What do you think about abortion

Post Reply New Topic

I've seen topics on this forum about whether sex is a need. I always said no because you won't die without sex but a lot of people here disagreed with me.

It is a strong desire for many and for many people no sex would be a dealbreaker if you wanted to be in a relationship with them.

It's not meant to be a justification for abortion; it's meant to support the claim that it's unreasonable to expect people to be voluntarily celibate just because they don't want kids, don't want more kids, or don't want kids at that particular time. Children should not be a punishment for having sex that someone else disapproves of.

Well, since AngelRho is ok with getting less sex, we all should be. Right?

Right?

So, you are missing the point. Even though you get less sex now than before , you still do, and I doubt every since of those intercourse events resulted in a baby. So apparently, even you have sex without procreation in mind.

I myself am a virgin and have decided not to bother with it ever as it would be too much trouble. That doesn't mean other people should be denied the right to have consensual, non-procreational sex.

Well, let me just say this...
My daughter was born at a time that was very difficult financially. My girlfriend at the time (now wife) didn't think she could get pregnant due to being diagnosed PCOS and having a previous long term relationship, as well as a few shorter term relationships, in which birth control wasn't used. So given that previous strong evidence that she seemed to not be able to get pregnant, we were careless about it, and pregnancy happened.
We were basically intending to get married and probably have kids (we weren't quite sure about the kids yet), but definitely not just then. We really needed a few years to get settled to where it could be manageable, especially financially. So was us having a child a punishment for having sex too carelessly? I suppose you could see it that way if you want. Did we want to have a child just then? Absolutely not. Did it cause us an awful lot of stress to have a child then? Absolutely. Did we have an abortion? No, because that would be murder.
My situation was really as simple as that. There may be others that are a bit more complicated, but I'm guessing most cases of abortion really aren't.

In my situation I never wanted kids and still don't. My boyfriends didn't want kids. It wasn't a matter of bad timing. It was I don't want any ever.

If both me and my wife had decided we never wanted to have kids, it wouldn't change anything about what I said about my personal example above.

It would have been murder, in your opinion. Not so in mine.

An armed robber who kills a man in a home burglary is a murderer in the opinion of the slain man's wife. Not so in his own.

That's your choice.

My choice is to get it out of my body asap. I never wanted kids.

My marriage is a poor example of trying to argue the opposite. We discussed issues of intimacy among other things enough to know what we would/would not do in any given situation. Celibacy is not a concern; divorce is not an option.

And no, we are NOT talking about need. The idea that we NEED sex for anything other than procreation has already been debunked; we do just fine without. We "need" sex like a drunk "needs" a drink. Withholding sex does NOT equal "shunning and isolation."

Now, if withholding sex were used as a punishment, that would be a different story. My wife and I agreed ahead of our wedding that sex is not a weapon. That can be an ugly source of marital strife. But, again, not something we have to worry about.

She's pestering me already about another baby, incidentally. I say fine, but we need to wait a little while before we go there. I said that a couple of times before, however, and we still ended up with two kids I didn't really expect. Doesn't mean I love them any less.

I think 8 billion people should be enough proof that sex is a high need for most humans. Yes, there always have been some, that didnt have that need, thats part of our humanity and their is nothing not normal about it. But the majority of people feel sex as something necessary for living a happy life. And no, the majority of the people dont see sex related with conceiving children, because in every society where conceptiva got available, the number of children decreased. So average its sex that people want, not children in general.

From my oppinion both sides simply should seek a compromise. I understand what pro-abortion people mean with their comparisons of bacteria and so on. But goddamn, then abort as long as the fetus looks as well as an bacteria and has similar abilities to feel pain. If you want your feelings respected, then best way to show that is by respecting the feelings of other beings as well, so simply abort before a fetus receives the ability to generally feel. An bacteria comparison in relation to an 5th month fetus that shows already an genetic benefit about 3.000.000 years of evolution in comparison to an bacteria, can hardly be compared to an bacteria.

And on the opposite, abortion in early stadium should be easened, so more hospitals doing this and so on, so that people that want to abort, easily have the possibility to do so in that shortened time.

I think as long as the majority of the people simply are not able to recognize an aborted being as an humans, then there will also be much less resistance against abortion as "killing of humans". I agree on the point, that we regularly kill "minor" life all day. But a human is no minor life for me, and if I am able as non-expert to recognize something as a human, then this is because of it already being a human and no minor life anymore. By doing that, the only opposite party left, were the religious wackos, reffering about the general sacrecy of life. But because of them referring anyway about everything all the time, that wouldnt be much heard.

Appeal to majority. All red herrings here. Doesn't matter one bit. If 7 out of 8 billion people decided sex was no longer necessary except for procreation, and all else remaining equal, would you suddenly change your mind? Majorities often have been and continue to be wrong.


I want people to respect my feelings and stop destroying the lives of innocent, defenseless human beings. So I should respect the feelings of murderers? That is an absurd statement. Perhaps we could compromise and I could kill just a few of those people who seek casual abortions and/or those who perform abortion procedures.


Appeal to majority.

In this case, the majority of public opinion, and more importantly the law and the actual definition of 'murder' all agree with me.

And, AngelRho, when one is trying to talk out a compromise that will appeal to the majority of people, talking about what the majority of people think about a subject is on topic, not 'an appeal to the majority.'

it is wrong,but sadly it's a woman choice,why a woman
would choose to have abortion,I don't know.

There could be a variety of reasons. Maybe they never wanted kids, maybe they can't afford one, maybe it will ruin their life in some way (like making them have to quit school), maybe it has a serious disorder that makes it unlikely to survive (like anencephaly), or maybe the pregnancy is endangering the mother's life.

I think the "compromise" we currently have works great.

People who don't like abortion are free to not have one, and people who want/need an abortion are free to get one.

Simple.