Abortion - Under what circumstances should it be allowed?

[Garbodor.]

Jesus christ, you make pro-lifers look bad. When I said can we have a real debate, I was talking to everyone you know.

They are attempting to play with my words. Calling a murderer savage is not the same as calling somoene a savage just because of their gender.
Can you tell me what was wrong with my comment?

 

[Yveltal96]

They are attempting to play with my words. Calling a murderer savage is not the same as calling somoene a savage just because of their gender.
Can you tell me what was wrong with my comment?

I understand completely, but both sides are in the wrong here. You both are at each others throats like animals twisting each others words. This is a debate, not a test of who has a bigger stick.
I feel like a god damn mother, just play nice kids.

 

[MidnightFennekin]

How old are? Why are you insulting me just because I am calling child murders "savages"? You're acting as if I called women in general savages.
Go grow up and don't come into a debate if you don't even have basic comprehension skills.
Any person who commits murder is a savage, regardless of their gender. If you can't debate someone, don't resort to insults.

Okay, I don't think any of us have a right to post.

We are not women. We do not go through this. We do not need to.

Why should we be allowed to make decisions for women, when it's they themselves who are the ones affected?

I am sorry for my vulgar language earlier, but as you are a Pro-Life, I am a Gender Equalist, and what you said generally pestered me.

Personally, I believe this is down to lack of proper sex education, and an increasing amount of problems in the world, such as drinking and smoking while pregnant.

I believe a simply making the rules on abortion a little harder can sort out this problem.

 

[Peter Quill]

Why is the whole rape thing constantly used? Abortions from rapes only takes up 0.3% of the reasons abortions occur. 98% use it as birth control. Yes, birth control doesn't always work, but that is why there are multiple forms of it, which is taught to us in sexual education class. You are taught how to be responsible with sex and how to use contraception properly, and the times birth control doesn't work, is if they skip taking it a day, and don't change to a different birth control, if the condom breaks because they either used a very cheap one, or didn't put it on properly. There is more than one way to use birth control, as I said, there is spermicide, women's condoms, regular birth control, and much much more, and it is their job to use it properly, and not make us pay tax dollars for both their sexual education, and their abortion, because they didn't learn how to use the contraception. And again, just because I am pro-life, doesn't mean I am anti-women, it just means I think there are other ways than just abortion, and that if they don't want the baby in the first place, men and women both need to know how to use birth control properly. Even if a girl is using birth control, you still gotta wrap your tool. It's just common sense that is (supposedly) beaten into our brains in sexual education class.

It's constantly brought up because it's a viable situation and invokes actual thought regarding whether we think a woman should have to be forced to relive a trauma. It's a completely sound moral question that makes people wonder where the parameters in their moral views on abortion should be drawn. You can't just dismiss it as an argument because it doesn't happen as often. It's not entirely a statistical matter, and to treat it as one and to dismiss a moral qualm is ridiculous. "The choice to abort" debate is all about personal morality in how you see health care, where life begins, and the rights of women. Also the majority of this speech is basically "People need to get educated but I don't want to waste tax dollars on getting educated" unless I severely misread that.

I think you are missing the larger point. If you want to stop (which is impossible, the goal should be to minimize) abortions then somethings need to happen and those don't include making abortion illegal. It boils down to better sex ed and easier acces to family planning health care with a dose of openess to discussing sexuality.

This is basically it.

Yes, any women which kills their child is uncivilized and should be punished

It's hard to man-up to misogyny. Props.

 

[WizardTrubbish]

Keep your legs closed

People are going to have sex. It's human nature. No amount of "**** shaming" is going to change that

 

[Garbodor.]

I think you are missing the larger point. If you want to stop (which is impossible, the goal should be to minimize) abortions then somethings need to happen and those don't include making abortion illegal. It boils down to better sex ed and easier acces to family planning health care with a dose of openess to discussing sexuality.

Also you seem to think that people are going around having abortions all willy-nilly. I hope you realize that is not how things are in the real world. Generally speaking it's a difficult decision to make. Also you seem to think that people are using abortion as an alternative to birth control (condoms and contraceptive, ect.) Which is not necesarrilly the case. And even if they were, you want these people to be responsible for raising a child?

I never said, making abortion illegal will bring the numbers down to 0. However, it will greatly reduce the number and it will make people think of why it is illegal. This will educate people much better than sex ed. I had sex ed and did not see how it would reduce abortion tbh. Maybe mine was different to yours but our sex ed just made people more aware about sex.

Now, your second point was good. No, I do not want them to raise the child but it's better than killing the child. In country I live in, I see many young teenage parents and I know the other alternative was abortion. I never said the choice was easy, but if I can choose between life and death then I will choose life. In country's where people are poorer things are different there and people are more mature there... They don't go left and right creating many kids due to casual sex but their children are created because they chose to create them. their parents are much more good at discipline and they don't have too much of the fooling around by having too much casual sex.

 

[LDSman]

Roe vs Wade was passed based on lies.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...y-about-the-woman-behind-the-roe-v-wade-case/

Abortion should be legal under very limited circumstances.

 

[Grey Wind]

Because I am pro-life. I love life and find it hard to go to bed knowing I can be saving lives from murdering savages who kill children because they see the baby as inconvenience.

Hi. Can you stop spouting this emotionally manipulative crap? Debate properly instead of vomiting "I want to save lives!!! Murderers!!" all over the thread. Abortion is not murder. That's the whole point of the debate.

And how dare you all women who seek abortions "murderous savages". Abortion is not an over night decision. They do not seek abortions because the baby is an "inconvenience". Anybody who seeks abortion thinks long and hard about their decision, and they are oftentimes heartbroken afterwards. Women do not want to be in that position, they do not want to have to abort their baby and they are not murderous savages. You whined earlier on after a tongue in cheek comment about your feminism stance and yet you think it's okay to march in here and blanket every aborting woman as some sort of savage? Come on now.

In most of cases, serious capital punishment is great deterrence for preventing something from happening. Only fear of serious punishment will stop abortion.

This is utterly insane. Think about what you're saying. Executing anybody who gets an abortion won't solve anything.

We will bring it down much much more by making abortion illegal.

No it won't. Are you just deliberately glazing over Moogles' posts?

 

[MidnightFennekin]

I never said, making abortion illegal will bring the numbers down to 0. However, it will greatly reduce the number and it will make people think of why it is illegal. This will educate people much better than sex ed. I had sex ed and did not see how it would reduce abortion tbh. Maybe mine was different to yours but our sex ed just made people more aware about sex.

Now, your second point was good. No, I do not want them to raise the child but it's better than killing the child. In country I live in, I see many young teenage parents and I know the other alternative was abortion. I never said the choice was easy, but if I can choose between life and death then I will choose life. In country's where people are poorer things are different there and people are more mature there... They don't go left and right creating many kids due to casual sex but their children are created because they chose to create them.

Yes, but that is just you. You are basing this purely off of your own opinion, with no regards for other opinion.

And I believe you are exaggerating. Woman don't just feel like not having a baby and then pop down to the doctor's to get a casual abortion. It is a life changing choice, which can bring serious regrets later on either choice.

That is because they can't feed all the children, and yes, I agree, they are wiser.

I blame this all on The Kardashians and Jersey Shore lack of Sex Ed and TV influence, as well as online porn during teenage years, which leads to imitation.

 

[Yveltal96]

It's constantly brought up because it's a viable situation and invokes actual thought regarding whether we think a woman should have to be forced to relive a trauma. It's a completely sound moral question that makes people wonder where the parameters in their moral views on abortion should be drawn. You can't just dismiss it as an argument because it doesn't happen as often. It's not entirely a statistical matter, and to treat it as one and to dismiss a moral qualm is ridiculous. "The choice to abort" debate is all about personal morality in how you see health care, where life begins, and the rights of women.

I am not saying that the moral issue you have going on there isn't a problem, but rape takes up such a minuscule portion of the reasons for abortion. I know it isn't proper to bring in personal accounts, but I am friends with an older woman (roughly 28) and she has been raped, and impregnated twice. She decided to keep the children, and she loves them dearly, and doesn't go through any "trauma" when she is around them. I know this may not be the same case for all women, but from what I have seen most women do not experience trauma from their children. Don't you think it's a little ridiculous to say that the child will cause trauma?

Also the majority of this speech is basically "People need to get educated but I don't want to waste tax dollars on getting educated" unless I severely misread that.

Yeah, you completely misread that. I said I would rather pay for their sex ed instead of their sex ed and their abortion.

People are going to have sex. It's human nature. No amount of "**** shaming" is going to change that

I was obviously joking bro.

 

[Garbodor.]

Hi. Can you stop spouting this emotionally manipulative crap? Debate properly instead of vomiting "I want to save lives!!! Murderers!!" all over the thread. Abortion is not murder. That's the whole point of the debate.

And how dare you all women who seek abortions "murderous savages". Abortion is not an over night decision. They do not seek abortions because the baby is an "inconvenience". Anybody who seeks abortion thinks long and hard about their decision, and they are oftentimes heartbroken afterwards. Women do not want to be in that position, they do not want to have to abort their baby and they are not murderous savages. You whined earlier on after a tongue in cheek comment about your feminism stance and yet you think it's okay to march in here and blanket every aborting woman as some sort of savage? Get over yourself.


:V


You are utterly insane. Think about what you're saying.


No it won't. Are you just deliberately glazing over Moogles' posts?

First of all don't call my comment "crap" just because you don't agree with it because your replies to my comment and pathetic and cheap. You made no real counter to what I said except calling me insane.

Yes, I do see anyone who kills someone as savages because murder is just plain wrong.
The only time a women is in any right to truly be sad about abortion is due to rape cases and I wish I could make their life easier but in majority of the cases women are not so sad because if they truly cared then they would had been careful and not play with sex and then get pregnant and just kill the child.
I know how difficult it will be for a women who has been raped, but they need to think about the innocent baby who has done nothing wrong and is innocent. No one said this was easy, Rape is a horrible experience for a women even without abortion.

Yes, but that is just you. You are basing this purely off of your own opinion, with no regards for other opinion.


That is because they can't feed all the children, and yes, I agree, they are wiser.

I blame this all on The Kardashians and Jersey Shore lack of Sex Ed and TV influence, as well as online porn during teenage years, which leads to imitation.

What made you think I am not for gender equality just because I called women who kill their child savages?
My mother is the most important person in the world to me and I know how difficult it can be for women, especially one whose husband left her with 5 kids.
I stand with women on equality, but abortion is just something else.

I totally agree with your last comment though. This increase in sex in music,TV is really manipulating kids from a early age and makes them think sex is like a toy.
Don't get me wrong, I have had sexual relationships myself but I really really don't see why a man or a women cannot control themselves and not go crazy and end up creating a innocent life which they see as a inconvenience.

BTW, in all except cases both men and women are responsible equality. in rape cases, of course the man should be given capital punishment.

 

[WizardTrubbish]

However, it will greatly reduce the number and it will make people think of why it is illegal.

Sort of like how prohibition worked out so well, or how the War on Drugs is really stopping drug use... oh wait.

Banning abortions is just going to create a black market. If a woman wants an abortion, she's going to get an abortion, it's that simple.

but in majority of the cases women are not so sad because if they truly cared then they would had been careful and not play with sex and then get pregnant and just kill the child.

Wait, what? Just because the child has not been conceived from rape, doesn't mean it isn't a difficult decision. No woman wants to have an abortion. And people are going to have sex. it's simply human nature, and birth control is not 100% effective.

 

[Yveltal96]

Sort of like how prohibition worked out so well, or how the War on Drugs is really stopping drug use... oh wait.

Banning abortions is just going to create a black market. If a woman wants an abortion, she's going to get an abortion, it's that simple.

Or, an alternative that I find very reasonable, that most of us can be happy about, is just better sexual education. That would, if received well, could potentially slash the number of unnecessary abortions drastically. 98% of the abortions that occur, are as a means of birth control, so if they can learn how to use proper birth control correctly, then that will definitely cut down the amount of unnecessary abortions.

 

[WizardTrubbish]

98% of the abortions that occur, are as a means of birth control,

You're right about the sex-ed thing, but this is just false. The majority of women get an abortion due to contraceptive failures. As in, they had already tried birth control, and it didn't work

http://women.webmd.com/tc/abortion-reasons-women-choose-abortion

 

[Yveltal96]

You're right about the sex-ed thing, but this is just false. The majority of women get an abortion due to contraceptive failures. As in, they had already tried birth control, and it didn't work

http://women.webmd.com/tc/abortion-reasons-women-choose-abortion

Well, I did forget to mention what else falls into that category, but that does fall under it, but that is where better education on it comes in. If they learn how to use it properly that entire 98% could potentially be knocked down a lot. There are reasons in that 98% such as not being financially ready to care for the child, but that is where adoption comes in. Yeah, the adoption system is not perfect, but it can be reformed. I have friends that are foster parents, and the reason it doesn't work well, is because the workers have no concern for the children, and better staff selection could potentially solve that problem.

 

[Blazekickblaziken]

Thank god, someone with reason. Honestly, if we had better sexual education, the unnecessary abortion cases would be slashed drastically. Especially considering that the abortion cases that do actually have some reason to them, only take up 2% of the reasons for abortion.

I've always been speaking reasonably, those are all things I've touched in my posts in one way or another.

You know, pro-choice people aren't the Oprah of abortions. Abortions for you, abortions for you, abortions for everyone! We think they're unpleasant and want to minimize them as well. We just think that banning abortions accomplishes nothing positive.

 

[Garbodor.]

S

Wait, what? Just because the child has not been conceived from rape, doesn't mean it isn't a difficult decision. No woman wants to have an abortion. And people are going to have sex. it's simply human nature, and birth control is not 100% effective.

I will not make the statement that they don't care at all, but someone who's been raped is much much more traumatized.
The people who have casual sex so much have ruined it for those poor rape victims.

Since we cannot ban all abortions overnight, at least let's make illegal, abortions which people who have not been rape have. This will make them much more careful. Sex is not a game.

It does not matter, if they were not raped then they are at fault for creating that child.

 

[Yveltal96]

Since we cannot ban all abortions overnight, at least let's make illegal, abortions which people who have not been rape have. This will make them much more careful. Sex is not a game.

Ok, I am pro-life, but that will simply not work. Better sexual education is honestly the best option, and making abortions illegal, will only increase the sale in wire coat hangers.

I've always been speaking reasonably, those are all things I've touched in my posts in one way or another.

You know, pro-choice people aren't the Oprah of abortions. Abortions for you, abortions for you, abortions for everyone! We think they're unpleasant and want to minimize them as well. We just think that banning abortions accomplishes nothing positive.

Tell that to the people in San Fran *shudders* going to a Walk for Life there was horrible.

 

[Garbodor.]

Ok, I am pro-life, but that will simply not work. Better sexual education is honestly the best option, and making abortions illegal, will only increase the sale in wire coat hangers.



T.

I wish there was a easy way. But I suggested going in stages at least.
Sex ed cannot work on it's own.
Parents really need to discipline their children. Lack of control will lead to your kids going around and probably ending up getting someone pregnant or getting pregnant. Education at home is at most important than that of school. control the level of sex your kids see in TV or listen to. All this stuff can really work.

But I will never be pro-abortion. It's just not something I can ever imagine doing.

 

[JDavidC]

Getting judgmental on others will NOT help here. This issue is COMPLICATED, there are a lot of factors in play here. There are MANY reasons people go for abortion, not all of them selfish either (and this is coming from someone who is very pro-life). Can people please read the rules I made in my opening post? If you go for a specific position, back your claims up with evidence (logical reasoning, or links to external sources, preferably scholarly sources that are unlikely to be biased). At the very least, if you post an opinion with no evidence, be prepared to provide evidence upon request, or when your opinion is denied as having no substance. Simply stating your opinion as a fact means nothing in a debate, absolutely nothing.

There is one thing that has surprised me so far in this debate, and that is very few people, if any, are attempting to answer the following question. What is a 'person' as opposed to a member of the species 'homo sapiens'. One of the biggest pro-choice arguments is this: You are dealing with a POTENTIAL person, and hence, there is nothing wrong with terminating a life-form that is not actually a person, therefore denying abortion in such a case is sheer insanity. If the premise is true (dealing with a POTENTIAL person), then we have a major problem when denying abortions before personhood is obtained. My opinion is that personhood begins at conception (if you want me to link to my arguments in the previous debate thread, ask me and I'll go search for them, it might take a lot of time to find them yourself!). A key question to answer is, WHEN does a human become a person. Can the answer given be proven? If not, what is the earliest possible time for this to happen, and why?

I'm going to go for the reasoning behind my position. Along with having to get tough on the causes of unwanted pregnancies, and choices other than abortion, there is the nasty issue of my position. Make no mistake, there is no such thing as a 'nice' position when it comes to abortion, as I have said previously. I've chosen an extremely nasty position, because I can see no superior alternative.

The whole rationale behind my position is damage limitation, the lessest of all evils. It is still utterly horrible and will lead to pain, death and suffering. I won't deny that for a split-second. The position is, the mother may only choose abortion if she is in danger of dying. This is a very extreme pro-life position indeed. It begs the question, why?

- In the most severe cases, rape (including statutory rape with consent, or even worse, without), both choices are horrifying. Either you end a life (one that, at the very least, may be an actual person), or you force a barbaric punishment on the mother who has already been raped. Both options are awful. I pick the one that is the least awful. Taking away a life is even worse than the insane punishment on the mother, as the latter does not necessarily lead to death. That is not enough of course, remember what I said about alternatives to abortion? Heavy-duty free counselling on possible solutions, with people available to provide access to people looking to adopt are absolutely required. It is not nearly enough to simply say no abortion when rape is involved, and leave it at that. Women deserve MUCH better than that. People deserve much better than that. One thing I have to say, regarding the question of potential persons, I can link to a massive risk analysis post I made in a previous debate if you want me to tackle the issue of when to treat a human as a person.
- In other cases, you also get horrifying choices, but not as severe as the one above! Needless to say, with these choices, I also believe the best way of limiting the damage done is to prevent abortion except when the mother is at risk of dying, for the same reason as I gave above.
- When it comes to Quality of Life decisions, I find this horribly flawed. Chaos Theory (check the wikipedia article I linked to previously, merely understanding the Butterfly Effect is enough to get the gist of what I'm driving at) shows that the future is HIGHLY unpredictable. Even people that are born may end up in bad situations, are we to kill them too because they are in a bad situation? No, of course not. In Holland however, they do seem to take this practice to an extreme (I will provide links if requested). What about all the suffering in the world, should we just nuke the entire planet and use death to end all pain and suffering? No, of course not! This might sound like hyperbole, but it follows the same sort of logic as that of euthanasia without consent via abortions, in order to show how flawed I believe the logic is.
- Dealing with the other issues that go with abortion very aggressively, not just imposing laws restricting it, are requirements to really tackle the problem, and to lessen the damage of unwanted pregnancies when abortion is not allowed. I'm looking into possible ways of doing this myself for if and when I get to talk to my MP about it. I can't look at abortion in isolation to its primary cause and the alternative choices.
- Liberalising abortion laws allows dangerous devaluation of human life, and introduces inequalities where they should not exist, reinforcing negative stereotypes and making the lives of the disadvantaged (e.g. disabled) even worse than they already are. Believe me, it's bad enough being disabled (multiple mental disabilities here), without attracting hate and scorn for being seen as a leech that drains the system or whatever. Again, I will link to that Parliamentary debate in the UK on how the law allowing for abortion of disabled children up to birth is being exploited if people ask for it.
- Liberalising abortion laws also increases anti-choice abortions. What do I mean by this? It's what I said previously. People can coerce women into having abortions more easily if they are legal, and then anti-life/anti-choice abortions will rise, and people may not always be able to prove whether or not the woman is being intimidated and having her choice stolen away from her. Needless to say, both pro-life and pro-choice people should be concerned at this.
- Restricting abortion laws will help preserve the value of life, and lower the amount of abortions. It will not eliminate abortion, in the same way that outlawing homicide will not eliminate murder, but it's a start to a long process of taking on abortion and its surrounding issues.

If you feel anything I say is a false opinion with no substance, challenge said opinion by asking for evidence please (you don't even need to respond with your own evidence if you're challenging an opinion).