New Abortion Law Wave

[Xzi]

Oh, by no means, no band-aids at all. I simply feel more comfortable investing time, effort and money into creating an environment where raising a child for 18 years, or at the very least finding someone to raise said child, is not an issue, as opposed to just killing it.

Sounds like Socialist propaganda to me, but okay. /s

Actually I completely agree with this, and much of the reason why I oppose a blanket ban on abortion is that it will only make such an environment harder to find in these states.

 

[Foxi4]

Sounds like Socialist propaganda to me, but okay. /s

Actually I completely agree with this, and much of the reason why I oppose a blanket ban on abortion is that it will only make such an environment harder to find in these states.

Some common ground. You were always the more reasonable one on the team. It's not really that socialist of an idea - conservatives have always advertised themselves as pro family values, it would be much easier to market that if they stopped tearing those families apart over the most fickle of reasons.

 

[Zonark]

Here's my two cents, Not all abortions are bad. Personally though I feel as if you are carrying the baby for more that 1/3rd of the pregnancy you need to have it and give it up for adoption if you don't want it, If the baby was going to cause harm to the mother and it needs to be aborted to save a life I believe that should be justifiable. Also people are looking at abortion being good at mainly just rape cases which isn't true, not all abortions are do to rape and While there are some people who literally get a abortion every 2 months they are vastly outweighed by the people that don't. I believe that 1/3rd is good timeframe but anything longer I think that the child should be born. I mean I would assume if someone conceived a child via rape this person isn't going to be waiting longer that 1/3rd of the pregnancy to decide.

 

[FAST6191]

A lot of people are saying really stupid things on here on both sides of the argument. Please try not to be emotional and to actually sincerely try to understand what someone else is saying. This is the way I see it:
1) The main question is when does life begin. Once we know this, we can determine our laws and rules more easily.
I believe life begins at conception. I don't believe this for religious reasons. I believe this because it seems most logical. This is when the two sex cells become fertilized and have all of the genetic material for the organism.
--I understand that some pro choicers don't think this, but I have never heard any of them give a clear example of when life begins. If you don't know when life begins, you cannot terminate it.
2) The viability argument- I have heard some prochoice people say that it is a person when it is viable (it could live if it were removed from the womb). The problem with this argument is that if you believe it, you have to accept that personhood is determined by medical technology and resources. A 6 month old child could be viable in a good hospital with a lot of resources in the US but that same child would not be viable in a small remove village in a country with obsolete medical technology.
3) It's a woman's right- You can't just declare something a right. This argument is a dishonest attempt to change the topic and to make the other side feel like they are anti-woman. Is it a woman's right to kill her one day old child? Is it her right to kill her child a minute before it is born? It depends on when life starts, but this argument avoids the real question.
4) You can't say anything because you're a man- This is the appeal to authority. Is the argument right or not? The validity of the argument is not dependent upon the person making the argument. I am pro life and a guy, so are my arguments any less valid than my girlfriend who is also pro life?
5) Republicans are only small government when they want to be- This might be true, but it is irrelevant.
6) Republicans only care about the babies before they are born- This might be true, but it is also irrelevant. Republicans don't want to pay taxes to support unwanted children. That doesn't mean that Republicans are okay with having children getting murdered (which is what abortion is from their perspective).
7)These arguments are fallacious and dishonest, and I haven't heard a convincing prochoice argument about why conception is not the start of life. I'm not even saying that all prolife arguments are honest. I'll be the first to admit that a lot of prolife arguments are just as dishonest as the prochoice ones. All I'm saying is that the prolife side seems logical while the prochoice side seems completely emotionally driven.
8) Once again, the main question that needs answering is: when does life begin? If we don't know, we should be cautious and not allow abortion. If it is conception, we should definitely not allow abortion.

1) So if a sperm meets and egg and they combine but skip implantation and land on a tampon in a week's time do I have to go help my friend through a miscarriage?
2) Most usually add on "without special measures" at this point, similar to how we also handle end of life and serious injury. If it is a chemical dropper for food and an incubator to stand a reasonable chance of making it then that is one thing. If it is going to be an array of tubes, specialist medics, high end medicines and such then even if it is available then yeah.
3) It is the woman's body, and lifestyle, that will have to suffer for the better part of a year, if not longer if they are also compelled to raise the result. That would be the foundation of that one. Generally the right to bodily autonomy is considered a fairly fundamental one.
4) I would agree, indeed you will find several posts in this thread and the other, saying that having the equipment which functions does not render you magically more capable of understanding things.
5) Didn't see that here but I would agree it is rather out of place here.
6) It does speak to a measure of double standard though. If it is life and it is so special and magical to then turn around and allow them to live a miserable and hard fought existence does seem rather contrary to the notions underpinning the former.
7) I would have probably come to the opposite conclusion. Something that can not feel, think, suffer, comprehend or otherwise be classified as sentient gets destroyed, and in doing so likely lifts a massive burden upon something that can feel, think, suffer, comprehend and otherwise be classified as sentient. Where is the big problem?
8) I would refer back to 7). Similarly I would also say life beginning is related at best but contemplating the suffering of things is where it is really at.

Back to 1) then what are these logical reasons for sperm meets egg (or virus self fertilises egg I guess)? The tech is such that you can probably scrape some cheek cells from someone and clone them. Do we care there? We can create strands of DNA from very much inert chemicals, assemble them into full sets of DNA and have the results very much count as alive, bacteria only right now (viruses before that) but no reason to suspect higher and higher orders of life can't be made.

 

[kumikochan]

The law here says when there is brain activity and that is from 3 months onward. Abortion is not legal after 3 months and only in extreme cases. That is a general good rule

 

[Deleted-401606]

Huh?
Sorry, still waking up.
No one accidentally has sex. You don't just slip and land your dick in a woman. It is an intentional act (not including rape). Everyone is taught what happens when you have sex. Everyone knows what happens when you drive drunk. You are taking a risk knowing the possible outcome, and everyone already knows condoms and birth control fails. The only way to avoid pregnancy is to avoid sex.

If you are the victim of a drunk driver, then the drunk driver must get consequences (unless you are an elitist and then you get away with anything).

There is no legal recourse for a woman getting an abortion, and there should be, ESPECIALLY if the father was against the abortion. It is his child too.

Women bitching "My body, my choice", yes, they already made their choice to have sex. There should be consequences for having an abortion to deter people from making poor choices.

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

And to anyone that says to me "So what are you going to do about all those unwanted babies when the mother gives it up and orphanages are full?"

You know what. I already do a shit load to help everyone around me. I give away the meat that we raise and the food that we grow to people all the time. I share a great amount. I have already been raising 3 troubling children that are not mine but I have treated them exactly as if they are mine. We have taken other children into our home that were in need and did great.

My life goal is to help people with my success. I was a shit head the majority of my younger years and I have turned that around to become a much better person. My plans for my future include continuing to give back to the community, the world, and people in need.

I will make certain that once I have even more the ability to do so, I will become actively involved with providing for children in foster homes and orphanages. My father spent a long time in an orphanage and it gave him nightmares for the rest of his life. No child should have to live like that. Ever child should have a great start to life. I will do my part in making that better for as many children as I can.

I am very happy that you got to turn your life around.Many of the people here just regurgitate what they heard in their liberal school about abortion,they don't really have the life experience to talk about such a delicate subject.When you spend the majority of your life playing video games instead of living in the real cruel world,it is easy to see how people could be on board with the idea of abortion.My personal opinion is that most gamer's see themselves as victims and victims are more likely to identify with liberal politics.Abortion is wrong in 99% of cases as people make a personal choice to have sex and to ejaculate inside someone for the sake of pleasure.If you aren't ready to raise a kid,you really should not be having unprotected sex.

 

[FAST6191]

If you aren't ready to raise a kid,you really should not be having unprotected sex.

If you are not prepared to be hit by a car you should not cross the street (or possibly even walk along it).
If you are not prepared to get hypothermia you should not climb a mountain.
If you are not prepared to be allergic to something you should never try it.
If you don't want to have a brick fall on you then probably should be a bricklayer or builder.
This could continue for a while.

In any case we have rather swish medicine these days that will attempt to correct for any problems in the event it all goes wrong, indeed not doing so if you are a medic and the patient is an otherwise healthy individually expressing a desire very much continue living will get you slapped really hard. Why is taking a few chemicals or firing up the womb vacuum any different here?

 

[Bonehead]

A lot of you should have been aborted. So many forever alone incels in this thread.

 

[chrisrlink]

It's AMAZING how many people here are willing to go along with or outright approve of the killing of a human life.

For the people who think it's just a clump of cells, if the "cells" are not removed from the mother, they will eventually form into a fully functioning human just as we all did.

For those saying that the baby could be deformed, have down's syndrome, or other affliction, life is life. Would you be willing to kill a grown adult with down's syndrome. What about the youtuber Ricky? Are you going to convince him that he should have been aborted? It looks like he sure does appreciate his mother not having him torn out of "her uterus" limb by limb and had his skull crushed before being yanked out and thrown in the trash. Same with rape and incest. Even though the mother went through a horrible experience, why convince them to go through another one immediately after?

For those worried about back alley abortions, if the woman destroys her uterus and can't have babies anymore, that's fine as they aren't fit to be a parent anyways since they think they have the right to kill their children. If they die themselves, then just hand them a Darwin's award.

We should be focusing more on ways of preventing these unwanted births rather than letting women think they can just have the baby "problem" removed from "their" body anytime they decide to make a mistake.

so I'm guessing you don't approve of the death penalty either like most hypocritical Republicans? if you say you support it then you're as bad of a Hypocrite as the rest of them

 

[pustal]

What about the fact that science in itself it it's own flawed religion? I mean, it's what's taught now as the defacto standard and considered the only way to live by. The same can be said about other stuff in the past. Science is just the popular one these days. Imposing their beliefs? Who thought it was a smart idea to use my money to fund baby killing? I don't care if your science currently justifies it. It's my money and you use it to kill babies with. You forced me into taking a position. Back the fuck off, give me my money back, stop using my money in the future to fund abortions, get rid of any laws that allow you to take my money and use it for abortions and I'll consider not having such a strong opinion on murdering babies. The justification; science changes all of the time, but killing a living organism definition hasn't changed. You get enough people in power that agree things should be a certain way and watch the science change to suit their needs. Don't give me that "In the name of science crap".

LOL, I rest my case.

Science is not a religion and is the way to face the world. Science is based on investigation, proof, analysis, corroboration, deduction, etc. Unlike religion that is based on a blind belief endotrinated by others. Science is verifiable, religion is not. Science encourages you to question things and prove them wrong, religion does not. Religion is the opposite, it's dogmatic. Science is meant to find the truth about the way the universe works. And it's not "my science", I'm afraid you are bound to the laws of physics and made of chemistry just as much as I do, while the laws of you're religion are in the minds of those who believe in it.

I feel sad having to state the obvious difference to someone. I also feel sad that someone whose religious belief is invalidated by factual evidence refuses to question it and consider the evidence.

Planned parenthood, which includes contraception and abortion is an effective proven mean against poverty. By defunding it, you are actually giving a hit to the Economy on the long run and actually paying more. And we live as a society, I'm sorry, not an anarchy.

Also science doesn't change, by the way. It's knowledge that increases. And you're right, most religions are immutable, don't change, don't evolve, and are stuck on the beliefs of the world set on one point in the past. Don't you give me the ''in the name of God" crap - Church and State are meant to be separated for a reason, Church and Science not.

Finally, again, a fetus without brain activity is nothing more that and appendix or yes, even a plant. We take out appendixes when they harm us and we cut down plants when we need it, even if to make a salad.

 

[Rolf12]

A lot of you should have been aborted. So many forever alone incels in this thread.

Oof. That is hard.

Who wrote so emotionally "gimme back my money" some posts up? Its not your money, and you don't get to choose what the government does with it. You may have an opinion and choose which clown does the miming from the big white mansion.

 

[Deleted-401606]

If you are not prepared to be hit by a car you should not cross the street (or possibly even walk along it).
If you are not prepared to get hypothermia you should not climb a mountain.
If you are not prepared to be allergic to something you should never try it.
If you don't want to have a brick fall on you then probably should be a bricklayer or builder.
This could continue for a while.

In any case we have rather swish medicine these days that will attempt to correct for any problems in the event it all goes wrong, indeed not doing so if you are a medic and the patient is an otherwise healthy individually expressing a desire very much continue living will get you slapped really hard. Why is taking a few chemicals or firing up the womb vacuum any different here?

Walking to get somewhere is completely different from doing something where the intended function is to reproduce.Please do not act disingenuous.Every moment of happiness you have had in your life is because your mom CHOSE not to abort you,imagine if she had.Would that be fair to you?I really don't think so.

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

LOL, I rest my case.

Science is not a religion and is the way to face the world. Science is based on investigation, proof, analysis, corroboration, deduction, etc. Unlike religion that is based on a blind belief endotrinated by others. Science is verifiable, religion is not. Science encourages you to question things and prove them wrong, religion does not. Religion is the opposite, it's dogmatic. Science is meant to find the truth about the way the universe works. And it's not "my science", I'm afraid you are bound to the laws of physics and made of chemistry just as much as I do, while the laws of you're religion are in the minds of those who believe in it.

I feel sad having to state the obvious difference to someone. I also feel sad that someone whose religious belief is invalidated by factual evidence refuses to question it and consider the evidence.

Planned parenthood, which includes contraception and abortion is an effective proven mean against poverty. By defunding it, you are actually giving a hit to the Economy on the long run and actually paying more. And we live as a society, I'm sorry, not an anarchy.

Also science doesn't change, by the way. It's knowledge that increases. And you're right, most religions are immutable, don't change, don't evolve, and are stuck on the beliefs of the world set on one point in the past. Don't you give me the ''in the name of God" crap - Church and State are meant to be separated for a reason, Church and Science not.

Finally, again, a fetus without brain activity is nothing more that and appendix or yes, even a plant. We take out appendixes when they harm us and we cut down plants when we need it, even if to make a salad.

Science is also bound by political motivation.You never see any scientific studies done on race and the different characteristics among each race,why is this?Because to do so would be politically incorrect and goes directly against the narrative that we are all "created equal". Repeating what you heard in school does not make you an intelligent individual.

 

[cots]

The law here says when there is brain activity and that is from 3 months onward. Abortion is not legal after 3 months and only in extreme cases. That is a general good rule

When exactly, does the brain activity in an Oak Tree start taking place? I mean, we should protect these trees at all cost. Just wondering?

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

Science is not a religion and is the way to face the world. Science is based on investigation, proof, analysis, corroboration, deduction, etc. Unlike religion that is based on a blind belief endotrinated by others. Science is verifiable, religion is not. Science encourages you to question things and prove them wrong, religion does not. Religion is the opposite, it's dogmatic. Science is meant to find the truth about the way the universe works. And it's not "my science", I'm afraid you are bound to the laws of physics and made of chemistry just as much as I do, while the laws of you're religion are in the minds of those who believe in it.

Science is not a religion in definition, I am aware of this. People are simply replacing religion or using science as a basis of their actions instead of religion. People now have faith in science. So in practical application people are worshiping science or using science as the explanation for "why we exist" (which is what the majority of people used to use Religion for). Just like religion science is flawed. I'm not bound to any laws that have been created by man and who knows what sort of laws people will find "next" that will replace the current ones (including replacing science, physics and chemistry). These will all be outdated concepts some day. Who knows, they may also be also proven totally inaccurate or wrong. What won't change is if you have an abortion and use your faith in science to justify it - this is something you did, commit murder, that won't change and you can't take it back.

 

[FAST6191]

Walking to get somewhere is completely different from doing something where the intended function is to reproduce.Please do not act disingenuous.Every moment of happiness you have had in your life is because your mom CHOSE not to abort you,imagine if she had.Would that be fair to you?I really don't think so.

Intended by what or whom, and why is that anything I should respect if there even is such a thing? Even if that can be answered then sex has many more factors to it for humans than simple reproduction. Reproduction is a variously pleasant or unpleasant side effect of such actions for some people.
I fail to see how it is disingenuous to make such comparisons. Quite OK with the medic saying use a rubber next time when they are doing it, just the same as I would for them to say look both ways, know your limits/train better, be more aware of ingredients and use a hard hat.

I similarly fail to see what my ending up existing has to do with anything. To the best of my knowledge (and greatest of hopes) I am not a parent. Am I supposed to feel bad about my hypothetical children that never came to pass because contraception or simply choosing not to have sex during the relevant points in the month (or indeed with an infertile woman)? We can go the other way as well. If my mum had not aborted her pregnancy at 18 she would never have gone to school, got a decent job, worked up through the ranks and ultimately given my siblings and I a pretty comfortable and fun upbringing. Instead I might either have never had my siblings (can't afford such luxuries) or have struggled on a minimum wage, time restricted job -- something I saw many of my friends at school have happen to them. We can return to science as well -- I have never cloned myself, never assembled DNA to make a life form, nor had a surrogate incubate a spawn despite the chemicals and means to do so being all around me and have been so for many years. Do we have to count that as a lack of life being made that is somehow a tragedy?

Science is also bound by political motivation.You never see any scientific studies done on race and the different characteristics among each race,why is this?Because to do so would be politically incorrect and goes directly against the narrative that we are all "created equal". Repeating what you heard in school does not make you an intelligent individual.

I see plenty -- universities seem ready to talk my ear off about the races of those enrolled, their incoming scores and their ultimate results. Certainly political correctness has kneecapped plenty of things in recent times and that is a crying shame, one I hope turns in on itself if not tomorrow then in the near future (more likely), an event I shall be watching with popcorn at hand.
If we are continuing with magical spark of life stuff then the history of a guy called Berzelius is probably worth looking at here -- at the time science was mainly done by time served experts making pronouncements on things (as opposed to the more data driven approaches favoured today), and one of the pervasive beliefs at the time was simple organic chemistry was actually endowed with a spark of life/needed to be produced by living organisms, something said same was considered a notable proponent of. Indeed reading some of the opinions of the day... do a very simple find and replace on them and we have the same things I am seeing from some in this thread. There were a few technical counters to it then (some ammonia based stuff) but they mostly went unnoticed. Then others came along and completely blew it out of the water.

 

[cots]

Oof. That is hard.

Who wrote so emotionally "gimme back my money" some posts up? Its not your money, and you don't get to choose what the government does with it. You may have an opinion and choose which clown does the miming from the big white mansion.

So I earn money and part of it's taken from me by other people and then used to pay for abortions. How is that not my money? Why don't I get in a say in the matter?

If not, I want to know where you live and were you work so the next time you get paid I want you to give me half of your paycheck so I can use the money for whatever purpose I see fit. I mean, if it's not your money, what would you care?

 

[Glyptofane]

Science is not a religion in definition, I am aware of this. People are simply replacing religion or using science as a basis of their actions instead of religion.

Replacing the man in a white robe with the man in a white lab coat and neither appears to be any less corruptible when it comes to pushing an agenda for bribery, blackmail, kickbacks, and payoffs.

 

[kumikochan]

When exactly, does the brain activity in an Oak Tree start taking place? I mean, we should protect these trees at all cost. Just wondering?

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



Science is not a religion in definition, I am aware of this. People are simply replacing religion or using science as a basis of their actions instead of religion. People now have faith in science. So in practical application people are worshiping science or using science as the explanation for "why we exist" (which is what the majority of people used to use Religion for). Just like religion science is flawed. I'm not bound to any laws that have been created by man and who knows what sort of laws people will find "next" that will replace the current ones (including replacing science, physics and chemistry). These will all be outdated concepts some day. Who knows, they may also be also proven totally inaccurate or wrong. What won't change is if you have an abortion and use your faith in science to justify it - this is something you did, commit murder, that won't change and you can't take it back.

Am i talking about trees ? No i wasn't

 

[cots]

Replacing the man in a white robe with the man in a white lab coat and neither appears to be any less corruptible when it comes to pushing an agenda for bribery, blackmail, kickbacks, and payoffs.

Both science and religion have flaws and both justify murdering in some capacity. I'm just calling it like I see it. I don't care if science is the "popular" or "newest" way explain things with. Murder is murder and murdering humans is wrong. I don't care if you're justifying it with prisoner executions, wars, to stop the spread of disease, etc ... Murder is wrong. Loss of life is inevitable and shouldn't be used as an excuse to commit murder.

 

[Lacius]

Both science and religion have flaws and both justify murdering in some capacity.

Science doesn't make moral judgments.

 

[kumikochan]

Science doesn't make moral judgments.

sociology is considered a science tho