Pro- life VS Pro-Abortion?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 21, 2008 7:15 AM GMT
    Pro abortion say it is the woman's right to decide. Suppose the woman decide's to abort because she is a white woman who had sex with a black man and does not want a mixed race child?

    Suppose she learns that the baby is a girl and she really wants a boy? So she aborts 10 female infants, zygotes, whatever, in a row? Suppose some day we get a prenatal test for gay kids? And Mother's abort them because they does not want gay kids?

    We are there now, almost. If a woman aborts a baby because the child is a male, or half black, but for no other reason, we are not allowed to judge that. It is a choice. Killing a living breathing child with brain waves, which we know now start at 2 weeks, because Roe VS. Wade, based on 1960's technology says you can, does that make it right? Roe vs. Wade, dumb 1970's thinking like 8 tracks and disco. But since then, 40 miilion abortions. Probably a few Einstein's and Bill Gates and Picasso's sucked down the drain.

    Why do liberals who fight so hard to save species from extinction like pup seals not care about abortion of pup humans?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 21, 2008 7:43 AM GMT
    I'm pro-life, but I'm also pro-choice. The option should be available as a safe alternative. If you make abortion illegal many women will still go to clandestine clinics to have them done.

    I also think it's a woman's right to choose what goes on with her body and, ultimately, her life. She's the one who will have to raise that kid, since for the most part guys find it a lot easier to walk out when the going gets tough. (edit: ALSO, a woman who walks out on her kid is usually seen as "bad" and "unnatural". Men do this and it's like "he's a guy, he needed space". Single mothers are sluts, single dads are victims and self-sacrificing. A woman aborts, but where's the father when this happens? Usually he's NOT outside worried about the well-being of the woman he impregnated and the being that now has half of his DNA.)

    You make some good points, but you're thinking of abortion as a luxury. Usually, it's not. In many cases, parents of the girl or the father of the unborn baby pressure the girl into having an abortion. Sometimes the girl feels that if anyone knows of her "error" she will be kicked out of her house or worse.

    There's a lot that society has to change before demanding the banning of adoption.
  • EricLA

    Posts: 3461

    Aug 21, 2008 7:45 AM GMT
    Wow. I don't even know where to start on this, because it's a bit all over the place. But, I've always been socially liberal, even when I was a Republican many years ago. Women should have control over their bodies, so the right to choose is theirs.

    That said, do I take issue with those women who use abortion as a form of birth control rather than using it as a last possible measure? Absolutely. There are far too many abortions going on, and personally I'd like to see people exercise more responsibility up front than relying on abortion to get them out of their irresponsibility.

    As for your trying to connect pup seals to human babies, it's way off the mark for so many reasons, but let's just use your "extinction" point. Humans are not nearing extinction. We're not even threatened. Quite the opposite, we're consuming this world's natural resources left and right, taking over habitats of other creatures and causing their extinction. If anything, there are too many humans on this planet.
  • Laurence

    Posts: 942

    Aug 21, 2008 7:56 AM GMT
    Oh Please.

    Remarks like 'there are far too many abortions going on' show a complete lack of understanding of the issue.

    Having an abortion is a very tramatic event for a woman and any man who thinks that women are using abortions as a form of contraception obviously doesn't understand the procedure.

    Women have abortions as a last resort, it is not an enjoyable experience.

    A Woman has the right to chose, its her body, and she can do what she wants with it.

    Lozx

  • NickoftheNort...

    Posts: 1416

    Aug 21, 2008 9:26 AM GMT
    I don't fight to save seal pups or the whales; a species' cuteness and anthropomorphic qualities won't hinder me from eating it. A danger of extinction would.

    Why do I support the right of women to choose whether they want to be host to a developing human? Because carrying and giving birth to a child is risky business, can take an extraordinary toll on carrying mother, and because being told that *I* would be forced by the larger society to carry a parasite for nine months without full financial and emotional support is something that would piss me off.

    If you want to end abortion, then eliminate the pre-conditions that prompt humans to have them: stigma of out-of-wedlock conception, the severe negative impact pregnancy has on the might-be-mother's financial livelihood, the lack of complete health insurance to ensure the maintenance of the pregnancy, the lack of government child support and support for mothers who put their children up for adoption, and the perspective that women are men's baby factories.

    Heck, if you want to discourage abortion, change the government financial support rules to adequately reflect your baby worship, such as providing a government salary for parents.

    Rendering abortion illegal is cheap (and convenient for those who do not wish to support, only control women and the financially poor), inconsistent with the ideal of equality between women and men in terms of control over their bodies, and dangerous to women's health (as criminalizing abortions fails to reduce the need for abortions).

    ***
    The Einsteins, Gates'es, and Picassos are already being sucked down the social drain through a laughable education system increasingly dedicated toward test-taking in the name of "accountability." If your goal is promote an increase in "great persons," you're going to need a far more comprehensive series of changes.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 21, 2008 9:45 AM GMT
    I don't think anything anyone writes or says here is going to make much of an impact on the opinion of anyone else on this topic. I'll go on record to say I'm pro-choice.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 21, 2008 9:46 AM GMT
    muchmorethanmuscle saidYou are just itching to start a flame war with this one. I can just feel it.


    Yes, Muchmore, this is Triggerman trying to get everyone all riled up again. He gets off on it. He revels in his smugness, knowing that he is the only one with common sense, we are all idiots, yadda yadda yadda. His "arguments" here make as much sense as any of his other "arguments", and this time I'm just not going to bother.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Aug 21, 2008 9:47 AM GMT
    Your argument is flawed from the get-go

    No one.... and that bares repeating no one is Pro-abortion

    As President Clinton once said abortions should be available but RARE

    The question isn't the things that you brought up
    but what about the 16 year old girl who's been raped
    at the homecoming football game

    or... the 39 year old woman who had amnino and has been diagnosed with a Down's pregnancy?

    or... a girl who's been repeatedly raped by her step father?

    or... a the woman with a tubal pregnancy who is that baby is brought to term might very well bleed to death?

    or... the mentally challenger girl in a group home who suddenly becomes pregnant?

    or... the the woman in Kentucky who took fertilization drugs to get pregnant and now has eight implanted embryos?

    You tell me?
    You're the big Kahuna... what would you do?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 21, 2008 10:03 AM GMT
    [quote]

    No one.... and that bares repeating no one is Pro-abortion

    As President Clinton once said abortions should be available but RARE

    [/quote]

    I'm with GQ and pretty much everyone else that's posted, but what the hell do I know..I'm also all for euthanasia clincs.
  • Barricade

    Posts: 457

    Aug 21, 2008 10:22 AM GMT
    [quote][cite]GQjock said[/cite]Your argument is flawed from the get-go

    No one.... and that bares repeating no one is Pro-abortion

    As President Clinton once said abortions should be available but RARE

    The question isn't the things that you brought up
    but what about the 16 year old girl who's been raped
    at the homecoming football game

    or... the 39 year old woman who had amnino and has been diagnosed with a Down's pregnancy?

    or... a girl who's been repeatedly raped by her step father?

    or... a the woman with a tubal pregnancy who is that baby is brought to term might very well bleed to death?

    or... the mentally challenger girl in a group home who suddenly becomes pregnant?

    or... the the woman in Kentucky who took fertilization drugs to get pregnant and now has eight implanted embryos?



    ..Lets not forget all the white women that don't want a mixed baby.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Aug 21, 2008 11:00 AM GMT
    Apples and Oranges Barricade and Triggerman

    ... if it ain't a "BABY" for the rape victim
    and you're willing to close your eyes to that one

    IT AIN'T A BABY PERIOD

    we're not talkin six months pregnancy here
    you can't be just a little hypocritical here

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 21, 2008 12:23 PM GMT
    This is not a black and white issue despite the attempts of people on both sides of the fence to paint it as such.

    I only know one thing for sure. Regardless of what RJ members say, women will continue to get abortions around the world. The only question is will it be done safely or unsafely.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 21, 2008 12:29 PM GMT
    Additionally, there should be a lottery of pregnant women. Those winners (or losers, depending), 50% of all pregnant women within a certain gestation period, every n months, would be the beneficiary of a choiceless abortion. It levels the playing field, somehow, and the human race lessens it's risk of producing yet more morons (you know who you are).
  • DiverScience

    Posts: 1426

    Aug 21, 2008 12:46 PM GMT
    It. Is. Not. A. BABY.

    Babies, are born.

    It's a stretch to even call most abortions "fetuses" but they *are not babies.* Babies can live on their own. Until they can, they are "fetuses." Calling them "babies" is simply attempt at drama hounding to compare apple trees to grass seed.

    But most abortions (and the millions upon millions of spontaneous miscarriages) are of little, largely undifferentiated balls of cells.
  • Bunjamon

    Posts: 3161

    Aug 21, 2008 12:50 PM GMT
    muchmorethanmuscle saidThe last thing women need is for men to tell them what they can or cannot do with their bodies. It should be their choice.


    I totally agree.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 21, 2008 12:55 PM GMT


    It's a stretch (not a joke), but imagine for a moment that MEN were the ones getting pregnant-would this topic have gone very far?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 21, 2008 12:59 PM GMT
    Ok, so I had this whole drawn out response and then decided... I just couldn't. It's like watching Bush on T.V. - I will simply change the channel. Ignorance. icon_rolleyes.gif

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 21, 2008 1:17 PM GMT
    jaydub saidOk, so I had this whole drawn out response and then decided... I just couldn't. It's like watching Bush on T.V. - I will simply change the channel. Ignorance. icon_rolleyes.gif



    wow. i think you just responded, verbatim, what i was thinking.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 21, 2008 1:34 PM GMT
    Obviously a touch subject. I think the Pro-choice people always like to bring up the same old justifications for it...what if the woman was raped...what if the mother is in danger if she carries to term...what if "this" and what if "that". see what I mean? All so they can say "see, you dont have an answer to that".

    Who makes the determination when a baby inside a woman is no longer able to be aborted by her? I know there is a time when it ISN'T a woman's choice to abort any longer. Why is that? Is it maybe because it is really a life inside of her whether her pregnancy is in it's 1st week or 20th week?

    Isn't there a 3rd trimester criteria or some arbitrary date, like past 60 days no more abortions? So how did that happen...where one day a baby inside a woman can be aborted and the next day "oops..you waited one day too long or 1 week too long" so now you can't have an abortion. It's circular (il)logic to me from the Pro-choice people.

    Yes, it is a woman's body. And most of the time she is the one who purposely had sex which TA DA makes a baby inside of her. Thus, she did make a CHOICE. That choice created life inside of her. She should have the baby and then if she doesn't want the child, she can give it up for adoption. Is that really that hard?
  • HereNBoston

    Posts: 221

    Aug 21, 2008 1:58 PM GMT
    bocaguyfl saidObviously a touch subject. I think the Pro-choice people always like to bring up the same old justifications for it...what if the woman was raped...what if the mother is in danger if she carries to term...what if "this" and what if "that". see what I mean? All so they can say "see, you dont have an answer to that".

    Who makes the determination when a baby inside a woman is no longer able to be aborted by her? I know there is a time when it ISN'T a woman's choice to abort any longer. Why is that? Is it maybe because it is really a life inside of her whether her pregnancy is in it's 1st week or 20th week?

    Isn't there a 3rd trimester criteria or some arbitrary date, like past 60 days no more abortions? So how did that happen...where one day a baby inside a woman can be aborted and the next day "oops..you waited one day too long or 1 week too long" so now you can't have an abortion. It's circular (il)logic to me from the Pro-choice people.

    Yes, it is a woman's body. And most of the time she is the one who purposely had sex which TA DA makes a baby inside of her. Thus, she did make a CHOICE. That choice created life inside of her. She should have the baby and then if she doesn't want the child, she can give it up for adoption. Is that really that hard?


    there's no real definite for what makes a late term abortion. its pretty much relates to how viable the fetus will be outside of the mother. some strict states say 12 weeks and later is late term which is kind absurd because it implies that a baby of 13 weeks is viable outside of the womb. 25-28 weeks is the really grey area. frankly any infant born before 25 weeks gestation is going to have a really hard fight surviving if they do at all.

    There's actually a little of a debate going on about whether its ethical to even save these really premature babies because a lot of them don't do well at all. they have really long hospitalizations and all the issues that go with that, and only a small % actually do well after the age of 6. it creates this huge burden on the family, and they get this false sense of hope. a millions dollars ( no exaggeration) in NICU stays and rehab and home nursing services later and the kids still not doing well.

    I don't think anyone likes the idea of abortions taking place, but as guy its not my place to tell a woman what to do with her body. besides its that or force the woman to have the baby and put it into an over burdened social services system where he'll get lost in the system anyway. or seek out a dark alley back room abortion.
  • MSUBioNerd

    Posts: 1813

    Aug 21, 2008 2:00 PM GMT
    Many, many problems with this original post, and I don't feel like getting into the obvious flame war, but let's take just one nondebatable issue:

    "Killing a living breathing child with brain waves, which we know now start at 2 weeks, because Roe VS. Wade, based on 1960's technology says you can, does that make it right?"

    You actually think it's breathing? The womb is a fluid-filled environment, where oxygen diffuses across the placenta from the mother's blood to the developing embryo/fetus' blood. (Mammalian fetuses actually have a different form of hemoglobin than they do later in life, specifically because the higher oxygen binding efficiency is necessary to get oxygen from the mother's blood supply.) A very large part of the reason for slapping a child just after birth is to trigger it to start breathing.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 21, 2008 2:17 PM GMT
    Barricade said[quote][cite]GQjock said[/cite]Your argument is flawed from the get-go

    No one.... and that bares repeating no one is Pro-abortion

    As President Clinton once said abortions should be available but RARE

    The question isn't the things that you brought up
    but what about the 16 year old girl who's been raped
    at the homecoming football game

    or... the 39 year old woman who had amnino and has been diagnosed with a Down's pregnancy?

    or... a girl who's been repeatedly raped by her step father?

    or... a the woman with a tubal pregnancy who is that baby is brought to term might very well bleed to death?

    or... the mentally challenger girl in a group home who suddenly becomes pregnant?

    or... the the woman in Kentucky who took fertilization drugs to get pregnant and now has eight implanted embryos?



    ..Lets not forget all the white women that don't want a mixed baby.


    Then they shouldn't be banging black guys.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 21, 2008 2:23 PM GMT
    A woman should be allowed an abortion any time during her pregnacy and for any reason. All people, not potential people, have a right to control their body. Just because a woman becomes pregnant doesn't mean that she has an obligation to sacrifice her right to her body. Other people have no say in whether she needs to peoduce another person because people are not slaves.

    To answer the original post, if a woman were to abort for eugenic reasons, her aweful reasons would not make the principle on which abortion is permisible invalid. A woman should not be obliged to any other person because she is olny responible for her living on her values not submitting to the standards of others even if her standard is irrational.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 21, 2008 2:33 PM GMT
    Triggerman saidPro abortion say it is the woman's right to decide. Suppose the woman decide's to abort because she is a white woman who had sex with a black man and does not want a mixed race child?

    Suppose she learns that the baby is a girl and she really wants a boy? So she aborts 10 female infants, zygotes, whatever, in a row? Suppose some day we get a prenatal test for gay kids? And Mother's abort them because they does not want gay kids?

    We are there now, almost. If a woman aborts a baby because the child is a male, or half black, but for no other reason, we are not allowed to judge that. It is a choice. Killing a living breathing child with brain waves, which we know now start at 2 weeks, because Roe VS. Wade, based on 1960's technology says you can, does that make it right? Roe vs. Wade, dumb 1970's thinking like 8 tracks and disco. But since then, 40 miilion abortions. Probably a few Einstein's and Bill Gates and Picasso's sucked down the drain.

    Why do liberals who fight so hard to save species from extinction like pup seals not care about abortion of pup humans?


    Just read your profile. Is this your idea of a "well-reasoned" argument against abortion? icon_lol.gif

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 21, 2008 2:48 PM GMT
    Triggerman saidPro abortion say it is the woman's right to decide. Suppose the woman decide's to abort because she is a white woman who had sex with a black man and does not want a mixed race child?

    Suppose she learns that the baby is a girl and she really wants a boy? So she aborts 10 female infants, zygotes, whatever, in a row? Suppose some day we get a prenatal test for gay kids? And Mother's abort them because they does not want gay kids?

    We are there now, almost. If a woman aborts a baby because the child is a male, or half black, but for no other reason, we are not allowed to judge that. It is a choice. Killing a living breathing child with brain waves, which we know now start at 2 weeks, because Roe VS. Wade, based on 1960's technology says you can, does that make it right? Roe vs. Wade, dumb 1970's thinking like 8 tracks and disco. But since then, 40 miilion abortions. Probably a few Einstein's and Bill Gates and Picasso's sucked down the drain.

    Why do liberals who fight so hard to save species from extinction like pup seals not care about abortion of pup humans?


    Then that women would be a horrible, horrible person. But that doesn't change the fact that it is HER body and HER right to choice. Should she abort for any of those reasons? No! But that doesnt mean i wont support the right for her to do so.

    You could go on listing specifics for either side all day, but at the end of that, it's the woman who has the fetus growing inside her, and it is her decision to abort; whether it's legal or not, she still must make this choice.