Abortion, choice or murder.

[Seth8530]

I'm just curios of everyone's opinion on this. Do you believe abortion to be a choice or it to be murder?


NOTE TO MOD. Could you please add an option for only in choice for rape, and maternal health. and change the choice option as choice in the form of birth control

[UnderseaLcpl]

This might get fun soon.

I'll just say that I support individual rights. IMHO, once a child has a brain cell, I'd consider it worthy of individual rights like not being killed. Before that, I don't consider it as having anymore individual sovereignty than a kidney or a liver.

It's a good compromise if you think about it. Many people think Bush has at least one brain cell, and it isn't legal to kill him.:D

[Onkel Neal]

Just a friendly warning, this is the kind of topic that gets people hot, so if you want to debate the topic, fine, just make double sure you don't slip in anything that resembles a personal attack. Brig time if you do, and no appeals. If that seems harsh, avoid this thread.

Neal

[Frame57]

When does it become a human? At conception? Seed has life it too, so then when a sperm cell dies is that murder? i would propbably be a mass murderer at this stage of the game if that were true. To me having babies is the normal by product of sex and was meant to be. I would not allow an abortion if my wife wanted one. Heck I would get another wife first. Very tough question that is difficult to answer.

[Digital_Trucker]

All I'll say on the subject is that I'm very happy that abortion wasn't much of an option when my parents were deciding what to do about me. Life may suck, but I'd rather be here than not.

Perhaps we should narrow the poll down to whether we are talking about abortion as a form of birth control or whether we're talking about abortion for some medical reason?

[kiwi_2005]

Choice1. Adopt the child out. If a young woman just out of college gets pregnant this will hamper her career unless she comes from a well off family that can hire a nanny while she goes off to make a living other wise she's going to live a life bringing up child and trying to better herself career wise which doesn't always work when you have a child to bring up.

Choice2. Third world countries - abortion: Whats better to bring up a child in poverty or to have an abortion and save that being a life of misery/hardship.
What is the statistics 30,000+ children die every day in some third world countries cause of poverty and diseases, what is the point of bringing a child into that type of world only to see them die a slow and ugly death?

[Thomen]

I'm just curios of everyone's opinion on this. Do you believe abortion to be a choice or it to be murder?
Your poll is missing one important option..
Medical necessity, as in the mother live is in danger if she carries the child out.

EDIT: Wife just came up with another one that is missing.. what is with rape and incest childs?

[Mush Martin]

If we accept abortion as murder does celibacy then become
negligent Homocide.:hmm:

[Platapus]

If we accept that life begins at conception, then should a woman who miscarries be investigated for involuntary manslaughter?

[jpm1]

i think you canno't tell a woman what she can or can't do mothers know better than anyboby what should be done . i'm for the abortion cause as kiwi_2005 said if in some cases the child 's born and must suffer it's better that he doesn't born and like Thomem said you can't neither force a woman victim of a rape to keep the child . i know personnaly a woman who aborted it's a real tromatism and believe me a woman who takes such decision has thought to the question at lengh and knows perfectly what she's doing

[Mush Martin]

I think a father is a parent and a person
what no rights?

[OneToughHerring]

Interestingly in my country, Finland, abortion is "legal for rape, maternal life, health, socioeconomic factors and/or fetal defects". Always thought my country is among the most liberal when it comes to this but I guess I was wrong. Even USA is more liberal in this issue. However the so called morning after - pills are readily available in my country.

Anyway, I recently watched a documentary called Lake of fire by Tony Kaye, the director of American History X. Not for the squemish. Personally I'm pro-choice, Kaye seemed to be undecided on the issue. I'm for women's rights and equality etc. and don't want to see a kind of swing to the religious side on this issue. The killings of abortion doctors etc. is to me terrorism that seems to exist in, for example, USA.

[Mush Martin]

I think that for such issues as described in finland its about right
but I also feel that abortion should be by consenting choice of
both parents. Men are given no say in there childrens fate.

[edit]He cant tell her what to do with her body but they participated with
the body willingly (with some exceptions) when it all started and if
a reasoning parent is willing and able to take charge of the responisbility
why shouldnt they be allowed.[end edit]

I feel that a consent clause should be included in any well reasoned
abortion law after all were offending half the voters if we dont.

[Digital_Trucker]

If we accept that life begins at conception, then should a woman who miscarries be investigated for involuntary manslaughter?
If we accept partial birth abortion as birth control, are we not condoning murder? (Edit: the worst possible form of murder, murder for convenience)

It amazes me that so many pro-choice folks are also against the death penalty and that so many pro-lifeers are for the death penalty. Go figure:hmm:

[JHuschke]

Choice

[Mush Martin]

Choice

Who's?

[Digital_Trucker]

Choice
Who's?
Why, his, of course:D

[Stealth Hunter]

Choice, not murder.

Although some see it as a case where women shouldn't have the right to make decisions about their own bodies, I believe they have every right to decide.

[nikimcbee]

popcorn, get your popcorn. icecoldbeer, get your icecoldbeer. trench shovels and helmets.

I'll say murder. Ironically, this subject doesn't get me to upset. I don't have a problem with the day after pill. In the very early stages, it doen't bother mebut the more the child develops it does. The late term abortion is another matter.
I think the guy should have some say in it, half of it is his.

I would hope the woman would choose life.

In regards to the rape, incest part of the equation, what's the number of abortions that are preformed because of this?

[Stealth Hunter]

Rape and Incest Abortions:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20061114200923AAy5zMs


Curiosity has sparked in my about your opinion, Niki. Would you support abortion if the baby were to have birth defects (the likes of which would put the mother's life in jeopardy)?

[nikimcbee]

Rape and Incest Abortions:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20061114200923AAy5zMs


Curiosity has sparked in my about your opinion, Niki. Would you support abortion if the baby were to have birth defects (the likes of which would put the mother's life in jeopardy)?

If the mother's life is in jeopardy, yes it's okay. The part to just get an abortion because you don't want the responsibility, I object to. But I think it should be legal. though.

[JoeCorrado]

double post

[JoeCorrado]

Abortion is a CHOICE in my mind for the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. After the twelve weeks- I believe it should only be allowed to save the life of the mother- after 5 months, no abortion should be allowed- at worst, the baby should be removed and every attemot made to save it's life.

No "voluntary" abortions after 12 weeks. Period.

That's my position based upon my personal beliefs about when "human life" begins.

This is what has occured inside the womb at 12 weeks:

http://www.kittymom.net/jessica/images/fetus12weeks.jpg

And this is at 6 weeks:
http://www.dushkin.com/connectext/psy/ch03/plate2.jpg


http://healthcare.utah.edu/healthinfo/images/ei_0128.gif

I know that we can all disagree, that beliefs will vary, that empathy for mother and child will be prioritized- but really for me- the bottom line is that the mother should have a CHOICE to make and nobody should believe that they have the right to dictate that choice away-

I reconcile the right of the unborn by putting a time definate by which the mother must make the choice or have her right of choice trumped by the childs right to life. This is not a black and white issue, there are a thousand shades of gray.

[Happy Times]

Abortion is a CHOICE in my mind for the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. After the twelve weeks- I believe it should only be allowed to save the life of the mother- after 5 months, no abortion should be allowed- at worst, the baby should be removed and every attemot made to save it's life.

No "voluntary" abortions after 12 weeks. Period.

That's my position based upon my personal beliefs about when "human life" begins.

This is what has occured inside the womb at 12 weeks:

http://www.kittymom.net/jessica/images/fetus12weeks.jpg

And this is at 6 weeks:
http://www.dushkin.com/connectext/psy/ch03/plate2.jpg


http://healthcare.utah.edu/healthinfo/images/ei_0128.gif

I know that we can all disagree, that beliefs will vary, that empathy for mother and child will be prioritized- but really for me- the bottom line is that the mother should have a CHOICE to make and nobody should believe that they have the right to dictate that choice away-

I reconcile the right of the unborn by putting a time definate by which the mother must make the choice or have her right of choice trumped by the childs right to life. This is not a black and white issue, there are a thousand shades of gray.

Good post, sums it up for me.:up:

[AJ!]

It is a hard topic to decide on...

Everyone has a choice and end of the day its up to the mother. At the same time though no matter what stage the child is at its still a human being and killing it would be unjust.

What makes me angry is the fact if they went through the proper precautions this "accidental" pregnancy wouldn't of happened.

Of course saying all this im not referring to rape as that would be different situation altogether.

[UnderseaLcpl]

This is the first time in my life I have ever seen a dignified and civil discussion about abortion. Bravo subsimmers!:up:

I would like to know a bit more about the dyed-in-the wool pro-lifer's views. Perhaps someone could write a short summary on their views on the role of the state in determining the legality of death. Would you also be against assisted suicide and the death penalty? Keeping the focus on abortion of course.

I would say that whilst I would support assisted suicide and condemn the death penalty (as well as being a conditional pro-abortionist) I would hardly trust my own opinions if I were to decide someone's mortal fate.

Thoughts?

[antikristuseke]

If we accept that life begins at conception, then should a woman who miscarries be investigated for involuntary manslaughter?

It amazes me that so many pro-choice folks are also against the death penalty and that so many pro-lifeers are for the death penalty. Go figure:hmm:

This is something that has puzzled me for a long time aswell.

Anyway, for my own opinion on the subject. I have to agree with JoeCorrado. The reason for this is quite simple, I concider it to be a lesser of the two evils, when compared to bringing an unwanted child into the world.

[Skybird]

In the end, it always comes down to be a personal choice. No matter if your choice is influenced by religious dogmas, or your parents education, the social climate in your living place or your economic situation, the legal condition in your country, and wether the woman had been raped or not, or her life in danger from the pregnancy or not. In the end, it always is something she has to get clear about with her own consciousness, and if sombody wants to abort, in this world she will always find a way to do so, illegally or legally, inside her country, or by travelling to another one.

Wether or not it is murder, depends on the judging mind'S background in morals, and is again basing on education, religious dogma, and the social and cultural climate of his/her place.

when becomes a human being a human being? does soul exist? Is soul and matter two separate, or is matter the condensate of soul? When turns a tiny cellular mass without forms into a human being worth beeing seen as that?

I personally do not like abortions being done when this bunch of cells has started to form out human forms, but even then I reject to speak out a reglar ruling, but insist on considering the individual case's factors and conditional variables. I also would not encourage a woman I love to abort, but if she does, I would not condemn her. For me, these issues can only be approached on a human level, trying to avoid aggression and command.

The alternative to abortion that I would prefer is to set legal and social conditons so that it is guaranteed that a mother in crisis can give away the baby without needing to fear of being brandmarked morally, socially or legally. that way, her mind not wanting to have a baby eventually may chnage by experiencing those nine months, the baby lives, and we have a growing number of parents in the Wetsenr world who cannot have babies of their own for medical reasons, and who would happily adopt a baby.

Legal or religous pressure on women i totally reject. To often there already is too much despair involved as if it can be defended from a "christian" standpoint of love for thy next to doom that next just because she does not obey your moral commands. What is it with "don't judge the other so that you will not get judged yourself" ? If you have read some stories about Jesus in the gospels and how he joined the pariah, the weak, and the contempted, you can hardly conclude that he would happily doomed such a woman himself, i think. where the bible is used tocondemn women, it is not because Jesus authorized it, but becasue of a dogma of patriarchalic dominance of men over women. Shame on any church (or religion) excusing that.

BTW, we learned at university that the statistics say that most women who abort, suffer a more or less developed depression in the months to come.

[UnderseaLcpl]

I have a few points of contention on your post, sky, but I also realize that I am no authority on such matters. None of us are. Just a few things I would like you to clear up please.

In the end, it always comes down to be a personal choice. No matter if your choice is influenced by religious dogmas, or your parents education, the social climate in your living place or your economic situation, the legal condition in your country, and wether the woman had been raped or not, or her life in danger from the pregnancy or not. In the end, it always is something she has to get clear about with her own consciousness, and if sombody wants to abort, in this world she will always find a way to do so, illegally or legally, inside her country, or by travelling to another one.
That is the most libertarian thing I have ever heard you say.:D Personal choice, the inflexibility of the system, one size-does-not-fit-all, no law can stand in the way of freedom. I'm taking what you said to extremes I'm sure, but is there any chance that you might apply this mentality to economics? No need to answer, I'm just happy to see we can have a common philosophy on something.


Wether or not it is murder, depends on the judging mind'S background in morals, and is again basing on education, religious dogma, and the social and cultural climate of his/her place.

Right again. Who has the objectivity to judge, though?

when becomes a human being a human being? does soul exist? Is soul and matter two separate, or is matter the condensate of soul? When turns a tiny cellular mass without forms into a human being worth beeing seen as that?

I'll have to surrender in this case. I don't know.

I personally do not like abortions being done when this bunch of cells has started to form out human forms, but even then I reject to speak out a reglar ruling, but insist on considering the individual case's factors and conditional variables. I also would not encourage a woman I love to abort, but if she does, I would not condemn her. For me, these issues can only be approached on a human level, trying to avoid aggression and command.

How do we find humans who are not going to be aggressive or commanding? There seems to be an overabundance of them. Even those who are not are not necessarily safe. Power corrupts.....no?

The alternative to abortion that I would prefer is to set legal and social conditons so that it is guaranteed that a mother in crisis can give away the baby without needing to fear of being brandmarked morally, socially or legally. that way, her mind not wanting to have a baby eventually may chnage by experiencing those nine months, the baby lives, and we have a growing number of parents in the Wetsenr world who cannot have babies of their own for medical reasons, and who would happily adopt a baby.
I'm going to agree with you on that, mostly. But how do you legislate against social condemnation? Moral condemnation?

Legal or religous pressure on women i totally reject. To often there already is too much despair involved as if it can be defended from a "christian" standpoint of love for thy next to doom that next just because she does not obey your moral commands. What is it with "don't judge the other so that you will not get judged yourself" ? If you have read some stories about Jesus in the gospels and how he joined the pariah, the weak, and the contempted, you can hardly conclude that he would happily doomed such a woman himself, i think. where the bible is used tocondemn women, it is not because Jesus authorized it, but becasue of a dogma of patriarchalic dominance of men over women. Shame on any church (or religion) excusing that.

I agree with you on the religious points of this. My only minor contention is that patriarchalic dominance of men over women is something I think we are not ever likely to see the end of. We could discuss that another time, perhaps?

BTW, we learned at university that the statistics say that most women who abort, suffer a more or less developed depression in the months to come.

Understandable. But I have also read that females of many species suffer a depression even after a successful pregnancy, humans included. (Matt Ridley, The Agile Gene) Perhaps a shifting of bichemical equilibrium?


Thanks again for your input!

[Skybird]

That is the most libertarian thing I have ever heard you say.:D Personal choice, the inflexibility of the system, one size-does-not-fit-all, no law can stand in the way of freedom. I'm taking what you said to extremes I'm sure, but is there any chance that you might apply this mentality to economics? No need to answer, I'm just happy to see we can have a common philosophy on something.
Partially. I never said to regulate all economy. I said I do not believe in a totally libertarian market regulating it all for the community's best interest, always. My motto is: as much regulation as needed to ensure business interests do not move along at the cost of the community's interests, but as little regulation as possible. In parts, we are too over-regulated. In other parts, we are irresponsibly underregulated at present

I'm going to agree with you on that, mostly. But how do you legislate against social condemnation? Moral condemnation?
You cannot legislate moral attitudes without raping the individual mind (that'S why I am so unforgiving and aggressive about lecturing young kids about religion and manipulating their undeveloped, uncritical and thus: vulnerable minds into a specified religious dogma: to me it is child abuse). These have to emerge from the individual mind. Precondition for influencing these is education, cultural climate, social climate, the attotude of a society as a whole. In a fundamentalistic christian community, people will be educated different and form other values than people in a community driven by a humanitarian or taoistic-buddhistic set of views and principles.


I agree with you on the religious points of this. My only minor contention is that patriarchalic dominance of men over women is something I think we are not ever likely to see the end of.
that remains to be seen, however, I did not refer to chances for thi9s happening, but criticised that status quo of being patriarchalic in itself. BTW, historxy knows ages and cultures that are described as having been matriarchalic. So, it must not necessarily all be patriarchalic at all.


Understandable. But I have also read that females of many species suffer a depression even after a successful pregnancy, humans included. (Matt Ridley, The Agile Gene) Perhaps a shifting of bichemical equilibrium?
Thanks again for your input!
Yes, "Wochenbettdepression" it is called in german. Biological, social, individual psychological reasons all come together and form indiviodual sets of causes for this. It ranges from a unspecified low mood up to a major psychosis. It is safe to say, I think, that these causes are different ones than those for depressions after abortions, which for the most are caused by reflecting over the deed being done, the perceived loss, short: the cognitive calculation of the event abortion itself. Biological reasons (hormones) are not of that importance in the early stage of prgnancy. the physical chnages after having given birth are much more dramatic in scale.

you still owe me your second move!

[UnderseaLcpl]

Partially. I never said to regulate all economy. I said I do not believe in a totally libertarian market regulating it all for the community's best interest, always. My motto is: as much regulation as needed to ensure business interests do not move along at the cost of the community's interests, but as little regulation as possible. In parts, we are too over-regulated. In other parts, we are irresponsibly underregulated at present

I know you never advocated regulating all economy. Our fundamental difference here seems to be regulation of economy at the expense of community. While I advocate that an economy cannot develop at the expense of most of the community due to the nature of the market, you seem to advocate regulation to prevent it from doing so. There are many examples for both. However, I will always posit the empirical proof that nations like Taiwan, Japan, the U.S. and city-states like Hong-Kong or China's special economics zones show the ridiculous amount of progress that can be obtained by free-market societies as opposed to those with controls designed to protect the populace. India is an excellent example against restrictive economic policies. Despite its vast economic potential, its' economic ( and social) controls keep the vast majority of the population in poverty.
I think we may reach an understanding here.
Of course, your economy is skewed because you're Germans and EVERYTHING you do is effecient:lol:

I'm going to agree with you on that, mostly. But how do you legislate against social condemnation? Moral condemnation?

You cannot legislate moral attitudes without raping the individual mind (that'S why I am so unforgiving and aggressive about lecturing young kids about religion and manipulating their undeveloped, uncritical and thus: vulnerable minds into a specified religious dogma: to me it is child abuse). These have to emerge from the individual mind. Precondition for influencing these is education, cultural climate, social climate, the attotude of a society as a whole. In a fundamentalistic christian community, people will be educated different and form other values than people in a community driven by a humanitarian or taoistic-buddhistic set of views and principles

Here, we have a conflict. Who but a child's parnts can be responsible for the ubringing and resulting mental sate of their children? Obviously, you cannot mandate religous teachings. Many totalitarian and theocratic states have shown us that. I am sure you would agree that no state or other entity can be responsible, as they are subject to their own biases. Children will always be subject to a biased education and development, the best thing you can do is to ensure that as many children as possible recieve slightly different educations via their parents. As they progress through life and meet other people, their views are tempered. Those that are unyielding in their beliefs are cast into the margins of societal development and eventually disappear. There is no escaping natural selection, I think.


I agree with you on the religious points of this. My only minor contention is that patriarchalic dominance of men over women is something I think we are not ever likely to see the end of.
that remains to be seen, however, I did not refer to chances for thi9s happening, but criticised that status quo of being patriarchalic in itself. BTW, historxy knows ages and cultures that are described as having been matriarchalic. So, it must not necessarily all be patriarchalic at all.

Not necessarily, but mostly so. The brutal reason is because most men can beat up or intimidate most women. It is a sad consequence of evolution that most never contemplate and therefore unthinkingly follow. Rather than expand this argument, I will leave you with this thought; We are all governed, to one degree or another, by genetic tyrants, masters of evolution that use us only as survival mechanisms. It is not species that reproduce, but genes.


Understandable. But I have also read that females of many species suffer a depression even after a successful pregnancy, humans included. (Matt Ridley, The Agile Gene) Perhaps a shifting of bichemical equilibrium?
Thanks again for your input!
Yes, "Wochenbettdepression" it is called in german. Biological, social, individual psychological reasons all come together and form indiviodual sets of causes for this. It ranges from a unspecified low mood up to a major psychosis. It is safe to say, I think, that these causes are different ones than those for depressions after abortions, which for the most are caused by reflecting over the deed being done, the perceived loss, short: the cognitive calculation of the event abortion itself. Biological reasons (hormones) are not of that importance in the early stage of prgnancy. the physical chnages after having given birth are much more dramatic in scale.

A psychiatrist's perspective. Why is it "safe" to say that the causes of a fulfilled pregnancy are any different from those produced by an abortion?
I agree that percieved loss may be a factor, as humans are genetically programmed to reproduce, but how does one reconcile that with the supposedly cognizant nature of the human psyche?


you still owe me your second move!
I know, I know. I'm just to lazy to type it after I lost it the first time. American, remember? I'll do it soon, I promise.

[Skybird]

However, I will always posit the empirical proof that nations like Taiwan, Japan, the U.S. and city-states like Hong-Kong or China's special economics zones show the ridiculous amount of progress that can be obtained by free-market societies. (...) Of course, your economy is skewed because you're Germans and EVERYTHING you do is effecient:lol:

It is not, those days are gone. "Made (or done) by Germany is a qwuality seal only in some bramnches anymore. It has not that general meaning anymore that it used to have let'S say thirty years ago.

also, there is no surprise in pointing at societies that have a low level of economical developement and then speed up to the top. That is, becasue they still have the room upwards to do so. After WWII, Germ cities were a flat desert - no wonder that there was a "Wirtschaftswunder", helped by the Marshal plan. but in the present, each and everything has been build twice and three times over, the room for further building has become small. Same is happening in china currnetly, althoiug only few have started to see. the crisis in the US and the lower consumation there have made the Shanghai stockmarket index loosing 60%. Japan is paying for it'S brutal economic course with very serious social distortions and living conditions for many owrkers that you and me would not like to change with. India has some space to the top and thus can rocket up currently, but even their growth will slow down again, soorner or later. The problem we have in europe, both in demogrpahic trends and economy, sooner or latter all other regions on the globe wioll have, too - america, china, india, Asia, they all follow in our wake and cannot avoid to do so. And if we europeans succeed in finding soltions to these problems, you all will copy them. seen that way, in these two fields, the Eu indeed is the world'S demographic and economic laboratory. We do the test run for all others to follow. an if we fail, it will have consequences far beyond the borders of europe.


Here, we have a conflict. Who but a child's parnts can be responsible for the ubringing and resulting mental sate of their children? Obviously, you cannot mandate religous teachings. Many totalitarian and theocratic states have shown us that. I am sure you would agree that no state or other entity can be responsible, as they are subject to their own biases.

In reference to your earlier posting, I was answering on terms of a state governing for given morals. This does not work well indeed. So, we do not have a conflict here at all, since you seem to agree.


Not necessarily, but mostly so. The brutal reason is because most men can beat up or intimidate most women. It is a sad consequence of evolution that most never contemplate and therefore unthinkingly follow. Rather than expand this argument, I will leave you with this thought; We are all governed, to one degree or another, by genetic tyrants, masters of evolution that use us only as survival mechanisms. It is not species that reproduce, but genes.

I disagree, for two reasons. Earlier societies were dominated by matriarchlaic stzructures, and as far as we can reflect these, they were not caused by female's superiority of genes, but becasue at that time a given way of sharing the daily works worked best. sexual conflict were ´not a reaosn for matriarchalic patterns. the second reason is, when societies changed for external reasons, a chnage in how work was distributed, came as a natrual consequences. Men proved to be better equipped to leave for the dangerous hunt for animals. Women proved to be the better guard for the village with the kids. A pregnant woman's chnace to give a fiaoled birth multiplies if during pregnancy she needs to do hard work on the field, and move a plow - so the men took it when agricultural farming became more and more widespread. dominance had nothing to do with it, like in many relations today the way wife and husband organioze the many deals of daily life has not much to do with dominance, but with the way both find out they can manage their shared life best, and take care of the kids. even modern feminism had to recognize meanwhile that patriarchalic structures probbaly did not set in due to a genetic basis of man being evil, but becasue the daily life's dutioes were distreibuted amongst men and women in the way it proved to serve all interests best.

A psychiatrist's perspective. Why is it "safe" to say that the causes of a fulfilled pregnancy are any different from those produced by an abortion?

Because the biologial and hormon status as well as the cognitive status are different for a women who aborted after 4 weeks and a woman that has given birth after nine months. final event, collected experience, timescale and biochemical status are different. And I were not a psychiatrist, but psychologist. that is a difference.


I know, I know. I'm just to lazy to type it after I lost it the first time. American, remember? I'll do it soon, I promise.

I think the link I sent you did not work as intended.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=90964&highlight=chessmatch
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=90982&highlight=chessmatch
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=91017&highlight=chessmatch
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=91214&highlight=chessmatch
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=91316&highlight=chessmatch
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=92871&highlight=chessmatch

Could it be that we have successfully hijacked this thread again? :lol:

[Platapus]

Why have an exception for abortions in the case of rape?

Is a fetus less human because it was caused by a criminal and cruel act?

The fetus was not involved in the crime so why does it have a less right to live than another fetus?

Why would it be justified for a woman to have an abortion because she did not intend to have a baby due to rape but not justified because a woman did not intend to have a baby due to the failure of birth control?

I have always wondered about this.

[Skybird]

Why have an exception for abortions in the case of rape?

Is a fetus less human because it was caused by a criminal and cruel act?

The fetus was not involved in the crime so why does it have a less right to live than another fetus?

Why would it be justified for a woman to have an abortion because she did not intend to have a baby due to rape but not justified because a woman did not intend to have a baby due to the failure of birth control?

I have always wondered about this.
The cruelty of having to carry out the baby of a criminal thug that hurt you the worst has somethign to do with it - at least for some women...? :hmm: Not to mention that in a way you rule tzhat in the ultimate end it is okay that men shall have the final power and word over women, and shall have the right to enforce them becoming pregnant and carry out babies...? :hmm:

[jpm1]

Why have an exception for abortions in the case of rape?

Is a fetus less human because it was caused by a criminal and cruel act?

The fetus was not involved in the crime so why does it have a less right to live than another fetus?

Why would it be justified for a woman to have an abortion because she did not intend to have a baby due to rape but not justified because a woman did not intend to have a baby due to the failure of birth control?

I have always wondered about this.
The cruelty of having to carry out the baby of a criminal thug that hurt you the worst has somethign to do with it - at least for some women...? :hmm: Not to mention that in a way you rule tzhat in the ultimate end it is okay that men shall have the final power and word over women, and shall have the right to enforce them becoming pregnant and carry out babies...? :hmm:

Broiled

[UnderseaLcpl]

The cruelty of having to carry out the baby of a criminal thug that hurt you the worst has somethign to do with it - at least for some women...? :hmm: Not to mention that in a way you rule tzhat in the ultimate end it is okay that men shall have the final power and word over women, and shall have the right to enforce them becoming pregnant and carry out babies...? :hmm:

I'd have to go with sky on this one. I don't really know of course, being male, but I do not think I would consent to carrying a baby like that.
Ever see that remake of The Fly? If you didn't, don't. If you have, I imagine that emotionally, it it something like the female protaganists' nightmare.

[Platapus]

Why have an exception for abortions in the case of rape?

Is a fetus less human because it was caused by a criminal and cruel act?

The fetus was not involved in the crime so why does it have a less right to live than another fetus?

Why would it be justified for a woman to have an abortion because she did not intend to have a baby due to rape but not justified because a woman did not intend to have a baby due to the failure of birth control?

I have always wondered about this.
The cruelty of having to carry out the baby of a criminal thug that hurt you the worst has somethign to do with it - at least for some women...?

Granted the horrors of Rape, but how about the cruelty of a woman having to carry out a pregnancy that was caused by the failure of contraceptive?

Or the cruelty of carrying out a pregnancy that was caused by a man she does not love/have a relationship with/for what ever reason?

Or the cruelty of carrying out a pregnancy that was caused by the woman getting drunk/high on drugs and "things just happened"?

Or the cruelty of carrying out a pregnancy when the mother knows she can't financially/emotionally support the pregnancy?

I am trying to figure out if the rape exception is based on logic or emotion.

[Skybird]

Granted the horrors of Rape, but how about the cruelty of a woman having to carry out a pregnancy that was caused by the failure of contraceptive?

Or the cruelty of carrying out a pregnancy that was caused by a man she does not love/have a relationship with/for what ever reason?

Or the cruelty of carrying out a pregnancy that was caused by the woman getting drunk/high on drugs and "things just happened"?

Or the cruelty of carrying out a pregnancy when the mother knows she can't financially/emotionally support the pregnancy?

I am trying to figure out if the rape exception is based on logic or emotion.

It is based on the experience of having been raped. none of your examples compare to that. when your health is being crippled becasue you had an accident, it is one thing, trauma or not. If your health is being crippled because you had been tortured, the quality of experience is a different one, and having been involved in treatment of toruture victims I dare say: it is the more serious and painful one.

If you think you can rationally compare the events by the mere outcomes only - pregnancy - , you are simply wrong. And heartless.

I strongly recommend that all you male guys do not try to tell a woman how she should feel in your opinion about the fact that she has been raped. You are not the experts regarding that question - she is, unfortunately.

If that still does not make you more hesitent to make moral judgements here on how ther woman should feel, I recommend you take some time and make yourself familiar with the events on the Balkans, and the rape camps they had established there. Then come back and tell me about how the women should feel, and wether it is all based on logic or emotion "only".

[Sailor Steve]

Sky, I think you may be misunderstanding the other side's argument. The question isn't why abortion should be legal in those cases; it's why abortion should only be legal in those cases. Most people who make strong anti-abortion arguments give that caveat: "Abortion should be illegal, except in the case of rape or incest." Some of those on both sides want to know why, if every fetus an inherent right to life from conception, would they then say that certain of them don't deserve the same consideration just because of the circumstances of their conception. If I'm wrong on your understanding, I apologize.

I fall firmly in the 'Depends' category. I just feel that abortion is wrong, ethically, morally and spiritually, but I also recognize that those are my personal feelings, and not everybody's. The only reason to ban abortion is if it really is murder, and that question would have to be answered in the legal sense beyond any possible doubt before it could even be considered. Since that is in itself impossible, it becomes a strictly moral question, and, as so many people on so many sides of so many arguments are fond of pointing out (but only when it suits their side), "You can't legislate morality."

It also depends because - as has been stated already - at some point the fetus has become a baby; that is, it can be delivered safely and have a good chance of surviving on its own. If the child can be born, it should be born. Until that time, as long as it has to have its mother's body to continue, it has to be her choice. Of course, as has also been stated, it would be nice if the father had some say as well.

[Kapt Z]

Though the idea of abortion disturbs me, I just cannot bring myself to tell a woman what she is allowed to do with her body. Personally, that is a line I will never cross.

[Skybird]

Sky, I think you may be misunderstanding the other side's argument. The question isn't why abortion should be legal in those cases; it's why abortion should only be legal in those cases.
If that is the case and I understood him wrong indeed, I close my mouth and step aside. ;)

[Platapus]

If you think you can rationally compare the events by the mere outcomes only - pregnancy - , you are simply wrong. And heartless.



I am just asking some questions. I am not making any moralistic judgements.

I am just trying to understand the commonly quoted exceptions for abortion.

Sailor Steve understands. :up:

[UnderseaLcpl]

Sky, I think you may be misunderstanding the other side's argument. The question isn't why abortion should be legal in those cases; it's why abortion should only be legal in those cases. Most people who make strong anti-abortion arguments give that caveat: "Abortion should be illegal, except in the case of rape or incest." Some of those on both sides want to know why, if every fetus an inherent right to life from conception, would they then say that certain of them don't deserve the same consideration just because of the circumstances of their conception. If I'm wrong on your understanding, I apologize.

I agree, it makes the issue quite dificult.

I fall firmly in the 'Depends' category.
:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: I'm sorry. It's just so damn funny. Why not the "Pampers" category? Oh I'm going to hell.:cry:


I just feel that abortion is wrong, ethically, morally and spiritually, but I also recognize that those are my personal feelings, and not everybody's. The only reason to ban abortion is if it really is murder, and that question would have to be answered in the legal sense beyond any possible doubt before it could even be considered. Since that is in itself impossible, it becomes a strictly moral question, and, as so many people on so many sides of so many arguments are fond of pointing out (but only when it suits their side), "You can't legislate morality."

It also depends because - as has been stated already - at some point the fetus has become a baby; that is, it can be delivered safely and have a good chance of surviving on its own. If the child can be born, it should be born. Until that time, as long as it has to have its mother's body to continue, it has to be her choice. Of course, as has also been stated, it would be nice if the father had some say as well.



If only we could all put that much consideration into the issue before making lame signs and protesting. SailorSteve for President!

[Sailor Steve]

I fall firmly in the 'Depends' category.
:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: I'm sorry. It's just so damn funny. Why not the "Pampers" category? Oh I'm going to hell.:cry:


As soon as I posted that I wondered if somebody wasn't going to think that. No, I'm to old for Pampers, but Depends may well be right around the corner.:dead:

If only we could all put that much consideration into the issue before making lame signs and protesting.
I haven't seen a single post on this thread that wasn't well thought out and reasonable. But then, they mostly agree with my viewpoint...

[UnderseaLcpl]

[quote]I fall firmly in the 'Depends' category.
:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: I'm sorry. It's just so damn funny. Why not the "Pampers" category? Oh I'm going to hell.:cry:


As soon as I posted that I wondered if somebody wasn't going to think that. No, I'm to old for Pampers, but Depends may well be right around the corner.:dead:

I owe you a personal apology for that. I just couldn't resist. :oops:

[Sailor Steve]

I owe you a personal apology for that. I just couldn't resist. :oops:
Why? There's nothing wrong with insult humor, as long as it's humorous. And I can't deny that it was.:sunny:

[Stealth Hunter]

Though the idea of abortion disturbs me, I just cannot bring myself to tell a woman what she is allowed to do with her body. Personally, that is a line I will never cross.

No opinion then? That's ok. We can respect that, can't we guys?

[Biggles]

I'll just say that I support individual rights. IMHO, once a child has a brain cell, I'd consider it worthy of individual rights like not being killed. Before that, I don't consider it as having anymore individual sovereignty than a kidney or a liver.


Basically what I think about the subject. Before there is a brain, there is no life...

[Sailor Steve]

So, some adults shouldn't be allowed to live either?
:rotfl:

[antikristuseke]

They have it, but they refuse to use it ;)

[bookworm_020]

I consider it choice up to a point, but prefer to see it avoided, either by prevention (contreception or abstainice) or give birth and keep or adopt.

The point at which it goes too far is late term abortion, unless there is a strong medical need (mothers life at risk from going further and a CZ is not an option). They had a choice early on and the decision needs to be made then.

I do understand other peoples points of view on this, and various religious views as well, but I also see a practical reason as well.