This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.5
PTR
10.2.6
Abortion Debate
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
164232
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
As for my position, I am afraid I am going to take the cop out and say I have no position, although having read this thread, I do at least feel a bit more educated on the topic.
I understand what you are saying, and so I hope you don't take what I am about to say as some sort of character judgement, because it isn't meant that way. I view "no opinion" as a negative opinion. I don't feel that this is something that is acceptable to have a neutral viewpoint on. I'll accept neutral on economics. I'll accept neutral on homosexual marriage. I'll accept neutral on parenting. I'll accept neutral on communism. I'll accept neutral on religion. I consider myself to be a compromising on a plethora of topics. This one topic, I will not compromise at all on. I don't accept neutral as neutral. I think that if you don't have an opinion, that is wrong. It's like (for the sake of Godwining) having a neutral opinion of Nazism. How can you not think that the slaughter of innocent people is wrong? To think that it is ok is horrible and heinous, but is not having a negative opinion about it also horrible and heinous?
I know that this puts me in a position that is untenable for people. I not only have the most extreme view possible, but I also have a view that doesn't accept the viewpoints of people that differ from me, nor will it compromise with any view other than my extreme view. I understand that this makes me unpopular in this discussion, and I come across as crass. I can't imagine doing anything else that the extreme, and the unpopular. It is the only thing that I can accept. Not because that it is extreme and unpopular, but because it is the right position, and every other position is wrong. I try... genuinely try to get along with other people's view, and not compromise my own views. This is a the paramount concept which defines so many of my views. This embodies empathy and morality, in the current age I live. This one topic, pretty well summarizes my personality toward life and the human race. I view my view as my own, and every other view as 'them'. Unpopular? Yep. I wouldn't change it for the world.
Post by
164232
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Magician22773
I never really understood why the 23 weeks was made to be, but I guessed their was some medical experts that provided evidence and that was the magic number.
WARNING: Semi-Graphic photo
You be the judge
This photo is at 12 weeks gestation. If 23 weeks is the "magic number", I don't think they are very good at magic.
MyTie, and many others have said all there is to say. Those that still believe abortion is an option would believe that way no matter what evidence was presented to them. Sadly, at one low point in this country, we actually had a Supreme court that was liberal (ignorant) enough to rule that murdering an unborn baby was a choice. And like so many other ignorant decisions made by our goverment, once the cat is let out of the bag, it is nearly impossible to put it back in.
**** Just for clarification. The photo I linked is very likely faked in some form. But it is the least graphic one I can find. I can assure you that their are real photos out there that are absolutely shocking of aborted children that can confirm what this picture represents, however, they are not something that needs to be linked to in a forum.****
Post by
Orranis
Those that still believe abortion is an option would believe that way no matter what evidence was presented to them.
I'm sure they'd say the same about you and MyTie. Let's not make assumptions.
I google'd it and found a wide variety of images, most of which looked nowhere near as shaped as yours. That's probably not 'faked in some form' as much as 'entirely faked' based on the appearance of the others, and not just in size/form.
Either way, the physical form of the fetus is not so much what I care about as much as its mental state.
The cell cluster immediately after conception is ALIVE, it is HUMAN, and it is NOT THE MOTHER. That is biologically provable, in a very scientific and definitive way.
This comes down to a discussion of Philosophy rather than Biology.
Is something that is not yet sentient human? Biologically yes, philosophically, not necessarily.
Or can it be considered truly 'alive' philosophically rather than biologically.
I agree that it is not the mother, but I think the other two are on sketchier ground from a philosophical point of view.
I said the flesh is human. It isn't a matter of philosophy. You can show that that is human flesh. It isn't pig flesh, or plant material, or goat flesh. It is human flesh.
I said the flesh is alive. It grows, responds to stimuli, it reproduces... it is alive, by definition.
I said the flesh is unique. You can show through DNA that it is not the mother's flesh.
It is human, it is living, and it is unique. Take your philosophy, and soak it. It doesn't hold up to fact.
It is a fact that an unborn fetus is biologically human alive and unique. However, the philosophical definitions of life, human, and to a lesser extent unique are going to be far more important when it comes to a decision of morality than the biological ones.
Post by
MyTie
If the entire world woke up tomorrow, and everyone were against abortion, I would feel something beyond relief. I would feel a mixture of sadness and joy. I'd feel ashamed to have been a part of a race and a society that saw this as progressive, and forward, and positive. I'd feel joy that it wouldn't happen anymore, but wonder that anyone could have ever done it in the first place. I'll always feel dismay, and anger which cannot be put into words, which I cannot quench with enough words. How can anyone label the abortion of a child as a "choice", and be pro-that? How? I have only felt shock, and horror to the degree that it consumed me three times in my life:
7th grade history, when I was introduced to the concept of genocide.
When I learned about abortion.
When my son died.
What twisted and malicious world do I live to? What callous, unsympathetic, and disgusting race am I a member of?
I will never back down. I will never compromise. I will never give up. I will never change my mind.
One last thing for tonight:So perhaps my nuetrality is more to do with my thoughts on my own lack of qualification on the topic at hand.I feel that your membership in the human race not only qualifies you for the topic, but makes it your responsibility.
Post by
Orranis
I will never back down. I will never compromise. I will never give up. I will never change my mind.
If you're Rorschach, am I Doctor Manhattan?
I'm sorry about your son. But don't say you will never change your mind. Argue instead that you have the right of it and would change your mind if you thought they did.
Post by
MyTie
I will never back down. I will never compromise. I will never give up. I will never change my mind.
If you're Rorschach, am I Doctor Manhattan? The comparison hadn't occurred to me. If I have to be a superhero, I'd rather be Buzz Lightyear.I'm sorry about your son.Thank you.But don't say you will never change your mind. Argue instead that you have the right of it and would change your mind if you thought they did.
Why? I
know
I'm right. Do you plan on changing your mind that the holocaust was wrong? Do you ever think you'll change your mind about racial discrimination, and find it "ok"? What if there were a lot of people, say 50%, that thought it was? Would you keep an open mind? What about child abuse? What about women's right to vote? What about rape?
I'll make you a deal. I'll keep an open mind that abortion might be acceptable, if you keep an open mind about racial lynchings. Somehow, I don't think you'd go for that. We both know that lynchings, no matter how popular they might once have been, are just not cool, nor right, nor acceptable in any form or fashion. I will never think that someone has "the right of it", when they argue pro-choice. It's as counter-intuitive as being pro-choice about a mob's right to choose to lynch someone. It's unacceptable. It goes against my humanity. It goes against who I am. I'm, frankly, appauled that not only are there people who are pro-choice, but that there is a large contingency of people who are pro-choice. It feels like an overwhelming swelling cold tide of inhuman death at the core of millions of people. Like someone pointed out, the Supreme Court even ruled pro-choice. But then again, Dred Scott. Maybe, in 100 years, people will look back and see abortion for what it really is. Maybe then it won't be vogue to gloss over horror with "women's rights". I hope I live to see the day that humanity washes its hands of this business, or the day when society chokes on its own filth. The demise of horror by redemption, or the demise of horror by collapse. I'll accept either. What I won't accept, is the horror itself.It is a fact that an unborn fetus is biologically human alive and unique. However, the philosophical definitions of life, human, and to a lesser extent unique are going to be far more important when it comes to a decision of morality than the biological ones.
Philosophy is surprisingly subjective. If you have to argue the philosophical merits of ending a human life, then perhaps you are on the wrong team. Either way, the physical form of the fetus is not so much what I care about as much as its mental state.I don't care if a human (born or not) has the mental fortitude to play chess, or the thought processes of a carrot, nor anywhere in between. I am not an adequate judge as to where the line between worthy of life is. Therefore, I must default to say "always". The same holds true for everyone else. When do we start to say which humans are acceptable for life, and which humans aren't human enough to deserve their life?
Post by
Lombax
It has been said in this thread ealier by another user but I feel that abortion is a necessary evil since for somepeople there is no other option. And before you say that there's always a option consider this: the other options are pretty much as wrong to me as abortion is for you.
Well the only other option for me would be letting the girl have the baby and ignore her and the child, unfortunatley this doesn't work since I would have to pay for some of the expenses.
Post by
MyTie
Well the only other option for me would be letting the girl have the baby and ignore her and the child, unfortunatley this doesn't work since I would have to pay for some of the expenses.
Actually, Lombax brings up an excellent point. We have to pay for these children? Pfft.... now I'm all for abortion.
Post by
Lombax
Actually, Lombax brings up an excellent point. We have to pay for these children? Pfft.... now I'm all for abortion.
Pay for a child you didn't want in the first place, I wouldn't get a abortion if I didn't have to pay for the child.
Post by
164232
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
Actually, Lombax brings up an excellent point. We have to pay for these children? Pfft.... now I'm all for abortion.
Pay for a child you didn't want in the first place, I wouldn't get a abortion if I didn't have to pay for the child.
/sigh
Post by
Lombax
Just for the this one time let's say you were ok with abortion and you got a girl pregnant. You want her too get a abortion, she doesn't want to get a abortion and keeps the child. You decide to break all contact with her. Would you want to pay for the child?
Please don't argue with you never being ok with abortion, in another place and time you might be ok with it.
Post by
MyTie
Please don't argue with you never being ok with abortion, in another place and time you might be ok with it.
This isn't another time, nor another place. This question serves no purpose to the point of abortion, and goes onto the subject of parenting. Don't throw out pointless off-topic hypotheticals in the future. To entertain this one: Yes, I'd pay for my kid. The child is my child. The topic doesn't have anything to do with my relationship, or lack thereof, to the mother.
Post by
gamerunknown
This is why economics shouldn't come into it. Casey Anthony couldn't afford to look after her child and maintain her lifestyle either, but it just so happened that the child was independent from her.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
Just for the this one time let's say you were ok with abortion and you got a girl pregnant. You want her too get a abortion, she doesn't want to get a abortion and keeps the child. You decide to break all contact with her. Would you want to pay for the child?
Please don't argue with you never being ok with abortion, in another place and time you might be ok with it.
No offense, but if I swerved off the road and hit someone else's car, I wouldn't necessarily want to pay for that either. It doesn't mean that it wasn't my own doing, that it's not my responsibility, or that I shouldn't pay for it. Sometimes, you put yourself in a position where something is your responsibility, and that's all there is to it.
Pregnancy is almost 100% preventable in the case of consensual sex. If you're informed about contraception, and use it correctly, the chances of an unintended pregnancy are pretty slim. And, even if a condom slips or breaks, there is emergency contraception available over the counter that will prevent- not end, but prevent- pregnancy if taken right after. I find it interesting that so many people are worried about pregnancy happening to them, like it falls out of the sky, and don't seem to feel they have any responsibility to prevent it from happening. I linked earlier in this thread statistics about women who got abortions- 50% of abortions are performed on women who already had one, and the vast majority admit that they were either using no protection at all, or not using it consistently.
In my mind, I can't believe that people have as a society decided that there are no responsibilities for your actions. It's not just in this arena- there seems to be a growing culture of people who just don't think that they need to be accountable for anything- that their choices should have no affect on them. It comes up in economics, when people would rather complain about how others have more money than them than learn how to make money, and people who put in the bare minimum in looking for work or giving a good performance at work feel entitled to be taken care of by the government regardless of whether or not they do anything to contribute to earning what's needed to stay alive. It shows up socially as we glorify and make reality shows about rich people's kids and stay-at-home wives of wealthy men who have nothing better to do all day that gossip, drink and be nasty people. And it shows up when so many people completely bypass the idea that preventing a pregnancy, with modern contraception, is pretty easy, and most people with unintended pregnancies are either being lazy or reckless.
I think the case of life of mother is more akin to battlefield triage than anything else. If you have two people who are in danger, and you know you can only save one or the other, then you have to choose. I respect if someone wants to put their baby first, but I can also understand that it is sometimes a necessary thing when you have a non-viable pregnancy, like outside the uterus.
My argument isn't about that, and isn't really about cases of rape, either. It's about how many people are willing to kill a fetus, which is either a person or (at the very least) on it's way to becoming a person, rather than use a condom. If the vast majority of abortions were the worst case scenarios that people wave as a flag- "Oh really, my wife has to die because you say it's wrong" or "My 12 year old got raped and now she has to be a mother?", then I don't think you'd see such a backlash from the rest of the population. The truth is (based on polls taken of actual women getting abortions)- the vast, vast majority of women who do it are in no danger, have not been raped, and took no consistent measures to prevent it.
Even if you believe that the choice needs to be there for worst case scenarios, don't you understand why some people find it disturbing that the majority of the time it's used because people would rather worry about it after the fact than be responsible for preventing it in the first place?
Source:
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html
- Reposting source for ease of reference.
Post by
Lombax
Even if you believe that the choice needs to be there for worst case scenarios, don't you understand why some people find it disturbing that the majority of the time it's used because people would rather worry about it after the fact than be responsible for preventing it in the first place?
I fully understand why people find it disturbing even though I personally don't.
I can't say I think it's right to get a abortion because you just couldn't be bothered with condoms or birth control pills.
No offense, but if I swerved off the road and hit someone else's car, I wouldn't necessarily want to pay for that either. It doesn't mean that it wasn't my own doing, that it's not my responsibility, or that I shouldn't pay for it. Sometimes, you put yourself in a position where something is your responsibility, and that's all there is to it.
What if the mother tells the father that she's on birth control pills, do you still think it's right that the father should pay?
Post by
Magician22773
The reason people use the worst case scenarios are because they are more difficult for most people, even pro-life people, to argue against. I am pro-life, but I could not say with 100% conviction what I would do in one of the worst case scenarios. Honestly, I pray that I never have to find out.
What if the mother tells the father that she's on birth control pills, do you still think it's right that the father should pay?
I have several opinions on your scenario.
First, there is my crazy religious one that you should not be having sex outside of marriage. Did I follow my own rule on this one...nope. At 22, I found out my girlfriend was pregnant. The thought of an abortion never crossed my mind. I gave up my young adult carefree life and did the best I could to be a father and a husband. And I believe now the same that I believed then, that my son was a gift from God.
Second is a more mainstream, reality opinion. If you do choose to have sex outside of marriage, as the majority of people do, at least know your partner enough to know that she would not lie about something as important as birth control. And if you are still unsure, use your own protection. As Elhonna said, its a matter of responsibility.
Third. At least in America, you always have other choices if you have an unwanted pregnancy. I know in Missouri, and I believe it may even be Federal law, that you can take a baby to any designated safe location...a fire ststion, police station, or hospital, and leave the baby with no legal recourse. No hospital can deny you care and delivery regardless of ability to pay. And beyond that, there are thousands of people willing to adopt a baby, and willing to cover all expenses related to it.
I will even go so far as to say that I believe there should be some legal mechanic in place for a father that does not want to participate in a childs life to be excused from financial support if the mother is opposed to adoption. However, there would need to be extensive limitations on it. First, it would need to be a scenario like you mentioned, where the male was decieved on the use of birth control. Second, it would need to be proven that neither the father or mother were able to provide for the child financially without "extreme" hardship. There are a lot of other points that would have to be made, but I don't want try and write a book here. But I do agree that there are women out there that will try to win the "baby daddy lottery", and that is wrong. But it still does not justify the murder of the innocent child in the womb.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
@Lombax- If he's tricked, then no he shouldn't pay. But he shouldn't be able to force an abortion.
Also, to summarize the stats of the page I linked, of women who got abortions, 46% admitted that they weren't using any birth control at all the month they got pregnant. Of the people who did, only 13-14% of that group said that they were using it correctly and consistently (every time). So, according to their own answers, over 90% of the abortions performed happen because they don't feel like using birth control, or abstaining when they forget it. And that's not even accounting for a percentage that might lie because they're embarrassed to admit they just didn't try to prevent it.
So, if you don't feel like that's an appropriate use of it, and over 90% are being done for that use, don't you think that there might be a problem with how accessible and de-regulated it is in this respect?
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.