• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

for those against abortion

Risen

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
3,185
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
9w8
I just thought of something. How come if you kill a pregnant woman with a growing fetus inside of her, the killer gets prosecuted for TWO murders, but if a woman aborts a fetus, it's suddenly not murder?
 

Alwar

The Architect
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
922
MBTI Type
INTP
I just thought of something. How come if you kill a pregnant woman with a growing fetus inside of her, the killer gets prosecuted for TWO murders, but if a woman aborts a fetus, it's suddenly not murder?

Probably because she intended to have it.
 

Risen

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
3,185
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
9w8
Probably because she intended to have it.

That's a really dumb reason. One person intends for it to live, so then its a murder. But if that person doesn't intend for it to live, then it's not a murder? I shouldn't have to even describe how illogical that is.
 

ajblaise

Minister of Propagandhi
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
7,914
MBTI Type
INTP
I just thought of something. How come if you kill a pregnant woman with a growing fetus inside of her, the killer gets prosecuted for TWO murders, but if a woman aborts a fetus, it's suddenly not murder?

Modern societies tend to give women control over their own bodies, which would include the things inside their bodies. If a fetus dies because of what a women chooses to do to herself, it's not the same as someone else deciding to kill the fetus.

You shouldn't be dumbfounded over this.
 

Risen

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
3,185
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
9w8
If a fetus dies because of what a women chooses to do to herself, it's the same as someone else deciding to kill the fetus.

Then how can abortion laws and and murder laws in regards to killing the fetus be any different by your own logic? If it's "the same" then they should either both be prosecuted for murdering the fetus, or neither of them prosecuted for killing it. You could say that she could kill herself and that wouldn't be illegal, but the fetus isn't herself, and that is represented by the fact that the killer gets prosecuted for murdering TWO people.
 

ajblaise

Minister of Propagandhi
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
7,914
MBTI Type
INTP
Then how can abortion laws and and murder laws in regards to killing the fetus be any different by your own logic? If it's "the same" then they should either both be prosecuted for murdering the fetus, or neither of them prosecuted for killing it.

It's not the same, that was a typo.
 

ajblaise

Minister of Propagandhi
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
7,914
MBTI Type
INTP
Those laws are still horribly inconsistent is the point.

Federal and state law put in a lot of nuances for what counts and doesn't count as murder. The people who want simple black and white legal definitions for things don't have the burden of needing to run anything.
 

Risen

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
3,185
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
9w8
Federal and state law put in a lot of nuances for what counts and doesn't count as murder. The people who want simple black and white legal definitions for things don't have the burden of needing to run anything.

Would YOU consider it double homicide if someone killed a pregnant woman?
 

ajblaise

Minister of Propagandhi
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
7,914
MBTI Type
INTP
Would YOU consider it double homicide if someone killed a pregnant woman?

Not morally, but I have no sympathy for someone who killed a pregnant women getting two murder charges. Legally, I think it makes sense to make hurting pregnant women more punishable.
 

Risen

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
3,185
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
9w8
Not morally, but I have no sympathy for someone who killed a pregnant women getting two murder charges. Legally, I think it makes sense to make hurting pregnant women more punishable.

Legally that makes even less sense than morally, for the reasons we've already mentioned. Morally, why is it worse when someone kills a woman carrying a fetus, yet there's nothing wrong when the woman with the fetus kills it?
 

ajblaise

Minister of Propagandhi
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
7,914
MBTI Type
INTP
Legally that makes even less sense than morally, for the reasons we've already mentioned. Morally, why is it worse when someone kills a woman carrying a fetus, yet there's nothing wrong when the woman with the fetus kills it?

Just don't..
 

Randomnity

insert random title here
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
9,485
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Yikes. You don't even know how good of a parent you or the father will be, even if you are married and plan your child. Also, are you saying it's better if people who were subjected to abuse as kids were not ever born? Your child could be abused by a family member without your consent, your kid could be born with a defect, your child could be run over by a car. Everyone has crappy things happen in life.

This really has nothing to do with the abortion discussion, I just couldn't handle seeing that post stand without the other side being mentioned.
Ok, I got bored enough to read through half of this pointless thread so I may as well answer.

Yes, I absolutely would rather be responsible for "no child" existing than for bringing an unwanted child into this world. I feel very strongly about this if it is my potential child. Crappy things happen to everyone, yes...that does NOT mean that you should go around bringing misery to others.

I don't believe in fate, so I'm not going to speculate about "whether people should be born". I just know that I'm not going to create a human being and then throw it away to the mercy of society. And if you read my post you will know that I am very reluctant to abort, too, which is why I'm incredibly paranoid about avoiding that situation because I don't want to have to make that decision.

I'm not arguing abortion because it's pointless, a waste of energy that would be better spend arguing that (for instance) the government should subsidize birth control and education. I just wanted to explain my post since apparently it seems unreasonable (???).
 

ajblaise

Minister of Propagandhi
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
7,914
MBTI Type
INTP
I'm not arguing abortion because it's pointless, a waste of energy that would be better spend arguing that (for instance) the government should subsidize birth control and education. I just wanted to explain my post since apparently it seems unreasonable (???).

It is pointless. Politically, it's already a finished debate. Repealing Roe v. Wade or making abortion illegal is completely off the table.

Pro-choicers have essentially won, all over the developed world, and I think pro-lifers would be more wise to pick new battles instead of fighting already lost ones.
 

LEGERdeMAIN

New member
Joined
Aug 16, 2009
Messages
2,516
-the thread continues-

ok, ok..so, basically what we have here is a failure to communicate. I'm curious to know reasons behind the reasons for the two major sides of this issue.

The proposition of the pro-abortion crowd seems to be that the rights of the individual pregnant woman over the biological process supersede the rights of what may, or may not, become another, individual human in the future.

What is the basis for a woman's right to control her body?

The proposition of the anti-abortion crowd seems to be that the rights of the fetus/unborn child supersede the rights of the pregnant woman to her own body.

What gives the fetus more authority than the woman without which said fetus cannot survive?
 

kyuuei

Emperor/Dictator
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
13,964
MBTI Type
enfp
Enneagram
8
^ This is my thinking, on the authority aspect. I'll put my two cents in here anyways.

Even if someone is against abortion, having abortion available is a necessity, whether it is used or not. Women have a right to privacy, and women have a right to have a safe, sterile environment. I think the availability of abortion is not, and should never be, debatable. Only the belief in using those availabilities.
 

LEGERdeMAIN

New member
Joined
Aug 16, 2009
Messages
2,516
^ This is my thinking, on the authority aspect. I'll put my two cents in here anyways.

Even if someone is against abortion, having abortion available is a necessity, whether it is used or not. Women have a right to privacy, and women have a right to have a safe, sterile environment. I think the availability of abortion is not, and should never be, debatable. Only the belief in using those availabilities.

I think that's a valid point. Thank you for your two cents.
 

Usehername

On a mission
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
3,794
But who gets to define what life is? By permitting abortions, we have decided that it is not life, or at least not viable life. By outlawing them you are deciding it is and therefore constitutes murder. Do we just poll everyone? No. It comes down to someone arbitrarily deciding. That doesn't make it any more right than someone arbitrarily deciding whose life (which is not viable without support) matters most. (Terrie Shivo's husband didn't believe she was actually "living", while her parents did. It was ultimately decided by a judge, according to that judges information and personal beliefs.) In some cultures, handicapped people and the extremely sick or elderly didn't have lives that were considered worthy of supporting. I'm just saying that the reasoning of permitting one and outlawing another doesn't make any sense. It's not as easy as saying you don't want to impose your beliefs on others. No matter what happens, someone's beliefs will be imposed on the rest of the population and those beliefs do have societal consequences.

I don't see how this conflicts with my POV. The Terry Shivo case is an analogy that makes a lot of sense to me--again, I would simply say that these are grey areas where no one can define life with legitimate authority (not the legal kind, the expertise kind).

I think it is as easy as saying I don't want to impose my beliefs on others--it's murky, grey area all around, defining what is or isn't human. I have beliefs on these things but I cannot put my finger on evidence and say xyz means this person is the definition of a human, just like no one else can. Whereas with your other analogies I can say "hey this person is a human and you cannot do that to a human."
 
Top