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

[Hrythingia]

She does, but those are diminished when she is carrying her child within her. Chances are she is responsible for its conception. She has no right to kill a child unless that child is going to passively kill her.

So does the fetus's right supersede the mothers?

Not when it comes to who lives. They are both humans, they must be treated as such. It is rarely ever ok to end someone's life.

No, most pregnancies are handled with routine and pose little credible threat to the mother's life.

My high school US History/World History/Student Council teacher died giving birth. *Most* pregnancies may end well in the US and other developed nations, but you don't know if you got one of the *most* pregnancies or one of the *some* pregnancies until the fecal matter has hit the rotary air ambulation device or the baby is born with no complications.

If you were handed a revolver with 100 chambers and told one contained a bullet, would you spin the wheel and pull the trigger if the result was 18 years of being expected to put in hard work and sacrifices to raise someone who may or may not appreciate it if you didn't feel you were up to the task?

It does not matter if the child appreciates it -that is an issue for the family and how they bring up their child. If they do not think they can look after the child then put it up for abortion. No need to take a life.

[Indo-Malaysia]

Oh, I long for the day when science will make it possible for *men* to be able to carry a pregnancy to term. Because the day a fetus can be removed from a woman who doesn't want it, and implanted into the man who insists he has a right to his child being born -- I forsee this entire argument ending.

When it's no longer a matter of, "The woman deciding what life is worth!" and more, "Well, *I* don't want it either!" that's when this idiocy will end.

If the woman doesn’t want it, but the father does...then the child is wanted by someone. Part of the pro-choice argument is to avoid unwanted pregnancies, well this pregnancy is wanted by the father. It is both their child. By this argument, if a father is not responsible for the child, they shouldn’t be responsible for child-support services either, when they decide to run off on their kids.

^ I likings this post.

Ignoring the whole custody argument, and whether or not abortion is morally okay, I believe both parents should have an equal say in the child/fetus/blob/cells. Each contributed a half (Sperm, eggo), and thus instead of the women having an unquestioned right to whether a child lives, both parents who contributed dna in consensual sex (if it's rape, I think abortion is okay as the rapist should be publically hung) should have an equal say.

[New haven america]

You and I know the vast majority would nope the fuck outta there.

I mean the question "why does it need to be a man?" pretty much made my point.

Is this the ideal? So you prove the man doesn’t want the child after experiencing pregnancy. Congrats. Guys’ bodies aren’t made for pregnancy anyway. But not wanting to be pregnant does’g mean the dad doesn’t want to be the father. And let’s say your point is proven, the guy leaves, and the girl aborts. Who wins? Nobody. The girl is alone, the unwanted pregnancy is now just an unwanted pregnancy that’s dead, and the man is probably going to get some other girl pregnant, continuing the cycle. If you like Pyrrhic victories, then there you go.

Presumably the woman wins, through the fact that she doesn't have to deal with a pregnancy she doesn't want nor does she have to deal with the guy anymore.

I fail to see how that's a loss, TBH.

[The South Falls]

The born are people.

Why is having been born the defining metric? Why is seperating human life into 'people' and 'not people' okay, by any qualification?

Because this isn't eugenics. This isn't racist bullshit peddled by some tinpot dictator. This is the simple distinction of being born.

[Jebslund]

Scientists and Science agree that it is 'life'. Depriving someone of their life just 'cos' is murder.

Well, put every pest control, lawn care, and animal shelter worker on death row, then, because they're all mass-murderers. Farmers, too. And let's not forget florists, those demons who cull life just because it looks pretty and don't even have the decency to give it a quick death!

[Luminesa]

If the woman doesn’t want it, but the father does...then the child is wanted by someone. Part of the pro-choice argument is to avoid unwanted pregnancies, well this pregnancy is wanted by the father. It is both their child. By this argument, if a father is not responsible for the child, they shouldn’t be responsible for child-support services either, when they decide to run off on their kids.

^ I likings this post.

Ignoring the whole custody argument, and whether or not abortion is morally okay, I believe both parents should have an equal say in the child/fetus/blob/cells. Each contributed a half (Sperm, eggo), and thus instead of the women having an unquestioned right to whether a child lives, both parents who contributed dna in consensual sex (if it's rape, I think abortion is okay as the rapist should be publically hung) should have an equal say.

It’s contradictory to say that one wants to avoid unwanted pregnancies while condemning the parent who wants the baby. If it’s an unwanted pregnancy that is now wanted, what’s the problem?

[The New California Republic]

There are extremely strict restrictions on late-term abortions. The main moral difference is that infanticide involves a person, while abortion does not.


I didn't realise that personhood was magic. TIL...

So basically, what you're saying is that if it hasn't been born yet, it's basically just an inanimate object taking up space.

Not at all, the situation is far more serious than your entirely spurious misrepresentation of my views.

A quick Google search will reveal that fetuses begin having brain function about 43 days in, can hear from about 23 weeks in, and can detect light via its eyes from about 16 weeks in (having virtually fully developed eyes by 26 weeks).

Limited brain and organ function does not imply awareness, sentience, or sapience. And none of that gives it the right to occupy the woman's body if she doesn't want it there.

I'd imagine most fetuses just prior to an abortion are some combination of confused, alarmed, or terrified for their own lives.

Baseless conjecture and appealing to emotion.

[The South Falls]

So does the fetus's right supersede the mothers?

Not when it comes to who lives. They are both humans, they must be treated as such. It is rarely ever ok to end someone's life.

My high school US History/World History/Student Council teacher died giving birth. *Most* pregnancies may end well in the US and other developed nations, but you don't know if you got one of the *most* pregnancies or one of the *some* pregnancies until the fecal matter has hit the rotary air ambulation device or the baby is born with no complications.

If you were handed a revolver with 100 chambers and told one contained a bullet, would you spin the wheel and pull the trigger if the result was 18 years of being expected to put in hard work and sacrifices to raise someone who may or may not appreciate it if you didn't feel you were up to the task?

It does not matter if the child appreciates it -that is an issue for the family and how they bring up their child. If they do not think they can look after the child then put it up for abortion. No need to take a life.

One is born, the other is not. This means that the born supersedes the unborn.

[Genivaria]

The born are people.

Why is having been born the defining metric? Why is seperating human life into 'people' and 'not people' okay, by any qualification?

You're right this is rather imprecise isn't it? We should probably leave this to people who actually know what they're talking about, like doctors.

[Luminesa]

Is this the ideal? So you prove the man doesn’t want the child after experiencing pregnancy. Congrats. Guys’ bodies aren’t made for pregnancy anyway. But not wanting to be pregnant does’g mean the dad doesn’t want to be the father. And let’s say your point is proven, the guy leaves, and the girl aborts. Who wins? Nobody. The girl is alone, the unwanted pregnancy is now just an unwanted pregnancy that’s dead, and the man is probably going to get some other girl pregnant, continuing the cycle. If you like Pyrrhic victories, then there you go.

Presumably the woman wins, through the fact that she doesn't have to deal with a pregnancy she doesn't want nor does she have to deal with the guy anymore.

I fail to see how that's a loss, TBH.

She doesn’t want the pregnancy, the guy does. Once the guy gets the baby, she doesn’t have to see the baby or him. Everyone wins.

[New haven america]

Nor the 50,000+ kids who age out before they're adopted.
Nor the fact that the foster system is woefully overfilled (over 108,000 kids waiting in foster care for an average of 8 YEARS before they are adopted) and unfortunately mismanaged occasionally to a catastrophic and newsworthy degree.

But hey, kids dying or being traumatized in foster care is better than them never being born.

They might go to a foster home, better kill em instead.
~Katganistan

Terrible strawman, 1/10.

Also, I still find it interesting how you're totally for the fetus' rights while it's a fetus, but don't care about what happens when it's actually born and has to deal with life.

[Luminesa]

Why is having been born the defining metric? Why is seperating human life into 'people' and 'not people' okay, by any qualification?

You're right this is rather imprecise isn't it? We should probably leave this to people who actually know what they're talking about, like doctors.

I mean...if it’s growing and is developing a human body, it’s alive...and that starts with fertilization.

[Luminesa]

They might go to a foster home, better kill em instead.
~Katganistan

Terrible strawman, 1/10.

Also, I still find it interesting how you're totally for the fetus' rights while it's a fetus, but don't care about what happens when it's actually born and has to deal with life.

That’s a bit of an assumption, we’re talking about what happens before it’s born. You could ask him what he thinks about the baby after it’s born...

[Genivaria]

^ I likings this post.

Ignoring the whole custody argument, and whether or not abortion is morally okay, I believe both parents should have an equal say in the child/fetus/blob/cells. Each contributed a half (Sperm, eggo), and thus instead of the women having an unquestioned right to whether a child lives, both parents who contributed dna in consensual sex (if it's rape, I think abortion is okay as the rapist should be publically hung) should have an equal say.

It’s contradictory to say that one wants to avoid unwanted pregnancies while condemning the parent who wants the baby. If it’s an unwanted pregnancy that is now wanted, what’s the problem?

By 'unwanted pregnancies' we're referring to the woman who has to carry the pregnancy to term, so saying that it is wanted by the father is rather irrelevant.

[New haven america]

Presumably the woman wins, through the fact that she doesn't have to deal with a pregnancy she doesn't want nor does she have to deal with the guy anymore.

I fail to see how that's a loss, TBH.

She doesn’t want the pregnancy, the guy does. Once the guy gets the baby, she doesn’t have to see the baby or him. Everyone wins.

And here's the fault with your argument!

Health issues that come with pregnancy: Weight gain, mood swings, hormonal issues, nausea, soreness and swelling in the joints and breasts, and an overall decreased quality of life. After pregnancy you have: Lack of bladder control, postpartum depression, blood pressure problems, gestational diabetes, bone density issues, cancer, etc...

The woman doesn't want to deal with that, then she shouldn't have to.

[Napkiraly]

Scientists and Science agree that it is 'life'. Depriving someone of their life just 'cos' is murder.

Well, put every pest control, lawn care, and animal shelter worker on death row, then, because they're all mass-murderers. Farmers, too. And let's not forget florists, those demons who cull life just because it looks pretty and don't even have the decency to give it a quick death!

He was clearly referring to human life.

[New haven america]

Terrible strawman, 1/10.

Also, I still find it interesting how you're totally for the fetus' rights while it's a fetus, but don't care about what happens when it's actually born and has to deal with life.

That’s a bit of an assumption, we’re talking about what happens before it’s born. You could ask him what he thinks about the baby after it’s born...

No it's not, were literally talking about what could happen after it's born.

Follow along or don't get involved.

[Napkiraly]

She doesn’t want the pregnancy, the guy does. Once the guy gets the baby, she doesn’t have to see the baby or him. Everyone wins.

And here's the fault with your argument!

Health issues that come with pregnancy: Weight gain, mood swings, hormonal issues, nausea, soreness and swelling in the joints and breasts, and an overall decreased quality of life. After pregnancy you have: Lack of bladder control, postpartum depression, blood pressure problems, gestational diabetes, bone density issues, cancer, etc...

The woman doesn't want to deal with that, then she shouldn't have to.

I don't think the fetus wants to put up with death by that metric.

[The South Falls]

If the qualifier of being born is arbitrary, what says we have to stop at conception? Masturbation is murdering hundreds of thousands of babies!

[Jebslund]

My high school US History/World History/Student Council teacher died giving birth. *Most* pregnancies may end well in the US and other developed nations, but you don't know if you got one of the *most* pregnancies or one of the *some* pregnancies until the fecal matter has hit the rotary air ambulation device or the baby is born with no complications.

If you were handed a revolver with 100 chambers and told one contained a bullet, would you spin the wheel and pull the trigger if the result was 18 years of being expected to put in hard work and sacrifices to raise someone who may or may not appreciate it if you didn't feel you were up to the task?

It does not matter if the child appreciates it -that is an issue for the family and how they bring up their child. If they do not think they can look after the child then put it up for abortion. No need to take a life.

First off, you never answered my question.

Second:

If they do not think they can look after the child then put it up for abortion.

Glad to see you're coming around.

I assume you *meant* adoption, which brings me to...

Third, do you have any idea how many kids are still orphans after years in adoption programs? We already have more children than families willing and vetted to be fit to care for them. Adoption is not the magic catch-all solution you imagine it to be, and it still doesn't eliminate the risks of pregnancy, which include the very real possibility of death.

[Hrythingia]

Scientists and Science agree that it is 'life'. Depriving someone of their life just 'cos' is murder.

Well, put every pest control, lawn care, and animal shelter worker on death row, then, because they're all mass-murderers. Farmers, too. And let's not forget florists, those demons who cull life just because it looks pretty and don't even have the decency to give it a quick death!

Human life is different to plant or other common beasts since we actually have souls.

Not when it comes to who lives. They are both humans, they must be treated as such. It is rarely ever ok to end someone's life.
It does not matter if the child appreciates it -that is an issue for the family and how they bring up their child. If they do not think they can look after the child then put it up for abortion. No need to take a life.

One is born, the other is not. This means that the born supersedes the unborn.

To an extent -the mother has a family and children too to look after so her life must be prioritised. But if she is able to give birth then she must do so, it is not for her to deprive a child of its life.

[Genivaria]

You're right this is rather imprecise isn't it? We should probably leave this to people who actually know what they're talking about, like doctors.

I mean...if it’s growing and is developing a human body, it’s alive...and that starts with fertilization.

Is it? And is that relevant in this case?
The cow that died so I could have a burger was also alive.

[The South Falls]

And here's the fault with your argument!

Health issues that come with pregnancy: Weight gain, mood swings, hormonal issues, nausea, soreness and swelling in the joints and breasts, and an overall decreased quality of life. After pregnancy you have: Lack of bladder control, postpartum depression, blood pressure problems, gestational diabetes, bone density issues, cancer, etc...

The woman doesn't want to deal with that, then she shouldn't have to.

I don't think the fetus wants to put up with death by that metric.

The fetus wants nothing, as it has an underdeveloped brain that doesn't really want anything.

[New haven america]

And here's the fault with your argument!

Health issues that come with pregnancy: Weight gain, mood swings, hormonal issues, nausea, soreness and swelling in the joints and breasts, and an overall decreased quality of life. After pregnancy you have: Lack of bladder control, postpartum depression, blood pressure problems, gestational diabetes, bone density issues, cancer, etc...

The woman doesn't want to deal with that, then she shouldn't have to.

I don't think the fetus wants to put up with death by that metric.

Fetus is incapable of giving or having a say in the matter.

[Luminesa]

She doesn’t want the pregnancy, the guy does. Once the guy gets the baby, she doesn’t have to see the baby or him. Everyone wins.

And here's the fault with your argument!

Health issues that come with pregnancy: Weight gain, mood swings, hormonal issues, nausea, soreness and swelling in the joints and breasts, and an overall decreased quality of life. After pregnancy you have: Lack of bladder control, postpartum depression, blood pressure problems, gestational diabetes, bone density issues, cancer, etc...

The woman doesn't want to deal with that, then she shouldn't have to.

These all depend on the woman’s individual body and health, some women have these and some women don’t. All of these are treatable. And actually pregnancy (before a certain point) lowers the risk of cancer.

The fault with the argument is you don’t actually want to deal with unwanted pregnancies in this scenario. It’s a ruse, a tease.