Welcome to Gaia! ::

Reply General Discussion
The Philosophy of Abortion Goto Page: 1 2 [>] [»|]

Quick Reply

Enter both words below, separated by a space:

Can't read the text? Click here

Submit

IcarusDream

PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2007 5:00 pm


To me, the whole debate draws down to the competing rights of Woman vs. Fetus, viz.:

Right of the Woman to Bodily Domain vs. Fetus Right to Survive.

The former is existent but the latter is nonexistent and is currently being striven for by Pro-lifers everywhere.

To me, I guess, it's seems like any form of human life deserves to live or at least have a chance of living.

American wise, I think the phrase "All men are created equal" is pretty much the basis of rights here in the states, specifically our inalienable rights. Is not a unique human life created when there is a set of duplicable DNA? So shouldn't it be guaranteed life?

The clash of apparent rights is an ugly one; even in my head, I'm not sure what to believe...thoughts?
PostPosted: Sun Jul 01, 2007 12:30 pm


There is no way to remove a fetus from woman's body without killing it. Since it has no sentience, I favor the woman's BD over the life of the fetus. Going through an unwanted pregnancy can possibly be traumatic, and there are a number of serious health risks that come with pregnancy and childbirth, not to mention that giving birth costs at least $2000-3000 if there are no complications.

LadyDarcia


Shintanai

PostPosted: Sun Jul 01, 2007 1:41 pm


Go ahead and kill the damn thing if the women wants to. and think about all the stuff the alleged child won't have to go through in life, like arguing about this.
PostPosted: Sun Jul 01, 2007 2:31 pm


To me, there is a point wherein abortion is acceptable and a point at which it is not. If a girl gets raped, then she should be able to get one (within time limits, which I'll discuss below). However, if some teen gets knocked up of her own volition, then she should have to raise it.

Now on time. There is a certain point at which the brain of the baby is developed; this is what I consider sentience. If it's just a ball of stem cells, it is not alive to me. That's my opinion; dispute it if you wish.

MyOwnBestCritic

Dapper Dabbler


LadyDarcia

PostPosted: Sun Jul 01, 2007 6:34 pm


MyOwnBestCritic
To me, there is a point wherein abortion is acceptable and a point at which it is not. If a girl gets raped, then she should be able to get one (within time limits, which I'll discuss below). However, if some teen gets knocked up of her own volition, then she should have to raise it.

Now on time. There is a certain point at which the brain of the baby is developed; this is what I consider sentience. If it's just a ball of stem cells, it is not alive to me. That's my opinion; dispute it if you wish.


You realize that the spectrum of women seeking abortions is much larger that rape victims and teenage sluts, right? Why should they (or even the slut) be denied an abortion in the timeframe you've given? Not only that, but what is the purpose on forcing them to raise it?
PostPosted: Mon Jul 02, 2007 12:47 am


To be consistent in our legal assertions that people accept and deal with the consequences of their actions.

When you go into consensual, unprotected sex, you are consenting to the possibility that you might have a child. It is a consequence of your act and is completely natural. It is seen to be an avoidance of responsibility if a woman gets an abortion. It is hypocritical to get an abortion in such circumstances and then to claim that murderers should be held responsible for their actions, for you yourself have avoided the same responsibilities.

Some compare going into the risky situation of unprotected sex to that of going into a slum or a ghetto and getting mugged. They claim that they should not be held responsible for what happens to them, even if they made the choice to go into the situation where it might happen. The same thing has been done to a situation where it is said one consents to the dangers of driving but surely you should not be held responsible for an accident you did not cause.

These arguments are even more examples of the avoidance of responsibility in that they blatantly ignore that the consequences (the pregnancies) are of their own acts, not of a mugger, or of another driver. This is what you did and you are responsible for it.

It is surely not so hypocritical to want an abortion in cases of failed protection or rape, and I think the philosophy there is a little different.

But to the former situation, I do not believe that woman should have the right to forfeit responsibility simply because they don't want a child in them. Do not all forms of human life, since creation, have the inalienable right to life in America?

IcarusDream


The FDA

PostPosted: Mon Jul 02, 2007 9:45 am


IcarusDream
To be consistent in our legal assertions that people accept and deal with the consequences of their actions.


But the "consequence" in this situation is a potential person. It sounds pretty cruel to force someone to keep a kid, or go through a pregnancy as a punishment. But it sounds like a good way to foster resentment, if that's what you're into.

Quote:
When you go into consensual, unprotected sex, you are consenting to the possibility that you might have a child. It is a consequence of your act and is completely natural. It is seen to be an avoidance of responsibility if a woman gets an abortion. It is hypocritical to get an abortion in such circumstances and then to claim that murderers should be held responsible for their actions, for you yourself have avoided the same responsibilities.


So it seems you have trouble grasping the difference between ending a sentient life and not allowing a potential life to reach sentience. That's the difference between abortion and murder. And not all unplanned pregnancies happen as a result of consenting, unprotected sex. Condoms break, pills get missed, sometimes even vasectomies and tubals fail. Not everyone has access to, or is even educated about the morning after pill.

Sometimes abortion is taking responsibility. Sometimes it is even less responsible to have a kid. And don't start with me about adoption or foster care. That can be a fate worse than not being born at all.

Quote:
Some compare going into the risky situation of unprotected sex to that of going into a slum or a ghetto and getting mugged. They claim that they should not be held responsible for what happens to them, even if they made the choice to go into the situation where it might happen. The same thing has been done to a situation where it is said one consents to the dangers of driving but surely you should not be held responsible for an accident you did not cause.


Do you even know how many abortions are the result of unprotected sex? I can't find any statistics, but my guess is that most women don't deliberately avoid protection because they can just waltz into the abortion clinic any time they want and get an abortion. Abortion isn't exactly cheap, and it's not a walk in/walk out procedure. And once again, do you think growing up knowing that you were an accident and that your parents didn't want you, but they were forced to have you anyway, would make you feel very good? Or do you just hope that every woman who is made to bear a child against her will, will magically love and want that child after it's born? Please.

Quote:
These arguments are even more examples of the avoidance of responsibility in that they blatantly ignore that the consequences (the pregnancies) are of their own acts, not of a mugger, or of another driver. This is what you did and you are responsible for it.


Children as consequences, how nice. Who benefits?

Quote:
It is surely not so hypocritical to want an abortion in cases of failed protection or rape, and I think the philosophy there is a little different.


Gee, thanks, how big of you. So do you propose taking pregnant women to court to determine how they wound up pregnant, and then granting or denying them the right to control their own bodies from there? Do you realize how much this will cost and how much this will tie up the already overflowing courts?

Quote:
But to the former situation, I do not believe that woman should have the right to forfeit responsibility simply because they don't want a child in them. Do not all forms of human life, since creation, have the inalienable right to life in America?


Can we have the right to "forfeit responsibility" by putting it up for adoption? And uh, we actually don't get our rights til birth. Birth means when you are born, not when you are gestating. Are you really telling me that a tadpole is more important than a grown woman?
PostPosted: Mon Jul 02, 2007 12:44 pm


The FDA
IcarusDream
To be consistent in our legal assertions that people accept and deal with the consequences of their actions.


But the "consequence" in this situation is a potential person. It sounds pretty cruel to force someone to keep a kid, or go through a pregnancy as a punishment. But it sounds like a good way to foster resentment, if that's what you're into.


What I got outta that is: "It's not right to force someone to keep a human alive." I can see how...forcing someone to donate a kidney or something would be a terrible thing...but man, I mean...c'mon. This is a form of human life that they created...not some brother or cousin...

Quote:
So it seems you have trouble grasping the difference between ending a sentient life and not allowing a potential life to reach sentience.


What I am trying to grasp is, why is it a right thing to prevent a potential life from reaching sentience?

Quote:
That's the difference between abortion and murder. And not all unplanned pregnancies happen as a result of consenting, unprotected sex. Condoms break, pills get missed, sometimes even vasectomies and tubals fail. Not everyone has access to, or is even educated about the morning after pill.


I am aware of these things as a flaw in the hypocrisy argument and am not exactly sure how to handle them as of yet.

Quote:
Sometimes abortion is taking responsibility. Sometimes it is even less responsible to have a kid. And don't start with me about adoption or foster care. That can be a fate worse than not being born at all.


So let's kill anything that we think won't live a decent life?

Quote:
Do you even know how many abortions are the result of unprotected sex? I can't find any statistics, but my guess is that most women don't deliberately avoid protection because they can just waltz into the abortion clinic any time they want and get an abortion.


I don't know, but this is the only case I'm arguing.

Quote:
Abortion isn't exactly cheap, and it's not a walk in/walk out procedure. And once again, do you think growing up knowing that you were an accident and that your parents didn't want you, but they were forced to have you anyway, would make you feel very good?


I'm dating someone who's in that situation, the fact that they were an accident doesn't affect them at all.

Quote:
Or do you just hope that every woman who is made to bear a child against her will, will magically love and want that child after it's born? Please.


I think I would hope that my parents didn't have the right to "abort" me...

Quote:
Quote:
These arguments are even more examples of the avoidance of responsibility in that they blatantly ignore that the consequences (the pregnancies) are of their own acts, not of a mugger, or of another driver. This is what you did and you are responsible for it.


Children as consequences, how nice. Who benefits?


The child? As they are not dead? And..are alive...

Quote:
Quote:
It is surely not so hypocritical to want an abortion in cases of failed protection or rape, and I think the philosophy there is a little different.


Gee, thanks, how big of you. So do you propose taking pregnant women to court to determine how they wound up pregnant, and then granting or denying them the right to control their own bodies from there? Do you realize how much this will cost and how much this will tie up the already overflowing courts?


Don't get me wrong, here. I was admitting a flaw in my argument.

Quote:
Quote:
But to the former situation, I do not believe that woman should have the right to forfeit responsibility simply because they don't want a child in them. Do not all forms of human life, since creation, have the inalienable right to life in America?


Can we have the right to "forfeit responsibility" by putting it up for adoption?


So orphaning children is an okay thing to do? It doesn't affect their minds at all? Orphanages are necessary as children are abandoned, it doesn't make the abandonment right.

Quote:
And uh, we actually don't get our rights til birth. Birth means when you are born, not when you are gestating. Are you really telling me that a tadpole is more important than a grown woman?



No...fetal right to survive (if instituted...) would certainly not trump Woman's right to survive, you save a productive adult over something that only has the potential to be...


You might keep in mind that I am politically pro-choice, but philosophically confused. You seem a little hostile for no real reason.

IcarusDream


The FDA

PostPosted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 7:33 am


IcarusDream


What I got outta that is: "It's not right to force someone to keep a human alive." I can see how...forcing someone to donate a kidney or something would be a terrible thing...but man, I mean...c'mon. This is a form of human life that they created...not some brother or cousin...


You have just discovered you have a foreign entity inside your body. Why should you be forced to play host to it against your will? Can you imagine how terrifying that could be? If you agree that it is wrong to force someone to give up a kidney, why should they be forced to give up their uterus, hell, their whole body and life for the next 18 years?

Quote:

What I am trying to grasp is, why is it a right thing to prevent a potential life from reaching sentience?


Because it's only a potential life. It's not viable on it's own. And it's not even sentient, so it doesn't even know it exists. And if it's inside my body, it's my business what I decide to do with it.

Quote:

I am aware of these things as a flaw in the hypocrisy argument and am not exactly sure how to handle them as of yet.


OK.

Quote:

So let's kill anything that we think won't live a decent life?


Not everyone has the money to raise a kid, or support from their family, or a partner, a work ethic, is able to handle money, good mental health, a place to live, etc. Sometimes it is better not to subject a child to that. You can only look at it through rose colored glasses and think all these problems can be solved and everyone will skip off into the sunset but sometimes nothing works out, ever. Sometimes, way too often, things don't turn out for the best. Go visit a homeless or battered woman's shelter sometime and report back to me what you see.

Quote:

I don't know, but this is the only case I'm arguing.


OK.

Quote:


I'm dating someone who's in that situation, the fact that they were an accident doesn't affect them at all.


Good, great. What about people whose parents use that fact to constantly push them down and make them feel like s**t? I have a friend whose dad refuses to call him by his name and instead calls him "George", because he is named after his dad, and his dad considers him a mistake and a disgrace to his name. And he is not OK.

Quote:
I think I would hope that my parents didn't have the right to "abort" me...


If you were aborted then they wouldn't be your parents. You would never know you were aborted.

Quote:


The child? As they are not dead? And..are alive...


If you force the woman to go through the pregnancy, then yes, it will be a child. While it is gestating, it is called a fetus.

Quote:

Don't get me wrong, here. I was admitting a flaw in my argument.


OK

Quote:

So orphaning children is an okay thing to do? It doesn't affect their minds at all? Orphanages are necessary as children are abandoned, it doesn't make the abandonment right.


Well, I don't think so, but what are you going to do about women who just plain do not want children? You can sterilize them but accidents DO happen, even with vasectomies and tubal ligations; it's rare, but it happens. Are you going to force these women to all keep these unwanted kids, then possible abuse or neglect them themselves? Do you realize what kind of mess we would have if abortion was totally illegal, and the option to adopt out is also taken from us? Dude, I am starting to get the feeling that you hate women.

Quote:

No...fetal right to survive (if instituted...) would certainly not trump Woman's right to survive, you save a productive adult over something that only has the potential to be...


You might keep in mind that I am politically pro-choice, but philosophically confused. You seem a little hostile for no real reason.


But why should a fetus get any rights at all? It cannot think, feel, or survive on it's own. Hell yes I am hostile, you are talking about taking away my right to control my own life and body! When you are not even a woman and have no clue what it's like to be pregnant and alone with no help or support from anyone. Of course I am going to get defensive. Losing my right to decide whether or not I have kids is a terrifying prospect.
PostPosted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 8:25 am


The FDA
IcarusDream


What I got outta that is: "It's not right to force someone to keep a human alive." I can see how...forcing someone to donate a kidney or something would be a terrible thing...but man, I mean...c'mon. This is a form of human life that they created...not some brother or cousin...


You have just discovered you have a foreign entity inside your body. Why should you be forced to play host to it against your will? Can you imagine how terrifying that could be? If you agree that it is wrong to force someone to give up a kidney, why should they be forced to give up their uterus, hell, their whole body and life for the next 18 years?


Because they put it there? And, no matter what you call it, it is still a form of human life.

Quote:
Quote:
What I am trying to grasp is, why is it a right thing to prevent a potential life from reaching sentience?


Because it's only a potential life. It's not viable on it's own. And it's not even sentient, so it doesn't even know it exists. And if it's inside my body, it's my business what I decide to do with it.


But...it is human.

Quote:
Quote:
So let's kill anything that we think won't live a decent life?


Not everyone has the money to raise a kid, or support from their family, or a partner, a work ethic, is able to handle money, good mental health, a place to live, etc. Sometimes it is better not to subject a child to that. You can only look at it through rose colored glasses and think all these problems can be solved and everyone will skip off into the sunset but sometimes nothing works out, ever. Sometimes, way too often, things don't turn out for the best. Go visit a homeless or battered woman's shelter sometime and report back to me what you see.


Just because it can't have a good life, we should kill it. I'm still not following. It still seems to be the right thing to do, to give every human life a chance to live..


Quote:
Quote:
I'm dating someone who's in that situation, the fact that they were an accident doesn't affect them at all.


Good, great. What about people whose parents use that fact to constantly push them down and make them feel like s**t?


Kids can be treated like that even when they're not an accident.

Quote:
I have a friend whose dad refuses to call him by his name and instead calls him "George", because he is named after his dad, and his dad considers him a mistake and a disgrace to his name. And he is not OK.


As with my personal anecdote, it doesn't hold true for all cases. I simply point out that emotional concern is not a problem for every child that narrowly escapes abortion.

Quote:
Quote:
I think I would hope that my parents didn't have the right to "abort" me...


If you were aborted then they wouldn't be your parents. You would never know you were aborted.


Which makes me all the more happy that I didn't get aborted.

Quote:
Quote:
The child? As they are not dead? And..are alive...


If you force the woman to go through the pregnancy, then yes, it will be a child. While it is gestating, it is called a fetus.


Which....is still a form of human life that you would be completely destroying?

Quote:
Quote:
So orphaning children is an okay thing to do? It doesn't affect their minds at all? Orphanages are necessary as children are abandoned, it doesn't make the abandonment right.


Well, I don't think so, but what are you going to do about women who just plain do not want children? You can sterilize them but accidents DO happen, even with vasectomies and tubal ligations; it's rare, but it happens. Are you going to force these women to all keep these unwanted kids, then possible abuse or neglect them themselves? Do you realize what kind of mess we would have if abortion was totally illegal, and the option to adopt out is also taken from us? Dude, I am starting to get the feeling that you hate women.


It's more like, I hate needlessly killing any type of human life. Now, what you bring up is an obvious need for abortion, which I think could be solved by a moral overhaul of society...which is much less likely to happen than just keeping abortion legal. lol

Quote:
Quote:
No...fetal right to survive (if instituted...) would certainly not trump Woman's right to survive, you save a productive adult over something that only has the potential to be...


You might keep in mind that I am politically pro-choice, but philosophically confused. You seem a little hostile for no real reason.


But why should a fetus get any rights at all? It cannot think, feel, or survive on it's own.


The best I can come up with is "It's human!" and man that's terrible.

Quote:
Hell yes I am hostile, you are talking about taking away my right to control my own life and body!


Oh really? Weren't you the one that put the fohl (form of human life) in you? Weren't you the one that created this fohl, thus giving it a right to live?

Quote:
When you are not even a woman and have no clue what it's like to be pregnant and alone with no help or support from anyone.


Argumentum ad hominem.

IcarusDream


The FDA

PostPosted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 9:23 am


IcarusDream


Because they put it there? And, no matter what you call it, it is still a form of human life.


In the case of in vitro fertilization, you would be "putting it there". If I deliberately tried to get pregnant, why would I then want to end the pregnancy? Abortion happens when pregnancy is unintended or unwanted.

Quote:

But...it is human.


No, it is a potential human. Until it is viable on it's own, it is like a tumor or parasite. You may think that sounds terrible, but a fetus is no more a human than my liver is a human.

Quote:


Just because it can't have a good life, we should kill it. I'm still not following. It still seems to be the right thing to do, to give every human life a chance to live..


First, I would like to ask why human life is so much more important than any other life. Second, I just don't get this "give it a chance to live". A chance to live like what? A chance to grow up and get stuck with an unwanted kid just like mom and dad because now abortion is illegal and you have no choice if your contraception fails?

Quote:

Kids can be treated like that even when they're not an accident.


OK, even more reason for some people to NOT have kids. What is your point here?

Quote:


As with my personal anecdote, it doesn't hold true for all cases. I simply point out that emotional concern is not a problem for every child that narrowly escapes abortion.


Oh come on. Have you ever heard of Maslow's Hierarchy of needs? Children need more than food and shelter, they also need love and support. Maybe your GF is an android, but most people need to be loved and wanted in order to feel safe and happy.

Quote:


Which makes me all the more happy that I didn't get aborted.


If you were aborted, you wouldn't feel anything. Now, if your mother had killed you after you were born, that would be cruel. But up until the 2nd trimester, it's not a kid. It has no consciousness. It won't care if you abort it.

Quote:

Which....is still a form of human life that you would be completely destroying?


My kidneys are a form of human life. You are grasping at straws here.

Quote:

It's more like, I hate needlessly killing any type of human life. Now, what you bring up is an obvious need for abortion, which I think could be solved by a moral overhaul of society...which is much less likely to happen than just keeping abortion legal. lol


Yup, so just leave it alone. If abortion was illegal, we would be in a helluva mess. If people don't want kids, don't force 'em to. It is more cruel, I think, to beat your kid and raise him to loathe himself than to not bring the child into the world at all.

Quote:


The best I can come up with is "It's human!" and man that's terrible.


Yeah that's pretty weak. Since you have this overwhelming love for humankind, why don't you go volunteer at a homeless shelter, or with Food Not Bombs or something? Join the Peace Corps, maybe.

Quote:

Oh really? Weren't you the one that put the fohl (form of human life) in you? Weren't you the one that created this fohl, thus giving it a right to live?


But I DIDN'T PUT IT THERE. Women get abortions not because they hate human life, or because they like to kill their potential offspring, but because they accidentally wound up pregnant. Not because they put it there on purpose. WTH?

Quote:

Argumentum ad hominem.


If you want think that was a personal attack, fine, but it is true that you are not a woman and you will never experience this situation, not do you seem to have the slightest idea what it's like. You make that blatantly obvious with your "But you put it there!" arguments. Finding out that you have an unwanted pregnancy is life changing and often terrifying. The choice to abort, or go through with it, or adopt it out is extremely hard and stressful. But it is so nice to have that choice. I am really grateful that I still do.
PostPosted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 3:54 pm


The FDA
No, it is a potential human. Until it is viable on it's own, it is like a tumor or parasite. You may think that sounds terrible, but a fetus is no more a human than my liver is a human.


A fohl then, I dunno, I guess it's just a serious personal problem that I have with killing anything that has a chance to be a human that could stand next to me. So, with that, I'll just keep leaving it alone. I've always made that choice in political debates, but I really am just morally stiffened when confronted with this. I concede.

Btw, ad hominem isn't necessarily a personal attack, it can be a compliment, like appeal to authority. You can't say someone's right, and leave it at that, on some subject simply because they're a doctor in that field. The ad Hom charge was the "You aren't a woman..." stuff. You can't say that I am wrong about what I said simply because of who I am.

IcarusDream


soul donut

PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 6:50 pm


I view pregnancy rather like sex. It's all fine and dandy if it's something you want. Sure, it's beautiful, it's magical, it's precious. But if it's something unwanted, it suddenly becomes this terrible, disgusting thing.

It is not my place to tell other women what to do with their bodies, just because I happen to disagree with what they're doing with them. The unborn fetus may be "a human life" but it is not cognizant to the abortion process, and will not experience any pain.

Besides, if we're getting all philosophical, I believe that those aborted pregnancies were never meant to be, anyway, and if there is a soul at stake in the process, it will come back in another time and place. Reincarnation, if that's the word you want to use. 3nodding
PostPosted: Sat Jul 07, 2007 2:47 am


The woman is far more useful that a fetus.

Atomic Sky


NonchalantConcern

PostPosted: Sat Jul 07, 2007 11:22 am


Dangit. I'm ALMOST sick of this topic. Don't get me wrong, it's a valid discussion but it's been done so many times. I don't blame it being posted in this guild, though. Bad thing about us (meaning members of this guild), the majority of the members here seem pretty strong willed, so I don't think many minds will be changed about this topic.

Hmmm... now for my input.

One thing that a lot of people seem to focus on is the want vs. the law. It seems to me that people want to make abortion a law in some sort of way, being the foundation of most arguments. Maybe without the person even realizing it. They say "Blah blah blah shouldn't be able to get an abortion because of blah blah blah." Key word being 'able', as in they shouldn't have a choice. Who is going to stop them? Surly not the doctor.
I say "Blah blah blah shouldn't WANT to get an abortion because of blah blah blah."

Yes, you should want to get an abortion if you were raped, will die if put through the birth, ect.
No, you shouldn't want to get an abortion if you can have a healthy birth.
No, you shouldn't want to get an abortion if you are responsible for becoming pregnant.


But this being said, I believe that a mother that does not want her baby should not be forced to keep it. What use would that be. Sure, the thing would have life, but you never know if that child will be abused all of it's life and what-not (I don't feel like listing all the posibilities). Why not give it to a family that would LOVE a baby and cannot themselves have one?
Reply
General Discussion

Goto Page: 1 2 [>] [»|]
 
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games
Mini-Games
Play with GCash
Play with Platinum