A one year old CAN'T live without the support of a mother. Simple concept really.
You place a one year old kid on the street to fend for itself, it will die within days.
Hang on, kindergartens on recess.
Does a one year old need its specific biological mother to survive?
Does a one year old medically need its specific biological mother to eat or be clothed?
Do all children whose mothers die in childbirth die?
Do all children whose parents die at any time in their upbringing, survive?
What are orphans, or adopted children? have they survived without biological mothers?
Can a foetus survive without the woman who carries it?
Simple, really.
A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects
are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider
god-fearing and pious: Aristotle
There are people who can't live without certain medicines. Should we kill them because they can't live "on their own"?
Heck, none of us can live without food. Should we kill everyone because they can't live "on their own"?
Grasping at straws there i feel. What relavence do those comments have to the questions posed in this discussion?
This is about restricting the choice, the freedoms of one specific person.
ANYBODY, can provide you with medicine or food. Nobody can force a pharma company, or a restaurant to privide you with food or medicine.
ONE SPECIFIC HUMAN being has to carry, nurture, and give birth to that foetus.
Why should that person BE FORCED to provide food, and nourishment, and care to that foetus?
A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects
are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider
god-fearing and pious: Aristotle
What if you are responsible for putting them in your uterus?
But we have to remember that many, many women do not actually consent to their sexual encounters. 1 in 3 girls are sexually abused/assaulted at some point in their lifetime. That's a lot of women not choosing to have sexual encounters. Until this changes, abortion must be an option. In addition, we need to make sure that 100% effective contraception is available to everyone and that 100% of the population is accurately educated about how to use it and has access to it. Then MAYBE we could reconsider.
But we have to remember that many, many women do not actually consent to their sexual encounters. 1 in 3 girls are sexually abused/assaulted at some point in their lifetime. That's a lot of women not choosing to have sexual encounters. Until this changes, abortion must be an option. In addition, we need to make sure that 100% effective contraception is available to everyone and that 100% of the population is accurately educated about how to use it and has access to it. Then MAYBE we could reconsider.
Blah, blah, blah. What percentage of abortions occur due to rape or sexual assault? It's not real, real high.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
But we have to remember that many, many women do not actually consent to their sexual encounters. 1 in 3 girls are sexually abused/assaulted at some point in their lifetime. That's a lot of women not choosing to have sexual encounters. Until this changes, abortion must be an option. In addition, we need to make sure that 100% effective contraception is available to everyone and that 100% of the population is accurately educated about how to use it and has access to it. Then MAYBE we could reconsider.
I'm not disputing abortion being an option.
You said you should have the right to remove others if they were to climb inside your uterus. I ask what if you are 100% responsible for your actions that put another unique life in your uterus? Do you still have the moral/ethical right to end the path of this unique never-before-created entity when you put them there to begin with?
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Ask a 6-month old baby what it wants and get back to me with an answer as well.
I think the fact that it's growing, developing, etc., could be taken as proof that it wants to live.
We don't ask 6 month old babies if they want to be adopted. That's typically another decision that is made by the parent.
Let the fetus develop. I"m fine with that - just not in my body if I don't choose it. We'll transplant it into your uterus and we're all set! Problem solved.
We don't ask 6 month old babies if they want to be adopted. That's typically another decision that is made by the parent.
Let the fetus develop. I"m fine with that - just not in my body if I don't choose it. We'll transplant it into your uterus and we're all set! Problem solved.
You're right. We don't ask babies a lot of things that we make them do. In my mind, there's a big difference between decisions that affect their life and decisions that END them.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
i am amazed at how we as a group can continue to debate the same subject, over and over, and come back for more. i was actually thinking just the other day...wow.....been awhile since there's been an abortion thread here and how unusual. damn you LAO.
that said, i completely agree with all comebackgirl's points and i'll leave it at that. thank you so for eloquently speaking my views too.
We don't ask 6 month old babies if they want to be adopted. That's typically another decision that is made by the parent.
We are still 100% accountable for any and all decisions we make on behalf of the 6 month old. Or the newborn, or any others in our charge. We're 100% responsible for our actions, whether we accept or face our responsibility or not.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
You said you should have the right to remove others if they were to climb inside your uterus. I ask what if you are 100% responsible for your actions that put another unique life in your uterus? Do you still have the moral/ethical right to end the path of this unique never-before-created entity when you put them there to begin with?
I do. I think as long as it's inside my body and depending on me for nourisment, that I should have the right to remove it. Ideally, people would take proper precautions (and have the information and resources to do so), so they can avoid the pregnancy in the first place. Unfortunately, few options are 100% effective (other than abstinence, which isn't the right option for everone. Major respect for your decision, though. Impressive). People don't know that antibiotics or some natural rememdies affect their pill. Condoms break or are defective. Some people throw caution to the wind and do make the really stupid decision to forgo protection. That's the type of situation that irks me the most. It is definitely and ethical dilemma. Ultimately, however, I don't believe a woman should have to carry a fetus to term in her body if she doesn't want to.
You're right. We don't ask babies a lot of things that we make them do. In my mind, there's a big difference between decisions that affect their life and decisions that END them.
In my mind there is also a huge difference between a fetus and a baby. Again, I'm all for preventing the unwanted pregnancy to begin with. Let's focus on that!!!!
i am amazed at how we as a group can continue to debate the same subject, over and over, and come back for more. i was actually thinking just the other day...wow.....been awhile since there's been an abortion thread here and how unusual. damn you LAO.
that said, i completely agree with all comebackgirl's points and i'll leave it at that. thank you so for eloquently speaking my views too.
I think the problem here really is a legal v.s moral question. When is it legal to have an abortion. Is that the same time frame it is morally okay? Legally I have no problem with abortion. If a woman chooses that option, then okay. But morally, I could never use it myself. I think it become very sticky when the government begins to push legal standards on moral issues like this.
We are still 100% accountable for any and all decisions we make on behalf of the 6 month old. Or the newborn, or any others in our charge. We're 100% responsible for our actions, whether we accept or face our responsibility or not.
I definitely agree with the accountability issue. We are responsible for our actions and our choices, including the difficult decision of abortion. And whatever choice someone makes (whether it's to forgo protection, have an abortion, place of adoption, or continue to term and parent), ultimately the person will have to deal with the ramifications of that choice.
I do. I think as long as it's inside my body and depending on me for nourisment, that I should have the right to remove it. Ideally, people would take proper precautions (and have the information and resources to do so), so they can avoid the pregnancy in the first place. Unfortunately, few options are 100% effective (other than abstinence, which isn't the right option for everone. Major respect for your decision, though. Impressive). People don't know that antibiotics or some natural rememdies affect their pill. Condoms break or are defective. Some people throw caution to the wind and do make the really stupid decision to forgo protection. That's the type of situation that irks me the most. It is definitely and ethical dilemma. Ultimately, however, I don't believe a woman should have to carry a fetus to term in her body if she doesn't want to.
My decision to become celibate had nothing to do with birth control on my part. At the same time, the birth control thing is a benefit, for sure. I appreciate the respect.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Comments
Obviously not in Chester, England. One-year olds hold 40 hour a week jobs.
Hang on, kindergartens on recess.
Does a one year old need its specific biological mother to survive?
Does a one year old medically need its specific biological mother to eat or be clothed?
Do all children whose mothers die in childbirth die?
Do all children whose parents die at any time in their upbringing, survive?
What are orphans, or adopted children? have they survived without biological mothers?
Can a foetus survive without the woman who carries it?
Simple, really.
are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider
god-fearing and pious: Aristotle
Viva Zapatista!
Heck, none of us can live without food. Should we kill everyone because they can't live "on their own"?
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
If they climb inside my uterus and start depending on ME for their survival, I should have the right to remove them. Again, very different concepts.
Grasping at straws there i feel. What relavence do those comments have to the questions posed in this discussion?
This is about restricting the choice, the freedoms of one specific person.
ANYBODY, can provide you with medicine or food. Nobody can force a pharma company, or a restaurant to privide you with food or medicine.
ONE SPECIFIC HUMAN being has to carry, nurture, and give birth to that foetus.
Why should that person BE FORCED to provide food, and nourishment, and care to that foetus?
are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider
god-fearing and pious: Aristotle
Viva Zapatista!
Very different types of support. Otherwise, better start outlawing adoption too.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Ahhhh...the "feel-good" rhetoric of "choice". Is there any choice available for the baby? Nah -that's why that argument is flawed as well.
(and next you'll say that the baby isn't a human so it doesn't deserve a choice and then we'll be back 'round again at the start).
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
But we have to remember that many, many women do not actually consent to their sexual encounters. 1 in 3 girls are sexually abused/assaulted at some point in their lifetime. That's a lot of women not choosing to have sexual encounters. Until this changes, abortion must be an option. In addition, we need to make sure that 100% effective contraception is available to everyone and that 100% of the population is accurately educated about how to use it and has access to it. Then MAYBE we could reconsider.
Ask the fetus what it wants and get back to me when you hear an answer.
feotus vs. baby, make the distinction please...
-Jean-Jacques Rousseau
Ask a 6-month old baby what it wants and get back to me with an answer as well.
I think the fact that it's growing, developing, etc., could be taken as proof that it wants to live.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Blah, blah, blah. What percentage of abortions occur due to rape or sexual assault? It's not real, real high.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
You said you should have the right to remove others if they were to climb inside your uterus. I ask what if you are 100% responsible for your actions that put another unique life in your uterus? Do you still have the moral/ethical right to end the path of this unique never-before-created entity when you put them there to begin with?
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
We don't ask 6 month old babies if they want to be adopted. That's typically another decision that is made by the parent.
Let the fetus develop. I"m fine with that - just not in my body if I don't choose it. We'll transplant it into your uterus and we're all set! Problem solved.
You're right. We don't ask babies a lot of things that we make them do. In my mind, there's a big difference between decisions that affect their life and decisions that END them.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
that said, i completely agree with all comebackgirl's points and i'll leave it at that. thank you so for eloquently speaking my views too.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
I do. I think as long as it's inside my body and depending on me for nourisment, that I should have the right to remove it. Ideally, people would take proper precautions (and have the information and resources to do so), so they can avoid the pregnancy in the first place. Unfortunately, few options are 100% effective (other than abstinence, which isn't the right option for everone. Major respect for your decision, though. Impressive). People don't know that antibiotics or some natural rememdies affect their pill. Condoms break or are defective. Some people throw caution to the wind and do make the really stupid decision to forgo protection. That's the type of situation that irks me the most. It is definitely and ethical dilemma. Ultimately, however, I don't believe a woman should have to carry a fetus to term in her body if she doesn't want to.
In my mind there is also a huge difference between a fetus and a baby. Again, I'm all for preventing the unwanted pregnancy to begin with. Let's focus on that!!!!
Glad I could return the favor
I'll ask the 6 month year old and get the same response.
How many kids say to their mom, "Why didn't you abort me? You knew I didn't want to live."
I definitely agree with the accountability issue. We are responsible for our actions and our choices, including the difficult decision of abortion. And whatever choice someone makes (whether it's to forgo protection, have an abortion, place of adoption, or continue to term and parent), ultimately the person will have to deal with the ramifications of that choice.
Why can't women realize that they are the baby makers? You have sex, and from that you may get pregnant. That's being a woman. Deal with it.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!