Would this Change your Position on Abortion?

[Thanda]

I've been thinking: if I understand correctly the main argument behind abortion is the bodily autonomy of a woman. Basically the thought process is that a woman shouldn't be forced to house another human being in her body.

In line with this thinking is the belief that if a child relies on a woman's body to live then they are not actually fully human yet and she should be allowed to cease supporting the child's existence by having an abortion.
Now as technology develops it may become possible for fetuses to be transferred from the earliest stages (a few weeks) to some machine that can help the fetuses develop into a fully viable baby.

Should such a system become available would you, if you currently support abortions, cease to support them as the baby is now no longer solely dependent on the mother's body for survival but the baby now has an option to develop independently from the mother through science?

 

[SpeaksForTheTrees]

I've been thinking: if I understand correctly the main argument behind abortion is the bodily autonomy of a woman. Basically the thought process is that a woman shouldn't be forced to house another human being in her body.

In line with this thinking is the belief that if a child relies on a woman's body to live then they are not actually fully human yet and she should be allowed to cease supporting the child's existence by having an abortion.
Now as technology develops it may become possible for fetuses to be transferred from the earliest stages (a few weeks) to some machine that can help the fetuses develop into a fully viable baby.

Should such a system become available would you, if you currently support abortions, cease to support them as the baby is now no longer solely dependent on the mother's body for survival but the baby now has an option to develop independently from the mother through science?

What like clone your own army , sounds cool , could create millions
No I don't support it

 

[FTNZ]

I support access to legal abortion because it's a simple medical procedure that women should have the right to choose if they want it, like any other procedure. The fetus is not a legal person. Underlying your idea is that women should be forced to have a fetus transferred out of their body to an incubator or some kind. This would infringe her rights in two ways. It forces her to have a certain procedure that she may not agree to. It forces her genetic material to be used to develop a human being against her will. I think it's unnecessary, unworkable, and contrary to human rights.

If you don't like abortion, don't have one.

 

[Mister Emu]

I won't answer the poll, because I am fervently against abortion, and the belief that anyone has a legal right to take a life except pursuant to the protection of their life or the lives of others.

That said, I look forward to the day when technology can put the disgusting practice of legalised abortion in the dustbin of history.

 

[Thanda]

I support access to legal abortion because it's a simple medical procedure that women should have the right to choose if they want it, like any other procedure. The fetus is not a legal person. Underlying your idea is that women should be forced to have a fetus transferred out of their body to an incubator or some kind. This would infringe her rights in two ways. It forces her to have a certain procedure that she may not agree to. It forces her genetic material to be used to develop a human being against her will. I think it's unnecessary, unworkable, and contrary to human rights.

If you don't like abortion, don't have one.

Do you agree with men being forced to have their genetic material being used to develop a human being against their will? Do you believe a woman who continues to carry a baby after the father has made it clear he doesn't want it is infringing on the father's human rights?

 

[Debater Slayer]

I won't answer the poll, because I am fervently against abortion, and the belief that anyone has a legal right to take a life except pursuant to the protection of their life or the lives of others.

That said, I look forward to the day when technology can put the disgusting practice of legalised abortion in the dustbin of history.

So you are against abortion even before the fetus is viable outside the womb?

 

[Thanda]

No I don't support it

What don't you support?

 

[Nietzsche]

I've been thinking: if I understand correctly the main argument behind abortion is the bodily autonomy of a woman. Basically the thought process is that a woman shouldn't be forced to house another human being in her body.

In line with this thinking is the belief that if a child relies on a woman's body to live then they are not actually fully human yet and she should be allowed to cease supporting the child's existence by having an abortion.
Now as technology develops it may become possible for fetuses to be transferred from the earliest stages (a few weeks) to some machine that can help the fetuses develop into a fully viable baby.

Should such a system become available would you, if you currently support abortions, cease to support them as the baby is now no longer solely dependent on the mother's body for survival but the baby now has an option to develop independently from the mother through science?

My opinion doesn't really matter here because it's none of my business. It's between the woman and her doctor, not the woman, her doctor, me, you, Congress, the Queen of England, the Emperor of Japan and Idi Amin Dada president-for-life of Uganda, last King of Scotland, lord of all the beasts on land, the fishes in the ocean, and conqueror of the British Empire-in-Africa-in-particular

 

[FTNZ]

Do you agree with men being forced to have their genetic material being used to develop a human being against their will? Do you believe a woman who continues to carry a baby after the father has made it clear he doesn't want it is infringing on the father's human rights?

That's a secondary issue. The more important issue is that the pregnancy affects the woman's body, not the man's. The woman's right to have a medical procedure far outweighs any right the man might claim regarding his genetic material. To support such a right would be to treat women as mere incubators and the property of the man.

 

[SpeaksForTheTrees]

What don't you support?

The technology of birth without a mum .
The technology in wrong hands with a supply of bought female eggs , a large corperation could abuse no end

 

[Thanda]

My opinion doesn't really matter here because it's none of my business. It's between the woman and her doctor, not the woman, her doctor, me, you, Congress, the Queen of England, the Emperor of Japan and Idi Amin Dada president-for-life of Uganda, last King of Scotland, lord of all the beasts on land, the fishes in the ocean, and conqueror of the British Empire-in-Africa-in-particular

Yes, I remember a time when domestic violence was a matter between a man and his wife - what has this world come to!

 

[Thanda]

The technology of birth without a mum .
The technology in wrong hands with a supply of bought female eggs , a large cooperation could abuse no end

I see.

 

[Mister Emu]

So you are against abortion even before the fetus is viable outside the womb?

I am against(for legal purposes) all abortions excepting that the mother has been raped or is in medical necessity.

 

[Thanda]

That's a secondary issue. The more important issue is that the pregnancy affects the woman's body, not the man's. The woman's right to have a medical procedure far outweighs any right the man might claim regarding his genetic material. To support such a right would be to treat women as mere incubators and the property of the man.

Ah I see, you have weighed up the rights and have found one to be more important than the other. Tell me, how did arrive at the conclusion that the women's right to not undergo a relatively painless procedure outweighs a man's right to not have his genetic material used for another human being who he may one day be forced to support for many years?

 

[Nietzsche]

Yes, I remember a time when domestic violence was a matter between a man and his wife - what has this world come to!

Are you really comparing the relationship between a patient and their doctor to an abusive husband or wife?

 

[Debater Slayer]

I am against(for legal purposes) all abortions excepting that the mother has been raped or is in medical necessity.

Don't you think that you are basically denying a woman the right to determine whether or not to go through pregnancy? How is a fetus before the point of viability outside the womb a life at all?

 

[Thanda]

Are you really comparing the relationship between a patient and their doctor to an abusive husband or wife?

No, I'm comparing the matter of a woman killing a baby with the matter of a man beating his wife.

 

[Nietzsche]

No, I'm comparing the matter of a woman killing a baby with the matter of a man beating his wife.

But in 99% of all abortions, it isn't a baby yet.

 

[Thanda]

But in 99% of all abortions, it isn't a baby yet.

No problem then I will rephrase if it suits you - I am comparing a woman killing a foetus to a man beating his wife.

 

[Nietzsche]

Ah I see, you have weighed up the rights and have found one to be more important than the other. Tell me, how did arrive at the conclusion that the women's right to not undergo a relatively painless procedure outweighs a man's right to not have his genetic material used for another human being who he may one day be forced to support for many years?

I actually agree with your sentiment here. If the man doesn't want the kid, the woman does, and is willing to pay for the abortion, at the very least it should be possible for the man to be exempted from child support payments and such.