How to shut up people who are against abortion

[Violet]

Imo it's justified only when mother's life is at danger and when woman was raped and filled out police report, not just came and said "I'm raped and I want abortion".

It's justified only by ruining two already existing lives? Interesting.

But hey, that's better than ruining three by allowing it to advance beyond its protohuman stage

---

Problem is that in spite of what they say, it never has been about that. It's about patriarchy, misogyny and "keeping them barefoot and pregnant."
If men got pregnant, I doubt very much that abortion would have ever been illegal.

While it's true that it probably wouldn't be illegal, to say that it's entirely about such things as patriarchy and misogyny is to be ignorant of the reason that many level-headed people (a good half of them women) are against abortion: they see it as murder.

I disagree, but then... I would also consider killing any person to be murder, and yet I'm okay with that if I didn't value the person very much Bonus points if we eat it afterwards... waste not: want not.

---

What about people who are against abortion but not Christians?

They don't exist, obviously. Y'know... everything exists, except for anti-abortionists what are not Christians.

Me? I thought it was a joke 0.o

---

A fetus cannot survive outside of its mother until around about 24 weeks. Up to that point it is entirely dependent upon her. At 24 weeks gestation it takes magnificent feats of medical technology to keep the baby alive. Not to mention the potential for lifelong complications due to such a premature birth (hearing and vision problems, asthma, cognitive issues, etc.) If it can't survive on its own, then why should the mother be forced to carry it to term?

No human baby survives on its own... without something to feed it: it is fucked.

Just saying There's no difference between a fetus and a baby when it comes to surviving completely on their own: they both fail. Miserably, too.

The fetus is usually uglier, though. So it's death will be less mourned.

---

Another potential consequence of sexual intercourse is catching an STI. Are you opposed to people getting treated for those as well?

Seeing how pregnancy is an STI... why would you even ask the second question?

How about potential consequences of other actions? What if you get a sky diving injury and break a leg, should we deny them medical care?

Yes, because nobody should fall that far and live. I say we shoot them when they land, and make bloody certain of it.

---

You know... the one thing I love about abortion threads is how it brings a bunch of speciesists together. Next time we have one, I should just disintegrate every one of them while they're clumped up That's efficient use of resources, it is ^_^

---

It looks like a human embryo, which is what matters to me. It's a human. It has human DNA. Not only that, but it has its own individual DNA, and it's alive.

Why does that matter to you? ... You're not a bloody vegan, are you?

* Violet looks upon Tiberius with disgust.

[festive1]

A fetus is distinctly different from a full-term newborn. I don't deny that a fetus is human, of course it is. A woman does not become pregnant with a cat or a salamander, but a human.
However, a fetus is incapable of sustaining its own life, in terms of having its own blood supply (meaning enough blood), getting nourishment, getting oxygen, etc., in terms of possessing the basic life systems enabling it to support and keep itself alive. This is deficient in comparison to a newborn that can breathe on its own, suckle and get food without inhaling and taking the food into its lungs. Hell, newborns even demonstrate they can move to reach a food source. Go to YouTube and search for "breast crawl." You'll find videos of newborns laid on their mother's stomachs crawling up her chest to her breasts and latching on to eat. In this sense, providing food for a newborn (breast or bottle) is very different than providing food for a severely premature infant, which requires medical intervention.
The earliest a fetus can be born and have even a 50/50 chance of survival is about 24 weeks gestation. Up to that point, there's nothing anyone can do, even the best neonatal doctors and hospitals in the world. In my view, up to this point the fetus is solely the mother's responsibility and burden. It is her decision to allow this life to grow and develop inside of her body, or not.
I'm all for the prevention of unwanted pregnancy. I say unwanted instead of unplanned, because an unplanned pregnancy isn't necessarily an unwanted one. I am not in favor of women using abortion as a form of birth control. This is almost impossible to police, though. Women who have multiple abortions thinking there are no consequences are mistaken, a woman's future fertility and ability to carry a pregnancy to term is effected by receiving multiple abortions. However, all forms of contraception have some percentage of failure. This means, even in cases where a woman has had a tubal ligation, there are some women who will still be able to get pregnant. Women get pregnant on every form of birth control, including IUD's (which often leads to miscarriage). We need better contraception. I think a very promising form is currently being developed. It's a shot for men that causes their testes to stop making sperm. It's still in development though.

[fr0d0]

I think we can safely say by now that the OP failed.

[Big Blue Sky]

I think we can safely say by now that the OP failed.

-coming from a mouth of a christian

-if some members don't agree with me that doesn't mean that this isn't an good argument.

-and instead of writing how I "failed" you should have written an argument in return rather than criticizing it

[CleanShavenJesus]

A fetus is not a person.

A mother is the one carrying said fetus.

She should be able to dictate what happens to the little thing inside her own body.

True or false?

[Tiberius]

I don't know how many times I have to tell you it's not a human or a person. It's a fucking ELEPHANT!

Wow, so you've decided to turn to dishonesty in order to try and win a debate? That's low.

I'm through trying to argue this with you, if you're going to try and score points by showing a photo of an elephant embryo and saying "this is not a human in any sense of the word", when the thread is about human abortion of human embryos. You have turned what should have been a rational debate into something very childish. Well done.

I wonder how many of you who are so anti-abortion will adopt an unwanted child

I would. Adoption is a great thing.

[Big Blue Sky]

I would. Adoption is a great thing.

Oh you would,so why don't you.

also:

[smax]

Why religious people insist on trying to control the lives of people they could care less about is beyond me? When I was a Christian, I felt obligated to share their views on things like abortion and homosexuality, among other things. However, I couldn't help asking myself:

"Why the fuck should I care how other people live their personal lives when it has no significant impact on me or others?"

I never found a good answer then, and I still haven't.

[Violet]

A fetus is distinctly different from a full-term newborn. I don't deny that a fetus is human, of course it is. A woman does not become pregnant with a cat or a salamander, but a human.

How does a being being human matter?

However, a fetus is incapable of sustaining its own life, in terms of having its own blood supply (meaning enough blood), getting nourishment, getting oxygen, etc., in terms of possessing the basic life systems enabling it to support and keep itself alive. This is deficient in comparison to a newborn that can breathe on its own, suckle and get food without inhaling and taking the food into its lungs. Hell, newborns even demonstrate they can move to reach a food source. Go to YouTube and search for "breast crawl." You'll find videos of newborns laid on their mother's stomachs crawling up her chest to her breasts and latching on to eat.

Really, you should just be honest, and say it this way: A newborn baby can survive for longer periods on its own, and isn't as likely to self-destruct. A newborn fetus cannot survive for as long a period on its own, and is more likely to self-destruct

In this sense, providing food for a newborn (breast or bottle) is very different than providing food for a severely premature infant, which requires medical intervention.

So whether it can eat/survive without 'medical intervention' is your basis for it not being a person? I feel badly for cripples under this system.

The earliest a fetus can be born and have even a 50/50 chance of survival is about 24 weeks gestation. Up to that point, there's nothing anyone can do, even the best neonatal doctors and hospitals in the world. In my view, up to this point the fetus is solely the mother's responsibility and burden. It is her decision to allow this life to grow and develop inside of her body, or not.

Why is it only up to this point? Is not a human of any stage prior to birth solely the responsibility of the potential mother? Is it not her decision to allow this parasite to grow and develop inside her body, and is it not her decision to decree how it shall exist her body, and on what terms it does so?

I'm all for the prevention of unwanted pregnancy. I say unwanted instead of unplanned, because an unplanned pregnancy isn't necessarily an unwanted one. I am not in favor of women using abortion as a form of birth control. This is almost impossible to police, though. Women who have multiple abortions thinking there are no consequences are mistaken, a woman's future fertility and ability to carry a pregnancy to term is effected by receiving multiple abortions.

If abortion isn't the most gloriously self-evident method of birth-control...

Sounds to me like you want for better education for parasite-infected peoples, and why would anyone be against that?

Want is an interesting subject... because the real question is this: who is it unwanted by? The grandparents might want it even if the mother doesn't, the friends might not want it even if the mother does, the father might not want it while the mother wants to gouge him for child support and live easy with something she wants, the nation might want it while the employers do not... it is a value placed upon the pregnancy, and it is different for everyone.

I'm all for doing what one will, according to what one wants, and for the desires of those not in control to be taken as counsel... to be considered or dismissed as you will. Aye, I'm a horrible person.

However, all forms of contraception have some percentage of failure. This means, even in cases where a woman has had a tubal ligation, there are some women who will still be able to get pregnant. Women get pregnant on every form of birth control, including IUD's (which often leads to miscarriage). We need better contraception. I think a very promising form is currently being developed. It's a shot for men that causes their testes to stop making sperm. It's still in development though.

Even if one uses absolutely no contraception, should not they be enabled to legally eject an unwanted tenet in their body? I mean, really... a good amount of sex is impromptu and/or unplanned, and that's just the nature of the beast. There are plenty of people who don't appreciate how condoms or hormone-pills make them feel, or how it affects their sex life... should they be disallowed abortion, especially when it's done well into a proto-human stage?

---

I would. Adoption is a great thing.

And we love you for it, Tiberlicious Adoption is a wonderful thing indeed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmlVv5rxTv8

[Tiberius]

Oh you would,so why don't you.

I live in a rented room in a house. I earn enough to be relatively comfortable, but not enough to look after a child. Also, my girlfriend lives in another country. I'm not exactly in the most ideal situation for any child.

In the future, when I'm settled down and have a steady income that can support children, I'll adopt. That is, if adoption agencies let me.