Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 8, 2010 18:17:30 GMT -5
Personally, I'd be opposed to abortion for reasons of the child having some deformation or genetic disease. Excepting maybe if it was clear the baby would die within a very short time frame after birth, or perhaps during birth. However, if there was a good chance the child would live for years, even with the difficulty of the illness, I would still support life. Otherwise it seems to much like eugenics. Now, of course, the ultimate decision needs to be left up to the mother, even in these cases. So you say a life of constant pain and frustration without the ability to fulfill practically any wishes is better than no life at all?...
|
|
|
Post by stephen5000 on Apr 8, 2010 19:18:51 GMT -5
So you say a life of constant pain and frustration without the ability to fulfill practically any wishes is better than no life at all?... Actually, yes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2010 7:22:49 GMT -5
So you say a life of constant pain and frustration without the ability to fulfill practically any wishes is better than no life at all?... Actually, yes. I disagree with your opinion. This is because I have a very well defined ethic code: I think a good action is one which maximizes the wishes and preferences fulfilled in people. If we forbid abortion we are creating people that have their wishes and preferences ruined from the beginning. We are creating (mostly) sad and hopeless people. This is a clear contribution to "world suck" in a certain way, and thus should be avoided. In the bottom it resumes to priorities and to the ethic code or ethic rules used. I think a good action is as said above because ethics involves people, something similar to the "do to others as you would like done to you". So a good ethic should promote well being. At least in my opinion. Now you seem to support a sanctity of life. And I'd like to ask you why do you do so. Before Christianity appeared, life was not that important. Yet, the ancient Greeks and Romans had amazing qualities of life and amazing ethical ideologies. Some even argue that saying that human life is holy or similar is specism, as it places human life with more importance than other lives. Specism is a similar position to racism as it is much often unjustified. So, why do you support the sanctity of life?
|
|
lydia
Meteor
MOTS
Posts: 58
|
Post by lydia on Apr 9, 2010 8:30:08 GMT -5
Without safe abortions women will try to have them done anyways. Before abortion was legal so many women died from infections and abortions from dangerous methods. If safe abortions aren't avaliable both the mother and the unborn child may die.
|
|
Cortney
Star
[AWD:0c15]The Objectioner
The Bown
Posts: 885
|
Post by Cortney on Apr 9, 2010 8:57:03 GMT -5
Without safe abortions women will try to have them done anyways. Before abortion was legal so many women died from infections and abortions from dangerous methods. If safe abortions aren't avaliable both the mother and the unborn child may die. Actually, the statistics with this aren't as bad as people are led to believe. That's from an article I used for my paper on abortion a few weeks ago. But still, I'm pro-choice. Yes, abortion is dangerous. Yes, you are killing what could be a baby in the future. The fact is, it's NOT a baby, and what's pregnant with it IS a grown woman. She has rights. Until that baby is fully developed, the woman's rights come first. So that's just it, I'm pro-CHOICE purely for the choice aspect.
|
|
|
Post by stephen5000 on Apr 9, 2010 11:24:05 GMT -5
I disagree with your opinion. This is because I have a very well defined ethic code: I think a good action is one which maximizes the wishes and preferences fulfilled in people. If we forbid abortion we are creating people that have their wishes and preferences ruined from the beginning. We are creating (mostly) sad and hopeless people. This is a clear contribution to "world suck" in a certain way, and thus should be avoided. In the bottom it resumes to priorities and to the ethic code or ethic rules used. I think a good action is as said above because ethics involves people, something similar to the "do to others as you would like done to you". So a good ethic should promote well being. At least in my opinion. Now you seem to support a sanctity of life. And I'd like to ask you why do you do so. Before Christianity appeared, life was not that important. Yet, the ancient Greeks and Romans had amazing qualities of life and amazing ethical ideologies. Some even argue that saying that human life is holy or similar is specism, as it places human life with more importance than other lives. Specism is a similar position to racism as it is much often unjustified. So, why do you support the sanctity of life? For starters, you make it sound like I'm anti-abortion, when I'm not. I just don't think people should be so hasty in getting one due to reasons of deformity or illness in the child (or economic reasons for that matter). The ultimate decision does lie in the mother regardless. I'm just saying that a difficult life is still preferable to no life. Now, this is probably a personal view. Myself, I would rather live under any hardship or circumstance as opposed to not existing at all, and as such would want to give these potential people a chance at life even if it was harder than normal. Other people might think different of course.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2010 13:40:31 GMT -5
For starters, you make it sound like I'm anti-abortion, when I'm not. I just don't think people should be so hasty in getting one due to reasons of deformity or illness in the child (or economic reasons for that matter). Sorry, in the post i read it sounded more of an anti-abortion argument and assumed that way. The ultimate decision does lie in the mother regardless. I'm just saying that a difficult life is still preferable to no life. Now, this is probably a personal view. Myself, I would rather live under any hardship or circumstance as opposed to not existing at all, and as such would want to give these potential people a chance at life even if it was harder than normal. Other people might think different of course. I think we simply cannot know if the life itself will be worth the suffering caused, and most times, it is an acceptable option to be cautious. A case like this depends on the severity, the pain going to be caused, the frustration going to be caused, the preference of the unborn person itself of living or not living... I think, as you might agree, it isn't a simple black and white question with an exact universal answer, and so, sometimes it might be better to follow a choice and sometimes other. Yet, I still think there is no problem with an abortion in less serious cases, as long as it was well thought. After all, the unborn baby won't have the frustration of never having existed in the first place.
|
|
CAKE
Meteorite
Posts: 7
|
Post by CAKE on Apr 9, 2010 22:50:03 GMT -5
My opinion does matter. Because I speak of the truth.
|
|
lucytie
Meteor
"You were born an original. Don't die a copy."
Posts: 72
|
Post by lucytie on Apr 11, 2010 20:56:49 GMT -5
For the US, it is completely, and i do mean completely, against the constitution to make it illegal. In terms of ethical-ness, first of all it is not a solution to pregnancy because these woman have to live with their decision for the rest of their life. It is not fair for a woman to have to give birth to a child they are only going to hate, and the kid shouldnt have to live with a mother who hates them. About the adoption thing, many woman dont want to give their kid to someone else to raise, they dont believe in adoption. Adoption is not always a solution to an unwanted pregnancy. Also many people dont have the physical capabilities to have a child, and should not be forced to do something that may kill them. More, not all people know that by having sex they will get pregnant. A number of people actually believe condoms and birth control will always prevent, even if it wont. Beyond that there is always the possibility of rape. NO woman should have to go through the pain of her rape every day for the rest of her life in a tangible form.
Regulation for something like abortion is completely impracticable because many woman could just claim rape and get abortions, or another wide variety of things.
|
|
|
Post by Trey on Apr 11, 2010 21:35:56 GMT -5
IMO, nobody can post ITT if they've never read about Roe vs. Wade, lol. Anyway, The legality shouldn't be questioned. It should be a right. But, you also have a right to refer to people who use it as a form of general birth control as the scum of the earth. Just like you have the right to call muslims "towel heads". (ps, I'm not bashing muslims. it's the first thing that came to my head, lol)
|
|
|
Post by krzych32 on Apr 12, 2010 17:36:45 GMT -5
lucytie"For the US, it is completely, and i do mean completely, against the constitution to make it illegal." -I read the constitution and I think I overlooked that part, could you point it out to me? "It is not fair for a woman to have to give birth to a child they are only going to hate, and the kid shouldnt have to live with a mother who hates them" -So death is much more fair to the child? Maybe its just me but I would rather live with a bad mother then not live at all. Also, who are we to make decisions for this children? "About the adoption thing, many woman dont want to give their kid to someone else to raise, they dont believe in adoption" -Don't believe in adoption? I'm pritty sure that adoption exists, but I know what you are saying there. Now lets look at what that means. Its like saying that all prisoners should be executed because we don't believe in rehabilitation so there is no point of supporting something like that. Or if your mother decided to stop providing for you (assuming that you can't provide for yourself) because she doesn't believe that you will be a good person and there is no point in feeding you. "Also many people dont have the physical capabilities to have a child" -Please explain what that means. If someone doesn't have physical capabilities to have a child, then they don't have to worry about having one in a first place "More, not all people know that by having sex they will get pregnant." -You mean like 12 years old's? " A number of people actually believe condoms and birth control will always prevent, even if it wont." - So they are given a right to choose who will live and who dies just because they are ignorant and lacking knowledge? This people should be the last one's to make any kind of decisions. "Beyond that there is always the possibility of rape. NO woman should have to go through the pain of her rape every day for the rest of her life in a tangible form." -I may even agree with you here. "Regulation for something like abortion is completely impracticable because many woman could just claim rape and get abortions, or another wide variety of things. " - Its like saying that going after killers is inpractical because people will keep killing other people. Also, what you are stating here is that laws are created just to be there, and that is wrong. Laws are created to protect values and not just for their plain existance. So, if we can't fully inforce certain laws should we just give up on them?
|
|
lucytie
Meteor
"You were born an original. Don't die a copy."
Posts: 72
|
Post by lucytie on Apr 12, 2010 18:15:02 GMT -5
@krzych2 -I read the constitution and I think I overlooked that part, could you point it out to me? Well the simple fact that we have freedom of choice, in basically all we do. Additionally, the main reasons against abortion [not fully but majority, is religious. Laws are not supposed to be religion based, so abortion should not be influenced by it, which only leaves an ethical thing which again, gvt has no right to regulate. [[additionally, roe v wade has already challenged this against the constitution]]
-So death is much more fair to the child? Maybe its just me but I would rather live with a bad mother then not live at all. Also, who are we to make decisions for this children? Well, can you imagine the depression and self-hatred the child would have? The mother could marry a man with no regard to the child and the child be abused. The child could easily become suicidal. The 'we', are the mothers who hold the child. She is the one to make the decision for the child. We base much of our socitey on parents being the ones who make choices for their young child, this starts at pregnancy. Also a woman may go into self harm and end up with a kid with FAS, or some other traumatic disorder.
-Don't believe in adoption? I'm pritty sure that adoption exists, but I know what you are saying there. Now lets look at what that means. Its like saying that all prisoners should be executed because we don't believe in rehabilitation so there is no point of supporting something like that. Or if your mother decided to stop providing for you (assuming that you can't provide for yourself) because she doesn't believe that you will be a good person and there is no point in feeding you. I dont think adoption could be compared to rehabilitation. However, many mothers do stop providing for their kids becuase they dont believe in them, such as kids who are kicked out of their homes. But there are people who dont want to give up their kid for a wide variety of reasons, such as people prejudice against homosexual relationships, religious discrimination, etc.
-Please explain what that means. If someone doesn't have physical capabilities to have a child, then they don't have to worry about having one in a first place I mean it in terms of a young girl, or even a woman, who is told if they give birth they and their baby will die.
-You mean like 12 years old's? Not just young people, but also ignorant people.
- So they are given a right to choose who will live and who dies just because they are ignorant and lacking knowledge? This people should be the last one's to make any kind of decisions. Would you want this ignorant person to control a live child? Ignorant people are given free choice everyday, and in the US at the very least, there isnt really discrimination against ignorance...even if there should be.
"Beyond that there is always the possibility of rape. NO woman should have to go through the pain of her rape every day for the rest of her life in a tangible form." -I may even agree with you here.
- Its like saying that going after killers is inpractical because people will keep killing other people. Also, what you are stating here is that laws are created just to be there, and that is wrong. Laws are created to protect values and not just for their plain existance. So, if we can't fully inforce certain laws should we just give up on them? I mean this more in terms of people lying or falsifying information in order to fit regulation. Plus there may be those who are too scared to go throught the process who should be allowed to have one. Abortion would still go on illegally for many of those who shouldnt have an abortion. It would essentially yield little to no result.
But who are we to regulate what is morally wrong and right in situations that do not apply to us? It is almost comparably to instituting a nation-wide religion. I would say it should be a majority vote, but it seems majority has already stated it should be legal, I say this because of current laws. But I have a question for you. If abortion was illegal, what should happen to the women who get abortions illegally? They already have to deal with the pain for the rest of their lives.
|
|
bye bye moon
Moon
The way i look at the world, would make you go blind
Posts: 192
|
Post by bye bye moon on Apr 12, 2010 19:17:01 GMT -5
o
|
|
bye bye moon
Moon
The way i look at the world, would make you go blind
Posts: 192
|
Post by bye bye moon on Apr 12, 2010 19:18:33 GMT -5
Abortion should be legal, BUT in specific cases.
If some STUPID BITCH gets knocked up beacuse she and Quarterback Mike couldnt use a condom then fuck em! BUT, if a woman is raped, or the woman is going to die, or a woman is a victim of child abuse then those are NO conditions for a baby to come out in
so basically ABORTION WITH EXCEPTIONS
|
|
|
Post by chelseeyuh on Apr 12, 2010 19:29:28 GMT -5
Abortion should be legal, BUT in specific cases. If some STUPID BITCH gets knocked up beacuse she and Quarterback Mike couldnt use a condom then fuck em! BUT, if a woman is raped, or the woman is going to die, or a woman is a victim of child abuse then those are NO conditions for a baby to come out in so basically ABORTION WITH EXCEPTIONS Firstly, please don't use such harsh language. It's completely unnecessary to be so rude (even to a hypothetical person), and it's not appropriate for a level 4+ tribe. Secondly, if someone is so irresponsible that they couldn't use a condom, do you really thin they're responsible enough to take care of a child? You can't say, "Well, you made this one little mistake, so now you have to deal with it by ruining the rest of your life, as well as that of another person."
|
|
ElfLady
Planet
I'm a crazy!
Posts: 409
|
Post by ElfLady on Apr 12, 2010 20:44:04 GMT -5
Personally, I believe that killing any living thing is wrong, no matter what (I am anti-war, a vegetarian, against the death penalty, etc.).
However "Personally, I believe" is key there. Just because I believe something does not mean that I should force it onto others. I think that mothers should have that choice, but other options should be very available to them as well, as well as resources to help them through this. I also think that the regulations placed on abortion should become more strict. ... yeah /awkward ending of a statement
|
|
|
Post by Joeknowsjello on Apr 12, 2010 22:16:54 GMT -5
See there is a difference between abortion and a medical problem. Doctors are required by law to do what is right for the already living partner, which is the mother when delivering a baby, or if she becomes unhealthy during the birth process. many people argue that abortion can help with issues of rape and mothers who may die from having a baby, but of course one of those are ruled out due to laws. And as relates to rape, yes this is a sad, horrible event; however, it is not right to kill a baby who could grow up to be one of the leaders of the world or discover a cure for terrible diseases. I believe everyone has the right to be born if they have been conceived, no matter how it happened. Also, if the parent has no money to support it, every day there are infertile couples who would gladly adopt a baby, and their are also centers and agencies which get their jobs through the service of caring for children under difficult circumstances relating to family.
Therefore, I do not agree with abortion...
|
|
|
Post by miztasha on Apr 12, 2010 22:23:51 GMT -5
Thios post has brought up so many issues, but what I always think is kinda ironic, is that I know there are some republicans who are all anti-abortion, yet they hunt are the opposite of vegitarian etc...
Personally, I'm a vegetarian. Even though, what's SO important about the potential of one specific human life, because we already have such over population and problems in many places in the word, and if some children weren't to be aborted, they could easily die soon after.
For instance, in some 3rd world countries, there are so many cases of insest and AIDS, that there are no places to place all the children, so they are left on the sides of road, stoned etc... So, why not abort them in the 1st place?
2nd places like foster care etc... could easily be quite financially strained and have less oppurtunity to give care to other children because of severely disabled children that would have been aborted.
One question I would ask. What circumstance would have the best potentiel? A place where over100 children are struggling and could develop psychological problems because of not enough care or a place with around 50 children where they are provided enough care and stability to suceed later in life?
Also, in our society, everyone is aloud/able to debate and have an opinion about any subject, but, this issue is about a minority, and some can not place themselves or have the compassion for the issue as those who could be faced with the issue tomorrow. So, women should certainly have more say in the issue, but about women who are "infertile" who knows with science these days, they may become fertile and even then there are cases of women who go through thousands of dollars of furtility treatments and find that they have a child with some serious ilness and decide to give them away/abort.
Peace
|
|
|
Post by krzych32 on Apr 13, 2010 0:19:28 GMT -5
www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQvsf2MUKRQwatch from 00:30 to 01:10 If we are not going to hold life as a gift in itself, but look only to gain from it then maybe Hitler and Stalin were right, and you believe that they were wrong only because everyone told you so thru all of your life.
|
|
|
Post by krzych32 on Apr 13, 2010 0:23:28 GMT -5
"2nd places like foster care etc... could easily be quite financially strained and have less oppurtunity to give care to other children because of severely disabled children that would have been aborted." miztasha, I find really scary what you are saying, in fact what you are talking about is close to what germans did just before WW2, they killed all of the mentally handicapped people, so the rest of us call have better lifes.
|
|