[NGTM-1R]

Yeah, well said. After all, it's their child and not ours.

Was that sarcasm?

While I tend to support abortion rights, I frequently find the absolute lack of legal standing the father has to arrest it frustrating...if necessary.

[Flipside]

That is a somewhat overlooked area of parents rights alas, problem is, it the debate never gets to that point because no-one can get past item 1.

[iamzack]

Tch. If the father wants it that bad, he can have it. But it's not staying in my body.

[NGTM-1R]

Tch. If the father wants it that bad, he can have it. But it's not staying in my body.

That's the reason it's necessary.

Also the one it's frustrating, since that kills it.

[Turambar]

If the father wants the kid and can't convince the mother to keep it using words and persuasion, then the couple has more problems than a kid, and really shouldn't be throwing any new humans into whatever their ****ty situation is.

[Ford Prefect]

Seeing things in black and white  is fun.

It's far from black and white, but my contention is that the gray area is irrelevant to the practical question of how to proceed. If this discussion is a purely academic foray into ethical philosophy, then by all means, let's discuss the imperatives and ramifications surrounding a woman's reasons for wanting an abortion. But if this is a debate over whether abortion is or is not a right, then your answer is either yes or no, and if you argue that a woman should only be permitted an abortion after her motivations have been officially ascertained, then your answer is no.

[NGTM-1R]

Uh, who was that? Seriously, something's wrong with the board?

[Knight Templar]

Well, it's true. Murder's a black and white thing, innit?

Exactly.

This is why we have soldiers who go to war for their countries, but aren't prosecuted when they return home. Also why we have 1st, 2nd, and Manslaughter degrees of murder in criminal law.

Oh wait...

[Polpolion]

I'd also like to add that I don't feel that even if women have the right to choose to have an abortion, that their choice will necessarily be a morally correct thing to do. This is the point where I think most of the issues in politics come up with abortion. I personally don't feel the government has the right to dictate whether abortion is always morally incorrect, and in turn make abortion illegal. I also feel that the neo-conservative voters that are anti-abortion have even less of a right to tell people what to do about it because they're not even elected by the people, assuming that has anything to do with it.

I don't really get what you're saying. Are you trying to say that the government has no right to decide people's morals for them, or are you saying that government has no right to decide whether they have a right to do this or not?

I guess I'd agree with the first possible case, but the second possible case is a bit funny, so I'm just not gonna touch it and hope that's not what you mean.

[TrashMan]

Seeing things in black and white  is fun.

It's far from black and white, but my contention is that the gray area is irrelevant to the practical question of how to proceed. If this discussion is a purely academic foray into ethical philosophy, then by all means, let's discuss the imperatives and ramifications surrounding a woman's reasons for wanting an abortion. But if this is a debate over whether abortion is or is not a right, then your answer is either yes or no, and if you argue that a woman should only be permitted an abortion after her motivations have been officially ascertained, then your answer is no.

Really? Cause I can say that murder is bad, but I will view killing in self-defense as justifiable. See the connection here?
I can say the same thing about abortion - bad, but there are specific circumstances in which I would find it justifiable.

If you create life than take responsiblity for it. But maybe it's better for that child to never be born - trying to escape the consequences and responsibility is a sure sign of a immature nad bad parent.

[Blue Lion]

You can come up with weird scenarios on either side, that doesn't mean that a person has to agree with every one of them to take that side.

My personal opinion is that with proper sex education and access to birth control, the odds of unwanted pregnancies would drop dramatically.

AFTER that, a woman should have the right to determine whether or not to keep something she physically has to bear for a time. Since women who didn't want a child to begin with almost would never get pregnant, this would exceedingly low and rare.

However those cases would have to be looked at as well.

[iamzack]

Lol, it's in the bible.

[Ford Prefect]

Really? Cause I can say that murder is bad, but I will view killing in self-defense as justifiable. See the connection here?
I can say the same thing about abortion - bad, but there are specific circumstances in which I would find it justifiable.

That's precisely the argument I was responding to. You've entirely missed my point.

[TrashMan]

I haven't. I just refused to be railroaded by you and that faulty logic.

But if this is a debate over whether abortion is or is not a right, then your answer is either yes or no, and if you argue that a woman should only be permitted an abortion after her motivations have been officially ascertained, then your answer is no.

I quite simply don't buy that.
Since it's not a matter of motivation in the first place, but rather circumstances. And, since we're talking about a human life here, which the mother DOES NOT own, and therefore, has no right to extinguish, especially since it's the product of her willing actions.

The need of the child to live overrules the womans "right" to be free of physical discomfort for 9 months.

[Blue Lion]

The need of the child to live overrules the womans "right" to be free of physical discomfort for 9 months.

Did you just call pregnancy a "discomfort"?

[General Battuta]

especially since it's the product of her willing actions.

Unless it's not.

The need of the child to live overrules the womans "right" to be free of physical discomfort for 9 months.

What if she's going to die?

And in any case, it's her choice as to whether it's right or not, not yours.

[karajorma]

From what I understand, the pro-lifers seem to believe that even if you've taken every sensible precaution to prevent pregnancy and still have sex but they fail and you end up pregnant you have to keep the baby because it's still your fault for having sex.

Now let's give an analogy to that.

Suppose you're out driving to the cinema. Not speeding, taking care. You have an accident. It's your fault even though you didn't do anything wrong. A pedestrian gets hit by your car and taken to hospital. He suffers renal failure due to his injuries. He'll die without a transplant but you happen to match.

The pro-life argument is similar to saying "You didn't have to drive. You knew that if you went out for a drive you could have an accident. So since you have caused one the government have the right to take one of your kidneys and give it to him. And if you don't want to do that, you're a murderer"

[JCDNWarrior]

Unwed mothers, unstable families... Who stands to gain from such things?

Child protection services, military.. pharmaceutical industry.. childporn rings (sometimes/often affiliated with CPS) and several others. (http://ryleepagebliss.wordpress.com/2008/07/24/stop-cps-kidnapping/   as an example of what CPS is responsible for)

Which often cause the problems one way or another, as well. Pills that mess up the dad's, war that kills fathers, etc.

Result for them, $$$$$$$ and a feeling of power.


The pursuit of riches seems to inevitably mean the loss of good and the gaining of evil. the more money you have, the more evil you can become.

[iamzack]

I'm an excellent example of what happens when people who don't want kids get pregnant and decide to keep it because abortion is wrong.

[TrashMan]

What if she's going to die?

Since it's not a matter of motivation in the first place, but rather circumstances

I believe I already covered that. Exceptions prove the rule.

And in any case, it's her choice as to whether it's right or not, not yours.

Then it's also my choice on weather or not if it's alright to kill YOU (since you cause me discomfort), not anyone elses.

From what I understand, the pro-lifers seem to believe that even if you've taken every sensible precaution to prevent pregnancy and still have sex but they fail and you end up pregnant you have to keep the baby because it's still your fault for having sex.

No. You have to keep her because it's the only right thing to do. It's a matter of life and death of a human being.

Some people are treating the child like it's a STD. A child. That I find appauling.

Treating it like a freak accident and looking at it only from the blame and want angle.... their own flesh and blood. It sickens me.