Anti Abortion? FUCK YOU!

[Rhizomorph13]

Welcome back TSQ,

I could ban you, but I won't because we all missed you. Now, post away...

[Minimalist]

Goddamn right.

[thesummerqueen]

I started ranting to Void on chat and he unbanned me and told me to go at it.

Shit like this makes me froth at the mouth.

[Minimalist]

One of Void's better moves!

[theVOID]

Hahah you're just infatuated with summer

[fr0d0]

~Min

Who said it was my business? LIKEWISE: who said anybody murdering anybody was another persons business? You're saying the baby doesn't have the same rights to life as any other human being. How do you justify that?

~Queen

You think just because you can't see the suffering you're causing that makes it ok?!? But when you have to face the reality that's not ok? Taking the least painful course of action seems reasonable to me, but you don't seem to be arguing that? No, your argument is the parents suffered more. If it was me I wouldn't give a toss about myself.. I'd want the best for the baby. ..oh yeah right... it's a baby - it has no right to life.

[thesummerqueen]

Actually, I think I was arguing what I thought was the least painful action for everyone involved - baby included - and I thought I made it clear that the baby was suffering. For 15 fucking minutes after forcing it to be born just so it could die anyway. And yeah, I was arguing the suffering of the parents. I didn't say they suffered more, I pointed out that they ALSO suffered. Excuse me if you feel they get discounted in all of this.

Most of the children that COULD be born don't get to be. I think people cite a rather poetic passage by Dawkins about this, but I'll spare everyone the now-cliched usage of it. Let's just put it down to "most potential human beings get flushed down a toilet/lost in biological waste receptacles/get swallowed on a friday night after a lot of drinking..." And then there are the ones who make it past that point but for whatever reason nothing happens. I watched a girlfriend of mine go through two miscarriages very early on in her pregnacy. Was that part of God's plan? Why does a potential child who happened to make it further along than that, but was going to die anyway, mean so much more?

As a potential mother, I wouldn't want to watch my child suffer. Not because I'm being selfish, but because that child is my responsibility and my love, and the thought of it going through 15 minutes of needless pain when a quicker alternative could have ended its suffering much sooner seems a better route. I couldn't have handled sitting there for 15 minutes watching my child die. I'm not even the mother and I can't handle that.

But that's not the overwhelming issue in all of this. Most of the people who are against abortion don't give two shits about the mother or the baby, as has been stated elsewhere. I think Carlin said "Republicans want live babies so they can make dead soldiers." Maybe not always so extreme as that, but if the baby has all these "rights," I think we'd see children cherished and also given more rights than they currently have. The bills they've been proposing against abortion are ludicrous at best, and frequently blame the victim for things happening to them. I'm for abortion in cases like this, or when it's dangerous to the mother (even Jews realize that sad as losing a child is, save the mother who might be able to have more children later - don't be an idiot and make her dangerously carry a child to term to satisfy your sick need). Sure, I think it's sad if you terminate a child because you feel you can't take care of it - after all, there are plenty of people willing to adopt - but who am I to think I have a right to dictate your life? I'm for abortion because there are times when its needed, but those who are against abortion would rather see it abolished altogether. They only add those "for" clauses to make people stop screaming so much.

And let's not forget that most of the ones who are against abortion are for the death penalty...at least in this country. Human life is only sacred before it breeches its mother's vagina.

[Ubermensch]

[fr0d0]

~Summer

No, you discounted the baby I said, not the parents. Your case seemed to be built on their suffering, never mind what the baby had to go through. It's potential suffering at being killed prematurely, as pointed out in your quote, seemed to have no bearing on your judgement. The baby had a 10% chance of survival, a 2% chance of basic functionality.

I didn't say this baby meant any more. I think they all matter a lot. My wife miscarried early on and it was very painful. After 11 years it still hurts. And I'm only talking about my feelings. No bleating on about 'Gods plan' gets you off the hook when taking your own choice to end a life.

I have no problem with making the best choice for the baby, like I said. If you're more concerned about YOUR FEELINGS though, rather than the interests of the baby, I'd question your motives, and certainly your reasoning to have an unchallenged right to take such an action.

Increasing the rights of babies and children shouldn't prevent us considering unborn children. I'm for abortion when it's needed. What you're defending is the right for the mother to kill the kid with no good reason. Like it isn't an independent life. To say you're totally for abortion because all anti abortionists want a complete ban/ want the death penalty/ have no interest in life after it's passed through the vagina is unreasonable and deprives us of justice.

[Captain Scarlet]

So Fr0d0..would you tell a 12 year old victim of insestual rape that she has to carry the baby to term and care for it?

Either you are pro choice or you are not. Either you support abortion or you do not. Either you vote "yes" that the 12 year old can kill her innocent baby or not.

I think I'm pro life. An opinion newly fostered since reading the series on aristpophrenium.com

The thing is a life is just that. To say we ought to have a veto on that life by virtue of the fact that it isn't out in the outside world yet seems indefensible to me. To make conditions like you just did and say our appeal to justice has to be limited by sweeping statements is also abhorrent. Of course there are mitigating circumstances and we need to pursue justice at all cost.

Limit the suffering of others by your actions and maximise yours and others well being. Blanket pro-choice/pro-life statements are useless and meaningless, each case should be considered subjectively on its own merit. The decision in this case causes revulsion in most (including me) and was probably wrong.

Pro-life lobby miss the fact that the baby IS PART of the mother and she probably has more rights (in my view) than the foetus in the early months of pregnancy. In the latter months the unborn foetus probably has more rights and the presumption should be for them. Most countries embed this principle in law. In cases where the foetus would nominally have more rights and they are horribly disadvantaged, a bit of common sense should prevail as the mother is not a life support machine and the baby should not be born and be tortured to death by their own body (as in this case).