Forums → WEPR → Abortion
| 1508 | 315016 |
What my peers here think?
I would like to try and avoid a buch of rabid Catholics and Christians falling back only on the religious reasons and what have you. However, I do not see how that can be dodged.
My view? I'm for it. If a woman wants to get one, it is her choice. Some people seem to act like if one woman gets an abortion, it means that all the rest have to. If the child in question is not yours, butt out.
Also, on a lighter note, I say that abortions should be allowed when kids are up to 18 years old. That would solve a lot of headaches, eh?
- 1,508 Replies
ok and?I'm asking what is so urgent about this that you have to terminate the fetus?
Reasons to get rid of an unwanted fetus soon:
1.) Not wanted
2.) Possibly causing harm to the woman
3.) Morning sickness
4.) Raging moods swings
5.) Back pain
6.) Not everyone women enjoys being forced to be a human incubator
There's actually an argument in philisophical circles about this. It's a bit of an allegory, so bear with me.
A person is knocked out cold. When they awake, they are chained to a hospital bed and hooked up to a machine which is, in turn, giving life support to a well-known and well-regarded violinist (or pianist, or whatever, depending on who you're talking to). If the woman unhooks herself from the life support machine before 9 months, the violinist will die; but the woman did not choose to be hooked up to this person, and it's not how she wanted her life to be. So the choice is hers: stay and he lives, or leave and he dies. Essentially, the answer most thinkers come to when the question is "should she stay?" is: it would be nice, but it's not required. It would be good of her to stay and give this violinist life whilst throwing part of hers away, but because it hinders HER interests, and because this isn't something she actively chose to do, she is not required to stay.
Of course everybody needs to be aware that not every person grows up to being something fantastic...
Just pointing out that one thing in that allegory. It might as well have been a serial killer, or just the next plain cubicle worker.
I think they use a violinist in the allegory because it's someone whom is respected but not necessary in society. Also, it strays away from the whole Hitler, Person who Cures Cancer, Serial Killer, Next Jesus stereotypes people use so often in these sorts of debates.
Yes, but it says "well-known and well-regarded", thus immediately indicating that it is a person with a good purpose in society.
It would work better if it was a more ordinary person. But basically, no matter what person it is...
What right would they have had to make her the life support? Heck, if her morals doesn't tie her to that responsibility, she should be free to leave.
Good allegory, that pretty much hits my view on abortion...
Then again, the circumstances under which one can become pregnant can't be flawlessly compared to be knocked out cold.
Some accidents happen for stupid reasons, others are genuine accidents where the preservatives fail, and then there's the r*pes...
I still don't think the cause should have any effects on whether it's right or not...
The 'knocked out cold' is just used as an example to illustrate that the events that ensued were not what she had wanted, planned, or chosen. It's an allegory, so you do kind of have to interperet it.
Well yes. I'm just pointing out, that not everybody knows how to interpret that kind of thing properly, and might possibly use the words in a different context. Happens a lot, actually.
I'm trying very hard to be unbiased here. This all comes to the point that everyone states but somehow don't thurally understand.
YOU ARE KILLING SOMEONE. Don't give any crap like "Oh, they aren't born yet..." because they would be if you weren't a murderer. Killing people is a law so why isn't abortion? So sluts should be forgiven for killing babies?
you aren't killing someone because an embryo/fetus/whatever isn't considered "alive" until after the first 4-6 months. Up until then, it's just sort of a cluster of developing cells. I think they consider it "alive" when it would be viable (able to sustain life on its own) outside the womb. That's why abortions are generally performed within the first trimester, and why they won't perform one after 5 or 6 months.
And don't try to say you're unbiased when you so clearly are! Calling people murderers is not unbiased!!
Well, with such a touchy topic as this, it's impossible to be completely unbiased. Everyone has their own opinion on everything, whether they admit it or not...
After reviewing my old comment and reading Carlie's I understand a little better now. If the baby causes any harm to the mother in anyway I think abortion would have to be done to save the mother's life, but in retrospect you are taking another's one life. Therefore controlling one's fate. I also agree that it's impossible to be completely unbias due to the situation at hand.
Ok I admit I wasn't THAT unbiased. But seriously, how is it not murder? It doesn't matter if the embryo isn't four weeks old. If maybe you let it grow and not kill it, it would turn into a human.
Ok I admit I wasn't THAT unbiased. But seriously, how is it not murder? It doesn't matter if the embryo isn't four weeks old. If maybe you let it grow and not kill it, it would turn into a human.The point is, it isn't one yet. Not everybody is comfortable with making a decision about when it must be considered more than cells.
The solution for those of you: Don't ever get an abortion. But do not force your opinions on anyone else. It is a decision that individuals need to make.
And since it is not yet babies they do not yet have any identity, and thus no one can be charged for the destruction of these cells... Or something like that. This paragraph is a weak argument, but I didn't know how to say what I wanted to say.
A question for all of you against abortion: If you had some sort of human-like parasite growing in you that could possibly hurt you, could not survive without you,and would die in nine months anyway, would you remove it?
A question for all of you against abortion: If you had some sort of human-like parasite growing in you that could possibly hurt you, could not survive without you,and would die in nine months anyway, would you remove it?
It's not human-like it's human, and it's SUPPOSED to be there.
You must be logged in to post a reply!