Abortion

Steel_Troll · April 2005

I am in brittain, so i assure you i have no American scope.

As for the memetics.. i do not see how memetic (social) human heritage is lined to our discussing if Abortion is write or wrong.

The conditions of the said survival are very good with modern medicine. But that is beyond my point, i was just stating that if babies can survive outside the womb, be it with care, after 22 weeks and thrive, becoming normal healthy humans( Note only their lungs need to develop after 22 weeks for them to be able to survive outside of the womb) then that means they are human and functioning enough for it to be considerd wrong to kill them at 24 weeks with an abortion.

Yes, abortions do happen - on a surprisinly large scale - Mostly in the western world, with US having very high numbers.
Would numbers decrease if there were a ban?Yes

"There is no valid alternative strategy if it means that a sizeable amount of women are just pushed into the hands of irresponsible profit mongers." What do you mean? You mean their babies are taken from them ? Im not sure i get your point. Well if there is no viable strategy to ensure for the babies born who are not aborted, than the governments should not only do something to ensure that is so, but also invest in preventitive measures and not full frontal attacks.

It is well known that preventitive measures are the best remedy, and if applied to abortion, millions of inocents could be spared.They had no choice to be conceived and killed.

Sky · April 2005

So, you disagree with abortion, even in cases of rape? I'd consider that extremely hard-hearted. Though it can't deal with the emotional and psychological pain a woman in such a situation would feel, an abortion would at least end the physical pain of a rape victim.

Steel_Troll · April 2005

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Sky @ Apr 20 2005, 06:56 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> So, you disagree with abortion, even in cases of rape? I'd consider that extremely hard-hearted. Though it can't deal with the emotional and psychological pain a woman in such a situation would feel, an abortion would at least end the physical pain of a rape victim.  </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> 
</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>My views, abortion should be baned except in extreme circumstances

eg
1) Mother has been raped (Termination only before 14 weeks)
</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>

On the very first post on this thread, that is what i stated, i thn went on to further explain why there should be that exception, please read what i said for that, as i do not want to repeat.

As with regards with my comment </div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>They had no choice to be conceived and killed.</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>, this, however, is still preceded by my first exception stated above, in case of rape, the mothers psychological and social well being would come first.

TommyVercetti · April 2005

Hmm... aren't irreversible physiological changes often dealt to women who give birth? I don't really know, but it's mentioned sometimes. If this is true, then there's another reason not to <b>force</b> someone into child birth.

Cagey · April 2005

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam @ Apr 20 2005, 12:57 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> I don't think the main abortion argument is about women's rights vs fetus' rights. I think the main argument is about infanticide.

First, we probably all agree that infanticide is wrong.
Then, all we're really arguing about is when a zygote becomes a child. If you think that it happens early during the pregnancy or at conception, then you're pro-life. If you think that it happens late during the pregnancy or at birth, then you're pro-choice.

Arguments about rape, informing a girl's parents, parental consent, etc. are all peripheral arguments.

Personally, I'm pro-choice. </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>
I think this is on the money, and don't have a firm opinion on when humanity begins--though I'm inclined to take a conservative view as a result and place the point at conception. For third-trimester/extremely late abortions, however, I have to ask--if you could theoretically remove an almost developed fetus/child (I wish there was a word choice without connotation there) from its mother completely and it can survive and grow into a fully functional human being outside of the womb, doesn't that indicate it's a separate person?

If I was theoretically in a position to make this choice on a personal level, I'd not want to have my future child aborted due to doubts over whether I'd be committing infanticide--but I've made other choices before now that have removed the possibility of facing this decision.

Extending my morally based decision based on personal doubts to others through legislation, however, goes against my strongly held belief that law should protect personal liberty rather than enforce a moral code of the majority that will never be universally held--as someone capable of making mistakes, it would be extremely arrogant for me to believe that I understood objective morality perfectly; I believe most atheists wouldn't even grant me objective morality as a starting point <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' />.

Like Nem0, I believe that anti-abortion laws would only harm desperate would-be-mothers rather than put a stop to the practice. Due to this belief and the fact that I don't have a firm idea of where to draw the line between killing some cells and infanticide, I can't in good conscience support legislative bans on abortion. I do feel, however, that very late abortions (7-8 months) are subject to the question of whether a fetus/child that can survive outside the womb is entitled to personal liberties as a demonstrably seperate person and therefore protection under the law.

theclam · April 2005

I've got a few resources for you guys.

Here's an interesting article by Anna Quindlen:
<a href='http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6830928/site/newsweek/' target='_blank'>http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6830928/site/newsweek/</a>
(Note that correlation != causation)

Here are some abortion statistics:
<a href='http://womensissues.about.com/cs/abortionstats/a/aaabortionstats.htm' target='_blank'>http://womensissues.about.com/cs/abortions...ortionstats.htm</a>

Choice quotes:
</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> * 88% of abortions occur during the first 6 to 12 weeks of pregnancy.
...
*Age - The majority of women getting an abortion are young. 52% are younger than 25 years old and 19% are teenagers. The abortion rate is highest for those women aged 18 to 19 (56 per 1,000 in 1992).
* 25.5% of women deciding to have an abortion want to postpone childbearing.
* 21.3% of women cannot afford a baby.
* 14.1% of women have a relationship issue or their partner does not want a child.
* 12.2% of women are too young (their parents or others object to the pregnancy.)
* 10.8% of women feel a child will disrupt their education or career.
* 7.9% of women want no (more) children.
* 3.3% of women have an abortion due to a risk to fetal health.
* 2.8% of women have an abortion due to a risk to maternal health.
...
<b>* 54% of women having an abortion said they used some form of contraception during the month they became pregnant.</b></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>

Sky · April 2005

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Steel Troll @ Apr 20 2005, 07:02 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> </div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Sky @ Apr 20 2005, 06:56 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> So, you disagree with abortion, even in cases of rape? I'd consider that extremely hard-hearted. Though it can't deal with the emotional and psychological pain a woman in such a situation would feel, an abortion would at least end the physical pain of a rape victim. </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>
</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>My views, abortion should be baned except in extreme circumstances

eg
1) Mother has been raped (Termination only before 14 weeks)
</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>

On the very first post on this thread, that is what i stated, i thn went on to further explain why there should be that exception, please read what i said for that, as i do not want to repeat.

As with regards with my comment </div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>They had no choice to be conceived and killed.</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>, this, however, is still preceded by my first exception stated above, in case of rape, the mothers psychological and social well being would come first.  </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> 
Bloody hell. That was dumb of me. <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/marine.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='marine.gif' />

Okay, how about in another case: girl gets pregnant, guy runs off halfway through pregnancy, girl can barely support herself let alone do it while also caring for a child?

CMEast · April 2005

I'd prefer to see one person growing up and being a valuable contribution to society than two people growing up with minimal chance of getting the things in life they deserve. In fact more than that, just being a whole person with goals achieved and a happy stable life is enough and if you (literally) have to break a few eggs to make an omlette so be it.

Of course I'd prefer it if there was no need for an abortion, if no woman was ever pregnant unless they wanted to be and every woman who chose to be was in a stable environment which nothing was going to affect but that really isn't going to happen is it?

'Infanticide' is just a shock word, call it murder and many would agree that murder can be excused in various circumstances, call it practical and everyone would say that you have to be realistic and do what will be best in the end.

torque · April 2005

Sky: I have a close friend who went through an abortion a long time ago. She was young, she could not care for the baby, and the father was most certainly in no position (and I doubt willing) to support the baby. She had an early abortion. That said, she is NOT happy about it - it's left mental scars she's not likely to forget. I don't know how it is she got pregnant, since she's good about birth control, or at least she is now - maybe she wasn't on the pill back then or something.

Sometimes I feel like it should just be a case by case thing - mitigating circumstances, and all that. In which case no one should be there to 'govern' it.

It's not like girls just randomly go "oh, crap. got pregnant, time to abort" - it's a decision that takes a lot of thought, or at least I think it would in a sensible person. I heard someone say before that men really shouldn't be allowed to pass judgement on it, since they have no idea what it's like to be pregnant, much less impregnated as a result of rape - and I'm inclined to agree.

As for getting an 'early' abortion immediately after rape - this doesn't always happen because of the stigma attached to being a rape victim. It REALLY messes with your mind. You do not want to remember it or think about it, yet it becomes all you can think about. You don't want to report it because then you'll be labeled a rape victim - and people WILL treat you differently. That's what you'll be known as. Then there's everything that follows - police reports, doctors having to check you (not pleasant, I assure you), possibly being on the news for all to see - there's a lot involved and it's a scary, scary process for a girl. Then there's also the problem if it's someone you know that raped you - a date rape or a relative or something - which makes it harder to report. And then there's the possibility of reprisal.

Cyndane · April 2005

I wasn't going to post in this one, but since I am seeing some very arrogant responses from the pro-life camp. I shall state four questions to ask yourself before you decide to be pro-life.

1. Are you a woman?
2. Can you physically feel what it is like to go through a pregnancy?
3. Do abortions in anyway affect your life?
4. Do you have a right to tell people how to live their lives let alone control their bodies?

Obviously, many of those are no for everyone on here. Myself included.

If you answered no to any of two of the four above, you can not stand as pro-life. Especially number four.

CMEast · April 2005

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Cyndane @ Apr 21 2005, 02:38 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> 2. Can you physically feel what it is like to go through a <u>pregnancy</u>?
3. Do <u>abortions</u> in anyway affect your life?
4. Do you have a right to tell people how to live their lives let alone control their bodies?  </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> 
Exchange any of the highlighted words for those appropriate to almost any other issue and what you have said will completely apply and others will still feel the need to force their 'ethics' on others. Just think about any major issue (many of which have been brought up recently here) like euthanasia, **** marriages, polygamy, drugs and other substances, vegetarianism and almost any belief, religious or otherwise.

Some people <i>do</i> feel like they have the right to decide how people should live their lives. I personally feel as long as you aren't hurting anyone then you can do <b>anything</b> you want and when two peoples rights clash it's the one that will affect everyone else the least that should prevail.

theclam · April 2005

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Cyndane @ Apr 20 2005, 09:38 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> I wasn't going to post in this one, but since I am seeing some very arrogant responses from the pro-life camp. I shall state four questions to ask yourself before you decide to be pro-life.

1. Are you a woman?
2. Can you physically feel what it is like to go through a pregnancy?
3. Do abortions in anyway affect your life?
4. Do you have a right to tell people how to live their lives let alone control their bodies?

Obviously, many of those are no for everyone on here. Myself included.

If you answered no to any of two of the four above, you can not stand as pro-life. Especially number four.  </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> 
I don't think pro-life men should be criticized for their beliefs. If they think something is immoral, then it shouldn't matter if they have the capability to experience that thing. I love to Godwinize, so here's an example:

Should gentiles be mad, because Hitler threw Jews in concentration camps, even though they wouldn't physically feel what it's like to be in a concentration camp?

It's ok to think that killing babies is wrong, even if you're a man.

That being said, I don't think men should be accusing women of using abortion as a replacement for condoms or a similiar argument against women who have abortions.

Disclaimer: I'm a pro-choice male.

Cyndane · April 2005

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CMEast @ Apr 20 2005, 09:06 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> </div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Cyndane @ Apr 21 2005, 02:38 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> 2. Can you physically feel what it is like to go through a <u>pregnancy</u>?
3. Do <u>abortions</u> in anyway affect your life?
4. Do you have a right to tell people how to live their lives let alone control their bodies? </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>
Exchange any of the highlighted words for those appropriate to almost any other issue and what you have said will completely apply and others will still feel the need to force their 'ethics' on others. Just think about any major issue (many of which have been brought up recently here) like euthanasia, **** marriages, polygamy, drugs and other substances, vegetarianism and almost any belief, religious or otherwise.

Some people <i>do</i> feel like they have the right to decide how people should live their lives. I personally feel as long as you aren't hurting anyone then you can do <b>anything</b> you want and when two peoples rights clash it's the one that will affect everyone else the least that should prevail. </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>
That is exactly the point I am making East, thank you. :-)

Those four questions could be used for any controversial issue today. They should be.
The last especially. :-)

*edit*
@theclam: If they choose to critize a woman for what she wants to do with her body, then yes they should be critized for their beliefs, if they choose not to, then they should not. Its the vocalists that need to be taught the rough lesson of allowing people to use their bodies as they see fit. (Same could be said for "illegal" drugs and/or alcholol.)

Steel_Troll · April 2005

TommyVercetti, </div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>aren't irreversible physiological changes often dealt to women who give birth? I don't really know, but it's mentioned sometimes. If this is true, then there's another reason not to force someone into child birth.</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>

True, but these changes arnt so bad. The women might get wider hips, larger mammery glands..these changes are not detremental to health so much as to warrant an abortion. They did have a choice about putting themselves at risk of getting pregnant.(unless it was due to rape, at which my stance remains)

Cagey I also think that theclam was on a good point, but more discussion is needed. </div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> For third-trimester/extremely late abortions, however, I have to ask--if you could theoretically remove an almost developed fetus/child ... from its mother completely and it can survive and grow into a fully functional human being outside of the womb, doesn't that indicate it's a separate person?</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> Yes, i do beleive it is a seperate person, and that is why i was so shocked at themuffinman's suggestion...That seperate person should therefore have the same rights of any other human being. The mother should not therefore be allowed to chose, to <b>kill</b> the foetus/child

Sky </div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Bloody hell. That was dumb of me.Okay, how about in another case: girl gets pregnant, guy runs off halfway through pregnancy, girl can barely support herself let alone do it while also caring for a child?</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> Foster care, adoption, better than saying, i dont want to keep the child, <b>kill</b> it.

CMEast, I have a 2 friends who are great, friendly, normal working members of sociey. They were both adopted. Another two peopl, one a friend, another an aquaintence were fostered. Only one has minor trust issues, which is to be accepted, hey are still great fun though. They both live and work and interact like normal human beings, sure they might have a little sstigma of being not wanted as a kid, but they sure as hell would rather be alive then dead.

Athena, thank you for your first hand info. Mental scarring is often a side affect of the abortion. This shows us the human side of things. Rape victims imo should get a lot more support and sympathy, but those are issues to be addressed at the time.
Rape victims

Cyndane, your points could be changed, and make us see why they are defective
</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>1. Are you a woman?</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>
</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>2. Can you physically feel what it is like to go through <b>rape</b></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>
</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>3.Does <b>rape</b> in anyway affect your life?</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>
</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>4. Do you have a right to tell people how to live their lives let alone control their bodies?</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>

You see, people would have the right to say rape is wrong, even if it does not affect them directly. Same with abortion.So yes people should be able to tell others what they are doing is wrong.

Cyndane, lastly
</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>what she wants to do with her body</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>
Its not her body, its the body of a developing human baby inside her which she is deciding to terminate, which is such a sterile word, i prefer <b>Kill</b>

Cyndane · April 2005

I'm sorry Steel but you are making assumptions that everyone thinks a fetus is a full fledged human when obviously they are not. If you remove the fetus from a mother, even after the 9 months, some of them will not surive on their own. After all they need to be fed, clothed, protected, etc.

While that fetus is still attached to the mother it is her body. You can't argue any other way. What is funny is that you are so admant about "infantcide" yet even dictionary.com doesn't agree with your definition.

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (dictionary.com)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
in·fan·ti·cide Audio pronunciation of "infanticide" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (n-fnt-sd)
n.

1. The act of killing an infant.
2. The practice of killing newborn infants.
3. One who kills an infant.
</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>

I'd like to point you to the second definition espcially. "Newborn infants"

Wait, does that mean that they have to be born to be considered infants... yes. :-)

Point four that I stated still stands all by itself, you have no right to impose any restrictions on what a person can do with his/her own body as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else.

Side note edit: Your attempt to describe pregancy is very much lacking in complexity. It is NOT as simple as the mammary glands simply growing and the hips have nothing to do with anything. *sigh* You have nothing to back any of that up. How about going to an online medical dictionary and look up pregnancy since you are lacking knowledge.

Here I shall even assist you in this matter.
<a href='http://my.webmd.com/hw/being_pregnant/hw2881.asp' target='_blank'>Web Md Pregnancy</a>

Steel_Troll · April 2005

Fine, lets distance ourselves from the to-be human more to make us feel more cosy... lets not call it infanticide as it is to close to home, lets call it something more alien and foreign. How bout foeticide. I deliberately avoid using that term for the very reason implied above. It is just another distancing term.

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Your attempt to describe pregancy is very much lacking in complexity :</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>

I didn't have time to go into details, my view still stands that in normal pregnancy, there are no major changes. OMG wow, her heart bp increases!!! Terminate!!

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Most women with chronic high blood pressure who are otherwise healthy have a low risk for other cardiovascular problems during pregnancy. </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>

How many women are most women? And it goes on to say that only 5 % of those have the risk...
So just because there is a very low risk of a woman having cardiovascular problems during pregnancy doesnt mean we should abort. My view still stands, normal pregnancy does not cause any problem which would warrant the use of wanton abortion or foeticide.

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I'm sorry Steel but you are making assumptions that everyone thinks a fetus is a full fledged human when obviously they are not. </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>

When do you think we can terminate? Same as the Muffin man? the very day before pregnancy??

I should pull up that very disturbing video of a baby at 24 weeks in a womb squirming and wrigling away from the hover like instrument and pincers which crushed its legs, torso and skull, sucking it out of that safe heaven -the womb- maybe then we would see how human like a foetus is as it fights beyond hope for all that we normaly strive for- survival. I again ask you to look at my first link posted and read the captions. It is clear to me that a foetus aquires very human nature and characteristics very early on in life.

Terminating it is.... <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /> Who are we to terminate it at a whim? (Again subject to the 2 front exeptions)

Pepe_Muffassa · April 2005

OK- I've read all the posts, and I'm getting a good feeling for where this argument is going. We seem to be hung up on what it means to be a person... is it conception - is it 24 weeks - where does the value in the life come into play.

Well, for some here, they say things like "I'd prefer to see one person growing up and being a valuable contribution to society than two people growing up with minimal chance of getting the things in life they deserve. In fact more than that, just being a whole person with goals achieved and a happy stable life is enough and if you (literally) have to break a few eggs to make an omlette so be it."

Obviously - to CMEast humans are nothing but eggs on the way to an omlette. Others here share a similar opinion. Usually, these people are on the "death" side of issues like abortion - or the whole Terri Schaivo deal.

I guess, I don't have a good argument against abortion - nothing that will convince anyone anyway. I do have a couple questions.
Why is it that no other 9 month period in our lives makes any difference as to weather or not we are a person?
If the life of the unborn is given value by being "wanted" or by socio-economic position of the parent - what gives YOUR life value - the fact that your mom didn't kill you?
Why can we go to jail if we neglect a newborn - but 6 months sooner we can kill it without any penalty? - the child is just as dependant on the mother in both situations.
Why aren't poor people allowed to kill their 10 year old children - who still happen to be a financial drain?
Why does a persons financial situation play into this argument at all? - does money determine value? Is Bill Gates life more valuable than yours?

Notice - I'm not even touching on morality... I just feel that if you as a person are going to be pro-death... I mean, pro-choice, then these are questions that need to be answered. And when answering - learn from John Kerry - being nuanced will only get you so far...

CForrester · April 2005

Hmm. I have a question to ask you guys. It's a matter of opinion, but I would like your opinion:

If there is a complication early on in the pregnancy, before there is any chance for the fetus to survive if you remove it from the womb, should abortion be allowed?

Just to start things off, my opinion on the matter:

Yes. HOWEVER, if that baby CAN survive if you remove it from the womb, then you <i>should not</i> kill it. It really annoys me that they're removing perfectly viable babies and then killing them when they can clearly survive, possibly with some help.

My best friend was born at six months. She was fully developed, she didn't need help to breathe and she only needed a feeding tube for a little while. Can someone properly argue that she should have been killed once she was removed from her mother's body? I doubt it.

Steel_Troll · April 2005

Nature is amazing. If there is a complication early on in the pregnancy, (eg severe cromosomal errors) then the foetus will auto-abort, without any intrusion from the outside world. If by that you mean that the baby is found to be deaf/ blind/ has downs syndrome/ lack of limbs or any other non life-threatening complication then i dont think there should be an abortion even at early stages. There is however scope for flexibility. That flexibility would only come from further debate on the actual complication.

CMEast · April 2005

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Pepe Muffassa @ Apr 21 2005, 02:00 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Why is it that no other 9 month period in our lives makes any difference as to weather or not we are a person?

If the life of the unborn is given value by being "wanted" or by socio-economic position of the parent - what gives YOUR life value - the fact that your mom didn't kill you?

Why can we go to jail if we neglect a newborn - but 6 months sooner we can kill it without any penalty? - the child is just as dependant on the mother in both situations.

Why aren't poor people allowed to kill their 10 year old children - who still happen to be a financial drain?

Why does a persons financial situation play into this argument at all? - does money determine value? Is Bill Gates life more valuable than yours?  </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> 
Because in all the other periods of our life we are outside of the womb, we are seperate from the mother.

I actually value it by its quality of life, the fact that it's able to contribute to society is something that goes hand in hand with that. I'm not saying that a child is forced to have a 'low quality' life if it is given birth too in the wrong circumstance, however it won't receive many of the things it should deserve in life and, more importantly, the mother will have had her quality of life severely crippled if she has a baby when she isn't ready/isn't capable to look after it.

Your third question is basically the same as the first question.

Because the 10 year old is a seperate being with its own experiences and opinions. Besides the mother, if she gave birth to it when she wasn't capable of being the parent she should have been, has already sacraficed her intended life for that child. She has already missed the window of opportunity.

Bill Gates is more important than me yes, he affects more people. If it came to an arbitrary choice between his life and mine then yes, I should probably die (unless he impacts on others in a more negative way or unless someone can see in the future that I would have more importance over all). I wouldn't chose to die myself but being objective I can accept the reasoning. Is the pope a more important catholic than another catholic? Yes, although his age would count against him. People aren't equal, some are better than others, there shouldn't ever be a reason to put one above another though and I can't say it is possible to adequately judge who is better as you will probably never know everything about two particular people.

Is that enough?

I don't really consider myself as 'pro-choice' or, as some here call it, 'pro-death'. If I had to pick a name for my feelings it would be 'pro-mother' instead of 'pro-foetus'. I think those names are far more accurate as no one here can really think of themselves as anti-choice or anti-life.

Steel_Troll · April 2005

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I actually value it by its quality of life, the fact that it's able to contribute to society is something that goes hand in hand with that........
[the 10 year old should not be killed]Because the 10 year old is a seperate being with its own experiences and opinions.</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>

So by your argument CMEast, we could say a newborn baby could be killed without much fuss as it has no experience or oppinions and does not contribute to society.Am i the only one who sees a flaw in East's views?<img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' />

You must place a very low value on human life then. Well i value every human life as any other.

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I actually value it by its quality of life the fact that it's able to contribute to society is something that goes hand in hand with that. I'm not saying that a child is forced to have a 'low quality' life if it is given birth too in the wrong circumstance, however it won't receive many of the things it should deserve in life and, more importantly, the mother will have had her quality of life severely crippled if she has a baby when she isn't ready/isn't capable to look after it.</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>

Just because people have a poor value of life, doesnt mean they should have any less right to live it. So what if they dont have a biological father/ mother?ie
How bout a child that has been orphaned early on in life? It won't receive many of the things it should deserve in life(what are these things??) Should it be killed? In many cases it motivates them, making them become active members of the comunity. I know of doctors lawyers and nurses who have all been fostered.

Fine... a girl gets pregnant. Takes a year off, has the baby, returns to school (after child has been given away)gets on with her life. Her mistake, her year.. but she can now carry on

I also think if the couples out there knew that Abortion wasnt a viable option if they made a mistake, then they would be more crefull in using contraception.

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> no one here can really think of themselves as anti-choice or anti-life. </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> they may not think of themselves as anti-life, but i think otherwise.

Pepe_Muffassa · April 2005

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Bill Gates is more important than me yes, he affects more people. If it came to an arbitrary choice between his life and mine then yes, I should probably die (unless he impacts on others in a more negative way or unless someone can see in the future that I would have more importance over all). I wouldn't chose to die myself but being objective I can accept the reasoning. Is the pope a more important catholic than another catholic? Yes, although his age would count against him. People aren't equal, some are better than others, there shouldn't ever be a reason to put one above another though and I can't say it is possible to adequately judge who is better as you will probably never know everything about two particular people.
</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>

can we make laws around this reasoning - if he kills you, he gets life in prison, but if you kill him, you get death penalty?

CMEast · April 2005

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Steel Troll @ Apr 21 2005, 04:07 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> So by your argument CMEast, we could say a newborn baby could be killed without much fuss as it has no experience or oppinions.Am i the only one who sees a flaw in East's views?<img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' />

You must place a very low value on human life then. Well i value every human life as any other.

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I actually value it by its quality of life the fact that it's able to contribute to society is something that goes hand in hand with that. I'm not saying that a child is forced to have a 'low quality' life if it is given birth too in the wrong circumstance, however it won't receive many of the things it should deserve in life and, more importantly, the mother will have had her quality of life severely crippled if she has a baby when she isn't ready/isn't capable to look after it.</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>

Just because people have a poor value of life, doesnt mean they should have any less right to live it. So what if they dont have a biological father/ mother?ie
How bout a child that has been orphaned early on in life? It won't receive many of the things it should deserve in life(what are these things??) Should it be killed? In many cases it motivates them, making them become active members of the comunity. I know of doctors lawyers and nurses who have all been fostered.  </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> 
I see no flaw whatsoever. You say without 'fuss'. By that do you mean would very little actually be affected? In that case yes, the baby hardly has a mind of its own, no personality at all. Do I agree with 'baby-killing'? No, of course not.

Humans aren't 'equal value', it's a useful idea, a handy myth but it doesn't make sense unless you believe in the whole 'soul' thing in which case you aren't killing them anyway. Either the foetus has a soul in which case it goes straight to heaven (or possibly purgatory? Depends on your particular belief) or it doesn't in which case it isn't important.

I'm not arguing to kill orphans, I'm saying I'd prefer it if every child had a stable, warm and loving home with capable parents. I've often thought of fostering kids when I have a few of my own. Mainly because I wish children didn't have to be fostered.

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I also think if the couples out there knew that Abortion wasnt a viable option if they made a mistake, then they would be more crefull in using contraception.</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>

You mean they should be punished for that mistake? No. When it comes to human life, no matter how 'low' I value it I don't believe that babies should be used as a punishment "you've made your bed, now lie in it" doesn't work when you are talking about bringing a new person in to the world.

You may think what you like but plenty of 'pro-life' are also 'pro-death penalty'. If life was so sacred then why can you abort in the case of rape? Or if their are complications? Why is it ok to kill a 'baby' one time but not another? Can a baby that was the product of rape not lead a decent life? Does a baby born with a crippling illness not count as human? You can sit on the fence all you want but I believe that the mother is more important than the foetus.

Pepe_Muffassa · April 2005

what if you want an abortion - but don't believe a doctor should be allowed to look at your *cough* private zones... should you be allowed to kill the baby right when it is born?

CMEast · April 2005

By saying you want an abortion you are saying "I don't want this foetus inside me, I am not able to be a mother at the moment and, for whatever reason, I don't want to continue this pregnancy".

If you have just given birth then all you can now say is "I am not able to be a mother at the moment" in which case you can give it up for adoption. You can't give a foetus up for adoption, it has to be brought to term.

Pepe_Muffassa · April 2005

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CMEast @ Apr 21 2005, 11:24 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> By saying you want an abortion you are saying "I don't want this foetus inside me, I am not able to be a mother at the moment and, for whatever reason, I don't want to continue this pregnancy".

If you have just given birth then all you can now say is "I am not able to be a mother at the moment" in which case you can give it up for adoption. You can't give a foetus up for adoption, it has to be brought to term.  </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> 
either way, it comes down to the mothers "wants" - what if she "wants" to give birth (for the experience sake) but doesn't want to give the kid up for adoption.

Think of it this way - she just want to have the kid, and then kill it when it is born (cheaper than an abortion - whatever) - under your justification for abortion - why is this wrong?

Steel_Troll · April 2005

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CMEast)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I actually value it by its quality of life, the fact that it's able to contribute to society is something that goes hand in hand with that........
[the 10 year old should not be killed]Because the 10 year old is a seperate being with its own experiences and opinions.</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>
</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Steel Troll)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>So by your argument CMEast, we could say a newborn baby could be killed without much fuss as it has no experience or oppinions and does not contribute to society.Am i the only one who sees a flaw in East's views?wink-fix.gif
</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>

Yes, sorry i re-read that and i hadnt put the first argument, sorry. The above was my argument and i have updated it above. Maybe fuss was a wrong word, i meant without any uproar or without breaking any rules. I cant quite think of the word that fits, but not from the babies point of view. Although it does have a developed brain.

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CMEast)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>You mean they should be punished for that mistake?</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> No i never implied a punishment, the thought of them having to care for a child when they are not capable an that abortion is not an option, should ward them off getting themselves into that mess. Social Learning Theory...We dont need to fall off a cliff to know it is bad for us

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CMEast)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>You may think what you like but plenty of 'pro-life' are also 'pro-death penalty'.</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>

I am pro death penalty. In extreme circumstances only, but that is another topic.

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CMEast)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> If life was so sacred then why can you abort in the case of rape? Or if their are complications?</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>
Due to psychological harm which could very well scar the mother for life, mental insanety is very much like the death of a mind (or soul call it what you must) this to me is very similar to the threat of the mothers life in pregnancy complications, ie if there is a mother-life-threatening-complication if the baby is later on in trimester, a c-section should be atempted andall possible should be undertaken to try and make the baby survive. But if the mothers life is in danger earlier on during the pregnancy abortion then may be an option (Note these are on vey rare occasions)

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CMEast)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Why is it ok to kill a 'baby' one time but not another?Can a baby that was the product of rape not lead a decent life? </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> Basicaly answered above,It can but at the price of the life or normal life functioning of another (its mother) I think it is important to have these exceptions.

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CMEast)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Does a baby born with a crippling illness not count as human? You can sit on the fence</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> I do not sit on the fence. Do you read?
I answered thisa few post up. </div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Steel Troll)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Nature is amazing. If there is a complication early on in the pregnancy, (eg severe cromosomal errors) then the foetus will auto-abort, without any intrusion from the outside world. If by that you mean that the baby is found to be deaf/ blind/ has downs syndrome/ lack of limbs or any other non life-threatening complication then i dont think there should be an abortion even at early stages. There is however scope for flexibility. That flexibility would only come from further debate on the actual complication.
</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>

CMEast · April 2005

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Steel Troll @ Apr 21 2005, 04:48 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> </div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CMEast)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>You mean they should be punished for that mistake?</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> No i never implied a punishment, the thought of them having to care for a child when they are not capable an that abortion is not an option, should ward them off getting themselves into that mess. Social Learning Theory...We dont need to fall off a cliff to know it is bad for us

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CMEast)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>You may think what you like but plenty of 'pro-life' are also 'pro-death penalty'.</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>

I am pro death penalty. In extreme circumstances only, but that is another topic.

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CMEast)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> If life was so sacred then why can you abort in the case of rape? Or if their are complications?</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>
Due to psychological harm which could very well scar the mother for life, mental insanety is very much like the death of a mind (or soul call it what you must) this to me is very similar to the threat of the mothers life in pregnancy complications, ie if there is a mother-life-threatening-complication if the baby is later on in trimester, a c-section should be atempted andall possible should be undertaken to try and make the baby survive. But if the mothers life is in danger earlier on during the pregnancy abortion then may be an option (Note these are on vey rare occasions)

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CMEast)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Why is it ok to kill a 'baby' one time but not another?Can a baby that was the product of rape not lead a decent life? </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> Basicaly answered above,It can but at the price of the life or normal life functioning of another (its mother) I think it is important to have these exceptions.

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CMEast)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Does a baby born with a crippling illness not count as human? You can sit on the fence</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> I do not sit on the fence. Do you read?
I answered thisa few post up. </div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Steel Troll)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Nature is amazing. If there is a complication early on in the pregnancy, (eg severe cromosomal errors) then the foetus will auto-abort, without any intrusion from the outside world. If by that you mean that the baby is found to be deaf/ blind/ has downs syndrome/ lack of limbs or any other non life-threatening complication then i dont think there should be an abortion even at early stages. There is however scope for flexibility. That flexibility would only come from further debate on the actual complication.
</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>  </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> 
Urgh, so many quotes <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' />

Maybe it <i>should</i> yes but it doesn't. To continue the comparison these people are warned of the cliff, they can see what might happening but they make a mistake or they aren't careful enough and end up falling off. Now you have the possibilty to catch them before they hit the bottom (abortion) and undo their mistake although perhaps they come out of it a little wiser and more experienced but no, what you want to do is let them fall and hit the bottom. How is that not a punishment?

I'm not sure it is a different topic. I said you were sitting on the fence because you say you value life and then suddenly you are willing to throw it away in 'extenuating circumstances'.

You say it's ok when it might endanger the life of a mother including when it endangers the quality of life so that they are 'mentally scarred' but surely there are therapists and drugs. Plus not every rape victim is a mental wreck, I've met a couple of incredibly strong women that have survived, in fact I went out with one for a few months and while she was hurt by it she wasn't incapable. So does that mean only certain rape victims can get an abortion but not others? How about if you extend quality of life to include having a life of their own, to put off motherhood until they feel happier to do it, more capable?

Pepe: If she is just worried about money then she could give the kid up for adoption, that costs nothing. There would be no justification for 'post-natal abortion'.

Pepe_Muffassa · April 2005

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Pepe: If she is just worried about money then she could give the kid up for adoption, that costs nothing. There would be no justification for 'post-natal abortion'.</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>

ehhhnnnngttt. Wrong answer. 10 minutes shouldn't make all the difference in classifying the kid as a person. What if she decided mid labor that she didn't want the kid - could she shove it back in and kill it there? - is an umbilical cord attachment what determines value?

I'm hitting at the heart of the issue here - Where is the value? - answer my previous question too - about Bill Gates - you admit he has more value than you - so if he kills you should he get a less stringent punsihment than if you kill him?

theclam · April 2005

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Pepe Muffassa @ Apr 21 2005, 09:00 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Why is it that no other 9 month period in our lives makes any difference as to weather or not we are a person? </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>
Well, certain criminals aren't regarded as people (otherwise they would be entitled to the right to live). Pregnancy is important because it's how human beings are created.
</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>If the life of the unborn is given value by being "wanted" or by socio-economic position of the parent - what gives YOUR life value - the fact that your mom didn't kill you?</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>The life of the unborn doesn't have or not have value because of any want or socioeconomic circumstance. Like I said earlier in the thread, it depends on how you define the difference between a zygote and an infant, not on anything else. We don't say that it's ok to murder people because we don't want them or because it will make us rich.
</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Why can we go to jail if we neglect a newborn - but 6 months sooner we can kill it without any penalty? - the child is just as dependant on the mother in both situations.</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>You have to make the dividing line between an infant and a zygote somewhere. The law makes it at or before birth. A pure utilitarian would have no dividing line at all.
</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Why aren't poor people allowed to kill their 10 year old children - who still happen to be a financial drain?</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>A 10 year old child is as alive as anyone else is, and has the right to live, just like everyone else. Murder isn't ok because of socioeconomic conditions, like I said before.
</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Why does a persons financial situation play into this argument at all? - does money determine value? Is Bill Gates life more valuable than yours?</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>
I think people take the financial situation into account because they won't be able to give the child a worthwhile (in their minds) life. I don't think financial situations should be taken into account; if you do take them into account, then it lets you grant different rights between the rich and the poor.
</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Notice - I'm not even touching on morality... I just feel that if you as a person are going to be pro-death... I mean, pro-choice, then these are questions that need to be answered. And when answering - learn from John Kerry - being nuanced will only get you so far...</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>Nuance may be uncharismatic, especially compared to black and white thinking, but it's a much better to craft a nuanced argument than a black and white argument.
</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>ehhhnnnngttt. Wrong answer. 10 minutes shouldn't make all the difference in classifying the kid as a person. What if she decided mid labor that she didn't want the kid - could she shove it back in and kill it there? - is an umbilical cord attachment what determines value?</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>
You're probably making the same distinction he is, except you probably believe that 10 minutes after conception is the dividing line, rather than 10 minutes before birth. Unless, of course, you hold a utilitarian view (which you don't, if you're a Christian).

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I'm hitting at the heart of the issue here - Where is the value? - answer my previous question too - about Bill Gates - you admit he has more value than you - so if he kills you should he get a less stringent punsihment than if you kill him?</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>I think he meant in a utilitarian way, that Bill Gates has a greater net positive effect on the world's happiness than he does, meaning that if the world had to choose who to kill, the world would kill him before it killed Bill Gates. That doesn't necessarily mean that Bill Gates has more value than he does, unless you define value as solely a net positive effect on the world's happiness.

Abortion

Comments