Poll: Abortion- What's your position and why?
- Thread starter shufflemonkey16
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Gotta be honest, I find the idea of abortion repugnant. However, my belief that a woman's body is her own 'sacred' property is also quite strong. So, I find myself against abortion as a concept, but for it as a practice of personal choice, if that makes any sense.
you have no fuckin' idea at all of the havoc you are about to create because of this thread. trust me man there's a couple of things you never want to talk about. 1shufflemonkey16 said:
olitics, 2:Religion, 3:The Great Pumpkin. and im pretty sure a thread about abortion falls into the first two!
I agree. Birth is the begining of human life all human life is sentiant (soz for spelling). Besides it's better that a kid never live than live a life of abuse crime and suffering right? some people just aren't ready to raise a child or in some cases not ready to give birth.Dr.Sean said:
Bravo sir, you have just made me lose the last vestiges of my hope for humankind.berethond said:
Expect the world to end shortly.
I'm not arguing ethics here. I'm pointing out a scientific fact, regardless of its implications. How you interpret that is up to you. I didn't put my opinion in my post and I respect yours, I'm simply stating a fact.crudus said:
I'm going to do my best to wrap up my end of this incredibly long discussionlostclause said:
I suppose what my underlying point is, is that I hesitate to adopt a qualitative means to determine what is human. This is because of everything you brought up; the mutations, the defects, the diseases etc. all make some people considerably different from "regular" people. I prefer using DNA, a more quantitative device, because it leaves no room for shades of gray. A quick analysis of someone's genetic material and you immediately know if it's human or not. The questions you ask are excellent ones, namely "where do we draw the line?". It is a question that is unanswerable unless you make up an arbitrary set of regulations (i.e. "to be human, the being must have no more and no less than two legs", a statement that would rule out the Indian girl in your picture), OR if you have something that is both common to all humans and that is easily analyzed. DNA seems to fit this perfectly, and therefore we can avoid making shady rules as to what is human or not.
As you said, human DNA is also very similar to monkey (or ape... or maybe both; either way...) DNA. You bring up a valid concern that it is similar enough that they too could be classified as "human" by DNA. Unfortunately, I am no geneticist, so I simply don't know by what exact amount monkey DNA is different from human DNA. However I do know that forensics instigators have never accidentally incriminated a monkey for a crime because they couldn't tell the difference between monkey and human DNA. Obviously, they are different enough that the distinction can be made. Also, in the case of mutations and the like, I don't think they cause such a radical change in the DNA that the DNA becomes completely undefined as to its species, but again, I am no geneticist.
I do have experience, and I think forensic investigators probably look at SNPs or something like "short nucleotide polymorphisms." They're fairly unique, and useful for determining one individual from another, but they're not important in a functional sense. I think the similarity between chimps and humans is like 99.7% or something? Also, I think that the same difference exists between human males and human females, though that's because of the sex chromosomes.cowbell40 said:
In the end, I think intelligence is the best criteria, though clearly one wants to make sure that said criteria isn't used for evil purposes (like sterilizing people, or killing mentally disabled people.) Maybe I've read too much sci-fi, but a sentient, non-human alien is still as valuable as a sentient human, right? Right. Anyone who disagreed with that in a sci-fi novel would probably be some sort of antagonist.
Well this is a landslide victory if I ever saw one.
While some view abortion as cruel, there is a 'positive' side to it (no matter how cold it may sound). Say that a 16 year old girl gets pregnant, her boyfriend leaves her, she belongs to an abusive family and her family will not help her support her child... what kind of life will that child have? It will have a miserable existence, it will be neglected and possibly even physically abused and in my opinion it is best to put it out of it's misery before its ability to feel misery begins.
While some view abortion as cruel, there is a 'positive' side to it (no matter how cold it may sound). Say that a 16 year old girl gets pregnant, her boyfriend leaves her, she belongs to an abusive family and her family will not help her support her child... what kind of life will that child have? It will have a miserable existence, it will be neglected and possibly even physically abused and in my opinion it is best to put it out of it's misery before its ability to feel misery begins.
I am not even going to post in this thread anymore it all now boils down to
Life or Freedom
(i'm for life... and I already said why)
Life or Freedom
(i'm for life... and I already said why)
Wrapping it up from this end too.cowbell40 said:I'm going to do my best to wrap up my end of this incredibly long discussion
I suppose what my underlying point is, is that I hesitate to adopt a qualitative means to determine what is human. This is because of everything you brought up; the mutations, the defects, the diseases etc. all make some people considerably different from "regular" people. I prefer using DNA, a more quantitative device, because it leaves no room for shades of gray. A quick analysis of someone's genetic material and you immediately know if it's human or not. The questions you ask are excellent ones, namely "where do we draw the line?". It is a question that is unanswerable unless you make up an arbitrary set of regulations (i.e. "to be human, the being must have no more and no less than two legs", a statement that would rule out the Indian girl in your picture), OR if you have something that is both common to all humans and that is easily analyzed. DNA seems to fit this perfectly, and therefore we can avoid making shady rules as to what is human or not.
As you said, human DNA is also very similar to monkey (or ape... or maybe both; either way...) DNA. You bring up a valid concern that it is similar enough that they too could be classified as "human" by DNA. Unfortunately, I am no geneticist, so I simply don't know by what exact amount monkey DNA is different from human DNA. However I do know that forensics instigators have never accidentally incriminated a monkey for a crime because they couldn't tell the difference between monkey and human DNA. Obviously, they are different enough that the distinction can be made. Also, in the case of mutations and the like, I don't think they cause such a radical change in the DNA that the DNA becomes completely undefined as to its species, but again, I am no geneticist.
I don't mind how anyone decides to define a human, I'm just aware that there is no simple way. I just want to make sure people justify their beliefs, as you have done, with facts.
Interestingly enough, they girl was actually the closest to us genetically, her mutation is from a parasetic conjoined twin, not her dna.
But well argued, thanks.
I think if it's voluntary intercourse, you should know the consequences, and I find it irresponsible not to be ready for them. However, involuntary insemination; I believe should give one the definite right to abort. Though, I'd give one the right to abort either way, but I'd advise against it strongly. Especially in most curcumstances.
There are girls at my Junior High School who've gotten a few abortions. And learned nothing from it because they can do it. I think that one should be assessed and evaluated on as many levels as can be provided before getting an abortion. I'd only advise it to rape victims who can not, or morally do not wish to, provide. I even think adoption is somewhat shirking responsibilities. Though, I'd say I dislike the openness of it, I'd leave it legal, for any choice. Though I would push for a heart-to-heart talk or something with the doctor beforehand or something.
EDIT: Oh, possible deformities or chance of death in labor? I suppose. I'd push for deformity to be accepted by the "parent", but it's a more understanding argument for the abortion than is regular.
There are girls at my Junior High School who've gotten a few abortions. And learned nothing from it because they can do it. I think that one should be assessed and evaluated on as many levels as can be provided before getting an abortion. I'd only advise it to rape victims who can not, or morally do not wish to, provide. I even think adoption is somewhat shirking responsibilities. Though, I'd say I dislike the openness of it, I'd leave it legal, for any choice. Though I would push for a heart-to-heart talk or something with the doctor beforehand or something.
EDIT: Oh, possible deformities or chance of death in labor? I suppose. I'd push for deformity to be accepted by the "parent", but it's a more understanding argument for the abortion than is regular.
I share this opinion, if the unwanted pregnancy was against her will then she is the victim, and should recieve all neccessary compasion, if she's just promiscuous then she's a victim of her own stupidity, and brought it on herself.xxhazyshadowsxx said:
I like to think abortion like a house! When people come in I.E. the baby, they stay for alittle bit and can't pay for shit, then the landlord either keeps them out of the kindness of his/her heart of evicts their ass!
Above is capitalism at work!
Now abortions the same concept, except its a belly and not a house, so if you hate capitalism than you hate America and you hate abortion too...I guess.
Kinda a Strawman argument but you get my point!
Above is capitalism at work!
Now abortions the same concept, except its a belly and not a house, so if you hate capitalism than you hate America and you hate abortion too...I guess.
Kinda a Strawman argument but you get my point!
I'm a woman and I do often wonder what gives woman the supreme right over a soon to be baby that they only half created. Just because the father doesn't have the option or privilage to carry a baby for nine months internally doesn't mean he should be left out of the loop entirely. I believe the father should be notified before an abortion except in cases of rape/incest or there is physical/sexual abuse in the relationship. Otherwise the man should have a right to have a say - last time I checked women don't do the whole thing by themselves and it's rather elitist to think they should be the only ones that have a say. (And yes, I have actually met men who have been hurt or even crushed, finding out about an abortion after the fact - sometimes years after the fact - when they would have liked to have kept the child).
The last thing I'll say on the subject: I believe a lot of our problems would be solved if we considered the heartbeat the start of life. We measure life and death by the heart outside of the womb, so why mince things inside? Of course if a woman's life is endanger then she should have the option of abortion, but strangely I haven't met a woman in real life that has taken it when in that situation...
The last thing I'll say on the subject: I believe a lot of our problems would be solved if we considered the heartbeat the start of life. We measure life and death by the heart outside of the womb, so why mince things inside? Of course if a woman's life is endanger then she should have the option of abortion, but strangely I haven't met a woman in real life that has taken it when in that situation...
I really am just curious when I ask this - I'm not trying to be rude or flame - when does a fetus become a living thing? At birth? Now-a-days a fetus is viable outside the womb at 21 weeks, so does that mean that the fetus is a living thing then or only if it is born then?NoMoreSanity said:
Personally I don't believe in abortion after the heart starts beating, which includes aborting a baby because of suppsed birth defects. I wouldn't have my little cousin if my aunt had believed the doctors - he turned out perfectly healthy. I'm not particularly okay with abortion before the heart beats, I defintely don't think it should be seen as last minute birth control which for many women I've met seems to be the case.