Explain why you can't smother your 1 and 2 year old

Forum Index » Political Discussion
[Post New]08/25/2010 23:23
Anonymous
aprilmayjune wrote:...
So it's one thing to say that a woman is in danger health wise, but this study (and others like it) show me that the majority of abortions are performed for very selfish reasons, and there are ways around all of the reasons that the study listed above, and that's what I have a problems with. You're talking about a baby.. not a something you bought at the store that you want a refund on, or a piece of trash that you want to throw away.
Although I am pro-choice, I agree with a lot of what you say. But like the line "I disagree with what you say but will fight for your right to say it," I will argue for the right of a woman to have an abortion for reasons I disagree with. I disagree with your use of the word "baby", but I admit that it is unclear to me at exactly what point I would apply that term. However, even if you call it a baby, that baby is very different at different stages of the pregnancy, and I think it is reasonable to treat it differently under law, just as we treat a five year old differently from a twenty-five year old.
[Post New]08/26/2010 00:24
aprilmayjune
Member Offline
I personally look at it from a religious point of view. God gives you a life to care for, and than raise. My views are that God has a plan for each life he creates.

But even from a scientific point of view, at just 8 weeks, there is a heartbeat, cartilidge and bones, fingers and toes (as well as fingernails) other internal organs are developing and forming. I am not sure what the average fetal age of abortion is but I'm sure it's higher than that, since most unplanned pregnancies aren't realized until later than that.
[Post New]08/26/2010 00:34
Anonymous
But if it's God's plan, then He already knows whether the mother will have an abortion or not.
[Post New]08/26/2010 00:48
aprilmayjune
Member Offline
God gives us free will to make our own decisions. My personal belief is that the Devil has a part in the bad decisions that we choose for ourselves. That's really a completely different discussion though. But that being said, I personally have never met anyone with a strong relationship with God who's been to an abortion clinic.
[Post New]08/26/2010 00:51
Anonymous
aprilmayjune wrote:I personally look at it from a religious point of view. God gives you a life to care for, and than raise. My views are that God has a plan for each life he creates.

But even from a scientific point of view, at just 8 weeks, there is a heartbeat, cartilidge and bones, fingers and toes (as well as fingernails) other internal organs are developing and forming. I am not sure what the average fetal age of abortion is but I'm sure it's higher than that, since most unplanned pregnancies aren't realized until later than that.


If it's God plan why are there miscarriages or still borns? Are these things the work of the devil because they have nothing to do with free will. Your argument doesn't hold up.
[Post New]08/26/2010 00:55
aprilmayjune
Member Offline
First of all, I am not trying to uphold my personal beliefs as arguments. But I can say that I had a miscarriage, and it caused me to really question my faith and the things I believed. One month later, I was pregnant with DD. I still don't understand why, but I do know that it was part of His plan. Just because something that we don't understand something that happened, doesn't mean that it wasn't His doing. And I also never said that the devil only puts his hand on matters concerning free will.. but as I said... That's a whole new argument.
[Post New]08/26/2010 07:21
Anonymous
aprilmayjune wrote:You're talking like the majority of pregnancies result in these kinds of health problems, and your wrong. A 2005 survey found that 18 percent of abortions performed in the US were to teenagers, and you're right, nearly half of US pregnancies are unplanned, and 4 in 10 are aborted. 22% of all pregnancies (excluding miscarriage) ended in abortion. 75% of women interviewed said their reasons for having an abortion were either financial reasons, how it would affect their career, don't want to be a single parent, or are having problems with their current partner. Half of the women interviewed during this study had at least one abortion previous.


So it's one thing to say that a woman is in danger health wise, but this study (and others like it) show me that the majority of abortions are performed for very selfish reasons, and there are ways around all of the reasons that the study listed above, and that's what I have a problems with. You're talking about a baby.. not a something you bought at the store that you want a refund on, or a piece of trash that you want to throw away.


I never said that; that's how you chose to interpret it. As long as one woman's life is at risk because of pregnancy, she should have the right to protect herself. If you take that right away based on the statistical reasons for abortion, then you devalue and dehumanize women. Women have intrinsic value too. They are not less valuable than any other human.

Nobody is denigrating the value of a fetus or baby because they want to protect the life and health of the woman. Nobody said abortion was fun or good. It's a necessity at times. And as long as it's necessary, it has to be legal.
[Post New]08/26/2010 07:36
Anonymous
God destroying my embryo, which I could not prevent, is completely different from me actively choosing to abort. This discussion is not about God's choices but ours.

In my opinion the husband of the woman who had 15 abortions is far more morally culpable than she is because he knew she had a mental illness but continued to impregnate her through rational cold selfishness. It bothers me too that men have no ability to protect a life they helped to create.

Maybe in the not so distant future people will sign precopulatory agreements in which each party makes clear what decisions will be taken in the event of an unplanned pregnancy.

A few weeks ago I read about a man in the Netherlands who intentionally put an abortion-causing pill in the food of a woman who became pregnant after a one night stand with him. When a woman chooses an abortion a man does not want why is his emotional suffering discounted although the end result -- fetal destruction -- is the same?
[Post New]08/26/2010 08:51
Anonymous
I am not sure what the average fetal age of abortion is but I'm sure it's higher than that, since most unplanned pregnancies aren't realized until later than that.


88% of abortions are completed in the first trimester. Half of abortions are completed within the first 8 weeks.

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html

http://www.prochoice.org/about_abortion/facts/women_who.html


[Post New]08/26/2010 08:55
Anonymous
Explain why you can't smother your 1 and 2 year old...


Probably covered this ground, and I usually don't respond to theo-trolling, but...

...same reason we don't put people to death for masturbating. At least not any more.
[Post New]08/26/2010 09:14
Anonymous
OP again. It is good to see people articulating their positions in thoughtful ways (for the most part). I, too, have a "sense" that there is a difference between an early-stage fetus and a late-stage fetus or an infant or small child. But I can't articulate a principled moral position based on that "sense," and I have yet to see anyone do it here, either. When the fetus is a threat to the mother's life, I don't see how anyone could argue that abortion is unjustified. That's like self defense. But short of that, I still don't see why it's less of a human life just because it's less developed. Maybe we feel that way because it doesn't "look" like a person yet -- just as most of us have no trouble killing a fly but would have a tough time personally killing a dog or some other mammal that "looks" more like us. (That's why I don't eat meat.) But drawing the line at viability still seems to me primarily a convenience -- giving women who have unwanted preganancies a "do over." There are all sorts of utilitarian justifications for that line -- preserving women's autonomy, keeping the population down, not bringing unwanted kids into the world with the social problems that creates -- but a utilitarian justification is not a moral justification. Thanks again for helping me think this through. I am really not "theo-trolling," but trying to understand this issue.
[Post New]08/26/2010 09:24
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:But short of that, I still don't see why it's less of a human life just because it's less developed.


You oppose birth control then. What about the sperm question? Should we criminalize masturbation? There is no question that each sperm is "life", and it contains all of the DNA that the parent has. Why should it be denied the rights any other human has, just because it hasn't paired with an egg? Any more than a fertilized egg should be given rights because it hasn't implanted in the uterine wall?
[Post New]08/26/2010 09:47
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:But short of that, I still don't see why it's less of a human life just because it's less developed.


You oppose birth control then. What about the sperm question? Should we criminalize masturbation? There is no question that each sperm is "life", and it contains all of the DNA that the parent has. Why should it be denied the rights any other human has, just because it hasn't paired with an egg? Any more than a fertilized egg should be given rights because it hasn't implanted in the uterine wall?


This is one of the reasons that Religion is fundamentally hostile to Science. The more you know, the more religious cant--particularly the so-called "ethical" aspects--becomes ridiculous. It's all as arbitrary as two 6-year-old boys arguing over what Spiderman can and can't do.
[Post New]08/26/2010 10:00
aprilmayjune
Member Offline
IMHO that's a really rediculous argument. A sperm doesn't become a human life until it is joined with an egg, why didn't you go so far as to criminalize menstration while you're using such rediculous extremes as examples.

Take measures to prevent your pregnancy.. but if you're going to have sex, you need to know that there may be consequenses. I won't judge someone negatively who has an abortion for serious health risks, in fact, I imagine it's the hardest thing some of them have ever had to do.. but as I said before, that's an extremely small percentage of abortions. MOST of them are just irresponsible people trying to cover their irresponsible actions, and that's something that I would never be able to support.
[Post New]08/26/2010 10:16
Anonymous
aprilmayjune wrote:IMHO that's a really rediculous argument. A sperm doesn't become a human life until it is joined with an egg, why didn't you go so far as to criminalize menstration while you're using such rediculous extremes as examples.


I'm not sure where to even start. Do you understand the phrase "begging the question"? The entire crux of the argument here is "when does human life begin." But of course, to you, it begins when the sperm "is joined with an egg."

Take measures to prevent your pregnancy.. but if you're going to have sex, you need to know that there may be consequenses. I won't judge someone negatively who has an abortion for serious health risks, in fact, I imagine it's the hardest thing some of them have ever had to do.. but as I said before, that's an extremely small percentage of abortions. MOST of them are just irresponsible people trying to cover their irresponsible actions, and that's something that I would never be able to support.


Right, but the larger point is, Who gives a shit whether you'll "judge someone negatively"? Frankly, who appointed you the arbiter of morality and responsibility. It's pretty clear you haven't given these issues even the slightest bit of adult consideration. So why should we give your barely informed opinion any weight?
Forum Index » Political Discussion
Go to: 

Search   Recent Topics   Hottest Topics