What is your stance on abortion?

Colonel Hogan said:

Excuse me? Every law I am aware of was enacted via legislation and every one of those had a social and/or moral core or purpose. You cannot argue for one minute that her argument was more morally weighted toward abortion on demand than it was outright prohibition.

Click to expand...

Wow, do I disagree. Definitely possible I misunderstood the article, though.

But why did she call it a Defense of Abortion if her argument could not be used to, you know, defend abortion?

She shows how the law cannot interfere with a woman’s choice to murder her fetus. That’s what the Violinist hypothetical is all about.

There are situations in which murdering your fetus is immoral. The specific example is, getting an abortion because you are due right around Christmas and you have a trip to the Bahamas planned.

But a woman cannot be required to bring her fetus to term, because her liberty outweighs the fetus’ right to parasitize her body. (Of course, Thomson doesn’t not use the word “parasitize” because of its negative connotations, but I’ve been told by several physicians that it is a technically accurate term for human gestation. In fact, compared to other mammals, I’m told our gestation strategy positively sucks.)

Suppose the only way I could survive the next 24 hours was for you to post, “Oblimo is right. I completely misunderstood the Violinist Argument,” in reply to this post.

Can I, the law, or society, force you to do so? Not in America, we can’t. And if we can’t make you do something as insignificant as that to save my life, how in the fucking hell do you expect to compel someone to be physically parasitized by another human being for 9 months?

You cannot minimize her condemnation of abortion or believe she does not accept the state's legitimate role in prohibiting it in all but the most exceptional medical cases directly affecting the mother's health or in the case of rape.

Click to expand...

I know I can’t force you, but could you direct me to where in the article it says that? I don’t see that anywhere. Quite the opposite, really. I could be wrong, though.

You are correct that no woman needs either legislation or a Supreme Court ruling to "get permission" to have an abortion. But you are equally incorrect to say that such is her "right" as an American citizen, thus implying it is not subject to a whole host of legislative restraints including prohibition in a variety of circumstances.

Click to expand...

10th Amendment, those powers not specifically granted to the Federal government are reserved by the States, or the people. An American citizen has a right to do anything they goddamn fucking want. In America and most Western governments, laws proscribe behavior, they do not grant abilities to do things. That’s why criminal laws are all designed as “Thou Shalt Nots” instead of “Thou Shalts.”

That’s what I meant in terms of the “right” to murder your fetus. But even if there were an Amendment, “the right of a woman to terminate her pregnancy shall not be infringed,” that right is not absolute and if the state can demonstrate a narrowly tailored law and a compelling state interest, then yes laws regulating abortions can of course be held to be Constitutional.

However, under Thomson’s argument, that would be quite a challenge.

Ramone45 said:

Coronary artery bypass surgery is a medical procedure that some people need to save their lives. I'm against eating bacon fat and drinking Pepsi with the attitude that I'll just get CABP surgery when my arteries clog up. Not the same by any means, but it kind of sums up my point of view. And I believe that life begins at conception because chasing any other time is arbitrary.

Click to expand...

.....

No matter how many orgasms [ a woman] has, they won’t make her pregnant. Pregnancies can only happen when men have an orgasm. Unwanted pregnancies can only happen when men orgasm irresponsibly.
What this means is a women can be the sluttliest slut in the entire world who loves having orgasms all day long and all night long and she will never find herself with an unwanted pregnancy unless a man shows up and ejaculates irresponsibly.

Click to expand...

This Twitter thread turns the question of responsibility for unwanted pregnancies on its head. Read it!

Que said:

What day of gestation are brain cells imbued with "consciousness."

Click to expand...

According to commonly available information, somewhere around the end of the 2nd Trimester.

Ramone45 said:

What you don't know about anatomy, physiology, embryology and cellular biology is alot.

Click to expand...

You are right! None of those things are specialist subjects for me.

But I know the difference between a baby and a blastocyst.

Did you have a point to make?

(I mean, if we are just here to point out specific lacks of knowledge, I could point out your lack of ability to spell.)

HelpImLost said:

....

Click to expand...

No response?

Still waiting for the answer to a simple question though. Given that you see no difference between the two, what makes a blastocyst a baby?

People have been having, or attempting to have, abortions ever since forever. Rendering them 'illegal' or any other attempts to stop them happening isn't going to stop them happening - it just means they happen in dangerous circumstances that aren't good for either the 'unborn baby' (which isn't actually a baby at all) or the mother. People make misjudgements and stupid decisions all the time - everyone contributing to this thread has made a dumb arse decision at some point in their life - but the idea that if a woman (and let's face it, it pretty much always is a woman) should spend the next 15-20 years of her life raising a child because of a stupid decision is ... well, lacking empathy, to say the least. Especially given the utter reluctance of many societies to provide adequate support to said woman.

This is a never-endingly dumb debate. Use science to work out a measure of 'independent life' or 'consciousness' or a 'soul' or whatever - 20 weeks seem to be the generally accepted consensus - and make terminations readily available and safe for anyone who wants them up to that point. With very few exceptions, terminations are not something women undertake 'lightly', and barely any would 'choose' to use this as a method of contraception - all these 'bad women' arguments are based on the limit case, which is so rare as to be virtually non-existent.

Banning abortions will NOT stop abortions happening ... what would actually lower the rates is adequate sex education and easy and cheap/free access to effective and safe contraception. (And getting men, as a social group [not picking on you individual dudes who obviously do get that] to realise that, as the post above notes, it's THEM that 'causes' the pregnancy, not a woman's moral laxness. But, you know, baby steps.)

KimGordon67 said:

People have been having, or attempting to have, abortions ever since forever. Rendering them 'illegal' or any other attempts to stop them happening isn't going to stop them happening - it just means they happen in dangerous circumstances that aren't good for either the 'unborn baby' (which isn't actually a baby at all) or the mother. People make misjudgements and stupid decisions all the time - everyone contributing to this thread has made a dumb arse decision at some point in their life - but the idea that if a woman (and let's face it, it pretty much always is a woman) should spend the next 15-20 years of her life raising a child because of a stupid decision is ... well, lacking empathy, to say the least. Especially given the utter reluctance of many societies to provide adequate support to said woman.

This is a never-endingly dumb debate. Use science to work out a measure of 'independent life' or 'consciousness' or a 'soul' or whatever - 20 weeks seem to be the generally accepted consensus - and make terminations readily available and safe for anyone who wants them up to that point. With very few exceptions, terminations are not something women undertake 'lightly', and barely any would 'choose' to use this as a method of contraception - all these 'bad women' arguments are based on the limit case, which is so rare as to be virtually non-existent.

Banning abortions will NOT stop abortions happening ... what would actually lower the rates is adequate sex education and easy and cheap/free access to effective and safe contraception. (And getting men, as a social group [not picking on you individual dudes who obviously do get that] to realise that, as the post above notes, it's THEM that 'causes' the pregnancy, not a woman's moral laxness. But, you know, baby steps.)

Click to expand...

Didn't science give us birth control?

toeskr said:

Didn't science give us birth control?

Click to expand...

Did you have an actual point?

.....

Que said:

A) Rqbid abortion fans in Americs are unwilling to concede that at any point the child is sentient
We have people who are arguing that a baby born alive and viable should not receive medical attention and should be allowed to die in a way that would be criminal neglect if you did it to a puppy. In America there are no Shades of Black and White because Planned Parenthood gets millions of dollars from the federal government by pretending that they aren't using that money nearly exclusively to fund abortions which is illegal. In order to keep that gravy train coming they refuse to concede on the least point at when and if an abortion might be reprehensible to polite Society.
B) why are you wasting any time at all on a failed philosophical argument that because it might be difficult to prevent people from doing something illegal you shouldn't make it illegal. People do lots of illegal things that we as a society have decided that we're going to frown upon. The fact that people get away with it has nothing whatsoever to do with whether you should or shouldn't make something illegal..

Click to expand...

Women haven't, historically (and I'm guessing in contemporary times) 'gotten away' with illegal abortions. They're resorted to measures that have often involved putting themselves (and ONLY themselves) at significant risk. My argument is about harm minimisation, not that people are 'getting way' with them even when they're illegal.

"We have people who are arguing that a baby born alive and viable should not receive medical attention and should be allowed to die in a way that would be criminal neglect if you did it to a puppy." How is this linked to the abortion debate?

"... Planned Parenthood gets millions of dollars from the federal government by pretending that they aren't using that money nearly exclusively to fund abortions which is illegal. In order to keep that gravy train coming they refuse to concede on the least point at when and if an abortion might be reprehensible to polite Society." I find it difficult to believe that a medical organisation are using ill-gotten gains to fund full/nearly full-term abortions in anything other than extremely extenuating circumstances (e.g. clear risk to the mother if the birth happens). Do you have actual evidence of this - like, more than one or two cases, but evidence that this is ongoing practice?

Que said:

A) Rqbid abortion fans in Americs are unwilling to concede that at any point the child is sentient
We have people who are arguing that a baby born alive and viable should not receive medical attention and should be allowed to die in a way that would be criminal neglect if you did it to a puppy. In America there are no Shades of Black and White because Planned Parenthood gets millions of dollars from the federal government by pretending that they aren't using that money nearly exclusively to fund abortions which is illegal. In order to keep that gravy train coming they refuse to concede on the least point at when and if an abortion might be reprehensible to polite Society.
B) why are you wasting any time at all on a failed philosophical argument that because it might be difficult to prevent people from doing something illegal you shouldn't make it illegal. People do lots of illegal things that we as a society have decided that we're going to frown upon. The fact that people get away with it has nothing whatsoever to do with whether you should or shouldn't make something illegal..

Click to expand...

PS - no one is an 'abortion fan'. It's an unpleasant but necessary means of dealing with a usually difficult situation. Pretty much everyone would prefer there were no unwanted pregnancies in the first place ... but things change, people make mistakes, all kind of stuff happens because life aren't people aren't always tidy and predictable.

KimGordon67 said:

PS - no one is an 'abortion fan'. It's an unpleasant but necessary means of dealing with a usually difficult situation.
Pretty much everyone would prefer there were no unwanted pregnancies in the first place ...
but things change, people make mistakes, all kind of stuff happens because life aren't people aren't always tidy and predictable.

Click to expand...

I agree with you in most cases of women who undergo abortion.

My judgmental attitude comes into play only regarding women who've had more than three accidental (forgot their pill, an unwise night of passion) pregnancies followed by abortions.
If they had clear signs that they can't look properly after that, why didn't they switch to longer term or more permanent measures of contraception? THAT's where I find callousness, self-centeredness and/or irresponsibility to be a factor.

beew said:

I agree with you in most cases of women who undergo abortion.

My judgmental attitude comes into play only regarding women who've had more than three accidental (forgot their pill, an unwise night of passion) pregnancies followed by abortions.
If they had clear signs that they can't look properly after that, why didn't they switch to longer term or more permanent measures of contraception? THAT's where I find callousness, self-centeredness and/or irresponsibility to be a factor.

Click to expand...

Yes, but that's just your judgement. Not to be confused with objective fact.

Just to get this straight - according to your judgement, if a woman (apparently the only person involved in the act?) make a lapse of judgement three times, THEN it's OK to say 'sorry, but you will be looking after this one for the next 15-20 years'? Given that you've already decided that ending up in this situation means they aren't very responsible, you think it's a good idea that they then raise a kid? (Just to be clear - *I'm* not making those assessments - I'm just following through your train of judgemental logic.)

KimGordon67 said:

Did you have an actual point?

Click to expand...

The top of your head.

Good fuck, you fuckers are dense.

So, Hitler, feel free to kill all your progeny.

Roe v. Wade ain't gonna go anywhere even if Kavanagh gets in. The whole crux of the argument now is who pays for poor decisions and planning.

I don't want to. You are perfectly capable of choosing to have sex or not. If you don't plan for the outcome, why do you want others to pay for it?

Yeah, yeah, yeah and but but but.

This is not condoning rape or incest. If you can't be responsible enough to prevent a pregnancy and that includes your partner, don't come looking for handouts.

toeskr said:

The top of your head.

Good fuck, you fuckers are dense.

So, Hitler, feel free to kill all your progeny.

Roe v. Wade ain't gonna go anywhere even if Kavanagh gets in. The whole crux of the argument now is who pays for poor decisions and planning.

I don't want to. You are perfectly capable of choosing to have sex or not. If you don't plan for the outcome, why do you want others to pay for it?

Yeah, yeah, yeah and but but but.

This is not condoning rape or incest. If you can't be responsible enough to prevent a pregnancy and that includes your partner, don't come looking for handouts.

Click to expand...

You don't think the LEVEL of cost involved is at all relevant - one relatively cheap procedure vs 15-20 years of supporting another human being, often in situations of relative deprivation that result in a significant social cost as well?

Clearly you've never made a poor decision in your life, which must be nice. I don't know if you've ever actually had sex, but quite often the physical, mental, and emotional factors at play mean that people make some somewhat rash decisions, and are often more focused on the immediate than the longer term future.

Life is messy and sometimes there are negative outcomes. Doubling down on the negative outcome is seldom the most helpful reaction.

(Also, you just Godwinned a thread on abortion - totally irrelevantly. WTF does Hitler have to do with the abortion debate?)

KimGordon67 said:

You don't think the LEVEL of cost involved is at all relevant - one relatively cheap procedure vs 15-20 years of supporting another human being, often in situations of relative deprivation that result in a significant social cost as well?

Clearly you've never made a poor decision in your life, which must be nice. I don't know if you've ever actually had sex, but quite often the physical, mental, and emotional factors at play mean that people make some somewhat rash decisions, and are often more focused on the immediate than the longer term future.

Life is messy and sometimes there are negative outcomes. Doubling down on the negative outcome is seldom the most helpful reaction.

(Also, you just Godwinned a thread on abortion - totally irrelevantly. WTF does Hitler have to do with the abortion debate?)

Click to expand...

Clearly we all make poor "choices", and I don't expect society to come in and make it better for me. If I fuck up I fuck up. Should you be expected to make me whole again? I don't think so.

Your choices start way before conception. But like a typical socialist you want to play the emotional and mental factors.

Here is a mental thought, plan ahead. Think before you act and if you don't, your bad, not mine. Are we expected to reimburse you if you make a stupid choice in the stock market and you lose your ass? Oh wait, that might be a very emotional moment for you.

Who the fuck is Godwin and what does that have to do with anything? Keep killing all you want, your choice. Just don't expect me to pay for it.

You are right that I can be judgmental of this very, very tiny category of women.
But you misunderstood my current train of thought.

KimGordon67 said:

Yes, but that's just your judgement. Not to be confused with objective fact.

Just to get this straight - according to your judgement, if a woman (apparently the only person involved in the act?) make a lapse of judgement three times, THEN it's OK to say 'sorry, but you will be looking after this one for the next 15-20 years'? Given that you've already decided that ending up in this situation means they aren't very responsible, you think it's a good idea that they then raise a kid? (Just to be clear - *I'm* not making those assessments - I'm just following through your train of judgemental logic.)

Click to expand...

Those women were clearly undecided, or didn't plan on having kids over the next few years, because they continued to have elective abortions after the initial 2-3 accidental pregnancies.
So why didn't they work on improving their compliance with oral pills or resorting to a long-acting reversible contraceptive (if they are unsure) or more permanent measures (if they don't want kids)? Or those in long term relationships could have asked their partner to have a reversible vasectomy.

KimGordon67 said:

if a woman (apparently the only person involved in the act?)

THEN it's OK to say 'sorry, but you will be looking after this one for the next 15-20 years'?
you think it's a good idea that they then raise a kid?

(Just to be clear - *I'm* not making those assessments - I'm just following through your train of judgemental logic.)

Click to expand...

I never implied that they aren't capable of raising kids. It's a big leap.
And I, too roll my eyes at those men (anti AND pro-choice) who inordinately focus only on women and abortions, while wasting no breath on educating irresponsible men. But that wasn't the topic that I was replying to.

You are being unnecessary defensive, because I'm pro-choice too.
But I also think that certain pro-choice advocates are doing a massive disservice to MOST women out there in term of perceptions, by conflating the generally responsible women who simply erred (90% of those undergoing abortions) with the ones who use abortions as contraception.

toeskr said:

Clearly we all make poor "choices", and I don't expect society to come in and make it better for me. If I fuck up I fuck up. Should you be expected to make me whole again? I don't think so.

Your choices start way before conception. But like a typical socialist you want to play the emotional and mental factors.

Here is a mental thought, plan ahead. Think before you act and if you don't, your bad, not mine. Are we expected to reimburse you if you make a stupid choice in the stock market and you lose your ass? Oh wait, that might be a very emotional moment for you.

Who the fuck is Godwin and what does that have to do with anything? Keep killing all you want, your choice. Just don't expect me to pay for it.

Click to expand...

Have your poor choices ever resulted in you have to raise another human being for 15-20 years, or had a similar outcome with similar social costs?

Newflash - if we all had it together to 'plan ahead' all the time, the poor choices wouldn't happen.

(I have absolutely no idea how 'socialism' and 'emotional and mental factors' are related.)

I truly and honestly hope neither you nor anyone you care about has to actually HAVE a termination at any point. Obviously I hope no one has to have a termination, but when it happens, it's nice to have supportive and helpful people around, not someone telling you that you should just suck it up and deal with the consequences of your poor decision-making. Having sat with a few friends and family members during this process, I can tell you it's really not the sort of thing they want to hearing.

KimGordon67 said:

So you've held funerals for any miscarriages you might have been involved in?

Click to expand...

Fuck you

beew said:

You are right that I can be judgmental of this very, very tiny category of women.
But you misunderstood my current train of thought.



Those women were clearly undecided, or didn't plan on having kids over the next few years, because they continued to have elective abortions after the initial 2-3 accidental pregnancies.
So why didn't they work on improving their compliance with oral pills or resorting to a long-acting reversible contraceptive (if they are unsure) or more permanent measures (if they don't want kids)? Or those in long term relationships could have asked their partner to have a reversible vasectomy.





I never implied that they aren't capable of raising kids. It's a big leap.
And I, too roll my eyes at those men (anti AND pro-choice) who inordinately focus only on women and abortions, while wasting no breath on educating irresponsible men. But that wasn't the topic that I was replying to.

You are being unnecessary defensive, because I'm pro-choice too.
But I also think that certain pro-choice advocates are doing a massive disservice to MOST women out there in term of perceptions, by conflating the generally responsible women who simply erred (90% of those undergoing abortions) with the ones who use abortions as contraception.

Click to expand...

You are only pro-choice for those women who fit into your moral universe.

Personally, I think anyone who gets pregnant accidentally is a bit silly - that would include myself, if it had ever happened (and there's certainly been times when it *could* have happened). I just don't think that being a bit silly means you should spend the next 15-20 years of your life raising another human being, often in situations of relative deprivation ... and also, my personal assessment of people who get pregnant shouldn't be a grounds for providing medical treatments to people.

And, in response to toeskr's weird issues, yes, I do think society should pick up the tab, because I would freaking hope that we care about each other enough to bear this relatively minimal cost. I understand that in toeskr's world, it's every man for himself, and the women just get left picking up the pieces ... but that's not the world I want to live in.

Led_Astray said:

According to commonly available information, somewhere around the end of the 2nd Trimester.



You are right! None of those things are specialist subjects for me.

But I know the difference between a baby and a blastocyst.

Did you have a point to make?

(I mean, if we are just here to point out specific lacks of knowledge, I could point out your lack of ability to spell.)



No response?

Still waiting for the answer to a simple question though. Given that you see no difference between the two, what makes a blastocyst a baby?

Click to expand...

Besides a baby, what else can a blastocyst become? I'm not an expert, but I am fascinated by biology, and the things we don't really know yet. There was a picture in an earlier post concerning consciousness. It was a picture of a baby with an arrow pointing to the head indicating the brain was the center of consciousness. But now we are learning about the Enteric Nervous System. A neurologic system centered around our gut that actually functions independently of the Brain and Spinal cord. So there may be an explanation for your "gut feelings".

KimGordon67 said:

You are only pro-choice for those women who fit into your moral universe.

Click to expand...

So according to you,

I want to make abortions available only to smart, responsible women (90% of those who undergo abortions).
But I want to force repeat aborters (many of whom have a low IQ, or are lazy) to have children.

Way to improve the gene pool!

Ramone45 said:

Besides a baby, what else can a blastocyst become? I'm not an expert, but I am fascinated by biology, and the things we don't really know yet. There was a picture in an earlier post concerning consciousness. It was a picture of a baby with an arrow pointing to the head indicating the brain was the center of consciousness. But now we are learning about the Enteric Nervous System. A neurologic system centered around our gut that actually functions independently of the Brain and Spinal cord. So there may be an explanation for your "gut feelings".

Click to expand...

That doesn't make it a baby, in the same way that acorns aren't oak trees. The process of turning an egg and a sperm into the final product of 'baby' is outrageously complex - it's a miracle it ever actually works at all.

beew said:

So according to you,

I want to make abortions available only to smart, responsible women (90% of those who undergo abortions).
But I want to force repeat aborters (many of whom have a low IQ, or are lazy) to have children.

Way to improve the gene pool!

Click to expand...

That seems to be your basic argument, based on your 'three strikes and you're out' rule. (Personally, I wouldn't ascribe either a low IQ or laziness to women on that basis, but feel free to do so yourself if it makes you feel better.)

KimGordon67 said:

Have your poor choices ever resulted in you have to raise another human being for 15-20 years, or had a similar outcome with similar social costs?

Newflash - if we all had it together to 'plan ahead' all the time, the poor choices wouldn't happen.

(I have absolutely no idea how 'socialism' and 'emotional and mental factors' are related.)

I truly and honestly hope neither you nor anyone you care about has to actually HAVE a termination at any point. Obviously I hope no one has to have a termination, but when it happens, it's nice to have supportive and helpful people around, not someone telling you that you should just suck it up and deal with the consequences of your poor decision-making. Having sat with a few friends and family members during this process, I can tell you it's really not the sort of thing they want to hearing.

Click to expand...

Have you ever had a day in your life that you don't constantly and hopelessly bang your head against a wall always looking for an argument?

People make poor choices everyday. And I don't expect other people to come in and make it all better, make me feel better and give me a participation ribbon.

Doesn't the sacred PP cow provide free advice and birth control prior to?

You are a socialist, emotional and mental all rolled up in one. You actually want to make it easy for termination without the thought of prior planning. And you want it to be penalty free. You fuck up, you fuck up and deal with it like an adult.

Having to "have" a termination is a whole different story from the garbage you are trying to sell. Those safeguards are in place and not going anywhere. No political party will be able to touch those.

What you are wanting is to be ignorant, carefree, do what you want and don't worry about the consequences. Simple easy procedure that socialized medicine will pay for. I say if you want to play an adult then be an adult and deal with the outcome of your decisions.

Newsflash, if you have poor planning and self control, is that your problem, not mine or societies as a whole?

Really, I don't want an answer back. I want you to think about being an adult, trying to make adult decisions and dealing with those decisions in an adult manner. No handouts, no freebies. Adult up and do the right thing.

Que said:

What day of gestation are brain cells imbued with "consciousness."

Click to expand...

With a lot of people it never happens. Same with intelligence and minding ones own business and body.