Abortion Options

[*Blow_Don't_SUCK*]

Should a child be murdered just because of what his or her father has done? It's the same thing as you being thrown into jail because your father held up a bank, or you being put on the electric chair because he murdered a family. I don't think a baby should face the consequences of his or her father's mistakes.

And I don't think a mother should have a baby she doesn't even want. I mean, did you guys even think about what these babies are going to grow into? Sure there are lots of kids who were supposed to be aborted that weren't, and yet they seem fine but that's only a minority. You want to waste money, clothing, space, air on something that wasn't even wanted?

[voguelove]

And I don't think a mother should have a baby she doesn't even want. I mean, did you guys even think about what these babies are going to grow into?

exactly what i would have said. why dont we think of it as if YOURE the one thats pregnant. would you keep the baby knowing you had absolutely nothing? would you keep the baby knowing you couldnt even feed yourself? sure, give it up for adoption is what everyone says..but after having something in your stomach for 9 months, youre going to get attached to it. youre going to wish you could keep it. and then if you kept your new baby, you wouldnt be able to support it. i never said i was for or against abortion..but i do agree that abortion SHOULD BE KEPT LEGAL for rape, for women who are teens, for women who have no money. but..if you have money, theres no reason to kill it.

[NoSex]

but..if you have money, theres no reason to kill it.

Sure there is. You might not want it or want to have it.

[voguelove]

Sure there is. You might not want it or want to have it.

then thats their mistake. im only for abortion if its teen, rape, or if they have no money to raise it.

[*mipadi*]

I think one of the best quotes on the issue comes from Steven D. Levitt:

"What the link between abortion and crime does say is this: when the government gives a woman the opportunity to make her own decision about abortion, she generally does a good job of figuring out if she is in a position to raise the baby well. If she decides she can't, she often chooses abortion."[1]




1. Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner, Freakonomics (William Morrow, 2005), 144.

[*CrackedRearView*]

That uh...wouldn't be killing themselves. Actually. Just the fetus.

Then what's the problem with back-alley abortions? People rally against pro-lifers because they say that if we outlaw abortion women will start coat-hangering themselves. If all that does is rid a fetus, who cares?

We've outlawed cocaine but people still smoke it.

[sadolakced acid]

^ because it will increase crime rates.

and illegal activity that is allowed would have a broken-window effect.

it would also help fund illegal drugs, most probably.
(drug rings could make money on the side doing illegal abortions. )

You know what, if that many people that get pregnant are stupid enough to unfold a wire hanger and kill themselves to abort a fetus illegally, I'd say that what we have is not a conflict of ideologies or a hot-button issue anymore.  What we have is a very stupid population, and the more of these idiots we get rid of, the better.

It may sound harsh, but let me take a page out of your book.

"Survival of the fittest."

most aborted babies aren't going to be growing up in nice suburban homes, sheltered and set to become a president.

[*Blow_Don't_SUCK*]

then thats their mistake. im only for abortion if its teen, rape, or if they have no money to raise it.

Yeah but if the woman has money and yet you can really really tell, she's an un-fit mother. You wouldn't want her raising a kid.

[*CrackedRearView*]

^ because it will increase crime rates.

and illegal activity that is allowed would have a broken-window effect.

it would also help fund illegal drugs, most probably.
(drug rings could make money on the side doing illegal abortions.  )
most aborted babies aren't going to be growing up in nice suburban homes, sheltered and set to become a president.

Nothing of what you just said holds any truth. And you're the one that usually bashes theory.

[*Blow_Don't_SUCK*]

^It is one of the most reasonable assumptions.

Besides if a woman wants to abort her baby, you can tell that the kid is not going to grow up in a good environment (as I said before). Those supposed-to-be-aborted babies that go into adoption centers or foster care can live a pretty darn hard live.

[*CrackedRearView*]

^It is one of the most reasonable assumptions.

Besides if a woman wants to abort her baby, you can tell that the kid is not going to grow up in a good environment (as I said before). Those supposed-to-be-aborted babies that go into adoption centers or foster care can live a pretty darn hard live.

Yet the fact remains -- it's an assumption. The only assumption that their entire argument rests upon.

[*Blow_Don't_SUCK*]

^Yeah, but would you seriously risk that? I mean that assumption can be possible! And according to articles and such a majority of supposed-to-be-aborted babies aren't living a paradise! Besides, adoption is a horrible choice...

I went to an adoption center in bridgeport for volunteer hours and some were supposed-to-be-aborted children. Those children are living a "depressed" life. When I tried to talk to them, they were a little hostile and had the "unworthy of a life" feeling. Would you seriously want to risk (yet again) overpopulation and a lot of money for adoption centers just for children like them?

[*disco infiltrator*]

If a woman tries to abort her baby with a coat-hanger, there's high probability of an infection or injury on her part. THAT would probably hurt the baby a lot more than current ways of abortion. It's not very fast and she really can't see what she's doing.

[BrunetteGoddess]

its not a baby. its a fetus. our mothers had us because they wanted a baby. what about the teens who get pregnant because of rape? what if YOU got pregnant because of rape? would you want to live your life delivering a baby knowing that that baby was a mistake? if abortion was made illegal, many to be mothers would go and get them done illegaly. the tools there wouldnt even be sterilized and theyd be dirty. the mothers could end up getting infections. sure, you could give that baby up for adoptiong, but do you really want to have a fetus in your stomach for 9 months and then just give it away?

but..if you were a teen who decided to go retarded, get drunk, and have sex willingly, then let them suffer through the pregnancy. its their fault.

also, i think that women should only be allowed a certain number of abortions. like, 3 or something. that way, they would just use abortion has an easy way out.

IT's still a human!And well i saw the percent of mothers who get abortions and the reason why and well rape was like under 10%. Which rape is the only case i still that is ok but i think there are other ways beside abortion that would be ok.Like even prisoners do not die in the cruel way of abortion.
Oh and i saw pictures of abortions and well some didn't look like fetuses to me.Some look like babies! And well i read that sometimes it still lives so they put it aside to die.Also do you even know how abortions are done?It's so wrong and cruel.

But the ONLY reason i think that is ok for a women to get an abortion is rape and that is the only reason.Because rape isnt your fault(unless you go to a party and get drunk-um if u go to parties dont get drunk)But then people can avoid rape if they learn how to protect themselves.Because i've read that rape can be prevented and most of the time it's because someone got the person drunk at a party so my advice is dont get drunk and be safe at parties.

But i still think abortions are wrong except maybe under the case of rape.Other then that if you dont want a baby dont have sex or use protection or get birth control. And always think of the consquences.

[*CrackedRearView*]

^Yeah, but would you seriously risk that? I mean that assumption can be possible! And according to articles and such a majority of supposed-to-be-aborted babies aren't living a paradise! Besides, adoption is a horrible choice...

I went to an adoption center in bridgeport for volunteer hours and some were supposed-to-be-aborted children. Those children are living a "depressed" life. When I tried to talk to them, they were a little hostile and had the "unworthy of a life" feeling. Would you seriously want to risk (yet again) overpopulation and a lot of money for adoption centers just for children like them?

You want to start talking about what could be possible?

What about the possibility of a newborn human child?

EDIT// And come on, how much more skewed can your logic get? Just because they're depressed they don't deserve a chance at life? We should stop it before it happens? In your (most likely selection biased) experience you noticed a few unhappy "would-be-aborted" children. Again, stop generalizing.

And the overpopulation argument is such a ridiculous crock. The alternate causality of overpopulation has absolutely NOTHING to do with abortion; believe me, we still see the injury of overpopulation and in most parts of the world abortion is fairly legal.

[NoSex]

then thats their mistake. im only for abortion if its teen, rape, or if they have no money to raise it.

So, let me get this straight, you are against destroying a fetus because you believe that the fetus has a certain amount of value to it. So, destorying it is wrong. However, if the pregnant mother had been raped, is a teen, or has little to no money then it is alright to destory that fetus?

I really don't see much of a difference as the option to adoption is always open.

For me, I don't really see much value in a fetus so it really doesn't bother me that they are being aborted. Especially a fetus within the first few months of pregnancy. I understand the responsibility argument, however, it is not our responsibility to impose and force a mother to be sexually responsible. That is a matter of philosophy and not law. Without the mother, the fetus dies. If the mother does not wish to be pregnant, she becomes a kind of host to a parasite. The fetus relies on the life of the mother to grow and survive, so the baby is directly the responsibility of the mother. If the mother does not wish to have a child there is no legal way we can force the mother to remain a host. It is her body and her choice. This is very much a private matter between the mother and the mother's doctor, not the government, the mother, and the mother's doctor.

As a fetus can not have, to itself, rights (as it has never comprehended, nor could have, such concepts) the mother is at liberty to choose the fate of the fetus as it's kind of guardian. As the fetus has not yet truly lived, to me, it is of little to no value. Its extermination will not keep me up at night.

Tell me, why should it?

[*CrackedRearView*]

As a fetus can not have, to itself, rights (as it has never comprehended, nor could have, such concepts) the mother is at liberty to choose the fate of the fetus as it's kind of guardian. As the fetus has not yet truly lived, to me, it is of little to no value. Its extermination will not keep me up at night.

Tell me, why should it?

Would you say the same thing about the native tribes in central Africa? Or the aborigines in New Zealand?

They don't comprehend or understand the concept of rights or liberty, yet we're not advocating their removal on a mass scale.

[voguelove]

So, let me get this straight, you are against destroying a fetus because you believe that the fetus has a certain amount of value to it. So, destorying it is wrong. However, if the pregnant mother had been raped, is a teen, or has little to no money then it is alright to destory that fetus?

I really don't see much of a difference as the option to adoption is always open.

For me, I don't really see much value in a fetus so it really doesn't bother me that they are being aborted. Especially a fetus within the first few months of pregnancy. I understand the responsibility argument, however, it is not our responsibility to impose and force a mother to be sexually responsible. That is a matter of philosophy and not law. Without the mother, the fetus dies. If the mother does not wish to be pregnant, she becomes a kind of host to a parasite. The fetus relies on the life of the mother to grow and survive, so the baby is directly the responsibility of the mother. If the mother does not wish to have a child there is no legal way we can force the mother to remain a host. It is her body and her choice. This is very much a private matter between the mother and the mother's doctor, not the government, the mother, and the mother's doctor.

As a fetus can not have, to itself, rights (as it has never comprehended, nor could have, such concepts) the mother is at liberty to choose the fate of the fetus as it's kind of guardian. As the fetus has not yet truly lived, to me, it is of little to no value. Its extermination will not keep me up at night.

Tell me, why should it?

um, no..im saying that if its the mothers fault that she got pregnant then she should live with it. if she went out and got drunk, had sex, and got rpegnant, she should live with it.

[NoSex]

Would you say the same thing about the native tribes in central Africa?  Or the aborigines in New Zealand?

They don't comprehend or understand the concept of rights or liberty, yet we're not advocating their removal on a mass scale.

Actually, I think they do understand. These people all have social constructs which include either an explicit or implicit appeal to the rights that certain individuals have. Many individuals have duties and these duties often directly reflect their rights. I think you are mistaking rights for equal rights.

Also, your analogy is false. You are speaking of people with the ability to comprehend and hold rights, even if they are not granted such in their own personal societies. These are all people that are, at least, capable of holding rights and duties. A fetus could not even begin to understand or hold a right, because of this a guardian figure must be responsible for the fetus. The mother is clearly that figure, which gives her the liberty to exterminate said fetus.

Your analogy makes me assume that you are attempting to or have already equated a fetus to the moral level of a sentient, full-grown, human being. This I find monsterously absurd as a fetus is in, many ways, very different from a full-grown human being. Most notably, the child is not capable of the most basic forms of thought and reasoning.

Why should I care that a fetus is being aborted exactly? What is, exactly, morally reprehensible about that?

um, no..im saying that if its the mothers fault that she got pregnant then she should live with it. if she went out and got drunk, had sex, and got rpegnant, she should live with it.

If it is the mother's fault that she got pregnant, then why should she be forced to have a child?
If it is not her fault, why shouldn't she be forced to have the child?

What exactly are you pointing out as justification for destorying a fetus?
Does the fetus really know the difference anyways?
You do realize that condoms are not 100% safe?
What happens if a woman uses all percuations, but she still gets pregnant? Techinically, that isn't her fault either.

And, how do we enforce this kind of legislation, and why gives us the right to?

[*CrackedRearView*]

Actually, I think they do understand. These people all have social constructs which include either an explicit or implicit appeal to the rights that certain individuals have. Many individuals have duties and these duties often directly reflect their rights. I think you are mistaking rights for equal rights.

Also, your analogy is false. You are speaking of people with the ability to comprehend and hold rights, even if they are not granted such in their own personal societies. These are all people that are, at least, capable of holding rights and duties. A fetus could not even begin to understand or hold a right, because of this a guardian figure must be responsible for the fetus. The mother is clearly that figure, which gives her the liberty to exterminate said fetus.

Your analogy makes me assume that you are attempting to or have already equated a fetus to the moral level of a sentient, full-grown, human being. This I find monsterously absurd as a fetus is in, many ways, very different from a full-grown human being. Most notably, the child is not capable of the most basic forms of thought and reasoning.

Why should I care that a fetus is being aborted exactly? What is, exactly, morally reprehensible about that?

Not so much, though. What you said was that a fetus doesn't comprehend rights. The same can be said about tribes who don't know that they deserve to live. I was simply pointing out the holes in your reasoning behind abortion. I just want to get to the bottom of why you think abortion should be legal.

You say that it's because a fetus can't feel it, which is an understood fact. Yet your comrade just before you says that we should have it legalized because there's a possibility of back-alley injury when we outlaw it.

Yet that leaves a contradiction in that, with a fetus, there's a possibility of life.

I just want to know where you guys draw the lines here, and why everyone on your side contradicts each other.

That's all

[*Blow_Don't_SUCK*]

^You're asking why we think abortion should be legal? The general reason is to give a woman her right, tramp or not, it's HER choice! We can't decide for them! They have to live their own lives!

[*disco infiltrator*]

You know Justin, just because people are on the same "side" about an issue doesn't mean they agree on every stipulation and limit.

[*CrackedRearView*]

You know Justin, just because people are on the same "side" about an issue doesn't mean they agree on every stipulation and limit.

Well, WTF?!?!!!11onebbq

I can't multitask...

[sadolakced acid]

you know, after 43 pages of arguments, it's kind of hard to not repeat the same ones without resorting to theory.

i mean, sure, i could use hard facts; but i've used them already, and it would be pointless to use them again.

[*swtcherriipie*]

Je Suis ANTI ABORTION 100%