What do you think about abortion

Post Reply New Topic

I think that abortion, taken in isolation without any context, is a Morally Bad Thing. But all of life is a balancing act. There are a million factors to take into account to make any decision. I mean, I just killed an ant because it was slightly annoying me. Killing an ant, taken in isolation without any context, is a Morally Bad Thing.

Abortion should be legal. It should always be the pregnant woman who gets to make the decision. And once she has made the decision, it is rude to second-guess her choice.

I think it's very possible, and I don't know why the pro life groups and the common ground groups (pro life and pro choice who agree on some of the issues) don't try and lobby for funding for that. I'm sure there are many parents who are spending tons on fertility treatments who would gladly donate to that cause if they had it. It would pay off for everybody. I think that's what the focus of the abortion rights debates should move to soon. The national ones that is, not here lol. But to discuss research to lower the age of viability to stop the killing that happens in abortion and to free up babies for couples who want to adopt but really can't to be able to. I had a friend who had to go to China to get two babies because there weren't any here for them. I know another girl who never was able to get a baby. And it would also take a lot of the emotional distress off many of the women who do have abortions and who strongly dislike the idea of killing but feel they have no other choice.

I think it's very possible, and I don't know why the pro life groups and the common ground groups (pro life and pro choice who agree on some of the issues) don't try and lobby for funding for that. I'm sure there are many parents who are spending tons on fertility treatments who would gladly donate to that cause if they had it. It would pay off for everybody. I think that's what the focus of the abortion rights debates should move to soon. The national ones that is, not here lol. But to discuss research to lower the age of viability to stop the killing that happens in abortion and to free up babies for couples who want to adopt but really can't to be able to. I had a friend who had to go to China to get two babies because there weren't any here for them. I know another girl who never was able to get a baby. And it would also take a lot of the emotional distress off many of the women who do have abortions and who strongly dislike the idea of killing but feel they have no other choice.

Angel, just get a sense of perspective here.

Why do you think murder is illegal?

Well, the jail isn't the one that is needing him out of there. You are getting it backwards and trying to say that a murderers need to get himself out of jail is the same as a womans need to get the baby out of her body. There is a big difference between being in jail for something you did and having to deal with the baby in your body for the whole pregnancy.

Pregnancy didn't bother me. I wouldn't have a problem with having the baby, but there are some who would and because I don't know their situations, I can't say. I might not approve of some of them even though I'm pro choice. The only issue for me in this is that it is her body. She is a living human being who was here first and there is another human being in her body that she wants to get out of there and if she gets it out before it's able to survive on it's own then it should be her right. I don't think it should be legal after viability. I think that crosses the line.

Actually, you can kill someone who has invaded your house.

But that has nothing to do with privacy nor murder. That would be a case of self-defense. And you STILL have to report it. You can't just say, "well, this guy invaded my house, I killed him, and I don't have to answer to anyone for what I did. It's another case of something that has to be investigated, documented, and it is possible that a prosecutor could bring charges against you for murder or manslaughter. If the invasion happens during the day, for instance, and he's killed while trying to escape, that would be a hefty strike against the alleged robbery victim. It depends on the jurisdiction, of course, as to how it's handled, but even in a night invasion your right to shoot first and ask questions later ends once the fleeing invader crosses the boundary of your property. Once the destruction of human life is involved, you effectively forfeit your right to privacy.

Whether the human being is inside or outside another human body really shouldn't make that much difference.

The whole Trayvon Martin thing ought to clearly show that just because you have a "stand your ground" law in effect, it doesn't place anyone even acting in self-defense above prosecution. Zimmermann was, like it or not, on the right side of the law. I'd describe his prosecution as politically motivated and not even trial-worthy. My opinion is that the jurors found only what anyone could have found given the laws in effect. But Zimmermann will serve a life sentence in the court of public opinion regardless of what happened in the court of law. In the world as it is today, laws protecting those who try to defend themselves don't really amount to much, and they certainly don't go very far in keeping innocent people out of the defense chair.

Last edited by AngelRho on 25 Jul 2013, 12:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

abortion. A sad necessity.

They keep medical records of abortions and I'm pretty sure there are boards that go over randomly pulled ones. Because there are laws in place to regulate abortion, the records are the equivilant of a police report. Not everyone who kills someone else is even prosecuted. The DA may look at the report and check into it and decide that it fits the parameters for justifiable homicide and not prosecute.

Also, there have been doctors prosecuted for doing abortions past the legal limit.

One more thing is that lets say you heard somebody breaking into your house and called the cops. You are on the phone at the top of the stairs and you see that he's got a gun. You don't though so you wait. The cop shows up and tells him to stop but he runs. The cop tells him again and then shoots him. In some places, because he had a gun and therefore the cop could be in fear for his life it's a good shoot and just investigated and closed. To compare that to abortion, you could be the mother, the robber is the baby, and the cop is the doctor. You go to the cop because you are in fear for your life and the cop stops the robber. Not every robber that breaks in with a gun is going to kill you, and not every unwanted pregnancy is going to cause physical harm to the mother, but as long as you stay within the boundries set up by the law, the cop can legally shoot the robber who has the gun because the robber could easily turn around and shoot him. Whether or not he would, nobody knows cause he's shot dead, but you wanted the robber out and the only way the cop could get him is to shoot.

So, would you be less opposed to legal abortion if all the records were turned in to be scrutinized? I know you are objecting on moral grounds about sanctity of life, but would you feel better if all the records were scrutinized? That way when there was a murder committed, rather than I supposed the medical equivilant of a justifiable homicide, the doctor and mother would be prosecuted? I'm not suggesting it be done, but I'm wondering if you would feel that it fulfills that law any better.

It is legal in this country to kill someone who is innocent if you truly feel in danger and you don't know they are innocent. If you could put the mother into that spot in your mind for a minute and understand that she sees the baby as a serious threat to her life, could you see using the self defense argument to justify an abortion? I'm not asking if you think it's morally right, I know you don't. I'm asking about the law now.

I see you edited your comment to include the Zimmerman case. Whats funny is I was alluding to it partly there too, but wasn't sure if I should bring it up or not. GMTA!

Yes, you bring up a good point here.
Now given this, I'm curious as to what you (and anyone else here) think of pro-life women who have had at least one child, or even have had an abortion (we can assume they have since changed their stance to pro-life in this case). Because I know a lot of cases like this exist.
I get the point about people will sometimes claim men can't fully understand it, and maybe even women who haven't been pregnant can't fully understand it. But it gets confusing then when we only look at the cases of women who have gotten pregnant, and the view is still very split. Because if going through the experience of pregnancy is supposed to clarify the issue in some dramatic way, then I would expect the view to be more unanimous there...

The thing is, it's not going to clarify it for once side or the other, because it's too personal. But it is going to be at least a bit more complete when they understand what it like to be pregnant at all - even though some people have a much, much easier time of it than others. It's actually quite common for women who are pregnant who don't want to be, to have frequent suicidal fantasies and thoughts, did you know that? In countries where abortion is illegal pregnant women who don't want the baby try to commit suicide at a rate of times 20 than others of their peer group.

I know pro lifers who once they got pregnant, realised just how horrible it was for them personally and how much they couldn't stand it, and also realised they were in no way fit or ready to raise a kid for the next 20 years and ended up having an abortion, and afterwards becoming pro choice. I also know pro choice women who have been pregnant, hated every minute of it, and were not ready to have a kid and had an abortion - and have regretted it as the worst mistake of their lives and become pro life after that because they never wanted to have to go through that again.

There are also women who don't have those really negative experiences and reactions to being pregnant in the first place, in which case it can change the viewpoint quite dramatically. I do know some who have had relatively pleasant experiences and made the decisions logically and based on feasibility, in both directions. Or those who had a good time, and their partners and them both decided they really wanted it once it was there. So many things affect it: your age, your financial status and ability, your family's support or lack of it, whether or not your partner is still around, whether or not the woman wants it, whether or not her partner wants it, how the pregnancy is for her both medically and psychologically speaking.

Her body her choice!

Given my dim view of humanity, I'd say it could be.

AngelRho, 'privacy' is just one, not the only, justification for abortion; self-defense and a plethora of other factors also come into play. As I mentioned earlier, you can call the police to evict an unwanted squatter in your house and you can call a doctor to evict an unwanted squatter in your body. 'Privacy' comes into play when the government wants to force you to have an ultrasound wand jammed up your hoo-ha before you can legally get an abortion for any reason.

Based on my own experience some things I read about abortion confuse me.

When I had mine I had to get a vaginal ultrasound before they would do it. They had to do it to accurately know how pregnant I was and if I was within their limit. They only did up to 14 weeks.

I always though Medicaid didn't pay for them but Medicaid paid for mine.