Poll: Pro Abortion or Con Abortion

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Woodcarver

Abortion is the ultimate infringement of rights to the unborn human.

That humans rights end where the mother’s right’s begin.

Does that baby have the right to use your body? Or another woman’s body?

So you are for infringement of rights.

*shrugs*

Nope, i’m saying that the baby doesn’t have the right to infringe on the mother’s rights to make decisions for herself.

And neither do you.

That's like saying I don't have the right to stop a pedophile from doing something terrible because I'd be infringing on the rights of the pedophile.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Woodcarver

Abortion is the ultimate infringement of rights to the unborn human.

That humans rights end where the mother’s right’s begin.

Does that baby have the right to use your body? Or another woman’s body?

So you are for infringement of rights.

*shrugs*

Nope, i’m saying that the baby doesn’t have the right to infringe on the mother’s rights to make decisions for herself.

And neither do you.

That's like saying I don't have the right to stop a pedophile from doing something terrible because I'd be infringing on the rights of the pedophile.

Are you saying that pedos have a right to abuse children?

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Woodcarver

Abortion is the ultimate infringement of rights to the unborn human.

That humans rights end where the mother’s right’s begin.

Does that baby have the right to use your body? Or another woman’s body?

So you are for infringement of rights.

*shrugs*

Nope, i’m saying that the baby doesn’t have the right to infringe on the mother’s rights to make decisions for herself.

And neither do you.

That's like saying I don't have the right to stop a pedophile from doing something terrible because I'd be infringing on the rights of the pedophile.

Are you saying that pedos have a right to abuse children?

Nope, but people sure to have the legal means to kill unborn children.

I wonder if those against arbitrary killing are also against the war machine, especially in regards to Iran or North Korea
Or, do they use cute phrases/statement to say it's ok to do so, as long as it's cruel and over quick.

"War is cruelty. There is no use trying to reform it. The crueler it is, the sooner it will be over."

originally posted by: vonclod
I wonder if those against arbitrary killing are also against the war machine, especially in regards to Iran or North Korea
Or, do they use cute phrases/statement to say it's ok to do so, as long as it's cruel and over quick.

"War is cruelty. There is no use trying to reform it. The crueler it is, the sooner it will be over."

That's be a great argument if you could find an unborn baby that invaded Poland.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Woodcarver

Abortion is the ultimate infringement of rights to the unborn human.

That humans rights end where the mother’s right’s begin.

Does that baby have the right to use your body? Or another woman’s body?

So you are for infringement of rights.

*shrugs*

Nope, i’m saying that the baby doesn’t have the right to infringe on the mother’s rights to make decisions for herself.

And neither do you.

That's like saying I don't have the right to stop a pedophile from doing something terrible because I'd be infringing on the rights of the pedophile.

Are you saying that pedos have a right to abuse children?

Nope, but people sure to have the legal means to kill unborn children.

Yes, mothers have the right to choose when or if they want to have children.

You never have the right to force anyone to do anything.

See how that works? A baby, being a person, does not have the right to force anyone to do anything.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Let’s say you fall sick, and you need a kidney or a new heart. Do you have the right to use your mother’s kidney? Or their heart?

Or do you need their consent?

a reply to: Woodcarver

Keep trying to find a proper justification for killing an unborn human.

I gave my opinion.

My reasoning must have upset you because you won't quit trying to find ANY strawman argument that would support your justification.

Right now, the unborn humans have no rights. People can kill them simply because it is inconvenient to have them.

I think that an unborn human should have the right to life.

a reply to: Woodcarver

I’m not forcing anyone to do anything.

My comment is unreasonable, but so is abortion IMO. Keep in mind that I’m not forcing my opinion on anyone, Woodcarver, only voicing it. Feel free to overreact again, though.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Woodcarver

Keep trying to find a proper justification for killing an unborn human.

I gave my opinion.

My reasoning must have upset you because you won't quit trying to find ANY strawman argument that would support your justification.

Right now, the unborn humans have no rights. People can kill them simply because it is inconvenient to have them.

I think that an unborn human should have the right to life.

It’s not a strawman, it is the actual legal definition.

And i think it is the logical position.

The world has tried your way before. It is proven to be detrimental to all women when they lose that choice. I assume you are American, and although, on the surface, your way seems like the moral way, (i used to agree with you), in practice, it enslaves women. All women. Even female babies.

I am always for the position that gives people the ability to make their own decisions. Even if it means millions of abortions a year. Your way is actually more immoral,

a reply to: EternalSolace

It's not that easy.

I'm opposed to abortion when used as demented birth control or avoidance of responsibility.

I'm not opposed to abortion when it is the only option to keep the mother alive, which is thankfully rare.

originally posted by: Teikiatsu
a reply to: EternalSolace

It's not that easy.

I'm opposed to abortion when used as demented birth control or avoidance of responsibility.

I'm not opposed to abortion when it is the only option to keep the mother alive, which is thankfully rare.

So you would force women to have children they don’t want? In your ideal society, sex is only for the procreation of children? Because, In reality, no form of birthcontrol is 100%. So every unplanned fertilization must be brought to term?

What do we do to mothers who attempt abortion?

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Woodcarver

Keep trying to find a proper justification for killing an unborn human.

I gave my opinion.

My reasoning must have upset you because you won't quit trying to find ANY strawman argument that would support your justification.

Right now, the unborn humans have no rights. People can kill them simply because it is inconvenient to have them.

I think that an unborn human should have the right to life.

why would your reasons upset me? And why use being upset about someone’s opinions to demean someone else?

You’re the emotional one here, and i don’t mean that as an insult. That is simply the way you see this argument. You look at it as a loss of all these children.

I look at it as keeping a society civil. People are civil when you don’t force your beliefs on them. Let people do what they want so long as no one is harmed. I know you see this as harming a bunch of babies, but in most cases, abortions happen in the first tri-mester.

I prefer that women have their abortions as early as possible, to keep (whatever) suffering as low as possible. I don’t agree with allowing post birth abortions, but i also wouldn’t want to legislate a certain timeframe that a woman would need to race against ( for hopefully obvious reasons) It should be between her the father and her doctor. But she should have final say.

I see this as giving women sovereignty over their being, even above the baby’s wants and rights.

You simply see it as the wholesale murder of babies. But, you also believe in sky fairies and probably souls and ghosts. So i find your reasons for your beliefs as irrational and childish.

originally posted by: Woodcarver

You simply see it as the wholesale murder of babies.

Yes.

But, you also believe in sky fairies and probably souls and ghosts. So i find your reasons for your beliefs as irrational and childish.

I never once brought religion into this on this thread nor any other.

It is an unborn human.

That is a fact.

You are also okay with the wholesale slaughter of unborn humans.

This is also an established fact.

originally posted by: RandomPerson
a reply to: Woodcarver

I’m not forcing anyone to do anything.

My comment is unreasonable, but so is abortion IMO. Keep in mind that I’m not forcing my opinion on anyone, Woodcarver, only voicing it. Feel free to overreact again, though.

Your way traps women in relationships with men they don’t want to be with. It traps them with a financial and personal responsibility of the child and that father.

What if the father is a deadbeat? What if he is abusive? What if he rapes her to get her pregnant so she has to stay with him?
Your way puts a stigma on abortion. Some men will use that to trap women.

Your way enslaves women. We tried that already.

a reply to: Woodcarver

I think if a woman doesn’t want a baby, she should take precautions against pregnancy using birth control. If that fails, she made the choice to take that chance, and should have to live with the consequences.

If the father is abusive or a deadbeat, the woman shouldn’t be sleeping with him and risking pregnancy, PERIOD. If she does, again it is her fault she’s pregnant and should have to accept the consequences. Her choice, her consequences.

As for pregnancies that are the result of rape, an argument could be made pro-abortion in my opinion, same with incestuous relationships. Thank god those are relatively rare, and along with pregnancies that may kill the mother they are the only reasons that make even a little sense.

You’re saying women should be able to kill the unborn babies because “Oopsie, I spread my legs and got preggernant, better tear to pieces this baby forming inside me, la la la!”

That is evil, and I will not side with it.

originally posted by: RandomPerson
a reply to: Woodcarver

I think if a woman doesn’t want a baby, she should take precautions against pregnancy using birth control. If that fails, she made the choice to take that chance, and should have to live with the consequences.

no birth control is 100% effective. They only claim a 99% effective rate. That leaves 1 out of 100 women out of luck and millions of unwanted unplanned children. And millions of women forced to do something they don’t want to do. Congratulations, your way puts society back in the dark ages.

[edit: it’s not 1 in a 100 women, it’s 1 in a 100 instances of sex.

If the father is abusive or a deadbeat, the woman shouldn’t be sleeping with him and risking pregnancy, PERIOD. If she does, again it is her fault she’s pregnant and should have to accept the consequences. Her choice, her consequences.

there are some really bad men out there who pretend for a short time that they are decent folks. There are also some women out there who are not good judges of character. There are some men who may not want children, and upon hearing they have gotten a chick prego, they change their mind and no longer want to be with her. He may also want her to get an abortion. You are completely ignoring human nature and the vast amount of differing personalities.

Your way effectively removes everybody’s choice in the matter. Which is called slavery. And is the opposite of freedom.

You do not want people coming into your life and forcing their will on you. Which is currently the reason you don’t have the right to do that.

You’re saying women should be able to kill the unborn babies because “Oopsie, I spread my legs and got preggernant, better tear to pieces this baby forming inside me, la la la!”

yes.

That is evil, and I will not side with it.

Our available choices are both pretty bad. On one hand you have some terminated pregnacies, and on the other, you have the enslavement of all women.

Which is the lesser of two evils?

I side with the position that people be given sovereignty over their own bodies and their own lives.

You side with slavery of all women. Maybe your the evil one?

Pro, but only to a point.

If the mother is in danger or the pregnancy is the result of rape then - Pro. No one should have to suffer through that.

If it is early enough in the pregnancy then - Pro. Having a child is a huge commitment. If someone does not believe they are up to the task then it is better to not bring the child in to the world.

If it is late-term - Con. There is no reason to go that long then decide against having it.

Adoption isn't always the happy solution we hope it will be. There are many children out there waiting to be adopted. Adding more because of the inability to make a decision or commit to one is not the answer.

My opinion will change when someone can accurately define the exact moment that 'human' life begins. Two cells is not a human. Neither is four, or eight, etc. Regardless of what it looks like or what features it has, I need to know it is a human being before I am willing to call someone a murderer. There can be no doubt. That moment is not the time to have a philosophical discussion on the subject. I need to know ahead of time: exactly when does 'human' life begin?

Post Script: remember, you cannot legislate potential. Having the potential to become a human being is not the same as being a human being. If you are at a stage where you have the potential to become a human being then termination is not murder because murder only applies to humans.

Can't handle or raise a baby, then don't have one.

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: Teikiatsu
a reply to: EternalSolace

It's not that easy.

I'm opposed to abortion when used as demented birth control or avoidance of responsibility.

I'm not opposed to abortion when it is the only option to keep the mother alive, which is thankfully rare.

So you would force women to have children they don’t want?

If they don't want kids, they shouldn't engage in an activity which evolved over billions of years to produce children.

In your ideal society, sex is only for the procreation of children? Because, In reality, no form of birthcontrol is 100%. So every unplanned fertilization must be brought to term?

There is no such thing as an ideal society. But if society were mine to put in place, then men and women would be held responsible for their actions. Sex is an action. If they think they are mature enough to engage in sexual activity, they should understand that there will always be a risk of pregnancy. If they aren't ready for kids, then they should take precautions and know there is always a chance and not avoid the consequences.

What do we do to mothers who attempt abortion?

Since we're fully hypothetical:

1) If they attempt abortion for the sole purpose of avoidance and not medically necessary yet the child survives, the mother would undergo forced sterilization, and charged with attempted. If the attempted abortion injures the child, then they are on the hook to pay for remediation. The abortion provider is charged with attempted murder and loses their license if they have one.

2) If they attempt abortion for the sole purpose of avoidance and not medically necessary and the child does not survive, the mother would undergo forced sterilization and be charged as an accessory to murder. The abortion provider is charged with murder. All assistants in the procedure are accessories.

2a) An exception would be made in the (rare) case of pregnancy after rape. Since the mother's right to choose was denied her, the next choice is to terminate the pregnancy. If the rapist is caught, they would be charged with involuntary manslaughter when the child is killed, in addition to all other charged. Forced sterilization on the rapist.

3) If the abortion is medically necessary, no penalties. If it was due to rape, the rapist is charged as above.

In all cases of successful abortions, the child is recognized as a human being given a full name, birth and death certificate, and funeral.

You may go apoplectic now, hypothetical or not.