Indisputable Abortion FACTS:

[Atahualpa]

Originally posted by Zylka
That's really great that you've entered this debate with a pre-determined characterization/stereotype for your ENTIRE opposition. Well done generalizing the opinions of a huge portion of the population in one fell swoop!

This post just convinces me more, Ata. You've branded all the anti-abortionists as a bunch of rednecks/conservatives/whatever, and then proceeded to make this question a non-issue.

nah I have not, I suspect, its because you'd expect that I'd do this that you feel this way.
The only estimation I did was that it is impossible in your country to live an ethical life. Of course you can feel free to prove me wrong.
Sure the whole thing is on whacky grounds, because the assumption that you cant live in a ethic country is a free ticket to not argue ethically is not true either.
The problem with the ethical side is that ethics works for both ways. There is no hierachy of ethics, at least not that I know of. And the ethical points of anti-abortionists just focus on the fetus, thats what disturbs me. If you use ethics as argument you are on the most slippery ground I know of, its not so simple as you try it to be.

Besides, I'd say you shouldnt judge by others what you do support and what not.

Am I about to be labled a fascist/conservative/religious zealot now?

I dont know you much enough to give you a label. Its always difficult to label in discussions because you dont know if I am acting as a counter-weight because I am moderately minded or a hardcore supporter.
You labeld yourself as utiliterian. Unfortunately I dont have any ideas about that. The point that you dont believe in any rights, however I do put in question. Then e.g. the state could easily enslave you for any purposes and you would accept that. -> - not really a clever argument IMO?

About the rights and obligations of men and women over children, I believe they should be equal. Obviously, the expectant mother is unable to work, so temporary disability must be granted for the period of expecting birth, and some time after that, as well. from that time, and afterwards, rights and obligations must be the same.

Of course they should be equal what else should it be? 50% is 50%. And if you argue against abortion but not for equal responsibility then thats strange (it seems thats not the case with you, so I afterwards refer to the others when meaning "you"; they know who they are). In your argumentation following must be present so that I can take you serious:
1. As a man you MUST live with the mother and help raising your child by devoting time and money.
2. You MUST NOT have children with other women as long as the one woman you have children with is still alive and as long as the child does not live on its own. (difference to "is able to live on its own")
3. Living with other women and occassionally devoting time and money is considered to be the weasel way and you are not respected by society members if you do so (of course this is not a law but a feeling everyone should have against such persons). Cause sometimes society pressure is much heavier than a law (if not, all of the times).

Now who would want to live under so strict rules? I certainly dont. But for "your" arguments it would be necessary.

Btw, I only know a male that tried to talk the girl into abortion once she got pregnant, because he werent the one to accept the consequences.
I would feel better if this discussion would focus a little more on the male point to this problem. Its not just the womens fault that they got pregnant.

So here comes my label: I will always be a supporter for abortion. I am glad when its not used, but it is there when one needs it. I am not a fan of teenage pregnancies and why **** up the life of a 15 year old when she made a mistake. We should learn out of our mistakes and not all the time BEAR the consequences, that rather breeds disgruntled citizen. Do you try to weasel out of your consequences? There are really a few people who fully accept them and I highly respect them for that. But not everyone can do this and you cant force this behavior by declaring all abortions illegal.

I just want to make sure that the possibility of an abortion is always present. Wether you do it or not depends on how mature you are, but the possibility must be kept. There is simply no advantage in disallowing it.

For example the notion of the united states administration to empower scientific research that focuses on the health-consequences of abortions (breast-cancer and so on, read it in the news here today).. I think thats another wrong way. It certainly breeds more fear and then we are where Michael Moore left in his movie "bowling for columbine". Ah yes, the "work for welfare" program that is presented there. I do believe that mothers with children are not very high on the list of "things" we show respect for. Another thing why it is not really attractive to give birth?

ata

[Az]

Originally posted by Atahualpa
nah I have not, I suspect, its because you'd expect that I'd do this that you feel this way.
The only estimation I did was that it is impossible in your country to live an ethical life. Of course you can feel free to prove me wrong.

what are you talking about?

Sure the whole thing is on whacky grounds, because the assumption that you cant live in a ethic country is a free ticket to not argue ethically is not true either.
The problem with the ethical side is that ethics works for both ways. There is no hierachy of ethics, at least not that I know of. And the ethical points of anti-abortionists just focus on the fetus, thats what disturbs me. If you use ethics as argument you are on the most slippery ground I know of, its not so simple as you try it to be.

when we discuss abortion, Why the hell shouldn't we focus on the fetus? It's one of the crucial points of the debate. If you think I am on slippery ground, feel free to point it out, no need to do me any favours. I'd hate to think that my position is ethically inconsistent with my core beliefs.

Besides, I'd say you shouldnt judge by others what you do support and what not.

Ah, the cultural relativistic point emerges once again, being as irrelevant and illogical as ever. So, I guess I cannot pass judgement on anyone, right, as long as they believe in what they do?

I dont know you much enough to give you a label. Its always difficult to label in discussions because you dont know if I am acting as a counter-weight because I am moderately minded or a hardcore supporter.

There is no need to act as a counter-weight. The only need is to present your arguements, and argue about their validity, generally, and in particular, versus other POVs.

You labeld yourself as utiliterian. Unfortunately I dont have any ideas about that. The point that you dont believe in any rights, however I do put in question. Then e.g. the state could easily enslave you for any purposes and you would accept that.

Not for ANY purposes. For some purposes, yes. For example, as a punishment for a crime, or conscription. In many of those cases it would be moral.

Of course they should be equal what else should it be? 50% is 50%. And if you argue against abortion but not for equal responsibility then thats strange (it seems thats not the case with you, so I afterwards refer to the others when meaning "you"; they know who they are).

Then I assume you agree that mother's and father's rights to decide on abortion should be equal.

In your argumentation following must be present so that I can take you serious:
1. As a man you MUST live with the mother and help raising your child by devoting time and money.
2. You MUST NOT have children with other women as long as the one woman you have children with is still alive and as long as the child does not live on its own. (difference to "is able to live on its own")
3. Living with other women and occassionally devoting time and money is considered to be the weasel way and you are not respected by society members if you do so (of course this is not a law but a feeling everyone should have against such persons). Cause sometimes society pressure is much heavier than a law (if not, all of the times).

Too many complications. I'd sum it up in: You should take care of your children, and you should be allowed to see them as often you wish, unless you present danger to them.

Btw, I only know a male that tried to talk the girl into abortion once she got pregnant, because he werent the one to accept the consequences.
I would feel better if this discussion would focus a little more on the male point to this problem. Its not just the womens fault that they got pregnant.

Exactly. Their responsibility is equal.

So here comes my label: I will always be a supporter for abortion. I am glad when its not used, but it is there when one needs it. I am not a fan of teenage pregnancies and why **** up the life of a 15 year old when she made a mistake. We should learn out of our mistakes and not all the time BEAR the consequences, that rather breeds disgruntled citizen. Do you try to weasel out of your consequences? There are really a few people who fully accept them and I highly respect them for that. But not everyone can do this and you cant force this behavior by declaring all abortions illegal.

So, basically, you think that people shouldn't be responsible? This brings it back to the fetus issue. If the fetus is human, why can one dispose of it like nothing?

I just want to make sure that the possibility of an abortion is always present. Wether you do it or not depends on how mature you are, but the possibility must be kept. There is simply no advantage in disallowing it.

Sure the option must be kept, in case of medical complications, or when a mother is a drug or alcohol addict, or the child will be born unhealthy.

For example the notion of the united states administration to empower scientific research that focuses on the health-consequences of abortions (breast-cancer and so on, read it in the news here today).. I think thats another wrong way. It certainly breeds more fear and then we are where Michael Moore left in his movie "bowling for columbine".

It's just useless, personally.

Ah yes, the "work for welfare" program that is presented there. I do believe that mothers with children are not very high on the list of "things" we show respect for. Another thing why it is not really attractive to give birth?

ata

That's a problem alright! But calling abortion a solution is similar to calling genocide a solution to racism.

[My Wife Hates CIV]

'So - I'd like to hear just how any of you might refute the fact that a 3 month old fetus (at the LEAST!) IS a human being - supported clearly by this evidence'

as soon as you remove a 3 month old fetus from the mother it dies. it's just a parasite.

i think all the pro-life people should pay an extra $2500 a year in taxes to cover the expense of taking care of a child brought into this world when the mother wanted to abort it earlier - before it was a child!

[Zylka]

...and I think all of the pro-abortionist people in my country should pay an extra $2500 a year for the irresponsible scumbags who are about to walk into a government funded clinic for their 6th abortion. Yet it's not going to happen - and I don't seem to care! What's your point?

[Zylka]

Originally posted by Atahualpa

nah I have not, I suspect, its because you'd expect that I'd do this that you feel this way.
The only estimation I did was that it is impossible in your country to live an ethical life. Of course you can feel free to prove me wrong.

I won't go any further into your post until you first clarify for me - are you simply suggesting that Az is by nature an unethical person because he was born and raised in Israel? As if any Israeli, just on the merit of argued past transgressions in the state history, REGARDLESS OF PERSONAL VIEWS - is automatically an unethical human being (therefore unable to express an opinion on abortion)?

Wow! ...and how relevant to the discussion - I guess we should have aborted him (as well as all other Israelis) on the spot!

The second I settle down, they feel free to come out of the woodworks, I guess. Strange world.

[Rogan Josh]

I have a question for the anti-abortion lobby:

Why do you regard an embryo/whatever as having become a 'child'?

For example, would you be morally opposed to in-vitro fertilisation, where often fertilised eggs are thrown away?

[Zylka]

I don't honestly know if I consider all stages of embryo development as a child, but many pro-abortionists do (fair enough). I take the opinion that it's pretty much impossible to define, and therefore it should be left alone when the consequence is possibly murder.

[Atahualpa]

Originally posted by Azazel
what are you talking about?

I am talking about it is impossible that you can live an ethical life when you for example dont stand up against your government which is shooting palestinians.
Now I dont want to say this is wrong or not, but is it ethically justified?
Same with me here, when I dont oppose the government (or the executive) in their treatment of e.g. black people then I can hardly live an ethical life.

when we discuss abortion, Why the hell shouldn't we focus on the fetus? It's one of the crucial points of the debate. If you think I am on slippery ground, feel free to point it out, no need to do me any favours. I'd hate to think that my position is ethically inconsistent with my core beliefs.

BECAUSE THERE IS THE LIFE OF THE MOTHER AS WELL THAT YOU NEED TO CONSIDER! dammit
(and the life of the father )

Ah, the cultural relativistic point emerges once again, being as irrelevant and illogical as ever. So, I guess I cannot pass judgement on anyone, right, as long as they believe in what they do?

nah that was not my point
You said, I convinced you that the other side has more of a point just because you sentenced gross generalization in my post. _That's_ completely illogical.

There is no need to act as a counter-weight. The only need is to present your arguements, and argue about their validity, generally, and in particular, versus other POVs.

Oh man, ok you may have not made the same experiences as me, BUT when I engage into a discussion where I have mostly a moderate opinion I do the "Balance of Power" approach argumenting for the one side when the other takes over and argumenting for the other side when the one takes over. That way I try to keep the discussion going my way, which is the middle way
I am sure you have experienced this one way or the other.

Then I assume you agree that mother's and father's rights to decide on abortion should be equal.

basically yes, in practice no. You cant force a woman to do an abortion (this would be the same as raping the woman). But for example if the father is not willing at all and the woman wants he shouldnt be held so much responsible for, meaning lower payments or such.
That way maybe there would be more kids in marriages and less kids w/o marriages as the father might back off later. If that's a good thing, I dont know. It either creates more distrust between genders or it binds them more together, both scenarios are possible.
Of course it would be much harder for girls with accidental marriages that dont want an abortion, so I guess it is not so good at all.
What do you think?

So, basically, you think that people shouldn't be responsible? This brings it back to the fetus issue. If the fetus is human, why can one dispose of it like nothing?

No I think they are responsible. But responsibility is something you have to learn and not magically receive from one hour to the other, not saying at all that you get born with it.
I may add that too much responsibility can break people and I do fear that in case of teenage pregnancies. Whats the point in breaking people? Is it really necessary to teach people the hard way (all the time)?

And besides, I dont think that for any woman it is an easy thing! You are talking as if an abortion would be *plop* and that was it and no thought at all. I rather think it is a very difficult step for a woman and she really needs to know what she is doing or else afterwards she might feel very guilty. That said I am all for a lot of talk prior to an abortion and AFAIK this is done here very well.

Sure the option must be kept, in case of medical complications, or when a mother is a drug or alcohol addict, or the child will be born unhealthy.

First of all it would be interesting what you mean with "unhealthy"?
Second I am open for general usage. I just dont find any advantages in restricting its usage.

That's a problem alright! But calling abortion a solution is similar to calling genocide a solution to racism.

Actually I did not want to present it as solution to this certain problem. What I was trying to say was: If you make children more attractive (social status and so on) then there would be less abortions. But the way it is, the more children you have the less socially attractive you are.
The Nazi regime for example has rewarded mothers with lots of children with the mother's cross. IMO that makes it more attractive to have kids. Do you see any politician posing with a mother and their 7 kids? They rather pose with sexy, successful women -> thats what women should be like. Children dont fit there so well dont you think?
This should not present abortion as solution either. I just think about why it is there after all. I guess it is a side effect of the modern society. And I tend to think it may be dangerous for it to exist without it.
You can do a case study if you want at the example of Ireland. Travel there for a month or so and talk with the people what they think. I would be highly interested in the results. In Ireland, as you may know, abortion is illegal by law (I believe even in cases of rape).

ata

[Atahualpa]

Originally posted by Zylka
I won't go any further into your post until you first clarify for me - are you simply suggesting that Az is by nature an unethical person because he was born and raised in Israel? As if any Israeli, just on the merit of argued past transgressions in the state history, REGARDLESS OF PERSONAL VIEWS - is automatically an unethical human being (therefore unable to express an opinion on abortion)?

No not by nature. But unethical is to sit back and watch when people kill each other? or is it not? And if it is not, than it is not unethical for you when some mother kills her unborn child! So any scream like MURDER would become totally irrelevant.

Wow! ...and how relevant to the discussion - I guess we should have aborted him (as well as all other Israelis) on the spot!

As a matter of fact I respect Azazel for his opinion. Dont try to lay your words into my mouth. That doesnt help a serious discussion, even more when you are twisting them like you need them.

ata

[Atahualpa]

Originally posted by Zylka
...and I think all of the pro-abortionist people in my country should pay an extra $2500 a year for the irresponsible scumbags who are about to walk into a government funded clinic for their 6th abortion. Yet it's not going to happen - and I don't seem to care! What's your point?

I guess that would be quite a minority.

[Zylka]

As a matter of fact I respect Azazel for his opinion. Dont try to lay your words into my mouth. That doesnt help a serious discussion, even more when you are twisting them like you need them.

ata

Yet you simply enough said it is IMPOSSIBLE for any Israeli citizen to be an ethical person. Are you an ethical person? Are you standing up and shouting for every single injustice your government commits? Out of the two of you, are YOU the spotless ethical one - and the only one allowed to an opinion in this matter?

...because that's what you've so far said, whether or not you drag me into proving (with your own statements) that I'm not putting words into your mouth. Ask nicely, and I will do so!

[Zylka]

Originally posted by Atahualpa


I guess that would be quite a minority.

Yeah, but second or third abortions would NOT be quite a minority, and that's pathetic and lowly enough for my shotty ethics. How about yours?

[Az]

Q

Originally posted by Atahualpa
I am talking about it is impossible that you can live an ethical life when you for example dont stand up against your government which is shooting palestinians.
Now I dont want to say this is wrong or not, but is it ethically justified?
Same with me here, when I dont oppose the government (or the executive) in their treatment of e.g. black people then I can hardly live an ethical life.

Actually, When I find the actions of my govt. unethical, I do point it out. I'd rather not have that hostility, but I hardly think that my government is the sole coulprit.

BECAUSE THERE IS THE LIFE OF THE MOTHER AS WELL THAT YOU NEED TO CONSIDER! dammit
(and the life of the father )

I do consider it. And I think that killing the unborn child is not the most ethical solution.

nah that was not my point
You said, I convinced you that the other side has more of a point just because you sentenced gross generalization in my post. _That's_ completely illogical.

I don't know what exactly are you talking about. You've said :

Besides, I'd say you shouldnt judge by others what you do support and what not.

as I understood it, you've said that I cannot judge others by my own ethical standards. I've claimed it to be rediculous.

Oh man, ok you may have not made the same experiences as me, BUT when I engage into a discussion where I have mostly a moderate opinion I do the "Balance of Power" approach argumenting for the one side when the other takes over and argumenting for the other side when the one takes over. That way I try to keep the discussion going my way, which is the middle way
I am sure you have experienced this one way or the other.

This is not very useful.

basically yes, in practice no. You cant force a woman to do an abortion (this would be the same as raping the woman). But for example if the father is not willing at all and the woman wants he shouldnt be held so much responsible for, meaning lower payments or such.

Why any payment whatsoever? why is he more responsible than the woman? Personally, I think they must be held responsible, and not just kill the child because they want to.

That way maybe there would be more kids in marriages and less kids w/o marriages as the father might back off later. If that's a good thing, I dont know. It either creates more distrust between genders or it binds them more together, both scenarios are possible.

Of course it would be much harder for girls with accidental marriages that dont want an abortion, so I guess it is not so good at all.
What do you think?

I think that if abortion would be allowed, which personally, I think it's wrong after the first couple of days ( You people had unprotected sex, well, GO CHECK YOURSELVES! Why wait?! ) The rules should be the same for men and women. They should have equal saying in the future of the baby, not just the mother as it is now.

No I think they are responsible. But responsibility is something you have to learn and not magically receive from one hour to the other, not saying at all that you get born with it.
I may add that too much responsibility can break people and I do fear that in case of teenage pregnancies. Whats the point in breaking people? Is it really necessary to teach people the hard way (all the time)?

No. we have to have the easy way, teach them about safe sex, etc. etc. If all of that wasn't enough, well, TOUGH. I guess we should forgive people that kill someone in a car accident, too.

And besides, I dont think that for any woman it is an easy thing! You are talking as if an abortion would be *plop* and that was it and no thought at all. I rather think it is a very difficult step for a woman and she really needs to know what she is doing or else afterwards she might feel very guilty. That said I am all for a lot of talk prior to an abortion and AFAIK this is done here very well.

Noone says it's *plop*. This is just another reason to teach people to have sex responsibly.

First of all it would be interesting what you mean with "unhealthy"?
Second I am open for general usage. I just dont find any advantages in restricting its usage.

unhealthy: Heavy disabilities, retardation, etc. This is not an easy question, btw.
why not for general usage? Because, once again, we're killing humans. Very young humans, of course, but remember how shocked we are when someone hurts a pregnant woman that causes miscarriage? We're obviously not shoked just because she was hit, because simply people being hit is, well, nothing special, sadly.

Actually I did not want to present it as solution to this certain problem. What I was trying to say was: If you make children more attractive (social status and so on) then there would be less abortions. But the way it is, the more children you have the less socially attractive you are.
The Nazi regime for example has rewarded mothers with lots of children with the mother's cross. IMO that makes it more attractive to have kids. Do you see any politician posing with a mother and their 7 kids? They rather pose with sexy, successful women -> thats what women should be like. Children dont fit there so well dont you think?
This should not present abortion as solution either. I just think about why it is there after all. I guess it is a side effect of the modern society. And I tend to think it may be dangerous for it to exist without it.
You can do a case study if you want at the example of Ireland. Travel there for a month or so and talk with the people what they think. I would be highly interested in the results. In Ireland, as you may know, abortion is illegal by law (I believe even in cases of rape).

ata

Sorry, then. I thought you meant it to be a viable soultion.

[st_swithin]

What a GRAND WIZARD of an idea!! Yavoon proposes to RAPE a woman, then FORCE the woman to carry the child to term, THEN tear the baby out of the mother's womb, THEN take this child, whom she's carried for 9 months and THEN GIVE IT AWAY TO THE HIGHEST BIDDER.

Don't forget to take the biological mother's parental rights away too - after all, "she's just a breeding sow, NOT a living, breathing HUMAN BEING with FEELINGS and EMOTIONS." Your words, not mine.

Why is it that a mother with cubs is the fiercest and most vicious competitor in Nature, but among Humans she is the most loathed, most reviled, most downtrodden?

YAVOON IS AN A55HOLE - he can't sh1t out a baby for himself, so he RAPES women and then FORCES them to become incubators for his precious seed, and then deigns to tell the woman, the child, and everyone else around them what's best for the mother, the child, and everyone else around them.

You sound a lot like George W. Bush, with your logic and rational thinking. Started any good land wars lately? I hear Asia's PRIME for the cherry-picking.

Remember the Rape of Nanjing? I DO.

All the pain and suffering of 1,000,000 souls - I give it ALL BACK TO YOU, a thousandfold, plus interest. They go now, to rest for all eternity. YOU MUST LIVE TO ATONE FOR YOUR SINS, AND THE SINS OF YOUR FATHERS.

You'd better hope YOU never end up in prison, otherwise you'll never be able to fart audibly again - it'll be like your a55 is sighing in pain. Don't think you'll miss it? You will, once you realise how uncomfortable adult diapers are. Oh well, you'll be quite popular among the black inmates, since they tend to be more well-endowed than your average Aryan. Don't worry - they'll probably like you too.

Did I mention I made a lot of friends in prison, after you sent me there for slapping you and telling you to leave me alone? They're waiting for you there, but I am not. I just received my 'Get out of jail free' card today, and I'm OUTTA HERE!! See ya!

Do NOT collect even a penny. Do not pass Go. Go directly to jail. HAVE A NICE TRIP! SEE YOU NEXT FALL!! Don't forget to bring some Kleenex!

Your loving daughter,
Tyler S Durden

PS I still remember what your **** feels like going in, and let me tell you, I've been attacked by string beans that were bigger.

Hope that clears up any misconceptions you had about being above or below average: You're WAAAAAAAAAAAAY BELOW! In fact, I do believe you've established some kind of record for having the smallest penis IN ALL OF RECORDED HISTORY.

Bye bye!!

[Az]

You'd get much more respect without the penis size joke.