• 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 anti-abortion, would you support other forms of population control?

Cameron

Politically Correct
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 26, 2010
Messages
5,028
Reaction score
3,435
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
My support of abortion rights is predominantly pragmatic. Unwanted children are a burden on society: our foster care and public schools systems are already underfunded and failing in many areas. Without proper care, such children are likely to grow up emotionally disturbed or with educational deficiencies or delinquent, imposing further burdens on society. I believe it was Freakanomics that posited that there was a correlation between Roe v Wade and the modern decrease in crime we have experienced since the 80s. Whether you believe that or not, it cannot be denied that dealing with children who are not wanted by their parents comes at a significant cost in an already overpopulated world.

Second, I simply do not feel that termination of a fetus — a small collection of human cells which in its earliest stages is far less complex than the trees we cut down at will or the flies we squash without a second thought, and which even in intermediate stages is still far less complex than animals we breed and slaughter for meet and clothing — is an inherently unjustifiable act.

But controversial as these opinions may be, and I know how passionately many will disagree, I am more curious to know what pro-lifers’ views are on the practical problems that anti-abortion policy presents. What alternatives policies would you support to control out-of-control population in a world where the need for human labor is becoming less and less critical, and yet more and more people are being born? Where overpopulation is already destroying our environment and creating friction between expanding cultures?
 

Lursa

Implacable
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
May 1, 2013
Messages
83,420
Reaction score
46,302
Location
Outside Seattle
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
OP posts an unsupported conclusion: who is using abortion for population control?
 

Bullseye

Fund police; Defund the politicians
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 18, 2018
Messages
33,443
Reaction score
11,140
Location
San Diego
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
My support of abortion rights is predominantly pragmatic. Unwanted children are a burden on society: our foster care and public schools systems are already underfunded and failing in many areas. Without proper care, such children are likely to grow up emotionally disturbed or with educational deficiencies or delinquent, imposing further burdens on society. I believe it was Freakanomics that posited that there was a correlation between Roe v Wade and the modern decrease in crime we have experienced since the 80s. Whether you believe that or not, it cannot be denied that dealing with children who are not wanted by their parents comes at a significant cost in an already overpopulated world.

Second, I simply do not feel that termination of a fetus — a small collection of human cells which in its earliest stages is far less complex than the trees we cut down at will or the flies we squash without a second thought, and which even in intermediate stages is still far less complex than animals we breed and slaughter for meet and clothing — is an inherently unjustifiable act.

But controversial as these opinions may be, and I know how passionately many will disagree, I am more curious to know what pro-lifers’ views are on the practical problems that anti-abortion policy presents. What alternatives policies would you support to control out-of-control population in a world where the need for human labor is becoming less and less critical, and yet more and more people are being born? Where overpopulation is already destroying our environment and creating friction between expanding cultures?
We could just buy a one way ticket for all those folks that complain that some other country's laws are better. If you like the healthcare in France? Au Revoir; better gun laws in Australia G'day mate, etc.
Maybe just ship all socialists to the Scandinavian country of their choice, or Venezuela if they'd prefer.

That should give us plenty of elbow room.
 

Scrabaholic

certified sane
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
22,211
Reaction score
16,016
Location
Near Kingston, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
We could just buy a one way ticket for all those folks that complain that some other country's laws are better. If you like the healthcare in France? Au Revoir; better gun laws in Australia G'day mate, etc.
Maybe just ship all socialists to the Scandinavian country of their choice, or Venezuela if they'd prefer.

That should give us plenty of elbow room.

Does that also apply to people who complain about abortion being legal? Should they be shipped off to a country where it's not?
 

Bullseye

Fund police; Defund the politicians
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 18, 2018
Messages
33,443
Reaction score
11,140
Location
San Diego
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Does that also apply to people who complain about abortion being legal? Should they be shipped off to a country where it's not?
It's already legal here. Why would we ship them out?
 

trixare4kids

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 16, 2017
Messages
44,450
Reaction score
30,661
Location
S. California
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
We could just buy a one way ticket for all those folks that complain that some other country's laws are better. If you like the healthcare in France? Au Revoir; better gun laws in Australia G'day mate, etc.
Maybe just ship all socialists to the Scandinavian country of their choice, or Venezuela if they'd prefer.

That should give us plenty of elbow room.

It sure would!
If wishes were horses, beggars would ride.
 

cpwill

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
67,085
Reaction score
34,147
Location
USofA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
OP posts an unsupported conclusion: who is using abortion for population control?

Ruth Bader Ginsburg?




Anywho, as to the OP: No. Whether to have children or not is, for adults, an individual choice. The State has no business bringing it's violent powers to bear in forcing you not to.
 

Tom Horn

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 22, 2018
Messages
1,854
Reaction score
207
Location
TEXAS
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
I’m not anti-abortion. I’m pro-choice. Once it’s been determined the the babies choice has been adhered to, go ahead and save the child, but off the mother. Just because she wishes to kill, doesn’t mean there’s only two options, but instead three.
 

TrumpTrain

Banned
Joined
Nov 9, 2018
Messages
419
Reaction score
146
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
My support of abortion rights is predominantly pragmatic.........

The problem with that is that you might as well say, why not infanticide? Why not kill kids under 3 years old? Why not kill all the homeless? Why not kill the disabled who are only a drag on society? Its all quite pragmatic after all.

Why? Because it would be immoral to murder infants, youngsters, the disabled or the homeless, thats why.

Well, it is just as immoral to murder those who are three months after conception as it is to murder those who are three years after conception. There is no difference. NO difference.
 

code1211

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
Messages
40,531
Reaction score
8,059
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
My support of abortion rights is predominantly pragmatic. Unwanted children are a burden on society: our foster care and public schools systems are already underfunded and failing in many areas. Without proper care, such children are likely to grow up emotionally disturbed or with educational deficiencies or delinquent, imposing further burdens on society. I believe it was Freakanomics that posited that there was a correlation between Roe v Wade and the modern decrease in crime we have experienced since the 80s. Whether you believe that or not, it cannot be denied that dealing with children who are not wanted by their parents comes at a significant cost in an already overpopulated world.

Second, I simply do not feel that termination of a fetus — a small collection of human cells which in its earliest stages is far less complex than the trees we cut down at will or the flies we squash without a second thought, and which even in intermediate stages is still far less complex than animals we breed and slaughter for meet and clothing — is an inherently unjustifiable act.

But controversial as these opinions may be, and I know how passionately many will disagree, I am more curious to know what pro-lifers’ views are on the practical problems that anti-abortion policy presents. What alternatives policies would you support to control out-of-control population in a world where the need for human labor is becoming less and less critical, and yet more and more people are being born? Where overpopulation is already destroying our environment and creating friction between expanding cultures?

You have interesting and foundation-free opinions on this.

I have reconciled the societal and individual justifications on abortion by having two, separated and discreet opinions on this.

Individually, there is no morally justifiable reason to have an abortion absent extenuating circumstances of forceful impregnation or health considerations.

Societally, there is no expedient method to care effectively for the unwanted child. As a society, we have decided to condone murder to avoid the problem. Same reasoning should extend to violent criminals.

Your disgusting comparison of a child in the womb to a tree is ridiculous.

Discussing abortion laws in the US as a means of population control is also ridiculous. Our population is not expanding at a break neck rate due to run away procreation. In truth, take away the immigration totals and the population is shrinking.

This topic is not one with a binary solution. There is plenty of grey to consider and we, as a society, need to discard the veils of dishonesty and understand what it is we are doing and why.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_the_United_States

US Population by Year
 

Lursa

Implacable
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
May 1, 2013
Messages
83,420
Reaction score
46,302
Location
Outside Seattle
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
I’m not anti-abortion. I’m pro-choice. Once it’s been determined the the babies choice has been adhered to, go ahead and save the child, but off the mother. Just because she wishes to kill, doesn’t mean there’s only two options, but instead three.

How do you determine the unborn's choice?

And good luck if you assume what it is. There are at least 3 people on this forum alone that will tell you they wish they had been aborted.
 

Lursa

Implacable
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
May 1, 2013
Messages
83,420
Reaction score
46,302
Location
Outside Seattle
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
The problem with that is that you might as well say, why not infanticide? Why not kill kids under 3 years old? Why not kill all the homeless? Why not kill the disabled who are only a drag on society? Its all quite pragmatic after all.

Why? Because it would be immoral to murder infants, youngsters, the disabled or the homeless, thats why.

Well, it is just as immoral to murder those who are three months after conception as it is to murder those who are three years after conception. There is no difference. NO difference.

One reason: because the state cannot act on behalf of the unborn without the mother's consent. To do so would violate her rights and her bodily sovereignty. This is not the case with anyone that is born.
 

Bullseye

Fund police; Defund the politicians
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 18, 2018
Messages
33,443
Reaction score
11,140
Location
San Diego
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
You really, really, really missed the point.
If the point is you drizzling cryptic one-liners, I got that. IF you have a point about what I said, say it.
 

Cameron

Politically Correct
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 26, 2010
Messages
5,028
Reaction score
3,435
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
The problem with that is that you might as well say, why not infanticide? Why not kill kids under 3 years old? Why not kill all the homeless? Why not kill the disabled who are only a drag on society? Its all quite pragmatic after all.

Why? Because it would be immoral to murder infants, youngsters, the disabled or the homeless, thats why.

Well, it is just as immoral to murder those who are three months after conception as it is to murder those who are three years after conception. There is no difference. NO difference.
interesting. So is it also immoral to kill cows, pigs, chickens, and trees? All of which are far more complex and intelligent forms of life than a first trimester fetus. The line of pragmatism has to be drawn somewhere, and the distinction between a live baby and a pea-sized collection of cells is broad.
 

Wan

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 16, 2018
Messages
3,137
Reaction score
321
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
interesting. So is it also immoral to kill cows, pigs, chickens, and trees? All of which are far more complex and intelligent forms of life than a first trimester fetus. The line of pragmatism has to be drawn somewhere, and the distinction between a live baby and a pea-sized collection of cells is broad.

The only difference between a "collection of cells" and a baby is the latter has the usual baby cute looks.
 

Cameron

Politically Correct
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 26, 2010
Messages
5,028
Reaction score
3,435
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
The only difference between a "collection of cells" and a baby is the latter has the usual baby cute looks.
And, you know, the ability to think, move, sense or feel.
 

Wan

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 16, 2018
Messages
3,137
Reaction score
321
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
And, you know, the ability to think, move, sense or feel.

Those things are certainly important, but I don't see why just because the unborn can't do those things (yet!) it means we get to kill it.
 

Scrabaholic

certified sane
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
22,211
Reaction score
16,016
Location
Near Kingston, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
If the point is you drizzling cryptic one-liners, I got that. IF you have a point about what I said, say it.

You said (bold is mine):
We could just buy a one way ticket for all those folks that complain that some other country's laws are better. If you like the healthcare in France? Au Revoir; better gun laws in Australia G'day mate, etc.
Maybe just ship all socialists to the Scandinavian country of their choice, or Venezuela if they'd prefer.


I replied:

Does that also apply to people who complain about abortion being legal? Should they be shipped off to a country where it's not?

YOU said to ship people who don't like your country's laws to a country more in line with their beliefs. There are people who do not like the fact that abortion is legal in the US. Should they be shipped to a country where it is not legal?

I don't know how to make it clearer. If you still don't understand, perhaps someone else can step in and explain it to you.
 
Top Bottom