AppleOutsider Abortion Thread v1

[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>The other thread is being hijacked ... </strong><hr></blockquote>

Mea culpa.

[quote]<strong>Where do you stand, Pro-Life or Pro-Choice?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Pro-life.

pro-life...

humans are irresponsible selfish creatures...

E PLURIBUS UNIX
-----------------------------

Pro Life, Pro Child, Pro Human, Pro Baby, Pro Fetus

Pro choice, not saying it's the right choice but it should be a choice.

[quote]Originally posted by Eskimo:
<strong>Pro choice, not saying it's the right choice but it should be a choice.</strong><hr></blockquote>

For some maybe...it started that way. Only the first trimester...Now it is partial-birth abortions. Sorry, it just has to stop.

Pro life, but, of course, with exceptions (the usual stuff you've all heard before).
But it's not really my place, I feel.

What I'd LIKE to happen would be a shift in the culture, regarding responsibility, morality, etc. that would make questions like these irrelevent.

But seeing how that's never going to happen...

I suppose if I was a young woman, with no partner, no money, etc. and found myself pregnant, I'd probably see the situation quite a bit differently.

I don't like the idea of it, that's for sure. But everyone has their life and everything's a situation.

I do my best to live in a way (through precaution, responsibility, careful consideration, planning, keeping my head, not engaging in foolish, dangerous behavior, etc.) that I hope I'm never in a situation where I truly have to step up and have a real-life opinion on it where it counts.

Not to say I don't have a good time...but I take having fun seriously.

[quote]Originally posted by Eskimo:
<strong>Pro choice, not saying it's the right choice but it should be a choice.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Exactly. I think abortion is wrong, that it is killing, that it shouldn't be done, but I will always vote pro-choice. This is a moral issue, not a political one.

[edit: just wanted to say that I'll "always" vote pro-choice if the pro-choice candidate is good on other policies as well, it's just a factor in making the decision that sometimes has to be weighed against other factors]

[ 11-15-2001: Message edited by: nonhuman ]</p>

Pro-Choice

Pro-choice. People need to stop arguing over the morality issues, and start concentrating on educating people so it's an issue that has to be dealt with less often.

[quote]Originally posted by Belle:
<strong>Pro-choice. People need to stop arguing over the morality issues, and start concentrating on educating people so it's an issue that has to be dealt with less often.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yes, but if you attack the source of the problem and not the symptoms you won't get results as quickly which will look bad politically. And, as if that weren't enough you would not longer have a problem to dedicate yourself to solving, nor would you have a moral issue to throw yourself behind, both of which would look even worse politically.

Pro Life

[quote]Originally posted by nonhuman:
<strong>

Yes, but if you attack the source of the problem and not the symptoms you won't get results as quickly which will look bad politically. And, as if that weren't enough you would not longer have a problem to dedicate yourself to solving, nor would you have a moral issue to throw yourself behind, both of which would look even worse politically.</strong><hr></blockquote>
So true, nonhuman. Many politicians, activists and religious leaders would be out of a job. Sometimes, you seem... well... almost human!

[quote]Originally posted by Belle:
<strong>Pro-choice. People need to stop arguing over the morality issues, and start concentrating on educating people so it's an issue that has to be dealt with less often.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well said, Belle!

I'm not going to label myself in any way. I don't believe that abortion is right in any way, but it shouldn't be illegal, either. If you were to get into a situation which involved even considering abortion, you should direct your concentration to getting the economical and emotional support which gave you the idea in the first place.

I can't form much of an opinion on that. If it came down to it right now, I suppose I'd go with pro-choice.

Pro-life.

I honestly can't understand the stance people take when they say, "I think it is wrong, and it is killing a baby, but it should still be a choice." I can understand people who say, "A fetus is not a life. It is not a person, therefore there is no problem in removing it," even if I disagree with them, but intentionally giving a woman power to take a defenseless life is an idea that absolutely boggles my mind. Sure you're legislating morality if you were to outlaw abortion, but laws against thievery and murder also legislate morality....

Pro Life in every case other than rape or incest. No woman should be made to carry a child that was forced upon her in a violent or otherwise dispicable act...

...otherwise I have to say I don't pity most teenage girls and others who get themselves pregnant because they were careless. People need to learn to take responsibility for their actions, and I can think of none greater than caring for your own child (even if it means finding another home for that child via adoption).

You want to be an adult, act like one when things get tough, not just when it's convenient for you. So many children are eliminated simply because their parent(s) don't want to "deal with the hassle" of a child. Tough shit. Should've thought about that when you were in the sack.

[ 11-15-2001: Message edited by: Moogs ]</p>

Belle said was I was getting at in my post: through education and a shift in how people do what they do (being responsible, being smart, thinking of the consequences BEFOREHAND, etc.) would take A LOT of this stuff completely off the table.

Education. Responsibility. Thinking. Planning.

And yes, I do think morality and one's sense of ethics, right or wrong, etc. DOES enter in to it. Or it should anyway.

It's a long, long way from chastity to porn actor...and those steps are taken by choices and actions we alone make for ourselves.

Like Moogs said, you want to act like an adult and do "adult" things, then ACT like an responsible adult when things get tough or don't go as planned.

That includes lots of things, but especially when it comes to sex and procreation. That's serious business and should only be handled by people with proper skills and training, who can do it right.



But as usual, the irresponsible dumbasses and the "I can do whatever I want as long as it feels good and I ain't hurtin' nobody!" among us go and mess it up for everyone. There are WAY too many people out there who can't even take care of THEMSELVES or get their own act together, yet, oddly, those seem to be the ones most likely to be engaging in activities they probably shouldn't to begin with! Then, on top of that, they use the ever-reliable "don't worry, baby...I promise I'll pull out..." method of birth control.



Two things result:
- abortion
- another unwanted, unplanned child brought into the world.

You oughtta have to have a license to screw.

[ 11-15-2001: Message edited by: pscates ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by Moogs :
<strong>...otherwise I have to say I don't pity most teenage girls and others who get themselves pregnant because they were careless.</strong><hr></blockquote>I've seen some of these studies lately that the majority of "teen pregnancies" are really where the mother is a young girl, but the father is an older man. If it's a 15-year old girl and a 25-year old man, does that change your view at all?

Hmmm, an idea: Maybe they could artificially implant the child into the father.

[quote]Originally posted by pscates:
<strong> You oughtta have to have a license to screw.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Not only that, but America's gene pool needs a chlorine treatment too.

Oops...I quoted and disagreed with MYSELF!
Haha...

[ 11-15-2001: Message edited by: pscates ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by BRussell:
<strong>I've seen some of these studies lately that the majority of "teen pregnancies" are really where the mother is a young girl, but the father is an older man. If it's a 15-year old girl and a 25-year old man, does that change your view at all?
</strong><hr></blockquote>


Not really B. There are a lot of promiscuous girls in high school (or of that age), who go around looking for older men (fake ID's at the local bar, whatever)...

...is the man a scumbag for jumping in the sack with a teenage girl? Depends on the circumstance, but most likely - yes. Does that mean the girl somehow bears no responsibility for her actions and by extension her pregnancy?

No freakin way. If you can prove the girl was held down or otherwise held against her will, that's one thing, but if you're just talking about some tramp who wasn't brought up right and is out banging a different guy every two weeks, forget it.

She bears the responsibility as much as the man -- I don't care if she's a teenager or not. We seem to have this view in America that 15 and 16 year old girls are these little naive, helpless creatures that can't think on their feet or make wise decisions. Bullcrap...all of it.

Example: some people seem to imply that 16 year old girls are mature enough to understand and handle the responsibility of operating a motor vehicle at high speeds among other people (i.e. their lives in her hands), but not mature enough to understand and handle her own body in a mature way?

Sorry. Not buyin' it. Maybe I'm a calous bastard for that but I think we put way too little responsibility on our kids (in terms of making them own up to their actions and decisions).

[ 11-15-2001: Message edited by: Moogs ]</p>

Pro-Choice. I'm with Belle on this one.

Mandricard
AppleOutsider

There are 15 year old girls out there who look like they could be in their 20s, easily. So if such a girl gets into a bar/club with a fake id and ends up going home with some older man who has no reason to suspect she's actually underage is the guy at fault? I sure can't see why he would be.

[quote]Originally posted by: groverat
<strong>The whole "only in rape or incest cases" argument doesn't make sense.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I agree that it isn't fair to take an innocent life even in this situation, but is it any less fair to force a woman or young girl to carry a child to term, give birth to it, and then have to either raise it or go through giving it away after having already been raped? It seems like punishment for the victim! Until a better solution arises I'll continue to think that abortion is less atrocious under these circumstances.

[quote]Originally posted by: Belle
<strong>So true, nonhuman. Many politicians, activists and religious leaders would be out of a job. Sometimes, you seem... well... almost human!</strong><hr></blockquote>

Legally/Politically: Pro-Choice, but only if you can afford to have the precedure done yourself. None of this state-assisted bullcrap. I'm sure as shit not paying for your irresponsibility...

Morally: Pro-Life. Don't want a baby? Don't have sex. Simple choice. Abortion as birth control demonstrates the disturbing lack of responsibility and self control among our society.

And something I've never understood: how can you be pro-choice and anti-death penalty? It's cool to kill them before they've had a chance to prove their worth has human beings, but it's wrong to kill them once they've proved they have no humanity? Bizarre.

Pro-Life. Except for when the mother's life is seriously in danger. I can't even begin to imagine the mental torment those mothers must go through. I haven't even decided if I should form an opinion for that circumstance.

[quote]Originally posted by beer:
<strong>And something I've never understood: how can you be pro-choice and anti-death penalty? It's cool to kill them before they've had a chance to prove their worth has human beings, but it's wrong to kill them once they've proved they have no humanity? Bizarre.</strong><hr></blockquote>I would think a true small-government libertarian would also be in this position.

[quote]Originally posted by Solishu:
<strong>Pro-life.

I honestly can't understand the stance people take when they say, "I think it is wrong, and it is killing a baby, but it should still be a choice." I can understand people who say, "A fetus is not a life. It is not a person, therefore there is no problem in removing it," even if I disagree with them, but intentionally giving a woman power to take a defenseless life is an idea that absolutely boggles my mind. Sure you're legislating morality if you were to outlaw abortion, but laws against thievery and murder also legislate morality....</strong><hr></blockquote>
I do support a woman's choice to abort and kill an unborn child. I have no problem with this distinction because my view is based upon social and economic ideas, not moral ones.

But I think those who do abort another's life should admit to the reality of the situation rather than hide behind the denial of euphemisms. It's often an emotionally painful experience. I wonder why! (see first sentence in this paragraph).

I've been close to many women who have decided to have an abortion (my sister being one). I haven't ever judged them as morally deficient. Each woman must decide what suits herself, obviously.

However, I do look down upon an old friend of mine who chose to have a baby under awful circumstances. She didn't know the father except for a one-night stand (didn't know his last name or have his phone number). Never saw him again. So she chose to have a kid as a single-parent, without a job, and LA County picked up a $20,000 tab for her hospital stay. Raising a kid in a single-parent home by choice hinders, statistically, that child's potential for success on many fronts; in addition, that child will likely depend on more taxpayer money in the future. It's simply a poor economical model. I think she made a poor decision. But that is only my opinion, which is always open to criticism

matthew

[ 11-15-2001: Message edited by: zonetuke ]</p>

[quote]I do support a woman's choice to abort and kill an unborn child. I have no problem with this distinction because my view is based upon social and economic ideas, not moral ones.

But I think those who do abort another's life should admit to the reality of the situation rather than hide behind the denial of euphemisms. It's often an emotionally painful experience. I wonder why! (see first sentence in this paragraph).<hr></blockquote>So killing "an unborn child" is not a matter of morality to you? I just cannot accept this kind of thinking.... So should people only be allowed to live if it is economically convenient for them to do so? What is it about an *unborn* child that makes it so different from a born child that it's life is at the mercy of its parent's convenience?

I really don't mean to misrepresent your stance on this, zonetuke, I'm just trying to flesh out its implications and foundation. Maybe you'ld like to clarify what makes abortion an a-moral decision, while murder clearly is a moral decision.... (if you believe that)

[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>That's valid logic, in my opinion. A fully developed woman is more "important" than a baby.</strong><hr></blockquote>

(I'm assuming that by "important" you mean that the mother has friends and family, whereas the baby does not.).

Partially, yeah. The real reason I'm not opposed to it in this specific circumstance is that someone's gonna die either way. So in my mind it's kinda like how you're allowed to kill someone who's pointing a gun at you. Except for there the person's threatening you on purpose, but here they're not. It doesn't quite seem fair to kill the baby for doing something that it didn't even know it was doing, but (using the above meaning) the mother's life is more important than the baby's life. I don't like either idea -- that we kill someone that doesn't intend to cause harm, or that we say that two humans are unequal -- and that's why I'm not sure I'll ever make up my mind on this particular sub-issue of abortion.

Other than the very rare case of that resulting from forced intercourse, pregnancy is a choice. Unfortunately it's often made without the parents being in possession of all the facts. There are countless thousands of people who don't understand that unprotected sex can lead to pregnancy. It's time for the campaigning groups - whether pro or anti - to stop bickering over morality issues and invest the millions of dollars they plough into furthering their moral crusade into educating people.

As for the pro-life or pro-choice debate, I fall into pro-choice by default. I don't presume to tell parents how to deal with the issues in their lives, just as I don't feel it's my place to argue whether someone should have transplant surgery, wear a condom, worship a particular deity, whatever.

[quote] It's time for the campaigning groups - whether pro or anti - to stop bickering over morality issues and invest the millions of dollars they plough into furthering their moral crusade into educating people.<hr></blockquote>I'll buy that. Education *is* key. But I wouldn't be willing to sacrifice the issue of the morality of abortion for it. I don't see the two approaches as mutually exclusive.

Pro-life. Wow your the first group I have ever seen that can disscuss this maturely. Thanks you for doing so.

Strider

Well, you're catching us right before we realize that ourselves, and degenerate into name-calling barbarians.

An ex-girlfriend had an abortion (before I met her). It seriously messed her up in the head. That's another thing people should consider when "championing" this so-called right.

I'm okay with sexual and moral education to reduce the risk of an unwanted pregnancy but if there are going to be abortions there should also be abortion education.

Talk about abortion without euphemism. I remember listening to a woman describe the abortion she had without even once using the word abortion. Talk about the mental trauma many women feel after having had an abortion.

So, groverat, your definition of viable is that it can feel pain, breathe and maintain a heartbeat? Am I correct? Is this what makes a human "viable"?