Forums → WEPR → Abortion
| 1508 | 314954 |
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
But what you don't get is that the fetus is pat of the mother's body- and not allowing her to do with her body what she wishes is discriminatory.
I'm not arguing that the fetus isn't subject to the mother. But the mother shouldn't be allowed to destroy it for no good reason is what I'm saying. Because it depends on her, the mother's life comes first, obviously. But it will one day be a person, and I don't think that's something that should be swept under the rug so easily.
If the prevention of life is considered murder, then by that same logic, condoms should be outlawed.
I think his argument was that the fetus is alive during an abortion, not that preventing life is considered murder. I could be wrong, though.
I think his argument was that the fetus is alive during an abortion, not that preventing life is considered murder. I could be wrong, though.
The fetus may be alive when it is terminated, but that does not make it murder. The term murder only applies to the unlawful taking of a person's life. Fetuses aren't legally considered alive, at least not within the legal time limit for abortion, therefore the term murder cannot be applied to abortions.
The fetus may be alive when it is terminated, but that does not make it murder. The term murder only applies to the unlawful taking of a person's life. Fetuses aren't legally considered alive, at least not within the legal time limit for abortion, therefore the term murder cannot be applied to abortions.
From a psychological standpoint, I think pro-life people call it that because they want to get into people's heads that it should be illegal. Occasionally I'll call it that by mistake, but technically, it's not murder.
Anyways, I was only saying that because you said something along the lines of "abortion is only preventing life". If it's alive, even if you don't think it deserves rights, it's technically killing. It is not, however, murder.
From a psychological standpoint, I think pro-life people call it that because they want to get into people's heads that it should be illegal.
As I've said before, garnering sympathy=weak argument.
Anyways, I was only saying that because you said something along the lines of "abortion is only preventing life". If it's alive, even if you don't think it deserves rights, it's technically killing.
It's alive in a biological sense, but not in a legal sense, and that's all that matters. Bearing in mind, that during the time abortion is legally acceptable, fetuses have no sensory awareness whatsoever. I've trod on an ant, killing something which was once alive. Am I a murderer? Better yet, I had radiation treatment (true story) to kill cancerous cells. Those cells were alive, yet does that make me a murderer?
Firefly, I wasn't trying to argue or anything, just clarrify and stuff. I specifically said from a psychological standpoint so you'd know I wasn't fighting against your logic. That's why at the end I also said It is not, however, murder.
I'm not arguing that the fetus isn't subject to the mother. But the mother shouldn't be allowed to destroy it for no good reason is what I'm saying. Because it depends on her, the mother's life comes first, obviously. But it will one day be a person, and I don't think that's something that should be swept under the rug so easily.
But people are allowed to do with their own bodies what they please, no matter what the reason. This applies to fetuses as well.
But people are allowed to do with their own bodies what they please, no matter what the reason. This applies to fetuses as well.
Just because you can do something doesn't make it right. But that's why I generally try to argue more on whether or not someone *should* do something, not on the *legality* of the act.
I think you mean this applies to the mother as well.
But either way, I think aborting for birth control is a complete lack of regard for anyone but themselves (I think earlier I discussed with you what I mean when I say *birth control*, so not rape, incest, child problems, etc).
In a way, what you said is true. No matter what the reason. But saying "I want to abort because I don't want to give birth..." doesn't work, in my opinion. That's not a reason, that's an outcome.
Nice catchin up, but I have to study for finals. I was supposed to start two hours ago, but I was too lazy. Keep an eye on the threads for me
I think that If the mother wants the abortion, that's there choose. But I still think that that's technically killing a living human being even though it hasn't been legally born yet. Yes, it is not legally alive until it has been delivered out of the womb, It is a living human, because if it wasn't alive, it would't be able to grow and how is a baby supposed to grow if it isn't alive. You tell me that.
Just because you can do something doesn't make it right. But that's why I generally try to argue more on whether or not someone *should* do something, not on the *legality* of the act.
I think you mean this applies to the mother as well.
But either way, I think aborting for birth control is a complete lack of regard for anyone but themselves (I think earlier I discussed with you what I mean when I say *birth control*, so not ****, incest, child problems, etc).
In a way, what you said is true. No matter what the reason. But saying "I want to abort because I don't want to give birth..." doesn't work, in my opinion. That's not a reason, that's an outcome.
Honestly., I'm repulsed and disgusted by it as well. It's not something I condone. But it's something that must remain in place to constitute equal rights between genders.
The fetus may be alive when it is terminated...
Ahhhhh...terminate is such a nice, mellow, innocent sounding word for MURDER!
FireflyIV, dont try an lessen a meaning by changing the word. At least put in the right word. I mean, really.
Next ill suppose we'll all just start calling the fetus(s) an "it"!
It's alive in a biological sense, but not in a legal sense, and that's all that matters.
Is it not still alive? You've just addmitted it. The killing of a human being is murder, or in your words "termination".
"Please sir, dont terminate me! Here! I'll uh...uh...give you my wallet!"
ugh...
Muder: the killing of another human being under conditions specifically covered in law.
A fetus is not legally classified as a human being. Therefore using the term murder to describe the termination of a pregnancy is incorrect. Use emotive language all you want, all it shows is that your argument is weak.
Is it not still alive? You've just addmitted it. The killing of a human being is murder, or in your words "termination".
Yeah.. but a foetus isn't a fully developed human being. Yet. It's a foetus. Hence the term "foetus".
I'll use the word murder if it makes you happy. It doesn't change my opinion or stance. It's just a word.
Technically, a baby doesn't really have thought or consciousness in the womb, so if you have an abortion, it isn't murder, it's preventing birth. Plus, if you think about, every second of our life we don't mate(For lack of a better word, or rather childhood appropriate), we are preventing birth.
I don't think it's right to have abortion...The poor helpless baby inside the mothers womb has no idea it's about to be, well, murderd! I think abortian is wrong because the parents were stupid enough to have the baby in the first place, and why?
Because they are stupid teen-agers who have no idea what their doing,(lol, each other...) and their probebly not even married.Is that right? No.
(I know that all people that get abortion arn't teen-agers,
but they should still at least THINK about the results! So, please, don't have S-e-X before youre married, or old enough.) So, essay done!
The poor helpless baby inside the mothers womb has no idea it's about to be, well, murderd!
That's more an argument for abortion rather then against. You're right - it has no idea about *anything*. There's no complex brain function. Putting your dog down is killing a more intelligent animal.
the parents were stupid enough to have the baby in the first place, and why?
Because they are stupid teen-agers who have no idea what their doing
Yes... having stupid teenagers responsible for raising a child with no advanced education, no means of pulling in a monetary income that will be enough to support a family very well - that's exactly who you want to have kids. That's another argument *for* abortion.
but they should still at least THINK about the results! So, please, don't have S-e-X before youre married, or old enough.
People think about the results, but then humans are wired to 'get busy'. People get pregnant, sometimes by mistake. People also get in car accidents, but it's not like they mean to do that either. Abortion is a solution to a problem, and it's their decision. I don't see what being married or not married has to do with abortion. Or sex.
You must be logged in to post a reply!