• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

abortion compromise

F

FallingPianos

what do you all think of this idea?

1) make direct feticide illegall

2) but make it legal to have the fetus disconnected from the mother

3) or for birth to be induced at any gestation. the baby may be left at the hospital.

the only exeption to [1] would be where there is no way to remove the fetus alive without putting unnessesary strain on the mother.

thoughts?
 

talloulou

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Messages
15,998
Reaction score
3,962
Location
Tiamat's better half
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
star2589 said:
what do you all think of this idea?

1) make direct feticide illegall

2) but make it legal to have the fetus disconnected from the mother

3) or for birth to be induced at any gestation. the baby may be left at the hospital.

the only exeption to [1] would be where there is no way to remove the fetus alive without putting unnessesary strain on the mother.

thoughts?

If a fetus is disconnected from the mother at too early a gestational age it will die. This is still feticide. Where's the compromise?

A real abortion compromise would be this:

Throw tons of money at sex ed and promotion of contraceptives. Use money to make birth control cheaper.

Make use of the MAP.

Limit abortions to a young gestational age for example under 10 wks, except in cases where the mothers health is a genuine concern.

Admit abortion kills a developing human being and make it as distasteful a choice as possible. Forget all this "the government doesn't own my womb crap" and get men and women to start taking responsibility for their procreations. The government isn't responsible for placing a developing human in your womb. Part of sex ed should involve how distasteful abortion really is. It shouldn't be avoided. It should be discussed. I don't advocate showing pregnant girls considering abortion fetal pics.....but girls in sex ed. Yeah show them all the pics you can find. Make them look long and hard. Let them have their choice for a reasonable time period but also let them understand what that choice is about, fully. Get statistics on average gestational ages for abortions and bring some of those into class in a pickle jar. Really educate those girls and maybe we will see these abortion numbers go down.

There is just no reason for the numbers of abortions taking place in the US today. It's horrid. But you have women jumping up and down for the right to choose like it's some cool thing. Some earned, respectable, and honorable constitutional right. It's a nasty business. And if more prochoicers started admitting that I'd be more inclined to listen to them. But the fact of the matter is we are taking feticide and turning it into a sterile cold procedure and acting like it's no big deal. Debating over whether it's a human being or not. In the meantime if you can be convinced to donate your fetus to science and your fetus was old enough to have developed ovaries.....researchers will take the eggs out of those ovaries and monkey with them to see if they can make your dead fetus that didn't live one day a mother! How sick is that?

If you think what you offered was in anyway some real compromise on how we can reduce the numbers of abortions I gotta say I missed it.
 
Last edited:

afr0byte

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 10, 2006
Messages
2,364
Reaction score
253
Location
A blue state
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
talloulou said:
If a fetus is disconnected from the mother at too early a gestational age it will die. This is still feticide. Where's the compromise?

If you start giving someone blood, should you not be able to stop even though the person (or fetus in terms of an abortion) will die?

talloulou said:
If you think what you offered was in anyway some real compromise on how we can reduce the numbers of abortions I gotta say I missed it.

I don't see where she said anything about reducing the number of abortions.
 
F

FallingPianos

talloulou said:
If a fetus is disconnected from the mother at too early a gestational age it will die. This is still feticide. Where's the compromise?

it dies a natural death instead of being killed.

talloulou said:
A real abortion compromise would be this:

Throw tons of money at sex ed and promotion of contraceptives. Use money to make birth control cheaper.

Make use of the MAP.

Limit abortions to a young gestational age for example under 10 wks, except in cases where the mothers health is a genuine concern.

Admit abortion kills a developing human being and make it as distasteful a choice as possible. Forget all this "the government doesn't own my womb crap" and get men and women to start taking responsibility for their procreations. The government isn't responsible for placing a developing human in your womb. Part of sex ed should involve how distasteful abortion really is. It shouldn't be avoided. It should be discussed. I don't advocate showing pregnant girls considering abortion fetal pics.....but girls in sex ed. Yeah show them all the pics you can find. Make them look long and hard. Let them have their choice for a reasonable time period but also let them understand what that choice is about, fully. Get statistics on average gestational ages for abortions and bring some of those into class in a pickle jar. Really educate those girls and maybe we will see these abortion numbers go down.

I agree with you there.
 

talloulou

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Messages
15,998
Reaction score
3,962
Location
Tiamat's better half
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
afr0byte said:
If you start giving someone blood, should you not be able to stop even though the person (or fetus in terms of an abortion) will die?

It's not the same and this strawman argument has grown old.



I don't see where she said anything about reducing the number of abortions.

Exactly!
 

talloulou

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Messages
15,998
Reaction score
3,962
Location
Tiamat's better half
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
star2589 said:
it dies a natural death instead of being killed.

Not unless it naturally rips itself from the womb. Otherwise there is nothing natural about it. If a women stops feeding her child and it dies of starvation who is responsible for that death? Would that death be "natural?"
 

afr0byte

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 10, 2006
Messages
2,364
Reaction score
253
Location
A blue state
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
talloulou said:
It's not the same and this strawman argument has grown old.

It's not a strawman. You just happen to disagree with it.
 

Korimyr the Rat

Baby Eating Monster
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 1, 2006
Messages
19,550
Reaction score
15,755
Location
Cheyenne, WY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
talloulou said:
A real abortion compromise would be this:

Throw tons of money at sex ed and promotion of contraceptives. Use money to make birth control cheaper.

I support this. The problem is that many of the anti-abortion advocates are also against public support of birth control and sex education-- I'd have a lot more respect for them if they weren't.

talloulou said:
Make use of the MAP.

MAP?

talloulou said:
Limit abortions to a young gestational age for example under 10 wks, except in cases where the mothers health is a genuine concern.

I would prefer sixteen, but accept twelve. Of course, if you limit it to twelve, you'd still be allowing 88% of abortions. However, preventing the abortion of 24 and 25 week fetuses-- as currently allowed by Roe v. Wade-- would go a long way to satisfy the people whose main objection is late-term abortion.

talloulou said:
Admit abortion kills a developing human being and make it as distasteful a choice as possible.

This will not happen as long as people use this as the basis for calling fertility doctors and everyone who's received their services "murderers".

We would need the other side to concede that there's a moral difference between a developing human being five months before its birth and five months after.

talloulou said:
I don't advocate showing pregnant girls considering abortion fetal pics.....but girls in sex ed. Yeah show them all the pics you can find. Make them look long and hard.

I agree with this. Making a decision without being able to face the consequences of it is cowardly-- and too much irresponsibility in our society is based on our efforts to hide from the results of our actions.

talloulou said:
There is just no reason for the numbers of abortions taking place in the US today. It's horrid.

Million point four a year. It's been pretty steady, adjusted for the population, for as long as we've been keeping figures. That's also not bad compared to our birth rate; thank the gods that we're not like Europe or Japan, watching our native population die off and be replaced by aliens.

talloulou said:
If you think what you offered was in anyway some real compromise on how we can reduce the numbers of abortions I gotta say I missed it.

That's because, really, abortion laws have nothing to do with the number of abortions. The main benefit of getting the abortion laws settled-- finding some compromise that the vast majority will stick to and the fringes aren't powerful enough to move-- is that it would allow us to stop arguing over them and devote our energies to actually reducing abortions.

The biggest thing, I think, is to restore the extended family. Most abortions are sought by women afraid of becoming single mothers-- remove that fear, and abortions will be reduced.

We also need to promote a cultural attitude that embraces and values family and parenthood. There is a social stigma against women-- or girls-- who bear children too young, or who bear too many children, or who bear children by multiple fathers. While some of this connects to the irresponsibility of having children out of wedlock-- something I am opposed to-- it also connects to a fundamental distrust and disrespect for people who choose to raise large families.

I think it's more nuclear-family bias; people who have more than the expected two point four children are greedy or crazy or too stupid to read the back of the condom wrapper.

And while you're absolutely correct that the government is not running around putting babies into wombs-- well, maybe the Department of Corrections is-- government services are a vital component of promoting childbirth. Absence of social services to help young mothers is part of the fear that causes abortion.

Of course... the main contingent of anti-abortion advocates are also in favor of cutting programs to these so-called "welfare queens" and their large, irresponsible hordes of barely-related offspring. Sound familiar?
 
F

FallingPianos

Korimyr the Rat said:
I support this. The problem is that many of the anti-abortion advocates are also against public support of birth control and sex education-- I'd have a lot more respect for them if they weren't.

abstinence and physiology are birth control and sex education. misguided? definatly. but its not something I disrespect.
Korimyr the Rat said:
Morning After Pill
Korimyr the Rat said:
I would prefer sixteen, but accept twelve. Of course, if you limit it to twelve, you'd still be allowing 88% of abortions. However, preventing the abortion of 24 and 25 week fetuses-- as currently allowed by Roe v. Wade-- would go a long way to satisfy the people whose main objection is late-term abortion.
indeed. but I get the feeling lately that most people's views on abortion are on one extreme or the other. limiting abortion to 16 weeks would just make both sides angry.
Korimyr the Rat said:
This will not happen as long as people use this as the basis for calling fertility doctors and everyone who's received their services "murderers".

We would need the other side to concede that there's a moral difference between a developing human being five months before its birth and five months after.
yes, definatly
Korimyr the Rat said:
I agree with this. Making a decision without being able to face the consequences of it is cowardly-- and too much irresponsibility in our society is based on our efforts to hide from the results of our actions.
agreed
Korimyr the Rat said:
That's because, really, abortion laws have nothing to do with the number of abortions. The main benefit of getting the abortion laws settled-- finding some compromise that the vast majority will stick to and the fringes aren't powerful enough to move-- is that it would allow us to stop arguing over them and devote our energies to actually reducing abortions.
I'm not convinced that most people are actually willing to comprimise on the issue. most people seem to be on one extreme or the other, there is very little middle ground.

Korimyr the Rat said:
The biggest thing, I think, is to restore the extended family. Most abortions are sought by women afraid of becoming single mothers-- remove that fear, and abortions will be reduced.

We also need to promote a cultural attitude that embraces and values family and parenthood. There is a social stigma against women-- or girls-- who bear children too young, or who bear too many children, or who bear children by multiple fathers. While some of this connects to the irresponsibility of having children out of wedlock-- something I am opposed to-- it also connects to a fundamental distrust and disrespect for people who choose to raise large families.

I think it's more nuclear-family bias; people who have more than the expected two point four children are greedy or crazy or too stupid to read the back of the condom wrapper.

And while you're absolutely correct that the government is not running around putting babies into wombs-- well, maybe the Department of Corrections is-- government services are a vital component of promoting childbirth. Absence of social services to help young mothers is part of the fear that causes abortion.

Of course... the main contingent of anti-abortion advocates are also in favor of cutting programs to these so-called "welfare queens" and their large, irresponsible hordes of barely-related offspring. Sound familiar?

agreed. but unfortunatly its much easier said then done.
 

FutureIncoming

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2005
Messages
5,623
Reaction score
605
Location
Land of the Freedom-Stealers, because also Home of
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
talloulou said:
Admit abortion kills a developing human
OK!
talloulou said:
Admit abortion kills a developing human being
ABSOLUTELY NOT! To do that is to lie
When will you admit that the word "being" implies far too much more than mere existence (it is synonymous with "minded" and "person"), and therefore the word "being" is Not Applicable to the mindless/empty living bodies of unborn human animals?

Any disagreement with the above data must be supported by factual evidence, and so far no pro-lifer has presented any. Why should anyone accept your worthless rhetoric, if you cannot make it non-worthless with evidence?
 

zymurgy

Banned
Joined
Feb 28, 2006
Messages
909
Reaction score
8
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
talloulou said:
If a fetus is disconnected from the mother at too early a gestational age it will die. This is still feticide. Where's the compromise?

A real abortion compromise would be this:

Throw tons of money at sex ed and promotion of contraceptives. Use money to make birth control cheaper.

Make use of the MAP.

Limit abortions to a young gestational age for example under 10 wks, except in cases where the mothers health is a genuine concern.

Admit abortion kills a developing human being and make it as distasteful a choice as possible. Forget all this "the government doesn't own my womb crap" and get men and women to start taking responsibility for their procreations. The government isn't responsible for placing a developing human in your womb. Part of sex ed should involve how distasteful abortion really is. It shouldn't be avoided. It should be discussed. I don't advocate showing pregnant girls considering abortion fetal pics.....but girls in sex ed. Yeah show them all the pics you can find. Make them look long and hard. Let them have their choice for a reasonable time period but also let them understand what that choice is about, fully. Get statistics on average gestational ages for abortions and bring some of those into class in a pickle jar. Really educate those girls and maybe we will see these abortion numbers go down.

There is just no reason for the numbers of abortions taking place in the US today. It's horrid. But you have women jumping up and down for the right to choose like it's some cool thing. Some earned, respectable, and honorable constitutional right. It's a nasty business. And if more prochoicers started admitting that I'd be more inclined to listen to them. But the fact of the matter is we are taking feticide and turning it into a sterile cold procedure and acting like it's no big deal. Debating over whether it's a human being or not. In the meantime if you can be convinced to donate your fetus to science and your fetus was old enough to have developed ovaries.....researchers will take the eggs out of those ovaries and monkey with them to see if they can make your dead fetus that didn't live one day a mother! How sick is that?

If you think what you offered was in anyway some real compromise on how we can reduce the numbers of abortions I gotta say I missed it.

This is an excellent compromise. The problem is that republican politicians won't accept a compromise. In fact they would prefer to not solve this at all. As long as abortion is an issue, they have something that seperates them from the democrats and an issue that brings out their voter base in good numbers. You guys don't really think they beleive in limited government anymore do you? :rofl

No, a solution to abortion would be the beginning of the end for the republicans.
 

Iriemon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
19,405
Reaction score
2,187
Location
Miami
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
talloulou said:
If a fetus is disconnected from the mother at too early a gestational age it will die. This is still feticide. Where's the compromise?

A real abortion compromise would be this:

Throw tons of money at sex ed and promotion of contraceptives. Use money to make birth control cheaper.

Make use of the MAP.

Limit abortions to a young gestational age for example under 10 wks, except in cases where the mothers health is a genuine concern.

...

This is a reasonable approach, IMO. Maybe I'd make it 12 weeks. By that time the fetus has developed a significant number of the attributes of a human being. From a practical point of view; 3 months is enough time for a woman to make up her mind and act even given it may be 6 weeks before she realizes she's pregnant.
 

vergiss

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
2,356
Reaction score
1
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Iriemon said:
This is a reasonable approach, IMO. Maybe I'd make it 12 weeks. By that time the fetus has developed a significant number of the attributes of a human being. From a practical point of view; 3 months is enough time for a woman to make up her mind and act even given it may be 6 weeks before she realizes she's pregnant.

I agree, although there should be exceptions in the case of severe genetic defect (up to about 22 weeks) or risk to the mother.
 

steen

Lie Detector
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
4,081
Reaction score
0
Location
Upper Midwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
If real sex-ed, contraception and support for pregnant wimen was pushed, then the number of abortions would drop dramarically. Why isn't this compromize being sought? Could it have to be with the pro-life movement's real goal is not to have fewer abortions, do you think?:roll:
 

Iriemon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
19,405
Reaction score
2,187
Location
Miami
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
steen said:
If real sex-ed, contraception and support for pregnant wimen was pushed, then the number of abortions would drop dramarically. Why isn't this compromize being sought? Could it have to be with the pro-life movement's real goal is not to have fewer abortions, do you think?:roll:

Concur 100%. I think that was part of the compromise talloulou was thinking of.

We should send a letter to the legislatures saying the diverse group on the DebatePolitics forum have come up with a compromise to put this issue to bed. But I suspect you are right, the hard core pro-life (and probably hard-core pro-choice) would not agree to it.
 

steen

Lie Detector
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
4,081
Reaction score
0
Location
Upper Midwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Iriemon said:
Concur 100%. I think that was part of the compromise talloulou was thinking of.

We should send a letter to the legislatures saying the diverse group on the DebatePolitics forum have come up with a compromise to put this issue to bed. But I suspect you are right, the hard core pro-life (and probably hard-core pro-choice) would not agree to it.
I don't see that hard-core pro-choice would object to any of these. The goal is to give women autonomy over their own lives. All of these points will give women more autonomy.
 

Iriemon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
19,405
Reaction score
2,187
Location
Miami
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
steen said:
I don't see that hard-core pro-choice would object to any of these. The goal is to give women autonomy over their own lives. All of these points will give women more autonomy.

My guess is there would be some that would balk at the proposition they couldn't have an abortion after 3 months (barring exceptional circumstances). But I don't know, just speculating.
 

steen

Lie Detector
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
4,081
Reaction score
0
Location
Upper Midwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Iriemon said:
My guess is there would be some that would balk at the proposition they couldn't have an abortion after 3 months (barring exceptional circumstances). But I don't know, just speculating.
I would balk at that one, certainly. It is still a medical decision, not a political one. I am saying that the compromise is to look at something other than the current struggle in getting the number of abortions down. Instead of fighting over restrictions, both sides could get together working on sex-ed, contraception and support of pregnant women and thus look at the demand side instead of the supply side.

THAT is the compromise.
 

talloulou

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Messages
15,998
Reaction score
3,962
Location
Tiamat's better half
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
steen said:
I would balk at that one, certainly. It is still a medical decision, not a political one. I am saying that the compromise is to look at something other than the current struggle in getting the number of abortions down. Instead of fighting over restrictions, both sides could get together working on sex-ed, contraception and support of pregnant women and thus look at the demand side instead of the supply side.

THAT is the compromise.


Where is the incentive for women to stop having abortions and act responsibly? The prochoice side argues that abortion is not killing a human being. Hell some of them argue it's killing a parasite. Either way the life developing in the womb has been devalued to the point that an abortion may not be such a big deal for some. If there are no consequences associated with an accidental pregnancy then an accidental pregnancy is no big deal.
 

Iriemon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
19,405
Reaction score
2,187
Location
Miami
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
steen said:
I would balk at that one, certainly. It is still a medical decision, not a political one. I am saying that the compromise is to look at something other than the current struggle in getting the number of abortions down. Instead of fighting over restrictions, both sides could get together working on sex-ed, contraception and support of pregnant women and thus look at the demand side instead of the supply side.

THAT is the compromise.

What is the compromise by the pro-choice side for that? A compromise means both sides give up something.
 
F

FallingPianos

talloulou said:
Where is the incentive for women to stop having abortions and act responsibly?

while abortion is 100% effective (well, almost.), birth control is easier emotionally, more convienent, and is safer.
 

afr0byte

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 10, 2006
Messages
2,364
Reaction score
253
Location
A blue state
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
star2589 said:
while abortion is 100% effective (well, almost.), birth control is easier emotionally, more convienent, and is safer.

Probably cheaper too.
 

talloulou

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Messages
15,998
Reaction score
3,962
Location
Tiamat's better half
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
star2589 said:
while abortion is 100% effective (well, almost.), birth control is easier emotionally, more convienent, and is safer.

You'd think so but some women actually have more than one abortion in their lifetime. I'm thinking the rhetoric that compares an abortion to an appendectomy is really taking hold in society.
 
Top Bottom