Social Are you pro choice or pro life?

Are you in favour of


  • Total voters
    142
Yeah the "life" problem is not a great way to go with an argument. I don't think it's asinine to discuss that, but there is always a logical hitch where you can't say that an obviously human developing life is not life (and it comes way earlier in a pregnancy than pro-abortion people are comfortable with).

The idea of the mother's consent solves that problem and still recognizes that the unborn will have rights at some point.

I didnt mean asinine as in to discuss, just that human cells at any stage, is human life. What else will the early cells turn into, a horse?
 
It's still murder. When a woman gets pregnant she does so under the knowledge that the pregnancy might be terminal. The woman accepted that risk and still undertook the venture.

It's a bit like arguing that you can bring someone onto a dangerous journey and then when the journey you brought them on becomes dangerous to both of you, you can kill them to save yourself. For a tangible example - you invlte someone on a rafting trip and get stuck in the woods. There's only enough food for one of you, so you kill them in their sleep so that you can survive. That's not self-defense. That's murder. Manslaughter at best. But it's not self-defense.

And the fetus's life is in just as much danger as that of the mother. So the woman creates a dangerous situation. The other party's life is in danger from the woman's action. Rather than live with the consequences of her choice, she kills the other person to save herself. Self-defense doesn't apply here.

It's okay that you don't grasp the 2nd paragraph. We have plenty of time to unpack it later.

So tell me exactly how abortion is self-defense. Try to remember that in self-defense you can't create the dangerous situation. And try to remember that the fetus has no ability to defend itself.
The alternative is for both of them to die. If 2 lives are threatened and 1 can be saved, then of course doctors have to save that life. Why are we acting like this is like 30% of pregnancies? The mother's life being in danger is so incredibly rare and there's nothing she can do to prevent it unless we just say no more babies and make this the last generation of humans.

Using your example, do you think it should be legal for someone to murder their friend on a rafting trip because they were worried they might run out of food at some point? Why would you kill your friend and not kill another animal to eat? You can go 30 days without eating, so that would be a pretty flimsy excuse to kill somebody.
 
I hate that people can't get out of their own way and leave it up to the adults who are actually in the situation, the woman and her partner (if he exists). Why the fuck is it any business of some rip skater from bublefuck kansas what a woman does with her body?
Because murdering your unborn child for convenience is morally wrong.
 
The alternative is for both of them to die. If 2 lives are threatened and 1 can be saved, then of course doctors have to save that life. Why are we acting like this is like 30% of pregnancies? The mother's life being in danger is so incredibly rare and there's nothing she can do to prevent it unless we just say no more babies and make this the last generation of humans.

Using your example, do you think it should be legal for someone to murder their friend on a rafting trip because they were worried they might run out of food at some point? Why would you kill your friend and not kill another animal to eat? You can go 30 days without eating, so that would be a pretty flimsy excuse to kill somebody.
Avoiding a situation where both of them die doesn't change the scenario into self-defense. It's just a utilitarian argument pretending to some higher sense of morality.

As for applying my example to your fact pattern - I didn't claim it was self-defense or murder. I said that people who argue for abortion caveats have no business pretending that they are any different from people who also argue for abortion caveats. Just because their preferred caveats are different doesn't change that they are both arguing in favor of abortion.

You're the one who said that it self-defense vs. murder. I don't think that analogy is, well, analogous.

As for the percentage of pregnancies where this occurs...that has no bearing on the abortion question that I was raising. Surely you can see the problem with saying "Abortion is justifiable in circumstances that are unlikely to occur but not justifiable in circumstances that are likely to occur." That argument basically acknowledges that the proponent isn't taking a fetus's have rights position.

The point I'm making is very simple: If abortion is wrong because the fetus is a person that should not be killed then no external circumstance can change that. Not until the fetus ceases to be a person and thus ceases to deserve those protections. Either it's a person and you can never abort or it's not a person and people can abort.

People can't live on the fence where it's a person when they don't want the woman to have an abortion but personhood is irrelevant when they're okay with the woman having an abortion.
 
Generally an issue where I don't have a dog in the fight. I am personally PL, but believe legal abortion should be available.

I know I'm old in these parts, but my mom told me the story more than once about a classmate who died via hanger injuries in an auto repair shop when she was in HS---getting an abortion.
Mom passed at 83 Christmas 2015, so that's been a long time ago she was talking about and there isn't quite the stigma now there was then, but I don't think any 16 year-old HS girl who might have parents that would throw her out on the streets should have to end up in an auto repair shop with some guy and a hanger doing her a "favor" for a couple hundred dollars...

So pro-life for me, pro-choice for thee. How about that?
<Fedor23>
 
if we abort the child i say we abort the mother as well

mods just let me know if that is too over the top and i will edit it. it is a joke and i am not calling for murdering mothers lol
 
if we abort the child i say we abort the mother as well

mods just let me know if that is too over the top and i will edit it. it is a joke and i am not calling for murdering mothers lol

Sarah Connor....Come with me if you want to live
 
One thing both pro life & pro choice folks can agree on....That new Robin Hood flick looks God awful and should warrant a late term abortion
 
Last edited:
I'm pro life, and think abortion should be illegal but decriminalized. Like doing drugs or visiting hookers in Amsterdam.
 
I'm pro life, and think abortion should be illegal but decriminalized. Like doing drugs or visiting hookers in Amsterdam.


Ironically, doing drugs and visiting prostitutes probably leads to plenty of abortions
 
Pro choice. Its not a political issue or a religious one. But i think its 100% up to the woman who has to carry the fetus.
I was adopted tho and i think its an option that has been overlooked. I couldve been aborted but i was lucky.
 
Couldn't it be argued that if a potential mother's life is legitimately at risk, killing her unborn child could be considered killing in self defense?

I disagree with that. I argued against it in another post later in the thread. Essentially, for it to be self-defense you'd have to argue that the fetus, through its own actions, chose to put the woman's life in danger. But the facts run the other way. The woman, by choosing to become pregnant, is putting the fetus's life in danger. She chooses to become pregnant, she manages the entirety of the pregnancy with no input from the fetus and she's the one who determines if the pregnancy is too risky to continue. She's the proactive party at all times. It's hard to argue she's acting in self-defense when the other party has no agency at all. My longer post fleshed this out more competently.
 
Personally I would never advocate or want an abortion for any fetus I was the father to.

However I would never impose the force of law to force women or society to do what I want.

So TS I don't think I fit your poll.
 
My view slightly changed once I had to deal with one. I don't think it should ever be illegal, but the whole "my body, my choice" is kinda bullshit. Slip up once or twice, yea, mistakes happen, whatever, but once you get beyond that at some point you're just pre-murdering people out of inconvenience. There are women out there that use it as a form of birth control and to me that's pretty f'd up. I wouldn't be against some form of legal action after a certain point, whether it be just a ticket, community service, or a week in jail. I'm sure this is a vastly unpopular opinion, but eh.
 
I disagree with that. I argued against it in another post later in the thread. Essentially, for it to be self-defense you'd have to argue that the fetus, through its own actions, chose to put the woman's life in danger. But the facts run the other way. The woman, by choosing to become pregnant, is putting the fetus's life in danger. She chooses to become pregnant, she manages the entirety of the pregnancy with no input from the fetus and she's the one who determines if the pregnancy is too risky to continue. She's the proactive party at all times. It's hard to argue she's acting in self-defense when the other party has no agency at all. My longer post fleshed this out more competently.

I'm sorry... I edited my post after I read through more of the thread.

I don't really agree with your stance but see your logic.
 
Avoiding a situation where both of them die doesn't change the scenario into self-defense. It's just a utilitarian argument pretending to some higher sense of morality.

As for applying my example to your fact pattern - I didn't claim it was self-defense or murder. I said that people who argue for abortion caveats have no business pretending that they are any different from people who also argue for abortion caveats. Just because their preferred caveats are different doesn't change that they are both arguing in favor of abortion.

You're the one who said that it self-defense vs. murder. I don't think that analogy is, well, analogous.

As for the percentage of pregnancies where this occurs...that has no bearing on the abortion question that I was raising. Surely you can see the problem with saying "Abortion is justifiable in circumstances that are unlikely to occur but not justifiable in circumstances that are likely to occur." That argument basically acknowledges that the proponent isn't taking a fetus's have rights position.

The point I'm making is very simple: If abortion is wrong because the fetus is a person that should not be killed then no external circumstance can change that. Not until the fetus ceases to be a person and thus ceases to deserve those protections. Either it's a person and you can never abort or it's not a person and people can abort.

People can't live on the fence where it's a person when they don't want the woman to have an abortion but personhood is irrelevant when they're okay with the woman having an abortion.
That's pretty simplistic. Nobody said it isn't a life because of the circumstances. I know it's not legally self-defense, especially since killing it for any reason at all is already legal. We recognize that killing another person is wrong, but there are circumstances when killing is justifiable, which makes no claim that the person sacrificed isn't a person. It's a silly argument that nobody has made to say that both of them dying is preferable to saving one of them, and it's still a life. The circumstance sacrificing a life to save others is more common among adults than in pregnancies

Of course the frequency of these "saving the mother's life" abortions is very relevant when you claimed "she knew the risk". You know there is a tiny chance of a roller coaster flying off the track and killing everyone or a plane crashing, but you don't just say "oh well, they knew that was a possibility" and let bygones be bygones.

Are any of the pro-abortion people in favor of allowing only abortions that save the mother's life? Of course not, so why do all of you keep using that? Nobody would argue for the legalization of shooting people you don't like and give examples of justified shootings to excuse the rest. People who are shot are people, unborn children are people, and there are life-threatening circumstances where taking another life is justified.
 
Back
Top