Should the government stop abortions?

[stretchypanda]

Originally Posted by sherbtail

Im just wondering, what do anti-abortionists think about the morning after pill?

I'm sure it's another case where you will find varying opinions.

It's not like we all belong to some giant anti-abortion convention where our grand high wizard tells us what opinions to spew.

[MalReynolds]

I'd like to point out that everyone in this thread is handling the discussion with boatloads of maturity, which I did not think would last at all.

Kudos.

[frankiesmithra24]

That is why the government let the doctors make birth control pills. (which I use and my bf uses condoms too). So we are extra careful when having sex.

[stretchypanda]

Originally Posted by MalReynolds

I'd like to point out that everyone in this thread is handling the discussion with boatloads of maturity, which I did not think would last at all.

Kudos.

We have been banning a ****ton of idiots with nothing good to say lately.

[MalReynolds]

Originally Posted by stretchypanda

We have been banning a ****ton of idiots with nothing good to say lately.

One might even go as far to say as... Aborting them from the forums?

[bluguerrilla]

Originally Posted by MalReynolds

One might even go as far to say as... Aborting them from the forums?

Originally Posted by MalReynolds

I'd like to point out that everyone in this thread is handling the discussion with boatloads of maturity, which I did not think would last at all.

Kudos.

lol, wtg, great mental image.

[Pippin667]

i like it, and i do think its better. But some ladys dont remember.

[OrganisM]

Originally Posted by stretchypanda

We have been banning a ****ton of idiots with nothing good to say lately.

Note that "good" and "bad" is VERY arbitrary.

That, I suppose, is why we have you snuggle bunnies to ban us for posting the politically incorre--- err, against the TOS-type things.



Aside from that, one of the biggest problems with threads like these is that since the issue has been so deadlocked for years we just keep on bringing up the same crap for the most part, so in all honesty, there should be a stickied topic that presents the most possible angles on the issue in the first post, so that we don't keep running in circles. I've found maybe one thing in this thread which I hadn't thought about prior to entering it.

[Tyren]

If the government manages to abolish the option of abortion, Im going to assume there will be nothing stopping Americans of going somewhere that allows it? Anyone aware if Canada does? If it's an important enough issue, it will still get done. Is there anything legally preventing the movement of unborn children over national borders, something required similar to a passport? I figure if this pushes into fruition, those who are willing to commit to abortion will have other options.

[OrganisM]

Originally Posted by Tyren

If the government manages to abolish the option of abortion, Im going to assume there will be nothing stopping Americans of going somewhere that allows it? Anyone aware if Canada does? If it's an important enough issue, it will still get done. Is there anything legally preventing the movement of unborn children over national borders, something required similar to a passport? I figure if this pushes into fruition, those who are willing to commit to abortion will have other options.

Like I have mentioned before, there's always the messy, dangerous make-shift abortions that used to go on. We can always go back to that.

[devonin]

Originally Posted by Tyren

If the government manages to abolish the option of abortion, Im going to assume there will be nothing stopping Americans of going somewhere that allows it? Anyone aware if Canada does? If it's an important enough issue, it will still get done. Is there anything legally preventing the movement of unborn children over national borders, something required similar to a passport? I figure if this pushes into fruition, those who are willing to commit to abortion will have other options.

That would depend entirely on how the law forbidding it in the USA was phrased. If they somehow managed to pass a law stating that unborn fetuses were-humans- with all the rights of a person, if you went into Canada and had an abortion you could then legally be charged with committing murder, and the US could theoretically try to have you extradited back for trial.

However, there is -no- chance that such a law could be passed. If they made a law forbidding the procedure of abortion, it would be just that, forbidding the procedure. This would have the effect of moving abortions underground, into unsafe, unsanitary conditions, rather than stopping them.

For that reason alone, abortion should remain legal, and anti-abortion movements should be dedicating their time to trying to educate women to their point of view, and convince them that they -shouldn't- do it, rather than try to make it so it is against the law.

Edit: To Guido, but to everyone in general: If the fetus is a human, child from the instant of conception, do you think that a family ought to gain all the legal, financial and medical benefits of "having a child" from the moment of conception onward as well? There's a surprising number of benefits given to parents with a child legally and economically.

[OrganisM]

Originally Posted by devonin

anti-abortion movements should be dedicating their time to trying to educate women to their point of view, and convince them that they -shouldn't- do it, rather than try to make it so it is against the law.

Sounds like a great solution, but who's to say that the women won't simply be plugged up with vicious propaganda to stop them from wanting to have an abortion?

Oh, wait, that's already going on.

EDIT: In case you haven't noticed, stretchy, I am actually trying to contribute. Thus the reason for this very post. I'm not trying to be an ass, so please don't BBQ my ass every time I get a little frustrated. And I mentioned the topic being over-debated all of twice. Did you even read any of my other posts? I rather think I did contribute something.

[stretchypanda]

Organism, this thread really seems to be going well, but all I see you contribute is, "RAWR THIS ARGUMENT IS OLD AND TIRED I SEE NO POINT DISCUSSING IT FURTHER PS HERE ARE MY OLD RECYCLED IDEAS ON THE SUBJECT."

People in this thread are, for once, engaged in a mature discussion on a very hot topic. Just because you have seen it over and over again is a) no reason people who want to talk about it can't and b) certainly no reason for you to go stomping around waving whatever little complex you have about people debating topics that have already been debated.

[Kilgamayan]

Originally Posted by GuidoHunter

When they combine, however, a new, unique life is formed. It is human (not to Kilga: there's no question here, either)

Uh, no, there most certainly is. We went over this in my Contemporary Moral Problems class just last semester, and there is no universal agreement on when exactly the sperm/egg combo is considered "human life".

You're more than welcome to declare that human life begins as soon as the sperm touches the egg, just be aware that not everyone agrees, and given people who argue that it is or is not human life do so based on definitions that their scientific beliefs came up with in the first place it's pretty stupid to say one side is definitively correct.

[GuidoHunter]

Originally Posted by Kilgamayan

Uh, no, there most certainly is. We went over this in my Contemporary Moral Problems class just last semester, and there is no universal agreement on when exactly the sperm/egg combo is considered "human life".

It's genetically human. That newly-created zygote isn't a proto-kitty or some new species; it's human.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[devonin]

Originally Posted by GuidoHunter

It's genetically human. That newly-created zygote isn't a proto-kitty or some new species; it's human.

See again the difference between "human life" and "a living human" or at least, see again the difference that some of us make between "life that is genetically homo sapiens sapiens" and "A human being"

As I said earlier, and I don't think you responded directly to it:

We simply have differing definitions of what consitutes a "human" then. I don't think a freshly laid egg is a chicken, any more than I think my sperm is thousands of humans. "Life" begins at conception, but we end the life of things -far- more advanced up the chain than a 2-week old zygote all the time, and think nothing at all of it.

I disagree with late-term abortion for every single reason you've quoted as why you oppose abortion, I just simply don't think it is valid logic to apply that same reasoning all the way back to the instant of conception.

[Kilgamayan]

So if it's genetics that defines humanity, what about human genetic experiments on animals like that mouse that grew a human ear on its back? Or what about organ transplants where the donor is an animal?

[OrganisM]

Originally Posted by Kilgamayan

So if it's genetics that defines humanity, what about human genetic experiments on animals like that mouse that grew a human ear on its back? Or what about organ transplants where the donor is an animal?

Well, as to the organ donor, that doesn't mean anything. Implanting an organ does not change your genes (duh!). It just so happens that certain parts of certain animals function similar to human parts, so the transplant can happen.

[frankiesmithra24]

I agree with Vavv. Women have the right to say no or not, but men have some responsiblities as well. Men should wear condoms even if the woman doesn't want them too. I say that all female teens should go on the pill abd use condoms too. Just to make safer.

[devonin]

You know, I'm starting to think that the phrasing of the question is all wrong here. by asking "Should" the government stop abortions, we're losing ourselves in the morass of "Is abortion right, wrong, neither or both"

Instead ask: Does the government have the -right- to make abortions illegal, and the only question is "Is there a point at which the fetus has rights that -supercede- that of the mother's right to control her own body" and whether you think abortion is right or wrong, I'm much more apt to say that "The government has no right to say one way or the other" than I am to say "The action itself is morally ok or morally not ok, so they should or shoudln't."