Pro-life

[RoBi3.0]

I would never in a million years talk my wife into an abortion


That being said I am Pro-choice, because what other people do in regards to abortion is none of my business.

This next part is going to sound cold and you can hate me for it if you choose, but the world isn't exactly hurting for new people at the moment especially ones that may or my not be wanted by someone eventually. I just don't see the destruction of a fetus as a lose of life. It is the loose of potential life, I will give you that, but that isn't exactly equal to murder in my book.


That is my two cents.

 

[Lyri]

I still disagree. I fail to see how I am anti-woman. Abortion can't be considered to be a legitimate right; it permits murder.

Yes - things could easily go wrong for an unplanned child, but that doesn't - at all - suddenly allow the mother to abort it.

So you don't get to play god one way but you do in another? I'm sorry but that doesn't stand at all, if you have the choice to create then you have the choice to destroy too.

Making another person suffer because you dropped the ball on a night out is ten times worse than them never having a life in the first place.
Growing up I was never told to have fun at someone's expense, that's pretty much what Pro-ife is.
You're not allowed to abort so someone else is going to pick up the check after you're done, to me that doesn't seem right.

 

[Steinar Valsson]

I'm "Pro-Life", though as you've pointed out the label itself is silly.

The reason for this is simple: I think everyone deserves a shot at life. Unless, and even then I think it's pretty murky waters, the child's birth will -kill- the mother then I don't think the child should be denied its chance to live.

Even if the mother doesn't want it, it still deserves a chance to live. And if she wasn't willing to birth a child, she should not have had sex. Simple as. Protection is never 100% and people should learn to live with the consequences of their actions.

That said, I understand that I have no right to command others to do as I wish. I do however have the right to tell them what I feel about it.

So you think the woman that maybe got raped and did not have a chance is supposed to die for a babie that might not have a future? Then the mother looses her chance to have children of her own at her will. If she would have had 2 children, we would have taken the chance from the 2nd child. Where do we draw the line of chances? Maybe the child would also die at birth, very small chance of survival, but still a chance. Should we still risk more likely death of both instead of making sure one lives? Someone that already feels? That's not by definition of the word, pro-life, to make one die at the chance of making someone else live. That's just as wrong, even more if you think the child could also die and the mother would have the chance of having more children.
Thinking the life of the mother is worth less then the life of the maybe to be baby...

Unless, and even then I think it's pretty murky waters, the child's birth will -kill- the mother then I don't think the child should be denied its chance to live.

... as you do. That is one of the reasons of which Carlin mentioned the anti-women. We know you are not anti-women, but you still think the women's life is worth less and that she is just supposed to be made to die. That is just sickening to me.

 

[Nezaros]

The notion "pro-life" was made so those people could feel better about who they are, calling it something that sounds better.

Yes, and the pro-choice crowd is not guilty of this, am I right?

"Pro-choice" isn't code for "Let's kill all the fetuses". It's pro-choice. There is no hypocrisy.

 

[Steinar Valsson]

...on the mother?s behalf. Specifically, force is appealed to based on the victim?s Environment ? the natural location in the womb of the child?s mother. We wouldn?t want anyone we were dependent upon to justify killing us because we existed in an environment they claimed.

Didn't want to hog up space so if people want to read the port, scroll up.

Their whole argument is based on them saying "a fetus is human" which is one of the things pro-choice does not agree on. So their arguments not an argument for us but for themselfs. Like in the size that Hillary Clinton is not less of a person then Shaq, in these terms is like saying the door of a Ferrari is not less of a car then a Hummer (stupid analogy, but gets the point across...). 2 different things, fetus and human. A fetus being the possibility/beginning of a human and the human being already human.

 

[Emperor Nat]

I'm "Pro-Life", though as you've pointed out the label itself is silly.

The reason for this is simple: I think everyone deserves a shot at life. Unless, and even then I think it's pretty murky waters, the child's birth will -kill- the mother then I don't think the child should be denied its chance to live.

Even if the mother doesn't want it, it still deserves a chance to live. And if she wasn't willing to birth a child, she should not have had sex. Simple as. Protection is never 100% and people should learn to live with the consequences of their actions.

That said, I understand that I have no right to command others to do as I wish. I do however have the right to tell them what I feel about it.

So you think the woman that maybe got raped and did not have a chance is supposed to die for a babie that might not have a future? Then the mother looses her chance to have children of her own at her will. If she would have had 2 children, we would have taken the chance from the 2nd child. Where do we draw the line of chances? Maybe the child would also die at birth, very small chance of survival, but still a chance. Should we still risk more likely death of both instead of making sure one lives? Someone that already feels? That's not by definition of the word, pro-life, to make one die at the chance of making someone else live. That's just as wrong, even more if you think the child could also die and the mother would have the chance of having more children.
Thinking the life of the mother is worth less then the life of the maybe to be baby...

Unless, and even then I think it's pretty murky waters, the child's birth will -kill- the mother then I don't think the child should be denied its chance to live.

... as you do. That is one of the reasons of which Carlin mentioned the anti-women. We know you are not anti-women, but you still think the women's life is worth less and that she is just supposed to be made to die. That is just sickening to me.

Firstly, a survey performed by the leading provider of abortions in America (forgive me, can't think of the name at the moment) a few years ago showed that around 50% of women having abortions had used it as their only means of contraception. MOST abortions are not due to rape.

However, I do understand that there are circumstances where there is no 'good' option.

This is why I said 'murky waters', rather than 'the woman should die'.

If it is a choice between saving the mother and saving the child, I cannot provide any solid council as to which is the best way forward, because all the outcomes kinda suck.

You have bad option 1) Mother dies. Bad Option 2) Child dies. Or worse option 3) They both die.


It essentially comes down to the decision of the mother in this case as to whether she wishes to sacrifice herself or the baby.
And in this situations, I make no claims for the morality of the act because I haven't been through that and cannot fathom how difficult that choice must be.

'Murky Waters' note aside, I still feel that "Unless the child's birth will -kill- the mother then I don't think the child should be denied its chance to live."

I don't think the child's life is worth more than the mother's. I think their worth is equal, because they are both human. I'm not saying she should be -made- to die, because you're right - that would be sickening; I'm just saying that if there is a better option available than killing the foetus it should be taken.

 

[DustyDrB]

The notion "pro-life" was made so those people could feel better about who they are, calling it something that sounds better.

Yes, and the pro-choice crowd is not guilty of this, am I right?

Exactly both sides pick the terminology that paints them in the best light. I really don't see how more people can't sympathize with both point of views.

 

[geK0]

Whats with all these people making the random generalization that being anti-abortion means that you don't care about people who are already born? (I'd include a quote, but there's a lot of people saying this)

who said they don't? : \
Do you ever hear anyone say "I'm against killing the unborn but, who gives a fuck about starving orphans?"

This is kind of a random assumption, "Person is actively arguing against X so they don't care about Y or Z"

"Gamers actively argue that games are an art form so they don't care about sex or socializing"

"Animal rights activists fight for animal rights so they don't care about people"

"Joe argues that chicken is better than beef so he can't care about fish or pork"

"Feminists fight for women's rights so they don't care about men or families"

surely you guys see how flawed this kind of argument is. I mean, there's plenty of Christian charities for things OTHER THAN fighting abortion (using christians as an example, not all anti-choice,anti-abortion, pro-life are christian)

A quick google will yield plenty of christian charities for children : \

 

[geK0]

I think this is a very appropriate image;


Pro-lifers really love the idea that life is holy from the 'immediate beginning', while nearly all 'pro-choicers' understand the idea that life develops in the womb. Pro-choicers nearly never support abortion in 9th month; they all want a sensible limit, giving the woman enough time to end their pregnancy but not waiting for development of an extensive nerve-system etcetera.

How about this?

Spoiler

[image=http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Kd-9ceILQ-E/TJosBbFY1WI/AAAAAAAAFw8/4jP3RWvWD7s/s1600/10-weeks-baby-picture.jpg]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Kd-9ceILQ-E/TJosBbFY1WI/AAAAAAAAFw8/4jP3RWvWD7s/s1600/10-weeks-baby-picture.jpg[/IMG]

looks pretty human (although not quite) after 2 months, it shows signs of life, there's brain activity, is it still okay at this stage?


Slightly off topic: is this a zerg?

Spoiler

[image=http://conceptart.org/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=600775&stc=1&d=1235364654]http://conceptart.org/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=600775&stc=1&d=1235364654[/IMG]

 

[Olas]

I used to be fully "pro-life" but honestly the more I think about it the more absurd it seems. If an egg and sperm become a person as soon as the zygote is formed, what happens if the fetus develops without a brain?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anencephaly

Without a brain the child could never reallistically be considered living person. If a regular person had his brain removed and destroyed he would certainly be considered dead. So at what point during this fetus's development did it go from being a living person to a dead fetus?

The way I see it, abortion is partial murder. The child is partially on the way to becoming a person, but isn't fully one yet, and the further along it is, the more imoral it is to kill it. Aborting an embryo early on, before it develops a brain, before it can have thoughts, emotions, or feel pain, is no worse than killing a plant. Aborting it right as it's about to exit the womb, however, is full on murder.

 

[Marcus Kehoe]

I don't like abortion, but I am a man so it's not my argument really. I just feel that with all the forms of birth prevention that it should never get to abortion.

I won't ever condemn some for having abortion, but I will say that I could never be in a relationship with someone who ever had one. I would much rather date someone with a kid.

 

[Steinar Valsson]

...I don't think the child's life is worth more than the mother's. I think their worth is equal, because they are both human. I'm not saying she should be -made- to die, because you're right - that would be sickening; I'm just saying that if there is a better option available than killing the foetus it should be taken.

I took it as you meant that the mother should die. Sorry about that.
I am pro-choice, but to the extent that cases should be looked into. It should NOT be used as a contraceptive and should be concidered as a last effort. If 2 people can't take care of a baby, put it up for adoption. If for some reason that is not able to be, well...
I am for it but I do not view it lightly. I do not believe it is murder, but non the less it's the chance for life. Contraceptives technically do the same, prevent the possibility of life, but we still allow them to be. Then again, if we didn't male masturbation should also be banned and that would only resault in disasters.
But the bottom line is, for my part, that abortion should stay legal and each case should be taken under view by a psychologist and someone from a social sector. In some cases at leat, when rape or likely death of the mother, it should be all her choice.

 

[anthony87]

Yes there is a lot of "it's possible" in there because frankly, just being born doesn't qualify you for having a really good life.
Shit happens in this world and "Pro-life" people really need to wake up to that fact, yes the child is alive now but what is the consequence and what future have you given to this person because of it?
It may have a loving, well adjusted home (I know of someone who was "an accident" and lives happily) but the case for the most part.

Shit does happen... most definitely. But that doesn't mean you can just take the easy way out.

Even if the chance of a good life for the child is extremely low, that's still a chance.

Even if you knew with 100% certainty that the child's life would be a very negative one, I still stand by the belief that we don't get to choose when another human being deserves to die.

Condemning two or more people after a night of hedonism isn't really the way to go in all of this.
I'm not out to change your mind but it's my $2.

I'd argue that depriving the child of life because you THINK it will live a terrible life isn't the way to go.

It's not a "child". Not at first anyway. At first it's just a thing taking up space in the woman. A woman who should have the choice to get rid of this thing inside her if she wishes.

 

[michiehoward]

Is it just me or does the Escapist get the most "pro life/choice" threads in the winter months?

 

[geK0]

...I don't think the child's life is worth more than the mother's. I think their worth is equal, because they are both human. I'm not saying she should be -made- to die, because you're right - that would be sickening; I'm just saying that if there is a better option available than killing the foetus it should be taken.

I took it as you meant that the mother should die. Sorry about that.
I am pro-choice, but to the extent that cases should be looked into. It should NOT be used as a contraceptive and should be concidered as a last effort. If 2 people can't take care of a baby, put it up for adoption. If for some reason that is not able to be, well...
I am for it but I do not view it lightly. I do not believe it is murder, but non the less it's the chance for life. Contraceptives technically do the same, prevent the possibility of life, but we still allow them to be. Then again, if we didn't male masturbation should also be banned and that would only resault in disasters.
But the bottom line is, for my part, that abortion should stay legal and each case should be taken under view by a psychologist and someone from a social sector. In some cases at leat, when rape or likely death of the mother, it should be all her choice.

Seems odd that we have pretty much the same opinion but place ourselves at opposite ends of the spectrum doesn't it? : \

My problem pretty much is that so many people don't consider it a last resort.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

Is it just me or does the Escapist get the most "pro life/choice" threads in the winter months?

These threads are made to sustain us through the harsh winter months. The rage keeps us warm.

Well, I say 'us', I'm not touching this thread with a ten foot pole. I'll just say that your opinion on the subject truly comes to light when you have to actually deal with this scenario.

 

[Steinar Valsson]

Seems odd that we have pretty much the same opinion but place ourselves at opposite ends of the spectrum doesn't it? : \

My problem pretty much is that so many people don't consider it a last resort.

I guess you can scale it, pro-life to pro-choice 0 - 10. 0 being those that always deny abortion at any point, no matter what and 10 being those that think of it like any other minor surgery. It's the 7-10's I oppose. Those that would rather sacrifice the life of the mother, physical and social. And those 0 - 1's that simply think of it like liposuction, something almost fashionable. But like I have said, if the reason for the deciscion is made of religious decisions... I oppose that in general, that a decision affecting so many can be because of interpritation of personal belief.
But yeah, we seem to be on the same page, same chapter at least.

 

[Griffolion]

Like everything else, freedom needs to reign. So whoever's pregnant should always be able too choose what to do with their unborn child.

I do also think that parties with a vested interest like a father (providing father has proven his willingness to be fully involved with everything that's going on) should be able to at least have their say on the matter.

This topic certainly brings out the hate in people.

 

[cthulhumythos]

Is it just me or does the Escapist get the most "pro life/choice" threads in the winter months?

These threads are made to sustain us through the harsh winter months. The rage keeps us warm.

Well, I say 'us', I'm not touching this thread with a ten foot pole. I'll just say that your opinion on the subject truly comes to light when you have to actually deal with this scenario.

heh, yeah. i've never seen the escapist so divided. actually, that's a lie, most controversial topics do that.

i'd say my opinion, but my morals are slightly screwed up the wazoo; and hate-filled responses are not my favorite kind to get.

 

[oktalist]

Yep, point made well by someone on BBC Newsnight a couple of days ago, if you don't support a woman's right to choose to have an abortion, then you effectively support forcing women to undergo unwanted pregnancies. And if you think that's okay then we have bigger problems than I ever imagined.