Abortion II

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

*mutters*
unless you miss your plane, get caught in a hurricane, move up the wedding, catch a bad cold, mislay your voting card, have to drive a friend to the hospital... *sigh*

[Empress_Flynn]

Lol... well, for legal reasons the wedding CAN'T be moved up... even if the plane was missed I have plenty of time to catch another flight, there aren't any hurricanes in the forecast, a cold would not stop me from going out, I will safety pin my voting card to my shirt, and I don't have any friends ^^

[Nurvingiel]

Don't forget guys, that we have this excellent thread to discuss voting in the USA's upcoming election.

[inked]

Does the genetically distinct and physiologically separate individual arising from the fusion of the gametes and happening to reside in the female get a vote?

[Empress_Flynn]

Can it express its opinion in any way?

[katya]

And is it of legal voting age?

[inked]

As this (hypothetical) individual is, we all were. As we are, so shall this one be if it is given O2, H2O, and nutrients.

Are all individuals under voting age subject to parental death decrees on that account?

When is the individual worthy of life if not from conception onward, when it begins? Why?

[katya]

I just watched a video of Palin saying that she thinks abortion is wrong even in the cases of incest and rape, and everyone seemed to think that was really extremist and stupid, but I have to say, I understand where she's coming from a little bit. I think if you're anti-abortion you should be anti-abortion under all circumstances. It's still a life regardless of what circumstances brought it about. I can't see being generally anti-abortion except when it'll cause the woman more pain than normal, because I don't think you can make qualitative judgments like that based just on whether it was rape or not. I think that if you think it's ok to have an abortion in cases of rape and incest you should just allow it in all cases.

That said, I'm pro-choice. I just felt like sharing that with you. I don't know if it's already been brought up or not.

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by Empress_Flynn

I think the issue with that is... it's not men who have to go through the actual carrying of the child or the birth... ultimately the reasoning behind the legality of abortion is that it's a woman's right to choose what she wants to do with her body...

So that same logic can't really apply to a man because it's not a man's right to choose what to do with a woman's body...

That's just from a legal standpoint though...

I'm just curious because a lot of the abortion debate revolves around guilt. Those against trying to make the mother feel guilty about making the choice to abort while giving a free ride to the father.

In fact, both those for and against abortion really don't care what the father prefers one way or another.

For those that are pro abortion, the body logic makes sense. But, for those that are against, what it really says is that they don't care all that much about anything but the child.

[Valandil]

Originally Posted by brownjenkins

:
:
For those that are pro abortion, the body logic makes sense. But, for those that are against, what it really says is that they don't care all that much about anything but the child.

Why do you say that? Nobody is suggesting that we kill the mother (or anyone else) - while the pro-abortion people are all on board with killing the baby.

Those of us who are pro-life simply want to protect the innocent, and speak up for those who have no voice.

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by Valandil

Why do you say that? Nobody is suggesting that we kill the mother (or anyone else) - while the pro-abortion people are all on board with killing the baby.

Of course, if pro-choice people thought the baby actually was a baby, as in, a person, then we wouldn't be pro-choice. I personally do not see the fetus as being a person. Killing a person, I'm sure we can all agree, would be horrific.

So, "no one is suggesting we kill the mother," is beside the point in this debate. We all agree that pregnant women are people. What we do not agree on is if a fetus is a person.

This is the fundamental difference between pro-life and pro-choice and one that can never be reconciled. If the fetus is a person, it would be wrong to kill it. If the fetus is not a person, it would be wrong to deny women choices over what to do with their own body. Of course the debate isn't really that simple, but this is the foundation of it all.

Originally Posted by Valandil

Those of us who are pro-life simply want to protect the innocent, and speak up for those who have no voice.

This makes complete sense when one feels that the fetus is a person. Though I don't agree, I respect pro-life's stance on the issue - it's the only logical one if a fetus is a person.

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

I'm not sure you can be so cut and dried about it, Nurv. People who are "against killing people" may still be supportive of soldiers. They may still support the death penalty. They may oppose laws for gun safety that permit murders to occur. They may accept killing in self-defense. They may honor DNR orders.

It's not as simple as "all cells are baby, therefore losing cells is either death of baby or homicide".

[Jonathan]

Nurv's post didn't seem that cut and dried to me. What both of you said is true and not contradictory.

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

Of course, if pro-choice people thought the baby actually was a baby, as in, a person, then we wouldn't be pro-choice.

This makes complete sense when one feels that the fetus is a person. Though I don't agree, I respect pro-life's stance on the issue - it's the only logical one if a fetus is a person.

Originally Posted by Jonathan

Nurv's post didn't seem that cut and dried to me. What both of you said is true and not contradictory.

I was replying to these two ideas, Jonathan. Being pro-choice doesn't necessarily imply only one idea about "where life begins." Plenty of practicing Catholics and other people of faith are pro-choice.

[Valandil]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

:
:
This makes complete sense when one feels that the fetus is a person. Though I don't agree, I respect pro-life's stance on the issue - it's the only logical one if a fetus is a person.

I just think the unborn baby deserves the benefit of the doubt. Re-check your fetal development and try to pick where you honestly think the baby looks like a person.

As to the remark about the woman - that was a response to the statement that pro-life people only care about the baby. That's completely untrue, but always thrown around as if fact.

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by sisterandcousinandaunt

I'm not sure you can be so cut and dried about it, Nurv. People who are "against killing people" may still be supportive of soldiers. They may still support the death penalty. They may oppose laws for gun safety that permit murders to occur. They may accept killing in self-defense. They may honor DNR orders.

It's not as simple as "all cells are baby, therefore losing cells is either death of baby or homicide".

I agree, I actually don't think it's that simple either. There's a lot I left out of my post. There's a big grey area in the whole abortion debate itself. And finally, people are complex. I'm not actually attempting to reduce the debate to one sentence or to say that there are only two views on .

Originally Posted by Valandil

I just think the unborn baby deserves the benefit of the doubt. Re-check your fetal development and try to pick where you honestly think the baby looks like a person.

As to the remark about the woman - that was a response to the statement that pro-life people only care about the baby. That's completely untrue, but always thrown around as if fact.

I've heard it and don't agree either, though I am pro-choice. Maybe some pro-life people only care about the fetus, but this attitude doesn't really describe the movement as a whole. I don't get the impression from this thread, at least.

But for me personhood is not about what it looks like. I just think that personhood happens at birth. Inked and I have already debated the point extensively though. I didn't really mean to rejoin the debate; I just wanted to reply to your post. But that's not how this thread works, is it?

[inked]

Precisely, Nurv. One's understanding of the nature of humanity and its origination will be followed by one's choices on the basis of that understanding.

Logic, indeed.

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

I ran across this article, a first person account of a woman who had an abortion. For those who haven't heard such an account, maybe it'll help you know that "choice" isn't always about selfishness.

http://www.marieclaire.com/world/new...on=art&mag=mar

[Insidious Rex]

Originally Posted by Valandil

I just think the unborn baby deserves the benefit of the doubt. Re-check your fetal development and try to pick where you honestly think the baby looks like a person.

So then are you saying your personal test for your beliefs regarding abortion is "looks like a person"?

[Valandil]

Originally Posted by Insidious Rex

So then are you saying your personal test for your beliefs regarding abortion is "looks like a person"?

No - in my mind it does not have to. If you read above, this was partially in response to some writing so much about a 'two-celled organism' or however they termed it.

I have to admit that I have a hard time understanding how some people can be alright with abortion once a baby DOES "look like a person" though.

And the issue is so HUGE! About 1,400,000 babies per year in America alone - which comes to about 3,800 per day. More than the victims of 9/11! (EACH DAY!) And about half those babies have African American mothers (and I read yesterday that about half of all pregnancies by African American mothers end in abortion). But the founder of Planned Parenthood was a known racist who advocated both abortion and sterilization to decrease the numbers of African Americans.

A bit of a tangent, but pertinent, since Planned Parenthood performs so many abortions in America.