Abortion: Pro-Choice or Pro-Life?

[Godular]

We're not clumps of cells that are inherently violating the bodily sovereignty of other humans.

Important distinction, that.

Pregnancy is a completely natural process that the female human body is, in fact, designed for.

So the fuck what?

Just because something is designed for supporting the growth of a human fetus does not mean that if it shows up there without the woman's consent she should just grin and let it happen.

Or that it defines the woman's existence.

[Jamzmania]

Pregnancy is a completely natural process that the female human body is, in fact, designed for.

So the fuck what?

Just because something is designed for supporting the growth of a human fetus does not mean that if it shows up there without the woman's consent she should just grin and let it happen.

Or that it defines the woman's existence.

Yeah, cause human life is totally irrelevant and has no sanctity, as long as some woman out there said, "Eh, can't be bothered."

[Godular]

So the fuck what?

Just because something is designed for supporting the growth of a human fetus does not mean that if it shows up there without the woman's consent she should just grin and let it happen.

Or that it defines the woman's existence.

Yeah, cause human life is totally irrelevant and has no sanctity, as long as some woman out there said, "Eh, can't be bothered."

You don't get to judge a woman's reasons for getting an abortion. You know nothing of her situation, you know nothing of her morality, and your morality is NOT superior to hers.

In trying to champion the rights of a fetus, you automatically deny the right of the woman to control her own body. No person has the right to use another person's body against their will.

[Jamzmania]

Yeah, cause human life is totally irrelevant and has no sanctity, as long as some woman out there said, "Eh, can't be bothered."

You don't get to judge a woman's reasons for getting an abortion. You know nothing of her situation, you know nothing of her morality, and your morality is NOT superior to hers.

In trying to champion the rights of a fetus, you automatically deny the right of the woman to control her own body. No person has the right to use another person's body against their will.

And you are championing the idea that that fetus deserves to die for something that it has no control over whatsoever.

[Geilinor]

You don't get to judge a woman's reasons for getting an abortion. You know nothing of her situation, you know nothing of her morality, and your morality is NOT superior to hers.

In trying to champion the rights of a fetus, you automatically deny the right of the woman to control her own body. No person has the right to use another person's body against their will.

And you are championing the idea that that fetus deserves to die for something that it has no control over whatsoever.

Nobody is championing the idea that fetuses need to die.

[Godular]

You don't get to judge a woman's reasons for getting an abortion. You know nothing of her situation, you know nothing of her morality, and your morality is NOT superior to hers.

In trying to champion the rights of a fetus, you automatically deny the right of the woman to control her own body. No person has the right to use another person's body against their will.

And you are championing the idea that that fetus deserves to die for something that it has no control over whatsoever.

Innocence is irrelevant. Whether it intended to be using the woman's body against her will doesn't at all change the fact that it IS doing exactly that thing.

The woman has and SHOULD have the right to cut support to an entity residing within her body and using her resources if she so chooses. That this will result in the inevitable demise of the aforementioned entity is an unfortunate consequence that nonetheless does not justify the deprivation of a woman's right to control her own body.

[Dyakovo]

We're not clumps of cells that are inherently violating the bodily sovereignty of other humans.

Important distinction, that.

Pregnancy is a completely natural process that the female human body is, in fact, designed for.

Death is a completely natural process that the human body was designed for.

[Dyakovo]

You don't get to judge a woman's reasons for getting an abortion. You know nothing of her situation, you know nothing of her morality, and your morality is NOT superior to hers.

In trying to champion the rights of a fetus, you automatically deny the right of the woman to control her own body. No person has the right to use another person's body against their will.

And you are championing the idea that that fetus deserves to die for something that it has no control over whatsoever.

No, we're championing the idea that women, like men, have the right to control what happens to their body.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

You don't get to judge a woman's reasons for getting an abortion. You know nothing of her situation, you know nothing of her morality, and your morality is NOT superior to hers.

In trying to champion the rights of a fetus, you automatically deny the right of the woman to control her own body. No person has the right to use another person's body against their will.

And you are championing the idea that that fetus deserves to die for something that it has no control over whatsoever.

It has nothing to do with the fetus "deserving" anything. We are not punishing a fetus.
But no one, and nothing, has the right to a person's body without their will. You are a thinking, feeling, experiencing born human being, and not even you get the right to my body. There is no reason whatsoever in which we should extend a right to a fetus to violate the body of another person, a right which is not afforded to anyone who is actually born and actually feels things.

[SaintB]

I have more concern for the people that are alive here and now in the world than I do for the children they may or may not have. Keeping that in mind I am supportive of women's right or privilege to have an abortion if they so choose. I'd support a mans decision to have an abortion if he also got pregnant.

[SaintB]

So the fuck what?

Just because something is designed for supporting the growth of a human fetus does not mean that if it shows up there without the woman's consent she should just grin and let it happen.

Or that it defines the woman's existence.

Yeah, cause human life is totally irrelevant and has no sanctity, as long as some woman out there said, "Eh, can't be bothered."

A person is dying because their kidney's have failed. They can clone him a new one but it will take nine months. So in the meantime they have no choice but to find someone with the same blood type and hook them up to that stranger for 9 months so that they can live. Now people can volunteer for it, but they don't have time for that so instead they see you visiting a family member in post op (use your imagination why). They corner you and ask you your blood type... turns out your a match. Now you are forced against your will to be the life support system for this guy. You have to eat, sleep, and drink enough to keep you both alive and healthy, you have no choice in the matter and the reasoning that you don't is that you were voluntarily in the hospital when it happened and you knew the risk.

Is that something you'd be perfectly ok with?

Because that is pretty much the same scenario you put all pregnant women in when they can't have a legal abortion.

[Othelos]

So the fuck what?

Just because something is designed for supporting the growth of a human fetus does not mean that if it shows up there without the woman's consent she should just grin and let it happen.

Or that it defines the woman's existence.

Yeah, cause human life is totally irrelevant and has no sanctity, as long as some woman out there said, "Eh, can't be bothered."

Just the fact that you think that's why women get abortions makes it obvious that you haven't actually bothered to think about this issue, beyond your initial emotional reaction and the following "logic".

[Ashmoria]

We're not clumps of cells that are inherently violating the bodily sovereignty of other humans.

Important distinction, that.

Pregnancy is a completely natural process that the female human body is, in fact, designed for.

so why should she have any control over her body at all when it comes to reproduction? its not like she is an autonomous human being with her own life to live. those people are called MEN.

[Ashmoria]

So the fuck what?

Just because something is designed for supporting the growth of a human fetus does not mean that if it shows up there without the woman's consent she should just grin and let it happen.

Or that it defines the woman's existence.

Yeah, cause human life is totally irrelevant and has no sanctity, as long as some woman out there said, "Eh, can't be bothered."

exacty.

its HER bother and her decision as to whether or not she wants to add a child to her family right now.

[BK117B2]

We're not clumps of cells that are inherently violating the bodily sovereignty of other humans.

Important distinction, that.

Pregnancy is a completely natural process that the female human body is, in fact, designed for.

So? Those same bodies are also designed for sexual intercourse...do you think that means they shouldn't be allowed to control when they are having sex?

[Stellonia]

Pregnancy is a completely natural process that the female human body is, in fact, designed for.

Death is a completely natural process that the human body was designed for.

Yes. That is another reason to support artificially-induced death, such as induced abortion.

[Geilinor]

Death is a completely natural process that the human body was designed for.

Yes. That is another reason to support artificially-induced death, such as induced abortion.

If you use silly arguments you receive silly retorts.

[Godular]

Death is a completely natural process that the human body was designed for.

Yes. That is another reason to support artificially-induced death, such as induced abortion.

Way to completely gloss over the other arguments in favor of targeting the only snarky reply.

I could drop an even more powerful riposte to Jamz's comment, but you keep feigning moral outrage at every little thing, even though it helps your position not one iota.

[KirbyFluffle]

Here is how I look at it:
Keeping the most humans alive in a sustainable way is my goal. If a fetus is not a human then there is no question about the legal status of abortion. If a fetus is a human then abortion is decreasing the number of living humans. So criminalizing abortion is the way to go because it would decrease the number of abortions and save more human lives, right? You would think that but women would resort to illegal abortions, many of which can end up killing them. So by criminalizing abortion, you have decreased the number of abortions and increased the amount of women dying, which would result in a net loss of human life. Therefore criminalizing abortion is not the way. To decrease abortion, the need for an abortion should be reduced. Some get an abortion because of financial problems. Others, because they feel they are not ready or because of the social stigma of being an unmarried pregnant woman or other unlisted reasons. To reduce these needs financial aid should be available and so should psychiatric help. There should also be a campaign to reduce the social stigma. However, all of these would not end all abortions. Therefore, the need for an abortion would be decreased even more if contraceptives and more comprehensive sex education was available. After all, a woman that isn't pregnant doesn't need an abortion. In conclusion, it doesn't matter if a fetus is a human or not. Criminalizing abortion would bring only more death.

[Dyakovo]

Yes. That is another reason to support artificially-induced death, such as induced abortion.

Way to completely gloss over the other arguments in favor of targeting the only snarky reply.

I could drop an even more powerful riposte to Jamz's comment, but you keep feigning moral outrage at every little thing, even though it helps your position not one iota.

It was a really good snarky reply though...

[Godular]

Way to completely gloss over the other arguments in favor of targeting the only snarky reply.

I could drop an even more powerful riposte to Jamz's comment, but you keep feigning moral outrage at every little thing, even though it helps your position not one iota.

It was a really good snarky reply though...

Aye, 'twas. I was gonna point out that though evolution has seen fit to make a woman's vagina form-fit around a penis, if one should happen to show up without the woman's consent, by Jamz's logic she should let it happen! It's perfectly natural, so it was simply meant to be! And its only some temporary discomfort!

Just because necks are form fitting to have collars on 'em...

Just because people can be digested...

A bunch of 'em really.

[Grave_n_idle]

So the fuck what?

Just because something is designed for supporting the growth of a human fetus does not mean that if it shows up there without the woman's consent she should just grin and let it happen.

Or that it defines the woman's existence.

Yeah, cause human life is totally irrelevant and has no sanctity, as long as some woman out there said, "Eh, can't be bothered."

I don't see you offering to feed, clothe and house an entire generation of unwanted children.

[Bitely]

Yeah, cause human life is totally irrelevant and has no sanctity, as long as some woman out there said, "Eh, can't be bothered."

I don't see you offering to feed, clothe and house an entire generation of unwanted children.

But if the father of the child didn't want the baby,and yet the mother still carried the baby to term, doesn't he still have to pay child support?

[Godular]

I don't see you offering to feed, clothe and house an entire generation of unwanted children.

But if the father of the child didn't want the baby,and yet the mother still carried the baby to term, doesn't he still have to pay child support?

An issue that should be rectified, yes.

[Grave_n_idle]

I don't see you offering to feed, clothe and house an entire generation of unwanted children.

But if the father of the child didn't want the baby,and yet the mother still carried the baby to term, doesn't he still have to pay child support?

That's not an answer to my point.

But jumping aboard your tangent... in most cases, he probably would, yes.

And that's not necessarily a bad thing - once that child IS born (which means we've chosen not to abort) - it's going to need to be fed, clothed, housed and educated. Personally, I'm happy for this whole process to be done collectively... but absent that paradigm... sure, let's let the biological parents pay.