Abortion: A 'right' that is wrong? (two theses for debate)

[Urban Ranger]

connor,

I think it will be silly not considering the status of the embryo (or foetus). If it is considered human than abortion is just murder, right?

[MrWhereItsAt]

MrFun,

I should hope that the three circumstances that you state for situations where abortion is OK are pretty much universally considered OK by most people not part of the activist groups.

It is any extension beyond that that is the most controversial.

[November Adam]

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
MrFun,

I should hope that the three circumstances that you state for situations where abortion is OK are pretty much universally considered OK by most people not part of the activist groups.

It is any extension beyond that that is the most controversial.

Exactly... it seems that many people use these examples to further their argument for abortion, when that is not what is the issue.

Albert, I disagree with your thinking abortion is justified if it thought that it wouldn't have a "good" life, or be a constructive member of society.

It is hard to determine which roads will open up in life, and some people who are born into hardship are better people for it, and some are not. The undeterminable is not a reason IMO.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
I think it will be silly not considering the status of the embryo (or foetus). If it is considered human than abortion is just murder, right?

Let's see if I remember connor's arguement correctly. Abortion is justified at any time in the prenancy, presumably until just before birth, because the mother never gave permission to the foetus for it to be residing in its body and can therefore terminate that relationship at a time of her choosing.

I now prepare to have connor correct me.

[Caligastia]

I agree with thesis 2 because no matter how much money the mother has she still does not want her child, and we have enough unwanted children in this world.

[connorkimbro]

Dino: Ehh, . . . i think it might have been something like that. Anyway, the way you said it, it sounds silly. After all, if the woman TRIED to get pregnant, than she did give permission. . .
. . . I don't think that was it exactly, but no matter. I think i gave up that position anyway. I forget what i think now. Or maybe i never have decided on this issue yet. dammit. . .

[Tom201]

I've said it before, and i'll say it again (mostly because i just like to stir things up a bit) that I do not consider whether or not the fetus is "alive" or not to have any bearing on abortions legality. To me, whether the fetus is alive or not is NOT an issue.

Of course it is, throwing away something dead is diffrent from killing something and throw it than away.

First one noone cares, second one probably gets u into trouble

[Bosh]

Abortion is one of those things that is fairly futile to outlaw, you'd just get abortion tourists going to a place where its legal (look what happened to ireland).

[Sava]

Regardless of whatever the reason behind a woman's RIGHT to abort her baby, it is not society's place to make policy on it.

It is reasonable to assume that a baby is aborted because it is not wanted. A child that is unwanted might not receive the love and support that a child needs. Why force a child to live a life where he/she is not going to be loved just because of your own warped sense of morals?

Until the bun comes out of the oven, I don't think it should be classified as a human being.

I have no idea whether or not abortion is equal to murder in God's (or any other higher power's) eyes. When we die, we will find out. The point is, aborted babies aren't suffering. In fact, in the majority of instances, they are being spared the burden of leading a life of pain.

Abortion is an issue between a woman and her doctor.

[Rex Little]

Let's see if I remember connor's arguement correctly. Abortion is justified at any time in the prenancy, presumably until just before birth, because the mother never gave permission to the foetus for it to be residing in its body and can therefore terminate that relationship at a time of her choosing.

Actually, this is a misstatement of my position. What I believe is that a woman has the right to abort up to the point at which the fetus could be removed safely and kept alive outside her body. After that time, she has the obligation to have it removed alive if she doesn't want to carry it to term. (The vast majority of abortions take place during the first trimester, well before the fetus is independently viable.)

Even if the mother gave permission--explicitly or implicitly--for the fetus to live inside her, that permission can be withdrawn.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by connorkimbro
Anyway, the way you said it, it sounds silly.

You should try hearing it from my POV.

I think i gave up that position anyway. I forget what i think now. Or maybe i never have decided on this issue yet. dammit. . .

Then I apologize for misrepresenting you. I may have gotten your position confused with that of Rex Little.

Edit: Which it appears that I have done exactly that.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
MrFun,

I should hope that the three circumstances that you state for situations where abortion is OK are pretty much universally considered OK by most people not part of the activist groups.

It is any extension beyond that that is the most controversial.

Exactly -- if a woman wishes to have an abortion outside of any of the three conditions I listed, then that abortion should be classified as illegal.

A woman needs to have a compelling, significant reason to justify having an abortion -- and the three reasons I listed are the only ones that are legitimate in my opinion.

So if that area is not even argued about anymore in our society, then let me state my opinion on the status of the fetus itself.

To me, the fetus is not a fully-functional human being upon conception. I agree with the Roe vs Wade ruling on when a fetus can no longer be legally aborted.

Partial-birth abortion is disgusting to me.
I have only ONE justification that I believe is legitimate for partial-birth abortion, and that is, if the woman's life is threatened.

But partial-birth abortion should NEVER be carried out for either of the other two reasons (rape or incest).

[DanS]

" I should hope that the three circumstances that you state for situations where abortion is OK are pretty much universally considered OK by most people not part of the activist groups."

I am not part of an activist group and I don't believe it's OK or should be legal.

[Felch]

Even if the fetus isn't considered human, it's barbaric that it would be treated differently from any animal. It is in most cases illegal (and in my opinion immoral) to kill animals without meaningful justification. The simple fact that a fetus is less meaningful to society than a dog or cat would be ridiculous, if it weren't for the tragic consequences.

I agree with MrFun, but I would say that the limit for abortions should be when the heart and brain are functioning. I understand that a person is considered dead when those two organs stop working, so it makes sense to me at least that they should be considered alive when they begin working. This restriction on abortion would give unexpected mothers something on the order of a couple months to decide, although I could definitely be wrong on that.

What troubles me the most about abortion is the lack of responsibility it gives to the mother. If you're mature enough to have sex, you should be mature enough to use birth control. The pill has been available for something like fifty years now, is more or less safe, and very effective. It's a common sense solution for people who don't want to be pregnant, and I don't think anybody besides the Vatican is really opposed to it.

[November Adam]

My two cents

On the status of a fetus:

I believe that while a fetus is not a fully functional human, I still believe it is human.

I don't understand how it can not be considered as such, as it is a homo sapien, at it's earliest developmental stage.

If you remove all of the emotion involved in this argument you can see this point. A life form has developmental stages with in it's life cycle, (basic biology), from the embryo to the adult. The method of incubation is different for each species, but that doesn't change the fact that the life form is an individual.

As you can see this has nothing to do with brain activity, nor individual organs, nor ability to live independently. But the fact that the embryo, fetus, is still an individual life form.