User Tag List

First 23456 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 95

Thread: abortion

  1. #31
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by elfinchilde View Post
    to me: circumstances dictate what is perceived as right or wrong. A 15 year old girl badly traumatised by rape would not be seen as 'wrong' to get an abortion. But one who's had multiple abortions as a crude form of birth control would, likely, be seen as wrong.
    That's what is interesting to me.

    Because, regardless of the mom's circumstances, the baby's "innocence" has never changed. It still doesn't "deserve" to die.

    Yet in one situation, people would bend the rules for the mom, in the other they would not. Logically, then, it's the mom and her situation which is the basis for the decision.. and NOT the often-focused-on ideal of the "baby being a human life."

    The baby's humanity has no bearing apparently on society's decision, it's all the mother's situation, yet the position is called "pro-life [in terms of baby]." It's not, technically, if one makes exceptions for the mom's circumstances.

    (I am not criticizing a particular stance, just pointing out a mislabeling/inconsistency as it is practiced.)
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  2. #32
    almost nekkid scantilyclad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sx
    Posts
    2,109

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Just a quibble -- but you mean you were like, "Abortion is great, everyone should have one"?

    (That's technically what the phrase "pro-abortion" would suggest. Which I doubt ANYONE -- except maybe Uber, when he's trying to provoke a reaction -- would claim to think.)

    So that seems to me to be a phrase to avoid, since it's a misrepresentation of the pro-choice stance.
    I guess i chose the wrong words there. I was meaning pro abortion in the pro-choice sense.

    I'm still really pro-choice for other people, but i would never choose to abort my own child. i hope i cleared that up a bit. i shouldn't post when i first wake up in the morning.
    INFP 4w5
    facebook
    The pain won't let me get away.

  3. #33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    I guess another problem is that we have been spoiled to think we can separate sex from reproduction.
    Agreed x100!

    I actually don't know for sure if I am pro-choice or pro-life, which sounds ridiculous for such a hot button issue. But one thing I do know is that it bothers me when people separate sex from reproduction. Sometimes it seems like people are almost indignant that they got pregnant, like it's a birthright to enjoy sex free of consequences. That's what sex is FOR. Nature only made us like it so that we'll keep doing it. It's like driving 100mph and saying it's the cop's fault you got a speeding ticket. In this sense I suppose I can say I'm pro-choice, but that the choice is made when you decide to engage in behavior designed to produce a child, not when you decide to abort.

    I know a lot of the viewpoint I mention above comes from women who argue that they're the ones who have to suffer the consequences of an unwanted pregnancy and so they should have the authority to decide its fate. It's a natural reaction. But again, this is something nature decided...women give birth. It's not something that a cabal of evil men decided at some point in the distant past to keep women down. It's just a biological fact. A lot of the resentment of this fact is directed at men, and I think many women feel that the best way to combat this and promote equality is to legislate the uterus into irrelevance. As if the best way to become equal is to wipe away all traces of femininity. I can't pinpoint what I find so distasteful about this, but it just seems so against the natural laws that it feels like hubris. It's almost the exact same feeling I get when contemplating genetic engineering.

    I suspect I've wandered off topic, so I'll stop now
    Everybody have fun tonight. Everybody Wang Chung tonight.

    Johari
    /Nohari

  4. #34
    insert random title here Randomnity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,489

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scantilyclad View Post
    With that said, the only time i think abortion should be an option, is if the female was raped. I can see why you may not want to have that child in your life as a reminder.
    Just out of curiosity, really I'm not picking on you, but maybe you can explain this puzzle to me: why is it a valid reason to end a pregnancy out of a dread of being reminded of rape, and not a valid reason to end one out of concern that you're not emotionally or financially ready to care for a child appropriately? If anything it's more admirable in the second case, at least to me....

    I'm just wondering because I hear the "rape exception" so often and it's never made sense to me. You can't call something murder and then turn around and say "oh but it's ok if the mother's sufficiently traumatized". It really has to be an all or nothing thing, for legal purposes, or it just makes no sense.

    For the record, I am firmly pro-choice, although it would be extremely difficult for me emotionally to go through with an abortion (I think I still would though, at this point in my life - I would be a terrible mother right now and no child deserves that).

  5. #35
    Strongly Ambivalent Ivy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6
    Posts
    24,060

    Default

    I've always wondered about that, Randomnity. It seems like a pretty huge hole in hard-line pro-life reasoning. Nobody who says that would approve of infanticide under those circumstances, which implies to me that even THEY see a difference between an embryo and a born child or even a late-term fetus.
    The one who buggers a fire burns his penis
    -anonymous graffiti in the basilica at Pompeii

  6. #36

    Default

    I add my confusion to this. Rape and incest exceptions have never made sense to me. Either it's murder or it's not. To me, if you make exceptions then you have started sliding down the slippery slope. You've already endorsed abortion, now it's just a matter of on whose terms it's done.

    It reminds me of the old punch line, "Well, now we know you're a whore, we just have to haggle on price."
    Everybody have fun tonight. Everybody Wang Chung tonight.

    Johari
    /Nohari

  7. #37
    Wannabe genius Splittet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    632

    Default

    This issue is a problem if you have a deontological approach to ethics, where you think it is wrong to kill a human. Then the issue is down to if the fetus is a human being or not, and if it is, it is wrong to kill it. In the biological sense a fetus obviously is a human, and I think any other approach to determining what a human being is will become quite arbitrary.

    From a utilitarian perspective there is obviously no problem in arguing for abortion, although you can argue the other way around also, but few will do.

    Then you have certain people like me who think natural rights and stuff like that is crap, and has nothing to do with reality, and think of course it is not wrong to kill a fetus, just like it's not wrong to kill a person or an animal. All ethics is arbitrary and that these debates are utterly pointless, objectively and subjectively.

  8. #38
    Mamma said knock you out Mempy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Randomnity View Post
    I'm just wondering because I hear the "rape exception" so often and it's never made sense to me. You can't call something murder and then turn around and say "oh but it's ok if the mother's sufficiently traumatized". It really has to be an all or nothing thing, for legal purposes, or it just makes no sense.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    I've always wondered about that, Randomnity. It seems like a pretty huge hole in hard-line pro-life reasoning.
    Quote Originally Posted by EffEmDoubleyou View Post
    I add my confusion to this. Rape and incest exceptions have never made sense to me. Either it's murder or it's not. To me, if you make exceptions then you have started sliding down the slippery slope. You've already endorsed abortion, now it's just a matter of on whose terms it's done.

    It reminds me of the old punch line, "Well, now we know you're a whore, we just have to haggle on price."
    Add me, too. It's all been said, and I agree with those above me.

    Agreed x100!

    I actually don't know for sure if I am pro-choice or pro-life, which sounds ridiculous for such a hot button issue. But one thing I do know is that it bothers me when people separate sex from reproduction. Sometimes it seems like people are almost indignant that they got pregnant, like it's a birthright to enjoy sex free of consequences. That's what sex is FOR. Nature only made us like it so that we'll keep doing it. It's like driving 100mph and saying it's the cop's fault you got a speeding ticket. In this sense I suppose I can say I'm pro-choice, but that the choice is made when you decide to engage in behavior designed to produce a child, not when you decide to abort.

    I know a lot of the viewpoint I mention above comes from women who argue that they're the ones who have to suffer the consequences of an unwanted pregnancy and so they should have the authority to decide its fate. It's a natural reaction. But again, this is something nature decided...women give birth. It's not something that a cabal of evil men decided at some point in the distant past to keep women down. It's just a biological fact. A lot of the resentment of this fact is directed at men, and I think many women feel that the best way to combat this and promote equality is to legislate the uterus into irrelevance. As if the best way to become equal is to wipe away all traces of femininity. I can't pinpoint what I find so distasteful about this, but it just seems so against the natural laws that it feels like hubris. It's almost the exact same feeling I get when contemplating genetic engineering.

    I suspect I've wandered off topic, so I'll stop now
    Hmm, hmm, hm.

    I see where you're coming from, and I think that's a very insightful way to put it: "As if the best way to become equal is to wipe away all traces of femininity." I've often contemplated equality of women along these lines as well. The bottom line is, stereotypically masculine qualities are and have always been more valued than feminine ones: strength, aggression, confidence, assertiveness, scholarliness, intelligence, and other masculine qualities are more honored and revered than nurturing qualities, even today. Men have always had all the say in government, and men's concerns have simply always been more important than women's. Empires were built on masculine qualities - or at least, masculine qualities probably got all the credit and glory, but in reality the nurturing qualities and the DOMESTIC SPHERE were just as necessary for the success and prosperity of society.

    Women have given up an ENORMOUS amount of their femininity in their search for equality, as though, in effect, "The only way to gain equality is to wipe away all traces of femininity." This angers me, because it seems we continue to place feminine qualities on the backburner and idolize masculine qualities. Look at how acceptable it is for a woman to pursue a career, i.e. a "man's" role, yet how completely unacceptable it is for a man to display more feminine qualities: for example GAY is such a popular insult, and it just seems to be a perfect example of how society still malignes femininity, especially in men.

    Besides the uterus being laid by the wayside, consider the other feminine practices women have given up. For one thing, instead of staying at home to rear kids, women now enter the work force as purposefully as men. Women have to a large extent shedded their softer, gentler behaviors and taken hold of stronger, more aggressive, more confident behaviors in order to find fulfillment and success in their careers, i.e. outside the domestic sphere of child-rearing and community-fostering. However, something we may have failed to realize is the extreme importance of fostering a healthy domestic sphere as well. In other words, I think society (and women especially) are gobbling up these new pathways to fulfillment that they never were allowed to enjoy before, but it's at the expense of a more family- and community-oriented homelife that previous generations enjoyed. I think a lot of society's loneliness and anxiety may be due to more and more women basically shedding their nurturing roles for more masculine roles, which seems to leave a tremendous gaping whole in the community (but I could be wrong).

    New doors have been opened for women and new pathways of fulfillment have been paved, ones that for centuries have been open to men but not to women, but does anyone realize the enormous strain it is to raise children and foster a sense of family and community while at the same time being a successful career person? Sure, it would be nice to have several meaningful pathways to fulfillment, but can women really double-dip, and what are the consequences of trying to have your cake and eat it too? It seems downright impossible to do BOTH at the same time, yet this is what so many women feel pressured to accomplish. Sure, they're entitled to it if they can manage it, but I don't see how. It seems like a preposterous amount of work.

    I like the equality women are still in the process of achieving, but it angers and anguishes me that this equality comes in the form of women adopting more masculine roles and in the still-practiced behavior of undercutting and undervaluing feminine qualities. DAMNIT.

    Anyway, this was SO a tangent! Well, split this into a new thread if you must, but in order to close my post with something more on topic, I'll just say that I'm not positive where I sit on the issue of abortion, either, which doesn't sound insane at all to me, FM.

    I'm pro-choice in theory, and I don't think reproduction can be expected to be completely separate from sex, but I also understand people's wish to enjoy sex without the consequences. I pity those who find themselves with the consequences, but I know they agreed to the risk when they engaged in those behaviors. Still, as Randomnity said, if I chanced to get pregnant at this point in my life, would I be able to rear a child? Hmm. It's a rhetorical question that HAS no answer, but I want my right to abort the child if I were to decide it was in everyone's best interest, especially mine, but also the interest of the child were I unable to care for it. I think I'd PROBABLY keep it, but that statement really says nothing about what would actually happen in that scenario. I would likely find myself with a very supportive family, so I'd probably be a lucky one and have that support to fall back on, but I know there are women out there with nothing close to the support system I have, so I have to think of them and their situations, too.
    They're running just like you
    For you, and I, wooo
    So people, people, need some good ol' love

  9. #39
    almost nekkid scantilyclad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sx
    Posts
    2,109

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Randomnity View Post
    Just out of curiosity, really I'm not picking on you, but maybe you can explain this puzzle to me: why is it a valid reason to end a pregnancy out of a dread of being reminded of rape, and not a valid reason to end one out of concern that you're not emotionally or financially ready to care for a child appropriately? If anything it's more admirable in the second case, at least to me....

    I'm just wondering because I hear the "rape exception" so often and it's never made sense to me. You can't call something murder and then turn around and say "oh but it's ok if the mother's sufficiently traumatized". It really has to be an all or nothing thing, for legal purposes, or it just makes no sense.

    For the record, I am firmly pro-choice, although it would be extremely difficult for me emotionally to go through with an abortion (I think I still would though, at this point in my life - I would be a terrible mother right now and no child deserves that).
    I guess i'm looking at the situation quite irrationally. I believe the things that i believe because of the way i feel about them, i can't really give you a reason as to why i believe what i have said,other than that it feels right to me, however i will say that my mother was 16 years old when she had me, i don't believe that she was emotionally or financially read to have me, but i'm damn sure that she decided to keep me around. My mother loved me, and wanted to keep me and she found ways to do that and i think that saying someone is not financially ready or emotionally ready is just an excuse. I think people should own up to what they did. If they conceived a child knowing that they weren't ready, it was their own mistake. However, if a woman was raped, she had no control what so ever over getting pregnant, she had no choice, and i guess thats where i see that it might be okay. I guess i just believe in doing what is right, and i don't see abortion as the right thing to do unless the mother had no control of the situation what so ever. I understand what you are saying as far as that it has to be all or nothing, but there seems to be exceptions to all rules..right?

    I know you aren't picking on me, i also have trouble trying to explain myself sometimes, so i don't mind you expecting me to explain stuff.
    INFP 4w5
    facebook
    The pain won't let me get away.

  10. #40
    insert random title here Randomnity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,489

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scantilyclad View Post
    I guess i'm looking at the situation quite irrationally. I believe the things that i believe because of the way i feel about them, i can't really give you a reason as to why i believe what i have said,other than that it feels right to me, however i will say that my mother was 16 years old when she had me, i don't believe that she was emotionally or financially read to have me, but i'm damn sure that she decided to keep me around. My mother loved me, and wanted to keep me and she found ways to do that and i think that saying someone is not financially ready or emotionally ready is just an excuse. I think people should own up to what they did. If they conceived a child knowing that they weren't ready, it was their own mistake. However, if a woman was raped, she had no control what so ever over getting pregnant, she had no choice, and i guess thats where i see that it might be okay. I guess i just believe in doing what is right, and i don't see abortion as the right thing to do unless the mother had no control of the situation what so ever. I understand what you are saying as far as that it has to be all or nothing, but there seems to be exceptions to all rules..right?

    I know you aren't picking on me, i also have trouble trying to explain myself sometimes, so i don't mind you expecting me to explain stuff.
    Thanks for the explanation. That makes sense to me, actually...while I was looking at it from the objective, killing a fetus, point of view, you were looking at it from the subjective "mother's choice" point of view.

    Interesting. I can see how such a situation would (partially) take the "blame" off of the mother, although it wouldn't change the actual "crime" committed.

    edit: perhaps the objective viewpoint is better for legal issues, while the subjective one is more applicable for "moral" issues...ie, judging someone for having one?

    edit edit: to clarify, while I can see your view, I still don't think people should be selectively allowed to commit crimes against innocent others (if an action is defined as such). While the situation definitely makes the action more understandable, it doesn't make it more moral, per se.

Similar Threads

  1. Abortion: The Ethics of Liberty
    By TheLastMohican in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: 03-21-2009, 07:49 PM
  2. Abortion, gay rights, and other social issues.
    By Angry Ayrab in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 08-06-2008, 11:54 PM
  3. Proposed (Bush Admin.) Rule equates Contraception to Abortion
    By spirilis in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 07-22-2008, 10:22 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO