Abortion Debate / Discussion Only In This Thread
- Thread starter JayDubya
- Start date
- Status
TheHeretic said:
One is an institutionally accepted violation of the right to liberty possessed by all human beings, "person" or no.
One is an institutionally accepted violation of the right to life possessed by all human beings, "person" or no.
As for legal definitions - so rigid and timeless, those. Speaking of the constancy therein of our legal codes, I do believe - by legal definition - a slave had a very clear answer as to when they became a person protected by law.
numble said:
Yup, look at me all pushing for war against the blue states and wanting my president to use an executive order to ban abortion. Oh, wait.
Xdrive05
Member
JayDub, I know you're busy defending your position right now, but this won't take long. You probably haven't had a chance to catch up with your replies. A couple pages back I asked you the following hypothetical question:
Again, I appreciate your time in responding. You fascinate the shit out of me so I'm really curious.
Take care.
Again, I appreciate your time in responding. You fascinate the shit out of me so I'm really curious.
Take care.
Xdrive05 said:
If I'm nonresponsive to you, it's because I thought we hashed out the questions you asked exhaustively the last time we sparred.
Personally, I'm opposed to what I'm opposed to, and I don't think the solution for one injustice is ever another injustice. So my answer to your question could not be more obvious; if you have a response to that, let's hear it.
numble said:
Other countries were able to solve this issue without massive amounts of bloodshed and destruction. Shame we couldn't. When the British banned slavery in 1833, they handled things quite a bit differently.
Lincoln had the right ideological stance on the topic but he was a powermongering asshole in practice.
Xdrive05
Member
JayDubya said:If I'm nonresponsive to you, it's because I thought we hashed out the questions you asked exhaustively the last time we sparred.
Personally, I'm opposed to what I'm opposed to, and I don't think the solution for one injustice is ever another injustice. So my answer to your question could not be more obvious; if you have a response to that, let's hear it.
So for you the injustice of a costly state educational program outweighs the injustice of millions of moms every year aggressively killing their children? Am I putting words in your mouth by phrasing it that way, and if so how? I really want to understand your thoughts on this.
D
Deleted member 1235
Unconfirmed Member
pnjtony said:
I'm down with that.
I also personally hope my first baby arrives expected and on time and I never have to make this decision.
Xdrive05
Member
JayDubya said:
But isn't that just rhetoric or dogmatism unless you actually believe all injustices are equal regardless of scope or issue? I mean do you?
And in the situation I presented you with, it is in fact a matter of rating the injustices - that's the whole point, to find out how (or if) you prioritize injustices relating to statism and abortion in this case. I'm giving you two options: 1) you can sig. raise taxes to sig. lower abortions, or 2) you can leave them alone and allow abortion rates to be sky high.
ErinIsADrunk
Member
I spent a year volunteering with AIDS prevention and women's groups in Africa and what I saw during my there will always convince me that the women should always have the right to choose for the safety of the woman. Most of this time was spent in Uganda where abortion is illegal (except when the life of the women is in danger) and because of problems the LRA in Northern Uganda there are many instances of rape, as it is used as a tool of war. Because abortions are illegal I have witnessed women doing some truly dangerous things in an effort to perform the abortions themselves and in many cases they either give themselves a disease because they aren't using proper or clean materials or they kill themselves in the process. Another common occurrence that I witnessed, particularly with young mothers is the complete abandonment of the child since they simply cannot cope with having a child or having the child of the person who raped them.
Now, the normal response I get from pro-life supporters is that this kind of stuff wouldn't happen in Western society but it did and I wouldn't think for a second that it wouldn't happen if abortion was made illegal particularly in cases involving rape since rape causes emotional and mental problems. Prior to the legalization of abortion in the United States, one method of women aborting their babies themselves was to take a coat hanger and uncoil them jam it into their uterus and when it went wrong they would push too hard, hit an artery and bleed to death.
There a whole whack of other reasons why I support abortion but this particularly reasoning is what always sticks with me and why I am steadfast in my support of women's right to choose.
Now, the normal response I get from pro-life supporters is that this kind of stuff wouldn't happen in Western society but it did and I wouldn't think for a second that it wouldn't happen if abortion was made illegal particularly in cases involving rape since rape causes emotional and mental problems. Prior to the legalization of abortion in the United States, one method of women aborting their babies themselves was to take a coat hanger and uncoil them jam it into their uterus and when it went wrong they would push too hard, hit an artery and bleed to death.
There a whole whack of other reasons why I support abortion but this particularly reasoning is what always sticks with me and why I am steadfast in my support of women's right to choose.
Lazy vs Crazy
Member
Because, poor women that live there will be unable to get an abortion. Rich women will take a flight to Connecticut or whatever and have it done there. You are advocating class warfare, and you are advocating a means to keep the poor, poor. Not to mention the racial implications of your stance...JayDubya said:
Child porn causes a net social harm. Legal abortion is a net social and economic positive. Legal abortion saves lives. Legal abortion helps the poor. Legal abortion reduces the need for the social programs you hate so much.JayDubya said:
ErinIsADrunk said:
That may be meaningful to you, but I don't understand why.
The only emotional impact that has for me is disgust, directed at the person so determined to kill an innocent that they're willing to hurt themselves to do so.
I could only have some sympathy for someone like that if they're so deranged and irrational that they need to be admitted, but like with other forms of aggressive homicide, that's not the majority of perpetrators.
Lazy vs Crazy said:
Child porn harms human young for the benefit and profit of others. Abortion kills human young for the benefit and profit of others.
Abortion has a fatality rate over 100%.
By destroying their young.
I believe in private charity, not wealth redistribution. This is an abortion thread, however. Someone could easily oppose abortion and favor wealth redistribution. Two separate issues.
Crayon Shinchan
Aquafina Fanboy
Look. Guys. You're not going to get anywhere on arguing pragmatic points against the literalist that is JayDub.
First you have to get him past the idea that a developing blastose without appropriate cognitive developmental structures is a human.
Otherwise he'll simply keep blathering, it's murder, murder, murder.
I can see where he's coming from; he's right to an extent... a 7 month old fetus that is able to survive outside of the womb as a premature baby, if aborted, would fill the majority of us with disgust. It is a reprehensible act; after all, the vagina is NOT a magical cave of personhood; if you were to remove the 7 month from the womb via the act of birthing, then kill it, there is absolutely no doubt that it's murder in all senses. Leaving it in it's womb and then killing it doesn't make a difference either.
However, there's a period during the developmental process in which the developing fetus is significantly different in nature and quality to the 7 month old fetus. I wouldn't even define it as survivability outside the womb (a 2 month premature baby would be very unlikely to survive without modern technology)... but more pointedly, and with more reason, i'd define humanity in terms of the mind; once the structures that support cognitive function start to develop, then the humanity of the child also develops. At that point, you want to close of abortions, as the fetus continues to develop into full personhood upon birth.
The counter I've seen JD parry with weakly before was that we do a similar favour for coma patients, as well as even more nebulously, patients induced into a chemical knockout, i.e. keep them alive based on their potential to (resume) attain cognitive function.
I'm not going to bother commenting on that one, other than to say, it's a stretch... a reach, on the same level as fox news pundits are going through now.
First you have to get him past the idea that a developing blastose without appropriate cognitive developmental structures is a human.
Otherwise he'll simply keep blathering, it's murder, murder, murder.
I can see where he's coming from; he's right to an extent... a 7 month old fetus that is able to survive outside of the womb as a premature baby, if aborted, would fill the majority of us with disgust. It is a reprehensible act; after all, the vagina is NOT a magical cave of personhood; if you were to remove the 7 month from the womb via the act of birthing, then kill it, there is absolutely no doubt that it's murder in all senses. Leaving it in it's womb and then killing it doesn't make a difference either.
However, there's a period during the developmental process in which the developing fetus is significantly different in nature and quality to the 7 month old fetus. I wouldn't even define it as survivability outside the womb (a 2 month premature baby would be very unlikely to survive without modern technology)... but more pointedly, and with more reason, i'd define humanity in terms of the mind; once the structures that support cognitive function start to develop, then the humanity of the child also develops. At that point, you want to close of abortions, as the fetus continues to develop into full personhood upon birth.
The counter I've seen JD parry with weakly before was that we do a similar favour for coma patients, as well as even more nebulously, patients induced into a chemical knockout, i.e. keep them alive based on their potential to (resume) attain cognitive function.
I'm not going to bother commenting on that one, other than to say, it's a stretch... a reach, on the same level as fox news pundits are going through now.
Beavertown
Garbage
JayDubya said:
Not intending to get into the debate, although I do not favor or condone abortions. But I just have trouble understanding your views.
So you'll fight tooth and nail to save an unborn baby. But once that baby is born and living, that's when you stop giving a fuck about it?
You don't care if that child's quality of life is shit? You think it doesn't need healthcare or a roof over its head? Food or clothes? Is it supposed to go out and get a job and take care of itself?
So baby born into poverty or lower class = tough shit?
Crayon Shinchan said:
I don't view it as weak or nebulous, but hey.
Coma patients that aren't brain dead and have a good prognosis (eventual recovery) are still afforded rights.
People under total anesthesia are unconscious and kept alive through assisted breathing, yet they are still afforded rights.
Those that are declared dead due to lack of brain activity have had the entirety of their lifespan and have reached a fatal pathophysiologic endpoint, one we only delay by continuing to artificially supply the ability to breathe.
Those that are proceeding with normal physiological brain development are not in the same boat as the brain dead save without some very awkward equivocation.
Beavertown said:
Not getting into this on an abortion thread, as it is irrelevant; me think private charity good, government charity bad. Someone else could have the converse view and still agree with the topic in question (Bob Casey, for example). So stick to said topic in question.
Hoping someone else will join in so it isn't me vs. all comers.
Crayon Shinchan
Aquafina Fanboy
JayDubya said:
So ladies and gentleman, we have arrived at the distillate, of the sticking point that JD has.
No, one is not like the other. I would not say blastose that has not achieved cognition development is human. On the otherhand, I would say a brain dead person is a deceased human.
Potential human, deceased human. But not a human with fully accorded rights, as granted by their cognitive capacity.
Xdrive05 said:
Your last question was like asking someone which arm they'd prefer to cut off, then insisting that they have to pick one. :lol
I would not support the program in your hypothetical scenario. I would take another approach. There are other approaches outside of your scenario.
I find abortion to be a sickening and reprehensible act.
In the cases where it has to be performed to save a mother's life, it becomes a difficult but necessary choice.
I think what I hate the most about the debate is the term "woman's right to choose what happens to her body", because it sounds so callous and insensitive and in a way it trivializes the awful situation a person feeling the need to make that decision faces.
I would do away with abortion, but because that will never happen in my lifetime and I don't get to make that decision, I'll simply make a definitive, non-inflammatory statement on the issue.
Anyone who thinks of abortion as a casual removal of unwanted cells to rectify a another casual, thoughtless choice deserves no sympathy or regard from anyone. I work at a retail store and see young (17-19), single mothers on almost a monthly basis (working in retail helps them to pay the bills). I believe their children are a beautiful and vital part of this world, and I praise them for taking responsibility for their actions.
In the cases where it has to be performed to save a mother's life, it becomes a difficult but necessary choice.
I think what I hate the most about the debate is the term "woman's right to choose what happens to her body", because it sounds so callous and insensitive and in a way it trivializes the awful situation a person feeling the need to make that decision faces.
I would do away with abortion, but because that will never happen in my lifetime and I don't get to make that decision, I'll simply make a definitive, non-inflammatory statement on the issue.
Anyone who thinks of abortion as a casual removal of unwanted cells to rectify a another casual, thoughtless choice deserves no sympathy or regard from anyone. I work at a retail store and see young (17-19), single mothers on almost a monthly basis (working in retail helps them to pay the bills). I believe their children are a beautiful and vital part of this world, and I praise them for taking responsibility for their actions.
Xdrive05
Member
JayDubya said:
Well that's the entire point of the question, as I explicitly pointed out, to determine whether you view all injustices as functionally equal (at least regarding abortion and statism), which apparently you do judging by your response.
JayDubya said:
No, you're avoiding the question by leaving the domain of the scenario. There may be a point to argue there, sure, but again you can't just not pick one for the scenario. If you do nothing because you're against raising taxes, then consequently you're choosing to let abortions remain high, per the scenario.
If it helps, think of this as one of those ethical dilemma questions every philosophy class uses. You only have two options in this scenario: 1) raise taxes and lower abortions, 2) do nothing and stand by as millions are murdered.
I won't keep bugging you about it if you just answer within the confines of the scenario. Again I'm trying to understand how your views on abortion and statism fit into your moral framework.
fistfulofmetal
Banned
I'm fine with abortion. I don't appose it in anyway and I think there's absolutely nothing wrong with it.
As long as they do it before the time when the thing inside of them has become sentient. When that is? I have no idea. It's none of my concern to know when really, but I know that at some point the lump of cells growing in there starts to develop brain activity. I think that as long as what's in there doesn't have that, it's free game.
edit: Reading back, someone mentions the second trimester as the time when this happens? Ok then, that's the cut off point.
As long as they do it before the time when the thing inside of them has become sentient. When that is? I have no idea. It's none of my concern to know when really, but I know that at some point the lump of cells growing in there starts to develop brain activity. I think that as long as what's in there doesn't have that, it's free game.
edit: Reading back, someone mentions the second trimester as the time when this happens? Ok then, that's the cut off point.
Crayon Shinchan
Aquafina Fanboy
JayDubya said:
Strawman much?
I was referring to a fetus that hadn't yet developed the neural cells or pathways (i.e. the structures needed to support cognitive capacity).
Learn2read
Member
I for one, endorse JayDubya's plan for a new Department of Utero Security. The bureaucracy of millions of new gov't agents constantly monitoring women's reproductive parts lives to ensure people are protected from the moment of conception will be a boon to our economy in these trying times.
Crayon Shinchan
Aquafina Fanboy
Speevy said:
Let me ask you this... is it beautiful for people to procreate, simply for the sake of making life? And what are your thoughts when that woman and her husband has had 20 children, and don't plan on stopping?
If they don't have resources to support their children? But persist in procreating nonetheless?
VeritasVierge
Member
I don't think it's that simple unless you want people who are against abortion no matter the circumstance and people who are for it no matter what. I don't think anybody here is really that clear cut/black and white on this unless they are ignorant.Siyou said:
cyclonekruse
Member
fistfulofmetal said:
I'm going to regret this, but define sentience. Is it different than consciousness? And why does sentience matter?
cyclonekruse
Member
Juice said:
Okay, but I want to know what his definition is. Considering he's using it as the crux of his argument, he should probably know.
But using Wiki's definition, when does that begin in a person? Is it when the fetus feels pain or when the fetus is aware that it feels pain? The latter seems to capture the "subjectivity" of it rather than just an autonomous reaction to physical damage to could occur without the person being 'aware' it happens.
Spruce Moose
Member
Nice to see you guys still going at this.
Has the problem been solved yet?
Has the problem been solved yet?
VeritasVierge
Member
After reading the first time thread, can we have a punishment for the guys that don't bother wrapping it which caused the pregnancy too?M3wThr33 said:
John Dunbar
correct about everything
Spruce Moose said:
yes, abortion has been legal for ages.
JayDubya is only concerned with the ethical side of the issue, all the practical stuff is not his problem.
I agree, abortion is wrong (except for the obvious reason), but criminalizing abortion does not make the number of abortions zero.
There is no perfect solution for this problem, but if we can't achieve zero abortions, how do we work on making it as few as possible? I doubt threatning people with prison will do the magic.
I agree, abortion is wrong (except for the obvious reason), but criminalizing abortion does not make the number of abortions zero.
There is no perfect solution for this problem, but if we can't achieve zero abortions, how do we work on making it as few as possible? I doubt threatning people with prison will do the magic.
Juice said:
Someone that is anti-abortion is someone that opposes the legality of abortion. That is more accurate than "pro-life" much of the time.
Someone that is pro-abortion is someone that promotes the legality of abortion. That is more accurate than "pro-choice" much of the time.
- Status