ABORTION: What is YOUR view, what would YOU do.

[AGENT J]

Which activities, in your life, should you be required to particpate?

that would depend on my profession and if i want accredited it, its an endless list

if i refuse to operate on brains then i certainly shouldn't be an accredited brain surgeon now should i?
im an engineer i had to participate in classes and i am required to get continued certification in certain fields/task for aerospace/defense/manufacturing
heck i have to renew my ISO and soldering standards yearly

now dont misunderstand what im saying, im not talking about requiring all doctors everywhere i was simply pointing out how if left to governing bodies not regulated by laws that people could simply get together and say hey we no longer treat Christians :shrug:

no thanks

 

[AlabamaPaul]

that would depend on my profession and if i want accredited it, its an endless list

if i refuse to operate on brains then i certainly shouldn't be an accredited brain surgeon now should i?
im an engineer i had to participate in classes and i am required to get continued certification in certain fields/task for aerospace/defense/manufacturing
heck i have to renew my ISO and soldering standards yearly

now dont misunderstand what im saying, im not talking about requiring all doctors everywhere i was simply pointing out how if left to governing bodies not regulated by laws that people could simply get together and say hey we no longer treat Christians :shrug:

no thanks

Your last paragraph is most telling. Should you, as an individual, not be able to decide the actions you would take in your chosen profession? Yes, yo may be required to prove proficiency in many areas, but isn't it your prerogative to choose to do what you want when practicing in your field?

 

[Scrabaholic]

The mother wouldn't have legal responsibility.
Not sure how the surgery would be performed. Probably C section or through the vagina.

You *do* realise that c-section is major surgery, right?

 

[Scrabaholic]

You should at least give exile as an option - a country like Canada would be willing to accept female American refugees from your anti-abortion regime.

Only if the US promised to keep Justin Beiber there in perpetuity.

 

[DashingAmerican]

You do not understand the problems involved. The embryo/fetus is physiologically attached to the woman's body. When you completely detach the embryo/fetus from that woman's body, it dies immediately or almost immediately unless it has attained the capacity to breathe oxygen by sufficient lung development. The only reason Savita Halappanavar's fetus still had a heartbeat is because the miscarriage was incomplete, i.e., the detachment, though irreversible, was only partial.

It's obviously a hypothetical.

 

[Goshin]

Frankly, I don't think I'd want to be the one to make that decision for the nation. I don't think I would want to live with the responsibility for a decision of that magnitude.

 

[AGENT J]

Your last paragraph is most telling. Should you, as an individual, not be able to decide the actions you would take in your chosen profession? Yes, yo may be required to prove proficiency in many areas, but isn't it your prerogative to choose to do what you want when practicing in your field?

again you are trying to insinuate that i implied something i didnt and you are failing.

you are talking apples and oranges, please focus on what i already said, you cant be a brain surgeon and not operate on brains :shrug:

maybe you should ask a more specific question I said governing bodies and accreditation. Cant be a pediatric hospital and not see any kids :shrug:. Please dont make more than what i actually said.

 

[AlabamaPaul]

again you are trying to insinuate that i implied something i didnt and you are failing.

you are talking apples and oranges, please focus on what i already said, you cant be a brain surgeon and not operate on brains :shrug:

maybe you should ask a more specific question I said governing bodies and accreditation. Cant be a pediatric hospital and not see any kids :shrug:. Please dont make more than what i actually said.

Is an apples to apples comparison not suiting your view? Please show me where I conflated any point you made...

 

[AGENT J]

Is an apples to apples comparison not suiting your view? Please show me where I conflated any point you made...

of course not because apples to oranges is illogical.

sure no problem thats very easy

I said one cant be a pediatric hospital and not see any kids, cant have any accreditation for that

you want me to be saying that "individuals cant decide the actions they would take in their chosen profession?" that was never said :shrug:

 

[digsbe]

I would ban all abortions with the only exception being those done in order to protect the life of the mother in the event of medical problems.

I would make it a criminal offense for a woman to have an abortion, seek an abortion, or for anyone to perform an abortion outside of the one exception.

I think adoption needs to be reformed, it needs to be cheaper and easier. I would also support tax incentives for families that adopt.

I would support setting up a legal framework to extend human rights to unborn humans. I would support free pregnancy tests at clinics and require positive pregnancy results to be recorded with the government along with the mother reporting who the likely father is/may be. The likely men should be notified and if things are unclear DNA testing should be done upon birth to find out which man is responsible for the child and should be responsible for child support if the mother and father do not place the child up for adoption.

 

[choiceone]

It's obviously a hypothetical.

What is a hypothetical? Right now, the fact is that when an embryo or previable fetus is detached from the woman's body, it dies so quickly that there would be a problem moving it to an artificial womb. The people working on artificial wombs are aiming at moving viable fetuses to them in the hopes that viable fetuses will be able to be moved there when their potential for survival in an incubator is low, and at growing non-human blastocysts and getting them to attach to the artificial wombs to see if/how long they will be able to survive, as a preliminary for human research where the law does not prevent growth of a human blastocyst for longer than 14 days.

 

[Quik]

I'm personally against abortion. I don't support it and I don't believe in it. There are good reasons like the health of the mother, ****ty defects and diseases that would make life miserable for the child, etc.

That being said, abortion should be legal because I don't think the state should be legislating morality. Like drugs, homosexuality, incest, or sex with 14 year olds, I don't have to personally agree with something in order to understand that the government shouldn't be involved.

 

[AGENT J]

1.)I would ban all abortions with the only exception being those done in order to protect the life of the mother in the event of medical problems.

2.)I would make it a criminal offense for a woman to have an abortion, seek an abortion, or for anyone to perform an abortion outside of the one exception.

I think adoption needs to be reformed, it needs to be cheaper and easier. I would also support tax incentives for families that adopt.

I would support setting up a legal framework to extend human rights to unborn humans. I would support free pregnancy tests at clinics and require positive pregnancy results to be recorded with the government along with the mother reporting who the likely father is/may be. The likely men should be notified and if things are unclear DNA testing should be done upon birth to find out which man is responsible for the child and should be responsible for child support if the mother and father do not place the child up for adoption.

not disagree or debating just getting more info and double checking
1.) no rape or fetal deformities
2.) define criminal offense endangerment, murder etc

 

[AGENT J]

Frankly, I don't think I'd want to be the one to make that decision for the nation. I don't think I would want to live with the responsibility for a decision of that magnitude.

well me neither but this is just to understand peoples ACTUAL feelings on the matter because theres way to much ASSUMING that goes on during the discussion of this topic.

 

[digsbe]

not disagree or debating just getting more info and double checking
1.) no rape or fetal deformities

No, in my view the only justifiable killing would be that done in self defense. A child conceived through rape is still an innocent life and as such should not be killed. The same goes for deformities.

2.) define criminal offense endangerment, murder etc

If someone has an abortion both the woman and abortion provider should be charged with murder.

 

[AGENT J]

No, in my view the only justifiable killing would be that done in self defense. A child conceived through rape is still an innocent life and as such should not be killed. The same goes for deformities.


If someone has an abortion both the woman and abortion provider should be charged with murder.

thanks for clarifying digs

 

[AGENT J]

Pretty reasonable imo. You almost wonder what it's doing in an abortion thread! :lol:

just to rehash on this its a perfect example of how things work.

Reasonable and honest thread with some reasonable discussion and its short lived. Effective and informative, at least i thought so but yet most people run from it because they arent interested in normal discussion or they are afraid to have their lies and dishonesty further exposed.

Weird that so many people just cant talk about something.

Pretty funny and telling.

 

[davidtaylorjr]

My view is that abortion, no matter what the circumstance, is immoral and wrong. It is not our role to play God. Every life is sacred and made in the image of God, and it is not our job to determine who is born and who is not. It is not a woman's "right" to kill a baby. Just like it is not my "right" to kill my neighbor.

Life begins at conception, so abortion is murder no matter which way you slice it.

Now before all of the haters begin... I am not saying that it is good if a woman becomes pregnant after a rape, or if the woman's life is in peril, those are terrible things. But those things do not give us the right to kill the baby. It was of no fault of the baby that those things happen. That would be like killing someone for a crime their brother committed. It just isn't right.

 

[AGENT J]

My view is that abortion, no matter what the circumstance, is immoral and wrong. It is not our role to play God. Every life is sacred and made in the image of God, and it is not our job to determine who is born and who is not. It is not a woman's "right" to kill a baby. Just like it is not my "right" to kill my neighbor.

Life begins at conception, so abortion is murder no matter which way you slice it.

Now before all of the haters begin... I am not saying that it is good if a woman becomes pregnant after a rape, or if the woman's life is in peril, those are terrible things. But those things do not give us the right to kill the baby. It was of no fault of the baby that those things happen. That would be like killing someone for a crime their brother committed. It just isn't right.

thanks for your reply

so what would you like done legally?
dou you want abortion totally banned and made murder?

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

My view is that abortion, no matter what the circumstance, is immoral and wrong. It is not our role to play God. Every life is sacred and made in the image of God, and it is not our job to determine who is born and who is not. It is not a woman's "right" to kill a baby. Just like it is not my "right" to kill my neighbor.

Life begins at conception, so abortion is murder no matter which way you slice it.

Now before all of the haters begin... I am not saying that it is good if a woman becomes pregnant after a rape, or if the woman's life is in peril, those are terrible things. But those things do not give us the right to kill the baby. It was of no fault of the baby that those things happen. That would be like killing someone for a crime their brother committed. It just isn't right.

So if we're going to take the view that killing is necessarily "punishment," which is basically what you're saying here, then a few questions for you.

If the woman will die before the ZEF is viable, what is the point of not aborting? The ZEF dies either way.

What if the ZEF itself is causing the life-threatening risk to the woman? If we're looking at this through a "only punish guilty parties" lens, and additionally the "a ZEF is a person" lens, which you are, then how is abortion unjustified?

And finally, if it's "not our role to play god," then do you support medical treatment at all? What about medical treatment of sick newborns? If they're meant to die, they're meant to die, right?

There's a lot of problems with this stance. These are but a few.

 

[GEIxBattleRifle]

1. It is not a woman's "right" to kill a baby. Just like it is not my "right" to kill my neighbor.

2. Life begins at conception, so abortion is murder no matter which way you slice it.

1. You're comparing apples and oranges here. Your neighbor is a organism that has put direct value on his existence while the unborn has not thus the killings are different.

2. Personhood does not begin at conception thus abortion is not murder no matter how you want to slice it since murder is the killing of a legal person which the unborn are not. Something that acts like a animal is no where close to a person. Humans get person class brains and minds after birth not while in the womb.

 

[davidtaylorjr]

1. You're comparing apples and oranges here. Your neighbor is a organism that has put direct value on his existence while the unborn has not thus the killings are different.

2. Personhood does not begin at conception thus abortion is not murder no matter how you want to slice it since murder is the killing of a legal person which the unborn are not. Something that acts like a animal is no where close to a person. Humans get person class brains and minds after birth not while in the womb.

The only people acting like animals are those that are murdering the children.

 

[davidtaylorjr]

So if we're going to take the view that killing is necessarily "punishment," which is basically what you're saying here, then a few questions for you.

If the woman will die before the ZEF is viable, what is the point of not aborting? The ZEF dies either way.

What if the ZEF itself is causing the life-threatening risk to the woman? If we're looking at this through a "only punish guilty parties" lens, and additionally the "a ZEF is a person" lens, which you are, then how is abortion unjustified?

And finally, if it's "not our role to play god," then do you support medical treatment at all? What about medical treatment of sick newborns? If they're meant to die, they're meant to die, right?

There's a lot of problems with this stance. These are but a few.

Medical treatment is ok, I never said we shouldn't do everything possible to keep someone alive. However, it is not our role to choose to kill a baby vs a mother.

 

[choiceone]

Medical treatment is ok, I never said we shouldn't do everything possible to keep someone alive. However, it is not our role to choose to kill a baby vs a mother.

What role could you possibly play in this? You do not have either the legal right or the power to know whether or not any particular woman is pregnant.

 

[davidtaylorjr]

What role could you possibly play in this? You do not have either the legal right or the power to know whether or not any particular woman is pregnant.

I'm not sure how this comment is relevant, please explain.