I'm pro life, and anti capital punishment. Every person has a chance. I don't think any human has the right to decide the fate of another, even if that human is inside you.
Don't kill me on here! I feel a wall of death coming my way
Does creating a law that tells women what they can or cannot do with their bodies count as humans deciding the fate of others?
That's where the debate gets icy. I think anyone has rights to make decisions for themselves, but it's weather or not the baby inside is considered human where I take a step back and think. I personally believe life begins with the first best of the heart, most religious people believe it's at conception, and some people believe it's at birth. I know a lot of people disagree with me, and I think that's completely ok. I think the first trimester argument is fair. like I said, it's just a conclusion I've personally drawn for myself. My long term girlfriend and I have both settled on the same thing and we both don't think our opinion should affect other people's. As Louis CK said once, "your either killing a baby.. or your just taking a shit out of your vagina." Who knows? Hahaha
That's the important part right there. Often times we're grouped into these pigeonholed dichotomies as if we cannot partially belong to both ends of the spectrum. It's either this or that. Fortunately, the world doesn't work that way. There's a whole lot of grey area in between. Being pro-life doesn't mean that you can't or won't respect others' choices. It sounds like you have a personal pro-life stance and you prescribe to your own moral code, but you don't feel you should force your views and thus have an openness to pro-choice for others. Empathy, not oppression, is what we need more of in this world. Great response!
Well put, both of you!
The choice of whether to abort should be up to the person who is most intimately aware about the life they are able (or not able) to provide for a child. It's interesting that even the terms "pro-choice" and "pro-life" implicitly are appeals to emotion. Are you pro-choice? If not, you are anti-choice. Are you pro-life? If not, you are anti-life. To me, I appreciate the labelling of "pro-choice". It does not condone nor condemn abortion - it just acknowledges that it is an option. Pro-life, to me, seems more nefarious. The definition of "life" is not limited to a fetus nor an embryo nor a human - it encompasses produce, animals, bacteria, or any organic materials. To frame one who aborts as a snuffer of life, when the intent is nothing more than to prevent what is predicted to be a bad life, feels dishonest.
With very strong arguments for and against abortions, I truly can't understand why a government should have any place in deciding a person's right to have one if deemed necessary by the people most (and exclusively) affected by them (potential mothers and fathers).
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
that is like calling it anti-life. Everything is labeled in the pro or positive.
When something is a negative, like removing freedom of choice, it gets framed up in the positive to make it more digestible and gain support. You see this now with "religious freedom" legislation that has the goal of legalizing discrimination.
Right at fertilization, new DNA is present. To me, that means it is its own being, not just the mothers body anymore. Even with no heartbeat justifying life for some here, the embryo is still unique from the mother.
Pittsburgh 2013 Cincinnati 2014 Greenville 2016 (Raleigh 2016) Columbia 2016
Right at fertilization, new DNA is present. To me, that means it is its own being, not just the mothers body anymore. Even with no heartbeat justifying life for some here, the embryo is still unique from the mother.
That is something that can't be argued! How much stock you put in that fact is another story.
that is like calling it anti-life. Everything is labeled in the pro or positive.
When something is a negative, like removing freedom of choice, it gets framed up in the positive to make it more digestible and gain support. You see this now with "religious freedom" legislation that has the goal of legalizing discrimination.
This whole argument could be copied and pasted for pro-choice. You say it is a negative to remove the choice, and others would say it is a negative to terminate life. Both sides think they are doing the right thing, I don't think anyone on either side is motivated by discrimination or sexism when it comes to abortion rights. I'm just saying that happens in nearly every scenario. Of course they don't phrase it as anti-choice just like no one would phrase it anti-life. Its common practice, I'm unclear why you are targeting pro-life with it.
As a person who used to be deep into a religious community I will speak from what I witnessed. A massive amount of people consider themselves religious, some bad people, some good people, and a lot of great people. Even though their beliefs may seem wacky to us it's important to note that they see abortion as murder, they believe that at conception life starts. Even though it's a little crazy to me I absolutely respect these people's beliefs. They deep down feel like they are trying to end child murder. Like I said, my church had some wacky people, but a lot of really good people with just a different point of view. Like I said before I believe life starts at the heart beat which comes later. And I am totally on board with the first trimester opinions. I believe both Barack Obama and Mitt Romney agreed on that in 2012 and I will say I agreed as well
I'm not targeting, I'm bringing it up in this context because that's the subject of the thread. It's common practice, particularly with legislation, because it's an easy way to manipulate people to your side. Labelling "pro-choice" side pro-choice makes sense logically because it aligns with what the legal outcome is. If someone is pushing for abortion to be illegal, calling it anti-choice is more accurate because that would be the legal outcome. The realities of making abortion illegal does not result in pro-life outcomes.
As a person who used to be deep into a religious community I will speak from what I witnessed. A massive amount of people consider themselves religious, some bad people, some good people, and a lot of great people. Even though their beliefs may seem wacky to us it's important to note that they see abortion as murder, they believe that at conception life starts. Even though it's a little crazy to me I absolutely respect these people's beliefs. They deep down feel like they are trying to end child murder. Like I said, my church had some wacky people, but a lot of really good people with just a different point of view. Like I said before I believe life starts at the heart beat which comes later. And I am totally on board with the first trimester opinions. I believe both Barack Obama and Mitt Romney agreed on that in 2012 and I will say I agreed as well
I would disagree only with the wording "murder." That seems too strong, and implies willingly killing another human. I think nearly all, 99.9% (don't quote that, thats just made up) understand those who believe in abortion have different views about when life starts. But of course it is the 0.1% that you see on the news protesting and holding up pictures of aborted fetuses. I would agree that the belief is that there is a life and that life is worth saving, and that is why many feel as passionate about it as those who are pro-choice. It isn't about taking away a choice, and it irks me when that seems to be the driving point behind the pro-choice movement. It is about preserving life. Not that being pro-choice irks me, but believing or stating pro-lifers want to restrict rights. And comments like the previous one about it phrasing a negative as a positive in a ploy to win you over is far removed from the truth. I stated before, the abortion debate is not truly about if the woman has the right to make a choice, but deep down it is about is it a human life or not?
As a person who used to be deep into a religious community I will speak from what I witnessed. A massive amount of people consider themselves religious, some bad people, some good people, and a lot of great people. Even though their beliefs may seem wacky to us it's important to note that they see abortion as murder, they believe that at conception life starts. Even though it's a little crazy to me I absolutely respect these people's beliefs. They deep down feel like they are trying to end child murder. Like I said, my church had some wacky people, but a lot of really good people with just a different point of view. Like I said before I believe life starts at the heart beat which comes later. And I am totally on board with the first trimester opinions. I believe both Barack Obama and Mitt Romney agreed on that in 2012 and I will say I agreed as well
I would disagree only with the wording "murder." That seems too strong, and implies willingly killing another human. I think nearly all, 99.9% (don't quote that, thats just made up) understand those who believe in abortion have different views about when life starts. But of course it is the 0.1% that you see on the news protesting and holding up pictures of aborted fetuses. I would agree that the belief is that there is a life and that life is worth saving, and that is why many feel as passionate about it as those who are pro-choice. It isn't about taking away a choice, and it irks me when that seems to be the driving point behind the pro-choice movement. It is about preserving life. Not that being pro-choice irks me, but believing or stating pro-lifers want to restrict rights. And comments like the previous one about it phrasing a negative as a positive in a ploy to win you over is far removed from the truth. I stated before, the abortion debate is not truly about if the woman has the right to make a choice, but deep down it is about is it a human life or not?
You are right, murder is not the correct word. Tell that to some of the people at my old baptist church... hahah!! Kidding. I'm on the same page as you based of why you just said. Well said!
As a person who used to be deep into a religious community I will speak from what I witnessed. A massive amount of people consider themselves religious, some bad people, some good people, and a lot of great people. Even though their beliefs may seem wacky to us it's important to note that they see abortion as murder, they believe that at conception life starts. Even though it's a little crazy to me I absolutely respect these people's beliefs. They deep down feel like they are trying to end child murder. Like I said, my church had some wacky people, but a lot of really good people with just a different point of view. Like I said before I believe life starts at the heart beat which comes later. And I am totally on board with the first trimester opinions. I believe both Barack Obama and Mitt Romney agreed on that in 2012 and I will say I agreed as well
I would disagree only with the wording "murder." That seems too strong, and implies willingly killing another human. I think nearly all, 99.9% (don't quote that, thats just made up) understand those who believe in abortion have different views about when life starts. But of course it is the 0.1% that you see on the news protesting and holding up pictures of aborted fetuses. I would agree that the belief is that there is a life and that life is worth saving, and that is why many feel as passionate about it as those who are pro-choice. It isn't about taking away a choice, and it irks me when that seems to be the driving point behind the pro-choice movement. It is about preserving life. Not that being pro-choice irks me, but believing or stating pro-lifers want to restrict rights. And comments like the previous one about it phrasing a negative as a positive in a ploy to win you over is far removed from the truth. I stated before, the abortion debate is not truly about if the woman has the right to make a choice, but deep down it is about is it a human life or not?
I suppose you're describing a group of people who are fine with legal abortion but wouldpush a philosophical discussion on when life begins and to consider that in the choice. I'm not sure how large that group is. I do know there are several million people who are single issue voters, strongly enough so that they made a significant moral compromise to vote for trump solely due to his promise to nominate Supremem Court Justices that will eventually over turn Roe v Wade. This group very much so wants abortion to be illegal.
As a person who used to be deep into a religious community I will speak from what I witnessed. A massive amount of people consider themselves religious, some bad people, some good people, and a lot of great people. Even though their beliefs may seem wacky to us it's important to note that they see abortion as murder, they believe that at conception life starts. Even though it's a little crazy to me I absolutely respect these people's beliefs. They deep down feel like they are trying to end child murder. Like I said, my church had some wacky people, but a lot of really good people with just a different point of view. Like I said before I believe life starts at the heart beat which comes later. And I am totally on board with the first trimester opinions. I believe both Barack Obama and Mitt Romney agreed on that in 2012 and I will say I agreed as well
I would disagree only with the wording "murder." That seems too strong, and implies willingly killing another human. I think nearly all, 99.9% (don't quote that, thats just made up) understand those who believe in abortion have different views about when life starts. But of course it is the 0.1% that you see on the news protesting and holding up pictures of aborted fetuses. I would agree that the belief is that there is a life and that life is worth saving, and that is why many feel as passionate about it as those who are pro-choice. It isn't about taking away a choice, and it irks me when that seems to be the driving point behind the pro-choice movement. It is about preserving life. Not that being pro-choice irks me, but believing or stating pro-lifers want to restrict rights. And comments like the previous one about it phrasing a negative as a positive in a ploy to win you over is far removed from the truth. I stated before, the abortion debate is not truly about if the woman has the right to make a choice, but deep down it is about is it a human life or not?
I suppose you're describing a group of people who are fine with legal abortion but wouldpush a philosophical discussion on when life begins and to consider that in the choice. I'm not sure how large that group is. I do know there are several million people who are single issue voters, strongly enough so that they made a significant moral compromise to vote for trump solely due to his promise to nominate Supremem Court Justices that will eventually over turn Roe v Wade. This group very much so wants abortion to be illegal.
I agree there is a group that wants it fully illegal. But there a lot of pro life people who believe in different degrees of legality. As in, it's ok within the first 3 months. Or in my opinion before the heart beat of the child. But I, like a lot of people respect that people don't agree. I think Pearl Jam is the greatest band ever, yet most people on player earth would likely disagree. I'm totally fine with applying my personal beliefs to my life, and not forcing them onto others. Everyone is allowed an opinion, which as amazing in itself
I'm curious to know what some of the pro life people think of the right to die with dignity (euthanasia)?
The arguments being made for pro life would seem to oppose the idea of assisted dying.
Would they? I don't see that. The cornerstone of that movement is making the choice for yourself, about yourself. The pro life people see abortion as a choice being made about someone else (the "someone else" being the embryo/fetus).
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
I'm curious to know what some of the pro life people think of the right to die with dignity (euthanasia)?
The arguments being made for pro life would seem to oppose the idea of assisted dying.
Would they? I don't see that. The cornerstone of that movement is making the choice for yourself, about yourself. The pro life people see abortion as a choice being made about someone else (the "someone else" being the embryo/fetus).
I hear you here.
I guess I'm referring to the notion that life is too precious on any level to waste.
I'm curious to know what some of the pro life people think of the right to die with dignity (euthanasia)?
The arguments being made for pro life would seem to oppose the idea of assisted dying.
I haven't thought too hard about it. But I've thought about suicide a bit and think it's ridiculous that it's illegal. I think people should have control on their own fate. But document that shit so the person helping doesn't look like a murderer! Haha!
I used to be a staunch proponent for pro choice. After a few decades of intermittent discussions around the topic... I've eased off my firm stance and believe that a woman- barring potential health issues related to a full term- needs to move early in the gestation period to avoid (as I expressed earlier) an underdeveloped baby dying it's gasping breaths on a stainless steel table.
I'm curious to know what some of the pro life people think of the right to die with dignity (euthanasia)?
The arguments being made for pro life would seem to oppose the idea of assisted dying.
I haven't thought too hard about it. But I've thought about suicide a bit and think it's ridiculous that it's illegal. I think people should have control on their own fate. But document that shit so the person helping doesn't look like a murderer! Haha!
I used to be a staunch proponent for pro choice. After a few decades of intermittent discussions around the topic... I've eased off my firm stance and believe that a woman- barring potential health issues related to a full term- needs to move early in the gestation period to avoid (as I expressed earlier) an underdeveloped baby dying it's gasping breaths on a stainless steel table.
I believe this is the middle way.
And when the medical system or legal framework puts roadblocks in her way that impedes that early movement? When she doesn't have access to a health care provider that will make a referral, or can't afford that care? When she's too poor to spend the money on a home pregnancy test that would give that info early? Or when she's a frightened teen, too scared to tell her parents? What then?
There can be many reasons for a delay in accessing an abortion, and most don't relate to laziness or lack of interest.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
I used to be a staunch proponent for pro choice. After a few decades of intermittent discussions around the topic... I've eased off my firm stance and believe that a woman- barring potential health issues related to a full term- needs to move early in the gestation period to avoid (as I expressed earlier) an underdeveloped baby dying it's gasping breaths on a stainless steel table.
I believe this is the middle way.
And when the medical system or legal framework puts roadblocks in her way that impedes that early movement? When she doesn't have access to a health care provider that will make a referral, or can't afford that care? When she's too poor to spend the money on a home pregnancy test that would give that info early? Or when she's a frightened teen, too scared to tell her parents? What then?
There can be many reasons for a delay in accessing an abortion, and most don't relate to laziness or lack of interest.
You're not going to get an argument from me for those scenarios, but what I will state is that, despite personal circumstances, there still needs to be a degree of urgency. I'm not in favour of legislation that demands it, but I am encouraging it.
I never implied laziness or lack of interest was at the root of a late decision.
I used to be a staunch proponent for pro choice. After a few decades of intermittent discussions around the topic... I've eased off my firm stance and believe that a woman- barring potential health issues related to a full term- needs to move early in the gestation period to avoid (as I expressed earlier) an underdeveloped baby dying it's gasping breaths on a stainless steel table.
I believe this is the middle way.
And when the medical system or legal framework puts roadblocks in her way that impedes that early movement? When she doesn't have access to a health care provider that will make a referral, or can't afford that care? When she's too poor to spend the money on a home pregnancy test that would give that info early? Or when she's a frightened teen, too scared to tell her parents? What then?
There can be many reasons for a delay in accessing an abortion, and most don't relate to laziness or lack of interest.
You're not going to get an argument from me for those scenarios, but what I will state is that, despite personal circumstances, there still needs to be a degree of urgency. I'm not in favour of legislation that demands it, but I am encouraging it.
I never implied laziness or lack of interest was at the root of a late decision.
"Needs to move early" suggests that the individual would otherwise unreasonably delay.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
I used to be a staunch proponent for pro choice. After a few decades of intermittent discussions around the topic... I've eased off my firm stance and believe that a woman- barring potential health issues related to a full term- needs to move early in the gestation period to avoid (as I expressed earlier) an underdeveloped baby dying it's gasping breaths on a stainless steel table.
I believe this is the middle way.
And when the medical system or legal framework puts roadblocks in her way that impedes that early movement? When she doesn't have access to a health care provider that will make a referral, or can't afford that care? When she's too poor to spend the money on a home pregnancy test that would give that info early? Or when she's a frightened teen, too scared to tell her parents? What then?
There can be many reasons for a delay in accessing an abortion, and most don't relate to laziness or lack of interest.
You're not going to get an argument from me for those scenarios, but what I will state is that, despite personal circumstances, there still needs to be a degree of urgency. I'm not in favour of legislation that demands it, but I am encouraging it.
I never implied laziness or lack of interest was at the root of a late decision.
"Needs to move early" suggests that the individual would otherwise unreasonably delay.
You're really trying to get me here aren't you?
I'll rephrase: it would be ideal if women getting abortions did so in a timely manner. If they can't, I still support their choice.
Comments
The choice of whether to abort should be up to the person who is most intimately aware about the life they are able (or not able) to provide for a child. It's interesting that even the terms "pro-choice" and "pro-life" implicitly are appeals to emotion. Are you pro-choice? If not, you are anti-choice. Are you pro-life? If not, you are anti-life. To me, I appreciate the labelling of "pro-choice". It does not condone nor condemn abortion - it just acknowledges that it is an option. Pro-life, to me, seems more nefarious. The definition of "life" is not limited to a fetus nor an embryo nor a human - it encompasses produce, animals, bacteria, or any organic materials. To frame one who aborts as a snuffer of life, when the intent is nothing more than to prevent what is predicted to be a bad life, feels dishonest.
With very strong arguments for and against abortions, I truly can't understand why a government should have any place in deciding a person's right to have one if deemed necessary by the people most (and exclusively) affected by them (potential mothers and fathers).
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
So who is really to decide which view is correct? The voters. But one side will still call the other side wrong
Cincinnati 2014
Greenville 2016
(Raleigh 2016)
Columbia 2016
Everything is labeled in the pro or positive.
Cincinnati 2014
Greenville 2016
(Raleigh 2016)
Columbia 2016
How much stock you put in that fact is another story.
You say it is a negative to remove the choice, and others would say it is a negative to terminate life. Both sides think they are doing the right thing, I don't think anyone on either side is motivated by discrimination or sexism when it comes to abortion rights. I'm just saying that happens in nearly every scenario. Of course they don't phrase it as anti-choice just like no one would phrase it anti-life. Its common practice, I'm unclear why you are targeting pro-life with it.
I think nearly all, 99.9% (don't quote that, thats just made up) understand those who believe in abortion have different views about when life starts. But of course it is the 0.1% that you see on the news protesting and holding up pictures of aborted fetuses.
I would agree that the belief is that there is a life and that life is worth saving, and that is why many feel as passionate about it as those who are pro-choice. It isn't about taking away a choice, and it irks me when that seems to be the driving point behind the pro-choice movement. It is about preserving life. Not that being pro-choice irks me, but believing or stating pro-lifers want to restrict rights. And comments like the previous one about it phrasing a negative as a positive in a ploy to win you over is far removed from the truth. I stated before, the abortion debate is not truly about if the woman has the right to make a choice, but deep down it is about is it a human life or not?
The arguments being made for pro life would seem to oppose the idea of assisted dying.
I guess I'm referring to the notion that life is too precious on any level to waste.
Cincinnati 2014
Greenville 2016
(Raleigh 2016)
Columbia 2016
I believe this is the middle way.
You are now documented.
Seek help.
There can be many reasons for a delay in accessing an abortion, and most don't relate to laziness or lack of interest.
I never implied laziness or lack of interest was at the root of a late decision.
I'll rephrase: it would be ideal if women getting abortions did so in a timely manner. If they can't, I still support their choice.