How to shut up people who are against abortion

[That guy who asked questions]

I notice that all of the anti-abortion advocates have completely ignored the point of the OP's original post.

With that, I guess silence tells us more than words. Christians feel it's okay for god to kill of human beings because he regrets creating them in the first place.

And they call advocates of abortion "hypocrites".

Don't you know God is completely incapable of any immorality? If he kills someone that obviously makes it a perfect act of justice!!! All hail!

[rexbeccarox]

Gil, this thread is about abortion, so I'm talking about women.

So, if we take abortion as 100% fine and legal, a man should have no say in it? Isn't it his baby too?

Well... that's a loaded question, isn't it? I don't understand the use of the term "baby" in this context. A fetus is not yet a baby. And, frankly, no. No one should have any say over anyone else's choices for their own bodies unless the owner of said body requests it, which is what I did. If men were able to get pregnant, I'd have the same opinion.

Back to the OP: you shut them up, like Kichi and Min said, by saying, "it's none of your business."

[That guy who asked questions]

Isn't it his baby too?

Does that apply to rapists?

What about men who fail to pay child support?

Or what about men who simply fuck anything that moves and don't even know their names?

Grand pronouncements are tempting but the devil is always in the details.

I like your questions but I would want a say if I got a girl pregnant, my opinion would differ depending on circumstances. Other than that I have no objections to your point.

[Big Blue Sky]

off topic:

[catfish]

Crybabies!!!

[festive1]

Violet, I scowl in your general direction. I know you understand what I'm getting at. Damn you for making me be clearer in my wording and terminology!! Curse you!
I brought up the fetus being human because The Guy Who Asked Questions seemed to have thought I implied a fetus isn't human. It is.
A severely premature infant cannot survive on its own period. It can't regulate body temperature, can't eat without medical assistance, has a virtually non-functioning immune system and is highly susceptible to infections, can't get oxygen on its own (due to immature lung functioning). By comparison a full-term newborn can do all of these things and is relatively independent, just change its nappies and give it a boob (or bottle if you prefer). Snuggles are ideal as well, though not mandatory, but if neglected lack of snuggling can lead to attachment issues in child and adulthood. And nappies and bottles can be changed/given by people by people other than the mother, whereas with a severely premature infant, the best place for it to thrive is the mother's womb. Indeed, depending on gestational age, the womb is the only place a fetus can survive at all.
People who are crippled are a different matter entirely. If through neonatal testing the fetus is found to have problems, it is the parents' decision to bring the baby term or to end the pregnancy. While admittedly unsavory to abort a 20+ week fetus this is one of the main reasons its done. Personally, I didn't have any genetic testing with either of my pregnancies and only had one ultrasound for each, the routine 20 week fetal development check. I would have wanted my babies if they had no kidneys, cleft palates, or had Down syndrome. Though, if the scan had shown they weren't developing parts of their brains, I think I would have strongly considered termination. Don't know, can't say for certain and this is dependent upon which portions were not developed, I think that is something one has to go through to know 100% what one would do. That's me, but I don't presume everyone to feel the same way I do about such a personal issue.
I view abortion as a woman's right to choose. Her body, her life, her offspring, her choice.
I also tie in birthing choices and options under this umbrella. I can get a bit rabid on that front and save most of my ranting about birth options for birth forums.

[KichigaiNeko]

A 24 week old whale is also a foetus, in fact any mammalian foetus is incapable of independent life at that stage of development. So foetus is pretty much a generic term for an undeveloped mammal

[littleendian]

A fetus is not yet a baby.

That's really what's at the core of the issue, I'm sure we all agree nobody may kill another human, whether it's their child or not. But when does the foetus become "another human"? Certainly the egg and the sperm are not yet a human being, and I'm sure most of us agree that even the fertilized egg is not yet a human, but certainly the baby that pops out nine months later is. Somewhere in between there is a point where we have to acknowledge there is now another person with rights of their own. For me the most reasonable line used to be the one where the phoetus/baby could survive on its own, i.e. could be born without major developmental issues and grow into a healthy human being even if it never once saw the mum. I'm not so sure anymore...

[Minimalist]

A severely premature infant cannot survive on its own period.

Um, a full term healthy infant cannot survive on its own, period. Not for very long.

If a pregnant woman survives a shipwreck, swims to a deserted island and gives birth and dies from complications the baby is going to die, too.

Frankly, judging from reports of college kids moving back into mommy's basement, it seems that most kids are not viable humans until they are in their 30's.

[festive1]

But you'd agree that a full term infant would require less help living than a gestational fetus of 24 weeks... That's the difference that matters IMO. Bottles and nappies are expected with infants, not everything else that goes into saving a 24 weeker.