Guys.....isn't this going a bit too far?

[LastPoet]

Yep. For liking science so much, science seems to fly out the window when abortion is the topic.

I know!

There's these people on the forum who can't differentiate between a functional neural network and a lump of cells. If it can't bootstrap because it's not done developing, then it's of little value when weighed against pre-existing human life.

No capability to form a mind (why we interact and care for infants) even with technological assistance (what we do in cases of infants being underdeveloped), then its not human.

Most anacephalic infants (no cerebrum) barely last a few hours, have no capability to develop a mind and are a perfect case example of "something that should've been aborted when it became detectable".

The whole "clump of cells" and "potential life" arguments never convince me either. Those cells have distinct human DNA, and are very much alive.

HeLa cells are human DNA.

They're also a cancer.

Viability, in the case of an human organism having the abiltity to form a coherent living mind at least at the level of extreme intellectual impairment, seems like a bare minimum. So looking at that, cell masses that do not have complex neural structures are fair game. Which is already the vast majority of abortions right there.

Missing vital structures like the cerebrum also qualifies as not a human. Things like that often comprise late term abortions. Then there are cases where the rest of the body is too damaged or undeveloped to salvage - some people bear them anyways only to watch them suffer, fade and die. How humane... but I guess it wasn't aborted.

Unless you have a purpose for human cattle, I would think that the late term abortions are more often catastrophes than not. And the early ones simply have no mind.

You know, executor, this lump of cells is drawing energy from those that somehow conceived it. It was wanted. I can't ever be responsible for anothers body. Priority is keeping that tiny human safe. Don't ask me how I did it.

W

[Catholic_Lady]

I think too much is made of arguing the logical consequences of certain generalizations. When we're discussing how we treat each other, we generally have in mind others like ourselves with the capacity to decide how they shall treat us as well. To then argue that, well, an embryo is in one phase of becoming a person like ourselves so whatever we decide in regard to others like ourselves should extend to them too requires further argumentation. It shouldn't be automatic.

Newborns and ppl with mental retardation such as Down Syndrome or anything of the like, don't have "minds like ourselves" either.

[LastPoet]

OT: pooo!

[Divinity]

I'll say it again:

If you're against abortion in all cases, this means that you're perfectly okay with a 13 year old girl being raped, and being forced against her will to carry to term. That makes you an asshole.

If you're okay with abortion in cases of rape, then you don't really care about 'punishing' an innocent life.

A woman should have complete control over her body. If men could get pregnant, you could get an abortion at Wal-Mart.

---

Also this whole 'right to their own body thing'...

I say if you're anti-choice, you should have to give up your kidney when you match a donor, if it'd save the other person's life. Or any other bodily organs that aren't necessary for survival. I mean if someone is dependent on you for life... right?

[Shell B]

Just so the readers know, Orochi was originally arguing that abortion cannot possibly be classified as  killing because the fetus is just a clump of cells. Later Orochi said without even realizing that it is killing no matter how small the chunk of cells are.

Now Orochi has moved the goal post from "killing" to murder. Little does she know you can kill without being a murderer but cannot murder without being a killer.

It must be killing you how you're failing so miserably when you can't fill the thread with insults but instead have to actually give points to your reason.

Oh and BTW, I do condone abortion in the right circumstance. Your life is at risk? No problem. Condom broke? Fine. You came to know of it on the same day Trump got inaugurated? Go fuck yourself.

Nobody in their right mind would take your summation of another person's word at face value.

---

If men could get pregnant, you could get an abortion at Wal-Mart.

[Whateverist]

I think too much is made of arguing the logical consequences of certain generalizations.  When we're discussing how we treat each other, we generally have in mind others like ourselves with the capacity to decide how they shall treat us as well.  To then argue that, well, an embryo is in one phase of becoming a person like ourselves so whatever we decide in regard to others like ourselves should extend to them too requires further argumentation.  It shouldn't be automatic.

Newborns and ppl with mental retardation such as Down Syndrome or anything of the like, don't have "minds like ourselves" either.

True, but that they exist at all is evidence that they matter to someone, someone like us who supports and loves them.  Therefore we have to extend to them the same consideration we do to others like ourselves, just as we expect them to do toward our loved ones.

I'm not saying it isn't valid for someone to feel a zygote is entitled to the same consideration as a person such as ourselves.  I'm just saying it requires more argumentation to a get someone to agree who doesn't feel the same way.

[brewer]

I'll say it again:

If you're against abortion in all cases, this means that you're perfectly okay with a 13 year old girl being raped, and being forced against her will to carry to term.  That makes you an asshole.

If you're okay with abortion in cases of rape, then you don't really care about 'punishing' an innocent life.

A woman should have complete control over her body.  If men could get pregnant, you could get an abortion at Wal-Mart.

---

Also this whole 'right to their own body thing'...

I say if you're anti-choice, you should have to give up your kidney when you match a donor, if it'd save the other person's life.  Or any other bodily organs that aren't necessary for survival.  I mean if someone is dependent on you for life... right?

Although a bit extreme for my taste, I can support this general position.

[ErGingerbreadMandude]

And just her responsibility? I suppose you think it is incumbent on women to take more precautions against abortion. Both sexes have a sex drive but women alone bare the blame when a sperm makes it to an egg?

I literally said, "The moment a woman becomes pregnant she is also responsible for another human being". I didn't say, "The moment a woman becomes pregnant she is solely responsible for the pregnancy". I have no idea what you're talking about.

If I'm correct in remembering that you identify as gay your stance here seems rather facile.

Ah yes, the identity politics. Well listen here then, I also identify as a 20 time Olympic gold medalist sex god, my pronouns are "Oh yeah daddy" and "Just like that daddy".

[A Theist]

I would like to see the elimination of abortion on demand, severely restricted to only those cases involving rape, incest, and to save the life of the mother. Even in those cases restrictions to charges of rape and incest, measures to interrupt the pregnancy need to be done within the first week of the offense. I also want to see the total federal defunding of Planned Parenthood.

[Crunchy]

While it is absolutely in her right to make this decision without any outside interference it is absolutely within my right to think and say that this is a really stupid and terrible reason to have an abortion especially given that she said she is happy about the pregnancy and ASKED for advice.
She's a stranger, so maybe some feel ok with dodging her request for advice but if someone I really love, like my sister or niece asked me for the same advice I'd tell them the truth. That is a terrible reason to abort a pregnancy that you wanted.

I'm certain that many who refuse to acknowledge how terrible her reasoning is would certainly have called her out on it if a woman had used the exact same reasoning about the election of any democrat.

.