Respect For Life - Page 8 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 10-15-2002, 03:28 PM   #106
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Lilly's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: back and to the left
Posts: 8,523
Local Time: 05:39 AM
Originally posted by melon
I have always found it semi-amusing that most pro-choicers are horrified by pictures of aborted fetuses. I guess the truth comes down to the fact that if you dehumanize your victim, it becomes easier to justify his/her destruction; and this is the case with anything: terrorism, homophobia, white supremacism, and, yes, abortion.

Now there is something to think about.


It's not something I want to see. The only reason I'm pro-choice is because I feel I don't have the right to decide for every other woman out there. I don't think I would ever, EVER be able to do it.

I know what dead fetuses look like, even before it was unwelcomly posted in this thread. I know what stillborns look like in person, I know what amniotic fluid that was taken out in an abortion looks like. It's disturbing. But it doesn't change the fact that it is not my place to decide for others.

Lilly is offline  
Old 10-15-2002, 11:15 PM   #107
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: foray's kitchen drawer
Posts: 431
Local Time: 11:39 PM
I am against abortion myself. If I were ever raped (heaven forbid), I hope I will keep to my beliefs and have the strength to carry the baby. I may consider not telling my child who his father is; that problem is more important than whether I ought to have the child or not.

I think pro-choice is an euphemism, and I dislike euphemisms. I watched the doco "silent scream" and saw that piccie of a foetus screaming. I don't know how anyone who ever saw that doco could ever agree to abortion...

Oh yeah, there was this artist few years back who made earrings out of real foetuses. Would you be outraged by that?

famous rungi is offline  
Old 10-16-2002, 12:04 AM   #108
Jesus Online
Angela Harlem's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 10:39 PM
Foray....honestly, no offence, but that's kinda something entirely different. That is making a fashion accessory out of a dead fetus for craps sake. Its not really an acceptable extension of some people's views. I mean, there is no hypocrisy or double standard with those who are ok to accept some women will choose abortion, and then are sickened by the idea of someone making art for arts sake out of a dead baby!
The lengths some go to in the name of art is beyond questionable. Making a statement, my arse.
<a href= target=_blank></a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
Old 10-16-2002, 06:43 AM   #109
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: full of sound and fury
Posts: 3,386
Local Time: 12:39 AM
Thanks Angie. Personally, I neither support nor condemn that artwork (btw, I've never seen it myself, only read about it). Just brought it up as a matter of interest, I'm not wanting to spark off more anger.

But the artwork did get people talking, I think any successful artwork does.

I forgot if you are pro-choice/pro-life, Angie, but you called it a "dead foetus"; that tells me that you regard the foetus as a once-living organism... If pro-choice people really believe that a fetus is just a lump of cells, why object to the foetus earrings? (Yeah, it is a gross question, in a way, sorry.) Is it a similar situation if the artist exhibited placentas?

foray is offline  
Old 10-16-2002, 09:09 AM   #110
love, blood, life
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 11,961
Local Time: 06:39 AM

i've seen silent scream too. it was, without question, the most horrific thing i've ever seen.
Screaming Flower is offline  
Old 10-16-2002, 11:51 AM   #111
Bono's Belly Dancing Friend
Mrs. Edge's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Torontonian in Maryland
Posts: 2,913
Local Time: 07:39 AM
Originally posted by foray
I forgot if you are pro-choice/pro-life, Angie, but you called it a "dead foetus"; that tells me that you regard the foetus as a once-living organism... If pro-choice people really believe that a fetus is just a lump of cells, why object to the foetus earrings? (Yeah, it is a gross question, in a way, sorry.) Is it a similar situation if the artist exhibited placentas?
OK, I am finally going to gingerly dip my toe into this discussion. I am offiially a "pro choice" person, because whether you make something illegal or not (drugs, prostitution etc.) people will do it anyway, and it seems ridiculous in free countries with access to excellent healthcare that you have to make women resort to these horrible back alley abortions when we have safe alternatives.

However, I do think a safe, accessible abortion should be carefully regulated and only made available in situations where the mother's life is in danger (either by her partner/family or by health problems having the child, if she were raped, etc.) and then to have the abortion as early as possible in the pregnancy. I certainly do NOT approve of using abortion as an alternate of birth control, or as a way out if your birth control fails.

With all that said, the issue of the fetus earrings...well yes, any clump of cells is a living organism of some sort, and whether one thinks the fetus is just a lump of cells or a human person, either way, the earrings are objectionable because it's just plain GROSS! Placenta art is gross too imo!

But taking this argument further, a leather jacket was once part of a living organism too for that matter, but of course because it wasn't a part of a human (either as simple cells or otherwise) it bothers few people.
Mrs. Edge is offline  
Old 10-16-2002, 01:45 PM   #112
War Child
Sparkysgrrrl's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: under the table and screaming
Posts: 754
Local Time: 03:39 AM
I urge everyone who has seen Silent Scream to read this:

Yes, it is from Planned Parenthood and you may not like reading the info from a bias source, but take a look at it non the less. If for no other reason than to "know thy enemy"
There are other articles and studies form sources other than PPH, but they have it set up on their website in the easiest to read formet.

As for art, it can be art, but like Mrs. Edge says, it's just gross.
I don't want to see someone's toes made into earings, I don't want to see someone's appendix as a bracelet. I just don't like medical things of any kind

and also brought up by Mrs. Edge - some humans tend to not look at animals in the same light, so when an animal or their parts are used some don't even bat an eyelash. But I guess that could get us into a whole human vs. animal thing...
Sparkysgrrrl is offline  
Old 10-16-2002, 06:12 PM   #113
Blue Crack Addict
nbcrusader's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 03:39 AM
Originally posted by Sparkysgrrrl
I urge everyone who has seen Silent Scream to read this:

I appreciate you posting this link. You are correct; the best way to sharpen you thinking is to know the opposing sides view in detail.

The arguments contained at this web site touch on Melonís comment: ďif you dehumanize your victim, it becomes easier to justify his/her destructionĒ.
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 10-17-2002, 05:10 AM   #114
Jesus Online
Angela Harlem's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 10:39 PM
Hmm, I'm not sure where to begin my reply, so apologies if its jumbled. Also fors, I hope I didn't sound angry when I replied, I re-read it just then and realised how pompous it sounded. Sorry again lol.
Ok, the earrings, plain and simply are gross. But that has been established so no need to go on. With the placenta artworks, they raise some interesting questions, but I dont hold a placenta in the same regard I do an unborn fetus, be it dead or alive. In a nutshell though, it falls under the same category to me, as 'gross'. I agree with you though that an artwork that sparks debate is good etc, that is all true. I do however have a problem with artwork that oversteps my own personal boundary of what is in good taste, for want of a better term. But this isn't about artwork lol, so I'll leave it at that.

Now, with abortion....Where to start...I have my interference setting set on 40 replies per page, and am not sure if anyone else has changed theirs, but I made a reply on what is page 2 for me, on what my beliefs are in a general kind of reply. But to reiterate, I dont see any difference in a life that is 6 weeks old in utero and one that is 60 years old in life. I see the whole life journey as a process and dont really like to differentiate simply because that fetus is yet to be born. I'll try and keep this succinct here. I could never opt for a medical abortion under normal circumstances. I could never purposely kill any other living human being. I dont see much difference between killing a person under many circumstances, or killing an unborn fetus. It's simply because I see all life at any stage, as equal. I dont ever think anyone has the right to end any life. Yet every day we kill people and we justify it, legalise it, accept it. We can kill someone who threatens us, we can kill someone who breaks into our homes and the law says we are just protecting ourselves. We argue about abortion and say it is an innocent life and it is different. Well to me every life is different, yet none more important than another. I wont look at these 'guilty' members of our adult or grown up society and say they got what they deserved, or they did something wrong, and their death was manslaughter in the name of self defense. Who am I to judge? I cannot say a person's death is acceptable. I dont think we should have that power to ever say it is someone's time to die. I dont think it is our place.
Is abortion acceptable to me? No.
<a href= target=_blank></a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
Old 10-17-2002, 08:21 PM   #115
RavenStar's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Purgatory
Posts: 1,101
Local Time: 06:39 AM
I think it all comes down to, not when the baby becomes human, but when the baby is considered a person. But then you have to ask thew question: "What is a person?" In my opinion, the way most people would define person would make alot of animals people too. But since some humans dont mind killing animals for no reason I assume they have a different view of what is a person. I think human rights should be changed to person rights. Humans who have raped children or abused animals are not people and should not get those rights.
RavenStar is offline  
Old 10-29-2002, 08:59 AM   #116
Rock n' Roll Doggie
hiphop's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the jungle
Posts: 7,410
Local Time: 01:39 PM
Respect for Life Pt. II

Here you go... a totally different story about the value of human life.

Visions for the Future: The Rules of Risk

If youíre not willing to take a risk, youíll never get off the ground!

Guy Thibodaux and Max Faget

Robbie: Thereís a question I really want to ask. What is your vision for the future of humans in space? If you could paint the picture any way you wanted, whatís your vision? What would it look like?

Max: I think the long range vision is probably that humans will at least explore the inner planets. Iím not sure theyíll go much beyond Mars, unless they get something that science fiction calls hyper-drive or something like that and the human race is really going to move to another solar system. We need space for more and more things. The commercial use of space could probably hardly be done without the human applications.

Iíll make another prediction thatís not original with me because Bob Gilruth said it long before I did. He said, "Next time we go to the moon, the people who do it are really going to find out that it is very difficult." I would agree with him on that. With the modern ground rules, itís almost impossible to do. The military talks about "rules of engagement." Well, Iíll talk about rules concerning risk and so forth. Those rules we have imposed on ourselves almost preclude the possibility of a reasonable landing on the moon in the next thirty or forty years. Thatís my feeling. We either change the rules or we wonít get there for another thirty or forty years.

Robbie: Because of the structure of NASA now?

Max: Itís the mindset of the bureaucrats on whatís safe and whatís not safe, and itís the culture of the country where human life is so precious and it canít be wasted. Weíve got rules against killing people even if they are murderers. Theyíre not hard rules, but youíve elevated the value of human life out of proportion to its true value. Thatís all there is to it. Iím talking as an engineer who is used to looking at big pictures and understanding whatís going on.

Robbie: So you think risks have to be taken to get back to the moon and they wonít be willing to take those risks.

Max: Every endeavor in the future has to be more risk free than the previous ventures. You just have to look at history to understand that.

Guy: Thereís no joy to success without an opportunity to fail. Absolutely not. If you canít fail, then there is no point in trying. Anybody can do it. Itís not a challenge.

Robbie: So are you saying the astronaut that gets in the next rocket has to be willing to die?

Max: I didnít say youíd have to be willing to die, but you have to understand the risk. The risk right now of flying is acceptable because itís an existing machine. But if you designed another one now youíd have to preclude a lot of the risks that are acceptable on the shuttleótheyíd have to be ruled out.

Guy: Many of the astronauts live around here--Buzz Aldrin, David Scott, Dick Gordon, Gene Cernan and Mike Collins all went to the moon. Jim McDivitt, Rusty Schweikert and Walt Cunningham flew on pre-lunar missions as well as Gemini missions. My wife knew all of their wives. She said, "Well, whatís the difference in working in NASA?" And every wife told her, We go to fewer funerals these days because they were all test pilots, and the death rate on test pilots is far more severe than any other group in the United States.

Robbie: How do you reckon the true value of human life? You said that they are overvaluing human life right now and thatís hurting them.

Max: Well, see thatís the problem. It depends on what youíre talking about. The place where a human life is valued the least is in the Highway Department. I can go up and down this road here and show you situation after situation where humans are at unnecessary risk because of the way the highway is constructed and so forth and so on. Theyíre slowly getting rid of these things, but I think the highway department probably used a formulaóa million dollars for a human life, something like that. Now, if itís a criminal, the life of a convicted criminal is probably worth about $20 million. You understand? You spend $20 million dollars screwing around with him after he gets the death sentence. Thatís ridiculous. We send them to the gas chamber in five or ten years. It doesnít make any sense.

Guy: Iíll tell you how I feel. Iíve worked in safety. Iíve worked in the most hazardous part of the operation. Everything I had could explode and detonate and do all sorts of damage and all of the failures of anything I had to do with were going to be the most spectacular things you ever saw. Consequently, I was very heavily involved in safety. My attitude toward safety is that if in order to save one manís life I have to spend more than one manís lifetime trying to do that, thereís a net loss to humanity. Thatís a very cold-hearted way of looking at it. Itís a very practical way of looking at it. If I have to spend a thousand man years of effort to save one manís life, then itís a great loss to humanity. That would not be a very popular opinion, but Iíve always looked at safety that way. I lean more toward the safe side, but that pretty much expresses my feelings about risk, for example. Knowledge of what you are doing, how it works and personal responsibility of the people doing the work is what makes things safe.

I remember a story about all the accidents people were having operating a press. People were having fingers cut off and other damage to their hands. Some bright guy got the idea to put the operators hand in shackles so when the press came down, the manís hands were pulled out of the way. The union struck. People were not going to be subject to the machine. So some bright guy put a ring with a small amount of harmless radioactivity in it. The press sensed when the operatorís hand was near and would not operate. The machine was now subject to the man. You have to know a lot about human nature and human behavior to be a successful safety expert.

Max: The best way to be safe is simply to understand what the hazards are. If you understand what the hazards are and the people that are involved understand what the hazards are, then youíve gone a big step forward toward safety. A lot of our safety now is what you might call "plastered-on safety." It hasnít got anything to do with making the thing safe, but weíve got a committee to sit in review, weíve got special organizations that specialize in safety.

The special organizations that specialize in safety donít understand the problem near as much as the guy that is working with the problem. You know--youíve got novelists that write good novels and youíve got critics. The critics themselves would love to be a good writer but they donít know how to do it, so they become a critic. Same thing with movies. They donít know how to act or they donít know how to produce a movie, so what the hell, Iíd like to be a critic. Itís cheap to be a critic. Well, youíve got these safety organizations of nothing but critics. Thatís what they are. Most of those people have never really done real engineering themselves. They had a brush with it or theyíve got an engineering degree, but they donít know how to make things work, they can only criticize the work of others. (laughs)

Robbie: As you speak, I am remembering that if you had been listened to in the design of the Challenger, there would have been no O-rings.

Max: The rocket would have been all one piece. It wouldnít have had any joints.

Robbie: So that means it wouldnít have blown up.

Max: But that was not a politically acceptable solution.

hiphop is offline  

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:39 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright ©