bernie14
Filter Manipulator
As a male, you are equally responsible for the death of the violinist
[RD] Abortion, once again
- Thread starter Angst
- Start date
Yes and there are more than one of those.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/1/8
(a)
In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the words “person”, “human being”, “child”, and “individual”, shall include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.
born alive”, with respect to a member of the species homo sapiens, means the complete expulsion or extraction from his or her mother of that member, at any stage of development, who after such expulsion or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been cut, and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean section, or induced abortion.
born alive” as defined in this section.
Should I have veto power over my wife's decisions about her body?
I'm going to have my say and then let the men of CFC argue about something they will never have to worry about experiencing.
There was a time when women were not considered legal persons in Canada. Decades later, I can remember watching a live newscast that reported that a French-Canadian woman, whose boyfriend had taken her to court to prevent her from having an abortion, had instead managed to slip across the border into the U.S. and have an abortion there.
The upshot was that abortion was decriminalized in Canada. That doesn't mean some regions made it easy. In spite of the Canada Health Act stating that all citizens are entitled to equal access to health care, it's a fact that there are many regions of this country where that simply doesn't happen, either because of funding or politics or some church group sticking their collective noses where they don't belong.
My own MLA (this riding's representative in the provincial Legislature) used to be the president of the Catholic school board in my city. During that time she saw nothing wrong with approving a "field trip" for a bunch of teenage students to be bused to an anti-abortion rally. Gotta teach them young, in how to harass, intimidate, and shame women and girls who are seeking legal reproductive health services.
This woman is now the Minister of Education. She's pushing a pro-right-wing Catholic draft curriculum on the province, including sex education that pushes abstention as birth control and the onus on girls to actively scream when assaulted rather than teaching both girls and boys about respect and consent and that "no" means NO (it's not uncommon for girls and women to freeze with fear or shock and be unable to utter a sound; there is no way in hell that this silent terror should be taken as consent).
As I've stated many times to people who insist that "pro-choice" means "advocating abortion", that's not what it means. Pro-choice is pro-CHOICE. As in the woman chooses to either terminate the pregnancy or continue it. It's funny how so many anti-choicers never acknowledge that a woman might want to keep the baby but is instead ordered to terminate it because the man doesn't want the responsibility of fatherhood or the obligation to pay child support, or the parents don't want the "shame" of a pregnant teenage daughter and threaten to kick her out on the street if she doesn't abort.
Finally, it's not so much funny as bitterly ironic that so many of the "my body, my choice" anti-vaxxers here (RL-here, not forum-here) are the same people who screech and rant that women should not have the right to terminate a pregnancy and "my body, my choice" is a choice they should not be allowed to have.
amadeus
Serenity now
I don’t have a uterus and don’t plan on having one.
I don’t have a medical degree and don’t plan on having that either.
My thoughts, well, I guess I don’t know or care enough to know. Seems rather difficult to have this conversation about future people when we’re doing at best a mediocre job of thinking about the people already around.
I don’t have a medical degree and don’t plan on having that either.
My thoughts, well, I guess I don’t know or care enough to know. Seems rather difficult to have this conversation about future people when we’re doing at best a mediocre job of thinking about the people already around.
I wonder what those who are against induced abortion think about the morality of acts likely to cause spontaneous abortion?
Technically, what most people refer to as abortion is "elective abortion", and what most people refer to as miscarriage is "spontaneous abortion".
The actual percentage of fertilised embryos that are aborted is unknown. The first attempt at quantifying it came up with over 70%, though recent studies indicate this may be a little lower, in the region 40 - 60%. It is undoubted that this increases significantly with age, such that when a women is in her thirties most conceptions will end in abortion, and by the late thirties the vast majority will end so. For example, one could say that Amy Coney Barrett has had more abortions than most women, having had 7 children in her thirties.
Therefore it would seem consistent to say that if elective abortion is murder, then trying for a baby later in life is negligent homicide, similar to drink driving or such. Would the anti-abortion advocates in this thread agree?
Technically, what most people refer to as abortion is "elective abortion", and what most people refer to as miscarriage is "spontaneous abortion".
The actual percentage of fertilised embryos that are aborted is unknown. The first attempt at quantifying it came up with over 70%, though recent studies indicate this may be a little lower, in the region 40 - 60%. It is undoubted that this increases significantly with age, such that when a women is in her thirties most conceptions will end in abortion, and by the late thirties the vast majority will end so. For example, one could say that Amy Coney Barrett has had more abortions than most women, having had 7 children in her thirties.
Therefore it would seem consistent to say that if elective abortion is murder, then trying for a baby later in life is negligent homicide, similar to drink driving or such. Would the anti-abortion advocates in this thread agree?
Farm Boy
run boy run
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2010
- Messages
- 26,663
Nope. But you've got me as far as drinking while pregnant being repugnant if you know what it does. Now that doesn't necessarily mean ban women from drinking if they may be pregnant, but it's still what it is. And that's still less repugnant than other things.
The drinking during pregnancy is a difficult one. On one hand, I think there is evidence that even the current recognition may be downplaying the magnitude of the harm done by fetal alcohol exposure, on the other I cannot imagine going through that without a drink.
Narz
keeping it real
Being raised an unwanted child is pretty **** for both the kid & the parents so yeah I'm pro-abortion. Let the state pay for the 1st one after that it shouldn't be covered.
Not everybody ascribes to the beliefs of specific Christian denominations with regards to when life starts. But sure, push it on others as though it's some kind of sacrosanct truth.
Angst
Rambling and inconsistent
on my way to practice, wanted to answer this shortly, will answer bernie later
I don't deny men suffer in the way you describe, but I think there's an abstraction in the language here between pervasive invasiveness of forced donorship (which happens to men but is much rarer than pregnancy) and general suffering. Differebt kinds of suffering feel different. Psychosis doesn't feel like Covid.
I don't deny men suffer in the way you describe, but I think there's an abstraction in the language here between pervasive invasiveness of forced donorship (which happens to men but is much rarer than pregnancy) and general suffering. Differebt kinds of suffering feel different. Psychosis doesn't feel like Covid.
I don't think it's relevant either but the potential of specialness in the potntial life is a point anti-abortionists often bring up. That's why it's adressed in the article.
Fippy
Mycro Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2013
- Messages
- 14,036
I am against abortion in "minor" cases, which are don't want responsibility (bit too late to think about that now).
Or family doesn't want a child from their "too young" daughter (just selfish thinking).
After all it's still and always will be terminating a life of which nobody knows if that child gets another one instead.
(everyone has their own theory about being reborn, or there being nothing etc.)
And i am pro abortion in cruel cases like crime (don't want to use *that* word here).
Or a child that would be disabled, in which case the woman should freely decide (huge responsibility).
Men should be allowed to intervene in minor cases as they are stated above.
"My body = only my choice" doesn't work there for me, it's their kid as well.
Or family doesn't want a child from their "too young" daughter (just selfish thinking).
After all it's still and always will be terminating a life of which nobody knows if that child gets another one instead.
(everyone has their own theory about being reborn, or there being nothing etc.)
And i am pro abortion in cruel cases like crime (don't want to use *that* word here).
Or a child that would be disabled, in which case the woman should freely decide (huge responsibility).
Men should be allowed to intervene in minor cases as they are stated above.
"My body = only my choice" doesn't work there for me, it's their kid as well.
Senethro
Overlord
Nah. Its not their kid until a kid exists.
With the caveat that most of my opinion (which doesn't matter much, except in arguments with pro-life people which don't matter much) on this topic focuses on personhood plus what's reasonably possible (and so doesn't focus as much on 'bodily autonomy', except for exceptions) ....
But I don't think the Violinist Argument says what people thinks it says. It's mostly about forced conception and self-defense arguments. Because of its limited scope, it's only approaching these main topics from different angles.
But I don't think the Violinist Argument says what people thinks it says. It's mostly about forced conception and self-defense arguments. Because of its limited scope, it's only approaching these main topics from different angles.
Fippy
Mycro Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2013
- Messages
- 14,036
Hair splitting..if a healthy baby is expected they would with high % lose their kid.
Senethro
Overlord
If a thing doesn't exist, it can't be stolen/damaged. The expectation of a kid is not a kid.
It also creates a problem. What if a spontaneous abortion happens, but the father doesn't believe that this is what occurred, and sues the mother anyway?
What you're asking for is not consistant with how we deal wiht other stuff, and creates a new problem as well.
Farm Boy
run boy run
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2010
- Messages
- 26,663
If something does not exist, no further action is needed or warranted.
But, if something exists that is preferred to die now, rather than die later, then action may be taken to kill it. Whatever the nature of the thing, dead now or dead later are the choices. Either choice is a boatload of active and intimate effort either way. Avoidance was upstream.
But, if something exists that is preferred to die now, rather than die later, then action may be taken to kill it. Whatever the nature of the thing, dead now or dead later are the choices. Either choice is a boatload of active and intimate effort either way. Avoidance was upstream.
Similar threads
