Abortion puzzles me

[jagec]

Originally posted by: AMDUALY
If someone came in the middle of the night while you were sleeping and hooked himself/herself up to you while you were sleeping would you keep them? Say they needed you or they would die, and they needed your body for 7-9 months. If you were pro-life you would be inclined to keep them no? That is the point he is making. I've studied this in my moral problems class and that is how a writer stated his argument.

OK, fine, I agree that women who get pregnant through no act of their own can abort. Happy?

It's a stupid analogy, because I'm not arguing against rape/incest/etc, which are the only cases in which the women didn't choose to roll the baby dice. But I'm done with this thread. I believe that within the first trimester abortion should be legal, but not beyond. I believe that one can't put an exact date on when a "fetus" becomes a "human" (or "person", if you will), but I think that it's stupid to put that date anywhere near the first day or last day of pregnancy, like most people in the debate like doing.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Originally posted by: Trevelyan

The debate about abortion always boils down to ONE CLEAR ISSUE: Is a developing human considered to be alive?

No, it doesn't. No rational person would deny that fetuses, embryos, zygotes nor even gametes are alive. For that matter, HeLa cell cultures, cancerous tumors and blood samples are also alive. "Life" is irrlevant therefore, and your concentration on this non-issue only demonstrates the extent to which you have been distracted by anti-choice propaganda.

If you want to talk about issues beyond that, fine, but be clear that you then support killing innocent people to benefit others.

Fetuses are not people. People are born -- but this is a non-issue as well. No person, born or unborn, has the right to occupy another person's body against that person's will. No person, born or unborn, has the right to forcibly extract nutirents from another person's body. No person, born or unborn, has the right to inject another person with unwanted waste and hormones. Any attempt to bestow such rights to a fetus violates the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment.

That's why a woman's right to choose an abortion is protected. If someone attempted to occupy your body and inject it with chemicals and waste, you would equally have a right to stop them, with deadly force if necessary.

-Garth

 

[totalcommand]

Originally posted by: jagec

Originally posted by: AMDUALY
If someone came in the middle of the night while you were sleeping and hooked himself/herself up to you while you were sleeping would you keep them? Say they needed you or they would die, and they needed your body for 7-9 months. If you were pro-life you would be inclined to keep them no? That is the point he is making. I've studied this in my moral problems class and that is how a writer stated his argument.

OK, fine, I agree that women who get pregnant through no act of their own can abort. Happy?

It's a stupid analogy, because I'm not arguing against rape/incest/etc, which are the only cases in which the women didn't choose to roll the baby dice. But I'm done with this thread. I believe that within the first trimester abortion should be legal, but not beyond. I believe that one can't put an exact date on when a "fetus" becomes a "human" (or "person", if you will), but I think that it's stupid to put that date anywhere near the first day or last day of pregnancy, like most people in the debate like doing.

good riddance.

 

[bluemax]

I just love how they use the word "choice".

They'll do anything to avoid the word "kill" because they want it to sound nice.

Abortion is out there strictly for lazy, selfish people who don't want to pay the consequences of their actions.

Go to a bar, get drunk, screw a stranger.... whoops! Dangit! Now I have to be RESPONSIBLE??? Forget that!! Get rid of it instead! The sooner, the better! If I begin to LOOK pregnant, people will talk and my reputation might be ruined! Besides, there's another party next week... I can't miss that or my social life will be ruined! It's not a baby yet anyways, since I can't see it or hold it ....

At three months, that "lump of goo" already definately looks like a baby and is already starting to move its limbs, breathe, heart pumping, brain developing.... By 4-5 months there's no question that it's definately human - just LOOK at it! Some preemies are born at 5 months and survive!

Doesn't it disturb you "choice"ers that abortion of a baby at this stage involves the equivalent of passing it through a bread slicer? Dismemberment and gutting.

Yeah..... pretty, eh? "Choice" sounds nicer because it avoids thinking about all that.


Just wait until the day you hold a child you actually wanted, and then tell me abortions are fine and dandy. And there's waiting lists like you wouldn't believe for adoption babies! Some couples wait well over 10 years for the chance! They'll take a child of any race or background, but there's just not enough put up for adoption.

...but then you'd have to spend 9 months pregnant with a child you don't want, hating yourself the whole time for the stupid mess you got yourself into (blaming someone else the whole time, I'm sure.)



Yes.... I was a teenager once. I would have told a girl to abort to avoid the punishment of responsibility too. I'm no longer a foolish, selfish teenager. I know now how reprehensible even I was.

 

[Boztech]

Originally posted by: bluemax
I just love how they use the word "choice".

They'll do anything to avoid the word "kill" because they want it to sound nice.

Abortion is out there strictly for lazy, selfish people who don't want to pay the consequences of their actions.

Go to a bar, get drunk, screw a stranger.... whoops! Dangit! Now I have to be RESPONSIBLE??? Forget that!! Get rid of it instead! The sooner, the better! If I begin to LOOK pregnant, people will talk and my reputation might be ruined! Besides, there's another party next week... I can't miss that or my social life will be ruined! It's not a baby yet anyways, since I can't see it or hold it ....

At three months, that "lump of goo" already definately looks like a baby and is already starting to move its limbs, breathe, heart pumping, brain developing.... By 4-5 months there's no question that it's definately human - just LOOK at it! Some preemies are born at 5 months and survive!

Doesn't it disturb you "choice"ers that abortion of a baby at this stage involves the equivalent of passing it through a bread slicer? Dismemberment and gutting.

Yeah..... pretty, eh? "Choice" sounds nicer because it avoids thinking about all that.


Just wait until the day you hold a child you actually wanted, and then tell me abortions are fine and dandy. And there's waiting lists like you wouldn't believe for adoption babies! Some couples wait well over 10 years for the chance! They'll take a child of any race or background, but there's just not enough put up for adoption.

...but then you'd have to spend 9 months pregnant with a child you don't want, hating yourself the whole time for the stupid mess you got yourself into (blaming someone else the whole time, I'm sure.)



Yes.... I was a teenager once. I would have told a girl to abort to avoid the punishment of responsibility too. I'm no longer a foolish, selfish teenager. I know now how reprehensible even I was.

If your wife was drugged, raped, and became pregnant, would you really want her to carry out the term of her pregnancy?

Or if she was a juvenile diabetic and had about a 90% chance of kidney failure or going into DKA during birth and dieing or having other very serious complications with birth?

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Originally posted by: bluemax
<snip>

LOL, I don't know the last time I saw such a concentrated collection of stereotypes, strawmen, and senseless emotionalism. You seem to be suffering from a condition that where I'm from we called constipation of the mind and diarreah of the mouth (or in your case, fingers).

When you get tired with the empty rhetoric, I'm ready to discuss the pertinent issues. Just let me know.

 

[Ryan]

Originally posted by: Garth

Originally posted by: bluemax
<snip>

LOL, I don't know the last time I saw such a concentrated collection of stereotypes, strawmen, and senseless emotionalism. You seem to be suffering from a condition that where I'm from we called constipation of the mind and diarreah of the mouth (or in your case, fingers).

When you get tired with the empty rhetoric, I'm ready to discuss the pertinent issues. Just let me know.

Bingo.

 

[shadow9d9]

Originally posted by: bluemax
I just love how they use the word "choice".

They'll do anything to avoid the word "kill" because they want it to sound nice.

Abortion is out there strictly for lazy, selfish people who don't want to pay the consequences of their actions.

Go to a bar, get drunk, screw a stranger.... whoops! Dangit! Now I have to be RESPONSIBLE??? Forget that!! Get rid of it instead! The sooner, the better! If I begin to LOOK pregnant, people will talk and my reputation might be ruined! Besides, there's another party next week... I can't miss that or my social life will be ruined! It's not a baby yet anyways, since I can't see it or hold it ....

At three months, that "lump of goo" already definately looks like a baby and is already starting to move its limbs, breathe, heart pumping, brain developing.... By 4-5 months there's no question that it's definately human - just LOOK at it! Some preemies are born at 5 months and survive!

Doesn't it disturb you "choice"ers that abortion of a baby at this stage involves the equivalent of passing it through a bread slicer? Dismemberment and gutting.

Yeah..... pretty, eh? "Choice" sounds nicer because it avoids thinking about all that.


Just wait until the day you hold a child you actually wanted, and then tell me abortions are fine and dandy. And there's waiting lists like you wouldn't believe for adoption babies! Some couples wait well over 10 years for the chance! They'll take a child of any race or background, but there's just not enough put up for adoption.

...but then you'd have to spend 9 months pregnant with a child you don't want, hating yourself the whole time for the stupid mess you got yourself into (blaming someone else the whole time, I'm sure.)



Yes.... I was a teenager once. I would have told a girl to abort to avoid the punishment of responsibility too. I'm no longer a foolish, selfish teenager. I know now how reprehensible even I was.

Such nonsense. Your opinion is no greater than the 1000s of others. Believe it or not, gasp, people have other opinions! A 1-3 week abortion is absolutely no big deal.. your emotional argument is laughable.. sorry : (.

 

[bluemax]

Did I say 1-3 week? No.

Did I say keep a rape baby? No.

You're putting words in my mouth and automatically calling anything I say "crap" just to avoid the main issue of which I am exactly right.

The majority of "choice"ers are not using abortion for life-saving emergencies or the removal of rape babies.

The VAST majority of abortions are for lazy, selfish people who deem the pregnancy too much of a hassle and consider the pregnancy as nothing more than a case of the flu - something that must be "cured" and removed.

Abortion is NOT for birth control!

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Originally posted by: bluemax
I just love how they use the word "choice".

They'll do anything to avoid the word "kill" because they want it to sound nice.

Abortion is out there strictly for lazy, selfish people who don't want to pay the consequences of their actions.

Go to a bar, get drunk, screw a stranger.... whoops! Dangit! Now I have to be RESPONSIBLE??? Forget that!! Get rid of it instead! The sooner, the better! If I begin to LOOK pregnant, people will talk and my reputation might be ruined! Besides, there's another party next week... I can't miss that or my social life will be ruined! It's not a baby yet anyways, since I can't see it or hold it ....

At three months, that "lump of goo" already definately looks like a baby and is already starting to move its limbs, breathe, heart pumping, brain developing.... By 4-5 months there's no question that it's definately human - just LOOK at it! Some preemies are born at 5 months and survive!

Doesn't it disturb you "choice"ers that abortion of a baby at this stage involves the equivalent of passing it through a bread slicer? Dismemberment and gutting.

Yeah..... pretty, eh? "Choice" sounds nicer because it avoids thinking about all that.


Just wait until the day you hold a child you actually wanted, and then tell me abortions are fine and dandy. And there's waiting lists like you wouldn't believe for adoption babies! Some couples wait well over 10 years for the chance! They'll take a child of any race or background, but there's just not enough put up for adoption.

...but then you'd have to spend 9 months pregnant with a child you don't want, hating yourself the whole time for the stupid mess you got yourself into (blaming someone else the whole time, I'm sure.)



Yes.... I was a teenager once. I would have told a girl to abort to avoid the punishment of responsibility too. I'm no longer a foolish, selfish teenager. I know now how reprehensible even I was.

Such nonsense. Your opinion is no greater than the 1000s of others. Believe it or not, gasp, people have other opinions! A 1-3 week abortion is absolutely no big deal.. your emotional argument is laughable.. sorry : (.

Why is 1-3 weeks any different than 7 or 8 months? It's still the same person. Not to mention, once we had third trimester abortions, what would the next step be? Infants under 3 months? Really, they are no more sentient or sapient during those first few months as they are in the womb. If we just totally gave in to the pro-lifers, one day if your five year old isn't turning out the way you want, or finances get to tight, you could just have him aborted.

 

[Ryan]

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Originally posted by: bluemax
I just love how they use the word "choice".

They'll do anything to avoid the word "kill" because they want it to sound nice.

Abortion is out there strictly for lazy, selfish people who don't want to pay the consequences of their actions.

Go to a bar, get drunk, screw a stranger.... whoops! Dangit! Now I have to be RESPONSIBLE??? Forget that!! Get rid of it instead! The sooner, the better! If I begin to LOOK pregnant, people will talk and my reputation might be ruined! Besides, there's another party next week... I can't miss that or my social life will be ruined! It's not a baby yet anyways, since I can't see it or hold it ....

At three months, that "lump of goo" already definately looks like a baby and is already starting to move its limbs, breathe, heart pumping, brain developing.... By 4-5 months there's no question that it's definately human - just LOOK at it! Some preemies are born at 5 months and survive!

Doesn't it disturb you "choice"ers that abortion of a baby at this stage involves the equivalent of passing it through a bread slicer? Dismemberment and gutting.

Yeah..... pretty, eh? "Choice" sounds nicer because it avoids thinking about all that.


Just wait until the day you hold a child you actually wanted, and then tell me abortions are fine and dandy. And there's waiting lists like you wouldn't believe for adoption babies! Some couples wait well over 10 years for the chance! They'll take a child of any race or background, but there's just not enough put up for adoption.

...but then you'd have to spend 9 months pregnant with a child you don't want, hating yourself the whole time for the stupid mess you got yourself into (blaming someone else the whole time, I'm sure.)



Yes.... I was a teenager once. I would have told a girl to abort to avoid the punishment of responsibility too. I'm no longer a foolish, selfish teenager. I know now how reprehensible even I was.

Such nonsense. Your opinion is no greater than the 1000s of others. Believe it or not, gasp, people have other opinions! A 1-3 week abortion is absolutely no big deal.. your emotional argument is laughable.. sorry : (.

Why is 1-3 weeks any different than 7 or 8 months? It's still the same person. Not to mention, once we had third trimester abortions, what would the next step be? Infants under 3 months? Really, they are no more sentient or sapient during those first few months as they are in the womb. If we just totally gave in to the pro-lifers, one day if your five year old isn't turning out the way you want, or finances get to tight, you could just have him aborted.

Slippery slop arguments have no merit.

 

[Trevelyan]

Originally posted by: Garth

Originally posted by: Trevelyan

The debate about abortion always boils down to ONE CLEAR ISSUE: Is a developing human considered to be alive?

No, it doesn't. No rational person would deny that fetuses, embryos, zygotes nor even gametes are alive. For that matter, HeLa cell cultures, cancerous tumors and blood samples are also alive. "Life" is irrlevant therefore, and your concentration on this non-issue only demonstrates the extent to which you have been distracted by anti-choice propaganda.

Indeed, fetuses are alive. What I mean by my word "life" is the kind of life you and I share, as do all other people on this planet. My use of the word "life" is not a reflection of purely a biological definition, as you assumed.

Originally posted by: Garth

If you want to talk about issues beyond that, fine, but be clear that you then support killing innocent people to benefit others.

Fetuses are not people. People are born -- but this is a non-issue as well.

Using your choice of words, people are human from conception. That's a biological definition.

Originally posted by: Garth
No person, born or unborn, has the right to occupy another person's body against that person's will. No person, born or unborn, has the right to forcibly extract nutirents from another person's body. No person, born or unborn, has the right to inject another person with unwanted waste and hormones. Any attempt to bestow such rights to a fetus violates the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment.

That's why a woman's right to choose an abortion is protected. If someone attempted to occupy your body and inject it with chemicals and waste, you would equally have a right to stop them, with deadly force if necessary.
-Garth

Your views on pregnancy are truly beautiful. You should write a novel.

 

[Boxxcar]

Did I hear someone say, "Coathanger?"

 

[Trevelyan]

Originally posted by: Boztech
This issue hits close to home for my fiance and I. One of her (our) best friends was recently date-raped and became pregant. Yesterday we drove down with her to the clinic in Austin as moral support while she was getting her abortion. Both of us were in full support.

She and my fiance are both Type I diabetics. Carrying out any pregnancy, much less one that was forced upon them, would cause extreme stress on their bodies and could likely lead to kidney failure and possibly death.

You couldn't imagine the emotional burden of just being raped alone that she's gone through, much less the thought of having to carry out the birth of the child, much less the medical complications that lie ahead. It's been three weeks and so far she hasn't even been able to tell her own husband.

I'm very sorry to hear that. I hope your friend can get the help she needs to recover. Obviously, the choice is very difficult to make when it means giving up your own life for your baby.

It is truly a terrible world to live in when things like this happen.

 

[Boxxcar]

We eat eggs of chicken, therefore abortion should be legal. Except for balut, then we must band together and bury the fetus for later!?!?!?!
Yum!

 

[Trevelyan]

Originally posted by: Boztech
If your wife was drugged, raped, and became pregnant, would you really want her to carry out the term of her pregnancy?

Or if she was a juvenile diabetic and had about a 90% chance of kidney failure or going into DKA during birth and dieing or having other very serious complications with birth?

Honestly, and I know this is easy for me to say, because it hasn't happened to me...

My reaction would first be extreme anger at the person who did this to my wife. The process of forgiving that person would be a long road. I would probably be extremely depressed and horrified for quite some time, and would have some long, tear-filled talks with God.

But, I would still believe the right thing to do would be to keep the baby. This child growing inside my wife would not be guilty because of his father... this child would still be innocent, and to kill him for my sake or my wife's sake would be selfish, and wrong.

I would probably think it my right to take that life, considering the extreme trauma that was endured. But that would not be so.

The rape would be the tragedy, but the child does not have to be.

 

[JDrake]

Originally posted by: Boztech

Originally posted by: joedrake

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: joedrake
Sperm cell (23) + egg cell (23) = human baby (46)

Negative.

It doesn't??

No. An embryo is not a baby just like an egg is not a chicken.

O yea? Then why don't vegans eat chicken eggs.. when they OBVIOUSLY aren't chicken?!

 

[J Heartless Slick]

This would be a clear cut issue if women did not die during childbirth.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Originally posted by: Trevelyan

Originally posted by: Garth

Originally posted by: Trevelyan

The debate about abortion always boils down to ONE CLEAR ISSUE: Is a developing human considered to be alive?

No, it doesn't. No rational person would deny that fetuses, embryos, zygotes nor even gametes are alive. For that matter, HeLa cell cultures, cancerous tumors and blood samples are also alive. "Life" is irrlevant therefore, and your concentration on this non-issue only demonstrates the extent to which you have been distracted by anti-choice propaganda.

Indeed, fetuses are alive. What I mean by my word "life" is the kind of life you and I share, as do all other people on this planet. My use of the word "life" is not a reflection of purely a biological definition, as you assumed.

There is no more rigorous definition of life than the biological one. If you think you have a more useful definition that is in some way pertinent to this debate, then present it. Otherwise you are just being sloppy, trying to play fast-and-loose with words for rhetorical effect. Of course, that is unsurprising behavior from a person holding a position that the facts do not favor.

Originally posted by: Garth

If you want to talk about issues beyond that, fine, but be clear that you then support killing innocent people to benefit others.

Fetuses are not people. People are born -- but this is a non-issue as well.

Using your choice of words, people are human from conception. That's a biological definition.

Again, you're being sloppy and dodging the point. People were human long before either of us were conceived. Gametes are human. HeLa cell cultures are human. Canecerous tumors are human. Obviously, the question doesn't hinge on whether or not a fetus is human, therefore, because being human does not automatically endow something with the constitutional rights of a person.

But, then again, one could hardly expect you to make relevant arguments when all of the relevant facts are not on your side.

Originally posted by: Garth
No person, born or unborn, has the right to occupy another person's body against that person's will. No person, born or unborn, has the right to forcibly extract nutirents from another person's body. No person, born or unborn, has the right to inject another person with unwanted waste and hormones. Any attempt to bestow such rights to a fetus violates the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment.

That's why a woman's right to choose an abortion is protected. If someone attempted to occupy your body and inject it with chemicals and waste, you would equally have a right to stop them, with deadly force if necessary.
-Garth

Your views on pregnancy are truly beautiful. You should write a novel.

Note that you could offer no rebuttal these facts, but rather only mustered weak sarcasm. No one said you had to like them, but they are the facts. It would probably be better for your long-term mental health if you would just get used to them. It couldn't hurt your arguments either.

-Garth

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Originally posted by: joedrake
No. An embryo is not a baby just like an egg is not a chicken.

O yea? Then why don't vegans eat chicken eggs.. when they OBVIOUSLY aren't chicken?![/quote]
Here's a better example: an embryo is not a baby just like an acorn is not an oak tree.

Regarding your rather peurile question, however, you need to acknowledge the distinction between something being "chicken" and something being "a chicken." Eggs may be "chicken" in that they are of the Gallus genus, but an egg is not "a chicken" because chickens are hatched. Of course, vegans have their own reasons why they don't want to eat eggs and chickens, but it utterly perplexes me how you would think those reasons are even remotely relevant.

-Garth

 

[newParadigm]

Originally posted by: Arkitech
My wife is 7 months along in her pregnacy and it's so amazing to me to see how new life is developing and growing. Even though the baby is still forming he responds to my voice and my wife's, it's an incredible experience.

Now I realize not every child has the benefit of being born to a pair of loving parents, in some cases babies are born to totally unfit and possibly unstable people. Then there are the cases where some unfortunate women have become the victim of rape and I can totally sympathize with why they feel the need to go for an abortion. But for the most part it seems to me that many people choose abortion because they don't want the responsibility. It's really sad, in fact it's downright heartbreaking because every abortion is taking away the life from a helpless child. Everyone gets up in arms when they hear of child porn, child abuse, molestation and any other atrocity (sp?) commited against kids but why does'nt that type of feeling extend to unborn babies. After all they're the most helpless and have the least means of defending themselves.

I don't want this to degenerate into a flamefest I just felt like stating something I feel strongly about and hopefully sparking some intelligent discussion.

Don't even get me started. Abortions before 3 months are OK, because the fetus has about the inteligence of a frog at that point. After that, the fetus can usuallu be sustained in an artificial womb (correct me if im wrong on that), so IMHO it pretty pointless to have an abortion, why not just extract the fetus, and let it finish its gestation in an incubator. Of course, the parents would have to pay for this procedure, but if you didn't want the kid, you could simply do that and offer it up for adoption. In short they should make abortion legal up to 3months through the pregnancy, and thereafter, impliment the procedure above, exeptions could be made for rape victims. The question thats comonly raised about what if the pregnancy endangers the mother's health, could also be solved through the use of an artificial womb.

 

[JDrake]

If you have a child, you are responsible for taking care of it. (i.e. giving it nutrients to survive)

 

[gigapet]

If all abortion ended tommorow who is supposed to support and raise all these unwanted babies? What would be the effects on society?

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: Vic
<- has not read thread, just the OP


Abortion is an artificial diversionary and divisive issue created expressly for the purpose of getting voters with otherwise almost identical political ideologies to divide into different camps. In other words, it gives them something to fight over and an excuse to butt into other peoples' lives and lord over them. They should all mind their own business.

What do you mean by artificial? I'll agree with you that there's more to politics that just abortion and it's become something that's it's not. Hell, my mom won't ever vote democrat due to their support of abortion.

The importance of abortion has grown much too large, but I have no problem with debates about the issuse - online at least.

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: joedrake

Originally posted by: Boztech

Originally posted by: joedrake

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: joedrake
Sperm cell (23) + egg cell (23) = human baby (46)

Negative.

It doesn't??

No. An embryo is not a baby just like an egg is not a chicken.

O yea? Then why don't vegans eat chicken eggs.. when they OBVIOUSLY aren't chicken?!

animal produts are not animals. Fingernails are not people either should we have laws against clipping nails and cutting hair. come on your being silly.