Abortion

[Neoteny]

When did "plain and simple" become the sex police's catchphrase? My favorite anti-abortion argument ever is still the "people have to deal with the consequences," ie "babies are punishments" angle. Awesome.

Also, can someone explain to me exactly when gametes become a person of status equal to that of the mother?

[john9blue]

Yeah, there are a lot of logical leaps in your statements there...

please share

I build a device that takes some eggs and some sperm. When I press a button the device will activate and in 10 minutes time the eggs will be fertilized with 99% probability, the egg is then cared for "Brave new world" style . Therefore the device will likely produce a living human.

By your definition, what is alive in those 10 minutes? The individual eggs and sperm? The whole contraption? If I press a second button and stop the fertilization am I liable for murder?

now we're talking...

i'm not a biological expert, but i really don't see how terminating what is guaranteed to result in human life can not qualify as murder. whether it's justified murder or not (euthanasia for example is technically murder but can be justified) is an entirely different debate. but it irks me that people talk about unborn children as objects. they are producing human life, and you are terminating it...

however, i would only consider it murder if the organism was virtually guaranteed to be alive now or in the future. this is why abortions for life-threatening miscarriages can be justified; the net outcome of the abortion is one life saved and one life terminated a bit sooner than it would be otherwise.

[CreepersWiener]

Ok, it's not my body, and I don't have a foreign thing growing inside of me like a parasite or a cancerous tumor. I am going to have to side with that abortion of a fetus is a woman's choice. It has been that way for a long time, and nothing is going to change it.

My best suggestion and advice is that if you do not agree with abortion....DON'T GET ONE! Pretty simple, huh?

I do not like the idea of women shirking responsibility by using Abortion as a form of birth control, but I do support abortion in the cases of rape, incest, and the health and well being of the mother. The "health" of the mother also includes the "mental health" and sometimes single women who have been used and left pregnant start to lose their marbles. I guess it would be better for them to just abort rather than to carry through and go nutzo.

Well, I know this is a sensitive issue, but abortion has been around and has been decided to be the right of the mother to decide. Therefore, let those women choose. Leave me out of it. Done deal.

[Symmetry]

I would have to say under most circumstances it is murder. Under EXTREME out of the ordinary cases the baby can cause the mother danger for life and therefore I would say it is okay to have an abortion if both would die in the event the abortion doesn't happen. Otherwise, abortion is indeed murder. The reason is that the fetus is indeed living inside the mother, an unborn child does not equal a nonliving organism, it is simply a living thing that can't fight for itself.

Lots of people justify it simply because the alternative is having a child that started from simply "having fun" to put it lightly. People do many things that cause them issues, and they have to pay the consequences for what they do. In this instance the consequences can be life changing. But in my personal opinion we should stand up for the mistakes we make, rather than simply trying to make the "easy" fix to our issue.

Looking at it plain and simple, basically, Abortion is murder because the child is alive.

How should women who get abortions be punished?

[john9blue]

call me heartless, but i don't see how being raped justifies murder, if abortion is indeed murder. two wrongs don't make a right...

[Army of GOD]

call me heartless, but i don't see how being raped justifies murder, if abortion is indeed murder. two wrongs don't make a right...

Being raped doesn't justify mass genocide, but abortion isn't mass genocide...





















...or is it?

[radiojake]

call me heartless, but i don't see how being raped justifies murder, if abortion is indeed murder. two wrongs don't make a right...

So not only does the victim have to deal with the trauma of being sexualy assualted but then she must also bear the the child she was impregnated with; and yet you are talking about what is right and wrong?

[Mr_Adams]

At some point in this thread, somebody asked when gametes become equal to the mother, and that is an interesting question, which I would like that person to please answer for us now. Let's look at the facts:

An unborn child is:
1)unable to feed itself
2)unable to defend itself
3)Is, in fact, genetically identifiable as human.
4)Is genetically identifiable as separate from the mother and father.

Arguments one and two trump 3 and 4, therefore abortion is moral, right? Let's observe another situation.

A two year old is:
1)unable to feed itself
2)unable to defend itself
3)Is, in fact, genetically identifiable as human.
4)Is genetically identifiable as separate from the mother and father.

Well, Holy crap! my sister should be able to slaughter her two year old with a kitchen knife by this argument!

I'm just following the observed argument to it's logical conclusion.

[john9blue]

call me heartless, but i don't see how being raped justifies murder, if abortion is indeed murder. two wrongs don't make a right...

So not only does the victim have to deal with the trauma of being sexualy assualted but then she must also bear the the child she was impregnated with; and yet you are talking about what is right and wrong?

worse things happen to millions on a daily basis. i never said i wanted it to happen.

[Army of GOD]

logical

lol

That's about as logical as me saying 1 and 2 are the same things because they're both numbers. The whole thing is a Hell of a lot more complex than that.

[muy_thaiguy]

For the record, I would put miscarriages into a seperate category, especially if it endanger's the mother's life.
The way I've seen it though, is when a would be mother realizes she got knocked by someone (boyfriend, random stranger in a one-night-stand, man who is not her husband, or just having a lot of sex with different men) and then decides to get rid of the baby because she couldn't keep her pants on, or at the very least, used proection.
If it is rape, I can see it from the trauma angle, but I also see it that the baby inside of her had nothing to do with it. So I'm a bit torn when it comes to this part.
Incest. Not all of it is rape or child abuse, hell, saw a news thing on yahoo or whatever about a German couple that are brother and sister (and consenting adults). When it comes to things like that, I think there are different issues going on. As rape of a family member, I would put right there with the rape category in general. Whild the child abuse thing I would put it under the term by the same name as well.

[Woodruff]

i'm not a biological expert, but i really don't see how terminating what is guaranteed to result in human life can not qualify as murder.

Perhaps a dictionary can educate you.

And for those who want to whine about "semantics"...words have meaning. At least TRY to fucking use them correctly.

call me heartless, but i don't see how being raped justifies murder, if abortion is indeed murder. two wrongs don't make a right...

IT'S NOT FUCKING MURDER! Jesus H. Christ.

As far as the point you're trying to make (substituting "homicide" for "murder"), you believe that a woman should go through not only the trauma of carrying a child that will remind them of the rape EVERY DAMN DAY THEY'RE PREGNANT? Quite honestly, that's monstrous.

[Mr_Adams]

logical

lol

That's about as logical as me saying 1 and 2 are the same things because they're both numbers. The whole thing is a Hell of a lot more complex than that.

* Let a=b.
* Then a^2=ab ,
* a^2+a^2=a^2+ab ,
* 2(a^2)=(a^2)+ab ,
* 2(a^2)-2ab=(a^2)+ab-2ab ,
* 2(a^2)-2ab=(a^2)-ab,
* Step 7: This can be written as 2((a^2)-ab)=1((a^2)-ab) ,
* Step 8: and cancelling the (a^2)-ab from both sides gives 1=2.


(teehee, it's a mathematical fallacy, I know, but if you can't identify the obvious mistake, then go away. )

[Army of GOD]

logical

lol

That's about as logical as me saying 1 and 2 are the same things because they're both numbers. The whole thing is a Hell of a lot more complex than that.

* Let a=b.
* Then a^2=ab ,
* a^2+a^2=a^2+ab ,
* 2(a^2)=(a^2)+ab ,
* 2(a^2)-2ab=(a^2)+ab-2ab ,
* 2(a^2)-2ab=(a^2)-ab,
* Step 7: This can be written as 2((a^2)-ab)=1((a^2)-ab) ,
* Step 8: and cancelling the (a^2)-ab from both sides gives 1=2.


(teehee, it's a mathematical fallacy, I know, but if you can't identify the obvious mistake, then go away. )

[Mr_Adams]

Yes. now burn me at the stake.

[natty dread]

Ok, to give you all some perspective:

I've had a child aborted once. Me and the mother-candidate were both very young, and both in such a situation that we couldn't possibly have taken care of a child (both unemployed, etc). We figured that abortion would be the responsible choice, rather than to bring another unwanted child we can not care for in the world.

It was years ago, and I still sometimes think, maybe things could have gone a different way, and I could be a father now. I still sometimes count how old my child would be now if he/she had not been aborted. But I still think we made the right choice, given the circumstances.

So, who here wants to call me a murderer? Who wants to be put in my shoes to make a decision like this? Before you've been faced with the decision, you have no idea what it entails. It's easy to moralize from the back seat.

[MeDeFe]

I build a device that takes some eggs and some sperm. When I press a button the device will activate and in 10 minutes time the eggs will be fertilized with 99% probability, the egg is then cared for "Brave new world" style . Therefore the device will likely produce a living human.

By your definition, what is alive in those 10 minutes? The individual eggs and sperm? The whole contraption? If I press a second button and stop the fertilization am I liable for murder?

now we're talking...

i'm not a biological expert, but i really don't see how terminating what is guaranteed to result in human life can not qualify as murder. whether it's justified murder or not (euthanasia for example is technically murder but can be justified) is an entirely different debate. but it irks me that people talk about unborn children as objects. they are producing human life, and you are terminating it...

however, i would only consider it murder if the organism was virtually guaranteed to be alive now or in the future. this is why abortions for life-threatening miscarriages can be justified; the net outcome of the abortion is one life saved and one life terminated a bit sooner than it would be otherwise.

Does this (the bolded part) mean that a parent who prevents their daughter, who's currently ovulating, from having unprotected sex by bursting in on her and her boyfriend is committing murder?
Does a person commit murder if they stop a rape from happening that would've left the woman pregnant?

[CreepersWiener]

It's easy to moralize from the back seat.

It's also very easy to get pregnant there as well!

[PLAYER57832]

i'm not a biological expert, but i really don't see how terminating what is guaranteed to result in human life can not qualify as murder. whether it's justified murder or not (euthanasia for example is technically murder but can be justified) is an entirely different debate. but it irks me that people talk about unborn children as objects. they are producing human life, and you are terminating it...

however, i would only consider it murder if the organism was virtually guaranteed to be alive now or in the future. this is why abortions for life-threatening miscarriages can be justified; the net outcome of the abortion is one life saved and one life terminated a bit sooner than it would be otherwise.

I have highlighted the very important point and the one that most here have utterly ignored.

An early pregnancy is very far from something "gauranteed to result in human life". Figures for miscarriages (aka "spontaneous abortions") vary, because the truth is that many women get pregnant and miscarry without even knowing it within the first trimester. A very early miscarriage is very like a normal cycle, particularly if you have heavy cycles. Estimates for the earliest miscarriages run as high as 50% of all pregnancies. Only as you get into the third month do you experience something that is truly recognizable as a miscarriage... and that is only for some women. (by "recognizable", I mean "bleeding" noticeably beyond a normal cycle)

Reliable sources I have heard (aka my gynecologist, various pregancy publications, etc.) give the rate of miscarriages for known pregnancies within the first trimester to be at 30%. (the most conservative estimate 20%, but that seems to refer to just physician-verified cases. Many women don't go to the doctor for early miscarriages.) The rates are much higher for the youngest women (or if the father is young) and older women.

That is just in the first trimester, the only time when an "elective' abortion is allowed. It does not include losses after 3 months, but before 20 weeks. I looked for, but could not find truly reliable data on those counts. After 20 weeks, a dead child is called a "still birth". BUT, even that does not take the true numbers into account. Many children are born, but die very shortly afterward. Many times with conditions such that the doctor/parents knew in advance that it would happen.

SO, the bottom line is that pregnancy, even today, even with all the medical advances we have is very, very far from a "gauranteed human life".

AND... when you add in that a "live birth" can include children that are only alive for short times or who are only alive thanks to being hooked up to multiple machines, that the term "live" says nothing at all about th e kind of life that child will lead....

No, claiming that an abortion is identical to killing a "gauranteed human" is wrong.

NOTE, again, that I DO consider abortion "killing". But, that is just the wrong question and pretending that is the only question is hypocritical, at best. The first question is whether this killing is justified. My answer is "rarely", but I also recognize that not everyone has the same values I have. Then the question is if I have the right to tell other people that they must follow my values. This gets more complicated, but the bottom line is that biologically, even within the church (reading the Bible), there is no absolutely clear answer. (within the Old Testament, there is a distinction made between children who are born and unborn and who these passages are viewed varies even among the very faithful). If you go outside the Judeo-Christian community, as we MUST if we are to live in a free and religiously diverse society, then you get very different views, indeed. So, the real question is whether there is enough ambiguity here in moral views to say that this is a decision best left to the individual and their doctor, their clergy.

For my part, I believe the societal obligation is education. It is quite obvious from the posts here that we fail there. We fail to educate both to the full risks involved with sex and getting pregnant, in general. Look at the number of you who seem to think that miscarriages are some unusual or infrequent occurance, for example. We ALSO fail to fully educate as to what abortion truly means and entails. Too many people think they "know" how they would act, what they would do... then, later realize they truly did not. (in this I refer to so called "elective" abortions).

[PLAYER57832]

but when a woman is pregnant because she was sleeping with her boyfriend or husband, that's her fault. and the child has the right to life.

I notice you utterly omit the father. Even today, in our culture whether a woman sleeps with a man has a LOT to do with the man's opinion of things. We still are not raising our girls to fully stand up to men in their lives.. be it about sleeping with them or other issues.

Ironically, the Conservative Christian churches do NOT help! Go to any of these churches and you find plenty of "place" for single men to be involved within the church, no matter his age (with the possible exception of being something akin to a nun .. doing missionary work alone.. but that is often seen as a good way to get a faithful man). Women are to be mothers and "helpers to men". Motherhood is often glorified highly, . Once a woman passes a "certain age", she is effectively sidelined. You are essentially classified as either a "spinster" or "slut". (though not so harshly). UNLESS.. you have a child. Then, you will be "condemned" (but only lightly) for "acting sinfully", but the church will typically "understand" and accept you "for the sake of the child".
The pressure is heavy indeed, even within the church to become pregnant and the condemnation for doing so outside of wedlock is relatively minor. Add in the idea that just insisting on abstinence or relaying utterly distorted "facts". The right tries to claim everything saying that birth control seriously destroys a woman's chance of having children (though it can be the case, the opposite is more often true) to claims that teaching children about sex means they are more likely to do it (again opposite of the truth). (but I don't give the left a "pass", either. They can sometimes minimize the risks of getting pregnant with birth control, etc.)

[PLAYER57832]

Murder...plain and simple.

Most "abortions" are actually surgical removeal of already dead infants. This is just one example of how the so-called "right to lifers" don't bother understanding facts.

Another is the utter refusal to accept that making abortions illegal means increased maternal deaths, serious increases in medical health costs and increased child neglect and abuse.

In short, this is not really about saving lives, its about making yourselves feel sanctimonious.

Sanctimonious wasn't a poll option...murder was. I don't need to clarify myself any further. You on the other hand feel it very necessary to explain and justify your position while trying to make abortion sound as if it were the salvation of the masses. Enough said...

Too bad you feel reading before commenting is optional. That's the thing. You cannot be bothered to even know what my position is, or WHY, you just want to get on your high horse and criticize.

so, yes.. until you can bother to do that, "enough said" indeed!

[john9blue]

key word = "guaranteed" for those of you who missed it

call me heartless, but i don't see how being raped justifies murder, if abortion is indeed murder. two wrongs don't make a right...

IT'S NOT FUCKING MURDER! Jesus H. Christ.

As far as the point you're trying to make (substituting "homicide" for "murder"), you believe that a woman should go through not only the trauma of carrying a child that will remind them of the rape EVERY DAMN DAY THEY'RE PREGNANT? Quite honestly, that's monstrous.

abortion can leave women traumatized as well (feelings of guilt). and no, it's not monstrous.

let me ask you this: would you terminate the life of an elderly person who was suffering in a hospital?

if (yes) { YOU MURDERED HIM THAT'S MONSTROUS }

else { YOU MAKE HIM SUFFER THAT'S MONSTROUS }

it's not pleasant but it's not monstrous. horrible word choice.

[BigBallinStalin]

It's a question of morals, which are subjectively defined; therefore, whenever someone takes the position that ABORTION IS WRONG, DENY PEOPLE THE CHOICE TO DO THIS, then that someone assumes that they know what's best for everyone. That they somehow know the objective truth.

(By morals, I'm talking about morality in the normative sense.)


If one would like to (or has) described why people think it's wrong, then kudos to them

[Symmetry]

It's a question of morals, which are subjectively defined; therefore, whenever someone takes the position that ABORTION IS WRONG, DENY PEOPLE THE CHOICE TO DO THIS, then that someone assumes that they know what's best for everyone. That they somehow know the objective truth.

(By morals, I'm talking about morality in the normative sense.)


If one would like to (or has) described why people think it's wrong, then kudos to them

In many ways you're right- few people who are anti-abortion will go beyond what they see as objective truth. Abortion is, it seems, literally murder to them. However, the objective vs subjective argument doesn't always apply.

Very few of the proponents of abortion as murder are able, or perhaps willing, to deal with what they are arguing. In an objective argument that abortion is murder you would have to deal with the consequences of those murders. It's objective in fantasy land, and then it's subjective after that. Logic breaks down. When abortion is murder, it seems, you don't have to think about the criminalization of women who have abortions, the policing of pregnancies, or the kind of surveillance culture it might entail.

It's objective truth, but when you ask for an explanation it's subjective and they can't explain beyond the fact that it's true for them, and you should just understand.

[spurgistan]

I like how the Republicans think we ought to save the deficit by taxing abortion. "Taxes are evil, unless it's trying to circumvent Roe v Wade." This also solves the obvious market failure of abortions - they're way too cheap. They should be too expensive for poor people, the only people that deserve abortions are daughters of prominent Republicans that get pregnant by nonwhite men.