Good way of debating, let's try, your opinion on abortion.

jel

Banned
I was thinking we could make a thread where you write your opinion and then write why you believe so, and finally write from which ground you've got to this.

That way it's easy to see where we disagree, and where we agree, as it's most likely on the most basic grounds, such as what rights do we have, etc.

So I choose the subject to be abortion, but it could have been anything, but here's how I think it'd be good to set it up:

Ground ideas (assumptions): Everyone have the right to decide what they want to with their body on themselves, but not on others.
Example: You may kill yourself, but you may not kill others.

There comes a whole problem then, when thinking about abortion, because if you kill yourself, you'll kill the child, but you're allowed to kill yourself, just not the child, this type of dependency is what I want to debate.

Claim: Abortion, though not encouraged, as it's something very sad, should be allowed.

Arguments: As it's up to everyone what they want to with their body, and as something else is dependent on your body, it's up to you whether or not they shall survive.
Note this is a dependency which isn't similar to say, food dependency, as you're not dependent on a single person only, but more similar to when someone is in an respirator, payed through by the state. Here the state can't shut down the respirator, because the state exists for the people, but a person doesn't exists for its child, therefore where the state has no choice as it's our "slave", the person can always choose to do with ones own body as one wish. The dependency of others may never limit your rights to what you want to do with yourself.

So I think it'd be nice if we could construct the debate this way, as I guess it's most likely at the "Ground ideas" state where most of us disagree, which is also the state where everyones rights is entitled, etc. I don't expect anyone to change their mind or anything like that.

If this type of topic is a succes I was thinking about creating a larger series of topics with many other subjects for debates as I've made a lot of thoughts about a lot of stuff, which I'd like to share, hear inputs on, and hope we can come to, if not a common agreement, then at least be inspired by eachother and renew the way we view the world.

Edit: Oh and if anyone have better ideas for a system like this, then it's on topic as well, as it's a dual topic thread.
 

Johnny

Banned
I believe abortion should be legal up until the 3rd trimester... Of high school.


If it's inside her then it's her to do with as she wishes. It's not feasible to give an unborn baby the same rights as a human being.
 

Galabab

Diabloii.Net Member
I believe abortion should be legal up until the 3rd trimester... Of high school.


If it's inside her then it's her to do with as she wishes. It's not feasible to give an unborn baby the same rights as a human being.
true.
im even more extreme in this respect.
A human being only developes consiousness during 2~3 year of life.
until then its only a potential human.
so why do we care about fetuses but not about millions of sperms which also are potentially human being if given the egg and time.


 

Ariadne

Diabloii.Net Member
People should always have the right to abort a pregnancy.
Giving birth to an unwanted child is terrible. If the claim is that with an abortion, you kill a possible consious (though not yet living individually) person, raising one with the knowledge of not being wanted is worse, because that child will, for sure, have consiousness and will know and realise it wasn't wanted.

It's the worst feeling to grow up with.

That said, if you know you don't want children, there's no need to smear that decision of keeping or aborting over such a long time. Most women have a pretty good idea whether they want a child, or not. I have always known I don't want children. If I were to get pregnant, it should be considered an accident and I, aswell as the unborn child, will be better off having it aborted. I wouldn't need months to think about that decision.

So I think people should have the right to abort a pregnancy, but if you come up with the idea that you dont'want the child you're carrying after all in, say 6th month, it's a bit late to jump to that conclusion.
 

Johnny

Banned
Being homeless is terrible too. Maybe we should just kill them as well.
And here we go again. Inside the woman = abortion okay

Outside = not okay. It's a pretty important divider you know and it's what the issue is built on.

Why is it that every time we have this debate people keep using examples of humans outside the woman's body.



 

Ariadne

Diabloii.Net Member
Being homeless is terrible too. Maybe we should just kill them as well.
What a very strange comparison. It looks like you did not read the next line or, more likely, didn't understand it. I suppose having been raised as a wanted child aswell as having a consiousness didn't help you there.

And here we go again. Inside the woman = abortion okay

Outside = not okay. It's a pretty important divider you know and it's what the issue is built on.

Why is it that every time we have this debate people keep using examples of humans outside the woman's body.
Because they can't find something else to compare. Which already proofs that inside the woman's body is a different story from outside.



 

jel

Banned
Being homeless is terrible too. Maybe we should just kill them as well.
The homeless isn't dependent of any singular individual, it's not like if someone does anything that they're intitled to through their rights (hurting themselves, etc.) that it puts the life of the homeless in danger. It's likewise not because it's terrible for the child (like you suggest with the homeless), it's completely up to the carrier to decide what should go on with the body of the carrier, the same applies for the homeless.


 

Glurin

Diabloii.Net Member
Very early on in the pregnancy, I couldn't care less what happens to it. As the pregnancy progresses, however, I think the option to abort should become more restricted, ending with an all out ban in the final stages. You should know long before then whether you want to have the baby or not. If you finally decide you don't, put the baby up for adoption. We prosecute mothers who abandon the baby in a dumpster or deliberately drown it in the bathtub. What makes stabbing it in the skull just before its exposed to the air any different?

Also, the argument that its for the mental or social health of the mother is BS IMO. If that is what we are protecting when we abort a child, we should just ban pregnancy altogether. Its a child's very nature to drive you crazy. :thumbup:
 

jel

Banned
Very early on in the pregnancy, I couldn't care less what happens to it.
Though maybe not relevant, I'll say I care all the time, but just because I care, I cannot force anyone to do something with their body that they won't. No one should be.

As the pregnancy progresses, however, I think the option to abort should become more restricted, ending with an all out ban in the final stages.
Here I disagree, I know it's hard to accept that due to a woman can do whatever she wants with her body, it gives her the right to remove something that later on can live by itself, but now at the moment she decides to move it out, I as well think it's terrible, but I do also believe it's her right.

You should know long before then whether you want to have the baby or not.
I agree, it's most likely so, but the exceptions that'll are important, as the law should be clear, hopefully.

We prosecute mothers who abandon the baby in a dumpster or deliberately drown it in the bathtub. What makes stabbing it in the skull just before its exposed to the air any different?
Yes it is, because they make an action to murder the baby eventhough the baby now can live without the support of the mother (any other person can help), however abandon the baby is not something I believe should be prosecuteable as no one can force a responsibility down on someone they do not wish, hopefully the baby will then be abandoned a place where it can be found before it's to late.

I only wish I could have convinced some of your parents to try it.
Abortion is terrible, also for the parents, the regret is something that'll be very hard to overcome and something that'll always be nagging in a corner of the memory. It's something I know from my parents, eventhough the foster had a genetic error, it's still very very hard, and nothing anyone should go through if you ask me, however it's still the right to do with yourself as one wants.

I mean if you really wants to hit yourself in the stomach, eventhough you're pregnant, no one can force you not to, it's your body, because a foster is dependent of you doesn't mean you've to accept the dependency.


 

PFSS

Diabloii.Net Member
My two cents:

A person has the right to refuse bodily donation and which medical procedures are carried out on their body

To me a fetus under ±20 weeks is not a person as it has minimal brain activity, whether the woman carrying it feels otherwise is her prerogative. On that basis I have no objection at all to abortions before ±20 weeks, and given that a very small percentage of abortions are carried out after that mark (which gets smaller when abortions are more easily accessible) and are almost always carried out for severe medical reasons I have no objection to allowing later abortions either.
 

Ariadne

Diabloii.Net Member
Yes yes good old Bob and his bible has all the answers. If only the world was as flat as he pretends it is.
But, Johnny, the world is flat, in the shape of a disc, carried by four elephants, who in turn are carried by a giant turtle. A moon and a sun orbit around it, and the only religious debate is where the turtle is heading for, or away from.:nod::wink:



 

BobCox2

Diabloii.Net Member
Yes yes good old Bob and his bible has all the answers. If only the world was as flat as he pretends it is.
?
THAT WAS SARCASM BTW.
I think you should have 72 hours after learning you are pregnant (no matter what the stage) to make a decision one way or the other - but then I'm a guy and really have no valid opinions in the thread so I Kibitz.

Incidentally I agree that children under age 8 or so are charming (or annoying) Aliens with limited rights, and parents have control that in other situations would seem like slavery, but I believe they have a right to life and protection as well as education by parents and the community if you live in a decent place to live, if not well those rights tend to degrade I've noticed.

Property rights and reproduction are tricky stuff.


 
Last edited:

stillman

Diabloii.Net Member
I think the first page was getting off track from what the OP had in mind. I believe we are meant to not let an emotionally charged issue get out of control. So doing things properly....

Opinion: Abortion should be encouraged everywhere because of the realities of our times and due to our nature.

Why I believe so: Many reasons. People will abort anyway. The safest (clinical) means should be provided. I also believe some things like prolonged child abuse and starvation are worse than the death of a zygote, blastula, fetus, etc. Bringing up K and B strategists, I also believe that humans are in the category of strategists who invest large amounts of energy into their offspring (similar to tigers for example) as opposed to strategists who invest very little energy into their offspring but maximize the number of offspring (example: some fish and flies). Thus, children imo should not be born only to die young like a bunch of fish eggs left to fend for themselves in the ocean without a parent. Imo, if a human being cannot invest the energy required of a newborne, then that newborn should not be shuffled into the wrong strategist group. The lesser of the two evils is to prevent the disater via abortion. Furthermore, I believe that as the population increases, the value of an individual decreases. Example: in prehistoric times when the human population was small, a human death was a mojor loss. When a person dies today, there are billions left, so the loss from our gene pool is insignificant. If we consider the trauma of a woman who aborts, I believe her trauma would be lessened if she clinically aborted a neonate as opposed to executing a kicking screaming infant fresh out of her womb. [End of opinion and beliefs sections]

Ground: Information told to me by professors. In one country, abortions were made illegal and the result was horrible. Orphanages overflowed with abandoned babies. A worker in such an orphanage would change a baby, put a bottle in it's mouth, slide that baby to the side, and work quickly on the next one. That is all the attention a baby would ever get. The result was a generation of developmentally delayed adults. Imo, an anti abortion view has implications that aren't fully realized.
 

Tanooki

Diabloii.Net Member
Are we supposed to accept the "ground idea" and try to argue based on it, or can we write our own "ground idea"?

Given: abortions happen after the point where the child could survive outside of the body
Given: studies show that adopted children (at least as babies) do VERY well in life
Given: except in extreme cases, almost every decision to have an abortion was started by a conscious decision to have sex (or are we going to argue that the millions of abortions were mostly rape victims?)
Given: we don't condone the killing of other people - even if making it legal makes it less messy (ie murder happens all the time, but we don't make it legal because of all the botched murders)
Given: people dying of natural causes and being killed are not comparable in any way shape or form
Given: slavery was once considered "ok" and was definitely legal
Given: the future judges us on their standards, not our own

Now argue that abortion should be done and somehow convince me anti-abortionists won't be proclaimed as heros in the future - much the same way we consider the anti-slaverly movement (a movement, I should add was started while slavery was perfectly legal, and therefore must have been morally ok in that day in age).

Oh.. there's the rub, eh? Either there's absolute morality (as in slavery was wrong, even though it was legal) or there's no absolute morality, and had you lived 200 years ago, you would have felt the same way about the antislavery movement that you feel toward the antiabortion movement.
 
Top