PRO or ANTI Abortion.

[SAVAGE]

I am a little bit of both. I do not believe that abortion should be a form of birth control. I believe that the potential life once conceived should be allowed to develop.

I believe that life begins the moment a person or foetus takes in oxygen and begins to feed and grow.

I am pro abortion on issues like pregnacy as a result of incest or rape.

I think that there needs to be a balance on the issue, as there are many variations to this argument.

I will present both sides (I dont neccesarily agree with all points from both sides, but I will try to present them in an unbiased fashion).


http://www.choicematters.org/articles/procon.html

So whats your take

[recycledwhitetrash]

I do not consider it a human until it has developed a nervouse system because evertyhting that we attribute (or commonl associate) to being human is a product of your nervouse system.

[Nameless]

I consider somebody a human once they have grown to achieve consciousness. I'm not actually sure WHEN that is (hey, I know some brainwashed Christians that technically shouldn't count as people. :P), but in my opinion abortion is okay before that point and murder afterwards.

[Jillamanda]

I'm pro abortion, mainly because I believe a woman should make the decisions about her own body. However, I agree it isn't a form of birth control. There's no excuse for unwanted pregnancies these days - except in cases of unconsenting sex, as previously mentioned.

I've been meaning to get to this thread before now, it's a bit difficult when we have the UN on our backs. :wink:

[Nanashi]

I'm 100% pro-choice. In all cases.

[Fallen Hero]

Always the woman's choice, but aborting at 8 months is just a little long of a wait.

[disciple]

So whats your take[/quote]


I know some adults who are a criminal waste of oxygen and they will never develop a consciousness. As to this issue, I have no right to tell another individual what to do with their body; except for those that annoy the hell out of me, I feel perfectly at ease telling them to copulate elsewhere.

[Baron Von Fandango]

Im what you might consider pro choice but anti abortion. If I were a woman I don't think I could go through with it but I believe in a woman's right to choose. Also I think the father should have some say in the matter but I dont see how you can put that into law.

[mapanggulo]

Abortion as birthcontrol is stupidity IMO, so for those that arent smart enough to wrap that soldier, swallow that pill or not put the peg in the hole should be spaded/neutered on the spot :twisted:

Abortion as a choice for rape, confirmed birith defects or life threatening situation for the mother should be left as a choice for the said bearer.

Might be slightly off topic but, what gets me is that Anti-abortion crowd has some seriously violent members out there who will go as far as murder...yet they are the ones that scream that abortion is murder.

[GeoffBoulton]

As a method of birth control - NO WAY!

Should be the woman's choice - ABSOLUTELY! (As a bloke I'm never going to find myself in the position of needing one)

Up to what stage of pregnancy - I think the development of a nervous system argument sounds about right.

Theists say that life begins at the moment of conception, when the egg is fertilised
It is estimated that 50% of fertilised eggs spontaneously abort due to natural causes, certainly 10% of confirmed pregnancies end this way.
Isn't this God's will?
Who said God is anti-abortion?

[Alice Shade]

I think I`m a mild pro.

Mild, because I think that abortion should be performed only in critical circumstances.

First of all, there are calendars and condoms and birth pills, no need to get the things as far as when abortion is needed.

Second - do you guys know, what exactly IS abortion? It`s not just baby pulled out and umbilical cut. No. Surgeon inserts whole hand in there (before any of you guys make a joke about fisting... Try jamming something half that thick up your rear. It`s NOT pleasant.), opens cervix (MAJOR ough), and scrapes out all placenta with a tool, which looks like curved spatula (And before you ask, NO, I didn`t had THAT done. I used to be a medic in army. That was in textbook, though I`ll be damned, if I`ll explain, why.). Basically, the insides of uterus are turned into bleeding abrasion.

Anyway, if I grossed someone out with explanation, sorry about that. The salt is that this operation is extremely rude intervention in female`s body, and should be committed only when there is no other way.

There`s a good chance, that abortion will eliminate the childbearing ability as well, especially on late stages (not to mention possible death from botched abortion). So, once again - only in case, when mother is NOT able to sustain child long enough to give birth, or when child is a result of crime. Otherwise... There`s always orphanage.

[emperor_bob]

Personally I am against abortion. I believe adoption is the better option for unwanted pregnancies.

I'm against any law that restricts a woman's right to make that very difficult and personal choice.

The idea that abortion is murder has some serious implications. If abortion is murder, that would mean that anything that the mother did that was not in the best interest of the fetus would also be criminal. Not eating right would be neglect. Going snow boarding would be reckless endangerment. Etc...

As far as when does a fetus become a separate life due all the protections and rights accorded by law goes, that is simply the moment it survives outside of the womb. Up until that moment, it is an integral part of the host mother's anatomy.

[SirRuben]

Abortion is fine by me. The faetus is not aware of anything, it can not even be classified as a human in my oppinion. So i don't have a problem with abortions, not even as birth control..

[GeoffBoulton]

Looking at the argument from a theist/atheist point of view:

Approximately 10% of confirmed pregnancies end in spontaneous abortion. This is usually because of some abnormality in the faetus but can also be because of illness or other conditions in the mother.

Since these abortions are 'naturally' ocurring they must be 'part of God's plan'.

How does this support the idea that God is anti-abortion if he/she is causing millions of such abortions every year?

[acachinero]

Mild pro-choice.

But mostly I think it's an insanely complex decision: Is it really only the woman's body if another person made 50% of the contribution to the foetus?

[Alice Shade]

It`s NOT 50% contribution.

By all accounts, fetus is a part of mother`s body, until the umbilical is cut, OR placenta extracted from uterus.

As for supposed 50% (blah, sure) male contribution - it`s, in fact, somewhere around 0.1%-0.05% of net weight/expenditure on fetus. Composed of disposable "goods", in any case.

Oh, and before someone says something, GENETIC input is still 0.1%-0.05%, as absolute majority of DNK strands would be connected out of mother`s gene material. Input DNK would be used only as a pattern.

[acachinero]

It`s NOT 50% contribution.

By all accounts, fetus is a part of mother`s body, until the umbilical is cut, OR placenta extracted from uterus.

As for supposed 50% (blah, sure) male contribution - it`s, in fact, somewhere around 0.1%-0.05% of net weight/expenditure on fetus. Composed of disposable "goods", in any case.

Oh, and before someone says something, GENETIC input is still 0.1%-0.05%, as absolute majority of DNK strands would be connected out of mother`s gene material. Input DNK would be used only as a pattern.

Despite this, there is a reasonable amount of room for there being input from the male - it is partly his genetic material as well, after all, and the resulting possible-child is under his legal jurisdiction as well.

In any case, ignoring the input of the biological father would be akin to ignoring shareholders in a company. Or something like that.

I don't know, I honestly don't get fired up a lot about this issue mainly because I don't know that much and I don't like talking about that which I do not know of.

DNK is russian/ukranian for DNA, right? :)

[punkinside]

To me its entirely the woman's decision. Her body, her choice. Men, although they did have something to do with it, will never experience childbearing or childbirth as a woman so they have absolutely NO say. Nonetheless, I think women should be more educated as to how exactly an abortion is performed, might gross a few candidates out.

As for so-called pro-lifers, here's a coupla quotes from george carlin:



Conservatives will do anything to save a fetus but if it grows up to be a doctor they just might have to kill it?


Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers!

[Fallen Hero]

The genetic material is half from the man. Do not downplay that. :wink:

[Alice Shade]

Correction.

Half of genetic PATTERN.

Material is all from mother, who has to scarf down twin meals while nuseated, to build all that.

[Fallen Hero]

Sperm is half the DNA, the Egg the other. It takes a man and a woman to have a baby, shut up with your femminist crap. You know what I meant.

[Alice Shade]

DNA PATTERN.

Which could be just as easily borrowed from another girl.

Of course, that limits us only to female progeny, but who needs you guys, anyways? ^_^

[SirRuben]

This makes me think.. No wonder the first cloned animal was a sheep..

[Alice Shade]

Um-hum.

Manageable enough and still high enough on evolution scale.

Cloning a lioness would be a bit tougher, no?

[AaronD]

i believe firmly in anti abortion. Many a teen today will abort their baby because of their boyfriend ect. or they cant take care of it. put it up for adobtion! naw, i could never adopt my baby. but you could kill it!?
that baby could be the next great baseball player, or he could make the cure to cancer, or become the new shakespear. people just dont appreciate the concept of life, giving it or taking it away.

So you don't believe that a woman has a right to choose? What if she has been raped, and could not stand to see a token of her worst memory coming out of her, did not want to have the child of a rapist or to let it into society... What if she doesn't have the money to support it, and would not be able to give her own kid away without severe depression or maybe suicide. And a collection of a couple cells without nerve endings is no more a person than a plastic doll. Only a truly naive person (this includes opposers that use religion as their reason) would not grant a woman the right to choose what is right for herself, for her well being, etc.

[Can Not]

I've always thought that a councel of doctors should make the decision.

Basicly, if you're born with a mentally retarded baby, it will be aborted to save on insurance.

If you want an abortion simply because you are a slut, you don't get an abortion.

Unhealthy babies should be aborted. Either that, or the parents must be required to pay extra insurance for going against artificial selection.

Parents who can't acquire a baby due to docters not approving of their baby should be offered a trip to the orphanages.

Use that for 100 years and we'll probably be better off in the long run.

[AaronD]

I've always thought that a councel of doctors should make the decision.

Basicly, if you're born with a mentally retarded baby, it will be aborted to save on insurance.

If you want an abortion simply because you are a slut, you don't get an abortion.

Unhealthy babies should be aborted. Either that, or the parents must be required to pay extra insurance for going against artificial selection.

Parents who can't acquire a baby due to docters not approving of their baby should be offered a trip to the orphanages.

Use that for 100 years and we'll probably be better off in the long run.

Abortions happen long before anything resembles a baby, and a baby is not the same as a fetus. Not even close. Any doctors being given the power to take somebody else's baby away is evil and unnecessary.

[linkskywalker]

I'm unique in a way. I don't believe in god...at least not in any conventional sense. However I'd say I'm against abortion once cognitive functions become active in the most absolute sense. Once the baby starts to think, it should legally be a person. I understand pregnancy is a horrible ordeal, please don't think me unsympathetic to a woman's plight. Every time I think of my own wife-to-be dealing with the months of suffering that accompany the birth of a child, I feel sick inside.

However, the life of one human being outweighs the comfort of any number of people.

BEFORE cognitive thought begins, it's more of a moral choice I think. Personally, I don't believe it's right to have an abortion ever. However, I don't see how I could ethically justify a law that forbade the expulsion of unthinking matter.

That's my two cents.

[Alice Shade]

Arguably, cognitive thought process starts well after birth, you know.

[Jillamanda]

Second - do you guys know, what exactly IS abortion? It`s not just baby pulled out and umbilical cut. No. Surgeon inserts whole hand in there (before any of you guys make a joke about fisting... Try jamming something half that thick up your rear. It`s NOT pleasant.), opens cervix (MAJOR ough), and scrapes out all placenta with a tool, which looks like curved spatula (And before you ask, NO, I didn`t had THAT done. I used to be a medic in army. That was in textbook, though I`ll be damned, if I`ll explain, why.). Basically, the insides of uterus are turned into bleeding abrasion.

You ought to try having a baby!!!

I'm pro choice. If a woman wants an abortion, she should have one. I draw the line at abortion being used as a means of contraceptive, but if a woman doesn't want to spend nine months carrying a baby she doesn't want - then that's good enough reason as far as I'm concerned.

[Alice Shade]

Before it`s too late, that is.

Abortion has own margins of error, as everyone knows, so... It should be decided very carefully, when to do what.

[linkskywalker]

Arguably, cognitive thought process starts well after birth, you know.

cognitive functions, not thought process. Heartbeat, breath, etcetera are all caused by activity in the brain.

[AaronD]

Abortion has own margins of error, as everyone knows

So does childbirth.

[Alice Shade]

Uh, no.

All the muscle activity is controlled by spine (heartbeat, lung movement, stomach movement, etc.).

Brain, as such, starts it`s activity over the course of first year of life, or so.

[linkskywalker]

Could you back that up? I find it very hard to believe that a baby who interacts with its environment has no cognitive function.

[Alice Shade]

Check medical sources.

Instinctual != Cognitive (which develops during first year or so)


The concept of cognitive thinking apriori expects some factual base of reasoning to stem all the conclusions from. Obviously, embryo can not gather relevant updated information on surrounding world, so it only possesses instincts upon birth (BIOS, if you`d like computer analogy), and gains factual base over the course of life via trial&error process.

[linkskywalker]

Somebody intelligent? On the internet? How very unique.

What you say checks out. It could be debated philosophically, but scientifically speaking it's sound.

I wont needlessly prolong this. You're clearly much more educated on this topic than I am and have given me a lot to think about. My personal ethic has always been that abortion is wrong, and so it shall remain. However, personal ethics are just that--personal. Unless there is a sufficient amount of uncertainty as to the humanity of a thing, then the government has no right making laws about its destruction.

I will consider all of this, and if I come to a satisfactory conclusion I may return to continue this discussion.

~LS

[Alice Shade]

No need to hurry conclusions.

If you deem abortion wrong from moral side, there`s simply no debate - morals are personal choices of everyone.

My argument was only to refute false reasoning behind "childkilling", which is often used by religious fundamentalists to veto the really needed abortions. (As in, if it`s pretty certain, that nor mother nor child will survive the birthing process, for example. I find "moral high" of religious types very callous here - child is dead anyways, but why mother should be sacrificed in the name of petty moral?)

[linkskywalker]

Kantian ethics versus utilitarian. It's classic. My leanings are toward utilitarianism in general, but I don't think it's right to quantify everything.

To me, the issue of abortion revolves around weather it is a moral choice, or if it's something that needs to be banned. Like the difference between, say, smoking, and murder. Both would be considered ethically wrong, but one is legal and one is not.

My question is always, which should abortion be?

I've yet to find a satisfactory answer for myself.

[Alice Shade]

Ah. Well, feel free to.

Though, to be honest, smoking and murder are not exactly polar opposites in negativity. Having done both, I have to conclude, that all the "moral" decisions are entirely up to one making such decision. He/she is ultimately the first and last instance for such guidance.

Sounds corny, but go where your heart leads you. ^_^

[Fallen Hero]

Check medical sources.

Instinctual != Cognitive (which develops during first year or so)


The concept of cognitive thinking apriori expects some factual base of reasoning to stem all the conclusions from. Obviously, embryo can not gather relevant updated information on surrounding world, so it only possesses instincts upon birth (BIOS, if you`d like computer analogy), and gains factual base over the course of life via trial&error process.

Now to take a religious side here:

A baby could have it's information on the world based on previous life(s).

[Alice Shade]

Scientific answer:

Considering, that there was no confirmed reoccuring "previous life memories" cases, and all, who claimed it, were discovered to be sharlatans, we can make an educated guess, that any baby is very unlikely to have previous life memories.

Moreso, reincarnation argument is not valid for christians, seeing as they go to heaven or hell, when they die, per their beliefs.

[Fallen Hero]

Scientific answer:

Considering, that there was no confirmed reoccuring "previous life memories" cases, and all, who claimed it, were discovered to be sharlatans, we can make an educated guess, that any baby is very unlikely to have previous life memories.

Moreso, reincarnation argument is not valid for christians, seeing as they go to heaven or hell, when they die, per their beliefs.

I never was taking the side of a christians but of some other religions. With the lack of alternative religion posters, as most of them do not care what our beliefs are, I thought I would try and post another perspective.

[Alice Shade]

Heh...

Well, it`s true, but to be honest, it seems that all the other religions recognise our right to believe, know and delude ourselves in whatever way we want... So it`s not like they need defending their point.