Discussion: Abortion II

[Figs]

What I don't get is how people find it fine to have an abortion unless it's pregnancy by rape of course.

 

[DieSmiling]

What I don't get is how people find it fine to have an abortion unless it's pregnancy by rape of course.

Who thinks its "fine" to have an abortion unless it's pregnancy by rape? That makes zero sense and I don't know anyone who thinks that way.

I'm pro choice because if I got a girl pregnant tomorrow I'd want her to get an abortion. I'd rather be wrong than a hypocrite.

 

[redhawk23]

Refusing to concede a fetus as a living them, I contend, weakens the foundation of a Pro-Choice argument.

very much so.

 

[Figs]

Who thinks its "fine" to have an abortion unless it's pregnancy by rape? That makes zero sense and I don't know anyone who thinks that way.

I'm pro choice because if I got a girl pregnant tomorrow I'd want her to get an abortion. I'd rather be wrong than a hypocrite.

Not sure if you misread my post or I didn't express myself clearly. I'm saying it's ok in my book to have an abortion if the women was raped and got pregnant, but I don't agree with people that use abortions as birth control for casual sex.

 

[SentinelMind]

Pro-Lifers don't want to grant a fetus with the same rights as a living person, they want to grant fetuses more rights than a living person. No one has the right to the life of another without their consent.

Parents are subject to child abandonment and neglect laws. You can't arbitrarily throw your child out on the street or leave baby next to a dumpster. Our laws generally indicate that state has responsibility of protecting children and minors even to the point of punishing abuse (indirect or direct) performed by the parent. I don't see how not giving birth to your child is any different than choosing not to feed your child. A parent has the option of sending child up for adoption, but they must apply to give up their parental rights revoked to the state. I don't see why abortion laws can't be treated differently.

 

[SentinelMind]

Refusing to concede a fetus as a living them, I contend, weakens the foundation of a Pro-Choice argument.

Agreed. As The Question mentions, a fetus satisfies any scientific textbook definition of life.

You can spin my pro-choice view as being 'pro-abortion' all you want, but it's just not true.

I don't want to get into semantics games, but can you explain to me how Hucakabee's analogy that being pro-choice involves tolerating abortion doesn't apply?

 

[Marx]

The only thing further that I will say is what I have always said on this subject...

I am personally opposed to abortion except in the cases of rape or mother's health. I am pro-choice because I support a woman's right to have that choice. It is not my place, or yours, to tell a woman what she can and cannot do with her own body.

 

[SentinelMind]

The only thing further that I will say is what I have always said on this subject...

I am personally opposed to abortion except in the cases of rape or mother's health. I am pro-choice because I support a woman's right to have that choice. It is not my place, or yours, to tell a woman what she can and cannot do with her own body.

She can decide what happens to the body of the fetus trying to survive? I never hear how the body of the fetus ever comes into the equation.

 

[StorminNorman]

Parents are subject to child abandonment and neglect laws. You can't arbitrarily throw your child out on the street or leave baby next to a dumpster. Our laws generally indicate that state has responsibility of protecting children and minors even to the point of punishing abuse (indirect or direct) performed by the parent. I don't see how not giving birth to your child is any different than choosing not to feed your child. A parent has the option of sending child up for adoption, but they must apply to give up their parental rights revoked to the state. I don't see why abortion laws can't be treated differently.

A parent does have the option of arbitrarily leaving a child at an adoption agency. A parent does have the right to give away their child to a friend or family member (or stranger).

Going back to the issue of having food for one and a mother having to choose between herself or her child, a strict interpretation of child laws would possibly make it illegal for the mother to choose herself over the child. I would contend that's unreasonable.

 

[Anita18]

The only thing further that I will say is what I have always said on this subject...

I am personally opposed to abortion except in the cases of rape or mother's health. I am pro-choice because I support a woman's right to have that choice. It is not my place, or yours, to tell a woman what she can and cannot do with her own body.

Exactly how I feel Marx.

I don't like the idea of abortion. If I got pregnant tomorrow I don't know if I could have the procedure myself. But I will fight for the right of every woman to decide what to do with HER body. That right to choose supersedes anything else, IMO. I'm not saying that a fetus is not a living thing, that's why I don't like the idea of abortion. But a woman not having a choice over her own body disturbs me more.

The fact is that pregnancy involves one living thing incubating inside the body of another. If we could grow babies in test tubes then this wouldn't even be an argument IMO - in that case, if a father wanted the baby and the mother did not, we could take the embryo from the mother and grow it in a lab and everybody would be happy aside from the possible custody/financial issues. Unfortunately life isn't always fair and IMO a woman's rights come first.

 

[Paradoxium]

You misunderstand Anita. A guy is less likely to care if the girl aborts his child. He has more of a problem when she doesn't. It's the whole issue of 18 years of legally enforced financial anal rape. Now if it's her body, and her money, I don't think the guy cares the least bit.

 

[UltimateJustin]

A fetus isn't real. It surprises me this debate still rages in modern times, though I guess healthy dialogue can be a good thing even if you're communicating with people who would actually tell a woman what to do with her own body. As if there is some kind of moral justice in giving a woman a list of things she can or cannot do regarding her body.

I guess I've just never heard the pro-life debate in a way that made any sense, though I'm certainly listening. As for me, I would rather not dictate over people's rights to plan and maintain their own lives. Seems like a dangerous road to go down.

 

[Anita18]

You misunderstand Anita. A guy is less likely to care if the girl aborts his child. He has more of a problem when she doesn't. It's the whole issue of 18 years of legally enforced financial anal rape. Now if it's her body, and her money, I don't think the guy cares the least bit.

I'm not misunderstanding. I'm pretty sure I've read here how guys are at a disadvantage because what the woman wants, goes, even if the guy wants to raise the child himself. The gold-digging baby mama is the more stereotypical situation, but the other situation happens too. Yeah, it sucks, but the right of the woman's choice supersedes everything. You can't force a woman to have an abortion the same way you can't force a woman not to have one.

And this is why one should be educated and have discussions with your partner about these things. Would lessen the suckage!

 

[UltimateJustin]

I'm not misunderstanding. I'm pretty sure I've read here how guys are at a disadvantage because what the woman wants, goes, even if the guy wants to raise the child himself. The gold-digging baby mama is the more stereotypical situation, but the other situation happens too. Yeah, it sucks, but the right of the woman's choice supersedes everything. You can't force a woman to have an abortion the same way you can't force a woman not to have one.

And this is why one should be educated and have discussions with your partner about these things. Would lessen the suckage!

Though it's true that since we do look at abortion from the singular standpoint of being a woman's rights issue, it makes no sense that a man should face any repercussions for her choice (i.e. child support).

 

[Kelly]

The thing is, abortion has consequences medically. So if a guy says, I want her to have an abortion, he is putting her in a situation that medically could have extreme consequences. He should not have that say....

You have sex, well, you run the risk of the girl getting pregnant....if you take the chance, you may have to dance. Paying child support does not equal making a medical choice for someone...very, very different.

 

[UltimateJustin]

The thing is, abortion has consequences medically. So if a guy says, I want her to have an abortion, he is putting her in a situation that medically could have extreme consequences. He should not have that say....

You have sex, well, you run the risk of the girl getting pregnant....if you take the chance, you may have to dance. Paying child support does not equal making a medical choice for someone...very, very different.

By all means. If I made the above look like I am endorsing a man being able to make a woman partake in ANY kind of medical procedure, that was absolutely not my intention.

I'm simply saying once the child is born it really shouldn't be their problemo.

 

[Anita18]

Though it's true that since we do look at abortion from the singular standpoint of being a woman's rights issue, it makes no sense that a man should face any repercussions for her choice (i.e. child support).

That's why the situation sucks. I understand that, but it's still HER body. What makes no sense to me is how a guy could tell a woman to undergo a medical procedure on his say-so and not hers.

If you don't want to get a woman pregnant, you have to make sure you use protection too. Heck, if you're really desperate, I've read about soaking male nether regions in very warm baths - kills sperm, no sweat. (There's a reason why they dangle outside of your core, so they don't overheat.) And no danger of your crazy potential baby mama poking holes in condoms.

It takes two to tango, everyone knows that.

 

[Anita18]

By all means. If I made the above look like I am endorsing a man being able to make a woman partake in ANY kind of medical procedure, that was absolutely not my intention.

I'm simply saying once the child is born it really shouldn't be their problemo.

That's when you need a good lawyer to write you a rock-solid legal document. You have to be rich to afford that.

So self-protection is definitely the way to go.

 

[Franklin Richards]

It does take two to tango, however when my son was born I had to sign some paperwork or the state of Texas wouldn't have recognized my rights as a father. However if I had shirked my duties they would have arrested me for being a deadbeat dad.


What?

 

[UltimateJustin]

That's when you need a good lawyer to write you a rock-solid legal document. You have to be rich to afford that.

So self-protection is definitely the way to go.

There are a lot of ways to not have a kid, I feel like most people who do somehow enjoyed the 'risk' at hand. I don't so I always wear a condom assuming she absolutely refuses entry to the butt.

 

[Anita18]

It does take two to tango, however when my son was born I had to sign some paperwork or the state of Texas wouldn't have recognized my rights as a father. However if I had shirked my duties they would have arrested me for being a deadbeat dad.

What?

Hey, women have to carry a little person inside themselves for 9 months and then pop them out of a small tube. I think we deserve something for that inconvenience.

 

[Franklin Richards]

We have to deal with a pregnant woman!!!

 

[Anita18]

We have to deal with a pregnant woman!!!

Not nearly comparable, dude.

 

[Franklin Richards]

Maybe we can do a Freaky Friday and we'll switch places and I'll be pregnant and you'll have to deal with me.


I think we have a movie, folks.

 

[StorminNorman]

Hey, women have to carry a little person inside themselves for 9 months and then pop them out of a small tube. I think we deserve something for that inconvenience.

But that's a woman's choice. Right? If a man would rather the woman not to have to bear that burden, I don't see where she has a case charging him for the inconvenience.