Pro-life versus Pro-Choice

[Titanicbuff 1,262]

Heres one from my home state- State representative Gordon Klingenschmitt ®-Colorado Springs made a real nasty response after a woman cut a pregnant woman open and "stole" the unborn child. He said that it was "Gods punishment for the US not protecting the rights of unborn children and that a woman will have her unborn child cut from her womb until the US government protects unborn children."  He has a televangelist show. And people wonder why I don't go to church.

[Ocram's Razr 964]

Well, the same laws that prevent women or doctors from being charged for any crimes for aborting a fetus would logically prevent the non-consensual abortion from being considered murder. However, it was still a violent crime against the pregnant woman so the perpetrator should still be charged with something.

 

--Ocram

[BLANKBLANK 4,414]

I guess a woman can always orphan the baby if she feels that bad about it. Abortion only makes sense if the fetus is dead or not viable, or the mother's life is in serious danger.

[Titanicbuff 1,262]

The woman is not being charged with any murder charges. The child was alive for a little bit, yet shes getting away with that one.

[Duke87 1,070]

Well, the same laws that prevent women or doctors from being charged for any crimes for aborting a fetus would logically prevent the non-consensual abortion from being considered murder.

 

In terms of morals? Not necessarily, although it is an open philosophical question. Does physician assisted suicide count as murder? If not then there is one other case where consent makes the difference between murder and not.

 

In terms of laws? Nah, lots of states explicitly consider it murder if you kill an unborn child against its mother's wishes. There was a contentious case about 10 years ago or so where someone killed a pregnant woman and it caused a stir because the perp was charged with two counts of murder.

 

 

Regardless, though, calling a brutal violent crime "god's punishment to us for failing to do such-and-such" is a disgusting insult to the victim's family. Why do we put people like that in office?

 

As for the woman not facing a murder charge, she's clearly coo coo for cocoa puffs. I daresay she needs a mental hospital more than a prison.

[Ocram's Razr 964]

While I believe that consent plays a major role, physician assisted suicide is considered murder in some areas and is still considered manslaughter in most areas. That means if assisted suicide is illegal and abortion is legal, then the areas with such laws would consider that heinous crime something other than murder. Morals, ethics, and legality all have differences and sometimes the ethical thing, the legal thing, and the "moral" (following an ancient set of morals written down in a holy book a long time ago) thing could all be different.

 

--Ocram

[Larks2242 251]

The woman is not being charged with any murder charges. The child was alive for a little bit, yet shes getting away with that one.

 

Casey Anthony all over again....Abortion is a crime and should be classified as such, There is a serious disconnect thinking absolute freedom over body constitutes the right to commit what should be a felony.

[Meg 368]

 

The woman is not being charged with any murder charges. The child was alive for a little bit, yet shes getting away with that one.

 

Casey Anthony all over again....Abortion is a crime and should be classified as such, There is a serious disconnect thinking absolute freedom over body constitutes the right to commit what should be a felony.

 

 

 

Don't we have a thread for this particular topic somewhere?   I can't find it.

[Titanicbuff 1,262]

 

 

The woman is not being charged with any murder charges. The child was alive for a little bit, yet shes getting away with that one.

 

Casey Anthony all over again....Abortion is a crime and should be classified as such, There is a serious disconnect thinking absolute freedom over body constitutes the right to commit what should be a felony.

 

 

 

Don't we have a thread for this particular topic somewhere?   I can't find it.

 

Shes being charged with unlawful abortion in the 1st degree-

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Abortion on demand is a matter of current ethos.  If society condones it as part of the greater good for the greatest number, no one can really argue to the contrary.  Personal mores are another matter.  If you personally don't support it but society in general does, that simply makes you a squeaky wheel who will succeed only in embarrassing yourself.

 

A woman who gets caught accidentally while engaging in unprotected consensual sex recreation has only herself to blame.  It should not be at the expense of society to fund her abortion, but up to her. 

 

Impoverished people often have only sex for entertainment, but it is a matter of education for them to practice safe sex.  On the other hand, there is little point in bringing a child into the world that cannot be or won't be supported.  The whole argument is moot in our society, but in more primitive societies this is a problem for that particular society.  I am generally against charities that want to save starving children in uncivilized places.  I really consider them to be an accidental result of the society's morals.  Human beings should not breed like rabbits.

[Larks2242 251]

A woman who gets caught accidentally while engaging in unprotected consensual sex recreation has only herself to blame.  It should not be at the expense of society to fund her abortion, but up to her. 

 

Where do we draw the line between a right of body VS A right for everyone to life? It isn't the child's fault the mother made stupid choices, In modern society we have to deal with the consequences of our actions, In the US it is pretty much universally known how babies are created.

 

 On the other hand, there is little point in bringing a child into the world that cannot be or won't be supported.  The whole argument is moot in our society, but in more primitive societies this is a problem for that particular society.  I am generally against charities that want to save starving children in uncivilized places.  I really consider them to be an accidental result of the society's morals.  Human beings should not breed like rabbits.

 

I agree that this is a complex situation, but again the child has done nothing to deserve the cards He/she is dealt, They deserve the have the same chance to live as everyone else.

 

While sadly in third world countries, they won't have the same quality of life, the same goes for people who were planned to be born as well.

 

The way I look at it is, having a child is only 6 months out of a persons life, A child's life can be 80+ years, There is no telling the the child could be another Bill Gates or change the world for the better.

 

There are limits to what freedom is, Absolute freedom stops when it involves interfering with someone else life.

 

 

 

 

The woman is not being charged with any murder charges. The child was alive for a little bit, yet shes getting away with that one.

 

Casey Anthony all over again....Abortion is a crime and should be classified as such, There is a serious disconnect thinking absolute freedom over body constitutes the right to commit what should be a felony.

 

 

 

Don't we have a thread for this particular topic somewhere?   I can't find it.

 

 

I don't ever remember seeing one.

[Munchiez 74]

 

A woman who gets caught accidentally while engaging in unprotected consensual sex recreation has only herself to blame.  It should not be at the expense of society to fund her abortion, but up to her. 

 

Where do we draw the line between a right of body VS A right for everyone to life? It isn't the child's fault the mother made stupid choices, In modern society we have to deal with the consequences of our actions, In the US it is pretty much universally known how babies are created.

 

 On the other hand, there is little point in bringing a child into the world that cannot be or won't be supported.  The whole argument is moot in our society, but in more primitive societies this is a problem for that particular society.  I am generally against charities that want to save starving children in uncivilized places.  I really consider them to be an accidental result of the society's morals.  Human beings should not breed like rabbits.

 

I agree that this is a complex situation, but again the child has done nothing to deserve the cards He/she is dealt, They deserve the have the same chance to live as everyone else.

 

While sadly in third world countries, they won't have the same quality of life, the same goes for people who were planned to be born as well.

 

The way I look at it is, having a child is only 6 months out of a persons life, A child's life can be 80+ years, There is no telling the the child could be another Bill Gates or change the world for the better.

 

There are limits to what freedom is, Absolute freedom stops when it involves interfering with someone else life.

 

 

 

 

The woman is not being charged with any murder charges. The child was alive for a little bit, yet shes getting away with that one.

 

Casey Anthony all over again....Abortion is a crime and should be classified as such, There is a serious disconnect thinking absolute freedom over body constitutes the right to commit what should be a felony.

 

 

 

Don't we have a thread for this particular topic somewhere?   I can't find it.

 

 

I don't ever remember seeing one.

 

Agree with Larks.

[Titanicbuff 1,262]

ok so why not become arab- those that think abortion should be illeagal would do better in an arab country. You guys are insane.

[NMUSpidey 3,956]

The way I look at it is, having a child is only 6 months out of a persons life, A child's life can be 80+ years, There is no telling the the child could be another Bill Gates or change the world for the better.

 

Having a child is a LOT more than 6 months of a person's life.  A woman will spend nine often agonizing months pregnant (morning sickness that never ends, all-encompassing fatigue, swollen legs and feet and the pain that comes with your ballooning belly, uncontrollable mood swings that you can see coming but can do nothing about, and then there's the endless list of worries and stresses that consume the rest of your willpower) before going through often excruciating birth and then dealing with postpartum depression (higher rates in those who get an epidural to brunt the pain of birth) in the ensuing months of quite literally nonstop caring for baby.  Postpartum depression may continue for upward of three to six months and baby care is literally around the clock for the first year or more depending on how soon you can wean them off of night feeding (a nightmare unto itself).  So yeah, you've got months and months of night feeding, mysterious crying for no discernible reason, diapers that need purchasing and changing, and if you can't produce breast milk you'll have to buy formula which, for 0-9 month old babies is very expensive.  Raising a child is a HUGE commitment that never ends and if you're not prepared can have disastrous results.  In a perfect world with perfect dissemination of information to everyone all the time, people would make the right choices concerning their reproductivity, but this isn't a perfect world and never will be.

 

I would NEVER recommend abortion and I do have a pretty negative view of it, but this goes WAY beyond "six months out of a persons life" [sic] and I am in no position to stand in judgment of women who do opt for that choice.

[LexusInfernus 908]

Where do we draw the line between a right of body VS A right for everyone to life? It isn't the child's fault the mother made stupid choices, In modern society we have to deal with the consequences of our actions, In the US it is pretty much universally known how babies are created.

 

I agree that this is a complex situation, but again the child has done nothing to deserve the cards He/she is dealt, They deserve the have the same chance to live as everyone else.

 

While sadly in third world countries, they won't have the same quality of life, the same goes for people who were planned to be born as well.

 

The way I look at it is, having a child is only 6 months out of a persons life, A child's life can be 80+ years, There is no telling the the child could be another Bill Gates or change the world for the better.

 

There are limits to what freedom is, Absolute freedom stops when it involves interfering with someone else life.

 

That first bit can be disputed, because thanks to Republican pushed abstention only sex ed programs, its clear that a lot of people don't have such a good idea of what happens when people have sex. The teen pregnancy rates and STD rates confirm it. 

 

And we are not talking about a person. We are talking about a clump of cells. As long as its inside the mother, its a parasite, not a person. Furthermore, not everyone who needs an abortion needs one because she was sexing around until one day she got some bad luck and got pregnant. There are plenty of people who have been raped and get pregnant, which Im sure you'll agree was not their choice, or there are people who took every measure not to get pregnant from sex but you know, accidents happen. Also, looping back to the bad sex ed in the US, a lot of people aren't properly educated on the various means of contraception that would prevent an unwanted pregnancy and therefor eliminate the need for an abortion. It seems to me that current Republican policy is to have people have sex in the unsafest way possible and then tell them its their own fault when they get pregnant. 

 

Also, a child does not take only 6 months out of a persons life. Unless you put the kid up for adoption, a child takes a minimum of 18 years of your life, as well as boatloads of money. For someone who is 28, has a degree, career, savings and is married and who has planned for a child, thats acceptable. For someone who is 16 and still in school, thats a virtual sentence to a life of poverty. So in that sense, aside from the 18 years in which the child is literally the mothers responsibility, there comes the rest of her life time of being trapped in poverty. Now thanks to those socioeconomic circumstances in which the child is forced to grow up, there is a statistically significant chance that the child will get involved in crime and has diminished opportunities to get ahead in life. You said one of them might be the next Einstein. Yes, altough statistically that chance is nihil, and on top of that, even if that child is technically capable of becoming the next Einstein, thanks to the socioeconomic situation in which he grows up, the chance of actually developing his skills to the point where he becomes Einstein is also nihil. So its pretty safe to say that society is not missing out on any Einsteins or other brilliant people if it allows women to abort unwanted babies. 

 

Of course, you could just say that those women should put their kids up for adoption. But does that solve the problem? If adoption becomes like the 'back up abortion' you basically encourage people to dump their kids with the state when they can't take care of their child. That would be more than 750.000 babies each year that the state must take care of, most of them for most of their life. Does that sound like a good idea? 

[Munchiez 74]

ok so why not become arab- those that think abortion should be illeagal would do better in an arab country. You guys are insane.

 

Wait, what? , That is a severe reality disconnect. I can't even understand how that makes sense to you. We would do better in an Arab country? That has nothing to do with what we are talking about. Besides, they don't value life there anyways, they believe that if they martyr their own kids they'll go to paradise.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

@Larks, Munchiez, et. al.

 

You say having a child is only six months out of a woman's life?  Neither of you are parents, clearly.  I suggest if you haven't played this game you shouldn't try to make the rules.  I have two adult children, and if you think having a child is a six month event, you are among the group that I refer to as unfit for parenthood.

 

Parenthood means seeing the child into adulthood, not just weaning them from the breast.  The ignorance around here is staggering.

[Munchiez 74]

@Larks, Munchiez, et. al.

 

You say having a child is only six months out of a woman's life?  Neither of you are parents, clearly.  I suggest if you haven't played this game you shouldn't try to make the rules.  I have two adult children, and if you think having a child is a six month event, you are among the group that I refer to as unfit for parenthood.

 

Parenthood means seeing the child into adulthood, not just weaning them from the breast.  The ignorance around here is staggering.

I didn't personally say that. It would be irresponsible for me to say that it's just a short term thing. Larks was saying that the process of having a child physically was around obviously 6-9 months, but their lives will have potential to go on for 80+. I don't see how you would classify me in your little book as "unfit for parenthood" Quite honestly, you don't even know me, so placing me into that group is silly. HOWEVER, you did say "If you think that having a child is a six month event" but I want to be clear that Larks and I weren't saying that. That's just the physical aspect of the birth, not the lifelong consequences. I believe there was a misunderstanding here.

[Meg 368]

To keep the American Politics thread from de-railing, we will give this topic it's own thread.

 

Remember:  Discuss the issues, not each other!

 

Several of you have already violated that rule.   Please discuss the issues, not each other from now on or your posts will be edited/deleted.  If misbehavior continues, the thread will be locked.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Good idea.  I am rather neutral on the issue of abortion.  I am, however, an advocate of safe sex when it comes to the inevitable use of it for recreation.  There are many contraceptive methods including the morning after pill.  Having unwanted children in our civilization is totally unacceptable.

 

Now, don't get me wrong, I am all for abortion if the child is the result of rape and the mother doesn't want to raise the child.

 

As for the impoverished, who are more likely to get into this situation and be unable to afford a remedy, a drive to end poverty in America is fine with me as long as it is understood that it is a never win situation.  Some people are just impossible to lift out of poverty because it seems to be somehow built into them.  Whether this is an acculturation problem is one of the questions that pops up all the time.  In the current culture, we shouldn't be having slums and ghettos but there they are.

 

Abortion on demand is not a right.  At best it is a privilege and it is up to society to sanction it.

[Titanicbuff 1,262]

To keep the American Politics thread from de-railing, we will give this topic it's own thread.

 

Remember:  Discuss the issues, not each other!

 

Several of you have already violated that rule.   Please discuss the issues, not each other from now on or your posts will be edited/deleted.  If misbehavior continues, the thread will be locked.

seems to me these guys feel its there chance to ridicule my beleafs- blocking all insulting people, and this thread-

[Meg 368]

Okay, let's try this again.

 

Let's say that Person A believes X and Person B believes Y.

 

Persons A and B can both talk about the merits and drawbacks of X versus Y.

 

Person A may not talk about Person B.   Person B may not talk about Person A.

 

"Talk about" includes calling other people names, making judgments about their mental state, ridiculing their beliefs and other forms of discussing them as an individual or discussing a group that they may or may not be involved with.

 

Discuss the merits and drawbacks of X and Y.   and Z if another viewpoint arises.

 

Rule of thumb:   Use of the word "you" probably indicates discussion of another person.   Exceptions including sentences such like "I don't understand what you mean by blah, blah, blah.  Please clarify."

 

Any questions?

[Mr Saturn64 742]

This is the type of issue in which I feel every decision is the wrong one.

[BLANKBLANK 4,414]

And we are not talking about a person. We are talking about a clump of cells. As long as its inside the mother, its a parasite, not a person.

 

A fetus is a person, a person in the earliest stages of development. Every human is a clump of cells in various stages of development or decline. Also a baby up to the age of one is a parasite because it wholly dependent on its parents for survival, it cannot speak cohorent words, it does not possess reason or advanced cognitive capabilities. Is practically an animal. That is harsh stuff, a baby inside its mother is a parasite not a person. How many women have that attitude and of those who are pregnant, how many get morning sickness, aches, pains and fatigue. If the mind ain't willing the body starts complaining.

 

Good idea.  I am rather neutral on the issue of abortion.  I am, however, an advocate of safe sex when it comes to the inevitable use of it for recreation.  There are many contraceptive methods including the morning after pill.  Having unwanted children in our civilization is totally unacceptable.

 

Now, don't get me wrong, I am all for abortion if the child is the result of rape and the mother doesn't want to raise the child.

 

Wow, more harsh stuff- the last line anyway is. There's always the orphanage. You never know what that child might contribute to humanity, the people he may save or protect and the lives he could change. Let's not devalue life, and the best safe sex is a restrained libido and underpants.

 

There is another thing to, if one believes in souls, the afterlife and God, then all of aborted fetuses -- from the morning after pill -- no more than a day or two old, are your unknown siblings, relatives and family members. So when you reach the next world you will be in for a surprise- brothers and sisters you never knew. Good food for thought.

[LexusInfernus 908]

A fetus is a person, a person in the earliest stages of development. Every human is a clump of cells in various stages of development or decline. Also a baby up to the age of one is a parasite because it wholly dependent on its parents for survival, it cannot speak cohorent words, it does not possess reason or advanced cognitive capabilities. Is practically an animal. That is harsh stuff, a baby inside its mother is a parasite not a person. How many women have that attitude and of those who are pregnant, how many get morning sickness, aches, pains and fatigue. If the mind ain't willing the body starts complaining.

 

There is a difference between a born baby and an unborn baby. An unborn fetus is parasitic in nature because, at least in the earlier stages of development it is incapable of surviving outside of the womb. Cut it out and it dies. But once a baby is born, that is different. Yes it requires the loving care of its parents to survive, but biologically its capable of sustaining itself. Also, I dont think it matter what the woman's attitude is towards her pregnancy when it comes to getting morning sickness and stuff. 

[Titanicbuff 1,262]

Funny how I started with a US politic thing and it turned to this- this is why I don't post. I get insulted each time.

[MandelSoft 2,770]

Politics and ethics aside, there is one argument in favour of allowing abortion: abortion is good for the environment

 

Let's face it: each human being requires resources from our planet: food, water, energy, metal etc. So each human being contributes to the strain put on Earth. If we limit our numbers, Earth will be better off. Now, that doesn't mean we need to kill each other, but it already helps greatly if we limit the birth rate. Of course, as an old dutch saying goes: "prevention is better than curing", it's true that anti-conception should be attempted first before abortion. But in my opinion, abortion should remain an option, because there will still be cases of unwanted pregnancy despite all precautions.

Also, what would you rather see? A child that suffers from being unwanted and cannot be supported by his/her parent(s), or an unwanted child that has never been born, saving him from all the suffering he could potentially get? Think of the children, but also think of what misery you could save...

 

Best,

Maarten

[Casmatori34 23]

Politics and ethics aside, there is one argument in favour of allowing abortion: abortion is good for the environment

 

Let's face it: each human being requires resources from our planet: food, water, energy, metal etc. So each human being contributes to the strain put on Earth. If we limit our numbers, Earth will be better off. Now, that doesn't mean we need to kill each other, but it already helps greatly if we limit the birth rate. Of course, as an old dutch saying goes: "prevention is better than curing", it's true that anti-conception should be attempted first before abortion. But in my opinion, abortion should remain an option, because there will still be cases of unwanted pregnancy despite all precautions.

Also, what would you rather see? A child that suffers from being unwanted and cannot be supported by his/her parent(s), or an unwanted child that has never been born, saving him from all the suffering he could potentially get? Think of the children, but also think of what misery you could save...

 

Best,

Maarten

 

Wow you sound like a 'nice' person. I would never hold question on a child's life over issues of the environment, that's disgusting. It's not the child's fault the world is overpopulated. It sounds almost like a wishy-washy, convenient excuse to justify indiscriminate abortion. 

 

And there is always the option of giving the child up for adoption for people who WANT a baby of their own but cannot. You don't have to immediately kill the child because you're too selfish to use contraception properly or take responsibility for your 'mistakes'.

 

Sorry, but that kind of irked me a little. 

[MandelSoft 2,770]

Of course it's not the childs fault! But parents have to take responsibility to take a child (and also to control over-population). The whole argument I just put up is just that: an argument. It's not a complete single justification (hence, why I said "politics and ethics aside"), but I tried to approach the subject from a different perspective (in maybe a controversial way).

It's good to reconsider how many children you actually want to put on this planet. The more children everybody gets, the more things there are they need to share. More people can be born, but there's only one earth to support them. The decision is ours when it comes to how many people the earth needs to share its resources with.

Abortion and euthanasia fall in the same moral gray area of what's considered murder or prevention from (more) suffering. One is to prevent children from being born in maybe a bad and unproductive life, the other one is to prevent living in a hell when you are terminally sick without any perspective on improving conditions. Personally, the strongest argument for me to be in favour of both is that I don't like to be commanded by people on religious ground about what I can and can't do. I think everyone should at least have the right to choose. Both are legal here and I'm happy about that we at least have the option.

 

You may call abortion murdering an unborn child; I see it as an option to save a child from suffering a live he doesn't deserve to live (as well as his parents). Don't get me wrong, you shouldn't abort fetuses just for the heck of it, but do it only when you think it's not a good idea to have a child at this point in life (e.g. teen moms).

You may call euthanasia suicide, but be glad that euthanasia is at least a clean way to end a life (without the mess that may disrupt other people's lives and the damage "conventional suicide" causes) and it can stop someone's suffering. Of course, you need explicit permission of the person when he wants to commit to it and you need to be clearly sick without any chance of curing. Isn't it humane and considerate to help someone to end his suffering? The alternative is to keep that person alive against its will, which doesn't only cost quite some money, but isn't improving the quality of life of this person at all or even make it worse; he gains NOTHING with it.

 

But then again, this issue is still quite sensitive with lots of nuances...

Best,
Maarten

[Belfastsocrates 1,753]

Pro-life and Pro-choice are not mutually exclusive. 

 

Someone can support the right of a woman to have an abortion while disagreeing with the practice and the death of a foetus in my opinion. I am fully supportive of a woman's right to have an abortion, within a medically defined time frame (allowing for foetal viability outside of the womb), for whatever reason she deems necessary. I am a very strong advocate of a woman's right to avail of abortion in cases such as rape, incest, fatal foetal abnormality, danger to a woman's life or if continuing with the pregnancy would have seriously adverse health or psychological effects on the woman.

 

That does not mean I 'celebrate' abortion or welcome it, but I'm not a woman and I have no right to impose restrictions on how that woman should deal with pregnancy. Nor do I think anyone has the right to castigate women that have an abortion unless they have personal experience of situations such as rape or fatal foetal abnormality. It is fascinating that the most vocal anti-choice campaigners and lobbyists tend to be men.