Abortion

[Japher]

and a pretty lame one at that

oh right...

Would you please care to explain why you think that should be so, and secondly why you consider adoption to be preferable to abortion?

Because ppl shouldn't be allowed to chose to kill someone because of their irresponsibility.

[Whaleboy]

Because ppl shouldn't be allowed to chose to kill someone because of their irresponsibility.

Pray tell, how is a 10 week old foetus a "someone"?

[Deity Dude]

Before those of you who disagree with my opinion call me a religous fundamentalist let me start off by saying I'm not even religous let alone a fundamentalist.

It seems to me it is a mere question of when does life begin. Note I didn't say self-sustaining life, I said life.

IMO life begins at conception. I think it is pretty much a scientific fact. (If someone has proof otherwise, I would be interested in listening to it.) Given that fact, it should be illegal to take another human life without IT'S permission.

In the case that bringing the pregnancy to full term could harm or kill the mother, I would make an exception. I say this because, while noone has the right to take another life without cause, no one should be required to give thier own life to save another's.

As for the arguments about aren't we better without all these unwanted people becoming gang-members, I would ask if you are for murdering all gang-members on sight. The same with the deformed people argument, the unwanted socio-path argument etc. All of these arguments take the premise that it is ok to kill a person before birth because they might or will become a problem, but to kill them after birth when they actually are a problem is murder.

As for the coathanger butcher argument, again I just don't find it compelling. That argument taken to its logical extension would legalize killing undesirable babies, children and adults so that the person commiting the murder can do it in a clean and sterile matter. The argument would go like this, "Afterall, whether murder is legal or not people are still going to do it. I prefer it be done in an open, clean, sterile manner. It's much safer that way for the person commiting the murder and the one paying for it to be done."

Then there is the trauma on the parent(s) argument. Basically it says that since the parents lives will be inconvienenced by the birth of the child that it is ok to kill it before it is born. Does this mean we should allow infanticide if the parents discover the inconvenience after birth.

Then there is the fetus is not a self-sustaining being argument. This is totally immaterial. Hospitals, nursing homes, etc. are full of nonself-sustaining individuals. Not only don't we kill them, we actively attempt to keep them alive.

The arguments for legalized abortion on demand are pretty ridiculous unless you convince yourself that life begins at birth or at least at the point where abortion would no longer be allowed.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Japher

Because ppl shouldn't be allowed to chose to kill someone because of their irresponsibility.

How is a rape victim responsible for her own rape?

[Whaleboy]

IMO life begins at conception. I think it is pretty much a scientific fact. (If someone has proof otherwise, I would be interested in listening to it.) Given that fact, it should be illegal to take another human life without IT'S permission.

Many medical ethicists make the distinction between lifeform (i.e., cells with DNA, like an amoeba), person, and being. The distinction here lies between lifeform and person, at what point does a collection of embrionic cells become a person? I find it hard to believe that a few cells, up to 8 or so weeks term, could possibly be considered a person.

An 8 month old foetus, no I wouldn't think that should be aborted, but we can take an age where we know by sheer common sense that a foetus isn't a person, say my arbitrary 8-10 weeks, whereby beforehand and at that time, we can guarantee the foetus not to be a person, but afterward, the true distinction may lie, and so we cannot guarantee, and thus cannot permit the abortion.

That seems the common-sense way to approach the problem.

[Q Classic]

Originally posted by MrFun



How is a rape victim responsible for her own rape?

Obviously, MrFun, you're forgetting to blame the victim here.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Q Cubed


Obviously, MrFun, you're forgetting to blame the victim here.

Shame on me -- I need to get my heart removed and replaced with a cold stone, I guess.

[Deity Dude]

Originally posted by Whaleboy


Many medical ethicists make the distinction between lifeform (i.e., cells with DNA, like an amoeba), person, and being. The distinction here lies between lifeform and person, at what point does a collection of embrionic cells become a person? I find it hard to believe that a few cells, up to 8 or so weeks term, could possibly be considered a person.

An 8 month old foetus, no I wouldn't think that should be aborted, but we can take an age where we know by sheer common sense that a foetus isn't a person, say my arbitrary 8-10 weeks, whereby beforehand and at that time, we can guarantee the foetus not to be a person, but afterward, the true distinction may lie, and so we cannot guarantee, and thus cannot permit the abortion.

That seems the common-sense way to approach the problem.

I'm glad you at least admit your distinction is arbitrary. I'm not sure why you consider a less developed human a non-person and a more developed one a person. Or why at 7 weeks its not a person but at 11 weeks it is

The reason why I consider "a collection of embrionic cells" a person is because that is what it is. That is what its intended outcome is. It isn't like there's a 20% chance it might become a fingernail. Assuming it continues normally it will one day be an adult male or female.

[Ben Kenobi]

If many of these people were truly concerned about preventing unwanted pregnancies from being aborted, they would be passing out condoms and birth control... not trying to take away reproductive rights and health care options.

Is it true that contraception reduces the number of abortions performed? If that were so, and given the array of options available, surely we should expect to see the rate go down.

Because many abortions are done to SAVE THE MOTHER'S LIFE. Including an abortion that a family member of mine had.

I agree with you that in certain circumstances you will not be able to save the life of both the mother and child, such as an ectopic pregnancy. However, I don't see you arguing that all other abortions ought to be banned. Is the issue really only about those abortions done to save the life of the mother?

I hope that none of those people ever have a family member that is raped or is ever faced with a high-risk pregnancy and is forced to make such a difficult decision to have an abortion. Maybe then those morons will understand it is not about murder.

Again, would you agree with banning all abortions, that do not involve rape? If not, why then should it matter whether the woman has been raped or not? You aren't helping someone who has been raped by giving them an abortion, you don't "unrape" the woman.

And a fetus is not a person. It's a lump of cells that does not have a developed brain. It is not aware. Terminating a pregnancy is not the same as killing a person no matter how much these religious fundamentalists say it is.

When do you consider a brain to be fully 'developed?' How does one tell a developed brain from an undeveloped one?

[Ben Kenobi]

Or parents/partners who pressure them not to abort. Apples and oranges.

If the choice is solely the woman's why should we permit parents and boyfriends to push their daughter and girlfriend into having an abortion? Wouldn't that be just as wrong?

[Ben Kenobi]

You ever seen the effect on a woman of the choice of adoption? It's not pleasant.

You ever see the effects of an abortion on the unborn child?

[Q Classic]

If the choice is solely the woman's why should we permit parents and boyfriends to push their daughter and girlfriend into having an abortion?

So, how do we solve that issue? By removing that choice? Curious logic there.

[DaShi]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


If the choice is solely the woman's why should we permit parents and boyfriends to push their daughter and girlfriend into having an abortion? Wouldn't that be just as wrong?

Agreed. Strangers should be making those decisions.

[Q Classic]

Originally posted by DaShi


Agreed. Strangers should be making those decisions.

Less chance of bias that way.

...Right?

[Sava]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Is it true that contraception reduces the number of abortions performed? If that were so, and given the array of options available, surely we should expect to see the rate go down.

well, sex education has helped enormously... another thing religious fundamentalists are against. According to the Centers for Disease Control, the birth rate for 15-17 years olds between 1991-2003 declined 42%. And between 1983 and 2000, the induced abortion rate for that same age group decreased by more than half.

http://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/UnintendedPregnancy/Teen.htm

You can find all the stats at that site.

I agree with you that in certain circumstances you will not be able to save the life of both the mother and child, such as an ectopic pregnancy. However, I don't see you arguing that all other abortions ought to be banned. Is the issue really only about those abortions done to save the life of the mother?

The issue about the woman's health is regarding the so called "partial birth" abortion bans. There is no such thing as a "partial birth" abortion. It is not a medical term. I've explain this to you many times. Do I need to explain it again? The procedure the fundamentalists want to ban is called "intact dilation and extraction". It is a procedure used to SAVE THE LIFE OF THE MOTHER. This is not a case of abortion by choice. No woman just chooses to go through pregnancy then one day says, "Oh no, let's just kill this fetus and go through a risky medical procedure because I don't feel like having a baby."

But rabid pro-lifers trying to ban this procedure make it sound like women are going out and getting pregnant just for fun and killing their unborn babies after 6-8 months of pregnancy.

Again, would you agree with banning all abortions, that do not involve rape? If not, why then should it matter whether the woman has been raped or not? You aren't helping someone who has been raped by giving them an abortion, you don't "unrape" the woman.

Wow. Just wow. So after a woman has been raped, you want to force her to have a rapist's child? Do you know how sick and twisted that is?

And to answer your question, I think abortion should be 100% legal all throughout the pregnancy... no restrictions. Period. I am even against parental notifications. It is nobody's business. It is not your business. It is not my business. It is not the GOVERNMENT's business. It is between a woman and her doctor. PERIOD!

I am not concerned about late term abortions. They are very rare. And in within those rare cases it is EXTREMELY rare that late term abortions are performed for reasons other than for the health of the mother.

When do you consider a brain to be fully 'developed?' How does one tell a developed brain from an undeveloped one?

According to what I've read and conversations I've had with my neurologist, the human brain begins to develop full consciousness around 2-3. That's around the time we start to become self-aware. Now that's not to say it's okay to kill infants and toddlers. The line is firmly drawn. Your DNA may be created at conception, but the process is not finished until birth. There's a lot of literature out there about the brain development of children. I don't have anything bookmarked though. You can do your own research.


The fact is BK, you will not accomplish anything by banning abortion. You will deny women vital health care and you will only drive women who want abortions into back alleys with coathangers and outlaw clinics. Or, if Roe V Wade is overturned, it will just be up to the States and you will just have women traveling to other states to get abortions.

Those who want abortions will still get them.

If you want to make a difference and prevent unwanted pregnancies, promote condom use. Go out and educate young people about contraception. Become a proponent for birth control. Encourage abstinence, but not at the exclusion of everything else!