Thread: ABORTION: Where do you stand?

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

So if no one knows you or loves you, you are worthless? What about all the homeless people out there who have been disowned by their family and who absolutely no one cares about? Should I be able to go kill them? Or what about the elderly, who have no children and living family? Should I be able to kill them?

Read my posts once more.

And about infertile couples, why can't they just adopt a child from the oceans of orphans around the world, instead of expecting yet another child to be produced, just for them?

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

So how do you justify that from a simple humane

Spoiler for unpopular opinion!:

perspective?

Spoiler for unpopular opinion!:

so what's wrong with murder.
serious question.

I say that losing that persons experiences and love memories and and other persons experiences and love for that person and everything they've done in the past is an absolute tragedy. absolutely awful.

but none of these things apply to a fetus. not one. there is nothing redeeming about a fetus except future prospects it might have. which also happen to apply to every single other sperm/egg combo we have on earth.

I don't classify abortion as murder, and by extension I do not classify fetuses as full humans.

Originally Posted by no-Name

break it down now

good thing you chose my favorite meaningless word! what makes something unnatural?
being "natural" is completely useless, as there are literally 0 (zero) unnatural things.

but they don't! they're not people, and shouldn't have been created in the first place, if they were to simply be dropped off or adopted. the mother does not want it.

I would actually argue that a child has no worth until it's alive for several months, but that's just my definition on life and how I classify humans.

I'm really not going to sit here and argue the exact meaning of the word "natural" with you. It's boring. You know what I meant, and it doesn't really matter if you disagree with me or not.

Just so I can be clear, you're opinion is that unless I want my child and intended for her to be created, she has no worth and I have the right to kill her at any point of life I choose? Does this mean that only the mother magically decides if a life is worthy of being continued? What if the father wants the child but the mother does not? Or what if neither parent decides they want the child but another family member steps in and asks to raise the child? Do they get worth then, if someone in the universe wants them?

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

Okay, so if I decide I do not want my "fetus" at 40 weeks gestation due to...let's say financial troubles, I have the right to kill it? How do you defend that from a moral, or even simply humane, standpoint?

As I said, if it simply out of choice not to raise the child, I would prefer it be early. To wait so long to finally decide not to commit to giving birth is irresponsible. However, from a legal standpoint, I don't think it should be impermissible. As for morals, they change from location to location and from time period to time period. These days, we can afford to try and salvage a sick baby or an unwanted pregnancy because of our technology and wealth, but did you know that in Roman Antiquity it was law to kill a deformed baby on the spot when it was born? Was this barbaric? Or maybe they just couldn't afford to try and support a disabled infant with the resources at their disposal?

All this to say that morals are subjective and are not set in stone for all to follow. I don't think an abortion is immoral because I don't think a fetus is a person any more than an apple is a tree. I can think of numerous circumstances where it would be appropriate to terminate a pregnancy right up to birth.

Originally Posted by Marvo

Read my posts once more.

And about infertile couples, why can't they just adopt a child from the oceans of orphans around the world, instead of expecting yet another child to be produced, just for them?

Alright, I did.

Your words..."I meant value, in the form of relations. Nobody knows the baby. The baby doesn't know anybody. Nobody else than the mother can realistically care about that baby, and if the mother does not want it, then she may have it aborted."

What I gather from this is that if no one knows you, no one realistically cares about you, and no one wants you then you have no value. There are MANY people out there in the world like that right now. Go to Africa, there are millions of orphans who have no family, no friends, no value. So, we should kill them, right?

Furthermore, it's not about an infertile couple expecting anything be done for them. It's about being selfless enough to give 10 months of your life so that an innocent child can have it's life and so that a couple who desperately wants a child can have one.

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

Do they get worth then, if someone in the universe wants them?

No more than an ipod or a car or any other material object. They still don't have any worth as a person, because they have not interacted with anybody, formed any personal connections or gained any life experience.

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

I'm really not going to sit here and argue the exact meaning of the word "natural" with you. It's boring. You know what I meant, and it doesn't really matter if you disagree with me or not.

the scary thing is that I don't. I have no idea what you meant by natural. I don't even know why you think being natural is somehow better! I'm very glad we have unnatural things such as contraception, pain-killers, and clean operating rooms.

Just so I can be clear, your opinion is that unless I want my child and intended for her to be created, she has no worth and I have the right to kill her at any point of life I choose? Does this mean that only the mother magically decides if a life is worthy of being continued?

close, but not quite.

What if the father wants the child but the mother does not?

I would hope you wouldn't be forced to carry a child you do not want for 9 months just because the father does. that's actually very amoral, in my view.

it's been said before in the thread. abortion sucks! no one wants it.
but there are no better feasible options.

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

I don't have to. You gave birth to a 20-week-old fetus that has no chance of surviving.

It certainly does have a chance of surviving! As I said, not a large chance, but a chance all the same. So how do you justify not giving that "fetus" it's chance at life?

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

So how do you justify not giving that "fetus" it's chance at life?

Why bother? There are enough of us. To use Xei's example, how do you justify me not knocking up a girl every weekend to give a new baby a chance at life?

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

Alright, I did.

Your words..."I meant value, in the form of relations. Nobody knows the baby. The baby doesn't know anybody. Nobody else than the mother can realistically care about that baby, and if the mother does not want it, then she may have it aborted."

What I gather from this is that if no one knows you, no one realistically cares about you, and no one wants you then you have no value. There are MANY people out there in the world like that right now. Go to Africa, there are millions of orphans who have no family, no friends, no value. So, we should kill them, right?

Furthermore, it's not about an infertile couple expecting anything be done for them. It's about being selfless enough to give 10 months of your life so that an innocent child can have it's life and so that a couple who desperately wants a child can have one.

This world is currently being destroyed by overpopulation. You're arguably a bad person, if you produce children. Additionally, another person can't just expect a woman to bear a child and give birth to it, simply because they would like it. Arguably, a person could demand to want a baby from a woman, for every egg that could potentially be a baby. There's only a very subtle difference between an egg and a fertilised egg.

Since your memory does not extend beyond 2 posts, here is the part that explains my position on murder:

I think that murder is bad, if the victim has any value to other people and if the victim itself cares about its own life in a conscious, human manner.

edit: too many womans in my post

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

Furthermore, it's not about an infertile couple expecting anything be done for them. It's about being selfless enough to give 10 months of your life so that an innocent child can have it's life and so that a couple who desperately wants a child can have one.

I'm going to have to interject here and point out it's not just 10 months they're giving up. I pointed out a couple reasons but (admittedly, it wasn't worded quite clearly) and there are plenty of others. Those 10 months are nothing in the grand scheme of things. =/

No strong opinion either way really. On one hand, earth is already overpopulated. On the other hand what if it were me?

No strong opinion.

Originally Posted by no-Name

the scary thing is that I don't. I have no idea what you meant by natural. I don't even know why you think being natural is somehow better! I'm very glad we have unnatural things such as contraception, pain-killers, and clean operating rooms.

close, but not quite.

I would hope you wouldn't be forced to carry a child you do not want for 9 months just because the father does. that's actually very amoral, in my view.

it's been said before in the thread. abortion sucks! no one wants it.
but there are no better feasible options.

You've got alot of opinons, but I don't see you explaining them. And since you insist on playing stupid word games...by "natural" I mean no human force has knowingly altered it. In other words, if a fetus dies while in their mother's womb, and no one purposefully caused it, that is a tragedy but it's just the way life goes. How does this have anything to do with sterile hospital rooms?

And if I was "close but not quite", please explain in a better way so that I can understand fully your views on the subject.

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

It certainly does have a chance of surviving! As I said, not a large chance, but a chance all the same. So how do you justify not giving that "fetus" it's chance at life?

Under what obligation do I have to give it a chance?

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

You've got alot of opinons, but I don't see you explaining them. And since you insist on playing stupid word games...by "natural" I mean no human force has knowingly altered it. In other words, if a fetus dies while in their mother's womb, and no one purposefully caused it, that is a tragedy but it's just the way life goes. How does this have anything to do with sterile hospital rooms?

And if I was "close but not quite", please explain in a better way so that I can understand fully your views on the subject.

>Implying human intervention is only destructive.

Originally Posted by Marvo

This world is currently being destroyed by overpopulation. You're arguably a bad person, if you produce children. Additionally, another person can't just expect a woman to bear a child and give birth to it, simply because they would like it. Arguably, a person could demand to want a baby from a woman, for every egg that could potentially be a woman. There's only a very subtle difference between an egg and a fertilised egg.

Since your memory does not extend beyond 2 posts, here is the part that explains my position on murder:

Oh! Okay, it all makes sense now. If a victim cares about its own life in a concious, human manner! Okay, so how about mentally retarded people, who have no family who wants to care for them and no friends who value them, and who also are not mentally advanced enough to understand that they want their own lives? Or what about elderly people with dementia, who don't have family or friends and who can't even remember their own names? What about all of the people who have no one, and who are depressed and hate their lives? Should we kill all of those people?

Also, arguably, people could want alot of fucking things. That is completely irrelevant. Furthermore, I DO expect a woman to carry a child a give birth to it simply because a person wants it. Just like I do expect that if you walk down the street and see a homeless person dying in the middle of the street you will help them. I don't care if your life is inconvienced, I don't care if you don't WANT to do it. There are some things people should do, simply because it is right.

I have a daughter and I'm pro life. However, I believe abortion facilities are necessary, but only under extreme circumstances. Not wanting a baby due to the inability to support a baby is not an extreme circumstance to me. Without abortion clinics many will turn to alternative life threating ways to abort a fetus and many will be unsuccessful, terminating not only the fetus but their life as well. So it's very necessary to have them. Just imo.

Originally Posted by GavinGill

I'm going to have to interject here and point out it's not just 10 months they're giving up. I pointed out a couple reasons but (admittedly, it wasn't worded quite clearly) and there are plenty of others. Those 10 months are nothing in the grand scheme of things. =/

Sorry! There are alot of people I'm trying to respond to, I'll get to you now.

I absolutely agree that there are reprecussions to having a child that extend beyond that 10 months of pregnancy, even if you choose to give it up for adoption. No argument here. But you are saving someone's life by not having an abortion, so why is it not worth it? If we all had the mindset of "I'm most important and I'm not going to possibly negatively impact MY life for you", we would not have a military. We would not have police, or fire fighters. We would actually not be here at all, because no one would have had children (trust me, raising kids certainly can have some negative reprecussions). So, maybe women should stop thinking solely about themselves and what THEY want.

I'm female, don't have kids, pro-choice. A woman should have the freedom to choose what she wants to do with her body, and no one else should make that decision for her, least of all the government.

I honestly think people should be able to see beyond whether they would personally get one/personal choice in general, and think more about the basic right a woman should have - what to do with HER body (not yours).

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

Under what obligation do I have to give it a chance?

Well, most people that I've met have the opinion that we should not just kill humans because they don't have a great chance at life. But if that's not your opinion, I'm interested in knowing why.

Originally Posted by Ne-yo

I have a daughter and I'm pro life. However, I believe abortion facilities are necessary, but only under extreme circumstances. Not wanting a baby due to the inability to support a baby is not an extreme circumstance to me. Without abortion clinics many will turn to alternative life threating ways to abort a fetus and many will be unsuccessful, terminating not only the fetus but their life as well. So it's very necessary to have them. Just imo.

I agree that because we have legalized abortion, it's going to be very hard to make it illegal without tremendous loss of life. It's a sad situation.

Originally Posted by Xox

I'm female, don't have kids, pro-choice. A woman should have the freedom to choose what she wants to do with her body, and no one else should make that decision for her, least of all the government.

I honestly think people should be able to see beyond whether they would personally get one/personal choice in general, and think more about the basic right a woman should have - what to do with HER body (not yours).

So, a fetus is MY body, until it exits my vagina? I pose to you the same question I've been asking everyone else...should I be able to kill my fetus at 40 weeks of life as long as it is still within my body?

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

Also, arguably, people could want alot of fucking things. That is completely irrelevant. Furthermore, I DO expect a woman to carry a child a give birth to it simply because a person wants it. Just like I do expect that if you walk down the street and see a homeless person dying in the middle of the street you will help them. I don't care if your life is inconvienced, I don't care if you don't WANT to do it. There are some things people should do, simply because it is right.

hoo boy this thread is moving fast

FORCING another human to do something as strenuous and debilitating as giving birth is pretty high on my list of things to be taken as seriously bad. like, objectively bad. I would compare it to rape, in some ways.

I'm outa here

Originally Posted by A Roxxor

>Implying human intervention is only destructive.

Blah blah. Word games. I'm so not taking the bait. If you have anything intelligent to say about the actual discussion, please speak up. Otherwise, STFU.