The Abortion Debate

[rweghrheh]

The Vespertine Perception

sachiko_sohma

Wow I told myself I wouldn't debate yet I do so anyways

Well, as long as you're debating, I'm debating. Completely up to you.

sachiko_sohma

I don't like the idea of you borrowing my body but since you are a living human I personally feel I have no right to end your life unless I feel my live is in danger (you have no need to borrow my body anyways since your not a embryo/fetus)

Hypothetically, let's say I walk up to you, a complete stranger, and tell you that if you do not donate one of your kidneys and some bone marrow I will die.

If you refuse, I'm dead. However, according to your logic you've killed me by refusing to help me. I contend that this is not so. You have perhaps let me die, but you have not actually killed me.

If letting people die from something that it is possible to prevent is the equivalent to killing them, we are all killers. We do not donate every moment of every day to saving lives. People die who we could, somehow, have saved, whether by charity donations or working with the Red Cross, or what have you.

First of all even if I did agree to donate something, doesn't mean I can (I may donate blood, money or something but I prefer to keep my kidneys, sorry. I have enough help problems as it is, that is way too risk for me. If I donate any major organ, I pefer to do so after I die).

I don't see it as the same as abortion since there is still a chance you can live and find a match and have someone to help where a fetus has no chance to live (if the abortion was preform correctly). It may be able to live out side the womans body once it reaches a certain point but shorter time it has to grow and develop (like six months instead of nine), the less chance it has. Also a fetus isn't using a part of your body permently, donating a kidney is awhole different matter altogether (not only is it permant but actually part of your body).

Sorry but it's humanly impossible to save every life out there, eventually every life comes to an end.

[hfhhjdsjkdkjdas]

sachiko_sohma

I don't see it as the same as abortion since there is still a chance you can live and find a match and have someone to help where a fetus has no chance to live (if the abortion was preform correctly).

So no matter how minuscule the chance of me finding a match may be, the fact that there is still a chance justifies your withholding of marrow or kidney?

Hypothetically, let's say the chance is zero. Does that mean that morally you are forced to give me whatever organs I need?

Let's say the chance is instead five billionths. In other words, five other random people somewhere in the world could possibly supply the marrow and organs. Does this tiny, tiny chance of me finding someone else justify you effectively letting me die? Also, what if they refuse?

sachiko_sohma

Also a fetus isn't using a part of your body permently, donating a kidney is awhole different matter altogether (not only is it permant but actually part of your body).

But the fetus can and does leave a permanent trace there, most commonly from scarring.

sachiko_sohma

Sorry but it's humanly impossible to save every life out there, eventually every life comes to an end.

True, but it is possible for you save far, far more then however many you currently are saving. Does that mean you're killing them by letting them die?

[rweghrheh]

The Vespertine Perception

sachiko_sohma

I don't see it as the same as abortion since there is still a chance you can live and find a match and have someone to help where a fetus has no chance to live (if the abortion was preform correctly).

So no matter how minuscule the chance of me finding a match may be, the fact that there is still a chance justifies your withholding of marrow or kidney?

Hypothetically, let's say the chance is zero. Does that mean that morally you are forced to give me whatever organs I need?

Let's say the chance is instead five billionths. In other words, five other random people somewhere in the world could possibly supply the marrow and organs. Does this tiny, tiny chance of me finding someone else justify you effectively letting me die? Also, what if they refuse?

sachiko_sohma

Also a fetus isn't using a part of your body permently, donating a kidney is awhole different matter altogether (not only is it permant but actually part of your body).

But the fetus can and does leave a permanent trace there, most commonly from scarring.

sachiko_sohma

Sorry but it's humanly impossible to save every life out there, eventually every life comes to an end.

True, but it is possible for you save far, far more then however many you currently are saving. Does that mean you're killing them by letting them die?

No I don't see it moral to give up a vital body part, it's a nice and brave thing and can possibly save a life but nobody is forced to give up a kidney (Though it is possible to live with one kidney, it can effect your health greatly. Just like if my health and life was greatly in danger, then I might think of aborting since that is an expection i'm not against, mostly disagree with elective abortion).

If I was dying, I have little doubt a stranger or you for that matter would donate a kidney to me, and though I would like it to live, I would understand it might not happen and know that facing death is something I would have to do sooner or later and won't blame anyone or find it unjustified. I might think it's unfair to become that ill but things like that happen.

I'm not killing them, a deadly illness that nobody had control over is (even if a kidney, liver, heart is donated to them, doesn't always mean they will live, that is being realistic).

I feel this is getting off track from abortion since I see it as way too different things.

[hfhhjdsjkdkjdas]

sachiko_sohma

No I don't see it moral to give up a vital body part, it's a nice and brave thing and can possibly save a life but nobody is forced to give up a kidney

Okay, we are in agreement here.

If not giving up a body part is not necessarily immoral, does that mean not giving up a womb for nine months is not necessarily immoral as well?

sachiko_sohma

Though it is possible to live with one kidney, it can effect your health greatly. Just like if my health and life was greatly in danger, then I might think of aborting since that is an expection i'm not against

But then that exception creates even more questions. When does the danger become "great" is there a line? Exactly how life-threatening does it have to become before abortion becomes moral from your point of view?

sachiko_sohma

I'm not killing them, a deadly illness that nobody had control over is (even if a kidney, liver, heart is donated to them, doesn't always mean they will live, that is being realistic).

No, but the chance of survival is greatly increased by the donation of an organ. Just like how the chance of survival is greatly increased for a fetus by retaining the pregnancy.

Does this mean that abortion is not killing the fetus, the fetus's own weakness is?

sachiko_sohma

I feel this is getting off track from abortion since I see it as way too different things.

It's the same moral argument, just slightly differing issues. It's still an effective analogy.

[GoatShow]

The Vespertine Perception

sachiko_sohma

I personally think the baby isn't part of the woman

If it isn't a physical part of the woman then surely she is entitled to remove any alien material body from her? Some do not view the fetus as killed but merely as a victim of its own weakness, as it cannot survive outside the womb by itself. Similar to a parasite, if you will.

Perhaps, but if I were to take a newborn and strand it somewhere, wouldn't it also die a victim of its own weakness?

[rweghrheh]

The Vespertine Perception

sachiko_sohma

No I don't see it moral to give up a vital body part, it's a nice and brave thing and can possibly save a life but nobody is forced to give up a kidney

Okay, we are in agreement here.

If not giving up a body part is not necessarily immoral, does that mean not giving up a womb for nine months is not necessarily immoral as well?

sachiko_sohma

Though it is possible to live with one kidney, it can effect your health greatly. Just like if my health and life was greatly in danger, then I might think of aborting since that is an expection i'm not against

But then that exception creates even more questions. When does the danger become "great" is there a line? Exactly how life-threatening does it have to become before abortion becomes moral from your point of view?

sachiko_sohma

I'm not killing them, a deadly illness that nobody had control over is (even if a kidney, liver, heart is donated to them, doesn't always mean they will live, that is being realistic).

No, but the chance of survival is greatly increased by the donation of an organ. Just like how the chance of survival is greatly increased for a fetus by retaining the pregnancy.

Does this mean that abortion is not killing the fetus, the fetus's own weakness is?

sachiko_sohma

I feel this is getting off track from abortion since I see it as way too different things.

It's the same moral argument, just slightly differing issues. It's still an effective analogy.

I never claimed it was immoral or not, I just said I disagree.

Abortion is different cause that is planned to end a life, that is the whole purpose of abortion (ending pregnancy) while illnesses isn't planned and not when not getting an organ that they need doesn't mean people plan to kill them or wanted them dead.

Some people choose to wait to die before donating and some don't want to donate anything at all. It's actually their body and can make that choice. The point was the fetus isn't them but a seperate human and they can't make a choice at all.
I don't see it as a victim of it's own weakness.

Also as Goatshow said- by that logic a baby would be a victim of its own weakness if it died because it had nobody to care for it. Does that mean it's his/her fault it died and deserved it cause they can't care for themself? People would find that cruel.

[hfhhjdsjkdkjdas]

sachiko_sohma

Abortion is different cause that is planned to end a life, that is the whole purpose of abortion (ending pregnancy) while illnesses isn't planned and not when not getting an organ that they need doesn't mean people plan to kill them or wanted them dead.

You're relating the wrong concepts. I'm relating illness or whatever to pregnancy, and abortion to organ donation.

sachiko_sohma

The point was the fetus isn't them but a seperate human and they can't make a choice at all.

If it is a separate human then surely it is violating my body?

GoatShow

Perhaps, but if I were to take a newborn and strand it somewhere, wouldn't it also die a victim of its own weakness?

Perhaps, but removing a fetus from your physical body is a far cry from dumping a baby somewhere.

[iSkyla]

Lady-of-Slaughter

-Skyla Beth-

*cuts out the incredibly long and incredibly amazing, intelligent, inspiring post*

I applaud you. You have truly shown what it means to be pro-choice, at least for me. Not only that, but you have presented a complete and comprehensive argument addressing nearly all of the aspects of abortion, and demonstrated that all the while you are a true Christian who abides by your religion. Great job on this intelligent and informed post! heart

Thank you very much. ^^

[iSkyla]

sachiko_sohma

Ok I hadn't been here in awhile and didn't plan on debating again but I read something on here that bothers me and I feel the need to speak up.

-Skyla Beth-
Pro-Life doesn't equal anti-woman (in fact many pro-lifers or personal pro-lifers which I techically call myself are woman, including I and we do care about woman).

I disagree. It is anti-woman because by not letting her have the abortion is forcing her to live with a single mistake for the very least, 9 months.

Quote:

In fact not all pro-lifers protest or even try to ban abortion, most agree that prevent of pregnancy is the best thing since it can help limit abortion. Though some protest, most still don't stop the woman from abortion. Most don't force them to give birth. And Alot of pro-lifes (at least the ones in the guild here) aren't against sex, not even before marriage nor do we think it's only for procreation and making babies.

Pro-life personal may be that way, but MOST pro-life political say abortion should be limited to special circumstances such as rape or should be banned all together unless the mother's life is at stake.

Quote:

I, as well has other pro-lifers are in favor of Birth Control and even plan B (though since that is stronger, it should only be used during an emergency. Not everyone can handle birth control cause of the hormones and it's something you have to talk to the doctor about and get regular check-ups for. I get calls for check-ups and exams every few months it seems and they also may not give refills until they talk to the doctor before had). Not all pro-lifers are against that.

I realize this. There are a lot of pro-life political that believe abstinence should be the sole birth control. Check out "thepillkills.com" and you'll see what I mean.

Quote:

I'm personally not sure what to think about abortion when it's yet to become an embryo.

How do you know that none of pro-lifers don't care about the baby after it is born or about the woman? Sure there are some that don't give a damn after it is born but not everyone is like that and that is the point I like to make.

Again, it was directed at MOST. Of course I don't know every single pro-lifers point of view, but if they cared so much after the birth you would see the difference in the orphanages and there would be more adoptions. You would be able to see the change in the foster homes. If they can't afford to take a child in, or donate, they could still give their time.

Quote:

Who is to say either will have a horrible life? Just like who is the say her life will be perfect if she had an abortion?
Nobody knows what life will be like in the future, there will always be up and downs (also who is to say she would HAVE to keep the baby?

No, an abortion won't make her life perfect. If she can't afford the child though, it will certainly help her financially and it will help her to have a better quality of life. Every baby is NOT going to be adopted into a loving home. I'd guess the chances of that are 2/5. That leaves the other 3/5 to most likely have a rough life, not necessarily horrible.

Quote:

There is adoption and there is also programs that helps woman, girls, couples,ect....)

The pretend example I gave was just an example of if abortion gets banned. Of course not everyone who has the baby has to keep it. But seriously? How many orphans do we already have who never get adopted? Do you really want to add to that problem? Those programs HARDLY help. I know from experience with my sis and my niece.

Quote:

Abortion is legal and people still kill their babies and dump them in the trash or kill themselfs, legal or not, it will still happen either way sadly. Hear about it many times.
Even if it was illegal, people will still take the risk and brake the law to have an abortion preformed (technically like it or not it's their choice to do so, nobody made them.
They don't deserve to die but that is part of the risk unfortunatly).
And there will always be risk when medication and surgery is involved so abortion will never be 100% safe, there are chances of complications during and after abortion just like there could be a chance of complication during pregnancy and childbirth (though it probably would be higher then childbirth I believe do to possible infections,puncturing of the uterus,ect...surgery will always have major risks, it's part of taking a chance).

Yes, some people will always be that way... but the problem would get worse if abortion were illegal. If it was illegal, yes people would still take the risk, BUT it would be even riskier because you wouldn't be able to do it in a hospital. The environment would most likely not be sterile and have a MUCH higher risk of infection/death. I didn't say abortion was 100% safe. I said it was safe, moreso than the past.

Quote:

There is alot of things in your post I don't like and think maybe you should go back and reword things, it might help your arguement out.

Depends on your interpretation. Others may think it was worded perfectly. I could have worded it differently, but if anyone questions what I meant, I can always explain.

Quote:

By the way, i'm not a Christian, i'm agnostic. How I feel about abortion doesn't have anything to do with God/Gods/Goddess,religion, or the government (personally I don't trust some things and people in the government). I personally think the baby isn't part of the woman (i'm not my mom, either is anyone else) and feel that it's taking a life that isn't yours

A majority of pro-lifers do believe in a god and base their opinions on such which is why I brought up my religion. I had that in the post originally, but I changed it. I believe The Vespertine Perception made a very good point about not being part of your mother.

Quote:

but that's just an opinon just like you feel that people don't have the right to tell you want to do.

Are you saying you feel people DO have the right to tell me what to do?

Quote:

I probably wouldn't come back to debate again since I didn't plan to so in the first place, I just felt something needed to be said about the pro-life side and it's generalisation and generalistion on both sides (since nobody really said anything about it). Overtime I learn new things and have a different view and opinon on everything.

If there is any spelling mistakes or if I didn't do a good job explaining things and debating, I apologize. I try to be respectful as possible (even though I was abit offended at times, mainly about the pro-lifers are anti-woman, I would feel the same if someone said pro-life is anti-choice just like pro-choicers would be offended if they are called anti-life or pro-abortion/death since it isn't accurate).

I honestly wouldn't be offended if I were called anti-life because I don't believe it is a life. So that title doesn't include me. Pro-abortion would be me saying every woman should have an abortion no matter what and that's just ridiculous. Pro-death would be me saying everyone should die now. I do believe pro-life is seriously anti-woman though because pro-life political puts the "baby" before the woman. Her life isn't has important as the thing inside her whether it's for 9 months or a life-time. You say you won't be back, but how can you resist? smile

[rweghrheh]

Yes I know, I couldn't resist.

But seriously, we aren't anti-woman so stop calling us that, it's rude and incorrect. I am a woman, why would I hate myself or anyother woman? We just hate the though of killing unless it's for survival.

No one is forcing the woman out of the abortion. Nobody is holding a gun to their head and force them to give birth. It's not banned or anything.

The people from "thepillkills" are far and few between, they are just the ones that speak the loudest and are more noticed. Seriously, almost all the pro-lifers I know support the pill in order to limit abortion (heck i'm even on the pill).

And lot of us do care and try to help people out. I helped give money, clothes, food, ect...I don't have much but I do what I can. I'm sure many others do help. My family helped foster kids before and almost adopted someone but due to some complications, they weren't able to.

I know plently of people that had adopted children (not all were perfect healthly white child, most actually had some sort of problem), so to say noone helps at all is ridiculous. Maybe some people want to help but aren't able to for one reason or another.

If a woman has financial problems, that is why there are some programs that help them out. Some even allow woman to stay for awhile and help them go to school or get a job. Some places even have daycare. Maybe there isn't many places like that out there but there are some.
Why should the offspring be punished cause the woman is having some problems?

If you have problems with aboption, why not help fix it as well? You tell us to care and help people, why don't choicers help as well? We all agree there need to be some changes so people can work together.

As for part of your mother part- The fetus isn't the mom, it is just using the moms body for awhile, Just because it dies without her doesn't mean it is her.

[qoute]Are you saying you feel people DO have the right to tell me what to do?

Quote:

. I think you clearly missed something there. Nobody is controlling you or telling what to do. The point I was making is people feel they have the right to abort and we feel that killing isn't a right. Not saying you can't abort, just disagree with abortion and think it's a horrible thing.

I also think you missed the point of the last part- Not all pro-lifers are the same as well as not all pro-choicers are the same and both sides get offend when people use certain terms to discride them. That is called generalising, which a notice alot on here.

[Heart of the Fallen Angel]

sachiko_sohma

But seriously, we aren't anti-woman so stop calling us that, it's rude and incorrect. I am a woman, why would I hate myself or anyother woman? We just hate the though of killing unless it's for survival.

The term Pro-Life, is often synonymous with Misongyny, or woman hating. Abortion is a woman's right to make choices about her reproductive system, and how it is used or not used. To outlaw abortion is to remove a woman's rights of bodily domain, and granting a fetus rights that no living human has, the right to her blood, organs, and nutrients without her consent.


Now then, if it came to a vote, would you vote to outlaw abortion, or would you vote to keep it legal. If you choose to outlaw it, then you truely are pro-life, and you truely are anti-woman. If you do nothing, or vote for it to remain legal, then you are pro-life for yourself, but pro-choice for others, and thusly, NOT anti-woman.

[rweghrheh]

Heart of the Fallen Angel

sachiko_sohma

But seriously, we aren't anti-woman so stop calling us that, it's rude and incorrect. I am a woman, why would I hate myself or anyother woman? We just hate the though of killing unless it's for survival.

The term Pro-Life, is often synonymous with Misongyny, or woman hating. Abortion is a woman's right to make choices about her reproductive system, and how it is used or not used. To outlaw abortion is to remove a woman's rights of bodily domain, and granting a fetus rights that no living human has, the right to her blood, organs, and nutrients without her consent.


Now then, if it came to a vote, would you vote to outlaw abortion, or would you vote to keep it legal. If you choose to outlaw it, then you truely are pro-life, and you truely are anti-woman. If you do nothing, or vote for it to remain legal, then you are pro-life for yourself, but pro-choice for others, and thusly, NOT anti-woman.

I don't vote so it wouldn't matter to me (it's a choice not to vote), I rather people just help limit it, not completely ban it (not like banning it would stop abortion either way so it's sort of pointless).

And I still disgree-true pro-life isn't anti-woman, they care for both, if anything they would be more anti-abortion.

If people cared about bodily domain, why take a life of another? Doesn't a fetus have a body too?

According to a medical dictionary- third through eight weeks it starts to develop a organ system and embryo starts to show human form. They may not be fully developed but it's still a living human as well.

[Heart of the Fallen Angel]

sachiko_sohma

Heart of the Fallen Angel

sachiko_sohma

But seriously, we aren't anti-woman so stop calling us that, it's rude and incorrect. I am a woman, why would I hate myself or anyother woman? We just hate the though of killing unless it's for survival.

The term Pro-Life, is often synonymous with Misongyny, or woman hating. Abortion is a woman's right to make choices about her reproductive system, and how it is used or not used. To outlaw abortion is to remove a woman's rights of bodily domain, and granting a fetus rights that no living human has, the right to her blood, organs, and nutrients without her consent.


Now then, if it came to a vote, would you vote to outlaw abortion, or would you vote to keep it legal. If you choose to outlaw it, then you truely are pro-life, and you truely are anti-woman. If you do nothing, or vote for it to remain legal, then you are pro-life for yourself, but pro-choice for others, and thusly, NOT anti-woman.

I don't vote so it wouldn't matter to me (it's a choice not to vote), I rather people just help limit it, not completely ban it (not like banning it would stop abortion either way so it's sort of pointless).

And I still disgree-true pro-life isn't anti-woman, they care for both, if anything they would be more anti-abortion.

If people cared about bodily domain, why take a life of another? Doesn't a fetus have a body too?

According to a medical dictionary- third through eight weeks it starts to develop a organ system and embryo starts to show human form. They may not be fully developed but it's still a living human as well.

The fetus does have a body, yet, it's body is infringing on the rights of a woman's bodily domain.

[eIitebanao]

Heart of the Fallen Angel

sachiko_sohma

Heart of the Fallen Angel

sachiko_sohma

But seriously, we aren't anti-woman so stop calling us that, it's rude and incorrect. I am a woman, why would I hate myself or anyother woman? We just hate the though of killing unless it's for survival.

The term Pro-Life, is often synonymous with Misongyny, or woman hating. Abortion is a woman's right to make choices about her reproductive system, and how it is used or not used. To outlaw abortion is to remove a woman's rights of bodily domain, and granting a fetus rights that no living human has, the right to her blood, organs, and nutrients without her consent.


Now then, if it came to a vote, would you vote to outlaw abortion, or would you vote to keep it legal. If you choose to outlaw it, then you truely are pro-life, and you truely are anti-woman. If you do nothing, or vote for it to remain legal, then you are pro-life for yourself, but pro-choice for others, and thusly, NOT anti-woman.

I don't vote so it wouldn't matter to me (it's a choice not to vote), I rather people just help limit it, not completely ban it (not like banning it would stop abortion either way so it's sort of pointless).

And I still disgree-true pro-life isn't anti-woman, they care for both, if anything they would be more anti-abortion.

If people cared about bodily domain, why take a life of another? Doesn't a fetus have a body too?

According to a medical dictionary- third through eight weeks it starts to develop a organ system and embryo starts to show human form. They may not be fully developed but it's still a living human as well.

The fetus does have a body, yet, it's body is infringing on the rights of a woman's bodily domain.

@ Sachiko_sohama-

At the bolded statement:
Just because you have a body,organ system, or an appearance of a human being does not give you the right of bodily domain. If so, then nearly every animal has its own right of bodily domain [which is, usually, only given to human beings].

[rweghrheh]

[Shimizu-chan]

Heart of the Fallen Angel

sachiko_sohma

Heart of the Fallen Angel

sachiko_sohma

But seriously, we aren't anti-woman so stop calling us that, it's rude and incorrect. I am a woman, why would I hate myself or anyother woman? We just hate the though of killing unless it's for survival.

The term Pro-Life, is often synonymous with Misongyny, or woman hating. Abortion is a woman's right to make choices about her reproductive system, and how it is used or not used. To outlaw abortion is to remove a woman's rights of bodily domain, and granting a fetus rights that no living human has, the right to her blood, organs, and nutrients without her consent.


Now then, if it came to a vote, would you vote to outlaw abortion, or would you vote to keep it legal. If you choose to outlaw it, then you truely are pro-life, and you truely are anti-woman. If you do nothing, or vote for it to remain legal, then you are pro-life for yourself, but pro-choice for others, and thusly, NOT anti-woman.

I don't vote so it wouldn't matter to me (it's a choice not to vote), I rather people just help limit it, not completely ban it (not like banning it would stop abortion either way so it's sort of pointless).

And I still disgree-true pro-life isn't anti-woman, they care for both, if anything they would be more anti-abortion.

If people cared about bodily domain, why take a life of another? Doesn't a fetus have a body too?

According to a medical dictionary- third through eight weeks it starts to develop a organ system and embryo starts to show human form. They may not be fully developed but it's still a living human as well.

The fetus does have a body, yet, it's body is infringing on the rights of a woman's bodily domain.

@ Sachiko_sohama-

At the bolded statement:
Just because you have a body,organ system, or an appearance of a human being does not give you the right of bodily domain. If so, then nearly every animal has its own right of bodily domain [which is, usually, only given to human beings].

But you yet to answear why it doesn't. What makes it less deserving to live? Even some animals (like the Condors) have more rights then a fetus when it comes to bodily domain. That's what I don't get about bodily domain.

Some animals have to die for us to live (we need to eat and every thing we eat is either from an animal or a plant), lets not get into that.