an abortion thread with no personal attacks

[El_Machinae]

It doesn't end. It's decided case-by-case. We're not talking about a small portion of society here. A major portion of the voting citizenry feels visceral and moral disgust at the idea of abortion, it's very close to 50%. Your two examples are good, but they're just not the same level of the societal-level debate.

I'm not saying pro-lifers should be allowed to opt-out, because that's too confusing. What I'm saying is that the 'elective' abortions can be treated separately than the medically necessary ones. I'm also not suggesting that it be performed solely out of the woman's pocket: I would greatly recommend that pro-choicers not only fight to keep abortions legal, but use their money to provide charity funding.

What I am acknowledging is that the debate around abortion is very powerfully felt, and I can sympathise with the sense of horror that pro-lifers feel, even though I think they are in error.

 

[Formaldehyde]

People can easily opt out of elective abortion by simply not using that provision of their insurance policies. But I don't understand why that particular medical procedure is being singled out merely because many consider it to be objectionable. I think it is far more objectionable to spend billions of dollars giving terminal cancer patients a few more months of life. But I don't seem to have the right to force that opinion on everybody else, even if a tiny majority happened to agree with me.

 

[Ondskan]

Ah the jolly good moderators here. If they only knew what good trolling is. Most of my remarks just contain a provocative thought. Good trolling rarely gets infractioned. It flies under the radar not at it.

Seems they didn't approve of my riddled question if it's alright to insult the unborn babies of abortion supporters as they are not considered people.

I thought it was quite a good point.
You see most people get insulted if you insult some part of their being, their body or their thoughts. But at least one person wouldn't mind having their unborn off-spring insulted.

To me this speaks of a degeneration of morals and the willful ignorance of the issue at hand.
It is one part of you! And it is not to be taken lightly.

But look. This whole debate just like the ridicilous "I still believe in Global Warming" debate needs to stop. To begin I think that religious fundamentalism is more of a hindrance for the "abortion critics" than something to lean back on.

It clouds the issue really at hand. And the issue is simply put it the lack of care. More and more people care about less and less. In one way there is an alertness to political issues that is growing but it is overshadowed by the general apathy we feel towards each other more and more.

We seek refuge in indulgence and this is not a sign of a healthy civilization. From crazy drinking, to unprotected sex to the simple philosophical statement "I am perfect as I am".

We have gone from the religious, metaphysical and even secular ideal that we all should aspire for greatness and perfection to that every degenerate act is alright.

Look. **** happens. You do get drunk, you with the wrong guy, you get pregnant and it's something you really really don't want. Fine, do an abortion.

But don't act as if it doesn't matter. It does matter. It is costing you or the society money and it is a part of you that you are simply discarding over 15 minutes of short, temporary and now forgotten pleasure.



To those that completely oppose abortion: Thou must be out of your minds.
Sincerely. There are cases where the woman has been raped, where the parent isn't simply ready to handle the baby. Do you propose a life under the harsh and unfriendly hand of the state and the life of crime that probably follows?

This life is not to be valued on the level of a fully grown human beings life nora childs.
It can't be. And there are many, many, grown people dying out there. Suffering out there.
Homeless people, soldiers, addicts, hungry children that don't die painlessly and without memories but in horrid pain with blown out stomaches.

We have journalists who have commited suicide after taking pictures of them because YOU WOULDN'T care enough. But you have enough time to babble about such issues about abortion on and on to the point where they become crucial issues in a presidential race?

Have you no shame?

 

[LucyDuke]

Seems they didn't approve of my riddled question if it's alright to insult the unborn babies of abortion supporters as they are not considered people.

I thought it was quite a good point.
You see most people get insulted if you insult some part of their being, their body or their thoughts. But at least one person wouldn't mind having their unborn off-spring insulted.

Such disrespect is tiring. Supporting access to safe abortion for those that seek it does not rob one of the ability to value what is becoming one's child. The key is whether and when the pregnancy is embraced.

 

[Traitorfish]

a degeneration of morals

Just so everybody knows, this is code for "I don't actually have an argument, so just go ahead and ignore everything I say".

 

[Farm Boy]

Would you like a golf clap for the well dressed one line putdown?

 

[Traitorfish]

My morals are far too degenerated for golf.

 

[El_Machinae]

Such disrespect is tiring. Supporting access to safe abortion for those that seek it does not rob one of the ability to value what is becoming one's child. The key is whether and when the pregnancy is embraced.

You know, if I am trying to make something that I want, I don't know if it's appropriate to insult it anyway. Insulting my unborn is at least as odious as insulting a work of art that I'm strived to create.

 

[Traitorfish]

We'd see it as unpleasant to insult somebodies art because we regard it as an expression of and therefore an extension of their own person. If we regard a foetus in similar terms, then a foetus is nothing more than an elaborately-sculpted deformity, and the entire pro-life position falls to pieces. So that doesn't seem like a line of argument they should be interested in pursuing.

 

[Farm Boy]

Heheh, pregnancy as deformity. You are so going to get your face rearranged by a beautiful, hormonal, pregnant woman someday.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Such disrespect is tiring. Supporting access to safe abortion for those that seek it does not rob one of the ability to value what is becoming one's child. The key is whether and when the pregnancy is embraced.

Exactly. I'm still waiting for that line to form at all abortion clinics of ready and willing embryo and fetus transplant recipients who are willing to pay all the costs until adulthood.

My morals are far too degenerated for golf.

It's not too late to change. Just look at Tiger Woods.

 

[Farm Boy]

Exactly. I'm still waiting for that line to form at all abortion clinics of ready and willing embryo and fetus transplant recipients who are willing to pay all the costs until adulthood.

That line is with adoption agencies, financial costs more than included. Embryo transplant as yet does not work functionally and reliably and is exacerbated commonly by infertility stemming from the inability to carry, rather than conceive, a child.

Sounds like you shouldn't have been waiting after all.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Once the technology does exist, I certainly expect all the pro-life women who think abortion is murder, are still fertile, and are not pregnant to line up at the abortion clinics to rescue embryos and fetuses while personally taking on financial responsibility until they are at least 18.

 

[Farm Boy]

Well, let's hope. There are more people out there willing to "take on financial responsibility" i.e. parent, than you seem to think. They're already working with the tools they have now. Why wait?

 

[Formaldehyde]

No problem. All they have to do is have the embryo transferred to their own body. I'm sure there are a number of women who are planning to have abortions who wouldn't object in the least. Over 47,000 successful transfers have already occurred with infertile women in the US alone.

 

[Farm Boy]

That's cool. Now to get insurance to cover it so it's feasible.

 

[caketastydelish]

I hate to bump an old thread, but seeing this has gone on for almost 20 pages and I started the thread, I suppose you all are entitled to know my opinion on the matter.

When it comes to the issue of abortion, I would consider myself to be "middle ground". I'm not firmly Pro-life, but I'm not firmly Pro-choice either. It depends on the particular situation. Current American President Barrack Obama has about the same views on abortion as I do.

I believe if a woman was raped, or the pregnancy was under-age, or there will be significant health problems for the baby or the mother, abortion should be legal. In fact, the state should pay for it.

Otherwise, I don't support it. HOWEVER

In these cases where I don't support it, I think the government is not doing their proper job. That is, if you're not going to give a woman the option to abort, then you should cover all of her expenses for raising her baby. Anything she can't get on her own, the state should pay for. Frankly, I think the state (at least the american government) hasn't been doing an adequate job of this thus far. Yes it would be expensive, and yes taxes will have to be raised. But you see, if you're not going to allow a woman to abort, then the child brought into this world should have all of their needs met.

So what does this mean the mother would get? It would include, but is not limited to:

1. Tax exemptions

2. Enough money from the government every month to adequately pay for food, clothing, and anything else the baby would need.

3. Supposing they knows who the father is, the father should have to pay his fair share. And by fair share, I don't mean current child support standards, which are not near enough.

4. Once the child graduates from high school, the government should help pay for the child's college, supposing the child wants to go.

 

[timtofly]

Why should the state carry that burden?

I am going to sound harsh here. Maybe the state should just put rapist out of their misery and then there would be no burden to any one. No one would be raped. There would be no waste of taxpayers money. No one would have to suffer psycholgical damage.

It seems that if the government paid every ones way, the entitlement to have fun would just increase, because the state would pay for everything.

 

[caketastydelish]

Why should the state carry that burden?

I am going to sound harsh here. Maybe the state should just put rapist out of their misery and then there would be no burden to any one. No one would be raped. There would be no waste of taxpayers money. No one would have to suffer psycholgical damage.

I support the death penalty for rapist. Fine with me.

It seems that if the government paid every ones way, the entitlement to have fun would just increase, because the state would pay for everything.

No. Forget a child. Let's use a CAT for an example. Let's say the government started a program to "help animals in need of a home" by paying every single expense one would need to take care of pets.

So I could get a cat from the shelter, and I'd get checks from the government each month to pay for the cats food, vet bills, etc. I still wouldn't do it. And for the record, I like cats.

Know why? Because even if expenses are paid, I'd still have to take care of the cat. Sure the money is covered, but I'd still have to feed it, change the litter box, actually take it to the vet, etc. And this is a cat we're talking about. It would be much harder to take care of a baby than it would a cat.

So you see, even if all expenses are paid, a lot of work would be required on the mothers part. I don't see the government simply paying for all of a child's expenses is a "entitlement to have fun".

 

[Traitorfish]

I believe if a woman was raped, or the pregnancy was under-age, or there will be significant health problems for the baby or the mother, abortion should be legal. In fact, the state should pay for it.

Otherwise, I don't support it.

"I'm against it until it makes me look like a dick."