Abortion - is it wrong?

[Alceste]

It really depends. For some women, it's not a tough choice at all.

Did you notice my question?

I noticed it, but apparently misread it. I thought you meant is it an issue that is important to me. Which it is, of course, being female. It's extremely important to me personally, and to women in general that elective abortions before 12 weeks remain available without any obstruction.

For the majority of women, it is a tough choice. Even for those who would never terminate a pregnancy, there are difficult choices and sacrifices to be made in terms of career, partnerships, juggling finances, assuring the well-being of the other children who may be involved. For one woman I know, she knew she couldn't have an abortion but also knew the child had birth defects which meant she would not be able to afford to care for him, so she gave him up for adoption.

I have nothing at all against women choosing to have children as a result of an unplanned pregnancy, by the way - I am FOR choice. That includes the choice to continue a pregnancy and let chance or the will of God, or whatever, decide whether or not it eventually becomes a child. What I am against is legislating that no other choice is even possible.

 

[Quiddity]

I noticed it, but apparently misread it. I thought you meant is it an issue that is important to me. Which it is, of course, being female. It's extremely important to me personally, and to women in general that elective abortions before 12 weeks remain available without any obstruction.

For the majority of women, it is a tough choice. Even for those who would never terminate a pregnancy, there are difficult choices and sacrifices to be made in terms of career, partnerships, juggling finances, assuring the well-being of the other children who may be involved. For one woman I know, she knew she couldn't have an abortion but also knew the child had birth defects which meant she would not be able to afford to care for him, so she gave him up for adoption.

I have nothing at all against women choosing to have children as a result of an unplanned pregnancy, by the way - I am FOR choice. That includes the choice to continue a pregnancy and let chance or the will of God, or whatever, decide whether or not it eventually becomes a child. What I am against is legislating that no other choice is even possible.

Got it.

The reason itself is truly irrelevant. There is no sense in giving examples of how hard the choice would be and why, if any reason, no matter how bad will suffice.

 

[Alceste]

Got it.

The reason itself is truly irrelevant. There is no sense in giving examples of how hard the choice would be and why, if any reason, no matter how bad will suffice.

Who are you to judge whether a woman's reasons are good or bad? Isn't that the job of your God in your religion?

 

[espo35]

What I am against is legislating that no other choice is even possible.

and......

"Who are you to judge whether a woman's reasons are good or bad? Isn't that the job of your God in your religion?"

Maybe one of you "unignored" posters could point out the title of this thread for our confused friend......

 

[Songbird]

Maybe one of you "unignored" posters could point out the title of this thread for our confused friend......

No thanks. She's plenty intelligent, caring, and well-thought-out as evidenced by her clear win at debate in this thread.

 

[Quiddity]

Who are you to judge whether a woman's reasons are good or bad? Isn't that the job of your God in your religion?

Well, at the very least you are certainly aware what is a good reason without "judging".

Thanks anyways.

 

[espo35]

No thanks. She's plenty intelligent, caring, and well-thought-out as evidenced by her clear win at debate in this thread.

Would you say the "I'm right because a lot of people do it!" line of reasoning speaks more to her intelligence, caring or ability to think things out?

 

[Songbird]

Would you say the "I'm right because a lot of people do it!" line of reasoning speaks more to her intelligence, caring or ability to think things out?

I'd say people using strawman arguments contribute to her decisive debate victory here.

 

[espo35]

I'd say people using strawman arguments contribute to her decisive debate victory here.

Sorry. Using an argumentum ad populum is STILL a logical fallacy, whether you side with her or not.

Originally Posted by Alceste
Sorry, espo, but the proportion of women in the population who have elected not to continue with an unplanned pregnancy is directly relevant to my point: the women you are calling "murderers" are all around you. They are in your own family. In your workplace. In your neighbourhood. In your church. You can call women in general "murderers" all you like, but don't expect a very warm reception.

Putting those who disagree with her on "ignore" is another fallacy- argumentum ad weaksuckium.....

Speaking of strawmen-


Originally Posted by Alceste
What I am against is legislating that no other choice is even possible.
*********************************************************************************

The title of the thread has nothing to do with "legislation", does it?

 

[Sleeppy]

What's being initiated? Do you view sex as for procreation only?

Potential for offspring is being initiated. No.

When sex is contained within a marriage - which has its own prerequisites - it is the most efficient. Now people use it destructively more than they do productively.

The way that sex is widely being used is destructive and ignorant. It has given way for sexual disease to spread rampant, and families to be mostly non-existant and unfulfilling. Orphans, abuse, etc.

To say that sex shouldn't be enjoyed is like saying we shouldn't enjoy our food. However, when the better tasting food is more harm than nourishment, you sacrifice that particular food to survive. And depending on the situation it can still be enjoyed in moderation or in substitute.

Put simply.. use sex in a responsible way. If you are incapable of that, accept the consequences or avoid them if you can.

 

[Father Heathen]

As simple as this - there are those who cherish and honor life, and those who do not.

So, following your logic, one can safely assume that you don't bathe or brush your teach, since that would kill bacteria and thus "murdering life"?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Sorry. Using an argumentum ad populum is STILL a logical fallacy, whether you side with her or not.

Her point wasn't an appeal to popularity; it was pointing out that there are likely women who you know (and maybe even love) who have had abortions, so if your position is consistent, then condemning abortion condemns them as well.

Which of the women in your life are you prepared to condemn?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

When sex is contained within a marriage - which has its own prerequisites - it is the most efficient. Now people use it destructively more than they do productively.

IMO, reserving sex only for marriage is more destructive than constructive.

And if someone was to ask me to list the terms that describe ideal sex, I don't think "efficient" would be anywhere on my list.

 

[espo35]

So, following your logic, one can safely assume that you don't bathe or brush your teach, since that would kill bacteria and thus "murdering life"?

I believe "human life" is the issue.....

Logical Fallacy: Equivocation

 

[espo35]

Her point wasn't an appeal to popularity; it was pointing out that there are likely women who you know (and maybe even love) who have had abortions, so if your position is consistent, then condemning abortion condemns them as well.

Which of the women in your life are you prepared to condemn?

Sound familiar?

This fallacy can also take on an indirect approach, where the speaker is, or seems to be, addressing a single person while focusing on some relationship that individual has to larger groups or crowds.

Appeal to Authority: Argumentum ad Populum (Appeal to Numbers)

 

[espo35]

By the way, I'm in no position to "condemn" anyone or anything.

Clearly, though, I believe abortion is wrong...which is my answer to this threads' question..

 

[McBell]

By the way, I'm in no position to "condemn" anyone or anything.

Clearly, though, I believe abortion is wrong...which is my answer to this threads' question..

Do you honestly not see that you are indirectly calling anyone who has had an abortion a murderer?

 

[espo35]

Do you honestly not see that you are indirectly calling anyone who has had an abortion a murderer?

No kidding.

Look up the word condemn.

 

[Father Heathen]

I believe "human life" is the issue.....

Logical Fallacy: Equivocation

But we've already established that a fetus doesn't possess the qualities that define personhood. A zygote has more in common with an amoeba than it does with you or me.

 

[McBell]

No kidding.

Look up the word condemn.

Are you going to answer the question?