• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons 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!

my beef with the Liberal position.

sbrettt

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2013
Messages
2,724
Reaction score
783
Location
Prospect park, PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Disclaimer, I support abortion in instances where the mothers physical health is at stake.
I find the Democratic parties position on abortion to be both oversimplified, and self contradicting. For instance, how can you say everyone has a right to choice on the subject while also saying the human being aborted has no right to choice? I understand the fetus can't make decisions yet, but is the inability to make decisions enough to lose that right? Why do the financial details of the parent(s) matter when adoption exists? It's disturbing to me that the left is happy to strip away an unborn humans life, potential for greatness, and influences on other people that could better their lives simply because the mother and or father can't afford it? I feel like I'll catch a lot of flak for this sentence, but is it not inherently selfish to deny an unborn human being life because you can't afford? In my opinion living is better than having your entire life taken away just because you don't have a voice yet. I'm sincerely sincerely sorry if I come off as insensitive to anyone on this forum.
 

Grand Mal

Question authority
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
35,685
Reaction score
18,213
Location
on an island off the left coast of Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Disclaimer, I support abortion in instances where the mothers physical health is at stake.
I find the Democratic parties position on abortion to be both oversimplified, and self contradicting. For instance, how can you say everyone has a right to choice on the subject while also saying the human being aborted has no right to choice? I understand the fetus can't make decisions yet, but is the inability to make decisions enough to lose that right? Why do the financial details of the parent(s) matter when adoption exists? It's disturbing to me that the left is happy to strip away an unborn humans life, potential for greatness, and influences on other people that could better their lives simply because the mother and or father can't afford it? I feel like I'll catch a lot of flak for this sentence, but is it not inherently selfish to deny an unborn human being life because you can't afford? In my opinion living is better than having your entire life taken away just because you don't have a voice yet. I'm sincerely sincerely sorry if I come off as insensitive to anyone on this forum.
Should a child be born to parents who wanted to kill it in the womb?
 

kerussll

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
1,589
Reaction score
730
Location
Colorado
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
"No abortions, just pick adoption" is the height of oversimplification.
 

Cecil900

Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2013
Messages
124
Reaction score
51
Location
Bay Area
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
How many kids are there waiting to be adopted right now?
 

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
15,460
Reaction score
20,321
Location
Mid-West USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Disclaimer, I support abortion in instances where the mothers physical health is at stake.
I find the Democratic parties position on abortion to be both oversimplified, and self contradicting. For instance, how can you say everyone has a right to choice on the subject while also saying the human being aborted has no right to choice? I understand the fetus can't make decisions yet, but is the inability to make decisions enough to lose that right? Why do the financial details of the parent(s) matter when adoption exists? It's disturbing to me that the left is happy to strip away an unborn humans life, potential for greatness, and influences on other people that could better their lives simply because the mother and or father can't afford it? I feel like I'll catch a lot of flak for this sentence, but is it not inherently selfish to deny an unborn human being life because you can't afford? In my opinion living is better than having your entire life taken away just because you don't have a voice yet. I'm sincerely sincerely sorry if I come off as insensitive to anyone on this forum.

This may sound strange but I'd say that before any male advocate of Pro-Life speaks to the process of requiring a woman to carry an unwanted baby to term, they set up a personal "baby burden" experiment.

Anyone remember those old Home Economics projects where students taking the class had to pretend to take care of a baby? I say using modern technology we strap a growing "baby machine" to each man's stomach and let him endure 9 months of it as it slowly gains weight, kicks, puts pressure on his back, etc. To further simulate the process, he would be required to take medication periodically to simulate the internal upsets that occur during this process that women go through. Finally, to experience birth pains, strap an expanding catheter inside his penis and add electronic muscle spasms.

If at the end of nine months of this "baby burden" experiment he still thinks a women should be forced to endure this just to give a baby an opportunity to be adopted, we can count his vote as having some small value. Otherwise, any male arguing on behalf of forcing women to endure childbirth has no merit.
 

sbrettt

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2013
Messages
2,724
Reaction score
783
Location
Prospect park, PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I mean, people are forced to give birth to children who will, hopefully, be adopted. That what you propose?
There was around 1.2 million abortions in 2011. I believe less than 5% were because the mother had health concerns. So there would be a lot of extra children in bad circumstances. I'm no where near economically savvy, but Planned parenthood received $270 mil in government grants. That could go to running programs intended to help families who can't support a child support their child unless I'm overestimating how far that $270 could go.
 

Grand Mal

Question authority
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
35,685
Reaction score
18,213
Location
on an island off the left coast of Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
There was around 1.2 million abortions in 2011. I believe less than 5% were because the mother had health concerns. So there would be a lot of extra children in bad circumstances. I'm no where near economically savvy, but Planned parenthood received $270 mil in government grants. That could go to running programs intended to help families who can't support a child support their child unless I'm overestimating how far that $270 could go.
I hope you're right.
 

Peter King

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 19, 2012
Messages
25,265
Reaction score
12,081
Location
Netherlands
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Disclaimer, I support abortion in instances where the mothers physical health is at stake.
I find the Democratic parties position on abortion to be both oversimplified, and self contradicting. For instance, how can you say everyone has a right to choice on the subject while also saying the human being aborted has no right to choice? I understand the fetus can't make decisions yet, but is the inability to make decisions enough to lose that right? Why do the financial details of the parent(s) matter when adoption exists? It's disturbing to me that the left is happy to strip away an unborn humans life, potential for greatness, and influences on other people that could better their lives simply because the mother and or father can't afford it? I feel like I'll catch a lot of flak for this sentence, but is it not inherently selfish to deny an unborn human being life because you can't afford? In my opinion living is better than having your entire life taken away just because you don't have a voice yet. I'm sincerely sincerely sorry if I come off as insensitive to anyone on this forum.
At the times when it is legal to have an abortion there is only one human being and the rights of that human being that count. A fetus is not a person, it does does not have personhood rights.

The financial details of the parent/parents have nothing to do with the practice of abortion. Some parents might make that decide to have an abortion because they cannot feed the ones they already have but the reasons for abortion are personal decisions and none of the public's business.

And don't be silly, there are people with are way more insensitive (and I am sure people will have thought that of me at times).

You cannot help the way you feel but you are right, the pro-choice people like myself are going to vehemently disagree with you. Especially about the "human rights for a ZEF" issue. Most pro-choice people will not agree with you on that one.
 

sbrettt

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2013
Messages
2,724
Reaction score
783
Location
Prospect park, PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
This may sound strange but I'd say that before any male advocate of Pro-Life speaks to the process of requiring a woman to carry an unwanted baby to term, they set up a personal "baby burden" experiment.

Anyone remember those old Home Economics projects where students taking the class had to pretend to take care of a baby? I say using modern technology we strap a growing "baby machine" to each man's stomach and let him endure 9 months of it as it slowly gains weight, kicks, puts pressure on his back, etc. To further simulate the process, he would be required to take medication periodically to simulate the internal upsets that occur during this process that women go through. Finally, to experience birth pains, strap an expanding catheter inside his penis and add electronic muscle spasms.

If at the end of nine months of this "baby burden" experiment he still thinks a women should be forced to endure this just to give a baby an opportunity to be adopted, we can count his vote as having some small value. Otherwise, any male arguing on behalf of forcing women to endure childbirth has no merit.
I would be down for that, but I am still bothered by the idea of taking away someones life for any reason other than it being life threatening to the mother.
 

Henrin

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 3, 2010
Messages
60,458
Reaction score
12,357
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Don't you ever think it's odd how you're putting the burden of pregnancy over human life? You can put me through whatever you want in your attempts to make me understand your argument but I assure you I never will. It is simply illogical to place so little value on life.
 

sbrettt

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2013
Messages
2,724
Reaction score
783
Location
Prospect park, PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
At the times when it is legal to have an abortion there is only one human being and the rights of that human being that count. A fetus is not a person, it does does not have personhood rights.

The financial details of the parent/parents have nothing to do with the practice of abortion. Some parents might make that decide to have an abortion because they cannot feed the ones they already have but the reasons for abortion are personal decisions and none of the public's business.

And don't be silly, there are people with are way more insensitive (and I am sure people will have thought that of me at times).

You cannot help the way you feel but you are right, the pro-choice people like myself are going to vehemently disagree with you. Especially about the "human rights for a ZEF" issue. Most pro-choice people will not agree with you on that one.
As silly as it may sound, I think it's unfair that someone who isn't born isn't considered a person merely because they're at the beginning of becoming a person.
 

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
15,460
Reaction score
20,321
Location
Mid-West USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Don't you ever think it's odd how you're putting the burden of pregnancy over human life? You can put me through whatever you want in your attempts to make me understand your argument but I assure you I never will. It is simply illogical to place so little value on life.
I don't think it's odd at all. That's because you know FULL WELL from all my prior arguments in such threads that I support a woman's absolute right to chose ONLY during the first 20 weeks of the pregnancy. That period when a zygote and fetus are clearly not functional human beings. Unlike you, I do not presume some "spirit" invests itself at the time of fertilization. Therefore, as you are also fully aware, I don't consider the combination of developing cells during that period any more worthy of consideration than a cancer we excise to prevent harm to the bearer.
 

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
15,460
Reaction score
20,321
Location
Mid-West USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
I'm sure some economics savvy poster will shut down my idea, and I will have no idea what happened.
I don't know about a savvy economics member, but I'd simply point to all the medical and developmental expenses accrued from birth until a child reaches adulthood. Do you think $225 per birth (270 million / 1.2 million births) would cover it????
 

sbrettt

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2013
Messages
2,724
Reaction score
783
Location
Prospect park, PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I don't think it's odd at all. That's because you know FULL WELL from all my prior arguments in such threads that I support a woman's absolute right to chose ONLY during the first 20 weeks of the pregnancy. That period when a zygote and fetus are clearly not functional human beings. Unlike you, I do not presume some "spirit" invests itself at the time of fertilization. Therefore, as you are also fully aware, I don't consider the combination of developing cells during that period any more worthy of consideration than a cancer we excise to prevent harm to the bearer.
Why does an unborn human who has their entire life ahead of them have to have "some spirit" associated with them to matter? Also, I think it's silly to compare cells that will soon develop into a human being to cancer cells that generally kill human beings.
 

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
15,460
Reaction score
20,321
Location
Mid-West USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Why does an unborn human who has their entire life ahead of them have to have "some spirit" associated with them to matter? Also, I think it's silly to compare cells that will soon develop into a human being to cancer cells that generally kill human beings.
Are you having some difficulty reading for comprehension? I'd suggest you take another look at what you quoted and you'll find the answer to your question is already there. :)
 

sbrettt

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2013
Messages
2,724
Reaction score
783
Location
Prospect park, PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I don't know about a savvy economics member, but I'd simply point to all the medical and developmental expenses accrued from birth until a child reaches adulthood. Do you think $225 per birth (270 million / 1.2 million births) would cover it????
I meant math savvy. Regardless I can't place monetary value on human beings. I think there should be a survey of young adults who grew up in the worst of the worst of financial conditions in the US asking if they would have rather been aborted. Would you be open to such a survey?
 

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
15,460
Reaction score
20,321
Location
Mid-West USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
I meant math savvy. Regardless I can't place monetary value on human beings. I think there should be a survey of young adults who grew up in the worst of the worst of financial conditions in the US asking if they would have rather been aborted. Would you be open to such a survey?
Well unless you intend to personally pay all the bills, or can absolutely guarantee someone will adopt each child and take proper care of them until they reach adulthood, your point has very little merit. :)
 

sbrettt

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2013
Messages
2,724
Reaction score
783
Location
Prospect park, PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Are you having some difficulty reading for comprehension? I'd suggest you take another look at what you quoted and you'll find the answer to your question is already there. :)
Your reasoning wasn't sufficient for me to write off what will be a human being as being "unworthy of my consideration".
 

Peter King

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 19, 2012
Messages
25,265
Reaction score
12,081
Location
Netherlands
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
As silly as it may sound, I think it's unfair that someone who isn't born isn't considered a person merely because they're at the beginning of becoming a person.
But this is a case of civil liberties, the woman who is pregnant has those civil liberties and ZEF's do not. It is very simple IMHO, there is no justification to deny a woman the civil liberty to decide what happens inside her womb because something grows inside her.
 
Top Bottom