Oppinions on abortion?

[Brandenburg-Altmark]

Oklahoma is a closer option for me.

Have you lost your mind? Oklahoma is the armpit of the universe.

Yeah. You can pork that 16 year old, then her father's going to come to your door with a shotgun and force you to marry her. Just go to the coast, please, where the civilized people are11!1one

[Bitchkitten]

I'm a man. With condoms, pills, shots and all of the methods of BC. nowadays there is no reason for anyone to have an "accidental pregnancy". I think it comes down to a moral choice wether or not it's "good" or "bad". Either way the government should stay out of it. You can't legislate morality it just doesn't work. People were getting abortions along time before Row v. Wade. It should be the woman's choice. Everyone assumes that these women are so stupid that they don't care, but I imagine it is a issue that takes a lot of thought and isn't taken lightly. It's better they are given clean and safe conditions to have this done.

My younger brother was concieved while my mother was on the pill. BC is never perfect. While strict abstinence is the only 100% effectivve way to prevent pregnancy, I'm a fucking adult and I think as long as I take reasonable precautions to prevent pregnancy, no was has any room to critisize and no right to interfere with my choices to rectify any BC malfunctions.

[Wiztopia]

I'm a man. With condoms, pills, shots and all of the methods of BC. nowadays there is no reason for anyone to have an "accidental pregnancy". I think it comes down to a moral choice wether or not it's "good" or "bad". Either way the government should stay out of it. You can't legislate morality it just doesn't work. People were getting abortions along time before Row v. Wade. It should be the woman's choice. Everyone assumes that these women are so stupid that they don't care, but I imagine it is a issue that takes a lot of thought and isn't taken lightly. It's better they are given clean and safe conditions to have this done.

My younger brother was concieved while my mother was on the pill. BC is never perfect. While strict abstinence is the only 100% effectivve way to prevent pregnancy, I'm a fucking adult and I think as long as I take reasonable precautions to prevent pregnancy, no was has any room to critisize and no right to interfere with my choices to rectify any BC malfunctions.

I don't think they should criticize or interfere even if the person was irresponsible.

[Nulono]

Did I say I'd kill anyone? No? Then shut up.

That's a disproportionately aggressive response.

Hypocrisy engenders that kind of emotion.

No, being sick of your kind of nonsense engenders that emotion. I've been trying to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you just don't know what you're talking about, but after you've conflated not adopting a child and actively killing a child I'm starting to think you're being deliberately disingenuous.

Everything becomes more dangerous when it's banned. That's kind of the point.

So you want women to get unsafe abortions so they can die?

No, no more than you want men to rape people and then die from STIs, or to try to burn a neighbor's house down and die from smoke inhalation. The point is to make it more risky so as to deter people from doing it. We don't make it legal to violate someone's rights so that it can be done more safely. That's not the role of government.

1. Why not?
2. Life OBVIOUSLY begins at conception. To say otherwise is a ridiculous assertion and showing a complete ignorance of what it means to be biologically living. I'm arguing personhood, the conditon of being a full human, does not begin at birth, particularly in legal spheres. It certainly does NOT begin at conception, as there is not enough brain activity to constitute anything more than an ambiguous lump of cells. It IS poissible to argue a developed fetus with a fully (or nearly) developed brain and other organs is a human, and that is why I'm not completely against term limits on abortion as a compromise. And that is the closest thing to a concession you will probably get from me in this debate.
4. Ok, but as unborn children are not legally people or citizens,[sic] it's really the same difference. If were arguing about, say, Gauntanamo Bay prisoner rights, then you would have bested me. But we're not, are we?
7. That defines a usage of the word. While it may be correct in certain situations (for example, a delivery room), it doesn't necessarily stand to follow that for purposes of abortion they are children. So yes, I suppose you can say that fetuses could be considered children under some definition of the word. But then I'll just ask what's wrong with killing children who have not been born? And again I'll say probably a lot, but that it doesn't necessarily stand to reason that killing millions of unborn children should be illegal, and so on and so on, ad infinitum. Maybe you see now the scope of how little I care about whether or not they actually ARE children? Bottom line is legally they are not people, nor should they be. Ultimately the woman's body is hers, and not society's or the state's. ANd please, none of that "It's should be legal cause it's legal?" crap.

1. That's not an answer. Why does personhood begin at birth?
2. You said, and I quote, "It assumes an ethical maxim (where life begins) that, bottom line, is not a given fact and is only subjectively true.". Are you backtracking on that claim, then?
4. No citizenship and personhood are NOT the same thing. And pointing to the law to justify abortion being legal is a nonstarter; it's circular reasoning.
7. The woman's body is hers, but the fetus's body isn't. Please tell me how the fetus is not a child. Even if you remove definition #2, which explicitly includes the unborn, you're still left with definition #3 to contend with. And until you can give a reason why they shouldn't be persons beyond "because the law says they aren't", I'm afraid you're stuck with "that 'It's should be legal cause it's legal?' crap".

Those damn whore slut bitches shouldn't have opened their slut whore legs if they didn't want a baby. The sluts.

Whoa, whoa, what the hell?! I hope this is a joke!

It's a shoddy attempt at setting up a strawman of the pro-life position.

Porn gives women an easy way to make money (and its saved a lot of them) but there is still risk of getting pregnant no matter how many precautions are taken. Abortions are needed to eliminate this. Besides (as others have said) if things aren't legal they will be done on the black market, where the procedures usually aren't as safe.
Again I still have no moral objections to abortion.

What does porn have to do with anything?

Why must anti-choice shows like Secret life of the American Teenager exist?

So it's "anti-choice" to depict a mother choosing anything other than abortion?

I still can't find the "Make abortions mandatory" option.

All teenage girls should be required to get abortions!

[Ifreann]

I'm a man. With condoms, pills, shots and all of the methods of BC. nowadays there is no reason for anyone to have an "accidental pregnancy". I think it comes down to a moral choice wether or not it's "good" or "bad". Either way the government should stay out of it. You can't legislate morality it just doesn't work. People were getting abortions along time before Row v. Wade. It should be the woman's choice. Everyone assumes that these women are so stupid that they don't care, but I imagine it is a issue that takes a lot of thought and isn't taken lightly. It's better they are given clean and safe conditions to have this done.

My younger brother was concieved while my mother was on the pill. BC is never perfect. While strict abstinence is the only 100% effectivve way to prevent pregnancy...

That's not really 100%, though. Being abstinent won't keep you from getting raped.

[The Murtunian Tribes]

Some stuffs.

1. Because birth is the threshold of legally being a person, endowed with all rights any other child has in whatever country they were born. Usually this includes the right to life, at least in Western nations. You can't kill people, that's murder. I don't have the desire to argue that this threshold should be bumped up to, say, 1 year old.
2. No. Agreeing that life begins at conception and saying it's a given ethical fact that having an abortion is wrong are two different claims that don't necessarily relate to each other. Also, I've never made a value judgement on the ethics of abortion, (actually I might have, but my ethical opinion on abortion is as irrelevant as yours is anyway), my only claim is there is no logical reason for it to be illegal.
4. It's not a justification for abortion. It's a justification for your argument's irrelevance. You claim fetus's have right to life; I can demostrate they don't. Demonstrating they shouldn't have one at all is different.
7. The fetus uses the same nutrients and oxygen as the mother. It is physically connected to her body through the umbilical cord. Biologically, a fetus IS a part of her body, just as much so as her hands and legs are. The problem is, one way or another, someone's "rights" are going to be infringed. It really comes down to the fact that it is worse to infringe on the rights of a grown adult than it is to infringe on the "rights" of an underdeveloped lump of cells incapable of thought and feeling. Not counting the numerous additional strains placed on the healthcare, social security, welfare, and foster care systems, among others. So you can call them people all you want, and I'll just say, I guess can make that point. But they're people that as far as I'm concerned it should be legally ok to slaughter; in the millions if people so decide to. Whether or not it is actually right or wrong and whether or not it they actually are or are not people isn't the point. The thing is for this to be legal, they can't be considered people; other wise it would legally be homicide. Therefore, fetuses can't be people.

Why must anti-choice shows like Secret life of the American Teenager exist?

So it's "anti-choice" to depict a mother choosing anything other than abortion?

Actually, abortions just make for bad tv. The show has a certain playout. Girl gets pregnant, has to deal with family, friends, and the father. She has to find a way to support the child, and to keep up with school. Throw in a deadbeat dad or something and you got a good solid 30-60 min chunk of D+ programming. Alternatively, girl gets pregnant, girl has abortion isn't (usually) quite so dramatic and doesn't fill out the timeslot as nicely. Besides, who actually likes watching abortions?

[SD_Film Artists]

I'd say pro-life, though only in cases of genetic screening as its akin to eugenics.

[SD_Film Artists]

Have you lost your mind? Oklahoma is the armpit of the universe.

Yeah. You can pork that 16 year old, then her father's going to come to your door with a shotgun and force you to marry her. Just go to the coast, please, where the civilized people are11!1one

The UK has an age of consent of 16, and some places in Europe are even younger. Indeed, America has some of the highest age laws, particularly in the case of drinking.

[The Murtunian Tribes]

I'd say pro-life, though only in cases of genetic screening as its akin to eugenics.

It IS eugenics. It's just more user friendly eugenics.

[Secular Sweden]

Why can't just all us guys get a vasectomy done, and be over with the discussion?

[Icketopia]

Criminal offense, no exceptions, must be illegal in order for a nation to be somewhat decent morally

[Ifreann]

Criminal offense, no exceptions, must be illegal in order for a nation to be somewhat decent morally

If that's true, I'd rather an immoral country.

[The Murtunian Tribes]

Why can't just all us guys get a vasectomy done, and be over with the discussion?

Because we still need to propagate.

[Ifreann]

Why can't just all us guys get a vasectomy done, and be over with the discussion?

Because that wouldn't change anything....

[Non-Exploding Cupcake]

Abortion should be mandatory in all cases. All women should be required to undergo tubal ligations; pregnancy causes all sorts of problems and we're better off without it. In order to keep a handle on population growth rates, fertile females with good genetics should be seized by the state as chattel, placed in breeding centers and forced to pop out babies until they are no longer capable of it. I'm guessing we could maintain current birth rates with, oh, 15% of the population used as raw breeding stock -- tops. It's probably best to start this process early (around age twelve or so) to minimise the likelihood of them having their heads filled with counterrevolutionary ideas and rebelling.

This is a reasonable compromise that I'm sure will please everyone equally.

[The Murtunian Tribes]

Abortion should be mandatory in all cases. All women should be required to undergo tubal ligations; pregnancy causes all sorts of problems and we're better off without it. In order to keep a handle on population growth rates, fertile females with good genetics should be seized by the state as chattel, placed in breeding centers and forced to pop out babies until they are no longer capable of it. I'm guessing we could maintain current birth rates with, oh, 15% of the population used as raw breeding stock -- tops. It's probably best to start this process early (around age twelve or so) to minimise the likelihood of them having their heads filled with counterrevolutionary ideas and rebelling.

This is a reasonable compromise that I'm sure will please everyone equally.

That's going to require a lot of turkey basters.

[Non-Exploding Cupcake]

Abortion should be mandatory in all cases. All women should be required to undergo tubal ligations; pregnancy causes all sorts of problems and we're better off without it. In order to keep a handle on population growth rates, fertile females with good genetics should be seized by the state as chattel, placed in breeding centers and forced to pop out babies until they are no longer capable of it. I'm guessing we could maintain current birth rates with, oh, 15% of the population used as raw breeding stock -- tops. It's probably best to start this process early (around age twelve or so) to minimise the likelihood of them having their heads filled with counterrevolutionary ideas and rebelling.

This is a reasonable compromise that I'm sure will please everyone equally.

That's going to require a lot of turkey basters.

Eh, we're replacing the military with the Divine Legion of Righteousness and Justice anyway. Just have Legionaries guard the breeding centers -- women can't serve in the Legion, homosexuality is punishable by death and disobeying a direct order from a member of the Legion is treason. That problem really solves itself when you think about it.

[-St George]

Tbh if you don't want her to get pregnant, switch to anal.

[SD_Film Artists]

Tbh if you don't want her to get pregnant, switch to anal.

Ewwww.

[Wiztopia]

So you want women to get unsafe abortions so they can die?

No, no more than you want men to rape people and then die from STIs, or to try to burn a neighbor's house down and die from smoke inhalation. The point is to make it more risky so as to deter people from doing it. We don't make it legal to violate someone's rights so that it can be done more safely. That's not the role of government.

No you want them to die from unsafe abortions because you want to make it harder for women to get them.

Why must anti-choice shows like Secret life of the American Teenager exist?

So it's "anti-choice" to depict a mother choosing anything other than abortion?

No its anti-choice to force only one view point on the viewer. At least make it even and have at least one character abort.

[-St George]

Tbh if you don't want her to get pregnant, switch to anal.

Ewwww.

Hmm?

[Marcheria]

Criminal offense, no exceptions, must be illegal in order for a nation to be somewhat decent morally

If that's true, I'd rather an immoral country.

^ this

[The Murtunian Tribes]

No you want them to die from unsafe abortions because you want to make it harder for women to get them.


So it's "anti-choice" to depict a mother choosing anything other than abortion?

No its anti-choice to force only one view point on the viewer. At least make it even and have at least one character abort.

I explained this already. And nothing on TV is forced. That's why we have remotes.

[Wiztopia]

No its anti-choice to force only one view point on the viewer. At least make it even and have at least one character abort.

I explained this already. And nothing on TV is forced. That's why we have remotes.

Getting an abortion would make for better drama.

[The Murtunian Tribes]

I explained this already. And nothing on TV is forced. That's why we have remotes.

Getting an abortion would make for better drama.

Then go pitch the show to a producer and see how many people are interested in watching people get abortions. Might be more than I think, you never know. But make sure you get some Jerry Springeresque people on the show.