Actually Sake, my contention is that you would put millions of lives at risk every year, just because you have a romaticized view of reality. Many people have killed themselves trying to perform a back-alley abortion. Do you really want to wish this on somebody, because you didn’t feel like throwing out a life-preserver.
Yes, some are willfully ignorant. Some make mistakes. Some, however, had no control in the matter. This is a life-or-death decision in more ways than one.
I don’t think any of us are in a position to pre-judge anonymous faces.
FTR, I’m pro-life, but not rabidly so. I realize there are a number of reasons a woman might choose to get an abortion, which might seem reasonable to her at the time, even though I think it’s a mistake to do so. I’m also realistic enough to realize that abortion is probably never going to go away—it’s here to stay, whether I, we, or they like it or not.
The one thing that really burns me about the whole debate, however, is this use of euphemism. I.e., “It’s not an unborn human being.” Oh really? Then what, pray tell, is it? An unborn kangaroo? An unborn zebra? An unborn 1956 Chevy BelAir Deluxe, mayhap? If it were allowed to exist up to its being born, what would it be then? Oh, a human being. My stars, how interesting. If a woman walks into a clinic to get an abortion, the doctor can perform the procedure, and since everybody volunteered for the duty, no call, no foul. But! If a pregnant woman is shot in the stomach and her unborn fetus is killed, then, then, it’s murder and the shooter goes to jail. Huh? Look, either it is or it isn’t. Either you can or you can’t. The current laws concerning definitions of unborn whatever-you-wanna-call-'ems are a tad ephemeral, to say the least.
The only other thing I’d say is that I have read some of the stuff put out by the so-called “ethicist” Peter Singer, and he is extremely frightening, to say the least. This is the type of reasoning that gave us people like Joseph Mengele and Adolf Eichmann.
My [now ex-]boyfriend and I were sitting in bed one day arguing about abortion. He was pro-life, I was pro-choice. We dickered for about a half-hour until we realized it was pretty fucking stupid for two fags to be arguing about abortion.
What irks me is the blatant double-standard afforded to women when it comes to anything involving a fetus.
Ooh, she’s pregnant? Well, a quick trip to the doc and the problem tissue is removed. People hold her hand and support her.
Oh no, she miscarries? She is lost in grief and depression over the death of her child. People hold her hand and support her.
And as someone else mentioned…oh no, someone kills her and her unborn baby? He’s guilty of double murder. People kick his ass and demonize him.
But the first woman who got the abortion–also killing a fetus–is innocent, of course. Laws in this country are simply absurd.
Sometimes I am grateful I’m not a man, because even as a woman, I do not get the female line of thinking. I can’t imagine how ridiculous it must seem to a man. It’s hypocrisy at its most obscene.
FTR, I’m starting to climb up on the fence. I do believe a baby is a baby is a baby regardless of age in or out of the womb, but I also believe a woman does have the right to choose. I do prefer that she choose life, but…I’m not her, and can’t make someone else’s decision.
I used to think the world was against me. Now I know better. Some of the smaller countries are neutral.
SterlingNorth: Not romantic. You see, I’m willing to accept the loss of some unfit mothers, who end up dead due to a botched hack abortion.
If I was female, I’d never have an abortion. Period.
If I wanted to, though, I should be able to walk into a legal, sanitary, professional facility, and throw down $250 and say, “Abort this human life inside of me, please.” I would strike down anyone who would take that right from me. If you are protesting the clinic and try to prevent my entrance, you’d better be willing to kill me for your beliefs.
I do NOT judge the women in my life who have had abortions. It is their decision. It is their right. I hold them in high esteem if they realize they took a life, but say it was for the greater good of their own life. I hold them in low esteem only if they deny the moral repercussions of their actions.
The government should entirely stay out of the whole debate. No legislation. No funding. If clinics are being bombed and women attacked - the criminals should be tried under the existing laws that deal with such mayhem. Abortion need not be a special case.
It’s pretty simple to answer your question about abortion vs. unborn baby killed by bad person.
In the former case, the person is making a decision based upon their morality to have an abortion. It is her body, and that indivisual person does not feel that the fetus is a “child,” but a problem.
And to try and change her wishes on what to do with her body by forcing her to have that baby is abominable.
In the latter case, a person is pregnant, is already looking forward to the kid, named it, bought furniture, can envision it being in college, and in general DOES see the fetus as a chld.
And to try and change her wishes on what to do with her body by killing that “baby” is abominable.
Sake,
I spent 20 min typing and deleting profanities directed at you. I’m calmer now.
There is NO way you can make that statement until you are actually IN that situation.
[b/]PERIOD.**
My view is this: A woman should have the right to terminate her pregnancy anytime in the first trimester. After that, it should be severely limited. Third trimester abortions should be banned entirely except for medical emergencies.
No, it’s called you controlling other people’s actions because they offend your sensitivities. Exactly the kind of thing people like you usually “bust liberals” for. (More on that later.)
Who, exactly, put you in charge of deciding this?
Yes, and by all means we should allow children to be raised by people obviously unfit to have them. Then we can punish the mothers and the children! Yay!
Exactly why?
Yes, that’s right, only liberals could possibly be pro-choice, huh?
Sake sayeth:
Ah, more controlling other people’s actions.
Pickman’s Model sayeth:
I haven’t seen a single person in this thread make that claim; and speaking for myself, I said precisely the opposite. So this is a bit of a strawman to the extent it concerns this thread.
“I love God! He’s so deliciously evil!” - Stewie Griffin, Family Guy
I didn’t see that at all, Peter. What I saw in Shirley’s post was statements of fact. I have a stepson who has an older sister with extreme disabilities. She is, as Shirley stated, in diapers for life. She is 11 years old, on her birth certificate. In reality, she’s not much older than my 3 week old son. Her name is Amanda. Her mother has told me pretty much the same thing that Shirley said. But there’s one kicker…the pregnancy progressed normally, and the handicaps occurred due to complications that arose during Amanda’s birth. Tracy has told me herself that had these handicaps been present and obvious during the pregnancy, she may well have aborted. She obviously loves Amanda, though, as do I.
Sorry, didn’t mean to get off topic. Just felt I had to reply.
What I was getting at is that with abortion comes ideas of what “might have been.” Who really knows what the potential of a baby is, even one with disabilities.
is identical to saying that there’s no way for you to say, “If I was a man, I would NEVER rape a woman.” Who knows, maybe you would, right?
I know enough women to reasonably state that my morals wouldn’t change if my sex did. And it’s also just like saying that only a serial killer has the right to judge Son of Sam or Jeff Dahmer. Everyone who’s not a maladjusted, psychotic freak should STFU, right?
Pldennison: I am not
merely opining. The same thing you did when you stated, however “humbly”
In fact, I have stated that we, as a society, should NOT control this issue at all. No laws, no funding, no “controlling” dogma. My opinion is just that. Accusing posters of “controlling” others is no way to advance this debate.
Sure it’s controlling. I mean, are there other medical procedures you think should be subject to this “no funding” restriction, or just abortions?
Why do you think it is not right to abort a baby, but it is right to forcibly consign it to a life of misery if it is going to be born to an unfit mother? Where the hell is the morality in that?
“I love God! He’s so deliciously evil!” - Stewie Griffin, Family Guy
I don’t think this - I would sooner kill the unfit mother and give the newborn to one of the thousands of fit couples looking to adopt than let her ruin a second life.
And like I said, just because I wouldn’t have an abortion, doesn’t mean I don’t think others should have that right.
I never said anything whatsoever about the “right” to life.
I happen to agree with your previous sentiment:
I just think that people who actively mutilate or end other people’s lives should be terminated with due process. Here I would define “people” to read “human past the stage of gestation” - so I suppose “murder” shouldn’t be used to refer to abortion.
It would be “acceptable infanticide” or something as equally creepy.
There’s only something sacred about life if you happen to be that particular form of life.
And I’m willing to accept that your “concern for the lives of others” is a incredibly hollow statement.
No, just those who can afford that right. Should we institute a literacy test before all abortions. (you know to make sure they are educated enough to make the decision) Make them recite Roe v. Wade by memory.
I don’t think you answered Phil’s question. Let’s try again.
<blockquote>Why do you think it is not right to abort a baby, but it is right to forcibly consign it to a life of misery if it is going to be born to an unfit mother? Where the hell is the morality in that?</blockquote>
It is by the fortune of God that, in this country, we have three benefits: freedom of speech, freedom of thought, and the wisdom never to use either.
—Mark Twain
Gee, I always miss out on all the meat of these conversations, because I gotta go to stupid SCHOOL. Anywho, here are my rather late responses:
This may sound morbid, but just out of curiosity, do you think that ANY of them would rather not be alive at all? And I mean really, truly believe it, not just comment on it in their worst moments.
As for you people who don’t agree that everybody deserves a shot at life, I pity you, because you must lead some pretty mundane lives. Because anybody who has really experienced the beauty and joy of this world knows that EVERYONE should have a chance to enjoy it. Maybe the baby (more rhymes, what IS it with me?) will be impoverished. Maybe Jr. will be deformed. Maybe Jr. won’t know his real parents. But Jr. will be alive. And that, friends and well-wishers, is what is truly important.
The IQ of a group is equal to the IQ of the dumbest member divided by the number of people in the group.