Welcome to Gaia! ::

The problem once again however, is that you are failing to realise that some people never want children. Also some people will never be able to afford children. Some people will die if they carry a child full term. What you are saying is that they should never have sex, because you believe that they should wait until they are able to afford a child before they have sex.

I agree that sex is not worth the life of another human being, however just because someone has sex when they're not ready for a child, does not mean they're going to take the life of another human being.

You act as though everyone who gets pregnant when they're not trying to, is going to rush off and get an abortion.

I was not using those examples to say "I'm right! See I have examples!" I was using them as just that, examples. Examples of people who do not deny themselves sexual gratification, and yet do not believe that abortion is a moral choice.

When a scientist tests his hypothesis he does not infact look for evidence to support his theory, he looks for evidence to disprove it. If there is enough evidence against his theory it is discarded or altered. I was providing you with some evidence against your hypothesis.

I will concede that societies views on sex, and their push towards sexual activity at younger and younger generations, is a driving factor in unwanted pregnancies. However unwanted pregnancy =/= an abortion. Nor does it have to.

If you want to end abortions you have to deal with the source itself, not all the redherrings.

You mean in your opinion, it's not going to completely ruin their life. Some people do not believe in putting a child up for adoption and never want to raise a child. Getting pregnant, in their opinion would always ruin their life. Why do people who would die from pregnancy, get special status in the book of FreeArsenal? And really as for any other reason (I assume you're referring to really young people) why would they abstain when they have the option of abortion readily available to them?

The people who are more likely to abstain or at least be as protected as possible, are the people who 1) have had better sex education and/or 2) people who do not want to deal with the concequences of sexual activity. If they have a get out of jail free card, they (especially younger, less mature people) can be more likely to worry about the concequences of their actions.

Sex is not a need the way that food or breathing is. However I disagree that it's not at all. It's a psychological need for a healthy long term relationship. The amount of sex and all the other things that can vary, depends on the couple.

This does not mean that in order to have a healthy relationship that after 2 years of dating people have to start having sex. There's no set date. Some people can go for years and years dating someone and refrain from sex, and that perfectly okay. And if there's a random interval in a sexual relationship in which it would be life shattering if the girl got pregnant, yes it would be wise to refrain from sexual activity. However if she had the ability to maintain her sexual relationship, and not have her life shattered, why would she refrain? Because life is worth more than sex? I agree. Society does not.

That said, good for you for being a philosopher and all that. What's the relevance? I see none. If you post something in here, you are posting knowing full well that people are going to argue with it and expect you to provide evidence that supports your claim. If all you have to say about anything is that it's your viewpoint, why exactly are you placing it under public scrutiny? Even philosophers know better than to make a statement that they're not willing to back up with some sort of tangable evidence.

Not entirely sure how the argument is going, but I say beware say that sex is not the problem-

But unwanted pregnancy can never occur without sex, and a wanted pregnancy will never be aborted. People have abortions because they are pregnant, and pregnancy happens because of sex. A=P, P=S, therefore A=S.

Of course not all pregnancies lead to abortion. But you can't get pregnant without sex. And I'm not trying to ban sex. Of course not. I think people need to be smarter about it, use birth control and all that.


But an ideology of sex > fetal life is no good. And you must admit that this is an important part of abortion- that having sex is more important than fetal lives, or else the person who did not want a fetus would not have sex. Sex IS a factor in abortion. It is not THE reason, but it certainly is a large factor.

In logic, one assumes the premise is true. So, I have a correct logical formula.

The argument all A is B, All B is C, therefore all A is C is valid. It is not a logical fallacy. It may not be TRUE, but it is not a fallacy. If I said All A is B, all B is C, therefore A is D, then that would be invalid.

And on another note, I never claimed that all unwanted pregnancies lead to abortion. However, abortion can not happen without unwanted pregnancy. Even if the woman wanted the child and then had complications, the fetus would be at that point unwanted. You can't get an abortion if you're not pregnant. And the numbers of women who abort feti they want are in the thousands, out of the millions. They are as worthwhile debating as are rape victims- It happens, yes, but not enough to make a powerful stance on for the whole of abortion. I'm sorry, but you have no case here.

Exactly. A good way to avoid becoming pregnant is to avoid vaginal sex. That's all we're saying.

You're quite right, however you need to go back and re-read everything that has already been said.

I agree that people need to practice safe sex, which means they need to be taught about safe sex. Which is why I am for sex-ed being taught in public schools. This however is because I want to see a drop in unwanted pregnancies, altogether.

This thread is NOT about people using protection, or being taught about protection etc. This thread is about how people don't need vaginal sex and so they shouldn't have it if the result could be a pregnancy they would abort.

What I have said, many times over, is that the people who refrain from having sex during a period where it would be extremely detrimental if they got pregnant, are most likely going to be people who would not get an abortion anyway. This type of thinking gets us no where what-so-ever. If someone has no moral qualms with obtaining an abortion why would they refrain from vaginal sex when the chance of them getting pregnant is so low (assuming they're using birth control) and if, failing that they do get pregnant, they can have an abortion?

Not to mention that there are many people who get pregnant and choose to keep the child or give it up for adoption. So stating that sex is the problem is ridiculous. Sex is an act which can have a concequence, the problem is how people deal with that concequence. And the only way we're going to change the way people deal with it is by changing societal views on abortion. NOT by demonizing sex.

Yes. But, when debating with people who would consider getting an abortion, saying that "sex isn't necessary because you could get pregnant and you might abort" probably won't persuade anyone, since these people are people who already would consider getting an abortion.

Also, these are sometimes people who care very deeply about having (protected, I hope) sex. They don't have any personal reasons that convince them to refrain from having sex. In fact, they often choose to have sex, because they enjoy sex. So, when told "well, I want to outlaw abortion, and if you don't want to get pregnant don't have sex," such people are not going to react very well.

And, yes, refraining from sex does solve the problem of one having to deal with an unintended pregnancy. But people CAN deal with an unintended pregnancy without getting an abortion, because they also have the options to carry the pregnancy to term and keep and raise the resulting baby or give it up for (Open or "Closed") adoption.

So, if someone wants abortion to no longer be a valid choice for people who might have an unintended pregnancy, attacking sex probably isn't going to help. The people who would refrain from sex to avoid a potential pregnancy probably already are doing so. The people who wouldn't, they need to learn about safer sex practices, and they need information about both kinds adoption and the resources available to help raise a child.

Attacking sex doesn't help, nor is refraining from sex really an option for people in adult relationships, if they want to keep those relationships. Educating people about ways to prevent, and other options to deal with, unintended pregnancies would help (abstinence being one of the ways to "prevent", of course).