[Abortion Thread] A Tough Pill To Swallow

[San Lumen]

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/south-c ... d=99565825

South Carolina 6-week abortion ban signed into law, providers file lawsuit
A state court struck down a previous six-week ban.

[Floofybit]

Incest typically caused birth defects and a woman should not be forced to carry a baby that she didn't make

Wasn't your objection something about "a child not getting to experience life?" Surely that also applies to rape.

Yes, however, some sympathy should be given towards the woman. She should not be forced to have a baby when she did not consent to the intercourse.

[Necroghastia]

Wasn't your objection something about "a child not getting to experience life?" Surely that also applies to rape.

Yes, however, some sympathy should be given towards the woman. She should not be forced to have a baby when she did not consent to the intercourse.

Why should anyone be forced to carry a pregnancy when they do not wish to?

[Floofybit]

Yes, however, some sympathy should be given towards the woman. She should not be forced to have a baby when she did not consent to the intercourse.

Why should anyone be forced to carry a pregnancy when they do not wish to?

A child deserves to have a chance at life and no one should be allowed to take that away without good reason.

[San Lumen]

Why should anyone be forced to carry a pregnancy when they do not wish to?

A child deserves to have a chance at life and no one should be allowed to take that away without good reason.

So a rape or incest victim no matter how old should have to carry a child to them they don’t want and could cause harm?

[Floofybit]

A child deserves to have a chance at life and no one should be allowed to take that away without good reason.

So a rape or incest victim no matter how old should have to carry a child to them they don’t want and could cause harm?

No.

[San Lumen]

So a rape or incest victim no matter how old should have to carry a child to them they don’t want and could cause harm?

No.

Ok what should the exceptions be?

[Floofybit]

No.

Ok what should the exceptions be?

Only in the rare case of rape, incest, harm to the mother or child's life

[Necroghastia]

Ok what should the exceptions be?

Only in the rare case of rape, incest, harm to the mother or child's life

Why doesn't the rape one deserve "a chance at life?"

[Floofybit]

Only in the rare case of rape, incest, harm to the mother or child's life

Why doesn't the rape one deserve "a chance at life?"

A mother should not be forced to carry a child when they did not consent to the intercourse

[Necroghastia]

Why doesn't the rape one deserve "a chance at life?"

A mother should not be forced to carry a child when they did not consent to the intercourse

And so I ask again: why should anyone be forced to? You can't just say "it deserves a chance at life" again, because obviously some of them don't, by your own admission.

[Floofybit]

A mother should not be forced to carry a child when they did not consent to the intercourse

And so I ask again: why should anyone be forced to? You can't just say "it deserves a chance at life" again, because obviously some of them don't, by your own admission.

Because there is not a good enough reason for the child to be deprived of life. Life should never be taken away without good reason

[Neutraligon]

And so I ask again: why should anyone be forced to? You can't just say "it deserves a chance at life" again, because obviously some of them don't, by your own admission.

Because there is not a good enough reason for the child to be deprived of life. Life should never be taken away without good reason

Then why are you excluding those of rape and incest from those who should not be deprived of life. What ate they any less deserving?

[The Pirateariat]

Why doesn't the rape one deserve "a chance at life?"

A mother should not be forced to carry a child when they did not consent to the intercourse

So why the incest exception then? Assuming both parties are consenting.

Are children born of incest inherently unworthy of life?

[Vassenor]

Why doesn't the rape one deserve "a chance at life?"

A mother should not be forced to carry a child when they did not consent to the intercourse

Consent to intercourse is not consent to pregnancy. And consent to anything can be withdrawn.

[Floofybit]

A mother should not be forced to carry a child when they did not consent to the intercourse

So why the incest exception then? Assuming both parties are consenting.

Are children born of incest inherently unworthy of life?

Incest has a much higher risk of causing birth defects. Although I am a little shaky on whether it is okay or not, and right now I am kind of starting to lean against it.

[Floofybit]

Because there is not a good enough reason for the child to be deprived of life. Life should never be taken away without good reason

Then why are you excluding those of rape and incest from those who should not be deprived of life. What ate they any less deserving?

For rape, a mother should not be forced to have a child when she did not consent to the sex. For incent, I honestly think I may have been wrong about it, and think it shouldn't be allowed.

[Necroghastia]

Then why are you excluding those of rape and incest from those who should not be deprived of life. What ate they any less deserving?

For rape, a mother should not be forced to have a child when she did not consent to the sex. For incent, I honestly think I may have been wrong about it, and think it shouldn't be allowed.

So it's more about punishing people for having sex than it is anything to do with any kind of concern for life or whatever.

[Celritannia]

Why should anyone be forced to carry a pregnancy when they do not wish to?

A child deserves to have a chance at life and no one should be allowed to take that away without good reason.

A child does yes, i.e., that child has already been born and is a separate living human being.

[Thepeopl]

And so I ask again: why should anyone be forced to? You can't just say "it deserves a chance at life" again, because obviously some of them don't, by your own admission.

Because there is not a good enough reason for the child to be deprived of life. Life should never be taken away without good reason

Your "good enough reason" differs from mine. So... Am I allowed to follow mine? Or are you going to force your view on me?

Abortions are not done on a whim. "Just because one feels like it". I think the responsibilities for pre existing life should out weigh the unborn ones.
You would deny parents that choice. Yes they consented to sex, sadly the contraceptive failed, now they are forced to have an extra child. Even if they don't have enough seats in their car, no bedroom to spare, no financial reserve to feed extra mouths.
Many parents will say, oh well let's do this. But just as many will say, sorry we are not going to shoulder the extra strain. We will not burden the other children.
You say: every unborn deserves a chance at life
I say: everyone should have the optimal start in life, without poverty, malnourishment, emotional negligence.

[Point Blob]

Also, this thread is even longer than the current page count indicates.

I can well imagine.

Simple: two or more passionate, intractable sides constantly arguing with each other, commenting on stories related to the topic, etc. Lots of voices trying to deconstruct the other sides' arguments (or force their beliefs down the other sides' throats depending on how you look at it). Throw in religion, medical consequences, and a bunch of other stuff and you have the recipe for a ridiculously long discussion.

It never goes anywhere, of course. I mean this topic has been rolling about all over the place how many decades now?
I've no idea why, personally. The entire thing is an idiotic non-issue.

[Dogmeat]

So why the incest exception then? Assuming both parties are consenting.

Are children born of incest inherently unworthy of life?

Incest has a much higher risk of causing birth defects. Although I am a little shaky on whether it is okay or not, and right now I am kind of starting to lean against it.

So does having kids after 35. But you weren't against that. Nor did you mention "birth defects" as a cause for abortion anywhere else.

So birth defects on their own are not a cause for abortion, nor is an increased likelihood of birth defects by itself enough, only the possibility of birth defects caused by inbreeding is enough to violate the sanctity of life. If a fetus doesn't have any skin, and will die in agony upon being born, that fetus must be carried to term. If a fetus seems totally healthy, but their parents are cousins, that fetus is too much of a risk. They might have birth defects.


I swear, it seems like the opponents of abortion have never thought about anything to do with abortion at all. Not once in their life. But they're so sure that their unconsidered opinion is right. And that we must all be forced to obey them.

[The Pirateariat]

So why the incest exception then? Assuming both parties are consenting.

Are children born of incest inherently unworthy of life?

Incest has a much higher risk of causing birth defects. Although I am a little shaky on whether it is okay or not, and right now I am kind of starting to lean against it.

So why not say "abortion is allowed when there is a high risk of birth defects?" Why just incest? If birth defects are what you're worried about, then why are only focusing on one possible cause of them?

[Floofybit]

Incest has a much higher risk of causing birth defects. Although I am a little shaky on whether it is okay or not, and right now I am kind of starting to lean against it.

So why not say "abortion is allowed when there is a high risk of birth defects?" Why just incest? If birth defects are what you're worried about, then why are only focusing on one possible cause of them?

If a great amount of harm to the child's life is present, abortion may be an option

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

And yet the South keeps denying mother's with functionally dead fetuses with 0 potential for life abortion.