Abortion is wrong, yet I am pro choice

Abuskedti

unifiedscene wrote:

I'm pro-choice, but that's the single dumbest argument for legal abortion I've ever heard of. Nothing personal.

Just brainstorming

Dylan Stone

unifiedscene wrote:

I'm pro-choice, but that's the single dumbest argument for legal abortion I've ever heard of. Nothing personal.

Uhmmm... no really it's not. Having worked in the foster care system for years and seen HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS (probably... no definitely... THOUSANDS) of kids that were born to parents that really should have never had them... babies that are born drug addicted... with mutilple congenital anomalies... severely delayed.... mentally retarded or with fetal alcohol syndrome etc...MANY of whom go on to be sexually abused as young children... are beaten.... abused... neglected... I've seen a number of children shaken so severely as infants that they are blind, deaf... damaged for life...

Then they have the pleasure of entering the foster care system... where... unfortunately many of them are moved from home to home to home and REALLY UNFORTUNATELY at times abused within and BY the foster care system.

And these are the ones that are KNOWN... there are so many children leading lives of hell, torture, neglect and abuse... that we DON'T know about.

There are many humans whose lives are living hell from the day they are born. The TONS we already have like this... and abortion is LEGAL.

I can't even begin to think of what it would be like if it was illegal.

Oddly... the same people that want to make abortion illegal are often the ones that are in favor of denying people access to comprehensive sex education, safe, easy and affordable contraception, and putting money into programs such as those as well as the foster care system.

The amount of children in foster care would skyrocket should abortion ever become illegal in the US. The horrible long term consequences would be way more far reaching than many people understand.

know1 wrote:

If I don't get to have the sex, then it's completely NOT up to me to take care of unwanted kids. It is their CHOICE to have the kid and they should deal with it.

This is hateful and ignorant...

Sweet Emotion

GTFLYGIRL wrote:

Uhmmm... no really it's not. Having worked in the foster care system for years and seen HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS (probably... no definitely... THOUSANDS) of kids that were born to parents that really should have never had them... babies that are born drug addicted... with mutilple congenital anomalies... severely delayed.... mentally retarded or with fetal alcohol syndrome etc...MANY of whom go on to be sexually abused as young children... are beaten.... abused... neglected... I've seen a number of children shaken so severely as infants that they are blind, deaf... damaged for life...

Then they have the pleasure of entering the foster care system... where... unfortunately many of them are moved from home to home to home and REALLY UNFORTUNATELY at times abused within and BY the foster care system.

And these are the ones that are KNOWN... there are so many children leading lives of hell, torture, neglect and abuse... that we DON'T know about.

There are many humans whose lives are living hell from the day they are born. The TONS we already have like this... and abortion is LEGAL.

I can't even begin to think of what it would be like if it was illegal.

Oddly... the same people that want to make abortion illegal are often the ones that are in favor of denying people access to comprehensive sex education, safe, easy and affordable contraception, and putting money into programs such as those as well as the foster care system.

The amount of children in foster care would skyrocket should abortion ever become illegal in the US. The horrible long term consequences would be way more far reaching than many people understand.



This is hateful and ignorant...

Great post. The reality check is long overdue. Maybe a few eyes have been opened or, heaven help us, a few minds....

saveuplife

GTFLYGIRL wrote:

This is hateful and ignorant...

Ummmm no, really it's not. It's actually pro-responsibility.

unifiedscene

Abuskedti wrote:

Just brainstorming

It's cool, I do the same thing often. You just might not want to play that card if you get into a little chat with the in-law

unifiedscene

GTFLYGIRL wrote:

Uhmmm... no really it's not. Having worked in the foster care system for years and seen HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS (probably... no definitely... THOUSANDS) of kids that were born to parents that really should have never had them... babies that are born drug addicted... with mutilple congenital anomalies... severely delayed.... mentally retarded or with fetal alcohol syndrome etc...MANY of whom go on to be sexually abused as young children... are beaten.... abused... neglected... I've seen a number of children shaken so severely as infants that they are blind, deaf... damaged for life...

Then they have the pleasure of entering the foster care system... where... unfortunately many of them are moved from home to home to home and REALLY UNFORTUNATELY at times abused within and BY the foster care system.

And these are the ones that are KNOWN... there are so many children leading lives of hell, torture, neglect and abuse... that we DON'T know about.

There are many humans whose lives are living hell from the day they are born. The TONS we already have like this... and abortion is LEGAL.

I can't even begin to think of what it would be like if it was illegal.

Oddly... the same people that want to make abortion illegal are often the ones that are in favor of denying people access to comprehensive sex education, safe, easy and affordable contraception, and putting money into programs such as those as well as the foster care system.

The amount of children in foster care would skyrocket should abortion ever become illegal in the US. The horrible long term consequences would be way more far reaching than many people understand.

1. I believe abortion should be legal. I also don't think a fetus is alive, so I have no moral qualms with abortion anyway.

2. I've also worked in the foster care system and yes, there are serious problems. I am a huge supporter of comprehensive sex ed and programs to aid children generally.

3. None of that changes the fact that saying "maybe the baby would want to be aborted" is a dumb fucking argument. We might look at the circumstances and say they're going to have a hard life and the mother should decide if she's up to it. But let's own the choice... it's OUR (or her) decision, NOT the unborn fetus's. To presume to speak for the fetus and say it wants to be aborted is fucking stupid. It's one thing to say that abortion is sometimes preferable to the alternative, it's another to try and rationalize it and comfort your guilt by trying to say "well, that's what the fetus wanted anyway." Nobody knows what the fetus wants... in fact, the chief argument from the pro-choice side is that the fetus isn't alive or conscious enough to want anything.

_

unifiedscene wrote:

3. None of that changes the fact that saying "maybe the baby would want to be aborted" is a dumb fucking argument. We might look at the circumstances and say they're going to have a hard life and the mother should decide if she's up to it. But let's own the choice... it's OUR (or her) decision, NOT the unborn fetus's. To presume to speak for the fetus and say it wants to be aborted is fucking stupid. It's one thing to say that abortion is sometimes preferable to the alternative, it's another to try and rationalize it and comfort your guilt by trying to say "well, that's what the fetus wanted anyway." Nobody knows what the fetus wants... in fact, the chief argument from the pro-choice side is that the fetus isn't alive or conscious enough to want anything.

It's no more fucking stupid as the "pro-life" argument that presumes to speak for the fetus and says it wants to be born, and I think that's the point.

Of course no one knows for sure that the fetus wants to be aborted, and most pro-choice arguments would say the fetus isn't developed enough to want anything at all. But the "pro-life" arguments generally presume that fetuses want to be born and I think it's reasonable to point out that, if fetal will is an issue, we need to also consider that they may NOT want to be born.

saveuplife

unifiedscene wrote:

3. None of that changes the fact that saying "maybe the baby would want to be aborted" is a dumb fucking argument. We might look at the circumstances and say they're going to have a hard life and the mother should decide if she's up to it. But let's own the choice... it's OUR (or her) decision, NOT the unborn fetus's. To presume to speak for the fetus and say it wants to be aborted is fucking stupid. It's one thing to say that abortion is sometimes preferable to the alternative, it's another to try and rationalize it and comfort your guilt by trying to say "well, that's what the fetus wanted anyway." Nobody knows what the fetus wants... in fact, the chief argument from the pro-choice side is that the fetus isn't alive or conscious enough to want anything.

I think this post pretty well sums up my argument in this thread. I understand the pro-choice argument, when they believe that the fetus is not a life. I don't agree, but I understand it because it's rational.

That said, I don't understand the argument that the fetus wants to die or anything of the sort. I totally agree that it's a dumb argument for abortion-rights. The pro-choice side's chief argument is that the fetus is not alive. The pro-life has a reasonable counter in saying it is. When you start speaking about what the fetus wants.... you are granting the pro-life side a moral victory, because only a living thing can want.

Abuskedti

saveuplife wrote:

I think this post pretty well sums up my argument in this thread. I understand the pro-choice argument, when they believe that the fetus is not a life. I don't agree, but I understand it because it's rational.

That said, I don't understand the argument that the fetus wants to die or anything of the sort. I totally agree that it's a dumb argument for abortion-rights. The pro-choice side's chief argument is that the fetus is not alive. The pro-life has a reasonable counter in saying it is. When you start speaking about what the fetus wants.... you are granting the pro-life side a moral victory, because only a living thing can want.

No. it us not that simple .. it is not simple at all. The "pro-choice" side can not be summed up so easily. to say its is merely that a fetus is not a life suggests that an abortion is a simple tossing away of some trash. Though that may serve to make you feel better about your side, and make it an easy decision for you, that is not accurate at all

catefrances

saveuplife wrote:

I think this post pretty well sums up my argument in this thread. I understand the pro-choice argument, when they believe that the fetus is not a life. I don't agree, but I understand it because it's rational.

That said, I don't understand the argument that the fetus wants to die or anything of the sort. I totally agree that it's a dumb argument for abortion-rights. The pro-choice side's chief argument is that the fetus is not alive. The pro-life has a reasonable counter in saying it is. When you start speaking about what the fetus wants.... you are granting the pro-life side a moral victory, because only a living thing can want.

im prochoice and it has never entered my argument that the foetus is not alive. ive always believed the foetus to be human AND alive. this however does not change my prochoice stance.

saveuplife

catefrances wrote:

im prochoice and it has never entered my argument that the foetus is not alive. ive always believed the foetus to be human AND alive. this however does not change my prochoice stance.

You're entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to mine. We agree that a fetus is human and is alive. You are OK with killing something that is human and alive, and has done no wrong. I am not. As a matter of fact, I'm adamantly against it. I hope you would be OK with someone murdering your husband, wife, son, daughter, mother, sister, father, or the homeless guy down the street tomorrow because it's essentially the same as what you just said.

saveuplife

Abuskedti wrote:

No. it us not that simple .. it is not simple at all. The "pro-choice" side can not be summed up so easily. to say its is merely that a fetus is not a life suggests that an abortion is a simple tossing away of some trash. Though that may serve to make you feel better about your side, and make it an easy decision for you, that is not accurate at all

His point is saying that your side needs to stick to the fetus is not a life stance or you lose pretty much all credibility. If you think that is not true, I think you need to wake up. But, to each his/her own.

Dylan Stone

know1 wrote:

If I don't get to have the sex, then it's completely NOT up to me to take care of unwanted kids. It is their CHOICE to have the kid and they should deal with it.

GTFLYGIRL wrote:

This is hateful and ignorant...

saveuplife wrote:

Ummmm no, really it's not. It's actually pro-responsibility.

So FUCK those kids that were born to irresponsible parents....

Yeah.

Not hateful or ignorant at all.

Abuskedti

saveuplife wrote:

His point is saying that your side needs to stick to the fetus is not a life stance or you lose pretty much all credibility. If you think that is not true, I think you need to wake up. But, to each his/her own.

"My side" does not think like that. I don't play semantics with life. An apple is life. a tree is life.

I think it is all valuable. I do not think a law that would punish a woman who chooses not to have a child after getting pregnant is humane.

that may not seem credible to you.. but that is my position none the less. I think the aspects to "your side" that seem a little coo coo to me. But this is indeed a difficult issue - that is driven by things held deep. Our roots are different, making our perceptions different.

Your judgement on my credibility doesn't hold much water with me.

catefrances

saveuplife wrote:

You're entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to mine. We agree that a fetus is human and is alive. You are OK with killing something that is human and alive, and has done no wrong. I am not. As a matter of fact, I'm adamantly against it. I hope you would be OK with someone murdering your husband, wife, son, daughter, mother, sister, father, or the homeless guy down the street tomorrow because it's essentially the same as what you just said.

of course youre entitled to your opinion.as we all are. that is not even an issue.

what i am okay with is making a decision that is best for the potential child and myself. i could not bring a child into the world that i knew i could not take care of. the decision for procreation must lie with the parent whose life is changed most irrevocably by such a decision. you can not force your values, whatever they are, on someone else. you can not tell a woman that she MUST carry a foetus to term if that is not what she wishes. if you want a child then you have a child. if i want a child ill have one thanks. but if i do not then there is no way i will ever. and dont think this is soemthing ive never faced, because it is, both sides. and the decisions i made another person were for the best. and thats all we can ever do, what we think is best without forcing our values on other people. it is not your life to decide what to do with. it is the pregnant womans.

and no i wouldnt be okay with the murder. i do not consider abortion murder. an embryo hass a parasitic relationship to its host. if it were taken from its host at the age that the majority of abortions take place, it would not survive. many things are alive that we kill. so whether an embryo is alive is irrelevant to me.

saveuplife

catefrances wrote:

of course youre entitled to your opinion.as we all are. that is not even an issue.

what i am okay with is making a decision that is best for the potential child and myself. i could not bring a child into the world that i knew i could not take care of. the decision for procreation must lie with the parent whose life is changed most irrevocably by such a decision. you can not force your values, whatever they are, on someone else. you can not tell a woman that she MUST carry a foetus to term if that is not what she wishes. if you want a child then you have a child. if i want a child ill have one thanks. but if i do not then there is no way i will ever. and dont think this is soemthing ive never faced, because it is, both sides. and the decisions i made another person were for the best. and thats all we can ever do, what we think is best without forcing our values on other people. it is not your life to decide what to do with. it is the pregnant womans.

and no i wouldnt be okay with the murder. i do not consider abortion murder. an embryo hass a parasitic relationship to its host. if it were taken from its host at the age that the majority of abortions take place, it would not survive. many things are alive that we kill. so whether an embryo is alive is irrelevant to me.

Example:

Let's say you have a father (mother, husband whatever), he gets a disease. He relies on you to feed him. Doctors say one day, the chances are almost 100% that he will get better, but he (your father) needs your assistance for the next several years to survive because he can't do it on his own and there's no other options. All he will need is you to care for him at the outset, like a baby, then a child and soon he'll be back to his adult self and need nothing from you. In a sense, he's what you called a "parasite" because he relies on you for food. Without you atleast for the next eight months, he will perish. Like you said, ---("you can not force your values, whatever they are, on someone else. you can not tell someone to not terminate the life" in this situation too. So, is it morally acceptable in your world to walk away or "terminate" him? Should the government stop you?

IMHO it's the exact same situation as the one you just laid out.

Another example would be a 1 month old. You don't feed them.... they die. So, according to you, it's OK to not feed them? And if your distinction is being in the woman's stomach, do you atleast admit that there have been babies born and survived early in the pregnancy? As a matter of fact, some fetuses have even survived abortion attempts. So, why would it be OK to kill it when it could survive on it's own with some assistance from a hospital? IMHO all these things make your argument very silly, and no offense, but just plain bad.

angelica

saveuplife wrote:

GTFLYGIRL wrote:

know1 wrote:

If I don't get to have the sex, then it's completely NOT up to me to take care of unwanted kids. It is their CHOICE to have the kid and they should deal with it.

This is hateful and ignorant...

Ummmm no, really it's not. It's actually pro-responsibility.

I agree with you, saveuplife.

unifiedscene

catefrances wrote:

of course youre entitled to your opinion.as we all are. that is not even an issue.

what i am okay with is making a decision that is best for the potential child and myself. i could not bring a child into the world that i knew i could not take care of. the decision for procreation must lie with the parent whose life is changed most irrevocably by such a decision. you can not force your values, whatever they are, on someone else. you can not tell a woman that she MUST carry a foetus to term if that is not what she wishes. if you want a child then you have a child. if i want a child ill have one thanks. but if i do not then there is no way i will ever. and dont think this is soemthing ive never faced, because it is, both sides. and the decisions i made another person were for the best. and thats all we can ever do, what we think is best without forcing our values on other people. it is not your life to decide what to do with. it is the pregnant womans.

and no i wouldnt be okay with the murder. i do not consider abortion murder. an embryo hass a parasitic relationship to its host. if it were taken from its host at the age that the majority of abortions take place, it would not survive. many things are alive that we kill. so whether an embryo is alive is irrelevant to me.

I'm ok with you making that decision for yourself and the fetus. What I argued against was someone saying that we should consider whether the fetus might want to be aborted. That's stupid. Nobody knows what the fetus wants, it can't tell anyone. Let's be real... trying to argue that abortion is just giving the fetus what it wants is bullshit and is just a lame attempt to pass the buck. I mean, how would you really react to woman saying "well I didn't want the abortion, but the fetus let me know it didn't want to be born and preferred to be aborted." It's absurd. What the fetus wants is, ipso facto, irrelevant when considering abortion. It's a woman making a judgment call about what is best for her and her potential child. I'm perfectly ok with that, but let's not be disingenuous about it.

catefrances

saveuplife wrote:

Example:

Let's say you have a father (mother, husband whatever), he gets a disease. He relies on you to feed him. Doctors say one day, the chances are almost 100% that he will get better, but he (your father) needs your assistance for the next several years to survive because he can't do it on his own and there's no other options. All he will need is you to care for him at the outset, like a baby, then a child and soon he'll be back to his adult self and need nothing from you. In a sense, he's what you called a "parasite" because he relies on you for food. Without you atleast for the next eight months, he will perish. Like you said, ---("you can not force your values, whatever they are, on someone else. you can not tell someone to not terminate the life" in this situation too. So, is it morally acceptable in your world to walk away or "terminate" him? Should the government stop you?

IMHO it's the exact same situation as the one you just laid out.

Another example would be a 1 month old. You don't feed them.... they die. So, according to you, it's OK to not feed them? And if your distinction is being in the woman's stomach, do you atleast admit that there have been babies born and survived early in the pregnancy? So, why would it be OK to kill it when it could survive on it's own? IMHO all these things make your argument very odd.

looking after a sick loved one is not the same. they are not a parasitic being. they are not reliant solely on the mother for their survival. they can exist without their mother specifically.
as for the government they should never be allowed to force medical issues, or morals for that matter, onto anyone, no matter what the scenario. it is clearly up to the individual and should always be.

a one month child does not need its mother specifically for its survival. it does not have parasitic relationship to its mother as an embryo does.

sure early births survive. but none as early as when the majority of abortions take place. and they do so with a whole lot of medical intervention. there is no medial technology existing today that would allow an embryo to survive outside the mothers womb.
what is odd is you equate a live separate being with one that is not separate and thusly would never survive on its own.

make no mistake i am speaking of early pregnancy embryonic abortions. not 2nd trimester and certainly not 3rd trimester.

angelica

catefrances wrote:

looking after a sick loved one is not the same. they are not a parasitic being.

parasite:

2. a person who receives support, advantage, or the like, from another or others without giving any useful or proper return, as one who lives on the hospitality of others.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/parasite