Poll: Abortions in today's society: your views

[Housebroken Lunatic]

By this I meant "do you think their INTERESTS are underrepresented in the financial aftermath." But yes, I agree... men can be seriously and cripplingly screwed over by the system for what in most cases is no-one's fault and in some might even be the woman's. I think something needs to change to make the system fairer.

They sure do. Also, one can ask oneself exactly how this current system is supposed to embody progression towards gender equality (which in a lot of civilized countries is a virtue that is considered admirable and very much wanted).

It's like women are supposed to have exactly equal rights in EVERY respect that men do, but when it comes to abortions and child support, men are just supposed to take the injustice with a smile on their lips. Really good way to send a message of gender equality, don't you think?

*sigh* how come the idiocy in the government of the civilized world has to be so insidious? At least barbaric practices like vaginal mutilation, approved spusal abuse and violence in general is a very apparent idiocy open for all to see. But the developed countries of the world has to go through hypocrisy every single day. It's enough to make you sick sometimes...

 

[zehydra]

It's absolutely sensible to get an abortion in your situation, should you girlfriend get pregnant. The average public attitude towards abortions are overly positive, unless you count religious fanatics, and who does?

You should only have a child when you're ready for it. Negating a child is severely worse than having an abortion in every way, if you're not ready for it.

On the subject matter of her implant, I'd say you should start using condoms if you are very worried. Just to be on the safer side.

Trust me, not everyone who has decided to keep a baby due to an "unintentional" pregnancy are happy with their choice later in life.

I disagree. A neglected child is at least alive. It is better to be alive than dead.

I'm sorry, what the fuck did you just say? It's definitely not better to be alive than dead, in many, MANY cases. Neglected children will likely have severe mental and emotional problems and be incredibly disadvantaged in life itself. Most do not make it to college. Neglected children who become parents often neglect their own children.
As for adoption, it's all well and good to think that your child will have a good home, but adoption really isn't that great. The parents basically drop off the kid and if it's lucky it'll get picked up. If not, it could be months or even years before that child is properly adopted. My mother was adopted. She doesn't much care about her ancestry. I'm the next generation. I kind of DO care about my ancestry, but I'll never get to know.

If I were given a choice between being adopted or being aborted, I'd choose abortion. Thank you and have a nice day.

Why do you care about your ancestry? it doesn't matter who your parents were, or who their parents were, just who you are now. When you say disadvantaged, you mean disadvantaged in our current societal system; not life itself.

I'm assuming you have some notion of an afterlife? otherwise, if not, then there is no positive or negative repercussions in being dead. What I mean is, if there can be no positive existence in death, than living MUST be BETTER because life has positive and negative existences.

 

[zehydra]

It's absolutely sensible to get an abortion in your situation, should you girlfriend get pregnant. The average public attitude towards abortions are overly positive, unless you count religious fanatics, and who does?

You should only have a child when you're ready for it. Negating a child is severely worse than having an abortion in every way, if you're not ready for it.

On the subject matter of her implant, I'd say you should start using condoms if you are very worried. Just to be on the safer side.

Trust me, not everyone who has decided to keep a baby due to an "unintentional" pregnancy are happy with their choice later in life.

I disagree. A neglected child is at least alive. It is better to be alive than dead.

Hah, right. Would YOU want to be that child that lives it's whole life developmentally and mentally disabled because the mother couldn't afford food for it when it was growing up? Neglecting a child is on the same level as beating it senseless every day. Popping out kid after kid because it's better to have retarded kids than dead ones is an asinine argument.


Hmmm...I'm a fairly callous person.

I'd rather be a neglected (mentally disabled is a bit of a stretch. You don't become mentally disabled from neglect, you get mental/emotional problems, but not disability) than dead.

 

[mr_rubino]

What a stupid thread. *gets banned*
No, but seriously. Everyone's mind has already been made up and 90 pages of people chucking overused emotional arguments at one another isn't going to change that. Or at least it shouldn't, because that would mean whoever's view has been changed is incredibly malleable and probably shouldn't be allowed to breed in the first place.

Murder. Blob of cells. Choice. Jesus. Blah blah blah.
It's your decision to make; don't ask the Internet to make it for you.

It's absolutely sensible to get an abortion in your situation, should you girlfriend get pregnant. The average public attitude towards abortions are overly positive, unless you count religious fanatics, and who does?

You should only have a child when you're ready for it. Negating a child is severely worse than having an abortion in every way, if you're not ready for it.

On the subject matter of her implant, I'd say you should start using condoms if you are very worried. Just to be on the safer side.

Trust me, not everyone who has decided to keep a baby due to an "unintentional" pregnancy are happy with their choice later in life.

I disagree. A neglected child is at least alive. It is better to be alive than dead.

Hah, right. Would YOU want to be that child that lives it's whole life developmentally and mentally disabled because the mother couldn't afford food for it when it was growing up? Neglecting a child is on the same level as beating it senseless every day. Popping out kid after kid because it's better to have retarded kids than dead ones is an asinine argument.


Hmmm...I'm a fairly callous person.

I'd rather be a neglected (mentally disabled is a bit of a stretch. You don't become mentally disabled from neglect, you get mental/emotional problems, but not disability) than dead.

But there's nothing to "rather be". You wouldn't have existed to realize you had died. *conundrum*

 

[Terminal Blue]

I'd rather be a neglected (mentally disabled is a bit of a stretch. You don't become mentally disabled from neglect, you get mental/emotional problems, but not disability) than dead.

I'd rather be neglected than die. If I was already dead I don't think I'd be terribly put out.

An unborn fetus isn't aware of dying, it has no preference either way. To inflect it's wishes at the expense of the mother's expressed preference strikes me as highly suspect.

Incidentally neglecting children can disable them if the neglect is extreme enough. Normal brain development requires stimulation, a child deprived of stimulation will not develop properly and will be to all intents and purposes mentally disabled. True, it requires quite extreme and exceptional circumstances like being locked in an empty room for years on end, but it has happened.

 

[spartandude]

The fetus isnt (as far as we know) self aware or even conscious until about 16 weeks, if thats the case why is termanating any worse than removing an unwanted mass of cells or cutting down a tree (and a tree produces oxygen and takes in carbondioxide)?

sure it has the potential for life, but so does AI research and stem cell research.

 

[Jonluw]

Aren't condoms fairly ineffective as far as contraceptives go? The pill, for example, only fails due to human faults. A condom, on the other hand, can fail on its own.
A condom's success rate is about 95%
The pill ticks in at about 99%, and the enirety of that 1% is people who forgot to take their pill one day and stuff like that. (At least if sex-ed class wasn't lying to me.)
Incidentally, 2% of people who get vasectomies still get children after the procedure.

The only way a condom will fail is through misuse: Doubling up, keeping them in your wallet or pocket, using old ones, not enough lubrication, and human intervention. Human intervention includes malicious acts, such as poking holes in them, and failing to wear them properly. Worn correctly and in good condition, they are 100% effective. Those figures are for condom USE as a whole, not on the quality of it as a contraceptive.

I realize the figures are for condom use as a whole, and that the accidental conceptions are mostly attributed to human fault; but I think there is room for some failure without human fault. Such as production mishaps.

Very, very, very rare will a condom break because of a production fault, at least with a name-brand. They are tested VERY vigorously because the manufacturer is afraid of liable mishaps. The numbers for that would be so low as to be a statistical anomaly.
As an anecdote, my dorm mates and I tried to have a water balloon fight with condoms once, the fuckers WOULD NOT BREAK, even thrown on concrete and stepped on.

Yeah, they are pretty resilient. In any case, the failure rate for condoms is higher; so I suppose it is easier to get condoms wrong than it is with the pill.

 

[fenrizz]

Why would anyone even care what a woman does to her own body?

It truly baffles me.

The 3 month rule we have in my country is just fine.


And also, and religious argument to the whole debate is invalid.
We do not care about your silly beliefs, and we do not share them.

If a person kills a pregnant woman should he be charged with killing two people?

If it's after the above mentioned 3 months, then yes.

If it's before, then no.