Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
morticia
Sultan
Retired AE Editor
Joined: 09-Aug-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2077
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Pro- Choice or Pro-Life? Posted: 12-Sep-2006 at 14:37 |
Between the years 500 and 515 BC, Chinese documents record abortions performed upon royal concubines in China. It is said that the legendary Emperor Shennong used mercury to induce abortions nearly 5000 years ago. Therefore, why is the termination of pregnancy still today so controversial, when its been performed for so long?
While I know this is a controversial topic and has been discussed as an abortion issue in AE, it does concern women and I thought it should be discussed in this womens forum. Im not getting into what is right and not right about abortion because I believe every individual has a right to their opinion (whether I agree or disagree with them). Personally, I'm pro-choice because I find that it provides women with the ability to make an informed choice regarding pregnancy. I am not pro-abortion and I dont agree that abortion should be used as a method of birth control, but I do agree that it should be a safe option available to women. I respect those women who carry unwanted pregnancies to term to raise the child, but I am glad that they had the option available to safely terminate an unwanted pregnancy. I guess it would all depend on each individuals needs and desires.
Unfortunately, many men are adamantly anti-abortion, although none of them will ever have the misfortune of having an unwanted pregnancy. It frightens me to think that one day women may not have control over what goes on in their own bodies. I think if those men could get pregnant, they would tell another story.
My questions are as follows:
1. Does a fetus have a right to be inside a woman who chooses to have sex with a man and becomes pregnant?
2. Does a fetus have a right to be inside a woman who has been raped by a man and becomes pregnant?
3. Unlike a fetus, a newborn child is a separate physical entity who would, as an actual human being, have rights, but does a fetus have any rights?
4. Do parents own their children as they would own a house?
Please, lets try and keep this discussion civil and mature! Thank you.
Edited by morticia - 12-Sep-2006 at 15:45
|
"Morty
Trust in God: She will provide." -- Emmeline Pankhurst
|
|
Constantine XI
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5711
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Sep-2006 at 18:15 |
Unfortunately a rational consideration of this issue has been clouded
by outdated religious dogma which was formulated for a time and place
vastly removed from our own. I suspect our dear Chinese Emperor was not
subject to such dogma and had a much more rational line of thinking in
what to do about his unwanted pregnancies.
1. The foetus is merely a conglomeration of cells which is incapable of
sustaining itself, thinking or basically behaving as a human being. It
has not attained a level of consciousness which may destinguish it as
being a proper human. As a bunch of cells inside the woman, this
conglomeration has no rights and is subject to the whim of the mother,
who is a free thinking and fully developed human being and therefore
has infinitely greater importance. Just because something MIGHT become
a fully fledged human one day, doesn't make it a fully fledged human
today.
2. Foetus in question 2 has no more rights than the foetus in question 1.
3. No, because the new born baby is a properly developed human which
has attained consciousness. It is a living creature, not a
conglomeration of cells like the foetus.
4. Parents have responsibility and authority over a child, it is not
their physical property. They maintain their authority as long as they
adequately carry out their duty of care.
|
|
Paul
General
AE Immoderator
Joined: 21-Aug-2004
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 952
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Sep-2006 at 19:22 |
I think the answer to all of the above questions is. In a world when 7 people die every second from a poverty related issues, such as disease, starvation, unclean water. It takes a seriously delusional kind of freak to get so upset over abortion.
Edited by Paul - 12-Sep-2006 at 19:23
|
|
|
flyingzone
Caliph
Joined: 11-Dec-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2630
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Sep-2006 at 19:54 |
I always think that terms such as "pro-life" and "pro-choice" are real misnomers. People who support "abortion" are not "anti-life". Most people who support abortion do not advocate its unregulated practice. The emphasis is simply on giving women or couples a CHOICE. If they are desuaded from such a dreadful decision after weighing all the options, fine. But if they do finally decide to go ahead and do it, it is still their choice.
But people who do not even want to consider offering such an option for women or couples are indeed denying them of any choices, hence they are really "anti-choice".
So I think those two camps should simply be called "pro-choice" and "anti-choice", not "pro-choice" and "pro-life".
|
|
QueenCleopatra
Earl
Joined: 03-Apr-2006
Location: Ireland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 292
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Sep-2006 at 08:48 |
A Fetus, ball of cells or not, is still a living being, a child, or it will become such. And no-one has the right to decide whether a child lives or dies except in extreme cases where the mother's life is in danger if she chooses to go full term.
|
Her Royal Highness , lady of the Two Lands, High Priestess of Thebes, Beloved of Isis , Cleopatra , Oueen of the Nile
|
|
mamikon
Sultan
Joined: 16-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2200
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Sep-2006 at 10:42 |
Originally posted by Paul
I think the answer to all of the above questions is. In a world when 7
people die every second from a poverty related issues, such as disease,
starvation, unclean water. It takes a seriously delusional kind of
freak to get so upset over abortion. |
I was wondering about the same thing. Kind of hypocritical of them isnt
it. However, it has been my experience that most "pro-life" people are
white, mostly religious and racist. The way I see it, their premise
does not lie in the inhumanity of destroying a fetus, but in increasing
the number of whites...I really have not seen a case where pro-life
people being obsessed with fetuses of black women.
Of course that doesnt apply to all pro-life, but to many of them...to my opinion
p.s. My post is not meant to insult anyone
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Sep-2006 at 10:56 |
I don't think there is a right or a wrong answer. Abortion IMO is in many ways an abdication of responsibility, and unfortunatly many people use it as such. I really can't see any reason to be militantly on either side of the issue, but then unfortunatly in this debate its hard to find anyone in the middle.
The only thing I can say is, that I am sure glad I was not aborted.
|
|
Reginmund
Arch Duke
Joined: 08-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1943
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Sep-2006 at 07:57 |
Originally posted by QueenCleopatra
A Fetus, ball of cells or not, is still a living being, a child, or it will become such. And no-one has the right to decide whether a child lives or dies except in extreme cases where the mother's life is in danger if she chooses to go full term. |
Why not? It has always bothered me that it is impossible to deduct one's way to proving the worth of a human life empirically, thus I must doubt whether it has any "higher value" at all, though of course I hope it has.
Personally I have nothing against abortion, even when used as a last measure preventive for women who just don't feel like it yet, it should be their choice. It's not like we're short of people on this planet.
Edited by Reginmund - 14-Sep-2006 at 07:58
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Sep-2006 at 08:18 |
From Conception a fetus begings forming in the womb it's own little person, and in just a few weeks can feel pain and sense danger. This is not just me saying this, it's a proven scientific fact. Knowing that they feel pain, how can you say that it should be "the mothers choice" when she is not the one who will feel that pain, she isn't the one who's life is going to be ended. If it were meant to be, We would have an automatic eject button, don't you think?
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Sep-2006 at 08:36 |
That said, couldn't it also be said people are either "pro-life" or "anti-life"? The boat rows both ways, deductive thinking can always come back and bite you on the butt don't ya think?
Instead of analysing the supposed gramatical errors of the choices, look deeper. Things are either black or white, there are no grays. It is either wrong or it is right.
I'm not going to shove anything down your throut, but deep down everyone knows the truth about abortion- It's wrong. People spend years trying to convince themselves and everyone around them of Abortions innocence, but the fact is they naturally know the truth. And in the end it's plain, and simple- everyone has a conscience- everyone knows the truth.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A little food for thought: "He who establishes his argument by noise and command shows that his reason is weak."
|
|
flyingzone
Caliph
Joined: 11-Dec-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2630
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Sep-2006 at 09:35 |
Originally posted by Un-Edu-Genius
That said, couldn't it also be said people are either "pro-life" or "anti-life"? The boat rows both ways, deductive thinking can always come back and bite you on the butt don't ya think? |
I have already explained in my post why that doesn't work. Please read it more carefully.
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Sep-2006 at 10:11 |
I just speak as I find, It's black or white- not grey.
If you don't believe a fetus has the right to live....your anti-life, plain and simple.
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Sep-2006 at 10:39 |
Its hard and wrong to deal in absolutes in this case. A victim of rape or worse incest deserves a chance at a proper life. A women who already has children should not be faulted for not risking her life by carrying it to term, since well her olders childrens welfare comes first. And their are numerous other situations where abortion will be the only sane route.
Now, what I am against is abortion on demand. And the "control of bodies" argument dose not really cut any ice here. After all we give up many rights to live in a civilized society. And if in this society the state must interfere than it should always protect the weaker party. So in "on demand" abortions the weaker party is the fetous. Its "mother" is an adult who freely chose to enter into intercourse , knowing full well the possible consequences. The fetous on the other hand is defenceless and on the whim of otehrs. If the state must interfere, than let it be for it.
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Sep-2006 at 11:46 |
I understand where your coming from... but there is such a thing as adoption, The mother could just as easily give her baby up for adoption and not risk all of the side effects of an abortion.
It not only kills the fetus, but also can cause depression and regret in the mother's case. If they truly believe it is not wrong, why do they regret it in the years to come?
|
|
morticia
Sultan
Retired AE Editor
Joined: 09-Aug-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2077
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Sep-2006 at 13:16 |
Thank you all for your enlightened contributions to this topic. A woman's choice to have a medically safe abortion is a very important issue for women, as the "Roe v Wade" decision is constantly being challenged in the courts by the anti-abortion and pro-life groups. I fear the day that said decision is ever overturned, only because many women will die from having abortions performed with unlicensed personnel and under unsafe and deplorable conditions (as it was before the Roe v Wade decision).
Quite frankly, I believe that most woman don't want to be subjected to such a procedure, but it is important for all women to know that they have a medically safe alternative to terminate an unwanted pregnancy, if they choose to do so.
As a mother of three, and as a woman, I can honestly say that if I ever found myself in a situation where I had an unwanted pregnancy, even though I may not choose an abortion, I would want to know that said medically safe option/alternative is available to me.
What I don't want is for some organization to tell women what to do with their bodies, when it should not be any of their business at all.
|
"Morty
Trust in God: She will provide." -- Emmeline Pankhurst
|
|
morticia
Sultan
Retired AE Editor
Joined: 09-Aug-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2077
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Sep-2006 at 13:24 |
Originally posted by Un-Edu-Genius
I understand where your coming from... but there is such a thing as adoption, The mother could just as easily give her baby up for adoption and not risk all of the side effects of an abortion.
It not only kills the fetus, but also can cause depression and regret in the mother's case. If they truly believe it is not wrong, why do they regret it in the years to come? |
You must be a man. You obviously don't realize that pregnancy has many more risks than you know (not to mention many side effects, i.e. nausea, vomiting, backaches, liquid retention, swelling and the obvious gain of weight). Also to be encountered are tubal pregnancies (where mothers have died due to loss of blood), breech births (again where mothers have died), episiotomies that some women undergo because they don't dilate enough, etcetera. Let's not forget the prenatal depression and crying spells PLUS the postpartum "blues" that women endure for NINE MONTHS PLUS!!!!!!
If a woman regrets her decision in the years to come, she'll have to live with it, just as we all do when we make decisions we regret later on in life.
Edited by morticia - 14-Sep-2006 at 13:25
|
"Morty
Trust in God: She will provide." -- Emmeline Pankhurst
|
|
TheDiplomat
Arch Duke
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1988
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Sep-2006 at 13:34 |
Originally posted by morticia
What I don't want is for some organization to tell women what to do with their bodies, when it should not be any of their business at all. |
It is a very cliche remark,dear Morticia Adams.
If that body also accomodates one human beingin the meantime, it is for sure a special concern for others than women also. A life is more important than individualism.
My philosophy teacher once told me that ''never wish something for others that you would not wish for yourself!.''
Put yourself into the shoes of that infant in one women's body,who is in the mood of abortion. would you wish not to be given birth?
|
ARDA:The best Turkish diplomat ever!
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Sep-2006 at 14:03 |
I am not pro-choice or pro-life. I am pro-sanity. Abortion is way different from say body piercing, when its nobody's business but your own. In abortion, a human lfe is being snuffed out. The fetus may no have been human, but it would have become one.
OTH we can't expect a 12 year old rape victim, to carry to term. Or a women with three children who was advised not to become pregnant.
It depends on the circumstances.
|
|
morticia
Sultan
Retired AE Editor
Joined: 09-Aug-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2077
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Sep-2006 at 14:04 |
Originally posted by TheDiplomat
Originally posted by morticia
What I don't want is for some organization to tell women what to do with their bodies, when it should not be any of their business at all. [IMG]smileys/smiley2.gif" align=middle> |
It is a very cliche remark,dear Morticia Adams.
If that body also accomodates one human beingin the meantime, it is for sure a special concern for others than women also. A life is more important than individualism.
My philosophy teacher once told me that ''never wish something for others that you would not wish for yourself!.''
Put yourself into the shoes of that infant in one women's body,who is in the mood of abortion. would you wish not to be given birth?
|
My dear friend, Diplomat! If I was in the shoes of the infant I don't think it would matter what I thought because, even if I was born, I would not remember anything. Do you remember when you were in your mother's womb? Do you even remember anything about the day you were born? I seriously doubt it! Maybe, just maybe, that is the reason nature does not let us remember! Ever thought of that?
|
"Morty
Trust in God: She will provide." -- Emmeline Pankhurst
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Sep-2006 at 14:08 |
Originally posted by morticia
Thank you all for your enlightened contributions to this topic. A woman's choice to have a medically safe abortion is a very important issue for women, as the "Roe v Wade" decision is constantly being challenged in the courts by the anti-abortion and pro-life groups. I fear the day that said decision is ever overturned, only because many women will die from having abortions performed with unlicensed personnel and under unsafe and deplorable conditions (as it was before the Roe v Wade decision).
Quite frankly, I believe that most woman don't want to be subjected to such a procedure, but it is important for all women to know that they have a medically safe alternative to terminate an unwanted pregnancy, if they choose to do so.
As a mother of three, and as a woman, I can honestly say that if I ever found myself in a situation where I had an unwanted pregnancy, even though I may not choose an abortion, I would want to know that said medically safe option/alternative is available to me.
What I don't want is for some organization to tell women what to do with their bodies, when it should not be any of their business at all. |
When I was taking my American Jurisprudence class for my Law Degree, my tutor (who was pro-choice BTW) pointed out that Roe was based on faulty premise anyhow. So it would be far better for the pro-choice crowd to go for bills passed in the state legislature (and most states would pass them anyhow)
|
|