How pro life (or pro choice) are you on abortion?

Author: TheUnderdog

Posts

Total: 59
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 3,096
3
4
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
4
10
I'd say I support legalizing abortion before 6 weeks.  After that, ban it.  Also, I want to focus on expanding contraception access to reduce abortions.

I don't see a zygote as human, but a fetus is human; their cells have already specialized.  This isin't the case for a zygote or an embryo.

Thoughts on this DARTers?
n8nrgmi
n8nrgmi's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,499
3
2
3
n8nrgmi's avatar
n8nrgmi
3
2
3
i like the idea of banning abortion after the heart starts beating and brain waves form. those indicators are used to measure the end of life... it could be used to measure the beginning too. the thing about brain waves though, is that there's just simple electrical activity at first, and i wouldn't be sure of when to 'count' the beginning of brain waves. 
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 3,096
3
4
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
4
10
-->
@n8nrgmi
Brain waves are first detected at most 6 weeks in from what I've read.
n8nrgmi
n8nrgmi's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,499
3
2
3
n8nrgmi's avatar
n8nrgmi
3
2
3
i read that it's not considered a fetus until like ten weeks, tho. on the other hand there's movement starting around eight weeks. 

i definitely say when the fetus feels pain is way past due to ban abortion, generally. 
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,555
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
complete ban except womens life/serious health risk
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 12,331
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Dr.Franklin
complete ban except womens life/serious health risk
Amen
Death23
Death23's avatar
Debates: 24
Posts: 618
3
4
7
Death23's avatar
Death23
3
4
7
-->
@TheUnderdog
Prenatal life has no value. Suck their brains out and throw them in to the garbage. Bye bye little guy!
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,555
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@ILikePie5
yup!
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,066
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ILikePie5
@Dr.Franklin
Selective morality is a tad hypocritical.
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 3,096
3
4
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
4
10
-->
@n8nrgmi
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 3,096
3
4
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
4
10
-->
@Death23
No; just no.
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,555
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@zedvictor4
what now
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,066
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Dr.Franklin
What what?

Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,555
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@zedvictor4
what what what
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@Death23
Prenatal life has no value. Suck their brains out and throw them in to the garbage. Bye bye little guy!

I want that! Except with communists instead.
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@TheUnderdog
Really, the only consistent argument would be at conception, outside of the mother dying from giving birth.

Anything else like "viability" or "sentience" is just arbitrary criteria.

Either all innocent lives matter or none of them do.
Death23
Death23's avatar
Debates: 24
Posts: 618
3
4
7
Death23's avatar
Death23
3
4
7
-->
@bmdrocks21
Ah but conception itself is not a point in time, but a process of merging of nuclear material. Lets have a look:


Where are we to draw the line here?
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@Death23
Whenever they would be classified as one cell instead of multiple, scientifically speaking. That fusion of the gametes indicates that a new organism was created, and thus that is a new life, different from either parent.
Death23
Death23's avatar
Debates: 24
Posts: 618
3
4
7
Death23's avatar
Death23
3
4
7
-->
@bmdrocks21
The war on fetuses must be won.
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@Death23
That isn't a fair fight! Give them 25 years to reach the peak of their abilities, then try to kill them!
Death23
Death23's avatar
Debates: 24
Posts: 618
3
4
7
Death23's avatar
Death23
3
4
7
-->
@bmdrocks21
This is precisely why it is necessary to launch a preemptive strike.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,066
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@bmdrocks21
The fusion of gametes etc.

Depends how you choose to look at things.

Some might rightly argue......A new life similar to both parents and not yet separate from, and dependant upon the mother.....Therefore, wholly the mother's responsibility.

And nothing whatsoever to do with a load of pious believers of nonsense....As I said, that's just one way of looking at it....Other options are available.
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@Death23
This is precisely why it is necessary to launch a preemptive strike.

That's cheating! Against the Geneva convention!
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@zedvictor4
What do you mean by responsibility? Do you mean that because of dependence, she should get to choose if she kills it or not?
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 3,096
3
4
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
4
10
-->
@bmdrocks21
A conception, they have DNA, but so does a cancer cell.  I therefore would draw the line at 6 weeks in, when the cells specialize.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,066
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@bmdrocks21
Within social guidelines, not influenced by religious and emotional overthought, then yes.

If you take the thought and consequent emotion out of the equation for a moment and just regard physiological processes, the number of zygotes involuntarily discarded by women on a daily basis is considerable.

So realistically, why should adding thought and emotion to the equation make any difference?

It might be argued that thought and emotion make us what we are, and I would agree....But thought and emotion does not make us and affect us all the same way.

So abortion is OK for some, and not OK for others and realistically no one is right and no one is wrong.

Similarly, that's why people of the  U.S and the U.K  for example, will happily support sending troops around the world to kill others in the pursuit of ideology and self righteousness.
SkepticalOne
SkepticalOne's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 1,720
3
3
7
SkepticalOne's avatar
SkepticalOne
3
3
7
-->
@TheUnderdog
We agree on expanding contraceptive access as a means of reducing abortion. Its refreshing to see a pro-lifer (?) hold this informed position.

I think personhood should be attached to the capacity for fully humanlike consciousness and (as I understand it) all the structures necessary for this are not fully developed until 6 months or so. However, at most, I would advocate 5 months as the cutoff to be sure there is no abortion performed (involving two persons) without good reason. That being said, I don't have an issue with the ~25 weeks cut-off for non-emergency or abortions without severe fetal abnormality, but if we were going to change it I would be in favor of less restrictive rather than more restrictive.

RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 555
Posts: 19,351
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
In my worldview, we each exist to benefit society. A fetus whose own life would be detrimental to itself and a huge drain on the economy and its family doesn't even want it on top of being poor is a case of the net-benefit being to not let it be born.

To me, every single sperm cell we ejaculate and egg that is bled out during a period are all potentially equally wasted to a zygote in terms of the potential to procure human life. This is not inherently immoral, we should produce life when its a benefit to us and society.

This is also why I am left-wing and want to reduce the circumstantial aspects that make raising a child undesirable (because the poor will have sufficient welfare) while also increasing the access to in-depth sexual education and availability of things like contraceptives. I think porn should not be a taboo and that we should embrace masturbation as a healthy alternative to sex, especially in younger, single people. It should be 0% seen as immoral or unhealthy.

I am not discounting what an addiction to masturbation and porn can entail. I also would encourage rehabilitation and again a lack of taboo about discussing said addictions.
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@TheUnderdog
It's all or nothing. When does it stop being her choice? When does it begin to be murder? Those who appeal to moderation cannot escape the whimsical arbitration. If one is "truly" pro-choice, then one would sustain that a pregnant woman can terminate her pregnancy at any point in time. She'd have plenary discretion over the use and content of her womb. A discretion which is subject to no time constraints.
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 3,096
3
4
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
4
10
-->
@Athias
When does it stop being her choice?
At 6 weeks in; when the fetal cells specialize.