Forums → WEPR → Abortion
| 1508 | 314963 |
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
I simply mean that there are many viable reasons- some you mentioned yourself -that fall under 'birth control.' That's all.
I simply mean that there are many viable reasons- some you mentioned yourself -that fall under 'birth control.' That's all.
I see. Well, when I say birth control, I mean aborting simply because it's faster and easier than giving birth. If there are realistic problems, I would consider that health or child problems or something like that. Maybe those who do the statistics need to break down into more helpful categories. Anyway, just came to surf AG for a while. I have to study for finals, so take care & make sure people don't get away with using stupid arguments
STOP ABORTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
STOP SPAMMING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
----
Really though, I have no idea how idiotic and close-minded you have to be to completely ignore all the logical and morally correct pro-choice arguments, even over the last few pages, and spam your heart out mindlessly.
Wow, the very next comment was spam! Good eye, Alt.
The previous page does contain a lot of good arguments, at least enough to reflect upon in your post, grebdews. Just back up merely one page.
I don't remember saying they were definitely people, and I don't see how whether or not they feel pain makes it less of a life. Like I said, my reason is that we can't prove it. Even if science is teaching us what is most likely, it is not proof.
All the evidence I provided through the links are facts. None of them have any degree of ambiguity.
As for the pain argument, the fact a fetues does not feel pain is not exclusively applicable to the life argument. Many pro lifers say that it's not the fetus' fault, so why should they feel pain. Here's the evidence that they don't feel pain. It's my belief that if something is underdeveloped it has no senses whatsoever, it can't be held in the same regard as a human life.
As for the pain argument, the fact a fetues does not feel pain is not exclusively applicable to the life argument. Many pro lifers say that it's not the fetus' fault, so why should they feel pain. Here's the evidence that they don't feel pain.
Well, ignore the pain argument. I didn't mean to use bumper sticker slogans
What we can't measure with science is the soul, which is my point. Of course your facts prove how developed the fetus is.
It's my belief that if something is underdeveloped it has no senses whatsoever, it can't be held in the same regard as a human life.
Well, we differ there, but we probably can't convince the other one otherwise. Anyway, the reason I didn't argue your links was because they were good sources and arguments. I don't argue something I agree with. Anyway, I think I've said all I can say. If you have more to say, I'll read through, but I probably won't respond.
If you ask me, abortion is really just a way for covering up a stupid mistake... Technically we are all hardwired to procreate, but doing so at random or outside the bounds of marriage is detrimental to society. The basis of a society is the family and when one is able to eliminate its function, even in the tiniest bit, the culture as a whole suffers. Families are the primary way in which wisdom is passed from one generation to the next.
Abortion's detrimental effects to families are rather simple. Once you make it possible to cover up a mistake which involves intimate involvement with someone aside from the spouse, family attachments grow weaker.
I also believe that anyone with half of their humanity (or even me who has less) should be against "ost-birth abortion." Essentially, if a baby is born which was intended to be aborted, it can be left to die from exposure. Now some have found ways to argue that a fetus a part of a mother's body (which I will discuss later) but please tell me how once a baby is born it isn't human...
Now, about being part of the mother's body... It isn't. The fetus is merely cared for by the mother. Technically, we could have artificial wombs if the tech was advanced enough. A fetus has its own genetic code and thus is independent. It also has its own mind and their brains are indeed active before birth. And most importantly (to someone who is highly atheistic at least), a fetus has its OWN blood supply.
If the placenta failed to function properly, the mothers blood would enter it. Now, the mother's body would recognize it as something foreign (further proof that it is not a mere part of her body), and would immediately begin a chemical attack on it. The fetus would be killed by being vastly outnumbered and then calcified.
All things I have mentioned are objective facts. I have not mentioned subjective opinions.
That is all.
Don't generalize. Sometimes, abortion for birth control is okay. Sometimes, it isn't. It's a very hit-and-miss thing, and throwing a blanket generalization over it isn't close to the truth.Abortion is not a form of birth control like condoms and birth control pills. Just as a 'morning after pill' isn't. They're both emergency exits when the water didn't keep the fire down. Not a default way of avoiding pregnancies. Last way out, not first choice.
@VoltCruelerz:
Who argued that it was part of the mother's body? Is it a thing stuck inside her that can not (with current technologies) be sustained outside.
I also don't think 'family' plays as big a role in modern day society as it may have before.
It also has its own mind and their brains are indeed active before birth.They are. But the brains do not really start to develop before they're a couple of months old. "Some rudimentary brain waves can be detected" when it is 6 months old, MUCH later than the upper gestation limit for abortions to be made.
And most importantly (to someone who is highly atheistic at least), a fetus has its OWN blood supply.I'm agnostic and do not see how that is relevant at all. Why would that be most importantly?
Replying to Carlie's comment on the first few pages:
(I know it was 100 or so pages back, but I felt to need to say this anyway)
Just because a woman is the one who carries the child, it doens't nessicarly mean that a man can't feel the same way about it.
For example, if a woman has never been pregnant before, then she really can't endure more emotion then a man regarding abortion.
However; if the woman has been pregnant bfore, then I agree that a man couldn't have the same understanding towards it.
I'm agnostic and do not see how that is relevant at all. Why would that be most importantly?
Maybe that shouldn't be most importantly, but I think having a bloodflow would relate to atheism more than having a soul or an individual personality. This is, of course, from a non-atheistic standpoint, so I don't mean that offensively to any atheists. Just that unless it can be proven seperate from the mother, it may not be as persuasive.
Thingthingfreak: Thanks for making that point. I tried to express that earlier, but I didn't really do as good a job. As a man, I regret that I may not have the same understanding of this issue as a woman, but this is also why I could never have sex with a woman unless she was willing to have the child. I couldn't put anyone in that position and leave such a difficult choice up to her.
I think having a bloodflow would relate to atheism more than having a soul or an individual personality.
Can't speak for everyone, but not for me. Most life on the planet is based off of the destruction of another living organism, be it plant or animal. I don't see how blood makes a foetus unique or.. special.
Can't speak for everyone, but not for me. Most life on the planet is based off of the destruction of another living organism, be it plant or animal. I don't see how blood makes a foetus unique or.. special.
That's true. I was a bit confused by it too, but I was just trying to elaborate its meaning. LIke I said, I'm not sure how to speak from an atheistic standpoint. You probably know more about that, so I'll trust your deduction of it.
I wouldn't call my standpoint typical either though - there are plenty of atheists out there that will gladly disagree with my view of our world. =P
I believe that it is all a womans choice. If she doesn't have the money, love, or even the father, then that can cause a woman to have an abortion. But what I don't like about it is that the Christians (especially the Pope) are making such a big deal out of it. Just because you see it as a bad thing, doesn't mean you can just go around saying "Abortion is bad!" Sometimes, it is necessary for a woman to get one.
So, abortion is a good thing if you really need it.
I put the thing about the blood in there because I was wanting to make a valid, non-religious point. That proves it is independent and suggests that it is indeed a life.
A fetus could, should technology advance enough, develop outside of the womb. I said that because it is true.
Unfortunately, the family doesn't play as much a role. If that could be changed, I believe our extreme drift towards liberalism could be slowed. I have nothing against liberals, just extreme liberalism... I think if there is something wrong, it should be changed, but don't change something for your personal benefit if society suffers...
I know it doesn't show many brainwaves, but the reason is because the brain works with knowledge packets. At first, it is difficult to describe something, but within a few months, enough information has been gathered to begin making connections between things that accelerates the learning process. This also is the reason that your IQ changes very little after you are 3-4...
The point was, it is sentient before birth. It is not intelligent, but still sentient.
So, I would like to hear someone intelligent give me a reason why they are not alive and why it should not be considered murder.
You must be logged in to post a reply!