Debate discussion
Politics
>
Pro-Life/ Pro-Choice
I can't stand that people are so selfish they think they can decide what a woman can do with her body.
Marley wrote: "I can't stand that people are so selfish they think they can decide what a woman can do with her body."Sure, it might the woman's body, but guess what? There's another body inside if her!!!
Not really. There are a bunch of cells. Until a baby can survive outside of the womb on it's own, it's not a person.
Sure, it might the woman's body, but guess what? There's another body inside if her!!!Guess what else?! That body doesn't have the brain capacity to make a conscious decision yet!
A woman's body is her own property, I may be tolerant of many fundamental beliefs, but one thing I will NEVER tolerate is the subjugation of women. We have the right to decide what to do with our bodies, without the dictation of the government.
And there's always adoption.
You say that like dumping off the baby on a doorstep without a second thought is something that can be easily done. There are enough homeless children in the world without adding to it simply because you think it's "immoral".
"Guess what else?! That body doesn't have the brain capacity to make a conscious decision yet!"That doesn't make it right!!! Might as well go shoot a mentally retarded person because most of them can't make a conscious decision.
Are you saying mentally handicapped person can't make a conscious decision? I disagree with that. They are perfectly able to make decisions. A 2 month old embryo can not.
In what way are those two things similar in ANY way?????? A fetus lives only because the mother's body supports it by letting it live on and feed off of her. In scientific terms, a fetus is a parasite. A mentally challenged individual is a living, breathing, fully developed and functional human being that is not living on the woman. And having an abortion is not at all like sticking a gun to someone's head, I don't know where in hell you made that comparison.
I cant stand that people are so selfish they cant live with thier mistakes so they murder another life. I can't stand that people are so selfish that they want to impose their beliefs on everyone else.
Well did you know rape is so traumatic that pregnancy chances of a rape is 1 in 100.
Only 1 in 100? Well, shit. Who cares about 1% of rape victims? Not me. Fuck those stupid whores. They probably dressed really slutty and that's why they got raped in the first place. And now, because they're nothing but stupid, lazy, ugly sluts, they want to get another abortion so they can keep whoring and drinking and partying every night. These stupid sluts probably get an abortion every week, just for fun.
Right? Right?
And there's always adoption.scenario 1: a foetus is aborted before it has any knowledge of life and does not know anything as it hasn't ever lived. It had no recognition of life before it was aborted.
scenario 2: a inadequate mother (lets say she had a teenage pregnancy) dumps her baby in an orphanage where, later in life, it wants to know who/where his parents are and lives a depressing life as most children in orphanages do.
Which one's crueler?
who cares if this has already been debated. It hasn't by us!!!
At the "go fuck yourself" comment- that's very diplomatic of you.And at the rape thing- You know that's not what I meant by it and you know it :P
And you obviously dont understand how adoption works do you? There's very few orphanages nowadays. Most people look for families to take thier babies.
And its not the womens body inside her. The baby grows very fast and after a relatively short peroid of time can feel pain and move and try and get away from the abortionists tools. Sounds like a useless ball of cells to me.
I personally think that this debate should be about when life begins.I think that no matter where we are on this issue we can all agree that life is precious. So the question is when is it life?
Now IMO life begins at conception. I have tried to think how it could be anything else and I cannot come up with anything. I know that I started at conception, in fact I know we were all conceived at one point or another. It is where all animal life begins, without conception we would have no life.
And those that say things like being to live on its own or have a conscious thought, do you really believe that a 1 day or 1 week or 1 month old baby could live on its own or even have a conscious thought. Yet I think you would think it wrong if the parent thought that after one week they decided to change their mind and end that baby's life. Key word there is life, and once again I think life begins at conception.
Dan
I agree with dan.
Dan wrote: "I cant stand that people are so selfish they cant live with thier mistakes so they murder another life. I can't stand that people are so selfish that they want to impose their beliefs on everyone..."
oh my gosh, this is so damn biased! U think women get raped because they dress in flashy clothes. No, it is the perverts out there who don't care if its a girl or a woman!!! Can you even imagine the mental trauma a girl who's been raped goes through??? Okay you tell me, a fifteen year old girl gets raped and gets pregnant, what then???? And as for other people's points i think abortion should be legal, a woman should have a right to decide whether she wants the child or not!!! After all its the woman who goes through the agony of child birth!!!
i·ro·ny[ahy-ruh-nee, ahy-er-]
– noun, plural -nies.
1. the use of words to convey a meaning that is the opposite of its literal meaning: the irony of her reply, “How nice!” when I said I had to work all weekend.
Oh please!!! Everyone knows what irony is!
Obviously you don't, since you completely missed it in my post.
Hmmm.....you must have a very weird concept of irony then. If you think saying that all women who get raped are sluts is ironical you'd better read the definition again.
you must have a very weird concept of irony then. If you think saying that all women who get raped are sluts is ironical you'd better read the definition again.Perhaps you should read it again. Dan said the opposite of what he meant. That is irony. I know you are young, but you can't be this obtuse. You have the definition right there. Are you trying to be ignorant?
irony and sarcasm. Did you not read the 'Right? Right?' at the end??
lives a depressing life as most children with adopted parents do.This is completely ridiculous and asinine. Most children with adoptive parents lead a depressing life? This is utter horse shit. Where exactly did you obtain this "information"?
Yeah, Izzy, having adopted parents doesn't mean your life is crap. Some people adopt children for a reason. I know a couple of adopted kids, and they are perfectly happy with their families. And also, I'm confused about what point you're making. Are you for or against the choice of abortion?
The debate isn't for or against abortion, the debate is for or against the choice of abortion. VERY different. I am EXTREMELY pro-choice
anyway, now I read it my post is idiotic and pointless so I will take it down and make you look like morons, talking to no one!
Anyway, that begs this question:are you for or against abortion? (i'm interested)
as I mentioned before, I am EXTREMELY pro-choice, however, I am not extremely sure if I am pro-abortion (no they are not the same thing)
Isabelle wrote: "Anyway, that begs this question:are you for or against abortion? (i'm interested)
as I mentioned before, I am EXTREMELY pro-choice, however, I am not extremely sure if I am pro-abortion (no..."
i'm not really sure....since I'm not sure it's probably pro-choice...
Isabelle wrote: "The debate isn't for or against abortion, the debate is for or against the choice of abortion. VERY different. I am EXTREMELY pro-choice
anyway, now I read it my post is idiotic and pointles..."
you looked like a moron in the first place! =D
Isabelle wrote: "The debate isn't for or against abortion, the debate is for or against the choice of abortion. VERY different. "ok.
Chiara *♥☺Eat cheesecake.....NOW☺♥* wrote: "Are you for or against the choice of abortion?"happy now???
@Dan Okay hold on, i didn't read Agnus' comment before yours so i didnt take it in that context! Sorry, my bad!
Personally it disgusts me. I cant stand that people are so selfish they cant live with thier mistakes so they murder another life. And I can't take when a person dosen't even attempt to understand someone else situation.
I'm sorry, but it really is the woman's choice whether or not she'll have the baby. If she decided that she wants an abortion, she should always, ALWAYS, have the right to have one.
And as for the raping: In America, a woman is raped every second minute, according to the US department of justice. So even if it's only one in 100, that will still be a hell of a lot of women who got pregnant.
Sorry you already made your choice when you decided to have unprotected sex!
Dude, ever heard of a condoms breaking? Pills not working?
And even if they did have sex without protection, the opportunity to get an abortion should still be there. It's up to the individual female to choose if they want an abortion or not.
Anna,I can understand what you are saying, I truly do. Let me ask you this..........
If a women decided, 3 days after her baby is born, that she made a mistake and never should have had the baby, would you allow her the choice to abort that child. I believe I know the answer, it is a resonding NO of course not.
You see in my opinion it is the same baby, wether it be 3 days old or just conceived. They are one in the same life, just different stages of that life. I think life is precious, and I am not saying that you don't. I think we just both have different ideas as to when life begins.
So another question I have for you is when, in your opinion, does a women stop having the right to an abortion? Is it 3 months into the pregnancy, 6 months into the pregnancy, some other date?
Dan
@ Dan: 3 days after the birth, the woman wouldn't have to kill the baby, she could give it to someone else. A 3 days old fetus is just that, a fetus. It only lives because it's connected to the woman. Remove it from the woman, and it wont survive. A 3 days old baby can be removed from it's mom without it dying, because it is capable of supporting it's own life-force, if you can say it like that.I think abortion is okay until the sixth week. As you probably know, the fetus' heart does not beat until the 6th week. When the heart dose not beat, it can be discussed how much of a living being it actually is.
You see in my opinion it is the same baby, wether it be 3 days old or just conceived.There is a huge difference, of course. The fetus just conceived cannot survive on its own without the direct support of the mother's body and natural resources. The mother is, in a way, a slave to the fetus. The mother should not be forced to sustain this life if she does not wish to. Your analogy of killing a newborn baby does not hold up. Why? Because the mother does not need to kill the newborn in order to stop taking care of it and get rid of it. She could simply give it away. However, in the case of the newly conceived fetus, her only option is to abort it in order to stop its using of the maternal resources.
Haha Nathan, we said almost the same thing ;)
So Anna, after the 6th week you and I are basically on the same page.To Nathan and Anna, why can't a women choose to give up her baby before it is born?
Also, does anyone think that a 3 day old baby or even a 1 year old baby could survive on its own. It still needs 24/7 care. It wouldn't know how to get food or water or any other care without someone doing it for them, in other words others would have to sustain its life, it can't do it on its own.
To Nathan and Anna, why can't a women choose to give up her baby before it is born?She can, if she wants to. Or she can make another choice like abortion, if she wants to. It is about what she wants to do, not about what you want her to do.
does anyone think that a 3 day old baby or even a 1 year old baby could survive on its own.
See Dan, you already aren't paying attention. You'll note that I said a newborn can survive without the direct support of its mother. It needs support, but it doesn't need hers. A newborn is not forcing itself on anyone. There are plenty of people who would love to take care of it if the mother didn't want to, both public and private. The fetus however is dependent on one particular individual and it is this individual's right to cut off her support if she wishes to.
I think a person is considered alive when their heart beats, yes.And I never said a baby can survive all on it's own. I said the baby could be removed from it's mom without dying. See the difference?
First of all Nathan, do not talk down to me I do not appreciate it. I do know how to read.Anna, yes I can see the difference.
However you can call it anything you want. "Direct Support", Dependent on one individual" the bottom line for me is that the baby regardless of whether it is just conceived or 3 months old it needs some sort of support. It cannot surive on its own.
Nathan, you also state that the newborn did not force itself on anyone, I would ask you, who did the fertilize egg force itself on? Yes it attached to the uterus wall however it certainly didn't ask to be conceived, it truly is an innocent bystander in the whole process.
Oh and just so you know, I may not agree with abortion, however, since a women has that right I would defend her choice to the very end. If she asked me for my advice however I would sway her against it. If she was truly intent on giving up the baby I would encourage her to get involved with deciding who she wanted as the parents through a private adoption agency.
Dan
Do you consider a kick in the gut murder of a kid too? 'Cause it kills the seedcells, and without them a child can't be conceived. Anyway, a woman isn't actually pregnant for the 1st two weeks. And the fetus isn't even a fetus until somewhere between the 6th and the 10th week, though I forget when. Again, it's heart dose not beat until the 6th week. I mean, I think it's wrong after 6th week, 'cause then the heart beats and the blood circulates, and it starts developing eyes and intestines and stuff like that.
First of all Nathan, do not talk down to me I do not appreciate it. I do know how to read.So, you just don't know how to understand what you have read? Interesting.
the bottom line for me is that the baby regardless of whether it is just conceived or 3 months old it needs some sort of support. It cannot surive on its own.
You can call this the bottom line if you like, but it is a meaningless argument since I have already explained the difference between the two situations. You have not refuted what I have said because you have not addressed the issue that I brought up. You haven't countered my "however." You have merely said, "Yes they both are dependent." Great, we established that already. We also, however, established that the two situations are not equivalent. You have not addressed this point.
Oh and just so you know, I may not agree with abortion, however, since a women has that right I would defend her choice to the very end. If she asked me for my advice however I would sway her against it. If she was truly intent on giving up the baby I would encourage her to get involved with deciding who she wanted as the parents through a private adoption agency.
Nothing wrong with that.
Mod
If you take this apart statement by statement, they have absolutely no connection to each other. Just because your mind can't grasp a fact does not make the fact untrue. How the fuck would you know if you started at concept? You WERE NOT SENTIENT. You had no thinking ability. Yes, everyone was conceived at one point, but that doesn't prove that we are alive. There is a difference between being an organic bunch of cells and being a human being. And bringing animals into it doesn't prove a point. Yes, things become alive, but the moment of conception is not that point.
Mod
Dear Nathan,As usual, your arguments are well-thought out and interesting to read. My personal opinions and how they differ are simply not relevant when admiring your thought process.
Regarding your message, number 41, I found your master-slave parallel between the baby and mother quite interesting. The thought process that occurred in my mind was as follows, and I write it out not to incite argument but because it raised questions I could not satisfactorily answer myself.
Premise: The mother is a slave to the baby.
Premise: Slavery is bad- the mother should not be forced to sustain the life.
Conclusion: The mother/baby slave relationship needs to be stopped.
Premise: The baby needs to be removed from the mother to stop its tyranny over her.
Premise: In the early stages of pregnancy, the baby cannot survive without its mother.
Conclusion: The baby needs to be removed, and therefore killed, to stop its possession of the mother.
Suppose we took this situation and put it in the context of the monstrous slavery that took place in our nation. Would it be acceptable for a slave to kill a white Southern slaveholder to free himself? Or would it be morally more satisfying for the slave to withstand their possession until they were legally free? Yes, there are dangers in remaining a slave, not unlike the dangers of giving birth- but would it be worth it to save the slaveholder's life?
*This questioning assumes that all lives have equal value, the mother's, the baby's, the master's, and the slave's. It also assumes that the baby is alive and not yet born. If either of these things are changed, it becomes an irrelevant argument.
Thank you for reading this.
Lauren,We were all conceived. Can anyone here argue that point?
Therefore all of us started at conception. Can anyone argue that point?
Now maybe there was no brain activity or no heart beat, but that 2 celled embryo that immediately started multiplying had the blue print that became you, or me or anyone else who is reading this and beyond.
So I know that I began at conception and since I am alive today my life started the day I was conceived. I also know that you were too.
Now maybe you don't consider it a "life" but regardless without you being conceived you would not be here today. I don't see how that point can be argued either.
Suppose we took this situation and put it in the context of the monstrous slavery that took place in our nation. Would it be acceptable for a slave to kill a white Southern slaveholder to free himself? Or would it be morally more satisfying for the slave to withstand their possession until they were legally free?If I was personally being held as a slave, I think it would be justifiable to gain my freedom through the killing of the slaveholder.
Yes, there are dangers in remaining a slave, not unlike the dangers of giving birth- but would it be worth it to save the slaveholder's life?
I don't think the analogy works well. I would have no sympathy for any slaveholder. The analogy doesn't work well because a fetus actually has made no concious decisions in the process. While this may seem to cause some to have more sympathy for the fetus than the slaveholder, I find it irrelevant.
So I know that I began at conception and since I am alive today my life started the day I was conceived. I also know that you were too.I am willing to concede that life starts at conception. However, I think that is irrelevant. A fetus is human life, no doubt. But it isn't yet a human life. There is a difference.
We were all conceived. Can anyone here argue that point? So what? We also all have a circulatory system. Does this mean life begins when the circulatory system is developed? We all have a nervous system. Does this mean that life begins when the nervous system develops? We all have bones. Does this mean life begins when bones develop, several years after birth?
Therefore all of us started at conception. Can anyone argue that point?
Yes. I can. Life does not "begin;" it merely changes forms. The sperm cell and the egg were both alive before the former fertilized the latter. So did you "begin" when your father's sperm fertilized your mother's egg? Did you begin when your father's testes produced that particular sperm cell? When your mother produced all her eggs? The sperm and egg, being haploid rather than diploid, do not all carry the same genes as each other, but the genes they carry are all culled from the same pool -- your parents' genes. So, then, did you begin when your grandparents conceived your parents, establishing your parents' genomes and therefore the gene pool from which your genes could be drawn?
What is a person, Dan? The story of a human (or any) life is a story of constant change and development. A newborn baby does not have a fully formed skull. A ten year-old girl does not have fully fused hip bones. A twenty year-old man does not have a fully developed brain. And by the time some of these systems and structures are "finished" or "complete," they or other systems and structures are already starting to break down.
You want to view life in very simplistic terms -- there is a "before," "during" and "after" -- when in fact it isn't that simple. There is no moment when life begins, when life is breathed into non-living cells. There is only transition. And at the edges things get fuzzy. We face the same problem at the end of life: considering our technological ability to keep vital systems functioning interminably, at what point is a person no longer alive?
We make value judgments all the time that concern other living things. Many people think nothing, for example, of essentially killing countless sperm and egg cells by separating them with a latex barrier and not allowing them to fertilize and come to fruition. These single-celled lifeforms are scarcely less complex than the two-, four- or eight-celled lifeforms that occur shortly after conception. We think nothing of killing insects, mice, etc. -- all of which are far more complex than a fertilized egg. We think nothing of driving cars, buying plastics or eating mass-produced food -- actions that will almost certainly negatively impact the world's poor and future generations of all social strata.
We clearly do not value all life -- not even all human life -- the same. We value the lives of mammals over insects; of humans over other animals; of compatriots over foreigners; of friends and family over strangers. Why, then, is it singularly troubling to you that we value the lives of adult women over the lives of newly fertilized eggs that lack any of the structures or systems that define for us what a human being is?
Anna wrote: "*round of applause for Dan!*"Defiantly a round of applause for Dan!
*Joins in the applause*
Personally it disgusts me. I cant stand that people are so selfish they cant live with thier mistakes so they murder another life.
Even the term "pro-choice" is a joke. Sorry you already made your choice when you decided to have unprotected sex!
I can already here the "what if you're raped" cries. Well did you know rape is so traumatic that pregnancy chances of a rape is 1 in 100. And there's always adoption.