1. We have moved to a new forum system. All your posts and data should have transferred over. Welcome, to the new Serebii Forums. Details here
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
    Dismiss Notice
  3. If you're still waiting for the e-mail, be sure to check your junk/spam e-mail folders
    Dismiss Notice

Abortion - Under what circumstances should it be allowed?

Discussion in 'Debate Forum' started by JDavidC, Jul 29, 2013.

  1. Sadib

    Sadib Time Lord Victorious

    Looks like there's a new abortion debate. I wonder how long it will take before things get out of control and this thread gets closed.

    I am pro-choice. Pro-life should be called anti-women. I also think that people should be able to discard their babies if they have severe mental retardation.
     
  2. JDavidC

    JDavidC Banned

    You do realise this is up there with pro-life people calling pro-choice people 'pro-death' or 'pro-murder', right? I don't even know why you would make a claim like this without even backing it up.

    Well, this is an opinion rather than a statement of fact, so at least you don't need evidence for it. BTW, what exactly do you mean by 'severe' in this instance?
     
  3. TheGiftedFlareon

    TheGiftedFlareon Tactician's Gambit

    Sorry... I removed my comment. I was thinking about something else. I will leave now.
     
  4. Nah. Considering this: http://www.gallup.com/poll/162548/americans-misjudge-abortion-views.aspx
    this was a poll taken in May of this year. It's interesting because one poll shows how we think people will lean on the topic of abortion and the second poll shows what the people really feel. And there's really only a 1% percent difference on how women stand on pro-life vs pro-choice.

    Plus I want to point out that in every anti-abortion protest and most debates on the subject that I personally have come across... most of the pro-lifers happen to be.... women! Older women to be exact. Younger women are more liberal.

    Anyway, I am pro-life. I never believed in abortions unless it was a serious heath issue for the mother. I can understand the rape reason. I can get behind that one. It's the "because I'm not ready for a child" reason that gets me. You should have thought about that before having unprotected sex. Don't want to use a condom? There are other ways to prevent pregnancy during intercourse... don't take the risk if you are not ready to face the consequences ...
     
    TheFightingPikachu likes this.
  5. KyuremFreeze

    KyuremFreeze Hello, b0ss

    say the person was raped. the baby could possibly have aids passed down to them. and also, what if the mother lives in an abusive family? what if the mother was dying, before the delivery? think about that.
     
  6. mjunior3

    mjunior3 Link Jokers!

    I will say this once, and not come back. If you don't like my opinion, I really don't care, so I'm gonna post this anyway:

    I believe that, unless the mother will die at childbirth, that abortion is terrible. You are killing a baby that hasn't done anything in it's power to harm anyone or anything. I don't like abortion, but if the mother chooses to, let her. It's her choice.
     
  7. greatguy

    greatguy Back.

    OK, imagine an adult loses both arms for some reason. Should we kill him/her? What about a teenager? A toddler? A baby?
     
  8. Geekachu

    Geekachu _____________

    The baby could represent something far more sinister, e.g. rape. Before you suggest adoption I'll counter with the fact that pregnancy is a laborious physical process which the woman needn't feel obligated to undergo. Typical abortion debate cycle.

    There's a difference between terminating the life of an already-alive, thinking, perceiving and loving human being as opposed to a developing embryo, assuming the nature of the abortion.
     
  9. greatguy

    greatguy Back.

    Does a human baby that's already been born perceive more than an animal? In any case, my point that just because a child has a disability does not mean it should be killed.
     
  10. Geekachu

    Geekachu _____________

    To avoid getting embroiled in a 'where does life begin?' debate I'm just leaving it that the original point was the possibility of the unborn child having AIDs or another detrimental disease that may 'warrant' abortion in order to avoid the torture the child may endure throughout it's life. This is clearly different to killing something that is out of the womb.
     
  11. KyuremFreeze

    KyuremFreeze Hello, b0ss

    geekachu is right. AIDS isnt a disabilaty, its a disease. i never said anytthig about killing disabled babies. you sir, have a twisted mind.
     
  12. Sadib

    Sadib Time Lord Victorious

    Babies are no smarter than animals. We slaughter animals for fun and food. Why should we show more respect for babies? Is it because they have potential to become something greater? Severely retarded people have no potential left. Why must we only kill fetuses and not also other unwanted people?
     
  13. Nightmareisalive

    Nightmareisalive Well-Known Member

    OK so what about feminists who are pro-life? where do they fit in? If you think pro-life=anti-women that would mean a pro-life feminist would be an anti-women feminist. It doesn't make much sense that does it. Using the whole you're against abortion means you hate women is a very lame argument to use in the abortion debate since it doesn't take in the factor of what a pro-life person does in life and how much respect and care they give to people.

    Well if you believe that it is OK as you say to "discard" people who suffer from severe mental retardation would that not be discrimination? Isn't society not trying to teach people to treat each other no matter how different with respect? So to have an abortion simply because child born would suffer from severe mental retardation not be the same as discriminating against a person who suffers from retardation?
     
  14. master3019

    master3019 Me gusta Flygon

    I don't believe abortion is right, however, I'm not a woman, and can't speak for them. Although, if we can teach each forthcoming generation to be responsible, abortions won't be necessary. In fact, soon sex might not even exist besides for the pleasure of it, as science develops.
     
  15. JDavidC

    JDavidC Banned

    I think I may have to edit the rules of this debate, Pro-life being called anti-women is going too far, and can easily be seen/used as flamebaiting/trolling. I might also have to edit the rules to ask people to back up their claims with evidence if they want to make any claims that are expressed as facts. I find the trend of people posting their opinions as statements of fact, but with no evidence to back it up vexing.

    One of the pro-choice issues is 'what is sentience'? Intelligence that only humans possess come into play. Also, if you want a REALLY extreme example of 'severe mental retardation', anencephaly is it. I mentioned that particularly disability due to how severely it limits/destroys intelligence. I've tried asking Marioguy to qualify what he meant by 'severe'. If someone is a vegetable, there is a question raised over whether they'd have the intelligence to be a 'sentient being', and hence a person with the rights that come with being one. That is the major pro-choice issue Marioguy seems to be driving at.

    Many pro-choice arguments centre around human intelligence, whether people disabled enough would have it or not, not just age of gestation. There are even scientists who would advocate 'post-birth abortion' as the baby is not intelligent enough to be classified as a person, in their opinion.

    However, the truth is, nobody knows what a sentient being is, so my main pro-life argument falls in line with my opinion, assign personhood at conception and keep it there. Let's NOT play God and risk getting it wrong with millions of deaths is what I think.
     
  16. Sadib

    Sadib Time Lord Victorious

    You're right. That is quite an oxymoron. Pro-lifers aren't feminists.
     
  17. SapphireL

    SapphireL Lydia

    Abortion always has and always will exist. Blaming the person (usually the woman) for an unintended pregnancy is horrible. Yeah, there are ways to prevent a pregnancy. Yes, there are condoms. However, these things fail. And to suggest that people should just abstain from having sex in that case is dumb, because as we've seen forever, people will keep having sex. Abortion needs to remain an option for everyone. Outlawing abortion doesn't make it go away either. Instead, we'll just see people seeking abortions dying too. That's not very pro-life.

    Birth control should also be available cheaply and over the counter. There shouldn't be rules for minors about obtaining birth control or an abortion.

    Creating exceptions for abortion, for instance, for rape/health of the mother or baby is problematic too. Either you're pro-choice or not. No one, especially men who aren't involved in the pregnancy, have no right to tell a person what to do with their body.
     
  18. Nightmareisalive

    Nightmareisalive Well-Known Member

    Well that's a bit obnoxious saying that you can't be pro-life and feminist. There are feminists out there who are pro-life and I don't think they will be amused if they heard that in your words you can't be pro-life and feminist.
     
  19. Henraye

    Henraye Toon Leader

    I'm sorry, but you honestly sound like a sick *******. We shouldn't kill babies because like you said, they have potential to be something greater. And retarded people do have potential left. Potential to make others happy and laugh. I remember in elementary, a "retarded" girl could always make everyone smile and laugh. We should only kill unwanted people like terrorists and murderes, not retarded people or babies

    Yes. It's ultimately the woman's decision, because what if that woman gets raped? When the kid asks what was his father like, she just says, "Oh, your father was a rapist, and I was his victim." You could keep it a secret from the kid, but you'll have to tell them eventually, or you'll have that guilt forever. And if you have another baby from another man, you look at the original kid, knowing he was not a cause of love, but of a sick man.
     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2013
  20. JDavidC

    JDavidC Banned

    Actually, I think the point of Marioguy's post was to expose double standards being applied for determining if someone is a person, by only applying those standards to unborn humans, but not ones that have been born. The main pro-choice argument is on *CURRENT* sentience/intelligence of the human in question, not future, potential intelligence.
     

Share This Page