Published: Monday, Sept. 2 2013 9:10 p.m. MDT
Well of course a fetus can have pain. There's nothing that isn't
tragic about abortion. The only thing in dispute is weather or not
you want women or the government to make the decision. I personally
think we need to step up and do more to support women NOT getting pregnant if
they don't want to and supporting them and that fetus when they do. Do it as a church or a government I don't really care, either takes
in plenty of funds to solve the problem.
This 'fetal pain' thing is espoused by the same crowd not afraid to
support the right of someone to beat the living daylights out of that same fetus
in the name of god and under the guise of 'discipline', just a few
years after it's born. You're grasping at excuses here, but people
have sex without your permission and we should do everything we can to help them
prevent unwanted pregnancies.
Whether the fetus feels pain or not is not the issue. The indisputable
biological fact is that from the moment of conception on, the baby is a human
baby, it is metabolizing and growing and developing and to kill it, for whatever
reason, is actually killing a human being. Arguments about viability and pain
are just smoke screens to avoid focusing on the real issue: When is it moral and
justifiable to kill an innocent human being.
Re: "When is it moral and justifiable to kill an innocent human
being."Genesis 7: "The flood engulfed the earth for forty
days....And all living things that moved on the earth died, including the birds,
domestic animals, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and
all humankind. Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its
nostrils died."Genesis 19: "Then the Lord rained down sulfur
and fire on Sodom and Gomorrah .... he overthrew those cities and all that
region, including all the inhabitants of the cities and the vegetation that grew
from the ground."Exodus 12: "...the Lord attacked all the
firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh who sat on his
throne to the firstborn of the captive who was in the prison ... and there was a
great cry in Egypt, for there was no house in which there was not someone
dead."Joshua 6: "The wall [of Jericho] collapsed and the
warriors charged straight ahead into the city and captured it. They annihilated
with the sword everything that breathed in the city, including men and women,
young and old, as well as cattle, sheep, and donkeys."
JSB, the fact is that it is not "life at conception". All scientist
agree that life is a continuous process and that life is passed forward, not
created at conception. What confuses you is that when speaking of the beginning
of a life that has already been born, it can be traced back to fertilization.
Life does not begin at conception, because it cannot be confirmed to exist at
conception. Until the DNA of the genotype expresses the correct phenotype the
product of conception cannot be proved to be alive or human. In fact 70 percent
of conceptions die in the first trimester. Of those that die, 60 percent are not
human enough to live as a human. It all boils down to the fact that 42
percent of conceptions are not human enough to live, 28 percent die for other
reasons and only 30 percent become human life. So life at conception is a lie.
The importance of that lie is that it leads otherwise reasonable people to
kill born life in an effort to save fetuses. Search Google for "Scientific
I would never personally get an abortion. But I am pro-choice. I got pregnant
when I was 25 and I chose to keep my baby even though a few in my family
demanded that I put my baby up for adoption. It's a personal choice that
most times is the sole decision of the mother. I believe that education and
having birth control available can be helpful. But if a woman chooses to have
an abortion, it's her decision and she should be able to have it done
safely within the first 12 weeks.
Lightbearer: You have it right. The only time taking a life is justifiable is
when the person who gave the life justifies it. In the words of Job "The
Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away".Only he has the right
unless he commands otherwise. As the mother of a newborn baby didn't create
baby that is inside of her she likewise has no right to destroy - except God
command it. For this reason the Lord also has the right to tell not
to tattoo ourselves. It is his body, not ours and he has every right to command
us how we should treat it.
The question of whether a developing baby in the womb can feel pain, must always
revert to the principle of law, innocent until proven guilty. If in doubt, the
least damaging decision must hold. Since the child is totally unprotected and
cannot speak for itself to express its pain or not, the child must be protected,
if for no other reason, just in case. Once the damage is done in the womb, it
cannot be undone and therefore, until and unless ability to feel pain or not is
absolutely proven the humane way must be to take the precaution that the child
might feel pain so therefore, cause of pain should not be inflicted.
Adoption> abortion in every measurement there is!
The pro-abortion crowd is livid with even the discussion. Is Conscience
something that exists? Apparently so!
" All scientist agree..." Now there is a leap of faith.
I must agree with Maslar. In the absence of conclusive evidence that a fetus is
or is not a human being, the state has the responsibility to protect that life
unless and until conclusive evidence is found and established as fact. An
analogy that makes sense to me is that of a mine collapse. If there are miners
still in the mine, we assume they may be alive and do all we can to rescue them.
We do not just walk away because they "might be" dead.
Re:JSB"The indisputable biological fact is that from the moment of
conception on, the baby is a human baby.... to kill it, for whatever reason, is
actually killing a human being. "Are abortion exceptions for
rape and incest tantamount to murder? What about life/health issues of the
The fetus may feel pin, or not, at different ages of development. It may be no
greater pain than I must have felt, but do not remember, when I was circumcised.
I believe the shift in public tolerance for setting a 20 or 26 week time line,
is not out of concern for the pain the fetus feels. Rather, it is a reflection
of the public sentiment that a woman should make a decision by the 5th month.
The down side for many children born pre-term is that of medical and
development issues that cost someone millions of dollars, per child, per year to
treat, manage, or resolve. Those are dollars from either a charity such as St.
Judes, or other hospitals, or from insurance companies which base your rate and
mine, on the costs of these expenses. Or lastly, the cost is picked up by the
It is chilling to me that we have so called scientists trying to find
'scientific' proof that is is okay to kill the unborn and trying to
say that being 'human' rests on the conscious ability to feel pain.and
it's all being done to sooth the public conscience and numb us to the
reality that we are deliberately destroying the most innocent among us. It just
proves how decadent,cold,immoral, uncaring, self centered and arrogant some in
our culture have become. Whether or not the baby feels pain is not the issue.
The issue is that from the moment of conception, it is a baby, a human baby. It
is not a "fetus", it is not a glob of unorganized tissue, it is a baby
and that baby is alive. Period. The pro abortion crowd never,ever want to talk
about the DNA proof. They just want to keep the water surrounding the issue
muddied with pointless hypothetical studies and 'social' issues.
Abortion is the deliberate murder of a human baby no matter when on the timeline
of development it is done. Period.
Does this imply that it would be ethical to kill a child or adult who does not
This whole discussion completely floors me. How much lower can the world, as a
whole, get on ethical and moral issues?! We weren't created to kill each
other off - we were created to create.
When a woman becomes pregnant, if she wants that baby, to her it is a baby, no
matter how small or undeveloped. It's a human baby. No matter whether
others refer to it as a fetus, it will not be born anything but a human baby. No
matter how much outward resemblance a tiny human fetus has to a cat or dolphin
fetus, it will never be anything but human. Genetically, it's human, not
dog or camel. Whether it is viable outside the womb does not change its
essential humanity. Genetically, it is fully human. It has all the DNA of a
human being, from the earliest stages.Whether a woman has the legal right
to kill this small human does not change its essential humanity.If a
woman, for whatever reason, decides to end the life she carries, she needs to
understand precisely what it is she's doing.All the euphemisms in the
world (terminating the pregnancy, for example) do not change what is really
This is another issue where traditional conservatives have taken a strong
opinion. However, in the so-called conservative state of Utah, the people
aren't quite as conservative.Whatever the cause for this
interesting departure from other conservative states, perhaps the people of Utah
ought to be reminded of what abortion is.Abortion is a procedure
performed to terminate the life of a baby growing in its mother's womb. It
isn't the prevention of the development of a zygote.I'm
confident if the details of how abortions are performed were provided to the
people of this state, they wouldn't support it. Further, they wouldn't
consider Texas's law controversial (though Deseret News' reporters
This almost seems inconceivable to me that they are actually arguing that a
"fetus" can't feel pain. What has this world come to?Of course they can feel pain!This is of course nothing more than a
justification for abortion.I personally think that nothing offends
God more than abortion. Can you imagine anything more abominable to Him? If the scripture is true that those who harm a child, it would be better
for them to have a millstone tied around their necks and cast into the sea, then
what child could be more innocent and need of our protection than those still in
the womb?I was born 44 years ago, just before Roe V. Wade - and I
was an unwanted pregnancy. Thank God these people didn't have the freedoms
they now have to abort babies back then...
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments