Total Posts:10|Showing Posts:1-10
Jump to topic:

Abortion, a necessary evil

o0jeannie0o
Posts: 77
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2015 11:56:05 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
have always been pro choice; as I have matured I have realized that abortion is, very simply, selfish.

Abortion is not murder, but it is taking a {possible} life. It is as if you are taking a coma patient off life support, a fetus can't live on its own. The main difference is, normally the fetus will grow to be able to.

I guess the question is if abortion if worth it. Is the fetus worth saving? This is where the rift between pro-lifers and pro-choicer starts. What is worth more? The mothers sanity or the potential babies life?

Pro life, It has its cost: 9 months, not 18 years, only months. A mother has to go through nine months of keeping her fetus safe as well as physical and emotional pain . Then she can end the suffering (at least as much as abortion), she has the option of adoption. To say she "couldn't bare to give her baby away so I need an abortion" is pure selfishness. To give up a baby is the hardest thing people would ever do for their kids welfare, accept kill it.

Some selfishness is understandable, even justified. This is why I am still pro choice. If the mother can't handle the 9 month burden, the fetus, the baby, may not be worth it. This sounds harsh, but it is true. I have always thought that if one person could benefit from a law then it is just. Ability to perform and receive a safe abortion is one law that has proved this many times.

Some people, and the babies that benefit from abortion:

A woman who has medical issues that will cripple her due to having the baby
A rape victim who unintentionally hates the thing inside her
The crack addict who is giving her unborn child drugs
The teen who is emotionally too unstable to carry a child to term
The woman who wants to get the fetus out by ANY means necessary.

These women are unfit to carry a baby to term endangering their own health as well as the fetus. There is no tests to show which women are fit to carry a child to term. There is no time to do a psychological work up or background test. There are just women, doing what they think is right.

To the women, Abortion is not birth control, It is a necessary evil. Pregnancy is a consequence to sex, not a punishment. I hope that for those who are considering abortion seriously consider adoption. You will be giving your child a life, and a family another reason to live. There is no other truly selfless action in the world.
Comrade_Silly_Otter
Posts: 725
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2015 12:13:12 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
There are some reasons a girl can consider a late term abortion.

- A disorder forms in the fetus, for example Downs Syndrome, or other disformaties
- The financial situation of the mother changes
- Emotional distress
- " Denial " from impregnation ( Unwanted in this case, denying that its actually there )

Those are a few I can think of at the moment.
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2015 12:28:19 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/18/2015 11:56:05 AM, o0jeannie0o wrote:
have always been pro choice; as I have matured I have realized that abortion is, very simply, selfish.

Abortion is not murder, but it is taking a {possible} life.

The saying "abortion is murder" is an allegation. It's like making the case that slavery was a crime - even as it too was (once) legal.

Are you aware of the fact that people have been and will continue to be charged with "murder" for their parts in "illegal" abortions? Since illegal abortions are in fact "murders" then the saying "abortion is murder" is not baseless

It is as if you are taking a coma patient off life support, a fetus can't live on its own. The main difference is, normally the fetus will grow to be able to.

It's a bit more complicated than only that. There are certain legal procedures that have to be followed to remove someone from life support. A consideration of their prognosis is only one part of it.

I guess the question is if abortion if worth it. Is the fetus worth saving?

Under the law, the question is not based upon the worth (the value) of the child at all. Our Constitution establishes the fact that all "persons" are entitled to due process and to the "equal protections" of our laws. So, the only question is "is a child in the womb a person?" Or not.

This is where the rift between pro-lifers and pro-choicer starts. What is worth more? The mothers sanity or the potential babies life?

Not quite. See above. It's a matter of personhood and when a child's rights and personhood begins.

Pro life, It has its cost: 9 months, not 18 years, only months. A mother has to go through nine months of keeping her fetus safe as well as physical and emotional pain . Then she can end the suffering (at least as much as abortion), she has the option of adoption. To say she "couldn't bare to give her baby away so I need an abortion" is pure selfishness. To give up a baby is the hardest thing people would ever do for their kids welfare, accept kill it.

I think you meant to say "except" there.

Some selfishness is understandable, even justified. This is why I am still pro choice. If the mother can't handle the 9 month burden, the fetus, the baby, may not be worth it. This sounds harsh, but it is true.

So much for the child having a right to the "equal protection of our laws" then.

I have always thought that if one person could benefit from a law then it is just. Ability to perform and receive a safe abortion is one law that has proved this many times.

Children are persons too. As such, they are entitled to the equal protections of our laws. Prior to Roe v Wade, there was very little under our laws to establish the fact that a child in the womb is a human being / person. We knew very little then as compared to now, about things like prenatal development, dna, etc. But the court did speculate about the personhood of children in the womb and the court did say that "once personhood is established for children in the womb - the case FOR abortion becomes nearly impossible to make."

Federal and State Fetal Homicide laws have been passed in our federal Laws and (now) in 35 States, since the Supreme Court made that declaration. Those laws DEFINE a child in the womb as "a human being" and they make it a crime of "murder" to kill a "child in the womb" in a criminal act.

Some people, and the babies that benefit from abortion:

A woman who has medical issues that will cripple her due to having the baby
A rape victim who unintentionally hates the thing inside her
The crack addict who is giving her unborn child drugs
The teen who is emotionally too unstable to carry a child to term
The woman who wants to get the fetus out by ANY means necessary.

All of those situations must be considered and dealt with - with the same legal premise - that the child in the womb is a person too and as such they are entitled to the same protections of our laws that the mother is entitled to.

These women are unfit to carry a baby to term endangering their own health as well as the fetus. There is no tests to show which women are fit to carry a child to term. There is no time to do a psychological work up or background test. There are just women, doing what they think is right.

See above.

To the women, Abortion is not birth control, It is a necessary evil. Pregnancy is a consequence to sex, not a punishment. I hope that for those who are considering abortion seriously consider adoption. You will be giving your child a life, and a family another reason to live. There is no other truly selfless action in the world.
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
o0jeannie0o
Posts: 77
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2015 1:22:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/18/2015 12:28:19 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 2/18/2015 11:56:05 AM, o0jeannie0o wrote:
have always been pro choice; as I have matured I have realized that abortion is, very simply, selfish.

Abortion is not murder, but it is taking a {possible} life.

The saying "abortion is murder" is an allegation. It's like making the case that slavery was a crime - even as it too was (once) legal.

Are you aware of the fact that people have been and will continue to be charged with "murder" for their parts in "illegal" abortions? Since illegal abortions are in fact "murders" then the saying "abortion is murder" is not baseless

It is as if you are taking a coma patient off life support, a fetus can't live on its own. The main difference is, normally the fetus will grow to be able to.


It's a bit more complicated than only that. There are certain legal procedures that have to be followed to remove someone from life support. A consideration of their prognosis is only one part of it.

I guess the question is if abortion if worth it. Is the fetus worth saving?

Under the law, the question is not based upon the worth (the value) of the child at all. Our Constitution establishes the fact that all "persons" are entitled to due process and to the "equal protections" of our laws. So, the only question is "is a child in the womb a person?" Or not.

This is where the rift between pro-lifers and pro-choicer starts. What is worth more? The mothers sanity or the potential babies life?

Not quite. See above. It's a matter of personhood and when a child's rights and personhood begins.

Pro life, It has its cost: 9 months, not 18 years, only months. A mother has to go through nine months of keeping her fetus safe as well as physical and emotional pain . Then she can end the suffering (at least as much as abortion), she has the option of adoption. To say she "couldn't bare to give her baby away so I need an abortion" is pure selfishness. To give up a baby is the hardest thing people would ever do for their kids welfare, accept kill it.

I think you meant to say "except" there.

Some selfishness is understandable, even justified. This is why I am still pro choice. If the mother can't handle the 9 month burden, the fetus, the baby, may not be worth it. This sounds harsh, but it is true.

So much for the child having a right to the "equal protection of our laws" then.

I have always thought that if one person could benefit from a law then it is just. Ability to perform and receive a safe abortion is one law that has proved this many times.

Children are persons too. As such, they are entitled to the equal protections of our laws. Prior to Roe v Wade, there was very little under our laws to establish the fact that a child in the womb is a human being / person. We knew very little then as compared to now, about things like prenatal development, dna, etc. But the court did speculate about the personhood of children in the womb and the court did say that "once personhood is established for children in the womb - the case FOR abortion becomes nearly impossible to make."

Federal and State Fetal Homicide laws have been passed in our federal Laws and (now) in 35 States, since the Supreme Court made that declaration. Those laws DEFINE a child in the womb as "a human being" and they make it a crime of "murder" to kill a "child in the womb" in a criminal act.

Some people, and the babies that benefit from abortion:

A woman who has medical issues that will cripple her due to having the baby
A rape victim who unintentionally hates the thing inside her
The crack addict who is giving her unborn child drugs
The teen who is emotionally too unstable to carry a child to term
The woman who wants to get the fetus out by ANY means necessary.

All of those situations must be considered and dealt with - with the same legal premise - that the child in the womb is a person too and as such they are entitled to the same protections of our laws that the mother is entitled to.

These women are unfit to carry a baby to term endangering their own health as well as the fetus. There is no tests to show which women are fit to carry a child to term. There is no time to do a psychological work up or background test. There are just women, doing what they think is right.

See above.

To the women, Abortion is not birth control, It is a necessary evil. Pregnancy is a consequence to sex, not a punishment. I hope that for those who are considering abortion seriously consider adoption. You will be giving your child a life, and a family another reason to live. There is no other truly selfless action in the world.

I think you are simply being picky. Twisting my words as if i was being simple out of ignorance (It was to get a point across). I do know it is "a bit more complicated" when it comes to the legalities of what is life or what is murder. if was not complicated then the dilemma of abortion would not exist.

This is to state that there are some people who need legal abortion to exist, that benefit from it. Yet it is an abused system, without any way of knowing which women are abusing it or taking it for granted.

There is a hard truth within my mind, sometimes [although rarely] a baby (fetus) is better off not existing. You may have different opinions on this, that's fine.

PS. if your are going to pick on someones grammar and spelling you should know that personhood is not a word.
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2015 11:00:48 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/18/2015 1:22:45 PM, o0jeannie0o wrote:

I think you are simply being picky.

About what?

Twisting my words as if i was being simple out of ignorance (It was to get a point across).

I responded to what you said with as much information as possible to help you to see the other side.

I do know it is "a bit more complicated" when it comes to the legalities of what is life or what is murder. if was not complicated then the dilemma of abortion would not exist.

Our Constitution declares that all persons are entitled to the equal protections of our laws so, I don't see what it is you feel is "the dilemma"

This is to state that there are some people who need legal abortion to exist, that benefit from it. Yet it is an abused system, without any way of knowing which women are abusing it or taking it for granted.

I don't see that as a dilemma. It's a logistical problem for sure but that's about it.

There is a hard truth within my mind, sometimes [although rarely] a baby (fetus) is better off not existing. You may have different opinions on this, that's fine.

If the woman is pregnant, the child she is pregnant with already exists - else she wouldn't be pregnant.

PS. if your are going to pick on someones grammar and spelling you should know that personhood is not a word.

Don't tell me - tell the authors of the dictionaries who have been including it in their dictionaries since the mid 50's.
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
PetersSmith
Posts: 5,844
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2015 11:30:43 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
A human fetus is technically useless to society until it grows. And let's face it: there is nothing objectively wrong with killing useless people.
Empress of DDO (also Poll and Forum "Maintenance" Moderator)

"The two most important days in your life is the day you were born, and the day you find out why."
~Mark Twain

"Wow"
-Doge

"Don't believe everything you read on the internet just because there's a picture with a quote next to it."
~Abraham Lincoln

Guide to the Polls Section: http://www.debate.org...
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2015 12:00:10 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/18/2015 11:30:43 PM, PetersSmith wrote:
A human fetus is technically useless to society until it grows. And let's face it: there is nothing objectively wrong with killing useless people.

Our Constitution does not allow for discrimination based on the value of one another to the rest of society. We are all supposed to have an equal right to the equal protections of our laws - period.
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
Diqiucun_Cunmin
Posts: 2,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2015 2:55:44 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/18/2015 11:30:43 PM, PetersSmith wrote:
A human fetus is technically useless to society until it grows. And let's face it: there is nothing objectively wrong with killing useless people.

Yes there is. Killing violates the principle of benevolence, which is the most basic and important virtue and derived from the feeling of commiseration, which is the basis of human nature.
The thing is, I hate relativism. I hate relativism more than I hate everything else, excepting, maybe, fibreglass powerboats... What it overlooks, to put it briefly and crudely, is the fixed structure of human nature. - Jerry Fodor

Don't be a stat cynic:
http://www.debate.org...

Response to conservative views on deforestation:
http://www.debate.org...

Topics I'd like to debate (not debating ATM): http://tinyurl.com...
codpeace
Posts: 22
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2015 3:19:17 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
If a woman has difficulty in childbirth, one dismembers the embryo within her, limb by limb, because her life takes precedence over its life. However, once its head (or its 'greater part') has emerged, it may not be touched, for we do not set aside one life for another
Ohalot 7:6
o0jeannie0o
Posts: 77
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2015 12:17:23 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/18/2015 11:30:43 PM, PetersSmith wrote:
A human fetus is technically useless to society until it grows. And let's face it: there is nothing objectively wrong with killing useless people.

Interesting take on it.... Would it be wrong to kill things that are useless currently but wont be in the future? It is not as if a serial murderer can grow to not be a murderer I am totally for killing those guys.