i support abortion for pragmatic reasons... but tbh i think that saying killing a 6 month old fetus is fine but killing a newborn baby is wrong is no less arbitrary a moral distinction than to say that killing an implanted zygote is wrong but preventing a fertilized egg from being implanted via birth control is not wrong
imo both sides of the debate have a tendency to espouse dogmatic and emotionally charged rhetoric... neither side seems clearly and definitively 'right' to me from a moral p.o.v.
nonetheless i support abortion cause i think it's better to prevent people from having unwanted babies in general
that's nice dear. good luck working on your fixation problem.
i support abortion for pragmatic reasons... but tbh i think that saying killing a 6 month old fetus is fine but killing a newborn baby is wrong is no less arbitrary a moral distinction than to say that killing an implanted zygote is wrong but preventing a fertilized egg from being implanted via birth control is not wrongimo both sides of the debate have a tendency to espouse dogmatic and emotionally charged rhetoric... neither side seems clearly and definitively 'right' to me from a moral p.o.v.
nonetheless i support abortion cause i think it's better to prevent people from having unwanted babies in general
Originally posted by Bashar Teg
to suggest that someone doesn't like an answer is to imply offense, but never mind that.
Nah. It can also mean confusion on the answer. Unwillingness to accept it. Disagree with it, etc. There can be many reasons.
Offense implies something of a personal thing. I didn't see my answer as being personal (for you or for me) in any way.
Originally posted by Nibedicus
Nah. It can also mean confusion on the answer. Unwillingness to accept it. Disagree with it, etc. There can be many reasons.Offense implies something of a personal thing. I didn't see my answer as being personal (for you or for me) in any way.
i don't believe that part about 'offense' is accurate, but i take your meaning.
Originally posted by psmith81992
Oh that's cute, still responding, still emotional, and now calling me dear. How amusing 👆
Originally posted by Bashar Teg
that's nice dear.
honestly though i would consider maybe that a woman who has repeated abortions is being pretty irresponsible... sort of like someone who keeps getting caught driving with no license is considered a "habitual," and there's laws something like if you get caught 3 times within 5 years then you lose your license for a given period of time. or if you get caught with a dui a certain number of times you have your license revoked permanently.
if you have lets say 3 abortions within a 5 year period, you should be forced to have your tubes tied imo.
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
In this infancy, possibly, this does not include/ make the 3, 6 month old babies in the womb that people still kill, okay.
I think 6 months is indeed going too far. For me I would say limit it to 2-3 months max. 6 months is too far along. If you're going to get an abortion it shouldn't take 6 months to decide. I realize it is a big decision, but sometimes adults have to make these decisions.
If you don't want a child..don't wait 6 months. Or better yet people should use friggin protection. The pill, condoms, whatever. Hell..even pulling out has like a 90% chance of the girl not getting pregnant.
Well it's a no-brainer if you'll pardon the pun, a woman has, or should have, a right to terminate any pregnancy up to 24 weeks, before there's any brain function. I'm sick of compromise with religious fanatics and their insane beliefs. No, a soul does not enter a fertilized egg immediately after ejaculation.
that's a tricky situation... i suppose you could make an exception for life threatening pregnancies
the rape thing is trickier because then she could just lie about rape to be able to have the abortions.. so in that case i guess there would have to at least be charges pressed for rape in each case
but i think in general those are less likely scenarios than her just being irresponsible and not using the proper birth control methods to prevent pregnancies
i also think birth control should be state subsidized and encouraged for anyone who isn't trying to have kids on purpose
I also realize this is harsh but..I don't care much about aborted babies. We have enough people on the planet already. I am not saying we are over populated or anything like that..but we aren't in a "Children of Men" situation either.
So for me it's unfortunate if an abortion happens but..it is not the end of the world. There are more important things to worry about. We need to focus on the people that are here.
Originally posted by red g jacks
the rape thing is trickier because then she could just lie about rape to be able to have the abortions.. so in that case i guess there would have to at least be charges pressed for rape in each case
many times that's not possible, though.
Originally posted by red g jacks
but i think in general those are less likely scenarios than her just being irresponsible and not using the proper birth control methods to prevent pregnancies
still need to be considered in the interest of avoiding one extremely gross injustice after another. same logic as keeping an appeals process for death row inmates to avoid killing wrongfully convicted people.
Originally posted by Tzeentch
How does that make him wrong? It's a widely accepted truism in paleontology that gorillas, chimps and human all evolved from a common ancestor.Are you an idiot?
What if we didn't, and are simply made up of very similar DNA strands shared by many other species of animals and even flora? Why should we believe what one group says when they have decided to ignore critical facts that would throw many a wrench into their design? Not really the point of this topic lest we go astray.
I would like to know exactly how soon it is before an embryo is considered human by Mr. Nye? Then I would like to know how he knows this? We still have yet to understand what animals are saying when they speak. so we know that there could come a time that even his research on the subject could be proven faulty.
I'm not completely on any particular side when it comes to abortion, but I do believe that no one should consider it a practical means of birth control. There are simply too many variables involved to lean too far to any side. Some of these people that get abortions have mental illnesses and should be placed under the same amount of scrutiny as people that apply for the right to carry a gun are. If these people have not been raped, they should have been proactive about their sexual relationships. If you can't be responsible for your own actions, don't pull your pants down.
@ bashar
i understand the concern... i guess my counter concern is that i believe in abortion but only as a last measure. i do think it is a morally tricky situation that we are essentially allowing human beings to be killed as a measure to prevent unwanted babies from being born. as such, i think there should be some practical reinforcement of the principle that this should be a last resort measure and not the primary method of birth control being used.
that's why i chose 3 abortions within 5 years as the arbitrary criteria in this case. that's a lot of abortions to have in such a short period of time. so unless there's a legit medical reason... i.e. each pregnancy is either threatening to the life of the woman or the baby is likely to be born with some sort of birth defect, i think 3 abortions in 5 years is most likely indicative of irresponsible sexual habits than anything else.
regarding rape... that's an extremely questionable scenario. is the woman being raped by the same man repeatedly? if so, then clearly something needs to happen about that. the man needs to be in jail. if it's by 3 different men then one needs to question how it is this woman keeps finding herself in this dangerous situation within a short period of time. once again there's either a problem with her current environment or her current behavior, most likely. and so that's what should be addressed, rather than just keep killing fetuses and sending her back into the world to continue to get repeatedly raped.
obviously no solution is perfect and is going to result in ideal results that are best in every case. i think that also applies to the current system of allowing as many abortions as one wants. in this case the less than ideal results are that human beings are being systematically killed to make up for the lack of proper birth control methods being used.
Originally posted by AyelewisYour bitterness has been noted because anytime you talk about the religious, you mention fanatics. Looks like there's only one here.
Well it's a no-brainer if you'll pardon the pun, a woman has, or should have, a right to terminate any pregnancy up to 24 weeks, before there's any brain function. I'm sick of compromise with religious fanatics and their insane beliefs. No, a soul does not enter a fertilized egg immediately after ejaculation.
Originally posted by red g jacks
@ bashari understand the concern... i guess my counter concern is that i believe in abortion but only as a last measure. i do think it is a morally tricky situation that we are essentially allowing human beings to be killed as a measure to prevent unwanted babies from being born. as such, i think there should be some practical reinforcement of the principle that this should be a last resort measure and not the primary method of birth control being used.
that's why i chose 3 abortions within 5 years as the arbitrary criteria in this case. that's a lot of abortions to have in such a short period of time. so unless there's a legit medical reason... i.e. each pregnancy is either threatening to the life of the woman or the baby is likely to be born with some sort of birth defect, i think 3 abortions in 5 years is most likely indicative of irresponsible sexual habits than anything else.
regarding rape... that's an extremely questionable scenario. is the woman being raped by the same man repeatedly? if so, then clearly something needs to happen about that. the man needs to be in jail. if it's by 3 different men then one needs to question how it is this woman keeps finding herself in this dangerous situation within a short period of time. once again there's either a problem with her current environment or her current behavior, most likely. and so that's what should be addressed, rather than just keep killing fetuses and sending her back into the world to continue to get repeatedly raped.
obviously no solution is perfect and is going to result in ideal results that are best in every case. i think that also applies to the current system of allowing as many abortions as one wants. in this case the less than ideal results are that human beings are being systematically killed to make up for the lack of proper birth control methods being used.
i disagree about pre-embryo=human being, so the idea is much more palatable for me obviously.
not necessarily the same man repeatedly. you're leaving out many other scenarios. off the top of my head: what if the victim lives in terror of their attacker (like a molester guardian for example)? what if they are being trafficked in the sex slave trade? what if they were drugged/unconscious and cant identify their attacker?
i just think the best solution is one that doesnt involve placing the rights of embryonic cells over conscious sentient beings. (not trying to marginalize issues like late term abortions. i too find that practice mostly troubling)