Bush Declares National Sanctity of Life Day

[Spiffor]

I can't wait to see the official banning of abortion in the US (I know, it's protected by the constitution).
Actually, I can't wait to see the administration's disney-like propaganda on the issue. I bet they'll say it improves freedom

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

Originally posted by obiwan18

This is not a 'punishment' for sex, but a consequence.

semantics... negative consequence/punishment, whatever.

Even with contraception, although contraception does lessen the likelyhood somewhat. Everyone should be prepared before sex for the possibility of getting their partner pregnant.

Sometimes pregnancies happen despite taking all reasonable precautions. And when that does happen, the couple/woman makes a decision. Keep the fetus, and irrevocably change her/their li(fe/ves), or terminate the pregnancy.

People have a right to have sex without having the specter of a massive life change hanging over their heads, due to a birth control failure.

And incidentally, if you don't call forcing someone to carry a child to term against her will and without compensation, slavery, what do you call it?

[Ben Kenobi]

"People have a right to have sex without having the specter of a massive life change hanging over their heads, " -STYOM

Not in Canada we don't. Only one of the judges in the Morgentaler Supreme Court case in 1988 recognised a right to abortion within the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The 8 other judges challenged the constitutionality of the 1969 law, and proposed that the legislature could pass a better law restricting abortion.

Once a woman is pregnant she is going through a major life change. Abortion is not like getting a nail trimmed. It is a major surgical procedure with a variety of potential complications. Even if she has the abortion it will not suddenly stop her life from changing.

"if you don't call forcing someone to carry a child to term against her will and without compensation, slavery, what do you call it?"

I call it motherhood.

[Spiffor]

I know two 20 year old women who aborted (and one has kept the following child), and I can tell you there is no comparison between aborting and keeping the child. Aborting is a painful experience they'll always remember, but which will remain nothing more as a memory.
A child is something you think of 100% of the time, and that you cannot disregard any second. Big difference.

(btw, I am a hardcore pro choice if you didn't guess Knowing 2 young women who told me they abortded and why helped)

[Ben Kenobi]

Spiffor:

And here I thought I had an ally.

"Aborting is a painful experience they'll always remember, but which will remain nothing more as a memory."

What about the women who die? The women who end up having a hysterectomy? Approximately 90% of the women who have an abortion record some kind of negative effect afterwards, whether it be depression or something more serious.

"A child is something you think of 100% of the time, and that you cannot disregard any second."

Question Spiffor- should a women be allowed to kill her child because their child demands too much of their time? Why or why not?

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by obiwan18
Question Spiffor- should a women be allowed to kill her child because their child demands too much of their time? Why or why not?

A woman should be able to kill her fetus before it reaches self-conciousness, if she feels she cannot give a satisfying life to the to-be-born baby.
This is completely subjective, because there is now way to tell objectively when the fetus reaches some kind of self conciousness. Some people believe we should protect the very first cell, while others think a human becomes one at birth and not before (Amélie Nothomb, Métaphysique des Tubes)
I believe "self-conciousness" (even a very vague form of it, meaning the ability to feel) is a step of the fetus development, and not the first one. I agree it is a question of belief. I do not see any moral problem killing a pre-consiousness fetus. Mind you, I do not see any moral problems pulling the plug out of a comatose person without hope of being alive again.

Yes, I believe it is better to "kill people" (since you seem to assimilate abortion with murder) before their birth, rather than making them jailbait. I strongly think a deficient education and a lack of parental love make for unbalanced children, and for extremely unhappy and sad people (and probably dangerous as well) in the future.

We shouldn't force unwanted children to suffer from lack of love.

[Ben Kenobi]

A couple of points, Spiffor

"A woman should be able to kill her fetus before it reaches self-conciousness,"

"Mind you, I do not see any moral problems pulling the plug out of a comatose person without hope of being alive again."

Most comatose people do have a chance of recovery, brain death is defined as the irreversable cessation of brain activity, which is different from being comatose. If you were to pull the plug out of a comatose person, you are in effect, killing them.

Also, someone who is irreversably brain dead is different from the unborn child. The unborn child may not have the current capacity to be self-aware, but rather the inherent capacity as a human person.

Do I have the right to kill you when you are sleeping, when you are not currently self-aware? Why not?

"We shouldn't force unwanted children to suffer from lack of love."

Do we kill the homeless who are not loved? Let's give the children a chance to be loved, rather than killing them through abortion.

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

The bottom line is, you can't interfere with a woman's right to control her own body -

(as I, and others, have said in other threads and other places)

-

Go on all you want about whether a fetus is a 'life' or not.

Go on all you want about how great an experience motherhood is (for those who desire it).

Restricting the right of a woman to choose whether to carry a fetus is a gross invasion of privacy, tantamount to viewing women as involuntary incubators, if they object to the pregnancy. And no number of winking smilies will change that.

I suspect you'd see it differently if you knew anyone who had to make that choice.

BTW, the SCC routinely avoids making policy decisions (e.g. "there is a constitutional right to abortion") where simply finding a law unconstitutional on other grounds will suffice for the same effect. R. v. Morgantaler was such an instance.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by obiwan18
A couple of points, Spiffor

"A woman should be able to kill her fetus before it reaches self-conciousness,"

"Mind you, I do not see any moral problems pulling the plug out of a comatose person without hope of being alive again."

Most comatose people do have a chance of recovery, brain death is defined as the irreversable cessation of brain activity, which is different from being comatose. If you were to pull the plug out of a comatose person, you are in effect, killing them.

Also, someone who is irreversably brain dead is different from the unborn child. The unborn child may not have the current capacity to be self-aware, but rather the inherent capacity as a human person.

Do I have the right to kill you when you are sleeping, when you are not currently self-aware? Why not?

"We shouldn't force unwanted children to suffer from lack of love."

Do we kill the homeless who are not loved? Let's give the children a chance to be loved, rather than killing them through abortion.

I almost replied to this before seeing how meaningless it would be. I don't assimilate abortion with murder. You do. Call this a conflict of values, because I don't think any of your kind will change my mind, while I don't think you'll change your mind either (except if you go through this kind of experience). It's fine by me, I don't care.

What I care about is the happiness of the mother and the child.

[Jon Miller]

and part of that, fundamental to that, for the child, is to be alive

most people come from sucky situations, it is not fair for some to not be born at all (and I do not see how it is not murder after brainwaves exist)

Jon Miller

[Ben Kenobi]

Where did I call abortion murder?
Your words not mine, Spiffor.
If you can't take the heat...

STYOM

"I suspect you'd see it differently if you knew anyone who had to make that choice."

Actually, I used to agree that it was a women's issue in which men have no part UNTIL I had a chance to meet some women who had abortion experiences. It's not a panacea, it can maim the women, even sterilise them.

"a woman's right to control her own body"

"Restricting the right of a woman to choose whether to carry a fetus is a gross invasion of privacy,"

Both assume there is only one body in question. The fetus has it's own circulatory system, a different blood type, and sometimes in an autoimmune disorder, the mother's antibodies destroy the fetus as they do not recognise the fetus as a part of the mother's body.

If there is only one person, then no justification is necessary for abortion. None whatsoever. If there is two, then both need to be considered.

We don't allow children to be beat in the privacy of the home, because we believe the child's welfare outweighs any privacy rights. Should abortion be the same?

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

You didn't address my points...

How can you justify forcing a person to be an incubator?

[Ben Kenobi]

I thought I went over that point.

Unless the state is forcibly impregnating people, then no woman is forced to be an incubator.

Sex can result in pregnancy, even with condoms and other forms of precautions. So long as the woman is not forced to have sex, she has to take responsibility for her actions.

The unborn child has nowhere else to go, while it is developing in the womb. Therefore, it is the duty of the mother to care for her child, at least until the child is born. Then, the care can be turned over to another couple if the mother feels she cannot take care of the child.

Is there an alternative? Is their another place the child could develop before they are born?

[Proteus_MST]

Originally posted by obiwan18
I thought I went over that point.

Unless the state is forcibly impregnating people, then no woman is forced to be an incubator.

Sex can result in pregnancy, even with condoms and other forms of precautions. So long as the woman is not forced to have sex, she has to take responsibility for her actions.

So in your eyes at least those women, which are raped would be allowed to abort?


oh, btw.
as for Abortion being an major chirurgical procedure.

That may be true for older methods, but in the present we´ve got a pill names myfegyne or RU486.
The woman takes the pill (in Combination with Prostaglandin) and the fetus is just washed away with the next menstruation bleeding.
It can be taken til the 9th week of pregnancy, is already in widespread use in a wide range of countries, and has far less complications than any chirurgical Abortion.

As I heard, Anti-Chaoice movements in Canada have succeeded in keeping the pill out of the country despite the support of medical Associations and Province governments for RU486

[tandeetaylor]

Originally posted by obiwan18 Sex can result in pregnancy, even with condoms and other forms of precautions. So long as the woman is not forced to have sex, she has to take responsibility for her actions.

Hi. I believe this should be a Virigins By Choice Argument only. Are you?

The unborn child has nowhere else to go, while it is developing in the womb. Therefore, it is the duty of the mother to care for her child, at least until the child is born. Then, the care can be turned over to another couple if the mother feels she cannot take care of the child.

I love it how men, who have never been pregnant, can argue endlessly about a woman's responsibility to carry pregnancies to term. Just sit back. Easy easy easy. Being pregnant is a major commitment, it forces many changes, most of which are unpleasant. The one pleasant is connecting with your unborn child, which, if you plan to give up your baby for adoption, would also be unpleasant.

Oh, and in case you do believe rape victims should be allowed to abort-- I believe this would result in a nightmarish situation of false accusations. And true accusations which unfortunately are difficult to prove resulting in honest women not being granted this right and forced to carry a product of rape...