Would you have an abortion? (1 Viewer)

[braad]

oh, and does 'pro-choice' automatically mean they'd abort?

i thought it meant they want to be able to have that choice if possible. But that doesnt mean they'd automatically abort

 

[azzie]

just a few things to think about... you loose millions of cells from your body every single day. when you fall pregnant, you basically have a bunch of cells in your uterus which don't resemble anything like a child. literally, its just a bunch of cells. it is only in the 8th week of pregancy that these cells become medically classified as a fetus. thus if we are arguing about a foetus, then we take it as the stage of pregnancy after eight weeks, meaning that abortions before this time are legitimate.
also, a woman has the right to say what she wants done with her body. if she doesnt want to have the child, whos right is it to tell her that she cant? if there are complications with the pregnancy, imagine the woman being unable to make the choice to terminate the pregnancy? it might cost her her life.

 

[glycerine]

oh but thats soooooo selfish, imagine putting your own life above that of an unborn, undeveloped child you don't even necessarily want or have the physical/emotional/mental/finanical capacity to deal with

i see 'pro-choice' as just that, for the right to CHOOSE. i know plenty of pro-choice women who've become inadvertadely pregnant and have kept the child

 

[azzie]

if you've heard of an ectopic pregnancy, you might know about the risks to the life of the mother and the child. what is the use of a mother and her child dying when she could have an abortion? there is no way that you could justify that.

and as for choosing to have a kid or not on the basis of the mental or physical incapacity of the child due to some impairment... i have a cousin who is 11. he was born with a mental disorder in which his nerves cannot communicate well with the brain. he cannot speak, walk, or care for himself. when he has to go to the bathroom, eat, go to bed... from the moment he wakes up he has to be cared for. on top of that he has about 20 epileptic attacks a day and is in basically constant pain. think about that kinda scenario.

 

[Porndwarf]

The wheels on the Bus go round and round, round and round, round and round. The wheels on the bus go round and round, allll dayyyyy longggggg.

 

[Ranger Stacie]

Because in the first trimester, the fetus is not yet a human being - it is a potential human being. It is not the same as killing a person. And in that siutation, the child can be handed to someone else. You can't hand a pregnancy to someone else.

Its still alive. I believe all this crap about 'but it isnt a human being' is simply an excuse for women who have (or would) have abortions to feel about the fact that they have actually killed, not only something alive but their OWN CHILD.

and azzie, when I say I am against abortions I am referring to 'normal' pregnancies, not ectopic etc..

also I hardly think that most women would classify their pregnancy as 'a bunch of cells'--the ones that would, would be the ones using this as an easy way out

 

[sparkl3z]

the fetus, it is a cell, therefore it is alive. in the first trimester the fetus is not a potential human being, it has DNA, the genetic make-up from it's parents, therefore it IS a human being.

 

[ogmzergrush]

and azzie, when I say I am against abortions I am referring to 'normal' pregnancies, not ectopic etc..

So murder is ok sometimes? Seems a bit selfish to me, putting the wellbeing of a fully developed normal person ahead of a bunch of gradually forming cells, regardless of the abnormality of the pregnancy.

 

[ur_inner_child]

So murder is ok sometimes? Seems a bit selfish to me, putting the wellbeing of a fully developed normal person ahead of a bunch of gradually forming cells, regardless of the abnormality of the pregnancy.

i quite agree with this. how anti-abortionists can give exceptions such as rape, or disease. what is it about these exceptions make this okay? does this not contradict the ground basis of anti-abortionists' theology/philosophy? the concept of it seriously bothers me. i repeat, the concept.

on the otherhand, i much rather an anti-abortionist who can give exceptions than one who does not.

 

[Ranger Stacie]

So murder is ok sometimes? Seems a bit selfish to me, putting the wellbeing of a fully developed normal person ahead of a bunch of gradually forming cells, regardless of the abnormality of the pregnancy.

if it is posing a huge health risk to the mother or the child, then it is likely one or both wont survive anyway..

besides that, no, i don't see how it is 'selfish' to put the well-being of a mother before her child. in fact i think its selfish not to.

 

[azzie]

im just going to throw something that might sound really stupid out there but i think its a valid point, in a super simplistic sense.
we all have different values and beliefs, we come from different societies and religions, have different experiences and hold different things to be true. if you're anti-abortion, then that's you're thing, so's being pro-choice. its like people won't ban a religion because they think its wrong or selfish or stupid, we hold it as a choice that an individual can make because of their convictions or family belief or experiences or whatever.
now, if a woman is carrying a child which she doesnt wish to keep, or if she's got medical issues or whatever, who's to take the choice to have an abortion away from her? what right do people have to tell her what she's doing is totally wrong when its only totally wrong for them and not for her? it should be the informed choice of a woman who recieves all the facts, has a bit of time to herself to think it over and then is free to carry on with whatever course of action she chooses.
there was a shown on SBS last night, on Cutting Edge called "The Last Abortion Clinic", about the restrictive and most of the time restrictive and nonsensical laws that some US states are bringing in to assist in closing down abortion clinics and making access to such clinics not only uncomfortable but nearly impossible. the ammont of harassment that these poor women cop from those loopy Christian groups who yell out things like "i want to live mamma!" is disgusting. the women who are coming into these clinics are mostly those who cannot afford to have another child, as well as the victims of rape, teen pregancy and those women whos health is at risk because of their pregnancy. what does it matter to the state if these women, after being WELL informed by doctors and nurses, choose to have an abortion? as well as this, those women who already have children or have financial issues and cannot have a child have to be supported by the government, which drains more resources to the area of such assistance payments, as well as reducing the quality of life and education for the children, as well as the quality of life of the family unit.
theres another thing to think about. if abortion was made illigal, a black market would appear as the demand wouldnt go away. when this starts, you are not only terminating a foetus, there is a large risk of the mother contracting debilitating diseases or dying. outlawing abortion would not stop the practice, there is no way it could. so isnt it better for a woman to go to a clinic with a qualified doctor and staff, have all the information, help and support, given all her options and then being able to make that choice, and if needs be, given a safe abortion by a doctor trained in the procedure?

 

[YBK]

What you said applies to sperm as well. Like I said before, many people are just nitpicking. Besides, the animals that we consume were also living at one stage. What then gives us the right to take away its life just "because we can't connect with it at an emotional level?"

Animals are not intellectual as us. Sperm is not the same as a fertilized egg, in that the sperm has not been fertilized (duh! ). Sperm alone has no way of feeling any emotion, because it is not living. Sperm needs the female's egg.

 

[sparkl3z]

Animals are not intellectual as us. Sperm is not the same as a fertilized egg, in that the sperm has not been fertilized (duh! ). Sperm alone has no way of feeling any emotion, because it is not living. Sperm needs the female's egg.

correction: sperm is living. it just can die fast if there is no fertilization.

 

[Benny1103]

Animals are not intellectual as us. Sperm is not the same as a fertilized egg, in that the sperm has not been fertilized (duh! ). Sperm alone has no way of feeling any emotion, because it is not living. Sperm needs the female's egg.

Now you're just throwing together a series of a unrelated 'facts' in order to support your argument. If you had read my post, instead of trying to butcher it, you would've realised that the main point is that there is a huge difference between humans and an egg. Clearly, the implication of your post is that sperm are so different to eggs that there simply is no comparison between them both physically and 'emtionally.' The same applied to eggs and humans - there is no comparison.

 

[ur_inner_child]

Animals are not intellectual as us. Sperm is not the same as a fertilized egg, in that the sperm has not been fertilized (duh! ). Sperm alone has no way of feeling any emotion, because it is not living. Sperm needs the female's egg.

what?

am i misunderstanding something here?

murder is bad only when the victim is intellectual?


there is a massive flaw in your argument.

 

[YBK]

what?

am i misunderstanding something here?

murder is bad only when the victim is intellectual?


there is a massive flaw in your argument.

I don't see your argument as having any more of a base than mine.

Killing animals for food is irrelivant to this debate. That is called the survival of the fittest; and us, being the most intellectual species, are indeed the fittest.

Lets go back to the very essense of life, reproduction. Killing other species for our benifit (food ect.) is completely different to killing our OWN species. Not any other species will deliberatly kill its own child - you are not meant to terminate your own pregnancy. Now if your body had some button on it that said, "kill pregnancy" then I couldn't argue, but you are going out of your way to take the child's life. You are forgeting the basic rule of why we are here; to keep our species alive through the process of reproduction.

 

[Ranger Stacie]

now, if a woman is carrying a child which she doesnt wish to keep,

this is the instance i believe is totally immoral.

theres another thing to think about. if abortion was made illigal, a black market would appear as the demand wouldnt go away. when this starts, you are not only terminating a foetus, there is a large risk of the mother contracting debilitating diseases or dying. outlawing abortion would not stop the practice, there is no way it could. so isnt it better for a woman to go to a clinic with a qualified doctor and staff, have all the information, help and support, given all her options and then being able to make that choice, and if needs be, given a safe abortion by a doctor trained in the procedure?

in my opinion if a woman gets pregnant and says 'whoops! i didnt mean to do that! my bad!' and then decides to undergo a black market abortion- that is her own stupid fault, for being stupid enough to go to such an abortionist in the first place.

if a woman is even in the position of killing her own kid, based on the fact that she just decided she doesent want it- why does she even deserve information, help and support? yes it is her body- but its not only her body anymore, its also her child as well. she is in that position through her own actions

 

[Lundy]

Lets go back to the very essense of life, reproduction. Killing other species for our benifit (food ect.) is completely different to killing our OWN species. Not any other species will deliberatly kill its own child.

Incorrect. Infantcide has been found to be practiced by many species.

 

[YBK]

Incorrect. Infantcide has been found to be practiced by many species.

Probably a logical reason behind that.

Care to provide a link?

 

[sparkl3z]

snakes do eat their own eggs from time to time, it has been seen in fish also.