Abortion, if you object does that mean you want to control women's uteri

Jogro said:
So a 39 week old fetus (that has a beating heart, sleep/wake cycles, opens and shuts its eyes, sucks its thumb, yawns, kicks, grabs things, responds to voices, and would be a "baby" immediately ex utero) isn't "alive" then? OK. .



This is absurd.

All law is consensual morality. Otherwise, as you say, what's wrong with killing abortion doctors or gays? Abortion law reflects a democratic consensus of adult voters.

Next, abortion term restriction isn't "arbitrary"; in most jurisdictions the law is specifically set at a gestational age believed to reflect the minimum possible age a fetus could survive outside the womb. How the procedure is actually done is dependent on gestational age too, and the older the fetus the harder it is to do the procedure AND the more risky to the mother. (Yes, while generally safer than childbirth, abortion isn't risk-free, either).

Lastly, setting the max gestational age at 25 weeks in practice isn't really the limiting factor. By that time the mother has had fully six months to come to terms with pregnancy and make a decision. That's not exactly a "rush" decision, depriving a woman of "control".

As a matter of practice, something like 90% of abortions are done before the end of 12 weeks, and only a little more than 1% after 20 weeks. In most cases, the really late term abortions are done when a serious defect comes to light, and those typically aren't detectable until after the end of the first trimester.
Click to expand...

you make some really good points, but in the end i simply trust the woman to make the right decision.

if my sarcasm to others and to you hasn't made it clear, i don't think that women are treating the beings growing inside of them like leftover chinese food, i think they are fully aware of the gravity of their decision. way more than any of us penis wielders are, at least.
 
UncleBuck said:
you make some really good points, but in the end i simply trust the woman to make the right decision.

if my sarcasm to others and to you hasn't made it clear, i don't think that women are treating the beings growing inside of them like leftover chinese food, i think they are fully aware of the gravity of their decision. way more than any of us penis wielders are, at least.
Click to expand...
Trust me when I say some women are stupid...really really fucking stupid.

Depending on the supposed inherent goodness or intelligence of "people" leads to one thing and one thing only...disappointment.

Buck, given you've no children that I know of, I assume you're speaking without experience, but 12 weeks is an abundance of time to make "the choice".

So should women/men be free to kill themselves? Gotta let them control their own bodies. Screw their families and people who love them, suicide for all! Infact Government should even encourage and pay for it.
 
Harrekin,
I see nothing wrong with suicide. It's your body. Abortion is different than drugs or suicide. If done properly, those actions only harm the one doing the act. I'm only against acts which harm a third party without consent.
 
Canna Sylvan said:
Harrekin,
I see nothing wrong with suicide. It's your body. Abortion is different than drugs or suicide. If done properly, those actions only harm the one doing the act. I'm only against acts which harm a third party without consent.
Click to expand...
Unless you've seen the damage a suicide leaves behind, you really shouldn't have an opinion...just IMO.
 
racerboy71 said:
idk, if a fetus can't survive outside of the mothers womb on it's own, it's kind of hard to call it a living thing imo.. anything like cannabineer said, third trimester or so is pretty bad as i believe you're killing something that could survive outside of the uterus ...

but yah, i think it's trying to control a women's body for sure... most people who don't want to carry to term usually have some pretty solid reasons for doing so, ie, they're young, don't have good jobs, etc, or plain old don't won't a kid right now.. have you ever tried growing up knowing that your parents didn't want you? it's no good to say the least..
people always bitch about people on welfare and programs like wic et al, but then they at the same time don't want to allow abortions.. idk, i don't get it..
Click to expand...

How many day old new born babies can "survive on their own" ?
 
Rob Roy said:
How many day old new born babies can "survive on their own" ?
Click to expand...

how many 2 year olds? 5 year olds? 18 year olds?

I'm with you Rob, I've never liked that argument. I'd still be hard-pressed to set an arbitrary date because of extenuating circumstances. What I wouldn't mind is a cut off date for the father. If after a certain gestational period (no idea what it should be though), the father must also sign off. Idk, maybe 20 weeks?

I respect Buck's position but there are 2 truths about women that are irrefutable. Some have a gold allergy that causes them to swell after application and some women get hormonally psychotic during pregnancy. Our society generally does not allow crazy people to make life altering decisions for others.
 
Rob Roy said:
Good question. However my point in the above post was that "survival on its own" may not be the best criteria for determining if something is alive or not.
Click to expand...

I am with you on that, just slow on the edit. It doesn't make sense to me to argue that 26 year olds need to be on their parents insurance because they can't take care of themselves at such a young tender age but it's cool to kill a fetus at X amount of weeks because they can't take care of themselves.
 
Jogro said:
So a 39 week old fetus (that has a beating heart, sleep/wake cycles, opens and shuts its eyes, sucks its thumb, yawns, kicks, grabs things, responds to voices, and would be a "baby" immediately ex utero) isn't "alive" then? OK. .
Click to expand...
"Alive" isn't the criterion! The ovum was alive, after all.
This is absurd.

All law is consensual morality. Otherwise, as you say, what's wrong with killing abortion doctors or gays? Abortion law reflects a democratic consensus of adult voters.

Next, abortion term restriction isn't "arbitrary"; in most jurisdictions the law is specifically set at a gestational age believed to reflect the minimum possible age a fetus could survive outside the womb. How the procedure is actually done is dependent on gestational age too, and the older the fetus the harder it is to do the procedure AND the more risky to the mother. (Yes, while generally safer than childbirth, abortion isn't risk-free, either).

Lastly, setting the max gestational age at 25 weeks in practice isn't really the limiting factor.
Click to expand...
This is incorrect. Conception occurs in week three, the way the convention has been established. The clock starts running over one million seconds before the male's, uhm, consultant gig. So at 25 weeks, month five of there actually being a conceptus has just been finished.
By that time the mother has had fully six months to come to terms with pregnancy and make a decision. That's not exactly a "rush" decision, depriving a woman of "control".

As a matter of practice, something like 90% of abortions are done before the end of 12 weeks, and only a little more than 1% after 20 weeks. In most cases, the really late term abortions are done when a serious defect comes to light, and those typically aren't detectable until after the end of the first trimester.
Click to expand...

I would modify your statement about consensual morality and say consensual moral sentiment. It seems like a fine distinction, but it admits (unlike your formulation) the possibility that that moral sentiment can be that of the majority and yet wrong. The laws in '30s Germany were definitely not consensual morality. They definitely were consensual moral sentiment ... raised and herded by skilled media cowhands. cn
 
UncleBuck said:
you make some really good points, but in the end i simply trust the woman to make the right decision.
Click to expand...

To this day, plenty of women commit infanticide, killing or abandoning their babies right after birth.

Is that the "right decision"?

And if it is not, why should we assume that elective abortion a week earlier iwould be "right" as well?



Again, the point is, even with legal "on demand" abortion, you have to draw the line SOMEWHERE. You appear to want to draw it right up until the moment of actual birth.

I suppose you could make an argument why that "should" be true (though you still haven't, just an assertion), but in practice

a. There is virtually nowhere on the planet where abortion at 39 weeks is legal, and
b. Even if it were legal, you're simply not going to find abortion providers willing to kill post 30 week "fetuses".

You can make a lot of lip service about "decisions" but abortion is still a surgical procedure, and the person undergoing it doesn't just get to dictate terms.
 
UncleBuck said:
we had a pretty clear choice. the one guy wanted to make abortion illegal and the other guy didn't.

here's to hoping the court tips in the next 4 years.
Click to expand...

not sure which election you are referring to. none of the presidential candidates wanted to abolish abortion laws as they currently stand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top