• 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!

If a woman's right to terminate were overturned

Same question (and Im cool with your definition BTW) then does the life become invalid when people lose brain function or experience dementia?

One the whole I do not view life as having a beginning or an ending. To me it is a circlcle with out beginning or ending.
 
A skin cell and a fertilized egg are in no way comparable.

The origins of 'life' will always be debated...but seriously...WHEN does it start? And for that matter when does it end? When it con first independently survive without the mother? Or if its born premature and in an incubator is it still not life? 3 weeks? 12? 24? Whats the difference? And what about when the person can no longer sustain themselves...do they lose 'life' status then?

Im cool with disagreements...just honest ones. I think a lot of folks make their definitions of 'life' conveniently to support their positions on killing said life. I will do you the courtesy of not assuming that about you.
A zygote and skin cell are comparible in some ways - but I agree that one is a part of the 'life cycle', whereas the other is just a cell.

I would love to have a topic on 'why do you draw the line when you draw the line' - most of the pro-life/pro-choice debate is centered around that one issue of "When does it become worthy of legal protection". It's always talked about, but very rarely directly addressed - and partly because we tend to have good reasons for drawing our own lines, they just tend to vary from person to person.

MaggieD said:
@ Iangb -- I think I have to be more careful in pegging myself a ProLifer. The images you post are not babies to me. So I wonder what I'd call myself? Someone who thinks more strict timeframes need to be implemented, perhaps. As I think about it, a ProLifer might take the stance that IUD's are abortion (which, of course, technically, they are. Or that taking birth control pills is abortion (which, of course, technically, they are. Or the morning after pill. Same thing there.

I pride myself (or constantly work on, anyway) on my ability to see greys. I see greys here.

I wonder if many ProLifers could find comfort in that. "A woman has a choice . . . up to a point."
Personally, I don't like the titles of 'pro-life' and 'pro-choice'.

"A woman has a choice - up to a point" is an excellent summary of both viewpoints (with some exceptions for the extreme positions) - we just disagree on when 'the point' is. It's very rare to find a pro-lifer who doesn't support the womans right to chose not to have sex, and most pro-lifers don't mind (certain types of) contraception. In the same way, it's very rare to find a pro-choicer who would kill a newborn still attached by the umbilical, and most pro-choicers don't mind bans on (non-medical) abortion past 24 weeks.

Greys are definitely present.
 
Higher rates of abortion indicate either more social aversion to raising a family or less material capacity. Either one is a troubling sign.

I agree with this, and likewise, I think illegalizing abortion is just treating a symptom, not the root.
 
I agree with this, and likewise, I think illegalizing abortion is just treating a symptom, not the root.


There may well be something to that.

But given that there are many different types of contraceptive methods available, some of which are very simple and convenient with a pretty high rate of reliability... it seems odd that we're still having so many abortions.

Over a million a year, with condoms and diaphrams and spermacide and the pill and implants so readily available? And sex-ed in almost every high school and most middle-schools?

Doesn't that seem a bit odd?
 
Higher rates of abortion indicate either more social aversion to raising a family or less material capacity. Either one is a troubling sign.

Since the majority of women (over 60%, according to Guttmacher) seeking abortions already have children, I'd say it's merely an aversion to raising families larger than they want or can afford; to look at it another way, it's a preference- rather than an "aversion"- for investing what resources a family has into a few children, rather than spreading said resources thin among many children.
This is a preference that all industrialized nations have in common.
 
Personally, I don't like the titles of 'pro-life' and 'pro-choice'.

"A woman has a choice - up to a point" is an excellent summary of both viewpoints (with some exceptions for the extreme positions) - we just disagree on when 'the point' is. It's very rare to find a pro-lifer who doesn't support the womans right to chose not to have sex, and most pro-lifers don't mind (certain types of) contraception. In the same way, it's very rare to find a pro-choicer who would kill a newborn still attached by the umbilical, and most pro-choicers don't mind bans on (non-medical) abortion past 24 weeks.

Greys are definitely present.


To some degree I concur.

Even among pro-life advocates who believe human life begins almost immediately, there is debate: does life begin at fertilization, or when the zygote attaches to the womb and begins dividing?

I tend towards the latter. If I am properly informed, a good many eggs get fertilized but fail to attach to the uterine wall and get flushed out during the woman's period, absent any intervention but that of nature.

This is also often the dividing line between those who think the birth-control pill is a form of abortion and those who don't.
 
But given that there are many different types of contraceptive methods available, some of which are very simple and convenient with a pretty high rate of reliability... it seems odd that we're still having so many abortions.

A few things to consider...

One is that contraceptive is never 100%, even if you are using multiple methods. My cousin, for example, was born even after his mother was on the pill, the dad used a condom, and she took the morning after pill when the condom broke. I mean, we all love my cousin, but we all know he was an accident. :)

The other thing is that reporting is better than it used to be.

Over a million a year, with condoms and diaphrams and spermacide and the pill and implants so readily available? And sex-ed in almost every high school and most middle-schools?

People have sex. Sex can cause pregnancy. People know all the facts but still do it. People still get STDs too. A lot of pro-life people say that people who have sex without thinking should just have to deal with the consequences of pregnancy, but obviously even increasing the protective measures available while also educating about the consequences has not created a deterrent. People want to have sex because it feels good, and because our modern society has more sexual freedom than even 60 years ago.

It's an unfortunate reality that abortion is needed, but I think the consequences to society would be much higher without it. There are already too many unfit parents who go through with the pregnancy; I shudder to think how the demography of our world would change if the most unfit of the unfit were also being forced into having children.

Doesn't that seem a bit odd?

No not really. Incidence of abortion around the world has actually be on the decline in the past 10 years. Even so, 48% of all abortions in the world are unsafe because of legal issues, and 13% of the maternal mortality rates relate to complications from unsafe abortions. Even if we are to consider that abortion is murder, then illegal abortion is a double homicide if the mother's life is lost.

I am not pro-abortion in the grand scheme but I do think we ought to look at the lesser of two evils here.
 
There may well be something to that.

But given that there are many different types of contraceptive methods available, some of which are very simple and convenient with a pretty high rate of reliability... it seems odd that we're still having so many abortions.

Over a million a year, with condoms and diaphrams and spermacide and the pill and implants so readily available? And sex-ed in almost every high school and most middle-schools?

Doesn't that seem a bit odd?

Not really. I got pregnant twice while using birth control.
 
Not really. I got pregnant twice while using birth control.

I was taking birth control pills when I had my first unwanted pregnancy, in my early 20s; and I had another one recently, while using the rhythm method and withdrawal (which has actually been very effective for us over the years, as my periods are quite regular and I have distinct ovulation signs; since entering my mid-30s, however, my cycles have changed somewhat and I guess that's what threw us off).
My doctor had been recommending an IUD for awhile, since pills are contraindicated for me at this time, but I really didn't want one, and still don't.
That's my choice.
I am fully aware that an IUD or tubal ligation could prevent yet a third unwanted pregnancy, but I don't want either one and am willing to take my chances.

I really don't see how it affects anyone else, or how it's anyone else's business.
 
I almost pushed to agree with Goshin's statement, but then realized he was making my case (while attempting to do so in the opposite direction).

We have EVERYTHING. Teaching, knowledge, education, condoms, the pill, the morning after pill, - whatever you can think of, our kids are learning. So WHY are there so many abortions? And why do you believe that if women couldn't abort anymore, they'd have a light bulb moment and somehow choose abstinence (because they knew about all the other stuff, and THAT didn't work).
 
I was taking birth control pills when I had my first unwanted pregnancy, in my early 20s; and I had another one recently, while using the rhythm method and withdrawal (which has actually been very effective for us over the years, as my periods are quite regular and I have distinct ovulation signs; since entering my mid-30s, however, my cycles have changed somewhat and I guess that's what threw us off).
My doctor had been recommending an IUD for awhile, since pills are contraindicated for me at this time, but I really didn't want one, and still don't.
That's my choice.
I am fully aware that an IUD or tubal ligation could prevent yet a third unwanted pregnancy, but I don't want either one and am willing to take my chances.

I really don't see how it affects anyone else, or how it's anyone else's business.

I got pregnant once while taking the pill, and once while using condoms. I hate the pill, I have always hated the pill. I suffered through using it because it was most effective and unobtrusive. I'm allergic to latex condoms, so using them sucks for me and I can't use spermicide for the same reason. But the pill gave me headaches, migraines, frequent spotting, high blood pressure, and made me nauseous. As I got older, I had to stop taking them too. I opted for the Mirena IUD and honestly, I couldn't be happier with it. Nothing to remember to do, no more constant headaches, and my periods have diminished to essentially spotting for a few days a month.

But you're right. It's no one else's business.
 
What would all you pro-lifers then do with all the hours you no longer needed to waste preaching on message boards. Would you start tilting at other windmills?

I am neither pro nor against abortion, but with the time I spend disgusing my in between stand on the issue I would discuss the overturning of the right to terminate, in order to consider if reasonable support is being made available for women who are having a baby and mothers. It would be depressing if the right to terminate was overturned, but the reasons why women were given this right and the right to solely make the decision herself were not being addressed.
 
What would us pro-life people do? Move on to other injustices, and probably listen to a bunch of angry feminists scream about how they should have the right to murder their unborn. Then they would be the ones preaching. The roles would be reversed.

Would you ever consider understanding what it is exactly that has made the feminists angry and trying to think up with a solution, that would satisify both your and their political interests?
 
That is probably because unlike in the past when people of higher education possessed a much broader knowledge base and thus could support their arguments with relevant facts and arguments, without needing top boast, some feel that by proclaiming a high degree in some field lends credibility to their non arguments. That of course begs the question as to the veracity of such proclamations on an anonymous internet forum.

There was thread stared and contributed to by somebody studying political science a while ago. I thought he was either taking the piss with the things he said, or doing an experiment on us, because it seemed like such opinions could not come from anybody who is politically aware, let alone somebody who is specifically taking a degree course in political science.

I chose to treat his questions and comments, as if he was intending them as an experiment, to test what disagreements are typically put forward about his points of view.
 
With a GED, you actually have to know the stuff. With a diploma, showing up for class, and doing assignments could get you a good grade. Some states do require testing to graduate now, but not back when I went.

For the record, you and 1069 are two of the more intelligent posters around here.:2razz:

Id say what makes any education really an education is an ability to apply a purpose and use to the information or skill. A purpose could be making a living with a skill or being able to think through a situation with the help of information on a degree course and other sources, or even just enjoying using the education to make a hobby more worthwhile.

I have a name that I use for those who cant apply what they learn: 'Dumb intellectuals'
 
Honestly, I have a college degree with a 3.87 GPA and I think you are smarter than I am.

I am smart in some areas and clueless in others. Is anyone ever completely stupid accross the board?
 
Abortion isn't pretty, but neither is childbirth. It's very expensive and difficult to rear a child. It's also expensive and difficult to give birth.

Speaking from a parent prespective, I think it is about as expensive as you want it to be. There are lots of options. At least there are, in Ireland and Germany where I have lived for my parenting years so far.

I think the main issue is if one has the willingness and ability to give of oneself, in the way that a child needs from a parent. This is a very big deal. It is a huge committment. Pregnancy and birth alone are already fairly big committments.
 
Speaking from a parent prespective, I think it is about as expensive as you want it to be. There are lots of options. At least there are, in Ireland and Germany where I have lived for my parenting years so far.

I think the main issue is if one has the willingness and ability to give of oneself, in the way that a child needs from a parent. This is a very big deal. It is a huge committment. Pregnancy and birth alone are already fairly big committments.

In many cases, including mine, it is not a matter of whether one is willing to make a commitment to be a parent, but whether one is willing to make whatever sacrifices are necessary to be a good parent.
Most women who have abortions already have children, and find themselves unexpectedly pregnant again when they can't afford and don't want more.
This is as much a parenting decision as it is a personal decision.
As any mother of small children can attest, there is no "personal" decision one can make into which the well-being of one's children does not factor, to some greater or lesser extent.
 
You're missing the point, which is that adoption may be expensive and difficult for a reason. Why should we endeavor to make adoption EASIER and less expensive than bearing and birthing a child? If you really want a child, you will make the necessary sacrifices, if you don't want a child, you shouldn't be forced to that sacrifice.

Paying out money is not a guarantee that a person will be a dedicated parent. Nobody really knows what they will be able to devote to parenting, until they are actually in the process of doing it. It is not like one expects is it going to be, before one actually becomes a parent.
 
That was over a decade ago. She now has two young boys, and has told me more than once that she wishes she hadn't had that abortion. She has dreams about her aborted baby and wakes up crying, and says she will live with a troubled conscience all her life.

I tried to spare her this. I guess that makes me an evil tyrant who hates women, huh.

Id say it is not your place, to try to spare her this.

I often think of the baby ghost that would follow me, if I had an abortion. But, I still would not see how attempts to be 'spared' this by somebody else, especially a person who will never experience pregancy, birth or motherhood would be in any way helpful, or if the decision to spare me needs help from such a person.

If anyone could help with this decision, it would be a trained therapist, who can point out all the realities of all my options, so I could choose.

I dont think this makes you an evil tyrant who hates women, but I do think it makes you somebody who has too much to say about the realities or motherhood and abortion, when you personally have no experience of them to back up what you say. As well as that, the responsibility of the outcome of a womens decision in this are one you could abandon at will even if you are the father, unlike the mother can. I think, this opinion of yours would be seen as arrogant by many women, with feminist leanings.
 
Last edited:
if the child is the mans' too, then of course he should be part of the discussion. he's certainly going to be paying if she decides to keep the baby, and he is morally obligated to help raise the child in a responsible and loving manner. the kinds of demands that children place on a person (as discussed here) are extreme. to pretend that he has no stake in this decision is feminism bordering on the ludicrous.

as for abortion being a parenting decision; that is on the one hand true and on the other false. absolutely you as a parent are going to make your decisions with an eye towards the needs/demands of your child. however, that is not the question that makes the difference; the critical question here is whether or not the baby in you or your significant others' womb is your child, too. lots of parents of three would have an easier time of it and more attention to devote to their individual kids if they were to simply kill the middle child with a shovel - that does not make it a 'good parenting decision'. only if the baby is already 'not your child' can killing it be considered a 'parenting' decision.
 
Last edited:
if the child is the mans' too, then of course he should be part of the discussion. he's certainly going to be paying if she decides to keep the baby, ...

He isnt necessarily going to be paying. That I think is one reason why abortion was legalised in many countries, and why women legally have the right to make the decision about whether to have an abortion or not. So many fathers run from their pregnant partners, and so many who dont take on few to none of the day to day childcare responsibilities when a child is born. These responsibilies most of the time fall heavily on a womans shoulders.

A womens chance of gaining a responsible father for her child are a lottery.
 
Been there, done that. A female relative whom I half-raised (in the absence of her father) was the subject; practically a daughter to me. Was asked to pay for an abortion when she got pregnant by some scumbag she was dating. Refused. Was asked to drive her to the clinic and bring her back home. Refused. Yes it was heart-wrenching but my belief that abortion is wrong isn't merely skin-deep, it is bone-deep.

To my mind I was being asked to participate in the murder of an innocent baby, because the erstwhile parents had been irresponsible and didn't want to reap the consequences. Aiding in the deliberate murder of inconvenient babies is something I will not do. She pleaded and cried... I cried too, because this girl is much beloved to me... but in the end I said "I'm sorry, but I cannot help you with this. I'm sorry you're in this fix, but it isn't the baby's fault, and I fear you will regret doing this. I can't be a part of it."

That was over a decade ago. She now has two young boys, and has told me more than once that she wishes she hadn't had that abortion. She has dreams about her aborted baby and wakes up crying, and says she will live with a troubled conscience all her life.

I tried to spare her this. I guess that makes me an evil tyrant who hates women, huh.

Whoa that really went over your head didn't it? I'm talking about 70,000 women dying every year from unsafe abortions, you're talking about giving someone a ride.

Would you feel differently if you woke up one morning and found that she had bled to death in her bedroom? Or that she died from an infection? This is what happens to girls and women in other countries where it is not legal. So no, you haven't been there or done that.

Different women have different emotions about their abortions. Abortion is a case by case thing and some women do feel a lot of guilt for having one. All women are different, and many times we reflect the feelings of people around us. Many women get a hard time about it, which also causes anxiety and negative feelings. If she thinks her parent thinks she is a murderer, she might hold that inside her.

It would be best all around if it never happened. It would be better if all women had access to universal healthcare. That alone would cut the abortion rate down.
 
He isnt necessarily going to be paying. That I think is one reason why abortion was legalised in many countries, and why women legally have the right to make the decision about whether to have an abortion or not. So many fathers run from their pregnant partners, and so many who dont take on few to none of the day to day childcare responsibilities when a child is born. These responsibilies most of the time fall heavily on a womans shoulders.

A womens chance of gaining a responsible father for her child are a lottery.

Among the poor, many women even here in the US do not receive child support from their baby-daddies.
I know; I live and work among them, and many of my female acquaintances, neighbors and coworkers, are raising their children alone or with a boyfriend who is not the children's father, with no help or financial assistance whatsoever from the biological father of their children.
My own husband's mom raised him and his siblings alone, and never ever tried to get child support out of her abusive ex after he ran away. He threatened to come back and kill her if she did. She was simply glad to be rid of him, and in fact that's how many mothers feel.
They have no intention of chasing after worthless men for anything. Half of these baby-daddies don't work anyway, or else they work illegally or under-the-table and get paid in cash, so what's the point of suing them for child support? At best, they might spend a week or two in jail here and there. It's only going to piss them off, and ultimately they'll take it out on mom and the kids.
It is not a given that men will or can be made to pay child support.
People who believe that it is have never spent any significant amount of time around the lowest socioeconomic sectors.
Women are running the show, in those sectors. So many of the men are simply worthless, stuck forever in the revolving door of the penal system, and in a perpetual state of gang-banging adolescence.
 
Very well said. Too many people (hence me starting this and the other thread) seriously seem to believe that the world of reproduction is just chock-full of easy answers - we just need to repeal Roe v Wade.
 
Back
Top Bottom