[Abortion Thread] (YET ANOTHER POLL!) Taking measure.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Yes, how could a woman ever be hurt by being forced to carry the child conceived during an incredibly traumatizing event for 9 months and then be forced to give birth to the child of the man who did that to her? What an astoundingly ignorant and arrogant statement to say that it does no harm.

Like passing abortion bans, such views are easy when you're a man.

Polls show there's little difference in views on abortion along gender lines.

[The Black Forrest]

Like passing abortion bans, such views are easy when you're a man.

Polls show there's little difference in views on abortion along gender lines.

Curiosity. Which polls?

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Polls show there's little difference in views on abortion along gender lines.

Curiosity. Which polls?

I think they mean the latest poll conducted by Vox media and PerryUndem

https://www.vox.com/a/abortion-decision ... g-mistakes

[Godular]

Curiosity. Which polls?

I think they mean the latest poll conducted by Vox media and PerryUndem

https://www.vox.com/a/abortion-decision ... g-mistakes

I like to think my polls are more informative

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

Actually, they're both a matter of bodily sovereignty.

Both the person who doesn't want to donate and the pregnant person have bodily autonomy.

Both forced donation and forced pregnancy involve compelled maintenance of another life (one that depends on them).

Neither the person who doesn't want to donate and the pregnant person can be mandated to medically maintain another life against their will.

But this is about abortion not bodily sovereignty.

I literally recoiled at this.

Abortion is 100% about bodily sovereignty.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

No. Also who the fuck do you think you are to force a woman to carry a baby that resulted from her being raped?

A good person who believes that children should not be allowed to die because of the whims of an adult.

You can't be a good person and also give women fewer rights than a corpse.

[Galloism]

A good person who believes that children should not be allowed to die because of the whims of an adult.

You can't be a good person and also give women fewer rights than a corpse.

It’s actually worth note families (and states) have overridden explicit organ donation elections after the death of the individual innumerable times - in both directions.

In 2001, 31% of organ procurement organizations followed the deceased's wishes, 31% followed the next of kin's wishes, and 21% recovered organs if either party consented and neither objected. 20 May et al 19 wrote that "asking the family for consent when an organ donor card has been signed actually places an undue, and unnecessary, burden on the family," and concluded that "honoring the documented wishes of a deceased patient to donate, even when the family does not consent, is not only morally permissible, but morally required." In a compromise position that seeks to respect potential donors' autonomy while also addressing the practical issue of family concerns, several organ procurement organizations now inform families of their deceased relatives' consent to organ donation, address their questions, and describe the benefit of this generous act in positive terms instead of asking for permission to carry out the donor's wishes. ...

https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... uld_Decide

There’s actually a lot of ethics discussions surrounding this:

As a result, many (but not all) organ procurement organizations attempt to protect the public's positive perception of organ donation by using the "double veto rule," wherein if either the potential donor's previously expressed wishes or the family's wishes oppose organ donation, then organ retrieval is not pursued. [19][20][21][22][23] The double veto rule is ethically controversial. Some authors argue that it is an affront to individual autonomy, whereas others argue that families' wishes carry more ethical weight than those of their deceased relative.

So, be advised, even if abortion were banned, women would not have less rights than a corpse.

[Kernen]

So you're saying pregnant rape victims should raise the offspring in submission to the rapist, or kill themselves.

Yes if they wish to be logically consistent in their message that nonexistence is better than existence. The people who keep saying they dont care if mommy aborted them should commit suicide to prove their point.

How are they a hypocrite? They didnt want the child why should they be forced to have it?

Its hypocritical to use morals to back up one issue then ignore it for another.

That nonexistence is better than existence does not mean that *ending* existence is better than continuing existence. Once you exist, suicide is potentially more harmful than enduring. But since suicide requires existence, it's outside the competition of existence being better than nonexistence.

[Cappuccina]

Yes if they wish to be logically consistent in their message that nonexistence is better than existence. The people who keep saying they dont care if mommy aborted them should commit suicide to prove their point.



Its hypocritical to use morals to back up one issue then ignore it for another.

That nonexistence is better than existence does not mean that *ending* existence is better than continuing existence. Once you exist, suicide is potentially more harmful than enduring. But since suicide requires existence, it's outside the competition of existence being better than nonexistence.

Non-existence is neutral, it isn't better or worse than existence, the thing is it can't be better because it is a static state, if you're dead you're dead. In life one's station can be improved.

[Godular]

That nonexistence is better than existence does not mean that *ending* existence is better than continuing existence. Once you exist, suicide is potentially more harmful than enduring. But since suicide requires existence, it's outside the competition of existence being better than nonexistence.

Non-existence is neutral, it isn't better or worse than existence, the thing is it can't be better because it is a static state, if you're dead you're dead. In life one's station can be improved.

In all honesty, I'mma just go with 'Akrisen's arguments are so crap that it somehow got contagious'.

[The Black Forrest]

No. Also who the fuck do you think you are to force a woman to carry a baby that resulted from her being raped?

A good person who believes that children should not be allowed to die because of the whims of an adult.

A good person would help these children after they were born and yet many of those who believe they should not die; do nothing.

[The Free Joy State]

A good person who believes that children should not be allowed to die because of the whims of an adult.

A good person would help these children after they were born and yet many of those who believe they should not die; do nothing.

True.

Some of the most vocal opponents of abortion are also the most vocal opponents on welfare:

Rush Limbaugh on abortion:

You know how to stop abortion? Require that each one occur with a gun.*

Rush Limbaugh on welfare:

By government giveaway programs, individuals are often hurt far more than they are helped. The recipients of these programs become dependent on the government and their dignity is destroyed. Is it compassionate to enslave more and more people by making them a part of the government dependency cycle? I think compassion should be measured by how many people no longer need it. Helping people to become self-sufficient is much more compassionate than drugging them with the narcotic of welfare.
[...]
Children need love and discipline. They need mothers and fathers. A welfare check is not a husband. The state is not a father.

To repeat that often cited quote by Carlin: ""If you're pre-born, you're fine. If you're preschool, you're fucked."

(And, yes, not all pro-lifers think this way. But there are a number that do. Sorry about Limbaugh, by the way -- he was the quickest I could think of).

It's also worth pointing out here that foetuses do not meet the definition of "child" (meaning that no children are being allowed to die, so the emotive language can be withheld).

A child is "a young human being below the age of puberty or below the legal age of majority." -- a foetus is not a "human being" because, in law (as Cornell states) "the words “person”, “human being”, “child”, and “individual”, shall include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development."

In addition to legally, science supports the definition of a foetus not being a child. For example, the WHO defines early child development as encompassing "physical, socio emotional, cognitive and motor development between 0-8 years of age." (a foetus is not 0, yet -- because that is birth).

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Meanwhile in Sweden abortions occurring in teenagers and 20-29 year olds has been halved since 2009. <.< >.>
Sources ascribes this trend to the increased usage of long term contraceptives and ease of access to maternal healthcare. <.< >.>

[The Free Joy State]

Meanwhile in Sweden abortions occurring in teenagers and 20-29 year olds has been halved since 2009. <.< >.>
Sources ascribes this trend to the increased usage of long term contraceptives and ease of access to maternal healthcare. <.< >.>

Hmm... I wonder why...

*scratches chin*

Coincidentally, in the UK, we've seen a similar trend in teen pregnancies over 20 years, with mandatory sex education (soon to become more mandatory and all encompassing) and free contraception: rates have halved in the last 20 years and are now at their lowest levels since the 1960s. Conception rates have also decreased in women under 25.

[Neanderthaland]

Meanwhile in Sweden abortions occurring in teenagers and 20-29 year olds has been halved since 2009. <.< >.>
Sources ascribes this trend to the increased usage of long term contraceptives and ease of access to maternal healthcare. <.< >.>

[Kernen]

That nonexistence is better than existence does not mean that *ending* existence is better than continuing existence. Once you exist, suicide is potentially more harmful than enduring. But since suicide requires existence, it's outside the competition of existence being better than nonexistence.

Non-existence is neutral, it isn't better or worse than existence, the thing is it can't be better because it is a static state, if you're dead you're dead. In life one's station can be improved.

The argument from anti-natalists is that nonexistence avoids harms, which is a net gain, and benefits, which is net neutral, meaning you have a net gain. Conversely, existence has harms, which is a net loss, and benefit, which is a net gain, which means you have a net neutral experience.

Missing benefit is generally seen as neutral because we don't view it as inherently harmful to miss something good, but we view it as a positive to miss something bad. At least, thats the Benetar anti-natalist perspective. Theres a lot of other arguments inherent in the asymmetry.

[The Alma Mater]

Non-existence is neutral, it isn't better or worse than existence, the thing is it can't be better because it is a static state, if you're dead you're dead. In life one's station can be improved.

The argument from anti-natalists is that nonexistence avoids harms, which is a net gain, and benefits, which is net neutral, meaning you have a net gain.

Why not simply state that non-existence is non-existence and therefor can be ignored ? There is no reason to take the wishes of the potential offspring of you and a Venusian gorilla into account, but it does not exist and will not come into existence.

[Electorate]

The overturning of Roe V Wade wouldn't immediately ban abortions, it would allow for legislation to be passed to ban or limit abortion. So, if a heavily Republican state wanted to ban abortions, it could.

And such bans should be seen as illegitimate and rebelled against, especially with the second amendment as women and doctors will likely be prosecuted for practicing their inalienable rights.

This inalienable right to murder, do they have it just by virtue of womanhood?

[The Alma Mater]

And such bans should be seen as illegitimate and rebelled against, especially with the second amendment as women and doctors will likely be prosecuted for practicing their inalienable rights.

This inalienable right to murder, do they have it just by virtue of womanhood?

Oh no, males have it to. Whenever you are giving bloodtransfusions to another human for 9 whole months, you can pull the plug and say "sorry, but my body and I say no".

[Highever]

And such bans should be seen as illegitimate and rebelled against, especially with the second amendment as women and doctors will likely be prosecuted for practicing their inalienable rights.

This inalienable right to murder, do they have it just by virtue of womanhood?

Not murder, chief.

[Highever]

Meanwhile in Sweden abortions occurring in teenagers and 20-29 year olds has been halved since 2009. <.< >.>
Sources ascribes this trend to the increased usage of long term contraceptives and ease of access to maternal healthcare. <.< >.>

It really is astoundingly absurd isnt it?

[San Lumen]

And such bans should be seen as illegitimate and rebelled against, especially with the second amendment as women and doctors will likely be prosecuted for practicing their inalienable rights.

This inalienable right to murder, do they have it just by virtue of womanhood?

Its not murder. You have no right to make medical decisions for others. Are you going to adopt the unwanted children or force a rape or incest victim to carry a child to term they dont want?

[Galloism]

You have no right to make medical decisions for others.

I mean, I would like this to be true, but the military has proven that this is not in any way true.

[Kernen]

The argument from anti-natalists is that nonexistence avoids harms, which is a net gain, and benefits, which is net neutral, meaning you have a net gain.

Why not simply state that non-existence is non-existence and therefor can be ignored ? There is no reason to take the wishes of the potential offspring of you and a Venusian gorilla into account, but it does not exist and will not come into existence.

Its part of a broader philosophical idea inherent in anti-natalism, which suggests it is more ethical to not reproduce than it is to reproduce.

You have no right to make medical decisions for others.

I mean, I would like this to be true, but the military has proven that this is not in any way true.

That's really only because you sign something to that effect. Otherwise, its limited to emergency care.

[Galloism]

I mean, I would like this to be true, but the military has proven that this is not in any way true.

That's really only because you sign something to that effect. Otherwise, its limited to emergency care.

Wrong. The military nonconsensually took people against their will under threat of imprisonment for medical experimentation - for decades.

Based on their gender.