PDA

View Full Version : Abortion


vrang
08-19-2005, 04:24 PM
Im against abortion in spite of being an atheist. Just seems wrong to me. Only exeption I would find it ok is if there is a life threathening situation for the mother, or if the pregnancy is the result of rape. There lies no strong intelectual conviction behind it, only a deep feeling its wrong.

Atheist@Umich
08-19-2005, 04:45 PM
I keep changing my mind about this issue. I definitely don't feel that we are a person right at conception for a few reasons.
1. I don't believe in a soul. So, no soul at conception.
2. Itís just a cell at that point... doesn't feel very significant to me.
3. When an egg is fertilized, it is my understanding that more than half of the time it fails to attach to the uterine wall. It's not even 50% likely to mature into an adult. If we defined a fertilized egg as a human being, then solving this problem would be more effective than solving current efforts to stop abortion.

I'm only bringing all that up because, conveniently, I think itís a pretty good justification for stem cell research. You can be pro-life but also pro-stem cell research if you believe that the embryo is human only after it attaches to the uterus and begins differentiating. (Someone correct me if I'm making any basic mistakes with my understanding of biology).

After saying all that, I don't know whether I'm pro-life or if I'm a more conservative pro-choice person. It's such a woman's issue anyways.

ghoulslime
08-19-2005, 04:49 PM
It seems very clear to me that it is a personal choice for an individual WOMAN to make. Individuals should be allowed to make their own choices about their bodies.

Atheist@Umich
08-19-2005, 04:51 PM
Yeah you're probably right. If I was a woman I don't think I'd have one, but on the other hand I don't like it when people tell me what I can and can't do.

Jennifer
08-19-2005, 04:55 PM
See, I'm way at the other end. I think if a woman is pregnant and one of the party doesn't want a child she should terminate. The people don't have to be "together" but they both have to be willing to be parents. Otherwise, game over.

Sir Sin-O-Lot
08-19-2005, 04:56 PM
I want to be an abortionist and lend a helping hand
I want to be an abortionist and spread joy throughout the land
Some might call me evil, but I gurantee
As soon as that sperm hits them, they'll be calling me

It is the woman's body, therefore she the choice is hers to make.

abortionman
08-19-2005, 05:01 PM
you're a true poet

Atheist@Umich
08-19-2005, 05:10 PM
Yeah that was a pretty good poem. Jennifer I agree that both people should agree to be parents (in the interest of the child) but Sin-O-Lot's right about it being her body thats going to carry it for 9 months. Maybe when people start using artificial wombs it will be acceptable to have either party terminate.

calpurnpiso
08-19-2005, 05:12 PM
I believe in the woman's right to choose but to a certain point. If a woman let the fetus grow after two months and decides to kill it, well too bad!!..she ought to be placed in a genitorium till the child can be removed and place for adoption.

I think the government ought to allow only two children per family, as they do in China.....and couples have to PROOF they can provide financially for the welfare of their children. It ought to be like qualifying to buy a house!.

Today, the US is populated by an overwhelming amount of uneducated retards, infected with Christianity that have sex for fun and the result being children that would end up living miserable lives, becoming criminals, reproducing themselves increasing the vicious circle.....and since they'll be able to vote in future elections ( the ignorant usually votes for a person as ignorant as themselves), there is no telling what kind of retard we'll have as POTUS. Someone like Bush in 2095?...:)

WITHTEETH
08-19-2005, 06:19 PM
The problem i have is when to draw the line of when its just a parasite or life. So when should it be? it takes a couple months for it to produce the beginings for a nervous system to start to become aware(I an ok personally with this). but late term abortions(6months) and so on... I am ambevolent about. Its hard to draw a line. In sweden(I believe) they have it rigged so when the baby is able to live on its own then it is to late to become an abortion.

I wouldn't dare make a decision for a women, but for arguments sake

Tenspace
08-19-2005, 08:34 PM
Look, God made babies cute so you don't throw them out the window at three in the morning when they just puked an entire bottle of formula all over your bare chest.

Fetuses aren't cute. God only cares about cute. Therefore, fetuses (and ugly babies, I guess) are fair game. Instead of late-term abortion, how 'bout post-term abortion. "Mommy, little Jimmy looks like that new pope! Can we kill him?"

:D:D:D

Cap'n Awesome
08-20-2005, 12:12 AM
I am a solidly pro-choice right winger. I wouldn't want to live in a country where a government is large and powerful enough to tell women they have to carry thier babies to term. The idea of it literally frightens me. Also there is the economic benifit to abortion. So many of those unwanted babies would end up on government aid. I know it may sound cold to people on both sides of what they consider to be an emotional issue, but economically getting rid of unwanted pregnancies just makes sense.

There is a certain point however, that prehaps a baby gains it's own individual rights. 4 months, 6 months, 8 months? I don't know, I'm not a medical ethicist, so it's hardly my place to decide.

Wiredrawn
08-20-2005, 12:20 AM
Today, the US is populated by an overwhelming amount of uneducated retards, infected with Christianity that have sex for fun and the result being children that would end up living miserable lives, becoming criminals, reproducing themselves increasing the vicious circle.....and since they'll be able to vote in future elections ( the ignorant usually votes for a person as ignorant as themselves), there is no telling what kind of retard we'll have as POTUS. Someone like Bush in 2095?...:)
You are my hero! *thinks about breaking into song but stops herself*

Anyway, I completely agree with you and I always use that arguement with people....right before I get chased down the street with stones being thrown at me :/

iiartisanii
08-20-2005, 02:04 AM
hey new here but this is a touchy subject for me. .

i'm not so much pro-choice as i am pro-abortion. this might partly be because i hate children, no wait, its not.

i believe very strongly that no one should be forced to have a child. i know that personally, i can barely afford myself, much less a very demanding kid and the thousands upon thousands of dollars it takes to raise them for 18 fun-filled years.

i also don't believe that a fetus is truly alive until it passes through the womb and takes its first breath. yeah, it has a heartbeat, but to me, a heartbeat does not equal life. life means being able to function on your own. so i guess, in essence, people who are braindead and comatose also fall into this category.

you have to keep in mind that abortions are not cheap. this is not europe where they will happily abort you if you are under three months pregnant. it costs $500-700 in my county to have a first trimester abortion. this kind of money is not easy for young unwed mothers to come by.

for the person who said that after two months along, it is wrong, i disagree and here is why. . when you first get pregnant, it takes a good month for you to realize it has even happened. you miss a period, you give it a few days. . you make excuses because everyone knows this is something that happens to everyone else and not them. it takes a good 4-5 weeks for it to hit you. then you have to come up with the $500. i personally do not have $500 in my abortion fund account.

now for my pro-abortion stance. .

i live in the wildly overpopulated region of southern california known as orange county. . right on the border of LA county. this area has a lot of Catholic hispanics, a lot of conservative Republicans and a lot of assholes in general. we have more unwed teenage mothers than you can shake a stick at. and we all know that unwed teenage mothers have a great propensity for milking the welfare system for all its worth. no pun intended.

now if you are actively having sex, but your religion says that if you use birth control you will go to hell, you are going to produce a lot of little Catholics. it is not uncommon for a 20-something woman to have 3 or 4 children, a minimum wage job and no intention of curbing her little reproduction issue.

at this point, my tax money is raising these children because their mothers cannot. i am not cool with that. my opinion, as inhumane as it sounds, is that abortion should be mandatory in cases where a parent simply cannot afford a child. because it is a well known fact that most people who are good candidates for adoption end up keeping their kid after they give birth.

and lastly, because i believe that the life of the mother is more important than the life of the unborn child, i believe that all women should have the right to abort. there is no reason why a woman should have to stop everything that she is doing to have a baby because the law says she has to. having a baby can ruin education, careers, relationships and mental stability. if someone doesn't want to sacrifice their entire life to bring a new life into the world, i don't call that selfishness, i call that being responsible.

Jennifer
08-20-2005, 04:28 AM
I wouldn't want to live in a country where a government is large and powerful enough to tell women they have to carry thier babies to term. The idea of it literally frightens me.
And me.

But its too late.

Right now the "Partial Birth Abortion" law makes no allowances for a woman's health, and as a matter of fact three case where a doctor terminated a pregnancy because of the mother's health have already passed through the appeals courts and at least one will likely be heard by SCOTUS after Roberts is sworn in.

In anticipation of a new conservative court, 15 states already have antichoice laws on the books ready to go which would make ALL abortions illegal.

And the pill is a self induced abortion.

And the President is against condoms.

Ladies and Gentlemen, the season of love is over.

TheSnake
08-20-2005, 06:28 AM
I haven't really formed a strong opinion on abortion, except that I certainly cannot treat a zygote as a person anymore than I could any single cell in my body.
To me it's funny how anti-abortionists seem to be going about the whole thing backwards. Since people are going to have sex anyway what they should be doing is teaching people about contraception, so there wouldn't be so much need for abortions.

Atheist@Umich
08-20-2005, 08:28 AM
hey new here but this is a touchy subject for me. .
Welcome to the forum iiartisanii!

at this point, my tax money is raising these children because their mothers cannot. i am not cool with that. my opinion, as inhumane as it sounds, is that abortion should be mandatory in cases where a parent simply cannot afford a child. because it is a well known fact that most people who are good candidates for adoption end up keeping their kid after they give birth.
I think you might be right about it being wrong that our tax dollars support them.... the government should only hand out money if your physically or mentally disabled, not if you can't stop popping out kids. If we stopped handing out as much money, the kids would get hungry. If they're parents let them die, they'll be charged with criminal negligence. So, they'll be forced to give them up for adoption. Works for me. And its probably a little more politically correct to enforce mandatory adoption than mandatory abortion.

Cap'n Awesome
08-21-2005, 01:09 AM
Right now the "Partial Birth Abortion" law makes no allowances for a woman's health, and as a matter of fact three case where a doctor terminated a pregnancy because of the mother's health have already passed through the appeals courts and at least one will likely be heard by SCOTUS after Roberts is sworn in.
Partial Birth Abortion law is just a feel good measure by the 'moral' wing of my Republican (and many Democrats too) Party. It really does nothing but force women who need these abortions to have a much more risky surgical procedure where they have to cut open woman to remove the fetus. So all that was accomplished was taking the safer abortion method off the market and endangering more women. Congrats!

If anyone is interested on exactly what is 'partial birth abortion' or 'dilation and extraction' as it's medically called the link is here (http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2002/07/24/late_term/index1.html)I think you might be right about it being wrong that our tax dollars support them.... the government should only hand out money if your physically or mentally disabled, not if you can't stop popping out kids. If we stopped handing out as much money, the kids would get hungry. If they're parents let them die, they'll be charged with criminal negligence. So, they'll be forced to give them up for adoption. Works for me. And its probably a little more politically correct to enforce mandatory adoption than mandatory abortion.
Best. Idea. Ever.

Choobus
08-21-2005, 02:44 AM
Im against abortion in spite of being an atheist. Just seems wrong to me. Only exeption I would find it ok is if there is a life threathening situation for the mother, or if the pregnancy is the result of rape. There lies no strong intelectual conviction behind it, only a deep feeling its wrong.
yeah, well, I guess you never knocked up an ugly skank on a dunken one night stand then. Believe me, abortion is a very good thing.

Another brick in the wall
08-22-2005, 05:56 PM
I can sort of understand opposition to abortion, but most people who are against abortion are also against birth control, which makes no sense unless you think that sex is itself immoral.

On a related topic, I'm not against government-assistance programs; I just think they should be reserved for the truly needy.