Abortion

What do you think about the world?

Your stance on abortion

I am anti-choice/pro-life/anti-abortion
9
13%
I am pro-choice/anti-life/pro-abortion
62
87%
 
Total votes: 71

User avatar
miir
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 11501
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:06 pm
XBL Gamertag: miir1
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Abortion

Post by miir »

I don't recall ever having a conversation about this topic.
I'll start with a poll.
I've got 99 problems and I'm not dealing with any of them - Lay-Z
User avatar
Zaelath
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4621
Joined: April 11, 2003, 5:53 am
Location: Canberra

Re: Abortion

Post by Zaelath »

Ugh...
May 2003 - "Mission Accomplished"
June 2005 - "The mission isn't easy, and it will not be accomplished overnight"
-- G W Bush, freelance writer for The Daily Show.
User avatar
Boogahz
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 9438
Joined: July 6, 2002, 2:00 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: corin12
PSN ID: boog144
Location: Austin, TX
Contact:

Re: Abortion

Post by Boogahz »

Kind of crappy options.
User avatar
Funkmasterr
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 9005
Joined: July 7, 2002, 9:12 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: Dandelo19
PSN ID: ToPsHoTTa471

Re: Abortion

Post by Funkmasterr »

I am pro choice. That being said, I don't like people using it as a form of birth control either - it should be a last resort thing, and it should only be able to be done in the first month or two. That's my simplified answer until the argument starts roaring.
User avatar
miir
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 11501
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:06 pm
XBL Gamertag: miir1
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Re: Abortion

Post by miir »

I can add more options if you like.
I've got 99 problems and I'm not dealing with any of them - Lay-Z
Sabek
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1702
Joined: July 8, 2002, 4:31 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: sabek
Location: Columbus, Oh

Re: Abortion

Post by Sabek »

There should be at least an option for "I dont agree with abortion, but dont feel the government should regulate peoples choices in this matter."
Sabek
Just Sabek
Image
User avatar
Funkmasterr
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 9005
Joined: July 7, 2002, 9:12 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: Dandelo19
PSN ID: ToPsHoTTa471

Re: Abortion

Post by Funkmasterr »

Oh, I also think the crazies that firebomb abortion clinics and spit on people on their way out the door should be hung in public (no trial).
User avatar
Midnyte_Ragebringer
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 7062
Joined: July 4, 2002, 1:59 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: Daellyn
Location: Northeast Pennsylvania

Re: Abortion

Post by Midnyte_Ragebringer »

We've had many discussions about this. There is no option for me though up there. I am pro-choice for a first trimester abortion. After that, no way.
User avatar
Spang
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4811
Joined: September 23, 2003, 10:34 am
Gender: Male
Location: Tennessee

Re: Abortion

Post by Spang »

I'm pro-choice.

NWS due to Chris Rock:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjW4i67YC04
Last edited by Spang on August 14, 2007, 12:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Make love, fuck war, peace will save us.
User avatar
miir
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 11501
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:06 pm
XBL Gamertag: miir1
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Re: Abortion

Post by miir »

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:We've had many discussions about this.
Perhaps it has been brought up in a few threads in the past few years but I don;t recall a topic specifically about it.
There is no option for me though up there. I am pro-choice for a first trimester abortion. After that, no way.
What if your wife was pregnant and it was discovered in the second trimester that the child had Downs or Spina Bifida. Or perhaps there was a significant heart defect that doctors weren't able to diagnose in the first trimester?
I've got 99 problems and I'm not dealing with any of them - Lay-Z
User avatar
Midnyte_Ragebringer
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 7062
Joined: July 4, 2002, 1:59 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: Daellyn
Location: Northeast Pennsylvania

Re: Abortion

Post by Midnyte_Ragebringer »

miir wrote:
Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:We've had many discussions about this.
Perhaps it has been brought up in a few threads in the past few years but I don;t recall a topic specifically about it.
There is no option for me though up there. I am pro-choice for a first trimester abortion. After that, no way.
What if your wife was pregnant and it was discovered in the second trimester that the child had Downs or Spina Bifida. Or perhaps there was a significant heart defect that doctors weren't able to diagnose in the first trimester?

Aye. After 1st trimester, I'd agree that for medical reasons an abortion be allowed. Very good point.
User avatar
miir
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 11501
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:06 pm
XBL Gamertag: miir1
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Re: Abortion

Post by miir »

Wow, we actually agree on something. :shock:
I've got 99 problems and I'm not dealing with any of them - Lay-Z
User avatar
Funkmasterr
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 9005
Joined: July 7, 2002, 9:12 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: Dandelo19
PSN ID: ToPsHoTTa471

Re: Abortion

Post by Funkmasterr »

miir wrote:Wow, we actually agree on something. :shock:
I guess for those kinds of reasons I would be on board as well. Is teh VV going to implode now?
User avatar
Neost
Almost 1337
Almost 1337
Posts: 911
Joined: July 3, 2002, 1:56 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: neost
Wii Friend Code: neost
Contact:

Re: Abortion

Post by Neost »

The options are loaded. If I am pro-choice, why do i have to be anti-life?

Which is pretty much my stance i suppose. I will never have to make the decision myself, being male however I have had to be involved in someone's decision. Luckily adoption was the solution chosen but if abortion had been the decision I would've support that decision also.

In other words, I am pro-choice and don't believe anyone can make the decision but the woman that is pregnant. I prefer solutions other than abortion personally but it just isn't my call.

does that make me anti-life?
Somali
Star Farmer
Star Farmer
Posts: 480
Joined: March 18, 2003, 1:37 pm
Gender: Male
Location: The Land of "Fundy Retards"

Re: Abortion

Post by Somali »

"Pro-life"
Against people bombing clinics.
Not for public hanging of people spitting on people. <poke Funk>
As for government regulation... I think that the current availability makes it to accessible and convenience abortions are too frequent. People should realize they have consequences for their actions. If you are incapable of raising a child yourself, there are always people who want to adopt.
Also against having a bajillion babies just to collect government aide. (thats a different convo, I know)

Honestly, the kid being born with a birth defect of whatever wouldn't affect me. It would be painful to hear and possibly hard to live with, but I've known people that raised kids with Downs, I've served as a counselor for "Special Kids and Meaningful People" and have had a chance to work with kids with these defects as well. All in all their still kids, and they can be quite amusing and uplifting. I'll concede that dealing with it on a daily basis for their whole lives is likely a strain on many marriages, but that is an experience that differs greatly from couple to couple. None of the people I personally knew would turn back time and make changes if they could. I'm not saying everyone is happy, just the people I've know personally.

Now, the hard choice for me would be if having a baby posed a significant risk to my wifes life. That would be a very difficult "choice" for me. Yes I say me. I don't pretend to think for my wife, but I would like to imagine that I have some level of input even if her decision trumps my input.

To summarize:
I'm against abortion, but there is a circumstance that would cause me to pause and think.
I'm not willing to judge someone who has had an abortion as a lesser person, though I would discourage them if I knew about it in advance.
I'm not convinced that government regulation would be a bad thing.
Wulfran
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1454
Joined: July 3, 2002, 12:40 pm
Location: Lost...

Re: Abortion

Post by Wulfran »

For those complaining about the choices, the poll really puts out the 2 options available to legislators.

I don't *like* abortion either and don't like the idea that it could be used as an after the fact method of contraception (although I have a hard time seeing it used as such) but I have level of dislike/disapproval/aversion to a legislature interfering with a woman's right to control over her own body and biological processes. In my mind its immutable: the choice of whether or not to have an abortion should be between a woman, her doctor and if applicable, her partner. Its the lesser of two evils.

And I know they are out there, but any legislator who is against medically necessitated abortions (and I include psychological ones such as a victim of rape) should be shipped back to whatever neolithic exhibit he escaped from and sealed in the their fucking cave.
Wulfran Moondancer
Stupid Sidekick of the Lambent Dorf
Petitioner to Club Bok Bok
Founding Member of the Barbarian Nation Movement
User avatar
Nick
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5711
Joined: July 4, 2002, 3:45 pm

Re: Abortion

Post by Nick »

I am pro choice. It should be up to the woman involved.

It always comes down to whether or not you think that a foetus is a conscious being that deserves the same rights as an already certainly conscious mother. Personally, I don't think that happens until very late in the foetus' development in the womb, or in some cases never at all, if the baby is severely physically and/or mentally disabled. As for whether it is being "abused as another form of contraception", well, that's for the most part nonsense, except in the very broadest (read non existent) terms available.

Where I live, it is illegal to have abortions, so what you get is a constant stream of women travelling over to the mainland to have abortions, mainly because the legislators in this hell hole are religious idiots who care more about the lives of things that haven't actually lived yet than the people who undergoing the tragic event of an abortion.

People seem to forget that its very difficult for most, if not all women to even consider the concept of abortion, let alone have to do it. Sometimes however it is necessary or the alternative will mean great misery and a lamentable quality of life for all those involved.

But even if that was the case, it is in my opinion up to the woman, it is her body, if she doesn't want it, its no one elses business what she does.

Religious folk also need to realise that just because it says in a book that they happen to follow the teachings of, doesn't mean that anyone else needs to give a flying fuck about that, and that this should never affect Government policy one bit. Also, I doubt theres a single person on the planet, especially those who have had to go through the pain of an abortion, that *likes* abortion.
Last edited by Nick on August 14, 2007, 12:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Midnyte_Ragebringer
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 7062
Joined: July 4, 2002, 1:59 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: Daellyn
Location: Northeast Pennsylvania

Re: Abortion

Post by Midnyte_Ragebringer »

Wulfran wrote:For those complaining about the choices, the poll really puts out the 2 options available to legislators.
.
Aye. Unfortunately they only see things in black or white. I guess it's easier to pit the parties and voters against eachother that way. If they actually put forth logical well thought out bills, they would have nothing to run elections on.
User avatar
Sylvus
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 7033
Joined: July 10, 2002, 11:10 am
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: mp72
Location: A², MI
Contact:

Re: Abortion

Post by Sylvus »

Wulfran wrote:And I know they are out there, but any legislator who is against medically necessitated abortions (and I include psychological ones such as a victim of rape) should be shipped back to whatever neolithic exhibit he escaped from and sealed in the their fucking cave.
I have trouble seeing how "in the case of rape" can be an exception to someone who is otherwise pro-life, and I know those people exist. If you are pro-life, it's a life.

Then again, I also have trouble seeing how someone can say that a collection of cells that is not viable outside of the mother's body is a "life" in the first place.

I'm quite pro-choice, across the board.
"It's like these guys take pride in being ignorant." - Barack Obama

Go Blue!
User avatar
Fash
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4147
Joined: July 10, 2002, 2:26 am
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: sylblaydis
Location: A Secure Location

Re: Abortion

Post by Fash »

I'm more than pro-choice... I'll go as far as saying abortion needs to be encouraged. (not forced!)

If it's retarded, if you're too poor, if you're receiving public assistance, if you're single, or if you're too young...

My concern is for the unborn life, or more specifically, the life it would be born into... the chances it will have or the disadvantages it will be subject to.

In the case of retardation... sure the off chance exists it could be the first retard president of the US (too late!) but more likely it will be a drain on the parents, the extended family, and the government.

Don't bring kids into a sad life.
Fash

--
Naivety is dangerous.
User avatar
miir
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 11501
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:06 pm
XBL Gamertag: miir1
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Re: Abortion

Post by miir »

Somali wrote:"Pro-life"
Against people bombing clinics.
Not for public hanging of people spitting on people. <poke Funk>
As for government regulation... I think that the current availability makes it to accessible and convenience abortions are too frequent. People should realize they have consequences for their actions. If you are incapable of raising a child yourself, there are always people who want to adopt.
Also against having a bajillion babies just to collect government aide. (thats a different convo, I know)

Honestly, the kid being born with a birth defect of whatever wouldn't affect me. It would be painful to hear and possibly hard to live with, but I've known people that raised kids with Downs, I've served as a counselor for "Special Kids and Meaningful People" and have had a chance to work with kids with these defects as well. All in all their still kids, and they can be quite amusing and uplifting. I'll concede that dealing with it on a daily basis for their whole lives is likely a strain on many marriages, but that is an experience that differs greatly from couple to couple. None of the people I personally knew would turn back time and make changes if they could. I'm not saying everyone is happy, just the people I've know personally.

Now, the hard choice for me would be if having a baby posed a significant risk to my wifes life. That would be a very difficult "choice" for me. Yes I say me. I don't pretend to think for my wife, but I would like to imagine that I have some level of input even if her decision trumps my input.

To summarize:
I'm against abortion, but there is a circumstance that would cause me to pause and think.
I'm not willing to judge someone who has had an abortion as a lesser person, though I would discourage them if I knew about it in advance.
I'm not convinced that government regulation would be a bad thing.
I respect your opinion but I want to clarify...

Do you believe that your own personal opinions on the subject should be applied to everyone?
If a couple doesn't feel they have the means to raise a chiled with Downs or Spina Bifida should the decision to terminate the pregnancy be theirs or should should it be left to government legislation?
I've got 99 problems and I'm not dealing with any of them - Lay-Z
User avatar
miir
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 11501
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:06 pm
XBL Gamertag: miir1
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Re: Abortion

Post by miir »

The options are loaded. If I am pro-choice, why do i have to be anti-life?
I didn't want the choices to seem like they had any bias. :)
I've got 99 problems and I'm not dealing with any of them - Lay-Z
nneenaK
Gets Around
Gets Around
Posts: 55
Joined: November 25, 2005, 7:05 pm

Re: Abortion

Post by nneenaK »

I am Pro-Choice, but the thought of abortion still makes me queasy.

While I do not foresee myself in need of an abortion, I still want the option if I am raped, my baby has a severe birth defect or there is a threat to my life due to pregnancy.
User avatar
miir
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 11501
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:06 pm
XBL Gamertag: miir1
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Re: Abortion

Post by miir »

nneenaK wrote:I am Pro-Choice, but the thought of abortion still makes me queasy.

While I do not foresee myself in need of an abortion, I still want the option if I am raped, my baby has a severe birth defect or there is a threat to my life due to pregnancy.
You preggers?
I've got 99 problems and I'm not dealing with any of them - Lay-Z
cadalano
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1673
Joined: July 16, 2004, 11:02 am
Location: Royal Palm Beach, FL

Re: Abortion

Post by cadalano »

Sylvus wrote: Then again, I also have trouble seeing how someone can say that a collection of cells that is not viable outside of the mother's body is a "life" in the first place.

hey, zygotes are people too.





(if you know where that quote is from <3)
I TOLD YOU ID SHOOT! BUT YOU DIDNT BELIEVE ME! WHY DIDNT YOU BELIEVE ME?
User avatar
Siji
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4040
Joined: November 11, 2002, 5:58 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: mAcK 624
PSN ID: mAcK_624
Wii Friend Code: 7304853446448491
Location: Tampa Bay, FL
Contact:

Re: Abortion

Post by Siji »

Baby license requirements!
User avatar
rhyae
Almost 1337
Almost 1337
Posts: 669
Joined: July 28, 2002, 2:45 pm
Gender: Female
Location: B'ham

Re: Abortion

Post by rhyae »

nneenaK wrote:I am Pro-Choice, but the thought of abortion still makes me queasy.
Same. I wouldn't have an abortion unless there was an undeniable life threatening medical reason to, but I am pro choice.
User avatar
Markulas
Star Farmer
Star Farmer
Posts: 496
Joined: June 27, 2003, 2:03 am

Re: Abortion

Post by Markulas »

Mandatory abortions for all!
I'm going to live forever or die trying
Hesten
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 2620
Joined: April 29, 2003, 3:50 pm

Re: Abortion

Post by Hesten »

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:
miir wrote:
Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:We've had many discussions about this.
Perhaps it has been brought up in a few threads in the past few years but I don;t recall a topic specifically about it.
There is no option for me though up there. I am pro-choice for a first trimester abortion. After that, no way.
What if your wife was pregnant and it was discovered in the second trimester that the child had Downs or Spina Bifida. Or perhaps there was a significant heart defect that doctors weren't able to diagnose in the first trimester?

Aye. After 1st trimester, I'd agree that for medical reasons an abortion be allowed. Very good point.
Damn, thats TWICE today i agree with you. I wonder if hell froze over or something :)
"Terrorism is the war of the poor, and war is the terrorism of the rich"
Somali
Star Farmer
Star Farmer
Posts: 480
Joined: March 18, 2003, 1:37 pm
Gender: Male
Location: The Land of "Fundy Retards"

Re: Abortion

Post by Somali »

Miir
I respect your opinion but I want to clarify...

Do you believe that your own personal opinions on the subject should be applied to everyone?
If a couple doesn't feel they have the means to raise a chiled with Downs or Spina Bifida should the decision to terminate the pregnancy be theirs or should should it be left to government legislation?
Do I believe they should apply to everyone. Absolutely. I believe everyone _should_ share my belief structure. Do I expect it... err... no.
Do I think it would be bad for Gov't to regulate? No
Would I condemn someone for having an abortion? No

I would hold the doctor's accountable rather than the patient if it were me in a world with Gov't regulation. A lot of the patients are ill informed and incapable of making decisions on their own. Its not to say that all of them are, but every doctor should be.

Now your argument is likely that doing so would lower the quality of personnel capable and force women into back-alley abortions if they were not for medical reasons that would impact the mother's ability to live (I do not consider downs a medical reason and you can disagree with that all you like). My statement to that would be yes, yes it would. Thus the risk involved. This is life. There is risk. You "accidentally" shoot someone and you get manslaughter. You accidentally get preggers, I don't think you should get a "get out of jail card." You try for a baby and life tosses you a curve in the form of mental of physical retardation? Be happy and make the best of it. I've met a lot of kids with disabilities and they can be really good people even if they are a bit challenged. There are people that aren't capable of having kids at all.

Edited my Everyone should share line>
Last edited by Somali on August 14, 2007, 3:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sueven
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 3200
Joined: July 22, 2002, 12:36 pm

Re: Abortion

Post by Sueven »

I'm pro-choice. I take the stance for pragmatic rather than ethical reasons. I think that people who are very strongly pro-life because it's all about the baby dammit and it's MURDER and people who are very strongly pro-choice because it's all about the freedom of the woman and you're ENSLAVING WOMEN are narrow-minded. There is a lot of validity to both viewpoints; it's about perspective. Both sides should be able to at least acknowledge the points made by the other side (even if they think that those points are outweighed by others), but this acknowledgement rarely seems to happen.

I'm pro-choice because I think the world is a better place with abortion. Fewer children period, a better distribution of children in loving/stable homes, etc etc.

I agree that people should realize that actions have consequences and should be accountable for their decisions. That said, I think that incidence of abortion-as-casual-birth-control is VASTLY overstated, especially considering that it's expensive and fairly invasive.

Ideally, I think that Roe v. Wade should be overturned and the issue should be returned to some sort of local control. I would hope that very few localities would choose a complete ban or complete permissiveness, but would instead choose rules that fit the character of the locality with respect to timing, notification, exceptions for various reasons, etc. Unfortunately, the debate has become so polarized (and I think this polarization is largely a result of Roe v. Wade, which forces the debate into rights discourse) that this would be a very unlikely outcome. Instead, 'blue' states would probably maintain a Roe-like system, while 'red' states would ban abortion outright, or at least put unmanageable obstacles in the way of abortion access. This is not a desirable outcome. So, I think Roe v. Wade should stand, but I'd really rather it hadn't become a federal issue in the first place.
Somali
Star Farmer
Star Farmer
Posts: 480
Joined: March 18, 2003, 1:37 pm
Gender: Male
Location: The Land of "Fundy Retards"

Re: Abortion

Post by Somali »

I agree about the perspective.

The issue is that from a "pro-life" standpoint. We are affecting a Women's "rights" but not in a way that they are not already impacted. We don't let women kill adults or children after they are born. Its the argument of the ends justifying the means right? Which is for the greater good. That a child should live or that a women should have the right to manipulate her own body. Last I checked we tried to prevent people from committing suicide and put them in psychiatric wards when they did that. Sure they were doing it to their own bodies, but still... The difference is that in those cases the person was insane right? But it's their body, why can't they end it if they want to?

The real issue is around what is considered life. That is the sticking point of the argument and it is where "pro-life" differs from "pro-choice." We have a fundamental difference of opinion concerning the matter and I doubt it will ever change.

A note about perspective. I've known 3 women who have had abortions. One was raped, two were a matter of convenience. The one that was raped was strongly encouraged by her parents because they were freaked out and had no clue what to do about it, they ended up making her feel ashamed and she got rid of the kid because "it seemed like the least complicated thing." How the hell someone who has been raped becomes ashamed of the fact is still odd to me, but supposedly its a common symptom.
User avatar
Xatrei
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 2104
Joined: July 22, 2002, 4:28 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Boringham, AL

Re: Abortion

Post by Xatrei »

I consider myself to be strongly pro-choice. Ultimately, I'd prefer to see abortion rates reduced by preventing unwanted pregnancies in the first place. The prevalence of abstinence only sex education in the U.S., and the poor availability of contraceptives and "morning after" pills to young, sexually active females is pathetic, whether due to economic or social reasons. Personally, I'd favor an abortion if we found out that our fetus has any serious defects without reservations. Call me selfish, but I don't want to deal with that, and I have no desire to bring someone into the world that has to face those serious problems.
"When I was a kid, my father told me, 'Never hit anyone in anger, unless you're absolutely sure you can get away with it.'" - Russel Ziskey
User avatar
Aabidano
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4861
Joined: July 19, 2002, 2:23 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Florida

Re: Abortion

Post by Aabidano »

I'm pro-choice in the first trimester, after that there should be a medical reason as mentioned above. Health of the mother, severe retardation, birth defects, etc...

Personally I'm strongly against it, but I understand it can be necessary. It's not my decision to make for someone else.

Allowing community by community decisions would be a bad IMO. That would be like them having allowed states to determine their own civil rights legislation in the '60s. Most of the country would have came out fine, the more regressive parts would still have Jim Crow laws.
"Life is what happens while you're making plans for later."
User avatar
Kilmoll the Sexy
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5295
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:31 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: bunkeru2k
Location: Ohio

Re: Abortion

Post by Kilmoll the Sexy »

I am not necessarily pro choice but I am not against abortion. If there are circumstances that would mandate an abortion being a good choice (health issues, rape, you are Nick's child, etc) then it should defintitely be your choice.

If you are having abortions because you are a stupid lazy gutter tramp, then you should be allowed to have your abortion and then be required to have your tubes tied since you have clearly demonstrated you are not competent enough to bring a child into the world. Of course I am also all for sterilizing anyone who requires government assistance to be able to afford to live. Why the taxpayers are subsidizing these people whose only purpose is to populate the world with more taxpayer drains and watch them get paid more for every child they can squeeze out with some random thug daddy is the greatest mystery of our society.
User avatar
Midnyte_Ragebringer
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 7062
Joined: July 4, 2002, 1:59 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: Daellyn
Location: Northeast Pennsylvania

Re: Abortion

Post by Midnyte_Ragebringer »

Aabidano wrote:
Allowing community by community decisions would be a bad IMO. That would be like them having allowed states to determine their own civil rights legislation in the '60s. Most of the country would have came out fine, the more regressive parts would still have Jim Crow laws.
Awesome point. You know that shit would happen in some areas too. Great great point.
Sueven
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 3200
Joined: July 22, 2002, 12:36 pm

Re: Abortion

Post by Sueven »

The real issue is around what is considered life. That is the sticking point of the argument and it is where "pro-life" differs from "pro-choice." We have a fundamental difference of opinion concerning the matter and I doubt it will ever change.
I disagree. My opinion regarding proper abortion policy has little or nothing to do with defining when "life" begins.

You point out that "women's choice" has never been a sanctified right which is preserved above all. This is correct. However, "preservation of life" has also never been a sanctified right which is preserved above all. The competing "rights," if the argument must be framed in rights discourse, are equally meaningful/meaningless.
User avatar
Midnyte_Ragebringer
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 7062
Joined: July 4, 2002, 1:59 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: Daellyn
Location: Northeast Pennsylvania

Re: Abortion

Post by Midnyte_Ragebringer »

Sueven wrote:
The real issue is around what is considered life. That is the sticking point of the argument and it is where "pro-life" differs from "pro-choice." We have a fundamental difference of opinion concerning the matter and I doubt it will ever change.
I disagree. My opinion regarding proper abortion policy has little or nothing to do with defining when "life" begins.

You point out that "women's choice" has never been a sanctified right which is preserved above all. This is correct. However, "preservation of life" has also never been a sanctified right which is preserved above all. The competing "rights," if the argument must be framed in rights discourse, are equally meaningful/meaningless.

I think the whole "women's right" thing is guilt from the past way men treated women. Very similar to the "white guilt" in how many blacks get a free ride for doing similar things whites gets crucified for. Just a thought.

***Edit*** Actually I shouldn't say the whole thing when pertaining to either one, but more I think it might be a contributing factor.
Last edited by Midnyte_Ragebringer on August 14, 2007, 4:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
rhyae
Almost 1337
Almost 1337
Posts: 669
Joined: July 28, 2002, 2:45 pm
Gender: Female
Location: B'ham

Re: Abortion

Post by rhyae »

Male Oral Contraceptives.
User avatar
Winnow
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 27525
Joined: July 5, 2002, 1:56 pm
Location: A Special Place in Hell

Re: Abortion

Post by Winnow »

Pro Choice

And we've had this discussion before. My conclusion was to sterilize everyone at birth and then make it a conscious decision to have a baby by taking a pill or some other simple means to allow pregnancy. I'm not talking government regulation of pregnancy. It can be an over the counter item. But, if this simple extra step was require to get pregnant, the need for abortions would plummet. You'd still have the stupid people thinking they want a baby and then figuring out they can't afford it, etc but the number of abortions required would be 10% or even less of what it is now.

The problem is that sexual urges can't be controlled. It's a natural instinct to want to breed. The only other option to sterilization would be to remove the sex drive from humans as there is an almost constant need for sexual relief. They aren't thinking about babies (consequences) during the act of sex.

You've got to get to the root of the issue. People are going to want to have sex no matter what the laws are on abortion.
Somali
Star Farmer
Star Farmer
Posts: 480
Joined: March 18, 2003, 1:37 pm
Gender: Male
Location: The Land of "Fundy Retards"

Re: Abortion

Post by Somali »

Sueven wrote:
The real issue is around what is considered life. That is the sticking point of the argument and it is where "pro-life" differs from "pro-choice." We have a fundamental difference of opinion concerning the matter and I doubt it will ever change.
I disagree. My opinion regarding proper abortion policy has little or nothing to do with defining when "life" begins.

You point out that "women's choice" has never been a sanctified right which is preserved above all. This is correct. However, "preservation of life" has also never been a sanctified right which is preserved above all. The competing "rights," if the argument must be framed in rights discourse, are equally meaningful/meaningless.
Wait a sec. Are you going to actually argue that freedom to manipulate your body should be in any way equal to preserving life. Like say if you were posed with the choice of making something piercings or murder illegal, you would have a hard time choosing because making piercing illegal would impede your right to express yourself? Perhaps you were saying that if we didn't have laws against murder that you would go on a killing rampage? When asked to weigh personal choice against the right to kill people, I would hope we all come to the same conclusion.

I understand it is an exaggerated correlary, but it holds true. Anything less than that makes the crux of the issue about what is considered life.
option 1: If you believe that life should be considered valid prior to the first trimester, then you are pro-life. (This assumes your morals deem killing as bad mkay)
option 2: If you believe that sometime prior to the baby being born (pick your trimester) a fetus is not alive/cognizant/human/etc..., you are [probably] pro-choice. (You can still consider killing bad, but do not deem this as killing)

If you choose option 2, then I completely understand why you are pro-choice. I get it. It makes perfect sense. If you choose option 1, but you are still pro-choice, then I have no idea where the hell you are coming from and would greatly appreciate being enlightened.
User avatar
Neost
Almost 1337
Almost 1337
Posts: 911
Joined: July 3, 2002, 1:56 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: neost
Wii Friend Code: neost
Contact:

Re: Abortion

Post by Neost »

If you choose option 1, but you are still pro-choice, then I have no idea where the hell you are coming from and would greatly appreciate being enlightened.
I'm not necessarily choosing option 1 here, but I could see circumstances where someone could believe that awareness/life begins in the womb at an early time but still believe they don't have the right to presume for the woman carrying that fetus. It may be cut and dried for you, but it isn't so for everyone.

I guess my thinking is influenced by the idea that I don't have a right to speak for anyone else or that anyone else has a right to speak for me. It is personal responsibility and you have to live with your decision. I won't try to influence it unless it affects me directly and then I hope that my decision is the correct one. If it isn't I have to live with it and that is not your burden to bear.
User avatar
Fash
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4147
Joined: July 10, 2002, 2:26 am
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: sylblaydis
Location: A Secure Location

Re: Abortion

Post by Fash »

Somali wrote: Wait a sec. Are you going to actually argue that freedom to manipulate your body should be in any way equal to preserving life. Like say if you were posed with the choice of making something piercings or murder illegal, you would have a hard time choosing because making piercing illegal would impede your right to express yourself? Perhaps you were saying that if we didn't have laws against murder that you would go on a killing rampage? When asked to weigh personal choice against the right to kill people, I would hope we all come to the same conclusion.
lol what a stupid hypothetical question, murder or piercings... grats you, assclown.

anyways, it has nothing to do with when life begins... it's alive microsecond 1. bicker over that all you want, but the sanctity of human life is bullshit... life is not oh so precious that it must all be sustained, sorry.
Fash

--
Naivety is dangerous.
User avatar
masteen
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 8197
Joined: July 3, 2002, 12:40 pm
Gender: Mangina
Location: Florida
Contact:

Re: Abortion

Post by masteen »

I am in favor of the elimination of all human life at any and all stages of growth.
"There is at least as much need to curb the cruel greed and arrogance of part of the world of capital, to curb the cruel greed and violence of part of the world of labor, as to check a cruel and unhealthy militarism in international relationships." -Theodore Roosevelt
User avatar
Dregor Thule
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5994
Joined: July 3, 2002, 8:59 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: Xathlak
PSN ID: dregor77
Location: Oakville, Ontario

Re: Abortion

Post by Dregor Thule »

I'm for anything that kills babies, be it abortion, lead paint, or clowns.
Image
Trek
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1670
Joined: July 5, 2002, 3:31 am
Contact:

Re: Abortion

Post by Trek »

I am pro-abortion, but I do think the sperm donor should have some sort of say in the whole mess. If he doesnt want the kid he should'nt be forced to pay for that kid via child support for the next 18 years just because the mom wanted to keep it. Either that or he should be able to to force the mom to have the child if he wants to raise it.
Sueven
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 3200
Joined: July 22, 2002, 12:36 pm

Re: Abortion

Post by Sueven »

Somali wrote:Wait a sec. Are you going to actually argue that freedom to manipulate your body should be in any way equal to preserving life. Like say if you were posed with the choice of making something piercings or murder illegal, you would have a hard time choosing because making piercing illegal would impede your right to express yourself? Perhaps you were saying that if we didn't have laws against murder that you would go on a killing rampage? When asked to weigh personal choice against the right to kill people, I would hope we all come to the same conclusion.
As Fash pointed out, that analogy is not meaningful enough to be worth responding to. However, as to the general question "are you actually saying that you value the right to personal choice as much as the right to life?" My answer is yes in some circumstances and no in others.

Many pro-life folks seem to think that the right to life is one that our society values and practices strongly-- except in the context of abortion, where we have this stunningly bad anti-life policy which is out of step with our set of values. ThIs value set is imaginary. The presumption of this heavy preference toward a right to life simply doesn't match up with reality. There are the overly obvious examples like war and the death penalty. But there are plenty of ways in which our society-- and other societies throughout history-- do not respect "life" than by actively killing people. We tolerate the existence of corporations and other business entities who actively kill people by virtue of their existence. Cigarette companies are a good example. Why don't we ban cigarettes? Oh that's right: personal choice. Now, you'll probably say: The smoker only hurts himself. Not true! Second hand smoke kills. Now I'm not a big anti-smoking guy myself, but there are statistics that demonstrate how many people die each year as a result of second hand smoke (I don't know what they are, but they exist). We tolerate this. We set up our social and legal and political systems such that this is an acceptable norm. There are literally thousands of ways in which we tolerate behavior that costs life.

The bottom-line truth is that "life" is a value which is just like any other value-- one which is weighed in context of all circumstances of a situation. I think exchanges like the early one in this thread between miir and Midnyte regarding birth defects past the first trimester demonstrate that many (most) people inherently understand this.
Somali wrote:I understand it is an exaggerated correlary, but it holds true. Anything less than that makes the crux of the issue about what is considered life.
option 1: If you believe that life should be considered valid prior to the first trimester, then you are pro-life. (This assumes your morals deem killing as bad mkay)
option 2: If you believe that sometime prior to the baby being born (pick your trimester) a fetus is not alive/cognizant/human/etc..., you are [probably] pro-choice. (You can still consider killing bad, but do not deem this as killing)

If you choose option 2, then I completely understand why you are pro-choice. I get it. It makes perfect sense. If you choose option 1, but you are still pro-choice, then I have no idea where the hell you are coming from and would greatly appreciate being enlightened.
I can't meaningfully answer your question because I believe it only makes sense in the context of assumptions that you hold which I disagree with. I don't care when "life" starts. If it's not "life" yet, it's something that very soon will be "life." If it is "life," it's something that was very recently "not-life" and has an awful long way to go before becoming even close to fully developed. Why does it make any difference whatsoever what word we use to describe the state that the fetus/baby/zygote/whatever is in?

edit: This might come across as mean which I don't intend it to be at all. I just reread it and thought it seemed kind of mean.
Somali
Star Farmer
Star Farmer
Posts: 480
Joined: March 18, 2003, 1:37 pm
Gender: Male
Location: The Land of "Fundy Retards"

Re: Abortion

Post by Somali »

Thanks Sueven. That actually helps.

I do believe I understand your arguments better and to some degree I understand the logic that would allow someone to consider it life without considering it important. Allow me the following questions to provide me a better understanding. Please understand that I am serious in the questions, but I am not attempting to incite you. I am in fact curious. Another note is that when I use the term argument, I refer to a means of expressing your view and reasoning, not referring to an aggravated discussion.

I believe I was perhaps vague by describing it as "life." Perhaps I wasn't but I'll try to extrapolate regardless. When I refer to life, I don't mean life in the sense of a random living thing, single cell organism, slug, dog, etc... I suppose a more accurate statement would have been: The functional difference is when the (whatever) should be considered human and granted the basic protections allocated to other humans.

Perhaps another separation would be an argument I heard considering the (whatever) as a parasitic lifeform. Because it was viewed as a parasite, the woman is simply removing a parasite from her body, and it is not considered human until birth. I can similarly understand the argument and where said people were coming from. Is this perhaps part of your reasoning as well?

On the argument of abortion because of mental of physical defect in the child, should we also allow for parents to terminate the lives of the kids that have been born and suffer from the same symptoms? We could view it as mercy killing, assisted suicide, whatever. After all, they are lesser lifeforms... right?

This again is why I assume the point of the argument revolves around when we call it [human] life. If the point of the argument does not have to do with that, then you should also find it perfectly acceptable to off the mentally or physically handicapped. Shouldn't you?



Fash:

Assclown. Quite original. Please reread my statements and understand the point. The point of the argument was that we had a fundamental difference in what we considered to be life. If you attempt to put yourself into the mind of someone that considers the fetus as human life, I would hope that you could understand how [we] could also assume it to have similar human rights. That was the point of my argument, nothing more, nothing less. If you assume the fetus to be provided human rights, then the analogy is quite on target. If you don't, then it is entirely absurd to you.

As for the piercings vs murder argument. It is an absurd analogy to anyone who considers the fetus as less than [human] life. I completely agree. Perhaps lets use another example that you may be able to understand better. Lets assume there are siamese twins attached at the head. The twin on the left wants to be its own person, separated from its twin. The twin on the right is mute. When instructed the operation would kill the twin on the right. The twin on the left says, "thats OK. I accept the scenario."

Again. the scenario likely means absolutely nothing to you and seems entirely absurd to relate a living human being to something in the womb. Why? Because of functional differences in what we consider to be the beginnings of human life and that rights that should be granted to it.

Your claim is that the sanctity of human life is bullshit, then please explain your views on murder. Do you believe that people should be imprisoned and/or sentenced to death for murdering another human? If you do feel there should be a penalty for murder, and you do feel that the fetus is human life, please explain how the two are different. Is it because the fetus has yet to experience life? It had nothing that depended upon it? Served no purpose? I think perhaps I could understand your argument from that perspective. I would still disagree, but I could understand it at least. To call the sanctity of human life bullshit is a relatively broad statement though. I need some better definition as to what that means before I am convinced that the basis for our disagreement does not revolve around what we consider to be [human] life. If the sanctity of human life is bullshit, you should have no qualms about murdering [full grown] people either. After all, human life doesn't really matter if its not yours. I really don't believe that is the point you were trying to make.

You feel that I am an idiot for not sharing your point of view, I feel you are perhaps misguided by convenience and a desire not to "impose your will on others." The primary difference between the two is that I at least try to understand why you feel the way you do and can empathize with your view, while you simply feel my view is that of a moron.

Allow me one other point as well, if you are trying to draw conclusions about my views of life and death based upon my recent arguments. I understand there are circumstances that pertain to nearly all scenarios. I am not going to argue that in a time of war, we should lay down our rifles and become fodder. I'm all for protecting yourself should someone pose a threat you or your family. I do however feel that life is important and should be protected from convenience. Abortions should have limitations and the use of abortions as a method of birth control frustrates me. You can argue that those scenarios are limited, I will argue that in 2/3 people I knew it was exactly that. In the 3rd she was pressured into it but her scenario was one that I have more sympathy for because the pregnancy was entirely out of her control. The sample size of my experience is small enough that it isn't remotely statistically significant. I agree, but it is my experience and is significant to me as a result. I hold no ill will against any of the 3 girls. Two of them are relatives of mine, but truthfully it wouldn't matter if they were people I met on the street.
User avatar
miir
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 11501
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:06 pm
XBL Gamertag: miir1
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Re: Abortion

Post by miir »

On the argument of abortion because of mental of physical defect in the child, should we also allow for parents to terminate the lives of the kids that have been born and suffer from the same symptoms? We could view it as mercy killing, assisted suicide, whatever. After all, they are lesser lifeforms... right?
At the point a child can exist outside of it's mothers womb, I think it could be considered life.
A zygote/embryo or a first/second trimester fetus is still(in my opinion) technically part of the mother's body. It cannot survive without being physically attached to the mother.

Culling mentally/physically handicapped children is a ridiculous extreme. Nobody would ever suggest legislation allowing such a thing... much like nobody would ever suggest legislation controlling an individual's freedom to get a vasectomy or tubal ligation.

Because a vasectomy is essentially the murder or (potential) children..... right?


Legally, a child is not an entity until it leaves the womb.
Your birth certificate does not list your conception date.
You do not receive tax breaks on unborn children.




My personal opinion is that the decision to abort a fetus in the first trimester should be the parent's.
In the second trimester, it should be a decided by the doctor and the parents.
In the third trimester(or late second), an abortion should only be considered if there is a serious heath risk to the mother if she were to carry to term.
I've got 99 problems and I'm not dealing with any of them - Lay-Z
User avatar
Boogahz
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 9438
Joined: July 6, 2002, 2:00 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: corin12
PSN ID: boog144
Location: Austin, TX
Contact:

Re: Abortion

Post by Boogahz »

miir wrote:Legally, a child is not an entity until it leaves the womb.
Your birth certificate does not list your conception date.
You do not receive tax breaks on unborn children.
Don't forget that you also cannot use the carpool lanes when pregnant! (could have sworn that story was linked here as well)
Post Reply