How do you feel about abortion?

[DRAGONBALLVINTAGE]

I get sick to my stomach hearing about it. If they were like just getting settled then ok, But be safe next time But when you can give birth at any moment or the baby is forming then thats when you look at adoption!

 

[Mikemk]

Abortion is murder. Discussions about legalizing abortion are discussions about legalizing murder. Except in cases where carrying the child puts the mother's life in jeopardy, in which case it's self defense.

 

[TotalInsanity4]

If I give my honest opinion, will ya'll promise to hear me out and not massacre me so long as I can give good reason for everything I say?

 

[Hanafuda]

Complicated. An abortion IS a human life being ended, and it doesn't matter if the fetus is viable yet or not. But for the abortion, the potential is there for a person to live a full life. Not calling that intervention the ending of a life is like pretending you didn't waste a cake when you take it out of the oven when it just started baking and just dump it in the garbage instead.

But, it's none of the government's business. The government shouldn't involve itself in charging anyone who has or performs an abortion with a crime, at least not if the abortion is done in compliance with Roe and Casey. Nor should the government be subsidizing the procedure (that does happen though, through funding Planned Parenthood and direct payment for the procedure via Medicaid in some states).

It gets more difficult when the father's rights wrt: abortion are considered. Basically, he has none. If the mother decides to have an abortion, he can't stop it. If she refuses to have an abortion, he can't force it. But either way, his life is affected in a major way. Either the child he wanted is terminated, or the child he didn't want becomes his financial liability for 18 years. It's easy to say, 'her body, her choice,' but her choice affects more lives than just her own. The law gives a pregnant woman a way out if she wants it. The 'pregnant man' is helpless.

Fortunately I've never had to confront the issue in my personal life. Anyone who thinks it's a simple issue hasn't really thought about it much.

 

[Kigiru]

It should be legal only in few special cases like pregnancy by rape or incest, pregnancy being dangerous for mother and if the children is confirmed to have health issues so serious that they will not be able to live more than few hours.

In other situations it should not be a thing.

 

[TotalInsanity4]

The 'pregnant man' is helpless.

I understand the point you're trying to get across, but there is no "we" in pregnancy, and the phrase "pregnant man" in this context is an oxymoron. Yes, the male in the relationship may have an emotional investment in the pregnancy, but it's not him that has to deal with all the physical hardships of carrying a child. Sure, it would be polite to have his opinion considered in the discussion of whether or not the child is kept, but in the end it's SOLELY up to the mother. Her body, her choice, in that regard.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

It should be legal only in few special cases like pregnancy by rape or incest, pregnancy being dangerous for mother and if the children is confirmed to have health issues so serious that they will not be able to live more than few hours.

Since I've given myself permission to speak on the matter: what's the difference between aborting the fetus of a rape victim vs literally anyone else, morally and/or physically speaking?

 

[Kigiru]

Since I've given myself permission to speak on the matter: what's the difference between aborting the fetus of a rape victim vs literally anyone else, morally and/or physically speaking?

No woman should be realy forced to be pregnant, simply to put. No woman should also bear a very complicated reminder that they were raped. I think that it is logical that pregnancy by rape is not good at all and can lead woman to some serious mental issues.

 

[Hanafuda]

I understand the point you're trying to get across, but there is no "we" in pregnancy, and the phrase "pregnant man" in this context is an oxymoron. Yes, the male in the relationship may have an emotional investment in the pregnancy, but it's not him that has to deal with all the physical hardships of carrying a child. Sure, it would be polite to have his opinion considered in the discussion of whether or not the child is kept, but in the end it's SOLELY up to the mother. Her body, her choice, in that regard.

If there's no "we" in the 9 months of pregnancy, then why is there a "we" for 18 years of child support?

As long as that choice you're talking about includes allowing the father to opt out of financial responsibility (other than the cost of the abortion, if that's what happens) within a certain amount of time after being informed of the pregnancy, then sure, her body, her choice. Her choice shouldn't take his financial support as a given if he doesn't want the baby. The mother's allowed to wash her hands of it if she wants to, the father should also have that opportunity, within certain conditions. Equal protection and treatment under the law. I know I'm pissing in the wind to even suggest that, but it's how I feel about it.

Since I've given myself permission to speak on the matter: what's the difference between aborting the fetus of a rape victim vs literally anyone else, morally and/or physically speaking?

Fair question, but I think the answer again is about responsibility. Consensual sex includes the risk of pregnancy, non-consensual sex imposes the risk of pregnancy.

Again, I'm not an abortion hardliner. I'm fine with the standards from Roe and Casey. Up to a certain point in the fetus' development, I support the mother's right to opt out. I'm just addressing your question, i.e. how can rape be differentiated.

 

[slaphappygamer]

It’s the woman’s choice to choose. It’s a personal choice. Im not going to tell someone else what they should do with their body. I’m a dude. I really have no say, unless it’s our baby.

 

[Hanafuda]

It’s the woman’s choice to choose. It’s a personal choice. Im not going to tell someone else what they should do with their body. I’m a dude. I really have no say, unless it’s our baby.

You have no say even if it is your baby.

 

[x65943]

You have no say even if it is your baby.

Legally he has no say. But ethically he should have some say about what happens to his child - if the decision to have a child was consensual.

 

[Jayro]

Abortions RULE! We need them, and they need to be mandatory for people with more than 2 kids on welfare. We're over-populated as fuck, so we should start regulating babies like China does. Besides, kids are annoying fuckbags anyways. They're gross, whiny, needy, they stink, they're dumber than rocks, and expensive as fuck to raise. No thanks... ABORT! ABORT! ABORT!

 

[x65943]

Abortions RULE! We need them, and they need to be mandatory for people with more than 2 kids on welfare. We're over-populated as fuck, so we should start regulating babies like China does. Besides, kids are annoying fuckbags anyways. They're gross, whiny, needy, they stink, they're dumber than rocks, and expensive as fuck to raise. No thanks... ABORT! ABORT! ABORT!

Uh, wow. I hope this is some parody.

That way lies the path to the dark side. Forced abortions? No thanks. The state should have no say in matters of medicine like this. Nanny state much?

 

[dpad_5678]

"Life is precious until it's born. Then fuck it." - conservatives

 

[kuwanger]

But ethically he should have some say about what happens to his child

The problem is it's hard to argue the abortion--ie, a form of murder--is ethical. Ethics presume a sort of code of conduct that as axioms includes a variety of unrealistic principles at times*. Add to that that it's very rarely, if ever, possible to argue that you have an ethical say in the workings of another person's body. I mean, I understand the point you're trying to raise, but you wouldn't have a discussion about the ethics of whether a father has any say on whether a mother murders her one year old.

* Ethics tries to get around this by introducing things like self-defense, for example. Or has to include situations like whether you should lie to protect someone who you presume will be murdered if you tell the truth.

 

[DRAGONBALLVINTAGE]

I think after 4 months thats when you can't abort
you had enough time to go now put it up or keep it

 

[Searinox]

I see abortion opposition as the result of people's rigid views about what is human, or living, clashing with the biological reality of life development. Once they found out that pregnancy starts out quite a while before any belly bulge and that the egg is microscopic in size, they were willing to coin that as much of a person as any other.

Yet we have situations where we legally discuss quality of life of persistently vegetative state people and where we take away some rights of mentally ill people that clearly show we are best handling a human being and its basic rights on the capabilities they possess at that time. We also discussed similar rights of ethics and cruelty to animals based on their exhibited intelligence and ability to feel. For example we added octopi to a list of considerations just because they were more sentient than other cephalopods and had some debates on dolphins. I believe the personhood of a developing fetus should be handled in much the same way.

I believe the standard should be defined around this emerging consensus tying intelligence and ability to grasp their surroundings and state to determine personhood. As such, I could only ever see problems with late-term abortions. Being us trying to determine a standard for an emergent, evolving process for whom biology didn't care to delimit for us, I don't think there's ever going to be a way that pleases everyone but current standards about fetus viability seem appropriate to me.

Nothing was made perfect. We were made to kill in order to live by construction in order to feed. Even if we could solely eat vegetables and survive it'd still be taking life. Even as we walk we may crush living things. We are by construction presented with some moral dilemmas to life and taking it. We make an exception for our own species, an exception that seems hypocritical but NECESSARY to us, and even then we struggle as we defend other lifeforms from unnecessary cruelty. Yes in an ideal world we wouldn't need to take life ever, but we live in the real world, and compromises must be found.

 

[x65943]

The problem is it's hard to argue the abortion--ie, a form of murder--is ethical. Ethics presume a sort of code of conduct that as axioms includes a variety of unrealistic principles at times*. Add to that that it's very rarely, if ever, possible to argue that you have an ethical say in the workings of another person's body. I mean, I understand the point you're trying to raise, but you wouldn't have a discussion about the ethics of whether a father has any say on whether a mother murders her one year old.

* Ethics tries to get around this by introducing things like self-defense, for example. Or has to include situations like whether you should lie to protect someone who you presume will be murdered if you tell the truth.

Personally I believe early in pregnancy - particularly at the morula stage - when the embryo is still a mass of unorganized cells - that abortion does not constitute murder. It's not much different than removing a mole at that point. Here an abortion seems much less about deciding life and death, and more akin to deciding whether or not to sell the family car etc.

But I can see your point about thinking this is an amoral situation. I personally think morals are relative, and so you could have a moral/ethical debate about matters some traditionally think to be completely outside the realm of morals entirely.

 

[TotalInsanity4]

If there's no "we" in the 9 months of pregnancy, then why is there a "we" for 18 years of child support?

You cannot seriously be equating the burden of pregnancy with the responsibility of parenthood

Fair question, but I think the answer again is about responsibility. Consensual sex includes the risk of pregnancy, non-consensual sex imposes the risk of pregnancy.

Now hang on, something you need to understand is that bringing someone into this world should not be a consequence. Someone should only birth a child if they feel as though they are ready to take care of one. If you see carrying a pregnancy to term as "punishment" for sex, especially if the parents are, for instance, financially unable to support a child, then there are bigger issues that need to be addressed on top of that. Especially the fact that that "punishment" WILL trickle down to the child

Another thing, though, is that I find that there's a moral inconsistency in your argument that I HOPE you realize isn't there. In your above argument, you say that the father should be able to opt out of child support if he didn't support keeping the child, which implies that you're forgiving him for having unsafe sex with his partner. However, below that, you then state that if a mother chooses to have consensual sex and conceives, she should take responsibility. I hate to pull the term "sexist" out and wave it around, because I really hate using "isms" in arguments because many people think that it's a buzzword, but even if you yourself are not intending it to be so, I'd say that your argument is rooted in an incredibly sexist thought process

 

[XDel]

I think there are a lot of benefits.

1. Maintain your girly figure.
2. No nagging brats hanging at your ankle.
3. Nothing to hold you back from your career.
4. Satisfy that life long curiosity; get out there and see what this abortion business is all about!
5. With abortion, there is zero reason not to walk scantly clad through a high crime neighborhood.
6. Give the middle finger to God, or Nature, or what ever it is that people make up and worship.
7. Nothing else to do.
8. Become a Hero.