has anybody ever been involved with an abortion?

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

JulesMaximus

No Lifer
Jul 3, 2003
74,534
911
126
Hmm Fair point, I would still say you have the right to your genetic line, whatever form it takes.

If you can force a woman, a perfect stranger, to carry your child to birth then you should also be able to force her to abort a fetus you don't want. Do you agree with that?
 
Jun 26, 2007
11,925
2
0
I'm saying if you are married and you knock up your wife you should have some say in whether she keeps the baby or not.

And i'm saying that the ceremony changes nothing, you have the exact same rights to her body before and after, you cannot rape her, you cannot force her to do anything with her body or do anything to her body against her will either before or after the ceremony, you are still only you and she is still her.

Modern societies (and most religious societies too actually) have done away with the idea that the man has a right to the womans body in any way.

Ultimately you cannot force her to do something she doesn't want to do but I'd think that you would have some say in the matter.

If she wants you to have a say, sure, if she doesn't, you don't, doesn't matter if you are married or not.

If you knock up a woman and you aren't married to her I don't think you have any rights as far as whether or not she aborts the fetus nor should you. Don't like it? Don't have unprotected sex with women you don't know or don't have a relationship with.

I agree on your second point though, you don't become a parent until the baby is born.

You don't have a right either way, it doesn't matter if you are married or not, it depends on your relationship more than ANYTHING else.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that what i think you mean is that in your experience, when it comes to the relationship your wife and you have, both of you believe that both of you should have a say in the matter.

But that assumes that you are both on the same page, if she changes her mind, you have no say... OTOH, if you agree, she's the one who's going to carry the baby, give birth and feed it so i say it's kinda even, all things considered. ;)
 

JulesMaximus

No Lifer
Jul 3, 2003
74,534
911
126
And i'm saying that the ceremony changes nothing, you have the exact same rights to her body before and after, you cannot rape her, you cannot force her to do anything with her body or do anything to her body against her will either before or after the ceremony, you are still only you and she is still her.

Modern societies (and most religious societies too actually) have done away with the idea that the man has a right to the womans body in any way.



If she wants you to have a say, sure, if she doesn't, you don't, doesn't matter if you are married or not.



You don't have a right either way, it doesn't matter if you are married or not, it depends on your relationship more than ANYTHING else.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that what i think you mean is that in your experience, when it comes to the relationship your wife and you have, both of you believe that both of you should have a say in the matter.

But that assumes that you are both on the same page, if she changes her mind, you have no say... OTOH, if you agree, she's the one who's going to carry the baby, give birth and feed it so i say it's kinda even, all things considered. ;)

I totally agree with you. I was really just speaking on my own opinion. Personally, I can't imagine being married to a woman I didn't know well enough to know her thoughts on having children before hand.
 

HAL9000

Lifer
Oct 17, 2010
22,021
3
76
If you can force a woman, a perfect stranger, to carry your child to birth then you should also be able to force her to abort a fetus you don't want. Do you agree with that?

Sex isn't a force, unless it's rape, in which case the rapist obviously should have no say in what happens...

You shouldn't be able to force her to abort, she shouldn't be able to force you to lose a child (or potential child) either.
 
Jun 26, 2007
11,925
2
0
I totally agree with you. I was really just speaking on my own opinion. Personally, I can't imagine being married to a woman I didn't know well enough to know her thoughts on having children before hand.

I completely agree on that too.

But women.... you think you know them when you get married, a number of years later you know so much more that you didn't know then, for you those was good things, for me... not so much...
 

dardarla

Senior member
May 27, 2010
392
0
0
I know 3 friends who have had an abortion... all with different outcomes.

1. Girl who sat next to me in high school got pregnant. She whispered her worries to me, and choose to discretely "take care" of her problem with little drama or emotional ramifications.

2. Friend got pregnant during an emotional abusive relationship and he pressured her to get an abortion. She did... and has ongoing guilt and regret.

3. Friend got pregnant, came home during the middle of the year to see her family (she was elsewhere in the country) and go over her options. She choose to have an abortion because she wasn't in a position to raise a child/face the stigma of being pregnant.. She was fine with this... but when other people pressured to tell why she left for medical reasons in the middle of the year by the far away friends, she faced social ramifications and harsh judgement.

4. NOT a abortion situation. Girl I knew was 20ish at the time and not ready for a child, choose to have a adoption and was treated VERY poorly by the nurses when she was giving birth because they knew she was not keeping her baby.

I think how an abortion will affect you depends on how you subjectively choose to interpret it. I know myself, I would never want to be faced with this choice, as I have been raised to be "pro-life"... but if I was faced with an unplanned pregnancy and I was unmarried and not in a situation to raise the baby I would have an abortion to avoid the social ramifications of being pregnant, being called a slut, being a heartless person who doesn't want their child. Giving up a baby for adoption is not a complete solution to being pregnant, because there will be social pressure to "keep the baby" even if you can't provide for them. And also the judgments/disappointment of my family would be ongoing, and I do not want to go through those social pains. Being pregnant would interfere with my professional life and school life, and set me back as I establish myself to be a successful parent someday. But if I'm in a position to raise that child, with a husband, even if we're not completely financially ready, I will keep that baby because there would not be the same social ramifications for me.
 

JulesMaximus

No Lifer
Jul 3, 2003
74,534
911
126
Sex isn't a force, unless it's rape, in which case the rapist obviously should have no say in what happens...

You shouldn't be able to force her to abort, she shouldn't be able to force you to lose a child (or potential child) either.

I'm not talking about sex. I'm talking about the guys' options after he gets her pregnant.

You say she shouldn't be able to force you to lose a child. That's the same thing as you forcing her to carry the child full term against her wishes which is the same thing as forcing her to have an abortion. You can't have it both ways. You are imposing your will on her. If you're for one you must be for both.
 

HAL9000

Lifer
Oct 17, 2010
22,021
3
76
I'm not talking about sex. I'm talking about the guys' options after he gets her pregnant.

You say she shouldn't be able to force you to lose a child. That's the same thing as you forcing her to carry the child full term against her wishes which is the same thing as forcing her to have an abortion. You can't have it both ways. You are imposing your will on her. If you're for one you must be for both.

It's not forcing if she chose to get pregnant, it was her choice to have sex in the first place.
 

manlymatt83

Lifer
Oct 14, 2005
10,051
44
91
I'm not talking about sex. I'm talking about the guys' options after he gets her pregnant.

You say she shouldn't be able to force you to lose a child. That's the same thing as you forcing her to carry the child full term against her wishes which is the same thing as forcing her to have an abortion. You can't have it both ways. You are imposing your will on her. If you're for one you must be for both.

My thoughts.

1) Abortion sucks in general. It's even worse when the would-be parents are people of two different types (logical vs. emotional) and/or have differing opinions on the issue.

2) A guy can't force a girl to have an abortion. A girl shouldn't be able to force anything on the guy, either. Technically, there should be a way for a guy to get out of the decision if the girl decides to keep it. Paper abortions they call it.

3) More respect needs to be given to people who choose to adopt or choose to keep their baby. I am very much in support of those girls who are truly pro-choice. However, many women I have met (especially in Boston) are pro-abortion, and it's quite sad. I have met many truly pro-choice women as well, and they are incredibly fair in their perspectives -- they'd go to a rally for abortion rights, but they'd also go to a rally for adoption. They'd support subsidization of abortions, but also support the Juno bill.

4) ABSOLUTELY NO ONE should have to have any involvement financially with abortions if they believe it is murder. I am 100% for the libertarian perspective on abortion. If a girl wants an abortion, she better pay for it herself, with absolutely no government funds -- and no "technicalities" either. There are enough pro-abortion people out there, that if government got out of the abortion debate all-together and made these people stop spending money on rallies and other things, they could instead subsidize women's abortions with their fund-raising. It'd be a win-win for them.
 

Cerpin Taxt

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
11,940
542
126
SYou shouldn't be able to force her to abort, she shouldn't be able to force you to lose a child (or potential child) either.
You can't have it both ways. The same principles which protect a woman from being forced to terminate her pregnancy also entitle her to terminate at her own discretion.

But go ahead and keep ignoring all of my posts, you cancerous asshole.
 

LumbergTech

Diamond Member
Sep 15, 2005
3,622
1
0
I completely agree on that too.

But women.... you think you know them when you get married, a number of years later you know so much more that you didn't know then, for you those was good things, for me... not so much...

its true for everyone

it is very difficult to give a true picture of oneself because people dont even understand themselves when they are younger

even as you get older you continue to learn (unless you actively live in denial)
 

JulesMaximus

No Lifer
Jul 3, 2003
74,534
911
126
It's not forcing if she chose to get pregnant, it was her choice to have sex in the first place.

What do you mean chose to get pregnant? It was a choice to have unprotected sex and both of them made the choice. However, only one of them is pregnant and it is the one who is pregnant who gets to decide what she wants to do with it. Don't like it? Then don't have unprotected sex with strangers.

Why you think a man should have any business saying whether she keeps it or not is beyond me. If he can tell her he wants the baby then how is that any different than him telling her to abort it? It is the SAME THING.
 

Kadarin

Lifer
Nov 23, 2001
44,296
15
81
It's not forcing if she chose to get pregnant, it was her choice to have sex in the first place.

You see, this is what the whole debate is actually about. Right wing Christian people don't really care about fetuses, if they did then it would absolutely not be acceptable for fertility treatments to create extra fetuses that then die. If they did they wouldn't make exceptions for cases of rape or incest, because the "sanctity of life" ranks higher than that. It's really about punishing women for engaging in "immoral" sexual behavior by forcing them to carry a baby to term and raise it (or give it up for adoption). Sex, to these people, must have consequences, because it isn't acceptable or moral for women to have sex without them.

Sugar coat it all you want, talk about how it's the sanctity of life all you want, but you're full of shit if you do.
 

Cerpin Taxt

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
11,940
542
126
You see, this is what the whole debate is actually about. Right wing Christian people don't really care about fetuses, if they did then it would absolutely not be acceptable for fertility treatments to create extra fetuses that then die. It's really about punishing women for engaging in "immoral" sexual behavior by forcing them to carry a baby to term and raise it (or give it up for adoption). Sex, to these people, must have consequences, because it isn't acceptable or moral for women to have sex without them.

Sugar coat it all you want, talk about how it's the sanctity of life all you want, but you're full of shit if you do.

One thousand times, this.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,225
5,801
126
You see, this is what the whole debate is actually about. Right wing Christian people don't really care about fetuses, if they did then it would absolutely not be acceptable for fertility treatments to create extra fetuses that then die. If they did they wouldn't make exceptions for cases of rape or incest, because the "sanctity of life" ranks higher than that. It's really about punishing women for engaging in "immoral" sexual behavior by forcing them to carry a baby to term and raise it (or give it up for adoption). Sex, to these people, must have consequences, because it isn't acceptable or moral for women to have sex without them.

Sugar coat it all you want, talk about how it's the sanctity of life all you want, but you're full of shit if you do.

Indeed.
 
Jun 26, 2007
11,925
2
0
You see, this is what the whole debate is actually about. Right wing Christian people don't really care about fetuses, if they did then it would absolutely not be acceptable for fertility treatments to create extra fetuses that then die. If they did they wouldn't make exceptions for cases of rape or incest, because the "sanctity of life" ranks higher than that. It's really about punishing women for engaging in "immoral" sexual behavior by forcing them to carry a baby to term and raise it (or give it up for adoption). Sex, to these people, must have consequences, because it isn't acceptable or moral for women to have sex without them.

Sugar coat it all you want, talk about how it's the sanctity of life all you want, but you're full of shit if you do.

Holy hell YES!

You're a smart motherfucker Kadarin, cheers!
 
Jun 26, 2007
11,925
2
0
What do you mean chose to get pregnant? It was a choice to have unprotected sex and both of them made the choice. However, only one of them is pregnant and it is the one who is pregnant who gets to decide what she wants to do with it. Don't like it? Then don't have unprotected sex with strangers.

Why you think a man should have any business saying whether she keeps it or not is beyond me. If he can tell her he wants the baby then how is that any different than him telling her to abort it? It is the SAME THING.

This too!

It's quite nice to know that there are good people in this world.
 
Jun 26, 2007
11,925
2
0
The whole "her body" argument is stupid. The kid's body is NOT her body.

Of course that would be stupid, if you don't shove a kid up her vagina then it won't have anything to do with her body and if you'd do that i think she should have the right to remove the kid, if for no other reason than that he'd start smelling eventually.

Now a fetus is a parasite living inside the womans body, before week 25 it's absolutely not more human life than a gamete, a cancerous cell or one of your spermies...

It has no higher brain function, in fact, if a man was born and hospitalised with the same amount of cerebral cortex brain activity they'd call him dead, harvest his organs (if they can).

For some reason you think that a fetus is MORE human and MORE alive than you or me? That it's special in a way that only applies to fetuses and not born humans, not even the mother?

You are either ignorant or stupid, take your pick.
 

preCRT

Platinum Member
Apr 12, 2000
2,340
123
106
Glad to see some men with brains in this thread, three of who are quite noticeable.

For the neanderthals, go crawl back under your rocks.
 

PieIsAwesome

Diamond Member
Feb 11, 2007
4,054
1
0
This. Every-time, I'm not a religious person but I do think that life deserves respect, you can't just suck it out and chuck it away, unless the health of the mother or child are at risk.

Why? There is plenty of completely insignificant and worthless life out there. Why should we give it "respect" just because its alive? Simply being alive doesn't necessarily give something more value than an inanimate object. My skin cells are alive, but I certainly don't shed a tear when one dies. And the bacteria that made me sick the other day, they can go fuck themselves.
 

HAL9000

Lifer
Oct 17, 2010
22,021
3
76
You can't have it both ways. The same principles which protect a woman from being forced to terminate her pregnancy also entitle her to terminate at her own discretion.

But go ahead and keep ignoring all of my posts, you cancerous asshole.

Sorry your on my ignore list, can't remember why. I don't think she should be forced to terminate, I also don't think that the father should be able to force her to either.

What do you mean chose to get pregnant? It was a choice to have unprotected sex and both of them made the choice. However, only one of them is pregnant and it is the one who is pregnant who gets to decide what she wants to do with it. Don't like it? Then don't have unprotected sex with strangers.

Why you think a man should have any business saying whether she keeps it or not is beyond me. If he can tell her he wants the baby then how is that any different than him telling her to abort it? It is the SAME THING.

Because you chose to have sex, that's a choice, theres a risk you could get preganant, it's a risk everyone knows, if you aren't prepared to put up with the result, don't do it... The woman chose to take the risk, she should accept the consequences, the father should not be forced to either lose a child, and neither should she be forced to abort.

You see, this is what the whole debate is actually about. Right wing Christian people don't really care about fetuses, if they did then it would absolutely not be acceptable for fertility treatments to create extra fetuses that then die. If they did they wouldn't make exceptions for cases of rape or incest, because the "sanctity of life" ranks higher than that. It's really about punishing women for engaging in "immoral" sexual behavior by forcing them to carry a baby to term and raise it (or give it up for adoption). Sex, to these people, must have consequences, because it isn't acceptable or moral for women to have sex without them.

Sugar coat it all you want, talk about how it's the sanctity of life all you want, but you're full of shit if you do.

I see your'e point, but I don't agree with the sanctity of life. Life isn't sacred, but it should be treated with respect and consideration.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.