Abortion debate (1 Viewer)

[katie_tully]

That's not true. I do believe that some murders are justified, such as in the cases of euthanasia (which, no matter how willing the victim is, still murder). I believe that to bring a child into a world where he or she will face nothing but hardship, sorrow and/or the stigma of being the product of rape is cruel, and that it's better to put them out of their misery while their minds are not at the point where they can feel pain. This does not mean they are not human, because we spend our entire lives developing, and losing certain physical and mental functions.

Dude. How can you justify some murders, and not others. Isn't that a "tad" selective and somewhat displaying your double standards. You're quite happy for somebody to terminate their own life through euthenasia, but you don't believe a woman should terminate a pregnancy if it's in her own best interests?
What thefuck.

 

[erawamai]

-------------------------

First things first, are you planning on being a socialist dictator

Yes.

I really hope you are joking. Dictatorships were peoples choices are not respected are not free societies. If you would like to live in such a society I suggest you go live in North Korea and do your best for the greater good.
---------------------------------------------------

You're not putting forward any original ideas, or any good ideas for that matter.

Abstinence education is not an original idea Phanatical now is it? Neither is telling them that sex will result in babies. they would have been original ideas in 20AD.
---------------------------------

I did not equate smoking with having sex.

Yes you did.

Simplistic, but important. And it's just one step in reducing the number of terminated children, just like reminding smokers that they can get lung cancer or that driving a car can result in people being run over. The only difference is that an abortion allows a mother to shirk their responsibility at the cost of a human life - a price which is FAR too high.

You equated a method of reminding people that if they have sex they will have children with warning people that if they smoke they might get cancer.

If you have sex you will get pregnant
IF you smoke you will get sick.

Smoking = sick
Sex = pregnant

---------------------------------------------

My goal isn't to stop them having abortions. My goal is to stop them getting pregnant in the first place. There's a HUGE difference, and surely you would support ANY move to reinforce in the community the concept that sex can, and does lead to pregnancy. Or maybe that's too sensible a concept for you to grasp.

You really think telling people that sex will result in a pregnancy will decrease unwanted pregnancies? Honestly, how many people do you know don’t know this fact or need to be reminded?

Why do you think many people use condoms and use other forms of birth control before they have sex? I think that indicates that people are very aware of the fact that sex = potential pregancy. If people are already aware of the risks (evidenced by the large market for birth control) what use is reminding them of the risks?

Are you going to show us how telling people that sex results in babies will decrease unwanted pregnancies?

Previously you equated telling these people this amazing fact with telling people that smoking can cause cancer.

Smoking = cancer
Sex = pregnancy

The goal with the smoking campaign is to stop people smoking. Is your goal to eradicate sexual intercourse? In any case smoking can be quit. Sexual desires which lead to sex cannot be quit, they are biologically ingrained.
---------------------------------------

If you suggest that abortion is murder then there is no exception for abortion. If you accept exceptions for abortion/murder then you are no better than the pro lifers because you are measuring life and making excpetions for it.

The rape victim did not choose to engage in the act of procreation. The second woman choose to engage in the act of procreation, namely willingly having sexual intercourse and facilitating the transfer of genetic material from the male to the female.

I can’t help but laugh at the bolded bit. Phanatical, a male is needed for pregnancy. It’s not all the females fault. What about the guy? You think he just sits there and waits for the girl to take advantage of him? The woman is not always the all powerful person in the relationship. You talk as if the female is responsbile for all sex that happens.

In any case what does consent have to do with whether a child should or should not be aborted? By your own definition a foetus is a life and when that foetus is aborted that is murder. Whether person consents or not is this irrelevant, a life has been created.
---------------------------------------------

And yes I know you are going to parrot on about how the female should not have opened up her legs in the first place and how people should just not have sex. But honestly, are you living in a parallel universe of make believe? The policies which you put forward would result in more unwanted pregnancies and have been proven to result in more unwanted pregnancies. And yes I know you have smoking and driving analogies. Both are crap and you should be doing better for your cause to come up with new ones. Why they are crap later

The policies I have put forward would result in less pregnancies, and where there Are pregnancies the parents will be better equipped to deal with the situation.

How? All you have at the moment to stop unwanted pregnancies is to tell them that sex will probably result in babies.

You are going to actually have to explain why an abstinence approach to sexual education will work. In particular when I would good enough to present some reasoning as to WHY abstinence sexual education will not prevent unwanted pregnancies and why it has resulted in more unwanted pregnancies in the past.
-----------------------------------------

I think we have considered this argument before and it has already been dealt with before. Stop using it, it doesn’t make any sense. It’s a crap analogy because it doesn’t like up with what you are trying to compare it with. In the case of a reckless driver having fun his accident results in a death that is not his active choice. You also can’t correct your analogy by arguing that by doing such speeds he has made an active choice to end a life as doing 160kmph in certain situations is safer than doing 40kmph in others.

When we get behind the wheel we do so with an understanding that no matter how many fatality-free kilometres you've driven, no matter how well-maintained your car is, you are still in a position to kill a person.

So explain this analogy to me.

Getting into your car and driving is like the act of sex? Crashing into someone and killing them is like having an abortion? Is that what you are trying to say?

You are going to have to lead everyone through your analogy.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This part is good too!

My analogy doesn't suggest that a person makes an active choice to kill somebody, but rather suggests that a driver cannot shirk the responsibility for doing so, willing or not.

You just contradicted your earlier reasoning. ‘Willing or not’? I thought the consent of the woman (ie whether she was willing or not) was a key factor to whether the person should be allowed to have an abortion or not? Remember you suggested that the woman (forgetting for the moment that a man is needed for conception) who actively consents to sex must be responsible for the consequences of her actions?

 

[HotShot]

Dude. How can you justify some murders, and not others. Isn't that a "tad" selective and somewhat displaying your double standards. You're quite happy for somebody to terminate their own life through euthenasia, but you don't believe a woman should terminate a pregnancy if it's in her own best interests?
What thefuck.

thats why they word called 'murder' and 'euthanasia' - they are both different.

I dont believe a woman should terminate a pregnancy if it's in her own best interests, because her 'best interests' are not good enough excuse to bringin up a child.

 

[ur_inner_child]

so your logic is

different word = different things

doesnt the word "synonym" blow up your whole logic?

 

[ur_inner_child]

seriously, its one of those :

a dog is a canine but a canine is not necessarily a dog

it doesnt mean that one is not the other.

 

[HotShot]

gud u figured it out, synonyms have the same meaning true, but euthanasia is not same as murder.

in t he sense 'there are already murdered' and to murder who is already murdered is not murder but euthanasia.

 

[katie_tully]

I can't take anybody who spells "good" as "gud" seriously. Abbreviation or not, it's bloody horrid.

 

[HotShot]

I can't take anybody who spells "good" as "gud" seriously. Abbreviation or not, it's bloody horrid.

DONT TAKE ME
?WTF IS THAT POST?
IT DOESNT MAKE ANY SENSE

GUD IS DIFFERENT FROM GOOD?

GET IT RIGHT

GUD.

 

[katie_tully]

What the hell.

 

[HotShot]

What the hell.

EXACTLY, SO STOP WHINGING, AND DO SOMETHIN USEFUL.......

 

[Nathan444]

Can any pro choice people say exactly when life begins? I have often asked this of people who believe in abortion, but I never get a straight answer. At what exact point is a life a life?

 

[Xayma]

That's not true. I do believe that some murders are justified, such as in the cases of euthanasia (which, no matter how willing the victim is, still murder). I believe that to bring a child into a world where he or she will face nothing but hardship, sorrow and/or the stigma of being the product of rape is cruel, and that it's better to put them out of their misery while their minds are not at the point where they can feel pain. This does not mean they are not human, because we spend our entire lives developing, and losing certain physical and mental functions.

Stigma? You are murdering a human life because society can not accept that their mother (or father in a rare case) had no choice in their creation. If I was a product of rape, then I would probably be more proud of my mother for having me despite the pain it caused, then sorrow. You are murdering them before thinking of other options, what if the child is put up for adoption. When they are 18, they will find out their biological parents, from here they then have the choice to deal with their own life, they could end it, having lived 18 years happy, they could accept it, or they could get professional help. I don't see how it would be more socially stigmatising to be a product of rape then a bastard child. Probably less so because the mother isn't seen as spreading her legs for everything that comes along.

Wait you say the needs of the child should come before the parents. Now the stigmatism will exist whether or not the mother wants the baby, so in cases of rape, we should forcefully abort babies?

The difference - and I think this is a pretty significant difference - is that my position on the issue takes into account the welfare of the unborn child before the welfare of the parents, both as an unborn child, and the future potential of said child. And sometimes it can be more merciful to end their lives before they feel pain.

But you are applying blanket assumptions to the childs welfare, with no significant evidence to point that people who are products of rape will feel significant pain such that they don't want to live for their entire lives.

I am saying that if a child is going to face a lifetime of hardship, stigma and disadvantage because of their birthright, then it could be argued that it would be more cruel to the child to bring them into the world. I don't like this point, but it's one that has to be considered in the greater context of the debate. Unlike you, erawamai, I make it a point to at least Try to consider All sides of an issue before making policy. Maybe you should try the same, and you might understand things better for it.

You are allowing exceptions to the rule, if society disapproved of extra marital affairs (which it does) would that child not face a life of hardship, stigma and disadvantage?

 

[ogmzergrush]

Can any pro choice people say exactly when life begins? I have often asked this of people who believe in abortion, but I never get a straight answer. At what exact point is a life a life?

Seeing as we're make points which have neve come up before, and seeing as you seem to fall outside the pro choice bracket from what you've said, can *you* say when life begins?

 

[avini]

Do you think our society in the future may turn out to be what is depicted in handmaid's tale?

 

[crazyhomo]

Can any pro choice people say exactly when life begins? I have often asked this of people who believe in abortion, but I never get a straight answer. At what exact point is a life a life?

conception.

i'm 'prochoice' btw

 

[davin]

Seeing as we're make points which have neve come up before, and seeing as you seem to fall outside the pro choice bracket from what you've said, can *you* say when life begins?

see, anti-abortion people also aren't saying "well, i don't know at what point its life, so i'll risk that we're potentially killing a life"...they're erring on the side of not aborting a life, if they don't know

 

[Not-That-Bright]

It's a life, a human life - it's just that its abortion given that it has no self awareness (and never has) is painless for the fetus and of great benefit to the mother... it's a cost/benefit analysis.

 

[ogmzergrush]

I found this info regarding the procedures they use to carry out an abortion which you may find informative.

Warning: text is very discriptive.




- I though they had pills to carry out an abortion?

Finger Licking Good!

 

[xoxo]

well i personally would never have an abortion, not because of religious reasons but simply because i dont belive in it.

I cant say when human life begins because i dont know for sure and i think thats gonna be a never ending debate, but whether or not the foetus inside of u is 2 weeks old or 2 months old or however old it is, it is still LIVING.

i classify living as breathing and growing. These two things are surely happening to the baby/foetus/whatever you wanna call it, when it is in its mothers stomach.

having an abortion is killing something inside of u...soemthing thats a part of u...and i just could never go through with it.

Im not sure exactly what the current legislation is on abortion...but i think although i would never have it done i dont think it should b made illegal. I cant exactly explain why but yehh... thats my opinion

 

[withoutaface]

Last time I checked foetuses didn't breathe.