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

[lewisnotmiller]

LOL -- we both support abortion rights, but disagree on who's rights are being violated, or maybe who has a claim to what rights, and why.

If I'm reading it right, she was suggesting the anti-abortion religious (few) shouldn't get to dictate to the many (women). Whereas you're more generally arguing that the powerless need to be protected from the powerful.
In a sense I'd agree with you both, depending on context, and you seem to both be pro-choice but with different rationales.

Tickles my admittedly warped funny bone is all.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

There appears to be correlation between sex education and the rise in sexual irrationality.

That's a claim you might want to support...

 

[lewisnotmiller]

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

Broadly, me too. I just don't want to throw my opinion out like it means much when I haven't spent time researching it. Still, yes...something like that.

 

[PureX]

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.

It's both sad and scary how freely and easily you presume upon yourself this godlike ability to know and therefor judge the minds and hearts of others, to the point of passing the sentence of life and death on them.

Even God knows humans are not especially logical beings, and make many mistakes in life. And even God can love and forgive them. But not you. No mercy from you, right? No exceptions. Only the maximum punishment for not measuring up to your idea of human intelligence and righteousness will do.

 

[Ashoka]

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.

I...I don't even know where to begin with this.

 

[Fool]

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.

no one should actively practice their beliefs on someone else without their consent. it simply boils down to free will and autonomy.

 

[Fool]

I think that abortion is a right that cannot be misused.
Women are expected to have a responsible and aware sex life with the numerous contraception methods. And abortion should be used as a last resort only. As extrema ratio.


Law 194/1978
The State guarantees the right to a conscious and responsible procreation; acknowledges the social value of motherhood and protects the human life from the very beginning. The voluntary interruption of pregnancy is not meant to be a means of births control.
The State, the region and the local bodies, according to their own specific powers and tasks, implement and develop the medical and social services, and other initiatives which will prevent that abortion is used with the purpose of contraception, and birth control.
The State allows abortion within the first ninety days of pregnancy, whenever the mother demonstrates that carrying out the pregnancy, the delivery and the maternal care will jeopardize her own physical or psychic health, as for her own medical state, or as for her own economic, social and family conditions, or as for the conditions of conception, or as for alleged and predicted anomalies of the foetus.

freedom of religions should include freedom of belief. a person's belief and their autonomy, shouldn't be controlled by someone else's belief. that is at playing god against other as self.

one should only practice beliefs upon self and seek to control the negative behavior of others who are harming themselves or other as self.


a fetus isn't in contrast, or other to self.

 

[PureX]

Let's do this ... let's pass a law that says any male that creates a pregnancy without the mother's written permission beforehand, goes to jail for the term of the pregnancy, and then is monetarily responsible for the child until it turns 18.

Unless she decides to have an abortion, which he must then pay for.

So instead of punishing the woman for having irresponsible sex, we punish the man. I bet abortion would become legal right quick, then. And VERY available.

 

[Fool]

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.

beliefs shouldn't become laws unless they are harmful to other as self. in other words, the right to choose for self as an autonomous being. if someone else's choice is actively forced upon self; then there should be a law correcting that behavior

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

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.

Unless I am empowered to order women to do my will, my thoughts on the matter are entirely irrelevant. Women have sole dominion over their own bodies, as I have sole dominion over mine.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

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.

Not to put negativity on anyone who comes into existence in such a fashion, (as once you are born, I think you have try to be as productive and positive a contributor as you can be) but forcing a birth under some circumstances, seems like it might call for more State euros to be spent. And you, the citizen, are paying those euros; you are the state. But now the money has to go toward costs for a parent who was unprepared. Or possibly it would, if the parent(s) just couldn't manage to make the ends meet, after all, there was presumably a reason for their hesitancy, which the 'state' finds to be a null and void reason.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

People are irresponsible and impulsive.

A primary argument with all this has to do with what responsibility is. Some would say that when two partners define an event as an accident, before it occurs, and have the ability to do something about, that this is responsibility. But the people in the country who said that it is not responsibility, and probably not an accident, at least to their minds on a technical level, would win the argument of definitions

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I am against abortion in most cases because in most cases precation/protection was thrown out the window for pleasure.

Punishing people for pleasure seems to be a Christian idea. You don't self-identify as one, but you seem to hold that value. It's as if when something happens because you are hard at work, then you're an innocent victim, but if you were having a good time or in pursuit of one, then punishment is just.

They knew what would happen, they should take responsibility for their choices.

Abortion does that. Problem resolved. Or by taking responsibility did you mean being punished? That also sounds like a Christian mindset. Did you somehow acquire two Christian positions without ever being one?

The entire psychology of Christianity is to submit or else. What are the enemies of submission? Free will. Desire. Religious uncertainty. They're all very bad in Christianity. Free will is called a gift from God, but is clearly an enemy of submission, and its free exercise results in damnation. Desire? Forget what makes you happy. You need to obey. If you don't, it's called rebellion and ego, or establishing oneself as God. You want sex for pleasure? That's going to cost you if biology prevails. Why? Because you were having fun.

 

[We Never Know]

There are plenty of situations where I'd see abortion as an undesirable outcome. But I'm not looking to impose that belief on others. Imposing that belief on others appears more immoral than the act itself to me.

Again, just speaking for myself there is a line. Dumb example (so please don't jump on me for the example) might be that late-stage abortions are banned except in situations involving medical risk to mother, or something.

"Medical risk to mother"

I agree with that one as well.

 

[Estro Felino]

Not to put negativity on anyone who comes into existence in such a fashion, (as once you are born, I think you have try to be as productive and positive a contributor as you can be) but forcing a birth under some circumstances, seems like it might call for more State euros to be spent. And you, the citizen, are paying those euros; you are the state. But now the money has to go toward costs for a parent who was unprepared. Or possibly it would, if the parent(s) just couldn't manage to make the ends meet, after all, there was presumably a reason for their hesitancy, which the 'state' finds to be a null and void reason.

Yes, that's a very good point. Nevertheless, the list of people who want to adopt a baby is long, so adoption is a solution. That is why abortion is a right that women have, but women are expected to know all the alternatives, before going through the procedure. We are speaking of healthy mothers carrying a healthy baby.

 

[Valjean]

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 like any other parasite it's an organism separate from its host.
True, it was formed from the woman's egg and the combined parental genetic blueprint, but so is every person formed from her mother's egg and parent's genetic codes. That doesn't make children part of their parents' bodies. They're separate organisms, genetically distinct from both parents.

Claiming a right to do what you wish with your own body doesn't apply to someone else's body, and the fœtus is a someone else. This is the point the right-to-lifers are making, and why they see this bodily integrity argument as meaningless. Your argument doesn't counter, or even address, their argument.

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

I agree it has no rights, but its humanness depends on how you're defining human. Me, I'd define human as having a human genome -- which would apply even to a zygote.

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

Sort of....
I'd say their view is: don't murder an innocent person for your own convenience--which is a good point, provided they can establish the personhood (claim to moral consideration) of the fœtus.

That's where the relevant issue lies. Not in a mother's bodily integrity, but in the personhood of the fœtus.

 

[Valjean]

no one should actively practice their beliefs on someone else without their consent. it simply boils down to free will and autonomy.

So noöne has a right to regulate the behavior of another in any way, even to mitigate harm? That would be dog-eat-dog anarchy!
People are not well behaved enough to live together in large societies without regulation.

 

[Fool]

So noöne has a right to regulate the behavior of another in any way, even to mitigate harm? That would be dog-eat-dog anarchy!
People are not well behaved enough to live together in large societies without regulation.

no one has the right to practice their beliefs on another and without their consent. that is basically the law of one, the law of reciprocity, the golden rule.

so any laws created should look at anti-social behaviors.

if you want to plant tulips in your yard, knock yourself out. you want to plant tulips in your neighbor's yard, get their permission first. otherwise pay attention to boundary lines; whether explicit, or implicit.

 

[Subduction Zone]

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.

If you are truly against abortion then you should be supporting the left in how they educate, want to make birth control available, etc.. Abortion rates are lower than ever mainly due to teaching prevention and education. Neighborhoods with a Planned Parenthood office have lower abortion rates than those without one. That is because they too emphasize education and provide preventive materials. Abortion is the last thing that they want to do.

 

[Revoltingest]

Abortion is good, right, moral, & useful.
I have spoken written.