[Ironsight]

Dunno if this is gonna be a big discussion, but I didn't see an Abortion topic in the dbates forum yet. So, Discuss!

[Quacnar]

Out of almost all the things to debate I have extremely strong opinions on them, this is the one exception. I am kind of unsure where I stand on this issue. On one hand it seems to be murder and on the other hand why should someone have to go through the pain and harshness of being pregnant and going through labor for 9 months? What goes on here will probably sway my decision and vote. I am usually democratic which would be pro-choice, but this could be an exception.

[Ravenblade]

As long as the woman wanting the abortion is fully aware that she will be destroying a life (Yes, I view foetus' as lifeforms, get over it) then i have no issue. Of course there are going to be times when it is the more appropriate thing to do, and bringing a child into the world that you cannot take care of/will hate forever (in cases of rape victims) is probably more cruel than killing it in the womb.

If my girlfriend considered one, I'd like to think I'd support her in whatever she chose.

[Folcon]

I'm kinda of in the middle. I'm pro chioce, as long as that choice is not abused. I think abortion is something that should be allowed, just as long as it is not used as a replacement for birth control.

[Ironsight]

Thank you, which ever mod put the third option.

I'm pro joice. It would be terrible for the child to grow up knowing he/she was an accident. It would make them feel unwanted.
And to those of you that say these foetus' are tomarrows hero's, bull. The've obviously never heard the quote "heros are made, not born."

[Golden Legacy]

No problem at all DS.

My views on abortion have become moderated over time. I still believe that a fetus is a living being and that the pro-choice side of things disregards this life over a woman's "choice", but I've now become a lot more aware of what circumstances can make it difficult to bear a child. Although I still "prefer" that a woman not have an abortion (especially if it's used as an alternative to birth control, as escout explained), I now am wise enough to realize that perhaps raising a child poorly may not be as ideal an option.

[My Best Wishes]

This is a moral gray for me, I don't have an opinion. As a member of a Christian Church I am against Abortion, but I can see in extrememe cases (rape, life of the mother is threatened) it to be the better choice, I condemn Abortion in cases where mummy couldn't find a condom for daddy.

http://www.goldensun-syndicate.net/forum/i...t=0&start=0

[Saturos S.]

I'm pro choice. If you don't want the child, you shouldn't raise it. People who have abortions are for most part young people who aren't ready to have a or even create a good family for the child. As long as the child doesn't have concienseness it isn't alive in my opinion. Most abortions happen the earliest stage of the creation.

Bad growing-up enviroments only result into twisted people, we don't want that in the society.

[TheEnglishman]

I'm one of the in the middle people. Ordinarly no, but when it's an extreme case I think it's only fair to have the choice.

[Moonear]

Damn, I clicked pro-choice by accident.
Anywho, I think that abortion is the same thing as killing. You are taking away an unborn life, o a kid that could have grown up and had a great life. Even if you cannot take care of the child, there are plenty of people who cannot have children and would very much love to have a child of their own. No one has the right to take someone else's life away.

[Quacnar]

ihatekraden, on Dec 13 2007, 05:37 PM, said:

Damn, I clicked pro-choice by accident.
Anywho, I think that abortion is the same thing as killing. You are taking away an unborn life, o a kid that could have grown up and had a great life. Even if you cannot take care of the child, there are plenty of people who cannot have children and would very much love to have a child of their own. No one has the right to take someone else's life away.

Haaris, not having enough children up for adoption is not a problem right now. Also, to your last sentence, the U.S. goverment currently does.

[Ravenblade]

killercoz, on Dec 13 2007, 11:06 PM, said:

Haaris, not having enough children up for adoption is not a problem right now. Also, to your last sentence, the U.S. goverment currently does.

How true, one wonders how the US government can defend life with one hand (abortion) and defend taking it away with another (capital punishment).

[Ironsight]

Because a foetus didn't kill anybody, thats why. Those are completely different subjects IMO.

[Quacnar]

DarkSword, on Dec 13 2007, 07:01 PM, said:

Because a foetus didn't kill anybody, thats why. Those are completely different subjects IMO.

Not really. Both involve the goverment killing something/someone.

[Ironsight]

That really depends on whether or not you consider a foetus a lump of flesh, or a living thing.

[Moonear]

A fetus is living, but it didn't do anything to harm anyone. On the other hand, a murderer, serial killer, or rapist has tried to harm other people and they knew the consequences. I'm just saying that that child who wasn't born could have gone on to do the world some good.

[Quacnar]

ihatekraden, on Dec 13 2007, 09:34 PM, said:

A fetus is living, but it didn't do anything to harm anyone. On the other hand, a murderer, serial killer, or rapist has tried to harm other people and they knew the consequences. I'm just saying that that child who wasn't born could have gone on to do the world some good.

He could have also been a murderer, serial killer, or a rapist.

[Someone Else]

If a mother wanted to have an abortion at all, do you think that child would have been happy in life? Do you think the mother would really want the child and support it? And even if she was willing, maybe there's other factors for her wanting to have an abortion. Not enough money, bad environment, abusive father, just less than stable situations for a person to grow up in.

Things like that don't make for a happy person, and an unhappy person probably isn't going to have a successful life. I think that the argument saying that abortion isn't fair for the child is pretty short-sighted and I think that people who say this aren't really thinking on the subject very much. Being raised in a poor environment is even less fair than having your life ended before it started.

[Ironsight]

Well said WD

I don't consider a Foestus living, as it has not Consience (sp) yet. If it has no mind, then it cannot be alive in my book.

[Split Infinity]

DarkSword, on Dec 14 2007, 04:08 PM, said:

Well said WD

I don't consider a Foestus living, as it has not Consience (sp) yet. If it has no mind, then it cannot be alive in my book.

So you're saying human vegetables aren't alive?

[Saturos S.]

I think he is saying that.

O, and I agree with all the pro choice arguments.

[Ironsight]

Spam King, on Dec 14 2007, 02:23 AM, said:

So you're saying human vegetables aren't alive?

No, human vegetables have minds too.

[Folcon]

DarkSword, on Dec 14 2007, 04:13 PM, said:

No, human vegetables have minds too.

What about someone who is completly brain dead? I'm talking zero brain activity. What about them?

[Ironsight]

Its safe to say that they wouldn't care much about dying then.

[Folcon]

But what about their families. And if you think about it, brain dead could mean a coma too, so they could come out of it. If there is a chance of recovery, should they still be condemed to die? But we are getting of topic now so lets get back to the main issue.

[Saturos S.]

escout, on Dec 14 2007, 11:19 PM, said:

But what about their families. And if you think about it, brain dead could mean a coma too, so they could come out of it. If there is a chance of recovery, should they still be condemed to die? But we are getting of topic now so lets get back to the main issue.

When you're brain dead, you'll never make a recovery. At least not to concienceness. They can keep the rest of the body alive so they can use organs for donors. But they can't recover. As for families, seeing a relative kept "alive" by equipment and knowing he/she can't recover. I'd pull the plug and give the person rest.

[Ironsight]

If I wanted to discuss the morality of killing a vegetible, I would have gone to another topic.

[Caael]

IMO, something isn't living until it's outside the womb or egg or seed etc. I'm totally pro choice.

[Eugine]

I'm pro-choice to an extent. I believe in a woman's right to choose, but I think there should be a limit with the age abortion takes place. If someone wants to abort a baby at 7 months, except for health reasons it shouldn't be allowed. There are reports of aborted babies with life in them >>

[Caael]

There is a limit, it's 24 weeks I believe, which is 6 months. We did a whole unit on abortion at school.

[Someone Else]

On DS's arguement, well it's kind of hard to end a life that never started.

I'm pretty pro-choice as you see.

[Ironsight]

It's not murder if there wasn't even life to begin with is my point. Like I said earlier, I guess it depends on when you believe life begins.

[Someone Else]

DarkSword, on Dec 14 2007, 07:59 PM, said:

It's not murder if there wasn't even life to begin with is my point.

Exactly, for something to "end" it has to "begin" first. It's kind of hard to really say that killing a fetus is really, well, murder.

[Split Infinity]

People keep saying that fetuses aren't alive; that leaves only two other options. They're either dead, or inanimate objects. And they're obviously neither.

[Ironsight]

Fetus' don't have a sense of idividualty (I guess) since there still part of the mother. There like an appendix kind of.

[Split Infinity]

And what about Siamese twins?

[Ironsight]

They're individuals. They have seperate thougths and the like.

[Split Infinity]

But they're biologically joined together, like a fetus to its mother. Why should the two be any different?

A fetus isn't an organ, by the way.

[Someone Else]

I don't think technicalities matter in this case.

[Ironsight]

Spam King, on Dec 14 2007, 08:15 PM, said:

But they're biologically joined together, like a fetus to its mother. Why should the two be any different?

A fetus isn't an organ, by the way.

1) They're different because there alive, and have sepereate thoughts. 2) I know its knot an organ, it's just an analogy

[Split Infinity]

But that brings us back to my original point, that a fetus is either alive, dead or an object. You've just said it isn't an organ, so then what is it?

[Ironsight]

The flesh in-between your skin and bones/organs isnt an organ, but ist's not dead.

[Split Infinity]

Flesh is a living thing. If it isn't, you have gangrene.

[Eugine]

DarkSword, on Dec 14 2007, 11:59 PM, said:

It's not murder if there wasn't even life to begin with is my point. Like I said earlier, I guess it depends on when you believe life begins.

First of all, I'll like you to tell me what you believe is life.

[Split Infinity]

He basically says life is anything which can think for itself, and nothing else it seems.

[Golden Legacy]

Wind Dude, on Dec 15 2007, 12:01 AM, said:

Exactly, for something to "end" it has to "begin" first. It's kind of hard to really say that killing a fetus is really, well, murder.

So why is it if a pregnant mother dies in a crash, the death toll is considered for both her and the unborn child? Further (and I know this argument is appealing only to emotion, but...), don't you more sense of sympathy/pity/emotion in general for a pregnant mother, if something should happen to her, as opposed to one who isn't? You can't honestly tell me you don't get an innate, inner sense of horror upon hearing that a pregnant woman was the victim of some tragedy?

~3600~

[Ironsight]

Er, yeah. I guess.

So, for those who support a forced birth. Wouldn't the mother just dump her child the first chance she got anyways?

[Split Infinity]

That only really happens in China, and most of the time no.

[Ironsight]

Really? I would have thought that it would be more common.

[Golden Legacy]

DarkSword, on Dec 15 2007, 01:15 AM, said:

Er, yeah. I guess.

You're missing the point. The point is, if the fetus were just a mass of cells and not "living", then why would people feel that way?

[Split Infinity]

Just because a woman didn't plan her pregnancy doesn't make her a monster. She's had nine whole months to get used to the idea.

[Ironsight]

It's instinctive.

EDIT: whoops, Split's post sliped in before mine.

[Split Infinity]

To add to my post, it's not really such an easy thing to just dump a defenceless child somewhere and leave it to die an awful death, especially not one you laboured over for nearly a year. That's instinctive.

[Ironsight]

People have been known for going against instinct. ex) Killing another person
EDIT: Scratch that. It's actually more instinctive to kill a rival, human or not. We (usually) restrain ourselves from instinctively hitting someone we dont like.

[Split Infinity]

Yeah, but the vast majority of people aren't murderers.

[Ironsight]

I edited my post after you read that. Might want to re-read.

[Split Infinity]

What could a baby possibly do to wrong another person? I can think of no more innocent creature.

[Ironsight]

What? I must have typed something wrong, or you read it wrong.

[Split Infinity]

Could you be more specific then?

[Eugine]

Imo, abortion should be allowed only during the first trimester.

[Ironsight]

I'll try.
Humans are very aggresive. I imagine alot of fighting occured between our ancient ancestors. When somebody really ticks you off, you want to attack them (ok, not everybody, but...) In todays society, it's expected of you to be patient. So we kind of go against instinc everyday.

Its not a very good point I guess. So I would just forget about it.

[Quacnar]

Spam King, on Dec 14 2007, 11:39 PM, said:

But that brings us back to my original point, that a fetus is either alive, dead or an object. You've just said it isn't an organ, so then what is it?

What is a virus considered? It moves and leeches, but does not have cells so it isn't considered to be living. at the same time itsn't dead either, so what is it?

[Split Infinity]

A fetus does have cells.

[Quacnar]

Is a fetus living? Science has to have agreed upon an answer.

[Split Infinity]

I meant I was thinking of something else when I made that post, smartass.

[Quacnar]

Spam King, on Dec 15 2007, 01:16 AM, said:

A fetus does have cells.

This is true. Maybe it is unethical, but you have to look at it from a women's perspective. She has 2 kids, she's a single parent and has low income. She can't take off from work to tend to another child. Also if it waas for abortion maybe you wouldn't have been born, trading a life for a life.

Spam King, on Dec 15 2007, 01:22 AM, said:

I meant I was thinking of something else when I made that post, smartass.

What are you talking about?

[Split Infinity]

Alright, fine. If you want to sneak around making edits to save your face then you can leave me out of it. Don't expect to make many friends here though.

[Quacnar]

You are right and I apoligize.

[Eugine]

Yea. He edited his post xD. BIG CHANCE also =)

killercoz, on Dec 15 2007, 02:29 AM, said:

This is true. Maybe it is unethical, but you have to look at it from a women's perspective. She has 2 kids, she's a single parent and has low income. She can't take off from work to tend to another child. Also if it waas for abortion maybe you wouldn't have been born, trading a life for a life.

How about going on the pill? Or stop having unprotected sex? Or atleast refrain from sex...

[Quacnar]

.eugine, on Dec 15 2007, 01:37 AM, said:

Yea. He edited his post xD. BIG CHANCE also =)

How about going on the pill? Or stop having unprotected sex? Or atleast refrain from sex...

Can't afford it, defective condum, yeah like that is going to happen.

[Ironsight]

I'm so confused...

Eugine: What if the mother was raped?

[Split Infinity]

Joker, if she has 2 kids and is a single parent with a low income, I doubt she's going to risk having unprotected sex with a stranger, unless she was under the influence. Plus that would be morally wrong to the max.

[Eugine]

Like I said, I'm pro-choice, but to an extent. I believe abortion should happen only in the first trimester. Most likely the woman will abort the baby ASAP (in the first trimester)

[Folcon]

@eugine - here would be the time that I point out that an abortion can only be done no later than I think about half-way through the second trimester, but it may just be no latter then the end of the first. Yeah, for some reason eight to twelve weeks sounds about right. I could check with a source and give a definite answer tomorrow, Saturday.

[Lightning Star]

I voted undecided, but only because I can't be positive that pro-life is the solution for all cases.

Personally I would never have an abortion, even if I was raped or it was just accidental. People don't realize that there is a chance that a condom might not work. In that situation, I would bear the burden of carrying around a child and giving birth, but if I had 2 kids, low income without a husband, I would probably give my newborn up for adoption.

I know so many females who have horrible nightmares of seeing their unborn child crawling to her and crying, or hear baby screams in their dreams. It leaves an affect on you, because when you come down to it, you're taking a human life.

I believe that everything happens for a reason. Now, I see how that can justify abortion, when a woman says after getting an abortion, "well maybe he/she really wasn't meant to be alive, because if they were, I wouldn't have gotten an abortion." But it doesn't work that way. I believe that while a unborn child is developing in the womb, God places a soul in that child, with special talents or perhaps with a plan to change the world for the better.

I'm glad Einstein's mother didn't have an abortion. Or Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King Jr. You never know until you give it a chance, and I think it's really selfish for a mother to not bear her child. Because she could just give the child up for adoption, but because she's afraid of what every one will say, or maybe doesn't want to go through the pain of giving birth, she chooses to take a human LIFE.

It's basically saying that one life is more important than the other, and I believe that's wrong.

[Quacnar]

Spam King, on Dec 15 2007, 01:51 AM, said:

Joker, if she has 2 kids and is a single parent with a low income, I doubt she's going to risk having unprotected sex with a stranger, unless she was under the influence. Plus that would be morally wrong to the max.

Defective condum or uneffective birth control pills

lightningstar, on Dec 15 2007, 02:58 AM, said:

I voted undecided, but only because I can't be positive that pro-life is the solution for all cases.

Personally I would never have an abortion, even if I was raped or it was just accidental. People don't realize that there is a chance that a condom might not work. In that situation, I would bear the burden of carrying around a child and giving birth, but if I had 2 kids, low income without a husband, I would probably give my newborn up for adoption.

I know so many females who have horrible nightmares of seeing their unborn child crawling to her and crying, or hear baby screams in their dreams. It leaves an affect on you, because when you come down to it, you're taking a human life.

I believe that everything happens for a reason. Now, I see how that can justify abortion, when a woman says after getting an abortion, "well maybe he/she really wasn't meant to be alive, because if they were, I wouldn't have gotten an abortion." But it doesn't work that way. I believe that while a unborn child is developing in the womb, God places a soul in that child, with special talents or perhaps with a plan to change the world for the better.

I'm glad Einstein's mother didn't have an abortion. Or Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King Jr. You never know until you give it a chance, and I think it's really selfish for a mother to not bear her child. Because she could just give the child up for adoption, but because she's afraid of what every one will say, or maybe doesn't want to go through the pain of giving birth, she chooses to take a human LIFE.

It's basically saying that one life is more important than the other, and I believe that's wrong.

It isn't that your life is more important, it is that that life isn't in complete existence. Would you chose your life over a kinda life?

[Ravenblade]

Icy's right, Ive heard of a lot of women being extremely traumatised after an abortion as they dont fully appreciate the severity of what they're doing before hand. I had not heard stories like the ones Icy mentioned but they sound pretty awful.

As for it being a "kinda" life, thats a very vague term to use especially as we are in no position to be able to determine at what point something moves from being a "kinda" life to a full life. Personally, i would argue that this happens at fertilisation. This is why i feel like people have to fully accept that with abortion they are killing something.

[Someone Else]

Golden Legacy, on Dec 14 2007, 08:59 PM, said:

So why is it if a pregnant mother dies in a crash, the death toll is considered for both her and the unborn child? Further (and I know this argument is appealing only to emotion, but...), don't you more sense of sympathy/pity/emotion in general for a pregnant mother, if something should happen to her, as opposed to one who isn't? You can't honestly tell me you don't get an innate, inner sense of horror upon hearing that a pregnant woman was the victim of some tragedy?

~3600~

Personally it's a bit hard for me to really sympathize for the death of someone I didn't know, pregnant or otherwise. And if someone I knew died, I'd feel awful either way if they were pregnant or not. Again, this is me. Anybody else who feels worse over the death of a pregnant women, I'd just say that's because that's what culture tells them to do, if that makes sense.

As for the death toll. I don't agree with that to begin with. The unborn child is unborn so personally I think it should only count for one.

[Lightning Star]

I agree with GL. I know a few years ago, a woman was attacked and had her baby cut out of her stomach. It horrified me, and many other females I know. I can't remember if the woman died, but I think would sympathize more with that woman rather than just a random non pregnant female who was attacked.

[Split Infinity]

lightningstar, on Dec 17 2007, 02:03 PM, said:

I agree with GL. I know a few years ago, a woman was attacked and had her baby cut out of her stomach. It horrified me, and many other females I know. I can't remember if the woman died, but I think would sympathize more with that woman rather than just a random non pregnant female who was attacked.

I was about to bring up that story. Yes, the woman survived and was reunited with the baby if I remember correctly.

[Saturos S.]

Pregnant women deaths shouldn't count for two deaths as the population count is done by counting the alive born children, not the dead ones, or on their way ones.

Population number = Old population + (Babies born alive - people who died) + (immigrator - emigrators)

As for if I'd be more horrified if a pregnant women died or a non-pregnant women. I'd find them both equally tragic. The thing that makes the cut baby out of woman's stomach story more tragic is it's gruesomeness, not the fact that the woman was pregnant.

[Split Infinity]

So what you're saying is you don't care at all that her baby was taken.

[Quacnar]

Spam King, on Dec 18 2007, 09:54 PM, said:

So what you're saying is you don't care at all that her baby was taken.

You can not use the word baby for something that hasn't been born yet. Fetus would be the proper termonology.

[Split Infinity]

Not really. You'd have to be pretty stupid to think a living, breathing baby is still a fetus just because it wasn't naturally 'born'.

[Eugine]

coz is right. It isn't a baby until birth.
Once inside the uterus, it is considered a fetus. 1 day from birth? It's just a fetus properly developed for life outside the uterus.

[Split Infinity]

A LIVING, BREATHING BABY.

[Eugine]

Elaborate? I have no idea how to respond x.x

[Split Infinity]

I would, but I don't have time right now. Read it yourself.

[Eugine]

I did. Otherwise I would not have told you to elaborate ^_~

[Quacnar]

Spam King, on Dec 19 2007, 12:52 AM, said:

Not really. You'd have to be pretty stupid to think a living, breathing baby is still a fetus just because it wasn't naturally 'born'.

What are you talking about? It is not living yet because it has not been born yet.

[Split Infinity]

I'm referring to when it was cut out of her.

[Saturos S.]

Spam King, on Dec 19 2007, 03:54 AM, said:

So what you're saying is you don't care at all that her baby was taken.

I care, but not more then when someone's stomach's cut out for no reason.

[Split Infinity]

What you just said is in perfect agreement to my statement.

[gsninja]

From a moral standpoint, I'm against abortion. Destroying a possible human life is NOT good in any way possible. If a woman gets pregnant, then she should give birth no matter what. There's a little thing called adoption, and that's far better than not having any chance to live. Don't give me any stupid statements like "Adoption will ruin the kid's life!", because it's better than having him/her dead.
However, no one but the pregnant woman should be able to decide whether to give birth to her child or not. Each person is in charge of his/her life only.

[Golden Legacy]

killercoz, on Dec 19 2007, 02:46 AM, said:

What are you talking about? It is not living yet because it has not been born yet.

It's living and alive - outside of the womb it would very much survive. Being "born" isn't a requisite for the baby/fetus (whichever term you want to use) to be a fully breathing, living organism.

[Split Infinity]

gsninja, on Dec 20 2007, 03:48 PM, said:

From a moral standpoint, I'm against abortion. Destroying a possible human life is NOT good in any way possible. If a woman gets pregnant, then she should give birth no matter what. There's a little thing called adoption, and that's far better than not having any chance to live. Don't give me any stupid statements like "Adoption will ruin the kid's life!", because it's better than having him/her dead.
However, no one but the pregnant woman should be able to decide whether to give birth to her child or not. Each person is in charge of his/her life only.

I'm seeing a little contradiction here. You're saying that a pregnant woman should be able to decide whether or not her child lives, but that a person can only take charge of their own life?

[gsninja]

Spam King, on Dec 20 2007, 12:19 AM, said:

I'm seeing a little contradiction here. You're saying that a pregnant woman should be able to decide whether or not her child lives, but that a person can only take charge of their own life?

How's that a contradiction? o.o I'm just saying that no one else should be able to decide for the pregnant woman, that everyone decides for him/herself only.

[Split Infinity]

But by choosing abortion, she is herself taking control of the baby's life. Hence the contradiction.

[Golden Legacy]

Well Split, I actually have to agree with gsninja here. Who else would have the say over the baby's life but the woman herself? What we're arguing is that she choose not to end the life, not for everyone else to decide for her.

[Split Infinity]

I'm sorry, is this a real thing that happened?

[Ironsight]

The mother should be able to choose for adoption. For what reason would we make it mandatory?

[Blue]

I'm not going to an abortion clinic to protest any time soon, but I believe in pro life.

[Lightning Star]

Well think of it this way. Scientists say that in order for something to be alive it must undergo homeostasis, have cellular organization, have some sort of metabolism, exhibit signs of growth, be able to adapt environments, respond to stimuli, and be programmed to reproduce. Now, if this is the truth, then a fetus would be classified as a living being.

Here in the United States all people are entitled to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of happiness, and I would hope that includes unborn people as well. Murder is illegal, because you're taking away their life--something that they have no right to control. How is giving a woman a chance to take away an unborn person's life any different?

[kate]

human life is protected in that way. It's not technically a human life until there is higher level brain activity, which occurs about half way through the pregnancy (i could be wrong about that though, it might be more like a third through, i can't remember the specific times of developments for things)

so until then it cannot be given the same rights as human life. Besides quality of life is sometimes more important than life itself. If that baby were due to an incestual rape, then when it is born it may have deformities or a mother that doesn't want it. Oh but there is the good side where it will get put in the foster care system, because that's so fabulous. Death is not the worst of evils.

[Someone Else]

kate, on Dec 30 2007, 04:06 PM, said:

so until then it cannot be given the same rights as human life. Besides quality of life is sometimes more important than life itself. If that baby were due to an incestual rape, then when it is born it may have deformities or a mother that doesn't want it. Oh but there is the good side where it will get put in the foster care system, because that's so fabulous. Death is not the worst of evils.

QFT. When will that flood come, kate?!

[kate]

Well really. Just because a woman can have an abortion doesn't mean she necessarily will. But like with most things, there is a reason it's legal to a certain point in Canada. I mean we're not just crazy-weed-smoking-music-downloading-baby-slaughterers up here. In reality it's because we respect the seperation of church and state and the americans just don't. That's why there's no same-sex marriage, and that's why abortion is illegal. So don't give me that right to life, because you're going against your own constitution by keeping these things illegal.

I mean, being pro life is fine, then when you get an unwanted pregnancy, don't get the abortion. But telling other people they can't? I don't know, it just doesn't make sense to me.

...I'm done ranting

[Drizzy Drake]

Really, we are crazy-weed-smoking-music-downloading. We jsut don't alaughter babies. I believe *** marriages and abortion are good things. For *** marriages, if two people love each other, then **** gender. And for abortion, say two 14 year olds go to a party, smoke alot of BC Bud, drank alot of Lakeport Honey lager, are really stoned and drunk, get to screwing, and she gets pregnant. Now must she keep the baby. Hell no. If she has no way to support it, she shouldn't have to keep it. She should be able to wait till she's old enough, and bring her baby into a good world.

Alright, I'm done ranting.

Have a nice day.

[Quacnar]

Completely right with a side of perfect reasoning^^.

[Drizzy Drake]

I thought I'd put it in a way more people could relate too. :lol:

[Eugine]

Quote

And for abortion, say two 14 year olds go to a party, smoke alot of BC Bud, drank alot of Lakeport Honey lager, are really stoned and drunk, get to screwing, and she gets pregnant. Now must she keep the baby. Hell no. If she has no way to support it, she shouldn't have to keep it. She should be able to wait till she's old enough, and bring her baby into a good world

Don't get me wrong, I agree with you. But, that's what the morning-after pill is for ^^.

[Drizzy Drake]

Not all 14 year olds have morning after pills and most would be to scared to tell their parents.

[Eugine]

True.
I'll like to branch of this debate to another topic.

At what age do you think the age of consent should be? In Spain, the age of consent is 13 and most girls are given birth control pills, and teenagers are given real sex education information. And contrary to what most people would believe, this has actually caused Spain to have one of the lowest teenage pregnancy rates in the world.
Other developed countries which still have the this high age of consent are facing so much teenage pregnancies.

I personally think this factor should be considered, and rethinked before we step into the realm of abortion because it can help prevent abortion.

[Quacnar]

.eugine, on Dec 30 2007, 09:47 PM, said:

True.
I'll like to branch of this debate to another topic.

At what age do you think the age of consent should be? In Spain, the age of consent is 13 and most girls are given birth control pills, and teenagers are given real sex education information. And contrary to what most people would believe, this has actually caused Spain to have one of the lowest teenage pregnancy rates in the world.
Other developed countries which still have the this high age of consent are facing so much teenage pregnancies.

I personally think this factor should be considered, and rethinked before we step into the realm of abortion because it can help prevent abortion.

I am not suprised whatsoever, actually. When something isn't alloweed people naturally want to do it more. When prohibition occured and all alcohol was banned, drinking increased enormously. If more teens thought they could have sex the drive wouldn't be the same. Also if they have the knowledge and the birth control pills why wouldn't they utilize those resources?

[kate]

you have to remember some people even consider the morning after pill as abortion.

And really, the age of consent isn't so high here. two 14 year olds are perfectly legal. Where it starts being illegal is with people over 18.

so I suppose I'm wondering if that age of consent in spain is for two 13 year olds or a 13 year old and anyone :S

[Eugine]

http://bp0.blogger.com/_ncdU3x63x4k/R3JfIN_8yZI/AAAAAAAAErQ/b88GHPVDyJg/s400/4.jpg
This picture says more than 1000 words to everyone who's pro choice (including me).

[Golden Legacy]

Reviving this from Caael's Medical Ethics thread, and I've reset the poll.

So I lean pro-choice on the topic of abortion, but with restrictions. I do not agree with abortion being used as an alternative to birth control, and after the first 6 weeks or so I feel only special circumstances should allow for an abortion. Still, the legality of abortions is important in society, as otherwise woman would go to back-alley, dangerous routes to getting abortions that only cause more harm.

[Caael]

I completely agree with GL. Abortions are great for medical advancement, but I can see them being abused easily; the no-care attitude of society these days doesn't help this fact. The mindset is "Oh no, i'm pregnant again. Oh well, lets go get another abortion". There needs to be restrictions.

[Gio]

I got an interesting take on this the other. I was talking to someone who said they were neither pro-life or pro-choice. They said they were pro-prevention. While this isn't really a new theory it was just interesting hearing it have a name. It encompasses using things such as condoms and pills to keep yourself from getting pregnant. The reason the person took this particular stance is because she said that rape only accounted for something like 2% of abortions, and the majority of abortions were repeat abortions, and she was appalled that someone would be dumb enough not to have an unwanted pregnancy once, but twice.

Just thought that was interesting.

[Split Infinity]

Sounds like she's avoiding the question.

I'm pro-choice in the same league as GL, though I won't say why because I know that I'll just get bombarded with the typical arguments.

[Gio]

Probably, but the statistics she pulled out are rather alarming which makes her stance make a bit more sense.

[Werebarrret/St Jimmy]

I'm fiercely pro-life, for a reason that has nothing to do with morals or religion, and everything to do with personal experience.


My parents got pregnant with me after two years of marriage. Everything was going great, until they had some tests done. I don't exactly recall what the deal was, but the prognosis wasn't good. If I remember correctly, I was supposed to suffer from autism, among many other problems. I think I was supposed to be born without a spinal cord, or something similar. I don't know the details. It's not exactly one of the favorite subjects in my house.

Anyway, my parents tried to figure out what to do. Of course, everyone around them had a different opinion. They were regularly told that they were stupid for even considering to have the child, given the circumstances. Why put yourself through that kind of unnecessary pain and suffering for a child whose life is going to be pure hell?

Anyway, after long hours of deliberating, my parents decided to have the child. To have me.

They decided not to allow me to live. It wasn't even a decision for them. They didn't make the choice to go ahead with the pregnancy. In their minds, there was no choice.

It wasn't for them to decide if this child, me, got to live or die. That wasn't in their hands.

They decided that they weren't going to play God.

Anyway, the due date came closer, and closer, and everyone was eager to see what would happen. Would the child be as hopelessly ****ed up as he or she was supposed to be? Or would there be a miracle, and somehow would the child be able to live a normal life?

Anyway, August 2nd, 1991 rolled around, and I was born. No defects. No developmental problems. A few small physical problems, but they were nothing that a healthy dose of physical therapy couldn't fix.

Fast-forward to today.

I'm one of the smartest kids at my high school. I play varsity football. I scored a 33 on my last ACT with little preparation, and I'm going for the 36 this time. I'm going to go to school way the **** away from here and major in nuclear engineering.

My point is...

Why should I get to live, when so many others have died? Why should I be allowed to live, and enjoy life, while so many others are denied it? Why should I be given life because of the character and courage of my parents?

It's not my fault. I didn't do a damn thing to deserve the parents that I have. I didn't have any say in their decision to have me, but I benefited from it, didn't I? Why should I get those benefits, when so many other unborn children don't?

What the **** makes me so special?

I don't see anything that does. Anything that gives me the right to live that all the aborted fetuses do not have.

/serious post

*goes back to insanity*

I'm a purple Jew with fourteen arms. FEAR ME!

[kate]

okay, guess this topic is alive again. apparently.

I'll make this short and sweet. Pro-choice within limitations (first 12 weeks of pregnancy) because after 12 weeks (I think I might have that number wrong though, It's been a while since I studied this) nervous system starts to form etc, higher brain function, then it is a person and not a group of cells.

If you want to say that it's the potential for life that matters so it shouldn't matter when the person actually becomes a person because it had the potential to become a person if no one had intervened, then every month I kill a person by not getting that egg fertilized (LOL generalization).

That being said my bf and I had a pregnancy scare a couple weeks before I left. We decided if I was pregnant I would have an abortion (or give it up for adoption, I dunno it never got that far), but it would've been the hardest decision of my life and it would've haunted me. And since I wasn't actually pregnant, I can only imagine how bad it would be for me to make that decision once my hormones were all fscked. So I'm all for that whole pro-prevention thing. So I got an iud. bada bing bada boom. Anyways, I think that you can always carry the baby to term and then give it up for adoption, and I frown on the idea of abortion, but it's still the woman's choice. There's a difference between deciding not to have an abortion and being forced not to.

I'm just a Jew. fear me.

[Golden Legacy]

Adoption is a wonderful idea...

if the baby is cute, if the baby is healthy, and if the baby is white.

[Ironsight]

Golden Legacy, on Apr 22 2009, 10:12 AM, said:

Adoption is a wonderful idea...

if the baby is cute, if the baby is healthy, and if the baby is white.

Where is this coming from?

[Legolastom]

NVM misread.

[kate]

Are you trying to say ugly sick ethnic babies don't get adopted? True that. But there are a hell of alot of people trying to adopt. It's just a very long process. Besides, everyone's into getting kids from africa and china now, so it's not that black and white (LOL pun kinda sorta not really)

[Split Infinity]

Werebarrret/St Jimmy, on Apr 22 2009, 12:15 PM, said:

Why should I get to live, when so many others have died? Why should I be allowed to live, and enjoy life, while so many others are denied it? Why should I be given life because of the character and courage of my parents?

kate, on Apr 22 2009, 09:11 PM, said:

If you want to say that it's the potential for life that matters so it shouldn't matter when the person actually becomes a person because it had the potential to become a person if no one had intervened, then every month I kill a person by not getting that egg fertilized (LOL generalization).

Pretty much what kate said. Your parents could have just as easily, you know, not conceived you at all, and the end result would have been the same. I could well be killing thousands of potential Nobel candidates every day by being single *...cough* but that's just how chance works. The odds of any of us being born in the first place are astronomically slim; not every zygote can have that same luck.