-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Pence becomes 1st vice president to address March for Life
- Thread starter Beefy
- Start date
- Status
So abortion is one of those things in society that people are generally going to do regardless of its legality right? It's kind of like alcohol or drugs or prostitution in that sense right? One of the big arguments is that a ban would really just lead to a whole lot of illegal, unsafe abortions.
My question right now is this: how much are people willing to deal with the results of that crimalization? Are they willing to start arresting large numbers of people for abortions? I guess I should look up what the incarceration rate was for that pre-Roe or what it might be now in societies with no legal abortion.
My question right now is this: how much are people willing to deal with the results of that crimalization? Are they willing to start arresting large numbers of people for abortions? I guess I should look up what the incarceration rate was for that pre-Roe or what it might be now in societies with no legal abortion.
How About No
Member
Of course he does, he's got support from his boss:
Like it was anything surprising, but I guess this is the direction we're going in
Like someone said earlier, you can't ban abortions, you can only ban safe, legal abortions
Eye for an Eye
Member
There's still a few catholic countries with complete bans on abortions. Women are turned into criminals for having a miscarriage. Rich women have the money to travel to abortion friendly countries (mostly Irish to other EU nations). And the rest are left to suffer the outcomes. It could mean bringing a child into a malnourished home or abusive home or giving birth to a still born or a baby with a 0% chance at survival.
They could make the abortion pills an OTC drug and handed out like plan B, but it takes away the safety net of doctors and counselors. I don't believe in waiting periods, but I do believe the counselors are invaluable because so many women need help in making a decision.
Khalifa Jayy
Banned
Why not allow women (just the women!) to kill their babies and toddlers, too?
Why is it that when a person slits their wrists we'll do whatever possible to preserve their life yet we allow a woman to murder the defenseless child in their body?
"It's their body" argument falls flat on its face with any sort of logical reasoning.
Ryzaki009
Member
Yep. That's what I fully believe much of that 47% of women who voted for Trump are. Every other women trying to get an abortion is a skeezy streetwalker. Meanwhile they're special snowflakes that made a mistake.
Pretty much. Its actually a great line that if abortions were banned, people would just do black market shit which is not only more dangerous but also empowering/rewarding the worst in society. I have had success in convincing pro-lifers to change their views with this logic.
NoblesseOblige
Banned
Because a baby or toddler is not living inside a woman.
Because anti-choicers make sure that it is currently illegal in most places. Where it is legal it is often performed by a professional, usually after a psychological examination. My pro-choice stance extends into assisted-suicide.
No it does not. You just fail to reason correctly.
Jesus fucking Christ
if you're playing devil's advocate you're doing a bad job of it
MWS Natural
Member
Thank all of the white women who happily voted Trump into office.
🤐
Eye for an Eye
Member
So for the hundreds of women that have a very much wanted pregnancy, in a loving house, with a loving husband, and enough money to properly raise a child, is not allowed to have an abortion because she received news that her unborn baby will not survive outside the womb? These are the women receiving this kind of devestating news at 20 weeks gestation, the point in a pregnancy that is most often targeted in these abortion limits.
How is an abortion at that stage anymore traumatizing or cruel to the unborn or the mother if the process of birth would be significantly worse on the baby?
Ohh and please tell it straight to my face, to me personally, how evil of a person I am because I chose ending two pregnancies at 21 weeks because of a genetic diagnosis. Because I stand for all the women in my shoes and all the women who want to make a choice about their life and body. I will never discriminate or judge a woman for choosing an abortion for whatever reason she chooses. Because if I have a choice, they should have a choice too. Or did you not realize that the female gender is present on these boards too?
ahahah, ahahahahahahaha, hahahahahahaha lol
ZombiePlatypus
Member
This is why I don't want a Trump impeachment. It just gets way more ugly as you look at what he's surrounded by.
hurricanes
Member
A baby isn't living inside anybody's womb, moron.
Karsticles
Member
You think pre-born infants aren't alive?
NoblesseOblige
Banned
Did you read the post you responded to?
Also there's no such thing as 'pre-born infants' haha.
At what age is the fetus in the woman a "child?"
Of course he does, he's got support from his boss:
This will be one of many marches against personal freedom.
Khalifa Jayy
Banned
Eye for an Eye
Member
No it's not. An infant is not an infant until it is born and breathing on its own.
excelsiorlef
Member
We don't force organ donations... even of the dead.
We dont force blood donations and transfusions.
No one is entitled to physically live off your body... ergo abortion is a legal means to securing that freedom
We dont force blood donations and transfusions.
No one is entitled to physically live off your body... ergo abortion is a legal means to securing that freedom
NoblesseOblige
Banned
So are you going to reply to the other people who responded to you? or just play the fallacy card like the super logical intelligent arguer that you are?
I'm totally pro choice, but so you think that 6, 7, 8 months old abortions should be allowed by law? Because I don't think so.
Except on very specific cases that put at risk the life of the mother and the baby.
DasPenguin
Member
It's really hard to take you seriously after your previous post. I really thought it was sarcastic or you were trying to be funny. I'm sure you will eventually come out with the "but the Bible says so!" argument. That is pretty much the only thing missing from than gem of yours.
NoblesseOblige
Banned
I do. But the poster you responded to doesn't even imply that in their post. They are stating the scientific fact that a baby doesn't exist in the womb. While there it is referred to as a fetus. A baby, or 'infant', requires birth.
This is a dumb argument because no one is waiting 6-8 months to get an abortion unless it's completely medically fucking necessary to do so.
So, yes, it should be legal because you and I aren't the individual and their fucking doctor deciding the best course of action.
Whay dumbshit argument? Read my edit.
All I mean is that someone shouldn't be able to enter an abortion clinic with a 6 months old pregnancy and have an abortion just because.
Khalifa Jayy
Banned
The not-yet-birthed human is absolutely living while physically located inside the womb.
Nice ad hominen.
The Bible has nothing to do with this conversation regarding lives of unborn humans.
excelsiorlef
Member
Why not?
This thread is exhausting to simply read so thank you and everyone else putting in the work.
And I'm saying that isn't happening.
Like, literally. The people that get abortions after 6 months are people that have the special cases you're talking about. Why do we need to spell that out in a law in such a way that makes people jump through hoops to prove shit when their life may be in danger? What doctor do you think is going to advise aborting a viable fetus unless it's necessary?
Seriously, the scenarios we've drawn up in mainstream media on what's apparently happening or what we have to stop from happening are just the boogiemen in the closet. They aren't real and it's time we just stop giving them credence as real arguments. They're used as cudgels to scare people into taking away rights.
I think you guys are dancing around misunderstanding each other here. He's saying that it's not a baby or an infant when it's in the womb, and the crucial difference between a baby and a fetus in the question of why not let people kill their kids is the fact that a fetus is literally living off of and inside a person. You're misunderstanding him and thinking he's saying it's not living. The argument wasn't about whether it's living or not, it was about how and where it's living.
At what point is it an "unborn human?"
excelsiorlef
Member
We celebrate age by birth date. The moment baby is removed from.the woman. That is when life begins.
Because the fetus is pretty much formed? It's a smaller baby inside the mother's womb.
NoblesseOblige
Banned
"The not-yet-birthed human"
Welp, that's a new ridiculous term for a fetus to me.
So? If a woman decides she doesn't want to give birth then why do you think it's right to force her to serve as an incubator to the remaining term?
Welp, that's a new ridiculous term for a fetus to me.
So? If a woman decides she doesn't want to give birth then why do you think it's right to force her to serve as an incubator to the remaining term?
i swear dudes think women and doctors are sitting in a little room playing rock paper scissors on if a child should get the ax or not. this is a big fucking, depressing ass fucking decision and notask fucking wid of all people isn't going to be the one to choose scissors
this is why americans and political parties get to have their way with us. people like you and khalifa jayy. fuck your decision, fuck your "shucks, im torn on the whole thing" attitude... its not fair that we have to continue playing checkers with these assholes.
Personally, as you can see from my posts, I'm pro choice as hell, but I don't like this argument. To me a fetus is pretty clearly life. It's not a person requiring constitutional protections, though. Just being life to me doesn't mean much, and to society it doesn't either as you can see from a lot of other 'life.' It's kind of a meaningless thing, but it's very easy for a 'pro-life' person to shoot down your argument if that's what you stick with. So, yeah, it's life, but it's not life worth protecting at all costs if it means unraveling all of society, locking women up for what they do with their body and removing their right bodily integrity plus crippling our scientific advances, etc etc.
This is still just a dumb argument to pay any mind to. The amount of women who would wait until it's fully formed like that and pretty much viable before thinking "oh fuck it I'll have an abortion!" is like.. no one. Literally no one. Why even discuss this unless it's for almost purely philosophical masturbation? It's not worth regulating something like this to me.
There's plenty of things that humans will continue to do despite laws against them. That really shouldn't have an impact on whether it's illegal or not.
Seriously, I can't wrap my brain around it. It's like people are so sold on the scary propaganda that they think abortions as contraception is a thing, and people will just pop in after 6 goddamned months of carrying it, like "nah, I rethought this whole thing." And then they think the Doctor is gonna be all "Ok, cool we'll just take that right out right now!"
Our society needs to actually talk about abortion more. They need to know what women go through for this shit, and it should be a more common story to hear. Instead we bottle it up and then this is the stuff people spout.
NoblesseOblige
Banned
Clearly the context of 'life' in that sentence is 'life as a person'.
That's unfortunate you think of those women as no ones.
excelsiorlef
Member
And?
Eye for an Eye
Member
Women shouldn't be forced to spend $12,000 - $15,000 out of pocket to go to Colorado or New Mexico because those are the only two places in the US that allow it. Plus travel expenses of flying last minute. Plus hotel costs. Plus childcare cost if they already have children at home. On top of being away from home. Away from family support. Away from trusted doctors. It's already an emotionally draining experience and all it does is add stress to be in a completely unfamiliar place with no one but your spouse during one of the most tragic experiences a woman can go through.
Less than 1% of abortions are after 20 weeks.
I only had to travel 2hrs away and that was stressful.
I know what they meant, I was just cautioning that particular phrasing because it's not clear to everyone. I mean, say that to someone that's pro-life and the entire argument shifts to a spot you'll never actually get back from. You have to choose words and phrases carefully when talking about this sort of stuff.
Huh? I mean I don't deny that it's ever happened, but that's just not a thing we should focus on at all.
Actual reasons women have late term abortions (and by late I don't necessarily mean 6 months, I mean 20 weeks or more):
1) Medical necessity for their own life
2) Birth defects
3) They didn't actually know they were pregnant until late
4) Jumping through hoops put into place by republicans
Abortion is a really fucking hard decision and almost no one is actually waiting 6 months before doing it. Most late abortions are from wanted pregnancies, actually, and it's circumstances like 1 and 2 that force them to go that route.
I mean, it's not a glamourous subject. And some men will always find a way to make it about themselves. their thoughts. their feelings. Always.
Tough Topic.
I guess I am in the middle, I see both sides. The mother should ALWAYS have a choice, but that choice needs to be made in a responsible amount of time. That includes enough time to receive counselling to make an informed and non-emotional decision.
Fact is I was adopted at a very early age (less than a month old), if the laws of today existed when I was born I likely would not be here today, so I could never be full-on Pro-Choice.
My daughter was taken early (1lb-3oz) due to my wife having a medical condition called Toxemia. My daughter is 16, does great in school and plays competitive Vball. There are states where at the time she was taken, it would have been legal to abort.
Thats Re-Fucking-Diculous.
The choice should always be available, but if the woman is not responsible enough to make a CHOICE to get checked if pregnancy is a possibility early on, they are not responsible enough to make this extremely important CHOICE either..
I guess I am in the middle, I see both sides. The mother should ALWAYS have a choice, but that choice needs to be made in a responsible amount of time. That includes enough time to receive counselling to make an informed and non-emotional decision.
Fact is I was adopted at a very early age (less than a month old), if the laws of today existed when I was born I likely would not be here today, so I could never be full-on Pro-Choice.
My daughter was taken early (1lb-3oz) due to my wife having a medical condition called Toxemia. My daughter is 16, does great in school and plays competitive Vball. There are states where at the time she was taken, it would have been legal to abort.
Thats Re-Fucking-Diculous.
The choice should always be available, but if the woman is not responsible enough to make a CHOICE to get checked if pregnancy is a possibility early on, they are not responsible enough to make this extremely important CHOICE either..
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked