Abortion debate (2 Viewers)

[+Po1ntDeXt3r+]

guys may not be in the position of aborting ever, but we ALL were in the position where we could've been aborted.

so are murderers.. and other unscrupulous ppl..
also ppl with disabilities that make them suffer..
ppl with disease

life isnt this whole definately goin to be good scenerio u seem to paint.. some ppl abort because they dun want the child to suffer over time .. shithouse parents ..disabled mother.. genetic disesase.. unable to love the child or provide financially..

giving a child away isnt peachy either

there is soo much potential for both good and bad.. just accept that u cant tell.. if u aborted an Einstein.. well thats the reality of it.. it could have just as easily have been a Hitler

personally if i got aborted i would be dead.. so i guess i wouldnt have to deal with the worry of it all .. mabbe my mother would have another kid?

 

[+Po1ntDeXt3r+]

Look lets just put all the religion and emotional debate aside. .

I am.. i just question ure science.. because its not one that i can subscribe to as the evidence is thin.. you have not proved anything

Look at the facts already discussed on here:

1. The portion of the brain associated with consciousness (the cerebrum) is identifiable by 4 weeks after fertilisation.

2. Brain wave activity (indicating that the brain is functioning) is identifiable only 40 days after fertilisation.

3. The heart is beating by 4 weeks.

The SCIENCE shows that the foetus is alive.

ure 'facts'
DO NOT SUPPORT URE CONCLUSION

here is why.
1. Identifiable is not the same as functioning..

2. This is present even in ppl that cannot survive after living... its call brain death.. it is still possible to observe brain waves.. but they will just be vegtative and die
http://www.emedicine.com/neuro/topic491.htm

3. the heart beat is also present in brain death.. but doesnt mean they will live

the source of ure information is questionable.. a 50 yr old journal article.. as reputable as JAMA is.. still 50 yrs old.. medicine has gone grown a huge amount in information in that time

u link pts 1 and 2 as if they are the same..
in order to PROVE ure point brain wave activity over the cerebral cortex.. over the frontal and the temporal lobes.. all the brain waves not just the ones u like.. and limbic function would be also needed

PET + dyes would work better..
but the main flaw in ure argument is that atm our understanding of consciousness is very theoretical too.

Science has no clear cut answer here.. abortion in medical terms is a line in the sand..

 

[Carnivour]

to people who say that women ONLY should have a choice regarding abortion, W.T.F.? how can a choice of such great repercussions lie in the hands of only half of the human population? if you want to get really stupid and pathetic, men also get "aborted".

in case people have forgotten, australia has an aging population. laws against abortion are just another means of combating this problem. however, i personally greatly dislike the fact that so many new laws are being proposed and passed. i dislike too many laws for cases where they arent really necessary as it simply puts too much friction in the populace.

i cant solidly identify myself with either side of the debate, because frankly, so many different variables come into the equation, and its impossible to judge which factors should be overlooked and which should be stressed.

having said that, i do think its morally (rather than legally) wrong to terminate human life. the decision CANNOT lie with women alone, its NOT just about them having choice "about their bodies". its just not that simple.

 

[musik_junky]

yep, totally agree with this.

Another interesting thing is that I saw this pro choice website which claims that 33% of American women have had an abortion by the age of 45. I can understand abortion in SOME circumstances, but 33% is just outrageous. Too many needless abortions I think. Its time to cut back.

 

[davin]

i have no idea how they get numbers like 33%. seems high.

 

[Generator]

having said that, i do think its morally (rather than legally) wrong to terminate human life. the decision CANNOT lie with women alone, its NOT just about them having choice "about their bodies". its just not that simple.

Ultimately, it is that simple. To argue otherwise is to be of the opinion that a woman shouldn't be free to exercise her reproductive rights.

 

[Carnivour]

so, if you got a girl you loved knocked up, and she wanted to have an abortion, you would want to have absolutely nothing to do with it?

thats pretty weak.

 

[Generator]

so, if you got a girl you loved knocked up, and she wanted to have an abortion, you would want to have absolutely nothing to do with it?

thats pretty weak.

I didn't say that - I would want to have my thoughts heard and taken on board, but as it's her body, ultimately it would be her choice. Now, in no way am I saying that I would necessarily be comfortable with whatever choice she may happen to make, but I would support her decision regardless.

 

[Phanatical]

Ultimately, it is that simple. To argue otherwise is to be of the opinion that a woman shouldn't be free to exercise her reproductive rights.

She executes her reproductive "rights" when she conceives the child. If she didn't want to carry the child, she shouldn't have conceived. If she didn't want to conceive, she shouldn't have committed acts that could result in conception. Assuming that a woman consents to the acts leading to conception, she has, in my view, effectively consented to the responsibility and privilege of raising the child. The woman has exercised her rights in creating the child, and in my view, the responsibility of society should then be towards the welfare of the child, within the context of the welfare of the mother. That is, it is in the best interests of both child and mother for the child to be aborted if the child is the product of rape, unhealthy, genetically malformed, born to a 14 year old mother, or if the mother is physically unable to carry the child to term without risking her own life.

 

[Carnivour]

what is this fascination with women and their bodies? this is the weakest reason for so-called 'pro-choice' i have ever heard.
sure, abortion has everything to do with choice, but it should not be governed by women's bodily necessities. women are just a means by which the whole fucking world exists, they shouldnt actually be given ultimate control of what exists and what doesnt.

 

[Generator]

She executes her reproductive "rights" when she conceives the child. If she didn't want to carry the child, she shouldn't have conceived. If she didn't want to conceive, she shouldn't have committed acts that could result in conception. Assuming that a woman consents to the acts leading to conception, she has, in my view, effectively consented to the responsibility and privilege of raising the child.

Phanatical, surely by now you know that such a point of view is so far removed from reality that it isn't funny?

Here's to hoping that one day you get that chip off your shoulder and start to treat such issues in a constructive manner... I won't be holding my breath, though.

 

[Phanatical]

That's the reason why people like you end up in middle management, and people like me changing the world. You see things as they are. I see things as they Should be, and how society can move towards those goals. That's not to say my views are far removed from reality, but my solutions are long term, effective goals, rather than short term bandaids.

 

[Generator]

That's the reason why people like you end up in middle management, and people like me changing the world.

What, but taking a step backwards in terms of the rights that a woman should be free to exercise?

You see things as they are. I see things as they Should be, and how society can move towards those goals.

See above.

That's not to say my views are far removed from reality, but my solutions are long term, effective goals, rather than short term bandaids.

What are these views, phanatical? Are they much like your partisan rants against USyd's SRC and the way in which it supports the rights of women and minority groups? Are the goals much like those that will see an end to notions of operational equality, even though the fact remains that women are still somewhat disadvantaged relative to men?

 

[Calculon]

what is this fascination with women and their bodies? this is the weakest reason for so-called 'pro-choice' i have ever heard.
sure, abortion has everything to do with choice, but it should not be governed by women's bodily necessities. women are just a means by which the whole fucking world exists, they shouldnt actually be given ultimate control of what exists and what doesnt.

It comes down to property rights. Ultimately your body is your property and you should be able to do whatever you want with it.

 

[ogmzergrush]

That's the reason why people like you end up in middle management, and people like me changing the world. You see things as they are. I see things as they Should be, and how society can move towards those goals. That's not to say my views are far removed from reality, but my solutions are long term, effective goals, rather than short term bandaids.

WOO, PHANATICAL FOR A BETTER TOMORROW!

Seriously dude, you sounded serious when you said that... ouch.

In fact, a lot of this thread and the more recent posters provoke that sort of reaction, I really can't believe that some of you are serious. Half of what I'm seeing reads like "palsy kid's first trolling account" material, and I think a lot of you make a fantastic case for the more liberal application of abortion in our society (Accidentally).

 

[erawamai]

That's the reason why people like you end up in middle management, and people like me changing the world.

I sense a dictator of some nature in the above. I hope, for your sake, that irony doesn't come back to bite you.

You see things as they are. I see things as they Should be, and how society can move towards those goals. That's not to say my views are far removed from reality, but my solutions are long term, effective goals, rather than short term bandaids.

I can't wait for the day when a women becomes your boss (quite possible). How on earth will you handle that?

Your solutions, which currently invovle the useful 'don't have sex if you dont want to have children' are about as good as the Police comissioner of LA saying 'I have a solution to the number of road fatalities each day. Everyone should not drive!' OR 'I have a solution to the gambling problem. Everyone should not gamble!' OR 'I have a solution to alcohol abuse! Don't drink'.

You then stand back and act all profound after such statements. All they illustrate is your interesting grasp on reality and social dynamics.

 

[Xayma]

well maybe the baby should have his/her say? according to you. Just imagine, your mom "aborted" u for whatever reason, you wouldnt be here now....

Well on the same token I was never asked if I wanted to be concieved. Given the choice I probably wouldn't have been. I wouldn't have minded being aborted, assuming I had some brain wave capacity I might have been pissed off for a few moments but I would quickly get over it.

 

[davin]

Your solutions, which currently invovle the useful 'don't have sex if you dont want to have children' are about as good as the Police comissioner of LA saying 'I have a solution to the number of road fatalities each day. Everyone should not drive!' OR 'I have a solution to the gambling problem. Everyone should not gamble!' OR 'I have a solution to alcohol abuse! Don't drink'.

i'd say its more like "i've a way to lower chances of cancer, don't smoke", or "i've a way to not be fat. don't eat unhealthily."

driving in LA isn't optional. sex is. i still think women have that choice, legally, but i don't think its a right choice, generally speaking.

 

[erawamai]

i'd say its more like "i've a way to lower chances of cancer, don't smoke", or "i've a way to not be fat. don't eat unhealthily."

driving in LA isn't optional. sex is. i still think women have that choice, legally, but i don't think its a right choice, generally speaking.

Sex isn't really optional for adults. It's probably in some way unheathy for a grown adult not to engage in some kind of sexual practice with or without a partner.

I guess phanatical can be a advocate for hevy petting, oral sex, mutual masturbation and other methods of sexual intercorse that decrease the chances of pregancy to almost nil (unless of course you are an idiot).

 

[Phanatical]

I see the issue as being analogous to driving a car. It is estimated that every three kilometres we do something that could result in an accident. We manage this risk, but when something Does happen the responsibility must still lie with the driver at fault. If you hit somebody with your car, you can't just say "it was the pedestrian's fault, I managed my risk to the best of my ability".

If a woman gets pregnant, the two parents MUST take responsibility for their actions. They cannot just commit a murder without good reason - and "convenience" is NOT a good reason. If they can't handle parenthood or adoption, then they shouldn't have conceived in the first place.