Pro-Choice VS. Pro-Life?

reply to post by EvilSadamClone


I give you much credit for honestly considering the issue. I don't understand how it is a tyranny, unless you perceive life itself to be a tyranny.

"...is it surprising that today we have become so morally blind (for wickedness blinds) that we save the baby whales at great cost, and murder millions of unborn children?"
~ Alice von Hildebrand, The Privilege of Being a Woman, p.24 ~

Pregnancy (fertilization) is not a guarantee of life.

I have been pregnant 10 times, I have 2 children 12 years apart. Medically, what happened is termed as a"spontaneous abortion", otherwise known as a miscarriage. Does that make me a murderer? By some ultra right wing perceptions of "pro-life" it does.

Does that mean that I would seek out an abortion for a child I did not want? Personally no, and that comes from my experience with the difficulty of maintaining a pregnancy.

However, despite all that I went through emotionally, physically and spiritually, I do not believe that I have the right to make that choice for someone else, they haven't gone through what I did, and there is absolutely no way I could EVER empathize with them because of it.

The thing that bothers me most is that the religious end of the argument always starts with something along the lines of a pregnancy is God's creation, it begins at conception...etc. Well, if that is the case, then God is also a mass murderer because using the same logic a miscarriage (though the ultra right would have you believe it was MY fault) is also God's creation.

If "life" begins at fertilization, and was meant to produce a life, because of the will of GOD. then there would be such thing as still births and miscarriages and then maybe the discussion would have merit.

Until that time arrives, if ever it does, I have no right to tell anyone whether or not they have a "right" to end a pregnancy, because no one asked me if I wanted a miscarriage!

Originally posted by TheCelestialHuman
reply to post by athes

 

1. Definition of individual:

A single human being as distinct from a group, class, or family.

2. In the first trimester, embryo's can not exist outside the womb, they can not survive without the mother.


3. Therefore they are not individuals.

4. Life does not begin at fertilization,

5. otherwise all women who have had more than one period are serial killers. Saying life begins at fertilization is almost as stupid as saying life begins at erection.
"Not all ejaculations deserve a name".
I hope I have made my point, now could you tell me how you stand on the issue, you didn't really go into detail..

See below for my comments on this little gem.

1. This is a quick google search social psychology definition, try a biological one like the following: A single, separate organism (animal or plant) distinguished from others of a same kind. - or - Being a distinct entity.
And what makes an individual distinct? it's DNA. At fertilization the egg and sperm combine to create a distinct organism in which its DNA does not match either parent but is a derivative of both combined.

2. Being able to survive or not without aid does not determine the worth of an individual, nor excuse the end. if you left a newborn in the woods for even a day alone, the child would most likely not survive. I am asking you to argue with scientific facts not with what you piece together using woefully inaccurate information

3. Refer to the more accurate definition

4. Read an biology textbook

5. In regards to your belief that fertilization is the same as ovulation.,...WOW, really? NO, when women ovulate they do not produce a distinct individual in the absence of sperm, nor does sperm alone create an distinct individual within the context of Humans. Nor does a human begin to form in the presence of an egg and a sperm, unless the sperm has breached the outer shell of the egg and even then not always. We do not clone ourselves outside of the lab. A child needs both an egg and a sperm in order to become a distinct individual.

I worked with an organism that reproduced both sexually and asexually, I will define these terms because I have taken for granted your understanding of the subject of human reproduction, which is sexual. Asexual reproduction only requires one individual and the offspring are considered replicas of the parent, also known as clones. Sexual reproduction requires DNA from both a male and a female in order to create offspring.
Following me? I was working on a genetic project. In order for my work to be published I had to show that the DNA from my organisms were exact copies, meaning they were cloned, they were not distinct from the single parent. We as humans are distinct from our parents DNA ,thus making us individuals.
So I can understand your stance due to your belief that a baby just gets put there because a women ovulates? I mean seriously every menstrual cycle is an abortion!? Really, your kidding right? Please tell me you understand how sex works. Please restore my faith in the intelligence of human kind, please.

And Please do as I asked and READ an Embryology textbook.

You did make me giggle, though, I will give you that.

reply to post by sad_eyed_lady

It is not alive nor is it an individual until after the 1st trimester, no matter what your 4,000 year old book tells you.

Originally posted by VoidHawk
It should be left to the individual to make the decision and live with it.

The pro's say we dont have the right to end a life, but what about the life of the mother? She may not have even been a willing participant.

We should all butt out of others peoples business.

But COMPLETELY. If a woman has an abortion, for whatever reason, that's her business...and her $$$. Not mine.

I am in the camp that says the murder of a child is the choice of the mother and father.

/TOA

reply to post by TheCelestialHuman


How about a genetic book, a biology book, well actually a plethora of other modern science books? is it true then? just asking

reply to post by athes

1. This is a quick google search social psychology definition, try a biological one like the following: A single, separate organism (animal or plant) distinguished from others of a same kind. - or - Being a distinct entity. And what makes an individual distinct? it's DNA. At fertilization the egg and sperm combine to create a distinct organism in which its DNA does not match either parent but is a derivative of both combined.

That is pretty much the same definition, an embryo couldn't be considered an individual because it is not separate from the mother, nor could it be outside of the womb. Beyond the first trimester, i would consider it an individual.

2. Being able to survive or not without aid does not determine the worth of an individual, nor excuse the end. if you left a newborn in the woods for even a day alone, the child would most likely not survive. I am asking you to argue with scientific facts not with what you piece together using woefully inaccurate information

Your not understanding what I am saying, reread the thread please.

3. Refer to the more accurate definition

1. Our definition are relatively close.
2. Where did you get your definition from and how is it anymore accurate?

4. Read an biology textbook

Read an English textbook.

5. In regards to your belief that fertilization is the same as ovulation.,...WOW, really? NO, when women ovulate they do not produce a distinct individual in the absence of sperm, nor does sperm alone create an distinct individual within the context of Humans. Nor does a human begin to form in the presence of an egg and a sperm, unless the sperm has breached the outer shell of the egg and even then not always. We do not clone ourselves outside of the lab. A child needs both an egg and a sperm in order to become a distinct individual.

I'm glad you understand this, once again, you have failed to understand what I am saying. reread please.

So I can understand your stance due to your belief that a baby just gets put there because a women ovulates? I mean seriously every menstrual cycle is an abortion!? Really, your kidding right? Please tell me you understand how sex works. Please restore my faith in the intelligence of human kind, please.

You have repeatedly failed to comprehend what I have been saying. 80% of fertilized eggs do not make it. I never once said that babies appear when women ovulate. But, if life begins at fertilization, then any women who has an egg fertilized, then goes through her period, has just aborted a baby- or at least your definition of a baby.

reply to post by ThreeSistersofLoveandLigh


I am so sorry you had to go through all that loss. Just losing one child would be terrible. I can not imagine what you went through. How anyone could blame it on you personally is ignorant to the point of being evil.

I have 2 siblings that were miscarried. I think about them and wonder what they are like. I hope to meet them someday. What a lovely place heaven would be to grow up in.

I believe you have 10 children, nobody can say why 8 died. I hope you find peace and comfort in the thought that maybe you will be with them for eternity.

reply to post by sad_eyed_lady


You assume too much my dear.
I never said that it was an easy choice.
I said the choice should be the individuals.
You assume there is no adverse effect on the mothers life giving birth.
You assume there is no rape or incest involved and no ill will against the child because of the rape or incest.
You assume every child will be welcomed into this world, and will have enough food, clothing and shelter and not be physically,mentally or sexualy abused.
And you assume that every child born will not be born with a deformity, handicap or be so sick that they won't die at a very early age.
What gives you the right to ever think you should have the right to decide over the individual who is involved
What gives you the right to judge others on their own personal choices.
Yes, all life is precious,and everyone will answer for their choices, but not to you.

I am Pro-Abortion.

Not Pro-Choice, but the actual antithesis of Pro-Life.

I am for the abortion of 100% of pregnancies.

It will end all of the problems on this planet in about 40 years.

Originally posted by Furbs
I am Pro-Abortion.

Not Pro-Choice, but the actual antithesis of Pro-Life.

I am for the abortion of 100% of pregnancies.

It will end all of the problems on this planet in about 40 years.

What an evil thing to say. I bet you're against africans and poor people "keeping it in their pants" though.
Marxism needs to be stomped out with pleasure by all humanists

Originally posted by ThreeSistersofLoveandLigh

Until that time arrives, if ever it does, I have no right to tell anyone whether or not they have a "right" to end a pregnancy, because no one asked me if I wanted a miscarriage!

You miscarried ten babies in your struggle to carry to term, yet you use it to justify murder? Is it not selfishness that you would use your own misfortune, to justify in your mind another woman purposely[/] murdering life? If a pedophile raped your child, would you use the same argument to justify another parent having the "right" to demand that pedophilia be legalised because "you weren't given a choice"? If someone murders your child,how could you use that to justify allowing another parent to claim the. "right" to murder their own just because you "weren't given a choice"? Do you see the hypocrisy and fallacious reasoning?

Originally posted by WhoKnows100


You miscarried ten babies in your struggle to carry to term, yet you use it to justify murder? Is it not selfishness that you would use your own misfortune, to justify in your mind another woman purposely[/] murdering life? If a pedophile raped your child, would you use the same argument to justify another parent having the "right" to demand that pedophilia be legalised because "you weren't given a choice"? If someone murders your child,how could you use that to justify allowing another parent to claim the. "right" to murder their own just because you "weren't given a choice"? Do you see the hypocrisy and fallacious reasoning?

I don't use my personal experience to justify anything. If I did, then I would probably have the same point of view as you. Having 8 miscarriages can make you very jaded about life. I wanted the baby every time, and I believe life is precious. If I had a choice in the matter I would have more children. I didn't have a choice.

It is because of my experience that I choose to take the stand that I do, which is not to choose for someone else.

I believe it is a black and white issue, I don't dwell in the grey area as most people who take the stand of "abortion is murder".

If it is acceptable in the case of rape, incest, severe birth defect or imminent harm to the mother, then the gray area is approached, and I cannot get on board with that thought. Either you have a choice or you don't. Neither can I get on board with the thought that "abortion is murder" because if I did, then I would be in the camp with the ultra right.

I do not believe that abortion should be used as a method of birth control. Neither do I believe that people who are unable to have children naturally do not have the right to "go against nature (god)" and create babies in test tubes, or through surrogates.

In my view it's the same thing. Either you have the right to choose or you don't. I choose to have the choice.

reply to post by OLD HIPPY DUDE


Perhaps your worst case scenarios give you comfort in your belief that abortion is acceptable.
To me a preborn child it is a human life. Yes, I made that judgement after consideration, just as I have judged that taking human life is wrong.

If you can't see where I am coming from after reading my post then I guess you never will.

I judge right from wrong. Killing is wrong. Killing humans is wrong. God gives life and He takes it away.

I do not condemn people for their actions, but it there is anyway I can help someone make a wise decision I will.

As a social worker who worked with unwed mothers I know the scene quite well. There are always options. Nobody has to get an abortion unless it is threatening their life. I have heard all the arguments and go ahead and say "how dare you". I stood up for my beliefs and lost my job for not giving out abortion information on a maternity home's pregnancy hotline. If they told me in advance they wanted me to provide abortion information I would have told them "No deal". I was told I must "Put aside my beliefs." All I could think of when my supervisor told me this was "She sounds like Adolph Hitler."

So perhaps I'll say back to you, "What gives you the right to decide who is to live and to die?" My body, my choice. Bull #. The baby has a body, too. When you get an abortion you decided the value of your child's life and that choice is a hell of a judgement call.

Originally posted by HamrHeed

Originally posted by Furbs
I am Pro-Abortion.

Not Pro-Choice, but the actual antithesis of Pro-Life.

I am for the abortion of 100% of pregnancies.

It will end all of the problems on this planet in about 40 years.

What an evil thing to say. I bet you're against africans and poor people "keeping it in their pants" though.
Marxism needs to be stomped out with pleasure by all humanists

Ha-ha.

Marxist? You think this sentiment is MARXIST? No wonder people like you hate Marxism.. You don't even know what it is.

"The Abortion Debate" is so tired and artificially inflated with importance that the only way left to respond is with rhetorical metaphor, which almost always falls flat on ATS. I blame ATS' current unofficial policy to deny intellectualism.

reply to post by sad_eyed_lady

As a social worker who worked with unwed mothers I know the scene quite well.

Well that explains alot about you. You actually believe your way of thinking is the only way. Your ego is so big that you think that you must mold people into your way of thinking, that people can not make the right choices on their own, so you must do it for them.

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by TheCelestialHuman

 

Here is my opinion:

I don't give a !$@!

And I'm sick of society talking about it. Same with homosexuality, get over it, we, as a nation, have far more important things to be discussing than the likes of abortion, sexual preference or any other asinine smoke and mirrors debate.

Rock, I rarely disagree with you but on this I will.

These are exactly the types of discussions/debates that make our Western society unique. We do have other more pressing issues but all things being equal our society could be in much more turmoil.

As I've stated previously on this topic. I've been wrestling with the issue for a few decades and I'm no closer to choosing a side.

It's a false dichotomy. Pro-choice and pro-life are not the only two choices when it comes to figuring out how to control one's reproduction so that it's best for everyone involved. There are a lot of other options, such as contraception. Active, responsible contraception makes the entire argument moot.

As for wanting to control someone else's morals or behavior, the best we can do is pass laws.

Otherwise, "judge not..."

reply to post by Blue Shift


How does forced rape/incest of a young teenage female who is not emotionally nor financially able to take proper care of the child fit into your solutions? Adoption is far more preferable IMO but, this does not negate the life long emotional/psychological impact of having a forced pregnancy have on her development...

It's bad enough to go through the trauma of the event but to carry it's result through to full term...?

Originally posted by SLAYER69
How does forced rape/incest of a young teenage female who is not emotionally nor financially able to take proper care of the child fit into your solutions?

Come on. How often does that happen? See, people are always dragging out the extreme situations to bolster their arguments, but those should always be dealt with on an individual, personal basis, anyway. But hey, if you want to talk about extreme cases, some countries in the world still practice infanticide and there's no particular law against it. It's all a matter of perspective.

Otherwise, like I said, there are laws in place -- rape, child endangerment, etc. -- and the perpetrators should be brought to justice when possible. Just because the laws don't always come to the rescue in time doesn't mean we give up on them. We have laws against murder, and people still get murdered. Sorry, but that's the way life works. Life can be pretty harsh. Superman can't save everybody.

But if nothing else, educating all young teenage females about contraception and making it available to them through school or other public programs is still a reasonable thing to do, even if they are stuck in a horrible situation otherwise.

In any event, it seems the most reasonable thing is to do everything practical to prevent an unwanted child from being conceived. The longer the situation continues after conception, the more problematic it becomes.