Abortion is Wrong

M

MEETJJ

New member
As am I...but would you deny medical assistance to people doing stupid things like smoking, drinking, hangliding, martial arts, rock climbing, jaywalking...etc

Playing DA again obviously, but it is never simple is it?
 
E

ELK

Member
Isn't that an indictment of how those children are raised and educated? Forcing them to keep a child to teach them a lesson doesn't seem very productive.

I think pro-lifers should be targeting chronic masturbators for genocide, because, if I remember my bible studies:

"Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is great,
If a sperm is wasted, God gets quite irate.

Let the heathen spill theirs, On the dusty ground,
God shall make them pay for Each sperm that can't be found."

How about, to make it fair, women get carte Blanche to decide if they give birth, but then fathers get 24 weeks when the child reaches 15 in which they can decide to legally terminate them?

Does anyone else think the arguments might be different if we weren't still crawling out of a patriarchal society? Or to put it more simply: would the debate be different if men had babies?
 
A

ANewCreation

Member
As Hannibal said that basically rules out all contraception. So what happens if the guy used a condom and it broke? Sure we've all been there at one time or another. You can't shove a morning after pill down your partner's throat so the balls all in her court. Or I suppose things like if your partner is on the pill and she forgot to take one.

People are stupid. In an ideal world people would always be smart about sex and would triple bag their junk but its unrealistic to expect that to happen. Birth control fails, people get drunk, people are involved in high speed car chases and massive shoot outs and then immediately forget their past problems and bang against a car. I can't think of a reason to force a man to take reponsiblity in those cases that can't also be applied to a woman. Obviously there's a difference in the fact that pregnancies take place inside the lady so forcing her to carry to term has a whole host of moral problems, but even though the dude isn't forced into something physhical against his will, in both cases someone's personal wishes and choices are being inhibited by someone else.
 
A

autigersfan89

New member
Not quite sure I follow you here. I am pro abortion. I was more in a side-bar conversation with SouthPaw about a man's responsibility and rights in the whole process.

Basically I am saying that if you are not prepared to provide 18-21 years of financial support, at a minimum, then don't engage in sex acts where the result can be a baby.

If you do produce a baby then man up to the consequences and do you part.

K?



How does that rule out contraception??? It means if you use contraception and it fails then you have to own up to the consequences of your actions.

Having vaginal sex even with contraception may result in a baby. If you are ok with that and willing to accept responsibility then go for it.

If you and your partner choose to have an abortion because of your sex choice that is fine as well.

If you are not willing to own up to being a father or getting an abortion then there are plenty of other sexual practices that you can engage in with your partner that don't lead to babies.
 
E

ElMagnificoS

New member
Smoking - Increased health care costs/extra fees if no health care in my opinion. Since I smoked for about 4 years and currently chew, I don't want to pay extra but I would and I understand why. You wouldn't see me fighting it.

Drinking, hangliding, rock climbing, jaywalking . . . . all things that are in the moment and are unfortunate if something bad happens.

A child is normally an 18 year commitment and costs a lot more in time and money. I get what you're trying to get at but there are few things that are similar enough to having a child and the responsibility that comes with that to compare to.

Again I think it's up to educating people and teaching why you need to be responsible, methods for child making, and methods for pleasure/intimacy only. Of course there will still be 'stupid sex' going on, but I don't think it will be a significant enough number that the reply, "well man, crap happens" wouldn't be a sufficient enough answer to those who would oppose abortion.
 
N

nothing_but_love13

New member
Nobody is saying you can't. You brought up the subject in a way that involves males, and males were addressed. You're asking specific questions and then trying to make a specific answer fit with another specific question that the specific answer wasn't meant to cover.
 
K

klt

New member
m1k3jobs has already said he's pro abortion so presumably that means accepting a woman can say no to it otherwise you're not really pro abortion.
 
S

stargirl796

Member
You can.

2 people choose to have sex using contraception.

Contraception fails, resulting in a pregnancy.

The 2 people now have choices to make based on the consequences of their previous action, sex.

BTW, I am using consequences here as a neutral term. A consequence is simply the result of a previous choice.

The choices are: have an abortion or have the baby which leads to more choices like adoption or willingness to support the baby you conceived and so on and so forth down the line.

If you are not willing to end up in the position stated above then don't have dumb sex.
 
H

Hoki

New member
Because Abortion terminates something that has been created. Condoms etc prevent it getting that far.

Raz
P.s I'm not against abortions at all, I just see clear differences in what your describing.
 
J

jaffn

New member
See, to me, I see both as "Birth Control". The method and timing are different but the end result is the same. No birth.
 
D

DirkvonPelvis

Member
But there aren't two people making a choice on the consequences of their action, only the woman is. It is 100% her choice whether she keeps that baby or not based on whether she wants it. Legally she cant be force either way. Whatever the wishes of the man however he is legally forced into financial support.

Yes, he shouldn't of been a boob if he didn't want that to happen (although I still think that's a very simplified stance that doesn't take a few variables into account) but if you're going to legally force him to deal with the consequences of that decision for 18 odd years, then I dont see why you can't legally force a woman to spend 9 months carrying the baby to term, because she equally shouldn't of been a boob if she didn't want to deal with pregnancy.
 
I

ilikemonkeys

New member
I think what is created when a sperm and egg meet is "different" to what they were before they met.
Saying otherwise, I think, is denying the very human element to abortion and child birth.
I think we should accept that the disposal of a blastocyst needs more consideration than disposal of some sperm.
Disposal of an embryo needs more consideration than disposal of a blastocyst.
Disposal of a foetus needs more consideration than disposal of an embryo (if I'm getting my developmental termnology about right).
There is a sliding scale of concerns we need to address. The problems come when people move that sliding scale to one end or the other and then try and debate from that position.
 
N

noneofurbusiness

New member
Southpaw, I kind of agree with you but since the woman is the host for the potential new human being the final choice is hers as whether or not she chooses to be the host.

Pregnancies can be life threatening for the mother and lead to other serious complications.

Not saying the man was a boob either. At the point he choose to have vaginal sex he put himself in the position where a possible consequence is conception. As did she.
 
F

funkypantsmoobmeister

New member
Take this image for example.



I'd be "OK" (but still not really OK if yu get my meaning) with voluntarily terminating the stage on the left but much less OK with voluntarily terminating the stage on the right.
And I don't think the pro-choice advocates can get round that "feeling" or sense of right and wrong by laying things out logically.
It's just there and pretty much hardwired I think. We need to work with that rather than denying it's a factor.
 
E

EmmanuelM

Member
Absolutely, and I don't think there's anything wrong with feeling there is a sanctity to human life, just that we should be honest about it.
 
H

halizad

New member
You get the pro-lifers sliding the concern scale to the end that says "This is a human life" and then applying that across the whole term of the pregnancy. That's not right. Certainly not accurate from a biological perspective.

Then you get the extreme pro-choicers that slide the scale all the way over to "This is not a human life" and then apply that across the whole term of the pregnancy. That's not right either. Certainly not from an embryological perspective.

I'd put the truth somewhere in the middle and then give myself a margin of error up towards the "human life" end and err on not aborting foetuses beyond something life 12-16 weeks.
If you haven't decided what to do with a potential baby in 16 weeks then you really should have to face the consequences.
Medical concerns for the mother and foetus would obviously amend that time upward right up until birth (if the mother was going to die and decided she'd rather the foetus did instead, if such a medical decision could actually be made).
 
T

TAG

Member
Not only that, but there is no logical cut-off point. We don't even have watertight definitions for life or sentience. It has to be an ethical consensus.

But, you can't stop people having abortions. I'd much rather they were being performed in hospitals by registered medical professionals, rather than what happens in some Catholic countries were foetuses are litterally thrown in the gutter, not to mention the risks of infection and other complications to the woman.

Personally, as it is such a horrendous ordeal for the vast majority of women (and even with women who've had many - I'd be very concerned about their mental health), I don't mind that some "stupid" women might "abuse the system". I'd rather that happen than add unnecessary stress and pressure in trying to determine if women "deserve" to have the procedure or not.
 
Top