Why would anyone support the practice of abortion?

[IglooDame]

Why would the children of anti-abortionists be against abortions necessarily? I know it sounds silly, to think that a child who is alive by virtue of an anti-abortion agenda could be pro-abortion themselves, but it's at all possible. And vice versa, a child who had a brother or sister aborted (before that child was born) could themselves be anti-abortion.

The article covered it - yes it is certainly possible. As I recall they had figured out that roughly three-quarters of children followed their parents' ideology with regard to abortion one way or the other.

 

[The Last Conformist]

Why would the children of anti-abortionists be against abortions necessarily? I know it sounds silly, to think that a child who is alive by virtue of an anti-abortion agenda could be pro-abortion themselves, but it's at all possible. And vice versa, a child who had a brother or sister aborted (before that child was born) could themselves be anti-abortion.

In Sweden, at least, anti-abortion ranks have thinned since abortion was legalized.

 

[Stapel]

@Stapel: In Sweden, similar concerns were addressed by requiring that the woman take counseling before the abortion is carried out. The choice, however, remains hers and hers alone.

I guess it is about the same here. Probably not illegal, but no doctor will cooperate.

 

[yoshi74]

First of all, to yoshi74: you have no way of knowing that I am thinking or feeling, so does that mean that I am not a person? Likewise, you have no way of knowing if anyone other than yourself is thinking or feeling, so are you the only human being on the planet?

Actually i don't even know if you exist at all. Maybe you're an experiement of some ai-programmer, a mere posting-bot programmed to argue against abortion.
But knowing that ai is not so advanced yet to deliver arguments in such a quality i'am quite sure that a person with the nickname "Pasi Nurminen" wrote this posts .
When assuming you're a real person writing here, then you're posts are the evidence that you're thinking. And feeling as well, otherwise you would not post so passionately against something which you sense as evil.
The same goes for other. I surly cannot know that a person standing on the other side of the street is thinking or feeling unless he shows it. Eighter showing emotions, talking or doing a thing which require some thinking.
The fact that i saw a lot of people in my life who showed me signs that they actually think and feel allows me the assumption that humans generally have this abilities (through some people let me question this, but well...).
But i have never heared or seen something from a few weeks old fetus which convinced me about this. Nor do i ever heard of someone who seen or heard something as such from a fetus. So i assume out of experience that the fetus isn't capable of thinking and feeling.
As well as i assume that my apple isn't thinking or feeling bad because i'am gonna eat him now.

 

[Vilati Timmadar]

@The Last Conformist:

Mine is a "worst-case scenario" basing on Murphy's law:
"It always fails when there are consequences."

Of course, yours is the "average-case scenario".

 

[The Last Conformist]

They're not different scenarios. They are radically different interpretations of what "98% efficacy" means.

 

[downtown]

question. a few of you have responded to the remark that because a fetus is dependant on the mother for things like air and food it isnt human with the comment that that would make those connected to life support not human

correct me if Im wrong, but if the family says it ok, cant you unplug the machine in most cases?

 

[The Last Conformist]

In the States? No idea.

In Sweden, in cases where there is no realistic chance of recovery, yes.

 

[Vilati Timmadar]

In Germany - more or less.

You can deny any further treatment. Then the patient just gets pain killers and air - nothing more.


@Last Conformist:

On condoms it says: "98 % effectiv". That means: 2 % not effectiv.

Let's say, everytime the condom is not effective, the woman can get pregnant (worst-case) and has sex three times a week - then you get to my calculation.

Of course, that's not likely, but it's possible and therefor the worst-case scenario.

 

[Ben E Gas]

Ok I have on this forum that alot of people are pro-choice. I am going to ask them why do they support abortion.
People should not be able to have the freedom to kill. Abortion is legal and it is pure murder. Since the legalization act of it an estimated forty million abortions have occured in the U.S. I want to ask people why do they not object to 40 million dying? A huge of those babies if they were given the chanve to live would be average citizens.

I haven't the time right this moment to read all the other posts after this first original post so I will just offer my short opinion on the original topic for now. I am pro-choice. I beleive if a woman is raped and impregnated against her will she should have the right to abort. I think it should be regulated though so that she couldn't do it after a certain length into the pregnacy. It must be done right away. Also, if one of those sperm bank places gives someone the wrong sperm and impregnates a woman with the wrong sperm or egg, she should have a choice. But I don't know if it would be too hard to distinguish between whether a woman was raped or not. That may add more problems, so you'd have to treat the subject as if all pregnant women are equal and all get a choice. But the timeframe is a must. They can't be aborting fully developed babies. It's a touchy subject this pro-choice thing. I have my opinion but I'm open to all opinions and willing to listen to the other side.

 

[Stapel]

question. a few of you have responded to the remark that because a fetus is dependant on the mother for things like air and food it isnt human with the comment that that would make those connected to life support not human

correct me if Im wrong, but if the family says it ok, cant you unplug the machine in most cases?

Though I don't follow the logic of this, I'd say yes.
My mother has specifically ordered me to unplug the machine if her life is equal to a plant. Not that this is likely, but just in case.

Anyway: this is a completely different dicussion. Comaparing a machine to a mother seems somewhat difficult.

 

[The Last Conformist]

On condoms it says: "98 % effectiv". That means: 2 % not effectiv.

Let's say, everytime the condom is not effective, the woman can get pregnant (worst-case) and has sex three times a week - then you get to my calculation.

Unless you can provide me with a link saying the opposite, I'm gonna assume they refer to the usual definition of effectiveness wrt contraceptive, which means your calculation is wrong.

 

[Thadlerian]

Considering I myself will never in my life go through the pains and personal sacrifices of bearing forth a child, this isn't really my business to decide whether abortion should be legal or illegal.
It should be no man's business.

 

[downtown]

Though I don't follow the logic of this, I'd say yes.
My mother has specifically ordered me to unplug the machine if her life is equal to a plant. Not that this is likely, but just in case.

Anyway: this is a completely different dicussion. Comaparing a machine to a mother seems somewhat difficult.

the reason I ask is this. Some of the people who are pro-choice stated that because the fetus cannot function on its own accord, (its organs are totally dependant on another source, the mother), that it isnt totally human. A few anti-abortionists responded "well, what about people plugged into life support"?
if you can legally kill a man on life support...then I dont think that arugement holds water

 

[Vilati Timmadar]

@Last Conformist:

Could you explain your definition of that please - I don't get it.

 

[The Last Conformist]

I already did in post #80 - what isn't clear?

 

[luiz]

1) - Your feelings, your thoughts and your emotions are created/perceived because you have a brain.
- If you neither feel, emote nor think, you affect nothing, experience nothing, and, in fact ARE nothing.
- An embryo has no brain.
=> an embryo isn't a human person, and as such has no right, on the contrary of the mother, and as such abortion is not only acceptable, but moral.

OK, so you equate our humanity to having feelings and intelect. Following that logic, I could say that ******** people who have less feelings and intelect are "less human" then the rest of us. I´m sure you agree with me that that´s a terrible statement.

2) - Everyone has the most fundamental right of enjoying the integrity of his own body.
- You can't be asked to relinquish your integrity on your body, even at the expense of someone's life (you have the right to kill a rapist in self-defense ; you can't be forced to give up an organ to save the life of another one)
=> even if an embryo was a human person (which it isn't), it would not have the right to force you to host it, and you would still enjoy full freedom over what you do with your body. As such, abortion is acceptable.

Agreed, in principle.

BUT, a foetus, just like a baby, exists because of the parents. They have responsabilities.

According to your logic, a father should not be forced to work(use his body and mind) to feed a baby. Most people agree he should be forced to work, and that he has responsabilities towards his kid. Just like parents have responsabilities over a foetus.

Here, now let's the backward anti-abortionists use fallacies and insincerity trying to find counter-arguments that prove nothing. As usual.

Insulting doesn´t add anything to your argument.

 

[Vanadorn]

Tell you what zlij, when you are a woman or when you are with a woman and the subject of abortion vs. adoption comes up...you make that decision then. That's what being an adult is all about, making a decsion, a tough and intensely personal, the government, church, grand mullah, parent, and civic organization of the world have no right to butt their nose and attention into, type of decision.

I have stated it before, to others but under similar circumstances. You are young, my guess is under 15. As a youth, the idealistic and glorified truths of the world are easier to behold in black and white. There are no qualms about what to believe and what is right. The saying goes, "Wise words from the mouth of babes."

However, that axiom does not hold truth as the days and years grind down the rock of your haughty words and unrealistic and unrealizeable dreams. As maturity and the real world take hold of you and yours, you will find that the truths that you held as self evident...are not.

You are entitled to your opinion, it's one the great things about the western world, is that YOU are ENTITLED to them. Do not think to or dare to judge that you have the RIGHT to remove those same entitlements that you enjoy from another. A woman's womb is a woman's. What goes in there or on in there is her decision and hers to make.

As to the no sex before marriage, that's really nice on paper or on the TV shows from the 50's but in real life, that does not happen. If you or a select few you know have been able to do that, then great and bully for you. That is your CHOICE. Again, it's a CHOICE, a FREDDOM that you have made. Enjoy that freedom and do not think to impose or remove it from others. Free thought and free will is the only rights that people can make, and these rights become more precious and defendable as we get older.

I wonder what your views will be on this subject in 10 years? I hope that you have the forethought and wisodm by then to have accounted for the growth and maturity that will affect you and those around you by that time.

Best of luck to all on both sides of this debate.

My 2 cents

 

[luiz]

40 Million Kids not wanted.
Maybe kids from kids (people less than 18 years, maybe ~13).
Kids from people who could not afford a kid.
Kids from people who don't a kid at all and don't wan't to raise a kid.

So?

There is a low chance that a lot of these kids would be valuable for a society. Most of them would raise as problem-kids and will grow into problem-people.

Valuable to society?
Only those valuable to society have the right to live?!
What are you, some sort of stalinist?

There are enough people on this world. We don't need numbers for every price. To many kids where risen by people who don't really care about their childs. Often these kids will cause problems later. Many more of these kind will not serve well any society.

Blah blah blah.
Earth can easily support 10 times our current population.
Just because someone *might* end up a criminal is no reason to deny him the right of life. Many people born in poverty end-up well.
[/QUOTE]

 

[The Last Conformist]

Earth can easily support 10 times our current population.

Any sources for that? I could come up with ones saying the the sustainable human population is a tenth of the present ...