Choose life

[KmDubya]

Calling them "Abortion supporters" exposes you as someone who is not really interested in an honest discussion here.

What term would you prefer?


If one side is against abortion the other side is for abortion. Not sure what else you could call it.

Not much of a chance at a discussion with regards to abortion as there is not a grey area, no middle ground. One side views abortion as murder and the other side does not. What would the middle ground be? Instead of killing the child you just wound it?

 

[JollyRoger]

You CHOOSE not to abort.

 

[timtofly]

One can choose life or choose ......

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Yeah I love abortion. I think more people should have them.

Go Team Abortion!

 

[Antilogic]

What term would you prefer?


If one side is against abortion the other side is for abortion. Not sure what else you could call it.

Not much of a chance at a discussion with regards to abortion as there is not a grey area, no middle ground. One side views abortion as murder and the other side does not. What would the middle ground be? Instead of killing the child you just wound it?

One can choose life or choose ......

People who are pro-life may be anti-abortion, but people who are pro-choice are not necessarily anti-life.

 

[KmDubya]

People who are pro-life may be anti-abortion, but people who are pro-choice are not necessarily anti-life.

I might be wrong here but I am pretty sure that if you are pro-life you are against abortion pretty much by definition.

People who support abortion call it pro-choice as pro-abortion sounds bad while pro-choice sounds like a good thing.

If you are pro-abortion, or pro-choice if that makes you squeamish, then that pretty much means that you support ending the life of unborn children at the discretion of the mother. Not sure what other definition one could have in the matter.

 

[Zelig]

I might be wrong here but I am pretty sure that if you are pro-life you are against abortion pretty much by definition.

People who support abortion call it pro-choice as pro-abortion sounds bad while pro-choice sounds like a good thing.

If you are pro-abortion, or pro-choice if that makes you squeamish, then that pretty much means that you support ending the life of unborn children at the discretion of the mother. Not sure what other definition one could have in the matter.

I might be wrong here but I am pretty sure that if you are pro-choice you are for freedom pretty much by definition.

People who don't support abortion call it pro-life as anti-choice sounds bad while pro-life sounds like a good thing.

If you are anti-choice, or pro-life if that makes you squeamish, then that pretty much means that you support forcing women to have children at the discretion of the government. Not sure what other definition one could have in the matter.

 

[Cutlass]

People who are pro-life may be anti-abortion, but people who are pro-choice are not necessarily anti-life.

I might be wrong here but I am pretty sure that if you are pro-life you are against abortion pretty much by definition.

People who support abortion call it pro-choice as pro-abortion sounds bad while pro-choice sounds like a good thing.

If you are pro-abortion, or pro-choice if that makes you squeamish, then that pretty much means that you support ending the life of unborn children at the discretion of the mother. Not sure what other definition one could have in the matter.

But being anti-abortion does not mean that a person is pro-life. It's not actually an accident that the most anti-abortion parts of the US are also the parts of the country that have the highest infant mortality.

https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41378.pdf

And the lowest life expectancy.

So anti-abortion people generally are not 'pro-life'. They are simply anti-choice.

 

[Tahuti]

But being anti-abortion does not mean that a person is pro-life. It's not actually an accident that the most anti-abortion parts of the US are also the parts of the country that have the highest infant mortality.

Makes sense actually: If a high infant mortality is combined with liberal abortion laws, it will severely cut short population growth. Conversely, having a low infant mortality affords states to have liberal abortion laws, if population growth is important for them.

 

[Farm Boy]

But being anti-abortion does not mean that a person is pro-life. It's not actually an accident that the most anti-abortion parts of the US are also the parts of the country that have the highest infant mortality.

While I'm more than happy to consider this means what you think it means, have you also considered the possibility that areas more generally hostile to the idea of abortion may be less inclined to kill pregnancies that develop defects? The sort where the infant has a chance of living 40 -70 good years, or a chance of being dead shortly after birth?

Or far more likely, you're just linking in the fact that poverty rates impact both lifespan and infant mortality while being clever enough to attempt to correlate abortion restrictions with poverty and poor education without actually biting the bullet and making your argument directly, that you associate abortion restrictions with uneducated idiots and poor people. You know, the underclasses.

 

[ParkCungHee]

Since the Pro-Choice movement seems to abhor the association with abortion, why do they seem to get so hung up on people who disapprove of abortion in particular?

 

[El_Machinae]

What term would you prefer?


If one side is against abortion the other side is for abortion. Not sure what else you could call it.

Not much of a chance at a discussion with regards to abortion as there is not a grey area, no middle ground. One side views abortion as murder and the other side does not. What would the middle ground be? Instead of killing the child you just wound it?

I think the word "pro-choice" is just more accurate. The logic seems to be "the issue is too complicated, and needs to take place at the personal level" more than anything else.

 

[Light Cleric]

Since the Pro-Choice movement seems to abhor the association with abortion, why do they seem to get so hung up on people who disapprove of abortion in particular?

It does get frustrating when people try to lump it in with other things, as though mammograms and abortion are equally uncontroversial, to avoid saying the word and having an honest discussion.

Or those lawmakers that try equate Viagra and contraception, which is actually worse than the people who try and be cute by proposing "knife control" legislation to make a point about gun control right after a crisis. P.S. I wanted to make a boner joke here but I had trouble getting one.

Whatever someone's opinion may be, I'd like to actually be able to discuss it rather than having to deal with this absurdity.

I think the word "pro-choice" is just more accurate. The logic seems to be "the issue is too complicated, and needs to take place at the personal level" more than anything else.

Frankly I think the words really are too simplistic for the argument, given that there's plenty of variance within both "pro-life"(rape, incest, etc.) and "pro-choice"(late-term abortions in particular) groups as to what should and shouldn't be permissible. "Pro-abortion" doesn't tell the whole story and feels about as genuine as calling Second Amendment people "pro-gun-death".

While I'm more than happy to consider this means what you think it means, have you also considered the possibility that areas more generally hostile to the idea of abortion may be less inclined to kill pregnancies that develop defects? The sort where the infant has a chance of living 40 -70 good years, or a chance of being dead shortly after birth?

Or far more likely, you're just linking in the fact that poverty rates impact both lifespan and infant mortality while being clever enough to attempt to correlate abortion restrictions with poverty and poor education without actually biting the bullet and making your argument directly, that you associate abortion restrictions with uneducated idiots and poor people. You know, the underclasses.

That's kinda what it seems to me, too. If the children that might die as infants are aborted and don't make it into those statistics, then yeah, the statistics are going to be skewed.

And lol @ the life expectancy argument. That is forcing coorelation and causation so hard it actually does roll over into being kinda funny. I would think that there's a million other reasons for the lower life expectancy like higher obesity rates in those areas.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Since the Pro-Choice movement seems to abhor the association with abortion, why do they seem to get so hung up on people who disapprove of abortion in particular?

If you state your question thuslywise:

Since the Pro-Choice movement seems to abhor the association with abortion, why do they seem to get so hung up on people who call them murderers?

it could answer your question. Case in point is our current layman psychiatrist who seems to have me all figured out.

The issue I have with the term: pro-abortion is that it suggest it's the go-to method I'd pick for anyone being pregnant unwanted. While pro-choice is more accurate, since I support the woman to have a choice in the matter. I'd always hope she'd figure a way to have the baby.

I feel while there should be good reasons to not have the baby, there should also be good reason to have one. I was always amazed when people asked me: "Why don't you have kids?" For me that's the wrong question. It's not some kind of default state which we have to go through because we be breeding species. You also need good reasons to have a baby.

So if a woman does not have good reasons to have a baby, and does have good reasons to not have one, I can understand why she would unfortunately chose to have an abortion.

 

[Farm Boy]

I think the word "pro-choice" is just more accurate. The logic seems to be "the issue is too complicated, and needs to take place at the personal level" more than anything else.

Eh, it's a cop out. You have to find a positive to be "pro" for, especially when you are advocating a policy that allows for destruction of our young. Maybe it is complicated, but it really doesn't seem it. Killing your young is a pretty suck action regardless of how you view the ethics surrounding "developing human brains are x at week y." It's particularly suck when the reason that there is a developing human to kill because of the intentional actions of two people to put it where it is. It's triply suck that all the financial arguments the people on this forum like to trot out are totally bunk in the developed western world given the massive availability of prospective adoptive parents willing to cover the costs of prenatal care, hospitalization, and often enough limited living expenses(an outcome of the western focus on women developing careers before having children, take that how you will(I'm neutral), but the plumbing just doesn't work as well at 37 as it did at 18, generally).

So the majority of abortions in this country, near as I can tell, are done in situations where there are two parties at fault for putting a developing human somewhere neither of them want it to be, the financial arguments are either a product of ignorance or lies. So they're done out of fear, or shame, or ignorance, or maybe sometimes even convenience, though I shy away from that term. So given how absolutely godawful is the morality of deciding to get your sexual kicks and just kill any resulting humans early enough to give you a "pass" on the ethics of the thing, why must it remain legal? Because it must. Because there are situations where it's even worse if abortion is illegal. The rights and place of women in this society is degraded at its base if you do not allow raped women to abort. If you do not allow women to abort when carrying a fetus may gravely harm or kill them. But how on earth would you test this. Put every woman that claims they were drunk and taken advantage of through a trial when seeking an abortion? You can't really. A psychological exam to prove that the pregnancy is really harmful for them? You can't really. At a certain point you just have to take her word on it, and if it's early enough you don't even need to ask. But recognizing that this is the least crappy path to take doesn't mean it isn't still a damned crappy path to take. Even if you want to somehow twist the availability of adoptive parents into so sort of failing at the foster system. Nobody has claimed that prospective adopters are saints, so I don't know why the argument that "they could be better" is any sort of relevant argument. Pregnant women could have "been better" and not had sex too, but that standard makes about as much sense here. Maybe even a little bit more.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Lord save me from psyquackery.

 

[Farm Boy]

Not following Ziggy.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Never mind.

I feel guilty because animals are bred and killed so I can have meat on my plate. I believe slaughtering those animals who are more sentient than a 3 week old embryo is the bigger attrocity.

And I still eat meat. Which makes me a hypocrit and a baby murder enthousiast. I feel my hypocrisy is my bigger vice.

 

[Farm Boy]

Then quit eating meat if it dirties your soul!

You really don't have to vomit out "baby murder enthusiast" with me, at least. Disregarding arguments with TF regarding the morality of disregarding tomorrow and the default action of people actually being lying down and starving to death.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

But I like meat. I have cut down significantly though.

And for someone who phrases it: destruction of our young to argue cop-out, it should not be that big a stretch. Then we're arguing which bole is the most hyper.