You're not exactly strengthening your position by agreeing with someone who's been ridiculously intellectually dishonest and twisting facts this entire debate.
GOP set to adopt official abortion platform without exceptions for rape and incest
- Thread starter cartoon_soldier
- Start date
- Status
You're not exactly strengthening your position by agreeing with someone who's been ridiculously intellectually dishonest and twisting facts this entire debate.
He is advocating his position on the subject. Devolution is asking him to clarify and expand on his posted opinion by reframing it. That's sort of how discussions like this go.
You realize you are attacking someone for simply saying that he thinks abortion shouldnt be taken lightly. That there is some morality that he thinks should be a part of the decision.
He said it's morally wrong for a woman to get an abortion.
Wolves Evolve
Member
See, you claim to be neutral here but a lot of people would say your comment about not being able to abort 'for no reason' to be, to say the least, as extreme as it comes. So this is why you're getting some grief here, just FYI.
I'm on your side here, I really am. I just think it's wrong and ridiculous. You are ending a life frivolously. Because you just don't want to accept the risk you took. Everything you do in life has risk involved....it's a matter of owning up to that slim percentage if it happens.
There is no point in arguing with you. You have your mind made up that it is completely a-ok to just abort whatever, whenever because it's not in your plans. That's wrong IMHO,.
The "for no reason" bit bothers me, because it's not as if women are going around en masse getting abortions willy nilly. It's an enormous, emotional, life altering decision.
This is the same, reworded. I think saying women end pregnancies frivolously implies a lack of respect, or appreciation, for the women in situations where they abort. It is not a frivolous decision by any stretch.
Devolution
Member
You're not on my side. Not at all. You want to give women the choice then slut shame them.
One might even say "life-ending." One like me.
You're calling a women's rights over her own body "wrong and ridiculous". And claiming to be on our side.
Well I don't know what to tell you. I already said I think it should be legal, because the alternative is much worse. I think that it's totally justifiable in probably most cases. However, there is a certain segment of the population that uses abortions as birth control. That.....that is abhorrent.
This is the response that I dont get though. Why is it shocking to hear people say that aborting a fetus is morally questionable? He even said that his morals should not be made into law, yet he still gets shit for just saying that someone may want to think a bit before getting an abortion. As if the thought of thinking about the gravity of what is happening here alone is turning women into baby production machines that should have no say in what is happening to them.
I would not disagree with that statement; it's part of why the decision is so hard. It's when you start to argue that women shouldn't have control over it - and that men should - that we part ways.
You're effectively saying here "If you have sex and get pregnant, the right decision is to own up and become a mother. I will defend your right to terminate the pregnancy, but you're a morally wrong person for doing so."
Which means you think abortion is killing a life. Which means you believe that abortion is murder. Which means you believe that you think abortion doctors and abortion patients are either committing first degree murder or at the minimum manslaughter. Maybe not exactly in those terms, but close enough.
You do understand how that might come off as insulting to somebody, right? Kinda like asking what somebody's age is in a thread when discussing this very topic because you think their opinion is childish when the reality is they have more experience than you with a partner deciding to terminate a pregnancy?
Now, if you were to say, "I don't like abortion as a solitary form of birth control because I think it's irresponsible when there are better, cheaper, ways to prevent pregnancy," then you wouldn't sound bad.
Having a child can life ending too. Especially if it survives the experience.
Devolution
Member
Oh here we go with this line of shit again.
Again, making a poor case for being on our side.
Could you give me what you consider "most cases" to be in which you think an abortion is "totally justifiable." Not trying to pile on you here, especially since I'm on the other side. The ACTUAL other extreme (almost).
What do you mean by "and that men should"? Just checking if you know my actual position and that's just a weird phrasing.
Do you believe that there are women out there that find abortion morally wrong, and that the choice should not be whether to have an abortion, but rather whether to take precautionary steps before sex? I ask because it seems that you have a narrow minded viewpoint of women and abortion, which seems odd. They're either in agreement with you or have the mindset of "It's nothing more complicated than "only sluts get raped/pregnant and I'm no slut.'"
To be clear, I'm not talking about cases of rape or incest.
What....the side that thinks it should be legal? I'm right here with you.
You just feel the need to attack someone who doesn't think that abortions are a good thing. A thing that should be nothing different than taking a tylenol to get rid of a headache. It's all the same right?
It wasn't really a direct comment on your position, so much as the observation that I don't think laws restricting abortion would pass if it were women doing the voting. Personally, I don't think men should have a say in it.
This is going to get ugly.
That's fine, I'll give you my reasons for "totally justifiable."
1.) Rape - this should be a no brainer.
2.) Medical reasons. This is pretty broad. Knowing the child will be born with a disease that will kill it. Gross deformities. Safety of the mother. A multitude of reasons here.
Devolution
Member
Not wanting to undergo a pregnancy isn't a medical reason? The possibility of maternal morality isn't a medical reason? Dear lord, how do think babies are even made.
Discomfort, growths inside your body, and stopping permanent bodily cosmetic and structural changes are not medical reasons for operations now. That about wraps it up for the medical profession.
Well, in America you'd be wrong, as more women consider themselves pro-life than pro-choice at this point (though the first time in a while), and the overwhelming majority believe in it being legal with some restrictions, such as after 20ish weeks unless there is risk to the mother.
And of course I do think all people should have a say in whether there should be laws protecting innocent children from violence.
Devolution
Member
Who are you polling?
I'm sure it's from the same source he got his 6% number from that when pressed he said it didn't matter what the statistics are.
Devolution
Member
OH it's possible, I just get really mad at the idea that I'm supposed to be content with a pro-choice person because they're pro-choice even if I consider a lot of their statements to basically be sexist or pro-life parroting.
Bowflex
The fact that anyone supports Hillary boggles my mind... I have tested between 130-160 on IQ tests
I think the idea is to reverse the ripple effect that Roe vs. Wade had on crime, and increase crime a few decades from now, therefore giving reason to increase the police state and bring us closer to Orwellian dystopia.
I was referring to the current federal baseline for legal abortions, which most women support. I was not clear, though.
So do I. But that's a topic for another thread.
No one should be able to tell my wife what to do with her body were she pregnant. It should be up to her. You are basically arguing, it should also be up to you. I get so angry and emotional at the thought of that, I have to work to remain civil on the subject.
I was referring to the current federal baseline for legal abortions, which most women support. I was not clear, though.
So do I. But that's a topic for another thread.
No one should be able to tell my wife what to do with her body were she pregnant. It should be up to her. You are basically arguing, it should also be up to you.
This is the PERFECT thread for that!
And to your edit: It would not be "up to me" what your wife did with her pregnancy, any more than what you two did with the child after it was born (hopefully healthy). I mean, I really feel this is like being accused of "telling people how to raise their children" because we say they can't neglect to feed them.
My own edit: Ghaleon, I can't remember, do you place any restrictions on abortion? Is there a point or situation in which you don't think a woman should have "control over their body"?
A child can be given to somebody else that can feed them so retaining custody implies the obligation to do so. A pregnancy cannot.
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
The instances you refer to are rare and far between. Hardly anyone gets pregnant to get out of school or just because.
And even then. You do know that it is a parent's job to provide for their child even well after they themselves have died, right? So basically, now you're saying that women should have the kid to punish them. And you're the one arguing that life is a moral obligation?
It's taking a stated policy position and making it personal. Now, I may not understand your position correctly; I've only read back a few pages since my last participation in the thread. Do you advocate for additional legal restrictions on abortion, along the lines of your personal views? Do or would you vote to further restrict abortion?
My comment is aimed at those who would, and do. I find I cannot hold these conversations in the abstract; been married 13 years and have two daughters. And in many states, their rights over their own bodies are being taken away, by other people. That is what angers me.
A pregnancy that sees through to birth can be given to somebody else, as well.
GhaleonEB said:
But somebody who is anti-abortion believes that life begins at conception; so it's not that they are against a woman killing off some random little blob of nothingness in their body, but rather a life. That's what they see as wrong. When there's another life involved, as people who are anti-abortion believe, it is no longer about taking rights away from women doing what they want with their own bodies.
Can the woman's body be returned to its prier state?
Its comments like this that give credence to the term "punishment" when it comes to pregnancy. If you have no desire to raise the child, then indeed bringing it to term is punishment
Devolution
Member
I like how to certain pro-lifers or in this case pro-choice anti-abortionists pregnancy isn't a medical condition in and of itself that women would like to avoid. It's just a passing phase or something.
Also, we would never charge a woman with child neglect/abuse because they tripped and fell and miscarried, or didn't eat properly and the fetus developed underweight and died, or they trained to hard during the third trimester and delivered too soon, or got stressed at work and miscarried, etc. etc. etc. etc.
That's why the argument is crap. They don't want to say "losing a fetus is manslaughter" it's only "abortion is murder." The choice aspect is enraging, actually losing a pregnancy is only met with an "aww, how sad" not "we should make sure it wasn't her fault that miscarriage happened."
There's a difference between the obligation to feed your children, and the alleged obligation to carry a pregnancy to term.
Please tell me you see that.
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
Just don't come near our dicks.
He's already stated that he does not. If a woman gets pregnant outside of rape she should carry the child to term or it's murder and not properly feeding a child is a crime as well. End of discussion, consequences to the mother be damned.
Of course, it's a bit more nuanced than that, but both are crimes that should be illegal.
Frist of all, are you talking about child abandonment? I honestly am confused as to what you're talking about. You said it like it's no big deal for somebody else to take custody of someone else's child and feed them. It's still the parents responsibility, and should be forced by law.
And the reason a "pregnancy cannot" is because in trying to do so you kill a human.
No, I think you've got me pegged. I'm quite a fan of the Constitutional Amendment idea of dictating when a human being has a right to life (always), even though I think it sucks that such an Amendment would be needed, as I think that is already so obviously the law of the land, our most important founding principle, and the Supreme Court should have ruled so a long time ago.
Please check my edit in the previous post, as I was asking for a little more clarification on your opinions.
NullPointer
Member
Thats honestly how a lot of this looks. One person makes one statement that they consider a fetus to be human, or that pregnancy within consensual sex can be avoided and that seems to be no different than claiming that women are nothing but birth canals and Jesus knows all.
Its a complicated issue that many people can honestly grapple with it. It'd be best if all sides of this didn't automatically assume or put words in other people's mouths.
You can be pro-choice AND believe its a heinous thing to destroy a growing life , and seek to do whatever possible on a personal, individual level to keep that from happening.
Its the cavalier attitude towards sex and its repercussions that I find childish, irresponsible and morbid.
Choices have consequences, do they not? Now, to be absolutely clear, I mean the choice to have unprotected sex. I don't believe abortion should be illegal in all circumstances like this bill says. There are instances where it's not a woman's choice, and that is understandable; I'm talking about this one facet. And talking about this one facet, I don't think a woman should have a choice to kill off a life (if I believe life begins at conception) if she made a prior choice that would/could lead to a pregnancy.
I don't disagree with that sentiment, and don't argue against it. Where I draw the line is in your second sentence.
There is a point where I grown uncomfortable, yes. Say a woman is due to deliver tomorrow, and decides she doesn't want the kid; should she be able to abort? (Totally random, hypothetical.) There's a line where I get uncomfortable, probably in the 3rd trimester. But even then I feel equally uncomfortable telling the woman that she can't make up her own mind. So I am conflicted on the subject of late term abortions, but still come down on the side of woman's choice.
So incredibly well said. Thank you. This discussion keeps turning into hypotheticals and arguments about social programs and strawmen about masturbation, but the only concern we have is "is this thing a human being that is therefore being killed"?
All someone has to do is show my why it isn't, and I will cyber-hug them for making my life so much happier. But I think it's safe to say that if such an argument existed it would have been presented a long, long time ago. Unfortunately.
Aaaand we're back to the discussion about how contraception isn't 100%.
- Status