Abortion

minotesvardet

New Member
I'm doing a report on abortion for school, and I need your help. I'd like to know what you think of abortion-should it ever be legal?, is it ethical?, etc.
Please post your thoughts, or PM me.
Thank you!
~Jordyn

PS-my personal take, to start discussion, is that abortion should not be legal because the "fetus" is a child, which constitutes the act of abortion as murder.
 
Here we go again. Eon, ready for another faceoff? ;).

It shouldn't be legal, nor is it ethical. It's not legal or ethical to slaughter your born children, and since scientifically life begins at conception, this is no different.
 
But if you want to get down to it all....fetuses aren't children because they're not fully human yet: their vestigial organs blah blah blah. Yeah, they're going through a chain of evolutionary stages, representing each stage in mankind's basic evolution. Blah blah.
Here are five of six main methods: dilation and extraction, suction, dilation and evacuation, saline, hysterotomy section.
What abortion is is the woman's right to choose. What if she doesn't want the kid? Is she forced to birth it, because you know what Christians would say: "You have sex, you have kid!" Or, should she have an alternative: death of the child in her. Maybe not a guilt-free method, but a lot cheaper than raising the kid and giving it your time and all that good stuff.
Kids are kids. The moment it's out of the womb, in a wanted birth, it's a human. So long as it's gestating, it's a thing, inhuman. Knock yourself out on this one. I don't believe it's ethical, nor should it be legal, but hey, who am I to contradict the Supreme Court (old, venerable idiots) AND Bill Clinton (moron)
 
That "right to choose" argument is devoid of intelligent thought. If I'm playing craps and I roll the dice, do I have the "right to choose" to take it back if I don't get that 7 I was hoping for? Once you roll the dice, you deal with what happens. I might lose some money playing craps, but I'm the one choosing to play the game. If I lose, should the casino be forced to give me my money back?
 
Way to bring up abortion as a topic...this is gonna last a while...

Ultima, I'm not sure by your writing exactly what you meant by "It's a woman's right to choose", but that's so unchristian, because yes, I *would* say, and *do* say, that if you have sex and get pregnant, you should have that baby. God *did* create sex for pleasure for married couples - notice, in marriage, having a baby is almost always a joyous thing, not something that is met with disbelief and stress. However, the main purpose, as it is with every other creature that walks this earth and reproduces sexually, is to....reproduce. Tom, let's take your craps example a bit further. It's as if you're playing craps, and you're betting big money, and taking it in when you win, but refusing to pay up when the dice don't fall your way.

And furthermore, it's murder, which is the biggest argument against it. Last I heard, new discoveries were showing that "fetus"'s display remarkably "human" qualities at VERY early stages.

Oh, and I love the people that are for abortion but are grossed-out by the protestors who have all those nasty pictures. Yes, they're disgusting. They're designed to be that way. It SHOULD shock and alarm and disgust you, because abortion is all of those things - shocking, alarming, and disgusting.

It's amazing what the world super-power, a "civilized" nation, allows and disallows. It's almost comical at times.

Anyways, yeah, I've been on and off these boards lately so if you respond to this post and I don't respond, don't necessarily assume you've got me beat... =\
 
This is how the world thinks:

Its the womans right to choose to kill the fetus in an abortion, just don't smoke or drink before you do it, ok, you might harm it.
 
Those warnings are in case the woman DOES want it. Does the doctor care if your kid is dying of lung cancer at 0 in the womb as he pumps in the saline to make that kid dance a bit before death? No. It's just a job.
Tom, the thing about life is it can't be gambled in a crap game. It is totally different from paper or metal money. If we treated life with the same respect we treated cash, why, life would be SO MUCH better, because money is life, in case you didn't notice, in the Land of the Free.
It IS unChristian dude, just cause it's the way man is. I refuse to support that pathetic plea: "The woman must choose!" In that case, the man can choose which sperm he wants to fertilize that egg. And if he doesn't like what comes out, he can just have it killed and start over again...right? Both ways you go are unChristian. What you should do is birth the kid. You want your "unprotected" sex, you get what you get. Then some people would argue that even in *protected* sex, children are sometimes born. Which is true. Then what happens? Still have the kid, or what? I say, be ready for the conseqences. You want it, you got it.
I don't like to look as kids as punishments for sex, but that's how half this freaking world makes it out to be. Read Aldous Huxley's Brave New World then come back and talk about sex/abortion/birthing. I read it and it is a very interesting book to think about.
remember, even in marriage, kids are a source of stress. Especially for young couples who are idiots about cash. Geez, how much does a baby cost from Day 1 to Year 18?
 
Well over a hundred thousand dollars.

My craps example was basically to illustrate just how stupid the "right to choose" argument really is.  I had plenty of time to "choose" whether or not I was going to play that evening.  I had all day to think about it, the ride to the casino, and even my walk on the way to the table gave me ample time to decide what I wanted to do.  If I decide that, despite the risk of losing cash, it's worth it because I may win, than I am fully aware of what might happen and have to be prepared to lose money.  I can't demand it back from the casino if I lose anything.

The same principle applies here.  The woman has ample time to decide if she really wants to have sex.  If she decides that she would like to do so, than she's going to have to deal with the consequences of her actions.  I'm tired of people always wanting to play but are never ready to lose.  You have the right to choose, and I fully support that if and only if you make that choice before you have sex.  If sex is something that you want so badly that you're going to do it despite the "risks", than you're going to have to deal with the result.  You might get "lucky" and not create a child, but if you're not than you're going to have to figure out where to go from there without slaughtering your child.

And I read Brave New World.  Man, that book was terrible!
 
I can't stress how wrong you (Ultima) are wrong about the evolution in the womb. Back in the 30s or something they thought that first the baby was a fish, than a frog, then a monkey then a human or some stuff like that, but its not true. You ask anyone with at least a little bit of intelligence and they should tell you that a fetus _is_ human life.

The current argument is that its simply an organ of the mother until birth, and that like any other organ, it is the woman's right to choose whether or not she wants it cut off, I beleive. Thats the "justification" for it, but its a nearly universal agreement that it is alive, and that it is (a) human (whether or not it is a human in its own right is a different story).

I forget the WHOLE argument, but its some acronym and I know theres an "S" and a "E" in it. The S stands size- is Michael Jordan any less or more human than me because he is different sized? I don't think so, so the fetus therefor is just a really small human. The E stands for enviroment- am I any less or more human if I go scuba diving and stay underwater? I don't think so, so the fetus therefor is just a human in the womb (hey, we were all there, which cannot be said for scuba diving :p). I believe there is also an A for age or something like that, or form, or I dunno. Basically am I any less or more human for being an adolescent or teenager rather than an adult or a toddler? Probably not. Same deal.

I know there is more to the argument, but thats all that I can remember, and that is all you really need.
 
Tom:
There's another side to your craps example. The guy's side. HE has time to choose as well, and he should choose abstinence. I know since abortion centers around the woman's body we usually only think of her in any abortion debate; but the male side is also there, if to a lesser extent.
Think about it, what if every woman was pro choice, but ever man always chose abstinence? Since most abortions are generally demanded by women who are pregnant outside of wedlock that would have roughly the same affect as if abortion was made illegial. I believe that abortion is unethical, horrible, and should be made illegial. However, if we simply have a law enacted that makes it illigial then we're just treating the symptoms of societies problems. It would be great to suppress abortion, but we need to reach the world for Christ or we're not going to do anything at all in the long run by adding a few laws.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]There's another side to your craps example. The guy's side. HE has time to choose as well, and he should choose abstinence. I know since abortion centers around the woman's body we usually only think of her in any abortion debate; but the male side is also there, if to a lesser extent.

I'm fully aware of that. Abortionists have a habit of ignoring the feelings of the father, but I deliberately left the guy out of the example for an obvious reason. He can have sex a million times but he'll never get pregnant. Technically, in that respect, it's not as big of a "risk" for him. If I were to add him to my example, let's say he's playing craps with someone else's money. He couldn't care less if he loses, because he doesn't have to deal with the consequences(assuming there is no debt to be paid because the guy who gave him the money doesn't care about it).

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Since most abortions are generally demanded by women who are pregnant outside of wedlock that would have roughly the same affect as if abortion was made illegial.

How so?
 
I am against abortion. It's the destruction of life. I perosnally find it interesting that a number of pro-animal (defined as those against usage of animals in product/medical/scientific testing and/or as a part of human dietary needs) people are usually at the forefront of the pro-choice movements. They don't want you to test products for safety on animals (or even kill them for dinner) but go ahead and destroy that new life in a woman's womb.


But as long as it is legal, I think it should require BOTH parents permission (paternity can be checked even in womb through genetic testing on amniotic fluid) and if either parent is a minor, that minor's parents need to sign off on it to.
 
regardless of whether or not we like abortion or what it is, life is about free will. God gave us choices to make in our lives. I am not in favor of the government dictating to me what I can and cannot choose to do.

Do I think abortion is wrong? yes

Do I think that women should have the right to make that choice? yes.

I do agree with Kidan. As a person who lost a child to an abortion, I do think the father should have some say in the decision, but that is a whole other can of beans now isn't it :p

Cory
 
Besides, you know that if abortion is outlawed, women will still be able to get their abortions: illegally. Maybe in some shack by some medical practitioner crossing the line, with "unsafe" equipment that might damage the woman. Besides, also understand that the father is there for a few moments in the life of the kid, and the woman for nine months. Perhaps that's why we all whine about the woman's right to choose.
The whole evolution thing is outdated, but you know, there will always be another one. No amount of fetoscopy will change the minds that BABIES are HUMAN. Suppose I, tired of my kid, decide to stab a tube through his head and suck out his brains...why, I'd be branded a murderer of monstrous proportions, and tried mercilessly! What would I plead? "I didn't want the kid?" Preposterous! What's the difference of it being partially born and the same thing occurring to it?
Dead ZOne's on, so gonna hurry.
If I die after birth, was I human then? If I die without being born, by abortion, was I human then? Is it that breath of air that makes me human?
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Tom Kazansky @ Mar. 02 2003,5:22)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Since most abortions are generally demanded by women who are pregnant outside of wedlock that would have roughly the same affect as if abortion was made illegial.

How so?
Well, we had a long and slightly heated discussion about this in my political science class last semester. The theory is that the current proliferation of abortion clinics is actually a help to the poor. The wealthy will fly to Cuba (where many abortions were performed before it was legal here in the states) while the poor will be stuck with either giving birth or a back alley job. Therefore abortions would drop drastically if it was mad illegial. So if you make abortion illegial you're oppressing the poor. (so goes the argument)
In my comment about abstinence from men having the same affect as abortion being outlawed I meant that; while you would still, sadly, have the married women who don't want a child because of job or whatever. You would not have all the other out-of-wedlock abortions. So an affective abstinence program would actually have a greater affect on abortion than simple laws would. It's more than a little idealistic, but I can dream can't I?
smile.gif
 
Why are you people hellbent on dragging your country back to the 17th century?

Partial birth abortions are incredibly rare - mostly because most people can and do make sure that it isn't left that long. I had left this one alone - mostly because beating my head against your pulpit pounding pseudo-morality wearies me beyond measure - but once again I will state my opinions, back them with fact and challenge you to provide a workable REAL WORLD alternative. Let's see if you make out any better than you have the last FOUR times I've had this debate with y'all.


Here's the situation - society is constantly evolving. The needs and demands that society makes on us have changed, and the fact is that reproductive system has NOT evolved apace with those changes. People are marrying later, they are having smaller families and they are generally not falling into the traditional pattern of home maker and bread winner. These days BOTH parents generally have to work in order to support a middle class family with two kids.

In addition women are FINALLY climbing out from under men. In the past it was considered necessary for a woman to sacrifice her own ambitions, talents and expectations to her husbands career. This is no longer the case. Previously sex was generally viewed as mostly a means of procreation - as far as women were concerned. The female orgasm used to be considered a MYTH, sex wasn't supposed to be pleasant for women, it was supposed to be a duty.

Well, we relearned a few skills in the last 100 years, and now we know that sex is just as enjoyable for women as it is for men. As part of their general process of achieving equilibrium there are a lot more sexually aggressive women out there, enjoying themselves, having careers, and basically behaving in much the same way as men their age have done since the Middle Ages.

Some of you do not like this. Well, tough! I'm afraid that the real world is the world we have to live in. I have explained to you how the real world works, and I suggest that you either refute that this is the case, or else you begin to deal with it.

Moving on, where you have sex and alcohol in juxtaposition, you're going to end up with unwanted pregnancies. This is not desirable, because these days, most young women cannot afford to throw away the time and money to carry an unwanted baby to term, or to bring it up. In addition most of these women had sex with partners that they don't have a stable partnership with - an environment illfitted for the introduction of children. Given the kind of numbers we're playing with, no matter how good the contraception method (and don't forget that the Catholics STILL aren't too keen on contraception!) you're going to be looking at some unwanted pregnancies. It's simple numbers, people.

Most career women CANNOT take the time out to have a baby, cannot spare the money it requires and have no interest in nurturing or raising a child. They do not want it. They will not have it. We can't make them. Even if you find a way to make them carry the child to term you CANNOT make them raise it - not without turning America into the kind of police state that even you people wouldn't want any part of. Most social welfare systems are badly underfunded to deal with the CURRENT crop of unwanted children - how would they deal with the population plague that you would wish on them?

The most humane solution is to detect the unwanted pregnancy early enough, and take the required steps to terminate it AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE. In most cases all that is done is to stimulate the bodies reflex to purge an unsuitable or unhealthy pregnancy DURING THE TIME WHERE THIS WOULD HAPPEN NATURALLY. Most abortions are performed well before the stage where you can inject anything into anything, a good percentage in fact are simply a case of taking a pill or two and suffering a heavy bleed as your body deals with the situation in its own way.

Given the population situation in the world, what we really DON'T need is MORE PEOPLE. We have too many already!

Eon
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Why are you people hellbent on dragging your country back to the 17th century?

Better there than dragging it into a nation who is not for the rights of every human, only those which it deems to have sufficient "personhood".  Sound familiar?  It should, I can think of one major case this century of a nation doing just that...

You're arguing that abortion is a new thing, it's not!  The ancient Romans used to do it, and it was one of the things that contributed to the fall of the Empire because they were not producing enough children.  Want proof?  Grab a history book....

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Partial birth abortions are incredibly rare

Partial birth, or day after.  You're still killing another person.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Let's see if you make out any better than you have the last FOUR times I've had this debate with y'all.

People never admit that they lose arguments....

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Here's the situation - society is constantly evolving. The needs and demands that society makes on us have changed, and the fact is that reproductive system has NOT evolved apace with those changes. People are marrying later, they are having smaller families and they are generally not falling into the traditional pattern of home maker and bread winner. These days BOTH parents generally have to work in order to support a middle class family with two kids.

Fine.  Both my parants worked hard to support two children without having to have an abortion....continue.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]In addition women are FINALLY climbing out from under men. In the past it was considered necessary for a woman to sacrifice her own ambitions, talents and expectations to her husbands career. This is no longer the case. Previously sex was generally viewed as mostly a means of procreation - as far as women were concerned. The female orgasm used to be considered a MYTH, sex wasn't supposed to be pleasant for women, it was supposed to be a duty.

That's fine, but it still doesn't change what sex does, and it wont change the result of engaging in sexual activity.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Well, we relearned a few skills in the last 100 years, and now we know that sex is just as enjoyable for women as it is for men. As part of their general process of achieving equilibrium there are a lot more sexually aggressive women out there, enjoying themselves, having careers, and basically behaving in much the same way as men their age have done since the Middle Ages.

Excellent justification for the slaughter of innocent children!  It's all fine and dandy because women are no longer able to control their sexual urges!  Abortion is beginning to make sense!

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Some of you do not like this. Well, tough! I'm afraid that the real world is the world we have to live in. I have explained to you how the real world works, and I suggest that you either refute that this is the case, or else you begin to deal with it.

Of course when you consider that legions of people go through life without having to have a single abortion I fail how this is a necessary component of the "real world".

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Moving on, where you have sex and alcohol in juxtaposition, you're going to end up with unwanted pregnancies.

Ok ladies and gentlemen.  The justifications for abortion so far are as follows:

1.  Women can no longer control their sexual urges.

2.  Women can't hold their liquor, and this is somehow the fault of the child.  The punishment for this crime is death.

OK, let's continue.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]This is not desirable, because these days, most young women cannot afford to throw away the time and money to carry an unwanted baby to term, or to bring it up.

They don't have to bring it up because many people wish to adopt children.  Otherwise, tough!  You should be more responsible at social gatherings.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]In addition most of these women had sex with partners that they don't have a stable partnership with - an environment illfitted for the introduction of children.

Which is why we have adoption, to give the child two willing parents.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Given the kind of numbers we're playing with, no matter how good the contraception method (and don't forget that the Catholics STILL aren't too keen on contraception!) you're going to be looking at some unwanted pregnancies. It's simple numbers, people.

Parachutes don't always open either unfortunately.  Welcome to the wonderful world of calculated risks.  Should we stop introducing new designs of aircraft because there is a possibility that the test pilot may get injured?

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Most career women CANNOT take the time out to have a baby,

Maternity leave, what a wonderful thing it is!

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]They do not want it. They will not have it.

They should have thought about that before they made stupid decisions.  Again, ADOPTION PEOPLE!

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Even if you find a way to make them carry the child to term you CANNOT make them raise it

She doesn't have to raise it, we have ADOPTIONS!

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Most social welfare systems are badly underfunded to deal with the CURRENT crop of unwanted children - how would they deal with the population plague that you would wish on them?

I have a solution for this, but I'm tired of saying it....

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Given the population situation in the world, what we really DON'T need is MORE PEOPLE. We have too many already!

So then, don't make more.  Got too much pizza?  Don't order another one!  Eating for one at Swiss Chalet?  Don't order a family pack!  Simple solutions we can all do Eon, and none of them involve slaughtering innocent children!
 
Ahem. Let us state something: what is a child but a stinking zygote? One freaking cell. That's it. A human is a cell. The soul in a cell? When is a human a human? At the moment of fusion? Still, then, it is but one cell, and then it begins its geometric expansion. Two cells, then four, then eight, then sixteen, then thirty-two, and so on and such forth. Keep it up and you get an astronomical number.
But it all starts out with one. WHEN IS A FREAKING HUMAN A HUMAN?!
Am I a human at fusion, or at two cells, or at a hundred million? Or at now? What is a human but a covering of cells over a soul? Then what is a child? A soul covered by one cell? I have significantly more cells than a baby firstborn does, or when it is but a single-cell organism.
And abstinence in this country is laughable, BlackKNight, because it's not something pushed: uncontrolled, rampant sex is what we want. A couple abstinence commercials here and there, and then paired up with MTV's freaking sex songs and shows with sex, or date shows, and cable TV, where basically gays and straights alike make out, which then evolves into hardcore sex. Watch HBO at ten or so. You'll see what I mean. That's what I mean. This great America that goes on at night. It doesn't care if you're twelve or twenty, you're prime targets for the sexual give-ins.
And Eon...
Partial-birth abortions are rare. Note that I mentioned saline, or dilationa and extraction, or the suction method. Would you like a comparison of the suction method? Plenty of logging companies use something called a wood-chipper. Basically they shove a branch through it and there are some unpleasant blades inside it that eat your tree branch up and barf it out as splinters. The suction method is basically sticking a vacuum tube up the chick and creating such a force inside the sac that the kid is broken apart and sucked through. I compared this in class to tossing a kid through a wood-chipper. It would eat him up and tear his flesh apart. Very graphic.
Seventeenth century Old World at least RESPECTED human life. Oh sure, a few criminals and factions, now it's rampant. WE've come such a long way, I'm almost ashamed to call myself American (actually I am)
In a decade, we'll have ancient folks, the baby boomers of the great 50s, dropping off like flies. What will that leave us with? Thirty-year olds with a couple kids per family in America? Whilst Africa drops off every freaking day? Tens of thousands a year? Not to mention our crime rates.
My parents both worked. One's kinda retired. Whoopdedoo. I'm 15 and still alive. Man, I'm glad they didn't give up as quickly as your theoretical parents would. As for my eighty+ friends that I personally know...that's a big plus.
This would be the first time I debate with you on this, so, uh, I don't know the results of these old ones.
What do you mean, "PReviously sex was viewed as a means of procreation?" What is it now? Just a pastime? Something to keep me smiling? More entertainment, more freaking entertainment that's always being shoved down my throat.
Neil Postman, Aldous Huxley, you guys were SO right. We are now in the Huxleyan age. And soon, it will be the Orewellian future.
What does sex do? It makes kids. Genetic altering hasn't changed that yet. When it does, I'm committing suicide. Sex is not there for your wanton pleasure. It is there as a sacred uniter, all right? So many say sex brings people closer together. Maybe there's a reason for that...
Alcohol/sex is naughty combo. Alcohol clouds your judgement, already! So...what does alcohol do when you're in a sexually vulnerable area? Umm....makes you...more vulnerable? Gee...I never would've guessed. Unwanted pregnancies can come even from our impenetrable *safe* sex programs that this ####able country continues to propagate. So take it out on your amniotic sac, eh?
Adoption/abortion. It's the choice of the Mom. Ah, to hear Ramah cry out again....never gonna happen. Why give your load to someone else when you can just easily stuff it in a jar and get it out of the way?
Look, risk. Contraception, schmontraception. There's always a chance of something going wrong, and that includes even sex, even *safe* sex. Maybe...just maybe, the Bible and myself have been wrong all this time in saying that is wisest to abstain from, hrmm, what was the term, sexual relations, until marriage, because it's usually in marriage when those doofus sixteen and fifteen-year olds are a tad wiser to handle the burden of bringing up baby.
Ahhh, too many people. Herr Hitler reborn. Indeed, I suggest we slaughter everyone that's old or fat or ugly or diseased. Leave all the nice, lean, hot people behind, and let them get fat, old, ugly, and diseased. Then we can kill their kids after letting them engage in buku sex. I don't really care. Or, better yet, we could quarantine a bunch of random people and unleash a nice amount of sarin on them...yeah, I think I could dig that.
 
Back
Top