Should abortions performed in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy be a crime?

Great Debates
141
  • What do you mean? I love you more and more with each snide,
  • disrespectful and needlessly hostile post. As far as I’m concerned,
  • you’re still in the running. Mention my name at the ceremony.
  • You’ll get a good seat.
  • quote:

Perhaps you should consider cultivating indifference?

  • Yeah, right. I’m dying to undertsand what makes you tick. Any
  • textbooks you’d recommend?

Oh, I think you need a few that deal with your particular and peculiar interests.

  • Oh, you wish. You ain’t close to the most troubling poster we’ve
  • seen, and I haven’t involved a mod yet. Keep trying, though.
  • We’ve practically got a chatroom going here.

It was just amusing, I doubt that you’d understand that.

142

**:shrug: Whatever.

**Peculiar? Hey, who have you been talking to?

Get outta here. I’m the most amusing guy on the whole board. Everybody knows that.

143

Candida, your abject refusal to use the quotation brackets is getting on my nerves, and it is detracting from your argument. Just thought you should know.

144

candida’s lack of quote tags makes her posts virtually impossible to follow, especially because it’s very hard to tell where or who the quote she pulled came from, what the context is, and whether all the things she’s re-posting came out of the same context.

Aside from that, I will interject my opinion for whatever worth it has.

Regardless of whether or not the fetus is a ‘baby’, even if it were accorded full personhood status, no born human has the right to use the blood and organs of another person for its survival. A six month old baby cannot be attached to a woman (or a man) against her (or his) will for the purposes of respiration, nutrition and excretion. One person cannot be compelled by any law to give up blood, tissue or organ to save the life of, or even to give aid to, another person, regardless of whether that person will die without such aid.

If someone were dying in front of me and the only chance that person had to survive was two pints of my blood, the law cannot compel me to give that blood. So, even if one would extend ‘personhood’ status to a fetus, it would have no more right than anyone else to use my body without my permission. If the law can’t force a woman to give her blood to, for example, a person who was stabbed in front of her, even if she helped that person in the past, on what grounds would it be able to force her to give her blood to an unborn person?

145

What if the only way you could avoid providing the pints of blood were to take the dying person and dismember him? Not permit him to be dismembered, but actively make sure that it occurred. Would you feel the same way?

146

OK, I give up. What is a “metaphorical fetus” and how is one beaten by it? Is it an unborn human person as opposed to a mass of tissue connected to a woman? Does the mere belief that a fetus is a human person with rights, coupled with mentioning that belief in public, make one a metaphorical fetus wielder?

I thought we were talking about what kind of law and how would it be enforced. Unfortunately for this conversation, the type of penalty selected depends on why an action is made illegal. If abortion is like not having the proper vehicle registration, a first type of law with a first type of enforcement is indicated than if abortion is like murder, in which case a second type of law with a second type of enforcement is indicated.

147

Hey, I don’t see anything wrong with removing a fetus whole from the uterus. If it’s capable of survival, it’ll start breathing. Otherwise, it won’t. So long as it hasn’t got the consent of the person whose body it’s using, it can be removed.

Also, if someone is trying to take another person’s blood or organs by force, that person would be able to defend their life or person with force, correct?

As it stands where I live, if someone tried to cut my kidney out to use it, I would be justified in using any force necessary to stop them.

148

The mother did not gain the fetus’ consent to place it there, so the fetus is more like a captive of the mother than an aggressor against the mother. The mother placed it there, forced it to be dependent upon her, and now wants to set aside her obligation to protect a creation of hers, something that she made dependent upon herself. (I’m really making friends now. By the way, I’m not talking about rape, only consensual sex risking pregnancy.)

"Not only are children not responsible for the consequences of a mother’s pregnancy upon herself, neither are they to blame for their need to remain in the womb. This need is something that was imposed upon them when they were created. Once having brought children into a state of dependency, we have the obligation to bring them safely out. This means we must wait until they are able to come “out” safely.

“Where parents choose not to fulfill their duty to children, such as when they choose to have an abortion, others are entitled to defend the child’s rights, for such defense is no aggression upon anyone.”

Source: “How I Became Pro-Life: Remarks on Abortion, Parental Obligation, and the Draft” by Doris Gordon (entered into the Congressional Record by the Hon. Ron Paul, Rep. of Texas (Quoted in another thread, but bore repeating here.)

149

An opinion piece does not equate to a cite disproving anything.

The bottom line is that your opinion should reign over who gets to use your body, and mine should reign over who gets to use mine.

By no consent of mine will there ever be a fetus in my body, and should all my efforts fail, it’s up to me and only me what to do about it.

I have no obligation to give use of my body to anyone or anything beyond the point that I wish it to stop using my body.

Or would you say that there reaches a point in a sexual encounter where I can no longer back out because I ‘invited’ it and am ‘obligated’ to finish it.

The editorial you’re so fond of quoting says absolutely nothing about the fact that many people, like myself, go to every measure within reason to prevent a fetus from ever existing. It also smacks of the arrogant ‘those whores must be punished for their impropriety’ attitude that seems so common in the pro-life movement.

I have no ‘duty’ to provide my body to anybody. None. And neither does anyone else.

150

Care to offer a shred of evidence that this is a “common” attitude in the pro life community?

151

Stand outside a clinic during one of their rallies.

152

Huh. You know, you’re right.

We have a Planned Parenthood clinic in a town near mine.

Every week, there people across the street from the clinic silently praying or silently holding “just say no” signs. (There was an article about them in the local paper…you can see them in all the violent fury here
).

From that I assume that all pro choice folks express their point of view through silent prayer or sign holding. No confrontational people at all. Anywhere. Thanks for making the connection for me. :slight_smile:

153

Loaded language? What’s a good reason to be against abortion, and wanting to make it legal, if one doesn’t believe that it’s wrong? Ok, ok, you got me, I think that abortion is just fine. I just want it outlawed for the hell of it.

154

“wanting to make it legal” should have been wanting to make it illegal." Oops.

155

Well then my experiences have differed from yours, because I have been called a whore and screamed at about how I’ll burn in hell and that I’m irresponsible and selfish and need to be taught a lesson.

It happened on the CNN message boards when they were still active, it happened when there were protests in front of clinics, it happened in debate class where people were supposedly learning the rules of civilized debate, and I doubt it’ll stop any time soon.

156

Yes, there are people who will be like that. With some people, emotions run high, and they don’t think rationally. But that isn’t what the majority of us are like. They’re just a few bad apples giving the rest of us a bad name.

157

Well I’m sorry that you have had this experience. At the same time, I hope we can agree that there are extremists in all political movements…to extrapolate a behavior from the extremists and apply it to the entire group is not entirely honest.

Would you characterize most environmentalists as extremists willing to burn down private property and threaten lives?

Would you characterize most vegetarians as sensationalistic hacks?

I honestly don’t think you would. The loudest group, the group that gets the most “media” attention…these are not often representative of the entire political or philosophical belief. If you wouldn’t generalize for one group, it’s not honest to do the same for another, regardless of your regretable personal experiences.

158

It’s just an argument counter to yours. I only quoted because I thought Ms. Gordon said it better than I could.

Always, unless your opinion regarding your body causes you to harm my body or someone elses body.

Unless you knowingly engage in behavior which risks the creation of a captive human being, in which case you should be responsible for protecting that human being until such captivity can be safely ended.

You can do what you want with the sexual act or the other parent. Once conception occurs, you have (or should have) a contract to bear the human that was created as a result of your actions until that human can be safely removed from your sphere of influence in which you created it.

You abstain from sex? If not, you engage in an act which you know has some risk, however small, of creating a captive and predictably necessarily needy human being in your body. Therefore, you are more responsible for the aftermath or your decisions than the human which was created without his/her consent.

You are projecting your abhorance at getting pregnant upon prolifers. I, for one, do not look upon pregnancy as a punishment. It certainly is a consequence of actions of adults, as you know.

Besides, the attitude of some prolifers (assuming there are any who really feel that way) has no ability to affect the logic of the arguments I offer today. As such, your comment is a non sequitor and merely seeks to distract us from the substantive discussion.

We disagree with each other on this point. Parents always have some duty to their children until the age of maturity. The duty to the unborn may be slightly different than the duty to the born, but no less significant.

159

I knowingly engage in behavior that could kill me every day. That doesn’t mean I want to be dead or that should I get into an accident while driving my car I won’t go to every effort to survive it. Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy. That’s one of the things that differentiates human beings from other animals.

No, actually, I make it quite clear that I never intend to enter in such a contract, and unless I intended such a contract, it cannot exist. Intent to form a contract is quite important in the enforcement of a contract. Since I have none, there is no obligation to bear anything. It’ll be removed from my body because I don’t want it there.

Which no matter what will never have my permission to be in my body, therefore it will be removed. It certainly wasn’t created by my consent, it won’t be there by my consent, but it will be removed in the interest of preserving my mental health.

You’re the one using the word ‘consequences’. I don’t abhor pregnancy in and of itself, nor see it as punishment. It’s something other people seem to enjoy quite a bit. Punishment is forcing me to go through a pregnancy I never consented to and do not wish to continue because you see it as a ‘consequence’.

I am not a parent nor will I ever be. I have no children, and never will. If there is a duty to an unwanted fetus, that duty is to not bear a child that is unwanted and will be resented. It’s to not continue a pregnancy knowing that I would have no regard whatsoever for the health of it, and wouldn’t mind slamming down a few martinis and a couple packs of cigarettes every friday night. My duty is to recognize who and what I am, and that is a person who should not have kids.

160

Does it allow you to hold others responsible for your death should it occur if the action that caused your death was solely yours?

No, but it is consent to the risk of pregnancy, which means, or should mean, consent to all things pertinent to pregnancy. Perhaps Russian Roulette isn’t consent to death, but if death occurs, who is responsible? Wait, let me guess, the gun maker. :rolleyes:

To whom do you communicate this? Certainly not to the other party to the contract, who does not exist before you create him/her without his/her consent. Intent is well and good, but you can’t nullify contract responsibilities merely by crossing your fingers behind your back and wishing your responsibilities away as you put your signature on the dotted line. But if you don’t buy contract law, how about tort law. If you create a harm, you bear the responsibility to right the harm. If you create a captive human, you have the responsibitlity to uncaptivate that human safely.

You’ve made it clear that regardless of your objective responsibilities, you will choose to ignore them for your personal benefit. I recognize that people will violate any law, and you would clearly be one of the violators. Now that we have established your intent, why don’t we set it aside and then try to work out a reason why abortion should not be illegal so you don’t have to become a criminal?

I drive recklessly, and I hit another car, and it explodes, killing a passenger, and horribly burning and crippling another. Did I consent to have an accident? Did I consent for the explosion? Did I consent to those burns and that death? Did I know those consequences were possible given my chosen actions? Do I bear responsibility for them? No; no; no. Yes and yes.

The term “consequences” is neutral. Consequences may be enjoyed or abhored. Because pregnancy is a consequence of sex does not make the mother a “whore”. I disagree with any demonizing of pregnant mothers, regardless of the circumstances of their pregnancy. Actions are different from people. Actions should be judged morally, and avoided if found lacking. But my place is not to judge humans for their past actions. I should offer my compassion to them, to help them assuage the more difficult consequences of pregnancy.

It is more than that I personally, subjectively see it as a consequence. I am arguing that objectively, it is a consequence of your actions, therefore is the legitimate subject matter of law. If our prospective pregnancy is not a consequence of the mother’s actions, then of what is it a consequence?

Too easy.:wink: