What's the Abortion Debate Really About?

[Me Myself]

By chance, are you attempting to offer up an intelligent criticism? If so, I'm all ears to hear your trenchant reasoning.

Its nothing too deep really.

I admit its hard for me to imagine how you can fall in such fallacy ithe first place.

Well, the thing is your assumption works only if you think they agree for example that the comparison is ridiculous, and othe other points, you are assuming avoiding those killings are their only goal.

Then there is the assumption that most people pro life are against those tngs you mentioned or pro accordingly.

Its just I dont understand why so many assumptions.

You disregard the main and actual point of being pro life which is, of course, valuying the life of the unborn.

Neither belief in God of in whatever political party you associate it with are the actual requirements, just believe in God. Thus, each person that happens to fall in line with your assumptions will have their own indivvidual reason for being both pro-life and *add whatever of your points*

I just dont get why the blind boxisation of people or why would there be confusion on how shortsighted and superficial such an action would be.

 

[Me Myself]

I mean most pro lifers I know ( which means most people I know and specially most women I know) are pro safe sex.

At least my intimate friends whith which I have talked about subject some, they all think sex ed should be mandatory in schools.

My atheist/¿agnostic aunt sent a pro life message not long ago oher facebook. Its just .i dont get this boxifying people, nor how would you expect it to be anything but shortsighted, honestly.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

I don't think the people against abortion think they are being immoral or restrictive in any way. Some maybe but for them it really is about the life of the child. I am still against abortion on a personal level but I more or less have accepted that its not my choice so I can't make that call for someone else. I don't like it and were I woman I don't think I would ever choose to have an abortion.

But I really don't think the first and foremost thing in people's mind is "lets make sure women are kept down". To think so is folly and prejudice. Just because people have different opinions than you doesn't make them "evil" or "bad".

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I support our legislation about abortions, and you need to understand that even lowly carpet-cleaners.... even part-time ones, have a right to voice an opinion, and to vote.

Do you support these people's right to vote on whether to provide care in any other cases, or only in this situation? As a man, you're never going to be in a position where you would seek an abortion yourself; is there any situation where you think it would be right for you to go to a hospital seeking medical care, only to be turned away because the staff decided they didn't want to do it?

 

[Me Myself]

Do you support these people's right to vote on whether to provide care in any other cases, or only in this situation? As a man, you're never going to be in a position where you would seek an abortion yourself; is there any situation where you think it would be right for you to go to a hospital seeking medical care, only to be turned away because the staff decided they didn't want to do it?

But he was in a position where he could have been aborted.

I have an answer for that. If I ask the medical staff to kill an innocent so I feel healthier, then they should turn me down without a blink.

 

[Falvlun]

I didn't feel like reading through this thread (yet), but selfishly wanted to offer my two cents, anyway.

I think the average person against abortion (and contraception) is doing so because of a-- usually religious-- sanctity of life position. That is, it really is about the life of the human zygote to these people.

However, when you look into the concepts that underpin their conviction regarding the sanctity of life, and procreation, it's generally been informed by a traditional (yes, misogynistic) worldview of the roles of gender, the purpose of marriage, and sex.

That is, they believe that human life is sacred from conception, and therefore, necessary to save.

But they also believe that sex should only be for procreation, that it should be confined to marriage, and that the roll of woman is to produce and raise children.

In other words, the opposition to abortion (and perhaps less so, contraception) is about preserving human life.

But the demonization of woman, and the drastic moves taken to punish and restrict their sexual freedom, is caused by that traditional worldview.

I don't think many anti-abortion people realize this. I think they truly believe they are doing it for the life of the "baby".

 

[MysticSang'ha]

I didn't feel like reading through this thread (yet), but selfishly wanted to offer my two cents, anyway.

I think the average person against abortion (and contraception) is doing so because of a-- usually religious-- sanctity of life position. That is, it really is about the life of the human zygote to these people.

However, when you look into the concepts that underpin their conviction regarding the sanctity of life, and procreation, it's generally been informed by a traditional (yes, misogynistic) worldview of the roles of gender, the purpose of marriage, and sex.

That is, they believe that human life is sacred from conception, and therefore, necessary to save.

But they also believe that sex should only be for procreation, that it should be confined to marriage, and that the roll of woman is to produce and raise children.

In other words, the opposition to abortion (and perhaps less so, contraception) is about preserving human life.

But the demonization of woman, and the drastic moves taken to punish and restrict their sexual freedom, is caused by that traditional worldview.

I don't think many anti-abortion people realize this. I think they truly believe they are doing it for the life of the "baby".

Pretty much.

The concept of seeing a developing fetus, embryo, or zygote as a human being worthy of the same inalienable rights as everyone else completely dismisses the life and welfare of the woman who is carrying it.

The baby has a right to live. But what does it take to ensure that the "baby" continues to develop?

It's in her uterus....she didn't want it? She shouldn't have _______.

The pregnancy puts her at risk for gestational diabetes. Didn't want that? She shouldn't have ________.

The pregnancy elevates her blood pressure, alters her hormones, and perhaps even has her camped out by the toilet for 4 months straight. Didn't want that? Well then she shouldn't have ________.

The welfare and bodily security of the woman means nothing to anti-choicers. All that matters is sustaining whatever is inside of her body. She is seen as a vessel that must give up her entire body to gestate for 9 months to preserve "life".

But definitely not her life.

It's quite the insidious position. I've said it before, and I'll say it again....it's easy to champion the rights of a fetus when the woman who is pregnant is not seen as a human being worthy of owning her own body and autonomous choices.

 

[oldbadger]

I don't think the people against abortion think they are being immoral or restrictive in any way. Some maybe but for them it really is about the life of the child. I am still against abortion on a personal level but I more or less have accepted that its not my choice so I can't make that call for someone else. I don't like it and were I woman I don't think I would ever choose to have an abortion.

But I really don't think the first and foremost thing in people's mind is "lets make sure women are kept down". To think so is folly and prejudice. Just because people have different opinions than you doesn't make them "evil" or "bad".

What a good post. I don't think that anybody likes abortion; it's just the fact that so many mothers (and couples) are forced towards such decisions through very difficult and often tragic circumstances.

And so, in the moderate 'central area' of this difficult question there are as many opinions... each very slightly different..... as there are people.

They must exist, but I've never met a woman yet 'face to face' who has had such a mindset as 'it's my body .... I don't want this thing in me..... I got rights..... get it out of me!' and how the medical profession deals with such monsters without going into meltdown is just amazing.

 

[oldbadger]

Do you support these people's right to vote on whether to provide care in any other cases, or only in this situation? As a man, you're never going to be in a position where you would seek an abortion yourself; is there any situation where you think it would be right for you to go to a hospital seeking medical care, only to be turned away because the staff decided they didn't want to do it?

Good question.

Please... I need to think about this..... only just had a quick look before tea-time.

But..... on the spot ... I would say, 'yes'.

I was turned away (nicely) three weeks ago. I have got a calcified testicle. It hasn't happened in the last 36 hours so it's nothing to do with you or any other respected member's prayers. (Please, Dear Lord...... could you kindly see your way to turning that b-st-rd's b-lls to stone.... I would be so eternally grateful..... etc )

Anyway, I was sent to a specialist, and I asked if he would kindly rid me of it. He said 'No', and gave me some more pain killers. I have taken pain killers for over 12 years for this little darling.

That's one instance, but there may be more pertinent and serious ones.... I need to think.

 

[Me Myself]

I didn't feel like reading through this thread (yet), but selfishly wanted to offer my two cents, anyway.

I think the average person against abortion (and contraception) is doing so because of a-- usually religious-- sanctity of life position. That is, it really is about the life of the human zygote to these people.

However, when you look into the concepts that underpin their conviction regarding the sanctity of life, and procreation, it's generally been informed by a traditional (yes, misogynistic) worldview of the roles of gender, the purpose of marriage, and sex.

That is, they believe that human life is sacred from conception, and therefore, necessary to save.

But they also believe that sex should only be for procreation, that it should be confined to marriage, and that the roll of woman is to produce and raise children.

In other words, the opposition to abortion (and perhaps less so, contraception) is about preserving human life.

But the demonization of woman, and the drastic moves taken to punish and restrict their sexual freedom, is caused by that traditional worldview.

I don't think many anti-abortion people realize this. I think they truly believe they are doing it for the life of the "baby".

Almost everyone pro life that I personally know practice premarital safe sex. My two closest bisexual friends are pro life, my atheist/agnostic aunt is pro life, there are several women in my college that decided to go through with their maternity given pro life values even though it was highly inconvinient for them

Furthermore, most of the cases I ve heard when someone wants someone to have an abortion, its the man begging the woman to get an abortion because he does not want to be a father. Wth mixed cases where sometimes the woman makes him pay financially after having the baby and some others where she just decides she will do it by herself and with the help of her family.

I know of almost no one in my personal life that has such drastic religious views and yet the culture here goes with the sanctity of life since conception.

 

[Me Myself]

It's in her uterus....she didn't want it? She shouldn't have _______.

The pregnancy puts her at risk for gestational diabetes. Didn't want that? She shouldn't have ________.

The pregnancy elevates her blood pressure, alters her hormones, and perhaps even has her camped out by the toilet for 4 months straight. Didn't want that? Well then she shouldn't have ________.

The welfare and bodily security of the woman means nothing to anti-choicers. All that matters is sustaining whatever is inside of her body. She is seen as a vessel that must give up her entire body to gestate for 9 months to preserve "life".

But definitely not her life.

It's quite the insidious position. I've said it before, and I'll say it again....it's easy to champion the rights of a fetus when the woman who is pregnant is not seen as a human being worthy of owning her own body and autonomous choices.

Most people here understand taking an innocent life for self defense, including cases of abortion.

The man doesnt want to pay for a son he didnt want to have? He shouldnt have _____. (Hint: its not "sex" its "______ sex" ( no, its not premarital sex)

The thing is unless life is at risk you dont deliberately kill an innocent person.

IF LIFE IS AT RISK then the person's whose LIFE is at risk has the choice.

 

[adi2d]

Most people here understand taking an innocent life for self defense, including cases of abortion.

The man doesnt want to pay for a son he didnt want to have? He shouldnt have _____. (Hint: its not "sex" its "______ sex" ( no, its not premarital sex)

The thing is unless life is at risk you dont deliberately kill an innocent person.

IF LIFE IS AT RISK then the person's whose LIFE is at risk has the choice.

There is only one persons health at risk in an abortion.

 

[Me Myself]

There is only one persons health at risk in an abortion.

To your definition.

 

[adi2d]

To your definition.

That's true. In my opinion. Just like every post in this thread. We all have an opinion

 

[Me Myself]

That's true. In my opinion. Just like every post in this thread. We all have an opinion

Indeed.

 

[Sunstone]

P....it's easy to champion the rights of a fetus when the woman who is pregnant is not seen as a human being worthy of owning her own body and autonomous choices.

Indeed. But I would go a step further to suggest that, for many opposed to abortion, the fact they do not see the woman "as a human being worthy of owning her own body" lends itself very readily to their perception they have a right to control her reproductive choices.

 

[nilsz]

I am pro-choice, but once sympathised with the pro-life stance.

I think it was in large part because the idea that a group of people should not have been born seemed grossly insulting. At the time I had been made very afraid of the prospect that people with a diagnosis of mine would be exterminated through prenatal testing, and thus saw abortion as an existential threat against any future person who thought as I, sensed as I.

Talking about it with others made me realise how oblivious I had been to the perspective of unwilling mothers, and made me realise how important this issue is to women's rights. Thinking more about it, I also realised how silly my perspective had been - there's still the right to bear children regardless of prenatal testing, and those electing to do so are surely the most fit to raise children with disabilities.

Abortion is often prompted by unfortunate socioeconomic situations, yes. Guess how you can help? Allow them reproductive rights.

 

[Me Myself]

I think its really silly the need to demonize those who stand for values contrary to yours.

They stand on the side of the unborn (many of this who do so being women) so they have a right to grow and develop into men and women.

The woman and the man both have the right to choose, and both's right ends when the right of someone else begins. Killing an inocent needlessly is simply not a right for neither under any circumstance.

 

[adi2d]

I think its really silly the need to demonize those who stand for values contrary to yours.

They stand on the side of the unborn (many of this who do so being women) so they have a right to grow and develop into men and women.

The woman and the man both have the right to choose, and both's right ends when the right of someone else begins. Killing an inocent needlessly is simply not a right for neither under any circumstance.

That is your opinion
What gives you the right to force your opinion on others?

 

[nilsz]

It is not silly to call wrong values wrong. Applying such a term as "innocent" to a fetus reflects an overly simplistic understanding of how morality relates to the real world.