Do you own your body?

[LittleDixie]

That's not a well formulated answer. Pregnancy is obviously the condition we are discussing.

The anti-abortion fanatics give the rights to the fetus while removing the rights from the woman.

You can't have two conflicting sets of rights in one body then give the authority to the fetus. That's insanity.

What rights have been taken from the woman?

I mean, I assume that your argument is that a woman should be able to do whatever she wants with her own body. I get that. But, once you're pregnant, it's not just your body anymore. There is another lifeform inside of you. That lifeform has rights and you can't just kill it because it is inconvenient.

You can do what you want to your body, but the fetus is it's own thing.

 

[adrina]

What rights have been taken from the woman?

I mean, I assume that your argument is that a woman should be able to do whatever she wants with her own body. I get that. But, once you're pregnant, it's not just your body anymore. There is another lifeform inside of you. That lifeform has rights and you can't just kill it because it is inconvenient.

You can do what you want to your body, but the fetus is it's own thing.

The right to bodily autonomy. The right not to be compelled to provide material physical support to another against her will.

Duh.

Yes there is another life - that is wholly and completely reliant on the woman and her body to sustain it. If she does not want to, then the right to preserve her body for her use has been taken from her.

And yes you absolutely can kill that life inside of you if you do not want it there. That's the point. Your body is not in service to another without your consent.

We don't even harvest organs from corpses without consent. Nor can we compel blood donation. Regardless of how many lives it will save. Just because there is a fetus in her uterus does not mean she no longer has the right to determine how her body will or will not be used to sustain or preserve the life of another.

What makes a fetus so special as to be granted the right to use a body of a person to sustain itself - especially against that person's wishes?

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

What rights have been taken from the woman?

I mean, I assume that your argument is that a woman should be able to do whatever she wants with her own body. I get that. But, once you're pregnant, it's not just your body anymore. There is another lifeform inside of you. That lifeform has rights and you can't just kill it because it is inconvenient.

You can do what you want to your body, but the fetus is it's own thing.

It’s a circular argument that basically comes down to where one believes human life begins. Anti-abortion extremists believe it begins at conception. There was a bill that just died in the Louisiana state legislature that would have banned IUDs. I haven’t seen any posts on this thread that support that degree of regulation.

The pro-abortion extremists on this thread believe the fetus isn’t a human being until birth. They even feel compelled to insist that parents, physicians, and health agencies not refer to the unborn as a babies. They have no objection to late term abortions even when it’s purely elective for the convenience of the mother (or “pregnant person” as they prefer to say).

Most of us are somewhere in the middle. I doubt there are many of us who have been blessed with children that embrace the idea of late term abortion when there is no extraordinary risk to mom or baby, or when rape or incest are not factors.

 

[adrina]

It’s a circular argument that basically comes down to where one believes human life begins. Anti-abortion extremists believe it begins at conception. There was a bill that just died in the Louisiana state legislature that would have banned IUDs. I haven’t seen any posts on this thread that support that degree of regulation.

The pro-abortion extremists on this thread believe the fetus isn’t a human being until birth. They even feel compelled to insist that parents, physicians, and health agencies not refer to the unborn as a babies. They have no objection to late term abortions even when it’s purely elective for the convenience of the mother (or “pregnant person” as they prefer to say).

Most of us are somewhere in the middle. I doubt there are many of us who have been blessed with children that embrace the idea of late term abortion when there is no extraordinary risk to mom or baby, or when rape or incest are not factors.

Why do you want to grant a fetus a right that no person, any person at all, has? Why do you think a fetus has the right to use another person's body without their permission to sustain its life?

No one has this right. Not you. Not me. I can't force you to donate blood or use any part of your body to save my life without your permission.

Why do you think a fetus has that right when no one else does?

 

[LittleDixie]

Yes there is another life...

Okay, you accept that there is another life inside of a pregnant woman. I want to take your comment in it's entirety, but I really need to dwell on these points of agreement. Pregnancy is a life. It is a different life than the mother.

The right to bodily autonomy. The right not to be compelled to provide material physical support to another against her will.

You should sue Mother Nature.

Yes there is another life - that is wholly and completely reliant on the woman and her body to sustain it.

So, are you saying that anyone who is wholly and completely reliant on another person to sustain them can be murdered?

A newborn baby is wholly and completely reliant on others. People in comas are reliant on others. People with dementia are reliant on others. Can we kill these people?

...the right to preserve her body for her use has been taken from her.

Again, this is an issue you should take up with Mother Nature. Life isn't fair, it is functional.

And yes you absolutely can kill that life inside of you if you do not want it there. That's the point. Your body is not in service to another without your consent.

I would point out that again you are agreeing with me that you are killing a life, and that it is a separate thing from the mother. It is "another" - thus NOT the mother.

Just because there is a fetus in her uterus does not mean she no longer has the right to determine how her body will or will not be used to sustain or preserve the life of another.

Some would disagree.

What makes a fetus so special as to be granted the right to use a body of a person to sustain itself - especially against that person's wishes?

So many of your arguments here revolve around the unfairness of biological reality.

 

[adrina]

Okay, you accept that there is another life inside of a pregnant woman. I want to take your comment in it's entirety, but I really need to dwell on these points of agreement. Pregnancy is a life. It is a different life than the mother.


You should sue Mother Nature.


So, are you saying that anyone who is wholly and completely reliant on another person to sustain them can be murdered?

A newborn baby is wholly and completely reliant on others. People in comas are reliant on others. People with dementia are reliant on others. Can we kill these people?


Again, this is an issue you should take up with Mother Nature. Life isn't fair, it is functional.


I would point out that again you are agreeing with me that you are killing a life, and that it is a separate thing from the mother. It is "another" - thus NOT the mother.


Some would disagree.


So many of your arguments here revolve around the unfairness of biological reality.

I never said there wasn't a life. It's even human. That's also irrelevant. I don't romanticize a fetus.

Mother nature has plants that are natural abortifacients. My problem isn't with nature. It's the fucked up interpretation you guys have that makes you believe women are slaves to a fetus.

A newborn baby can process its own oxygen and circulate its own blood. It is not reliant on the woman's physical body for support. Surely you know the difference. Don't be an idiot extremist.

Again, it's an issue with your fucked up interpretations. Nature isn't the problem. You are. (Knee surgeries aren't known in nature so we should just do away with them, right?)

I'm saying for the umpteenth time that no person has a right to compel anyone to provide physical material support to sustain their lives. Why do you think a fetus should have a right that no person has?

Yes duh. But I'm not some hysterical moron that gets the vapors because it's a buh-haaabeee. If you want to prove that human life is special, then you'll have to do a better job of actually caring about ALL humans. Not just the fetus. It's not like you'd let a woman compel someone to donate their blood to save her life.

If you want to remove that right from women then there is nothing to stop us as a society from compelling blood donation, organ donation etc. You will no longer own your body. That's the argument you are supporting in giving a fetus rights that no person has.

It's not a matter of biological reality as abortions have been around for literally thousands upon thousands of years. Again, that knee surgery goes more "against" nature then abortion. Hell, even eyeglasses if you want to pull that nature line.

Again, why do you think a fetus has rights that no person has?

 

[ll74]

It’s a circular argument that basically comes down to where one believes human life begins. Anti-abortion extremists believe it begins at conception. There was a bill that just died in the Louisiana state legislature that would have banned IUDs. I haven’t seen any posts on this thread that support that degree of regulation.

The pro-abortion extremists on this thread believe the fetus isn’t a human being until birth. They even feel compelled to insist that parents, physicians, and health agencies not refer to the unborn as a babies. They have no objection to late term abortions even when it’s purely elective for the convenience of the mother (or “pregnant person” as they prefer to say).

Most of us are somewhere in the middle. I doubt there are many of us who have been blessed with children that embrace the idea of late term abortion when there is no extraordinary risk to mom or baby, or when rape or incest are not factors.

The fetus is not an independent life until birth. There's no argument that overcomes that. And there is no such thing as an "unborn baby". That term was created by pro life activists to trigger an emotional response.

 

[icanhelp1]

Fuck off.

There's no civility to be had with people like yourself who support politicians who enact policies that reduce half the populations' basic rights.

What rights have been taken from the woman?

I mean, I assume that your argument is that a woman should be able to do whatever she wants with her own body. I get that. But, once you're pregnant, it's not just your body anymore. There is another lifeform inside of you. That lifeform has rights and you can't just kill it because it is inconvenient.

You can do what you want to your body, but the fetus is it's own thing.

You are wasting your time! To some women abortion is a right of passage to enter the church of *what's happening now*. Pardon me but my fetus is an inconvenient truth, hell, an inconvenience all the way around. Women pushing for wholesale abortion lack self awareness. Women are given the gift of life they so enjoy, which ironically, they shamefully use it to publicly pontificate the eradication of life under the guise of *my body my choice*. Our moral values are on par with that of China, N Korea. Our moral decay as a nation is astounding and perhaps unstoppable. I wonder how many doctors, Lawyers, school teachers were snuffed out because it was an inconvenience, too busy to think things through before engaging in a sexual relationship. One ounce of prevention is all it takes.

 

[adrina]

You are wasting your time! To some women abortion is a right of passage to enter the church of *what's happening now*. Pardon me but my fetus is an inconvenient truth, hell, an inconvenience all the way around. Women pushing for wholesale abortion lack self awareness. Women are given the gift of life they so enjoy, which ironically, they shamefully use it to publicly pontificate the eradication of life under the guise of *my body my choice*. Our moral values are on par with that of China, N Korea. Our moral decay as a nation is astounding and perhaps unstoppable. I wonder how many doctors, Lawyers, school teachers were snuffed out because it was an inconvenience, too busy to think things through before engaging in a sexual relationship. One ounce of prevention is all it takes.

Fuck off you hysterical lying fanatic. All anti abortion hysterics are liars and the anti abortion movement is inherently dishonest.

Go gaslight someone else.

 

[ll74]

You are wasting your time! To some women abortion is a right of passage to enter the church of *what's happening now*. Pardon me but my fetus is an inconvenient truth, hell, an inconvenience all the way around. Women pushing for wholesale abortion lack self awareness. Women are given the gift of life they so enjoy, which ironically, they shamefully use it to publicly pontificate the eradication of life under the guise of *my body my choice*. Our moral values are on par with that of China, N Korea. Our moral decay as a nation is astounding and perhaps unstoppable. I wonder how many doctors, Lawyers, school teachers were snuffed out because it was an inconvenience, too busy to think things through before engaging in a sexual relationship. One ounce of prevention is all it takes.

No woman sees abortion like that. You're an idiot.

Talk to a woman sometime about the joys of reproductive health.

No greatness was ruined because of an abortion. Plenty of idiots exist because of the lack of one

 

[windar]

In all this back and forth, no one has laid out how any abortion ban would be enforced. The devil is always in the details.

How many abortions would actually be prevented, as opposed to simply being made less safe? The majority of early abortions these days are done medically with a few pills. The authorities can't stop truckloads of fentanyl and other dangerous drugs from being sold; how will they stop tiny little pills from other states or overseas? Will a Walter White start cranking out mifepristone instead of meth? Count on it. This is actually a more meaningful real world question than who owns what. Sadly, I forsee this entire area turning into a giant social catastrophe like the War on Drugs that will reduce the number of abortions minimally, if at all, whilst producing all kinds of bad social consequences.

 

[AlexBailey]

People have a right to their health care privacy and choice of provider. Who is the state to get involved? What rights and freedoms are violated by limiting what healthcare options can be available to citizens? What rights to privacy are sacrificed?

The state will have access and authority over a woman's personal healthcare choices.

Are there going to be allowances made for other medical reasons? If so, the state will need some kind of access or supervision of a woman's medical care.

These rights violations will create legal precedence of the government being allowed to more closely supervise the lives and healthcare of it's citizens. Way to go GOP.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Why do you want to grant a fetus a right that no person, any person at all, has? Why do you think a fetus has the right to use another person's body without their permission to sustain its life?

No one has this right. Not you. Not me. I can't force you to donate blood or use any part of your body to save my life without your permission.

Why do you think a fetus has that right when no one else does?

Blame ultrasound technology and little kicking feet inside the womb. Those are the main reasons few people share your extreme views.

 

[ll74]

In all this back and forth, no one has laid out how any abortion ban would be enforced. The devil is always in the details.

How many abortions would actually be prevented, as opposed to simply being made less safe? The majority of early abortions these days are done medically with a few pills. The authorities can't stop truckloads of fentanyl and other dangerous drugs from being sold; how will they stop tiny little pills from other states or overseas? Will a Walter White start cranking out mifepristone instead of meth? Count on it. This is actually a more meaningful real world question than who owns what. Sadly, I forsee this entire area turning into a giant social catastrophe like the War on Drugs that will reduce the number of abortions minimally, if at all, whilst producing all kinds of bad social consequences.

Birth control and education reduce abortion

 

[Deleted member 1306910]

The Stand Your Ground laws allow a citizen who owns a gun, to defend their property in many states. If you can shoot a motherfucker in the face for trying to take your big screen TV, why does a woman not have the right to snuff a baby for threatening to kill her?

Ohh right. Because you're the exception to every rule. Do as you SAY, not as you DO. Gotcha.

 

[windar]

Birth control and education reduce abortion

Yes, they do. And in fact, abortions have been decreasing even where there are few restrictions on them. But of course the pro-lifers want to ban birth control as well and the Court has, despite Alito's protestations given them the green light to do so.

By the way, how long before they target this site and others like it? Believe me, that's on their list.

 

[jaF0]

Some people ain't none too plentiful in the smarts.

Murder Charges for Women Getting Abortion Backed by 24% of Men: Poll​

The poll revealed that 35 percent of Republican-leaning respondents said women who have abortions that violates state law should face murder charges.

 

[windar]

Some people ain't none too plentiful in the smarts.

Murder Charges for Women Getting Abortion Backed by 24% of Men: Poll​

The poll revealed that 35 percent of Republican-leaning respondents said women who have abortions that violates state law should face murder charges.

Unless it was their daughter, in which case it should be a parking ticket...

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Yes, they do. And in fact, abortions have been decreasing even where there are few restrictions on them. But of course the pro-lifers want to ban birth control as well and the Court has, despite Alito's protestations given them the green light to do so.

By the way, how long before they target this site and others like it? Believe me, that's on their list.

Condoms, birth control pills, vasectomies, vaginal rings, patches, and other popular forms of birth control are in no danger of being outlawed. Plan B pills and IUDs could be outlawed in certain states, but even that recently failed in Louisiana.

 

[windar]

Condoms, birth control pills, vasectomies, vaginal rings, patches, and other popular forms of birth control are in no danger of being outlawed. Plan B pills and IUDs could be outlawed in certain states, but even that recently failed in Louisiana.

The decision hasn't even come down yet. Stupidity is infinite. Check back in a few years and let's see...If it happens, can I say, "But some guy on the internet promised it wouldn't?"

 

[LLCox]

I own my body and have used the hell out of it. I am all about my body my choice.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

The decision hasn't even come down yet. Stupidity is infinite. Check back in a few years and let's see...

Correct. Your suggestion that birth control will be outlawed is groundless speculation.

 

[adrina]

Blame ultrasound technology and little kicking feet inside the womb. Those are the main reasons few people share your extreme views.

Trusting the woman to make decisions about her life and health - how very extreme of me.

Ultrasound has nothing to do with it. You can see people right in front of you and you still can't compel anyone to use their body to provide physical material support against their will.

Why does a fetus have this right that no one else does?

The Stand Your Ground laws allow a citizen who owns a gun, to defend their property in many states. If you can shoot a motherfucker in the face for trying to take your big screen TV, why does a woman not have the right to snuff a baby for threatening to kill her?

Ohh right. Because you're the exception to every rule. Do as you SAY, not as you DO. Gotcha.

Abortion is truly an act of self defense.

Condoms, birth control pills, vasectomies, vaginal rings, patches, and other popular forms of birth control are in no danger of being outlawed. Plan B pills and IUDs could be outlawed in certain states, but even that recently failed in Louisiana.

Pffft. Yeah right. You're just another liar - all of you anti abortion fanatics are liars. In a bit you'll be supporting a national ban - even though it was supposedly all about states rights. You will do anything - lie, cheat, steal, whatever - because the ends justify the means. Women will die because of your fanaticism. Molested children will be forced to carry a pregnancy because of your morbid obsession. And it won't stop there. Gay rights, medical access and yes even birth control. Because you are hysterical fanatics who want to control others.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Trusting the woman to make decisions about her life and health - how very extreme of me.

Ultrasound has nothing to do with it. You can see people right in front of you and you still can't compel anyone to use their body to provide physical material support against their will.

Why does a fetus have this right that no one else does?



Abortion is truly an act of self defense.



Pffft. Yeah right. You're just another liar - all of you anti abortion fanatics are liars. In a bit you'll be supporting a national ban - even though it was supposedly all about states rights. You will do anything - lie, cheat, steal, whatever - because the ends justify the means. Women will die because of your fanaticism. Molested children will be forced to carry a pregnancy because of your morbid obsession. And it won't stop there. Gay rights, medical access and yes even birth control. Because you are hysterical fanatics who want to control others.

Because elected representatives believe that at certain stages of pregnancy (varies by state), the fetus is a human being and has a right to continue living despite the wishes of host who played a role in creating that human being.

 

[adrina]

Because elected representatives believe that at certain stages of pregnancy (varies by state), the fetus is a human being and has a right to continue living despite the wishes of host who played a role in creating that human being.

Again, for the folks in the back. No other human being has that right. If you all want to say that the fetus is a person, whatever. Again, no person has that right. No person can use another person's body to provide material physical support to preserve or sustain their life without their permission.

Laws are based on precedents - not feelings.

Why do fetuses get this right - especially with this whole ridiculous push to personhood - that no person gets?

What basis of logic do these "elected representatives"/you use for this conclusion? Why do fetuses get special rights?