Abortion or No abortion. What's right and what's moral, etc

[Altfish]

I am against abortion in most cases because in most cases precation/protection was thrown out the window for pleasure. They knew what would happen, they should take responsibility for their choices.

Oh dear.
It is all the woman's fault, she shouldn't have secummed to the male advances. Trouble is, in most cases the man is now nowhere to be seen. Consequently for one night of love the woman has her whole life changed. Have you ever made a mistake? I know I have ... many.

btw I am against abortion too but I have more exceptions than you. The example you quote is a no-brainer, but other exceptions require thought, compassion and empathy.

 

[Subduction Zone]

My main issue with my example is more that I haven't thought it through, don't have a view on what 'late-stage' means, or how it could be structured in a way that is 'fair' to exceptional circumstances, amongst other details.

Mostly I don't think they're a meaningful percentage of cases, and do think they're used for political purposes.

But in answering about morality, and how my morals 'should' effect others, I'm thinking it's in that realm, to some degree. A view I know not all would share, but there it is.

I would classify "late term" as after viability. Twenty weeks is pushing it, and by that time 98.7% of all abortions have occurred. Women at that stage are usually ones that wanted to have a baby but something serious happened:
Mother Jones Magazine

 

[SomeRandom]

I am against abortion in most cases because in most cases precation/protection was thrown out the window for pleasure. They knew what would happen, they should take responsibility for their choices.

However in cases of rape, incest, child molestation, etc I have no problem with abortion.

Here's an example....

A child was raped and became pregnant by unwanted force, not choice, something that will haunt her for the rest of here life, should she again be forced to birth that child?

I say no.

Your thoughts.....
Is it right or wrong to force her to birth the child?
Is it moral or not moral to force her to birth the child?

Debate or discuss, I am simply seeking what others think and why.

PS. I put this in this forum because it kinda falls under politics, religion and non-religious plus could be debated or discussed.

I prefer ethics to morals.
Morals I find to be far too rigid and fails to take into account nuance. That’s just my opinion though

To me, I don’t think abortion is an ideal solution to anything, right? Like I don’t like that abortion happens.

However, on the whole, it seems to bare better overall outcomes if abortion is legal and is easily accessible.
We have already seen the results of the overturning of R v W in the US just recently even. And funnily enough a lot of them were literally predicted by pro choice advocates. Strange that
For example there was a woman who was forced to carry a literally dead fetus for 2 weeks because the medical procedure to remove the dead tissue is literally the same one as abortion.
The rather infamous example of the 10 year old child literally having to travel across states to obtain a medically necessary abortion.
Both examples have long been used as hypothetical instances of why it’s a bad idea to legislate abortion. Only they are now a reality and a reality in one of the richest first world country in the world. Disgraceful, if you ask me.
As to is it immoral to force a child to carry to term.
I would definitely consider it unethical not to mention literally dangerous.

 

[SomeRandom]

I would classify "late term" as after viability. Twenty weeks is pushing it, and by that time 98.7% of all abortions have occurred. Women at that stage are usually ones that wanted to have a baby but something serious happened:
Mother Jones Magazine

My state allows legal abortion on demand up to 22 weeks. Which is probably the most “easy going” out of all the states on Australian abortion laws, truth be told
I’m honestly now a little curious of the stats in my state regarding abortion.
I’m sure late term would still be rather low, obviously. But I guess I’m still a bit taken aback at just how “liberal” our abortion laws are today.
(For context before 2018, abortion was federally banned in Australia, with exceptions for rape, incest and medical necessity, afaik.)

In saying that, I think polls have consistently shown the majority have wanted abortion to be legal for years. Regardless of political affiliation.
So maybe I shouldn’t be too surprised

 

[Estro Felino]

Several posters have also commented on the unreliability of contraception, even when used responsibly. There are also the issues of contraceptive availability and reproductive education. Contraceptives are not so universally available and affordable as you seem to think, and many people are abysmally ignorant of their usage.

We need to distinguish between a woman who gets pregnant despite taking the pill regularly (very rare, but it happens) and a woman (who refuses to use contraception) getting pregnant after engaging in restless sexual activities.
The first deserves comprehension, if she has an abortion. The second woman...well...not really.

 

[ChristineM]

Women are expected to have a responsible and aware sex life with the numerous contraception methods.

So should men be responsible

 

[Estro Felino]

So should men be responsible

So should them. But the man doesn't have a say in that decision.

 

[SomeRandom]

We need to distinguish between a woman who gets pregnant despite taking the pill regularly (very rare, but it happens) and a woman (who refuses to use contraception) getting pregnant after engaging in restless sexual activities.
The first deserves comprehension, if she has an abortion. The second woman...well...not really.

But what if the woman in question is allergic to the pill? What if she’s on other medication and can’t take the pill due to adverse reactions?
And condoms fail.
So surely we should afford the same compassion?

I will agree that anyone having sex should always be responsible and utilise birth control. Ideally.
But we do not live in an ideal world.

For instance teens have sex and they’re not exactly known for their impulse control.
Surely one can show compassion to a teen who impulsively had unprotected sex?

 

[ChristineM]

So should them. But the man doesn't have a say in that decision.

He has a say on dipping his wick. He should therefore be at least partially responsible.

 

[ChristineM]

I am against abortion in most cases because in most cases precation/protection was thrown out the window for pleasure. They knew what would happen, they should take responsibility for their choices.

However in cases of rape, incest, child molestation, etc I have no problem with abortion.

Here's an example....

A child was raped and became pregnant by unwanted force, not choice, something that will haunt her for the rest of here life, should she again be forced to birth that child?

I say no.

Your thoughts.....
Is it right or wrong to force her to birth the child?
Is it moral or not moral to force her to birth the child?

Debate or discuss, I am simply seeking what others think and why.

PS. I put this in this forum because it kinda falls under politics, religion and non-religious plus could be debated or discussed.

Ultimately it is the woman's body not yours

 

[Subduction Zone]

My state allows legal abortion on demand up to 22 weeks. Which is probably the most “easy going” out of all the states on Australian abortion laws, truth be told
I’m honestly now a little curious of the stats in my state regarding abortion.
I’m sure late term would still be rather low, obviously. But I guess I’m still a bit taken aback at just how “liberal” our abortion laws are today.
(For context before 2018, abortion was federally banned in Australia, with exceptions for rape, incest and medical necessity, afaik.)

In saying that, I think polls have consistently shown the majority have wanted abortion to be legal for years. Regardless of political affiliation.
So maybe I shouldn’t be too surprised

I can accept those terms. As long as people don't abuse them. And here the percentage that think abortions should be legal is probably very similar. Over 60% are in favor of abortion with little to no restrictions. Mid term elections are coming up. Usually the party that won the presidency loses a few seats in Congress. But that may be reversed this time around.

 

[Valjean]

We need to distinguish between a woman who gets pregnant despite taking the pill regularly (very rare, but it happens) and a woman (who refuses to use contraception) getting pregnant after engaging in restless sexual activities.
The first deserves comprehension, if she has an abortion. The second woman...well...not really.

People are irresponsible and impulsive. That's just human nature, and when sexual urges are involved all bets are off. The sexual urge can be overwhelming. Impulsive liaisons are going to happen.
Luckily, the untoward effects of these can easily be eliminated, but for the vindictiveness of those morally outraged by this, particular situation.

 

[Valjean]

Ultimately it is the woman's body not yours

But the anti-abortionist position is that the fœtus is not part of the woman's body, but a separate being temporarily dependent on her, with its own right to life.
Arguments hinging on a woman's bodily integrity are lost on those arguing fœtal rights. They're countering a position the opposition isn't arguing.

 

[ChristineM]

But the anti-abortionist position is that the fœtus is not part of the woman's body, but a separate being temporarily dependent on her, with its own right to life.
Arguments hinging on a woman's bodily integrity are lost on those arguing fœtal rights. They're countering a position the opposition isn't arguing.

The fetus is created from a fertalised egg created from the woman's body. Ever atom of it's existence contains something of the woman and it is a parasite feeding off the womans body.

And legally the fetus has no rights. It is not human until born.

Their view is change the law to agree with me and screw the womans rights and future life

 

[Estro Felino]

People are irresponsible and impulsive. That's just human nature, and when sexual urges are involved all bets are off. The sexual urge can be overwhelming. Impulsive liaisons are going to happen.
Luckily, the untoward effects of these can easily be eliminated, but for the vindictiveness of those morally outraged by this, particular situation.

In a country where such procedures are paid for by the State, the State has the right to be morally outraged whenever the choices imply more euros to spend.
And by the way, in my country statistics say that most abortions are performed on foreign women. Non-citizens. Which signifies that women are responsible and use contraception.

 

[Estro Felino]

He has a say on dipping his wick. He should therefore be at least partially responsible.

Morally? Yes.
Juridically? No. He cannot impose a woman to have an abortion. Nor he can impose her to keep the baby.

 

[Erebus]

But the anti-abortionist position is that the fœtus is not part of the woman's body, but a separate being temporarily dependent on her, with its own right to life.
Arguments hinging on a woman's bodily integrity are lost on those arguing fœtal rights. They're countering a position the opposition isn't arguing.

Yep. In my opinion, this is probably the strongest argument the anti-abortion crowd have and I honestly do have a little bit of sympathy for it.

Now here's why I'm still pro-choice anyway:

Firstly, I don't buy the "life begins at conception" argument. What you initially have is a bundle of cells that's no more a human being (let alone a person) than somebody's lung is. In other words, it really is a part of the woman's body at that time. I do think though that at some point during pregnancy, you can make the argument that the decision to abort isn't purely about a woman's body anymore.

So that raises the question: To what extent are we obligated to use our bodies to sustain the life of another?

I'm a man so I'll never face the prospect of being pregnant (not without something going seriously wrong with my biology!) but there are other ways I could use my body to sustain the life of another. For example, should I be required by law to give blood? Should I be required to give bone marrow? How about a kidney? A part of my liver?

I seriously doubt that anti-abortionists would argue in favour of mandatory kidney donations from living people. It would be unreasonable to expect somebody to give up their bodily autonomy in order to save the life of somebody else.

Yet, that's what's being demanded of women when abortion is made illegal. Carrying a child to term causes permanent changes to a woman's body and can even be life threatening.

I can't support forcing women into that situation any more than I can support mandatory kidney donations.

 

[PureX]

I am against abortion in most cases because in most cases precation/protection was thrown out the window for pleasure. They knew what would happen, they should take responsibility for their choices.

However in cases of rape, incest, child molestation, etc I have no problem with abortion.

Here's an example....

A child was raped and became pregnant by unwanted force, not choice, something that will haunt her for the rest of here life, should she again be forced to birth that child?

I say no.

Your thoughts.....
Is it right or wrong to force her to birth the child?
Is it moral or not moral to force her to birth the child?

Debate or discuss, I am simply seeking what others think and why.

PS. I put this in this forum because it kinda falls under politics, religion and non-religious plus could be debated or discussed.

The problem with blaming people for getting pregnant is that you can't know it to be the case. You just think you know. So your 'pregnancy as punishment' theme is a conviction without a trial. Not to mention that it makes the unwanted fetus even more unwanted. And potentially at risk for abuse.

We really need to stop looking at this as a means of 'punishing those hussies' and start looking at it as a health and we'll being issue.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

I am against abortion in most cases because in most cases precation/protection was thrown out the window for pleasure. They knew what would happen, they should take responsibility for their choices.

A few things to consider:

-Sex is a powerful biological urge. Yes, it's an urge that can be controlled, but the reproductive urge is a powerful one that can drive reason and responsibility out the window.

-Societal views on sex concerning men and women are unequal. Men are culturally encouraged to have sex whereas women are shamed for it. Consider the difference between the labels "player" and "sl*t." So women are left in this extremely unfair situation where they are shamed for being sexual creatures while also having men who will pressure them to have sex.

-Being a single mother is extremely difficult, not just financially, emotionally, and physically, but there is a stigma to being a single mom. Not just based on the above social stigma of women being sexual, but there is this political issue of single moms being used as a scapegoat for ignoring practical (though expensive) methods to reducing poverty and crime. (This is usually from the conservative branch of the American government.)

 

[wellwisher]

The problem with blaming people for getting pregnant is that you can't know it to be the case. You just think you know. So your 'pregnancy as punishment' theme is a conviction without a trial. Not to mention that it makes the unwanted fetus even more unwanted. And potentially at risk for abuse.

We really need to stop looking at this as a means of 'punishing those hussies' and start looking at it as a health and we'll being issue.

Say I tell you not put you hand in the fire or you will get burnt. You hear my warning, by you ignore the warning and burn yourself. It is not my fault for telling you how to avoid danger. My warning you may have hurt your ego by appearing to limit you choices. So you ignored the warning and suffer the consequences. You cannot blame me or nature for your choice to ignore natural cause and affect.

The Left has made it their quest to teach little children sex education, reproduction and birth control. They start young and have birth control pills in the shape of cartoon characters. I cannot see how anyone, who was supportive of that, and who lived through these lessons, can just ignore what was taught. Instead they stick their hand in the fire and blame everyone else. I am not sure if pandering to irrationality is in their best long term interest. There is tough love with the hope you can become rational again.

The wild card is connected to those who make money off irrationality, via the free market. One does not have to remain rational and in touch with cause and affect, if there is mop for sale, that can alter the natural equation. In the case of burning your hand, if you can acquire and take pain killers, you can burn your hand all you want, as though this is your right to choose. But this is not the same as learning self sufficiency within natural cause and affect. The irrational path of mops requires extra funds that many expect others to pay, so they can remain irrational and unnatural.

There appears to be correlation between sex education and the rise in sexual irrationality. Maybe as a test since the Left assumes guns are bad for culture, we can teach safe gun use in schools, to see is this type of education makes the problem of irrationality better or worse.