A question for people who are pro-abortion

Originally posted by Thundersmurf
reply to post by James1982

 

Yeah you raise some interesting points.

I didn't mean that the fetus only becomes a child once it can be self sufficient - if that were the case it wouldn't be a child for years. What I meant was that the fetus can't be seen as an independent entity as it's connected to the mother, getting absolutely everything to grow and develop, form her. Until that cord is cut, the women should have the right to say no.

It's cool that you would stick by your women and bring a child in to the world. But what if you had no money? No prospects? No future? Is it fair to bring a child in to that knowing that you couldn't support it?

My girlfriend fell pregnant once. We both talked and agreed that abortion was the best thing to do. Neither of us wanted a baby or were in any position to give it a good standard of life.

I've never been financially stable for long periods of time, but even so, I would do anything and everything in my power to support my child and child's mother. I would hate to be on government assistance, but if I had to be in order to support a child, I would be. I was brought up in a home that wasn't financially stable by my mother and father, and while I didn't always have fancy new gadgets I knew my parents loved me and would do anything for me.

I didn't see much of my father as he was working 90% of the time, and my mother was also working a full time job, but ever second I spent with both of them reinforced that I was their #1 priority and that they had unconditional love for me, and that made up for any other shortcomings.

I'm only discussing what I would do as I'm a man, and I think men have just as much responsibility as women do in the whole situation, and I didn't want it to appear as if I was singling out women for not having/supporting a child. If the father of the child doesn't wish to be in the picture, this places additional stress and uncertainty upon the woman, which complicates the issue even more.

Which is why I said I'm still a realist, I still support abortion in most cases, forcing a woman to raise a child that she doesn't want and can't support isn't a good idea no matter what my moral views are. Past viewing them as slightly irresponsible I wouldn't ever judge someone who had an abortion as I realize we all live in the real world.

But I still want people to be honest, if someone supports abortion and also would feel an emotional response from any of the acts described in my OP, they have to admit that they are violating their own moral standard. I admit it. I violate my own moral standard in my support of abortion, because sometimes the best thing isn't always the RIGHT thing, if you know what i mean. I just take issue with the whitewashing of the moral aspect, totally ignoring the moral implications instead of saying "what I'm doing is wrong, but it's the best thing for everyone"

I would have much respect for someone honest enough to say that, and I wouldn't wish anyone to be forced to make a choice between keeping a baby or not, but since that choice is often made, I just think people should be honest about it.

Originally posted by Thundersmurf

Originally posted by James1982

Originally posted by butcherguy
I will play devil's advocate a bit.

If it is a woman's right to do what she wants with her body, why is she forced to have a medical procedure to kill a full term fetus, when she could just have the baby and abandon it in a trash bin?

Why go through the joke of delivering the full term fetus backwards in order to snip it's spine with scissors, when a normal head-first delivery is safer for the woman?

It's magically transformed from fetus to baby when the head pops out.

I totally agree with your observation here... it's the exact double standard I'm trying to figure out. Since you say you're playing devil's advocate I assume you disagree with the sentiment, but I appreciate you contributing nonetheless!

Except that the observation is wrong and it's far safer to have an abortion than to actually give birth.

I'm not talking about the safety aspect, I'm talking about the aspect of a person instantly becoming a 'non person' due to a technicality.

killing is wrong!

unless rape, incest, or personal health is an issue. then yeah kill away, whos gives a crap.
(lol...)


this logic is even more humourous when its a person of religion that has the anti abortion except "......" opinion.

reply to post by James1982


Very well, I'll play your game.

In my opinion, a child does not count as a person until they are capable of thought outside of basic instincts. So I would say around 6 months to a year old.

Originally posted by watchitburn
reply to post by James1982

 

Very well, I'll play your game.

In my opinion, a child does not count as a person until they are capable of thought outside of basic instincts. So I would say around 6 months to a year old.

To continue the game then....

Would that mean that a woman should have the right to perform a post-live-birth abortion on that child and that any deaths occurring to that point at the hands of the mother/doctor are not classified as murder? Also, a baby at that age is still very reliant on their basic instincts of survival and would have a very slim chance, if left without care, to live past 3 days in my estimation.

ETA: a star for the thought provocation of the subject.

reply to post by ownbestenemy


Well that's a fair point. I think if we're all looking at different studies and statistics, the number are going to vary a lot; especially if they are 12/13 years old, such as yours (though I am struggling to find recent figures)...

Contraceptive Use Among U.S. Women Having Abortions in 2000-2001......Forty-six percent of women had not used a contraceptive method in the month they conceived

Source

Originally posted by randomtangentsrme
reply to post by James1982

 

You do not use as an example a baby to be born with severe birth defects. A situation I sadly have had to deal with recently.
1 through 4. Not going to happen under the current laws?
Second group
1 If the fetus (look it up) cannot survive by itself, is that life?

Third set:
Who talks of feeding this to pets?
Who talks of stomping fetuses?
Who talks of using aborted fetuses for target practice?
Or fuel for bonfire?
Or as garbage to toss from a car window.

You are trying to appeal to emotion without realising that these decisions do weigh heavy on the people involved.

The plain and simple is you give improbable situations, in which we all will shout NO, but do not allow the reality of this decision into your thoughts.
People do not elect to abort lightly (sure there might be a few who do), but this is a decision made between a woman and her Doc.

From what I've seen and learned. It is a benefit to mankind and society to have the option available.
Although I'm open to proof to the contrary.

Babies with severe genetic defects and the like.... this again comes into the realm of still being morally wrong (to me) but overall the best choice for everyone. It's a difficult choice, and that's why I've repeated several times I realize we live in the real world, and I support abortion, I just want people to be honest about the whole thing and not take a light attitude when dealing with the subject. The simplistic "you can't tell someone what to do with their body" is used over and over, when it's not really even relevant to the subject.

The acts I describe, as I have said several times already, were meant to show that a fetus is NOT just a lump of flesh. It's a being. If it wasn't a being, there wouldn't be any emotional attachment or response to those things. If someone makes the choice to end the life of another being, that needs to be forefront in the discussion, instead of totally covering up the issue and saying a fetus isn't a being until it's born. That's dishonest.

I am not playing on emotion to guilt people into not supporting abortion. I have already said several times I support abortion myself.

The main point here is:

Most pro-abortionists say a fetus is NOT a being, an entity, until it is born.

If the fetus IS an entity, a being, the argument of "it's the woman's body" falls flat.

Therefore, if the acts describe invoke an emotional response, this proves that people DO believe a fetus IS an entity, it's own being, therefore the argument "it's a woman's body" is a fallacy, as we all realize a fetus is NOT the woman's body, it's a being, its own entity.

THAT'S that basis for be describing those acts. I hope you can follow.

As far as your closing comments, I agree totally, which you can see in my OP, and in my subsequent replies I've said many times I support abortion, for many reasons, one of which is the effect on society of forcing women to give birth to unwanted babies. You'll get no argument from me on that subject.

I simply want people to be honest. I DO realize the choice to abort a fetus is a heavy choice for a woman, that shows that a fetus is NOT just a lump of flesh, but its own entity.

There is a disconnect between the act and the mentality of the act. Supporters of abortion say that abortion is NOT killing, because the baby isn't alive, it doesn't exists as an entity. If that was true, it wouldn't be an emotional choice, it would be a purely logical one.

Honesty.. it's all I ask for. Admit that you are killing the fetus, and are doing it because it's the best choice. Sometimes killing IS the best choice. That's an uncomfortable view to hold and defend for some people, but it's not uncomfortable to me. But I don't hide from it, I embrace it, and admit fully that it's morally wrong, a killing is taking place, but that's the best choice.

I have no intention of making anyone feel bad for having or supporting abortion, that's the point, you shouldn't feel bad, you should be honest. I do however have the intention of getting people to be honest with themselves and others. If it makes someone sleep better at night to tell themselves they aren't killing anything because it's not alive, and not a being, fine. I personally would sleep better at night knowing that I'm being totally honest with myself and others, not deluding myself and hiding behind defenses of "it's my body" to evade the moral implications of ending the life of another being.

Originally posted by wantsome
People like sex we are driven by it it's fun. Accidents happen and not everybody that gets pregnant is prepared to raise a child. I believe it's up to a women weather or not she want to bring a kid into this world. What people do in their own life is their business no one else's. If you believe it's against god then let that person deal with the consequensce after all didn't he give us free will? We are only responsible for our own actions in this world. Mind your own business.

Please... if you do not care about the subject enough to even read the OP, then simply don't respond. I'm not looking for a twitterfest of replies, I'm looking for serious, real discussion.

I do not believe abortion is against god, as I do not believe in god. I do not believe abortion should be illegal, as I believe abortion if the best choice to make in some instances even though it may not be morally right.

The subject of this thread is when does a fetus become its own being, your opinion on which would have a huge effect on the justifications used by supporters of abortion. The "it's my body" excuse falls flat if you consider a fetus a being, as it's THEIR body being affected.

I'm not trying to be rude, but I'm very tired of fly-by posters that have no desire to engage in an actual discussion. If one's attention span is too short to read 4,000 words then maybe a lighter subject matter in another forum would be more your speed.

Originally posted by Thundersmurf
reply to post by ownbestenemy

 

Took me 2 seconds to google some stats. Everyone is free to do so, and not posting sources doesn't make something untrue.

The only reason I stopped reading the OP was because it was getting ridiculous ... "feeding fetus' to dogs"?. There's no place for extreme, loaded examples like that in a discussion.

I don't expect any stats or sources, so don't feel pressured to back up anything you say with a website. I'm interested in what's in your mind, not on the web.

Fair enough on the reason to stop reading the OP, I can understand it would be easy to misunderstand the reason for the examples I used. I've explained this several times already and have no problem explaining it again if you would like the explanation.

The main argument abortion supporters use is that it's the woman's body, and you can't tell her what to do with her body.

They back up the idea that it's HER body, by saying that a fetus isn't alive, that it's a non-being a non-entity.

To prove that most people do NOT feel that a fetus is a non-entity, I posted those examples of gruesome things being done to a fetus. The fact people find it offensive or extreme or loaded proves that people feel a fetus IS a being, that it IS an entity.

If the fetus IS a being, the argument of "It's the woman's body" is invalidated.

Does that make it a bit more clear why I used those examples? They were not used to emotionally blackmail people into being against abortion, they were used as a logical tool to demonstrate a simple idea, that a fetus IS a being, IS a person.

I hope that clears it up.

Originally posted by watchitburn
reply to post by James1982

 

Very well, I'll play your game.

In my opinion, a child does not count as a person until they are capable of thought outside of basic instincts. So I would say around 6 months to a year old.

It's not a game, it's logic. Following a path of thought to a conclusion, even if you don't like that conclusion, is what thinking is all about.

I'm confused on your post though, a child does not count as a person until they are 6 months to a year old... I believe this is something different you are talking about here, since you can't be suggesting that children can be aborted up until 1 year of age.

I'm asking, at what point in the womb does a fetus become a being with rights?

reply to post by James1982


I was a teen when the 1st abortion debates came on the table/news. And even back then I realized one thing. Also I personally do not see it "right", - I cant have a say about it. Simply because I am a MALE. So for me the whole abortion issue is 100% an issue to be decided by the females. This said, I might have opened a can of worms with this. I think that some issues should be handed by referendums. And some issues should even then be given to be voted on by the members/gender/age-group to who the issue is relevant. Though I can't off hand right now list any other issue for the exception of abortion, - not enough coffee yet - I do strongly support single issue referrendums for the parties concerned only, and the rest of us to simply butt out.

reply to post by James1982


When deciding if a fetus is a person or not I think a lot of factors are considered.

It can't be intelligence because the neighbourhood dog has a higher IQ at that stage, although intelligence must play a part. I believe the main factor is the fetus' state. By that I mean that it is continually developing in to what we call a baby.

If I'm carving a solid piece of wood in to a sculpture, is it a sculpture when I've only chiseled in to it once? Or do i need to wait a while to call it a sculpture.

From your OP and most of your replies you are constantly bringing up the word emotion. Emotion has nothing to do with this. Morals, on the other hand, do. And morally speaking it makes no difference whether a dead, aborted fetus is fed to animals, thrown in a land-fill, or put to rest respectfully.

Edit to add something about another reply:

I'm asking, at what point in the womb does a fetus become a being with rights?

This question doesn't work here because the pro-choicers don't believe that a fetus is a person until it's born (unless you're like the guy further up who seems to be advocating the execution of 1 year olds... madness), and the pro-abortionists believe it always is. If that question is the basis of the thread then you're just going to get absolute answers like "never, whilst in the womb" or "from the moment of conception"

Originally posted by Guenter
reply to post by James1982

 

I was a teen when the 1st abortion debates came on the table/news. And even back then I realized one thing. Also I personally do not see it "right", - I cant have a say about it. Simply because I am a MALE. So for me the whole abortion issue is 100% an issue to be decided by the females. This said, I might have opened a can of worms with this. I think that some issues should be handed by referendums. And some issues should even then be given to be voted on by the members/gender/age-group to who the issue is relevant. Though I can't off hand right now list any other issue for the exception of abortion, - not enough coffee yet - I do strongly support single issue referrendums for the parties concerned only, and the rest of us to simply butt out.

To have the idea that abortion is 100% a woman's prerogative relies on the basis that the choices being made effect only the woman's body, which means the fetus is NOT an entity, if a fetus was an entity, it would not only be the woman's body, it would be the child's body being effected.

That's the root of the issue, when does a fetus become an entity. Either a fetus IS an entity, in which case it's NOT the woman's body, or it's NOT an entity, in which case there should be no more care for a fetus than clipped fingernails or hair.

reply to post by James1982


1. Everything is a game, regardless of whether or not you accept it as such.

2. A fetus in the womb has no rights, because it is not yet a person, it doesn't think, it doesn't feel it is a thing.

But all this is irrelevant. Our moral standings have no position in the debate. Not our body not our decision.

Originally posted by Thundersmurf
reply to post by James1982

 

When deciding if a fetus is a person or not I think a lot of factors are considered.

It can't be intelligence because the neighbourhood dog has a higher IQ at that stage, although intelligence must play a part. I believe the main factor is the fetus' state. By that I mean that it is continually developing in to what we call a baby.

If I'm carving a solid piece of wood in to a sculpture, is it a sculpture when I've only chiseled in to it once? Or do i need to wait a while to call it a sculpture.

From your OP and most of your replies you are constantly bringing up the word emotion. Emotion has nothing to do with this. Morals, on the other hand, do. And morally speaking it makes no difference whether a dead, aborted fetus is fed to animals, thrown in a land-fill, or put to rest respectfully.

Edit to add something about another reply:

I'm asking, at what point in the womb does a fetus become a being with rights?

This question doesn't work here because the pro-choicers don't believe that a fetus is a person until it's born (unless you're like the guy further up who seems to be advocating the execution of 1 year olds... madness), and the pro-abortionists believe it always is.

edit on 4-4-2013 by Thundersmurf because: (no reason given)

Two extremes: Life begins immediately at conception, at the other end life only begins after birth. I don't personally believe either one is correct, I feel (like most things) the truth lies somewhere in the middle, but we all have to find our own truth.

That's why I want to hear from people what their opinions are on when life begins, and then they can examine whether their opinion on when life begins is congruent with their opinions on whether or not abortion is killing anything.

Hypocrisy and dishonesty bug me, actually they make me irate. Which is why I find it ridiculous that someone could believe that a fetus is a being, yet believe that it's not killing a fetus to have an abortion.

If you think about the subject you can expose the hypocrisy and dishonesty in people's opinions. Like a person that thinks a fetus is a being, yet it's not killing anything to abort a fetus. That is a hypocritical viewpoint.

The reason I mention emotion is because emotion can betray a person who is lying to themselves. If someone finds the acts described in the OP to be offensive in any way, that means they feel that a fetus IS a being. Which means abortion IS killing.

I would have to disagree that morally speaking it doesn't matter what happens to an aborted fetus. Evidently it does matter since people take offense to what was described. Evidently it does matter because people here on ATS were freaking out about Pepsi using cells from aborted fetuses to test their new flavor compounds or whatever it was.

People have an emotional attachment to dead bodies, which is why most of us go through some sort of ritual and have "rules" about what's OK to do with the dead. It's illegal to have sex with a corpse, for instance, because people believe, morally speaking, it's wrong to do something to a dead body like that.

When that same emotional attachment that people have for the bodies of dead loved ones extends to the body of an aborted fetus, that shows that people have the same feeling for the fetus as they do for the person who's body they care for, that it's a being, and entity.

Originally posted by watchitburn
reply to post by James1982

 

1. Everything is a game, regardless of whether or not you accept it as such.

2. A fetus in the womb has no rights, because it is not yet a person, it doesn't think, it doesn't feel it is a thing.

But all this is irrelevant. Our moral standings have no position in the debate. Not our body not our decision.

So if I kill someone because they were getting in my way, your moral standings have no position in the debate on whether it was right, because it wasn't YOU that I killed? Even though most every society on the planet views killing as morally wrong?

People keep bringing up the idea that it's the woman's body, that means they don't believe a fetus to be an entity or a being, otherwise it would NOT be the woman's body, it would be the child's body. That's the entire subject of this thread and we seemingly keep going in circles.

If YOU don't think a fetus deserves any rights, is not a living being, a human, an entity, that's all you had to say. That's what I was asking in my OP.

But, by extension, if you honestly feel that way, you should have no objection to any of the gruesome acts described in the OP. Do you have any objection or take offense to those acts? If you saw someone doing them would you be disgusted? Angered? Or just totally apathetic?

I'm not asking to judge, I'm asking to see if you are being honest with yourself. If you are offended or disgusted by those acts, then you aren't being honest with yourself, because that means you feel that an aborted fetus IS a human, an entity, a being.

Originally posted by James1982
What I mean by that, is:

Would you have any problem feeding this aborted fetus to a cat or dog?

Would you have any problem stomping this aborted fetus into tiny bits under the heel of your boot?

Would you have any problem throwing this aborted fetus into the air and shooting at it with a shotgun?

Would you have any problem with throwing this aborted fetus into a bonfire?

Would you have any problem with throwing this aborted fetus out the window of a moving car?

That can't be healthy for the dog/cat
That would be really messy
I would probably miss
That would smell nasty
And leave a mess for other to clean? No

Those are the first things I thought about when reading those questions, so I guess the answer is no, I'm not emotionally attached to an aborted child.

Originally posted by Nekodos

Originally posted by James1982
What I mean by that, is:

Would you have any problem feeding this aborted fetus to a cat or dog?

Would you have any problem stomping this aborted fetus into tiny bits under the heel of your boot?

Would you have any problem throwing this aborted fetus into the air and shooting at it with a shotgun?

Would you have any problem with throwing this aborted fetus into a bonfire?

Would you have any problem with throwing this aborted fetus out the window of a moving car?

That can't be healthy for the dog/cat
That would be really messy
I would probably miss
That would smell nasty
And leave a mess for other to clean? No

Those are the first things I thought about when reading those questions, so I guess the answer is no, I'm not emotionally attached to an aborted child.

Thank you for your straightforward answer!

So I'm guessing by your opinion that you support abortion, and don't believe a fetus being a living being until birth?

If so, thank you very much for posting, because you demonstrate honesty and logic in your opinions. Do you understand how it would seem hypocritical to be emotionally attached to a fetus, yet deny that abortion is killing?

But if there is no emotional attachment to an aborted fetus, that means you truly believe a fetus is a non-entity until birth. And I say that in a completely non-judgemental way, as I can totally respect someone who, even if I disagree with, is honest and is not a hypocrite.

Listen to the song "Bodies" by the Sex Pistols.

What's the leading cause of death for black people in the US? Take a guess...

No one is pro abortion.
Pro-choice doesn't equal pro abortion.
There's no such thing as a full term abortion.
No one would feed a dog an aborted fetus, or stomp it under their heel. WTF kind of question is that even? Do we do that with severed limbs or removed appendixes? No.