Abortion Debate?

[OctoberGirl]

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
Christine wrote:
You’re gonna get crap for this, but it is so much easier to sit in judgement when it is a decision that you will never be confronted with making.

I know… I know… but it had to be pointed out.

the fact of the issue is that this will never be a level playing field. Sorry gentlemen, I am not being underhanded or hysterical, it is the physical truth of the matter. I am not saying it to put myself apart from you or be holding the golden key, it’s the way we were made.

and I also wanted to point out that I haven’t seen any posts relating to the punishment for men (and you’ve discussed punishment for women).

this whole thread seems to only be about punishing women

By the same token, as the others have pointed out, men today have no power over their own progeny as long as it is contained in the body of the mother. Men are completely disempowered once the sex act is completed. A woman has the choice to abort any pregnancy that might come about or she can force a man to pay child support for 18 years for a child he never wanted. It’s shocking how few teen boys really understand this. (One of the concrete things I do to protect lives is to tell them.)

[/quote]

Emily men can petition the Courts and I have filled out those forms. I do know of women who had their abortions delayed until it was too late for them to terminate the pregnancy.

and there is no forcing a man to pay child support, if a child is born, the child is entitled and that is the obligation when you choose to engage in intercourse. Whether or not you use protection you have to remember that in the back of your head.

[EmilyQ]

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
EmilyQ wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
Christine wrote:
You’re gonna get crap for this, but it is so much easier to sit in judgement when it is a decision that you will never be confronted with making.

I know… I know… but it had to be pointed out.

the fact of the issue is that this will never be a level playing field. Sorry gentlemen, I am not being underhanded or hysterical, it is the physical truth of the matter. I am not saying it to put myself apart from you or be holding the golden key, it’s the way we were made.

and I also wanted to point out that I haven’t seen any posts relating to the punishment for men (and you’ve discussed punishment for women).

this whole thread seems to only be about punishing women

By the same token, as the others have pointed out, men today have no power over their own progeny as long as it is contained in the body of the mother. Men are completely disempowered once the sex act is completed. A woman has the choice to abort any pregnancy that might come about or she can force a man to pay child support for 18 years for a child he never wanted. It’s shocking how few teen boys really understand this. (One of the concrete things I do to protect lives is to tell them.)

Emily men can petition the Courts and I have filled out those forms. I do know of women who had their abortions delayed until it was too late for them to terminate the pregnancy.[/quote]

Oh, I didn’t realize that. Still, they don’t always even know there’s a pregnancy or have the wherewithal to fight, so if they are opposed to abortion, they should exercise their right to choose early on (during the pants-lowering stage of the game, perhaps).

[quote]and there is no forcing a man to pay child support, if a child is born, the child is entitled and that is the obligation when you choose to engage in intercourse. Whether or not you use protection you have to remember that in the back of your head.
[/quote]

I agree! As above, the men should take that into careful consideration early on.

[malonetd]

[quote]tedro wrote:
The question of personhood is extremely problematic. It does nothing to develop the debate and at best simply asks questions that are unanswerable.

We can examine Mary Ann Warren’s personhood argument, but even she admits that a being need not possess all five conditions to be determined a person (consciousness, reason, motives, communication, self-awareness), and that it lends itself well to infanticide.

The most obvious problem with this argument is that there is insufficient reason to distinguish between the personhood of a newborn and that of a fetus. The list also seems to exclude the comatose from personhood, as most of these arguments do.

Many abortionists choose to then throw in the brain activity variable, which also does little to further this argument. The biggest limiting factor to measuring neural activity is our own current technology. Furthermore, this argument suggests that it is morally permissible to murder the brain dead.

The other major problem with the personhood argument is that there are many other mammals that meet all the criteria. In many cases these animals fit her definition of personhood better than young children, not just infants. Chimpanzees and dolphins are the best examples.

The personhood argument should then logically conclude that killing a dolphin is as morally wrong as killing a six-year old. Our own intuition tells us that while killing a dolphin is probably not morally permissible, it is surely not equal to killing a six-year old.

This is why the DNA argument is arbitrary. If a dolphin possesses every quality that we consider valuable in a person, sometimes moreso than a person, how can we logically deprive it of the same right to life that we give people?

Thankfully, this whole argument can be avoided. Since by definition killing results in death, we simply must ask ourselves why death is undesireable. The most logical answer is because it deprives us of all future experiences.

A future of value is our most valuable asset. No other loss would be as great as the loss of that future. Killing clearly deprives a being of this future. Therefore, killing is prima facie wrong because it deprives a being of a future like ours.

This argument need not distinguish between the future of an animal or a human. It does raise the question as to whether or not some other beings have a future of value, but it is clear that a chimpanzee or a dolphin does not have a future like ours, whereas a fetus obviously does.

Since we all agree that a fetus or embryo has all of the potential to become a full-fledged human, it can easily be concluded that the future of an embryo is a future sufficiently close to a future like ours. Since the embryo then has a future like ours, killing of the embryo must also be prima facie wrong.

[/quote]

Excellent. I like this post. A lot.

[tedro]

[quote]Aragorn wrote:
But broadly, my point was more that the ethics have to be decided before and separately from public policy issues of administration or enforcement.[/quote]

Absolutely. I’m addressing the topic from a purely philosophical standpoint. Pat, pushharder, et al have already demonstrated why this must be addressed before the enforcement issues.

[tedro]

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
tedro wrote:
Since we all agree that a fetus or embryo has all of the potential to become a full-fledged human,

who is we?

[/quote]

Do you disagree? How so? It seems to me that it is undeniable that when left alone, an implanted embryo has every good a chance as you of experiencing of future like ours.

[EmilyQ]

[quote]tedro wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
tedro wrote:
Since we all agree that a fetus or embryo has all of the potential to become a full-fledged human,

who is we?

Do you disagree? How so? It seems to me that it is undeniable that when left alone, an implanted embryo has every good a chance as you of experiencing of future like ours.[/quote]

A future like ours? They’d be literate and fit and eat fresh, healthy food (and plenty of it), like those of us here at T-Nation?

[pat]

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
pushharder wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
pushharder wrote:

It is crystal clear that life is not as valuable to some as it is to others. If you failed to see that you did not read the whole thread.

By the way, many have commented on how civil this thread has been, even Geraldine.

I did read the whole thread. I also read that people do value life. Maybe some do not place the same value as you would like them to, but things are rarely universal.

you did not make a mention about the lack of talk of how to control the male input in the pregnancy?

I don’t understand what you’re looking for here.

I don’t know how much clearer I can be but I will try. Some men lie and say they will be there for the baby and then leave. Men can get a woman pregnant and then walk away. For some men there isn’t even a financial burden.

What is the consequence of that? Yes… yes… I know you support a responsible parenting, but for right now there isn’t. Why not? Why isn’t there a campaign to go after men who lie? I know why, the Courts don’t legislate emotion and that is how men get out of it.

But there needs to be a change. If you get into a pregnancy and then walk away, go to jail or be castrated so you do not commit this battery again.

How do we punish men for unwanted pregnancy?

Do you mean rape? If not, what do you mean by punishing men? Are you implying that an innocent child is a punishment for a woman? A consequence maybe but a punishment?

No… some men lie and say they will be there for the pregnancy. How do we punish this type of fraud? Not in the wallet, that doesn’t have an impact.

Or I also mentioned that group of men/boys in Chicago that were getting points by getting girls pregnant. Why isn’t that some kind of crime?

How do they pay for the unwanted pregnancy, don’t say the wallet because that is nothing. If this is to be a crime, punish that male criminal.

You mean if abortion were illegal and the woman gets one anyway with the sperm donor’s support and urging?

Sure we can go with the illegal abortion theory. But see there is the crux isn’t it? Men can lie and say they didn’t want an abortion… then it leaves the woman hanging all on her own. Men can and do lie.

Nor did you mention the lack of adoptions from those who have been posting

I don’t know that adoptions or the lack thereof has been mentioned at all. I do know and I imagine you do too that many Americans have to go overseas to find children to adopt.

but I know of two families in my department that have adopted children from here.

I can change that though, how about (and no lying or embellishing) all the posters who donate time and money to an orphanage or youth home please post. How many of you are Big Brothers or Big Sisters?

civil or not, you cannot deny that the term murder and the bashing of women has been inherent in some of the posts, that has been crystal clear or you have not read the whole thread.

I haven’t seen bashing of women; maybe I’m blind. I’ve seen bashing of the idea that abortion is appropriate and downright necessary because of social pressures.

I do see the bashing, and I’ve seen some cavalier attitude towards women. This is subjective, but I find it hard to swallow that you haven’t seen ANY bashing.

abortion is legal and the women who get an abortion are not criminals

and you as a man will never have to face the actual decision, you can guess how you might decide, but you will never have the mindset and you will never completely understand

maybe young men should have a constriction band on their vas deferens until they are ready to have a baby.

maybe if a woman become pregnant by accident and took all the precautions she can sue the man not for money but for “specific performance” he will have to be a nanny and a diaper changer and work his job and live his life for the baby.

maybe they could implant a balloon in men and have it continually stretch for 9-months and then he will have to pass a walnut through his urethra anytime he gets a woman pregnant that she didn’t want.

I dunno, but for right now, men want equal voice but they do not share equal burden

[/quote]

Not one bit of what you just said matters if the “fetus” is a human being. The question is simple this, is the unborn child a human being. If it is then killing it is wrong, if it is not then we can use it to string tennis rackets if we want to because it doesn’t matter. Everything you listed is semantics and bullshit if the life you are taking for a matter of convenience is human.

If you want any thing you said to bear any weight at all then answer when human life begins. The only decernable breaks in the human life cycle are conception and death…Any thing in between would be a wild guess. If you guess wrong and have an abortion then you just killed a human being. Do you think it’s ok to kill people who put a strain on your existence? Because in that case I know a few folks who are in need of a good killing.

[Varqanir]

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:

A future like ours? They’d be literate and fit and eat fresh, healthy food (and plenty of it), like those of us here at T-Nation?

[/quote]

Yup. All forty-five million of em.

[katzenjammer]

[quote]malonetd wrote:
tedro wrote:
The question of personhood is extremely problematic. It does nothing to develop the debate and at best simply asks questions that are unanswerable.

We can examine Mary Ann Warren’s personhood argument, but even she admits that a being need not possess all five conditions to be determined a person (consciousness, reason, motives, communication, self-awareness), and that it lends itself well to infanticide.

The most obvious problem with this argument is that there is insufficient reason to distinguish between the personhood of a newborn and that of a fetus. The list also seems to exclude the comatose from personhood, as most of these arguments do.

Many abortionists choose to then throw in the brain activity variable, which also does little to further this argument. The biggest limiting factor to measuring neural activity is our own current technology. Furthermore, this argument suggests that it is morally permissible to murder the brain dead.

The other major problem with the personhood argument is that there are many other mammals that meet all the criteria. In many cases these animals fit her definition of personhood better than young children, not just infants. Chimpanzees and dolphins are the best examples.

The personhood argument should then logically conclude that killing a dolphin is as morally wrong as killing a six-year old. Our own intuition tells us that while killing a dolphin is probably not morally permissible, it is surely not equal to killing a six-year old.

This is why the DNA argument is arbitrary. If a dolphin possesses every quality that we consider valuable in a person, sometimes moreso than a person, how can we logically deprive it of the same right to life that we give people?

Thankfully, this whole argument can be avoided. Since by definition killing results in death, we simply must ask ourselves why death is undesireable. The most logical answer is because it deprives us of all future experiences.

A future of value is our most valuable asset. No other loss would be as great as the loss of that future. Killing clearly deprives a being of this future. Therefore, killing is prima facie wrong because it deprives a being of a future like ours.

This argument need not distinguish between the future of an animal or a human. It does raise the question as to whether or not some other beings have a future of value, but it is clear that a chimpanzee or a dolphin does not have a future like ours, whereas a fetus obviously does.

Since we all agree that a fetus or embryo has all of the potential to become a full-fledged human, it can easily be concluded that the future of an embryo is a future sufficiently close to a future like ours. Since the embryo then has a future like ours, killing of the embryo must also be prima facie wrong.

Excellent. I like this post. A lot.[/quote]

Me2.

[pat]

[quote]tedro wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
tedro wrote:
Since we all agree that a fetus or embryo has all of the potential to become a full-fledged human,

who is we?

Do you disagree? How so? It seems to me that it is undeniable that when left alone, an implanted embryo has every good a chance as you of experiencing of future like ours.[/quote]

I disagree, the potential for human life is in the sperm and the egg. Once they meet they become one human.

[EmilyQ]

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
EmilyQ wrote:

A future like ours? They’d be literate and fit and eat fresh, healthy food (and plenty of it), like those of us here at T-Nation?

Yup. All forty-five million of em.[/quote]

Well, then, that’s nice! I can’t see why anyone would be against that.

[ephrem]

From: 9 Reasons Why Abortions are Legal

Only a very shallow thinker could not come up with several ways that outlawing abortion would not negatively affect other things.

Here are just a few problems we could expect from outlawing abortion:

1. Women would be forced to remain pregnant against their will.
2. Unwanted or unneeded births would occur.
3. Families forced to have a(nother) child would be distressed financially and emotionally.
4. More unwed mothers would result.
5. More teen pregnancies would result.
6. More child abuse would likely result.
7. More child abandonment would likely result.
8. Illegals abortions would occur but they would be less safe, less accessible, and more costly to the woman.
9. Sterilizations would likely be requested more often.
10. Law enforcement, judicial, and prison resources would be further burdened.
11. Women would be locked up for getting illegal abortions.
12. RU486 and other chemical abortion drugs would be smuggled in and used.
13. More women would have their education, careers, and freedom lost to an unwanted or parenthood.
14. Many more women would die from botched abortions.
15. Many families would be disrupted by those botched abortions.
16. Further contribution toward overpopulation and resource consumption.
17. Additional cost to society from subsidized births, child care, education, etc.

Then there are the obvious questions to be answered:

1. Who would be penalized for abortions �?? the doctor, the pregnant woman, her husband/boyfriend, her parents, her friends, the clinic workers, friends who don’t report the abortion?
2. Wouldn’t penalizing the woman cause greater overall harm to existing families?
3. When might abortions be allowed �?? rape, incest, the woman’s health?
4. How might the law be enforced fairly for all, rich or poor?
5. What about people who cross borders to get abortions?
6. Will all miscarriages require mandatory examination?
7. What about other threats to fetal health by the woman �?? poor diet, drug use, alcohol abuse, negligence?
8. What other rights of privacy and bodily intergrity might be lost with the precedent of forced pregnancy?

[pat]

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
EmilyQ wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
Christine wrote:
You’re gonna get crap for this, but it is so much easier to sit in judgement when it is a decision that you will never be confronted with making.

I know… I know… but it had to be pointed out.

the fact of the issue is that this will never be a level playing field. Sorry gentlemen, I am not being underhanded or hysterical, it is the physical truth of the matter. I am not saying it to put myself apart from you or be holding the golden key, it’s the way we were made.

and I also wanted to point out that I haven’t seen any posts relating to the punishment for men (and you’ve discussed punishment for women).

this whole thread seems to only be about punishing women

By the same token, as the others have pointed out, men today have no power over their own progeny as long as it is contained in the body of the mother. Men are completely disempowered once the sex act is completed. A woman has the choice to abort any pregnancy that might come about or she can force a man to pay child support for 18 years for a child he never wanted. It’s shocking how few teen boys really understand this. (One of the concrete things I do to protect lives is to tell them.)

Emily men can petition the Courts and I have filled out those forms. I do know of women who had their abortions delayed until it was too late for them to terminate the pregnancy.

and there is no forcing a man to pay child support, if a child is born, the child is entitled and that is the obligation when you choose to engage in intercourse. Whether or not you use protection you have to remember that in the back of your head.

[/quote]

My heart breaks for those women who could not kill their child at will.

[pat]

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
pushharder wrote:
Celeste, I disagree with nothing you wrote but see Aragorn’s post above. Everything you wrote is valid but it is secondary to whether or not the child is a human or not.

I could make a list two pages long detailing every conceivable societal/familial/political/ethical problem under the stars but the correct solution is not the willful, deliberate elimination of innocent human life in any one of those cases. Not a single one.

See, everyone wants to point to all the complications, the complexities, the myriad of twists and turns that illegal abortion might encompass but in all that mind-weaving exercise the innocent baby and his/her will and right to live is set aside as inconsequential.

That is simply backwards no matter how your Ginsu knife slices and dices it.

Push, nothing in life is as simple as some people would like to believe.

no matter how you slice it and dice it, life rarely hands you simple answers and solutions.

The fact that life, lives and situations are weighed and measured happens every day in all social strata and circumstance.

I notice you didn’t address how men really don’t have the same obligation and you don’t choose to discuss how social change with the men being more liable could perhaps reduce unwanted pregnancy.

fortunately life is subjective

you can change a person’s opinion but not a belief so this whole topic is really hard to discuss because it is usually folks who have a belief in regards to the issue so you are just at loggerheads

and you telling me what your belief is doesn’t necessarily make it a truth for me, but I do respect that as your belief
[/quote]

Things in life are often simpler than people believe. People complicate things because they often do not like the answers. The only question that matters in the abortion debate is whether or not the unborn life is a human life or not. If it is a human life then killing it is wrong, period. If it is not, then it does not matter what you do with it, you can make it a hackey-sack for all I give a shit. See, simple. Human or not, that is the only question.

[pat]

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
pat wrote:
What an idiotic question. Where you trying to make a point?

No, I was asking a question, which you failed to answer. Allow me to rephrase.

Do you advocate the end of abortion in all countries, and if so, how do propose to bring this about?[/quote]

Yes of course. Why the fuck would I agree with abortions in any country if I think it is the killing of a human. I don’t have plan for the whole fucking world though. I can control very little, for my part I am doing what I can here. Every child saved is a victory. Besides the U.S. is always copied. If we have smoking bans, so does the rest of the world. If we ban abortion, like we should, then then at least some of the world will follow suit. If not, then oh well I guess. I can’t control it. I don’t have a world voice, I have a U.S. voice.

[EmilyQ]

[quote]pat wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
Emily men can petition the Courts and I have filled out those forms. I do know of women who had their abortions delayed until it was too late for them to terminate the pregnancy.

and there is no forcing a man to pay child support, if a child is born, the child is entitled and that is the obligation when you choose to engage in intercourse. Whether or not you use protection you have to remember that in the back of your head.

My heart breaks for those women who could not kill their child at will.[/quote]

I sense you’re being sarcastic, but I think it’s an excellent outcome. As long as someone wants the child, good. And the mother can pay support to the father. Fine. Sometimes paying money for a long time is the cost of unprotected sex.

If someone is prepared to love and care for the child they should have the right to do so.

I disagree with Debra that the violation of a mother’s body (by the fetus with its demands) justifies negating the father’s rights.

[Christine]

[quote]pushharder wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
…I don’t think anyone has said life isn’t valuable…

The implications by many that all innocent life is not valuable is rife in a debate like this one.

Do you want me to cut and paste?

[/quote]

And I find the lack of compassion to be abhorrent.

It is all perspective.

Life may be valuable, not every life in this world, or in this country even, is given the same value. These inequalities start well before birth. You choose to ignore these inherent inequalities. I do not. All men are not created equal in the world I live in.

An interesting aside to this is my parents have chosen me to be the one to make the decision to ‘pull the plug’ should the need arise. The topic came up last night as they need to me to sign some papers.

Their reasoning being is that I am the compassionate one who places a high value on human life.

Again, it is all perspective.

[katzenjammer]

[quote]Christine wrote:
pushharder wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
…I don’t think anyone has said life isn’t valuable…

The implications by many that all innocent life is not valuable is rife in a debate like this one.

Do you want me to cut and paste?

And I find the lack of compassion to be abhorrent.[/quote]

^^Are you trying to sound ironic?

It is all perspective.

^^ postmodern escape valve.

Life may be valuable,

You meant to say that life IS valuable, right? Just because that “may” not be true the world over, doesn’t mean that we should abandon this value, does it?

not every life in this world, or in this country even, is given the same value. These inequalities start well before birth. You choose to ignore these inherent inequalities. I do not. All men are not created equal in the world I live in.

So, we should allow mothers to kill the less fortunate off?

[/quote]

[Christine]

[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
Christine wrote:
pushharder wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
…I don’t think anyone has said life isn’t valuable…

The implications by many that all innocent life is not valuable is rife in a debate like this one.

Do you want me to cut and paste?

And I find the lack of compassion to be abhorrent.

^^Are you trying to sound ironic?

It is all perspective.

^^ postmodern escape valve.

Life may be valuable,

You meant to say that life IS valuable, right? Just because that “may” not be true the world over, doesn’t mean that we should abandon this value, does it?

not every life in this world, or in this country even, is given the same value. These inequalities start well before birth. You choose to ignore these inherent inequalities. I do not. All men are not created equal in the world I live in.

So, we should allow mothers to kill the less fortunate off?

[/quote]

Less fortunate are killed off all the time. I just choose reserve my anger and compassion for those who happen to have already been born.

[EmilyQ]

Pat, I’m going to ask you to refrain from posting photos, please. In return I will do you the courtesy of not posting photographs of brutalized infants and infested, malnourished two-year-olds.

Would that be fair, do you think?

Editing to add that I would like you to edit the photo out of your post.

Editing again: Thank you.