When you prevent an abortion...

[Sheldon]

Abortion is a guarantee of death.

An unborn baby lives most of the time.

It can't be a baby if it's unborn. it is most likely an embryo or blastocyst, a clump of insentient cells. You are worrying more about your emotional distress here, than anyone who is alive and can suffer.

 

[Brickjectivity]

You save a human life.


Does anyone disagree?

You save a potential human life, just like if you don't use a condom you save a potential human life. The human is not there, yet; but everything is being set up to make one.

 

[Sheldon]

How is it misleading?

If you kill the baby it won't live.

If you prevent the killing of the baby it lives.

You save a life.

Baby
noun

1. a very young child.

Blastocyst
A blastocyst is made up of an inner group of cells with an outer shell. The inner group of cells will become the embryo.

Embryo
noun

1. an unborn or unhatched offspring in the process of development, in particular a human offspring during the period from approximately the second to the eighth week after fertilization (after which it is usually termed a fetus).

That is how it is misleading:

 

[SomeRandom]

Everyday we try to avoid unwanted things/accidents.
If someone doesn't want a baby, they should take steps to avoid getting pregnant.
It isn't hard.

Considering pregnancies have occurred after vasectomies and using birth control, I don’t think it really is.
Unless everyone is to live like Nuns/Priests?
Which I don’t see happening any time soon

 

[Sheldon]

Everyday we try to avoid unwanted things/accidents.
If someone doesn't want a baby, they should take steps to avoid getting pregnant.
It isn't hard.

Except when religious bigots try to prevent women access to family planning and contraception, because they believe an imaginary deity thinks condoms and the pill are evil.

 

[Sheldon]

Yet a person can be charged with two counts of murder/manslaughter for the death of a pregnant woman.
If it isn't a human life, how can one be charged with two counts of murder/manslaughter?

Probably for the same reason shaving your own head isn't assault, but forcibly holding someone down and shaving theirs against their will is.

 

[SalixIncendium]

**MOVED TO GENERAL DEBATES**​

 

[firedragon]

What if the mother was raped?

This is one of the most pressing issues very rarely addressed by pro life groups. At least not comprehensively.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

You save a human life.


Does anyone disagree?

If I didn't disagree, then we'd both be wrong.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Good opinion.

To my mind are these anti-abortion Christians really all that moral? I ask because if they were truly pro-life as they claim wouldn't they be fighting as hard to demand healthcare for all lives? Wouldn't they demand paid leave for parents when they have a child of at least 14 weeks, if not more? Wouldn't these people be working towards cleaner air and food? How about expanded mental health services? How about free prenatal care for poor women? How about decent housing, and public safety, like vaccinations and social cooperation during public health emergencies?

I don't see them doing this, so are they really pro-life?

I've found that if I assume that the so-called "pro-life" movement is motivated by a desire to save what they consider to be human life, their actions are full of hypocrisy and contradiction.

OTOH, if I assume that their actions are motivated by a desire to punish women for having sex they disapprove of, everything falls into place and nothing is inconsistent.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

This is one of the most pressing issues very rarely addressed by pro life groups. At least not comprehensively.

Like I touched on in the post before this one, if we assume that the anti-choice movement is motivated by a desire to punish women for having sex they disapprove of, their position becomes consistent: they consider rape to be sex they disapprove of, so punishing the woman is - in their eyes - an appropriate response.

Yes, this is monstrous. There's a lot that's monstrous about the anti-choice movement.

 

[MikeF]

You save a human life.


Does anyone disagree?

I would be curious to know whether you oppose the use of lethal force by law enforcement or by the military. Would the imperative to save a human life be absolute?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yet a person can be charged with two counts of murder/manslaughter for the death of a pregnant woman.
If it isn't a human life, how can one be charged with two counts of murder/manslaughter?

That is due to intent and the fact that a fetus is well on the way to being human.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Like I touched on in the post before this one, if we assume that the anti-choice movement is motivated by a desire to punish women for having sex they disapprove of, their position becomes consistent: they consider rape to be sex they disapprove of, so punishing the woman is - in their eyes - an appropriate response.

Yes, this is monstrous. There's a lot that's monstrous about the anti-choice movement.

Well if she was in the city and did not cry out it was her fault. Or at least that is what a good authority to many here says.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Your reasoning here, would mean that masturbation is the murder of millions of potential humans.
A woman completing her monthly cycle without getting pregnant would also be murder.

Every sperm and eggcell are "potential humans" also, after all.
So where do you draw the arbitrary line?

Oh ohh! I'm in troubllllle!

 

[KW]

Well there are instances where a pregnancy will threaten the life of the mother. Even in scenarios where it was a planned baby/pregnancy. That’s just how biology works.
Off the top of my head there’s what’s called a “hedgehog baby” or ectopic pregnancy. Meaning the fetus is quite literally a ball of limbs and nothing else. If this is not surgically removed the mother will likely die and there is literally no baby to speak of either way. Meaning you literally killed a sister, daughter and potentially someone’s mother just by preventing that abortion
How very moral. /s
That’s a more extreme scenario but there are other things that can occur.

The stance of “Preventing abortions” imagines a utopia that is nothing but perfect pregnancies. Something that simply does not exist in reality. Biology is far more complicated as a general rule

 

[KW]

Well there are instances where a pregnancy will threaten the life of the mother. Even in scenarios where it was a planned baby/pregnancy. That’s just how biology works.
Off the top of my head there’s what’s called a “hedgehog baby” or ectopic pregnancy. Meaning the fetus is quite literally a ball of limbs and nothing else. If this is not surgically removed the mother will likely die and there is literally no baby to speak of either way. Meaning you literally killed a sister, daughter and potentially someone’s mother just by preventing that abortion
How very moral. /s
That’s a more extreme scenario but there are other things that can occur.

The stance of “Preventing abortions” imagines a utopia that is nothing but perfect pregnancies. Something that simply does not exist in reality. Biology is far more complicated as a general rule

Well there are instances where a pregnancy will threaten the life of the mother. Even in scenarios where it was a planned baby/pregnancy. That’s just how biology works.
Off the top of my head there’s what’s called a “hedgehog baby” or ectopic pregnancy. Meaning the fetus is quite literally a ball of limbs and nothing else. If this is not surgically removed the mother will likely die and there is literally no baby to speak of either way. Meaning you literally killed a sister, daughter and potentially someone’s mother just by preventing that abortion
How very moral. /s
That’s a more extreme scenario but there are other things that can occur.

The stance of “Preventing abortions” imagines a utopia that is nothing but perfect pregnancies. Something that simply does not exist in reality. Biology is far more complicated as a general rule

In these cases there is no reason the baby can’t be removed alive..

in the rare case where this is not possible then abortions are always legal and always will be.

 

[syo]

You save a human life.


Does anyone disagree?

Yes. I disagree.

 

[Polymath257]

You save a human life.


Does anyone disagree?

I very much disagree.

Early on, the embryo doesn't have the relevant properties to be called a 'human life' with the corresponding legal rights. More specifically, the embryo is not a person.

Being a clump of human cells, even having human tissues, does not make one a person.

As you get later in pregnancy, there are more and more properties that give a moral weight to ending the pregnancy,

BUT, and this is crucial, to deny the woman the right to an abortion effectively puts her into involuntary servitude. it takes away her right to determine the medical procedures that can happen to her body. It means she is, effectively, only a womb and not a person herself.

In essence, the fetus does not have the right to enslave the woman in whom it resides.

Of the two, I strongly support giving her the right to terminate the pregnancy. For a late pregnancy, that can involve killing a human life as long as that life cannot be supported outside of her.

 

[Polymath257]

In these cases there is no reason the baby can’t be removed alive..

in the rare case where this is not possible then abortions are always legal and always will be.

Huh? An ectopic pregnancy is *always* fatal for the embryo (it never gets to the fetus stage) and will be fatal for the woman unless the pregnancy is terminated.