Abortion

[Brick-top]

This thread isn't mainly about whether it's right or wrong. This is more about the people who argue about it.

Pro-lifers
Pro-lifers say that's It's muder and no one has a right to take a life. Yet what about the 158,000 people that die everyday? 3000 people die just going to work, that's like a 9/11 attack on a daily basis. So where's your bleeding heart for them? There are thousands of Children that need are in orphanages and group homes that go on top of the enourmous death rate. Unless you start caring about the kids and people that are dying now you have no right to say anything.

Pro-choicers
Usually these people say that it's the womans choice to do whatever she wants with her body. So why will I get arrested if I fail to commit suicide or severe off my own arm? It's my body so I have the right do whatever I want with it, right? Going by this logic I have the right to tear chucks out of my own face and get away with it. I dont think the government will agree.

Basically look at this. There's nothing either of you can do.

What can anyone do? Contraception. The more contraception the less abortions that will be performed and it's a win, win. The pro-choicers get their abotions, and the pro-lifers have less abortions and then we can live in bliss with safer sex.

Now you can put down the toys, stop bickering and try to get something productive done instead of pissing and moaning at each other like children.

Now let's have unprotected sex with many different partners while taking nurotic drugs. YAY!

[Al6200]

At 4/15/08 04:17 PM, Brick-top wrote: This thread isn't mainly about whether it's right or wrong. This is more about the people who argue about it.

Okay.

Pro-lifers
Pro-lifers say that's It's muder and no one has a right to take a life. Yet what about the 158,000 people that die everyday? 3000 people die just going to work, that's like a 9/11 attack on a daily basis. So where's your bleeding heart for them?

And this means we should just ignore a smaller number. If I stabbed you, and the judge said "Killing is wrong", would it make any sense for me to say "What about all the dying kids in Africa? Where's your bleeding heart for them?" Would that make any sense as a defense? Of course not.

I fail to see how elderly people dying everyday at all effects

There are thousands of Children that need are in orphanages and group homes that go on top of the enourmous death rate. Unless you start caring about the kids and people that are dying now you have no right to say anything.

Pro-choicers
Usually these people say that it's the womans choice to do whatever she wants with her body. So why will I get arrested if I fail to commit suicide or severe off my own arm? It's my body so I have the right do whatever I want with it, right? Going by this logic I have the right to tear chucks out of my own face and get away with it. I dont think the government will agree.

Right, but it's about her killing the fetus in her body - not her doing anything to her own body.

Basically look at this. There's nothing either of you can do.

Except increase the distribution of contraception and discourage abortion?

What can anyone do? Contraception. The more contraception the less abortions that will be performed and it's a win, win. The pro-choicers get their abotions, and the pro-lifers have less abortions and then we can live in bliss with safer sex.

Good point. I wish more Pro-Life people would agree with this position.

Now you can put down the toys, stop bickering and try to get something productive done instead of pissing and moaning at each other like children.

I agree 100%. Unfortunately abortion has become a wedge issue in American politics, not something that we work together to solve.

Now let's have unprotected sex with many different partners while taking nurotic drugs. YAY!

Protected.

[MidnightEscapeArtist]

At 4/15/08 04:17 PM, Brick-top wrote: This thread isn't mainly about whether it's right or wrong. This is more about the people who argue about it.

Pro-lifers
Pro-lifers say that's It's muder and no one has a right to take a life. Yet what about the 158,000 people that die everyday? 3000 people die just going to work, that's like a 9/11 attack on a daily basis. So where's your bleeding heart for them? There are thousands of Children that need are in orphanages and group homes that go on top of the enourmous death rate. Unless you start caring about the kids and people that are dying now you have no right to say anything.

Because a tragedy exists, does not mean that some are not preventable. If you're of the opinion abortion is murder, you would try to stop it. Just like if you knew about 9/11 before it happened, you would try to stop them from happening.

Because this is about the people that argue each side, I'll keep it that way.

Think of every abortion as a mini-9/11 happening several times a day that you know about in advance. That's how people strongly pro-life feel.

Pro-choicers
Usually these people say that it's the womans choice to do whatever she wants with her body. So why will I get arrested if I fail to commit suicide or severe off my own arm? It's my body so I have the right do whatever I want with it, right? Going by this logic I have the right to tear chucks out of my own face and get away with it. I dont think the government will agree.

You're wrong. It's not illegal to commit suicide. It's irrational. Because life is considered sacred, you are encouraged not to kill yourself, especially if you try to do so, and don't succeed.

It's illegal to commit suicide in a way that endangers others, but that's a different story.

Basically look at this. There's nothing either of you can do.

Except argue about it. Full circle back to what actually happens.

What can anyone do? Contraception. The more contraception the less abortions that will be performed and it's a win, win. The pro-choicers get their abotions, and the pro-lifers have less abortions and then we can live in bliss with safer sex.

Now you're being rational, something people who feel strongly aren't good at :)

Now you can put down the toys, stop bickering and try to get something productive done instead of pissing and moaning at each other like children.

This will never stop happening unfortunately.

I believe it's a choice though. Death is only a tragedy because it can be observed. If you died and no one existed to witness your death, it wouldn't be a good or bad thing.

To you, before you died, you might think it was a bad thing, but that would mean you're developed enough to think it's a bad thing, which isn't true for a fetus.

Ergo, the position that is wrong comes from giving too much false-empathy to a creature that will never be self-aware, and who is not known. The mere potential is not enough to take someone's choice away. (The fetus' choice is irrelevent: they have no opinion on the subject because they aren't aware of themselves.)

[alchemylord]

There are also some pro-lifers that feel any release of semen anywhere but a woman's vagina is considered an abortion so. So Even contraceptives wouldn't work.

[Al6200]

At 4/15/08 07:09 PM, alchemylord wrote: There are also some pro-lifers that feel any release of semen anywhere but a woman's vagina is considered an abortion so. So Even contraceptives wouldn't work.

Is there any credible organization (i.e. not parody) that extends personhood to semen?

My understanding of the scientific evidence supports the conclusion that the fetus should be granted personhood at some period before it is born.

[Christopherr]

At 4/15/08 07:42 PM, Al6200 wrote: Is there any credible organization (i.e. not parody) that extends personhood to semen?

Ehhh, no. Even if you do ejaculate into vaginas all the time, you're killing most of the sperms anyways.

My understanding of the scientific evidence supports the conclusion that the fetus should be granted personhood at some period before it is born.

It definitely should, because a fetus exhibits high levels of brain activity long before it is born.

Fetuses, although they are not connected to the mother's nervous system in any way, can exhibit movement. People write this off as reflex arc, which would explain the movement, but is improbable. The umbilical cord feeds and pumps blood, and that is all.

[GuitarSmuggler]

Please refrain from posting spam in the forums. If you cannot think of any particular subject to discuss, read other peoples threads and post thoughtful replies. Any message that serves no purpose, or breaks forum rules, is considered spam.

I would like to remind ALL posters that any posts on a spam thread is also spam.

Please read the Code of Conduct, and the Forum Specific Rules, before you continue to use the forums.

[Garage]

I agree.

[GuitarSmuggler]

At 4/15/08 09:17 PM, snyperscope wrote: I agree.

I can do that too.

[Al6200]

At 4/15/08 08:33 PM, Christopherr wrote:

At 4/15/08 07:42 PM, Al6200 wrote: Is there any credible organization (i.e. not parody) that extends personhood to semen?

Ehhh, no. Even if you do ejaculate into vaginas all the time, you're killing most of the sperms anyways.

Yeah, you'd have to be pretty darn stupid to apply personhood to sperm.

My understanding of the scientific evidence supports the conclusion that the fetus should be granted personhood at some period before it is born.

It definitely should, because a fetus exhibits high levels of brain activity long before it is born.

Fetuses, although they are not connected to the mother's nervous system in any way, can exhibit movement. People write this off as reflex arc, which would explain the movement, but is improbable. The umbilical cord feeds and pumps blood, and that is all.

A fetus could have movement without being conscious. If you've ever crushed spiders in a tent (I'm not a monster, they're just really annoying) you'll notice that their legs will kick for even a minute after they're removed from the body. Clearly, a spiders cut off leg isn't conscious (it doesn't even have a brain), but it still can kick and jolt. More disturbing, the same thing would happen if you cut up a human.

The basis of fetal personhood isn't from kicking or jolts, it's from the study of brain structure and waves - both of which are present about midway through the first trimester.

[Christopherr]

At 4/15/08 09:20 PM, Al6200 wrote: A fetus could have movement without being conscious. If you've ever crushed spiders in a tent (I'm not a monster, they're just really annoying) you'll notice that their legs will kick for even a minute after they're removed from the body. Clearly, a spiders cut off leg isn't conscious (it doesn't even have a brain), but it still can kick and jolt. More disturbing, the same thing would happen if you cut up a human.
The basis of fetal personhood isn't from kicking or jolts, it's from the study of brain structure and waves - both of which are present about midway through the first trimester.

Yes, but the movement of a fetus just isn't a reflex arc. That was my point. The movement of the fetus is often accompanied by brain waves, so it would be wiser to assume that the fetus's brain was sending signals to the muscles.

[MidnightEscapeArtist]

At 4/15/08 09:20 PM, Al6200 wrote: The basis of fetal personhood isn't from kicking or jolts, it's from the study of brain structure and waves - both of which are present about midway through the first trimester.

I notice how the opinion on personhood varies from person to person drastically. Your answer doesn't match mine, but is a strong one nonetheless. It speaks of life as though it were sacred - and I suppose it should be considered that way.

I operate more on the golden rule. Do what you would have done to yourself. Would I have had an abortion conducted on myself?

The immediate cling-to-life answer is yes, but it's not rational. For an accurate comparison to be made, I see it like this:

If I'd never been born I'd never have known I wanted to be alive. Because of that, if someone had decided to abort me, I would never have been concerned about it. Therefore, rationally, I wouldn't mind if someone did it to me, simply because I wouldn't have minded.

Therefore, choice. All the other arguments seem to be either irrational or religious, and I have little patience for the latter, though respect for the former.

[MidnightEscapeArtist]

At 4/15/08 09:35 PM, MidnightEscapeArtist wrote: The immediate cling-to-life answer is yes...

Oops, that's meant to be 'no'. :X

Hahahaha.

[Brick-top]

At 4/15/08 09:04 PM, GuitarSmuggler wrote: Please refrain from posting spam in the forums.

Spam? Well well, looks like the thread is still here so it is you sir who should revise the rules.

[Memorize]

Step 1: Sterilize adult women who receive abortions without good cause.

Abortion is good for only 1 thing: It prevents stupid people from raising stupid children. The only thing that would make it better is for stupid people to be prevented from having any children at all.

Step 2: Wait.

Obviously because of such restrictions, some of these sad women will try to hurt themselves. Maybe even wind up dead because of their own stupidity by attacking the fetus still inside their own bodies. Good. It just means more and better progress.

What's better then prevented a stupid person from raising stupid kids? To stop them from having any kids. What's better than that? For them not to exist to spread their stupidity to people living today.

After all, they're a plague. A contribution to the complete lack of social society, leading to bail-outs and inefficiency.

[svenisgod]

At 4/16/08 04:47 AM, Memorize wrote: Step 1: Sterilize adult women who receive abortions without good cause.

Abortion is good for only 1 thing: It prevents stupid people from raising stupid children. The only thing that would make it better is for stupid people to be prevented from having any children at all.

What's better then prevented a stupid person from raising stupid kids? To stop them from having any kids. What's better than that? For them not to exist to spread their stupidity to people living today.

QFT oh god this is so true

but some really anal people are also against some contraceptions like the pill because it kills the sperm oh teh noes!

[SadisticMonkey]

Because even condoms work 100% of the time.

[Bennyboymck]

It's murder

ADOPT easy!

[morefngdbs]

At 4/16/08 05:56 AM, SadisticMonkey wrote: Because even condoms work 100% of the time.

;
unless they break...that is why I have 2 daughters.

[SteveGuzzi]

contraception

Having sex with a condom on is like eating a juicy steak with your tongue wrapped in a balloon.

Spermicidal lubricants are the way to go.

[EliteGamer]

You can't give your opinion on something you haven't tried yet. Get an abortion and then give your opinion.

[Slizor]

My understanding of the scientific evidence supports the conclusion that the fetus should be granted personhood at some period before it is born.

Sorry, but the "scientific evidence" will depend on your definition of personhood. Anyone want to sort out a definition of a person that includes a fetus, but (using the same criteria that is not based on arbitrary discrimination between species) not include a dolphin? Remember that pesonhood is a moral attribute, not a scientific or properly defined attribute.

[Memorize]

At 4/16/08 11:52 AM, Slizor wrote:

Sorry, but the "scientific evidence" will depend on your definition of personhood. Anyone want to sort out a definition of a person that includes a fetus, but (using the same criteria that is not based on arbitrary discrimination between species) not include a dolphin? Remember that pesonhood is a moral attribute, not a scientific or properly defined attribute.

Considering:

-That a person can be charged with double homocide for murdering a pregnant woman, no matter the age of the fetus

-That the same feminists who fought for the "right to choose" under 'any circumstance' also call the abortion of a fetus based upon gender as "Apalling", and that it's 'not a good reason'

Then how does "Science" really apply?

Get in an abortion argument long enough with someone who is pro-choice, eventually they'll simply say "It's not up to science whether it's a person, it's up to the woman".

Science means nothing in the abortion issue. It has everything to do with human selfishness.

[KeithHybrid]

My view on abortion:

It shouldn't be used as a quick-solution to an unwanted pregnancy, since that will just make women think that its okay to have promiscuious sex. However, there are some circumstances in which I see abortion being okay, such as when a pregnancy threatens the life of the woman.

[Brick-top]

At 4/16/08 10:12 AM, EliteGamer wrote: You can't give your opinion on something you haven't tried yet. Get an abortion and then give your opinion.

Age/Gender: 15, Male

Neither do you sonny.

[TrueDemocrat]

Sex-selective abortion is a fundamental right that has opened the gate of equality for millions of women in China and India.

[SmilezRoyale]

Contraception in most 1st world countries is an easily accessible and fairly cheap. And honestly if you can't afford them then you really don't have enough money to be having sex in the first place.

[That sounds crazy [And somewhat elitist, poor people can't have sex] , but i can imagine the only people who cannot afford them are individuals who should SERIOUSLY be putting their mind on more important and pressing matters; money. In the same way that kids who are failing in school should probably not be taking sports, if it distracts them from what they need to be working on]

In reality, the effectiveness of contraception becomes diminished when they are not used properly.

http://www.contraceptivetechnology.org/t able.html

The highest values being in the 30 percentile, and the lowest being 3 roughly, i exclude no methods because that's not contraception at all]

That might seem like very little, but consider the number of times that the average westerner is engaging in sex.... Also notice the big difference between using something in the typical fashion and using it perfectly [perfectly, or responsibly]

The statistics lead me to beleive that most of these abortions are created because people are simply irresponsible...

Self responsibility and accountability are the only things that are going to bring abortion rates to the bare minimum. [Which should definitely be lower than the shameful peak at 29.9 million, and the current level at 19 million.]

Also, and quite clearly, education has helped bring these down by 10 million. And if it stops the ignorance, i don't care if people have sex. [of course, nothing can save them from contracting aids, and dying a horrible miserable death :D ]

I also hold, that in my opinion, individuals who are most responsible to engage in sex are the ones who, ironically, but not surprisingly, abstain from it.

[Christopherr]

At 4/16/08 10:12 AM, EliteGamer wrote: You can't give your opinion on something you haven't tried yet. Get an abortion and then give your opinion.

I've never murdered someone, so therefore my opinion on murder is invalid.

I've never driven a race car, so therefore my opinion on the safety of race cars is invalid.

I've never committed an act of robbery, so therefore my opinion on robbery is invalid.

Am I doing it right?

[Al6200]

At 4/16/08 09:51 PM, Christopherr wrote:

At 4/16/08 10:12 AM, EliteGamer wrote: You can't give your opinion on something you haven't tried yet. Get an abortion and then give your opinion.

I've never murdered someone, so therefore my opinion on murder is invalid.

I've never driven a race car, so therefore my opinion on the safety of race cars is invalid.

I've never committed an act of robbery, so therefore my opinion on robbery is invalid.

Am I doing it right?

You have to be drunk to know the chemical properties of alcohol.

Seriously, do people even think before they hit the post button (not you, EliteGamer) or do they just make a random accusation and assume it holds water?

[SadisticMonkey]

At 4/16/08 08:41 AM, morefngdbs wrote: unless they break...

That was the point of my post...