Pro-choice? Where do you draw the line?

[Jezebel]

Wow I'm late to the party.

If a woman is 8 months pregnant, she should be able to walk into a Planned Parenthood and have her baby killed?

I wouldn't have an abortion at 8 months(unless raped), but if a woman wants to that's her decision and I don't care either way...

I would wager though, that most pro choice activists would argue that at 8 months an abortion would be unnecessary since the fetus could be delivered alive.

What if it just wasn't convenient to be pregnant? Would you have an abortion then and likewise be unapologetic about it?

If the the father was older/capable and willing to support me and the child than no I wouldn't have an abortion. Otherwise yes, and be unapologetic about it because it's noone else's business.

I'd like to think I'm responsible enough to not end up in that situation in the first place.

An abortion is a deliberate termination of a human pregnancy. Not all abortions are legal.

True, though I think they should be.

And the fetuses body and life be damned?

I don't believe a woman is obligated to share her body with the fetus.

Irrelevant. If criminalizing speeding did nothing to prevent speeding, should speeding be legal?

Choose any such example that suits you.

Depends on why you feel it's irrelevant. I don't understand why anti abortion acivists fight so hard to make abortion illegal when that's one of the least effective ways to lower the abortion rate. It just makes abortion more dangerous for women that choose to have them. I feel like many(not all) pro lifers are more concerned with punishing women that have abortions than they are actually getting rid of abortion. It would make more sense to me to get rid of the need and eliminate the abortion debate for good.

Do you think women that have abortions should be prosecuted for murder and face life sentences/death penalty?

If a woman doesn't use protection and gets one abortion after another, is there nothing wrong or destructive about this behavior? :think:

Nothing wrong with it. I suppose it would be destructive in that multiple abortions would be dangerous, but otherwise no.

 

[WizardofOz]

Wow I'm late to the party.

Welcome back :e4e:

I wouldn't have an abortion at 8 months (unless raped),

Why not?

I would wager though, that most pro choice activists would argue that at 8 months an abortion would be unnecessary since the fetus could be delivered alive.

A fetus could be delivered alive at 21 weeks and 5 days. Should we then outlaw all abortion after 22 weeks? If not, the above standard is a red herring.

What if it just wasn't convenient to be pregnant? Would you have an abortion then and likewise be unapologetic about it?

If the the father was older/capable and willing to support me and the child than no I wouldn't have an abortion. Otherwise yes, and be unapologetic about it because it's noone else's business.

If the father happens to be younger/incapable isn't it yet still his business?

Depends on why you feel it's irrelevant. I don't understand why anti abortion acivists fight so hard to make abortion illegal when that's one of the least effective ways to lower the abortion rate.

Because they feel abortion is immoral. :idunno:

It just makes abortion more dangerous for women that choose to have them.

Breaking the law often has consequences.

I feel like many(not all) pro lifers are more concerned with punishing women that have abortions than they are actually getting rid of abortion.

I would like to see the person performing the abortion(s) be punished.

It would make more sense to me to get rid of the need and eliminate the abortion debate for good.

How do we get rid of the need?

Nothing wrong with it. I suppose it would be destructive in that multiple abortions would be dangerous, but otherwise no.

Every abortion is dangerous and destructive.

 

[Jezebel]

Welcome back :e4e:

Okay I'm sorry I keep doing this. I swear this time I'll try to respond more often. I just get caught up in work and school and forget about this site. No more I promise. :angel:

Why not?

The thought of aborting my fetus at 8 months would personally make me uncomfortable not to mention late term abortions are very risky.

A fetus could be delivered alive at 21 weeks and 5 days. Should we then outlaw all abortion after 22 weeks? If not, the above standard is a red herring.

I didn't say anything about outlawing. I said most pro choicers would probably argue that it would be unnecessary.

If the father happens to be younger/incapable isn't it yet still his business?

When I said "no one's business" I meant the general public, but no it isn't his business because
1.He probably won't be stuck caring for it. I will.
2. He won't have to risk his health/damage his body to carry a pregnancy to term. I will.

But again, I'm on birth control/never have unprotected sex. So it's 99.9% likely that this will never be an issue.

Because they feel abortion is immoral. :idunno:

But I'd be more concerned about stopping vs punishing people for it.

The thing I don't understand is see abortion as this awful tragic thing, but then focus all of their attention of one of the most ineffective ways of stopping this "tragedy". That's what makes some people feel like it's more motivated by judgements on sex/women/ideology than abortion itself.

I personally think the reason most people fight so hard to make it illegal is because they haven't actually sat down and weighed the pro's/cons of it. I don't mean you specifically, just in general.

Breaking the law often has consequences.

Well at least you admit you're okay with that part of the deal. A lot of pro lifers I've encountered ignore it altogether.

I would like to see the person performing the abortion(s) be punished.

Why not the woman/girl? What if the woman/girl self aborted?

How do we get rid of the need?

This is a big question and I'll answer it in a post of its own after school.

Every abortion is dangerous and destructive.

Are we talking about for women? Because having an early term abortion is 3x safer than carrying to term and giving birth.

 

[WizardofOz]

Okay I'm sorry I keep doing this. I swear this time I'll try to respond more often. I just get caught up in work and school and forget about this site. No more I promise. :angel:

No problem :e4e:

I wouldn't have an abortion at 8 months (unless raped)

Why not?

The thought of aborting my fetus at 8 months would personally make me uncomfortable not to mention late term abortions are very risky.

But you would have one at 8 months if the pregnancy was a result of rape. What about at 7 months....6....5? Where do you become uncomfortable?

Also, I had to review how this line of discussion began. Please address the original question: If a woman is 8 months pregnant, she should be able to walk into a Planned Parenthood and have her baby killed?

I am not necessarily speaking about you specifically but the law in general. You also said:

I would wager though, that most pro choice activists would argue that at 8 months an abortion would be unnecessary since the fetus could be delivered alive.

What if she doesn't want to keep the baby alive? Should it be up to her if the fetus lives or dies at 8 months?

A fetus could be delivered alive at 21 weeks and 5 days. Should we then outlaw all abortion after 22 weeks? If not, the above standard is a red herring.

I didn't say anything about outlawing. I said most pro choicers would probably argue that it would be unnecessary.

I am talking about the law. I am not asking about most pro-choicers as their opinions will likely be all over the place.

But I'd be more concerned about stopping vs punishing people for it.

The thing I don't understand is see abortion as this awful tragic thing, but then focus all of their attention of one of the most ineffective ways of stopping this "tragedy". That's what makes some people feel like it's more motivated by judgements on sex/women/ideology than abortion itself.

I don't see it that way. Those opposed to abortion feel strongly that it is immoral and a travesty akin to murder. They want it to be against the law because they feel strongly about how wrong it is. It isn't about judging sex or women, it is about saving innocent lives.

I would like to see the person performing the abortion(s) be punished.

Why not the woman/girl? What if the woman/girl self aborted?

Well, then she was the one performing the abortion and my answer would then apply to her.

 

[Rusha]

Are we talking about for women? Because having an early term abortion is 3x safer than carrying to term and giving birth.

Only for the mother and father ... NEVER for the unborn baby. Who, BTW, was conceived by no fault of their own.

 

[IMJerusha]

Only for the mother and father ... NEVER for the unborn baby. Who, BTW, was conceived by no fault of their own.

:up: Conceived through no fault at all! I believe every child has a purpose prior to conception. Abortion spits in God's face regarding His purposes.

 

[PureX]

Conceived through no fault at all! I believe every child has a purpose prior to conception. Abortion spits in God's face regarding His purposes.

But do you have the right to impose your belief on another person, regarding what's going on inside their body?

 

[Rusha]

:up: Conceived through no fault at all! I believe every child has a purpose prior to conception. Abortion spits in God's face regarding His purposes.

Exactly. Even though some pregnancies are not planned, ALL unborn babies are a blessing.

 

[Rusha]

But do you have the right to impose your belief on another person, regarding what's going on inside their body?

Yes ... in the same way we have a right to impose our view against the killing of all other human beings.

The location and whether or not the unborn baby is wanted does not determine his/her value and right to life.

 

[IMJerusha]

Are we talking about for women? Because having an early term abortion is 3x safer than carrying to term and giving birth.

That is not true. I survived having a child despite my high risk status. Part of my high risk status was caused by the abortion I'd had. A clamp is used to hold the uterus. It bites into the cervix and scars it. The scars can then become the focal point of erosion which can become dysplasia and ultimately cervical cancer. Does this happen to every woman? The scars do. What happens after the scars depends on a lot of things, such as whether one uses oral contraception or in utero contraception, the frequency with which one participates in sex and other things it's not necessary to mention here. The scars weaken the cervix creating a potential threat to a woman's ability to carry an infant to full term. Cervical conizations necessary for the eradication of chronic erosion, dysplasia and cervical cancer weakens the cervix even further creating the need for a woman to have her uterus stitched closed to accommodate the increasing weight of the infant in utero. Additionally, studies have shown that women who have abortions are more likely to develop breast cancer and breast anomalies. There's no incidence of breast cancer, or any cancer for that matter, in our family yet my sister, who had an abortion, developed breast cancer. Women who believe that early term abortion is safer than carrying to term or safe at all are just plain ignorant of the facts.

 

[WizardofOz]

But do you have the right to impose your belief on another person, regarding what's going on inside their body?

Unless you feel all abortion should be legal up until 9 months, your argument is a red herring. Most pro-choicers feel society has a right to impose on another person regarding what's going on inside her body after arbitrary week X.

 

[IMJerusha]

Exactly. Even though some pregnancies are not planned, ALL unborn babies are a blessing.

Well they would be a blessing if pregnancy centers and clinics would encourage adoption for women with unwanted pregnancies but that avenue isn't encouraged and counselors are more often than not, forbidden to even bring the option up. The hypocrisy employed is disgusting.

 

[PureX]

Yes ... in the same way we have a right to impose our view against the killing of all other human beings.

But to characterize a fetus as a "human being" is also not something everyone agrees on. So the same question of imposing your beliefs on others applies to that belief as well.

The reason I asked the question is because no one ever thought abortion was a good thing. No one ever thought it was the "right thing" to do. The question was never about that. The question was always about allowing people to decide for themselves what is the necessary thing in a difficult situation, or denying them that choice and imposing our beliefs, opinions, and choices on other people.

 

[PureX]

Unless you feel all abortion should be legal up until 9 months, your argument is a red herring. Most pro-choicers feel society has a right to impose on another person regarding what's going on inside her body after arbitrary week X.

At some stage in the development of the fetus, it becomes a "humans being". And we don't know when that is, exactly. But we needed a determination, anyway. So we made one.

You may not like it, and you can argue that it's irrational or imperfect. But you can't offer a better, more rational, more perfect determination that everyone can agree to. And so for now, this one stands.

And the question to you, remains, why do you think you should be allowed to impose your beliefs and opinions about it on others?

 

[IMJerusha]

But to characterize a fetus as a "human being" is also not something everyone agrees on.

Any believer who questions whether a fetus is a human being is someone who is doubting God and His Word. Suddenly the believer has an enormous problem in that they're not really believing.

 

[PureX]

Any believer who questions whether a fetus is a human being is someone who is doubting God and His Word. Suddenly the believer has an enormous problem in that they're not really believing.

This doesn't explain why "believers" get to impose their beliefs on everyone else.

 

[WizardofOz]

And the question to you, remains, why do you think you should be allowed to impose your beliefs and opinions about it on others?

We both think we should be allowed to impose our beliefs and opinions on others. Otherwise, you would be OK with a woman who is 9 months pregnant having an abortion.

Why do you think you should be allowed to impose your beliefs and opinions about it on others?

 

[PureX]

We both think we should be allowed to impose our beliefs and opinions on others. Otherwise, you would be OK with a woman who is 9 months pregnant having an abortion.

I am against abortion. But I am also not God, nor the Supreme Court. So I don't get to decide for other people what they should believe, or what they can and can't do.

You aren't God or the Supreme Court, either. So why do you think you should be allowed to impose your beliefs and opinions about it on others?

 

[xAvarice]

"For any reason, but only up to a certain period during pregnancy"

Unless there are other circumstances... like the women kept in basements if they escape and they're 30 weeks into a pregnancy then I'd let them abort.

And any time if it's going to likely kill the mother or really damage her health.

I don't call myself pro-choice, what a weak thing to do. I'm pro-abortion and if people don't have the common-sense to figure out that means I support a woman to choose they're not worth bothering with.

It's going to be difficult to be pro-choice when they're only going to have ONE choice if the republicans get through with it.

 

[xAvarice]

"What occurs naturally is not subject to morality."

:freak: