• 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!

Abortion = Eviction

T

Tucker Case

Matthew 16:3
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 28, 2008
Messages
45,596
Reaction score
22,537
Location
Everywhere and nowhere
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
I have a solution to the Abortion dilemma. What should be clear is that no woman wants an abortion in order to end a life. they just don;t want to have that life inside of them.

the issue is not about pro-life/pro-choice. It's about squatters and should they have right to live in a property without permission.

The fetus decides to plant itself unannounced and without permission in the Uterine property of the woman in question. That woman has the option to allow this freeloading squatter to stay by way of charity, or she can evict said freeloader.

But the issue with abortion is that the baby doesn't have a choice, so i recommend that all women seeking an abortion should be forced to place an eviction notice on their bellies for at least 30 days prior to the eviction.

This gives the freeloading fetus reasonable time to find more appropriate accommodations.

If the fetus chooses not to exercise their rights to find new accommodations, the fetus is in essence giving agreement to allow the eviction to take place.

This way, the fetus is in charge of its own destiny, and the woman has a choice to evict the freeloader.

If any fetuses die during the eviction, that is due to the risk they have chosen to take by not finding suitable accommodations in time.



Seems perfectly reasonable to me.
 
Tucker Case said:
I have a solution to the Abortion dilemma. What should be clear is that no woman wants an abortion in order to end a life. they just don;t want to have that life inside of them.

the issue is not about pro-life/pro-choice. It's about squatters and should they have right to live in a property without permission.

The fetus decides to plant itself unannounced and without permission in the Uterine property of the woman in question. That woman has the option to allow this freeloading squatter to stay by way of charity, or she can evict said freeloader.

But the issue with abortion is that the baby doesn't have a choice, so i recommend that all women seeking an abortion should be forced to place an eviction notice on their bellies for at least 30 days prior to the eviction.

This gives the freeloading fetus reasonable time to find more appropriate accommodations.

If the fetus chooses not to exercise their rights to find new accommodations, the fetus is in essence giving agreement to allow the eviction to take place.

This way, the fetus is in charge of its own destiny, and the woman has a choice to evict the freeloader.

If any fetuses die during the eviction, that is due to the risk they have chosen to take by not finding suitable accommodations in time.



Seems perfectly reasonable to me.
Click to expand...



I've said this a million times.
Just like anyone else, a pregnant woman owns her body and has the right to share it with whom she chooses.
Just like anyone else, a fetus has no right to occupy a woman's body and extract her bodily resources unless she chooses to allow this.

If society deems that a pregnant woman does not have sovereignty over her body and that others do have the right to avail themselves of women's bodies against the will of said women, then there is no reason for rape to be illegal.
 
1069 said:
I've said this a million times.
Just like anyone else, a pregnant woman owns her body and has the right to share it with whom she chooses.
Just like anyone else, a fetus has no right to occupy a woman's body and extract her bodily resources unless she chooses to allow this.

If society deems that a pregnant woman does not have sovereignty over her body and that others do have the right to avail themselves of women's bodies against the will of said women, then there is no reason for rape to be illegal.
Click to expand...

What about the Eviction notice idea?
 
Tucker Case said:
What about the Eviction notice idea?
Click to expand...

Since I never rented out my uterus to any freeloaders in the first place- and since the birth control pills should've served as sufficient warning; a "beware of dog"/ "tresspassers will be shot" notice, if you will- I do not feel obligated to give a 30 day free ride to anyone.
Keep in mind that for each of those thirty days, said freeloader is not only occupying one's body but also sucking away the iron from one's blood and the calcium from one's bones and teeth. He is overtaxing one's heart, liver, and kidneys. He is wreaking hormonal havok. He is doing many other unpleasant things, all with the aim of growing larger and stronger so that he can one day, after ripping one's vagina to shreds, survive independently of the body he has cannibalized in order to build his own.
Since that is a pointless and unachievable aim, seeing as how he's not going to be allowed to remain in the host's body long enough to accomplish it, I see no benefit to the fetus in any sort of notice, and much detriment to the woman, who doesn't deserve to be cannibalized one day longer than necessary, let alone thirty.
 
Last edited:
It made me laugh. But I don't consider a fetus to be a freeloader. I love all of my babies. And I also like being pregnant so meh.
Birthcontrol is not sufficient notice in my opinion, however tubal ligation would be. Birthcontrol is proven that it is not 100 percent effective and some are now not supposed to harm a baby if it is conceived. (I am aware that not all birthcontrol is like this). But then again, if you're just taking birthcontrol you're not completely against the idea of having children in my opinion. There are much more effective methods to keep one self from becoming pregnant.
So I think the eviction notice would be a good idea. But I don't think it would have to be something a women should have to wear. It could be so much that she goes to the doctor and lets them know 30 days in advance that she was going to have an abortion. I don't think it needs to be something that is humiliating.
 
Dynamic said:
It made me laugh. But I don't consider a fetus to be a freeloader. I love all of my babies. And I also like being pregnant so meh.
Birthcontrol is not sufficient notice in my opinion, however tubal ligation would be. Birthcontrol is proven that it is not 100 percent effective and some are now not supposed to harm a baby if it is conceived. (I am aware that not all birthcontrol is like this). But then again, if you're just taking birthcontrol you're not completely against the idea of having children in my opinion. There are much more effective methods to keep one self from becoming pregnant.
So I think the eviction notice would be a good idea. But I don't think it would have to be something a women should have to wear. It could be so much that she goes to the doctor and lets them know 30 days in advance that she was going to have an abortion. I don't think it needs to be something that is humiliating.
Click to expand...

I guess you wouldn't have to post it, but the fetus would need to be informed somehow, so someone would have to holler in at it and let it know what's up.
 
Very funny post. I liked it a lot.

Similar to a parasite.
 
I was laughing at the 2nd paragraph. I couldn't believe it. Some christmas humour, eh Tucker? lol
 
actually birthing the baby is more of an eviction. think about it, the woman spends hours trying to kick the baby out. babies are so stubborn. then what about the ones that are so desperate to stay that they have to be cut out. deadbeat babies
Cool_20.gif
 
I think delaying an Abortion is more like a continuing resolution.

Formation of a Zygot, and attachment to a womb, are steps toward the formation of a child. The woman and the man involved in conception, have the knowledge of gene pools, and family pride, to judge the timing of continuing a pregnancy.

Does the idea of an embryo's eviction revoke the woman's right to refuse adoption to others?

If there is a mother willing to accept the evicted embryo, will the biological father of the soon-to-be child, be responsible for contributing to the expenses of raising the child?

Science is advancing, and transplanting Zygots, Embryos and Fetuses at varous stages, will become more possible, as Science marches on.

If another woman is willing to take an evicted child into her womb, but science cannot transplant the ambilical cord, who is in charge of keeping the ambilical cord going? Can an Ambilical cord from the original mother, be kept going for 7 months, or so, while the embryo is in the adopting mother's uterus? How close will the Adopting mother have to stay to the Evicting mother?

One of the problems with the Pro-Choice side is that there is not a good metaphor for the image of an aborted Zygot/Embryo/Fetus, as under the domain of the mother, parents and family.

Abortion is more the power to disinherit, or to write somone out of a will, designating heirs. Abortion is more a disinheritance, before legal personhood has attached, with Total Expungement.

An automatic Pardon is extended to those responsible for an Abortion.

The function of Religion should be to Forgive and Redeem any and all guilt associated with abortions. Instead, many Religions of Today seek to shame and criminalize the disinheritance of unintentional creations of potential life.


..
 
Last edited:
Tucker Case said:
I have a solution to the Abortion dilemma. What should be clear is that no woman wants an abortion in order to end a life. they just don;t want to have that life inside of them.

the issue is not about pro-life/pro-choice. It's about squatters and should they have right to live in a property without permission.

The fetus decides to plant itself unannounced and without permission in the Uterine property of the woman in question. That woman has the option to allow this freeloading squatter to stay by way of charity, or she can evict said freeloader.

But the issue with abortion is that the baby doesn't have a choice, so i recommend that all women seeking an abortion should be forced to place an eviction notice on their bellies for at least 30 days prior to the eviction.

This gives the freeloading fetus reasonable time to find more appropriate accommodations.

If the fetus chooses not to exercise their rights to find new accommodations, the fetus is in essence giving agreement to allow the eviction to take place.

This way, the fetus is in charge of its own destiny, and the woman has a choice to evict the freeloader.

If any fetuses die during the eviction, that is due to the risk they have chosen to take by not finding suitable accommodations in time.

Seems perfectly reasonable to me.
Click to expand...

If the mother's a prostitute this is an easy case, as her belly is zoned for commercial use.

No eviction proceeding needed, a simple trespassing charge will do.
 
Last edited:
Jerry said:
So no abortions from November through January?
Click to expand...

Why, are evictions not allowed in December where you live?
That must be some northern law, to keep people from freezing to death.
Here, they evict people all year round.
 
But the issue with abortion is that the baby doesn't have a choice, so i recommend that all women seeking an abortion should be forced to place an eviction notice on their bellies for at least 30 days prior to the eviction.
Click to expand...

But the fetus is a minor, so the decision defaults to the parents (mother).

:lol:
 
Maybe an Abortion is like a rejection notice after submitting a book for publication. So you have to re-write the book and submit it again, later.
 
Gladiator said:
Maybe an Abortion is like a rejection notice after submitting a book for publication. So you have to re-write the book and submit it again, later.
Click to expand...

Right.
maybe even to a different publishing house altogether.
 
The fetus should have a right to appeal the eviction. With the state of the Courts, this should keep it safe until approximately the age of retirement.
 
Perhaps the State should grant certificates for Psychics who can be assigned the job of determining the "WILL" of the fetus. What is the Fetus really thinking?

"I'd rather wait for a better opportunity?"

There is a genetic, inherent will to suvive, in all organisms. Adult Man has the thinking capacity to understand the consequences of the management of living organisms on Earth. The thinking of a Fetus is probably limited to the idea to survive, regardless of the reality of the expectations of the future.

The Embryo and fetus are not capable of understanding the factors of world over-population and the consequences of increased pollution of the planet, over the next 500 years. It is for the parents, the parents' supporters, and the society, to determine whether to bring each potential life, Sperm, Egg, Zygot, Embryo, or Fetus, to term.


..
 
Last edited:
Gladiator said:
Perhaps the State should grant certificates for Psychics who can be assigned the job of determining the "WILL" of the fetus. What is the Fetus really thinking?

"I'd rather wait for a better opportunity?"

There is a genetic, inherent will to suvive, in all organisms. Adult Man has the thinking capacity to understand the consequences of the management of living organisms on Earth. The thinking of a Fetus is probably limited to the idea to survive, regardless of the reality of the expectations of the future.

The Embryo and fetus are not capable of understanding the factors of world over-population and the consequences of increased pollution of the planet, over the next 500 years. It is for the parents, the parents' supporters, and the society, to determine whether to bring each potential life, Sperm, Egg, Zygot, Embryo, or Fetus, to term.
..
Click to expand...
I've always found such as this to be a particularly weak argument for the legalized homicidal abortion. By this reasoning, every drunk loses all rights to self determination once they have reached deep unconsciousness, and thus intellectual parity with a fetus.

Further, if the adults are consumed with concern for overpopulation, then restraint in procreative matters should follow. Or perhaps voluntary reduction of the adults so concerned would be in order, no?

One should be careful with such reasoning, lest they justify that with themselves slumbering in some pleasant state of deep repose following the day's exertions, a concerned representative of repentant Humanity, all awash in righteous concern for the future of this overburdened sphere, take it upon themself to reduce the planet's travails by one momentarily incognizant life.*
* note to self: good stuff! Remeber for later.
​
 
Last edited:
I'm all for choice but this thread is pretty sick and provides little legitimacy to the pro-choice side.
 
Isn 't there some new movie about the feelings of the unborn wanting to be born?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom