The Fush Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 I will go ahead and admit it. I voted for ® Greg Abbott over (D) Wendy Davis for Texas, largely because I feel Davis is much too liberal and that Abbott isn't as conservative in kind. I also have a strong dislike for her pro-choice views and her actions in the state legislative branch involving said views, with Abortion being an issue I find more important than the country itself. (Sue me.) Any particular reason that you feel abortion's an issue? Just curious, as I'm wholly supportive of it in contrast. We can move this to a PM if you think it derails this topic too much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleted User Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Because it is in fact the ending of someone elses life. The biggest controversy comes in that when does the organism start to have cognitive brain waves, and is it a 'person' before hand. I don't support abortion, unless there are EXTREME circumstances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fush Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Because it is in fact the ending of someone elses life. The biggest controversy comes in that when does the organism start to have cognitive brain waves, and is it a 'person' before hand. I don't support abortion, unless there are EXTREME circumstances. I can understand your latter half of that first sentence, but prior to that it's just cells with life; nothing about it is human at that point, and all cells hold life and die. Raising, and ESPECIALLY getting born with a child is an incredibly difficult, significant and painful process that some people just aren't willing to undertake, especially when it comes unexpected due to accident; the pain of pregnancy isn't easy shit to deal with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HolyKnight Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 i know my opinion matters shit, but I do support Abortion, there´s reasons for it and won´t explain them. And should be supported in some cases. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleted User Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 There are plenty of ways to prevent undesired pregnancies. And even then its better to put them up for adoption then to kill them. And from what I've heard the point where the fetus starts to yield brain waves is about the end of the first trimester. If its too hard to deal with, then don't get knocked up. I can only PERSONALLY accept abortion in the cases of rape or danger to the health of the child or mother. If you get knocked up, you reap what you sew. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fush Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 If its too hard to deal with, then don't get knocked up. If only it were that simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleted User Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 http://www.pamf.org/teen/sex/birthcontrol/bcpill.html Yes, as long as the pill is taken every day consistently. Pregnancy can occur if the pill is not taken correctly. For example: If pills are begun too late in the course of the menstrual cycle If two or more pills are missed in a row If pills are not taken in the correct order For the really low-dose pills, even if you are half-day late taking the pills What are the chances of getting pregnant using the pill? Typical use: 5 percent Perfect use: 0.1 percent Those numbers reflect number of pregnancies per year. So if done used correctly, only 1 out of 1000 women on the pill will get pregnant in an entire year. It's also possible to y'know, be abstinent if those odds aren't good enough for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fush Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Those numbers reflect number of pregnancies per year. So if done used correctly, only 1 out of 1000 women on the pill will get pregnant in an entire year. That's still a notable number when it comes to sizing it to the number of a whole population; this is kinda where all of the controversy came from in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chase Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 I'll be happy to share my reasoning behind being Pro-Life. 1. Legal by Association: We all know that unprotected sex is going to happen while being consensual, and that abortion gives couples that don't understand the ramifications of their actions a way out of them that isn't "fair" to the child. I -do- understand the argument of children through rape and that the mother had no intention of having that child in the first place, and I do understand how women feel about their own bodies, but studies have shown that most abortions happen after consensual sex. This leads to the effect of abortion being a sort of "safety net" for those that didn't pay enough attention to realize they were risking the "life" of another individual. (be it post-birth or 1st trimester - more on this later.) If the laws were made in a manner that solely protected rape victims and mothers who faced "lethal" childbirth implications alone, rather than just giving Americans the right to kill their offspring, I would be a -lot- more supportive of abortion than I am now (which still wouldn't be ironclad.) 2. Religious Bias. Based on my last post you should have gleaned that I care about things more than I care about America itself. The significant bulk of those things collectively is called the "Kingdom of God." Religion typically does influence people's political outlook (and the more I've learned about the actual mission of God, the more and more liberal I've become, Ironically.) I believe each and every "cell" that shows life has a purpose, and that purpose probably wasn't getting "offed" by one's parents. No child is a mistake. 3. Other solutions. Yeah, Childbirth is absolutely painful. I understand that. However, abortion is not the only solution of relieving a parent with parenting duties. There are LOTS of couples in the market for newborn babies. (the biggest adoption age by far) If the issue is you don't have the ability to be that child's guardian, it doesn't mean the best option is to save face by killing the child prior to birthing it. 4. Differing opinions on where it's okay to go through with the process. There is not a line in the sand with Pro-Choicers, and some of them have a rather disturbing lenience regarding abortion. Many of them support POST-birth abortions. That's not killing a cell people. That's a newborn baby. That's not acceptable in my opinion, and I would much rather be Pro-Life, and know that the only option is to have the child and let it live -somehow-. 5. The debate over women's rights surrounding the issue, is mostly silly. The 'Femme Mystique' fueled Roe V. Wade more than the two most acceptable arguments for it (rape and lethal birth). Having a child doesn't deny a woman any rights whatsoever. Once the kid is out them womb, you're your own woman again if you are able to get the child to a place where they can be cared for. If the first thing you feel like doing afterwards is hitting the gym, then fine. The popular phrase here is "It's my body, therefore it's my choice".....If the single celled organism in your body has LIFE. That single cell organism belongs to ITSELF just as much as it belongs to you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleted User Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 It's also possible to y'know, be abstinent if those odds aren't good enough for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fush Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 I'll be happy to share my reasoning behind being Pro-Life. 1. Legal by Association: We all know that unprotected sex is going to happen while being consensual, and that abortion gives couples that don't understand the ramifications of their actions a way out of them that isn't "fair" to the child. I -do- understand the argument of children through rape and that the mother had no intention of having that child in the first place, and I do understand how women feel about their own bodies, but studies have shown that most abortions happen after consensual sex. This leads to the effect of abortion being a sort of "safety net" for those that didn't pay enough attention to realize they were risking the "life" of another individual. (be it post-birth or 1st trimester - more on this later.) If the laws were made in a manner that solely protected rape victims and mothers who faced "lethal" childbirth implications alone, rather than just giving Americans the right to kill their offspring, I would be a -lot- more supportive of abortion than I am now (which still wouldn't be ironclad.) 2. Religious Bias. Based on my last post you should have gleaned that I care about things more than I care about America itself. The significant bulk of those things collectively is called the "Kingdom of God." Religion typically does influence people's political outlook (and the more I've learned about the actual mission of God, the more and more liberal I've become, Ironically.) I believe each and every "cell" that shows life has a purpose, and that purpose probably wasn't getting "offed" by one's parents. No child is a mistake. 3. Other solutions. Yeah, Childbirth is absolutely painful. I understand that. However, abortion is not the only solution of relieving a parent with parenting duties. There are LOTS of couples in the market for newborn babies. (the biggest adoption age by far) If the issue is you don't have the ability to be that child's guardian, it doesn't mean the best option is to save face by killing the child prior to birthing it. 4. Differing opinions on where it's okay to go through with the process. There is not a line in the sand with Pro-Choicers, and some of them have a rather disturbing lenience regarding abortion. Many of them support POST-birth abortions. That's not killing a cell people. That's a newborn baby. That's not acceptable in my opinion, and I would much rather be Pro-Life, and know that the only option is to have the child and let it live -somehow-. 5. The debate over women's rights surrounding the issue, is mostly silly. The 'Femme Mystique' fueled Roe V. Wade more than the two most acceptable arguments for it (rape and lethal birth). Having a child doesn't deny a woman any rights whatsoever. Once the kid is out them womb, you're your own woman again if you are able to get the child to a place where they can be cared for. If the first thing you feel like doing afterwards is hitting the gym, then fine. The popular phrase here is "It's my body, therefore it's my choice".....If the single celled organism in your body has LIFE. That single cell organism belongs to ITSELF just as much as it belongs to you. That's a fair argument; my apologies, I was kind of worried your reasons were originally a bit more ignorant, but you seem well-informed; my bad. It's also possible to y'know, be abstinent if those odds aren't good enough for you. And how does that disprove my point on streching to the ratio of several country populations? Not to mention that abstinence isn't as simple a factor as that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleted User Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Sure it is, just don't put the XY into the XX. If you're that worried about the 1 in 1000 chance of it failing. Then that shouldn't be too difficult, the child who didn't ask to be brought into this world in the first place, why should they have to suffer? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chase Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 (edited) Guys, guys. Let's put this one to bed. The moment things get ad hominem is the moment a debate turns into an argument. Mods: you may remove this post as it doesn't add to discussion. Edited November 5, 2014 by Minerva Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 Sure it is, just don't put the XY into the XX. If you're that worried about the 1 in 1000 chance of it failing. Then that shouldn't be too difficult, the child who didn't ask to be brought into this world in the first place, why should they have to suffer? So then, you're just pro-birth. That's the truth behind it. Never mind that the parents might not be ready for the child, never mind the fact some people just don't want kids and shouldn't have to abstain from sex just because of the chance that they might. 5. The debate over women's rights surrounding the issue, is mostly silly. The 'Femme Mystique' fueled Roe V. Wade more than the two most acceptable arguments for it (rape and lethal birth). Having a child doesn't deny a woman any rights whatsoever. Once the kid is out them womb, you're your own woman again if you are able to get the child to a place where they can be cared for. If the first thing you feel like doing afterwards is hitting the gym, then fine. The popular phrase here is "It's my body, therefore it's my choice".....If the single celled organism in your body has LIFE. That single cell organism belongs to ITSELF just as much as it belongs to you. You see, this shit right here is just wrong. The fetus/zygote/whatever the fuck it is ISN'T its own person until it's out of the pregnant woman's body. If it was its own person, it'd be able to survive without the mother, but that's clearly not the case. The mother has full jurisdiction over what goes down in and on her body, even after she's fucking dead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chase Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 (edited) By that logic, Neo, I would assume you are okay with the baby being birthed and then killed afterwards, because it can't support itself right? If you're going to be Pro-Choice that's absolutely fine, but if you're going to say that the mother has the right to terminate the pregnancy because she can make decisions and the fetus is dependent on her, then you better be ready to flat out own that viewpoint all the way. By your logic, you should be able to have the right to kill your child up until....possibly the years before they are old enough to work for themselves. Edited November 6, 2014 by Minerva Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 Bruh. Don't get it fuckin' twisted. If you decide to go through with birthing a child that shit's your burden. If you don't want the child AFTER birthing it, then adoption is always an option. That being said, don't just cherry pick one part of the post. Especially the part about people having bodily autonomy after death. While the child is in the mother's body, it is not, I repeat, not, its own person. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chase Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 A fetus lives on it's own heartbeat, has it's own body parts, bleeds it's own blood, and depends on the mother to EAT and GROW. Nothing changes after it's born. The dependency level doesn't change whether the baby is in the womb or out of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 It isn't about the level of dependency, but about the fact that the child resides WITHIN another person, and therefore is subject to the governance of that person over their body. By making women carry babies to term, you're denying them BODILY AUTONOMY, which even CORPSES have. Meaning that the woman carrying the fetus would have less rights to their own body than literally any person dead or alive. Do you not see the issue with that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chase Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 I see your point, but I don't see why that is a justifiable argument for abortion. Studies show that most cases of pregnancy are completely preventable, and I've already explained that if the law were designed in a manner that only protected rape victims and mothers whose own lives were at major risk if the birth took place, that it would be more agreeable to me. The only "right" that is denied a pregnant woman is to not kill the human being inside of it. I'm taking the same approach as if the fetus was akin to a bacteria cell or a virus. If it's going to be BAD for you, then you can kill it. Children most of the time aren't bad for you and if they are, once again, I've already established that the law on abortion can be tailored as such. -Because- Adoption is a viable option, there really isn't a reason why widespread abortion should be legalized on the basis of women's rights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 I see your point, but I don't see why that is a justifiable argument for abortion. Studies show that most cases of pregnancy are completely preventable, and I've already explained that if the law were designed in a manner that only protected rape victims and mothers whose own lives were at major risk if the birth took place, that it would be more agreeable to me. Children are not a punishment for sex. Children are not a punishment for sex. Children are not a punishment for sex. Children are not a punishment for sex. As for your point about rape. Fetuses that are the result of rape and normal fetuses are biologically the same? So why not allow the mother to carry the baby to term, then just give it up to adoption? OH WAIT, BECAUSE THAT WOULD VIOLATE HER BODILY AUTONOMY. The only "right" that is denied a pregnant woman is to not kill the human being inside of it. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. Something needs to be established here. A fetus is not a person. A fetus is a potential human. To use the 'but it's a person, and therefore abortion is murder' argument is fallacious as fuck as we just saw because you just said abortion would be okay in cases of rape. It's not about the fetus. -Because- Adoption is a viable option, there really isn't a reason why widespread abortion should be legalized on the basis of women's rights. This is hella wrong. Fuck beliefs. Fuck any sort of religious grounding of the argument. By denying women the right to abortion, you're denying them control over their own fucking body for 9 months. Not only that, but you're affecting the woman's body for the rest of her life. A woman's body is never the same after childbirth. Women's rights is by far the strongest argument for why women should have the right to terminate a pregnancy should they choose to do so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chase Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 Are you a woman? Excuse me? I can write big fancy bold underlined statements too. Consequences do not equal Punishment. I'm not saying you shouldn't have sex. There's these rubber things called "condoms" that dramatically reduce the chance of successful conception, but to not understand that every single decision you make in life gives you a consequence (be it a GOOD one or BAD) then you just haven't grown up to understand how the world really works. Children aren't a punishment, they're just that. Children. Yes, I believe fetuses within rape victims are still fetuses, and if I had -MY- way, they would get as much chance at an actual future as well. If you were to go get so angry at my responses on this topic that you located me and raped me, I would have your child. I'm not going to argue that fetuses are different from one another in the amount of rights they should have. I think they all deserve to be born into the world and to have a life. I just pointed out that if you didn't want a kid, and someone raped you and it happened anyway, that the -middle ground- Pro Lifer would have to accept that it wasn't the woman's fault that fetus was conceived, and in my original post on Abortion views, I told you I still wouldn't have an ironclad acceptance of the law even if it allowed for it in fatal birth cases and rape cases only. I fail to see how a woman doesn't have control of her own body when she is pregnant. It's strongly "advised" that a woman doesn't drink or smoke while expecting, but you see it happen anyway with no "legal" consequence. Diets are not enforced, Freedoms are not infringed on outside of the fact that in a world without a right to an abortion, they can't terminate the child. The child doesn't CONTROL the mother. WHERE THE BLUE HELL IS A WOMAN'S RIGHTS BEING INFRINGED UPON if they have to carry the baby to term? In the quote that you used and followed with shaming religious ties to the issue, there was nothing that indicated religious ties. That was ad hominem from my first post. Ad Hominem arguments are -also- fallacies, my friend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jelly Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 If you were to go get so angry at my responses on this topic that you located me and raped me, I would have your child. that's fucked up and this argument is fucking done and over with Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chevaleresse Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 because we should force a mother that doesn't want a child to carry it to term, undergo immense physical pain, literally have her psychology rearranged forcibly by her hormones so she will be less likely to want to kill the child, then either raise it while resenting it or give it up for adoption where it is in no way guaranteed to have a good life. (living in orphanages/foster homes has been proven to increase the chance of axis II mental illnesses) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chase Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 (edited) Jelly, that was completely hypothetical, but I agree, I'm just about over this argument. Murdoc, It's already been explained that there are ways to pretty much lower the issue that this causes. 1) Don't have sex, or 2) Have sex where the consequences are accounted for. That doesn't infringe upon a woman's right to have sex, but does effectively lower the rate of abortions that happen. Simple. As. That. If you're talking about rape victims specifically, that's already been addressed. Orphans usually don't result from immediate post birth adoption, so why would you talk about them here? Most adoptive parents are looking for newborn babies, and most "promising parents" are usually looking for those newborn babies. We're not leaving children in alleys here, nor am I encouraging people to be that child's parent against their will. Edited November 6, 2014 by Minerva Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jelly Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 you still dont just say shit like that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.