Poll: Abortion- What's your position and why?

[Ultrajoe]

Look, I don't want this to become a slugging match, but to imply pregancy is something a mother can just do and then move on/forget is preposterous. There are hormonal, emotional, physical and mental repurcussions for pregnancy that can stay with her for the rest of her life. Whereas this 'child' has no more of a chance now than it did if she had never gotten pregnant.

abortions also cause hormonal, emotional, physical and mental repurcussions
Seriously. no slugs intended.

I fully agree, but i'd bet my steel socks that pregancy messes with you a good deal more. And until I go and look up (I will) the facts, i'm going to assume the recovery rates are a good deal higher for abortion, if not almost universal. How many cases of abortion complications are freak happenings? How much of the 'common knowledge' about abortion aftermath is overhyped or understated? What percentage of abortions are 'mind-changings' rather than other occurences?

The above are questions I need to research for myself before I can speak with any authority on the after-effects of abortions/pregnancy.

What all arguments boil down to, concerning abortion, is what you classify as life. I don't think anyone claims that a bundle of proteins and DNA attatched to a woman is life, so what we are really discussing is potential. The potential of a child, what it might become and what it can do and be.

And it comes down to what you consider more important; The rights, life and wellbeing of a living and breathing human, or the uncertain potential of that quasi-human. And that's before we even begin to discuss how this pregnancy came to happen, the medical implications or cultural bias of the issue.

 

[thom_cat_]

Case by case basis I say...
If someone is just having them because they are irresponsible and can't be stuffed doing the normal stuff. stop em. but if it's someone who made an honest mistake or was raped, etc, go ahead.

 

[julia_sterling]

killing a fetus isn't any different then killing a bug

That's screwed up. Imma go ahead and take it as sarcasm.

how is that screwed up?

calling a kid a bug is screwed up, time to sleep. I will debate some more Tomorrow!

well as a fetus they are as small as one soo it kind makes sense, that and they dont think/have emotions .
Don't worry, I look forward, its fun to see other peoples opinions on such trivial matters

 

[lostclause]

Yes, certain features of humans are also found in other species. This can be said about many different species. But no other species is put together in the same fashion as we are. For as similar as we are to apes (an excellent example), we are not apes. When talking about how similar we are, you simply can't ignore the biggest difference of them all: our ability to reason. That alone pretty much stands us out from all other species by miles in my book.

You are definitely correct at noticing just how similar all animals are to each other; it's incredible how just a few differences in DNA sequence here and there can mean the difference between a hippo and a frog.

I don't think our ability to reason is so special. My example of Alex the parrot still stands, maybe they can't do it as well as us but they can still manage it. Dogs have the same ability to puzzle solve as a ~4 year old. Apes have figured out how to use sticks to get ants, using their powers of reason or not? This blurs the line even more, at least according to your definition, since they can both reason and are genetically similar to us. Again, we stand out but we're not alone. Are all flying birds eagles? Are all amiphibians frogs? A single characteristic, no matter how much we excel, does not seem to qualify it. Are great athletes separate species? Walker, a famous NZ runner and gold medal winner, was also genetically different, having an abnormally large heart. New species? He excels, reasons and has a major genetic difference.

I did make a typo there, but actually, both statements are true. Deer do in fact have the same nucleotides, they're just in completely different order.

Yes, but they were simply an example. Some people I've talked to before have defined a human by the number of chromosomes (and one idiot by the number of cells).

Down Syndrome and all other mutations are dis-orders. In other words, they go against what is the norm, what is orderly. Normally, DNA is very ordered. If it wasn't, we'd see a lot more people with limbs growing at odd places. Despite needing to be copied trillions of times from conception to death, it nearly always stays in order.

Cancer? Anyway, most mistakes are destroyed by the white blood cells before there are any problems.
But to steer myself back on topic, what is the norm? Blue eyes were a mutation that deviated thousands of years ago, should they mean that you're not human (I hope not, I have them)? Now they are an accepted norm. White skin is a mutation, now a norm. Are all mutations disorders? No, Walker's one was an advantage. Should they result in our removal from the human race? How much difference is necessary?

This entire thing may sound a bit like I'm trolling but I believe that this way of defining humanity, whilst perfectly acceptable as an opinion, is on very shaky ground in my book.

 

[Dys]

Look, I don't want this to become a slugging match, but to imply pregancy is something a mother can just do and then move on/forget is preposterous. There are hormonal, emotional, physical and mental repurcussions for pregnancy that can stay with her for the rest of her life. Whereas this 'child' has no more of a chance now than it did if she had never gotten pregnant.

abortions also cause hormonal, emotional, physical and mental repurcussions
Seriously. no slugs intended.

Quoted for truth. There are reprocussions to a woman's mental being as well as body no matter if it's abortion or pregnancy. In fact, an abortion has quite a few more, considering it's completely un-natural and invasive. And don't anyone dare try to tell me that a miscarriage is the same as an abortion. -_- Sorry, not going to fly.

Are you implying that an abortion is worse than a miscarrage?

If that's the case, I'd kindly like to inform you that isn't so. An abortion can be as simple as taking a drug early in the pregnancy. I hardly think swallowing a pill can be compared to a traumatic stillbirth (they really aren't a fun experience). Not to say there are never negative effects from aborting this way, just that it's completely absurd to rate it next to the shock of discovering a baby you wanted dead (or for that matter a child brough up by parents who don't want it).

You're not making a fair comparison
The pill needs to be taken v.v. early, (morning after...get it? It's rather literal) and sometimes the zygot naturally miscarriages anyways. So if you compare taking the morning after pill to having a period two weeks after unprotected sex...no, neither are traumatic
If you're thinking traumatic stillbirth where you can see the body parts and the baby's almost fully developed, yes, thats traumatic, but so is taking the baby out piece by piece...same feelings of pain, disappointment, massive amounts of guilt (not saying that stillbirths don't involve guilt), depression...in stillbirths there's the question of what happened wrong, in abortions it's kinda clear. the mum happened wrong. Some women (after abortions) can't even look at a toilet flushing for a long time because it reminds them of their dead baby. some can't eat eggs, or hear babies crying at night. that sounds pretty traumatic to me.

The drug I was referancing isn't the morning after pill, it's RU 486.

There's a difference between having an abortion two months into the pregnancy and having one 8 months in. I don't think anybody is claiming that we should be aborting near-fully developed babies, that's disguisting. There is no shortage of time for the woman to choose a humane way to abort an unwanted child. As for the women struggling to cope with the morality of their choice, it seems to be a reoccuring argument with the 'pro life' crowd that they should have to live with their (possibly bad/wrong) decisions. That's their problem, we aren't forcing them to abort, we are saying it's an option they should be allowed to choose. It isn't for everyone and a big part of my problem with the conservatives trying to block abortions is that they are forcing their beleifs upon me (and other people in society), I am not so hypocritical as to even suggest they even consider abortion if they beleive it's wrong.

It's unfair to completely put the responsibility of unwanted pregnancys on women, but that doesn't mean they should be allowed to act in an inhumane way. The 'pro life' campagners seem to misunderstand that that abrtions aren't always messy operations that murder babies, yet they still support stupid restrictions and pointless bans on safe, effective drugs. RU486 is no less humane than condoms, yet I don't see any sensible person protesting their use.

 

[Spineyguy]

Until it becomes sentient (About 24 weeks or so), the feotus is just a ball of cells, it doesn't do anything. Aborting the pregnancy at this stage is no different from getting rid of a wart.

 

[Extirpation]

Well I was going to argue,
but if the ratio is 1 to 7 against my stance,
I deem talking to a wall as a more productive outlet for my time.

But I will leave you with two dramatized questions:

If I were to force you/your wife to have a miscarriage a week before the expected birth, or if I was a doctor, and because of my negligence your child was killed in labor.
Would you be unhappy with me, or could you and I meet for lunch the next day and still be friends if I apologized?

Also wasn't the "choice" to make a baby made the moment you gave your partner consent, not after the fact?
Unless,
of course,
Ive been deceived that the outcome of unprotected sexual intercourse is usually a baby.

Time for me to go hide.

 

[lovetropicana]

Look, I don't want this to become a slugging match, but to imply pregancy is something a mother can just do and then move on/forget is preposterous. There are hormonal, emotional, physical and mental repurcussions for pregnancy that can stay with her for the rest of her life. Whereas this 'child' has no more of a chance now than it did if she had never gotten pregnant.

abortions also cause hormonal, emotional, physical and mental repurcussions
Seriously. no slugs intended.

Quoted for truth. There are reprocussions to a woman's mental being as well as body no matter if it's abortion or pregnancy. In fact, an abortion has quite a few more, considering it's completely un-natural and invasive. And don't anyone dare try to tell me that a miscarriage is the same as an abortion. -_- Sorry, not going to fly.

Are you implying that an abortion is worse than a miscarrage?

If that's the case, I'd kindly like to inform you that isn't so. An abortion can be as simple as taking a drug early in the pregnancy. I hardly think swallowing a pill can be compared to a traumatic stillbirth (they really aren't a fun experience). Not to say there are never negative effects from aborting this way, just that it's completely absurd to rate it next to the shock of discovering a baby you wanted dead (or for that matter a child brough up by parents who don't want it).

You're not making a fair comparison
The pill needs to be taken v.v. early, (morning after...get it? It's rather literal) and sometimes the zygot naturally miscarriages anyways. So if you compare taking the morning after pill to having a period two weeks after unprotected sex...no, neither are traumatic
If you're thinking traumatic stillbirth where you can see the body parts and the baby's almost fully developed, yes, thats traumatic, but so is taking the baby out piece by piece...same feelings of pain, disappointment, massive amounts of guilt (not saying that stillbirths don't involve guilt), depression...in stillbirths there's the question of what happened wrong, in abortions it's kinda clear. the mum happened wrong. Some women (after abortions) can't even look at a toilet flushing for a long time because it reminds them of their dead baby. some can't eat eggs, or hear babies crying at night. that sounds pretty traumatic to me.

The drug I was referancing isn't the morning after pill, it's RU 486.

There's a difference between having an abortion two weeks into the pregnancy and having one 8 months in. I don't think anybody is claiming that we should be aborting near-fully developed babies, that's disguisting. There is no shortage of time for the woman to choose a humane way to abort an unwanted child. As for the women struggling to cope with the morality of their choice, it seems to be a reoccuring argument with the 'pro life' crowd that they should have to live with their (possibly bad/wrong) decisions. That's their problem, we aren't forcing them to abort, we are saying it's an option they should be allowed to choose. It isn't for everyone and a big part of my problem with the conservatives trying to block abortions is that they are forcing their beleifs upon me (and other people in society), I am not so hypocritical as to even suggest they even consider abortion if they beleive it's wrong.

It's unfair to completely put the responsibility of unwanted pregnancys on women, but that doesn't mean they should be allowed to act in an inhumane way. The 'pro life' campagners seem to misunderstand that that abrtions aren't always messy operations that murder babies, yet they still support stupid restrictions and pointless bans on safe, effective drugs. RU486 is no less humane than condoms, yet I don't see any sensible person protesting their use.

there's plenty of people who don't mind aborting near-fully developed babies - plenty that think pro-choice for women, no restrictions at all
I edited my post and included what i think of RU486 - it's not like you take a pill and it's gone and there's no repercussions, i think it might even be dangerous because there's no doctor to peek at the progress, there are risks with both procedures.
And what else is it if not a messy operation that murder babies? maybe our debate lies in the semantics of baby/foetus words, but if anything remotely resembling an abortion happened to a live baby it would be instant news calling it murder.

 

[Sark]

Until it becomes sentient (About 24 weeks or so), the feotus is just a ball of cells, it doesn't do anything. Aborting the pregnancy at this stage is no different from getting rid of a wart.

Basically this. Although I think the man should have as much of a choice as the woman. If a women falsely claims she is on the pill, and falls pregnant, the faetus should not be allowed to live. Having someones baby as a form of extortion is an evil, evil thing to do.

 

[MagicShroom]

It's a womans body, it's her choice. Simple as that, case closed.

Oh sure the body is the woman's but the life she's carrying isn't hers, Denying a life is just wrong plain and simple... case closed!

To the promiscuous: There are consequences to your actions take responsibility for them. Remember the rule of opportunity cost.

To the rape victim: I am so sorry that this unfortunate event have happened to you, but do not take it out on the fetus, it has done nothing to you. Even though it had reminded you of the horror and the pain, there are better options than abortion (maybe put them up for adoption)

To the "you or the child" person: This situation is so rare nowadays even that you are just told that, there's a chance that the doctor is wrong, who knows.

The "baby should have a choice" argument is also pants on head retarded. We don't let children choose anything, we force them to go to school, brush their teeth and wash behind their ears. It is a parents job to decide what's best for a child, regardless of whether they agree or not. If the mother doesn't feel she can raise a child, it's her choice to spare said child of it's potentially damaging childhood.

WTF does this have to do with this thread, of course babies cannot make a choice, their brains aren't fully developed.

 

[Emilie Diabolica]

It's a womans body, it's her choice. Simple as that, case closed.

Oh sure the body is the woman's but the life she's carrying isn't hers, Denying a life is just wrong plain and simple... case closed!

To the promiscuous: There are consequences to your actions take responsibility for them. Remember the rule of opportunity cost.

To the rape victim: I am so sorry that this unfortunate event have happened to you, but do not take it out on the fetus, it has done nothing to you. Even though it had reminded you of the horror and the pain, there are better options than abortion (maybe put them up for adoption)

To the "you or the child" person: This situation is so rare nowadays even that you are just told that, there's a chance that the doctor is wrong, who knows.

The "baby should have a choice" argument is also pants on head retarded. We don't let children choose anything, we force them to go to school, brush their teeth and wash behind their ears. It is a parents job to decide what's best for a child, regardless of whether they agree or not. If the mother doesn't feel she can raise a child, it's her choice to spare said child of it's potentially damaging childhood.

WTF does this have to do with this thread, of course babies cannot make a choice, their brains aren't fully developed.

thankyou. yay for reason!

 

[Sark]

It's a womans body, it's her choice. Simple as that, case closed.

Oh sure the body is the woman's but the life she's carrying isn't hers, Denying a life is just wrong plain and simple... case closed!

To the promiscuous: There are consequences to your actions take responsibility for them. Remember the rule of opportunity cost.

To the rape victim: I am so sorry that this unfortunate event have happened to you, but do not take it out on the fetus, it has done nothing to you. Even though it had reminded you of the horror and the pain, there are better options than abortion (maybe put them up for adoption)

To the "you or the child" person: This situation is so rare nowadays even that you are just told that, there's a chance that the doctor is wrong, who knows.

The "baby should have a choice" argument is also pants on head retarded. We don't let children choose anything, we force them to go to school, brush their teeth and wash behind their ears. It is a parents job to decide what's best for a child, regardless of whether they agree or not. If the mother doesn't feel she can raise a child, it's her choice to spare said child of it's potentially damaging childhood.

WTF does this have to do with this thread, of course babies cannot make a choice, their brains aren't fully developed.

thankyou. yay for reason!

And if their brains aren't fully developed, they aren't really people. So out comes the coathanger.

 

[Scrythe]

I hate the terms "pro-life" and "pro-choice". Everyone is both pro-life AND pro-choice.

My stance? Women can do whatever the hell they want with their bodies. How I feel about that should have no bearing on the legality of abortion. If I think it's wrong, so what? It's not my body.

I will say this: under certain circumstances, I do believe that the father of the child should have some kind of say-so. Imagine this scenario: You are a male who unknowingly got your girlfriend pregnant.

Without telling you that she was, she went and had a professional ram a rusty clotheshanger through its head (I know that's not how it works, but I like being graphic) but somehow you find out. There was no compromise involved, no "but what if I wanted a kid... maybe we can work this out?" Nope, sorry.

And don't even get me started on stem cell research.

 

[MagicShroom]

It's a womans body, it's her choice. Simple as that, case closed.

Oh sure the body is the woman's but the life she's carrying isn't hers, Denying a life is just wrong plain and simple... case closed!

To the promiscuous: There are consequences to your actions take responsibility for them. Remember the rule of opportunity cost.

To the rape victim: I am so sorry that this unfortunate event have happened to you, but do not take it out on the fetus, it has done nothing to you. Even though it had reminded you of the horror and the pain, there are better options than abortion (maybe put them up for adoption)

To the "you or the child" person: This situation is so rare nowadays even that you are just told that, there's a chance that the doctor is wrong, who knows.

The "baby should have a choice" argument is also pants on head retarded. We don't let children choose anything, we force them to go to school, brush their teeth and wash behind their ears. It is a parents job to decide what's best for a child, regardless of whether they agree or not. If the mother doesn't feel she can raise a child, it's her choice to spare said child of it's potentially damaging childhood.

WTF does this have to do with this thread, of course babies cannot make a choice, their brains aren't fully developed.

thankyou. yay for reason!

And if their brains aren't fully developed, they aren't really people. So out comes the coathanger.

Even when they are born their brains aren't fully developed.

 

[ilessthanthreetea]

I think abortion is a necessary evil in this world, its not nice, its not plesant but I think it would be a worse decision to make it illegal.

Even though to me having children to probally one of the most sacred and beautiful things in the world (I have fertility problems myself), I still am a pro-choice.

Reasoning for this is I believe it is a bigger crime to a kid into the world when you arent ready, still a child yourself or in no place to raise one.

I think a child should be brought up in a stable, both socially and economically stable enviroement to people who are ready and are in the mental state to do the best job.

In the case of rape, incest, the baby poses a threat to the mothers life, failure of contraception (I know 3 people who have got pregnant on the pill) abortion is needed and that right shouldnt be taken away.

I think that its worse for a teenager, let say 13-14 year olds who get pregnant or even under 18 who still in the eyes of the law at least are still children themselves to have children isnt correct, they arent at the mental capacity to give a child everything that they need as they are still learning and still needing guidance themselves.

Biologically, I dont believe that there is life from time of conception, I think the 20 week mark should be used for abortions and anything post that up to 24 weeks should be under special circumstance.

 

[Lynx]

I can tell you a little about the system we have in my country - A woman can have an abortion up until the eighteenth week without having to state why. Between week eighteen and twenty-two, it is only allowed if it is under "special circumstances" (I am not sure what circumstances, but I can look it up), in which case a welfare officer will investigate the case.
If it is discovered that the pregnancy can cause severe damage to either the baby or the mom, an abortion can be permitted.
Abortions made after week eighteen are very unusual in this country, most are made at an early stage.

I do agree with this system, based on everything I know about the development of a fetus along with my general opinion that a woman should be able to decide over her own body (to a certain extent.)

 

[Extirpation]

It's a womans body, it's her choice. Simple as that, case closed.

Oh sure the body is the woman's but the life she's carrying isn't hers, Denying a life is just wrong plain and simple... case closed!

To the promiscuous: There are consequences to your actions take responsibility for them. Remember the rule of opportunity cost.

To the rape victim: I am so sorry that this unfortunate event have happened to you, but do not take it out on the fetus, it has done nothing to you. Even though it had reminded you of the horror and the pain, there are better options than abortion (maybe put them up for adoption)

To the "you or the child" person: This situation is so rare nowadays even that you are just told that, there's a chance that the doctor is wrong, who knows.

The "baby should have a choice" argument is also pants on head retarded. We don't let children choose anything, we force them to go to school, brush their teeth and wash behind their ears. It is a parents job to decide what's best for a child, regardless of whether they agree or not. If the mother doesn't feel she can raise a child, it's her choice to spare said child of it's potentially damaging childhood.

WTF does this have to do with this thread, of course babies cannot make a choice, their brains aren't fully developed.

thankyou. yay for reason!

And if their brains aren't fully developed, they aren't really people. So out comes the coathanger.

Technically your brain isn't fully developed until your around 18-25, ...
not to mention people who are born with mental disabilities and may never achieve a fully developed brain.

 

[Sark]

It's a womans body, it's her choice. Simple as that, case closed.

Oh sure the body is the woman's but the life she's carrying isn't hers, Denying a life is just wrong plain and simple... case closed!

To the promiscuous: There are consequences to your actions take responsibility for them. Remember the rule of opportunity cost.

To the rape victim: I am so sorry that this unfortunate event have happened to you, but do not take it out on the fetus, it has done nothing to you. Even though it had reminded you of the horror and the pain, there are better options than abortion (maybe put them up for adoption)

To the "you or the child" person: This situation is so rare nowadays even that you are just told that, there's a chance that the doctor is wrong, who knows.

The "baby should have a choice" argument is also pants on head retarded. We don't let children choose anything, we force them to go to school, brush their teeth and wash behind their ears. It is a parents job to decide what's best for a child, regardless of whether they agree or not. If the mother doesn't feel she can raise a child, it's her choice to spare said child of it's potentially damaging childhood.

WTF does this have to do with this thread, of course babies cannot make a choice, their brains aren't fully developed.

thankyou. yay for reason!

And if their brains aren't fully developed, they aren't really people. So out comes the coathanger.

Even when they are born their brains aren't fully developed.

Excellent reasoning. Brains aren't fully developed until the mid 20s. I propose we extend the abortion time limit until then. Of course the abortee would have to undergo a means test, to attempt to disprove whether or not they should be aborted.

 

[Labyrinth]

Why do you say human lives don't matter anymore than a common animal, then go on to argue that abortion will save lives?

Its confusing...

I'm saying that people should have the availability to protect themselves. Also, valuing humans no more than any other organism in terms of life doesn't mean they should be helped.

adoption also solves plenty of those problems
And it's not always nine months of vomiting every day, stretching pains, additional weight, followed by the amount of pain endured through birth - you could have an epidural, diet, and not all women have stretching pain and vomit everyday. Yes, it's unpleasant, but the kid gets a chance to live
also, "Many women simply feel that they have no control over whether there is contraception used during sex if the male partner doesn't wish to." then where is your pro-choice in that? You just chose a douche and you might as well resign yourself to getting pregnant if you don't use contraception

Do you think that I, as a feminist, actually agree that women should be powerless in the face of contraception? Because something happens doesn't mean it should. I'd love to be able to say that every woman is empowered to say "no, you're wearing a condom" but it simply doesn't work like that.

As I said, even when contraception is used there's a chance it will fail. And there's rape.

Also, if you don't like abortion there's a simple answer. Don't get one. That's your choice and your view, you have no right to stop other people who disagree with it from having them.