the laws in most developed countries, like European ones, for instance, the following applies: a fetus isn't a human being because it can't live outside the womb, therefore it has no rights as human yet, but the mother already has rights, so she is allowed to do whatever she wants - it's her life in the first place.



Individualism is at the base of all human rights...



Sex is supposed to be fun. What's wrong about sex? This vision that sex is such a huge deal is absurdly retrograde. Really. Sex is natural and should be regarded that way. It's good, it's fun. Why shouldn't people do it? That's why there's birth control.

Religion has really done an awful job on the minds of people.

It's easier for a country to make their population happy by making legal abortion, but also a lot of people there has not be born because of this; and now they face decrease in their population.:worship:
Sex is supposed to be fun, but the fun itīs not the main reason for sex, so if you want to have fun you must face the consequences and be aware.
Religion is not just bullshit.At least it teaches us that we should be more disciplined but you must not let heve it get you out.:o
However, abort a child and you go to hell:devil: because you will not let your child born and her soul will be lost. You devil :nerner:

JolánGagó
02-22-2009, 12:04 PM
Sex is supposed to be fun, but the fun itīs not the main reason for sex

Perhaps in your case it isn't, in my case fun is the only reason.

Abortion isn't an exclusively religious matter. Yes, religion is against it but it's also against murder and theft. You can oppose abortion on ethical grounds without being religious, exactly the same as you oppose murder and theft.

Ilovetheblues_86
02-22-2009, 01:55 PM
Perhaps in your case it isn't, in my case fun is the only reason.

Abortion isn't an exclusively religious matter. Yes, religion is against it but it's also against murder and theft. You can oppose abortion on ethical grounds without being religious, exactly the same as you oppose murder and theft.

What I mean is that its purpose used to be for reproduction, animals usually donīt have sex only for reproduction, but iīts hardly for fun itīs mostly due to show power (but Iīm not a bio to say that however).But humans use for fun, however they should not forget it's also a reproduction way. So Iīm against discarding a fetus if our fun had with bad consequence a pregnancy.

Iīm not a religious crazy person; i just think that there are no diffs between killing a baby and a fetus. Maybe killing a baby seems more severe because he is not anymore on the motherīs body, but I believe that a person should always have the right to be born as it has the right to live and this right is over the right of the parents to have a good life with no kids; however, I wouldnīt care if our law let abortion legal because like I said I canīt impose my ethic to other people. So, 'm saying also I only oppose abortion on ethical grounds, also as religious, but this religious ground is veryt particular to me. :wavey:

TNX1.0E6TOPCA
02-22-2009, 03:43 PM
reference is made to the first post of this thread, I do feel the need to defend my country http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v473/pix-perso/flag_suisse.gif

Confronted with the evidence, Oliveira admitted Feb. 13 that no attack had taken place and that she had cut her own skin, the prosecutor's office said. She also admitted that she was not pregnant. The Swiss weekly "Weltwoche" first reported that she had admitted faking the attack.

Initial reports of Oliveira's claims shocked the Swiss public and outraged Brazilians, whose President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva condemned the purported attack. He later backtracked.

GlennMirnyi
02-22-2009, 04:06 PM
There are limits on the right of abortion, normally it's allowed only in the first 4 months of pregnancy plus minus 2-3 weeks depending on the country.

Makes sense. It's related to when the embryo becomes a fetus, probably.

GlennMirnyi
02-22-2009, 04:24 PM
It's easier for a country to make their population happy by making legal abortion, but also a lot of people there has not be born because of this; and now they face decrease in their population.:worship:
Sex is supposed to be fun, but the fun itīs not the main reason for sex, so if you want to have fun you must face the consequences and be aware.
Religion is not just bullshit.At least it teaches us that we should be more disciplined but you must not let heve it get you out.:o
However, abort a child and you go to hell:devil: because you will not let your child born and her soul will be lost. You devil :nerner:

It's not like European countries need more population. Also it's not about happiness, it's about legal rights.

Fun is the main reason for sex for me and most people out there too.

Religion only teaches something if you wanna learn stories... You can educate someone pretty well without all this :bs:.

Perhaps in your case it isn't, in my case fun is the only reason.

Abortion isn't an exclusively religious matter. Yes, religion is against it but it's also against murder and theft. You can oppose abortion on ethical grounds without being religious, exactly the same as you oppose murder and theft.

Yep.

What I mean is that its purpose used to be for reproduction, animals usually donīt have sex only for reproduction, but iīts hardly for fun itīs mostly due to show power (but Iīm not a bio to say that however).But humans use for fun, however they should not forget it's also a reproduction way. So Iīm against discarding a fetus if our fun had with bad consequence a pregnancy.

Iīm not a religious crazy person; i just think that there are no diffs between killing a baby and a fetus. Maybe killing a baby seems more severe because he is not anymore on the motherīs body, but I believe that a person should always have the right to be born as it has the right to live and this right is over the right of the parents to have a good life with no kids; however, I wouldnīt care if our law let abortion legal because like I said I canīt impose my ethic to other people. So, 'm saying also I only oppose abortion on ethical grounds, also as religious, but this religious ground is veryt particular to me. :wavey:

Science has allowed humans to reproduce whenever they want to, and that's the big advance here... since that development, sex isn't anymore always a form of reproduction.

Killing what isn't even alive? Then masturbation is murder too?

Caio_Brasil
02-22-2009, 04:25 PM
Makes sense. It's related to when the embryo becomes a fetus, probably.

I read the embryo becomes a fetus around the week 8, which means 2 months. I'm sure you would condemn the same attitude if it was taken in Brazil. But as it's in your so loved Europe you defend it. So I ask you: does it make sense or not? Do you defend abortion in any period of pregnancy or not anyway?

Caio_Brasil
02-22-2009, 04:29 PM
Killing what isn't even alive? Then masturbation is murder too?

Judging from this post you think menstruation is murder as well, right?

In both cases the gametes are being expelled without concepting purposes.

GlennMirnyi
02-22-2009, 04:51 PM
Judging from this post you think menstruation is murder as well, right?

In both cases the gametes are being expelled without concepting purposes.

I don't. He does.

Caio_Brasil
02-22-2009, 04:54 PM
I don't. He does.

Hmm, my bad really. I direct my question to him then :lol:

GlennMirnyi
02-22-2009, 04:54 PM
I read the embryo becomes a fetus around the week 8, which means 2 months. I'm sure you would condemn the same attitude if it was taken in Brazil. But as it's in your so loved Europe you defend it. So I ask you: does it make sense or not? Do you defend abortion in any period of pregnancy or not anyway?

Personally, I defend full rights of abortion. I do, however, understand some of the moral issues that permeate this subject and ultimately agree on a limit of 2-3 months of pregnancy to abort. I think this is enough time for any decisions to be made.

Ilovetheblues_86
02-22-2009, 04:58 PM
Judging from this post you think menstruation is murder as well, right?

In both cases the gametes are being expelled without concepting purposes.

The gametes are expelled, but they have 23 cromossomes is a question of numbers.
23=you can expell
46= you canīt :haha:

But thew most I donīt defend abortion is because I follow Allan Kardekīs tecahings thay if you abort you are not letting a new spirit to be born. It can be bullshit to you, but itīs a justified bullshit. :p

Caio_Brasil
02-22-2009, 05:00 PM
The gametes are expelled, but they have 23 cromossomes is a question of numbers.
23=you can expell
46= you canīt :haha:

But thew most I donīt defend abortion is because I follow Allan Kardekīs tecahings thay if you abort you are not letting a new spirit to be born. It can be bullshit to you, but itīs a justified bullshit. :p

I know, I totally disagree with that as well :yeah:

GlennMirnyi
02-22-2009, 05:01 PM
So? Then you teach your children or whatever to follow your beliefs. You don't impose those same beliefs to everybody.

That's the problem with the Brazilian law - it's discriminatory and violates freedom of religion. People should be free to do whatever they believe is right or not.

Ilovetheblues_86
02-22-2009, 05:03 PM
I know, I totally disagree with that as well :yeah:

Oh man, the spirit gets in when itīs 46 not 23.:p

Killing what isn't even alive? Then masturbation is murder too?

Alive and has soul only need to involve its body cause we are not created in full form. Also a kangoo (marsupial) needs itīs mother belly and is very alive, you can see he jumping and kicking some balls around. :p

Caio_Brasil
02-22-2009, 05:04 PM
So? Then you teach your children or whatever to follow your beliefs. You don't impose those same beliefs to everybody.

That's the problem with the Brazilian law - it's discriminatory and violates freedom of religion. People should be free to do whatever they believe is right or not.

Not that simple. People should be free to do some issues according to what they believe is right or not, but this doesn't apply for everything.

GlennMirnyi
02-22-2009, 05:05 PM
Not that simple. People should be free to do some issues according to what they believe is right or not, but this doesn't apply for everything.

Like?

Caio_Brasil
02-22-2009, 05:10 PM
Like?

http://www.e-paulopes.blogspot.com/2008/10/manaco-da-cruz-afirma-que-gosto-por.html

Ilovetheblues_86
02-22-2009, 05:11 PM
So? Then you teach your children or whatever to follow your beliefs. You don't impose those same beliefs to everybody.

That's the problem with the Brazilian law - it's discriminatory and violates freedom of religion. People should be free to do whatever they believe is right or not.

I know I donīt want to see people aborting artificially everywhere and it disgusts me, but I agree with you, we donīt live in a policy state anymore Gu.
But maybe some of the people alive now would be dead by its parents decision if abortion wasnīt prohibited. So itīs not only a religion problem, itīs a question of protecting someoneīs possibility to get alive (moral). It has a reason but also creates a lot of problems.
We say itīs a conflict of interest:

Embryo-fetus x Mother
Where the embryo is less protected.


If thatīs a good thing or wrong, I used to prefer to let for the destiny. :unsure:

GlennMirnyi
02-22-2009, 05:13 PM
http://www.e-paulopes.blogspot.com/2008/10/manaco-da-cruz-afirma-que-gosto-por.html

What this has to do with freedom of religion, mate?

There are moral issues already on discussions about crime and punishment. Religion doesn't need to be put into any of those issues.

Ilovetheblues_86
02-22-2009, 05:20 PM
Also, with this politic of giving a lots of rights to the not-born people we have a lot of consequences,like for curiosity, the not-yet-born child has the rights of the properties and money of the dead father, for an example.

FilipeMB
02-22-2009, 05:23 PM
So? Then you teach your children or whatever to follow your beliefs. You don't impose those same beliefs to everybody.

That's the problem with the Brazilian law - it's discriminatory and violates freedom of religion. People should be free to do whatever they believe is right or not.

Brazil self-claims itself as a State without religion but a big part of groups who controls brazil's politic are conservationists, in the meaning of making them a part of the politic system for decades. They are, sometimes, related morally and family to groups from ages highly religious, such as 70's and before.
The influence of Catholics beliefs on Brazilian Constitution are notorious as also is the influence of Church in life on many states.

What I mean is that its purpose used to be for reproduction, animals usually donīt have sex only for reproduction, but iīts hardly for fun itīs mostly due to show power (but Iīm not a bio to say that however).But humans use for fun, however they should not forget it's also a reproduction way. So Iīm against discarding a fetus if our fun had with bad consequence a pregnancy.

May I also add that, in my point of view, human also does it in a way to demonstrate. I mean, major part of society values the one who "fucks" the most as the powerful and discriminate the ones with different beliefs, aka the one who fucks mainly because of love.
After all, the human being is also an animal, just conscious of what they are doing when they are not affected by their insticts.

Science has allowed humans to reproduce whenever they want to, and that's the big advance here... since that development, sex isn't anymore always a form of reproduction.

Killing what isn't even alive? Then masturbation is murder too?

:lol: :lol: it would be a funnier argument to bring on the table when discussing abortion.