Abortion

[Crazy Weavile]

I am unbeatable because I am Vladimir. Putin's. Livejournal.

If a foetus is a person why do families say 'we have five children and one of the way' and not 'we have six children'.

That's kind of a shoddy argument- all it means is that people say something one way. I wouldn't use the wording of a common phrase to argue any point.

To anyone saying rape is the mother's fault: No, it isn't. Al you're accomplishing by saying that is making the other pro-life people here look bad.

My argument is that it's indefensible for consented sex because by engaging in sexual activity, you accept that, should anything go wrong, you will become pregnant. If you aren't willing to accept that fact, you shouldn't have sex.

But... please, please people. Read the thread before posting in it. I think in many ways YOU'RE more effective as a pro-choice argument than anyone who's trying.

 

[Furretsu]

My argument is that it's indefensible for consented sex because by engaging in sexual activity, you accept that, should anything go wrong, you will become pregnant. If you aren't willing to accept that fact, you shouldn't have sex.

this is very idealistic; people are going to have sex regardless of what the consequences may be. what you said is completely invalid in modern society.

furthermore: if your statement stands and someone actually does have sex without thinking of the consequences, do you want someone so irresponsible having a child?

 

[Sparrow]

Using a baby as a punishment is stupid.

Here comes the adoption argument, again. Why does this thread keep going around in circles? :/

 

[Crazy Weavile]

I've no clue.
Here's a thought: What if all the money spent on ineffective propaganda was spend on research into simulating the environment of the womb? If a pregnancy is unwanted, remove the zygote and transplant it into the artificial womb, effectively satisfying both sides.

 

[Espeon]

Here comes the adoption argument, again. Why does this thread keep going around in circles? :/

Because some people just don't get the idea, so they go: "No, abortion is wrong." and then the others all have to re-explain, only for another person to go: "No, that's wrong."

It's a never ending cycle between people in support of abortion, and against abortion. Well, unless of course the people against abortion were to change their minds or something. Or the other way around. Personally, I think that it should be the non-abortion people who should really just stop using: "La di da" as an excuse and just listen to what the other people are saying so it doesn't have to be explained over and over and over, again and again.

Also, AK is right. If these irresponsible people have a child, it could be subject to child abuse, or just brought up badly. It's more likely to become a criminal or something than a child-genius.

Here's a thought: What if all the money spent on ineffective propaganda was spend on research into simulating the environment of the womb? If a pregnancy is unwanted, remove the zygote and transplant it into the artificial womb, effectively satisfying both sides.

That doesn't solve anything. You've got an artificial womb, with a child in it. The child grows up, the parents don't want it. What happens then? The child goes up for adoption. It would have been better just to have had the abortion. That way, the child doesn't have to suffer the whole: "who are my real parents?" dilemma and furthermore, doesn't have to live in a care-home, waiting to be selected like some form of cattle.

 

[Crazy Weavile]

The problem is that I seem to be the only one on my side that's even trying to debate.

 

[Eevee]

My argument is that it's indefensible for consented sex because by engaging in sexual activity, you accept that, should anything go wrong, you will become pregnant. If you aren't willing to accept that fact, you shouldn't have sex.

When you eat peanuts for the first time, you accept that, should you be allergic to them, you will react badly and probably die. If you aren't willing to accept that fact, you shouldn't eat peanuts.

Also, since it would be entirely your fault for taking the risk in the first place, nobody else is going to step in and save your life because you're an irresponsible jerkface.

 

[Crazy Weavile]

When you eat peanuts for the first time, you accept that, should you be allergic to them, you will react badly and probably die. If you aren't willing to accept that fact, you shouldn't eat peanuts.

Also, since it would be entirely your fault for taking the risk in the first place, nobody else is going to step in and save your life because you're an irresponsible jerkface.

You should really get an allergy test in the first place. :/ But I digress; that's irrelevant to this debate.


Because being pregnant is CLEARLY comparable to death.

 

[surskitty]

Pregnancies frequently have complications.

 

[Crazy Weavile]

Which rarely involve death.

 

[Vladimir Putin's LJ]

That's kind of a shoddy argument-

It's not an argument, I was just saying :v

Also I like that just because someone doesn't die but will face temporary physical pain and long-lasting emotional damage is a good thing.

 

[surskitty]

Which rarely involve death.

Yes, because our level of technology is such that even when people normally would have died, they are not necessarily going to do so. I see no reason that one should wish months of pain and other problems on someone for the sake of a potential baby. Why should someone care more about the life of something that may never cross over into 'someone' territory without any outside involvement at all than for someone who is already existing, sapient, and does not want to deal with physical and emotional trauma?

 

[Crazy Weavile]

Because they brought said physical and emotional trauma upon themselves, and shouldn't be allowed to simply handwave it away.

 

[surskitty]

But they didn't necessarily bring it upon themselves. Contraception does not always work. Also, sex education is frequently inadequate.

And why do you want a baby brought into the world if it's unwanted? While some children are adopted, plenty more are not, and wouldn't it be better to not have anywhere near as many people rotting in orphanages?

 

[Crazy Weavile]

No, but they should have the common sense to realize that when they engage in sexual activity, there is a chance of pregnancy.

Assuming the worst situations... if .005% of those in the orphanages grow up to be good, intelligent citizens, that's still significantly more than 0%.

 

[Bombsey]

Assuming the worst situations... if .005% of those in the orphanages grow up to be good, intelligent citizens, that's still significantly more than 0%.

And what about the people who grow up to be bad citizens? If 99.995% of those in orphanages grow up to be bad citizens, how is that better than the 0% that would grow up to be bad citizens if everyone had the access to an abortion?

Sorry, bad wording.

 

[EvilCrazyMonkey]

Because they brought said physical and emotional trauma upon themselves, and shouldn't be allowed to simply handwave it away.

Contraception doesn't always work.
Sex ed. isn't always the best.
People are raped.

However if they are rather careless, there should be no difference; I'm sure a mother should have the right to abortion. And no, I'm not saying that abortion is the new birth control. Wishing an unwanted baby that's likely to grow up either bad or unloved onto someone is not just punishment.

 

[Crazy Weavile]

And what about the people who grow up to be bad citizens? If 99.995% of those in orphanages grow up to be bad citizens, how is that better than the 0% that would grow up to be bad citizens if everyone had the access to an abortion?

That's just a number I pulled out of my butt, making sure it was freakishly small. The point was that a worse childhood doe not automatically make someone become a psychopath.


But, anyway...


How do you define bad citizens?

 

[surskitty]

How is that relevant?

 

[Harlequin]

Pregnancy is a choice, not a punishment.